Slashdot Mirror
Universal to Copyprotect All CDs
angkor wrote in with a link to a story about how Universal Plans to
copyprotect all CDs which
will render them unplayable on Macs, DVD Players, PS2s, and some CD Players.
And it won't even stop people from ripping MP3s I bet.
Don't buy em.
Vote with your wallet. It's the only true voice you have in a capitalist society.
[)amien
I'd like to pay for my music, but I'm not going to buy a product I can't use!
Oh well, I don't like the music industry anyway... I've been listening to more non-mainstream music...
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
Au contrare!
If anything, any time I see a post on Usenet of Mp3's from a CD that is supposedly copy protected, the poster usually takes great pains to brag discuss the fact that he was able to rip despite copy protection.
Really, I think that even the record industry didn't expect the various copy protections to really work. What they're doing is building an easily hackable content protection system so that they can prosecute MP3 traders under the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
OK, so when I play it in my Discman, it's OK; (even if i go to Radio Shack and buy a couple bucks worth of cable, 'line in' to my sound card, and record)
But if I play it on a Sony CDROM drive in my computer, it's bad?
First, how *exactly* does it know? As my dad used to say, "A laser is just a laser".
Prepare for massive consumer backlash. Even if people don't want to ever "rip, mix, and burn" (thank you Apple 'Dont Steal Music' Computer) they want to listen to their CDs when and where they want to.
ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK
There you have it, instead of letting true musical diversity create authentic, viable fan bases, the music industry has locked itself into the failing practice of top-down music manufacturing...reminiscent of a Soviet state capitalism that never worked either.
Maybe one day when a free market for music exists again, people will care.
Let's insure this prediction turns out to be untrue :-). I say we all make sure to buy and return this sucker, preferably in a coordinated effort targeted on a certain day...
What idiots... we long ago ceased being "customers" to them, now they just expect us to roll over and play dead. Forget that.
``They've been testing this in Europe and they're experiencing less than a 1 percent return rate from consumers. It really has turned out to be nothing,'' said Jerry Kamiler, TransWorld Entertainment's division merchandise manger. ``If we get the same results here, as I imagine we would, I don't think it's going to manifest itself into a consumer problem.''
It's a strange world -- let's keep it that way
However, I am fed up with this charade and I would like to end it once and for all. I have the paperwork in front of me to take Universal Records to small claims court to recover the purchase price of the CD. Since Universal is not based in my area, it will be very expensive for them to send their high-priced lawyers to my county to deal with the charges. And, worst case, I will lose the cost of the CD (and best case, I will get a refund on the CD and make a political statement at the same time).
I strongly encourage all of you to do the same thing: buy whatever CDs you want, and sue the record labels if they are copy protected. Even if most of the cases get thrown out, it will be *very* expensive for the labels to take any sort of action against the thousands of individuals who are suing them.
The RIAA has been able to manipulate the legal system into standing up for their rights. Why shouldn't we do the same thing back to them?
~wally
Don't settle for in-store-credit... Demand a full refund for 1 of two reasons...
1.) The thing is labeled as CD Digital Audio (CDDA), which is in violation of logo, because in order to be CDDA, it must be red-book compliant, (or whatever book it is), and this copy protected CD is most definately NOT compliant.
2.) The CD is "defective" because it is labeled as CDDA, but does not play in a CDDA compliant player, ie my DVD player, my computer, etc etc.
The copy restriction scheme (if I understand it correctly) involves putting noise into the data stream that normal error correction in stereo racks, boomboxes and the like correct for. So yes, it should be easy enough to lift the actual data stream from the disc and remove these anomalies in the streams. If they can error correct in hardware, we can certainly error correct in software.
Even easier math to code up would be to play the audio to an analog channel and feed that back into the sound-in plug on your computer. If you are hyper-concerned about fidelity you can copy it four or five times and blend the copies together using an averaging algorithm (the composite stream is more likely to be accurate to the original than any of the instance streams).
Of course, none of this will protect you from the low quality of the original content, and frankly I think it's ironic that in order to protect the copying of a high quality digital stream they are basically degrading the quality of the signal. If I wanted a degraded signal I'd go back to tapes and vinyl (and please, no audiofile flames about sound range and that stuff, okay?).
I suppose I've just violated the DMCA by providing fairly vague instructions on how to circumvent this so-called protection (as in racket) device.
