Macrovision Right or Wrong?

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by JethroUK©, Aug 30, 2003.

  1. JethroUK©

    JethroUK© Guest

    Is macrovision a [legal] requirement?

    If it is - then why do some companies support it whilst others dont?

    This implies it's a moral issue & not a legal issue

    If it's a moral issue - why do dvd [player] manufacturers support it? (why
    do consumers support the companies that support it?) - on the simple premise
    that [you] are paying for the player & [not] the film industry - & it's not
    in the consumers interest to pay extra to be crippled - any copyright
    protection is in the film industries interest and should be restricted to
    the software (the disc) & not the player

    there's no legitimate difference between 'ripping-off' a broadcast film &
    'ripping' off a dvd - they both breach copyright law
     
    JethroUK©, Aug 30, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. JethroUK©

    Larry Guest

    In article <NE24b.1940$>, "JethroUK©"
    <> wrote:

    >Is macrovision a [legal] requirement?


    It;s not legally required, AFAIK. But its effective, so most companies use it.
    >
    >If it is - then why do some companies support it whilst others dont?
    >
    >This implies it's a moral issue & not a legal issue


    No, this is a false dichotomy. It doesn't have to be a moral issue just
    because it's not a legal issue.

    >If it's a moral issue - why do dvd [player] manufacturers support it? (why
    >do consumers support the companies that support it?) - on the simple premise
    >that [you] are paying for the player & [not] the film industry - & it's not
    >in the consumers interest to pay extra to be crippled - any copyright
    >protection is in the film industries interest and should be restricted to
    >the software (the disc) & not the player
    >
    >there's no legitimate difference between 'ripping-off' a broadcast film &
    >'ripping' off a dvd - they both breach copyright law
     
    Larry, Aug 30, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. JethroUK©

    JethroUK© Guest

    "Larry" <> wrote in message
    news:none-3008031050430001@192.168.2.4...
    > In article <NE24b.1940$>, "JethroUK©"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >Is macrovision a [legal] requirement?

    >
    > It;s not legally required, AFAIK. But its effective, so most companies

    use it.

    hence my question

    > >
    > >If it is - then why do some companies support it whilst others dont?
    > >
    > >This implies it's a moral issue & not a legal issue

    >
    > No, this is a false dichotomy. It doesn't have to be a moral issue just
    > because it's not a legal issue.


    No you're wrong - if it isn't a legal issue it [is] a moral issue - there is
    no other issue

    >
    > >If it's a moral issue - why do dvd [player] manufacturers support it?

    (why
    > >do consumers support the companies that support it?) - on the simple

    premise
    > >that [you] are paying for the player & [not] the film industry - & it's

    not
    > >in the consumers interest to pay extra to be crippled - any copyright
    > >protection is in the film industries interest and should be restricted to
    > >the software (the disc) & not the player
    > >
    > >there's no legitimate difference between 'ripping-off' a broadcast film &
    > >'ripping' off a dvd - they both breach copyright law
     
    JethroUK©, Aug 30, 2003
    #3
  4. JethroUK©

    JethroUK© Guest

    "Larry" <> wrote in message
    news:none-3008031107450001@192.168.2.4...
    > In article <rU24b.1959$>, "JethroUK©"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >"Larry" <> wrote in message
    > >news:none-3008031050430001@192.168.2.4...
    > >> In article <NE24b.1940$>,

    "JethroUK©"
    > >> <> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >Is macrovision a [legal] requirement?
    > >>
    > >> It;s not legally required, AFAIK. But its effective, so most companies

    > >use it.
    > >
    > >hence my question

    >
    > What's the question? It's legal, most companies use it, and consumers
    > don't seem to mind,


    the vast majority of consumers dont know they're [buying] it & even more
    dont it's legitimate status


    > as they buy macrovision-enabled products anyway.


    but they dont [know] they're paying for a crippled machine (and the few that
    [do], do so because they [know] they can UN-cripple it :eek:)

    > >
    > >> >
    > >> >If it is - then why do some companies support it whilst others dont?
    > >> >
    > >> >This implies it's a moral issue & not a legal issue
    > >>
    > >> No, this is a false dichotomy. It doesn't have to be a moral issue

    just
    > >> because it's not a legal issue.

