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.
Does this mean we have to use it? All my old MP3s will work just fine.
Ogg.
"Hu, ho, ho-ah-oh-oh-oh. Hu, ho ho-ah-oh-oh-oh. Mario Paint! Whoaaa!"
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Yet again, this will be a waste of valuable resources. We all know that any attempt at protection of unauthorized copying will fail. With today's standards of source codes being leaded and what not, someone from inside the company will surely provide a work around, but most likely, that won't be needed. Another genius will find some simple solution that works around the protection.
Why not just illegally trade the "old format" mp3s then? Or am I missing the totally obvious?
to switch to Vorbis/FLAC/et al
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
We have AAC/MP4, to name one, which is already superior to mp3 in quality, and ready-made for a DRM candy-coating. The only advantage mp3 really has at this point is penetration, and I'll wager that those days are numbered.
Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
It won't stop anyone from using the old mp3 format, much less from distributing old mp3s. And then any music that can be played can be ripped to standard mp3 with simple tools. This will have absolutely ZERO effect on piracy.
Repeal the DMCA!
but anything that makes the RIAA complain a little less is good in my book.
What is the big deal about this? Sure if you use the new codec its going to be protected but what is to stop somebody from using cd-ripping software from today without it or just using a different codec? Its a good idea but there does not seem to be any point about it other then service like itunes can distribute smaller files but still have the DRM on it. Another good idea but it seems to be rather pointless and useless.
We all knew this was coming. Madonna yelling in the mp3s was never going to be enough!
Free XBox, PS2
Cnet News.com has a leading story saying that the venerable MP3 music format is getting a makeover aimed at blocking unauthorized copying.
And I have a shiny sixpence in my pocket that says people will avoid the new "improved" version like the plague and stick to the older, user-friendly, non-RIAA-bullshit-encumbered version of the standard.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Just one more reason I love ogg.
Besides, someone will just find a way around this, there always is, nothing ever works long against these ingenius pirates.
...since Lame doesn't use the Fraunhofer codec, and is widely available for most major platforms.
Honestly, has anyone even consciously *used* Fraunhofer's codec in the last four years for personal MP3 encoding?
I can hear all the geeks screaming how ogg is the best thing on the planet. only problem is hardware support is almost nonexistent... Yeah, there are a couple of devices, but by and large most devices support one or maybe two formats. mp3 and wma. mp3 is here to stay!
Good - perhaps this is what we've been needing to finally kill off MP3. Thomson and Fraunhofer are morons if they think this will help market share. The *only* compelling feature of MP3 over WMA or whatever is that you don't have to dick around with licenses for your MP3 playing hardware.
Long live Ogg Vorbis.
I mean really... why would anyone, except those making a profit off of selling music, adopt this? I guess I can see someone shifting to a new format - lets say a lossless format came out with the same filesize of mp3, but with DRM, maybe people would tolerate it. But this.... this makes no sense? Its just plain old mp3 all over again! Its like saying Hey buy this new TV - its the exact same in every other way from your old TV except it punches you in the face every time you change channels to avoid commercials"
Am i missing something here, or am I just stupid?
I really hope this changed format has a new file extension. If it doesn't then it will make searching for even legitimate MP3s using peer-to-peer software a nightmare. OGG is looking more attractive all the time.
OK! But we have to walk to dinner. No car...
While they have been very willing to let anyone decode mp3s (charging royalties only for the encoders), there is nothing to keep them from announcing tomorrow that no more mp3 players can be made or released without this new DRM technology.
And that they want a nickel for every download of a player.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
MP3 is so deeply entrenched in its current form, the public isn't going to switch. There are untold Terrabytes or even Petabytes of MP3s in the world that have no DRM. It's pure idiocy to think that people will just switch from the free and open (in their minds, if not truly in reality) format that MP3 currently is to another one.
It's a waste of money to develop an add on and try to force it on the market. That won't happen.
Then again, "Trusted Computing" might be enough to force people.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Well, actually, if you examine and MP3 and compare it to an AAC/MP4, you'll see that the MP3 picks up more of the static, higher frequency sounds. While this sounds bad, these are actually the sounds you hear on snare drums and high pitched singing and guitar solos. To me, it looks like AAC/MP4 will be past over until something new and big comes out. MP4's just won't cut it.
