Slashdot Mirror
Philips Says Compact Discs Can't be Copyprotected
Tomcat666 writes "tecChannel has a story about Philips, the holder of the most CD digital audio (CD-DA) patents. Apparently, they don't like the audio CD copy protection many record companies want to enforce in the future. They break the CD-DA standard and therefore are not allowed to use the logo. As a conclusion, Philips' next audio CD copier will be able to detect and probably circumvent the copy protection of audio CDs."
This article is Auf Deutsch but the fish does a tolerable job of
making it sane for those who can't remember the proper gender of all
their nouns.
Now just give me a domestic region-less DVD player and I'll be your customer for life!
--
I like to watch.
This is exactly what we need. Someone to stand up to the new practice of wrecking the CDs so they can't be played on certain players. I never actually pictured one of the larger companies doing that, but Phillips is apparently in a perfect position to do it.
Phillips is doing practically everything I would have wanted a hardware manufacturer (and holder of the CD Rom license) to do!
So, mmm, what's the giant conspiracy? Why is this happening?
big business supporting the little guys.
Regardless of copyright, would they not be in violation of copyright for producing a device that bypasses a circumvention method?
DMCA seems to be more important then other laws, such as fair use lately.
I wonder if Phillips is prepared to fight against the DMCA, that would be a huge boost in the fight.
If they do, my next cd-rom will be phillips.
Phillips will probably just create their own copy protection standard, incorporate that into CD-DA, and force other companies to pay for the privilege of using this new standard if they want to call themselves CD-DA compatible. No way Phillips is doing this out of the goodness of their collective hearts.
I'm the stranger...posting to
Its good to see that some folks understand that violation of the standard would ensure that customers may not be able to use their equipment (ergo reducing their market share). I may actually go buy something from Philips because of this.
-- The Hollow Man
Non illegitimati carborundum
Thank You Philips! Finally a company with the power of IP using it to the consumer's benefit. I would love to see Philips sue record companies for deceptively using their certification logo!
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
I'm impressed that a large corporation is acctually taking a sane stance. But, I'm wonder just how long they'll be able to maintain this position. Surely even their large pockets can't beat the endless pockets of all the other large corporations who are developing these copyprotection schemes. And what about the DMCA?
Dozings.com -- Its kinda funny... If you're as crazy as me.
Since Hemos is the only one that realizes that the fish isn't the only translator...
Google now has language tools, translates pages, AND will let you link to the translated page (that link is to the article in question). And, actually, google's translators are really good. Maybe even better than altavistas...
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
NewScientist.com is carrying the same story in english
According to the article, Philips is not going to try to get offending companies to remove the logo since the patents are running out in 2003/2004.
That's got nothing to do with the 'right' to copy or anything similar.
IMHO, Philips is just protecting their business and patents by trying to enforce a standard almost entirely made by them (CD-DA).
And do you think that copyright enforcers will care about carrying a logo when millions/billions are lost (or will be in the future) with people copying their stuff?
Looks like Philips will buy a tought fight if they decided to manufacturate such hardware, a fight my dear \. reader, that on my opinion will be inevitabily lost.
BTW, a quick tip, Google can do better translations...
Buy a Nintendo DS Lite
In roughly 85% of all the countries Aucio CD's are being sold, there are Fi Use laws in place that do no allow for manufacturers to circumvent copy ability.
Im glad to see Phillips is at least protecting their
property and not allowing it to be emblazoned on a CD that does not conform to those standards, would MS allow their logo to be pasted on a S/390 and say built for windows 98 ?? No dont think so.....
I hope all this copy circumvention leads to more piracy than ever before. JUST piracy of the stuff that was to be protected, maybe then theyll think twice....
Sig went tro...aahemmm.....fishing........
Everyone get out there and buy a Philips product of some sort, doesn't matter what, it's just important you tell Philips what you did and why. Showing a tangible result will only encourage them in the future.
Need some ideas? The eXpanium is a sweet piece of hardware, especially the 503.
The RIAA is trying to stop the flood at the highest point in its crest. Trying to put copy protection on the CDs is folly. It won't work. There are ways to circumvent this kind of self-sabotage, and everyone knows them.
What they need to do is make it worth the hardware manufacturers' while to *not* include those copying abilities. Pay Philips, JVC, et al. to remove digital copying capabilities from their devices. Obviously, this will still allow for analog copying, but as we all know, the quality of analog vs. digital copying is pretty crappy.
They need to stop the flood at the smallest chokepoint, where there are only a few floodgates to manage. They'll never stop the flood if they try to catch the raindrops.
There's an enlish-language article on the subject at New Scientist:9 91783
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99
How long it will be before the content creators and their lobbying efforts begin an attempt at forcing hardware manufacturers to build "copy protedction" mechanisms in their readers?
Will we see a similar situation to the DVD players that did not conform to the DVD spec (you know, the ones that would play any region DVDs and did not force you to watch the goddamn FBI warning for the 256,000th time)? Remember how quickly most national resellers stopped carring those brands? How hard it was to find one once the Word was Out?
Cheers,
- RLJ
News D-CInventor Philips criticizes copy protection
In the discussion around the copy protection for music DS have itself now with Philips the inventor the silberscheiben to word announce. The enterprise sees no future for the protection and sees therein a break of the audio format. In an interview with the " Financial Times Germany " said Philips speaker Klaus Petri: " those are silberscheiben with music drauf, which DS resemble, but none are. " Petri expressed thereby openly about what tecCHANNEL already before two years reported: Copy-protected music DS break the format CD-DA and might not thereby the Logo actually any longer carry. This covers itself also with the legal concept of law of communication media-learns. Stone of the impact: Also HiFi devices, here Sonys MXD-D3, have problems with the copy protection. As owners of most patents for CD-DA the Philips's does not want to proceed according to report however against the protection procedures. Accumulated themselves up the complaints of consumers, which could not play the DS in HiFi devices. Since however in 2002 and 2003 the Philips patents run out after 20 years, a law case is no longer be worth worth, meant Klaus Petri. He hopes for the fact that the consumers would boycott the protected disks. This has in Great Britain to it that the copy protection is not " topic " more, continued to mean led already the Philips speaker. Quite alone the Philips's could not pound anyway on the adherence to standards. Sony nevertheless regards an important proportion of the patents as CD-DA. To this company belong however with Sony Music one of the largest disk companies and with Sony DADC one the largest D-CPresswerke ONE in Europe - and there increases disks with the protection keyàudio manufactured. As pure hardware manufacturers goes Philips's another way Klaus Petri indicated in the discussion as tecChannel.de that one wants to detect new copy protection procedures in the future by software updates for the HiFi D recorders of the enterprise. The devices should be able to create then also digital copies of the protected DS. For example with keyàudio as in the above picture set copy bit after SCMS wants to respect Philips thereby however further. In addition, with such disks with the Philips Duplizierern a similar copy is possible. About the first failed introduction of a copy protection this report informs. You find the current status of the protection procedures in this contribution. And which standards a CD-DA would have to actually keep, is this basic article to infer
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns999 91783
Much as we all love OS/9, the games on the CD-I were unnecessarily naff.
Also Philips whiteware lasts exactly warrenty time + one day before it breaks down :-(
Audio music can *ALWAYS* be copied - no matter what format or what protection!!! You don't need no software solutions to do that - you can capture the audio from the wires to your speakers. There will *NEVER* be any copy protection which could prevent that.
is much better from google than from the fish, imo.
Honestly, Philips only has there self interest at stake here. I'm sure it's just posturing to get there own CD copy protection scheme in place. Hopefully they will do as bad a job as the DVD people did. The one thing we can all be sure of is that they don't care about you, me or the CD consumer -- these are the same people who try to sell "audio" CD-R's for $20!
I recall someone who worked at Philips telling me -- "How was copper wire invented? Philips management squeezing a penny".
I am not a number! I am a man! And don't you
Unfortuneatly according to the article, Philip's patent runs out in 2002/3 (hitting that 20yr mark).
So, they won't be able to enforce it soon anyway.
see http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns999 91783
Please remember that Royal Philips Electronics is headquartered in the Netherlands. This doesn't mean that they are immune to the effects of DMCA but they are in a better position than most American companies to challenge it.
If philips goes ahead with this, that will mean that any 'copy protected' disc will not be technically a Compact Disc, since they aren't allowed to use the logo.
This should mean that you will be able to enter a store, and ask if the CD is actually a CD, or a non-CD copy protected disc. This will allow you to choose, and avoid, copy protected discs.
The whole catch with the copy protected discs is that the idea only works if people DON'T know that they are copy protected.
If people DO know, then they just won't buy them, and the record companies will lose money.
Props to philips.
they are trying to sell their product, a cd copier. being able to copy "copy-protected" cd's is a cool feature people will pay money for. they are not doing this to be cool, they are trying to make money
"They break the CD-DA standard and therefore are not allowed to use the logo. "
So they release copy-protected CDs with no CD-DA logo. 99.99999999% of all consumers wouldn't even notice.
This is ridiculous. Phillips, a Dutch company, has been one of the few companies to embrace progressive policies that place concern of people over profits. There is no record, to my knowledge, of Phillips fucking anyone.
So relax.
Did anyone ever wonder if Phillips liked the idea of copy right protection? After all I believe they invented the redbook standard all those years ago..
I think they just got mad of people messing up their standard. DVD Is on the rampage, they need to keep the CD standard afloat. I wonder if the whole cd protection thing was to make DVD look more tantilizing?
