Universal to Copyprotect All CDs 887
angkor wrote in with a link to a story about how Universal Plans to
copyprotect all CDs which
will render them unplayable on Macs, DVD Players, PS2s, and some CD Players.
And it won't even stop people from ripping MP3s I bet.
Obvious solution to this (Score:5, Insightful)
Vote with your wallet. It's the only true voice you have in a capitalist society.
If it's 1s and 0s (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Obvious solution to this (Score:4, Insightful)
And do you know who that will be blamed on? Right. It's the fault of the nasty internet pirates! So, we need even more protections.
A load of bull. (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't understand something... (Score:4, Insightful)
But if I play it on a Sony CDROM drive in my computer, it's bad?
First, how *exactly* does it know? As my dad used to say, "A laser is just a laser".
Prepare for massive consumer backlash. Even if people don't want to ever "rip, mix, and burn" (thank you Apple 'Dont Steal Music' Computer) they want to listen to their CDs when and where they want to.
To quote, the REAL problem... (Score:5, Insightful)
There you have it, instead of letting true musical diversity create authentic, viable fan bases, the music industry has locked itself into the failing practice of top-down music manufacturing...reminiscent of a Soviet state capitalism that never worked either.
Maybe one day when a free market for music exists again, people will care.
Buy it, open it, return it. (Score:5, Insightful)
What idiots... we long ago ceased being "customers" to them, now they just expect us to roll over and play dead. Forget that.
``They've been testing this in Europe and they're experiencing less than a 1 percent return rate from consumers. It really has turned out to be nothing,'' said Jerry Kamiler, TransWorld Entertainment's division merchandise manger. ``If we get the same results here, as I imagine we would, I don't think it's going to manifest itself into a consumer problem.''
Blank CD's outsell recorded ones (Score:2, Insightful)
Use their best weapon against them (Score:5, Insightful)
However, I am fed up with this charade and I would like to end it once and for all. I have the paperwork in front of me to take Universal Records to small claims court to recover the purchase price of the CD. Since Universal is not based in my area, it will be very expensive for them to send their high-priced lawyers to my county to deal with the charges. And, worst case, I will lose the cost of the CD (and best case, I will get a refund on the CD and make a political statement at the same time).
I strongly encourage all of you to do the same thing: buy whatever CDs you want, and sue the record labels if they are copy protected. Even if most of the cases get thrown out, it will be *very* expensive for the labels to take any sort of action against the thousands of individuals who are suing them.
The RIAA has been able to manipulate the legal system into standing up for their rights. Why shouldn't we do the same thing back to them?
~wally
Re:Obvious solution to this (Score:2, Insightful)
--
Re:Obvious solution to this (Score:5, Insightful)
Won't this just increase piracy?
Think about it. If I want to hear Twisted Wet Noodle's lastest single "Geriatric Cheerleader" and I can't play it on over half the devices in my house, guess where I'm gonna turn?
MP3's are becoming the only way to play on all forms of players (including DVDs).
Do all companies have this kind of disrespect for their customers? I really hope not.
It depends on how many MP3s are first-gen (Score:2, Insightful)
So the real question is, right now, what % of CDs are first-generation rips? Since we all know that any CD like this can be ripped (even if with a loss of quality from going the DAC/ADC in the sound card), they will be ripped. And then they'll be traded. So who cares?
The other interesting question is whether something like cdparanoia (which, from what I've heard, rips these CDs) can be considered a circumvention device even though it existed independently of (and before) the copy-protection being circumvented. I presume this would guarantee that it had "substantial non-infringing use" or whatever the standard is that they measure it by, but I dunno.
Re:If it's 1s and 0s (Score:4, Insightful)
Even easier math to code up would be to play the audio to an analog channel and feed that back into the sound-in plug on your computer. If you are hyper-concerned about fidelity you can copy it four or five times and blend the copies together using an averaging algorithm (the composite stream is more likely to be accurate to the original than any of the instance streams).
Of course, none of this will protect you from the low quality of the original content, and frankly I think it's ironic that in order to protect the copying of a high quality digital stream they are basically degrading the quality of the signal. If I wanted a degraded signal I'd go back to tapes and vinyl (and please, no audiofile flames about sound range and that stuff, okay?).
