PDA

View Full Version : New copy protection and Squeezebox



Jeff52
2005-06-23, 13:54
According to a story in the UK register http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/21/emi_sony_bmg_revisit_cd_copy_protection/ and other similar stories, the new Sony/BMG copy protection scheme will only allow ripping of such CD's to a hard drive as WMA DRM protected files. See detailed description from one of the copy protection companies here: http://www.sunncomm.com/support/sonybmg/

According to the Slimserver FAQ, Squeezebox2 will not stream DRM protected files. For those who do not download tracks from iTunes and similar services and obtain their music by ripping from CD's, I presume this will pose some substantial problems for Squeezebox users. From reading posts on the forum, it appears many of us (myself included) use lossless files on their PC's ripped from their CD's as a source for their Squeezebox music. These kinds of draconian copy protection measures really put a "squeeze" (pardon the pun) on Squeezebox users. I am not really interested in downloading lossy formatted music just to play via the Squeezebox or being forced to purchasing a CD AND downloading the same music via a music service to avoid the DRM issue. I paid for the CD, legally ripped it to my hard drive, paid for a Squeezebox to be able to stream it to my stereo equipment and now all of a sudden the DRM police won't allow me to listen to new music via my Squeezebox. I realize that there will be "cracks" developed and convulted workarounds, but that will just complicate things and make it a real hassle for most folks.

What a mess this all is. What does everyone else think?

kefa
2005-06-23, 14:00
totally agree. I vote with my wallet against DRM which is the reason why I go to all the trouble of buying CDs rather than downloading some poxy crippled files that sound foo barred.

problem is, I'm sure the unwashed britney listening masses don't see how they're being conned.

fuzzyT
2005-06-23, 14:05
Jeff52 wrote:

> What a mess this all is. What does everyone else think?

absolutely vote with your wallet.

when that fails you and something you must have comes out on one of
these labels, then educate yourself. not so convoluted after all:

<http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~jhalderm/cd3/>

You can:
Use Linux
Disable Auto-Run
Disable the malware driver
Just use the <shift> key

--
rt

"This is not a smoking gun for superfluidity. This is a cannon."

kdf
2005-06-23, 14:07
Quoting Jeff52 <Jeff52.1r3khn (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:

> What a mess this all is. What does everyone else think?
>

since you asked...
Every record company executive who so greedily takes their customers' money
while failing to deliver a real product, and all the artists who allow this
kind of treatment to their loyal fans should all be lined up for one big,
collective bitch-slap.

yeah, I know, I'm riding the fence too much on this one..

-kdf

Jeff52
2005-06-23, 14:48
[QUOTE=fuzzyT]Jeff52 wrote:

> What a mess this all is. What does everyone else think?

absolutely vote with your wallet.

when that fails you and something you must have comes out on one of
these labels, then educate yourself. not so convoluted after all:

<http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~jhalderm/cd3/>

You can:
Use Linux
Disable Auto-Run
Disable the malware driver
Just use the <shift> key
QUOTE]

According to the link to Sunncom in my original post, the shift key "Princeton student" workaround, disable autorun workaround does NOT work with the new protection. The new protection forces you to accept the EULA and install the software or the disc will eject and cannot be copied. Yeah, I could buy a Mac (which is not currently affected), install Linux, etc., but that was precisely my point, in order to use the new discs, we will be forced to resort to new hacks or some other convulted method of what formerly was a rather simple process: ripping the CD's and then streaming the music via Squeezebox.

I agree with voting with my wallet, however, if, as reported and expected, all of the major labels follow suit (EMI is using another similar method already), then I will be limited to searching obscure labels with obscure artists which do not use crippled audio discs. Maybe that isn't all bad, however it is a substantial restriction on what I may listen to on my Squeezebox. This has got to be causing some anxiety to people who are in the business of marketing products to stream digital music via harddrives, e.g., Slimdevices and others. It would appear that most of these companies will be forced to use DRM licensing in their products so that the average person may stream their music.

fuzzyT
2005-06-23, 15:09
Jeff52 wrote:

>>According to the link to Sunncom in my original post, the shift key
>>"Princeton student" workaround, disable autorun workaround does NOT
>>work with the new protection.

Sorry, I didn't see that information in the Sunncomm page. The Register
page says something to that effect, but not with any precision. Did I
miss something?

