Slashdot Mirror
DRM Technology To Be Added To MP3 Format
Bob Zer Fish writes "Cnet News.com has a leading story saying that the venerable MP3 music format is getting a makeover aimed at blocking unauthorized copying. Thomson and Fraunhofer, the companies that license and own the patents behind the MP3 digital music technology, are in the midst of creating a new digital rights management add-on. Of course, there are current standards, but most are incompatible."
An anonymous reader points to this brief mention as well.
I say it's time to start saving the setup files to the existing MP3 players w/o the DRM crap attached.
- OohGodYeah!
Why does Fraunhofer think that their "standard" is going to get any more acceptance than any of the other options?
There are 10 kinds of people: ones who understand ternary, ones who don't, and ones who think this joke is about binary
Why not just illegally trade the "old format" mp3s then? Or am I missing the totally obvious?
Officer, arrest this man. He is obviously a user, and probably a dealer, of a terrorist-grade operating system weapon, capable of running audio playback software software (and undoubtedly encryption software too) not expressly authorized by the ministry of rights (MiniRight).
Yes, I know it sounds like a joke, but so did the DMCA before 1998.
what they are saying is that people will buy DRM'd mp3s, enmasse. Why oh why would they do that? if i wanted crippled, i would download WMA's or ituney music. And im sure people will love trying to get their DRM'd mp3s to work in their 5 year old mp3 car stereo.
if their not labeled differently, all this will do is add more clutter to P2P networks, making people swtch to less cluttered p2p networks.
I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
The article mentions that the MPEG community and others are working on open standards. I believe they are talking about using variations of XrML as the standard Rights Expression Language (REL). ContentGuard, a company heavily backed by Microsoft, originally owned the rights to XrML, but has stated that they will not control the actual language. What ContentGuard is saying is that they hold patents which cover any type of implementation of any REL - so that while the actual "standard" might be open (lots of discussion points around this in and of itself), any IMPLEMENTATION of the standard is not open.
So, is a non-open source implementatable standard actually an open standard? I would say not.
"What we have here, is a failure to communicate." - Cool Hand Luke
It being their business, they'd like to produce their own online music DRM scheme and get paid royalties for it. At the same time, they are not a manufacturer of devices which will be able to provide a presence for the format on the market or begin its popularisation. Furthermore, the most extremely popular and well liked online music distribution platforms already use existing formats. I doubt Apple is likely to change over to a third party licensed format. Understanding this, how can this possibly be feasible?
Its also been rumored that Longhorn will try to incorporate some versions of Windows Media player that will only play DRM MP3's.
That's the problem with closed technologies like MP3. Sure its open in the sense that you can implement applications that support it. But its destinay is controlled by Thomson and Fraunhofer, if they decide to sell out to the likes of DRM that's their choice. Its their protocol and their patents. This is why an truly open protocol, such as OGG will likely become the standard song swapping medium. Especially as players begin to support it. Besides, WHO says we have to use the new MP3 format anyway?
MP3 predated Ogg by years (AFAIK). So it has lots more "market share," if you will. Also, "mp3" has become synonymous with "music on the computer." It's like Kleenex. I can't recall off the top of my head a different brand of tissue paper. (But that example really only counts for a half point...)
We mention Ogg so much because we honestly believe (at least I think so...) it to be at least as good as MP3. What's wrong with us wanting someone "big" to try to put it in the mainstream.
So you can stop the vindictive ranting. I can't tell if you're a partial troll, or just disillusioned, or just a very confusing read to me.
Obviously the new format won't affect the legacy, but it might pollute the waters.
History lesson: Anybody here remember .arc ? Probably not - when its owners flexed their tiny muscles, it disappeared in a .zip. Yes, I know it was for different reasons, but the point is that in this digital age, things can adapt in a flash.
Sigs are bad for your health.
What, other than every single person who has made MP3s with iTunes or MusicMatch?
Cripes, man! Ever gone to a mainstream P2P network? LAME-encoded MP3s are the exceptions there, not the rule. I see far more Xing and FHG-encoded files on Kazaa and WinMX than LAME-encoded files.
I'm so glad right now that I drink Pepsi. Even after their lovely promotion I'll continue to purchase iTunes AAC locked type format. It's easy enough...
:)
... if I can hear it I can copy it (heck, on a Mac the same applies that if I can see it [motion or otherwise] I can copy it :)
Download.
Import with Quicktime
Save as AIFF
Import to iTunes
Convert AIFF to MP3
Copy over the tag and delete M4P and AIFF files.
(hint: easy enough to automated through Applescript
And frankly I can't tell the difference from a original CD to their AAC format to the newly converted MP3 file. As long as it passed my ear test I'll just stick with their DRM scheme and work right around it (the day I can't is the day I stop buying).
Of course with tools like AudioHijack
Bah -- DRM.
Come on MS would never do that....
They would just convert it to a wma with DRM.