:)
gallix
-conspiracy? what! where?
"The sum of the angles of that rectangle is too monstrous to contemplate." --Commissioner Gordon
Is not law, merely doctrine. It's a set of guildelines allowing users certain rights such as making a copy for archival purposes (not distributed).
But all that is slowly disappearing with each new piece of legislation.
I'm not afraid of falling, it's the sudden stop at the end that frightens me.
While it's good to see somebody standing up for the official format, the trend is moving away from the standard. With Microsoft cutting deals with CD-player manufacturers, and the predictable leanings of big media companies, it seems likely that our future will have "new and improved" CD players that are really stripped down little brothers of the XBox designed to play these new "CDs". Cactus Data Shield uses crippled low-bitrate MP3 files to provide some PC-based music playing capability--but of course, the player is Windows-only. This is just the first halting, unsophisticated stab. Will we soon be seeing new music released in DRM-enabled WMA-only CDs that can only be played in special players or Windows boxes?
from the new scientist article:
"At the moment we are trying to reason with people rather than sue them."
This seems like a groundbreaking approach to things, especially in today's world. Phillips seems to be a pretty cool company, first by making CD copying home audio equipment, and now stickin' it to the record industry!
Talk about thinking differently... I only fear that reason will not work with the record industry.
--
Some weasel took the cork out of my lunch.
This is the argument I've made for a long time, and I think it's a strong one. The Red Book standards lay out what a cd is, and the CD mark you see on the back of any disc you buy is supposed to be a guarantee that the enclosed software will play on all compatible hardware. Any copy-protected cd fails this test, and should not legally be sold as a compact audio disc.
This is great news, because it will take Phillips to enforce the standards
ceci n'est pas un 'sig'
Aren't they one of the biggest CD-R manufacturers out there? Maybe they could get Maxell on board too ;-)
crazy dynamite monkey
It looked like good news on the surface, but I've got mixed feelings about that one...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Perhaps it would be wise for the crowd to contact Phillips and let them know how we feel about their stance.
Perhaps a suggestion that we would support (read buy/recommend) their products should they decide to fight this battle and refuse to incorporate silly copy protection schemes in their hardware seems to be in order.
If you do decide to contact them, be sure to be brief and to the point. Also it would probably be wise to only send to one or two people as I'm sure these people have business to attend to outside of reading 5000 emails that show up from the Slashdot faithful.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Please understand, I approach this as a mental midget. If I'm entirely off base-- sorry.
Is this in anyway similar to asserting ownership of a trademark? I don't really know (but I assume I will soon enough) who, if anyone, owns the "CD" trademark, but it seems to me, that if media which does not conform to the necessary standards becomes widely known as "CD"s, whoever does own the rights (again, if anyone) would lose them--> like zippers and frisbes.
Cache Rules Everything Around Me
I'm happy to see that Slashdot changes is rhetorics from "copyright protection" to the somewhat preferable "copy protection." However, that term is still completely inaccurate. "Copy protection" does not protect copies. It does not protect your right to make a copy. It does, in fact, not protect anything at all (except the greed of the media industry).
Some of the more accurate terms that you might prefer to use are "copy prevention" (that's what those technologies actually try to do) or "usage control" (that's the effect of copy prevention, e.g. your choice of playback devices is limited). To describe a media that is crippled by usage control technology, you can use something like "restricted use media."
If you think these terms are too political, think about how political the terminology used by the media industry is. The only reason why "copyright protection" doesn't sound completely laughable to you is that you've heard it so often.
Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
OK,
- B
http://www.bradheintz.com/
- updated
Playing MPEG stream from Dueling Banjos.mp3
Nothin' like multinational corporations duking it out. Who'll be the first to sue Phillips under DMCA?
As a conclusion, Philips' next audio CD copier will be able to detect and probably circumvent the copy protection of audio CDs.
"I've got to admit, it's getting better... it's getting better all the time..."
:-)
If it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet.
It's *Philips* NOT Phillips, the poster got it right, but almost without exception everyone else is using the superfluous 'l' in the name...
I know it's anal, but there's a big difference between Philips and Phillips... or Phillips for that matter...
No man is an island, but Gary is a city in Indiana.
Readily available mail-order (do a search) and probably at your local china-town as well. The ones in china town where I live are from several different manufacturers and offer karaoke support as well. Sure most of these are 'moded' players, but some are available with upgradeable BIOSes that you just slap in a CD-ROM and it writes the new instructions into the DVD players BIOS.
People are just too lazy to look for items like this if they aren't on the shelf at their local best-buy, radio shack or wal mart, but the products are readily available.
If it's in a jewel case that looks like a CD, and is on the shelf in HMV, and costs the same as other CDs, and is on the shelf beside other CDs, do you think that most consumers would stop to look if it has the Philips CD logo on it?
- In Capitalist America, law violates YOU!
I, for one, would certainly welcome being able to filter out ``broken'' CDs by looking for a label stating that it meets the CD standard.
I'm concerned, though, as to whether the lifetime of some CD-related patent (or several of them) is coming up which would allow major music companies to figure they can make their own without having to meet the standard and tell Philips to take their logo and shove it (leaving the consumer without sufficient information to make an informed choice and avoid purchasing a defective (IMHO) product. Anyone up to date on the patents that cover the CD technologies?
Of course, this all supposes that the major music publishers that are leaning toward selling broken CDs have anything that's really worth purchasing anyway. Personally, I find that the material that's put out by the indie labels is immeasurably better than the drek that the major labels are spewing out. I can't imagine finding much on a major label that worth pirating much less shelling out money for. I may be in a minority (but I doubt it) when I ask the mega music distributors: ``Why would I invest even the paltry US$0.5 for a blank CD (and the 30 minutes of unattended computer time it takes to copy) to pirate something that I wouldn't even listen to once?''
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
Indeed, some us were speculating about this very possibility when 'NSync's protected CD was announced about three months ago.
-- Alastair
Even though I'm not the hugest fan of government intervention in everything, Philips does raise a legitimate issue (one that we probably should have noticed first, but oh well) - that the copy protected CDs are being labelled and sold with the "Compact Disc - Digital Audio" logos even though they do not comply with the standards.
Even in Philips doesn't pursue litigation, the US Gov't could certainly prosecute the record labels for defrauding consumers. It would be interesting to see if a class-action lawsuit could be filed under similar reasoning (although a class of N'Sync fans is probably something the world is better off without).
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
Hell yea!
That's about all I can say. It makes me so happy to see Phillips doing this. This is exactly the kind of thing that convinces me to buy a certain company's products. Go Phillips!
If you read the article you will discover that:
I. Phillip's patents expire in 2002 and 2003. So even if Phillips goes hog wild, the issue in court will be over before it goes to trial. So Phillips is not going to try to stop the copy protected CD's in court
II. Sony is also a major CD patent holder, and is quite happily pressing massive numbers of CD's that don't even work with some of their equipment.
III. The head of Phillips made the comment that consumer activism is the means to stop CD copy protection.
IV. The Phillips CD copier hardware will probably not disable the copy protection, but just ignore it.
If I wasn't so cynical I might see this as a corporation doing the "right thing," but I cannot see this as anything but a PR sound byte. Phillips is going to sit around for the last year of its patent and collect royalties like nothing was going on. The discussion with the exec. was purely technical.
It's also the little label. If it doesn't have the little icon, normal people might pass it up because obviously it's something screwy, like one of those newfangled mp3 thingies or something. Of course, I could be wrong. Happens lots, actually.
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
"Philips indicted for violating DMCA, initiated by complaint from RIAA and MPAA"
Recently law makers have been showing resistance to industry execs who are pushing cd copy-protection. Here is a recent story on this. The recording industry according to this article is rethinking copy protection all together.
Yes but every time I try to see it your way, I get a headache.
Finally a company that does the right thing ... I can only tell you that my next CD player will be Phillips :). This is the kind of companies I like to support .
"We all know Linux is great...it does infinite loops in 5 seconds." -- Linus
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Philips tried to release a DVD-R last year too, I think. At least they demo'ed it at some expo. They are a hardware company and want to sell hardware. Think of competitors like Sony, whose vested interest is in the Movies/Music/Software instead of the products that play them. That is the sort of thing anti-trust legislation is meant to stop.
I need some blank cdr's too.
Now I have a brand to tell people to buy when they ask me.
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
Philips says copy-protected CDs have no future at New Scientist. As an aside, I find New Scientist to be one of the best all-around sources for sci/tech news.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
If a commerical company were to circumvent a "copy protection measure" what would the RIAA do? Philips is capable of a big fight and would probably put one up just to improve their geek appeal, and thus sales. DeCSS will never break the DMCA, but this just might. Philips has enough resources to do it, if they want to. Will they be the ones?
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
Negative moderation is flawed. It is obviously unhelpful for one
moderator to mod something down as "redundant" if another moderator
has already modded the post up as "informative" earlier.
The "flamebait" label and to a lesser degree the "troll" label are all
also used continuously to moderate down posts which are clearly
on-topic and which make valid points but which the moderator in
question disagrees with.
I think that slashcode needs to be rewritten to separate negative and
positive moderation points. Each moderator receiving moderation points
will get AT MOST one negative point per batch of points, and there
will only be a 50% chance that the moderator will even receive this
one negative moderator point.
