Slashdot Mirror
Beastie Boys' New Album Silently Installs DRM Code
nfsilkey writes "After more than five years, the Beastie Boys have released a new album. It seems that the retail disc is bundled with a copy protection autoinstaller which silently silently puts itself onto the listener's computer. Many listeners are up in arms and some are venting their frustrations on the band's website."
Let's see, this is something that spreads without the user's consent, and is probably difficult to get rid of. Sounds like a virus to me.
It's hard to believe that a band that has prided itself on pushing the envelope and being controversial would do something like this. These people obviousle cared enough to buy the CD, why would the record industry need to protect themselves from them? It's just another way for them to control what we can and cannot do, thereby infringing on my rights. When I can't even listen to my music without worrying about what programs may be being installed on my computer, we've let them go too far.
As a computer, I am amused by the faith you have in technology.
Don't tell me that if this really bothered them, they couldn't start their own damn label and find their own distribution channels. The time when artists of with this level of success and that large of a following still had to play the corporate bullshit game is over. Period. Contract, you say? Break up, add a fucking backup dancer and call yourselves something else. No excuses, put your money where your mouth is.
"You know why you do not see me styling wit my homies? Because I have no homies!!" -Mojo Jojo
it should be flat out illegal for anybody to install software on someone elses computer w/o the owners written permission - that goes for spyware, virus, marketing research firms, even Microsoft, and this. Just because you're network connected or pop in a CD doesn't give everybody and his brother the right to take over part of your machine in ANY way. It's so bizarre that govt. enforces access rights for govt business and military machines but personal home computers, pfft, it's like an open free for all.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
Everywhere but the US / UK? Nice way to set a precident - act as though people outside US/UK don't count. If it's "okay" to you, it'll probably be "okay" when the next wave of albums all have DRM because it would only be more expensive to only put DRM on some versions of the album.
Anyway, it sounds as though they're too gutless to have taken the correct action:
d) Dump EMI.
I'm sure there are a hundred other record labels that would have loved the chance to release a Beastie Boys album (worldwide, without DRM). Contracts probably prevented it though.. I can't imagine that they'd let an act like the Beastie Boys slip away without putting up some sort of fight.
This is why I love owning a Mac :D No viruses. No silly self-installing apps.
Yet.
i agree 100% the beats and rhymes are nothing like their old stuff... this album isn't worth protecting
It's a simple fact that people expect to be able copy their CDs.
Lately people have been prosecuted for writing a virus, well, whoever wrote this needs to be prosecuted the same way.
1. It is malicious (prevents you from copying the CD as you noramlly would be able to.
2. It silently installs itself, masquarading as a
standard Audio CD (I'm sorry, 5" music disc)
How is that different than any other trojan horse?
If I remember correctly, go to Start-Run, and type gpedit.msc (that's from what little I remember from when I was using XP, so it may be wrong), and then click on System in the window that appears. In the right panel, there should be an option called Autorun. Change it to false. I may be wrong about some of the details, since it's been a while since I ran XP.
Actually, classic Mac OS allowed autorunning of files/scripts/applications on a CD before Windows did. Supposedly OS X doesn't anymore.
17" eMac $799.00 USD for Combo Drive version with 40GB HD or 999.00USD for the 8X DVD-R/RW drive version with 80GB HD.
Not to mention all of the bundled software.
How much is virus free a, commercial software compatiblity (photoshop and most of the hottest games) computing experience worth to you?
Yes, linux is immune to windows viruses but it lacks commercial software, hardware support and ease of use.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
I bet it does not install on os x or linux...
||| I still can't believe Parkay's not butter.
I really do hope the courts do something about this passive signing away of your rights. I call it passive because the agreements define for themselves what agreeing to them means, so they are by nature fraudulent. So buying a product is a legal signature? So is opening a CD case, or installing software? They can put all the "Read the EULA"'s they want, but I don't see how any specific number of warnings suddenly merits compliance by law.
