DVD Drives Defeat Cactus Data Shield 381
jsepeta sends in a story about Cactus Data Shield, one of the schemes to be used for copy-protecting compact discs. A reporter for TechTV notes that DVD drives see right through the disc corruption that Cactus uses to supposedly prevent those CDs from being ripped.
Soon to be illegal... (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re:Soon to be illegal... (Score:2, Informative)
Oh well, this is getting offtopic so I'll shut up now.
Re:Soon to be illegal... (Score:5, Informative)
There is an excellent review of CPRM, SSSCA and the coming "Secure PC" on The Register [theregister.co.uk]. Here's a short excerpt from this article [theregister.co.uk]:
Re:Soon to be illegal... (Score:3, Interesting)
- RIAA and friends (via their pocket-reps) are trying to push through laws to force everyone to run a "Digital Media Rights" operating system.
- Microsoft have already filed patents on a Digital Media Rights OS.
- If this law was passed, wouldn't that give Microsoft control of 100% of the operating system market in any country where this law and their patent were both in effect.
An interesting turn of events..Re:Soon to be illegal... (Score:2)
Re:Soon to be illegal... (Score:2, Insightful)
I've read that the major HD manufacturers have been toying with implementing Digital Rights Management on the hard drive, but I doubt any OEM would touch that...geeks would then make a small fortune building gray boxes for all their neighbors, who might finally realize that trusting the techie guy next door is a better idea than giving Dell/Gateway their $$$.
Unless, of course, the absence of rights management on a PC is outlawed. Way, way unlikely, that. Would you sit still for it? I wouldn't.
Re:Soon to be illegal... (Score:2)
Unless, of course, the absence of rights management on a PC is outlawed. Way, way unlikely, that. Would you sit still for it? I wouldn't.
Since my income is dependant of developing for Linux and building Linux based systems, my options would be to dig ditches or leave the country. I HATE digging ditches!
Re:Soon to be illegal... (Score:2)
One of the discussion on that is here [slashdot.org]. Basically, what it comes down to is that the hard drive manufacturers (*not* the OEMs) know better. In fact, it is in their best interests not to implement this because less DRM means more things stored on the hard drive which means more hard drive sales for them.
All DVD drives...or just that NEC model? (Score:2, Redundant)
What it didn't say, however, is if other DVD drives, such as the famous slot-loading Pioneer (which I am blessed to have), also exhibit this behavior.
In any case, this whole copy-protection of audio CD's is a sham. If I use my computer as a CD player (which many people at work do), I should be able to play the CD normally, and do what I want with it.
Re:All DVD drives...or just that NEC model? (Score:2, Flamebait)
"should" is the key word here. We should be able to do whatever the hell we want in life as long as we aren't hurting other people. But look how gays were harrassed under sodomy laws years ago. "Should" isn't going to prevent our rights from being taken away. Especially by greedy corporations and corrupt government.
Re:Unjust laws (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Unjust laws (Score:2)
you drug advocates seem to miss how much suffering is caused to children and spouses in families where one of the parents is a drug addict.
As opposed to how much better off they are when daddy goes to jail and mommy goes to work while the house goes on the auction block?
And, naturally since alcohol is perfectly legal (if you're over 21), it must not cause any trouble at all.
Or it could be that any drugs (including alcohol) will be a significant problem for a minority of dysfunctional individuals and the rest will not have much problem with it or will have the sense to leave it alone (the same way the majority of people have the sense to not sniff bug spray).
Re:Unjust laws (Score:3, Insightful)
But you drug bashers don't seem to understand that alchohol and cigarettes are actually much more destructive and addicting than drugs like marijuana and to a certain degree even cocaine (but not necessarily "crack" cocaine). But despite that, I still think people should have the freedom to do whatever they want to themselves. A law shouldn't prevent me from losing my job, health, and general well-being because of my own choices. That's not what American laws are supposed to be for. They're supposed to advocate freedom, not be a straight-jacket that protects us from ourselves.
Besides, the whole "it's for your protection" thing is a bullshit reason anyway. Do all of the trees in my yard have to be regulation height so I don't jump out of them and hurt myself? Do all businesses have to line their parking lots with foam so I don't scrape my knee on their pavement? Is there any law that says that my kitchen knives can only be as sharp as a butter knife?
Drug laws were born out of the lust for money, that's still what they're about, and that's the reason why they're so inconsistent and illogical.
Think about it this way. (Score:2)
Re:Unjust laws (Score:2)
Reagan's war on drugs
In the last 20 years the "War on Drugs" has cost us billions of dollars, many bad laws have been passed because of it, many good peoples lives have been ruined and drug abuse is worse now then it ever has been.
Today we have Bush's "War on Terrorism" which I beleive will be exactly as successful as the "War on Drugs". In 20 years we will have spent trillions of dollars, many bad laws will be passed, many good peoples lives will be ruined and terrorism will be worse than ever.
Remember, you heard it on Slashdot first.
Re:All DVD drives...or just that NEC model? (Score:2)
So they're cutting out the portion of their customers who have jobs then?
Re:All DVD drives...or just that NEC model? (Score:3, Funny)
No, they are assuming that those people who have jobs can afford $25 for a portable CD player to use at work.
Re:All DVD drives...or just that NEC model? (Score:5, Funny)
Now the big question: Who will cave in first? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Now the big question: Who will cave in first? (Score:4, Interesting)
People will be lining up to buy them. When they notice that they can't rip, it'll be too late- and the only response they will get is "what, you want to pirate music? You are a bad person, I ought to report you." Makes me glad that I've already got a drive.
Re:Now the big question: Who will cave in first? (Score:2, Insightful)
I think a distinction to be made here is that in the Macrovision case, the copy-protection scheme predated the hardware to beat it, so that it could legitimately be argued that the hardware was designed specifically to defeat Macrovision copy protection.
