On Wednesday, February 12, 2003, at 02:05 AM, John Leonard wrote: > Your original post implied that _all_ CDs that are labelled as being > for > audio were of the licensed variety and would not work in anything > other than > a stand-alone CD burner. Wrong. Where did I state that the Audio Discs would work *only* in a Stand Alone recorder? I said nothing of the sort. Here is my original post: "Music or Audio CDRs are watermarked and contain a flag that tells the standalone player that these are certified for use in that player. Typically, these discs use a better quality dye as well, resulting in better burns, especially at high speeds." Show me where I state that "Music" CDRs can *only* be used in a standalone recorder. Once again, Kunga made a false statement, i corrected him. Then you tried to claim that what I said was "not exactly correct" when in fact it was entirely correct. In fact, *YOU* made an erroneous statement when you claimed: > The concept of > this licensing system never really took off as it became perfectly > possible > to burn CDs for personal use using a standard CD-R in any computer, > which > doesn't care what blanks you use (unless you try using one of the > "licensed" > discs, which won't work.) Which is incorrect as I pointed out already. Computer CD-R/Ws will use a "licensed" CDR just fine, contrary to your incorrect assumption. That's 3 times now you've claimed I said something I didn't, I'd suggest you read things a little more carefully from this point forward. > Here in the UK, where we didn't sign up for the Athens agreement that > promoted the so-called consumer CD-R system using licence-paid discs Wonderful. However that means exactly squat to people living in the U.S, which is the majority of this list. And incidentally, ALL CDRs marked as "Music" here in the U.S. are of the licensed variety. I am in the U.S. and so is Kunga, so what I said applies. In your zeal to ------------------------------- Ric Perrott Writer, Poet, Pot-Stirrer Visit http://www.ricperrott.com