Slashdot Mirror
CD burning Will Never Be The Same
mooneyguy writes: "Reuters is reporting that EMI has just announced a partnership with Roxio (you know, the "toast" and "Easy CD Creator" folks). They have also bought a minority stake in the company. The potential impact here is scary. Roxio's Duea is quoted: 'Our goal is to enable consumers to legally download and record music to CD in a consumer-friendly manner while fairly compensating copyright owners and creators...' What changes now are forthcoming in their software to force this "fair compensation"? And how far will those changes penetrate throughout the industry? This can't be good for the consumer. Roxio has also come forth with a press release announcing this partnership. In it they announce "EMI will work to develop ways for consumers to easily record authorized music onto recordable CDs" and, even better, 'We want to continue to work with leaders in the music industry, like EMI, to not only provide for the protection of their digital content, but also to enable record companies and artists to get paid for burning.' Yikes!" Anybody else notice how stores like Walmart and Target are pushing the Music CD-Rs more and more? Hmmmm.
Roxio is far from the only available tool. Shuffle off to another brand - vote with your feet.
of course i use gnome to toast my cd's. whats bad about this stuff? maybe more users who decide for linux because they can't do their work on windoze. btw: please don't support the current rightwing austrian governmet. haider is a fascist. http://www.stophaider.com/
I am...including four words in fine print at the bottom of the screen near the end:
"Stop ripping ME off"
Can you explain to me why tapes are 8 bucks and cds are AT LEAST double that for the exact same album at the same time? The record companies are the ones stealing the music, I pay for it when im buying it from the Indies. Hell, I usually chip in a few extra bucks for random encouragement so that that poor 20 year old musician can have a beer. Oh, and again, this CD was 10 bucks at a FREE live performance. Wanna explain that 18$ cd to me again? Wanna explain why they shut off my.mp3.com? (Yeah, I know the legal reasons, but I don't agree with them. my.mp3.com was a personal jukebox as far as im concerned, and they took it a way.) Wanna explain why one of my favorite bands couldnt play THEIR OWN music for a year, and had to buy it back from the company that was busy protecting the ARTISTS copyright? Wanna explain why they keep trying to kill fair use, even in front of the fucking congress?!? Wanna explain the percentages that acually get back to the creators of the music youre ripping me off for? THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS I REMEMBER EVERY TIME I DOWNLOD AN MP3 OF A SONG I DON'T ALREADY HAVE. ITS BECAUSE OF ACTIONS LIKE THESE THAT I FIND IT NECESSARY TO PROTECT MY MONEY IN DOING WHAT I CAN TO CHEAT AND DESTROY A COMPANY THAT DOSENT CLAIM TO BE LIMITING MY RIGHTS, SOMEHOW.
(sorry bout the excessive caps, as you can see, this pisses me off a bit.)
The music industry isn't owed one red cent for Fair Use of purchased CDs, no matter how much they might hate the concept of Fair Use. And I certainly hope you're not going to argue that the record companies are entitled to more money every time you need to back up your hard disk or archive digital camera pictures.
This could be another chance to get "the masses" to give Linux a try. Create a distro on a CD that a Win-whatever box could boot from. This CD would have Linux, a pretty GUI (KDE or Gnome) and the software needed to burn a CD. Maybe, if ripping becomes problematic under M$, add ripping apps too. All the Win user has to do is reboot with the CD in to burn all they want. They get a taste of Linux (and their CD burnt), and we get more converts to the One True Way. It's win win all around. Something like this could work when ever the "evil empires" try to lock something else down. Cpt_Kirks
It's like the bozo bit on the Mac. There's a long historical precedent of all copy programs ignoring it. EMI can no more jump up and suddenly demand it enforced than the Beethoven descendants can demand royalties for "their" music.
Complete goddamned sons of bitches
make usefull software, i pay for music CD's i like doing that (supporting artist, blah blah), but don't make everything require digital identities , passwords, registration codes, verivication, regio codes, activation codes, harddisks with copy protection, blah blah, and on and on. Completly fucking useless ebooks, which stop just short instantly electrocuting you for even thinking about lending it to someone else. Bah you make me sick. I fucking look down on you.
And no, I don't fucking want your upgraded CD's (DVD audio, yeah right ass if..), and I also refuse to start hiring music, either i buy it or i don't. You can stick the rest of your services where the sun don't shine.
What's next? CD phone home? Needing a goddamn 1000 Mhz proccessor to decode and play a fucking audio CD?
So in short: FUCK THE HELL OFF
piracy isn't going to stop (ever i might add. You can believe me on this one, even though i'm just a lousy anonymous coward) whatever the hell you do about it. I don't like it either, but i don't like you money groping bitches even less.
$7 - $10
Reasonable here would be $1-4. Remeber; you are paying for the manufacture and transport (as you said) outside of an artist singing - what costs are there? Remember: The RIAA is outmoded by technology - and they are going to go kicking and screaming about. We have to remain steadfast... they are a dinosaur, let them die.
CDR Music Media already has tax levied against it. All media designed for music has a tax on it. What I wondering if you buy CDR Music media, can you legally d/l songs off the internet and burn them to a cd since I already paid a tax to the RIAA?
(1) There are places on this earth where [pick any law in nay nation] does not apply.
(2) These places can set up web sites that access just as easly as yahoo.com.
(3) You do not rule the world
(4) Deal.
>Let me see here ... your new cd burning software will not burn songs unless they are digitally signed. In what way is this wrong?
What if I'm a musician trying to burn music I've created onto a CD? Just like in the 80s, when the music business had manufacturers of cheaper DATs cripple copying, so musicians had to spend twice as much for DATs that would make unlimited copies, my right to record my own music would be violated. Part of the dirty secret of the copyright wars is that the big guys want to prevent the little guys from producing their art themselves.
Ever heard of SCMS? It's a flip-bit copy/no-copy system implemented on DAT and MiniDisc. It is the direct result of the Audio Home Recording Act, and certainly illegal to bypass under the DMCA.
I think the intent is that a system is "effective" if it's widely used (such as with Macrovision, also DMCA protected), not that it's good. Obviously the widely used part is a problem with standard red book CDs.
This is for music burning kiosks in stores. Go in, slide your credit card through the slot, make your selections and get a custom CD all your own.
Come off your high horse. This is about putting anti-copying restrictions in place against everyone, including people who have already paid for their music and want to exercise their Fair Use rights. Backing up a CD you own or making a compilation CD from CDs you own are both examples of Fair Use that could be interfered with by this latest scheme.
Does the name Thomas Jefferson ring a bell? He believed in freedom, but certainly not in anything like the Ayn Rand speech you are giving. Among other things, he wrote that ideas could not, in nature, be a subject of property. U.S. copyright law is grounded in the philosophy of him and others like him who believed that all published works must ultimately belong to the public, that Government may grant limited-time monopolies as an incentive to produce more works, but that those monopolies are not a recognition of any form of natural property right.
I personaly have used the shorten (.shn) formatt a few times for getting concerts off the E-tree (http://www.etree.org/). the compression formatt shrinks wavs to about half the original without any degredation what so ever. So with a good broadband connecion, which I have, a 300 meg file isn't that big a deal.
I also want to point out that this is all from bands that allow taping, and there's a bunch of great stuff out there thats totaly legal. From the E-tree's home page...
"You can find nearly every band that allows taping in the jambands community on etree.org, including Phish, The Grateful Dead, String Cheese Incident, The Slip, Medeski, Martin & Wood, Umphrey's McGee, The Big Wu, Amfibian and The New Deal."
and there's more bands there and of course there are other similar places too.
I have a ton of mp3's and frankly I really don't care about them all that much because of the sound degredation. sure it was fun too collect them, but in retrospect, I wouldn't do it again. Not only because I feel kind of guilty about what I now see as stolen, but because the quality is just not there. Even the files I have made myself (I've used several, my fave being Lame with the Razor front-end) just don't sound as good on my system, I can easily hear the difference. But I probley still won't part with the ones I have....
"live music is better, bumper stickers should be issued" Neil Young
Come on. Slashdot has been like this for ages.
"Sony is in the RIAA. They're evil. Boycott them."
"Sony is in the MPAA. They're evil. Boycott them."
"Oh, look, Sony has the PS2! I've got to go buy one right now!"
This has obviously been the next logical step in the evolution of CD-R. For the longest time, people (especially here on /.) have been debating the pros and cons of taxes on the CD-R drvies, or taxes on the actual CD-R's which are meant to help compensate those musicians (read greedy RIAA). Obviously, that's a long way away (and likely to never happen), so the next logical step is software control, and here it comes via Easy CD Creator. Too bad there's a lot more better writing programs out there that are free.
They do accomplish their goal here though. they are slowly making it harder for the average Joe to pirate music. Generally, I don't think that the RIAA, MPAA and whoever else really cares if the whole slashdot crowd pirates their music (we're the geeks, we'll always have the ability to pirate). But when Joe Blow sitting next to you has to so much as scratch his head to pirate music, they've won.
Sorry for posting anonymous coward :)
Easy CD Creator adamantly refuses to burn to audio-only CD-Rs anyway, and has since at least the later Adaptec versions. It's a horrid piece of shit.
--
Forget Napster. Why not really break the law?
"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?"
My primary concern is always, "I make my own music. Do I have the technical and legal capability to record and copy it to industry-standard media that I can distribute?"
Well, I already _have_ a CD burner, and even if all future CD writers refused to write a byte without me paying money for authorization to burn a _specific_ _RIAA_ song, I would still have my CD burner, and there are others out there if mine broke.
Plus, Red Book is a very well-established format, and there's so much of it out there that it's impossible to deprecate at this point. It's only just gotten to the point where quality rivals top-end analog systems: modern dithering is a thing of wonder. So not only can I be confident that I will be able to find a (not necessarily new!) CD burner, but I will also have the capacity to burn disks that are consumer-ready. CD audio's going to be supported for a _long_ time. Digital means you can support a lot of different formats- someday we'll have 27 terabyte disks that also play all DVD formats and _also_ play good old Audio CDs. It's just too easy and useful to add the support, to skip it. That means that all future disk-based playback decks are likely to support the format I can write.
This article is alarming, but it's a false alarm. If they do that it'll be about as commercially successful as pay-per-download Napster.
They'd have to mobilize legislation and basically destroy anyone who makes an unrestricted burner or unrestricted burning software. There are way too many other purposes for a burner to make that remotely feasible. They're NOT just for music CDs- and the standard Red Book is not a restricted format. Those music CDs are for _standalone_ burners that are intentionally crippled, the playing back needs no such special media to work.
It's meme time again: assuming that we _have_ already got the word out that 'music' CDRs are simply CDRs to work with crippleware standalone burners (pay more, for no extra functionality or fidelity AT ALL), we now have to also get the word out that the new Toast is merely a 'downgrade' taking away functionality that was previously there. And I can't wait to see exactly how they intend to implement this! Should be good for a laugh.
This is assuming they even get that far.
If _I_ was EMI, here's what I'd do. I'd figure out some way of pushing the _existing_ software out there- bundle it, price-cut it, whatever- with NO restriction, but with a timebomb built into it. Then, at some future time, the software switches to a mode where in order to burn an audio CD or audio track, it does an analysis (fingerprint) of the audio and refers to an online verification site that charges you. If you don't pay and get the verification, no burn! This also has the advantage that if YOU make music, you no longer have the capability to burn your own CDs. Better get signed with EMI if you expect to hear yourself on a CD boy! This would be not a side-effect but an intended effect of the authorisation process. For more fun, you can have the burner refuse to burn the other record companies' songs, and only make CDs from EMI, so you'd have to get five burners! :D
But then I _am_ a complete bastard when I set my mind to it :)
Problem 1 is GOOD. This is a GOOD THING! Please oh please, let them do this! The only real danger is that the big five _will_ hold together as a cartel and cooperate! I would much rather they fight and cause hardware vendors to release misleadingly named special crippled devices (How about the "Complete Music Collection Initiative CD Burner"? Will only burn EMI's releases, for a small payment. Anything else, no go...)
We should _beg_ them to do this. It would totally destroy the commercial potential of those devices, those burners, those initiatives. If we can get the Big Five backbiting each other and using the technological restrictions ON EACH OTHER, we'll have it made. That would backfire viciously and do them considerable damage...
GO FOR IT ROXIO! Make your burner so it will only burn EMI content at a dollar a song! Release a different model with different firmware for each of the Big Five, collect the whole set! Make consumers have to learn which multinational conglomerate really owns Prawn Song or Swan Song or whatever little vanity label that's supposed to look all indie and stuff! RIP OFF THE VEIL!
*G* *G* *G* *G* *G* (oh, how I hope they're fools enough to do this...)
It's going to be impossibly hard to keep _you_ from having the capability to burn your CDs, as long as you have a fairly minor ability to hunt down the proper tool for it. The concern is more for your Aunt Mary who only uses AOL and doesn't understand these things. It would be nice if she, too, had the capacity to make mix CDs without being penalized for not being as savvy as you. Think of it as consumer protection.
The conclusion is there is NO demand for 'music' CDRs. ANY presence of 'music' CDRs in stores is a scam. The whole concept is a scam from the beginning, and if anyone suggests they 'sound better' they need a quick refresher on digital audio (technically, what would affect the sound would be burst errors, and 'music' CDRs offer NO advantage whatsoever on that score)
The only reason 'music' CDRs are in the stores at all, much less being (at some times) the ONLY brand name CDRs you can buy (I've seen this in Radio Shack at times) is because _somebody_ is pushing them on the channel, and you're seeing them because some people are smart enough or price-sensitive enough to buy the 'data' kind and use that. Surprise surprise, it works perfectly (expect computer CD burners to begin refusing to burn audio onto 'data' CDs... but the trick is, how's the burner gonna know the difference? It's the software that would know).
When most people would rather buy 'data' for cheaper, and don't want to buy 'music', the stores end up with lots of 'music' CDRs sitting around, which is what you see. You may even end up buying them if you're desperate for media and there's no 'data' left. But really, it would be better if you left the 'music' CDRs to rot on the shelf, and walked out of the place.
After asking the management if they have any 'data' CDRs, maybe asking them to carry more of the 'data' kind and noting that they do double duty as audio CDs. But don't expect to have your request listened to... these guys are all pretty armtwisted. Don't make the error of thinking we have a free market here :) it's all too easy to control. Next time you're in the store, _count_ how many 'data' and how many 'music' there are. See if you're offered the choice of 'music' CDR, or going to find another store hoping they too are not 'out of stock'. Which is a nice euphemism for "We're not allowed to carry too many of those because people buy them instead of the music CDRs".
Out of curiosity, does anyone working in retail have any idea of the ordering requirements? For instance, I am wondering if at any time the music CDRs are BUNDLED- as in, the store HAS to buy equal amounts of each to do business with the supplier. That would cause the result we see. What's it look like from the viewpoint of store inventory and purchasing? Anybody have hard data here? Maybe there's price breaks if you buy a certain amount of 'music' CDRs?
