Sony Copy Protected CDs - Too Far

Why won't a Sony / BMG CD work in your latest deck?  Because it doesn't conform to the standard CD format. 
Why did your computer drop a frame or two in the latest 3d-shooter after you listened to a Sony / BMG CD on your system?

Because they install a resident process on your computer that takes 1-2%... even when your PC is idle. 

This is a new and very intrusive form of DRM that consumers of ALL audio need to know about. 

https://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051101-5514.html

This is an excellent reason never to buy another Sony car audio product, in my opinion. 

They need to get back to producing quality products and put their COMPETITORS in their crosshairs; not their customers. 

I, for one, will let Sony know what I think with my pocket.  There will be no Playstation games bought by me as gifts for relatives this xmas.  There will be no DVD-R drives from Sony bought.  I certainly will not consider a Sony WEGA monitor or t.v. set.

I've been lurking here when I have time; but this news pissed me off enough to post.

Edit:  looks like the national media has caught wind of this sh*t too: 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/02/AR2005110202362.html?sub=new

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

Im with you, i'll never buy another sony product again, what they are doing will definately get themselves sued.

-------------
2003 Chevy Avalanche,Eclipse CD7000,Morel Elate 5,Adire Extremis,Alpine PDX-4.150, 15" TC-3000, 2 Alpine PDX-1.1000, 470Amp HO Alt.

AHAHA.

Dude, I told my mom I wanted an MP3 player like last Christmas, so she gets me this Sony MD player that has like "MP3 Player" written all over the package.

It turns out that the *only* way to use this thing at all is to install some software package that manages the players music library and makes you encode the file in Sony's special little format and then "check-out" the file to your MD player. If you want more than a set number of songs or whatever, you have to "check-in" your own files back in with the software ...

These people are absolutely *obsessed* with control.      

-------------
"I'm finished!" - Daniel Plainview

This is awful! I am apalled at this b.s!    Oh man, do I ever have some guilt.

I recently recieved a sony digital camera for my birthday, not really my call though.

But the big one, the shop I work for just got in a shipment of the new sony specialty edition junk today. I even got a t-shirt! Better burn it! There was some stickers on the decks that had a website for sony music, don't know if there is any correlation to what was mentioned but who knows.

So even sony decks wont play sony/bmg cd's? How ridiculous is that!

-------------

If you're as angry as I am, let them know how you feel:

https://www.sonymusic.com/about/feedback.cgi

I informed them that I will not buy Sony products until they:
1) stop selling CD's with Rootkit-based DRM; and
2) release an easy-removal tool to the general public.

I encourage you to ask for the same.

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

Most decks will still play the CD's, but they aren't standard.  Some decks won't play them.

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

I left them some feedback.

kfr01 is quite the out spoken one, more power to you and thank you for the info.

-------------

I have to make a good-faith edit to my above information. It was based on information read at another forum. Sony says that the discs -are- standard: "This disc contains both an audio session and a data session for computers which makes it a multi-session disc. These discs are fully compliant with the Sony/Philips CD disc specifications. If your player will not recognize the disc please check whether your player recognizes multi-session discs in general." From: https://cp.sonybmg.com/xcp/english/faq.html

But, something else I read made me just as angry:

"PC Users: When listening to music directly off the disc, you must use the player provided on the disc. Attempting to play the audio on the disc (while the disc is spinning in the computer drive) with another player (i.e. Windows Media Player, Real Player, iTunes) will result in distorted sound."

(bold font added for emphasis)



-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

More links for your reading pleasure:

https://news.com.com/Sony+to+patch+copy-protected+CD/2100-7355_3-5928608.html

https://www.theinquirer.net/?article=27426

The Inquirer article is quite more scathing than the News.com article... 

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

I never liked Sony products(except my old MD player and i had to bite my tongue to buy it).This all the more reason to inform my customers about the 2nd"Evil Empire".Russ

-------------
BigDog

FWI:  The Register has also been covering this:  https://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/01/sony_rootkit_drm/

Don't try to remove the files yourself.  You may kill your ability to use your optical drive.

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

PISSED does not begin to describe my state of mind right now! I always KNEW Sony was too big for their britches, but GEEZ! BS, man... BS!

