Slashdot Mirror
Don't Smudge The Sensor When You Press 'Play'
mattyrobinson69 writes "According to The Register, 'The RIAA wants your fingerprints.' They've teamed up with VeriTouch, who say 'In practical terms, VeriTouch's breakthrough in anti-piracy technology means that no delivered content to a customer may be copied, shared or otherwise distributed because each file is uniquely locked by the customer's live fingerprint scan.'" No details, but the article talks about a locked-down "wireless media player" to prevent such passing around.
they just don't get it do they?
Locked down devices have no future. Witness Sony getting its but handed to it by apple, after years of walkmen, by making intentionally defective products
and I'll say it again:
If I can hear it, I can copy it.
These companies who are selling technology "solutions" to the piracy problem are like snake-oil salesmen selling cures to old ladies. It might make them feel better, but it doesn't make a damn bit of real difference.
---- El diablo esta en mis pantalones! Mire, mire!
Because we all know how terrible it is to let a friend borrow your movie or music. Jesus h christ.
The image is a dream, the beauty is real. Can you see the difference?
This is The RIAA's dream. Everyone has to buy new... it's no longer possible to sell your music or give it to your little brother.
However, the principle buyers of music, PCKs (Poor College Kids), won't bite because they sell their crappy cd's and buy used ones that they think they will like.
Disclaimer: I am a PCK.
You have to ask if mugshots are to follow. DNA sample to buy a CD ? This does tend to confirm that the music industry considers there customers criminals and feels they should be treated as such.
I can allready see the boost in music sales this will bring.
It's certainly not fair use.
Or a piece of tape over the sensor....
The real question is what if they can individually mark the music you purchase, and hold you liable if that music shows up on the net?
Cash is going the way of the dodo. I imagine there will be some degree of outcry to this in general, but already almost everyone's using check cards, ATM cards, and what have you and the music industry just may decide to stop allowing the purchase of music with cash, effectively eliminating anonymous purchasing.
Copy protection is inherently breakable if you allow the person to play the music back. The same is not true for watermarking, and I wouldn't be surprised if they try to go this direction in the long run.
Does lending music to a friend not constitute as fare use?
What about when you die, if you have a sizeable music library (such could be considered an asset) how will your family be given access to it?
They are wasting their time.
Burn Bright or Fade Away
This is actually a great question the RIAA should ask. If this has no way of taking off in the porn industry, how the hell do they think they will pull this off to the general public. All great technologies of their time got their boost from porn (VHS, internet, etc)
If you can't sell it to the porn industry, aren't they just wasting their time?
I'd like to see this technology used extensively. Only then, when it's absolutely ridiculous, can there be the kind of angry, widespread non-cooperation that can bring down or properly declaw (regulate) the RIAA.
Things are bad now, but they're not bad enough to spark a revolt against the RIAA. They don't realize it, but they're bringing about their own doom.
-Jem
From the linked article: "iVue: a wireless media player that allows content producers to lock down media files with biometric security. This week Veritouch announced that it had demonstrated the device to the RIAA and MPAA.
"In practical terms, VeriTouch's breakthrough in anti-piracy technology means that no delivered content to a customer may be copied, shared or otherwise distributed because each file is uniquely locked by the customer's live fingerprint scan," claims the company."
Now just who is going to buy this, a player that you can't let your mom or girlfriend (ok, that's not a problem for Slashdotters) or colleague borrow, that you can't use if your hand's in a cast or even in a glove (nobody plays MP3s on cold days?)?
And worse: how do you purchase tunes? Presumably, you'll have to present your fingerprint on purchase so it can be matched to the fingerprint when played. So will the media player lock you into purchasing only from merchants that process your fingerprint? How will you play free music -- like the legal live band recording at archive.org?
