Slashdot Mirror
SunnComm Says Pointing to Shift Key 'Possible Felony'
The Importance of writes "A couple of weeks ago BMG released an audio CD with a new type of DRM. Earlier this week, a computer science graduate student at Princeton wrote a report showing the DRM was ineffective - it could easily be defeated by use of the 'shift' key. The stock of the DRM company (SunnComm) has since fallen by 20%. Now, SunnComm plans to sue the student under the DMCA and claim that SunnComm's reputation has been falsely damaged. According to SunnComm's CEO, 'No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property.'"
http://www.sunncomm.com/index2.html
http://www.zombo.com/
told ya
Precedence set by Sklyarov trial.
to see if DMCA really has merit in the courts. This is so nutty its unbelievable.
Ahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
*cough*
They need to sue Microsoft for allowing common users to see what services are running. No user has any business looking at what processes are running on their systems.
My keyboard has a shift key too... and I know how to use it. I am gonna get sued for sure!
Sounds like SunComm needs it's mommy!
Or they could do some research and see what thye can do to prevent this from happeneing next time (not that I am a fan of the copy protection).....it is kind of sad how much of a knee-jerk and predictable reaction suing has become.
April fools in October feeling? Slashdot poll: Initial reaction to SunnComm's suit: 1) You've got to be fucking kidding me? 2) You've got to be fucking kidding me? 3) You've got to be fucking kidding me? 4) You've got to be fucking kidding me? 5) Cowbody Neal has got to be fucking kidding me?!
Never confuse volume with power.
After all they built in the ability to bypass the Autorun feature.
Morons.
Wearing pants should always be optional.
They're just mad they were found out to be dummies with a broken product, and that their share price dropped 20% when Wall Streeties discovered they were dummies. Solution: sue the guy who said, "the Emperor has no clothes!"
Stop the ride. I want off.
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
1. Market defective product
2. Watch the news
3. Sue the messenger
4. Profit!
This one seems to be a sure thing; no question marks required.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property.
Magic markers and shift keys asside, I guess using a "slim-jim" to gain access to one's own car is wrong too. The car door was certianly never designed to allow entry using this method. Where's the DMCA when you really need it??
They obviously have no case, but is there a way for Hamilton to effectively defend himself in case it's allowed to go to trial?
A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
How long until you can get the SunnComm DRM code on a t-shirt?
But don't you think this is an attempt at intimidation rather than a real lawsuit? In otherwords, SunnComm knows they can't win, but it looks like they're defending themselves, plus it will prevent other people from even discussing SunnComm for fear of being sued.
I mean, a judge would have to be wacky to find for the SunnComm if only because:
1) Microsoft published these directions to bypass the SunnComm protection years ago
2) The publishing of opinions is generally considered freedom of the press isn't it?
My first reaction is that this is an April Fool's joke, except its the wrong time of year.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Wait, if I know that -- fixes Windows, does that mean I'm going to be sued by MS?
For gross incompetence... !
:)
Please tell me this is a "Friday FUnny" (ahead of schedule) or something like that...
However it could be a good thing: if the DMCA is used to protect this type of trash, people will see it for what it is and MAYBE the law will be shot down for being too broad by protecting dumb-ass business models.
If the DMCA prevents me from telling someone how to use A BASIC FEATURE OF WINDOWS to prevent malware from being run on my computer, then I'm moving to a different country. (Oh wait, I already did... my VISA ran out!)
MadCow.
I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
Should stealing unlocked cars be a crime? You're still stealing - just because it's not secure doesn't mean it's legal. And should telling someone a car is unlocked be a crime, since you're simply stating the fact?
Rock!
waaaaaaaaaat? you've got to be shitting me. we need laws shielding scientific research from the dmca.
Welp, my letter to Hillary Clinton has already been fired off. Not that my letter alone will do anything, but it's time for people to at least do something, anything at all to try to put a stop to crap like this under the guise of the DMCA. Write to your congress-people, donate to the EFF and ACLU, vote for candidates based on their stances on technology issues rather than their standing in Hollywood... I mean whatever. Get the movement started, for god's sake. This is getting completely out of hand at this point. The USSR is alive and kicking when it's a "felony" to talk about using the shift key on your keyboard. (No Soviet Russia jokes please - I am being totally serious.)
and the real criminals are those that who wants to keep raking it in for a job they did once. Decent people work and get paid, work and get paid. They don't do a job just once and expect to get paid forever - thats sick greed and amoral, yet that is what copyright allows some to do. 60 million file shares in the US - 51 million who voted for President Bush - time to vote for some politicians who will abolish these amoral laws.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Saw this on K5 this morning, said the company was suing keyboard manufacturers under the DMCA, thought it was completley a joke. Guess its partly true, which is scary. So now DMCA violations include keyboards, sharpies, line in jacks...
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
Perhaps next they will sue Microsoft for putting such a devious circumvention system into their operating systems. After all, what kind of responsible company would let a user do what they wanted with their computer that they paid for?
Oh, hang on, perhaps _that's_ what palladium is all about - lawsuit avoidance.
Beep beep.
No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property."
No matter the organization or rationale, it is wrong to use purchased legislation and the cover of law to deprive people of their rights.
No matter the organization or rationale, it is wrong to use purchased legislation and the cover of law to hide the fact that your product is shoddy, and very likely will not work as advertised.
No matter the organization or rationale, it is wrong to use purchased legislation and the cover of law to exagerate the dammage caused by saying 'hold the shift key.'
But who's counting?
Thomas Galvin
Did you just read that and think to yourself...WOW?
If this bullshit lawsuit doesn't get thrown out of court in five minutes or less, I am moving to Canada.
Mail these fucktards and let them know what you think of them and their ridiculous suit.
~Philly
you too can sue SOMEONE ELSE for a faulty product YOU made.
You just can't make this stuff up folks.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Try telling people that they're not allowed to make copies, or allow copies to be made.
If anyone lets loose with the secret that hearing a request doesn't force one to obey it, sue 'em under the DMCA. After that, anyone who doesn't obey you is obviously using a circumvention device (their brain), which you can have confiscated by the authorities.
This DMCA thing is getting nucking futs.
Buy the President
For example, visiting http://www.sunncomm.com/video/video.asp using i686+Linux+Mozilla gives the error message "Sorry, this feature is not available to Macintosh users at this time"
If they can't do something as mediocre as a browser check with javascript (can't even COPY-PASTE it from any of the free resources online), is it really a surprise that their DRM software can be bypassed by hitting shift ?
I think they were counting on computer users not knowing where the shift key was on their keyboard. poor them.
...we live in. DMCA, Patriot Act, UCITA,...
to this kid's defense?
--something witty
Disabling autorun via the use of the Shift key is pretty well known, isn't it?
/. pointing out that the use of the Shift key would probably disable this kind of copy "protection" when the story about this "system" was first posted.
I recall a post on
Pierre
Everyone knows Apple was using the key to disable system extensions years before MS was.
After all, how else could you defeat the Oscar the Grouch in the Trash can?
Share and Enjoy!
it is wrong to use money and the cover of law to facilitate the stifling of invention and to obscure the flaws in one's products :P
...and tell them I have a shift key and autorun disabled.
'Ere is the number, J.H.
SunnComm
602-267-7500
[Don't believe me? Look at the press release, near the bottom.]
"Life's funny sometimes." "And sometimes it isn't." --Cat's Cradle
"The act of publishing instructions under the cloak of "academic research" showing how to defeat MediaMax such as those instructions found in Halderman's report is, at best, duplicitous and, at worst, a felony."
I swear if they get away with this argument I'm never politely pointing out someone's fly is down.
Your product sucks, don't blame it on those who prove it.
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
I create a "new" type of lock for a home that really isn't a lock and in order to use it I have to put the key under the front door mat and expect to called Secure? Yes, I know the criminals would have to make an exact duplicate of my furniture and leave my original for this to be valid, but there seems to be a new business model starting up: Create some assinine DRM ploy (snake oil) then sue whomever attempts to circumvent it!
Pathetic.
What exactly do you mean by "Don't touch this button?"
The subject pretty much sums it all up.
This is not the greatest sig in the world, this is just a tribute.
I though I had heard stupid things, and companies being litigious just for the hell of it, but this tops it all. It like suing somebody for, well, hmm, I just cant think of anything even remotely close to this. Suing someone for stating the obvious, thank you very much.
"What, you can turn autorun OFF completely, damn, we had no idea..."
Make you wonder about the "clever" people wrote a copy protection scheme that relies on autorun... They could have given my all that money, and I could have told them from the start that it isn't going to work, nothing is, and that they can just as well scrap the entire copy protection idea.
Not to mention they're probably breaking the "cd" standard, and still calling it a compact discs. I wonder when pioneer (or sony or philips or whomever it is that owns the right, patent, whatever to "cd") will sue the people who cook up these horrid shemes
Move sig!
Coincidence? I think not. (Where's my tinfoil?)
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
Once again as soon as something critical is said about a DRM product (notably how weak it really is) a company screams that the research is in violation of the DMCA.
Quote from Suncomm's release:
"SunnComm believes that by making erroneous assumptions in putting together his critical review of the MediaMax CD-3 technology, Halderman came to false conclusions concerning the robustness and efficacy of SunnComm's MediaMax technology. Based on several of these incorrect assumptions, Halderman and Princeton University have significantly damaged SunnComm's reputation and caused the market value of SunnComm to drop by more than $10 million. "
Frankly this company deserves to have their reputation damaged. Did they even test this product before selling it to a record company?
I'm waiting for Overly Critical guy to chime in about how, if Microsoft had implemented this -- and that they should -- it would all work okay, and we should all be happy with it, because Microsoft is the bees' knees.
C'mon, post, you bastard! We're all waiting!
This makes no sense.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
Their website has it's own equally effective security feature.... Much like the Shift key with their Audio CD security, if you disable flash (ActiveX in IE, plug-ins elsewhere) it simply disappears (no alternate content if you block flash)! Perhaps if someone disables the DMCA these absurd lawsuits will also disappear (one can dream, right?).
-Joe
If we're all god's children, what's so special about Jesus? - Jimmy Carr
According to the article, SunComm now believes that deleting a file on your computer can possibly be a DMCA violation.
So just whose computer is it? Theirs once I insert a CD? If not, then why can't I delete any file on my Hard Drive?
Do I now legally HAVE to use their uninstall option instead of cleaning it out myself? What if it doesn't work?
Screw them. They're idiots and should have been able to make a more robust system. Simple as that. But the DMCA saves them from having to properly engineer their product. What a great law.
I really feel no sympathy for this company. Boohoo, you made a product which DOESN'T WORK and someone points that out, and now your stock price drops as people realize your product DOESN'T WORK AS CLAIMED.
So of course the appropriate response is to go back to the drawing board and create a new DRM product which does work. Oh, I'm sorry, my keyboard seems to be buggy today, that previous sentence had a typo, I MEANT to say they should just sue him under the DMCA.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
DAMN, I did it again. DAMN, there's three strikes, life in prison for me.
While there is a large degree of outrage to this abusive lawsuit, I wonder why it is only these instances that draw the outrage. Folks - each use of the DMCA pushes the line closer to this kind of bullshit. Opposition to the DMCA must be without any reservation.
I heard the story and a complete description of how to bypass the security on National Public Radio. They should be named as co-conspiritors.
Design a compentent system. This CEO should be fired.
This just in, using capital letters by not using CAPS LOCK results in 20 years of jail.
SunnComm is a joke, hope it and all of its evil employees lose thier jobs.
"If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer
SunComm sues Linux users because its software won't run on Linux based OSes.
SunnComm CEO: They ought to recomplie the kernel with the support for our software because we all know that you are a pirate if you use any OSes that doesn't use DRM.
On the other news, SCO sues SunnComm because SunnComm has letters S C O in it and also for violating SCO's patent on stupid lawsuits.
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
Their useless site only works with Flash 6, so blind people can't go there. they should be sued under the ADA for that.
haha.
These guys are morons. I don't know anyone who doesn't know how to disable auto-run on a PC. Even my mom can do it.
Also, pointing out that Linux and older MAC OSes are unaffected would technically be a violation of DMCA too according to these buffoons.
--- It is not the things we do which we regret the most, but the things which we don't do.
The CD that you buy is a music CD. Yet the protected CD actually installs a driver on the target computer without the user knowing - there is another type of program that behaves in this way. It's called a virus (ok, really a trojan) and generally the authors get jail terms. Let's try and do the same for these SunnComm people.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Let's recap two essential points of your argument:
1. The critique is flawed because it is based on "incorrect assumptions" because the author "didn't read your white paper explaining how the system works before writing it". and
2. He probably committed a felony by comprehensively breaking the system.
Guys, you can't possibly have both of these. They are mutually exclusive. If he did, as you say, actually circumvent the system, then his conclusion that the system doesn't work can't be invalid, can it now?
Krill
Any time I see AutoRun, I run out and download PowerToys and disable it.
Am I in violation of the DMCA if I'm logged in as a user with no admin rights, therefore without rights to install drivers? Any copy protection scheme that requires a device driver mucking with my CD is stupid and deserves to fail. Any company who's market cap (I mean, didn't they see this in testing?) depends on said system deserves to be devalued.
When are we going to sue spammers for circumventing our spam filters?
A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
Not only did I invent W00t! in 1967, I also patented First Pizzost! in1997. You're sad and you're late, my legal represention will be in touch, BTW you also owe me $14 for evey time you have used the '0' character when then 'o'character was required, I took that patent in 1986.
Well you can help but think that the student knew the trick that if you hold shift when you insert a CD into Windows it will stop the autoplay. I would guess that is what happened here
Rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
EMphasis my own.
So in effect, with no innovation, no invention, and no solid ground to stand on this company created a DRM scheme that was flawed apon inception then expects the rest of us to 'put our head in the sand' while people try to control what's rightfully ours to begin with?
This is as ineffective as designing cars not to hit pedestrians, not allowing cars using (insert xxx technology here) to be used in drive by shootings, or even in the legitimate use of hitting people (ie movies).
I'm sorry, but if by telling people where their files were being placed or even that by holding the shift key can bypass the autorun feature thus crippling an otherwise defunct DRM 'feature' is considered a crime, then you had better implicate a hell of a lot more than just a college student who's just doing his job.
Try taking out the thousands of websites designed to "tweak" windows or other software programs that facilitate any "possible intent" of wrong doing.
I'm sorry. This company should have scrapped the idea of using the flawed DRM it had to begin with.
Just my 0.02 pence
Seeing as users of these operating systems can deactivate the DRM by, um, using the operating system, which the student also pointed out, where does use of these OSes stand? Are you not allowed to point out that the system fails to work for anything but Windows (okay, and MacOS X)? I presume not.
I mean really, this was the most retarded DRM scheme I've ever seen. In installs a Windows driver to screw up readback by using a windows Autorun on the CD. They were sufficiently cunning to include a MacOS X driver too. Anyone using anything else won't even notice there's any DRM at all. Bafflingly stupid. And you can disable Autorun can't you? I seem to recall trying to do such things many years ago when I used Windows simply because it was bloody annoying.
Jedidiah
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
Just thought you'd like to know that.
The article says that they are not suing under the DMCA becasue of the shift key bypass, but because the stutent disclosed which files to erase to bypass the software.
Besides the DMCA charges, they say they are also suing because they say the student was wrong about some conclusions because they wre based on false assumprtions (i didnt know you could sue someone because they were wrong about someting, but whatever)
The stock of the DRM company (SunnComm) has since fallen by 20%. Now, SunnComm plans to sue the student under the DMCA and claim that SunnComm's reputation has been falsely damaged.
It's too bad that the stockholders who took thier money to a safe place aren't going to help the student who had the cajones to put his ideas out there and warn them of thier bad investment.
And in other news the RIAA is planning to sue keyboard makers...
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
I hope they get their pecker slapped REAL hard for this.
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
i would be shocked at how f***ed up this scenario is, if these kind of things didn't happen all the time. thanks god for the DMCA.
Here is something that a judge will actually understand: a graduate student publishing a plain-English report of research into DRM being sued (and bankrupted) under the DMCA for pointing out a shift key.
- No Eeeeeeevil "hackers" at 2600
- No that-can't-be-speech "code"
- No funny Commie (Russian) names
- Nothing for sale, even speculatively
This is the test case we've been waiting for.Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
does this mean that the next Microsoft DRM enabled keyboard won't have any shift key? Now I'll have to actually empty my recycle bin...
because it is so absurd that it's another illustration of what's wrong with the DMCA. I hope the Electronic Frontier Foundation steps up to defend this researcher.
Thank Jebus for corporate idiocy.
As has been uttered many times, these kinds of cases could be like setting a teeball stand up for Sammy Sosa (sorry, got to tie it in to current events). We laughed about ROT-13 being a security system so trivial that we couldn't believe Adobe would claim it as such.
Even more so than that, anybody can understand how poor and overly broad the DMCA is.
Try telling non-geek members of your family that some Princeton kid is being prosecuted for pointing out that holding down the shift key can defeat a CD's copy protection. Now, if your family is a Yale legacy, be prepared for "How many Princeton students does it take to drop a company's stock 20%?" jokes.
With events like this putting the DMCA in the public's eye, I think the subject might become a topic come election time.
-- "Complacency is a far more dangerous attitude than outrage." -Naomi Littlebear
These people are the scum of the earth. Hiding behind duplicitous laws to cloak their infinite stupidity...
The DMCA is proving to be the most absurd legislation yet from a nation that has more than its fair share..
Just how the fuck are they going to make this stick? Will they not have to go after IBM for designing the keyboard bus? Microsoft for allowing the auto-play to be bypassed?
Seriously though, this sounds rather like a windup....story about them suing keyboard manufacturers was floating about on K5 yesterday in a ha-ha-next-thing-they'll-do-this kind of way... are you sure about this? A "drm" (very much lower case) system that is dependent on an optional feature of one computer operating system? It's not as if they could sue him for revealing any secret knowledge, given that windows even asks you if you would like to autoplay the disc or not.
Lost cause, clutching at straws. (see also; SCO..)
You mean to tell me that a company means to supress that holding down 1 key can prevent the unauthorized loading FROM A DISK YOU OWN to A COMPUTER YOU OWN of A PROGRAM YOU DON'T WANT on the basis that it violates a law against circumvention measures???? If I do use this violation I use an "illegal" "feature" built into an OS. But I'm not supposed to use that feature, or probably even know about it. Explain this please.
This is just another example of security by blind trust and blatant ignorance. If we wanted this, we could declare everything secure because it's illegal to try to make it insecure or even experiment with security. It's not only illegal now to metaphorically climb the fence to get to land you own, now it's illegal to look at the lock.
All I'm asking for is a sanity check.
Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
In addition, SunnComm believes that Halderman has violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by disclosing unpublished MediaMax management files placed on a user's computer after user approval is granted.
Does this CD actually pop up a dialog telling you you've agreed to let them install unspecified crud on your machine? Or is the assumption that because I bought the CD and put it in my computer that they're allowed to install unspecified crud on my machine that interferes with the normal operation of my computer in a manner undisclosed to me.
Sounds like a virus to me...with a publicly visible author that can get tagged for it...I smell a class action......
I'll be arrested tomorrow morning for telling everyone this fantastic piracy secret:
If you borrow someone's installation CD, you can install the software!
P.S. Don't tell anyone!
"a computer science graduate student at Princeton wrote a report showing the DRM was ineffective - it could easily be defeated by use of the 'shift' key."
"Now, SunnComm plans to sue the student under the DMCA and claim that SunnComm's reputation has been falsely damaged."
YES! YES! DO IT! PLEASE!!! the states NEED as many retarded and frivolous DMCA cases as they can handle, until they repeal that stupid, stupid law. DO IT, FUCKERS!!
"Oh, oh... well uh... we we fully aware that disabling the autorun feature would disable our copy protection!"
[Did your customers know that? No.]
"We've uh... we've got top plans to fix it in our second generation technology."
[Oops, your customers are now pissed and are pulling their contracts.]
"And besides, it will also be integrated in third party software so it won't be run off the CD!"
[It's your customers fault for using the software "wrong" and if they'd shell out for option B the software works as advertised.]
"Theft is theft, no matter how you label it."
[My customer's feet are so up my butt right now that if I don't blame it on somebody else, I'll look like a complete failure.]
It's one thing to perpetuate a bad business model (Enron). How are these bozos like SCO and now this company getting money to operate! I want to know! Or is just that legitimate business ideas don't "sell" anymore!?
You can disable autoloading by changing your CD-ROM drive settings.
That DCMA violation is facilitated by Microsoft and the CD-ROM drive manufacturers.
You should all short stocks of those companies now, because the upcoming lawsuit against those companies will be a landslide victory for Sunncomm Technologies.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill the DMCA
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
Since by pressing the shift key you keep autorun from installing an application, by NOT installing a piece of software on my computer, I am breaking the law?
This case will answer the question; if you uninstall something, or refuse to install something, does that constitute as a circumvention of the security of digital media (meaning, if you don't view it with a certain app), and hence, is it a felony? This could go as far as to say that by opening a Game cd with the explore function in windows that you are circunventing the copy protection schemes of the game by viewing the raw content, such as movies, without agreeing to the eula (generally, a 2nd time around thanks to package lisencing). Could Trillian be considered circumvention of MS's MSN messanger service? How rediculously far do they want to take this?
This case is different than skylov's case. Skylov went ahead and (I believe this is the one) broke Adobe's encryption schemes and published the weakness. This is a direct, purposful circumvention. Now we're extending the law to accidental and really nitpicky issues, and forcing the user to do certain things without even really telling them.
And just think of what corperations like microsoft will do with stuff like this. "Since they had linux installed and since linux ignores autorun, they circumvented the cd copy protection." Can we say "Fok me"? They're getting so far away from what people think is right and wrong. It's getting real ugly now, I'm curious if they'll set a precident for or against the people and how far they'll go with this before they start outright revoltes. Pretty soon cd's will have all kinds of protection schemes, and users won't buy them because they can't do what they want with them. They'll still go for the indie cd's and stuff their friends burn for em'. For those who aren't interent savvy, I hope they have internet savvy friends to teach them.
Remember this guys, help your buddies, get them setup with p2p apps and talk with them. Teach them how to use a computer.
Candy-Coated Knowledge
if the shift key can be used to circumvent digital rights management, it obviously should be outlawed. seriously, its not the kid's fault for their resting their business model on something so easily to circumvent.
today is spelling optional day.
They need to sue linux because you can mount a volume and stip the thing clean. But hey didn't SCO say linux was their code.... I know! They should sue SCO because their code is in Linux! Boy that would be a fun little legal match!
Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
All slashdotters are asked to upgrade immediately!!!!
