Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Protests Digital Radio
prostoalex writes "Afraid that digital radio listeners might soon be able to cherry-pick certain songs and share them with others on the Internet, RIAA urged FCC to consider broadcast regulations that limit such copying. The National Association of Broadcasters is not too happy with RIAA's request, as more than three hundred broadcasters either have digital CD-quality radio, or are in the process of setting them up. Meanwhile, as MSNBC notes, products like The Bug from Pure Digital are already capable of recording digital radio."
The RIAA will try to outlaw singing. After all, they can't sell as many records if people can just reproduce the music with their voice!!! Bahahaha... ::tear::
Wake up RIAA, your customer base isn't happy with you. Stop doing idiotic crap to piss it off.
This is a Blunder by the RIAA. Now every broadcaster has more too worry about with Digital TV. Clearly, the broadcaster will have to kowtow to the **AA groups, and broadcaster do not like that one bit.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Or can digital radios already do this?
Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
Does anyone still remember Massinova? They offered near CD quality streams, a great request system, etc etc...
And to thank them for their efforts, the RIAA sued and screwed em, and now that great Trance stream is no more.
Long live Massinova.
The RIAA is now seeking to eliminate ALL music in an attempt to make sure people don't steal it. Buy CDs while you can, they'll soon be outlawed! LPs and audio cassetes will also soon be collected and destroyed. The RIAA will begin raiding people's homes and taking away all audio equipment to be incinerated in giant ovens, never to be heard of again. During the burn-fest, Metallica will be paying a huge concert at $500 a head... blah blah blah, maybe I dragged this joke out for too long, but you'll have to excuse me...I just work up and this isn't the way I wanted to start my day.
I'm against picketing but I don't know how to show it.
Ever hear of taping a song off the radio. A lot of people do it.
Git off ma fair use before aye shoot ya.
Limit the features of the client. That would work great. Just like DVD copy protection. If it's being broadcast, people will be able to record it.
Jesus, who are these asshats?
Let the RIAA complain all they want-it will not get them anywhere anyway....Personally, I don't think the NAB would let this fly
There are other ways to get around this (casettes, radio to line-in, etc - and watch out, they'll want to ban obsolete hardware next) and the RIAA can really do little to stop it...Another RIAA attempt to stifle pirates, terrorists, and baby-killers, and innovation as well, all in the name of saving their bottom line
My MythTV HowTo
why dont they outlaw the speaker. After all, anything that comes out of a speaker can be recorded and reproduced without limitations.
So what comes next? we can only look at a shiny new CD instead of playing? but wait, looking at a disc can give people the opportunity to memorize the bit patterns and recreate it. Your eyes oppose the DMCA. gouge them out... quick
this posting might be of interest/relevance to this discussion.
:-)
Posted without a karma bonus so I'm not accused of karma.... well you know. I would have posted anonymously but I've alrealy posted anon 10 jokes today
Well, this was only a matter of time. Most people I know listen to Internet Radio more then their own libraries anymore especially on iTunes. Does this mean that Sirius is going to get regulated too because of broadcasting music at such a high quality? What about the people in the 80s/90s who listened to regular radio and recorded songs to tape?
Second, I was always a subtle Howard Stern fan, but now with what is going on with clear channel, his broadcasts are more entertaining then just the stupid fart jokes. He really is going through a struggle, and the FCC/RIAA are seeing great times to strike out with the election.
Let's stop going back in the time machine...
Thanks,
Aj
GroupShares.com - Free Stock Logs/Commentary
-------
artlu.net
Breaking news: the RIAA has appealled to the FCC to help regulate individuals from singing out loud.
An RIAA spokesman, I. M. Prick, has indicated "That people pose a very serious threat to our industry because they are able to reproduce music by vocalization. It appears that if other people hear individuals hear others singing songs illegaly, then they might remember the lyrics, tune and beat and thereby infringe on our copyrights."
No trees were harmed in the composition of this; however, numerous electrons were inconvenienced.
Unfortunately people keep buying US music. (I'm fortunate that most of my tastes are non RIAA controlled imports.) We can hope they end up like SCO and only getting revenue from lawsuits but overall this still just speaks that the masses are uneducated. Also, with the RIAA getting their brainwashing on copyright into public education systems they are around for the long haul.
:(){
Someone put an MP3 player + digital radio receiver in a high-powered assault rifle.
RIAA execs vs NRA members, mmm. "You can take my H&K MP3 when you pry it from my cold dead fingers!"
Oh come on! There's an (overused) trick to prevent people from creating their music libraries from taping off the radio today: it's when the radio DJ "talks" into the first 10 seconds or so of the song, or fades one song into the other.
That makes every piece annoying enough that I doubt many people are going to want to record anything other than maybe entire programs.
Murray Todd Williams
I mean, pretty soon, the RIAA will have so many high tech snooping devices that we won't be able to even sing "DO RE MI F-- NO CARRIER
Last I heard, "HD Radio" was compressed using MPEG-4 AAC. I forget the bitrate, but it's likely around 128 Kbps. This is real good, but not CD-quality. Eric Weaver Chief Engineer, KFJC, 1993-1997
Why are the RIAA kicking up about this now? Wouldn't it have caused alot less hassle if they had mentioned their concerns to the FCC before the broadcasters spent wads of cash implementing digital radio schemes?
