Lawsuit Over Crippled Charley Pride Music Disks Settled 175
thumbtack writes: "In a follow up to the /. story
"Record Companies Sued Over Charley Pride CD" last fall, Boycott-RIAA
is reporting in this story
that the case has been settled with Fahrenheit Entertainment, Music City Records, and Sunncomm. They have agreed to a list of 10 items that were the basis of the lawsuit. In addition following the link to the settlement document (pdf) the plaintiffs got a little cash to pay their lawyers as well."
About time we get something back (Score:1)
The Ten Items (Score:4, Funny)
Too bad none of those ten has to do with the fact that country music makes your ears bleed.
Re:The Ten Items (Score:2, Funny)
Re:The Ten Items (Score:1, Funny)
The trick is to play country music backwards. That way you get your job back, you get your wife back, you get your dog back, and you stop drinking.
The 8 types of country songs (Score:4, Funny)
Re:The 8 types of country songs (Score:4, Funny)
Don't you mean "I wonder if MY OTHER sister still lives in Alabama"?
Re:The 8 types of country songs (Score:4, Funny)
The 8 types of songs played on MTV:
1. Scantily-clad white girl dances while singing about how much she wants to please you.
2. A bunch of white pretty boys sing in harmony about how bad-ass they are.
3. A bunch of pretty black girls sing in harmony about how bad-ass they are.
4. Scantily-clad black man poses while singing about how much he wants to please you.
5. The real world.
6. Road Rules.
7. The Real World versus Road Rules.
8. Retro "The Real World" marathons with behind-the scenes interviews so you can really get to know the cast members.
Re:The 8 types of country songs (Score:2)
1. Scantily-clad white girl dances while singing about how much she wants to please you.
3. A bunch of pretty black girls sing in harmony about how bad-ass they are.
??
Re:The 8 types of country songs (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The 8 types of country songs (Score:1)
9. Countin' songs (99 bottles of beer, I have 10 dogs under my porch, etc)
10. Self pity songs (I don't have enough money for a beer, the ice box done broke and skunked my stash, etc)
11. Excuse songs (this trailer ain't big enough for both of us, goat ropin' ain't no way to provide for a family, etc)
Re:The 8 types of country songs (Score:3, Funny)
You sick frea... oh, wait, you said ropin'. My mistake.
Re:The 8 types of country songs (Score:1)
And I went to pick her up in the rain
But before I could get to the station in my pickup truck
My Momma, she got run over by a damned old train"
Steve Goodman "You Never Even Call Me By My Name"
( As sung by David Allen Coe )
Secret Satanic messages? Nope... (Score:1, Redundant)
You get your job back...
You get your girlfriend back...
You get your pickup truck back...
You get your dog back...
-
Re:The 8 types of country songs (Score:1)
Point of the article (Score:3, Informative)
Basically, consumers can get new de-protected CDs to replace their protected ones.
Yawn. They'll just try again.
Re:Point of the article (Score:5, Insightful)
And manufacturers are going to think twice before implimenting something that hurts their sales.
The efforts we've seen so far have been low key, trying to put protection on without making a big deal out of it. Forcing such protection schemes to be advertized on the product will be a big disincentive to their use.
Re:Point of the article (Score:1, Insightful)
Unfortunatly I don't think that protects those (like myself) who buy CDs online. I suppose I could go to a store and buy CDs except for the fact that they don't have any CDs I want (mainly just the popular garbage).
Re:Point of the article (Score:1, Insightful)
Universal can go right ahead and copy protect their CDs however they chose, and label them (or not) in whatever manner they want.
But the point of almost all of this is that there is nothing illegal with any of these copy protection schemes - at the *most* you will get gov't imposed labelling standards and requirements. But when N*Sync releases their album with fully-labelled copy protection, do you really think it won't sell to the teen masses?
In other words, get used to this idea - it's their IP, and they can protect it however they want (so long as they aren't tricking people, etc.)
Protection? They need protection from themselves.. (Score:2)
Actually the DVD/mp3 players are the showstoppers for the records companies around here, even people without computers got one. Guess what? They'll ask people like me to download it off the net and burn it to cd for them, and give me a nifty profit on it too. That's people that wouldn't bother to steal music normally, but the record companies would be driving them off. And then they'll go crying to the politicans over all the bad people who steal their music...