Whereas in the use of the computer to copy digital media, the computer's ability to do so predates any copy protection scheme to prevent it from doing so -- it's simply what computers do. As a result, the case that computers are designed specifically to thwart digital rights managment schemes is absurd, which is why the record companies are going to Capitol Hill to buy legislation. As the law presently stands, their case against the computer industry is unwinnable in court.
Re:Now the big question: Who will cave in first? (Score:2, Funny)
Yet another problem with the DMCA... Perhaps we will soon see legislation that requires cameras to superimpose clothing on the emperor so that citizens may not document his lack of clothes.
Re:Now the big question: Who will cave in first? (Score:2)
But... it seems pretty much simple to me that :
CONTENT == POWER.
So far, Sony and AOL (yuk)-TM have been pretty good at verifying this equation.
So... the result is that no DVD can be sold if the big fishes don't use the content. And Companies like Sony are even big enough to manufacture them if they are not pleased by the others.
It's a big corporate world out there, and if you are a standard customer looking to spend money, I am afraid that you don't weight too much in the equation above. Kinda like the simplified equation of relativity if you will.
PPA, the girl next door.
So? (Score:3, Insightful)
Time for a new media or new way around it perhaps?
Difference between copying and reading? (Score:5, Informative)
Another point is that many drives have maingenance modes which allow the host computer to see exactly what is on the disk without correction. This is normally used for testing, but again would be very useful for breaking the DMCA. Just read track w/o correction and aply the correction at software level ignoring the bad bits.
I guess that a DVD-rom drive is more sensitive to errors on conventional CD's as they have much finer bit resolutions for DVDs so they alreasy have the modified error recovery built in.
Protection of CDs is pointless and it interferes with customers' own rights and annoys the customer. The original article mentions a class action against Universal about Unplayable CDs.
Re:Difference between copying and reading? (Score:2)
They want to create a premium product, but they fail to understand that they can not protect the path between the media and the d/a conversion process, well not unless they could get away with shipping sealed boxes as CD-players, which I guess they would prefer. Unfortunately for them, they can't.
I nearly got arrested because of this! (Score:3, Funny)
A theory if you will (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems to me this is just one of those CDAutoStart things that Windows responds to in particular.
I got tipped off to this by when they mention "Track 1" never plays. I BET they didn't notice the total track count go up by one, as the Windows software talking to the DVD player parses its error-handling differently (correctly), and the result is like putting a PC hybrid CD in a Mac. In fact i strongly expect this Cactus lockout thing would not work on a Mac by default, and very very likely Linux/*nix as well. The tracks would appear as normal, though possibly not that first track, because its header DOES get lost in the scrambling, maybe.
Perhaps this is hogwash, but I've heard about Macs seeing through similar schemes before. I think that these TechTV guys sort of percolated through the truth of older reports to home users that are kinda savvy but don't like leaving their Gates Paradigm Computing, thus only the windows DVD stuff, no mention of other platforms at all.
On the other hand, if this is not unique to Windows (I wonder about Mac DVD players) then maybe that program has low-level drivers which affect how the CD drive does checksums, but DVD players do differently anyway.
Yeah, another victory for the Fair Use groups, as the people designing this have their asses backwards because they're counting on all computer users (mass 37331 pirates) to be Windows computers. OOPS...
Universal, i will scout for your discs, and as a Mac user of self-proclaimed badassary, "hack" via insertion your CD, rip, burn and mail to your well-tanned California ass.... Mwahaaha... All right enough fevered fantasies of geek revenge... back to work...
Re:A theory if you will (Score:3, Interesting)
Better yet, first be sure it's got the "copy protected" label. Then insert, rip to AIFF (just a copy command under OS X, which presents audio CDs as implicitly ripped AIFF files!), burn CD-ROM with AIFF files. Then go back to Circus Shitty (they deserve this kind of hassle because of their old Divx "rental" format), whine that "it won't play in my DVD player!" and demand a refund.
As far as I'm concerned, RIAA record companies have got the best kind of copy protection of all: they don't make anything new that I would want to pirate, much less buy. And the old stuff I can usually find much cheaper used, if I care enough to want to hear it.
Just about all the music I listen to these days, aside from talk radio bumper music, is from JASRAC, not ASCAP or BMI. In other words, anime music and J-pop. And I prefer the original CDs when I can find them, because they almost always include the lyrics, and printed lyrics are helpful in one of the most homophone-laden languages on the planet.
Re:A theory if you will (Score:2)
Remember, the best thing to do with these is a reverse boycott. Buy every copy you can from every store, then return them opened to collect your refund. Out of 7 stores I have done this at so far, only one hassled me after pointing to the sticker on the back. I said fine, I'll exchange it, what happens if this one dosen't work?
I plan on wiriting a dead wood letter here soon to Universal stating I'll be one of their best customers next year, as I plan to buy and open all their releases. Then promptly return them for a refund.
Another way around it: (Score:5, Informative)
(Tested it on 'Natalie Imbruglia - White Lillies Island' with a Yamaha 6x4x16x SCSI CDRW drive)
1) Get IsoBuster [isobuster.com] (A Win32 app)
2) Rip the entire disc as raw data. May struggle/take a while. Tell it to ignore any read errors
3) Open the raw file in CoolEdit (or any decent audio editor) as a 44.1Kz 16-bit stereo sample (with Intel byte ordering)
4) There you have it! The entire CD as one big sample!
5) In CoolEdit, you can use 'Edit->AutoCue->Find Phrases and Mark' to split the tracks up automatically
6) Save 'em out, and convert to MP3/Ogg if neccesssary
Re:Another way around it: (Score:5, Funny)
1) Take 'Natalie Imbruglia - White Lillies Island' CD.
2) Fasten the disc to your car's bumper with a chain.
3) Drive around until there's nothing left but the chain.
Re:Another way around it: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Another way around it: (Score:3, Funny)
1) Take 'Natalie Imbruglia - White Lillies Island' CD.
2) Fasten the disc to your car's bumper with a chain.
