A few months ago we heard that two consumers-defense organizations sued four music majors on the basis that anti-copy protections on CDs are abusive.
This Tuesday, EMI was condemned and mandated to refund a protected CD or provide an unprotected copy to a woman who couldn't play it in her car CD player. The court deemed the protected CD as defective. The shop which sold the CD was also sued for lack of information but not condemned, apparently because of a "broken" proof of purchase. Shops in France are now likely to affix stickers on protected CDs to warn customers about their limitations, and therefore lift their liability. Further cases involving Warner Music France and Universal Pictures are in progress.
These actions are pursued to halt the new habit of the majors to put copy protection technologies on their CDs. Those technologies are considered ineffective because they do not stop pirates and abusive because they limit the fair use rights of the legitimate consumers.
Article in English by News.com.au.
Article en français par France 2.
; "googlecertificateexpired.png")
; "wellbebacksoon.png")
; "sarkozysarkozysarkozy.png")
Those technologies are considered ineffective because they do not stop pirates and abusive because they limit the fair use rights of the legitimate consumers.
Exactly. I had the pleasure of purchasing the new Kraftwerk CD, it was clearly labelled 'Copy Controlled'. It was quite pointless because I ripped it to AAC through iTunes and heard no problems. How does that stop piracy? It boggles the mind how these Music Industry people work.
FNAC clearly labels the product, the checkout has a little blurb explaining what copy protection means and gives a 15-day money back guarantee on these CDs as well. Quite handy.
thats un real
thats to much to handle ,sometimes we just cant hold our breath so we have to get it out and over with!
cant u give some free downloadable rape movies or animal sex movies
cant u give some free downloadable rape movies or animal sex movies