Nice to see an official source finally taking action.

We´ve been talking about a lawsuit like this ever since these issues started to hit the headlines. Now someone is finally prepared to give it a shot.

Since this is a european agency suing multinational - USA based - companies, where will the actual trial take place? If they go to court that is.

I assume that they've sued record labels' Belgian branch or European branch and that the matter will be handled in Belgium.

---

Love the idea that there is a bit of get back within this. The idea of sueing your customer base has been struck me as being a particularly smart business move.

Much hanky-panky has went on behind the scenes to arrive at the present day situtation we have today. One I guess that sticks in my craw was the Walt Disney case where they went after lengthening the time copywrite is private domain. I understand that they are particularly interested in saving ownership of the "Mickey Mouse" trademark and all that goes with it. What happened was that the length of time now that a copywrite or trademark can be held goes beyond the normal life span of people. Meaning that if it was popular in the 20's those folks will be dead and gone that it meant something to before the time runs out and it becomes public domain.

It's about time that the record companies were brought to book over this as "The product must do what it is intended to do under it's usage discription and what the manufacturer claims it does" ie play music.
In the UK we have the, Trade Descriptions Act, and this is one of definitions that any product sold to the general public must comply to, not a lot to ask for really, If i wanted a cd that would not play i could make one myself, as i am quite good at that!

Walt disney are guilty of double standards when it suits them, i saw a programme that involved the family of the creator of winnie the poo, they sold certain rights to walt disney for films/cartoons but disney produced loads of spin off products like toys etc and did not ask for permission to do so, a classic case of, "Do as i say not as i do".

Geeze. I need to start doing proof-reading before hitting the button. Half of my previous statements don't make sense in light of a new day.

I won't get started on my favorite soap box of the RIAA as this is the wrong forum for it. But as you mentioned for Disney, the mouthpiece for the major labels is well known for the double stanard.

They were instrumental in seeing that the DMCA was included in most music cd's. Love the idea that someone is saying if you are going to make it and include it, make sure it works or tell folks straight up that it is included in the package (because it may make problems for the buyer). Knowing that it doesn't work in all applications, they have known for a long time and it is what they want. Being hauled to task for the practice and not saying anything is just too great...

It is down right froad when you buy a device and suddenly there are restrictions within normal use that require you to purchase a different sort of CD player. Oh and what about those people like myself who have a home theater system and I use a combo DVD/CD player? I have a right to continue to enjoy my CD's in my player just as I've always done for years. And I think that everyone who ever bought a copy-protected CD without their knowledge and it refused to play under normal conditions (not copying) should get over a million dollars from the record company for froad and extortion. A small buliness person would never get away with a stunt remotely as this.

Voodoohippie

I think this is a winnig position for Test-Achats and concur with most of what has been said.
Best to all!
Rodgers