Don't Smudge The Sensor When You Press 'Play'

mattyrobinson69 writes "According to The Register, 'The RIAA wants your fingerprints.' They've teamed up with VeriTouch, who say 'In practical terms, VeriTouch's breakthrough in anti-piracy technology means that no delivered content to a customer may be copied, shared or otherwise distributed because each file is uniquely locked by the customer's live fingerprint scan.'" No details, but the article talks about a locked-down "wireless media player" to prevent such passing around.

I Hate to think...

[Anonymous Coward]

how this will work with porn movies...

They've planned ahead

[T-Kir]

They really want your DNA in the long run... so be careful where you aim. :)

Re:I Hate to think...

[sleepnmojo]

This is actually a great question the RIAA should ask. If this has no way of taking off in the porn industry, how the hell do they think they will pull this off to the general public. All great technologies of their time got their boost from porn (VHS, internet, etc)

If you can't sell it to the porn industry, aren't they just wasting their time?

just watch...

[MoOsEb0y]

now playdough is going to become illegal under the DMCA because it's a circumvention tool :)

Re:just watch...

[SenatorTreason]

Or a piece of tape over the sensor....

Re:just watch...

[deacon]

I know you are just joking, but it is more likely that what will be made unlawful is sound cards or other recording devices with:

Line in

or

Mic in

8 ohm or 30 ohm resistors(whatever the impedance of a headphone speaker is), wire, plugs, solder, and knowledge are far too common to ban.

Almost fair....

[wvitXpert]

Having your music locked to you instead of your computer almost sounds fair.

I did say almost...

Re:Almost fair....

[Delphix]

It's certainly not fair use.

Re:Almost fair....

[timeOday]

It may very well be fair, it may well be legal. But do you think consumers will spring for it? I sure don't think so.

Not unless Hatch get it mandated by law that is.

Time to stock up on Gummi Bears!

[grnchile]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/05/16/gummi_bear s_defeat_fingerprint_sensors/

Here's a link that actually works

[xSquaredAdmin]

Linkie [theregister.co.uk]

Warm Hot dog

[cgenman]

I worked at a place that required finger prints as a confirmation that employees weren't checking in / out for eachother. After a few years the system got so bad that you could check in with the wrong finger, with someone else's finger, with toes, with an elbow... I've even signed in using a warm hot dog.

In short, the real-world performance of these systems is still greatly up in the air, and is by no means a solution to security problems. The idea of etching a fingerprint photograph onto a PCB and into a gummy bear is ingenious, but somehow I doubt that after a few years of being kicked around any of these systems will be sensitive enough to tell if you took a picture of a fingerprint or of the president's head.

Re:Time to stock up on Gummi Bears!

[Anonymous Coward]

Forgery is already illegal but I will wager money that a new law will be passed that makes forging biometrics a even bigger crime with heftier punishments.

outrageous

[Anonymous Coward]

they just don't get it do they?

Locked down devices have no future. Witness Sony getting its but handed to it by apple, after years of walkmen, by making intentionally defective products

Re:outrageous

[Grishnakh]

I don't know either. The only thing I can think of is that Sony really led the portable music device industry for a while since it pioneered the Walkman, and stayed in the lead with portable music players long after, including the switch to portable CD players, etc. However, for some reason (piracy concerns, maybe?), Sony never got into the portable MP3 player market, and when Apple brought out the iPod, it took over. Now, no one listens to tapes, portable CD players are old hat, and when people think of portable MP3 players, they think of the iPod and Apple, not of anything from Sony. Basically, it seems Sony has become a has-been.

Re:outrageous

[badasscat]

Doesn't it look like one locked down device has usurped another ?

I'm guessing you mean the iPod is a locked-down device too. But it isn't. It'll play non-DRM'd mp3's just as well as it'll play AAC files, which Sony players won't. Personally, *no one* I know plays anything but regular old mp3's on their iPod. I'm sure there are people out there that do use it for Apple AAC, but I would think those people are in the clear minority. People don't call the iPod and others of its ilk "mp3 players" for nothing. This is a clear fact that Sony and the rest of the RIAA (and don't forget, Sony *is* a member of the RIAA) don't seem to grasp. The iPod is a success because it plays mp3's. If it didn't, it would have failed. And mp3's are as popular as they are because they can be easily copied and traded, whatever the legality of it. It's as simple as that - if a hardware company wants a music device to succeed, it must support the standard mp3 format, which is what most everyone has the vast majority of their music in to begin with, and not for nothing either.

