DOCSLIB.ORG

United States Patent (10) Patent N0.: US 7,281,034 B1 Eyal (45) Date of Patent: *Oct

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
United States Patent (10) Patent N0.: US 7,281,034 B1 Eyal (45) Date of Patent: *Oct US007281034B1 (12) United States Patent (10) Patent N0.: US 7,281,034 B1 Eyal (45) Date of Patent: *Oct. 9, 2007 (54) SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MEDIA 5,442,390 A 8/1995 Hooper et al. PLAYBACK OVER A NETWORK USING 5,548,724 A 8/1996 AkiZaWa et al. LINKS THAT CONTAIN CONTROL SIGNALS 5,583,763 A 12/1996 Atcheson 6t ?1~ AND COMMANDS 5,583,868 A 12/1996 Rashid et al. 5,616,876 A 4/1997 Cluts _ . 5,659,732 A 8/1997 Kirsch (75) Inventor. Aviv Eyal, San Franc1sco, CA (US) 5,668,948 A 9/1997 Belknap et a1‘ (73) Assignee: Friskit, Inc., San Francisco, CA (US) (Continued) ( * ) Notice: Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS patent is extended or adjusted under 35 U'S'C' 154(1)) by 0 days‘ EP 0649121 A2 4/1995 This_ patent 1s_ subJect_ to a termmal_ d1s_ (Continued) claimen OTHER PUBLICATIONS _ “A Web Jukebox, Creating a Custom Multimedia Player for Your (21) Appl' NO" 09/562’939 Site”, by Aviv Eyal. (Electronic publication). (22) Filed: May 2, 2000 (Continued) Related US. Application Data Primary Examineripaul H Kang _ _ _ _ _ (74) Attorney, Agent, or F irmiShemWell Mahamedi LLP (60) Provislonal appl1cat1on No. 60/177,786, ?led on Jan. 24, 2000. (57) ABSTRACT (51) Int- Cl- Amethod and system to provide media to a terminal coupled G06F 15/16 (2006-01) to a network, the terminal comprising a media playback US. Cl- ..................... .. eolnponent~ The method and System provides for program (58) Field of Classi?cation Search .............. .. 709/201, matically directing the terminal to access a ?rst netWork site 709/202, 203, 207, 206, 208, 219, 217, 238, in the plurality of netWork sites, and causing the media 709/245, 231; 713/171 playback component on the terminal to automatically load a See application ?le for complete search history. ?rst media Web resource located at the ?rst network site to (56) References Cited playback a ?rst medla. The method and system also includes programmatically directing the terminal to access a second U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS netWork site in the plurality of netWork sites, and causing the media playback component on the terminal to automatically 4,788,675 A 11/1988 Jones et al. load a second media Web resource located at the second 4,870,579 A 9/1989 Hey netWork site to playback a second media. 4,996,642 A 2/1991 Hey 5,191,573 A 3/1993 Hair 5,297,042 A 3/1994 Morita 33 Claims, 22 Drawing Sheets NETWORK SERVER NETWORK 2075/_\ MODULE PLAY- ARG 2020 LISTS‘ ’ 2&5 MESSAGING *MESSAGE TERMINAL 2 ESQ/\l MODULE URL 1- AHGUMENTS 2085 NETWORK REQUEST ADDRESS @2010 Q: TERMINAL 1 US 7,281,034 B1 Page 2 U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS 6,526,411 B1 2/2003 Ward 6,539,395 B1 3/2003 Gjerdingen et al. 5,675,734 A 10/1997 Hair 6,563,769 B1 5/2003 Van Der Meulen 5,734,719 A 3/1998 Tsevdos er 41 6,638,313 B1 10/2003 Freeman etal. 5,778,367 A 7/1998 Wesinger, Jr. et a1. 6,675,195 B1 1/2004 Chatterjee 5,790,423 A 8/1998 Lau et al. 6,678,680 B1 1/2004 W00 5,793,980 A 8/1998 Glaser et al. 6,741,369 B1 5/2004 Lehr 5,818,510 A 10/1998 Cobbley et al. 6,772,113 B1 g/2004 Fujita et 31, 5,833,469 A 11/1998 Ito er 41 6,879,963 B1 4/2005 Rosenberg 5,864,863 A 1/1999 Burrows 6,925,439 B1 3/2005 (31min 5,864,868 A l/1999 Contois 7,022,905 B1 4/2006 Hinman et al. 5,873,080 A 2/1999 Coden er 41 7,024,681 B1* 4/2006 Fransman etal. ........ .. 725/115 5,884,282 A 3/1999 Robinson 2001/0013061 A1* 8/2001 DeMartin etal. ......... .. 709/217 5,892,905 A 4/1999 Brandt er a1 2002/0194260 A1* 12/2002 Headley etal. ........... .. 709/203 5,900,564 A 5/1999 Kurakake 5,911,043 A 6/1999 Duffy et a1. FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS 5,911,139 A 6/1999 Jain et a1. 5,915,094 A 6/1999 Kouloheris etal. EP 0649121 A3 ‘"1995 5,920,856 A 7/1999 Syeda-Mahmood EP 0822502 2/ 1998 5,931,679 A 8/1999 Funahashi EP 0831608 3/1998 5,961,603 A 10/1999 Kunkel et al. EP 0875846 11/1998 5,963,916 A 10/1999 Kaplan 5,963,9575,966,440 A 10/1999 Hof?aergHair “Lycos MP3 Web Search Engine”, http://www.music.lycos.com, 2 5,969,283 A 10/1999 Looney et al. pages, 5,980,261 A 11/1999 MiIlO et a1~ “Fast Multimedia Search Engine”, http://www.multimedia.al 5,980,262 A 11/1999 Tseng et al. lthewebcom, 1 page, 5,983,176 A 11/1999 HOlTeIT et a1~ “MP3.com Launches First Fully Interactive Radio Stations,” Dec. 5,987,454 A 11/1999 HObbS 1999, 5,991,374 A 11/1999 HaZeIl?eld “Fire?y: From the Media Lab to Microsoft,” Scott Kirsner, Apr. 9, 5,996,015 A 11/1999 Day et a1. 1998, 6,009,459 A 12/1999 Bel?ofe et a1~ “MP3.com and RealNetworks Team Up To Provide New Music 6,011,537 A 1/2000 SlOtZIllCk JukeBOX Users,” Sep. 24, 1999, 6,016,504 A 1/2000 Arnold et a1~ “New MP3.com Service Lets Consumers Listen To Their Music 6,021,409 A 2/2000 Burrows Anywhere, Anytime,” MP3.com Press Release, Jan. 12, 2000 6,026,439 A 2/2000 Chowdhury (http://www.creativepro.com/story/news/3622.html). 6,035,055 A 3/2000 Wang et a1~ “MP3.com Announces Strategic Relationship With PortalPlayer, 6,041,318 A 3/2000 D?Ilfofd-Klein Inc.,” MP3.com Press Release, Jan. 6, 2000. 6,041,360 A 3/2000 Himmel et a1~ “MP3.com and Listen.com Form Strategic Alliance,” MP3.com 6,049,829 A 4/2000 Li Press Release, Oct. 28, 1999 (http://www.rhapsody.com/). 6,058,423 A 5/2000 Factor “MP3.com and I-Drive.com Join Forces to Store and Manage MP3 6,064,379 A * 5/2000 DeMoney .............. .. 715/500.1 Files,” Mp3'com press Release, Oct‘ 6, 1999 (httpy/WWW‘ 6,074,215 A 6/2000 Tslll'llmi creativepro.com/story/news/3619.html). 6,092,204 A 7/2000 Baker “MP3.com and MusicMatch Olfer Exclusive Download of Custom 6,101,510 A 8/2000 Stone MusicMatch Jukebox,” MP3.com Press Release, Sep. 29, 1999 6,112,239 A 8/2000 KeIlIlef (http://www.creativepro.com/story/news/3618.html). 6,134,596 A 10/2000 Bolosky et a1~ “MP3.com, Inc. and PlayMedia Systems, Inc. Agree to Dismiss 6,134,680 A 10/2000 Yeom?ns Lawsuit,” MP3.com Press Release, Sep. 29, 1999, Jun. 3, 1999. 6,151,624 A 11/2000 Te?fe et 31~ “MP3 Goes Mainstream, but Internet Music Has Yet To Find Its 6,192,340 Bl 2/2001 AbeCaSSiS Perfect Form,” Laura Goldstein, Dec. 1999. 6,201,176 B1 3/2001 YOllflO “Top Ten MP3 Utilities,” Max Green, FileWorld, Jun. 1, 1999. 6,202,061 B1 3/2001 KhOSla et a1~ “RealNetworks Launches Enhanced RealGuide Connecting Con 6,226,672 B1 * 5/2001 DeM?ITiIl et 31~ --------- ~~ 709/219 sumers To The Richest Streaming Media Content Available On The 6,232,539 B1 5/2001 Looney et a1~ Web,” RealNetworks Company Press Release, Mar. 17, 1999. 6,240,423 B1 5/2001 Hiram “Streaming Media Comes Of Age,” Jesse Berst, ZDNet 6,246,672 B1 6/2001 Lumelsky AnehorDesk, Mar, 1999, 6,247,069 B1 6/2001 Smyers “RealNetworks Launches RealJukebox, Turning Internet PC’s Into 6,247,130 B1 * 6/2001 Fritsch ..................... .. 