3) Drive around until there's nothing left but the chain.
Then take the chain, wrap it around a rafter in a high ceiling, and hang yourself from it. Do your family a favor and don't mention the CD in your suicide note.
damnit, couldn't they be quiet? (Score:5, Funny)
Dell. (Score:4, Troll)
If they enforce the DMCA on this, they can change there commercials..
"Dude, You're getting arrested!"
Re:Dell. (Score:2, Funny)
9:51 PM EST
Steve Badly Beaten
http://www.bbspot.com/News/2001/11/steve.html [bbspot.com]
First Track (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:First Track (Score:2)
That's my theory anyways, if anyone can confirm this, I'd be pleased.
The people who wrote this article are idiots. (Score:5, Informative)
Correct me if I'm wrong (nobody's perfect), but this seems pretty simple to me.
Re:The people who wrote this article are idiots. (Score:4, Informative)
if you can listen to it, you can rip it (Score:5, Insightful)
Not even watermarking is going to see them out of this. Watermarks can be removed anyway, and even if they succeed in a lunatic scheme to require that every computer audio board have some kind of watermark detection circuit, A/D and D/A converters that are fast enough and good enough are cheap, widely available, and easily hooked up to a PC.
Are the record labels just clueless or is there some other diabolical plan in the wings?
Re:if you can listen to it, you can rip it (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure there's a plan: digital speakers (usb?) that include tamper-proof decoding hardware. Of course they can't prevent you from mic'ing the speakers, but then microphones are just tools of pirates and kiddie-pr0n drug-snorting criminals anyway.
Re:if you can listen to it, you can rip it (Score:2, Funny)
But what about the artists that use microphones to record their work? Oh, wait, nevermind.
Re:if you can listen to it, you can rip it (Score:3, Insightful)
There may be. The copying/piracy argument is only a front. It is the CREATION of content that the studios and labels are worried about.
There economic mode is to control the access of artists to audience and make money by charging as much as possible to the audience and paying as little as possible to the artists.
So if they can get most people to use a player that only they can create content for then they can squeeze the artists. As long as it is possible/legal to may copies you can make originals.
This is why we as information smiths need to get artists on our side. Once content begins to travel from artist to audience (and the rewards back the other way) without the studios and the labels then things will begin to change.
Charles Puffer
Re:if you can listen to it, you can rip it (Score:2)
Try it with your current equipment (if you're not using a high-end media machine) and you'll hear what I mean.
Re:if you can listen to it, you can rip it (Score:2)
Re:Napsterization of the nation (Score:2)
They're not that worried about the technically adept minority that can build their own A/D-D/A converters to rip the music. They're worried about the napsterization of the entire nation when the ripping has been made so easy that every mom and pop can do it.
Then they need to look at the history of software. In the '80s a few people knew how to patch a binary to bypass copy protection schemes and those stupid code wheel lookups, but once done, the copy spread far and wide (In a few cases, before the game was released). As I recall, the big motivation for the protection breakers was fun, beating the system, and bragging rights.
Just like the good old days! (Score:3, Insightful)
The only way they'll win is if they make CDs connect to the Internet and verify with the record company everytime you play it, ala Return to Castle Wolfenstein. Or have some crappy activation featuers, ala Windows XP. Then again someone will work around that too
Read the classic Copy Protection: A History and Outlook [textfiles.com]
Re:Just like the good old days! (Score:2, Interesting)
You said: I've never copied music, movies or programs and feel damn good about it when I read threads like these. Where's your self-respect? If you can't afford to buy it, you don't deserve to have it. Work and earn the money instead of stealing other people's property. Losers.
I dislike CDs because they only contain an hour or so of music. Therefore, I rip them to mp3 and play them on my computer. I've ripped almost all of my CDs, so I can mix and match them in this way.
I take great offense when a record company decides to produce flawed CDs to stop me from listening to my music how I like.
I do not care about the piracy side.. since pirates will always break any scheme. But it pisses me off that in certain situations I might have to rip to mp3 off of a live analog feed, instead of direct from the CD like I do now.
What the record companies are doing is not just copy protection, they're actually stopping you from using the CD in a perfectly legal manner. Many of these copy protected CDs aren't even meant to play in computer CD drives.
Believe it or not, my computer CD drive is the only CD drive I have after I sold my separates system.. I got rid of my separates because I spend 99% of my time listening to mp3s through my computer speakers!!!!
So, get your facts straight before you bitch at us for stealing music.
Re:Just like the good old days! (Score:2)
Ripping music does not equal stealing music.
Perfect copy protection IS possible! (Score:5, Insightful)
All kidding aside— here is a formula that might be useful to publishers of digital data:where If L > 0, the data will be copied.
A publisher can control the level of his data's protection only to the degree that he can control these variables.
- Cm cannot be kept artificially high, due to market forces to the contrary;
- Ce continues to drop, as coding ingenuity continues to outstrip copy prevention standards almost as quickly as they are developed;
- Ca is relatively low for the end user, since it usually only involves paying for software you had anyway; and
- Pa is low because the crime is widespread and social costs are low, so enforcement at the end user level is minimal.
This leaves a publisher of digital data with two variables he can control: the data's cost and its value. This provides two options for perfect copy protection:- make the product free, or
- make the product worthless.
Since neither option would be attractive to most publishers, it would appear that widespread copyright violations (and violators) will be with us for a long, long time.Re:Perfect copy protection IS possible! (Score:2, Insightful)
Conveniently, most of the music put out by the major labels these days IS worthless. Maybe that's the plan. Personally speaking, you couldn't pay me enough to waste my time duplicating more than 99% of the music released in any given year.
[elitism:OFF]
Re:Perfect copy protection IS possible! (Score:4, Funny)
Perhaps you could define L? ;)
Formula is wrong (Score:4, Insightful)
Has no one ever tried to understand the formala you posted ?
