Slashdot Mirror
Sony Intentionally Crashes Customers' Computers
Uttles writes "According to Yahoo!, Celine Dion's latest CD will not play in computer drives. In fact: 'Should the consumer try to play Dion's CD on a PC or Macintosh, the computer likely will crash.' How is this legal?" Since Sony admits that their product is designed to cause damage to your computer system, almost anyone would likely have a good lawsuit against them. Attention Celine Dion and all musicians: crashing your fans' computers is not a good business practice. No matter what your agent says.
Are you sure it's the protection? I would say that the computers they tested it on had good taste, that's all. :)
Since Sony admits that their product is designed to cause damage to your computer system, almost anyone would likely have a good lawsuit against them.
How would that make a good lawsuit? Seems to me that Sony is covering its ass by letting the consumer know up front, which would make the lawsuit more difficult.
Your heart may go on, but your computer won't.
Crashing computers are nothing. Put Celine's CD in to your car while you're driving and it'll make you crash that too, just to end the god awful experience.
</all too obvious crashing joke>
"According to a spokeswoman for Sony Music Entertainment, it is clearly stated on the front of the booklet and on the back of the jewel box that the CD "will not play on a PC or a Mac" in the language of the country in which it is sold. Besides those notices, which the spokeswoman said were readable before purchase, the disc itself bears the same warning."
And physical damage to the computer is supposedly in the firmware of the drives (on macs)
"On the German discussion boards at MacFixit, Mac users claim that the CD will not eject using normal methods and that the intentional corruption of the disc's session data could unpredictably affect the drive's firmware." But Sony said that the firmware problem is not real.
Please keep in mind that I'm not saying that any of this is right or ethical. It's just that the post doen't completely represent what happenned (and I am sure that article has some shortcomings in the 'truth dapartment' too.)
Actually, I just showed this to one of my roomates and he said he hasn't had a problem with it...
-shoptroll
Insert Sig Here
If Sony wanted to be obnoxious, they could write a program that starts when Autorun is activated. It could cover the screen and say "YOU CANT PLAY THIS HERE!!!", and then send a signal to the CD ROM to eject the CD. When somebody puts it back in... and so on.
Yes, this would be easy to get around. But I'd far prefer that then causing a BSOD.
"Derp de derp."
Now some poor kernel hackers will have to listen to this music so they can code a workaround for the linux kernel. :)
I feel there pain. Just rember this is for the greater good.
I know I'm going to hell, I'm just trying to get good seats.
http://riocar.org/cd/ for the 7 I have returned to date.
Hours? Minutes? Seconds? It shouldn't take long for the entire CD to appear on the Gnutella network and other P-2-P sessions. In fact, it will probably be one of the most ripped CDs of all time, just out of spite -- not that anyone wants to listen to it.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
If Sony tried to market this thing in the U.S. they would probably run afoul of state and Federal Consumer Protection Agencies. In spite of what Sony may claim, any sudden crash of a computer has the potential to cause irrepairable harm. I seriously doubt that any company can dodge responsibility with a printed disclaimer. Which of course explains why this copy protection (ha!) is only being sold in Europe. In the litigious U.S. they would very likely get into trouble very quickly.
A well-crafted lie appears unquestionable - Dama Mahaleo
For how to copy it and more information see here
Let me get this straight: If I go shell ~$1800 USDfor a Sony Vaio (like I did 3 weeks ago), then I shell out another ~$20 USD for the disc, it not only will not play in their own damned PC, but it will crash their own system?
That shit is fucked up. I wonder if they make any claims as to the stability of their systems.
I think the RIAA should just use new media for music and stop using CD's. It'd be really simple for them to use a media format not unlike Nintendo's GameCube media. Heck, with modern compression schemes, they could use a higher frequency range and put all kinds of other doodads in it to make it better than the modern CD.
The media wouldn't have a drive for PC's, and if they patent the technology then nobody could release a PC drive. The only recourse would be for for people to run a cable from the device to the PC to capture the music. No matter what kind of 'protection schemes' they create, they'll never get around the fact that the sound becomes analog at some point. At least this way, they make it less convenient to copy the music.
This would go a lot farther than trying to preemptively punish me for being a criminal.
"Derp de derp."
Isn't that Whitney Houston?
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
There's a warning in my car owner's manual that admits that pouring gasoline all over myself and lighting a match may cause permanent injury or death. I should sue them!