DMCA protects "encrypted" data. The audio tracks on the CD are NOT encrypted, they are in the CD(tm) standard format. DMCA not applicable.
Their program installs without permission. Their program causes my CD(tm) player to not read CD(tm) disks. Their program causes my computer to not function and installs without permission. Sounds like a virus.
IANAL but I say coutersue under (Patriot Act?) for computer hacking and virus writing. Point out audio tracks are not encryted therefore not covered under the DMCA.
My IP has been logged I will be contacted by the Department of Homeland Security for questioning the DMCA.
Did you know you can even disable that stupid little issue of windows automatically running arbitrary code on insertation of a CD? just goto the hardware manager and look at the properties of your CD/DVD drive and you can disable the stupid feature of windows! if i want to run something on a cd i'm looking at i'll bloody well do it myself!
Okay. You can protect your household by setting up a scarecrow in front of your house.
What? Thieves aren't afraid of scarecrows? How dare you! You're going to pay for damaging our reputation!
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
I thank God everyday i live in the United States
++mse61--
I find this part of the CNet article particularly ominous:
..Future versions of the SunnComm software would include ways that the copy-protecting files would change their name on different computers, making them harder to find, Jacobs said. Moreover, the company will distribute the technology along with third-party software, so that it doesn't always come off a protected CD, he added..
Translated: we will call our driver by the same name as legitimate drivers, or whatever name we want; and we will sign shady under-the-table deals with other ISVs to sneak our DRM crippleware onto your computers without you ever realising.
"I can't rip this CD to make a backup!"
"Ah, have you ever installed [famous-brand antivirus software / famous-brand office suite by Redmond-based company / Microsoft QFE patch# Q666666]? That means you've now got Suncomm's software on your system.."
Jeez, it really makes my blood boil. How can these people get away with this?
If you or I were to write a program that claims to "enhance your computer experience", but which actually cripples the PC in some way, we'd (rightly, IMHO) get the book thrown at us for being malware/virus writers. But companies like this do it, and it's considered so acceptable that anyone criticising it can be sued into oblivion?
AAAARGH! [hits head repeatedly on keyboard]
Well, at the very least, their case doesn't hold water -- the DMCA requires that whatever the "device" is that you traffic in that lets you bypass encryption (whether it be a physical device, information, etc.), that device must not have substantial noninfringing uses in order to be illegal under the DMCA. Pointing out that the SHIFT key can be used to bypass encryption is absolutely NO different than pointing out that you can use a hammer to break into someone's car. SunnComm hasn't got a leg to stand on.
This doesn't mean, however, that they won't abuse the court system in the usual ways and come out on top -- but at least we know that cheating is the only way they can win.
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
Burn all corporate headquarters to the ground!
Line the highways with the heads of IP lawyers on sticks!
Cut out the tongues and gouge out the eyes of the legislators!
JUST BURN THE WHOLE MOTHERFUCKER TO THE GROUND, BACK TO THE STONE-AGE, AND LET EVOLUTION START OVER, BECAUSE IT'S TAKEN A WRONG TURN SOMEHWERE!
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
I believe this is the test case for the DMCA that we have been waiting for. What stonger defence is there with this case? It is summed up in a way that anyone can be explained the action in question, and the widely documented feature from a wide number of soruces, inclduing the Windows Operating system itself.
We shall watch this case with great interest.
AnamanFan - Trying to find the Truth, one post at a time.
I guess it's time for MS to get sued! Below is for Win 9x, and ME. SUMMARY
This article describes how to disable the feature that allows CD-ROMs and audio compact discs (CDs) to run automatically when you insert them in your CR-ROM drive.
MORE INFORMATION
How to Disable the Feature That Allows CD-ROMs and Audio CDs to Run Automatically
To disable the feature that allows CD-ROMs and audio CDs to run automatically:
Click Start, point to Settings, click Control Panel, and then double-click System.
Double-click the CDROM branch on the Device Manager tab, and then double-click the entry for your CD-ROM drive.
On the Settings tab, click to clear the Auto Insert Notification check box.
Click OK, click Close, and then click Yes when you are prompted to restart your computer.
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
It looks like SunnComm are making themselves out to be complete idiots.
The U.K.'s courts aren't much to write home about but if tried here, I could see this case being 'roared' out of court by an irate judge and SunnComm being charged with contempt of court for even bringing it.
Disappointingly perhaps, the only party who could really be forgiven for suing is BMG who have been sold false-assurances on a defective product!
Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
[Enter Cheezy Rebirth Techno]
Can you hear...
Our stock price plummet?!?
The Future... is... HERE!
SUNNCOMM!
The keyboard has been found in violation of the DMCA because it can be used to type in passwords that don't belong to you. It can also be used to type code that when compiled can cause great harm to many things. While I'm at it, turn in your mouse, stylus, and your fingers, too, for that matter.
Do they have any idea how hard it is to post with proper capitalization using only the CAPS LOCK key/ i guess now you either have to post like e.e.cummings or TRIP THE LAMENESS FILTER1
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
They're saying that if he had read their stupid Whitepaper he would see that the incredibly obvious shift key workaround wouldn't really have been one? What are they smoking?
It's as if someone said you can secure your house by tying the door shut with a piece of twine in a bowknot. When people happen to notice you can bypass this fortification by tugging on the knot, the "knot idea" man tells you you'd see that conclusion is erroneous if you read the knots section of the Boy Scout Handbook.
What really boggles the mind is this:
Concluded Jacobs, "This cat-and-mouse game that hackers and others like to play with owners of digital property is over..."
Holding down SHIFT is HACKING? You can't even point out an obvious flaw anymore? "We want to make lame-ass, shitty software, and don't you DARE point that out!"
A few more moronic lawsuits like this one and we should be able to completely invalidate the DMCA! yay!
Does anyone have the ICBM address of SunnComm?
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
...while I reload.
Apparently their position is:
Somehow I suspect the average judge will see through that.
In addition, SunnComm believes that Halderman has violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by disclosing unpublished MediaMax management files placed on a user's computer after user approval is granted. Once the file is found and deleted according to the instructions given in the Princeton grad student's report, the MediaMax copy management system can be bypassed resulting in the copyright protected music being converted or misappropriated for potentially unauthorized and/or illegal use.
Heaven forbid users be able to delete files off their own systems!
It's like they're getting pissy just because someone was actually savvy enough to notice the "unpublished" junk they're slipping onto a system.
Enjoy, SunnComm, you and anyone you're associated with have just lost another customer for life.
....they could have at least sold an effective DRM, rather than one that could be dismantled by a monkey using the famous PLOKTA method. So, someone publishes the fact that their DRM is defective, and the incompetents who wrote the POS intend to sue. I guess this is the reductio ab absurdum (sic) of the Constitution - if the 1st Amendment is trumped by a bunch of incompetents with a legal team of their own powered by corporate- (Hollywood-)sponsored legislation, then we should just give up now.
... under the DMCA for distributing a copy-protection circumvention device? Never mind that the software was written years BEFORE the copy protection scheme, so you'd expect the copy-protection implementors to have thought of it... basically, I don't think the mechanism is designed to prevent ripping CDs at all; it is designed to make ripping CDs a clear violation of the DMCA. This violates one of my rules: "Never use a legal solution for a problem more easily and completely solved by a technical solution."
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Actually, upon reflection, I don't think they will. My analysis can be found on LawMeme, here.
Through loopholes in computer security, it is technically possible to install undesired software on a person's hard drive without their knowledge or approval.
Furthermore, this is legal.
But letting a person know about this issue and explaining how to fix it is not legal?
Like AverageAOLUser said, OMG WTF?
there is no shift key. apparently i can use caps lock up to three times. i'm saving that for when i really need it.
Anybody want a peanut?
I can't tell anymore... Have American companies suddenly acquired a deep and cynical sense of self-depreciating humor, or have they all just gone batty.
Company A publishes a piece of DRM software that it trumpets to industry executives as bulletproof. Graduate Student B exposes deep flaws in the product Company A is selling. Company A sues Graduate Student B for being badly misinformed, spreading false information, and telling people foolproof ways to defeat their scheme. Company A describes these flaws in detail in all of their press releases, ensuring that they will be known by the magic-marker and shift-key weilding pirates when the technology finally hits the market. Their suit against Graduate Student B ensures that they will at least be given a job immediately upon exit of college, if not being picked up by a major university's PHD program... thus encouraging Graduate Students C - Z to attempt this shortcut through the "Publish or Perish" mentality pervading college campuses.
What company A should be doing is preparing version 2.0 of their software, which they will then sell to record companies while hiring Graduate Student B to get free publicity on all of the news websites. This won't discourage academics from looking for flaws in software, but it will gain someone who has proven themselves to be good QA for the company's product. Company A comes out smelling like the good guy, with an improved (read, sustainable) product, press that cost one additional employee, and a compelling reason to push their clients to pay for an upgrade.
Why is it this is hard to see for companies? Maybe they have gone batty.
The ______ Agenda
That the pop-up on the second page of their website says something to the effect of "expect to lose all your money if you invest in us 'cuz we're scared to show you our check book?" No wonder they're suing. They need the revenue. (Holy shades of SCO, Batman!)
The greates bussiness model of the 21st century would be: Create an application to enforce DRM, it doesn have to be a good application, even more, just leave a BIG backdoor, or use a CRAPPY security scheme ... let some one with brain discover that your system is faulty and then SUEM. ..... if anyone says it doesn't, I'll sue him!!!!
Right now I' announcing that this Message is protected by a DRM application
(sorry about anonymous, no time to create an account)
Forget about selling the companies stock because the protection scheme is crap. Did anyone else notice that they are admitting to placing hidden files on the users computer to interfere with its normal operation ? I'd want to be far away from this company when the system blows up on something important.
And pry off those pesky shift keys because they will be our undoing..
Kid: Daddy why can't I use capital letters?
Father: Because i had to pry off the shift keys so daddy wouldn't get sued by the record company. Because if daddy got sued by them, daddy wouldn't be able to pay for your college or your food.
Kid: But why is the computer running slowly?
Father: That is because all the spyware installed on the computer from the CD's daddy uses.
Come on... All this ever does is screw the common man.
Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
STEH currently sells at 11 cents per share, a 20% drop means it's down from 15 cents. This is a low-end penny stock, almost completely worthless even before the alleged "damage." Any amateur spammer could move this stock more than 4 cents with even a badly executed pump and dump.
Here's where you can send feedback to somebody at SunnComm: http://www.sunncomm.com/support/askthetech.asp
I, for one, welcome our new digital content security for optical media overlords.
I'd like to thank SunComm for their leadership in this area. Keep up the good work!
Makes me wonder if the /. quote system should get a +100 Insightful, it really is a joke (unlikely), or it truncated it with the second part: "...if it was a joke"
If it does interefere with other programs that use the CD-ROM drive, can't the government prosecute them for terrorist activity now that hacking has been declared a terrorist activity? After all, they've created a program that tricks users into executing it and is designed to damage the computer's normal functions.
The student's paper was posted on slahsdot a day or two ago, and then bunch of people said "that guy should be sued under the dmca" and meant it as a bad joke.
Sure enough he was sued under the DMCA. I wonder if they got the idea from slashdot.
While I'm on this, I wonder exactly how many sites have instructions on disabling autorun? Google reports "disable autorun" as having 15,000 hits on the web, 5,000 on usenet groups. Also, how about all the pc magazines and books that have this info? What about all the tv networks that carried this story?
That's just considering the disabling of autorun. Think about how many more sites will have info on linux or MacOS. They can't possibly stop this information, so why they hell did they come up with a system this damn easy to defeat?
C:\>
Am I correct to assume it's this students fault that sunncomm didn't make a foolproof product like they boasted they would? For goodness sakes, you don't even need a marker for this one! Maybe all that Arizona sunnnnn is getting to them.
It's actually close to "you don't even need to lift a finger" pathetic, simply pathetic.
R-
Hard loop..... huh?
Dynamic Designs
SunnComm is suing the student for "falsely" damaging their reputation? First, it wasn't falsely damaged. The student did not lie about anything as far as I can tell. Second, suing the student would be like Ford suing people that said the tires on their SUVs exploded a couple years back. "Our product failed, so we're going to sue our customers." Was Ford's reputation false damaged? No, it was justly damaged.
-William Brendel
Does this guy have a legal defense fund? If he does, I'll gladly donate the $25 I was going to spend on CDs this month.
Oh wait, make that CD. You can't buy two CDs for only $25.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
by their estimation, Microsoft, and other keyboard makers are the manufacturer of a DMCA "circumvention device" -- woot!-- this should be fun, like try explaining to a jury how holding down a shift key ; or telling people to hold down a shift key should be illegal
k b; en-us;126025t .aspx?scid=kb; en-us;155217n -us/shellcc/pl atform/shell/programmersguide/shell_basics/shell_b asics_extending/autorun/autoplay_reg.asp
I guess microsoft is also guilty of publishing information which circumvents their DMCA:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/e
I don't see any mention of the Shift key / autorun 'exploit' in this article. Instead, it talks about "SunnComm believes that Halderman has violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by disclosing unpublished MediaMax management files placed on a user's computer after user approval is granted. Once the file is found and deleted according to the instructions given in the Princeton grad student's report, the MediaMax copy management system can be bypassed resulting in the copyright protected music being converted or misappropriated for potentially unauthorized and/or illegal use." Are they really suing over what the title proclaims, or is this just Slashdot issuing misleading headlines again?
Security through promiscuity is no better than security through obscurity.
LOL - If I had mod points, I'd mod you up!!!
Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
...the RIAA doesn't enemies. I mean common, is there any sane person who doesn't think this is just plain silly...
We need more companies making statements like these.
Go SunComm...What else you got?
So do you recon they'll want to sue me for putting this in my OS X box because I am circumventing the copy protection?
....that we can only type in lowercase? if the shift key is a DMCA (oops, four counts there) violation, then I guess someone is going to have to make a very large keyboard for standard use...
I think this is one of the few legitimate arguments aganst education - with education, morons like this can run a company, hire lawyers, write legislation (and crappy DRM) and get rich doing it.
"Lightyears Beyond Encryption"
Those *SAME* instructions are there. Posted over 2 years ago. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb; en-us;126025
Anonymous Cowards generally receive no replies because you're a coward and I'm a bitch
Donate to the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Shh.
And sleazy numbnuts wackjob CEO's like this, whose mothers should be slapped for bringing them into the world, will seize upon this cocked-up law to point the blame for their own pitiful shortcomings elsewhere.
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
You sure about that, SunnComm?
Security through promiscuity is no better than security through obscurity.
You know, I grew up thinking that the US of A was a pretty fine place to live--sure, we have our turmoils, but we generally manage to get right in the end. I was proud to live in the free-est damn country in the world.
I swear, if this actually fucking works, I'm moving someplace where the state/legal system doesn't let particular interests hold up everybody else by buying laws.
So who wants to help my find a good Mandarin Chinese teacher in Manhattan?
OMFG! Let them sue. It's the best thing that can happen. Bring the lunacy of the ridiculous laws into everyone's living room and expose them for what they are. The media will latch on to this one.
Yoda of Borg am I! Assimilated shall you be! Futile resistance is, hmm?
When it's a FALSE sense of security?
it's people that make mistakes, and not computers.
SunnComm Fucked up, why should some one else pay for SunnComm's mistakes? This is just plain idiocy.
Something has to be done about companies not taking responsibility for their actions, because this is just plain dumb!
DMCA ==bad!
-- Charles A. Plater
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/33322.html:
Reading Slashdot is ruining my spelling and grammar.
Jacobs is just a McBride wannabe.
Please help, I can't seem to find the SHIFT key on my Nokia 3595.
Regards,
D.M.C.A.
From the article:
"He said the company was also exploring a civil suit based on damage to the company's reputation, since Halderman concluded that the technology was ineffective without knowing about future enhancements."
So 'future enhancements' make current technology effective? What kind of bullshit is that? That's like saying Windows is secure because it'll eventually be fixed, and there are millions of people whose computers got hit recently who know that's about as effective a security measure as the rhythm method.
High-speed Road Trip (18.000KPH)
The DMCA specifies that it is illegal to circumvent an effective means of content protection.
Now if one can circumvent it, it isn't very effective, now is it? It seems to me that effective at a minimum means the circumvention involves solving an NP-complete problem, which certainly is not the case here...
Aren't these multi-mode CD's with a DRM-laden WMA track in addition to an audio track?
And isn't the workaround just a way to get to the CDDA, and doesn't it leave the WMA unlistenable?
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Is there a new 'Corporate fuckups for dummies' book out that I haven't seen yet? RIAA, SCO, and now SunnComm seem to have all read the same book.
Karma: SELECT `karma` FROM `users` WHERE `userid`=138474;
Analysis of the MediaMax CD3 Copy-Prevention System
I went through it, and it is pretty blatant in showing others how to circumvent the CD for copying it (which, BTW, is my god damn right). Though i hardly think it's enough to sue somebody over. Come on, just thinking about it for 5 minutes could get you as far as he did! If i was a greedy multi-million publicaly traded company, i'd rather invest my time and money going after REAL software pirates and 'hackers'.
Ben, you've become an UberGeek! Take me as your padawan!!!
...is the part of their suit that alleges that users who installed this software violated the DMCA by removing certain files.
Does anyone know if this software explictly warns the user that, once installed, it is against the law to delete it?
Excuse me, now, I have to go rip a tag off my mattress.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Imagine if we had to invest more in R&D!!!! NO!!
"Martha Stewart can lick my Scrotum......do i have a scrotum?" -- Sharon Osbourne
If anyone out there has a few spare old keyboards we should start sending them our 'shift' key. That way we are free and clear from all leagal issues.
If I go around saying (or I publish a paper stating) that Linux users can play the CD on their systems without any problem, would I be open to being sued for violation under the DMCA, too? I wouldn't mind seeing this go to court... if it's turned down (I sure hope the student doesn't lose!), it'll be one step closer to showing how ridiculously the DMCA can be taken.
it's not just the shift key you have to worry about. now whenever you tell someone to disable cd-autorun, you are violating the dmca, and can be sued.
if this is a sound threat, under the dmca, then something as simple as installing antivirus software - which disables lots of uninvited programs - will be illegial.
yes your honor, i use the blaster worm as copy protection. can i go now...
this entire post was made without using the shift key, to prevent hundreds of 150,000 lawsuits.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
doesn't matter what you do/who you sue, we will not buy ANYTHING from you until ALL of this nonsense ceases. the customer is ALWAYS right. have fund with yourselves.
it's a shame that the artists will have to pay for the endgame of your felonious greed scams.
"I have a remarkably simple proof of this other theorem, however I cannot write it down in the margin of this book as it may be a DMCA violation..."
Next up: Suing keyboard manufacturers for including 2 components that circumvent their copy protection and, hence, violate the DMCA.
Following that keyboard manufacturers rename the Shift key to some weird symbol and everyone just calls it "the key formerly known as shift".
Price, Quality, Time. Pick none. What, you thought you had a choice?
What's really insane is that they are actually using the stock market to justify the damages they supposedly endured. Any judge with any ounce of sense will reject this as bullshit. The market is so damn volatile these days that you cannot use it as evidence unless it could be proven that the accused performed actions specifically to manipulate the market.
If the market did go down because of his actions, it was only because investors saw the company had a crappy product to begin with and it was only a matter of time anyway.
Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
I think the fall of the SunnComm stock by 20% is a good thing. Obviously their value as a company needs to be readjusted if their products suck.
Why should anyone invest in a company who can't even invest enough in their DRM product to protect it from simple circumvention?
Use the address for investors.
investor@sunncomm.com
I sent them an email stating simply that they are doing a disservice to thier clients and the artists they represent by making such an easily defeatable "encryption" system and that you'll check for and never buy a product using thier systems.
Having it rely on a default setting in the OS is just plain stupid.
me thinks you're a shithead
Not only is the Emperor naked, but he has a small penis. Why do you think SunnComm is suing? The stockholders are trying to compensate for something: a little DRM company making a big stink 'cos Microsoft built in the ability to bypass AutoRun by holding down [shift].
Blithering idiots...
*meow!*
Alright, holding shift to disable autorun IS pretty obscure. And using it to disable autorun to copy data is a pretty obscure application. But looking at this is a broader aspect, are we not supposed to understand our computers anymore? Are we not supposed to understand that this disk comes with an autorun we are allowed to disable? Isn't the greater question here, 'Are we losing control of our computers?' Think about it. Are we moving from a world of entreprenurs and ingenuity to a world of plug-and-play, autorun, vanilla coke world where any understanding should be left to professionally trained and liscensed experts in the name of security? If we didn't have Linux, would we already be there?
Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
*sigh* Yet another example of a company trying to cover up stupid security by invoking the DMCA.
Several years ago I was comissioned to write code to allow a Dongle lock to work with a CD that a publisher was releasing.
The code wasn't allowed out of the door until all debug, backdoor and bugs had been beaten out of it. And even then it was audited by two seperate programmers before it was sent to the client.
Something like "Press Shift, and bypass it" would have gotten me fired.
Actually, a closer analogy would be finding that putting the antenna down on a Ford Ranger caused the doors to unlock & the engine to start. Think of how many trucks would be stolen if you published that information!!!
This MediaMax copy protection scheme isn't even capable of working on all computers (for obvious reasons). And for a computer that can't run this autorun Windows binary, the disc will just look like a mixed-media one with audio and data tracks. BUT, since MediaMax is a copy protection scheme, doing *anything* to get around that copy protection is therefore a violation of the DMCA. Hitting to turn off AutoRun...disabling AutoRun on your computer, or simply putting the disc in a non-Windows computer could all be construed as DMCA violations.
But it gets better. Since the copy protection technology obviously isn't capable of working across all platforms (it has no effect on non-Windows computers or audio CD players), then it's not 100% effective to begin with. You could also say that printing the words "This CD is copy protected" on the disc label and then not actually putting any copy protection on the disc isn't a 100% effective method of copy protection either. So would a person ignoring those words and making a copy of the disc be a DMCA violation?
The world has finally begun to defy all logic. I'll be checking into my rubber room at the funny farm now. Nice knowin' y'all.
Fun with Anagarams! LADS HOST, SHALT DOS. HAS DOLTS. AD SLOTHS, HATS SOLD. ASS HO, LTD.
