Slashdot Mirror
Unique ID Codes for CD / DVD Manufacturers
terrymr writes: "The movie & recording industry are lobbying hard for the European Union to require all CDs & DVDs to carry unique source identifiers to aid in combatting piracy. They are also demanding tougher penalties for infringers. It seems the only people who would be hit by the ID code requirement would be the legitimate manufacturers as the pirates simply wouldn't bother."
Well...I guess this could also give Microsoft some ammunition with their claims about not being able to release the source code of certain Windows components (including the Intellectual property protection stuff) due to threats of national security. Seems that copying and file sharing really is terrorism.
Anyone have any solid facts (or at least a little more substantial than these whisps of smoke) about music and movie piracy supporting terrorism and terrorists?
"Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
Yes, that is why all those movies are out on Usenet and IRC, to fund terrorism.
When I read last Friday's story about watermarking on all ADCs, I went and joined the EFF. People have a lot of inertia with these stories, they disapprove but find it hard to get worked up. At some point it will become so anti-libertarian, all in the name of protecting the exploitation of artists by a giant parasitic maggotlike managerial structure, that you will feel the cold restrictive hand on your shoulder day by day.
Consider joining the EFF or a similar organization today, to help them keep our freedoms on our behalf.
They will put these unique IDs somewhere on the edges of the disk. Where's my sharpie? :)
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Current damages are based on how much money people make on selling the stuff. However they want that changed to the full retail price... which allows companies to set there own damages by overinflating the value of their software then giving everyone a discount.
Have a copy of 2000 Enterprise server, your why not just give your house to Bill!
James
This is a tricky and dangerous detail. Right now, if Microsoft rips of a GPL program, they may get penalized based on the money they have made from it. Under these proposed rules, Microsoft could rip off GPL programs with impunity because their penalty would be nil (since the GPL retail price would be zero). This is clearly not acceptable.
If we are going to have penalties on copyright infringement, they should be based on a percentage of the net worth of the infringer, not on some imaginary retail value dreamed up by a marketing department. That way, the penalty is comparably painful to whoever infringes.
"feeds a growing black economy in which criminal networks use piracy to fund other activities such as drug dealing, arms trading, money laundering and terrorism."
I'm sure it happens - the simple fact is these organizations need money and will do whatever illegal activity is neccassary to fund their operations, or whatever can make them the most profit... but here is the sticking point. How much do you think these people realy make of of pirated software? MOst of the stuff I have seen sells for 4-5$. Not really a big deal when you consider other likely sorts of income - drug dealing (I believe a 1kg of cocaine fetches 100,000$ anymore) extoration, blackmail, etc. Can you see Tony Soprano talking about their new 'cd pirating scheme?' Consider the taliban/al qaeda (sp?). Most of the funding for those two organizations (besides legit taxes) occured from A.) Opium B.) Donations from wealthy businessmen - Oil Money. Never forget, the vast majority of funding for most middle eastearn terrorist groups is from oil. Remember that the next time you go to fill up the SUV.
This is probably just FUD. Most of the people doing this are people who are just trying ot earn a quick buck, but this doesn't preclude the possibility of it happening. Anymore it seems that you throw the word 'terrorist' into anything and you have a good chance of getting people to side with you.
The main example provided by the Motion Picture Association is a "DVD-R factory" that produced Spider Man and Star Wars copies.
But this is not a factory with professional DVD-burners. This is just a guy who bought 30 DVD-writers at the computer shop around the corner - just as you and I could do. I am afraid that some day we will end with a unique ID on our DVD and CD writers at home just to protect the copyrights.
Just as with the prohibition in the 1930s we have here laws that are far outside acceptance by the general public. All those measures won't stop the main problem (in this case: overpriced CDs) and in fact it only helps the mob.
Whether you choose to apply [copy]right to copying or distribution, in the end it does not matter. It is a question of having a control point. Which simply does not exist. Either you try to stop copying in the devices that can make digital copies (any gadget with a CPU or a DSP on it) or you try to find a point in the distribution chain where you can stop the distribution (such as a directory maintained by companies like Napster or AudioGalaxy).
The problem in either case is that the potential control points are beyond reach of national legislation. Sure, you can impose restrictions on digital devices and try to prevent imports of devices that break those restrictions. However, this is not enforcible internationally. All it takes is a single digital copy that finds its way into the Internet. Once the first copy has been made, it can be distributed en masse.
Then it becomes a question trying to find the control point for preventing its distribution. This is even more hopeless. Sure, you can go after the Napsters of this world but that won't stop the distribution. People will just find other ways to share and you can't go after every citizen who does so. It would simply be infeasible.
So, let the legislators have their little dreams. They are fighting against wind mills.
The movie industry will be the next one to feel the cold winds. Pretty soon full movies will be as convenient to swap as mp3's are today. While people will still go to theaters to see the movies on wide screen, VHS and DVD rentals and sales will suffer. Sill, record breaking mega budget movies may soon be a thing of the past, too.
In the end, I think, the non-copyable and non-distributable commodity is the artist itself. No-one can duplicate the creativity of a person. Hopefully this will eventually lead to the artists having more control over their works. The business model certainly could be envisioned and it would be more artist-to-consumer without unnecessary middle men.
"I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them." -- George H. W. Bush
This quote, "use piracy to fund other activities such as drug dealing, arms trading, money laundering and terrorism." cracked me up.
I was under the naive impression that drug dealing and arms trading were highly profitable, I thought money laundering was used to hide the massive ammounts money those actvities generated.
It's now obvious to me that file sharing and pirate CD's in flea markets are really just a front to pay for unprofitable activities like drug trafficing and arms trading.
Come on guys, at least try to make up convicing FUD.
Australian? Join EFA
When it comes to tagging EXPLOSIVES to identify the source, oh, no, it would cost money and it wouldn't work ( http://www.speedsite.com/~ccohen/taggants.htm ; http://www.speedsite.com/~ccohen/taggants.htm ). But when it comes to stopping kiddies from copying MUSIC, no effort should be spared...
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
The idea here is to be able to trace a CD back to the plant where it was manufactured, so that large-scale pirates can be stopped.
How long until we're able to copy the unique ids?