Sony really has no such thing as an mp3 player - even their upcoming iPod competitor converts mp3's to ATRAC as you copy them over, from what I've read. It's an ATRAC player just like all their other digital music players (other than CD players, which are a dying market). Honestly, I half believe that the true nature of the PSP - which is considered a gaming device right now - is as a media player designed to popularize Sony Connect. It won't work, but I do believe that's the plan, to sort of sneak in there and make music a value-added feature of this device they expect to be popular for other reasons. And of course that music will be in the ATRAC format.

Anyway, the RIAA is really smoking crack if they think people are going to have anything to do with fingerprinting to get their music. It almost reminds me of that Seinfeld episode where David Dinkins proposed a law requiring all New Yorkers to wear name tags all the time. I mean it's about that dumb. It's not even that it won't work (which it won't), it's that NO ONE will buy such a system, even if it means they don't get to listen to any new music. There's plenty of good music around already to listen to - more than I'd ever have time for in my life, that's for sure.

It's been said before...

[bravehamster]

and I'll say it again:

If I can hear it, I can copy it.

These companies who are selling technology "solutions" to the piracy problem are like snake-oil salesmen selling cures to old ladies. It might make them feel better, but it doesn't make a damn bit of real difference.

Not the point

[cot]

The real question is what if they can individually mark the music you purchase, and hold you liable if that music shows up on the net?

Cash is going the way of the dodo. I imagine there will be some degree of outcry to this in general, but already almost everyone's using check cards, ATM cards, and what have you and the music industry just may decide to stop allowing the purchase of music with cash, effectively eliminating anonymous purchasing.

Copy protection is inherently breakable if you allow the person to play the music back. The same is not true for watermarking, and I wouldn't be surprised if they try to go this direction in the long run.

Re:Not the point

[selderrr]

Cash is going the way of the dodo.
no it isn't. There are way to many shabby practices that get dirty money. Last time I heard, there is as much fraudulent money (not counterfeit ! Just money gained from illegal activities) changing hands as white money. Andthe majority of that dirty money is circulating among the powers that be.

They will never ever allow a fully traceable system to come alive. The mere fact that there isn't such a system yet proves this, since techincally, it not rocket sience.

Re:Not the point

[commodoresloat]

techincally, it not rocket sience.

Technically, no it's not, or there would be a rocket involved.

Re:Not the point

[bryanp]

the music industry just may decide to stop allowing the purchase of music with cash, effectively eliminating anonymous purchasing.

Nope. Take a bill out of your wallet and read what it says:

THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS PUBLIC AND PRIVATE.

They can give you incentives for using plastic, but they cannot refuse to accept cash.

Re:Not the point

[Xzzy]

They can give you incentives for using plastic, but they cannot refuse to accept cash.

Actually yes they can. The rules for it are a bit convoluted, but what it amounts to is that as long as it's made clear cash won't be accepted prior to any services, they can reject it as a payment.

If that isn't adhered to, the eventual result is that any debt is forgiven by the courts.

I may be sketchy a bit on some of that, but I looked it up a year or so ago and the point was that there are some situations where one doesn't have to accept cash.

Re:Not the point

[FryGuy1013]

"We do not accept bills larger than $20"

I'm sure that $100 bills have the same markings, but refusing to accept them is perfectly acceptable. What "this note is LEGAL TENDER for all debts public and private" (emphasis mine) means is that the money is "real" since it's not backed by any gold bullion but rather is fiat money and is money because the gubment says so.

Re:Not the point

[(H)elix1]

"We do not accept bills larger than $20"

I'm sure that $100 bills have the same markings, but refusing to accept them is perfectly acceptable.

I pushed someone on this... and the manager said I was correct, they could not refuse it. He then continued - of course, I won't make change either...

Re:Not the point

[rearden]

That is not true at all. Just because a US Bank note is legal for debts, does not mean that the seller has to accept it. Case in point my landlord... they will not take my rent in cash. My options are to get a check/ money order of some type or move elsewhere.

However, the number one group purchasers of music in the US is teenagers. Until most teenagers have bank cards/ credit cards they will still accept cash as they will not risk loosing their biggest (and often most mindless) customers.

Re:Not the point

[bryanp]

While Amazon may not accept cash directly they do accept money orders, which may be purchased with cash at your local post office without any form of identification being required. So effectively, yes they do accept cash, as money orders are an accepted way of paying by cash through the mail.

And yes, I do know someone who buys things online this way. A friend of mine is a little funny about his money - he doesn't use checks or credit cards or check cards or what not. He pays for everything with cash or money order. He orders things from Newegg quite regularly via money order.

Re:Not the point

[rossz]

Here in the U.S., the limit is $1. Most likely this limit is to prevent someone from paying a large debt in the smallest coin possible just for the annoyance factor. My guess is prior to the enactment of this law someone paid a $10,000 tax debt in pennies and the government had to accept it.

Ok, that probably didn't happen, but I can dream, can't I?