I probably could have expressed myself better without the profanities, but here is the message I left for them:

It's called LiNUX, you *******. Keep your piece of **** Windows anti-hacking bull**** application stored safely in your *****! I will NOT continue to buy your CD's, and your application will not inconvenience me one bit, AND the rest of the world, really bent on sharing (or "stealing", as you so conveniently describe it) "your" music will be forced into alternate operating systems. You are only killing yourselves, and helping take Micro$oft with you... Actually, keep right on doing what you are doing - those bastards need a good *** reaming as well!

Yeah, Dave's pissed about it too, but as my message above states, not terribly inconvenienced by it. LiNUX LOVES Windows-based anti-ANYTHING

Oh, and being not afraid of the Sony juggernaut, I gave them my REAL e-mail address as well!

-------------
It all reminds me of something that Molière once said to Guy de Maupassant at a café in Vienna: "That's nice. You should write it down."

And if that pisses you off, how about this: the RIAA has created a new time-coding scheme for MP3 files that will make them expire after 90 days and self-delete off hard drives and memory sticks.  The same technology will be applied to the new HD-DVDs and to Tivo-type digital recordings of video content.  There is pending legislation in congress to make this sort of ant-time-shifting and anti-piracy technology 100% legal, and the FCC is considering making it mandatory for all digital broadcasts.  Yippie.

-------------
Support the12volt.com

No, I'm not inconvenienced at all by it either - but I hate the slippery slope that is created if we (the consuming public) allows this.  We are sending the message that it is O.K. to take away rights we previously had in the privacy of our homes regarding products we paid for.

With non-copy protected CD's we basically have the capability to do whatever we want in the privacy of our own homes with products we buy.  This copy-protection takes this capability away from us.

At this point, I say to Sony, go after the people sharing thousands of files they didn't pay for, but leave what I do with my private property in my own home alone!

This reminds me of what Circuit City tried with limited/pay-per-view DVDs a few years ago, but is even worse; they drastically reduced the price of those DVDs.  Sony is charging the same price for a lesser product. 

Sigh.  I could go on and on, but I won't.  :)

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

Sony is wonderful at alienating their customers. They did it with cheap car audio, they did it with their online games, and now they are doing it with their music. I stopping buying Sony products a few years ago, this just solidifies my position.

-------------
2003 Chevrolet Silverado Standard Cab ~ Alpine CDA-9851
Diamond Audio D3600.1 ~ 2x Diamond Audio TM310D4
Diamond Audio D3400.4 ~ Diamond Audio Hex S600s
AstroStart RS5204 Remote Start/Alarm

I'm canceling my family trip to Disney World.

-------------
Build the box so that it performs well in the worst case scenario and, in return, it will reward you at all times.

Because Disney adopted the Blu-ray format?

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

Wow. What bulls**t!! It just goes to show that this country is being run by big business. If the american public let Sony get away with this, who knows whats next. The way things are going, between big business and the goverment, it wont be very long before the american people have no privacy at all, even in our own homes. Not that we have much now anyways.

-------------

Just remember what ever copywrite protection is out there, or will be out there in the future.. there will always be people who will be able to bypass it with ease

I wouldnt let this get to you all so much, its going to be exactlly like limited/pay-per-view DVDs , the'll fade away after a few years.

Just  a random thought

--Skold

-------------
2004 Honda Civic Ex 4Dr

Kenwood DDX-7015/W Nav
4 Fosgate T152C
Hifonics Brutus BX1500D
RE XXX 12 in a 4 Cube Snail Shell

skoldspuppy wrote:

---

Just remember what ever copywrite protection is out there, or will be out there in the future.. there will always be people who will be able to bypass it with ease

I wouldnt let this get to you all so much, its going to be exactlly like limited/pay-per-view DVDs , the'll fade away after a few years.

---

I dunno man I think the trend.. as so many ppl here seem to see as well.. toward total ... say... 'remote' ownership. Like... the idea being to steadily move toward a system of content distribution.... from music to video games to freakin spreadsheet software.... where all the content is *served* to you... for a monthly fee to the content owner.

Its the same thing as pharmaceutical companies having no vested interest in actually *curing* disease. The money stops. The idea is you "live with it" .... lifetime payments.