Kjella
Telephone, television, and tell-a-girl (Score:3, Interesting)
Universal can go right ahead and copy protect their CDs however they chose, and label them (or not) in whatever manner they want.
But now, armed with the precedent from this case, plaintiffs will be able to take down the labels easily. To avoid legal expenses, the labels will likely voluntarily comply.
there is nothing illegal with any of these copy protection schemes
What about misrepresentation? The user is sold a disc with the Philips Compact Disc Digital Audio logo on it, but the disc doesn't meet the Compact Disc Digital Audio standards. Fraud is a felony.
at the *most* you will get gov't imposed labelling standards and requirements.
And ad campaigns to "look for the logo" on behalf of independent labels and Compact Disc logo trademark holder Philips.
But when N*Sync releases their album with fully-labelled copy protection, do you really think it won't sell to the teen masses?
Ever heard the old joke about the three fastest forms of communication? Telephone, television, and tell-a-girl. Negative word of mouth will kill the *NSYNC franchise rápidamente.
get used to this idea - it's their IP
IP stands for "Internet Protocol" or a numeric address assigned thereunder. The notion of "intellectual property" exists nowhere in the letter of United States copyright law; Congress presumably passed the copyright act "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts," not to create a new form of property.
Re:Telephone, television, and tell-a-girl (Score:2)
Settlements are usually not considered legal precedent.
Re:Point of the article (Score:1)
Most important (Score:5, Insightful)
6. Defendants shall include a warning that the Charlie Pride CD is not designed to work in DVD players or Computer CD-ROM players;
As long as they mark the cd, and people know ahead that the product will not work for them, they can protect all the cds they want to. People will just learn to avoid cds that are marked that way.
Re:Most important (Score:1)
It could just be a little logo where the CDDA logo is on many CDs now... The point, of course, is that Joe Sixpack doesn't examine everything he buys for little wording, especially when it comes to CDs.
Whereas those of us who were pushing for this don't have to look for it - most don't buy CDs anyway.
'course, the RIAA is a bunch of idiots anyway.. What're they going to do next? Scramble the music such that it can't be heard out of the analog out port on a CD player? Hell, you can plug that bad boy into a PC and record it with Goldwave! CRAP! Gotta get rid of that!
non-cd section? (Score:1)
Re:non-cd section? (Score:1)
Re:non-cd section? (Score:2)
Laserdisc was niche because of the price of the player's perhaps, which were $100 or so more than a VCR back then (on up to THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS for the top of the line ones). Honestly I think the side-flipping thing was more of a deterrent. A good player would flip sides FOR you, but if the movie was over 2 hours you still had to change discs once because you got a max 2 hours per platter. No getting around that disc swap without a $3000 2-drawer Pioneer Elite player!
The price of the media more than made up for a couple hundred bucks extra for the player, though. Consider the movie situation at the end of the 80's.
- Die Hard on VHS for $100
- Die Hard on laser for $50
- RoboCop on VHS for $100
- RoboCop on laser for $30
It seems crazy now, but once the idea of OWNING a shrink-wrapped VHS movie was absurd; movies were for renting, silly rabbit! If you wanted to BUY a movie, you paid the same $100 that the video store did, or you waited for a video store to sell a worn-out copy. (Even that didn't happen a lot then as I recall, because the rental biz was smaller and they would get in a FEW tapes, not 50 when a new title came out. They tended to keep what they first got.)
You didn't have to buy a lot of movies to make a laserdisc player a good deal. If you were into movies, anyway. And nearly EVERY US movie was available in the format. Many of them had exotic collector'e editions with the deleted scenes and stuff we take for granted on DVDs now.
It was in this climate that laserdiscs flourished. OK, flourished is an exaggeration. It was definitely a niche. They never got huge, but they were big enough that every movie came out on laser, there were scads of players to choose from, and every city had a few specialty retailers to support the format.
We laser jocks were enjoying near-DVD quality movies at comparatively bargain prices over a decade ago. So I have to post this same rant every time someone slights the format, in your case due to a misunderstanding of the price factor.
Now to await the flames and mods!
Re:Most important (Score:1)
And when there are no non-protected CDs available, will people continue to avoid them?
Continued availability of real CDs (Score:2)
And when there are no non-protected CDs available, will people continue to avoid them?
Name one independent label that has committed to using technical fair use restrictions on its entire music catalog.
[/me hums the Jeopardy! theme song]
Give up? None of them have. Real CDs will continue to be available; teens will just have to give up *NSYNC and a few other manufactured bands.