By reading this you acknowledge my right to use your computer to research how better to write future comments. Oh yeah you have to give me your stuff too if you break our agreement. By reading this sentence you have broken our agreement. The next bag of potato chips you open signifies your compliance to turn over all properties that can be used to drink out of.
when boys who where rebels become middle aged...
Beastie boys my ass
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
They're entertainers. Revolution was never their intent. MONEY is their intent. All rock bands want to get rich and famous once they get signed. If they can flaunt their politics and change the world along the way, hey, that's cool. But those checks had better keep coming. Anyone that thinks that this isn't the aim of almost all bands from the start are fools. And please, use John Lennon as an example. Paul McCartney has said that during songwriting, Lennon would say things like "Cool, I've got a boat, now let's write a Pool" when penning new songs.
There's no such thing as a band "selling out". That's naive bullshit. They're an entertainment act, created to make lots of money. Period. They preach the revolution, because they know you guys will pony up your cash and buy into it. It sells records.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
And this highlights the major flaw behind the "This doesn't happen on MY platform," argument. If you are advocating that Windows sucks because it has the most viruses, or spyware, etc and people should therefore switch to your platform (Mac, Linux, whatever) since it does not, you are misunderstanding cause and effect.
The reason that people target Windows is because it is, BY FAR, the largest consumer OS. Well over 90% of desktops run it. Thus if you want the widest distribution of something, be it software or malware, Windows is your target. However, should another platform raise to dominance, or even just large enough to make it make sense, you'll see it targeted as well.
An excellent example of this in action is website malware. Some sites you browse to try and install some crappy software on your computer, usually spyware but sometimes worse. Now for a good while, this was an IE only problem. It was all ActiveX apps, so only IE users were ever prompted to install.
However Mozilla/Firefox are getting to be quite popular these days. The number of converts I know continues to grow, and it's not just the tech savvy crowd either; I know plenty of non-savvy users who are now non-IE.
Well, the malware writers have responded to the trend, and now many sites attempt to throw an XPI at you if you are on Mozilla/Firefox, as well as the ActiveX control for IE. The market is now big enough (and the additonal work minimal enough) to warrant doing this.
So, if one of the main reasons you like Linux, OS-X, or any other non-Windows platform is that it remains below the radar of most virus writers, spyware authors, and so on then I suggest you work to KEEP it that way and DON'T advocate it. You don't want it becomming big because, if it does, you'd have to abandon it for another platform.
If you do want Linux/Mac growing to dominance, that's great, but then don't try to argue benefits gained form obscurity. If Linux becomes dominant then most apps will be written for it. This includes legitimate software, and malware alike. Both kinds of authors will target what is the most popular and espically in the case of malware, where the most clueless users reside.
And if they say no, the goddamned thing doesn't play, they take it back to the store and get a refund.
What this evil corporation is saying, is: "Fuck you. We own you. We own your computer. You'll take it and like it, because protecting our digital rights trump fucking up your piece of shit from Dell, you fucking Joe Sixpack sheeple. If you don't like it call your Congresscritter. Oops, we own it, too."
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
It's now in Hardware Category of System Prefs. "CDs & DVDs" Icon.
So, by default, when I insert an audio CD, my PowerBook is set to launch iTunes. Is there some type of exploit or buffer overrun that is hijacking iTunes and telling it to install malware? I don't see how this is possible. iTunes will just read the audio data from the CD, as far as I know.
Could you please provide more information? Thanks.
"When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
Looks like maybe the days of "it's okay, nothing will ever infect my machine, since nobody bothers to write things like this for macs" are coming to an end.
...and you can thank your iPod for that one.
For you angry fans... :
There are two simple solutions
1) Don't buy it
2) If you already bought it then return it
If everybody keeps their bought copy, they won't get the message.
What bothers the hell out of me, though, is that it can be done.
How in the world can I trust *anything* that willy-nilly follows whatever orders someone else tells *my* machine to do, leaving me powerless to override? The most surprising thing to me is that business is taking this. Do they really think only "good guys" know where the unlocked back doors to the operating system are?
