Slashdot Mirror
Still More 'Copy Protected' CDs
maniac11 writes: "This story describes new CDs planned on being released by Universal Music Group that sport anti-copying technology. Not much in the way of actual details, but a heads up on a new plan to foil." Same price, worse product -- higher sales! Universal seems to be the first company to commit to downgrading its entire lineup over the next six months or so.
for a vinyl comeback
Je t'aime Stéphanie
Everyone should go back to 8 track...it's rockin in the free world
you a winna , ha ha ha
Lets hope it isn't like those Michael Jackson CDs.. wait a minute.. depending on the music, LETS hope for it ;-)
you can't damage Audio DVDs in same way. Tolerance
will be much lower for data corruption.
Who knew that a lossier product would cause cd's to follow.
These products should absolutely be labelled as "non-compatible" with the CD standard if they in any way are not compatible with other CD usages.
This includes playing on a computer. Many of the other "copy protection" schemes make it impossible to use them on a computer of any sort. Others degrade sound quality.
If they're not clearly labelled as such, I could see lawsuits over mis-representation of the product.
INIAL, IAJAMC.
MadCow.
I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
Only to the rippers, my friend, only to the rippers. The average "Joe Public" could care less.
Ask your mom if she cares that she can't copy it to her computer or an MP3 player.
"Can I still copy it to a cassette tape to play in my Suburban?"
"Yes, mom."
"Then how is it 'broken'?"
BTW, SJ Mercury has a good story on this too.
sulli
RTFJ.
The only thing you can do when a vendor is providing a defective product is not purchase it. So, stop purchasing CDs, DVDs or other copy protected material. Encourage everyone you know to stop purchasing the same.
Otherwise, all you are doing is encouraging them to produce defective products.
..It'll be said again:
Return faulty products for refund or exchange. The marketplace rules, and if enough people return these cd's this technology goes to an early grave.
air and light and time and space
The majority of consumers will never know the difference. The only people the record companies are offending here are the "geeks" who play CDs in their computers. Unfortunately, we're not the largest chunk of the consumer base (right now, it's teenagers), so they really don't give a rat's butt. The record companies are of the impression that we're not worth their time, since we take all the CDs and make illegal copies of them (heavy sarcasm alert).
I for one think it's exceptionally unethical to muck with standards like this. Of course, someone will figure a way to work around it, and the files will end up out there anyway. Those files will probably get pirated more just out of spite. The best thing any of us can do is boycott any "modified" CDs like this, and tell our friends to do so as well. It's been said before, speak with your wallet. That's what I intend to do.
Electronic Frontier Foundation for online civil rights information
Reverse Enginner!!
Loop your line-out to your line-in, dump that all to WAV, encode to Ogg Vorbis.
Ta-da.
This sig is xenon coated, and will glow red when in the presence of aliens
2001-09-26 01:03:41 More 'protected' CDs (articles,news) (rejected)
Good point. Here is a question... Do they lose the ability to have the "Compact Disc" logo on thier case?
"Dude, sweet tunes! When did you buy the new XXXXXXX album?"
"Oh, I didn't buy it. I downloaded it. I woulda bought it, but you can't play CD's in your computer any more."
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Yeah. Seeing as how I play CDs through my DVD player which has a digital coax out into my receiver, I'll be in touch with my lawyer with a quickness if I run into a CD that restricts my ability to listen to music that I've bought on my home system.
Someone needs to reverse-engineer these systems and release their findings in an encrypted format. You'll have violated the DMCA, but they'll have violated the DMCA proving it.
Easy does it!
This comment has been submitted already, 276865 hours , 59 minutes ago. No need to try again.
about when they said vinyal is better than digital.
Who "owns" the "Compact Disc" logo? Also, who is in charge of keeping the standard? I'm sure those logos will still be on there.
As reported a few weeks back, a woman has already filed suit for mislabeling of her CD. Haven't heard any updates on this though. Anyone seen anything else about it?
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
For the most part, I Rip my own CDs, for convinience. Though from time to time I may download a song or rip a friends CD as well.
As a consumer, though, I would dislike not being able to rip my own CD's to my computer. I don't want to search through a vast CD collection, then fumble around swapping CD's every hour or so. It makes for a cluttered desk. I could always go back to the old days when ripping a CD meant playing it and recording it off the computer's mixer with Windows Sound Recorder. Heh. Just my thoughts, though.
Nathan
I might be just a little pissed off if I was part
of a company marketing high-end home and car cd players
that utilized cd-rom drives and now Universal
decides to make their disks such that they won't
play on my head units and players...
I would be all about lawsuits for lost business
and research
A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
Philips as the inventor holds the licences. How long before they'll sue?
Maybe we have to start writing them a few questions/suggestions.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Philips, IIRC.
I just saw on the news here that cd sales are down 10% in sweden compared to last year, and it is going down in the rest of europe as well. They (the record industry) blame it on cd-w, mp3:s etc.
The Swedish CEO of one company (Warner, I think), said that they had no way to compete with the price. I guess that is true, although they probably could lower the price a bit. I started to think of their options. Trying to prevent copying is probably the first thing that the average record-company-member-of-the-board would think of, but that has never worked in practice.
So, what are their options? I have absolutely no idea.
Aside from any fair use issues with regards to restricting all copying, could Vivendi be sued for knowingly selling/distributing a defective product? Since the CD's no longer fall within the set standards for CD audio, and they won't work in some devices, the CD's would seem to be defective.
Is there anything that could be done legally about this?
Seriously, I have bought maybe 15 cds in the past 3 years. Three of those were replacements of cds I'd have for years had been remastered, and the rest were by bands that allow me and others like me to freely record and trade their live concerts. Radiohead and U2 are two big name acts that have recently figured out that people who trade their concerts are more likely to buy their albums and attend their concerts than someone who doesn't trade.
Check out the links above, there is something for all tastes. There is plenty of music to be had for the price of your bandwidth and blank CDs.
newsflash: Anything I can listen to, I can record. You can too!
Checkout This Incredible Idea: Run a cable from your portable cd player to the audio-in on your computer. Play+Record the track. Run resulting file through mp3 encoder. Viola, you now have an mp3 of a 'protected' cd. Sure, it isn't a digital extraction from the cd, but I bet the average mp3-downloader couldn't tell the difference anyway.
All it takes is one person getting a decent recording of the cd for it to get in circulation on p2p servivices like gnutella.
If you can download these copy-protected cd's for free anyway, then the copy protection is worthless!
___
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
The protected CDs can be played on conventional CD players and CD-ROMs, Bronfman said, but safeguards will be in place to prevent copying the music onto computers or "burning" them onto recordable CDs.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
Phillips...
g os .html
http://www.licensing.philips.com/cdsystems/cdlo
I am looking up the rules now...
How will this affect car audio systems? I know alot them can play burned CD-R's and CD-RW's as well as pulling data like track names off, so I assume that they use the same type of drive as a computer does.
Also, most of the old CD-Rom drives, as well as some new ones, have stereo miniplugs for headphones in the front, will you be able to play these cd's through that? I doubt it based on the previous reports of "no disc detected" but you never know.
I think most people buy cd's to listen to in their car anyway, or at least, that's where the majority of music listening takes place, so if they're not compatible with car audio then the industry is going to have a lot of irate consumers on their hands.
May you be touched by His Noodly Appendage. RAmen.
Is anyone working on a website where a consumer can go and see how broken his or her possible purchase is, before they buy it?
Can't you read the raw device and disect the data retrieved. Or is the stuff scrambled? What are the issues?
Now, obviously the Slashdot vibe is that this is a flawed model for making music, and I'm inclined to agree. That is why you should be supporting independent artists who don't pull this copy-protection bullshit on their listeners. The media cartel only exists because people keep fueling it and voting with their dollars; if we want to beat it, we need to make our own content. Support independent films, musicians, and other artists who do their work for the love of it. Hell, make your own music and give it away on the Internet; there's bound to be somebody who likes it, no matter what it is. Hell, there are people who like listening to white noise.
As long as you continue to buy mainstream CDs and DVDs, you are going to have to take whatever copy-protection measures the publishers decide to incorporate. If you don't like their terms, take your money elsewhere. That's how our society works.
Loneliness is a power that we possess to give or take away forever
I love it when they talk about giving the artists their due. For the most part that's crap. Most record deals rip off the artist to begin with. Most bands make money from touring and merchandise such as concert T's etc. Free music swapping benifits them. The record companies trying to hold on to their outmoded models are the only ones who benifit from these kinds of things.
Their defense would probably be that the intention of the CDs they are selling is to be used to play music in a standard CD music player. No where is it stated that they have to allow non-musical-playback purposes.
If the argument is then that they are degrading audio quality, you have to prove that audio quality is degraded. It's not that hard to design the intentional errors so that the interpolation produces the value that would normally be in the music (or very close to it).
I highly doubt that an A/B test would be able to find the difference to any ears.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
If the industry is losing billions to copying, and they've made it impossible, we can expect to see prices fall to say $4.99, right? Or were they lying about napster....
It's time to take up the discussion from a couple of days ago. Slashdot as a politcal force. One of the simpler things we could do is form a boycott. Boycott UMG at first and then all of the other music monopolists. I for one usually buy $100+ worth of music a month. I hereby declare that I will immediately stop buying music from the UMG until they make the anti-copy noise go away. Who's in?
--- Think of it as evolution in action ---
According to this, the "Compact Disc Digital Audio" logo can only be used "on discs complying with the CD-DA specification: IEC 60908 and/or the Philips-Sony Compact Disc Digital Audio System Description) also known as the RED Book)."
So does this mean that the new, crippled CDs will still be sold under the name "CD"? Wouldn't Phillips want to protect their patented technology's name from being misapplied to products which don't adhere to the standards which they established? And, on the flipside, if these new things aren't CDs, then do the companies pressing the new, flawed discs still have to pay licensing to Phillips? Could it be that there's an additional financial incentive to switching over - a marginal savings in cost in avoiding those fees?
