data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f4aa7/f4aa70d35160f984c066a905e3d574b637b2d802" alt="Music Music"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/75bbe/75bbea2b645399526281828e064d03a8a5dc22d1" alt="Media Media"
Companies Abandon The Sinking Ship That Is SDMI 136
wiggles writes: "Cryptome is mirroring a federally filed notice which discloses that a small number of companies (9) have joined the SDMI, and a large number of companies (27) 'have been dropped from the [SDMI] venture' i.e. either kicked out, or jumped ship. I put my money on the second possibility. The list of companies 'that have been dropped' is staggering in scope. Some of the more notable names include Encoding.com/Loudeye Technologies (famous infrastructure provider for streaming music), Guillemot (French maker of kickass graphic cards), I2GO.COM (American maker of high-capacity solid state mp3 players), LG Electronics (Korean makers of all kinds of consumer electronics), among others. One wonders how many more defections will follow, as the SDMI group continues to try (and fail) to achieve the impossible. As Bruce Schneier says 'Trying to make bits uncopyable is like trying to make water not wet. The sooner people accept this, and build business models that take this into account, the sooner people will start making money again.'"
Time for a new definition of "Realistic" (Score:1)
Precisely. The only reasonable business models are those that pass along the benefits of cheap copying to the public, and that treat people as valued customers rather than as criminals to be controlled.
Unfortunately, these are the types of business models that companies following the old paradigm like to dismiss as "unrealistic".
On a "lighter" note, it's really funny that Intel is so heavily involved in copy protection given that Andrew Grove (1) escaped a Communist country, (i.e. a place that limited personal freedom), and (2) wrote "the book" on strategic inflection points and the danger they pose to companies that prefer to stay set in their ways. Can you say "deliberately placing yourself on the wrong side of history"?
Re:Guillemot does more than video cards.. (Score:1)
Godel's Theorem and SDMI (Score:1)
Re:Not absolutely impossible, but close (Score:1)
Remember cutouts? Those records with a little notch in the corner? As part of the contract between a record store and the record distributors, the distributors agree to take back any unsold product. So a record store can order 25 copies of a record, and if only five sell, they can send back the remaining 20. The distributors then cut off the corner, and liquidate the "cutouts" at reduced prices.
In order to eliminate vinyl, the record distributors simply informed the record stores that they would no longer be accepting returns on vinyl. Within a month or so, vinyl was GONE.
Who are my dumb, and why are they damned? (Score:2)
Re:Guillemot does more than video cards.. (Score:2)
Down that path lies madness. On the other hand, the road to hell is paved with melting snowballs.
Re:Guillemot does more than video cards.. (Score:1)
I don't think so!
ttyl
Farrell
Guillemot does more than video cards.. (Score:3)
And it is a well done card...I can turn up the volume on my studio monitors, and I still hear no noise...very nice!
ttyl
Farrell J. McGovern
Amature Recording Engineer
Re:Making it uncopyable (Score:2)
If they controlled 100% of the hardware, it would be impossible (and that's assuming they did it perfectly), it might well be uncrackable.
But in the real world, the cat is out of the bag, systems they do not control exist, and there will be a way to crack everything.
Re:Making it uncopyable (Score:2)
Well, if it can be read, it can be copied. It's that simple. Copying is just reading something and writing what you've read elsewhere (i.e., what the Unix 'cp' command does). That's where SDMI is going to lose - they're trying to make reading and copying out to be separate operations, but one is just an extension of the other.
_____
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Re: SDMI and other 'compliance' technologies (Score:2)
And MiniDisc is in basically the same boat, if I'm not too much mistaken. Ah, all the potentially excellent technology we've missed out on because of stupid legislation.
_____
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Re:SMDI an Impossible task? I'm afraid not. (Score:2)
if you stop paying for the product most people will stop supplying (I am talking about original designers)
What this means is that something is scarce in the equasion. That would be the capacity of people to compose music good enough that many others want to hear it.
