Slashdot Mirror
Music Industry Backlash Against Sony Rootkit
Foobar of Borg writes "The Associated Press describes how backlash from Sony's Rootkit CDs is causing problems for the music industry. The problem is two-fold: (1) the inherent technological problem of trying to prevent anyone from copying anything and (2) letting lawyers make technical decisions when (from the article) 'Lawyers don't have any better understanding of technology than a cow does algebra.'" More from the article: "'I think they've set back audio CD protection by years,' said Richard M. Smith, an Internet privacy and security consultant. 'Nobody will want to pull a Sony now.' Phil Leigh, analyst for Inside Digital Media, said the debacle shows just how reluctant the labels are to change their business model to reflect the distribution powers -- good and bad -- of the Internet. He believes that rather than adopting technological methods to try to stop unauthorized copying of music, record companies need to do more to remove the incentive for piracy."
So the Sony rootkit is BAD?! This needs more coverage.
Matthew Grint Midnight Artists
"need to do more to remove the incentive for piracy".
:|
Like say, making shit music that no-one would want to pirate? Ugh, too late
'Lawyers don't have any better understanding of technology than a cow does algebra.'
Is that right?
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Now we just need to use this to draw attention to other things that "people don't understand, so why should they care?", like the broadcast flag, and other overly restrictive DRM technologies.
We'd be paying $1500.00 for a coast to coast airline ticket.
There'd be no interstate trucking industry. All freight would go by rail and canal.All television would be black and white. There'd be no VCR's (let alone PVR's!).
All radio would be AM.Telephones would all be dial. Long distance calls would be $2.50/minute.
We'd all still be using slide rules.There would be no foreign cars in the U.S.
There would be no sources of alternative energy (wiond, solar, etc.) whatsoever.And on and on. The RIAA wants to maintain the status quo at any cost. They have had ten years to adapt and have resisted at every turn. They all likely believe in Landrew (save us, save us, Landrew!).
They are pathetic....as the first and probably only rootkit wich has done something good.
Perhaps it is too much to hope for, but it is certainly clear that the current system is completely out of whack. Perhaps it will collapse now and America can start considering why this was supposed to be a good idea in the first place. It's way past time to whack Mickey Mouse.
On the other hand, perhaps it doesn't matter. If you believe that the free exchange of creative ideas is a thing that benefits society, and that this encourages growth and development of a healthy society, then you must conclude it confers competitive advantage. Therefore, the societies that do better at encouraging creativity will eventually overwhelm the others--and nothing the **AA can do will stop that inevitable transition.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
It doesn't seem to stop every self proclaimed expert here from spouting off their particular pet theory that coiincidentally justifies their eMule use, nevertheless.
'...record companies need to do more to remove the incentive for piracy.'
Which brings up the method, again, of how the 'Dead dealt with bootlegging, by inviting bootleggers to give it thier best shot - This meant more publicity for the band, which led to more sales.
The record companies just won't let go. They want the model that puts them in control. Pricing control where they get to say which track sells for what amount, giving them leverage over the artist - bundleing, where trash tracks have to be purchased, whether the consumer wants them or not - consumer habit tracking, where they get first dibs on mining all that data...it goes on and on. The record companies just need to die, it's that simple.
In Sony's case, I guess this one can be laid at the feet of the lawyers, but hey, they've got their own business model to protect, and we all know where that one leads.
Why not just let the artists be in control for a while. Let the $$$ grabbers sell peanuts and t-shirts while the consumer enjoys decent music for a change.
He believes that rather than adopting technological methods to try to stop unauthorized copying of music, record companies need to do more to remove the incentive for piracy.
Well of course they have to! What they're attempting now is more like trying to cure the symptom rather than curing the disease. And to use yet another metaphor, Sony really is trying to cure head-ache by chopping off the head.
I enjoy large posteriors and I cannot prevaricate.
Now I cannot trust Sony or EMI. This process will continue until I stop buying any industry products. I am more inclined to shore up my back catalogue than trust anything current on CD. Online mp3 retail can take care of the rest. Goodbye, music industry.
insecurity asks the wrong question irritation gives the wrong answer
Mashboxx and the New Grokster 3G that will be launched later this year has the serious backing of Sony\BMG and the Sony Music CEO Andrew Lack was intrememtal putting the project together with the Mashboxx chairman Wayne Russo who was the former president of Grokster.
The whole Sony rootkit contreversey will seriously damage the reputation of this p2p service that already faces a uphill battle to convert the already sceptical filesharing community.
Many in the tech community have vowed to boycott Sony products and many just dont trust them anymore so Mashboxx will be put into the same boat.
A cow doing algebra
Dir sirs,
The suggested apparatus is a sentient, grass-eating organism ("Cow"), that has or will be taught complex mathematical operations ("Algebra"), with or without the aid of various computational devices.
I intend to patent this "invention" and then go on and "licence" it to all cattle grows in the planet, which will have to pay or face my formidable legal team. In fact, I have already hired an "Intellectual property" law firm, who has assured me that I am loosing $5.6B every day - literally being stolen out of my pocket, and the plates of my children, by greedy farmers who will not respect the foundations of our economy.
Moreover, said lawyers have promised me that the USPTO and the courts will share their (my) view that every cow grazing grass is in fact performing complex calculations, probably for some foreign power like Iraq, or worse, Europe.
All the best,
Edgar Bronfman.
"667 - Neighbour of the beast"
Man, and here I was following that link totally expecting a website about a cow doing algebra.
Give me a nice case, a shiny disk, good sleeve notes and nice music all at a reasonable price and I am perfectly happy - especially if I can then rip it the way I want to for portability afterwards.
To me, free music downloads from Usenet mean I get to preview my music before I buy it, no different to test driving a car before I buy it. When all said and done, if I download some music and don't like it, it's not even worth the waste of disk space keeping it and if it's a good piece of music then I want it in the clearest format possible to play on my nice shiny hi-fi.
Music downloads are for people who don't fully *appreciate* music and treat it as something to have on in the background while they work or workout - I don't have a problem with that, before anyone comments, because I do the same thing myself by ripping my own CDs when I want portability for the car, gym, etc.
However, a true music enthusiast, be it rock, blues, classical, whatever, only fully appreciates a piece of music when he/she sits down and does *nothing else* but listen to that music on a reasonable hi-fi setup with the best quality version of that music he/she can lay their hands on - namely, the original CD.
Call it snobbery, whatever you like, but music downloading is fine for people who treat music as "throwaway", like a set of clothes that gets changed when it goes out of fashion - again, it's up to them how they treat their music. But it's definitely not for someone who *truly* appreciates music...
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
You heard it here first
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Translation: Sony BMG needs to research how to make their next crippling system-level crack more undetectable before they try this exact same crap again. They don't give a second thought b0rk1ng their customer's computers, but they absolutely hate getting caught.
You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
The one I like is "Nobody will want to pull a Sony now."
Like it's a bad thing that corporations learn that invasive and damaging approaches to IP protection actually tick off consumers and cause lawsuits? The only surprise is that they had to learn by doing instead of just asking a few computer maintenance techs how they feel about the rootkit approach!
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
You know, there's a CD I actually want to check out but it isn't a mainstream release and isn't availiable from the mall. The only way I get a copy around here is to travel into the city center, not exactly my idea of fun. I can order it from the 1-click jokers but I'd prefer not to do any business with them. What I want and what technology offers me is the ability to download an ISO of the entire album at a price point that defeats piracy. This price point is obtainable when we no longer have to pay for packaging, manufacture and transport of physical goods; it also makes DRM obsolete.
It may seem obvious but it's the artists who are going to have to do it, the music "industry" is (brain) dead.
Yeah, but the problem for the record industry is that adopting means they are practically out of business in the long run - at least their traditional business.
The music industry is - at it's base - "selling" to artists the service for distributing music.
That means (or meant) basically the technology to record and produce music to sound storage mediums, the marketing to promote it and the infrastructure to distribute it.
The recording technology became commodity with the advent of digital recording, marketing was never a unique selling point for them, and the infrastructure question is answered by the internet.
For years now they reaped the benefits of vastly cheaper production, but now they are facing a situation where the everything has come together even for the average music customer.
In my opinion, what they are trying to do with that DRM stuff is trying to put the genie back in the bottle, by recapturing control of the distribution channel. Not only because of pirating, but also to save the heart of their business model.
I've been on a active boycott of record-companies since 1997. Two reasons. Sony closed a local CD-factory, claiming that 'piracy' was the reason. The production-equipment was shipped to Romania (or such) so I guess selling the CD's wasn't the problem, but they found a nice way to justify moving to a country with lower wages. (please keep in mind that most of you barely had the equipment to burn CD's or the bandwidth to exchange MP3's)
The other reason was that most companies abandoned recruiting local talent. All we get in our shops is American R&B, all we see on TV is American Gangsta Crap. There is a shitload of bands out their, but none of the big labels will see or hear them. Ilse de Lange might be the last you've heard from the Netherlands.
Haven't bought a single CD since, except directly from the hands of the musician.
