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."

Comments

Heh

[teknokracy]

Not my version of the album....

Re:Heh

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh. Not on my tux-wearing platform. ;)

Re:Heh

[Anonymous Coward]

"Nor on my Macintosh..."

Are you sure? According to the blurb, it "installs 'helpful' copy protection software on MacOS and Windows as soon as you insert the CD into default systems."

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.

Here comes the death of "security-through-smugness"

Re:Heh

[DJTodd242]

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.

Re:Heh

[Beek]

I've bought two albums with EMI's copy protection... I couldn't tell the difference from a normal CD. I played normally, and was able to rip all the tracks into iTunes.

If it did install something, it was done in some extremely sneaky fashion. I didn't notice it installing anything, and it would have somehow got around the fact that I was an unprivileged user.

Re:Heh

[arminw]

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

Re:Heh

[Nurseman]

Are you sure? According to the blurb, it "installs 'helpful' copy protection software on MacOS and Windows as soon as you insert the CD into default systems."

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

Re:Heh

[YOU LIKEWISE FAIL IT]

Jumping Jesus, this coming from someone with a Calvin & Hobbes quote in their signature. Oh the delicious ironing!

Re:Heh

[Build6]

It's a little ironic that it's being done with a Beastie Boys album. Historically the primary "copyright", or "theft" issue with songs is sampling.

They were hit in the past for sampling from AC/DC's song "Back in Black" for their 1985 single "Rock Hard", which was supposed to appear in their "best of" anthology release, but couldn't because AC/DC refused them permission to sample. It seems a little incongruous for them to be shipping out DRM also.

Re:Heh

[dotwaffle]

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 ;)

Re:Heh

[NonSequor]

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.

Re:Heh

[Zro Point Two]

According to North American Law (Canada and US), aren't viruses against the law? And don't virus writers go to jail (or at least get heavy fines) for writing thier viruses?

Asside from the Windows bashing, the parent post has a good point (and btw, this "virus" isn't windows only...) it is a virus... If I don't know it's installing, and it disables some sort of functionality of my computer (even if that functionality can potentially be used for wrongful doings), then it is a virus, and should be dealt with as such...

I havn't hit the record store yet to pick up my copy, but, does it have a BIG ass warning on the back? If so, then, that will be thier leagal loophole. And if that is the case, are music disks (not actually a CD because of the error bits tossed in here and there) going to start coming with EULA's that you have to "agree to" by breaking the seal? Heck, why not encrypt the cd, have it access a server on the net where you put in your geographical location, favorite color, age, job position, mothers maden name, and your address, and they send you a floppy disk that has a program that checks for the original cd, then sets an "ok" flag in some directory, that will allow you to access the second digital key (each time you want to play the cd) from the internet, makes you take two steps backwards, turn clockwise twice, then hold the left mouse button, the - on the keypad, F2 and F10 all at the same time in order to listen to it.....or just buy your copy, support the artist, then fire up any P2P software, download the files, and burn them onto a cd that you can listen to whenever, and wherever you are.

Let's keep this rant going...

The more complex the copy protection they put on to "deterr" piracy, the more of a one-upmanship contest it becomes, and the bigger the contest, the more people that play...and the more that try to crack it, the better the odds are that someone else will think the same way the software writer did when they wrote that specific copy protection routine.

Now, I'm not getting on any "high and mighty" bandwagon here...I don't buy all the music I listen to, I do download quite a bit to check out new bands, or to preview how an average band had decided to go with their next album, but if I do like the band (or album to be more specific) I will definately shell out my hard earned cash to buy the original. I've got some cd's that I've never actually put into a cd player (because I already had a downloaded copy) but I still bought the cd.

One last thought I have that you can mull over if you are so inclined is... People say that CD prices should have dropped by now...and to some extent, I agree, but that's my opinion, but there is also a flip side that I realize...SOME of the additional cash that I pay for a cd is going to research new copy protection schemes so that POSSIBLY someone won't be able to rip it and distribute it for free. Sure, I like the sounds of that, but I would prefer if they did more work on these skemes before putting it into production on a retail product. And even if they did manage to get the perfect scheme working that was transparant to everyone (with the exception of the warning that they can use as thier loophole), and would work on any device, and allow me to port to an iPod, backup cd, whatever, then what's going to stop the pirate from hooking the line out of a diskman to the line in on a soundcard and recording the cd and putting it up on a P2P network?

Mod me up, Mod me down, Makes no difference to me at this point, because you've already read what I had to say.

Re:Heh

[atrizzah]

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

Re:Heh

[Grym]

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

Re:Heh

[Esoteric Moniker]

If you're interested in supporting your favorite artist but want to deter this sort of behavior by recording companies buy the artist's merchandise (preferrably directly off their web site). I can guarantee you that the artist is making a whole lot more money from every shirt or hat you buy than a couple of CD's.

Illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

I was under the impression that installing software on the user's computer without asking is illegal?

Re:Illegal?

[teknokracy]

When one goes in-depth into the "end user license agreement" that we all say "I agree" to, it becomes apparent that you actually do warrant them to install such an application. I'd imagine it would be part of the liner notes, interactive software related agreement, or perhaps even just a simple "look on this site to see the license agreement" blurb.

Re:Illegal?

[xigxag]

Illegal in the US, you mean?

One of the comments in the cited links says that the copy protection is only for discs sold outside the US and UK.

Re:Illegal?

[DarkMantle]

Two words...

Spy-Ware

That said, if it's a stardard EXE I don't see how it would run on linux. :D And since Linux doesn't have an autorun annoyance... I mean feature, we'd have to consciously install it.

Once again, the solution is... Don't use M$ Windows. (Sorry Mac people, I have had no recent experience with a Mac to make a comment on it.

Re:Illegal?

[aka-ed]

I'm $orry it'$ ju$t that my keyboard i$ broken.

anyway, who is Ian $ez? Tell Ian that part of the whole point i$ that it doe$n't matter how the arti$t feel$ about copy protection. The label$ have been in the court$ and in front of the pre$$, repeatedly talking about the right$ of the arti$t; how well doe$ that rhetoric $tand up when we learn that the arti$t has no right to avoid $uch protection?

Where i$ the recording indu$trie$' re$pect for arti$t$' right$ in $uch a ca$e?

Re:Illegal?

[Martix]

Its also being sold in Canada as well.

as far as i can say is you install something on my computer or network you need to beaten and left for the flies to eat.. if you dont let me know and give me an opt out...to me this a virus because its on my machine with out my permission.

I ask the store clerk about the protection i got a blank stare. like a deer in the head lights.

I also told them why .... I will not buy DRM ..TCPA....Copy controlled disks...ect

Funny thing is there is also a new Meat Loaf album as well for sale i told the clerk the store has lost a sale.....

To date there have been 6 CD'S i wanted to by but there protected as well thats 6 sales lost ...Way to go morons.

so as this carries on i guess i will stop buying music ....or use my expensive studio gear to record it and strip the crap off ;)

So i can use my car deck mp3 player ect. or were i feel i want to listen to my music.

I dont mind buying to suport the artists but protection systems are a waste of money then anything else and shooting them selves in the foot to boot

Re:Illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

can we call them MICROS~1 ? ;)

Re:Illegal?

[Epistax]

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.

Re:Illegal?

[deacon]

... becomes apparent that you actually do warrant them to install such an application. I'd imagine it would be part of the liner notes...

Well that seems fair.

When you read this reply to your post, you have agreed to put all your money in a paper bag, put your underwear on your head if it is not already there, slather yourself with Marmite, and run naked down the center of the street throwing your money to passers-by.

That is all.

Re:Illegal?

[halowolf]

For those of us that know that it can be disabled. Again its the lowest common denominator scenario, where preventitive measuers are in place that only affect those who do not know how to get past them, or that a CD that they are using is doing this to their computer.