Maybe I'm just paranoid, or misinformed... but I can see how this would read as win-win to record companies: Cheaper bulk disc fabrication, and the elimination of all that pesky fair use!
Someone set up a domain. "CopyproofCDs.org" or something. Make a list of every copy-proof CD out there.
Then we need to get people to sign up and deliberately go out and buy them.
Here's the fun part.
Once you've bought them and opened them up, return them.
Do this ad nauseum. On your way home from work or school, on the way to the store, or when you're at the mall. Just return a copy. They'll have to throw it out. Ask for another copy of the same album. Bring in a laptop to prove to them that it doesn't play in your computer. What can they do? They HAVE to give you your money back or give you a new copy of the damned CD.
Now, if we get THOUSANDS of people doing this -- and we can, this is slashdot we're talking about -- record companies will soon realize that there's NO money to be made in copy-proof CDs.
Good idea?
"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?"
How about we return it for a refund? If enough people did that they'd have to stop!
You know, I bet we could just take the digital-out of the cdplayer and pipe it into our soundcard....
Even a D-A-D conversion would be a little lossy, but after that we could copy as much as we wanted.
Damn those RIAA bastards to hell! They're releasing defective CDs!
These go against the redbook standard. For shame.
Hey, I think I'm witty! I'll make a list of all the comments that people will make in the article because that's all people ever say in these articles! Oh, wait....
-Denor
Not relevant in a law suit, the point is that they don't comply with the standard as required for labeling your product a 'Compact Disk'(tm).
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
We all know that it's only a matter of time before someone finds a way to by pass the copy protection.
I know that I'll be focusing the majority of my CD purchases on music released by independent labels. Major lables are the corrupters of good music and they can kiss my ass. MTV too.
Sony _is_ 'protecting' Michael Jackson's CD's Sorry slash, I sent it to you first, you didn't want it so I picked it back up.
Face it, people are stupid, and the internet is the place where they all meet.
Amazon.com and CDNOW reviews have already included this in the comments (on the crappy disc they tried it out on, I forget the title)
sulli
RTFJ.
And I just spent $500+ on my spiffy Kenwood MP3 player. I guess I'll just have to get my MP3s to play in my car off those war3z sit3z and ftp3z.
Shame too, because all I was doing was making it more convenient to keep lots of music in my car. It also makes me happier as the person(s) who broke into my car is just a little more screwed since they won't be able to profit (oh, and not pay royalties) off the cds s/he stole.
So I take it this means that cd-duping is supposed to be eliminated ("more difficult")?
Really... I wonder when they're going to demand that used cd stores pay the record industries for the lost profits.
Idiots. All of them.
We could boycott them. Stop buying cd's and we'll all start singing.
Next they will get rid of all trees so there will be no sheet music. For those that can learn by listening well then The atmosphere will be sucked off into space.
Since this copy protection method works by throwing in errors which (most) CD players will simply interpolate over, won't this make these CDs much less tolerant to scratches & fingerprints? If this is the case, this would be a pretty big reason to stay away from these CDs. Blah. Time to invest in a new needle for my phonograph...
This logo may be used on discs complying with the CD-DA specifications: the IEC 908 standard and/or the Philips-Sony Compact Disc Digital Audio System Description (the RED Book).
There are 12 different logos all with different requirements for permitted use. What I don't know is if these new discs would violate _every_ one of these standards resulting in the publisher's inability to use any "compact disc" logo.
CD will be just fine when we all switch to 24bit/96kHz or better..
<^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
The reason why the record industry is doing poorly is because they sued Napster and shut them down. I used Napster to listen to music I liked but couldn't find on the radio. If I liked a song enough I went out and actually bought the CD that the song existed on. It isn't enough for me to download the song onto the one machine I have dedicated for that task, I wanted to be able to listen to the whole CD and that meant that I bought it.
The music industry shuts down Napster, which automatically makes me angry at the music industry. So I stop buying CD's from the music industry. Not only that, but I also stop buying things I can copy music onto. Like blank CDs and disk drives and such. Those companies loose sales because not only do I stop buying CDs, but also so did two million other people. This means that probably a dozen, maybe two dozen companies suddenly can't pay their bills. They start laying off people and maybe they go out of business and maybe they just scale back but the fact is, they are in a recession. So those dozen or two dozen companies employ something like a quarter of a million people and of those maybe something like fifty thousand are now out of work. Those people now half to scale back on everything if they don't want to loose what they still have. No to mention the 200,000 people that are still working but are now terrified that they are next. But these people aren't the only ones who are scared. People read about it in the newspapers and they begin to think: "I don't think I'm going to buy that new cell phone today. I can afford it, but God, look at the economy." Before you know it we are in a full scale recession. This is because some record executive was afraid he might loose sales on CDs for Twisted Sister or Metallica.
They have their cause and effect really screwed up. They say, "It's all those people out there copying this stuff that's hurting us." It isn't that. Most people I know are fairly honest and if they make copies its almost always for themselves to use on some medium the record company didn't think of. Most people aren't buying music from these companies because they see how much the artists and the companies themselves hate their customers. It is this contempt for their customers that has put them in this pickle. Now they grind salt into their own self inflicted wounds and make it so that you can only copy onto a blank CD. This ought to make there customers happy.
Beware the wood elf!!!
The Compact Disc logo is owned by Phillips.
g os .html
http://www.licensing.philips.com/cdsystems/cdlo
The right to use the logo is as follows:
"This logo may be used on discs complying with the CD-DA specification: IEC 60908 and/or the Phillips-Sony Compact Disc Digital Audio System Description (also known as the RED Book)"
Players have similar restrictions. So if the disc dosen't play on your "Compact Disc" labeled device and it is labeled "Compact Disc" one of them is lying, or the spec is too loose.
This only works as long as computer CD-ROM drives don't allow interpolation of digital data. Are there any drives out there that allow that as an option? If not, I wouldn't be surprised to see them spring up soon.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Why? Because it has no licensing issues, silly. And - guess what - this is just ideal for high volume, low cost enterprises. Once Linux devices really start to take off, (and they will - people just won't know what they really are) - you will hearing gorgeous Ogg Vorbis sound everywhere.
Besides, Ogg Vorbis should win on it's fantastical name alone..
Stop the brainwash
Philips does, and according to the rules stated in the rule book on their web site:
This logo may only be used on discs complying with the CD-DA specification: IEC 60908 and/or the Philips-Sony Compact Disc Digital Audio System Description (also known as the RED Book)
This is step 1: establish a "copy protection scheme" on CDs. Step 2 will be the real killer: going after each and every application that's capable of defeating it, using the DMCA as the Big Stick.
Interesting to see how that turns out. I mean, they're bastardizing a published standard and selling the product as compatible with that standard. Jeez, if they weren't all in the same bed, I'd expect Phillips to sue them ;)
Does anyone know of web site that lists such albums. I would like to start purchasing them and returning them as defective to every record store in a 20 mile radius.
I know the Dow Jones Ind Avg is down 25% from a year ago...but this general trend in business could have nothing todo with a 10% drop in someones retail sales ....
Nope...it's the damn internet pirates !
-- www.globaltics.net
Political discussion for a new world
Anyone with a good soundcard can create a rip, using a good codec and a high enough bitrate, that sounds (to most ears) indistinguishable from most pure digital rips (especialy considering how many people use low bitrates and quick, low-quality encoding). People accustomed to playing music on their computer will actually be forced into making such rips, assuming these disks are not playable on cd-rom drives.
The first method of distributing/sharing mp3s was the newsgroups -- a method I still prefer. Believe me, the expert rip-artistes of alt.binaries.sounds.mp3 will be targeting Universals's copy-protected releases and releasing them to the world quite promptly; a skip and a hop and they'll be on all sharing services as well.
Perhaps this is Universal's scheme to get the music more widely distributed?
I survived the Dick Cheney Presidency 7 to 9 AM 7-21-07
It's always going to be feisable to copy music. If you can't directly rip a cd right from your cdrom, then you can use the line in function on your soundcard an play it from a "Music Disc' player. I'm sure there is many other ways as well.
(NOTE: I said Music Player since the mew CD's arn't really CD compatible.)
Now with these new CDs, because they're copy-protected, a ripper for them violates the DMCA. So these new pieces of software which allow the contents of a CD containing copyrighted music to be converted into a plain old ordinary computer file are wholly illegal. Which is kinda odd, really, seeing as how they do the exact same thing.
I know that's nothing you didn't aready know, but I just thought I'd get it off my chest.
If there's one thing this argument needs, it's a catchy label. If copy-prevention on CD's get slapped with a 'downgrade' label, it'll be dead before it gets any momentum. Joe Sixpack will NEVER stand for it and the media will have a field day demonstrating car stereos and home computers balking at the latest N'Sync CD.
We should push this rhetoric HARD.
Let's not forget about Dave Matthews Band. They had the foresight to pass on several offers from record companies because they wanted one of them to guarantee them the right to allow their fans to record concerts and swap songs. For that reason, while I have not bought a new CD in months, and don't intend to, I will make a small exception to my boycott and buy them -- assuming they don't allow copy protection to be foisted off on their CDs, in which case, I'll have to take a pass on that, too, since I almost exclusively listen to them on my box while working.
Am I bad for business? I've bought every album, some more than once because of mishap, plus their bio CD and a pair of DVDs (one was videos, one was a concert). I've also been to two of their concerts and would gladly go to another, and snap up their professionally recorded live albums eagerly.
What's to prevent someone from producing CD-ROM drivers that just emulate whatever it is that the audio error correction hardware does? I would expect such software to emerge from the bazaar pretty quickly. Is there some deeper hardware issue here?
-- Remember that we live in a world where all the really big decisions are made by people with short attention spans.
yup, 1/4", half-track, 30 IPS if I remember correctly [the 1970's is a long way back] but the damn tape is so dirty you need to clean the heads every 30-60 playing minutes.