>> The new protection forces you to accept the EULA and install the
>> software or the disc will eject and cannot be copied.

Some software must display the EULA and on rejection eject the disc. I
don't see how this could work except where this software loads (via
AutoRun) from the CD itself. Please let us know if you find out
otherwise.

Oh, and it appears as if Sunncomm will actually give you a workaround if
you ask in the right way.

see:
<http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050620_150829.html>

The 'simple mechanical workaround' referenced here smells an awful lot
like the old <shift> key trick.

perhaps this is where you ask:
<http://www.sunncomm.com/support/askthetech.asp>

I don't have direct experience with these discs, and it sounds as if you
don't either. For the time being I think the best course is just to
wait and see.

--rt

Damon Riley
2005-06-23, 19:42
Jeff52 wrote:
> According to a story in the UK register
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/21/emi_sony_bmg_revisit_cd_copy_protection/
> and other similar stories, the new Sony/BMG copy protection scheme will
> only allow ripping of such CD's to a hard drive as WMA DRM protected
> files. See detailed description from one of the copy protection
> companies here: http://www.sunncomm.com/support/sonybmg/


This is a nuisance, and I *do* vote with my wallet, but it's only the
tip of the iceberg. I worry that DRM will one day be attached to the
files I create myself and only allow "trusted" software to open those
files. Eg. Text documents I wrote myself that only open for MS-Word, or
music files I recorded that will only play on iTunes. Why else would MS
& Intel be working on built-in DRM tech other than to lock you into
their formats & their software? Honestly, can you think of a better
reason besides lock-in from their point of view?

Oh, and for you US customers, you ought not forget that defeating DRM is
a federal offense. Literally. Check the DMCA. So even if the DRM tech
is crap, it's a crime to defeat it (though going around it is still
legal-- check with the US Circuit Court where you live, I Am Not A
Lawyer, etc. etc.).

-- Damon

radish
2005-06-23, 20:48
It is simply impossible (IMNSHO) to make a CD which will play in a regular CD player but which cannot be ripped. Many companies (including Suncomm in the past) have tried, all have failed. There have been so-called "protected" CDs on the market for years now, all are trivially defeated. In my experience, with auto-run switched off and a copy of EAC I never even notice the protection. Likewise, using Linux, MacOS or anything else non-windows will utterly defeat their schemes.

Thankfully very little of the music I care about comes from labels who treat their loyal customers like criminals, but for that little which does, well let them spend their money on snake oil. It doesn't work, it can't work, and it won't work.


I worry that DRM will one day be attached to the
files I create myself and only allow "trusted" software to open those
files. Eg. Text documents I wrote myself that only open for MS-Word, or
music files I recorded that will only play on iTunes.
Sounds like an excellent reason to use OpenOffice and Foobar2000 rather that Word and iTunes to me.

mherger
2005-06-23, 23:21
> Thankfully very little of the music I care about comes from labels who
> treat their loyal customers like criminals, but for that little which
> does, well let them spend their money on snake oil. It doesn't work, it
> can't work, and it won't work.

IMHO the american market is still very free compared to the european. Most
labels over here add copy protection. And I won't buy one single protected
CD.

A while back I ordered a disc directly from the US as I did not expect it
to appear on the european (swiss) market. I had rarely seen this artist's
work in Switzerland's music stores. But I was wrong: A few months later it
was in local shops - copy protected! Labels don't treat us all the same...

I recently asked myself whether labels are actually creeping back. There
are more and more unprotected CDs whose precursor were protected.

--

Michael

-----------------------------------------------------------
Help translate SlimServer by using the
StringEditor Plugin (http://www.herger.net/slim/)

cliveb
2005-06-24, 01:11
It is simply impossible (IMNSHO) to make a CD which will play in a regular CD player but which cannot be ripped.
Sort of true.

Any CD which needs to be able to be playable in a standard audio CD must have a red book compliant first session. Many copy-protected CDs use the simple expedient of having a second data session which is what the CDROM drive sees. This is trivially defeated by using a CDROM drive which has an option to ignore multi-session (eg. many of the Plextor range).

