Sony Adds New Copyright Method to CDs in 2003 630
Natoi writes "Sony is leaving Mac and **nix users out in the cold with their new copyright method called Label Gate CD copyright system. You'd have to be running Windows and use a Sony developed proprietary software to listen to CD's published by Sony starting next year." This seems a little extreme to me, since sitting at the computer just to listen to music is stupid. What about car stereos and high-fidelity CD players?
Not CDs (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not CDs (Score:3, Insightful)
for once, this actually sounds REASONABLE (Score:4, Insightful)
now this allows the cd to be played in normal dumb cd "players" as well as on a PC while still accomplishing their goal of making it tougher than a normal cd to rip to mp3 and trade.
so, except for the fact that most people actually like trading music for free, it sounds like a pretty good plan.
as an addendum, I will add that I wrote a couple really nasty letters about prior anti-pirating technology because of the 6 players I own, only 1 was capable of playing those protected disks because all others are either in my PC's or are $500+ head units in cars!
Re:for once, this actually sounds REASONABLE (Score:4, Interesting)
I own a mac which has the perfect music listening/organizing software. Even if (and they won't!!) Sony ports their app to OSX I would still have to switch between iTunes and Sony's app to listen to my music. This doesn't even cover my other legitimate uses that involve iTunes and a CD burner...
On the other hand I haven't bought anything made or published by Sony in over two years, so this won't affect me, yet.
Read the article before posting (Score:5, Informative)
If you read the article, you might see your questions answered.
What about computer obsolescence? (Score:5, Insightful)
I read the article. Like all the DRM schemes I've seen to date, it still doesn't deal with my biggest question: What happens when my computer gets old?
A computer, over its useful life, can accumulate thousands of dollars worth of digital rights. Bought at $1 or even $20 apiece they don't seem like much, but it all adds up. When my computer gets old (or eats its hard drive), and I buy a new one, how do I transfer those rights which are specifically designed to be non-transferable? Am I violating the DMCA by even trying?
Do DRM keys survive a backup/restore? How about a disk-to-disk sector copy?
Think of it in today's terms: You go out tomorrow and buy a new computer. Before you can boot it for the first time, you must call the RIAA. They send a truck around that picks up your entire CD collection and takes it away to be crushed.
And if the stuff you like isn't popular enough, and the record companies haven't decided to keep it in print, forget about ever getting your hands on it again. Oh well, you'll always have your memories.
DRM is new now, but we should be discussing what happens when it matures. Until someone invents a key ring technology for digital rights, I'm buying nothing with copy protection.
Immature (Score:5, Insightful)
Depends on what you mean by matures; attitudes towards DRM don't seem particularly "mature" to me. Short of turning every western country into a draconian state with no freedom to do anything `unapproved' with a computer (including all those embedded ones) - a lot of hard work if you ask me - the music and film industries will *never* be able to change things back to how they were before.
'Mature' DRM would exploit new media, not attempt to suffocate it (current DRM technology just reflects these attitudes). But I think there are too many vested interests in the old way of doing things...
Until someone invents a key ring technology for digital rights, I'm buying nothing with copy protection.
I'm not doing that either. I'll just wait until someone cracks the protection and get a copy of that instead. More useful for me, but no money in that for Mr.Sony (*sob*! Just picture the faces of his ickle kiddies when there's no food on the table- remember, MP3 KILLS CHILDREN. JUST SAY NO.)
Sony can go to hell until they stop trying to charge me 10 times to listen to 1 CD where *they* want me to listen to it.
Re:Read the article before posting (Score:3, Insightful)
"Copied music on a hard disk drive can be transferred to audio devices that comply with SME's OpenMG digital rights management (DRM) technology for a number of times set by the music company."
So this means that only 'audio devices' that use SME's OpenMG DRM tech will be able to play the music, which was downloaded to them from a PC.
Sounds like a PITA to me.
I hope the technocrazed Japanese find this too much of a PITA as well and that sales of the CD like things are bad so that Sony decides not to continue using this technology.
whatever. (Score:5, Insightful)
We're just going to hack it.
Sincerely,
The Mac and *nix Community
Re:whatever. (Score:3, Informative)
VMware won't work (Score:5, Interesting)
If you use a product such a vmware, it's a simple matter to start up windows in a virtual machine with a virtual sound card i.e. vsound.
Recent versions of Windows Media running on Windows ME and Windows XP will not play copy-restricted audio over unsigned drivers [pineight.com]. The driver for VMware audio is not signed.
"So apply to get the driver signed." Microsoft won't sign a driver unless it turns off all cleartext digital outputs when playing copy-restricted audio, which means that the virtualizer would have to open a Secure Audio Path on the host operating system.
"Then just use an older Windows OS." And risk newer versions of WiMP not installing.
"Then just use an older WiMP." And lose support for new proprietary codecs such as Sony's, which is (knowing Sony) probably based on MiniDisc ATRAC3.
"Then try something else." And risk doing several years of hard time in prison the next time you step into the UK or the USA, both of which have banned circumvention of access restrictions.
Re:whatever. (Score:3, Insightful)
We're just not going to buy your shit at all.
Limiting who can use your stuff = recuding sales by definition. If they make it impossible to use it, people aren't going to buy it. Music piracy has nothing to do with it.
Re:whatever. (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't you slashdotters understand yet? The music indsutry is trying to obsolete CDs as quickly as possible so that a more "protectable" format can be produced.
Re:whatever. (Score:5, Insightful)
Moreover, at this point consumers have access to so many CD players, not to mention extraordinarily large CD collections (one friend of mine has approximately 900 CDs and growing), that it would be a huge transition. If not an all-at-once thing, surely it'll take them a decade or so.
Even if they DO create a format that, magically, won't allow itself to be digitally reproduced - what's to stop audiophiles from recording and encoding the output stream?
