Searching \ for '[OT]: Will pay cash for pic programming' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/microchip/devprogs.htm?key=programming
Search entire site for: 'Will pay cash for pic programming'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT]: Will pay cash for pic programming'
2000\10\22@113524 by hgraf

picon face
As I mentioned in my post, most of my "ranting" applies to NA. The original
poster did email me saying that in the UK this practice was legal, as I
mentioned at the bottom of my post. TTYL

> {Original Message removed}

2000\10\23@101706 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
You'll find that many of the people on this list will not help you.  At some
point an engineer designed the scheme you are attempting to circumvent, and we
like to look after our own, so to speak.

As far as overcoming multi-region encoding on DVDs, I suspect that there are
laws in the UK which would prevent you from disabling the copy-right protection
scheme in your DVD players.  The owners of the work you are trying to play have
given certian rights to DVD publishers to produce DVDs on a per region basis.
By enabling your player to play a DVD published and sold in the US you are
denying the owner of the work the ability to determine who sells their work,
what the royalties are, etc, etc.

Now, I personally feel that it would be better if authors and owners were more
open with their work.  But I certianly believe that if they want to excercise
such control over it, and implement schemes to do so, then by overcoming those
schemes one is essentially stealing from them.  While that may be 'legal' in a
particular country, it is certianly unethical and/or immoral.  (unless of course
it is a corporation whose copyright you are breaking, they have no rights, and
we love our double-standards too much to think clearly.)

-Adam

Terry Ferrari wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> {Original Message removed}

2000\10\23@104248 by Bond Peter S-petbond1

flavicon
face
> You'll find that many of the people on this list will not help you.  At
some
> point an engineer designed the scheme you are attempting to circumvent,
and we
> like to look after our own, so to speak.

Noble sentiment.  In general, I'd agree - however, in this case, I feel your
reasons are not quite accurate.

{Quote hidden}

Firstly, there are no laws in the UK that "prevent you from disabling the
copyright protection".  The crime exists in breaching the copyright -
whether or not one is entitled to make a backup copy is rapidly getting
greyer.  However, making a "backup" and selling it is obviously criminal.

Secondly, region coding on DVDs does not exist to prevent copyright
protection, it exists to control distribution between regions, in much the
same way as film releases are phased (we in the UK get films months after
they have disappeared from cinemas in the US).

Thirdly, the selection of R2 DVDs is fairly poor in comparison the selection
available in the US - we have perhaps 10% of the titles available.

Fourthly, for reasons best known to the producers of the DVDs, we generally
end up with inferior (and significantly more expensive) discs than the US.

Defeating region coding (as opposed to Macrovision, which is there for copy
protection) enables those of us who give a monkey's about the films we watch
(and, on a similar note, are allowed to watch by the BBFC - but that isn't
my issue) to get hold of discs from the US that simply cannot be obtained
anywhere else.  Still purchased, at (full?) retail price, from US
distributors - so there is no theft going on.  The recent case over DeCSS
has been a more interesting issue - those for it, said it enabled Linux to
play DVDs.  Those against it pointed out (accurately) that it made it easier
to copy those same DVDs.  Modchips do not facilitate piracy.

The one area that could be construed as dubious is that it reduces revenues
for the local distributors who wish to fob us off with sub-standard
reproductions of films we wish to watch.  Quite frankly, if they reacted a
little bit more sensibly - for example, by producing discs of equivalent
quality to R1 releases - then the demand for modchips would disappear.

{Quote hidden}

No theft is carried out.  No immoral behaviour goes on.  No copyrights are
broken.  The only thing that is unethical is the distribution of substandard
product at 50% more than the cost of the "identical" product n thousand
miles away.

As you can probably guess, I tend to buy a number of DVDs from across the
water, so I'm biased in favour of defeating region encoding!

Cor, it's a long way down from this hobbyhorse...

Peter
(and no, I'm not going to be assisting, as I lack that one vital commodity -
time)

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
.....piclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspamspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@111436 by Simon Nield

flavicon
face
Well said Peter. I was trying to conjure up my own rebuttal of Adam's misguided tirade, but couldn't
work up the energy.

Regards,
Simon

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@111439 by Bob Ammerman

picon face
Remember:

When you buy a DVD you are _not_ buying the media. You are buying the rights
(license) to use the content, under whatever restrictions the copyright
holder cares to name. If one of those restrictions states that it may only
be viewed in North America (or Antarctica for that matter), that is
perfectly valid.

While I personally think it is stupid for the content providers to be
fracturing the marketplace as they are, it is their right to do so.

As I said before, I for one will have nothing to do with this, except of
course to repeatedly get up on my soapbox about it :-)

I've added some more comments below....

Bob Ammerman
RAm Systems
(contract development of high performance, high function, low-level
software)


> Secondly, region coding on DVDs does not exist to prevent copyright
> protection, it exists to control distribution between regions, in much the
> same way as film releases are phased (we in the UK get films months after
> they have disappeared from cinemas in the US).

Yep,  again it is there choice to do this, even if we think it is stupid.

> Thirdly, the selection of R2 DVDs is fairly poor in comparison the
selection
> available in the US - we have perhaps 10% of the titles available.

Yep,  again it is there choice to do this, even if we think it is stupid.

> Fourthly, for reasons best known to the producers of the DVDs, we
generally
> end up with inferior (and significantly more expensive) discs than the US.

Yep,  again it is there choice to do this, even if we think it is stupid.

> Defeating region coding (as opposed to Macrovision, which is there for
copy
> protection) enables those of us who give a monkey's about the films we
watch
> (and, on a similar note, are allowed to watch by the BBFC - but that isn't
> my issue) to get hold of discs from the US that simply cannot be obtained
> anywhere else.  Still purchased, at (full?) retail price, from US
> distributors - so there is no theft going on.

When you purchase a DVD from the US you are purchasing a license to view it
in R1, not R2! So, you are still stealing the R2 license.

> The recent case over DeCSS
> has been a more interesting issue - those for it, said it enabled Linux to
> play DVDs.  Those against it pointed out (accurately) that it made it
easier
> to copy those same DVDs.  Modchips do not facilitate piracy.

> The one area that could be construed as dubious is that it reduces
revenues
> for the local distributors who wish to fob us off with sub-standard
> reproductions of films we wish to watch.  Quite frankly, if they reacted a
> little bit more sensibly - for example, by producing discs of equivalent
> quality to R1 releases - then the demand for modchips would disappear.

This is a very weak argument. The correct response is to just not buy
product that is viewed as inferior. The marketplace will eventually get it
right.

> > Now, I personally feel that it would be better if authors and
> > owners were more
> > open with their work.  But I certianly believe that if they
> > want to excercise
> > such control over it, and implement schemes to do so, then by
> > overcoming those
> > schemes one is essentially stealing from them.  While that
> > may be 'legal' in a
> > particular country, it is certianly unethical and/or immoral.

Amen, amen and amen.

> No theft is carried out.  No immoral behaviour goes on.  No copyrights are
> broken.