The system can work with positive moderation only; users can read at
+3 or +4 to see only the best posts. I already feel like I've missed
many informative, helpful posts -- including many that were
*previously* modded up -- because others have seen fit to mod them
back down, usually (in the case of "flamebait" and "troll") because
they disagree with them, often because (in the case of "redundant")
they just apparently have moderator points to burn before they run out
of time.
Negative moderation should be very, very rare on a system like this
one; to do anything else is to stifle the free exchange of ideas.
So the real reason CD's can't be copyrighted is because the CD standard didn't allow for them. So what's the next step for the RIAA? Simple - new standard. These things were written into the DVD spec document and so I predict a "CD 2" spec soon. Then they get the major manufacturers on board and before long come out with only "CD 2"'s. The Redbook Standard is over 20 years old, I figure it's not like they're turning right around and making a new one or something.
Schnapple
Several years ago, not long before they started producing audio CD copiers.
They must have previewed the conflict due to arise between hardware and software (audio) companies.
I don't think they really support the little guys, but mainly their own business (and rightly so).
There is an interesting court case against BMG that is linked to the violations of the CD-DA standard all current cd copyproctions use. In germany it is a punishable act to use false or incomplete data to affect the result of data processing in a way that someone loses property. This offence is called "computer fraud" and is punishable with up to 5 years jail. ,disk space or your time while you try to make a legal copy as it is allowed by fair use rules. It doesn't matter how much money or property you lose.
It is easy to see that these copyprotections use false data. They all contain the CD-DA logo but contain data that isn't valid in the current standard. That there is a lose of property is also easy to show. You could easily waste a cd-r
Read all about it in a real nice article by telepolis. The article is in german, but google produces a readable version.
Jan
That's okay, just losing the right to the logo is a Good Thing. For one, it could mean an injunction against distribution of any existing copy-protected discs mislabeled with that logo -- which hurts the recording/distribution companies responsible.
:-) which silvery discs are the copy-protected ones -- namely the ones without the CD logo. We can just avoid buying those. (And encourage others likewise).
For another, it makes it obvious (well, in a subtle way
-- Alastair
"Ain't no right way to do a wrong thing."
I link that translation link. I found this quote to be a great summary of the whole CD copy protection issue:
said Philips speaker Klaus Petri: "those are silberscheiben with music drauf, which CDs resemble, but none are."
Damn straight, those new copy protected CD's really are a bunch of silberscheiben with music drauf.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
unlike patents and (in theory) copyright do not run out
Actually, in theory, copyrights DO run out.. it's reality that they keep getting extended.
Philips, the inventor of the Compact Disc, does not expect controversial attempts by the music industry to introduce CD "copy protection" technologies to last very long, because of consumer complaints. Philips is opposed to the use of copy protection systems. ... Philips could refuse to license such copy protected discs as genuine CDs, or pursue some other legal obstruction to the practice. But Gary Wirtz, general manager of the Philips Copyright Office at its headquarters in the Netherlands, believes that copy protection technology will fail all by itself.
These are good guys, just like SonicBlue, Archos, and Apple. They need our support.sulli
RTFJ.
...is really easy to break. It's a simple integer underrun error that is placed on the first track of the disc (in the LBA field of the TOC). Simple sanity checking in future cd rippers will easily circumvent this. In fact, the latest beta of CoolEdit is able to rip these discs by accident (they do the sanity checking, I think).
If anyone that writes CD rippers wants a more in depth description of how to circumvent this, just email me (m-i-k-e-f-e-l-d@engin.umich.edu without the dashes). It's really simple.
Anyhow, I only know of one disc that has this "protection" from universal on it... "The Fast and the Furious Vol. 2". I was trying to run some audio analysis algorithms on its tracks, and couldn't rip the audio... which is why I investigated. Once more discs with this "protection" come out, it will just be a matter of patching existing mp3 rippers.
mike
Since Slashdot rejected this story, I will post it here.
There is a related item reported in the LA Times about a bill being introduced to amend the DMCA - which will allow for consumers to copy digital works without running afoul of the law.
LA Times Story
Given the data on the CDs is still PCM but with a minor tweak on the samples to induce confusion in computer CDROM equipment, why couldn't Phillips just argue that they are merely trying to fix a problem that the RIAA has caused?
From what little I understand of it, some simple analog filtering present in most CD players essentially defeats the scheme. And if this is the case, I would hardly think their scheme could possibly be considered digital copy protection.
I agree wholeheartedly.
Note: This appears not to work in Mozilla 0.9.7. :-(
m ercare/contact.jhtml
Tell Philips you appreciate their stance on fair use (even though, yes, I realize they have their own motivations):
www2.consumer.philips.com/global/b2c/common/custo
Going to pricewatch and purchasing Philips equipment is great, but let them know your doing so and why.
One of the reasons that I became a lawyer was to avoid ever having to hire one. -SPYvSPY
I tried pointing this out a while ago when we first got news of data scrambled CD's.
I pointed out that this is in direct violation of the standard. I guess they read slashdot, although just a little behind.
If I bought a piece of software that says "Made For Windows XP" and it's comprised of a binary RPM.. I'd be pissed. Microsoft would sue to hell, and there would be a big hub-bub.
Hopefully they won't only produce copying equipment [breaking the DMCA?] but they will also take strong legal action against said companies.
Maybe Philips has a new technology they are working on... maybe they read my huge brainstorm under the Gracenote story... but let's hope not.
Hopefully content protection companies, like M$ is trying to be, aren't behind their backs telling them to swear off these data scrambling techniques to push their own.
Get your Unix fortune now!
You see those Phillips commercials on the music and 'techy' shows? The commercial goes something like this:
,from his collection, a mix cd for listening with dates.
"1- Guy with date plays cd and has crummy music on it. Date winces.
2- Guy goes home and 'mixes'
3- Guy then plays music with date. Date is happy."
If anything, Phillips will NOT change the standard, since all cd players operate by it. Nobody would buy thier product if it was incapible of playing other media. They cut thier own throats.
If you put this all together it makes tremendous sense.
1: Congressman makes statement questioning legality of 'Blank CD' tax (authorizing fair use in copying) and the Copy-Protection by Universal and other companies.
2: Copy-Protected CD's are not compatible with the Red Book Standard (therefore will not play in some players). In other words, Stay with Red Book, people stay happy.
3: There is a large amount of capital involved in copy protection, and Phillips doesn't want to waste money on a scheam that may flop and may be illegal (possible law suits may pursue).
And past that, more games are being copy-protected by brain dead scheams. If I could buy a decently priced, self contained unit with a reader and a writer and make perfect copies, I'd buy 1, maybe 2.
Josh Crawley
ps: About pirating, stopping making cd burners wont stop pirating. It's like saying, "The internet has caused evil stuff to spread, let's shut it down". Both are infeasible, one much more than the other.
What's the desired end result here? Lower CD costs? Free music? Drive the music companies out of business?
These are BIG companies with huge payrolls and tons of overhead for manufacturing and distribution, marketing, A&R, etc. Those machines eat millions of US dollars every day chewing up artists and spitting out CDs - many of which no one buys enough of to make a profit on.
I bet if you got your favorite record executive drunk and he'd even admit that they really don't care if you back up your CD or make a copy of it for the car or even if your kid makes one for his friend. Heck, at least you bought it for $18.99 and there's some extra built into that for your kid passing out copies. These people have always understood that this is going to happen.
But what happened? We, the people, got greedy. We decided we wanted everything for free. EVERYTHING. No, not you Mr. Slashdot reader who actually buys more CDs after finding new and exciting artists on you favorite Napster clone. No, not the person with the professional ethics who pays the artist directly with PayPal at their website. No, not the select few individuals who used to pay for all their Shareware in the "old" days. It's the seventh grade cheerleader who uploads her favorite boy band somewhere or shares all the songs with the entire planet of people downloading free music. Now that we can share with 500,000 people at one time those machines are taking notice.
Do you know why? They found out at the end of last year that the market for music had gotten smaller. Less people who were available to purchase music did so. These are people who could afford to buy CDs and had in the past who are no longer purchasing music that way. Big problem because these same people are finding music through "alternative" means.
This is seen as a threat by the music business, because the majority of these people are finding illegal ways to obtain the same music that sells for big bucks.
What should we expect them to do? They're going to fight tooth and nail to get that business back and grow it even more.
Sure you can rip the copy protected CDs and will probably always be able to in the future. This is just a shot across the bow - to let us know they're serious.
Wait until you see Congress (quietly) pass a bill that makes ISPs responsible for the traffic across their lines and servers. No more common carrier status. I bet lots of businesses would like that.
How about when the serial number in your next processor is turned on by default and you can't turn it off?
When everyone's favorite OS (no, not *your* favorite OS) won't play non-secure media anymore and any player for LINUX will have to break the DMCA just to play whatever the new form of CD is called. What about when that "favorite" OS wont even load a program that isn't digitally signed? Or a driver that isn't approved? Or a piece of hardware that isn't "authenticated".
What about when CDs vanish in a few years and only DVDs exist? Audio DVDs will completely replace CDs for the mass market by 2008, if not before.
How about when the first 100 college students go to federal prison for breaking the DMCA by using "evil hacker tools that could destroy humanity as we know it"? Or whatever the prosecutor has to say to get a conviction. Don't think it won't happen. Mitnick didn't even get his trial for five years!
They will not stop. They will try whatever they have to do to make it work for them and the Clipper chip will look like ROT13 next to what they can envision.
So feel free to complain and talk about lawsuits and what Phillips can/cannot do, but the bottom line is that the big guns are mad and no one is going to stop them.
