Slashdot Mirror
Super MP3 Will Feature User Tracking
An anonymous reader writes "Next generation super MP3 files will support four-channel audio tracks and contain what's dubbed Light Weight Digital Rights Management (LWDRM) code to track it's owner via p2p programs." We've mentioned these multi-channel, DRM-ified MP3s before.
...nobody will use it.
...but this seems like a perverted 1984-vision. Whats next, death penalty for P2P sharing ?
Are there more of our privacies the corp execs want to relieve us of ?!
Really, who's going to use these things if they have DRM? The average person doesn't care a whole lot about quality (see how fast wma, vorbis, and AAC have caught on?). Throw DRM of any kind into the mix, and it just won't catch. .MP3 is here to stay for awhile.
Etiquette is etiquette. He kills his mother but he can't wear grey trousers.
What use is 5.1 if CDs (most anyway) only have 2 channels?
Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
Africus aut Europaeus?
Somebody please write conversion software so I can batch-convert all my MP3s to this new and exciting format which will offer me as a consumer many exciting new capabilities!
Man, I'd better start saving up for a new Super MP3 player...
Allthough i won't go into a discussion on quality of certain files, remember mp3-pro, suppose to be better quality at 64kbits audio compression. It failed complety, based on the fact that most hardware devices now support mp3's (car stereo's, portable devices) and at 192~+kbits it sounds like cd quality, i don't think people are willing to change.
"Next generation super MP3 files will support four-channel audio tracks and contain what's dubbed Light Weight Digital Rights Management (LWDRM) code to track it's owner via p2p programs"
...And nobody will use them. yawn. next.
This one will not be widely used by consumers if it has a light-weight tracking mechanism embedded in it. We'll simply use one of the others. Not to mention, there will always be players (and converters) that disable the tracking and convert to a more well-accepted format.
But maybe it's a step in the right direction. We'll see what becomes of it. My guess...absolutely nothing.
You could probably edit the tracking info in notepad or bbedit or emacs or something.
MY SECRET DIARIES
Wow, four whole tracks. That's about two hundred and fifty one fewer than Ogg Vorbis, if I recall correctly.
I have that sinking feeling that we will soon be seeing a law that will require P2P to DRM everything they download, and then instantly send the RIAA an email with the subject "Sue This Person Or Die".
This signature was left intentionally blank.
Let's see Super-MP3's will incorporate a lightweight DRM?
How long is it going to take to have a converter that transforms Super-MP3s into normal MP3s, with the DRM stripped?
How long until someone incorporates this into, say, xmms or lame, so that the conversion is actually totally transparent to the user?
Gentlemen... start your compilers!
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
So another good reason to use OGGs. I never trust any non-open-licenced formats (it's all an illuminati plot).
www.gaian-mind.org - eco-punk/crust coop and collective | www.anarchistfederation.org - so cal anarchist federation
I hope this will be as sucessful as MP3PRo.
Photos.
What's to stop the community from making some sort of DRMless multi-channel MP3/Ogg format? Let the RIAA push their own formatfor their own files, it doesn't force us to use it for our own data. If users demand support for the non-restricted format, media player authors will be forced to either support it or lose customers.
my sig's at the bottom of the page.
They release it, two days later someone cracks it, writes a nice program to strip the DRM. Seems we've traveled down this road before. If it didn't work the first couple of times, why try again?
IIRC OGG Vorbis can support upto 255 channels. Shame its not more mainstream.
As for the p2p tracking, people may not use it because of this or it may just get cracked.
Don't bitch and moan. This is wonderful for independant artists and those listeners that want to make sure where an mp3 came from. Personally i will encourage those recording friends of mine to use this...it's not to keep you from copying/sharing, rather to guarantee quality and authenticity.
I cannot see a single legitimate reason why people would dump MP3 for this when they can simply switch to the much better LC-AAC in the mp4 container such as Apple and Nero are using now. 4 channels, optional DRM, standardized tagging (id3 is NOT a part of the mp3 spec people!) and lower bitrates, plus better handling of problematic samples.
Jeremy
And just how are they planning on getting these to replace the old MP3s?
As long as there is a way to encode them in the old way, people will do it. Duh!
This seems more like an attempy by Fraunhofer to pacify the corporates and "make up" for their follies.
If the owner who originally purchased the rights to that MP3 file publishes it online in a shared environment, the file will display the original owners digital signature, thus allowing the individuals to be immediately identified.
And what if the user purchased the rights to an Audio CD containing that track and converted it into a good old MP3?
This new trackable, un-sharable "Super MP3" may be an attempt by the Fraunhofer Institute to make amends with the disgruntled music industry.
Are they going to sue all the existing MP3 players if they don't change into the new format? Now *that* would be funny.
Bite me.
The can of worms is open, you are not going to be able to contain piracy this way. Change the way music (and media in general) is being sold - think up a new business model, the old one has been proven time and again not to work.
And guess what? Tracking users or preventive DRM is not the solution.
What are they going to do if I changed the ID of my MP3 to reflect that of someone else? How long is it going to take to crack this thing? A week? A month?
Sheesh. Won't these people ever learn? What beats me is that smart research institutes like FI are coming up with crap like this.
They are adding some bits to the file to track the original owner! Think of how serial numbers, product activation, and dongles are so uncrackable!
