Comment What's really good for the Industry (Score 2, Interesting) 404
Ok, I'm going to try to reply without getting flamed, but here's my take on this.
I RTFA, but I don't know if this is the same copying protection scheme where a person would be limitted to burning all of the CDs they want from the original, but would prevent the copies from themselves being copied. It's probably not, but stick with me a moment.
While one can argue against copyright as it is now, and information wanting to be free, but considering Fair Use as it is now, such a scheme like that makes sense. The big problem with previous schemes is that it locks out Fair Use.
I purchased NIN - With Teeth. I'm an honest consumer, and I pay for products I find of a good enough quality to deserve my consumer dollars. (I actually own pay for a RHEL license, for instance, even though I can legally get linux for free.)
Now, I immediately made 3 copies of this CD. I ripped the highest quality MP3s to my harddrive (I hate when CD's get scratched, and songs are destroyed), and I burned 2 CD-R copies of the CD, one in MP3 format for my DVD/MP3 entertainment system, and 1 for my car in CDA format.
My copying isn't to give the CD to my friends, but to store my nice new CD away, and use "disposable copies" in the 3 places where I often listen to music: my computer, my entertainment system, and my car. I've only made copies that extend my fair use.
Now, if there were a DRM out there that let me make all these copies, as many times as I want, but just prevented me from 'schoolyard piracy', that's perfectly acceptable for me. Of course, that's considering that I'm free to use the content on any OS I want (linux), in any format I want (my brand of CD-R's, not some locked up high price brand), and that none of my listening preferences or other personal information is sent over the Internet to unlock the files on every play. My privacy is absolutely paramount.
If there is a DRM out there that can accomplish this, I would welcome it with open arms. Of course, I do agree with opening up those copyrights, making them opt-in, and for much shorter tersm. But, if NIN wants to not give their songs away, and use a charge only system, at least for a short term like 20 years, that's ok with me because I'm willing to pay for such excellent music. AFAIK, I can own this CD and listen to it for the rest of my life. I think my $10 (marked down at an independant retailer, not some mega-chain) was a fair trade for this content.
As always, I'm on the lookout for good Creative Commons licensed music as well. Sensable copyright and digital rights management doesn't necessarily mean that you are in league with the RIAA/MPAA, nor does it mean you can't support both it and copyleft. The **AA sense of Fair Use is warped, and they're just wanting the equivilant of a nuclear warhead for DRM.
I RTFA, but I don't know if this is the same copying protection scheme where a person would be limitted to burning all of the CDs they want from the original, but would prevent the copies from themselves being copied. It's probably not, but stick with me a moment.
While one can argue against copyright as it is now, and information wanting to be free, but considering Fair Use as it is now, such a scheme like that makes sense. The big problem with previous schemes is that it locks out Fair Use.
I purchased NIN - With Teeth. I'm an honest consumer, and I pay for products I find of a good enough quality to deserve my consumer dollars. (I actually own pay for a RHEL license, for instance, even though I can legally get linux for free.)
Now, I immediately made 3 copies of this CD. I ripped the highest quality MP3s to my harddrive (I hate when CD's get scratched, and songs are destroyed), and I burned 2 CD-R copies of the CD, one in MP3 format for my DVD/MP3 entertainment system, and 1 for my car in CDA format.
My copying isn't to give the CD to my friends, but to store my nice new CD away, and use "disposable copies" in the 3 places where I often listen to music: my computer, my entertainment system, and my car. I've only made copies that extend my fair use.
Now, if there were a DRM out there that let me make all these copies, as many times as I want, but just prevented me from 'schoolyard piracy', that's perfectly acceptable for me. Of course, that's considering that I'm free to use the content on any OS I want (linux), in any format I want (my brand of CD-R's, not some locked up high price brand), and that none of my listening preferences or other personal information is sent over the Internet to unlock the files on every play. My privacy is absolutely paramount.
If there is a DRM out there that can accomplish this, I would welcome it with open arms. Of course, I do agree with opening up those copyrights, making them opt-in, and for much shorter tersm. But, if NIN wants to not give their songs away, and use a charge only system, at least for a short term like 20 years, that's ok with me because I'm willing to pay for such excellent music. AFAIK, I can own this CD and listen to it for the rest of my life. I think my $10 (marked down at an independant retailer, not some mega-chain) was a fair trade for this content.
As always, I'm on the lookout for good Creative Commons licensed music as well. Sensable copyright and digital rights management doesn't necessarily mean that you are in league with the RIAA/MPAA, nor does it mean you can't support both it and copyleft. The **AA sense of Fair Use is warped, and they're just wanting the equivilant of a nuclear warhead for DRM.
