Comments on: Re-lock un-locked cell phones ! http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10694 p2pnet.net - reader powered Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:11:09 -0300 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10694/comment-page-1#comment-131261 Reader's Write Fri, 08 Dec 2006 23:37:58 +0000 #comment-131261 The other poster is correct. It doesn't have anything to do with copyright. TracFone is making no claims of copyright infringement. They are mis-applying the anti-circumvention portions of the DMCA to protect a poorly structured business model. And for cripes sake, use some capitalization, punctuation, oh, and maybe even some basic grammatical structure. The other poster is correct. It doesn’t have anything to do with copyright. TracFone is making no claims of copyright infringement. They are mis-applying the anti-circumvention portions of the DMCA to protect a poorly structured business model.

And for cripes sake, use some capitalization, punctuation, oh, and maybe even some basic grammatical structure.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10694/comment-page-1#comment-131246 Reader's Write Fri, 08 Dec 2006 23:22:40 +0000 #comment-131246 look it up what it stands for if you don't understand what this has to do with copyrights look it up what it stands for if you don’t understand what this has to do with copyrights

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10694/comment-page-1#comment-131232 Reader's Write Fri, 08 Dec 2006 22:49:27 +0000 #comment-131232 Alright, this is re-goddamn-diculous. This claim doesn't have anything to do with copyrights at all. How exactly do you call copyright infringement on a phone service? That would be like if someone figured out a way to modify the iPod to play C.R.A.P-infected music from other pay services besides iTunes, or vice versa. Apple (or Creative, Microsoft, et al) would not have the authority sue, because no infringement has taken place. When Hollywood gets pissed off at people being able to copy DVD's, it's because the copy protection exists to prevent unauthorized copying of THEIR COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. How does that have anything to do with these companies implementing the same unethical strategy to hold a monopoly over their consumers? Alright, this is re-goddamn-diculous. This claim doesn’t have anything to do with copyrights at all. How exactly do you call copyright infringement on a phone service? That would be like if someone figured out a way to modify the iPod to play C.R.A.P-infected music from other pay services besides iTunes, or vice versa. Apple (or Creative, Microsoft, et al) would not have the authority sue, because no infringement has taken place. When Hollywood gets pissed off at people being able to copy DVD’s, it’s because the copy protection exists to prevent unauthorized copying of THEIR COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. How does that have anything to do with these companies implementing the same unethical strategy to hold a monopoly over their consumers?

]]>