Eeeeew, is that a plug of earwax?
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
Kinda not a good idea as goinf from one lossy to another makes the end result a file that sounds "less" that the original but......
Here are some MP3 to Ogg Misory one could try
Julius Caesar - Act I, Scene i: "What mean'st thou by that? Mend me, thou saucy fellow!"
OK! But we have to walk to dinner. No car...
Not a problem. The dinner, like the lunch, is free.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
This will not destroy compatibility with existing MP3s, nor will it stop piracy from people ripping. They are just making a DRM-enabled MP3 format for online music stores to sell so that Fraunhofer can start getting the royalties it was trying to get in the first place when it started charging for the MP3 format. Microsoft is getting loads of cash for licensing WMA, and Apple is getting wads of greenies for licensing AAC, Fraunhofer is just trying to get in the game. There will still be MP3s without DRM, just like there are AAC and WMA files without DRM.
Make me a friend and I'll mod you up
Seems like it might end up doing to the MP3 format what record company DRM is doing to the CD... Creating a format where you don't know if you'll be able to play it until you hit "play".
And if they can enforce DRM in authoring tools through nasty patent licensing, well, you can maybe kiss MP3 goodbye as a useful format.
That sucks. The CD in my truck doesn't do OGG...
c.
Log in or piss off.
You do all realize there's nothing stoping anyone who feels like it from putting a DRM wrapper arround an ogg file, right?
Just because some people sell music in a DRMed/encrypted version of some open format like MP3 or AAC doesn't automatically make that format evil.
"The worst tyrannies were the ones where a governance required its own logic on every embedded node." - Vernor Vinge
Is when MS Media Player (or even Windows) automatically "upgrades" your MP3's for you. Unless you had good backups, all your MP3's are now DRM enabled.
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
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
New MP3 DRM technology cracked; DMCA invoked in lawsuit...
---
Never criticize religion on Slashdot. You will be modded down for "Troll" no matter how factual it is.
Seriously, what's the point? MP3 as a codec is outdated. All new codecs (be it aac, ogg, or even, god forbids, wma9) are a BIG step above mp3 in the quality / compression ratio department.
The only reason why everybody uses MP3 is exactly because of that, everybody uses it! But adding a DRM layer will make it incompatible to all existing (hardware/software) players, so why wouldn't you use a better codec for some shiny new drm scheme?
One word: patents. They can start enforcing them whenever they want. (See www.mp3licensing.com.) Remember Unisys patent on LZW compression? All my old GIFs was working just fine too, which didn't mean I could keep using them. Fortunately, now with zlib, PNG and Ogg Vorbis, this is not an issue this time.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
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?
Caldwell said he expected to see devices and services supporting the protected MP3 format by the end of 2004
But, will the new devices support the old format (and if not, why would those with massive Mp3 collections buy them), and will the new format work on old devices (again, why would those with old devices use this format).
It seems really that they're shooting themselves in the foot, but I'll be glad when that means my next deck for the car should support OGG.
The Rio Karma, a 20GB HDD-based player, supports Ogg Vorbis AND FLAC, and gapless playback of these formats. It retails for around US$230, and is probably the most advanced DAP on the market.
or at least what this would seem like to me. I've not chimed in too much about DRM on /. (if I ever have) but this gets my ire up. At exactly what point is music and music sharing going to stop being one of those "marijuana" type of subjects, where everyone knows it's illegal, and judging from a good majority of people I've met on the internet, everyone does it.
:D
It's been said many times before but I'll say it again. The record industries failings are their fault. They've invested themselves in trendy "novelty" music, and are blaming their problems on digital file traders. It's been shown that time and time again any DRM can be gotten around (line out anybody?) This dragon needs to quit chasing it's tail. The problem isn't in the formats. It's in the medium. If I wanted to bootleg a CD for profit (which is really where the copyright issues fall IMO) I could simply copy the physical CD and start pressing out copies all night long.