He's just joking.
This will set the the cause of bovine freedom back several decades. I urge everyone to withold support of initiatives expanding the role of copyright in this manner.
Non, je ne veux pas coucher avec toi ce soir.
I'm surprised that we've not heard more from the artists themselves on this front. You'd think that those whose CDs were clandestinely infiltrated by this technology would have opinions. After all these people make thie money directly from the sales of those CD's too and you can pretty well bet that not a one of them was told about or consulted in advance of the decision to rootkit these cds.
I'm curious to know if on top of Sony's problems a rash of lawsuits will be filed by attorneys representing artists that either had their work defiled by the rootkits or those that want out of their contracts because Sony's miserable judgment will result in substantially reduced sales for any artist on a Sony label.
Anyone know about this or have an opinion?
Stitch
"There is no "I" in B-O-R-G"
There is no "I" in B-O-R-G.
Translation: cut prices, allow personal copying w/o restrictions.
Worst. DRM. Ever.
So someone put the fear of God into a company and now they're all running away going "NOT ME TOO! I'M NICE!" Well it's about fucking time.
Companies get away with murder, they tried to step on peoples feet again and they stepped on a very pissed off geeks feet and are now paying the price. If we had this uproar against all bullshit policies maybe the world would be a better place. But no, we're in a world of submissive consumers who won't say boo to a goose incase of a lawsuit.
I like muppets.
I want high quality, which the online music stores do not provide (128k WMA and AAC SUCK for a serious music fan with even marginaly good equipment)
I want the ability to easily copy the music! I should be able to rip it to MP3 ort ogg for listening on a HTPC or iPod, or Dell DJ or an mp3 cell phone...
Now as I shop for CDs I will always wonder in the back of my mind, "does t6his have spy/scumware? a virus? a rootkit? what does "enhanced" mean? would I be safer DLing a 320k MP3 from (insert P2P of choice here)?"
Actually, this Macrovision protection seems kinda pointless. Who's going to rip a disc 7 times? Like I said before: Rip it once and discard the original.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
"... rather than adopting technological methods to try to stop unauthorized copying of music, record companies need to do more to remove the incentive for piracy."
I do find it rather ironic that I was, not five minutes ago, looking for an Oasis song (forgive me, its stuck in my head) on iTunes music store to purchase legally only to find out they are published by Sony-BMG who, in their infinite wisdom, have declined to be involved with the Australian iTunes music store.
Given their current predilication for sticking DRM crap on CDs and the fact I only want one or two specific tracks, no sale for you. Good going Sony. What's a possible customer meant to do if you insist on treating us like (potential) criminals?
Issues that remain:
Attacking customer computers seems to be the kind of thing that is part of the Sony corporate culture. There has been no apology, and Sony management makes statements giving the impression they will do it again if they think they can without bad publicity.
A music retail store spokesman said that Sony's attack became public just before Christmas. Customers can easily choose some other gift now that they are scared about computer attacks. Sony's attack has hurt the entire music industry, not just Sony. Also, the damage will continue after Christmas.
Few people are technically knowledgeable. The Sony CDs will be causing problems for many years, as they are traded or sold to thrift stores.
The number of computers already corrupted is probably far larger than the 500,000 quoted in articles about the Sony attack. That number is just the number of Domain Name Servers that show evidence that a computer has tried to contact the Sony phone home address. The average server would almost certainly service more than one corrupted computer.
One kind of attack has received attention. However, Sony apparently sells other CDs with other software that may also have negative consequences for Sony customers.
Following Microsoft's lead years ago, some businesses treat all their customers as crooks so that they can stop a few.
By forcing intrusive and dangerous DRM management, without fully consulting third party hardware and software vendors that the product is used on, Sony deserve everything thrown at them, especially from the fact that they have not only placed Microsoft in a difficult position, but also upset Philips by producing non-Red Book CDs.
Problem is will anybody want to fit a Bluray disc in their computer after this fiasco?
"The crew of the Enterprise land on a new planet. Their first reactions are of wariness. As Mr Spock says: 'Odd. The expression on that man's face. Mindlessness. Vacant contentment'. Everyone in the society is happy: they all smile, and their standard greeting is 'joy to you'. This disturbs the heroes: in a society where everyone is this happy, something must be wrong. They intervene.
"They discover that the planet is ruled by a supposedly benign deity named 'Landrew', whose representatives - the faceless, dark-robed 'lawmen' - ensure that everyone behaves happily, repeating such catchphrases as 'Happy communing'. 'Joy be with you, peace and contentment'. 'Peace and tranquility', 'Peace and harmony'. In the course of the story, McCoy is brainwashed. He begins to speak in the same terms: 'Happiness to all of us. Blessed be Landrew'. The society is peaceful, everyone is happy - or, at least, everyone thinks that they are happy. What is wrong with this?
"Firstly, according to the logic of the program, it is false consciousness. People only think that they are happy because they have been brainwashed by a computer which is running their society... Mr Spock reminds Captain Kirk: 'Captain - our prime directive is non-interference' The Captain responds - 'That refers to living, growing cultures. Do you think this one is?'.
"...as Mr Spock puts it: 'This is a soulless society. They have no spirit, no spark. All is indeed peace and tranquility - the tranquility of the machine'. As Kirk puts the argument to the computer who runs the system: 'The [society] is dying. You are destroying it. What have you done to do justice to the full potential of every individual in the body?
"...Return of the Archons ends with the crew back on board the Enterprise. Kirk asks the resident sociologist how things are going now they have destroyed the perfect society. The sociologist responds excitedly - 'Already today we've had three marital disputes and a stand up fight'. Kirk is delighted - the society is once again as it should be."
Stolen from here: http://www.staff.vu.edu.au/CSAA/newsletter01-1.ht
Better write up here: http://www.wizardrealm.com/Galadriel/landru.htm
"You can stop wearing those robes now.
And if I were you, I'd start looking
for another job."
-- [ Kirk to monk-robed figures after he blows
up Landru's computerized successor.]
Kirm was such a man's man.
He goes to alien planets,
sleeps with their women,
changes their society,
then makes smart-ass comments as he's leaving.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
What you meant to say is
Music downloads are for people who don't fully *appreciate* music the way I do
I can perfectly well appreciate my iTMS downloads on less "snobbish" equipment. I don't require the knowledge of having spent tons of cash for a "resonable hi-fi setup" in order to enjoy listening to music. In fact, even the el-cheapo earphones that come with iPods will do. That is because my interest is in music and not in expensive equipment.
...in its proper place.
The people here being the artist and their ability to make use of the internet to introduce themselves and promote themselves via the internet. And to do so to the point of having enough opf a following to then approach the industry with bargaining power.... "I'm taking bids on who will giove me the best deal"...
Everybody benefits this way... as the music industry wouldn't then need the risky practice of subsidizing of newbies (often failures) with profits made from the established artaist that would really be better in the pockets of the established, where it belongs. Such subsidizing is somewhat anti-competitive for the artists.
On the public side, we get to better determine what is good and bad music. While having a wider rasnge of free music from samples and newbie trying to make an impression... Arrangements (music) and re-mixes can take a good song, shown to have public appeal and made better, then released for purchase... etc...
Where does this put the industry? Quite different than it is today, slimmed down and more efficient. And certainly not so damn greedy... cause greedy really wouldn't get the bids...
I've written some pages about Sony's XCP DRM system.
Summary about the DRM, what it does, and what its problems are: http://hack.fi/~muzzy/sony-drm/info.html
You can also find my research and opinions about the issue linked from there. Please send mail if you have anything to add or any corrections to my content.
-- Matti Nikki
Sorry, this should mean "at its base". I hate when I do this.
Only sad thing is, most any of us could have told them that this would be a fiasco, but before this happened there's no way any of us would have been believed or noticed. It took a disaster like this to wake everybody up. Lucky thing it wasn't nuclear bombs, huh?
But I'm happy, anyway. Slashdot has been fun to read this week; Sonygate brings the comedian out in the most taciturn geeks.
Actually the "Sony Rootkit" incident has increased the public awareness of computer security. How many non technically inclined people knew about "rootkit" prior to this?
To a certain extent, this incident has increased the public awareness of computer security, which is a good thing.
w00t
personally i would agree, but surely the point is the particular personal mechanism by which anyone chooses to indulge their appreciation. i choose to prefer CDs simply because downloads involve too much interaction with my computer which reminds me of being at work. CDs are colourful, they sit on my nice shelves, i can use them in my non-computer hi-fi with lots of knobs useful directly to my musical experience, etc etc. (incidentally, perhaps this makes a hi-fi simply a computer (it has transistors too...) with an infinitely customised user interface.)
however others may feel that their musical experience is not clipped by continual interaction with a computer, in which case all power to them.
k e l l a r
It has already started at work. As the resident geek in the department, I already have explained many times about the Sony DRM and the XCP rootkit. With Thanksgiving holidays coming up and get-togethers with the relatives, I figure I should just hand out a little pamphlet. I would like to be a fly on the wall inside the Sony corporate offices as they look for some mid-level managers to can over this. I would also like to read some of their heated and panicked internal correspondence as they try to do damage control. Someone is going to get torched publicly for this by Sony's legal team. I have looked to see if any class-action lawsuits have been filed, but I am now aware of any, yet.
