U.K. Group Wants DRM'd Media Labeled

peterfa writes "The BBC reports that the U.K. 'All Party Parliamentary Internet Group' wants companies to label their DRMed products. Consumers will see a label on the product before they buy. The label will spell out clearly just how easy it is to copy media, and what they can and cannot do. This is in response to Sony BMG and their virus-like DRM. The group claims the industry is turning media into a rent system, rather than a purchase system."

Comments

go even further

[yagu]

I wonder what their response will be to the request to label their products and how their DRMed, and make it "crystal clear" (nice irony) to the consumers. I propose they go even further.

I've encountered a couple of CDs which had some message to the effect, "while every attempt has been made to ensure an enjoyable experience, blah, blah, blah, ... we cannot guarantee this disc will play on every and all of your devices." And, all of those (btw, the print is so small, it's unreadable) actually did play on my computer, and not in my car, and I had to go through a few hoops to return what the store claimed was "non-returnable".

Since they are knowingly creating a corrupt version of what is or should be a standard format (compact disc), it should be their responsibility to allow the consumer to know positively for sure what devices and manufacturers their product will be guaranteed to play on. This, in addition to the clear and explicit list of how the tracks may be copied, .... all of the other suggestions in the article.

From the article: "The group claims the industry is turning media into a rent system, rather than a purchase system." If that's the case, and it does appear that's the industry's direction, they're changing the rules as they previously existed, even more reason they should list the constraints and restrictions of their product. By visual inspection alone, it is impossible to look at a CD and know whether it is of the "corrupt" ilk.

Does it seem ironic there are laws requiring "explicit lyrics" warnings on CDs, and not information that explains whether or not you can even play the damn things?

(would have posted this a moment sooner, took me a second to find the "Read More..." link. ;-) )

Re:go even further

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that the DRM sticker would be more welcomed on the face of the CDs than the Explicit Lyrics one, since DRM, as proven by Sony, can be much more damaging to the consumer than swearing in songs.

Re:go even further

[Itsacon]

It's being sold as an audio CD. You have a reasonable expectation that it will work in your audio CD player(s). If it doesn't, then as far as I'm concerned either the CD or the player(s) is faulty. Assuming your player(s) work(s) with other CDs, the implication would be that it's the CD that's faulty. Therefore, you're entitled to a refund, end of story.

Actually, right from the beginning, Philips has made a stand that these copy protected CD's are never sold with the 'CD-Compact Disc' label on it, since they do not comply with the Red Book standard Sony and Philips published back in 1982.

So if you're shopping for a CD and the logo is not on it, it's a good signal to read a the small print. In my experience, you'll often find copyright notices for the copyprotection on there somewhere. :-P

However, it seems to me that right from the beginning this stuff has gone the wrong way. Hackers and pirates are way more inventive that 'regular' consumers, so any copy protection will be cracked (after all, if it was IMPOSSIBLE to get the audio off there, it would never sell), while Joe Average will never get it to play on his car stereo.

I rip all my CD's to my harddisk, since I like variation, and a big harddrive with WinAmp is a much better CD-changer than a real CD-changer ever will be. I have over time bought several DRM'ed CD's, and none of them have EVER given me much trouble ripping them. Most work was one that required the 'black marker on the outer ring' trick.

My two cents...

label

[radicalnerd]

The label will spell out clearly just how easy it is to copy media
I'd suggest a color coded advisory system.

Three-Pronged Evaluation

[ewhac]

I thought about this idea some time ago, and came up with a system where the media's friendliness was measured according to three aspects:

1. Ability to Copy
   The media should contain no measures to prevent or deter duplication, nor should it require measures on the part of the playback platform to support such deterrents.
2. Ability to Distribute
   The media should contain no measures to prevent or deter redistribution, nor should it require measures on the part of the playback platform to support such deterrents.
3. No Usage Monitoring/Metering
   Usage of the media should not be monitored, metered, or compromise the user's privacy or usage habits in any other way, nor should it require measures on the part of the playback platform to support such monitoring.

Each aspect would represent one leg of an iconic triangle. The triangle logo (and sub-permutations thereof) would be trademarked so it could only lawfully be used by the authority performing the evaluations. So all you'd have to do to know which media were safe would be to look for a complete triangle.

Schwab

Knowledge is power

[Swifti]

"If consumers even know there's a DRM, what it is, and how it works, we've already failed"

- Peter Lee, Disney executive

Re:At least someone is thinking about the consumer

[iainl]

When the first wave of "enthusiatic" DRM measures for CDs came out in the UK, a few major magazines took to making note of it in their album reviews. e.g.

Major Artist - New Album
Doesn't actually work in the office CD player due to "rights management". So we've no idea. The boxart is nice, though.
0/5

and so on.