But there is another, far more sinister form of copy protection. In this, the audio session on the disc is deliberately scattered with uncorrectable errors, and relies on the audio CD player's error concealment (via interpolation) to produce an acceptable playback. The overwhelming majority of CDROM drives either do not perform error concealment, or do so poorly. The upshot of this is that you have to rip the CD in a mode that doesn't detect the errors (eg. EAC burst mode), and you end up with a rip that has many short digital glitches.

The only method I have found for successfully ripping these CDs is to play them on an audio CD player and record the SPDIF output in real time using a soundcard with a non-resampling SPDIF input. And of course this technique will work with *any* CD, no matter what "copy protection" technology it uses. The bottom line is: if you can listen to it, you can record it.

radish
2005-06-24, 08:21
IMHO the american market is still very free compared to the european. Most labels over here add copy protection
Most MAJOR labels, and they're the same companies as the US ones. They're using europe as a test market to see how acceptable the protected discs are to consumers. What I meant by my original comment was that most of the music I buy isn't from the major international labels, it's from smaller indy labels who appreciate their fans. Almost all of whom are european, as it happens. Examples: ID&G, Vandit, Armada, Bonzai, etc etc. Mainly German, Dutch & Belgian.

dbls
2005-06-24, 09:09
radish wrote:

> In my experience, with auto-run switched off and a
> copy of EAC I never even notice the protection.

If only it were so...

My wife and I were in France a few months ago and bought a few
CDs (at 20+ euros a pop!) to listen to while we were driving.
One of them, Ray Charles' "Genius Loves Company", was copy
protected. Unfortunately, I didn't notice until a couple of
days later. When we got home, I found that EAC will recognize
the CD and list the track titles, but won't allow ripping.

I have a friend with a CD recorder (i.e. an audio component) who
can record it, but that means going through D/A and A/D
conversions. Better than nothing, I guess. And I can tell him
not to bother recording "It Was A Very Good Year" (yuck!).

-:- dbls

Neil Sleightholm
2005-06-24, 10:55
My wife and I were in France a few months ago and bought a few CDs (at 20+ euros a pop!) to listen to while we were driving.
You are lucky they worked in the car, the player in my car (Saab) is the only player we own that plays copy protected CDs. My wife's Audi won't, PC's won't and 3 differect Bose systems won't. I have to rip them using AudioGrabber's "Get TOC..." options (http://www.audiograbber.com-us.net/) then create a new CD so we can play them.

Neil

dbls
2005-06-24, 11:18
Neil Sleightholm wrote:

> You are lucky they worked in the car, the player in my car (Saab) is
> the only player we own that plays copy protected CDs. My wife's Audi
> won't, PC's won't and 3 differect Bose systems won't. I have to rip
> them using AudioGrabber's "Get TOC..." options
> (http://www.audiograbber.com-us.net/) then create a new CD so we can
> play them.

Well, maybe that's one reason why they call it a Smart car!

-:- dbls

Phillip Kerman
2005-06-24, 11:59
Dang, I have a hard time believing that there is actually a foolproof copy
protection technology. I haven't seen one yet (that I couldn't rip). Not
saying you all are wrong--but I just haven't seen it and I don't understand
how it could be true.

Maybe people can make a list here of the CDs they believe are un-rippable.

In any event, yeah, if it's true that really sucks.

Thanks,
Phillip

mherger
2005-06-24, 12:08
> Maybe people can make a list here of the CDs they believe are
> un-rippable.

The German PC magazine c't already has a list of copy protected CDs and on
which players/drives they can/can't be read:

http://www.heise.de/ct/cd-register/default.shtml?s=suche

It's in german, but there's little important text to read:

Abspielen: can the disc be played?
Auslesen: can the disc be ripped?

Laufwerk/Brenner: drive for computers
Player: player :-)

Ja: yes
Nein: no

--

Michael

-----------------------------------------------------------
Help translate SlimServer by using the
StringEditor Plugin (http://www.herger.net/slim/)

radish
2005-06-24, 12:12
but won't allow ripping

What do you mean by "won't allow"? What actually happens?

Phillip Kerman
2005-06-24, 13:52
>
> > but won't allow ripping
>
> What do you mean by "won't allow"? What actually happens?
>

Hard to say because I've always been able to defeat it. But, some cds
install software via auto-start which will disable common ripping software.
Plus, other things people mentioned on this list.

I have one new CD, Tom Waits "Real Gone". The last track I can't get... it
always freaks out the error correction in EAC. I'm not sure what,
technically, it's doing.