When you combine these things, it becomes very easy to download a music file and burn an audio CD of it. It's also easy to take a microphone and record your baby's first words and burn an audio CD of it. The permissible uses are just too wide-ranging- it'd be impossibly hard to stamp out all the methods used to copy RIAA stuff, so they have to focus on the specific businesses that are out there obviously doing things with RIAA stuff without asking.
The only difference in 'music' CDRs is the price, and the fact that there's a small additional area with data to enable crippleware standalone CD writers to be authorised. If you have a player that doesn't work with audio CDs from CDRs, it won't work with 'music' CDRs either. There's no performance gain.
Or would you prefer the consumer NOT to be told to take advantage of the freedom and flexibility of digital media? 'sitdown-shutup-consume'? That's fine, but I think 'rip-mix-burn' has more sales appeal, frankly >:)
You _cannot_ have a new generation of CD players refuse to play 'data' CDs, because that would make them also refuse to play all legacy CDs. The extra information is for consumer standalone _burners_. Players don't care about that part.
You can cripple burners, but an uncrippled burner will produce discs that will play on all players, excepting those that can't read the dye layer. The difference is the price and the ability to work with crippleware standalone burners- and possibly with a new generation of PC software/burner combinations.
I don't think you can block CD writing in the burner itself- I think you have to control the software, too. Even with a crippleware burner that's ready to check for the 'music' header area, the software will still have to check for that and give thumbs-up/thumbs-down. Hence, EMI/Roxio. And much good may it do them... ;)
This implicit assumption that the only audio recording anyone wants to do is to record big-name pop music is arrogant, rude, and obviously designed to destroy the small-time up-and-coming labels. This reminds me of the way corps are portrayed in Cyberpunk-genre sci-fi. I used to think that stuff was fiction.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
I have zero confidence in the industry's ability (or more important, their willingness) to produce a solution that repsects this fair use type of copying. Those a**holes would love to make fair use a thing of the past. If they can't do it by changing the law, they'll do it by ruining all the available tools.
Normally, that wouldn't matter. I'd just say, "Screw them, I'll use my own burning software". The specs are public, there's a plethora of CD burner software. But the badly worded DMCA will make those tools become illegal because they "circumvent" a protection scheme, even if that protection scheme wasn't invented until after the fact, and even if that protection scheme is so badly implemented that ignoring it is acutally the default if your software wasn't written to notice it.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
read a music cd in, do a cddb lookup, and then burn a copy with CD-TEXT? I've been looking for something to do this forever.. I've been using cdrdao for about 3-4 years because cdrecord couldn't burn tracks without gaps, dunno if that's changed..
thanks
-o
I have a DVD player that only has one read head. It doesn't officially support CD-Rs, although I have some green Maxell discs that I can play on it if there are no marks or scratches on the surface. CD-RWs will not work at all. Will these "music" CD-Rs be any better? I've always thought that these were just about marketing and making extra money (they seem to be 2-3x the price of an ordinary CD-R).
Companies that make alliances with Microsoft get screwed. Companies that get bought by Microsoft do just fine.
As an example. Microsoft is planning on bundling their own CD burning software with Windows XP. Can you imagine what this will do to the value of Roxio's CD burning software? Somehow I can't imagine that the alliance with Microsoft worked out well for Roxio.
I repeat. Companies that make alliances with Microsoft get screwed.
The only response to all of the systems that will restrict your fair use (and I don't know if this scheme does) is to keep yer old stuff in working order! For once obsolescence(sp?) may be a GOOD thing, because they can't add copy-protect nonsense to the stuff you already own. For new releases you'll be stuck though, so buy everything you want now! Hmm, maybe there's a business idea in there somewhere... sit on a bunch of current non-protected media so old folk can update their collections without buying the whole thing today... sort of media escrow..
Nah, I'll just have a beer.
The revolution will NOT be televised.
Packaged into your choice of mahogany, oak or tye-dyed Grateful Dead t-shirt...
Maybe we could get some insurance company to write a policy to go along with it, like the UPS manfacturers do? Think they'll insure that you'll always be able to play the CD's and DVD's you bought?
Sheesh, what a thought.
The revolution will NOT be televised.
Many other comments here have already addressed the specific point that you bring up. See for example here, here, and here.
P.S. Good bass player though... :-)
...richie - It is a good day to code.
Perhaps if he got another lyricist... :-)
...richie - It is a good day to code.
OK. Maybe I'll give it shot....richie
...richie - It is a good day to code.
Of course, the public is not FORCED to grant copyrights on music or to permit collusive and monopolistic behavior in the music industry. Perhaps they should leave well enough alone.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
IIRC, MS is licensing it from Roxio. Apple's is also licensed from them, AFAIK.
But yeah, I agree doing business with those guys up the street inevitably results in getting screwed. Remember Spyglass?
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Don't worry about Mac users. Toast still works fine, and anyone who's sticking with the Mac will end up with OS X which starts to open the door for Unix software to come in. (Although personally, having Unix underlying the system is not appealing to me, so I've been migrating towards Win due to a lack of options)
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Well, I truly believe in freedom. But you're backwards, my friend.
In a state of perfect freedom, *everyone* can disseminate works, provided that they have them. In a state of total oppression, only the creator can disseminate works - others have the ability to, as granted by God, and the natural right to, which we call Freedom of Speech, but the exercise of their rights and abilities are denied them by an interfering authority.
Your freedom is oppression, and your oppression is freedom.
That said, there may be, and in fact _are_ socially desirable consequences of enacting a carefully devised and moderate system wherein rights are circumscribed, but it is impossible to call this freedom. It's just practical - don't flaunt it as anything but.
The real point of copyright is not to enshrine natural moral rights artists posess, since there simply are none. It is to encourage artists to create as many useful works as possible, in order that they may be freely used without regard to the artist. A temporary and limited monopoly on certain instances of dissemination is granted to the artist, but it is a means to an end, and never ever an end in itself.
And even then, the real system is not like you describe. Artists do not have absolute rights to dictate how their works are disseminated. No artist can rightfully deny a fair use of their work. (such as its inclusion within a transformative work) No artist can rightfully prevent their work from entering the public domain, whereupon the limits that people willingly suffer are lifted.
And certainly this isn't a matter of stealing - it's a matter of copyright infringement, which could also be considered illegally exercising natural rights to which only the copyright holder and his designees have permission to exercise. (roughly)
Ideas are not property. Even works are not property, though the medium they are within may - _may_ - be. A book is property; the words are not. A statue is property; the shape is not. Yet reproduce either into another medium which you impeccably own, and you have transgressed. Words are not things, and we actually do not treat them as such. What is illegal is not the thing, but the act of copying them - the exercise of rights that you're not permitted to exercise. Thus, infringement.
As for the Roxio system itself, I can see a significant flaw. It imposes burdens for copyright holders to make use of it to exercise their own legal rights. This treads dangerously close to copyright infringement. (as copyrights must be exclusively assigned to the creator, unless he transfers or expands them) In my capacity in my job, I've made copies of CDs for musicians with ordinary equipment. Prohibiting this is just not a good thing.
Besides which, the courts have found that it is entirely outside the scope of copyright to preclude the copying of works from one medium to another, aka "space shifting." Statutory exceptions exist for many other classes of works. (for instance, any software you legally own or lease may be backed up all you please) There is no need to require that the original source be used, or that you prove to the satisfaction of an inanimate hunk of junk that you may legally do so; posession and performing the copy oneself is all.
Ultimately, no computer program in the world will _ever_ be a substitute for a court. We have perfectly good mechanisms in place for determining if copies are legally or illegally made and disseminated, and that entire framework exists within the domain that we collectively through our government allow it to. Copyrights for music could vanish tomorrow if we really wanted them to - there'd be nothing wrong with it, they aren't manditory.
Software cannot make the kinds of decisions human beings are capable of, it's not a substitute. We should not try to allow it to attempt to be one as it'll inevitably be sorely lacking.
Me, I'm an artist, and that's how I earn my daily bread. Nevertheless, I know the place that I and my bretheren occupy. It is *not* one that deserves dear privleges.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
I want to be able to pay the artists money for their songs. Up until now, there simply is no way to give money if you want to download an electronic version. If they allow me to pay a reasonable price to download a song, then I will gladly pay it.
Unfortunately, that's not what will happen through this scheme.
You'll be giving money to the copyright owner, who is almost without fail the label. If you really think that RIAA is in business for the artists, you're completely deluding yourself.
Further, there exist artists (They Might Be Giants comes to mind) who have had ways for their audience to get their music electronically and compensate them directly for quite some time now. Granted, it's not the norm, but it'd be the right way to do it, rather than feeding RIAA more cash.
--
Do you have a
I just helped a 13 year old kid set up apache and a dynamic dns client on his computer, I'm pretty sure all he wants to do is share mp3s with his buddies.
Actually I'm hoping he'll develop an interest in more than that, but who knows?
In the meantime, he's happily telling his buddies about his new website or whatever.
Chris Cothrun
Curator of Chaos
Bleh!
I'm sorry. I have friends who are music majors and are, IMHO, millions of times better than the likes of Brittany Spears.
Even if you think Spears is the greatest musician ever, I still doubt that she puts the same amount of work into truely mastering music that my friends have.
I'm going to argue that it is better for regional stars to arise because people like them, not because some fat cat record company propped them up.
I know some fantastic jazz musicians who play for a subsistance lifestyle that enables them to spend all their time doing what they love.
Perhaps art is dead elsewhere, but where I come from we like our local bands. Many of our local bands are every bit as good as anyone else, and they are funner to listen to because they are people.
-Peter
. Penguins Surely Ca
Also regardless of which version is copied there is also the "Mechanical Royalty" which goes straight to the songwriter for any reproduction, including sheet music. This Royalty is $0.08/song (or $0.016/minute for songs longer than 5 minutes). The Harry Fox Agency deals with this royalty, it never has to recoup, and the record company gets none of it. So copying should automatically give 8 cents a track directly to the songwriter.
Do you even read what you're writing?
The potential impact here is scary. Roxio's Duea is quoted: 'Our goal is to enable consumers to legally download and record music to CD in a consumer-friendly manner while fairly compensating copyright owners and creators...'
Allowing consumers to buy music online and burn it directly instead of going to a music store for the same CD is "scary"?
'We want to continue to work with leaders in the music industry, like EMI, to not only provide for the protection of their digital content, but also to enable record companies and artists to get paid for burning.' Yikes!
Having artists get paid for their music deserves a "Yikes"?
Don't like the fact that EZCD Creator is working with "the Man"? Feel free to use one of the gazillion other cd burning softare programs out there.
But don't get all bent out of shape because some people are looking at new methods to make money off of old business models.
Don't like it? Don't take part in it.
Pretty easy workaround, huh?
two words: mkisofs and cdrecord.
Only on slashdot can a posting be rated "Score -1, Insightful".
I think I had to use their software a few times to record CDs from iso images. Unfortunately, the version I had didn't have a verify option, so I had to just assume that all the bits were going on right.
JET Program: see Japan, meet intere
that new cd R/W units will have a coin slot?
JET Program: see Japan, meet intere
way a decent product. When adaptec sold out to Roxio (they SUCK) easy CD began to SUCK also. The latest version is not worth the disc it is burned on....
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
that you are a MORON ?? We could figure that out without you opening your mouth and proving it to us.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
The public at large is not going to have to do much Roxio and the latest version of the SW is AWFUL. Even if you were a nitwit and Roxio is installed it still has so many bugs it barely functions to write legal stuff.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
Co'm on folks, you don't realy think I will belive you are using Windows are you ?
Look, download CDRecord and compile it.
Put whatever you want to burn into a directory DDD and do "mkisofs -l -r -J -o Image.iso -V "My Stuff" /location/of/DDD
Then do "cdrecord --scanbus" to find the ID of your SCSI writer (there is a little bit different command for IDE drives)
Now write the image with "cdrecord dev=0:6:6 speed=12 -v Image.iso"
And CD burning will never be the same again ;-)2 C3AF4F2snlbxq'|dc
--
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb15CB32EF3AF9C0E5D727
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
Actually, Apple is providing drivers for a lot of 3rd party manufacturers to work with OS X and/or their Disk Burner extension (insert blank disk, copy files to the virtual directory created, burn CD when finished). It'll even format an ISOxxxx CD and add PC filename extensions as required.
Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
For Windows:
.ogg files into the track window and have them burn out to normal CD Audio files. Is this the first burning app to offer this feature?
Beginner: NTI's software (http://www.nticdmaker.com/index.cfm)
Advanced: Nero
http://www.ahead.de/en/index2.htm
For Linux:
Gnometoaster
(http://gnometoaster.rulez.org)
kisocd
(http://kisocd.sourceforge.net)
Or cdrecord directly for Win32, Linux, Mac, BeOS, Solaris and more.
Hey, for those of you not following, Andy (the developer for Gnometoaster) has released a 1.0Beta1 of the excellent Gnometoaster burning app.
One of the nifty new features is the ability to DnD
Ben
Sadly, you have to be careful with that kind of argument. When attention was called to this disparity in the UK, the record companies responded by jacking up the prices of tapes to somewhere near the price of CDs.
Strike one victory to the consumer :-(
Tim
Here's some of the Real Problems as I see them related to this partnership to create some sort of compensation system.
Problem 1: There is the possibility one music coroporation will force the other corporation out of partnership with the system through contracts or other 'legal' means. This is TERRIBLE and the first thing I thought of when I saw the EMI name. Judging from the behavior of the record industry to date, I believe this is a very real problem. Because of the way the competition works, there may never be a real standard in the way of copyright protection. If EMI signs a contract keeping RCA out of their deal - any RCA music will NOT be able to be played on that system.
Solution: An open-license system or protocol that any recording company can get for a nominal fee (if at all, a fee to cover development costs to the developing parties) that enables them to create products and or music that adheres to the license. All of the above relates to devices to play these works as well.
Problem 2: Artists not willing/wanting to join a 'major' recording company or recieve compensation will not be able to produce music compatible.
Solution: again, the open-licensed solution from above. The protocol should have some sort of price-per-use type of field, where 0 is a vaild number, and high prices simply will not be purchased.
--onyx--
Yes, that was exactly my point. A lot of the replies have said "no, you can't read into the file and detect a bit" etc. But if the majority of cd-burners are bought out and they suddenly "respect" this bit, then that seems functionally equivalent (or so the RIAA could argue) to the CSS, where the "valid" players use a key to unlock the scrambled content.
So a "rogue" burner that ignores the set bit could arguably be "jumping over" the technical obstacle used by every valid burner, thus violating the new DMCA law.
In that way it just takes one judge to make those open source burners illegal.
