Slashdot Log In
Copy Protection On CDs Is 'Worthless'
Posted by
timothy
on Wed Nov 06, 2002 05:09 PM
from the healing-the-crippled dept.
from the healing-the-crippled dept.
zotler writes "NewScientist.com has an article about how copy protection on audio CDs is worthless. I thought this was funny since I just read this earlier Slashdot article 'BMG copy protecting all CDs'." The article also neatly sums up the technology behind current fair-use-inhibition stratagems.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Copy Protection On CDs Is 'Worthless'
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 509 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
|
2
Not Totally Worthless (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously though... If it can be played, it can be copied... no matter what kind of protection they use... Why waste the money and resources to 'secure' the CD, and piss off and lose customers?
Re:Not Totally Worthless (Score:5, Insightful)
I buy all my music, whether I buy CDs or download from emusic.com, and the last ten CDs I bought were all over ten years old and were all on sale for no more than $12.00 (US). And I know a lot of other consumers just like me: Disafected and out priced.
Re:Not Totally Worthless (Score:5, Funny)
You must have meant moist, referring to that Britney Spears - Yowzer that is moist.
Re:Not Totally Worthless (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not Totally Worthless (Score:4, Informative)
Amen, brother
I only buy used CDs. When the Music Industry starts treating their customes with respect again, then I'll start buying new CDs.
Re:Not Totally Worthless (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't forget that they would love [slashdot.org] to stop that, too. After all, buying a used CD is an unlicensed activity.
---
Dum de dum.
Re:Not Totally Worthless (Score:4, Insightful)
Hmm. I knew the record industry hates resales because they don't get a piece of the action.
Why did I suddenly get a chill at the thought of having to sign a 3 page EULA when I buy a piece of music in a store? I'm suddenly feeling very paranoid.
Re:Not Totally Worthless (Score:5, Funny)
They could give out a Big Black Guy Named Ben (tm) [newgrounds.com] with each CD.
"Don't copy the CD mother f*beep*cker"
Re:Not Totally Worthless (Score:5, Insightful)
I got a better question: Why try to 'protect' one of the easiest forms of media to duplicate?
I mean seriously, if they got to the point that it was possible to totally secure music so that it couldn't be copied (even with a mic to a speaker), what's to prevent an ameteur band from re-singing the song and recording their version of it?
Would it sound the same? Nope. Potentially, it could sound better. Look at the popularity of remixes today. I guarantee you, it'd just drive the need for RIAA independent people to surface.
What the RIAA should be doing is enticing their customers to buy the CDs in the stores. Didn't the recent Eminem album launch with a DVD in it? That's pretty damn cool. They should think about doing more stuff like that. Heck, include Video CD's with band interviews or remixes or something, I dunno. If you're having trouble making your product sell, make it more appealing.
Re:Not Totally Worthless (Score:5, Insightful)
Not only won't the RIAA admit that the music is crap and that they won't do anything to improve sales on their end, they now have to focus on only one or two areas of sales to "prove" that sales are down, and ignore areas where sales go up.
Desperate or misguided, I can't figure it out...
Recession? (Re:Not Totally Worthless) (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see Sears blaming "pirates" on lower washing machine and refrigerator sales.
Nor are airlines complaining about stowaways causing ridership to be down.
RIAA: Charge me a decent price for a CD (lets say, 1hr at minimum wage) and I'll buy them. Oh, and perhaps promote more than your top 15 bands to me.
Re:Recession? (Re:Not Totally Worthless) (Score:5, Funny)
I spent 5 days downloading the latest Maytag Washing Machine. It was totally worth it.. I was able to get it 3 weeks before Sears had it!
My only problem is that my clothes are all pixelated now, and you can hear someone coughing when the dryer is on.
Maybe if they offered more in the box, I'd actually buy a Washing Machine. You know, like some behind the scenes extras, and maybe a biography of the Maytag Repair-Man.
Re:Not Totally Worthless (Score:5, Informative)
Royalties. (I hope this is the correct word in English. Forgive me, I'm German.)
If you perform someone else's work in public, if you record it on a media and give away copies, if you broadcast that recording to the public, you have to pay royalties to the author(s) of a song. You also have to pay royalties as well when you play music to the public, e.g. a large public party or the music you play as a cafe owner to keep your customers happy. (That's why royalty-free music is a niche market, btw.)
There are royalty collection organizations in most states, the GEMA is the one here in Germany. I once had the dumb luck of writing a small tune that was then performed by my band on German national TV. As a result, we instantly got a little royalty check through GEMA, since these TV stations paid royalties to GEMA for broadcasting music.