So, what the market seeks is a way to pay for that and distribute it in the most efficient way possable. A middleman who keeps >90% of the wholesale price and prevents a method of distribution that costs next to nothing is not efficient.
As a consumer, wouldn't you be willing to pay $1.50 - $1.80 to your favorite artist to produce the next CD (as high quality mp3's)?
If you were a musician, would you write and produce music for ~$1,000,000 a year? ($1 each for a single platinum album)
In other words, if the market was working here, we'd be paying for the scarce thing (composition and production) not the unlimited thing (reproduction of the work). Likely, many would pay a small amount to get that in a convieniant form (a CD) as well, but not $15 - $18.
Re:SDMI (Score:2)
Sure he might find out after. But is he really likey to take it back to the store now? Probably not. He'll just live with it.
Or have the kid next door 'flush the filmware or whatever he said' and remove the 'feature'.
Re:Guillemot does more than video cards.. (Score:1)
[*hushed whispers*]
oh. Never mind . . .
hawk
Re:SDMI and other 'compliance' technologies (Score:1)
Well, since that is illegal, you take them to court (assuming you have the program under copyright and didn't Open Source it). Of course, under Copyright, they can still use that software as they want, even running it backwards, disassembling it to see how it works, etc.
The problem with all of these things like SDMI is that they are ACCESS CONTROL, not COPYRIGHT PROTECTION. As has been noted many times, you can't prevent copying (bits are bits). Copyright law actually ALLOWS copies (Fair Use). Copyright does NOT allow redistribution (creation of new copies for others).
The problem with all of these things like SDMI is that they are ACCESS CONTROL, not COPYRIGHT PROTECTION. Is that copy I made a Fair Use backup copy or a copy I'm selling? Or is it a backup copy that I later decide to sell? The Software has no way to know without reading my mind. Thus, each and every one of these schemes ultimately means that you assume EVERY person is a crook, and deny them their LEGAL rights, in order to prevent theft.
Of course, using the alternative, the court systems, that has been there for hundreds of years, is, I guess, to low-tech and difficult for all these high-tech companies.
Re:Making water not wet... (Score:1)
Re:Companies abandon sinking ship... (Score:2)
Re:Making water not wet. (Score:2)
--
Actually, it's lost 1 megacorp, gained 1 megacorp (Score:3)
Perhaps if they said "Lucky Goldstar" the name might start ringing some bells. Or just "Goldstar". Or maybe "Zenith".
Yes, that's right, it's one of everyone's favorite makers of relatively cheap, relatively well-made (ahem) electronic equipment. Which has the advantage of being based in a country with somewhat lax enforcement of IP laws.
So LG is a big loss to SDMI - but otherwise, you're right on with your assessment of the other loser & no-name companies bailing out.
Re:Making it uncopyable (Score:2)
Accurate, but you forgot the logical conclusion, which is the real reason that any sort of copy protection scheme is doomed:
Once anyone breaks the copy protection on a digital work, they can make the unprotected version of that work available to the world at large, for effectively zero cost and at almost zero risk. This is the real reason any sort of digital copy protection scheme is doomed; not because it's technically or politically difficult to implement, but because if it fails even once, it's effectively useless.
Re:copy protecting bytes is like WHAT? (Score:1)
Oh wait, that's another song :)
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
That would be ice! (Score:1)
Not Quite (Score:2)
Re:SDMI and other 'compliance' technologies (Score:2)
Re:Might as well (Score:1)
-------------------
Because of the huge install base of analog tape. Tape players are everywhere, build into cars, in stereos, walkmen, portable stereos, etc. Even CD which offered some real advantages over tape (generally better sounding, doesn't degrade, no rewinding) took a long time to replace tapes. Sound Quality just doesn't sell that well. The only real advantage of DAT over analog tape is it sounds better. It was more expensive, less available, and you had to go out and buy a new deck to play it.
To sum up DAT had the disadvantage of both tape and cds without having the benefits of either. Sounds like a good reason for it not to catch on.