As an anoymous coward said:
>Ever heard of SCMS? It's a flip-bit copy/no-copy system implemented on DAT and MiniDisc. It is the direct result of the Audio Home Recording Act, and certainly illegal to bypass under the DMCA.
>
>I think the intent is that a system is "effective" if it's widely used (such as with Macrovision, also DMCA protected), not that it's good. Obviously the widely used part is a problem with standard red book CDs.
So this could be an attempt to make respect for the bit widely used.
-------------------
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
I mean, if a song is encoded in such a way that it has a "security bit" turned on (say, uh, bit 1 turned on means "copyrighted") and all the commercial burning software "respects" this convention, then either Nero has to refuse to burn as well or it's "circumventing a technology intended to protect copyright" and becomes illegal.
Or am I missing something?
-------------------
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
You can turn it off, just whip out RegEdit.
u rr entVersion\Run
Go to:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\C
And delete the DirectCD wizard entry. That'll stop it from running on startup, in case you want to load anything else that conflicts with it.
If you want to use CD-RWs though (I found I couldn't eject them without it - weird!), you do need to load it.
--
Delphis
Delphis
Well, some windows DLLs mysteriously became IE dlls a few years back, if you recall.
The real bugger is Roxio/Adaptec's deal with Microsoft in Windows Media Player 7.0. Turns out my previously compatible EZ CD Creator 3.5+patches software bluescreened on 2K boot due to the lack of the now necessary proper content protection doohickey.
Thankfully Microsoft's technotes addressed the solution (Last Known Good), but I thought it took a little gaul on their parts to retroactively make working software incompatible with Windows.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
There's still a small part of me that tries to remain optimistic, and believes that when Roxio begins messing around with EZ CD Creator then someone else will come out with a burner that's not crippled. I don't know -- I haven't been at Win shareware sites in years -- but there just might be some shareware burners that can also be used.
I really don't see any reason to panic. Life goes on.
---
----
Every expression is true, for a given value of 'true'
The better example would be writing off your losses against your property taxes. But the Supreme Court has ruled more than once that the police do not have an obligation to prevent crime, so you can't hold them responsible when you get robbed.
Since the government is only charging me Marginal_Tax_Rate, it seems a little specious to write off more than Marginal_Tax_Rate.
Bah... read this:
s .h tml
http://www.urbanlegends.com/products/beta_vs_vh
First of all, Nero is not a freeware program. From what I gather it is a well known and versatile Windows program for CD authoring etc.
Anyway, I didn't have to look for it, It came bundled with my YAMAHA CD-RW drive. I also got Easy CD Creator bundled with a cheap SCSI controller I bought for an old system. Considering that I don't use Windows, have no use for Windows CD authoring software and would never bother finding and downloading one, it was quite easy getting hold of it, wasn't it?
Oh well, I'll just go on using mkisofs/cdrecord.
Nero is not a freeware program.
Q.
Then that's a fucked up law that should be repealed at the same time DMCA is. This has nothing to do with being a tool of the industry; it goes to the core of whether you think IP should exist or not. And that is a seperate issue.
Legalizing the movement of the stuff between potential customers, whether it's "commercial" or not, is a threat to everyone who makes IP for money. The bands I listen to can barely even break even. In fact, quite a few of them lose money, and have to dump money from their day jobs into recording their albums. Home Recording Act, if you have interpreted its intent correctly, is a direct threat to professional music itself (i.e. the people I listen to will have to give up on the futile hope that they money they invest in recording will ever be paid back, so they might as well spend it on food and rent instead) unless they can figure out a business model where they get paid for service instead of IP.
I would like to see that happen, but we're definately years away from it at best. Just a couple of weeks ago I went to El Paso to see Angel Dust, Nevermore, and Opeth (and also some shitty band called God Forbid). Nevermore and Opeth had to cancel because the club didn't sell enough tickets so they couldn't pay the musicians enough. And these are bands that actually have record labels and fairly large worldwide fan bases. So if there's going to be a service model, it's going to have to be something like Street Performer Protocol or something like that at the point of album creation; touring is too risky.
Note that I'm mainly concerned about this law legalizing the "pirating" (yes, I know some people think that's a misleading term) of entire albums (or whatever unit the music is sold as). Spreading around samples (i.e. a song or two) so that people can evaluate it, probably should be legal and encouraged.
BTW, the only reason that law allows "non-commercial" propagation is that ignorant lawmakers (and perhaps the industry that bribed them as well) were so visionless that they thought non-commercial copying was small-time and even when it happened, it largely served to promote the music rather than reduce sales. They were wrong, as anyone who has seen Napster knows.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
The "knee-jerk reaction" is to paying to copy your files, not to paying for music. That's a pretty justified reflex./p.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
No, because it is not reasonable or normal for CDR copying software to look inside the files that it copies. They have worked blindly for many many years. Thus, the bit cannot conceivable be said to "effectively control access".
It's bascially way too late (by more than a decade) to establish a brand new convention for writing CDs.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Many of you know that the reason music CDRs are more expensive than regular CDRs- in fact the ONLY difference in the two types of CDRs is that in the case of the music CDR, a fee has been paid to the RIAA because the CDRs might be used by the legions of evil consumers to copy a copyrighted CD. It doesn't matter if you actually copy one of the RIAA's tracks, you pay for the right to do it anyway... sound familiar? But don't fret... this fee gives you the inalieable right to copy cd's produced by the RIAA! Maybe this hasn't been tested in court, but their lawyers would be hard pressed to explain what the consumer gets in exchange for that fee if not the right to copy. By that logic, all you need to do to LEGALLY OWN your MP3's you got off napster is to burn them on MUSIC CDRs, (even as a data CD). The fee is still paid, right? You bought the right to copy, might as well use it.
Maybe EMI will insist on Roxio patching their products to the point where they DON'T destroy Windows, regardless of the install options selected.
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
The last couple of versions of EasyCD have apparently being irrevocably trashing people's Windows installations-- the Register has been covering it blow-by-blow, including the patches that don't solve the problem, the revelation that connecting a USB device suddenly triggers it etc. etc. So my impression is that they're taken some seriously bad press of late, and could be in trouble; could be that EMI are throwing them a line?
Matthew @ Bytemark Hosting
This, of course, is assuming that you will upgrade to the latest version of "Easy CD Creator". I'm using an older version now that works just fine. I will hang on to my CD and also my CDRW drive.
I wonder if they are going to try the same bogus scheme as the guys who were trying to created Harddrives that would prevent writing "unauthorized" files? Weren't they going to try some sort of key/encryption system? So, now when you go to rip a disk your CD drive will want to connect to the Net to validate you first???
I think not. Look at all the companies jumping ship on SMDI! Any company that relies on encryption (hardware or software) to prevent people from copying bits is in for a rude-awakening. It ain't gonna happen.
nobody complained about fair use when we used tapes.
:)
Yes, they certainly did! I have a Captain Sensible LP from 1982 with a 'tape and crossbones' design on the back that states "Home taping is killing music."
And this was before dual cassette decks started getting popular.
As for the rest of your statement: I've had more tapes get stuck in players rendering them useless than I have scratched CD's beyond fixing. I'm just really careful with them, and rarely have a problem. I also try not to lend them out
Pope
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
So, what is "authorized music", and who determines what is and isn't authorized? Is burning a copy of a CD so I can listen in the car authorized? How about the MP3 file a friend made with his garage band, that isn't in their database? The CD a local choir sold as a fundraiser?
What will happen with stuff that's not on their RADAR? If they allow it unrestricted, that opens up an avenue to circumvent their "protection". If they block it, they'll cripple their software to the point of unusability.
And just how do they plan to collect these fees? Does my PC have to be online when I burn the CDs, so the software can check for authorization, and transfer fees accordingly? Do I have to enter my VISA number to burn a CD? What if I'm not online (there are still standalone PC in the world).
Just a hunch, but I think they'll find this unworkable.....
I've seensome games use DAE to cache their in game music. ITs not common, but its sometimes done, and its also legitimate.
------- Oh damn.... the Sigfile escaped... -Great OM
You need a smaller peg or a bigger hole.
My old two computer household had Win98 on one and Slackware 7 on mine. After about an hour of instruction, they were doing all the same things in Linux that they did in Win98.
- Parents Activities, in order:
- Check E-mail
- Write new e-mail
- Check Weather
- Check News
- Check Stocks
What else is there?You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
Good...some relevant points were made. In the end it will depend on how they implement the "proof of purchase" method. It will most likely end up being something like keeping an online db. Or, they will have to grandfather all older music but begin doing it with newer stuff.
I believe in the honor system, folks. I do not believe they will be able to pull it off, but I don't see anything wrong with them trying because I know that they can't enforce it. I just hate the music thiefs acting like it is their right to share music. The Home Use thing was for sharing to entice purchase. We all know that most people used Napster and Gnutella to pirate, not to try it out. The way you can tell if they are leeches is to ask them "will you pay for access to Napster?" and they all say "hell no. I'll switch to someplace where I don't have to pay."
----------
----------
Twisted Little Gnome - The Podcasting Network http://www.twistedlittlegnome.com
My local best buy had a spindle of 50 regular 650MB CD-WORM's for only $19.95. [... CD-ROM, read only memory; CD-WORM, write once read many; quit calling them CD-R's]
(Score: +1, appealingly pedantic)
Distribute their music themselves on websites that they can build and get hosted for free.
Keep dreaming. Do you really think think this will happen?
If an mp3 search engine gets axed (or a file-trading service has its hands tied) it doesn't slow the people who use IRC or FTP.
With Napster now pretty much out of the picture, there has been a huge jump in the amount of traffic on the efnet channels that release albums on a regular basis. #mp3hqdcc saw many hundreds of additional users in the past 3 months. Looks like the college kids are wising up and going straight to the source.
Cheers,
levine
I want to be able to pay the artists money for their songs.
Yeah, sure, great. But I've already paid once. I regularly rip batches of CDs to mp3, then burn a bunch of albums back onto a CD in mp3 format. Why? So I can take one CD with me to listen to on my CD/mp3 player instead of ten. Or so that I can listen to a hundred different songs off of a hundred different CDs that I already bought and paid for. Simple. This is not theoretical - I'm actually doing this, and if I had to pay extra to space-shift music that I've already paid for once, I'd be super pissed, and more likely to pirate/steal music and not use their crappy fascist hardware.
Bottom line is, the majority people are using this technology well withing the legal limits of fair use, and shouldn't have to pay more tribute to the record labels. If you want to do something extra to support the artists, fine - but let it be voluntary, not a mandatory corporate tax.
Ahead, the makers of Nero, are German. So it wouldn't be illegal for them, but it would be illegal for people from the USA to use it.
Land of the free? Don't think so.
----------------------------------------------
the pun is mightier than the sword
Are we talking about the Easy CD Creator 4-5 which has been destroying W2K and W95 machines? The above links say that the Microsoft instructions might not save your machine. Be careful out there.
From what I understand, the difference only (currently) comes into play when you're using a stereo component CD recorder, which looks for a bit on the Music CD-R that is not present on the Data CD-R. That way, anyone using a component CD recorder is paying part of their money to the RIAA to compensate for 'piracy'.
If I'm wrong, please correct me, but that's the way I understand it to be.
_______
Scott Jones
Newscast Director / ABC19 WKPT
FC Closer
even though there are companies who are insistent on betting on the wrong horse, there is really nothing about this deal that scares me.
who cares about burning CDs anyways? i have no need for it. i have a computer, i have mp3 converting software pre-installed (thanks, apple), and i have a portable player capable of holding 150+ hours of music. none of these things is going to go away.
so... burning an hour of music? go away. put those CD burners in the closet, along with the 8-track and the stereo cassette player.
as for what to do about Roxio - i would suggest: sell their stock. now.
Yeah... I've got "EZ CD Creator" 3.something, which came with my CD burner, and it's not what I would have bought if it weren't bundled with the burner, but it works OK... except MicroSlough's latest version of Windows Media Player is incompatible with it being installed. I figured, like every decent company out there, I could get a bug fix (yeah, it's MicroSlough's bug, but...) from their web site...
Nope. Pay full price for 4.0.
No. Not just no, but Hell no! Not now, not ever. Millions for defense, but not one penny for tribute. I can easily live without Windows Media Player 8. If I ever decide otherwise, I'll buy Nero Burning ROM, or something else from one of (any of) Roxio's competitors. It's not the money, it's the principle of the thing.
(Even if the Roxio software were better, which, by all acounts, it most emphatically is not.)
*You* want the ability to burn a CD without restrictions. It remains to be seen whether the public at large finds that feature important enough to hurt Roxio's sales. This will likely lose them some customers, however they believe they will gain more money in the long run by doing this. Market failure doesn't occur just because one company comes out with a product you personally don't like. Roxio's decision is a great opportunity for a different manufacturer, be it a corporation or a free software developer, to create the "better" product.
Roxio's decision is only a problem if it becomes illegal to make an unencumbered CD burner. At that point, though, it's not just market forces at play.
Lack of the ability to burn a cd without encubrance isn't going to kill anyone, and the barrier to entry to making an unencumbered burner is pretty low.
I think you've got it wrong. The linux users are
precisely the NON-copyright infringers. The
copyright infringers pirate Microsoft OS's
and use them.
In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
Veritas alone may be *the* next quality cd recording software, with something for everyone...even pros!
Home CD Tools
CD Mastering Tools
DVD Mastering Tools
A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
Exactly. This is NOT about paying artists voluntarily with a tip-model as Ms. Love and others suggest, it's about paying the RIAA for more (as Ms. Love puts it) trips to Scores! The ironic thing is that if this move is "successful," artists will probably get less money than if they used (greed alert) my currency or other means to honestly ask for tips! Most tips would probably be orders of magnitude larger than what Ms. Love claims musicians get for selling a $15 overpriced CD. I know that there are quite a few songs I'd tip half a gram (between 4 and 5 bucks) for if I knew the artist was getting it, rather than some talentless music industry slimeball.
Will they get tips for crappy songs? No. Will they still be able to bundle crappy songs with good ones? Nope. Is this situation bad? You be the judge. My usual offer to Slashdot readers of a small click of e-gold is still open, BTW. Opinions here, as always, are solely my own (but I'm RIGHT, dammit!).
JMR
Continually-ranting about this issue lately, I know, but I sit here with the solution to the problem and nobody's paying much attention yet.
Try e-gold - (contact me). I'm NOT e-
Instead of using a one-bit flag for the "anti-circumvention device", they should use a zero-bit string instead. Then, the only safe course of action for CD-burning program would be to refuse to burn anything at all. This would also simplify the programming a great deal, since CD-burning programs wouldn't need to be any more complicated than a "Hello World" program, except that they would say "I'm not allowed to copy anything; go away!"
Yes there are. On the Mac, there is no audio connection between the CDRom (or DVD Rom) drive and the sound output. The audio data is ripped off the CD, and sent to the computer's sound system in real time. This was done, partially, so that users could listen to their CDs over their USB speakers.
