It's ironic that intel is defending grokster because they feel that if the supreme court rules in favor of the MPAA it could prevent companies from innovating... when was the last time intel was innovative with any of their products? Pentium 2? Pentium 3 maybe?
technic58 Minister of Spare Parts
Posts: 13953
Joined: 07/25/2004
hmm...well i like intels reasoning on that one....its bad publicity for them tho.
someone shoud make an icon out of that....
intel <3 kazaa
------------------------- My GT430 Is Folding For AMD Team 34106 FOR A GOOD CAUSE---Accepting Donations of New, Used, Working, Nonworking PC Components Thanks to KLEETUS for his generous donation of components!!
And claiming they have not innovated anyting recently just because they selected a dead end on P4 is a bit harsh, surely.
But this is a serious issue:
People who develop technology are not, and should not be made, liable for the ways in which other people choose to use the technology they develop.
Not that I wouldn't enjoy spending all the money I could get if Ma Bell was liable for every nuisance phone call I get.
And claiming off Bill Gates for every invoice I ever had to pay that was printed on a Windows PC.... great.
Yes, fun. But not right.
When technology is developed that has no legal use in any country in the world then maybe you can make thr developer liable. Maybe... but I think it's a very dangerous principal. Can I get money from the US government for for teh mental anguish I have suffered because of their developmant (and use) of Atomic bombs during hte Second World War?
No, I can't... and the principal that technolgy itself is neutral and only the actual use is illegal is one we should stick with.
MD - Moderator Deployer of Mjölnir - House Keeping
Posts: 11102
Joined: 11/05/2003
Ironic...
The usage of the word "Ironic" does not fit the situation...
Intel does not own the copyrighted IP* being stolen/traded...
It would only be ironic if Intel was stealing/trading some copyrighted IP* they do not own and then turning around and saying some other company cannot do that with Intel's copyrighted IP*...because it will stifle creativity/innovation...
*IP = Intellectual Property
QUOTE Intel says that while it likes its patents to be protected by law, it feels that the Court could err if it holds companies responsible for what consumers do with their products.
Look what happened when VIA came out with chipsets that would work with Intel processors, they tried to slam VIA in court...Intel had a cross license agreement with VIA...but did not like the competition.
If this is truly the case then Intel is guilty of hypocrisy or there are a lot of Grokster users at Intel
MD
------------------------- The opinions expressed above do not represent those of Advanced Micro Devices or any of their affiliates.
Physics? Ha! This is clearly magic and devilry at work. Prepare firewood! We have witches to burn!
First the RIAA and MPAA are sueing the people that download the illegal material. Next they have moved onto the program creators. Soon they will be sueing ISP for allowing people to download illegal material. Next they will be sueing Intel or AMD maybe Nvidia or ATI for allowing people to run or to display illegal material.
Its kind of like if someone sued a gun shop because he sold a gun to someone who ended up using that gun to kill some loved one of theirs. Then going on and sueing the gun maker for creating an object that was used to kill someone. Although this example is on the extreme side it gives a somewhat comparison.
The MPAA and the RIAA are going to sue everyone they can just to get their way.
-------------------------
Aspire X-Navigator Case (Black\Silver) AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Winchester @ 2.4ghz (240 FSB, CPU Mult x10, HTT Mult x4, Vcore @ 1.37v) DFI LanParty UT NF4 Ultra-D 1Gb Dual Channel OCZ Gold Series PC-3200 VX RAM (3-3-3-8, Vdimm @ 3.2) Gigabyte Nvidia Geforce 6600GT (Core @ 500mhz / Memory @ 1000mhz) E-POWER Tagan 480w PSU Hitachi SATA 250GB HDD
Search Topic
03/30/2005 10:06 AM
