Sony BMG Settles Over CD DRM 225
aurispector writes "Sony BMG Music Entertainment will pay $1.5 million and kick in thousands more in customer refunds to settle lawsuits brought by California and Texas over music CDs that installed a hidden anti-piracy program on consumers' computers. The settlements, announced Tuesday, cover lawsuits over CDs loaded with one of two types of copy-protection software — known as MediaMax or XCP.
Although it's great to see this as a victory for consumers, I can't help but wonder about the next wave of DRM schemes."
The Best Democracy Money Can Buy (Score:5, Insightful)
Nice. Real way to protect the consumer.
Cheap DRM Research (Score:4, Insightful)
Either way, not much to see here. Big company does nasty things with DRM, gets caught, walks away with dignity and wallet intact.
mandelbr0t
Tagged Peanuts (Score:1, Insightful)
Next Step (Score:5, Insightful)
hidden anti-piracy program? (Score:0, Insightful)
Re:Tagged Peanuts (Score:4, Insightful)
This is sad. (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Trusted Computing (Score:3, Insightful)
With any disrupting technology, one can use it for "safer" computing or "treacherous" computing (remember P2P?!). It almost looks like entertainment industry is waiting to embrace this (one once it matures) and use it treacherously. BTW, my research area is trusted computing and I believe this technology is the first step towards safer computing. It is so very un-scientific to blindly disregard any technology at inception. All in all, you want it or not, corporations are going to push it into your home PC very soon...
Fair Compensation (Score:5, Insightful)
Where's the justice in that?
Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
1.5 Mil? Someone got paid (Score:5, Insightful)
I Bet It's A Big Deal Internally (Score:5, Insightful)
I can see the meeting now:
Muckety Muck: Last quarter your unit had profits of $1.5mil. But this quarter you have a loss of $.5mil. Care to explain?
Sony Music Exec: Well we put this DRM on our CDs and got sued and settled for $2mil.
Muckety Muck: I see. Did the DRM reduce piracy? Or increase sales?
Sony Music Exec: Well... we can't tell if it reduced piracy. And, ahem, sales kinda collapsed after people found out we were getting sued for it.
Muckety Muck: That might just qualify for the dumbest business decision this year! No bonus for you and I'm taking away your parking space.
so while for Sony it's not a big deal, you can bet that the people that made the decision to rootkit their CDs are scrambling to save their careers.
Re:Next Step (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not the DRM, the rootkit. (Score:5, Insightful)
What about criminal charges? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I Bet It's A Big Deal Internally (Score:5, Insightful)
Muckety Muck: Last quarter your unit had profits of $1.5mil. But this quarter you have a loss of $.5mil. Care to explain?
Weasely Sony Music Exec: Pirates! Yes, Pirates! With swords and parrots! Our DRM just wasn't strong enough to hold them off. But if you give us another 2 million dollars, we have this surefire thing that is guaranteed to work!
Muckety Muck: You sound full of confidence, so you must be right. Here's another 2 million dollars.
\Weasely Sony Music Exec already working on how to use that money to gild his Gulfstream
I see very little scrambling that will be done by Execs. At most I see some fingerslapping for the poor guy who implemented it.
Completely unacceptable! (Score:5, Insightful)
Second, they should have to pay everybody the cost of professional cleanup. I would say that is at least $150 per customer hit, probably more.
I think they got out of thi extremely cheap. Not acceptable for clearly criminal behaviour.
Re:What about criminal charges? (Score:5, Insightful)
All you would need to do is become part or a cartel that engages in international price fixing, rip off millions of music lovers and thousands of artists, hire hundreds of lawyers and lobbyists and you too will get a decent legal defence.
Re:Next Step (Score:5, Insightful)
How about the OS vendor that runs untrusted code off a CD without as much as bothering to inform the user?
Re:Just boycott these companies. (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow.
Re:Next Step (Score:5, Insightful)
No kidding -- and you know what the worst part is? If it had been an individual doing this, he would have gotten the jail time! But since it's a big corporation responsible, they get the best "justice" money can buy.
Anybody know the names of the dumbass judges/prosecutors that approved this? I, for one, would like to help them realize just how asinine this settlement is by bitching them out!
Re:Next Step (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Next Step (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:What about criminal charges? (Score:3, Insightful)
You know, I "hate" a lot of companies. In particular, I "hate" Microsoft -- although I only truly hate companies guilty of more egregious crimes. Not because they are the "most evil" company in the world, but simply because they interfere with my career, harass me at work, and have done a lot of damage in my industry(IMHO).
Still... MS corporate execs perjured themselves in court on a regular basis, to the detriment of the entire American public, throughout their whole anti-trust trial, and I never called for the disbandment of their entire company and the seizing of all their assets(how the parent got modded up... some mods must be demented). Do I think some of the top execs at MS deserve to do some time? Maybe. I believe they deserve a fair shake in court if it came to that.
Anyway, my point is this: many of you participating in this 2 minute hate, like the parent poster, are being absolutely fucking ridiculous.
That said, I do consider the "rootkit" to be criminal, and I do indeed think criminal charges should be considered. One must take into consideration, however, the "rootkit" was not developed by any division of Sony, and we cannot rush to conclusions that any of the Sony execs you folks are calling for immediate pound-me-in-the-ass sentences for had any idea what it was exactly they were doing.
Riiight. I'm sure a few other people care about being reasonable and objective... But let the furor will continue unabated.
Now go ahead. Call me a "fanboi" again.
Re:1.5 Mil? Someone got paid (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The Best Democracy Money Can Buy (Score:5, Insightful)
Sony execs should be doing time over this.
Re:Next Step (Score:4, Insightful)
3rd party program prompts before executing unknown code/drivers, prevents hooks, etc [diamondcs.com.au]
If Microsoft adds this stuff by default they are being anti-competitive. If they don't then they are selling an insecure OS. Basically they are damned if they do, damned if they don't. Windows has plenty of leaks but there are plenty of ways to plug them. The days of relying on Windows to include everything for you should have ended in 2001.
Re:1.5 Mil? Someone got paid (Score:4, Insightful)
But it's really much worse, because any individual who did what Sony did could be convicted under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and sent to jail for up to a decade. Instead, Sony has to give up what, 10% of their profits over a 3 month period? Less than 3% of their yearly profit (give or take)? How is that justice?
Re:What about criminal charges? (Score:4, Insightful)
If there is any uncertainty, a proper criminal investigation would eliminate it. There surely must be correspondence between Sony and the developer, including detailed product specifications.
There's a kernel of truth in what you say though. This kind of thing happens all the time in business, because normal people aren't inclined to examine their actions ethically. They go by what "sounds right", which is why the industry is so keen on the term "piracy".
If rootkit vendor had used the colloquial (but inaccurate) term "computer virus" to describe their product, Sony execs might well have been mortified. However, if the vendor described the actual operation of a rootkit in the context of reducing copyright infringement, carefully using neutral terminology, it is quite possible that the execs would see nothing illegal or immoral about it. Quite the contrary, since they were protecting their own legal and ethical rights, it might have seemed like a morally good thing to do.
Which is no excuse. You can't say "Gee, I guess I didn't think the consequences through very carefully," when you torch your neighbors house.