-- www.globaltics.net
Political discussion for a new world
As far as that goes, does the record company have any obligation to you to produce a CD which is compatible with your player of choice? Even if you sue them, the worst thing that can probably happen is that they'll be forced to acknowledge in the liner notes that the CD is not red book standard
sigs are for suckers
I just had a flash-back to my glory days as a electronic music freak, with dual ARP 2600's [each two voice!] ... man the 70's rocked !
-- www.globaltics.net
Political discussion for a new world
Sony Music Entertainment recently said the CD of Michael Jackson's new single "You Rock My World" was distributed to European radio stations with protection software after the song started showing up on the Internet.
I think it's funny that the author of the story chose to point out the absurdity of this sequence of events in this subtle way.
What were the record execs thinking? "Hey, everyone who wanted to pirate a copy of this Michael Jackson song already has. In retaliation, let's hurt our paying customers! That will show 'em!"
That's not closing the barn door after the horse has gone - that's setting fire to the barn to teach it a lesson.
I have a blind friend who complains about the "ticks" when listening to a cd.
with all of this copy protection and the high level of competition that arises between artists, even on the same label, to get widespread exposure, it's not much of a surprise that most of my musical friends have decided to record and distribute solely through their friends and other social networks, using mp3's and burnt cds.
Mind you, they wont be making 2 million bux a record.
I say boycott "Price code H" and go check out the bluegrass jam at your local bar.
you can't go wrong for $2
rehab, captain ahab, you're chasing the wrong fish!
If you get a CD that fails to play for you, you can still use it as a throwing weapon. I've been burned by one before, someone threw it at me and hit my hand. The spinning of the disk caused enough friction with my skin in the split second it took for it to fall down that it burnt me.
It hurt for several days.
Why wouldn't someone simply start a service where users can report technical complaints about CDs.
This way it would be possible to reference this database before a purchase and be able to determine the ability to rip it based on others experience. If it's a title that's protected, sipmly don't buy it.
I agree this stuff should be labeled but that's nothing more than a pipe dream. Instead of just complaining about the problem, let's do something about it!
Like flashing a DVD to be reigonless, maybe people will make firmware upgrades that allow these 'protected' CDs to be played in PCs.
Sure, it will depend on whether your CD Rom drive can be flashed (and it probably can't if it is a plain reader, not writer or DVD), but I guess those that are informed (i.e. the rippers) will look for CD devices that have the required features. Those that don't know will just remain inconvenienced and in the dark.
As for piracy. It won't stop it, nothing can while CD prices are so high. Just get a PC and HIFI with SPDIF I/O and you presumable can make mp3's to put on Napster (or what ever is taking it's place).
-- Mike
The only thing I think this might prohibit is digital audio extraction - if you're using the S/PDIF output of a CD ROM drive, you should get the full digital info, just at 1X speed. Full digital quality, no loss. The audio portion (like the headphone out jack and digital audio out via S/PDIF) is independent of the IDE interface. Once it starts playing, it just keeps going.
I don't see how they could hobble the normal playback mode of a CD ROM - is this actually the case, or do they just hamper direct digital extraction? I just haven't had the slightest urge to buy a Michael Jackson or Charley Pride CD to try this out...
+5:offtopic,but anti-American
You mean "Compact Disc"? :)
God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
IANAL:
The point of the supposed lawsuit is that there is a 'Compact disc' logo on the disc itself. That claims compliance with the compact disc standard as developed by Phillips long ago. That standard includes specifications which allow the disc to be read in a cd-rom drive.
If this isn't supported in the crappy discs, then it isn't compliant with the compact disc standard and therefore shouldn't wear the logo.
A few months ago I heard a very interesting radio program where the widow of a composer or musician had been upset with real music counterfeiting. That is, the unlicensed physical counterfeits made it to store shelves. At first she went to each store and dealt with things. Then she realized that wasn't dealing with the problem effectively.
So instead of hassling every store, she started her own recording company. Then she issued licensed versions of the music she was concerned about, and made a point of selling below the price of the counterfeiters. End of problem. Yes, the place is named Revenge Records.
Granted you can't beat 'free' on price, but you _can_ offer a quality product at a reasonable price. CDs have the advantage of being better than many mp3 files for quality, they can be played in standard players, and they are a physical backup (as well as a convenient proof of ownership, perhaps). All of this has value. The question becomes, what does one consider a reasonable price for that value?
I don't subscribe to RMS's GNUtopian vision.
That's all it will take. Bring it on!
there's no place like ~
Well I would bet that most slashdot readers dont buy their CDs, I never buy my cds unless I feel like it, or it is like some game music. My 10 Gb of MP3's is good enough for me.
Gaming Shizzle
I expect them to change the standard to accomodate the new "copy protection" features.
The executive envisioned protection software that placed no restrictions on conventional cassette copies of CDs and some restrictions on digital copies.
I'd love to see how they would place restrictions on cassette copying - It can't be done in this manner, the cassette is just recording the analog output of the music. They say this as if its a 'feature' that they are throwing in out of the kindness of their hearts- "hey, look- we won't limit cassette copies"
As far as interactive content goes, thats another smoke screen, Its not as if this isn't already being done and is a 'feature' of this new technology. I've seen CD's with 'interactive content' before (Beasty Boys-Hello Nasty). Oh look! A link to the bands website! How very interactive!
air and light and time and space
Copy protection blah blah fair use blah blah return the CDs blah blah.
Most of the stuff here is rehash, but the News.com article mentioned that the record industry has been reeling from poor sales.
Huh?
When they were initially fighting Napster, sales were through the roof and climbing, and now that they've gotten rid of Napster... oh, oops.
Wow, RIAA, maybe all those people who said that they were more likely to buy a CD after sampling tracks from Napster were telling you the truth!!
That claims compliance with the compact disc standard as developed by Phillips long ago.
That standard also allows for interpolation of bad data by the CD player, I believe.
That standard includes specifications which allow the disc to be read in a cd-rom drive.
Does it? As far as I know, the CD standard was not originally intended for data, although it ended up as a useful carrier of data. I would be surprised if the standard doesn't have the words "music playback" all over it, rather than "data storage that can be used for music playback".
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
The simple matter is that it is easy to deduce that CD's were originally attractive to the music industry because, compared to cassettes, they are both cheaper to produce and (at the time of their invention) impossible to copy.
However, technology has evolved to the point where CD copying and MP3's has gained enormous popularity and is beginning to affect music sales. The fact that the music industry is now forced to take measures to protect their own existence does NOT constitute an inferior product, simply because it makes its theft more difficult.
(Begin Troll)Of course, I wouldn't expect the majority of /. readers to respect the concept of protecting one's property.(End Troll)
Please keep your personal opinions to yoursleves when determing what is worth reading.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
Are they lost ? ,hooked a 1/8 stereo jack and plugged it in line in of the sound card.All i had to do was select the line in instead of the cd.
Just use the audio out from a cd player
record and convert.
Gees are they THAT clueless ?
I tried a lil trick,tok the analog out from the cd player in the comp
When you stop thinking everything is digital and think analog and use analog there is nothing that can prevent making a copy.
And by the way Analog still sounds better than crappy digital.
ric
The record companies claim that song swapping cost them money. The technology, if it's not cracked to soon, essentially should remove the electronic version of these CDs.
It will be an interesting test of their statements. If unprotected CDs outsell the protected ones they will have to eat some crow.
Try bringing up LimeWire, BearShare, WinMX, etc. and looking for MIchael Jackson's new single (which was released with this "protection"). Count the hits you get.
Whoops. Guess that didn't work so well.
Okay...the latest tripe gets shipped to Blockbuster, Best Buy, etc...
:)
They put it on the shelves right in alphabetical order where it should be. Do you really think the consumers will care if it says "Compact Disc Digital Audio" on it? As long as it's in a jewel case the size of a CD, it won't matter.
I'm looking at Pink Floyd's "A Momentary Lapse of Reason" right now. Nowhere on the outside, which you would see in the store, does it say anything about it being a CD. I see it in 4 places as soon as I open the case, but I also see this shiny metal disc which I assume is the CD, even if it didn't say so
Yeah...it would be a way to sue them if they marked them as such, but it's not gonna hurt them if they don't.
My response, as a consumer, is to take my music pirating up a notch. Where as before I spent a predetermined budget on the CDs I wanted the most, I'm now going to pirate everything, save the indy bands I like.
Remember, people, the ball (money) is in our court. We need to understand collectively that music piracy is a legitimate form of protest against these damaged products being sold. Use it.
----- sXe
Somebody violates the GPL: bitch bitch bitch.
Somebody violates an RIAA copyright: viva la revolucion.
hypocrites.
CD-sales has dropped 20% the last year. People buys the music they download anyway. We just want it in our cars also. Yeah, sure...
Personally, I don't care about the copy protection issue. If the music companies find a way to prevent people from ripping mp3's and the like, good for them. What I care about is interoperability. For years, I didn't have a cd player other than my computer cdrom. I still primarily listen to CDs on my computer rather than on my lousy stereo. If this technology means that I can't do that anymore, I'm going to be royally pissed. Even more so if I also can't listen to CDs in the car. At that point CDs become pretty worthless to me.
This isn't about not being able to copy CDs, at least not for me. It's about not being able to use something in the completely legal manner that it's meant to be used.
"This message is composed of 100% recycled electrons."
It is clearly stated in the documentation for cd players dvd players, cd-rom drives etc. that they are compatible with any disc bearing the cd digital audio logo.
It would be easy to argue in court that that it is a reasonable expectation for a disc displaying that logo to play in all equipment displaying the same logo.
IMHO Philips and sony have a case for trademark infrigement against any company that displays the logo on an incompatible product - unfortunately philips and sony also own the major record companies.
At this point, there is no getting around the ability of consumers to generate perfect replicas of second-generation copies of music - you can simply record the audio output and rip it to an MP3. This will be good enough for many - how many of you used to tape your friends' CDs?