The risk that data will be copied rises when the cost of recordable media rises ? Your formula should have been:
Rc = ((Ca * Pa) -Cp) * Vd / ( Cm + Ce )
Re:Perfect copy protection IS possible! (Score:2)
Wherein social forces invisible to the market act.
Simple Publisher Motives (Score:2)
A glimpse of the future comes from the article:
With the copy protection working, a Windows PC shows the files and automatically runs the CactusPJ audio player that comes with the CD. (The CactusPJ player features difficult-to-see buttons and needs a second window to show track info. It also shows up as possible spyware on Ad-aware 5.6.)
DVD is large enough to contain software for playing the music. A programable "dumb" box can be made that depends on that software to play at all. In theory, each DVD can have a totally different encoding scheme and file format. Nasty, nasty. Oh yeah, the spyware is real nice too. Expect your smart media to get really dumb.
This have grave implications for all publishing, not just music. Free players of the future will be banned by the DCMA, and they will have to decode the player software itself to then decode the freaking DVD. It will not be too controversial to outlaw entertainment content encryption circumventers like that. Once such things are common and people are conditioned to the chains imposed, book publishers can adopt the same tricks and all but "official readers" will be outlawed. "Sure I'm litterate, but there is nothing left to read." may be heard when all the acid paper libraires crumple to dust 100 years from now. They the only way for you to read a book will be through some kind of pay per play censor ware. Do not contribute to this. Boycot such trash now and teach the greedheads what they failed to learn from DIVX.
Re:Perfect copy protection IS possible! (Score:3, Interesting)
Please excuse any rambling here. Your post started this stream of thought, so it's a reply to your posting.
Since neither option would be attractive to most publishers, it would appear that widespread copyright violations (and violators) will be with us for a long, long time.
Really, the RIAA is facing nothing that retailers haven't faced since the beginning of commerce. While copying (or theft to use their term) is a bit higher than for retail, but their loss per copy is also lower.
At the same time, retailers have faced a serious threat to their profits for many years that the RIAA never sees in any realistic way....Competition in a free market.
Imagine starting a new department store in an environment where some sort of DSIA (Department Stores of America) controled every single advertising medium you might use to advertise your existance except for word of mouth.
One symptom of this state of affairs is that prices are much higher than they would be otherwise. In any sane pricing in a free market, the seller has to strike a balance between profit per unit and consumer willingness (and ability) to pay the price that results. Since the barriers to entry for the music market are artificially high, the RIAA has been able to consistantly keep profit/unit high. At the same time, they have created an unusually large population that really wants music, but can't/won't afford the price they charge. By consistantly making large profits while the artists make very little, they have also made themselves easy to despise.
That is a combination that makes widespread copying (or theft as they prefer) inevitable.
Returning to your equasion, I believe it will better reflect the real world as:
Rc = (Cp - (Ce + Cm + (Ca*Pa))) * Vd
I agree more or less with your analysis of the controlability of the variables (Though RIAA HAS tried hard to manipulate Cm and Ca through legislation and Ce through stupid copy protection scheme). Note that this version of the equasion subtly changes the meaning of Rc to utility (to the consumer) of copying.
For the sake of convieniance, I will define Cc, cost of copying, as Cc = (Ce + Cm + (Ca*Pa)).
Note that in any case where Cc < Cp there will be negative utility in copying. In those cases, the RIAA is a commodity manufacturer and gains it's profits from the efficiencies of mass production vs. individual copying.
I believe that the RIAA CAN compete with Gnutella! There is value in not having to hassle with crappy quality tracks, nodes that are too busy, or never seem to actually provide the tracks they claim to offer, misnamed tracks, etc... In addition, video tracks in free and open formats can also up the Cc without 'cheating'. If Cp is low enough, the only people who will copy are people whose time is worth nothing (who couldn't pay anyway since they are unemployed and unemployable).
The RIAA can also boost their profits through business innovations. At a low Cp, they might be best off by terminating their expensive ad campaigns and instead producing a subscription based review service. They could also capture value by charging a nominal fee to broadband providers to colo a music server (yes, charge a fee to allow a provider to colo!). The provider could then use that as an incentive to sign up and reduce their costs for upstream bandwidth.
Other sources of revenue could include providing a content rating system for parents and paid advertising in their review media (website, magazine, television show, streaming broadcasts etc).
In short, they could switch from their current strategy of poisoning every well in town but their own to the strategy that made them big in the first place: providing something of value at a reasonable cost.
Where is the profit for the artist? The same place it is now, concerts, merchandising, paid television appearances, a small cut from the RIAA's income, etc.
Interesting formula (Score:2, Funny)
Have you considered a career as an economist?
Normal CD drives can do it to... (Score:2)
Good for music trading after all? (Score:5, Insightful)
The only thing hurting the warez scene is games being so friggin big nowadays... multiple CDs, etc. You can't run bladeenc, or oggenc on a game.
Maybe DVD-Audio will help combat music piracy, but that's a bit off.
Re:Good for music trading after all? (Score:2)
The problem is, the amount of audio that would be needed to fill a DVD is outrageous. Most artists can't even fill a 74min CD [with good songs]!
Then again, we could get N*Stync all at once, and if they don't sell lots of albums they would be gone in a week. It could also show what an artist really has. When they say that they've been working on this CD their whole lives they would be telling the truth.
But this isn't going to change a thing. If we do get DVD audio discs [hrmm... what does DVD stand for?] not only will we rip the songs, but we will be ripping the videos that come with them.
People always find a way! I mean wake up... mp3's are being released by warez style groups. Haven't you gotten a song off of a P2P and noticed a three letter acronym at the end. Groups always have a three letter acronym.....
Re:Good for music trading after all? (Score:2)
Part of it seems to be that it's cheaper to make two single-layer disks than one double-layer disk (at a guess), leading to boxed sets where one disk would do it, but I don't think copyright-owners want to blow their wad in one go.
(DVD-Audio and SuperCD (or whatever Sony call theirs) both have support for 24bit/96khz and for multichannel (surround) audio - that's why they use larger format disks.