This whole undertaking just sparks of an abortive effort. They attack Napster, a hundred other P2P networks spring up in its place. They create encrypted CDs that can only be played in "{company} approved" devices, and by the release date over 100k people already have the entire contents of the CD. They create DRM on their CDs, people buy a $5.00 cable from their local Radio Shack and circumvent it.
I wonder just how long the record labels are going to survive before they figure out that they, not just their technology, are obsolete.
Re:whatever. (Score:5, Interesting)
There have been some reports of DRM speakers that decode the sound inside the speaker. But I can't find them right now.
But seriously, I understand what you mean. No matter how hard they try, we can just put a microphone up to the speaker and record it with a slight degradadion in quality and then digitize it and it's good forever.
"I wonder just how long the record labels are going to survive before they figure out that they, not just their technology, are obsolete."
Ultimately, I believe that that is the real point here. They will last as long as joe consumer doesn't realise that old music distribution methods are obsolete.
Re:whatever. (Score:3, Funny)
The music industry is reporting today that it has created an 'unbreakable' DRM system which should finally prevent pirates from illegally reproducing music. The system involves setting into law the requirement for everyone to wear headphones at all times which meet the new Digital Rights Management standard. These headphones will not allow users to listen to music which is unencrypted, according to major record labels. However, they do say that the headphones will allow users to hear most languages being spoken for a modest fee, as long as that language has been approved. Currently approved languages include English and Japanese, although the music industry say that more will be added soon, and that a minimal number of nations will need to change their official language to comply with the new standard.
Re:whatever. (Score:3, Insightful)
How many Joe Schmo consumers do you know who have mod-chipped their set-top DVD players with DeCCS? How many people can use "backup" copies of their X-Box games without being kicked off the X-Box live service? How easy and realiable is it (even for us 1337 slashdotters) to get full-length DVD-quality video rips off P2P services? Is this worth your time?
We are reaching the point of dimishing returns, and "they have the technology".
Re:whatever. (Score:4, Informative)
Not a single one, because it's not necessary.
Most cheap DVD players sold nowadays are region free and play whatever you feed them.
Re:whatever. (Score:3, Insightful)
Joe Schmo, on the other hand, will get pretty fed up with having downloaded the latest Harry Potter flick, only to discover that for the seventh time, he has downloaded an old bootleg filmed with a tripod with an audio track that sounds worse than AM radio and doesn't stay in synch with the video.
I fail to see where I mentioned games, but you bring up another good point. With DVD/PVR becoming more commonplace (OK, PVR is a stretch), who is to stop them from automating "software updates" in the interest of "security"? Granted, this would require an internet connection, but whose to stop them from making deal with cell phone companies? Mod chip your DVD player and you void your "service contract".
On second thought, maybe we should stop discussing this.
New protectable format. (Score:5, Funny)
BR
Re:New protectable format. (Score:3, Informative)
Once again, the industry didn't realise that computers can already read LPs [slashdot.org].
Besides, I already copied a bunch of my parents' old LPs to CD by running the connection from the amp output into my machine. The pops and scratches were cleaned out by a simple low-pass FFT filter in audacity [sourceforge.net] and everything was good to go for CD burning.
(Note: I do recognise that the parent post is a joke.)
Vinyl far form unhackable! (Score:3, Informative)
not so fast to dismiss the law (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes.
Remember the DeCCS and Dmitry Sklyarov debacles? Although "someone will hack it," good luck disseminating it and staying out of jail.
The industry does not view these laws as symbolic, and has the lobbying power to see them enforced. There will always be an underground, but it will be economically insignificant, far smaller anyway than the currently easy piracy any high schooler can pull off.
What about ripping from the audio stream, is that illegal too?
It would still be legal under "fair use." But a copyright violation, such as selling the music, would still be a copyright violation, as it damn well should be IMHO (not all artists are rich). Enforcement is not impossible -- for example, Napster; P2P is just farther underground -- but very difficult, like it is now. I doubt it will be long before P2P software is attacked, if it has not already (I don't know).
*
I don't think stealing will work. Stealing is not civil disobedience, anyway, it's just taking what you want because you want it. Piracy is no noble protest. Surely there are better ways, more open ways of protest.
The best that occurs to me, aside from lobbying Congress (ha!), is to boycott the companies, declaring we want fair use back. It's the oldest rule of capitalism: Vote with your feet. If imposing copy protection schemes results in making less money, the industry realize its error a heck of a lot faster than any amount of criticism or lawbreaking. (They'd rather be rich if unpopular.)
Re:not so fast to dismiss the law (Score:5, Insightful)
This hasn't worked because the industry just blames the loss on people stealing their music and goes on to get more and more mind boggling legislation and implement more crummy copy protection schemes, which like all copy protection schemes inconvenience legitimate users more than they prevent the theft of copyrighted materials.
In my opinion, companies which produce digital media of any kind, cd's dvd's, software, etc have really only a few choices left to them, they can invest in copy protection methods, they can lower the cost and increase the quality and variety of the product they sell, or they can as some software companies seem to do and as the dvd standard certainly did, increase the size of files to a point which effectively limits anything but personal exchanges of burned media.
The first option, which is the one which most companies are likely to pursue is, quite admitedly, a poor option in the long term, not only does it trample on fair use(which they don't like anyway), but it alienates consumers and isn't sustainable in the long run without legislation so draconian it makes the DMCA look like a fluff law. It is however the option which is easiest and cheapest "now", and many the digital media industries may think that in the future they can either create a truly uncopiable media, or that they can get the legislation they need.
The second option, is of course the option which most everyone would prefer, but it is the most difficult to achieve. Lowering costs would involve cutting into profits, and investing in ideas which weren't just derivatives of previously successful groups, or just flashy with no real substance is a risky investment. Personally I strongly believe, as has been posited by other groups, that if digital media, particularly software which is much more expensive and much harder to determine if you actually like it in advance, would sell much better, and get a lot more people willing to take risks on untried products if it were sold at a lower price. This method, which is pretty much the only sustainable option, is very difficult "now", and as such will probably never be implemented by the digital media industries.
