<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Jan 9, 2008, at 1:37 AM, Steve Smith wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 08/01/2008, <b class="gmail_sendername">Dean Harding</b> <<a href="mailto:dean.harding@dload.com.au">dean.harding@dload.com.au</a>> wrote:</span> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">So while they may have removed the DRM from a couple of CDs, they still<br>assume their customers are all criminals.<br></blockquote></div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div></blockquote><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>Regarding the watermark, I can sympathise with Sony on this one.</div> <div>After all what I suppose most people want is the freedom to move the tracks between their own devices, a "fair use". If you then put the track onto a peer to peer network that's a bit unfair to Sony really so for them to be able to track this, is fair I suppose. Fair has to run both ways... at the moment of course Sony gets all the fair.</div></blockquote><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>Yeah, I don't have a big problem with this either. It's just a way for them to determine where a track came from. Saying that this means they're "assuming their customers are criminals" is a bit like saying that having to put a license plate on my car means the police are assuming I'm going to commit a crime with it.</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div></div><br></body></html>