"But it's just more Lock-jawed pop-stars Thicker than pig-shit Nothing to convey... So scared to show intelligence It might smear Their very career. This world I am afraid Is designed for crashing bores"
Funny thing is, this is from a song sung in concert in 2002 by a VERY famous artist, who holds the record for the FASTEST sellout of the Hollywood Bowl in history, breaking the record previously held by the Beatles. A great artist who remains UNSIGNED by a major record label.
That comment about shooting oneselves in the foot seems so perfect to describe the inanity of the recording industry today.
One question though - the $250 'lifetime service fee' - is that TIVO's lifetime, or yours? If TIVO has control of how long that lifetime is, then it may not really be worth as much to me as the ability to record shows on a digital device without having to pay for the priviledge (like we do today with VCR's).
Blockbuster in Canada sells previously viewed DVD movies for between $12.99 to $19.99 CDN (between $8.50 and $13 US). That's roughly the price of 2-3 rentals.
Doesn't seem any where near worth the additional effort to rent the DVD, buy the blank media, search for the software to decrypt it, rip it to a PC and burn it to a DVD. just to save such a small amount of cash.
Anyways, the speed of these things still isn't anywhere near what it needs to be - compared to a 700 GB CD which takes 8-10 minutes on the latest burners. They need to hit at least 12X-24X copy speed before they get any real penetration in the consumer market IMHO.
Sony is trying to play both sides - sell as many consumer electronics products as possible to get them hooked, then slowly take the capability away from those products to do anything that might harm their bottom line.
Sony knows EXACTLY what it's doing. Remember how the WALKMAN only became popular AFTER the rise of home taping, which allowed Joe Public to easily take songs from a big 12" vinyl disc to a 3" cassette tape to play in their walkmen.
Don't think it will do that much.
on
CD Copy Stopper
·
· Score: 1
Since the technology will have to work in a standard read-only drive, any request to read data off of the CD will have to be authorized (otherwise the CD wouldn't work in a legacy player).
A read-only CD drive will not be able to tell whether a request to READ data is a request to play the music on the CD, or a request to copy the CD's content to a file.
This protection may prevent direct track to track CD to CD copying, but it will not prevent someone from copying all of the files on the CD to their hard drive or a CD-R, or ripping the songs into MP3's.
This law seems to have the impact of killing the entire digital video industry. If I record a video of my family, this law will prevent me from LEGALLY making as many backup copies of that movie as I feel like and hosting it on my own website or even e-mailing it to other family mambers. Quite scary - amateur filmmakers and regular people all over will be impacted.
What do some of the companies that sell digital cameras, digital video editing equipment and software, etc. think about this. Canon, Sony, Panasonic, RCA, I know are very big in this area. We should start talking to these companies to convince them to support the fight against this bill.
It's an ongoing evolution in the centre of power of the United States. Many years ago, the US was the biggest manufacturing powerhouse in the world. Today, almost everything for sale is made in Asia. Finance, Media and IT are the tools that maintain the U.S. world leadership. All of these are concepts that can be learned - there is no physical barrier stopping, lets say India or China from building an empire in these areas that rivals the U.S. That's why the government is striking now to protect its dominant industries, and it's relative position in the world. When you're a small population trying to dominate or control a larger one, 'sharing' can sometimes be a dangerous thing.
It appears that the MPAA/RIAA, etc. will only have the ability under this law to:
a) restrict people from trading works to which they are the copyright owner (meaning every company that owns copyrighted material will have to employ these countermeasures or have someone do it on their behalf)
b) intervene only on the P2P network itself (deleting files on file traders PC's is expressly prohibited by the legislation) as those files may have been created via fair use.
c) only affect "Public" P2P networks (e.g. Gnutella)
What they are trying to get approval for basically amounts to running programs (some kind of bot maybe) that interrupts or interferes with downloads of whatever files they are trying to prevent from reaching public distribution. They can only
"block, divert or otherwise impair the unauthorized distribution, display, performance, or reproduction of his or her copyrighted work on a publicly accessible peer-to-peer file-trading network, if such impairment does not, without authorization, alter, delete, or otherwise impair the integrity of any computer file or data residing on the computer of a file trader."
This will deter casual users from trading files with P2P, and the most popular media will probably be very hard to obtain for some time after its release. I don't think they'll give a shit about your rare old Morrissey bootlegs or anything that's not on the Bestsellers lists.
Slashdot Mirror
"But it's just more
Lock-jawed pop-stars
Thicker than pig-shit
Nothing to convey...
