Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Music Media

Record Companies Sued Over Charley Pride CD 429

DevNova writes: "This posting describes a woman in California suing Fahrenheit Entertainment, Inc. and its label Music City Records over CDs she has purchased which use a proprietary music encoding scheme that prevents them from being listened to without the user identifying themselves. These CDs won't play on standard CD players, are not encoded in the popular MP3 format, and will not play on a computer until the user enters personal information. A large part of the suit is that Fahrenheit discloses none of this information on the packaging."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Record Companies Sued Over Charley Pride CD

Comments Filter:
  • by perdida ( 251676 ) <thethreatprojectNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Friday September 07, 2001 @01:04PM (#2263780) Homepage Journal
    i am a musician and i give away all of it. i dont sell it.

    this is the only way to keep out controls like this.

    this shit is just going to get worse, and it makes me very quiet, i feel like everyone around me is a little fascist now. i won't take an opportunity in music although it's not likely i'd get one anyway since i don't look like britney spears.

    i guess that i am willing to get sick and die and not go to a hospital, or to have my own teeth fall out because i don't have benefits, so a corporate system doesn't own me.

    in a few months my honeymoon will be over.. if i don't post anymore it means i am gone for good.

  • by allknowing ( 304084 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @01:07PM (#2263798) Homepage Journal
    This could be good for those of us who have CD-Burners.

    If some sort of precedence in a court of law is found in this case, it may prevent companies from making this type of CD, or at least provide proper labeling of these "BAD" cd's. I know I'd be able to stay away from these types of CD's.

    Let's hope she wins over corporate America, and help all of us who burn CD's like mad.
  • by johnstown ( 471249 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @01:13PM (#2263832)
    CDNOW does mention the protection scheme in its synopsis [cdnow.com] of the CD. But they do call it a "ham-handed and unjustifiable response to the problem" of piracy.
  • the sneaks! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Maditude ( 473526 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @01:14PM (#2263841)
    This suit should be interesting to follow...
    "A large part of the suit is that Fahrenheit discloses none of this information on the packaging."

    My wife just bought a cd (arg! I can't remember the artist name, Toby sumthin-or-other, your basic country crapola [metal rules, imho]). Anyways, there was NO indication anywhere on the cd that it was copy-protected, but it absolutely could not be backed-up with ezcd (she likes the security and convenience of having copied-cd's for use in the car, and leaving the original at the house). After a couple of tries, I moved on to attempting to just rip the tracks to .wav files, which I would burn later -- not all of the tracks could be ripped, and the ones that DID, were full of static noise. Luckily, CloneCD [www.elby.de] didn't have any trouble at all.

    My point (having wandered a bit away from the original topic), is that more than one record company seems to be trying to sneak this sort of crap past consumers.
  • jury trial... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jeffy124 ( 453342 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @01:18PM (#2263862) Homepage Journal
    I noticed at the very end of the complaint that a jury trial is requested. This is good because if that request is granted, it will mean that regular Joes and Janes will be the ones deciding this case, and juries have traditionnally tended to lean toward what they personally feel is right, not what is legally right.

    Natuarally the defendants will do everything hty can to block a jury and have just the judge.
  • Re:nope, sorry. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Evro ( 18923 ) <evandhoffman AT gmail DOT com> on Friday September 07, 2001 @01:30PM (#2263963) Homepage Journal
    Once you buy something you own it. That's it. Their ownership of the item stops when money exchanges hands.
    So I guess you've never heard of software licensing? There's very little software that once you purchase the CDROM you actually "own". When's the last time you bought an MS product and actually had rights to use it however you like? What's to stop the music industry from moving to a "licensing" model as well? They're all just bits, after all.