Re:Not the point

[Txiasaeia]

"The real question is what if they can individually mark the music you purchase, and hold you liable if that music shows up on the net?"

If it's an analog recording, and the music is fairly popular, then there's no way that any company can trace back a particular watermark to an individual user. The MPAA can do it because a watermark is not detrimental to the entire movie experience, but an audio watermark in a 3 minute song? People are going to complain about that.

Even if they put it in a region which

Re:Not the point

[dmaxwell]

Lets assume they come up with a watermark that really works. You can't remove it and you can't obscure it. Its ultrasecure and robust yadda yadda.

Suppose me and five of my closest friends purchase the same watermarked tune. The amplitude of each audio stream is reduced to 1/5 and then all are mixed with each other. That could be fun to figure out.

How's this? Me and a buddy purchase the same tune. Feed each into one input of an op-amp and the only thing that will come out is the sum of the watermarks

Re:Not the point

[mengel]

First you filter it.

Then you add the fingerprint-noise for a random Senator on the appropriate commitee, and post.

Repeat.

Six months later, the RIAA sues all the Senators on the House Appropriations Committee.

One week later, the law is changed.

Re:Not the point

[Alsee]

Copy protection is inherently breakable if you allow the person to play the music back.

Right.
Not only can you use an audio tape recorder, but it's impossible for them to prevent you from just decrypting the damn file in the first place. You can't play it at all unless they give you the decryption key in one form or another. If you have the key you can know the key and use it at will.

The same is not true for watermarking

?????
What makes you say that? The entire RIAA/Felton DMCA fiasco was exactly over the fact that every single watermarking variation the RIAA wanted to test was pretty much trivial to defeat.

You just look at the same song from different people and with different watermarking. The difference between the songs is the difference between the watermarkings. At that point you can have software that either scrambles the watermarking or even strips the marking back to the raw song.

-

No need to do any analysis

[maxwell demon]

A perfect audio compression algorithm would remove exactly everything you don't hear. Since watermarks cannot be heared, an ideal audio compressor would therefore just remove them.

Although a perfect audio compressor doesn't exist (and probably won't ever), this shows that all watermark mechanisms are inherently fragile on improved audio compression algorithms. That is, algorithms which weren't developed with the intent of removing watermarks, but just with the intent of saving memory/bandwidth.

Re:It's been said before...

[tyrani]

I really hope that these "snake oil" salesmen keep up the good work. The longer that they keep selling silly ideas like this, the longer things will stay the same.

Re:It's been said before...

[OneDeeTenTee]

If I can hear it, I can copy it.

*GASP* But you lose 0.005% of the recording quality in the digital->analog->digital transitions!

Re:It's been said before...

[tftp]

a lot of people really do care about that loss.

Then they should go out and buy the CD. Normal people, however, not burdened with "golden ears", are quite happy with quality of Vorbis and MP3, if encoded correctly.

Older people remember vinyl and tape. *That* was painful to listen to - and guess what, everyone loved the thing!

Re:It's been said before...

[noidentity]

If I can hear it, I can copy it.

Aha! That's the solution: make it impossible to hear! Boss will surely compensate me well for this...

Very Insightful

[Pan T. Hose]

It's been said before... and I'll say it again: If I can hear it, I can copy it.

This is very insightful. Very insightful indeed. Do I have to remind the 1769 history of 13 years old Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756-1791) and the Miserere by Gregorio Allegri in Sistine Chapel? I don't think so. I believe everyone here remembers how this one of the unquestionably most significant and influential composers in history, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, was the first person who has literally circumvented the copy-protection of Sistine Chapel with nothing more but bare ears and his pure genius. Please let me quote Wikipedia:

Among the musical compositions of Allegri were two volumes of concerti, published in 1618 and 1619; two volumes of motets, published in 1620 and 1621; besides a number of works still in manuscript. He was one of the earliest composers for stringed instruments, and Athanasius Kircher has given one specimen of this class of his works in the Musurgia. But the most celebrated composition of Allegri is the Miserere, still annually performed in the Sistine Chapel at Rome. It is written for two choirs, the one of five and the other of four voices, and has obtained a celebrity which, if not entirely factitious, is certainly not due to its intrinsic merits alone.

The mystery in which the composition was long shrouded, no single copy being allowed to reach the public, the place and circumstances of the performance, and the added embellishments of the singers, account to a great degree for much of the impressive effect of which all who have heard the music speak. This view is confirmed by the fact that, when the music was performed at Venice by permission of the pope, it produced so little effect that the emperor Leopold I, Holy Roman Emperor., at whose request the manuscript had been sent, thought that something else had been substituted. In spite of the precautions of the popes, the Miserere has long been public property.