All I know is, if a human ear is able to hear it, it can be recorded. The quality might be a touch less than a true digital conversion, and it might take a few more days for the mp3s to get on the net, but in the end it makes no difference. The companies are simply wasting valuable time. I guess it is good fodder for share holder meetings though
Won't boycotting CDs and DVDs just play into their hands? If we can actually impact sales such that they stay flat instead of increasing like they should (all things being equal), won't they just see that as evidence of "pirating"? And work even harder at "copy protection"?
Maybe what we should do is buy MORE CDs and DVDs - make them so profitable that they drop their rediculous encryption and copy protection crusades because the crusade will be COSTING them more money than it saves them.
Ok, let the flaming begin 8-)
Which is only relevant if the person doing the suing owns the "Compact Disc" trademark.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
CD+ Now with extra super bonus content!
-c
I have discovered a truly remarkable proof which this margin is too small to contain.
It occurs to me that this desision also has the effect of pissing off microsoft. The order of microsoft's desires of features is as follows: they would prefer if only they had a certain useful feature but at times they can allow others to have such a feature but detest the idea of the feature being impossible to them. Not being able to play cds on windows media player is going to piss them off. My guess is once they start throwing their weight around some back door will be put in that allows new microsoft products to play these cds. Once such a back door is in place it will not be a serious challenge to reverse engineer it.
Sony may work to change the standard as they have something at stake in the music industry, but Phillips doesn't and thus doesn't care. That's why you don't see "bit accurate" CD copiers advertised by Sony, but you do Phillips.
It costs me (on average) 10 cents for a BLANK CD-R. It takes me roughly an hour to find enough music to fill a CD-R (Audio Format). My hobby is collecting, so the time spent is free.
Lessee....takes me 30 minutes to go to the Music Shop. 20 Minutes picking out & buying my CD (at a cost Per CD (rounded) $20.00), and then 30 minutes back home. Buying stuff is a chore not a hobby, so I charge 1/2 my time rate ($40). Even without that charge of time...do the math.
I would already have an Inet connection. I would already have a CD-R burner. So, for 10 Cents, I can have the latest & greatest.
Why don't they take all the money they are spending on the worthless "Protection" scheme and reduce the cost of a Real CD. I might actually want to buy one then. As it stands, I don't (nor do I see in the future any need) buy them now because of the hassle. But if they were to be available, online, at a minor price (I am talking $1.00 here at most) per CD, I am sure I would take the time to download and record my own. Then they might actually make money....
You keep going until you die..."Me".
Agreed, using the "downgraded" CD wording is a good idea, and helps consumers understand they're buying defective product. To help with that we need a "downgraded" CD list site, which lists all the CDs proven to be "downgraded for your listening displeasure".
Catchy alternative CD labels should also be used. Let's say that we heard that N'Sync came out with a new CD entitled "All Your Hearts" (this is totally made up, by the way, as an example).
We would then have on such a site a listing as follows:
Manufacturer - Artist - CD Title - Downgraded Title
Sony - N'Sync - All Your Hearts - Some of your Hearts
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
The are live bootlegs everywhere, and these things run about $25-40. How do you deal with it?
Record the concerts yourself, and sell them at $16.99.
It is clearly stated in the documentation for cd players dvd players, cd-rom drives etc. that they are compatible with any disc bearing the cd digital audio logo.
And these discs still are compatible with CD-ROM players -- as long as you play audio. You only run into trouble when you try and pull digital data from them. There is no guarantee that CDs are free from digital defects. In fact, the standard specifically allows digital defects.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
The reason why the record industry is doing poorly is because they sued Napster and shut them down. I used Napster to listen to music I liked but couldn't find on the radio. If I liked a song enough I went out and actually bought the CD that the song existed on. It isn't enough for me to download the song onto the one machine I have dedicated for that task, I wanted to be able to listen to the whole CD and that meant that I bought it.
Have to agree. I've gotten to the point where I'll buy the CD direct from the Artist or at something like WOMAD where I can be sure I get a good CD, but will only buy CDs if they have MP3 versions too nowadays.
The whole thing just hurts my head, so I just am balking at sending any more money the corporate music pathway, and finding myself turning into other music forms where people don't pull tricks like this.
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
"Hey, Mom, would you care if you can't play CDs on your computer?"
"Uh, YES, don't you remember? That's how I play all my CDs."
"Hey, Dad, would you care that you can't rip CDs to your computer?"
"Well, yes, because I copy all my CDs to MP3s so I don't need a CD changer to listen to them in sequence."
I suppose my parents may be weird though. After all, my Dad listens to country... (and he's got *all* his CDs on his computer as MP3s, but then again, he works for Digital - er, Compaq - er, HP). My Mom does some work with editting webpages, so I guess she can be considered a "technical" type.
But I know many people who I wouldn't consider a "nerd" who use their computer to play CDs straight. And they'll be mightly pissed if they can't listen to their new CDs on their $2000 laptop...
Don't forget, computers are slowly becoming "entertainment centers." My Mom basically gave up on her little CD player she used to use to play CDs and now (would) play her CDs via her CD-ROM drive -- except that she uses AudioGalaxy now. (And the incident with the CD-ROM door being stuck shut. Ignoring that...) Her computer sounds better than her small "portable stereo."
My sister (who is definately not a tech-type at all) uses her computer to play CDs - which, considering she only uses it for homework any other time should tell you something. (Although she has a "real" CD-player now she uses instead. It's a portable CD-player with headphones which is the real selling point.)
Many people who own a computer - a growing portion of the population - especially in the "pop music" set - end up playing CDs through it. Sometimes it's because the computer is in a separate room from the stereo and they want to listen to music while doing homework. Sometimes it's because they want to rip the 2-CD set and listen straight through them without swapping disks.
Legal digital music is becoming a way of life for the "younger" generation. Go through practically any college and you'll find that most of the music pumping these days is either a mix CD or straight MP3s being played through a high-fi stereo system. (With more colleges requiring computers, college students stick with the tool that works - if we can't spend $500 on a stereo, we'll use the $1000 computer we had to get instead...) It may not be near 50% of music listeners yet, but it's at least 10% - which is a lot of listeners to potentially permentantly alienate.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
What have you done?
I hope, for the sake of avoiding hypocrisy, that the answer is something substantial.
I say do that and to hell with these people - rip the tracks and spread them far and wide. Then we'll see how far their expensive and liberty infringing copy protection gets them.
Will the inevitable methods to transfer these CD's be labled a DCMA violation?
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Return faulty products for refund or exchange.
I don't disagree with this, however, I just bought a copy of Max Payne (a new 3D shooter game) only to discover that its SafeDisc copy protection didn't allow my CD-R to even READ the disc so I could PLAY the game!
The solution, apparently, is to purchase a new CD-R that doesn't have this problem. Seems unfair, huh? I mean, the game developers probably didn't choose to put the copy protection on, the publisher no doubt did.
I don't want to return the game and punish the developers, they did a great job! I suppose the same argument could be made for the musicians whose music is now copy protected.
I'm a 2000 man.
I think all of the free software advocacy and Linux zealotry that is constantly purported here on slashdot has caused all of it's readers to live under the illusion that everything should be free. Granted, I'm all for free software since it's created by volunteers, and it was intended to be free from it's initial inception; however, CD sales happen to be the chanell from which artists that create music that you love make their living. Sure, they're breaking a standard that will keep you from playing your CDs in your computer, and that sucks.
The truth of the matter is that 90 percent of the CD listening population could really give a rat's ass if they can listen to music in their computer, and let's be frank here. Most of you aren't bitching and moaning due to the fact that you can't "listen" to your CDs in your computer. You're all hung up because you want to rip/encode/upload to whatever pirate ship of a peer-to-peer network you happen to advocate this week. This kind of piracy has to stop, and it's new technology like these "secure" CDs that are going to protect the artists who have worked so very hard to get where they are. Just think about Britney Spears!
Go ahead and mod me down, but I have a point here.
thank you.
Edward Burr
Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
What??? You can circumvent the copy protection??? They know that. This isn't a consumer choice thing, this is a producers' choice thing.
If you had a choice (as an artist/producer) for what CD manufacturing process to choose, wouldn't you choose the 'copy protected' one over the 'raw'? Even if there was some chance that the copy protection could be bypassed (with some effort)?
They know that if you want to buy the latest U2 that you wouldn't have a choice. It's the producers they are marketing this copy protection to, not the consumers....
Try to appeal to the artists if you want results.
--Phil
My CD changer is connected to my receiver via Toslink (optical) cable. Will this type of setup be affected by these non-Redbook CDs? Will I be receiving the same bitstream as if the CD wasn't "downgraded"? Likewise, for SPDIF coax digital connections to receivers? (Non speculative answers or real links would be appreciated.)
The original intent of my post was to suggest that the only way for them NOT to get sued is to be BLATANTLY clear that it is not a "normal" CD.
This doesn't mean just ommitting the "CD" logo, it means putting a "warning label" on it of some sort, explaining the differences.
If I market a product that is deceptively similar to a common product, and "let users believe" that it is the same, I am guilty of deceptive marketing and misrepresentation. "Deceptively similar" is the key word... misleading people through similarities to another product and not noting that it's different is as bad as advertising it as something it isn't in the first place.
MadCow
I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
Record stores will just change their return policy, long before it ever gets to the point where its a blip on the radar screen of the corporate suits at Universal.
I happen to have purchased one of these copy-protected CD's (ACDC's back in black remaster) and they _do not_ carry the 'compact disc digital audio' mark. please call off the law dogs, they're not pulling any dirty tricks here
As long as content providers want to be compatible with general purpose HW, every copy protection scheme they come up with will be a house of cards that is held up only by legal attacks against transgressors.
Since paying for a whole new set of proprietary HW is just not a practical plan they're doomed - they should roll over and give up right now.
I seem to recall that the purchaser of a software package has a legal right to make a single backup copy for their protection. Does anything like that apply to published media?
When I buy a new piece of (copy protected) software, I usually find myself looking for a crack so that I don't have to keep the stupid CD on my desktop every time I want to run the thing. I can't afford a 200 disc CD-ROM changer, but I can afford a 100 Meg hard drive.
