Slashdot Mirror
Coming Soon: Burn-Proof CDs
An Anonymous Coward writes: "This article on MSNBC opens the door to the "Copyright protected CD's". Apparently the very first copyright protected cd is set to burn this April for some country star's album. Copyright protected cd's do not allow you to replicate them in a cd burner nor do they allow you to rip the audio tracks "digitally" (although can still be done through analog)." I wonder how long before someone finds a way around this. Actually the article is well-written, covering all the bases, although it neglects to say how we're all expected to bend over while our fair use of stuff we paid for is taken away from us.
Oddly, this will really, really increase sales of this particular CD, and the music industry will say it's because people can't pirate it. But they'll have it backwards.
Tons of us will race out and buy a Charlie Pride CD (even though we abhor country music) simply because we want to try to break it. We want to see whether or not it's really burnproof, and whether we can be the first to figure out the easy way around it.
The industry will hail the huge sales of this CD as demonstrable proof that non-copyable CD's enjoy higher revenues because us nasty mean hackers can't make copies of Charlie Pride's wonderful stuff, and thus we have to buy several copies for our car, our office, etc. They'll show this fact to other recording artists and say, "See, you too could be enjoying this kind of royalty," and the artists will lick their chops in anticipation. I guarantee they'll be a long line of artists willing to be the second burn-proof CD.
What's your damage, Heather?
Don't buy the CD, if you don't agree with the copyright protection. The RIAA will eventually realize that their sales are dropping because of the copyright protection and they are better off without it.
Unbelievable. How about fair use? I copy my CDs so I don't have to carry the originals in the car. I guess you can forget about that, as well as "best-of" cds...
Jethro
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
I am an unfortunate owner of one such CD.
What does burn proofing involve? Obviously a CD player can play it... I'm seriously missing how you can secure a CD while it still able to play in a normal CD player.
---- http://www.opedog.com/
I'm sure this is just coincidence, but when I clicked on the poll on the left margin ("Do you support copy-proctected CDs?") to vote "NO", their site took me to a blank page. When I tried to go back to the article, still nothing... blank page. Shortly after that, Netscape crashed. By now they have no doubt logged my IP address and sent a complaint to my ISP that I'm a potential pirate, and asking that my account be revoked.
On the other hand, maybe I've been watching too much X-Files. And it's early... yeah, that's the ticket... early... brain not function... must... get... caffiene...
With playstation 1?
This is so stupid. Its so easy to defeat. Just take the waveform from the speaker wires.
Why are our rights being trampled for some company to make a buck with this afternoon's pop-star as filer between the ads?
It certainly NOT because they are trying to stop people from recording the stuff.
Anybody got any thoughts on why this is being done?
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
From everything I rea din this article, these schemes prevent the ripping of audio data from a CD, since there is extra data that confuses the TOC so that CDROM drives cannot read it. While this will keep your ripping program from working, I do not see how this would prevent the burning of a CD. A simple raw copy using dd or some other command would copy the raw data from the CD, no filesystem or format necessary. Then it is a simple matter of burning that image to a CD. I fail to see how there is any prevention of copying in this.
Read the Salon article. There, much better.
-Docvert converts MSWord to OpenDocument, clean HTML
If my computer can see the bits (and it has to if it can run the software on it) then I can copy those bits. Unless of course they found a way to make "soft" bits on the CD that sometimes read 1 and sometimes 0. That way they could have the program read the same section of data over and over to make sure that the data coming from it is different. I believe that this type of copy protection was used on the old floppies for some Apple II games.\ =\=\=\=\
=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=
Why is it when schemes like this come out they always use terms like "It will be far too dificult for the average user". Is every person on the internet expected to crack the protection personally. Dont these companies realise all it takes is for one person to write the crack, then the "average user" can just run the program for himself.
It just seems to me at times that large businesses seem unable to comprehend the basic concept of a programmable machine. The ability to store a list of instructions and repeat. Given the manufacturers reluctance to cripple dvd-rom drives, purposely making them easy to mod to multi-region. I bet they start advertising cd-roms that can read these so called protected disks fairly soon after release.
Hence, the technology, as it now stands, only frustrates the casual pirate, not the hardcore fair use maven. Also, N.B., the same article can be found on Salon, and in point of fact actually comes from Inside.
There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
Ever tried copying an audio track with dd?
In addition to all the usual suspects, it seems to me that there is a point being missed about the nature of automation. The article mentions that the record companies just want to make it hard for the average user to rip. But as long as we're dealing mostly with software, the complexities of writing drivers that ignore bad TOC data, or rippers that do bitwise copies and guess where tracks are (maybe from an online lookup table) can be almost completely transparent to the end user. That is, there is going to be little or no real added complexity. The record companies are not idiots, right? They know that this is only a bump in the road. They just are doing this as a stopgap untill they can strongarm device manufacturers (with stuff like CSS liscencing) into limiting outputs and paying attention to copyright bits and encryption.
...unless they can somehow disable the CD Digital out on my DVD-ROM. It's a bit more cumbersome to have to manually record it as .WAV, but there'll be no quality loss. Right now I'm in the process of ripping all of my CDs to Ogg Vorbis format. This kind of bullshit would only prevent me from buying those CDs.
That is against the 'fair use' part of the copyright law.
The other question I have is can you not bit-copy the thing? It would copy the 'copy protection' over to the new one as well, but who cares? It's for my own personal use, I can do with it as I please.
DanH
Cav Pilot's Reference Page
Cav Pilot's Reference Page
UNIX - Not just for Vestal Virgins anymore
Yeah. Right. Just like PSX games.
But even *that's* different, because the PSX hardware is looking for a boot code that doesnt transfer when the disc is copied (the burner's error correction removes it).
But how will thier copy-pro work for a $50 Walmart CD player?
And on the flipside, lets assume this copy protection does what it is supposed to to, if only initially. Lets also assume cdparanoia (for an example of a beautiful piece of software) releases a patch to defeat the copy protection. Aren't they violating the DCMA, as referenced in the interview with Rep Boucher? What recourse does that leave?
dirk
I keep trying to pick fights, but I can't shake this Excellent karma.
I think that's the first article I've ever seen with the words 'Napster' and 'country music' in it. Way to pick your battles, recording folks...
PowerMac G4s, for example, have no analog connection coming out of the CD drive. The CD player software works by ripping the audio data across the IDE/SCSI/USB bus and then feeding it out of the sound card. That won't work with burn-proof CDs.
The problem will get bigger with, for instance, the proliferation of USB speakers, where all data has to be transferred digitally all the way.
Hopefully the population using such schemes will become large enough that the move will be politically impossible by the time the technology is there.
If they could only limit the use of these disks to Country CDs, then its a blessing in disguise that they prevent duplicates being made of them ;)
That ultimately WE are the ones paying to have our rights taken away - how much money do you think they invested in the technology? And who pays for it, ultimately? In more ways than one.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Surely if they don`t conform to the Redbook standard exactly they will no longer be marketable as music CDs If they sell them as such and they will not work in a player that will play music CDs there are commiting a crime ie, improper description of there product Regards
Unlike vinyl records, which store music in a continuous spiral, RedBook CDs -- the CDs owned by every music fan -- break up music tracks and distribute them higgledy-piggledy around the disk in "sectors" that are similar to the data sectors on computer hard drives. Because the data are scattered all over the disk, each CD has a "table of contents" that tells the player where to find each track. RedBook CDs run a maximum of 74 minutes and can hold at most 99 tracks -- if a CD is longer or has more tracks, the player won't know how to read the extra music. Importantly, the music sectors on a CD are interwoven with additional error-fixing data that the player's built-in software uses to reconstruct the tracks if dirt or tiny air bubbles from the manufacturing process make little chunks of the disk unreadable.
... So the trick seems to be that the playing time of 100:30 is interpreted as 00:30." The literal-minded computer software, he suggested, stopped when told it had reached the end, whereas the "hifi-player also says 00:30 of course, but after 30 secs it goes down to 99:59" and plays normally. (Asked about this account, a Midbar representative said the firm "cannot provide more technical information at this time.")
CD-ROMs, which are also used for computer software, are different. Because CD-ROMs may have hundreds or even thousands of files, they need to handle many more than 99 "tracks," which means they have different, larger tables of contents and can, in theory, hold up to 100 minutes. Because computer programs can't just skip a bit of code if the disk is dirty, CD-ROMs are more exacting about error correction. For that reason, a YellowBook CD-ROM devotes an extra chunk of each data sector to a second method of detecting and fixing flaws.
According to label executives and audio engineers, copy-protection firms take advantage of these differences by adding extra data to both the tables of contents and the music tracks -- data that are ignored by CD players but confuse CD-ROMs. One purchaser of the Midbar-protected version of Razorblade Romance, for instance, reported on Slashdot that an Onkyo CD player had no trouble with the CD, but Cdparanoia, a powerful open-source ripping program, could extract only 30 seconds of it. The CD player, the Slashdotter wrote, displayed "a playing time of 100 minutes, 30 seconds -- not!
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
Slashdot and 2600, linked together in their cause and in their need, will defend to the death their native soil, aiding each other like good comrades to the utmost of their strength. Even though large tracts of Napster and many old and famous software projects have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo^H^H^H^H^H^H^HRIAA and all the odious apparatus of DCMA rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in chat-rooms, we shall fight on the Peer-to-Peer networks, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength on the Internet, we shall defend our fair use and free speech rights, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the web, we shall fight by cracking their CDs, we shall fight in the courts and in the media, we shall fight in the TCP/IP packets themselves; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Freedom or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our web-servers beyond the seas, armed and guarded by SSL, would carry on the struggle, until, in Ghod's good time, the New Internet, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.
I read that first as "a Minbar representative". ;-)
I don't see any possible way that this will work, short of exploiting the copyright protection schemes in the newwe M$ operating systems (ME, 2000, XP), and even that is doubtful. At most, a minor rewrite to the ripper program will be required.
If the audio tracks will play on a PC CD-ROM drive, then there is a way a ripper can save the tracks. There is just no way around that. And once the track is in MP3 format, there is no copy control.
I see this as a possible attempt by the RIAA to exploit the DMCA ala the MPAA and DeCss. Tey may next be going to court to get CD rippers and MP3 encoders declared "circumvention devices" under the DMCA. And they know how to do it, just file their suit in so-called "judge" Kaplan's "court". (as an aside, perhaps Kaplan could be the Judge Wapner in a new show on the WB called "The Corporates Court").
CD's that employ this kind of copy controls, which will NOT stop piracy, but are intended to prevent me from excercising my right to fair use, SHOULD BE BOYCOTTED! Make them fail in the marketplace. It would seem to me that this copyright control scheme would only really prevent copying on consumer level audio equipment (non PC's), where you can't get at the hardware and change the software.
=== The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
When I read "Burn Proof CDs" I thought the article had something to do with CDRs that were somehow impossible to burn. That didn't make too much sense, believe it or not, so perhaps a better title would be:
Coming Soon: Rip Proof CDs
Unless you're a big fan of, you know, blank CDRs that can't be burned. Sounds like a RIAA concept to me, if there ever was one.
Wow...it's really nice to see that Bob Heatherly, the head of Music City Records is such a caring humanitarian. That fact that he REALLY cares about those starving artists is really touching. Nevermind the fact that his profit margin is dropping like a rock because no one wants to pay for an overpriced cd. It's actually quite encouraging to see that unsatisfied music customers aren't just "students and geeks" like some moron once wrote in an article. Country music is a HUGE business and it looks like the folkes that listen to it are just as pissed off about the prices as Joe Computer is. It all boils down to inflated cd prices (and no, we aren't cheapskates...just look at how much we spend on hardware) were music is concerned. The music and movie companies have done a great job convincing the media that we pirate EVERYTHING..when the truth is that most people don't have the time, bandwidth or desire to pirate music, movies etc. even WITH the widespread deployment of Cable and DSL. Do I want to sit here and download a divx movie of a DVD that I can pick up for $15 and watch it on my 36" tv as oppose to my 17" monitor? No, that's just foolish. Do I download a hit single mp3 instead of spending my hard earned cash on a cd that's not really worth it? Yes. If I want just one song, that's all I want to pay for.
This entire cd protection scheme goes back to one thing and one thing alone: control. The industry wants to regain the control that they had prior to mp3s and the internet so that they can continue to screw over the consumer. Why aren't the record companies going after the factories overseas that are mass producing their "art" and selling it on the streets of Hong Kong, LA, NYC, etc. The answer is simple: It's cheaper to buy a law here and enforce it than in any other country. We are being sold out daily and the unfortunate truth is that until it hits Joe Sixpack in the wallet, they won't care about it.
"Klaatu, verada, necktie!" -Ash
Is it just me or is everyone really short-sighted? We can record sound by connecting two wires. Until you develop a system which prevents that method of recording sound there is nothing ... wait let me repeat myself... N..O..T..H..I..N..G.. the music industry can do about it! What do they not understand?
P.S. Introducing a law which makes it illegal to connect those two wires is a method of prevention.
Pinky: What are we going to do tomorrow night Brain?
Pinky: "What are we going to do tomorrow night Brain?"
Brain: "I would tell you Pinky but this 120 char limi
so don't buy it...learn to listen to better music instead of metallica and 95% of the other pap ladled out to you...don't be so fsck'ing lazy when it comes to listening to music...as mike watt once said, "there are too many liars singing songs these days"...of course the advice is useless when your ears can no longer tell when someone is lying, and mtv and the other culture-dispensers have made damned sure that most of you can't tell sonic shite from shinola...just my two cheerful drachmas, of course... :)
So, hands up who has a soundcard with a digital-in. Keep your hand up if you have a CD audio player with a digital-out. Keep your hand up if you are a country music fan, and you make your own MP3s.
Well, let's assume there's one hand still raised; that's all that's needed for this particular CD to be ripped (in the digital domain) and placed onto [insert your P2P MP3 sharing system of choice here].
Well, that wasn't that hard, was it? Looks like the only people who are going to be truly inconvenienced by this are those want to exercise their (jurisdiction dependent) right to make a backup copy of their CD, and don't have the hardware or the technical know-how to circumvent this.
-- O improbe amor, quid non mortalia pectora cogis!
First of all: Visible gaps could be seen on the CD! (probably gaps between tracks)
The album had sticker saying "NOT COMPATIBLE WITH PCs" and this seems to be true. The CD is not recognized as audio CD at all and cannot be played in PC.
Then I tried analyzing/grabbing the CD data using various applications such as CloneCD, CDRWin, Blind Read, NTI CD-Maker etc with various settings. All of this without any success. Not only did I get various contradictory and theoretically impossible error messages but several of the programs crashed spectacularly and/or produced scary noises through the CDROM drive! The best success I achieved was displaying some sort of Table of Contents which contained very strange numbers (negative data lengths, 99 sessions on the disk etc...)
Then I tried all of this with 3 different drives (AOpen CDRW, AOpen DVD ROM and Creative DVD ROM) and the results varied wildly. The best success I has was capturing 650 MB file which contained 2 seconds of the first track and then zeroes.
I tried playing the CD in two different CD players (Aiwa and Sony) and it worked without any problems. Track numbers and lenghts were ok, everything looked fine.
So, it seems that these CDs really cannot be ripped/copied using standard CD ROMs. Of course:
1) You can send the music from the CD player with digital output to PC soundcard with digital input and create perfect "deprotected" CD.
2) If this copyprotection gains any notoriety, CD drive makers will immediately update their firmware to allow "dumbing down" the drive and "really RAW" grabbing of the audio data.
--- Frantisek Fuka (Yes, that's my real name and you have no idea how it's pronounced)
Copyright protected cd's do not allow you to replicate them in a cd burner nor do they allow you to rip the audio tracks "digitally" (although can still be done through analog)."
Taco editorialized:
Actually the article is well written, covering all the bases, although it neglects to say how we're all expected to bend over while our fair use of stuff we paid for is taken away from us.
So now "fair use" for any piece of music you buy is meant to be defined by you're being able to make digital copies of it? I guess the RIAA is really fucking us with those analog LP's then, with their insidious built-in bumpy groove technology.
Fair use of a music CD is to be able to play the thing whereever you like, and generally do whatever you like with it (such as making a copy for the car) as long as it's for your own use and not giving copies away to others who hav't paid for it.
However, Fair use DOES not by any stretch of the imagination mean you should be guaranteed to be able to copy directly to CD rather than tape, or that you should be facilitated in copying it to MiniOggCD-2010 or whatever alternate formats may emerge. That is ridiculous.
I'm just glad they finally made my mind for me. I used to hear songs on the radio, grab mp3's of the ones I liked, and grab the album's of the one's I liked the most. However, my only cd players are my computers at home and my laptop at work. Now I have no choice but to do all my music listening in mp3 format. Thanks guys, saves me a bunch of money!
-Tannin Kal
-Tannin Kal
Trying to break it is all well and good, but what if you cant? What if this is done is such a way as to make it impossible for you to break? I think one of the most effective ways to deal with this would be to boycott whichever albums use it. If they think mp3s will hurt thier sales, show them that taking away this ability will hurt thier sales even more.
-Omar
You've done this? An entire audio cd? with dd?
Because for some reason, I don't think you can do that. You can't simply read a whole CD block-by-block. You can use DD to grab a single track perhaps..... but the whole thing?
Skipping the hacking arguement currently being discussed on /.
If I remember correctly, with Fair Use, I'm allowed to make backups....
So how is Charley Pride going to let me do my Supreme Court ok'ed right to have backups....are they going to cut the price in half or give me two copies for the price of one?
Just curious...
"Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
Dad's Army.