From an ethical standpoint I have a problem with the way that they are going about this. I am a consumer, not a lawyer that can interpret EULA's and terms of agreements and can retrieve every consequence to their agreement out of them. Sure I can get most of the stuff, but not everything. And lets not forget that this stuff can be written in a point 4 font or something to make it hard to read. Well thankfully I have 20-20 vision but others may not have that luxury or carry a magnifying glass with them when they go shopping for music. Surely there should be a law about legal agreements being written in a easy to understand manner for consumers, and even more surely if that purchase is going to install software onto your computer without explicit consent and potentially damage it, that should be front and centre in the agreement and that they be liable to any damage done to your computer because of it.

Again its business that doesn't seem to be capable of treating their customers with common decency. They don't seem to realise that you can treat your customers decently AND make money at the same time. Sure it might not be easy but with a market climate of screwing consumers, I would imagine there is a market for those customers that don't like being screwed over.

If only all the sites referenced by this article weren't slashdotted, I might have something more to say. :) I might of even said something different if there was a copy of any agreements to look at.

After reading what I wrote, it sounds like a rant... well I can live with that.

Re:Illegal?

[madmancarman]

anyway, who is Ian $ez? Tell Ian that part of the whole point i$ that it doe$n't matter how the arti$t feel$ about copy protection. The label$ have been in the court$ and in front of the pre$$, repeatedly talking about the right$ of the arti$t; how well doe$ that rhetoric $tand up when we learn that the arti$t has no right to avoid $uch protection?

It's probably Ian Rogers, the webmaster for the Beastie Boys' web site for a very long time - starting in 1994. I worked with Ian a bit when I was running the original Foo Fighters site, he's actually a really nice guy (Foo Fighters and Beastie Boys used to share the same management, Gold Mountain Entertainment, now GAS or something like that).

With how the industry works, I'm sure he had absolutely nothing to do with this, but instead it was label decision as has already been pointed out. It's another perfect example of how disconnected the music industry is from its fans (at least those in non-english speaking countries - the software doesn't exist on the US or UK releases).

Re:Illegal?

[Mycroft_VIII]

A 'Blue Moon' is the second full moon in the same callendar month, IIRC every 12 to 13 months.
Just some odd trivia I thought I'd throw out. Was going to try for funny, but can't think of a way to make it funny. Oh well.

Mycroft

Re:Illegal?

[ichimunki]

I'm confused. If all my money is in the paper bag, do I throw the bag at passers-by or do I use the bag to carry the money until I throw the money at the passers-by?

Re:Illegal?

[JPriest]

With Linux it won't install the DRM, but it won't make any difference because because your sound card does not work with Linux anyway.

Re:Illegal?

[Fulcrum of Evil]

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.

Re:Illegal?

[Jace of Fuse!]

Once again, the solution is... Don't use M$ Windows. (Sorry Mac people, I have had no recent experience with a Mac to make a comment on it.

No, actually, the solution is to disable AutoStart. It's easy to do. And it's easier than switching operating systems (at least for most people.)

Maybe instead of blaming Microsoft at every chance that pops up, users could try to be more constructive and try to resolve the issues at hand through less invasive, arrogant, annoying, or sometimes just plain stupid means.

Re:Illegal?

[kasperd]

No, actually, the solution is to disable AutoStart. It's easy to do.

I did that on my parents Windows 95 system, but it certainly wasn't easy. You see they had made it easy to disable disk change detection. But that is certainly not what you want to do. The correct way to disable autodetection required modification of some key hidden deep down in the registry.

I always considered autorun a bug. And it annoys me, that Red Hat Linux and Fedora Core now have this feature. Fortunately it is easy to disable: rpm -e autorun. And just to shut up kde complaining that it is unable to start autorun, I did this: ln -s /bin/true /usr/bin/autorun. A lot easier than what I had to do on a Windows 95 system.

I find it funny, that AmigaOS had a bug that allowed a carefully crafted floppy to cause automatic execution of code from the floppy. That bug was abused by multiple vira, but it was fixed with AmigaOS 2.0 (around 1990). And five years later Microsoft introduce a similar bug in Windows 95. And today we see this security hole being abused by the music industry.

And what the music industry is doing start looking more and more like vira. It has been suggested they would allow limited copying, but the copy protection code would copy itself to the new CDDA you create. Now if they are really going to do that, where is the difference from a virus?

Re:Illegal?

[rifter]

"Not that its exactly hard to disable the 'autorun annoyance'"

It used to be easy to do this in Windows, but the control to do this seems to be missing. It is true you can hold the shift key down, but if there is a way to disable autorun altogether anymore it is pretty well hidden. Fuck Windows, anyhow.

Well in answer to my own question, to disable the autorun in Win2k ya gotta edit the registry, which is pretty much what I thought you'd have to do. So Joe Sixpack probably won't be doing it so easily. I would say that yes, it is hard. It woudl especially be hard if you did not know how to look for information on disabling the feature, which would require that you knew it was called "autorun," know to search the microsoft knowlege base, and know how to use the registry editor without killing your machine.

Re:Illegal?

[RichardX]

I'm really starting to get irritated with this nonsense. disabling autorun on XP its embarrassingly simple to do, and claiming that it requires a registry hack just shows that your knowledge of windows doesn't even extend to the most absolute basics - so what the hell are you doing making claims about it's functionality when you don't even know how to use it?

TO DISABLE CD AUTORUN IN WINDOWS XP

1. Double click on "My Computer", or go start>my computer

2. Locate your CD or DVD drive in the "My Computer" window, and right-click on it

3. From the popup menu click "properties"

4. In the drive properties window that appears, go to the autoplay options, and select "take no action"

OR

The policy method (XP Pro only)

This involves changing your computer's policy to disallow autorunning of inserted media (Again, a very basic aspect of windows)

[1] Start/Run/GPEDIT.MSC
[2] Computer Configuration/Administrative Templates/System.
[3] Locate the entry for Turn Off Autoplay and modify.

And just for the sake of completeness, bere's the registry tweak, too (which again, is certainly not any kind of "deep magic", though is probably more advanced than your granny would be comfortable with, at least you don't have to compile anything)

Start, run... "regedit"
System Key: [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Servi ces\CDRom]
Value Name: Autorun
Data Type: REG_DWORD (DWORD Value)
Value Data: (0=disable, 1=enable)

Or you can download any of the ten zillion tweaking utilities for windows? how come, btw, when a tweaking utility for Linux is released, it's a cool added bit of functionality that makes Linux even more kickass than it already was... but when a tweaking utility is released for windows it's a kludgy fix to add functionality that obviously SHOULD've been there in the first place?

Oh well.

Re:Illegal?

[cyborch]

That would have been funnier if it was remotely true. What could happen (and what I have had happen to me previously) was that the DRM protected media is unplayable without the DRM malware, for instance I am unable to view the one e-book I bought without a wandows installation, and sadly the book didn't come with a windows license. IMHO it would have been appropriate to ship a windows license along with e-books since it's needed to read it.

Re:Illegal?

[PhxBlue]

Alternately, you could download and install TweakUI for whatever version of Windows you're running and disable autorun from there. It's safer than going directly into the registry, and easy enough that even a common joe can do it.

Re:Illegal?

[bcmm]

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.

Re:Illegal?

[Sj0]

Actually, there are two definitions of "blue moon", and only one of them is particularly rare. The second full moon of the month happens every 32 months, but the second defenition refers to an atmospheric phenomena where the moon actually appears to be blue, usually due to particles in the air or smoke.

My name's Mike D. and I want respect...

[Anonymous Coward]

Your freedom and your privacy are what I expect!

Re:My name's Mike D. and I want respect...

[Mattintosh]

They did it like this...
They did it like that...
They did it with the wiffle ball bat...

Beasties

[qewl]

That's not cool. Makes me kinda wonder why they put out this album anyway ($$$?).. I love their old stuff but I'm not sure their old passion was really in this work anyway.