By the same token, I usually rip most of my audio cd's to mp3/ogg format so that I can listen to whatever I want without having to go dig out the cd.
At least copy protected software doesn't (usually! Still wondering about Diablo II) damage my cd-rom drive...
Why can't these publishers realize that cd's are best used as a delivery media, NOT as a way of controlling how the content gets used. We should be buying the content, not the physcial disc it's on.
I only used Napster (and other such MP3 services and so forth) to aquire music that was impossible to find in stores, thus buy, or to download music from artists that had said they supported their fans sharing music in that manner.
Last year I spent >$200 on CDs. The RIAA certainly made money off of me. However, now the RIAA wants to curtail my ability of fair use? Naturally, I'll be less inclined to buy CDs I can't use in all of my players. Not to mention that I consider these CDs that are "protected" to be defective. Of course, I might be inclined to buy again if I can have a tool to bypass their schemes (which will more than likely be illegal under the DMCA).
Case in point. I don't want to buy CDs that are defective (either intentionally or not). RIAA is losing my business by curtailing my ability to listen to my CD in the format I choose.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
Sometimes wish there was something other than "rejected" ... you know, like "hey dumbass we already posted that"
Face it, people are stupid, and the internet is the place where they all meet.
Actually, it is becoming increasingly common for CD-ROMs in computers to use CDDA to extract & play audio instead of a direct analog hookup to the sound card.
All recent Mac's are like this, and recent pc clones are also being built this way.
Out of the three computers at home that I use the most (iBook w/internal DVD drive, iMac w/internal CD-ROM, and Dell w/internal CD-R/RW), only one (the Dell) has an analog connection from the CD drive to the sound card... the other two use digital extraction, and thus can't play these CD's.
You must've been living in a cave for the past 15 years. Computers have become "standard CD music players". So have PlayStation's and DVD players.
I know I'd at least want my money back if I bought a CD and it didn't play on my PC or if I couldn't transfer the music to my Rio.
But they're taking away my right to do something that is perfectly legal in my country, make a copy of a CD(Or other audio recording) for my personal use. You know that levy that Canadians pay on blank CDs? Well, you can bet your ass that I'll fight it if I can't make a LEGAL copy of my legally purchased CD.
From the Copyright Act, Section 80, Subsection 1:the act of reproducing all or any substantial part of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer's performance or the sound recording.
Subsection 2 limits this, ie: you can't perform it in public etc. Things that should be illegal.God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
It doesn't matter than the record industry alters their distribution standards....
All one needs to do is play music and capture the output either through a speaker wire or soundcard.
Its too easy to circumvent.
The main argument that they are using is that their current sales are slipping .... There are three obvious reasons that this could be happening ...
... Lets assume there are lots of folks with bad taste in musak ...
... this is what they are claiming.
... Just compare things to almost any other market. What is happening is that they are taking advantage in the downturn in the economy to do somthing that they have wanted to for a while (stopping digital copying) but did not have a justification to do.
... your computer!
1) Music on their label sucks
2) Everyone who would be buying copies of their musak is burning copies, and not buying orginals
3) The economy sucks, and people are buying less musak in general. Especially the folks who two years ago had more disposable cash than they knew what to do with. Now, they are penny pinching and not buying tens of disks on inpulse.
I belive that #3 is the real reason that sales are down
What we need to do is setup a campain to educate people which disks are protected, and to buy lots and lots of them. Then take every one of them back to the store and demand your $$$ back since they will not play on your primary/only cd player
Are you paranoid if you know that they just want to know everything you say and do?
Perhaps this has already been discussed...if so, please point me towards the thread.
When I purchase a CD, what am I buying the rights to? Is the content tied to the medium? Am I buying the rights to listen to that CD only from the CD itself? Or, am I buying the rights to the content without regard to the medium, so once purchased may I do whatever I want with it so long as it's for my own personal use? What sort of "license" am I committing to when I purchase a CD, or does this simply fall under current copyright law?
If we aren't allowed to use the Internet in the classroom to download our MP3s, I sure hope the music industry will let us listen to CDs in the CD-ROM drives.
Otherwise... no music during class =(
CD player SPDIF output => computer soundcard with digital in.
Presto!
There's 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Seriously though, the analog loop trick will work of course, but some hacker will write a digital ripper that bypasses the protection and release it anonymously on the 'net anyway.
"The minority, the ruling class at present, has the schools and press, usually the Church as well, under its thumb. This enables it to organize and sway the emotions of the masses, and make its tool of them." - Albert Einstein, 1932
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
Their defense would probably be that the intention of the CDs they are selling is to be used to play music in a standard CD music player. No where is it stated that they have to allow non-musical-playback purposes.
And my rebuttal to that defense would be that my car player or computer is a standard music player. It plays any standard CDDA red book disk.
What possible use would I be buying their CD for other than for the purpose of musical playback? I want to play it in my car. I want to play it in my computer. I want to play it in my pocket mp3 player.
Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
My component CD player/changer has a digital out going to the digital input on my amp. My sound card has digital input. More than 'nuff said.
Since everyone here is whining about how the new CD's will limit their legal rights to copy CD's for their own use (as if that's all they do), maybe someone could take the time to think of a better idea to prevent people from violating copyrights while preserving natural rights. I bet some slashdot readers could come up with a reasonable technology that would preserve everyone's rights, the listener's and the musician's.
After all, it's one thing to say "Musicians should share their music for free," but to steal the work of an unwilling party is theft, plain and simple. The musicians (and the record companies that market them) do own their work -- if they hadn't created it, no one else would have the privilege of listening to it. And if a particular artist's music or attitude doesn't appeal to you, don't listen to their music. But respect their wishes and don't steal their music -- that's just childish.
Well It seems that I have picked up a copy protected CD despite all my intentons not to do so. But it's not from Sony, Universal, or Atlantic ... it's from a small european label, dependent records (be sure to use the fish for the guestbook). And from teh sounds of their president in his release is that lots of other european labels are starting to use copy protection as well. He even gave us the type of copy protection used... Cactus Data Shield from a company called midbar. So if the little guys are using it, and the big guys are using it well... I know I will be purchasing less music.
Moderating to further my personal world domination agenda... and to get chicks.
And its our right to make fair use of a product by overriding their protection measures. We have as much right to override them as they do to put them there. It is NOT like breaking into someone's house, there you are breaking a protection system (lock, etc) to do something intrinsically illegal. Breaking copy protection to infringe is illegal, but doing so to make fair use shouldn't be. Fair use is legal.
(If some random person, not acting on orders from the local gov't, padlocks the public park, it would be legal to break that bogus lock. And the one that put the lock there would likely be in trouble. It would be nice if obstructing fair use were similarly illegal.)
Even the DMCA itself says it doesn't affect fair use. Anything that violates fair use is also unconstitutional.
Of course, Judge Kaplan ignores all that (DeCSS case), and he isn't the only one out there.
So we morally, and according to the letter of the law as I understand it, have the right for "self-help" to get back fair use, but not according to the gov't. As they can assess monetary penalties and even lock you up, we need to keep in mind that we need more than just a technical solution.
We need to repeal the DMCA.
Of course, anyone that knows of a defeat method or code, please do let us know.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Er, yah.
Only if compliant with Red Book...
...until Philips finds it more profitable to discard that rule.
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
As a consumer, I don't want to buy anything that won't function according to my expectations. And my expectations are that when I buy an audio CD, I'll be able to stick it into my computer's CD player and listen to it at work.
Now I'm thinking that if the cases don't have to be labeled, there isn't any way to tell ex ante whether it's one of the 'defective' CDs. What I want to know is if anyone has had success in returning one of these things to the retailer because it won't function properly? Or is one, in general, basically screwed and stuck with the bogus CD?
Does anybody know if this copy protection scheme breaks CD/DVD/MP3 players? Internally, I suspect they're way closer to a computer than to an "old" CD player. What happens? Are these new CD compatible with my player?
-- Did you try Tao3D? http://tao3d.sourceforge.net
Ok, they change the CD's usual format for something else or decrease the quality... we can't back-up them with Ogg Vorbis (or MP3 is you prefer)... we are angry... we find a way to do what we want with them and restart doing our usual ripping like nothing have changed!
:P
that's the normal story about big compagny trying to screw us... but to date, we've always win
This Cnet article mentions that there are different levels of protection available, including a level that will allow MP3s downloaded to PC but still prevent piracy (I guess by not allowing the creation of a master to be burned a gazzilion times). This seems to me the best of both worlds: stop piracy and let the geeks have their MP3s. This is what we should push the record companies to do (and this answers their concern over piracy, so if they refuse they expose their hipocracy).
Sorry to reply to my own post - I found further information from Phillips on licensing terms for their patented CD-DA technology:
l 00 131.pdf
http://www.licensing.philips.com/partner/data/s
It basically says that if you pay the license fee, you can use the logo. Nothing in it says that your CD _must_ meet their standard, only that in order to produce a CD using their patented technology, you must agree to their terms which include money, money and more money.
This is far from definitive, but it would seem that a company could license their technology, produce compact discs with the tm logo, but as long as you keep up with the license fees, Phillips and Sony probably wouldn't care if you mangled the layout.
I don't normally speak up, but it just cracks me up about all these companies working towards better product security. I mean that's all good and well, trying to protect your livelihood. But don't they realize they can't win? Let's say you have a team of 1000 developers, scientists, mathmaticians working on some security process for your product, does that really matter when compared to the 100 million hackers trying to break it? People are always surprised when a 10 year old kid breaks the security -- it just a matter of skills, creativity, and out-of-the-box thinking ...
"This isn't a study in computer science, its a study in human behavior"
[culture jam disclaimer]Now IANAL, and I suspect that actually doing this would not be viewed as appropriate by store owners and cops but . . . [/culture jam disclaimer]
People could help the industry out . . . produce stickers on your printer at home and take them with you when you shop. Consult your list of CDnots and affix something like:
ALERT: This is not a CD! It may not work on your equipment. Check http://...... to find out why.