I am not a lawyer, but I don't see how a rational judge would interpret the warning label "Will not play on PC" as "If inserted into a PC, may irreversibly damage PC hardware". Sony's best bet here is to blame the CD-ROM drive manufacturers and shift the damage to their warranty. In that case, if it's a Sony drive, tough sh*t for Sony.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Is anyone using any critical thinking? How can a particular combination of bits on a CD crash your computer, much less "cause damage to your computer"?
If your computer crashes based on a bad CD, then get a new CD-ROM drive because it's a piece of crap.
Assuming Sony is not doing anything physically wrong to the disk (like making it too thick or something absurd), there is no story here.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
I hope not. Then any company could take away consumer's rights by just issuing warnings. What if I opened up a store with a big sign out front stating, "Warning! Homosexuals are not permitted to make purchases in this store." Something tells me I still might get into trouble... I don't have time right now to cite actual court cases, but it seems to me that consumers have basic rights, and that companies have to have damn good reasons for taking them away.
"Now gluttony and exploitation serves eight!" - TV's Frank
Free Mac Mini
There's a big difference here. A CD is meant to play in a CD player. A shotgun is meant to hunt birds.
Using the shotgun to blast your computer into small pieces is not the normal use of a shotgun. Putting a music CD into a CD player *is* the normal use of a shotgun.
Of course, in the future, the normal use of Celine Dion CDs will be to launch them as clay pidgeons and shoot them with your shotgun...
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
-- everyones not everybody and neither is everybody like everyone.
Near... far... wherever you are...
I believe that the mouse won't move on...
Once more... you close the drive door...
rip, mix, and blue screen...
our prices go up and on...
I work for Sony, and this our only idea as to the killing off of Celine's career. How dare you warn her, have you heard the awful cd?!
- colin
I have one of these Mini Disc Walkmans. Along with it came this handy little kit to connect my walkman to my PC and record a cd to it.
Now with this CD from Sony Music I am unable to use my Sony PC Link to enjoy this music I have (hypothetically) purchased using my Sony MD Walkman. Hmmmm. Certainly calls into question my plans to purchase a new MD Walkman, the much more expensive MZ-900DPC sometime this month. Or maybe I just won't purchase Sony Music titles any more.
Nice of you guys to put me in a position where I have to choose between your hardware and music titles. I would have figured you would prefer me to purchase both, that's probably why you're the high paid media exective and I'm just the consumer with a love of music and a large disposable income though.
So long and thanks for all the laughs, if you need me I'll be in the Panasonic section at Circut City.
So, if Sony has enabled this 'protection' technology on the CD's, then they are (in theory) stopping 'pirates' from making unauthorized copies. Therefore, they are not losing as much money.
Shouldn't they at least reward us for our inconvenience? I mean if Sony said "Tell you what, because we've implemented this new 'protection' scheme, we'll knock $5 off the price of the CD."
If they're not doing that, how can the use the word protection? It's certainly not us they're protecting. They should use the word restriction at that point.
Tell you what, if Sony (or any other Music Label) were to take this approach, I'd have a hell of a lot more sympathy for them. I'm not sure it'd end my boycott, but it'd be a start. They took my music rights away, therefore the music has much less value. So why should the prices be the same? That gives them the image of being super evil.
"Derp de derp."
Sadly, no. The Fair Use provision of copyright law only shield you from prosecution, they don't guarantee anything. And the DMCA overrides most of the fair use laws, too, especially the ones about backups (If you can make a backup with it, you can make a copy with it, if you can make a copy with it, it's a circumvention device).
This was the only way a Celine Dion record could get free publicity on Slashdot.
With key2audio Sony DADC is offering you the optimal protection for your Audio CD's. Using highest quality and ensuring best compatibility, key2audio was developed to support the music industry in protecting its music from illegal duplication and copyright infringement. Without altering the music data stream, key2audio CD's still offer crystal clear sound and no read fault errors.
During glass mastering, several special hidden signatures, similar to a unique fingerprint, are applied outside the music data area. These signatures can neither be duplicated by CD-R/RW burners, nor by professional glass mastering systems.
Audio discs protected with the current version cannot be recognised by standard CD/DVD-ROM, CD-R and CD-RW drives, thus they do not play on PC, Apple Macintosh or other systems equipped with CD- ROM, CD-R, CD-RW, DVD-ROM and DVD-R devices. This ensures the highest efficiency currently available. Due to the fact that key2audio(TM) protected discs do not play on PC, no ripping is possible. Analogue copies, on the contrary, can be made to any analogue devices. (eg MC).
key2audio does not alter the sound quality in any way. Music data is not accessed, the bitstream is exactly the same for a protected and an unprotected CD (no C2 errors/uncorrectables in the music data). Only the copier notices a difference, for the listener, the sound remains the same.
