Universal Music Hit with Anti-Piracy Suit

prostoalex writes "Remember Bon Jovi trying to fight piracy with individual PIN numbers that legitimate buyers could get off the CD? DownloadCard, who claims to have invented the technology, filed a lawsuit against Universal Music Group saying the music execs stole the technology and trade secrets from the company. Yahoo! Launch headline suggests that Bon Jovi album might be delayed because of the lawsuit."

Comments

Yeah, but look on the bright side...

[GreyWolf3000]

Yahoo! Launch headline suggests that Bon Jovi album might be delayed because of the lawsuit.

That's the best news I've heard all day...

Re:Yeah, but look on the bright side...

[Usquebaugh]

Well I can see how the CD might be delayed by this action. But they could release the mp3s/oggs etc and build demand for the CD when it is released.

Holy smokes, there goes a whole squadron of flying pigs past my window.

Re:Yeah, but look on the bright side...

[Lord Sauron]

The MP3s have already been released in alt.binaries.sounds.mp3.complete_cd, 17 days ago, on Sep. 11.

So, all we need now is a keygen that makes codes to access that web page that offers exclusive content.

Re:Yeah, but look on the bright side...

[Alsee]

already been released ... on Sep. 11.

Releasing a Bon Jovi album is clearly a terrorist attack.

-

OH THE IRONY!!!

[gatesh8r]

Megacorp gets sued by a smaller company for infringement... ROFL

Re:OH THE IRONY!!!

[packeteer]

This is what we have to do. Beat them at their own game which is very hard because they have the money to play how they want. they only thing we have is numbers and the ability to vote. Lets use em people. Quit being apathetic and write a letter and get out and VOTE, EVERY TIME you get the chance.

Bad MI

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't ignore other people's intellectual property, damnit. Only pirates would do that kind of stuff.

Re:Bad MI

[mgv]

You can't ignore other people's intellectual property, damnit. Only pirates would do that kind of stuff.

True, but you can redefine how much of their intellectual property they own.

Seems strange? Well, copyrights have been extended a couple of times (mostly at the whim of large content providers) in legislation. Otherwise, all of Elvis's work would be in the public domain by now, for example. Just like nobody owns Beethoven's or Mozart's work.

The truth is, its not as if intellectual property is a black and white issue.

Michael

Re:Bad MI

[Anonymous Coward]

Learn your history.
Piracy has been around about as far as history goes back. I'm sure nobody really wants to solve this problem.

Speak to you in 10 yuears from now and you'll see the same problem is still not solved.

Re:Bad MI

[Zemran]

What are you saying ? People are going to arrive in tall ships with cannons blazing and swing over with swords in their teeth to kill us? Stop all this daft clap trap. Kids copying music has been going on for decades. Most reasonable people will tape a TV programme that is on while they are out. I am sure you would. That *IS* the same thing. Big business has brought in the term "pirate" to make it sound a lot worse than it really is and the term is completely innapropriate. These kids do *NOT* steal anything. Stealing, by legal definition, involves an intention to permanently deprive the owner of the object. These kids have no such intent. It is all claptrap to make something out of nothing in an effort to make more money out of the public. If it were a geuine intent to stop copying they would target the commercial operations, which so far have been generally left alone. If they did that I would support them wholeheartedly but while they try to make out I am a criminal because I want a copy of something for the car that I have bought for my home, I support the bad guys.

Re:Bad MI

[Melantha_Bacchae]

An AC wrote:

> You can't ignore other people's intellectual
> property, damnit. Only pirates would do that kind
> of stuff.

Three incidents show the tip of an iceberg:

1) Eisner, Disney's president, showed a pirated Sony movie at a Senate hearing on Hollings' bill.

2) CNN showed a pirated tape of a bin Laden interview after the Afghan TV station that did the interview refused to give the rights to show the interview to CNN.

3) InterTrust is suing Microsoft because DRM in Windows XP, .Net, Office XP, and Windows Media Player infringe on its patents.

Face it, the very people who want to treat customers like criminals and take away our rights are the biggest pirates of all!

Actually, "Mosura no Uta" (Mothra's Song) has a better term for people like these, the words it applied to Nelson and his goons: "tong yu" or "barrel of sharks". Me, I just call 'em "media sharks".

Bells are ringing: Mothra, Mothra! Every heart is calling: Mothra, Mothra!
Come on, Tok Wira, these sharks have gotta pay! New Kirk calling Mothra, we need you today!

Good to know

[Inthewire]

Ha ha!
</nelson>

Should've run a patent search, no?

Well, maybe not. Theft of trade secrets suggest that this isn't a patent issue.

Fuck it.

Re:Good to know

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, the idea reminds me just a little bit of CD Keys on games. Which is already widespread. If it's widespread, how can it be a trade "secret"? In fact, if you notice, the way CD keys work these days, is that without one you get limited play, and with one you get unlimited play. I.e., quake3, single player only without a key. Counterstrike, single player or lan games without a valid key (invalid ones are trivial to find) but internet play only with a real one.

Now, getting to listen to the music anywhere, but getting extra stuff with a valid key sounds just like that to me. So explain again, what "secret" was stolen here, and why aren't the game companies getting sued too?

At least something good comes of it

[Chester K]

Patents suck Patents suck Patents suck... er... hello what's this?

Yahoo! Launch headline suggests that Bon Jovi album might be delayed because of the lawsuit."

Yay for patents! Yay for patents! Yay for patents!

Re:At least something good comes of it

[Anonymous Coward]

My sentiments exactly

Re:At least something good comes of it

[AtrN]

Patents aren't mentioned in the articles at all, it looks like its trade secrets (as to what they've got that's secret I'm not sure, probably because it's secret :) They (DownloadCard) claim they've got something unique but having worked on something similar about five years ago I think they should do a serious patent search.

Re:At least something good comes of it

[machine of god]

Is that all it takes??? It's a TRICK you fool!! We need to look into conversion resistance.

Re:At least something good comes of it

[Robotech_Master]

Patents don't have anything to do with this. It's not a "we patented this" suit, it's a "they hired us to do this, watched what we were doing, then fired us and ripped us off" suit. Whole different animal entirely.

So?

[pla]

More IP BS, this time entirely between those that abuse such laws regularly.

Money gets shifted around, and we, the consumers, get screwed like usual. The *only* outcome I see from this involves the album coming out late, and the lawsuit justifying yet more "cost-added" excuses on the part of the recording industry.

I'll care more when 72 minutes of pure audio doesn't cost 50% more than 2 hours of high quality movie footage with soundtracks in three language plus bonus material, AND I can legally (and easily) store what I buy on my file server. Until then, the MPAA and RIAA can collectively "bite me".

Re:So?

[Monkelectric]

More IP BS, this time entirely between those that abuse such laws regularly.

Live by the sword, die by the arrow ... the irony is deliscious

Re:So?

[Anonymous Coward]

Money gets shifted around, and we, the consumers, get screwed like usual.

Don't like it? Learn to sing.

Re:So?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why? Bon Jovi didn't.

Re:So?

[dirk]

I'll care more when 72 minutes of pure audio doesn't cost 50% more than 2 hours of high quality movie footage with soundtracks in three language plus bonus material, AND I can legally (and easily) store what I buy on my file server. Until then, the MPAA and RIAA can collectively "bite me".

Can we finally stop the comparison between CDs and DVDs, since it is one of the most flawed comparison that exists. A DVD is an aftermarket product of a movie. The money is spent making a movie, not the DVD. The cost of the DVD is fairly small, especially compared to the movie. Marketing is also very small (if anything), because there was so much advertising for the movie very little is needed (although sometimes a lot is done anyway). By the time a DVD comes out, the movies has already made back a portion of the money (hopefully at least a decent portion if not actually made money) in the theatres. Even the extras are cheap, using footage already filmed and maybe bringing in a few people to record an audio soundtrack. All of these things combined make the DVD fairly cheap to produce compared to a CD. A CD has made no money when it is released and must make enough money to pay for every single thing that went into the making/marketing of the CD. Taking an already made movie and slapping it on a DVD and making basically nothing but profit from the sale is a lot different than putting out a CD and hoping the sales pay for the expense of the CD itself.

And just for the record, you can legally and easily store the MP3s you make from a CD you own on your file server. That has already been established. You can't share them with other people, but you are free to rip MP3s from CDs you own and listen to them.

Re:So?

[letxa2000]

Can we finally stop the comparison between CDs and DVDs, since it is one of the most flawed comparison that exists. A DVD is an aftermarket product of a movie. A CD has made no money when it is released and must make enough money to pay for every single thing that went into the making/marketing of the CD

While this is a valid explanation of the relative pricing from a business standpoint, it doesn't mean squat to the consumer who has to decide how to spend $20.

Whenever someone at some company gives me justifications or reasons why they can't give me the service I deserve or paid for my answer is quite simple: "Your internal company problems are not MY problems, they're yours. You deal with your internal problems, but in the meantime solve the problem you have right now with the consumer--me!"

In this case, my heart bleeds for the RIAA (sarcasm), but I really don't care what their costs of business are, nor do I care if their business model is broken. As a consumer I see a $15 DVD for a movie I thought was fun when I saw it, or I see a $20 CD that might have one good song, maybe. Where do you think I'm going to spend my money?

