Slashdot Mirror


Copy Protected CD Makers Attempt iPod Support

andrewdski writes "C|Net is reporting that both SunnComm International and Macrovision are courting Apple in an attempt to make their copy-protected CDs compatible with the iPod. This is being portrayed as a significant blow to Microsoft's control over digital rights technology." The iPod concerns were raised in a previous article.

26 of 113 comments (clear)

  1. Copy protected CD? by lightspawn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If it's "copy protected", it's not a CD. Using the music industry's term is not the way to get non-geeks to understand the issue.

    Let's come up with a name that reflects the true nature of these things, stick to it, and start using it.

    1. Re:Copy protected CD? by MarsDefenseMinister · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Limited play compact disk. Let's call them LPCD. Old timers will groan, but it's better than nothing.

      --
      No weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men.-Ronald Reagan
    2. Re:Copy protected CD? by wizatcomputer · · Score: 3, Informative
      For some copy portection schemes, it can't even have the "Compact Disc" logo on it becasue it dosen't follow the format.
      They have deliberately violated the CD Audio specifications by not starting the data at the specified location, and storing data where it isn't supposed to be stored. Because such CDs do not follow the specifications co-created by Sony and Philips, Philips, like Apple, says such copy protected CDs are not Audio CDs, and will not allow their cases to display the Compact Disc logo.
      Quoted from http://www.digitalmedievalist.com/it/archive/00003 1.html
      --
      What's the point of a sig?
    3. Re:Copy protected CD? by plj · · Score: 2, Informative

      If it's "copy protected", it's not a CD.

      Not exactly true. Every copyprotected CD-like disc out there relies to one of the following tricks:

      a. Deliberate RedBook errors on audio tracks. Used at least on Cactus Data Shield discs
      b. Data session at the end of the disc left deliberately unclosed. Used at least on Sony Key2Audio discs
      c. Audio obfuscation driver that relies on Windows autoplay for installation. Used at least on SunnComm MediaMax discs (complete analysis here).

      In the case c, the disc is perfectly standards compatible CD -- it could even have the CD-DA-logo. If the copy protection hurts you because you're using Windows and had Autoplay on -- well, bad for you, but on other OSes -- like OS X or Linux -- there are no problems ripping these CDs whatsoever. Neither in Windows, if you don't let autoplay run.

      The bad thing is obviously, that it is damn hard to find out what was the technology used, as even the non-copyprotected discs often lack the logo nowadays. But I think most shops will normally accept returning of copyprotected CDs, if you'll just claim that they didn't work in your stereo CD player. In case of C, you don't really need to -- the disc will work, if you don't just act like a fool by letting Windows autoplay it.

      Case A is usually worst, as these discs do not stand physical damage as well as standard discs. Deliberate errors also forces to use special tools when ripping. OTOH, in thgis case the copy will be better in quality terms than the original. In case B most drives are able to rip the audio tracks succesfully, at least using special software. There are some drives, though, which refuse to ever recognise these discs at all.

      --
      “Wait for Hurd if you want something real” –Linus
    4. Re:Copy protected CD? by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Time to napalm my karma....

      Nobody outside out of Slashdot (yes I know where we are) gives a crap about this.

      geek: OMG! they violated the CD audio specs!!! LMAO!!
      joe public: look, shiny disc music thingies!

      If these things work in more CD players than not (let's all hope not), then the average comsumer will buy his music in the format offered by his local chain.

      He also wouldn't care if it was riddled with spyware, studded with RFID tags and not offered under an Open Source license.

      Beowulf is an unknown word to him. He cares not if it runs Linux. He is a sheep.

      Why is this important? Because he is one of very, very many. And they dominate the culture, for the most part. Not the small stuff, but the big slow tectonic movements. It's their fault for Hootie & The Blowfish, the Macarena and the Atkins diet, for example. There's not much recourse against such a behemoth of a force.

      So instead of telling me for the umpteenth time that something is technically, legally or morally wrong, remember you're preaching to the choir here and tell me what we can do about it instead.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
  2. Good by magefile · · Score: 3, Informative

    This adds another (easier) loophole. Import to iTunes, export to whatever. Or, import to iPod, plug into line-in. The more complexity they add, the more holes there'll be for legitimate (using the term in its pre-DMCA/INDUCE-IICA sense, of course) use.

    1. Re:Good by NaugaHunter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What loophole? They are almost certainly trying to get Apple to import the songs as "Protected" and only allow exporting to iPods. Even these idiots would recognize that the iTunes software allows burning CDs from Apple's current DRM.

      --
      R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
  3. No Crippled CDs, Period by Michael_Burton · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As much as I'm in favor of any "significant blow to Microsoft control", I won't support any attempt to replace Blue Book audio with any crippled format. I simply will not buy crippled "CDs"; I don't care how many different flavors of DRM are included for my convenience.

    --
    When all you have is an axe, everything looks like a grindstone.
  4. It seems like the iPod by hype7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... is the biggest single obstacle the music industry has from ramming really nasty DRM down all our throats. The very nature of Apple's terms has stopped WMP dead in its tracks, and it's going to make the labels think twice with future formats like DVD-A and SACD.

