Just my comments:

• Of course - CloneCD can't make a "perfect" copy of data it cannot read. That should be obvious. I think it wasn't necessary to prove this :-)
• In case CloneCD detects a bad sector, it will display an error in the logfile. Well, displaying an error should give the user a hint, that the copy can't be "perfect".
• If the data can't be read, dummy data is created that can't be read either. If the Original can't be read, and the Copy can't be read - isn't that as a close as "perfect copy" can be?
• The author talks a lot about read errors. Come on, do SecuROM CDs have read errors? AFAIK CloneCD is the only CD-Duplicating program in the world, that can make a working safety backup of e.g., Revolt (SecuROM) *without* bypassing the copy protection. What has this to do with read errors?
• Why can CloneCD overburn with Sony and HP Burners, but other programs can't? Does this have anything to do with read errors?
• The author talks about bypassing copy protections. I want to make it perfectly clear, that CloneCD does not and never has bypassed any copy protection. It does not decrypt, descramble or modify the data it reads in any way. Important: The data it "reads". Read errors are - Errors. The data can't be read.
• In conclusion, calling CloneCD a hoax and calling me a liar is very bad attitude (and wrong, too), and leaves a foul taste in the mouth, especially from an author of a competing product.
• I asked the author of the article for a public apology, but he didn't reply.

Regards,

Oliver Kastl