Yes, theft is carried out. This is theft of license, if you wil.

Yes, immoral behaviour goes on. Stealing is immoral.

Yes, copyrights are broken. Copyright allows the copyright owner to specify
the conditions under which the work can be used.

>The only thing that is unethical is the distribution of substandard
> product at 50% more than the cost of the "identical" product n thousand
> miles away.

This is not unethical, it is perhaps stupid.

For example, airlines will sell the exact same seat to different groups of
people for wildly different prices. It is a basic principle of economics
that if you can split your market into segments you can make more money by
setting optimizing the price seperately in each segment because of
differences in the demand curve.


Whew....

Climbing down off of rather large soapbox. Sorry, but this really bothers
me!

Bob Ammerman
RAm Systems
(contract development of high performance, high function, low-level
software)

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
.....piclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspamspam.....mitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@112311 by Bob Blick

face
flavicon
face
I think there are more than two opinions on this (and actually
any) topic. My own personal opinion is that VHS tape is good enough for me
and I hope DVD dies a painful(for the copyright holder) death. Copy
protection is wrong, the main reason being it turns people into criminals.

Perhaps we need one of those polls at piclist.com, but I hope it has more
than two choices.

Cheers,

Bob

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
EraseMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@114602 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
Well, all your arguments are centered around the belief that the copyright owner
has no right to determine who gets the work and how.

Copyright is more than just preventing someone from making copies of your work.
It is also the control you exert over the distribution, medium and form of your
work.

By perpetuating the fallacy that you are justified in overcoming copyright
restrictions because of "poor quality/distribution/decisions" you are eroding my
rights as well.

-Adam

(specific responses below)

Bond Peter S-petbond1 wrote:
> Secondly, region coding on DVDs does not exist to prevent copyright
> protection, it exists to control distribution between regions, in much the
> same way as film releases are phased (we in the UK get films months after
> they have disappeared from cinemas in the US).

You contend that controlling distribution between regions is not the right of
the creator of the work?

{Quote hidden}

These are what I would call rationalizations.  Rationalization is nothing more
than a poor excuse to do something you believe to be wrong.

> No theft is carried out.  No immoral behaviour goes on.  No copyrights are
> broken.  The only thing that is unethical is the distribution of substandard
> product at 50% more than the cost of the "identical" product n thousand
> miles away.

It again comes down to the choice the work holder makes.  Whether you feel
justified in doing so or not, the simple fact is that they have chosen to
exercise their rights in this way.  You are trampling on their rights.  You may
feel justified in doing so, but you are still doing it.  You are at the mercy of
the copyright holder.  When you are put in the position of needing to protect
your own copyrights it will be interesting to see how you act.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@115213 by Bob Ammerman

picon face
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Blick <@spam@bobKILLspamspamTED.NET>
To: <KILLspamPICLISTKILLspamspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 11:22 AM
Subject: Re: [OT]: Will pay cash for pic programming


> I think there are more than two opinions on this (and actually
> any) topic. My own personal opinion is that VHS tape is good enough for me
> and I hope DVD dies a painful(for the copyright holder) death. Copy
> protection is wrong, the main reason being it turns people into criminals.

This is completely wrong! Does displaying a bin of apples outside the
grocery mart turn the kids that grab one and run into criminals?

Bob Ammerman
RAm Systems
(contract development of high performance, high function, low-level
software)

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamBeGonespammitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@120433 by D Lloyd

flavicon
face
part 1 2168 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset=us-ascii
See below:





(Embedded     Bob Ammerman <TakeThisOuTRAMMERMANEraseMEspamspam_OUTPRODIGY.NET>EraseMEspamspam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU>> image moved   23/10/2000 16:51
to file:
pic00479.pcx)





Please respond to pic microcontroller discussion list
     <
RemoveMEPICLISTspamTakeThisOuTMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent by:  pic microcontroller discussion list <PICLISTEraseMEspam.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU>


To:   EraseMEPICLISTspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
cc:
Subject:  Re: [OT]: Will pay cash for pic programming

Security Level:?         Internal


{Original Message removed}
part 2 165 bytes content-type:application/octet-stream; (decode)

part 3 107 bytes
--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestEraseMEspamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@121715 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>The marketplace will eventually get it right.

You seriously believe this? I get the impression from this statement that you have never lived in the UK. Having lived here a short time I would not put any faith in this happening, especially in an industry that sees fit to regionally encode their media, whatever their rights to do so.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspam_OUTspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@121911 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
The real problem is not copyright protection, but that our current economic
models do not adequately support copyrights for digital works.  VHS wasn't so
bad, you knew that it took a lot of time to copy a tape to another tape (even
for high volume, high speed copies).  DVDs and CDs can be pressed in a fraction
of the time it took for tape.  Since the price of distribution fell, the end
user cost should have as well.  It hasn't, and it won't since the companies are
milking consumers at the 'price the market can bear', rather than 'the price we
can still make a decent profit at, and still get our product into their hands'.

I'd like to see you convince the populace of the world to stop buying
over-priced DVDs and CDs.

I don't know the answer.  I still believe that a copyright holder should be able
enforce their rights, but I also know that many of these holders are basing
their models on older methods.  They are collapsing now, and are scrambling to
find new ways to keep using the old model with new technology.  Most of these
'fit the large foot into the tiny shoe' schemes center around 'copy
protection'.  It won't work.  It can't work.  Some small company is going to
come along with a completely different model and mindset that uses a different
method of distribution that actually works.  When that happens, these older more
established companies are going to have to change rapidly, or they'll die.  This
isn't going to be some small change such as pricing structure, copy protection,
etc.

My favorite quote from Dilbert:
*POP*
"What was that sound?"
"A paradigm shifting without a clutch."

-Adam

Bob Blick wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
EraseMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@123547 by Dale Botkin

flavicon
face
On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, M. Adam Davis wrote:

> My favorite quote from Dilbert:
> *POP*
> "What was that sound?"
> "A paradigm shifting without a clutch."

Huh -- I shift without a clutch all the time, and no one even notices.

8-)  We *are OT, after all!

Dale
---
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new
discoveries, is not "Eureka!" (I found it!) but "That's funny ..."
               -- Isaac Asimov

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspamspammitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@123754 by Bond Peter S-petbond1

flavicon
face
> Well said Peter. I was trying to conjure up my own rebuttal
> of Adam's misguided tirade, but couldn't
> work up the energy.

Bob's point is interesting, in that he says that you purchase the right to
watch the DVD (in accordance with the restrictions), rather than the item
itself (i.e. a disc imprinted with film x).  This of course would mean my
watching R1 DVDs constitutes a breach (which would make my actions amoral
rather than immoral - regardless of specious accusations of
rationalisation).  The disclaimer on R2 films usually states that it may not
be shown to groups for money, on oil rigs, in prisons etc, but not where it
may be shown geographically.