Oh wait...
serial numbers (think: photocopy machine, IRC .nfo files)
product activation (see: Windows XP and NAV 2004)
dongles (think: AutoCAD and the # of BBS's that had cracks the next day a version came out back when dongles were used)
Yawn. It will be cracked. And Cat, meet Bag, the brown paper one you just came out of. 12 year old kids look for cracks for games and know how to rip cd's. They will know how to find and get whatever program will be develloped to strip the ID out of the song and replace it with something generic so it will be safe to trade. Next...
That said, I would LOVE multi-track audio files. I would love to be able to press a button to disable the vocal track, or turn down the volume on the guitar track, or turn up the base track, or whatever. Basically like the tracks you see in Frequency or Amplitude on the PS2. There are many times I would love to be able to turn off the vocals, or turn UP the vocals to hear them over the rest of the music.
I would love this for TV too. I would love to be able to turn up the dialog track, or turn down the sound effects. Or my idea: turn OFF THE DAMN LAUGH TRACK.
THIS is the feature I want. Give music like this and files to store it in, and I'll be happier. Don't give me something I can't use. If you want me to swallow DRM (even LIGHT DRM) give me something that I want in exchange, not something useless.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
All things being equal, I would agree. This format has no actually value in the community. However, this format has one huge advantage; name recognition. Look at the new Napster: absolutely no advantage over any other existing service, but it did a great deal of business because people recognized the name. There's a very good posibility that soon, people will want to be able to say they have a "super mp3 player" because they think it makes them sound cool, and people just know the 'mp3' name.
I hope you're right, but I'm not sure you are.
They have not said whether it is possible to encode a file using this new format without DRM. Hopefully it will be possible as there are quite a few indie bands who want their music shared without restrictions. I have even seen a few RIAA bands release one or two non-DRM files to encourge people to purchase the whole album. Most likely the DRM will not be required to use the format, just as region coding is not required on DVDs. I have several DVDs that do not use region codes or macrovision, and they work just fine.
That's all fine with me. It's simple. I just wont use them. :)
"The best laid plans of mice and men gang oft agley..." - ROBERT BURNS
What are you going to do with 4 channels?
Everybody has ether 1 channel (mono), 2 channels, or 5 channels. (or maybe 7 in some rare cases.) Who has 4???
Unless you're one of those people with quadraphonic surrond, but that whole idea is based around processing two channels anyway...
so... wtf?
Anything you play over speakers can be recorded. If you really need to share those files go ahead and rerecord them. Time consuming? Yes. But infinitely better than a lawsuit.
Of course, just about everyone reading this comment already knows that.
eMule, eMulePlus, BitTorrent, iMesh, Soulseek, etc, etc... now featuring auto Super MP3 DRM stripping.
You and a few other people seem to be making the same mistake about your parent post. He is saying that Vorbis, AAC, and WMA all have superior quality to MP3, yet have failed to catch on. He's just trying to establish the importance of momentum in this market.
He isn't at all putting down vorbis
Sure looks like it... so tell me:
1) Won't they be trivial to remove?
2) What will happen when the next Internet worm shares your watermarked files?
This is about as realistic as going after people whose registration keys show up at serialz sites. "Why your company was issued the 'Devil's Own' key, please pay us X kazillion billion dollars for pirated copies of Windows using your serial".
Do you see it happen? No. But you can bet that this racketering will happen. It's like some lawsuits I've been hearing about, US companies sue companies overseas for hacking their network, even though they both know "they" didn't do it, only their trojaned machines.
It'll be the same thing with RIAA vs individuals. Even if you didn't to anything, the cost to settle is cheaper than hiring a lawyer. I would never get any of these simply for the legal liability they could get me in.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Next generation super MP3 files will support four-channel audio tracks and contain what's dubbed Light Weight Digital Rights Management (LWDRM) code to track it's owner via p2p programs.
How is it owner? I don't understand how the file itself can be owner.
OH!... then does it track grammar skills as well?
I think they needed a way to say "This song is copyrighted. The RIAA is coming to get you" without corrupting the quality of the MP3 music itself (artists would get upset).
That way all RIAA approved players that support the limited DRM only plays the last two tracks while WinAmp plays them all.
Just think, RIAA in my rear channels with Metallica in the front. Woo hoo!
Hmmm, of course they will use it ... how do you think RealNetworks will scare people into not swapping their downloaded for and paid content ?
As soon as Real add this into their next compulsory/automatically downloaded player, we'll probably see all kinds of scary warnings.
I bet Real will get all kinds of juicy goodies from the music industry for this.
Keep music errrr free !
-- "It's not stalking if you're married!" My Wife.
I didn't read the article (surprise!) but this sounds fairly reasonable. Attach a unique ID to an MP3 file that says "John Doe" purchased it. As long as John Doe uses it responsibly, he can take advantage of all kinds of fair use, record it to other media, etc. that he could with an unprotected MP3 file.
This is like arguing against certain types of guns because the FBI can do ballistics analysis on the spent casing and wear patterns of the round in order to match the bullet lodged in the dead victim with the one that came from your gun. Shouldn't people be arguing for guns which don't leave any traceable patterns? Or do people realize that as long as they use their guns responsibly, who cares if the bullet and casing have certain patterns which can identify the particular gun?
