Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Music Media Your Rights Online

Artist Suggesting Ways Around Copy Protection 548

fanboyslayer writes "Switchfoot's new album Nothing Is Sound shipped from Sony with copy protection software on the CD, much to the dismay of thousands of iPod-wielding fans. The band posted a response on their official forum apologizing for the protection and detailing ways to circumvent the protection and rip their songs to PC. Switchfoot linked to open-source program CDex's download page with instructions on disabling the autorunning protection and ripping the files to MP3. Many of Switchfoot's fans have been upset by the copy protection measures, and it's nice to know the artists seem to care about the issue."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Artist Suggesting Ways Around Copy Protection

Comments Filter:
  • Wow (Score:5, Interesting)

    by rm999 ( 775449 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @04:11AM (#13594224)
    Wow, I wonder how Sony will respond to this. After all, bands usually have to give away all their freedom (and their souls) to the record companies when they sign.

    Respect to Switchfoot. Oh, and down with the record companies, who don't give a damn about the artists or their music.
  • RIAA Lawsuit Factor (Score:5, Interesting)

    by digital-madman ( 860873 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @04:14AM (#13594235)
    Okay folks.. My first thought was: "How cool! At least not all artist's (I'm looking at you metallica) are all about money and not the art". But here's another thought. Most artists only make around $2 profit (I've read that somewhere, sorry I can't source it) per album. The rest of the 15 bucks go to production, marketing, studios, and guess who? The RIAA! So this could be the first case where the RIAA sues AN ARTIST! With all the P2P music trading lawsuits... I think the RIAA has the grounds here. The Artist could be called pirates for detailing how to bypass the DRM. Plus the OSS software is now at risk of a RIAA lawsuit. I'm no lawyer so I may be off base here but I do think the next Slashdot headline will be "RIAA Sues Switchfoot". -Digital Madman
  • Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @04:14AM (#13594236)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Evil? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by __aaxwdb6741 ( 884633 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @04:18AM (#13594249) Journal
    So, let me get this straight.
    The record labels ARE the bad guys, and the band themselves probably didnt have a say when their record label decided that the CD should have copy protection, right?
    The artists did realize that by putting copyright-protection on their CD, the piracy of their CD would increase, and not decrease - like the record company propagates - because everyone wants to listen to their music not just on their CD player, but also on their mp3 player, car stereo, and whatnot, right?

    I really salute these guys for doing that they did, by putting out these instructions. It doesnt even matter to me that this smells a bit like a PR stunt - The thing that matters is that maybe more artists will follow this example, and soon "UNPROTECTED AUDIO-CD" will be a treat, just like "Limited Edition" is today.
  • Re:Respect (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Karyyk ( 910994 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @04:33AM (#13594305) Homepage
    As a long-time fan of Switchfoot (when they were a 3-piece band and doing some rather creative, but still cheesy videos for the Christian music scene), I'm fairly sure he did. The Foremans (Tim and his brother Jon) are a few cuts above the average rockers out there, and a bit deeper as well. They're also one of those bands who will stick around a venue for a while afterwards getting to know their fans, and to this point, have yet to let stardom cloud their eyes about what's really important, the fans. They'll stick by their guns on this one.
  • by moriya ( 195881 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @04:38AM (#13594326) Homepage
    The artist should have a say as to whether they'd like to opt for a copy protection system that their holders/labels employ. At least this gives the artist the flexibility of being able to let their fans rip the CDs into mp3s for dumping into their portable players. Eventually all the record labels would then be able to gauge as to whether the system is worth the price to pay to "defeat" piracy.
  • Wondering... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Karyyk ( 910994 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @04:40AM (#13594332) Homepage
    I wonder how many of the Sony bashers here have paid-for Sony products lying all over their abode? Just thinking out loud. Before this becomes a "Switchfoot sold-out" bashing thread, some of us might want to consider that we've done the same thing. Kudos to Switchfoot, Tim Foreman in particular. I'm sure they're aware that this will bring the Sony hounds on top of them, and they did it anyway. Oh, and if it's that easy to bypass the, ahem, "copy protection," Sony should get back to the corporate drawing board...
  • by slashnik ( 181800 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @04:45AM (#13594343)
    "burn the music back to CD and rip it again".

