Am 30. Dec, 2007 schwätzte Scott so:

> I think you're getting a little over-excited there.
> The point, I believe, that Josh is trying to make is
> that the RIAA had a number of songs flagged awhile
> back that could "phone home" when they're downloaded
> via the internet.

The songs called home? Or do you mean they released some with specific
watermarks in order to track them?

There are claims that the Apple DRM-free songs are watermarked to track
who purchased them. Wonder if a binary diff could be used to drop the
watermarks.

> There's a certain paragraph there that says the words
> are "I suppose...", which tends to mean that there is
> some doubt as to how hard-line the RIAA is actually
> attempting to claim its absurd position in the matter.
> Since these cases revolve around the fact that these
> people were actually sharing copies of songs that they

The pdf Craig linked to claims there was sharing via kazaa, not just
copying from the CD. Still, if they are also claiming that shifting to
digital from the CD is copyright infringement and the court upheld that
claim it's a major shift in shrinking fair use.

ciao,

der.hans
-- 
#  https://www.LuftHans.com/        http://www.CiscoLearning.org/
#  kill telnet, long live ssh - der.hans