Re: [dvd-discuss] Gedankenexperiment

[Noah silva <nsilva(at)atari-source.com>]

I don't see what was wrong with their origional model.  In my view it is
not on the burden of the service provider to make sure their service is
used legally.  This was even upheld quite a bit in the BBS age.  If it is
true that agreements on web pages, etc. are legally binding, then simply
stating that "you may only download music which you already own" should be
ample protection.  If the user breaks the contract, they are breaking the
contract, and the law.  Let the record companies go after
tham... only... it's not economical to sue each person
individually.. that's why they will go after mymp3.com, etc.  OTOH if such
agreements aren't legally enforcable, then a lot of other places will be
in trouble.  I don't think you can pick and choose though.. 

 -- noah silva

On Fri, 26 Oct 2001, D. C. Sessions wrote:

> Please shoot this down on either technical or legal grounds:
> 
> The MP3.com "my MP3.com" model, where MP3.com kept pre-ripped
> copies of music for customers who already had the CDs, *probably*
> could have been made resistant to legal objections if the copies were
> encrypted.  "Encrypted how?" you ask.  Suppose that they were
> symmetrically block-cipher encrypted using the RC5 checksum of the
> original track.
> 
> Trivially easy to extract and keep on a keyring if you have the original
> CD, annoying enough to break if you don't.  Of course people could
> trade checksums, but then they can trade tracks too.
> 
> (Yes, somewhat OT but at least less so than the spam discussion!)
> 
> -- 
> | I'm old enough that I don't have to pretend to be grown up.|
> +----------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+
> 
>