In 1769 Mozart heard it and wrote it down, and in 1771 a copy was procured and published in England by Dr Burney. The entire music performed at Rome in Holy Week, Allegri's Miserere included, has been issued at Leipzig by Breitkopf and Härtel. Interesting accounts of the impression produced by the performance at Rome may be found in the first volume of Felix Mendelssohn's letters and in Miss Taylor's Letters from Italy.

It is worth repeating: If I can hear it, I can copy it. Amen. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart himself has proved it in the age of 13. Could we really need any better proof? Could there even be any better proof? Please keep in mind that there is more complexity and beauty in every minute of Allegri's Miserere than in the whole content produced by RIAA in any year. Let us not forget this very important fact.

Yep...

[i wanted another nam]

Because we all know how terrible it is to let a friend borrow your movie or music. Jesus h christ.

Re:Not just that...

[MikeCapone]

Or am I just being paranoid?

I think you are not being paranoid enough, actually. Do a google search on the RIAA's new toy, the PIRATE act. You'd end up paying for sueing yourself. What a nice business model...

Riaa's Dream

[jeffkjo1]

This is The RIAA's dream. Everyone has to buy new... it's no longer possible to sell your music or give it to your little brother.

However, the principle buyers of music, PCKs (Poor College Kids), won't bite because they sell their crappy cd's and buy used ones that they think they will like.

Disclaimer: I am a PCK.

Re:Riaa's Dream

[arminw]

If they could get away with this, not only could you not sell or give your music to anyone, but only one person, whose fingerprint is registered could play it. I don't see how anyone in their right mind would buy such a device. Of course they could first buy a sufficient number of polititians that would make it unlawful to manufacture any player device without this faboulous "security feature"
AAW

Re:Riaa's Dream

[orthogonal]

This is The RIAA's dream. Everyone has to buy new... it's no longer possible to sell your music or give it to your little brother.

No, the RIAA's dream is mandatory cochlear implants with attached DRM'd combination locks and a coin slot.

I mean, why should the music on someone else's boombox or stereo be free for you?

"Please deposit twenty-five cents for another minute of music."

Re:Riaa's Dream

[netringer]

This is The RIAA's dream. Everyone has to buy new... it's no longer possible to sell your music or give it to your little brother.

No, the RIAA's dream is mandatory cochlear implants with attached DRM'd combination locks and a coin slot.

No the RIAA's dream is the same as Microsoft's:

"Congratulations Mr. Smith, you're a father! It's a boy!"
"Here's the birth certificate, the hospital bill, the fee for his initial Windows license and the fee for the first year of his right-to-listen-to-music license. We can combine those into the second mortgage loan amount or do you want to use your credit card?"

Re:Riaa's Dream

[xigxag]

"Here's the birth certificate, the hospital bill, the fee for his initial Windows license and the fee for the first year of his right-to-listen-to-music license. We can combine those into the second mortgage loan amount or do you want to use your credit card?"

Funny? No, that's not funny at all. In our parents generation it would've been freaky to graduate college with $10,000 or more in credit card debt hanging over your head. Now it's the norm. It used to be common law for contracts to be unenforce

Re:Riaa's Dream

[Grishnakh]

However, the principle buyers of music, PCKs (Poor College Kids), won't bite because they sell their crappy cd's and buy used ones that they think they will like.

What are you smoking? The principal buyers of music are teenage girls. As you just pointed out, PCKs don't buy much new music; they buy more indy music, used CDs, etc. Teenage brats with excessive allowances are the ones keeping the RIAA profitable, and they're such herd-followers that they'll buy into any crazy scheme the RIAA concocts.

Well

[Crashmarik]

You have to ask if mugshots are to follow. DNA sample to buy a CD ? This does tend to confirm that the music industry considers there customers criminals and feels they should be treated as such.

I can allready see the boost in music sales this will bring.

Re:Well

[miu]

I can allready see the boost in music sales this will bring.

I do wonder how much contempt and abuse customers will accept from RIAA. I reached my threshold about a year ago and I've not bought anything from a RIAA company since. I don't care if this technology will work or not, the idea itself is the kind of insult only an organization that truly despises its customers could contemplate.

Re:Well

[HiThere]

A couple of weeks? I cut my thumb in college (stupid accident in a chem lab). It's now over 30 years later and the scar is still just starting to fade.

Mkay

[broothal]

RIAA asked for it. They got it...
/me gives RIAA the finger

Happy now?

Re:Mkay

[kfg]

/me gives RIAA the finger

Dear Sir,

It is our duty to inform you that Freebird is the intellectual property of one of our constituant members, thus giving a free bird is going to cost you.

Please send everything you have plus 10% per Slashdot reader (which we place at 37 billion). We'll be by for your liver later.

