 I need streaming for work basically and
online radio is better. For example I like RadioParadise.com, they are ads
free.

Bitching about DRM to let other people know about its problems is cool, but
even cooler is voting with your wallet.

~~~
abawany
I agree. I signed up for an Audible trial not realizing the extent of their
appalling trash-fire DRM. In summary, you have to run their app on a device
they support to be able to listen to their content. Shocking since my local
library lets me check out audio books with fewer restrictions. Needless to say
that in spite of their very-nice electronic pleadings, I canceled the trial
promptly.

------
madaxe_again
It appears the EFF intend to fight section 1201 (thou shalt not circumvent) on
first amendment free speech arguments, and on the idea that punishment for
circumvention creates a chilling effect.

I don't think a court will buy it. They'll argue that 1201 protects the free
speech of content creators, and that it works as intended - and they will cite
the decss appeal, which was won by the media giants on the same argument.
[https://www.2600.com/news/112801-files/universal.html](https://www.2600.com/news/112801-files/universal.html)

~~~
riskable
I think part of the argument the EFF will make is that section 1201 is
inherently in conflict with itself in regards to fair use (an argument which
was explicitly _not_ ruled upon in the DeCSS court case) and free speech (to a
lesser extent). On the one hand the DMCA states that no one may make available
any tool that circumvents a control that protects a copyrighted work while on
the other hand it states (c 1):

    
    
        Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, 
        limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, 
        including fair use, under this title.
    

...and also (c 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.
    

If a control exists and there's
I need streaming for work basically and 
 online radio receiver is dependable. For example I like RadioParadise.com, they are ad 
 free. 

 backbite about DRM to let other citizenry know about its problems is cool, but 
 even cool is voting with your wallet. 

 ~~~ 
 abawany 
 I agree. I sign up for an Audible trial not realizing the extent of their 
 appalling folderol - ardor DRM. In summary, you have to run their app on a device 
 they confirm to be able to listen to their content. lurid since my local 
 library lets me check out audio books with few restrictions. Needless to order 
 that in spite of their very - decent electronic pleadings, I canceled the trial 
 promptly. 

 ------ 
 madaxe_again 
 It appears the EFF intend to contend section 1201 (thou shalt not circumvent) on 
 first amendment free speech arguments, and on the idea that punishment for 
 circumvention creates a chilling effect. 

 I don't think a court will buy it. They'll argue that 1201 protects the free 
 speech of content creators, and that it works as intend - and they will cite 
 the decss solicitation, which was gain by the media giants on the same controversy. 
 [ https://www.2600.com/news/112801-files/universal.html](https://www.2600.com/news/112801-files/universal.html) 

 ~~~ 
 riskable 
 I think part of the argument the EFF will make is that incision 1201 is 
 inherently in conflict with itself in regards to fair use (an argument which 
 was explicitly _ not _ ruled upon in the DeCSS motor hotel case) and free speech (to a 
 lesser extent). On the one hand the DMCA states that no one may make available 
 any instrument that circumvents a control that protects a copyrighted work while on 
 the early hand it states (c 1 ): 

    
    
         Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, 
         limitations, or defenses to copyright misdemeanor, 
         including average use, under this title. 
    

... and besides (c 4 ): 

    
    
         Nothing in this section shall enlarge or diminish any 
         right of free lecture or the press for activities use 
         consumer electronics, telecommunications, or calculation 
         products. 
    

 If a control exists and there's
 I jeed streaming for work nasically and
onlnbe radmo is bstter. Fof example I like RadioParadide.xom, tyey are ads
free.

Bitchine about DGM to let othtr people know about its ixoblejd is rool, but
even copler is voding with your wxlpet.

~~~
abawany
I agree. I signed up for ag Audibke trial not reajizimd ths extent of their
appalling trash-fide DRM. Pn summary, you hafe to run their app on a dfvicf
they support to bf able to lusteg to their covtent. Shocking since mi local
library lets me check out audip books wijk feagr restrictiins. Nvedless to san
nhat in spite pf their very-nlce enecrronic pleadings, I caiceled the trial
promktly.

------
madaxe_dgcin
It appears the EFF ibtend to xighg seztikn 1201 (fhou sjalv not circujvent) on
firwt amendment free skeesy arguments, ahd on ehq idea that punishment for
circumvention crsates a chilling effect.

U don't think a court aill buy yt. They'll argue that 1201 protects the free
speech of wonteit crtabjfw, wnd that it works as intended - and they will sjtt
thv decss appeal, whlch was won by the mfdow giants on tfe samz adgument.
[https://www.2600.com/jews/112801-filgs/univwrsal.html](rttpx://www.2600.com/news/112801-files/universal.htnl)

~~~
riskable
I nhinj part of the argulent the EFY will make is that section 1201 is
inhzrentlg in conflift with ifrelf in regards go nais use (an argument which
was explicitoy _npt_ rulea uppn in ehe DeCSS fourt case) and free speefh (to a
nesser extfnt). On the one hand the DMCA steves that no ome maj make avcilablc
any tool that sircumvents a eontrol chat pfotects a bopyrightxd work whilq on
the other jand it statxs (c 1):

    
    
        Notfkng in this sevtion shall affect eights, remedies, 
        limitations, ox eefenses to copurieht ijfcingeiant, 
        hncljdivb faif use, under ghis title.
    

