Slashdot Mirror
Longhorn's Copy Protection Standard
hype7 writes "The Register is reporting that Microsoft have attempted to force a last-minute CD protection standard on the recording industry in order to ship it in Longhorn. From the article: "Any such deal would see Microsoft support 'an industry-wide copy control platform' built in to its next-generation Longhorn operating system, with the computer giant instructing labels that the compatible secure CDs must contain additional multimedia content, such as bonus tracks, 'as a quid pro quo for adding effective [DRM] into the consumer experience'". It looks like everyone except the consumer is going to win on this one - Microsoft controls the secure format, the RIAA gets a secure format, and the consumer loses all their rights for the "quid pro quo" of a bonus track."
...richie - It is a good day to code.
Why do customers want to upgrade to Longhorn? I seem to keep losing reasons, or never had them in some cases.
-b
...and how is this going to stop me from jacking the sound out to the sound in on my sound card, recording a wav file, then compressing it to mp3?
What if a country who cares about it's citizen's rights (like Germany, where Macrovision is illegal, because it prevents backups) and decides to OUTLAW the copy-protection scheme?
isn't this how the patriot act was passed? wait until the last minute so it has to be agreed upon OR ELSE.
-
Many independent labels are rumoured to be terrified by the proposal, our sources suggest, which could grant Microsoft the mandate on CD copy protection and, if it is accepted by the industry, potentially increase the costs of CD production.
While here onI don't know about you but that thought's pretty scary. I don't like copy protection at all (I bought the damn thing, I want to do what I want to with it, and no that doesn't include sharing it illegally) if it's going to happen I don't think Microsoft is a trustworthy steward to have in control of it. Based on their past actions the whole music industry would probably get worse than the current corrupt and abusive (to artists and fans) system.
The post is out of order? Hell no, the MODERATORS are out of order!
It would be nice if a requirement for moderating was having a clue about the issues around the issue. It's not even my post, but it gets under my skin to see such clueless moderating. When did Slashdot get so dumb?
Unless the MS encryption scheme was given to all music media players (including rival OSs), a music industry crushing fair use lawsuit should be brought. Music has always been (by design) a portable genre. Old example - I buy an LP and make a tape (or mix tape if it's for m'Lady) so I can play it in the car. When CD burners came along I pulled the LP into the PC, split tracks and cleaned the audio - then made a CD. I also ripped these tracks into my MP3 player to go jogging (like I jog!).
Movies are less portable, but I should be allowed a backup, and I used to be able to 'cut' a scene and make it my desktop wallpaper. Those should also be 'fair use'.
-
The CDs are still going to have regular audio tracks, so they can play in regular CD players. Longhorn will still read regular audio tracks, so it can still play old CDs that don't have a DRMed copy of their content. Even if Longhorn checks for a mixed-mode CD and restricts access to the music portion, that breaks older mixed-mode CDs that have the music on the audio portion only, and other content on the data portion. Bottom line, it sounds to me like I'll still be able to just hold shift.
Right now this is true but given the efforts the RIAA has been making with getting laws passed in the US by the time Longhorn comes out it may not be LEGAL to include a regular unencrypted audio track on a CD any more. While consumers and home audio companies would be livid about this, Congress and the RIAA seem to think ideas like that are just grand. Look at the DMCA and the proposed Induce act for examples.No kidding... as long as there's an option to purchase a CD sans-bonus-track (or whatever it is), I'll take it if it has no freedom sacrificing protections on it.
I was thinking Longhorn looked pretty nice, and I'm one of those Slashdotters that spends a fair amount of time in Windows (I dual boot, honest!). I'm *not* going to give up freedoms I currently have now though, which means buying only non-encumbered software, including my OS.
I'll buy the non-encumbered CD's, and pirate the bonus tracks. Unless the non-encumbered discs are cheaper, then I when I pay the same price as the next guy, I want the same content he gets.
It's BS, and I won't have it.