A mate in the office yesterday bought a CD which looked kinda weird... on the back there were what looked like concentric gaps. It skipped like mad in our PCs, so he took it back. The replacement CD also didn't place in a PC, but played perfectly well in a cheap hifi.
This is _so_ wrong it's unbelievable...
from the article:
"If CDs were as hard to copy as DVDs or VHS tapes or even books, we would not be going through anything like what we're going through now with Napster or Gnutella."
Yeah, it took a teenager a whole week to figure out how to copy a DVD. (I realize that it's quite hard to burn a DVD now, but 5 years ago CDs were equally hard to burn)
I would imagine that it would only take slightly longer to break this method.
What really needs to be done here is to give consumers access to digital music for a fair price. I don't see RIAA or any record company even trying to do that. If MP3s were 50 cents per copy, I think record companies would make a mint. I certainly would buy a ton of them.
-_underSCORE
"This is not a company that appears to be bothered by ethical boundaries."
Attorney General Mike Hatch on Microsoft
Now you've hit the nail on the head. Obviously, "The Programmable Machine" must die. The first step is to key the BIOS and OS together, so it only boots the One True OS, Windows. Then come up with copy-protected and access-controlled media. Then how about Windows-only peripherals, network connections, etc. Once you've taken The Programmable Machine and made it fully Windows-bound, you've got a set of deep pockets available to sue, and Microsoft will make sure that machine won't be usable for illegal copying.
The Programmable Machine can be dead and gone within our lifetime.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
...where Springfield institutes Prohibition, and Homer becomes a bootlegger, making alcohol in his basement and smuggling it in bowling balls. At the end, Mayor Quimby repeals prohibition, and asks Homer how long it will take him to flood the town with alcohol.
"I'm not in that business anymore," Homer says.
Fat Tony, the gangster character, leans into the frame and whispers, "Four minutes."
Which is about how long Charlie Pride will have to wait before pristine digital copies of his tracks are available throughout the Gnutella network.
http://www.farmerbob.org
(nm)
===sam=== free nessus vulnerability scan = www.vulnerabilities.org
It was nice for them to mention /. in the article, but it would have been nicer if they had linked to /., or at least said something along the lines of what /. is.
--You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
"But if piracy continues to spiral out of control, [copy-protecting CDs] will become more and more attractive an option -- even if it has some negative impact on some listeners." (This comes from the Salon artical.)
I love it when recording execs get on their high horse about piracy. While Joe User still is paying 10-15 bucks a CD but can't play it in their Wall-Mart CD player well that is just too bad. But perish the thought of any of the suits not getting that extra million-dollar bonus each year.
Don't get me wrong, I believe that artists should be compensated for their work, however until they can prove to me beyond a doubt that they going broke because of MP3's they can look forward to users like me cracking each and every protection scheme they can think up.
Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
Actually we let them get away with it. Soon it will be copy proof CDs when that catches on what will they come out with next copy proof DVDs? oh wait maybe they will try to outlaw the use of VCRs and CD burners all together... oh yeah and dont forgot about those so call copy protected hard drives that they are also working on....
If the idea is to make CDs that will only play in a CDDA player, wouldn't it be easy to hack the hardware to pick up the digital stream before it goes into the D/A converter and output it to a digital interface into the computer? You'd lose the speed advantage of 52x CD-ROMs, but you should still be able to grab the bitstream.
i really agree with the poster that says we should refuse to buy any CD's that involve these copy protections. if you have a toddler in the house, you know the lifetime of an average CD (i won't even get started on VHS tapes) isn't 4ever, hardly close. backups are necessary if you want to have it longer than a few months. the article does point out that we still would be able to make a tape backup, but who wants an analogue copy of a digital media they bought? i thought analogue tape was a depreciated interface anyway. 0.02$
For years, the average consumer has made analog copies of a CD. While it may not have the best sound quality, most were happy with it. If I couldn't make digital copies of CDs so what, I'll run a loopback cable into my sound card and make a one off copy that way. It's still a hell of a lot better then tape.
although it neglects to say how we're all expected to bend over while our fair use of stuff we paid for is taken away from us okay, the obvious response is... don't buy it. if the market shows that it will not accept this kind of thing, they will take it off the market. if the market will buy this kind of thing, they will make more of them and work on even nastier things. so no, we're not expected to 'bend over', we're expected to choose between mass-manufactured pop crap on a (more than likely soon to be broken) 'secure disk' and other forms of music consumption. so don't whine about being screwed by the record company, they are doing what they do best. if you don't like what they are doing DON'T BUY THEIR STUPID CDs. sheesh...
The REAL sam_at_caveman_dot_org is user ID 13833.
If you go check out the Salon article, you'll find some more info on how this works.
I actually think this is kind of funny. The proposed schemes mostly work by expoiting differences int the redbook(cd audio) and yellowbook(cd-rom) standards, making it impossible to play these CDs in most cd-rom drives.
Well guess what you twits, I buy quite a few cds but I hardly ever use them in a stero style cd player. Basically what they're going to do is make it so I can't play them in my desktop, I can't play them in my laptop, I can't rip them and play them in my rio and they may not work in the high end player I've been thinking about buying. Even some car cd players may have problems.
So I'm supposed to pay 20 bucks for a cd I can only play in my $200 bookshelf system that sounds terrible and my 5 year old discman (which I can't find). Oh goody, I'm gonna go buy lots of these things.
idiots
bla
I find it hard to believe that this "CD" really
:-)
qualifies as a CD, by the definition.
So, can I sue them for false advertising?
This is not a sig.
I admit it- I'm a music junkie, and through my CD purchases, have been supporting the RIAA. I'm a very good customer of theirs. I feel very ambivalent about Napster, and have never shared an MP3 with anyone.
BUT- as soon as I unwrap a CD I rip and encode it as a high quality MP3. It goes back into the case, and from that point on I primarily listen only to the MP3, whether it be on my stereo, computer, laptop, or Rio (don't have a car player).
I know I'm a geek through and through and that relatively few other people in this country exercise their "fair use" this way. I've been extremely scrupulous in upholding the rights of the copywright owners, I've fattened their wallets, and what am I going to get for it? They're going to try to f**k me over.
I will be the first in line to download the "crack" when it comes, DMCA or not. They're turning me into a "criminal".
I kind of hold this stubborn belief that if it can be played--it can be copied. I'm not worried if they throw copy protection on a Redbook CD, because if they do there'll be a utility to do it within a few months (couldn't you do the audio equivalent of "blind read" where it ignores the data structure and just does a bit-by-bit copy?)
Anyway, in my opinion, until someone figures out how to encrypt sound coming out of the speaker there'll be no "copy-proof" CDs.
-brain
Can't you just play the cd on your portable cd player and pipe the output into the line in on the soudboard? itmight not be as easy but it should work (unless we all have to buy new CD players)
"So you call this your free contry, tell me why it costs so much to live?" - Three Doors Down
So, my question is...What are the "best in class" linux CD audio tools that would be a good base for working on this (cdparanoia springs to mind)? What is the ISO designator for the format of CD audio?
SuperID
I happen to agree with you on the capitalism thing, but people on this board talk out of both sides of their mouths when it comes to that subject. When it comes to Microsoft, people are not willing to accept that the consumers have chosen to use Windows because it is the easiest consumer OS to use and is stable enough to do everyday work on. Period. If it weren't, they wouldn't buy it. But, that's another rant...
El Karma: excelente(principalmente la suma de moderación hecha a los comentarios de los usuarios)
email me and let me know... so i can forward the info to the SPA.
I refuse to buy their CDs. They are completely ripping off people, and by trying to copy-protect CDs, all they will do in the long run is gyp the customers, as people who want to pirate the music will always find a way to circumvent it. And also, their talk of replacing CDs is interesting. They only want to switch for copy protection, not for quality. I don't think the consumer market is going to care enough about protecting the companies to invest a LOT of money in upgrading stereos when CDs of equal quality are still released. Any attempt to try to replace mp3 with a copy-protected scheme also will fail, because mp3 is good enough and familiar to people. They need to move towards selling music downloadable online and dropping CD prices. I used to buy CDs, then wisened up. I also don't download mp3s either, just completely abstain from the music industry. Maybe one day they will wise up as to a good consumer-friendly way to conduct business.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Usually when the hardcore Slashdot crowd starts whining about having their "fair-use" rights violated I am likely to roll my eyes. Who says that when you bought a CD that gave you the right to have my.mp3.com stream that music to you no matter where you are? (Neglecting how cool the service is and how stupid the labels are for not trying to work within the system.)
But in this case the labels really are going to far. At work I use a Sun Ultra 10 on my desk and usually have my headphones on most of the day listening to a CD that I have brought in. Unfortunately many of the "enhanced CDs" that I own confuse Solaris to the point that I can't play them. Now how many labels test their CDs to ensure that they work on a SUN workstation? And how much work does SUN put in trying to understand every different CD type? (remember this is a workstation that has a CD-ROM drive that has no builtin connection to the sound card; I literally have a patch cable running from the front of the machine to the back to accomplish this) When I was using Solaris 2.6 it would reject almost all of my enhanced CDs, but when I was upgraded to Solaris 7 (2.7) I was happy to see that some of them, like the latest Fiona Apple disk were now recognized. I still have some discs that the machine can't understand though, like a CD I bought from mp3.com that is supposed to be "playable on any CD player and any computer".
When I buy a CD I would expect that I should be able to take the CD with me to any CD player and have it work. I'm not trying to do anything "special" like copy it, or rip it, or stream it to myself. But the fact that I can't play it in my machine at work means that I am now forced do start thinking about ripping those songs to MP3s (I never got into MP3s until "Smashing Pumpkins" released "Machina II" exclusively as MP3s).
As the article hints at, I fully expect the (h/cr)ackers to figure out how to get around the system; probably even making a special point of going after the protected discs and posting them on Napster because it is an extra challenge and feat to boast about. Those "rebel" Linux guys will write some app to read the discs. But me, a non-Windows, non-Mac user who is just trying to execercise my fair-use on a "fringe OS" gets caught in the middle. (I am really curious to know how the new DVD/CD players that will be able to read CD-R and MP3 data discs are going to respond...)
Every CD reader already available will read the data clear text off the disk. It is how the CD spec was agreed and no one can force it to change overnight without replacing all the players and readers out there. At the very least, you will always be able to read the data from the SPDIF digitally.
I fear this is a ploy to prove the point beyond all doubt that nothing can be done to "protect" the current CD format and to usher in the move to closed formats such as DVD-Audio and its like, region coded and all.
There is no other reason that such a technical thing would be employed by a relatively small artist (except to show the before and after napster figures of people offering his works).
I imagine he's currently quite low down the napster chart. I also imagine he'll sky rocket after his album launch.
My advice is ignore this bait, don't buy the album and prove the point in opposite, that we don't want your work in any medium, at any price, if you won't respect our right to fair use (I don't mean the right to give it away on napster, I mean the right to make personal MP3 files from it etc).
This is simply a move to prove with more figures that "fair use == piracy". Don't make it so people.
And we all know how a big of a problem with country music being ripped and sent accross the internet.
If they had tried this with a new MnM cd I could see that the h4x0rs would start to complain. I dont think that this cd will have the clint base to properly test the "burn proof" feature though
Sure someone will crack it within a day or two. Of course that crack will be difficult for joe user to use, and will probably not be available for every OS. The recording industry is on the order of a $10 Billion business. If they only make it inconvienient enough that 10% of the people that would have outright pirate CDs decide to buy them. Or they convince those people who want two coppies that it's just easier to buy another one for their car than to get around the copy protection. If can mean 10s of Millions of dollars of more profits to them. So a few hundred thousand tech geeks figure out how to get around their new copy protection scheme. The bottom line is that they still make more money.
I don't HAVE a CD player.... I have a CD ROM in my computer connected to really nice speakers that functions as my stereo. I know MANY people who have this setup. If I cannot play CDs in my CDROM, like the article suggests, why should I bother to pay for any CDs????? I am NOT going to buy a stereo just because the RIAA has a burr up their a$$.....
Wake up record companies! You're not shutting out hackers! You're shutting out legit customers who buy CDs and play them on their computer!!!!
Trains stop at a train station. Buses stop at a bus station.
Buses stop at a bus station
Trains stop at a train station
On my desk there's a workstation....
Could you use the optical out on a nice sound card, pipe them to the optical in and record the 'analog' stream effectively getting a perfect 'analog' burn?
"Only amateurs attack machines; professionals target people."
I'm not intimately familiar with the intricacies of the Fair Use law, but I'd imagine it would probably be sufficient for the record company to package a CD in such a way that by breaking the seal on the package you implicitly agree to some kind of lisence agreement which waives your Fair Use rights.
.sig this!
Copyright terms are limited. Is the copyright protection?
Of course not, that's nearly impossible to do. If a copyright term today is, say, 100 years, will that copy protected CD be copyable in 2101? Same goes for SDMI, DVDs and all that other crap.
After the term, will it then be legal to "circumvent" such copy protection?
But wait, there's more! Copyright term extensions of been hostorically retroactive (for no legitimate reason I can see). So, is someone were to make a copy-protected CD that then becomes copyable after 100 years, what do the copyright holders do when the term has been retroactively extended to 200 years?
If they can't properly protect something for the term of its copyright, they shouldn't protecte it at all -- its at the expense of society ultimately and it shouldn't be allowed.
The last time I checked, almost all CDs were "copyright protected". Remember, it's copy protection not copyright protection.
Copyright protection comes from the law. Copy protection comes from technology.
(It should really be called copy hindering. CP has been proven countless times to be impossible. "Here, I'll encrypt something and then give you the keys. That'll stop you from using the data!")
--------
Genius dies of the same blow that destroys liberty.
I'll agree with the second half, but disagree with the first. It isn't the easiest consumer OS, its just easy enough. For the most part I agree though. M$ got 85% of where they are the good old fashioned way... providing something the market wanted at the correct price. It's the other 15% of the things they've done to protect that market it that sorta make me blanch. The Bastard
If you don't have anything nice to say, say it often.
If you don't have anything nice to say, say it often.
- Ed the Sock
Back in the day (mutters the grizzled, 35-year-old software veteran ;) ), most floppy disk copy protection schemes relied on formatting the sectors differently so that they couldn't be copied, only read. It was just a matter of time until Copy II PC, and its ilk, came along to allow legitimate users to back up expensive software off of annoying fragile media.
How is it going to be different this time? The talk here is not about _if_ we can by pass the protection scheme, but how many days (counting on one hand) will it take. And I have no doubts it will turn out to be correct.
What I have to ask our friends at the RIAA, if they could hear us over the crackling of burning hundred-dollar bills lighting cigars is, who are they trying to kid? Are they assuming that the majority of CD rippers will simply give up if they can't copy music off of CD's and only the hardcore fringe will attempt to break the copy protection? Will they somehow try to leverage the DCMA to make all CD ripping illegal? Are they stupid, naive, hopelessly optimistic or just plain evil? Well, I think I can answer my own question ("Yes.")
Anyhow, just like the SDMI stuff (so far) and DiVX (capitalization?), this will probably just be a small blip on the radar of consumer consciousness and then slink back to the swampy hinterland of all failed, bad ideas.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
This will take the *nix guys about a month to hack, perhaps two or three for the Windoze version. At first glance, it looks like you need a program that reads the dd output and repairs the damaged TOC. If we're lucky or smart, the "fair use--re-enabler" will stay off-line long enough for RIAA to fully deploy this dumbware. How about requiring a government warning label: "Warning! this product fails to adhere to CD-ROM industry standards. Your "fair use" rights under the Home Audio Recording Act may be difficult to exercise.
I doubt that CDs were ever as expensive to make as their retail price would suggest, even in 1983.
---
where there's fish, there's cats
I bought Dario G's "Sunmachine" album over two years ago, which was the first copy-protected CD I'd ever seen. It has the concentric rings described in other posts, and I couldn't get it to rip digitally, though it did play fine in my cdrom.
I ended up doing an analog rip of the album, which was good quality except for an ICQ "Uh-oh!" popping up in one of the tracks.
an even better free music system than napster. You no longer have to download mp3, you can rip it yourself for free.
They admit that this technology doesn't work with many high-end home/car CD players - Despite apparently extensive testing, about 3 percent of buyers could not play it, forcing a chagrined BMG to recall the CDs and re-issue the record.
Now you can buy the CD, take it home and rip it (a crack for this will be surely be out in no time) at whatever rate you want, and return the CD claiming that it doesn't work in home system.
Seriously, this is ridiculous. Doesn't this completley take aware fair use. I thought you were allowed to make a copy of any media that you've bought for archival purposes.
I want to be able to store all of my music on my machine so I can have the song I want at my fingertips at any time. This news would have seriously worried me if I wasn't 99% sure that it will be cracked within a week.
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
It reads the "special" sectors on PlayStation CD's and SafeDisc'd CD's with no problem....and of course there is always just ripping the tracks thru analog...they can't really do anything about that untill they take our hardware away from us.
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
I wonder if those cd recorders made by pioneer (and others) that have dual trays for dubbing cd's (and mix & max tracks for custom cd's) will play and rip these? How soon will it be before the software in these players is updated?
I'll tell you this, If I bought a cd and found out later that it would not play in ANY audio player I would be hounding the label for a refund or replacement till I got one. And that includes the audio 'player' in my computer. Oh well, they CAN'T ever stop DAD copying, and with today's equipment the lose of quality would not be measurable. And I doubt that the labels will be doing this copy protected cd crap with classical releases as they wouldn't see the need, no one want's to pirate that stuff.
although it neglects to say how we're all expected to bend over while our fair use of stuff we paid for is taken away from us.
