Slashdot Mirror


Felten Follower Examines Crippled Music Disks

D4C5CE writes "Following in the footsteps of his famous professor, in his paper "Evaluating New Copy-Prevention Techniques for Audio CDs" (yes, that's pure PS), which is one of many interesting contributions to the 2002 ACM Workshop on Digital Rights Management, Princeton student Alex Halderman takes apart (bit by bit, literally) the "tricks on tracks" employed by the music industry to frustrate fair use."

160 comments

  1. Role of OS! by krazyninja · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think examining the strength/weaknesses of algorithms without regard to the surroundings is not a good idea. With Windows providing most of the drivers in signed form, and refusing to accept unsigned drivers, it could be difficult to apply the "breaking" methods defined, in the mainstream operating systems. Ofcourse, in other OS's this shouldnot be a problem.

    --
    "Do something man. Right now."
    1. Re:Role of OS! by fishnuts · · Score: 3, Informative

      Windows' "driver signing" is only a way to guarantee that a particular driver is verified and certified by microsoft to be fit for its particular purpose in whatever versions of the OS the author wants to get it signed for. You can still install unsigned drivers, with only a benign warning from the OS that it's "not signed by microsoft".

    2. Re:Role of OS! by krazyninja · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Windows' "driver signing" is only a way to guarantee that a particular driver is verified

      Yah..But how long before that "option" is removed from the screen, and instead an "error" is indicated? From the way the DMCA has been brought upon, I dont see far.

      --
      "Do something man. Right now."
    3. Re:Role of OS! by Klerck · · Score: 0, Redundant

      This is a correction to the poster of the parent. Windows drivers can be installed whether they are signed or not. The only fussing Windows does is complains that they aren't signed, but the user can install them anyway.

    4. Re:Role of OS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, but for how long?

      Seriously, Microsoft is getting all the pieces in place, look at their "Secure Audio Path" approved drivers; they're pretty clearly planning to pull the "benign warning" lynch pin at some point.

    5. Re:Role of OS! by Zocalo · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Yah..But how long before that "option" is removed from the screen, and instead an "error" is indicated? From the way the DMCA has been brought upon, I dont see far.

      I'd tend to disagree. Microsoft does at least appear to have gained a clue about security recently, and if they refuse to allow unsigned drivers outright they are opening an ugly can of worms. It takes time to get that WHQL certification that marks a driver as signed, so consider what would happen in the scenario of an exploit being found in a WHQL driver and made public immediately.

      The driver vendor might be able to issue a patch almost immediately, but would then have to submit it for WHQL approval before it can be installed. Even with somekind of "fasttrack emergency approval" mechanism for this situation, that's not going to happen overnight. Now imagine the outcry from those who do have a security clue if they are left vulnerable because Microsoft decided it was in their best interests not to allow them to install the patch because it was unsigned.

      The security services have the definition right; a "trusted box" is one that has the capability to break your security policy. Think about it - your firewall is "trusted" right? Yet if it breaks and starts allowing all packets through, what just happened to security. Now, tell me again Microsoft, "Palladium" is "trusted computing" and this is a good thing? ;)

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    6. Re:Role of OS! by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I've always wondered why drivers from Microsoft aren't signed when performing a Windows Update.

      Perhaps this is to trick users to "always trust content from Microsoft" and thereby have all this stuff rammed down their throat, unaware?

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    7. Re:Role of OS! by BeBoxer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd tend to disagree. Microsoft does at least appear to have gained a clue about security recently, and if they refuse to allow unsigned drivers outright they are opening an ugly can of worms. It takes time to get that WHQL certification that marks a driver as signed, so consider what would happen in the scenario of an exploit being found in a WHQL driver and made public immediately.

      Microsoft(tm)'s Palladium scheme will require signed drivers. There is simply no way to try to enforce that level of security while still allowing end users to insert arbitrary code into the kernel. Not with any standard definition of "driver" and "kernel".

      Most likely they will "compromise". You'll be able to load unsigned drivers, but when you reboot to load the drivers Palladium will detect that the OS is no longer in a "secure" state and any software that relies on the "trust" Palladium gives will be disabled. So no running WMP. And even though Microsoft(tm) has claimed that they won't use Palladium for software licensing somebody will. It's just too juicy for software publishers to resist. So you can expect that software to break. And since guarding against virii and such is one of the trumpeted reasons for Palladium, you can expect your AV software to have a fit. Who knows what it's failure mode will be. Should it not allow anything, since it can't really trust it's own binary, or it's AV database? Or should it allow everything for the same reason? Either failure mode is quite unpleasant. Or should it continue as if nothing had changed?

      Now imagine the outcry from those who do have a security clue if they are left vulnerable because Microsoft decided it was in their best interests not to allow them to install the patch because it was unsigned.

      Anybody with a security clue should realize that Palladium is about creating a new level of security user which is higher than "Administrator" and which only Microsoft(tm) has access to. No more. No less. It's about taking root access away from the user and giving it to Microsoft(tm). Any security administrator who willfully gives up final control of their box to the OS vendor gets exactly what they deserve. What's remarkable is how many "administrators" are going to be dumb enough to do exactly that.

      Palladium is designed to make the PC an attractive platform to media conglomerates for online content. A platform which will allow Microsoft(tm) to collect a toll on that delivery. It has nothing to do with increasing security for end users. Media companies don't trust their cusomters, nor do they trust their PCs. Microsoft(tm), by assuming control of the users computer, will be able to assure the media companies that their customers PC's can be trusted, even though the customers themselves can't be.

    8. Re:Role of OS! by Jerf · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Now imagine the outcry from those who do have a security clue if they are left vulnerable because Microsoft decided it was in their best interests not to allow them to install the patch because it was unsigned.

      With all due respect, because everything you say is literally true, you are not thinking like a lawyer-driven beauracracy.

      In fact, the exact same evidence that you present for why unsigned drivers must be allowed will be interpreted as evidence that only signed drivers must be allowed by the buearacracy. The more things might go wrong in the system, the more evidence that centralized control is necessary, and should not be possible to bypass.

      Because remember, once a beauracracy has signed off on something, it IS perfect, even after it has been proven it is not. Whereas things not signed off on are worthless. The problem is always the stuff not under its control. Beauracracies are apparently incapable of realizing that mistakes are possible, and by assuming their impossibility, make the ones they make that much worse.

      Note I'm not speaking of Microsoft, specifically; this applies equally to lot of other things, most notably many large Government agencies.

    9. Re:Role of OS! by rabidcow · · Score: 1

      Both MS and whoever's writing the driver need to be able to test the driver somehow. This means loading it, BEFORE it has been signed. They cannot entirely remove the ability to install unsigned drivers.

    10. Re:Role of OS! by SiliconEntity · · Score: 2

      Microsoft(tm)'s Palladium scheme will require signed drivers. There is simply no way to try to enforce that level of security while still allowing end users to insert arbitrary code into the kernel. Not with any standard definition of "driver" and "kernel".

      That's not true. According to what Microsoft has said, Palladium runs "beside" Windows. It uses a new hardware mode (some people refer to it as ring -1) to get access to special "curtained" memory. Only a small Palladium kernel called the "nub" runs in this hardware mode.

      The ordinary Windows kernel is hopelessly insecure and the Palladium guys knew they'd never get anywhere if they relied on MS kernel security. The Windows kernel does not have sufficient privileges to touch Palladium secure code. Therefore Windows device drivers are not a security issue for Palladium.

      Microsoft has also said that Palladium does not involve having Microsoft certify code or verify signatures. Instead they provide a general mechanism by which application developers can create programs which authenticate themselves to servers, and store encrypted data that other programs can't decrypt. It's an open system and Microsoft doesn't want to be in the business of checking every application out there to see if it satisfies some kind of Palladium security requirements. Instead, it will be up to each application developer to decide which programs it will trust.

