Nickname: topher

Review: what is to stop people from recording songs from regular radio?? if u can record from fm and am why not XM its like tivo why not be able to record for later listening, and viewing?? there just money hungry cowards..

Date reviewed: Oct 25, 2006 9:10 PM

Nickname: ditchwater

Review: XM..Youtube..Internet..keep it up major labels..and we will be seeing you on MTV where are they now. myspace.com/ditchwater

Date reviewed: Oct 9, 2006 7:47 PM

Nickname: Brian

Review: Leave sat radio alone!!! Call 800-303-3263 and tell your congressperson that you want them to vote against H.R. 6052. This bill is definitely inspired by the whining recording industry. If this happens, XM and sirius will surely have to raise their rates, and delete a feature that is important to many subscribers. The record industry is backpedaling because they made a bad deal with the devil, when signing the current licensing agreements with the sat.radio providers. Crooks!!!!!

Date reviewed: Sep 25, 2006 7:27 PM

Nickname: busyboy

Review: Fair use does not require the consumer to record an entire broadcast, or keep an entire broadcast if it is recorded. Excerpting can be performed in many audio and video formats, and consumers often keep only highlights or songs. That the inno is configured to perform this for the consumer at the time of broadcast, that is, to record only the songs, is merely an enhancement feature providing convenience to the customer. At it's essential level, the inno is no different than a 200 pound 1970's Betamax deck. The suit is a rehash of the past and is essentially frivolous.

Date reviewed: Jul 19, 2006 4:45 PM

Nickname: jpoey

Review: Record labels are becoming dinosaurs in the digital age. Instead of embracing technology they're fighting it for nothing more than greed, they know their time is coming. New technologies will allow the artist, whom should be make the $$$, distribute their work without without the greedy middleman. The labels know it. $20.00 for a cd and the artist makes less than $1.00. Rest in peace music labels and RIAA!

Date reviewed: Jun 24, 2006 2:31 AM

Nickname: Steve Wildstrom

Review: @pAppy The suit I think you are referring to is Universal City Studios v. Sony, better known as the Betamax case. It existence is probably why the record companies sued XM rather than Pioneer; Pioneer would win cold on the part of that decision that doesn;t apply to XM, that the inno has "substantial non-infringing uses." The plaintiffs try hard to distinguish their case from Betamax's fair use exemption for time shifting, but in my amateur opinion, they don't do very well. I expect that when XM does file its response, it will seek summary judgment on trhe grounds of Universal City v. Sony. Then we'll see what the court will do.

Date reviewed: Jun 22, 2006 9:46 PM

Nickname: ssw

Review: I couldn't agree more! AND, let's not forget the RIAA represents the record COMPANIES not the mere artists, who get a TINY part, if anything, of what is collected in these royalties! Kuddos to XM for NOT rolling over like their counterpart did!

Date reviewed: Jun 22, 2006 8:28 PM

Nickname: pAppy

Review: How is this anything different from the old RCA Victor law suit regarding VCRs. All the product is for is time shifting of listening.

Date reviewed: Jun 22, 2006 8:24 PM

Nickname: Yancy

Review: I have been an XM subscriber for 4 years - the inno is my 4th radio - it is by far the best because of its ability to time shift recordings to when I want to hear them. I believe that the RIAA will lose, because the movie/tv industry has allowed time shifting (and in fact - entertainment providers even encourage its use with DVRs) and XM may point to that as a vindication for the RIAA's claims. Good column!

Date reviewed: Jun 22, 2006 7:40 PM

Nickname: scoobydoobydoo

Review: The RIAA and record companies are way off base this time. I currently have an XM radio that has recording capabilities. I record to listen at a later time. Also, if I hear a song that I would like to listen to whenever I want, I make a note of the song name and artist and purchase through iTunes. This lawsuit will only damage the record companies' credibility. It's time for the RIAA to change its business model or be relegated to irrelevant footnote in music history.

Date reviewed: Jun 22, 2006 3:07 PM