The audio part completely complies with Red Book standard. In addition, a CD protected with key2audio still guarantees a maximum playing time of 77 minutes and therefore does not limit the pleasure of listening time at all. Full ISRC, UPC, CD Text capabilities are supported.
The key2Audio work on most CD Readers but on a few (more expensive) readers they fail to work.
Can't Sony cross-market this as a system that protects the user from Celine Dion?
... is that it's waaaaaaay too easy to replicate. I think the RIAA chose a very bad product to produce if they are concerned about non-paid-for copies floating around.
All I have to do is download the lyrics and I could sing the song. Garage bands could easily do a nice rendition of the song that'd be worth listening to. As a matter of fact, re-mixes are quite popular out there. A lot of remixes don't even have elements of the original score in them. Sounds like a problem, doesn't it? They may be able to stop me from ripping a CD, but there's no way on Earth they could stop somebody from recording their own rendition of a song.
It seems to me that the RIAA is being rather unrealistic in their choice of products to make. I just don't see how they could expect to end all 'piracy' for good. The worst part is that they are blaming the wrong people.
For example, Eisner said that Apple was promoting piracy with their "Rip/Mix/Burn" campaign. His concern is that people will think that music is free and that they don't have to pay for it. But wait a minute, people were trading MP3's LONG before Apple was airing any commercials. If anybody thinks that music is free, its because it's played on the radio!
When the music is played on the radio, they're basically saying 'music is free, just enjoy it.'. That's part of what made it fun to go buy songs. What you were buying, then, was not the right to listen to it, but the convenience of listening to it whenever and wherever you want. CD's, at the time, were the best way to do it.
Then MP3's came along. Oopsie, the RIAA didn't stay on the ball, and now their business model that THEY CREATED is turning against them. The amusing thing is that they are playing the wrong hand to fight it. I can't believe they are actually surprised that people may think music is free. This is not a new occurance, this is what the RIAA taught them!
If they want to fight it, they need to come up with a MORE CONVENIENT solution, instead of trying to make it illegal. Underage smoking: Illegal, happens anyway. Underage drinking: Illegal, happens anwyay. Smoking pot: Illegal, happens anyway. Why on earth do they think they can stop it? What they're FAR better off doing is saying "You can buy MP3s (or a variant) from us! They're cheap, and you can download any song you want really really fast. Buy an album and get a discount."
Better yet, they'd find ways to make money through the channels people are using to get songs. What if they released an MP3 version of a song with one of the singers at the end saying 'Mention this code: JdWt when you buy the song and get $2 off the album purchase.'?
They have so many options they could use, but they chose the one where they piss EVERYBODY off. Nice.
"Derp de derp."
- Bypassing it: CDFreaks article, although I don'tthink they're the original posters of this method.
- Hardware solution: AOpen CD 56X AKH/A80 (unconfirmed)
- Windows software solution #1: EAC. This is truly excellent software in its own regard, and apparently it bypasses Key2Audio nicely. You're better off Googling for EAC, as the site isn't updated often. Also check out the EAC mailing list, and this message in particular.
- Windows software solution #2: CloneCD. Many swear by it, but I haven't used it myself.
Most importantly, the tests are over - this is for real. It seems that Celine is Sony's biggest-selling "artist" - they wouldn't use her as a beta test.This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
How thick are the recording companies?
They think that by copy-protecting their CDs, people will no longer burn backups for the car or for their portable diskman players -- both environments where it's easy to accidentaly scratch/wreck an expensive original.
What they don't realize is that instead of buying legal CDs and making "fair use" backups for their own use, people will now find it far more attractive to simply wait until someone else either rips the disk or does an A-D conversion then makes the resulting MP3 files available on the net (through alt.binaries.music.* or one of the many P2P networks).
I for one won't buy a protected music CD -- so that would leave me with no alternative but to download an illegal MP3 copy because I need to burn a couple of spares for my own use.
I guess if I really wanted to be honest, I'd send the recording company a check for the value of the album I'd downloaded -- but chances are that they'd then prosecute me for piracy -- even though I had offered to pay anyway.
These guys couldn't organize a piss-up in a brewery!
May it please the readers, I have summarized the above story and all attendant comments.