Seems to me like they are just trying to make enemies of everyone. But then again, this comes from the industry that has spent the last couple decades screwing over its customers, its clients,its business associates and other entities within the industry.
Wonder if Mrs Rosen went to the same business college as Bill and Daryl? ;)
She's built like a steak house, but she handles like a bistro....
I for one am completely and totally tired of their antics. We geeks have power and can be a serious force. I am issuing a challenge at this moment. We need to develop an alternative path for customers and artists to take to bypass them.
I am confident that if we can all band together, we can overcome. I am talking about a distribution system that is based on open standards that allows payment to go directly to artist with minimal (if any) overhead.
Here is what I propose:
-A non-profit organization comprised of volunteers
-Create a website to serve as a repository of songs to be distributed via bittorrent
-Payment taken in the form of Paypal donations
-Payment is artist AND song specific based completely on an honor system
-To encourage reasonable sized payments, offer bonuses for tiered donations
-For example, after $100 is donated to band X, the customer becomes eligble for free concert tickets or something
-Payment is dispursed to artists in entirety
-Artists are encouraged to donate back a portion of their payments to cover costs of bandwidth, etc.
-No DRM to be used and only open formats for music.
-Songs should be available in varying qualities.
Maybe this exact model has already been proposed, I don't know. Comments and suggestions welcome. I have issued the challenge, will anyone answer?
I was actually just discussing this with a few friends yesterday. I wasked them whether they thought streamripping music off of shoutcast stations using winamp and the streamripper plugin was illegal. We came to the conclusion that no, it wasn't because it's obviously the same thing as recording the radio with a cassette recorder. I also brought up the question of since it's obviously not illegal to share music with your friends in a car or something, what's so different about broadcasting it over the internet? You're sharing it with your friends, albiet 1,000 of them. Hey, if you had a big enough card you could do it there, why not the net? You can apply so many situations to these kind of questions, it just gets ugly. I think the RIAA needs to realize the path of destruction is paved by good intentions.
would it take for it to be hacked and used as a free music CD generator? :)
But if I lose my Digitally Imported, I will commit arson. And homicide. And pillaging. And public urination. Not necessarily in that order.
I know nothing
Earlier today I was listening to a CD with the window open. I have a bad feeling I've influenced the buying decisions of my next-door neighbor now.
It would be a great idea, similar to the DeCSS Gallery, to document every possible way you can copy/save/record any auido/video stream including schematics and code for DIY hardware boxes (like phreaking boxes) and software in many forms (t-shirts, songs, art, or just plain code etc..). Cover every hardware platform, every media format and every method, from micro-phone-to-speaker to full digital stream copies. Make sure the site shows how much of a joke this is but at the same time gives a useful resource and of course, make many many mirrors of it. If its already been done then great, whats the url? but if it hasnt it would be a great project (funded by t-shirt sales). All these great copying methods from pressing shift to blacking out the edges of CDs to decryption need to be in one place. Device-by-device guides showing you pin-outs and wiring instructions, code for PICs etc and what country sells the tools you need. The site should conform to some basic common sense rules i.e displaying "copyright violation is a criminal offence" etc and the thinking being that what you do with your own property in your own home is your business.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
RIAA and ClearChannel are tooled by idiots
Sure it's from Russia, but for ~$1.00 a CD for 256 VBR MP3's... Who cares... If I don't like a song, I've thrown away $.07..
Tape Recorders. And I'd be more worried about the tape recorders than spicific software that can do the same thing, it's easier to record too, just a push of a button. And since you're willing to waste time with all that software configuration to get that 'specific' song, I'm sure you have enough time to get the song off the tape on to your computer..
honestly who runs the legal show for the RIAA? wait.. don't answer that..(a thousand monkeys on typewriters is what I'm abut to hear)
Do your part to talk with your acquaintances and encourage them not to support the RIAA.
Whining on Slashdot won't get much accomplished. Convincing people that they won't be able to enjoy music how they like it in the near future will make a difference.
Just last night I carefully explained to a friend who enjoys listening to Cold exactly why she should take a look at which record labels publish those CDs. It's pretty simple--sure, you may be able to buy the CD now, but the next one might be copy protected. If you buy stuff that is put out by those who aren't part of this major media conglomerate, then you won't be encouraging such business tactics.
I don't know how much of my message was actually heard and how much was just glossed over, but by the time I finished talking she seemed to be at least a little more aware that there should be more to CD purchasing than just finding what you like.
For me, it is COMPLETELY about the record label. I use the RIAA Radar like nobody's business, and I try my absolute hardest only to buy CDs that come up clean when checked there. There are several highly-desirable purchases I refuse to make because I would be supporting the RIAA. It's a sacrifice I'm willing to make because I understand the implications of giving in.