I'm trying to remember if I've seen anything on R1 discs that explicitly
states that the disc may not be viewed in any country outside its assigned
region code (I'm fairly sure the FBI warning doesn't have it).  If anyone
can point me at a resource that clarifies this, I'd be interested.  The only
sites I can find that say anything on the subject say "Yes!  It's legal!".
However, since they tend to be the same sites extolling the virtues of
importing R1, I don't think they can be deemed unbiased somehow...

Adam's tirade hinges on one point, and only one point where we disagree -
that is that I do not believe I am breaching the copyright on the work by
watching it over here, whilst he does.  All of the rest follows from that
primary assumption.  Bob's suggestion that the marketplace should simply not
buy the offending product - why, if there is a better alternative available,
and there are no laws that say otherwise?  Or possibly more exactly, there
are no perceived laws that prevent it.

I do feel there is a parallel here with car manufacturers threatening
European (continental) dealers should they think about selling a car to a UK
resident for export.  Cars in the UK are much more expensive, and it has now
been deemed illegal by the EU to play this sort of game.  I could go on a
rant about fair trade, anti-competitive practices and similar, but it would
all probably come across as sour grapes.  Or bananas for the more topically
minded...

I'd love the erosion of rights bit explained, however?

Oh - and as for copy protection, I *think* I can see what the poster meant -
there have been a few times where I have purchased sw (usually games) with
copy protection that functions arbitrarily, depending on what CD drive is
used.  In these cases, there can be no argument about whether or not I have
succeeded in purchasing the right to use the sw, but I'm prevented from
doing so by measures that don't really bother the individuals it is
*supposed* to inconvenience.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestSTOPspamspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@125006 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>Some small company is going to
>come along with a completely different model and mindset that uses a different
>method of distribution that actually works.  When that happens, these older more
>established companies are going to have to change rapidly, or they'll die.  This
>isn't going to be some small change such as pricing structure, copy protection,
>etc.

is this not what is happening over the MP3 fiasco?
I have no problem with copyright per se, but when I see artists getting the sort of laws passed that have happened in the European Union where they expect to get a few pennies every time a record or CD they put out gets sold second hand, then they do come into the money grabbing category. Do you get a second bite at the cherry when someone else sells an item you have programmed as a second hand item? this is the sort of situation that creates the environment for trying to get stuff by the backdoor.

When DVD came out the movie industry tried to do this for their artists and have found that the model does not work. They would actually lower their costs if they did away with the copy protection and swamped the market with their product. This would also remove the pirate market and all the costs of chasing that as well.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-requestSTOPspamspamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@125421 by Bob Ammerman

picon face
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan B. Pearce <KILLspamA.B.PearcespamBeGonespamRL.AC.UK>
To: <EraseMEPICLISTspamEraseMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [OT]: Will pay cash for pic programming


>>The marketplace will eventually get it right.

>You seriously believe this? I get the impression from this statement that
you have never lived in the UK. Having >lived here a short time I would not
put any faith in this happening, especially in an industry that sees fit to
>regionally encode their media, whatever their rights to do so.

Yes, I believe this, in the sense that 'get it right' is 'maximizing
profit', and that you'll never maximize profit with a cruddy product.

Bob Ammerman
RAm Systems
(contract development of high performance, high function, low-level
software)

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
@spam@piclist-unsubscribe-request@spam@spamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@125424 by Bob Ammerman

picon face
----- Original Message -----
From: M. Adam Davis <.....adavisspam_OUTspamUBASICS.COM>
To: <TakeThisOuTPICLIST.....spamTakeThisOuTMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: [OT]: Will pay cash for pic programming


> The real problem is not copyright protection, but that our current
economic
> models do not adequately support copyrights for digital works.  VHS wasn't
so
> bad, you knew that it took a lot of time to copy a tape to another tape
(even
> for high volume, high speed copies).  DVDs and CDs can be pressed in a
fraction
> of the time it took for tape.  Since the price of distribution fell, the
end
> user cost should have as well.  It hasn't, and it won't since the
companies are
> milking consumers at the 'price the market can bear', rather than 'the
price we
> can still make a decent profit at, and still get our product into their
hands'.

Actually, it is the 'price that maximizes our profits', or at least an
attempt at that.

> I'd like to see you convince the populace of the world to stop buying
> over-priced DVDs and CDs.

Won't happen of course. By definition DVD's and CD's are _not_ overpriced if
people continue to buy them in such quantities as to provide sweet profits
to the content providers.

OTOH: remember when the typical VHS movie was US$70 and up? Now you can get
most anything for US$20 to US$25. I guess they learned something there.

> I don't know the answer.  I still believe that a copyright holder should
be able
> enforce their rights, but I also know that many of these holders are
basing
> their models on older methods.  They are collapsing now, and are
scrambling to
> find new ways to keep using the old model with new technology.  Most of
these
> 'fit the large foot into the tiny shoe' schemes center around 'copy
> protection'.  It won't work.  It can't work.  Some small company is going
to
> come along with a completely different model and mindset that uses a
different
> method of distribution that actually works.  When that happens, these
older more
> established companies are going to have to change rapidly, or they'll die.
This
> isn't going to be some small change such as pricing structure, copy
protection,
> etc.

Let's hope you are right!

> My favorite quote from Dilbert:
> *POP*
> "What was that sound?"
> "A paradigm shifting without a clutch."
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
TakeThisOuTpiclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspamspamspammitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@125630 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>Bob's point is interesting, in that he says that you purchase the right to
>watch the DVD (in accordance with the restrictions), rather than the item
>itself (i.e. a disc imprinted with film x).  This of course would mean my
>watching R1 DVDs constitutes a breach (which would make my actions amoral
>rather than immoral - regardless of specious accusations of
>rationalisation).
It also brings up two questions -
If I purchase a DVD player in R1, along with a few DVD's, and take them to another region, am I now breaking some copyright or other law by watching them on a legally purchased player?

If I have lived in region 1 for a period and built up a library of DVD's which I have legally watched and generally abided by the law, but know for employment opportunities move to work in a different region, can I not now watch my legally acquired library of DVD's?

The problem is the whole world population is now so much more mobile, and the movie industry is still travelling in a Model T instead of a Jumbo Jet.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
.....piclist-unsubscribe-requestspamRemoveMEmitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@130632 by Andrew Kunz

flavicon
face
>When that happens, these older more established companies are going to have to
change rapidly, or they'll die.


Nope.  They'll buy out the small company and keep "business as usual."

For example, M$.

Andy

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@130840 by Andrew Kunz

flavicon
face
>region code (I'm fairly sure the FBI warning doesn't have it).  If anyone


You get FBI warnings on videos not available to view in the USA?  HAHAHAHAHA!
Now _that's_ funny!

(Assuming that your region is not compatible with this one, that is).

Andy

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-request@spam@spamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@131045 by Andy Howard

picon face
> From: "Bob Ammerman" <TakeThisOuTRAMMERMANspamspamPRODIGY.NET>



> > The one area that could be construed as dubious is that it reduces
> revenues
> > for the local distributors who wish to fob us off with sub-standard
> > reproductions of films we wish to watch.  Quite frankly, if they reacted
a
> > little bit more sensibly - for example, by producing discs of equivalent
> > quality to R1 releases - then the demand for modchips would disappear.
>
> This is a very weak argument. The correct response is to just not buy
> product that is viewed as inferior. The marketplace will eventually get it
> right.