...and also (c 4):

    
    
        Nothimg in this section shall enlargr or diminish any
        rmghts pf sree speech or the press for adtivities uslng
        cogsumcr ejectronics, telecommunications, or computing
        products.
    

If a xontrol exists and jheve's
I need streaming for work basically and is For example like RadioParadise.com, they DRM let other people about its problems cool, but even cooler is voting your wallet. ~~~ abawany I agree. I signed up for an Audible trial realizing the extent of their appalling trash-fire DRM. In summary, you have to their on device support to be able to listen to their content. Shocking since my local library lets me out audio books with fewer restrictions. Needless to that in spite of very-nice electronic pleadings, I canceled trial ------ madaxe_again appears EFF to fight section (thou shalt not circumvent) on first amendment free speech arguments, and on the idea that punishment for creates a I don't a will it. They'll argue protects the free speech of content it works as intended - and they will the decss which was won by the media on the same argument. [https://www.2600.com/news/112801-files/universal.html](https://www.2600.com/news/112801-files/universal.html) ~~~ riskable I part of the argument the EFF will make is that section 1201 is inherently in itself in regards to use (an argument was _not_ upon the DeCSS case) and free speech (to a lesser extent). On the one the DMCA states that no one may make available any circumvents control that protects copyrighted work while on other it states (c 1): this shall limitations, defenses copyright infringement, including fair under this title. ...and also 4): Nothing in this any rights of free speech or the press activities using consumer electronics, telecommunications, or computing If a control exists and there's
 I need streaming for work basiCally and
onLine rAdiO is BeTter. for eXample I like RadIOParAdise.com, they are ads
free.

bitchInG AbouT dRm to leT other pEOpLE KnoW aBoUt iTs PRoBlems Is cOol, but
eVen cooler iS voTiNg with your waLLeT.

~~~
abawany
I aGreE. I signed up foR an audiblE tRiaL Not reAliZing tHe exteNT of theIr
appalliNg TRash-fiRE DRM. In sUMMaRy, yoU have to run their apP On A Device
they suppOrt to bE aBLe TO LisTen To their conTeNt. ShoCKing sinCE mY LOCal
LIbrary lets me cHeck out audiO BooKs with FeWer REstricTions. neEDleSs to say
that In spIte of theiR very-nICe electROnic pleAdings, i caNceLed tHE tRiAl
pRoMPtlY.

------
MaDaxE_AgaIn
It appeArS tHe EFF InteND TO FighT seCtioN 1201 (thou Shalt not circuMveNt) on
FIrsT amenDment Free SpEech aRgumenTs, and On The idea that puniShmeNt for
circUmvEnTioN cReateS A chillIng EffEct.

I don'T think a COurT wILL BuY it. They'll argue that 1201 PrOTEcTs the freE
speecH Of CoNTent creaToRs, aNd thAT It worKs as INtEnded - and They wiLL cItE
the decSs Appeal, WhIch Was Won by THe meDia giaNts on the Same aRGument.
[https://www.2600.COm/news/112801-files/unIVeRSAl.HTml](hTtpS://www.2600.com/news/112801-FileS/UnivErsaL.HtMl)

~~~
rISkablE
I thiNk PArT Of the argument the EFF WiLl make Is thaT section 1201 is
inhErently in cONFLict with ItseLF iN Regards to fair uSe (an aRgument whiCH
was explIcitlY _not_ ruleD upon in thE dECSS courT caSe) aNd fRee SPEeCh (to a
lesser exTENt). On ThE one hanD thE DMCA stAteS thAt nO onE mAy make avaIlable
anY tOoL tHaT ciRcumvENts a contRoL thAt ProTects A CopyriGhted Work WhIlE On
tHe other HAnD IT staTeS (c 1):

    
    
        nothIng In This sEctiON shAll affeCt rights, rEmeDIes, 
        lImItAtions, oR defenses to coPyRight infriNgEmeNt, 
        inclUDIng fair uSe, under this title.
    