    The article suggests in option (c) copying the secure WMA files to the PC and then burning these WMA files to a standard CD, and then use iTunes to rip the songs.

    What's the quality going to be like after all this format conversion?
  • Re:DMCA (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Tezkah ( 771144 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @04:46AM (#13594344)
    Sony will have to sue their own employees, since when I voiced my frustrations after buying a CD with copy protection (The Coral - Invisible Invasion), I couldn't put it on my iPod. After giving them my email they sent me this:

    [Windows]

    If you have a PC place the CD into your computer and allow the Sony BMG audio player on the CD to automatically start. If the player software does not automatically start, open your Windows Explorer. Locate and select the drive letter for your CD drive. On the disc you will find either a file named LaunchCD.exe or Autorun.exe. Double-click this file to manually start the player.

    TIP: If your CD does not contain either the LaunchCD.exe or
                    Autorun.exe files, it may not be compatible with this iPod
                    solution. Please reply to this letter for more information.

    Once the Sony BMG player application has been launched and the End User License Agreement has been accepted, you can click the Copy Songs button on the top menu.

    Follow the instructions to copy the secure Windows Media Files (WMA) to your PC. Make a note of where you are copying the songs to, you will need to get to these secure Windows Media Files in the next steps.

    Once the WMA files are on your PC you can open and listen to the songs with Windows Media Player 9.0 or higher (or another fully compatible player that can playback secure WMA files, such as MusicMatch, RealPlayer, and Winamp). You can then burn the songs to a standard Audio CD. Please note that in order to burn the files, you will need to upgrade to, or already have, Windows Media Player 9 or 10.

    Once the standard Audio CD has been created, place this copied CD back into your computer and open iTunes. iTunes can now rip the songs as you would any normal audio CD.

    Please note an easier and more acceptable solution requires cooperation from Apple, who we have already reached out to in hopes of addressing this issue. To help speed this effort, we ask that you use the following link to contact Apple and ask them to provide a solution that would easily allow you to move content from protected CDs into iTunes or onto your iPod rather than having to go through the additional steps above:

          http://www.apple.com/feedback/ipod.html [apple.com]

    Thank you for the opportunity to be of assistance.

    The Sony BMG Online Support Team
    CCKM


    Notice how they try to blame Apple because they only allow customers to rip to crippled (and crappy, IMO) WMA. I eventually just downloaded Exact Audio Copy [google.ca] and it ripped it just fine. Still frustrating.
  • Re:Nice try, but (Score:4, Interesting)

    by bnitsua ( 72438 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @04:49AM (#13594355)
    they're a "christian" band, not indie. which, for some reason, only adds humor to the situation for me...
  • by Eivind ( 15695 ) <eivindorama@gmail.com> on Monday September 19, 2005 @05:21AM (#13594435) Homepage
    Most of what he writes makes sense and is true, but he is a little bit overeager to put the blame on someone else:

    It is also unfortunate when bands such as ourselves, Foo Fighters, Coldplay, etc... (just a few of the new releases with copy protection) are the target of this criticism, when there is no possible way to avoid this new industry policy.

    This is bull. The artists are the original copyrigth-holder for their work. They choose to license it for publication by some record-company, or not. They are free to set whatever demands they want for this publication. (with the risk that if their demands are too stiff, the record-company will say: "no deal")

    Especially famous, well-selling artists have considerable leverage. If say Madonna (more realistically, her manager or whomever representing her) walks into a record-company and say she'd like to publish her new record with them, but one of the conditions is that it be released in standard CD-format, that the company would refuse to negotiate a contract.

    Artists do have a way of influencing record-companies. It may not be easy, and it may be that not all artists have a lot of negotiation-leverage all the time. But to claim, as he does here, that they have "no possible way" to influence things, is bullshit.