1. Story is posted noting that $company had implemented $copy_protection on the newest CD of $artist.
2. Someone points out that $copy_protection has a certain $bad_thing associated with it.
3. Users bemoan this heinous $copy_protection and associated $bad_thing.
4. Users bash $company and suggest boycott. Other users note that boycotts never work. Flamewar ensues.
5. Users bash $artist, say it wouldn't be worth ripping anyway.
6. Other users take the high moral ground about the sanctity of fair use.
7. Still other users suggest that $artist go independent. Other users defend $artist, stating that $company controls $artist.
8. There will be a smattering of posts flaming RIAA and other evil organizations.
9. Some users will suggest possible hardware/software workarounds.
10. Finally, in the background, the trolls continue on, oblivious to the actual content of the story.
There you have it, the story in a nutshell.
~Chazzf
No statement is true, not even this one.
Whitney Houston:Celine Dion | Linux:BSD
The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
Just don't count on me to be the guy who buys the CD to rip it for you. :)
Sony is going quite overboard with this Album; Not only are they using copy protection, but they've also gone ahead and hired NetPD to investigate any possible location of the file on any filesharing network.
We've recieved a number of complaints from NetPD when they've seen songs from the album pass through our networks on Gnutella. It's quite extreme the lengths they are going through for such a popular artist.
You'd think they would put more effort into their smaller artists. They are the ones that will be hurt more from copying, not Dion. With millions of fans, she's not going to lose that much from copying; Sure, it's illegial to copy, but apply the same protection to ALL of your artists. Not just your big seller.
Sony by warning the customer is actually admitting that they have a defect product, they know it's defective and can cause damages, and they refuse to fix it.
Remember all those frighteningly vague and overbroad "computer crime" and "anti-hacking" laws that most states have passed over the last 20 years? You know, like the one that got that college kid a felony indictment for installing SETI@Home at his university?
a ws.html
This CD is illegal under almost all of them.
http://nsi.org/Library/Compsec/computerlaw/statel
Of course, so is all "spyware," including RealPlayer/CometCursor/RealJukebox/etc., and for that matter, perhaps even Windows Media Player 8 (silent reporting) and Microsoft Word (silent GUID/CPUID tagging). Not to mention all spam/UCE. Then again, so is even portwalking or attempting to log in to a computer that's not yours... And I could go on.
Then again, if the government is corrupt enough for Bono/DMCA/UCITA/SSSCA, it's way more than corrupt enough to conveniently forget to enforce these laws to any good end.
We're on the road to Tycho.
- cable line-out of CD player to line-in of computer.
- start analog to digital software on computer (I like wavrec)
- play cd
- encode to mp3
- upload the fuck out of that thing
Oh, yeah, copy protection will keep this of the Internet. Right.This is just cover for the real agenda: to convince people that they don't own what they just paid for, and must have the RIAA's permission to use it.
Pay per play is the ultimate goal and this is just a step in that direction.
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
- Encode the source material into high-quality MP3.
- Decode the resulting MP3s back into
.WAV format.
- Use the WAV files to create the master.
- Press copies of the master and distribute to retail.
This way there is negligible quality loss, and even perfect CD rips will still sound like ass when re-encoded into MP3. More importantly, the CD does not lose functionality!Nathan
BTW. Why put copy protection on this disc? Really, honestly, how many people who actively participate in file sharing (ripping, encoding, and sharing) are going to listen to Celine Dion? I was under the impression that most P2P users were somewhere in the age bracket of 15-30, and male..I may be mistaken, but that's my understanding from following all this..
So why then? I'm guessing that this is an attempt by the RIAA to say, "Look! Copy Protection works! There are 'x' number of copies of Celine floating around the net. Without Copy Protection there would be many more. If we compare it to the latest Nickleback album, you see that copy protection works! This is why Senator Holling's bill is genius! " This is the argument that the RIAA will take to Congress in order to get the SSSCA passed.
Go and buy this disc. Rip it in ANY manner. Make it the MOST shared disc EVER. GIVE copies away to all who WOULD have bought it. Return it to the store. Repeat.
Of course, this would probably end up being the argument then: "See! We NEED Hardware Copy Protection! We tried to keep them from this disc and they broke the protection!"
The answer, then, is to not buy OR listen to music from the RIAA. Explore unsigned bands! THINK! Has your life improved because of Creed's newest album? Where would you be if you had never heard it? If the RIAA sells nothing, and has no pirate to rail against, where are they? Gone. And, you are also helping out artists who deserve your attention, and are not part of the Media Industry.