"Fixing" the MP3 format would be like buying all your blank tapes pre-recorded from the record companies directly.
I'm not well educated enough about this, and I'm sure it probably shows, but I don't want a hassle if I get a new hard drive. I shouldn't have to ask for permission to listen to something I've paid for if some component fries out on me. This to me would be the equivalent of calling KitchenAid if my mixer fails on me, and after getting it repaired I need to check for permission to plug it in, even though I own it.
I'm tired of being restricted because of what I might do, instead of for what I've done. There are plenty of other "secure" formats out there (I use that term loosly)... Why get another one?
Mod me down if this seems too rambling and incoherent. I'm celebrating having mad vacation money.
Now I just may be some naive college student with an econ minor under his belt, but last time I checked my professors were telling me that things increased in worth when they went through those nice little "added value" cycles. Apparently someone RIAA seems to be pumping out the FUD in mass quantities that says rather than make something people find so useful they want to literally throw their money at you, you should just cripple your product so it can only be used in limited ways and just frustrate the hell out of people. ...but that's just me.
ce n'est pas un Sig.
Note that it says "unauthorized" copying. Not illegal copying, UNAUTHORIZED copying. Want to listen to it on RIO? Pay a fee. Computer? Pay a fee. Transfer to CD? Pay a fee.
Again, the simple solution to broken music is to NOT BUY IT. The people in RIAA are real smart. As soon as no one buys their crapware, they'll quit trying to shove it up our a$$.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Try the new MpDRM! Now loaded with 50% more crap, 100% more agony, and 500% more incompatability than the equally obscure mp4. MpDRM! Because less really is more, if you live at the RIAA.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
You, sir, are a hypocrite. That's right: A hypocrite. I won't say much about your comment (except it was insightful and I think the online music business is going to eat this stuff up!) but I do have something to say about your signature.
That's right, your signature. You know, the one that reads: End acronym abuse today! The one that linked to your rant against the overuse of acronyms. The signature at the END of a very short post that still somehow managed to be riddled with words like "DRM" "MP3s" "WMA" and "AAC". Just struck me as ironic, I guess...
I would have to say that explosives are the most abused technology in all of history.
RIAA would love this... MP3 is deeply entrenched, if they feel they can pull something off where at first glance on an online file, users won't know if it is DRM-enabled or not and confusion reigns, they will acheive greater market penetration for DRM-enabled files. Once user goes through effort to get mp3 only to end up with a DRM-crippled MP3, the industry expects the user will be too lazy/apathetic to 'rectify' the situation so long as user can listen to music him/herself. If a user has a DRM-enabled MP3, the prospect of getting a traditional MP3 no longer means user gets to listen, plus share, it means the user would have to go through the trouble of getting the MP3 *just* so he can share what he already has. For most common users, selfishness/apathy reigns high enough it might just work...
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
You're smoking crack.
Ogg won't be popular until the developers get off their asses and put a big link on their front page that says "Install Ogg for Windows!".
At the moment they just give out the codec and say "you do what you want with it". Doing something useful with it? Well... ummmm... here's a bunch of third parties that can maybe do something useful with it.
If Xiph want Ogg to be popular they're going to have to break down and make actual usable technology with instant gratification for Win32 users. They don't want to have to know that a DirectShow fiter is what lets you play Oggs in Windows Media Player. They want to double click an installer and have their OS Ogg enabled.
I'll even point this out to you using references avaialable on the plain old intarweb. See Divx. Theres a "New To Divx" section! Fancy that! There used to be a direct "download Divx whatever version" link but it seems the webmaster woke up stupid this month. Then you download a file and you double click on it once it's finished and it gives you Divx! You can double click on a Divx AVI file and it opens in WMP and plays with all the Divxy goodness.
Xiph needs that for Ogg. They don't need a third party to fill the gaps. They don't need a billion programs nobody cares about with Ogg support. They need a standard installer package with instant fucking gratification and until Xiph get that through their heads people will either switch to WMA or download iTunes and switch to AAC.
What about those that encode their own music... as in music they made.