I think you could argue that this is exactly what is happening - just that
the market in this case is international. People are not buying the inferior
R2 selections, instead they are using those essentially internationalising
market devices the credit card and net retailing to get from the market the
product they desire.


Just to muddy the waters a little more, I'm told that on many DVD players
sold in the UK the region settings can be changed by entering a code into
the remote control.

Cheers,

Andy (non-DVD owner)

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestEraseMEspammitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@131458 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
If I understand you correctly, you are saying that the person/entity who created
the work does not have the right to determine how the work is used (as in,
where, when, and to whom)?

Or are you contending that they only have that right if they use it
'responsibly'?

So if I decided that my wildly popular creation could be viewed in the US at
great quality, but those in another country were limited to a lower quality, or
perhaps not the whole creation, then you believe that I do not have that right?
Does it really matter *why* I choose to do so?  Isn't it my right regardless of
my reasons?

-Adam

Bond Peter S-petbond1 wrote:

> Adam's tirade hinges on one point, and only one point where we disagree -
> that is that I do not believe I am breaching the copyright on the work by
> watching it over here, whilst he does.  All of the rest follows from that
> primary assumption.

tirade: a protracted speech usually marked by intemperate, vituperative, or
harshly censorious language.

I can understand the 'protracted' part, but intemperate, vituperative, or
harshly censorious?  I certianly did not mean to be abusive in my posting, I'm
sorry if it seemed that way.  Probably arises from language cues that are
different between our continents?

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestEraseMEspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@131504 by Bond Peter S-petbond1

flavicon
face
> You get FBI warnings on videos not available to view in the
> USA?  HAHAHAHAHA!
> Now _that's_ funny!
>
> (Assuming that your region is not compatible with this one, that is).

Oops - sorry - I'm not being clear.

My *R1* DVDs that I'm watching in R2 display FBI warnings.  Still a little
outside their normal jurisdiction, however <G>.  My R2 DVDs display a
different warning.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
@spam@piclist-unsubscribe-requestRemoveMEspamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@132111 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
I forgot the last criterion:  They only have that right if they can enforce it?
(ie, obviously they can't enfore the right in your particular household without
resorting to expensive legal problems, so therefore they don't have that right?)

-Adam

"M. Adam Davis" wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
@spam@piclist-unsubscribe-requestspam_OUTspam.....mitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@133326 by Kev

picon face
Sounds like discrimination based on nationality.  We don't allow that in the
USA anymore......

Kev

> So if I decided that my wildly popular creation could be viewed in the US
at
> great quality, but those in another country were limited to a lower
quality, or
> perhaps not the whole creation, then you believe that I do not have that
right?
> Does it really matter *why* I choose to do so?  Isn't it my right
regardless of
> my reasons?
>
> -Adam
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-requestEraseMEspammitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@133333 by mike

flavicon
face
On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:15:46 -0400, you wrote:

>You'll find that many of the people on this list will not help you.  
> At some point an engineer designed the scheme you are attempting to circumvent, and we
>like to look after our own, so to speak.

>As far as overcoming multi-region encoding on DVDs, I suspect that there are
>laws in the UK which would prevent you from disabling the copy-right protection
>scheme in your DVD players.  The owners of the work you are trying to play have
>given certian rights to DVD publishers to produce DVDs on a per region basis.
>By enabling your player to play a DVD published and sold in the US you are
>denying the owner of the work the ability to determine who sells their work,
>what the royalties are, etc, etc.
I have no problem with denying companies the right to rip people off
by creating  captive markets. In some places (I thought that included
the US, obviously not), this attempt to  control supply and fix prices
is illegal.
>Now, I personally feel that it would be better if authors and owners were more
>open with their work.  But I certianly believe that if they want to excercise
>such control over it, and implement schemes to do so, then by overcoming those
>schemes one is essentially stealing from them.  
>While that may be 'legal' in a
>particular country, it is certianly unethical and/or immoral.  I think you are in the minority here - we are not talking about
software piracy but the right of the consumer to buy and use products
they want wherever they want. I've never heard that being described as
unethical before!
In the specific case of DVD, I, and I'm sure many others,  would
strongly disagree. Region-coding is unquestionably bad for the
consumer and in the long run probably also bad for the industry. If
people across the world can by DVDs from anywhere it will almost
certainly increase overall sales, thus benefitting the authors (as
opposed to the corporations who only care about increasing their cut).
Commercial organisations like the MPAA should not be allowed to
manipulate the market and enjoy legal backing to support what is
effectively blatant illegal price-fixing.
Region coding is such a dumb, anti-consumer  concept that it
absolutely DESERVES to be broken, legally or otherwise, if only to
show these corporations that consumers are not prepared to be
exploited by them. Us engineers are also consumers, and I personally
would have no problem whatsoever in using my skills as an engineer to
protect my rights as a consumer and I'm sure I'm not alone here. If they get away with this one, what's next? I have huge admiration for people like the OpenDVD guys
(http://www.opendvd.org)  who are standing up for the rights of the consumer
against  the huge corporations, with their legal bullying tactics and
campaign of misinformation.

>(unless of course
>it is a corporation whose copyright you are breaking, they have no rights, and
>we love our double-standards too much to think clearly.)
The fact that it is a corporation just means they are big and
unethical enough to be able to get laws passed to protect their own
interests.
 
--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestspamBeGonespammitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@133537 by mike

flavicon
face
On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:44:24 -0400, you wrote:

>Well, all your arguments are centered around the belief that the copyright owner
>has no right to determine who gets the work and how.
>
>Copyright is more than just preventing someone from making copies of your work.
>It is also the control you exert over the distribution, medium and form of your
>work.
Otherwise known as price-fixing and restraint of trade.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-request@spam@spamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@133755 by David Kott

flavicon
face
> Bond Peter S-petbond1 wrote:
>
> > Adam's tirade hinges on one point, and only one point where we
disagree -
> > that is that I do not believe I am breaching the copyright on the work
by
> > watching it over here, whilst he does.  All of the rest follows from
that
> > primary assumption.
>
> tirade: a protracted speech usually marked by intemperate, vituperative,
or
> harshly censorious language.
>
> I can understand the 'protracted' part, but intemperate, vituperative, or
> harshly censorious?  I certianly did not mean to be abusive in my posting,
I'm
> sorry if it seemed that way.  Probably arises from language cues that are
> different between our continents?
>

Or, more to the point, different between our Regions? :-)

-d

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
.....piclist-unsubscribe-request@spam@spamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@135018 by Bond Peter S-petbond1

flavicon
face
> If I understand you correctly, you are saying that the
> person/entity who created
> the work does not have the right to determine how the work is
> used (as in,
> where, when, and to whom)?

Evidently you do not.