    > >
    > >No you're wrong - if it isn't a legal issue it [is] a moral issue - there

    is
    > >no other issue

    >
    > It can be a financial issue.


    not in terms of DVD player manufacturer - in fact the only financial issues
    are negative (it cost more to put it in, than not to bother) - hence it's
    some sorta moral issue


    > Using macrovision is legal, and it is
    > neither moral nor immoral. It protects both profits and intellectual
    > property.


    it does NOT protect the profit of DVD player manufacturer - that [is] my
    question !

    >
    > >
    > >>
    > >> >If it's a moral issue - why do dvd [player] manufacturers support it?

    > >(why
    > >> >do consumers support the companies that support it?) - on the simple

    > >premise
    > >> >that [you] are paying for the player & [not] the film industry - &

    it's
    > >not
    > >> >in the consumers interest to pay extra to be crippled - any copyright
    > >> >protection is in the film industries interest and should be restricted

    to
    > >> >the software (the disc) & not the player
    > >> >
    > >> >there's no legitimate difference between 'ripping-off' a broadcast

    film &
    > >> >'ripping' off a dvd - they both breach copyright law
     
    JethroUK©, Aug 30, 2003
    #4
  5. JethroUK©

    JethroUK© Guest

    "The dog from that film you saw" <> wrote in
    message news:biqglf$b6duk$-berlin.de...
    >
    > "JethroUK©" <> wrote in message
    > news:NE24b.1940$...
    > > Is macrovision a [legal] requirement?
    > >
    > > If it is - then why do some companies support it whilst others dont?
    > >
    > > This implies it's a moral issue & not a legal issue

    >
    >
    > nope!
    > to use macrovision the company that releases a dvd has to pay money to
    > macrovision for permission to turn it on.
    > some think it worth their while, others don't - simple as that.
    >


    assuming you're talking about hardware (dvd player) manufacturers (as
    opposed to software (disc manufacturers )) - then the only reason for
    "turning it on" - are moral ones - hence my question
     
    JethroUK©, Aug 30, 2003
    #5
  6. "JethroUK©" <> wrote in message
    news:5I34b.2021$...
    >
    > "The dog from that film you saw" <> wrote in
    > message news:biqglf$b6duk$-berlin.de...
    > >
    > > "JethroUK©" <> wrote in message
    > > news:NE24b.1940$...
    > > > Is macrovision a [legal] requirement?
    > > >
    > > > If it is - then why do some companies support it whilst others dont?
    > > >
    > > > This implies it's a moral issue & not a legal issue

    > >
    > >
    > > nope!
    > > to use macrovision the company that releases a dvd has to pay money to
    > > macrovision for permission to turn it on.
    > > some think it worth their while, others don't - simple as that.
    > >

    >
    > assuming you're talking about hardware (dvd player) manufacturers (as
    > opposed to software (disc manufacturers )) - then the only reason for
    > "turning it on" - are moral ones - hence my question
    >
    >


    no!
    it's software.
    part of the dvd specification is that the player contains the hardware to
    generate macrovision.
    the producer of the software - the dvd disc, must pay macrovision for the
    permission to turn it on.
    some consider it a price worth paying, others not.
    it's a financial consideration - cost of turning it on vs revenue lost if
    they don't.


    --
    Gareth
    quote of the day
    'nostradamus? -sounds like a rock group to me!'
    see my ebay auctions a
    http://makeashorterlink.com/?F4B314E61
     
    The dog from that film you saw, Aug 30, 2003
    #6
  7. JethroUK©

    Mike G Guest

    On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 15:34:10 +0100, "JethroUK©" <>
    wrote:

    >Is macrovision a [legal] requirement?


    For DVD players? Effectively, yes.

    As I understand it, hardware manufacturers need a licence from the DVD
    Forum in order to produce DVD players. This gives them access to the
    CSS encryption technology as well as the DVD name and logo.

    According to this licence, Macrovision is a compulsory requirement, as
    is region coding.

