Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Trying to Copy-Protect Radio
doctorfaustus writes "The EFF is reporting that "the RIAA has been pushing the FCC to impose a copy-protection mandate on the makers of next-generation digital radio receiver/recorders (think TiVo-for-radio)." According to Mike Godwin, "Never mind that digital audio broadcasting is not significantly greater in quality than regular, analog radio. Never mind that its music quality is vastly less than than that of audio CDs. In spite of these inconvenient facts, the RIAA is hoping that the transition to "digital audio broadcasting" will provide enough confusion and panic that they can persuade Congress or the FCC to impose some kind of copy-protection scheme or regulation on digital radio broadcast." "
I could see this in the form of an XM like device, with PPV radio on demand, but I'm not sure the concept of tivo for radio will really pay off. It's not worth the effort. That's what music on CDs is for. As far as programs go, most people are perfectly happy turning the radio on and playing whatever happens to be on at the time.
I could tivo my radio now with the capture card in my computer and dump mp3 files of shows I like but never happen to catch such as Car Talk, to disk and play that in my car right now. The odds of me actually doing it are very, very small.
Never confuse volume with power.
Same as email received is the property of the owner, isn't signal received property of the receiver?
This article has recently been linked from Slashdot. Please keep an eye on the page history for errors or vandalism.
The recording industry has proposed that the FCC (1) prevent redistribution of recordings onto the Internet, removable media or to other devices; and (2) limit searching and automated copying such as by artist or song title so that individual recordings cannot be separated from surrounding content.
Good for them.
Vague solution, so are they saying that they want the recording to somehow STAY on the recording device? They must have some magick or something that will accomplish that! And that you cannot just record a song, without,say, recording the lead-in from the DJ and the commercial afterwards (surrounding content)?
They just don't get it. If people want your songs for free, they will get it. One way or another. Goddamnit, how long will it take them to realize this so I don't have to see the "**AA is trying to steal our rights again" versus "Our revenues (and even the hard working music store clerk too!!) are going to be devistated! Waaah!" get rehashed over and over and over.
And the sad thing is most of whats out there on commercial radio I wouldn't care about even if it was truly FREE from the get go.
Blah.
Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!
...really disturbing. Whatever my bias may be, it is hard not to consider that the riaa is simply trying to control everything. What about college radio stations that play indipendent music, or when the radio plays artists that arent really concerned about piracy issues? It looks more and more like the riaa are becoming control freaks...
xao
http://TheHillforum.hopto.org
I ran some radio ads a while back and didn't get any hits off of them. Even my older client base doesn't really listen to the radio anymore.
I also agree about music on the radio. I use a tape adapter for my iPod. If my batteries die, I have some old mix tapes stashed in my glove box. I haven't bought a major lab CD in years, and it's not because of anything to do with the RIAA. It's because of the crap that's released. I do the same thing, go to small shows, and buy the CD right off of the band. But then, I listen to mostly hardcore, Oi, and punk. Not stuff you're likely to hear on the radio.
rm -rf
The differences between analog and digital can seem numerous and great - especially if you get a couple thousand on the side from the people presenting these "facts" to you.
I got to the point a little while ago where I'm not completely blaming the RIAA etc for pushing stupid legislation but for the politicians in accepting it. If stupid legislation gets passed, we really only have a small group of people to blame.
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
People who pay for digital radio arent the ones pirating material.
In fact, this is probably just gonna piss people off - I've heard of people who record digital radio, then put it onto their ipods in batches, so they can listen to new music all the time, and its portable.
The purpose of digital radio is to eliminate the need for owning so much music, and that means you dont need to pirate OR buy tons of music! The point of digital radio was to get decent quality, original material on an ongoing basis - its like Napster, only you dont have to do all the research (look for good bands) on your own - they do the work for you.
What they really need is portable digital radios! And bundle it in with another service, like cell-phones or cable TV!
Really Incompetent Assholes of America
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" -Hunter S. Thompson
One of the many possible misuses of these broadcasts, given the many audio editing software tools out there today, would be the recording and editing of these broadcasts to make broadcasters appear to take positions (political, ethical, or other) that are the exact opposite of what they actually represent.
Listen to the Don and Mike radio show and sooner or later you will hear edited audio of Govenor Arnold S. of California espousing positions exactly opposite of his stated ones.
Like him or not, copyright of digital broadcasts could give originators of content the legal protection they need to limit others from profiting from or generally smearing their reputation.
With respect to not copying the music--- go buy the CD if it's that good. The owner of the product determines the license agreement.