  • Re:Nice comment (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19, 2005 @05:25AM (#13594448)
    Microsoft designed Windows (this really *is* a feature :) so that you could bypass pesky autorun software by holding the SHIFT key (or just turning off on a per-drive basis)

    What's the odds that in Vista, the Autorun feature will be "improved" so that it's more like, "to disable Autorun, hold down SHIFT, unless it's a copy-protected disc in which case it WILL auto-run regardless of any key-presses or registry changes you make"?
    /me paranoid first thing on a Monday morning
  • by Dr_Barnowl ( 709838 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @05:30AM (#13594460)
    They're not dumb. They're getting exactly what they want, which is to restrict the fair use rights of the consumer in the pursuit of greater profits ; if they can prevent the average Joe manipulating the music through his computer, they can sell more ringtones (bigger than the singles market now), digital music (especially for your DRM enabled player), and so forth. The argument that it's to prevent piracy is pretty transparent, precisely because of the demographic the technology is targetting. Which is over 90% of the installed user base for the consumer OS market.

    The vast majority of their clientele will have Windows, with the CD-ROM Autorun feature switched on. The fact that the technology does nothing to prevent copying by the tech-savvy demographic indicates that they know that there is nothing they can do to prevent "cracking" of their protection schemes. They would love a universally uncrackable scheme, but they know that such a thing is not achievable. So they have settled for a scheme that nets them more money from a demographic that they can push around, and pointed the finger of blame at "those dirty smelly hacker pirates".

  • by jcaren ( 862362 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @05:32AM (#13594465)
    I understood that installing any software without express permission is illegal within the UK/EU? If true, and if every purchaser returned the CD, and then somehow managed to take the record shop to courts for the IT cleanup fees, record shops would be far more wary about invasive DRM. Jacqui
  • Publicity? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gallondr00nk ( 868673 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @05:47AM (#13594511)
    Has anyone considered that this announcment could be made with the full cooperation of Sony? The label wins by having "underground" artists who supposedly don't buy into the corporate ethos - angst and pseudo anti-corporatism generates a lot of sales. Anyone worth their salt would find a way to circumvent copy protection this easy anyway, so the label doesn't really lose out.

      The artist gains from having that warm fuzzy feeling of "speaking out", and generating sales of course. They also have a shared voice with their fans, without lifting a finger.

    I'm not saying they don't care, i'm just saying this could easily be a publicity stunt. It's on /., so it has worked to some extent.

  • by Seumas ( 6865 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @05:53AM (#13594523)
    Hah. Unless I'm in the Rolling Stones, I'm probably having a hard enough time negotiating a contract that allows me to own a home and consider retiring someday (or even just put food on my plate), but I'm going to waste my bargaining power (what little there may be unless, again, I'm the biggest act around) on making sure the few legitimate users out there who need to circumvent copy protection can do so?

    Not bloody likely.
  • Re:NOBODY WANTS IT (Score:2, Interesting)

    by LordFnord ( 843048 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @05:56AM (#13594531)
    You're in .uk? Richer Sounds (and Comet, and Currys, and everywhere else) are selling multi-region players. If they're illegal then no-one's bothered :-)

    For example, try here [richersounds.com].

  • Re:CDs? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by StrawberryFrog ( 67065 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @06:02AM (#13594554) Homepage Journal
    I sucessfully returned a CD (Kasabian [amazon.com]) to Amazon.co.uk

    My main argument in returning the CD was that the CD attempted to install unknown software onto my pc without my consent when I inserted it, and said software did not come with any way of unistalling - after taking advice from geeky friends, I uninstalled this driver by reverting to the last system restore point.

    Also at the time there was no indication of any copy protection on Amazon's product page.

    If everyone did that, they'd soon get the message.
  • by CAIMLAS ( 41445 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @06:11AM (#13594578)
    I've got a friend that is in a quickly-rising band. He's getting fucked twelve ways to Sunday - bigtime. He's having to borrow money from friends and relatives just to stay on the road.

    The problem is that he has a contract with both a record label and an agent, and the agent is fucking him over. Unfortunately, he can't do anything about it until his contract expires - which it does, soon.

    After that, he's got a guy lined up to give him and another member of the band (the only two who aren't restricted from leaving) a contract on another label, complete with a 11k/month salary and various other benefits.

    It might not be enough to live off indefinately, but it's certainly enough to compensate them for their time. Artists shouldn't be allowed to eat off their art indefinately; they need to keep innovating and improving, just like the rest of us. A good example of this is, I think, Greenday. Their sound has matured quite a bit, and now they're not teen punkers but fairly mature adult artists.
  • by Morgaine ( 4316 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @06:46AM (#13594668)
    It's nice to see bands standing up for their public against the wishes of their labels.