    11. Re:Role of OS! by Salsaman · · Score: 2
      Well if what you claim is true, then no matter how much DRM Microsoft build into WMP, it will be useless. All somebody has to do to get round it is to make a new soundcard driver that writes sound to disk instead of to the soundcard.

      The only alternative would be to force *all* soundcard manufacturers to incorporate hardware decryption straight onto their boards.

    12. Re:Role of OS! by Alsee · · Score: 2

      Palladium programs won't run unless they trust the operating system (nub), and you only access palladium content that trusts the palladium program.

      If a security hole is found in the OS (nub) or in a program you cannot patch it to close the hole untill you get the patch certified as Palladium-trusted. This will signifigantly delay they release of critical security fixes, leaving machines vulnerable.

      Oh yeah, and one of Palladium's big selling points is how it's supposed to protect security.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    13. Re:Role of OS! by Yankovic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They are signed. The activeX which downloads the file is signed and goes through intensive checking when communicating with the server at MS.

  2. Long trip... by mseeger · · Score: 5, Funny
    Hi,

    I hope he knows such trips to conferences may last longer than expected. Instead of bodyguards he should be guarded by lawyers.

    Yours, Martin

  3. Postscript Viewer by enneff · · Score: 5, Informative

    For those that don't have a Postscript viewer and run Windows, check out RoPS - small, fast and effective.

    1. Re:Postscript Viewer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      ..or you can get ghostscript with gsview. Did you know that 63503 is isomorph in gsview? ;-)

    2. Re:Postscript Viewer by Mr.+Droopy+Drawers · · Score: 1

      OK, why is this site a .org? It is obviously a for-profit site.

      --

      To Copy from One is Plagiarism; To Copy from Many is Research.

    3. Re:Postscript Viewer by darkonc · · Score: 2

      OK, why is this site a .org? It is obviously a for-profit site.
      Probably because rops.com is already taken and not worth buying on the secondhand market.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
  4. Crippled music discs? by acehole · · Score: 2, Funny

    Do they have wheelchairs or crutches?

    --
    Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
    1. Re:Crippled music discs? by khuber · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      Race records, Christian Rock, Cripple Discs. It's just a natural progression.

      -Kevin

  5. Damn PS by dew-genen-ny · · Score: 0

    Anyone care to repost that doc in another format ??? Our IT department are very very strict and I can't install jack on my NT box.... oh and my sun box can't see the 'net..... how much does that suck :C Cheers

    --
    tom-george.comBecause geeks rate higher t
    1. Re:Damn PS by Pathwalker · · Score: 5, Informative

      here is a PDF version for those people stuck on systems with only an acrobat viewer.

      It looks like he used a bitmap font, so the conversion looks a little ugly, but it is readable. I'll try to replace it with a better conversion in a half hour or so, as soon as I match the font he used.

    2. Re:Damn PS by RV.eq.VFG · · Score: 1

      the PDF version looks like the output from ps2pdf.

      ps2pdf will sometimes convert text to high-resolution bitmapped fonts rather than to embedded outline fonts. Currently, this will always occur when the PostScript file uses CID-keyed or double-byte fonts, when the input file uses kshow, or in some cases if it uses fonts with non-standard encodings; it may occur in other cases as well.

    3. Re:Damn PS by Pathwalker · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Nope - that was Acrobat Distiller.
      You don't want to see how badly the copy I made using ps2pdf turned out.

      If you look inside the .ps file, the fonts are labeled %DVIPSBitmapFont: Fa cmsy10 10 2 - showing that they are the 600 DPI bitmap version of 10 point Computer Modern.

      Acrobat distiller did what it could - it left all of the detail in the fonts. If you view the PDF file at 600 DPI or print it you can verify this for yourself.

      The problem is, the bitmap fonts are designed to display at one resolution - 600 dpi. While they print well, they scale down very poorly.

      I've been trying to replace the bitmap font with a vector version and reconvert, but I haven't had much luck so far.

    4. Re:Damn PS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bitmap fonts scale down very poorly in Adobe Acrobat, but there's no very good reason why Acrobat does such an astonishingly bad job of it. I've always thought this feature of Acrobat is one of the mysteries of the universe, especially considering that so many academic papers in PDF format have bitmap fonts.

      If you do figure out a way of changing the font to a vector one without destroying the document to much, I for one would be fascinated to know how it's done...

    5. Re:Damn PS by Hal-9001 · · Score: 1

      I've always found that an annoying aspect of (La)TeX documents on the web...a lot of them look really crappy when converted to PDF...

      --
      "It take 9 months to bear a child, no matter how many women you assign to the job."
    6. Re:Damn PS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "While they print well, they scale down very poorly" is not the case. They display badly in
      acroread due inadequacies in acroread. The real
      problem is that Adobe sells type 1 fonts, so
      thay have no incentive to fix the problem.

    7. Re:Damn PS by captaineo · · Score: 2

      Maybe Adobe would prefer that authors buy Acrobat and use it to publish documents rather than LaTeX... =)

    8. Re:Damn PS by almaw · · Score: 1

      Already done that - see previous post:

      HTML version available here

    9. Re:Damn PS by rweir · · Score: 3, Informative

      Tips for all the people churning out crappy PDFs from LaTeX: here

    10. Re:Damn PS by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2

      I can't believe this. Slashdot readers not knowing about LaTeX? It's right there in the postscript code: "TeXDict begin 40258431 52099146 1000 600 600 (jp.dvi)" Obviously, he's rendered his LaTeX document usind dvips at 600 DPI. TeX uses MetaFONT to render the various typefaces, not Postscript or TrueType.

    11. Re:Damn PS by t · · Score: 1
      I use pdf2html, for the really bad papers, it produces really nice gray scale pictures of each page. If you want color then you have to hack it up and change the device to -sDEVICE=jpeg among other things probably. Doing it this way you lose the nice antialiasing that the original package has. I've been contemplating writing some wavelet software using (daub(9,7) maybe? spline?) specifically to downsample it.

      Another thing I wanted was a way to crop the excessive white space border that many papers have. It would also fix the binding offset that some papers have, i.e., left-side pages have a larger right margin for the binding. It annoys me to no end to view papers in feh that jump side to side between pages. I also wish feh had a "toilet paper" mode for viewing images.

      Are you trying to do an OCR type thing that recognizes the font and replaces it with the appropriate postscript font?

      The other thing is, why bother converting a ps to pdf? I keep my ps files bzip2, and ggv will open a *.ps.{gz,bzip2} file with no problem. (It decompresses it to /tmp and opens that.)

      Now if you're talking about creating pdf directly than that's different.

    12. Re:Damn PS by almaw · · Score: 1

      About the only way to do this is to extract the pages as images (using for example Photoshop, which can batch-convert PDFs to PSDs).

      Then convert the images into something more useful (like TIFFs).

      Then OCR then using something that preserves formatting roughly, like OmniPage or something.

      Then load it into Word and save it out as a PDF using Acrobat.

      And even then you need to do some hand tweaking.

      Grrrr.

  6. This guy rocks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is it just me, or does he have a picture of Natalie Portman in his photo collection?

    Her name is Julie?

    Copy-protection bashing and Natalie Portman... A hero to us all. I salute you!

    1. Re:This guy rocks! by svallarian · · Score: 1

      yeah, she looks like she could definitely use some hot grits!

      (mods - look at the picture first)

      Steven V.

      --
      I patented screwing your mom. But it got revoked for "prior art."
  7. Actually, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    they prefer the term "Music Discs with Disabilities"

    1. Re:Actually, by more+fool+you · · Score: 5, Funny

      or even useability-challenged

    2. Re:Actually, by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 2

      How about:

      Music disks with reading difficulties?

    3. Re:Actually, by wiit_rabit · · Score: 3, Funny

      How about Fair Use challenged.

    4. Re:Actually, by operagost · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's "Differently-abled", you insensitive right-wing clod!

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  8. 'Frustrate fair use' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Exactly. There is no way that an audio cd can be made copy-protected, and remain reasonably compatible with redbook CD players. It was never built in to the spec, and there is no way to shoe-horn it in to the spec now.

