Slashdot Mirror
The Day The Music Died: Windows Media and DRM
SampleMinded writes "The Guardian reports on an early glimpse of what a DRM controlled future looks like. Imagine backing up your files, reformatting your hard drive, then copying the files back over only to find your music no longer works. It happened to this guy. Now That's what I call Xperience!"
It happened to my fiancee. She backed up her music made using Real Jukebox to her D drive. We re-formatted drive C and re-installed Windows. Of course, not having saved the security key, when she restored her music files she couldn't play them.
As always, the honest people suffer.
have been collecting music using Windows Media Player to copy from CDs.
That was the first mistake...
You don't even have to try to reload backed up data to get bit by this. Not too long ago, I upgraded my processor and was subsequently locked out of all the media files I made using Media Player.
I was less then pleased, for obvious reasons. It was just a minor headache remaking files using other programs and such, but it was a minor headache I could have lived without.
Of course it may not really be that easy, and it still is a pain, but that doesn't seem like that big of a deal, IF what they say is true in this case. Yes, this is a pain, but it could've been worse. If that's the future, it doesn't look as bad as I thought it did.
Thank goodness I only use it to play porn clips from the internet, and use WinAMP and RealPlayer for anything important.
I think with the interesting people, their lives can't possibly be wrapped up into a nice little package.
it did sound like updateing the licenses for the "new" computer was pretty simple.
What I don't understand is the reason the files could be "re-licensed" was because they were legit in the first place. Well.... isn't this true for any copy? (at some point down the line it was legit)
-... ---
So the user in question didn't follow the procedure for either turning off the DRM protection or backing up his licenses. I'm no fan of DRM, but RTFM still applies in a "DRM controlled future". Maybe even more so!
1) Now Joe Public starts understanding and disliking DRM
2) Techies that already hated DRM but are not listened to by Joe Public don't use silly WMP and are not hindered by this.
What's the problem again?
If an experiment works, something has gone wrong.
Updated? How did they get the original and how would they know that your files are the right files, etc... because they are watching what you are listening to. Time to read that EULA Mr. End User. Problem is, most bloody end users really don't care. I've talked to many a person and they really think it's ok. I guess that means that I _can_ put that hidden camera in their daughter's bathroom Boy, I certainly hope noone takes that one literally. ;)
I wish MS would go even further, like automatically delete the music files after a set period, or when you reinstall Windows, Word will stop working, and you need to rent a new license etc.
You know that line from Star Wars applies (paraphrasing): The more control they take over your system, the more users they will lose.
Je ne parle pas francais.
* If certain software becomes hostile to copy survivability, switch to more user friendly software.
* If a file format becomes undesirable for some reason, switch formats. The shift from GIF to JPEG was accelerated when CI$ wanted royalties for GIFs. if MPEG becomes untenable, switch to a format WMA/Windoze, etc, wouldn't tell from any other binary.
I think all people are proving is that they can muck up a file format or two. But there are a number of ways of encoding music after the fact. Just, you may need to convert your precious MPEGs to a more modern (and less policed) format.
iTunes is actually just SoundJam MP. Apple licensed it and modified the look/functionality a bit. So, just get SoundJam MP for Windows (if it exists).
I was very happy about this - I run OS X fulltime, and was recently given one of the original Creative Nomad 6G MP3 jukeboxes. The bundled software was SoundJam MP, but for OS9. I hooked up the Nomad (USB, ugh), fired up iTunes, and it recognized it right away and I could drag/drop MP3s from my library to it.
Whoops, I just checked (www.soundjam.com):
"Casady & Greene, Inc. ceased publication of SoundJam MP on June 1, 2001 at the request of its developers. We believe that SoundJam MP will continue to give our customers long and useful service, and, in keeping with our philosophy of putting our customers first, Casady & Greene will continue to offer tech support to SoundJam MP owners. The SoundJam development team is now working for Apple on their popular iTunes jukebox software, and will continue to work on exciting and innovative products for Mac use"
The real problem is not that windows is controlling her, that she's trying to control windows. Anyone with any common sence knows that windows xp provides a superior user experience and that it's rock solid reliability eliminates the need for tenous reinstalls. Not only is it never neccessary, but only hackers, pirats, and the dark forces of the universe would try to get control over windows for their own selfish gain. In my opinion, she got what she deserved. That filthy evildoer
DRM will happen. Deal with it, Michael. What other solution would you offer to deal with the rampant piracy and IP theft that escalates every single day?