Stuff like this just convinces me further that anyone even thinking of using this kind of system in a business environment needs to have his salary and standing in his organization re-evaluated.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
To trigger the maximum penalty, you would have to incur $2,500 in those 10 seconds. So if you could convince the court that sometimes you charge $900,000 an hour....
;)
On another note, if you take a look at 609.87 Subd. 12:
Destructive computer program.
"Destructive computer program" means a computer program that performs a destructive function or produces a destructive product. A program performs a destructive function if it degrades performance of the affected computer[yep], associated peripherals[yep] or a computer program[definately]; disables the computer[partially], associated peripherals[uh huh] or a computer program[of course]; or destroys or alters computer programs or data. A program produces a destructive product if it produces unauthorized data, including data that make computer memory space unavailable[e.g., the copy protection keys]; results in the unauthorized alteration of data or computer programs; or produces a destructive computer program, including a self-replicating computer program[To be determined].
This definition gives a pretty clear cut case against them. Particularly if you were the one that disagreed to the EULA and it installed anyway. However, there doesn't appear to be any other clarifications or penalties definitions referencing this excerpt.
I'm no expert in law, but I'm thinking you could take this as a "no maximums" kind of deal, and claim $50 billion per millisecond of seek time...assuming your running Windows (a.k.a. the Codename Logwhore security model has given the Internet access to your hard drive) and that every employee in North America might have needed to accidentally jack your data at that moment in time for important business. Hey, everything that isn't impossible can happen, no matter how improbable
On a more serious note, the entire Minnesota statutes e-law-book (link goes to chapter 609) can be found here.
Use the power of your dollar and boycott the band and the label!
So to avoid having the CD install DRM software on your computer, you used a DRM system you already had (iTunes) to buy the songs in AAC format with DRM?
Not only is that site heavy on the propaganda, light on the facts, the author isn't aware of how the whole malware situation works. Spyware type malware gets on the user's sustem through an action of the user. For the web variety you visit a site and a popup asks you if you want to install Comet Cursor, or whatever the spyware calls itself. If you click yes, it downloads and installs. For the trojan type, it just piggybacks on other apps. Kazaa RQUIRES you to install and leave installed several peices of spyware to use it. It even TELLS you this. None the less, people install it willingly.
There is NO DEFENCE against this so long as the user has administrative access to the system. If they WANT to install it, they will. If it asks for admin, big deal, software does that all the time when it installs. I've never seen a Mac user give a second though to entering the root password in during a software install.
For viruses, the situation is about the same. The vast majority of viruses these days are e-mail viruses. A person recieves an e-mail that has an attachment claiming to be something they should open. They do so, and it installs a virus, that then proceeds to e-mail itself out to people on their contact list. Again, this is a USER INITATED ACTION. It's not sneaking itself in through a hole, it's waltzing in through the front door. Again nothing you can do if the user has admin access.
As for exploit viruses, which are a good deal rarer than e-mail viruses, these could possibly reduced on alternate platforms. It is possible that MacOS really is less prone to exploits than Windows. Unforunately, this isn't really testable at this point since there is less effort devoted to looking for OX-X exploits than for Windows exploits. However it is dangerous huburis to think that a UNIX basis equals security. I invite you to look at the history of Solaris/SunOS security holes. Here is real, enterprise grade UNIX, and it has a rich history of security problems. Again, this is not ot say that MacOS might not be better, but one cannot infer it is better from the fact that it is UNIX, or from the fact that it has less found exploits (that you don't know they are there does not mean they are not there).
Oh and by the way, saying "Windoze" just makes you, and your argument, look immature. It does no good since you aren't going to convince anyone that Windows has faults though simple name calling. Keep it professional and people are more likely to listen to what you have to say.
Ahh, good point. I also hear you can stop 100% of popups and ads by having a text only browser. Further I'm told that ALL remote exploits are stopped by not having a computer on the Itnernet.
Amazing isn't it? If there is no service, there can be no denial. The problem is that most people WANT things that make their life easier, their computing experience nicer. Trying to advertise an non-Windows OS as better because it lacks a feature is not a very good idea. That shows lack of polish and completeness to most people.