Fact is, the DVD vs. CD comparison is a VERY valid comparison from a consumer standpoint. The DVD vs. CD decision is one that is made probably thousands of times per day by consumers around the world. It just turns out the business model of the movie industry is more profitable than that of the RIAA. Tough luck.

Re:So?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't call being unable to listen to Bon Jovi as "consumers get screwed."

Re:So?

[Alsee]

DVD vs. CD comparison is a VERY valid comparison

Agreed.

Pledge of Allegiance(1): One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

(1) Footnote - As illegally revised in 1954. See original(2).

(2) Footnote - Original and legal Pledge of Allegiance: "One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all..."

-

Re:So?

[pla]

The money is spent making a movie, not the DVD

I think you just defeated your own point, there. I agree fully that it costs a *lot* more to produce (the content on) a DVD than a CD. Hundreds of millions, compared to a few tens of thousands (if that). And yes, a movie has most likely at least broken even by the time it comes out on DVD. However, an audio CD *starts* closer to "breaking even" than just about any DVD ever made - the latter either have made a huge profit already, or failed miserably, by the time they hit stores. Naturally, exceptions to this exist... For example, how about some of Disney's "direct to DVD" releases, which presumeably still cost money to make (if not as much as a typical for-theater production), yet sell for less than a "real" movie on DVD?

Basically, no matter how you look at it, you have to agree that the comparison *doesn't* count as fair - the pure audio CD should sell for *far* less.


you can legally and easily store the MP3s you make from a CD you own on your file server

Really? I have a handfull of CDs that I have yet to find a way around the copy protection on, and even if I do find a way, doing so violates the DMCA. Please, tell me how I can satisfy both "easy" and "legal" in making MP3s of these. And, believe it or not, I do actually only make MP3s (VQFs, actually, but same idea) for personal use. I don't know if most people fall into that category, but I simply find it much more convenient to load up a 200 hour WinAmp playlist than to change CDs every 40-70 minutes.

so now

[Anonymous Coward]

so now the wolves are eating the wolves

This gives me an idea!

[antisocial77]

Somebody go get a bunch of patents on anti-piracy googaws and then claim prior-art on all the companies attempting to put stuff like this in place. When it ends up costing them more money in legal fees than they would allegedly recoop from the stop of piracy, they'll just give up. Hopefully.

Yes, I know it's a pipe dream. So what.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[quantaman]

they'll just give up. Hopefully.

From the original article

Retail CDs will be distributed with a unique serial number with which the purchaser can register in order to receive such exclusives as prioritized concert ticket purchases and unreleased music.

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT THEM TO DO!!!

Added value for purchasing the CD is what most of the ./ community has been pushing for for months! The record companies are going to do something one way or another, with this scheme instead of taking something away they are giving something extra. If they give up on this scheme more likely than not they are going to shove some anti-piracy, anti-fair use, anti-consumer DRM technology down their throat. Even if we didn't want this scheme to work this is precisly the type of soft patent that we are trying to get rid of, the moment we start selling ourself by abusing the very flaws we are trying to get rid of in the patent system we are worse than the corporations who are doing it (at least they won't be hypocrites). No we do not want this actually good idea industry to fail. No we do not want to abuse a flawed patent system. We do not want this lawsuit to succed.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[richard-parker]

Somebody go get a bunch of patents on anti-piracy googaws and then claim prior-art on all the companies attempting to put stuff like this in place.

Actually, the cryptographer Lucky Green has already done this with respect to Palladium and software piracy. At a panel on Palladium at the USENIX Security Conference in August the Microsoft Palladium team claimed that Palladium couldn't and thus wouldn't be used to combat software piracy. However, Lucky Green was able to think of several methods to use Palladium / TCPA in the enforcement of software licenses, so in response has applied for patents on all of the methods he could think of in an effort to thwart any such use.

For more information, see the following posts (August 8th and August 10th) to the Cryptography mailing list.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[garcia]

you're wrong. That's NOT what I want.

First. There is NO WAY that I want a UNIQUE identifier linking me w/ANY purchase.

Second. Fuck that, I don't want priority on concert tickets nor do I want unreleased music. The music is easy to find (see Sopranos season 4 ep. 1 - 4 on Kazaa or IRC).

What I want is simple. I want CHEAP music. I want music to be like movies... I can wait several months and buy a DVD at $9.99 when it was originally $25.00. Why the fuck doesn't music drop in price like that? They come out at $12.99+ and stay that way or even GO UP.

Sorry, but movies have the same amount of longevity as music. They should go down in price (just like everything else).

I will CONTINUE to support free music until the "BIG ARTISTS" and the RIAA decides that what they are doing is DUMB as HELL.

That's my worthless .02

Re:This gives me an idea!

[DEBEDb]

Because you don't watch the same movie
as many times as you listen to the same
CD.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[mad flyer]

Bullshit,

I even manage to have 2 editions of the laserdiscs of the hunt for red october to become opaque (to much micro-scratches) because i watched them too often...

Re:This gives me an idea!

[p3d0]

Translation: WAH I want music and I want it cheap. WAH I'm entitled. BOO HOO It's my God-given right to have people perform for me for free. WAH WAH gimme gimme BOO HOO.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[cappadocius]

They [CDs] come out at $12.99

Where? 13 bucks? Holy crap! That's like a third less than I normally have to pay!!

Re:This gives me an idea!

[Kierthos]

You must be kidding, right? I've seen some movies dozens of times, and only listened to the entire CD of some of the music I've bought/received as a gift a couple of times. And how many people own every different release of the Star Wars trilogy?

Example: The Rolling Stones are (I believe) releasing another album that contains only 4 new songs, and has 36 of their old songs. If I recall the article correctly, it's called "Forty licks".

Now, odds are that this album will contain most, if not all of the songs that are on another album of theirs called "Hot Rocks" which is a greatest hits album. Shouldn't the price on that album go down, if this is indeed the case? But I'll bet it won't.

Kierthos

Re:This gives me an idea!

[JDizzy]

to quote you:

I will CONTINUE to support free music until the "BIG ARTISTS" and the RIAA decides that what they are doing is DUMB as HELL.

You mean to say that you will continue to support illeagal activity, and the destruction of the music industry as it currently stands. By the same token, youi also then support the motivatiosn of the RIAA to install their DRM technologies in the next gen music distribution formats. LEt me remind you that there is no such thing as FREE MUSIC from a free lable, and what your talking about is you will continue to support stolen music.

If contracting HIV came were possible from copyright violations, instead of sex, you would be a AIDS crack-whore needle freak.

It is true that copywrite violation is a statutory crime, unlike violent crimes, and by that token most folks feel it is simply OK to break the law. Just because it is possible to download music doens't mean it is actually ok to do so, no matter how much you pretend it is, or justify it, or whatever. What you call supporting free music is just a cop-out to make your crimes seem alright in your mind. Finding a piece of crack rock on the street is also a very simple minded thing, but picking it up is against the law as it is possestion of a controlled substance, as is the same when you download a copy-protected work.

Now it is true the copywrite law suck int he usa, and so do patent laws. Maybe destroying the music industry is you form of civil disobediance, or whatever. How cares! The fact is that this Bon Jovi CD is being dellayed because of a patent issue that is simply crazy. This patent is akin to having a patent on signing your name on paper, yet since it is involving electronics/technologies, etc... it is now something patentable. This is akin to patent on whiping my ass with your idiot resume with a technological robot arm.

Think about it this way. That card that is shiped with the bon jovi cd, in the future that might be some sort fo smart card with a special decrypt key to decypher the encrypted music on the disc. Think your gonna have kazaa trading then? No! The fact that this method is not involving DRM is good, the fact that your too stupid to understand that is bad! Your the motivation behind suck ideas. The problem is too many of you type folks exist (the ignorant, and arrogant).

Re:This gives me an idea!

[mgblst]

It actually has nothing to do with this. They only charge like this, because...SURPRISE...people will pay like this.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[Dwonis]

There is NO WAY that I want a UNIQUE identifier linking me w/ANY purchase.

Nobody's forcing you to use the PIN to listen to the CD.

This PIN system is much like the system used for Quake III Arena. You can play the game without the CD, but if you want to use id Software's master servers, you have to punch in the CD key.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Learn to spell.

2. Bullshit. Listening to free music is not theft. There are literally thousands of artists on the net who are giving away their music. Take a look at MP3.com for an obvious example of this. Take a look at official band websites for another example of this.

3. The rest of your post rests on the false assumption that the only free music on the net is illegal music.

4. STFU.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

They [CDs] come out at $12.99

Where? 13 bucks? Holy crap! That's like a third less than I normally have to pay!!

You obviously buy good music. Not the junk from k-mart, target, etc. [$15/cd at those places.]

The last time I went to target to buy a cd, the salesdroid thought that Asian Rock was something to do with geology, and eurotrance was a drug. At least the droids at Tower have heard of those genres. Even if they can't get the good cds in those genres.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[virtigex]

First. There is NO WAY that I want a UNIQUE identifier linking me w/ANY purchase.