Re:Beasties

[E_elven]

Record exec: We decided to give your music away for free, guys. We'll still pay you $50 million, though.
Beasties: Hell no, dude. We DEMAND you put some evil copy protection on the album!
Record exec: Isn't that horribly unfair towards the customers, guys? Come on, have a heart.
Beasties: Oh yeah? Well fuck you, fat Record Exec. We've got the right to party! *BLAWW* *BLAWW* *BLAWW*
Record exec: *Aaaargh* Oooooverrr my deaaaad boddyyyyyy... custooooemmueua *AAAARGH* cstmrrrrs muuust beee pa... pah.... pahmpppered.. *groan*
Beasties: *Urinate on the dead Record Exec and offer a sacrifice to Satan*

Re:Beasties

[Anonymous Coward]

They told us to tell them to screw it anyway in their late 80's hit song "You gotta fight, for you right"...

And I wonder, shouldn't they be called "The Beastie Geezers" now?

Control

[Ms.XingTianCai]

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.

Re:Control

[bersl2]

I don't think this would be the artists' call to put copy protection on the CD.

Re:Control

[mriker]

Maybe, but the artists have a choice in who distributes their music.

Re:Control

[YouHaveSnail]

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.

When you can't even listen to your music without worrying about what programs may be installed on your computer, you need a different operating system.

Re:Control

[mvpll]

"Our new OS comes with a Longhorn(TM), once an hour it anal probes the user to confirm their identity. After the intial hour long ass reaming required for installation, most users appreciate the quick prostate massage required to keep everything working perfectly."

Where do you want to take it today?

Re:Control

[antiMStroll]

" For the average user Windows is much easier to use.

Unfortunately, much easier to use too for Capital, Gator, klez,....

Re:Control

[DavidBrown]

Having your computer be that much of a hassle is not my definition of easy. Not to mention that XP and win2k systems still seem to lockup or blue screen quite regularly despite the much touted "stability improvements"...

Sorry, but I haven't seen the BSOD in two years - and this is counting my computers at home and 16 at work, all running Windows XP. Please feel free to comment about Windows security issues, and the amount of resources XP gobbles up, and Microsoft's secret plan to take over the world, but the OS itself is very stable and does what it's supposed to do.

Re:Control

[NegativeK]

Maybe, but the artists have a choice in who distributes their music.

Why is this modded funny? Just sitting here, I've imagined ways of them getting out of their contracts. Of course, I'm imagining that the Beastie Boys are rich, which can't be too far of a stretch. How? Simple.
1) Release crap albums until their contract runs out.
2) Make sure everyone knows _why_ you're releasing crap albums. Make public press releases about why you're doing it. If your contract prohibits that, then make private statements.
3) In all likelihood, the contract would be ended early by the RIAA. If not, it isn't hard to live on a million for the next few years or so, until the contract runs out on its own.
4) Release on an independent record label. Aphex Twin has a successful one. Paul Van Dyk is doing fine on his record label. The Beastie Boys have the clout to do it.
5) Profit. Again.

Where there's a will, there's a way. That's a way. The Beastie Boys just don't have the will.

Re:Control

[jmorris42]

> You can say "get a new OS" all you want, but unless you are willing to
> set it up so everything works perfectly, including their webcam with
> AIM, Yahoo, etc, and all their Windows games, then you can tell them
> to "get a new OS".

Or you can tell them what I say to that argument:

Listen, you have a choice.

Option 1: Keep Windows, reinstall every few months and suffer through every malware that comes along and run the risk of some criminal outfit in Russia keystroke logging your credit card and DON'T BUG ME ABOUT ANY OF THIS BECAUSE I WARNED YOU. I can't fix it for you and other than a trivial tweak now and then I don't plan to even try. Bill Gates can't fix Windows, why do you think I can?

Option 2: Toss the PC and buy a Mac. Sorry, that isn't my preferred platform so I won't be able to help you much. I do know they don't suffer from most of the ills of Windows though and from my limited experience on one they are very easy to use so you shouldn't have too much difficulty.

Option 3: Invest the effort in learning Linux. Almost all of the important software genres are available, you will just have to adapt to different programs. I have been running Linux for about ten years now and I'll be happy to help when you get stuck on something. (No, I have never recommended someone use BSD. If you don't know enough to know when to choose BSD on your own, you are not ready for BSD.)

Life in a Free Society is about making choices, and living with the consequences. Windows has some pretty dire consequences and I have little pity for the ones who know the risks and choose Windows anyway. The ones who don't even know there ARE choices are a different matter though, I'll spend a little more time on those folks.

Re:Control

[Christ-on-a-bike]

All well and good, but we don't know what happened in this case. Quite likely, the label didn't tell the group they were going to mung the CD until mastering was under way. (And they aren't even 'protecting' the US/UK release.)

In any case, what is an artist supposed to do? The Beastie Boys wanted to broadcast a political message with this album (NB, released just before the US presidential election). If your label springs some crap like this on you, what can you do instead of releasing your chosen work? Just suddenly come up with some mediocre crap instead? That makes no sense.

In reality, making music is expensive for most major-label artists, even established ones. If the Beasties run out their contract with terrible albums, they could well end up in a few years owing EMI money. And I'm sure that by rock-star standards they aren't that rich. You don't see them endorsing Pepsi.

Re:Control

[Scarblac]

1) Release crap albums until their contract runs out.

It's the label that decides whether to release it. If they don't, you have no released CD, and still x cds to go. There are artists who have simply been shut up by this mechanism - cannot release anything anymore.

Re:Control

[Tim C]

Option 1: Keep Windows, reinstall every few months and suffer through every malware that comes along

Bullshit. I've been running XP Pro at home and at work for a couple of years now, and I have reinstalled zero times, and had zero problems with malware, viruses and the like.

How? Simple. I don't use IE, I only use Outlook at work and then only because I have to, and I don't run unknown executables from untrusted sources. Throw (free) AV software and a software firewall in there with timely updating and I'm as safe running Windows as you are running Linux.

Windows has some pretty dire consequences

Only if you don't know what you're doing. You appear to have a clue; I think your efforts would be better spent educating users on how to protect their systems, rather than trying to convince them to change OS. Should Linux gain significant market share, virus and malware authors will start targetting it. Users will get used to running as root or entering their root password to install stuff, so will not think twice about doing so when prompted. A lot of malware piggy-backs on the installers for other software (eg Kazaa), and running Linux cannot protect you from that. Please don't try to tell me that open source alternatives will save people - there are open source p2p clients for Windows (eg eMule), yet people still use the closed-source, malware-ridden ones.

Getting people to switch OS is a short term fix at best. They need to be educated out of their bad habits, or they'll fall prey to the same tricks again in the end.

Silently installing DRM eh?

[chrispyman]

Technically, if your product silently installs software without the users knowledge, wouldn't that put it in the same league as spyware, as defined by some of the more recent bills passing through Congress?

Re:Silently installing DRM eh?

[SamNmaX]

Technically, if your product silently installs software without the users knowledge, wouldn't that put it in the same league as spyware, as defined by some of the more recent bills passing through Congress?

Even though this may be technically spyware, it could also be technically illegal to remove due the DMCA. So basically, you put a cd with this type of crap on it, and since it's goal is copy-protection, anything that could get around it, including say, the ability to remove it if it attempts to stick on your system like a virus, could very well be considerred 'circumvension'. I'd be curious to see how such an argument would hold up in court.

Re:Silently installing DRM eh?

[jeti]

Well - then I'm waiting for the first worm that
installs DRM as well as a backdoor and cannot
be legally removed. ;-)

Re:Silently installing DRM eh?

[Tin Foil Hat]

I have a feeling that argument wouldn't stand up very well. Therefore, I'd want to avoid having to make the argument at all. I'd like to see a proactive lawsuit attacking EMI or whoever first, before they can attack somebody else over DMCA violations.

Maybe the EFF could get the DoJ to look into the spyware matter (in fact, it is a virus since it will propogate itself silently when the victim inserts the disk.) That would be best since it would not require that the crime have been committed within the United States because, under U.S. law, writing a worm or virus is illegal no matter where the offense takes place. Failing that, if the tech makes it within U.S. borders, perhaps the offending company could be sued. The argument would be that it causes citizens to unknowingly install viruses/spyware on others' computers when they play the disk in an entirely legal way.