Re:SDMI (Score:2)
Since the uncrippled player gets sued out of existence, there will be no choice. Just wait a year or two and Hilary Rosen's "if we don't approve it, it won't happen" will be the law.
Don't compare it with Divx, compare it with DVD. We've already lost that battle, but does anyone care?
HahaHA! A victory! (Score:3)
Friends, let us gloat. Briefly, to be sure, but let's gloat nonetheless. We said it couldn't be done. We *showed* them it couldn't be done. Did they listen? Nay! Their foolish efforts to stop the free-flow of bits through weak-ass crypto hacks not only had the Good Guys(TM) alternately furious and aloof, but I'm sure there were information theorists who were just passively humored. "They wanna do what? Morons! The 'enemy' has physical access to the ciphertext!"
So a big ol' raspberry to all the suits over at the RIAA, MPAA, etc. Fuck y'all! You are going to have to change your business model, bribe politicians into starting a War on Copyright a la the notorious War on Drugs, or just start offing people a la the Church of Scientology. But any way you go against it the genie is out of the bottle and ya can't stop it.
Or maybe I've just drank too much Jolt. I actually found some today. RaH!
- Rev.Re:Ironic (Score:3)
How does this affect their "most-favored-big-company" status here on Slashdot?
Yeah, that part sucks. Sure, 27 winky companies are gone, but IBM is worth 100 of 'em.
And too bad IBM is a big drive manufacturer too... as mass storage is the core of tomorrow's consumer electronics. Geez, this is BAD news.
SMDI an Impossible task? I'm afraid not. (Score:5)
Sure, I agree: you'll be able to break any copy protections. But the industry can make it ugly and painful to do so. Just wait for a couple generations of consumer-level home electronics, and we'll find more and more protections baked into the hardware.
Yep, the consumer will pay for all this in real dollars and in their personal freedoms. All in the name of protecting the industry's profits and obsolete business models.
Re:Why comment (Score:1)
pointless analogy bashing. (Score:1)
customers have choice? (Score:1)
Some people deserve all your hate. (Score:1)
Re:Why comment (Score:1)
shaken not stirred (Score:1)
Re:HahaHA! A victory! (Score:2)
------
SDMI (Score:3)
I smell another Divx (the Circuit City DVD thing) happening. Of course, one can never underestimate the power of evil marketing executives. Average Consumer: "It's Sony; it must be good!"
Re:Guillemot does more than video cards.. (Score:2)
Ironic (Score:5)
How does this affect their "most-favored-big-company" status here on Slashdot?
Re:Ironic (Score:5)
Winbond, makers of chips that appear in just about EVERY PC system on the planet have joined.
Go through your machine, whether self-built or bought. You will likely find a Winbond chip in there.
That worries me a bit...
Re:Why comment (Score:2)
--
Bruce Schneier's take on this (Score:3)
Bruce Schneier
Music, videos, books on the Internet! Freely available to anyone without paying! The entertainment industry sees services like Napster as the death of its business, and it's using every technical and legal means possible to prevail against them. They want to implement widespread copy prevention of digital files, so that people can view or listen to content on their computer but can't copy or distribute it.
Abstractly, it is an impossible task. All entertainment media on the Internet (like everything else on the Internet) is just bits: ones and zeros. Bits are inherently copyable, easily and repeatedly. If you have a digital file -- text, music, video, or whatever -- you can make as many copies of that file as you want, do whatever you want with the copies. This is a natural law of the digital world, and makes copying on the Internet different from copying Rolex watches or Louis Vuitton luggage.
What the entertainment industry is trying to do is to use technology to contradict that natural law. They want a practical way to make copying hard enough to save their existing business. But they are doomed to fail.
Complete Article [cryptome.org]
Re:i2go.com no longer in business (Score:1)
Dammit.
where's EmbedMan when you need him?
some of 27 are failed companies (Score:1)
I'm saying SDMI is good or bad but don't read too much into 27 out of business companies not be part of SDMI.