Fortunately, my music tastes lean towards electronic ("techno"), which is quite predisposed towards free sharing and downloading. Right now I can give you URLs to four artists' music sites that allow you to download 128kbps or better mp3s of those artists songs without any DRM. There are plenty of indie labels and pro-P2P/sharing musicians out there in other genres, but it appears to me that my favorite type of music has the largest percentage.
CD quality? I'd be happy if my radio produced FM quality. The typical American broadcaster takes a nice, clean audio signal and then proceeds to mutilate it beyond recognition with a "modulation optimizer" before feeding it to the transmitter. These devices ensure that the transmitter is run at 100% modulation, or greater, all the time, in every audio band. The result is badly distorted audio without the slightest trace of dynamic range. If they will not broadcast a clean FM signal, why should we expect them to broadcast a clean digital signal?
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Remember Digital Audio Tape? Wanna go buy one?
Look at what the DMCA is doing to reverse engineering.
Look at what's being discussed to close the 'analog hole'.
Our nation is sacrificing it's technological competitiveness in the name of the entertainment industries. We have already sacrificed a LOT, though it's still reversible.
One of my Senators is Patrick Leahy, and maybe it's time for me to become a single-issue voter. His response to my last letter on this was not satisfactory, I need to try again - well before November.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
In other news, McDonalds protests the word "diet".
And furthermore, the males of the world denounce the entire cast and crew of "Sex in the City".
Am I leaving anything out?
Oh yeah, george bush eats babies.... babies with diseases.
my last sig was too controversial... now, a new and improved useless sig!
Your system relies on two groups (consumers and artists) behaving well and selflessly. There's no evidence that either one will actually do so.
... is one way to show them that you disagree with their approach.
The comment about fears of "cherry-picking" songs probably tells more about the industry's real fears than they intended. Their biggest fear, I think, isn't simply about piracy (which can always be fought as a crime) but that listeners will become accustomed to listen to what they want, when they want. The existing structure of the music industry depends on using the radio and favorable product placement to boost certain artists; that's why those artists are willing to sign such unfavorable contracts. If the people in charge of the music industry lose control of popular taste, they're finished no matter what else happens.
So on one side we have the RIAA representing their interests in "reducing piracy" by trying to stop people time-slipping radio.
On the other we have companies like Clearchannel, who benefit from advertising revenues the more listeners they get.
Clearchannel are sucked up to by record labels who want to get their output out there and promoted.
So now we have this problem... do the labels want to be represented by the views of the RIAA, when those views will cause one of the greatest ways of promoting music to turn against them.
Especially, when companies like Clearchannel have so much control.
However this pans out, it's going to get messy and very interesting before it calms down.
This is the time to pull up a seat and relish the spot the RIAA have put themselves in (between a rock (the labels) and a hard place (radio)).
They propose allowing you to record "entire broadcasts", not individual songs, for later playback. What do you bet that the next step will be disallowing fast-forward/commercial skip?
The RIAA Sucks.
You know that, I know that, Cowboyneal knows it, and pretty much everyone who frequents this site knows it. It's plain and simple, they are out to defend an old Cartel-like system, only because it continues to line their pockets with billions of dollars each year.
Unfortunetly, we are still sitting here reading yet another article of hundreds on how the RIAA sucks, and everyone is saying how outrageous it is, "their just going to destroy all music next!" is a common thread. I'm sure most of us haven't even read the story (shocker **insert a gasp here**). The problem is, what is this doing to fix the problem which is now un-deniable.
Sites like downhillbattle and all of its siblings propose large scale sweeping plans to topple the RIAA cartel. I am a muscian and the number one problem with these great plans of creating a larger "indie" scene, and having artists distribute their own songs over the internet, and getting artists to sign with Non-RIAA companies all require a public, both the artists and the consumers to be informed. As one person mentioned "The RIAA's consumer base is a bunch of stupid kids who buy...", it is not the geeks/nerds/"l33t" who support the RIAA, it is every person who goes to the store, any store and buys a CD. How innocent of a thing is this, yet it is all the RIAA needs to continue in its dominance, NO MATTER WHAT HATRED they are recieving from the few informed. They will not succumb to pressure, there is too much money involved. If we are able to take the message to the masses, and the masses hear it, understand it, accept it, and then chose to change their behaviors because of it, we can choke the RIAA off to the point where they are insignificant. And then trully there has been a solution, an end all end all. Music can then become about a communication between an artist and its audience again, and I'm sure no one can disagree that once to RIAA is removed, it is at least a step in the right direction.
What's another word for Thesaurus?
-Steve Wright
"U.S. regulators at the Federal Communications Commission should ensure that the broadcast format limits such copying so radio stations don't turn the airwaves into a giant file-sharing network, RIAA officials said."
So the RIAA doesn't want radio to become a giant sharing network?
You're the ones broadcasting your signal into our airspace. You don't want to share? Turn off the transmitter.
While the NAB doesn't exactly have the best interests of you and me in mind, the RIAA's desire to regulate every single intersection of music and commerce might cause the NAB to recognize that if they espouse the cause of less restrictive copyright, they could gain tremendous political and economic benefit.