This is just the kind of campaign that Adbusters Adbusters[adbusters.org] specializes in.
Maybe the rest of the world should follow the example of the Taliban and ban the internet. This would solve a world of problems for governments, record companies and security agencies. Think about it, no more pr0n, no more music, film or software pirating, no problem with distributing hacks cracks and bypasses for copy protection systems. No one could send messages with secret plans in them.
The world would be a much safer place. Finally the poor record companies could start making big money again. DVDs could sell for more and no one could 'compare prices'. Microsoft wouldn't have to worry about the IE/anti-trust thing. Banks and governments would get hacked less and virii wouldn't spread so fast.
The internet isn't making any money - just look at all the dot-coms that have gone. Projects like Linux that are stealing from Microsoft would die out and people would forget the silly idea of 'open source'. With no mass communication media left, the people wouldn't be able to break out of line and cause trouble. Everyone would be able to work and play, do their duty for their country and generally serve the government.
The reason we have such Draconian laws is that there are so many evil people in the world. People that would sooner fight for 'freedom' than accept their life and serve their countries to rid the world of these 'freedom fighters'
I don't know where people get this selfish idea that they should be able to roam free on this earth, we are here to make the rich richer, to keep the poor in check, and to serve our superiors. So next time your thinking about pirating a CD or DVD, just think about the people you are depriving - the record producers who have enjoyed a life in the sun with a cool drink, the singers who live in the spot light loved by all, snorting cocaine. You are depriving these people of [more] money. They could loose all this glory just because you are too selfish to think of their needs. We are not your enemies, we are your friends. Thank you.
Yours
George W. Bush
(co signed Tony Blair.)
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Time and time again we've seen cracks/hacks/patches/workarounds for all kinds of groovy new "protection." It seems to me that the motivation behind the Hacker (Free Speech/Proving Themselves and their worth/Defending the /. Culture, etc) always prevails over the motivation behind the guys creating the protection -- Money. Already, one poster has talked about his digital-in/digital-out setup, and I'm always hearing from Audiophiles that analog is "better." Life will go on, burning/ripping/thieving/stealing will go on, and Charley Pride will continue to sell something like 20 CDs Nationwide regardless of the copy protection, 'cos no one has ever heard of 'im!
If your idea if winning includes statuatory damages of $250 (MINIMUM) to $2500, actual monetary damages (i.e. whatever they hoodwink the judge into thinking you cost them), and possibly 5 years in prison (NO PAROLE ALLOWED IN FEDERAL PRISON) if you at all financially benefitted (*) from it, yeah, in that case, I'd say we have a good chance of winning.
* In the copyright law "financially benefit" has been redefined to include non-monetary benefits!
See the DMCA and how Judge Kaplan interprets it as removing fair use in the DeCSS trial (*) for more info.
(*) The DeCSS defendants have been ORDERED TO PAY COURT COSTS, i.e. ordered to pay the court for their own persecution by the court. It would be like me throwing a rock and you and billing you for the cost of the rock.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
If they get thousands of returns, they'll take notice....
Ah Well, Major labels won't let me rip my CDs eh? Thats a pity - I was just dying to buy major label music anyway.. dontchya just love crappy generic radio rock/pop? Well ok, there are some major label musicians that put out decent music (especially if you consider Capitol a major label), but how long do you think it'll be before Independent record companies are gonna produce these CDs.. years?, not at all? That actually opens up the opportunity for Independent music to take over the file exchange systems (just what I've always wanted! - I hate trying to find rare tracks and being swamped by radio hits) I think Independents should take up the cause of providing better service to their customers, by not incoporating this technology - having an internet presence is good publicity anyway! Chris Fraew Andrews
I think putting copy protection on CDs (something that companies have been doing with game CD-ROMs for years, yet no one seems to complain about that) is a far cry from "forc(ing) everyone at gunpoint to buy hundreds of their CDs". Copyright is backed by the Constitution, and music companies have as much right to defend their copyright as software companies.
Loneliness is a power that we possess to give or take away forever
Now, let's assume that someone will find a way of creating faithful digital copies of even these protected disks. If we can't rip our own purchased CDs but can find ripped copies on the 'net what are we going to do? I suppose we might continue to buy the originals while obtaining our MP3 copies from the 'net, but we might just forget about buying the originals.
This could be a huge own goal for the record companies. At least I hope it will be.
Andy Armstrong
Please mod this up as interesting.
Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
So I agree that current standards for digital sound recording on DVD-Audio may solve the problem with 24 bit sampling rate and 96,000 hertz at the high end.
"The minority, the ruling class at present, has the schools and press, usually the Church as well, under its thumb. This enables it to organize and sway the emotions of the masses, and make its tool of them." - Albert Einstein, 1932
Sorry to respond to a sig, but that quote is great!
And it applies today as much as it did then...
The question is, are we doing more to change it now than Einstein's generation did 69 years ago?
Or in another 70 years will the same statement still hold true?
___
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
Music publishers are free to cripple their CDs if they want. After all, whether we like it or not, they own the copyrights to that music. The cost of encrypting content and fighting piracy is just part of doing business, like tax. If a business with a different cost structure based on freely distributing digital content (and so does not incur these costs) can be more profitable, then that's fine. Marillion seemed to do something like this in Michael Lewis's book "Next".
It's when bills like the SSSCA and DMCA come about that effectively subsidise the cost of preventing piracy by pushing it onto hardware manufacturers or consumers that it's no longer OK. Companies should have to pay the full cost of executing their business model, and it costs to impose scarcity on goods that are naturally non-scarce.
Ultimately the customer should decide which competitive business offers them the most value. They should clearly label their CDs with what can or cannot be done with them, and then people can choose to buy them or go to unrestricted CDs.
zimran
http://www.winterspeak.com
It stands to reason that the biggest enemy of these non-standard CDs has to be the consumer electronics industry. They've seen a huge sales of burners, players, software, blanks, labels and all the other paraphernalia that goes with the make-your-own-CD revolution.
Limiting or preventing ripping of CDs seems like a real threat to not just Johnny Digital's passtime but of those in the electronics industry whose livlihood relies on consumers legitimately being able to rip CDs.
How soon until they fire back with firmware upgrades or other hardware hacks that overcome the copy protection gimmicks? And how will the music industry respond when this stuff is sold with the claim "Now compatible with new CDS!"?
I have boycotted such things, and I am sure others have. How many others have started boycotting things? If so what?
Also, getting the "warez" version isn;t the solution either.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
Another 'broken record' recently released is Heather Nova's new album 'South'. At least on the German version (UK release is not till Monday)
Apparently there's a small warning 'will not play on PCs'
If you want to buy a CD just to play with the copy protection, I'd suggest this one.... (Although her earlier 'Oyster' is *far* better)
Dave
If it simply doesn't work, I'll be demanding a full refund (from the place of sale) and writing the label a nastygram letting them know they've lost my business over it, much the same as I write my representatives nastygrams. If it damages my equipment (as some of these "protection" (read: strongarm) methods are purported to have the ability to do), you'd better believe I'll be in touch with a lawyer.
The Gza admonished us to check the labels, and I do. When I buy new, I consciously look for indie labels' releases before I look to majors.
If copy protection is the myopic way of the future, it'll be exclusively indies and the majors that don't employ copy protection that receive my spending dollars.
Easy does it!
This comment has been submitted already, 276865 hours , 59 minutes ago. No need to try again.
I don't plan to stop purchasing CD's... I *WILL*, however, return every defective/mis-labeled CD for a refund. Because the industry is in a downturn, "lost sales" mearly reinforce the arguments these weasels use to support copy protection. Returns, on the other hand, cost retailers and distributors "real money" and send the unambiguous message that the product is crap
-- "At Microsoft, quality is job 1.1" -- PC Magazine, Nov. 1994
Hey, at the local shop I have to pay 48 guilders for a new release I like. I earn 3000 guilders net as a reasonably paid ICT-person at a hospital. I always hear something like 5% goes to the artist(s) and producing the disc itself costs something like 0.50$.
:-)
Do you seriously think that average me would bother with a fragile, ugly CD-R (without the booklet) if a CD would cost 20 guilders?
Don't pity me, excuse me while I'm off to the local library, where they lend CDs. 4 guilders per disc per week. They sell CD-Rs, too.
cheers
pyz
So you can't play it on your PC. Wah.
Get an old, standalone CD player, splice the speaker wires, and run to the Line In or Mic port on your soundcard. Record, and convert to MP3.
Winners tell stories while losers yell deal.
I still can't understand why people are trying to create complex protections to avoid copying CDs.
Support that finally an "unbreakable" method has been found. So what does prevent anyone from plugging the line output of his cd player into a DAT recorder, a minidisc, a sound card, etc? Once this is copied, you can duplicate it at will. So what's the point here?
As far as you can *hear* the sound, you can record it. The only way to avoid that would be to encrypt CDs and to put secret decryption chips into speakers. But this will never happen. It'd mean that effect racks, mixing consoles, etc. wouldn't work any more.
{{.sig}}
Well, mines an aerobic instrictor who likes using mp3s to put songs in an order that matches the class compaird to the hassel with tapes wich takes hrs and hrs just to make one.
So yes, my mother would be a bit peaved. She's also a school teacher, and I don't know a single teacher that likes the current copyrights.
Also, tell them that they are no longer able to backup said media. How many people do you know had cars stole as well as 50+ cds (1k right there). If they do as I do, only carry copies in the car, they could have lost 5$ not $1000, and this is that part that the insurance companies don't cover.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
What worries me most about record labels introducing non-copyable CDs etc is that they are infringing upon the rights of other users under copyright law.
I'm in Australia, but I can get in trouble for copying an American CD because the reach of the DMCA is not limited to US shores, because I could theoretically be damaging Universal etc.
However, I have rights under Australian copyright law to duplicate CDs for the purpose of broadcasting under the 'ease of use' provisions because I work in radio.
