Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Diamond Multimedia -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: nick nelson who wrote (3741)	10/17/1998 6:09:00 PM
From: Jonathan Quick	Respond to of 4679

Nick, I don't think that RIAA is avoiding a compromise. Both legal filings show that Diamond and RIAA attempted to negotiate a compromise before RIAA initiated legal action. RIAA wants two things, both of which are required by the AHRA: a royalty and the use of SCMS. The issue is really whether or not Diamond Multimedia has to abide by federal law. I think we'll have the answer in fairly short order. I also don't think publicity is much of an issue. This lawsuit has not captured the attention of the national media for the most part. Certain industry publications have reported on Diamond's legal troubles with Rio, but the major mass media outlets have largely ignored the story. If Rio ever actually shipped, there's no question that piracy would increase, and thus make the story worthy of national attention. Rio isn't a viable product as long as the restraining order is in place, so the current situation actually reduces RIAA's exposure. The next court date is October 26th. The bottom line is that the ball is in Diamond's court. The smart thing to do is also the legal and ethical thing to do. Diamond should implement SCMS at the software level. With copy protection in place, much of the wind could be taken out of the RIAA's sails regarding royalty payments and Diamond would be in a better negotiating position from a legal standpoint. This totally unnecessary legal battle is just one more reason to believe Bill Schroeder is a fool. Jonathan

To: nick nelson who wrote (3741)	10/18/1998 3:59:00 PM
From: nick nelson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4679

The RIO is manufactured in Korea - a TRO or preliminary injunction only applies in the United States. Diamond is going "full tilt" in Korea - I would imagine. If they can not sell into the US market... there is still all of SE Asia! Diamond is correct in maintaining that the RIO is a playback device only. All recording and coping of MP3 files (all of which CAN be legal) is done by the host computer onto the flash memory disk. The disk is inserted into the RIO for playback only.... there is absolutely no circuitry in the RIO for recording or encoding. The RIO is only decoding and playing back the MP3 on the removable medium flash disk generated by the computer. Of course, the U.S. District judge was probably assigned the case because of known bias in favor of the recording industry, lack of specific computer knowledge related to MP3, and/or known bias to continue BAD law, set BAD precedent, and generally create more money making opportunities for judges, lawyers, and the court system - while impeding free enterprise and stifling healthy competition and more open opportunities in the music recording industry. As always, the defendant is presumed guilt by associating even though they are in NO way illegally recording copyrighted material - but, hey, isn't all law designed to protect those organization that are in power and suppress any options that threat the existing power structure!! Of course - the domino theory worked in Vietnam... it will also work on Diamond. All it takes is a judge with "juevos" and the ability to use and exercise "common" sense - the ultimate basis of all good law. IMO, nick