Why comment (Score:3)
I think that pretty much beats out any comment a slashdotter will ever come up with. Bruce is the man...
copy protecting bytes is like WHAT? (Score:2)
like a millionaire that has no money
like a rainy day that is not wet
like a gamblin fiend that does not bet
like dracula with out his fangs
like the boogie to the boogie without the boogie bang
like collard greens that dont taste good
like a tree that's not made out of wood
like goin up and not comin down
is just like the beat without the sound no sound
to the beat beat, ya do the freak
everybody just rock and dance to the beat
(copyright: the authors of the lyric in my URL
--
Re:Making it uncopyable (Score:1)
It would require a platform that is impossible to simulate in order to secure the bits. The closest thing we have to that is the sort of smart card technology employed by DirecTV. They stay up late devising new ways to make sure that the code in the smart card isn't running in a simulator or in a trojaned card or what not. Just surf the net looking for "3 muskateer" cards (for sale in Canada, of course, where I hear it's not really a crime to decrypt US satellite TV. IANABarrister, of course) to get an idea how successful they are.
Re:SMDI an Impossible task? I'm afraid not. (Score:2)
Because I can go and copy those products an infinite number of times with virtually no cost to myself or others - certainly less cost than it is to buy it from the companies. Of course, I'm not buying the product - the product is the phyiscal CD, the packaging, etc. I'm buying the music. I can get the music without the "product", and without paying money for it.
It's just like software - the rules of economics just don't apply. There is (or at least can be) an infinite, unlimited supply. Simple economics (IANAE) says that from an unlimited supply, the price should probably be pretty low. But it's not, unless you consider $15 a CD a low price.
Not only that, but unlike software companies, they music industry can't/won't even offer services, extras, etc. At least _some_ software companies are trying to do it smart. The MPAA is just blindly pushing ahead trying to do anything it can to preserve this fundamentally broken model, regardless of who it hurts.
Re:SMDI an Impossible task? I'm afraid not. (Score:2)
Oh really? Perhaps you've heard of this "open source" or "free software" phenomenon, where people write code, and for the most part are not paid a penny for it. There's actually a fair number of them. Perhaps you should go inform them that they are breaking the laws of economics.
Re:SMDI an Impossible task? I'm afraid not. (Score:1)
What is the current price for a music CD in the US ? I'll tell you what we (Europe; Netherlands) have to pay: Hfl. 44 which translates to, uhm, 20 Euro. I'm not too sure what the Dollar does nowadays in respect to the Euro, but they're not too far apart. If that isn't bad enough, lookup the price of a blank CD and do the math.
This industry has, for the past 15 years, charged us way too much money for their products. Classical albums, which are royalty-free, are even more expensive than "normal" albums, etc., etc. Doesn't that make you think something is up...?
They get NO sympathy from me, for all I care they can all go bankrupt in the next five years, I'm totally fed up with this.
oh hummmmmm (Score:2)
I'd kinda like to see SDMI continue... (Score:3)
Call it "just desserts".
$9 at godaddy (Score:1)
Re:$9 at godaddy (Score:1)
Hooray (Score:1)
Didn't loudeye go bankrupt?
Re:Why comment (Score:1)
Re:Why comment (Score:1)
Re:Why comment (Score:1)
Yes, if you want to use conventional equipement, you do, but SDMI isn't about that. Media and hardware makers haven't even tried to protect data yet. CSS was a joke, no more serious than a briefcase lock. Without even thinking, they could take something like DVD region codes and make a checksum that compares to the data. But that would be computation heavy--
Hey, you could just encrypt a key sufficiently large enough to make a brute force analysis of the whole data too computationally intensive to be inconvenient
Is this the difference between a code and a cipher to you:
Code: Substitute A for B Cipher: Substitute (C+D)^E'%H for (F+G)^E''%H
Lost 27 nobodies, gained 8 nobodies and 1 megacorp (Score:5)
The companies that left are rather trivial players. That's kind of backed up by the fact that you have to explain who they are. Two dot coms whose web sites seem to be down at the moment, a graphics card company I've never heard of, and a consumer electronics company I've never heard of? (LG's probably bigger than I realize, but they don't ring a bell the way Sony, Matushita/Panasonic, Fuji, or Philips do.)