Perhaps it will also play fingerprint unencumbered music, but then what's the point?Why go to the extra trouble to purchase from a fingerprinting vendor, which at least will probably require hooking the player to your PC, providing the fingerprint, transmitting the stored fingerprint from the media player through the PC using some proprietary mechanism like an Active-X control?
again, who will want to pay extra to deal with having to provide a fingerprint?
The answer: no one.
So will it be legally mandated, or are the big record companies planning to stop selling CDs and sell only encrypted, DRM'd music? It has to be one of the two, or else this product has no market.
Opinions on the Twiddler2 hand-held keyboard?
The problem is, those of us who will refuse to purchase music under conditions like this make up a very small percentage of the population. Most sheep, er, consumers, will jump through whatever hoops necessary to listen to the latest tripe from the music industry.
How to break the cycle?
Method 1 - the stupid method - rant about basic issues of copyright like whether it should exist at all. insult the RIAA/MPAA and accuse them of being worse than hitler and thus antagonizing the situation more. talk about the loophole technology of the week, be it freenet or the MIT 'on demand' system or bittorrent or whatever while giving a "substantial noninfringing uses" wink wink.
Method 2 - the reasonable method - foster a culture that respects copyrights and really and truly frowns upon piracy. rational behaviour leads to being able to enter into sane dialog with rightsholders about the future of intellectual property in a digital age, including looking at which areas of IPR are out of date or need revision. the culture of respect and no-tolerance-for-pirates allows for a wider range of useful services to be deployed that are now possible thanks to new technology. everybody wins.
It's funny -- you can lock down a player all you want, but not the output. Nothing stops you from running a standard audio cable from the output (headpone or speaker jack) of the DRM'd device into the input of an unrestricted device, thereby allowing you to copy the music.
Sure it's analog (unless you use S/PDIF), and there will be a slight reduction in quality, but it will definitely be a useable recording.
Yet another DRM technology defeated by a simply workaround.
-Jem
ALl they have to do is take a loss on it. if it's substantially cheaper than a iPod, people will buy it.
And I will publish a hack to circumvent the system on freenet, making in effect a super cheap iPod.
Everybody Wins!
Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
Software should help people, bring people together, make stuff easier to do. It should not restrict us, seperate us, and make things harder to accomplish.
Forgery is already illegal but I will wager money that a new law will be passed that makes forging biometrics a even bigger crime with heftier punishments.
I can't wait until I cut my finger by accident, leaving a scar and changing the print pattern.
"Your effort to remain what you are is what limits you."
Would couples need to scan both sets of fingerprints? Familes? Will gay couples be allowed to scan both sets of fingerprints?
Can I mod something +1 Scary if it's true but I wish it weren't?
You might hate his music, but George Michael has released his LAST store CD release. Everything from now on will be available online only! This is a huge step forward for the artists themselves.
Bands like U2 and Aerosmith need to follow suit, drop their labels, do all their own production (which they do anyway) and sell their songs themselves. The day of the middle man making money off of the talent needs to come to a close. Our rights as consumers and fans are being infringed. The artists are the ones that need to step up.
Lars if you're listening, drop Electra and start doing it all yourselves. Control your own distribution!
Peace
Or am I just being paranoid?
I think you are not being paranoid enough, actually. Do a google search on the RIAA's new toy, the PIRATE act. You'd end up paying for sueing yourself. What a nice business model...
Treehugger? Treehugger... Treehugger!
One thing about your statement, S/PDIF is digital and caries the digitized audio part of a file unchanged, if the audio signal contains some form of watermark it won't be filtered by the interface. If the DRM is contained in the file headers or metadata it won't be found at the other end of the cable since S/PDIF only carries the audio part of a signal and apply it's own headers which are only present during the transfer. Therefore, it depends on how the DRM works for an S/PDIF transfer to result in a DRM free file..
You walk into the music shop.
You: I'd like to buy the latest... err.. Eminem single, please. Erm. As a present, you know. For my little brother.
Sales assistant: Certainly, if I can just take your fingerprint...
