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

[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

[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

[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?

[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?

[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?

[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.

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*

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

[antiMStroll]

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

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

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

[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.

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.

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.

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...

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.

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...

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: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.

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?

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.

see this is what happens

[geekoid]

when boys who where rebels become middle aged...

Beastie boys my ass

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.

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

[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: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.

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!

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?

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).

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

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.

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.