Remember the U.S. is all about commerce and money. Nothing else. No one understands this better than the present government and if you think they mind trashing your supposed "rights" then you're in for a shock.
My eleven year old wants to play video games all day and I don't let him because it's bad for him. The entire U.S. population may want to download music for free, but it's bad for commerce and the U.S. government wont let them.
Tamum shud
Note that the article appears to only refer to Philips' audio CD-recorders, not their CD-RW recorders. So hurray! Instead of compiling mix cDs on a computer and burning them to $0.50-$1.00 CD-Rs, you get to use Philips' audio components and burn to $$$ "audio CDs". This is not a huge step forward.
RC
OK, can anyone in Germany tell us if "copy protected" CD's are being sold there?
Since the "CD Audio" logo is a Trademark, and Phillips has said that "copy protected" CD's do not qualify, can't a private individual (like that ambulance chaser from the Suse and Killustrator stories) start a lawsuit against the media companies?
From the sound of the Suse case, you could even get Universal shut down even if they're not doing it yet (since they're the principal backers of this..)
Anyone from Germany care to comment?
Anything that slows down the sale of CD-ROMs and thence plastic resin sales will probably not get their approval.
Philips does not seem to own very many content producers. They don't care who put what on a disc, as long as somebody does.
*whup* "Get along, little electrons. Heeyah!"
There may be a conflict as some manufacturer is also a member of RIAA/MPAA (e.g. Sony), but the majority are just making consumer electronics.
I'm sure it makes more business sense for manufacturer to have, say, standard encoding scheme for the whole planet, instead of that stupid regional coding scheme for DVD. This regional coding scheme adds nothing but cost, overhead, consumer dissatisfaction, critiques, etc. It's not in their best interest. And devices that allow people to do whatever they want, including making backup copy and creating their own audio/video contents, will only sell more devices, and more related (or even unrelated) devices too. Would you think there's a market for MP3 players if none of the music CDs can be ripped? Me think not.
Now if you're a reasonable person, you're saying "that's nuts!" because the end result is the content is not copied. This presumes that the record company's protection scheme is better than the government's scheme. The DMCA would certainly prevent replacing a more secure coppy protection scheme with a lesser one(even though technically the material was still secure, just not as secure). So record companies fiddling with the government's copy-protection is clearly prohibited under the DMCA.
My other sig is extremely clever...
Please, somebody! Mod this person up, even if the post is off-topic, and even though I'm an A/C. Words are political. The largest barrier to clear thought is imprecise language. Anyone with the spare brain cells, who actually cares to influence public opinion, should heed this guy's advice!!
Finally a big company deciding to listen to the consumers? Whats next, free stuff!
-- 4 8 15 16 23 42
Remember that the Electronics industry is worth a lot more than the record industry.
The logo is a trademark indicating certain specifications and recognition. The patent is different from the logo.
Fight Spammers!
Duh! They could've just asked us Slashdotters and we would have reported the same thing.
Hmm. Philips sets a standard that lasts for nigh on 20 years, about as long as a typical Slashdot reader has been alive, a standard that made a real difference (do -you- remenber how clunky LPs were, and do -you- recall who invented the Compact Cassette?),and still people bitch about Philips! Please, buy some Philips stuff, or at least, and just for once, be a spelling N*Z* and help promote their brand if you respect what they do, by spelling Philips with one L ...
Wow, for once, a big company has done something good (maybe for the wrong reasons, but who cares?).
In other news: "The United States Government has today stated that the DMCA is unconstitutional. If corporations want to sew people just for talking, then they can't use the US Government Logo, flag, or do so on US soil..." umm, yeah, like that will happen 'til pigs fly, or bush makes a long sentence make sense.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
I think someone didn't have the insight to know that the honor system rarely works.
:)
The Honor system works here, we use it in the cafe for all the yogourt and the muffins. Trust me I have seen some people's tabs.. it works
It's Philips, not "Phillips".
Philips, Eindhoven
(no pun intended)
I just checked a bunch of cds that I have lying around my desk. Only ~50% of them carry the phillips 'CD' logo on the disc itself or on the liner. They do all carry the logo stamped into the plastic jewel case insert tho - so who is Phillips actually licensing the logo to? The disc manufacturers or the jewel case manufacturers?
They are already 100% safe from me even *thinking* about copying their stuff.
BTW, I haven't been keeping score. NSync is which rev of Menudo, exactly?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
At one time the "Big 5" was the "Big 6."
Universal in the late 90's purchased Philips labels (Polygram, Decca, maybe Deutche Grammphone).
All this wouldn't be interesting, except that the deal involved stock if I remember. Anyone know if Philips still holds stock in Universal Music Group (part of Vivendi)?
That was Phillips and Compton. If they'd followed through, there wouldn't have BEEN an Internet Revolution.
Honestly, there's another reason they're doing this besides altruism, and it's the almighty dollar (or Euro, in the case of Phillips). If CD players can't play CD's, then that dilutes their trademark - the little 'Compact Disc' logo you see on everything.
If there was a secure (for the monopolist) music format, and they held the patent, they'd put that one down all our throats.
Yeah, but nobody is buying audio only CD-R's (I know they definately used to cost $20, I can belive they are cheaper now -- the recorders still seem to be ludicrously expensive). Philips wouldn't look on Cd copy protection as muddying their CD format, it's "innovation" which will sell more of their audio CD-R's and (most likely) lead to new patents. If you think that phillips is going to sue someone like the deep-pocketed RIAA over a technical dispute, you better think again.
I am not a number! I am a man! And don't you
... And with that, the trolls rejoiced.
We still need some way of filtering the crapfloods and other garbage that makes it through the lameness filters.
I have another reason - they squash good music and feed use tripe music. EG. pop singer flavor of the day.
When the few decide for the many what is good, that's censorship.
make Linux, not Microsoft. sin(beast) = -0.809016994374947424102293417182819
In turn, Philips attempts to dictate how the record labels may use their CD format: It's our standard, so you can only use it the way we want you to.
The recording companies will just release CD's without the logo. Does anyone actually look for teh logo?
but Phillips has a new customer!
-- Knowing too much can get you killed, but knowing who knows too much can make you rich.
Are exactly the same.
the AES standard is just SPDIF transimitted using a balanced line - you can interface the two with a ballancing/unbalancing chip (INA135/DRV137)
I would start with The Antitrust Terrible 10: Why the Most Reviled "Anti-competitive" Business Practices Can Benefit Consumers in the New Economy and The Government's War on Mergers: The Fatal Conceit of Antitrust Policy, because it is a common misconception that antitrust is even needed. More analysis is found here, here, and these two links. In short, antitrust and monopoly-busting tactics do more damage than good.
"All mankind is at the mercy of a handful of neurotics". - Norman Douglas
How exactly does putting this "copy protection" scheme on the discs circumvent the taxes? If I go into a store and tell them I'm trying to copy these "protected" CDs are they going to refund my taxes? NO. This is an ADDITIONAL method, not a REPLACEMENT method. Not that the DMCA doesn't contradict other laws (i.e. Fair Use) but your premise is flawed.
"Da ist ein Technölüst in mein Unterpanten!"
Can't patents be renewed
Patents last three and a half years after being granted but can renewed to 7 1/2 after grant, 11 1/2 after grant, and 20 after filing by paying maintenance fees.
Copyrights last 95 years unless you're a freelancer creating works on or after 1 Jan 1978, in which case they last life plus 70. (To renew a copyright for 20 years, simply stuff millions of dollars into the pockets of both parties in the United States and all major parties in the European Union.) Either way, they last additionally until December 31.
A registered trademark lasts five years. After that, the owner files an affidavit of continued use, which buys another five years; then the trademark can be renewed for ten years at a time until a court decides that the trademark has become too generic to maintain.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I think it's time for a different set of moderators... jesus christ... The parent comment was moderated Redundant, when almost every other goddamn comment about this story has been redundant... What the hell...
I was sitting here wondering who the hell the moderators are so I could punch them in the nose...
So what if Philips says no-go on the logo?
I mean, how many people actually check for the 'compact disc -digital audio'
logo before buying a record at the record store?
You could argument that record stores may refuse
to sell CD:s without the logo, but given the tight
bonds between the recording industry and record stores, I for one doubt it.
I mean, sure, buy a Philips Tivo instead of a Sony one, but its not like they're the avenging angel of fair use.
The only thing Phillips could do is demand that the copyprotected CD's not carry the "CD" label.
And run smear ads against the RIAA labels accusing them of not producing CDs. (RIAA will attempt to sue Philips for libel, but in the US, the truth cannot constitute libel.) Make like the dairy industry: "If you want real CDs, look for the logo."
RIAA is an association of music distrubuters et al, they don't sell CDs.
Common Slashdot practice accepts "RIAA" as shorthand for "RIAA member labels" in appropriate contexts.
The irony of that would be that there'd be no new music left to trade since the over produced modern pop crap is always the most popular.
*NSHIT fans will just have to find new music such as independent punk or electro.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The solution for RIAA and major music labels is to push for another "standard" rather than CD (or CDDA). Simply create Extended Disc (ED) and market it it as such. Make this standard work just like the CDDA standard, but allow for copy protection-style errors. Big marketing campaign to support ED as being "better" than CD. Done!
You need to install an RTFM interface.
While I can see why people would be against any attempts to stop people from making copies of other people's works - Phillips will be incapable of realistically doing anything to stop copyright owners from protecting their works.