    >If it is - then why do some companies support it whilst others dont?


    See above. Consumers want region free players which don't have
    Macrovision, so companies have an incentive to 'cheat' a little.

    It's still against the rules, though - for example, Samsung got
    reprimanded for including a 'Macrovision off' loophole in the x09
    series players, so this loophole was removed in all their subsequent
    models.

    --
    Mike
     
    Mike G, Aug 30, 2003
    #7
  8. JethroUK©

    JethroUK© Guest

    "The dog from that film you saw" <> wrote in
    message news:biqhod$c16lu$-berlin.de...
    >
    > "JethroUK©" <> wrote in message
    > news:5I34b.2021$...
    > >
    > > "The dog from that film you saw" <> wrote in
    > > message news:biqglf$b6duk$-berlin.de...
    > > >
    > > > "JethroUK©" <> wrote in message
    > > > news:NE24b.1940$...
    > > > > Is macrovision a [legal] requirement?
    > > > >
    > > > > If it is - then why do some companies support it whilst others dont?
    > > > >
    > > > > This implies it's a moral issue & not a legal issue
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > nope!
    > > > to use macrovision the company that releases a dvd has to pay money to
    > > > macrovision for permission to turn it on.
    > > > some think it worth their while, others don't - simple as that.
    > > >

    > >
    > > assuming you're talking about hardware (dvd player) manufacturers (as
    > > opposed to software (disc manufacturers )) - then the only reason for
    > > "turning it on" - are moral ones - hence my question
    > >
    > >

    >
    > no!
    > it's software.
    > part of the dvd specification


    i've lost track right there - dvd 'disc' (software) spec or dvd 'player'
    (hardware) spec?

    > is that the player contains the hardware to
    > generate macrovision.


    if you're saying the software spec (in it's own interest) means it will only
    run on macrovision protected hardware, it makes sense - but it isn't so (the
    software runs on any hardware)

    > the producer of the software - the dvd disc, must pay macrovision for the
    > permission to turn it on.
    > some consider it a price worth paying, others not.
    > it's a financial consideration - cost of turning it on vs revenue lost if
    > they don't.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Gareth
    > quote of the day
    > 'nostradamus? -sounds like a rock group to me!'
    > see my ebay auctions a
    > http://makeashorterlink.com/?F4B314E61
    >
    >
     
    JethroUK©, Aug 30, 2003
    #8
  9. JethroUK©

    JethroUK© Guest

    "Mike G" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 15:34:10 +0100, "JethroUK©" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >Is macrovision a [legal] requirement?

    >
    > For DVD players? Effectively, yes.


    but some dont have it - are they illegal?

    >
    > As I understand it, hardware manufacturers need a licence from the DVD
    > Forum in order to produce DVD players. This gives them access to the
    > CSS encryption technology as well as the DVD name and logo.
    >
    > According to this licence, Macrovision is a compulsory requirement, as
    > is region coding.
    >
    > >If it is - then why do some companies support it whilst others dont?

    >
    > See above. Consumers want region free players which don't have
    > Macrovision, so companies have an incentive to 'cheat' a little.
    >
    > It's still against the rules, though - for example, Samsung got
    > reprimanded for including a 'Macrovision off' loophole in the x09
    > series players, so this loophole was removed in all their subsequent
    > models.


    but there's lot more hardware that doesn't support macrovision than 'the
    odd' samsung - are these all illegitimate manufacturers (breaking the code
    of conduct) ?
     
