Slashdot Mirror
Copy Protection On CDs Is 'Worthless'
zotler writes "NewScientist.com has an article about how copy protection on audio CDs is worthless. I thought this was funny since I just read this earlier Slashdot article 'BMG copy protecting all CDs'." The article also neatly sums up the technology behind current fair-use-inhibition stratagems.
take a look at this Tom's Hardware Guide article on CD-RW drives and what copy protection they could get by out of the box by using blindread/blindwrite:o m/storage/02q2/020617/i ndex.html
http://www6.tomshardware.c
Three out of four were successfully copied (two versions of safedisc, cactus data shield, and the one they couldn't get by: TAGES, which is used in games).
The copy protection schemes are created to force consumers to *buy* legit copies of the CDs, as opposed to stealing the MP3 versions. So Mr. Honest Consumer with lots of discretionary income:
1) Goes to the store and buys a new copy of some Top-40 Fluff band of the minute.
2) Tries to play it in his new "Super Fancy 500 feature Play-Any-Format CD player", but it can't play the new CD because the CD thinks his player is a PC player.
3)Tries it in his similar car CD player, with similar results.
4) Says "screw this", D/Ls his favorite songs for free, burns them to CD, and lives happily ever after, perfectingly *WILLING* to pay for new CDs, but he can't, because they won't work with any of his "Advanced" stereo eqpt.
Hats off to the file sharing companies for coming up with this brilliant scheme to deprive record companies of their most secure source of income, the Honest Customer! Wait, they ARE the ones who came up with this copy protection scheme, aren't they? No? Hmmm.....
Right. No, your other right. No, the other other right.
I mean seriously, if they got to the point that it was possible to totally secure music so that it couldn't be copied (even with a mic to a speaker), what's to prevent an ameteur band from re-singing the song and recording their version of it?
Royalties. (I hope this is the correct word in English. Forgive me, I'm German.)
If you perform someone else's work in public, if you record it on a media and give away copies, if you broadcast that recording to the public, you have to pay royalties to the author(s) of a song. You also have to pay royalties as well when you play music to the public, e.g. a large public party or the music you play as a cafe owner to keep your customers happy. (That's why royalty-free music is a niche market, btw.)
There are royalty collection organizations in most states, the GEMA is the one here in Germany. I once had the dumb luck of writing a small tune that was then performed by my band on German national TV. As a result, we instantly got a little royalty check through GEMA, since these TV stations paid royalties to GEMA for broadcasting music.
(This, btw., is another reason why some celebrity musicians perform for free on globally broadcast charity events. It's a royalty bonanza.)
------------------
You may like my a cappella music
You also still have to pay royalties if the live convert that your ban plays at is free.
Wrong. Covers are royalty free when played live, even at a paid concert. Once that performance is recorded, THEN royalties come into play. If my combo decides to play 'Rime of the Ancient Mariner' at a local club, we don't owe ASCAP dick (we would, however, probably owe Iron Maiden an apology). If that performance were recorded and then sold or distributed, we would then have to pony up some copyright ducats - based upon the number of copies produced.
IANAL. IAAM.
-72
-Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music.