Re: Circumvention Technology?

Michael Scarpitti <mscarpit[_at_]asnt.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 1998, Shelly Warwick <swarwick[_at_]sprynet.com> wrote:
> >
> > COURT REJECTS ATTEMPT TO BLOCK RECORDING DEVICE
> >
> > Federal District Judge Audrey B. Collins of Los Angeles has
> > denied a request by the recording industry to stop production of
> > a 2.4-ounce $188 handheld recording device called Rio, which can
> > record and play back digital music found on the Internet. The
> > industry is concerned that the recorder will encourage widespread
> > piracy, and that manufacturers of such devices "have a moral
> > obligation to protect creative works." But a lawyer for Diamond
> > Multimedia Systems, the company that makes Rio, asks: "Are they
> > saying no one can develop a new technology without their
> > permission?" (New York Times 28 Oct 98)
>
> I own a minidisc recorder. What's different about this?

The Rio must by needs make a copy of a work to replay it. Your minidisc recorder *can* make a copy of a disk, but could presumably play a pre-recorded minidisc (unless it's a record-only device).

I think the original post was off-topic in that Rio is a potentially infringing (copyright) but not circumventing (technology), device.

-- 
Karsten M. Self (kmself[_at_]ix.netcom.com)

    What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
    Welchen Teil von "Gestalt" verstehen Sie nicht?

web:       http://www.netcom.com/~kmself/
SAS/Linux: http://www.netcom.com/~kmself/SAS/SAS4Linux.html    

 12:11am  up 17:28,  3 users,  load average: 0.24, 0.13, 0.10