It is now a crime under DCMA for Phillips to circumvent copy protection. Any attempts by Phillips to circumvent any existing copy protection will result in them being continuously in court with suits from each and every company that desires to copy protect their wares (and that's not just audio CD companies).
Major copyright owners will lobby the government to stop Phillips CD players and writers from shipping (which would be one up the butt for Phillips), and they don't need to succeed. All the copyright owners need to do is keep the players off the market while the case is at trial... something that could put Phillips through immense financial hardship.
Most people who buy audio CDs (and the retailers who sell them) could really care less about the CD logo. The ones that actually aren't compatible with the standard can't ship with them, but what does that change? If you can only get the song on protected media are you just not going to listen to that artist (and any others) indefinitely?
Phillips has a commitment to build hardware and this isn't much more than an exec speaking his mind about what he'd like to see happen. In most companies I've noticed that what execs say and that actually happens/can happen is generally pretty far apart. Even if we assume that Phillips succeeds, the rest of the copyright owners will simply band together - put together a competing logo and such and print CDs in their own format that will just happen to be backwardly compatible with CD players.
Phillips has no teeth in this matter - this is just a nice consumer spot to get people excited about the Phillips brand.
bipolar companies such as Sony who make great profits off of consumer electronics -- walkman say -- and from content -- their music holdings -- will be engaged in strong internal battles over intellectual property rights (hardies going for lesser protection so as to get more content and more demand for hardware at a lower price point; content protectors the opposite). since Sony and others make much more from hardware look for the challenge to IP to come from them as they turn on the RIAA and MPAA
Certified Black Helicopter Pilot *** Unwitting Dupe of One World Gov'ment
It's a shame philips is the only one saying this - their burners SUCK ASS!
I've gone through 6 different philips drives in the past 3 years (gateway won't give me a different brand, and I won't pay for something covered by warranty(yet))
They seem to have a big problem with the laser going out of alignment and calibration problems, or at least that's what happened to me everytime.
After fighting with gateway for the last time for them to actually honor the warranty(but not the in home service I paid for) I decided vent the case - it now looks like swiss cheese, and I've had the same drive for over 8 months and 200+cd
s burnt! a new record for me!
Of course, had I not gone the route of Gateway, I probably wouldn't have had most of the problems I've had - they suck ass as well, and I hope they end up nothing more than a pile of cow bones bleaching in the sun
Ergo, since CDs are physical items and sold under the various country's respective trades description acts, ANY AND ALL record companies or retailiers can be sued in a class-action suit, for selling goods under false pretenses.
Sure, the suits would likely be dismissed, if they ever went to court, but think of the negative publicity it would generate! The RIAA and MPAA are unlikely to welcome that kind of exposure. Especially if it puts their precious DMCA at risk.
As such, it's entirely possible they would settle and just change their labelling, rather than take the gamble that it might hurt their image.
Even if they don't, there's a slim chance that Philips would use such a class-action to eliminate a few headaches of their own. After all, the defendents would include companies making rival technologies. Also, because it would be a civil suit, it might be possible for something like this to reach court before any case Philips could bring would. All they'd have to do is tag along for the ride, and smooth the way a bit.
And if the whole thing gets dismissed out of hand? Then the supporters of copy-protected CDs, amongst the techno-media, might find themselves a bit squished. They'd have to openly take sides against one giant, or another. And once they do that, they could find themselves in dire straights with their editors. More than one journalist has been sacked for pissing off the wrong advertiser, at the wrong time.
Is any of this probable? No. Is it possible? Certainly. And that might be all that's needed, at the very least to put the Intellectual Property philosophy under a microscope. We might not be able to save the Universe, but we can bring to the attention of those who can that it really does need saving.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Not to be cynical or pick on them, because I'm awfully glad they're taking this position. But it's easily explained. Phillips has no interest in copy protection. They're simply an electronics company, not a major media player like Sony. So eliminating the influence of the content side of the business puts Phillips on an even playing field.
didn't you read the article? Punishment is required! i say all mod points are negative, except potential positives.. get rid of the crap that the majority doesn't want me to see, because they're always right and knows what's best for me better than i do, right?
Everyone get out there and buy a Philips product of some sort, doesn't matter what, it's just important you tell Philips what you did and why. Showing a tangible result will only encourage them in the future.
It's little known, but Philips makes sound cards too. The best one they have is the Philips Acoustic Edge, which is better than that Audigy shit.
http://www.pcsound.philips.com/flash_intro.html
As consumers, can we sue the record companies for false advertising? Since the copy protected CD's are not real CD's, would they not then be claiming the product to be something it is not?
More importantly, it gives a tangible thing to show to the proles and help them identify what is a "good" CD and what is "bad" "CD". And that will be "great".
THIS SPACE FOR RENT
Not many people realize that this is actually a Phillips, not Sony who has invented CD-DA. Sony did come up with a number of substantial enhancements. If I remember correctly, the whole error-correction scheme belongs to Sony. Yet the main inventor is Phillips. Now Sony's position regarding the whole issue is completely schizoid. Parts of Sony which are involved in music business fight the parts of Sony involved in A/V equipment. A good example is Minidisc vs MP3. In case you are not familiar with technology, Minidisc is heavily copy-protected, extremely unflexible, this is its major limitation as a coding scheme, yet Sony doesn't want to open it up. For instance, you cannot digitally copy one MD to another - unless you have a high-end expensive professional MD mastering equipment. From what I've head there was a big conflict inside Sony between those who wanted to release Sony CD/MP3 player, and those against MP3 (for obvious reasons). (the 'good guys' won, btw)
Well, apparently Phillips doesn't have such type of mentality and this is nice. I'm not sure if they are involved into recording business (I vaguelly remember seeing LPs with 'Phillips' label, but that was many years ago). Probably it is mostly company specializing on A/V equipment
Now this is what I've been saying all along. So-called 'copy-protected' CDs are nothing else but the violation of Red Book standard. I'm glad to hear it from Phillips.
Incidently, there is a good article on copyrighted CDs by Steve Rochlin, at http://www.enjoythemusic.com. It also contains some good URLs.
It's been stated above, but it's about time a megaplayer got their hands dirty.
I knew it!
Copy protected CDs are really a collabroation between the music/hardware industrial complex. Hardware sales on CD writers flat? Solution: Make copy-protected CDs then make CD-ROMS and CD-writers that can circumvent that protection thus forcing consumers into an endless upgrade cycle! It's all a trick to get us to buy new CD-ROMS and other hardware.
They still can hold on to the trademark - and that's what's important.
We've seen stories before of people taking home 'stealth-copy protected' discs, having no way of knowing whether or not they were copy protected when they bought them.
No CD - Compact Disc blurb, and it's obviously not a 100% real golly gee whiz CD.
Times like these make me glad I'm sitting across from a Phillips TV, VCR and DVD player.
If philips can stop people using the Compact Disc logo on CD's, they should also be able to stop people using the logo on cd players/drives etc.
Perhaps they can force all new CD players to NOT play copy protected "non CD's"...
i hate pansy republicans
Ye for capitalism and also the ability for everyone to sample music before they buy using programs like Morpheus and WinMX!
Visit BobtheKing.com it's perhaps the best thing I've ever made to waste your time with.
As i wrote, when i submitted this story two weeks ago.. , a spokesperson from Philips said that they expected music companies to clearly LABLE their copyprotected CD's. Indicating that the CD had a much shorter lifespan than a "real" CD, and that it was in fact NOT a real CD.
Apparently the can't prevent people from making small round discs, but they can prevent them from calling them CD's.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
In the other New Scientist article there is this jucy tidbit:
/.
If you look at Philips' history in regards to audio tape cassettes (which are based on Nazi technology, like most magnetic recording)I think you will find that they recognize the obvious benefits of unrestricted recording hardware.
Hey, doesn't Philips own several content providers? Polygram for one?
--Charlie
I like A/V equipment from Philips. Anything I've ever owned made by them is usually good quality. They have always seemed like a cool company and they're a UK company primarily. Its good to hear that they're still a good company by telling the RIAA and music companies to go f' themselves.
Well, then, it won't be long before companies quit using the logo. Just call it a "Music disc" and drop the logo. But maybe you'd need help from retailers to change their advertising nomenclature.
if the new laws that Bush and Ashcroft want, get passed, stuff in the public domain will be able to be re-copyrighted.
But that stuff fell out of copyright due to a technicality, not expiration; Congress is simply correcting the balance. No copyright is being enacted on works whose copyright has expired. The Uruguay Round treaty simply recognizes the same "limited" copyrights that other countries recognized.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I'm not so certain that Philips will fall in line, but a different scenario occurred to me. Perhaps the RIAA will simply dump the "CD Compact Disc" logo and put a disclaimer on that says something to the effect of "may not work in all CD(tm) players" and then Philips wouldn't have any leverage against them.
Virg
Just because the head-in-the-sand US market has never been very enthusiastic about them doesn't mean they have failed. They are extremely popular in Asia, and prior to dirt-cheap CDRs, they were the most effective way of compiling your own music. And they're still better for some appications because of the small size - the portable players are about 3" square, and they consume less power and are more stable than traditional portable CD players.
Granted, they never became popular for pre-recorded media, but they were never targeted heavily for that (read-only) market.
Just like DAT, Minidisc hasn't failed - it has found a niche market and is very successful in it.