Thanks,
Phillip

Jeff52
2005-06-25, 13:51
I have frequented a number of websites and forums discussing the new copy protection schemes as opposed to those that were originally used. The new schemes are quite different than the first generation and will only become much more sophisticated. We no longer have "redbook" CD's. Some new CD's may be ripped by SOME programs or by SOME drives or by SOME operating systems or a combination thereof. Yeah, I can copy a CD via digital out to my professional stand-alone CD writer or my digital audio tape player and then rip it (or copy it via analogue out), but my whole point in starting this thread wasn't that a particular scheme would not eventually be cracked or a workaround found, but that this has become a giant shell game about DRM.

MOST people will not have the time or sophistication to figure out how to rip a non-DRM copy of their CD, thus coercing those who manufacture products (digital audio players, including Slim Devices) to adopt DRM protection. The hackers will find a way: "Let's see...this is the new CD by the Foo Wrestlers. According to my new Snoop Copy Protect Detect program it uses the SunMoonMacrovision XYZ protection scheme. Ahhh, now I can switch to my Linux/Apple/Commodore 64 box, plug in my external Plextor/Lite On combo 12XY drive, use Isobuster/EAC/Audiograb prebeta version 87a, run it through my homebrew DAC computer card, store an image on my hard drive, convert to FLAC with cuesheet and then rip it to CD-R with Nero version 1AZP. Now I can use that copy to rip it to my player or drive without DRM. Yesssireee, I CRACKED it."

The major labels and copy protection companies employed by them must enjoy reading 20 pages of hacker forums discussions about the confusion over how to rip the new releases. I would expect that they do not intend to confound everyone, just most people. In fact, Sony/BMG press releases have referred to "casual piracy". They know they are not going to outwit the dedicated hacker who wants to post the stuff on P2P networks--they will fight and are fighting that particular battle with lawsuits and legislation.

I suspect that the days of holding down the shift key or pressing Control-Alt-Whatever while holding your mouth just right to avoid a program installation are over. The major labels are at war with piracy and I can't blame them. However, their scorched earth policy will soon interfere with the average person's ability to listen to the music they purchased legally and legitimately and most likely will result in DRM becoming standard for hardware manufacturers who need to sell their products in the marketplace. The customers will be hollering at the manufacturer of their players (YOUR player will not play/store MY song) and NOT the labels. This is precisely what the labels want: to force DRM on manufacturers of hardware. Then the battle has been won. Slim Devices and other manufacturers want and need to sell to a broad range of people, not just sophisicated computer users who can figure out how to crack copy protected audio content.

Phillip Kerman
2005-06-25, 14:55
Pretty funny writing Jeff52. Pretty accurate too. There are a few things
that I still don't get. Are there not CDROM drives that can simply make an
exact copy of any CD? (Not re-encode it etc. but just make a dupe.) I do
tend to believe that simply holding down shift will defeat my ability to
make a CD Copy. What am I missing if I'm wrong?

Regarding DRM... I too totally don't blame the labels. But, I also don't see
how my "fair use" gets in their way after I forked over the price they felt
was fair. And, I'd be fine if there was some sort of DRM pre-installed on
Windows or whatever that actually WORKED.... but I fear any attempt will be
frought with issues... with slim to name the one I care about.

I don't think the end of music as we know it is necessarily here; around the
corner; or so far gone that we can't change its course. There's all these
new formats of audio CD that aren't going to make it.

Anyway, I'm almost tempted to try to get into the DRM business to knock some
sense into folks but I don't know if I'm capable or care that much.

Thanks,
Phillip

Jeff52
2005-06-25, 15:40
Pretty funny writing Jeff52. Pretty accurate too. There are a few things
that I still don't get. Are there not CDROM drives that can simply make an
exact copy of any CD? (Not re-encode it etc. but just make a dupe.) I do
tend to believe that simply holding down shift will defeat my ability to
make a CD Copy. What am I missing if I'm wrong?

Regarding DRM... I too totally don't blame the labels. But, I also don't see
how my "fair use" gets in their way after I forked over the price they felt
was fair. And, I'd be fine if there was some sort of DRM pre-installed on
Windows or whatever that actually WORKED.... but I fear any attempt will be
frought with issues... with slim to name the one I care about.

