Illegality or a simple buyout?

[spt72]

The thing is though.... we werent doing anything more illegal than what we were doign when we recorded our radio stations to cassettes in the 80s.....

The DirecTV hackers were stealing service and getting it for free. We paid for the software, paid for the equipment, and we were paying for the XM service.

And some of XMs new players also allow timeshifting.....

If TimeTrax was doing anything illegal - which I dont think they were - then wouldnt that be like NBC shutting down Sony because NBC wanted you to buy NBC-brand VCRs to record shows on NBC? I mean, thats ridiculous.

If TimeTrax did buy them out, then its a simple buyout. It shouldnt - from what I understand - be a "ok, now lets go after the users" thing... after all, what are we doing that you cant do with the TimeTrax timeshifting recorders? In that sense, its NOT like the DirecTV hackers who (man) were stealing service altogether.

Am I correct about this or way off?

 

[pretzelboy]

Keep in mind that the new generation of XM programming recorders/MP3 players are intensely controlled as to what they can record. This is by agreement with the RIAA. As TimeTrax users we are able to record things that are not permitted at all by the XM/RIAA content recording agreement.

 

[spt72]

What cant the XM recorders record? Just curious.

 

[pretzelboy]

It restricts to a maximum of two scheduled recordings a day. The firmware had to include the ability to lock out any program from recording. If I remember correctly, the blocks are recorded oddly and you can't jump backwards (if you wanted to go back a recording a song to another media). And, of course, the recordings are locked on the receiver/recorder. They're not going to let you transfer them off. In recent weeks there has been a lot of press about the RIAA getting greedy and wanting to see more money out of XM for royalties because of these units and XM is fighting back on that.

 

[src666]

Keep in mind that the new generation of XM programming recorders/MP3 players are intensely controlled as to what they can record. This is by agreement with the RIAA. As TimeTrax users we are able to record things that are not permitted at all by the XM/RIAA content recording agreement.

Actually, Sirius is the only satellite radio provider that had an agreement that covered the recording features of their players. The RIAA is actually sueing XM for their recording players.

XM put those controls on the recorders hoping to prevent the RIAA from sueing, and these controls actually remove the cause of action that the RIAA is trying to use. The case will never make it to a trial.

 

[spt72]

Ill admit a lack of knowledge in this area of law... but can someone explain to me how this is different than millions of us who recorded radio stations onto cassettes in the 80s? I dont recall the RIAA being able to shut down the blank tape market.

 

[src666]

The funny thing is that in the early 1990's, the RIAA pushed a law through that dealt with home recording rights. They promised, outright, that they would NEVER sue someone for producing a product that allows the home recording of radio. Period.

 

[jhand_us]

The funny thing is that in the early 1990's, the RIAA pushed a law through that dealt with home recording rights. They promised, outright, that they would NEVER sue someone for producing a product that allows the home recording of radio. Period.

The RIAA, id that a branch of the U.N.? - yet another worthless organization 'protecting you'.

 

[src666]

The RIAA, id that a branch of the U.N.? - yet another worthless organization 'protecting you'.

In case you aren't being sarcastic, its the Recording Industry Association of America - you know, the group that sues it's customers rather than come up with a viable business model for the future.

 

[pretzelboy]

While the RIAA is US-based there is an International version of them called the IFPI (International Federation of Phonogram and Videogram Producers). They're the bulldogs attempting to get the same types of restrictions passed in international law.

 

[TestingTheTester]

I think if it was anything like a "legal" or buy out thing we'd see some kinda press/PR information being toted around. Look at how they did things before with announcements and stuff...

Beyond that - when/if it is something like that - most companies would want to make an announcement stating - these people made us do this - we wanted to work together and get things done - but these people [RIAA, xm, whomever] are not allowing us to - and we have to close shop.

I dunno - I find it completely odd there is NO PRESS - no information - no websites picking up that this company is folded.

Maybe we should let someone know.