Have you Meta Moderated t
Right on! This is just another manifestation of the fact that CD's cost on average $17. I remember when CDs first came out, they cost about $15-17 and usually came in bulky cardboard packaging (ostensibly to discourage theft). Cassette tapes at the time ran $9-13. The dirty little secret in the industry was that CDs were much cheaper to manufacture than cassettes. So, why then was the consumer paying twice as much for CDs? You could say that if they sold them for the same price or lower than cassettes, that no one would buy cassettes because they are lower quality. Everyone would go out and buy a CD player. Well, now everyone in the world has a CD player and it's incredibly hard to even find releases on cassette anymore, yet the price of a CD has not gone down a single cent on average in the last 15 years. Mind you, the record companies are no longer paying to produce cassettes, no longer paying for producing those bulky packages that CDs used to come packaged in. If anything, CDs ought to be less expensive to produce. But... the industry is very powerful. The RIAA and its associate members are a cartel of sorts, like OPEC, and can set whatever prices they like and gouge the hell out of consumers. And they can get away with it because Congress not only allows them to, but they even protect them!
That seems to be how companies like Sony view them. Any rights customers may have are seen by SONY and their ilk (a cast too numerous to catalog) as detracting from their own. The only way SONY et al. can maximize rights (and, they hope, profit) is to minimize everyone else's, ultimately including the rights of other companies. Under that notion their rights are maximized when everyone else's rights = 0. That is a reasonable explanation of why they chose to crap on the rights of their paying customers. It's the same logic tyrannies have always used. Sic semper tyrannis
The the success of the GNU and other OSS liscence models suggest that SONY and their brothers in greed are wrong. Just my 2 cents.
If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
"Sony, in fact, tried discs that contained data near the perimeter of the CD instructing a computer's hard drive not to look for audio tracks."
Man, that's nothing... I remember when that Kid Rock CD instructed my hard drive to score some weed and a couple of hookers! Try explaining that to your wife!
Cars are complex, but McDonnalds doesnt put a tracking device in rthe ignition system while I am buying a bigmac.
To me, free music downloads from Usenet mean I get to preview my music before I buy it, no different to test driving a car before I buy it. When all said and done, if I download some music and don't like it, it's not even worth the waste of disk space keeping it and if it's a good piece of music then I want it in the clearest format possible to play on my nice shiny hi-fi.
To me... free music should be a vehicel to sell licensed CD cases, covers, bumperstickers and the like. I "could" pirate using an inkjet based printer but paper and ink would run me over $3.00. Publishers get their money, fans get that warm golden feeling from supporting the artists, inkjet mfgs are no longer exploiting this piracy cash cow, everyone is happy.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
They would have made sure that the weaknesses in the DVD encryption scheme wasn't in their scheme (which dvdjon cracked in October 1999, so the music industry would have been aware of the problems). And even if their scheme was broke, like the DVD scheme was, it would still be hard enough to copy a CD that most people wouldn't try.
By encouraging and perhaps subsidising (for the first couple of years) the placement of the encryption chip, by today, six years later, nearly every CD player would be encryption enabled and they could stop producing unencrypted CDs entirely. Through encryption, they could allow the music to be ripped to the harddrive, but it would only play on your computer. They could also allow you to produce a copy, but the copy would be uncopyable. And they could let you place the files on your DAP.
People would have the fair use rights they expect and criminal copying becomes nearly impossible.
. . .they are practically out of business in the long run
And it's about fucking time. I believe I've written a few posts on this subject in the past. Most people just don't get what's really going on and why.
In my opinion, what they are trying to do with that DRM stuff is trying to put the genie back in the bottle, by recapturing control of the distribution channel. Not only because of pirating, but also to save the heart of their business model.
Exactly. The real risk isn't even the DRM stuff though, it's their willingness, and success at, buying law to support the business model.
KFG
He believes that rather than adopting technological methods to try to stop unauthorized copying of music, record companies need to do more to remove the incentive for piracy."
Yes, as always, innovation (of products, price, distribution and markets) to match actual demands is almost certainly superior to oppression and enforcing old entrenched business models by law ... but why is noone listening? Do they all need to live through oppression on their own to get a clue?
I can't wait for the conspiracy paranoics to start putting up websites blaming Sony for everything from the Spanish flu to the Hindenburg disaster. Sony started the war in Iraq! Sony shot Reagan! And on and on... Maybe someone will just resurrect the "Bert is evil" website and put the CEO of Sony in there instead of Bert. You know it's coming, though...
However, when I asked if Van Zant would even consider moving to somebody other than Sony when the current contract ended, there was no comment. Meaning no, they won't. And here, people, is the proof. And the pudding. In a nice silver serving dish. Van Zant is making lots and lots of money from Sony - this is a good thing. I believe people should be allowed to try and make as much money as they can or want. But Van Zant is making money at the expense of their fans. If they respected their fans, they would make it clear and public that as soon as they can they would leave Sony. But they are being paid too much to do so. I would hope that the people who comprise the free market would vote with their feet, but we all know that isn't going to happen. Sony is going to continue to make billions of dollars selling CDs to people. Van Zant is going to continue to receive their millions from Sony. The world continues spinning.
If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
I remember Switchfoot was so mortified that Sony broke their CD that they were actively helping fans to defeat the protection....long before it became a very public debacle.
I for one have only this to say:
...the debacle shows just how reluctant the labels are to change their business model to reflect the distribution powers -- good and bad -- of the Internet.
...They [the lables] insist on chasing this white whale...
Thank you Sony!
But enough sarcasm. That article had some good quotes in it:
This one should make good ammunitions for the Newsweeks cartoonist:
And my favorite:
Nobody will want to pull a 'Sony' now.
Having your business practices compared to one of Homer Simpsons most famous stunts most famous stunts has to burn the ego... badly.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
They don't necessarily need to be out of business. A large part of what they do currently is give small musicians the benefit of their hugeness. They give them "loans" so that they can record with good equipment and with professional producers. At home you can record with no producers and with, at best, ok equipment. They promote the band. Advertise its shows and its albums. Also very expensive and very difficult to do without a record company. And of course, they distribute the music, as well as band merchandise. This can be in the form of CD's, as currently, or it could be in the form of getting mp3s on Itunes or even setting up free distribution channels. This would also be very expensive without a record company. The real money to be made is going to become licensing your music, royalties from radio stations and touring. We'll probably see ticket prices for concerts increase a lot in the future(and I think I've been seeing some of this already).
The record companies can kick and scream all they want, but whether it is right or not, there is going to be piracy and they are not going to be able to prevent it. They don't even have to alter their business model that much to be able to take advantage of free online distribution of music.
(I know very litle about the record industry, so I'm sure I'm wrong about at least half of that, but it's the way I see things going more or less)
Why should they care? Besides the obvious invasion of privacy issue and compromised security? People care when they have cookies that register more information than they should. You'd think they'd care if you installed a friggin' trojan horse, especially one that also cripples people using your product legally (i.e the 3 copy limit on CDs for people transferring songs from the CD to their iPods).
I still can't believe he was quoted saying that... the Head of Sony BMG's global digital business. It just shows how completely off these people when it comes to understanding piracy, and how to "fight" it...
I just what I felt was a fine job of this on the phone with one of my family members who was not pro P2P, but was upset about this Sony thing.
The whole situation is quite simple to explain really. It's merely a conflict over privacy.
The biggest privacy advocates in the world are corporate interests really and by extension their Republican or so-called neo liberal supporters which would include other political factions such as libertarians. This emphasis on the fundamental importance of privacy is clear in the fact that big business and its Republican advocates are hell bent on privatizing all sorts of things that have traditionally been public. Private is about as close as you can get to the opposite of public. It's like two sides of the same coin, or two edges to the sword if you like.
So, the private sector is totally dependent for its existence upon technologies that allow privacy. Who is the biggest user of virtual LAN technology? This is obviously an essential tool for modern corporations. SSL is another privacy protocol essential for e-commerce. If the public sector had no privacy it would cease to be the private sector, it would be the public sector. That's what the public sector is, those things which are not private.
Which brings us to the issue at hand. It's not that companies like Sony are saying that people shouldn't have privacy. That's totally in opposition to their very nature. Corporations can't exist without privacy and technologies that enforce and defend privacy. The problem is they are saying that their privacy is essential and the consumer's privacy is not.
That's quite a simple explanation of what's going on that anybody can understand. Good one to bring up this Thanksgiving while the family is all together.
"record companies need to do more to remove the incentive for piracy."
I've been saying this for years.. There will always be someone who is gonna try to bypass the rules. But if they had music availible online at a reasonable price when the Napster issue first arose they probably would have nipped a lot of this in the bud.
I think the biggest backlash to come is versus the security companies.
Where the hell where they ?