I can't blame Microsoft for the auto-run thing. It was simply a way to make the computing experience easier on their users. Rather than needing to find the correct file to run (which is usually setup, but not always), simply make the CD come up by itself when inserted. It isn't their fault that some asshats have corrupted this in to installing software without user consent.
This is akin to blaming the creators of the SMTP spec for SPAM. They created a useful spec that allowed for the non-realtime interchange of messages. Good idea too, as it was one of two killer apps of the Internet (the web being the other). Without e-mail, I'm not sure the Internet would have taken off like it did. Well, some fucks have now figured out how to abuse it for their own gain. That's the fault of the spammers, not the creators of SMTP.
So advocate Linux on the things it does better, not the things it does not do.
Why was this modded insightful?? Presumably the moderators are as dumb as the author. The "or" before "with intent to injure or defraud" means that this is not a necessary provision, just that it may be sufficient. Learn English, people...
Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
I have to wonder if anyone who suggests setting up Windows like that has actually tried it and used it. Everyone I know that has tried that approach usually gives up in a short amount of time and just runs as a full blown Administrator. Multiple users on Windows still seems like a hack on top of their old single user, non-networked, Dos-based OSes to me.
If you do not have admin privileges on an OSX Mac, then no software can install, whether classic or otherwise. Also, when an audio CD is inserted the user can be prompted whether to allow an install. That install STILL will not happen if the user is not admin. So, all Mac users should make a non-admin account for day today use and another admin account for installing software and other admin tasks.
AAW
All theory is gray
The EULA's power stems from how a computer works. Because a computers' processor has registers, it must copy the cd over and over and read/write it in order to play the CD. This essentially requires you to have their permission to copy.
No it doesn't. The supremes have ruled that copying a copyrighted work is perfectly fine so long as it is required to actually make use of said work (other conditions notwithstanding). If I own a copy of some CD, I can play it - this isn't really debatable. If the CD contains an EULA, I can ignore it, as I already have the right to use it under copyright law. You could make a similar argument for software, but I am not aware of any specific precedent.
"We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
Heck yeah! I'll take a somewhat manageable DRM any day of the week instead of some auto-loaded DRM crap that I can't control (or much-less know about) myself.
You, sir, are an idiot. Let's extend your logic beyond computers and contemplate the idea of using lockless doors. Damn, it's just too much trouble to find those keys when I just want to get into my own house! Why not eliminate the locks once and for all so it would be much easier to get in after a night of partying. Sure, my house will be easier to burglarize, but blame that on the burglers!
I'm terribly sorry to inform you that basic security ALWAYS invloves some level of inconvienence to legimate users and computers are no exception -- welcome to reality.
And the message I get from this is:
Do not buy this album. If I want to hear it, download it instead.
Their instruction is just crystal clear. Yes; it sucks that Windows auto-installs crap off CDs, and yes, there's easy ways around that. But to arrive at that is to miss the point. The point is that if you don't want their DRM, don't buy the product... you can get the music for a nice $0.00, without rewarding their vile practice.
If people in the biz are reading this, please take note: DRM offends and insults and disrespects those who you're trying to sell to. You're only getting sales from the ignorant, and I'm working to reduce their numbers by telling as many friends / family members as I can to stop buying big label music. Flat out stop. Download, buy used, or go with small, respectable labels. (I do still buy, generally direct from small artists; the rest... fuck 'em. Not a dime to the RIAA from me.)
If you agree, you can help... simply assist as many people as you can to find alternatives to buying big label music. If people really want the latest Beastie / other-pop album, there's torrents, k-lite, etc... and the price is better. Is it wrong? Is killing in a war wrong? I'm working to destroy my enemy or change their stance here; that is the nature of war. You gotta fight... It may be company policy, but you're still sell-out bitches, Beastie Boys (and I love some of your work... oh, well).
In the 1980s. The software industry tried all this copy control nonsense with Commodore 64 software. Many companies did not survive the backlash. The record labels will not learn until everyone stops buying. Any business that alienates their customers deserves to fail. Vote with your pocket books. Stop feeding the hand that bites you.