Second. Fuck that, I don't want priority on concert tickets nor do I want unreleased music. The music is easy to find (see Sopranos season 4 ep. 1 - 4 on Kazaa or IRC).

Um.. If you don't like being tracked, please don't use Kazaa. It's chock full o' spyware.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

Haha, just go the unpopular route and you can get great classical recordings from $8-$16 dollars (with some double-discs, yes, two cds, for $17)--I mean New York w/Bernstein, Chicago w/Reiner, not just [insert country not known for musical talent] National Orchestra

Re:This gives me an idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean to say that you will continue to support illeagal activity, and the destruction of the music industry as it currently stands.

You say that like it's a bad thing...

Re:This gives me an idea!

[Saeger]

you will continue to support stolen music.

I will continue to support the fight against artificial scarcity towards business models that work. Capitalism doesn't work well when things aren't scarce... it's a kludge.

mp3's are free ads in my book - for (overpriced) CDs, concerts (real work), merchandise, direct support, etc. The recording isn't scarce, which is why pressing CDs is liking printing money, which in turn is why the RIAA is fighting like mad to keep control of their old cashcow.

--

Re:This gives me an idea!

[Xenographic]

> First. There is NO WAY that I want a UNIQUE identifier linking me w/ANY purchase.

You mean, like your credit card number?

Re:This gives me an idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

First off, rice boys can't rock. Period. Fuck, when they dance they go at twice the tempo so they look like spastic, bucktoothed, yellow monkeys.

Second, they're not "eurotrance," they're "eurotrash." Europe is full of hairy legged bitches and androgynous wimps. All the smart and strong ones emigrated, leaving behind a welfare nanny state.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean, like your credit card number?

That's why it's best to pay for everything through sex.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[gl4ss]

the pin doesn't identify you anymore than your browser can identify by setting cookies&etc, the other option would be joining some official fan organization to get those exclusive tickets&etc, and i think that would identify you WAY much more than just some pin.

i'm sorry but most things that you have bought(that cost more than a fiver) have some kinda serial&tracking numbers.

what you want is the music for dirt cheap and all the other aspects fucked, because you already get the music for 'free' from kazaa? how the f does finding sopranos on kazaa relate to finding music? btw, if the tracks never get released anywhere (or even recorded) they won't end up in kazaa, this pin number system allows them to record stuff like this and release it too, without the execs giving them shit like 'wait till next fall the last cd is still selling'.

anyways, music has way much more longevity (as background music&etc) than some cheesy 5$ dvd from your local mall feat. stallone.

if you want cheap music and support the artists(which, you don't seem to want) just hang out in local music bars and check out starting bands making their demo's, they usually sell themm off for very little profit or no profit at all to get listeners, and it makes them happy too.

if you want it for totally free, check www.machinaesupremacy.com

btw. i'm looking for a site that would have mp3/ogg's of classical recordings that have fallen into public domain (i know there's a huge stack of this kind of old recordings).

ps. i wouldnt pay a cent for bon jovi recording unless it was on a cd-rw.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[lasmith05]

That's funny... added functionality/features is the only reason i've purchased games like warcraft III, starcraft, etc. Cause I could get the single player version for free, but I need to pay to play online...

Re:This gives me an idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoever moderated this up needs to be kicked in the testicles.

Re:This gives me an idea!

[sacrilicious]

quantaman was right: this is a step in the right direction, much better than DRM.

garcia was also right: there is an even better alternative, that of much cheaper music, and easily downloadable.

Extrapolating even further along this line, I offer this point of view: that what I *REALLY* want is for music copyright to go away entirely, and for a completely different mode of thinking to arise regarding music and how and why it is shared and produced. I know this is radical, but I believe it is right.

.

Might I be the first to point out

[pheph]

That while this may be targetting 'the enemy', we need to consider other rammifications if this lawsuit succeeds. The 'PIN' idea seems rather, well, obvious (I'm not sure if DownloadCard was responsible for this, but Daft Punk did the same thing with their album 'Discovery'). While the DownloadCard is 'novel, original and unique' it doesn't mention that it is patented.

In the same sense, you shouldn't support the US government's attack on Microsoft just because you don't like Microsoft.

Re:Might I be the first to point out

[beebware]

I agree with you here. It could be very much likened to the 'technology' used in old computer games and stuff where the manual or cassette inlay card had a "PIN type" number which needed to be entered to have access to the purchased software.

Re:Might I be the first to point out

[samdu]

I agree. You shouldn't support the US government's attack on Microsoft just because you don't like Microsoft. You should support the US government's attack on Microsoft because it's right.

Re:Might I be the first to point out

[evilviper]

Still, just the fact that they ape now attacking their own kind indicates both, ammunition to use against such laws, and possibly a changing stance on the issue. Perhapse they'll sue each other silly, and hollywood will begin lobying against those same laws they've voraciously supported.
So far it's been big companies against individuals who can't afford a lawsuit, so they gave in to the big company. Now, big company against big company should prove interesting (as was the AOL v. MSN messengers battle).

Re:Might I be the first to point out

[Anonymous Coward]

You should how ever support thier attack on MS just because of MS's questionable buisness practices and repeated attempts to hinder progress.

Re:Might I be the first to point out

[FyRE666]

Exactly. In the UK, Bizarre magazine has been using the same idea for a long time. They include a serial number in each issue you can use to access extra content on their website.

From the story: As previously reported by LAUNCH, the Bon Jovi album will include a serial number in the CD packaging, which will allow users to access exclusive content from the band's website. DownloadCard has filed a claim that it created the program used for access and offered it to the record label.

What "technology" is this exactly. For god's sake, its a number. The buyer types a number into a website and gets access - hardly cutting edge technology! Absolute crap - I hate the record companies as much as anyone with any sense of right and wrong, but seems to me "DownloadCard" are yet another 2 bit outfit trying to make a fast buck. We'll doubtless never hear of them or their "technologies" ever again after this case...

Re:Might I be the first to point out

[Anonymous Coward]

In the same sense, you shouldn't support the US government's attack on Microsoft just because you don't like Microsoft.

s/Microsoft/Iraq/

Rampant privacy violations possible!

[I Am The Owl]

I'm sorry, but this is just inexcusable! As if it wasn't bad enough that the RIAA was trying to hunt down each and every user of a P2P network, now they want to tie each individual consumer to a unique PIN number!

Does anyone have any idea how evil this is? Let's look at the facts:

• Every year, millions of people download music, and the RIAA loses more money (good)
• Every year, millions of Americans have their privacy violated when they have their social security number tied to their real identity by identity theives and their whole market valuation is drained from their bank accounts, along with tons of credit.

So, you see, this is only part of an evil RIAA scam to rape consumers even more. The next thing you know, they have all your personal info in a big government database, where they can tie it all together and violate your Constitutional right to privacy! I'm not going to stand for this; I'm not going to buy any more music by Bon Jovi. This is an outrage.

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[egg troll]

Oh please! While the RIAA has policies many of us disagree with, I'm sure that it would do an excellent job of keeping this data safe. Can you imagine the outcry if it was hacked?

Scaremongering like this is just pathetic.

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[gerardrj]

You have no privacy rights pertaining to private companies and individuals in The Constitution. The only privacy right granted to you by The Constitution is that of right of protection from search and seazure of your person and your home unless duly athorized by a court of law, or if a crime is in progress.

I'd really like to know (in the U.S.) where this notion of universal provacy came from. Whene people say "They violated my privacy", exactly what laws are they referring to?

Unless you stay in your home with the windows covered, you have no resaonable expectation of privacy.

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[Eric Smith]

The only privacy right granted to you by The Constitution is that of right of protection from search and seazure of your person and your home unless duly athorized by a court of law, or if a crime is in progress.

This demonstrates an amazing degree of misunderstanding of what the Constitution is all about. I wish the schools would better educate people on these matters!

The Constitution does NOT grant rights to the people. The government has no power (authority) to grant rights! The powers of government are explicitly stated in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution and expanded on by a few of the Amendments.

The people inherently have rights, and the Constitution establishes that the people grant the government certain powers, but that those powers are limited and the government is not permitted to take away the rights of the people. Certain of those rights are enumerated in the Bill of Rights. However, carefully read the Ninth Amendment:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Thus the fact that a right to privacy is not specifically enumerated in the Constitution or Bill of Rights does NOT mean that the people don't have that right, or that the government has the power to take away that right from the people.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly found that the people do have a right to privacy.

However, as with all rights, there are some limitations. It is not possible to grant an absolute right without simultaneously taking away another right. For instance, you have the right to swing your fist, but that right ends where my nose begins.

Back to your posting:

right of protection from search and seazure of your person and your home unless duly athorized by a court of law, or if a crime is in progress.

Actually, the Fourth Amendment doesn't say anything about a crime in progress. It says:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Note that this doesn't even say that the police can conduct a search without a warrant if they have probable cause. It says that if they have probably cause, and give an Oath or affirmation, a warrant shall issue. This is possibly the most-trampled of the enumerated rights.

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[Wierd Willy]

You have no privacy rights pertaining to private companies and individuals in The Constitution.