Simple. Don't buy the damned content! Everyone complains that the music is crap, so don't buy it at all.
Support a local band, or download legit Napster songs and send donations to the authors. If you hate the RIAA and their draconian practices, starve them to death, and listen to something worthwhile.
Wich means that how it works will be publicly available. Woohoo the patent system works for us for a change. In order to protect their method of protecting their cd's they have to release the details of how it works to the general public, who can then reverse engineer it relatively quickly... how ironic.
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
According to the article, many car CD players will refuse to play these CDs, as will all "multimedia PC" systems. So, let's assume I've got my big Altec Lansing subwoofer hooked up to my PC, and it's the only CD player I own (not really, but many of my friends in the army only have their PCs to play CDs on, to save space). Now, I can't play any new CDs on this machine, because I MIGHT copy them? Well, I can't even listen to them "wherever I like" so I'm not going to buy them either.
If I put this CD in my new RioVolt MP3/CD player (the only CD player in my car), will it cease to function? Now, I've got a portable CD player (RioVolt) that can't play audio CDs of the new style, I've got a home audio system (MPC) that can't play the new CDs. And, this somehow does NOT infringe on fair use?
I know plenty of college students and soldiers that don't buy stereos, because they have computers. These happen to be the ages that buy the majority of popular music as well. I imagine the RIAA is not so smart on this one.
Illegitimi non carborundum
Actually this CD wouldn't even work on my home stereo - older CD players (pre 1992) like mine won't play these SUNcomm copy protected CD's either...
As someone who spends about $300 a month on music purchases, it seems somewhat ironic that the music industry wants to make it impossible for me to get music without resorting to copying (a cracked copy would probably work on my CD player and laptop, but the original would be worthless to me!).
Many DJ CD players are fussier still, so maybe any artist who releases music on copy protected CD and neglects to have a vinyl release will be cutting themselves out of play at many clubs. (This is a good source of royalty money, ASCAP & BMI please take note of this when you're handing out the checks.)
I doubt it will push up sales much, if a few thousand hackers go and get a copy it won't register much more than a blip on anyone's radar. Here's a brief article about Charlie Pride's reasoning on why he wants to do this.
Basically he believes that others are making money off 'pirated' music. I myself have fundimental problems with making copies of a CD and selling them for profit. But I have huge problems with the way the industry is trying to ignore our fair use rights. If the artists understood what was going on here they might have a different view, but they're being fed propaganda by their labels. "Yeah, Charlie, that Napster thingy is just like when you saw pirated records in a gas station... exactly."
When you read from a hard disk, errors aren't that a big a deal as far as skipping because you can just read/write raw sectors and let software take a crack it fixing it... My understanding of this article is that you can't just read the sectors into memory from the CD-ROM, but that the CD-ROM has to be particular about making sure it's error corrected... Is that really the case? I mean I would think there's a way to force it to just read it, let software do its thing & move on... in which case, I'm sure algorithms could be written to error correct it...
So ultimately... how in the world do you copy protect it?
What exactly is the violation of fair use? Nothing is really stopping the buyer from playing the CD they bought, making analog copies of it, finding some way to make digital copies of it.
An audio CD that only works on some players is not very different from software that only runs on a Mac -- is a buyer's fair use violated because the software won't run on PC's? Is the buyer breaking the law if the software is run on a PC with a Mac emulator?
If the media is purchased, it's still legal (in most places) to do with that media whatever the owner likes for their own personal use (even copying it if someone can hack the protection).
-- IANAL though...
Keep believing, guys!
since the protection model(s) presented in the article achieve their protection by introducing errors onto the disc, and these errors make the disc unplayable in cd-rom drives, shouldn't you be able to return the discs as defective merchandise? imagine the costs to the stores that would pile up if people (some untentionally, some with malice aforethought) went out and did this... the stores (at the very least) would have to protest to the recording industry that the returns were hurting their bottom line. i mention it because i believe that there's laws dictating that stores have to accept returns on defective merchandise...
(email addr is at acm, not mca)
We are Number One. All others are Number Two, or lower.
(email addr is at acm, not mca)
We are Number One. All others are Number Two, or lower.
--The Sphinx
I think the public needs a lesson on basic information theory. If you can listen to it, or watch it, there has to be a decoded stream somewhere. There are many ways you could record a burn-proof cd. One of the simple ways is to use a program called www.highcriteria.com Total Recorder (www.highcriteria.com) that simply installs itself as a sound driver, and records everything that is supposed to go to the sound card. Or just plug the line out on your sound card to the line in and record.
The (Hopefully) Great Slashdot Blackout Apr 21-27
>>engineers in the world are working on this,"
>>says Samit of EMI.
Yes and the rest are just waiting to crack it.
I can't believe the music industry is being so blaise about the fact that many consumers are getting ripped off. In fact just about all are. There is no reason that you shouldn't be able to rip songs off of a cd that you purchased (or were given). The music industry acts as if it has some god given right to exist, and that it can do whatever it wants. Don't these music executives realize that without the consumer they do not exist?
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
And I quote:
"The CD is the root of all of our problems with the Net," says Jay Samit, senior vice president of new media at EMI, which is testing various copy-protection technologies. "If CDs were as hard to copy as DVDs or VHS tapes or even books, we would not be going through anything like what we're going through now with Napster or Gnutella."
Apparently this guy hasn't heard of DeCSS?
"Nobody wants to make things difficult for legitimate purchasers," says Cary Sherman, general counsel of the Recording Industry Association of America, which is helping the labels examine the new techniques. "But if piracy continues to spiral out of control, (copy-protecting CDs) will become more and more attractive an option -- even if it has some negative impact on some listeners."
What they don't get is that if you have a negative impact on legitimate listeners, you're going to automatically increase piracy. Cause and affect, kiddies. Some people just can't afford to buy new CD players because the damn labels thing you should. They'll see a drop off 3 percent drop off in sales, and a 300% increase in piracy. Good for them!!
I normally don't reply to trolls, but you've popped up too often on this thread...
OK, here is MY EXPERIENCE with MP3s. I can't possibly speak for everyone, but this is me. I am 30 years old, I have been a soldier for 12 years, and I have been a computer geek since I was 10. I listen to MP3s, mainly from Usenet postings of unreleased albums. If I like the album, I buy the CD.
As an example, when the last "No Doubt" album was released, I was at the store on the first day of issue, so I could buy one. Three weeks earlier, I would never have imagined I would buy it, but it was a damned good set of songs. If I had not sampled it via Usenet, I would not have bought the CD. Seriously.
Another example is Metallica. Except for a track here and there, I've never been a huge Metallica fan. I grabbed about 3 or 4 tracks from the S&M album off Usenet, and then bought the double-CD set. Even Metallica has made money from MP3s.
If the RIAA would consider MP3s to be advertising, or radio-like, they may have a chance to make money off them. So far, the digital distribution schemes seem to involve charging as much or more for the privelige of downloading the tracks, rather than going to the store and getting cover art and a jewel case. Personally, I'd be very inclined to use an industry-approved download system, if they guaranteed quality-of-service (not an option with the P2P systems obviously), and if they charged LESS than the physical CD.
As it is now, I tend to listen to music from internet radio stations, check out random tracks from Usenet or Gnutella, and buy CDs from CDNow.
I buy a lot of CDs, and I burn many of them to MP3 format to listen to in my MP3/CD player, so I can have 10 or 12 hours of music on one disc. Makes those cross-country car drives much nicer.
So, don't paint everyone with the same brush, but realize that at least some of us are really not just out to be thieves. YMMV
Illegitimi non carborundum
Tracks from copy-protected CDs will likely be the most traded of any on the p2p file sharing systems. Why? There is no other way to listen to them on a PC. The irony here is that the artist mentioned in the article wanted copy protection on his CDs as a direct result of seeing his stuff on Napster.
Copy protection is like airport security, it makes people feel like something is being done. In reality, copy protection of any kind will be broken. If you can read it, you can copy it.
Would this make audio cables an illegal circumvention device?
Have there been any major copy protection methods used that havn't been broken?
The closest thing I can think of are the cd-keys on half-life and the like, where you need a unique key to play online.
Innominate
What about using a CD dubbing deck? They don't make bit-for-bit copies. They make SCMS-protected digital audio duplicates of the original. Seems to me if you want to break the protection, just copy the disc in a CD-dubbing deck and your problem is solved: You'll wind up with a perfect digital version of your CD that's now UN-copy protected and can be ripped with ease. Granted, this is not for the casual pirate, but for someone (like me) who refuses to let the RIAA dictate how I use a CD that I've paid for it will solve the problem quite nicely.
Oh and Mr. RIAA - I have over 700 CDs and buy copies of all of the music I listen to, so if you have a problem with what I've said, bite me. I could care less.
Polymorphism -- It's what you make of it.
Do not break the seal on this CD until you have read and agreed to this license. (We have placed this license underneath the seal, in order to protect our intellectual property.) If you do not agree to this license, please apply 1500 PSI to the entire package and kiss your fifteen bucks goodbye.
... tough.
... unless Screwed decides otherwise.
The party of the first part, known hereafter as the Screwed, agrees to the following provisions as stipulated by the party of the second part, known hereafter as the Screwer:
o The Screwed agree the that Screwer may employ any legal, technical, moral, or immoral means to protect the intellectual property of the creative artists who are so critical to the success of the industry. (By "creative artists," we refer not to the scribblers or performers, but the truly creative: the bookeepers and executives who serve the stockholders. You think that's not creative? You have no idea how long it took us to come up with just this license.)
o The Screwed will chose one (1) device, approved by the Screwer, to play the product recorded on this medium. (It's called a "medium" because it's neither well done nor rare. Yes, it's an old joke. We said we were creative; we didn't say we were original.) Screwer reserves the right to un-approve a device after it has been chosen. If the Screwed does not chose a device, the Screwer reserves the right to chose a player for the Screwed.
o The Screwed will chose one (1) person, approved by the Screwer, to listen to the product recorded on this medium. If any other person or persons listen to this product, Screwer will charge Screwed a performance fee to be determined after our next "business" trip to Las Vegas.
o This product is not guaranteed against manufacturing defects or any other flaws. We don't promise that there's even a medium in the package, that if there is, that it has anything but zero bits on it, or that any so-called "music" corresponds in any way to the label on the outside of the package. If our copy protection schemes make it impossible for you to listen to the so-called "music"
o Screwed has the right to listen to the product as many times as he or she likes
o We control the horizontal. We control the vertical. We control the treble, and all your bass are belong to us, too.
Stupid job ads, weird spam, occasional insight at
While I was abroad in Germany last spring, the Finnish band HIM came out with a CD that was copy protected. The CD was also clearly labeled that it was not compatible with CD Rom drives.
Story on Wired from over a year ago
According to the article, this test was limited to the German market, but perhaps the band didn't have the popularity for someone to work out a uncopyright scheme, because I haven't seen one relesased.
-----
"Defenestration" is to throw out of a window; what's a word for throwing 'Windows' out of something?
I think he misspelled "wallets" as "hearts." Geez, how could that have ever happened by a well-informed, educated company man?? ;-p
Dream as if you'll live forever.
Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
~Anonymous~
cdrdao rocks, absolutly NO problem copying any CD from raw!
This is not informative at all if you've read the article.
This was part of the basis for imposing a levy or tax on blank cassettes and the levy on blank audio CD-Rs. This money was to be distributed to artists and songwriters (or was that multinational copyright holders...) based on sales popularity.
Backing up an licensed audio CD is legal in Canada, AFAIK. After all I supposed pay the big bucks not for the piece of plastic but to pay to the artists and songwriters, so if I back up what I get with my "license" then I am not gaining any unfair advantage, nor are the creative artists and technical engineers lose any income.
Some comments on the mainly well written article:
.vob's are on the hard drive you have a variety of options to recode the movie to a 1 or 2 CDR friendly format like Divx;-) or VCD and burn. Or perhaps just record to VHS (Macrovision can be turned of on many cards, and there are filters too)
/Patrix - Sweden
If CDs were as hard to copy as DVDs...
Hellooo? DeCSS? DVD rippers like DODspeed ripper decrypts and rips practically any DVD. Then when the decrypted
When a standard CD player comes across an error in a CD, says a technology officer at a major label, "it basically skips over it and keeps playing. But a CD-ROM must read every bit of the data. When it detects something that it suspects is an error, it loops back and rereads the data, trying to discover how to fix the problem. And ultimately, if the error can't be corrected" -- as is the case with the "erroneous" data introduced by copy-protection programs -- "the software will cease to run and the CD-ROM will stop playing."
Not sure about this, but what about skip or shock memory that all new players have? Doesent these players try to re-read when errors occur? My Numark player most certainly do this.
Trouble is, many high-end and car-stereo CD players use CD-ROM technology, which is both more accurate and less likely to skip when the player is jostled. Consequently, some audiophiles and commuters may not be able to play protected CDs. "I feel gloomy every time I go on a plane and see how many people are listening to music with their laptops," says a label executive who nonetheless regards copy protection as inevitable. "High-end players, car players, laptops -- those people are going to feel burned, and justifiably so, if they can't listen to music in the way they like."
You bet!
Unfortunately, consumers have resisted past efforts to replace CDs with MiniDiscs, DVD audio disks and Super Audio Compact Discs. For now, the labels' technologists agree that copy-protecting CDs with software locks is the most practical way to go. "Some of the best and most experienced engineers in the world are working on this," says Samit of EMI. "It's near and dear to our hearts to get this right."
The end result will most likley be:
* Many angry previosly "honest" conumers with incompatible players or laptops turn to Napster-type programs.
* Audiograbber releases a new version that "supports" the new format.
I've ripped and burned alot of CD's in my days. I work parttime as a DJ, and the ability to put 18 good songs from 10 records onto one record is very good for me. It means I can bring more music to my gigs.
A few years ago there where CD singels with copy protection. Some rippers refused to read them. Big problem...not. Decent CD-players have digital output. Just use that and record digitally if nothing else works. I've newer had to btw.
Cheers
Now, now, calm down a bit. Take your medicine. There, feel better?
Now then, I wouldn't worry too much about these guys. I used to be a pirate back in college, myself. I was even proud of my collection. However, several years later, I have gotten rid of my MP3 collection, ripped only the ones that I own, and bought any that I wanted, but didn't own yet (most of these CDs were really cheap by now).
So relax, the world isn't coming to an end, and most people will grow out of it and eventually pay their dues.
However, please note several things: I haven't bought a music CD in several years; I replaced the stuff I wanted, and forgot about the rest. They ARE too expensive, thus, I don't buy any more, and I don't listen to any new ones.
Additionally, I will be quite unhappy if I buy a CD that I cannot rip for myself. This is, as many people have noted, quite legal, as I have paid my dues to the artist (not much, unfortunately) and the record company (too much).
I am just demonstrating that, yes, there are people out there who do really want to only rip their own CDs for their own purposes. I suppose all I can do now is wait for the next format.
It only takes one successful copy to spread throughout the entire Internet via file-sharing utilities... :)
It won't matter if the CD is copyable anymore.
Do you like German cars?
Ok, it's apparent that these things succeed by preventing themselves from being read by CD-ROM drives.
But what happens if you stick it in one of those new stereos that has a CD burner built in? I know Philips has released several models like this, and other companies probably have, too.
Either it's a simple way of copying them, or the RIAA has broken much more than PCs with these non-standard discs.
I seem to remember DVD's having that too, but we all know what happened to that "protection" don't we...
It's just a matter of time before someone figures out the encryption...and until then we should not buy ANY cds at all. Seems that money is the only thing that talks to the RIAA
"Great Spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds"
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.
-Albert Einstein
I'm sitting here, slightly bemused, wondering if the idiots who think up all the ways to attempt to copy protect things will ever get the clue that the whole idea of copy protection is useless. If there is a way to protect something, there is a way to break it, it is simple as that. Why the heck don't these companies quit wasting so much time and resources on such a futile operation? Do they not know that most CDROM drives have spdif outputs? And that I can get a moderately decent sound card and record that data? Or If I were really attempting to rip the music industry off I would purchase slightly higher end equipment and record digitally the output? Or that, either way, 2 days after they release this 'marvel of copy protection' someone will have a copy of a direct ripped CD in the mail on the way to the RIAA folx? The pure idiocy of these people really is a shock to my system, one wonders how they even tie their own shoes or pee in the toilet without making a mess on the floor.
Here's what I find ridiculous:
If the copy protection scheme doesn't stop half the people out there who want to copy it, someone in that half is going to put their copy up on Napster and everyone who doesn't want to buy it won't have to. They won't even know that there is a copy protection system.
Bottom line: A major percentage of people will never buy the CD. They never bought the records when tapes were the way of copying because someone could just tape them, and they never bought the CDs for the same reason. And they use Napster to fill that bill now. They still don't buy any CDs. Never will. Their musical taste runs to single songs, which they listen to and discard after their 5 minutes of fame abate.
The RIAA will never reach these people, because they never have.
--Perianwyr Stormcrow
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
Okay folks, if you're going to spout off about Fair Use at least read the clause. It's not very long, and it's not what you think it is:
107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use38
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include-
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
There it is. If you're teaching, editorializing, reporting, or researching the work you can reproduce limited parts. No, you don't get to make all the copies you want regardless of the media used. Technically, if you want a copy for the house and one for the car then you are supposed to buy two. If you want a CD for the house and a tape for the car then you are supposed to buy one of each. Maybe it sucks, but that's the way they wrote the law.