Cogito Ergo Sum
I ran tens of thousands of dollars of radio ads this year for my retail stores (focused on 10-22 year olds). Few people heard them. Why? Radio is dead or dying for most younger people.
Wrong. Few people heard them because most radio stations run commercials for what seems like 5-10 minutes at a stretch, so that they can advertise "50-minute non-stop music". They don't realize that most people, when they hit that eon-long commercial break, just switch to a different station with a similar format.
It's not like TV, where you'd end up missing half of a half-hour program--it's one self-contained four-minute song after another. (Talk radio and similar shows are the exception, natch, but you did specify 10-22 year olds.)
There's a station here in Chicago called NineFM. Tagline: "We play anything" -- they're one of a growing number of what I think of as "iPod Shuffle stations". What really distinguishes them, though, is that they have more but shorter commercial breaks -- usually three or four ads max -- which the listener is more willing to wait through. It's a win-win situation, ad-wise. Honestly, it's half the reason I listen to them almost all the time.
Fair use says I can copy it for research. I think that listening to it hours on end and experiencing the nuances of the tones can be qualified as research :)
Notice it says digital broadcasts, not just the songs that might be part of the broadcasts, because it'll certainly be cheaper to make the whole bitstream uncopy-able than to add a circuit to the receiver to turn protection on and off at the beginning and end of each song.
So, if I were still working as an announcer, I wouldn't even be able to record a digital aircheck of my own voice unless I took the post D/A converter analog audio and converted it back to digital, and we can all guess how easy that will be once the RIAA can dictate design and features to manufacturers.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
"Well, we've got it for radio, why not for CD's? Or cable TV?"
"I have never won a debate with an ignorant person." -Ali ibn Abi Talib
Sections 107 - 118 of the Copyright Act. See http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html
There have been court decisions upholding sections of sections 107 - 118 in the context of home recordings of broadcasted programs.
There is also a Supreme Court decision that specifically says that the recording of tv broadcasts is legal for home use. Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios 464 U.S. 417, 104 S. Ct. 774, 78 L. Ed. 2d 574 (1984)
Also, as a person in his late 20's, I can say with absolute authority that I have *NO* patience left at all. None whatsoever. My time is extremely valuable to me personally, and to the folks who pay for it, and I consider listening/watching advertisements and bad music, or even music I dont want to listen to at the moment a sin of the highest order.
I think I am the worst case scenario in a group of people who sees *NO VALUE* in being entertained on someone elses schedule. The days of waiting for your favorite song on the radio, or your favorite episode of something are dead and gone. Between DVD purchases and internet downloads I have every episode of every show I like avaliable to me, all stored on cheap HDs. I carry the complete Aqua Teen Hunger Force DVDs ripped to my laptop, it doesn't even use much space! If I want to see a specific episode of something, I *WATCH THAT EPISODE*.
My *REAL* challenge with media is finding new stuff I like as my free time is almost zero. A service which could reliably recommend good music would be very valuable to me. Right now I use Amazon, a network of like minded friends, and i download tons of albums and go buy the ones I like ... but this is very time consuming.
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
The fact that the prices are largely similar in 2005 is somewhat cool. Using an inflation calculator at http://www.westegg.com/inflation/ the cost of a $15 CD in 1988 would be equivalent to $24.34 today. If pricing pressures can keep the price around the same, it'll continue to gradually decrease.
Nobody I know will spend more than $16 on a given disc...much less $24.
// Agent Green (Ian / IU7 / KB1JQO)
// IEEE 802.3: All 10base Are Belong To Us
What inherent rights would those be? Sorry, but *all* your rights are protected by human laws and not nature - you have no inherent right to life in nature, beyond you protecting yourself, you have no inherent right to property in nature, again beyond what you can protect yourself. All of your rights are created through use of law and those are just two examples. Theres no such thing as inherent rights, basic or not.
That is the big problem with Clear Channel and Jacor. They are turning Radio into McDonalds and Walmart. They are trying to provide a universal experience.
That can be good at times. If you are traveling and want to grab a quick burger or need to get some film a chain can provide you with known quantity. The problem is when you take too far you loose your sencse of place.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
College radio is great listening too, and most college stations have online streams. I like WTBU out of Boston University -- amazingly eclectic programming schedule.
Wasn't the entire initial point of the Internet to create a more effective method of emergency communications in the event of a major disaster such as nuclear war?
The net was not about communications to the general public. It was about communications between military organizations. The whole point was that the telephone switching system was vulnerable. A communication network where packets could dynamically be re-routed on the fly is a lot harder to knock out.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.