Slashdot Mirror
Beastie Boys Respond to DRM Claims
An anonymous reader notes that the Beastie Boys have responded to claims that their new album is DRM-crippled; their response is that the US and UK versions aren't crippled, and the DRM software is only installed in RAM, not on disk. See our previous story for background.
A) No software is permanently installed on your hard disk.
B) Check install.log on your hard disk for details.
Haha.
*weep*
salesmen lie (especially multi million dollar ones)
I don't care where its installed. If I am not notified when its installed. Its illegal. I think Symantec should start lumping this crap in with viruses and trojans.
ItWasFree.com - Take the mystery
Since when was anyone accusing them of using software that doesn't exist? Wouldn't we all be happy if all new spyware turned out to be vaporware?
Can they call this a cd then? Does it conform to red book standards?
Uh... do they even know what vaporware means? I love press releases like this, they should just how little the PR goons know about anything related to this technology.
My sig is blank, I typed this by hand.
The best thing about this was that the public outcry worked enough to demand a statement from the artists (or at least the artists' minders). It shows that the RIAA model of distrusting the customer is flawed, and that the people still have some power. Perhaps in the future, the awareness of this sort of malware will help prevent it from propagating further.
But my CD player as spdif out, and my computer has spdif in. All it takes is one person like me to put it on the internet and then the cats out of the bag, and trust me when I say I'm not the only one with digital connections on my equipment.
Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
Not buy the CD. I won't buy CD's that are copy-protected. Basically, if I see that it's copy-protected, I look for the CD logo. If it's not on there, why would I want to buy something that isn't a CD?
Oh, it sucks. I like the Beastie Boy's, and I was going to buy their CD. I picked it up, and started walking to the register. But as soon as I saw that it was protected, I put it back.
I will buy CD's. I won't buy things that look like CD's, but aren't.
Jason Lotito
These details can be verified in the 'install.log' file in the computer's root directory.
and
This Macrovision technology does NOT install spyware or vaporware of any kind on a users PC. In fact, CDS-200 does not install software applications of ANY KIND on a user's PC. All the copy protection in CDS-200 is hardware based,
So, if everything is hardware protection, why do they touch some "install.log" in the computer's root directory?
"This Macrovision technology does NOT install spyware or vaporwaere..." of course not. We call this mandatory DRM protection over here at EMI; not "spyware."
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
Am I the only one who sees a strange contradiction between the following lines in the press release?
The copy protection system used for all EMI/Capitol releases including "To the 5 Boroughs" is Macrovision's CDS-200, which sets up an audio player into the users RAM (not hard drive) to playback the RED book audio on the disk.
Vs.The technology does activate a proprietary Macrovision player in order to play the CD on a PC, and that player converts WMA compressed files to audio on the fly.
So, which is it then? A Redbook audio cd, or a data CD with WMA compressed files? Am I reading this right?
There's a Starman, waiting in the sky / He'd like to come and meet us, but he hasn't got the time.
I like my recycle bin the way it is, painfully microsoft, I don't need it painfully microsoft and horribly symantec at the same time. Try and walk the average home user through disabling it over the phone. . . well then, my mother has always been the hardest person for me to give tech support for. . .. too much swearing knocks me out of the will.
This is why "broadcast flag" technology is being added to digital media streams and to all media-player hardware. So that even that option wont be available.
All it takes is one person like me to put it on the internet and then the cats out of the bag,
And let's face it; even if it was necessary to convert to analog at one stage, the drop in quality is likely to be fairly small compared to the drop caused by someone using a ropey encoder at 128kbps. Most people aren't *that* bothered.
Well, it debuted at Number One on the Billboard Album Chart, so somebody must care.
What is most distressing is that the Beasties are the second DRM CD to hit the top of the chart. Boroughs displaced Velvet Revolver's Contraband at #1. Contraband is also DRM "protected."
This should open the floodgates. If record companies were ever shy of DRM, now they'll know people will buy their defective wares, anyway.
