3 ms·
As the article mentions, DAT was mandated to be deliberately limited in its use by the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_Home_Recording_Act https://en.wikiped
by dannyobrien 1y ago
As the article mentions, DAT was mandated to be deliberately limited in its use by the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_Home_Recording_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_Home_Recording_Act -- the first MP3 players were sued under the definition in the law, and barely escaped being banned. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recording_Industry_Ass%27n_of_America_v._Diamond_Multimedia_Systems,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recording_Industry_Ass%27n_of_.... )
The lesson learned by from this in the tech policy space in the 2000s was that legal tech mandates like this were really the worst form of regulation -- they both limited innovation, and didn't really work for the kind of market/business model protection that their advocates desired. I think we'll probably re-learn this after a long period of lax (or relaxed, depending on how you view it) regulation of tech.
- laborcontract 1y agoI wonder if this is what led to Sony forcing ATRAC down users throats. It killed their chance at any success in the mp3 player market which should have parlayed into greater success in the mobile phone market. Crap like this can permanently alter the trajectory of a company and its products. My speculation about Google’s slowness to productize LLMs were, in part, due to the chilling effect of the Google Books lawsuit.
- axiolite 1y agoATRAC was just to avoid the onerous MP3 license fees, AND lock-in consumers. Sony is all about NIH. They never release a product unless it uses their own proprietary something-or-other. Remember memory stick? Hi8? UMD? PS Vita memory cards? MicroMV? MiniDisc? HiFD drives? SuperAIT? AVCHD? Why do you think DAT didn't use some other existing tape format like Digital8?