Microsoft unveils new antipiracy tools

TalkBack 22 of 158:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Whats Rediculous

Is the fact that a digital file while whole,uncopied,complete to its first form,must go through a battery of examinations in order to have it 'mobile,or ubiquitous between 'storage locations.

Using along with this the precipitous 'aquire liscence to do so,in inarticulate as to the actual 'existence of the person of ownership of that media file. That is,the requirement of somekind of 'notification again to manufacturer,or authentication, wich is done when a location of the same media file is located at the persons description - .. . .... and so on.

The actual relationship to 'purchases wich microsoft portrays,that of a 'lifetime of ownership from the proprietors of wich they are purchased' should be challenged. Either in its ethical count of person in ownership,or via competing platforms of products and 'goods.

The idea of the subscription model bypasses this question. Whereby the role of 'ownership of copyrighted 'goods seen through commerce of them is sidetracked via the again 'contract of sale agreement ideals.

The deliberation of device by Microsoft to choose is also questionable since this ideal details that 'Microsoft is 'party to all purchases,whereby these are and should be individual,unique and transparent to what specifications they contain concerning operability as pertaining to the files 'feature within the copyrighted work.

Microsoft should not make itself party to 'any purchase,except to the reasonable 'performance of 'good. It should not replace the person of consumers ,and relationship of 'good,via the contractual delegation provisioned because of the directo corrolation of the benifit of devices that Microsoft can control.

Those devices are the persons usage.They should not be considered colateral to the 'contract of effect 'to replace 'commerce of good,via satisfactory expectation of performance in them. Which should be 'defined by the 'uniqueness of the features involved describing using of copyrighted media works -purchased as 'good only.

No such 'liscence needs parallel a patronage.Especially since in example,Microsoft,or any other cannot enter any type of contractual expectation of 'any minor to a conditional term including it.(only example).

The plural of this.Is to simply have goods,patranage,receipt,and expectation of perforance. THAT is what Microsoft cannot expect to delegate in and of itself.Since it should only be involved with the expection of performance in 'good only. NOT with 'party,and continuation of 'contractual proliferation of inconsistent legal mannerisms requiring loss of person,and continuity of performance 'in 'good of reasonable expectation.

.just talking.

Posted by: ParadigmOdyssey   Posted on: 05/03/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now
• Get top-ranked Novell support for Red Hat at 50% less Novell A simplified IT environment isn't just less complex, it's more reliable. ... Download Now
• Five Steps to Determine When to Virtualize YourServers VMware Server virtualization isn't just for big companies. Entry-level ... Download Now