Re:Most important (Score:1, Informative)
The language is deliberately misleading.
There is a difference between "is not designed to work" and "is designed not to work". Bah!
Re:Most important (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, but this is still a problem for people who buy most of their CDs online, and so don't have the opportunity to inspect the packaging before making a purchase. Even if this settlement makes music stores more willing to take back (rather than exchange for the same item) non-compliant CDs, the hassle may make the whole experience just too irritating.
Imagine buying 10 CDs at cdnow and finding seven of them have warnings on the label. So you send them back. Then you open the other three, to find that two of them have warnings inside the shrinkwrapped package. Even the imaginary more liberal return policies are unlikely to help you now.
Re:Most important (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Most important (Score:2, Insightful)
Well why not? These are "copy protected" cds aren't they? There shouldn't be a problem with returning open items then.
Re:Most important (Score:3, Insightful)
As for me as a buyer: I use my iPod for all my music, so I have no plans to buy any CD I can't rip into real MP3. Warnings will help me make reasonable decisions here. Vendors who wish to sell crippled CDs will need to find other customers.
Re:Most important (Score:2)
I wish the court had specified that they now had to mark them in 72pt. bright red type on the cd's front or back, but any step towards marking them is a good one.
Phillips is a doing a good thing asking the CD logo not be displayed on them, but I wonder if any more people will take notice of that than they would a fine print warning. More info from EFF at:
http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020206 [eff.org]_eff_philips_al
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, as long as they know what's inside. (Score:2)
-- This is not a
A win? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:A win? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:A win? (Score:1)
max
Re:A win? (Score:2)
No. A settlement gives no precedent at all.
What I'm wondering is whether those ten points agreed too were haggled over or whether the label simply agreed to all the damands. My suspicion is that they knew they had over-stepped the bounds with this one (due to those blatant privacy violations that consumers could not opt-out of), and so if it went to court, they would likely lose on at least some points AND as a result have a precedent set that could cripple further attempts at corrupting CDs in the future. So what they perhaps did is "lost" out of court (ie agreed to the demands) to avoid a precedent being set, and will continue to sell corrupt CDs until such a time as they have the tech working better, the issues nailed down a bit more, and THEN they'll let it go to court, and they'll win. A precedent will be set establishing that they have the right to sell corrupt CDs under certain conditions.
I'm thinking this matter will get to a courtroom only when the labels are sure they're going to win a precedent in their favour. The bastards.
Wow! (Score:4, Insightful)
The only problem is they're going to continue using this copy protection. How many other distributors will adopt this or similar protection schemes in the future?
Re:Wow! (Score:1)
Demographic? (Score:3, Informative)
Mod Down! (Score:2, Insightful)
Just think if this was a rap cd and you said "do you really think anyone who listens to rap is smart enough to encode it on their computer", people would be all over you. Let's not trivialize the criticism of country music listeners!
Adam
Re:Mod Down! (Score:1)
The problem is, he IS the first to stand up as such....
Nah... we'd agree.. In fact there are scientific studies that say rap makes you dumber
Re:Mod Down! (Score:1)
Wait a minute, mr. TRACK, don't you intentionally look for music that causes other people pain and discomfort? Looks likes it's back to the self-accusation world for me...
Re:Mod Down! (Score:2)
Me - I can't stand modern country music, except for Lyle Lovett. Most of my favorite country singers have one foot in the grave or are gone the Grandest Old Opry or it's counterpart.
Pity.
Re:Mod Down! (Score:2)
Re:Mod Down! (Score:2)
Funny thing, two of my fave musical forms are country and punk -- which have a LOT in common, if you think about it. They're both basically about real life and the consequences of your own actions.
That said, I don't care much for Charlie Pride
To be somewhat on topic despite myself.. does this settlement cover ONLY his stuff?? that's the impression I got. And being a settlement and not a court decision, it's not likely to have any lasting impact anyway. Out of court settlements are often done for exactly that reason -- to AVOID setting a legal precedent that would have a more far-reaching effect on corporate behaviour.
Re:Demographic? (Score:1)
You joke... but perhaps that was calculated. If they release a Charley Pride CD this way, and no one complains, they have a successful "test market" example they can use to justify it for other, more popular artists...
Re:Demographic? (Score:1)
http://www.angelfire.com/mt/mistybrooks/
Too bad she's kinda hot.