I just called the company. I first talked to a woman whose name I did not get (she answered the phone), and she transferred me to someone else, who introduced himself as "Bill". I believe him to be the COO, Bill Whitmore. We had a rather long conversation about the press release and how SunnComm feels about the information being published. Yes, they did "threaten" Alex with DMCA charges, and they may or may not report this for investigation, but from what Bill told me, they have no plans to file suit against Alex Halderman. I'm not sure if Bill agreed with me that the press release was rather extreme in its implications, but I think he acknowledged something to that fact. don't hold me to that. Bill did, however, seem upset that Alex did not contact the company first, before releasing this information to the world. Perhaps they would have threatened him, perhaps they would have offered him a chance to help fix the problem (Bill said the latter). I don't know. Bill also said that while "all software solutions can be bypassed", his company was trying to create a "licence system" for people to listen to their music legally, without "having to make copies" of it in an illegal manner. So, he said, this is not really a software anti-copying solution, but more of a licence framework for the use of the music. That was what was said, to the best of my recollection.
I haven't purchased this CD and I don't intend to. If I am correct in my assumption you open the shrink wrap, nowhere on the wrap does it have an EULA. Then you put the CD into your computer, does it pop up an EULA? If not and if it put files on my harddrive then I consider that unauthorized use of my computer. They did not inform me of what the CD would do when put in my computer. Also if they do not have an EULA screen then it is not a criminal act to delete the files that it created or use sysdiff or other tools to audit your system after having run this program. If they wanted this stuff to be secret or protected by law they needed an EULA, otherwise its all fair game. IMO, but that doesn't matter to big brother, or to the carnivore system, or to those people whom say they represent you because you did not vote for them and have a big big fancy property in the "country" in Vermont because they were paid off.
~ryan
,b.it's a testament to the effectiveness of our justice system.,/b.,br. ,b.immoral111,/b.
use of shift key is unnecessary and may i say
If SunnComm protected CDs install drivers that stay system resident (as I gather happens based on what is said in the article), and no mention of this is made on the packaging of the CDs, might that itself be something one could sue over?
Music CDs are not software, and therefore if I insert a music CD into my computer, it should not act like software, nor should it install anything onto my computer without my consent or even a notice it is doing so. I bet the DMCA could be manipulated to sue over THAT.
- MaineCoon
Whose girlfriend recently bought a CD-player/radio for $20 and the Reloaded soundtrack for $15.
Hunt your preferred prey at Aliens vs Predator MUD. Join the war at avpmud.com port 4000
Shouldn't the companies who paid to license this software sue SunnComm for making false claims of security?
After all, if Master Lock says that their padlocks are bullet-proof, crowbar proof, etc. and some kid opens it with a paperclip, isn't Master Lock responsible for telling me their product was better than it actually is?
Overrated / Underrated : Moderation
Where's the defense fund donation site? And who's donated?
When /. covered the story originally, one poster half seriously suggested (and got modded informative) using the shift key to defeat the protection. Hmmmmmm. See this comment. /bg
This story's been out for what, a week, and I still don't know who Anthony Hamilton is. Did he lose out on both sales of his CD because of this?
If anything should be illegal, it should be their shoddy technology. First, they create a CD that is obtensibly a music compact disc, but is in reality a CD-ROM that surreptitiously installs programs onto a user's computer without the computer owner's attempt, in a deliberate attempt to sabotage the functionality of the computer. This is what is known as a "virus"*.
Then they present this ill-concieved technology to their clients and shareholders as some sort of panacea, knowing all the while that it is utterly ineffective. This is what is known as "fraud".
To top off their audacity, they then threaten a lawsuit against the researcher who alerted the public to this fraud. This is completely ridiculous. What next, a medical researcher's tests prove that Quack Corp.'s Snake Oil does not really enlarge your penis, so the researcher is sent to prison?
This is a technology that is dependent on an unrealistic number of constraints. If the user of the CD is running Windows AND has autorun turned on AND doesn't press the shift key while putting the disc in AND allows the SunnComm virus to infect their computer AND leaves it running AND tries to copy the music, it won't work, otherwise it will. Oops I just pointed out how flawed their scheme is too, I guess that's a "possible felony"
.* To be pedantic it's more of a trojan than a virus because the malicious code does not self-replicate beyond installing from the disc, but you get the idea.
The big question here is: Will he fold and settle or actually take this through court? As with most students, the individual probably has little money and less time to spend on idiotic lawsuits. Maybe Princeton will help him out, as I find it hard to see how they could support one of their students being blasted over something so obvious and still claim being a haven to academia.
by their estimation, Microsoft, and other keyboard makers are the manufacturer of a DMCA "circumvention device" -- woot!-- this should be fun, like try explaining to a jury how holding down a shift key ; or telling people to hold down a shift key should be illegal....
k b; en-us;126025t .aspx?scid=kb; en-us;155217n -us/shellcc/pl atform/shell/programmersguide/shell_basics/shell_b asics_extending/autorun/autoplay_reg.asp
I guess microsoft is also guilty of publishing information which circumvents their DMCA:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/e
Concluded Jacobs, "This cat-and-mouse game that hackers and others like to play with owners of digital property is over. No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property. SunnComm is taking a stand here because we believe that those who own property, whether physical or digital, have the ultimate authority over how their property is used."
Is it just be or did he just accidently take a stand for the rights of consumers to do what they please with the products they buy?
sigs are dumb.
Let's say that I want my CD locked. I bought this splendid, rare music and value it like a diamond. That someone might sneak into my house (for instance, a PATRIOT FBI employee) and copy my treasure without my knowledge or consent really upsets me. So I'm very concerned if the folks selling me the CD haven't put the protection on it which I've paid for!
How can I be sure my CD is protected and safe unless there are objective measures of the strength of the lock? This threat to the security of my property causes me endless worry. Thankfully some academic institutions still promote objective assessment of the world. On this thin reed floats the hope that theft will not undergo exponential explosion! Boom!!
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
I'm reading "Atlas Shrugged" and this SunnComm fellow's comments just smack of the tripe that the James Taggart character spews in the beginning of the book.
Basically he's saying "how dare you point out our inefficiency and crappy code, you evil, anti-social person!"
Sigh.
I wonder is the installation of the program gave an install shield to let you know that it was installing software to your computer, or if there was a lisence agreement with the disk stating this. I am sure this woould be ilegel if it did not.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
looks like we're paying the over on the "12 hour" line wager placed yesterday.
MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
This cat-and-mouse game that hackers and others like to play with owners of digital property is over...
They'd better hope it's still going, because if it's over, I know who won. (Hint: Hackers are the cat.)
Someone you trust is one of us.
Um, not 100% correct- he forgot to mention France, but he did mention a correct country on the list all the same...
Virgin - England.
EMI Records - England.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Kuro5shin spoof
I read this before I read the reality. Not sure which came out first. Maaaaaaaaad.
These people must have no honour.
What brain dead lawyer is telling them to sue with the DMCA? The shift key has been know for years and is DOCUMENTED by MS. If they are to sue anyone it should be MS for documenting this feature (not that I am saying suing MS would make sense, it would be just as dumb as trying to sue this student for pointing out the obvious). This is one of the bigger problems with the DMCA. It is a "blanket" law for all these big corps to use to get their way when they have NO legal grounds to stand on. This student did NOTHING but point out a known MS feature to by pass the auto-run "feature". It is this companies fault for betting their money on a bunch of incompetent developers who would overlook such a well know feature.
Email these punks and let them know how you feel: investor@sunncomm.com
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
Disabling auto-run is also a violation of the DMCA.
Does anyone know how this thing works under Mac OS X? Supposedly it does, but I can't figure out how it would do it without first asking for administrator authentication to load a new kernel extension (if it uses a custom driver to read itself).
i don't know about you, but i am in total compliance with the dmca in this case
Once again we have a misunderstanding about ownership. If I buy a CD, I own the media and the data on the disk. I do not own a license to make and distribute copies the disk. If I own the data, then SunnComm would seem to agree that I can do anything I want with it, however they are selling a product that limits what I can do with it.
Of course, SunnComm believes that the owner of the copyright on that information is the owner of the data on the disk I bought. I wonder if the record company would agree with that? After all, they own the masters for many of their artists' songs, even though the artists own the copyrights. I bet in that case the record companies believe that they own the data and not the artists (because that lets them charge nice fees for doing the work of making copies -- with authorization from the artists of course).
I dont think the SHIFT key is really the point in this whole story, but instead the informations he gives out about CD standards and how one can insert or bypass such errors in the CD TOC, check the original document, section 4. Yet, for those interrested, all those infos are since a long time on the net anyway...
-- search the web
I think instead of us all getting upset at the ridiculousness of the lawsuit we should be praising it.
Is the lawsuit ridiculous? Most certainly.
Is the lawsuit an attempt by SunnComm to hide their technical deficiencies in their so called copy protections? Yes.
However, what is even more important is this case, if it goes to trial will further underscore the problems with the DMCA.
RIAA has brought enough scrutiny on the law recently with the forests of trees that have become subpeonas to 12 year olds and grandmothers. However, the fact of the matter is in their case they are protecting their legal copyright (although using a sledge hammer on a tack is a bit excesive, but to them it gets the job done). While they may turn popular opinion against them many people may not entirely understand the DMCA and the provisions it gives copyright holders, thus making any change in the law relatively minor (such as requiring judicial review to issue a subpeona).
However, if you can provide in addition to RIAA's abuse of the DMCA vast examples that companies are using this law wholesale to cover up anything they deem violates their rights then a pattern of missuse can be proven.
So far the pattern of missuse can be seen in the Dimitri Skylarov trial, MPAA and the magical and 40bit encryption known as CSS (which in the end only took 5 lines of code to break), RIAA preventing the publishing of academic research on the faults of their digital watermark in music, etc.
This list goes on and on, while this is not the first time nor will it be the last someone is threatened with the DMCA. It is important that the author decided to test the law rather than hide as has happened in prior cases. The more the publicity about how draconian it is the better the chance for meaningful change and hopefully to restore some balance in favor of the consumer and researcher.
I AM BREAKING THE LAW. God I feel so refreshed. Nothing like tempting the wrath of John Ashcroft and the RIAA. Now is the time that all good men need a shiatsu and release.
Comparing it to Windows will be a moot point, since El Dorado is going to have a 40% larger code base than XP.
My contry is endangered by the DMCA due to the FTAA.
If they sue in THIS case, it will be such a great example against the DMCA and the like, that even the most reactionary will be convinced that "it is no good" (tm).
Thank you SunnComm.
-><- no
For the past year, I've been putting the short Perl DeCSS program in my sig - a minimal form of civil disobedience. Unfortunately, that plus the rest of my sig is more than 4 lines, and I risk incurring the wrath of the standards gestapo. "To circumvent SunnComm's CD protection, hold shift while inserting the CD," or the shorter "Press shift if you hate DRM" is much better sig-fodder.
Litigious bastards
How on earth did someone manage to sell about 250,000 shares for a dollar a piece (that's what it looks like anyways) when the stock is worth a dime.
However, did people notice this (from c|net article): "Future versions of the SunnComm software would include ways that the copy-protecting files would change their name on different computers, making them harder to find, Jacobs said. Moreover, the company will distribute the technology along with third-party software, so that it doesn't always come off a protected CD, he added."
So, this has some really bad implications: 1) Random software spyware style will be installed on my PC when I install legitimate software and 2) Does this software distinguish between copy protected and non-copy protected compact disks? 3) Once it becomes legal for this kind of stuff to be installed on your system, who knows what kind of stuff will start being installed behind the scenes when you install a regular piece of software? Keyboard loggers that send info to John Ashcroft? 4) What about fair use?
...should have their lower horns removed.
to make it possible to sue people for saying: "Hey guys, this software is crap and here's why"
Things similar to this have pissed me off in the past, but this is over the line. I'm totally pissed. Time for a valium.
But why is the rum gone?
Oh for fsck's sake... why is there so much screamy whiney serious reaction to this? Many of you slasdotters need to roll up a nice one, take a few hauls, sit back and relax.
/.?
Some wacky company is deciding to sue somebody for something ridiculous. And this is a news-worthy horror, why?
Say I announce tonight that I plan to sue Weird Al Yankovic simply due to the fact he wears glasses (I too wear glasses)... will my press release make front page
Yeesh. I think I may take my own advice...
-ben
myselfmusic
*points to the shift key* :p
This company is going to SCO itself. Step 1. Make news. Step 2. Threaten to sue. Step 3. Make more news and attract idiots to buy stock. 4. Profit via selling onto the idiot buyers.
Secondly -- and I'm not a very eloquent man so let me put this carefully; Fuck you SunnComm. Fuck you and your little idiot minds. You worthless scumm of the earth, you pusdripping sewage waste you. You're a company of IQ 70 personel, a two bit player that is never going to amount to anything. When you're company fails I will celebrate.
You're stupid PR spin is transparent to everyone in the world with an IQ higher than you, which is a majority by large.
All the best, and have a nice time failing as a business.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
The normal CD format already provides for this: legitimate owners can copy or share the music, in a legal way.
"Hackers" can illegally use a SunnComm'ed CD almost as easily as a non-broken CD.
What value is SunnComm bringing to the table? Stopping the non-criminal element of society from "accidentally" using the CD in an illegal fashion?
SunnComm's product appears to provide no value to licensees of their "technology". The standard CD format provides the same usage, without the added risk that the consumer will find it unplayable.
Reading Slashdot is ruining my spelling and grammar.
For installing a driver on your computer without asking.
Quoted from article above (Concluded Jacobs):
"SunnComm is taking a stand here because we believe that those who own property, whether physical or digital, have the ultimate authority over how their property is used."
Does this mean they have no problem with me holding down the shift key? After all, it's my property....
now we have dmca
Am I right in thinking that this CD protection system installs a driver (which prevents normal access to the CD) by default without asking the user...?
If so, what's the difference between this and a trojan ? Sue these muppets for damaging your PC.
This would certainly be illegal in the UK under the computer misuse act.
I agree parent should be modded up, but I thought parent should be modded "insightful"!
I've been eagerly waiting years to invest in a DRM provider that develops real solutions to real problems. I've spent some time researching your company and was considering investing until I read an article about how your technology worked. As it turns out, it was built on a very unstable factor. It requires that users have the autorun feature enabled on their computer in order to work. It also turns out that a user can either hold the shift key down or disable the autorun feature through various windows configuration points. Also, a user could easily press control-alt-delete and manually terminate the process. This type DRM, while functional at a basic level, cannot and should not be relied upon in the market. The announcement that you plan to sue a college student who reminded people how to disable the autorun feature is completely ridiculous. I find it hard to believe that anyone would consider such a flimsy piece of protection something the DMCA would protect. I find it interesting that your company has decided to make a legal statement that they wish to separate a college student from his tuition yet refuse to sue Microsoft for adding not only the ability to disable the autorun feature, but providing instructions on how to do so in the help files bundled with its' OS. I feel that this law suit is the equivalent of suing Consumer Reports. Your customers and investors should know the exact viability of your service, and now they do. Since your company has decided to follow such a misguided legal attack as retribution against someone who alerted the public to your technological short comings, I feel that I can never invest in your company. I only have interest in backing technology firms. Since you company is now a litigation firm, I believe that SunnComm will share the fate of many other technology-gone-litigation companies, and will not return to their values or principals. If you wish to prove that SunnComm is truly interested in technology, this suit should be dropped and a real DRM solution should be pursued.
> I don't know when the next war will be, but it will be fought against corporations.
You must be an American and only watch news on American TV. Just a guess. No offense.
The corporations WILL come for you and your freedoms... but not yet. It's a matter of timing... you know... cost/risk analysis.
It's much more profitable to first attack Syria, Iran and Korea first. Every country with nationalized industries will be given a "taste of freedom".
I expect the next planeload of Saudi suicide bombers to be blamed on... (coin toss)... Syria! North Korea! I'm not sure really... they did a good job associating September 11 with Iraq and the SMALL FRIES in Afghanistan. Where's the MONEY TRAIL back to the big shots? Oh yeah... 25 pages of blacked out "national security".
I guess we can thank King Fahd, and his jester puppet George Bush Jr.
Don't blame me.. my election was hijacked.
Wow, they're actually claiming that the DMCA actually implies that it's a felony for telling people that the CD won't autoload if you hold down shift?
What a bunch of morons. What the hell happened to freedom of speech. This is an empirical function of the operating system, there is absolutely nothing untoward about telling people this.
I suppose these bozos should sue anyone who doesn't run windows for violating the DMCA since that won't run their crappy windows executable anyway, shift or no shift.
Jeeze, they bullshit about hiding behind academic credentials when it's they who are hiding their incompetence behind a frivilous and draconian lawsuit.
SunComm was secretly formed by EFF in order to create a deliberately easy-to-circumvent DRM scheme, and subsequently sue the (also hired by EFF) whistleblower in order to set precedent. Pretty sneaky, but they can't fool me!
Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
SunnComm Technologies Inc. (OTC: STEH), a leader in digital content security and enhancement for optical media, announced today that it intends to take legal action against the writer of a critical report titled: "Analysis of the MediaMax CD3 Copy-Prevention System." According to Peter Jacobs, SunnComm's CEO, "The conclusions contained in the Princeton University grad student's report issued last Monday were derived from incorrect assumptions by its author. The author did not ask for, or receive, SunnComm's MediaMax 'white paper' documentation available on the technology prior to concluding that 'MediaMax and similar copy-prevention systems are irreparably flawed ...'"
When security is this weak and flawed, one doesn't NEED the white papers to prove it.
Perhaps SunnComm's CEO expected the grad student to assume that computers were as dumb as hammers and that most wouldn't know about things like TweakUI or the shify key.
"Security Through Obscurity"--yet more proof that it's a bad business model. Unless of course, SunnComm was waiting for somebody to come to this conclusion and that's where they wanted to make their money after all...
Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
We should all figure out how to use the DMCA to our advantage. The author of the paper should have spelled "Shift" backwards, copyrighted the work and then claim the software makers decrypted his article.
For exposing how the DMCA is abused but stupid lawsuits as these. Now maybe a Judge will actually read the DMCA and realize that our time is wasted in courts by badly written laws.
Also kid if you're reading this countersue them for installing software and locks on your pc without your permission. "Opening this case" does not qualify as accepting the terms.
What really gets me is SunnComm implying that because Halderman didn't review their white-papers and reviewed the product solely on its own merits he is somehow maligning the company's reputation. "Oh he didn't take into consideration all the nifty new features we plan to roll out in the future... blahblahblah."
Hint, it wasn't his job as a researcher to provide your company with free marketing.
I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
Wha-wha-wha-wha-what?
I do think that the only logical reaction to the CEO's justification is:
bwahahahahahahahaha!
Will some people stop at nothing to ignore their own failings?!
-VolVE
Oh I...love...trash!
I love it be-cause it's trash!
Thanks for bringing back good memories.
This is the wax padlock which makes knowledge of fire illegal.
I hope that this does go to court. As clyde c posted, this puts the feet in the form of the "effective control" clause of the DMCA to the proverbial fire. (And he should be modded up.)
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
'No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property.'
Should have been:
"No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use faulty legislation and the cover of righteousness to defend incompetent development and bad software."
We should boycott all companies who invoke the DMCA, particularly those who try to use it to cover up crappy products.
Kinda makes you wonder... If Linux does one day take over as the prodominent OS on most computer devices, we'll get just as sick of its advertizing as we are of Microsofts now. Microsoft used to be cool...
One thing that does disturb me as a scientist in general is the chilling effects on academic research in the United States. If we continue to pander to large companies with fat wallets (read DMCA) the United States could very conceivabley loose its place as a leader of technological innovation.
This would be a very catastophic result since this is one of the few areas the United States actually exports more than it imports (the only other area is aircraft).
If the United States lost its technological edge and thus the economic advantage it enjoys in this field the economic effects worldwide could be very troubling (As a percentage of worldwide consumption the United States accounts for 20%). Therfore, people in other countries who see the DMCA as an American problem should try and see that if this type of lawmaking persists in the United States any ill effects of these laws could very well affect the rest of the world in addition to the United States.
4,134,800 "penny" stocks add up to quite a bit. From the FA: SunnComm believes that by making erroneous assumptions in putting together his critical review of the MediaMax CD-3 technology, Halderman came to false conclusions concerning the robustness and efficacy of SunnComm's MediaMax technology. Based on several of these incorrect assumptions, Halderman and Princeton University have significantly damaged SunnComm's reputation and caused the market value of SunnComm to drop by more than $10 million.
the SunnComm sales guy who closed the deal. Anyone who can sell invisible clothes to a record company (read: SHARK) deserves to work for a company with a stock price above 15 cents.
Everybody is quoting the "cover of academia" line, but I think this one's much better: :-)
So, just because you own your computer doesn't mean that you may copy your CDs with it, 'cuz the owner of any property-- physical or digital-- should have the ultimate authority over how ther property is used. Ain't that most beautifully self-contradictory?
Don't worry, they couldn't sue themselves (they'd have to borrow even more money). This is a completely pointless threat! Their web site pulls up a disclaimer upon loading that informs you that the company hasn't made any money (probably up to their eyebrows in debt) and they're under their rights not to report to any stock purchasers just how much they've lost until they break even (if ever). The CEO of the company acknowledges that buying their stock is a risk of losing your entire investment in it.
How are they so concerned about their 20% loss in stock value when they warn their own shareholders that they're buying a volatile stock in a company that hasn't made any money and they don't want to tell you how much they've lost and/or owe? What damage exactly has this kid done to their reputation?!? They don't have one!
-Joe
If we're all god's children, what's so special about Jesus? - Jimmy Carr
It is totally bogus that a corporation should even be allowed to sue over speech. The issue here is not the DMCA, the issue is that a corporation is allowed to sue someone because of their opinion about that product.
Allowing corporations to silence critics effectively reduces competition. If there is no competition, there is no free enterprise. Ergo, the corporate system is as equally distorting of market realities as any socialist system.
Business owners and their Republican lackeys that allow companies to sue over speech are no different than the socialist blowhards they claim to oppose.
Thieves all, up against the wall with them when the revolution comes. Since we cannot criticize one CEO or one corporate lawyer, I propose we kill them all.
This is my sig.
If telling someone that they can disable autorun via the shift key is fellonious, I want to see what these guys thing of the official Microsoft description of this feature. Go ahead, sue Microsoft too, I dare you.
= /library/en-us/shellcc/platform/Shell/programmersg uide/shell_basics/shell_basics_extending/autorun/a utoplay_reg.asp
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url
-molo
Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
Hey, I can't accept that I have horrible software: SOLUTION - file a lawsuit!!!!!!!
I think there should be a law against being that stupid or people should be allowed to sue someone for being a commonsenseless jackass.
Reading the rhetoric from this dipshit, I'm angry, I mean I am frikin livid. I've had it with these morons defining the debate and getting all the backing from these sycophantic media outlets that the need despite the utterly preposterous and mendacious positions they take on these issues. This honest researcher should sue these rat bastard, lying, incompetent bozos for defamation.
"That DCMA violation is facilitated by Microsoft and the CD-ROM drive manufacturers."