On the other hand, they've gained IBM. You don't need to explain who they are.
Now consider a few of the companies that did stay in the consortium: Aiwa, AT&T, BMG Entertainment, Casio, Compaq, Dolby Labs, Fujitsu, Hewlett-Packard, Hitachi, Intel, Iomega, JVC, Kenwood, Lucent, Matsushita, Mitsubishi, Motorola, Napster, Nokia, Philips Electronics, Pioneer, Real Networks, Samsung, Sanyo, Sharp, Siemens, Toshiba, and Yamaha.
I'd guess they make about 95% of audio equipment sold worldwide.
I'm not arguing that SDMI is making a good, nice, or viable standard. But if you're trying to make it sound like they're in trouble simply because the quantity of companies dropped is greater than the quantity of companies added, I think you've neglected to consider the significance of those companies.
Re:Bruce Schneier's take on this (Score:2)
From the media through all sorts of interfaces, to RAM, through CPUs, into the DAC, out the speakers, resonating all convenient surfaces, rippling across synapses.
Obviously some people will never be happy until they root reality.org. :-)
Re:SMDI an Impossible task? I'm afraid not. (Score:1)
- Steeltoe
Don't worry too much (Score:3)
Intel: "Look! It's good for e-commerce!"
Consumers: "Fuck you, we don't want serial numbers on our hardware that can get read by our software and sent to other people."
Intel: "We're making a utility available to turn it off and it won't be a 'feature' of the next chip revision. Sorry."
When push comes to shove, some other company will provide hard drives, chipsets, etc., with no copy protection restrictions, and some enterprising hackers will provide software to emulate the protection measures so that SDMI or other "protected" bits and bytes will work on any system.
Re:Copy Protection. (Score:2)
--Fesh
Making water not wet. (Score:2)
Re:Copy Protection. (Score:2)
Remember, IT IS MY PATENT. RIAA - you can't touch this. Nyah nyah!
As pointless as yet another round of RIAA bashing (Score:2)
Re:Companies abandon sinking ship... (Score:2)
And when hate runs out, (Score:2)
Re:Might as well (Score:3)
burris
Re:Monopoly (Score:2)
If they do that, there will be a demand for non-SDMI hardware, but no supply. Anyone that would enter that market would make a killing selling at high prices due to the law of supply and demand, until the supply reached a resonable level - at which time the market would find a balance between low prices for the buyers and decent profits for the producers.
They'll also pay off the governments not only to make this monopoly legal, but to enforce compliance with it (SDMI says "DMCA is just the beginning").
Yes, a law mandating SDMI could happen and would be very bad. The AHRA mandated SCMS and the DMCA [cornell.edu] mandated the standard Macrovision and Colorstripe copy restriction technologies. It is illegal to sell VCRs that do not get hosed by Macrovision, even if the fact they are immune isn't engineered in on purpose to allow recording in spite of the restriction technologies. Example: A VCR company could have been making VCRs without AGC circuits. They would be immune to Macrovision. Under the DMCA, the manufacturer would have to deliberately engineer a bug into the product - make it so Macrovision just hoses it (e.g. add an AGC circuit) or detect it and block the copy.
If I made VCRs, I'd obey the law, but instead of recording gibberish I would put - "Copying prevented due to copy restriction measures. It is illegal for us to allow you to record under Federal law 17 USC 1201(k).". Let the citizens (not mere "consumers") know WHY their rights are being restricted.
I don't know if CD drives could be made to read the "copy protected" CDs. Since the "protected" CDs just have hosed metadata, and nothing is encrypted, and they break the standard, it might not be illegal under the DMCA. Unless Kaplan is presiding, it which case not only would it be illegal, but I'd likely be a criminal for even mentioning the "details" of "protected" CDs.
Re:Might as well (Score:2)
It's funny 'cuz it's true (Score:2)
What's funny? the fact that Launch.com is owned by some pretty big RIAA members.
fuck, for some reason I sound like a press release or something today.)