What are ya, retarded? Or maybe just another uneducated yankee with a truckfull of Amfo? Read the constitution asshole. Article 4, of the Bill of Rights specifically. Heres the URL: http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Amend.html

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[gerardrj]

Thanks for the construcive comments. I am intimately familliar with the Bill of Rights, I read it several times a year.
If you read article four, the tone is generally that of preventing the government from snooping in your private life wihtout cause. Have you ever heard of someone being sued or charged under the fourth amendment for breaking and entering? I haven't.

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[Anonymous Coward]

"...but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation..."

This phrase is what gives the police the ability to enter and search "upon probable cause." If I tell a cop a crime is being committed in a building, then the cops can go in. There is cause, supported by my affirmation.

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[gerardrj]

First of all, I agree with you. I really posted that message as sort of devils advocate, I tend to get flamed when I post a messge along the lines of "you have the right to everything".
An example I use is that you have the right to commit muder. The society also has the right, through laws, to make that act illegal and thus apprehend, charge, try and punish you for exercising your right to murder. It's a matter of whose rights take precedence. In this case a person's right to live is stronger than your right to kill them.

The supreme court, and many other courts have also ruled that you generally have no reasonable expectaion of privacy in an public place, or in your workplace. Pretty much that means that the only place you can reasonably expect privacy is in your own home(s) or the homes of others.

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[shepd]

>I'd really like to know (in the U.S.) where this notion of universal provacy came from

Here.

It's a good read.

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[Eric Smith]

What it says is "no warrants shall issue, but upon probably cause". Not that if there's probable cause, no warrant is necessary.

Police officers don't have the authority to issue warrants. This is a function of the courts. The Fourth Amendment requires that judges not issue warrants if there is not an oath or affirmation of probable cause.

Presumably the way the system has gotten perverted into the state it's in is that people have said "well, getting a warrant is too much trouble, and if we have probable cause, we'll get one anyhow, so we'll just skip that step or do it later, since that is easier and faster." But the fact that it is easier and faster doesn't make it legitimate.

A policeman's job is only easy in a police state. -- Orson Welles

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[letxa2000]

While I see where you are coming from, and am generally in favor of reducing the reach of government, your interpretation would make the police essentially useless.

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that if someone calls the police and reports that she sees their neighbor beating his wife that the police can't act on that until a judge grants a warrant? In such a scenario the police would just be garbage collectors, documenting crimes that have already been permitted.

I am not a Constitutional scholar but I read that text as two separate points:

1. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated"

This talks about the right of the person against unreasonable search and seisure.

2. and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

This talks about something not happening in real-time, and indicates the requirements for issuing a warrant. I don't see this second part being conditions on the police to act in real-time, as long as they can show that they acted reasonably based on what they considered a reasonable and reliable belief of a crime in progress. If they didn't, bad cops, and they need to be sued.

I really don't think the founding fathers had an impotent police force in mind that were not able to act on crimes in-progress. That itself enters into the realm of "unreasonable."

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[gerardrj]

You article is interesting. I do find it interesting that it mentions early on the nevessity of religous tolerance and that this is not a christian nation, yet proceedes to use christian morals as the norm. Often in the text morals are compared agains actions.
Morals are personal, any given act may be moral or immoral depending on the interpriter of the action. The article tends to enforce a notion of global morality that simply does not exist.

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[shepd]

No disagreements on the faux pas on morals the author has committed, but nevertheless, a good read for when you're sitting at work and just don't have anything to do. Plus your boss might reconsider getting angry at you next time if he sees you reading that... :-)

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[Eric Smith]

This talks about something not happening in real-time, and indicates the requirements for issuing a warrant. I don't see this second part being conditions on the police to act in real-time

One might ask, then, why you think they put it in the same sentence? If it's as unrelated as you claim, surely it would have been written as a separate sentence?

The very purpose of a warrant is to authorize search or seizure. Are you arguing that the only time a warrant is necessary is when there is no probable cause? That would flatly contradict the explicit statement. You can't have it both ways. Either probable cause is necessary to issue a warrant, and a warrant is necessary to conduct a search/seizure, or there's no rationale for having warrants.

How can people be "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures," and at the same time give the police the power to break down their door at any moment for the slightest flimsy excuse?

if someone calls the police and reports that she sees their neighbor beating his wife that the police can't act on that until a judge grants a warrant?

From experiences of close friends, I know that the police often cannot be trusted to make a reasonable determination as to what constitutes "probable cause". This is why it is supposed to be determined by a court.

I also don't trust my neighbors to sic the cops on me only when I'm beating my wife, and not when they have some other personal vendetta against me. The neighbor claiming that I'm beating my wife is not sufficient as probable cause if there is no other evidence.

Allowing the police to determine when there is probable cause is hardly better than not requiring warrants at all.

"A policeman's job is only easy in a police state." -- Orson Welles

I really don't think the founding fathers had an impotent police force in mind that were not able to act on crimes in-progress.

It is clear that historically it was expected that people defend themselves against criminals, using force as necessary. If you expect the police to do it for you, prepare to be disappointed, and quite possibly dead.

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[letxa2000]

Me: This talks about something not happening in real-time, and indicates the requirements for issuing a warrant. I don't see this second part being conditions on the police to act in real-time
You: One might ask, then, why you think they put it in the same sentence? If it's as unrelated as you claim, surely it would have been written as a separate sentence?

They both involve matters that involve search and seizure, although I still believe they aren't tightly linked except for that they share that similarity.

Why in the 7th ammendment dos it read: "In suits at common law, where the value in controvery shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwised re-examined in any Court of the United States..." What does the right to a trial by jury and the fact that the conclusion cannot be re-examined have to do with each other? What does 20 dollars have to do with it? They're all related to trials, but there is no overwhelming link between the clause about 20 dollars, the clause about my right to a trial by jury, and the fact that the decision can't be re-examined.

Run-on sentences were very prevalent in old English. If you read the Constitution check out how many paragraphs consist of just one sentence. It is also interesting how many times the word "and" and "but" in the Constitution imply the beginning of a new sentence, although they are actually preceeded with a semicolon or comma.

The very purpose of a warrant is to authorize search or seizure. Are you arguing that the only time a warrant is necessary is when there is no probable cause?

No, I'm arguing that a warranty is necessary when there is no reason to believe that a crime is currently in-progress, but there is reason to believe that evidence of a crime will be obtained if permission (warrant) is granted to enter a location and search for that specific evidence.

I.e., if the police think the murder weapon for some crime is in my house, they need to convince a judge of their reasoning. If he agrees, the warrant is issued and they can search the specified location for that weapon. There is no probable cause that the crime is in-progress, but there presumably the police have provided the judge with a reasonable explanation of why they think they will find the murder weapon at my house.

How can people be "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures," and at the same time give the police the power to break down their door at any moment for the slightest flimsy excuse?

If the excuse was flimsy, sue the police department or the officers involved. Sue the person that intentionally gave a false tip.

I also don't trust my neighbors to sic the cops on me only when I'm beating my wife, and not when they have some other personal vendetta against me. The neighbor claiming that I'm beating my wife is not sufficient as probable cause if there is no other evidence.

I'd say that someone reporting a beating in-progress is sufficient reason for the police to act. If they find out that it was a lie, then they should haul your neighbor with a vendetta to jail for filing a false report.

It is clear that historically it was expected that people defend themselves against criminals, using force as necessary. If you expect the police to do it for you, prepare to be disappointed, and quite possibly dead.

I fully support the right to bear arms. I even support the right to carried concealed weapons. If 1 out of 4 citizens carried concealed weapons I think current crime would go down; on the other hand, I can't ignore the fact that road rage could become more deadly if everyone carried guns.

This isn't the wild west. While I support the right to bear arms, I also recognize that many people don't want to bear arms. These people deserve to be secure as well and the police provide that protection. Sure, someone can break in and kill me before the police arrive. Those of us that don't have weapons in the house evaluate the risks. But the great majority of those that don't carry arms get through life without being physyically threatened by either crminals or the police. If you are harassed by either some neighbor or the police it is almost always because you've pissed someone off--and you, too, should evaluate the risks of pissing anyone off, be it a police, neighbor, drug dealer, or unknown stranger who many be any of the above. Everything has consequences, and it really isn't that hard to get along with everybody.

Sure, the police should respect your rights. But at the same time, is there any particular reason you should taunt someone in such away that provokes them to violate your rights?

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[Anonymous Coward]

The government has no power (authority) to grant rights!

Add the word "inalienable" before "rights" and I'd agree with you.

The government does have power to grant other, lesser rights, within limits. Copyright is an example of this; Article I, Section 8 permits the Congress to grant "exclusive Rights" for "limited Times" in the pursuit of a public end. (This involves temporary surrender of some of the public's inherent rights to use and to copy published material as it sees fit.)

Re:Rampant privacy violations possible!

[Eric Smith]

Good point!

In general, the government does not have the power to grant any rights, except those powers explicitly stated in the constitution, of which copyright is a good example.

This is the future!