713/171 The Best Way To Experience Music,” RealNetworks Company 6,317,740 B1 11/2001 Mukherjea et a1. Press Release, May 3, 1999, 6,353,929 Bl 3/2002 Houston “Shareware Music Machine News,” May 4, 1999. 6,363,434 B1 3/2002 Eytchison “RealNetworks Introduces RealJukebox Plus, The First Complete 6,389,467 B1 5/2002 Eyal Digital Music System With CD-Quality Recording And Playback,” 6,404,893 B2 6/2002 IOIi RealNetworks Company Press Release, Aug. 9, 1999. 6,418,421 B1 7/2002 HuITadO “RealNetworks Ships Gold Release Of RealJukebox And 6,425,018 B1 7/2002 Kaganas et a1~ RealJukebox Plus, First Complete Digital Music Solution,” 6,429,863 B1 8/2002 LOPiCCOlO et a1~ RealNetworks Company Press Release, May 3, 1999. 6,430,573 Bl 8/2002 Pachet et 61 “Managing Your Music,” Manual For RealJukebox Gold. 6,434,550 B1 8/2002 Warner “CNET Online To Feature Microsoft Streaming Media Technol 6,452,609 Bl 9/2002 Katinsky et a1~ ogy,” CNETNetworks Press Releases, Jul. 7, 1998. 6,484,156 B1 * 11/2002 Gupta et 31~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -- 707/1 “Sonic Foundry and Microsoft Provide First Music Jukebox Based 6,484,199 B2 11/2002 Eyal Soley On Windows Media Audio,” Microsoft Presspass, Aug. 17, 6,502,194 B1 12/2002 Berman et a1. 1999 http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/Aug99/ 6,519,648 B1 2/2003 Eyal SonicFMSpr.asp. US 7,281,034 B1 Page 3 “Audio/Video Development Tools Servers-Windows Media “Lycos Music Launches as the Ultimate Online Music Destination,” Player,” ServerWatch, Apr. 14, 1999 http://www.serverwatch.com/ ProRec.com, Nov.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Peer-To-Peer Systems and Massively Multiplayer Online Games
    Peer-to-Peer Systems and Massively Multiplayer Online Games Speaker: Jehn-Ruey Jiang CSIE Department National Central University P2P Systems Client/Server Architecture GET /index.html HTTP/1.0 HTTP/1.1 200 OK ... Server Clients 3/66 Peer-to-Peer Architecture Gateway Server Peers 4/66 The architectures Server-based architecture Client-Server / Server-Cluster Problems： Limited resources All loads are centered on the server Server-based architecture has low scalability. The setup and maintenance cost is high. Peer-to-Peer (P2P) architecture Advantages： Distributing loads to all users Users consume and provide resources P2P architecture has high scalability. The setup and maintenance cost is low. The Client Side Today‟s clients can perform more roles than just forwarding users requests Today‟s clients have: more computing power more storage space Thin client Fat client 6/66 Evolution at the Client Side DEC‟S VT100 IBM PC PC @ 4-core 4GHz @ 4.77MHz No storage 300GB HD 360k diskettes „70 „80 2008 7/66 What Else Has Changed? The number of home PCs is increasing rapidly Most of the PCs are “fat clients” As the Internet usage grow, more and more PCs are connecting to the global net Most of the time PCs are idle How can we use all this? Peer-to-Peer (P2P) 8/66 What is peer-to-peer (P2P)? “Peer-to-peer is a way of structuring distributed applications such that the individual nodes have symmetric roles. Rather than being divided into clients and servers each with quite distinct roles, in P2P applications a node may act as both
    [Show full text]
  • 04. Peer-To-Peer Applications