People shoplift from grocery stores every day also, but I don't have to get new licenses for my soup if I move it from one cabinet to another. Let the RIAA etc. do what grocery stores do and add the "losses" due to piracy onto everyone else's bill.
Looking at the price vs. cost of production of CDs, it appears that they must already do this. Not to mention that they get a chunk of every blank CD Audio disc sold. Bingo, problem solved. Now quit with the DRM shit, you bastard record companies!
Seriously, how can they expect consumers to put up with that much hassle to "protect" their multi-billion-dollar industry from the miniscule sales they really lose to piracy?
Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
Lessee:
1. 'When you first run Windows Media Player, it will ask if you want to keep copy protection on, and you can turn it off if you wish.'
and
2. 'We did anticipate this scenario and developed a tool to help them update their licenses: the Personal License Update Utility.'
What's the big deal here?
p.s. What's funny is, My Lyra requires a funky DRM'd MP3 format that only uses their propietary software to create it...those files won't work on anything else either. BUT, copy any kind fo WMA file directly to the CF card and it works fine.
"Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
According to Microsoft's lead product manager of Windows Digital Media:
There is still a way to get these licenses back and it is pretty easy using our Personal License Migration Service (PLMS), [which] was designed to address the exact situation you outline.
It's morning and I'm still feeling pretty alert, but even the acronym PLMS is enough to make me think, "this is going to be a gigantic pain in the ass." Would it be possible to come up with a more intimidating bit of tech-speak for a product's name?
More to the point, can you picture an inexperienced user having to track down the Personal License Migration Service utility and get it working? Just the name of it alone makes it sound like an afternoon's project.
Looks like Windows users who want to maintain rights to their music libraries are going to have to regularly clear some rather intimidating hurdles every time they buy a new system or reformat their drive. I wonder how Apple will handle the same situation. Somehow, I can't picture Steve announcing iPLMS at an upcoming MacWorld ;)
I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
But what if they had paid for them? Even a trivial amount like 25 cents adds up extremely quick. At least in their case, though, they still have the files. Hard drives fail.. the Windows Registry can be corrupted.. what then? Do you re-purchase all the files you've already bought once?
This should be yet another compelling reason to dump Windows in favor of Linux on your PC's.
* I can't feel too sorry for anyone using Windows Media Player Spyware.. Is it really Microsoft's business that I spend a large part of my work day writing code and listening to (legal) mp3 rips of my Ozzy Osbourne cd's?
people are eventually just going to quit buying music and stick to listening to what they already own. I have already started to do this
By any chance, are you in your in your mid- to late- twenties? Many people stop getting into new music in that timeframe, and have been for 25-30 years.
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
I've made similar comments like this before, but in this case it is worth repeating (well, I'll find out whether it is).
The sooner the general public begins to experience the real issues behind DRM, DMCA, Palladium, UCITA (or whatever they're calling it this week), etc, the sooner the issue will rise to the importance of other issues that get real (ie political, financial) attention.
It will probably be painful for a while, since the entire public won't realize the impact of this sort of thing at first, but give it time... the general public let their opinion be known about DivX and it didn't take long for CC to back down and toss that idea (or at least table it for a while).
This too shall pass? I hope so.
Just imaging the fun when the library of Congress does the same thing....
(Well, maby they have a smarter boyfriend who anticipates these things...)
-On a Mr. fixit note, NEVER destory your source. Copy info to new media, and verify functionality on that new media, THEN format the source...)
While those things may apply to this case, DRM is a scary thing where it would be very easy to make it so it doesn't matter what app you use, DRM could be embedded in your processor (Palladium). They could make it so that you can't turn off DRM in the apps, or there is no manual to read, it will all just be built in so you don't have to "worry" about it.
And since when did it become a REQUIREMENT to be connected to the internet to listen to music that you own?! Sure, internet access is more widespread than ever, but required? That's BS. That just means that Microsoft is watching and controlling what you are listening to. How long before it goes beyond that to cover every app on your system?