I personnaly uninstalled Norton Security from my computer as it's now clear that they can not protect me from emerging threats.
The threats of today are not the threats of tomorrow and security firms have to adjust in consequences.
Threats of today : Companies hiding stuff in your computer and correlation between companies. Think Windows Vista.
Threats of tomorrow : Don't ask security firms
Linux/Mac is not an alternative to this shit if you like to play the latest games.
Quite possibly the 2nd worst idea Sony has ever had
f
(right behind their rootkit fiasco) Is their returns process.
http://www.upsrow.com/sonybmg/
They let you fill in whatever nonsense you want & then provide you with a mailing label good for up to 1 lb. of mail at their expense.
I for one plan to send them, on behalf of The President of The United States, 1 Lb. of my finest junkmail. Its UPS, which means you have to drop it off at a UPS store. All that really means is I'll only send them a package every few days.
Feel free to print out the label from here:
http://www.upsrow.com/label/113249543300867500.gi
In case that link dissappeares, I ULed it to xs.to
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
"They want the model that puts them in control."
That's exactly it right there. Business is risk-averse. Any risks taken must have known, quantifiable limits and statsitcally likely profits to justify them. There is no gambling in successful businesses. The only risks are making less money than projected, and even that is unacceptable.
But that's the way it has to be. Anything else would be unforgivable. Any company that throws money around without knowing exactly how much ROI they're going to get is playing fast-and-loose with investment capital, and MUST fail eventually. Witness the dot-com bust.
The answer to this problem is not legislation or education of the business people. The answer is for the people who care about the problem to take steps to obsolete that system. If you're an artist, refuse to sign with companies with which you disagree. If you are a consumer, don't buy from companies with which you disagree. Support the independant artists. If you are a voter, vote against anything which interferes with the ability of the artists and consumers to make those choices.
The freedom to not participate in a relationship you find offensive is very important, and we must continue to exercise it lest it atrophy.
If you're looking for a specific way to support independant artists, I recommend listening to kexp.org. They are listener-sponsered radio and they know who their masters are: the listeners and artists who support them.
No sweat off of Sony's back. I'm betting that the full cost of this initiative is coming out of the artists' royalty cheques.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
They don't necessarily need to be out of business. A large part of what they do currently is give small musicians the benefit of their hugeness. They give them "loans" so that they can record with good equipment and with professional producers. At home you can record with no producers and with, at best, ok equipment. They promote the band. Advertise its shows and its albums. Also very expensive and very difficult to do without a record company. And of course, they distribute the music, as well as band merchandise. This can be in the form of CD's, as currently, or it could be in the form of getting mp3s on Itunes or even setting up free distribution channels. This would also be very expensive without a record company.
If you take the classic distribution channels out, like getting the CDs to the big department store chains, there's nothing in what you describe above which couldn't be done by Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Apple etc.
It's done in smaller dimensions today already, but imagine Google or Amazon throwing their knowledge of datamining the behavior of individual users and using it to find "relevant" products (i.e. music titles) to this field in a big way. This combined with them offering mp3 downloads. The classic core competency of record companies (distribution) is not only totally made obsolete, but they also add something where Sony et al. have nothing to bring on the table.
I'd say if Amazon wasn't still dependend on good relationships to the legacy music industry and google wasn't busy targeting microsoft, one of them reviving the mp3.com idea could really hurt the music industry.
The nice thing is that all this DRM crap will lessen their chances even more in the long run, because makes their product less attractive and other big players with alternative offers will eventually surface.
What needs to happen is that a big star will have to surface who is not already bound with contracts to the record industry.
If you want to see the future, go over to allofmp3 dot com, look here for an example..
Copy protection is mathematically impossible. That limitation is not one of technology, which would be overcome by a suitable invention -- it is a limitation of the way the universe works. {Blame the appropriate God if you're so inclined}.
I can't provide a formal proof, unfortunately. But let's just say that there's no way for the dumb, read-only CD even to be certain of, much less do anything about, what lies downstream of the laser head, and that's where the problem begins and ends: the act of reading the CD for the legitimate purpose of listening to it is, on some level, utterly indistinguible from the act of reading the CD for nefarious purposes such as copying it. Of course, you might well have a right to copy it anyway: think Fair Use / Fair Dealing. If you've a cassette player, but no CD player, in your car, then you are allowed to make a copy of the CD onto a cassette as a necessary step in listening to the music on the CD -- your common law property right by virtue of ownership of the CD -- in your car. It only infringes copyright if you part with the CD and retain the cassette for longer than is reasonable for you to get around to recording something else over it, or if someone steals the cassette -- and they are the infringing party. You were merely aiding and abetting copyright infringement, but ignorance of the fact is a defence. These rights aren't set in stone anywhere, because exactly what constitutes Fair Dealing is determined by the courts; but face it, no court in the land is ever going to send you down for taping albums -- hell, even the judge probably has a few in his car.
If you boot up a Linux LiveCD on a computer which has already been infected with the Sony rootkit, you can still rip it with cdparanoia. That proves the protection is ineffective. And while it isn't obvious to everyone how to do it yet, it's a foregone conclusion that someone somewhere will make a Linux distro just for ripping CDs.
Why don't the record companies learn from the printing industry? Many newsagents have a photocopier sitting right next to the magazines and newspapers. Does anybody ever illegally photocopy the Times, the Penguin Shaggers' Gazette, the Woman's Monthly, or the latest Harry Potter novel? No, of course not.
The fact is that CDs are overpriced, and downloading offers an economically viable alternative to purchase. Downloading isn't free: it takes up time, bandwidth and drive space that all have some value to the downloader. If the intention is to burn the tracks to an actual CD, then this requires additional resources: a jewel case and about 1.05 blank CDs {remember the hit rate is not 100%}. Recreating the CD packaging -- even crudely -- will require further resources in the shape of paper, ink and time.
So my challenge to the music industry is to set a new price point for CDs that compares favourably with this figure. Make it cheaper to buy the physical CD than to download the tracks. And people will buy CDs in preference to downloading.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
This really gets me excited for the possibility of malware using exploits to take advantage of Vista's Trusted Computing (TM) framework. Won't that be spiffy if somehow, once it gets into your system, a piece of malware can suddenly decide that your monitor, ethernet/modem, and sound card aren't Trusted (TM)?
Oh frapjuous day.
random underscore blankspace at ya know hoo dot comedy.
What they missed was the possibility that, once the geeks figured out what was going on, that they could explain it to the masses in a way that they could understand just how badly Sony is treating everybody.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
Would that be, your genie in your bottle, baby?
Sorry, Britney Spears quote.
random underscore blankspace at ya know hoo dot comedy.
When palladium/vista/'trusted computing' comes out, most of this capability is going to be built into the OS. Sony will be able to install this garbage and we won't have much say in it because 'trusted' computing is meant to be trusted by companies like Sony, not people like us.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
I think you're confusing sarcasm and satire. Satire is often a reductio ad absurdum argument, showing the silliness of a particular hidebound point of view. Sarcasm is just being snarky.
Illegitimi non carborundum
Wrong. I have an amp, speakers & CD player from 3 different manufacturers that cost me a total of around £600. I am quite happy with it currently.
I've no doubt Bose / B&O probably sound good (never bothered finding out) but I'm not after spending 5 times the price just for something to impress the neighbours with alongside a cappucino machine.
Please don't assume hi-fi is always about expensive equipment - it's not. It's more about hearing something that sounds good, at whatever budget you have.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Of course, lots of people call listening to music and not doing anything else, unless at a gig of course, either one, two, or both of these :-
1. boring
2. a waste of time
Not Free SF Reader
I didn't follow all the whole event, but how antivirus companies reacted to this? Was there one that prevented infection? I guess the rest should find some excuses for betraying their customers?
I read this elsewhere, hence, it's not my original thought: why were the antivirus, etc. manufactures so silent?
If they ignore such an egregious attack on the majority of systems in use, why should they expect credence with their PR campaign about the next dire threats facing computing?
If you like music as something to have in the background, that's fine, but you are not giving it you full attention then either:- 1. You are not fully appreciating that music, or 2. You don't know how to appreciate a piece of music.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
because one has to know logarithms to use the thing.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
I think what Sony actually did wrong here was go to the lowest bidder to write them this. Pay peanuts, get monkeys.
It is really quite an irritation, Sony aren't the only firm doing this, and this isn't the first time Sonys been caught (any readers here own a Viao, hæ hæ hæ), but now everyone and their dog is looking for these things.
Some people write really good quality viruses and their collective reputation is being besmirched by these cowboys. Something ought to be done about it, questions ought to be asked in Parliament!
I blame the industry, any fool can now get a certificate in point and click (level 2), install visual basic, and call themselves a programmer.
threadeds blog
And -- as most smart people -- they tend to know their limitations, and are not afraid of hiring expert advice...
And, after all, lawyers are just a tool...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
To be perfectly honest, at 43 years of age, I'm glad I'm too old for most of the modern-day music scene. I have more than enough good music with some albums (yes, *albums*, not single tracks) I've appreciated for the past 30 years that I will continue to appreciate to my grave - it's just nice sometimes to find a new album by a new artist to add to my collection.