  9. Which way will hardware producers go? by eddy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As the paper points out, these schemes rely on "bugs" and "mis-features" in reader firmware, and it suggests that CDDA copy prevention won't last since "[...]Hardware and Software adaption is an inevitable and natural extension of improved design and bug fixing".

    The question is if the hardware manufacturers will begin competing for customers by providing the very best fireware in their drives, or if they will join hands with the RIAA and the snake-oil salesmen. So far I see no decisive move in either direction.

    Some drives can 'clone' protections just fine or need only better software on the computer side, but on the other hand there's a whole class of typical hardware -- like the Toshiba in this case -- which has been b0rken for so long that I really think the manufacturer is playing nice with the copy-protection industry.

    Maybe what we really need is drives with a more capable RAW reading interface, then all errors could be emulated and/or corrected as necessary on the side we control, the computer.

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
    1. Re:Which way will hardware producers go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The question is if the hardware manufacturers will begin competing for customers by providing the very best fireware in their drives, or if they will join hands with the RIAA and the snake-oil salesmen.

      Maybe they will. If you cast your mind back a few years, it was touch and go as to wether a drive supported CDDA properly. Consumers educated themselves and bought drives which were known to work. This caused a demand for CDDA capable drives, and the other manufacturers caught up (Most of them, anyway!). These days its hard to find a drive that doesn't do CDDA.

      The system works! (O.K, it sort of works...). I don't see why it couldn't work again.

    2. Re:Which way will hardware producers go? by StrawberryFrog · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The question is if the hardware manufacturers will begin competing for customers by providing the very best fireware in their drives, or if they will join hands with the RIAA and the snake-oil salesmen. So far I see no decisive move in either direction.

      Well, here's a good sign: DVD players here in the UK are mostly region-agile, and are often advertised as such, even in national newspapers. Retailers tend to listen to consumers more then media monopolies do, as they compete more fiercely for customers.

      --

      My Karma: ran over your Dogma
      StrawberryFrog

    3. Re:Which way will hardware producers go? by PjotrP · · Score: 1
      Another good sign is that even Sony has mp3 playing devices, one of which even has the selling line "record from the net..." on their own homepage... http://www.sonystyle.com/home/dept.jsp?hierc=9687& deptid=9687

      "record from the net..."??? On the one hand they wanna cripple the fair use but on the other hand they release mp3 players that "record from the net..."? If you have the cd yourself why record from the net? for all those REALLY FREE mp3's made by people who cant get a record deal? yeah sure... that's just the same lame excuse that people who want kazaa to stay up use...

      It happened with mp3 players... first there were only weird hong kong made mp3 players... but when sony and all the big boys saw how much money those hong kong guys made they all wanted a piece of the pie... the only thing that can break those corporations from doing anything they can to make more profit is their greed... I mean, they stick together quite nicely when fighting for their profits.. but as soon as they find out a way to make even more money by not sticking together they suddenly forget their partners in their lil axis of evil...

      --
      PjotrP
  10. Standards? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems that some industries define standards to break them (for "additional features"). Interesting what happens to players if they follow the standard, i.e. they probably need to be a bit "non-standard" to play crippled CDs...

  11. Let's be fair here... by goldspider · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Princeton student Alex Halderman takes apart (bit by bit, literally) the "tricks on tracks" employed by the music industry to frustrate fair use."

    ...as if the music industry's actions has nothing whatsoever to do with frustrating music pirates.

    Let's be fair here. We all know that recent copy protection schemes do in fact (at the very least) interfere with fair use, but we can't forget/deliberately ignore the underlying goal of the music industry for the sake of sensationalism, however faulty their methods are.

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    1. Re:Let's be fair here... by Chriscypher · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It amazing me that the same battles seem to be fought as computers infiltrate each new market. In the early 80's, personal computer software publishers did everything in their power to copy protect floppy disks, writing on half tracks, out-of-range tracks, and using other floppy format tricks.

      This created a new industry of commercial disk copy utilities, such as Copy2Mac, etc etc which enabled any floppy disk to be duplicated. For years it was an arms race of new protection schemes vs. copy utilities.

      If I remember correctly (I was pretty young then), lawsuits were filed against copy utility publishers, which lost, the courts holding that making a personal copy for backup purposes fell under fair use doctrine.

      I am sure there are plenty of prior cases which would overthrow the DMCA if a test case would only come to court.

      This software copy protection war resulted in:
      A) Common use of copy utilities by end users
      B) Eventual resignation by the industry against protecting media: not worth the cost or user inconvience.
      C) Introduction of hardware dongles for high-ticket software.
      D) The serial number 'protection' method in common use today for software.

      So here we are with music publishers revisiting the same war, and I believe they too will ultimately lose. I believe their actions are the result of old school inertia within the industry, and that ultimately, their business model will necessarily change.

      --
      "You have liberated me from thought."
    2. Re:Let's be fair here... by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 0

      ...as if the music industry's actions has nothing whatsoever to do with frustrating music pirates.

      The industry's intent is allegedly to frustrate 'pirates'. But since these measures have not been shown to prevent illegal copyright violations in any way, yet the industry continues to push these technologies, they must have elimination of 'fair use' rights as a secondary goal.

    3. Re:Let's be fair here... by Meowing · · Score: 1
      ...as if the music industry's actions has nothing whatsoever to do with frustrating music pirates.
      Thing is, there is an actual industry based around counterfeiting this stuff, and these things don't involve fair use at all, and the DRM attempts to date aren't going to do a damn thing to stop that business. I've run across "discounted" CDs that were really obvious recordsings of vinyl, complete with skips and pops. not being able to get that perfect digital copy isn't going to stop the stuff the RIAA and MPAA should legitimately be worried about. Sell these things in transient markets -- tourist/vacation spots, fairs, etc., for cash, and there isn't much the buyer can (or will bother to) do.
    4. Re:Let's be fair here... by scottmccasland · · Score: 1

      You mentioned Copy2Mac, anyone know where I can get a copy? I have one of those old mac floppies with insanely complicated copy protection, a graphic version of Rogue by EPYX I'm down to the original disk(which is over 15 years old) as all the others have died and the cracks I found online do not work.

  12. errr, what's ps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    it doesn't have an icon on my windows xp system. Do I use notepad :(

    1. Re:errr, what's ps? by ottffssent · · Score: 0

      I do hope that was /intended/ to be +1 Funny. Because if you really don't know what postscript is, you're too young to read Slashdot...

      <feels old>

    2. Re:errr, what's ps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do hope that was /intended/ to be +1 Funny. Because if you really don't know what postscript is, you're too young to read Slashdot...

      But I'm 97, how old do you have to get? :(

    3. Re:errr, what's ps? by Hal-9001 · · Score: 2, Funny

      1337 h4x0rs read Postscript in plain text...just not in Notepad... ;-)

      --
      "It take 9 months to bear a child, no matter how many women you assign to the job."
    4. Re:errr, what's ps? by SN74S181 · · Score: 1

      It works on my Windows 2000 machine. I just click on the .ps file and it opens up Acrobat Distiller and makes it into a .pdf file.

    5. Re:errr, what's ps? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

      I didn't download the file, and didn't realize that "PS" was referring to the file at all. I thought that "pure PS" meant "pure Princeton Shit" or something. I was expecting "BS".

  13. Just semantics? by Sheetrock · · Score: 0, Interesting
    True, it is not probable that the industry can find a way to effectively protect a compact-disc from illegal copying without violating the specification, but how many average Britney Spears fans pay careful attention to how 'in spec' their CD collections are? What's the effective difference between a compact-disc and music on a plastic wafer that will play back pretty much anywhere but won't let people record from it, other than the preventing copying part?