Again:

I do not believe the region coding scheme explicitly or implicitly states
that it is a breach of copyright for me to watch it in a region other than
its origin.  Hence I do not believe that any breach of copyright is taking
place.  Hence - and here's the tricky bit - there is no issue.

I shall be checking, however.

IF that is the case, THEN (oh dear, back to BASIC programming) I am not in
breach of copyright, and all further inferences on your part were incorrect.

ELSE
I am in breach of copyright.  In which case I shall make no further claims
that what I have been doing is ethical, moral or legal.

> tirade: a protracted speech usually marked by intemperate,
> vituperative, or
> harshly censorious language.

Yes, I think tirade to be wholly applicable - and I don't think it has
anything to do with a language barrier.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
.....piclist-unsubscribe-requestRemoveMEspammitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@144636 by Bruce Cannon

picon face
I hesitate to weigh in on this subject because a lot of the smartest people
on this list are involved and I don't want to seem to be criticizing them
personally.  So independent of who wrote what:

The idea that one (dvd creators/distributors for example) can do anything
they want is total crap!  The libertarian interpretation of the "free
market" concept is ridiculous.  The market is a system which must serve the
population.  Because of it's design all the players are free to attempt to
manipulate it to their advantage, and they do.  This is NOT inherently a
valuable characteristic!  The only thing that makes the system tolerable AT
ALL is the population's various means of coercing fundamentally evil
mechanisms into _generally_ acceptable behavior.

I'm not going to develop here a lengthy diatribe on capitalism but the idea
that it's perfectly OK for someone to create a superior media format and
decide that only blacks or americans or poodles can use it is grim; and the
idea of condoning that practice in order to protect general intellectual
property rights is pathetic, as is saying "If you don't like it, don't buy
it!  Isn't it great how the market works that way!".  The idea that one can
'vote' with their pocketbook is a duplicitous fiction perpetrated solely for
the advantage of its creators.

Lastly, comparing someone living in the UK who orders a film from the US and
watches it, to someone who hacks copy protection for immoral gain is
spurious and clearly designed to deflect serious consideration of the real
arguments about the rights of consumers in the market, and shouldn't be
allowed to suck any bandwidth at all.

And yes, that means that I draw a very clear distinction between 'legal' and
'moral', and disagreement with that will have to become another (long, long)
topic (one which I would reluctantly enter into with free-market
extremists).

Bruce Cannon
Style Management Systems
http://siliconcrucible.com
(510) 787-6870
1228 Ceres ST Crockett CA 94525

Remember: electronics is changing your world...for good!

> {Original Message removed}

2000\10\23@145049 by Bob Blick

face
flavicon
face
> This is completely wrong! Does displaying a bin of apples outside the
> grocery mart turn the kids that grab one and run into criminals?
>
> Bob Ammerman

The DVD disk has been purchased, it's just making it possible to view it,
no "apple" was stolen. That's why the majority of people would see no
problem with it - they bought the DVD disk fair and square. You're
comparing "apples" to "oranges".

-Bob

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
.....piclist-unsubscribe-requestSTOPspamspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\23@234754 by o-8859-1?Q?K=FCbek_Tony?=

flavicon
face
hmmmm...long thread..ignored it first..but then read up abit,

Bob Ammerman wrote:
>> No theft is carried out.  No immoral behaviour goes on.  No
copyrights are
>> broken.

>Yes, theft is carried out. This is theft of license, if you wil.

>Yes, immoral behaviour goes on. Stealing is immoral.

>Yes, copyrights are broken. Copyright allows the copyright owner to
specify
>the conditions under which the work can be used.

/soap on

Agreed BUT here in Sweden the consumer electronics stores ADVERTISE (
openly )
about 'non-region' standalone DVD-players. ( i.e. a new marketing term
).
In that case, If I buy one ( lets say that I know nothing about the
region scheme ) am I performing an illegal act ? I would consider this
to be
perfect example of 'good faith'.

Also this disturbes me, that something is allegedly illegal but should
no be so, it goes totally against 'free market' and everything else said
about
market economics. I.e. the market ( that's us :) the consumers ) should
decide
and dictate the demands for the suppliers ( oohh that's also us forgot
about
being on the piclist ). It should not be the other way around !

But it all goes in the way of the lawyers, the US-way, patent everything
and sue everybody.Yuk! ( which is not helping either mankind or general
progress )

/soap off

/Tony




Tony Kübek, Flintab AB            
²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²
E-mail: tony.kubekEraseMEspam@spam@flintab.com
²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²²

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu




2000\10\24@004655 by McMeikan, Andrew

flavicon
face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I also held out on commenting, even though I hold STRONG views.

The best thing to do if anyone needs to think through copyright issues is
to read this http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/ISP/ISP5.html

Nimmer is about the best recognized copyright expert and he brings up many thoughts and interpretations.

       cya,    Andrew...

- {Original Message removed}

2000\10\24@043020 by Bond Peter S-petbond1

flavicon
face
OK, last bit from me on this.

I have checked all the R1 DVDs I own, and whilst the wording on the back
differs slightly, they all say pretty much the same things:

For home or rental use only;  (some omit rental)
For sale in US (&/| Canada) only; (OK, that's where I bought them)
Not to be copied.

Not a word about not playing them outside R1.

As such, I still maintain that there is no breach of copyright.

FWIW, the controls that exist on region encoding are that the DVD consortium
award licences and decryption keys to manufacturers to enable them to access
the content.  If they produce a region-free player (or a player that is too
easy to make region-free), theory has it that the licence is withdrawn and
that decryption key is no longer valid.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:" =uP ONLY! "[EE]:","[OT]:" =Other "[BUY]:","[AD]:" =Ads




2000\10\24@043633 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>Agreed BUT here in Sweden the consumer electronics stores ADVERTISE (
>openly )
>about 'non-region' standalone DVD-players. ( i.e. a new marketing term
>).

Similar things are being advertised in the UK as well.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:"

2000\10\24@044050 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>For sale in US (&/| Canada) only

So if I send money or credit card info to a shop in USA or Canada from outside R1, then I have also purchased it in one of these two countries also, because as soon as the shop drops it in the mail box, they have my money and I own the DVD.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:"

2000\10\24@054656 by Russell McMahon

picon face
>>When that happens, these older more established companies are going to
have to
>change rapidly, or they'll die.
>
>
>Nope.  They'll buy out the small company and keep "business as usual."
>
>For example, M$.



No - they'll steal their intellectual rights and keep "business as usual".
A good example is M..

            ***  unapproved portions of this message have been ***
            ***  removed to comply with regoonal sensibilities.    ***

RM

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:" =uP ONLY! "[EE]:","[OT]:" =Other "[BUY]:","[AD]:" =Ads




2000\10\24@061657 by staff

flavicon
face
Alan B. Pearce wrote:

> It also brings up two questions -
>
> If I purchase a DVD player in R1, along with a few DVD's, and take them to another region, am I now breaking some copyright or other law by watching them on a legally purchased player?
>
> If I have lived in region 1 for a period and built up a library of DVD's which I have legally watched and generally abided by the law, but know for employment opportunities move to work in a different region, can I not now watch my legally acquired library of DVD's?
>
> The problem is the whole world population is now so much more mobile, and the movie industry is still travelling in a Model T instead of a Jumbo Jet.