You: Fingerprint? I didn't know it was a crime to buy Eminem records. Yet. Although I'm sure somebody's working on it.
Sales assistant: No, no, it's just to stop other people from using it.
You: No, no, you don't understand. It isn't for me. It's a present.
Sales assistant: Sorry, we need a fingerprint.
You: He lives five hundred miles away.
Sales assistant: We can sell you a voucher? Or maybe you could get him to send his finger to you?
Or, even simpler, pay some kid $20 to buy the a CD. Cash sale. Minor cannot be held to contract. It is not illegal for someone to purchase unrestricted merchandise for some one else. It is not yet illegal to resell discs. Police can't do much of anything.
Just like most security systems, this will tend to protect the innocent who probably would not significantly violate copyright and are probably not the one that the RIAA cares about. However, unlike many security systems, I see little that protects the innocent from those who would desire to circumvent the system.
I mean, this system encourages the criminal element to target the unsuspecting, and the RIAA doesn't care because all it wants to do is file bogus lawsuits and net a few thousands dollars in extortion fees.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
That article has to be a fake: What happens when you die? to my son I leave my right hand... What happens when you sell your cd collection to the local secondhand shop.. what happens when your sittin round with friends and it comes time to change the music.. I have to get up every time ? what happens if your working away from home? does your wife have to wait untill you get back from your trip... Oh wait there is the latex finger, well I suppose you can ensure she doesn't miss you too much... what would be the score with DJ's ? Job security ??? who comes up with these idea's the articles a fake isnt it ? isn't it? unless.. 1)impliment finger print scheme 2)Kill music sales entirely 3)Everybody pirates everything 4)Sue everybody for copyright infringement Profit!
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
The more intrusive scheme RIAA can concoct, the more people will resort to the alternative, whether it's "legal" or not. It's a privacy issue. I seriously doubt that even a "good" person who listens to "decent" music and pay for the priviledge likes the fact that RIAA gets his/her listening habit. And oh, what happens when, say, one accidentally burns one's thumb during cooking?
One thing RIAA forgets is that there are millions of unprotected music out there, enough for one to listen in one's lifetime. Then, there is that annoying "only one unprotected copy released to P2P breaks the dam and flood all with copies".
I hope they don't have plans to move onto other forms of biometrics. The jokes are too obvious - "All your face are..." Seriously, I am very disturbed by things like this. They're treating their customers as criminals. It's kinda true in my case, but that's besides the point. The fact that they can ignore their customers' feelings in this way indicates that there is some kind of monopoly problem here. Apologies if I'm wrong, but I can't think of a single non-monopoly group that a) played fast and loose with customers and b) stayed in business. Most people don't realise how far and fast their personal info spreads, and how dangerous this is. But just think "solial engineering". Think "identity theft". Consider what happens when the system for storing everyone's details (for confirmation purposes obviously) is hacked and all those lovely biometrics, which were supposed to also be used for passports, appear on the black market. There will be a way that this can be abused. I personally am willing to do whatever is necessary to avoid this sort of situation. In particular, I'm not going to trust some random company with any more info than strictly necessary. I use Linux to avert the possibility of trojan code in the OS, and I intend to find some way of detecting RFID tags so I can boycott shops that use them. Masochistic but, if many people behave like this, then the companies peddling this crap may get the message. We can only hope.
For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
If you read the originating companies (there's two of them) PR, they state only that they have "demonstrated it to" the RIAA. That's very different, and shouldn't be taken to be an endorsement by them. My guess is that what this amounts to is they called up the RIAA and said "we have a brand new DRM system that will solve all your problems!!! Do you want us to come and show you?", and the RIAA said "sure, we'd love to take a look".
That the best they can now say in a press release is that they "demonstrated it to" the RIAA makes me think that the reception was lukewarm. I guess we'll have to wait and see. The RIAA have certainly supported dumb ideas before, but at this point I don't see any evidence they're actually backing this one.