Slashdot Mirror
Install Copyright Filters on PCs, Says RIAA Boss
Don't squeeze the Sherman writes "At a conference last week, RIAA president Cary Sherman said he didn't support mandatory filtering by ISPs, but in a video clip posted by Public Knowledge, Sherman offers a far more troubling 'solution': installing filters on users' PCs. From Ars Technica's coverage: 'The issue of encryption "would have to be faced," Sherman admitted after talking about the wonders of filtering. "One could have a filter on the end user's computer that would actually eliminate any benefit from encryption because if you want to hear [the music], you would need to decrypt it, and at that point the filter would work."'"
How the hell did these clueless fucks get so much power?
Oh yeah. Lobbying. God bless free speech!
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
Not out of touch with reality at all!
It's funny how the RIAA and MPAA both seem to be using a public forum for their brainstorming technique. Most groups would come to a conclusion in private and announce their final and ultimate strategy. Nope, these guys just come up with idea after idea and announce them before they've even contemplated what they mean or their reprocussions. If my company announced every brain-dead idea we came up with before bouncing it around in the brainstorming sessions we had- we'd kill ourselves off with bad PR alone!
If you read TFA he goes on to admit that it's unlikely to get people to install the filterware themselves, but maybe if they put it into routers and modems....It's worth noting that the decryption doesn't take place there, and it'd be no more effective.
It just seems like this guy has it figured out- he understands what won't work, but he still wants to move foward with the bad plan. If you're going to go down, might as well go down swinging..?
Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
Having implemented RSA public key encryption/decryption on my malleus, incus and stepdius, I listen to digitally archived music by dd'ing the GnuPG-encrypted files directly into /dev/dsp, deciphering the tunes on the fly, in-ear, using my memorized private key.
NOW HOW DOES YOUR FILTER WORK FOR THAT SETUP, SUCKERS???!11
:%s/Open Source/Free Software/g
YTARY!
Yeah you guys go spend a bunch of money on that.
We are so fast approaching the time when bands just have concert promoters rather than record labels. I think this is a very good thing.
In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
work under Linux
They should demand that everyone have a cerebral implant that would block all unauthorized content. I mean, serious problems demand serious solutions.
I'm glad the guy doesn't have a clue. It would be so lonely in that big empty head...
But to make this business model work, it requires that the entire planet changes the way it does things and I get to control when, how or *if* how you use the stuff I sell to you. Sound good to you?
I simply will not be installing that on my PC. Please feel free to not pocket my $$$ and to not sell me any of your product. Enjoy your unemployment Mr RIAA.
So we're talking ubiquitous DRM that is transparent (or at least, not terribly intrusive upon the overall user experience), doesn't piss people off, doesn't get broken, can be deployed everywhere, does not add too much complexity to playback devices.
So, is Mr. Sherman planning on buying every music consumer a pony too? That has as much likelihood of happening as the DRM.
The truth about Scientology, Xenu, and you: Operation Clambake
I think it's apparent that it's only their complete ignorance of how technology works--evidenced by these ridiculous statements--that lets them have any hope that their organization can possibly continue to be relevant in the face of the increasing numbers of technological workarounds for every countermeasure that they come up with.
One might get the impression that were they to receive adequate education in The Way Things Work, they might possibly lose all morale altogether...not necessarily a bad thing, methinks.
Perhaps we should sign them up for a correspondence course in basic computer science?
In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure dome decree
this is total BS. just a worthless executive filling the people who pay his wage with a load of nonsense so they'll keep paying. stop funding RIAA now and the companies would save a hell of a lot of money.
Isn't the magical "free market" supposed to settle all of this?
If they manage to get this into Vista Service Pack 2, 2009 really could finally be the year of Linux on the desktop.
Beep beep.
They'll rip your ears off (or transplant them onto your a.... which they think they already own)
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
The Right to Read. If you haven't read it yet, read it now, while there is no filter preventing it.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Does this mean that copyrighted Microsoft software won't run (assuming hardware-based encryption)?
I just bought my 1st album in years from amazon (mp3 download). Fuck the RIAA; I'll amazon indie stuff and p2p the RIAA's.
How do filters know whether something's copyrighted or not?
There are many situations where nobody is sure.
...do they intend to force people to install it? Something like InterActual has with DVDs?
""The issue of encryption "would have to be faced," Sherman admitted after talking about the wonders of filtering."
Sheesh!
ISP: Hello, how can I help you?
Advanced User: My Internet stopped working. I can't figure it out.
ISP: Hmmm... What version of Windows are you using?
User: Well, It's umm... It's not windows. It's OS/2.
ISP: Sir, if you read the contract changes we made last week, you would know that the Internet needs Windows now.
User: ???
Never ask for directions from a two-headed tourist! -Big Bird
...on his PR statements, and a bullshit filter on his mouth?
I have better things to do with my PC than protect your artificial and increasingly indefensible "rights". People and organizations buy PCs to conduct business, science and for their entertainment, not to put money in your coffers you greedy fuck!