Which law overrides the other? How do I even know what rights I have?
I just find it so annoying that laws which are enacted in one country can have such an impact across the world. Think Universal will make a copyable batch of its CDs for those of us who do have duplication rights? Nope, didn't think so.
It wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened - especially in the computer industry.
:P
First, destroy the current standard with incompatible formats.
Second, appologize and 'make it all better' by offering DVD Audio (well protected anyway, of course) with 'new and improved QUALITY' for the SAME PRICE!
What a DEAL!
I don't see how fixing the standard windows CDROMS driver so it plays CDs can be a DMCA violation.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
A lot of people here (me included) think $18 for a CD (or even $11 on sale) is too much too pay for on average less than 50 minutes of music. I also will remember a song with absolute clarity after hearing it 10 times, so I feel like the price is a double insult (now, if I could just figure out how to download out of my brain - then the RIAA would really have a problem: fair-use? piracy? what's the difference?)
As we learn in Micro Econ 101, every product has a demand curve: at any price, a certain number of consumers will buy it, a certain number will not. A company sets a price such that enough people will buy it to satisfy their want/need for revenue. Now, if you drop the price further, enough more people may buy that it will offset the price drop; this is elasticity greater than 1 (I think).
But /.'ers aside, a lot of people do seem to think that getting 30 minutes of Britney Spears-crap is worth $11-$18, or are willing to pay it through the nose and grumble. This is why I don't think boycotts really work. Unless you have a huge number of people boycotting (think tens or hundreds of thousands in the cd market), it won't do anything.
What I wonder is why people think that $14 is a reasonable price for a CD? Is it that they don't know that the media/pressing-cost-in-volume is around $2 per disc? Personally, I would have paid it and grumbled in the past (would have, mind you, I didn't buy them even then much), until I started to learn about how the recording industry shafted it's artists, spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on questionably-needed promotion, and the other things that fly around /.
Jim
The pathetic thing is that I can rip those tracks to HDD, then burn them to CD instead of making a full copy of the CD, and it will play! So much for copy "protection."
As an audio purist ever in search of better sound quality, the very idea of purposely degrading my signal source with digital fingerprints and copy protection is just pushing me to buy fewer and fewer CDs. I am not willing to pay for damaged goods, and I can't see how messing with my audio source can be viewed as anything but damaging.
As to piracy, I own a grand total of one pirated CD -- a copy of Willie Dixon's "Gingerale Afternoon" that I haven't been able to find anywhere in over 5 years. (At least not for a sane price -- there are a couple online shops that are willing to sell me a copy for $27+shipping.)
There are another 5-10 CDs that I'd pirate for the same reason, but I can't even find someone who owns an original, much less a place to buy those albums.
On the downside, my reduced purchases have absolutely no impact on the big labels as most of my purchases are from much smaller studios like Blind Pig Records. Odds are these smaller companies don't have the volume to invest in so-called copy-protection technologies, but if they farm out the AD conversion and manufacture to bigger companies I'll end up having to skip their products as well.
For those using the so-called CD player in their computer, if you actually cared about the music you'd spring for a CD portable regardless of the copy protection issue. The players built into a computer have so much signal interference and low-quality chip amps that they just aren't worth listening to!
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Not buying achieves nothing. No-one will notice. Your sacrifice only serves to lower your own quality of life.
What I'm thinking you should do is buy CDs. Take them home and rip them. If they don't rip, take them back and get a refund. This FORCES the store to take notice, and data on the number of returns goes all the way up the distribution chain to the asshole execs who try to work out exactly how unethical a policy they can get away with.
I'm new to this country and don't know much about consumer rights laws here. Given that CD stores are reluctant to take back used CDs (and sometimes have a policy against it), it would be useful for us to know our rights. That the CD violates your right to format-shift might be sufficient grounds that they cannot legally refuse the refund, as might the misrepresentation of the product looking like a CD but not playing in all CD players. I don't know.
If someone like the EFF could get a lawyer to write a page explaining our consumer rights with regards to these degraded-CDs, that would be very useful. It may be that the matter is legally grey and we wait for the results of lawsuits. In which case, it's up to us to not take "no" for an answer when demanding our money back.
As a mix of protest and consumer rights enforcement, could get some lawyers to draft a small contract saying "I am buying this CD on the understanding that it will play on all CD players, as confirmed by the salesperson. If this is not a CD-player compatible product, it can be returned for a full refund".
If the sales person refuses to sign, ask them to get the manager to sign it. If neither will, you walk out of the store leaving them with the CD and the unsigned contract.
Either way you win - they can't help but remember such an example of consumer concern, and if they sign, you can get a refund no-matter what their store policy if the CD is degraded.
Is format-shifting is a consumer right in the USA? (I'm new here)
Thoughts?
Complain. Loudly. Make it heard that you don't want to receive inferior merchandise. The more returns that the record companies receive, the less they'll be tempted to rip the consumer off this way again.
I always thought Einstürzende Neubauten were a forward thinking progressive band anyway, and wouldn't want to be associated with this kind of nonsense.
Now there's a subliterate filthy raghead in every office and municipal building in this country, what do YOU think is going to happen when the bombs start flying?
The Islamic Invasion force is already here and masquerading as our equals, when they secretly curse our every free breath.
The first solution to the terrorism menace would be to ban Muslims from flying on aeroplanes. This is quite easy, as Islamic culture prohibits Muslims from having an individual identity, hence the sickening hordes of Mohammeds and Hussains infesting our welfare system. If they need to get somewhere Allah the Child Molestor can sort them out. Pretty soon they'll realise how deluded they are!
From the CNet article, September 25, 2001:
From IMDB StudioBrief, September 26, 2001:
So which is it? Lost sales? Or record sales?
(I also think that predicting a drop in music sales due to The Attack is disingenuous---I actually suspect that music sales won't be affected at all, and may even increase a little.)
Don't worry though.. you weren't replying to a sig, sigs have a max of 120 chars, I looked that one up specifically for that post from this site.
On that note, here's another one:
"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." - Einstein
Whoops.. I just broke that one. ;)
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
that sell us cd burners are the same people trying to prevent us from using them. Betcha
It all depends on what they say. If they say sales are falling, well, that's the way it is. But if they say sales are rising, well, rejoice! Next we'll have larger chocolate rations.
It all makes sense.
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
and I was about to buy it too... I guess I won't.
I'm inclined to just find out how I could send 20 bucks to the band itself... perhaps next time they are in town I shall go do that at the concert.
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
Gee, sounds just like Microsoft.
This is a great thing for me and my colleagues..did the record companies even take radio stations into consideration? Many radio stations, including our own, have mp3s going out over the air. What happens when the stations cant make mp3s to play? People dont hear songs. What happens then? Sales to the record label drop. And by the way, all the music we play is legal..::sigh::
This is a digital control technology, in that its primary
purpose is to control how a device is used and can use
digital works. Although these technologies can be used
for copyright enforcement, their control extends far
beyond that mandate.
-- Scott A Crosby
Actually, you should run right out and purchase at least one of these broken CDs... then promptly return it with complaints. The more returns they have, the more likely it is that they'll listen, eh?
Hell, I'd gladly join a class action lawsuit to achieve that...
how in the hell do i get a hold of this company? I want to tell them how i feel. i bought a mp3 player for my car a while back and if I cant make a cd into mp3's i will be super pissed. oh well guess they lost a customer.
Out of the three computers at home that I use the most (iBook w/internal DVD drive, iMac w/internal CD-ROM, and Dell w/internal CD-R/RW), only one (the Dell) has an analog connection from the CD drive to the sound card... the other two use digital extraction, and thus can't play these CD's.
To better support real-time digital audio extraction, CD-ROM drives often do more powerful error correction when running at the rotation speeds that the Red Book suggests (i.e. 1x). However, if the copyright industry has any say, future CD-ROM drives may support digital audio extraction with error correction only in an encrypted mode that protects the pocketbooks of the publishers.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Philips and sony have a case for trademark infrigement against any company that displays the logo on an incompatible product
I am not a lawyer, but this case looks like infringement on a trademark or certification mark, given that the copy protection may insert more errors on a single disc than the Red Book allows.
unfortunately philips and sony also own the major record companies.
Not anymore. Sony still owns Columbia Records, but Philips sold its copyright-industry holdings to Polygram.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I'll second that law suit.
.50 cent product for what its worth. Ahh no big deal, just record it of the radio, and burn the cd yourself, eh?
.05 USD$?
When will they sell a
Oh wait not many stations play whole albums any longer, but who cares, so many cd's only have one or two decent tunes on them anyway.
Until i can return a scratched CD then they must lable proper, or face the 4 horsemen of the Esquire school. This same concept goes for all digital medial that one purchase on a compact disk.
Sure they could charge us replacement cost, so whats that at their duplication scale,
I'm sure no one would bitch too loudly then.
How's this appeal? Damaged goods == NO SALE.
Hmmm....
This disc works in fewer players than my older discs.
That is worse product to me. Less function regardless of the ability to copy.
I simply don't understand what is a problem. If the CD player can read the disks but the CD-ROM drive cannot, then either:
You can write the software that reads the CD-ROM in raw mode and applies a due correction (May be illegal) or
Just keep one such disk, visit the nearest computer shop and ask for the drive that can play it.
When the market demanded CD-ROM drives that can grab audio, they appeared. When the market will demand the drives that read the protected CD-ROMs, they will appear too.
if this catches on and CD sales drop afterwords (doesn't matter what reason it actually drops), the music industry will raise high hell and blame piracy and mp3s as the cause and we will see more attacks on our freedom to do what we want with the items that we own. For some reason the record companies have it in their head that they are loosing a lot of music sales because of mp3s. This I can tell you is not how it really works, I personally have bought 3 times as many CDs since i started listening to mp3s and won't buy a CD from a group i haven't listened to more than half a CD of, and I have friends who have gone throught the exact same process.