    That'll go over well. "Oh, you haven't paid your Led Zeppelin subscription fee, all your CDs will no longer work." See: DIVX (the old one).
  • Re:Punitive damages (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 07, 2001 @01:34PM (#2263988)
    Pathetic (devisive) partisan patter aside, who is going to set up a web site for this woman with an escrowed pay pal account for her legal costs? I see a lot of typing here, but generally very little action. This is obviously a case where slashdotters could mobilize for Good.
  • Re:the sneaks! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FooDog ( 68645 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @01:36PM (#2264001) Journal
    Now this is a damn good point! I've had my car broken into TWICE and had some miscreant make off with all of my original, fully paid for, not burned off the computer CD's. After that I started making copies of every CD I BOUGHT (If anyone from the RIAA is reading this, please make special note of that last word. Here, I'll even spell it out real slow so you can understand it: B-O-U-G-H-T....) so that I could put the copies in my car. If they got stolen, I just make new ones. If someone breaks into my HOUSE and makes off with the originals, well, I probably have bigger problems. :)
  • by Alan ( 347 ) <arcterex@NoSPaM.ufies.org> on Friday September 07, 2001 @01:42PM (#2264066) Homepage
    You own the physical disk, and have the rights to listen to it. I think the issue in question is "what devices do you have the rights to listen to it on". According to what the RIAA is saying it seems you have the rights to listen to it on any "normal" CD player (home or computer or car or mobile).

    According to this company you do not have the rights to listen to it on ANYTHING but a home CD player. You aren't allowed to convert it to another form to listen to it (ie: rip to mp3 to play in my car mp3 player) and you have to register with them if you want to play it on a computer CD player.

    Since I got myself a MP3 CD player for my car the idea of being able to buy mp3s instead of CDs is stronger and stronger. I rarely listen to normal CDs anymore... why would I want a format where I can only fit 10-20 songs on a disk instead of 200+ songs?

    I'm interested to hear if this is a windows only thing or if a linux CD player would play the CD normally?
  • Re:nope, sorry. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Jburkholder ( 28127 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @01:47PM (#2264109)
    >I hate to shop at Radio Shack

    I feel the same way, only RS apparently doesn't do that anymore. I needed a couple of d-sub connector kits to build a cable (hacking my bros TiVo) and went into the local RS. I was really surprised when the clerk added up the parts, asked me for the total, gave me the change, bag and receipt without asking for even a zip-code.

    I asked him about it... he said they don't do that anymore - too many people were walking out instead of buying stuff.

    Seems like it took a loooong time for them to figure that one out.
  • by DrgnDancer ( 137700 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @02:02PM (#2264201) Homepage

    How much sound quality would be lost if one plugged the "out" on a moderatly good stereo into the "in" on a moderatly good sound card and recorded that way? The sound is going from digital to analog and back to digital, but it's never leaving the wires. As long as one made a "master" copy at full sampling rate, then made one's recordings from that, I would not think you'd loose much.


    I'm just curious, because all these protection schemes seem to leave out the idea of a direct, hardware to hardware, copy being made, once the "appoved" player has decoded the sound. Since most decent sound systems are component systems, I don't see them removing the "out" from stereos, and since more and more people are playing with amatur video editing, I don't see them getting rid of the "in" on sound cards, so all of this is really kinda futile. At least that is how it seems to me, I might be missing something.

  • by saider ( 177166 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @02:16PM (#2264293)
    I believe that the disc is corrupted by introducing errors into the error correcting sectors of the disk. Simple CD players simply average out the errors, but CD-ROMS require every bit to be properly reconstructed. With a fragged error correction sector, the CDROM is unable to reconstruct the data and reports an I/O error.

    I'm sure someone will hack some CD firmware eventually, but until then, just put bogus information into the computer. As I write this GWBush@whitehouse.gov is gettings tons of crap because that's the address I give to all these people who ask for personal information. I also live at

    1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW #101,

    Washington, DC 20500.

    Phone number? 202-456-1414.

  • Re:A little off (Score:4, Interesting)

    by bigbadwlf ( 304883 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @02:19PM (#2264307)
    A lot of Car CD players do the same thing... presumably to help prevent skipping.
    How will the record company offering a downloadable proprietary encoding of the music help someone listen to it in their car?