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Notes
a PC is not primarily a music recording device. thus it does not qualify for protection under HMRA. thus if I copy music to a PC I have committed a copyright violation.
now if I copied to a local directory probably no one will care
but if i copy to my web site or to a p2p share directory then my evil deed is presented in public ( bad move on my part )
now if RIAA has trouble locating copyright violation copies on p2p machines they could just hire some college kids to help them learn how
and when the find the offending material, just ask the owner to remove it from the public/share area. if the owner does not cooperate then take whatever action is warranted
this ain't rocket science kids and we don't need to stay up nights fussing over it
Customers would never install this on their own. For this to work, they'd have to find some large OS maker who would accept a large payment in order to implement it directly into the OS. And as far as I know, none of the major OS makers would be willing to accept a ton of money if it meant a worse experience for their users.
:-)
https://www.facebook.com/digitizeicm -- Show your support for the digitization of the Iron County Miner newspaper archiv
I realize most people are pushing this aside as something users would never do. But consider the scenario where a hardware decryption device is marketed as something else. Is it that unreasonable to think we could have devices like an "apple itunes box," a dedicated music downloading device that also happens to integrate RIAA's "copyright filter?"
Of course, this would only affect people CHOOSING to use the device, but that doesn't mean it can't become the norm.
it's called vista aka WinMe2.0
-.no
Okay so when people hack and unencrypt or digitally re-record the music as it's playing and put it on a p2p network, this stops it how? They're saying it will filter encrypted music that you don't own and not let you play it? That's what they're doing now! It's called DRM! The only difference is adding encryption. Anyway, I can record straight from my soundcard's output internally at basically 99% quality. Newer motherboards and all Vista machines can't do that apparently because that's the ultimate encryption and DRM buster. There's just no stopping it. So if they really mean a "filter" it would have to be a content filter which of course wouldn't work because how could it tell an legal, bought downloading song from a p2p downloading song? All it has to do is block one single legal file and they've got a law suit. So until they find a way to telepathetically beam the music only into my head and not the air as sound waves based on my DNA or retina, they're out of luck. Too bad their product actually has to be played! If only they could charge us for owning the song and then not let us listen to it at all.
Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
Microsoft would love it, love it, love it. This would mean that any operating system whose kernel can be recompiled by the end-users would be illegal under DMCA -- because it would become a device for circumventing copyright protection mechanisms built into the computer system. Say, how do we get the OTHER half of the server market? Well, let's make the competition illegal.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
To paraphrase President-Vice Richard B. Cheney, go @#$#$%$!!@#!@#@&#$%~!$*)(__+(%^$@!!@!~ yourself.
Thank you for your consideration.
PatRIOTically,
Kilgore Trout
How the hell did these clueless fucks get so much power?
That's no way to talk about the GOP.
Does anyone else remember the Second Amendment? You know, the one forbidding the Government to station soldiers in people's homes without their consent during peace time?
Just make a few substitutions, and it's clear that this "proposal" completely violates the spirit (if not the letter) of that Amendment.
"Government strongarming citizens" ===> "Corporations strongarming citizens with the aid of Government and device vendors"
"Soldiers quartered in your home against your will" ===> "DRM stationed in your home against your will"
"Entire population presumed to be criminals" ===> Check!
"No freedom in your own home because the unwanted guests can tell you what to do" ===> Check!
If this doesn't clearly demonstrate how completely out of touch with the current era (and reality) the RIAA top brass is, then nothing will. I would think that the client-companies would be eager to replace him (and all others who are similarly out of touch). That or I'd think the client-companies' shareholders would be looking to make some replacements... With people like this running the show, it's no wonder the client-companies are losing money...
But in 1995 I honestly believed that no company would be stupid enough to automatically run code delivered in an email message, and in 1997 that Microsoft would be forced by public opinion to back down on the obviously absurd integration of the browser and the desktop, and in 2000 that people would reject an operating system with components to lock them out of their own computer... after all, dongles had proven to be a passing fad, surely people were wising up to things like this.
I no longer believe in any limits to the complaisance and naivete of the computer-using public.
What planet is that guy from? We don't encrypt our music we compress it. Why would I download or install any codec that the RIAA supports? MP3 will rule for years into the future mainly because its a standard that RIAA can't kill as of yet.
I've never paid for any music in my life other than some music appreciation cds that I had to get in college. I've never felt the need to go out and buy any form of recorded music. Radio has been fine for me. This doesn't mean that I don't have many mp3s. I have tons. The RIAA would like to put a RIAA listened hearing aid in everyone's head and filter out any RIAA that you've not paid for from ever being heard.
I'm sick of the RIAA, but I'm not going through any additional effort to actually fight them. I don't buy any music, so I can't boycott selected music. I've been boycotting it most of my life. You know every video game or movie that I buy has background music in it. I hear music on the radio. I'd really like to have all RIAA actually filtered out of my life, but without RIAA methods. I can't buy a video game, TV DVDs, or movie that hasn't already paid into the RIAA or MPAA scheme of things.