Re:Why comment (Score:2)
/Brian
Re:Lost 27 nobodies, gained 8 nobodies and 1 megac (Score:2)
But this is true -- I've never really understood how SDMI could be made a selling point...
(At some random convention. Prospective Shopper is looking at MP3 players and approaches Hardware Company Suit.)
PS: So explain this SDMI thing to me you're pushing.
HCS: Well, this is a great feature! It allows you to be sure your music is secure!
PS: What do you mean? Like someone sticking a virus in an MP3 file?
HCS: No, that can't happen.
PS: So why exactly am I concerned about it being secure?
HCS: Well, you wouldn't want to be getting software from some source that might have attached a virus to it, right?
PS: Uh, no...
HCS: Well, SDMI just makes sure that the music you play on one of our systems comes from a source you can trust.
PS: Wait, I don't get it. It's just music...
HCS: All I'm saying is that you don't want to get your music from a source you can't trust...
PS: I'm sorry, I just don't see the point...
And the conversation goes on in this vein, the Hardware Company Suit beating around the bush in hopes of snowjobbing the Prospective Shopper. The sad part is that there might actually be someone who falls for this line, but I think the SDMI folks are realizing there aren't enough.
/Brian
Making water not wet... (Score:2)
Making bits uncopyable is a much harder problem.
Cryptnotic
Re:Copy Protection. (Score:2)
Out of control... (Score:5)
Copy Protection. (Score:5)
Customer: "I'd like to return this walkman"
Salesperson: "Is it broken?"
Customer: "well, theres nowhere to plug the headphones in"
Salesperson: "oh.. They just clip on the back, like this"
Customer: "yeah.. I tried that, but I couldn't hear anything.. Isn't there supposed to be a headphone jack or something?"
Salesperson: "Oh, No sir.. Pirates use headphone jacks to steal the audio signal.. This walkman is secured against intellectual property theft.."
Oh well, until then there's always FM radio [popealien.com]
"Again"? (Score:2)
"Again"? When did music companies stop making money?
Re:Not absolutely impossible, but close (Score:2)
And, I wouldn't underestimate the power of laws, and the power of mainstream media demonizing large parts of the population (resulting in witchhunts).
Therefore, techonlogies that are designed to undermine free expression must be fought before they go mainstream.
You have no chance to survive, SDMI make your time (Score:2)
Don't forget Nap$ter (Score:2)
Subscribers who pay a monthly fee will be able to load any other digital audio files -- like the music of independent labels, their own recordings or other material -- onto their computers and share it with other Napster users. The fidelity will be just below the sound quality of compact discs and users who obtain files over Napster will be precluded from loading them onto their own discs or sending them outside its network.
So their participation in SDMI makes some sense - until you try to use the service of course. Oh well, I added them to my FC list [fuckedcompany.com] months ago.
Monopoly (Score:3)
In order to gain consumer acceptance, the industry will have to offer something BETTER or CHEAPER.
If together the SDMI Stasi form a monopoly of electronic devices and produced music, then better doesn't matter -- you'll take what they give if you want anything.
Cheaper they can take care of by taking a loss and pricing SDMI hardware far below what anyone outside the monopoly can sell non-SDMI hardware at. Then they'll jack the prices back up way high once non-SDMI producers go out of business.
They'll also pay off the governments not only to make this monopoly legal, but to enforce compliance with it (SDMI says "DMCA is just the beginning").
Companies abandon sinking ship... (Score:2)
-
Re:Copy Protection. (Score:2)
When I was a kid, my folks bought me a cassette boom box. I would listen for HOURS to the radio every day recording songs that I liked. I had boxes of tapes, all neatly labeled and catalogged. I pretty much had any decent song that was getting played on FM radio and I knew where I could find it.