An interesting side effect of this is that if you do it right, you can play two tracks off the CD at the same time, with no skipping. Why you'd want to do this is another matter entirely.
...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
Sounds a lot like Copy Code on DATs, however it allowed you to make only a first generation copy from the master. You could not copy the copy, only the master. Of course, any DAT deck worth its salt (TASCAM comes to mind) had a jumper on the logic board that you could close to disable Copy Code. Tascam even included the jumper half on the jumper block.
...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
The question isn't what ROXI is doing to make me pay extra for each cut on the mix CDs I'm making for a trip this weekend. The question is what is going into CD-RW drives to make me use Roxio or forget about burning anything at all.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Rader
They want it so bad, they're rolling over in their graves. (Record execs are the undead, after all)
Rader
Apple Includes ability to RIP/BURN MP3 and CDs
without any limitations as a standard feature of OS 9.1.
iTunes & Disk Burner 1.0 are better than Toast for this, and it burns 'in the background' while you continue to work.
regards,
johnRpenner.
Let's say I want to create a mix CD from live concert MP3s. Since this is /., let's say we're talking about the Minibosses, who distribute their unsigned MP3s freely. Will I be able to do it with Roxio's awesome software, without the cracks that will inevitably be released within a week of release?
Stealing is stealing, but this isn't stealing. It's copyright infringement. Theft is the act of taking something away from someone with the intent of depriving that person of possessing what you've taken. Copying zeroes and ones while leaving the original data intact is not stealing, and U.S. law (on a good day) has different laws regarding each. All those mp3 lawsuits you keep reading about are for copyright infringement, not theft.
No I don't. But treating gnutella like a 24-hour all-request radio station does help me make smarter purchasing decisions about my music.
How does adding a corpo-funded layer of complexity to CD burning software make it easier for me to buy more music? Sounds like all it does is make it easier for EMI and their colleagues to keep CD prices nutrageously high, just to fund more copy-protection schemes like this one.
A question: How will Roxio prevent users from decoding MP3s into WAV/AIFFs, then burning them? Will it all of a sudden become morally wrong to burn arbitrary AIFFs? Somebody better tell the budding garage bands of the world that they are not welcome to use Roxio software.
< tofuhead >
--
It is still the dark of night.
He wants to be able to pay the ARTIST. The RIAA, at best, only sheds a few crocodile tears for artists. The RIAA is only concerned with filling the coffers of member record companies. Record companies are notorious for not paying artist and behaving like mafia rackets.
Let's look at it from a practical standpoint. There are 1000s of artists in the RIAA stable. How is YOUR favorite artist compensated when a music CD is used to burn those audiogalaxy tracks?
If you check the readme while installing Easy CD Creater 4.0, you'll notice it says you have to install Internet Explorer because Microsoft won't let them distribute the necessary DLL files seperately.
I hope the slashdot article was tongue-in-cheek, because this is EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED.
.cx), Oh No, That's Awful!
"The potential impact here is scary."
Yeah, it's scary that we might be getting what we were asking for the whole time!
"And how far will those changes penetrate throughout the industry?"
Hopefully far and wide.
"This can't be good for the consumer."
But paying $17 dollars for a CD for one good song IS? I thought the whole point was to avoid the artificial scarcity and inefficiency of material distribution.
"'We want to continue to work with leaders in the music industry, like EMI, to not only provide for the protection of their digital content, but also to enable record companies and artists to get paid for burning.' Yikes!"
Not "Yikes!", "YAY!". I don't get you people. First we complained that the music industry didn't "get it", and that CDs are exorbitantly inexpensive and of much less value than digital copies. But now that somebody actually "gets it" and wants to SELL you legitimate digital copies so you don't have to illegally copy them (say, from a "friend" in
How many of you were crowing that you trade MP3s because CDs are outrageously expensive, or some other similar moral rationalization? Well HERE is your solution. You can't now cry and say "oh, wait a minute...no no, I really DID want free copyright-infringed music...this isn't fair!". If you respect the GPL, you have to respect the copyrights of artists (just another form of "author"). Now, whether the music industry will really allow a fair amount of profits to filter back to artists anyway is still an issue, and some may still find a moral haven for trading MP3s. How can the same people that tout micro-payments and street performer's protocol, complain when a mechanism allowing people to compensate artists is being created?
Or have I been trolled?
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Only for the musicians who are not really great. The musicians that are (IMO) really good do it because they love it, and are willing to tour continuously, make no $, and be dirt-poor.
There was a time, about 8 BN [1], when I wanted to be a professional musician myself...My heart wasn't really in it, but what eventually made me decide against it was that the odds are heavily stacked against any newcomer who wants a record deal.
Sorry to hear it. No offense, but I find it hard to believe that you would have ever 'made it big', since it sounds like you were doing it for $ not for the love of music. Most musicians spend many, many years touring (or practicing in their free time while holding day jobs) before getting any record deal.
For some reason, I have this irrational aversion to working for no money...
You could have
- Done local shows/toured
- Kept a day job and played at night (in clubs for $ or in your garage for nothing)
But you're not going to get handed a record contract out of the blue, sorry...However, I think it can't be ignored that we have seen an explosion of musical talent in the 20th century that is primarily owed to the recording industry.
I gotta disagree on that one. The 'explosion' is due to affordable musical instruments and improved recording techniques/equipment. The 'recording industry' helped create exactly 0 musical 'talents'. They have however created such 'greats' as N'Sync, The Backstreet Boys, Brittney Spears, Ricky Martin, etc. They are not 'musical talents'.
And how much less music would we have if he had to lay bricks by day?
Lay bricks when he was eight? Somehow I don't think life was quite that bad back then, at least for upper class families.
I think you have a seriously naive view of how musicians, and the music industry, works.
Almost all the great musicians have become great before getting 'signed' and 'famous'. They get good by playing in small, cheap shows over and over and over. Then, once they can make good music, they become famous (usually when they are signed by a record company). They don't get signed, start getting paid big $, and then get good.
In recent times, the record companies have noticed that 'sex sells' and started signing good-looking people with no or little talent. These people are paid insane amounts of money but I guarantee that their skill does not improve at all.
If there is no money in music, then a lot of the best musicians will simply cease to exist.
You are so very, very wrong. If you do some background research into past musicians, you will find that NONE of them became rich and famous before they became a great musician. They all became great musicians, then became rich and famous (some, maybe most, never became rich and only famous after they died).
a lot of the best musicians will never happen unless they are able to practice all day, every day, and you can't do that unless you do it professionally.
I see you're not a musician!
And no, 200 years ago Mozart or whoever DID NOT do it on an amateur basis. They were paid by either royalty, upper class citizens or the church.
Hmm...I think it's called 'a gig'? Believe it or not, there are a lot of musicians who are paid exactly that way today! And, Mozart was composing at the age of eight. Exactly how much cash do you think he was getting at that age?
You can see it coming, can you? "cdrecord forks without the ()..."
------
I learned a long time back that just because a product has a higher version number does not mean that it is in any way better (compare stability and ram consumption of Photoshop 5 and 6, or Word 5 and 6 and you'll see what I mean immediatly). So some dingbat company is getting in bed with a record giant? Yes, it's definitely not a good thing by any stretch of the word, but there are alternatives, you know....
By the same token, we have a CD burner attached to one of the G3s at work... and a built-in drive on the G4. The software that comes with the MacOS for burning is useable for one purpose- making music CDs. It blows for everything else... and it doesn't play well with Toast, either. The solution? Simple- we keep using the burner on the G3, with Toast, which works beautifully. We haven't upgraded toast for a very, very long time... and it still does everything we need it to do and then some. Shit, the only thing it doesn't do is convert MP3s straight to CD audio on the fly.... but that's what the G4 and iTunes will do, and quite speedily, to boot.
Honestly, with a laptop and a pile of computers at work and at home, I've stopped caring about audio CDs- I still have them, but my collection has a thin film of dust on it. You can't beat the convenience of having two hundred albums on your hard drive, rather than having to shuffle a disk every five tracks....
True in the early part of the 20th century, when electronic distribution at zero cost was impossible, leaving for-pay distribution at moderate cost as the only way for the "Rock and Roll" derived from early Jazz/R&B musicians to make its way into the ears of Joe Consumer and sweep the nation in the 1950s.
False in the early part of the 21st century, when electronic distribution at zero cost was widely available, and the recording industry served only to prevent Joe Consumer from hearing the early Tibetan Electronica artists whose work set the stage for the solar-system-shaking grooves that rocked the colonies of Luna and Mars in the 2180s.
Download all patches for Windows-based CD-burning software today.
Install Linux tomorrow.
My old CD burning software didn't care about copy control.
My old CD burning software did things my new CD burning software doesn't do.
My old CD burning software was more functional - I could do more things with it than I can the new version.
What's wrong about it is that there are people trying to pass off downgrades as upgrades.
If your local Porsche dealer said "By the way, the new model Porsche has a rev-limiter hooked up to a GPS system that prevents you from going faster than 55 mph! It's so much better than last year's model!", you'd slap him silly, and you'd be right to slap him silly whether you ever intended to drive over the speed limit or not.
I know I won't be using anything like that.
Well for a start, Nero comes from ahead.de - and since they're not in the US (.de is Deutschland) I imagine it will be somewhat difficult for US courts and the RIAA to control what they do or publish.
RIAA: Listen up. I tried to buy that CD the other day when I have 30 minutes to kill, and could not get it at K-mart.
Sorry Frank, the Taste Police got there before you. In fact, all of Las Vegas is scheduled for removal later this year.
If you must have it and you want an easy way, try amazon or cdnow.
I guess it is finally time to stop upgrading my burner software. I use Nero for software, music, and MP3 discs; I only use Easy CD Creator just for ISOs. I guess this won't really effect me ... I have a Creative 8432 burner, there's usually quite wide support for the Creative drives.
--
microsoft, it's what's for dinner
bq--3b7y4vyll6xi5x2rnrj7q.com
it's a sig, wtf?
So if I have a choice between one program that lets me only burn something in a crippled fashion, and another product that allows me to burn a CD with no cripples, I'd choose the product that allows the latter.
Unless I don't have a choice for some reason...
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
So in essence this company thinks that either by offering a program to burn mp3's to cd will halt what they call illegal thievery? I doubt it in fact why would someone who allegedly steals cd's go out and buy this software when they could continue with their normal bypassing ways.
Is it me or does this reak with this notion;
By creating these so called programs I personally think they sort of force people to go out and rip more since your sort of telling someone USE THIS TO DO THIS. People should have choices, and while I do see the pro's and con's of Napster I also see somebody somewhere along the lines of Roxio, the Artists complaining, RIAA, $INSERT_TARGET_HERE don't have a really good clue yet.
Maybe these people should go and read Bruce Schneier's "The Futility of Digital Copy Prevention" article word for word, and come to a better conclusion instead of thinking some lawsuit, or some program is going to be the answer to people ripping mp3's and doing whatever the heck they want with them.
Want Root?
Since it appears that the content industry (e.g., music and movie) is dead set on destroying our freedoms to safeguard their artificially propped, intellectual "properties", what is needed are alternative technologies. Maybe someone can come up with a do-it-yourself kit that almost anybody can use to build a FREE burner. We must counteract whatever scheme they come up with. We must not let them take away our liberties one by one, a little bit at a time, until there is none left. We must not let the powers that be turn us into drones.
Demand liberty!
I agree. Saying "this can't be good for the consumer" is getting too easy to say, and it doesn't need to be the case here. Noone argues that selling CDs is bad for the consumer, and that's really all this appears to be doing; it's just going to move the burning mechanism down to the desktop and probably reduce costs and improve flexibility to boot. At least, if done correctly it will.
There's no reason to be negative on new technology that allows new inroads into consumer products. The things that are bad for consumers are exhibited in fighting against new tech. Of course they want to have some security on the process, which may amount to limited copy protection, but if the service lets you burn CDs that work in audio players, they're not doing any major black ops here.
We can't go jumping down everyone's throat just because their new products include "copy protection".
This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
If this is actually the case, you have a defective minidisc player. The copyright bit should not be set when an analog (I'm assuming that your own music is recorded via microphone or guitar pickup or the like) recording is made and you should be able to make as many generations of digital recordings as you like. Even if it is the case that the no copy bit gets set on your analog recordings you are still free to make as many copies as you like, though you are not able to make copies of those copies.
If you're complaining that your MD player doesn't have a digital out port, you should have forked over a few extra few dollars to get one that does. Yeah, it's stupid that Sony charges an extra $100 to add in a $0.49 laser diode, but that's just the way marketing works. If in doubt, consult any introduction of microeconomics book and check the index for "price discrimination".
________________________
I don't want free as in beer. I just want free beer.
See subject and run if you fret over this stuff... www.barchord.com is a website dedicated to independent or signed artists. We give them control over the price, music type (mp3, vorbis, some strange encoded format), and in general attempt to provide tools and places for them to do their thing. Website is fairly new, but theres already a few hundred bands most of which have music listed. About half of that is free. Go and enjoy. Also, I'd love constructive comments on the website itself.
Rod Taylor
There are no artists, only the recording industry. Or haven't you been listening to Courtney Love?
.sig: Now legally binding!
Consider the fact that Easy CD comes with a VERY large portion of burners, and just as large an amount of PC's. This would make it quite easy for them to get the "compliant" software on to quite a few machines. As long as they don't team up with CD manufactures to create a complient disc of some sort.
No, BETA lost out because of the booming porn industry.
Sony apparently refused to let pornos be released on BETA, so VHS took over.
i don't read slashdot anymore.
Digital media simply will not fit in with the old monopolistic practices of the emotive-meme industry, the real purpose of which seems to be programming of the human amygdala via sound signals rather than pheromonal signals.
Seastead this.
What you say is absolutely correct of course. At least it would be if the music companies were actually as concerned for the artists as they make out and have you believe.
I think peoples' knee-jerk reactions against paying for music is not to do with the artists, because most sane people realise that artists should be compensated for what they do, but because people aren't stupid and they know that the music companies/RIAA whatever are suggesting these schemes mainly to benefit themselves and their greedy profit margins.
People have no qualms about giving money to artists, it's giving money to asshole record companies who really don't deserve it, that's the knee-jerker.
xx Stuii!
.... and reinstall Windows 2000... I'm not sure I'd trust them to be able to implement anything at this point in time, much less some complicated copy-protection scheme.
Roxio has been working hard to prove to everyone they really suck. This probably is the coup-de-grace. Congrats to them for succeeding so aptly at it.
If I was a designer there, I'd be sending my resume around.
Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
That's what most of my dead end users upgraded to Creator 4 for. No more, first you turn it into a wav, then you...ect..ect phone calls.