DRM for what?

[Hello Spaceman]

I bought "To The 5 Boroughs" (cause I'm representin' Manhattan), and ripped all the tracks to my iPod with no problems. Just what does the DRM code do?

I'm on a Mac, is this another case where I'm missing out on the DRM fun because of platform neglect? (There IS a Mac partition on the disc, but all it seems to have on it is a Macromedia presentation with a QuickTime movie.)

Re:DRM for what?

[skinfitz]

This is why I love owning a Mac :D No viruses. No silly self-installing apps.

Yet.

Re:DRM for what?

[aristotle-dude]

Three times?
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.

That is just sorry..

[dealsites]

What about fighting for your right to party??? Music makes the party. They are selling out these days.

--
7 Gmail accounts still availiable

Nothing wrong with my copy

[kxmas]

I didn't notice anything wrong with the version that I downloaded off the newsgroups.

Obligatory Futurama Quote:

[orkysoft]

Yo Bender wanna make some noise
Get your harddrive scratched by the Beastie Boys!

Calm yourself...

[chronicon]

I'm sure the RIAA said it was OK. Get over it. Besides, I sure if you gave the Hon. Senator Orrin Hatch a call he would help clarify the importance of the issue. You'd just have to get past the "Beastie who??" questions first...

I'm pissed, but it rips fine

[jgerry]

Grrrr!!!

I just bought this CD, the first CD I've bought in over 2 years. A friend told me I could copy hers, but I said no, I want to pay for it. $10 at Worst Buy.

It did rip fine though, no problems there. DRM-free mp3s work fine.

should be a law

[ch-chuck]

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.

Re:DRM is worth it

[Anonymous Coward]

They even have it in their new lyrics:

Check-ch-check-check-check-ch-check it out
What-wha-what-what-what DRM is all about
Work-wa-work-work-work-wa-work it out
Let's turn this motherfuckin' operating system out

subtle, but effective.

Re:Fuck them.

[Anonymous Coward]

They did have their own damn label with their own damn distribution channels. It was called Grand Royale.

It failed miserable and went bankrupt owing a lot of money to a lot of people.

As for contracts -- these generally follow individual members of bands as well as the band entity as itself.

Sabotage

[The Ape With No Name]

Well, someone had to come up with a "it's part of their plan" post.

Sabotage (Ill Communication)

I Can't Stand It I Know You Planned It
I'm Gonna Set It Straight, This Watergate
I Can't Stand Rocking When I'm In Here
Because Your Crystal Ball Ain't So Crystal Clear
So While You Sit Back and Wonder Why
I Got This Fucking Thorn In My Side
Oh My, It's A Mirage
I'm Tellin' Y'all It's Sabotage

So Listen Up 'Cause You Can't Say Nothin'
You'll Shut Me Down With A Push Of Your Button?
But Yo I'm Out And I'm Gone
I'll Tell You Now I Keep It On And On

'Cause What You See You Might Not Get
And We Can Bet So Don't You Get Souped Yet
You're Scheming On A Thing That's A Mirage
I'm Trying To Tell You Now It's Sabotage

Whyyy; Our Backs Are Now Against The Wall
Listen All Of Y'all It's A Sabotage
Listen All Of Y'all It's A Sabotage
Listen All Of Y'all It's A Sabotage
Listen All Of Y'all It's A Sabotage

I Can't Stand It, I Know You Planned It
But I'm Gonna Set It Straight This Watergate
But I Can't Stand Rockin' When I'm In This Place
Because I Feel Disgrace Because You're All In My Face
But Make No Mistakes And Switch Up My Channel
I'm Buddy Rich When I Fly Off The Handle
What Could It Be, It's A Mirage
You're Scheming On A Thing - That's Sabotage

Does the band know or care..?

[lovecult]

To quote from
http://www.boingboing.net/2004/06/11/new_beasties_ disc_ha.html

Update: Ian sez, "Hi, I'm not sure who posted re: Beastie Boys copy protection, but I just spoke with Mike D and their management and they wanted me to pass along that a) This is all territories except the US and UK -- US and UK discs do not have this protection on them; b) All EMI CDs are treated this way, theirs isn't receiving special treatment; c) They would have preferred not to have the copy protection, but weren't allowed to differ from EMI policy."

Re:Does the band know or care..?

[skinfitz]

Looks like I can add EMI to my list of labels to never buy from then. That makes Sony and EMI up to now.

Tell me again how this sort of crap is supposed to deter piracy? All they are doing is actively encouraging it.

You gotta fight...

[neonstz]

You gotta fight for your right to copy!

Re:You gotta fight...

[miracle69]

You bought a new CD - man you don't wanna know
You go to your PC it says "no go"
Loaded DRM - your machine won't work
But the Beasties don't tell you like you're some kind of jerk.

You gotta fight for your right to copy

The Boys caught your sampling and they said "No Way"
Those hypocrites - use samples every day.
Man, del-ing this is such a drag
Now your idols tossed all their cred in the bag.

You gotta fight for your right to copy!

Don't you buy our CD if you expect to have a hear.
Cause our DRM won't let you play it through the air.
Your PC busted and you said "Where's my noise?"
Aw, man, it won't play cause it's the Beastie Boys.

Re:Fuck them.

[GoofyBoy]

"Fuck them. "

Funny, I'm sure thats what someone said when they realized how much they lost by people downloading their stuff and then decided to add this DRM crap.

Isn't this easily circumvented?

[Dimensio]

Wasn't there an article many months (years?) ago about how to circumvent this kind of thing by holding "shift" as you insert the disc? Yes, that's a Windows-only solution, but I don't see this kind of problem affecting Macs or Linux machines.

Wait, is mentioning that little workaround considered a DMCA violation?

This is Illegal in Minnesota

[Kope]

I personally hope that a CD I buy installs something on my computer. Really. 'Cuase I'm walking into the DA's office and demanding prosecution under 609.88 the next day. And as a highly paid professional, I know I can bill my time that any 10 second problem will turn into the maximum allowable penalty pretty darn quick...

609.88 Computer damage.

Subdivision 1. Acts. Whoever does any of the following is guilty of computer damage and may be sentenced as provided in subdivision 2:

(b) intentionally and without authorization or with intent to injure or defraud alters any computer, computer system, computer network, computer software, or any other property specifically defined in section 609.87, subdivision 6;

Subd. 2. Penalty. Whoever commits computer damage may be sentenced as follows:

(a) To imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $50,000, or both, if the damage, destruction or alteration results in a loss in excess of $2,500, to the owner, or the owner's agent, or lessee;

(b) To imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both, if the damage, destruction or alteration results in a loss of more than $500, but not more than $2,500 to the owner, or the owner's agent or lessee; or

(c) In all other cases to imprisonment for not more than 90 days or to payment of a fine of not more than $700, or both.

Re:This is Illegal in Minnesota

[jpetts]

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...

Re:DRM'd CD's on the rise...

[Daniel Dvorkin]

I'm sure it's just a matter of time before someone figures out how to get any DRM/crippling software off of our systems.

I can see moves and countermoves here. Suppose "someone" posts "instructions for removing the DRM software" that turn out to be destructive ... most users would probably follow the instructions without being careful about it, particularly if they're obfuscated. Later, much too late, you find out that "someone" is an employee of the RIAA.

So for all Windows users

[Sycraft-fu]

This is one of the reasons to disable autorunning of CDs. It's nice yes, but really, it's not a big deal to take the extra step to go to the CD and run setp. Since this sort of game of actually installing software without asking seems to be getting popular, it's a good rpeventitive step.

To shut it off, open your registry editor and go to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Servic es\Cdrom and set the Autorun value to 0. You cal also download TweakUI from Microsoft (go to Microsoft.com and search for TweakUI) which will change the key for you, as well as altering other behaviour.

When you do this, Windows will no longer popup and do anything when you put a disk in. Instead, it will wait for you to do something. For normal data disks, this means you'll have to go run setup yourself. For evil audio disks such as this, they'll simply never install their BS and you can play as normal.