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.

Sincerly,

The R.I. "Satan is our Bitch" I. A.

KFG

da' finga'

[GillBates0]

they'll have to make do with my middle finger. Hope that's okay.

Re:da' finga'

[rusty0101]

I am thinking they will have to figure out how to do this with my middle finger nail, or my middle finger knuckle. Not sure I want to imprint any other surface, either to my music player, or their forheads...

Yeah, right.

[Tassleman]

This will go over like a lead balloon.

I love these wacky ideas they come up with, they're so unbelieveable implausible. It's nice to know that they're wasting a fuckton of money on R&D for thie type of crap though.

Re:Yeah, right.

[cetialphav]

As a representative of the music industry, I am disappointed that you think this idea is implausible. We think that this idea is one of the best that we have had. Almost as good as Milli Vanilli and Vanilla Ice and just above DivX DVDs.

Our research indicates there is a lot of demand for this type of product. Customers actually want to pay extra for media players that can be locked down. It is a security feature. The Theft-Proof MP3 players. You do wan't protection against those mad gangs of raving mp

Re:Yeah, right.

[Paleomacus]

Thank you for introducing me to a new unit of measure. The 'fuckton', has now replaced the term 'fuckload' in my vocabulary.

lol - I'm gonna be rich

[salesgeek]

Because I'm getting in the latex finger/thumb print business.

Someone...

[Anonymous Coward]

...has to say it:

I'm a parapalegic, you inses....

Oh, you get the idea....

Fair Use

[manitoulinnerd]

Does lending music to a friend not constitute as fare use?

What about when you die, if you have a sizeable music library (such could be considered an asset) how will your family be given access to it?

They are wasting their time.

Re:Fair Use

[EvilSporkMan]

What about when you die, if you have a sizeable music library (such could be considered an asset) how will your family be given access to it?

Well, obviously you won't be needing those fingers anymore...

Re:Fair Use

[in7ane]

The real questions is, when you die, who does your finger belong to? The RIAA or can your family keep it on a keychain :)

Actually forget about when you die... Will this mean that RIAA will own my finger (you laugh now, but have you read the contract?)

Re:Fair Use

[anonicon]

"What about when you die, if you have a sizeable music library (such could be considered an asset) how will your family be given access to it?"

Honestly, neither the record, movie or print industries give a cow over whether one's heirs can access the deceased's intellectual property. While this whole fingerprint-tie-in with a given CD is a one-way ticket to bad sales, seeing the RIAA try to implement it even across the threshold of death wouldn't surprise me. They seem to be a never ending source of dumb i

Re:Fair Use

[psoriac]

...how will your family be given access to it?

Isn't it obvious? They won't. They'll each have to purchase and register via [insert biometric here] their own legitimate copies of any music they want. Does this surprise you? I shouldn't.

This will never succeed

[FunWithHeadlines]

I don't think thise iVue product will succeed in the marketplace unless it has some totally new feature that can seduce unwary buyers. No, having to have your finger scanned is not "cool" and doesn't count as a feature. It's an annoyance. Who wants to verify themselves to their own player to hear their own music? That's absurd.

No, this will only succeed if the RIAA is prepared to start shooting offenders. Or slightly less drastically, paying Congress to force people by law to buy such hobbled devices

Re:This will never succeed

[paganizer]

ALl they have to do is take a loss on it. if it's substantially cheaper than a iPod, people will buy it.
And I will publish a hack to circumvent the system on freenet, making in effect a super cheap iPod.
Everybody Wins!

I know what people are doing

[tyrani]

They're watching old Mission Impossible episodes and reselling the technology to the bloated RIAA.

I think that I'll corner the market on the A-team technology, start filing patents and help with the war against proper audio distribution.

Re:I know what people are doing

[Dun Malg]

I think that I'll corner the market on the A-team technology, start filing patents and help with the war against proper audio distribution.

I totally can't wait to see how you employ the cannon that fires heads of cabbage. That episode totally ruled!

Pop will eat itself.

[Tokerat]

No one is going to go for this. Now you have to buy a proprietary player AND keep all your music on it?

The big 5 are digging their own grave.

Verification of Actual Fingerprint

[MrNonchalant]

Makes me wonder if the RIAA will have some way to verify that it's actually a fingerprint they're getting. Simplest circumvention method I can think of is to lock the file with a random ubiquitous object (i.e. paper clip) and then anyone can unlock it with the same object.

oh dear

[__aahlyu4518]

WHOOOHAHAAAHAAAA Americans are allowed to have guns, but gloves are slowly becoming a capital crime hahahahaha.

It's not just their president we have to laugh at. Oh dear... do I have to appologize now or is it to late and is the invasion of my country already being planned ?

