If I understand the article correctly, it consumes processing power even when you're not playing CDs because it is constantly monitoring your computer:

"I closed the player and expected $sys$DRMServer’s CPU usage to drop to zero, but was dismayed to see that it was still consuming between one and two percent. It appears I was paying an unknown CPU penalty for just having the process active on my system. I launched Filemon and Regmon to see what it might be doing and the Filemon trace showed that it scans the executables corresponding to the running processes on the system every two seconds, querying basic information about the files, including their size, eight times each scan."

The author's conclusion:

"The entire experience was frustrating and irritating. Not only had Sony put software on my system that uses techniques commonly used by malware to mask its presence, the software is poorly written and provides no means for uninstall. Worse, most users that stumble across the cloaked files with a RKR scan will cripple their computer if they attempt the obvious step of deleting the cloaked files.

"While I believe in the media industry’s right to use copy protection mechanisms to prevent illegal copying, I don’t think that we’ve found the right balance of fair use and copy protection, yet. This is a clear case of Sony taking DRM too far."

If there's anyone who's more technologically sophisticate than I am (and that ain't hard), I'd be interested to hear how disturbing or dangerous you think this is.

• "Sony, Rootkits and Digital Rights Management Gone Too Far"

Have you tried PHILZONE?

Believe me when I tell you that the legal issues surrounding this have nothing to do with a constitutional right to privacy. And, in fact, state law and state courts are going to be the primary battlefields on which such issues are fought -- unless Congress, using its power under the Interstate Commerce Clause and Copyright Clause choose to occupy the field by enacting a statute that preempts state laws. But absent that, claims will be primarily governed by state law, such as contract law (e.g., does the End User License Agreement constitute a binding contract?) and state consumer protection laws (e.g., are the disclosures in the EULA so vague and opaque as to be misleading or worse?).

Ironically, you may scoff at state law, but in many ways the states have more latitude than and are more pro-consumer activist than Federal courts can be -- in fact, sometimes too much so IMHO (you've heard of "junk science"?). For example, most of the "pro consumer" class actions you hear about, involving claims for defective products (asbestos, cars, drugs, etc.), involve state laws.

Say; did you try that site..Philzone.com? They have a lot of info on what you ask and how to treat that larceny.

there may be others. Let us know if you find any.
I'd rather buy here. The only label CDs i'm going to buy are used ones on Ebay or in used stores. The ones that sell for 5-6 bucks or less.
akhilesh

As to your question, state-law claims can, at the option of the plaintiff, sometimes be filed in federal court, depending on the citizenship of the parties (generally, if the plaintiff and the defendant are from different states, federal court is available). If he has the option, whether a plaintiff decides to sue in state or federal court depends on a number of tactical factors. I don't want to get to technical, but to give one example, there may be different procedural rules in state and federal court as to when an appeal is available. Or, the lawyer may just be more comfortable in state or federal court.

Jury pools may be a factor too. If a plaintiff can bring a case in state court in The Bronx in NYC, he may choose to go there rather than to the corresponding federal court (which is either in White Plains or Manhattan), on the theory that Bronx juries are notoriously generous. In other situations, the roles may be reversed, and it may be in the plaintiff's interest to sue in federal court. There was, for example, a federal judge in Alton, Illinois about 20 years ago who just hated corporations. Every plaintiff in the area would if possible sue in federal rather than state court because, basically, they couldn't lose.

Finally, just to make it clear, the important role played by state courts and state law is not limited to product liablity. Virtually all states, for example, have various consumer protection laws, often with treble damage remedies, attorneys' fees, etc. Even in employment and housing discrimination, which you probably think of as largely a federal matter, all states that I know of have such laws, and often they are more protective of individual rights than federal statutes, and plaintiffs often choose to sue in state court under state law.

see link what some think commercial radio is all about

• http://www.rapcointelpro.com/Pay%20For%20Play.htm