13 Dec
2002
13 Dec
'02
11:27 p.m.
At 09:12 PM 12/13/02 -0800, you wrote:
I haven't, I have friends that are / were in signed bands, and they were
ripped off royally by the record companies they were signed through. There
are plenty of stories out there by recording artists that are getting the
royal purple shaft by their recording companies (lets start with the band
having to pay the recording company back for all expenses incurred in
advertising a record or tour...., the same expenses that the record company
wrote off in their takes but the band has to repay.)
Every recording contract with a participation clause
has an audit provision in
it that allows the artist to come in with their own auditor/accountant and
have
full access to the books. Same is true in the movie biz. So I don't really
know what you're referring to.
-BZZZTTTT- Wrong answer... the recording industry contracts state that
Yes, you can ahve your contract audited, but only with a list of 'approved'
auditors, as a matter of fact if you show your contract to ANYONE you are
in violation of the contract.
Also, I think
it's pretty petty for the recording industry especially to
be griping about losing sales, especially when it robs most recording
artists blind anyway. But that's another (and even more off-topic)
thread.
I see you've been reading the popular press and the gospel according to
Courtney
Love. It depends on what you mean by "distributing that
research." If you mean
unrestricted distribution of a hack -- particularly when you know that
99.9% of
those who will use it have no interest in "research" (other than to
"research"
whether they can crack a DVD) -- then I do support it.
Um, I seem to remember text in the DMCA that makes it a criminal offense to
do ANYTHING that could be construed as an attempt at bypassing copy
protection, that would include reverse-engineering CSS....