(This, btw., is another reason why some celebrity musicians perform for free on globally broadcast charity events. It's a royalty bonanza.)
Re:Not Totally Worthless (Score:5, Informative)
Wrong. Covers are royalty free when played live, even at a paid concert. Once that performance is recorded, THEN royalties come into play. If my combo decides to play 'Rime of the Ancient Mariner' at a local club, we don't owe ASCAP dick (we would, however, probably owe Iron Maiden an apology). If that performance were recorded and then sold or distributed, we would then have to pony up some copyright ducats - based upon the number of copies produced.
IANAL. IAAM.
-72
Re:Not Totally Worthless (Score:4, Informative)
Copyright law... ASCAP.... etc... You can play it, but if it becomes a recorded performance... you can be sued and thrown in jail. (assuming you did not have proper permission. Trust me, you don't.)
The author's real point is that CD Drives will continue to be upgraded, and that the newer firmware will defeat these copy-protection schemes. Hogwash.
Most SA2 discs are copyable, if you can find older firmware for your CD-Burner. My Panasonic works fine with firmware rev 1.05 or lower, not with newer firmware. Also, older firmware is not available from the manufacturer.
I think we have been and will continue to see the manufacturers "playing ball" with the entertainment cartels. As the author states, there is very very little that would need to be done to make PC CDRW drives read the TOC like every other disc, but where are the burners that support this??
RIAA brand music is already obsolete. Kids don't listen to Britney for the music, they want to belong to the herd. Go ahead and re-record OOPS!, and then get a cute girl and an expensive plastic surgeon. You'd need to sell those CD's for $20 a pop too.
~Hammy
Re:Not Totally Worthless (Score:5, Insightful)
i agree. (Score:4, Insightful)
Halderman reckons he has a solution for them. "Reduce the cost of new CDs; if discs cost only a few dollars each, buying them might be preferable to spending the time and effort to make copies or find them online."
amen!
I would actually buy CDs!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I would actually buy CDs!!! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I would actually buy CDs!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
Heck, I'd settle for a "send us a list of MP3s you have and we'll send you a fair priced bill for digital use" service.
The RIAA would make a few bucks off me that way.
Re:i agree. (Score:5, Interesting)
Unfortunately, I'm having a hard time imagining a price for CDs that's sufficiently cheap that copying them becomes unappealing. On my computer, I can copy a CD in about five minutes (drive to drive), and I can rip one in about three, depending on how much music is on it. I don't generally steal music, but that's because I hardly ever find music that somebody else has that I would like to have but that I don't already have. (Did that make sense?) Even at $3 each, it'd still be possible to copy a CD-- or even download it, if you can find it on the Internet-- faster and less expensively than you could drive to the store and buy it.
Re:i agree. (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, friend, you spend considerably more than five minutes every day doing things like brushing your teeth and going to the bathroom. Pop the CD in optical drive 1, the blank in optical drive 2, click here and here, then forget about it while you take a shower or something.
Multitasking is the key insight.
Plus you are forgetting the other stuff that comes with a CD or are you printing out color pages of the CD covers....
Strangely enough, I've never given any thought at all to CD covers. If they're important to you, then that's between you and your God.
Not just the copy protection... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not just the copy protection... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not just the copy protection... (Score:5, Insightful)
You think that's something new? That's always been true. It can't explain why CD sales are down. Records have had filler since the beginning. Even the old 45 RPM singles had an A side and a B side.
And the fact is, some music is more accessible than others. Some songs are instant hits, the first time you hear them you like them. Other songs take a few hearings before you appreciate them. I know I've bought albums for one or two hits, but after I've listened to the CD half a dozen times I like several of the other songs just as much.
But if they do start selling individual songs, most people will only buy the hits. Without being more or less forced to listen to the other ones because of the album format, they'll never get past that accessibility barrier. This means that a typical artist will only sell one or two songs where they now sell a whole album. And since we all know that CD prices are not based on manufacturing/distribution costs, this means that the sellers will have to charge almost as much per song as they do for a whole CD now.
In other words, for the record companies and everyone involved to continue to be as profitable as they are today, they'll have to charge probably five to ten dollars per song downloaded! That's just basic economics based on the number of hit songs per CD, and based on where the costs are for a record company (most of which won't be reduced by online distribution).
That's the reality. I hope you consider that a "reasonable amount" to pay for a song, because that's what it costs to create them.
Worth & worthlessness (Score:4, Informative)
The costs of producing the music are nearly beside the point, as are the media costs. The other stuff sets the price.