Gaaarrrr! I'm gettin a beer.
The reason that major news organizations such as CNN, Newsweek, etc., all preface "Osama Bin Laden" with the phrase "alleged terrorist" instead of "terrorist" is that if you publish something you cannot prove, as a news organization, you can be held liable for the result.
Sort of. The reason they do that is to protect themselves from libel, as in calling someone a criminal who has yet to tried in court of law. That can be very damaging to someone's reputation.
When Slashdot publishes as fact the point that Celine Dion's CD is cause for a no-lose lawsuit against Sony, that could be a potentially bad situation. What's the source? Is it opinion? It's stated as fact!
There's a reason that they are called "legal opinions". There no such thing as a "legal fact".
Be that as it may, this is totally different from protecting oneself from libel. Guess what -- the first Amendment gives you the right to say just about anything you want, including factually untrue statements, as long as you are not damaging another person or entity. Is Michael representing himself as a lawyer? No, he is not. He's stating his opinion. Who is he damaging here? Someone might believe that he's a lawyer and file a lawsuit? Without getting any further legal advice from a real lawyer? Doubtful.
Yeah, I can just imagine that courtroom scene: "Your honor, I was visiting a geek web site, and one of the editors said that this was a no-lose case! Well, no, it isn't a web site about legal issues. Well, no, he wasn't a laywer. Well, no, I didn't talk to any qualified attorneys, I just filed the case myself. Well, yes, the site does have a history of posting editorials about various stories."
Sheesh, and you call me a troll.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Windows has been crashing my computers for years... so whats wrong with one Celine CD doing the same? At least they are telling you upfront. I have yet to find the label on Win98 that says the same.
Its all just smoke and mirrors.
The reason that cassettes are still available is that people like to listen to music in their cars.
Not cars. As lucifuge31337 said, any car CD player over $50 should handle bumps well. The same can't be said for pocket CD players. No matter how big your pocket CD player's buffer is, it won't be able to buffer over 10 minutes of jogging. A pocket tape player is also much cheaper than a MiniDisc recorder or an MP3 player.
In any case, part of what I was saying was that the 'new media' would be a higher quality than CD.
No. Quality is not a linear function of signal-to-noise ratio or frequency because the ear has limits to what it can hear. The recording industry will have a hard time convincing the audio-enlightened that their new format has higher fidelity than good old CD Audio. A well-mastered CD has 120 dB dynamic range in 20-16000 Hz and decent dynamic range above that because modern mastering techniques shove all the dither noise into the high frequencies (16-22 kHz) where the human ear is not nearly as sensitive. (Look up "noise shaping" on Google to see how.)
Will I retire or break 10K?
The errors that the CD causes are interpreted by XP as a failure of the drive, so it permanently turns off DMA in the hopes that will make the drive usable. Here's an informative Usenet post about the problem. So Sony is wrong when they say the CD "...will not alter anything."
Despite what the lawyers want you to think, almost anything you do still has to pass a "reasonable person" test.
Would a reasonable person expect a CD purchased (or received as a gift) to destroy a computer that has successfully played hundreds of other CDs? Of course not, they won't even read the disclaimer, and if they do they will interpret "may not play in computers" as "it may play in computers, why don't you give it a try" not as "will cause temporary or permanent damage."
In other words, that disclaimer is worthless at best, and an active inducement to try playing it in vulnerable hardware at worse.
As for your example, there's the same issue with the reasonable person test. Bigots may think they can identify homosexuals at a glance, but they can't and that policy is both unenforceable and arbitrarily enforced against innocent parties.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
Firmware isn't as 'firm' as you think.
Most cd-drives have firmware that is upgradeable, similar to the BIOS in your PC. Mainly to fix or work around the bugs that they didn't see at the factory.
For example, I upgraded the firmware on my DVD drive because it didn't do DMA properly when it came out, but a firmware upgrade fixed it.
It's pretty unlikely that it would cause firmware corruption though. It is possible however to "crash" your firmware , so that it ends up in an unknown state (it's unknown, because the damn drive just sits there, and there aint no monitor or keyboard directly attached to your CD drive to see what went wrong).
Most likely, with a corrupted CD, all you get is a drive that spends 10 minutes trying to find a table of contents that makes sense. This (esp in windows machines) means 10 minutes of waiting for your cursor to respond, or rebooting.
A little on the anti-social side for Sony though.