I talk to some of my friends about this stuff, and they think it will never happen. They also don't know about the DMCA and the CDPDTA-E-I-E-I-O. This shit is real, and it is very scary. I have heard people say "Well, I don't care if they know what I do." Well dammit, I DO! It is none of their business, and that is the first step down a long, dark path. You want to tell them what you are doing, what web sites you are visiting, where you are shopping? Fine. Opt-in. But don't force that on everyone. Some people may actually want some of these dumbass services that Microsoft and other companies offer. Maybe they like targeted advertising. I don't, and I should not have to jump through hoops to NOT get it.
Think it won't happen? Who is going to stop them?
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Think of it like a cage. It's meant to let us see what's inside, but not let what's inside get out. It can never effectively be used to get back what's escaped. And something only needs to escape from it once to be outside, fruitful and multiplying and all that, forever.
It's an absurdly complicated cage, with hundreds of potential points of failure. Even if it's the best designed cage in the world, with encryption and booby-traps at every joint and hindge, someone in a good lab in Hong Kong is going to arrange a jailbreak anyway. And you know it's not going to be the best designed cage in the world. It's going to suck, maybe slightly less than CSS sucked.
Once the content is out of it, that's it. You can't make a computer that refuses legacy data and applications (mp3s). That might be what Hollywood wants, but it's the only thing Microsoft can never do. At least not in the next 10-20 years - they'd have to work up to it very gradually. And even then, there are a million problems.
The real purpose of DRM is to act as a shield against free software technologies interoperating with commercial products. MS has been considering fighting compatible free software with patents and bribes and EULA suits (and probably would, but for the awkwardness of doing it during their anti-trust trial), but by far its best weapon is to pretend to ally with the content people. They, after all, own Washington, and they were the geniuses that engineered the DMCA. The law that will make Samba, or the encrypted-WindowsDRM-filesystem module, or any number of other enabling technologies illegal... because it's trying to "bypass Microsoft's access control features."
People will point out that the DMCA has provisions for allowing interoperability. That's right, it does. That's called a "bait exception." Sort of like the distributor price caps in the California electric utility deregulation, they're there for show; they can have no real effect. DeCSS, after all, is meant to allow free softare to interoperate with DVD's. But tell that to all the people in court all around the world right now. When deciding on whether there's a "significant non-infringing use," it turns out that it's quite easy to make a non-savvy judge (and how few of them are savvy?) believe the worst. DVDs are case in point.
DRM will accomplish none of its stated goals. But it will be great for Microsoft. Paladium is a big deal to them because it will be the first Windows which can't be emulated by Wine, for instance, or interoperated with by other software, without risking the appearance that one is interoperating in order to open the cage. And if you mess with cages, you know we're not just talking about a civil trial and bankruptcy. We're talking about a good long stretch in federal prison.
Want to Know How to Cheat the GPL? Read On!
People shoplift from grocery stores every day also, but I don't have to get new licenses for my soup if I move it from one cabinet to another.
Yes, but there are no "Soup-uters" out there that allow you to make unlimited, perfect copies of your can of soup and instantly deliver the soup to millions of people around the globe for free. If there were, you can bet Campbells would be very interested in controlling what you did with your can of soup.
When updating my soundcard drivers recently, I discovered a notice of Digital Rig^H^Hestrictions Management from Creative Labs. Apparently copy protected "intellectual property content" causes the digital output of the sound card to be shutoff. Of course this only works on WMAs, so I believe this fits in the context of this article. For more information visit this URL Creative Labs: DRM with WMA
By any chance, are you in your in your mid- to late- twenties? Many people stop getting into new music in that timeframe, and have been for 25-30 years.
Gawd, ain't it the truth.
It's disturbing me, but after college it's really difficult to get exposed to new music. The death of napster doesn't help.
On the other hand, I think the late-90s/early-2000s might've been a particularly soso time for new music. On the radio, I still here the same songs I heard played in the gym in 1997, along with what to me sounds like pretty anonymous modern R+B. Other electronica stuff I find interesting, but genre-wise it's all firmly planted in the 90s.