Read the fine print.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Read the fine print.... (Score:4, Funny)
BTW Ignore this text down here. I had to write it to make
Limited victory (Score:5, Insightful)
My understanding is that a settlement is _not_ an admission or wrongdoing. So while this settlement may give moral support to others, it won't give you legal leverage against a music label in the future. (the whole point of a settlement is that it's cheaper and quicker than going to court, and since no legal decision is made, no precedent is set)
Second, it's not clear how much the label can get away with if their CDs give consumers explicit warning. People will just "avoid" CDs that are hobbled? There are five music labels that control the industry, from signing artists to what gets produced and distributed to what gets played on the radio.
Courtney Love, Tom Petty and others are suing those labels on the basis that their contracts for artists are basically identical - and uniformly screw the artist. We could be looking at a parallel situation here.
Re:Limited victory (Score:2, Insightful)
Agreed. Nevertheless, considering the hardball tactics played by the music industry, the aparently infinite financial resources and their general arrogant attitude this seems to be a major victory.
A little ol' lady (I guess) with bad taste seems to be able to throw the fear of god into those bozos.
If they'd had considered their chances as good, there's no way in hell, that they would have settled.
"avoid" CDs (Score:2)
You could have put 'avoid "CDs"', as they arent really CDs as far as Philips is concerned. Check out:
http://www.gramofile.co.uk/newsMainTemplate.asp
I may not be a lawyer but... (Score:4, Interesting)
A guy can't wish, can't he?
You are the weakest link, goodbye! (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe it is good that the RIAA lost in the long run, but they are now absolved of any liability for stupid people who could potentially help our cause...
On the flipside, this may raise more awareness as to the dirty deeds of the RIAA by creating more unhappy customers.
Re:You are the weakest link, goodbye! (Score:2)
Re:You are the weakest link, goodbye! (Score:1)
What if it were regulated like the way they have "Parental advisory / Explicit Lyrics" on the CD? It doesn't have to be on the cover even, the back would do. But it would have to be a certain size and format, so it's easy to detect?
markNot that big a win (Score:3, Insightful)
Contributing factor (Score:5, Insightful)
If this had not happened would the RIAA have not lost?
How can a CD track you? (Score:1)
From the story:
Re:How can a CD track you? (Score:2, Informative)
It's not an original idea - Windows Media Player does reports your playlists back to Microsoft secretly if you don't stop it. Download and run ZoneAlarm [zonealarm.com], fire up a CD with Media Player, and wait for the warning.
Re:How can a CD track you? MS says they don't. (Score:1)
According to article in Wired [wired.com] Microsoft admits caching the information on what you play, but they say it never goes out. The cache removes the necessity for Media Player from going out again for the information.
Re:How can a CD track you? (Score:4, Informative)
Not only is this a total invasion of privacy, but it also extends the MS Monopoly, since your CD theoretically wouldn't play under Linux, MacOS, etc. It's also ridiculously stupid; if you are at home on dialup, and you want to listen to this CD on your computer, why the hell would you want to wait hours for it to download when you HAVE THE MUSIC ON THE CD?!
We can only hope these things crash & burn ASAP.
Fat Chuck's Corrupt CD list (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.fatchucks.com/corruptcds/
You can scope out your CDs _before_ ordering them online, something that is otherwise difficult. If you're having trouble with a new CD in the DVD or CD-ROM drive it might be worth checking here also.
if they could spell... or write (Score:1, Flamebait)
NO!!!!!! (Score:2)
IDIOTS!!!
Only applies to Charley Pride CD, not future CDs (Score:4, Insightful)
Given that... I don't see how this is much of a victory; a draw at best.
Re:Only applies to Charley Pride CD, not future CD (Score:1)
Easy: that's 'cause it's the Judicial Branch's job to make decisions based on current law, and it's up to the Legislative Branch (Congress) to make new laws.
Unfortunately, that doesn't always work the way it's supposed to. See Roe v. Wade.
Re:Only applies to Charley Pride CD, not future CD (Score:2)
The Plaintiffs didn't have to roll over and accept this settlement that applies only to the Charley Pride disc. The publisher of this CD could have been required to label all of their future protected discs as a part of this settlement.
The next time there is an unlabled protected disc, we'll go through this all over again.
Resale + 6 downloads = self-contradiction? (Score:2)
and
Does this mean that If I use my 6 downloads and then sell the disc to a friend, they'll get 6 downloads, too? Or will they have bought a disc that they can't play in their computer (and they'll have no way of knowing it until after they've bought it)?