Looking at a random selection of recent CDs (the ones sitting on my desk right now), I notice that the only "Compact Disc Digital Audio" logos displayed are on the plastic inlay holding the disc. And you can't see those logos when the jewel box is shrinkwrapped. So not showing the logo doesn't help -- it's barely shown now.
It's Philips, folks, with one "l", please. This is not a screwdriver or a petroleum company or an auction house, but a consumer electronics company née bulb factory headquartered in Eindhoven, Netherlands. Thank you.
And this my friends is why I'll be looking out for Phillips products to spend MY money on!
3000 dead over past 2 years, still no free Palestinians, still
you're trusting everything2 for accurate data [on the Bono Act]?
You mean like this?
Yes. I'm trusting myself and my sources (which include the Library of Congress web site and Open Secrets) for accurate data.
Will I retire or break 10K?
don't feed the trolls... duh.
Despite having the occasionally crappy product, I've always experienced a high level of customer service from them...
A little bit ago, my CD burner died. Not only did they RMA it, (and paid my shipping...) They sent me personal email when a new firmware revision came out for the drive later.
Of course your milage may vary...
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
This copy protection effectively bars you from listening to CD's on your Computer or DVD player. So why is it that only Phillips is the only big name company that has come out against it? Mac users are especially screwed, as they can't listen to CD's even in analog mode, so why hasn't Apple railed against it? It also can't be good for anyone that makes an MP3 player. It seems to me that copy protection not only hurts the consumer, but also the bottom line of a good number of hardware/software companies, all for the sake of the Music Industry.
Why the silence from the tech industry? I'm honestly curious to know.
...
the article linked in the topic merely quotes an original interview with the financial times german edition that can be found here (English Translation by the wonders of Google)
OK, I'm absolutely not a lawyer, but it seems to me that the familiar Compact Disc Digital Audio trademark is probably way too diluted to hold up under American law. If you look at the jewel cases around you you'll probably see that almost all of the trays carry the logo, regardless of what they're holding. For example in my immediate desk area I see: Adobe Photoshop, Microsoft Office 98 for Macintosh, Corbis and PhotoDisc stock art CDs, some brands of CD-R (Maxell uses the Compact Disc Recordable logo on their tray, Imation and Kodak use it on the insert but use the audio logo on the tray) Not to mention the hybrid CDs that have been on music dealers' shelves for years.
I think that Philips' failure to crack down on this behavior for the past 8 or 10 years would render their trademark useless in the USA.
Any opinions?
It's definitely not a non-event, quite the opposite actually.
Stated more simply:
It's an event.
I just check at some cd's at the mall, none of them had the logo (not where i could see it), but they were legal cd's and compilations. That's not stopping anybody from buying them it seems.
So in the end does it matter?
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Hi,
h ol d=0&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=2722719
.edu and .com users posting from their real addresses are the most vulnerable to being intimidated.
It's not like I'm keeping a list of domains or addresses. That's not my job. Neither is this. That's why I have to wait until I get home from work to post this stuff.
Yup. I work for UMG. Universal Music Group.
This is just the first round, dude. I don't have any insider knowledge on this, but from my experience these people are not going to monkey around anymore.
Most everyone at work (in IT at least) has started deleting their MP3 collections and erased their sharing software. It's not funny anymore. They are catching users right now and no one wants to lose their job at UMG for some songs they downloaded.
People we work with are losing their jobs right now because not enough people are buying CDs anymore. That would be o.k., if it was just because the music sucked, but it's not. Y'all not buying because you're getting the same music from "an alternative source".
Please read my previous SlashRant(tm) on this subject.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=25052&thres
I post anonymously to be able to tell you even this much. I want to keep my job.
P.S. You should really post your "I can break the copy protection" types of posts anonymously from now on. Just a tip from an insider.
um....browse at -1 and make klerc amd iamklerk and pagelengtheningposte your foes and make foes -6
Collecting data is only the first step toward wisdom. But sharing data is the first step toward community
Perhaps, but then so be it. Its evolution, the wheel turns. Look at history, other professions have died out for various reasons. You could argue that this is not a "fair" way to go, but then when was life fair.
The irony of that would be that there'd be no new music left to trade since the over produced modern pop crap is always the most popular.
Nonsense. That's like saying there would be now free software, because if its free why would people make it?
It will probably be different from what it is now, but I doubt it will die out. People made music long before the CD's, or even records were invented - they had the drive. They will still have that drive, the path will just be somewhat different. Initially many will supply free mp3s to music sites, and suddenly some artists will be popular enough to give performances - and concerts must be payed for. Admmitance fees would probably be much greater than now - but everything else would be promotion.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
I'vre read it 10000 times on this thread
IT IS COMPACT DISC. DISC! DISC! DISC! NOT DISK! NOT DISK! DAMN YOU!
And you sent that to them... great... YOU SPELLING-IMPAIRED DUMBASS!!!!
Great, so Philips can prevent the labels from producing "non-CDs" with the logo.
But if the labels then boycot the logo on all their products - CDs and non-CDs alike - then consumers are still unable to tell in advance if a given CD will work with their player!
So people: Boycot all non-logo Silver Discs! And be vocal about it!
"Those are silberscheiben with music drauf, which DS resemble, but none are." =)
that these new copy-protected CD's will play on? Companies like Sony, perhaps? I'm starting to think the roaring success of the Playstation hasn't corrupted them. So the recording industry (of which Sony has a hand) demands a copy-protected CD format, because they are claiming they are losing money (to MP3's, CD copying, etc). What, its not compatible with regular CD-ROM/Audio drives? Well then somebody will just have to make new drives for us. Who will do that? (Sony quietly raises hand at this point)
I swear the Recording Industry is as slimy as they get. Not only do they give the consumer an assraping solely for the company's benefit, the comsumer also has to pay the company for thier trouble. I can't think of too many companies like that, save for Microsoft. Perhaps there are more. Maybe all big business is like that?
What could possibly hurt the security of the American people more than giving our own government the ability to hide its
I amazed that organisations like the RIAA don't go after the companies that create CDR/RW drives.
This is a nice blow to those record companies trying to stop us from "stealing" music.
i have this witless fuck on my foes list and foes =-6mod...i still have to see them if I browse at -1, you should be able to make foes go to -2 so i can still see other stuff at -1,for example the turd report makes me laugh, but klerks page lenghtening posts suck ass.
i want to see -1 posts,but want to block shithead crapflooders,please please please let me make my foes show up as -2
check this out:
/PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Philips Medical Systems, a division of Royal Philips Electronics (NYSE: PHG, AEX: PHI), today announced that it has released for public use a U.S. patent detailing pediatric pads technology designed for the Heartstream FR2 AED (Automated External Defibrillator). Philips is relinquishing its rights to U.S. Patent number 6,134,468 in order to encourage development of similar technology for competitive AEDs. The company's goal is to ensure that all AEDs are equipped to quickly and easily treat a child who suffers from cardiac arrest.
Philips Medical Systems releases patent for public use pediatric pads
/FROM PR NEWSWIRE NEW YORK 800-776-8090/ [STK] PHG [IN] MTC CPR [SU] TO BUSINESS AND MEDICAL EDITORS:
Philips Medical Systems releases patent for public use pediatric pads
ANDOVER, Mass., Jan. 10
The first of their kind, pediatric pads reduce the amount of energy delivered by the Heartstream FR2 AED to a level appropriate for infants and children under eight years old. The Heartstream FR2 AED with pediatric pads was cleared by the FDA in May 2001 for use on young children. The FR2 is currently the only AED available for use on cardiac arrest victims of any age.
Sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) is a leading cause of death in the United States, striking approximately 220,000 Americans annually, including small children. AEDs provide treatment by delivering an electric shock to the heart that can re-establish a regular heartbeat. However, to be effective, the shock must be applied within the first few minutes following an arrest. AEDs normally deliver a level of energy that is appropriate for adults, but a lower level is recommended for children.
The pads feature an attenuator that reduces the energy delivered by the AED to the appropriate level for a child. A specially developed pad connector represented by a pink teddy bear ensures that a responder can quickly identify proper pads for the victim in an emergency situation.
"We are sharing this technology because protecting the lives of children is the right thing to do," said Carl Morgan, a scientist with Philips Medical Systems. "Sudden cardiac arrest in children is rare, but when it does occur, use of an AED may be the only way to save a life. It is essential that the process for treating children be easy to remember and to perform. By making this technology available to other manufacturers, we hope to encourage a simple and uniform method of treating a child who suffers sudden cardiac arrest. Established AED programs have a solid track record of adult lifesaving. Our intent is to ensure that AEDs are properly enabled to save the lives of people of all ages."
Philips Medical Systems presently has a second patent application, number 09/417,269, on its attenuating pads technology under consideration by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The company intends to release its exclusive rights to intellectual property that may also result from that application. About Philips Medical Systems:
With the recent acquisitions of Marconi Medical Systems, Agilent's Healthcare Solutions Group, ADAC Laboratories and ATL Ultrasound, Philips Medical Systems is firmly established as the global number one or two player in most of its markets and businesses. Philips' portfolio includes X-ray, ultrasound, magnetic resonance, computed tomography, nuclear medicine and PET, patient monitoring, information management and resuscitation products, as well as a range of services which include asset management, training and education, business consultancy, financial services and e-care business services.
Philips Medical Systems has annual sales of US$ 6.5 billion, is represented in more than 100 countries and employs over 22,000 people. All products are backed by Philips' worldwide network of research and development and sales and service organizations. Philips Medical Systems is part of Royal Philips Electronics, one of the world's largest electronics companies. Additional information can be found at http://www.medical.philips.com.