I suppose I've just violated the DMCA by providing fairly vague instructions on how to circumvent this so-called protection (as in racket) device.
Re:To quote, the REAL problem... (Score:5, Insightful)
I liked this terror-scenario from the article:
Speaking for myself, I don't want to keep the kids from copying the bubble-gum stuff and throwing it all around the school. I want the market for that to dry up, because the whole concept of a manufactured youth-culture is destructive to society as a whole and it deserves to be destroyed.Re:Obvious solution to this (Score:2, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe the music sucks! (Score:5, Insightful)
What about the quality of the music that's being released? Did Universal, BMG, Sony, et al ever stop to wonder if part of the problem is that they're churning out bands that are carbon copies of each other? Do we really need more "boy bands" or breathy, heartbroken beauty queens? It's just like TV...as soon as Survivor became a hit, every network had to have a clone...but now that the market is saturated, ratings are terrible.
Oh, and what about the economy? I'll bet that if you're one of the million or so high tech workers who doesn't have a job anymore, buying the latest Brittany Spears CD is probably way down on your list, below, say groceries!
Piracy is always an easy card to play, and not just for the music industry. It's a whole lot easier it blame some kid with a ripper, a burner and a fast Internet connection for destroying their market than it is to realize that the industry itself, by churning out disc after disc of bubble gum flavored dreck, is killing itself.
-h-
Obligatory Warning (Score:3, Insightful)
Remember, don't buy and return from the indy and/or mom-and-pop shops. Buy and return from Circuit City, Amazon.com, Wal-Mart, etc. (The bonus with buying from Amazon is that if they don't identify the offending CD, you might be able to get them charged with mail fraud)
Re:Use their best weapon against them (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, Best Buy can now sue the distributor, essentially under the same grounds. (and it keeps going up the food chain from there).
But you have no cause of action directly with Universal. Only with Best Buy. It's kinda like Windows Refund Day: no cause with M$, but with the seller of the product.
Exactly (Score:2, Insightful)
What happened to the Bob Dylans, the Tom Pettys, the Beattles of the world? Bands in those days stood for something, wrote real music and were deserving of the praise they got.
The music industry has sold out like the professional sports industry, paying higher and higher dollar figures to this weeks glam and pop queens/kings.
I have no interest at all in any music I heard on the radio on my way into work this morning. Not one song stood out as something I would buy let alone collect like I would with some old Doors records or some Credence Clear Water Revival.
The industry is in dire need of a revolution. Like when the Beattles broke out on to the scene, they literally exploded. They started a whole new trend, rocked the foundation of our society. Same applies with the Doors, Led Zepplin, The Who.
I want someone to strike a cord in me like Bruce Springstien. I want to hear someone who can communicate with me on an intellectual level like Paul Simon.
Hell, Poison and Motley Crue had more style and talent than the bands that are out today. Everyone on the rock side wants to be Limp Bizkit, everyone in rap wants to be Puff Daddy and everone in pop wants to be Britney or NSYNC.
I'm disgusted with music today. I'm sick of it and I'm not going to take it anymore.
-todd
Re:Polite, thoughtful feedback (Score:2, Insightful)
Today I read about the upcoming "copy protected" CDs that Universal plans to distribute because as Hilary Rosen claims: "the ease of `ripping and burning' are causing artists and record companies real harm."
I still haven't seen any research on artists losing revenue due to mp3 trading or creating backups. (Please reply with any information you might have that would prove me wrong.) The real harm to artists, and especially record companies, will come from the consumer backlash. I plan to boycott all such modified CDs that don't allow me to play music in my car, playstation and macintosh, or make backups and mp3s to play in my portable devices. I will also endeavor to educate my friends and family about these greedy tactics that attempt to fatten the distribution companies' bottom line at the expense of consumer's fair use rights.
I think you'll find that the consumers will veto Universal's proposal with the votes contained in their wallets. The landscape of music distribution is changing, and for some reason the major labels can't find the roadmap.