Then again, the NAB might simply form some kind of cooperative scheme with the RIAA. But I don't think that's a foregone conclusion. Look at the good will IBM has generated by fighting SCO. Sure, IBM was forced into it by a suicidal Darl McBride, but others are likely watching how much goodwill IBM is garnering by their actions in the SCO/Linux struggle.
I know, profits are more powerful than goodwill, but goodwill can lead to profits. Maybe the NAB will grok this and take the fight to the RIAA.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
One more thing I forgot -- you might want to grab what you can from Massinova: Reborn with Streamripper. Never know when someone will take it down again due to bandwidth costs, RIAA threats, etc.
No kidding they are protesting this.. if they didn't i think the sky would fall in.
Eventually they will get a clue, but in the meantime, everyone that likes music will have to suffer.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
It's pretty simple. If it is audible to the human ear, it is audible to a Shure SM58 wired to a high-falootin' sound card - or for the low budget, a condensor mic on a portable tape recorder. It's simple physics, and to misquote Scotty, ye canna change the laws o' physics by passin' laws in the legislation.
This sig no verb.
I'm slightly confused. As far as I can work out, the RIAA wants to make it illegal to record (or spread) digital (/internet) radio.. well, since when has making something illegal stopped people doing it?
If someone wants a song, whether it be a download from irc or a rip from a radio station, they're generally just gonna get it, unless they're scared off by the gestapo tactics of these organisations.
The other thing is radio is public, so how can they sue you for having something that is essentially publicly available. Isn't that like sueing you for taping a tv show because you were out?
The (apparent) complaint is about spreading music instead of buying it, but if you take e.g. Radio 1 in the UK, it overplays so many songs to death (seriously, 6 or 7 times in the daytime) that you get sick and don't want to buy it anyway. The fact it plays it so much means you won't need to buy it, and the fact it's so overplayed means you'll get sick of it and won't want to.
I realise I've drifted off the main point there.
In all cases, the RIAA have once again spectacularly missed the point, if CDs were a reasonable price, more people would probably buy them. Not all of course, there will always be downloaders, but they're hardly gonna be swayed by a few legalities anyway so all in all the RIAA don't seem to have a clue what they're doing. Ironically, if they bothered to listen to people, they could (and we could) gain a lot more, which indicates that they aren't bothered about gain or money, they just love the power.
Get paid to search..It's geniune and
Isn't it true that the RIAA DOESN'T have jurisdiction in any other countries than USA? If digital radio listeners get fed up with the RIAA and don't want to listen to internet radio from USA sites, they can use the many radio internet sites in Europe; such as DR (Danmarks Radio) www.dr.dk, whose internet radio music is 70% American, and is CD quality!
Just remember, replacing every existing digital radio and upgrading every digital station just to install DRM is not a problem, other things that the RIAA might also consider an option in the near future: Rounding up all non-DRM hardware by force (first digital then analog), Breaking down your door and beating you on the ground for using Kazaa, Raping your wife/sister/daughter because you 'raped an artist of their work', Getting the death sentence imposed for copyright violation (by giving the government some 'gifts'), and 'buying' the rights to major historical composers such as Mozart, Beethoven and Vivaldi, sampling their work or reusing melodies to create really crap gangsta rap albums and charging orchestras royalties for playing any of the original music.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
A few years ago, when I was living in ancient Sumeria, the Hunter-Gatherers Association of Mesopotamia were not too happy about those meddling farmers with their disruptive wheat fields, orchards and dairies. "Whose gonna pay a hunter to hunt down an ox or a gatherer to gather berries from the forest when everyone's just growing their own right ouside their huts and giving away the seeds?", they whined to the Chiefs.
Fortunately the Chiefs were wise in those days.
An interesting idea would be for the artists to release separate versions of the songs which aren't commercially mastered (thus not using the equipment that RIAA-backers pay for), but I'm not sure their contracts allow independently releasing music like this. These songs could then be distributed via this system. However, such a system already existed on mp3.com where independent artists released their music and asked for donations (although, granted, mp3.com closed down as I recall, probably due to lack of profitability, which might be changed in a system where the users shoulder the cost of the bandwidth; still this runs into the same problems as Kazaa in terms of making sure there are enough distributors of the music)
Ignoring the part of this post dealing with distribution, what you're really talking about is an organized way to donate to bands so that we can feel better about pirating their music. I've wanted something like this too, but it seems there are several problems. In fact, if we could set this part of your suggestion up, even without the rest of it, then that would handle the main void that currently exists. (Get the music through whatever mechanism you want, and then have one place where you can go to donate.)
First of all, the bands' labels will probably not look too kindly on their signing up for this. Their contracts might even explicitly forbid this as some sort of exlusivity clause in who can distribute their songs. I've gone to several bands' websites in the hopes that they would even have a "Donate" thing on there just to show extra appreciation (with the implicit understanding that many people are donating in order to feel better about pirating music), but I have yet to find a band website that has such an option to donate.