So scared to show intelligence
It might smear
Their very career.
This world
I am afraid
Is designed for crashing bores"
Funny thing is, this is from a song sung in concert in 2002 by a VERY famous artist, who holds the record for the FASTEST sellout of the Hollywood Bowl in history, breaking the record previously held by the Beatles. A great artist who remains UNSIGNED by a major record label.
That comment about shooting oneselves in the foot seems so perfect to describe the inanity of the recording industry today.
One question though - the $250 'lifetime service fee' - is that TIVO's lifetime, or yours? If TIVO has control of how long that lifetime is, then it may not really be worth as much to me as the ability to record shows on a digital device without having to pay for the priviledge (like we do today with VCR's).
click on I DO NOT ACCEPT. It appears to be a faster way into the AA.COM site anyways - don't even have to register.
Is that the same software plugged into WMP that told me my Warcraft III game was a Corrs album?
Blockbuster in Canada sells previously viewed DVD movies for between $12.99 to $19.99 CDN (between $8.50 and $13 US). That's roughly the price of 2-3 rentals. Doesn't seem any where near worth the additional effort to rent the DVD, buy the blank media, search for the software to decrypt it, rip it to a PC and burn it to a DVD. just to save such a small amount of cash. Anyways, the speed of these things still isn't anywhere near what it needs to be - compared to a 700 GB CD which takes 8-10 minutes on the latest burners. They need to hit at least 12X-24X copy speed before they get any real penetration in the consumer market IMHO.
Sony is trying to play both sides - sell as many consumer electronics products as possible to get them hooked, then slowly take the capability away from those products to do anything that might harm their bottom line. Sony knows EXACTLY what it's doing. Remember how the WALKMAN only became popular AFTER the rise of home taping, which allowed Joe Public to easily take songs from a big 12" vinyl disc to a 3" cassette tape to play in their walkmen.
Since the technology will have to work in a standard read-only drive, any request to read data off of the CD will have to be authorized (otherwise the CD wouldn't work in a legacy player). A read-only CD drive will not be able to tell whether a request to READ data is a request to play the music on the CD, or a request to copy the CD's content to a file. This protection may prevent direct track to track CD to CD copying, but it will not prevent someone from copying all of the files on the CD to their hard drive or a CD-R, or ripping the songs into MP3's.
This law seems to have the impact of killing the entire digital video industry. If I record a video of my family, this law will prevent me from LEGALLY making as many backup copies of that movie as I feel like and hosting it on my own website or even e-mailing it to other family mambers. Quite scary - amateur filmmakers and regular people all over will be impacted. What do some of the companies that sell digital cameras, digital video editing equipment and software, etc. think about this. Canon, Sony, Panasonic, RCA, I know are very big in this area. We should start talking to these companies to convince them to support the fight against this bill.
It's an ongoing evolution in the centre of power of the United States. Many years ago, the US was the biggest manufacturing powerhouse in the world. Today, almost everything for sale is made in Asia. Finance, Media and IT are the tools that maintain the U.S. world leadership. All of these are concepts that can be learned - there is no physical barrier stopping, lets say India or China from building an empire in these areas that rivals the U.S. That's why the government is striking now to protect its dominant industries, and it's relative position in the world. When you're a small population trying to dominate or control a larger one, 'sharing' can sometimes be a dangerous thing.
It appears that the MPAA/RIAA, etc. will only have the ability under this law to:
a) restrict people from trading works to which they are the copyright owner (meaning every company that owns copyrighted material will have to employ these countermeasures or have someone do it on their behalf)
b) intervene only on the P2P network itself (deleting files on file traders PC's is expressly prohibited by the legislation) as those files may have been created via fair use.
c) only affect "Public" P2P networks (e.g. Gnutella)
What they are trying to get approval for basically amounts to running programs (some kind of bot maybe) that interrupts or interferes with downloads of whatever files they are trying to prevent from reaching public distribution. They can only
"block, divert or otherwise impair the unauthorized distribution, display, performance, or reproduction of his or her copyrighted work on a publicly accessible peer-to-peer file-trading network, if such impairment does not, without authorization, alter, delete, or otherwise impair the integrity of any computer file or data residing on the computer of a file trader."
This will deter casual users from trading files with P2P, and the most popular media will probably be very hard to obtain for some time after its release. I don't think they'll give a shit about your rare old Morrissey bootlegs or anything that's not on the Bestsellers lists.