Ya gotta wonder how long Roxio will support turning all those napster downloads into dead end users click to create CDs.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Actually, I expect this will probably cause a drop in casual burning (Geez, I make it sound like drug use). Joe Schmoe suddenly discovers he has to pay to burn a CD, so what's he do? 1) Give up, or 2) Talk to a geek and find out how to get around it. Either way, it's a minor stumbling block to the average user. I don't expect it will be too effective, though. I imagine that those who know how to cirvumvent this account for a large majority of the cd-burning population, so all you do is fend off the dumb users.
My only complaint is that all my non-techie friends are suddenly going to be asking me to burn CDs for them, seeing as they can't anymore without a credit card number. As if I needed more to do.
Pay it to who, the artist? The artist is probably not the copyright holder - they sign the copyright away to the record label. It's the same distinction as the author of software vs the company that employed that programmer.
...burn it on a Mac. Dig it?
As George Clinton said.
Exactly! And that is why you will simply not be able to do many legal things in the future, if the industry goes the RIAA/MPAA/SDMI/... way. Look: You are legally permitted to make VCR copies as many as you want. But - without extra effort - you cannot. Why? Because of Macrovision. You can legally buy a DVD, and legally buy a DVD Player, and the player will refuse to play your DVD, because it thinks that you might be in the wrong country. My MD player refuses to copy my own recordings digitally, because by allowing digital copies there is the slight possiblity of maybe me committing a sinister crime (i.e. distributing copyrighted music)!
You would be perfectly legal if you could copy your CDs in the future, only you cannot. That is what "they" want, and if the industry complies, in 5 years CDs will be obsolete. What can be done with stupid laws (DMCA) will be done that way, and where they cannot castrate your basic human rights (freedom of speech for example) the industry will simply take away the technical means for exercising them, and sue every company who doesn't comply.
Look at this article for details about what's wrong with copy protection.
Remember: CDs are just about the only digital Hi-Fi media left that do not have some form of copy protection! They must be destroyed, because every CD owner is a potential criminal!
Home Page
--
Artix
Your Linux, your init.
I think people are getting a little paranoid. All it looks like to me is that they're going to give the software a pay-for-download-and-burn feature. They don't say anything about blocking music, and it seems to me that if they were going to block burning "unauthorized" music, they would put that in the lead of the press release. They would be proud of coming up with a technology that "stops the pirates" from stealing their music.
Matt
There sure is: 'roid rage.
What's the difference between a Music CDR, and a Data CDR?
-- This space intentionally left blank.
Let's say I own quite a few CDs that are no longer readable. This is happening quite often for some of the older CDs that I own -- KMFDM's "Naive", The Cult's "Electric", Meat Beat Manifesto's "Armed Audio Warfare", etc. Some songs won't play in a regular CD player and none will rip into MP3s.
There's no way I'm going to buy these CDs again (even if they are still in print) because I already own them. Therefore, I downloaded MP3s of the songs off LimeWire and add them to my iTunes music library. As far as I'm concerned, downloading MP3s of songs I own is the same as inserting the disc and ripping them myself. In fact, converting your CDs into MP3s has a hundred advantages over discs, including being generally immune to the paint-leaking-though-the-plastic syndrome that seems to affect lesser discs.
Now, I'm not going to explain to Roxio the above situation, and I don't want to have the hassle of dealing with some goofy digital signature "feature". I like to listen to music, not fsck around with digital signatures or whatever so that "the artist can be compensated" -- we all know that Roxio means it's the RIAA and the music labels that will be compensated.
I expect that Roxio will add some annoying feature because that's the way they run their business. I've had to buy three copies of Toast ($99 ea): once for Mac OS 8 capability, once for Mac OS 8.5 capability, once for Mac OS 9 capability. Toast had no new features I wanted, but I had to buy to use the software with the new OS. This is crazy because Adaptec (now Roxio) never offer an upgrade price. "Oh, you upgraded your OS? Where's our $100?"
I am now more than happy to use the free Disc Burner software that Apple provides. iTunes is better than the SoundJam/Toast hack, and it's much easier to burn indexed CDs with Disc Burner than Toast anyway.
If nothing else, Apple's free disc burning software will make Roxio think twice about charging for a simple compatibility upgrade. It doesn't matter anyway; they lost me as a customer a long time ago.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
This isn't about downloadable music, it's about burning music onto CDROM - whatever the source. If you can't figure out how we lose here, then maybe you should sell your computer. It's far too complicated a tool for you.
Do you honestly feel good about yourself when you steal music from artists you like?
No, I feel good only when I steal music from "artists" who suck (which is almost every single one of them). I certainly don't feel bad in any case.
If you do, move to a third world country where that's legal.
I already live in the US.
Edith Keeler Must Die
This is a solution in search of a boycott. Besides, Easy CD Creator sucks anyway. Let them cripple it, it deserves to lose even more market share.
Edith Keeler Must Die
I mean, if a song is encoded in such a way that it has a "security bit" turned on (say, uh, bit 1 turned on means "copyrighted") and all the commercial burning software "respects" this convention, then either Nero has to refuse to burn as well or it's "circumventing a technology intended to protect copyright" and becomes illegal.
IANAL, etc, but right now copying all of the bits in a file is not illegal. If someone changes the meaning of bit 1147 at some point, do they suddenly and retroactively take ownership of bit 1147 on all of my own files? What about the 250 CDs of mine that I legally ripped to mp3 for my personal use over the past couple of weeks? Can that retroactively be made a crime?
What I *do* with my copied files might be illegal (if I share them, which I don't), but I don't think you can easily distinguish between the physical act of making a backup copy of something, and making a backup copy you intend to distribute, etc. Squishy territory to be sure, but I think we're still safe as far as the actual backing up of program and data files goes. I would think that as long as copy programs can be used for legal purposes, their use can't be criminalized.
TomatoMan
-- http://frobnosticate.com
I miss fair use ...
I agree 100%. Anybody ever burn cds with linux? Yeah, that's right... there ARE other cd recording programs out there. So, don't worry about it. Roxio isn't the only ball game in town, and even if they were, somebody will write a "non-compliant" burning program that isn't buddy-buddy with EMI. So, no big deal here.
Can someone explain to me what the difference between these "Music" CD-Rs and normal CD-Rs are? I always thought they used a different dye type to get the discs to play in older CD players. This suggests otherwise. Can anyone elaborate?
Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
But I want this mud.
Have fun complaining about losing those rights you never had, losing rights that you are not actually losing, and how people actually want you to PAY THEM for access to things they created. I'm outta here.
------
Good example except:
1) If you don't like McDonalds, you can go somewhere else. If you don't like RIAA, you're stuck.
2) Similar problem, all contracts offered by record companies to bands will be similar in the magnitude of the raping, and you have no where else to go except give it away.
But I would agree that a good start to a solution would be convincing people not to sign away their lives and their music and be proud of the more modest rewards accorded smaller scale promotion distribution, internet and what not.
.... of the software. EZ CD Creator's been pretty good thus far -- just buy an older version of the software, and you won't have to worry about any "innovations" that the company might make with respect to future releases.
Hmmm - buy this type of reader and I can watch movies I buy as many times I want.
Buy this other type and I have to pay each time?!
I think even Joe User can figure out the math on this one....
Somedays it's just not worth chewing through the restraints...
Figures.... they cant make it work properly under W2K so they are going to improve it.
I do wonder how effective this will be though. How do they plan to stop bootlegs from being made? Take out mp3 support? Make it so you have to pay royalties whenever you burn your own compilations for personal use? This to me sounds like corporate suicide, as much so as the new XP copy restraint system. People don't like being nickled and dimed to death, and making people pay a lot of money for the "right" (notice how any "right" these days can be taken away as easily as a privelege?) to make compilations from the cds they legally buy sure as hell is a doomed idea. Part of me is wondering if Roxio isn't trying to give out good PR to keep the DMCA from being expanded to provide massive oversight and regulation of the burning industry. Just a thought.
projects like fairtunes could use your support.. They don't disturbute a lot of money, but it's exactly what you're looking for.
---
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
It doesn't do rockridge format, so I don't even use it.
========================
63,000 bugs in the code, 63,000 bugs,
ya get 1 whacked with a service pack,
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
Roxio can do whatever they want. They are not obligated to anyone for anything and that includes CD writing software. Why do you think they owe you their software?
Anyway, there will always be a need for data CDs and there is no way to diffrentiate between kinds of data. As longs as those mp3 CD players keep coming out, this partnership is meaningless.
I don't have the bandwidth to download a ton of digital music off the internet. I don't have the time to burn all my cds for my friends (and most of my friends don't want my music anyway, and most of my music is by bands who would kiss me if I gave them more exposure). I use my cd-burner to make mix cds to use in my car. My big worry about all this talk about "safely copying authorized music in order to protect copyrights" is that I will lose the true fair use of my cds--making copies for my own personal use. It's fine with me if these companies figure out a way to keep people from stealing music off the internet, but if that method keeps me from making copies of music I have purchased for my own personal use, I would say that oversteps the bounds of their copyrights.
As of Windows XP, CD burning is built into the operating system, thus rendering this entire thread mute since Easy CD Creator will likely never be bought by a customer again anyway.
"If I can see farther it is because I am surrounded by dwarves." -- Murray Gell-Mann
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
One of the nifty new features is the ability to DnD .ogg files into the track window and have them burn out to normal CD Audio files. Is this the first burning app to offer this feature?
Roxio's Easy CD Creator claims to do this with MPEG layer 3 audio files (and could probably do ogg vorbis with a plugin), but it has never worked properly for me (dies on the slightest corruption that Winamp skips right over), so I just use AOL's Winamp to turn the OGGs and MP3s into wav files and then fix and mix them with some audio editing software.
Will I retire or break 10K?
My old CD burning software
My old CD burning
Will I retire or break 10K?
Toast works with my CD burner now and does what I want. When Roxio recovers from this apparent lack of oxygen to the corporate head, I'll upgrade. Ta da. Not a big deal.
It's just the Windows users that have to worry, at least until another program is sufficiently populous that the proliferation of Roxio's stuff is irrelevent.
They can't do this for CDs because there already are millions of DAE-supporting CD-ROM drives out there. No hardware maker would ever agree to removing the DAE feature because
1) they don't have to, legally
2) it would dramatically reduce their market share! The word will spread, people will specifically ask for CD-ROM that have DAE.
So basically, it's too late. If the RIAA comes up with a new media format, OTOH, watch out!
Most likely, they'll start pushing Audio DVDs, because makers are legally tied to the (million dollar) DVD license and have to swallow all specs pushed down their throats. Also, lots of DVD players don't read CD-Rs.
Does anyone know if there's any way that the DMCA can be used against products such as NERO?
That's the direction i could see this sort of alliance going towards..
Sure we'll still be able to get ahold of "black market" burning software..
But if they have Non-standard burning software declared a "Circumvention device" ala decss or whatnot
Well then.. Things will get Ugly
In fact.. With the new Types of copy protection on music cd's (I think the major one is some bastardization of the orange book format)
Would ownership of an mp3 of a song that only showed up on the copy protected cd be considered a violation of the DMCA?
And what company do you think was providing MS
with CD Burning software to bundle in Windows XP?
And THAT, my friend, is exactly what the big media cartels are afraid of.
The media companies got fat because the barrier to entry in the recorded music market was high -- you needed hundereds of thousands of dollars worth of equipment to record professional-quality music, and millions of dollars to master, duplicate, and distribute the media.
Now, you can set up a home studio with a PC for less than $10k that equals or surpasses professional studios of 10 years ago. For the cost of a web hosting account, you can advertise and sell your product directly to the consumers. The only premium the record companies can still offer is mindshare / exposure, but a band can hire their own publicist to do that for a whole lot less.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
Yes, this is bad, but frankly, who the hell didn't see it coming?
I mean, shit, you buy a drive for a few hundred bucks, but for some reason, that doesn't entitle you to the goddamn write drivers for the thing! Imagine if they sold zips like this, or even floppies. It's absurd that you have to have some special program just to write to media.
Sorry guys, but we're a few years late on this one...
--
Feminism is the wild notion that women are human beings.
Almost every CD I own (300+) is in a cardboard box at the bottom of a stack in my closet. It is perfectly legal for me to listen to those songs I have converted into MP3 format. I, for one, will not be paying a cent more to move them to another media to be played in my car.
So, I guess I'll stick to my Linux CD Burner application.
As for music piracy, as long as CDs are produced (and that will go on for another 5 years at the very least, I think), everyone will be able to copy and rip them. There isn't much music/software companies can do about it.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
But again, this is what the real issue is. It's an issue of distribution, and that's it. Record companies, through payola and networking push songs to the top of the charts. If you destroy the distribution channels, they don't make money, and this is their biggest fear -- not the loss of revenues, but the loss of their industry because they are simply no longer needed.
Good (bad) enough scenario for you?
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
I.e. the same tax structure, maybe different rates, divying up could be made more fair, and only audio CDs "play". (I'm not saying this is what is proposed)
Bad, good, or indifferent?
P.S. I am extremely strongly in favor of fair use, but I do want the artists to get payed. That's why I am going to BUY a Gladys Knight CD instead of downloading the songs. I want to support her, she is extremely good and is a Las Vegas resident as am I :).
RIAA: Listen up. I tried to buy that CD the other day when I have 30 minutes to kill, and could not get it at K-mart.
Make it EASIER TO BUY CDs and more people will buy - not just the true fans and those who can't use Napster. How about enter a CD and/or song title on RIAA.com, enter your zip code, and it tell you where to buy it. Or just buy it over the Net, and get the CD 48 hours later.
MAKE IT EASY folks.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Or if you are unaware you have a choice. Look at people who use IE because it is the DEFAULT, even though they can download Netscape FOR FREE.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Of course. Their lawyers are too busy filing look and feel and trademark lawsuits to have any time left to file DMCA lawsuits.
There are only 168 hours in a week you know...
Plus Steve Jobs would NEVER accept any fascist system other than his own - he HATES competition.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
The Powers That Be have managed to destroy some mechanisms for music trading (Napster, MP3.com), but have not succeeded with even a single positive step toward controlling music trading (such as SDMI, CPRM, CD burning control, etc.) This heartens me. Am I overlooking something?
So instead of using the expensive locked down burning software, use open source software instead. cdrecord for unix works with just about every drive made, and even has DVD-RAM/RW support. With the plethora of GUI interfaces to cdrecord (and companion utilities such as rippers, MP3 encoders), why use that commercial crap?
- "Use the Source, Luke!"
I doubt so, too. The business reasons that apply here are the same ones that still prevent us from being able to buy subscriptions to just the individual cable TV channels we want.
Bingo. I'm still surprised (but shouldn't be, I suppose) at how many tracks from a disc by an artist I really like, featuring a track or two I really like, are not good enough to warrant the purchase of the full disc.
And why all commercial software kicks all free software. NOT!