Re:Obligatory Warning (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyway, if the mom-and-pop stores really cared about their customers, and were really worthy of the support taht you people always want to throw at them, they'd save themselves the trouble and NOT STOCK THE CDS YOU'RE GOING TO RETURN. By selling those cds they are just as guilty as any store, if you're going ot be mad at HMV for selling defective disks and helping the record industry, you've got to angry towards the mom-and-pops as well.
You're either for the copy protection, or you're against it.
simple (Score:2, Insightful)
Simple.
Re:Obvious solution to this (Score:2, Insightful)
You can't change the world by acting like a jerk. A monster perhaps, but not a jerk.
Re:To quote, the REAL problem... (Score:3, Insightful)
Amen brother.
It's degraded to the point that our corporate-centric society is practically breeding American youth like cattle, both in the market of culture and the market of ideas.
Obey.
Work.
Consume.
Breed.
Affected sales. (Score:2, Insightful)
Being able to prosecute under the DMCA should lead to some interesting cases. Organized groups of CD pirates will probably have a hard time defending themselves, but issues of consumer rights will be out in the open at every step of the way to chip away at the validity of the DMCA. What happened to fair use such as being able to make backup copies? Should the license we buy to listen to these CDs (since we don't actually own anything anymore), be able to tell us what hardware we can and cannot play the music with? Many people are using devices that these CD will not play on and will become annoyed when they find out they can only listen to certain music in certain rooms of their homes. And these people will be subject to prosecution simply for trying to get past technology that forces them to listen to music in the living room instead of on their computers while they work or in their MP3 compatible CD player in their car. I'm not so sure the American consumer will be as willing to be jerked around as the music industry hopes.
Re:well shit (Score:3, Insightful)
But, apparently, the record companies are forcing me to download MP3s only from now on. I'd rather have the higher sound quality found in a CD, and the nice cover and booklets, but oh well, I'm being forced into this.
Re:Go to Coconuts TODAY.... (Score:4, Insightful)
The indie music store makes nearly 100% of its money from selling music, and they typically have much better/wider selections than big corporate stores. If they end up losing a lot to ship it all back to their supplier, they might not be able to swallow the loss, even if it is eventually refunded. I'm all for pissing off the music companies, but don't screw your local music stores at the same time.
Eric
If you don't like the rules, stop playing the game (Score:4, Insightful)
So a label has announced that it will cripple all of its CDs... Did they announce that they will be cutting their prices in half to make up for the decreased functionality? I doubt it. So now all Universal CDs are effectively more expensive because you get less for the same price. Where do these guys learn their economics, from drug dealers? Get people hooked on the "good" stuff, then cut down on the amount of actual product they get for their money...
The simple solution, as others have pointed out, is not to buy the crap. More than that though, don't buy anyone else's crap either. Don't buy any CDs, DVDs, e-books, etc. Don't go to movies, don't rent movies, don't order pay-per-view, don't subscribe to premium cable channels, or possibly even cable itself. Don't buy anything because of ads on TV, radio, or billboards, in magazines, etc. Cut back on consumer electronics purchases, buy only used books, don't go to sporting events. If you do buy anything, only buy it when it is so cheap that someone must be taking a loss somewhere. The only way to change things is to get the entire entertainment industry to rethink its business model. Otherwise, we will keep getting less value.
If that is too drastic a step for you, then return the CDs right after you buy them:
Universal told retailers that it would honor refunds on all returned discs -- even for CDs that have been opened.
We're in this mess because the entertainment industry is driven by maximization of profits through decreasing value and not by delivering quality products at reasonable prices. Through marketing and legislation, they have fought to preserve this flawed model, which will succeed as long as people remain mindless drones who buy anything someone is trying to sell them. Yes, I realize that there really is no hope...
False figures again (Score:3, Insightful)
This year in the US, the sale of matchs went up 57% indicating that teenage smoking is up over 200%.
For those that didn't get my example. How does that percent of blank CD sales mean anything as far as "pre-made CD" sales goes. People use blank CDs for all sorts of things. I have friends who make backups of there applications on CD once a day, 7 days a week. So, a spool of CD-Rs can go pretty quickly.