    Yeah, while still taking Sony's money and saying that it is "impossible" to change the system, and therefore supporting its continuation.

    Let's be honest here. They don't WANT to change the system, because they like Sony's cash too much.

    If they were genuine about being pro-fan, there is a hell of a lot that they could do about the situation.

    For a start they could tell Sony to sod off with the copy protection, or they'll go with another publisher. If Sony threatens them with litigation on the basis of the contract signed, then get together with other artists in the same situation and run a class action on the basis of such contracts being in restraint of trade.

    Sony (and other labels) are just distributors and promotors in this day and age when you can have a billion-track studio at home for peanuts, and hire in your mastering experts for a session. Yet, the labels want to own it all, for eternity. Bollocks.

    It's time that bands did something about it, or be branded money-grabbing hypocrits. The power to bring down the system is in their hands. Currently the majority just have no interest in using that power and getting rid of the old machine.
  • Re:Nice try, but (Score:2, Interesting)

    by somersault ( 912633 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @06:47AM (#13594669) Homepage Journal
    errr yeah, Christians shouldnt be allowed to play rock music.. o_0 that makes sense *enjoys rock music, is in a band, is a Christian* though I agree, most 'christian' bands play sucky music, hehehe
  • by Tom ( 822 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @06:55AM (#13594689) Homepage Journal
    Especially famous, well-selling artists have considerable leverage.

    Not all. Most of them are under long-term contracts. Remember Prince? He didn't even own his own stage name.
  • Re:CDs? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ettlz ( 639203 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @07:06AM (#13594717) Journal
    A trojan cd. I believe there's a criminal case...

    This is actually a good point. Did the grandparent contact the Police?

  • Re:Nice comment (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Itchy Rich ( 818896 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @07:06AM (#13594718)

    They did give up all their principles, if they ever had any, when signing for Sony. You're either part of the problem or part of the solution.

    This is the same logic that Bush used. You're either with us or with the terrorists. It's just fallacy. Empty rhetoric. It just sounds good.

    Sony are not a "problem" they're a symptom. They're a company, created by commerce-based culture. If they go under, another company will form to take their place. Your problem is with the system that created them.

    Also, comparing a bunch of entertainers to mother Theresa and Gandhi is downright laughable, and only serves to reinforce my perception that these guys are some sort of PR hoes.

    Why? They're just human beings in the pubic eye. Look at Bob Geldof. He's an entertainer and he helps people. Just because you have them categorised into neat little boxes doesn't mean they have to conform to your definitions.

    Oh, and good_press != heaven so there goes the rest of your argument. Go get some sleep, fanboy.

    I'm going to ignore your childish insults and explain again.

    You are *assuming* that these musicians are doing this for PR reasons. If they are doing that then, although your label of "karma bitch" might be valid, you have to apply that label in some places you might not expect in order for you critisism to be consistent, and hence for you not to be a hypocrite.

    For example, the Catholic church (amongst many others, I apologise for using the easy target) preaches that if you don't follow their ways you will go to hell. It follows that people become Catholic to avoid going to hell. So, a catholic who performs a charitable act could be said to do so under the threat of hell. The same label of "karma bitch" could be applied, it's just that the reward comes in the afterlife instead of at a celebrity record launch.

    Personally I disagree with your label of "karma bitch". I think that performing charitable acts in your own interests is perfectly acceptable. In fact, think that performing charitable acts is actually usually in your own interests, even if it's only to satisfy your conscience or to appear generous.