That's Bigboo TAY! TAY!
Is there any reason to have autorun "on" in the first place ? One of the first things I do when I set up a system is disable it. I would like to choose which app to use, not rely on the OS to decide. I saw a previous story about the new Velvet Revolver CD having copy protection. I came home after buying it, popped it into my CDR, and burned it to MP3 for my car player. I would have never known it was copt protected until I saw the story. BTW I have never had a DRM disk that would not burn in CDEX
Save a Life. Donate Blood. Please.
TCPA is an enabling technology to implement hardware-level digital control technology (DRM). The idea being that the'trusted platform module' has the ability to create locked boxes that the user of the computer can choose to run or to not run, but any code in that locked box cannot be modified by the user. (well, it can, but if it is, the platform module will refuse to relinquish decryption keys so it'll end up being nonfunctional.)
If I want to enforce a control technology on your computer, I need some way to keep users from modifying the very program enforcing my policy choices, I need TCPA or some other hardware control technology that keeps my program from being modified.
In one sense, this is security, I know that any sowftware runnign under TCPA/Palladium won't be changed by any virus and will only be given decryption keys only if its unmodified by any virus or worm. But at another level, it is *the* enabling technology to let anyone install *arbitrary* digital control technology, creating *arbitrary* hoops for me to go through on my computer before I can access the data it controls access to.
Can you say ripe for abuse?
Well - then I'm waiting for the first worm that ;-)
installs DRM as well as a backdoor and cannot
be legally removed.
That sounds unlikely. Perhaps with the Mac equivalent of the RPM you're prompted for a password, but installing simply means "putting the stuff where it's useful."
So unless you Mac users require a password to copy a file from A to B, where you have read access in A and write in B, then it seems unlikely that this can 't install without your knowledge.
im in ur
"The EULA's power stems from how a computer works. Because a computers' processor has registers, it must copy the cd over and over and read/write it in order to play the CD."
First, that's not true. There's nothing stopping CD drives to stream sound directly to the speakers (hey, look, there's a headphone plug on my CD drive...; okay, my DVD+-RW drive doesn't have one).
Second, even if the above *were* true, it's nothing. Why? Because to view a page of a book, you have to shine light on it which means there's a copy "suspended" in the air by photons. Even with brail, your fingers would be temporarily deformed into a copy of the text you read. So, there's no reasonable way that temporary copy doesn't occur regardless of the work. All this discussion about temporary copies and acting like a computer is somehow "magical" is stupid.
By buying a copy of a copyrighted work, you have a fundamental right to use said work. That's what First Sale Doctrine is about (and please realize, First Sale Doctrine is an inherent part of copyright, not something written up that can be taken away; it doesn't make any logical sense to allow for a copyright owner to copyright a work, sell copies, then make it impossible for someone to actually *use* the copies; doing so fundamental goes against the idea of "promoting the progress of the arts and sciences" as it's impossible to advance the arts or sciences if you can't access a work, so the idea the people would give an author exclusive rights to such a work is ridiculous).
Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
The false or fraudulent part? It's fine to sell people a CD which says it's "copy protected" that is hard to copy. But it's not fine if that CD is designed to install stuff onto people's computers without their explicit permission - remember they bought the CD to listen to the stuff, not to install software, especially software that is USELESS or perhaps even damaging to them and only USEFUL to the CD creators.
This is "trojan horse" software.
If this is legal then creators of webpages could legally install software of their choice into systems of people who just browse a page containing copyrighted content, and say it's "copy protection". e.g. install stuff like monitoring/blocking software so that they could keep track of the user's activities - "to ensure that the terms of use are complied to".
Even if there's an agreement with lots of fine-print to click on doesn't necessarily make it OK. Otherwise those wormmakers will be spreading those greeting card/screen saver stuff which does other things that's written in the fine print (like allow the worm makers to use the PC for whatever they want).
How about if I sold you a movie DVD that hypnotized you so that you would never ever willingly make copies of that DVD for whoever or whatever reason? A "Copy Protected" label doesn't count. If the DVD was explicitly about convincing people not to copy then that's different - there is no or little deception involved.