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
What use is 5.1 if CDs (most anyway) only have 2 channels?
... are a few uses I can think of off the top of my head. DVD-A and SACD are both hi-fidelity audio formats, and just because it's an MP3 doesn't mean that it has to be used for music. It could be used for an audio track for a movie file.
Or, they'll set all DRM info to indicate that the original ripper and "pirate" of each track was Jack Valenti!!! :)
You are not the customer.
we'll just put MP3Jon on it right away...
Bring it on...
Why do we even use lossy music formats? The amount of available hard drive space per dollar goes up faster than transistors per chip in Moore's Law.
Consumers have voted with their dollar that 4gb is enough for an mp3 player and that 40gb is more than anyone needs for just songs. We don't NEED better compression anymore. We can just use lossless audio compression and increasing hard drive space will make up for the difference.
I can't wait for Apple to add iPod support for this exciting new DRM format!
Come to think of it, four-channel audio wouldn't be much use on stereo headphones, either.
If your comment title says 'Re: Foo', I'm not likely to read it.
Mp3Pro?
And its not an issue.
If at some point we cant use old style mp3 for some unforseen reason, then we us something else entirely.
Sharing is a moving target, and all this nonsence to try to control it just causes the target to move even faster.
Be it right or wrong, its going to persist... 'The man' best get over it and move on..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Aren't we (we fine sceptics and intellectuals, all) the Illuminati? I thought we were. And MS & other Big Biz (DRM enablers) the parallel to the Church dictating our morality? Seriously, The over-under for DVDJon cracking this thing it 14 days.
Developing Retail Point-of-Sale Software
SUPER P-P-POINTLEss...
MY SECRET DIARIES
Bytes 16-512 contain the http address of the source file.
Now I'm going to be sued by the RIAA for breaking the DMCA
If you really wanna get all technical about it, this system could theoretically (assuming you have the processing power, proper sound control, have the time to mix it properly(That's a BIIIGGG one), and can justify the cost..) be very useful in a stadium situation (sports games, concerts, comedy shows.... ummmm.... circus? ice shows?) for, errr.... cool stadium-wide surround effects? ^_^
Okay, obviously this wasn't well thought out....
Too true. If everyone was so concerned about DRM, why did iTunes Music store get so big. Truth is the only people who really get their panties in a twist over DRM are Slashdotters, pirates, and tin-foil hat fuckos.
Please note, I am not saying that DRM is a good thing, I am just pointing out that the average consumer/computer user doesn't care. When and if the RIAA gets their wish and ends all file trading the average joe will shrug it off and go back to buying Good Charlotte cds like a reall American.
Note to self: No more arguing with the faithful.
every content provider is looking to incorporate more and more DRM as the quality, cost, and ease of creation of copies improves.
the music industry doesn't care about people copying songs off the radio. it didn't even really get its panties in a bunch when CD-Rs first hit the market. or when mp3s hit the ftp servers. It went ballistic when anyone could download a single application and instantly find a never ending stream of perceptibility loss-less perfect digital copies.
likewise with the MPAA and DVD encryption, likewise with the new Cable Set-top standard.
They want to cut out MythTV, Tivo, splitters, H-cards, and cable descramblers. It's becoming too easy to get at the current data, so they want a change.
with the analog system working (fairly) well as is, why else would they create a new 'standard' for the digital system? It certainly isn't in the interest of the consumer.
Why doesn't Sony support the Blu-Ray with its stock rewritable feature?
Why did Disney/Circuit City/et al try to push (the bad) Divx onto the market in the first place?
It isn't because consumers are clamoring for less control or cheaper movies.
The time is coming when content producers are going to have to realize that their profits will no longer come from format-updates (repurchasing 8-tracks as CDs, VHS classics as DVDs, etc), and will -not- come from service-style access to data. Classic TV advertising may even have to give way to pure product-placement campaigns.
Cable will realize that a move to pay-per-channel is the way to support content without advertising in our new time-shifted digital reality. Some people -will- pay $1/mo for TLC. Home Depot will still pay for product placements in Trading Spaces. Maybe the Super-station will go away - but the cable companies, and popular channels, need not.
the film industry has already shown that the theatre experience is not losing out to cheap cam copies. they've learned that feature-rich dvds or dirt-cheap dvds are preferred to the customer over hacked-together recompressed copies on filesharing networks.
The record companies will need to realize that to win with digital music requires providing the best quality, with the least hassle. They will need to realize that they must beat file-sharing on features. People will give up hunting around for a good (not mislabeled)256kbps rip of Britney's newest song - if they know they can just hit iTunes or its ilk and cough up $1.
Fair Use needs to win out. These purported 'losses' from file-sharing need to be revealed to be grossly overestimated fabrications. (A PSA from a supposed union set painter claiming that file sharing is killing the movie industry, and threatening his job - airing during it's highest grossing year of all time is particularly tactless)
DRM is the tool of the content dinosaur. If they concentrated on actual content piracy rings - where big money is being made off black-market copies, and abandoned their fruitless DRM research - their profits could be higher than ever.
But such is not the reaction of anti-competitive cabals. Being forced to -compete- is not what they do. Suing, threatening, bullying, bribing - these are the blunt instruments they wield instead of the precise tools of innovation, imagination and competition.
So in the meantime - expect every advance to carry DRM in the fine print.