    Internet Technology 04. Peer-to-Peer Applications Paul Krzyzanowski Rutgers University Spring 2016 February 15, 2016 CS 352 © 2013-2016 Paul Krzyzanowski 1 Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Application Architectures • No reliance on a central server • Machines (peers) communicate with each other • Pools of machines (peers) provide the service • Goals client server – Robustness • Expect that some systems may be down – Self-scalability • The system can handle greater workloads as more peers are added peers February 15, 2016 CS 352 © 2013-2016 Paul Krzyzanowski 2 Peer-to-Peer networking “If a million people use a web site simultaneously, doesn’t that mean that we must have a heavy-duty remote server to keep them all happy? No; we could move the site onto a million desktops and use the Internet for coordination. Could amazon.com be an itinerant horde instead of a fixed central command post? Yes.” – David Gelernter The Second Coming – A Manifesto See http://edge.org/conversation/the-second-coming-a-manifesto February 15, 2016 CS 352 © 2013-2016 Paul Krzyzanowski 3 Peer to Peer applications • P2P targets diverse solutions – Cooperative computation – Communications (e.g., Skype) – Exchanges, digital currency (bitcoin) – DNS (including multicast DNS) – Content distribution (e.g., BitTorrent) – Storage distribution • P2P can be a distributed server – Lots of machines spread across multiple datacenters Today, we’ll focus on file distribution February 15, 2016 CS 352 © 2013-2016 Paul Krzyzanowski 4 Four key primitives • Join/Leave – How do you join a P2P system?
    [Show full text]
  • You Are Not Welcome Among Us: Pirates and the State
    International Journal of Communication 9(2015), 890–908 1932–8036/20150005 You Are Not Welcome Among Us: Pirates and the State JESSICA L. BEYER University of Washington, USA FENWICK MCKELVEY1 Concordia University, Canada In a historical review focused on digital piracy, we explore the relationship between hacker politics and the state. We distinguish between two core aspects of piracy—the challenge to property rights and the challenge to state power—and argue that digital piracy should be considered more broadly as a challenge to the authority of the state. We trace generations of peer-to-peer networking, showing that digital piracy is a key component in the development of a political platform that advocates for a set of ideals grounded in collaborative culture, nonhierarchical organization, and a reliance on the network. We assert that this politics expresses itself in a philosophy that was formed together with the development of the state-evading forms of communication that perpetuate unmanageable networks. Keywords: pirates, information politics, intellectual property, state networks Introduction Digital piracy is most frequently framed as a challenge to property rights or as theft. This framing is not incorrect, but it overemphasizes intellectual property regimes and, in doing so, underemphasizes the broader political challenge posed by digital pirates. In fact, digital pirates and broader “hacker culture” are part of a political challenge to the state, as well as a challenge to property rights regimes. This challenge is articulated in terms of contributory culture, in contrast to the commodification and enclosures of capitalist culture; as nonhierarchical, in contrast to the strict hierarchies of the modern state; and as faith in the potential of a seemingly uncontrollable communication technology that makes all of this possible, in contrast to a fear of the potential chaos that unsurveilled spaces can bring.