Greed right now is the worst thing that faces our society today. If it wasn't for greed we would have companies being a lot less paranoid about copy protection. So what if they temporarily loose imaginary money and then make more off of this temporary loss. I personally buy the CD that goes with most mp3s that I download. If i like the group I buy the CD if i don't, I usually delete the mp3 (there are a few rare cases where that is the only good song that the group has done and i refuse to pay 14-18 dollars for a CD that has only one good song). If they make it so that mp3s are harder to get I know for a fact that I will not be buying more CDs than I do now, infact I will buy less as I only get ones that I KNOW I will like, and if they bitch about it I have something useful for them to do for me.
what if my encryption system is based on the human audio preception model ie MP3 ? This system encrypts the wave file, so decrypting it is illegal and hence illegally obtained evidence. ;)
The article states that the CDs will contain some sofrt of software that will stop the data (read: music) on the discs being copied.
For this to happen, the software must be executed. I am assuming that the software on the disc will be windows-only, as well. This also means that the user will have to have auto-run enabled on their computer. Otherwise, you can just insert the disc and the CD is not read until the playing/ripping software is run.
This will not stop a user of another operating system with CD drivers that allow raw access (Linux, *BSD, whatever) mounting the disc and just doing a raw sector copy.
I can't really see why they would spend so much time developing this sort of copy 'control' when it could (at face value) be so easily bypassed.
You asked for someone to set up a domain where everyone can catalog all the copy protected cds. i just registered the domain, and as soon as i can throw some perl together the site will be up.
and thanks ryanvm for the idea and the domain name.
cristiana
I think that there is a file system driver for linux called cdfs which may be able to help us in this cause. I have been thinking about this problem since the first reports of "protected" CDs, but haven't had the time to read the necessary standards, although I am starting right now. If someone has one of these protected CDs and a linux box they would be willing to use for some tests, they would be of great help. Go to the cdfs homepage and download the correct patch for your kernel. This file system MAY be the first step in a robust alternative to CDDA (read paranoia) which works on these "protected" CDs. Please provide feedback to this thread and to the author of cdfs if his filesystem is useful. Now I have to try to get one of these CD's myself and try this out... Stanley Pinchak
i think napster for pay was a good idea, some day the music industry is going to have to move into the future a little bit.
hey i read that napster was going to start up again soon...is this true?
Could Jesus microwave a burrito so hot that he himself cou
Its the crappy prepackaged, overproduced garbage that is killing music. MTV, Clearchannel, the big chain stores choking out innovative new music, just rehashing the same crap over and over again. Not Gnutella, Limewire, or KaZaA
:)
I personally can't wait to get a CD that won't play in my CD player at home. That would be my computer. I'll return it for being defective. That should be a fun arguement
-- When a fool hears of the Tao, he will laugh out loud.
Only if compliant with Red Book...
...until Philips finds it more profitable to discard that rule.
Given that Philips is still making and selling CD players, it would very much be in their interest to see that their drives do not start barfing on CD's claiming to be authentic Compact Discs. I don't see these "pre-scratched" discs bearing Philips' CD logo for long.
Dyolf Knip
The purpose of that logo is to claim conformance to the standard. If they use the logo without conforming to the standard, isn't that some sort of false advertising or fraud that any buyer can bring action over?
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam! - I'll either find a way or make one...
Purgamentum init, exit purgamentum - Garbage in, garbage out
...someone will routinely knock off the content before it's mastered, and circulate the results to the well-equipped duplicators in Indonesia...don't sweat the 'protected' CD's. They're doomed...get one to play with, but get them fast, as they will go the way of the chastity belt...straight into a museum.
Copy-protected CDs are an inferior product. Asserting that they aren't won't change that.
As for your use of the words "theft" and "property" (in reference to copying), under the terms of the U. S. Constitution, copyright is not a recognition of any property rights in the copyrighted content. Instead, copyright is an optional incentive that Congress can use to promote the progress of Arts and Sciences with the ultimate goal of making more works available to the public.
The Supreme Court's majority opinion in the Betamax case has the quotes you need to check up on the previous paragraph. There's also a letter by Thomas Jefferson that explains why, e.g. land is recognized as property while ideas (and by extension, expressions) are not.
Copyright infringement is against the law not because it constitutes theft (a distinction lost on the sponsors of the inappropriately-named N.E.T. Act), but because it interferes with the (presumed) incentive to make more works available to the public.
Copy protection frequently interferes with legitimate use of a work both during and after the copyright period. That is to say, copy protection hurts the interests of the very public who has been kind enough to grant a valuable copyright.
Remember, the public is under no obligation to grant copyrights. Without those copyrights, new music would instantly belong to the public domain and any number of non-royalty-paying commercial labels could start selling clones of an album within days of its release. The exemption from competition that copyrights provide is a huge benefit to those who enjoy it, and I think it's reasonable to ask in return that they not deliberately damage the goods.
If CDs were copy protected, would most people rip them by attaching their CD players to sound cards? Probably not. And not because of the quality, but because of the effort required. Consider this:
Ripping a CD to MP3s involves: (a) fetching track names automatically from freedb, (b) reading the audio off the CD (much faster than playing it) into separate files and (c) making MP3/ogg files.
Ripping a recording from line in involves (a) recording the whole damned thing at real time, (b) cutting it into separate tracks (no track info, remember), (c) hand-naming the files and making playlists. Takes a lot longer and requires more effort. I've done it once for a live recording from a MiniDisc, and it's not something I'd want to do for every CD I wish to listen to on my computer.
Of course, the payoff for going to this Herculean effort would be the kudos you get from all the mp3 l33ch3z when you upload it for the taking. So, in effect, copy-protected CDs would punish honest home-rippers and encourage file-sharing mp3 d00dz.
...until new CD-ROM drives are compatible with this?
"Buy our new ultrafast SCSI 80x CD/20x DVD drive
Reads the following formats: CD-ROM,CDDA,CD-R,CD-RW,DVD,DVD-A.
*** Now also Fully compatible with Universal Music CDs ***"
Dave
Hopefully many people will buy the CD, copy it (to tape I guess), then return the CD to the shop and demand a refund for the "faulty goods".
They'll have to actually release some decent music on this new broken format first though...
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
Surely the first, most obvious symptom of these protection schemes to Joe Public is that the CD-ripping software for the MP3 players from Iomega, Rio et. al. is going to stop working. I can imagine the player vendors to start getting shirty about this (and I'm certainly not buying a HipZip until cdparanoia can deal with these CP schemes, thankyouveddymuch). Or will the vendors try and push us onto subscription services?
...you cant digitally rip a vinyl either. So why not?
...um...like...a sig...
"Is format-shifting is a consumer right in the USA? (I'm new here) "
Welcome...embrace / extend (format shifting) is not a right, its an art. I'm not surprised we haven't seen this tactic being used more often.
....I fire up KaZaA and leave it on full time so more folk can access MP3s.
Like someone already posted, do a search of Michael Jackson's protected song & you'll see it's already in MP3 format for download.
Are there any software DVD-Audio players ?
What's even more devastating to the merchant is that every sale that gets disputed goes against their "bad credit" history. If a certain percent (in monetary units) of your sales are bad credit you can have the ability of accepting certain credit cards taken away from you. I think Visa will yank your ability to accept Visa cards if you have 3% bad credit transactions.
Philips sold Polygram to Universal/Vivendi/Seagrams about two years ago. It's probably one reason why Philips makes MP3-file compatible CD players and Sony doesn't.
Just most new CDROM drives have a built in S/PDIF output, and if your soundcard has a CDROM digital (S/PDIF) input, you're all set without adding an external component. Of course, this relies on the CD actually playing in the CDROM, which nobody seems to have difinitive information on.
Your suggestion is the first thing I'd do if they didn't actually play. Be careful with the S/PDIF lines, they're not actually the same - the CDROM level is TTL (higher voltage) than real S/PDIF.
+5:offtopic,but anti-American
If you can hear it, you can copy it. Perceptual encoding like MP3's isn't a perfect digital copy anyways, so capturing the audio stream and converting it MP3's is good enough for most people. Of course if you want a perfect digital copy on another CD, you may be SOL.
...build a better mousetrap and someone will build a better mouse? Microsoft had added their registration piece to Office XP to help prevent piracy. Go to any of the cracks or warez sites and do a search for Office XP. Real effective, huh kids?
Personally, this is gonna piss me off, because I, as I know others do, put together CD's of music I PURCHASED because I only like a few songs from each one and you can't find artists like Danzig and Dr. Dre on the same compilations CD's.
Does someone have the means to head up this effort? The domain name boycottumg.org is available right now. It could be the center for education/information on this issue and people could make web banners to connect to this site...
I'd have to check the fine print but as I understand it SCMS compliance for CDs, CD Players & CD Recorders is mandatory under copyright statutes.
I wonder if there's any merit to arguing that a copy protected disc is not SCMS compliant (it doesn't allow your legally mandated copy from original only). of course I expect the RIAA had an opt out for their benefit written into the law.
I would buy the cd , but i want to listen to it on my computer... well , better head off to a mp3 search engine , i will get the music there...la la la la
Cruise TT
How were CDs more "impossible to copy" than LPs, the media which CDs replaced? Neither could be easily duplicated onto the same format at that time, while both could be copied onto analog cassettes.
This makes no sense. You guy say the cd's cannot be copied, but as long as you can play them in a regular cd player, you just plug that into a computer's sound card input, and record it from there, the way it used to be made.
Well a friend and I got the data off the disc it was fairly simple. Linux kernel 2.4.7 and cdparanoia what a beautiful combination. 2.4.8 and 2.4.10 have problems with scsi generic at leat on ppc or with my U160 card, or it could be my yamaha cdrw drive. Who knows But at least there is way.. the will is already there.
Moderating to further my personal world domination agenda... and to get chicks.
It's just too convenient - every Mac shipped comes with iTunes, which takes 1 click or less to MP3 a CD. Apple's sold a lot of iMacs and iBooks to Joe Public. Most of the consumer-oriented PCs ship with similar software installed, too. This is decidely not limited to geeks...