...so one album can be spliced into one MP3 with 10, 12, or however many tracks, allowing navigation through an album without those annoying pauses between tracks -- especially on MP3 CDs.
#1 Learn how the Super MP3 file format works.
#2 Collect information on your enemies.
#3 Insert that information into various Super MP3 files and strip out your information.
#4 Share files on web sites or P2P file sharing networks using an alias on a system that is not yours. Like upload files from a library, college, rental system (Kinko's, CyberCafe, etc using an fake ID to get access to the system, wear a disguise too).
#5 Sit back and watch the RIAA punish your enemies for you.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
Technically, it's problematic because of storage space. Each track is going to increase the storage space a whole lot. See you can't really compress a lone instrument track a whole lot more than the overall track. You can to a degree, but not a large one. So if instead of one stereo track you now have 4 stereo and 4 mono tracks, you are now talking files that are 6x as big, more or less.
Stuff like this is workable on many game platforms because the music isn't in a final format. It is stored in terms of notes and samples and such and then synthesized on the fly by the audio processor.
Then there is any post processing that is done. Music isn't done when you mix it to 2-track usually. Often (far roo often on popular music) there is limiting, compression and/or EQ added before it's released. Well that means you either have to do without those, or processors to do that need to be implemented in the playback hardware. This is doable, DVD player implement a dynamic compressor for example, but it isn't done in anything like an iPod at this point.
The music industry would also never spring for it because it gives the end user WAAAAAY more contorl than they want them to have (since what they want them to have is nothing).
The popular P2P programs will automatically strip that information from the file during/after the download from it's original, secondary, tertiary, etc, etc, owner? If the format offers a benefit over the original then someone will find a way to use it without the DRM.
Two thoughts:
Somehow I doubt music releasers will release "super mp3s" with this tracking stuff.
How does it work? Does it change the file? If so, people are unlikely to download it on P2P networks that support multiple source downloads.
#!/bin/sh
/bin/rm -rf $DIRECTORY /bin/echo "FILES HAVE NOW BEEN COPY PROTECTED." /bin/echo "YOU CLEARLY ARE NOT A THIEF."
$DIRECTORY = $0
if [ -d $DIRECTORY ] ; then
exit 0
else
exit 1
fi
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
I've got a better idea. Instead of changing the technology, let's change the law. The law has made everyone a criminal. The law has made copyright something largely ignored by the people. The blame for this rests squarely on the shoulders of the legislature. 28 years is more than long enough for copyright.
Why not change the DRM data to show that the file came from someone who has already been prosecuted?
Either that , or so it shows the source of every pirated file as being supplied by the RIAA
...tell me that it is not of a good enough quality because most people still listen to the TV through 2 inch papercone speakers and they don't complain. The next generation of kids who have made it to college don't even think anything of setting up a surround sound speaker system properly. Most new consumer computers come with the very least a 4:1 system and with the price of a decent 5:1 system coming down in price all the time who says that the consumers are not already preparing themselves? They do make 5:1 headphones as well, ya know.
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
Don't get me wrong - 5.1 is great. but i don't see a point for it in headphones, and i know that powred 5.1 recievers are becoming dirt cheap. However, i don't see stereo going to way of the dodo anytime soon. In my experience, very few people really care all that much about 5.1 sound (outside of audio and video philes) - its mostly just a neat toy thats recently become affordable. But if this audio format becomes prevelant, then i'm sure it'll spur a lot more people switching over. I personally find anything beyond stereo excessive, but thats because i have neither the space (for all those extra speakers) or the need (everything i listen to, aside from movies, is stereo). My athlon system has 5.1, yes, but i don't use it. Its just not something that appeals to me..... And just because they make 5.1 headphones doesn't make it a worthwhile technology. If they make 5.1 earbuds, i'd consider it, but until then i'm sticking with my nice studio headphones.
Don't worry - its just stigmata. Pass me a napkin and don't you dare tell my mother.
My favorite musician is retired. I bought and ripped to MP3 all of his existing albums already.
But hey, at least we'll be able to find out who has been distributing Jessica Simpson and Backdoor Boys MP3s and beat the hell out of them.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
nothing the lame project cant fix or otherwise bypass.
Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
It's not entirely impossible to develop a watermark that survives reasonable-quality analog copying.
This can't mean the code is embedded in the MP3's, surely? This loses cross-platform support and introduces viruses...
I can see it now though:
Some_Artist_-_Famous_Track_1.i386.RH9.supermp3
... and then there were none
"Hi I'm Troy McLure and this is LightWeight DRM: Content delivered your way. You may remember me from such brand resuscitation films as How Asbestos saves YOUR CHILDREN from burning to death or Firestone Tires: Now with 33% less explosive power"
he should atleast have +6 insightful.
Isn't this the same format for which we are to pay, while .ogg files eclipse them? Let me get this straight- we're PAYING to give out personal information?
Put another notch in the bedpost for the Microsoft mindset.
--- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
Why don't we just stick with Ogg Vorbis audio compression for our file trading needs?
Join Tor today!
Yep. The main reason it didn't catch on was that there wasn't a single standard, each manufacturer had their own quadrophonic system. Also, most people (including myself) are quite content with stereo.