    JethroUK©, Aug 30, 2003
    #9
  10. "JethroUK©" <> wrote in message
    news:xh44b.2041$...
    >
    > "The dog from that film you saw" <> wrote in
    > message news:biqhod$c16lu$-berlin.de...
    > >
    > > "JethroUK©" <> wrote in message
    > > news:5I34b.2021$...
    > > >
    > > > "The dog from that film you saw" <> wrote

    in
    > > > message news:biqglf$b6duk$-berlin.de...
    > > > >
    > > > > "JethroUK©" <> wrote in message
    > > > > news:NE24b.1940$...
    > > > > > Is macrovision a [legal] requirement?
    > > > > >
    > > > > > If it is - then why do some companies support it whilst others

    dont?
    > > > > >
    > > > > > This implies it's a moral issue & not a legal issue
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > nope!
    > > > > to use macrovision the company that releases a dvd has to pay money

    to
    > > > > macrovision for permission to turn it on.
    > > > > some think it worth their while, others don't - simple as that.
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > > assuming you're talking about hardware (dvd player) manufacturers (as
    > > > opposed to software (disc manufacturers )) - then the only reason for
    > > > "turning it on" - are moral ones - hence my question
    > > >
    > > >

    > >
    > > no!
    > > it's software.
    > > part of the dvd specification

    >
    > i've lost track right there - dvd 'disc' (software) spec or dvd 'player'
    > (hardware) spec?



    ok!

    the dvd player contains hardware that generates macrovision
    but
    it wont do it unless the disc specifically tells it to

    if the disc does do that, the makers of the disc have to pay money to the
    company that invented macrovision

    got it?


    --
    Gareth
    quote of the day
    'nostradamus? -sounds like a rock group to me!'
    see my ebay auctions a
    http://makeashorterlink.com/?F4B314E61
     
    The dog from that film you saw, Aug 30, 2003
    #10
  11. JethroUK©

    Dick Sidbury Guest

    JethroUK© wrote:
    >
    > but there's lot more hardware that doesn't support macrovision than 'the
    > odd' samsung - are these all illegitimate manufacturers (breaking the code
    > of conduct) ?


    Can you name some? And the Samsung does support macrovision. It just
    has a "secret code" to disable it.

    dick
     
    Dick Sidbury, Aug 30, 2003
    #11
  12. "JethroUK©" <> wrote in message
    news:xA44b.2051$...
    >


    > > ok!
    > >
    > > the dvd player contains hardware that generates macrovision
    > > but
    > > it wont do it unless the disc specifically tells it to
    > >
    > > if the disc does do that, the makers of the disc have to pay money to

    the
    > > company that invented macrovision
    > >
    > > got it?

    >
    >
    > yep - but then it still leaves my original question, why do hardware
    > manufacturers indulge it (what is their reasoning)?
    >


    because the dvd forum who tegether invented dvd, make the manufacturer
    promise to do so.


    --
    Gareth
    quote of the day
    'nostradamus? -sounds like a rock group to me!'
    see my ebay auctions a
    http://makeashorterlink.com/?F4B314E61
     
    The dog from that film you saw, Aug 30, 2003
    #12
  13. JethroUK©

    JethroUK© Guest

    "The dog from that film you saw" <> wrote in
    message news:biql76$c2rlf$-berlin.de...
    >
    > "JethroUK©" <> wrote in message
    > news:xA44b.2051$...
    > >

    >
    > > > ok!
    > > >
    > > > the dvd player contains hardware that generates macrovision
    > > > but
    > > > it wont do it unless the disc specifically tells it to
    > > >
    > > > if the disc does do that, the makers of the disc have to pay money to

    > the
    > > > company that invented macrovision
    > > >
    > > > got it?

    > >
    > >
    > > yep - but then it still leaves my original question, why do hardware
    > > manufacturers indulge it (what is their reasoning)?
    > >

    >
    > because the dvd forum who tegether invented dvd, make the manufacturer
    > promise to do so.
    >


    i dont buy any o that

    who are the dvd formum?

    what have 'inventors' got to do with anything? (it's a film industry issue)

    what they gunna do about it - if no one complies?

    Would you wonder what the Ford Motor Company were upto ?
     
    JethroUK©, Aug 30, 2003
    #13
  14. JethroUK©

    Dom Robinson Guest

    In article <xh44b.2041$>,
    d says...
    <snip>
    > > is that the player contains the hardware to
    > > generate macrovision.

    >
    > if you're saying the software spec (in it's own interest) means it will only
    > run on macrovision protected hardware, it makes sense - but it isn't so (the
    > software runs on any hardware)
    >
    > > the producer of the software - the dvd disc, must pay macrovision for the
    > > permission to turn it on.
    > > some consider it a price worth paying, others not.
    > > it's a financial consideration - cost of turning it on vs revenue lost if
    > > they don't.