[A nonymous Coward]

Big companies and greedy SOBs trying to be big have wanted this patent nonsense; maybe they will regret getting what they asked for. Maybe, just maybe, when enough of these ridiculous patent fights take up so much of their time and resources, really innovative people will be able to get on with their lives, and common sense will be restored. Maybe. Someday.

Wait a second

[eyez]

Did I miss something? I thought the Bon Jovi thing was just like printing a unique serial on the booklet or a piece of paper that comes with the thing, or something.

How the hell is that technology, or more to the point, patentable?

Re:Wait a second

[WEFUNK]

Did I miss something? I thought the Bon Jovi thing was just like printing a unique serial on the booklet or a piece of paper that comes with the thing, or something.

How the hell is that technology, or more to the point, patentable?

I think it's because companies finally ran out of existing ideas that they could patent by tacking on "with a computer". The next round of bad patents will take obvious ideas and tack on "by an 80's hair band".

For instance, DownloadCard has the rights to "a means of using and distributing unique serial identifiers to provide redeemable incentives to discourage the online theft of intellectual property where said intellectual property is audio or video media content by an 80's hair band". The Dave Matthews Band and the Crystal Method were able to get around this patent by not being an 80's hair band, but Universal finally got busted for trying it with Bon Jovi.

In related news, Jeff Bezos has just invented and patented a one-click combination CD player power-on/play button to allow quick and efficient listening of any of his favorite music by an 80's hair band.

Re:Wait a second

[theLOUDroom]

Hey IBM has a patent on determining bra cup size via direct measurement (US Patent 5,965,809).
If they got a patent for that, anything is patentable.

Re:Wait a second

[JohnG]

Haha! I don't know why but reading that I imagined a late night talk show host. You should write for Conan O'Brian! :)

Re:Wait a second

[Anne Thwacks]

I have evidence of PRIOR ART.

In or around 1988, I tried to GIVE my then employers (GEC) the IP for a system whereby CDs would be encrypted using an algorithm that had multiple decryption codes. Each purchaser could be give a unique key.

Furthermore, I predicted that forthcoming technology would make possible a massive increase in storage capacity, and assumed that the only viable way to use it for music would be to include a huge range of songs on a single DVD, and allow on-line purchase of keys to play those numbers that appealed to you. GEC*, claimed ths was "a really stupid idea" and refused to file a patent.

If it had been patented then, the patent would have expired by now, so I hereby announce that this concept is available under the BSD licence to anyone who wants it.

I personanaly have not bought any CDs, ever, BECAUSE THE MUSIC ON THEM REALLY SUCKS.

*So if you invested in GEC shares, and lost your money - just remember It was Lord Weinstock and Lord Prior what done it.

Good start

[Anonymous Coward]

"Bon Jovi album might be delayed because of the lawsuit."

Tragic...

Now only if Madona, N'sync, B. Spears et al would do the same... We might get to hear some "real music"

Re:Good start

[Anonymous Coward]

You're an idiot. Or were you doing parody of the typical /. moron?

So what should they do?

[sameb]

It's kind of sad, actually. A plan was finally put into use that 'accepts' the trading of mp3s, giving more incentive to buy the actual album. If this goes through, I sincerely doubt the record companies are going to try that hard to come up with better plans.

Re:PIN number???

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, IT IS.

I don't get it. . .

[An Onerous Coward]

Why is this a novel technology? Sure, it's never been done by the music industry, but the commercial software folks have been providing "registration keys" for decades now.

This just doesn't strike me as something that should be patentable. Of course, that seldom impedes the patent process.

Bon Jovi rocks! Peace, out.

Re:I don't get it. . .

[Saeger]

Patent application: "Blah blah blee blaaah dee blaa blaah bla bla with a computer bla bla and the internet."

*APPROVED*

--

Re:I don't get it. . .

[Anonymous Coward]

What i understand of this is that DownloadCard has sent the Universal Music Group a copy of their "serial-key generation and validation" software. The UMG probably never contacted them
for a license but nonethless _used_ it for the Bon Jovi CD "Bounce".
So, for as far as i understand, this has nothing todo with patents but with violating copyrights.

Need for a new music distribution system

[path_man]

This just underscores the need for a new, novel, music distribution system that allows the music conglomerates to receive money for sales of the songs their artists record & sing. The PIN system is nothing new... this gimmick has been around for quite some time. All that most of us want is to be able to buy the songs we like with the FREEDOM to use the music as we like (computer, mp3 player, car stereo, home entertainment centre, etc.).

Unfortunately, the result of this infringement will likly just cause the music industry to go back to their pet senators for exceptions or maybe even buying out the patent rights so that they can perpetuate the crap system that exists today.

(Meta) Pedantic, or understood?

[yerricde]

PIN number? Come on, you are saying, "Personal Identification Number number."

What is better: to be pedantically correct, or to be understood? "PIN" by itself looks like I'm shouting the English "pin" rather than using an acronym. It's easier to understand an acronym that sounds like an English word if the acronym is followed by a generic noun.

if only this could be applied to the MPAA also

[Ishkibble]

it would be pretty freak'in halrious if the people that made the film for the cameras, started sueing also, for some kinda copyright, infringment. imagin that the DMCA being used by someone other than a big miulti-million dollar company

Call Hillary Rosen we found a pirate

[linuxislandsucks]

Now lets see how long it takes Hillary Rosen to go after Universal for piracy...now holding breathe.. ah turning blue..

Nanny nanny boo boo!

[rice_burners_suck]

Great! They tried to use some technology to prevent piracy, and they're getting SUED! Bwaaaahaaaahaaahaahahahah!!! That's what the evil recording industry deserves!

Re:Nanny nanny boo boo!

[MindStalker]

Hu? This isn't an anti-piracy technology. You should read the original slashdot article about it. There is no anti-piracy technology. There is simply a number that comes with the CD, this number can be used to download unreleased tracks off the internet, and concert ticket discounts/good seats. Its giving something more for the cd, not a technology to mess with fair use at all.

Re:Nanny nanny boo boo!

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't bother trying to explain it to him?

Did you see his nick? He's obviously closed minded, living in his own world, etc. Typical.

Re:Nanny nanny boo boo!

[MindStalker]

Actually no, I did not notice his nick. Ok I know what a rice-boy is, but whats a rice burner? Is that pro rice or anti rice?

Prior art?

[JohnG]

This seems very silly. Should I be worried that my ATM card will no longer work, or that I will no longer have access to my Ameritrade account? Both of those things use PIN's. PIN's aren't a technology. I get so sick of people misusing the term technology. Clicking a mouse button isn't technology either, but that didn't stop amazon from getting a patent. One arsehole even has a patent on waving a laser in front of a cat for chissakes!

Re:PIN number???

[Anonymous Coward]

Irony:

1. The use of words to express something different from and often opposite to their literal meaning.
2. An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning.
3. A literary style employing such contrasts for humorous or rhetorical effect. See wit.

Absurd

[Anonymous Coward]

This claim is completely absurd. So, DownloadCard claims that they invented unique numeric identifiers?

I mean, I'm pretty sure that EVERY categorization system since written language was formed would count as prior art. The fact that they're using it to give access to a website isn't even relevant; they've been in use for everything else for centuries - being online isn't any different than any other use.

Bon Jovi?

[digitalsynapse]

The delaying of a Bon Jovi album?

I sense a great disturbance in the force, as if the state of New Jersey is crying out in pain..

Re:Bon Jovi?

[Anonymous Coward]

For all the jokes about Bon Jovi and New Jersey, just remember that one of the members of that band is married to Heather Locklear.

That sure does trump a hell of a lot negatives you might associate with Bon Jovi or New Jersey.

prior musical use?

[Anonymous Coward]

The latest Crystal Method album (Tweekend) had an enclosed plastic sheet with a 'serial number' on it that allowed access to a special area of their website.

That album came out in July 2001, and as far as I can tell isn't anything to do with Downloadcard.

Besides, what idiot granted them a patent on a SERIAL NUMBER?

Re:prior musical use?

[zman99]

Besides, what idiot granted them a patent on a SERIAL NUMBER?

The thing about patent law is that you can get a patent for just about anything and the patent office generally won't bother to check if you really deserve the patent or not. They have too many requests to do such a thing. The process of determining your right to a patent is relinquished to the already overburdened justice system when someone decides to use their patent against an allegedly infringing company.

The patent office is merely a way of getting a record saying "I had [this idea] on [this date]".

one question...

[kevin lyda]

did they use hospital corners when they made their bed?

Re:one question...

[gmhowell]

Actually, I think they short sheeted themselves.

(Okay, to the dense amongst the moderators. Parent asked about making a bed with hospital corners. What he's implying is that 'Universal has made their bed; now they must lie in it'. To which I make the funny comment... Christ, if you haven't figured it out by now, just mod me -1, offtopic already)

delayed launch

[Eric Smith]

Yahoo! Launch headline suggests that Bon Jovi album might be delayed because of the lawsuit.

I don't suppose it has occurred to anyone at Universal to simply release the album as an ordinary CD with no PIN? And that consumers might actually buy it?

Re:delayed launch

[hitzroth]

Of course, if they already had the packaging printed up, they might have to start over. That can take time and be expensive. But at least they might have a legitimate reason to charge $15 for each CD: "The pin sticker for this CD was carefully removed by the now bloody fingers of Pauly Shore."