When I got a set of copyright registration papers several years ago there was also mention that, generally, if the owner does not offer the work in a particular medium then it wasn't considered infringement to make a copy for your own use in that medium. So if you buy a CD and the owner doesn't offer tape, mp3, vinyl, etc. then you are probably OK to make yourself a copy on one of those. DMCA may have changed that view though.
You can read the whole thing at http://www.loc.gov/copyright/title17/.
You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
A week later there will be whispers of a successful hack.
A month later instructions will be available on how to modify the drive to bypass the protection.
I am sure people do this all the time, or try this all the time. However, I would assume data CD drives have detection code to determine if its audio or not... whereas audio-only does not.
Can you purposely trash the index of the CDs so that PC drives cannot read them correctly but at the same time have zero effect on audio drives?
It would seem to me that you could put data where the "index" should be that would spork most operating systems as OSes rely on standards.
Since I never ever looked at CD specs I have no clue if this can be done. I just don't see how my cd player can be made to NOT read a CD unless it is purposely loaded with bad data that the CD drive or operating system will search out for first as compared to straight audio-only solutions
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
My wife left me, my dog died. The bank now has mah truck and I can't even play my Charlie Pride CD.
Yes, any protection scheme will probably be quickly broken. But the major labels shouldn't even try to protect their data until the next audio format.
--
--
* CmdrTaco is an idiot.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
Come check out a site I am working on, musiciansview.com.
If you don't buy or share music from musicians who agree with this crap, the RIAA will be forced to take people to court on behalf of artist who don't want the help!
It's still a work in progress. TBA soon.
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
Maybe we could get class action status.
My audio CD drive is pretty old and crappy, so I have not used it for years. It's just so much more convenient to use the CD-ROM drive in the PC, too. I have a radio tuner card in my PC, so the stereo only serves as an amplifier in these days.
I am sure many people have similar setups. Considering this and laptop users, I don't give those CDs much of a chance in the open market.
what i hope to see happen is a whole bunch of "end users" getting pissed off that they can't play these new copy-protected cds in their high-end cd players, car cd decks, etc and SUE (class action suit, anyone?) the riaa for what they are doing. if that happens, this becomes a REAL fair-use case and bam! no more cd copy protection. but i live in a world full of ideals and "what-should-be" so i am most likely wrong. but seriously i feel that this is really will bring about a 'pure' fair-use case that cannot be disputed.
Sorry for this response to a troll...
I guess the problem is, right or wrong, very few of us believe that we are stealing from artists. If any theft is involved it is from the marketers, accountants, and lawyers that make so many aspects of modern life a more negative experience. And, in exchange, they are stealing from us the rights we used to have for "fair use". We've all read the stories about truly great musicians dieing in poverty while the "suit" with no musical talent collects all of the royalties and none of us believe the RIAA is acting for the benifit of artists. As many people have noted, its the "Recording Industry Assoc." not the "Musician's Assoc.".
There is a common cause for many of us to root for the underdog, and with impression that only huge companies can influence the law, we are the underdogs and the RIAA is the 300 lb. gorilla. In a larger context, this story is just another episode in the continuing saga of Disney copyright extensions, patent travesties, monopolies crushing the small software companies, attacks on DeCSS and 2600, FUD against open source, etc. etc. etc..
Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
General comment: Copy protection inevitably involves violating the specifications of the medium: Macrovision violates the NTSC video standard, Those CDs violate the Red Book audio CD standard. So manufacturers get suckered into making standard-compliant devices, and media producers go right ahead and break those standatds.
---
The number one reason why I "rip" CD's is reduce the storage space needed for my music collection.
I am currently trying to get all of my stuff turned into digital format and burned in an efficient storage format to CD that I can use/play in my computer. This includes pictures/photos, music (especially the stuff still trapped on phonograph records and cassette tapes). By doing this, I can get rid of the extraneuous equipment taking up space.
I expect to end up with TV shows, movies, books, music, photos, all on CD's in efficient and standard storage formats. Then integrate everything with webpages. The article mentions that I am supposed to maintain a cassette tape player and a stand-alone CD player just to listen to music. This is silly.
The financially successful artists of the future will make their work available in a digital format directly available to the purchaser as demanded by a computer-savvy market. The RIAA will be left out.
My DVD player has two types of digital outputs. My friend's soundcard has digital inputs. Even if this CD won't work on my CD-ROM it damn well better play on my DVD changers, since its my only CD player. So I can still make a perfect digital copy, ironically by using the digital outputs that were pushed by the MPAA for digital surround.
I can't wait, actually. How many people buy CDs to listen to at work? Most of my coworkers are listening to CDs on their computers. If it won't play, they'll exchange it (hopefully a couple of times), then give up and get their money back. This will cost the record company a sale, they'll have to deal with 2+ returned CDs, and they've pissed off the distribution chain which has lost money on the non-sale. "That's not very good at all, Yogi."
It sends a nice signal to the artist: "you're worth a lot, we don't want anyone listening to you". Or if you're a small artist: "you're not worth it". A true no-win proposition. If only I could stomach Country enough to buy & return 1.
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
I just thought of this, Apple's pushing the "mix, rip, burn" thing so hard. They'd be pissed if the big selling point of their machines went away. They could probably re-write the firmware of their CD and DVD drives so they didn't get hung up on the track errors, or maybe some other drive manufacturer will do this. Then hopefully all the manufacturers will do the same thing and the market will just roll right over this copy protection scheme.
since the CD does not comply with the RedBook standard, it can not be labeled an audioCD and can thus not be sold as such...
Secondly how much time do you think it'll take before the CDROM manufacturers start producing drives that can read them?
*sigh* This is hust plain pathetic.
Metallica died in a car crash, after the Black album was released. Those short haired, talentless, hacks that are in Metallica now are some janitors that the Record Producers found working in their company basement.
Greedy Producers: "Hey guys, you wanna be Metallica?"
Under Paid Worker: "Ooh ooh I get to be Lars!"
--
microsoft, it's what's for dinner
bq--3b7y4vyll6xi5x2rnrj7q.com
it's a sig, wtf?
We will all bend over, because the average John Q. Public has no idea that the RIAA is doing this.
Nor does he care. Let's face the facts, here: Your average person just buys a CD. They don't have a burner at home, they might have a 5- or 6-disk carrycase for their favorite albums of the moment which they can bring into the car (if they even HAVE a car CD player) or to work. Fair use? To the average music CD consumer, they're getting their fair use out of it, playing it wherever they want.
Your average person has never heard of the DMCA. He has probably never even heard of the riaa before the Napster case, and has an imperfect understanding of what it is. And your average person will not have even heard of copy-protection on CDs, and likely never will learn. Why? Because that's outside their world.
We live in a world of packets and Perl, of Unix and USB, of code and SOAP and SMB. We speak a language that most users find incomprehensible -- not because they're dumb or clueless, but because it's not in their world. Talk with an economist or a biochemist, and I'm sure they'll make utterances you can't even begin to grasp. It's the same way with most users and anything to do with computers.
And just like only doctors and medical researchers might be up on the latest discussions of bioethics and medical legistlation, so too are we going to be the ones (perhaps the only ones) most in touch with Internet legislation and "Your Rights Online."
There is startlingly little chance of changing peoples' views about this. They have their concerns and their worries. It does not matter to them if CDs are copy protected -- they weren't going to be even thinking of copying a CD anyway. Make a copy of a CD onto another CD? Bizzare! Amazing! And, frankly, frightening. In trying to educate most users you are dealing with an inordinate but (make no mistake) very, very real fear of technology. It's annoying to us, it's frustrating, to hear a user whine about how they don't like using computers; would you believe, I had one user get "very upset" when I had to drag her (almost kicking and screaming) from her Novell client MS-DOS v5.2 running IPX and NETX, and WordPerfect 5.1, onto a Windows 98SE bells-and-whistles running on a TCP/IP Win2KS network? (Then again, I'd be kicking and screaming, too.) (And, ironically, the one thing that made the transition less painful... was that she discovered the MS Office Assistant cat, Links.)
We have very far to go indeed before Joe Average and his sister are even remotely concerned about what the {RI|MP}AA are doing to our rights. Education is important, but when it comes down to it, you cannot teach those who are unwilling -- in, through fear, incapable -- of learning.
"I am an Adept of Tantric VAX."
Quite a few audio CD players depend upon the directory information being right to enable their own error correction. The German CDs did not work in Car CD players in particular.
CDs are a low margin commodity, if the return rates are unacceptable on a CD the stores cannot afford to stock it. Amazon in particular can't afford to process returns.
The 'copy protection' appears to work by exploiting the error response of CDROM drives. Like most computer equipment they halt on error rather than trying to continue. This is an irritating behavior in any case.
The pressure on hardware manufacturers to make drives and drivers that don't halt on error will render the copy protection irrelevant in the long run.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
What with 83 percent of 5477 voters voting no, that makes around 4546 pirates, according to RIAA-logic.
---
At least mafia-owned pizzarias make excellent pizza. Compare to Bill Gates.
Perhaps you won't be able to directly rip from a CD-ROM drive, but any component audio CD player with digital output should give you a decent digital stream to splash around in.
Also, if Sony, for example, has control software and connectors for some of its higher-end CD players, like it does for some MD recorders, the process should be easily automate-able.
---
click a button, feed a hungry person!
Get off my launchpad!
Do you remember when copy protecting 5.25" disks was all the rage? Didn't ever really do the job, did it? Can't you just hear the starting gun for another race?
... 'cause if I pop down the grey plastic door on my G4's CD-ROM, I see that it's pretty much a generic Toshiba unit, with, lo and behold, an analog audio output right there on the front.
And, if worse comes to worse, I can play it via the player, disable all system sounds, and record what comes out of the speaker port.
IT'S CHARLIE FUCKIN PRIDE kids these days, i swear
--Chris http://chris.quietlife.net/
Yuppers, they have the right to muck up their format, but we can vote with our wallets. When will we grasp the idea of a grass-roots movement to cease our discretionary spending on CDs for 6 months? If we all could get our collective act together, we could put a serious hurt on these idjiots!!!
I wonder what Sony, Creative, et al will think about this once they realize it will pretty much put a nail in the coffin of their Mini-disc players, portable MP3 players, etc.
Heck, several companies make products that do nothing BUT copy cds.
And what about the new Mac ads (with Lil' Kim, hubba hubba) lauding the ability to rip and burn mix cds? So much for that feature...
Green-voting, republican-registered, socialist-libertarian.
If I told you, four years ago, that your "average" Mac or Windows user would be copying binary data off of a CD, encoding it into a new format, then then exchanging that data over the net freely, downloading it into personal devices, or burning it onto CD's that could be played in other devices, would you have bought it?
While it's popular to flog the masses as being "iggnerent lusers," the truth is, if you're capable of making a process fairly straightforward, Joe average will actually be able to follow along. Joe Average wasn't supposed to use computers in the first place. Or be able to get on the internet. Or be a threat to the mighty music business. Guess what? It happened.
The argument used that "this will be beyond the ability of average user" is bullshit. Just like "no one will ever find this security hole if they can't see the source code" and "open source software can't be worth anything, becuase it is free." It's what clueless executives murmur over and over, while clinging to their dreams of a new Lexus and a vacation home in the Bahamas.
You just have to get the fire hot enough :)
kc.
kc.
"You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel." - Homer J. Simpson
I don't beleive this protection is going to hold long. I've seen several new protection mechanisms in software and it was broken usually broken the next morning.
I would like to make three points.
Fistly, The manufactuers of CD-burners have enormously cut down on hardware, to keep the price low. This is especially true for IDE drives. All actions of the drive are gided by software drivers, which can be bypassed. I've seen some rippes do some really strange things with my drive like: "reading data beyond readable area". Heck, I even think it could burn the logo of your favorite footballteam on a CD!
Secondly, There are a hundred people at most working on a single protection and several thousands of people working on breaking it. This isn't a ridiculous number; The amount of people who own a computer (USA, Europe and Japan) should be close to 100 million. If one assumes only a 1/100000th (that about your chance to win a prise the lotery) part is active in the protection-cracking-bizz you still end up with several thousend people. By the way, in theory you only need one person the crack a protection.
Thirdly, the all mighty thing: Money. I think there are some pretty powerfull people who would give a lot of money to bypass this problem. It would probably not be available for "the ordinary computeruser".
Basically, from the copyright point of view the CD is a lost cause.
I hardly think that this will affect... anything. I haven't ripped a single mp3 track ever! ...Even when I own the CD. All of the songs that I want on mp3 format have already been ripped by someone else. It only takes one successful duplication / rip / conversion of the song to propagate it through P2P applications.
I have a Sony Espressa CD writer. Sony is in the music business. Sony is not going to give me any firmware updates that allow me to break their copy protection scheme. Best case, I buy a CDRW from a company who isn't in the recording business (assuming they even update the firmware). My question is the following: at what point do we start seeing hacked/3rd party firmware updates from non-vendors?
there are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots
I'm baffled how this scheme will slow down ripping more than slightly. It sounds like it won't stop programs like CloneCD and Exact Copy. So people will just have to use different ripping software.
Sony (owner of several major record labels) has finally thrown in the towel and started selling an in-dash MP3 CD player. If copy protection takes off, I wonder what Sony will tell people who buy these MP3 players and then find they can't rip Sony copy-protected CD's to play in them.
You want ot send the RIAA a messag? Start doing this NOW... go out to your local mass-market store (let's leave the mom and pop - if there are any left - alone) and buy a CD. Scratch it. Take it back saying it was scratched. Since most places will only let you return opened music for another of the same CD, get another. Scratch it. Lather, rince, repeat indefinately. If the store catches on tell them "I don't know... the lot must be bad or something."
The store returns it to their vendor (the recording company) who replaces the defective CD for another one. Yes, you're huring the store a little bit but you're hurting the recording company even more.
Ok, so I get most of my music from the record stores, right now, with some hard-to-find tracks off Napster or newsgroups. Everything gets ripped, stored, and mixed into CDs with songs that I actually like, at least when I'm done being lazy.
Let's say that this thing happens, and I can't rip the majority of the CDs that I buy. Through methods outlined elsewhere under this topic, there will be other people who can rip tracks with good enough quality for road trip listening, which is what I mainly listen to CDs for these days, anyway. So. I have no incentive to buy CDs. Therefore, I will go from 75% wholesome consumer, 25% NASTY EVIL BAD PIRATE WANTS OUR PRECIOUSSSS to 100% NASTY &c.
Sucks to be a recording artist.
-=Best Viewed Using [INLINE]=-
Does VHSs copy? Macrovision remover anyone
Does books copy? With enough hours on an Xerox?
It's not about getting the hardcore copyists. They'll find a way anyway. It's the average consumer that'll suffer. Oh well one more reason not to buy CDs, I'll just download them instead.
If I can't make a backup, forget it. How many CDs have been scratched, bent or broken when you/your family or friends have used or borrowed them? Not to mention PC games. At least I have a legal right to make backups here and no DMCA, so as long as I CAN, I will make backups of those too. And don't start about "you can always go to the store and get a replacement" when it's out of stock, out of business or whatever, and even if it's not it's still using of my time getting the replacement.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Do you really think the pc cd-rom manufacturers will allow the riaa to cripple their products in this way. Expect the firmware upgrades(downgrades) to be coming to new cd-romish type products almost forthwith.
In 1991, I was ftp'ing songs like "Stairway To Heaven" (as an AU or WAV, I can't remember) off of a remote server (not at my University), and piping it (unbuffered) to /dev/audio on a Sparc in a computer lab. Yes, it was kind of choppy most of the time, but sometimes there wouldn't be a single hitch. It worked - 10 years ago. So, if you had told me in 1997 that by 2001 the "average" user would be doing the same thing, I wouldn't have been surprised at all.
Education is the silver bullet.
If it is truly 'too difficult for the average user,' then isn't grabbing a copy of the song off [insert ripped music source here] a legitimate method of obtaining a back-up of a song you have own a copy of?
...until a hacker figures out how to make CDROM reader s/w that does the same things as the CD players - unless the differences between CD and CDROM are built into the CDROM player hardware/firmware. That would make it harder. Does anyone know if this is the case?
--
--
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
From the article:
"I've seen songwriters myself who have been close to homeless before they finally got the two or three hits that let them survive."
Perhaps maybe they should get a dayjob like the rest of us?
"The CD is the root of all of our problems with the Net," says Jay Samit, senior vice president of new media at EMI, which is testing various copy-protection technologies. "If CDs were as hard to copy as DVDs or VHS tapes or even books, we would not be going through anything like what we're going through now with Napster or Gnutella."
Does this guy even have a grasp on reality? I takes me little to no effort to dupe a VHS tape or copy a DVD to VHS. And thanks to connections at the local Kinko's, i could even get books copied in a matter of hours, if need be. (Although books are the one medium I never feel justified in copying)
Is it just me or would it not be incredably funny if someone were to send the RIAA a gift basket of CDs copied off of the "copy protected" disc? I mean come on. If you can get the music out of it, then you are able to copy it. I know the next wave! Yeah, unreadable CDs! Discs which woln't let anyone read them without the proper armed gaurd looking over your shoulder...no wait that wouldn't work. Someone would just steal the player their useing and make a normal CD with it.
I challenge anyone to take a listen to some classic country and not enjoyment. Take a trip to your local library (the original music sharing service) and try starting with two of the biggies:
Want something more current, but not the country crossover pop pap? Try Neko Case's Furnace Room Lullaby or some Robbie Fulks. Hell, most anything on the Bloodshot label is a place to start.
As for Charley, he's especially key to country music as one of the first black performers in a very white-dominated genre.