You know this reminds me of why I'd like the IRS and think that all taxes of that nature removed and it all just go to some magic percentage sales tax. Because people/companies/assorted government offices can't cheat their way out of paying taxes then. You know if they really wanted to secure it they'd stop selling all music, movies, and TV DVDs and make the mediums all ad supported or where you have to show up a specific place and pay a cover charge before you can listen/watch the content.
Listen up folks of the RIAA/MPAA. We aren't in the 1500-1600s any more. The citizenry has gotten used to radio, TV, and now the internet. Face it, your content's price is dropping fast and if the government really was pushed by the citizenry it would go the whole bread and circus route which means we get the radio, TV, movies, and internet at the expense of content providers. That's why the RIAA/MPAA has been truly panicking about their business models.
While I am all for making backup copies of CD/DVD's or transfering ripped CD's to my iPod-esque device, I do think sharing my ripped files with the rest of the world is wrong. As we see it there are two groups affected by RIAA's attempts to secure the media music is on, the people like me who just want a backup and transfer to a iPod and then there are those that want to do those things AND be able to share their music with their friends/families/12th cousin 3 times removed/bum on the corner/whoever. Which of those does RIAA not care about, the first group. Why? As was stated in the video, yeah when it comes down to it, its illegal but they aren't going to enforce it....how could they with no way to track? The second group on the other hand is basically walking into whatever record store and using their five-finger discount to get music for free. Yeah a bit simplified, but the basic principles work. Everyone needs to remember that to RIAA, music is a product and if someone is stealing it, that means stealing money....and they will come after you. If artists truely wanted their music to be free don't you think they would just submit them to torrent trackers themselves and create a license saying basically the same thing as GPL? Well not very many of them do that. Why? Its hard to be rich and famous with out any FUCKING MONEY. Which is paid to them by the companies that participate in RIAA and pay the artist huge sums of FUCKING MONEY to make their music *cough*product*/cough*. So when it all comes down to it, its the artists fault for demanding such large sums of FUCKING MONEY to make their music. So, don't blame RIAA, blame the artists out there that have made more FUCKING MONEY than the yearly budgets of some 3rd world countries.
Insert funny smart-ass comment here.
It's called blu-ray. The filter will stop unauthorized playback to unauthorized hardware. If all media was on blu-ray, they'd get what they want. And, comments around here excepted, there is at least some degree of acceptance.
They just reframe the argument.
Microssoft's Vista is already on the way to the everyone-pays-for-everything-everytime utopia this jackass is imagining. Does anyone really believe that the DRM laden OS Microsoft has released *isn't* an attempt to get a never ending revenue stream from record labels who believe MS has the power to completely lock down what users see and hear?
Fiat Homos et Pereat Theos
NT
Probably the same way these guys did.
Seriously, this sounds very much like Trusted Computing, only making it mandatory (heh, good luck with that, Mr. Sherman). Install a Fritz chip in every computer and make all content slowly slide toward only being usable through the TC subsystem. Extend that to players and formats, and you've got your monopoly, especially when the operating system itself can only be used on a certified system and starts only running certified applications.
The TCPA FAQ gives an insightful perspective on it, what they want you think it can do, and what it will probably actually be used for.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Actually, it's not hard to visualize this happening. Most people connect with what, one of four major ISPs in the US, and there are usually no more than three competing ISPs, except in big cities? That's only four companies, each headed by a relatively few number of individuals whose motives are driven by shareholder (not necessarily customer) demands. If the MAFIAA writes a solid-gold check to Comcast, Qwest, Verizon, and Time-Warner, you can bet that find ways to impose an end-user filter on your PC as a requirement to connect, and with a limited number of broadband ISPs in the area, you can bet that people will suck it up and deal with it.
~SK
It sounds like an attempt to plug the customer's a-holes.
"One could have a filter on the end user's computer that would actually eliminate any benefit from encryption because if you want to hear [the music], you would need to decrypt it, and at that point the filter would work."
Isn't he describing exactly why DRM can never work? I love that these companies are spending so much money on crypto research, and in the end, it's things like TPM that are going to be what stops them from being able to install their anti piracy rootkits.
Furthermore, one of the partners in Sony BMG makes the PLAYSTATION 3 video game console that is designed to run GNU/Linux.
Let's all see what files Cary Sherman has on his PC/Laptop/hard drives? Who does he talk to? What does he like? How can we invade his privacy? Turnabout is fair play.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
sorry but if you setup content filters on my hardware then you will have to scan my information to make sure the filter works, if you scan my data and get a copy of something that I have written (the the virus thats set to be transmitted to you) then you will be committing corporate espionage as I have a corp (costs about $250 bucks to setup in Toronto)and you are viewing corporate data. I'll take my millions now, save you time.
-Ours is the wisdom of Solomon, the magic of Merlyn, the fall of Icaris.
...but a friend of mine knows a little bit.
He tells me that lots of people already have copyright filter software on their machines. I think it was called bittorrent or something....
So does Anonymous Coward have good karma?
If in theory, the ISP could mandidate that a user had to install their spy software to use the internet connection, I would only have to write a short program (or ask a DVD John type friend to write one) to isolate said spy software and feed it false and misleading data while encrypting my regular data.