Re:Resale + 6 downloads = self-contradiction? (Score:2)
Are we, as consumers, free to sell products we originally purchased and transfer their entire worth to the purchaser? Conversely, are we, as purchasers, entitled to expect the entire value of products we purchase second hand?
This isn't a win. At all. (Score:2, Insightful)
So no, this wasn't a victory for anything but the status quo.
spaceshifting? (Score:3, Interesting)
It's interesting that the music companies would use a term which sounds like "timeshifting" (a legally protected consumer right for recording television programs) rather then just "copying".
Perhaps they are anticipating laws that would regulate moving music files around for your convenience.
I'd like to spaceshift to a warmer climate.
-Paul
Nice, but doesn't matter much to me (Score:2, Interesting)
Boycott the RIAA? Who needs to? I've simply and effectively removed the RIAA from my life by just not buying music. If they want to play hardball, they can play all they want. I just won't play the game.
And before I get irate comments about me stealing music, I don't download any music from any of the big name file sharing networks. The free stuff at MP3.com (well, what used to be free, haven't been there in awhile) from independent artists in the kind of music I listen to is more than enough for me. If you want Charley Pride or Metallica or whatever, go on right ahead. I've ceased to care.
Cruel Bastards (Score:2)
CD's will now be incompatible with Macs, too (Score:2, Informative)
There are already legal requirements about CD format, including a requirement that the "true name and address of the manufacturer" appear on the CD. This is in most states (here's Arizona's [state.az.us], look at Subsection A, 3 & 4) and in Federal law. This decision will just mean another line of fine print on the back of your CD.
Warning labels (Score:4, Interesting)
I wonder if the warning would like this:
PLAYS IN ANY CD PLAYER. TO ACCESS ADDITIONAL DIGITAL MUSIC FILES ON A COMPUTER, YOU NEED MICROSOFT WINDOWS 98 OR LATER, MICROSOFT WINDOWS MEDIA PLAYER 7.0 (INCLUDED FREE ON THIS CD), AND ACCESS TO THE INTERNET (ALSO INCLUDED; TRY AOL FOR 50 HOURS FOR FREE). ACCESS WILL REQUIRE NOT MORE THAN SIX DOWNLOADS. NOT DESIGNED TO WORK IN DVD, MP3, OR COMPUTER CD-ROM PLAYERS. FOR A LIST OF KNOWN COMPATIBLITY PROBLEMS RELATED TO COMPUTERS, CD PLAYERS, AND DIGITAL MUSIC PLAYING DEVICES, PLEASE VISIT WWW.RECORDSTORE.COM/01lOI/|I\!.HTML
(Yeah, I know it's in upper case. It's meant to be hard to read. That's why liquor and cigarette labels use it...)
Re:Warning labels (Score:2)
There's another reason, too -- they use it so that it's "prominant". Quite a few laws require that some statement be prominant or emphasized; making some text upper-case (as opposed to, say, bolding it) fulfills that requirement, but also makes it harder to read. That's why disclaimers of implied warranties, for instance, are always in a different typecase or font size, or are upper-cased, or something else of that sort.
Of course, it's pretty stupid when everything needs to be "prominant", so the upper-casing/bolding/whatever fails to stick out; there've been cases where, since everything was uniformly bolded and upper-cased, the judge ruled that they'd done nothing to fulfil the legally required prominance.
But then whada I know? IANAL.
Re:Warning labels (OT) (Score:1)
Yes, but arguably fewer people don't know about the birth defects than about the not being able to drive part. How many people do you think really need to be told that drinking impairs their ability to drive? Show me one and I will show you an ideal candidate for the Darwin awards.
Efforts to include warnings on cigarette packaging seem targeted more at trying to be a pain in the ass for the manufacturers than towards serving any useful purpose.
The harmful effects of cigarettes are well known. This is not the 1960s. People who choose to smoke cigarettes today know what they are getting into.
Re:Warning labels (Score:3, Funny)
Sweet! Free modem with every CD!
How long before Sony catches up? (Score:3, Informative)
6. Defendants shall include a warning that the Charlie Pride CD is not designed to work in DVD players or Computer CD-ROM players
The first DVD players didn't have the ability to play normal audio CDs. This feature was added by manufacturers in order to set their products apart from other DVD players. A "value-added" thing.