Sometimes I really wonder how the hell my cd collection got as big as it did (it's not even that big, like 300 give or take 50)
And more often these days, new albums I buy are pretty big dissapointments. From N.E.R.D. to the new Alanis.
I really miss the party rap of the early 1990s, pre-gangsta. That was good stuff to dance to.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
The idea, of course, is to get people used to it, so when it does come time to shove it down people's throats, there won't be much resistance.
... so what looks fair on the outside is actually pretty sneaky and deceptive.
I don't know about you, but I find that the phrase "Protect My Music" is a bit deceptive. Admittedly, "Make it so my music will only play on this computer" is a bit of a mouthful, but at least it's not misleading.
If someone like my little sister (who is a fairly average computer user) sees that checkbox, they don't know what it means, but they generally leave it checked because it sounds positive. A power user (who has some experience with recent commercial software) may be more inclined to be a bit suspicious about the vague and somewhat ominous "Protect My Music." Sadly, most users are the average kind and not the power kind
I have been told, and I believe even read in dead-tree publications, that the reason the DivX plan died was that people were creeped out by having to dial someone up and transfer information. Even with the *promise* of anonymity, this is guaranteed to scare some people away, since they worry "What if?" (Like "What if the company goes bust and they sell their database to someone that doesn't make the same promise?" or "What if they get hacked and someone takes my credit card number or personal viewing habits?")
Add into this that much of media innovation and format decisions are apparently driven by the porn production industry, and the reason for media without a tether to home base becomes more clear. No one wanted to buy a DivX disc that phoned home to validate and no porn movie maker really wanted to go that route because they know their audience.
Having to phone home has got to be the Achilles' Heel for this kind of stuff. I sure as hell don't want it, and I imagine most people would feel the same way, even if they aren't watching dirty movies.
Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
-- Ken Kinder ken@_nospam_kenkinder.com http://kenkinder.com/
In this case, an unobvious (mis-)feature caused a user to lose hours of work. That's a software problem, and specifically, a problem with a particular software feature, DRM. It shows that DRM reduces usability in practice. The burden of proof that this isn't necessarily true is on proponents of DRM to find workarounds.
Also note that this particular implementation of DRM is deliberately not secure; an implementation of the form that the music industry might like might simply not let the user recover their music when they reformat their drive no matter what they do. That is, after all, effectively how CDs used to work (if the medium went bad, you lost the music), and the music industry would love to get back to that kind of environment.
It's not shut off, it's emitted with a copyright bit (part of the stream format) set. It's the "client" end (a DAT recorder, for instance) which does the prohibiting. This is all well-trodden ground to anyone who's messed with audio DAT drives or audio CD recorders: it prohibits you from recording copyright-asserted content from one to another digitally.
Peter
There is one solution to this (that could be used dozens od other ways, too) that many people won't like: Universal IDs. If everyone was issued a unique personal sequence (Long enough to be virtually impossible to remember) these issues would never occur.
The UID should include personal space as well - so I could have several different accounts (home, job1, job2, hobby, oss project1, etc) without losing the access to my media/data.
Log on at work with your work UID. Your work UID server authorizes your log on and file access. It also knows you have access to your HOME UID systems, and sets up a VPN connection, allowing you access to your home computer & MP3s.
Log on at another company's office with your work UID. The local UID server doesn't know you. The UID Root Servers are queried for your UID's ownership. It returns your work UID server and your home UID server. The company's server recognizes that you work for a "trusted" company and allows you acces to certain portions of their network, as well as setting up VPN to your work and your home.
The UID could be attached to a fingerprint identification database, to a magnetic stripe card, to a SD card for login identification. The UID would make easy permissions tracking. Use any cellphone on your account, as long as you insert your UID chip. It could be great.
Alternately, it could be used to track your movements, your whereabouts, everything that you do and have electronically. This is why the Root UID servers should be set up on floating installations with Satellite connectivity in International Waters...
--
Or maybe I'm insane.
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
Legally, a user that does not read the EULA then can not fiegn ignorance later if they break the license. It was presented to them at the pre-installation. It is there responsibility to make sure they legally understand what they are getting into.
