Lawsuit Challenges Copy-protected CDs 341
acer123 writes "An article states that 'The five major record companies have been hit with a class-action lawsuit charging that new CDs designed to thwart Napster-style piracy are defective and should either be barred from sale or carry warning labels.'"
NOT digital quality (Score:5, Interesting)
Also, wasn't something like this reported a few days ago?
How to join? (Score:5, Interesting)
---
I'm tired of waltzing for pancakes. - Gwen Mezzrow
What will this accomplish? (Score:4, Interesting)
The pessimist in me though, says this is only a delay tactic. LEt's hope it's not economically feasible for them to make this a new standard.
Hopefully this'll work... (Score:4, Interesting)
Here's hoping that at the very least it'll become obvious which CDs are copy protected (maybe a sticker like the "Warning: Mature Content") sticker. Then I will be able to at least be guaranteed a functioning product that does what it claims to do.
my own way around it (Score:3, Interesting)
Well isn't that special. (Score:3, Interesting)
Uhm. Hello? Is this thing on?
DVD movies and PC games don't crash other platforms when you put them in last I checked. DVD movies work on DVD PLAYERS. PC games work on PC's. Music CD's should work on ALL CD PLAYERS.
What do they expect? If I pop'd a music CD in my PC and it locked my box I'd be awfully pissed off too.
Amusing how often they prove their stupidity... (Score:5, Interesting)
"...software and video game publishers have protected their works for years, and no one has even (thought) to claim that doing so was inappropriate, let alone unlawful."
This is just wrong on so many levels. One, as anyone in Usenet knows, there are a lot of trolls out there who claim its wrong, not that we listen to them.
But seriously, how many CD copy protections prevent the CD from being used on a majority of players?? I know of one game thats been almost endemic in its lack of functionality, and thats MS' Dungeon Siege. I've got 3 cd drives (32x, DVD-ROM, and CD-RW) and dungeon siege only worked with my CDRW. Thats the worst case instance I can think of for software lack of functionality due to media changes (MS has some lovely copy protection nonsense on the CDs). And there are legitimate complaints all over the place about that problem.
The majority of software is protected via regkeys and other software based methods, *not* by scratching the CD so only some players can read it. Someone want to come with me to smack this guy with an EUL printout or two? It'd be fun...
Packaging Laws (Score:2, Interesting)
Of course, this warning label should be in big, bold, black text on a white background.
At the very least, this would make these CDs a very unattractive proposition.
But of course that is probably not likely to happen.
Re:If the RIAA wins... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:From the article.... (Score:2, Interesting)
> The RIAA may have a point about piracy
No, they dont! "just like owners of any other property"???! Thats why Copyright law exists! Because owners of cultural and artistic work is not like owners of other property.
The Great Big Lie has everybody forgetting this. Everybody get it through thy skulls! Copyright, and intellectual property is and never will be physical property! So you dont get to distribute it, or protect it like physical property. End of story.
Incidentally, copyright law 2002 is much more like the Licensing Act of 1722, which the first true copyright law of the 1760s was supposed to fix. The Statue of Anne, the firtst true copyright law meant to protect the creators of the work, not the publishers/distributors was meant to wrestle control of cultural distribution and publication from the companies to the arists. Nowadays, look in those 'big label' contracts. Guess who ends up owning the copyright when you sign (the only real way to get big time distribution these days?)
RIAA Pres did make one valid point (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm curious to hear the Slashdot community's response to Sherman's point. We cannot copy movies, even under "fair use" provisions, thanks to Macrovision (VHS) and CSS + Macrovision (DVD). While we can make backups of our software, it is harder to pirate them due to the use of software keys. This is a relatively effective, and unobtrusive protection mechanism.
But when it comes to music, it's no-holds-barred. There is absolutely zero protection on a CD to prevent unauthorized copying. Don't you agree that it is hypocritical to cry foul regarding CD copy-protection, but not the guards built into VHS and DVD works?
Why the double-standard? Why do we just accept that any VHS tape we buy will be uncopyable thanks to Macrovision (barring any specialized hardware to bypass it that's beyond the reach of the lay consumer), but we so vigorously oppose those similar protections on CDs? I can't copy my VHS tapes, even if I own them and want to make a copy to take on the road in my van, or to preserve the slowly-degrading quality inherent in repeated playing of such media. But we don't cry about it - we just accept it. Why?
Circumventing the whole fight (Score:1, Interesting)
Perhaps more importantly, we will be, along with other record companies, releasing future music on a format called Dataplay along with the usual vinyl/CD releases. Dataplay cartridges are very similar to mini-discs in appearance but are made in the mindset of Dvds. This includes copy protection, video and image galleries, the potential for higher audio quality, etc. My main gripe is that, as far as I know, the ability to rip mp3's off this new format is non-existent. For more info, go to www.dataplay.com
-Reggie Bannister
I would like to know ... (Score:3, Interesting)
Dungeon Siege is copy protected? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:RIAA Pres did make one valid point (Score:5, Interesting)
DVD CSS/region coded: sucks, yes, but at least part of the standard from inception. Anything designed to play DVDs *should* play even CSS/region coded discs (provided the region matches, etc...). Copy protection does not interfere with playback for commercial systems. The peeve here is that non-sanctioned players (i.e. ogle) cannot legally read CSS discs in the US (though many ignore the law, it is still illegal). And backup is not an option for the average consumer, and backup is important.