Re:Good for music trading after all? (Score:2)
I don't know about your world, but in my world, I buy them 4 to a disc. When they bother to put them out. Let's see, first year three discs, 12 episodes. Second year, three discs, 12 episodes. Third year two discs, 8 episodes. This year, two discs, 8 episodes, and it looks like they may have stopped bothering to put episodes in the correct order, in favor of "collections" discs. Since I don't get pay TV any more, it looks like I'll get to see the current South Park episodes by 2010.
Re:Good for music trading after all? (Score:2)
DivX can make it more....
.... but the industy doesn't want you to know that.
Re:Good for music trading after all? (Score:2)
Basically, DVD Audio provides 88.2kHz, 24-bit audio with up to 6 channels (well, 5.1), same as you can get with regular DVD Video, along with CSS encryption. In theory, this could provide dramatically better quality than the 2-channel, 44.1kHz, 16-bit audio on a regular CD-ROM.
However, most/all current CDs do not utilize the dynamic range of current CDs, and the extra channels would probably only be useful for reproducing the performance environment (e.g. an amphitheatre, stage, etc.) and not for providing you with 1 channel per instrument, or anything like that.
There is also the cost involved - producing DVDs costs more money than CDs (not just the media costs, but licensing, etc.), and consumers aren't likely to shell out an extra $10 for a DVD that sounds marginally better than a CD and can't be played by their current equipment.
Re:Good for music trading after all? (Score:2)
Note that I don't recommend this practice for all CDs; only copy-protected ones.... I figure they're asking for it. If this sort of trade is common and well-publicized, it would really give the RIAA some inscentive to quit copy-protecting their CDs alltogether.
Re:Good for music trading after all? (Score:2)
Re:Good for music trading after all? (Score:2, Informative)
.. they already do. check EGO, APC and so on. This will however -probably- boost the popularity of such groups, since your average John Doe will have to download the mp3s instead of converting them himself.
As if this would stop mp3s from spreading (Score:2)
Re:As if this would stop mp3s from spreading (Score:2, Interesting)
I listen to MP3's to determine what to buy, since most record stores are not that friendly to people wanting to listen to more than one or two cd's before buying. I also rip my CD's to MP3 for convenience. (e.g. to play at work without having to carry a pile of CD's with me every day).
With this sillyness going on, I'm considering just not buying any more CD's. Why contribute to an industry that is trying to alienate me and screw me over?
So record/movie companies, if you are listening:
-> I am buying CD's/DVD's (lots of them)
-> I want to continue to do so
-> You are shafting your customers
-> Shafted customers eventually become ex-customers!
These kind of findings are exactly what will ... (Score:2, Insightful)
And heres where the crappy DCMA really starts to leak water, because now these products (ie. DVD-ROM drives, etc) that are being manufactured by large corporations some of which don't give a f*** about the MPAA and the DVD Forum because they allow all of that to be handled by software, are circumvention devices, and thus illegal. All it takes is a lawsuit and there is no way that anyone can tell me that this crappy law can stand up in court when multibillion dollar industries go head to head with each other. Now IANAL but in my opinion the DCMA has the quality of construction roughly equal to that of M$'s software, and that under this much scrutiny it will (and forgive the really corny wording of this but i'm tired) BSOD.
Well at least thats what I hope happens.
"fair use" is not a right. (Score:4, Insightful)
Having said all this, record industry does have the right to implement copy protection. I'm not saying that it's good, I'm just saying that they have legal right to do so. Under current law, record company is not obligated to grant you the ability to use the material in "fair use" manner. At the same time, you are not obligated to buy copy protected CDs.
Re:"fair use" is not a right. (Score:5, Interesting)
I've thought about the following for a while. There ought to be a two-track system of copyright. Whenever anything is released for public consumption, the publisher would make a choice:
In other words, the content publisher doesn't get to eat his/her cake and have it, too. By restricting Fair Use access, by cordonning off the material from the public domain (essentially forever), the publisher loses the protection of the courts. If you don't want to play ball with the justice system, you don't get to use it, either.
This approach is entirely justifiable, as copyright is a privilege granted by the state, not a right inherent in the content. As Litman and others point out, historically, copyright has been viewed as a bargain between the publishers and the public. If publishers try to unilaterally change the terms of the game -- by, for instance, encrypting data streams -- then the public has every right and justification to revoke the copyright.
This is idiocy, it's fundamentally a paradox. (Score:4, Funny)
However, since the customer is allowed to hear the music or see the film, the data has been "released" into the wild and can easily be recaptured in other formats. In other words, they cannot use purely digital, "black-box" means to protect this data because we have nice analog visual and auditory systems that require this data to pass through the air in order for us to perceive and enjoy it.
Once the data is in the air, any microphone, nice camera, etc. etc. will be able to grab it out of the air again.
The only way I can see copy protection working is if in 50 years all "out-loud" music is strictly forbidden and illegal and instead, we have a DBC (digital-to-brain converter) implanted in our skull that accepts an input from the line-out jack on our "secure" digital music device.
There will have to be secret police everywhere to make sure nobody actually hums along, because if anyone does, someone with a hidden microphone (banned decades ago, but available on the black market, nevertheless) might capture it and distribute it, not to mention the 20 other people in the room who will hear this humming and thus "steal" the music without paying the original artist/composer for it...
Re:This is idiocy, it's fundamentally a paradox. (Score:2)
That would make having a tune that you "just can't get out of your head" become a real problem!
Hey Cartman, listen to this! "I'm sailing awaaaaayyyy..." >_<
In the Bad Old Days of diskette copy protection.. (Score:3, Insightful)
In the Bad Old Days of diskette copy protection, the good guys eventually won. You had the usual arms race, the usual idiocy, companies wasted time devising slightly corrupted disk formats that could be loaded but not copied, schemes that would allow you to install on a hard drive but forced you to deinstall before the diskette would allow a reinstall, and so forth and so on.