I have over 700 CDs, and on average buy about 60 or so a year. I do not copy my CDs and I have no copied CDs as I respect intellectual property and feel that artists should be appropriately rewarded for their hard work.
However, after ill-advisedly buying a copy prohibited disk (Norah Jones), I had to get my car serviced to get the disk out. This cost me a morning of my time, and $70, plus I have a disk I can't use and couldn't return as Borders felt that I had copied it, even though I showed them the VW dealership receipt.
Norah has released a second album. I will not be buying it. I will not buy any copy prohibited disks. Ever. Not even if you pay for my lost time and my bills to get my stuff repaired when playing music I legally bought and used in usual fashion.
Wise up or go bust.
Andrew van der Stock
It's weird, technically, it's a virus. It spreads onto your system without your knowledge and prevents the computer from doing some function. Glad we use Linux, we're immune from all these WinViruses ;)
So to avoid having the CD install DRM software on your computer, you used a DRM system you already had (iTunes) to buy the songs in AAC format with DRM?
I chose to install iTunes. And I chose to buy songs from iTMS.
And although I bought this CD, I did not choose to install its DRM.
Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax/ &couldn\'t %get $worse;
What some people don't realize is that sampling is part of a very old tradition. Many jazz and classical compositions have been enriched by incorporating material from other sources. Often the borrowed material is just as recognizeable as a sampled song, so it's not like this is something that has been hidden.
This practice is in many ways similar to allusion in literature. By making reference to earlier works, one can enhance the depth of one's own work. Ezra Pound said, "Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal" and this statement can be generalized to all forms of art.
My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
"Autorun" is one of the most irritating features of Windows. It's easily disabled, but at the cost of losing "notification" when you insert or remove a CD, which means you have to manually prompt for a refresh sometimes. But it's better than some installer taking over every time you insert a program disk to refer to something or copy some files. Trusting to "pressing the shift key" to defeat it on each insertion is about as reliable as using the withdrawal method of birth control; pretty soon your PC is going to get knocked up.
It's not that hard, you can do it. Better yet, write a script and run it on your friends' computers, too. Be proactive about this shit.
r l= /library/en-us/shellcc/platform/shell/programmersg uide/shell_basics/shell_basics_extending/autorun/a utoplay_reg.asp
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?u
Oh, and not buying CDs from bands that have no respect for you would be a good idea, too.
What people don't also realize is that song swapping is an old tradition, which helps keep old groups alive and helps new groups become more popular through word of mouth. I would say that literally the majority of the classic rock and underground songs that I listen to, I would never have known about if it wasn't for the fact that I could give a group a try by downloading MP3's. Then provided that I KNOW that I'm getting more than a couple good tracks, I buy the CD to support the group
What some people don't realize is that sampling is part of a very old tradition. Many jazz and classical compositions have been enriched by incorporating material from other sources. Often the borrowed material is just as recognizeable as a sampled song, so it's not like this is something that has been hidden.
This practice is in many ways similar to allusion in literature. By making reference to earlier works, one can enhance the depth of one's own work. Ezra Pound said, "Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal" and this statement can be generalized to all forms of art.
... which completely undermines the use of copyrights and "intellectual property" in the arts in the first place. Think about it: Much of the idea of the copyright revolves around this notion that men are completely unaffected by previous works--as if their art is somehow independently conjured through the power of the artist's superior intellect.
What bullshit. No man is quite literally an island. We are all affected and shaped, by our language, culture, body of sciences, collection of arts and so on. To say that the artist is the sole "owner" of the resultant art is utterly insulting and ultimately counterproductive.
-Grym
*** Do not buy this album. If I want to hear it, download it instead. ***
No, no, no dude. You've sent the wrong message. You've just told the music execs that you are unrepentant music pirate who will use any excuse to justify not paying for music.
Yeah, I know where you're coming from, but the Gucci-wearing music geniuses won't. And they'll take your above statement as the justification for their virus-laden music cds: you must be forced to pay for the music.