Exactly! Don't buy RIAA music. Download your shit online, use filesharing applications with bandwidth-limiting enabled so you are harder to detect. Change the default port numbers. Use obscure file sharing apps. Set up a node on freenet. Complain to your ISP and threaten to leave if they poo-poo P2P use. Teach others how to use file sharing properly. Avoid using file sharing at school, university, or work. Support BitTorrent by leaving your client running well after you're done downloading. Don't leave your filesharing apps unattended 24 hours a day. Keep your host free of viruses. Keep your music collections clean of tainted files or corrupt downloads.
We're slowly killing the big record labels... keep up the good work. I'm not being sarcastic, I really want to see these evil bastards go poor.
Unacompanied Sonata
(To avoid the inevetable off-topic moderation: this is a story about a young musical prodigy who is raised completely separated from any outside influences, so he can create "pure" music.)
"Great men are not always wise: neither do the aged understand judgement." Job 32:9
Is this supposed to mean that no one can create anything new anymore, because it has "all been done before" ?
I once read a Slashdot journal entry that concluded that the chance of copying something copyrighted was so great that the risk of having to spend the funds to defend oneself in court wasn't worth it. The legal standard for copying is "access" (has the defendant heard the plaintiff's work even once?) plus "substantial similarity" (are they similar?); once Their Experts have presented strong evidence that the songs are in fact similar, you'll probably bankrupt yourself before you can get Your Experts to prove that you'd never heard the song.
Oh here it is.
Except unlike LP and cassette, Compact Disc Digital Audio has already crossed the threshold where the medium's noise floor is below an adult human being's noise floor, even if the listener can hear a sigma or two better than average.
I was just thinking, could someone explain to me why ASCAP isn't the one complaining about the trading of MP3's? They are the ones collecting money from radio stations, so why couldnt' we just pay ascap a once a year royalty fee and trade mp3's all day long? That would be a lot better than the current situation of paying the RIAA who coninuously rips off artists. At least (as far as I know) ASCAP collects the royalties on behalf of the artists (and [sigh] the record companies) That seems to me to be the better way to do things.
Any thoughts?
You allude to the iTunes Music Store with your "99 cents for a song" comment, I assume.
I just bought a new (recent release) CD from it for $9.99. I subsequently burned a copy for everyone at my office, and we all split the cost. 5 copies, $2 per copy = $10. The office paid for the blank discs, and it was sanctioned, as the boss was one of the recipients of the discs. The office also paid for the CD labels, whipped up quickly by our resident graphics guru (me) from only the included album cover art and a copy of Illustrator 10 (with a bit of chop-help from MS Paint).
Total amount earned by the music industry for 5 copies of that CD: less than $9.99.
I generally consider myself an honest person. Hell, at least my copy is "legal". But really, DRM doesn't keep even honest people honest. It just makes media company CEO's think they have a bigger penis than you do. And if that's what they wanna think, then great. I have some herbal viagra and some penis lengthener pills they could buy from me...
Anyway, the fact is, super-restrictive DRM only pisses off paying customers. Why? Because paying customers don't know what it is. Anyone that knows DRM exists has the exact piece of knowledge needed to bypass it. So, in essence, all DRM is a wasted effort.
Does anyone understand logic here? If you're lzw compressed gifs can't be displayed anymore, it's because no one thought it was worth paying the royalty.
Two words: free software.
Nine words: You haven't read this and this, have you?
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
Or
(a) The popular (as in Kazaa) filesharing apps will allow the DRM-crippled files because there will be a profit incentive for them in the deal
(b) music industry "sponcered" seeds of DRM-crippled files will appear all over the networks, many users (other then the slashdot crowd) will end up downloading crippled files
(c) this will leed to (i) users purchasing rights for songs when they stop working, or (ii) user frustration with poor quality, mis-named, and drm-crippled files on the open-networks, and may be pushed towards the legal services.
either way it seems the record industry will gain ground by destabalizing the file sharing experience and pushing people towards legal services.
Paco
You know, I resent the fact that you consider anyone who doesn't know the difference between a ogg file, an mp3 file, and an AAC file a mindless drone. Do you know how everything in your body function? How to diagnose illnesses and treatments. The medical analogy might not be as comparative, so how about hobbyist mechanics. Do you know every part of your car, or even remotely all of them? How to change them and troubleshoot problems? They're are plenty of smart people out there, much smarter than you it would seem, who don't know much about computers, but it would seem that only us geeks are the really arrogant ones. Maybe it stems from all the social problems we had to endure. Anyway, I grew out of my elitest phase, I'm going to recommend that you do too. On a side note, I decided to reply rather than to mod you retarded, or troll.
--fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
Unless of course you're talking hardware DVD player - on Slashdot? Nah :)
.02
cLive ;-)
-- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
This is an attempt to extinguish the mp3 format.
First, they'll add DRM and continue to call it MP3 even though the file formats are incompatible. "MP3" files won't play in a traditional MP3 player.
Next, "MP3" files will be distributed widely on the P2P networks. Vendors will sell "MP3" songs. People with traditional MP3 players will never know whether an "MP3" file they are about to download is a real MP3 file or not.
The resulting confusion will send MP3 and the P2P networks into obscurity.
So the DMCA will apply as a proof-of-negligence device?
That will have enough implications to cause a severe backlash.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)