Secondly, I think an issue arises in terms of authentication. So, we set up an account for a song (or, a band) and let people donate. Then you have this money sitting around. And some guy e-mails you to tell you he's the band leader and to ask for the money; how do you make sure that he's really the guy that deserves the money? This might be less of an issue for national bands than it would be for smaller bands. Now you could rely on several volunteers who are enthusiasts of the band to track down the people and figure things out, but the point is that you'll have a lot of money floating around and you need to make sure that people feel safe donating money and knowing that it's going to who it's supposed to go to. This gets even more complicated if two bands (or band members from different bands) cooperate on a song. The thing about distribution of a physical medium like a CD is that the distributor takes the time to lay out the royalty agreements ahead of time. If you get e-mails from both bands demanding the money, how do you divide it up? There are probably various ways to handle these things, but the more time/human-intensive it is, the more volunteers that are going to be required for this thing to really work. It seems like most other major donation agencies (and I think something on this scale classifies as major) hire employees. I guess that's what would need to be done here.
.
.
.
.
* Total Crap As Content.
Sigs are bad for your health.
I don't know if anyone still does this but I dub music off the radio with an old cassette deck. I then convert it through my sound card to digital. Albeit, it isn't that great of a quality but it's enough for myself and those that are with me.
I've had XM for over a year and listen daily in the car. The reason I got XM was because I absolutely hate the junk that is heard in Clearchanel dominated market I live in.
Not once have I thought of recording anything from XM. Since most XM radios have line outputs for amplifiers, it would be easy to plug in a laptop and record to wav or even mp3 with no problem. This article put the idea in my head, courtesy of the RIAA. Good job guys.
I've bought quite a few CD's from "new" artists that I actually had a chance to hear on XM. XM definately helps the labels sell more CD's since Clearchanel doesn't play what the public wants to hear anymore.
The few decent artists that are played to death on broadcast radio don't seem worth the $15 to buy. Hell, I could hear the same song every time I turn on the radio anyway. But the ones that I hear on XM are new and aren't jammed down my throat. I WANT to buy the CD's. Nobody feels good ripping off the underdog artists, but we all write off the radio artists as the enemy, thus they are exploitable.
The RIAA seems to want control over which artists are popular more than they want money from listeners. In any other business, the stockholders would have voted out anyone who repeatedly made such bad decisions. It just makes no sense.
If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
"Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough."
You don't need a lab to make mud.
That's interesting. There are a few things that I think would have to be worked out, though.
1. Is it going to be a record label? Or just a collective of home recording artists? If I were in a band, and I had to choose between a record label which would promote me and a collective which would rely on donations and word of mouth, I'd pick the label. Since I would want this to be my job, I'd want to guarantee myself some money rather than just rely on the goodwill of others.
2. The bandwidth issue: don't just encourage the artists to help pay with bandwidth, their priorities are paying their own bills, not the organization's. You have to MAKE them pay for the bandwidth by setting up the payment structure properly. I've known people who are in touring bands. When they tour, the goal is to leave the show with enough money for food and gas. Laundry and showers next. Fat chance they'll be paying for your bandwidth voluntarily.
3. People without internet access who enjoy music. You're alienating a large part of the prospective audience if you just distribute via the internet. Another reason why a conventional label wins out. A regular record label can put CDs in stores and press them for the band to bring on tour. The internet cannot, or would rely on the artist doing that work themselves. Not convenient.
I think the best way to do this is to do it like Emusic.com, where they have set up deals with record labels to sell access to mp3s of bands who have a record label deal already. That way there are CDs in the stores and mp3s being sold. And you don't have to rely on the generosity of the community to download files, as you would with BitTorrent. The "alternative path" that you are thinking of MUST include CDs in stores, or some kind of kiosk sort of device, so people can easily get a hold of albums. But I agree, more choice is good. I think there is a decent alternative, though, and that includes independent record labels. I think Warp Records has it right, offer digital downloads as well as provide a good distribution system for brick and mortar stores.
We're geeks, right? We're the sorcerers of the modern-day world. Without us, nothing happens and no-one works.
The RIAA can try this all they like, but if they succeed in getting the restrictions they want, we'll break them, we'll show others how to break them and we'll pirate the content out over the web just to make sure they learn that if they fuck with us they'll get hurt.
There's a lesson pending for the RIAA, and its this. Our rights as consumers are not up for renegotiation, and we don't want our rights to be protected (enforced) by expensive and unreliable DRM. RIAA, you can accept this, or you can pay up for the technology only to see us painlessely circumvent it. We will not be governed by you. That's not the way it works
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
They don't do it to prevent you from making copies of the music, they do it because it's a slicker way to DJ. It sounds better, and more importantly, it prevents dead air. Dead air's a real no-no if you're a radio DJ.
How the hell does the RIAA protest? Do they stop selling crap music until their demands are met?
Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me
Not only does this advance permit making a copy a live performance that can be played back multiple times without additional recompense to the artist. But soon enough it became possible to make virtually unlimited copies of that performance, all of which could be shared by loaning the recording to other people who hadn't bought them. After all, everyone who wishes to listen to a performance even once should have to buy the product.