The really scary thing with companies as massive as Sony is that not only does the company produce the media they are trying to protect, the they are indeed an industry leader in the very industry that makes the hardware that plays the media in the first place! This places the company in a fairly unique position (outside of Mitsubishi I can't think of another company with so many tentacles) to seriously protect and control content... forget not how many other companies out there have a vested interest and are pushing other, if perhaps less scary standards of DRM... the whole 'trusted computer' thing coming out of Microsoft a few years ago gave me nightmares.

I don't think these trends are going to fade like DivX... which... in all reality, was a really half-baked idea anyway in the coming face of broadband delivery... Circuit City really isn't run very well... trust me... I have 100 friends that worked in the home office not across the street from my apartment. The place is run by half-blind monkeys I swear.

....eh... honestly? Sony is run by smart, smart capitalists.

-------------
"I'm finished!" - Daniel Plainview

I have gotten around copy protection on cd's by "

-edit by Dyohn -

-------------
BigDog

Look, owners of intellectual property have every right to copy protect it to help protect themselves from piracy and loss of revenue.  Do you like working for free?  Neither do the artists, producers and distributors who sell music and videos. 

Breaking copy protection schemes and producing duplicates of copy written material is a violation of US federal law and international copyright law, and no it does not have to be for commercial purposes.

This forum will not promote breaking the law.  Please do not post your methods, schemes, or instructions about how to do so.  Discussing the issue is fine, but not posting how-tos for thieves.

-------------
Support the12volt.com

Well put and fully supporting you Dyohn

-------------
Jeff
Velocity Custom Home Theater
Mobile Audio/Video Specialist
Morden, Manitoba CANADA

Yikes.  DYohn.  I am sad to see you censoring this.  Nothing outlaws, to my knowledge, TALKING ABOUT how to get around copy protection schemes yet, has it? 

If so, PLEASE link me to this court opinion or statute.  The dcss case?  Please.  the12volt.com is hardly 2600:  Hacker's Quarterly.  The solution russ lund posted is quite unlike the links to the actual software of the dcss case. 

What, the DMCA you say?  See the relevant portions here:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/1201.html

Sure, it says:

(a)(1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.

However, it also says:

(c) Other Rights, Etc., Not Affected. - (1) Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title.   (2) Nothing in this section shall enlarge or diminish vicarious or contributory liability for copyright infringement in connection with any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof.   (4) Nothing in this section shall enlarge or diminish any rights of free speech or the press for activities using consumer electronics, telecommunications, or computing products.

(f) Reverse Engineering. - (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), a person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a particular portion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and that have not previously been readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement under this title.

The DMCA also provides - BUT NOTICE THE BOLDED LIMITATIONS!

(b) Additional Violations. - (1) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that - (A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof;  (B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof; or (C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof.

See also: 

§ 1204. Criminal Offenses and Penalties   (a) In general.--Any person who violates section 1201 or 1202 willfully and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DYohn, sadly, I am not supporting you at all on this.  Not all copying is illegal.  Fair use is still arguably alive.  Free speech is sure as sh*h still alive.  As EVEN THE DMCA acknowledges, NOT ALL COPYRIGHT PROTECTION CIRCUMVENTION is ILLEGAL.  Not everyone that circumvents copyright is a thief!  It deeply saddens me to see the PUBLIC CONSUMERS (people on this forum) self censoring like this.  Why not put the BURDEN on the movie companies to sue Russ Lund?  Why not put the BURDEN on the DOJ to try to arrest everyone that wants to exercise their fair use rights? 

The sad thing is that self-censorship is exactly what the companies that lobbied for the DMCA want.  They want to SCARE us into not talking about it.  They want to SCARE us into suppressing information. 

Their cause, when indirectly helped and supported even by intelligent people such as DYohn, is stronger than I thought.  You, DYohn, Velocity Motors, dear sirs, are doing their work for them.   The Car Audio community should be deeply concerned. 

This day saddens me. 

Free speech?  Fair use?  Civil disobedience?  Innocent until proven guilty?  Right to trial? 

Sad.

I love this site and you do an excellent job Moderating, DYohn and Velocity, but I strongly disagree with your views on this topic.

You are so concerned about the media conglomerates and artists.  Yes, they have a right to TRY to enforce their IP.  Why are you trying to do it for them? They aren't losing any money when I buy over $1,000 of CDs a year and rip a few to FLAC.  Am I a thief because I use my original cd as a backup? 

