Discussion in 'The VIP Lounge' started by Drew, Jun 21, 2007.
Maybe this will force the courts to deal with this since the chickened out with the Kaleidescape case.
Agree with this comment.
I don't think this is anti-competitive; by analogy, there were no anti-trust issues when DVD players rendered VCRs obsolete.
Of course you don't. VCR's didn't rely absolutely on DVD's for their media. DVD's playback properties are intrinsic to Kaleidescape's survival.
They never outlawed copying VCR tapes.
People copy DVD's?! :shock: :thinking:
Larry, I don't think that's not a valid analogy. An unintentional strawman, perhaps, but not a good analogy. Neither the DVD nor the VHS groups took actions that prevented to full use of the other's capabilities.
The issue at question is really ripping them to a hard drive. Think of Kaleidescape as ROKU or Squeezebox for movies.
If pen manufacturers decided that ALL pens would use only a new type of ink, manufacturers of the old type of ink would not, IMO, have an anti-trust case.
I just spoke to a friend who is an anti-trust attorney and his initial impression is that the issue at hand is NOT an anti-trust issue, but of course he has not examined the facts in detail.
What if Pen manufacturers decided that all pens made since the dawn of time were no longer legal to use because they used the old ink?
If DVD manufacturers decided as a group that all DVD players will use metal remotes, manufacturers of plastic remotes would NOT have an anti-trust case.
Pen manufacturers cannot and do not decide what is legal. So why do DVD manufacturers get to decide what's legal?
Well why the hell not!? And where do DVD makers get off telling DVD PLAYER makers what to do?
Anti-trust does not always = monopoly.
I would argue that this move, ESPECIALLY since it is so targeted is certainly oppressive. They are basically making a move to drive another company out of business.
And automobiles drove horse and buggies out of business.
..and "Xerox copiers" rendered mimeograph machines obsolete, and cable is slowly making antennae obsolete, etc. etc. None of these examples are anti-competitive.
Larry, I don't think it is specifically an anti-trust issue, I think it's collusion. If all the pen manufacturers got together and made that decision it could be collusion, which is generally illegal under US law. Those laws have been upheld by the SCOTUS on many occasions.
I don't see how this is any different, all the studios get together and make a decision that affects the market place. That would seem to be textbook collusion, IMO. Of course, I'm not a lawyer at all, let alone an anti-trust attorney, so...
All I'm saying is, the more the RIAA/MPAA tighten their grip, the more star systems will slip through their fingers.
Collusion usually has to do with pricing.
If all the soda manufacturers got together and agreed to stop putting caffeine in their drinks, with the result that caffeine manufacturers went out of business, it would not be anti-trust, nor would it be collusion.
Colton: please PS an MPAA badge on the Tarkin please.
Separate names with a comma.