Moral: Watch out for people who would ban progress to protect their own narrow (and greedy) interests. They don't care about the effect on anyone else as long as their own niche is protected.
Note: If it takes money to make music, and the money disappears because of sharing and copying, then the music will disappear. Then the people who want the music will find a way to pay for it, and it will return -- perhaps cheaper once the RIAA tax is gone.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
....they'd be working on ways to increase how much money an artist makes per CD rather than worrying about stopping people from listening to the artists material.
There are a lot of things in the music industry today that are a lot more screwed up and costing artists a lot more money then file sharing and downloading.
When asked for any additional comments, he would only say "Let them play wax - we'll show the customer who is king."
Sigs are bad for your health.
OT but Howard Stern gets dropped from Clear Channel because he is critical of Bush's War on Iraq.
100% wrong. Howard was gung-ho in favor of the war. He only went against Bush (and the war, if he has complained about that, but I haven't heard one way or the other) when he correctly blamed Bush for Clear Channel firing him.
Everybody really needs to know about this.
http://m4mrecordlabel.com/
i know i posted this elsewhere, but frankly people need to know. My friends need help getting more bands under their organization.
I know this process works. for christ sake, Eminem mentioned hed kill everyone who downloaded his CD, EVERYBODY and their mother did... it was the most downloaded thing on the internet, THEN when his album came out, it was one of the Fastest selling albums.
While Napster was around, Cd sales where the highest ever, it was after THEY shut napster down that everything began to fail. THEY believed it was because people were downloading for free instead of buying CDs. It was because there was no access to the music to know what you want to buy.
I would download the album, but also have a purchased CD version. I believe many people also do that, which is what my friends business is based off of. Hes not looking to make the money, infact the business is for the artists not royaly screwing over artists in not being able to pay all their fees to cover making one CD.
Help these guys out... Free the music. Bring music to where it was originally intended. Music For the Masses!
That just simply wouldn't work as it would be effective suicide for the radio stations. What, precisely, would be left to play? fifty year old yodelling tapes? The consumers expect that stuff.
Listening == advertising == money for the radio station.
Eventually someone would come along who *was* willing to play RIAA stuff, and he'd be rich, because he'd be able to sell advertising again, because people would be listening -- unlike the guys with the yodelling tapes.
Unfortunately the great masses of people out there really do appear to want to hear the music, don't know/care about artist compensation, that other music is being made, nor would they care if it's not Brittany Spears.
It's like a lot of things in current North American culture -- some of us think it's just complete dreck (ie all 'reality' shows) but if the great shopping public tunes in, it stays on the air, because they can sell the advertising for more money.
Except for some college-radio type stuff, you can't exactly walk away from the RIAA's music and expect the public to listen. (At least here in North America, hopefully people outside of North America can get better access to non-RIAA stuff.)
Unfortunately when the RIAA (or MPAA) move to block technology like this, while it gets us riled up, the average person on the street doesn't know about it and might need a small bit of background information to understand the issue and why they should care.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
The NAB (their members obviously)has been sticking the hand out for decades accepting the paylola money, and colluding with them to keep microbroadcasters and independents off the air, about as unfair and crooked as you can get, they know how the game is played, and it's a crooked game. So NOW they go OMG, THIS AIN'T FAIR!
duh It's like a falling out between two mafia gangs. There's no good guys here to speak of.
NAB=crooked
MAFFIA=crooked
bad guys=known to rip each other off
FCC=crooked beat cop "on the pad"
joe citizen=screwed as usual, and somehow it's all his fault and there needs to be a "crack down" on joe citizen
...that the USA just outlaw music all together. That way the RIAA dies and we can start over again from scratch in about 75 years...isn't that the current 'Mickey Mouse' mandate by the government?
[SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
RIAA is a threat to music makers and music lovers and needs to have its power curtailed before things get any more ridiculous. There has to be a way to render RIAA powerless, such as developing off shore production and distribution that is not under RIAA control. It's up to the music makers and distribution channels to make this happen, and soon. RIAA is all about harassment; its a bunch of greedy lawyers, based in NYC who are all about exploitation and harassment.
No matter who gets the short end in this one I will
feel better.
The perfect outcome would be if they kill each other off.
Reminds of shortwave. Its virtually unlistenable. The way the channels phase. Its like fingernails on a chalkboard.
Might as well listen to SomaFM; their streams are 128kb/s, which is like good FM radio.
No wonder you guys think 128kb/s AAC's sound as good as the CD, you're deaf!
just put the price of plastic down? This is totally ridiculous. They're soooo worried about their "lost revenue", but the problem isn't the internet, or any other "new" technology (that's been around ages, they just didn't pull their heads out of their arses to notice it!). The problem is the price of a CD is outrageous. Its overpriced. Want to make people buy more? Put the prices down. Its simple economics. More people will buy more CDs if they don't feel that they are being raped when they buy one.
...when recording from an analog signal that was reconstructed from a digital one?
i.e. I could take my XM satellite radio (if I had one) such as the XM PCR Radio (as reviewed by another site other than the XM Radio one). I could plug the output into the input of my sound card... and capture the audio going in. The article I linked to above mentions the fringe benefit of being able to record from the XM PCR Radio using a third party program, thanks to the fact that the radio is designed to be plugged into the input of a computer sound card.