The above does not constitute legal advice.   Again, the above does not constitute legal advice.  I am not an attorney.  I am a concerned American. 

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

kfr01, puh-leeze...that's dramatic.  This is a car audio forum, and the mods and admin have discretionary privileges.  You know that.  And your personal case,  "They aren't losing any money when I buy over $1,000 of CDs a year and rip a few to FLAC"  is, as you are well aware, not the norm. 

By the way, you are not an attorney but you are studying to become one.  "ACLU, here I come!"

Just ribbing, but the size of your soapbox made me have to remark.

-------------
Build the box so that it performs well in the worst case scenario and, in return, it will reward you at all times.

Nothing outlaws talking about them except for the self-imposed restrictions of this forum.  Discuss the issue, that's fine.  Post how-to ideas or instructions, they will get deleted and memberships may be revoked if it continues.  Sorry, I have strong opinions about copyright issues and feel they need to be protected.  It's no different than our rules to help discourage car stereo thieves by not allowing posting of head unit security codes.

-------------
Support the12volt.com

I agree. My post was dramatic. I meant it to be. A soapbox? Sure, that too. I felt like the thievery language was too strong, given the respect DYohn has on this forum, and that it deserved a strong response.

I believe this issue is MUCH different than the car stereo thief issue. Why? Nevermind. You don't want to hear it.

Please close this thread I started. Lets get back to discussing real issues that really matter to the car audio community....

Which subwoofer should I buy next?

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

No need to close this thread.  It is a good discussion.  Here's a post I wrote on another forum in response to a question about Warez and file sharing that seems appropriate to repost:

****

A few points.  First, when you purchase or rent a CD, DVD, computer software, book, magazine, newspaper, toy, game, paper, work of art, mechanical design, invention, or any other item upon which has been granted a copyright, patent, trademark, registration mark or any similar protection, you do not own it.  You only own the medium into which the content has been encoded, stored, published, etc.  You may NOT,  "use it as you see fit" if that means copying and distributing, using it in another creation, or claiming it as your own, except for uses covered by the "fair use" doctrine.  Doing so, whether any monetary gains result or not, is a violation of the law.

Granted, usually only those making monetary gains are actually prosecuted, but recent trends (such as successful prosecution of illegal file sharing and individual downloading of pirated music) indicate the monetary motivation is less important.  The law is written so that "depriving the copyright holder of income" is all it takes.  Under that interpretation, making any copy of any work could be considered a violation.

"Fair use" does not mean you can copy content for whatever use you desire.  Legally, "the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright."  The law remains fairly ambiguous on what is and is not fair use, however, so each challenge generally goes to the courts.

In Sony v. Universal City Studios; the U.S. Supreme Court stated, "any individual may reproduce a copyrighted work for a 'fair use;' the copyright owner does not possess the exclusive right to such a use."  This led to the idea of a "personal use" right under fair use.

The fair use doctrine allows an individual to make a copy of their lawfully obtained copyrighted work for their own personal use. Allowing people to make a copy for personal use provides for "enhanced consumer convenience through legitimate and lawful copying. It can also enlarge the exploitable market for the rights holders." The fair use privilege's personal use right is what allows an individual to make a backup copy of their computer software or music and video content as a defense against future media failure.

Personal use also permits fans to make "mix tapes" or compilations of their favorite songs from their own personal music collection or off the radio for "their own personal enjoyment in a more convenient format," also called "format shifting." Another example of acceptable personal use copying of a copyrighted work is "time-shifting," or the recording of a copyrighted program to enjoy at a later and more convenient time.
This has been expanded to include the right and ability to copy ones own music collection onto their own computer storage device and create customized play lists for their own personal use and enjoyment of their music.

It is important to note that while consumers have the right to listen to their own music collection for their own personal use, they do not have the legal right to make their music collections available to others by uploading them onto the Internet for public downloading, or to share them and give them away to others.  I am guilty of violating this idea.  :)

"Warez" is and always has been illegal in any form, unless royalties are paid to the publishers.  It is stealing, plain and simple.  Facilitating it is a crime, as is downloading or using pirated software.  Warez is blatant and obvious.  You should be ashamed.  :)  But there are more subtle issues.

