Karaoke Forums

Nope. Rather than me supplying something that people will dispute for the heck of it, I invite any and all to research the software wars of the '90s, and get their own undisputed info. Software makers fought tooth and nail against single site backups - and lost. What they wanted does not matter. Look it up yourselves.

However, Jim's issue is with media shifted backups. To date, no court precedent has been set in stone either for or against media shifting. That is why it is still described as a gray area.

Jim may well be trying to set said precedent, but it hasn't happened yet. Until it does, initiating a suit based on media shifting is simply a trolling effort.

Make no mistake - it IS based solely on media shifting, not display. Otherwise, OMD hosts would be targets as well. An original mfrs. disc displays the same logo.

However their suits are resolved, SC is targeting any media shifter, regardless of past loyalty as a paying customer or any lack of indicators of actual wrondoing.


Think "shoot them all - we'll figure it out later.".

Yes, it gets repetitious, but as long as the same statements are made, one must expect the same replies to be given....

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

To media shift = create a copy which effectively = create a backup. The greater issue is that technology has enabled us to create copies with such ease that sharing those copies has become trivial for even the least tech savvy individuals. So the pushback on copies regardless of type is justified by the IP rights holders.

This is one reason why cloud/online models are gaining in popularity. The IP holders can control their IP much more effectively.

_________________
-Chris

If SC's interest were truly to make new law forbidding media shifting, they could have done it a long time ago with admissions of media shifting and a motion for summary judgment asking the court as a matter of law to find liability. Have they done that? If not, why not? Too risky? A decision of no liability may set bad precedent for them? Prefer instead to continue to extract settlements? Maybe a defendant will file such a motion for non-liability?

If the rules are stated as "No Unauthorized Copies" with the understanding that there will be some sort of penalty *AND* the product in question states this clearly *AND* the company involved put the word out through various means *AND* the community is chattering about it - then I have no problem with them "extracting" settlements. Willful ignorance is not bliss under any circumstances.

_________________
-Chris

The law is already there and in fact there is a provision to be able copy, media shift or whatever for private, personal use. A karaoke host is a professional use.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Again Chris, you are not the universe. And laws may differ from your view.

I don't know why you think that I believe that there is no other way for things to be than what I present here. I usually qualify things and I accept that my world view isn't shared by everyone else. But I also don't believe I am solitary in my views. I keep a pretty open mind about things.....unless I know I am right.

I made no mention of "laws", only "rules".
I qualified the above with "I have no problem", not that no one should have a problem with with the extraction of settlements.
I also used a series of *AND* conditions which even you should agree that *IF* they are all true, should be a pretty good case for filing suit. That is common sense outside of the law.

_________________
-Chris

I assure you, our interest has never been in making new law. The existing law is plenty fine for our purposes. Our primary purposes have been and are to recover money for piracy of the product and to stop it going forward.

Your fundamental problem with what we do has nothing to do with law or procedure. It is that you have a problem with a company making money from its intellectual property when that means using the courts to compel pirates to pay for what they stole. What we are asking for isn't exorbitant or confiscatory. But it is also not a public service enterprise, nor should it be.

Maybe in Canada. If Sears wants to make a backup of their accounting software here, they have every right to do so - for professional use.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

Joe, I don't understand the comparison. Copying media to be used in place of the original is totally different from copying a Department Store's accounting program. The Department Store would not be using their Back-Up program to run their accounting from. Just like I work for Merrill Lynch/Bank of America on their Mainframe. We run our regular Batch work, and then also have that work duplicated/copied to our CNR (Crash n Recovery) systems in case of anything happening (such as a Disaster Recovery scenario). That's still doesn't compare to copying media, and using the copies instead of the originals.

Given the size of Sears and the number of licenses they will be using for a piece of software, Sears will likely have a major licensing agreement with the software vendor that entitles them to request installation media or files at will from the vendor at no charge. They will also likely be allowed to store the installation files on a distribution server with custom installation scripts that modify the installed software to their parameters.

At Microsoft this is call Volume Licensing. The Microsoft Volume Licensing programs often extends use of said software to be used on the home computers of employees with certain restrictions.

Point being......Sears is not going to be worried in the least about storing a backup of their Windows 8.1 CD but they will go to great lengths to ensure they have their database files highly available, redundant, replicated and backup both on-site and off-site.

They can call their Microsoft Technical Account Manager 24/7 to ask for the Windows 8.1 installation files.

_________________
-Chris

I think you mean Windows 3.1. We are talking about Sears.

Just Pepsi -ed my tablet... now THAT'S freakin' funny!

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

....of course that ships on 28 - 3.5" floppies as well.......


EDIT.....ack....age is getting the best of me. the 28 floppies was Win95. I don't know how many floppies Windows 3.1 shipped on because 1) I never installed Win 3.1 and 2) the copy of Windows 3.1 I have is sealed and will remain that way.

_________________
-Chris

Six floppies normally. I have them here somewhere..

Didn't that come on 5 inchers?

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

The days before CD ROM's

Five Million LPs.. http://money.cnn.com/video/news/2014/08 ... tml?iid=GM

it's a good thing you posted the link or there would be 4 members in here crying piracy !!!

I wonder if they have been doing any "media shifting" without authorization?