An Open Letter to Microsoft - Why you shouldn't kill FairUse4WM - Engadget

An Open Letter to Microsoft - Why you shouldn't kill FairUse4WM - Engadget


We know that you're already probably working to fix the, um, hole that's been discovered in Windows DRM 10/11, but we're going to ask you this anyway: please don't stop consumers from using FairUse4WM to remove copy protection from music they've downloaded.

We understand why you put DRM on these files in the first place – the major labels won't grant you (or rather the companies that are using your DRM) a license to sell their music without it – but there are some good reasons why you should let this one slide.

For starters, it'll actually make consumers more likely to buy music and sign up for subscription services like Napster To Go and Rhapsody To Go. This sounds counterintuitive, but it's not. Being able to strip out the DRM on a file actually makes it more useful – and thus more valuable – for the consumer.

Shortly after posting the news, we got a slew of messages from readers and friends telling us they were signing up with a PlaysForSure service provider because they were no longer worried about being able to play the songs they've downloaded on their MP3 player. Since you can already get the same music for free if using P2P networks, all DRM does is make it harder for honest consumers to enjoy the music they're paying for. It's difficult to justify paying for a less useful version of a song when with a little effort you can find it elsewhere in a non-copy protected format.

We're big fans of the subscription services, here at Engadget, but let's face facts: the damn things don't work very well. It's pretty easy to download tracks, but it's a serious pain in the ass to successfully transfer them to a portable device. The only way for DRM to be successful is if it's painless and seamless, and we get tons of emails from consumers complaining about how hard it is to get Napster, Rhapsody, Yahoo Music Unlimited, etc. tracks on to their players, or, god forbid, Macs.

Are a lot of people going to pay $15 to sign up for a subscription service, download a ton of music, and then cancel a month later? Absolutely, but that's not a big deal. Those people were never, ever going to sign up for a service that offers locked down music anyway, so be happy that you squeezed any money out of them at all. (Yeah, this does make it tougher to offer free, unlimited trials, but that's not the end of the world.) Could those same people then put all the music they've just downloaded up on the P2P networks? Sure, but all that music is available there anyway, so it shouldn't make a bit of difference in the grand scheme of things.

So just try and look the other way this time. We've been on the verge of canceling our subscription services for a couple of months now (too many snafus involving DRM licenses and device syncing), but FairUse4WM has changed our minds now that we can actually download music with the confidence that we'll be able to enjoy it. Does the fact that we could quit and "keep" the music that we've been "renting" a problem? Theoretically, but what's going to keep consumers paying those monthly fees isn't the threat of losing access to their collection (though that's part of it); what keeps them paying is the continuing access to a large, frequently updated catalog of new releases and older tunes. DRM makes paying for music less attractive than stealing it; FairUse4WM flips that around and makes paying for music more attractive since you can more easily play the music you've purchased on the device of your choice.

Without a doubt you guys in Redmond are getting an earful from the record labels. You promised them a secure system, and you failed. They might already be threatening to withdraw their licenses for their music, but here's where you have to stand up and explain to the labels why they need to chill. Send Steve or Bill or J or whomever to smooth things over. We aren't assuming this is going to be an easy thing to make happen, but c'mon, you guys are /Microsoft/, if any company has the clout to make this happen and drag the entertainment industry into the 21st century, it's you. The music industry needs to accept that there is always going to be a certain amount of piracy, and then just get on with the business of selling digital. Let 'em keep the DRM in place if they want – we can all pretend that it still works -- just make it possible for anyone who really wants to get rid of it to take that extra step.

Besides, whether the RIAA likes it or not (or realizes it or not), you'll be doing the right thing for both consumers and the music business. (And isn't that the point of all this?) FairUse4WM means that all our PlaysForSure tracks will actually play for sure, so please don't go and spoil it.

Sincerely,

Your friends at Engadget [This Post Continues after the jump...]

The Fertility Gap

Liberal politics will prove fruitless as long as liberals refuse to multiply.


OpinionJournal - Featured Article

"It would appear liberals have been quite successful controlling overpopulation--in the Democratic Party." [This Post Continues after the jump...]

My Problem with Christianism (Andrew Sullivan)

I'll never understand why some people think their (and my) religion is of so little importance that it can't even effect the way I vote.

I mean, am I supposed to vote the OPPOSITE of my belief just to prove I'm tolerant of different beliefs?

Is my religion supposed to be something I check at the door when I enter a political discussion?


My Problem with Christianism (Andrew Sullivan)


Original Link I found on Tounge-Tied [This Post Continues after the jump...]

The Rule of Law

Link Here [This Post Continues after the jump...]

Billy Graham's New Thinking on Politics & the Bible

An interesting read.
I would like to sit down and talk with this man...

Billy Graham's New Thinking on Politics, the Bible - Newsweek National News - MSNBC.com [This Post Continues after the jump...]

Apple's Copy Protection Isn't Just Bad For Consumers, It's Bad For Business

Interesting Read...

InformationWeek | Digital Rights Management | Opinion: Apple's Copy Protection Isn't Just Bad For Consumers, It's Bad For Business | July 31, 2006 [This Post Continues after the jump...]

Stem Cells: The Hope And The Hype

Interesting...still reading it...

TIME.com: Stem Cells: The Hope And The Hype -- Aug. 7, 2006 -- Page 1: "Stem Cells: The Hope And The Hype"

Here is a list of the common lies put forth by people who support Embryonic stem cell research. The quoted text is from the article, which surpisingly actually does point out some of these lies (or hype)

Lie #1: A cure is just around the corner for you or your grandpa.