Microsoft provided this 'DMCA Violation' long before the DMCA existed. Autorun was never intended to be used as a protection device.
For this reason, I don't think MS will ever be seriously seen as violating the DMCA.
"Derp de derp."
These are the words of Halspal , a Everything2 user, in a discussion regarding a controversial write-up regarding finding child porn on the Net. I bet a sizable portion of slashdotters has just clenched the fists. But free speech is free speech. If it needs to be approved by a censor first, it's no longer so free. You see, explaining how to press a Shift Key is now illegal, posting a link to bomb-making instructions is illegal. Apparently people are already scared enough to believe that instructions on capital crimes are themselves capital crimes. Really nice, isn't it?
The write-up was nuked on E2. It was later deleted from Wikipedia in violation of their own Deletion policy. It was restored after a complaint, but immediately deleted again, probably because the admin is scared it might be a doubleplusungood thinkcrime to leave the article.
Was there anything so bad that it should be instantly banned? How would a site like Slashdot react to it? I don't know, but I am willing to find out. Please find it in the reply to this post. The text is released under the GNU Free Documentation License, so feel free to mirror it or use in any other way.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
Perhaps they should go after Linus and other Linux developers for incorporating this copy protection circumvention feature. --- naa..
Cheers to SunComm for ripping off BMG with crappy software. I wonder if I could interest BMG in some ocean front property near Phoenix.
But the way our legal system works, they can go on claiming both for a while until it looks like they are for sure going to lose/win one claim or the other. Then they can drop the claim that's not working for them. It's all lawyer games. (NOTE: IANAL and NBAYROS (Never Believe Anything You Read On Slashdot))
Furry cows moo and decompress.
In order to start whittling down the DMCA, we need to see some cases develop that find for a Defendant. Starting with ridiculous propositions such as suggesting a person playing a CD hold down the shift key, I anticipate a court will at last feel comfortable beginning to find for a defendant. Now, with cases on both sides of an extreme, DeCSS on one hand, and pressing the shift key on the other, we can start whittling down the terror that has become DMCA.
But some interesting things occur to me. I don't recall ever authorizing this manufacturer to install software on my machine. There was no shrink-wrap license, so far as I can tell from the articles, no opportunity to avoid installing the nasty stuff. If this is so, then the code is no different from so many viruses distributed with digital media, except this is intentional and willful.
Looks like a Computer Fraud and Abuse/Patriot Act case to me. Perhaps a Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices counterclaim is due? Perhaps, even, it is time to suggest that the publisher who used it shoudl be held to account for illicitly installing software on people's machines without authorization. The devil is in the details -- I would need to see the packaging and actual software in process, but hell, this might be a relatively easy counterclaim to bring.
A very tried woman put me on hold. I held for 5-6 minutes the the call was dropped. I sent them an email through their web-form available here.
s p
http://www.sunncomm.com/asktheprez/asktheprez.a
There is an explanation of sorts at the bottom. Basically, you're bad because their locks are crappy. If GM sold cars that could driven with a butter knife, don't you think they would fix it rather than sue the guy who figured it out?
They truely do suck.
Blar.
At my office, we have Win2K Group Policies which prevent CD Autorun. Is my company violating the DCMA?
This whole thing is rediculous. Can't anyone do anything down there in America(TM) without getting sued anymore?
Come to Canada, everything is legal up here!
"You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake."...Tyler Durden
By this same logic, you can be sued for a DMCA vialation if you attempt to playback this CD on a machine running Linux or a *BSD operating system. AFAIK, this DRM system will only work on Windows and MacOS X, so in this case, "Linux" and "BSD" can be seen as "hacker tools" used to counterfeit the DRM system. Therefore, you are breaking DMCA and can be sued. Aren't things just getting better and better ?
A COMMON feature like disabling autorun is public knowledge and isn't any flaw or revelation on anyone's part.
This CD automatically modifies the user's computer.
It does this either automatically (without the approval of the user) or with the user's permission.
If the former, it is absolutely clear that Suncomm was using the audio cd as a trojan horse to limit the functionality of the user's computer. The last time I checked, this was considered to be one of the most serious possible offences in the US and could get you arrested and held indefinitely without even basic legal rights.
If the the software is intended to be installed with the user's knowledge and consent, I fail to see how that knowledge (of the installation process) can be construed as a trade secret.
I like the first option, it would be sort of funny to see USA-PATRIOT and the DMCA square off here. It would also be pretty ironic if Suncomm's defense turned out to make anti-virus software illegal.
Owning copying technology is not an unconditional 'free pass' to replicate or distribute protected work." (emphasis mine)
Owning copying technology certainly is a 'free pass' to replicate protected work. It's only the distribution thereof which is restricted. This has to do with the fair use doctrine. Copyright holders may not prevent me from making any number of backup copies. They don't have to make it easy, though, and can try to prevent me from doing so. But I still retain the right to try and succeed in copying works. It's only when I distribute those copies do I infringe.
This text was nuked from Everything2> and deleted from Wikipedia.
Media in the past often touted the Internet as a child porn heaven. It was repeatedly claimed that Internet users are constantly bombarded with child pornography in their spam, on seeminly innoculous pages, among the search results for "Britney Spears" or "Pokemon" and on P2P, masquerading as vanilla porn. But the facts do not support these assertions. Seek, and ye shall find. Don't and you won't.
But as another saying goes, if it exists, it must be somewhere on the Internet. And yes, this is true for child porn as well. The continuing attempts to eradicate online child pornography made it more difficult to find, but not impossible. Still, it usually requires considerable Internet search skills and experience, otherwise users are trapped into countless pop-up ads and surrounded by images of 35+ year old "lolitas" with pigtails. This article is a collection of techniques for finding child pornography on the Net. I will probably scorned by both paedophiles (for indirectly helping law enforcement) and "normal people" alike, but freedom of speech is paramount to me. Let the knowledge spread!
Disclaimer: I am against rape, violence and coercion, whether applied to children or to adults. I realise that child porn sometimes harms the children involved. But bits and pixels are not humans. No additional harm is being done. Downloading and posession of child porn is legal in many countries. IANAL. YMMV.
Sources of child porn
Child porn was de facto and de jure allowed before 1980s. There have been numerous porn magazines featuring photos of naked children and photos of children having consensual sex with other children and with adults. These magazines operated completely in the open and even solicited photos from their readers' families. These magazines, of course, were closed a long time ago and there is no place to buy the back issues today. But many images from these magazines were scanned and are now distributed on the BBSes and on the Net. For example, the most known series of hardcore scans from print magazines such as Lolita, called LL (Little Lolita) is well-represented online.
There are different laws regarding child pornography in countries all other the world. For example, in Japan child erotica was legal all the way until 1999. It was not usually exported officially, but scanners again filled this niche. One of the best known series, called Black Cat Scans (named after the scanner), available in many places online, features photos of beautiful young (early teens) girls from Russia and other countries made by Japanese photographers. One of the Black Cat Scans models, a beautiful 12 year-old girl called Laika even had an online cult following with a virtual church set up in one of the Usenet newsgroups. Other well-known series include MCLT (My Collection of Lolitas and Teens) by Atom, Yossy Scans and others.
Another abundant source of softcore child erotica is the nudism subculture. Nudists have no qualms about child nudity and hundreds of thousands of photos and videos featuring nude teenagers and kids are freely available. Banning such images is probably impossible without effectively outlawing the entire nudist subculture.
When American courts worked out the differences between art and child pornography, a new generation of legitimate softcore child pornography sites blossomed on the Web. Photos of Next Door Lolitas, Astral Nymphets, Natural Angels, Little Virgins and, of course, Most Erotic Teens appeared online, open to any person with a valid credit card. These sites can be thought about as Playboy with kids, offering viewers a lot of stylish sexual innuendo, but none of the blunt smut that usually characterises porno. And the best thing is that t
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
The Business Wire article has "Notes about Forward-Looking Statements" at the end.
What a joke. Yanks are going to eventually disappear up their own litigious arseholes.
It's a disclaimer that serves to cover their arses for their own poor journalism. If the article was entirely fact with no opinion, there would be no need for such a statement. If it was an editorial, or an opinion, or even just plain old comment, then there is still no need for such a statement, because speculation is expected in these cases. They seem to be admitting that there is no such thing as freedom of the press.
This is quite aside from the fact that statements don't have eyes.
Maybe care to give them a call.
;)
602-267-7500
Of course, it'll be like talking to a brick wall, but hey, it might be worth a try.
Sunncomm Inc
668 N 44th St
Phoenix, AZ 85008
I'm planning on sending a letter (complete, with on university letterhead nonetheless) when I sit down and take the time to come up with a good rant. Hell, who knows, maybe I'll be sued too
I disable sigs...do you?
<FAKE>
Hey, hey, hey!!! Stop all this piracy supportin' talk, OKay? If ya don't me an' my RIAA buddies might just have ta get medieval on your butt.
</FAKE>
It's gettin' pretty bad here, folks. Now editing the registry is mad, evil, hax0r piracy. argh. When oh when will RIAA go away? That's what I wanna know.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
This method relies on installing a device driver, so surely it won't work unless you're logged in as Administrator?
Even if their legal staff is better than their engineering staff (Which must have consisted of Bozo the Monkey and 3 pot smoking interns to have come up with a "protection" scheme like that) there's not really any way to get blood from a stone.
They should just save their investors the money and go bankrupt now. Unless they've siphoned it all off already to buy the CEO a house in Hawaii...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
http://www.sunncomm.com/asktheprez/asktheprez.asp
At http://www.sunncomm.com/video/video.asp?VideoID=01 30 Peter Jacob says at a congressional hearing in response to "what happens when the market presents a cdrom that mimics the function of a cd player? Would you consider that to be a circumvention device?"
"That protection won't do any good any more for that particular CD"
He also says later:
"Everyone knows that the customer will dictate what fair use is at the end of the day. I think our company will pioneer that."
Well, it doesn't take a doctor to figure that out.
People have invested a lot of money in this company, and for doing so, they have the right to expect it will succeed no matter what secondary concerns there are about competition.
Ideally, the corporate system should produce stable companies with guaranteed returns. Thus, old ideas of competition and free enterprise and in some cases even speech should give way for the greater good of social stability.
In that light, DMCA busting students and other corporate critics are dangerous revolutionaries, and we should shoot them all.
This is my sig.
Concluded Jacobs, "This cat-and-mouse game that hackers and others like to play with owners of digital property is over. No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property. SunnComm is taking a stand here because we believe that those who own property, whether physical or digital, have the ultimate authority over how their property is used. Owning copying technology is not an unconditional 'free pass' to replicate or distribute protected work."
..and I'm confused as to how this gives them the right to install stuff on my computer.. How can I use the "ultimate authority" to decide how my computer is used if the protection scheme doesn't ask my permission....
After all I if I did buy the thing I may forget after a couple years that the "CD" installs malware and drop it into a drive one day.
There are that many IDIOTS that still believe in this company? My god. Somebody please shoot the CEO'S of this company now. It's only like putting a lame horse out of it's misery.
One thing that is worth noting, is the fact that the Autorun feature (as well as the ability to install software, which in this case is necesary for this DRM program to work) on a Windows XP/2K machine is disabled for users that do not belong to either the Administrators or Powerusers groups; but last time I checked, anyone who logs onto the machine can listen to CD's.
Dammit Jim! we've been here before! -- Bones.
He used his superior academia to uncover little know and hard to understand "pushing of the Shift key."
My karma is getting better everyday.
Show your hate for SCO. Get a cool t-shirt and donate to the Open Source Now Fund.
Posted to this link. Wonder what the chances of a reply are!
In your first answer you note that "Now with MediaMax on the CD, honest people have a way of honoring the artists wishes regarding how and where the music property can be copied and shared." Wouldn't you agree that it's not the honest people you are worried about? Honest people didn't copy CDs and distribute them, only the dishonest ones, so basically your software is only re-enforcing to the honest users that they are all potential theives, and are not trusted?
In your third point: "Thieves attempting to circumvent the technology for the purpose of re-distributing the music are breaking the law. Nothing will ever stop these thieves." What about people who have autorun disabled on their CDs due to security concerns? When they rip and burn or copy the music from a mediamax protected CD they'll be able to do it (as I understand it) without the knowledge they are doing something wrong, because your software appears to rely on autorun being enabled... are they still considered to be circumventing your copy protection?
When you say "The difference between using our implanted technology or ripping the music for re-distribution is the difference between withdrawing money from your bank or robbing it." you are again implying that the users are theives, regardless of their reasons for ripping a CD. When I rip my CDs so I can stream them to my computer at work, or have backups in case a CD is lost or damaged, or have them available in a large playlist format that I can use to play a mix of music as I want it at home through my computer am I a thief?
"If you owned technology that allowed you to transport the money from your local bank to your living room, doesnt give you the right to do it." Why not? It is my money. If I want to use it to light my cigars or roll around naked in or simply tear MY money into little pieces why am I not allowed to?
"No matter how much stealing (called "sharing" to make thieves feel better about themselves)goes on, its still taking the copyrighted property of others and converting it to ones own use." As I understand the music industry it's infringing on the rights of the record companies to make money and rip off the artists, who (some of them anyway) actually make music that they want to be heard by others. I think your opinions of people who "share" files is a bit uneducated and lopsided.
When you boast that: "The current version of MediaMax is like any software technology in Version 1. The next version will make it tougher and tougher to circumvent." you are indicating that you will make it harder to prevent software from sneakily installing on a computer. In fact, unless your software makes its presence known (and approved) it rates as a virus.
"So-called "experts" who grandstand by publishing MediaMax hacks dont "get it." They seem to born out of some Messiah complex hell-bent on saving the world from any technological attempt to protect artists and their property." Surely you are joking when you say this Mr. Jacobs. These "hacks" are the act of holding down the shift key or having autorun disabled, hardly the work of a master hacker. I believe most of the mention was along the lines of "wow, lame copy protection, it uses autorun". Hardly a "messia complex" as you describe it.
"With MediaMax, we have a technology that plays on virtually every device" As a law abiding person who has resisted the urge to "share" or "borrow" music online, I must ask if this technology will work on my linux system, or the mac laptop which I will be getting through work soon. Working in CD players is fine, but the other side of the technology, the side where it works in computers, is important as well, and the entire world doesn't run windows... or are those who don't thieves because they aren't (can't) use your software?
"Stealing is serious. People are getting hurt...real people, and SunnComm intends to pl
AS IF!
What we really need is a revolution like the
recall vote in California -- throw the bums
out.
>>>
>
I think these Suncomm guys and their lawyers are smarter than they look. I mean, their company exists to make money, right? But why make money by developing and marketing good products when
you can release something so crappy that it basically serves as nothing more than a gigantic piece of DMCA-violation bait, enabling your company to sue the first poor soul who bites and points out that the brown thing floating in the water isn't Almond Joy. No need to go through the effort of creating and trying to sell a decent product - just sue for the profits that you would have had if you'd bothered to make a decent, secure product to begin with. In the meantime, you claim as damages the (entirely predictable) devaluation of your company when the stock price goes down the toilet.
Really, the RIAA lawyers, for all their underhandedness, don't have anything on these guys. RIAA is only claiming lost sales - how about suing Joe Customer for the accompanying "artifically" lower stock prices of the RIAA member companies too?
Hopefuly, if this ever goes to trial the judge will catch on to the fact that this clearly was not a legitimate attempt to create a secure product (Suncomm admits prior knowledge of the shift-key flaw) and will hopefuly throw out this lawsuit. I mean, it seems to me that the producer of a product that features a protection mechanism needs to have made a good faith attempt to have made the protection mechanism an effective one before they can accuse someone of "circumventing" it. Of course, my way of thinking comes from the pre-DMCA world where most laws were reasonably fair and equittable - sigh.....
Understanding is a three edged sword. - Ambassador Kosh Naranek, Babylon 5
Yeah. And Apple, and every Linux distributor, because you can use their software to circumvent it too...
I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
It's also convenient that they don't have to report, because it means we won't get an explanation as to who sold (looks like sold anyways) 250K shares or so of it at $1/piece at around 2:30PM.
or how to create land mines on the keyboard...
I submitted an article about the shift key bypass two days ago, and in it I joked about DMCA prosecution. I thought I was being sarcastic!
They are even dumerer than I thought.
They are trying to fight computer users and don't even know enough about computers to see that a well documented feature of the OS 95% of their victims use will defeat the protection they paid thousands of dollars for?
They have no clue how bad off they are. It's time for management to close shop and hope they are smart enough to land a job as a greeter at Wal-Mart.
How about consumers sue for the record companies installing what is in all respects a virus that adversely effects the operation of your computer? It spreads with the CD and disables your ability to read CD tracks, sounds like a virus to me...
Even better, use a few of these new Parrot Act laws against them. Computer hacking is a hard time offense these days.
As for a few other ways of avoiding this virus, how about disabling autorun? That is well documented also.
XP's driver rollback or System Restore should do it. Again, well documented.
Do you have to be logged in as Administer for it to install? I'd thing playing an audio CD as a normal user would be an easy way to defeat this unless it somehow is able to change system files as a user which would make the virus claim even stronger.
You could use Linux, BSD or any other non-MS OS on your system.
Or my favorite way to defeat the protection...don't buy shit from an RIAA affiliated label.
With all these suggestions I guess they will be after me next for stating the obvious.
If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
You don't have to cat it, that's what the redirection operators are for. Also, as far as I recall, CDRecord takes the name of the file to record as an argument, not the name of the disk to burn to.
I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
Even with the newfound freedom given me by the shift key, I still refuse to listen to Anthony Hamilton. Whoever he is.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
my god 10 million dollars for telling people to press the shift key
makes you wonder how much caps lock is worth.
what's even worse, i have to type this entire posting in lower case and without much punctuation. i'm too scared to go near either end of my keyboard.
'No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property.'
amusing out-of-context snippet: 'it is wrong to use one's knowledge'
something george the bush joonyur never has to worry about
i know, it's flamebait. as long as it doesn't go on my PERMANENT record
Where's Robin Hood? We could kinda really use him now.
If it were me, I'd file under California's anti-SLAPP provisions, and give this company an ass-reaming, good and proper. California's ANTI-SLAPP provisions are described here:
http://llr.lls.edu/volumes/v33-issue3/tate.pdf
6) Use the information provided in the article and call:
SunnComm Technologies Inc., Phoenix
Kimberly Faulkner, 602-267-7500
and express... "You've got to be fucking kidding me?"
To myself and most of us, this sort of thing should be common knowledge. if an end user has an understanding how how their windows system works - are we in violation of the dmca by simply existing?
This paper didn't teach me much - just reaffirmed what I already knew. Maybe I should turn myself in to the rcmp.
I can see the name of this lawsuit now -- Academia vs. Assholes. <wry grin> If I were Anthony Hamilton, I'd go into hiding to escape the raving hordes of lawyers from the ACLU , EFF , and other organizations concerned with civil liberties and free speech rights. This threat is akin to Microsoft threatening to sue someone who discovers and publicizes a Windows OS security hole.
I hope the first court that sees this alleged case treats it with EXACTLY the respect it deserves. :/
Catherine
If they do the press will consider this newsworth enough to report. Not the "hold down the shift key" but the fact that the DMCA allows someone to be sued because they published the fact that you can "hold down the shift key".
If it were to happen, it would raise the visibility of the evil apects of the DMCA.
Are you paranoid if you know that they just want to know everything you say and do?
This is a bad analogy. Stealing a car is wrong. Illegally copying music is wrong. But I fail to see how it's wrong to point out that for all the shiny electronic locks on some car, it can still be slimjimmed. The thieves almost certainly know that already, and the company's customers have a right to know that the fancy locks don't protect them.
I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
I'm sooooooooooooooooo tired of seeing that word misspelled time and time again. And here it actually is the cornerstone of the whole post, yet that freak can't get it right.
Please mod this up. And read it. Over and over again.
From my understanding, holding the shift key on a windows box while inserting a CD will stop the autorun feature, which I hear installs a driver on the computer so that I can not rip the music off of it.
My question is: what gives this company the right to install software on my computer without my authorization? What if the driver is bugged and somehow causes data loss? Can I sue them?
Also, I assume that these DRM measures will never work on linux. I also imagine that rather than find a way to do this under linux, they'd like to outlaw open source.
I noticed on SunnComm's web page they have a web form for sending a message to the president of the company... HAVE AT IT: http://www.sunncomm.com/asktheprez/asktheprez.asp
'No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property.'
So... you see... first they say its a false statment, then they confirm it... all in the same report? how convenient....
\m/
I modified the registry in my XP box to shut off autorun completely. Does this mean I'm going to jail?
-R
Is there any way people can file "friend of the court" briefs in support of the beleaguered?
No text!
You all realize, I assume, that if this sort of bullshit continues, you will be unable to make ANY purchase without the risk of being sued.
The combination of not making them label DRM-ed garbage and suing everyone who tries to use anything they own outside of the company's narrowly-allowed set of criteria means that anyone at all is always at risk for being sued even if they think they don't own anything that's DRM-ed.
What a frightful New World...
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
But regardless, I wonder if your point could still be true... Would having a shrinkwrap license that says "we will interfere with your CD" actually indemnify them from this law? Could someone put a shrinkwrap license that says "we will record your keystrokes and use this info to log into your bank accounts" and get away with installing programs on your computer without your approval?
....will 12 year old and little old ladies get sued for accidently holding down the shift key?
the english language will never be the same...if i YELL IN CHAT ROOMS, people will be able to sue me for circumventing DRM....
> No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong > to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to > facilitate piracy and theft of digital property. I do not think so. My tax dollars at work, baby. Would it be better to keep it a secret shared only by hackers? Thanks to this student, people will be able to focus their investments on companies that build *real*, valuable technology, unlike SunnComm and their laughable protection schemes. Knowledge wants to spread. You cannot stop it.
Does Slashdot even read the articles they post? The company is sueing the grad student for 2 things:
1. The student made "erroneous assumptions" about their DRM technology in his published paper. This caused a $10 million drop in their stock prices.
2. The student published the names of certain files that can be deleted from the hard drive after the installation of the CD which would disable the copy-protection. This is a violation of the DMCA.
This isn't about the student saying you can just press the shift key to get around the copy-protection. He actually named "unpublished" (whatever that means) files that could be deleted to disable the DRM.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the shift key have substantial non-infringing use?
U.S. copyright law is so utterly bankrupt it's laughable. Stop buying CDs -- it's the only way the media companies will listen.
Wait -- they'll just blame the drop in sales on file traders.
A better Analogy would be, "Should telling people they can open unlocked car doors be a crime?" After all, it enables people to steal cars from people who do not lock their doors.
Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
Directly after the quoted text in the submission, the article reads, "SunnComm is taking a stand here because we believe that those who own property, whether physical or digital, have the ultimate authority over how their property is used."