Responding for friends who write their own operating systems or use various forms of linux, "I DON'T THINK SO DEAREST ISP!"
Good luck getting ME to install any filters on my computer. It is *MY* computer. Not yours. Back off.
I have had enough of the RIAA and its ilk. I have been spending most of my money on indie/underground music anyways but now I am putting my foot down and joining the embargo. Sorry Rhino Records, but I had to do it.
Deep in the ocean are treasures beyond compare; but if you seek safety, it is on the shore.
don't want to hear the music? What if I just want to share it with a few million of my closest friends?
Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
This boils down to tagging. A file would have to be tagged in some way that is has a copyright. It would also need to know who DOES have the right to listen and distribute. Don't forget that every work not 95 years old is out of copyright in the US and can be freely shared, copied, traded, etc. Also, there is the possibility that people may have been given the right to share, copy, trade, etc a piece of music that has a current copyright.
I'm just not sure how any filter could determine all of the characteristics without some sort of tagging. Following that logic, all that would need to be done to circumvent the DRM would be to remove/modify such a tag. DRM like this is easy to defeat and has been done.
Ninjas don't carry tic tacs
You want me to run your software? I'll consider it, but you have to remember that my computer is just that... MY computer. Time on it will cost you just like it would cost from a mainframe from IBM. How much are you willing to pay me to run this software that only benefits you? If this takes too much RAM, CPU the overflow charges may be... up there.
Your security is not my concern, and should not be expected to be my concern. Otherwise you also have a responsibility to make sure no one breaks into my house. (You should be happy to, they could steal my CDs!)
Of course, the conditions under which I'm willing to run your software may change without announcement from time to time but will still be considered binding, much like whatever the "licensing" consists of on a CD is this week. Like your CD licensing, the wording behind this agreement will never be readily available. Perhaps I'll add extra charges for running the software on weekends...
Analog hole.
Web 2.0 == Giant Blogspam Circle Jerk
As IBM says themselves in their paper Clarifying Misinformation on TCPA :
The terms copy protection and DRM do not appear anywhere on www.trustedpc.org. They were not the main business objectives, and the resultant chip is not particularly suited to DRM, being poorly defended against owner tampering. The main goals are to secure the user's private keys and encrypted data against external software attack.They have more reasons in that paper why their chip won't work with DRM.
c++;
You mark my words, the next version of MS OS will have even more copyright "features".
/. so sloooooooow lately!
Vista and its HDCP is just the start. I really don't like these people.
On another note, was
when you can just record the output and BLAM DRM free media. A million encryption algorithms can't stop one man with a microphone right next to his speakers.
> ...on his PR statements, and a bullshit filter on his mouth?
:-)
How do you expect to convince him to wear a ball gag?
Funny. That "if you want to hear [the music], you would need to decrypt it"-argument also works quite well for proving that DRM can't work.
Unless of course the hardware (soundcard or whatever) does the decryption. Then DRM works, and the filter doesn't. RIAA bites their own ass....
Eat a dick, says the internet. How do these people get away with these ideas?
Suck my balls, says anonymous coward.
Ok Mr Sherman. You first. On the computers belonging to your household, friends, family. May as well throw it on the company PC's too. How many other network admins have had to flog a user over storing their iTunes on the corp FS?
No sig for you!!
Hell yes! I want one of those filter ehh... thingies! Preferably kidney-shaped. Where can I get one!!1!
MMO Vampire Role Playing
Mr. Sherman: YOU can't use my stuff! IF YOU WANT TO USE IT PUT THIS FILTER ON!
Me: Nah, thats okay, I'm going to go surfing. I prefer the sounds of the ocean and the natural symphony of the wind...
Mr. Sherman: But...You can't...I mean...PUT THAT IPOD ON AND LISTEN TO MY MUSIC! I COMMAND YOU!
Me: hehe, its okay Cary. Cary? Isn't that a girls name?
Cary: NO...ITS LIKE CARY GRANT....WHO WASN'T GAY...
Me: Ok, ok...don't get all excited...I'm outta here man have fun with your filters!*runs off to surf*
Cary: No body likes me...whats wrong with everyone....*sniff*
They'll need to ban knievs or you'll lose all your audience in another dimension when it gets ripped...
In that theory, the ISP would only allow connections to their router, this router would act as a proxy. Anything you wanted, you would have to request through that router. Everything else would be blocked. Problem solved.
...if we just installed cameras and microphones throughout everyones house and used software to listen for people saying things like "record that show" or "copy this CD"? Heck, we could get those pirates using VCRs to record shows and then bring them over to a friends as well.
I believe that is the first ammendment in the bill of rights, that the RIAA has the right to ignore all other rights to prevent copying of material.
I think it's the only way to end this nonsense. Defang the industry by striking at what gives them power -- profit. When the money dries up, the investors will force the company to change or it will perish. Or, they'll behave like the newspaper industry, deciding to favour biased political viewpoints over profit and they watch their subscriber base drop %20 year-after-year until they are no longer relevant. Any of these is an acceptable outcome.
