[Free-sklyarov-uk] New gentle-reader leaflet, plus Chuck's variant on AD's leaflet

[Chuck Heffner]

Howdy,
    I chose the word and continue to use the word "corrupt" for several
reasons which may interest you (or NOT, :-). First, unlike the alternatives,
it's not unwieldy. Being two succinct syllables and absolutely identifiable
in and of itself with little or no explanation, the word also imbues the
subject you associate it with with a poor quality.
    Second, it's true. You have the normal CD that plays and copies fine
anywhere, anytime. Corrupt CDs have been intentionally corrupted at the
manufacturing level and impose a diminished value on your enjoyment of the
music, both because it's less portable, and because the sound quality
may/may not suffer. Corrupt.
    Last, using the term associates the act of corrupting CDs with the
people who do it. Give it time, Jane Public will eventually get to the point
of associating corrupt CDs with the corrupt attitude or actions of the
labels who do this. "Copy-protected" or "copy-prevented" don't do this and
vaguely do point 2.
    Try it, it works on many levels.

Chuck

----- Original Message -----
From: "Edward Welbourne" <eddy at vortigen.demon.co.uk>
To: <jim at uazu.net>
Cc: <free-sklyarov-uk at xenoclast.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 7:26 AM
Subject: Re: [Free-sklyarov-uk] New gentle-reader leaflet, plus Chuck's
variant on AD's leaflet


> >> our opponents' propaganda term "copy protection"? IMO it sounds better
> >> (and is more accurate) to say "copy prevention".
>
> > Well, we can talk about copy-protection and copy-protected CDs, or
> > we can talk about copy-prevention and copy-prevented CDs.
>
> The last, `copy-prevented CDs', is rather clumsy.  Furthermore,
> `copy-prevent' is no more accurate than `copy-protect' and still buys
> into the enemy's lie - that this stuff prevents copying of the CD,
> when in fact it merely restricts access so that the CD can only be
> copied by those who already have the kit for real copyright abuse.
>
> Alternatives:
>   access-restricted (most accurate)
>   copy-restricted (resonance between truth and the original)
>
> > ... use the opposition's term, and then connect it with all our
> > criticisms of this technology, rather than `boycott' it and leave
> > people hearing the term `copy-protection' from other sources and not
> > connecting it with what we were saying.
>
> I would go with this too - albeit remembering, in each discourse, to
> qualify at least one use of the term with a parenthetical reminder
> that the phrase is double-speak, the medium isn't `protected' from
> copying, the manufacturers have merely restricted the legal
> purchasers' access to it.  Get the public associating `copy-protect'
> with `rip-off' and don't worry too much about the pedantic damage to
> Anglic - which is a fairly robust language, after all.
>
> Eddy.
> --
> Who needs rhetorical questions?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Free-sklyarov-uk mailing list
> Free-sklyarov-uk at xenoclast.org
> http://mailman.xenoclast.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov-uk
>