  • Re:NOBODY WANTS IT (Score:3, Interesting)

    by laffer1 ( 701823 ) <luke AT foolishgames DOT com> on Monday September 19, 2005 @07:44AM (#13594798) Homepage Journal
    Yes, an example would be the Rolling Stones. I think its obvious from their history in court. All they care about is money and not the fans. I think i'll go listen to bitter sweet symphony.
  • Re:Nice try, but (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ElBeano ( 570883 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @08:10AM (#13594893)
    I know Christian bashing is popular on Slashdot, but it merely displays ignorance of the diversity of those who call themselves "Christian". For example, the first Christians were model citizens but refused to recognize the "godhood" of the emperor. You may disagree with them (Switchfoot), loathe them, but they are doing what they believe is right. If you take care to analyze the situation, you WILL respect them... and avoid the snide comments. I take every claim to be "Christian" with a grain of salt. I examine the evidence to see whether the claim is valid (admittedly according to my fallible judgment) and then comment. I have a lot of respect for this band.
  • Re:Wow (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19, 2005 @08:11AM (#13594895)
    I'll believe the band did this in defiance of the label when Sony sues Switchfoot. Until then, I'll assume this is just another case of engineered street cred.

  • by Aslan72 ( 647654 ) <`psjuvin' `at' `ilstu.edu'> on Monday September 19, 2005 @08:12AM (#13594900)
    What's especially evil in this version of the copy protection is that the disc doesn't allow any programs that could burn it to run while the disc is in the drive. If you don't close the programs (like itunes/nero/etc.) the disc ejects and won't insert into your computer unless their closed.

    --pete
  • Re:Nice comment (Score:3, Interesting)

    by lowrydr310 ( 830514 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @08:27AM (#13594953)
    I think most new CDs (at least the ones I've seen) have a little disclaimer that says something about them not being compliant with some standard and that there's no guarantee they'll play on all CD players. I haven't had any problems playing anything yet, but I'd be a little upset if I bought a CD that wouldn't play. I don't know of any store that would accept a return on an opened CD, unless it was physically damaged in which case they'd issue a replacement of the exact title.
  • Re:Wow (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Brave Guy ( 457657 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @08:27AM (#13594954)
    There is such a thing as "right of fair use",
    Not in any country I know of. In some places, there are fair use exemptions to copyright law, but that's not the same thing at all.
    which is sacrosanct.

    Again, not in any country I know of. Many places now have laws that make circumvention of copy protection mechanisms a crime in its own right, regardless of whether you would otherwise be allowed to copy the material. This is why things like the DMCA and EUCD are such bad law: they created a loophole through which fair use exemptions could be eliminated.

    You might wish it to be different -- and I'm sure you would not be alone -- but wishing does not make it so, and I'm afraid shouting all over Slashdot in bold capitals that it is just makes you sound ill-informed.

  • The thing is.... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @08:42AM (#13595014)
    The thing is, I've bought a couple CD's with copy protection. Effectiveness of this copy protection is essentially NIL. If you either have CD Autorun disabled, or are using Linux, then you don't even know it's there. Disabling CD autorun is good anyway, why would it want my computer to automatically execute any CD I place in the drive? Basically, all you really need is for 1 person to figure out how to copy the music off the CD, and put it on some P2P network. Then, let the internet do the rest. I wonder if the people paying to put this crap on the CDs are actually aware of how bad it is a stopping piracy, and how good it is at pissing off normal everyday users who just want to copy the music to their mp3 player.
  • Wonder how long..... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by cbiltcliffe ( 186293 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @08:44AM (#13595028) Homepage Journal
    Wonder how long it will be till the RIAA starts suing their artists under the DMCA for "providing tools to break copyright protection". They already sue their customers, so why not?

    Guess that'll shoot to hell their insistence that "it's all for the artists!", though, huh?
  • Re:Nice comment (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MyDixieWrecked ( 548719 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @10:06AM (#13595493) Homepage Journal
    If the Apple and Windows userbases suddenly became equal, you'd see copy protection for both platforms. Why spend an equal amount of money for copy protection that's only going to affect 3% of your consumers vs 95%?

    same idea as spyware.

    i've got a question, though (being as I don't use windows and I've had the opportunity to rip several protected CDs for other people)...

    One of the main problems with windows, in terms of reasons for lack of stability and the like, is that there is so much crap being installed on a regular basis (spyware, adware, and not to mention actual real software), what's to stop all this crap from conflicting and bringing down the system?

    at my job, they just locked down all of the windows computers. Software cannot be installed without an administrator password. hell, you can't even look at the built-in calendar without loggin in as an admin (doubleclick the time in the taskbar).

    how are office peons supposed to listen to music, now?

    this also brings up another issue. Earlier on slashdot, there was an article about the 6 stupidest ideas for security. the author proposed a whitelist for executing software on a machine, rather than a blacklist. Having audio CDs require installation of software just to listen to music completely shatters his idea of keeping a clean system. Suddenly, you go from knowing exactly what you need to run (excel, word, minesweeper, adobe reader, etc) to saying "sonydrmdaemon32.exe? columnbiaprotect_win32.exe... wtf is that crap?"