:*)
Come one now...I've never seen programs as flexible as those programs. Hell, I can pre-record 30 seconds on track one...meaning you have to play backwards when Track 1 starts to hear it. Hmm...wonder if those windows programs are as easy to do that with.
Also, I find it mildly amuzing/annoying the they all use their own ISO. I mean...i kinda thought mkiso was the proper ISO, but then why does Adaptec, CDRWIN, CDClone all have different ISO that I can't burn in Linux. Well, I don't see this being that much of a problem. There will always be CD-Burners and programs that will allow me to do whatever I want. This threat really means nothing to the people that care to know.
"Time is long and life is short, so begin to live while you still can." -EV
Imagine if you could micropay for 12 songs, and burn your own Metallica CD, like the guy at PayLars.com was trying to do? Even great band put out CDs with some crap songs, why not prune out the bad ones? .75 USD on a CD, regardless of sale price. Imagine if a musician could record .WAV files of his songs (no quality loss like MP3) and sell them for .75 USD apiece. You win, since a 12-song CD becomes 8 USD, and the musician wins, because he gets it all, a 12x increase in his profit by not using a record company distribution channel.
I spoke with a musician who said that the musician is lucky to make
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
What good would a CD-ROM be if you couldn't pull data off a CD? Repeat after me: Audio CD's are just 1's and 0's.
LOL. Not quite. Audio data is arranged COMPLETELY differently from other data (files, etc) on a CD. Pulling audio data from a CD, pulling regular ISO 9660 data from a CD, and having the CD read audio data and run it through the DAC and out through an analog connection are three ENTIRELY different opreations from a hardware standpoint.
"It is true that audio CDs use all 2352 bytes per block for sound samples, while CD-ROMs use only 2048 bytes per block, with most of the rest going to ECC (Error Correcting Code) data. The error correction that keeps your CDs sounding the way they're supposed to, even when scratched or dirty, is applied at a lower level.
All of the data written to a CD uses CIRC (Cross-Interleaved Reed-Solomon Code) encoding. Every CD has two layers of error correction, called C1 and C2. C1 corrects bit errors at the lowest level, C2 applies to bytes in a frame (24 bytes per frame, 98 frames per block). In addition, the data is interleaved and spread over a large arc. (This is why you should always clean CDs from the center out, not in a circular motion.)"
--from this cool faq
Like I said... a ton of CDROM drives used to NOT support DAE. DAE is an extra feature purposely included by hardware manufacturers. From a technical standpoint they could EASILY stop including this feature (if laws forced them to do so).
"Don't worry about the hardware manufacturers of CD-ROM's, worry about a new format to replace CD-ROM's that carries copy protection bullshit in with it"
Well... I agree with you 100% there... you're right... like you say they're already building all sorts of digital protection into new digital TV's... I just wonder WHY they never went after (in a legal sense) the DAE feature on CDROM's. Made sense to me... not that that would be right... it just seems like the logical step of attack. *shrug*
http://www.bootyproject.org
OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
"I've seensome games use DAE to cache their in game music. ITs not common, but its sometimes done, and its also legitimate."
Are you sure it's streamed in via DAE and not just streamed in as regular data? See my other post on this thread... DAE != regular data. Just because they're streaming data (even audio data) in doesn't mean they're using DAE.
In fact, I really doubt they'd want to use DAE. High error rate, high CPU utilization, absolutely no control over bitrate, no ability to interleave other game data (for example, terrain data, etc) with the audio.
http://www.bootyproject.org
OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
Yeah that's true... hehehe, the way I understand it, basically three options if you're playing music from a CD during a game:
http://www.bootyproject.org
OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
I don't really care if companies like Roxio will stop making ripping-friendly software... as a zillion other posters have pointed out, we can always use other software (or other OS's, if need be).
:)
Here's the thing, though, that's scary. When will they start going after the HARDWARE makers? If I was an bastard record company exec, I would go after the CD-ROM drive manufacturers and fight against the digital audio extraction (DAE) feature. Because without that, you can't rip songs directly from a CD. Sure, you could do an analog rip, but that's a pain in the ass (and usually sounds like ass).
Are there any uses for DAE, besides ripping music? It's seems to me that's pretty much it's sole purpose... used to be, in the days of 8x (and lesser) cd-rom drives, a lot of drives didn't even support DAE and they worked fine for everything but ripping.
So, to me, based on the $#$%#$ evil laws that we have in America it would be hard to defend the inclusion of the DAE feature. Not saying that's right, but basically, from a functional standpoint... DSS:DVD = DAE:CD. You know what I mean? Please, someone correct me if I'm wrong in a legal sense. I hope I am.
One good thing: the hardware manufacturers WILL fight efforts by the RIAA, et al, to defend their hardware's ability to rip music... because as another poster pointed out, ripping/burning/downloading music is pretty much the only new "killer app" for PC's these days.
http://www.bootyproject.org
OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
I don't think this is much of a problem. It isn't like Roxio is the ONLY company to make cd writing software, and even it it was do you seriously think people wouldn't find a way to get around any protection put in place?
And why is it so scary? Not to troll, but it just means that you would now be paying for songs that you most likely should have been paying for in the first place...
If people don't like whatever scheme for payment Roxio/EMI end up putting in place, they will find a way to get around it by cracking the program or moving on to a new one.
-- Judas96
"...don't take a nerf bat to a knife fight." - Joe Rogan, said on News Radio
When you get into bed with a giant, you gotta expect he'll roll over during the night. Roxio's management seems to be so ignorant of a fact that's left a string of empty buildings from Fisherman's Wharf to Los Gatos that they've gotten into bed with two giants.
This is called the Dance of the Doomed.
The only sensible advice to shareholders of ROXI is contained in the subject line.
If you don't own any shares in Roxio -- and why you'd have held any after their announcement of the alliance with MSFT escapes me -- and if you don't use their Easy CD Creator/Direct CD -- another "in God's name, why?" kind of practice --this is a NOP. Roxio won't be here to worry about this time next year.
And if there's anybody on /. who didn't already know that Windows and Office XP were going to be very nasty propositions -- helLOOOOOOO!
No, BETA lost out because of the booming porn industry.
Sony apparently refused to let pornos be released on BETA, so VHS took over.
You're confusing BetaMax with VCC 2000. As far as i know BetaMax 'lost' for the same reason MCA failed; licensing fees.
use another CD burner, or don't upgrade Toast. Roxio loses money. Fuck 'em.
I'm still using the Adaptec Easy CD Creator 3.5c that came with my Plextor burner, and for a very good reason; 4.0 not only managed to totally fuck up my cd's but insisted i install IE 5.5, which i refused to do. Why do i need IE 5.5 to burn CD's??? Also, Feurio is much better for burning music cd's...
I think they want to cash up on some money before they go out of business. Windows XP will come with burning software. Just like the Netscape vs. IE deal, 3rd party software for the home market will die.
hmm... for fun I enjoy launching DDoS attacks against 127.87.42.5
It's going to be Very Bad (tm) for Fair Use if the other four of the Five Families of the International Music Industry sign on. It's also going to be Very Bad (tm) for Ahead Software GMBH, Veritas Software and hundreds of little shareware companies too. I smell a cartel forming. It doesn't smell too good.
----
http://www.msgeek.org/html/
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
...
As I recall, the Ferrari F50 was considerably slower than the F40 (I might be off, I'm actually not much of a car buff) A magazine (Car and Driver, I think) tried to review the new one, and foudn that _no one_ had been allowed to buy them, only lease them. And if they were reviewed, then the leasee lost their Ferrari status symbol.
Eventually they found out there was _1_ (one) actual owner of a Ferrari F50, someone who'd been a big Ferrari racing supporter. He let them test it, and it was slower. (Not slow, but slower)
Looking for freelance Actionscript (Flash/Flex) or ColdFusion work and/or freelance developers. Email me, put Slashdot
The slashdot 2 minute between postings limit: /.'ers since Spring 2001.
Pissing off hyper caffeineated
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
The slashdot 2 minute between postings limit: /.'ers since Spring 2001.
Pissing off hyper caffeineated
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
gall, not gaul.
Though, if you think about it, quite a bit did not work with 2k that worked with previous versions of windows.
My scanner drivers and cd indexing program come to mind.
The slashdot 2 minute between postings limit: /.'ers since Spring 2001.
Pissing off hyper caffeineated
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
Now, those sales are not going to be there, and a majority of the
Yes, by all means, if the situation is created that is "inhospitable" to the consumer, the consumer should stand up and say "fuck company x", after all, this is what keeps the suppliers in touch with the consumers.
Customer loyalty is a load of crap and is very outdated.
If "company x" starts making crap (and there is competition, unlike M$, cause my parents can't use linux / kde / x, I tried it, square pegs don't fit into round holes.) then consumers will choose the competition, company x better fix their shit or be put out of business.
Welcome to the democracy called capatalism.
About the third paragraph of your post - I don't think you are in the majority of ther users with cd burners. Lets be honest with ourselves - cd burners are for one of several things.
List (in order)
#1. Warez / a copy of ms office
#2. Mp3z / CD Audio (pirated)
#3. Moviez (i.e. bootlegs or dvd rips)
#4. Other (actual work, porn)
This is for both home / work use, although at work, actual business related things might be one or two (ok.. maybe three) items up the list.
You back up shit at work to a tape drive - or a high capacity optical disk - not to a 650mb cdr.
Lets be honest to ourselves here.
Anyways, my point is that although you won't mind it - because you are one of the rare honest people (or a poser, wow, that word is so 80's) - other people who rely on their CDRW drives for the above "traditional" uses will.
You are an exception, most likely roxio will not find a market and will discontinue this unless the RIAA gives them more $ for this.
Though judging by the greed of the RIAA (or it just be a markup because all their stuff is pirated), invididual songs will cost $5, which isn't really important because there will be ways to hack it.
The slashdot 2 minute between postings limit: /.'ers since Spring 2001.
Pissing off hyper caffeineated
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
See this entry in the CDR FAQ.
Easy way around that; use another CD writing program.
With the problems that Easy CD has been having, that's probably a good idea anyway.
The reference to the 'Music CD-Rs' is another of the music industry's daft ideas. From the CD-R FAQ: http://www.cdrfaq.org/faq07.html#S7-17
So potentially expect to see Easy CD whinge if you try and burn audio onto an ordinary data CD. I doubt they'd be silly enough to block it, but pop up a warning and your average user gets worried enough to think maybe they ought to buy those 'Music CD-Rs' after all.
Windows XP will include built-in, in-line, Explorer-based cd burning. In other words, it will be no different then writing to a floppy. As it should be.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
here are some problems with your reasoning:
1) you are not forced to BUY CDS/music. This is kind of like saying: mcdonalds is charging too much for their food, let's start robbing and looting their stores. Yeah...that kind of reasoning is going to work REAL well. (why not have some balls for once and start boycotting). This kind of reasoning is kinda like the riots of Los Angelos or Detroit. The blacks get pissed because they feel someone is being overly mistreated, so in response they rob and steal from stores that are owned by chinese,koreans,americans, and GASP blacks. (this isn't supposed to be against any race or religion, im just using the riots as an example)
2) artists are not FORCED to go with a company that rapes them. They choose to do so on their own. If they wanted their music to be "freely" givin to the hands of their beloved fans, they would start up an Internet site, or give it away on a napster like service. If you haven't already figured it out, recording artists do serve a purpose: promotion and advertising. They allow a band to get their music into the hands of the fans.
the real reason we should be against the RIAA is because of their control and monopoly over things like VCD,DVD,etc.,etc. and now burning CD's.
then why have the GPL/GNU license??
I also would like to give money to artists when I enjoy their songs. However I want to give monney to the artist and NOT EMI or any other big label. ESPECIALY when those companies go arround restricting my freedoms.
just my 2bits
"this title" is Title 17 - Copyrights. This means that if I use a recording device to, say, copy something, It is directly excluded from being covered by copyright law unless it is for commercial purposes. Giving to a friend earns you no money and no more respect than you already had, and is therefore non-commercial. "No action can be brought" is very strong language and this WAS intended as a blanket clause to protect consumers, including "swapping" tapes. The trouble is, they never predicted a communication medium on the scale of the internet. Believe me, I was completely flabbergasted when I came to terms with exactly what this clause means.
This strengthens your argument, since they have already succeeded in restricting your exercise of fair use without you even knowing it.
You are missing something: Say the owner of three CD's wants to make up a CD consisting of different tracks of those three CD's. As long as he owns the original, then having the copy CD is LEGAL. The recording industry wants to collect the royalty twice since ther is no GUARANTEE that the copy would be used legally. People have been doing this quite legally for forty years with real-to-real tape drives and their right to do this has been confirmed by the Supreme Court. TOM
if only X CD Roast was cross platform
XP CD Roast
(XP, forever tarnished by the stupidity of Microsoft, it stands for Cross Platform dammit!)
and CD paranoia mmmm.
hrm.. lets see..
pay for burner
pay for cd-r
pay for bandwidth
pay for subscription to download music.
pay again to download same music after silver film gets scrached of of cr-r
pay for windows XP twice becuase it desided to crash, and had to reformat.
They get good by playing in small, cheap shows over and over and over.
That's called "playing professionally". But you're right, in the sense that Napster doesn't necessarily kill live performances, and musicians can still earn a living.
However, I think it can't be ignored that we have seen an explosion of musical talent in the 20th century that is primarily owed to the recording industry. The recording industry has allowed the potential market to be expanded tremendously to people that otherwise wouldn't be able to hear the London Philharmonic, or whomever. If the recording industry was destroyed, how many people would have heard early black Jazz performers?
And, Mozart was composing at the age of eight. Exactly how much cash do you think he was getting at that age?
And how much less music would we have if he had to lay bricks by day?
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
This is the right principle, the only question is the execution. If you think this is bad, then you are part of the problem, not the solution.
I want to be able to pay the artists money for their songs. Up until now, there simply is no way to give money if you want to download an electronic version. If they allow me to pay a reasonable price to download a song, then I will gladly pay it.
The only question is whether they are going to put restrictions on what I can do with my purchased song for my personal use. If there is any copy restriction, then that obviously is not acceptable.
But this knee-jerk reaction to any kind of paying for music is just stupid. If there is no money in music, then a lot of the best musicians will simply cease to exist. Yes, we will always have amateur musicians, but a lot of the best musicians will never happen unless they are able to practice all day, every day, and you can't do that unless you do it professionally. There is a reason why professional athletes, for example, will kick almost any amateur's ass.
And no, 200 years ago Mozart or whoever DID NOT do it on an amateur basis. They were paid by either royalty, upper class citizens or the church. In fact, most artists were compensated in that way. Art and money have always gone hand in hand. Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive (and impractical).
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
My.yahoo on crack w/slashdot module :)
that multi surf thing is pretty neat..
Well, let's see.
Functionally, this doesn't have *THAT* great an impact. Data cds are still kosher, but music cds will be affected.