    <big snip>

    Jethro, if you're going to continue this thread about Macrovision, at least
    get a clue and stop quoting endless previous text that no longer is relevant
    (ie. all that extra stuff under your last comment which you keep leaving in)
    --

    Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk
    /* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor)
    /* 940 DVDs, 259 games, 33 videos, 67 cinema films, 69 CDs, laserdiscs & news
    /* star trek nemesis, bringing down the house, phone booth, human nature
    "Your eyes, they take me... to eternity." - Natalie Imbruglia, Identify
     
    Dom Robinson, Aug 30, 2003
    #14
  15. JethroUK©

    Dom Robinson Guest

    In article <xA44b.2051$>, d
    says...
    > > the dvd player contains hardware that generates macrovision
    > > but
    > > it wont do it unless the disc specifically tells it to
    > >
    > > if the disc does do that, the makers of the disc have to pay money to the
    > > company that invented macrovision
    > >
    > > got it?

    >
    >
    > yep - but then it still leaves my original question, why do hardware
    > manufacturers indulge it (what is their reasoning)?
    >

    Because, as has already been explained to you, it is part of the DVD
    specification that all hardware manufacturers must adhere to. Let's hope
    that's spelled it out again for the hard of thinking like yourself.
    --

    Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk
    /* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor)
    /* 940 DVDs, 259 games, 33 videos, 67 cinema films, 69 CDs, laserdiscs & news
    /* star trek nemesis, bringing down the house, phone booth, human nature
    "Your eyes, they take me... to eternity." - Natalie Imbruglia, Identify
     
    Dom Robinson, Aug 30, 2003
    #15
  16. JethroUK©

    Dom Robinson Guest

    In article <bI44b.2061$>,
    d says...
    >
    > "Dick Sidbury" <> wrote in message
    > news:biqkll$btd3c$-berlin.de...
    > > JethroUK© wrote:
    > > >
    > > > but there's lot more hardware that doesn't support macrovision than 'the
    > > > odd' samsung - are these all illegitimate manufacturers (breaking the

    > code
    > > > of conduct) ?

    > >
    > > Can you name some?

    >
    > How about the one i've just bought (Philips DVD755VR) - all the more
    > suprising since it's a combi dvd/vcr which makes it nothing short of
    > deliberate - which lead me to read about it, and i've read about lots that
    > dont support macrovision - which then lead to wondering why any hardware
    > manufacturer does & thus to why anybody buys em
    >

    The player will support macrovision, but generally you won't be able to record
    macrovision-protected DVDs to video, unless they've disabled the Macrovision.

    Hence, they must allow the player to produce macrovision, but they're also
    able to stop it from doing so if the user wishes. It's only the first bit they
    need to abide by in order to sell the machine.
    --

    Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk
    /* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor)
    /* 940 DVDs, 259 games, 33 videos, 67 cinema films, 69 CDs, laserdiscs & news
    /* star trek nemesis, bringing down the house, phone booth, human nature
    "Your eyes, they take me... to eternity." - Natalie Imbruglia, Identify
     
    Dom Robinson, Aug 30, 2003
    #16
  17. JethroUK© wrote:

    > If it's a moral issue - why do dvd [player] manufacturers support it?


    My best guess: if they didn't, the movie studios would develop a
    standard that did.

    Okay, who just said, "Some studios did try that; it was called DIVX"?
    DIVX failed for the most part because there was a viable alternative,
    something I doubt would have existed had it not been for Macrovision
    (and, to a lesser extent, region control, but that's another matter).
    I doubt that most of the studios would have accepted a DIVX-style
    "call in to enable your DVDs" format, but eventually the "if you won't
    put some sort of copy protection in your players, we'll develop a
    separate format that has it and release DVDs that work only in our
    machines (but once you buy a DVD, it will work on any of "our" DVD
    players without having to pay extra)" types would have won out, and
    something tells me that enough major studios would have been behind
    this effort that we'd be right about where we are today.


