IIRC, there’s some verbage in the Patriot Act which if parsed correctly that would make the use of the software by Sony a terrorist act. Now all we need is a prosecutor willing to take on a multi-billion dollar international corp.
Der Trihs, I wasn’t clear. My outrage wasn’t directed at you, but at the idea expressed in your post. (I included your name so others reading this thread would know my comment was in referance to you post.) I realise you were just reporting, and didn’t mean to seem to be “shooting the messanger”. 
The latest wrinkle: it seems that Sony stole one of the software components used to build the rootkit…
No, I wasn’t clear; I was agreeing with you. 
Maybe I missed it, but I don’t see anything in that link that indicates the DRM can install itself even when autorun is turned off.
Christ, this just keeps getting better and better, doesn’t it? The whole stated purpose of their rootkit was to protect copyrights. And yet they violate copyrights.
If Sony were a dude standing in front of me right now, I’d kick him in the balls.
Read the paragraph below the first image. It’s not the root kit, but it’s another, slightly less heinous spyware program that installs itself even if you tell it specifically not to.
Apparently, that’s against the terms of the EULA
Some of the conditions there suck but are somewhat understandable (the one about having no right to the music if the CD has been stolen from you), but the one about agreeing that you will delete the music from your computer if you’re bankrupt makes no sense to me at all.
WTF?!! :eek: :mad:
Was it Sony who ‘stole’ the LAME code, or was it First 4 Internet, the company which wrote the DRM malware? My impression is that First 4 Internet may have sold the malware to other companies.
There aren’t words vehement enough to describe that entire list of terms, particularily numbers one, four, five, six, and seven.
Unless I misread the article, it says that even if you answer no to its prompt it installs software. That’s different from not allowing autorun in the first place (i.e. holding down shift as you insert the disk). Does it get around that too?
It won’t even get to that point if you have autorun turned off. The whole thing is still triggered by autorun, so if that’s off you are safe.
Like I said in the GD thread: The 800 pound gorilla has spoken:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1886122,00.asp
Just think on the millions Sony already has lost in this fiasco (wasted programming time). Heads need to roll.
Except I wasn’t even talking about copies-I’m talking about the actual CD I bought. Let’s say I take it home, and then the next day, I’m at work, and I want to listen to my CD on the computer at work. I pop it in, and now, not only has Sony vandalized MY computer with their malaware, but they’ve done so to my computer at work, which I don’t own.
Actually, I’d WAG that the cost was higher. A lot higher. The last time Sony tried a “cpoyright protection” scheme this big, it set them back an estimated $1 **b*illion dollars, only to have it defeated by a Sharpie! 
Any intelligent company would have learned from their mistake, but not Sony.
The good news there is that EULA’s are completely unenforceable in a court. Because it’s a contract that occurs after the point of sale they’re considered null and void and you can click “yes” to as many as you want without fear of reprisal when you fail to do stuff like fail to delete all your music when you go bankrupt.
Does that count as legal advice? It’s a pretty open secret anyway. They’re as useful as those things you sign going into surgery that state that if the doctor screws up (s)he’s not liable for damages. Those haven’t exactly stopped successful malpractice suits.
This only makes sense if one assumes that Sony is planning to introduce some scheme that requires you to keep paying for the privilege of continued access to your copy.
Heads need to go to jail – that’s what would happen if some teenaged l33t haquer d00d pulled a stunt like this, and it’s what needs to happen if we are to maintain any pretense that there a uniform rule of law.