Having said this, the way most EULA are presented are HOSTILE to the user. Confusing legalese language presented in a tiny scrolling text box smaller than the text area I'm writing this response in. What is your recourse if you have a question about a clause? Stop the installation and e-mail MicroSoft? You bought the software today and would probably like to use it today. Waiting for a response from MS and then possibly consulting your private lawyer is a laughable action to take for minor piece of software. Then step it up a notch: Window's Media Player is tightly integrated. You can't PATCH the system properly unless you take all of the parts which requires reading multiple EULA which are all different. What happens if you agree to one but not another? Your installation (and your computer) is probably now unusable or will have incompatible hiccups.
I am still waiting for EULA in general to be challenged in court. Where did the consumer right for quality assurance and regress go? Why does one have to sign away more rights to get bug fixes?!?
Your comment about tiny text made me wonder - could a user unable to read the EULA (because of the type font size) call up a software company and ask for them to read them the EULA out loud? Is this not a reasonable accomodation to a common disability (inability to read 6pt type, or whatever is used)? Is there some reading disability that would make it impossible to read and understand something presented only one line at a time (because of a really small scroll window)?
Most EULA dialogs I've seen have been very limited in functionality - no chance to, say, copy the EULA text into a program and change the font size. That being said, they usually appear to be in about ten-point type. This is much better than the font that used to be used on the break-this-seal-to-agree envelopes. (Which I actually had to pull out a magnifying glass to read)
Sure there are.
One of them is called allrecipies.com.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
and it happening to the general masses is a very very good thing. The more this stuff pisses off journalists, writers, average joe the better...
Me? I rip everything to mp3 with lame and the proper settings to get the absolute best copy I can get. (I dont use OGG and probably never will because my car stereo,audiotron and 2 portable devices never will play OGG. No DRM crap to worry about, no mysterious "licenses" or other crap needed.. and finally I use a non-bloated fast responding media player.. it's call winamp, freeamp(or Zinf now) and XMMS. winamp os starting to get bloated so all windows boxen I touch get Zinf instead now.. and linux boxes get either zinf or the default XMMS install.
Anyways, DRM cant and wont bother anyone that makes sure they know what they are using and doing. As it is easily avoided without causing any discomfort. Non-techies? it's gonna bite them in the ares and bite them hard... and I hope that it start biting people at a rapid rate... that's the ONLY way to get the word out...
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
...it would have been funnier. How bout:
"The more you tighten your grip, the more Dell Systems slip through your fingers."
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
If you're lazy and use MS products just because they're already there, you're likely to keep running into this problem.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
Certainly nothing to do with punitive prices for cds, right?? 22+ freakin' Euros for a CD where I come from.
Why is it that CDs are waaay more expensive than cassettes to buy, yet cassettes are way more expensive to produce in terms of materials, complexity, etc ...??
Let me answer - they charge what they do, because they can, plain and simple .... people are slowly wising up & sales figures are falling. The free market sux, eh?
Alison
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." - Albert Einstein
This is a good example of why this technology is doomed from the start.
Can you imagine what will happen when Mary Jan Mathteacher and her husband Joe Sixpack run into this? I mean, you and I are above average with respect to our computer knowledge and this is a pain the in the butt even for us. To Mary and her brethren, this is just one more reason why "the computer hates me". I can't thing of any better way to stifle online music sales (if there ever becomes a market for them)
Jack Schofield, the Jack in "Ask Jack," the title of this Q&A, is a notoriously pro-MS cheerleader. It's almost sickening, in fact, having read his articles over the years. Many newspapers have these sort of "Doctor PC" columns, and they give Microsoft a free ride in terms of customer support and advertising. But how is it these columns don't ever advise: "Internet Explorer really sucks, you should download Mozilla" or whatever superior Open Source alternative there is. Certainly Jack never does.
In fact, last week the section's letters page got a letter from a reader asking why "Ask Jack" never answered any Mac queries, or any other OS for that matter. The reply was, oh Jack's a real expert, you can ask him anything. So, please, go ahead, why not "Ask Jack" your deepest questions about some tricky Debian or Slackware problem, I'm sure he'll be just delighted to answer. Email him at: jack.schofield@guardian.co.uk
I'm not sure when something that benefits the RIAA but can only cause headaches for end users started being called a "feature."