Re:So for all Windows users

[brickbat]

You can also disable AutoRun via the properties for your drive in Device Manager. Or, you can turn it off temporarily by holding down the Shift key while loading the disc.

Re:So for all Windows users

[santos_douglas]

Excellent advice, another crucial piece of software I never run windows without is Mike Lin's Startup Monitor. Which will pop up a dialogue box and notify you if a program attempts to install itself to run on startup. You can then allow or disallow. This is good for stopping all kind of annoying things from happening to your PC.

Re:So for all Windows users

[Sycraft-fu]

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.

Re:Fuck them.

[JonTurner]

Agreed. And to show my disgust, I'm going to NOT buy their album. Twice.

We'll see who's laughing then!

Not going to check this out

[dvduval]

I don't think I'll ch-ch-ch-check...check it out! Cause DRM's what it's all about!

They aren't the only ones.

[AltGrendel]

The new Velvet Revolver does the same thing. It has a CD driver that is silently installed whether you accept the "EULA" or not. The only way around this (for Windows users) is to turn off auto start. I'm trying to get my SCSI CDRW running on my Linux system to see if it's prodected there.

And even if you do get round the protection, the burner software may check for "Proper Licensing" anyway. I know MusicMatch does.

Re:They aren't the only ones.

[AnyoneEB]

It's pretty well hidden in Windows XP. You have to use the group policies manager to disable it. Goto start --> run --> "gpedit.msc" (thanks to the other replier, I forget what it was called) --> Local Computer Policy --> Administrative Templates --> System (click it) --> on the right pane find "Turn off Autoplay" in the list --> right-click --> properties --> select the "enable" radio button.

Note that you can hold down shift while putting in a CD to disable autoplay for just that time.

Re:They aren't the only ones.

[sbjordal]

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.

Re:They aren't the only ones.

[BollocksToThis]

No, that disables Windows' automatic launching of a media player to handle the audio portion of the CD, not Windows' automatic launching of any random EXE pointed to by the autorun.inf. Messing around with the policy editor or TweakUI for XP (god bless that paranoia tab) is the only way to prevent autoplay.

Your 'informative' score is decidedly undeserved.

Re:Virus

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't be silly. It's only a virus when it's not made by a company.

Re:Shift key to skip install?

[Embedded2004]

I believe it works by the cd auto run feature in windows. Which I have long since disabled. Why anyone would let cds automatically run and install stuff in this day an age is beyond me.

Hold Down Shift - Ripping Success

[Kenshin]

I won a copy of the CD last night at a bar.

When I saw the "Copyright Control" logo on it, I held down shift when I put it into my drive. That was a good plan, because I explored the CD and found all that CRM crapola in the autorun file.

Ripped it with iTunes. It ripped fine, but VERY slowly. (2x, compared to the usual 16x.)

Re:Hold Down Shift - Ripping Success

[Johnathon_Dough]

I was talking to a friend of mine who got past some DRM he had on a CD by going to the preferences in iTunes, and turning on "use error correction" under the "importing" section.

also works pretty well for those cd's that have been floating around your car for a while.

Shows why Linux is not ready for the desktop

[cetialphav]

This is just another example of why Linux is not ready for the desktop. I should be able to buy this CD and put it in my Linux box and NOT be able to rip it just like on Windows. Until Linux can run all of my important software (DRM controls, Kazaa, Gator, Sobig virus, and various spyware), I'll just stick with windows.

Seriously, this is just stupid. I would guess that most pirated MP3s that are being shared out there have been downloaded from someone else, not ripped from the original CD. So it really only takes a few people with either a linux box or enough sense to turn of autorun on their CD drive to be able to spread pirated MP3s all over the world. This can't possibly stop anything and will likely piss off the people that are supposed to be customers.

With tricks like these ...

[MuMart]

I predict that the next versions of CD recording software will bundle their own hardware-banging IDE/ATAPI drivers to get around tricks like these.

It's a simple fact that people expect to be able copy their CDs.

Autorun on Mac OS?

[Anonymous Writer]

Quotes from the story links...

"It seems that Capitol Records has some sort of new copy protection system, that automatically, silently, installs "helpful" copy protection software on MacOS and Windows as soon as you insert the CD into default systems."

"They include some sort of uninstaller buried on there for Windows, but I see no such thing for MacOS."

I've never heard of something like the "autorun" feature for Mac OS. Is there one? Or was the person who wrote this unfamiliar with Mac OS and just presumed it had one?

TweakUI

[Ryan Stortz]

Download TweakUI from the MS Power Toys section, it will let you change a slew of settings. Including disabling autorun.

I'm also pretty sure that holding shift when you put the cd in will do the same thing.

Prosecute them for writing a Virus/Trojan horse

[BigDish]

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?

Autoplay and AutoRUN are different.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's different. There's Autoplay and Autorun.

Autoplay (which you are talking about) just tells Windows what to do when you insert a disc containing certain types of content (images, audio, etc.). It won't start an installer or do anything bad. It can be configured or turned off when inserting one of these discs or through the properties for the drive. It can also be setup separately for removable media (such as USB drives and cameras).

Autorun can be used to launch any program/command, and can be used to start installers on the CD or programs on your computer, which is why most commercial software and games will pop up a window with options when you insert the disc. Leaving this on will leave you at the mercy of the people who made the CD. It can be turned off like the GP poster explained, or temporarily disabled by holding SHIFT when inserting the disc.

Autoplay is actually kind of cool, but unfortunately it requires Autorun being enabled. I can live without it though.

Re:Fuck them.

[lnX.Kid]

Too bad the album never made it to my Lbox for a gripping...I couldn't bear to listen to anymore of their crappy "Kool Moe Dee" lyrical sty-lee. I mean, does anyone still remember Ron Popeil? Hello, 1985.

Thankfully I got my money back...I feel sorry for any saps that actually like this album!

What I don't understand is - Why in the hell would anyone *want* to rip this crap? They should have retired after Ill Communications....they're just making fools out of themselves.

Buying CDs

[$beirdo]

Wow - I'm *really* not going to be buying any more CDs anytime soon, then. Way to go EMI, gutting your own business and all!

I Copied my USA Version

[MercenarySG]

I bought it at the local BB, ripped it to my harddrive, and make a copy of the cd off the mp3s onto a cd. Nothing stopped me. The CD works just fine.

Also-- Anyone else notice the new FBI warning about piracy on the back of the case? Funny.

see this is what happens

[geekoid]

when boys who where rebels become middle aged...

Beastie boys my ass

The protection is on the Canadian version

[DaveCBio]

And it won't play on my car CD player. So, it's going back to Futureshop and I am going to demand my money back.

Oh, except on music CD's

[Jadecristal]

From Microsoft's description:

Turns off the Autoplay feature.

Autoplay begins reading from a drive as soon as you insert media in the drive. As a result, the setup file of programs and the music on audio media start immediately.

By default, Autoplay is disabled on removable drives, such as the floppy disk drive (but not the CD-ROM drive), and on network drives.

If you enable this setting, you can also disable Autoplay on CD-ROM drives or disable Autoplay on all drives.

This setting disables Autoplay on additional types of drives. You cannot use this setting to enable Autoplay on drives on which it is disabled by default.

Note: This setting appears in both the Computer Configuration and User Configuration folders. If the settings conflict, the setting in Computer Configuration takes precedence over the setting in User Configuration.

Note: This setting does not prevent Autoplay for music CDs.

Re:Oh, except on music CD's

[Echnin]

But since it's an executable installer, doesn't that mean the CD is a Data/Audio hybrid CD? Many CDs have extras and stuff, and I remember many old games used CD audio and could be played in a regular CD player. So I'd have to think that this counts as a data CD.

Heh, Naive slashdotters....

[DesScorp]

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.

Re:Heh, Naive slashdotters....