Emphatically, I think a more efficient model can be created, but as with books the transition to the internet has been slow. But eventually I am certain will be plenty of $1 songs, and that the artists will be better off -- esp. the small-market ones not blessed by the marketing focus of a major label. In fact, it may be the big names that produce mediocre music who suffer.
Re:Worth & worthlessness (Score:5, Funny)
"We started trying to use underhanded methods to get our music played, then it became standard industry practice, now you get to pay the cost."
Are We Sure... (Score:5, Funny)
while copy protection is worthless (Score:5, Funny)
Metric or US? (Score:5, Funny)
Constant Restatement of the obvious (Score:5, Interesting)
What one man can hide, another can find.
Cheers,
VonKraken
Re:Constant Restatement of the obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
Isn't it clever how they dodge the question my not repeating the word compliant in the response, but instead using a similar word, compatible? I guess one must be on one's toes all the time these days, even technical FAQs are no longer a haven from sneaky public relations propaganda.
Re:Constant Restatement of the obvious (Score:4, Interesting)
not that macrovisions earlier products were that much better.. it's all about marketing to the few right key people and then rolling it out as something that hw/media producers _MUST_ have in their products even if it's totally worthless.
Well, duh (Score:5, Insightful)
Such as:
the idea of CD copy-prevention is "fundamentally misguided".
And:
To ban upgrades, he argues, would lead to "buggy software and poor hardware."
And best of all:
Halderman reckons he has a solution for them. "Reduce the cost of new CDs; if discs cost only a few dollars each, buying them might be preferable to spending the time and effort to make copies or find them online."
Are you listening Ms. Rosen?
Re:Well, duh (Score:5, Insightful)
When you get just past whipper-snapper age you'll realize that monetizing every life transaction is ridiculous. It makes sense in terms of CD purchasing because it is a mass-media transaction, but in terms of friends and families it isn't a good idea.
You may make $25 to install that TIVO, but treating everyone in the world like a business transaction will result in personal alienation. Ultimately, it may COST you money because people don't enjoy doing business with, or referring business to, people who act like they are God's gift to those around them.
My suggestion is to instead say "sure but it'll cost you lunch/dinner/bottle of wine/six-pack" based on the job, which you then share with them. People enjoy giving gifts far more than paying money, even if the cost is the same. That way, also, when they "pay" you, you get to do something novel... SOCIALIZE!
Because, frankly, you sure as hell need it.
I've already stopped buying CD's (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes and No... (Score:5, Insightful)
Then again, for a while now those people are also the least likely to try to copy a CD so I guess there is some truthfulness to the original claim.
Either way, we all know that there's an industry model change on the way. That's easy to predict. Knowing what it is or when it will hit, that's the hard part (always has been, always will be). It reminds me of Warren Buffet's comments about the invention of the automobile -- (paraphrased) nobody could have predicted how it would develop with any kind of guaranteed accuracy, but it would be fairly obvious that buggy-whip manufacturers were on the way out.
Re: Yes and No... (Score:4, Insightful)
> One thing that a lot of people seem to ignore is that most people are pretty clueless about the relatively easy methods of circumvention.
In principle, only one person needs to circumvent. After that the copying is easy.
As silly as it sounds ... (Score:5, Insightful)
All copy protection is useless (Score:5, Interesting)
I always understood that *any* copy protection of media such as this is useless, because at some point the content has to be decoded to analog so that the speakers can physically create the sound. At this point you can capture the analog signal and encode it in any digital format you like.
A simple (and ineffective due to quality issues) example is connecting a line-in cable from your CD player's head phones jack to your PC's line-in, and then recording and encoding to ogg.
What's stopping people doing this?
Re:All copy protection is useless (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't think they are worried about this type of copying. It isn't bit for bit perfect.
Recording analog to digital will always introduce noise to the signal. Remember all those old CD's that sounded worse then the original tapes? (Say, like AC/DC, Back in Black). That's because transferring analog to digital sounds like crap.
Re:All copy protection is useless (Score:4, Interesting)
For what it's worth all it takes is a turntable, my iMic USB A/D converter from Griffin Technologies and FinalVinyl on my iBook with CD burner to get the job done.
from the article.... (Score:5, Funny)
is this man insane??? doesn't he know that making an audio CD is a horribly expensive thing and the HUGE royalties given to the artist forbids such tactics?
Oh wait... someone hit me in the head with a 2 by 4 again..... sorry, my bad... I lost my mind for a minute there...