If you build a car that is incapable of going over 65mph do you advertise it as an anti-speed ticket "feature"?
nonsense.
ôó
So how does this so-called DRM actually provide any security whatsoever for the copyright holders? It doesn't. It is irritation-ware pure and simple. Just another totally unnecessary hoop to jump through.
<PARANOIA>
Or is it? How about this for a totally irrational paranoid fantasy: could it be that by clicking the "turn off DRM" button you are circumventing the copy-protection and so, technically, in breach of the DCMA? Just how twisted would MS have to be to implement a honey-trap just so they could sell the RIAA a list of the theoretically guilty?
</PARANOIA>
Disclaimer: no, even I don't really believe this. But, hey, food for thought, eh?
--
What short sigs we have -
One hundred and twenty chars!
Too short for haiku.
Sure am glad that I run Linux now... this whole DRM thing is going to get out of hand within the next 2-5 years.
:)
Of course, when TCPA/Palladium hits it'll be integrated into hardware and will probably kill off any solution that ISN'T Microsoft-based. I sure hope some other hardware manufacturer will make non-TCPA-compliant hardware during the fallout.
Welcome to hell. Here's your copy of Windows.
-- Jim
Given the state of most web pages, it appears to be <body> ... </body>.
Oh, so you're a food pirate! Stealing your recipes instead of supporting the chefs that give you those recipes, by eating at their restaurants.
I bet you even have a "burner" in your kitchen, you THIEF!
signed,
President, Chefs Association of America
The first time someone wants to replay their child's birth (or conception :o)) MPEG and they are informed they can't unless they use the internet or they jump through the right hoops. Then at that point will DRM be an infringement on a person's own right to play their own content on any machine they want?
What about burning the image of a child, as an example, playing little league you want to send to the folks at home? Does this DRM mean that those images can only play on the originating computer?
I guess in MS's world, content managament means they can manage any content that plays on any of their licensed products. Wasn't this, like, declared illegal summer 2001? Help me out here, you folks who are so in love with Redmond's products... Enlighten me...
You know MS is so fixated on digital rights management they don't even consider what their obligations are to the world at large, the obligations that though the new paradigm is they own the software you are using and you have only those rights they grant you, at some point there must be a delineation of responsibilities by MS: that they may not interfere with your online or offline activities, EVEN IF ILLEGAL, unless they go through the same processes that law enforcement agencies must go through to build a prima facie case; where is MS's obligation? Doesn't their use of the internet to manage XP constitute broadcasting and is subject to the same strictures that everyone else is under the FCC? Even in computers it would seem to me that citizens in a republic such as ours (USA) must be protected from outlaw contracts such as EULAs.
Dawn of the Dead
Because when it drops it will look something like this:
The Software players themselves will clock out and have to be relicenced. This licenced code will recognize that all of the media files are 'old' and they have to be relicenced as well. And Oh did I mention that the licence to the objects will use a 3 way handshake that couples a corresponding key in the OS itself and will embed a keyed licence in the objects themselves so they will only play on a machine that already has a licenced OS with a licenced player playing licenced media files.
And if you had three legs the third shoe will look like this.
All media files will be 'owned' by someone else, probably the DMCA licence owner and they will have the ability, through your licenced OS to revoke the licence of a media file at any time for any reason. You will receive a bill in the mail, like your phone bill, that charges you for listening to or watching those media files and it will be 100% usage based.
And if you had a fourth leg the last shoe dropping will look like this.
All Libraries will be privatised and they will charge you to borrow books which will be slowly phased out anyhow in lieu of digital media. They will charge you for each viewing of each page on a per view per page basis.
And if you are a starfish it will loko like this.
Eventually there will be a literate class and an illiterate class distinguished my wealth just like in Medieval times. Long live the revolution!
No, M$ was buying time and free PR, so that they could decide on the best way to profit from DRM.
No corporations are against it, those that say they are simply haven't figured out how to use it to their own advantage.
Duh.
(Probably different genre, but same principle, so pay attention.)