    I can see it now. in 2 years when nearly every audioCD comes with their own flavour of software DRM, the next wave of security exploits are going to involve that software.

    the future looks pretty dark.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19, 2005 @10:21AM (#13595601)
    It is trivial to circumvent, for the 200,000 or so people who regularly read Slashdot.

    It is not trivial to circumvent for many of the "average" consumers, though.

    The point of this type of DRM is not to prevent "piracy." The point is to create a situation where the "average" consumer, frustrated by their inability to copy their just-bought cd to their flashy mp3 player, turns around and buys the cd -again- from an online music source, like iTunes. This way Sony gets to make double the money on the same songs.

    Sony knows that a "pirate" will know how to circumvent DRM like this. Sony also knows that the average human being is not a pirate. What Sony is banking on is that enough average human beings won't know or won't take the time to learn how to circumvent this DRM. Sony hopes these people will just roll over and pay them even more money just to play songs they have already purchased.
  • by wbren ( 682133 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @11:26AM (#13596150) Homepage
    You or me? Because no matter how much money Sony has paid Switchfoot for its work, they won't have enough to fend off the RIAA lawyers when they get sued for copyright infringement.

    The best analogy I can come up with is this: A Microsoft exployee working on Windows XP discovers that Windows Genuine Advantage is about to be implemented and posts instructions on how to circumvent it. Microsoft is feeding him and his family, Sony is feeding Switchfoot and its members' families. The Microsoft employee and Switchfoot both gave up rights when they signed their respective contracts.

    As stupid and unjust as it may seem, Switchfoot has set themselves up for a major lawsuit.

    Or.... Maybe it's just a conspiracy.

    1. The RIAA told Switchfoot to post the story so they would get sued.
    2. The RIAA sues Switchfoot to "prove" bypassing DRM is illegal.
    3. Switchfoot's lawyers intentionally do a horrible job presenting their case in exchange for an RIAA pay off, and the RIAA wins.
    4. Precendent now says that bypassing the DRM on these discs is illegal.
    5. People are scared to post instructions on bypassing any form of DRM.
    6. Profit!
  • Re:Wow (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Bastian ( 66383 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @11:48AM (#13596337)
    Agreed. Doesn't installing this software without my knowledge qualify as some sort of computer crime? If I installed software on one of Sony's computers without asking them first, you can be sure my ass would be in jail on computer hacking charges faster than you could blink.
  • Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @12:26PM (#13596695)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Actually (Score:2, Interesting)

    by idonthack ( 883680 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @02:13PM (#13597413)
    The "christian rock band" is just a front. It's not who they really are.
  • by KrackHouse ( 628313 ) on Monday September 19, 2005 @03:17PM (#13597890) Homepage
    I went to high school with those guys, they're really not greedy people. Sony is giving them a bad name though with the copy protection and the payola thing involving switchfoot.

    In fact, the fact that they are nice and trusting is probably what allowed Sony to sneak this under their radar.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19, 2005 @04:24PM (#13598502)
    You can record a band in a basement with $1000 worth of gear, a $1000 audio interface and Cubase, but it's not going to be good enough for production no matter what you do with it.

    Oh yes it is (good enough), in fact it's vastly better than required. You obviously haven't heard any home studio demos recently.

    Pretty much anything you make yourself with modern equipment can be turned into a smash hit by a pro mastering engineer. They're the only people worth their weight in gold, apart from the artists.

    If the studios and labels died tomorrow and were replaced by entirely separate mastering co-ops, CD+packaging contractors, and promotors working on a small commission basis, it would be no loss whatsoever, and a huge gain for the musicians' profits. No cartels tying artists into serfdom, just competing service providers.

Everybody likes a kidder, but nobody lends him money. -- Arthur Miller

Working...