I don't think the end of music as we know it is necessarily here; around the
corner; or so far gone that we can't change its course. There's all these
new formats of audio CD that aren't going to make it.

Anyway, I'm almost tempted to try to get into the DRM business to knock some
sense into folks but I don't know if I'm capable or care that much.

Hey Phillip,

Thanks for the compliment I was trying to be funny in order to illustrate my point. Several of the sites I have recently viewed have reported using older vintage CD-ROM only drives to accomplish just what you mentioned with the new schemes. The new schemes go beyond the "shift key" stuff and many have reported an ability to rip using a particular hardware/software combination, but even then many have reported a substantial number of errors on the copy or at least several tracks. These discs are no longer redbook compliant and it appears to me (no expert by any means)they are designed to be error correctable on MOST CD audio players while introducing errors on MOST computer CD drives. Who knows what is being done to the audio on the CD since the redbook standard is being ditched. Freed of redbook standards, the copy protection companies will be free to continue to develop a myriad of schemes to cripple the audio and change it from time-to-time. The labels are only concerned that the CD will play on MOST audio CD players, and even then, if it doesn't play on all they really don't care. Denon, Creek and other hardware manufacturers have already posted information on their websites about not guaranteeing the playability of new dual discs in their products and specifically state that the discs are not redbook compliant. How in the heck can you design a product to play a CD, when the CD is not manufactured according to the specs used by the hardware manufacturer?

The labels (and some software companies) idea of "fair use" is DRM. Ultimately what they want is for us to rip the music with a DRM compliant ripper which requires a "license" in order to rip and thereafter play it. I would guess that the vast majority of folks rip using one of the standard rippers, e.g., Music Match, Real Player, Windows Media Player, iTunes, etc., rather than EAC, CD-EX, etc. and to the extent that these programs and the players used to play the music are DRM protected then I assume the labels would be happy.

Once again, what a mess.

Damon Riley
2005-06-26, 08:22
Jeff52 wrote:

> The labels (and some software companies) idea of "fair use" is DRM.
> Ultimately what they want is for us to rip the music with a DRM
> compliant ripper which requires a "license" in order to rip and
> thereafter play it. I would guess that the vast majority of folks rip
> using one of the standard rippers, e.g., Music Match, Real Player,
> Windows Media Player, iTunes, etc., rather than EAC, CD-EX, etc. and to
> the extent that these programs and the players used to play the music
> are DRM protected then I assume the labels would be happy.
>
> Once again, what a mess.
>
>

Why would Microsoft want DRM? What's in it for them? Why should they
care about casual music piracy?

They don't care about it except as an excuse for DRM, and the reason
they want DRM, I think, is lock-in. If they can build-in DRM, then they
can control what programs are 'trusted' to open other file types, no
matter who created the content in the file or who owns the content.

If cooperative legislators, like Fritz Hollings, make it illegal to sell
or even own hardware that doesn't include built-in DRM, then we're all
screwed, not just those of us who want fair use of the music we buy.

I don't use MS Word, but almost all of the people who send me articles
for a school newsletter I edit use it. If future versions of Word are
DRM'd, I may no longer be able to open these files because my word
processor isn't 'trusted.' The DRM fight is about much more than just
copying a song.

radish
2005-06-26, 10:04
In fact, Sony/BMG press releases have referred to "casual piracy". They know they are not going to outwit the dedicated hacker who wants to post the stuff on P2P networks--they will fight and are fighting that particular battle with lawsuits and legislation.

And this is precisely the fallacy of DRM. It only takes ONE PERSON in the entire world to go to the lengths required to rip a cd and put it on p2p, and it's there for everyone. Why should I pay money for a CD which I can't actually play the way I want, when I could just download it for free and use it however I like? By doing this they are actualy discouraging me from buying their product. How the braindeadness of this doesn't sink in is quite beyond me. Casual piracy is a myth, the vast majority of illegal distribution happens via p2p and DRM does NOTHING to prevent that - it actually encourages it.

Phillip Kerman
2005-06-26, 10:33
In case it's interesting to anyone, I pasted an excerpt from a forthcoming
release of a book I wrote about using Macromedia Flash. You can see that in
the next edition I'll have a minor mention of DRM. Probably not as strong
as I'd like it--but this book is not exactly my opportunity to push
political opinion. Each edition reaches over 50,000 readers worldwide
however.