If these copy-protected CDs become widely used in the music industry, then it won't be long before Sony, Panasonic, etc. will make players and CD-ROM drives that can read these disks. The consumer demand is too high to ignore.
Re:How long before Sony catches up? (Score:1)
...actually, that's a court case I'd like to see. Two big, high expense leagal teams battling it out instead of the David vs Goliath affairs that don't seem to stand much of a chance.
Re:How long before Sony catches up? WTF?!?! (Score:2)
Have you had your head in the sand?!? Sony IS the RIAA! Many years ago Sony used to make consumer electronics. They made good stuff. That's all in the past. Today, Sony makes their money from content (Sony Music, Sony Pictures, Sony Playstation titles, etc), and they build their hardware to maximize THOSE profits, at the expense of features.
Sony equipment has more cripples than any other brand. They have a string of failed product lines because the cripples and proprietary restrictions were so blatant even Joe Consumer clued on. (Memory stick mp3-player-like devices that would not actually play mp3s, but only locked-down DRM shit instead. DVD players that are SERIOUS about implementing zone cripples and output restrictions as bulletproof as possible, while no-name brands do the mininum crippling that licensing requires of them, and sometimes not even that. Minidiscs packaged with "digital" USB connection devices that were not, in fact, digital connecters, but digital to analogue converters, ensuring that any transfer to or from the minidisc was via analogue, even though both machines have digital. Not to mention the prevention/removal of digital output jacks from consumer minidisc recorders to begin with, despite them already being SCMS compliant...). I shudder to think what kind of cripples a sony-brand HDTV system is loaded with...
Sony doesn't make hardware, they make content. And they design that hardware to sell their content.
Not only will Sony not make players to play corrupted CDs (unless every other company is doing it already), they are actively funding the developement of these corruption systems and will spend buckets of $$$ to get them the court's and congress's blessings.
Know thine enemy.
Sony is not the knight in shining armour waiting to take on the labels. Sony is the labels, masquerading as its previous business as an electronics manufacturer to fool the unwary.
Don't ever buy sony products - after those failed products, they are getting very, very good at hiding the cripples. Better than we are at spotting them before purchase.
Re:How long before Sony catches up? WTF?!?! (Score:2)
An amp is not relevant to content - it does not record content, it does not play content, it is an in-between for devices that deal with content. As such, sure, it probably is safe to buy a home-theatre amp from Sony - they'll make a kick-ass amp. But buy the devices that plug into the amp that Do deal with content, that's getting riskier...
I own a couple of ultra-small minidisc recorders also. They were part of what put me off Sony. The actual minidisc tech is fabulous. The cripples and propritary crap is not. And since Sony owns the format, competitors have to license it under Sony's terms.
Your digital connection is only allowed by Sony after mp3 players and the like were looking to imminently kill the minidisc format in the marketplace, due to fast music transfer and other features Sony prohibited in their hardware. Seriously - the format faltered and for a short time it looked like it would die forever, because Sony wouldn't allow the features that genuine product manufacturers would, and mp3 players were taking their marketshare.
That the marketplace eventually forced Sony to relax a cripple doesn't change the point that they crippled it in the first place. And that, when it became apparent that this wasn't cutting the mustard any longer, they tried to disguise an analogue audio transfer as a direct computer connection (when a direct connection would have been cheaper hardware!) is even more damning yet.
There will be hardware divisions of Sony reletively unaffected by the shift in priority, but anything to do with digital content - run! Run away while you still can!
Re:How long before Sony catches up? WTF?!?! (Score:2)
The mp3 player is a little bigger than a small minidisc, and a fair bit heavier (thus less able to survive drops...), but a hell of a lot better.
Digital input AND output. No cripples. SCMS has a work-around. Realtime recording via digital, analogue, or built-in mic (which is a piece of crap, but it's there
Hook it up to the digital port of your Sony amp and you'll get better sound than from a minidisc.
No matter where I am, no matter which mood, the exact song I want to listen to is in my pocket. Custom playlists, no changing discs, no carrying additional discs. Amazing.
(Well, I thought so. I've been addicted to it for months now
Why am I saying this? Because I found minidisc so good compared to the other options that I put up with Sony's crap. But now there is a new option, and it kicks minidisc. So I don't have to put up with sony anymore. And so if there is anyone out there like - this is for you - You don't have to put up with Sony anymore!
Yay!