If you record a song to which you do not own the copyright, you have recorded a cover song. If you distribute phonorecords (e.g. in MP3 format) of a cover song to the public, then you owe a royalty to the songwriter('s publisher). If you write your own song, record it, and distribute it, then you owe a royalty to the songwriter('s publisher) whose song you subconsciously copied. Subconscious copying is actionable infringement. Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music, 420 F. Supp. 177 (SDNY 1976). Or do you know of a foolproof way to write music while preventing oneself from accidentally copying a copyrighted work?
Several government organizations (supreme court!) use mp3 as one of the means with which they provide transcriptions.
Granted. Works of the United States government enter the public domain upon publication.
I'll bet you anything! Because there are already a number of music players, such as the Rio Karma that play Ogg Vorbis just fine.
too late there out there http://wiki.xiph.org/VorbisHardware
De sig boss de sig
Trying to make bits not copyable is like trying to make water not wet.
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.
since Lame doesn't use the Fraunhofer codec
This could be a lead-up to Fraunhofer cease-and-desisting the lead developers of LAME for patent infringement. The MP3 patents apply to the general processes of analyzing audio that result in an MP3 bitstream rather than to some specific encoder implementation.
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.
Copyrighting music is just plain stupid
"Hey man, put your jack in here to listen to my iPod this tune is great"
"Sorry dude, i don't own the rights to that song, maybe another time".
"Are you sure, here i'll put it on my portable speakers"
"NOOO I DONT HAVE THE RIGHTS AND NEITHER DO THESE PEOPLE ARGH MY MORAL CONSCIENCE"
(falls on floor in convulsions)
Can you imagine that? Come on. If you like Open Source so much, i believe you might want the same to music. I agree with protecting your hard work but it's getting out of hand.
Trolls dont like to be Flamebait, because they burn so well. Protect our Troll heritage!
Fraunhofer was flagrantly unable to get MP3Pro out as a format of choice for illegal music distribution, but still makes a few dollars on streams from sites like Live 365. Now, eyeing the legal distro market, it would make sense to pander to where the money is (or was, by the time they get there) and sell to these other sites.
Yes, Microsoft could decide to upgrade your MP3 collection to DRMP3... but it could decide to jack everyone to WMA tomorrow anyway. And let's be frank, the more piracy there is in the world the more people they will sell their "secure" formats to.
The people here seem to be seeing a tempest in a teapot. Fraunhofer was unable to change the role of "their" format before... why should we expect any more now?
The ______ Agenda
Nullsoft Winamp, since 2.9 or so, already comes with an Ogg Vorbis decoder plug-in right next to its MP3 decoder plug-in. Now all we have to do is get the Speex plug-in into wide use so that the audio book people can switch. (Speex is specialized to represent a human voice more concisely than a general audio codec such as Vorbis can.)
Yeah converting Mp3s to Oggs is going to make for some crap quality audio files but you gotta start somewhere.
Degraded, perhaps. Still rather listenable, yes. Option to go back to the original source from CDex, absolutely.
One already has. It was called Diamond Multimedia, the inventor of the Rio. If you'll recall, they stared down both barrels of an RIAA lawsuit, fought off a preliminary injunction (the RIAA tried to use the AHRA and the absence of a "serial copy management system" to interfere in the marketplace) and introduced the first commercially successful portable MP3 player.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
That might explain why ogg files are so much thinner than MP3 files. They get more exercise.
Welcome to the hall of corporate shame Mr Thomson and Mr Fraunhofer! Help yourself to the complimentary Crystal Pepsi and New Coke. In a few minutes, a waiter will swing by of a Segway with some Doritos 3D's and we'll start off the welcoming ceremony by awarding you metals made from recycled metric highway signs from the 70s. and top it off with a back to back showing of Gigli, Kangaroo Jack, and Glitter.
It assists content providers in exercising their freedom to control the distribution of their (their?) copyrighted works. If they want to sell a product of significantly reduced value at full retail price, they're free to go ahead and try, and see if they can trick, err, convince anyone to purchase their now worthless offering. There's no law saying a business can't close its doors to potential customers. It hurts both the business and the consumer but they're well within their rights.