Great, I'll make my x86 music discs with cdrecord (thanks, Jorg!) and my PPC music discs with iTunes and the MacOS cdburner. (thanks Jobs!)
We know that Jobs isn't interested in this kind of strong-arming to get consumers to get in step- they advertised it with the Rip.Mix.Burn. campaign, and that combined with iTunes and the new iBook, the user is meant to insert a cd, have iTunes rip it to mp3, and burn to cd-r/rw.
So I can still do the things I need to do in iTunes and cdrecord. I can use roxio for data cds if I must.
At least Apple is still catering to some of the customers' concerns.
And hey, reason enough for me to support Apple? They voted AGAINST all CPRM proposals.
A host is a host from coast to coast, but no one uses a host that's close
DivX (the DVD product)This is nothing more than an industry attempt at cornering freedom. It will fail in the free market. The only thing that scares me about such setup is if they pass a law forcing it upon every Burner/Media combination. When they outlaw CDBurners, only outlaws will burn CDs. Now if the everyone got together and boycotted the Music Industry ...... Oh wait, now I sound like a liberal.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
amazing. technology puts power in the hands of the consumer; this simply means that you must make a profit by becoming an enabler, not an obstacle. an obstacle is extortion. you MUST do it my way, i lock you out of any other. you are now my slave. pay me. an enabler is positive. i can help you with a better way. here it is. pay me. yes, the enabling way relies on consumer good will, because the old militant force ways of obtaining payment no longer work. whatever. competition ultimately will weed out the extortionists and enrich the enablers. but.. has anyone given serious thought as to how to pay the Good Guys, the enablers? if i want to donate money to a band, without the music industry getting a penny of it, HOW do i do this? this is a significant problem. whoever solves it will make a big step in enriching enablers and impoverishing extortionists.
Check this out! I don't feel that people necessarily feel that people have the right to distribute "their intellectual property" in any way they see fit.
Oh, I forgot to grow up, sorry.
I use cdrecord-1.9 on Linux. BTW, a port of cdrecord is available for Windows, and it's GPLed. You don't have to pay a dime to use it.
I hadn't known there were so many idiots in the world until I started using the Internet -Stanislaw Lem
I believe in the Constitution of the United States. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 embodies my idea of copyright. When copyright law reflects what our founding fathers wrote down to prevent the kind of monopolies we are currently seeing, then I will once more have respect for copyright law.
Copyright is for Creators, not corporations.
Copyright is for only a limited time and then the work becomes elevated to the Public Domain.
Copyright is only an incentive to creators urging them to further effort, to promote the progress of the arts and sciences.
If all of these things were true (as were intended) then I think most people would respect copyright, but when all the money is going to the big corporations who use it to buy Congress - how do you respect that???
Don't just complain - DO something about it!
----We can't go jumping down everyone's throat just because their new products include "copy protection".----
YES, WE CAN -- AND SHOULD!!
Copy protection should be illegal. Copyright law already provides far, far more protection than any 'creative' work deserves. Putting copy protection on something takes away all sorts of Freedoms like 'Fair Use,' like making archive, personal, backup copies, like what happens when (if ever) something actually completes the journey to the Public Domain!! The companies surely will not distribute unprotected copies when this happens.
Give up your Freedoms if you like, but I'm going to fight for mine.
Don't just complain - DO something about it!
No! Keep using it. I was just noting that Roxio will suffer in the market when people don't buy their crippled software, and that they will deserve it.
sulli
RTFJ.
use another CD burner, or don't upgrade Toast. Roxio loses money. Fuck 'em.
sulli
RTFJ.
This really is the new killer app. Think of Apple's "Rip, Mix, Burn" ads. Of course the industry is running scared ... serves 'em right.
sulli
RTFJ.
You can't see it coming, can you? "EMI joins forces with the creators of cdrecord..."
Some people in here seem to have the crazy idea that the industry is "doing the right thing," and we're all just saying, "oh no, they're doing the right thing, now we can't have anarchy and do as we please." Well, it's not that way. Companies never do the right thing. They do the profitable thing, the thing that is in their interests -- whether or not it is right or wrong. We should not put any deference in what a company says of their own measures, their own hype of their own products, etc. Companies are simply looking out for their interests -- if there interests included killing you, and they could get away with it, they would do it. The fact of the matter is that what they are doing can and will negatively impair our rights -- it will hinder people who are not using technology to illegally redistribute music(just as the Napster decision has negatively affected people who were not using it to distribute copyrighted material -- i.e., the ppl who distributed parodies). Of course, it will also negatively affect those of us who ARE using technology to illegally distribute/get copyrighted material.
We, of course, should look out for our interests, whether or not its right/wrong. Right and wrong is a concept that companies couldn't care less about -- neither should we, at least not on such things.
Everyone looks out for their own interests. A companies interest is to charge you 5000 times more on a product than its worth. Your interest is to get that product for free, irrelevant of the "moral values" involved.
Very simply put -- its a conflict of interests. Neither is right. Companies naturally want to do illegal and shady things to deprive the consumer of choice and competition. Customers naturally want to rip companies off.
Its natural. Don't whine about people who want stuff for free, b/c so do companies.
Let OUR will prevail.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
Well, I'm sure the guys & gals at Padus, GoldenHawk Technology, and Nero will be glad to hear about this. It's not everyday a competitor tries to alienate a quarter of their customer base.
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
HAH....like I'm ever going to use XP...
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
Now I know why Adaptec spun off Roxio...they didn't want their stock affected when Roxio's goes thru the basement....
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
"Which NO software can legally force you to have an active connection to use their product. "
You ever played Asheron's Call Offline?
;)
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
In the early days, CD-ROM drives couldn't rip audio, mostly for the precise reason you describe--pressure from music publishers. You could modify the early Philips drives to rip audio but of course few people bothered. Then some drive vendors started putting in the ripping feature, and the cat was out of the bag. I think the Toshiba XM-3401B (the premier 2x SCSI drive for a few weeks) was one of the first to offer reliable ripping. But soon nearly every new drive could rip.
that's good shit...
i especially like this bit: The software was to be given away for free, and the entire "commun"ity of developers the world over (including the despised USA) would help with the project. Clearly after time, this software would rival anything put out by US corporations.... so if it truly yields a better product, doesn't that make it... well, better?
other than that, a fun read.
to email, take off every 'zig'
All you know-it-all, pole-in-ass types are so sure that you're morally superior, that every Napster or Gnutella user is out there stealing music. Well, there are LEGAL uses for Napster that DO involve downloading lots of music.
FOR EXAMPLE:
I own about 1,000 CDs. I own a tablet PC which I carry around with me nearly everywhere I go and which doubles as my memopad-sized MP3 walkman. Now I could spend hours encoding songs from CD to MP3 each morning so that I can carry around the music that I want, but that's not really time-effective. What do I do? I download the songs that someone else has already encoded. And what's more, sometimes in the middle of the day I find myself wanting that one particular song that I don't have loaded into the PC at the moment. What do I do? Pop on to one of the OpenNap servers and grab the song. If some of you had your way, I'd have to run home, find the CD, encode the track on my desktop PC, IR it to my tablet and run back to work -- or forego listening to it. Buy why should I have to forego listening to it if I've already BOUGHT the damn thing?
I've bought every CD that ever contained a song I liked. I can show you the matching CD from every song I've ever downloaded. I'm not stealing, and I resent the implication that just because I use the MP3 format or visit Napster/OpenNap sites I'm some sort of criminal.
And just to prove that I'm ON TOPIC, I've even burned a few MP3 CDs that I downloaded. How is this legal? Well, I've been through some albums (Black Crowes SHMC, Fiona Apple Tidal, etc.) 4+ times, buying the damn CD each time, because they've been scratched so much they start to skip. Now for the ones I really like, where quality is really important, I will always buy the CD again (paying royalties EACH time, even though I'm only one listener), but for some of them which aren't worth THAT much to me, I'll just grab the non-working tracks off the net and re-burn the entire CD with the skipping tracks replaced. Voila. FIXED CD. That I already paid for.
And aside from these black-and-white issues, I don't see ANY problem with grabbing an MP3 from a CD I own and sending it to a friend in e-mail with "Hey man, check this track out!" in the message body. I lend my CDs out. Sometimes friends copy them to tape, I'm sure. That doesn't give me any guilt pangs and neither do MP3s.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Speaking of which, I just downgraded to EZCD 4 from 5. EZCD5 is buggy and has an irratating bolted-on quasi wizard GUI which assumes the user wants his software to look like AOL circa 1995. It's slower and it intermittantly freezes during mp3 burns. More and more companies are catching the MSFT feature-creep disease which consists of adding fluff features while continuing to ignore bugs that have been present for many versions, all to justify another .0 release.
It seems to me that Wintel is seriously fucking itself. No one gives a shit about another .1 mhz increase in CPU speed and no one gives a fuck about Office 2002, neither add ANY value to 99% of us. The only interesting area of innovation is Graphics cards and that is raplidly approaching the point of diminishing returns. How many of your friends have shelled out $400 for a GeForce3?
Use CD-R/W for what these folks would consider as "legitimate" purposes, such as backups? I, as an artist, often build up large numbers of high resolution pictures on my HD that I would like to make backups of from time to time, and being the copyright holder, see no reason why I should pay EMI/Roxio for the right to do so...
In addition, what of those who want to back up their HD's who happen to also have mp3's? Does this mean that they will be unable to, until every unsigned audio file (including, ironically, those that install automatically with some games, operating systems, and professional audio applications)is hunted down and eradicated?
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
Remember, XP is crippled in the CD ripping department. It's a feature to reduce casual piracy as the rips are low quality. Aftermarket ripping software may get past this, but it may be crippled at the low level. Anybody know for sure?
The truth shall set you free!
I can stream
Artist, studio get paid. Roxio keeps selling software subscriptions. Consumer gets a cheap, easy alternative to buying at the store. Everyone wins.
REALLY bad .wav file to a CD, even the ones I already own. Now, I pay for the "privilege" of making my own Best of Iron Maiden, Vol. 1 - 4 because I don't feel like lugging 20 discs around in my car all the time. I pay for the "privilege" of having a burned copy of Seventh Son of a Seventh Son at work, so I can keep the original at home.
I have to pay the studio *anytime* I burn a
Consumer pay more money to legally use media she has already purchased. She seeks out less restrictive alternatives. Roxio loses money she may have spent on software. Artist, studio loses money she might have spent for an album that is worth $8 to her but certainly not $16. She considers boycotting studio and Roxio who tried to fuck her through ill-conceived business plan to bleed legitimate consumers of more money. Everybody loses.
-------
We want some answers and all that we get
Some kind of shit about a terrorist threat
- Ministry
I hate this. I hate this so much more than I hate the continual music piracy arguments, because in this case your fair use rights are clearly being violated. You already purchased the music -- you are legally entitled to make a copy of it and you do not need the permission of anyone at all to do so, including EMI. I am VERY glad I decided to hold off on purchasing the Roxio software. Their kindly efforts to ensure that I do not exercise my rights has decided me in favour of the competition. It was a tricky choice, but heh, problem solved. Now I know which product to purchase.
-- My cat, Chairman Meow, would like you to join his political party.
I was one of the people that purchased EZCD4. I'm on Win2K and I was honestly considering upgrading to EZCD5 once I was sure it worked. With the Win2K bugs I'm glad I waited. I suspect MS had a lot to do with Roxio's bugs but I digress. With them in bed with the devil spawn, I will rest much easier having crossed them off my software list.
To tell the truth I didn't pay much attention to music before. I hate radio. Then MP3's came along and I was actually buying music because friends were always sending stuff. I was more aware of it. I was actually interested in concerts. But now that I am aware of the greed that exists in the industry; I am discusted to think that one cent lest alone 99% of what I spent went to corperate trolls and slick lawyers. Some greed is good but some people have evidently not heard that too much of a good thing can be bad...
I find myself caring less about music again. I am left with a sour taste in my mouth. In fact I am looking more at all entertainment more cynically. Come to think about it I don't go much to the movies anymore either where I use to always go the day an interesting movie came out...
I already burned all of my cd's, nice bonfire. Now if they had a problem with burning my mp3's and software then I would have a problem...
rrdejay
Gone but not... ummm
That's probably besides the point. One of the big criticisms that everyone has about the music industry is that they're always behind the times on catching up to new technology. Seems to me to be a fairly good approach on their part, if you ask me. They can cut manufacturing costs like nuts and put out a low-cost alternative to buying CDs and a higher-quality (and not to mention legal) alternative to downloading amateur rips.
Plus, it opens up the door for providing an even better service than what Napster has. They can set up a fast, dedicated network to serve the files instead of having to rely on shaky internet downloads, they can make the process of finding a song quicker by providing their own directories, they can even order CDs en masse (like, tens of thousands at a time) and reduce the per-unit expense for themselves and (potentially) the consumer... It seems like a smart all around play, if you ask me.
The only real question will be if they (a) can implement it properly, and (b) can resist the temptation to once again become the megalithic expensive dinosaur that charged too much and encouraged the average music-lover to piracy in the first place.
--------
Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...
The only way a media company can win is if their product is cheaper. Remember Beta? It costed more. VHS = crappier, but CHEAP. So it sold. This is same with this example.
But... I could be wrong.
The bit only indicates copyright status and in of itself isn't a barrier of any kind to copying. It is not illegal to copy copyrighted materials for the purposes of fair use. For example, as an individual creator of content I could conceivably choose to set a bit indicating copyright of my works. So is it now illegal for me to copy my own work with a program that uses the bit as an indication of legality for copying purposes? The way it works now and has pretty much always worked is that copyright is protected by people's willingness to acknowledge it and play by the rules of the copyright holder. Some people do, some don't. This is what the media companies have been trying to change since the invention of the cassette tape. They have had limited success limiting the consumers rights in law, and almost no success in practicality. Though lately they have made frighteningly fast and substantial progress in law (See DMCA, UCITA) and in innovations designed to thwart consumers (See, CPRM, Napster, MP3.com, DVD region codes and encryption, and worst of all "Blessed" software and hardware such as Window's XP and driver level protection.) The only good thing about Roxio's new openly consumer unfriendly copyright protection is that it has always been there from the begining. There are many games and software that it won't copy properly on it due to it's respect for their "copy" protection schemes. Now if the media companies buy out the makers of Nero, Clone CD, and Disk Juggler, then I'll start to worry. This all begs the question, which is stronger; monied corporations and their interests, or consumers and theirs? My heart's with the consumers, but were this a bet I'd side my wager with the money.
Thanks if you do.
No, because it is not reasonable or normal for CDR copying software to look inside the files that it copies. They have worked blindly for many many years. Thus, the bit cannot conceivable be said to "effectively control access".
It's bascially way too late (by more than a decade) to establish a brand new convention for writing CDs.
Its scary, but if folks like the RIAA can get a few of the more popular CD burning software people to implement something it would become the new convention.