Sound anything like the
I was in my early teens. I didn't have any money to buy albums or cassettes. I think the RIAA was a bit less paranoid back then. And because they didn't try to stifle my music listening, I have since turned into quite a music BUYER. Music is an important part of my life, and I buy lots of CDs (mp3 sounds like crap, as did cassette). If I'd had to jump through hoops to record those songs back then, who knows how I would have ended up. Chances are I would have ended up with a bitter taste in my mouth toward the music industry and would not have given them anywhere NEAR the money I have over the years.
-S
Re:SDMI and other 'compliance' technologies (Score:2)
Now, I am not necessarily taking their side, but look at it this way. If I buy a car, it's not like I have the equipment to pirate the design specs of the car and start producing my own cars. If I buy an oak desk, likewise, I am not likely to have a shop set up to crank out duplicate desks. However, with computer software, cassette tapes, CDs, video tapes, etc. it is so much easier (and relatively cheaper) to make bootlegs after buying one legal copy. Heck, in some cases, they don't even need a legal copy.... I am reminded of the time I saw tapes of "The Matrix" for sale at a local flea market the day after the movie came out in theaters.
They are not taking away your freedom by trying to protect their interests. They are trying to stop software/music/movie/whatever piracy from happening. In the long run, such piracy raises the prices they we have to pay.
Kierthos
Not absolutely impossible, but close (Score:3)
Let's get back to "better or cheaper". "Better" is going to be tough because it means expensive hardware upgrades -- replacing your stereo with some kind of 16-channel amplifier and speakers. A tough sell when you consider that we all have only 2 ears, and they are not upgradable.
"Cheaper" is not likely either. The industry could use existing P2P technology to roll out a "cheaper" pay-per-song model, but they chose not to. To these folks, "cheaper" means less profit in the short term.
Even if they could solve the technical problem, the unsold hardware and media would end up at the landfill, right next to the DIVX players and discs.
Crazy laws won't work. P2P networks (with or without Napster) are growing faster than anyone can legislate. Legal tactics work only against centrally controlled networks. Any law that cannot achive voluntary compliance from the majority of citizens is doomed. We simply don't have enough lawyers and courts to prosecute the number of would-be criminals. Remember the national 55 MPH speed limit? Prohibition?
Are they really going to attack P2P networks (legally or otherwise)? Consider the scum-sucking spammers. They're like cockroaches. In theory, killing them is easy. LART one and it's dead. The problem is you can't kill them fast enough to control their growth. There are alot more P2P users than spammers -- both are here to stay.
Re:Ironic (Score:2)
--
"I'm not downloaded, I'm just loaded and down"
Re:Not absolutely impossible, but close (Score:2)
I used to work at a music publisher. Take my word for it - the execs (and A&R people) at those places are pure evil. And that's not a word I like to use.
--
"I'm not downloaded, I'm just loaded and down"
Re:Not absolutely impossible, but close (Score:3)
> the industry will have to offer something
>BETTER or CHEAPER. Until that happens, we all
>keep our protection-free CD and MP3 players,
>and we buy only music that is compatible with
>them. The industry will continue to sell
>unencrypted CDs because the customers don't
>have the hardware to play anything else.
Some of us remember the way that vinyl records were ruthlessly swept out of shops; this happened *ahead* of consumer acceptance of CDs. I certainly remember when it started getting harder and harder to find decent vinyl copies of stuff I wanted, and this was the major factor in me reluctantly moving to CD. Remember there was a >70% price hike at the same time, supposedly to because th ultra-clean lasts-forever sound quality of CD was worth more to the consumer than crackly old records...
Yes, I know, I could still get hold of fancy Technics 1200 DJ turntables if I really *want* to play my old records... can't afford that three hundred quid at present, though.
Personally I'm just waiting for the point when I can afford to digitise my 400-ish CDs, store backups and the original masters off-site and just use a RAID equipped fileserver to pipe music around my house... I can dream, goddammit!