--
If I understand correctly, the only way that a person who has a computer (with CD-ROM) but not a standalone CD player (the case for a _lot_ of students) is going to be able to listen to the music is to find some pirated MP3's on the net!
Boy, that sounds like a way to increase sales.
"I'm sorry, but the RIAA has specified that buying the CD will not allow you to listen to your music. If you really want to hear that album, I'm afraid you're just going to have to find it on the net. What? No, of course we won't sell it to you over the net. Don't be absurd. That would encourage piracy."
Another case of "If we've eliminated customer shoplifting by shooting all our customers, why are we going out of business?"
They think long term -- they're counting on the Third Law of Termodynamics as an ally. Entropy means in XX years all electronic devices in existence today will rot and become unusable. In the meantime, they try to ensure no new device which will allow copying will be ever built again, anywhere in the world. A near impossible goal, but they think they can do it.
When I say "near", I mean the only way they could possibly achieve such a thing is by turning this planet into a global China-cum-Afghanistan-cum-NSA-like police state. And make no mistake, they do want that. Rich people in Chile, for instance, tend to love Pinochet (former mass-murdering dictator).
(Closely avoiding Godwin's Law. Whew!)
Remember how successful the copy-proof VHS tape was? When's the last time you saw one of those? Hopefully this will also go the way of the dodo; the only thing that worries me is it might be much cheaper for them to make copy-proof CD's than copy-proof VHS tapes.
"Who ever heard of a suitcase being dominated by minds from an alien star-system?" -- Philip K. Dick
The whole issue of copy protecting audio CD's is great for DownSlam. All the discs are free of copy protection schemes. Also, if the disc craps out while under warranty, your disc will be replaced for free. If it craps out while out of warranty, your music CD will be replaced for the cost of the media only. You have already bought the music.
What's to stop anyone from recording the audio from protected CD to another medium (DAT, MiniDisk) and then ripping that to an mp3 directly? Sure, it may take more time and energy, but the same result can be achieved.
I use this technique to rip vinyl records to mp3s... Turntable out to MiniDisk, line in to a digital 8-track program on my computer, and then compress it to an mp3. The only problem I've found is a slight loss of quality from the original audio, although the sound quality of an mp3 is lacking anyway, I doubt anyone would notice. Just my two cents.
// the vastness of space and time, and I end up here?
Here is a shortened list of people who will not like this, with legitimate reasons:
1) Car drivers: Car cd players use cd-rom error correction technology to prevent skipping, and this error-correction technology is based off inserting nonsense data, so these cds will be unplayable in car stereo systems.
2) People who legitimately listen to music through their computer. For reasons mentioned above, these cds will be unplayable in computers.
3) Apple computer. "It's your music, burn it on a Mac, dig?" With what I imagine to be a multimillion dollar adverising campaign aimed at home audiophiles, Apple has a lot to lose if these become widespread.
4) Consumer electronics makers. People like Creative, Sony, Phillips are only just beginning to get involved in the high-capacity/small size mp3 music player industry. With no way for consumers to make mp3s, and no plans from the record companies to commercialize mp3 distribution, this could be disatrous.
5) Me! I happen to like listening to my music on my computer, with a random playlist. It's so much better than buying a 300-disc changer, and I can also carry around my entire cd collection on 7 cd-rs. If I won't be able to do that, I'll be very unhappy, and the record companies do not want to make me unhappy. That could be really dangerous.
-- Nerds on toast in the new millenium
Here's why:
Usually, when I go to school each morning, I bring my collection of CDs with me. This numbers about 36 or 38 legit, purchased CDs, as well as 12 or 10 burned CDs .
Yes, I realize that bringing something of that much value to school, even my private school, is a bad idea. Unfortunately, I found that out the hard way, when, about 5 weeks ago, they were stolen. Poof, gone without a trace. Now I don't even have the originals still with me, because they were all taken.
Now what I'm going to have to do is to burn copies of all my CDs that I purchase in the future, so I can take the copies with me and still have the originals at home, so that they can be re-burned in case my CDs are stolen again. This is a perfectly acceptable example of fair use, since I (the purchaser) was the only one who used the albums and (as far as I know) fair use laws allow you, or at least USED to allow you, to keep extra copies for backup purposes.
Time used to be when you wouldn't have to rebuy CDs or other items such as video games if they were stolen, you could just rely on your backup copy. Not anymore.
Corporate greed has finally overridden any concern that the music industry might have once had for the consumer, because the average American consumer is either so dumb, or so lacking self control, that they go right on and buy from them anyway.
Friends don't let friends use multiple inheritance.
The first thing people should do where it happens is to require that every disk that has this "protection" should be clearly maked as being so, so that you won't accidentally buy the "protected" disk for the full price and then discover you cannot use it for half the things you are used with regular disks. If they think people would love it - they certainly won't be afraid to mark the disks. If they think people won't love it - well, tough luck, they'll have to bear the consequences.
-- Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
So now I'm into buying music of local artists and watching traveling performances. When I want a movie, I rent it.
If the industry doesn't want us to truly own what we buy, them I simply won't buy.
Man, this guy's got some serious depression issues going here...
--mdr
Are they saying it will be unplayable on a computer cd rom drive? Computer audio extraction from a cd doesn't have to happen in real time, right? If the "errors" on the disc affect the ripping process, the software can just be modified to compensate for those errors. It will be on Napster the day after it's released.
With the take off of DVD, more and more people are in my position: not a single player in my posession is missing a digital out.
1) Laserdisc player that doubles as my main CD player.
2) DVD player that doubles as my secondary CD player.
3) CD Walkman.
4) DVD ROM drive.
5) CD Writer.
All have either an optical, coaxial or IDE digital audio out. So, either you give me a CD that I can get to work on a player that would allow me (if I so chose) to make a digital copy from, or the disc goes back to the shop as faulty. Its up to them...
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
Give me a break. Ok, tweak two lines of code in the CDROM driver. Oohhh, scary.
Someone you trust is one of us.
So much for personal MP3 Players, Car MP3 players such as Kenwoods KDCMP7018 and Alpine's High end system.. If the RIAA does pull this off, they will have more than just angery customers, they will end up having a whole market segment really pissed off. What if I had bought the Kenwood or Alpine system.. now I'm not going to be able to create mp3s to play on my new $350 dollar system?! That's just total BS, and I think more people need to write to their represenatives.
Rip proof CD's? Funny, how the Canadian governement in their esteemed wisdom *cough* instituted a levy on CD-Rs (aka: the Keep-Celine-Dion-Clothed-and-Fed levy). The thought was that recording artists' rights and revenues were being circumvented through the illegal duplication of their creative works. Fine. Place a levy, redistribute the wealth, and copy with abandon.
With the introduction of copy protected audio CDs, can I reasonably expect this levy to be lifted? I can no longer duplicate audio CDs, after all.
I'm not going to hold my breath on this one....
The music industry has given up on making it impossible to copy music and decided to go for making music no one would want to copy.
"Charley Pride: A Tribute to Jim Reeves"
I've heard the MP3s some of my friends download. Thanks to Xing, most of them sound like utter crap. I'm no "golden ear", but when I can tell a major difference on POS computer speakers (without comparing to original source) I know that it's bad.
I bought a copy of Type O Negative's "Least worst of" a few months ago, and I've noticed that it won't
play in my laptop (a Dell Inspiron 5k, 24x CDROM), yet works fine in my car.
I never really thought much about it, as I don't usually listen to CDs anywhere but the car,
but now I'm wondering if this disc is usage-disabled.
The symptoms sound similar, the machine can't identify the disc, never starts playing, and occasionally the drive makes a 'wugga-wugga' sound as if it's moving the read head back an forth, looking for something.
Has anyone else seen this happening with this disc?
I just kinda assumed it was mis-stamped or something, and my 'puter couldn't handle it...Now I'm not quite so sure.
C-X C-S
Is it just me, or does this seem trivial to work around? Here's my idea. Go out and buy one of those nifty little Sony mini disc thingies. Connect to your pre-amp/amp/whatever, play your cd and record it to the mini disc. Now you're ready to record your music anywhere. I mean this seems just like making a tape recording except with digital media. Any comments? Am I just clueless here?
According to the article it will block many car CD players, portable CD players, and of course CD ROM drives. That is a pretty significant amount. It's not just ripping that will be affected. You won't be able to listen to your CD player in your car anymore. You won't be able to use your discman. You can't listen to them at work in your CDROM. This idea needs to be flushed immediately into the rancid stinking hole it originated from.
Mas vale cholo, que mal acompañado.
This is a lost cause, and this is only going to affect the people who actually buy the CD. I don't see how this will keep copy protected CD's from showing up on Napster.
Why do I keep typing pythong?
I have three comments on this latest RIAA gem.
First, is Philips (or whoever makes that 'create your own cd dub device') on board with this? If they can't copy it, there will be a lawsuit over lost revenue.
Second, I have a great device, 100% guaranteed to copy any form of digital or analog music. It's called a decent stereo. Mine just happens to have digital, analog, DTS, Surround, and DVD jacks. Oddly enough, these encrypted CDs and DVDs come out in dolby, DTS, RCA, what-have-you. No problems. The DVDs come out in crystal clear S-Video, no country code problems.
Third, I wonder how this will work into their price scheme? Will we, the consumers, have to shoulder the burdens of their R&D with price hikes? Will they increase the cost of legal music, thereby making the illegal music the only avenue for most low paid people? I know that when I was making minimum wage I could only afford tapes. I had to tape the artists who only released on CD from my friends. Will this sort of thing cause the RIAA to have a backlash, where people are more willing to 'pirate' than to purchase?
I think this is the worst idea they have had yet. Perhaps in the future, they will realize that if they want people to purchase their audio legally, they need to make the price/quality ratio so good that the value will be much higher than the pirated stuff. I'd certainly pay $5 for a CD, no problem. $15 is a stretch, and I will bet that if this encryption raises the prices into the $20 range, many people will just 'pirate' from the radio, from friends, from whatever.
-WSAn operating system should be like a light switch... simple, effective, easy to use, and designed for everyone.
Did anyone else notice that this first "uncopyable" CD is Charlie Pride doing "A tribute to singer Jim Reves"?
"A tribute to" means an album where ALL the songs were previously done by the singer to whom the tribute is being paid.
In other words, EVERY SONG ON THE ALBUM is Johnny Pride COPYING a song done by Jim Reves.
Somehow this seems appropriate. B-)
But it's not a copyright violation. Johnny will have licenced all those songs from the current copyright holder.
So if Jim actually WROTE any of them and his estate or heirs still own the copyright, perhaps Johnny actually WILL pay some tribute to Jim, in the financial sense.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
I wish there was a way to reconcile our having the freedom to share our music with the need for artists to be paid for what they do. The recording industry has made a ridiculously unfair amount of money from society in the past (and hence the difficulty for us to feel sorry for them), but I really do feel for the up-and-coming artists who only get pennies (if any) from all their hard work as a result of an industry that capitalizes on them.
In other words, I wish there was a way for us to donate directly to musicians in appreciation of, and as compensation for, their creative genius and all the hard work they put into entertaining us. Any suggestions???
If you can manage to find some old crappy 2x CD-ROM or something that WILL play one of these, just rip in analog with your sound card and then encode to MP3.
Either that, or don't encode to MP3 at all, just burn it to another CD.
It's hardly an issue, more sound quality is lost to MP3 encoding than analog ripping anyway (Supposing you have a good sound-card with built in "Save what you Play" software... the Sound Blaster Live comes with such features.) Must be sure that you disable all system sounds and don't tax your machine. There are good ways to do this, and I would know -- I've had CDs so scratched up ripping digitally just wasn't working, but for some reason I was able to rip in analog. And as I said, the analog ripping didn't effect the sound quality any more so than the transition to MP3, in fact, probably much less.
I've love to buy a copy of this CD, burn a copy onto a very generic, unmarked (no branding information) blank CD, and then take it back to Wal-mart and claim that it's defective as it had no disk face printed on it. Get a replacement. Repeat.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
You're doing material harm to the genuine case for free speech by associating it with theft.
-- the most controversial site on the Web
According to the article, in the future, I may be buying CD's that will not run on any of the high end CD playing devices that I own. Keep in mind, many car CD players the support some sort of anti skipping technology won't play back the new copy protected CD's. It will also be criminal to make a copy of the CD that strips the protection off, so that I CAN play it in my "high end" CD devices. I can't figure out which criminal behavior is worse: the fraud being perpetrated by the labels for selling CD's with content that can't be played back, or the consumer for going to the extra effort to legally pay for this content (which includes the rights to listen to it) and put this content on a medium in which they can play it back. Will labels like Sony be dumb enough to put out content that can't be played back on their own devices?
They burned me a full 12 hours earlier and when they finally post this story they use a version white-labelled by the Microsoft/NBC alliance. Why the hell Taco is sending users to the MSNBC site instead of Inside.com baffles me. That's a great idea! Let's give the large media conglomerate (which has already shown its journalistic integrity to be tenuous at best) all the page views and ad revenue instead of the site which actually authored the article! Sometimes, I think the guys who run this site really need to walk their talk a little more.
Here is the original Inside.com link.
-------
We want some answers and all that we get
Some kind of shit about a terrorist threat
- Ministry
Wouldn't it be great, though? What if, starting tomorrow, everyone in the world stopped buying CDs, DVDs, and everything that offends us with its copy controls? And, what if we all wrote letters to the RIAA and MPAA companies, saying, "We won't buy any more until you release your content on the Internet, for reasonable prices, without copy control." It'd be great. We'd crush them.
An organized consumer body would have tremendous power. We could even stoop to their level and lobby congress, set prices on our own whims. But, two wrongs don't make a right.
This is so simple. There is a program on the market called Total Recorder. I replaces your sound driver in windows and then EVERYTHING goes through it. This makes this form of copy protection at worst a minor annoyance.
Brazil? That description sounds a lot like the US!
(except only parts of the US get really hot in the summer)
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
The funny thing about this is, they seem to think that if consumers can't copy it, it won't end up on the internet. But only ONE consumer needs to figure out how to copy it, and the MP3 will be everywhere.
This will not hinder anyone who really wants to rip the data. So what if today's cdparanoia can't read it; tomorrow's will. And there's always audio resampling.
But it will anger customers who will not be able to play the CDs that they've bought, without going to extra trouble. In fact, that "extra trouble" will probably involve ripping the music and then either encoding it as mp3/vorbis, or reburning the wav/aiff data to a standard format CD. Then the customer will be able to play the music on all equipment, not just some equipment.
Thus, it will effectively only hurt the publisher's sales and reputation, while not doing anything to address the alleged agenda of reducing piracy. It's just a dumb idea. Apparently some people need the market to teach this to them. Fine. As long as I return and get refunds for any CDs that don't play correctly, then it's their money that they are spending on this education, rather than mine.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
DVDs? Excuse me? I know of no seven line perl program that can rip a CD. DVDs, on the other hand...
seriously if all the record company "New media" guys have this level of genius, we have NOTHING to worry about.
--
Assuming that what I've read here is true, then bit copies (perhaps requiring specialized hardware and in-depth technical knowledge) are still possible (so pirates could still do it), but ripping to my hard drive for convenience or transport on a portable device is at best extremely difficult for the average user(i.e. not someone posting here). Seems to do exactly the wrong thing.
Fair use still exists despite the DMCA, and they're probably violating it.
Somebody please let these buggers know - boys bands want their protections!
What ever happened to the DCMA? I have been making a MP3 server for my entertainment center at home, and I've been ripping all the CD's that I OWN, and have no MP3's downloaded from Napster or gotten illegally any other way. Now, if they start releasing these CD's, I won't be able to make a copy of a CD that I legally own?
Jeez. Maybe I'll just go break some laws, as apparently big business can!
Wouldn't it just be possible to create an Image of the disk by doing a raw data dump, then burning that image to a CD? That seems like an easy fix to me, probably too easy tho.
Trust me, she's going to be calling me, saying "this new CD won't play in my computer... why not?" I want them to explain to her that they deliberately did it, there's nothing wrong with the CD (other than they broke it, and there's only broken copies around) or her CD-ROM, they are just afraid she's going to distribute it over the net. Please do that for me.
I wish I could say I'm not buying any more CDs, but I've already done that. Did that last year -- not because of Napster but because I'm tired of the strong-arm tactics and "sue everyone" stance. It's a cartel, an organized monopoly of five big companies. Now, they want to do away with the CD player all together -- because it's become too easy to pirate. Not that they weren't raking money in hand over fist or anything. Now, they want you to replace all the media players you've currently got, and all your media once again.
I don't think it's going to fly this time. They made an almost perfect media in CD. Small enough, durable enough, direct track access, and any improvement in sound Joe Sixpack won't notice nor will he pay extra for it. Joe's just going to realize that new discs won't play in his current player, and they want him to buy a new one -- that won't play any of his old music. And, there's no benefit to the new music! Think that won't piss Joe off?
And hey, where's all the fair use? I think the pendulum has swung far enough, and if the RIAA isn't careful, Congress will suddenly swing it right back the other way.
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.fairtunes.com
DNA just wants to be free...
Hmm, it seems to me that the way that Windows Media Player (WMP) plays CDs is pretty much the same as the way that cdparanoia rips them. Meaning, that WMP reads the digital data straight off the disk rather than using the CD-ROMs analog playback facilities. I don't imagine people will be happy with CDs that won't play in their PC.
Even if it does break WMP, a lot of people have a straight digital (S/PDIF, but wrong voltage) connection between their sound card and CD-ROM. This means that CD playing programs that don't know about digital audio extraction can still have all the great sound of digital playback (in my experience, the DAC in a good sound card is better than the DAC in a CDROM, but getting an external DAC is even better, which is why digital out on sound cards is nice).
