redshifter
High Fidelity Gentility• redrum....I mean redshifter• Pee-pee. Hoo-hoo.• I ♥ Garfield
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2001
- Posts
- 10,223
- Likes
- 24
Quote:
we MUST be talking about the same thing, coming at it from different angles.
my fear is if devices are targetted for lawsuits that could spell trouble for headphone audiophiles.
Originally Posted by vcoheda /img/forum/go_quote.gif You have to read the whole article. "In refusing to toss out the lawsuit, the judge noted that the record companies consent to XM's use of their copyrighted material solely for the purposes of providing a digital satellite broadcasting service. She said XM operates like traditional radio broadcast providers, . . . But by broadcasting and storing copyrighted music for later listening by the consumer, the judge said XM is both a broadcaster and a distributor, but only paying to be a broadcaster. "The record companies sufficiently allege that serving as a music distributor to XM + MP3 users gives XM added commercial benefit as a satellite radio broadcaster," Batts said." That's just what I said. The law suit is not going after the consumer or the technology but the broadcaster and their archiving of music. You're not reading this right. |
we MUST be talking about the same thing, coming at it from different angles.
my fear is if devices are targetted for lawsuits that could spell trouble for headphone audiophiles.