I do not have a signature
From the article:
Universal told retailers that it would honor refunds on all returned discs -- even for CDs that have been opened.
This is great news. If you believe copy-protected discs are wrong, just buy one, open it, and return. In fact, buy 50 of them, open them all, then return them. If enough people do this, maybe Universal will get the message.
If you want to be even more eeeeeeeeevil, you could open it, rip it via line out, post the ripped tracks to newsgroups, then return it.
They asked for it.
--
For the book says, "We may be through with the past, but the past ain't through with us."
I doubt you can return the CD if it says "will not play on CD-ROM" on the cover.,
Unless you RECEIVED it as a GIFT. DUH.
.sig wanted: Must be concise, funny, and display my cleverness.
What about the quality of the music that's being released? Did Universal, BMG, Sony, et al ever stop to wonder if part of the problem is that they're churning out bands that are carbon copies of each other? Do we really need more "boy bands" or breathy, heartbroken beauty queens? It's just like TV...as soon as Survivor became a hit, every network had to have a clone...but now that the market is saturated, ratings are terrible.
Oh, and what about the economy? I'll bet that if you're one of the million or so high tech workers who doesn't have a job anymore, buying the latest Brittany Spears CD is probably way down on your list, below, say groceries!
Piracy is always an easy card to play, and not just for the music industry. It's a whole lot easier it blame some kid with a ripper, a burner and a fast Internet connection for destroying their market than it is to realize that the industry itself, by churning out disc after disc of bubble gum flavored dreck, is killing itself.
-h-
there's a whole bucketload of ignoramii who won't hear about this unless we tell them.
SPREAD THE WORD. Evangelize at your local record store. Bring it up in conversation. Dangle CDs from your car mirrors and prepare a 10-second explanation that you can deliver at stoplights. Tell your aunt blabbermouth, make sure she's got the facts straight, then let gossipnet take over.
The difference being, back in the 80s-90s, the publishers weren't on the hunt, prosecuting the crackers and pirates. They didn't have the wonderful DMCA and SSCA backing them up. They didn't spend more money on lawyers than they did on creating good content. And they didn't see the writing on the wall.
What we're witnessing is a rat backed into a corner. RIAA recognises that its days are numbered, and it's doing every goddamn thing it can to fight its way out of the corner.
It's beyond mere music piracy. They could live with piracy: they always have.
It's to the point where they can see that artists are going to go independent. And so they're desperately trying to invent a reason for artists to stay with them. "Music protection" seems to be the salespitch they've chosen.
But they're doomed anyway.
Artists don't need the megaexpensive recording studios. These days, most anyone can set up a decent studio for a relatively small investment.
Artists don't need the megaexpensive advertising. These days, anyone can gain popularity via web media. Fansites, mailing lists, word of mouth: it's worked before, it's working now, and it's hella cheaper than MTV.
Artists don't need the distribution chain. They can post to the web. As soon as a good payment system comes along, where the artist can be paid directly and receives most of that payment, the distribution chain is toast.
And artists have recently begun to discover that they can sell out concerts via the net. There's no need to for the megapop media orgy that the old-style companies provided. Word of mouth is doing it.
The writing is on the wall: as soon as the one hiccup is removed -- paying the artists directly, cheaply -- the RIAA is dead. Their *only* hope is to convince artists that music theft is more harmful than the music mafia.
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
So, this could be a very effective strategy for dealing with record companies. With hundreds of lawsuits coming from different directions, they won't bother appearing in court and they will lose every case - making copy protection economically infeasible.
-sting3r
Any why do mom-and-pop shops deserve anything better than the major stores? They're both owned by somebody. Just because the guy who owns Virgin is quite a few steps removed from the actual brick and mortar stores, doesn't mean that in the end, he doesn't lose whatever profit is to be made from the sale of that cd. It does get to the end of the chain eventually. When you return cds to the store, you're hurting the owner. I don't really see why it matters if they're far removed from the store, or directly in charge.
Anyway, if the mom-and-pop stores really cared about their customers, and were really worthy of the support taht you people always want to throw at them, they'd save themselves the trouble and NOT STOCK THE CDS YOU'RE GOING TO RETURN. By selling those cds they are just as guilty as any store, if you're going ot be mad at HMV for selling defective disks and helping the record industry, you've got to angry towards the mom-and-pops as well.
You're either for the copy protection, or you're against it.