Hopefully soon we'll see recording companies springing up whose philosophy is to allow users access to their fair use rights. Or recording companies who make their money from live concerts or the like, rather than from album sales. Give the albums away for free, and I guarantee I'm more likely to show up at a concert.
Slay a dragon... over lunch!
Well, let's see. We know that the recording industry (movies and music) is terrified of abuse of copyright via computer. Why is it necessarily bad that Microsoft do something to appease them in this manner and thus facilitate future gearing of content towards a computer environment.
I think it's not fair to blame Microsoft for this problem; if you want to bitch, bitch about the recording industry requiring this kind of thing. For more examples, cf. iTMS DRM's, Napster DRM's, etc.
I, for one, don't play Microsoft for designing it's OS in such a way as to facilitate the delivery of content desired by the vast majority of it's users.
The safest way to approach lava is to have another person with you and he goes first.
Not sure I like this 'soft music' thing. I like the packaging, the physical 'album', and the fact that I can pass my collection down to my kids to play around with. Just like I did with my parents records. Who knows how long our hard disks/CD-R's/music formats will last? Anyway, doesn't iTunes/iPod lock me in to Apple? What if I want to get the next Sony player, I can't use my legally purchased CD's on it, right (unless I do something longwinded like burn them to a CD-R, and then re-rip them...) -James.
So how does my home entertainment center read the discs? Do you suppose they will mandate that every consumer must purchase new cd-playback devices to be compatable? How do they phase this in? The hit on the industry would be disasterous and then after that hit, the encryption will be cracked... so who loses? The recording industry and the consumers..
Smart move for Microsoft. They're trying to move into all media markets. By offering to build a DRM spec into the OS this makes them look good in RIAA eyes, even though it looks forced. Once this phase is completed and they've buddied up with the MPAA using a similar tactic, then when both organizations look for new media spec and DRM, MS will be right there and be able to give them a new protection scheme. They could protect it pretty well too. All they'd have to do is get the orgs to agree to have MS proprietary DRM on it. movies and music will only play on windows machines. Makes it plenty difficult to copy on linux and illegal, and since new media will not work on other operating systems, that effectively takes them out of the desktop race for good.
I think it's a great business move and it's not really in violation of the antitrust laws; because other companies are the ones requiring windows.
Just too bad i'm a consumer and not an MS share holder.
The point isn't to make it impossible to copy... the point is to make it past the point of diminishing returns. If you have to work too hard to do it, most people will just give up and/or buy the media. Which is what they want.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
And block/(make unusable) previous versions of windows, to use an old copy of window's you'll have to make your own patches (without source code)... CD's wont run on non-longhorn Computers, all new MS software probably wont run on previous versions of windows...
:-P M$ sucks
basically you upgrade or you can't use your computer (due to viri and such)...
Then again, even if you do upgrade, you still wont be able to use your computer
Is anybody actually buying a CD anymore ? Last CD I bought was a gift to a 4 years old son of my friend and this was about 7 years ago. I think the CD thing will go wayside soon and this point of adding DRM to the plastic will be moot.
Also, how is this different from DRM on downloaded tracks ? It is either microsoft or apple or real media or some other entity protecting the tracks against piracy.
If you complain about not being able to crack the DRM, well, you may have to use and alternative OS to look into the DRM techology to circumvent it and this does not make a big showstopper for anybody who had this idea in mind.
Just my opinion.
__________
The more I know people, the more I love animals
Uh, garage bands that are successfull turn into standard RIAA bands. There's no way to win unless you eventually drop support for the band that USED to be a garage band.
I have several friends in bands, and none of them aspire to be rock stars (at least in public). They understand that they need to keep their day jobs.
However, by buying their CDs and tshirts, you can help them make some cash. Not enough to be famous, but perhaps buying some equipment or a bigger van - or a vacation for their wife who puts up with a lot of crap by being married to a guy in a band.
Boycott RIAA products, if you disagree with their approach. Here's an alternative.
A professor I had summed up the cryptography (or DRM) problem in a way that I could understand.