Back to the article. This is a difficault thing to stop, even telling retailers you won't be shopping there for the holidays doesn't work as expected. There are still a ton of dumb people out there that will buy an "approved CD player" if need be. Its only a matter of time until someone figures out a way to rip from theses.
How will computer hardware vendors handle this one. Think of the number of returns over something this simple. Personally, to make a point. I would force them to accept the return and give me my money back.
Re:history repeats itself (Score:3, Insightful)
Artists don't need the megaexpensive recording studios. These days, most anyone can set up a decent studio for a relatively small investment.
Artists don't need the megaexpensive advertising. These days, anyone can gain popularity via web media. Fansites, mailing lists, word of mouth: it's worked before, it's working now, and it's hella cheaper than MTV.
Artists don't need the distribution chain. They can post to the web. As soon as a good payment system comes along, where the artist can be paid directly and receives most of that payment, the distribution chain is toast.
The industry is fighting everything you talk about here because they see a new dawn for them: TOTAL control of media.
To totally control access to a system, you have to control the whole damn thing, input to output, re their SSSCA, CPRM, DMCA, LMNOP or whatever the initiative will be. That means that you will need a license just to input. If by law, you use THEIR tools, you'll have to PAY to buy a license to publish. After all, the industry will control this. If the industry doesn't want what you're pushing, you get no license.
If you don't have a license, and it's illegal to go around their system, well, you have no independent artists. It's that simple. RIAA and MPAA win.
Re:Obvious solution to this (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Obvious solution to this (Score:4, Insightful)
What's so scary about that? I mean, besides the fact that it's legally accurate?
Section 107 of the copyright at, which describes the doctrine of "fair use," sets for particular instances where reproduction of a copyrighted work is "not an infringement of copyright." Specifically, reproducing some portion of a copyrighted work is not considered a violation of Section 106 of the Act (which vests exclusive rights in copyright holders to control the reproduction and distribution of their work) where, among other things, the purpose of the reproduction is for "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research."
In other words, when I publish a review (i.e. criticism or commentary) of the new Britney Spears album, I can quote lyrics from the songs without infringing on the copyright in those lyrics held by the author, but can't republish those lyrics in part of my novel about a young teen pop star. I can use clips of the "Lord of the Rings" movie in a news story (i.e. news reporting) about the advances in movie technology, but I can't videotape the whole movie and give copies of it to my friends.
Granted, the concept of a "right to fair use" and fair use being a "defense against infringement" is subtle, and probably just semantics. But the doctrine of "fair use" isn't the idea that you have a right to do whatever you want with a copyrighted work, as long as you consider what you're doing to be karmically "fair."
Universal (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, there is no fair use, according to Disney. (Score:2, Insightful)
Check out the Wired article [wired.com] on the workshop. Preston Padden, head of government relations for Disney, is quoted as saying :
This from the company that bought off the politicians to change the law in the 90s and so prevent Mickey Mouse going out of copyright in 2004. This from the company that appropriates others' intellectual property and claims it as their own (Snow White, Aladdin, Christmas Carol, countless others). They are thieves and liars.
Note that not a single work has gone out of copyright in the US since the first world war. If the corps get their way, nothing will ever go out of copyright again. We will still have a culture, but you'll need to purchase a license to partake of it.
Re:Obvious solution to this (Score:2, Insightful)
Fair use is the counterpoint to copyright. Without fair use copyright becomes yet another fascist censorship power.
"I copyrighted / patented that... you must pay me" arguements make me ill. The sad thing is I believe that the creators do deserve payment, I do not believe that corporations peddling in "intellectual property" have any real right to perpetual monopolies. I would love to see copyright return to something mor along the line of the life of the artist or 50 years, whichever is longer. That way artists are allowed control their work while they are alive and potential proceeds. Otherwise it quickly passes into public domain, while people can still remember why it's relevant and use it. Unlike the current 150 years or so. Somehow I doubt that much of our current culture will survive due to our legislation...