    [Show full text]
  • Get Real: Print This
    Get Real: Print This http://www.corante.com/getreal/archives/032237print.html from Get Real by Marc Eisenstadt January 11, 2005 BitTorrent, eXeem, Meta-Torrent, Podcasting: "What? So What?" SUMMARY: The index that facilitates the sharing of files on a large scale is also the Achilles heel of peer-to-peer file-sharing, because it is vulnerable to litigation and closure. So what happens if the index is itself distributed? I try to get my head around the latest in peer-to-peer file sharing, and explain a bit about what I've learned, including the fact that BitTorrent's power rests in its 'swarm' distribution model, but not necessarily in your end-user download speed. What has this got to do with podcasting? (Answer: invisible P2P plumbing helps the podcasting wheel go round). [Warning: lengthy article follows]. First, some history (skip ahead to the next section if you're already bored with the Napster, Gnutella, KaZaa, and BitTorrent saga). Napster opened our eyes to the power of distributed file sharing on a massive scale. But it was closed down by lawsuits to stop it from listing copyrighted works for which the owners would naturally have preferred to collect royalties (there are thousands of commentaries on the pros and cons of such royalties, but that's not the focus of this posting). Successive generations of tools such as Gnutella, KaZaa, and now BitTorrent have created their own buzz, their own massive followings, their own headaches, and their own solutions to others' headaches. Here's my rundown of the 'big ideas' (and the people behind them): Napster (Shawn Fanning): This was the Mother of big-time peer-to-peer (P2P) file transfers, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Title: P2P Networks for Content Sharing
    Title: P2P Networks for Content Sharing Authors: Choon Hoong Ding, Sarana Nutanong, and Rajkumar Buyya Grid Computing and Distributed Systems Laboratory, Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Australia (chd, sarana, raj)@cs.mu.oz.au ABSTRACT Peer-to-peer (P2P) technologies have been widely used for content sharing, popularly called “file-swapping” networks. This chapter gives a broad overview of content sharing P2P technologies. It starts with the fundamental concept of P2P computing followed by the analysis of network topologies used in peer-to-peer systems. Next, three milestone peer-to-peer technologies: Napster, Gnutella, and Fasttrack are explored in details, and they are finally concluded with the comparison table in the last section. 1. INTRODUCTION Peer-to-peer (P2P) content sharing has been an astonishingly successful P2P application on the Internet. P2P has gained tremendous public attention from Napster, the system supporting music sharing on the Web. It is a new emerging, interesting research technology and a promising product base. Intel P2P working group gave the definition of P2P as "The sharing of computer resources and services by direct exchange between systems". This thus gives P2P systems two main key characteristics: • Scalability: there is no algorithmic, or technical limitation of the size of the system, e.g. the complexity of the system should be somewhat constant regardless of number of nodes in the system. • Reliability: The malfunction on any given node will not effect the whole system (or maybe even any other nodes). File sharing network like Gnutella is a good example of scalability and reliability.