Re:delayed launch

[chris_7d0h]

I don't suppose it has occurred to anyone at Universal to simply release the album as an ordinary CD with no PIN? And that consumers might actually buy it?

If they did, all potential customers (both of them) would simply Napster the CD.
No, the record label(s) need to protect their customers from possibilities of end user mistakes.

Re:delayed launch

[tregoweth]

Reprinting the CDs without the PINs would also delay it.

Really, though, who can quarrel with the delay of a Bon Jovi album?

Re:delayed launch

[Anonymous Coward]

You obviously missed the part about it being a Bon Jovi album...

Irony at its finest.

[Googa]

Really, the best news i've heard in a while. Anti-piracy efforts being slapped down by anti-piracy efforts. The MAN is attacking the MAN.

Software prior art?

[Anonymous Coward]

There must be a way to show whatever patents they have are invalid given the number of software products that have used serial numbers (or software 'keys') to unlock features - over the course of the past several decades.

The "product" in this case would be the CD. The "features" would be the website.

So it's OK now?

[halftrack]

So, suddenly IP is a real thing and patent suits are great?

It seems to me that somethimes the /. crowd get's a bit narrow sighted.

Here are the facts:

1. No /.ers (or just a few) listens to BonJovi (I don't) which automatically means that he's a crappy, bad sounding, commercial doll, which again means that everything he (or those who really control him) does is bad.

2. Universal can be regarded as big and bad.

3. DownloadCard is David fighting Goliat for the money. It's not a /.y principal suit.

4. Universal is making an honest attempt to fight piracy without crippeling user rights. They are trying to make the CDs you purchase more like DVDs, with extra stuff BonJovi fans (not /.ers) would like.

Belive it or not, /. is not the center of the world. Even though we dislike something/someone doesn't mean that others have to dislike it/them too.

Re:So it's OK now?

[DAldredge]

Yes. We hate them so this is OK!

Re:So it's OK now?

[p3d0]

Um, thanks for taking it upon your self to deal us that well-deserved tongue-lashing.

-1: Obvious

I have yet to read even one article that seriously makes the points you're refuting. I suggest you change your browser settings to read highest-rated articles first. You'll see a few lucky dummies who posted early, but often you see a lot of reasonable and insightful replies.

weird

[Anonymous Coward]

the new bon jovi album is already out in the UK, does that mean europeans are allowed to pirate their music but americans aren't? Great stuff.

self-immolation

[crm114]

let the games begin!

Terrorists!

[Anonymous Coward]

And remember, boys and girls, if you steal patented PIN number technology, the terrorists have already won.

Fat chance...

[zman99]

I really can't possibly see this lawsuit winning. This is the same model of registration that the software industry has been using for years.

• Buy the software
• Register it with your personal serial number
• Get free updates, tech support, newsletters, etc.

If this isn't an example of prior art, then I don't know what is. Once again, the consumer is getting screwed while the lawyers cash in....

Re:Fat chance...

[zenyu]

This is the same model of registration that the software industry has been using for years.

We really don't know enough about this to say Universal didn't break the patent. We all know there are 10,000 ways to implement this that don't break any patents. But we also know that the Patent office hands out patents for left handed bum washing, so they may very well have a defendable patent on a say a particular formula for computing a one way hash, and if Universal copied that willy nilly then maybe they should cough up the pocket change they are asking for.

We don't even know if it is like the keys on software, since the features sound like a web site it could just be a random string that's easy to type but hard to remember.

Re:Fat chance...

[56]

If this isn't an example of prior art, then I don't know what is. Once again, the consumer is getting screwed while the lawyers cash in....

One more reason to go to law school.

LP!

[mdechene]

Last Post! (Unless you want to beat me and post after this!)

Read the articles next time...

[gleffler]

Um, Universal is a customer of Downloadcard, which you find out if you read the article. Maybe they're having a tiff or something, but look here, and see: "Cards manufactured in English, French and German offer several exclusive Universal Records rock tracks to fans in many foreign territories."

I think what has acutally happened is that Downloadcard is mad that Universal is taking their toys and going home and not using their service anymore.

Why we will win...

[Eric_Cartman_South_P]

The big companies will sue each other left and right, while technology and file sharing will advance beyone our wildest dreams (and their nightmares).

Remember seeing the Martrix, and other SciFi flicks where people swap and sell disks like it was crack? Well, once again SciFi predicts the future. But who ever though that it would turn out to be MUSIC and MOVIES on those disks! Listen, pundints and nay-sayers can bitch al they want, but once I have a little hollogram cube that is black market, so it can hold it's 10 petabytes without needing MS Palladium v4, you can hold EVERY SONG EVER MADE and EVERY MOVIE EVER MADE in your pocket. TEll me agian why a distribution channel for anything that can be stored digitally should even be a business model?

I'm sure once there was a great business where for a few pennies you could get your loom repaired, or the cotton gin fixed. Those days are gone, and so are the music and movie distrubtors. If any artist wants my cash, I will gladly fork it over for a LIVE performance only. So Brittney, bring some kneepads, otherwise you will never get my $16 sweetie.

Bon Jovi release delay = BAD

[flogger]

Damnit! Release a new bon Jovi song. I'm sick of the only damn radio station in my BFE town playing the same Bon Jovi song from the mid 80's. Maybe they'll play a new bonjovi song with the old one and double the damn playlist.


(Watch, I'll be modded as troll/offtopic while others that say "not releasing Bon Jovi is good" will not be modded as redundant.

while digging some dirt...

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they should hire a web developer who knows what multimedia files are.

From: peter (peter@downloadcard.com) Subject: how come muti media files come down as arcane text messages through newsgroups? Newsgroups: alt.culture.usenet View this article only Date: 2001-05-15 08:32:47 PST

And How can i change this?

deja

Re:while digging some dirt...

[Vinum]

Hmm... I really like peter. Every time I get spam from now on and there is an "opt-out" option where I can go on their web page and make sure they don't send me more spam... I think I will make sure that I put peter's email in there to make sure he doesn't ever get spam from the same people I did. I usually whois the domains of the urls listed in the spam and make sure the domain contacts are added to the nospam lists also. No one should have to suffer.

Re:while digging some dirt...

[alecto]

Bwahaha! I like it. Of course, spammer's domain contact emails are usually routed to /dev/null. Better to use the Reply-To addresses (of the ones that request replies). This way, their business will be less likely to be interrupted by unwanted email after you opt them all out :).

Sad news ... Stephen King dead at 55

[Anonymous Coward]

I just heard some sad news on talk radio - Horror/Sci Fi writer Stephen King was found dead in his Maine home this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his contributions to popular culture. Truly an American icon.

Not gonna happen

[Anonymous Coward]

But they could release the mp3s/oggs etc and build demand for the CD when it is released.

Who is going to buy the CD after hearing the MP3/Ogg?

This is not a matter of "piracy." Once you hear that crap, there is no way you're paying $18 for it.

Stole the tech?

[geek]

Umm it's a PIN for crying out loud. Banks have been using this same system for ages, not to mention about a billion other business. I mean really whats the diff between this technology wise than with a CD key for winxp?

All it is, is a number that allows you to access a service or feature. I could do this with pen and paper if I wanted too.

Maybe i'm not understanding their "technology", so feel free to correct me.

Re:Stole the tech?

[ImaLamer]

I'm guessing it's the implementation of that technology that is patented.

You see, even if you disagree with IP in general, the term goes "build a better mouse trap". There are numerous patents on mouse traps, but it's the design and implementation of that new trap which gets it awarded a patent.

Looking around I found 4 three-ring binders which all have their own systems of opening and closing those rings. Just because it has been done before doesn't mean that you can do something like it again.

I don't think there is anything which isn't built on earlier works, nothing is new.

Re:Stole the tech?

[ealar dlanvuli]

My best guess is they stole the "encryption scheme", and we all know copying or reverse engineering a encryption scheme is a more sever crime than assination of an elected official.

Re:Stole the tech?

[Blue Stone]

It's also exactly the same as a serial number that you get on any houshold electrical device.
Putting it on media, is hardly revolutionary, unique, or inventive.
Nor is the use to which you then put it.

I think some people would patent wiping their arse.

Re:Stole the tech?

[Anonymous Coward]

Americans Kill People!

Re:Stole the tech?

[Moofie]

The problem is not patenting "Novel, clever, detailed method for trapping mice". The problem is patenting "Vermin suppression technology".

Patenting specific, detailed, mechanisms is one thing. That's arguably OK. Patenting anything that can accomplish task X is NOT OK, and runs contrary to the philosophy behind patents.

Re:Stole the tech?

[Dwedit]

...is a more sever crime...

No, slashdotting a website is a more server crime. :)

Re:Stole the tech?

[Anonymous Coward]

And how does this make them different from anyone else?

A recent poll shows that

[Anonymous Coward]

10% of those polled think war with iraq is inevitable.
15% of those polled feel we should avoid conflict unless attacked.
75% of those polled would kick Bon Jovi square in the balls if given the chance.