    ----------------------------------------------------
    Don Del Grande,
    And how many people STILL won't go to Circuit City because they once
    supported DIVX?
     
    Don Del Grande, Aug 30, 2003
    #17
  18. JethroUK©

    JethroUK© Guest

    "The dog from that film you saw" <> wrote in
    message news:biqlu3$cbr6c$-berlin.de...
    >
    > "JethroUK©" <> wrote in message
    > news:LS44b.2066$...
    >
    > > > > yep - but then it still leaves my original question, why do hardware
    > > > > manufacturers indulge it (what is their reasoning)?
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > > because the dvd forum who tegether invented dvd, make the manufacturer
    > > > promise to do so.
    > > >

    > >
    > > i dont buy any o that
    > >

    >
    > doesn't make it any less true.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > who are the dvd formum?
    > >

    >
    > the individual companies who together invented the dvd format - at one

    time
    > sony and others had rival formats, but they got together before going to
    > market to make a single format - dvd.
    > they called this alliance ' the dvd forum'
    > the own the copyright of the dvd format - want to make one? - pay them a
    > license fee. want a license? - include everything they tell you to
    > including macrovision hardware.
    >
    > >

    >
    > once again, this is all true - i'm not making it up.


    but once again it doesn't answer my question ( where is the motive?)
     
    JethroUK©, Aug 30, 2003
    #18
  19. "JethroUK©" <> wrote in message
    news:Y254b.2079$...

    > > the individual companies who together invented the dvd format - at one

    > time
    > > sony and others had rival formats, but they got together before going to
    > > market to make a single format - dvd.
    > > they called this alliance ' the dvd forum'
    > > the own the copyright of the dvd format - want to make one? - pay them a
    > > license fee. want a license? - include everything they tell you to
    > > including macrovision hardware.
    > >
    > > >

    > >
    > > once again, this is all true - i'm not making it up.

    >
    > but once again it doesn't answer my question ( where is the motive?)
    >
    >


    are you being deliberately daft?
    the motive is that the big movie studios ( also part of the dvd forum)
    wouldn't release their films to the format and therefore allow it's success
    without the forum specifying macrovision.
    so the motive is those companies that want to prevent copying can do so.


    --
    Gareth
    quote of the day
    'nostradamus? -sounds like a rock group to me!'
    see my ebay auctions a
    http://makeashorterlink.com/?F4B314E61
     
    The dog from that film you saw, Aug 30, 2003
    #19
  20. JethroUK©

    POD {Ò¿Ó} Guest

    Not so long ago, in a Newsgroup, not so very far away POD {Ò¿Ó} whipped out
    his laser sword, set it to tickle and prodded The dog from that film you
    saw with his throbbing weapon, who gasped out in wonder to all in
    uk.media.dvd:

    > the dvd player contains hardware that generates macrovision
    > but
    > it wont do it unless the disc specifically tells it to


    Bollocks, Macrovision is encoded in the data stream of the signal on the
    disc, there's nowt in a DVD player to generate it.

    --
    *..· ´¨¨)) -:¦:-
    ¸.·´ .·´¨¨))
    ((¸¸.·´ .·´ -:¦:- *POD {Ò¿Ó}* -:¦:-
    -:¦:- ((¸¸.·´*
     
    POD {Ò¿Ó}, Aug 30, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Rick

    New Photoshop CS Contains Macrovision Spyware

    Rick, Nov 14, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    411
    Views:
    9,596
  2. BIG J

    REQ:Macrovision hack ALBA 109

    BIG J, Aug 16, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    518
    BIG J
    Aug 16, 2003
  3. Spot

    Re: Macrovision

    Spot, Aug 31, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    467
    Dr. Speedbyrd
    Sep 1, 2003
  4. Jim D

    Re: Macrovision

    Jim D, Aug 31, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    44
    Views:
    1,342
    Wile E. Coyote
    Sep 3, 2003
  5. Anonymous Joe

    Re: Macrovision

    Anonymous Joe, Sep 2, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    763
    Anonymous Joe
    Sep 7, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page