    I remember reading about this when they were planning it. I'm glad to see people aren't putting up with it.
    People who listen to Charley Pride are people like my mom... people who aren't exactly in the know.
    I'm sure they were counting on getting this 'technology' rolling at the expense of these people.
  • COSUMER MY ARSE! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by SubtleNuance ( 184325 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @02:23PM (#2264324) Journal
    trying to sneak this sort of crap past consumers.

    Well there you have the *real* crux of the problem. When see your involvement in this world, and the art you appreciate, as a function of being a consumer then they have you. When you stop to realize, that you are allowing your community, your government to enforce/condone and prosecute based on these kinds of fascist-business laws (intellectual property laws in general) you are in for a very serious uphill battle.

    These publishing houses, *MUST* be made accountable to the public they wish to serve. They must not collude (RIAA) to abridge the rights of citizens.

    If you think that your 'voting with your dollars' will make change - forget it. This is the way the USA presently works, and it really only works if you have *LOTS AND LOTS* of dollars. Otherwise you have no rights - your rights only exist in relation to your function in the economy.

    Thats just plain wrong. The USA is a Plutocracy, and crap like this (extortion of people in the marketplace) is allowed to persist - you can forget about any 'human rights' and Really start considering yourself a consumer instead of a citizen .

    Whats my point? Please dont call yourself a "consumer", and dont call me a "consumer" when you do so you give up your power in the struggle, you accept the pretence (above) as being the frame of debate (the 'playing field' or 'perspective') to those who will justify this type of corporate action in the name of 'free markets' (etc), and you re-enforce the myriad of propaganda-enforced memes and words used in your culture. The last 15 years the USA has been bombarded with images/language and crap that tells its citizens they are 'consumers' their involvment in the world around them is embodied in the way they shop - this is a terribly impotent position. When faced with the power struggle that is described in this article, the corporate interests will *always* be served when you accept the master|corporation|king|church - slave|consumer|fife|congregation relationship.

    If you think it dosnt matter; your wrong, go read some Chomsky [zmag.org].

  • Re:the sneaks! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by csbruce ( 39509 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @02:38PM (#2264418)
    A web site should be set up, like "fuckedcd.org" or something, that maintains a registry of copy-protected CDs, so that consumers can find out what albums they should avoid buying. Maybe it could be called "fuckedrecordcompany.com".
  • Re:So? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by glitch! ( 57276 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @02:53PM (#2264499)
    Read between the lines. The cd works fine if you just want to listen to the tunes.

    A couple years ago, I bought a used Who CD. I should expect to play it and listen to the music, right? Well, it turns out that there were some scratches, and while most of the tracks were playable, one was not.

    The reason that the "standard" CDs have error correction is so that it can tolerate a few minor scratches and still play. Without it, I might not have been able to play any of the songs... And this is the problem - these copy protection nuts want to render this feature useless.

    Another interesting possibility is that if the error correction data is reduced, minor scratches or other wear and tear will increase the number of sales to people replacing CDs. I'm sure the recording industry enjoyed the vinyl era where they could depend on albums wearing out, and getting repeat sales due to the limited lifetime "feature". This trick with CDs may be a step back to the "good old days".
  • file swapping (Score:3, Interesting)

    by csbruce ( 39509 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @02:54PM (#2264511)
    In other news, song swapping reached a record high level on the Internet in August as 3.05-billion files [cnn.com]were swapped using various systems. The peak for the "Napster era" was 2.79-billion files, but, of course, the RIAA took care of that problem.
  • The issues (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Ungrounded Lightning ( 62228 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @03:32PM (#2264722) Journal
    So far, we have been ABLE TO listen to CDs on our computers, etc. Whether this is a RIGHT that we obtain from purchasing a CD is an entirely different issue.