You also had legally-purchased diskettes that wouldn't install because of SQA issues with the protection scheme, or hardware incompatibilities with certain drives.
But you had vigorous free enterprise producing products like Locksmith and Copy II PC, constantly improving them and developing new "parms."
This meant that the companies using copy protection had to spend serious development resources devising new and better copy protection schemes, AND were constantly pissing off legitimate customers.
Eventually the Lotuses of the world got tired of it all and decided not to bother with copy protection. Lotus has declined, but as far as I know, not one person has suggested that the decline was caused by software piracy...
Right now, CD protection is in the same stage that diskette copy protection was... and we'll have these amusing stories for a while... and occasionally decent law-abiding customers will find that their new CD's don't play.
What we WON'T have is a vigorous free-market solution. In a free market, of course, the DVD-drive companies would realize that the ability to read "copy-protected" CD's gives them a valuable competitive advantage. But, instead, thanks to the DMCA, they will probably be FORCED to become Midbar-compliant whether they like it or not.
And it will only get worse.
Unless consumers wake up... and that, alas, doesn't seem likely...
Re:In the Bad Old Days of diskette copy protection (Score:3, Interesting)
The issue we were seeing was customer resistance to disks that were "defective". End users weren't terribly technical, and tended to call a colleague company's help line whenever their disks didn't read.
Of course, stealing copies of our program was as illegal as breaking copy protection is now, and that was sufficient for the majority of our customer base. When a customer called our help line with what turned out to be a stolen copy, we first helped them, then arrange for them to get a copy of the update release (with some bug fixes they needed!) for the regular update price.
I recollect actually going out to both a local college and high school and helping them set up whole labs of our product after they agreed to put us on next year's budget at the reduced academic rate (;-)).
Just like they were non-technical, you see, they were also well-meaning and faily law-abiding. We played to these, gained friendly customers, and got our profit margin back by selling upgrades, which were much chaper to produce than the whole package with manuals, etc. This approach allowed us to entirely avoid the known, quantified (and large) cost of copy protection. And this in turn allowed us to survive far longer than our management deserved!
My conclusion? Companies selling ordinary CDs without copy protection will have a business advantage over the ones trying to shoulder both the costs of DVDs for normal-fidelity audio and the support costs of "copy protection". Scofflaws will further reduce the profitability of copy-protected DVDs if they target them preferentially...
Copy Protection taken to extremes. (Score:2, Insightful)
You thought 1984 was bad?
DMCA = Communism? (Score:3, Interesting)
You'd think the industry would learn that a new market has opened up and learn how to profit in it instead of trying to close it. The most damning thing for them is as long as Linux is around, there will always be ways to prevent copy protection from ruining our lives.
How many more subtle changes to the law will it take before it becomes illegal to not purchase a product because you saw the ad on TV?
Re:DMCA = Communism? (Score:2)
And this does sound kinda like fascism. It would have been nice if you had bothered to finish the analogy, though. "DMCA is bad! It's like Hitler!" doesn't exactly contribute anything useful to the discussion.
Re:DMCA = Communism? (Score:3, Interesting)
Make that "Joseph Stalin" instead of Hitler and you may have a point...
Like 'real-world' communist governments, everything in the US is gravitating towards central control at a federal level, which makes the federal capitol a 'one-stop-shopping' node for nationwide influence. As long as central authority increases, this problem will only get worse, no matter what you do...
Like former Soviet Union government agencies, the MPAA and RIAA (and Disney and Adobe and...you get the idea) can use their influence to apply government pressure to increase their own power. Copyright 'dissenters' can be punished unreasonably (having to go to jail, make bail, have your movements restricted, and racking up legal fees defending your basic rights IS an unreasonable punishment!). Economic problems that hurt the country can't possibly their fault, it must be the fault of dissenters and other wrong-thinkers who must be punished, so that profit by a few corporations can somehow stimulate the economy. The State(tm) being a corporation itself, I don't see much difference between State owned 'production facilities' and having most 'productions facilities' run and controlled by a small number of 'non-State' corporations.
While I don't foresee it becoming illegal not to purchase products seen in advertisements, I find it frighteningly easy to believe that purchasing a type of product at below-average might be considered suspicious, and legislation might someday be introduced to track and investigate such things. ("He's not buying the requisite average of 2.3 new DVD's per month! He OBVIOUSLY must be PIRATING 2.3 DVD's per month! Call the FBI! This person is hurting the economy and our taxpaying corporations!")
(Don't forget that something like 97%, as I recall, of federal tax income comes from corporations and people who make more than $100,000US/year. If us normal people have our income cut in half by bad policy making, government feels a tiny pinch. If Corporations or wealthy people have their income cut in half, Government will go bankrupt at its current spending rates. This is a problem of inefficient central control, I think. It makes Government dependent on the profit of the wealthy, and since central control will tend to make 'The People' dependent on Government...well, follow the chain.)
Like totalitarian Communist governments, agencies give lip-service to 'the people' (RIAA/MPAA - 'The Artist' and 'The Consumer') but use their positions of influence and power to gain power at the expense of 'the people'. (The declining condition of 'The People' can be used to set up 'dissidents' as scapegoats who allegedly cause the problem. ["We wouldn't have to charge so much for CD's if it weren't for all the rampant piracy!"]
I wonder what the MPAA and RIAA have in store for us with their Glorious 5-year Plan(tm)...
Re:DMCA = Communism? (Score:2)
Interesting side note: Microsoft does not pay ANY corporate income tax.
No one picked up on this? (Score:5, Funny)
Don't touch the data or you will be subjected to thousands of lawy^H^H^H^H little pricks!
Talk about hidden meaning.
.
Heh, sweet (Score:3, Interesting)
Why am I somehow not surprised at this? Anyone got information on what it sends and where, if it does turn out to be spyware? If I was the kind of fool to write software like this I'd probably have it look for mp3s on the assumption that all mp3s are by definition contraband. If I was more of a fool I'd have the program delete them or something. Has anyone studied the behavior of this apparently annoying and awkward program?