    [Show full text]
  • Liquid Audio, Inc. LQID 56 $ 25 -$ 48.4
    Tornado Report, December 31, 2002 Patrick Lannigan - Lannigan and Associates - 905-305-8004 [email protected] Tornado Report. All prices as of market close Tuesday, December 31, 2002 Figures do not account for debt, which is usually not a concern for all but the very largest software and hardware companies (e.g. Lucent, Nortel, IBM, CA, etc.) Cash (as it is tallied here) = Cash + Securities. ( Warning: Cash + Securities data can lag earnings data - by many weeks!) MC = Market Capitalization ttm = Trailing Twelve Months Companies are in order of --> TR = Tornado Ratio = (MC - CASH) / Revenue For more information on the TR (Tornado Ratio) go to: http://www.lannigan.org/tornado_report.htm Company Symbol MC MC-Cash MC/Rev. TR Cash Rev. EPS P/E Price Shares (mill.) (mill) (ttm) (mill.) (ttm) (ttm) (mill.) Liquid Audio, Inc. LQID$ 56 -$ 25 48.4 -21.81$ 81 $ 1 -$0.75 n/a$ 2.5 22.8 Clarus CLRS$ 88 -$ 15 22.4 -3.68$ 103 $ 4 -$1.09 n/a$ 5.6 15.7 BackWeb Technologies Ltd. BWEB$ 9 -$ 19 1.0 -2.03$ 28 $ 9 -$0.73 n/a$ 0.2 39.8 Blue Martini Software BLUE$ 30 -$ 41 0.9 -1.23$ 71 $ 34 -$5.75 n/a$ 2.9 10.4 FirePond, Inc. FIRE$ 9 -$ 20 0.4 -0.93$ 29 $ 22 -$5.38 n/a$ 2.5 3.7 Keynote KEYN$ 220 -$ 19 5.8 -0.51$ 239 $ 38 -$2.23 n/a$ 7.7 28.5 Commerce One CMRC$ 80 -$ 68 0.6 -0.48$ 148 $ 142 -$17.61 n/a$ 2.8 29.2 Centra Software CTRA$ 26 -$ 14 0.7 -0.40$ 40 $ 35 -$0.64 n/a$ 1.0 26.0 Liberate Technologies LBRT$ 122 -$ 27 1.7 -0.37$ 149 $ 73 -$2.70 n/a$ 1.1 107.6 Rogue Wave Software RWAV$ 18 -$ 10 0.4 -0.23$ 28 $ 43 -$0.68 n/a$ 1.8 10.2 Pivotal Corporation PVTL$ 18 -$ 12 0.3 -0.19$ 30 $ 66 -$3.42 n/a$ 0.7 25.3 Vignette Corporation VIGN$ 306 -$ 29 1.8 -0.18$ 335 $ 167 -$4.33 n/a$ 1.2 250.6 Docent DCNT$ 41 -$ 4 1.5 -0.14$ 45 $ 28 -$2.53 n/a$ 2.9 14.3 Safeguard Scientifics SFE$ 162 -$ 164 0.1 -0.10$ 326 $ 1,650 -$1.37 n/a$ 1.4 119.4 Selectica, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Amazon.Com, Inc. Securities Litigation 01-CV-00358-Consolidated
    Case 2:01-cv-00358-RSL Document 30 Filed 10/05/01 Page 1 of 215 1 THE HONORABLE ROBERT S. LASNIK 2 3 4 5 6 vi 7 øA1.S Al OUT 8 9 UNITE STAThS15iSTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 10 AT SEATTLE 11 MAXiNE MARCUS, et al., On Behalf of Master File No. C-01-0358-L Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, CLASS ACTION 12 Plaintiffs, CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT FOR 13 VS. VIOLATION OF THE SECURITIES 14 EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AMAZON COM, INC., JEFFREY P. BEZOS, 15 WARREN C. JENSON, JOSEPH GALLI, JR., THOMAS A. ALBERG, L. JOHN DOERR, 16 MARK J BRITTO, JOEL R. SPIEGEL, SCOTT D. COOK, JOY D. COVEY, 17 'RICHARD L. DALZELL, JOHN D. RISHER, KAVITARK R. SHRIRAM, PATRICIA Q. 18 STONESIFER, JIMMY WRIGHT, ICELYN J. BRANNON, MARY E. ENGSTROM, 19 KLEJNER PERKINS CAUF1ELD & BYERS, MORGAN STANLEY DEAN WITTER, 20 CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON, MARY MEEKER, JAMIE KIGGEN and USE BUYER, 21 Defendants. 22 In re AMAZON.COM, INC. SECURITIES 23 LITIGATION 24 This Document Relates To: 25 ALL ACTIONS 26 11111111 II 1111111111 11111 III III liii 1111111111111 111111 Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Le955 600 West Broadway, Suite 18 0 111111 11111 11111 liii III III 11111 11111111 San Diego, CA 92191 CV 01-00358 #00000030 TeIephone 619/231-058 Fax: 619/2j.23 Case 2:01-cv-00358-RSL Document 30 Filed 10/05/01 Page 2 of 215 TA L TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 Page 3 4 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW I 5 JURISDICTION AND VENUE .............................36 6 THE PARTIES ...........................