You're a thief

[geek]

"I will gladly fork it over for a LIVE performance only"

Lots of very talented artists don't/can't perform live. Take Enya for example, she writes and records everything herself. Want her to stand on a stage by herself performing? that wouldnt be a very good show.

Where do you think they get the money to put on the show in the first place? FROM THE ALBUM SALES.

Just because you can transfer music and movies over a digital connection doesn't mean you have a right to. I can crawl through your bedroom window at night, but that doesn't make it legal.

Grow up. Pay some respect to the authors of the arts you admire. Art appreciation in the country has gone to shit. Artists don't owe YOU anything. Get over yourself

Re:You're a thief

[p3d0]

I think you may be misinformed. My understanding was that artists make diddly from album sales, and make big bucks from live performances. Granted, the performances are probably financed by record companies who get money from record sales, but that's not a necessary part of the food chain here. Anyone could finance a concert series: even a banks. Hell, they finance everything else.

Having said that, my personal opinion is that recordings should have reasonable, limited protection based on copyright law, under control of the author until his death and no longer. Anything more is beyond the point of diminishing returns with respect to fostering creativity, which was, after all, the whole point of copyright in the first place.

IRS is gonna be pissed

[Anonymous Coward]

Imagine if somebody has actually patented sequential numbers. Social Security Numbers, Tax ID numbers, etc. are all going to be subject to royalty payments.

What else could it be?

Support

[_Sprocket_]

In the same sense, you shouldn't support the US government's attack on Microsoft just because you don't like Microsoft.

And by the same token, one should not withhold support from the US Government's prosecution of Microsoft just because one likes Microsoft.

Now that we have that minor little point sewen up... mind if we remain focused on the topic at hand?

How ironic..

[Anonymous Coward]

They (the RIAA) will pursue almost any means to protecting there copyrights, but won't think twice about violating someone else's copyrights to achieve their goals.

Why is everybody so HAPPY?

[thefogger]

I thought that the pin approach was a rather good idea. The pin is only for EXTRA stuff that you normally don't get with a CD. Like concert tickets, unreleased songs or whatever. It would've been a standard CD, with the PIN as a bonus! Why is everybody so happy that Universal is getting sued because of it?

Re:Why is everybody so HAPPY?

[geek]

I don't know personally. It seems however everyone forgot that it's Universal who's copyprotecting all their CD's (Fast and the Furious soundtrack for example). So this PIN isn't for "added extra" content, as in "go ahead and pirate the album if you want, you just dont get a PIN". This PIN is more of a way for Bon Jovi to get people to his website and make some more cash with banner ads and pedal t-shirts to online fans. It has nothing to do with piracy.

Win what? What are you talking about?

[Anonymous Coward]

One day you'll get a job that pays more than minimum wage and you'll quickly come to understand that other people's work and time has value too.

Until then, don't get caught because it is still against the law. Laws that have been around before you and will still be here afterwards. Giving you free stuff just because you can take it isn't something a civil society accepts. We call it theft.

yeah right

[Tablizer]

"The proprietary DownloadCard Technology is novel, original and unique."

Just like that claim itself.

Re:yeah right

[m0rph3us0]

Hehe, the lawyers just put those words in because I bet somewhere in case or patent law there is a requirement for the idea to be "novel, original, unique" now my question is can Judges start suing lawyers for IP infringement if they copyright their decisions.
Umm... I'm sorry you can't use that case law until you pay the Judge $14.99 don't think its a rip off, there are 18 other pieces of case law on that CD. But if you only pay 14.99 you only get the right to view it on your computer and not present it to the court.

-1, Troll?

[egg troll]

Suprisingly, you were modded down as a troll! Apparently Bon Jovi has mod points....

Re:-1, Troll?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently Bon Jovi has mod points....

Yes. I have mod points. Let it Rock!

- Jon

Re:-1, Troll?

[Anonymous Coward]

You give moderators a bad name.

They know best

[dacarr]

Once again, it is demonstrated that corporations and attorneys know what is best for the people.

Re:They know best

[Alec Varezz]

All this copyright stuff is a lawyers dream come
true..
Hmmm.. Law School?

Obligatory nelson laugh

[Anonymous Coward]

*points at RIAA*

Haaaa Ha

The RIAA Releases new statistics.

[ConnortheMad]

"The RIAA has released a new set of statistics showing a distinct drop in filesharing of MP3's in P2P networks upon the release of Bon Jovi's latest album."

PIN numbers

[bradintheusa]

Anybody who writes the term 'PIN Number' cannot be taken seriously.

Re:PIN numbers

[jachim69]

Heh, how true.

"I'm going to type my PIN number on the keypad on the ATM machine to get some money."

Sort of like the "come here once" that is commonly heard 'round here. My typically response is "how many times?"

Re:PIN numbers

[neuph]

Same goes for "NIC card"

Re:PIN numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

What about DNS servers?

Re:PIN numbers

[freeweed]

Yeah, but we all know that GNU's Not Unix, WINE Is Not an Emulator, and PHP Hypertext Protocol exists..

The Hip did this first

[elykyllek]

I'm not exactly sure how Bon Joni's pin number idea works, but The Tragically Hip's (A well-known Canadian band) latest cd that came out quite a few months ago comes with a membership card in it. By going to the membership site and using the id number that comes with the CD you get access to exclusive news and media. Its a great way to get people to acutally by the cd, without using DRM.

Not really ironic

[Anonymous Coward]

I.P. laws are, after all, the only thing that keeps megacorps from stealing all the little guys' work.

Re:Not really ironic

[Zemran]

Maybe you do not understand the concept of irony?

Delayed!?

[kstumpf]

Bon Jovi album delayed!?? Now I'm mad!

Um... why mod this a troll?

[namespan]

I just noted a -1, Troll mod on this, and can't see why. This is a really interesting idea...

A while back I read an article by an environmental group discussing using funds to out-n-out purchase environmentally valuable lands, and then putting them in a trust. From that point on, you don't have to worry about regulations or which way the political wind blows, the land is simply administered according to the trust.

This is the same idea, but for intellectual property. It has its problems -- it only works as long as the property laws are applicable, it takes money to stake out the claim and administer it, and finally, it lends some legitimacy to what may be illegitimate processes. The best thing, though, is that you don't have to wait to change the world before you get to protect something important.

There ought to be more people doing this...

Re:Um... why mod this a troll?

[BrynM]

Unfortunately, setting up a trust is far more expensive than simply buying the land. Though it is a nice idea, the trust will eventually fold.

Even worse, if the trust goes bankrupt, the creditors (those who could care what happens to the land) take over. End of trust. End of preserved land.

You could donate the land to the BLM (bureau of land management), but Mr. Bush Jr. has shown that BLM land belongs more to the government than it does the people.

I guess I'm a pessimist, but this is one possible outcome that concerns me greatly.

In the immortal words of Nelson...

[k-0s]

HAH HAH!

Re:FIRST FISH!

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU ARE A NIGGER

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Bon Jovi picked on purpose?

[mark_space2001]

> Launch headline suggests that Bon Jovi album might be delayed because of the lawsuit."

So I'm guessing Universal picked Bon Jovi to debut this technology for a reason. If the suit against them has any merit, then Universal knew it was in the wrong and decided to try to use this PIN stuff anyway. I assume that Bon Jovi's fan base is no longer what it was, so perhaps Universal picked a band that wouldn't lose them huge amounts of money if it was delayed?

Not exactly a vote of confidence in ol' Bon Jovi, ya ask me! ^_^

PIN

[obdulio]

Someby may have said it already, but as soon as the album is released, PIN numbers will be spreading all over the Internet.

Re:PIN number???

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet you are a crappy public speaker and an even worse dancer.

New Lyrics

[Danborg]

Shot through the wallet, and you're to blame!
You give piracy, a bad name!

Re:New Lyrics

[Anonymous Coward]

hehe :)

No I'm not... here's why...

[Eric_Cartman_South_P]

that wouldnt be a very good show. So don't go!

And where do I think artists get money from? NOT THE CD, BUDDY! Use a little google action and see just how much artists get from CD sales. Apart from mega-star contracts (ala N'Sync) an artist can owe money, even after going gold. Read up. Artists keep their largest chunk of change from Live performances.

You do post an intersting question about Enya, which can be transposed to say, Techno artists who make sweet mixes and pre-mix everything in a studio. No, they won't perform live. So how do they get paid? I don't know...

Point is this: As long as there is a massive, fraudulat abuse of power to keep crappy music (Brittney, NSync) at a high price ($16+) on an obsolete medium (CD) all the artists can starve for all I care. I'm not out to fix the world. I would gladly pay for recorded works ONLY if I can put them where I want (car, iPod, etc). If a music company tells me I can only listen to my music on my living room Palladium controlled X-Box2, I say FUCK THEM and FUCK YOU TOO and FUCK THE ARTISTS. I'm not going to be forced to pay outragous money for crap music on an ***obsolete medium*** like CD's.

Re:No I'm not... here's why...

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, some techno artists (off the top of my head: orbital, faithless, underworld) are very, very good live, they do a whole show. and others do a lot of dj'ing as well as producing and if you knew how much big dj's a la dave clarke, sasha, oakenfold, rush etc pulled in, you'd might well be shocked :P

Why not just save a step?