And you can't really put much blame on the developers of the DRM software either. They're just meeting demands for increased support for copyright protection. It's still up to authors and content providers to use it.
So lets blame the lawyers!
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.
They want to double click an installer and have their OS Ogg enabled.
They have one:
Winamp 2.91 plays Ogg Vorbis, among others
If they're using Windows Media Player to play their music, they deserve to have the DRM chain yanked, hard.
People switching to WMA or AAC with iTunes instead of sticking with an older MP3 encoder as has been suggested here would be dumb as hell. WMA and AAC both have DRM installed, and enabled by default (iirc from my unhappy times trying to convert my WMA crap to Ogg goodness, but I don't know about AAC's default)
DivX is commercial software, and can thus afford to hire a webmaster who can be allowed to wake up stupid one day. Xiph's webmaster is probably one of their core coders.
DivX is also supported by winamp 2.91, without any plug-ins other than what comes with it. In addition, I'd definitely say that the AVI format was originated by someone other than DivX, given that according to Wikipedia, the AVI format is defined (thus was originated) by Microsoft. So DivX becomes an extension on a Microslut format that can be played by extensions to Microslut World Domination Take-over Software (aka WMP), thus making DivX itself only playable by third-party software. (Am I correct here in saying that having another party other than the DivX team and the end user-- in this case, WMP-- makes DivX third-party software?)
I'll give you that installing DirectShow filters is rather beyond certain users-- my mom included-- and that getting a standardized installer for the poor souls who have to use WMP would be a tremendous idea. But having users switch to WMA or AAC just makes for another inevitable format war; Ogg works on nearly every platform ever, with the possible exceptions of the Atari and the Amiga 500.* AAC works only on iTunes or very very compatible players; WMA works on Windows and WMP for Mac.
On another note, has Fraunhofer shown any interest (positive or negative) towards Linux and the OSS community? If they have, could this be an attempt to squeeze Linux out of the market for multimedia and thereby desktop systems? And is it possible (conspiracy theory) that Microslut could have funded them and/or be providing coders for this heinous act? (/conspiracy theory)
(*) For those who didn't catch it, this is a flat-out JOKE.
This is not the sig you're looking for.
" They will work just fine until the mp3 format license requires the DRM add-on"
Sure. And all those millions and millions of MP3 players out there already will stop working.
They tried this before with the SuperMP3 or whatever they called it. Sank without a trace. Made the titanic look like a "good idea".
Sorry, Fraunhaufer, the genie is out of the bottle on MP3. There are "free" implementations, and 10's of millions of licensed players out there already.
If I'm going to go licensed, might as well use a codec like AAC.
Some predictions:
(1) The P2P community will reject the use of the ".MP3" suffix on the new DRM-crippled files. ".MP3" will continue to mean the full-featured format, and something else will be adopted (by informal consensus) to label the crippled files. Expect a new generation of P2P clients that will do this suffix-renaming automatically.
(2) The owners of the MP3 format will want to (eventually) start forbidding the playback of non-crippled MP3 files. (Without this, there's no way that the DRM-crippled version will catch on.) This will result in:
(a) a huge demand for black-market "original" MP3 software (codecs, players, etc.), and,
(b) Microsoft will fight hard to make sure that MediaPlayer doesn't end up rendered useless by new MP3 licensing that forbids playback of non-crippled MP3 files. This fight could get very nasty.
If you write your own song, record it, and distribute it, then you owe a royalty to the songwriter('s publisher) whose song you subconsciously copied
WTF? Is this supposed to mean that no one can create anything new anymore, because it has "all been done before" ?
I know a large number of independant musicians and artists who would now like to beat your ass.
Maybe if you would get your ears out of the Top 40 drivel, you'd realize there's still a lot of original content being created daily.
MP3 does have that little propritary problem doesn't it.
I find that ogg files suit me just fine thank you. I have ripped all of my CDs to ogg format and put them on my server so that I can listen to them from any room in my house with a computer. And since I'm a geek that means most of them!
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Come on MS would never do that....
They would just convert it to a wma with DRM.
See sig.