    [Show full text]
  • A Reference for the Scene Page 1
    WareZ101.org - A Reference For The Scene Page 1 Home *Articles* Downloads Discussion Forum Search Links Contact Us December 17 2006 07:38:33 What are these files I downloaded? How do I "open" them? Login This article will discuss the following popular download formats: Username *Official Scene Releases (RAR splits) Password *Single ZIP Files *Single RAR Files *Single TAR Files Login *ISO Files *BIN/.CUE Files Not a member *IMG Files (CD's, 700 MB and under) yet? *IMG Files (DVD's, 4.4 GB and under) Click here to *MDF/.MDS Files register. *CCD/.IMG/.SUB Files *MP3/.M3U Files Forgotten your *WMA Files password? *OGG Files Request a new *AVI Files one here. *MPG/.MPEG Files *VCD Files & Folders Users Online *SVCD Files & Folders *VOB/.IFO/.BUP Files Guests Online: 1 --- No Members Online Official Scene Release Format Registered Example: Members: 94 Newest Member: NoX Latest Articles Coded Anti- Piracy The Bittorrent Bible... Secrets of the Pirat... How to use Daemon Tools How to Convert DVDs ... Member Poll What's your primary source of warez? FTP Servers (Public) FTP Servers (Private) http://warez101.org/readarticle.php?article_id=36 17/12/2006 06:39:09 PM WareZ101.org - A Reference For The Scene Page 2 HTTP Servers Torrent Sites E-Mule Sites P2P Application(s) IRC Servers Other You must login to vote. Shoutbox You must login to post a message. 5cr3w3d DATE: 02/09/2006 17:52 Testing 1-2-3 I have somehow NOTE: This particular release contains 3CD's, as you can see above. Your particular release may not have found my way these folders, all the RAR's, .NFO and .SFV files may be in a single folder with no subfolders.
    [Show full text]
  • Case COMP/C-3/37.792 Microsoft)
    EN EN EN COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 21.4.2004 C(2004)900 final COMMISSION DECISION of 24.03.2004 relating to a proceeding under Article 82 of the EC Treaty (Case COMP/C-3/37.792 Microsoft) (ONLY THE ENGLISH TEXT IS AUTHENTIC) (Text with EEA relevance) EN EN COMMISSION DECISION of 24.03.2004 relating to a proceeding under Article 82 of the EC Treaty (Case COMP/C-3/37.792 Microsoft) (ONLY THE ENGLISH TEXT IS AUTHENTIC) (Text with EEA relevance) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation No 17 of 6 February 1962, First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty1, and in particular Article 3 and Article 15(2) thereof, Having regard to the complaint lodged by Sun Microsystems, Inc. on 10 December 1998, alleging infringements of Article 82 of the Treaty by Microsoft and requesting the Commission to put an end to those infringements, Having regard to the Commission decision of 1 August 2000 to initiate proceedings in Case IV/C-3/37.345, Having regard to the Commission decision of 29 August 2001 to initiate proceedings in this case, and to join the findings in Case IV/C-3/37.345 to the procedure followed under this case, Having given the undertaking concerned the opportunity to make known their views on the objections raised by the Commission pursuant to Article 19(1) of Regulation No 17 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 2842/98 of 22 December 1998 on the hearing of parties in certain proceedings under Articles 85 and 86 of the EC Treaty2, Having regard to the final report of the hearing officer in this case, After consulting the Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions, 1 OJ 13, 21.2.1962, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Ÿþu N T I T L E
    MAKE IT • STREAM IT SPECIAL WEAR IT • SING IT ISSUE RIP IT • PLAY IT ULTIMATE GET MORE FROM TECHNOLOGY DIGITAL 48 COOL PRODUCTS MUSIC COMPARED MP3 PLAYERS GUIDE HEADPHONES SERVICES SIRIUS VS. XM DJ GEAR HOME STUDIO HOW TO USB GUITAR SIMPLE STREAMING TIPS KARAOKE EASY WAYS ...AND MORE! TO TAKE IT ANYWHERE ROCK STAR SECRETS FROM FLAMING LIPS, DEVO, AND MORE! Master Your Music Play it. Share it. Rip It. Stream it. Sing it. Scratch it. Take it with you. Our 15-page guide shows you every way to enjoy digital music. BY MIKE KOBRIN WHAT’S INSIDE PERHAPS YOU SUFFER FROM THE SAME 64 MP3 players serious addiction that has gripped me for much of my 66 Subscription Services life: I have to have music with me at just about every 66 