Re:oh dear

[__aahlyu4518]

score :
AC 1 - MarsDude 0 :-( ;-)

So.. this is a "single user" License Agreement?

[popo]

Reading between the lines here is an implication that music will be sold on a "single user license" basis. Note that this differs from a "single seat license" since the right to enjoy content will be granted to the individual, not the stereo, the household, office, or other potentially multi-user location.

Would couples need to scan both sets of fingerprints? Families?

Oh, and never mind your right to privacy...


"Imagine if wagon-wheel manufacturers had
criminalized the tire."

This is beyond insane...

[mcknation]

If you are going to do something this complex you are going to have to close the analog hole. Next thing you will have to have the speakers surgically implanted into your ears...so that you can only hear input from an "approved" device.

Ahh...crap I better shut up giving them ideas.

*runs to patent the idea*

McK

Yes!

[Kreigaffe]

This is perfect! I've always wanted to pay more for something because it comes with some sort of arcane and pointless feature that decreases functionality! It's like they read my mind! I don't even pirate music, the rewards vs. time invested for me just doesn't work out (apparently, no one else with a computer likes the music I look for). However it's measures like this that would drive me to rip&burn my way through anything i ever might want. Yes let's not even get into the fact that fingerprints change, and I've no faith in fingerprint scanners to begin with, and when you couple that with a cheap piece of crap stuck on to a portable player.. I'm sure it'll work just fine. Even after I wind up with a few new scars across my fingerpads, I'm SURE it won't accidentally lock me out of my own music! Oh and I bet if that DID happen the RIAA would gladly and with all due haste remedy the situation with a new copy of those now-locked songs for me.

I hope they use it

[ValourX]

I'd like to see this technology used extensively. Only then, when it's absolutely ridiculous, can there be the kind of angry, widespread non-cooperation that can bring down or properly declaw (regulate) the RIAA.

Things are bad now, but they're not bad enough to spark a revolt against the RIAA. They don't realize it, but they're bringing about their own doom.

-Jem

Do it!!

[tji]

> VeriTouch's breakthrough in anti-piracy technology means that no delivered content to a customer may be copied, shared or otherwise distributed because each file is uniquely locked by the customer's live fingerprint scan.

That would be great! I hope they completely lock the music down. They should also implement a LoJack system that detects potential piracy and alerts the DOJ, whose jackbooted thugs swoop down for the arrest.

Please, hasten the destruction of your industry. The faster that happens,

In related news...

[l0ungeb0y]

The RIAA recently announced the addition of Mr. 3 of 5 to it's board of directors. In a statement Jack Valenti welcomed the newest addition to it's board and said his mission was to better integrate consumers and media while fighting music piracy. 3 of 5, according to industry insiders is advocating the discontinuance of MP3 and CD audio formats in favor of using of a DRM restricted biomechanical implant that would allow individuals to wirelessly download and play audio directly through the implants interfa

Re:In related news...

[LighthouseJ]

haha, you should have got me yesterday when I had some mod points to hand out. You're talking about a part of the Borg collective right? I hope so because that's what I'm thinking of.

No market for this, unless....

[orthogonal]

From the linked article: "iVue: a wireless media player that allows content producers to lock down media files with biometric security. This week Veritouch announced that it had demonstrated the device to the RIAA and MPAA.

"In practical terms, VeriTouch's breakthrough in anti-piracy technology means that no delivered content to a customer may be copied, shared or otherwise distributed because each file is uniquely locked by the customer's live fingerprint scan," claims the company."

Now just who is going to buy this, a player that you can't let your mom or girlfriend (ok, that's not a problem for Slashdotters) or colleague borrow, that you can't use if your hand's in a cast or even in a glove (nobody plays MP3s on cold days?)?

And worse: how do you purchase tunes? Presumably, you'll have to present your fingerprint on purchase so it can be matched to the fingerprint when played. So will the media player lock you into purchasing only from merchants that process your fingerprint? How will you play free music -- like the legal live band recording at archive.org?

Perhaps it will also play fingerprint unencumbered music, but then what's the point?Why go to the extra trouble to purchase from a fingerprinting vendor, which at least will probably require hooking the player to your PC, providing the fingerprint, transmitting the stored fingerprint from the media player through the PC using some proprietary mechanism like an Active-X control?

again, who will want to pay extra to deal with having to provide a fingerprint?

The answer: no one.

So will it be legally mandated, or are the big record companies planning to stop selling CDs and sell only encrypted, DRM'd music? It has to be one of the two, or else this product has no market.