Last month, when President George W. Bush vetoed the bill that would have expanded funding for human embryonic-stem-cell (ESC) research, doctors got calls from patients with Parkinson's disease saying they weren't sure they could hang on for another year or two.


Lie #2 It's not a human life (but then they have to say "compared" to you or me). What gives them the right to compare one life to another? Why can't they just admit it is a human life and deal with it. Oh, we don't experiment on other humans, so admitting embryos are human life would kind of end the discussion.

Opponents of ESC research--starting with Bush--argue that you can't destroy life in order to save it; supporters argue that an eight-cell embryo doesn't count as a human life in the first place--not when compared with the life it could help save.


Lie #3: We only talking about embryos that would be destroyed anyways...

Extracting knowledge from embryos that would otherwise be wasted is one thing, but scientists admit that moving forward would require a much larger supply of fresh, healthy embryos than fertility clinics could ever provide.

Tied to #3 is the possibility that any cure might require embyroic cells related to the patient. So couples might create an embryo for the sole purpose of destroying it to save themselves. This is mentioned offten for some reason!

Lie #4: Bush's VETO a bill that would have fixed everything

Congress tried to address the problem with its bill to allow funding for research on any leftover embryos donated by infertility patients. But even if Bush hadn't vetoed the bill, it wouldn't have solved the supply problems. One study estimated that at best, a couple hundred cell lines might be derived from leftover IVF embryos, which tend to be weaker than those implanted in patients. The very fact that they come from infertile couples may mean they are not typical, and the process of freezing and thawing is hard on delicate cells.


Lie #5: The Scientific community reviews the "ethics" of all research. So I have to ask, just what is the "Scientific" basis for "Ethics"? When you have a bush of Scientists doing "ethics reviews' is it really surprising that they find doing science "ethical"? Also, is the option to shutdown ALL embryonic research really "on the table" in these reviews? It's a joke that they even go through the motions of these "reviews".

After exhaustive ethical review [This Post Continues after the jump...]

The UN Actually Praises Israel !!

All I can say is WOW...
I still don't understand all that is going on, but Israel is actually getting support from the UN, so something weird is going on.

Maybe I've been watching too much CNN. The UN actually expressed disapproval of CNN and the BBC.

The world is turning upside down (or maybe back right side up...)

TCS Daily : Technology - Commerce - Society [This Post Continues after the jump...]

Shaken and Stirred

An interesting perspective... I've said that I don't agree with or understand what Israel is doing, but this is based on the assumption that they will not be able to actually "destroy" hezbollah.

If they are able to do that, then this attack would make sense. But I still don't think they will be able to do in a few weeks what years of occupation couldn't do before.

But time will tell....

TCS Daily - Shaken and Stirred [This Post Continues after the jump...]

Bush's use of "signing statements"

What does it mean to pass a law aimed at limiting an executive branch practice (such as a Torture ban) if the president says he can just ignore it? Is the president "above" the law?

But then again, if the 3 branches of government are supposed to be "equal" then congress should not be able to limit the President (If they could then congress would be "above" the President, not co-equal)

The whole idea of "equal branches" seems unworkable to me. In my opinion, Congress should be the "first" among equals. The Supreme Court is above Congress because they can strike down any law passes (but supposedly only if it clearly contradicts the constitution), but they can be cut out the loop if congress says they don't have jurisdiction.

The President is the most powerful brach mainly because he is one person and doesn't have to debate issues or work the middle ground. He or She does whatever they want.

Congress is the pass all laws, but is a large body and has to compromise a lot. It is also the most effected by "the people" in many ways.

I'm rambling.. here's the link
USNews.com: Inside Washington: Bar association task force urges Congress to push for judicial review of Bush signing statements [This Post Continues after the jump...]

Judge Orders Teen to Cancer Treatment

This is scary to me.

At 16 I don't even see this as a parental rights issue (but it is partly that), but mainly a 16 year old should be able to make their OWN healthcare decisions to a large extent.

I don't know the success rate for Hodgkin's disease, but no one should be forced to take Chemo for anything.

BREITBART.COM - Judge Orders Teen to Cancer Treatment [This Post Continues after the jump...]

WorldNetDaily: Where are the Christians?

I hate to say it, but I tend to agree with Pat here...
I just don't understand what Israel hopes to accomplish.

WorldNetDaily: Where are the Christians? [This Post Continues after the jump...]

Bush Vetoes Embryonic Stem Cell Research Bill

Thank God that Bush is able to stop this for now. But eventually it will pass, or something like it.

FOXNews.com - Bush Vetoes Embryonic Stem Cell Research Bill - The Executive Branch [This Post Continues after the jump...]

Israel Going too far

No link here, just my thoughts that I think Israel is going too far. Maybe I don't know all the facts and the US news organizations are not giving any reason for Israel's action, but the response seems disproportionate.

An example would be if a drug cartel in Mexico capture two US boarder patrol agents and the US started bombing Mexico City as a result.

I really don't see what Israel is tring to prove or accomplish. Lebanon has a week government and needs to eventually be held accountable for Hezbollah, but destrying them is not going to help things. [This Post Continues after the jump...]

New Scientist Breaking News - 'Rewired brain' revives patient after 19 years

New Scientist Breaking News - 'Rewired brain' revives patient after 19 years [This Post Continues after the jump...]