YOu dun understand...this issue has been thrashed out in court in relation to VCRs 20 years ago. And the law still stands! Why would creative decide to piss off their customers en masse to protect themselves from an unlikely lawsuit?Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Licensing or potential violations of copyright issues, it has been expected.
Especially since Creative is working hand in hand with Apple, I somehow expect RIAA to be involved in this. Directly or indirectly.
Maybe I don't understand. 20 years ago I wasn't even born yet.Originally posted by scabstermooch:YOu dun understand...this issue has been thrashed out in court in relation to VCRs 20 years ago. And the law still stands! Why would creative decide to piss off their customers en masse to protect themselves from an unlikely lawsuit?
It's unlikely that Creative will start fighting with Apple again over the MP3 market.Originally posted by scabstermooch:Because creative is trying to capture the mp3 player market from apple?
Its a risk management issue and indications are that there isn't much risk. Hence, my suspicion that RIAA must have done some very very serious lobbying somewhere or used some other form of underhand methods.
Bloody RIAA is acting like the mafia!
No. I only mean that they won't fight against each other.Originally posted by scabstermooch:so you mean creative will not be bothering with its mp3 players anymore?
See, most of the latest hits are being broadcast through radio before the album is out as a promo. But ppl record it, and sell them, or allow downloads online.Originally posted by nightzip:HUH? Radio only leh???
Why cannot record? So does THAT means we cannot record channel 8, channel 5, etc programmes? Then Starhub should NOT allow pre-recording also liao leh?
What nonsense is this???
Cuz if you say record music from radio then convert to mp3 is illegal, then how about recording updated movies from cable vision (which normally shows very recent movies like 1 month ago types) and then seeing it at your own leisure time???![]()
![]()
I think what creative is trying to do is to pre-emptively demonstrate that it has tried to do something about copyright infringement - so that it cannot later be said that Creative knew infringemnt was gg on but did nothing even though it could.Originally posted by hisoka:A more interesting issue would be whether they were cheating hte customers by listing the FM recordability as part of the features and now taking it out.