<soapbox>
Absolutely right! I was born in UK and live in Australia. I do not
consider
myself a citizen (prisoner) of any country, I am a citizen of the world
and I will damn well buy whatever I choose from whoever I choose. I will
also live wherever I choose. It's called freedom, and the only other
alternative is to believe your country is a big prison, holding you in
as a prisoner and only allowing some "restricted access" to freedom and
the free world. I find that concept offensive.

I cannot believe that any customer is a criminal for having/using the
right to purchase from whoever they choose. And IF I owned a DVD I am
sure
I would fight for my right to have FULL NORMAL FUNCTIONING of the
product.

I do believe it would be immoral to copy AND SELL someones copyrighted
movie/music etc. That's fair enough.

Now as a customer I will choose vendor A or vendor B. That is absolutely
my choice. If vendor B lives in a more efficient country and can make
the
product cheaper, and I am prepared to pay the extra freight, as a
citizen
of the world I will choose the vendor that suits me best.

Now if someone was to hold a gun to my head and FORCE me to buy the same
product from a much more expensive vendor, that is a violation of my
rights, and THAT is a criminal act. Someone profiteering by forcing me
to buy from an overpriced vendor? Reeks of Mafia standover tactics and
i'm offended. (again!)

As for the copyright holder, they have the right to MAKE their product
by any vendor they choose, they have the right to SELL it through any
vendor they choose, they have the right to SUE any firm that is copying
and selling their product without giving them their fair cut.
They DONT have the right to force me to buy from vendor A and not vendor
B.
If I have the cash and ability to purchase of someone I can and will.

<extra soapbox>
As imperfect as this analogy is, i'll throw it in anyway. Imagine if
Microsoft were rich and powerful enough to persuade the governments to
agree that ONLY M$ products could be used on PCs. Only software that
was actually packaged and sold by M$ themselves. Would you "mod" your PC
so you could again use other supplier's software? Even though it might
"infringe" on M$ new govt given rights?? Obviously M$ are not powerful
enough in their market niche to make this come about...
-but the music/movie industry giants WERE!

Being able to persuade governments to back-up your profiteering
DOES NOT MAKE IT MORALLY RIGHT! I bought vinyl LPs from the US
in the seventies and if I want to buy music/movies from the US
in the new millenium my rights haven't changed.
</soapbox> whew!! :o)
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:" =uP ONLY! "[EE]:","[OT]:" =Other "[BUY]:","[AD]:" =Ads




2000\10\24@062759 by staff

flavicon
face
M. Adam Davis wrote:
> So if I decided that my wildly popular creation could be viewed in the US at
> great quality, but those in another country were limited to a lower quality, or
> perhaps not the whole creation, then you believe that I do not have that right?
> Does it really matter *why* I choose to do so?  Isn't it my right regardless of
> my reasons?
> -Adam

Adam, of course you would have the right to make two versions of your
product,
and sell them in two different regions. the right you DONT have is to
tell
people in region X where they are and are-not allowed to purchase from!
:o)
You would be infringing their rights and you could be prosecuted under
anti-discrimination laws in most civilised countries.

If you made a good product and sold it in California, and a inferior
product and sold that in Texas, the Texans have the right to purchase
the
one from CA if they choose. If you tried to use force to stop them
doing that you would be a very bad man. Doesn't the argument sound
different if you keep it all in the USA?? :o)
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:" =uP ONLY! "[EE]:","[OT]:" =Other "[BUY]:","[AD]:" =Ads




2000\10\24@071534 by staff

flavicon
face
Alan B. Pearce wrote:
>
> >For sale in US (&/| Canada) only
>
> So if I send money or credit card info to a shop in USA or Canada from outside R1, then I have also purchased it in one of these two countries also, because as soon as the shop drops it in the mail box, they have my money and I own the DVD.

Yes, purchase takes place at the vendor. Where the transaction/receipt
is generated. It can get a bit fuzzy when one company processes your
card,
one sticks the product in a box in a warehouse, one takes the box to
a centre and labels it, one/many transport it to you etc. But if you
send payment to a firm in another country I am pretty sure you are
purchasing the product in their country under their laws.
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:" =uP ONLY! "[EE]:","[OT]:" =Other "[BUY]:","[AD]:" =Ads




2000\10\24@075508 by Russell McMahon

picon face
>Now as a customer I will choose vendor A or vendor B. That is absolutely
>my choice. If vendor B lives in a more efficient country and can make
>the
>product cheaper, and I am prepared to pay the extra freight, as a
>citizen
>of the world I will choose the vendor that suits me best.
>


OK. Don't try and infer anything from what I say here except what I actually
say (which is bad enough as it is :-) ).

AFAIK the main argument here WASN'T about someone making it cheaper
elsewhere - it was mainly about the same maker selling products at different
prices in different places.

SOME manufacturers put extensive effort into promoting their products in
ways which they consider are appropriate to cause it to sell in a given
market. Some provide substantial support to their resellers and training and
perhaps incentives to help the resellers to be competitive in a given
market. The same manufacturers may recognise that some other markets are
unable to afford or support or require the level of input as the high cost
markets. For instance, the USA may be a highly competitive and expensive
market to sell into and it may be that lowering price does NOT sell more
product. It may be that instead you have to pay major sporting stars big
bucks to say that they eat your razor blades, would never wear anything ever
again except your brand of shoes, feel so much more accepted by the world
when they wear your watch etc. it MAY be that you need to start youth sport
training programs or xxx etc.
Now you also want to sell to eg India. There you may find that price is THE
driving factor (maybe not). You may be able to set up a factory in India and
"leverage" their low labour costs to sell your product to them at a price
consistent with the local pricing structures.

Of course, other manufacturers just want to rip you off :-)

If Joe "I demand my rights" purchaser from the US of A can access Indian
produced product or even product made in the same factory as the for-USA
product but priced at the for-India price then the manufacturer will sell
little USA priced product and the poor sporting stars will lose their
free-meals. After a while the USA purchaser will also not have manufacturers
willing to provide the hoopla and extravaganza that they expect along with
their products. They may also not get the support from the well trained
suppliers, the after and before sales service etc.

Morally, if you are silly enough to use products from Reebok, Nike, Tag
Heuer, Cartier, Calvin K or a host of others then you should feel obliged to
support the excesses of capitalist marketing and allow people to market
differentially to maintain the great American dream etc. while still selling
at a "fair" price to the less privileged.

Bypassing these systems will hasten the end of society as we know it.
Y'all do it now, y' hear :-)



RM

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:" =uP ONLY! "[EE]:","[OT]:" =Other "[BUY]:","[AD]:" =Ads




2000\10\24@082555 by staff

flavicon
face
Russell McMahon wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Sure Russell, you provided an intelligent argument. I can see why
it is in the makers BENEFIT to try to force region codes. But I still
can't see why it is their RIGHT.