Sorry, I'm a geek just like most others here and I like my PCs and gadgets. But it seems to me that far too many people, mainly the younger generation, spends far too much time rushing through life trying to do lots of things at the same time - this is why (most) modern music has become "disposable" because it's been manufactured as something that justs goes on in the background while you are doing something else.
My argument, therefore, is that those same people do not know how to devote *all* of their attention to a piece of music and therefore do not appreciate it fully.
Whereas you may be laughing at me, I feel sorry for you at not being able to understand what it really means to *LISTEN* to a piece of music.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
"It's an arms race that the content owner can never win," said Yankee Group analyst Michael Goodman. "In order to make it usable, you also have to make it beatable. If you really truly want to lock it down, it is possible to lock it down. But it is so onerous on the user that they'd never want to use it in the first place."
This is exactly the problem with the record industry today. They think their shit smells sooooo good that people will put up with ANYTHING to get at it.
What they don't know is that once they finally reach that holy grail where content is locked down, non-portable, non-shareable, only listenable on approved and certified devices, and only copiable when you put a microphone in front of a speaker... NOBODY will want to bother with it.
Normal people don't want to spend time learning the difference between "Plays for Sure - Download" and "Plays for Sure - Subscription". Normal people don't want to figure out how many computers they can own before their music collection becomes unplayable. Normal people just want to listen to their music on the home stereo, in the car, on the computer, on the ipod... and not have to jump through hoops when they paid hard-earned cash for the privilege.
Yeah - it's a bunch of ones and zeros
And yeah, it's 16 bit audio... whoopdedo.
If you listen to CDs you obviously don't appreciate music, I only listen to live music where the bit rate is so much higher. And I need something tangible.
/sarcasm
When bandwidth gets there we'll be downloading far higher quality tracks than you can get on your glorious CDs. Then people like you will claim that CDs are only for philistines who don't truly appreciate music.
"What ? You mean too far." Youa re surely saying. No. I mean too quick, too fast. If they had continued to erode fair use by slowly using more strigent DRM, with each step a small one, Maybe in 5-10 years or so they would have been able to install rootkit. After all if the evolution is slow enough joe sixpack will not see anything happenning or may not protest too much. But a brutal step in "DRM"-ing in one throw is too much for anybody to swallow. This is one of those rare occasion where I am happy firms take a shortsighted view on the future and want to reap immediatly benefit. They would be far more evil if they had long term plans.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
"He believes that rather than adopting technological methods to try to stop unauthorized copying of music, record companies need to do more to remove the incentive for piracy."
Time to repeat my subject:
Somebody actually gets it? HOW CAN THIS BE?!?!?!
It might not be possible to put the genie back in the bottle, but the record companies might have a chance of staying in the game if they would reduce the price of CDs to between $5 and $7. Sure, they would earn less per CD, but they would reduce the incentive to pirate CDs. Most experts agree that the "lack of value to the consumer" is what is driving most casual piracy. If you could buy the CD for five bucks wouldn't you rather have an original than a copy of a CD?
I have a new business model for a new recording studio concept but I don't have the capital to pull it off.
Here are the main points:
* Artists would retain all rights to their own music. Copyrights would be in the names of the artists and bands, not the studio.
* All contracts with the studio are open ended, they never expire, and allow the artists and/or bands to back out of them at any time. The artists and bands ARE NOT employees of the studio, the studio is strictly a service to them to get their music published and on the radio.
* The studio would only retain publishing rights, not ownership. The studio's publishing rights ends when the contracts end.
* Music would be published on CD and via a paid P2P service similar to iTunes or Napster. Downloaded music could be used on MP3 players (including the iPod) and burned to CD an unlimited number of times.
* Music CDs published by the studio would contain CD Extra content such as interviews with the artists and bands, music videos, printable lyrics sheets for all the music on the CD, and news about the artists or bands updated via RSS Feed daily.
* A PR Department of the studio would help with merchandising the artist or band. The artist and/or band retains the copyrights and trademarks of all merchandise. The studio receives a percentage of sales as a fee.
* The studio would pioneer the Open Media License, or OML. The OML like the GPL, but for music, video and literature, would apply to media that is offered free of copyrights and trademarks and can be downloaded, used, and even altered without restriction depending on the OML License that is used.
Basically, the artists and bands have full control over everything, and the studio becomes their client offering CD publishing services, P2P music sales and distribution, marketing and advertising, and the artists and bands retain all the copyrights and trademarks. A studio like this I think would set the whole recording industry on its head.
Any comments? If you know a VC who can help me please let me know.
Michael "TheZorch" Haney
thezorch@gmail.com
http://thezorch.googlepages.com/home
or
:)
3. It is possible to do more than one thing at a time for a lot of us
and yes, reading a book and watching a movie is done frequently, harder at a cinema though, in the dark
Not Free SF Reader
aaaaannnnnnndddddd they call it closed mindednesss!!!!!!!
*to the tune of whatever I feel like at the time*
Yes, but then you are not appreciating either thing *FULLY*. This is my point exactly.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
yeah, well if you have to do only one thing at a time (can you eat and do any of these?)
I guess I would have several thousand less books read, movies watched, and songs heard, so I think I will not be too worried about my lack of appreciation - I even get time to listen to, read, or watch the good ones more than once then, as well
Not Free SF Reader
That is actually "support" software which most spyware cataloguing sites list as harmless.
Some sites claim that there is a modified spyware version out there too - but not the Vaio version.
The site you have linked to looks like the least professional site of the bunch. Maybe you are right, but it is not so definite from the evidence I've seen.
My view will be controversial...but DRM is not good or evil. DRM is a tool.
The SONY rooktkit is not DRM. The SONY rootkit is an abomination.
DRM is like a knife. In a surgeon's hands, a knife can save lives. In a butcher's hands, the same knife can cut throats.
It's the knife wielder that we have to watch. The DRM wielders haven't learned how to properly use or label DRM yet.
What we should do is ensure DRM is properly labeled.
I might be willing to pay x amount, or nothing at all, for a song I can listen to only once.
I might be willing to pay x + y amount for a song I can listen to an infinite number of times.
I might be willing to pay x + y + z amount for a song I can listen to an infinite number of times and make N copies of for non-commercial use or put on an MP3 or other device.
I need to know, before buying anything, the limitations imposed. I need to know what I can do. I need to know what I am buying.
People shouldn't fear DRM.
DRM will do to the music and movie industry that the cable industry did for/to the television industry.
There will be "pay-per-view" channels where one can listen to something only once and make no copies.
There will be "Showtime/HBO" channels where one pays a monthly fee for access to the record or movie library.
There will be "free" channeles with commercials where one can make a recoding and do anything as long as it's for non-commerical use.
The big record labels and movie studios won't go away. They will become less important.
ABC, CBS, NBC, haven't gone away. HBO and Showtime have their niche. WGN, TBS, CNN, FOX, ESPN, have their following. Pay-Per-View has it's place.
Smaller bands will benefit immensely. Smaller bands will join together to form their own channels. Smaller movie producers will do the same.
With DRM, a band could broadcast a live convert, over the Internet, with a listen once, no record limitations, for a certain fee.
The same band could release previous music, with less restrictive DRM or no fees, to drum up support for their concert.
To gain popularity, a band could broadcast a concert with less restrictive DRM.
DRM will not stop piracy. Criminals will always find a way around DRM. Law enforcement will always have work to do.
DRM will allow new business models much as the cable industry allowed new business models in the television industry.
Perhaps the RIAA and MPAA see this coming. I doubt it. But, they will have no choice. They will face competition and lose market share just as the big three television networks did.
I could even do without a cd at all!
I mean, a CD doesn't have the artistic touch of vinyls anyway, and CDs are getting less and less important for the typical consumer, because the way we catalogue and store our media at home and in the car is rapidly transitioning towards centralized server applications.
I'd have no problem paying 5 bucks for downloading a CD worth of high quality mp3s, maybe with a little artwork to display on a media center screen or something.
If the music and movie industries had their way, their product would be kept locked away inside a vault buried under a mountain surrounded by armed guards, a moat, landmines, pits of diesel ready to burn, and lots and lots of razor wire.
NOBODY is gonna steal even a look at the box, and even if they did, it's sitting on a self-destruct device that would scare Indiana Jones(TM).
Thanks for making sure a) nobody can touch your content, and B) if they do, they and the content get nuked.
It's like that car alarm from one the James Bond movies featuring the innocent "protected by an anti-theft device" sticker. The goon laughs and tries to smash the windshield with a pipe. The car explodes.
Extreme, yeah, but he didn't steal it, did he? Nope! The content is protected!
Sig for hire.
I remember back in the early to mid 80's, as a H.S. student, and making copies of software like the original Wizardry for my Apple II+ and the like. I had friends from two different areas that were a group of hackers, and I was the conduit between the 2 groups, meaning my fater had to purchase boxes of 100 5 1/4 diskettes every month or so.