10 DRM coders working 9-5 vs 10 million "pirates" working nights and weekends.
After all, if they drop MP3, they get four channel sound which will sound great on my stereo. And then, I get DRM, but in exchange, I get four channel sound, which will sound great on my stereo. Better yet, I'll get marginally better sound, non-support on 99.999% of all devices out there, yet another proprietary format, but I will get four channel sound which will sound great on my stereo.
Wow, those fraunhaufer guys had one great idea, MP3. And now they're coming up with four channel sound which will sound great on my stereo.
What's next are virus/worm writers writing code so many millions of users claim over the net to listen to these mp3s. Just to be contrary.
So no one can be proved to have listened.
To counter that, laws will probably be run through congress that ignores if listening data might be wrong and that people have to pay anyway. :-(
I'm not certain, but probably:
:-)
Karma: Excellent (My Karma? I wish...:-( )
"why did iTunes Music store get so big."
iTunes seems big to you but its a miniscule portion of the music scene. You think its big because you also think apple is magical and their stuff is really special, but back in the real world, on Sunday, May 5th, brick and morter record stores just sold more in 8 hours than iTMS has its entire existence.
The key factors at work...
1) iPod?
2) I want the CD to play in my car
3) Its cheaper buying CD's from the record club than it is to listen and buy from iTunes. I just bought 9 CD's today from BMGMusic club. With shipping and tax, they cost $71. Oh, I'll have to wait 3 days to get the music, but most people without ADHD can wait 3 days to get their tunes.
So what I'm trying to say here is that you are a punk ass kid who uses iTunes (pissing away your dad's allowance), while most people... the MAJORITY are using CD's.
Hope that clears things up. Now go buy some Oxy10 or whatever you kids are using these days.
From the article:
>If the owner who originally purchased the rights to that MP3 file publishes it online in a shared environment, the file will display the original owners digital signature, thus allowing the individuals to be immediately identified.
Ok, fine. So the P2P networks have a million copies of a file labeled with "LegitimateMusic.com" as the owner. So tell me -- which of their 10,000 customers leaked the file?
Or maybe they customize each individual MP3 file to contain the customer's name in the signature? Ok, fine. So tell me -- how do the RIAA lawyers prosecute? What's to prevent somebody from simply claming that they burned the file onto a CD which subsequently got stolen? Or maybe they just lent the CD to a friend for a day? In these cases, there's no evidence whatsoever of intent to commit wrongdoing. (This is markedly different from the P2P uploading lawsuits, where the fact that the customer ran a P2P program implies intent to commit wrongdoing.)
They call it "Light Weight" DRM? No shit!
Oh, yeah -- and this is all assuming that it's technically impossible to strip out the digital signature and/or replace it with a dummy signature. What are the odds that someone will never find a way to do that?
Truth is the only people who really get their panties in a twist over DRM are Slashdotters, pirates, and tin-foil hat fuckos. If a Slashdotter is getting his panties in a twist over DRM, what is he if not a pirate or tin-foil hat fucko?
Then you are sure to love the new SUPER MP3!
Shoot, it couldn't do any worse than Alabama Man.
Exactly.
And the l33t shall inherit the 34r7h.
They want to be encoding standard on HD-DVDs. Well, the DVD consortium will not consider any format that isn't open and controlled by the appropriate standards body. So MS submitted WM-9 to SMPTE, and it has now been accepted and standardised. It is available to everyone under standard licensing terms.
Now notice I said open, not free. It is like MPEG-4, MPEG-2, AAC, MP3 and so on. Anyone many implement the standard for a fixed licensing fee ($0.10 per decoder, $0.20 per encoder) but it isn't free of charge. As a pracitcal matter they'd probably ignore not-for-profit, source-only implementations like the MPEG consoritum ignores Xvid.
But yes, it's open and controlled by SMPTE now. Your money goes to MS if you license it, but the fees are fixed, and any changes to the standard must be approved by SMPTE and will be given to all licensees as part of the license. It now is a viable alternative to MPEG-4, and it is one of the three finalists for the HD-DVD format.
I am sure it will take less than a week, err make that hour, to figure out how to spoof it. Another 2 days for some GUI guid spoofer tool to be published. Probably 5 days to figure out the guid of some famous person who uses this stuff. 10 days before everyone is just hacking the guid flag to make it look like it came from said famous person. 3 weeks for slashdot to pic up the story :P
Ok, you have a typical 5MB mp3 song.
For a song to become a super mp3, tracking P2P users and multi channel sound.... wouldn't this be naturally much bigger than 5MB? If so wouldn't it be easy for the P2P user to just recognize that and avoid downloading it right away.
Not to mention this is probably going to create a new P2P feature to flag an mp3 as "super" or "regular" before downloading.
I'm not going to state how I feel about the topic of the article, but the argument you use is just flat out wrong. "If it didn't work the first couple of times, why try again?" Haven't you ever heard of "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again?" That is the correct mentality to look at it with. Hell, if we had stopped trying after a few failures we wouldn't have a space program, automobiles, airplanes, etc, etc. Eventually someone will come out with a scheme that is too hard to crack in a reasonable amount of time. Nothing is impossible to crack; it is only possible to make the time required to crack it so long that is it impracticle.
I'm not exactly up to date on the latest music that's being released, but last I checked CD's were still being released in stereo, and seeing as how standard players are only capable of decoding 2-channel, 16 bit, 44.1kHz PCM streams that's the way it's going to be for a long time, if not forever.
