Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Crippled CD Deemed Defective In France

Posted by timothy on from the aongh-haw-haw dept.

Noryungi writes "The daily newspaper Liberation reports that at least one person got her money back, by suing EMI, no less. She was able to do that with the help of the largest consumer organization in France, which has its own list of articles on this subject. So, French people who cannot read their copy-protected CDs can get their money back, but copy protection is not made illegal by the court decision... It's certainly a step in the right direction, though..." For the French-impaired, an anonymous reader adds "The Register has a good article on EMI being forced to refund the cost of a copy-protected CD, because it was found to have a 'hidden defect' -- it wouldn't work on a car's CD player ... Is the tide changing?"

6 of 388 comments (clear)

  1. If it's defective - isn't a recall in order? by machinecraig · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seems like they've proved that EMI made defective disks, shouldn't a recall be necessary?

  2. CDs Death March by Sophrosyne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Once (and if) Apple gets their iTunes music store over to windows, and into international markets we will slowly begin to see the CD market go the way of the horse and buggy.
    The market has been declining for years due to high prices, and formulaic content... there is still a possibility record labels may become more innovative and profitable with newer technologies.
    I think that it's about time these huge record labels had some sense knocked into them (even if it is by the french government).

  3. Copy protection = Defective by Doesn't_Comment_Code · · Score: 4, Interesting

    EMI being forced to refund the cost of a copy-protected CD, because it was found to have a 'hidden defect'

    What beautiful wording. And absolutely true. If you purchase data, it should be that, data, plain and simple, with no extras or hitches.

    Theory and Philsophy lesson 1 for Copy protection companies:
    If you can read it, you can copy it.

    I think they already know that deep down. So their idea is to make the data harder and harder to read... to the point where it becomes defective.

    ...morons

    --

    Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
  4. Re:Clear Labeling of CDs.. by ajnlth · · Score: 3, Interesting
    As far as I know it's already so that Copyprotected CD's aren't allowed to use the "Compact Disc" symbol since they don't follow the CD standard.

    Might just be fun to go into a record store and ask why they put a disc that clearly isn't a CD (no label) in the CD-section.

  5. I'm seeing more of these from outside the US... by djaj · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I buy a lot of CDs (yeah, I'm a sucker, what can I say?), and I still haven't seen a US-based copy-protected CD, but I've recently purchased three imports (one each from Australia, Germany and France) which were very clearly labelled as such. (I didn't know they would be copy-protected when I plunked down money for them, and I've been able to make perfectly good MP3s of the contents from the analog source.)

    Neither disc has the CD logo on it, and both had very large stickers on the shrink-wrap with this logo on it and descriptions of what it meant, and what systems you should be able to play it on. (Since I refused to install the software necessary to actually play these on a computer, I have no idea how well they work in that respect.) I'm certainly going to avoid these from here on out if I can. I've noticed that amazon.co.uk, amazon.fr and amazon.de will occasionally note that a disc is copy-protected, so I'm going to check there first before buying from here on out.

    --

    Your mileage may vary, but mine is constant.

  6. Re:How about a copy-protection standard? by Alien+Being · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Secondly, this type of copy-protection is a clear violation of the rights of any person who buys such a CD."

    Here's where that argument breaks down. You have no rights. Rights in this country are granted by congress. You can't afford to outbribe industry lobbyists, so the laws are being made in their favor.

    Many of the new laws go against the fundamental concepts of American freedom that we had drilled into our heads in public school. We want to believe that the government is "for the people", but what we see is a bunch of fatcats who don't give a damn about the Constitution and who cannot relate to the other 90% of the population.

    One psychobabble term for the way all of this makes us feel is 'cognitive dissonance'. The choices for coping with it are

    a) fix the problem.
    b) give up your old beliefs.
    c) find some new beliefs that are more important than the old ones.

    Our feckless fuckwads in the whorehouse and the war department know they can't convince people to give up the beliefs that we should live free, that we're innocent until proven guilty, etc. They sure as hell don't want us to fix the problem, because that would mean putting Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Powell, Wolfowitz, Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe in front of a firing squad. Their method is to give us some new things to believe in.

    In other words, due to 9/11 our rights are not important. Due to 9/11 we must go occupy Iraq. To protect the economy (what economy?) we must allow big business to run roughshod over American citizens.

    Damn, i need a drink. I guess that's option d).