The third option which I firmly believe people are actually doing, is just too ludicrous to sustain, and so I won't comment further on it.
Re:not so fast to dismiss the law (Score:3, Insightful)
The weird thing is... Some people will risk going to jail, and know the risk they are facing.
Re:not so fast to dismiss the law (Score:3, Insightful)
If you don't like copyright, "vote with your feet" and buy only from artists who don't impose copyright. Of course if they waive copyright, why buy in the first place. Just copy it from the internet -- you'll be 100% legal and the artists 100% poor. And then you can sense the problem; unlike free software, the artist will have no second chance at distribution or consulting fees.
Well, I forgot live performances, certainly a viable reason for distributing free music. But not everyone goes in for the grueling work (some are dead, or can't sing any more, like Bob Dylan). Many think writing, composing, and recording songs is work enough
I'm being a little tongue-in-check, but I do see two parallel debates here, one spoken and other subliminal. My idea of progress in the recording industry would be a bigger cut to the artist (current about 50 per $15 CD), a greater variety of alternative low-budget music, and lower prices to the consumer.
Re:not so fast to dismiss the law (Score:3, Funny)
Re:not so fast to dismiss the law (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, it does seem dumb, something recognized by public-key encryption: if you rely on a discoverable key for security, you're vulnerable, and passing a law saying "don't look at my key" is pretty futile.
The copy protection is irritating, and so bad business. MP3 recorders are big business, and a lot of people won't realize their new CD's are "defective" until they get home, and they'll be pissed. So I tend to think these schemes will die as economically suicidal. Or I hope so. I find it as offensive as that fscking FBI copy warning I'm forced to watch at the beginning of a DVD -- who thinks that makes a difference to a pirate? Well, the industry does I guess.
I also don't like the precedent of these enforcement mechanisms -- heavy-handed is an understatement.
Re:not so fast to dismiss the law (Score:3, Informative)
And DeCSS is laughably simple. I liked the guys who put it on T-shirts, and there's even a haiku [cmu.edu]. Some scary precedent is getting set down. Don't even ask me to say where the line between protected free speech and unprotected illegal code is drawn, considering we've been pointedly calling them computer languages all these years. I'm a lawyer, not an oracle, but I do know the first amendment doesn't protect everything in writing (copyright for example; trade secrets, espionage, blackmail, obscenity, etc.).
The more complex solutions will be harder to spread around anonymously, and won't look as innocent or amusing as a haiku or T-shirt. (These folks are practicing civil disobedience and rubbing the industry's face in it, which I think is just fine, and probably illegal or it wouldn't be civil disobedience.) Public sympathy will be less, and that's important. Look how hard they came down on Sklarov! He is fortunate to attract a lot of sympathy, and to be a fairly innocent looking guy, an academic more than a black market profiteer. I was amazed, if you look at how lax the gov't is to enforce lots of other "economic harm" laws. I don't know many honest people will want to get involved inthis, and really it's the honest people who need to be won over to the cause.
So
Re:whatever. (Score:5, Funny)
Dear Consumer #2285203229, Your action of refusing to purchase the newest Sony produced album "Backstreet Boyz are Back Again 5" is in violation of the Consumer Copyright Abuse and Corporate Welfare Funding Law of 2015. In accordance with this law, a fine of $25.95 will automatically be deducated from your credit card if you have not purchased this CD within 7 days of the date of this letter to offset the losses of your illegal pirating of this CD. Sony takes non-compliance of purchasing music you have probably pirated very seriously and will prosecute you to the fullest extent of the Mandatory Consumer Credit Card Law of 2009 if you fail to have a credit card which can be charged the full amount. We are but a humble $95 billion media company and cannot afford to have rogue consumers such as yourself not doing your civic duty and buying our products. We hope this acts as a wake up call and remind you of your duty to purchase the upcoming "Britney Spears and N'Sync Reunion Christmas Special" CD which will be released next month. - Max Wineberger - Sony Consumer Enforcement Division
Re:Dear Sony... (Score:3, Insightful)
After reviewing your letter, something dawned on me. You can keep your media, your $25.95, and your humble $95 billion company. I want no part of it. I will immediately cease purchasing any products from Sony or any of its affiliates or subsidiaries. You see, I figure that there is at least one enlightened competitor in the marketplace that can offer a reasonably-priced product with a reasonably fair licensing policy, and it is this competitor that will gain my loyalty as a consumer. While it's obvious that you see customers as a right, and not a valued resource, hopefully my actions will serve as a reminder that this reasoning is seriously flawed. Your competitor may offer a more limited selection, but I value my freedom far more than I value your product.
Sincerely,
John Q. Consumer
Re:whatever. (Score:5, Funny)
When it comes to the Backstreet Boys this cartoon [yahoo.com] says it all.
Re:whatever. (Score:3, Funny)
everyone loses (Score:5, Interesting)
This will just encourage people to go find an analogue->Digital MP3 conversion of the CD on the internet; everyone loses.
I guess I'll never be buying another Sony CD if this goes through.
Re:millions who've bought MP3 players (Score:5, Insightful)
I have simply stopped buying ANY CD until the corrupt CD are all properly labled and not sold on the same shelf as red book CD's. Then I may go back to buying red book CD's. If I can't put them in by MP3 jukebox, I can't use them. I'll just be forced to use alternitive sources for MP3's.
and don't forget... (Score:4, Informative)
And don't forget radio talk shows, several areas have dj's who discuss consumer/and/or tech issues (clark howard, kim kommando,motley fools, etc), call up, state position. Play the word twisting propoganda game right back at them state you dislike being called and demonized as a "pirate' and to you it's the same as calling someone in public The N word or whatecver as it's inaccurate and demeaning. Enough stock market "investors"and store managers and whatnot hear these complaints on the radio, and they WILL hear it, it WILL get back to sony and hollyweird, and stick to your guns, don't buy any of the riaa stuff, ever.