You mentioned what I feel is the built-in safety valve for consumers should the music or movie industries make a successful short term push for all devices/programs to operate under their regs. Namely that it WILL ultimately fail in the face of consumer demand for non-crippled/right infringing products. And it only takes ONE company to do it once the magical state of unity sought by the RIAA/MPAA is reached. Here's hoping we don't come to the point of needing this to happen though!
LEXX
"Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
Nero Burning ROM is where it's at. It's hands down the best CD burning software there is. If you have a Plextor, CloneCD and Nero just don't upgrade ever, and you'll be straight.
The way I see all this stuff about people trying to enforce copyrights is this. Copyrighting things is a good idea, but corporate America is taking it too far. The law, in my eyes, is unjust in its present form. So I will disobey this law and download all the mp3s I want. Just as the African Americans disobeyed the unjust law that didn't let them drink from any waterfountain they wanted to. They'll never be able to stop me. There will always be some underground network on the internet where I will be able to get music for free. So until this law changes and becomes just, I will disobey it forever. All I have to do is keep my current ( soon to be legacy ) hardware, and not upgrade anything.
What are they going to do about it?
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
http://www.siliconvalley.com/docs/news/depth/roxio 060501.htm
I really fail to see why recording companies should be getting money from people burning their own cds. Sure, the artists should get some money, after all it is their music. But the recording industry? No, I just don't see it. The recording industry is going the way of the dinosaurs in the future.
What is the difference between a Music CD-R and a conventional CD-R? Is there a real difference, or is it just a marketing gimmick, and if the latter, how does *Mart marketing the stuff make a difference in this case?
--
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Despite the reporter's negative view about secure digital music transaction, I think the consumer can only benefit from this. How do we lose if we pay a low, reasonable price for downloadable music? Do you honestly feel good about yourself when you steal music from artists you like? If you do, move to a third world country where that's legal.
I have never had a problem with paying for music, but I love the convienience and satisfaction of being able to download music whenever I want. Having an integrated solution is the next logical step. Kudos!
"Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
This is further proof that someone is soon going to control, or at LEAST monitor EVERYTHING we do. not to mention they'll probly charge more for it, and say it's to protect US. I hope that FREEDOM doesnt lose the fight against the BS that this most likely is
The opinions in this post are ficticious. Any similarity to actual opinions, real or imagined, is purely coincidental.
You might want to check out Fairtunes, which is a free voluntary payment service: they contact artists (and others) and send them a cheque ("check" in American) when enough money has accumulated. There's no fee except the unavoidable percentage/transaction fee charged by the credit card companies.
I say "and others" because many non-musicians have received donations. Linus Torvalds is near the top of the list in terms of total payments.
i am investigating the possibility of forming an "organization" of citizens concerned about the growing power of multinational corporations. i would like to organize a group of people who all feel that legal action is the wrong way, the way the corporations would like us to fight (because they know they will win one way or another), and that taking matters into our OWN hands is the only solution. please contact me at junkuser69@hotmail.com
--- it's pelvis to be cube
What I want to know, is where is Bill Gates and Microsoft in this deal? Will this new technology require the use of MSN and XP?
Excuse me? Authorized music? Are we back in the USSR all of a sudden? Must we ask the Politburo if the band we intend on downloading is approved by the Mothers Against Rock & Roll, the MPAA and Dubya's pastor, before we are allowed to listed and record?
Once again, it sounds like the Entertainement moguls are simply trying to control which bands we will be allowed access to: only those under contract with them. Where's Courtney when you need her to be as bold about defending independant artists as she was about showing her pussy in Larry Flint?
Software is not supposed to be about how to work around a useability issue. - Ken Barber
Anybody else notice how stores like Walmart and Target are pushing the Music CD-Rs more and more? Hmmmm.
Oh, I don't know, maybe CD-Rs are pushed heavily because there is a higher demand then ever before? WTF does this have to do with that?
Gotta love paranoid geeks..
I know this is like a abortion debate, it goes on and on, but I just have to say about record companies and multibillion dollar software companies they are crooks!
For the RIAA I say this: Motown (Artists never got paid)
For MS/Roxio/Real.com : Windows XP (Control over what you can and can't do with your computer)
I'm not even going to mention RIAA folleys like Britney Spears (no talent, huge market), every Blues singer who is great, hard working and poor, $18 CD's (I could sell a local bands CD for $2 and make a huge profit.) and buying airtime.
It's a damn sham - what the real deep down problem is: loss of control. In many ways a record company is like a Facist Regime, control. If they buy radio time, chances are you can't hear the music you might like - blah blah
It makes my head hurt - sounds like Nazi's they had their 'propaganda machine' a radio. And through that they brainwashed the people. A stretch I know, but take a close look. It's all a sham, from MTV to your local station to Media Play and Sam Goodie.
Get your Unix fortune now!
Dear Anonymous Friend -
Yes, an idea can't by nature be property - at least in the long-term - but the expression of an idea can be.
A song is a creation, no different from a cabinet, that is an expression of an idea. The person who made that creation should - during the time that we as a society have decided to grant them - have the right to determine how and under what terms it is distributed.
It may surprise those that are trying to put me in the Ayn Rand camp, that I believe that the monopolies currently granted under both copyright and patent law run too long. Personally, I believe the following is more appropriate:
I also believe that Copyright and Patents should only be granted to individuals. They should be licensed to corporations or other individuals with a minimum 5% license fee of gross revenues to be divided among the creators of record.
Well, here are a few points that you miss from my presentation:
The right to determine how to disribute and under what terms is for a limited time.
I believe that the current monopoloies granted to copyright and patent holders are too long. They should be:
Copyright, 20 years or the life of the author plus one year, whichever is shorter.
Patent, 10 years, but the clock doesn't start ticking until the invention can be marketed sans regulatory hurdles (FDA approval for drugs).
Finally, copyrights and patents should only be granted to individuals or groups of individuals. Those individuals or groups of individuals can license them to corporations, but a minimum royalty of 5% of the gross revenues must be paid to and divided among the creators.
Ok, the big argumnet to date for support Napster and its kin has been that I want my music in an online format and the record companies and artists don't make it easy for me pay for it in that format.
So, now we have a way to pay them. A way that likely would - if worked right - allow us to reduce the overhead in moving money to the artists. But how do people react they start bitching that they want be able to take stuff without paying the folks that created it. Please, grow up!
If you truly believe in freedom, then the people that create stuff have the freedom to decide how and under what terms their creations are distributed. You on the other hand have the freedom to choose if you will accpet distribution on their terms. If you don't like those terms, then don't use it. Find someone else that will give you what you want on acceptable terms. If you don't like the terms, you don't have a right to take it without their permission ! This is called stealing and it is a direct attack on their freedom to choose how they want to and under what terms they choose to disribute their creations. Attacking someone's freedom is called oppression and that is a bad thing!
Properly executed, a Roxio based distribution technology has the promise of allowing smaller labels to have a reach equal to the big guys. This is a good thing. It means that they can be economically viable.
In case people haven't been paying attention, the world of everything costing nothing on the Internet is quickly disappearing. If people are going to create, they have to figure out how to eat. Some do this by working at a "job" so that they can pursue their "vocation". That is fine, it is their choice. Others want to engage in their vocation full-time. But to do so, they need a way to sell the fruit of their labor. If you like the taste of that fruit and the terms under which they want to provide it to you, then you pay them for it. But you don't take it without their consent.
I don't want to be forced to pay for creations I don't want or under terms I find unacceptable - this is my criticism of RMS and the Free Software Model, I don't want to pay a "software tax" for software I may or may not want - but I also can't take something that another has created without their consent.
This will stop only the people who are ignorant to their options or too lazy to find a different route.
If an mp3 search engine gets axed (or a file-trading service has its hands tied) it doesn't slow the people who use IRC or FTP. Sure it's less convenient for most, but it doesn't stop the practice.
If Adaptec handicaps their product, it will only make other burning software more appealing. If you're reading slashdot, you're probably capable of finding an alternative.
Would it be possible to invoke antitrust law against the music industry for attempting to boost sales of CDs by making legitimate CD copying impossible? Where's that lawyer guy that Slashdot interviewed earlier today?
Just go out now and make a very inexpensive purchase of the most recent burners and softwear - and save them for later... So if the versions get better you will still be able to burn all you want while burning the asses of all the entertainment exes....
aren't audio cd's just regular cdr's that have painted on labels so as not to confuse older (less powerful laser) cd players who might not be able to read the data from a semi-transparent cd?
You may think Roxio is taking the wrong path. But, hey, if they succeeded to bring forth an evidence of sales record being up, then the lawmakers will force that into a bill! What a nightmare!
--
Error 500: Internal sig error
I'm really getting tired of the one-sided posting here on Slashdot. You guys always word things to make capitalism sound bad and piracy/communism/free everything/anti-M$ as good.
/. users.
Really slashdot, why can't you guys put a little more objectivity in your selection of stories and the way you word them in your introductions?
Or maybe someone at the top is pro-communist and is pusing that agenda and trying to brainwash
Sigh....
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
eTrade SUCKS
And you're posting as an anonymous coward because what? You're afraid YOU might get mod'ed down for being a troll?
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
eTrade SUCKS
In order for the burning software to know if a track was copyrighted would be if each and everytrack was digitally signed and encoded w/ its OWN serial # (or serial # range).
If it was the range, then the software would then need to have an active internet connection to verify the tracks authenticity. Which NO software can legally force you to have an active connection to use their product.
This kind of encoding would then make the tracks unplayable on normal (older and present day) cd players. Users would be forced to buy new cd players to play their music.
If they think I am going to buy a new CD player just to listen to their overpriced, engineered crap, they're in for a real surprise (because most people would side with me on this issue).
Which would cause those that resorted to this kind of drastic action to lose money.
So what would be their (the recording industry) option? Invest massive amounts of money into R&D to make it backwards compatible.
This leads to price hikes, many, many new lawsuits due to possible copyright infringement on encoding techniques, and even less compensation for the artists.
Now what do we have?
A bunch of tired, underpaid, pissed off artists.
What do they do?
Drop their record labels.
Distribute their music themselves on websites that they can build and get hosted for free.
Can't have that now, can we?
What do I think will happen then?
NOTHING is going to happen.
NOTHING will change.
Life will go on its merry way.
_____________________________
can you <handle> it?
that's why we have other programs like Nero out there. So what if Joe-Schmoe uses Easy CD Creator and has to pay a small fee. Your average computer geeks will still be using Nero or some 'other' program out there.
Really, when you get down to it, this could be a big mistake. Nothing could drive more people to a different product than creating some sort of burn-payment scheme. Nero and others like it should be happy.
I'm not sure, but it seems as if everyone has missed the point. Either that, or I'm just dumb. The press release says that they've teamed up to allow users to buy EMI music (over the Web, I'd imagine).. download it to their computers, and then use special software to burn it to CD -- rather than offer it in MP3 format, which you could then distribute illegally. That sounds like a good idea. It doesn't sound like it's going to cripple the player at all. It's just an added feature. It does not say that their burner will demand fees from you whenever you burn a CD.
mogorific carpentry experiments
The potential impact here is scary
article. Surprise, surprise.
I think I'll stop here.
Being a audio purist myself. I'm sure not going to pay full price for an MP3 album. As they just do not sound as good. So I hope they discount a bit for quality too... Or do they just plan to send ya the whole 600MB or so. ;)
I remember an older version of nero would warn you if you were copying a copyrighted CD..... it wouldn't do much more than warn you (ie, it didn't stop the copy).... as only I think is fair, since it is ultimately up to the end user to respect copyright.... since there is always a kid out there writing a hack to something to allow copying.... you cannot stop it.... just learn to live with it.
(sort of like the argument of banning or regulating gambling/alcohol/etc.)
===> An eye for an eye makes everyone blind - MG
I won't pay to make CDs of my favorite artists. Even if they make it so I have to pay to put a song on a CD, I'll just use other software (or write my own if/when other software is unavailable). Where there's a will, there's a way.
--Dale
"Why must I always be surrounded by frickin' idiots?" --Dr. Evil
Based on my reading of the DMCA, I don't think software which ignores a bit would constitute a circumvention device.
Here is the relevant portion:
The emphasis was added by me. So what do they mean by "effectively?" Luckily the authors explain what circumvention and effective control mean to them in the next part:
Realisticly, I don't see how anyone could say that having a bit set (or cleared) in a file "effectively controls access to a work," even using their definition of "effective." (Humorously, if you stick to the normal sense of the word "effective," it would appear that the circumvention issue is inapplicable to DVD's since CSS does not effectively control access to them.)
MM
By including this sig, the copyright holders of this work or collection unreservedly place it in the public domain.
And if you worry about joe blow, not being able to run on windows or mac, I guarantee that someone will slap a gui on top of one some existing opensource cd recording software. cdrecord alreasy runs in DOS i believe.
And in no time roxio's market share will disappear, and no longer be bundled with Apple's OS, or HP CD burners, or wherever else it's bundled today, because at some point the vendors realize that everybody downloads 'package X' anyways.
-- Another senseless waste of fine bytes.
This is the most pathetic argument I have ever heard. Communism is about restriction. The government manages everything. In the Open Source movement, it's about freedom. Linux exists because of kind people like Linus who took THEIR time to create it. Thousands of businesses have saved millions of dollars because of Linux. The bottom line is that open source is about sharing. If I write something great and give it away, I'm open-sourcing it. I've just shared. I've saved thousands money. If you think that's Communist, then you need a refresher course in kindergarten morals. I guess I shouldn't release it because I want people to spend money on companies like Microsoft, which has ideals similar to Communism itself! P.S. Tell Microsoft it didn't work. :-)
I want the labels to Erase the junk/garbage tracks on my 80+ cd's and refund accordingly!
1+1=10
EMI is offering music for download and burning, something they haven't done before. If they do it with annoying "copy protection", it won't catch on. If they do something reasonable, it will. It doesn't really affect anything we are doing now, and it won't displace the current CD format for many years. So, I don't really see a problem.
Now with Roxio planning to team up with Emi, Microsoft thinking of bundling a cd-r writer program with Windows XP while having a WMI-Enabled and License-Enabled Windows Media Player since Win2k, do really people think that they will have much choice sticking with the Windows platform?
And where is the matter? We'll continue using Nero and cdrecord as well...
p.bes
For information, stores like Wal-Mart dont push Music CD-R's the company like Memorex sets a price, We buy it at that price and sell it for a price where 47.5% it the markup and we can still make a profit. the memorex CD-R music cd's in a 30 pack at my store are $18.88, if any body that could read the "50" pack of CD-R "data" you will notice the price is the same...hmmm! we don't have a choice as to what we sell or how much, if it sells at 18.88 or 20.00 even, it still sells the same to idiot morons who don't know that you can burn audio on data cd's and data on audio cd's.