The difference was, back then (and even now, to a large extent), there was an entry level knowledge often needed to do this kind of thing. You couldn't just make a copy, because of the variable disk speeds often written into the games, etc. You had to know how to use certain programs to make it work, and access to folks that had copies of the original wasn't always easy.
10 years ago, as well as today, for music especially, there isn't a great deal of knowledge you need to do it. Windows will rip a CD for you, in fact. You don't need anything more than what your core OS gives you.
It is similar, in a fashion, to how Sony and Verant handled some cheating in EverQuest. There was an application often run on a Linux box called ShowEQ. It would give you relevant data about where mobs were, how much xp they would grant you (approx) and their levels, etc. For the longest time, there was an entry level knowledge required to use it, so Sony didn't go out of it's way to protect it that much. Then folks started selling machines with a pre-built ShowEQ kit on it that automatically updated itself, and too many folks were using it. Sony had to fight back, and did, with much harder encryption as well as other things to make it harder to work. Could it still be done? Yes, but it made it that much harder. The entry level went up.
Basically, that is what these music companies need to do. Make the cost of entry to rip a CD illegally higher than most folks can handle. The problem they have is that they haven't been able to come up with a way to do that. Until they do, they won't fix anything. And with the internet being what it is, as soon as someone figures an easier way to get around what the music companies have done, they will distribute it easily. Today's ease of naer global communication makes the job well nigh impossible.
Conclusion: The music companies can't win this fight. They never could.
[lots of rant against SACD/DVD-A]
From what I've understood, SACD is in quite widespread use today as hybrid CD/SACD discs. Just about every argument you had about them being inferior to CD pretty much went out the window, since they are at least equal to a CD. But as you say, hardly anyone has a SACD-compatible system due to the wierd bitstream, it's not so much that it is proprietary but wildly different, instead of 16bit/44.1KHz it's something like 1bit/2.83MHz. So if you really want the added resolution, it's there in a lot of mainstream music today. But guess what? Nobody cared.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I wrote something just a few days ago about how the music industry should not only concentrate on fighting piracy, but also give something back to their loyal customers. It seems that just like lawyers know nothing about technology (or cows know little about algebra), music companies know very little about using the power of the internet for good causes. Maybe now they'll learn.
"I think they've set back audio CD protection by years."
Ahhhhhhh... that made my day. I could read that over and over.
I agree with the above entirely. What is interesting is that with the old analog LP, no matter what you might say about it's sound quality (vastly better than CD or crackly, noisy annoyance), you actually get a copy of the sound waves as captured in the studio/stage as they happened. Pretty amazing if you ask me. Not to mention the larger canvas for artwork and often some quite creative packaging concepts. Unfortunately you don't get DRM protection, which I know we'll all miss. (Note for the Anonymous Coward above: This is also sarcasm. Just in case you were wondering.) Cheers
Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?
Yes that's true, and it's an anomaly that should be taken advantage of to promote free software and user control.
Sony is being made a scapegoat for the relative complexity of maintaining a secure and clean system.
What? I think you understand the issue less than your non technical friends.
The only difference between Sony's DRM and any other is that the popular press noticed and reported it. You seem to understand this, but not the implications and you underestimate your friends.
People really are angry for the right reasons. No one asks for DRM and no one selling computers or software ever tells them about it. What's sold are partial advantages of digital media. Less honest vendors promise all the advantages of digital media but actually deliver almost none of them other than portability. Cases like this show the real problem of all DRM: when you can't read and write files on your system but someone else can, that someone else owns your computer. They understand that WM / the new Napster, Ipod and others do the same kinds of things with more or less honesty about it.
Now's the time to pop in a copy of Mepis or some other good distro. The longer you wait, the more entangled in DRM trash your friends become and the more they have to lose. The demonstration is even more appropriate if your friend's computers are all crapped up.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
under the current system when something falls out of copyright (yes it happens every day, even to Elvis!) it enters the public domain and if free for all. Because DRM systems are attempting to be 'impossible' to crack there's a good change that when DRMed music falls out of copyright it will not enter the public domain. So using DRM is basically like saying bye bye to existing copyright laws.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Yes! B&O and Reading Railroad too!
Just "gittin-r-done," day after day.
That is because my interest is in music and not in expensive equipment.
Beautiful. That's the soundbite that needs to get used more often.
The whole Idea of DRM is flawed. It will never stop the black market of counterfeit CDs at flea markets, on street corners, and in regular retail outlets in some parts of the world. DRM will only stop legitimate paying customers from using their personal property as they see fit. I hope this thing bankrupts Sony, and that their demise becomes a cautionary tale for the rest of the industry. Don't call your customers thieves and expect to still have customers. Don't buy CDs.
The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
Does anyone know if this rootkit stuff is preinstalled on VAIO computers? I'd like to know before I buy one.
So when I listen to music am I supposed to not eat, drink, dance, or even breathe? Seriously, what do you have to do to "FULLY" appreciate the music?
Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
Precisely.
A question I'd love to ask the record industry (slashdot interview, anyone? :-) )
would be:
"Would you rather sell X million CDs per year with a 0% piracy rate,
or 2X million with a 30% piracy rate?"
(They still wouldn't "get it", of course, but it'd be fun to ask.)
This is also a bit off-topic, but the view of the oil-connected, "born-again christian" businessmen who run Washington is that the world is coming to an end soon anyways with the second coming of you-know-who. If you remember, James Watt, under the Reagan adiministration, made that very remark regarding the selling off of park lands to the big mining and oil conglomerates.
Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?
Instead of trying to give less freedom for your paying customers compared to the pirated work, give more freedom? Online encoding services work great for allofmp3.com -- you tell them which song(s) you want, then if you want it as mp3, ogg, FLAC, or something else, and in which bitrate. Nothing is of course DRM'ed. Granted, allofmp3.com may not be entirely "clean" legally, but it's time the sites who are start doing the same.
Give the customers something P2P software rarely can; there's a lot to offer still, compared to eMule or Pirate Bay's unorganized torrents where you don't know how good job the ripper did, and where you only get the raw music, and nothing more.
I think they need to *compete* against piracy, as it'll always stay, and competing isn't done best by basically pissing on your paying customers with DRM protections.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
People that have broadband and are inclined to listen to music on computer and music player are going to be very reluctunt to buy CDs. Last CD that I bought was probably a year ago. It will be very hard to convince me to buy another CD.
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
Great! Then you would be interested in buying my own version of Beethoven's Ninth, sung by myself in the shower? If, as you say, any "el cheapo" earphones are okay, then maybe an "el cheapo" artist as myself would also do? What really matters is music itself, not the quality of the recording, right?
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
It's more about hearing something that sounds good, at whatever budget you have.
So, if I can't afford even a moderately priced system and a bunch of CDs, and instead I download a few tracks and use my headphones on the computer (remember, this is all I can fit into my budget), am I now a true hi-fi music enthusiast or am I someone who thinks of music as throwaway?
Remember in your original post where you invited us to call it snobbery? It is. Get over yourself. Music is meant to be enjoyed, but that enjoyment has no concrete definition and is subjective to the listener. I'm glad you enjoy your CDs on your mediocre system, but someone listening on their $60 CD player to a burned copy of a 96bit mp3 is no less into music. Or did you want someone with an expensive system and DVD-A to come tell you that the way you listen to music is worthless? After that we can have a studio engineer with a studio worth a few million come in and say that everyone else is listening to junk. Then maybe we can invite the band in and have them tell us we are all "throwaway listeners" since we don't follow them around the world only listening to the music when they play it live.
You wanted to know why sales have been down? THIS is why!!! Well, that and the bubble gum pop crap you are pushing out lately and calling music.
If somebody *expects* me to steal, when I did not merit that expectancy in the first place, then yes, you might say, they criminalize me. And that just p*sses me off.
I don't go and shout "you are a murderer" to Sony's boss, just because he might get a gun someday and actually shoot somebody.
These are Star Trek references...
HA! Their plans were foiled by Sony.
They're not happy because they were all working on their own excessive CD DRM schemes and Sony just turned public opinion very much against it. This DRM-ing everything needs to stop.
When will they realize that when people buy something, they're not going to give it away, sure some kids might sell copies to their friends for a few dollars, but that's not much. The people who want to "pirate" the RIAA crap on the Intarnets don't buy the CDs, they get the leaked master copies from someone industry insider before the DRM is added. It's like gun control, it just negatively affects those who try to do everything the legal way. It has been and should be when you BUY a CD you can do anything with it but this list of a few things, they seem to want it to be you can't do anything with it except for this list of a few things. I havn't bought a new CD in years and don't plan on it anytime soon.
F7 doesn't work, ignore spelling and grammar
Sorry, I already don't shoplift. ^_^
If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
I don't get it.
All this talk of boycotting Sony is well and good -- I've already had geek friends comment that Sony is now off their shortlist for HDTV's, games, etc. -- but unless this behavior spreads beyond the typical /. crowd, I don't think it's gonna make a speck of difference.