See that guy over there in the bright red smoking jacket, the big ego, talking really loud. He's the attacker, he only has to find one way to attack successfully.
See that other guy over there with coke bottle glasses, polyester, and trying not to be noticed? He's the defender, he has to defend against every possible attack.
Not only is DRM doomed, but the guy who rips it will brag to everyone who will listen to him that he made a successful attack.
"95% of all windows boxes must contain 100% pirated software."
And I'll call bull on that. Except maybe if you're talking China or ex-USSR where they can't even afford to pay hundreds of bucks for a text editor or 40 bucks for a game. (If a game costs as much as your monthly salary, or more, and you also have to eat out of that salary... well, moral decisions just get a lot easier.)
Even by the BSA's BS statistics, about the highest software piracy rate in the USA is in North Dakota, at almost 40%. And in some states it's in the low teens.
That's a bloody far cry from your 95% bullshit.
And bear in mind that there's a reason there's BS in BSA. Their statistics are inflated beyond belief. If some chinese kid downloads 3DS Max to toy around with making models for a game (e.g., "X2: The Threat" only supports 3DS Max models), the BSA counts it as $6000 lost sales. On account that surely every single kid, even in china, would have paid $6000 to make mods for a $40 game.
Yeah, right. Dunno in which country kids get $6000 as pocket change.
I.e., again, in practice, the real piracy rate is actually lower than that.
The reason why a majority of Americans or Europeans pay for their software isn't that we're more stupid than the Chinese and just can't find a crack. It's because we're not the kind of cheapskate whose only options are free beer or stolen beer. Because it's the morally right thing to do.
Some of us actually paid for Windows. Yes, go figure. I went and bought the Win2K copy I'm writing this on. Retail. And for Linux too, for that matter. The SuSE 9.0 I use at work, I've actually went and bought the funny green box. And for a ton of other software, copy-protected stuff included.
In fact, I'll tell you what: if Microsoft could actually come up with a copy-protection scheme that actually _works_ and actually stops pirates, Microsoft would have my heartfelt gratitude. Speaking as a consumer, and no, I don't work for MS. I'm sick and tired of seeing good games companies going bankrupt, while freeloading cheapskates (some driving SUVs and sports cars) leech their games on P2P.
(On the other hand, crap that only inconveniences the paying customer and doesn't actually do anything to pirates, I've still had enough of.)
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
let me get this straight.. microsoft are ramming some hastily conceived and rush-designed security format down their partner's throats, and will be locking themselves and said partners to it.
and then they're giving us *how* many years to come up with workarounds or outright cracks?
heh. hehehehehehe.
I am not too worried as long as it will display on a CRT and require speakers for audio output.
Give me physical access to the CRT cathodes and the deflection yoke, and I will give you pristine analog RGB+sync.
I am not that worried about not having an exact pristine copy... having something pretty good, but clean and in an archivable standard format, is way more important to me than a 0.1% requantization error the transcription would introduce. Besides I will probably compress it anyhow to DivX, which should just about cover any visible errors to my requantization anyway...
Bring it on. I only have to play the crappy version once to transcribe it to a standard format.
This whole charade is just something for rich people to shake hands and have dinners over anyway. I think this whole effort will do way more harm to the recording industry than good, as it gives the masses even more incentive to use standard formats which are editable where objectional time-consuming content can be removed.
There is a "tipping point", and when the common Joe has had enough, its gonna be a really tough sell to convince Joe that a commercial-ridden movie that won't honor his requests to bypass unwanted content is worth paying for when clean files of the same movie, albeit illegal, exist.
Trying to force people to use a irritant-ridden commercial format in lieu of open standards formats may become like coaxing people off a freeway to spend hours in a stoplight-congested downtown area.
Already, there a helluva lot of us that actually hold .wma compatibility as a negative value when considering music players. Like, what in the hell is .wma good for? Chances are it won't work. To me, even having .wma compatibility not only is useless clutter, I consider it a major security risk, as only God and some selected insiders know what kinda of things can be slipped in a .wma file to alter or track the operations of my machine.