I'm a loser baby, so why don't you kill me.
> I used it to make a copy of my diablo 2 play disk so I could play at home on battle.net and also do the same at work.
.iso of the 2nd disc (it's not copy protected) and just use Daemon Tools to "mount" your .iso in the virtual cd-rom! Change the registry drive setting for D2 and you're set! (I have drive R: cdrom, drive V: virtual, drive W: burner)
;-) but at least I never have to worry about my cd getting scratched.
I frequently play a few games, and they all require the stupid cd in the drive. After getting tired of swapping cd's all the time, I found this page:
Game Copy World - Diablo 2
Which gave me a link to game CD ripping utils
Then finally to Daemon tools
Use DiscDump to get an
Sure it takes 640 megs (good thing 30 gig drives are less then $200
If I bought the game, wtf do I *need* the cd in the drive to play?!
UT has a real nice compromise - you only need the cd-rom for patches: you can play BOTH single player and multi-player without the cd. I find Q3 and HalfLife to be annoying that you need the CD for single player.
I wish certain idiots would wise up and realize ALL copy-protection schemes have been and will continue to be broken.
You would think a community like slashdot, which jumped at the opportunity to bitch and moan about generalizations toward geeky students (ref. hellmouth), might be a little slower to disparage people that don't fit into their group. I suppose that was too much wishful thinking. This community is just as ready to make fun of people they view as outsiders as any other.
I am a self professed geek, I also wear boots and a hat. I thought we (geeks) were more tolarant and accepting. I know I am.
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
The key to this technology catching on is:
How many normal cd players fail to play the CD?
If this number is sufficiently high enough, they will have to recall the CD.
So buy the CD, then return it as unplayable.
I read on this page about CD standards that the well known little 'Compact Disc digital audio' logo has these requirements:
This logo may be used on discs complying with the CD-DA specifications: the IEC 908 standard and/or the Philips-Sony Compact Disc Digital Audio System Description (the RED Book).
So yeah, it seems as if these protected CDs should not be allowed to carry this logo. But I doubt anyone is going to rub their nose in it. Worse is they'll probably get away with a 'may cause problems in some CDROM drives' sticker - which promotes unwarranted doubts about the compatibility of CDROM drives.
nt
hmm, since I have el-cheapo cdrom that only reads music cd's anolog anyway, I have absolutly nothing to worry about.
The music people need to stop whining about not making enough money. Do you really need 3 ferrari's, porche, and a bmw ? Well fuck you! The record companies either need to lower the price of their cd's, or start paying the artists some more. Oh, and if people don't wanna buy your music, if they want to download it for free, then I guess you all will have to get a real job, just like the rest of us.
I think this will really increase Plextor's revenue as well. See I have a Plextor 8/4/32 CDRW and with the aid of Nero Burning ROM I can do bit for bit copies. I'm pretty sure that whatever they are doing isn't going to prevent me from copying each bit on the CD one at a time to another CD. However if it does prevent that, then it means there is some genius out there. I'm pretty sure the solution will be new Burning software and CDRW drivers.
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
A friend and I are starting an informational/persuasive website about the RIAA http://www.fucktheriaa.net if you have any suggestions, content, or want to help out in any way please email me at webmaster@fucktheriaa.net.
thanks
-crumpledfarm
"drink plenty of water when you take these, now you can relax, and return to your job"
hey, couldn't i just go something like this: 'dd if=/dev/cdrom of=cd.iso'? it seems to me, that if it can be read, it can be saved, if it can be saved, it can be burned. naturally it can't that simple, but i mean, aside from painting the shiny side with a can of matte black or something, i don't think that there is any way to prevent burning a cd.
It seems to me that there is no way to prevent the following digital copying of these CDs: Standalone CD player --> digital out (coax/optical)--> digital sound card --> .wav
Seems to me that their copy protection doesn't prevent this
I too only own CDROMs for playback of CD audio disks; if I spend $15 + for a CD and it doesn't work, I'll keep exchanging it until I get one that works; Walmart/etc will see that this CD loses money and discontinue it;
If you gotten here by now, most likely you already know that those rip-proof CDs may not play in CD-ROM drives or even a number of cheap CD-players.
So, if I would be an average joe redneck that picks up a cd like dat and tries tah play it in mah truck and it wont play ima gunna only get mah shuttgin and get mah mohney bawck!
Aren't the rednecks a very infeluential lobbyist group in the US now (looking at how their states voted in the last election)?
People forget that no one is forcing us to buy CDs.
The record industry is a for-profit organinzation. They respond to record sales. They will not stand behind a technology that hinders sales (regardless that they say they're doing for the artist). Don't buy the CD. Buy CDs from artists and labels that use what you consider fair technology. Find labels that give their artists fair royalty deals and support the crap out of them!
Put some pressure on the artists, too. Tell them that you respect their work but you're not going to buy their new CD because it uses 'X' technology. Force them to have a say about how their art is distributed. And respect their decision. Protest but don't steal.
Breaking the copy-protection to steal the information is lame. Why should people get to steal a loaf of bread because they don't like the baker. Make your own damn bread and give it away.
Note - Breaking the copy-protection to prove the protection is lame is cool. You be your own jury.
Be a responsible consumer, not a petty thief.
and only the holder of the standadr, Sony I believe could make the record company do anything about it
Sony, one of the maintainers of the CD standard, is also a major record label. Philips (the other maintainer) is also a (minor) label.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I think what they're trying to do here is to slow down the wave, not stop it, no matter how hard they try I'm sure they know they'll never be able to actually stop pirates.
:p)
I guess what they are aiming for are the masses, casual ners like me & you won't get fooled by this and we'll find a way around in less than a day probably, but normal people who use computers to browse the internet, read the news over the internet, people with a fairly low understanding of a computer will believe in this and will adhere to this new method.
Same thing for CD players or anything that is CD related that is (except maybe video games which are usally used by nerds
Of course you can't stop pirates, only slow them down and have the masses think its not feasible.
Just my 2 cents worth.
SD.
If you guys have not noticed, most if not all Game CDs that are produced by Westwood© are burn-proof, because of a file on them called (CloakCD) or somthing similar. There is a program called Clone-CD that can burn them (I mean make educational backups) luckybob@phreaker.net
This is SO not going to work. People have become USED to taking their entire CD collections, ripping them into MP3s or some other format, and then using jukebox software to arrange and play them back. We all also listen to CDs at work, and what do we use? A computer, of course. Its just too fun and convenient to organize your music on your computer as MP3s rather than as plain physical CDs. In fact, probably one of the only things keeping the computer hardware industry going is the fact that music ripping and burning takes huge hard-drives, faster machines, faster bus speeds, etc., creating growth. Oh, and by the way, if this isn't supported by Fair Use rights, along with space-shifting one's own content, then I don't know what is. I bet the DMCA will declare that software that bypasses this is illegal, but Fair Use definently supports this. This will be a great Fair Use Vs. DMCA court case, and I can't wait.
I read the article on both the MSNBC web site and the INSIDE.COM web site. The MSNBC version really sucks bad. The text appears to be there, but it was harder to read and very poorly layed out. Notice how it is formatted into a little narrow column on MSNBC while INSIDE.COM has it filling out the whole screen, even though they do have menus and ads along the sides. This does show the case that big corporations are really goofing up bad. And they are wondering why the net isn't turning huge profits for them?.
Slashdot needs to start making a better choice about which sites they give primary links to and start encouraging better web sites, instead of brown nosing big corporations that can only make screwed up web sites.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
If my computer can't read the CD, then I have two choices:
1. I don't get the music. The music company loses $15.
2. I download the music from Napster. The music company loses $15.
However, with a non-copy-protected CD, the music company would gain $15 because I'd buy the CD. I realize that many people still listen to music on old-fashioned CD players and so the music companies shouldn't be too worried right now, but that will change.
USA law doesnt apply outside USA
Until the USA invades those countries that do not recognize USA copyright law.
Will I retire or break 10K?
If you're unhappy with the RIAA's pricing scheme, then you have the option of not buying their CDs. As long as you continue piracy of your music, you are contributing to the problem(RIAA paranoia about piracy) rather than the solution(cheaper CDs). You have no more intrinsic right to the music you wish to acquire than you do to read my health records
Visit the
But my MP3 player doesn't have a 20GB hard drive, it has 64MB of Flash RAM
And mine has 650 MB of optical WORM memory (i.e. CD-R drive). Many newer portable CD players can play CDs encoded in MPEG layer 3; just burn it.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Pardon me, but doesn't this technology destroy my right (assuming this is a right) to a single, personal-use, backup copy? After I purchase a cd, I typically rip it to the MP3 format so that I may listen to it on my machine. I much prefer this method than having to constantly switch cd's in the drive. This, as far as I have seen, constitutes fair use and is not illegal. These rip-proof cd's would take away this possibility. Are there any laws that could stop this technology from coming into use since I am not able to make my legal backup copy?
"Copyright protected cd's do not allow you to replicate them in a cd burner nor do they allow you to rip the audio tracks "digitally" ", Sounds very familiar... divix anyone? Didn't they learn, they spent x millions of dollars on DVD encoding that was "hack proof" and "someone i know" has backed up all thier DVDs to divix.
to
---
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
This works best if you open the case backwards (without breaking the copy protection seal), so it can be claimed you didn't open it. Plus, it would have the bonus of making the "unplayable" CD's truly unplayable.
Uh..
How can you say it doesn't work in a CD player unless you've (noticably) opened it to try it?
--
Delphis
Delphis
Note that this technique only works for copy protected CDs, since others cannot be returned after having been opened.
--
"As I was negotiating with Charley, I learned that (protecting CDs) was important to him," says Bob Heatherly, head of Music City Records, the independent Nashville label that Pride joined in January.
Isn't Music City an OpenNap network?
Will I retire or break 10K?
This will have adverse effects on the average consumer - a CD being unplayable in high-end (digital out) players, cars, and computers is more than just a drawback. Most of the consumers that will be affected by this won't be interested in ripping he thing anyway. This is a case of burning down a barn to kill a few rats.
Any spoon would be too big.
Or was it because inside is a subscription site?
---
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
<insert blank cd>
# cat file.img >
If you do a bit for bit copy from the "protected" cd to a blank cd won't you be avoiding this "table" that the cd burner is supposed to get choked up on? Or do the tracks actually have to be created one by one and copied onto specific sectors?
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
--
Garett
when i read this article i almost laughed, I find a unusually strange flaw to most reasoning by the RIAA, however this one blows my mind. If there is a way to play it on our computer (like a regular CD) there is a way to copy, extract, and manipulate the files. Bits are Bits so are burners if they support cloning :-). I give 2 days before we have these suckers cracked, in whatever way they need to be.
"If a man watches 3 football games in a row he should be declared leagaly dead" - A
But what you are forgetting is that in 1983, the music industry still had enormous R&D and new hardware (CD pressers didn't come from thin air) costs that they had to recoup by subsidizing them through CD costs. Now, even though the costs have long been recovered, they still hang on to the outdated pricing scheme just to scam money out of us.
Freedom: "I won't!"
I have >500 cds. I've ripped ripped them all and listen to them on the pc, the cd's just get archived :-) It seems that I am the prototype of someone who bought more cd's since the mp3's got popular. For every mp3 I like, I buy the cd or cd-single. (These are kept like a backup, with the highest quality.)
...
Of course I won't buy such a disk, because I simply can't *use* it the way I like. I'll get the mp3's and not support the artist anymore
- Go to the record store and buy any copy-protected CD
- take the CD home and remove the wrapper
- return the CD and get your money back.
- repeat ad infinitum at other stores...
The "opened" CD can't be sold as new, and will probably be returned to the manufacturer, or sold as used (at a loss) by the record store. The manufacturer will notice that they are losing money on copy-protected CDs...You can figure the rest out yourself.
there are 3 kinds of people:
* those who can count
there are 3 kinds of people:
* those who can count
* those who can't
So these "copy-protected" CDs won't work in CD/DVD-ROM drives...guess what I, and a few million others, use to listen to their CDs? Brilliant move, ensuring that a good-sized chunk of their customers won't be able to make use of their products anymore. Sounds like a sure-fire way...of driving people to Napster, or Gnutella now that Napster will soon only list RIAA-approved files.
I usually buy a CD, listen to it a couple of times, decide which tracks I like (maybe all, maybe some), and rip them to my mp3 directory for later random playback. Now, suddenly I'm told that I'm not allowed to listen to music that way? Fsck that. I'll just stick with artists that don't use the anti-consumer protection scheme the RIAA wishes to impose.
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
We all know how a dDOS attack works. An individual floods some networked service, usually using compromised systems to aid in the dirty work. This is of course, wrong. But, what if an electronic service is shut down, not because of an individual, but rather because of the combined requests of many individuals, who, of their own accord, wish to use it? When this happens accidentally, we call it slashdotting. Would it be wrong if it happened on purpose?
Consider. I am upset with some company's policy. So, I fire off an email telling them so. Others may too. What if we organized and did it at the same time?
Imagine if you will a chatroom where people can voice their beefs. Imagine further that a gathering is organized in that room at a particular time to attract a virtual crowd. Finally, imagine that if you, as an individual agree with a particluar comment made at a particular time, you could click a button near the comment, causing it to be emailed to the address of the offender, with the pre- and post-amble of your choice. Or pressing another button would pull up their web page to see if they recanted their offensive possition. A human DDOS attack, if you will.
Clearly no individual action will harm the target systems, but the aggregate effect could be staggering. And, we're all acting of our own volition (though I see a bot somewhere in all this, he he), peacefully protesting.
I suppose that actions could be taken against the organizers of such an event, but what if it's relatively spontaneous? Someone posts a Slashdot article about a nasty practice, and people start to gather "outside the web site and mail server", as it were.
Could action be taken against the developper of the technilogy (the e-protest chat client)? If so, then action would have to be taken against anyone who facilitates the forming of a crown (city planners, road builders, etc.).
Maybe it's time to write some radical code.
You could've hired me.
And anyone who has any kind of music software doesn't care either (Sound Forge, Cool Edit, etc.). You can always play the cd and capture the output as wav files. Which then burn easily to cd or compress to mp3. If you're after mp3s anyway, a slight possible loss of quality obviously isn't your main concern. And besides, that gives you the opportunity to add some reverb, back-mask in 'Fuck the RIAA', etc.
Will this cd bear the 'compact disc digital audio' logo? CAN it if it varies from the standard and won't play in some devices that say they play standard compact disc digital audio cds? Someone grants the right to print that logo on cd's, anyone have any idea who? I'm sure they have published standards that do NOT include faulty TOC's.
This quote makes me laugh! "If CDs were as hard to copy as DVDs or VHS tapes or even books, we would not be going through anything like what we're going through now with Napster or Gnutella." All I have to say about it: [DVD copying] CHECK! [VHS copying] CHECK! [Book copying] CHECK! [Copy Protected CD copying] Coming Soon!
Are the record companies planning to put cute little labels on all of the "burnproof" CDs... so we'll be able to easily side-step them,.. or will there be a posted list of participating artists, or am I to envision a blacklist propogating across the 'net listing all the bad CDs we should avoid?
It's certainly quite easy to say "Just don't buy those CDs" but if you don't know what you're getting til you've got it.. then where are you? Some stores don't return CDs after the seals have been broken. Most don't, actually, I'm sure.
On the other hand... I see what you mean. Certainly, we're free (I think, but, heh, IANAL) to listen to our CDs that we've bought on whatever player we have.. but we've got to keep in mind that this foolproof cd thing could either spark a whole new line of CD playing products, or we've got to be able to prove their malicious intent that caused record companies/artists to choose CDs that would play in some CD playing devices and not in others. This.. shouldn't be too hard, given a sufficient amount of $ to maintain the case against the record companies, et al... but.. we'll end up back at square one if we win. Not that we should just give up now.. no.. we shouldn't.
On a somewhat random note... was there this much upheaval when VCRs came out? I mean... one could say the same kinds of things about VCRs, but they're everywhere now, and there is still lots of money to be found in selling and renting VHS tapes... *sigh* This world gets greedier and greedier and greedier.
Insert mind here.
Nope. The good thing about Philips (arguably the most important cd patent holder) is that they got out of the media business by selling Polygram to Seagram. This is why they're on our side in stuff like this. That's also why they (and not e.g. Sony) are behind Tivo. They don't have to protect the IP of their media daughter anymore.
Tob
The "CD Protectors" readily admit that they can't be 100% successful, just because of the wide variety of CDROMs, rippers, &c out there. So, a few things are going to happen:
1. People will discover the technology that allows ripping, and it will actually be a feature of that technology. Knowledge of what technology is necessary will spread around and more people will use it.
2. Those who don't possess the technology will sometimes buy a "copy-protected CD," and try to convert it to mp3s for use in their portable player. Unable to do so, they'll go looking out on the 'net for mp3 versions of these songs, and will find them because some people will possess technology that allows these CDs to be ripped.
3. Once person X discovers how easy it is to get copies of mp3s, he may not see any reason to buy the original CDs to begin with -- after all, if all he wants to do is play it on his mp3 player, the original CD doesn't do him any good at all.
So, I expect that this will actually result in more piracy, rather than less.
Two other predictions:
1. Out of spite, a lot of people will buy the Charlie Pride CD and then return it to the store because "it didn't work in my car" or whatever.