    On a related note (since I try to stomp out FUD where I find it), I'd have a hard time saying that the industry's intent is to destroy fair use. Where's the profit in that? I have little doubt that the problems that are occurring are because they're trying to -comply- with spec, not obliterate it -- namely, the problems some have noted with copy-protected compact discs are because the industry is trying to protect its content while remaining compatible with an obsolete standard. I have little doubt that when the next generation of media arrives, with effective digital rights management built in, that it will have the capability to deliver content and permit fair use while preventing the sort of rampant piracy that is driving small record chains out of business. I think that the free market will probably be the best way to determine how importantly fair use should factor in to these new designs.

    --

    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
    -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




    1. Re:Just semantics? by 3141 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      1. I'd have a hard time saying that the industry's intent is to destroy fair use. Where's the profit in that?

      Fair use is largely concerned with being able to copy a work. The problem that I and many like me see is that it can't even be properly argued that there IS any profit in it. The point is not profit but control, with the idea that in some time in the future this can be leveraged to make profit. It's the same reason Disney are so scared to let "Steamboat Willie" fall out of copyright. You think they're going to many a fortune on that any time soon?

      2. I have little doubt that the problems that are occurring are because they're trying to -comply- with spec, not obliterate it -- namely, the problems some have noted with copy-protected compact discs are because the industry is trying to protect its content while remaining compatible with an obsolete standard.

      I have to wonder if you're not just having a laugh with this one. Altering a specification, for whatever reason, is quite the opposite to complying with it. The proper method of adding functionality to a specification is to create a new one. Compare how PNG could not support animation, so a new specification was made, MNG, that could. Also compare how no-one uses MNG, because they are quite happy with PNGs and animated gifs. This is how you determine whether a standard is obsolete or not, and the same logic applies to the CD. If everyone is happy with it, it isn't obsolete... or will you be listening to sounds with a frequency out of the (44100/2) = 22050Hz that CD supports?

      3. I have little doubt that when the next generation of media arrives, with effective digital rights management built in, that it will have the capability to deliver content and permit fair use...

      The two are the antithesis of each other. When the day comes that I can't copy a CD to play on another stereo, or just to make a backup, I've lost all pretence of having fair use capabilities in the CD.

      4. ...while preventing the sort of rampant piracy that is driving small record chains out of business.

      Examples, please. I have yet to see any examples that have evidence of piracy harming small record chains, while I have seen some that suggest it helps by providing wider exposure. "Piracy" has been bandied around so long as the cause of all commercial suffering that people are beginning to believe it, even using it for an excuse for failure.

      5. I think that the free market will probably be the best way to determine how importantly fair use should factor in to these new designs.

      Spot on correct! So when are we going to repeal the DMCA and throw out the SSSCA/CBDTPA? Let's let the free market (including all the fair-use supporting consumers) decide whether crippled content delivery will fly or not.

    2. Re:Just semantics? by Hope+Thelps · · Score: 1

      What's the effective difference between a compact-disc and music on a plastic wafer that will play back pretty much anywhere but won't let people record from it, other than the preventing copying part?

      It's not entirely clear from your question whether or not you realise that these pseudo-cds won't play back in devices correctly made to play real cds.

      If the question is "what is the difference between a piece of plastic that will play on a class of devices and a piece of plastic that will play on a subset of that class of devices"? Then... well, I think with a bit of effort you should be able to work out the answer but if not then let me know and I'll try to think up some clues.

      --
      To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem. ~ h2g2
    3. Re:Just semantics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You're right, the average person doesn't care about the Redbook spec, but what I meant was that you can't create an audio CD that even plays on any standard audio CD player, than cannot be copied, regardless of whether it violates the Redbook spec.

      In other words, if it plays on anything resembling a CD player, you can digitally copy it.

      Just because scrambling the error correction throws off Windows PCs, that does not mean it is impossible to copy the disc. It might make it impossible for the average person, but not impossible.

    4. Re:Just semantics? by shis-ka-bob · · Score: 1

      5. I think that the free market will probably be the best way to determine how importantly fair use should factor in to these new designs. Free markets are an economic construction that allocated scarce resources. It is perhaps the best mechanism we have DEVISED for this purpose. One problem is that information is not scarce, at least once it has been published. WE, as a society make it scarce with copyrights & patents. This is a choise we make to reward the creative process. I support this, but at a level comperable with what the founding fathers of the US had in mind. So, how can a free market sort out fair-use. These are artifical constructions & we must choose which one is paramount. There is no invisible hand at work here, WE must choose.

      --
      Think global, act loco
    5. Re:Just semantics? by Hut_Mul · · Score: 1
      On a related note (since I try to stomp out FUD where I find it)... rampant piracy that is driving small record chains out of business.

      Funny you should mention stomping out FUD while you are spewing FUD with this statement. Rampant piracy is not driving small record chains out of business. It is large retail chain's like Best Buy and Wal-Mart that are cutting the price of CD's below cost, which in turn is hurting record store's.

      Why don't you buy a dog and name it Clue so you will have one.

    6. Re:Just semantics? by Empty+Threats · · Score: 0

      Nothing, no DRM, no law, nothing can put a stop to piracy. Only draconian measures have any chance at even slowing it down.

    7. Re:Just semantics? by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 1

      or will you be listening to sounds with a frequency out of the (44100/2) = 22050Hz that CD supports?

      Damn if this isn't the last-understood facet fo sound ever. Sampling rates well over 44.1 kHz are useful.

      Think for a moment about a sine wave with a frequency of 22,000 Hz. Now, try to represent that in a digital medium that is capable of describing 22,050 Hz accurately. For the first part of the encoded signal, as the sampling occurs at appoximately the crests and troughs, you will have a good approximation 0f the 22 kHz wave. As time goes on, however, the signal will drift out of phase with the encoder, and you will end up with a flat line until they drift into phase again.

      Now, think of a 22,050 Hz signal that starts out of phase with the encoder. If both of them operate at exactly the same frequency, you could end up with your 44,100 samples per second filled with nothing, provided you are sampling at just the right (wrong?) part of the wave.

      This is why 96 kHz sampling is a good idea. It allows a good representation of all audible waveforms no matter what the conditions. I really doubt the music industry would push for such advances, and use them in every modern studio, if it weren't worthwhile. Sure, consumers buy whatever number you put in front of them, but if they didn't need to increase the sampling rate you can bet the music industry would have a heyday selling you a disc with twice as much (time-based) capacity.

      --
      ± 29 dB
  14. Just use an CD-Burner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I just had contact with an copy protected audio cd.
    It was a present at a birthday party on which musik was played with a pc. We just wanted to insert the CD to the cdrom an listen to the music. The music wasn't playing and the cdplayer just hung. So we booted into Winblows to try it over there. Same result. The guy was only listening to the music with his computer. So i took the cd with me and ripped it in my CD-Burner. So now i have a spare copy of the disk just because it was copy protected. Doh.
    Music industrie annoys me - haven't bought any CD's lately. This boycott is not very constructive
    but i just don't have any idea how to "fair use" the music of the artist.

  15. OT Re:Fair use? by expro · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The record companies have had more than ample opportunity to express their committment, both verbally and in deeds, to preserving what used to be the normal use of purchased media and fair uses of media by their customers. They have made it clear that they are trying to stamp out exactly that by opposing it and never saying otherwise.

    Whatever games they and you (and for all we know you are they) play to pretend otherwise, their goal is to squeeze more and more money out of those who legally purchase their works, thinking that as long as the market may be able to bear more, it is their duty to extract more by further restriction of rights, whatever that means to their customers.

    This is also very obvious from your / their push to extend copyright perpetually, extracting more and more, not from the copyright violators, but from those who abide by the laws.

    While you / they feel it is your right to push it to the edge to squeeze every last drop from the paying public who have suported you thus far, claiming you / they are just trying to make pirates pay their fair share. The fact kicking those who have been buying dozens or hundreds of new titles every a year does not make us more loyal, and will eventually lead to changes more fundamental than what you / they complain about today.

    We know your industry hates discussion of fair use. If they ever showed any signs of actually caring about preserving the rights of the customer, they might have a legitimate sympathizer or two among the paying public. An approach that exhibited any evenhandedness, restoring some of what they have driven so hard to take away, would shock their opponents. There are any number of forms this could take technologically.