The DMCA, Section 1201 "prohibits gaining unauthorized access to a work by circumventing a technological protection measure put in place by the copyright owner where such protection measure otherwise effectively controls access to a copyrighted work. This prohibition on unauthorized access takes effect two years after enactment of the DMCA."   This is why circumventing IP copy protection is illegal, although this 1998 law is still being modified and re-interpreted.

In any case, the bottom line is still being adjudicated and probably will be for some time to come.  My advise is to not do it, and do not participate in any schemes that enable copyright violation.  I expect the law will become much more rigid, not more liberal in these matters.

Cheers.

-------------
Support the12volt.com

Also, back to the Sony issue, they have apparently admitted their software is wrong and are trying to "fix" it:

Article HERE.

-------------
Support the12volt.com

DYohn:

What an excellent balanced post. I'll attempt to back off my dramatic and soapbox-like and write an appropriate reply.

You draw a distinction between "personal use" (mix tapes, format shifting, and time shifting) and impermissible sharing. I believe this is a very important distinction; very important.

Bravo. I believe in Intellectual Property Rights. I recently accepted a job where I'll be obtaining and defending them for a living in less than a year. Artists, inventors, businesses; IP rights provide them with an important incentive to invest. An incentive authorized by the Constitution.

However, I also believe in some sort of Correct Level of IP rights. I'm glad you recognize the fact that the 1998 DMCA is still being modified and re-interpreted. You say that you expect the law to become more rigid rather than more liberal.

I HOPE that the voice of the public AND the voice of interested corporate entities (those making DVR's, VCR's, MP3 players, etc.) is strong enough to counterbalance the strong lobbying for the DMCA from the Sony/BMG's of the world.

During a period of interpretation and modification, I believe the public has a right to fight against laws that will negatively affect the way they enjoy items they buy in the sanctity of their own home.

Please note that this fighting, to me, should NOT include the sharing of music and movies. Illegal sharing DOES hurt authors, programmers, etc. I used to be a programmer. I understand this.

The regulation of IP rights are authorized in the Constitution by the following line, Article I, Section 8:
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"

It has been well recognized by the courts and the academic world that incentive to invest is the primary interest we are worried about protecting. In other words, we want to encourage artists and companies to make music and invest in research and development. We accomplish this encouragement by providing artists and inventors some correct level of exclusive rights; a level where free-riders (those who spent no time and effort) cannot illegitimately compete or offer the work or invention for free, harming the ability of the artist or inventor to achieve the correct return on his investment.

Here's my problem with the DMCA: it goes beyond the level of promoting the progress of science and the useful arts authorized by the Constitution. It has not been shown that artists' ability to achieve a correct return on investment, stimulating their investment, is achieved by making it illegal for buyers of the CD's to be subject to civil and criminal penalties for exercising the "personal use" mentioned above (time shifting, format shifting, mix tapes).

The key question is this: Does allowing my personal use (time shifting, format shifting, mix tapes), after I bought the CD, harm the artist's ability to earn a return on his investment?

I say NO! I say that restricting my personal use is wrong because the artist or inventor has already extracted their profit from me. I say that restricting my personal use goes beyond the promotion of the arts and useful sciences authorized by the Constitution. I say that artists' and inventors' incentive to invest is not damaged by my personal use after I already paid for a CD.

Stevdart mentioned that I wasn't the norm when I said I buy CD's, convert them to FLAC for my personal use, and do not share them. He might be right. To the extent such format shifting harms artists' ability to earn a return on their creation-related investment, I believe the record companies -should- be able to do something about it.

However, I have neither seen proof that format shifting hurts artists' ability to earn a return on their investment, nor that there are less restrictive alternatives (that don't impose so many restrictions on me, the sucker that actually paid for price-fixed piece of plastic). I don't think Congress has seen this evidence either. I don't think the Music companies have this evidence. I think the Music companies have been blind to business models that could embrace the 21st century consumer.

I believe the CORRECT level of IP rights is an issue worth getting all Americans involved in. I believe that those opposed to rigid DMCA-like laws should speak out. I believe that the entire burden should be on the IP holders to enforce their own rights. Leave it to them to decide whether their ability to return a correct return on investment has been hampered by me, the format-shifting-buyer.

I believe IP rights should include IP holder's abilities to go after individuals that pirate works.