I'm a metalhead, but I didn't have enough underground exposure, and let me tell you: the early/mid 1990s were hell. Since metal was being pushed in the 1980s, I had lazily gotten into the bad habit of relying on a very twisted and distorted intel source: the radio (and even worse at one point: MTV headbangers ball -- this is fucking embarrassing to admit in public). That was how I heard new music. When the push switched away from metal in the 1990s, I came to the same conclusion as you: all the new music is shit. So I just stuck with what I knew, and only kept up with the same old aging American thrash bands from the 1980s (e.g. Flotsam and Jetsam, Testament, etc.). Those guys were actually making pretty good music IMHO, but there just wasn't very much of it. It was a sad feeling, knowing that someday the 1980s metal bands would all die off, and then that would be the end of an artform. Mankind would descend into a dreary soulless nothingness.
There's just one problem: across the pond, metal was thriving. Even here in America, there were some damned fine bands making great music. I just didn't know about it, because my intel source (commercial mass media) was rotten, and they weren't covering it.
In '98, thanks to the internet, I finally found out and was saved. My CD collection blossomed from a couple hundred to around a thousand or so, I guess. Turns out that not all new music was shit, I just had to go looking for it, that's all.
Maybe metal isn't your thing. I don't know what your thing is. But I bet someone out there is playing it. So get off your ass and find it, and lose that nostalgia. I'm not saying you have to give up the classics, but if you're waiting for the shit to blow over, you're going to miss something you'll regret.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
MS doesn't want to tell this to people, but it obviously must be archiving your list of songs on their servers somewhere. Remember the EULA of WMP that says you give MS the right to 'spy' on what you are playing? I think this feature might be the reason why that clause was there. They know that you had played that song in WMP once before.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Nobody is going to like this, but I'm going to say it anyway. These sorts of problems wouldn't exist if computers had a unique serial number in them.
I work a lot with SGI computers. Software on SGIs is licensed with FlexLM, and FlexLM depends on this thing called the license host ID number. On an SGI, that host number is burned into a special chip on the midplane called the NIC, for number-in-a-can. (Yeah, another instance of an overloaded acronym.) SGI's have had these for years and years.
When you get a software license, you provide the vendor with your license host ID, which is that number-in-a-can number. The vendor generates a license that will only be valid on your computer. Because the NIC is a piece of hardware, you can wipe your disks to your heart's content, and your license keys (as long as you keep copies of them) will continue to work.
It's a pretty foolproof system. I don't know precisely how it works, but there are at least two NICs in each computer, and new components are shipped from the factory in a special blank state, such that the old, failed part can be replaced with the new part and the system will flash the new NIC chip with the system's license host ID at power-up. Or something like that. All I know for sure is that I've had virtually every piece of my SGIs replaced at one time or another, and I've never had a problem with the license host ID.
I want to re-emphasize that this is not a new thing. SGIs have had NIC chips on them for as long as I can remember. Computers from other vendors may have them, too, but I couldn't say.
Now, if PCs had NIC chips in them, or the equivalent, the sort of problem described in the article would never arise. Copy-protected music files could be linked to a specific license host ID, which is stored in hardware. Wipe your drives, upgrade your machine, whatever, as long as you keep the same license host ID, the licensed stuff on your computer will continue to work.
Of course, you'd be unable to move your music files from one computer to another, but that's the whole point of the system, isn't it?
Now, how do you think the Slashdot audience would respond if somebody-- anybody-- advocated putting NIC-like technology in personal computers?
I think we're all going to have to acknowledge that some form of copy protection for media is necessary. The question then becomes, how do we (and I don't literally mean "we," but you get my point) devise a system that protects the media to the extent necessary, but that ensures as much convenience to the user as possible?
Next time somebody advocates something like the Pentium unique serial number scheme from a few years back, don't be quite so quick to flame them.
I actually used to be a big fan of Microsoft. Evil Empire, shady business tactics, yeah yeah, whatever. I admired their goal of transforming the then-chaotic software world into a coherent, integrated whole that would do really cool things. Ask almost anybody at Microsoft ten years ago and they would have sincerely told you that was their mission.
... Personal License Migration Service blah blah... Personal License Update Utility yada yada... I translate these 4 or 5 paragraphs into one sentence:
But back then MS was still truly a geek-run company, headed by one particular geek who had figured out how to hack the business world. Today lawyers and bean counters are running the show, and making tremendous amounts of money is the only goal. Today we get root authorization snuck into security patches, and circle jerking with the entertainment industry.