  16. I don't understand why they try... by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...because this only pisses off their existing customers. I've yet to see one CD protection that hasn't been bit-exact ripped by someone (which is all it takes).

    If they can't play it in the devices they have will they
    a) Call it a defective cd? Most likely.

    b) When they find out it's defective by design, will they

    1) Continue to buy defective CDs?
    2) Get a normal CD(-R) from friends or mp3 from internet?

    We get more and more DVD/CD/MP3/kitchen sink consumer players. Break compatibility with those, and the MPAA will have only themselves to thank when the customers abandon them (Who the hell pays $20-25/CD anyway, that's the usual full price here in Norway...)

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:I don't understand why they try... by ljfrench · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If they can't play it in the devices they have will they
      a) Call it a defective cd? Most likely.
      b) When they find out it's defective by design, will they
      1) Continue to buy defective CDs?
      2) Get a normal CD(-R) from friends or mp3 from internet?


      No, right about the time the users start to rally and enough of an outcry is made, the RIAA will present their solution: A new medium, be it DVDA or SACD or some other format, that has DRM built in.

      They're hoping if they frustrate you enough, you'll eventually have to choose another medium, which they'll be happy to provide!

      ljfrench

    2. Re:I don't understand why they try... by BeBoxer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We get more and more DVD/CD/MP3/kitchen sink consumer players. Break compatibility with those, and the MPAA will have only themselves to thank when the customers abandon them

      That's what I find amazing. These CD's work only in plain audio CD players. But as the incremental cost of adding MP3 playback drops to almost nothing, more and more players are including that functionality. Quite a few portables play MP3s. At least a dozen car CD decks play them. All DVD players. All computers of course. I've even seen boom boxes that play them.

      And these new discs, by trashing the TOC with stupid multisession tricks, are going to have problems in a growing class of players. It's like the media conglomerates want me to go pirate their music. With their endless campaign to reduce both the quality of the music as well as the compatability and usefulness of the disc itself, combined with what seems to be endless price hikes and settlements with the FCC for price fixing. Ugh. The music industry survives despite the executives running it, not because of them.

    3. Re:I don't understand why they try... by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 2


      If there's public outcry about CDs that don't work in normal CD players, there sure as hell will be public outcry against the RIAA's proposed solution of "buy your entire library of music again, on this new format that looks exactly the same as the existing format and won't work in normal CD players either" also...

  17. Updated software "soon"? by Spider[DAC] · · Score: 1

    This paper appears to have a lot of good pointers to software writers, including a "recipie" to make cdr-dao read the faulty discs on all hardware readers that support it.

    Will this lead to a new release of cdr-dao "soon" that incorporates theese suggestsions? will the apperantly "dead" cdparanoia also be updated? (yes, it did work good on plextor, but for other cd-roms, can it be made to work?)

    I also wonder, how can theese suggestions be incorporated in the average cd player? things like xmms would probably need updating to the cd player module to handle some of theese. I know it's ugly hacking to go around broken hardware, but thats what we do in all other places....

    --
    I didn't do this, now did I?
  18. Re:Witch one is is: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whose dome are we freeing?

  19. So what is a "pirate"? by fmaxwell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is no scheme yet devised that will significantly hamper true music pirates. And by that term, I mean people who create and redistribute bootleg CDs for profit. Any of those folks will just take an audio CD player and capture the music via the SPDIF output.

    The music industry wants to convince the world that anyone who records a CD to their hard disc is a "pirate." They want consumers to believe that making a backup copy in case of damage is piracy. They want people to believe that creating a "mix CD" of your favorite songs is piracy. They want the public to believe that the guy who copies a CD so he can have one in his car and one at home is a pirate. In short, they are waging a campaign to equate simple copying with piracy.

    In their ideal world, if you wanted a copy of a CD for the car and one for the home, you would have to purchase two of them. If you wanted a "mix CD" with numerous hits, you would choose from their canned compilations. If you damaged the CD while moving it from player to player, you would have to purchase a new one (since you would not have a backup). This is not about piracy. It's about making you pay multiple times for the same music.

    1. Re:So what is a "pirate"? by goldspider · · Score: 4, Interesting
      All very good points, but let me ask you this:

      Would this nearly as much of an issue without the likes of Napster and P2P contributing to the proliferation of illegal music distribution (whatever you want to call it, I'm talking about the illegal stuff)?

      Outdated business models, infringements on fair use, and past claims about bootlegging aside (we've heard all of that already) there's a definite cause-and-effect relationship between the ease of file sharing/distribution and the xxAA's actions.

      Ignoring the fact that people who have illegally acquired/distributed software have largely contributed to the problem we are now facing from the music/movie industries won't make that fact go away.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    2. Re:So what is a "pirate"? by fmaxwell · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Would this nearly as much of an issue without the likes of Napster and P2P contributing to the proliferation of illegal music distribution (whatever you want to call it, I'm talking about the illegal stuff)?

      I think so. I believe that Napster and other P2P networks were simply an excuse. There is little evidence to suggest that Napster et al. were costing the record companies a lot in sales. In fact, there were some pretty reputable studies and polls done that showed that exposure to new music on Napster caused people to buy more CDs. It's one thing to download a song or two by an artist to see if you like their stuff, but it is quite another to risk $15 or more on a CD that you've never heard.

      Want to know what the largest network is that distributes copyrighted music? FM radio. Back in high school when I wanted one song by a band and could not afford and/or justify buying their whole album, I'd just record it off the air on cassette. My friends did the same thing. We also made cassettes of LPs (yeah, I know that I'm old).

      I think that the RIAA just saw this as an opportunity to push crippled CDs on to the public.

    3. Re:So what is a "pirate"? by goldspider · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "There is little evidence to suggest that Napster et al. were costing the record companies a lot in sales."

      That wasn't the point I was making. My point is that these technologies simply have made it easier to aquire their product without paying for it.

      "Want to know what the largest network is that distributes copyrighted music?"

      That's true, but neither Napster nor any of the P2P software makers are paying royalties for the distribution of their product.

      And I may be too young to remember, but I don't recall any music company suing a radio station over listeners who were recording songs from the airwaves.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    4. Re:So what is a "pirate"? by Melantha_Bacchae · · Score: 2

      goldspider writes:

      > there's a definite cause-and-effect relationship
      > between the ease of file sharing/distribution and
      > the xxAA's actions.

      Yes, let us take a moment to weep for the pirates that enslave the artists in work-for-hire contracts, and take their copyrights so they can profit from their ill gotten booty again and again. The poor old things have gotten shanghai'ed by their customers who break their copyrights by sharing the music with others for no profit. Boo-hoo.

      Please! P2P is a convenient scapegoat, and the greedy media sharks know it. It is a competitor that they want to destroy. P2P competes with the big labels in two ways:

      1) Promotion. Some of the indies have spoken out to confirm it. They actually profit from P2P because it promotes their work.

      2) Distribution. P2P is an efficient distribution network. Used legally, it can get demos out to a wide audience. Used in combination with existing internet shareware sales structures and things like Amazon ZShops, even a small indie (student with basement studio) could easily distribute demo mp3s and sell CDs.

      > Ignoring the fact that people who have illegally
      > acquired/distributed software have largely
      > contributed to the problem we are now facing
      > from the music/movie industries won't make that
      > fact go away.

      Nope, the real problem is a bunch of greedy pirate media sharks. Mothra dealt with that problem 41 years ago by trouncing evacuated areas of Newkirk City (Hollywood) until they freed and returned her little artists to her ("Mothra" 1961). These days she has gotten a lot sneakier and made friends with Apple ("Mothra" 1996, "Mothra 2" 1997), who has pledged to democratize the tools of the music and movie industries.