But seriously,

[Botchka]

how is it that this will benefit consumers in the slightest? If I understand this correctly, I would have to swipe my fingerprint on this device in order to listen to my cd????? WTF?? How is it that the RIAA continues to dabble in unfettered gestapo tactics and still have any artists to represent?? This is a joke. If artists really want to make more money, put out some decent music. I'm sorry but Britney Spears doesn't count as decent music and the RIAA needs to be stopped.

right from RIAA.com Every

Good waste of money

[mmarlett]

Even if they could technically do this (they probably can't), it would still rely on people actually paying money to allow themselves to be fingerprinted.

No way.

Average people aren't going to like that. Sure, maybe on a door lock for their own house or car, but your Internet-compatible music device? No way.

The market for finger print devices will always be for people to protect their property and privacy, not to participate in the protection of giant media companies' dollars.

Guess they never heard of Tsutomu Matsumoto...

[hethatishere]

The RIAA is very excited about their newly discovered way to stifle fair-use and beat down consumer rights.

They seemed to have forgotten that two years ago Finger Print scanners were tricked by then a little known Japanese cyptogropher named Tsutomu Matsumoto. This pretty much stalled adoption of finger-print scanners indefinetely since supporters were unable to prove they could outsmart his meddling.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1991517.stm [bbc.co.uk] [BBC.UK]

I'm sure those who want to will find an even easier way of defeating it on a hardware/software level rather than resorting to copying finger-prints. But still you think the RIAA themselves would follow security news.

the grand circle of piracy.

[mumblestheclown]

• media is produced.
• media is pirated.
• media is locked down to prevent piracy; users lose some abilities that they previously had.
• lock is broken; media is pirated.
• go up two bullet points; repeat indefinately.

How to break the cycle?

Method 1 - the stupid method - rant about basic issues of copyright like whether it should exist at all. insult the RIAA/MPAA and accuse them of being worse than hitler and thus antagonizing the situation more. talk about the loophole technology of the week, be it freenet or the MIT 'on demand' system or bittorrent or whatever while giving a "substantial noninfringing uses" wink wink.

Method 2 - the reasonable method - foster a culture that respects copyrights and really and truly frowns upon piracy. rational behaviour leads to being able to enter into sane dialog with rightsholders about the future of intellectual property in a digital age, including looking at which areas of IPR are out of date or need revision. the culture of respect and no-tolerance-for-pirates allows for a wider range of useful services to be deployed that are now possible thanks to new technology. everybody wins.

Re:the grand circle of piracy.

[roystgnr]

the reasonable method - foster a culture that respects copyrights and really and truly frowns upon piracy. rational behaviour leads to being able to enter into sane dialog with rightsholders about the future of intellectual property in a digital age, including looking at which areas of IPR are out of date or need revision. the culture of respect and no-tolerance-for-pirates allows for a wider range of useful services to be deployed that are now possible thanks to new technology. everybody wins.

So boiling

What gets me

[ValourX]

It's funny -- you can lock down a player all you want, but not the output. Nothing stops you from running a standard audio cable from the output (headpone or speaker jack) of the DRM'd device into the input of an unrestricted device, thereby allowing you to copy the music.

Sure it's analog (unless you use S/PDIF), and there will be a slight reduction in quality, but it will definitely be a useable recording.

Yet another DRM technology defeated by a simply workaround.

-Jem

WARNING

[Tetsujin28]

By reading this article you may be violating your Listener's License. [theafternow.com]

If the RIAA get its way,

[crovira]

its the DEATH of innovation and creastivitity.

Yeah Right

[MajorDick]

I would never give my fingerprint to a BANK let alone to play some music.

Yeah this is going to catch on ..... right.....

Ok, this is getting out of hand

[nurb432]

What is next, implanted devices that will prevent you from seeing or hearing content you are not licensed for ( or that the government doesn't think is acceptable ) ?

Just fucking sad

[Henrik S. Hansen]

It's just so fucking sad to think about the amount of time, talent and money that's wasted on this kind of crap.

Software should help people, bring people together, make stuff easier to do. It should not restrict us, seperate us, and make things harder to accomplish.

AHAHAH AWESOME!!

[waspleg]

i love it when the RIAA does shit like htis publically

they're like the evil villian in the top hat w/ the handlebar mustache trying to get the girl on the train tracks killed and every single time they do shit like this they cement that image into the minds of everyone they come in contact with...

the more hated the better, people wont' stand for not being able to play their music WITHOUT A FUCKING FINGERPRINT SCAN FIRST ahahaha hell they might as well have you verify every single song individually (fun while driving i'm sure) and have a lil webcam that broadcasts live spy video of you wehrever you are back to RIAA Headquarters so they can invidiually charge all the people within earshot (maybe they'll switch to retina scans/facial recognition to make this easily debited from your bank)

Sure...

[Teppy]

They can have my fingerprints.

On second thought, I'll just give them the finger.