DVD's are another story. I'm sure the \AUDIO_TS directory could hold some 5.1 music, but I've yet to see it being used. There'd be a small market if so. Would people really buy the super whizbang 5.1 version of their favorite music that will only run on their DVD player, given that they listen to CD's in their cars, discmans, etc?
And now to the crux of the problem. Since there is no 5.1 music out unless you are ripping it straight from a movie, why does SuperMP3 matter to p2p, or anything for that matter? IMHO, it doesn't - for straight music files.
Possibly, however, it might make a difference with DVR's. In the distant future, when all TV is HD and all audio is 5.1, DVR's will perhaps encode to SuperMP3 to save space and keep the 5.1 channels. Will this matter to p2p? Only if you rip the movie out of the box and place it on the 'Net.
Regardless, SuperMP3 will probably end up being yet another case study on why DRM doesn't work.
-R
I assume the "unsigned" comment refers to Microsoft's next-generation secure computing base called Palladium. It will run unsigned code, but its "sealed storage" permits access to files in encrypted Palladium archives only to code signed by the owner of monopoly in the file.
... my CD collection has never killed anybody, dickhole.
You're comparing apples and organges there son.
I mean, why not 5.1? Most people these days have 2.0 or 5.1 sound cards, not 4.0. Isn't the goal of software to sell hardware? So make it 5.1 or even 7.1. Oh, and put the lead voice in the central speaker. So I can shut it off and have decent karaoke parties without resorting to midis or expensive DVDs with 15 songs on them.
5 years is bloody short in my opinion. CD-ROM has been around in main stream for a decade now, and CDs in audio for nearing 20 years. DVDs better bloody well be the video standard until at least 2015, or I'M going to pissed, and it takes a bit to do that I might add.
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
The parent poster has got the thinking right. I run a record/CD store so I have lots of opportunity to talk with customers about their digital music needs. The basic trends are:
1. People want vinyl records. They see it as a format from simpler times. They hate CDs for any number of reasons and vinyl lets them just listen to music.
2. People buy CDs, copy them and sell them back. For those that rip they use MP3 and they don't care about quality. They hate any compressed format other than MP3 because it's one extra choice they don't want to think about.
3. The only people that are happy with digital music are the ones that have an iPod because they see it has being their whole collection in a little box. People who listen to music on their computer jukebox, or any of the competing portable players complain about the experience for any number of reasons.
4. The people who do know about DRM or any new formats have sworn to never use them.
Overall from what I see, the trend is to actively resist any kind of format that requires too much decision making, too much restriction, or which makes too much extra work. This negative wave has extended back against CDs and no one wants the majority of them because they have no physical character. I think from here on out, all new consumer audio and video formats are going to have a huge problem with adoption. The effort to adopt them is well past the acceptable limit of consumers. Need we mention DVD-A or SACD?
I. Don't. Care. The only people that will encode with this are the ones who encode with WMA or use Internet Explorer. Because it's the default and that's exactly what they'll use if it works. I, on the other hand, care about sound quality and being able to redistribute the files. I don't listen to music from RIAA (www.magnetbox.com/riaa/) and most of it I do is from artists that encourage or post their songs on the web. They won't use this crap, WMA, or DRM-boxed AAC. They WANT people to use these p2p apps because they love the music and makes them more popular at live shows. The point is the format is only important to those who are against P2P or the new wave of music. Those of us who aren't interested in that music will continue using MP3's or Ogg. Makes life simple, really.
Homer: You tried your best and failed miserably. The
lesson is, Never Try.
How many people have four-channel headphones? I ask because my iPod is used on the go, and not on my home stereo. Oh, wait, my home stereo doesn't have four channels either. Hell, I don't even know any songs that employ four channels. Why do I need more channels again?
I regularly report MSN spam to the Hotmail admins.
great now i need to pull out my old tape recorder! damn the RIAA!
Why not make mpg, avi, jpg, and whatever else track you too, what the heck, go for it!
What does a audio encoding format have to do with DRM anyway? Who makes this crap?
If anyone uses this they are simply stupid, way stupid.
DRM doesn't work. You saw DVD Jon release that thingie for converting AAC to non-DRM formats. Also, playfair is still foating around on P2P networks, regardless of what Apple did to their website. Oh, and we'll keep using mp3 (ick!) and ogg. I won't download any other media files off the 'net. Screw wma, aac and friends.
dont need another multichannel encoding scheme!
True, but this beautifully sets up a blackmail: Mr. Valenti, agree to our demands, or we'll sic the RIAA goons on your precious MPAA.
I've been bit once too many buying a CD claiming to contain original recordings by the original artists, but in fact "original" was used in the copyright-law sense of "newly created", and what I got was a cover album.
There's no reason to lose cross-platform support if your code is a bytecode that all licensees' platforms can interpret.
wouldn't this be naturally much bigger than 5MB? If so wouldn't it be easy for the P2P user to just recognize that and avoid downloading it right away.
Most current p2p user agents do not display number of channels. They do display bitrate, but until upgraded, they won't be able to distinguish a 192 kbps rip with 96 kbps per channel from a 192 kbps rip with 48 kbps per channel.