      The way to make that problem go away for good is to replace the greedy sharks with indie artists and small business studios. Then the rights of the artists will be preserved, and the public will have a wide and plentiful variety of inexpensive music. (Until then, grab a pair of rocks, and beat out: "Strangers, strangers, let them go!" ;)

      Fame might still be possible, but it will be a rare and deserved crown granted by the real public, and not a tinsel crown bestowed by some music exec with a tin ear.

      "They bind our hearts: 'Let's sell them again and again!'
      Our plan understands the sea; we can wait for her coming."
      From the song "Infanto no Musume" in the Japanese version of "Mothra" (1961).

    5. Re:So what is a "pirate"? by goldspider · · Score: 1
      "The way to make that problem go away for good is to replace the greedy sharks with indie artists and small business studios."

      And while we're at it, let's solve world hunger, cure cancer, and make people of all cultures and religions get along.

      As long as we continue to demand the RIAA's product, they will always be around to provide the supply. And yes, copying a song from a P2P network still counts as demand.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    6. Re:So what is a "pirate"? by Jerf · · Score: 2

      That wasn't the point I was making. My point is that these technologies simply have made it easier to aquire their product without paying for it.

      And his point was that they did, on average, pay for it more then they did when Napster wasn't present.

      That's true, but neither Napster nor any of the P2P software makers are paying royalties for the distribution of their product.

      The point is motivation. From a strict profit motivation, Napster made the record companies money, according to several independent studies. It is transparently obvious that the record companies did not shut down Napster because of money. Royalties are one instituted system of payment; there is nothing holy about them in copyright law or morality. On average, Napster users did pay for their music, in terms of money in the music distributors coffers, which is what really counts from a moral point of view.

      Please do me the courtesy of carefully reading that paragraph before replying with a knee-jerk reaction. Make sure you read what I said and not what you think I said. (This is not directed at goldspider personally, I'm just sick in general of people reading their pre-conceived notions of "what people like that say" into debates like this. How can you think you understand the opposition when you never actually read what they have to say?)

      And I may be too young to remember, but I don't recall any music company suing a radio station over listeners who were recording songs from the airwaves.

      Rest assured that had the MPAA won their VCR suit where they wanted to prevent people from taping off of the television (as exact a match as you can hope for), this would have followed. With such a clear precedent, it wasn't worth bothering with, they know they would have lost.

    7. Re:So what is a "pirate"? by goldspider · · Score: 1
      "From a strict profit motivation, Napster made the record companies money, according to several independent studies. It is transparently obvious that the record companies did not shut down Napster because of money."

      Considering that money is generally accepted as the primary motivation of an industry, I am interested in hearing what, then, WAS the motivation for shutting down Napster. If I were a good businessman, I certainly wouldn't shut down a proven source of profit, especially in an era of (supposed) ever-dwindling profit margins.

      So either Hilary Rosen is a piss-poor busuiness leader (as some of the RIAA's other decisions could certainly suggest) or the independent studies you referred to aren't as accurate as they would like us to believe.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    8. Re:So what is a "pirate"? by MyHair · · Score: 2

      My point is that these technologies simply have made it easier to aquire their product without paying for it.

      You think computerized digital copying is easier than cassette tapes? Everyone I know can record things on cassette, but not everyone can operate--let alone install--copying/ripping/p2p and player software. I was making tapes when I was 4 and younger.

      And I may be too young to remember, but I don't recall any music company suing a radio station over listeners who were recording songs from the airwaves.

      But you do know that a portion of blank cassette sales goes to the music industry because they assume they are used for "piracy", right? They didn't go after radio, but they did go after the hardware to record from it.

    9. Re:So what is a "pirate"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The music industry is so scared of the potential threat of people sharing unprotected music files that they're unswayed by any studies that show that music sharing increases sales. Remember, this is the same industry that sued to try to kill the radio industry when it was new (by attempting to require them to pay the same insane kinds of royalties that they're now extracting from online streaming audio stations, oddly enough).

      This isn't a discussion about facts or ROI models, it is a discussion about fear of a potential culture shift that could wipe out their industry.

    10. Re:So what is a "pirate"? by jwilcox154 · · Score: 1

      That wasn't the point I was making. My point is that these technologies simply have made it easier to aquire their product without paying for it.

      That's true, but neither Napster nor any of the P2P software makers are paying royalties for the distribution of their product.


      The RIAA though is using P2P as a "scapegoat" to push New Laws "SSSCA/CBDTPA" to get rid of competition, and to prevent "Fair Use".

      BTW, I don't use P2P much, I get most of My Music today from "Analog" Sources "Cassette, LP, & 8-Track" and copy it to CD, which is why the xxAA wants to plug the Analog Hole


      And I may be too young to remember, but I don't recall any music company suing a radio station over listeners who were recording songs from the airwaves.

      That is because there is a tax^h^h^h Surcharge on Blank Cassettes that goes to the RIAA, And cassettes don't last as long as CDs.

    11. Re:So what is a "pirate"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The industry attacked digital tape recorders long before there was ever a Napster. The Congress (yes, I mean you, ex-Senator Gore) went along.

      That's why consumer MiniDisc and DAT recorders are crippled with SCMS, why you pay royalties on such recorders for the benefit of the industry, and why you pay royalties on the blank media for the benefit of the industry.

      They also got an exemption carved out of the First Sale Doctrine to make it illegal to rent records without approval (as forthcoming as ice water in Hell). Hollywood didn't get any such exemption for videos, which is why we have video rental stores.

    12. Re:So what is a "pirate"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently, I am a pirate since I no longer use my "audio components" to listen to music at all. The RIAA has convinced me to add them to my boycott list (which they will share with Microsoft and their ISV cronies). Since I own 1000+ cd's, it will be their loss more than mine. On the upside, its getting easier to save for my retirement (gave up on MPAA and professional sports a long time ago)!!

    13. Re:So what is a "pirate"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is also a small matter of a large recession that has hit the United States recently. The drop in sales apperantly has nothing to do with that according to the RIAA.

  20. Oh nooooo... by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now it's not just the DMCA we're up against; we also have to worry about the ADA. If you don't buy one of these copy-protected CDs you may be sued for discriminating against the handicapped.

  21. It also costs $, while GhostScript is free by Slashamatic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Perhaps it is a sledgehammer to crack a nut but I would rather use GhostScript. Both variants (AFPL and GPL) are esentially and totally free, respectively which I prefer. For such an article, is a commercial (and overpriced)viewer really appropriate?

    1. Re:It also costs $, while GhostScript is free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh... sorry to poke my idiotic Windows user nose in here... but how do I install GhostScript exactly? I've found instructions which call for particular files, but the GhostScript site isn't all that easy to navigate.

    2. Re:It also costs $, while GhostScript is free by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2

      Look here Scrool down to "Windows 95, 98, ME, NT, 2000 or XP" and download the gs704w32.exe and gsv43w32.exe files.

    3. Re:It also costs $, while GhostScript is free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better yet, go to Redhat.com or Mandrake.com and download the latest. Postscript and PDF with an excellect OS thrown in for free.

    4. Re:It also costs $, while GhostScript is free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be good and all, except for the fact that my job requires several applications that only run on Windows, and it requires Outlook to recieve email and calendars from an Exchange 5.5 server. If it was Exchange 2k, I could use Ximian Connector, but there are no connectors for Exchange 5.5. Because of this, I have to run Windows on my primary box.

  22. I have to wonder whether publishing the results of such endeavours violates the DMCA -- it sure seems like everything that involves data security does these days. I'm still happy he's published but I wonder whether the lawyer-boys in the RIAA are salivating right now... (insert hungry animal growling noise here).

    1. Re:DMCA? by klaasvakie · · Score: 2, Funny

      >> I'm still happy he's published but I wonder whether the lawyer-boys in the RIAA are salivating right now... (insert hungry animal growling noise here).

      they aren't, he published it in .ps format, the RIAA can't read it.