--
RumorsDaily
ion. I used the plural "mirrors" to indicate that but I guess additional clarification was needed. Yes, I know CDs dangling from the inside mirror are dangerous and illegal. A friend of mine got an "obstructed view" ticket for his fuzzy dice. It was thrown out after he showed the judge 18 Polaroids of larger decorations hanging inside the city's cop cars.
Okay everyone, I spent some time out at the Universal Music Group section of the Universal Music Studios website, and there's a fairly hefty list of music labels in this group.
Just saying you won't buy from Universal isn't enough. Here's the list I found:
A&M Records
Decca Record Company
Deutsche Grammophon
Geffen Records
Interscope Rercords
Island Def Jam Music Group
Jimmy and Doug's Farmclub.com
MCA Nashville
MCA Records
Mercury Records
Motown Records
Phillips
Polydor
Universal Records
Verve Music Group
I also went through their list of artists, and saw a shocking number of artists that I either currenly own CD's from, or want to purchase some or all from their discography.
My next quest is to find landmail addresses for all the record labels *and* the Universal Music Group, plus the RIAA, as well as the artists of UMG's that I listen to, and start writing a lot of letters stating my disappointment at what they're planning to do, and how it stands to completely wreck my ability to purchase and enjoy their music.
I don't have a "regular CD player". Not _one_. The CD player in my car is based on CD-Rom drive technology. I listen to my music on my computer, or I pipe the audio out straight to the stereo and listen on the big speakers. I listen to my headphones at work while I do my design documents, and that's to MP3's I ripped from CD's that I purchased.
Frankly, their decision sucks if they want me to keep purchasing music from their group. Simple as that.
Please please please do NOT do this to the local indie music retailer. Only use this tactic against the large chains, the Coconuts, Best Buys, Wal-Marts of the world. They can afford to lose a little money and have to fight Universal to get it back. Most of their profit comes from other merchandise lines (home electronics, for instance).
The indie music store makes nearly 100% of its money from selling music, and they typically have much better/wider selections than big corporate stores. If they end up losing a lot to ship it all back to their supplier, they might not be able to swallow the loss, even if it is eventually refunded. I'm all for pissing off the music companies, but don't screw your local music stores at the same time.
Eric
So a label has announced that it will cripple all of its CDs... Did they announce that they will be cutting their prices in half to make up for the decreased functionality? I doubt it. So now all Universal CDs are effectively more expensive because you get less for the same price. Where do these guys learn their economics, from drug dealers? Get people hooked on the "good" stuff, then cut down on the amount of actual product they get for their money...
The simple solution, as others have pointed out, is not to buy the crap. More than that though, don't buy anyone else's crap either. Don't buy any CDs, DVDs, e-books, etc. Don't go to movies, don't rent movies, don't order pay-per-view, don't subscribe to premium cable channels, or possibly even cable itself. Don't buy anything because of ads on TV, radio, or billboards, in magazines, etc. Cut back on consumer electronics purchases, buy only used books, don't go to sporting events. If you do buy anything, only buy it when it is so cheap that someone must be taking a loss somewhere. The only way to change things is to get the entire entertainment industry to rethink its business model. Otherwise, we will keep getting less value.
If that is too drastic a step for you, then return the CDs right after you buy them:
Universal told retailers that it would honor refunds on all returned discs -- even for CDs that have been opened.
We're in this mess because the entertainment industry is driven by maximization of profits through decreasing value and not by delivering quality products at reasonable prices. Through marketing and legislation, they have fought to preserve this flawed model, which will succeed as long as people remain mindless drones who buy anything someone is trying to sell them. Yes, I realize that there really is no hope...
I first went to Fatchucks to see which cd's are currently being copy protected.....
I then hopped on Morpheus (musiccity.com) and typed in the name of the album that was copy protected....
guess what?!
All the ones that I tried are there. So what does that tell you Mr. RIAA....?
www.slightlycrewed.com - Because aren't we all?
GfK found that blank CD sales jumped 129 percent this year. Purchases of pre-recorded music dropped 2.2 percent in the same period.
129% of blank CD's = 2.2% of music CD sales. With some basic math we therefore conclude an additional 2560% rise in blank CD sales will reduce music CD sales to ZERO. COOL! If we really want to wipe out the RIAA, all we have to do is all go out and buy a buttload of blank CD's!