2. Within a day of being released, mp3s will be available in 100 places on the net.
If the music companies want to stem piracy, they need to meet their customers needs: Distribute their own digital music on-line, Sell individual songs instead of entire CDs with 2 good songs and 8 crappy ones, and make the price reasonable enough and the process easy enough that buying from them just makes the most sense.
In short, their problem is that their customers are sick of spending $15 for a CD with 2 good songs on it.
Yes, buy copies of this CD. Buy many copies. Play with them a couple days, try to crack them, whatever.
Then return them all to the retail store and demand a full refund. Site the fact that these CDs will not play on your CD player, your mother's CD player, your brother's CD player, etc. Don't settle for an exchange or store credit. Get angry and tell them you will never buy CDs from this store again. You ruined little Timmy birthday party when his new CD wouldn't play boo hoo hoo.
In short, hit the record industry in its most important link...the music retailer. Customers don't buy opened CDs, re-shrinkwrapping is illegal and now there is no way for a store to tell if a CD is truly defective (warped) or just semi-defective (copy-protected) which means a lot more stock is going to get tied up in the return process.
If enough stores get burned by these copy-protected CDs, then guess what? They probably will stop carrying them. Artists aren't going to like that. What will that do for sales? Or store owners will start bitching up the channel all the way to RIAA. RIAA can't piss off the music retailer because right now THAT IS THEIR ONLY SALES OUTLET.
- JoeShmoe
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
You seem to be mistaken
Si vis pacem, para bellum
The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
What stops you from plugging the audio line out from your "normal" bookshelf stereo and encoding that directly to a .wav, which can then easily turned into an mp3?
Worse comes to worse you can always record (shudder) to a tape and then back to your machine. Quality will suffer but if you use a new tape there won't be much noticeable different (for the tone-def like me) from a 128kbps track.
- z
M period. Fresh, comma
Copy-proof CDs may be all well and good for new albums, but what about the umpteen-million CDs already out there that aren't protected like this? Even a year after this is implemented, they'll be lucky if these CDs cover 5% of the shelf-space that the non-protected CDs have. On top of that, with the MP3 format so widely-spread, people now know that they no longer have to pay $20 for one song they like and 14 they could live without. Copy protection is just one more reason not to buy. If anything, this will help MP3s.
Anyway, the majority of my MP3s seem to be songs about as old as I am (currently listening to a tune from "Tommy"). The only way I could buy fewer CDs is if I started selling the few I have. I'd like to help with a boycott, but...
Now I'm forced to wonder if software that burns a cd bit for bit can be considered illegal under the DMCA as a form of copyright-protection circumvention. In this case the software came first, but the case for this seems as strong to me as the case they had against DeCSS.
I don't know about you, but if I had my druthers, I'd have copies of all my music on vinyl. This predigested digitized stuff simply doesn't sound as nice, especially for analog-original recordings, of which I have many. A little bit of the sound depth is shaved off, and some of the highs and lows are gone too.
As to artistic endeavours, I won't be releasing any music direct-to-MP3 either. If you want it that way badly enough, you can DIY. Yep, it's probably irrational, but there's just something to be said for things like liner notes, album design, cover art, lyrics sheets, and all that stuff that people put a lot of work into. Heck, if music recordings no longer had cover (or CD) art, my buddy Winston would be practically out of a job.
Interrobang, the high-tech Luddite
I'm not a geek, I'm just a clever script.
What do we do? One sentence -- don't buy it! We're not talking about life and death here; if they don't wanna play nice then we just don't have to play!
Most people don't care about it anyway and will simply dub copies via analog methods because that's the way they do it now. If the RIAA wants revenue from digital customers then they better get their shit together, that's all I can say...
Such as Phillips' CD recorders? Would they even play a "copy-protected" CD? Do they copy bit for bit, or do they burn the audio signal? Would they produce a non "copy-protected" CD?
Of course, now it collects dust, since my computer is next to my component system and I play MP3s through it. Not that I'm gonna get rid of the CD players anytime soon, I still buy CDs of songs I like (besides that, many people do NOT know how to do quality rips, the topic of a different rant). I just want to know these new copy-protected CDs will play on 10 and 15 year old players, just like current Macrovision tapes will still play on those ancient 20 year old top-loading indestructable easily repaired VCRs.
Take it home, and put it in my CD-player (very old, quite likely to not be able to read it) or maybe one of those MP3/CD players. It doesn't work. I go back to the store with my CD player in hand, and go to the manager. "Look, this new CD is defective. I doesn't work in my CD player. This other CD of mine (non-crippled) does work, so the CD player is not broken. Please refund my purchase." A couple of these, and the stores will be leery about stocking them.
Then I write a short letter to the actual band: "I bought your CD. It was broken, my CD player was unable to play it. I returned the CD to the store. I downloaded the tracks from Napster/Gnutella/Bearshare. Here is a cheque for $8 that I think you deserve for your efforts in producing the music. I don't think the record company deserves anything, as their CD does not work in my CD player."
Then I write a letter to the RIAA: "I bought an album. You crippled it. I returned it. I downloaded the tracks from Napster/Gnutella/Bearshare. I paid the artists directly for their efforts. You are no longer part of the equation. Good-bye. I hope that you sold your shares two years ago."
Artists get paid, I paid less for the songs, and the record company is taken out of the equation entirely (except that they now have a returned CD to deal with). Keep this up, and they will be forced out of business. And I can rest well, in that I didn't rip off the artist. In fact, the artist probably made 8 times as much from me as they would have from the record company.
Why continue doing business with a company that is trying to hurt you, when you can simply work around them and take them out of the equation?
The significant problems we face cannot be solved by the same level of thinking that created them. -Einstein
Buy it, then return it. Let's face it, we can cry about fair use all we want, but the government isn't about to step in and anger some of their biggest tax-payers. Money talks; if you buy a CD you can't copy, return it. Tell them you won't buy a CD you can't exercise your rights to fair-use over. You take your concerns to the retailers; they'll take your concerns to the RIAA - democracy in motion. :P
noone, nowhere, and the RIAA will claim success at last! They have us right where they want us! Copy this!, you little ba$tard$! More like, Play this! you poor $uckers! Anyone else get this idea? HDTV ala emperors new clothes for CDs?
This mind intentionally left blank.
The KKK a bunch of sheetheads? You decide!
Granted, I don't care about country albums. However, I often rip solos from jazz albums and slow them down with a sound editor to pick out the solos. I guess I either have to go analog or just be SOL.
I wonder how long before someone finds a way around this. 24 hours at most
Except for the fact that your consumer-grade Karmen Hardon CD player sets the SCMS bit when you make a direct digital copy. Once that bit is set (and you do get one fair-use copy), you can't make any further copies. SCMS had been around since the mid-'80s; I'm surprised that it hasn't been mentioned here.
Something like the M-Audio Audiophile 2496 can be found for around $160 or so from DigitalConnection (cheaper than an SBLive 5.1 Plat), and you can toggle said SCMS bit on, or off, at will. Did I mention that it takes SPDIF in, and that it's a worthy card to consider anyway, if you're into even moderately high-end audio? (mmm, 24-bit dac, 96 khz sampling for recording...) For the average consumer, this is _the_ ultimate card for clean digital copies of these new CDs that are coming out.
First WalMart pressures record companies to change artwork on albums, i.e. on Nirvana's In Utereo album, the song "Rape Me" was changed to "Waif Me", before WalMart will carry those albums. (Side Note: What other albums if any have been modified?) And now I might not be able to listen to certain artist on my portable MP3 player. Definitely an interesting change of events.
I hope there is a way to track with albums have this copy protection on them so as I can avoid it. It will be intriguing to see if they - the RIAA - puts in on the covers: "featuring the new copy proof CD technology".
Silliness! What ever happened to the old letter written campaigns? Or even e-mail campaigns nowadays? Get people organized and lets send out a bunch of letters!
"If CDs were as hard to copy as DVDs or VHS tapes or even books, we would not be going through anything like what we're going through now with Napster or Gnutella." since when were DVDs and VHS tapes so hard to copy? That's the soulution, we need to go back to books!
i just climb trees, and look for rhythm everywhere.
Hopefully. he didn't use it because your link requires registration.
Dave Williams
Copy the CD to Cassette. But seriously, this copy protection stuff is facist as hell. How can you sell me something then tell me how I am allowed to use it? 99% of my Napstering is simply downloading stuff I have on vinyl so I can enjoy it at work.
Look, I don't pirate music, I burn MP3s to CDs to play on my RioVolt. BUT, if I can't play regular audio CDs on that same player, which is designed specifically to play audio CDs as well as MP3 disks, I will be annoyed at least.
I'm sure that all those people who bought high-end car stereos that use CDROM technology to augment their anti-skip mechanisms will be annoyed when the new CD they bought won't work in their year-old stereo.
Whether copying the CD is fair use or not, being able to play it in a device that is sold explicitly for the purpose of playing CD audio is fair use. Otherwise, all you have is a shiny coaster, and who wants to pay 15 bucks for that?
Sure, the recording industry can lock down the content in any way they see fit, which is the point of DataPlay. But, to lock down an existing format by rendering much high-end equipment worthless is a public-relations blunder of the highest order.
Illegitimi non carborundum
Does anyone remember the audio "notch" that was going to be placed in pre-recorded DATs to prevent D-A-D recordings? How long until they start recommending the same thing for CDs? (Although they can't kill the CD industry at this point, like they killed the DAT industry)
At least in the U.S.A, the blank media only have royalties if they are the "Audio CDR" types. You can't use CDRs in the Phillips home CD-copier unless they have special codes, so the standard 50-pack spindle CDs only can be burned on a PC.
This was a compromise worked out years ago, when Philips and others began working on consumer CD-copying technology. The industry realized they couldn't afford to piss off the millions of legitimate CD-R owners by levying extra taxes on them to pay the RIAA when the disks were most likely going to be used for writing archived porn or some such, not music.
Since then, though, it seems that most of my "newbie" friends use their CD burners exclusively to copy audio CDs. Time keeps on ticking tickin tickin...
Illegitimi non carborundum
It doesn't imply that the people producing it HAVE to make the product copyable...only that if the product is copyable, I can copy it, under certain circumstances.
-h-
How much time will pass before hardware firms rally in lawsuit, and how long before antitrust investigations get underway? Will Creative, for example, stand by while anti-fair-use and anti-competitive measures arbitrarily erode the market for their Nomad MP3 player? Will manufacturers of high-end audio components do nothing when their customers can't play music CDs through separate CD transport and DAC units? For that matter, how could such a thing be stopped? As long as I have a standard CD player with a TOSLINK output, I'll always have access to a pure digital stream. Weather or not US law can actually prevent these "copy protection" schemes, the flood of litigation will most definitely ensue. And what about companies that have a vested interest in both hardware and media? Will Sony, for example, put out CDs that cannot be used on their own hardware?
Piracy (as opposed to theft; they are NOT exactly the same) hurts copyright owners not because they no longer have as many copies they can sell (that's how theft hurts the victim) but because they no longer sell as many copies because some people pirate rather than buying. This is why copy protection of software SOMETIMES works, especially protection that makes copying impossible but doesn't keep the software from working. But more importantly, most heavily protected software (like, say, Quark or Media100) is the way its users make a living, so they WILL accept limitations (such as needing a computer with certain free ports for a hardware dongle) to be able to use the software.
:)
On the other hand, nobody buying a CD is making a living from that CD (usually; I'm talking about consumers here). People who find that these new CDs don't work in their new $500 car player, or worse, their $2500 laptop, are NOT going to replace those devices. They're going to return the CD, and certainly not buy any more CDs with that copy protection. Thus, the goal of the copyright holders, namely, to sell more CDs by not having people pirate them, is not going to be accomplished. Instead, people are going to not buy CDs EVEN if they might have bought them without the copy protection. While some may now buy the CDs (if they work in their players) who might have pirated before, some other people are going to NOT buy the CD when they might have before. I, for example, often buy CDs and then rip them to mp3 so I can play them in my livingroom mp3 'jukebox' (headless computer) or my car mp3 player, not to give pirate copies to other people. However, if I could no longer do this form of fair use, I WOULD NOT buy the CDs.
Thus, rather than selling more CDs, the industry will sell fewer CDs.
This same thing will happen if the industry tries to push new secure formats like DataPlay. Some users will like the new players and thus buy the new format, but if the old format is still available, more people will stick with it. And if the old format is NOT available, many people will simply not buy the music.
A hardware manufacturer selling, say, shovels, will probably make more money (with their thin margins) with 1000 people buying shovels and nobody stealing them, than with 10,000 people buying shovels and 10,000 more stealing shovels. On the other hand, a music company will make MORE money with 10,000 copies being sold and 10,000 copies being made of those (50% piracy) than they would with 1000 copies being sold and NO piracy.
In other words, for a company that is selling something that's copyable, like music, the amount of money they make has NOTHING to do with piracy and EVERYTHING to do with how many copies they sell. Piracy only hurts them in so far as it is an alternative to purchasing. I am assuming that the number of actual physical CDs that get stolen via shoplifting is irrelevant here.
So it is not in the industry's interest to ensure that nobody pirates their music, if that means fewer people buy it. Stopping piracy without gaining new buyers will not benefit the industry; stopping piracy while at the same time losing would-be customers because of incompatibilities will destroy the industry.
Which I hope happens
-- "Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything." -Joseph Stalin
Hello Did anybody notice that the cd is by Charlie Pride doing the late Jim Reeve's songs. Isn't that ironic? John
Even if the compatibility issues can be solved, the Slashdot crowd will protest that the very idea of copy protection infringes their fair-use rights. (The industry responds that fair use of music does not include the right to make entire backup CDs, and that consumers will still be able to make cassette copies.) Since when does fair use have to do with what media the content is being copied to? Let's see, copy a CD to a tape or a CD to a CD? why does fair use force us to downgrade our content? It doesnt .
Chicago2600.net more than a lifestyle, its a survival trait.
You would have to guess that a good amount of all music exists somewhere in some form of tradable mp3 format, including most stuff produced in the last 3 years. This seems like a rather lo-tech fix. Why didn't they come up with this before?
Anyway, this is just a sign of more things to come. A lot of people complain about how good things used to be, when you could 'borrow' CD's easily. You have to imagine that there will be some point where publishers will have complete control over their copyrights. Try looking at what that might look like. The article from this thread raises some interesting points:
---More subtly, the Sims Online will allow players to bookmark retail objects. For instance, if you see a cool chair at someone's house, you bookmark it. If you buy the chair, a commission flows back to the person from whom you bookmarked it, and the person from whom they bookmarked it, as well as the creator of that object. This motivates people to buy expensive stuff and throw parties. It also makes it economically attractive to buy one of every chair in the Sim universe and open a Chairs "R" Us showroom. Imagine a world where you could earn an Amazon-style affiliate commission for every product on your homepage - it makes retail into a massively multiplayer game.---
If you apply this, then the copyrights look more interesting. Also, music becomes more interesting. There is not only an emotional incentive to find and listen to good music, there is a subtle financial one.
IANAL, but I've noticed that everything I buy says "without even the implied warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose"
So, what would you argue?
I find it hard to argue any moral dillema against pirating a full version of software that is designed solely for the purpose of piracy.
Exactly; it's no worse than rear-ending a radar detector salesman's car, breaking into a locksmith's shop, or shooting a gun store clerk.
*g*
Seriously, though, I don't know if "solely for the purpose of piracy" is accurate. It occurs to me that if I wanted to publish just a few hundred copies of my own copy-protected CD-ROM, something like CloneCD would be the way to do it.
Anybody try mounting the suckers as a UDF filesystem?...
"...they may harpoon us, but they ain't gonna pick us up on no radar screen!"
What happens if you purchase one of these disks, and then your player (whatever type it is) will not play it? I don't know of any music stores that would let me return a CD. And, what if you buy from a store that won't give you a refund? Do I even have any rights in this case?
According to this url, it seems they got the co-operation of the cd-rw drive makers for one of their standards breaking technologies. This is absoloutely unacceptable to purposely sell broken hardware.
Maybe you should buy an MP3 player, rip all the good tracks into MP3's, store them on one or two CD's, and just take the MP3 CD's to school.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
Ok so they mentioned that we wwould still be able to copy it to cassette tapes. Well cassette is about the sam equility as MP3 anyway. Once again they loose. Even if I am wrong ( I only put about 5 sec worth of thought into this ) someone will within two weeks find a hack, write up the code, stick it up on freenet and bam back to were we are now. I can promise that I will be one of the first in line to buy the disk, but only so I might also be the first to get past copy protection. I am sure I will probably not be the first as some insider will more than likely do it first. In short I think at best it will last for 2 weeks before it is hacked, and 2 weeks after that it will spread to the masses outside of slashdot. Hack on.
what?
Sorry, I think there's maybe a couple of hundred competent coders who would buy it just to hack it. About equivalent to the weekly sale in one southern WalMart.
While I think those who can should do so (and I hope you find a very tractable hole in the anti-burn tech), I'd hope the mainstream population would boycott this particular disk ("we wont give up our right to backup", etc) to express the outrage of the cd-burner userbase to the record companies. Perhaps we can spread the ugly rumor that the anti-burn stuff creates unhealthy but subliminal sub-sonic audio inducements to buy CDs which (with a little sensationalist media coverage) will scare the general public away from listening to it (and radio stations from playing it). Comment?
So taking that into account, there will be no need for Rip-Proof CD-Rs because the RIAA wants Napster to use Opt-In filtering. Voilà, now Charlie Pride doesn't have to worry about his songs being on Napster, and there is no need for Rip-Proof CDs.
.sig: Open Source, Open Mind
I have 2 Issues with the idea of making non-burnable CD's.