That's pretty funny! But it's also very, very close to the totalitarian ideas of the ex-Soviet Union (a Worker's Paradise, dontchaknow?) The State owns everything, and controls the means of production, including the people. We saw how well that worked out.
Just like those survivalist types who have their own generators and water purification systems for when the world finally falls apart - I've got myself a ZX81 and plenty of cassette tapes for this post tech hell you describe, or as I like to call 'Armageekdon'.
I'll just fire that puppy up, change my name to Mad Betamax and ride out the storm. Yeeee haaaa!
Genesis 1:32 And God typed
When the RIAA provides the open source code that runs on all the various flavors of BSD, then I'll consider it.
I'll install it when I'm paid for the disk space, electrical power, and admin time to keep it running.
(Oh what's that? RIAA/MPAA is willing to go to congress to get a law, but won't provide code for their ideas?)
Says Slashdot Commenter
Cut off your dick, you RIAA shithead - says me
Anyone foolish enough to believe that capitalism is the friend of democracy need look no further than this.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
"It looks like you are trying to copy copyrighted material. I have already called the police for you so that you don't have to." -Clippy
Table-ized A.I.
I'd say "dream on" - but we're talking about the USA and the Republicans are still in charge...
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
RIAA reports that new copyright filters will be powered by eating babies and cute puppies. Everyone else says, "I'd like to be surprised by this turn of events, but it's really perfectly in line with their past actions."
I had never before thought about it in that way, and you're absolutely right.
The reason why they think they can win is because they have no idea what the rules of the game actually are.
The only problem we have is in how much damage they do to the legal structure of the country while figuring this inescapable fact out.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Read up on SoundExchange.
The RIAA, through SoundExchange, collects a toll on every song played on internet radio. But get this - they collect for music from bands who aren't RIAA members! They collect for every song, no matter what. Because nobody would ever play a song for free. And they hold that money until you come to claim it (you have to join SoundExchange to claim it, btw).
And if you don't ever claim it, they keep it.
Fucking unreal or what?
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
You'll get my mp3z, my bittorrentz, and my warez when you pry them from my cold dead hands. FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS!
Install 100,000 volt cattle prod on RIAA Boss' ass, says consumers.
Seriously. This guy should just be tortured until he begs to die.
I'll just continue to sing my own songs. Seems the RIAA doesn't want anyone to hear the music they feel they control! Wonder what they'll do if everyone quits listening?
RIAA spending millions to give you a program that keeps out crappy music? How would anybody not want that?
Here's what he meant to say: Most of the ISPs threw us out of their office but Microsoft thinks a filter on every computer is a great idea.
If they really want to restrict content, they can do the following.
Maybe have it generate a large 1 Kilobyte MD5 type of checksup against the media file. Then the RIAA has a database of these Hashes and if it passes then you can play the file, if not then it send the file to RIAA to be reviewed by an RIAA media judge and put the 1K checksum into either a Acceptable or Denied database.
When you go to download a file the Browser downloads the file but stores it in a DRM encrapted partitiion on your hard drive. Then after you receive the file it runs a process to generate a Chucksum and send it to the RIAA. The RIAA Database then cross checks the Checksum. They then allow you to play the file when you get a "Thumbs up" on your media file. It deletes the file if there is no checksum and sends the URL to the RIAA to download the file for judging and which DB to put the checksum. They won't have to store all the actual media, just the checksums.
Of course i think I just screwed over everyone here by cumming up with a somewhat workable model, don't hurt me please.
Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
It may make us nervous that there are so many forces of evil trying to limit our right to information, but at the same time there are popular and successful trends in the opposite direction like emusic and FOSS and other happy pretty sparkles the likes of which we never would have thought possible a decade ago.
The RIAA folks are infantile in their comprehension. Filters and encryption can be broken so fast it'll make their heads spin. They are spending so much money trying to kill off piracy that they lost track of the idea of providing us something that is a benefit above and beyond piracy.
These guys are total infantile dorks. They have no idea what they are up against. How could anyone get into a position of authority with absolutely no clue as to what is going on and be able to give such a suggestion in the face of odds that they are not likely to win against. They can't win this way. They need to win another way. Give everyone something above and beyond the basic song. And, how about paying the artists and the song writers their true due. Stop stealing from the artists and song writers and stop suing people and maybe you'll overcome some of your woes. I personally would start buying music again (I stopped when I heard they were suing people). Now that I know they aren't compensating the artists properly and are trying to steal from the song writers, I have no choice but to stand by my decision not to put any more money into their hands.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
These guys have way too much power. And we gave it to them. Stop buying and endorsing their wares now.
Yes, I'm afraid that means no longer listening to Smooth Criminal, Stairway To Heaven and Oops, I Did It Again.
Boycott the RIAA. Take away their lobbying power while you still can.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
This is the best suggestion since they came up with the degrading mp3... each copy yields a lower quality track... good one guys, keep them coming.