I've been doing it for years, I just flat refuse to buy any of those overpriced pieces of "entertainment" whether audio or video. i got whizzed over the blatant zillion percent markups, because I know that moneyis pure greed profits well above any sort of normal rational level, and i won't support greed. I'll support some osrt of reasonable profit, but not making these bozos mega rich, "rich" should be good enough for anyone, IMO. I buy already purchased/used or independent and that's it.
As an aside,if you want a source of a good set of political/freedom/human-civil rights, etc. issues videos that you are encouraged to copy and redistribute, goto infowars.com, get any of alex jones videos, he has them on dvd or vhs, buy one, make 100 or 1000 copies, give them away or charge just for the media, exactly like linux distros, he don't care. He only asks you use a first gen copy you get from him for the copying efforts, very reasonable, IMO.
Re:millions who've bought MP3 players (Score:3, Informative)
And Digital Audio Tape (DAT). DAT was a perfectly good technology that is 100% dead because it had LEGALLY MANDATED DRM built in.
And to those of you who are pro-DRM, DAT prooves the horror stories about DRM are absolutely valid. People who bought DAT and recorded their own band discovered that they could not make copies.
THE LEGITIMATE COPYRIGHT HOLDER was unable to copy HIS OWN MATERIAL!
Situations like that will become common if DRM catches on.
-
Dot Mac, perhaps? (Score:4, Interesting)
I've been wondering when the price of a
After all, they have a good deal of the music producing community's loyalty. Maybe they'll team up with a few open-minded artists and do the promotion and distribution that way. Maybe they'll find new artists - who knows?
I use a Mac almost exclusively now, having just given away the last of my Sony laptops. Yet, I don't think I'll be lacking for music any time soon.
I'm certainly not going to buy any more Sony equipment so that I can listen to Sony 'artists' on some POS Sony software. I mean, have you ever *used* Sony-produced software? Utter crap, every program I've ever used of theirs. They do make really nice hardware, though, once you get Linux installed...
Apple has shown that MP3 is a format that is viable for their users though while not totally secure, at least inconvenient to pass around. Sure, there are hacks to let you copy music from a friend's iPod onto your Mac, but few people really do that, IMHO. The thing is, Apple hasn't alienated their customers by making what you buy less accessible, instead, you get a gentle reminder - 'Don't steal music.' It's subtle, but I think it has an effect that reduces theft without making honest people feel like criminals.
How many CDs worth of music a year would it take to justify paying $99 a year for
Imagine the
What if Janis Ian or someone put an album of MP3s and Quicktime clips on Apple's servers and you could play them as much as you wanted, forever for $8? You could copy it down to your iTunes library and listen as you like off-line. Would you even bother to burn it to CD? Well, maybe if you want to listen in your car...
Think what a boon it would be to emerging or forgotten artists. There's a lot more talent out there than just Lil Kim or N'Sync or Aerosmith - a lot of real musicians who actually make their own music and do it on Macs - I bet more than a couple would jump at the chance to sell directly to Mac users. I'm sure they'd be making a lot more money.
Of course, this is all just speculation and wishful thinking...
(Either that, or Steve Jobs needs to change his email password to something other than 'sN@pple'...)
Cheers,
Jim
Oh, and if you read my site, I have a short bit about returning a copy-protected CD to Tower Records. Please add your thoughts...
It plays in Cars and CD Players, too! (Score:5, Informative)
SME's new Label Gate CD consists of two kinds of music data -- one is data for audio devices to replay and the other is encoded compressed data for PCs to replay.
Re:It plays in Cars and CD Players, too! (Score:2)
Re:It plays in Cars and CD Players, too! (Score:3, Interesting)
Hoontech Digital/XG, ca. EUR 60 (Score:4, Informative)
And, oh yes, the Linux drivers (ymf744 IIRC, or ALSA) ignore the SMCS bit. I can copy from MD or CD to PC and vice versa as much as I want. Under Windows, the Toslink (optical) stuff seems to be disabled as soon as you playback stuff.
I bought this card precisely for this reason. I don't want no stupid bit telling me I cannot copy my own live recordings (from my own music I myself, and the rest of our big band, make). Seriously.
Re:Hoontech Digital/XG, ca. EUR 60 (Score:4, Informative)
I recommend them over what you have discribed since having chinese-only drivers does not really do well for my confidence of the product.
Re:It plays in Cars and CD Players, too! (Score:5, Informative)
SCMS is the Serial Copy Management System. There's more info [minidisc.org] on it from minidisc.org. There's a more technical description [epanorama.net] of the whole S/PDIF protocol at epanorama.net.
Elektor Electronics is an electronics hobbyist magazine from the UK which featured an SCMS remover in their July/August 1998 issue. There's a page (not affiliated with Elektor) with some more information [sketchy.net]. That page includes links to on-line ordering of the kit, a parts list for the kit, and some notes to help you if you're trying to build it.
The Elektor kit got things started, but was produced before CPLDs were accessable to the general electronics hobbyist. I agree with warmcat that it wouldn't take much work to implement an SCMS remover in some CPLD, although I haven't yet come across published plans for one.
I am also unsure if soundcards with S/PDIF inputs honour the copybit or not. However, a cheapo AudioPCI can easily have an S/PDIF input added on [www.uta.fi], which won't care about the copybit. This is the way I'm going since I already had an AudioPCI lying around.
Of course, you don't need to build anything. You can get an SCMS copybit remover [minidisc.org] brand new from Behringer [behringer.com].