Thanks,
Phillip

EXCERPT:
For now, it's enough to know that just four sound formats can be imported
into Flash. What about songs on audio CDs? CD audio tracks aren't in WAV,
AIF, AU, or MP3 format, so you can't use them directly. Luckily, however,
most sound-editing software--and Apple's excellent free product
iTunes--provides the ability to extract music from a CD and save it in WAV
or AIF format. Of course, you should realize that significant copyright
concerns arise when you use audio from a published CD. Plus, record labels
are adopting DRM (Digital Rights Management) techniques that make CDs
difficult or impossible to copy. (Alas, some of these CDs won't even play in
your CD player.)

Steven Moore
2005-06-26, 11:24
I thought that most piracy was in 3rd world countries like China
which copied cd's by the millions.
These companies should be the targets for the music business not
their customers.

Steven Moore
On 26 Jun 2005, at 18:04, radish wrote:

>
>
>> In fact, Sony/BMG press releases have referred to "casual piracy".
>> They
>> know they are not going to outwit the dedicated hacker who wants to
>> post the stuff on P2P networks--they will fight and are fighting that
>> particular battle with lawsuits and legislation.
>>
>
> And this is precisely the fallacy of DRM. It only takes ONE PERSON in
> the entire world to go to the lengths required to rip a cd and put it
> on p2p, and it's there for everyone. Why should I pay money for a CD
> which I can't actually play the way I want, when I could just download
> it for free and use it however I like? By doing this they are actualy
> discouraging me from buying their product. How the braindeadness of
> this doesn't sink in is quite beyond me. Casual piracy is a myth, the
> vast majority of illegal distribution happens via p2p and DRM does
> NOTHING to prevent that - it actually encourages it.
>
>
> --
> radish
>

stinkingpig
2005-06-26, 13:09
Jeff52 wrote:
> I have frequented a number of websites and forums discussing the new
> copy protection schemes as opposed to those that were originally used.
> The new schemes are quite different than the first generation and will
> only become much more sophisticated. We no longer have "redbook" CD's.
> Some new CD's may be ripped by SOME programs or by SOME drives or by
> SOME operating systems or a combination thereof. Yeah, I can copy a CD
> via digital out to my professional stand-alone CD writer or my digital
> audio tape player and then rip it (or copy it via analogue out), but my
> whole point in starting this thread wasn't that a particular scheme
> would not eventually be cracked or a workaround found, but that this
> has become a giant shell game about DRM.
>
> MOST people will not have the time or sophistication to figure out how
> to rip a non-DRM copy of their CD, thus coercing those who manufacture
> products (digital audio players, including Slim Devices) to adopt DRM
> protection. The hackers will find a way: "Let's see...this is the new
> CD by the Foo Wrestlers. According to my new Snoop Copy Protect Detect
> program it uses the SunMoonMacrovision XYZ protection scheme. Ahhh, now
> I can switch to my Linux/Apple/Commodore 64 box, plug in my external
> Plextor/Lite On combo 12XY drive, use Isobuster/EAC/Audiograb prebeta
> version 87a, run it through my homebrew DAC computer card, store an
> image on my hard drive, convert to FLAC with cuesheet and then rip it
> to CD-R with Nero version 1AZP. Now I can use that copy to rip it to my
> player or drive without DRM. Yesssireee, I CRACKED it."

Too true -- this is why if the CD won't rip in at least one of my
machines I send it back to whence it came for store credit and tell them
that it's defective. I don't even bother with an anti-DRM rant, I just
tell them that it doesn't work in my car. I then use the store credit
for something else, because I don't have time to deal with finding out
if it was DRM or a truly defective disc. Funny thing is that I've only
had to do this a couple of times, maybe because we don't listen to top 40.

The retailers know full well that they will be killed by returns if the
CDs they sell don't work 100%. They're helping out with this little
social experiment, but they're not vested in the RIAA's success and it
won't take a lot of returns for them to side with us.