The sad thing is, the forces at work are more likely to implement this and get it at least partially working despite all the complications than a similar technology that is concerned with protecting user identity and users' privileged information. I suspect it's because the music industry that is so pro-DRM when it comes to protecting their own content would be perfectly happy to leave our information completely in the clear so it would be avialable to them for marketing purposes.
but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
is both OSX and Windows Vista are heading down this road of "we tell you how and when you use your hardware. Thank god I threw windows in the bin 7 years ago and swapped to Linux and FreeBSD.
I would be happy to install filtering software on my PC for say the bargain price of free RIAA registered label's music for life. This goes for movies and television programming as well. You want me to pay to access your property... well you can pay to access mine (if only the world worked this way).
That TPM was going to be used for copy protection (e.g., the operating system stores a list of hardware components and stops working if the configuration changes) is not a function of TPM itself... instead that is Microsoft's (and the like) fault.
Blaming TPM for the disgusting behavior of software vendors is like blaming lock-makers for letting your wife lock you out of the house.
The RIAA seems to think way too complicated.
Just remove the damn sound card and speakers! There, no illegal music for you.
They will be visiting you tomorrow: "Hello, we're the RIAA guys. We're here to take your speakers, step aside."
And I don't want to here him bitch when the holes in the Sony DRM allow us to steal all of his personal information. :-)
Does it run on linux?
One could have a filter on the end user's computer
Over my cold, dead body. This is my property, not his.
Ass.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
I would be happy to do this... if:
- I could opt out on a per machine basis
- I was allowed to charge them rent on the disk space; I have decided that rent is $5000/month.
If I have to pay for hosting services for my software, why shouldn't they for theirs?
-- Terry
202-775-0101 is the RIAA's Washington, D.C. number.
DRM has not worked, doesn't work and will never work. Given that, how would an even more hairbrained idea like this one ever work?
Does anybody know where that asshole lives?
We went the totally different route and used Video 2000 in our house.
240 minutes per side!
Harald
Out to destroy MP3's of Sarah Connor!
Seriously, no way in H3LL this gets on my PC. Besides, there's always someone out there with a way around it.
Geez, and I don't even download songs, and this has me mad. Personal privacy, eh?
"Teach a man to build a fire, and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life."
I don't see how this could ever work. It's in the fundamentals.
For them to create such a filter they would need to eliminate audible output alltogheter.
Any IO that can be converted to sound can be recorded again. Sound per se can't be encrypted, it's vibrations in teh facking air, they'll have to speak to the Almighty about that...
Ah sorry, missed the subtext, they will probably go with a cybernetic implant into our ear solution. Silly me.
All the RIAA needs to do is put some sort of watermark into their music files which the sound card can look for.
If it spots the watermark on a non-DRM file then it distorts the playback - adds white noise or something.
No sig today...
hurry up and die already. You're not going to save your aging business model now. You may not realize this, but you actually need your customers to NOT HATE YOU for them to pay for anything. Your strategy seems to be to make them hate you even more. Any idea why this isn't working?
Happiness does not come from having much, but from being attached to little.
Look who is taking all the money from the entertainment industry:
http://www.opensecrets.org/cmteprofiles/indus.asp?cycle=2008&CmteID=S17&Cmte=SJUD&CongNo=110&Chamber=S (Senate Judicairy Committee, which makes new criminal laws, $2,675,675 from TV/Movies/Music).
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/indus.asp?CID=N00009918&cycle=2008 PATRICK LEAHY (D-VT) (took $250K from entertainment industry, supports Induce Act, Pirate Act)
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/indus.asp?CID=N00009869&cycle=2008 Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT) (has taken $114K from entertainment, sponsored Induce Act, Pirate Act)
There are even pics of the Congresswhores hobnobbing to celebrate the passage of the DMCA.
BTW, the entertainment industry tends to give more to Democrats, even when the GOP is controlling Congress.
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
So guess which congresscritters are taking the most from the entertainment industry.
Mods, please don't shoot the messenger.
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
See how easy it is to simply hand down a directive? AM.
What is illegally copied vs something that is legally copied?
Pretty much everything on the web is copyrighted, will it filter it all out?
The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
They are trying for the copyright regime in the SF novel "Persistence" by Karl Schroeder.
What they don't seem to understand that this is science fiction not science fact.
(not to mention that their fictional counterparts are the bad guys in Persistence)
I know some people might want to say that DRM is different then copyright protection and content filtering, but DRM stands for Digital Rights Management. If you think it's the consumers rights that it "manages", you would be a little naive. So copyright protections, content filtering, and DRM are all really the same thing. They are designed to forcefully protect IP rights, and at the expense of consumer privacy and fair use.
So he admits here that they need to get "behind" the encryption in order to filter the files. Forgetting the hugely clueless aspect about this, and the frightening implications about it for our privacy and peaceful enjoyment of our property, it is amusing to watch him admit it's futility:
I think a tough sell is putting it lightly, how about an impossible sell. But wait he has a plan!:
Tangible Benefit? That is really reaching there. I think you could sooner convince people to voluntarily accept cavity searches at airports since it would provide a "tangible" benefit to security and they would be patriotic in doing so. Of course he realizes his error immediately and admits that is not going to happen. Then he back peddles to an idea he already admitted was technically futile:
He already stated they need to be behind the encryption in order to filter, so why put it at the modems? Convincing the coders responsible for uTorrent to put filtering in is downright futility. That idea is about as ridiculous as Freenet and TOR coding in monitoring mechanisms for government intelligence agencies.