    I sincerely hope that they get the fact that people will pay for convenience, quality and portability. I think that as soon as they get that, the file sharing apps are going to seriously head south. They've got convenience with the iTunes music store, portability is ok (average at best), but they need a lot of work on quality (I'd like to see a lossless version of the digital master recording made available).

    Get all three of those, and I'd pay up to double what they're presently charging.

    -- james

    1. Re:It seems like the iPod by WhiteBandit · · Score: 2

      DRM protected or not, you've always been able to do this. Play the AAC file in one program, in another program, record the stereo mix. Save as an mp3. Boom! You are done.

      I don't know why the RIAA is spending so much money on making it difficult to create mp3's. If you can listen to it, you can make an mp3/ogg/aac/wmv file out of it. All it takes is 1 person to upload it to the internet and bam! There goes the money they invested to "protect" it.

      About the only effective thing to stop people from being able to create mp3's is to stop making music. As far as the RIAA goes, that would be a blessing in disguise. ;)

  5. No problem by duffbeer703 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Apple will have no qualms arbitrarily altering the current iTunes DRM scheme to suit Macrovision's desires.

    --
    Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
    1. Re:No problem by nine-times · · Score: 2, Insightful
      'Apple will have no qualms arbitrarily altering the current iTunes DRM scheme to suit Macrovision's desires.'

      And where do you get that from? Apple has agreed to DRM for their iTunes music store, under pressure from the RIAA (who wouldn't agree to any of the music to be put into iTunes' catalogue without DRM), but Apple has also insisted that DRM be fairly non-obtrusive. (if the DRM on iTMS gets too annoying, no one will use it anymore)

      Apple has even refused to give the iPod WMA-playback capability. I mean, they haven't given a public refusal, but there's no technological reason why they couldn't include it, and rumor is that Apple even has firmware in-house that will give the iPod the ability to play WMAs, and they've chosen not to include this capability. Why? Perhaps they've made that choice in order to push users to use iTMS instead of other options. Or, just maybe, they did it because they have no motivation to make it easy for Microsoft to control media distribution by making WMA ubiquitous.

    2. Re:No problem by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 2, Insightful


      Releases of iTunes often include subtle changes in the licensing model

      If by "often" you mean "once."

      --

      --
      $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    3. Re:No problem by nine-times · · Score: 2, Informative
      Thus far, the changes have been trivial; but since nobody called Apple to task for arbitrarily changing licensing terms ex post facto, they'll feel free to do so again in the future.

      That seems like a bit of a leap. Maybe it would be more reasonable to say:

      'Releases of iTunes has once included subtle changes in the licensing model for music that you purchased in the past. Since nobody called Apple to task for arbitrarily making trivial changes in the past, they may feel more comfortable making trivial changes in the future.'

  6. Something good comes out of this... by nine-times · · Score: 2, Insightful
    'This is being portrayed as a significant blow to Microsoft's control over digital rights technology.'

    Of course it's a blow to MS's control of DRM. They've been pushing everyone to use WMA, which not only would increase their control over DRM, but increase their control over media distribution in general.

    Pushing everyone into WMA is a great example of Microsoft using it's near-monopoly to increase its control on other sectors of industry. I, for one, am glad Apple has chosen not to support WMA. Sure, you might argue that choosing to only support their own DRM scheme is anti-competitive on Apple's part, too, but I'd rather see a company limit its player to one DRM scheme than see all music everywhere put into a single DRM scheme, controlled by one company. Besides, I don't believe Apple has the sort of control over any market that Microsoft.

    In any event, Apple/iTunes/iPod has brought the annoyance of DRM and it's conflict with fair use more into the forefront, which is what I've been predicting for a while now. (which is good)

    1. Re:Something good comes out of this... by Jord · · Score: 3, Insightful
      you might argue that choosing to only support their own DRM scheme is anti-competitive on Apple's part

      You can only be anti-competitive if you are a monopoly. Apple is not a monopoly and therefore cannot be anti-competitive.

      Calling Apple anti-competitive in this area is like calling Sony anti-competitive because their mini-disc players do not support the industry standard 80cm Compact Disc.

    2. Re:Something good comes out of this... by Jord · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Exactly what market would Apple be a Monopoly of?

      PPC Processor market? Nope they are used in other machines
      Notebooks? Nope other people make them
      LCD Displays? Nope other people make them
      Unix? Nope other versions exist
      OS X? Nope, other operating systems run on PPC hardware
      Tying everything together? Nope you are not required to use any one product with another.

      Apple is NOT a monopoly. Unless you limit the definition of their market to some insane level, they cannot be called a monopoly in any shape or form. Even if we pretend for an instant that they are a monopoly -- just remember that being a monopoly is not illegal, abusing that status is.

      Nice try though.

  7. how about.... by RegalBegal · · Score: 2, Funny

    if you don't know how to shut off the 'feature' known as autoplay, in turn making such things pointless. Then you don't deserve to steal music.

    all kidding aside now.

    Me being a proud owner/fan of an iPod, I think this a good idea for apple to get their product pimped out to even more people. Not that they haven't done so already through their stallar marketing campaign concerning all thins iPod and iTunes.