Re:Universals sales plummet !!!!! (Score:2, Insightful)
Blank CDs can be bought in spindles of 50 for $18.99 in some places. In some mall stores, you're lucky if you can buy a *real* CD for $18.99. Added to the fact that blank CDs have a multitude of uses beyond that of music copying, and it's no wonder that they outsell "conventional" CDs. Pity the RIAA doesn't expect people to do any of their own thinking...
Re:Obvious solution to this (Score:2, Insightful)
Sean.
The REAL reason they're doing this (Score:5, Insightful)
Good article. There's another article that might explain Universal's reasoning for adding copy-protection. (HINT: It really has little to do with piracy.)
http://www.wired.com/news/mp3/0,1285,49188,00.html [wired.com]
On Tuesday, Universal Music Group becomes the first label to sell copy-protected CDs in the United States with the release of its soundtrack Fast & Furious -- More Music. This comes at a time when the recording industry is asking consumers to pay for music that can only be listened to on the PC.
The newly released CD will keep people from listening to their music on the computer, game consoles and other digital devices. If they wanted to go through the major labels to buy the same music for their computer, the only way would be to sign up for Pressplay, one of the major label subscription services, when it launches later this month.
Essentially, consumers would be required to pay once for a physical CD and once for the digital music file. The restrictions for online subscription services and physical CDs are part of a music industry-wide attempt to stop online music piracy.
Bascially, they want to move everyone into a position where they get paid everytime you "space-shift" your music. Playing your CD in CD player? Pay for it once. Playing it on the computer? Pay for it again. <begin sarcasm>After all, we've got to keep those RIAA pockets filled, don't we?<end sarcasm>
Re:heck no (Score:3, Insightful)
Speaking as someone who ran a record store for eight years, my prediction is that at some point in the next year Universal and the other labels involved in this scam will do two things:
1) They'll stop accepting returns on all copy-protected CDs. If you don't like it, go pound sand. Sony stopped accepting returns on opened CDs several years back because they felt that their production methods had improved to the point where genuinely defective CDs represented a "statistically insignificant" percentage of their output. The reality from where I was standing was that Sony's defective CDs were coming in at about the same clip as always; Sony just didn't want to deal with them.
2) Universal (and other companies involved in similar practices) will either a) ignore the CDDA red-book standards and dare them to just try and do something about it, b) bail on the CDDA and create their own in-house red-book standards, or c) lobby the people in charge of the CDDA standards to change the red book.
One or both of these things will happen, but labels will not accept an unlimited number of returns forever, particularly if they start seeing large quantities of CDs coming back to them.
"Underground" music is now mainstream... (Score:3, Insightful)
While there's a big market for Britney Spears, there's another big market for "underground" music.
Thier sound or trite messages still doesn't distinguish the Backstreet Boys or Incubus from being a bunch of monkey boys who perform when you shove a quarter in thier ass.
It's all the same crap, targeted at a wide demographic of people and children, sending out the same old shit message, "Image is everything... Cultural, Political, Moral, Whatever..." (Note: Image refers to more than just external appearances. Include behavioral nuances and all elements of "culture")
What I do agree with is that these same people hawking Britney Spears have way too much influence on people. Hence, My opinions on fair use...
Re:Obvious solution to this (Score:2, Insightful)
used to justify paying artists a lower royalty rate on the front end, and to further reduce
payment to them on the back end.
Good. Maybe that will encourage more artists to avoid volunteering for rape at the hands of the industry.
Re:legally accurate? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think that what scared the original poster with the "fair use is a defense against the charge of infringement, not a right" quotation is that, just as with your murder example, even if you shoot someone in self-defense, you still get the fun (a) arrested for shooting somone, (b) tried for murder/manslaughter, and (c) drained of your finances in the process, whether you are convicted or not.
(It also implies that the defence of fair use may legally be taken away from you, either indirectly through DMCA - which is silent on fair use per se, but since you have to violate the DMCA to get your fair-use snippet of video, you still go to jail. Or directly, by whatever they do in SSSCA.)
The industry's goal is to make "fair use" a right -- in the sense that both Bill Gates and that homeless bum down the street have the same right to sleep under a highway overpass.