--
"I'm not downloaded, I'm just loaded and down"
Like 10,000 spoons when all I need is a fork. (Score:2)
Which is why this might be a blessing. IBM has an intrest in people clogging their hard drives with large and available media. And IBM is huge. It has customers that border on fans. That + Money = Clout. Maybe IBM can change the evil empire. There are millions of reasons for them to try. Besides, "the more the RIAA tightens [their grip], the more mp3 will fall through [their] fingers." -- Carrie Fisher
Re:Lost 27 nobodies, gained 8 nobodies and 1 megac (Score:4)
LG does not market much under its own brand. The only place where I know of that happening is the UK where the Dixons/Currys chain replaced their in house 'Matsui' label with an exclusive distribution deal with LG. They did a similar deal with Samsung many years ago when nobody in Europe knew who they were.
I'd guess they make about 95% of audio equipment sold worldwide. :-)
I doubt if those companies make more than 30% combined. They market upwards of 80% - China and India ae huge markets with significant local players.
SDMI is in trouble for reasons that were obvious two years ago when I went to their meetings, the only way SDMI can succeed is if every country in the world passes a law making non-SDMI players illegal. The hardware manufacturers have very little incentive to actually implement SDMI, they have a marginal interest in pretending they might.
I suspect that the list of companies leaving is simply the list of compaines whose subscriptions were not renewed. I can't see anyone going out of their way to declare in public the private contempt they express for SDMI.
In 1999 the group was running arround like headless chickens declaring that they had to solve the problem by Christmas or it was all over.
One of the most ridiculous features of SDMI is that it prohibits absolutely any form of microphone built into the package. So it will be illegal to have a portable dictation machine that also plays SDMI MP3s.
My strong belief is that there will be convergence between video cameras and MP3 players, just as there is already convergence between digital cameras and MP3. The idea of prohibiting a line in or mic in jack to such devices is pure fantasy.
What I want is a device about the size of a cigarete packet that has a CPU, battery and compact flash II socket. It would record 20 mnutes of video onto an IBM (or other manufacturer) minidrive. There would be sockets for headphones, line-out, camera, microphone and line-in, plus USB of course. The base unit would strap to the waist belt with only lightweight peripherals to plug into it - just like modern cell phones.
Re:Ironic (Score:2)
Re:Ironic (Score:2)
To kick them while they're down? All they need to do is to keep SDMI tied up in wrangling and FUD until their own standard becomes de facto. Works for M$.
Re:SDMI and other 'compliance' technologies (Score:2)
Ha ha. No.
SDMI, CSS and their daddy, the DMCA, are aimed squarely at stopping me and thee from doing any fair use activities. Why? Because commercial duplication is already illegal, and because if you make it hard for amatuers to crack protection, then only professionals will crack it. It's that simple. If they were targetting professional pirates, they'd crank up the penalties for commercial piracy. They aren't, and they didn't. DMCA, CSS and SDMI are aimed at you and they're aimed at me.
Re:SDMI and other 'compliance' technologies (Score:2)
While I broadly agree with you, I have to pick up on a few points:
Re:Making it uncopyable (Score:2)
That is when the DVD 'copy protection' kicks in. That's why we need deCSS -- to get around the CSS encryption so we can play the damn things, not to copy the disk. Anybody can copy a DVD, encryption and all, and you'll need deCSS to play the copy just like you need it to play the original. That's what the RIAA just does not get: stopping deCSS does not stop people from pirating DVDs, it just stops people like me from buying them legally because I can't play them. Oh, yes, it also stops me from buying pirated DVDs, because I can't play them either, so I suppose at that level the RIAA is right (as they shoot of their own nose to spite their face).
Re:Lost 27 nobodies, gained 8 nobodies and 1 megac (Score:2)
Re:Making it uncopyable (Score:2)
No, it's not possible, if you can read it, then you can copy it.
The interesting thing happen when you want to *use* those bits.
That is when the copy protection should kick in.
Re:Why comment (Score:2)
The important part is not to make cracking the encryption impossible, the important part is to make cracking the encryption cracking *long*.
Give the NSA computers enough to calculate that they would take longer than it's appropriate to crack it.
(It doesn't help you when you pick up enemy communication in mid-battle if it takes a year to break it.)