[Christ-on-a-bike]

They preach the revolution, because they know you guys will pony up your cash

I think that's a bit of a stretch. Just because Lennon wanted to make money didn't mean he cynically told people what they wanted to hear. Just as a surgeon may make wads of cash and yet earnestly believe that he does as much as he can for his patients.

Not all artists lack integrity. I think the Beasties are one of the better groups in this regard.

Strange

[vandan]

Tripple J ( youth national radio network in Australia ) reviewed the CD recently and said that many of their songs had political statements against the bullshit greed and right-wing idiology running rampant through the current US government.

Strange that they are critical of their government yet side with the record companies on this issue. Maybe they don't mean what they say? Or purphaps the record company pulled this one of them without telling them?

I certainly won't be buying it anyway. I'll add it to the not-worth-buying-but-good-download-potential list.

You could also

[autopr0n]

not run as administrator, that way they wouldn't be able to 'install' anything. Nor could any holes in IE, general spyware, etc.

Re:You could also

[antiMStroll]

Isn't amazing how many people in this computer literate forum miss something so simple? Holding to two simple rules - use a daily account with "User" permissions only and never use Microsoft internet software (IE, OE) - I never get spyware or viruses. Scams like this Capitol one wouldn't work in a non-admin world.

Re:You could also

[Fulcrum of Evil]

When I was at MS, common practice was to run as administrator, or rather, to add your domain account to the local admin group. Of course, we were writing and debugging software, but most apps do stuff like write to HKLM or the program directory, so that makes running as non-admin ricky at best.

Re:You could also

[MrHanky]

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.

Arrogance

[Esion Modnar]

Installing anything on a person's computer, without authorization, is just plain old arrogance. "But it was in the fine print of the EULA..." Fuck the EULA. There needs to be a big dialog box: "DRM to be installed. Yes/No?"

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."

Re:Do as I say, not as I do...

[Waffle Iron]

Would it have even been possible to make this album if the sources of those clips had been DRM restricted?

These days, the recording companies seem to have a special system in place to trade sample rights. The liner notes often say something like "sample licensed through so-and-so recording company special products division". I'm sure that if DRM was somehow preventing their sampling (although they would probably work around this by holding down the shift key like anyone else), they could arrange to get an official sample straight from the source.

The ironic thing is that the Beastie Boys' early days, before court rulings that forced people to pay up, they did massive sampling without attributing the sources. I have their "Paul's Boutique" album from 1989 (A pretty good CD, IMO). I've seen a blurb somewhere that said that an album like this couldn't be made today, given that each track contains at least 2 or 3 recognizable samples. In fact, I'd say that the samples are so prominent, they are the main "musical instrument" on the record. Many of these weren't obscure samples either; I recognized some of the main "hooks" out of several top-40 hits. There are zero credits in the liner notes mentioning any of these samples.

Compare this to The Verve, who tried to get away with only a slightly worse sample ripoff a decade later, and got their asses handed to them on a platter by the Rolling Stones' lawyers.

beastieboys.com Offline

[Barryke]

The Beastie Boys site seems to be down.. since half an hour ago actualy...

Maybe some hackers acualy buyed the cd. and got mad.

5 bucks says the shift key circumvents this....

[anakin357]

Two links:

New Audio CD DRM Defeated by Use of ''SHIFT'' Key

Google search that found above link, good read.

Re:5 bucks says the shift key circumvents this....

[John Biggabooty]

To find out if this is true, borrow the disc from some sucker who actually bought it, and can't use it. By all means do not buy it yourself.

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.

Re:5 bucks says the shift key circumvents this....

[1u3hr]

How do you think a cd is supposed to run a program after being inserted without using autorun?

"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.

drm?

[BlueLines]

i decided to be wary about this album when i heard the drm rumors, and i was prepared. but i can't seem to find the 'shift' button on my turntable..

Re:There is autorun on Mac OS

[mj_1903]

There is no autorun similar to the Windows variant that automatically starts an exe up. There is only 'autorun' for Audio CD's, DVD's and camera's, etc, media that cannot do any damage to the machine.

see, this is why people use windows

[Anonymous Coward]

You have to use the group policies manager to disable it. Goto start --> run --> "gpedit.msc" (thanks to the other replier, I forget what it was called) --> Local Computer Policy --> Administrative Templates --> System (click it) --> on the right pane find "Turn off Autoplay" in the list --> right-click --> properties --> select the "enable" radio button.

Ease of use has always been Windows' strong point. In linux you'd have to open up a file and change something; that's unexceptable for the casual user.

TCPA is not DRM

[Mephie]

I also told them why .... I will not buy DRM ..TCPA....Copy controlled disks...ect

TCPA is actually now TCG, Trusted Computing Group, and doesn't have anything to do with DRM. It's essentially a standards body that specifies compliance for hardware security modules, or TPMs (Trusted Platform Modules), which also don't have to have anything to do with DRM. For example, IBM makes desktop and laptop computers with TCG compliant TPMs on the systemboard which exist for the sole purpose of providing security for your data, not ensuring that you install only "trusted" software or don't violate this copyright or whatever, and cannot, in fact, be used for that function.

A refusal to buy anything TCPA (which is actually TCG) is pointless. You're boycotting the wrong thing.

Re:TCPA is not DRM

[Convergence]

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?

It doesn't bother all that much to me ...

[anubi]

That they did this.

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.

it's a Mac OS 9 vulnerability

[dmoen]

The vulnerability doesn't exist in MacOS X, unless you are running the Classic subsystem. To protect yourself, start up Classic, run the Classic QuickTime control panel, and disable "AutoStart". Now your Mac will not automatically run malware on inserted CDs.

So that's why most MacOS X users will not have their machines infected--they aren't running Classic at the time they insert the CD.

Doug Moen.

Re:it's a Mac OS 9 vulnerability

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. And to clarify, you CAN NOT turn on autorun in Mac OSX at all. It's not even available.

Re:it's a Mac OS 9 vulnerability

[socode]

Perhaps you're in the habit of inserting a CD, copying a malware application from it yourself, and then telling OSX to automatically run the malware whenever a CD/DVD is inserted.

For everybody else, this merely allows you to run something _locally_ on your computer in response to a CD/DVD insertion, for example DVDPlayer, not something on the CD/DVD itself.

Re:There is autorun on Mac OS

[Graff]

This is the first I've heard of copy protection being installed through autorun on Mac OS, but yes, there is autorun. In fact there was a worm that spread this way a couple years back.

There is no autorun feature under Mac OS X 10.3 and I'm pretty sure it wasn't in 10.2 either. There is an autorun in Mac OS 9 and I believe there was one in versions of Mac OS X previous to 10.2

The only thing in Mac OS X which is similar to autorun is that you can set certain actions to happen when you put a CD or DVD in the drive. The default is for a blank CD or DVD to ask you what to do, for a music CD to open iTunes, a photo CD to open iPhoto and a video DVD to open DVD Player. All other CDs or DVDs will be just be mounted in the Finder if they contain a filesystem readable by Mac OS X.

None of these default actions will cause anything else to be run or anything to be installed on your computer. If you want you can change the default actions to run another application, to run a script, or to be ignored.

shift key

[Spetiam]

Nor with the SHIFT key held down on Windows?

Re:Very true

[Mycroft_VIII]

It may not be completely accurate, but it is a factor.
Other factors include such things as the TYPE of person using the platform in question. While this is purely anectedotal, Most of the Mac users I run into have one of several attitudes that make them less likely to be virus writers. Many are proffessional/serious hobbiest audio/visual people and preffer to spend thier time on that. Most Mac owners are very pro Apple and Evangelize the apple heavilly, writing Mac viruses would counter productive.
Another is the anger issue. I would wager comparatively few Mac users hate apple compared to the number who hate Microsoft.
And Finally there is inherent differences in the platforms themselves. Windows security model and codebase seems very exploit friendly to my mind, and with OSX being bsd at the core is most likely less malware friendly (I couldn't comment on previous mac os's, but bsd seems to be widly held as doing well in this regard).
And I'd like to point out at least one flaw in the site you linked to. It pointed out some windows exploits target as small or smaller a subsegment of windows users as the macs overal market segment. This completely misses the fact all the toolkits virus writers have developed for windows sofar (A great many) are much more easily adapted to target a single windows application than they are to port to a mac, where so much is different right down to processor.