The original thread argument was more about morality (and I think Bob
touched on legality), how do you stand on this?

1. do you think someone who has a non-region DVD for their own use
and buys movies from many sources is doing something WRONG?

2. also, do you think that person is behaving in a criminal manner?

3. is copyright infringement for personal use a criminal or civil
matter, ie, arrested/fingerprinted vs sued for money? Sounds like
the original arguments with audio cassettes, the LP record makers
were totally scared that the "copyable" cassette format would
be the end of the music industry. I remember for some years it
was illegal to copy your records onto cassettes. :o)

Anyone else like to comment?
-Roman

PS. No I have never modded a DVD player but I would do it
in a pinch if asked by a friend. I doubt I could be persuaded
to do it for money though. Too "dark" a grey area for me!

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:" =uP ONLY! "[EE]:","[OT]:" =Other "[BUY]:","[AD]:" =Ads




2000\10\24@084215 by Andy Howard

picon face
> From: "Russell McMahon" <spamBeGoneapptechKILLspamspam@spam@CLEAR.NET.NZ>


> Bypassing these systems will hasten the end of society as we know it.

> Y'all do it now, y' hear :-)

HAHAHAHA! Right on.
Dan was right about the Kiwi anarchist tendency then....











.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:" =uP ONLY! "[EE]:","[OT]:" =Other "[BUY]:","[AD]:" =Ads




2000\10\24@091537 by Andrew Kunz

flavicon
face
The big thing locally (an hour or so from New York City) is Gray Market
products.

These are big-name cameras, etc, which are the same quality one would normally
buy here.  The difference is that they are sold with a warranty only good in
another country, say Japan, and usually come without English instructions.

They are not supposed to be sold here, but they are anyway.

What do you all think of this practice.

Andy

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:" =uP ONLY! "[EE]:","[OT]:" =Other "[BUY]:","[AD]:" =Ads




2000\10\24@100541 by mike

flavicon
face
On Tue, 24 Oct 2000 09:15:39 -0400, you wrote:

>The big thing locally (an hour or so from New York City) is Gray Market
>products.
>
>These are big-name cameras, etc, which are the same quality one would normally
>buy here.  The difference is that they are sold with a warranty only good in
>another country, say Japan, and usually come without English instructions.
>
>They are not supposed to be sold here, but they are anyway.
>
>What do you all think of this practice.
No problem as long as the buyer is aware of the situation, but I guess
this is often not the case..!

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:"

2000\10\24@153307 by hgraf

picon face
> The big thing locally (an hour or so from New York City) is Gray Market
> products.
>
> These are big-name cameras, etc, which are the same quality one
> would normally
> buy here.  The difference is that they are sold with a warranty
> only good in
> another country, say Japan, and usually come without English instructions.

       Same thing here in Canada, although often they are sold not because they
are cheaper but because they are simply not available here. For example, I
bought a Sony Walkman with TV Audio. It is one of the only models ever made
and was not made available here in Canada.

> They are not supposed to be sold here, but they are anyway.
>
> What do you all think of this practice.

       I'm not sure what the law says (as long as they aren't smuggled in), but
morally I don't see something wrong with this practice, the consumer takes
the brunt of the risk (no warranty) and everyone gets paid the said amount.
However I do see something wrong if you buy a product gray market that IS
available in your own market, you are cheating the local distributors that
way. Just my opinion. TTYL

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:" =uP ONLY! "[EE]:","[OT]:" =Other "[BUY]:","[AD]:" =Ads




2000\10\24@162353 by steve

flavicon
face
> Adam, of course you would have the right to make two versions of your
> product,
> and sell them in two different regions. the right you DONT have is to
> tell
> people in region X where they are and are-not allowed to purchase from!
> :o)
> You would be infringing their rights and you could be prosecuted under
> anti-discrimination laws in most civilised countries.

Would they be the same countries that slap large duties and tariffs
on imported goods to protect local industry ?

Steve.

======================================================
Steve Baldwin                Electronic Product Design
TLA Microsystems Ltd         Microcontroller Specialists
PO Box 15-680, New Lynn      http://www.tla.co.nz
Auckland, New Zealand        ph  +64 9 820-2221
email: stevebspam_OUTspam@spam@tla.co.nz      fax +64 9 820-1929
======================================================

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:" =uP ONLY! "[EE]:","[OT]:" =Other "[BUY]:","[AD]:" =Ads




2000\10\24@162356 by steve

flavicon
face
> The big thing locally (an hour or so from New York City) is Gray Market
> products.
>
> These are big-name cameras, etc, which are the same quality one would normally
> buy here.  The difference is that they are sold with a warranty only good in
> another country, say Japan, and usually come without English instructions.
>
> They are not supposed to be sold here, but they are anyway.
>
> What do you all think of this practice.

A few years ago the laws here were changed to allow (encourage?) gray
market imports. Another aspect of the New Zealand economic experiment
we discussed a while back.

Previously, distribution rights of a particular product was protected
at the border. The changes meant that anyone could bring in any
brand. There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth from companies
who had been creaming it for no real reason (car importers).

One objection that was put up was that it encouraged breach of
copyright because an item could be copied in some far off land and
then imported with no verification that the goods were genuine. That
has happened to some extent and it is up to the distributor to take
action, rather than customs.

In general, the consumer comes out on top but there are complications
when it comes to service and support.

For example in the consumer electronics area, companies like Philips
compete with Sony, Mitsubishi, Sanyo, etc and have to spend quite a
bit on marketing to maintain their share of the market. If some other
company imports Philips product, sells them cheaper based on the
brand awareness paid for by Philips, IMHO Philips has a reasonable
gripe.

Just to throw more fuel onto the DVD discussion, if I were to quit my
job, mortgage my house and almost go broke to finance development of
a product and patent it worldwide, should I have the right to decide
where, to whom and at what price I want to sell it ? If it was your
house, would the same rules apply ?

Steve.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:","[SX]:","[AVR]:" =uP ONLY! "[EE]:","[OT]:" =Other "[BUY]:","[AD]:" =Ads




2000\10\25@073153 by Russell McMahon

picon face
>Sure Russell, you provided an intelligent argument.

Flattery will get you somewhere :-)

{Quote hidden}

Good questions.
My previous comments didn't necessarily reflect how I FELT (or even
thought) - the various other aspects of a subject seem to come freely to
mind when I hear people taking a strong line :-)

I find it hard to have a one sided opinion on this and similar subjects.