Artists of the world unite!

[midifarm]

This will do nothing, but drive record sales into the ground. Artists need to uprise and stand up for themselves because the RIAA doesn't seem to be servicing them any more, it's all about the labels and the royalty publishers.

You might hate his music, but George Michael has released his LAST store CD release. Everything from now on will be available online only! This is a huge step forward for the artists themselves.

Bands like U2 and Aerosmith need to follow suit, drop their labels, do all their own production (which they do anyway) and sell their songs themselves. The day of the middle man making money off of the talent needs to come to a close. Our rights as consumers and fans are being infringed. The artists are the ones that need to step up.

Lars if you're listening, drop Electra and start doing it all yourselves. Control your own distribution!

Peace

I can see the scene now.

[julesh]

You walk into the music shop.

You: I'd like to buy the latest... err.. Eminem single, please. Erm. As a present, you know. For my little brother.
Sales assistant: Certainly, if I can just take your fingerprint...
You: Fingerprint? I didn't know it was a crime to buy Eminem records. Yet. Although I'm sure somebody's working on it.
Sales assistant: No, no, it's just to stop other people from using it.
You: No, no, you don't understand. It isn't for me. It's a present.
Sales assistant: Sorry, we need a fingerprint.
You: He lives five hundred miles away.
Sales assistant: We can sell you a voucher? Or maybe you could get him to send his finger to you?

Alternative scenes

[cgenman]

Scene 1:

Roommate: Hey, the CD's over and the party's dying. Get up off the floor and put another one on.
You: Ngguh.
Roommate: You've got to. It's your fault for getting smashed by 11.
You: Nnnnuuuuuuuh.
Roommate: Dude, that cute girl in red has been giving me looks all night. You have to keep the party going.
You: Nnnnuh. Nuhhhhhhhh.
Roommate: Allright, we'll do this the hard way. Give me your hand. Guh! Damn you're heavy. Guh! Ok, over to the stereo! And no grunting in protest.

Roommate: Phew. I knew we should have just played MP3's.

Scene 2:

Employee: Welcome to Walmart! How can I help you?
Customer: I'd like to buy a copy of "Vespertine" by Bjork.
Employee: Ok. I need your fingerprint and 3 forms of ID. There will be a 4 day waiting period while we burn an individualized copy.
Customer: What?
Employee: We do all of this for your convienience.
Customer: That doesn't make any sense.
Employee: See, right here on the label of the sample box. It says "For your convienience, this recording is individually traced."
Customer: ...How much is that shotgun?
Employee: Fourty-nine ninty five, with your super-saver card.
Customer: Deal. [turns gun on Employee] Now give me that CD.
Employee: Sure thing.

Scene 3:

[Scene 3 has been lost. The woman delivering scene 3 to the studios struck a telephone pole while trying to get approved by her biometric car stereo. But on the bright side, none of the medics stole any of her CDs.]

is this the same finger...

[utexaspunk]

...that was used to hold down shift in order to circumvent their last silly attempt at copy protection?

Interesting Technology, Wrong Application

[sloth jr]

Unless technology provides any useful upside for the consumer, it's not going to pan out. This technology could be used as a basis for global authentication, making tedium like PGP keys a thing of the past. Instead, the makers concentrate on protecting content providers.

Think small.

In defense of the RIAA...

[Bored Huge Krill]

yes, I know, but.... don't judge them on this particular insanity just yet. The /. story indicates that the RIAA has "teamed up" with the company that has produced this device, but I see nothing in the referenced article which supports that assertion. In fact, I can't see anything anywhere which does.

If you read the originating companies (there's two of them) PR, they state only that they have "demonstrated it to" the RIAA. That's very different, and shouldn't be taken to be an endorsement by them. My guess is that what this amounts to is they called up the RIAA and said "we have a brand new DRM system that will solve all your problems!!! Do you want us to come and show you?", and the RIAA said "sure, we'd love to take a look".

That the best they can now say in a press release is that they "demonstrated it to" the RIAA makes me think that the reception was lukewarm. I guess we'll have to wait and see. The RIAA have certainly supported dumb ideas before, but at this point I don't see any evidence they're actually backing this one.

Re:Not another dime

[b4k4]

If this goes mainstream, I won't buy another piece of music. Not another dime....

The problem is, those of us who will refuse to purchase music under conditions like this make up a very small percentage of the population. Most sheep, er, consumers, will jump through whatever hoops necessary to listen to the latest tripe from the music industry.

Re:1984

[Anonymous Coward]

Then you can forget about using my music collection.

Re:Out of luck?

[turgid]

Carbine? Is that a cross between a car and a combine harvester? Maybe you can use a toe. They have prints too. They're just like fingers, only you stand on them or something.