    In an iPod related note, my little cousin showed me the 'ipod' he wanted. It was in fact a Dell Brick Box. Has iPod turned into the new Kleenix? If so Apple should market for the military if it can do THAT kind of brainwashing. HUUZAAHHHH!

    --
    "It'll destroy you if you try to make it mean anything to anyone but yourself." - Henry Rollins
  8. In order to play the songs on your iPod by foidulus · · Score: 3, Funny

    You will have to hold down the action button while loading the cd.

  9. Fairplay won't work on CD in its current form by jdb8167 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Something that no one seems to notice in these articles is that Fairplay as it currently implemented won't work on a CD. Fairplay includes your user id and encrypted atoms in the AAC container based on your user id. A CD will necessarily have to have a static encryption model. As far as I know, Fairplay doesn't do that.

    I don't think that Apple will have much interest in changing their DRM to accommodate the CD DRM companies since doing nothing will have the same effect. If users can't use their iPods then I don't think that Suncomm or Macrovision DRM is going to become an industry standard.

    1. Re:Fairplay won't work on CD in its current form by NaugaHunter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't think that Apple will have much interest in changing their DRM to accommodate the CD DRM companies since doing nothing will have the same effect.

      There are two reasons Apple won't do this. 1) Economical. They'd rather sell the controlled music through the iTunes Music Store. 2) Usability. You know damn well Suncomm and Macrovision aren't going to label these things as protected unless they have to, and Apple doesn't want to deal with "Why can I burn songs from CD A but not B?".

      --
      R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
  10. Why the hell would Apple do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Vultures: Dear Apple Computer. As you know we are the market leaders..blah blah..our products are used in..blah blah. We have an exciting proposition for you! We'd like you to make your products DO LESS, COST MORE, and BE MORE COMPLICATED! And in exchange for this awesome upgrade, we'll let you use our hip logo which means nothing to consumers!

    The Steve: Let me get this straight. Our music player is #1. Our service is #1. We sold more units (100,000,000) in the past few months than you can conceive in one meeting without calling in your accountant. Customers are happy. Record labels are happy. *We're* happy (it's been 3 months since the financal press called us "beleagured").

    We've found the right balance to keep the record companies happy. Record labels small and large are banging on our door. The few holdout artists are looking pretty silly.

    After discussing this with the others we have come to the conclusion that you should go fuck yourself. Thanks.

  11. Fishing expedition... by Chief+Typist · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Both Macrovision and Sunncom seem like their on a fishing expedition -- and C|net is playing along.

    Apple declined comment and MSFT only says "we don't know what they're up to".

    Apple doesn't want DRM anymore than the rest of us -- the first version of the iPod had none. And I'm sure they could really give a crap about physical media when their whole business model is based on networked media.

    -ch

  12. Only 3 Possibilities by Bricklets · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I can think of only three ways these companies can get their technology to work in an "iPod Nation":

    + Convince Apple to make iPods play WMV (fat chance)

    + Convince Apple to make iTunes burn protected AAC files only (no mp3 or unprotected AAC anymore. again, fat chance)

    + Convince Apple to kill off the iPod, hence making it a Windows Media Nation once again (better chance of this happening than the other two).

    By complying with these companies, Apple gains nothing but may lose something. In fact, it can be argued that music CDs that do not work with iPods only encourages iTunes sales. I remember reading the customer reviews of Contraband on Amazon. 9 of the the 10 most helpful reviews rate the music as 1-star solely b/c of copy protection. But you can easily go online and buy that CD off of iTunes which, surprise, does work with your iPod.

    Audio compression concerns aside, buying a music CD off of iTunes is a whole lot easier than buying it off of Amazon or even your local music store. CD protection schemes only drives iTunes ease of use into the consumer's head further.

    --
    Little Bricklets
  13. Contraband Negative Customer Reviews Removed??? by Bricklets · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hey, what happened to all the customer reviews on Amazon for Contraband. A huge number of them gave it a bad rating because of the copy protection. But now ALL of these reviews have disappeared.

    What happened? See for youself over Here

    --
    Little Bricklets
  14. iTMS obsoletes copy-protected CDs anyway by Steve+Cowan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have bought one copy-protected audio CD (Kraftwerk - Tour De France Sountracks) and it is a pain in the ass. It won't play in my iBook, and it won't play in 95% of computers I have put it in.

    It comes with a Windows player installer that wants to copy multiple files to the HD, and a buggy Mac player that crashes my iBook in 9.2 and quits as soon as it is launched in Panther.

    (It plays just like any other CD in my Sawtooth G4's stock DVD-ROM drive).

    Don't these people realize that a lot of people nowadays use a computer instead of a standard CD player to listen to their music?

    If I had an iPod and the iTunes Music Store was available in my country (Canada! cmon Apple!) , I would have bought the album online, paid less money, and I'd be able to listen to it anywhere.

    Copy protection on audio CD's is far worse than Apple's DRM. If I were Apple I'd let the people doing the copy protection futz around trying to make their product actually work, while the iTMS model continues to gain momentum as a better way to buy music.