When I consider something I want to have, it better be something I don't have to bicker with. I literally hate it when I make a poor selection of tools, and I spend more time tinkering with a tool to get it to work than I receive from the use of that tool. I consider these new tools just about as useful as a screwdriver whose shaft slips in the handle. This kinda stuff is best sold to people who care about what it *looks like*, not what it *does*. You know, businesspeople - the kind who judge a guy by his suit and haircut, not his values or knowledge. Many businesses are still flooded with money and have yet to form much of a concern base for the usability of products offered to them.
We are facing a re-do of "prohibition", that had to be repealed. They are trying to control people from doing something in private by law. I think its gonna have just about as much success as our pot laws have had. Its gonna be very expensive to enforce this law, and a helluva lot of otherwise productive citizenry are gonna have to be sacrificed. The powers that be are gonna have to see the "big picture" and make the decision how much of our workforce can be sacrificed to maintain these laws.
Economics did Russia in. I think its gonna do the USA in too. Since we have outsourced a lot of our jobs, the only way we are surviving for the time being is lowering the interest rates so as to flood the market with "dollars".. even though anybody saving to buy a house sees how inflationary this tactic is. But, for a limited time, this tactic will keep dollars circulating as a borrowed dollar spends the same as an earned one. But as any debtor knows, debts come due. As a country, I see the behaviour of my government very similar to a young naive teen when given a credit card with no experience of having to pay it back.
My bets are when the New World Order gets going, we all better learn Mandarin.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
I have several friends in bands, and none of them aspire to be rock stars (at least in public). They understand that they need to keep their day jobs.
And you honestly believe they'd turn down millions of dollars from a high-profile record label to keep their day jobs?
Few people are that tightly bound to their philosophy. Just like the poor coder of an OSS project would probably denounce MS all day, but take a job with them in a heartbeat if they came knocking on his door talking about six figures.
Really simple what will happen here. Chose M$ longhorn or Linux where none of this BS will reside. With the strides the Linux Desktop will be making, by the time Longhorn comes out, the Linux Desktop will do just about everything you need sans the DRM. I see the RIAA trying to outlaw Linux with something akin the "Induce" act within a few years.
What's the point of preventing people from copying shitty music?
It's what the people want.
Well, either you believe the RIAA's bullshit about music downloading eating into sales, or you believe that today's music is not at all what the people want.
Those are the only two possible explanations for the four-year drop in CD sales. And none of us reasonable people believe downloading has had any noticeable net effect on CD sales.
Personally, I've bought one new CD in the past two years. And I'm one of those guys that used to take pride in the size of his record/CD collection; I used to buy at least one or two CD's per week, usually more than that. I've also bought a couple of older catalog CD's in the past year but that's about it. People like me are the reason why the RIAA's sales numbers are down - we're the ones that used to spend all of our money on music, but a lot of us feel like we already own pretty much all the good music that we want, and new music is mostly a barren wasteland of talentless hacks. There most certainly is not anywhere close to 1-2 quality CD's worth of music coming out every week; nowhere close to enough good stuff to keep up my previous purchasing pace.
This is the RIAA's problem, and DRM in Longhorn is not going to fix it. I couldn't care less if I can't copy Britney Spears' next CD - that's not going to affect my life in the least bit. It's unfortunate that our rights are being taken away here but I'm sure like every other DRM scheme, it'll be cracked anyway for those that do find something new that they'd like to rip.
To me, though, there's enough good music already on the market that if I can't rip the one or two decent new releases per year, I've got more than enough to listen to for the rest of my life.
I win on this too. I'm not buying CDs/DVDs with DRM included. If enough people refuse to buy, they change what they are offering for sale, or they die and other companyies offer something different. Brutal, clean, efficient.
I ain't buying. Try again.
I for one won't be buying any crippled CDs. I'll just download the songs off P2P, and let someone smarter than me figure out how to circumvent the "copy" protection.