I don't know about anybody else, but listening to this guy is like watching a retarded kid continually try to get the square peg into the round hole. It might be funny, if this guy did not wield so much influence with the ridiculous amounts of money funding them and Senators getting wet everyday trying to "turn tricks" with the special interests like him.
Interesting idea. Didn't Sony try that a few years ago?
That's all, folks!
...Lorenzo / I'm into kinky crustaceans. I just discovered internet praWn.
Dear sir:
The auditory center of your brain has been found to be a copyright circumvention device. Such devices are illegal under the DMCA. Be advised that we will pursue the harshest penalty available: the removal of the aforementioned brain center, steralization (lest you disseminate this device), and a fine to the sum of everything you own plus everything you will ever earn.
Sincerely,
The RIAA
PS: We also intend to have you jailed until the copyright of every piece of music you have ever infringed expires.
Furthermore, one of the partners in Sony BMG makes the PLAYSTATION 3 video game console that is designed to run GNU/Linux.
Not exactly, Sony BMG is a joint-venture between Sony Music Entertainment and BMG. SME is a daughter of Sony. But Sony itself, is NOT a partner is this joint venture anymore then your dad is a partner in your marriage (assuming offcourse you are not from the deep south).
Futher more the PS3 is a product of Sony Computer Entertainment another daughter of Sony.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
You're a record company that wants me to part with my hard-earned money to buy my music track-by-track at a price that's usually more expensive than just going to the cheapest CD vendor I can find and buying the CD...
You then expect me to pay that price on the basis that the compressed music format I'm buying is of lower quality than what's on the CD...
You're then saying that the music I download is protected to the point where I cannot share it with anyone else - unlike a CD which I can loan to a friend or family member to let them listen to...
And on top of all that, you're now saying that even when I've downloaded it for ME to use on MY PC and music players, I may be severely restricted in being able to do that also whereas just about any CD I buy plays on any music player I own and can be ripped with a free CD ripper on any OS I care to use...
My response is two words, the first being an Old-English coloquialism originating from the Battle of Agincourt and the second one being the word "off".
People, it's time to wake up and smell the coffee...
Buying a CD gives you something tangible - a shiny disk, a printed sleeve to read while in the lavatory undertaking your morning ablutions, and, to boot, a nice hard protective case to store it in to that you can file neatly and alphabetically on a shelf and gaze lovingly at occasionally along with your vast collection of other CDs...
And if you truly believe that a music CD only contains one or two good tracks, then you are listening to the wrong sort of music or not a true music fan - there is an ABSOLUTE WEALTH of good music out there spanning back hundreds of years and if you can take the time to research what you plan to buy carefully, you will rarely, if ever, be disappointed with your CD purchases...
So please STOP with this "paying for downloads" nonsense - like a moronic dwarf, it's not big and it's not clever.
If a music artist or group is not able to string together at least one album that is an absolute pleasure to listen to, then please ignore them until they either go the way Britney Spears has or release something that IS worth listening to.
And once you find that album, having avoided buying it in the rip-off merchant high street stores, you will understand that EVERY CD YOU OWN IS WELL WORTH THE MONEY YOU PAID FOR IT!!!
Rant mode off, this is a true music enthusiast signing off...
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
So how much do you think the RIAA pays to the composers. Actually a nickel is pretty decent amount. I would think that much could be payed by the Advertisers. I am pretty sure in the future musicians will be payed by websites like google, earning from advertisers and will pay based on popularity. Rest income for the composers will come from touring, merchandising, signed physical copies, and donations. The niche composers will earn most of their income through donations while superstars will earn most of their income from merchandising and touring.
Why not just equip every person with those high tech ear muffs that would filter copyrighted content?!
God, you guys are all insensitive. They HAD a technical guy to let them know what a ridiculously infeasable idea this was, but they fired him when their databases were hacked.
I'm surprised that no one here is referring back to Peter Gutmann's paper on Vista. Yes, it contained some things that were subject to misunderstanding (that could have been construed as factual errors to sticklers) but the point of the paper was this: Microsoft engineered Vista primarily to benefit content producers, not the people who buy the OS. And if you will recall, their requirements for Vista certification mostly concerned arm-twisting on the part of Microsoft: Show that you support DRM in all of your hardware or you don't get Vista certification; Oh, and by the way, make sure that your hardware will disable itself in any OS that doesn't toe the DRM line.
Sure, in the case of Vista, the more egregious steps are aimed at HD content, but the lion's share of Vista technology was aimed at digital restrictions management, not end-user functionality. Which is one of the reasons why Vista has been less than a stellar success: Microsoft didn't engineer it for the people who buy it; they put most of the engineering into satisfying the corporate obsession with control. This ticked off all of the end users who had a clue. Sure, the OS has a large lemming constituency.