You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.
Attention Celine Dion and all musicians
Kudos for not mistaking Céline Dion for a musician. (-:
S
I'm currently listening to this cd on my pc... works like every OTHER cd I own...tested on a Samsung SW-408B CD-RW drive and a Samsung SD-608 DVD drive. No problems. :P
Are you sure all of them are protected?
I tried it in WinAmp, Roxio EZ CD Creator, and even Windows Media Player...if it doesn't crash WMP, I think it's safe to say it's not gonna crash anything
Perhaps I got lucky? Can anyone verify?
Jim
This means that the second encoding process has to throw away audible frequencies, resulting in audible compression artifacts.
No it dosn't. In theory a good encoder could reproduce, bit for bit (or extremly close) the mp3 file at the first stage, in other words it dosn't have to throw away anything because all of the data would fit into a compressed format.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
I mean, they are making a product that is LESS useful than what you can get on the net. So, if I want to hear artist X on my PC, I can't. I am forced to go to the net to download an 'unauthorised copy'.
This copy has greater utility than the Sony offering. I can copy it, burn it to CD that will play on my PC, or my CD player, play with it, share it etc etc
This is a form of madness. They are creating demand for P2P networks and filesharing with this policy.
Just to prove a point, I have looked at both Amazon and CDNow's sites and neither one state that the disk won't play on a computer. So I can buy it online, but can't play it on my desktop.
BTW - Has anyone tried to play this on a console system? I can see it crashing a XBox just because of the underlying OS.
To anyone who hasn't read this, go to your nearest bookstore (or just order it from Amazon) and get a copy of Goedel, Escher, Bach by Douglas Hofstadter. There is a whole chapter on the subject of albums called "I Cannot Be Played On Record Player X". Rather funny in its frustrating repetitiveness.
/Brian
I just saw Céline and her manger/husband on TV speak of this (lucky me, I was zapping around on tv and just stumbled on a rerun of her press conference).
It was mostly René Angelil doing the talking (the manager/husband), and he was...not clear.
What he said is that the CDs sold in europe can break your computer (to wich Céline said "Ouch, that's gonna cost 'em"), its only sold that way in europe, for now, but might come to america soon. Then he said there are two sides to this story, the first part is that music makes you feel a lot of emotions are is very important in people's lives and not everyone can afford CDs because they are a bit expensive, especially for teenagers. The second part is that authors and singers and producers need to get paid, and the big companies meet every year and they are working on technology for music that can be downloaded that will get paid for, but the technology isn't ready. So in europe they are much more agressive, but this technology might come to america soon.
So, he's not being clear at all...and this is loosely translated from french, but that's pretty much what they said about it.
So, to summerise: These copy-protected CDs might break their fan's computer, and they feel this is harsh. They wished that people could listen to their emotionally-charged songs for free, but they want to get paid.
So...if people actually PAY for the CDs, its ok to break their expensive computers?
You can't take the sky from me...
I don't think I will buy another CD. I don't want their crap breaking my machine. From now on it is straight rips so I don't have to worry about damaging my hardware.
Very true, although I think it might be even bigger than that. It's not just the business model that the RIAA created, it's the model that all of society has created for us. It's like that one (great)
The problem is that the model has totally backfired here. We've been programmed to consume so much that we're all doing it far too well for them now. We can consume and consume and consume all we want now without them acting as our (drug) dealers. We're not taught to buy our stuff, we're taught to devour it. Hence, no one sees any problem with not buying CD's because we've been taught that the purpose is not to buy as much as we can, but to have as much as we can. This is why people fill up their hard drives with MP3's and movies and why my roomate has cases and cases full of burned CD's.
I think this also explains why companies are more focused on regaining control than on increasing sales. Rather than add extras to the CD's to make them worth buying, or dropping the price, they try to regain control of access. It's stemming consumption at will that matters. Before it was good enough to control what bands got promoted via radio. Then it was MTV. Now it's bigger than that. Because people can download whatever they can make their own playlists. Granted, a lot of it is the stuff that the record companies are pushing heavily, but a lot of it is stuff they wouldn't expect, like older favorites that aren't the flavor of the month. Suddenly radio and MTV doesn't hold as much sway any more, and their control is weakened. At the end of the day, this is what it's about. It's not so much about profit in itself, but about control, because control guarantees profit.