If you want to let them know you are really UPSET about legitimately purchasing a cd, about doing the RIGHT thing but instead of being given a pat on the back they label you a thief instead, then don't go anywhere near their music.
Don't purchase it. Don't download it. Don't listen to it on the radio. You hear the Beasties on Q107, phone the DJ and tell him not to put such crap on the air.
Then write, both to the Beasties and to the music execs, and tell them you aren't purchasing their music, you aren't downloading their music, hell, you won't even listen to it because of the DRM-virus on the last cd. Then tell 'em you are encouraging all of your friends to do the same.
When the music industry sees all interest in their bands die - put DRM on a music cd and sales/interest in the band/artist dies - the industry will soon learn not to DRM anything.
And that is what both you and me want -- to purchase an audio cd and be able to play it without fearing it'll screw the computer up and result in another 3 days worth of fighting with the damn machine to get it working properly again, all because I was stupid enough to want to play the music on the portable mp3 player. THAT kind of hassle I do not need.
You really should have been modded troll for that.
And it's not even true. The first method only stops automatic selection of the program to open the content with, for example WMP for audio CDs, ACDSee for photos. It does not prevent executables specified in autorun.inf from being loaded.
The other 2 methods are not simple. Did you work out that reg entry or did you read about it on the web?
Thought so.
In win95, users could work it out for themselves, or if not it was in the manual.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
Damn it, I've got mod points, but nobody has bothered responding with anything worth modding up, and you're not wrong, so I'm not going to mod you down. When can I get rid of these bothersome mod points? Oh, well.
The problem with using a non-privileged account in Windows is not so much the OS itself as the applications. Most old applications are not multi-user aware, and even many new ones are plain broken as well.
I think it's been fixed in later versions, but running the Quake 3 level editor as non-admin just didn't work in Windows a couple of years ago. I could use it fine in Linux, as a normal user, at the same time, because no Linux app tries to store the user's files in a directory outside ~/ and so on -- no ordinary app needs special privileges. In Windows, many quite normal apps demand full Administrator privileges for no reason at all, apart from that they were developed for systems that had no privilege separation, or on systems where the developers just didn't bother running as something other than admin and never imagined anyone else would.
I was enjoying your rants, but the part about Windows "protecting the user" cracked me up. You really deserve a +Funny for that one. :)
Don't be stupid.
;) Notice there will be at LEAST 10 different versions, in WMA, MP3, OGG, FLAC, hell, even uncompressed WAV! The point being, many people copy, many people download. It's not one evil sector of the community we're looking at, it's the average person who copies the CD's to their computer and then shares their music folder over P2P.
I'll try.
The auth code scheme you're talking about sounds like Windows XP's activation and installation codes - do you think that works?
Yes. Yes it does work. It stops Mr. Brown from installing it on two machines. However, Mr. Brown is a manager of some sort, and has no kids. Mr. Blue however is an engineer, and has a 12 year old kid. His kid downloads an activation crack and fixes the CD or even just downloads an ISO of the precracked installer. It stops CASUAL copying of software, if you're determined enough, nothing will stop you.
Copy protection does not work and is in fact incorrectly named. It is just Copy Inconveniencing. The sad part is the record companies know this, and think that slowing down pirates by a matter of minutes is worth fucking up the experience for everyone.
I hate to say it, but you're wrong. They genuinely are trying to get a system that allows players to play, and PC's... not to play. Unfortuanately it was such a rushed system that it doesn't work and they are getting their comeupance. And no, people don't copy the SAME song. Check on any P2P network, type in something popular like Red Hot Chili Peppers. Ok, maybe not them, no-one can spell them - try Madonna. Just don't hit download
Put simply, rather than ramming "don't download" down our throats, the RIAA etc should be saying "if you like it, pay for it - it's the right thing to do". SOunds very cheesy and that it wouldn't work, but I know for a fact that I only bought the Piper Downs album because I felt it was wrong to rip them off. If you are sitting in your chair listening to something you downloaded, and you don't own it, sorry, own a licence for it, then go out and get it from your local shop!
Rant over... Next week we'll be discussing the Clergy...