Check out the "security" on Midbar's web site! (Score:4, Interesting)
Error detection, etc..... (Score:2, Interesting)
I realize Universal has implied that this is a hardware issue, but I have a hard time with that "line"- my guess is that anyone could write software "error detection" that emulates that of an audio CD player capable of playing a "protected CD". My understanding, and I may be wrong here, is that a PC's CD drive uses a more exacting form of error detection (since they spin faster, and let's face it- one bit of error sneaking by in your walkman's CD playing in real time can be interpolated with less impact than on a data CD for a PC).
I also find it difficult to believe that all of the glass mastering facilities have been retooled to accept masters with "errors." Obviously there is a great difference between "pressing a CD" and burning one- and the error tolerances are very different.
The actual digital data of a CDDA file is identical to that of a
Labels need to realize that a compressed format such as mp3 poses a legitimate compromise to fidelity. It is not unlike making a mix tape on(cassette). Granted many people also are copying entire CDs with the wave audio intact, but if the labels wanted to show a gesture of good faith, they would INCLUDE mp3s at a decent audio quality (above 128!). This would at least make purchasing the CD "valuable" (since it is higher quality than mp3).
But keep in mind that we will soon see high resolution audio on DVD, and the labels will try to resell you your entire collection with audio at least at 24 bits, and likely twice the sample rates... likely with surround sound mixes, etc. This of course if overkill considering most people's listening environments. Again, this could be viewed as a value added service worth paying a premium (and I consider the cost of a new CD at that price point, considering what little you get for your money). An mp3 will look like a very inferior medium to those with discerning ears.
To address another point someone raised, it will be VERY EASY to fill a DVD audio CD- the audio files themselves could easily double if not triple, and they will likely add alternate mixes of the same songs, and dump a bunch of other multi-media crap on them... and probably add "commercials" promoting other artists or products .
They CANNOT mandate copy protection for PCs. Hardware has historically been ahead of media (think VCR if you must... or cassette tapes). Look what a flop the "pay-per-view" DVD players were... consumers voted with their wallets.
The DIRECT DIGITAL copy argument does not apply here if we consider that a blank DVD could cost more than a high-res audio DVD (which it could- for the time being). In the meantime, people need to use the technology to unseat the stranglehold that the centralized form of distribution places on content (FOUR major labels controlling everying, including the LAW?!- certainly promotes a grassroots "open source" movement for artists to distribute their wares directly- most consumers would arguably rather pay the artist than the label anyway, and arguably actual production costs are at an all-time low and are headed lower... as long as you don't need that top shelf producer).
Universal and others truly are cutting off their noses to spite their faces.
Totally senseless... (Score:4, Insightful)
LOWER THE PRICE OF THE GOD DAMN CDS IF YOU WANT MORE VOLUME SELLS, I can see some mozart crap sold at C$6 at my local music shop, why would I have to pay C$20 for a metallica CD? Don't tell me because of the expenses and all, the expenses are the packaging, the design, the loans, etc etc.. YES... well, the mozart CD went thru the about the same process, Metallica sells a LOT more hense more VOLUME hense more PROFIT in the end to repay that possible loan (well now they are rich anyways), so why 20$? maybe they'd sell a LOT more if CDs would be cheaper and become the "trading cards" of the kids instead of being overpriced unreachable-to-most-teenagers-that-aren't-working
3 times cheaper would mean greater volume, greater splitting among artists, greater audience, greater penetration of the market, and I'D BUY SOME, which I don't do since maybe 5 years after being raped having to pay c$50 for imports that I really wanted and they would classify imports when they had actually a TON of them and anyways, even metallica is "imported" to canada so who cares about the "import" label. I was ripped off, I've searched for alternatives, and I got one.
You can screw people off big time and keep it up for YEARS, but history shows that in ANY circumstances, people will find alternatives or revolt when they are mistreated or abused.
I did my part, I have 100's of Original CDs, but I had it with that system, and seeing them investing massively in crap like DMCA or DRM instead of doing the obvious: CUTTING THE PRICES, simply disgust me. Again, I'd buy a shitload of CDs if the price would be right, it isn't.
For people with the lame "expenses" arguments, tell me, why are tapes 1/2 the price of the cd? it's the SAME process, heck a cassette costs more to produce than a CD, in both time and material, so why is it cheaper? there are many reasons, but I don't care, WHY wouldn't the CDs be cheaper? why would I shell C$30 for a DVD or C$20 for a CD if they could be sold for a fraction of that price?
I am not saying I copy my stuff, I don't even own a dvd player because I just skipped that technology, I'm still happy with my SVHS tapedeck. But I am really not surprised (like most of the people here) of what's happening. Someone is really high at RIAA... Towelie must be running things
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The problem is... (Score:3, Insightful)
Instead of taking the loss and deciding, "Hey, we should stop producing crap or mimicking bands," they decide they can turn out ten bands under the profits of one major one. If one of those other bands happens to make it, then they have another band to help sell more bands.
Sadly, though, this practice is done regularly, even with some of the independent labels. I just wish there were a distributor out there who would handle completely independent artists. You want to spend your money and time doing your own CDs for your band, send it to the distributor who puts out a catalog of discs. These discs can be ordered by any major chain or music store. Then it's just up to the bands themselves to promote themselves and let people know they have a disc out.
This would really make the costs dive down if people could just get into the stores without major labels and without the RIAA.
On Robustness (Score:2)
Security in general and Cactus's scheme in particular is a system for decreasing system robustness. Except with a precise combination of software player, disc, and equipment, the system should not still work.
So, from a theoretical point of view, they've repurposed something that added value into something that subtracted value. In practical terms, scratching your CD is now much more likely to cause serious damage, worthy of replacement.
This can, and will be proven experimentally.