Introducing the new Occam Fusion! Now with sqrt(-1) fewer blades!
That, or download the inevitible cracked player off of suprnova that removes the DRM tags.
There is no way these people can win. But if they want to keep trying, let them - the more they spend on futile copy protection, the less money to sue us with ;)
There's no point during which they're copyrighted between fixation and publication which are distinct events though sometimes simultaneous.
It's true that unpublished works of the US government aren't subject to Title 17, but they're still potentially subject to 18 USC 798 until they're officially published, and some of the Defense FOIA regulations seem to translate "public domain" as "unclassified" rather than "uncopyrighted." I can easily imagine use of digital restrictions management systems to restrict access to works to promote national security rather than "the progress of science and useful arts."
Any incompatibility this DRM upgrade introduces to MP3 is an opportunity to switch to a better codec. Unencumbered by DRM, patents, religious wars, brand stigma, merely adequate compression ratios and audio quality. If the alternate codecs/ players community is ready for the opportunity, this will be the best thing to happen to music playing since, well, MP3.
--
make install -not war
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.
of Beavis and Butthead:
"The more things change, the more they suck!"
-- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
New advertising campaign:
With a name like "Ogg Vorbis", it's got to be good...
A marriage is always made up of two people who are prepared to swear that only the other one snores.
Yes, but if you're a defendant, how will you afford to prove that you have never, even once, heard a particular song on the radio in all the years you have been alive? Unlike with computer programs, where it's easy to avoid reading somebody else's source code, it's almost impossible in the United States to avoid hearing songs on the radio.
For developers it's not having to pay thousands in licensing costs. That's an easy sell. There's no reason for a developer to say "no" to Ogg. I have a plug and play DSound 8 class that plays Ogg. It's available at IcarusIndie.com
But, until MP3 becomes annoying Joe User isn't going to care. There's really no way that companies are going to make it cost effective for the user to choose a more open format.
What companies fail to realize (or think the DMCA protects them) is that if you can see or listen to it, you can rip it to any format you want. And unless you're silly and start flaunting your rips for the whole world to see, there's nothing they can do about it. Who's to say that sound blasting from your stereo is comming from an "unauthorized" rip?
I say let them do their thing. The sooner they get going DRMing everything to death the sooner they go out of business under the weight of their own stupidity.
They should just stick to frying the big fish and not worry about how many fish are in the sea. If Joe User can rip a CD, oh well.
Ben
Work Safe Porn
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 cheap bastard.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
Maybe now people will which to an alternative format like Ogg.
Can they really change the source of cp, cat, more and every other program out there that reads files to check for drm?
/home/otheruser/ /home/otheruser/cool_muzak.mp3
bash$ cp cool_muzak.mp3
cp: DRM Error: The RIAA is out to get you.
cp: DRM Error: Your IP has been sent to the RIAA.
bash$ cat cool_muzak.mp3 >
cat: DRM Error: They is still out to get you. Mua ha ha.
cat: DRM Error: Big brother is watching...
It seems impossible to make every player and old install file support the DRM in the new and improved DRMed files
Well at any rate, I'm going off to install debian stable. I'll be safe from this new technology for a few more years.
Captain: What happen?
Mechanic: Someone set up us the update
Operator: We get DRM signal
Captain: What!
Operator: WMP turn on.
Captain: It's you!!
RIAA: How are you gentlemen!!
RIAA: All your MP3 are belong to us
The problem with all the schemes is that, at some point, you have to unencrypt the data. This means that you have two big points of succeptability:
1) The location of decryption. All someone needs to do is modify the device to get at the data. I mean lets say you invent a scheme where the data is encrypted the whole time until it hits the audio card. Not decrypted and re-encrypted, but simlpy kept encrypted until the soundcard. That then decrypts it. Well what happens when the data is decrupted? It gets fed to a little chip made by Texas Instruments or Sigmatel or someone like that. That is the digital-analogue converter. So you just go and tap the signal right there, which will no longer be encrypted and you're good to go.