I'd like a copy of Velvet Revolver. But I won't buy it until I can find a copy on the used market. If the entire Slashdot world quit buying CDs, it would hardly make a dent (not that Slashdotters *always* pay for their music). But it's the principle of the whole thing.
My main bitch with DRM CDs is that it might make it more difficult to rip legally purchased music to my hard drive. I don't even own a standalone CD player these days, and I want to be able to load my library on an iPod. All perfectly legal activities, but Big Music wants to dictate how I listen and store my music. In the owrds of our Vice President, f*ck them.
And f*ck artists who go along with it. Maybe I don't need that Velvet Revolver CD, after all.
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
I was trying to explain the workings of the various online digital distributors to someone at the office. After a couple minutes she said "I think I'll just buy the CD and rip it".
Now junk like this is adding the same confusion to purchasing a CD. The logical result? "I think I'll just download a pirated copy".
When you have to post a 'response' to a new thing on an old thing that used to just work, you have by definition created confusion. People will go for the simpler option: piracy.
Good thinkin' record people!
Who cares about the latest Indigo Girls or Outkast album?
Everyone has different musical tastes. Why is it "better" to like some indie band over, say, Britney Spears? If person A gets the same enjoyment from listening to Britney Spears as person B does from listening to Indigo Girls, what is the fucking problem? People like what they like, even when it is what the RIAA tells them to like.
Uh, did you ever stop and think it was an enhanced CD? You know, music tracks at the beginning and usually some video files at the end that you can access in a computer? A lot of bands release those, in fact a whole lot more release those than a CD with DRM. It's one thing to make a conscious decision to not buy copy protected things, but come on, take off your tinfoil hat, the damn thing was likely not copy protected. For one, name me an indie label that has implemented DRM. Mod me down to hell for this, but the ignorance in some cases (this one) is amazing.
First off, I totally agree with you about the stalness of the vast majority of music produced by the major labels, but I think in the grand scheme its beside the point.
While you and I arent running out to buy the new beastie boys album, many people are. They have the right to fair use. The beastie boys and the labels are dnying that right.
I know I'm just complaining without offering a solution, but no matter how crappy we think the state of music is just not buying it is not the solution.
Oh my, I think Dave just turned into a bear.
That doesn't make any goddamn sense. Vapourware? Who ever wrote that article must not know what the fuck they're talking about.
Slashdot is proof that Sturgeon's Law applies to mankind.
Actually, Thats plain copyright infringement Mr. Hatch, but we won't go there. You're correct thats not fair use, but what the poster is saying is that the recording industry doesnt respect fair use so he is going to use civil disobedience to disrespect them in return.
Then what do you call that Half-Life 2 beta which "my friend" installed?
The copy protection system used for all EMI/Capitol releases including "To the 5 Boroughs" is Macrovision's CDS-200, which sets up an audio player into the users RAM (not hard drive) to playback the RED book audio on the disk.
If it's DRM'd then it clearly isn't Red Book is it? Sigh, fucking technical illiterates.
Actually their new album is quite good. Atleast you know where they're coming from. Their lyrics reflect their politics. Which i think is right on.
:) I'm sorry the whole first cd is a ballad to women.
The new album has some very good songs. The beasties are perhaps a little more innocent in style compared to todays "i'm a big rich mother fucker driving a bentley" rap. Frankly that stuff is so sickening. The fantasy world the fans of that shit live in, is simply put... tragic.
The Beasties are as real as it gets and so what they have an older style.... Its still pretty dam good. They leave the audience feeling good, rather than worshiping the $ like a false god, only to go home to their lower-middle class lives, pretending that they're jay-z. Yeah that gets you far in life.
As for outkast, i never got how people love those guys. Someone in the record industry gave me their latest cd and i felt like a fag listening to it
The second disc is more of the same, except for a song or two.
I give Outkast credit for being differernt... but from an audience point of view... the music's really fem.
I'm not really down with music cd's automatically downloading stuff to my computer. I have many other audio players that will play the CD fine, thanks!
