View Single Post
  #6  
Old June 23rd 03, 04:38 AM
J.Clarke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 17:07:24 +0100
"ceedee" wrote:

its just another in a long line of anti piracy enforcement measures
foisted on us.

unfortunately it just plays startight into the pirates hands

i for one and im sure many other people too now just download pirated
copies much easier , no cdilla , macrovision , disk grinding copy
protections fooing up my systems and annoying me anymore
no need for cds in drives or dialing up to the internet and
authorising stuff every 5 minutes
if i find something actually worth paying for i do buy it
software authors deserve to get paid for there work
but the original never gets actually used just chucked in a box in a
cupboard

this system im posting from only has legit software on it
it crashes , grinds and falls over quite a lot
my other system has only pirated software on it which
is all cracked or patched including the os
guess what
its the most stable system you will ever see
never blue screens or falls over least so far anyway and its been
running since the
cracked release of win xp was released.

i just wish that software companies would realise that anti piracy
measures just
make pirates more determined to break them.
they just dont work and as the internet gets quicker and is available
to more and more people
the problem of piracy will increase hugely as more and more people
discover that
pirated versions of software and movies and even audio cds are far
more attractive
due to there lack of invasive,damaging or just plain annoying
protections and suchlike
and ironically enough the pirate products perform better and are much
more user freindly than the originals.............

I know this post will attract the anti piracy flame brigade but
constructive points
on this issue are welcomed, flames ignored.


The Hollyweird crowd just needs to grok the concept that the days of the
zillionaire musician or actor are coming to an end. The crap they've
been producing has never been worth what they charge for it, and finally
the public has a means to not pay that. Instead of trying desperately
to put the digital genie back in the bottle (ain't gonna happen no
matter how many DMCAs and the like they pass) they should from the start
tried to figure out how they were going to use it to their advantage.

I really like their argument that we need strong copy protection because
piracy stifles innovation--like anything innovative has come out of
Hollywood in the past 50 years. What it's really going to do is stifle
innovation in the software and electronics industries, which is where
much _real_ innovation has taken place over the past 50 years.

Unfortunately Congress has been buying into their crap and nvidia
appears to be running scared.

"Brad" wrote in message
...
It does not make DVDs unplayable, it makes them unplayable if your
card's TV-encoder chip is old (look most Brooktree/Conexant chips)
and doesn't support macrovision. Frankly I don't know why they
didn't just make the driver disable the damn TV-out when you play a
DVD.


"Pepys" wrote in message
...
XP Pro, P4 2.4, Pioneer 106 s DVD player, GeForce 3 500 Ti, Power
DVD 5

blah
blah blah


WTF is nVidia up to with their latest drivers?

There is apparently some sort of Macrovision detection function
built in

to
the latest geforce drivers which disallows any DVD with copyright
to be played through a computer.

****, **** and double ****.

The only way I watch DVDs is through the computer on a flash new
19" TFT screen, and now that has been denied me by some ******
deciding to arbitrarily stop the watching of DVDs on computers.

If they think this is going to stop piracy - think again.

The only advice I have received so far to overcome this annoying

problem,
is
to rip the DVD to my hard drive, hack out the macrovision element
of the show and take it from there.

If anyone knows of a fix for this problem I would be greatful.



Sam

PS Tried the old Remote Selector thingie and it simply did not
correct

the
problem.








--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)