2) The far easier method: The key. Encryption is inherantly a technology if trusted parties. You give the key to the people you wish to be able to decipher your message. Doing that, you lock everyone else out from being able to read it. The problem with DRM is that you are trying to lock EVERYONE out, including the person you give the message to. That doesn't work, you HAVE to give them the key in some form or another at some time or another. If you do that, they can find it, and make use of it to decrypt the data themselves. This is the problem with things like game copy protection. They release some new version of SafeDisc with 2048-bit, uber-secure, penis-enhancing encryption to keep the evil haxors out.... Which the key to resides on the disc. So, you debug the program, find where it gets the key, grab it yourself, decode the data, write it to disc and call it a day.
However for things like audio, it is generally just easier to say fuck it to digital and capture it analogue and re-encode it. It's real easy to get soundcards that exceed the CD spec for a reasonable price, never mind the quality of compressed audio. Just re-record it and go. Sure you loose a tiny bit of quality, but if done right no one but people with good ears and high end gear will be able to tell (who won't put up with compressed music in the first place).
Of course, once something is available unencrypted it can be quickly distributed.
Companies pretty much just need to knock it the fuck off. People WILL violate copyright, it's just life. Been happening forever. Now I don't object to some non invasive controls to make it more than just pressing copy to keep honest people honest, but it just gets stupid. No matter what you do, you won't lock out the hard core people, and you'll just piss off the legitimate users.
Game copyprotection has gotten really bad. Time was you were better off having a warez version of Neverwinter Nights. The new Securerom copyprotection was so screwed it wouldn't work on a ton of CD-ROMs with perfectly legit discs. It actually was punishing legit users, whiile doing nothing to stop the game from being copied by those that wanted to.
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."
At least, not as copyright law was orignally written and not as the constitution intends it to be.
The part of the constitution that allows copyright and patent laws to be created is Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 8 which reads: "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;"
Now as orignally written and enforced, they did just that. You'd make a creative work and get a copyright for 14 years, which you could extend once. During that time nobody could go and copy the work without your permission. This allowed you to profit from it. Remember, the U.S. is a highly capatalistic country so profit motive is important. Then, after your copyright expired, your work became the property of the people.
28 years was a good long time to profit, I mean that's over a quarter of even a long life. However it ensured that your work would fall into the public domain in a reaonable amount of time. You couldn't horde control over it forever, just for awhile. The idea being, of course, that it would encourage people to create, since there was an ecenomic incentive.
Also, your control wasn't absolute. You just got to control who was allowed to make copies. You couldn't control everything. People could resell copies they had legitimately purchased. Copies of portions could be made for education. People (or libraries) could loan a copy to a friend, then take it back later, and so on. This is what is collectively refered to as Fair Use.
There was not a problem with this system. It gave profit motive, which is important in a capatalism, for creative works and saw to it that society reaped the benefit.
The problem is with how copyright laws have changed. First there is the problem of extension. It is getting to the point of stupid how long a copyright lasts. Right now it's the lifetime of the author plus 50 years. Are you kidding me? How the hell does the +50 years have to do with profit motive for the author, not to mention that it flies in the face of the "limited times" clause.
Then there is this concept that you don't actually own the rights to do anything with the copy you buy. You can't use it in ways the author doesn't like, you can't trade it, sell it, etc. Well the law hasn't actually changed to say that, they just passed a new law, that says those things can be forced on you technologically and there's jack you can do about it. This of course clearly flies in the face of the "To promote the progress of" clause.
THAT'S the problem. Copyright is a good, and necessary, idea for a capatalistic country. It might intrest you to know that copyright is the reason the GPL can exist and be legally enforcable. With no copyright, the GPL would be worthless.
What's bad is that copyright is being twisted to add levels of control that are not intended or allowed by the constitution.
And I do mean the obvious double entendre. Let's just keep using the old non-DRM format. It that means no MS, then OK.
.exe or .gzip files I will mail us.
If anyone needs a copy of non-DRM-forced Media Player or iTunes or VLC, I have
I do not believe that a company can legally force you to modify your information if you decide not to use their software. So what if I can't use Longhorn.
Besides, in the time it will take to actually release it, someone will crack the DRM (can you say CSS).