Royal Philips Electronics of the Netherlands is one of the world's biggest electronics companies and Europe's largest, with sales of EUR 37.9 billion in 2000. It is a global leader in color television sets, lighting, electric shavers, color picture tubes for televisions and monitors, and one-chip TV products. Its 192,000 employees in more than 60 countries are active in the areas of lighting, consumer electronics, domestic appliances, components, semiconductors, and medical systems. Philips is quoted on the NYSE (symbol: PHG), London, Frankfurt, Amsterdam and other stock exchanges. News from Philips is located at http://www.news.philips.com.
I'd love to email Philips to give them my kudos.... gonna go look for an email addy.
Will post again when I find one.
Now just give me a domestic region-less DVD player and I'll be your customer for life
Can't do it.
There is very little control over CD drive manufacturers by anyone, and what control there is in the hands of people like Phillips.
The DVD Consortium has all manufacturers of DVD mechanisms tied up in all sorts of licensing agreements with tough stipulations. You violate one, and you're screwed.
So Philips demands that labels stop using the CD logo and can't call their discs "Compact Discs."
Does anyone really CARE? Sheeple will go to the renamed "Music" section and buy those little silver discs that go in their player, even if they now are called, say, DMCs (Digital Music Carriers.)
This is like what happened a few years ago - some company came up with a very cheap, very generic version of the VHS cassette used to send out promotional tapes. JVC said that the tape did not meet the standards required to be called a VHS tape and thus the company could not use the VHS logo.
Did this matter? Nope - the tapes were the right size, and when you put them in a VHS deck and press play, you get sound and video out...
Go Philips!! As long a CD costs $5 more than a tape, you know that the music industry is ripping you off. 1. It's not the material. Blank CDs cost about $.25. Tape about $.75 2. It's not the quanity. More music CDs are sold than tapes. 3. It's not the quality. What, you think they go back to the recording studio and to it again for a cassette? Perhaps its more difficult mass record CDs, but I doubt. If they can sell the tape for $9.99, they can sell the CD for $9.99
If the RIAA members lose the right to have that little "Compact Disc" trademark symbol, does that mean they have to issue a recall on all of their copy protected CDs out there? That could cost quite a bit of money.
[PowerPoint] is a tool for capitalist presentation
For another, it makes it obvious (well, in a subtle way :-) which silvery discs are the copy-protected ones -- namely the ones without the CD logo. We can just avoid buying those. (And encourage others likewise).
And the record companies simply remove the logo from *all* their CDs. Why wouldn't they? I don't think having the logo really helps them currently.
i have stopped buying CDs. been about 2 years. maybe a little less. if i want music, i go down to the local coffee shop where they have some locals play. i'm telling you, much more realistic 'surround sound' complete with the ambience. i'm surprized to see people act as if music in a certain medium is among the firsts in maslow's heirarchy of needs. when did that happen? was maslow informed of this change? i guess after debeers made diamond into a marriage-tax (diamonds aren't as rare as they're marketed out to be. infact, debeers execs never showed up for the antitrust lawsuits in the US.), and MS made sure people couldn't do squat with their computer except 'WORD' all day long, maslow just threw out his ideas.
Just buy a cd-player with optical (digital) out. As a normal audio-device it of course plays the CD. Feed the output into your computer (need a soundcard with digital in of course) and there you go. There's nothing that can stop that. What the player can play it can output.
:-)
I can only recommend my Onkyo DX7211, in fact, I realy love it
I'm sure they will insert a couple of value-add's in the process, most likely title/artist/track information at a minimum.
In order to get a license for this new format, the players would have to explicitly reject recordable media.
The real key is going to be getting people to give up their old media and switch. Given the amount of money a group like RIAA would have to throw at this a highly subsidized trade-in program would probably be the fastest way to get serious market share quickly.
Who needs babelfish? The article is half-english anyway. Or maybe english is half-german. Who knows?
If Philips gets strict about their ownership of the CD-DA patent and logo, what might the RIAA do in response? I can only think of two different possibilities:
1.) Forsake the CD logo and "reverse engineer" the CD-DA technology to make something that works in genuine CD players. After all, how many of you checked to make sure that it was a genuine CD-DA disk you were buying and not some cheak, shiny knock-off?
2.) Revert to some other technology they have more control over. For example, DVD audio is a bit of a red herring right now, but if push comes to shove, the RIAA people could just buy out the technology behind it and start pushing it. Other ideas might be resuscitating DATs or they could even just tinker with minicasettes just enough to make them proprietary.
Either way, they can still get what they want.
Those links are a bunch of crap. Get real - when directtv and dish networks join together, the subscription costs will go up. Don't expect otherwise. When TCI started gaining 'economies of scale' did the average customer benefit with lower costs or better service? No. Take a look at This
No, I don't trust in god. He'll have to pay up front, like everybody else.
or this one!
since many copyrights are held by corporations, and corporations don't die, when does that expire?
Ninety-five years (plus Dec 31) is the current copyright term in the United States for works for hire.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I always have liked their commericals and taking stances like this are One Damn Good Way(tm) to gain some strong new customers and gain a heavy dosage of customer loyalty.
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
I know they have/had a line of classical CDs, and used to owned a share of Polygram (and by extension, Decca and Deutsche Gramophon, I think).
Are they now out of recording biz, which allows them to come out so solidly _against_ CD copy prot? Anybody know?
I like the idea of the Philips "look for the logo" ads, but other than that, or a grassroots "don't buy these cds", I don't see this making any difference, even if Philips win. Although the PR surrounding it might do some good.
"Inflammable means flammable? What a strange country!" -Dr. Nick, The Simpsons
And secondly, who really gives a crap about the logo anyway? If the record labels don't mind labeling their CDs as copy protected, which it seems they don't, why do you think they would care too much about omitting the logo, and simply calling it a compact disc without the logo. And if they can't use the name compact disc, they could simply say CD, or something else that gets the point across as to what it is. Do you think they're concerned that sales will drop merely because their products which are so obviously CDs don't carry the familiar CD logo?
So, this is really non-news, I'm afraid.
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
Many posts were stating that the patents are going to expire too soon to have the courts involved.
What I thought is this: they still have time on their side. Phillips can sue presses, recoding companies, whatever because they are not only infringing on trademark but on patents at the time the CDs were released. Thus Phillips can be paid money on "damages" for the breach of contract. While this won't stop the RIAA industry from producing copyprotected CDs, it can put a dent in their pocketbook.
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
Their equipment is often sub par (remember, they own Magnavox, there may be some old'uns who remember their ads where the sound quality appeared to be recorded with a can and string connected to the microphone, but I digress), but at least their morals are not... Guess that IP lawyers aren't *all* evil, ehwot?
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
I'll support them. I can assure you that whether this is successful or not I'll now look more favorably on Philips products.
The RIAA is already looking for another format. DVD-Audio or something. They know they can't pull the switcheroo quite yet -- not enough DVD players in homes. But at some point, they'll settle on something like that, and then do what they did to kill vinyl: tell distributors/retailers they won't accept their unsold copies of albums back.
Anyone know who holds the DVD standard? Not that it matters, plenty of provision for copy protection in that....
Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
Just what I told them to do
However, another part of Philips has dopier ideas:
Philips is leading the charge to start yet another industry initiative to tackle digital rights management, this time focusing on the wirelessly networked home, EE Times has learned.
At stake here, said Leon Husson, executive vice president of consumer businesses at Philips Semiconductors, is the "free-floating" copyrighted content that will soon be "redistributed" or "rebroadcast" to different TV sets throughout a home by consumers using wireless networking technologies like IEEE802.11.
Rather than wait for Hollywood studios to raise a red flag over unprotected wirelessly transmitted content, some technology companies want to tackle the issue in advance and develop solutions together with content owners.
"We are dying to lobby Hollywood studios on this issue," Husson said
Meanwhile, Thomson's Lafaye seems to think people will buy lots of technology from him so they can be prevented from using it:
The SmartRight technology will honor a local "entitlement control message" -- such digital rights management rules as copy never or copy once, for example -- originally attached to the content. By putting the SmartRight technology in place, which enforces rights management in the home, said Lafaye, "we can help content owners create a new business revenue model." Content owners, for example, can start charging consumers every time their digital content is re-distributed within the home, or viewed several times during a certain number of days specified by them.
http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20020111S0060
People still don't get it.
1.) Insert Copy Protected disc into stereo
2.) Hook Stereo RCA --> Stereo mini plug to speaker jacks of stereo, mini plug to line in on sound card
3.) Fire up Soundforge
4.) Press "Record"
5.) Press Play on stereo.
6.) Save as MP3
7.) Rinse, repeat step 4-6 as necessary.
>Just because the head-in-the-sand US market has never been very enthusiastic about them doesn't mean they have failed.
No, the US market simply decided not to waste money on a half-baked idea like MiniDisc. Now that there is a solution which does everything that Minidisc can do, except 10-50x faster, and with over 50% market penetration; America has decided the time is right for a portable solution. They just let you be the guinea pigs with MiniDisc.
So what is the solution that bests MiniDisc in every single way known?