Of course there could be local noise which the analog signal would be susceptible to, and the sound card needs to be good enough to re-encode the decoded digital signal...
But really... can the degradation be that great... and how good are even the 'cheap and nasty' sound cards at capturing and re-coding audio?
Because as countless others have posted, people have been taping the radio for years. And right now, the technology exists (and is likely to continue to exist for some time yet) that allows us to circumvent any so-called digital protection by going through the analog chain.
Or does it really require a very high end PC with the best sound card around? Personally, I think not, because I think that technology has advanced far enough for even 'bog standard' PC equipment that is sold even in places like Wal-Mart have just about enough computer power and sound card hardware to create a CD-quality digital recording from a suitable analog input. But then I am not an audiophile, so I cannot state this as absolute fact... and would appreciate any clarification.
Thanks, Mark.
riaa is up to its old tricks
sco still sueing ibm
microsoft hates linux
YAWN
we really do need something really fresh...
FM digital radio is a C R O C K!
The audio fidelity is about that of a mediocre mp3 stream via the internet. Anyone that wants to sit around and cherry pick songs off of an HD radio...deserves what they paid for...CRUMMY audio fidelity.
I guarantee that the audio is WORSE than when I used to record songs off of FM to a cassette 20 years ago.
This is one of several examples of where the advent of digital won't improve a THING.
The RIAA needs to seriously check itself in and realize that the music industry has begun a rebound because downloading has recently been legitimized.
Waaaah! Waaaah waaah waaaaaaaaaaaah! Waaaaaaaah!
Really the most funniest thing that RIAA.
Who are they?
I have no fear of them , because I am not of the USA
But I see that they are going to do more damage to the Artist.
Fight the RIAA and keep the freedom!
I truly wanted to write something insightful about this story. I wanted to make a logical balanced statement about why the RIAA is simply wrong and will eventually die due to their own greed. I wanted to write something that would illuminate and entertain and was suitable for all age groups to read.
Unfortunately I couldn't do that. Every time I now think about the RIAA and whatever approach they are currently trying to keep their grip on the fat cash they make screwing over the artist, customer, and anyone else who gets in the way I can only ever think of two words.
"Fuck Them"
So that's my post. Don't be too hard on me mods because I tried. Maybe I've seen one too many RIAA stories or something but those four letters just draw one response from me at this point and that was it.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
RIAA wants to sell you something w/o actually giving you anything for your money! Yay, that makes sense! Uhm, I think I will keep my money instead of throwing it down the drain.
Must-not-watch TV!
So the industry gets caught -- yet again! -- with their hand in the cookie jar, cooking their own damn charts by having big hits played in the middle of the night shift as "ads" to avoid soiling themselves with the 'payola' scarlet letter. Now, their lobby groups wants to prevent people from 'cherry-picking' tunes off super-snazzy digital radio?
WTF?
If it's an open secret that most music now is shit and every album is designed to have one, maybe two, big hit(s) to draw in the suckers, what's the problem? Doesn't this solve the industries lagging money woes and distribution issues? They simply drop free (ad-driven) radio as a medium and move exclusively to digital (subscription) radio, demand a huge jack in price and a big 'ole piece o' the pie.
No fuss, no muss. The broadcast flags become unnecessary (in the beginning at least), as they^H^H^H^H^H the artists are being paid for their 'labors'.
Personally, with the advent of studios in a box and whatnot, I'd think more performers would forego big studios altogether, hit the road and sell CDs out the backs of their cars. A groundswell starts and you use the Internet for world-wide distribution outside the usual chains. That is, of course, assuming it really is still 'all about the music' and not mere, grubby cash and swishy lifestyle perks.
Odd that...
Kingstrum
Where would we be today if:
The horse-drawn carriage association (HDCA) lobbied congress to institute legislation to prevent the sale of automobiles?
The typewriter manufacturers lobbied congress to prevent the introduction of computers, as it would hurt the sales of typewriters? [On the countrary, the most successful typewriter manufacturer became the largest computer manufacturer (for a while, anyway)].
Witchdoctors had lobbied congress to prevent medical science as it would hurt their business.
The recording industry itself would not exist if local musicians had successfully lobbied congress arguing that mass produced music would cut down on business for local musicians.
New technologies will ultimately wipe out industries that do not adapt. Deal.