I agree. The problem here is that the idea of ownership is simply not defined properly in modern american law. It has suddenly become legal, in the last few years, for companies to sell me products to which they retain ownership. If this problem is corrected, and consumers are given rights to the products they buy, a large portion of this DMCA nonsense would evaporate.
Stop the ride. I want off.
What I think you meant to say is the emperor has a big wad of toilet paper jammed up his ass. Why?
To stem the bloodflow from all the damage his head was caused!
The original poster made no references to stealing a car, just that the car door wasn't originally designed to be circumvented in this way. You dopey fuck.
For a moment I thought a subsidiary of Sun created this genius technology! Just imagine someone telling "You have the technical IQ of SunComm"!
The following was sent to their "talk to the president" page at http://www.sunncomm.com/asktheprez/asktheprez.asp ...
Your responses have raised several issues in my mind, and I would like to ask for your clarification...
"MediaMax was designed to put a structure on the CD, itself, that empowers consumers to make licensed, legal and yes, limited copies of the music."
This is flat-out false. MediaMax was designed to automatically install, without my knowledge and without my consent, software on my computer that restricts my right to access digital content that I have purchased with the program of my choice. A device that loads software without the knowledge and/or consent of the user onto a computer to perform functions that the user may not desire is generally known as a "virus."
To cast your own words back in your teeth, no matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of "protecting artists" to facilitate the uninvited and covert installation of a virus on another's computer.
Having done with your notion of what your program is doing, let me now turn my attention to your responses about what I am buying...
"As a consumer, you purchase the "listening rights" to the music on the CD, not the duplication rights."
If I am purchasing the listening rights to the music, why can I not do so in a medium of my choice (e.g., MP3)? Why must I only use your proprietary format? And furthermore, if I have purchased the right to listen to the music, why can I not get a free replacement CD if my CD gets scratched? After all, you said that I purchased the right to listen... does that mean that you believe if I allow a CD to be scratched, I lose the right to listen to music on that CD? I paid for the right to listen to the music - what does a scratch have to do with me exercising that right? Are you prepared to send me a duplicate copy of a CD **AT COST** (i.e., $0.10 plus mailing) if my disk becomes scratched so that I may continue to exercise my listening rights? If not, you have not sold me "listening rights" to the music. What, exactly, have you sold me? I'll answer that for you... nothing.
"Theyve rationalized the theft and they will always be looking for ways to cheat the system."
You have rationalized robbing me of my Fair Use rights allowed under copyright law... specifically, the right to shift intellectual property to which I purchase rights to the format of my choosing that best meets my needs. Since the Doctrine of Fair Use has a legal pedigree that states that it is derived from the Right to Freedom of Speech, you have robbed me of one of my basic rights under the Constitution of the United States of America. How, exactly, do YOU rationalize that violation, sir?
"Its as though they think that music is different from other real property."
Excuse me? When did music become 'real property?' Last I checked, music failed every test of 'real property.' It is not exclusive (i.e., my taking and using it does not deprive you of the ability to use it). It is not tangible. It is not naturally scarce. Your statement shows the profound logical error in your thinking. Music is 'intellectual property' - which is a darn sight different than real property. "Intellectual property" is an oxymoron of a name anyway, as music - along with all other copyrighted material - is, has been, and always will be... and pay attention to this here... THE COMMON PROPERTY OF ALL OF MANKIND. We simply choose to grant for a limited term a monopoly on its use to he that first expends the effort to shape the ephemeral into a recordable form. Music doesn't "belong" to the artist. Music belongs to all of mankind. Mankind simply chooses to give custodianship of the music that an artist "discovers" (not "creates") for a limited period of time.
Copying music is not analogous to stealing money or stealing a car. Copying music is analagous to me looking over your BMW while it sits in your
"By opening this CD case you agree to be bound by the license and pay us one million dollars for each stupid lawsuit we can file against you for using our product" :)
Now that'd be a comprehensive EULA.
Though I probably should not give them any ideas...
Hyperom.com
3) BMG charged with many counts of computer trespass for knowingly distributing a trojan horse.
is the bad guy said "the cover of academia" to know he's bad.
Is 668 N. 44th St., suite 248 in Phoenix a Mailboxes Etc? Plenty of odd little businesses share that address.
Also, it appears the founder of this SunnComm operation may also be connected with a cigar peddling site, http://www.cigarsamerica.com. Pretty cheesy site. Anything that makes money, huh? No worries about mouth cancer. And earlier SunnComm was doing some kind of turnkey web store product, it looks like. Just one bandwagon after another with these guys.
ppl should sue them back for selling a deffective CD that won't prevent copying!!
I've got some questions.
Do you really think that your *not* ripping people off by selling them technology that doesn't do it's job??
Do you really think that a software only DRM solution for music can ever do it's job?
Do you really think that just because some kid wrote an article about how your software doesn't work the way it's supposed to, the he's doing something wrong?
Well, we'll check back in about a month or two to see if you've still got BMG as a client :)
Most of what I see in their page reads so nauseautingly smarmy that it appears Suncomm may be writing both the questions and the answers. At the least it seems they may be filtering what they allow onto the page to keep it all positive. Are there really as many stupid people in the world as the alleged bouquet-throwing, kudos-flinging bearers of unabashed praise represented on that page?
Look at the bright side: there's always seppuku.
Can someone please remind me why this is not a criminal act of sabotage ?
:
1 8_en_2.htm#mdiv3:
Paraphrasing via the Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/33298.html
"He found that when the disc was first inserted, it auto-installs a device driver that subsequently interferes with attempts to
copying the songs on the CD.
'"The driver examines each CD placed in the machine, and when it recognizes the protected title, it actively interferes with read
operations on the audio content,'"
From the Computer Misuse Act http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1990/Ukpga_199000
"3.-(1) A person is guilty of an offence if-
(a) he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer; and
(b) at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any
computer and by so doing-
(a) to impair the operation of any computer;"
Unauthorised modification - check.
Impairs the operation of the computer - check.
Requisite intent and knowledge - check.
But it is of course a crime being committed by a large company, so I guess it doesn't really count.....
If anyone can tell me of any CDs that use this technology and are available in the UK, please let me know so that I can report these EvilDoers to the appropriate police department.
"Free software as in beer, copy protection as in racket" - Telsa Gwynne
Mail? Put "slashdot" in the subject to pass the spam filters.
I've been looking into all of the press surrounding SunnComm lately and your DRM software, and I can't understand why I should still consider investing in your company when it seems that overriding your protection is as easy as pushing a button. It seems that if it were that easy to bypass your product, which you bill as being a countermeasure to thieves, well, isn't that next to useless? How can you justify spending any kind of R&D money on a protection scheme that so obviously doesn't work.
You mention in a recent Prez answer that this is designed to prevent "casual copying." I do not see how this is so. For instance, people can download music using KaZaA as easily as they can check their email. In fact, going to a CD store and bringing home a CD requires more effort than just grabbing the file from some P2P service. And for those that want to transmit copies of their CD around, well, they aren't casual copiers in the first place. Thus, I don't see how this DRM software prevents anything (though it does seem to be good at gathering press - pointing out the malfunctions in SunnComm's product - and driving the stock price lower).
On a related note, it seems your stock price has sunk by nearly 20% (perhaps more by now). Is SunnComm on the way out? How will you stay competitive when you have a clearly malfunctional product?
Let me get this straight. SunnComm is worried because "SunnComm's reputation has been falsely damaged."
SunnComm creates a product that purports to be secure DRM. Then someone holds down the shift key and disables this secure DRM.
It seems to me that SunnComm's reputation as a maker of secure DRM has been quite fairly damaged. If someone claimed that holding down the shift key rendered the DRM useless when in fact it did no such thing, that might be "false damage" to SunnComm's reputation if it were widely distributed and accepted as truth. But SunnComm's reputation is being damaged specifically because their product doesn't do what it's supposed to do!
SunnComm: Bringing doublespeak to a whole new level.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
How about BMG suing Sun-Comm for producing a DRM product that could so easily be circumvented by either a single keystroke or an ALREADY AVAILABLE system setting?
Sounds to me more like BMG got screwed on whatever money they paid for the licensing of this "technology," and Sun-Comm's using the DMCA to make some guy who basically pointed out something BLATANTLY OBVIOUS into a scapegoat.
I mean, if I told people all they had to do to run a red light was press the gas pedal instead of the brake, would I suddenly be liable for all the traffic offenses?
if this drm system was auto run based then the user has EVERY right to use the shift key (i beleave that is the disable option for autorun discs)
if the drm system is based on a program running then the distributor has no right loading that software automaticly on someones system
1. Insert disc into Macintosh computer. (I highly doubt the "mediamax driver" trash will autorun and load up on the mac. Especially since MacOS doesn't have an autorun feature, and even if it did, it would be quite unlikely to succesfully load a windows driver.)
2. Rip as usual.
To do my part to comply with the DMCA and to help American business (what? You're against Bid-ness? You must be some Al-Qu-y-a-da tarr'ist or sum'thin,) particularly the battered music industry, I'm henceforth going to include the following warning with every computer I build and ship to someone from now on.
"POSILUTELY ABSITIVELY DO NOT double-click on the 'cd ripper' icon on the desktop after you have inserted a SunComm-DRM'd music CD into the cup holder^W^W CD-ROM drive while holding down the "shift" key on your keyboard. To do so would circumvent a copyright-portection technology and produce illegal MP3s of the tracks contained thereon, a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1999."
'No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property.'
Is it then right to knowingly foist an ineffective scheme on a client and then bitch when you are discovered? Or was it unknowingly foisted? Which is it - fraud or incompetence?
Actually, this was not copy protection. Nothing was done to protect anything. It was a malicious virus designed to make my computer fail to function the way it was designed to.
Nice try Sunncomm. Get a new business plan/technology scam.
-- $G
(my apologies in advance to the good people of Newfoundland)
I'm reminded of an old email joke about the "newfie virus"--no attachment just the following message:
--
Dis 'ere is a virus from da good people o' Newfoundland. Da bye's 'ere on da rock aint dat sharp wit da 'puters so if ya could be so kind as to pass dis message on to all yer kin and erase yer hard drive it'd be much appreciated.
--
We now have "Newfie DRM":
--
We dont want ya sharin' our tunes with all the world fer nuttin' so if ya'd be so kind as to let yer CD play by itself and keep yer paws of da shift key so we can mess wit ya 'puter it'd be much appreciated. If ya can't be helped to do dat den please find and run our nifty screwup program yerself.
PS: If yer one o' dem nerd types with dat linux ting please pretend not to hear da music.
--
(Paraphrased from the actual instructions on the CD as shown below):
THIS CD IS ENHANCED WITH MEDIAMAX SOFTWARE. Windows Compatible Instructions: Insert disc into CD-ROM drive. Software will automatically install. If it doesn't, click on "LaunchCd.exe." MacOS Instructions: Insert disc into CD-ROM drive. Click on "Start." Usage of the CD on your computer requires your acceptance of the End User License Agreement and installation of specific software contained on the CD.
Yesterday morning, when this first broke, the SunnComm CEO dismissed its importance in a CNet story:
"This is not an all-or-nothing thing," Jacobs said. "People can break into your house, because there's lots of information out there on how to pick locks. But that knowledge doesn't mean you don't buy a lock."
But then the story broke out of the industry news and into the mass media. Whoops! I guess the financial markets think that you won't buy a lock that won't work. Panic ensues in the boardroom. SunnComm seemed unavailable for comment by yesterday afternoon when CNN and the "major" media started calling. If they had talked to the media, the quote would have been:
"What the fuck to we do now?"
So someone had the bright idea to sue the messenger. I bet Jack Valent and his movie mogul masters are soooooo pissed at the Music Morons. Between this and the RIAA suopenas, they are wrecking the DMCA.
It was too tempting, I just had to take a screenshot of this...
f
http://www.digitalpropulsion.org/junk/sunncomm.gi
It is, however, incumbent on anybody with two neurons to bang together (no matter their credentials or rationale) to call an asshat an asshat.
SunnComm? You guys are asshats. Your engineers are asshats. Your marketroids? Asshats. Your customers? Asshats. Your stockholders? You know, those guys with the pitchforks and the torches outside the front door?
Yeah. They're asshats too.
Have a nice day.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
A counterfactual is a subjunctive conditional with a false antecedent. The general form of a counterfactual is "If it were the case that P, then it would be the case that Q", where P and Q are propositions and P is false.
E.g., "If GS hadn't published his paper, then SunnComm's stock price wouldn't have plummeted."
Counterfactual conditionals are not truth-functional. In particular, they cannot be analysed in terms of the material conditional "if... then..." used in ordinary sentential logic.
Granted I don't know what it installs or how it does it, but obviously it *has* to *forcefuly* install it in order to be effective (ie. no 'cancel/no thanks' button) so where do they get off installing stuff on your computer without your permission in the first place?
But hey, if there's no telling it did it, then obviously there's no EULA. and no EULA means, nothing that says you CAN'T use the shift key.
Here is the form.
Be polite.
>
:), read other slashdot posts for comment.
1. In order to make a copy and analyze the CD he would of had to buy it. So making a copy for himself is perfectly legal. OMG
2. well damn
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml%3ftype=to pNews%26storyID=3589406
funny - a company so worried about its reputation is so quick to destroying whats left of it by filing this simple minded lawsuit. Obviously a reaction from a floundering management team in the face of how bad their product really was.
I've used the analogy of locks on a house before and I find it very fitting here. If SunnComm sold locks for you house, you would find that if the person at the door just pushed a button on the door knob they could open the door.
... if people would obey the sticker they would obey the "Please Don't hold down the Shift key" that the software implies.
If SunnComm's system was a home security system, the the thieves would be asked to wear electro-shock collars to help the system to work. Those darn thieves keep taking off thier electro-shock collars! How dare they! That's criminal behavior!
If SunnComm's system was a car lock... then when you walked up to the car you could open it by depressing the lock. Next, you'd find you could start the car by pressing the gas while turning the ignition without needing a key.
If these were physical objects no one would be fooled by the utter stupidity of the system and how its basic functionality requires cooperation from the thief. If the idea behind DRM is some kind of security mechanism... then this system is only as good as a string tied around your luggage.
A string tied around you luggage will "keep the honest man honest" but it won't discourage the dishonest man. SunnComm is selling special green colored string. Artists should just put a sticker on their album that says "Please Don't Copy my Album"
Does SunnComm market this product as "string" or as a pad lock? It sounds like SunnComm thinks they have a pad lock. A pad lock with a button that says "unlock" on the side.
[signature]
Same here. Are we breaking the law by running a program that prevents other software from being installed? Suncomm has decided that I must run what is literally a trojan horse in order to listen to one of their CDs. And by using a program that I was already using for years before their new "technology" came out, am I breaking the law?
By the way, The latest version of TweakUI for Windows XP is freaking awesome. They even let you turn off those damned help bubbles that constantly pop up in the system tray. Brilliant.
How insane is this?????
I mean, really.
"Press and hold the shift key while loading a CD into your CD-ROM drive to bypass autoloading."
I've violated the DMCA?
How many tech support techs world-wide are now guilty exactly?
Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).
Perhaps, but if so, I am not the only one that misspelled it.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
A more accurate term would be "fraudulent."
I mean, this company is automatically installing software on my machine without my knowlege or consent. Isn't this hacking? And if it is, shouldn't the president of this company be arrested for felonious criminal behavior?
SunComm: We won! We won the case against the student! Let's see, what did we get...
1) The shirt off his back (unwashed).
2) A Jimi Hendrix poster
3) A stolen traffic cone
Yay, that'll easily cover the $10 million in stock value we lost!
Is there that much of a difference? How far ahead was ray Bradbury in his thinking, or was it that obvious already? You think this is far fetched? How long do you think it will take before corporations can send little kids off to jail because they listened to a song or watched a movie without paying for it? Why is it that this DMCA can provide more draconian sentences than killing someone would? How long will it be until some frustrated nut flips and kills some DMCA corporate type because of all this abuse of ordinary people?
"All hail the American dream" -- Yeah, sure.
We invaded in March. It is now October. You counting dog-months or something?
Criticism is rapidly becoming the new crime of the age - government or company leaks are pursued far more than than the crimes they expose.
IMHO before the US government passed a law such as this after lobbying from Hollywood, they should have asked Hollywood to pay it's taxes.
Speaking as an unemployed software engineer, it's great to know that some *really talented* researchers out there came up with an encryption scheme that couldn't at least outlast the sharpie-decryption method. "It would be nice to have that kind of job security" -Samir
I think the really wacky part is that SunnComm is suing somebody for showing that their software isn't capable of doing it's job effectively. This would be like Microsoft suing everyone who found a flaw in Windows. I know Microsoft has a large legal department, but even this is a stretch.
Too scared to take on MS for providing the solution before you even thought of your stupit, restricting product.
Do you not know that it is LEGAL in my country (Australia) to rip the music off the CD as much as I wish, as long as it is used my ME. Which is exactly what I do.
We must all do as I do now, and if you wish to purchase a CD, and see that it has copy protection, then put it back on the shelf.
When the CEO's of these money monolpolsing music companies (and their spin off "Copy Protection" producers) notice that CD's that aren't protected are out selling protected ones, maybee they will realise that we do not like such restrictions being placed on music that you wish to purchase.
When will the music industry realise that it is not copying, file sharing or the internet that has affected CD's sales, but the crappy music that they are pumping millions of dollars into.
They usually produce manufactuerd pop music, aimed at teenage girls. Hence the reason that most of the bands I listen to are local Australian acts, that work hard for their music, and do it because they enjoy it. These people produce full albums, with 50 - 80 minutes of listenable music, not just one crappy track, in amoust 10 shite ones, lie the big music companies do, eg Britney Spears, etc.
This needs to stop before people are being sues just for the hell of it.
Third of Nine.
We are the Americans. You will not think, you will not circumnavigate. You will be assimulated.
Well, um, yes.
I did a search on google and found this page which has instructions on what to do if the DRM software didn't load.
At the bottom of this page they have this:
What should I do if the program does not automatically start when I place the CD in my computer?:
Try removing the CD from the CD-Rom drive, and replacing it again to allow the application to start automatically. If the application still does not start by itself, PC users can double-click their "My Computer" icon on the desktop and then double-click on the drive letter containing the CD. If the application still does not launch, try double-clicking on the LaunchCD.exe file in the CD directory. The application should start.
So what Halderman did wasn't even close to a breach (duh +5). If he had attempted to circumvent the digital keys now THAT would have been something. I suppose this lawsuit is a way of preventing anyone from going further with "research". Halderman has my respect for what he's done, and what he's about to go through, but this wasn't exactly ground breaking.
Technically I can put out another paper now saying I installed VMWare (which suggests turning off autorun) and this bypassed their DRM.
Really the DRM never even has a chance to come under scrutiny since it didn't get installed. Look back at that page and you'll see that the technology is around the Digital Keys and part of MS's new DRM.
Hey, everyone, listen up!!! You can use the 'SHIFT' key to defeat SunnComm's DRM!!! Spread the word!!!
Sue me!!!
Absolutely. If I had mod points and hadn't already posted, I'd mod you up. I've always attempted to find the individual responsible for bad policies in companies I've had dealings with. In the few I've found, I made it clear to upper management exactly why they weren't getting my business again, along with the name of the person responsible. For all the rest, all I could do is stop doing business with them and tell everyone I know why. There is ALWAYS at least one person responsible. Make them pay for bad decisions.
But why is the rum gone?
Hey, that interesting article also contains the companies phone number:
"call the company directly at 602-267-7500"
So go ahead, call the company directly!
-ha
After reading this, how can *anyone* doubt the security and robustness of their tek'nology? He is getting what he deserves!!!
SunnComm's MediaMax CD-3 Technology Passes International Test with 'Flying Colors'
heh
and just for grins
SunnComm.com Privacy
SunnComm, Inc.
668 44th Street Suite 248
Phoenix, Arizona, USA 80058
We tah ded.
Considering that this is a documented feature of Windows which is has already been published all over the Internet as a quick way of squelching the AutoPlay feature and an attempt at a lawsuit on these grounds would have a snowball in Hell commenting, "Wow! That was over with fast". Searching for this information is ridiculously easy...
Sample Google Search #1
Sample Google Search #2
...and for once, a lawsuit clearly filed for the purposes of harassment is highly likely to result in a successful counter-suit for damages, simply by the fact that this is a documented feature of Windows. Demonstrating that SunnComm's suit had absolutely no merit on the basis that the information in question was already common knowledge should be a walk in the park.
DMCA "Violation" #1
DMCA "Violation" #2
What makes this especially stupid is that they'll be suing someone who has very little (if any) money, although I imagine that may well change after the counter-suit. If the people at SunnComm weren't complete idiots, they'd go after someone who has money, like Jeffrey Richter, who writes books on using Windows as well as articles for the MSDN network and who already published this information in 1998.
Yet Another DMCA "Violation"
I know what you're thinking right now, but even really stupid companies don't try to sue Microsoft over things this trivial.
It is not even close to something like telling somebody how to steal DirecTV, or build a cable descrambler box, the activities of which are illegal (though I still disagree with the telling someone part).
What rankles me is that they want to use the DMCA to shut down speech about legal activities. Such an attack on the First Amendment borders on treason against this country.
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
If the protection can be circumvented by holding down shift to disable autorun, and this is a documented feature of Windows, doesn't that make Windows a circumvention device?
Escoutaire
When a dream dreams the dreamer, the dreams the real.
Who gave these people the right to install something onto MY system without MY permission the instant I inserted MY CD into MY CD-ROM drive?
- They are clueless enough to run Microsoft-IIS
on Win2K, according to
netcraft.
No, I don't suggest that you do anything in this regard.
-
Their stock, according to
this
plot, has been in free fall since the beginning of September and is now valued at, like,
11 cents.
I would LOVE these losers to bring the matter to court - this could spell doom for DMCA.Lets send this company a hint that we arn't going to tolerate this kind of shit. Intuit got the hint. Lets pass it along to this company. Post a phone number and lets phonedot them. :)
I didn't use the preview button, so get over it!!!!
Mike
Sun Com can now shutdown its business.. hackers won't let them protect any more CDs :)
didn't read the word "own"
I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
Have these guys ever heard of fair use?
Is the keyboard maqnufacturer liable?
I think that the DMCA is violated when more effort is required to circumvent a protection technology and this shift key probably doesn't count because it was left open by Windows or SunnComm. However if reason and logic were to be brushed aside by politics could keyboard makers be held liable? And since this is only exploitable on Windows does it mean keyboards intended for windows (Windows-key equiiped ones) are prime targets?