(btw - warmcat, dude, you rock!)
Re:It plays in Cars and CD Players, too! (Score:2, Insightful)
So what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So what? (Score:5, Funny)
Dont give them any ideas. Before you know it, they'll take that out too.
Perhaps they should just cut to the chase and start making CD players without any external connectors whatsoever. No headphone jack, no speaker connectors, no nothing. I actually already have one of these -- I call it a "trashcan". It sits next to my desk... I put unplayable CDs into it all the time.
Cheers,
Correction: (Score:5, Insightful)
Uh... Shouldn't that read "Sony will be removing functions from music CDs?"
What you are seeing (Score:5, Insightful)
It's time to get the power of the music back to the artists and the listeners, from profitering bastards!
Revolution!
Re:What you are seeing (Score:4, Interesting)
1) Sony [sony.com] develops copy protection that largely works (yes, yes, I know.)
2) Sony develop hardware [mp3daze.com] and software [pcmag.com] (for their other hardware)that supports it.
3) Artists start getting less money because recording labels [sonymusic.com] give them less royalties due to bad sales.
4) ???*
5) Profit. Massively.
Can you guess the blank? Horizontal markets are the way to go. Microsoft supports everything off of Windows sales. Conglomo's [title14.com] time has come. And its name is Sony. or microsoft. or nokia. or maybe samsung at a push.
*A Record label [sonymusic.com] offers them more, because it a) sells more due to hassle factor, and b) can partially support it from hardware revenues.
Extraordinary Claims Require Coherant Evidendence (Score:3, Interesting)
1. Are you partly saying because Sony manufactures hardware and the copy protection, it will be picked up and implemented?
2. Which SPECIFIC horizontal markets are you talking about, and WHY are they the way to go?
3. If Microsoft supports everything off of Windows sales, are you saying Sony will support everything off thier CD sales???
4. What does your Conglomo link mean? It looks like a fan website. HOW does this tie into Sony?
5. A Record label offers them more? What's them?
6. What's the blank before "Profit. Massively."?
Re:Extraordinary Claims Require Coherant Evidenden (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Are you partly saying because Sony manufactures hardware and the copy protection, it will be picked up and implemented?
No, the other way round. I'm saying that hardware sells anyway, and Sony, due to their presence in both the music media and music device industries can use influence in one to help out the other.
2. Which SPECIFIC horizontal markets are you talking about, and WHY are they the way to go?
Music. From distribution, through music hardware to normal pc hardware to copy protection software.
3. If Microsoft supports everything off of Windows sales, are you saying Sony will support everything off thier CD sales???
No, the other way round. CD sales are the endangered market at the moment, with sales dropping off. Artists are going to start losing money, and they don't want that at all. So if Sony can offer then better royalties by signing the to record on Sony copy-protected media, they will be happy. And to listen to the music we will have to buy the Sony hardware, making Sony a profic on both sides of the fence, and helping to keep the CD sales afloat.
4. What does your Conglomo link mean? It looks like a fan website. HOW does this tie into Sony?
Never saw Rocko's Modern Life then?
5. A Record label offers them more? What's them?
artists. more money.
6. What's the blank before "Profit. Massively."?
I included spoilers in the original post... that bit with the '*' on it..?
Basically, I am trying to point out how Sony is aligning itself to play the music market, both in terms of media and electronics, by the prodution of this closed copy protection mechanism, and how throwaway comments like 'the recording industry is scared shitless' are shortsighted and naive. Large companies have clever people in them that devote all day every day to planning a successful future for their company, and people shouldn't throw out their 5-minute's-worth-of-thought opinion like it's God's Own Truth.
Does that help?
Just Desserts (Score:3, Funny)
You got what you wanted, sorry.
Re:Just Desserts (Score:3, Interesting)
Another Excuse (Score:4, Insightful)
I use my music CD's in my computer... (Score:2, Insightful)
I use my computer to create .ogg [xiph.org] files of the CD's I have here. When I start my computer, XMMS starts playing, and I like having constant music.
Another thing I do, is create backups from my CD's (after a tip from another Slashdot reader). That way, I don't have to be afraid of scratches, since I always have my original CD.
These are examples of fair use - if a company limits our rights to fair use, can we sue them then? IANAL, bue maybe one of you is (poor you, of course...)
high-fidelity CD players (Score:5, Funny)
What about low fidelity CD players? And all of those middle-range ones? Cheapskates have a right to music, too!
(I'm being an idiot, please move along)
Re:high-fidelity CD players (Score:3, Interesting)
The CD format was developed as a medium-fidelity format... cheap, easy to mass produce, and good enough quality for the home user.
Only in later years after mass market acceptance did they start calling it "high fidelity"
human ears (Score:3, Interesting)
Only in later years after mass market acceptance did they start calling it "high fidelity"
However, mass market acceptance wasn't the only factor in calling 16-bit 44.1 kHz stereo "high fidelity". The field of psychoacoustics advanced greatly at that time, and it became apparent that DC-22 kHz frequency response with 110 dB dynamic range and 90 dB signal-to-noise ratio (the difference is due to noise-shaped dithering, which was also developed around that time) was enough to fool the best of human ears.
Hi Fi Players are not affected by this (Score:5, Informative)
Of course, since some car CD players work on the same principle as PC CD players, they would be unusable.
I normally play my CDs in the car. I have more or less stopped buying CDs altogether. Go Figure.
Campaign for Digital Rights (Score:5, Informative)
This is an active campaign to try to stop this kind of evil action by corporations who insist they are the injured party when charging ripoff pricing for their goods and using graft to stop anything at all ever falling out of copyright and into the public domain where all works finally belong.
Take a look at their site at least, consider joining the mailing list.
urgh! (Score:5, Funny)
bring back the 8-track.