Why won't the RIAA spend its money giving us value instead of crappy music. I buy music I want to listen to. I just like to manage my music in MP3 format. blah blah blah
Developing Retail Point-of-Sale Software
As opposed to MP3, which is the best fucking name of all time? The name of the format is Vorbis. It is much easier to pronounce than MP3 and for anyone being even remotely literate, it sounds instantly familiar. I am sick of those trolls in every story about Vorbis, Ogg, Theora, Tarkin, or anything made by the Xiphophorus Helleri Foundation in general.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
Free food is a matter of the users' freedom to eat, consume, chow, gobble, slurp and devour the food. More precisely, it refers to four kinds of freedom, for the consumers of the food:
* The freedom to eat the food, for any purpose (freedom 0).
* The freedom to study how the food works, and adapt it to your needs (freedom 1). Access to the ingredients are a precondition for this.
* The freedom to distribute the food so you can feed your neighbor (freedom 2).
* The freedom to improve the food, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole dinner party benefits (freedom 3). Access to the recipe is a precondition for this.
If you're religishitty, KILL YOURSELF!
GIF is in the public domain now...
When thou MP3?
Being a lazy ass, and not about to look it up.
My point, I guess, is basically a quote from a Great Russian, General Zukoff IIRC(sp?) and I will badly paraphrase it I'm sure, as the beer is good:
(Trying to provide attribution, please excuse)
"The enemy of better is good enough."
The current format works well.
Everyone and their dog has MP3s, and the dog probably has a device that can play them.
Anything that kills compatibility and the ability to move files, or god forbid, SHARE files, will sell like dog shit on a bun.
Owners of Everything Decide to Indenture the Rest of Us for Life
Ungrateful sods and copyright pirates to be imprisoned, executed. "You're lucky to have those jobs we provide you with," says spokesperson for owners of everything.
These guys must be smoking something...
The thing about illegal MP3 distribution is that the vast majority of the material originates from MP3 "groups".
And guess what: the people in these groups are smart enough to use LAME rather than some DRM-restricted garbage.
I wish these companies luck. They are going to need it, given the fact that most users can barely get their MP3 player working, let alone set it up to rip music.
Just be aware that the script have hard times dealing with special characters. If you've got MP3s originating from a Windows user the characters ` and ' are probably mixed up, so you'll have to fix that before converting.
You are ogg | s/gg/dd/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
Ok. I'm no oracle, but this is what i see. In this order:
These files are secured for you.
In the name of your security, the secure files must be authorized before playback.
Security is implied, yet for a while. Un-authorized music is considered suspicious and mostly illegal.
Poeple allowed to release music. Everything none-authorized is pirate-music, very much like pirate-radio. The RIAA has full control.
People showing this system little respect are simply banned from using it, and thus has no access to audio medias. "No music for you!", the ironhand to keep control.
That might be a bit extreme, but I find the current climate so extreme I wouldn't believe this was possible 7-8 years ago. So who's to tell what's next?
So please tell me I have a tinfoil hat on my head, I just didn't notice, because I'd like this not to be true.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
A little nitpick: VCDs use MPEG-1, for video and audio. The audio is encoded in MPEG-1 Layer 2 (whereas MP3s are MPEG-1 Layer 3) at a fairly high bitrate, 224kbps if my memory serves me correctly.
Now, the AAC codec used in DVDs is a much higher bitrate than what you'd purchase at iTMS. 448kbps at 48000 KHz vs. 128kbps at 44100 KHz. Naturally, the DVD will have surround sound channels, but since most of the bandwidth will still be devoted to stereo, it's not really fair to compare the AAC that everyone will actually hear when it comes to music to that used by DVDs. In practice, at "normal" bitrates (between 128 and 256 kpbs), MP3 and Ogg Vorbis almost always sound better.
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.
An MP3 with DRM is just another incompatible file format. If my current MP3 players and my current DVD/CD/MP3 player stero system won't play it, it ain't MP3.
Mark Twain: "If you call a dog's tail a leg also, how many legs does a dog have?"
"5?"
"No, 4. Just calling a tail a leg doesn't make it one."