Macrovision, unlike DVD, was a modification of Tape encoding methods. It sucks for backup purposes, but has minimal effect on playback. The technology kept confined to the relatively small world of VCRs, so the technology pretty much works as intended. Backups are made possible by 'signal enhancers' available from anywhere that remove macrovision spikes. Backups are suddenly possible and the slight video degradation is taken care of. Again, the law-abiding person suffers most from the slight picture degradation, while copiers continue, but the impact is minor.
Now CD protection is different, the worst of both worlds. CD technology has gotten to the point where many people use computers/computer based cd players to play back music and ditch the far more limited dedicated low end cd players. This is fine for the standard, but now the RIAA screws the standard so that very high end and computers no longer play back this music, and the chunk of listeners cut out by that is quite significant. Meanwhile, the ones who are determined break out sharpies, post it notes, and analog lines to copy to their hearts content. In the long run only the legit customers really get screwed, and get screwed quite significantly by this bastardized format...
Re:RIAA Pres did make one valid point (Score:2, Interesting)
Because the copy protection on VHS tapes doesn't render my VCR useless for simple playing. That's the crux of the argument - legally purchased copy-protected CDs cannot be played on my home PC, whereas copy-protected DVDs can. The record labels are knowingly selling goods that could potentially damage my computer equipment through no fault of my own.
Re:insulting (Score:1, Interesting)
Then maybe it's time for a second class action lawsuit, against publishers that extort (copy-)rights out of artists.
Now that "monopoly" is starting to lose some of its glamour because everybody hears the word way too often, "cartel" could become a new fashion word.
I don't know about the US, but over here cartels (as in "combinations of independent commercial or industrial enterprises designed to limit competition or fix prices") are as illegal as monopolies.
And what other purpose does the RIAA serve?
Re:The real truth (Score:2, Interesting)
But I digress. My point is this: I agree that the Big 5 are trying to move toward copy-protection in an attempt to prevent time-shifting. Everyone has probably seen the commercials playing on VH1 or MTV (i dont remember which) about favorite records. "You bought it on vinyl, you bought it on tape, you bought it when it came out on CD, you ripped it to an MP#, and you downloaded it to an MP3 player."
The industry has so far been able to make us purchase several copies of a single album that we love in order to keep up with the latest audio technology. What is after digital? If we can make digital copies on our computers, and then transfer that copy to any new un-copy-protected media, there will never be a need for us to purchase another copy of an album we've already paid for at least once.
AFAIK (Score:3, Interesting)
I would intuitively think that this is a more dangerous tactic for the record companies, as it pretty clearly shows for thought and planning in their bid to actually disable peoples computers causing them a not insignificant expense in both time and money. The crippling of the computers wasn't a side effect of the 'copy protection' (such as it is) it was actually the plan. I personally can't see a difference between that and any other malicious act which damages someones computer.
But I do think going after the stores would be the way to go, with their thinner margins, it would hurt them a lot more. And they, in turn, would use their market muscle for ends that are more inline with their customers wishes. The last thing Best Buy, Sam Goodie, or any chain wants to do is end up in a court battling a former customer.
Re:Maybe I'm naive, (Score:1, Interesting)
From my accounting records, it costs about US$16300 to record, package, distribute and promote a print run of 1000 CDs. On that, you can expect a return of $14 per CD (the rest goes to the retailer & tax).
Return:$14000
Cost:$16300
Net profit:-$2300
And that's IF you sell 1000 CDs (which you won't do without serious promotion power; you think radio stations line up to interview Joe Bloggs just because he owns a guitar?). On top of that, about 80% of acts don't get past that first pressing. It falls to the remaining 20% of acts to cover those losses.
By comparison, a DVD will have had a cinema run, with healthy ticket revenues; ever notice that the better a movie does in the cinema, the longer it takes to get to DVD/video? Thats no coincidence. There is no equivalent pre-relase profit take for music CDs.
Bear in mind that the record company and the act are usually separate corporate entities. The most common arrangement is for the act to license their works to a company for a period of time; however long that is, six months is generally considered the product's life cycle. If it isn't selling (read:made back it's costs) by then, it probably never will.
Established record companies with formulaic promotion schemes & pre-packaged acts can make vast amounts of money, and, surprisingly, do spend some of that developing acts which will never turn a profit. The rule is: for every Brittney Spears, there are 4 acts you never hear about, who may produce better music, but don't easily conform with some marketing type's preconceived ideas about what sells, or the radio stations formats, or don't posess J-Lo's arse (& are thus of no interest to males 14-21).