    The fact that you have been able to use CDs in this way up until now creates the expectation that this particular new CD (from the same manufacturer) can also be used in this way. The labeling does not do anything to correct the impression.

    So the CD violates the "implied warranty of servicibility and fitness" - for the purpose SHE intended when she bought it - and is thus a defective product. Because this was done deliberately, the company has DELIBERATELY shipped a defective product. There's lots of nice stuff in consumer law and case-law about that. B-)

    Further, if they put the CD logo on the case (I don't know if they did) it is being advertised as conforming to the Red Book standard - which it obviously does not if the error correction code is not correct. That would be false advertising as well.

    Could get VERY interesting.

    (IANAL)
  • by LionKimbro ( 200000 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @04:02PM (#2264800) Homepage

    Let me get this straight:

    1. A bunch of Equity Lords find some artist. They pay the artist a little bit of money ("Someone's recognized my talent!").
    2. Then they pay some money to a brainwashing company ("Marketting consultants").
    3. The brainwashing company indirectly pay money to radio stations to get their songs played. More recently, the brainwashing companies have been flooding the period just before a movie plays.
    4. You hear a whole spectrum of music, and talk with your friends about what you are all seeing and hearing on that spectrum.
    5. The Equity Lords have CD's and paraphanalia for you to buy, so that you can express your opinions about what is seen and heard.

    Now lately, they've added a new twist: They collect information on you when you try to play your CD.

    And then you claim to be deceived.

    If it's just now that you think you are being deceived, and that the only issue to you is that your CD has some sort of odd protection on it, I'd think that you were more deeply deceived than you think.

    Listen to free music. Go to MP3.com, or one of the other various music sites, and download good music. It'll take some sifting, but you'll find it; it's all there.

    Learn about propaganda. Learn how it touches your mind. Then steer the hell clear of it! Otherwise, expect more messes like the one you find yourself in.

  • by guttentag ( 313541 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @05:14PM (#2265178) Journal
    I would like to think so, but was DIVX backed by Microsoft? According to Fahrenheit's Web site [fahrenheit...inment.com]:
    The company's newly designed corporate website at www.sunncomm.com will serve as a portal to consumers and permit authorized CD owners interactive access to digital rights management (DRM) files -- a technology made available as part of SunnComm's technology relationship with the Microsoft Corp.(R).
    DIVX failed (fortunately) because it asked too much of consumers without providing any real benefit over DVD. If Microsoft has an interest in seeing this work, they'll bundle it with some "convenience feature" to make people think they're getting something and then use WindowsXX and the HomeStation [slashdot.org] to ensure people buy it. With Microsoft's assurance that people will buy it, what record company wouldn't jump on the bandwagon?

    P.S. - I particularly like this quote from SunnComm's CEO:
    "The SunnComm team sees themselves as the warriors in the fight against what has become socially acceptable larceny which takes place everyday around the world. At the same time, we create a CD that brings greater enjoyment and broadens the musical experience of the consumer."
    I almost died laughing, until I realized your average K-Mart shopper would believe that BS...
  • by colmore ( 56499 ) on Friday September 07, 2001 @08:22PM (#2265759) Journal
    OK, guy, just because you operate one way, doesn't mean that we all have to. Niche artists, even good ones, can't tour heavily enough to really turn a profit: Good Speed you Black Emperor (Canadian, noise / instrumental act) are very good, but because of the limited audience for their genre, they make most of their (modest) income off of those who hear them on independant radio, or word-of-mouth. They simply couldn't tour well enough to cover such sparse (but enthusiastic) support.

    Or what about the *Beatles* from 1966 on they basically only sold records. Their popularity became a hindrance to their artistic expression on stage, and so they redirected their efforts to the studio and made some of the best god damn music of the twentieth century.

    There's nothing wrong with being a primarily live act, of course, but I'm just seeing a lot of "real artists do it MY way" in this thread that is bothering me a lot.

"Gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling in love." -- Albert Einstein

Working...