From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_038C_01C6DD8A.DE001310
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   What you describe includes ripping, other forms of format shifting, =
adding to a ZIP file, downloading from a secure web server or other =
network protocols, or any of a bunch of other things.  Do you think adam =
is so stupid as to believe these to be verboten?

Rich

  "Glenn Meadows"  wrote in message =
news:4513038f{at}w3.nls.net...
  Rearranging the bits in the file, scrambled with an encryption/drm=20
  wrapper/watermark.

  --=20

  Glenn M.
  "Rich"  wrote in message news:4512fa12$1{at}w3.nls.net...
     What possible meaning of the word "rearranging" could mean this?

  Rich

    "Glenn Meadows"  wrote in message=20
  news:4512ed82$1{at}w3.nls.net...
    I took his "rearranging" to mean changing the file with time limited =
DRM
    code, not time shifting.

    --=20

    Glenn M.
    "Rich"  wrote in message news:4512e62c$1{at}w3.nls.net...
       No.  This is about the following statements from adam

      I wonder if it changes the file in any way. If
      so.....ummm....copyright....? If I own the file then like a movie =
or
      piece of music "rearranging without permission" etc is verboten.

    The rearranging to which he is referring is what you call format =
shifting.

    Rich

      "Geo"  wrote in message =
news:45126772$2{at}w3.nls.net...
      what about format shifting to your ipod then sharing the files? =
That's
    what this is about yes?

      Geo.
        "Rich"  wrote in message news:4510efb3{at}w3.nls.net...
           I have always thought it OK rip your own CDs for your own =
use.  I
    have also thought it OK to further format shift into other formats=20
  including
    transfering to your ipod or other music player for your own use.  =
I'm=20
  pretty
    sure you have asserted this position as well in the past.  Only now =
do you
    act like an idiot with some silly position that it is illegal for =
apple to
    support format shifting in itunes if they try to make money on ipods =
and
    itunes.  Why haven't you been more vocal about your silly position =
for the
    past few years?

        Rich

          "Adam"  wrote in message
    news:4510e6c8{at}w3.nls.net...
          Rich wrote:
          >    What an idiot.  You think I believe ripping is OK only =
because=20
  my
          > employer thinks it is OK?  What a hoot!

          Nope I think your views change as those of your employer =
change.

          > And your sudden assertion that
          > ripping is not OK is because of what?
          >

          I never said it was right to rip in order to make money. Home
          backup/format shifting by the person who has purchased the =
media etc
    is
          fine but to make money makes you into a publisher. You are the =
one=20
  who
          holds it's fine for people to rip so long as it makes your =
employer
    money.

          Adam

          > Rich
          >
          >
          >     "Adam"      > wrote in message
          >     news:45100d5a{at}w3.nls.net...
          >     Rich wrote:
          >      >    Apparently you.  My views haven't changed.  You =
appear=20
  to
    take
          >     silly
          >      > positions at the drop of a hat.
          >      >
          >      > Rich
          >      >
          >      >
          >      >     "Adam"      
          >      >     >
wrote in =
message
          >      >     news:450fecc9$1{at}w3.nls.net...
          >      >     Rich wrote:
          >      >      >    My views haven't changed.  I think it is OK =
to=20
  rip
    your own
          >      >     CDs for
          >      >      > your own use.  Always have.  You are changing =
your
    tune and
          >      >     looking like
          >      >      > a fool with your new very silly assertions.
          >      >      >
          >      >
          >      >
          >      >
          >      >     So Rich who is the fool/has his views dictated to =
him=20
  by
    his
          >     betters?
          >      >
          >      >     Adam
          >     Nope, You simply take whatever position your employer =
takes,
    which
          >     is in
          >     itself dictated by the search from profits.
          >
          >     Adam



------=_NextPart_000_038C_01C6DD8A.DE001310
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








   What you
describe includes =
ripping,=20
other forms of format shifting, adding to a ZIP file, downloading
= from a=20
secure web server or other network protocols, or any of a bunch of other =

things.  Do you think adam is so stupid as to believe these to
be=20 verboten?
 