The irony, of course, is that the more copy protection is added, the more legitimate the need will be to make copies. Beautiful.
Yours Truly,
Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://www.doxpara.com
Autostart as copy protection (Score:3, Interesting)
First, does this mean it's Windows-only? Probably. What happens on a non-Windows system? Is the disk labelled accordingly?
Second, unless the install process ("install process to play an audio CD?") makes you sign a EULA, that spyware thing could be considered hostile code, and might be illegal under anti-hacking laws. This is definitely worth litigation.
Re:Autostart as copy protection (Score:2)
Steve Jobs Has It Right (Score:5, Interesting)
"Piracy is a social problem, not a technological one."
That really sums it up. And you can see in Apple's products that they really believe this.
Ripping MP3's (or AIFF's) in iTunes is ridiculously simple. Like it should be. (Single click rips an entire CD)
Copying those MP3's to a portable music device is also incredibly simple. Even automated if you use an iPod (though iTunes works great with other MP3 players too!)
The only copy protection on my iPod is the fact that it's a one-way sync. And for what it's worth, it's a LOT LOT LOT harder to do a 2-way sync than a one-way sync. So I really don't believe the conspiracy theorists, and I think it's all about keeping things simple!
Steve's on the right track here. He understands.
There's no real technological reason that other companies can't do what Apple's doing. But for some reason, they "get it" and folks like MS, etc. don't.
Obvious metaphore - Organized crime (Score:2, Insightful)
1) Ripping CD is ALWAYS going to be possible
2) People like getting something for nothing (I rip my Cd for personal use only and don't share them, you may too but what all this noise about
3) It is prohibitively expensive to prosecute individuals for trading/sharing music only - both finically and in terms of bad publicity
RIAA, face it - you are just giving more power to your "enemies" (read customers) by making this such a big issue. If you want to stop music trading/sharing online -- make it cheep and easy to download songs! That's the only way your gonna stop this. ANY other action you take will just force the "Bad people" committing this crime against your pocketbook to organize to become more effective.
Re:Once again, the VCR case. (Score:2)
Hint: It isn't to do with what you think is fair.
Re:Once again, the VCR case. (Score:2)
More relevant to personal copies are the sections on libraries and archives from US Copyright Office Circular 92 [loc.gov]:
In other words, converting from an older format (CD) to a newer one (MP3) for your own personal use is legal, provided that the copies are not distributed.
No where in the documents on fair use could I find any reference to an individual's "right" to distribute copies, particularly to the general public (e.g. Napster.) Even public libraries are under significant restrictions for copying, and are not allowed to have more than 3 archive copies in circulation at a time.
If interpreted loosely, you might read those restrictions as meaning that you can "lend" two copies of an MP3 to personal friends while keeping one for your own use, provided that you own the (overpriced) CD the MP3s were ripped from.
Of course the PTO doesn't mention anything about copy protection, but as a "copy protected" CD isn't readable by my MP3 player, I believe it is legal for me to transform media to a format that is usable with my equipment. (i.e. Ripping a "copy protected" CD for use in an MP3 player.)
As per usual, IANAL.
Missing the point (Score:2, Informative)
The copy protection won't stop me anyway; I have a line input on my computer. It will just make it a pain in the ass for me, someone who DOES give them money, to use albums the way I want to.
Re:IP theft galore! (Score:3, Interesting)
> Oh joy!
>
> So now we can get back to stealing from the artists!?
>
> What a wonderful discovery!
No discovery. Artists have been stolen from all along by the recording industry. Hardly anything you pay for a CD goes to the actual artist. It goes to a bunch of greedy exploiters that call themselves the RIAA. Now they want to make the artists to work for a paycheck so all their IP belongs to the record label they work for.
To make matters worse, they want to restrict what law abiding people can do with their overpriced CD by selling broken ones (only their broken ones still don't do what they want)! As far as we know, these Universal CD's only play on Windows PCs with their crappy software, or on (some?) Windows PCs with DVD drives. If you want to play the songs using Windows Media Player on a PC without a DVD drive, you are out of luck. (Has anyone even tried to use Universal's player on a Windows XP PC? Does XP even let you run it?) If you want to use the XBox's feature to rip songs and play them as you game (or even just play the idiot CD's) you are out of luck. (Why Microsoft, patenter of the all-wonderful DRM OS and all around monopoly-abusing juggernaut, isn't screaming bloody murder here, I'll never know.) If you have any non-Microsoft OS, computer, or game console, you are seriously out of luck.
No, I don't trade mp3's. I'm not into mass-piracy, or even the "information should be free" movement. But I am also not into paying $20 (or whatever they are now) for broken CD's, especially when the money goes to greedy sharks and not to the artists. On the other hand, I happily paid $60 (and waited months to get) the two disc "Mothra 3" soundtrack, partly because it is the only way, without a US distributor, to reward Toho for one of their best Mothra movies, and because I have had so much fun translating the label and writing English lyrics to the instrumental pieces.
"They bind our hearts: 'Let's sell them again and again!'"
From the fairies' song "Infant Girl" in the Japanese version of "Mothra" (1961).
Re:Alternative OSs? (Score:4, Informative)
I was recently in a local music store that carried "The Fast & The Furious" soundtrack. (First off, figures Universal would start with a CD like this--no one wants it, so there won't be a huge outrage over it!) On the back, it states something to the effect of "This CD is copy protected and it meant to be played in standard CD Audio players or Windows-based PCs"
No, it will not play in your Mac. No, it will not play in your consoles. It may play in your car CD player, but that totally depends on the model. And to be honest, I'm not sure about Linux--I'm not going to spend $20 on that POS CD to see if it works under redhat or not.
On top of the fact that this protection decreases the quality of the CD-Audio, etc., it also further extends Microsoft's monopoly. Now if you want to play an Audio CD in your computer, you had better have Windows! This is something that needs to be fought immediately. (Some nice "DEFECTIVE CD" stickers would help, I think)