:-)
The 10 Conditions (Score:4, Informative)
Privacy
1. Defendants shall immediately ensure that any and all Internet music file downloads and listening of the music contained or arising out of said Charlie Pride CD are always anonymous and personal identifying information including, but not limited to, e-mail address and IP addresses shall not be required nor obtained as a condition of downloading (including file downloads from sunncomm.com) or playing or listening to the CD or music files, thereby protecting consumer privacy.
2. Defendants shall immediately purge all personal identifying information (including e-mail addresses and IP addresses) obtained via the music file downloading process to date.
3. Defendants shall amend their privacy policy(s) to advise consumers that all Internet file downloads of the music contained on the Charlie Pride CD are anonymous.
Right of First Sale
4. Defendants shall not impair or limit in any manner the ability and right of consumers to lawfully sell or transfer ownership of the Charlie Pride CD to others who shall have the equal ability to download related digital music files;
Return Policy
5. Defendants shall immediately begin accepting from consumers not satisfied with the Charlie Pride CD due to problems with playability on their CD player, computer CD player, or electronic or portable playing device
Platform Notices
6. Defendants shall include a warning that the Charlie Pride CD is not designed to work in DVD players or Computer CD-ROM players;
7. Defendants shall include a warning of the minimum system requirements for playing the downloadable encrypted digital music files on a computer, including Microsoft Windows 98 and above and Microsoft Windows Media Player 7.0 and above and access to the Internet;
Spaceshifting Notices
8. Defendants shall include a warning that the Charlie Pride CD and encrypted digital music file downloads are not compatible with MP3 rippers and players and are not compatible with MP3 electronic playing devices;
9. Defendants shall include a notice to visit a web page with a simple URL for an updated list of known compatibility problems related to computers. CDplayers, and digital music playing devices;
10. Defendants shall include a warning that the downloadable encrypted digital music files of the songs contained on the Charlie Pride CD may only be downloaded six times.
Warning lables are supposed to help? (Score:2)
Seriously, anybody remember how long it was until the tobacco companies got around to (ie. were forced to) putting the warnings on a white background, making them legible? And if this is how labels about a lethal product are treated, why should we expect warning labels on music to be any better?
Of course, the light on the end of the tunnel is that not even the warning labels were enough to keep the tobacco companies from getting their pants sued off.
Re:Yowsers (Score:3, Interesting)
hmm... how are they going to possibly be able to inforce this, since all downloads are anonymous?
1. Defendants shall immediately ensure that any and all Internet music file downloads and listening of the music contained or arising out of said Charlie Pride CD are always anonymous and personal identifying information including, but not limited to, e-mail address and IP addresses shall not be required nor obtained as a condition of downloading (including file downloads from sunncomm.com) or playing or listening to the CD or music files, thereby protecting consumer privacy.
Re:Yowsers (Score:1)
This ones going to be really hard to follow, unless they want to use freenet.
Re:Yowsers (Score:1)
---
Extra! Extra! Read all about it [slashdot.org]! Slashdot editors censor dissenters [slashdot.org].
Re:Yowsers (Score:2)
Re:Yowsers (Score:1)
As far as term papers go, it's usually frowned apon to copy the text of an entire work. This is often referred to as cheating. Fair use allows short excerpts to be used for purposes of review or such things. As far as Google being able to do it, the legallity has been questioned in the past and probably will be again. If the webmaster prefers, he can use a robots.txt to ask web crawlers to ignore particular pages. The "Well he was doing it to" routine doesn't work too well.
Re:Yowsers (Score:2)
I posted this because I was unsure of the host's bandwidth capabilities and was under the impression that the story was new enough for Google not to have a cache of it.
As a side note, there's also a story on the settlement over at C|Net News.com [com.com].
first sale! huraah! (Score:4, Insightful)
Right of First Sale
4. Defendants shall not impair or limit in any manner the ability and right of consumers to lawfully sell or transfer ownership of the Charlie Pride CD to others who shall have the equal ability to download related digital music files;
What a breath of fresh air. I think this is what the music labels are really after here. Not mass piracy (ala asian copy shops) but abridging first sale rights. And the good news is that in this and the adobe vs. softman [slashdot.org] case, the courts are upholding our rights.
So now the battle shifts to hardware and standards bodies, as the content cartels will try to get through firmware what they can't achieve in the courts.
Re:I like 'em wide!!! (Score:1)
Re:Lovely..... (Score:1)