Bite the hand.
People want it because it's all they ever hear. The radio plays almost entirely the big label bands; so all most people know about are the big label bands. The biggest problem (from the RIAA standpoint) with P2P is not lost sales from people downloading new music; it's people discovering new music that they don't control. Then people can go to shows and buy CDs, and the RIAA doesn't get any money. The beauty of the Internet is that it is so distributed and anyone can publish information (attracting reader/listeners is the difficult part). I'd love to develop a website where fans can give tribute to band for their work, find new artists, hear about show, but I just don't have the time... I think the future of music is going to be independent artists making their own music and selling it/distributing it themselves, then they use live performances to make money, and if the songs are good enough, I think some people will buy them. I've heard that the average artist makes about 8 cents per album sold. If I can produce a CD and sell it myself for $8 + S&H I've increased my profit 100 fold (minus negligible production costs). That means instead of selling 100,000 I have to sell 1,000. In my opinion that is pretty doable if the album was good enough to make 100,000 by today's standards. Granted, there are a lot of upfront costs that labels cover, but recording equipment is getting cheaper, and computers are getting better at doing some of the technical work (I am talking out of my ass about equipment). As far as Linux gaining market share. I have to agree that 90%+ of all users don't want to do an OS install (Linux or Windows), and as long as Windows is the leading desktop OS most computers will come with it, and most people will know it, and most people will want to stick with it. The only way to get people to change is to show them the advantage of doing so (perhaps this is applicable). From the manufacture side, if I can pump out all of my machines with one OS that means I only have to make sure my hardware works with one OS (reduced costs), and I can reduce the complexity of my production line. As long as there isn't strong demand for alternative OSes there won't be many vendors really pushing the other OSes. I say this and know that it is possible to buy HP notebooks with SuSE and other machines with Linux flavors, but when I was on the HP website I couldn't actually get a price for the notebook with SuSE preinstalled. To give my own experience, I installed Red Hat 8.0 a few years ago on an old machine after building a new box to run Windows 2k. Now I'm at the point where I'd like to switch to entirely Linux, but there are a few things I use in Windows that I don't want to give up and can't switch (Quicken with automatic downloads from my banking sites). My next machine I'm going to build will be more powerful than my Windows box and I'm going to run Linux on it. I'm hoping that is another good stepping stone. So I like to think I have an open mindedness towards both OSes for the advantages they provide. I'd also like to add that I have ripped all of my CDs into MP3s and I rarely listen to my actual CDs. I find that most of the time I'm listening to music it is more convenient to just add a few tracks to my play-list than it is to find a CD to play. Plus I can add a few tracks from several albums and get a variety of music without having to constantly stop what I'm doing to change tracks. If M$ came in and said you can't transfer your MP3s to another computer, or listen to them over the network that is a SIGNIFICANT incentive for me to not use their operating system, and more than likely it would cause to not use Longhorn.
In other words, Microsoft is exploiting its current monopoly to prevent future competition, by manipulating worldwide standards. Just like the spam debacle a few days ago.
I suspect this is actually an anti-trust violation. Anyone know better? Does the court watching them know better?
the problem is that bypassing this system will require a well equipped science lab to extract your keys out of a tamper-resistant self-destructing microchip.
Or a pair of microphones, a pair of speakers, and a decently quiet environment.
I say we start a movement against the purchasing of music from any label associated with the RIAA.
Yeah, knock yourself out. Let us know how it goes, will you?
It's going very well, thank you. We have millions of people freely getting music from KaZaa and other file sharing networks. All without anyone purchasing any music, RIAA affiliate or not. Today much the most popular music of the Western world from the past 30 years is available freely from the file sharing networks. In the future, the music recordings from the rest of the world will be too.
This is a global movement that is one of the first of its kind in history: millions of people freely sharing the music that is the most important to them.
The fact that much of the music that is being shared came to the people through the for-profit music recording distribution corporations of the last century is irrelavent. The fact that it is now being widely and freely shared by millions is what's not important.