What are they thinking (Score:2, Insightful)
decss part two? (Score:3, Insightful)
If you argue that it makes it too easy to copy their work, well, then what they have is an unworkable business model. It's like sheet music. For the really big orchestras who are playing the works of composers who are under copyright protection, they have to buy expensive scores. High-visibility = doing it the right way. This would be equivalent to using music in movies and games and such. On the other hand, if you're going for private lessons, and you need a copy of the blue bells of scotland, the prices of the real thing are going to be cheap enough to make it not worth the trouble of copying it from someone else. This is equivalent to consumers and cd's.
Believe me, I'm all for protection of intellectual property. However, when protection just isn't possible without harassing researchers, threatening consumers, and forcing us to get our songs in a crippled format, it's time for our government to say: "Good luck with that whole music industry thing, you're on your own."
"Free world" (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, and this will be hacked within a week of its' release. The data can probably be intercepted somewhere in the soundcard on the way to the speaker...
I Give Up (Score:4, Insightful)
-aiabx
Sony and trademarks/branding (Score:5, Funny)
MagicGate...
LabelGate...
If they start doing per-use billing, will they have a brand "BillGate" and will those "BillGates" then cause a huge lawsuit to be launched by our favourite WA resident?
-psy
Re:Sony and trademarks/branding (Score:4, Informative)
Started? That's the heart of the plan:
Copy protection on CDs isn't about stopping file sharing, its about creating new per-play revenue streams WHILE ALSO preserving obscenely high hard-media profits.
I.V.
This sure makes me want to be a Sony consumer (Score:5, Interesting)
I can't wait for the music industry to implode. An abusive power (whether in goverment (old school) or coporate (new school)) must be subverted. Funny thing. I just went to the library yesterday from which I had ordered eight discs I've been wanting. Spent an hour or so last night ripping copies of them to give to myself as a holiday present.
Am I stealing? Yes, yes I am.
Do I feel badly about it? No, no I don't.
How come? Because the media companies have so far overstepped the boundaries of decency, that I have lost the ability to feel their pain.
Isn't there one executive at one of these companies who has the slightest idea or vision of how this is going to work out?
Finally, I agree with the poster who said simply that this will be hacked. It will indeed be hacked and it's likely that it will be hacked before the discs are widely available. Then the music will be on p2p and the system will continue to dissolve and fade away.
Re:This sure makes me want to be a Sony consumer (Score:3, Interesting)
+1 Paranoid, -1 Conspiratorial.
Re:This sure makes me want to be a Sony consumer (Score:5, Insightful)
No, no you're not. However, you areviolating copyright law. Big, big difference.
Outrageous (Score:4, Interesting)
To ostracise computing communities in this way is nothing short of disgusting - and it should be corporate responsibility to bring all under the same umbrella. Will this be a good thing or a bad thing for Sony? I do't know, but what I do know is that from the moment this technology is used Sony will have lost one CD-purchasing consumer (me) simply becasue of my choice of computing platform (Macintosh). Does this affect me? Well, slightly yes it does, but I am sure that if I want a song bad enough there will be a way for me to get it, but on the whole I'm hoping it affects Sony more than anyone else.
Mac users (and possible Linux users?) are a very media-based group of people, there are so many Mac-based graphic designers, film editors, 3d artists, animators etc. These creative people love music! The two go hand in hand! So what are these people going to do in the CD-store? Are they going to change their computing platform so they can listen to music on their machines, or simply not buy the (Sony) CD?
I simply don't get how this could be a *benefit* to Sony.
We should speak out about restrictive technologies such as these - is there a consolidated action group for such things? If so, where can I join?
-Nex
Incomprehensible (Score:5, Informative)
1. This is not a copyright system, it's a copy protection system.
2. It doesn't prevent people from playing CD's in analog players altogether. The music available in two forms on the CD, one inteneded for traditional CD players in a copy protected format, and one for PC's, also copy protected.
3. This only applies to 12 cm CD singles produced in Japan.
Re:Incomprehensible (Score:5, Informative)
And a few other points no one seems to be making (probably because they don't RTFA):
4) If there truly are two copies of the data, redbook and protected, not shared data, then the capacity will effectively be cut in half, meaning this approach could never be applied across the board to Sony's whole catalog since the average album is too long to fit twice on the same CD. Which raises two interesting questions - is the data duplicated or shared? And is the protected data uncompressed, or are you getting a lossy version?
5) You only get one free key to listen to your music. Subsequent keys must be purchased. So if your hard drive fails, or you wipe your drive and forget to backup your keys, you get to buy your music all over again. Not to mention that if you want to listen to your new "CD" in your home office and your computer at work, you will have to pay for two keys.
6) The copy protection system requires an Internet connection, making it even more burdensome than it already is
7) You have to use Sony's proprietary player, like it or not.
All around it sounds like a a great system that is exactly what consumers are asking for. Way to go Sony!
What about Playstation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Copies vs originals (Score:3, Insightful)
But with all this crap they are pushing into the printed cd's, it is going to be a good policy to just avoid them and trust the copies.
If you come across a copy of a music cd, you know that the person who copied it made the effort to remove the restrictions placed on it.
Therefore in the future, there will be less trouble with copies than with original discs!
Also, an album downloaded from the internet will have more value that a original one because it will play everywhere once you burn it!
I think this is gonna backfire on them.
Re:Copies vs originals (Score:3, Interesting)
That is abolsutely right. My mom just bought a Univeral disc and lo and behold it was copy-protected. (All universal discs have been like this for some time.) The first track had a bunch of static at the start. I knew she would bring one home sooner or later.
What do I do? I put the CD into the stereo, play the thing, and pipe the output into my machine and record a clean copy.
Now how often do you think we listen to the original?
