Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 2nd Feb 2009 21:23 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 346964
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
" "Using Vista".
Read on, as I did the experiment again using Vista... Same result. " Fair enough. It worked for you in that situation. I have directly encountered some situations where the same thing did not work for others. It seems to depend on the source, or something.
Where is my retraction, BTW, for your false accusation?
Alternatively ... can you please point out exactly where you thought I told a lie?
Or am I going to have to put "Thom the slanderer" as my signature everywhere?
Edited 2009-02-03 22:35 UTC
Alternatively ... can you please point out exactly where you thought I told a lie?
Sure!
You stated that it is debatable whether or not non-DRM media is affected by Vista's DRM. That debatable bit is the obvious lie, as not only have several people here shown that your example poses no problems whatsoever, but it has also been made clear that mp3 isn't even capable of carrying DRM in the first place.
You are the one making the false accusation here, so bring up the proof I'd say. Until then, it's just a false accusation without any proof (other than some anecdotal "friend"), which is no better than a lie.
Give me the proof. Surely, such a case of WMP/Vista adding DRM to ripped mp3s should be all over Google, right?
Good luck, sport!





Member since:
2005-06-29
Read on, as I did the experiment again using Vista... Same result.