So, let me make a modest proposal: all you geeks in the USA who are about to visit friends and family for Thanksgiving, TELL THEM THIS STORY.
"Sony has been making music CDs that have a computer virus on them. The idea is that if you play the CD in your computer, the computer gets modified to prevent you from making illegal copies of the CD. The problem is that not only is this illegal to do, it makes it easy for more viruses to get on your system. Even the Department of Homeland Security has condemned Sony for this, but they have yet to apologize. So I'm going to avoid buying any Sony product -- music, movies, games, electronics, computers, etc. -- until they do. I wasn't planning on stealing their CD, and I don't appreciate them treating me with the presumption that I was going to."
(I realize that calling it a "virus" isn't technically accurate, but I'm assuming that's much more likely to be a meaningful term to grandma than trying to explain what a "rootkit" is...)
- Windows users all over the place have turned off autoplay on their machines, so they won't get infected again
- Nerds everywhere will be posting ways to defeat whatever shows up in the future
- The whole industry (and Sony in particular, thank God) is trembling about taking the risk of the ire of the computer industry if they screw these things up again
- The fact that it took 6 months or more to discover this rootkit is a GOOD thing, as the damage done is now more noteworthy and it has caused more damage than if it was discovered quickly
- There's been a ton of bad press, meaning the awareness of 'fake' CDs that are really copy-protected disks has been raised, even in the minds of many non-technical people
How much money would it have cost to arrange for this ourselves? Way to go Sony! Your long-standing behavior toward proprietary and lock-in types of behavior (Betamax, Minidisc, Memory Stick, and now rootkits) has *really* hosed you up good this time!
Us Slashdotters owe Sony a debt of gratitude.
I completely agree. The problem is that the same people who won't sit down for an hour to listen to music won't spend a minute to think about what you're saying and see that you have a point. :(
Nowadays people equate taste with snobbery
Try sitting in a dark room with your eyes closed and put on some of your favourite music - either in headphones or a good quality stereo. I tend to lie in bed with good headphones
Now REALLY listen to the music. Focus on the different layers. Listen to the textures of the instruments. Focus on the form of the composition.
Pretty soon you'll be hearing all sorts of little details and layers that the musician has put in there that you never noticed before, and with any luck you'll get a shiver running down your spine occasionally. I'm speaking literally here - listening to music this way can actually get shivers running down your spine, the way you can be moved when you loose yourself at a great concert.
Your milage may vary.... and it might not work like this with all styles of music :D
To me, music downloads are exactly like independent radio, with the bonus that the request line works any time I want it to. The quality runs from iffy to just barely tolerable, but I get to try lots of different stuff I'd never have heard otherwise, from bands I'd never have heard of at all without downloaded MP3s. I get to decide what I really like vs what is just filler or noise, and I'm not pressured into making that decision on the spot, as with in-store sampling (sometimes a song that at first I disliked, over time becomes one of my favourites!) I have a chance to become addicted to any given band in a way that otherwise would never happen.
This is the sole factor in whether I buy CDs or not -- did the "radio" (traditional or downloaded) generate an interest in a given band? if so, sooner or later they get my money, because I want that prime-quality backup (physical CD), not to mention the ability to thereby make my own MP3s at whatever quality I care to spend my disk space on.
In fact this week I went so far as to track down a band whose stuff is out of press, and finagle a purchase of two CDs from a band member's private stash. How'd I get so interested in their work? Free, unencumbered MP3 downloads, sponsored by the band itself.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
DVD-Audio didn't sell.
You can buy DVD-Audio discs, and most DVD video players will play them. You get more channels and more dynamic range. Finally, 24-bit audio. But no digital outputs from the player, a tough copy protection system, and watermarking in the audio.
Nobody buys this stuff. Total worldwide sales of DVD-Audio disks are around 400,000 units. That number has been flat for years. There's some high-end audiophile interest, but it's a niche product.
So that was the industry's try #1 at moving customers from copyable CDs. It was an abject failure. Try #2 was hokey copy protection schemes for audio CDs. That backfired. Stay tuned for the next great idea from the music industry.
Lawyers don't have any better understanding of technology than a cow does algebra
It's not the lawyers at fault here, it's the courts. Judges (and moreso juries) are people too. Even if this case went before a judge, there is a lot of technicality that would probably need to be very much reworded in order for him/her to understand. One of the problems with law is that one not only need to understand law (a difficult task in itself), but how it applies to the case at hand. In technology we've been getting by using laws pieced together from non-technical applications - sometimes coming out OK but often ending in disaster.
Even if the lawyers understand tech (Lessig, for example), you still need a judge and/or jury that understands it... and possibly more importantly laws that actual deal with tech rather than vaguely related scenarios/applications that have been applied to tech.
C'mon now, let's keep the argument intelligent and away from personal attacks - yes, perhaps it's a mediocre system but what the hell, I'm happy with it.
but someone listening on their $60 CD player to a burned copy of a 96bit mp3 is no less into music.
But that's my entire point - downloadable music is designed for people who are not prepared to put in the time and effort to *enjoy* their music properly. Don't get me wrong, I like background music just like the next guy but all that's doing is giving my mind something to focus on whilst I'm carrying out some other laborious task - that is not fully appreciating and listening to music.
Downloadable music is great for fad followers who want just have the latest tunes on their players and perhaps boast to their friends about the size of their track collections.
I'm no art fanatic but someone who appreciates a painting can stand staring at it for hours, just giving it their full attention and just enjoying every brush stroke the original artist made - that's why I wouldn't give, say, the Mona Lisa a second look compared to an art fan.
Music is *NO* different - if you're not giving it your full attention and not getting all you can out of listening to it, then whilst you may enjoy having it playing in you ears, you are definitely NOT truly appreciating it.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
In the same way, downloadable music is all about *convenience* (just like being able to buy a £4 bottle of Australian wine in a supermarket), nothing more. Fine, if there's a market for it then I say let people have their downloads.
But just like a true wine enthusiast cleanses his/her palette before tasting a good wine, a true music enthusiast does his/her best to get the most out of a piece of music - and no, that doesn't mean expensive hi-fi but it *does* mean giving it 100% attention to start fully appreciating it.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Do what you like, you're missing my point entirely. But if you're doing something else, all you are doing is *hearing* music, not *listening* to it.
Seriously, what do you have to do to "FULLY" appreciate the music?
You give it your full attention, start hearing things in it you never knew were there.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Of course you would but then it's all about *quality* not *quantity*.
I read lots of books and watch lots of movies, to the point where I can't remember, a couple of months later, whether I saw a particular movie or read a particular book. But that's because I wasn't giving either my full attention at the time and not appreciating them fully.
Much of my music collection is similar. I know about 1/4 of my music CD collection *really well* to the point where I can only play a lot of albums when I am in particular moods. The rest of it tends to be used as background stuff and will continue to be used in that way unless I *really* sit and listen to it. Therefore, I only truly appreciate about 1/4 of my collection, I'm the first to admit that.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
I'm about your age, but c'mon even at 70's or 80's we had so much "disposable" music that I'm still ashamed of, like classics from "Middle of the road" ( Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep) and "Baccara" (Yes Sir, I Can Boogie) and many more. Is this a troll, or are you really feeling that old, when your real life is just starting.
"record companies need to do more to remove the incentive for piracy" like lowering the ridiculous price tag! but I guess the rootkit is more lucrative than lowering prices in regard to consumer interest.
OK. Here's a test. Talk about source code to a lawyer. I sold a tech business. I NEVER got the lawyers (ours and theirs) to understand what source code was. I CONSTANTLY had to edit the agreements to change "source codes" to "source code". I think they file it in their brains under "secret nuclear launch codes type things; dangerous; can cause company to explode; must be kept top secret, dual keys, vetted staff, keep out cameras".
Morons. Trouble comes when a company needs to use tech, but is run by lawyers. Bah.
K.
Oh the irony. Perhaps the lawyers are also not aware that every time I've tried to play a copy-protected cd in linux, the only way I've been able to do it is to rip it with cdparanoia
Bah! You wouldn't know how to appreciate good music if it jumped up and bit you on the ass. Hell, I bet you don't even have any Tuning Dots!
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
An individual singer/songwriter usually does not have the business skills, capital, resources, networking contacts etc to promote their own material. They are the creative element of the mix. Most of the time they need a business element in order to market, exploit, and further the artistic element.
Since most singer/songwriters do not know much about business, or they are not able to conduct the business themselves, they have to partner with someone who does. This partnership results in the limited transfer of the right to copy and exploit the person's creative works.
Think of it this way - how many inventors would want to actually manage their own companies? Most would not. Most would want someone else to handle the business, the accounting, the marketing, the selling, the taxes, etc so that the inventor themself could focus on the actual productivity and creative side of things: the inventing itself.
That analogy is very similar to the typical situation a singer/songwriter is faced with. Focus on the art, let someone else sell it.
Libertas in infinitum
I think you are confused on a couple of things and the Industry is slightly more complicated than you probably think.