Oh, and there is a reason why digital radio won't hurt the RIAA basket case industries much: Clear Channel Communications (the corporate world's answer to "dead air"). With such short playlists you could only record an hours worth of music - and why would you want to record them anyway since they are repeated every hour, anyway. We actually had a radio station locally that as a promotion once decided to play every song in their library in alphabetical order. It was a tremendous improvement even if it only lasted a few weeks. Normally, they played short play lists (and they were bought by clear channel). Station management explained that surveys showed the average listener only listed for about 15 minutes a day and the radio station needed to give them the most popular songs when they tuned in. Kinda becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
Now, it would be interesting if someone came up with a way to make digital radio a viable distribution mechanism (particularly for car players). Unfortunately, this would probably require at least a light handed form of DRM or players would be sold that would defeat the financial viability. For example, you have a car radio with a built in hard drive that can store songs and buttons that you can press to indicate if you like or don't like the songs. The radio plays songs intersperced with commercials (as separate OGG files). But the radio remembers which songs you have said in the past you do or don't like so when the radio station broadcasts one which you don't like it substitutes one which you do like which was recorded on the hard disk. Further, the radio learns which genres and artists you do and don't like and preferentially records those when broadcast. Eventually, your radio is mostly ignoring the audio stream from the station while playing songs you indicate you liked or ones it predicts you will like. The radio mixes in the commercials from radio channels in proportion to the percentage of songs played from those channels. Now, radio stations have an incentive to broadcast a wide variety of music. And the consumer could be given a choice to purchase songs already downloaded (for a reasonable price of, say,$0.50 each). When you played a purchased song, the player would remove the radio station commercial tag. The radio could remain powered on for a specified time after you turned of the ignition recording additional songs. Also, the radio system could have more bandwidth than needed so it could stream songs faster than real time alowing even radios with limited storage to excercise some degree of selection. Each song transmitted would have a commercial price (say 0.20 units) and a station id. Each time a song was played the palyer would credit that price to a particular station's talley and once it reached 1.00 units the player would play a recent commercial from that station (and then deduct the price (1.00) of that commercial) from the total. Longer commercials could have a higher price and shorter ones a smaller price, and likewise for songs. Stations (and other distributers) would kick back a portion of the advertiser revenue to artists and artists would kick back a portion of the song sales revenue to the distributor. Maybe more pop
DAB/HDradio/IBOC/Ibiquity what ever you want to call it is not CD quality. It is a very poor codec that is limited to 96Kb/s. Some stations will only be using 64Kb/s. In fact Ibiquity had to shotgun the current coded to move to another as the current one sounded so bad.
Second, you can copy music now and stamp the resulting MP3 files with meta data from RDBS. There is no difference from what is going on right now with analog radio and what will be happening with DAB. In many cases, the audio will sound better from the analog broadcast.
Tim
The cat's already out of the bag... Heard of Replay Music?
This clever program records internet radio streams or songs from services like Rhapsody & Napster, splits tracks into individual MP3s, and even automatically tags the MP3 files with the title and artist info. It records with great quality, too.
Check it out here:
www.replay-music.com
there are how many million people that download music, "legally" or not online.. I say if a significant portion showed up in DC on a single day, that would do more than all this pandering on /.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
I listen to one particular public radio station on occasion.
The only advertising I here is the 'today's broadcast sponsored by' message used as a 'station break/id' BETWEEN content blocks or the lengthier pledge drive segments used in the same manner. Other than that, this kind of public radio is much better than the regular ad-ridden, DJ yapping radio stations which I'd rather not listen to because the music played on such stations do little more than break up the constant, round the clock ad delivery by DJs and commercials.
Web repository of songs you can download without any DRM crap, you pay the artist whatever you think it's worth... Yeps, it's there!
Not quite as "ideal" as div_2n described, but we're getting closer:
http://www.magnatune.com/
Cool stuff, those guys rock.
You mean they can't just wave their hands and make it disappear?
Doesn't have RIAA something better to do? Like creating awful songs for their crappy artists? Or signing deals with other/new soon-to-be-very-crappy suc^h^h^h artists?
Next thing, they will forbid listening to music, because you could _remember_ the songs...
80 CC D8 AF AE D3 AB 54 B7 2E CE 67 C7
What's with the 'Muaaaaaks' thing?
It makes me think of the sound Frank Zappa makes at the end of a song called Baby Take Your Teeth Out.
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
At best, we're taking about 96kbps audio. However, many stations (e.g., NPR) are pursuing dual-program configurations in which the 'main' audio would be transmitted at only 64kbps.
The RIAA is afraid of us recording 96 (or likely, 64) kbps (highly compressed) audio. With a good signal at a stationary location, some would argue that current FM sounds as good (if not better) than the compressed version. (At the end of the day, it's a subjective issue.) It would seem the RIAA is attempting to make radio more restrictive than it currently is.
Your monitor is staring at you.
Go to this website and listen to these two Nickelback songs (2001 & 2003) played simultaneously on left & right channels. This is proof that they just want to turn out the same crap with least amount of effort. The songs have the exact same melody, instrumentation, just different words, but otherwise eerily identical. Don't support this crap force fed to us on MTV and the CC owned radio.
This is really interesting to listen to. Not that I didn't know that all Nickelback had going for them were two chords and a bad haircut, but I kinda actually enjoyed this whilst I was being force fed it on the radio.
Does the RIAA realize that killing P2P will only make the most creative artists that debut on the Internet go away? They don't have the money to pay big royalties to get CDs made. P2P makes the artists more popular and encourages people to go to concerts, which make the artists more money than CDs ever do!
Remember, beneath every cynic there lies a romantic, probably an injured one.