But Gutmann's paper made clear that Microsoft was unsatisfied with leveraging lock-in of simple computer operating systems. He may have gotten a few things wrong, but he clearly understood the main fact that their (Microsoft's) main motivation is the extension of their hegemony into the realm of content. They ignored older content, concentrating on HD stuff.
It's still an open question of whether this is merely the flailing of a dying dinosaur or not. It will take a few years to see. Dinosaurs survived for a long time after their extinction became inevitable. The real irony of Microsoft is that they, as a computer company of all things, haven't realized that we live in a postmodern, information-age culture. Microsoft is simply one more institution governed by modern, industrial-age assumptions.
In this period of cultural liminality and transition, there are plenty of institutions like Microsoft (and the RIAA and MPAA) who are bewildered by the facts of the new economy. The old economic formulas are based on scarcity of goods, and even according to them, price always approaches incremental cost. Digital content, however, is produced at an effective incremental cost of zero, and the flailing of the RIAA, MPAA, and companies like Microsoft reflects resistance not only to the new paradigm, but also to the prevailing economic rule that price ALWAYS approaches incremental cost. In an economy of abundance, different models must emerge, but media companies and would-be channel monopolies like Microsoft have not even shown the ability to apprehend, much less operate according to, the newly emerging formulas that govern an economy of abundance, and it is unlikely that they will read people like Eben Moglen, Larry Lessig, or Yochai Benkler in an effort to understand the emerging reality, since they aren't interested in understanding; they only view these thinkers as enemies.
But please don't miss the fact that the issue is larger than just the RIAA and the MPAA. The incremental cost of digital media is merely one of the first fields to be impacted by the emerging economic paradigm. It's already affecting publishing and the general field of knowledge and education. Look for industrial-age institutions across the entire economic and political spectrum to be just as resistant to change as the RIAA and MPAA are.
These institutions will fight to preserve their business model, just as the RIAA and MPAA are fighting to preserve theirs. The business models are dinosaurs, and are extinct already de facto, but it will take a while before the walnut-sized brain gets the word that the heart stopped beating some time ago.
Change will be disruptive, but what will drive it is not rage against the existing institutions. Though that will obviously play a role, the real driver will be the emergence of new institu
on how much money the labels have to lose before they and the RIAA fold altogether? It would be nice to have a countdown site with a definite goal so we all know how many of our friends and neighbors we need to convince to stop buying CDs to reach that glorious day.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
that would be right after you see Mr. Ballmer putting the wad of bills into his pants pocket. The briefcase with the rest of the bills is in the chair waiting for him to grab it on his way out of RIAA offices...
All content in this message is copyright (c) 2008. All rights reserved. RIAA is prohibited here.
If it's anything like the crap we're seeing now that prevents video content at resolutions beyond a certain threshold from playing at its native size unless it's source is verified, we could be in for a world of hurt. For example, how about suddenly having that fancy, all-digital 7.1 surround sound system decide it's only going to play "privileged" sounds normally while reducing all unverifiable audio playback to the quality of AM radio at random? (After all, if it goes from digital to analogue at some point, it could be intercepted by a third party device for making "unauthorized" copies...)
Just as certain printers, scanners and graphics software won't function on images that contain any image that could pass as currency, newer computers could soon have these RIAA "filters" embedded into the audio system via hardware. All those fancy off the shelf audio devices will then suddenly need to comply with the filter protocols or else the system will go mute on you at the point of the audio output hardware itself.
Consumers really need to start wising up on this stuff before it reaches a point of no return. Once that happens, you better be handy with a soldering iron and a wiz at deciphering and juggling hardware code running straight off the metal itself to get around it.
In capitalist America, computer runs you!
8==8 Bones 8==8
Well, whatever they try we still will be able to get music/video/games/soft/etc from eMule, Bit Torrent or whatever you like. DRM mostly affects Windows so maybe thanks to their 'smart' ideas people will start switching to other oses (maybe). And if all that stuff won't work out they will start to built DRM into human brain so you won't be able to hear any music or see any video.
The world is going crazy. When I go to cinema the first thing they show is that I'll be imprisoned for recording the video. Can you imagine? People get away with killing others and they want to imprison people for recording video (no one gains or loses anything because of that). They try to tell us that copying music is stealing and the consequences of that gonna be worse than if you stole a car.
I'm just glad that people in Europe are more reasonable (so far).
My Windows is NOT slow, it's special!
I do think Hollywood tends to be more liberal and like Dems more, of course. But lots of Republicans are taking money from entertainment too, at least the ones on the right committees. If anything, the entertainment industry is a lot less partisan in its handing out of money than, say, the trial lawyers.
But you gotta believe that most politicians, even those who come into government with the best of intentions, are sooner or later worn down by this lobbying. Take the money or get beaten, kind of like steroids in the NFL. It really does make me sick. Too bad all the billionaires are kooky or maybe they could be an alternative.
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you