SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : MPPP - MP3.com
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: dumbmoney who wrote (981)4/30/2000 1:58:00 AM
From: Kashish King  Read Replies (1) of 1116
 
They profit from the copying service, and the availability of the service has the potential to affect the demand for legal copies. So it can't possibily be fair use.

Dumb, your conclusion does not follow from your argument. The manufacturers of scanners and copiers profit their products and they have the potential to affect the demand for legal copies. So it can't possibly be fair use. Right? But what in the world is it? The service or the act of duplication? Neither MP3 nor the scanner manufacturer is the one initiating the copying process. The user initiates the copy and, unlike the scanner, MP3 for some unknown reason feels compelled to verify that you have the right to do so.

What is the problem with MP3? Why are they being required to take extreme measures that other duplication services are free to ignore? Once again, this boils down to a users right to the pursuit of happiness (another gem) and fair use of information. We can't emphasize this enough, we're talking about information here while the not-too-bright drafters of that law didn't get that and started concocting terms like works of authorship rather than just calling it what it is: information. It would not surpise me if they change the law from fair use to happy use.

Where MP3 Went Wrong

In my opinion, MP3 should not have purchased any CDs, period. Rather than do that they should have cached user's submissions. That is, keep a local copy that is only accessible to those lawfully allowed to duplicate that music. This would be an internal software optimization that any competent software developer would be fired for not implementing. Subsequent "uploads" of the same information would not waste the user's time or the public's bandwidth.

SIDE NOTE: I have played several copyrighted materials backward as part of my religious research and you can clearly hear the words "I grant this to the public domain" on several rap "artists" releases. Granted (no pun intended) it does require some frequency and amplitude modulation to improve the quality of the intended result.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News