Mycroft

Re:Virus

[c0dedude]

The CD is the vector. Give it to a friend, it perpetuates. Direct-copy it, it probably perpetuates. Remember, worms perpetuate without user action. Viruses perpetuate with user action.

Seriously: How does someone so blatantly shortsighted manage to breathe?

If you don't buy my record, I got my advance

[The Tyro]

But I think it was the appropriately-named The New Style where they said "I had to get a beeper cuz my 'puter is tapped, better keep your mouth shut cuz I'm fully strapped"

Apparently it is the new style.

Sabotaged!

[Rai]

Sabotaged

You can't stand it, you know I planned it
I'm gonna set it straight, this fair use debate
You can't copy shit when I'm in here
Because my new CD will stop all your file shares
So while you sit back and wonder why
Copy protection is installed inside
That's not a real CD, it's a mirage
I'm tellin' y'all you've been sabotaged

So listen up 'cause you can't copy nothin'
I'll shut you down unless you use the shift button
But I'm in and your MP3s are gone
You'll never rip another one of my songs
'Cause what you hear you might not get
And we got legal threats so don't you pirate yet
You're copying a thing that's a mirage
I'm trying to tell you now you've been sabotaged

You can't stand it, you know i planned it
I'm gonna set it straight, the consumer rights fate
You can't copy shit when my CD's in place
And now you feel disgrace because I'm in your disc space
But make no mistakes, I'll shutdown your scandal
I'm Hilary Rosen when I fly off the handle
No more fair use, it was all a mirage
I'm scheming on your rights; you're sabotaged!

Sorry, wrong

[Sycraft-fu]

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.

How to really screw these studios

[Windcatcher]

If I had more guts I'd call my uncle and ask him to do this, since he's a local politician and knows lots of judges. Someone should go to his local Justice of the Peace, pay his $50, and sue based on anti-hacking laws, asking the judge for an injunction blocking sale of this album anywhere in his state (or a fine of something like $100,000/day if the record companies defy the judge). Wouldn't it be a kick in the ass if EMI couldn't sell this piece of spywhere anywhere in, say, the entire COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA?

New Song Titles

[nathanh]

Their next album has the following predicted hits.

• Three MCs and One DRM
• Fight Against Your Right (to COOOOO-PY)
• Intergalactic Copy Protection
• Sabotage (your Fair Use)

I was going to buy the latest album but screw them. No album is worth the hassle of DRM.

Pennsylvania Anti-hacking Statute

[Windcatcher]

Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

CRIMES AND OFFENSES (TITLE 18)

CHAPTER 39. THEFT AND RELATED OFFENSES

3933. Unlawful use of computer.

(a) Offense defined.--A person commits the offense of unlawful use of a computer if he, whether in person, electronically or through the intentional distribution of a computer virus:

1. accesses, exceeds authorization to access, alters, damages or destroys any computer, computer system, computer network, computer software, computer program or data base or any part thereof, with the intent: to interrupt the normal functioning of an organization or to devise or execute any scheme or artifice to defraud or deceive or control property or services by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises;

2. intentionally and without authorization accesses, alters, interferes with the operation of, damages or destroys any computer, computer system, computer network, computer software, computer program or computer data base or any part thereof;

3. intentionally or knowingly and without authorization gives or publishes a password, identifying code, personal identification number or other confidential information about a computer, computer system, computer network or data base.

4. intentionally or knowingly engages in a scheme or artifice, including, but not limited to, a denial of service attack, upon any computer, computer system, computer network, computer software, computer program, computer server or data base or any part thereof that is designed to block, impede or deny the access of information or initiation or completion of any sale or transaction by users of that computer, computer system, computer network, computer software, computer program, computer server or data base or any part thereof.

(b) Grading.--An offense under subsection (a)(1) is a felony of the third degree. An offense under subsection (a)(2), (3) or (4) is a misdemeanor of the first degree.

(c) Definitions.--As used in this section the following words and phrases shall have the meanings given to them in this subsection:

"Access." To intercept, instruct, communicate with, store data in, retrieve data from or otherwise make use of any resources of a computer, computer system, computer network or data base.

"Computer." An electronic, magnetic, optical, hydraulic, organic or other high speed data processing device or system which performs logic, arithmetic or memory functions and includes all input, output, processing, storage, software or communication facilities which are connected or related to the device in a system or network.

"Computer network." The interconnection of two or more computers through the usage of satellite, microwave, line or other communication medium.

"Computer program." An ordered set of instructions or statements and related data that, when automatically executed in actual or modified form in a computer system, causes it to perform specified functions.

"Computer software." A set of computer programs, procedures and associated documentation concerned with the operation of a computer system.

"Computer system." A set of related, connected or unconnected computer equipment, devices and software.

"Computer virus." A computer program copied to or installed on a computer, computer network, computer program, computer software or computer system without the informed consent of the owner of the computer, computer network, computer program, computer software or computer system that may replicate itself and that causes unauthorized activities within or by the computer, computer network, computer program, computer software or computer system.

"Data base." A representation of information, knowledge, facts, concepts or instructions which are being prepared or processed or have been prepared or processed in a formalized manner and are intended for use in a computer

unanticipated outcome from DRM attempts

[borgalicious]

I have a friend who put a DRM hybrid disk into her iMac (Alexander Calder model) to listen to it. Somehow, the code portion of the disk totally trashed her System 9 boot drive, as in restore from factory media type trashed.

Not having made the correlation between the two events, she tried to play the disc some days later. The boot drive was trashed again. There is something severely wrong with this model. When code designed to thwart legitimate use causes loss of user data and much time restoring the computer and the code wasn't even written for the box in question, the labels really are shooting themselves in the foot.

I haven't bought a commercial CD since. Yes, I know a one-person boycott won't kill the industry but I used to buy ~100 discs per year.

Re:But this in an audio CD!

[Graff]

There is only 'autorun' for Audio CD's

But this one is supposed to be an Audio CD!!

The 'autorun' he was talking about is not a true autorun like the one on Windows. What the 'autorun' under Mac OS X does is tell the proper application (iTunes by default for an audio CD) to run. The default applications are pretty safe and they normally don't allow anything new to be installed automatically.

For example, when an audio CD is put in a Mac OS X machine it defaults to running iTunes. iTunes by default simply shows the music that is on the disk. Nothing else is run, nothing is installed. It is safe.

Now, if the user then goes on to run any old applications that happen to be on the data portion of the CD well then that's the user's dumbass fault if something evil gets installed! :-)

Well, there's a very clear and simple message here

[X86Daddy]

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).

Linux machines.

[eniu!uine]

"Wasn't there an article many months (years?) ago about how to circumvent this kind of thing by holding "shift" as you insert the disc? Yes, that's a Windows-only solution, but I don't see this kind of problem affecting Macs or Linux machines."

I'd like to see them try to install something on my linux machine. Hell, I can't install anything when I'm trying.

Re:Very true

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

"Oh, ferchrissake, stop spouting that old FUD about how Windoze market dominance means it's the preferred target for viruses, and if Mac had a 90% share, it would be targeted too. It's just not true."

Right, and you know because Mac has 90% marketshare, right?

The fact is, we don't know *how many* bugs and flaws OS X has, and until it has the fabled 90% market share, it will not be targeted.

There are PLENTY of security flaws in Mac OS and Linux. Remember the SSH remote root compromise? Remember the kernel releases that allowed privelage elevation? Remember the whole URL-handler flaw?

There are probably millions of Macs out there that are STILL veulnerable to the URL flaw. Why haven't they been attacked? It's not because they couldn't be, it's because it's simply better business to write spyware for Windows.

The linked article gives counterexamples. It does not, however, make any compelling argument against the FACT that Windows is run on more desktops than any other OS. If you're going to write crap, who do you target, 92% or 4%?

