[ale] SSSCA rears its (ugly) head once more

[Greg]

Why not out-source it to MS and make it a new "feature" of .NET ?  Besides,
what's to copy ? Since music CD's now cannot be copied ?... well, there was
that pesky lady in LA (Louisiana , not Los Angeles or Lower Alabama) who
sued Target and won for selling here one of those new-fangled anti-copy
CD's. oops, I just recalled that someone told me the new MS Media Player
won't do copying..... dang, late again on the great ideas...

As for the idea of Mr. Millson's ... will there be a grandfather clause for
all of the old hard drives ?... it might just cause a run on them...people
paying more for a 500 MG hard drive than a 40 GB.... If so I guess then I
need to brush up on my MAOD...Massive Array of Old Drives technology... I
guess then my office will have stacks of drives piled up and connected like
those pictures of the old submarines (circa 1930's)  with the batteries
connected - <apologies to RAID types>...


Greg Canter

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Millson [mailto:mgm at atsga.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 7:04 AM
> To: ttlchaos at randomc.com; ALE
> Subject: RE: [ale] SSSCA rears its (ugly) head once more
>
>
> Maybe they will set up those huts like they have for vehicle emmissions
> testing. We could load up our computers and drive to one of those huts to
> have our hard drives tested. Then we could mail in the certificate we get
> from the hut and get a decal that we can afix to the case of our
> computer so
> people will know we are law abiding citizens. Probably they will
> simplify it
> by only requiring it on an odd/even year basis depending on when the hard
> drive was manufactured.
>
> Mike ;-)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Webb [mailto:ttlchaos at randomc.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 6:54 PM
> To: ale at ale.org
> Subject: Re: [ale] SSSCA rears its (ugly) head once more
>
>
> On Friday 01 March 2002 01:51 pm, you wrote:
> > If you haven't heard of it, the SSSCA (Security Systems Standards
> > Certification Act) would mandate that all new hard drives contain an
> > as-yet-undecided copy-protection scheme. Buying or selling a new drive
> > which was not so crippled would be a crime.  It  would also be a crime
> > to tamper with the copy-protection hardware or software on a disk drive.
> > Up to a half-million dollar fine or five years in jail for the first
> > offfense. This ain't law yet, but the time to act is now.
>
> Who the hell is going to know if you tamper with it, or is there also some
> kind of provision for monitoring my hard drive...?  Will there be required
> yearly testings to verify that your hard drive is still
> untampered?  How can
> they expect to enforce such stupidity?
>
>
> -E.
>
> ---
> This message has been sent through the ALE general discussion list.
> See http://www.ale.org/mailing-lists.shtml for more info.
> Problems should be
> sent to listmaster at ale dot org.
>
>
>
> ---
> This message has been sent through the ALE general discussion list.
> See http://www.ale.org/mailing-lists.shtml for more info.
> Problems should be
> sent to listmaster at ale dot org.
>
>
>


---
This message has been sent through the ALE general discussion list.
See http://www.ale.org/mailing-lists.shtml for more info. Problems should be 
sent to listmaster at ale dot org.