      --
      # ssh -l neo the_matrix; killall -9 agent_smith
    2. Re:DMCA? by herbierobinson · · Score: 2

      Given that Philleps (the designers of CD format and owners of the trademarks), have publicly claimed the techniques to be "defects" not "copy protection schemes" I suspect it would be hard to prosecute. Of course that wouldn't stop harassment lawsuits.

      --
      An engineer who ran for Congress. http://herbrobinson.us
  23. Future directions by eddy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The difference, I feel, is that the region system is something which average joes can understand and question; "So you're saying that for some artifical reason this player will reject DVDs I've bought over-seas?", while the reliance by CDDA copy-protection schemes on reader firmware (as opposed to being fully contained within the CDs themselves) isn't as apparent or easy to convey. Basically, people are mostly unaware that their choice of drive will and can change the degree to which they can use copy-protected discs on their computer.

    I wish they'd used a Lite-On drive in the tests too. Plextor is mostly bought by people in-the-know, while Lite-on provides quality firmware (my experience) on a much wider level and could be used as a good recommendation based on quality, high availability and low price.

    I'd also like to see future research which goes beyond the black-box approach and actually use a custom firmware to dump the disc.

    I just hope that some manufacturer recognize the opportunity and either provides a good quality firmware with good failovers which just rips through these protections, or provides a firmware which can be switched into "dummy cd-player mode" in which it would behave exactly like a dumb cd-player would. This shouldn't take up too many bytes, and the interface could be anything from a simple "tripple-click eject button to change mode" to a nice looking GUI-app (which Plextor is very good with already, via their "PlexTools".

    (I don't work for Plextor or Lite-On. I do own drives from both manufacturers though)

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
  24. PDF version by almaw · · Score: 3, Informative

    Call me a karma-whoring idiot if you like, but I thought I'd stick up a copy of this in a format that's not quite so bitmapped. ph33r my l33t OCRing skillz, etc. :)

    Click here for an HTML version.

    1. Re:PDF version by almaw · · Score: 1

      Oh, and when I said "PDF version" in the header, I didn't mean that - I was going to do a PDF, but Acrobat's being rather uncooperative. :(

      There's a Word (spit) version too:
      Click here for a Word (doc) version

    2. Re:PDF version by SN74S181 · · Score: 1

      But, but, but... don't you realize you've just violated his copyright?

      Yes, I know. Copyright isn't very respected here. Unless it's the copyright that is the only protection of GPL'd software, of course.

    3. Re:PDF version by MyHair · · Score: 1

      Copyright isn't very respected here. Unless it's the copyright that is the only protection of GPL'd software, of course.

      Copyright is dead! Long live the GPL!

  25. Re:Witch one is is: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whose dome are we freeing?

    Nobody's, domes should belong to themselves, that's why we're freeing them.

  26. A chance to get ahead of the curve by seanellis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Looks like we can get ahead of the game here, by ensuring that we have our "Free Alex" flyers and placards printed out in advance.

    Seriously, the amount of information in this paper is similar to that which got Dmitry Sklyarov detained under the Downloaded Music Criminalization Act (DMCA). It even gives information as to which programs and hardware are most effective at bypassing these copy-restriction technologies.

    It's well worth a read to see how these technolgies only work due to buggy or fragile implementations of the standard.

  27. technical analysis in Halderman paper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't this technical research mostly based on the assumption that the firmware programmers of Plextor did their job good (while others can't)? I think he should has done his technical analysis with more drives, like Teac or the latest Yamaha F1. Drives like this also read audio protections fine.

  28. IANAL but... by Greyfox · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Any attempt to bar publication of a dicussion of various techniques should fail as long as the author doesn't post source code or executables. The DMCA does not override the First Ammendment and, IIRC, only deals with devices that defeat copy protection.

    The industry likes to threaten lawsuits over technical discussions of their various techniques, but they will never actually let one of those lawsuits be taken to court because they know they'll be bitchslapped into the middle of next week by a pissed off judge. They'd far rather stick an academian with the cost of initially retaining a lawyer rather than risk having to pay his legal fees for blatantly abusing the legal system.

    So they may file a lawsuit but it'll be retracted as soon as Halderman's lawer files his first brief.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:IANAL but... by Corby911 · · Score: 1

      Since Princeton has agreed to protect him (in the legal sense), this isn't really a huge issue. I'm sure they can afford a decent lawyer. See also Princeton Law.

      --
      Monday is a horrible way to spend 1/7 of your life.
  29. big cancer carrying monsters biting their own ass. by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Informative

    imagine, buying a SONY minidisc player, that's advertised being easy to use and fast to transfer songs to from your cd's via your pc(and able to play mp3's), and that come's with software to do that.

    you buy it at an all purpose entertainment electronics supermarket that sells cd's too, you pick up a record you like that's published by SONY thinking that at least that one should work easily (because you are not very tech savvy and would like the first transfer to go smooth as possible).

    you get home after that, excited about your new purchase, software installs easily but the cd copy to player just won't work, completely clueless you call your geek friend who then comes over, and explains he could tell you how to do it but would have to kill you afterwards.

    would the average consumer be a LITTLE confused and afterwards disappointed at this?

    could the companies PLEASE at least make up their mind about the issues?(sure they might be different depts. of same corp. but still.. and sure this same issue might have been brought up before too.)

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  30. Same thing by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 2

    The music industry considers fair use to be theft. See, for instance, the dialogue between Hilary Rosen and Orrin Hatch, where she told him that it should be illegal to copy a CD he bought for his car or for his wife.

  31. Whoa! I gotta get me one of these! by u38cg · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Since when did Red Hat release with a 4.2.18-3 kernel? I can't seem to find it in the official tree, so I might just have to reconsider my loyalties to SuSE.

    --
    [FUCK BETA]
  32. Re:What a geek! by evil+superstar · · Score: 0

    the guy writes his paper in postscript, what do you expect?

  33. Pissing away precious resources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I wonder what the world would be like if all these efforts were directed at actually getting information into the hands and minds of people, as opposed to hiding it from them? Simplistic, yes. Information is just information to me. There is plenty of it for free or very low cost, and the for pay can be quickly reverse engineered in the human mind in a pinch. Timely delivery or well crafted information is of value and has a limited term business model.. i.e. books, research, art, .. but for the most part, in an economic sense, people should probably focus on tangible goods and services (not to be confused with Greenspeak's new economy folly).

    I hope for an age of reason and innovation, a fairly major paradigm shift. But it's a possibility as these MNCs continue to p*ss away their working capital trying to abate evolution.. it's good that some of these cathedrals will fall, because there are some great raw materials there that can be recycled and used to create things of better value.

  34. Re:LOTR: an allegory for our times by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 3

    Not to feed the trolls -- or, in this case, the Balrogs -- but...

    There are far fewer than six degrees of separation between Tolkien's Magnum Opus and the Third Reich's own modern mythology. Himmler and the good Professor both drew from the same sources. Himmler, of course, took a very wrong turn Eastward through Hindu Mythology, but had both men sat at the same table at a dinner party, they would have had a lot to talk about...

  35. Re:LOTR: an allegory for our times by ThePeeWeeMan · · Score: 1

    Kudos to whoever modded this as Funny.

    In other news, the "instant karma" algorithm on /. is breaking down... mentioning the RIAA, MPAA, DMCA and MS will no longer get you an instant +5.

  36. What about home audio CD recorders? by dpbsmith · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I continue to feel that attention should be paid to how these things interact with home audio CD recorders, and not just because I happen to own one.

    Under the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, blank media for home audio CD recorders includes a fee which is distributed to publishers and artists in exchange for the right to copy the CD. Home audio recorders are restricted from writing to ordinary blank CD-R media; the media must have the encoding that identifies them as a "Music CD-R" thus verifying that the fee has been paid, and they also incorporate a "serial copy control system" which makes it difficult for people to create huge numbers of copies by making copies for three friends who each make copies for three friends, etc.

    Copy-protection schemes have to corrupt the data enough to prevent access by standard computer software. HOWEVER, they must not corrupt it so much that home audio CD recorders fail, or they are (probably) violating the AHRA.