Don't feed me this shit about how wrong I am in believing that the security of Mac OS X has yet to be tested. There have been flaws in Mac OS X, big ones. They have been patched, just like the Windows flaws. Millions of users are likely still running unpatched software.

The difference is that the exploits simply are not there for Mac OS. And, no, an exploit of the Microsoft type doesn't require root access.

You have no direct evidence to support your position, as I have no direct evidence to support mine. The jury is still out. Until Windows is no longer the dominant platform, any conclusion is just conjecture.

Don't pretend that it's not.

Re:Do as I say, not as I do...

[babbage]

I have their "Paul's Boutique" album from 1989 (A pretty good CD, IMO). I've seen a blurb somewhere that said that an album like this couldn't be made today, given that each track contains at least 2 or 3 recognizable samples. In fact, I'd say that the samples are so prominent, they are the main "musical instrument" on the record.

Well, yeah. It's not such a stretch to assume that that was the whole point back then. If you listen to an album like "License to Ill" , it's like a scavenger hunt to track down where all the samples came from. Hey, it's the drums from Led Zeppelin's "When The Levee Breaks"; hey, it's a Beatles riff; hey, it's that guy from "Good Times", etc.

And the same thing was true for other rappers in the eighties. If you listen to an old Public Enemy or Run-DMC album, they also were chock full of recognizeable riffs.

When I was a kid, this whole sampling business bugged the hell out of me -- how can they call it music when all they're doing is re-arranging the rock music I liked? It took me a while to come around and realize that they were making something new out of older things, just as the rock bands I liked were doing in more indirect ways (Led Zeppelin ripped off Robert Johnson & made heavy metal, while Robert Johnson ripped old black folk music and made the blues); it took me longer still to realize that all this sampling business is really very postmodern and therefore enjoyable in the same way that I enjoy blazingly referential Tarantino movies, retro-futuristic product design like the new Mini Cooper, the scattershot eclecticism of a computer language like Perl, or yes the rap of a Run-DMC or Public Enemy. All of these borrow heavily from that which came before them, but they make something somehow original out of the pieces, so the at-first obvious familiarity is actually distracting you from how brilliant & new this really is. You *think* you've seen this before, but once you get your head around it, you realize that it really is a whole new thing. Clever trick, that.

But I digress.

Back in the early 90s, Rolling Stone magazine had a constant series of articles about sampling, which really came to a head with Vanilla Ice's butchery of David Bowie & Queen's "Under Pressure" with his "Ice, Ice, Baby", which preserved not only a several second long sample, but the whole song had the same basic melodical feel as the original. Vanilla Ice and his record label got in a lot of trouble for that (I forget if they lost the lawsuit per se, but they were forced to change their tactics). Meanwhile, you had people like Dr. Dre and Snoop Dogg raiding everything they could find in James Brown's back catalog, turning all his old funk & soul hits into, basically, the exact same songs, but with more drugs & prostitution. James Brown was somewhat less than flattered.

As a result, as you say, the labels were forced to start doing more bookkeeping for the sampling done by their artists. That wasn't to say that sampling ended -- bands like Massive Attack & Portishead put out fantastic late-90s albums with lots of recognizable samples -- but somewhere in the fine print had to be some kind of legal acknowledgement that old material was being used, and if recognizeable snippets of more than a couple of seconds were being used (that is, if they were going beyond simple fair use citations of the original material), they had to get permission from the original artists.

In recent years, the only time bands have really run into trouble are ones that made the mistake that Vanilla Ice made, where not only the sample but the whole song seems like a simple remake of the original song. So for example, on "When The Levee Breaks", Led Zeppelin started the song with these massive, booming drums for a few bars before bringing in the guitars & other instruments, while the Beastie Boys took that drum loop and used it as the foundation for "Rhymin' And Stealin'" -- which sounds almost nothing like

Completely illegal in the UK?

[mattbee]

I remember some software which pulled a stunt like this in the name of "copy protection", and in the same way I think the CD's operation may be illegal under the "Computer Misuse Act 1984. Section 3 says

3.-(1) A person is guilty of an offence if-
(a) he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer; and

(b) at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing-
(a) to impair the operation of any computer;

(b) to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer; or

(c) to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.

Doesn't that sound like exactly what this is? Unauthorised modification of data on a computer to impair its normal operation? Absolutely no consent or knowledge from the purchaser of the CD?

Any Beastie-Boy-fan lawyers reading who agree? The sentence could be up to five years in jail :-)

Trojan horse

[TheLink]

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.

To any record company execs who can read

[ajv]

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.

Beasty Boys broke my PC ?

[freaker_TuC]

My soulmate wanted to rip the CD to put on his Archos Jukebox, since he is not using CD's anymore but still buys them to be legal and to have the full version.

Since I put in the CD I can't run my company invoice system anymore, can't do anything at all with that cdrom drive, not even play a game. Every time I put in the CD it cannot be recognized by my system.

I already tried to uninstall the software but the problem stays, which forces me to reinstall the PC completely (which I definitely don't have the time for now at the moment and will cost me days to get the invoicing update done).

Is this legal ? Can this be allowed ? I am literally loosing money now just because I wanted to rip that legal and bought cd for him straight to his Archos. It's not even music I like to listen to...

The Liner Notes

[cammoblammo]

Given the EULA that these things will attempt to pass off on us, I wonder if they can (pseudo-legally, at least) get around *nix type security arrangements?

Hey! Buy this great CD! It rocks! It jives! It's phat. It's good, and reeeaaalll bad! Stick it up the establishment, throw down your oppressors and ROCK!!!!

.
.
.
4. A II 3 e vii) THE USER AGREES, IN THE EVENT OF SECURITY SYSTEMS ON MUSIC SYSTEM BLOCKING THE INSTALLATION OF SAID MUSIC PROTECTION SOFTWARE, TO SUPPLY AS NEEDED ALL PASSWORDS, ENCRYPTION/ DECRYPTION KEYS, USER NAMES, OPERATING SYSTEM DETAILS, CREDIT CARDS NUMBERS AND ALL OTHER INFORMATION NECESSARY TO INSTALL AFOREMENTIONED ON THE AFOREMENTIONED MACHINE OF AFOREMENTIONED USER, HERETOFORE AFOREMENTIONED.
4. A II 3 e viii) IN THE SITUATION THE SAID MUSIC PROTECTION SOFTWARE IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE OPERATING SYSTEM, APIS, REGISTRATION DEVICES, OR OTHER SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE FEATURES OF THE COMPUTER ON WHICH THE SOFTWARE IS TO BE INSTALLED THE USER AGREES TO REMOVE ALL SOFTWARE FROM THE COMPUTER, INCLUDING OPERATING SYSTEMS, AND AGREES TO INSTALL THE PRESCRIBED OPERATING SYSTEM SOFTWARE WHICH CAN BE PURCHASED VIA WWW.MICROSOFT.COM. ANY NECESSARY SOFTWARE PURCHASES, SYSTEM UPGRADES, OR OTHER CHANGES IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER. THE PUBLISHER WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ASSOCIATED COST.

.
.
.

Yeah! Rock on!

I'd like to thank my girl, my wife, my manager, and most of all God who made all this possible.

Just disable the god damn autorun

[melted]

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.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?ur l= /library/en-us/shellcc/platform/shell/programmersg uide/shell_basics/shell_basics_extending/autorun/a utoplay_reg.asp

Oh, and not buying CDs from bands that have no respect for you would be a good idea, too.

UK version is non-DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

Reading the articles, it says that the US and UK releases are the only ones without DRM. Possibly that's the reason. We had an article about US anti-spyware laws just the other day that would ban installing without consent, and according to another poster further up the story this is already the case in Minnesota.

It looks like the record companies are on the run. Now all we need is Canada and Europe to follow suit.

beastie boys website bbs thread

[tobyvoss]

here is a link to the forum thread explaining that the copy protection is on all emi cds, except us and uk versions, and that the beastie boys would have liked it not to be protected but couldn't help.