Rich
 

  "Glenn Meadows" <gmeadow{at}comcast.net>">mailto:gmeadow{at}comcast.net">gmeadow{at}comcast.net>
wrote =
in message=20
  news:4513038f{at}w3.nls.net...Re=
arranging=20
  the bits in the file, scrambled with an encryption/drm=20
  wrapper/watermark.--
Glenn M."Rich" <{at}> =
wrote in=20
  message news:4512fa12$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
  =20
  What possible meaning of the word "rearranging" could mean=20
  this?Rich  "Glenn
Meadows" <gmeadow{at}comcast.net>">mailto:gmeadow{at}comcast.net">gmeadow{at}comcast.net>
wrote =
in message=20
  news:4512ed82$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
 =20
  I took his "rearranging" to mean changing the file with time limited=20
  DRM  code, not time
shifting.  --   =
Glenn=20
  M.  "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:4512e62c$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
    =20
  No.  This is about the following statements from=20
  adam    I wonder if it
changes the file in any =
way.=20
  If    so.....ummm....copyright....?
If I own the =
file then=20
  like a movie or    piece of music
"rearranging =
without=20
  permission" etc is verboten.  The
rearranging to which he =
is=20
  referring is what you call format shifting. =20
  Rich    "Geo"
<georger{at}nls.net>">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>
wrote in =
message news:45126772$2{at}w3.nls.net...=
   =20
  what about format shifting to your ipod then sharing the files?=20
  That's  what this is about
yes?   =20
  Geo.     
"Rich" <{at}> wrote in =
message news:4510efb3{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p;       =20
  I have always thought it OK rip your own CDs for your own use. =20
  I  have also thought it OK to further format shift into other =
formats=20
  including  transfering to your ipod or other
music player =
for=20
  your own use.  I'm pretty  sure you
have asserted =
this=20
  position as well in the past.  Only now do
you  act like =
an=20
  idiot with some silly position that it is illegal for apple =
to =20
  support format shifting in itunes if they try to make money on ipods=20
  and  itunes.  Why haven't you been more vocal
about your =
silly=20
  position for the  past few=20
  years?     =20
 
Rich       
"Adam" <mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts{at}moesmailto:mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts{at}moes">mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts{at}moes
A>>=20
  wrote in message  news:4510e6c8{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p;      =20
  Rich
wrote:       =20
  >    What an idiot.  You think
I believe =
ripping is OK=20
  only because
my       
> =

  employer thinks it is OK?  What a=20
 
hoot!       
Nope I think =
your=20
  views change as those of your employer=20
 
change.       
> And =
your sudden=20
  assertion
that       
> =
ripping is=20
  not OK is because of =
what?       =20
 
>       
I never said it =
was=20
  right to rip in order to make money.=20
 
Home       
backup/format =
shifting by=20
  the person who has purchased the media etc =20
 
is       
fine but to make =
money makes=20
  you into a publisher. You are the one=20
 
who       
holds it's fine =
for=20
  people to rip so long as it makes your employer =20
 
money.       =20
 
Adam       
>=20
 
Rich       =20
 
>       =20
 
>       =20
  >     "Adam" <mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts{at}moesmailto:mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts{at}moes">mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts{at}moes
A>       =20
  >     <mailto:mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts=">mailto:mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts{at}moes">mailto:mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts=
{at}moes>>=20
  wrote in
message       =20
  >     news:45100d5a{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p;      =20
  >     Rich=20
 
wrote:       =20
  >     
>    Apparently=20
  you.  My views haven't changed.  You appear
to  =

 
take       =20
  >    =20
 
silly       =20
  >      >
positions at the drop of a=20
 
hat.       =20
  >     =20
 
>       =20
  >      >=20
 
Rich       =20
  >     =20
 
>       =20
  >     =20
 
>       =20
  >     
>     "Adam" =
<mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts{at}moesmailto:mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts{at}moes">mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts{at}moes
A>       =20
  >     <mailto:mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts=">mailto:mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts{at}moes">mailto:mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts=
{at}moes>       =20
  >     
>     <mailto:mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts=">mailto:mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts{at}moes">mailto:mmmmm_beer_mmmm_donuts=
{at}moes>>=20
  wrote in
message       =20
  >     
>     news:450fecc9$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
       =20
  >     
>     Rich=20
 
wrote:       =20
  >     
>     =20
  >    My views haven't
changed.  I think it is =
OK to=20
  rip  your =
own       =20
  >     
>     CDs=20
 
for       =20
  >     
>      =
>=20
  your own use.  Always have.  You are changing
your  =
tune=20
 
and       =20
  >     
>     =
looking=20
 
like       =20
  >     
>      =
> a=20
  fool with your new very silly=20
 
assertions.       =20
  >     
>     =20
 
>       =20
  >     =20
 
>       =20
  >     =20
 
>       =20
  >     =20
 
>       =20
  >     
>     So =
Rich who is=20
  the fool/has his views dictated to him by =20
 
his       
=
>    =20
 
betters?       =20
  >     =20
 
>       =20
  >     
>    =20
 
Adam       =20
  >     Nope, You simply take
whatever position =
your=20
  employer takes,  =
which       =20
  >     is=20
 
in       
=
>    =20
  itself dictated by the search from=20
 
profits.       =20
 
>       =20
  >     =
Adam

------=_NextPart_000_038C_01C6DD8A.DE001310--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5