First, these people (RIAA ect...) are guilty of presumption of guilt. They are assuming that every person who burns a CD is going to give a free copy to their friend. Well although this is the case sometimes, it is not always true.
Second, if all CD's are made this way then then i will never again buy a CD because the only cd player i own (besides the one in my car) is in a computer. What a great marketing plan: make it so people can't listen to your music.
But I do see the point of the record companies and i think that i have a good idea. I think that they should sell 2 versions of every CD. 1 version is not burnable and the other is, but cost a few dollors more. This solution would make everyone happy. The record companies would be makng money on people buring CD's.
"Sniff Packets, Not Glue"
Man, ain't that the truth. Actually, the absolutely most obscenely rich kids at my school steal the most stuff. Usually, they just throw it away afterwards, or something. I really don't understand them.
Friends don't let friends use multiple inheritance.
why are these organizations allowed to exist in the first place? don't they conform to the standard definition of 'cartel,' ie: a group of similar independent companies who join together to control prices and limit competition (Cambridge International Dictionary of English) which i believe is currently illegal?
There are 2 different types of offenses, violating access control and "copy" control (measures "protecting" exclusive rights). Access control isn't really copyright, but it is part of the law. The definition there for circumvention is: "to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; ".
Okay the CD copy restriction technology does not encrypt/scramble, so a "hack" won't decrypt/descramble. One can already get access to the work directly. The work just has defects designed to make accessing it difficult. No lock, just garbage that makes a CD-ROM puke. Locking content and making your content exploit a bug in CD-ROM firmware are 2 different things. Hmm, deliberately exploiting a bug, could be illegal under anti-"hacking" statues, especially if a CD-ROM damages itself trying to read it...
Next, effectively controls access: "effectively controls access to a work'' if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work."
Nope, the work is right there in front of you. Adding stuff to/messing with it to confuse CD-ROM's which are smart enough to see it and get hosed, whereas CD players are too dumb to care is indeed clever (albeit it detestable and unethical). That hardly qualifies as requiring special steps to get the access. MPAA did a MUCH better job with DVD by using CSS. Even a 1-byte XOR would be better, legally. The RIAA could not change the format retroactively and keep backward compatibility (which the citizens who purchase music demand - note: MPAA did not have this problem, they controlled the format BEFORE its adoption). So they do the ONLY thing they can do - which is clever tricks. You can't put a lock on something if legacy devices don't grok keys. So you look for the next best thing.
Now the copy control bypassing prohibitions: to ''circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure'' means avoiding, bypassing, removing, deactivating, or otherwise impairing a technological measure; and (B) a technological measure ''effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title'' if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, prevents, restricts, or otherwise limits the exercise of a right of a copyright owner under this title. We could get nailed on circumvention theoretically. However the effective protection clause helps us (encryption being weak ala CSS may not, but this is different).
Does the measure protect a "right"? NO. It stops ACCESS, not COPYING. COPYING is an exclusive "right" (monopoly), not ACCESS. Copyright does not grant an ACCESS monopoly. The only access prohibition were dealt with above.
The device prohibitions depend on facilitating those violations, so if you aren't illegally circumventing, a device you use won't be considered an illegal cirumvention device.
Disclaimer: I am neither a lawyer, nor Judge Kaplan.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
But, if only one person copies the cd and then uploads/shares it, it will be all over the world in less than 24hours (especially if it is a popular cd)
---- Thus is the power of the internet
I've got an old Denon cd-player that's about 7 years old, but I don't suppose it could play these new CDs. If you can't read the digital signals off the disc with a cd-rom drive, then how would a old cd-player that doesn't have the decryption software on it? (or however they're doing this)...seems kind of stupid to me
So I have begun bringing up copy prevention (not protection) in every conversation where it is appropriate. I mention XP, SDMI, the Sound Blaster Audigy (encrypts PCI traffic), the Dataplay discs, and now this. And what is the reaction? From those who listen to music they didn't overpay for and those who don't alike, the reaction is "Wow. That's shitty." Often in those exact words. I then tell them that I (a Win2K user) don't plan to "upgrade" and will move to Linux when it better meets my needs. I explain that I won't buy this shit. They agree. I think many will follow through.
Anyway, most of them are (I think) above average computer users, but they can all understand that all of these prevent them from getting to *their* music (not the RIAAs. They paid for it and they know it).
At some point in the discussion they raise the point that "It'll get hacked soon enough." Then I paint the pessimistic (maybe not?) picture of WinXP not copying the files, not playing through an insecure player, not giving sound to an insecure driver, and that driver not giving sound to an insecure card. And then I say, so maybe you could hack the WinXP kernel. But they quickly realize that's a LOT harder or impossible in any practical sense.
So, they realize how shitty it is. And the next time the topic comes up, I mention it again. IN PASSING. I don't go off on a rant (or try not to) until and unless they ask a question, and then I answer it. And guess what? the response to a brief comment is usually "oh yeah, that shittiness" or "huh?" in which case I explain somewhat more, and they ask more questions. No one I mentioned this to said "yeah, whatever."
GET THE WORD OUT. It can be done. The consumers don't want this and they know it. They don't read Slashdot, but a large number of them know someone who does. TELL PEOPLE. It can work.
Please, before it's to late, GET OFF YOUR ASSES AND DO SOMETHING. it's not even all that hard. And I'll bet it does more than a letter to your rep (do keep them up though.. and vote.. but do this too).
OK, I'm done ranting now. bye.
i had no idea compact diskettes were flammable. i can only imagine what horrendous deathtraps aol cd factories must be.
People abused the hell out of the "fair use" provision and have basicaly been stealing music for some time now. No no, don't bitch at me about right and wrong, YOU STOLE THE DAMN MUSIC, YOU BROKE THE LAW, GET OVER IT.
_YOU_ where wrong, _YOU_ fucked up, and guess what, now _YOU_ are being punished. Hell, now there is a new idea for ya, getting PUNISHED for your wrongfull actions! Shit, stop acting like a group of whining babies, you downloaded napster, you downloaded music, and you didn't buy the CD now did ya? Oh sure, you bought a FEW cd's, but hell, you downloaded ALOT more then you bought.
Fair Use was designed so that you could copy a few tracks off and create your own Tape/CD/Whatever. ___NOT___ so you could copy it and put it on napster for millions to have access to. There is a difference between copying for personal use, and outright STEALING. Hell, even giving away stuff freely is stealing IF WHAT YOU ARE GIVING AWAY IS NOT YOURS TO GIVE. Theft is theft, get over it! Granted, the music industry is not going out of business any time soon, but then again neither is the US Goverment, doesn't mean you should go into fort knox and start stealing gold! Theft is Theft, plain and simple. You stole something, now your privledges are being taken away.
No no NO, don't bitch about them being a RIGHT. You DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO ILLEGIALY COPIED CD'S.
There is NOT A SINGLE PLACE where the U.S. constitution says:
"And Yee Shalts steal stuff, and then burn it to CD and sell of thou's CD's in order to pay for bandwidth to steal more stuff."
Sorry, not in there, not a single line of it. Fair Use also IS NOT COVERED when it comes to complete copying of stuff. In fact the CLOSEST thing we have to actualy fair use that applies to copying something for public distrobution is the copying of PARTIAL works and even then it is ONLY for some sort of academic/legal/educational/etc purposes. Napster is NOT fair use. Learn it, deal with it.
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
Emanuel Kronitz, chief operating officer of TTR, which says two major labels are testing its software. "It's a major technological challenge, which is why we believe that what we've done -- mostly beating it -- is not trivial."
Mostly beating it? I don't think that's much to be proud of. Fact is, Al Gore mostly beat George Bush...but really...how far did it get him?
I can't believe after 20 years of the Reagan-Reagan-Bush-Clinton-Clinton criminals that any American has any respect for the law anymore anyway.
Think the laws are unfair? Break them. Break them repeatedly. It's your duty. Just because it's the law doesn't make it just.
"Reactionaries must be deprived of the right to voice their opinions; only the people have that right." - Mao
Oh, that's not what you meant :)
I'm not 100% sure but couldn't one guarantee they couuld beat this by writing a new set of CDRom drivers. Have an optional setting that makes your CDRom "act" like a CD Player?
Ouch
Sorry? Did I hear you say: "using laptops on planes"? I though that made them fall out of the sky.
What I still don't understand is: how much this copy protection scheme is going to cost (what will be the price tag on the final product)
If Linus or anyone else in the linux community wrote a driver to compensate for the bit could he or the community be sued?
....( I know this sounds korny but imagine how easly a corrupt lawyer can make this sound to an ignorant jury about those evil hackers. ) Remember that the majority of the public and zdnet think decss is only for ripping illegal movies and its not used to watch them. Again the RIAA lwyer could state this to frieghten the jury.
I bet the RIAA could make a case that the cd is copyrighted and the driver would fall into a circumvention device under the DMCA. I do not think we can do anything at all to change this unless the DMCA is ruled unconstitutional. A corrupt lawyer, an ignorant jury and judge can be persuaded quite easily if
A.) Linux is used for the majority for warez ftp sites ( This is now true )
B.)Decss was a linux program
C.) Linux has no support for cprm drives nor does it have support for intel's pentiumIII id ( again a lawyer can point out the only reason you would want to hide the pentiumII ID is to hide our identity. Hmm I wonder why someone would want to hide there ID unless there about to commit an illegal act.
D.) Hollywood makes hackers into crackers in all the movies and this has influenced the public on who they think a hacker really is. This is why the public was easily suaded in MPAA vs Decss.
I know that the RIAA will do just about anything to keep this new form of copyright protection from being compromised.
I bet the RIAA won't even sue.
I bet they will throw the programmer into prison for like 20 years and make sure he has no access to any computers for life. Remember this is hollywood were dealing with here.
Also an individual can not aford to defend themsevles while naspter had a few billion dollars to do just that. This is why the crearos of napster are not in jail and why it took months to shut them down.
http://saveie6.com/
The section of the dmca is section 1201 wich states that any attempt to reverse engineer a "copyright protection scheme is illegal". It doesn't matter what the circumstance is and even if its fair use. You are right with the supreme court. But the DMCA was a sneaky loophole to make a way to circumvent fair use. So in actuallity you stil have fair use but you can not undo a "copyrighted protection scheme" weither its fair use or not. I guess our personal electronics are our new Trial, judge, and jury taht go around the supreme court decsions. Very sneaky trick by the RIAA/MPAA.
Anyway according to the home recording act of 1992 it is perfectly legal to have CD Paranoia because there are perfectly legal purposes for it. Under the DMCA it is no longer legal. Or is illegal if the "circumvetion device" can circumvent a copyrighted work wether fair use or not.
This is a sad world we live in. Also it is still fully legal to reverse engineer something as long as it is not coprighted.
Amazing what happens when soft and hard money contribtutions go up TEN FOLD since 1992 when the home recording act was written isn't it ?
http://saveie6.com/
THIS man violated the DMCA via free speech!
He menioned how to circumvent a copyright on a cd that he owned, and on a computer he owned, AND HE ACTUALLY EXPECTED TO DO WHAT HE WANTED TO DO ON HIS OWN MACHINE WITHOUT THE RIAA'S PERMISSION! You know a post can be considered a circumvention device as well as linking.
What the world is coming too! I bet SOny music and time warner will no go bankrupt just like they predicted when napster hit the scenes. You know the RIAA does't make enough money and how can people have free thought and speech at the expensive of those poor and starving media companies!
http://saveie6.com/
My -2 "flamebait" (-2 it's so bad?!?!?) that started this is a bit terse, but a well-reasoned description of what's going on. This nonsentient reply is given a plus one?!?!?
Some of those posters are right. When you disagree with the prevailing "wisdom" of poverty-stricken, theft-oriented students who run the show around here, they do nail you. And there is nothing in this paragraph that is inaccurate or not applicable to this topic, either. Go figure.
I envision some 19 year old sitting in his college dorm thinking he's some intellectual king of the world, unable to separate his emotional attachment to an issue (pweeze don't take away my hundreds of dollars of fwee music) and converts it into an auto-adaption mental kit bearing no resemblence to good, or even functional understanding of actual reasoned discourse.
I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
A snapshot of an advance copy of the new "burnproof"
Charley Pride release has been leaked... photo here
Animetal = Anime + Metal - band that plays heavy metal covers of popular Anime songs.
Well if I can't play a "copy protected" CD on the player in my computer at work, I'll download the MP3 instead of buying the CD. Dohhh!!!!
Instead of keeping 10% of the poeple who might have pirated from doing so, they're insuring that 60% or 70% of them will!
Now I understand why record executives get the big bucks. A normal person couldn't think up a scheme this stupid, it takes someone SPECIAL!
Of course Napster is actually much needed free advertising and airplay for any artist that isn't in the top 100. Like everyone else, I search for, my favorate artists on Napster, then check out the collections of people who have similar tastes to myself. The record companies aren't bright enough to come up with a marketing aid as effective as Napster themselves, but they ARE "bright" enough to ruin it for themselves. Why is it that people too dumb to breath run the world?
Rocky Squirrel
Sounds like you work for the RIAA.
Well RIAA corporate lackey Here is message for you and your employers:
Don't tread on me.
(read some american history for a refernce to the message above)
Don't buy any CD that you cannot digitally copy. If you buy one by accident take it back to the store. Write letters indicating your policy to the distributors. Encourage others widely to do the same.
If you keep buying this krap they will keep producing it. Only buy what works for you.
I couldn't bring myself to support any artist that uses this kind of technology with their recorded music.
If I couldn't rip and copy CD music off the disc to MP3 or another CD, I'd lose one of my favorite hobbies. I actually pay for my music. In the last six months alone, I've purchased at least 50 CDs, at $15-25 a piece (counting double disc sets). I rip songs to make my own CDs with the "best of" and "favorites" and to make MP3's for continuous listening. I only have one CD player at home - a single disc portable. If I want to listen to music without changing the CD every 40-60 minutes then I fire up the MP3 player and load up my 10GB of ripped songs.
I know I'm not the only person that actually pays for music. And I know I'm not the only person that has 200+ CDs and doesn't have a jukebox changer. And I know I'm not the only person that likes having custom made CD mixes.
I hope they are paying you well to aid them in destroying our freedom.
So Ill have a cheeseburger but not a flamegrilled one if I'm way off the mark here :)
Is it not possible for a large collection of music purchasers to take legal action against the industry for the restriction/prevention/infringment of fair use?
Perhaps this is something the EFF would like to get involved in. But (as with everything like this such as DECSS) it needs people to get off their butts and do something rather than just ranting about it (The PFJ in monty pythons life of Brian anyone?)
....but all they found there was a man who repeatedly said that nothing was true, but was later found to be lying.
Hi, Reading down the threads, it doesn't surprise me that this is happening. If Napster would have never had reared it's ugly head and offended and pissed off so many of the "big boys" this situation may have never have seen the light. Then again, maybe it would have come eventually, just not at this time. Who knows? This is going to piss off the makers of CDR's and people like MusicMatch Jukebox and some other software vendors!! This is going to really mess with sales not to mention client base>>"Why should I spend $30.00 on a program that I can't even use for what it was originally intended for?" and I agree. I own both MusicMatch in Win98 and in Linux (though it has quite a way to go). But this mess is going to directly effect all OS's and that's going to inevitably affect the vendors as to whether to continue to program higher versions of their software, then there is the clients and potential clients decisions as to whether to purchase the CDR's or the software because of the restrictions set into place. If folks like Napster would have observed the licensing and respected the artists rights to monies owed them through the licensing then this would have, probably NOT have happened. I NEVER liked Napster. It was a sneaky, dirty way to obtain music. I certainly don't claim to be the most honest person walking around, but in this case I don't blame the industry for suing them and in a way, I don't blame the industry for re-setting standards and preventing other pirtates to infringe on those standards. The unfortunate thing about this mess is that it also messes up everyone..i.e. Not being able to play audio cd's in the car player or PC. Now that gets under my skin, quite a bit. I am no geek, but I am entitled to my .02 cents and I hope you guts figure out a way around this.
Thanks for hearing me.
RAMWolf44
RAMWolff
Tons of us will race out and buy a Charlie Pride CD (even though we abhor country music) simply because we want to try to break it. We want to see whether or not it's really burnproof, and whether we can be the first to figure out the easy way around it.
You could grab the audio data as the CD is playing. Then burn it on a blank CD. Then you have a version of the CD that is not 'burn proof'.
There is no such thing as a 'burn proof' CD, if you want to listen to a CD then it has to give out data, then anyone (Most likely one of you Slashdotters) can grab it.
-I will never be driven into grabbing music from the air.
REAL friends don't let freinds use Microsoft
If it won't play on your computer, put it it your CD player and hook up the speaker (or headphone) to your computer and grab it then burn it. (Or just burn it.)
-I will never be reduced to grabbing music from the air.
(I got it right that time)
Email me
REAL friends don't let freinds use Microsoft
Obviously, the person who wrote this article doesn't realize how easy it is to rip a DVD . . .
Whew. Longwinded, eh?
Anyway, it's only a matter of time (days, probably hours) before one of the cd-ripper authors has a fix for the defective CDs.
--Dan
Let's try getting your head out of your ass first. Okay, now that it's out, try to use dd to rip an audio CD. What's that? It doesn't work? That's right, it doesn't. Maybe you should try things before saying they work.
Hey jackass -- did I say it would work? That's right, I didn't.
cdparanoia is just one program among many that can rip audio tracks.
The enemies of Democracy are
Oops - did not mean to post that last one about MidBar as "anonymous coward". Be seeing you.