Well, it is not as if you are forced to use longhorn in the first place :)
Many "consumers" or joe blows are still running 98SE and ME and many still so 95 - i would assuje based on the amount of people i talk to for support for our company...... XP likely has far less market in the typical home users home then 98 still does - so longhorn will likely be very little more so when it comes out and or a few years after wards.
Do you really know how hard and expensive it is to record in surround sound? What are advantages for 5.1 sound? So you can hear the fans screaming? Properly mixing stereo sound is hard enough, doing 5.1 is another dimension of complexity. You have LFE channel too, that music studio guys are not accustomed to. BESIDES, all audiophile equipment is *stereo*. You dont have coupled subwoofers with small speakers for excellent music, you just get bigger more expesive speakers. Why? becuase its so hard to get same characteristics out of that .1 that makes a boom.
So forget it. Not only 5.1 is a sham on DRM side of things but technically as well. 5.1 music is still in its infancy, and is struggling along pretty bad. Why? Well, when do you need band being behind you? Ok, so you may have some electronica that has some effects bumping around in the back, thats pretty cool. But what about 99% of the rest of the music, is there need for 5.1? NO.
5.1 was invented for movies, for specific reasons. For music there are no hard justification why 5.1 is needed.
my 2c
You've got it exactly right.
Unlike production houses, tv stations and the like
consumers don't care if DVD-A is better than DVD+ or WTF.
The entertainment industy is a bunch of dumbasses,
you'd think they'd have learned from the stupid S?VHS/Betacam battle...
As far as I know the TCPA specs, Longhorn won't stop you from running unisgned code.
TCPA will stop you from allowing unsigned code to access trusted mode and trusted keys.
There is no way TCPA can prevent you from bruteforcing the key, or even aquirering them by using a Un-TCPAed bootfloppy (w/some possibly necassery bruteforcers as well....)
This might not be as easy as DeCSS, but saying Longhorn won't run unsigned code at all is just plain stupid.
You think Microsoft will dear to break backward compatebility that bad? Nobody will upgrade, regardless of pressure, if it means that all other software will have to go, and Microsoft knows this.
So stop misinterpeting things, and repeating stupid, groundless claims. Get a tinfoil hat, and get rid of your fullcover tinfoil body-suit.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
Erm... Are you that sure? :)
Really. In the DVD-Jon (argh, I hate that handle!) DeCSS-case in norwegian criminal court, Linux was referred to as a "hacker os". No big news here, and any hacker will claim the same, but I guess governments and hackers define the word "hacker" rather differently.
Ask any government official, and he will firmly claim that a "hacker" is a criminal. Outlawing tools which may assists criminals, is catching on like nothing else these days, so I'll just say "beware".
If we allow big buisness to define the language (as we more or less are doing now), don't be suprprised when even current laws start outlawing things in a totally unreasonable manner.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
This is utter nonsense and I guess this has been repealed quite a few times, but I'll take the time to debunk this myself as well.
Future BIOSes might deny uncertified OSes to access the TCPA trusted mode, and thus disable the ability to run TCPA enabled software. It will not make the x86-platform a Windows-only platform. Claiming such sheer stupidity is, well quite frankly, stupid.
Between the facts and your ignorant claim, there are lightyears of difference. And that you actually got moded "interesting" for this... The moderators are still clueless, I guess.
Yes, TCPA is evil, but we don't have to resort to lies to defeat it, do we?
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
I think the main point here is to repeal this defintion of "secure". If every tech-writer reading slashdot started referring to these files as "restricted" files and the methods used as "restricting" (as opposed to securing), I think we can come a long way.
"Securing" the files and transfers almost sound good you know. However enforcing "restrictions" sounds quite borderlining to criminal, if you ask me. But IANAL and I don't know trade-laws and trade-treaties.
Oh. And it only takes one guy to break the encryption and it's all useless. Anyone have the odds on that not happening?
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
You are saying that European-made and recorded music is not affiliated with the Recording Industry Assosiation of America? You must be joking!
You might have ment the big labels, but I'd still like to point out that's there more in this world than the US. In fact I'm glad there is.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
90% infection rate. LOL!
Ogg is a competitor, but I don't think any rational person would say that ogg "eclipses" MP3 at similar bitrates. The consensus on hydrogenaudio is that ogg is very capable but currently requires higher bitrates to achieve the same quality as MP3.
Put another notch in the bedpost for the "Open source is ALWAYS better" mindset.
1) I'm 27, not 16
2) I only think my iBook is magic, apple has flaws
3) iTunes is pretty much the digital music seller that other digital music sellers want to be
4) I make my own money
5) I tend to buy my music from interpunk.com if I buy CDs (the punk assed part is right, just not Good Charlotte, I was bagging on those talentless fucks)
6) I don't use iTunes, when I buy mp3s I use audiolunchbox.com so I get good mp3s without DRM.
7) You're a goddamn idiot.
Note to self: No more arguing with the faithful.
Exactly *where* do you see these decoding flaws?
And no, your fancy DVD decoder tester discs don't count.
I have a el-cheapo chinese 45 dollar DVD player, and honestly I cannot see absolutely *any* diference between it's quality and the quality of my friends $500+ model.