:P
Would turning off the autorun feature in Windows prevent stuff like this from happening? I keep it turned off since I find the windows automatically popping up to be an annoyance, especially if I just want to explore the files on the CD.
You Americans get the unprotected version to ensure that any illegal copies can be tried and convicted under American law. Where a 30.000.000 dollar claim is standard, instead of (for instance) Dutch law where there's a maximum penalty of 1500 euro (1600 something in dollars).
Enforcement of DRM isn't inherently bad whatsoever. It's when the consumer isn't told about it.
I'm sure that we will all agree that the DVDCA informed the public that DVDs were encrypted so that their content could be controlled. I'm also sure that most of us will agree that it was a bad thing when they invoked the DMCA to prevent people from developing a Linux DVD Player.
DRM is evil. It's an attempt to control when, where and how you can enjoy the content that you've paid to access.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
This Macrovision technology does NOT install spyware or vaporware of any kind on a users PC (emphasis mine)
Those marketing-drones really have no clue what they are talking about... vaporware can, by definition, not be installed.
I have discovered a truly remarkable sig which this 120 chars is too small to contain.
Sometime semantics is important. Spinners for the record companies use the word "theft" for IP infringement because it carries more emotional heft. From this I conclude the record companies do not want us to think rationaly about this.
Religion is the main cause of atheism.
I bit of a modification of Pastor Martin Niemöller's quote, but it shows why if someone is doing something wrong we should speak out, even if it doesn't hurt us (yet).
First they came for Rap
and I did not speak out
because I did not like Rap.
Then they came for Pop
and I did not speak out
because I did not like Pop.
Then they came for Country
and I did not speak out
because I did not like Country.
Then they came for my favorites
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Oh! Silly me! I never thought to look at why they are doing what they are doing instead of looking at what they are actually doing! That makes it OK then!
As a matter of fact I'm going to start shooting everyone I see. You see, it doesn't matter what I'm actually doing, it only matters why I'm doing it. Shooting everyong I see is an attempt to enforce, empower, and maintain my rights as a car owner to prevent my rights being trampled on by car theives. If car theft weren't so rampant, this wouldn't be an issue. And blaming me for shooting people is a baseless copout.
If they want to "enforce DRM" against copyright infringers (car theives), well OK. But they have no more right to "enforce DRM" against innocent and non-infringing people than I have to shoot people who are not stealing my car!
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
My name's mike D and I demand respect
Your RAM and CD drive are what I expect
and lets not forget other great momments such as:
I did it like this, I did it like that, I DRM'd and shoved it up your ass hat so.....
And..
Macro Vision.. that funky VISION! Cop's got my gun, I'm on the run, and right about now I'd like to have some fun... fucking those geek slash dotters.
WORD
Then the RIAA came for Good Music
and I did not speak out
For I died of shock
I've got a few CD's that are multisession. They usually have some crappy PC-Friendly junk that always seems to crash.
Out of all the CD's I do have, which isn't TOO many but probably around 30 or so, not a single one is even 60 minutes, nevermind 70. Almost all albums have around 12 - 14 songs, some less some more. There's exceptions, but not enough to worry about the extra space required for the psuedo copy protection that this Beastie Boys album has.
The other crappy part about this whole thing is that these WMA files won't sound as good as your standard 44.1Khz, 16-bit *uncompressed* audio. I mean, they could sound just about as good, but in my experience these DRM music files are usually encoded at something like 128Kbps, and will especially be so if the album is larger then normal.
The above points aside, the whole DRM thing in it's current forms depend on technology that changes too much. I don't want my music CD to be unusable in six years because Windows 2010 won't run the application. Or the required libraries are no longer available. Or I'm running a different processor platform, or not Windows at all.
CD's eventually took over because they worked with every CD player no matter what, no exceptions. This DRM crap works on no CD Players and there's no single DRM standard that everyone is using.
DRM will get between a person and his or her music. It won't stop music from being copied (Haven't they learned anything from the last three decades of trying to copy protect software?) and it will simply cause law-abiding citizens their time and money.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -