Quote from: maximusotterArent those agreements from before internet music distribution was even a tingle in a hackers pants?

yup, but they are still legally binding.  

QuoteCritically, however, the agreement prevented Apple Computer from distributing content on physical media. This was designed to cover CDs and tapes, but it is unclear whether it included later inventions such as digital music files or devices used to play them.

Apple Computer will argue that its music service, which has sold more than a billion songs since 2002, is merely data transmission.

I think apple corps are trying to prove that ipod is delivering music on a physical media. If apple had no restrictions on how the media was used after it was downloaded they may have got away with the just data transmission.

Time will tell

Quote from: brummieLOL why are you right??

that is what Im asking you to explain - if you can that is.

Ive not actually put forward a view as to whether the agreement has been broken or not - Im not sure tbh... as I think the case isnt all that clear cut. You on the other hand have stated that it has & yet you cant actually explain why it has.

read my last post

yes you are speculating again - why cant you back up the statement of fact you made previously though? I think that might have something to do with the fact the trial hasnt come to a conclusion yet.

??

stop editing ya posts DOH

What friggin fact are we on about here??

Im asking you why you are so sure that apple computers has broken the agreement - as far as I can tell the case isnt clear cut

Quote from: timesonline.co.ukCritically, however, the agreement prevented Apple Computer from distributing content on physical media. This was designed to cover CDs and tapes, but it is unclear whether it included later inventions such as digital music files or devices used to play them.

Apple Computer will argue that its music service, which has sold more than a billion songs since 2002, is merely data transmission.  

it isnt hard brummie - just think for yourself & explain your reasoning.

Btw.. your times quote is supporting my pov.

Quotebut it is unclear whether it included later inventions such as digital music files or devices used to play them.

Are you going to actually back up your previous statment or have you now changed your mind?

WTF are you on about??

Im asking you to explain how you can, at this point, know for sure that apple computers has actually broken the agreement - IMO it isnt all that clear thus the need for a trial.

Apple Comps has broken the agreement, by walking all over Apple Corps turf - yet it hasnt actually breached any of the conditions on the piece of paper that says what Apple Comps is allowed to do.

Lots of turf overlappage. They *have* broken the agreement - but at the same time - they havent.

the agreement is the bit of paper & they may well have breached the conditions on it tbh...

Well in my story, there were two bits of paper

While Apple comps hasnt done anything wrong on their sheet, Apple corps are screaming and shouting waving their own piece in the air going "WTF?!"