I'm just glad that i'm not living in America so I can use all the felt markers and shift keys I want.
For example, I know Andrew "bunnie" Huang of xbox cracking fame was very hesitant to publish the paper without MIT's support, and MIT (specifically their lawyers) held out on that support until MS agreed that it was legitimate adademic research and that they had no intention of going to court.
GET YOUR WEAPONS READY! --DR.LIGHT
i might be wrong here, but... is copying a CD that i've legally purchased, to my hard drive, illegal? filesharing is, but as long as i don't share the files, how is it illegal?
If you are worried about getting sued an official Shift-Key removal tool has been released.
If you do not want to do that you can replace your keyboard with this legal shift-free keyboard which has all the keys you need for MS Windows.
(\(\
(^.^)
(")")
*This is the cute bunny virus, please copy this into your sig so it can spread
amazing how the position has changed so rapidly (the above article was from 10ish EDT on the 8th)
Only outlaws will have shift keys.
actually I am happy to see you, however that is in fact a banana in my pocket.
BTW, when I have explained my daughter why her girlfiends CD player has been broken just from trying to play Britney's so-called "protected" CD, she's lost any interest to any so-called "art" of Britney.
That's what we should do: to publish the list of so-called "artists" who care more about own greed then about any real art.
Less is more !
Well, since Microsoft provides the functionality of disabling the autorun by pressing the shift key, doesnt Microsoft Windows(TM) become a device to disable a copy protection scheme ? Isnt it therefore, illegal to use Windows(TM) in the US of A ?
Expert legal advice anyone ?
Instead of suing the student who found the problem, what they should've done is fire the QA people. Obvisouly the QA people didn't do a good job of testing the software before releasing.
reputation is their crappy product.
I have 2 parts to this. The first part is; If his intentions were so honest, and mature, why didnt he just email the owner of the compnay with the information, and a place to look for the solution ? Why did he HAVE to publish it ? He might have even gotten some work helping these guys out. So, if you had tool lockers at work, and had a combination lock on it. Say there is your own personal test equipment that is quite valuable. Is it ok for me to stand up in your workplace and announce over the intercom, the contents and value of that test kit, and to announce your combination ? Is that not facilitation of a crime ?
It would be great if someone over at Norton or other antivirus manufacturers added this to their virus definitions. Then, when the thing tries to install, users will get a virus alert message, and SunnComm will get plenty of angry emails from customers claiming that they've released a virus-ridden disc.
someone saying your shoftware sucks and is easily borked doesn't hurt your reputation. the fact that your software sucks and is easily borked does. these guys should use a little more logic if they want him punished for "hurting their reputation." The violation of the DMCA is clear....but who gives a fuck the DMCA is bullshit anyways.
This driver will not work on Windows 2008.
Then SunComm can sue M$, Nature, Father Time, the cosmos all for undoing their amazing DRM.
I mean look at that flash on their page! We all know flash animation means good products right?
-- taking over the world, we are.
See Support.microsoft.com article Q126025
Did anyone else think that "autorun" doesn't exist in linux consoles or any other *nix for that matter? Or their software is targetted at just ONE platform. Last i checked macs don't run windows programs too well...
Also, doesn't the DMCA state that you're ENTITLED to a backup of YOUR digital media? By them doing this, don't they break the DMCA themselves?
And has anyone else thought that they're installing software onto your computer without your knowlege, this tells me spyware...
Food for thought.....
Great, first I had to throw away all my markers becuase of the DMCA, now I have to pry off all my shift keys.
(And then I post this comment to the wrong article the first time around!)
I have auto-run turned off.
You're in luck. The RIAA has just announced its amnesty program, whereby you send them a signed affidavit stating that you put auto-run back on and promise to never again disable it. They in turn promise to not sue you in the near (but not intermediate or distant) future.
That's like saying "well, the customer bought the damn horse statue, how dare he bitch about the 100 greek soliders hiding in it".
I don't think that's the wrong analogy.
I think the analogy would more likely be: We built a Trojan Rabit and forgot to hide in it before the stupid French people took it into their castle. Those French People should give it back to us so that we can hide in it and then take it back in so that we can kill them in their sleep.
Anyone that lets people know how stupid this plan is is slandering our company and we will sue!
And anyone that says that suing just makes us look more stupid will also be sued.
(or should that be sacked?)
This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you
If you dislike this the idea of them suing everyone perhaps we should call SunnComm at 602.267.7500 and tell them how much they suck and that we will never buy anything from them even if we are under the slightest impression that they might have been invovled with it and saying your an investor that sold all their shares probably would help you more :)
I have violated the DMCA 10 times in this comment.
possibly be a joke?
Damnit man! Must you continue to hammer the on the last remnants of the dome of the dot.com bubble? These shift-defeatable copy-protection geniuses have somehow managed to generate some kind of time-distortion field that has kept them and their shareholders in the year 1999. Your comments may result in yet another post to the front page of fuckedcompany.com. It's people like you who caused me to lose my cushy Innovation Technician job. I hope you're proud of yourself.
Go to hell, will you? There, you might find something better to do than posting flamebait.
While it's nice of you point out that "credentials" should not be required for free speech, your attitude in general is servile and inflamatory. I will not deny that this technique will be used to make copies of music but I refuse to consider that "piracy" or immoral. It's not even a copyright violation, if you have a reasonable and lawful view of publishing. You either believe the above or you are posting flamebait. Either way, you have little regard for your rights and those of others.
Use of the collective "Slashdot" and the perverse views expressed here makes me think you are simply trolling:
Curiously, this seems to be the average Slashdotter's stand too. The disagreement is over who actually owns the property in question. SunnComm says they do, Slashdot says that the guy who bought the CD does.
Nonsense, the question is if ownership of ideas can ever occur rather than the details of what the "owner" allows you. Society should never come together to keep the Girl Scouts of America from singing "America the Beautiful" around a campfire because someone else "owns" the tune. Yet that's exactly what happens when songs can be owned like that. Yes, that happened. The conditions of the GPL use the power of copyright law to enforce good behavoir. You can only use and benifit from free software if you agree to pass along what you learned while you benifit. It's a reasonable request next to what people like you advocate, complete ownership of ideas with abitrary powers to stop other people from doing things with your ideas or ideas very similar to yours.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
So circumventing the copy protection is a felony, as this company sees it at least. Autoplay does not run in Linux, so by extension, if I put that CD into my Linux machine, I'm a criminal because I circumvented the DMCA. Bullshit like I have never seen in my life.
> SunnComm believes that
For God's sake -- either the Shift-key breaks the DRM or it doesn't.
If the Shift-key breaks it, then Halderman is right.
If the Shift-key doesn't work, then SunnComm has direct evidence that discredits Halderman.
One simple courtroom demonstration is all it will take.
Too bad Halderman's going to have some legal bills. Has anyone set up a legal fund for him yet?
here (sunncomm.com)
It's worth checking out this page just for some of the comments, like "I have recently become a stockholder in your company and am proud to have done so..."
One born every minute...
Dmitry Sklyarov
in related news, sunncomm sued keyboard manufacturers for distributing keyboards with shift keys.
Now, we're getting back to the "Security through Obscurity".
And know all too well how well that has worked for *certain* companies.
Everyone who reads slashdot would just have to buy 100 stocks ( $12 ) worth, and then vote to disolve the company.
Finally a use of the slashdot effect for good!
I'd just like to know who BOUGHT those shares. ;-)
It was a feature of quicktime 4, which had an "autoplay" feature enabled by default.
Eventually a prolific worm got spread around that way--autostart 9805 -- through many prepress and design houses.
After that, many people just turned off autoplay, since it was lame window-ism feature that no mac developer ever took advantage of anyways... (Mac users expect to insert a disk and wait for it to mount up on the desktop, then proceed to open it and do whatever they intended to do --run the installer, or copy a file, etc).
The following versions of quicktime no longer had that "feature".
I would think the stock would be near zero...
I'm going to rip a bunch of SHIFT keys from the stockpile of dead keyboards I have here and mail them to SunnComm with a little note 'There! take them, see if I care'
probably do the entire note in capitals though.
I have violated the DMCA by "bypassing" the copy protection, since I assume it runs only under windows. Heck, they should sue RedHat/Linus/Apple/Microsoft for providing the means of circumventing the copy protection.
......"it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property". I'd say it's more wrong to fleece clients with such an easily circumventable product. Halderman is a hero for warning possible buyers of this product.
The meme police, They live inside of my head
How many company make you click-thru a EULA just to see the web site? This company sounds like a complete fraud to me.
...and it's the Music Industry's fault. This is total bullshit. You can be sued by a company for revealing publicly, via the internet, that the company's product is faulty. That's ludicrous.
hahahahaha.. absolutely ridiculous.
--- Robert Strickland
I have a troll in favor, a troll against, what happens to my Karma, I do not know.
This is my sig.
Ok great, you want to sue a little guy because you done want to take on the people who WROTE THE CODE TO circumvent your little copy protection program. Microsoft wrote the code that also harms you laughable product. The only question that I have is.. didn't Microsoft write this ANTI-DCMA code long before your code was ever written??? Meaning the only thing worth mentioning is that you you code was faulty to begin with.
.like my program was inept and is fatially flawed before I released it... and instead of admiting that, were going to take out of somebodies hide what we would have made if the fatal flaw was eiter ignored or not found.
All this student did was point out what was already present. There needs to be a level of common sense before companies go around suing people..
All DCMA does is allow stupidy to abound unchecked.
You get in DMCA trouble for pointing to keys.
What happens to those companies that make devices "for the pupose of disabling copyright protection"?
Like Microsoft, Logitech, Dell, Gateway, or anyone who makes a keyboard with a printed label?
How can this pass beta testing? I do not know what is wrong at that company. Someone in the software quality lab there needs to be fired. Maybe this company is using the SCO business plan.
(Fire everyone but the lawyers)
"We will sue you if we F up"
I am the unwilling control for my Origin.
"No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property." WTF he bought the CD, and did not agree to the EULA. By not agreeing to the EULA Title 17 Chapter 1 of the fair use act is invoked.
The past is just the present only older -me-
Could always recall him...
*cough* Sorry.
I was just in Arizona, right near phoenix (gonna move their.) I would have driven right to this comapnies HQ and laughed for hours at them. They're suing this guy for telling people something that's already common knowledge (I don't think it's a secret that holding shift would disable autorun I'm pretty sure microsoft shows that on their website somewhere.) If this company had some kind of thing pop up that said "Don't click here!" and someone told everyone "Hey if you click there, the protection no longer works" would they still be able to sue the person under the DMCA? It's such a blatently obvious thing, not like he had to reverse engineer anything.
I've seen the backwards .sigs, and the "ROT26-encoded" .sigs here, claiming that reading the .sig is a violation of the DMCA. I always thought those were jokes!
But seriously, the greatest threat to the DMCA is friends like this. Every time the public sees the DMCA in action like this, the tide of popular support for repeal or reform will grow. Don't you think we owe SunnComm a debt of thanks for shedding light on the true nature of this abysmal law?
When all you have is an axe, everything looks like a grindstone.
Their claim is that this startling finding has harmed their reputation, is that right?
According to this story, Nathaniel Brown, spokesperson for Bertlesmann Musig Group (BMG), the publisher of Hamilton's latest CD, admits that the MediaMax protections are little more than a "speed bump," but the company hopes that this minor inconvenience will deter casual copiers. "It's not going to stop a hacker or someone who wants to mass copy," says Brown and add that the technology was selected not for it's protection abilities, but because it affords a "new level of playability."
By publishing a "work around" for the CD copy protections, Halderman might have exposed himself to risk of procecution under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA.) SunComm president Peter Jacobs reports that they have no plans to pursue such a case, however, saying "this isn't one of the weighty issues of the world."
How can SunComm's reputation be hurt when their paying customer knew the technology was practically worthless before hand?
I also find CEO Peter Jacobs complete change of opinion interesting, he went from practically dismissing the incident a few days ago to now saying, "No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate piracy and theft of digital property."
Hmm...
If you actually RTFLaw, it clearly says "no person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title."
Any protection that is bypassed by holding down the shift key, disabling autorun, using Linux, disabling a device driver through normal means, etc is not effective and not illegal to bypass. The student should counter-sue and put SunnComm out of business. That's the only precedent that can actually come out of this.
SunnComm Receives $4 Million for Digital Content Security License
They actually sold this crap?
P.S. try to go to dstage.com
Microsoft's how to for disabling autorun. This how-to is also quoted as a link in the original publication and holding down the shift key is probably easier for most people but its fun to make sure that all those who would circumvent the DMCA are known to the appropriate authorities. (Bill should call his lawyer)
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
Actually, your car is designed to let you gain access with a slim jim, in case of an emergency. It's just designed to make it take a while.
"These people are no better than virus writers, and it is no wonder they are such hacks. Besides, if you want the cd to be DRM'd would it not make more sense to actually encrypt the contents rather than to have a software driver encrypt them on the fly? Who thought that was a good idea?"
The next virus/worm/trojan will provide "DRM" to Windows boxes by deleting all their files (%!@$% IP thiefs!). Any attempt to remove the "DRM Technology" will cause massive lawsuits under the DMCA. Any attempt to spread knowledge about the existance of aformentioned virus will also incur massive DMCA lawsuits.
411 y0ur w1nt3l b0x3n 4r3 b310ng t0 us.
Or at least for documenting it.
Now imagine the Princeton researcher had said, "I've discovered that playing this CD under Linux disables the copy protection." Bang! Linux becomes an instant circumvention device, illegal under the DMCA for A) not providing Autorun and B) not supporting SunComm's idiotic Windows-only copy protection code.
But don't stop there -- toss in Mac, BSD, AIX and any other OS that doesn't provide Autorun services. And while you're at it, don't forget to sue any Windows user who has disabled Autorun -- crackers and thieves, the lot of 'em.
Fortunately for SunComm, being stupid isn't a violation of the DMCA. Unfortunately for the Princeton guy, apparently being intelligent is.
Lee Kaiwen, Taiwan
1) Yell bullshit and sue.
2) Yell more bullshit.
3) ???
4) pROFIT!!! (or go into bankruptcy, and perhaps to prison).
"His understanding of encryption software helped him bypass the security measures, he said."
And my understanding of network topology helped me make a sandwich earlier today....
-- I care not for your foolish signatures.
The student should not be in trouble for pointing out that something doesn't work. He is doing the same thing that anyone else does when they review another product. Should everybody who points out a flaw in anything be sued?
I would have defeated it without trying. I have autorun off on all my drives. If I realized that and told people, would I be liable.
I have spent the last year developing DCM, or Digital Capitalization Management, a preventative measure to keep unauthorized customers from using ASCII 0x41 - 0x5A.
By exposing the use of the Shift Key, Halderman has undermined the DCM security! When news of the Shift Key was released, my stock* fell by infinite percent to our all-time low** of $0.00!
It is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of academia to facilitate the use of capital letters.
* 0 shares publically traded under the symbol LUSR
** I meant average
Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
This is bullshit, just like the parents sueing a school for installing a wireless network. The people in this country (USA) need to get a fucking life or a job or something. I swear to God, all anyone knows how to do here is call their frickin lawyers. People need to stop sueing everyone for every little thing, and stop trying to act like their precious intellectual property is more important than the people paying them to use it. Boycott is not the answer either, I normally am not for government regulation but we need to make these things a real issue for the American public otherwise they will keep electing idiots that don't tell the RIAA/MPAA to fuck off. Most people over 40 have no clue what the DMCA is or what an MP3 is or even that the RIAA and MPAA are pulling this bullshit. Every time I turn on CNN all I want to do it walk up to someone new and say, no, you can't fucking sue for that, and for being so damn dumb I'm going to punch you in the head until you pass out. GRRR!
but just sitback and laugh sometimes? wait for the legal wheel of justice to slowly spin and realize the err of its way. in the mean time, may tux help us all.
apathy has given way to disbelief
"Meanwhile, honest people, may, for the first time, enjoy the pleasurable experience of legal and licensed copying and sharing of their music - thats about 95% of us. Thats who we designed MediaMax for." For the first time? My wife has been buying CDs and transferring them to her Rio for a year and a half. It isn't a pleasurable experience for her to use the MediaMax WMA tracks- her box don't do WMA.
Peter:
Allow me a gross analogy in saying that SunnComm is a company that sells locks. You have admitted that SunnComm's first generation of locks were easily defeated. This is not the point you say. You aren't trying to build the "holy grail" of locks, because that's impossible.
But locks are judged on far more than just their effectiveness at keeping property safe. For example, if I spend 3000$ on bike because it weighs 15 pounds, I will definitely want a good lock. I will probably also be willing to spend a lot on it. But, no matter how effective or inexpensive, I will probably not be willing to buy a lock that weighs more than a few pounds.
Similarly, if SunnComm produces "locks" that prevent the owners of some property (even if it is "listening property") from the legitimate use of their property, these "locks" are unlikely to be a source of success for SunnComm or the interests it represents.
Maybe SunnComm already invests in some kind of "user acceptance" testing of their software. If so, I would highly suggest that they invest more and more seriously in this.
Peter, the rest of my note describes some of my deeper thoughts on these topics. I feel they might be interesting to you, so I spent the time to record them. Be warned: they aren't as pragmatic as my advice above. They're more in the category of forward-thinking philosophy.
Not so long ago, professional musicians earned commissions for their work to support themselves -- many other kinds of professional artistists still do. There was no such thing as a recording. For awhile, recordings could be bought and sold -- if we are to believe Adam Smith -- because they were scarce. It was hard to make a good sounding copy of a recording, if it were possible at all. With technology today, however, that scarcity is starting to diminish. I know this asks you to question the very tenets of your business, but ask yourself all the same: is this such a bad thing?
In a cents (ha!), the "value" (monetary, not artistic) of an artistist's work was *created* by the recording industry. Metallica are millionaires because they sold a million recordings to a million fans. If we were forced back to commissioning musicians, it is conceivable that Metallica would insist on a million dollars from fans before releasing a single new song... but unlikely. Instead, they'd probably just insist on what they need to survive comfortably. There wouldn't be many millionaire rockstars anymore. But there would probably be *many* more musicians since, after all, how much money does a musician really need to support themselves comfortably and how much money is the public willing to spend on music? Come to think of it... this is kind of like the rest of the art world! Artists are "starving" not because there isn't an audience for their art, but because the worth of their labor is primarily a function of the observer. Could it be the case that recordings presented an opportunity for an entire industry to spring up around music that specializes in adding perceived value to a piece of music? Might it also be the case that this was helped along by the fact that mass media outlets were, until recently, massively expensive? If anybody can cheaply copy a recording, and anybody can cheaply trumpet their love or hate of that recording, where is the value that the recording industry historically provided to the artist and consumers? It seems to me that their "value add" has become mighty slim. Did you see the NY Times article yesterday about the huge "value added" bonuses record companies are throwing into their CDs today? Nothing could better make my point.
The record industry is fond of pointing out that, without it, musicians could only become established as word-of-mouth phenomenons. I wonder if it isn't the other way around. If musicians become established through word-of-mouth, can the record industry continue to justify its existence? I am not a betting man, and I don't work in the record industry. It doesn't
This business of suing over alleged DMCA violation has gone so far that it is now deep in silly land, much like the Mad March Hare Tea party.
I wish I were a lawyer. I would represent this
student gratis and meticulously build up a case
and counter-sue them for libel, wasting the court's time and anything I can throw at them
Next I would try and bankrupt them, attempt *if possible* to bring criminal charges and put someone over there behind bars.
There's a limit to how idiotic people can be and someone has to be crucified to be held as an example. I can't believe they even for a moment seriously said that they considered suing him.
Didn't it occur to anyone that this might be a setup. It looks like they purposely released this easily circumventable technology and waited for someone to "bite".
... everyone for that matter). If they succeed with the case they have now effictively proved that this form of copy protection "works" at least in legal terms.
Now that they have someone on the hook they can drag him trough court to prove a point (reminds me of SCO, we have no business plan so lets sue someone or
Won't this CD play perfectly well on a non-Windows box without having to "violate" the DMCA? Isn't this one of the nuisance lawsuits that Shrub wants to eliminate?
and
Now the thing that SunnComm is objecting to is not the shift key bypass (which is a DMCA violation which I hope is fully prosecuted so we can see how stupid the law is), but instructions on how to remove the driver. It sounds like the driver is installed whether one accepts the EULA or not, but not left active if you don't (which is what H. seems to have done).
Here's a great defense: removing the driver is *repairing* your computer. The driver might only interfere with discs it recognizes as protected, but maybe I've suffered enough Windows driver incompatibilities and find a tip that a driver's secretly installed & how to get rid of it useful.
Does WinXP's system restore also get rid of the driver?
Why doesn't the "interoperability" defense *built in* to the DMCA ever get used?
Dude, that's it!
1) Introduce new protection scheme for popular OS, knowing full well that it can be disabled via well-known features of that OS which have been around for years.
2) Sue OS manufacturer under DMCA for pre-emptively circumventing my protection scheme.
3) Profit!!!
Extending this logic...
Surely any operating system that does not enforce autorun installation behaviour must be guilty of a felony. Leaves Windows, Linux, *BSD et al. in a very tricky position. What idiocy!
The same argument used by gun manufacturers in the US to avoid liability claims, i.e. "Guns don't kill people, people kill people", can be used against this stupidity. Providing the tool, in this case just information from five minutes research, is NOT the same as using the tool.
I feel sorry for the programmers over there at SunnComm. You just know this whole system was the brainchild of some idiot product manager/marketeer whose knowledge of cryptography was gained through extensive research on the film Mercury Rising. He probably went to his head programmer, and said "We want the software to install secretly when the user installs the CD."
The head programmer, who is probably making more money with his title as a a "senior cryptographic analyst and engineer" than he ever did as a "visual basic stooge," probably nodded his head and smiled at the other programmers with that knowing look of "we'll do this, but we all know it won't work." If you had a job in the late 1990s, you know the look. In fact, they probably had their fingers on the shift key the whole time this was in development...as did the QA department. Shit, I don't think I've EVER had a CD autoload on me...not since 1996 or so anyway.
The programmers have probably known this would be a failure since #include <stdio>, and have just been hoping they could scrounge a living before the other metakey dropped.
Management no doubt knew about this too and wrote it off, because it is very easy to ignore a deal breaking error that is your own fault and will cost you your job if you admit how poor your judgment was. I always loved that about business management...you can never admit that you did something stupid. I don't think I could handle it, as I am doing stupid things all the time and I would rather correct them than pretend they were good ideas in a bad market. The other day my fly was down until 10 am...should I have left it down all day or closed it and blamed 9/11?