Are these "errors" you cite based on playing any actual movies? Is the "error" larger than 2px by 2px? ( as in, would anyone watching the movie actually *see* it if they were paying attention to the film and not scrounging it for errors? )
Regardless of your response, I sure won't be inclinded to spend more than I have to, since I can personally see no quality difference whatsoever. I am just curious where people like you get these numbers.
So what will happen when millions of XP users unknowingly install the DRM required for the grand evil plan when they install XP'x soon to be rolled out "Our Focus is on Security" Service Pack?
Instantly half the market has now accepted the new terms of abuse for the world's biggest convicted monopolist and the consumer pillaging continues!
No amount of geek tweaking is going to stop the inevitable. This is not the fuckin' Matrix kids. Big biz, convicted monopolists and corrupt politicans rule the day so bend over and stop bitchin' or try and vote the bastards out of office!
OMFG! IEI? TISL!
-Imidazole2
Sooo... let me get this straight - these people think that the vinyl listening procedure is simpler? WTF?
1. Take record sleeve out of outer sleeve
2. Take record out of inner sleeve
3. Place record on TT
4. Turn on TT motor
5. Use carbon fibre brush to remove dust from record
6. Use stylus brush to remove dust from stylus
7. Raise tonearm lifter
8. Move tonearm over first groove
9. Lower tonearm lifter
10. Enjoy the music!!!
And, of course, after 20 minutes max you'll do it again.
Granted, it can be relaxing to play around with vinyl. Hell, I own more than 500 of the buggers. The sleeve artwork is also often way cooler than with CD's. But "just listen to music"? I don't think so.
I can speak on this one. What i look at vinyl for is not 'simpler,' per se, but 'analog.' The joy of vinyl is simply that it isn't digital; that it is a reproduction that you could conceivably build a home listening station for without needing any programming ability. For some people, this is a big deal- the way books are so lovable in hard copy. Any bibliophile can tell you about the smell of a bookstore specialising in antique books.
This doesn't mean that vinyl i necessarily better, but it does mean that there isn't exactly a replacement for it so much as an alternate choice. Personally, i don't mind CDs or MP3s. My collection is stored mostly digitally. But i understand about vinyl- it's not just simpler, but to some people, more 'real,' because there are fewer leaps between product and music. The sound quality may not be the same- but there's a perception about the type of recording, rather than the quality, that gets involved.
"I'd say 'Have a good time,' but arson is still illegal.
Being that the US is a Constintutional Republic and not a Constintutional Democracy, the rights of big business far outweigh the rights of the individual.
;)
Now if you really wanted to "mix" things up... Imagine if everyone in North America where to register themselves as a corporation, you'd pay less tax AND have more rights (the ones that the big corporations have, that you the citizen dont have). You would be able to deduct all living expenses and only pay tax on any profit at the end of the year. Of course this requires lots of paperwork, but the government loves paperwork & red tape. So why not indulge them
Another simple idea is to just stop living by their terms. Get OFF the grid, stop using their services, listening to their propaganda and most of all stop believing the president. He is only there to serve big business and make sure you pay their salaries.
Another thing to note is that while the current system of government has worked in the past, it has become quite antiquiated. The levels of corruption, influence and ass kissing run so deep that unless something is done SOON, there is no other route for it to go but to a future similar to that of 1984.
Cut away the cancer, a bloody revolution IS the answer.
Another open source fetishist.
Listen I'm not saying ogg is bad, but you are denying reality if you think that the quality is the same between ogg and mp3 at the same bitrate. I trust the people on HydrogenAudio, I guarantee they care more about quality than either of us. They perform blind listening tests all the time and they've concluded that mp3 sounds better than ogg at a given bitrate. So no, ogg doesn't sound "at least" as good as mp3. As for your other points:
Lame is free, and going to stay that way.
Standard mp3 doesn't track people, and it never will.
We control Lame, so we can change it. It's open source too, if you've forgotten.
Now if you absolutely must have patent-free audio, ogg is a fine choice but don't go around saying it sounds better than MP3.
Fraunhofer's super mp3 won't have any effect on regular mp3, and I doubt anyone will even use it.
WTF are you talking about? I guess I haven't seen any hand-cranked CD players but that hardly seems relevant as I haven't seen any LP walkmen either.
Actually, Sony did make an LP Walkman. It was the original Discman, released in about 1983. I've never seen one in person; they didn't catch on for obvious reasons of practicality. Nor could I find any references to it anywhere online, but it was featured in the Gadget section of Hands-On Electronics magazine at the time - I think I'll have to scan the article and put it online. The Sony model looked like a large 80's-styled plastic C-clamp. It came with a belt clip (presumably only for carrying it to your listening spot, since having a whirring record on your hip would be ...problematic), and it took a 33RPM LP. I don't know what you'd use it for - back when I was a kid, libraries would lend LPs, maybe for listening in the library?
Others did make similar things but mostly in slot-load format - check out these pictures of one which was only capable of 45RPM singles.
Yes, I know. It's asinine. But they did make 'em.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
Claiming that as a rule a $30 chinese player is never as good as a $200 jap player is more than silly, Demaagd. Most of the players out there, no matter whether they're jap-made Philips/Panasonic or ones from Red Star Corp., China use common chipsets that allow little to no control over the quality of the decoded YUV data and use the same Philips patent NTSC/PAL/SECAM encoders. Only when it comes to some analog circuitry and mechanical parts (loading tray etc.) that you will notice differences in quality.