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
5 players? One for each label? (Score:3, Interesting)
Beat CD DRM for all time. (Score:5, Interesting)
The great Slashdot Alarmists (Score:5, Insightful)
They're putting restrictions on their product, we find it inconvenient. 1) don't go flying off the handle and claiming we can't play their CD's on anything but our PC's, and 2) don't act like some fundamental God-given right has been raped away from you.
It's a product inconvenience, making the product less desirable. The free market always solves these problems in the end. If loss of sales due to these features offsets the sales they're allegedly losing due to P2P, they'll drop it. That's all.
Calm down. You don't have some basic humanitarian right to listen to popular music.
Music is not an commodity product. (Score:3, Insightful)
What free market?
You seem to be under the illusion that music is an undifferentiated market where all the products are interchangeable like wheat or crude oil. This is known in economics as perfect competition. Sadly, it doesn't happen in most real-world products people buy. The market for music is an imperfect competition, and it's hardly an open market right now.
Instead there is an oligopoly controlling music currently. All it takes is for the major members of the RIAA to band up together to introduce a scheme like this (which they are all in the process of doing) and 99% of the music you hear on the radio will only be accessible via this format.
Then what? Where does your average consumer get their Christina Aguilera, their Faith Hill, their Enimem, etc.? What competing publisher publishes the particular artists and even whole genres that they like? No one does. There isn't a wide variety of sources from which to get an artist's song that you like. Oh, if you're "indy," you can go underground to the local artist from your city, but 90%+ of the population likes what they hear on the radio, and what they hear on the radio is what the RIAA pays independent promoters to have them play.
So what if people buy less CDs because the TCO is higher? As long as they pay the same total amount of money, the RIAA is doing well. Heck, it even saves them money because they don't have to promote nearly as many artists if fewer CDs will make them more money through pay-for-play arrangements. The masses will continue to "vote with their dollars" to pay for these schemes when they're the only source of music that they like. The "free market" will decide this one for us because that market isn't truly free.
You're right on one point. It's not a basic humanitarian right to listen to popular music. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't be upset about being forced to pay more for goods while their utility decreases. It may not be "some fundamental God-given right," but it's certainly not fair and just treatment. It's someone making like a tinge less enjoyable for millions of people to greatly profit a few. It's like spam that way. The level of inconvenience that one person suffers is inconsequential, but the level of inconvenience that the total mass of affected people suffers is inexcusable -- especially when it's all done just to pump money out of people with providing them any benefit.
And this is the music industry's brain on drugs (Score:5, Informative)
Here's yet another example. (I submitted this various forms to the /. editor gods 3 times in the last two days, but they don't seem to think it worthy of your attention) :
According to this article [electricnews.net] , Universal Vivendi will be making 43,000 tracks available for sale, at $0.99/track, on 28 different web sites (that will get commissions for the sales). In what can best be described as a monumental example of still not getting it, UMG will be selling the tracks in the proprietary DRM hobbled Liquid Audio format [lycos.com] . A quote in the article from a UMG unit president demonstrates that years of listening to the kind of stuff big labels sell does indeed damage the hearing (and possibly the corporate brain) when he said (please try not to laugh too hard, folks) "We have listened to the public, and we are offering the music that people want at a reasonable price that fairly compensates the artists, songwriters and [other] individuals who make their living in the music industry". Apparently UMG thinks that a restricted format is what the public wants. As to "fairly compensating artists (and) songwriters", I have yet to hear any UMG artists announce that their contracts have been ripped up. Just to double check that last point, I looked outside - there is still only one moon in the sky.
Finally, for the 3 of you that don't also peruse the Register, here's an interesting item that the music industry should pay attention to: File swap nets will win, DRM and lawyers lose, say MS researchers [theregister.co.uk]
It seems that the harder the music industry tries to resist, the more likely it is that they're writing their own epitaphs.
It'll backfire on them... (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Shell out $$$ for protected CD, run into trouble.
2. Store refuses to take it back, claims it's not broken
3. Find mp3 (or ogg or whatever, let's not get int that) on internet, burn a 100% plain vanilla RedBook-compliant Audio CD.
4. Enjoy music.
5. Lesson learned: Next time, skip steps 1 and 2.
6. Record companies complain about increased piracy.
7. Even more protected CDs come out
8. Goto 1 (Basic anyone?)
And, unlike CSS, this isn't really a copy protection. This is just a crude hack to use different ways of interpretating a CD to make life difficult. Sometimes I wish CD-manufacturers would just give us the raw output of the CD, complete with lead-ins, lead-outs, only providing the error data but doing no error calculation of its own. With all the data, and a software ripper that could fix whatever tricks they pull, maybe they would realize just how pointless this is.
Kjella
Put down your mouse, pick up your guitar!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
You may even score with a real woman, not some digital recreation.
I miss the old Sony (Score:4, Interesting)
Their remaining innovation seems mostly directed at dumping crippled products on their customers. They push proprietary "standards" like SDMI and invent new ways to lock up the tripe they press on CDs. And, just like Microsoft, if there's an industry standard, it's a good bet Sony is pushing a competing technology.
Sony still lets the engineers out once in a while, to create products like the Aibo. It has little commercial significance, but it keeps their image polished. In their profit-making lines, they're coasting on their reputation. They still command premium prices, but the value behind the logo is gone. Substance and performance have been replaced with frills and flash.
Like most companies, some Sony products are very good, some are junk, most are so-so. Unfortunately, even the decent stuff may have proprietary bells and whistles that increase costs or limit compatibility. The Sony brand used to top shoppers' buying lists. Now, unless you know a product well, the Sony brand is best avoided.
IMHO, YMMV, etc.
EMI just did the same with the new Robbie Williams (Score:4, Informative)
First let me state I bought it for the girlfriend :)
Anyway, like the acticle description of Sony's technique, the CD plays in a normal CD player, or a DVD player, however when put into a PC it autoruns and starts a little, quite good looking player, and plays the CD using this player.