Part of me feels that it is ultimately the sellers right to do what he*
wants with what is their property. As long as it is theirs they can offer it
to me on whatever terms they wish and I can decide whether I wish to accept
those terms. What right have I (or you (whoever you are)) to insist that
someone else sell you anything on terms which you dictate. Perhaps (perhaps)
if it is a matter of survival and/or life & death or basic human need then
moral imperatives may enter in (you don't need ALL of that loaf of bread, I
think). In the case of a DVD, if Mr Sony says that he wants to sell his
property (or rights to use his property) at a certain price in some
countries and not in others, what right have YOU to say otherwise. The great
philosophers (who are not always right) have generally felt that "freedom"
and your rights extend out until they impact on others equal rights and the
boundary is somewhere near where the pressure on the two sets of rights are
about balanced. [[In fact they are wrong and the boundary is an inverse
power think where the stronger you are the more RIGHT you have to ALLOW the
weak to impinge on your rights, but I think we don't want to argue that here
:-) ]]. In the case of Mr Sony and his DVD you have no compelling right to
the contents and if he enters into an arguably  moral and legal arrangement
to acquire the contents he can do what he wants with them without affecting
you whatsoever. Any effort by you to acquire his property in a manner which
is contrary to his will constitutes theft as we know it (and probably gross
stupidity and consumerism and follow the crowd peer pressure as well).
Much of the justification that we offer for doing things which others object
to are ways of excusing or trying to overlook theft. If I demand that
someone sell me something at a price that I consider fair, under threat of
my otherwise stealing some or all of it then there is a fairly continuous
path to any and all of justifying "liberating" rich people's property,
software "piracy", disdain or worse for eg Jews in Nazi Germany, Asians in
Uganda or people from anywhere else almost anywhere, on the basis of their
business successes, liberating anybody's property, liberating (in the
opposite to normal sense) anybody's country (Kuwait, Sudatenland, Alsace
Lorraine (both ways) and many more and worse

And another part of me says this is rubbish :-)

Christ advised (commanded?) "Render unto Caesar what is Caesars and to God
what is God's".
We DO have to meet the moral imperatives (or else) BUT sometimes we mix up
moral and legal requirements. It is of course very easy to use legal and
spurious argument to justify immoral behaviours BUT it is also possible to
be so wowed by what the legal rights of the sellers APPEAR to be that we
overlook the actual rights conveyed by law. I am not a lawyer but if what
was said here about what you are NOT allowed to do with DVDs is what is
written on the sleeve and IF this is the limit of the legal contract that
you agree to when you purchase then there seems to be all sorts holes in the
arguments about what you can and can't do "legally".

It would appear from what has been said, that DVDs can be legally purchased
in the country they are "intended" for and then taken elsewhere. IF (IF)
this is indeed the limit of the legal requirement then what's the fuss
about? The most paperish of paper transactions should suffice to meet this
requirement. [[ DVD purchase and resale associates :-) ]].  Mayhaps the law
is actually slightly tighter than this. Maybe not. How does this match the
"Mr Sony's rights" argument above. Not too comfortably. BUT this is indeed
Caesar's country. If the blind can in fact see that Mr Sony's rights are
indeed a legal; fabrication aimed at usury then perhaps and equally legally,
legal-fiction is a fair way of addressing the problem. Purchase by VISA and
Internet seems to meet the required criteria of being sold in the country of
sale, regardless of the subsequent destination. .

Unlike Napster and MP3 I feel that this may just possibly be an arrangement
that Christ will not be too upset by.
B,IMBW :-).




Russell



* includes women, children and of course internet enabled intelligent
entities.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics




2000\10\25@073208 by Russell McMahon

picon face
>Sure Russell, you provided an intelligent argument.

Flattery will get you somewhere :-)

{Quote hidden}

Good questions.
My previous comments didn't necessarily reflect how I FELT (or even
thought) - the various other aspects of a subject seem to come freely to
mind when I hear people taking a strong line :-)

I find it hard to have a one sided opinion on this and similar subjects.

Part of me feels that it is ultimately the sellers right to do what he*
wants with what is their property. As long as it is theirs they can offer it
to me on whatever terms they wish and I can decide whether I wish to accept
those terms. What right have I (or you (whoever you are)) to insist that
someone else sell you anything on terms which you dictate. Perhaps (perhaps)
if it is a matter of survival and/or life & death or basic human need then
moral imperatives may enter in (you don't need ALL of that loaf of bread, I
think). In the case of a DVD, if Mr Sony says that he wants to sell his
property (or rights to use his property) at a certain price in some
countries and not in others, what right have YOU to say otherwise. The great
philosophers (who are not always right) have generally felt that "freedom"
and your rights extend out until they impact on others equal rights and the
boundary is somewhere near where the presure on the two sets of rights are
about balanced. [[In fact they are wrong and the boundary is an inverse
power think where tjhe stronger you are the more RIGHT you have to ALLOW the
weak to impinge on your rights, but I think we don't want to argue that here
:-) ]]. In the case of Mr Sony and his DVD you have no compelling right to
the contents and if he enters into an arguably  moral and legal arrangement
to acquire the contents he can do what he wants with them without affecting
you whatsoever. Any effort by you to acquire his property in a manner which
is contrary to his will constitutes theft as we know it (and probably gross
stupidity and consumerism and follow the crowd peer pressure as well).
Much of the justification that we offer for doing things which others object
to are ways of excusing or trying to overlook theft. If I demand that
someone sell me something at a price that I consider fair, under threat of
my otherwise stealing some or all of it then there is a fairly continuous
path to any and all of justifying "liberating" rich people's property,
software "piracy", disdain or worse for eg Jews in Nazi Germany, Asians in
Uganda or people from anywhere else almost anywhere, on the basis of their
business successes, liberating anybodys' property, liberating (in the
opposite to normal sense) anybody's country (Kuwait, Sudatenland, Alsace
Lorraine (both ways) and many more and worse

And another part of me says this is rubbish :-)

Christ advised (commanded?) "Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasars and to God
what is God's".
We DO have to meet the moral imperatives (or else) BUT sometimes we mix up
moral and legal requirements. It is of course very easy to use legal and
spurious argument to justify immoral behaviours BUT it is also possible to
be so wowed by what the legal rights of the sellers APPEAR to be that we
overlook the actual rights conveyed by law. I am not a lawyer but if what
was said here about what you are NOT allowed to do with DVDs is what is
written on the sleeve and IF this is the limit of the legal contract that
you agree to when you purchase then there seems to be all sorts holes innthe
arguments about what you can and can't do "legally".

It would appear from what has been said, that DVDs can be legally purchased
in the country they are "intended" for and then taken elsewhere. IF (IF)
this is indeed the limit of the legal requirement then what's the fuss
about? The most paperish of paper transactions should suffice to meet this
requirement. [[ DVD purchase and resale associates :-) ]].  Mayhaps the law
is actually slightly tighter than this. Maybe not. How does this match the
"Mr Sony's rights" argument above. Not too comfortably. BUT this is indeed
Ceasar's country. If the blind can in fact see that Mr Sony's rights are
indeed a legal; fabrication aimed at usury then perhaps and equally legally,
legal-fiction is a fair way of addressing the problem. Purchase by VISA and
Intenet seems to meet the required criteria of being sold in the country of
sale, regardless of the subsequent desitination. .

Unlike Napster and MP3 I feel that this may just possibly be an arrangement
that Christ will not be too upset by.
B,IMBW :-).




Russell



* includes women, children and of course internet enabled intelligent
entities.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics




More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2000 , 2001 only
- Today
- New search...