[telstar]

"Yahoo! Launch headline suggests that Bon Jovi album might be delayed because of the lawsuit."

• Why don't they just release a copy onto Kazaa? That's where it's going to end up anyway.

lie, cheat, steal

[Anonymous Coward]

is that how most corporations operate in the first place. Especially the old established ones that don't want to get off their fat asses?

Cool, let them

[gotan]

I mean, could it get any better than one group wanting to screw fair use rights going after another?

Re:Bon Jovi? (OT)

[program21]

The state of NJ is perpetually crying out in pain.

They've got it all wrong...

[artemis67]

They should be giving out the PIN numbers to pay to have it turned off, not on. I think they'll make a lot more money that way.

Great.

[ilyag]

Now piracy fighters accuse piracy fighters of piracy.

It would be nice if they would do that full-time.

the company with the "invention" getting hammered

[alizard]

My guess is that the intellectual property lawyers with UMG looked at it, and said "prior art" as in games and software distributed a few years ago as pointed out on this thread.

Any patents based on what's described should be readily breakable.

Just as well because I'm thinking of using this one of these days on a music project I'm involved with.

Lets just make this simple.

[interstellar_donkey]

Put all the legal teams in a cage and give them knifes. The legal team still standing at the end gets $1 million, and their client wins. (Appeals could be handled by pistols at 20 paces).

The outcome would stand about the same as the current way our courts work, just faster and far more entertaining.

Re:Lets just make this simple.

[Anonymous Coward]

"knives"

the plural of "knife" is "knives"

have a nice day

Re:Lets just make this simple.

[loraksus]

naah, fuck knives, "everyday blunt instruments" (lamps, bats, etc) is what you are looking for - much more amusing.

Re:Lets just make this simple.

[asobala]

I suggest you read "The Dosadi Experiment" by Frank Herbert. He evolved courts to ... pretty much what you just said.

Re:Lets just make this simple.

[Herkum01]

Put all the legal teams in a cage and give them knifes.

Hmm, I like your ideas on justice, they remind me of a King Solomon, or Ghengis Khan. You sir, are brilliant, now what would it take to vote this new system of justice into place?

Re:Lets just make this simple.

[Anonymous Coward]

Two teams enter, one team leaves ... Now where (*cough*Mad Max*cough*) have I heard something like that before?

Re:Lets just make this simple.

[renard]

The outcome would stand about the same as the current way our courts work, just faster and far more entertaining.

no - you forget one important bit - at the end of each "lawsuit" we would be assured of having fewer lawyers...

i like your thinking...
renard

temper, temper

[Anonymous Coward]

"I say FUCK THEM and FUCK YOU TOO and FUCK THE ARTISTS."

If you are so pissed, why not make your own music? Or conversely, don't purchase the music, and don't obtain it using your own set of juvenile ethics. The laws that prevent you from doing as you wish are laws that you can help change, however. If you think that the adolescent ranting on a liberal swamp of a web-board is going to further your cause, guess again.

I'm not worried. You people will simply attempt to choke the artists until they can take no more, and will simply refuse to do anymore. If you were to have your way, soon, your creepy socialist disease would spread to the concert issue as well. You wouldn't be happy until everything was free to a talentless chump like yourself. After all, those with talent, skill and money owe people like you, don't they?

You are a faggot.

It only makes sence

[Felinoid]

It only makes sence that most of the obveous and commen prior art type methods of controlling content is a patent.
The type of person who thinks about content control would say "patent it" no matter how obveous it is.

With the music industry running in the whole (knownladge as propety) croud it's only a matter of time before a music industry stunt was patented. I wouldn't be supprised if the preveous stunts did have rejected patent applications from a time when you had to earn a patent award not just buy it.

Patent creation utility released under GPL

[Anonymous Coward]

Now that the number of worthwhile patenting ideas is diminishing, I thought this might be useful - it is a patent generating utility. I'm releasing it under the GPL, so anybody can use it. Just follow these instructions:

1. Choose a random number between one and three. Add this to the current year, (2002). This becomes the date that you file for the patent.

2. Choose another random number between one and three. This decides where you will patent your idea - 1. Europe, 2. Japan, 3. U.S.A.

3. Pick a word from this list and write it down:

* Device
* Instrument
* Method
* Program

4. Now choose a sentence from this list and write it down:

* For the purpose of
* To be used for
* That allows one to go about

5. Finally think of a concept that has prior art at least 10 years ago, and write it down. For example, 'tying your shoelaces', or 'jumping up and down very quickly'.

WELL DONE! You have successfully completed a patent application - NOT! Try and file it and see what happens.

Funny

[Anonymous Coward]

Has anyone else noticed how the only artists that talk about piracy are the ones that noone in their right mind would download anyway...they all suck. I have a theory: Nobody is buying their records, because they suck, so the RIAA companies say "Hey, if you spokesman for us we will invest in marketing your music until everyone pukes." And the artist is probably convinced that the reason nobody buys their records is because everyone is downloading it, when in fact they just suck and nobody wants to waste $15 on bad music...

Prove me wrong, name a band or artist that is spokesmodeling for the RIAA that doesn't suck....I'm waiting...

NR

Patented technology

[Saiai Hakutyoutani]

Well yeah, but PINs on products have been in use for years, for example on Microsoft Windows CDs. I think it's amazing how many people try to patent technology without having invented it. For example the whole auction system on eBay... Wasn't that really invented by the stock market? And btw, I just invented washing machines with stickers on them and fridges with stickers on them. So if you have those, please remove the machines and buy new ones from me, as they're my invention. If you want your personal stickers on them, please subscribe to mySticker and I'll attach the stickers you send me in the mail.

the only thing that would make this sweeter...

[IronicCheese]

...is if they came across DownloadCard's idea out there on Kaaza and just helped themselves...

Not much they can do now...

[grumwsmith]

There's not much they can do about the Bounce album now because I've seen copies of it in the shops already. If they prevented anyone else using this again that would be good but intelectual property laws can't really stop a product that's been mass produced, released into shops and then sold to consumers. I also don't think they can get much or any money from the album because it was a widely known fact that the album was being released with this mechanism enabled so they should have raised the fact before it was released. Come on the littly guy!

Re:Bravo! (in theory, anyhow... reality is diff)

[MickLinux]

You are making the same lame point that constitutionalists and libertarians make.

Actually, scratch that "lame" bit. It's a good point, but it has nothing to do with reality.

Reality: Power derives from a willingness to use force and destroy.
Reality: Rights exist only insofar as people require them, either through voting with their feet, or through their own exercise of power.
Reality: Wars exist when group A comes in contact with group B, or group A comes in contact with another group A, or even when group B comes in contact with another group B.
Reality: Smart people vote with their feet while they can.

Our government hasn't paid attention to its Constitution since the civil war. Sometimes, it happens to approximately follow the Constitution, but only incidentally, and not because it is its "contract of governance". When its actions follow the Constitution, it is because the Constitution does give a pretty good path to follow, so as not to degenerate into constant fighting.

That said, there are always groups that want to seize more power, and sometimes they are in the government. When they try to seize to much power, they abandon their responsibilities, and chaos follows.

Let's just say that the Constitution was a statement of good faith by the men who purposed to rule the new nation of the USA. They did a pretty good job, and a lot of men tried to keep faith with that statement. Today, a few of them still do; many really don't care.

Trade Secret != Patent

[Kindaian]

Trade secret falls into the commercial law. Patents fall into the Intelectual Property law. Cheers...

Re:Trade Secret != Patent

[blue_zero]

mod as informative, please.

Property of Downloadcard

[uncoveror]

The following are the intellectual property of Downloadcard, and Universal may not use them: 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9

Re:Bravo! (in theory, anyhow... reality is diff)

[Eric Smith]

The government will obey the Constitution to the extent that we force them to do so. If they violate it, and we just say "too bad" and don't do anything, they'll keep right on doing it, and get increasingly bold about it.

If we challenge the abuses, some of them will be curbed. But to mount an effective challenge against anything, you need citizens who are aware that there is a problem. Educating citizen as to how the goverment is supposed to work is essential. The fact that it doesn't actually work that way in practice much of the time is why we need to educate them, not a reason to let it slide.

Ummmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the tracks that are in the groups are not from the actual CD itself. Some enterprising youngster pieced the CD together using tracks gathered from various radio shows, streams, and what not.

Or, umm, so I heard, errr, on the Discovery channel.

Value-added incentive?

[sin(theta)]

People keep talking about the brilliant idea of value-added incentive to buy CDs.

While it's probably a good idea in the long-run to get people to buy MUSIC CDs because of their frills, anybody who needs incentive beyond THE MUSIC itself is buying MUSIC CDs for the wrong reason.

You want frills? Go to their goddamn website; that's what websites are for.

McCallum

Last Post!

[alpg]

I have a switch in my apartment that doesn't do anything. Every once
in a while I turn it on and off. On and off. On and off. One day I
got a call from a woman in France who said "Cut it out!"
-- Steven Wright

- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...