Now if I use Media Player, or Real to play the CD, it still works, but if I try to rip the CD, each track errors about 5 seconds in.
By the looks of things, the CD based player software has digital versions of the songs embedded in it. According to the player the tracks are encoded at 47kps.
It's clearly labelled as "Copy Controlled" on the front and back of the CD. It is not described anywhere on the media as a "CD", nor does the Phillip's logo appear. Minimum listed specs are Windows 95, Pentium II, 4Mb RAM. But as you can still play it using your normal computer, I guess those specs are for their little specific player.
The point of all this? None really, it does stop you ripping the music, but it's still playable from everywhere else, your CD player, your DVD, or your own player software. Almost seems reasonable when you think about it.
Why do they even try? (Score:3, Interesting)
The first download of the electronic key that goes with a CD is free. SME plans to charge about A5200 (US$1.64) per song for the second time onwards, Ide said. Users cannot opt to just decode one song from a CD, but have to purchase the key for the entire CD, he said.
Why are they even trying? Off the top of my head I can get at this data by using...
Oh, what's that? The player is Windows only? That's OK, use WINE to translate the Windows API calls into easy-to-tinker with UNIX calls. Same steps above apply under WINE you know (and why stop there? Think about Counter-Strike cheats)
Hmm, it doesn't run under WINE? No problem, VMWare to the rescue!
Oh, you're not a programmer you say? That's alright. Just hook your sound card output to a recorder instead.
Or put a tape recorder up to your speakers for that retro teenage 80s style pirate action.
Basically, it has been cracked before it has even been released. It is hopeless and will just inconvenience casual users at best. If anything, casual users will now start seeking ways to rip the content, causing them to become better acquainted with how to break copy control.
A little thing called ANALOG IN and OUT (Score:3, Interesting)
But they're giving the music away anyway (Score:3, Interesting)
I have all the latest top-10 tracks (that interest me) and lots of other less mainstream stuff as well.
And guess what -- I haven't bought a music CD for years.
Nor have I ever used a P2P network for getting this stuff.
Nor have burned copies of someone else's CDs
Just how did I accumulate this wonderful collection of music and videos?
I recorded them from free-to-air broadcasts, that's how.
Given the fidelity limitations of MP3, an FM stereo or stereo TV broadcast is more than the equal of most CD rips.
Now, if the recording industry want to sell public performance rights to broadcasters, and if the likes of Sony want to sell me the gear I need to record from these radio and TV broadcasts -- how on earth can they complain later that I don't buy their CDs?
Just throw a TV/radio tuner card in your PC and you too can quickly accumulate a great music collection at no cost -- and without the hassles of circumventing CD copy-protection or getting caught file-swapping over the Net.
So what's the recording industry going to do about it? Make recording radio/TV transmissions illegal?
I don't think so.
Let's face it -- people have been recording music (and movies) from FTA broadcasts for years. Maybe they're just starting to realise that any business model which relies on selling something people are already getting for free might be fatally flawed.
Re:But they're giving the music away anyway (Score:3, Insightful)
As far as the 128kb MP3s that are typically shared around on p2p networks go, I agree with you. However, cd audio ripped on a Plextor with cdparanoia and then encoded with a LAME preset like --r3mix is another kettle of fish altogether. I doubt most people could tell difference between those and the original. That is as long as things aren't the way so-called Golden Ears like them. They don't things that contribute to objectivity like double blinded testing. They have to absolutely see the hand built tube amp to KNOW they have quality.
NewtonsLaw is right, most mp3s that are traded around sound like FM radio taped onto a cassette. I did it when I teenager. What are they getting excited about? Oh yeah, that's right. They tried to kill cassettes too.
Not out in the cold. (Score:3, Insightful)
What this scheme will do is make it harder for computer-illiterate young girls (Teenage guys can figure out anything on a computer, so I stick this on the girls.) to rip the latest top 40 hits and share them on P2P networks with all of the other file swappers. This will leave the music being shared on the systems of clueful users, making obvious supernodes that the record companies will be able to hack once they are given vigilante privileges by the US government.
Copyright != Copy Protection (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm suprised this mistake was not caught. The article has nothing to do with a new copyright system, which is a legal fiction. The article is about a new copy protection/restriction system.
This appears to actually be part of the copyright cartel's plan. First they twist the meaning of Pirate to include bootlegging, now copy protection becomes copyright, giving it a whole new outlook.
It's not the DRM that bothers me, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
For a comparison, look at say, a VideoDisc (them big old record-like things). There's no way you'd ever confuse it with a VHS casette, and as such, not really expect it to work similarly. This, it looks like a CD, is marketed similarly to a CD, fills a similar niche to a CD, yet strangely isn't a CD.
If you want to do a DRM format, make it very different. How about the size and shape of a British two-pound coin? This benefits you in several ways:
1. Completely new and potentially propriatery player base, no need to worry about some old equipment designed in a way that can look through your attempts to maintain compatibility and DRM in one disc. I can easily see them giving away free DRM-disc players, perhaps with the purchase of some number of discs, to buy market share.
2. No problems with people returning "broken" discs because they thought they were CDs that work properly.
Consumers also win because they can make intelligent purchasing decisions, and not have to guess if a disc will work or not; it also allows them to see the true effect for them of DRM (because market penetration will probably never be 1000%, you'll probably see both CD and DRM-D releases together, and be able to compare sound quality and price.
In 5 years there will be 30 artists (Score:3, Funny)
They future's so bright I need a welding mask.
A New Sourceforge Project (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Read the story! (Score:5, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Time to stop buying Sony then surely? (Score:5, Interesting)
Mac/Unix users (Score:3, Insightful)
I wish Sony all the worst and am glad my CD collection was "completed" when I got pissed off at the ridiculous prices several years ago.
But hey guys, clean up your act and I'll rush out and spends