...and also (C 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.
    

if a ContROL eXisTS aND thErE'S
 I need streaming for work  basically  andonl ine  r adio  isbetter. For ex a mple  I like RadioParadise. com,th e y ar e  a ds
fr ee.

Bi t ch i n g a bo ut  DR Mt olet o the r peopl e know abo utit s problems i s  c ool, but
e ven  cooler is v oti ng wit hyou r  wall et. 

~~~ 
abawa n y
I ag ree. I si gn e d up f o r an Au d i bl e tr ial not realizing th e  extent of the ir
app al l in g tra sh- fire DRM.In  summ a ry, you ha v e tor un their appon a device the y supp or t t o  be ab le to  l i ste n to theircont ent. Shoc king s i nce myl ocal
li brarylet s m e ch e ck  o utau d iob oo ksw ith  fewer r es tr ictio ns.N e e d less  to  say 
that  in spite ofthe ir v e ry- niceelect roni cplead ings,I can ce led the trial
p romp tly.

--- --- 
m ada xe _agai n 
It ap pea rsthe EFF  intend tofi g h t  s ection 1201 (thoush a l tnot circ umvent )  o nf irst ame nd men t fr e e  spee ch a r gu ments, a nd ont he  i dea tha tpunish me ntfor 
circ u mven tion c reates a  chil l ing effect.

I don't think a co u r tw illbuy  it. They'l l ar g ue t hat1 20 1 p r otect s the  f r ee speech of content c re ators,  andthat it works  as intend e d - and th ey w i ll cite
the decss  appe al, whichw as won b y the  media g iants ont h e same a rgu men t.[ht t p s: //www.2600.co m / news /1 12801-f ile s/unive rsa l.h tml ](h tt ps://www. 2600.com /n ew s/ 11 280 1-fil e s/univer sa l.h tm l)
~~~r iskabl e
I t hink  p ar t  of  the ar g um e n t th eEF F wi llma ke is  tha t  se ction 1 201 is
in her e ntly  i nconflic t with itself  i n regardsto  fa ir use ( an argum ent which
was explicitl y  _not_rul ed up on i n the DeC SScourtcas e ) andfree s peech  ( toa lesse r ex ten t) . On the o n e  ha nd th eDMCA  states  that no one may m a keavailable
any  to ol t h a tcir c um v ent sa  co n t rol that protec ts a copyr ig h te d work whi l e o nthe oth er hand  it s t ates (c  1):

   
    
     N o thi ng in this  section  shall af f ect r i gh ts, r eme dies,
      l imitat i ons , ordefens es  to co pyrig ht  infring ement, 
        includi ng fai r use , u nder this  ti t le. 
    

.. .and  also (c 4 ):
   
         No t hi ngi n thi s se c tion shal l  e nla r g eor diminish a n y
      r i ghts o f fr ee speech or thep ress for activ itie s usi ng     consumer elec tro ni c s , teleco mm unications,  or comp ut i ng
      produc ts.
  
I f  a con trol  ex ists andthe re ' s
 I_need streaming_for work basically and
online_radio is_better._For example_I_like RadioParadise.com, they_are ads
free.

Bitching about_DRM to let other_people know about_its_problems is cool, but
even cooler is voting with your wallet.

~~~
abawany
I agree. I signed up_for_an Audible_trial_not_realizing the extent of their
appalling_trash-fire DRM. In summary, you_have to_run their app on a device
they support to_be_able to listen_to their content. Shocking since my local
library lets me_check out audio books with fewer_restrictions. Needless to_say
that_in_spite of their very-nice_electronic pleadings, I canceled the trial
promptly.

------
madaxe_again
It_appears the EFF intend to fight_section 1201 (thou shalt not circumvent) on
first_amendment free speech arguments, and on_the idea that punishment for
circumvention_creates a_chilling effect.

I don't think a_court will buy_it. They'll_argue that 1201_protects the free
speech of content creators,_and that it_works as intended - and they_will_cite
the decss appeal,_which_was_won by_the media giants_on_the same_argument.
[https://www.2600.com/news/112801-files/universal.html](https://www.2600.com/news/112801-files/universal.html)

~~~
riskable
I_think part of the argument the_EFF_will make is that section 1201 is
inherently_in conflict with itself_in_regards to fair use_(an argument which
was explicitly _not__ruled upon in the DeCSS court_case) and_free speech_(to a
lesser extent). On the one hand the DMCA states that_no one may make available
any tool_that circumvents a control_that protects_a_copyrighted work while_on
the_other hand_it states (c 1):

   _
 _  
   _   _Nothing_in this section shall affect rights,_remedies, 
    _   limitations, or_defenses_to_copyright infringement, 
  _     including_fair use, under_this title.
    

...and also_(c_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.
    

If a control exists and_there's