We've all been trained too well, including the RIAA themselves. We've all been brainwashed in to consuming everything. The RIAA has been brainwashed the same way, which is why they're so focused on the control aspect. Finding ways to increase sales would suit them better than what they're doing. Unfortunately, I doubt they'll see the light until someone stands up and shows it to them with a spreadsheet and a stock quote.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
On:
t ections_key2audio.shtml
;>
http://www.cdmediaworld.com/hardware/cdrom/cd_pro
Is this quote:
A digital-2-digital (digital CD output to digital CD-Recorder/MD input) generates an "Copy Prohibit" or "Cannot Copy" error message!
I have a HiFi system which delivers digital data to the ampiflier, which has a DSP processor (all modern A/V receivers are like this). This way I avoid introducing the noise/distorsions through audio cables between CD player and ampifiler, and also let the ampifiler process the digital signal better than CD player would do.
I use all normal HiFi components, and just use the digital connection between them through optical cable between my CD player and my ampiflier.
In short, the disk with stated protection wouldn't play on my HiFi system. Note: I don't use any computer.
And that is not stated on the sticker. Fantastic reason to buy, open and return the opened disk to the store.
At the end, Sony'd have to put on the sticker something like:
"this disk won't play on Mac, PC and on digital HiFi systems"
CD disk which you can't play on digital HiFi systems -- only on analog ones -- it's really a good buy.
Even if somebody at the moment doesn't have the system which I explained (and a lot of people can upgrade the present systems to it by just buying once optical cable), why would anybody buy a CD which wouldn't work once he improves his HiFi system?
Although I disagree with the use of the propaganda term "piracy", this summary from a footnote in the landmark Diamond Rio case, the case that opened the door for portable MP3 players, is otherwise agreeable:
To which I'd also add that even if one were to pay for the music CD, it's not clear that one would pay the publisher for it. There are venues to legally obtain the music CD without paying the publisher (public libraries and any second-hand sale) in which case multiple people can listen to the music as the music licensee but only result in one sale for the publisher. Your burger example doesn't help eludicate understanding of copyright at all. A burger cook working for someone else doesn't hold a copyright on the burgers.
Too simple; simplistic, really. I'm not sure what you mean by the "result" of your thoughts, but your thoughts are not copyrightable, copyright law in the US only protects certain expression of ideas. How much control you have over that expression is not anywhere near as simple as you have made it out to be (your burger scenario, for example, would not allow me to do as I wished with the burger; sometimes there are patents that can interfere with your ability to legally distribute a work copyrighted to you). You should find the book I recommended earlier (ISBN: 0-8147-8806-8). It will painlessly get you up to speed in understanding copyright. I found it a worthwhile read and I hope you do too.
Digital Citizen
I listen occasionally listen to real audio CDs on the following devices:
- One of our PCs (all running Linux..)
- My Rio Volt
- Our Apex DVD player
This means that pretty soon I won't be able to listen to audio CDs on my own players even if I want to.I have never used Napster (or similar services) as I think it's morally wrong and illegal. However, if I can't go out, buy an audio CD, rip it and listen to it then I consider myself forced into using one of these means to acquire the music I want.
I have absolutely no qualms with paying $20 for a CD. I always get my money out of it, provided the disc doesn't suck. Frankly, at the rate we buy CDs I don't even mind occasionally paying for a dud. I will, however, refuse to buy something I can't use.
End of story.
As has been reported ad nauseum, this does absolutely nothing to curb illegal copying of these songs. All it does is anger good customers. If I, a paying, legal customer, am going to be treated like a criminal, I may as well act the part.
So, here's my ultimatum to the recording industry: Stop this ridiculous behaviour or I will cease to be a customer. As soon as I buy a CD that I actually want (sorry Celine) and can no longer rip and listen to in MP3 form I will cease buying CDs at all and will start making use of one of these napster/kazaa/limewire type services. I don't want to do this. I still think it's illegal, I still think it's wrong, but I think that punishing all customers for the sake of a few, who will pirate anyway, is worse, not to mention a dangerous precedent. I won't stand for it.
If the record industry won't play fair neither will I. I know I'm only one person, I realize that the recording industry probably doesn't care about me, but I buy about 30 CDs a year. That's $600 they lose from me. Pretty insignificant in the big scheme, but it's all I can do. I will continue to listen to the music I want in the form I want.
Let go! Bad dog! BAD DOG!
Stupid product and a computer with a stupid name.
You know, I just don't get it. Why would you want a synthetic dog?
There's something about the Japanese culture that I just don't get. Hello Kitty is a perfect example. Why do they like Hello Kitty?