--
Jack at Monkeynoodle dot Org: It's a Scientific Venture...
Riding the Emergency Third Rail Power Trip since 1996!

stinkingpig
2005-06-26, 13:14
Damon Riley wrote:
>
>
> Jeff52 wrote:
>
>> The labels (and some software companies) idea of "fair use" is DRM.
>> Ultimately what they want is for us to rip the music with a DRM
>> compliant ripper which requires a "license" in order to rip and
>> thereafter play it. I would guess that the vast majority of folks rip
>> using one of the standard rippers, e.g., Music Match, Real Player,
>> Windows Media Player, iTunes, etc., rather than EAC, CD-EX, etc. and to
>> the extent that these programs and the players used to play the music
>> are DRM protected then I assume the labels would be happy.
>> Once again, what a mess.
>>
>>
>
> Why would Microsoft want DRM? What's in it for them? Why should they
> care about casual music piracy?
>
> They don't care about it except as an excuse for DRM, and the reason
> they want DRM, I think, is lock-in. If they can build-in DRM, then they
> can control what programs are 'trusted' to open other file types, no
> matter who created the content in the file or who owns the content.
>
> If cooperative legislators, like Fritz Hollings, make it illegal to sell
> or even own hardware that doesn't include built-in DRM, then we're all
> screwed, not just those of us who want fair use of the music we buy.
>
> I don't use MS Word, but almost all of the people who send me articles
> for a school newsletter I edit use it. If future versions of Word are
> DRM'd, I may no longer be able to open these files because my word
> processor isn't 'trusted.' The DRM fight is about much more than just
> copying a song.
>

Bingo -- extend the argument into the hardware realm, and you see why
Apple is willing to switch to Intel x86 but not AMD x86. TPCA. Thing is,
I don't really care as long as this sort of thing is limited to niches.
I do care when every piece of hardware you can buy has to be authorized
by the vendor for the use that you intend to put it to. I don't think
that'll really happen though, there'll always be a place for the
discount vendor who's saving a buck or two by skipping the TPCA chip.

--
Jack at Monkeynoodle dot Org: It's a Scientific Venture...
Riding the Emergency Third Rail Power Trip since 1996!

bill fumerola
2005-06-26, 16:01
On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 11:22:51AM -0400, Damon Riley wrote:
> Why would Microsoft want DRM? What's in it for them? Why should they
> care about casual music piracy?

Cory Doctorow (of the EFF) has an excellent speech on this topic:

http://craphound.com/msftdrm.txt

-- bill

FLMike
2005-06-27, 09:29
If this is an issue you care about, contact your Congressperson or Senator and tell them that this is important to you and why. Explain that you are not a pirate or someone who steals content, but that you value your right to fair use. Ask them to support an exception to the DMCA that gives the consumer the right to bypass copy protection or other DRM mechanisms as long as that bypass is used ONLY to excercise what are traditionally considered to be your rights to fair use. I believe a bill like this has been floated by Rep. Rich Boucher (sp?). This is a huge issue with fundamental implications for the way we as consumers use electronic media. For instance, there have already been several attempts to get congress to force equipment makers to make every device they sell that can receive and record digital TV signals to recognize and honor a "broadcast flag" that can specify whether the transmission can be recorded or not, and if so how many times etc. If they say "no recording allowed", then forget about recording your favorite teams championship game. Cut a check to the NBA or NFL instead. IMHO, under the cover of combating piracy, the media industry is trying to force a move away from a broad fair-use environment to a pay-per-play model. That's not something I am looking forward to.

Michaelwagner
2005-12-27, 21:00
Cory Doctorow (of the EFF) has an excellent speech on this topic:

http://craphound.com/msftdrm.txt

-- bill
A somewhat more readable version is here:
http://www.dashes.com/anil/stuff/doctorow-drm-ms.html

And as a footnote to this thread, since it was last updated, Sony/BMG got caught - their copy protection was based on a rootkit, and they've had to take back massive numbers of disks and exchange them. And face a boycott.

http://www.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20051222.gttwsony22/BNStory/Technology/

Pale Blue Ego
2005-12-28, 21:25
Play dumb. When you buy a "CD" you can't rip to your iPod or Slimserver, call or email the record company. Tell them you need to get the music onto your iPod and so what should you do? Take the CD back or download the tracks off the net? After all, there really isn't any other choice - make sure you let them know that the DRM CD is useless to you.

The funny thing is, you'll probably get an email telling you how to disable the copy protection. We've seen this with the Sony rootkit fiasco. They actually ended up providing mp3 files to customers who bought the CD - that's the very thing the DRM was supposed to prevent!