Hey freaks: now you're ju
This is by far the most LUDICROUS case of DMCA abuse I have seen so far. That law needs to be abolished and the people who dreamed it up publicly hanged. Crybaby corporations need to get off of their collective rumps and innovate, rather than crying and litigating every time someone defeats one of their crappy copy protection schemes, which shouldn't exist in the first place. Of course, if the pockets of our politicians weren't lined with the dirty money of the lobbiests who want them to serve their agendas, we wouldn't have as many of these problems. The United States is no longer of the people, by the people, and for the people, under God...rather it's of the corporation, by the corporation, and for the corporation, no exceptions. We have very few freedoms left, which we need to treasure. Our government is a great institution, but it has been abused by those with wealth and power (see election 2000 for further proof...I didn't really care who won, but the way Bush won was absolutely unscrupulous). Someone needs to bring a law into effect that would prohibit politicians from discriminating in their choice of causes to take up simply by how large the pocketbook of the lobbiest is that "asks" them to take it up. Of course, I think George Carlin made some excellent points about America's origins, but I won't go there. I'm basically ticked because I was in the Army protecting the very bastards that want to turn us all into criminals for just wanting to do whatever we want with the music, movies, and software we buy. I guess they don't know any respect for the military, either, given their actions against those cadets at the naval academy. In any decently ran world, the Navy should have sent in the Marines to dispatch of the RIAA appropriately, since their actions TECHNICALLY by law would deem them enemies of the state. Given their recent actions, the RIAA should be declared an enemy of the United States...because they're launching litigious attacks against our citizens and military for their own greedy gain, stifling our economy, and causing misery. If that isn't the work of an evil terrorist organization, I don't know what is. We deserve the right to copy our music and defeat copy protections for backup purposes, ability to play the medium on an alternative operating system (see DECSS) or to be able to play it on a different medium WITHOUT restriction. We have too many politically correct crybabies in this world. They need to just grow up and deal with it. People will ALWAYS find ways to unlock what is locked by alternate means. It's just a fact of life. RIAA, MPAA, and the like, you need to stop trying to control our behavior with your stupid lawsuits. If you want to really make a difference in CD, DVD, and software sales, why don't you lower the prices?
</soapbox>
Microsoft publishes encryption device circumvention device in this article.
I warn everyone that uses this to make sure they save the file below to "autorun.reg" an re-enable the SunComm encryption service
Make sure you change Autorun amd set it to 1 otherwise you will be violating the DMCA.YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.
Hey, don't you all love the warning to the shareholders that says, "we have no intention of ever making a profit. Invest in us!" Pure genius, I tell ya.
If it's not one thing it's your mother.
But if you read the article, they didn't claim that his revelation about the shift key was the DMCA violation.
:)
They said, "Halderman has violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by disclosing unpublished MediaMax management files placed on a user's computer after user approval is granted."
They're still total, utter morons, and they deserve to see their stock tank, and then get delisted
.sigs are for post^Hers.
"Owning copying technology is not an unconditional 'free pass' to replicate or distribute protected work."
He is correct. The very nature of information is the 'free pass' he speaks of.
A man walks into a bar and tells a joke. Several people remember the joke, and are able to tell it to others. The man has no legal recourse to prevent them from this act, and there is nothing immoral about their behavior.
That is natural reality. Copyright is an agreement between a general body of people (as represented by their government) and specific people who produce information, to exchange exclusive selling rights during an initial time period for that information becoming public domain after the specified time. And that is a reasonable way to handle a non-scarce resource (information) in a capatalist economic system.
Unfortunately, today's situation is one where there is no longer the 'exchange' part of the agreement anywhere to be seen.
When there is no exchange, copyright is null and void.
Your 'free pass' to do whatever the hell you want with information came from (your possession of a mind | your diety | your mother) & the fact that you have no obligation to observe a perhaps once noble, but now utterly rotten system of copyright.
It is not valid logic to assume it's reasonable for a company that is built upon a house of cards to use PR-focused lawsuits to protect/increase stock price.
Stock price is supposed to show some combination of what the value of the company is, which way the company appears to be going, and what investor sentiment is. Stock price is NOT supposed to go up for all companies. Try to forget the mid-late 90s, or at least remember them in contrast to 1987, 1991, and 2001.
.sigs are for post^Hers.
Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
Smarter than the other 2.
er, remember them in CONTEXT (not contrast).
.sigs are for post^Hers.
Where are they going with this? Are they going to try and sue every keyboard maker in the world for 'providing the tools (shift key) for piracy and infringement upon SunComm's IP' and crap like that?
Maybe if I use the righthand shift or caps lock...
Why is he so surprised he is being sued? Breaking the law is a serious matter, and he knew that perfectly well. I don't think there are any excuses. The pirate asshole is just trying to profit off of others' hard work that they put into creating the copy protected CDs.
Does SunComm read Kuro5hin or what?!
Fuck Beta. Fuck Dice
Surely this is an extreme example of how the DMCA violates
the first amendment and is thus, unconstitutional. If I say
"Hold down the shift key to copy that cd", I've just
committed a felony under the DMCA. We now have the
perfect case to illustrate how ludicrous this is. This is great
news! Can you think of a better vehicle to get the DMCA
declared uncostitutional?
Read your history bub. Our Founders were aware of the problems asociated with a pure democracy, and DID NOT WANT ONE! True the electoral college was intended partly to assure that a president was elected, even if nobody had a majority, but that was hardly the only reason that they set it up the way it is.
Using the shift key to disable autoloading of cds is a known and publicised, not to mention published, feature of Windows. And those idiots knew it before they developed and deployed their 'copy protection'.
And if they are as stupid as **cough* *sco* *cough** some companies, they'll try to sue MS for making that 'Anticopy protection' system.
The fact that the reason and use of it was never intended to deafeat pitiful protection as nobody with 3 or more functioning braincells would do something that weak is beside the point.
Sheesh! Do these bozos protect their car with a piece of string tied in a bow? If so, they'd probably threaten to sue anyone who said, "umm, gee, you just pull the end of the string and the bow comes undone, just like shoelaces...".
nail on head... this is good not bad
Henry Ford was building and selling HIS OWN cars HE CREATED.
If the RIAA were trying to squish independent artists because they were making and selling music cheaper than they were then it would be a valid comparison.
Last I checked the RIAA is NOT suing people for buying independent music.
They're suing people who pirate THEIR music.
Big GIANT legal difference. If I started copying and selling/giving away copies of HalfLife 2 in plain sight for the whole world to see, I'd be sued/thrown in jail faster than I could blink.
The RIAA is going about it the wrong way but they are perfectly in their rights to sue people who pirate their things. Do you think Valve is just going to slap the wrist of the person who stole their source code?
Every digital media company on the face of the planet has taken down/sued warez site owners at one time or another. P2P has just made it easier and more socially acceptible to do and the RIAA isn't about to just sit back to take it. I wouldn't expect them to. No other company that's been in their position has.
There is no way to prevent piracy 100%. Nintendo has come the closest by maintaining a strick control over their system and their media. Both of which are far too proprietary to replicate in a reasonable amount of time. It took a very long time for an N64 emulator to come out and none of them are all that great. Sony went with standard sized media and opened themselves up wide for easy pirating with Bleem.
I agree that trying to "copyprotect" audio, video and text is a pointless pursuit but I think it's time to drop the "suing their own customers" bullshit.
No store gives a shit how many times you've bought something. If you steal from them, you'll be hauled off. Name one company that wants thieves for customers. Just because I buy X albums doesn't grant me Y free ones just because I can get away with it.
Heavy handed and extreme, yes. Wrong. No. If you download illegal media you are a pirate and you make yourself a target of litigation. Whining that you're a "customer" won't fly with any competent judge.
Ben
Work Safe Porn
Wouldn't the checkbox that disables autorun in Device Manager be construed as a circumvention mechanism from Microsoft?
The U.S. government , in the form of the National Security Agency, recommends that Autorun be disabled in secure Windows systems. (see page 42 of the Guide to Securing Windows 2000 .
Seems to me that people who design a DRM scheme that won't even work by default on a well-configured system shouldn't be talking about their "reputation"
It was bad enough when we started litigating just to protect people from their own stupidity, now we are going to allow stupid people to sue someone for being smarter.
yes, and for that reason i'm not using the shift key to answer to you
my 2 cents
Since Linux doesn't run .exe files, and doesn't have an autorun feature, does this make using their MediaMax 3 'protected' CD's in a Linux workstation a violation of DMCA? Technically you are circumventing their copy protection just by not using Windows (or OSX) on a computer.
I did read the whle thing and saw that text. However, though it tells you it will install software it does not mention it will RUN it - forever!! There is quite a difference between just installing something on my HD and activley taking control of it. I can easily imagine this unknown factor accidentially causing issues with some OTHER program, and then what have you got? A system that is messed up by a program you never knew was running.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
There is a fine disticntion between installing software, which just sits there, and services (or the like) with run wthout you knowing. I know you agreed to install software, but did you agree to have it take over your computer forever? That crosses a major boundary in my mind, and is not what the text (or what I know of it) implied would happed by accepting the agreement.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
Why don't you just sue Microsoft? They created Windows with this "don't load custom drivers" hole! Also, let's sue manual writers! I'm sure there has to be a manual somewhere which desctibes (IN DETAIL NO LESS) this method for circumventing CD security. And why don't we sue keyboard manufacturers, they're the ones who give users that fscking shift key IN THE FIRST PLACE!
This company is just pissed that their half-assed solution to a problem that cannot be fixed by means of a technological barrier was so easily defeated. One keystroke...jesus...and they actually went ahead and spent the money on the R&D for this? Is ANYONE awake over there?
They deserve what they got, and the RIAA should be pissed at them for pawning off this assinine scheme to them as a reasonable solution.
PS: This makes me realize exactly how bad a law the DMCA is; It is an attempt to, by law, enforce security through obscurity. If answers are outlawed, then only outlaws will have answers.
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
I was looking at some CD someone had the other day I had thought was protected, and finding the CD logo on the plastic jewel case assumed it was legit. But it this case I would say it was an error, and that they could run afoul of Phillips.
Then again, it really is a perfectly valid music CD, that ships with a trojan. So I suppose phillips would have no problem as it does follow the spec and will not cause problems for standalone CD players too dumb (or smart) to run the programs on the disc.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
...i could reasonably see to this is that it could (if we're lucky) turn into a PR turd maelstrom that could land on the DMCAs lap, pushing for a revision/excision of this stupid stupid stupid law from the books.
Ask The President of Sunncomm what the hell he was thinking!
The EFF should have a field day with this one.
... and apparently they are.
. php#000585
http://www.eff.org/news/breaking/archives/2003_10
In addition, SunnComm believes that Halderman has violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by disclosing unpublished MediaMax management files placed on a user's computer after user approval is granted.
Damn, anyone have a copy of that EULA they can put up? What the hell were users agreeing to?
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
From an MSNBC article:
Future versions of the SunnComm software would include ways that the copy-protecting files would change their name on different computers, making them harder to find, Jacobs said. Moreover, the company will distribute the technology along with third-party software, so that it doesn't always come off a protected CD, he added.
So, they intend to get their DLL onto your system by having it installed by other unrelated programs... Sneaky.
PK: 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
prolly instead of a lenghty paper whit names like priceton on it is a bad idea.
/me doesn't like autorun. press shift /me doesn't like autoinstall. dir (the file in question.exe) /s, del file in question.
...
... asking for trouble.
just go to a IRC channel and typ sumething like:
1)
2)
3)
4) finished.
this would have then just floated thru the internet as information.
doing this: me is student at princeton, me smart me tell everybody thingy is
So is disabling the auto-run feature of Windows also a violation of the DMCA? Or does SunnComm's product somehow sidestep the fact this can be disabled? If so, is this now an "illegal" use of my computer?
After all, if a cracker attacks my machine and runs some arbitary code on it without my permission, that is against the law. Why is installing some broken device driver, without my permission the not same? It shouldn't be all that hard to demonstrate inserting an Audio CD does not neccessarily mean that you intend or expect software to be installed from it.
I wonder what happens to those in work place enviroments when they insert the CD. My employeer has just had another "attempt" at locking down their Windows machines to prevent users installing software (the attempt is bound to be futile.. but there we go). Is the user of a machine they have no administration powers over now in violation of the DMCA too?
http://www.sunncomm.com/asktheprez/asktheprez.asp
Make sure you mention the stock price. I know he is proud of it.
If I lived in the USA, I would even be inclined to invite that fuckwad to sue me for the same shit. The nice thing is, I cannot imagine a school like Princeton taking crap like this lying down. If Sunncomm ever did file suit (and I bet money it won't happen), Princeton will have some nice attorneys to meet that pathetic, piece of shit company head-on.
Oops, you explained how to defeat the copy protection.
If I purchase a CD, it is my personal property. I have the absolute right to do with it as I see fit. Alex Halderman of Princeton University is only showing us how to take back our rights as property owners.
This poster is insightful? Sorry guy, read the copyright law when you have a moment. You can get it here.
The problem here is not that BMG and SunComm are trying to protect copyrights, it's that they are doing it by installing software on your computer without you knowing it. Your computer is your personal property and their software should not be mucking about on it without your knowledge or permission. Of course, the CD is your property as well. The music on the CD, however, is not. You have the right to listen to it because the artist has granted you that limited right, plus fair use. Thus, the problem with many DRM systems, though obviously not this one, is that they too often restrict your right, as granted by the artist, to listen to the CD as you see fit as long as you do not break the copyright.
Whether record companies are kicking their own asses by treating their customers so poorly is another issue.
Copyright is a temporary loan from the public domain, not property.
Does no one else think this is insane? I hate to break it to you, but you can't be the only one with property rights. You can't expect to own a CD you bought and at the same time have no right to your own creations, especially since a creative work is arguably the most valuable type of property there is, certainly more so than a mediocre CD in your collection. What's more, how can the public domain have any initial right to someone's creative work unless it is expressly granted? Would you say that an author's mind is on loan from the public domain?
It shouldn't be all that hard to demonstrate inserting an Audio CD does not neccessarily mean that you intend or expect software to be installed from it.
Why not? After all it is not an audio CD (a format descibed by the Philips Red Book Standard).
The best way to popularize Open Source Software is to support the BSA.
Regardless of who you're for... /skip
C'mon!!!!!!!! It's a F*cking shift key for god's sake!!!
How can you argue against something that's already there??????????? Dickheads? (intended as inflamatory)
When any movie star can become govenor and finding critical bugs in software is a felony offense, I worry how bad it will be after I die. Then I remember that I'll be dead :)
All they're saying is "Stop telling everyone how easy it is to defeat". Your average AOL user doesn't know that autorun can be turned off, and there are a lot of said AOL users.
Under the DMCA it's illegal to distribute programs that circumvent technical measures to protect copyright.
This would seem to mean that all non-Windows OS's (e.g.: Mac OS X, *BSD, Linux, Gnu/Hurd, Unix, etc.) that don't support either the autorun 'technology' or support the specific DLL they are trying to run, would circumvent the copyright holders protection mechanism.
This would also seem to mean that spreading info about changing specific registry keys to disable autorun, the tweakui program, and probably many other programs that do similar things are also illegal.
All because a company made some inept software. Yuck.
"But actually trying to use m4 as a general-purpose langage would be deeply perverse" --ESR
Look, this is what your Second Amendment rights are for. When the government starts getting tyrannical, start shooting them. Your crack-monkey president must die, and soon. Death to Bush!
because everyone who as autorun turned off will be committing a felony !
I mean, you are circumventing a copy protection system, which can't clearly be legal. This is a much bigger case than the person who just points out to a way of breaking the law, these people are actually doing it.
"'Oh, that was easy,' says man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing" - Douglas Adams
Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
I dont understand CD encryption/protection?
So CDs contain data that reprasents sound. When I play the CD the data is entupreted and played as sound.
If that wasnt the case then I couldnt here the music and I wouldnt buy the CD...
so my logic follows that if the data can be played out of the speaker... then it can be recorded back to a file. irespective of whatever decryption it has had to go through?
I can see that this is not going to be the case with Data CDs like computer games etc. but will somone find the fault in my logic please, because Im having trouble understanding why people are trying to produce Music CD protection?
...before exposing critical security holes in Random_OS_1 is considered a DMCA violation?
Oh, crap, another bug in some_random_unnamed_browser! Guess we'd best just ignore it....
-Szii
SunnComma re completely dumb!
..and what if you dont have autorun enabled?? you're obviously a main criminal who needs to be locked away!!
;-)
everyone (and their dog) already knows that the shift key stops the autorun occuring with windows.
thank god they dont know about other operating systems! otherwise my ass would be sued for $10m too as my AmigaOS doesnt read or load their precious frikking little driver !
this company deserves to crash and burn big time!
On lighter note..perhaps this is the one time that a key is actually NEEDED to bypass security!
Elementary my dear Watson. The media company lacked even a modicum of technical knowledge and failed to obtain an expert opinion before buying the SunnComm product. Just as magpies are attracted to shiny objects, business executives are attracted to technical bullshit.
It's a sad business Holmes.
Indeed Watson, a sad business. Yet I see no end in sight while the law protects the criminally stupid.
A child: "Look the king is naked!"
I don't remember, did tailor sue the child?
It is the intention of management to remain a non-reporting company listed on the "The Pink Sheets" until such time as the company reports significant sales of its technology. It is within the corporation's legal rights to elect this option. However, this means that you, the investor or interest-holder, will not be afforded public access to regular company audits and therefore you must solely rely on the company's press releases, news stories, or other publicly available information.
Not having access to audit detail or other significant reporting dynamics can put SunnComm shareholders or interest-holders, at a significant disadvantage from a risk standpoint. Due to SunnComm's current, legal, non-disclosure status, your investment in SunnComm may carry with it an even higher degree of risk than that of other publicly traded companies which are currently fully reporting.
SO.. I can only believe what SunnComm tells me about SunnComm since SunnComm will try to sue and jail anyone that says anything bad about SunnComm or at least has them under a tight NDA. By the way:
If you have additional questions regarding this notice or anything you may read on SunnComm's website, we urge you to contact company directly.
So, go to Ask the Prez and watch the bullshit flow. Like this exchange on the "Prez" page:
Q: Ive heard your technology can be hacked. Does that mean it wont "work?" (10/6/2003 7:37:18 PM)
A: Not at all. People who perform tests on MediaMax and declare it to be "hackable" dont understand why its there in the first place. Let me tell you why:
1. All technology can be "hacked" by people wishing to make illegal and unauthorized use of the content owners property. Prior to MediaMax, there was no alternative to the illegal copying and re-copying of music by users. Now with MediaMax on the CD, honest people have a way of honoring the artists wishes regarding how and where the music property can be copied and shared.
2. MediaMax was designed to put a structure on the CD, itself, that empowers consumers to make licensed, legal and yes, limited copies of the music. The world has never seen anything like it before.
3. Thieves attempting to circumvent the technology for the purpose of re-distributing the music are breaking the law. Nothing will ever stop these thieves. Theyve rationalized the theft and they will always be looking for ways to cheat the system.
4. The goal of MediaMax was not to invent the "holy grail" (since one does not exist). The idea was to provide users with a way to legally use the CD, whether that be for copying or sharing the music. The difference between using our implanted technology or ripping the music for re-distribution is the difference between withdrawing money from your bank or robbing it.
5. If you owned technology that allowed you to transport the money from your local bank to your living room, doesnt give you the right to do it. Music is much the same. As a consumer, you purchase the "listening rights" to the music on the CD, not the duplication rights.
6. No matter how much stealing (called "sharing" to make thieves feel better about themselves)goes on, its still taking the copyrighted property of others and converting it to ones own use.
7. The current version of MediaMax is like any software technology in Version 1. The next version will make it tougher and tougher to circumvent. We have to start somewhere and progressive record companies like BMG and others understand this.
8. Meanwhile, honest people, may, for the first time, enjoy the pleasurable experience of legal and licensed copying and sharing of their music - thats about 95% of us.
-- I have a private email server in my basement.
This is such utter bullshit it's amazing!
Give me a break! The guy was simply showing how completely and utterly bullshit the DRM system was. If he's sued for showing people that not using Autoplay as a workaround, let's have that dumb company sue MS for providing Auto Insert Notification in the first place!
My god, these tech lawsuits get more and more idiotic. My brain just shrivels every damn time I read about them. Damn, and I thought SCO was pushing it...
They knew full well that their system did not work and unless they are total idiots they knew full well that Windows could by-pass installing the software by disabling auto-run or with the shift key. Its a documented feature of Windows which has many legitimate uses - especially for bypassing the execution of malicious code (which this is). This company relied on some stupid executives not having a clue about the technology (or lack of) so that they could sell it. This is like sales people telling a little kid that their product is 'magic'. Now someone has said the obvious which most people are going to know already or have friends tell them with-in a week. Hes being targeted as a scapegoat because its much easier for a massive company with $$ worth of lawyers to have one little grad students ass rather than they do their legal obligation and sue every single person in America who has spread this rumour - YES! SunnComm must sue everyone who has told a friend that the shift key will bypass the DRM and every friend thats passed it on to another friend. Infact they must sue Microsoft for documenting and designing this feature and they must sue who-ever puts the little shift keys on key-boards. If they dont then they are not upholding their moral duty and are allowing criminals to go free!
;) do they wanna have a piece of us? come on SunnComm come and sue me, you want my address?
Nice to know slashdot had a part in dropping their stock 20%
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
So I guess this also means pressing cancel to bypass the logon screen in Win9x is a violation of DCMA
...putting the antenna down on a Ford Ranger caused the doors to unlock & the engine to start...
.haeger
I don't know about You, but I'd like to have this information before I purchased a car. How else am I going to make an informed purchase that is so important in our capitalistic society?
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. -- Harlan Ellison
Reading this, I am really happy I am not living in such country ....
young man, there's no need to feel down. I said, young man, pick yourself off the ground.
...
...
...
...
...
I said, young man, 'cause your stock's going down there's no need to be unhappy.
young man, there's a law that'll wash; I said, young man, when you're short on your dosh.
you can use it, and I'm sure you will find many kids who can't afford to be sued.
it's fun to sue with the d-m-c-a.
it's fun to sue with the d-m-c-a.
they have everything for lawyers to enjoy, you can hang out with all the judges
it's fun to sue with the d-m-c-a.
it's fun to sue with the d-m-c-a.
you can get your stock cleaned, you can have a good whinge, you can sue whoever you feel
young man, are you listening to me? I said, young man, what do you want to be?
I said, young man, you can make real your dreams. But you got to know this one thing!
no man does it all by himself. I said, young man, put your techs on the shelf,
and just go there, with the d.m.c.a. Lawyers can help you today.
it's fun to sue with the d-m-c-a.
it's fun to sue with the d-m-c-a.
they have everything for lawyers to enjoy, you can hang out with all the judges
it's fun to sue with the d-m-c-a.
it's fun to sue with the d-m-c-a.
you can get your stock cleaned, you can have a good whinge, you can sue whoever you feel
young man, I was once in your shoes. I said, stock was down and out with the blues.
