Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!sjsca4!sjs!jones
From: jones@sjs.sj.ate.slb.com
Newsgroups: sci.electronics
Subject: Re: (UNCONSTITUTIONAL!) CD to DAT agreement
Message-ID: <618@sjs.sj.ate.slb.com>
Date: 10 Aug 89 12:35:03 GMT
References: <752@palladium.UUCP> <1104@tukki.jyu.fi> <1064@philmds.UUCP>
Organization: Schlumberger Technologies Inc., ATE Division
Lines: 24

In article <1064@philmds.UUCP>, janpo@philmds.UUCP (Jan Postma) writes:
> An recording on a DAT from an analog source can be digitally copied twice,
> i.e. a digital copy of a digital copy of an analog recording on a DAT is
> possible, any further digital copying of this third generation is not.

This makes me cringe that these clowns are trying to deny me my Constitutional
rights to publish my own works so that some money-grubbers can be so *STUPID*
as to not see that a simple distribution amp can be made to drive 200 DATs
from a single CD at once, thus (a) simplifying the task of pirating and (b)
bypassing the so-called anti-pirate circuit.

If I had the resources, I'd take both the DAT-makers AND the CD publishers
to court under (a) denial of my constitutional rights and (b) anti-trust
violations.

BTW, the existance of so-called "professional" equipment that is not so raped
does NOT make a difference to either issue.

Maybe we'll luck out and the FTC will notice this.

Clark Jones                             | My opinions are NOT those of the
Schlumberger Technologies, Tempe, AZ    | company because they are NOT covered
jones@sjs.sj.ate.slb.com                | by the Patent Agreement!
Remember:  China has a ban on the retail sale of assault weapons! (AND D.A.T.!)