First off, most studios are just that; studios. They only do the recording, mixing, editing, mastering etc and usually have no affiliation with the record labels. The record labels are the people who are memebrs of the RIAA and front all of the money, market the recordings etc.
Also publishers hold the copyrights to the lyrics and composition while the record labels usually hold the phonorecord copyright. Pubs and labels are definately two different entities. A pub's job is to exploit songs and get them in the hands of the labels to record the songs. And the labels job is to exploit masters.
Hope this makes sense. If you have more questions about the industry feel free to ask. I have a degree in it and live/work in Nashville.
Libertas in infinitum
Im pretty sure that someone would have figured out a workaround or fix for that root kit. Music companies and the entertaiment industry are a bunch or greddy aholes. Its none of their business what ppl share among themselves, as long as they are not selling it. Sony needs to look in its own backyard for piracy. Asia is a hot bed of piracy.
this is why (most) modern music has become "disposable" because it's been manufactured as something that justs goes on in the background while you are doing something else.
Every generation complains about the music that the following generation prefers. Every single one in history.
There will be classic popular tunes of the 200x decade that people will still listen to in 2050, just like we still listen to Elvis and the Beatles today. But not everything in current charts will survive this long. But it's the same with 1950s pop music. Look at the old chart hits of the 1950s and you will note that only few of those pop tunes and artits of that era survived music history.
Throwaway, easy-to-consume music existed in the 1950s, as well, and it's forgotten today.
------------------
You may like my a cappella music
Has anyone explored the topic of how this debacle might be used to explain what is being attempted by the media companies with their advocacy of Trusted Computing? It is another effort to hijack a computer from its owner. In fact it seems to me that this episode is a clumsy attempt to retrofit Trusted Computing onto existing non-compliant machines.
I suppose it might be too confusing to try to bring up something that does not exist yet but you don't want to face a situation where it has been become a fait accompli for all new computers. There are enough ways for a computer to fail to work without adding people trying to inhibit it for their own agenda.
Linux and/or Mac is an alternative though if you use consoles for gaming!
There aren't that many games that are really even PC only anymore, Half-Life 2 was just released for XBox. Is it really worth having the computer you use for so many things be so subject to malware and personal corporate espionage? Are a few first release games really worth that?
At the very least use a linux/Mac system as a primary box and keep a PC just for gaming. It'll save yourself a lot of bother.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
"Lawyers don't have any better understanding of technology than a cow does algebra" ...
It's not the lawyers at fault here, it's the courts.
That doesn't make any sense in this situation. Sony decided at some point to include this rootkit on CD's they sold. Almost certainly, someone in Sony's legal department looked over the plan and said OK. No courts were involved at any point.
THAT lawyer (really team of lawyers) obviously did not know technology well or he/she would have realized what a grave risk Sony was taking. Software that modifies the deepest innards of every computer that it touches? I'm sorry but you couldn't pay me enough to write that software as I know the kind of liability such an effort puts you under. Yet this group of Sony lawyers gave the OK for Sony to embed this in millions of CD's.
Lawyers are, by training, the most risk adverse people on the face of the planet. They are not stupid but they are compelled to avoid risk by years of said legal training. The lawyers job is primarily to go around saying "well you could do that but here are the reasons why you will go to jail if you do". That they did not succeed in convincing Sony execs not to go forward with the mad rootkit plan can only mean they did not understand the risks enough, as an informed lawer would have been able to make a strong case for probable legal damage WHEN the rootkit was discovered that would have dissuaded any Sony executive from undertaking it.
I have a lot of close friends whoe are lawyers - just ask any lawyer what lawschool really is and they will agree it's basically re-molding how your brain works.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Not only would radio be AM only, it would be talk radio, with no "bumpers".
Mandela
Gandhi
most of the founding fathers
plenty of the french revolutionaries
Lord Denning
Warren (for Brown v Board of Education)
Despite all your objections (which are correct), the railroads in the US ship 2/3rds of the ton-miles in the US. Trucks are only used where on-time is important. One wonders how much long distant shipping would be left if the railroads figured out how to stick to a schedule when customers want.
To compete with the railroads, semis need to get better than 20 mpg (they get about 7). That isn't counting cost of the drivers - 1 train engineer can replace about 25 truck drivers.
Barge traffic is more efficient, but limited to where there are rivers.
The curious thing is that Sony stock went up about 10% since the rootkit was discovered.
We need a catchy name for software that thinks it knows what's best for the user. Sony's software thinks I don't need to see files beginning with $$, my HP all-in-one driver thinks I want to devote 16 MB of RAM to it all the time when I only use it once a month. My ipod thinks I don't ever want to delete any files immediately after hearing them and just knows I want to use iTunes to organize ALL my music. My Brother laser printer thinks I want to see its "multiple page" window all the time. It goes on and on.
Once again, you don't have to buy CD's. I want to emphasize that one more time: you don't HAVE to buy CD's.
I think you are missing the point. Sony does not have the right to take over a consumer's PC. Whether or not the consumer buys the CD is not the issue.
I have no idea how these things are done, but why not find the secret IP addresses that First4Internet, XCP, and others phone home to, and create a denial of service attack ? Maybe a Black hat cracker who feels the need to use his zombie droves to perform a public service ? Sony, etc, can't change the phone home addresses, so this might work.
Apologies for the cheap shot, I didn't consider it as one at first, it was meant to illustrate that your system was far from "high-end", but in re-reading I see it is a bit insulting.
I do think, however, that you completely missed my point. And maybe you aren't clear on yours.
On one hand you say that downloadable music is not for true music enthusiasts. On the other you say that budget doesn't make you a music enthusiast. So which is it. You quoted two lines from my response, completely ignoring my question as to what you call a person who can only afford to download music. Your argument about "giving [music] your full attention" doesn't even really belong here. Are you actually saying I can't give a downloaded song my full attention just because I downloaded it?
As for getting all you can out of listening to it, you've set "downloaded music" as your metric for non-music enthusiast. And that is why I called you a snob. My reciever alone costs more than your whole system (and I consider my setup up to be in the middle of the "mid-end", nothing special). So now can I say that because you didn't spend as much as I did that you aren't really into music? No. What about a person that listens to downloaded music on a system that is more expensive than yours? Where do they fall? Music is art, and it is not for you to say how or where someone enjoys it. Nor is it possible for you to assign a value to that person's enjoyment. It is theirs and theirs alone. If they only want/can listen to downloaded music, and they consider themselves music enthusiasts, it is not for you to say otherwise.
And on a purely technical note; what is it about downloaded music, if encoded at a high enough bit-rate, that makes it inferior to a CD? Because if you want to start down that path, than budget really does a music enthusiast make. And we'll end up somewhere down the line with a system worth millions and an analog recording, because remember, even your CD is lossy.
A cluster of cows doing algebra
fantastic! now we can all remember when something daft is done, we can all say how it was to 'pull a Sony'.
I bought an Bob Dylan disk I used to have in my vinyl record collection, Hiway 66 Revisted. It was a combination SACD/CD. It wouldn't let me rip it in my computer so I could transfer the tracks to my 20 gig iRiver (maybe there is a way, but I didn't try very hard). I prompltly returned it to Walmart and got my money back. The thing is, my stero hasn't even been hooked up for a couple of years since I last rearranged my living room. I mainly buy CDs to rip to my iRiver. And Sony lost a sale by not letting me do this. Incidentally, I believe SACD supports 5.1 surround sound. Where do you think I have a 5.1 sound system? On my computer, not my stereo. If Sony had made these disks so they could play in the common 5.1 computer setups many people have, they may have sold a boatload, but no, their stupid copy protection killed their own product. They are about to repeat the same mistake with blue-ray DVDs, which will require copy-protected monitors and hard disks. Good luck on getting people to throw out their $5000 home theather setups to play Sony's DRMed to death crap.
This ad space for rent.
... I hope this thing bankrupts Sony, and that their demise becomes a cautionary tale for the rest of the industry....
A better hope is that this will teach Sony and the others that DRM is not in their best interest, since it is not in their customers best interest. I hope that this is the beginning of the end for all DRM, simply because it has made the average Joe aware of the anti consumer tactics of the big contents companies. There will always be a minimum number of cheap, dishonest persons, but most people will pay for a product if the cost is reasonable and it is easy and convenient to get. After this episode, the first major company to prominently advertise that they don't and will never offer any of their content with any kind of DRM restrictions may attract a good number of extra sales, most likely exceeding any losses from unpaid for copying. A section on the label of a CD or DVD something along these lines would certainly get my attention:
The content of this disk is brought to you without any playback or copy restrictions. You and your immediate family household may use the content and the copies herefrom on any playback device you own. Please don't violate copyright laws and our trust in your honesty by making copies available to others. ( signed by the content creators )
All theory is gray
Bear in mind that the rootkit code appears to be of dubious quality. I have pointed out before that running multiple kernel patches is very risky. I doubt you would have the problem of several rootkits hogging too much CPU, because your system would fail to boot much before CPU hogging would become an issue.
I did and I do ;-)
Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?