I felt no man cared I hadn't a yacht. I felt the whole world was so tight
that's when someone came up to me, and said, young man, take a walk up the street.
there's a lawsuit called the d.m.c.a. it can start you back on your way.
it's fun to sue with the d-m-c-a.
it's fun to sue with the d-m-c-a.
Looks like SunnComm have seen the light:
Daily Princetonian
Actually if you load up the original slashdot story on the CD's release and search for autoplay you will find that someone beat him to it in revealing a work-around. This is certainly a freedom of speech restriction, maybe it will lead to a new craze: instead of first-post - first-violation, where everyone trys to be the first to say a DMCA violating circumnavigation method ;)
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
I do not think the company is that annoyed about the world being told that the shift key disables autoplay ('cause that's something mentioned even in the most trivial computer dummy magazine). The real problem, I guess, is that the student wrote that this particular copy protection can be defeated by disabling autoplay. From what I've read, the copy protection works by "stealth installing" a driver via autoplay - something a standard user does not notice, and thus something he probably would not think of preventing, even if he knew that autoplay could be disabled. But, even considering that, I think it's silly to drag somebody to court for pointint out that a "new and better" copy protection is simply crap.
IMO, it is quite *ridiculous* to spell 'ridiculous' with the characters:'rediculous'
. . . unless you foolishly have commie attitudes!
.
(David Bowman, EVA near HUGE Monolithic Win-PC in orbit around Jupiter) "My God - its full of Malware!"
This comes as no surprise to me, I've always thought that key looked a little "shifty".
1984's come and gone peoples. Oh well, I'll go for it...
I for one welcome our new DMCA overlords!!
Perhaps these commercial Nazis should think about redisgning their logos?
I'll be converting my "Free Dmitri Sklyarov" T-shirt into a "Free Alex Halderman" one.
Er, assuming that nobody plans to sue me for doing so.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
We all have a new DMCA-mocking .sig:
.SIG ENCODED WITH 'SHIFT-KEY' TECHNOLOGY. IF YOU ARE READING THIS, YOU ARE A CRIMINAL"
"THIS
Also, here's some filler. I got filtered out for too many caps. For serious.
Your Rights Online: SunnComm Says Pointing to Shift Key 'Possible Felony'
Look! I'm pointing to the Shift Key! I'm pointing to the Shift Key! I'm a Felon! And here's me pointing to the NumLock Key as a Misdemeanor.
Now, I'm going to go home and tear the tags off all my matresses. Mwahahahahhahahah!!!
Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
According to: http://www.msnbc.com/news/978433.asp?0cv=CB20
Future versions of the SunnComm software would include ways that the copy-protecting files would change their name on different computers, making them harder to find, Jacobs said. Moreover, the company will distribute the technology along with third-party software, so that it doesn't always come off a protected CD, he added.
"
"
your gravity fails and negativity don't pull you through
Does this spell the end for software reviews? I mean, if one cannot point out flaws in software in what is, IMHO, a review, then what does that leave us with? Blind software shopping?
When all is said and done, nothing changes...
Everyone keeps talking about the shit-key and Windows' autorun functionality, but when this thing runs it installs software -- is it still able to install itself if you are logged in as a user which doesn't have Administrator priviliges????
(Yeah, I know, it's a rare thing these days when a Windows user isn't a member of the Administrator group... especially a home user)
Why do companies think they can install software on my PC without my permission? They cant. Its hacking. Its a criminal offense.
Sorry SunnComm.
Try again.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Did anyone else consider that following these instructions would stop the auto-run function, and thus (in SunnComm's mind) violate the DMCA.
1. Open notepad.
2. Start typing "DMCA" repeatedly, without use of the capslock key.
3. Insert CD (by way of knee hitting drive tray, or a friend's assistance.
Congratulations, you just used the DMCA to violate the DMCA!*
*Or not.
of copy protection. It involves not placing the CD in the CD-ROM. If you tell anyone that this can be circumvented by placing the CD in the CD-ROM, I'll DMCA your ass.
This post uses the CAPS LOCK since the shift key is a circumvention device.
how long until
Is telling someone how to use TweakUI, which is written by the same people who wrote Windows, a violation of the DMCA? It has a function that diables Autorun...
"All because a company made some inept software. Yuck."
Or not. Any programmer worth their salt knew full well that it's so easily bypassed. I'd bet that this company was just waiting for this exact thing to happen and then unleash the lawyers. Win against the little guy - then go after the big bucks.
Q: Ive heard your technology can be hacked. Does that mean it wont "work?" (10/6/2003 7:37:18 PM) A: Not at all. People who perform tests on MediaMax and declare it to be "hackable" dont understand why its there in the first place. Let me tell you why: 1. All technology can be "hacked" by people wishing to make illegal and unauthorized use of the content owners property. Prior to MediaMax, there was no alternative to the illegal copying and re-copying of music by users. Now with MediaMax on the CD, honest people have a way of honoring the artists wishes regarding how and where the music property can be copied and shared. 2. MediaMax was designed to put a structure on the CD, itself, that empowers consumers to make licensed, legal and yes, limited copies of the music. The world has never seen anything like it before. 3. Thieves attempting to circumvent the technology for the purpose of re-distributing the music are breaking the law. Nothing will ever stop these thieves. Theyve rationalized the theft and they will always be looking for ways to cheat the system. 4. The goal of MediaMax was not to invent the "holy grail" (since one does not exist). The idea was to provide users with a way to legally use the CD, whether that be for copying or sharing the music. The difference between using our implanted technology or ripping the music for re-distribution is the difference between withdrawing money from your bank or robbing it. 5. If you owned technology that allowed you to transport the money from your local bank to your living room, doesnt give you the right to do it. Music is much the same. As a consumer, you purchase the "listening rights" to the music on the CD, not the duplication rights. 6. No matter how much stealing (called "sharing" to make thieves feel better about themselves)goes on, its still taking the copyrighted property of others and converting it to ones own use. 7. The current version of MediaMax is like any software technology in Version 1. The next version will make it tougher and tougher to circumvent. We have to start somewhere and progressive record companies like BMG and others understand this. 8. Meanwhile, honest people, may, for the first time, enjoy the pleasurable experience of legal and licensed copying and sharing of their music - thats about 95% of us. Thats who we designed MediaMax for. 9. So-called "experts" who grandstand by publishing MediaMax hacks dont "get it." They seem to born out of some Messiah complex hell-bent on saving the world from any technological attempt to protect artists and their property. Its as though they think that music is different from other real property. It isnt, and the people who subvert the protection that is afforded by MediaMax, no matter how trivial they deem that protection to be, are conspiring to commit theft against the wishes of the artists who created the musical property. 10. With MediaMax, we have a technology that plays on virtually every device and allows both copying and sharing, yet some think our technology is worthless based on how easy or hard it is to steal and convert the music property. Its as though they think that honest people will always steal if theres a way to get away with it. Hackers think circumventing protection technologies is a game. Its not. Its a crime. Im going to predict theyve all got a wake-up call coming. -------------- This is how we, a bunch of musicians and artists (and, yes, business people) at SunnComm feel about what we do. Thanks for writing, Peter
Kinda ironic that Kuro5hin ran a spoof on this topic just yesterday, when it seemed too preposterous to actually happen: Kuro5hin
You are totally blocking my view of the wall. - Dogbert
I have asked the prez this:
I am running the Linux operating system on my computer and I am able to play your copy protected CD's with no restrictions. I can copy the music onto my hard drive, rip it to .mp3's or .ogg files and generally I am not aware of any copy restrictions at all.
Have I bought a faulty CD or does your copy protection technology only work in some highly controlled circumstances ? E.g. if you are running a certain version of a certain operating system ?
How much does anyone want to bet I never get an answer ?
I love how SunnComm essentially argues that you risk a lawsuit if you point out flaws in its products:
a sp?0cv=CB20
SunnComm CEO Peter Jacobs "said the company was also exploring a civil suit based on damage to the company's reputation, since Halderman concluded that the technology was ineffective without knowing about future enhancements."
http://www.msnbc.com/news/978433.
If SunnComm is correct, certainly Consumer Reports couldn't criticize the latest Ford if Ford intended to fix any problems. And of course SunnComm would never tell us about their problems, because that would defeat the purpose of security through obscurity. Thus, all products reviewers will have to assume than any negative aspect of a product will be fixed and to simply keep their mouths shut.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
SunnComm would have no case. The bill clearly states in section 5(c) that:
I read down some of the previous answers to lettes on this page and some of them are just really awful, check this answer saying their copy protection cannot easily be hacked by novices...
"MediaMax, like all copy management or protection technology, can be hacked, but it's not easy for novices and honest people to do. Look, your front door lock to your home enables you to sleep well at night and guards your possessions while you're away. Sure, a professional burglar may be able to pick your lock or force the door open anyway, but the lock keeps honest people "honest," and bad thieves from breaking in. Knowing that professional thieves won't be stopped by your door lock is no reason NOT to buy a lock"
Seems like they should change their motto to: "Light Lears From Reality."
"Can there be a Klein bottle that is an efficient and effective beer pitcher?"
No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of the DMCA to facilitate sales and expose copyright holders to the risk of theft of their digital property.
Seriously, don't copyright owners have a right to know that the technology peddled to them under the guise of protecting their property is worthless?
Damn kid foiled our plans for world domination 1) Install trojan horse on PCs 2) Feed RIAA with findings 3) Sue the pants off the world HAHAHAHAHA Idiots should be happy that the flaw was publicly announced. Now they can correct it (I hope the don't). Burn in hell RIAA!!!
to type now that i removed my shift keys. you cant be to careful 1111. guess i will save some 4 by not buying that new wireless shiftkeys included keyboard.
How long till some one just puts a txt file ELUA on the CD? They don't need any thing else. They have lawyers to go after the ones that break the ELUA.
How can they claim false damage? It seems that alerting stockholders to the utter ineffectiveness of the company's product is allowing the company's reputation to suffer its due damage.
tone
Well, at least now in the states, you can say that on prime time tv all you want.
It seems everytime some piece of encryption or protection is broken because it is weak the DMCA comes out the bag and is used to crush those individuals who showed us how to do it. Inside and outside of the U.S.
/. readers know the full effect of what breaking that code had for the course of this world.
I was just wondering what Hitler's reaction in todays world would have been to know the British broke the Enigma code. Sue them via the DMCA.
I'm sure most
Mind you the good old British establishment did enact their revenge on one of the main code-breakers, Alan Turing, by hounding him for his sexuallity until he commited suicide.
So the moral of this story is that if you are code-breaker who breaks encryption for either the rights of the individual or the protection of the country then sooner or later you will get pissed on.
Their lawyers probably told them the minor flaw in the lawsuit:
They forget Mac users. And all the other flavors of unix that have CD-player programs. And the Gnu HURD. And Be, our dearly departed multimedia OS. And the CD players that have a 'play' button on the front that you can use to bypass the computer entirely...
... AND if their testers missed testing for well-documented 'features' like this, it's probably so bug ridden that they'll be sued out of existance if they claim that it actually protects the content.
I guess that's why they took a step back and said "uh, we'll be lenient in this case, and not sue to keep us out of bankruptcy and from looking stupid, er keep the STUDENT out of bankruptcy, and make him look smart. Yeah, that's it.... For the good of the criminal. Okay, let's start over. We don't want the STUDENT to go bankrupt. Not that WE would go bankrupt, if we took it to court, but the STUDENT. And we want the STUDENT to not look stupid. Because the STUDENT is supposed to be smart. Not that we're not smart, or anything. Our staff is smart. Our testing team managed to figure out the windows install procedure, after only two months! It takes IT people years to get MSCE certified."
OR MAYBE -- the entire programming staff said "You sue the student and we'll quit since we want to be employable. And you will NEVER be able to hire another programmer again."
Just some thoughts...
frob
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
Sorry, i'm laughing my ass off. How ridiculous can company's get ? However i'm very interested in how this case continues, as it clearly isn't an infringment off the protection scheme. But more or less disabling a feature in Windows and NOT in SunComm's crappy cheap-ass 'i can not think' clueless solution.
-- Cliff Albert
I think that's a very good point.
Actually, what I worry about (and this is completely conjecture) is that the reason that SunComm released strong protection that is easily bypassed is that the current concerns about copy protection of music forced it out into the world early.
What's it waiting for? Well, my fear is that it's waiting for a later DRM-enhanced version of Windows from Microsoft. MS has definitely said that DRM will play a bigger part of future products (isn't Office 2003 the first appearance of things like Word documents that you can read but not print and Outlook messages that you can receive but not forward?).
In a DRM-enhanced Windows OS, it's not hard to imagine that the presence of some hidden status word on a SunComm-type music CD would disable the feature that lets Shift bypass autorun. You'd still have full control to do that on the Toyota demo disc you just got in the mail, or if you don't want to load the DVD feature viewer when you put a DVD on your computer. But,under command of compliant media, you might lose the ability to defeat automatic installation.
Doing something like this (or, of course, more sophisticated) seems exactly in line with what MS has been doing lately. Perhaps the SunnComm protection is trying to use that other bit but MS hasn't snuck the DRM code into a service pack yet. Sigh...
Defeating a system like this would be a signficant effort and certainly one that would be a DMCA violation.
Maybe I'm overly paranoid (when I wrote "In a DRM-enhanced Windows OS" above it was hard not to write "In Soviet Russia"!), but I think it's hard to believe that anybody that would put the effort into a protection scheme would miss a barn-door sized boner like this.
But this protection is not covered by DMCA.
Read the ACT:
`Sec. 1201. Circumvention of copyright protection systems
`(a) VIOLATIONS REGARDING CIRCUMVENTION OF TECHNOLOGICAL MEASURES- (1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
Define effectively:
`(B) a technological measure `effectively controls access to a work' if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.
No, you can gain access to work without any of the above. The DMCA covers processes that are required to access the copyrighted work. SunnComm's process is not required to access the copyrighted material. SunnComm's process is optional. Therefore it is ineffective and not protected by DMCA.
I presume that if the CD was already in the drive when the computer boots (or if it's inserted before the OS has finished loading) then the CD won't autorun anyway, so you'll be able to rip the tracks without even having to press shift or perform any other workarounds.
If this is the case, then it's possible that computer user could copy all the tracks without even realising the CD is protected as they'll never see the LaunchCD program load.
That part doesn't mean much, it's a pretty standard disclaimer. Technically (well, a bit more than technically - there have been cases of very solid, or apparently very solid, companies crashing) true no matter how good the stock is.
We apologize for the inconvenience.
To prove a point to these losers I sold the hundreds of shares of their stock I had invested in...
Now what are they going to do without my 20 bucks?!
LilMikey.com... I'll stop doing it when you sto
It's root word is RIDICULE...
So is there next line of products going to be a line of DMCA compliant keyboards -- minus shift-key of course.
"you will get my 'shift key' when you pry it from under my cold dead fingers"
Sunncomm is the same company that raised eyebrows and ire with the release of that Charley Pride CD a few years back. Check out this October 2002 report from the privacy and information commissioner, Ontario, detailing the litigation that ensued.
According to the report, some Californians got ticked and filed a suit. As a result, the record company "agreed not to require consumers to provide personally identifiable information, such as their e-mail address or Internet Provider (IP) address, as a condition for listening to the Charley Pride CD on their computer or downloading songs from the SunnComm Web site."
No, Rediculous wouldn't be a word at all.
If telling people that pressing the Shift Key to bypass stupid protection software if a FELONY, then allow me to commit a crime:
If you want 'UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS' into a Windows 98 machine, just press ESC at the initial login window. There, did I just commit a crime?
Perhaps the DRM software should feature a big yellow sticker that pressing the Shift key while inserting their CD is against the law....
Are we going to see things like Software Usage Agreements requiring a certain group of settings to be set a particular way (like AutoRun) in order for us to be able to use their software legally? YIKES!
Did this guy even THINK of just asking: "did we test the SHIFT key guys?" C'mon, what kind of management is this? How could the people in control of this project not be thorough enough to check for an obvious loophole like this?
Troll!
Furry cows moo and decompress.
*Effin'* troll!
Only a dumb slashdot troll would attempt to relate ROT13 and real, human death. That shows a total lack of perspective, that does. It makes me question the relevance of your physical location.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
Rave on, brother Beavis! Yeah, keep on uselessly venting your rage here. Yeah, whatever it's not like we're really listening or anything.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
I think people that think that other people "deserve death" deserve death (except me :-P ). Think about it--if we killed off both you *and* George Bush and all the other terrorists, the world would be a happier place, wouldn't it? We could just nuke all the Israelies and all the Palestinians from a reasonable distance. Then we wouldn't have to watch them killing each other anymore.
Why not set a good example by going out in your back yard and opening fire on yourself? Please? No, don't go out in a suicide bombing attack because that would be counter-productive. Just go out in the backyard and unleash your violence on yourself *without* involving a bunch of other people that don't really care about the fact that you've got so much hate inside.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
My sound blaster drivers can record and encode any sound played across my card without loss. So once you get the cd to play and no matter what "software" like winamp it is not compatable with I can record it to mp3 format via my SB drivers.
Guess suing researchers still isn't a good move.
Q. Does the MediaMax CD3 software run on Linux?
A. We can't tell you.
Q. Does the MediaMax CD3 software run on Mac?
A. Because of legal limitations, we really can't say anything about that.
Q. The MediaMax CD3 software isn't running on my computer. Is it because I have the Auto-run feature disabled?
A. Erm... maybe, maybe not. We really can't say.
Q. When I put the CD in my computer, I was holding the Shift key down. Then I noticed that the MediaMax CD3 software wasn't running. Are these things related?
A. Legally, we can't tell you. (Hint: stop doing that!)
Q. What files are installed with the MediaMax CD3 software?
A. It's not that we can't tell you. It just that we don't want to.
Q. I want to buy SunnComm stock. Is now a good time?
A. We'd like to say it is, but we can't.
The Daily Princetonian reports that SunnComm have decided not to shoot themselves in the foot any more than they already have done, and have dropped the threat of a suit.
It's nice for Halderman, but it's a shame that SunnComm aren't quite stupid enough to bring a losing DMCA case and set a precedent. Hmm, perhaps we could persuade SCO to do it...
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Because a $2 gold-plug RCA cable can shove up their a$$es totally dis-considers any lame DRM they invent...
In the UK it is illegal to install a program on a PC without permission, if (as I understand) this CD doesn't offer you the option NOT to install it, then I suspect that it breaks UK law, interesting no?
"SunnComm's management feels you need to understand these very important facts prior to making a decision to invest in the company's shares, and you should also be totally aware that you run the risk of losing your entire investment should you make the decision to purchase shares in SunnComm." They said it ....
sunncomm says it won't sue. guess they finally saw reason.
Dear USA citizens,
Your system is totally FUBARed.
Please consider another revolution and this time make sure that what is done right, stays right.
a company like this hides behind it's own ignornace. I am not in favor of DRM technoligy, I think it's a wild goose chase, but that aside, instead of releasing a well tested DRM package and then using the findings to improve on their product they are suing a college student for pointing out the fact they released a poor product.
"It's better to be a pirate then join the Navy"
IIRC, the language of the DMCA prohibits bypassing a mechanism that "effectively controls access to a copyrighted work". If the control mechanism is so broken that merely turning off Autorun or holding down SHIFT bypasses it, there's a VERY good case to be made that the access control is not "effective" ('cause it clearly won't stop most users), so bypassing it is NOT prohibited by the DMCA, and the whole suit collapses.
"My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
SunnComm came to it's senses.
"Can there be a Klein bottle that is an efficient and effective beer pitcher?"
In commenting on SunnComm's statement:
The Pope declared:
"Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin
See this Daily Princetonian story for an update.
SunnComm's CEO decided late last night to change his mind. "I don't want to be the guy that creates any kind of chilling effect on research," he said.
> 1. What the fuck? ... Don't forget
> 2. Oh, fuck that
> 3. That's fucking ridiculous
> 4. Fuck the fucking fuckers
> 5. Cowboy Neal does it best
4a. I can't swear, you insensitive clod!
...
...
14,321) profit
14,322) eliminate ability to disable autorun
14,323) profit
Sigs are bad for your health.
Right in the article, the reporter manages to include the instructions for disabling the copy protection - LOL!
Princeton Student Sued Over Paper on CD Copying
Thu Oct 9, 6:07 PM ET
By Ben Berkowitz
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) -
*snip the lead para*
In a statement, SunnComm Technologies Inc. said it would sue Alex Halderman over the paper, which said SunnComm's MediaMax CD-3 software could be blocked by holding down the "Shift" key on a computer keyboard as a CD using the software was inserted into a disc drive.
SunnComm just has to realize the shift happens.
From the article, "... SunnComm is taking a stand here because we believe that those who own property, whether physical or digital, have the ultimate authority over how their property is used. Owning copying technology is not an unconditional 'free pass' to replicate or distribute protected work." "
He just contradicted himself! Not even a sentence separating the two contradictory statements. If he believes that THE OWNER of a piece of property, in any form has the ultimate authority over how it is used, WHY DOES HE want to stop someone from using THEIR own CD copier in any manner they see fit? This guy is on the lunatic fringe...
Russian Russian Russian RussianDollSig DollSig DollSig DollSig
Is someone pursuing this?
I believe this would be an excellent time for you Americans to test some of your shiny new anti-terrorism laws.
Which is precisely why, today, SunnComm rethought its position and announced that they wouldn't go after the grad student who published the paper demonstrating how crappy their DRM is. Because they didn't want to take the risk of losing, especially since losing would defang the DMCA and seriously screw with the MPAA and RIAA's legal efforts.
Maybe the same people who made that software designed their website, it consists of a really tacky logo made with office wordart and a flash file, which I can't get to work.
Are any record companies going to actually use this copy protection in the future now it's publicly been rubbished? Is it going to be used in any other CDs at all?
It's going to be the case for a long long time that linux users can get round this sort of copy protection, so the pirates can easily get their linux boxes set up I'm sure!
Disclaimer: If I disagree with you I'm probably trolling...
Isn't this called Scodomy?
So i just posted on the "ask the prez" site and told him how to "hack" (and i use their term, mine is "use") his software.
Am i going to get sued now?
From the article: "MediaMax CD-3 is a collection of technologies that provides copy management for optical media, while simultaneously enhancing and expanding the consumer's experience."
Could someone please explain to me how DRM "enhances the consumer's experience?" Do your CDs sound better with it?
âoeIn theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not." â Albert Einstein