Rockbox mail archiveSubject: RIAA+SCMS (was:FM Recorder owner - 3% Rockbox content)
RIAA+SCMS (was:FM Recorder owner - 3% Rockbox content)
From: E Doc <doc6502_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 12:37:25 -0800 (PST)
>SCMS is the fruit of one of the many attempts by the RIAA to cripple or
>outlaw consumer technology in the USA.
>...the RIAA much prefers to leave the actual
> pirates alone and litigate tech companies instead, as it's easier.
Easier and more profitable. As Steve Dallas said, "Rule Number 1: Never, ever
sue poor people."
>Of course, in the Real World, with a versatile device (like the archos)
>that can connect to any sound system, it's often impossible to know
>whether it is copying from a digital master or a digital copy, thus
>SCMS, which seems fair enough in theory, effectively turns into
>"no-digital recording or copying - period!", which is, of course,
>completely unacceptable. Unless, that is, you are an RIAA exec
>determined to run your industry into the ground via your relentless
>technophobia and resistance to change, in which case SCMS is a good
>So in summary: SCMS is a "feature" that actaully means the device is not
>as useful as it should be. It is unfortunately required to safely sell
>products in the USA, and because one large production line is cheaper
>than two smaller ones, SCMS is often present in devices sold in other
>Archos did an excellant job - they implemented SCMS, but it can be
>disabled. And they didn't further cripple the device with DRM
>"features". That alone makes it the best device on the market IMO. The
>fact that the product is also really good is just icing on the cake :-)
OK, I completely agree with everything that Justin has said here. However,
because I dig the Equal Time concept, has anyone done any analysis of how much
income the "artists" represented by RIAA have actually lost due to piracy? I'm
talking about straightforward cases here like, "Due to digital piracy, artist
MadonnaShakiraSpears lost 35 squidjillion dollars."
Also, I wonder, how much have the "open-ness" of formats like .mp*, etc. have
helped artists on smaller labels? I'm talking about very straightforward cases
here like, "Because we sell our music over the internet, we've been able to
establish an international fan base, and make enough money to keep us out of
the poorhouse?" Does anyone know if there are any studies of this sort of
Just curious-- sorry about the off-topic content.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
Received on 2002-12-19