(Fwd) Re: [dvd-discuss] What does Philips know that we don't

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

I've always noticed that Philips seems to create markets that 
others spend all their time trying to monopolize afterwards. Philips 
meanwhile has moved on and working on another one.


> On Saturday 19 January 2002 23:50, Ravi Nanavati wrote:
> # I was just reading another recent Register article about Philips' opposition
> # to copy-protected CDs when a section jumped out at me:
> # 
> # "Meanwhile, the second barrel of the Philips shotgun is CD burning. In a Reuters
> # interview Gerry Wirtz, general manager of Philips' copyright office, said that
> # the company would be building CD burners that can read and burn copy protected CDs.
> # He argues that the protection system is not a protection system as such, but simply
> # a mechanism for stopping the playback of music. This interesting claim allows him to
> # contend that the protection systems are not covered by the Digital Millenium
> # Copyright Act, and lays the ground for the mother of all sue-fests with the number
> # of large and rich companies who are most certainly not going to agree with him."
> 
> There are time when I get downright proud of the Company.
> 
> # After reading that I'm moved to ask what he thinks CSS is other than "a mechanism
> # for stopping the playback of" DVDs. AFAICT, their legal situation is no different
> # from 2600's except:
> # 
> # 1) They're doing their "circumvention" for a profit so criminal penalties will be involved.
> # 2) They don't have the suspicion of being "evil, bad hackers" to deal with.
> 
> # Is their something their lawyers know that ours don't?
> 
> Yeah, they know that Philips has a very large and aggressive legal department.
> Philips' "copyright office" is part of Corporate Intellectual Property (the same
> people who manage my patents) and don't mind going to the mat on issues
> that affect the long-range health of the Company.  They know that as the
> originator of CD-reading and -writing technologies they can practically define
> the terms (e.g. Red Book) of discussion.
> 
> They also know that Philips got rid of its publishing subsidiaries five years ago,
> and now has a large stake in TiVO and other digital entertainment technologies
> that the content cartel Does Not Like.  I'm not normally one to ascribe subtlety
> to the Management, but they *do* have their moments.
> 
> -- 
> | I'm old enough that I don't have to pretend to be grown up.|
> +----------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+
> 


------- End of forwarded message -------