I don't believe that IP rights should include criminal or civil penalties that harm a paying customer's ability to enjoy their purchase in their own home.

I think that I should be able to buy a Sony/BMG CD and copy the darn thing to my IPOD without violating the DMCA. I bet most artists in this country also believe that I should be able to do this.

I don't think the artists' interests are the ones being served in the DMCA+Sony DRM case. I think Sony is trying to bolster, anticompetitively, their position in the digital player and music download world.

Thank you for the more-balanced post, DYohn. I hope this post followed suit and was also more-balanced and less dramatic.

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

Yep.  It is a complex and evolving issue.  I really believe the wishes of the public are moot in this unless court challenges are brought.  It is the corporations and copyright holders who have the power to influence the law.  The only power consumers have is to 1) let lawmakers know how you feel and hope they listen, and 2) use the power of the purse.  If you don't like what a company like Sony is doing, then don't buy Sony products.  Organize a boycott.  Take out ads in the trade and fan magazines and on TV.  Make a web site like sonysucks.com.  Losing money is really the only thing most corporations and lawmakers will really listen to.

My position on this issue in these forums remains: any member may discuss, argue, cajole, bitch and complain all they want.  But when anyone posts instructions, tips or links to other web sites intended to violate existing law, the line has been crossed.  I do not care if people agree or disagree with the law: it is what it is and we'll do our best to not proliferate violations.  It protects the forum and everyone else's ability to access and use it.  Cool? 

-------------
Support the12volt.com

Wow this thread got hot fast,

The way I see it, its all about choice.. My personal choice to break the law or not. Sometimes I choose to break the law, sometimes I choose to abide by the law

As an adult with a prior criminal record I will gladly serve my time to society if I choose to break a law and get caught, thats my choice, most people will not  break the law and I respect that

Due to the nature of the company I work for, every day we have to Violate the DMCA there is no option itspart of  what makes us our money

Does that mean I dont respect Copyrights, Tradmarks and IP? no it doesn't , you should be paid for your work, but as I have said before many times, I will not let myself get blatantly ripped off .. I will take my business elsewhere or look to other means

Does that make me a bad person, evil , A criminal.. yes it does but I can live with myself , I sleep soundly at night knowing every now and then I can screw over the entire structure of business

But again this is only the thoughs of a Insane Computer guy.. your thoughts will vary with mileage

Stay safe and have fun all

--Skold
Destroying The World Since 5 Billion B.C



-------------
2004 Honda Civic Ex 4Dr

Kenwood DDX-7015/W Nav
4 Fosgate T152C
Hifonics Brutus BX1500D
RE XXX 12 in a 4 Cube Snail Shell

DYohn:

Of course it is cool that you do your job as a moderator. Had you simply moderated without calling me, and others that actually buy their music, a thief, I probably wouldn't have commented.

The combination, and adding your stature in the mind of some young minds on this board, motivated me to providing a counterpoint.

Keep doing your job, but remember that with power comes responsibility; you influence quite a few young minds here. I beg you to provide a balanced view of controversial topics while moderating. Your post from another forum accomplished this. Thank you.

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

Here's a list of titles to watch out for:

https://www.eff.org/news/archives/2005_11.php#004146

-------------
Build the box so that it performs well in the worst case scenario and, in return, it will reward you at all times.

Just read an article in Yahoo that says an Anti virus company has already found three viruses that are piggy backing their way into PCs on the Sony Rootkit. I thought it was going to take a little longer then this. Wow Skold!

-------------
There is no such thing as free installation!

"Stung by continuing criticism, the world's second-largest music label, Sony BMG Music Entertainment, promised Friday to temporarily suspend making music CDs with antipiracy technology that can leave computers vulnerable to hackers."

https://apnews.excite.com/article/20051112/D8DQJN3G2.html

-------------
Support the12volt.com

 PRIVACY AND SECURITY TIP: Sony's music CD rootkit

-------------

There is a PATCH available.............But SONY Sucks>>>>>>>>

https://www.accountancyage.com/vnunet/news/2145413/sony-rapped-rootkit-music-cd

Plus SONY put a Stop to it Friday:

https://apnews1.iwon.com//article/20051112/D8DQJN3G2.html?PG=home&SEC=news

-------------
MO

Don't Learn from Others Mistakes
You Might Be the One That Knows.

-------------