8 cm Re-Writeable CDs and MP3 encoders/players designed for these. Expect this open format to become HOT as more people realize MiniCD lets them put multiple albums on a disc of similar size to MD, of similar quality to MD, and allows them to play it in well over half the locations they might travel. And don't forget the ace-in-the-hole of most any format over MD, ease of copying. Not to mention the full data compatibility of the disc, allowing people to store interesting tidbits like music videos, album art, and other things MiniDisc either wasn't designed to handle, or which Sony forced format incompatibility with. Let me repeat the most important point: Philips, a very large investor in the CD format, actually wants you to be able to use these CDs to copy as much music as you like, unlike Sony and their proprietary MiniDisc format.
If you ask me, MD needs to rest with Sony's many other stillborn consumer formats, such as Beta and MemoryStick.
>They are extremely popular in Asia,
That's great, but virtually no music that appeals to the American market is produced in Asia. This makes the format further unappealing to us.
What's good for Asia isn't always good for us. If MiniDisc has worked out for them, good for them. It didn't here simply because people here want easy to use, unemcumbered music formats.
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
Is anyone familiar with how CD-DA copy protection works? For instance, why do certain players (such as some DVD-ROM drives, and apparently the upcoming Phillips drive) seem to miss the copy protection while others do not (and further still, while allowing normal CD players to still play the music).
Generally, I haven't heard of companies making drives copy protection friendly or not, so I was just wondering how they get all of this to work. Kinda boggles my mind. 8-)
Thanks,
Tim
-------------
"You would not get a high grade for such a design" -- Andy Tanenbaum on Linus' Linux design.
Why should Philips care about the DMCA? They are a Dutch company (a big one). DMCA is a US law. If the FBI try to do a Skylarov on them, they will have the EEC breathing down their necks and rightly so.
If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
As of the time I'm reading this, the score of the parent post reads "(Score:5, Troll)". How is this possible?? I've seen "(Score:4, Troll)" before, and assumed that the word after the score was simply the last moderation that was done to it, (it was modded up to 5 and then someone modded back down 1 point as Troll). But now we have a (Score:5, Troll), which means... what??
Is it now possible to mod something as "Troll" and have it go UP in score?? What's going on?
Sometimes the best solution to morale problems is just to fire all the unhappy people.
Apparently putting "( Score: 5, Troll)" as the subject results in the subject being truncated to "(". Weird.
Sometimes the best solution to morale problems is just to fire all the unhappy people.
If it's in a jewel case that looks like a CD, and is on the shelf in HMV, and costs the same as other CDs, and is on the shelf beside other CDs, do you think that most consumers would stop to look if it has the Philips CD logo on it?
They will if there's a mass TV campaign with little Intel-like guys in Day-glo colored space suits telling you to look for the "CD inside" logo...
Sometimes the best solution to morale problems is just to fire all the unhappy people.
FIRST, i apologize to my peeps in the hood, but i can't let this troll off the hook...
...So What? that's why it's called a "difference of opinion"
/.'s failure...don't know if you're a Nganear...(eye aar) BUT...
/. editor/M1 dickhead????
/.'s mess with each other just like life...it surely ain't pretty....but it beats the alternative(s)....
"It is obviously unhelpful for one moderator to mod something down as "redundant" if another moderator has already modded the post up as "informative" earlier."
obvious, eh? to who?
it's not obvious to me, and i've come away spitting mad when some Mod1 Troll has modded down "my brillant words and observations"...
it just part of the free exchange of ideas...kinda like a community, eh?
"The "flamebait" label and to a lesser degree the "troll" label are all also used continuously to moderate down posts which are clearly on-topic and which make valid points but which the moderator in question disagrees with."
lordy, lordy... ain't it the truth and
"I think that slashcode needs to be rewritten to separate negative and positive moderation points. Each moderator receiving moderation points will get AT MOST one negative point per batch of points, and there will only be a 50% chance that the moderator will even receive this one negative moderator point."
CONGRATULATIONS! You have stumbled the single best way to ensure
any one who has had experience with control and feeback system automation can tell you that positive feedback systems and most esp highly biased positive feeback systems, are much more prone to oscillations and destructive loss of control than negative feedback based systems....
does it piss me off to lose mod points to some
of course, but most the comments i see unfairly modded (incl my own, and i've hit the cap on a # of occasions and gotten slapped a few points down right away), are predominantly (IMO) modded UP, not down...
you are much more likely to mod up if you stick to the routine "LINUX ROCKS/MS SUCKS" paradigm, no matter how vacuous your comment might be...
and while i've read some "score:5, Funny" that have left me ROFL, most of them are 3 lefts and a half a mile past lame
DUUDE, it's the H/S thing,
your system would leave so little negative moderation available that most folk would use it only to mod down only "hot responder" religious/flame topics, and you would have a corresponding rise in trolling as the WIPO, BSD, Steven King, Al Gore, George Bush, Bill Clinton, various rascist, sexist, *ist trolls were left off the hook
if it didn't beat the others, we'd all be posting there, right?
It's whenever you type in "Score:" in the subject, it chops the rest off. Lameness sucks.
"Score Score: Eat my Goat Ass" Just shows as "Score "
Philips is a seriously cool company. They make good equipment (listening to their 4.1 amplifier hooked up to my computer right now), and the only thing they're interested in is selling it. What you do with it is none of their business, and they come right out and say so.
If copy prevention schemes impede their sales, they will fight them. Note that according to them, they would not care about copy prevention anyway, because it just doesn't work.
Second, do a grep -ri philips /usr/src/linux/ | wc -l on your machine. Most of the lines are of course merely variables to deal with cd-rom hardware, but you will also find that one of the developers is a Philips employee. So Philips is also supportive of Free Software because, once again, it helps them shift units and of course being open with specs saves them the trouble with writing drivers.
Of course I'm biased here (I'm Dutch and so is the Philips Corporation), but I made it a point to buy most of my equipment from them. Kudos Philips! You gain loyal customers with this attitude!
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
Often hacking is not required. I picked up an Apex AD-660 (sold under the marque Hiteker in Australia) a while ago. The box bore a Region 4 logo, as required by law. However, the player itself happily played Region 1 discs as well as Region 4 ones, with no modifications required.
The Red Book standard does include a "copy allow" bit, which is set or cleared for individual tracks. On virtually all CDs, it is off, ostensibly forbidding copying.
In theory, future technologies would have looked at the bit and refused to copy tracks, disabled perfect digital output or what have you. (The flag may in fact affect the SCMS code sent to DAT recorders, which nobody actually uses for copying CDs to.) However, they did not count on CD-ROM drives capable of sucking the ones and zeroes off a CD directly, and as such, the "copy allow" bit is a fossil.
Which goes to the point and doesn't mess around with euphemisms.
Which was the largest recording company; then, in 1998 or so, PolyGram was bought out and swallowed up by our old friends Universal.
taco, you faggot
Last time I checked at Borders they had play stations, and they would frequently have CDs that could be played on them. Perhaps they would let you see the CD before you bought it? (I was looking for a PDQ Bach album that they didn't have in stock, so I didn't find out how it worked.)
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
...We just won't buy any cd's without the CD logo on them.
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
before long anymore... Just think. More and more people are getting online.
All a band or artist has to do, is make the music, put it online as mp3 or something similar, ask for up to half a euro (yes I'm from europe) as payment, then give someone the right to download and store it.
I know I'd be buying lotsa songs... AND I'd know that the right people were getting the money.
Does anyone know anything about these? Are they subject to DeCSS? If so, is the recording industry just trying to move from CDs (IQ required to copy: 80) to CSS-encrypted DVD-Audio (IQ required: 120)? Is that also why Philips would be opposed to such measures? Would hastening the adoption of DVD-Audio also hasten the (future) adoption of a more rigorously copy-protected format?
Personally, I kind of like the idea of STOPPING the entire process of switching to a new audio standard every ten years. I don't see that DVD-Audio formats offer anything over and above regular audio CDs similar to what audio CDs offered over Tapes. I'd like to hear if anyone thinks they do...
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
Better Homes and Gardens in Australia is using a mangled version of the Beatles' song as their theme song...
I didn't say "They're going to win this and crush all opposition. Barring, of course, armed insurrection by the populace and the overthrow of the U.S. government."
If you think the mass-market loving populace of the U.S. (me included) are going to go to war against the government for their string of abuses, you should think again.
Your two examples above do not have anything to do with updating business models. They have to do with technology that was vastly outmoded by new inventions. That is not what we are talking about here. Everyone did NOT throw away their CD players to run to online music the way they DID throw away their record players to run to CDs.
My last 3 VCRs have been Philips/Magnavox because they completely ignore Macrovision, not that that is such a big deal in the digital age, but it is the thought that counts :-)
But only govt monopolies.
As in govt utility monopolies
With economies of scale monopolies are best, with govt ownership comes voter control, as politicians have learnt here in Oz, they can lose office if the prices jump too much. & ontop of that all net profits go back to the govt meaning less tax is need. Useally the combination of those 2 factors mean they end up breaking even plus a little bit left over.
California wouldn't have had any electricity problems if a state owned utility controlled electricity supplies from the power station to the fuse box in every home (the only state in Oz that's had any trouple is the only state with privatised electricity companies)
Look at all the broadband providers that have gone bust in the US. Now if there was a publically owned cable utility nationwide in the US with the economies of scale that only a govt utility has those problems wouldn't have happened.
Really when its electricty, gas, water & telcos the govt does it best.
It doesn't even stop them expanding overseas, Singapore Telecom Singapore's govt phone 'n broadband monopoly has purchased businesses arround the planet. Telstra, Australia's govt telco (now majority govt owned/minority private owned) has made huge inroads into Asia, particularly Vietnam.