Devo’s Mark step of my day. I wake up with John Coltrane on my Mothersbaugh JBL On Time clock radio, sip my morning coffee while 67 Brian “BT” Transeau listening to NPR streaming from a Sonos ZonePlayer 68 Wireless Streaming Devices 80, and catch a morning train with my iPod nano and 70 Front Row versus Ultimate Ears super.fi 5 Pro earphones. Media Center At work, I dock my iPod and switch to the Sennheiser 70 Convert Your CDs PX100 headphones. Lucky for me, my job involves testing 71 The Flaming Lips 74 Music Clothes and audio gear, so I get to use a variety of software (iTunes, Headphones WMP, Musicmatch) and services (Rhapsody, Napster, 74 Satellite Radio Audible, Vongo) nearly every day while I’m at my desk.
    [Show full text]
  • A Multi-Level Perspective Analysis of the Change in Music Consumption 1989-2014
    A multi-level perspective analysis of the change in music consumption 1989-2014 by Richard Samuels Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Geography and Planning Cardiff University 2018 i Abstract This thesis seeks to examine the historical socio-technical transitions in the music industry through the 1990s and 2000s which fundamentally altered the way in which music is consumed along with the environmental resource impact of such transitions. Specifically, the investigation seeks to establish a historical narrative of events that are significant to the story of this transition through the use of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions as a framework. This thesis adopts a multi-level perspective for socio-technical transitions approach to analyse this historical narrative seeking to identify key events and actors that influenced the transition as well as enhance the methodological implementation of the multi-level perspective. Additionally, this thesis utilised the Material Intensity Per Service unit methodology to derive several illustrative scenarios of music consumption and their associated resource usage to establish whether the socio-technical transitions experienced by the music industry can be said to be dematerialising socio-technical transitions. This thesis provides a number of original empirical and theoretical contributions to knowledge. This is achieved by presenting a multi-level perspective analysis of a historical narrative established using over 1000 primary sources. The research identifies, examines and discusses key events, actors and transition pathways denote the complex nature of dematerialising socio-technical systems as well as highlights specifically the influence different actors and actor groups can have on the pathways that transitions take.
    [Show full text]
  • Essay the Evolution and Revolution
    Essay The Evolution and Revolution of Napster* By PETER JAN HONIGSBERG** As I TURNED the corner onto Seventh Street from Mission Street in San Francisco on that Monday morning, October 1, 2000, I knew I was watching history unfold. The satellite dishes, the neon-bright lights set atop the media vans, and members of the press fidgeting anxiously had replaced the homeless who usually encamp near the main en- trance to the Federal Court of Appeals building. As many as two hun- dred members of the national and international media had arrived that day, some as early as 4:15 A.M., although the music industry's law- suit against Napster was scheduled to begin at 11:00 A.M.I A television reporter was interviewing a balding man in a blue striped suit, the artificial lamps barely making a dent in the gray, dull natural light. I. Piracy-the Word of the Day While I watched the reporters lining up at the door to the court- house, I could not help but see the "P" word flashing overhead. The five major record companies ("the majors") and the Recording Indus- try Association of America ("RIAA")-the association that represents the companies-had paid their publicity agents and lawyers well. Piracy was the word of the day. Actually, at least where Napster was concerned, it was the word of the entire millennium year of 2000, and continued to be the word after the Ninth Circuit issued its unanimous * Just like the technology upon which this essay is based, the essay itself will be out of date the moment the typing stops.
    [Show full text]