How did they get the bow to stick to Hello Kitty's ear? I tried that on my own cat, but the taper of the ear as it reached the extremity wasn't conducive to holding a bow, much like pants will be self-adjusting on the rotund. Besides, she flicked away the bow then attempted to sever my femural artery. After I got back from the emergency room, I thought about using the staple gun, but Hello Kitty doesn't appear to have pierced ears. Unfortunately, I was out of hot-melt glue sticks, so I was unable to investigate that possibility.
Why do anime characters always have two teeth? (One on top going all the way around from molar to molar, and one on the bottom going all the way around from molar to molar.) Does Japanese toothpaste include spackle, or am I missing something? Why these one-piece monolithic teeth? The monolith is a fissure-free, gap-free symbol of strength. Which is ironic from a people who have been living in one of the world's most active seismic zone and yet persist in building paper houses with stone roofs.
[sigh] I long for the good old days, when the Japanese were quiet, reserved, and Sony built battle-wagon open-reel VTRs instead of CanCon pop music CDs.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
In Denmark (where I'm from) it is perfectly legal for me to have digital copies of every single cd-album ever published - even if I don't own a single album.
...
Why?
Because the copyright law in Denmark allows me to make copies of original works - no matter who owns them. If I wanted to, I could walk down to the local library, borrow a copy of every album they have in store, go home, rip them onto my computer and return the albums - without breaking any laws in Denmark.
I can even take the copies, burn them onto CDs, and play them where ever I want to (just not to loudly, or I'll have to pay KODA/IFPI for playing music in public - stupid law). The only thing I can't do is give the copies to anyone not living with me. I can't give them as gifts, I can lend them to friends etc. But other than that, I can do just about everything I want to.
Now - I can't download music off most P2P networks, because then I'd be copying an illegal copy, and I'm not allowed to do that. But hey - I can just walk down to the local library and check out their CDs
How's that for fair use?
We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
That's just being dishonest.
If he's Canadian, he's paid for it (assuming it's CDs he copied, onto cds). If he's really honest, he can just go see the band live, where they will see a penny for their toils.
I hate to say this, but I'm going to keep banging this point into people's heads. Others should do this, too. Yes, I know it doesn't really apply to your post. In Canada, it is perfectly legal for me to possess copied works, because the government decided that they would worry about paying the artist. How about they do that isn't my problem, but for the time being, I can copy music without guilt - because I've paid a tax^h^h^hlevy on the CDs. Nothing like turning music into a public good to solve this peer to peer problem, eh. Nevermind how stupid and unworkable that is to independant artists. Or once the public is made aware of this abolution in droves, or the big kicker: If someone defends a peer-to-peer music sharing program under this law in court. That would make napster LEGAL in Canada. Oh, baby. The RIAA would riot.
This of course doesn't apply in the land of the DMCA, not to worry, we're holding (held) tribunals on what we're going to do to hop in line like good little empire citizens, too.
..don't panic
From the business point of view, this is as stupid a move as a consumer oriented company could make. Anyone with an MBA and a brain in their head would come to the same conclusion.
The potential gain (avoid lost sales) is so far below the potential loss (lawsuits, internal Sony politics, losses to other Sony divisions, lost sales to pissed off consumers, lost sales due to geeks cracking the cd as a point of honor, angry artists, inter-territory grey marketing, spread of hardware workarounds, etc.) that nobody in their right mind would implement such a scheme. Which is why most companies aren't rushing to try out the technology. There is no business incentive to be a pioneer.
Also, from a strategic business point of view, when a consumer company treats its customers as criminals, then there is something far more basic than technology at work. This is the classic case of a technology that allows the expression of a nacient desire. BUT IT IS NOT A TECHNOLOGICAL PROBLEM! Its the nacient desire that is the issue. So there can be no technological solution. They do actually teach this stuff in business schools. Sony is now about to re-teach the lesson to a generation of music executives. Remember to not get too pissed off and enjoy the fun.
You make the classic conceptual error all the napster types make, in confusing the recording with the music itself. I suppose this is to be expected from a crowd that by and large don't value creativity.
Of course the recording itself is infinitely reproducible, but the music is not. It takes time and effort to write, produce and record another piece of music.
The initial production of the work is worth something, economically speaking, and that's what I got paid for. Each subsequent use or copy is not.
They are getting paid for the original work. The amount they get paid depends on the number of copies sold, because this is what is used to determine the economic value of that work.