Reading through all the MS instructions
Do not use Microsoft software.
A bomber the FBI was hunting recently discovered something similar about his cell phone.
He had driven halfway across the country from the area where he had been planting bombs in people's mailboxes. Somewhere in Nevada he powered up his cellphone. And when the cellphone identified itself to the network, the new "locate the 911 call" system (which actually tracks the phone any time it's on) reported his location to the cops (who had already notified the phone company to look out for him). They had him captured within half an hour.
Of course the first time the general population heard about this capability was when it was mentioned in a news story about the capture. (If the cops hadn't told the reporter it had been used, even those of us who knew it was possible wouldn't have known it was already deployed.)
This digital rights management registration has the same properties, but for any type of line:
Turn on your computer while it's attached to the internet and it "phones home" to check your licenses, which are identified to you personally.
This identifies the IP number you're currently using.
The IP number - even if it's dynamic - identifies the ISP, and the port within it.
The ISP can track the port to a physical connection - either hardwired or dialup - and can do this either in real-time or from logs after the connection is dropped.
The location can be identified immediately for hardwired connectinos. For dialups the phone company or companies handling the call can track it - again either real-time or from logs. (Both the ISP and the phone companies can tie this to your name, bank account, and so on.)
The entire process CAN be automated (if it has not been already), much like Carnivore, giving the FBI or others instant access to the information.
This may already have been authorized by the Patriot act. It's directed at enemy non-citizens and intended to be used by the "intelligence community" and so claims to escape many civil-rights safeguards (such as the need to get a warrant before using it), much like the incarceration without recourse to courts used against Johnny Walker Lindh and others associated with the Taliban.
Of course if this facility is used to capture an actual bomber and save lives, that's good. But if it's used to capture somebody some law-enforcement or spy agency THINKS is the bomber, it's not so good. And if it's used to harass opposition political figures, anybody some bureaucrat or cop doesn't like, or random citizens, it's called "a police state".
Please don't tell me "It can't happen here." Because it DID happen here. Repeatedly. (Look up COINTELPRO - or the general history of the FBI - for examples within the computer era.) And don't tell me it USED to happen but doesn't anymore, either. It takes decades for this stuff to come to light, so the recent stuff is still not general knowledge. (I remember people saying it doesn't happen anymore when COINTELPRO was happeneing.)
But the "digital rights management" hook is just the last straw, tying your personal identity to your computer's identity in advance. The bulk of this has already been deployed - at least in Microsoft systems and possibly in others.
Microsoft system installs attempt to configure your network connection. If they succeed, it's "PC Phone Home". They have your Software Product Key (a unique identifier for the software distribution), the serial number of your CPU if it exposes one, the MAC address of any ethernet cards (which can serve as a hardware unique identifier if your CPU doesn't expose a serial number), and any info you entered during the setup - like to sign up for network service. Of course the connection itself gives them your call trace information.
A few years ago Microsoft found a new use for spam: They sent out a series of "developer conference" adds. The remove-me email address would bounce. But the remove-me URL would load a mix of HTML, Javascirpt, and VBscript which would construct a URL containing your registry information and use it to query register.microsoft.com. (The registry contains your Software Product Key, ethernet card MAC address, etc.)
Some of the file formats used by Microsoft tools embed identifying information in files they store or exchange - which can also get it into email. An example is Microsoft Word, and the identifying information has already been use to arrest at least one macro-virus author.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
From the Winamp changelog:
Winamp 2.61:
* In accordance with Microsoft's license agreement, we no longer allow you to use DSP plug-ins or alternate output plug-ins when playing WMA files.
So you'd have to find a version older than 2.61 for that trick to work.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Usable in *pure* DOS. Real, for-really, boot from the bottom up, no Windows, no VM, no linux, the real thing DOS. :) Meaning it's gotta have user-settable IRQ/DMA. If it does SB16-compatible, that's usually good enough.
Tho thanks for reminding me about VDMSound (and McGill, I was trying to remember the name of the place yesterday when Waterloo was the subject of slashdot's scrutiny, and couldn't come up with it to save my life!)
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?