    In practice, Universal Music evaded answering any questions I asked them about this issue; however, when I sent them a copy of "The Fast and the Furious" which my home audio CD recorder refused to copy, they sent me a replacement which did! I believe their strategy is "avoid public discussion by taking care of any individuals who complain, on a case-by-case basis."

  37. Re:big cancer carrying monsters biting their own a by thomasdelbert · · Score: 1
    could the companies PLEASE at least make up their mind about the issues?

    I think that they are pretty clear on this issue - they don't really care if you copy a competitor's cd's. Just don't copy theirs. Sounds pretty clear to me

    -Thomas

    --
    ___ This sig is in boldface to emphasize its importance!
  38. Only a matter of time by Captain_Stupendous · · Score: 1

    Isn't any discussion of any type of security measure realted to ANYTHING cause for an instant 10-year prison sentence without trial under the DMCA? ...Oh yeah, it's trollin' time...

    --


    I am alone, yet I also surf the universal backwash of undifferentiated Being, which is LOVE.
  39. Re:easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why was this modded down? It's a valid way of bypassing copyprotection.

  40. Slight correction by sulli · · Score: 1
    MPAA (or members thereof) will be happy that you bought the DVD player, because many of them are also members of DVD Forum and holders of patents, and therefore collectors of royalties.

    RIAA (or members thereof) will be unhappy that you didn't buy their crippled CDs.

    Of course some companies (e.g. AOL Time Warner) are members of both - and one distributes leading mp3 software (Nullsoft Winamp/Shoutcast).

    HTH, HAND.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
  41. Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Very ironic that it is presented in double Adobe. You can't just view the damned thing, you have to download it, convert it, and open it again.

    Am I the only one who hates adobe?

    What's worse is the screen fonts are nearly unreadable. Does anybody have a less insane version (like, say, HTML)?

    I'd like to see the paper but don't want to waste the ink printing it.

    On the other hand, can this guy possibly know anything about computers if he presents his papers in this God-awful format?

    -steve
    mcgrew.info

  42. Audiotorially-Challenged by Dark+Coder · · Score: 1

    (bending mah ears): "Huh...?"

  43. They do this because it works ... by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 2

    ... I've yet to see one CD protection that hasn't been bit-exact ripped by someone (which is all it takes) ...

    You are mistaken. Many high schools kids wouldn't have a clue as to how to get around the protection, nor would they know anyone who could, directly or indirectly. They barely know how to dupe a CD with their CD-RW. After a few coasters they give up.

    It's been like this for a long time, proection in general not coasters. Copy protection doesn't have to be perfect, it just has to stop enough to be cost effective.

  44. clarification by edfelten · · Score: 1

    Some people have misread the Slashdot headline as implying that I had some involvement in writing the CD copy protection paper, or doing the research, or thinking up the idea. I did not play any of those roles.

    It's a great paper, and Alex Halderman deserves all of the credit for it.

    Ed Felten

    1. Re:clarification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you were the one who was willing to write and publish papers on copy prevention systems after the DMCA came out, so you deserve credit for giving Alex Halderman the courage to actually research, write, and publish the paper. Even though you were not directly involved with his paper in any way, you had considerable influence on the very existance of the paper.

    2. Re:clarification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop being such a suck up. Ed doesn't have a job for you.

  45. Microsoft/Panasonic propose new CD format by Ian+Jefferies · · Score: 1
    2. I have little doubt that the problems that are occurring are because they're trying to -comply- with spec, not obliterate it -- namely, the problems some have noted with copy-protected compact discs are because the industry is trying to protect its content while remaining compatible with an obsolete standard.
    I have to wonder if you're not just having a laugh with this one. Altering a specification, for whatever reason, is quite the opposite to complying with it. The proper method of adding functionality to a specification is to create a new one.

    Conspiracy theory mode kicks in: Microsoft, Panasonic propose (another) CD standard
    Microsoft HighMAT announcement

    with this quote from the MS page:

    Today when consumers want to create their own digital media collections on CDs or other physical formats, there are a variety of inconsistent ways that CD and DVD players read this data. Each interface for finding media and the viewable information available like playlists, music metadata, and folders with photos or videos varies depending on what each device supports. In many cases this creates confusion for the user regarding how to find the music, photos or videos they want. In addition with large collections of music and videos it can sometimes take several minutes for the DVD or CD player to "read" what music or video is available.

    HighM.A.T. solves these problems by creating a standard way for PCs to structure digital media on physical formats and for consumer devices to read these discs. This will make startup times for data CDs and other physical formats faster and give consumers a consistent, easy navigation experience across a broad range of consumer electronic devices.

    While by definition you're storing digital media on a digital format, that combined with specially designed consumer devices hints that there is more than just data re-ordering on disc going on here. OK, it could just be a "special file format" for pointing to important data that should be pre-cached, but...

    And finally the specifications:

    The HighMAT Specification will also be available for easy licensing by other consumer electronics companies and software developers at www.HighMAT.com

    Nothing of interest at the site yet that I could see. I wonder if you've got to sign an NDA just to see the licensing agreement and the fees for using the specification...

    Lots of questions and not too many answers at the moment. Make of it what you will. (Unable to get a preview, so posting as is).

    --
    A physicist is an atom's way of thinking about atoms
  46. Re:LOTR: an allegory for WW-II by Latent+Heat · · Score: 2
    Of course Tolkien and Himmler were speaking of the same myths because they were talking about the same thing, although they were on different sides of that thing. In Tolkein, Sauron was evil while for Himmler, Sauron was glorified.

    It is widely regarded that the hobbits represented the simple virtues of the English working classes, who were drafted into service in a conflict about an outside world for which they had little regard, but for which they perceived the danger to their liberty and took up force of arms to fight.

  47. German article about Halderman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like Telepolis was faster than /. this time:

    http://www.heise.de/tp/deutsch/inhalt/musik/1345 7/ 1.html

    1. Re:German article about Halderman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  48. Re:Damn PS (a little off-topic) by uid8472 · · Score: 1

    I've always found that an annoying aspect of (La)TeX documents on the web...a lot of them look really crappy when converted to PDF...

    They don't have to. With teTeX, if you generate the PDFs with pdftex or pdflatex (as appropriate), the vector fonts will be used. The problem arises when people use dvips with ps2pdf (or similar); by default, dvips uses bitmap fonts even when vector ones are available. However, this can be fixed by editing the script /usr/share/texmf/dvips/config/updmap (adjust path as needed) and changing the value of the parameter type1_default, then running that script as a sufficiently privileged user. (I'd love to know if there's a nicer way of doing that.) Also, older versions of ghostscript (ps2pdf is a wrapper for gs) would rasterize embedded fonts when generating PDF, but recent ones don't have that problem. Oh, and specifying a font like cmr13 rather than cmr10 scaled 1300 can cause bitmappedness.

  49. Vector PDF, doc and html formats by almaw · · Score: 1
    That PS file isn't nice, so pick one of these:

    HTH. HAND.
  50. Re:Damn PS (a little off-topic) by Hal-9001 · · Score: 1

    I know how to generate my own PDFs from LaTeX source files (IIRC I used dvipdf in the MikTeX distribution to typeset my senior thesis...pdflatex didn't handle my thesis template and/or graphics very well), but most LaTeXed documents are posted on the web in Postscript format which, as is well-documented in this thread, often does not convert very well to PDF. Your comment did remind me that Ghostscript does a pretty good job of converting Postscript to PDF, but it pales in comparison with the anti-aliased output when the author typesets the document directly to PDF using pdf(la)tex or converts DVI straight to PDF.

    --
    "It take 9 months to bear a child, no matter how many women you assign to the job."
  51. Re:LOTR: an allegory for WW-II by Tungbo · · Score: 1

    Not to mention the strain of racism that ran through the LOTR mythology.
    Look at the allies of Sauron and Saruman. Look at their skin colors, the oliphants, etc.
    We need not even talk about the whole white/dark sybologies.