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Good article. There's another article that might explain Universal's reasoning for adding copy-protection. (HINT: It really has little to do with piracy.)
http://www.wired.com/news/mp3/0,1285,49188,00.html
On Tuesday, Universal Music Group becomes the first label to sell copy-protected CDs in the United States with the release of its soundtrack Fast & Furious -- More Music. This comes at a time when the recording industry is asking consumers to pay for music that can only be listened to on the PC.
The newly released CD will keep people from listening to their music on the computer, game consoles and other digital devices. If they wanted to go through the major labels to buy the same music for their computer, the only way would be to sign up for Pressplay, one of the major label subscription services, when it launches later this month.
Essentially, consumers would be required to pay once for a physical CD and once for the digital music file. The restrictions for online subscription services and physical CDs are part of a music industry-wide attempt to stop online music piracy.
Bascially, they want to move everyone into a position where they get paid everytime you "space-shift" your music. Playing your CD in CD player? Pay for it once. Playing it on the computer? Pay for it again. <begin sarcasm>After all, we've got to keep those RIAA pockets filled, don't we?<end sarcasm>
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Your argument is pure crap.
You make three incorrect assumptions:
I work for Amazon.com and hurting a retailer like us does not effect higher ups like Jeff Bezos, it effects people like me, the lower level owners of the company. My stock is not worth much, so when you damage the company your not hurting someone who owns a million or so shares of stock that they bought at 25 cents or less, your hurting people like me who own a few thousand where the buying and selling price is very narrow. If I sell stock, I do not get much, or worse yet, my buying price is above the market price!
The second flaw is that everyone who works at a large company is evil does not care about customers and thus desires to be hurt. Most employees of large companies care alot about the customer and thier experiences with thier company. Alot of the large companies spend lots of money and time figuring out how to make the shopping experience better and more enjoyable.
Third, you make the assumption that Mom and Pop stores are not motivated by pure profit. Mom and Pop places are just as motivated by profit as any large company, they just do it on a smaller scale. In the free market, all persons who own a business are motivated by pure profit, if they are not, they quickly go out of business.
Linux O Muerte!
all persons who own a business are motivated by pure profit
Everyone needs to turn a profit from business, but that doesn't mean they are in business only for the profit. Many people I've talked with personally (including a number of record shop owners) derive utility from the work they're doing. They do it because they derive satisfaction from doing the work or providing the service, and are content with making a living at it. Let me reiterate: they have a motive -- other than profit -- for doing what they do.
I have noticed that mom/pop/indie store owners tend to be more knowledgeable (breadth and depth) and passionate about music than their Media Play counterparts. Sure, they're there to sell something and keep the roof over their heads. But they're also there -- instead of getting their MCSE and getting paid double working in IT -- because they're doing work that's in line with their personal mission. In the process, they usually end up providing better service to customers.
I'm not saying that every small shop is that way. They seem to tend to be, though. And conversely, I'm not saying everyone who works at a large corp is evil...but, I feel like I get poorer service at Media Play and Sam Goody and the like. My theory is that once a corp becomes large and public, the obligation to the (often absentee) owners becomes almost purely that of investment. In our current system, most of the owners are simply looking for a good place to invest their money which will get a good return. They're abstracted away from the operations and mission of the company, and often don't have any interest in the product at all. Just return on investment. Those who make policy decisions high up in the company are thus only affected by financial pressures, and thus customer service and product quality only means something to them in terms of costs and returns.
My stock is not worth much, so when you damage the company your not hurting someone who owns a million or so shares of stock that they bought at 25 cents or less, your hurting people like me
First off, no one is trying to hurt amazon or the retailers, but....
Any action that people could take which would make an appreciable impact on stock prices in the way you describe would be noticed by the ceo, the board, and investors at large. Some of these people may have got in when the getting was cheap, but a lot of them didn't, and furthermore, they have large enough investments in the company that a fluctuation of a quarter can gain/lose them millions in some cases.
Anyway, back to the point. No one is trying to hurt the retailer, but rather punish the publisher. The large retailers have much more clout with the publishers. Returning lots of CDs to Amazon won't hurt them -- they have the clout and motivation to write it off to the manufacturer/publisher. Thus, returning lots of CDs to Amazon is much more likely to hurt universal than returning them to Crandall Records in Orem Utah.
Your argument is pure crap.
While I realize this is not an uncommon mode of discourse/rhetoric on slashdot, avoiding statements like this will actually give you more credibility and respect. Try actually refuting my arguments next time.
Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.