Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

223 comments

Re:The real moral is stay under the radar (1)

dsfox (2694) | more than 13 years ago | (#364632)

What you've shown is that nothing significant can stay under the radar forever.

Re:All CDDB-listed titles are copyright? (2)

hburch (98908) | more than 13 years ago | (#364633)

Easy. Here are all of the signatures of our CDs, please give me the track lists for those CDs. Search Napster for those names and voila.

Your right that there is clearly an arms-race going on. However, the copyright holders have the advantage that if they can't find the track easily, than neither can the general public.

Remember that their goal is to keep piracy levels low. They don't have to eliminate it completely. They will only goes as far as makes sense economically (how much am I `losing' and how much will it cost me to stop it?

Re:Thanks For Helping The RIAA (1)

SirGeek (120712) | more than 13 years ago | (#364637)

The IMDB [imdb.com] .. They list MOST motion pictures, TV Shows, specials, etc.

This is a DB that even the studios are using to spread information (info about movies in production, complete cast lists/etc. before the movies are out)..

This 'could' be used to do that ( I bet they MPAA has made sure that they have the DVD codes somewhere so that it can be tracked)...

If it's not a website, don't prefix it with 'www'. (1)

T.Hobbes (101603) | more than 13 years ago | (#364638)

www stands for something: world wide web. So, the average dolt would assume that 'www' denotes a website.

Re:there is a tool for that (2)

Hank Chinaski (257573) | more than 13 years ago | (#364640)

take a look @
www.renatager.de [renatager.de]

greets
hank

Re:It's not sharing... (2)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 13 years ago | (#364641)

It's denying the rights of the artist

And for the millionth time: what rights does an artist signed to a major music label have? Please quote figures on the proportion of Napster featured artists who retains the intellectual property rights on their music.

The vast majority of artists sell all their legal (and moral) rights to their creations, and retain only a limited and strictly contractual right to royalties from sales of it. They don't own the music.

So, if I wasn't going to buy the music anyway (I haven't bought any music since the 1980's), then how, exactly, does the artist suffer? The legal and moral loser is the owner of the intellectual property rights - and that's MegaRecordCorp.

Now, if we're talking about artists that retain their own rights, and distribute online, then that's a different issue. But I doubt you were thinking clearly enough to be talking about that.

Re:Can one fool apps into using FreeDB instead? (5)

Nexx (75873) | more than 13 years ago | (#364644)

Yes, at least on NT. edit %SYSTEMROOT%\System32\drivers\etc\hosts .


--

The future of online music sharing ... (1)

apheXcoil (325913) | more than 13 years ago | (#364645)

"At one point during the RIAA litigation process, I thought I would wake up one morning and find that Napster had totally shut down. However, now I just sit and watch as it slowly bleeds to death." -- me The entire "Napster" phenomenon will likely get a solid place in the computer halls of fame -- letting people around the world share music with each other. Instead of having the recording industry select which songs would be funneled through our local radio stations and television channels, the music lover could now sample endless varieties of music and discover fresh new bands. Ahhh, but "No," said the record industry, "you will not take the power away from me!" Napster, knowing their demise would eventually come from endless litigation, even offered the recording industry an offer that just might please both the labels and the must listeners. Unfortunately, the RIAA, in their short-mindedness, turned any sort of compromise down. Ironically, when has there ever been a time in history where over 70 million users have lined up screaming, "give us a product!" and then a company, already in a monopolistic position, shouted, "Go f*** yourselves!!" Napster will die slowly. With the dot-com hysteria now behind us, investor capitalists won't be so quick to fund another Napster want-a-bee. It just proves an age old point that, in the end, someone wants to and HAS to get paid.

So, how is this bad? (1)

Bob Dobbz (321950) | more than 13 years ago | (#364646)

This doesn't seem to prevent me from buying my CD's at the store... I've never used CDDB, but at least with it's recent "deny of access" to things like Grip etc, I won't have to deal with seeing a new version of that stuff every 5 minutes on freshmeat.net

Sharing is for losers? No! (1)

cardiaz (173572) | more than 13 years ago | (#364648)

I think it is terrible that the effort and good will of the net community be used to stab us in the back, but I don't think we should say "Sharing is for losers". We got to realize that once we share something we don't control what other people do with it. And sharing is really what OpenSource is about. Never the less... Down with the RIAA! And I don't think this will stop us from sharing music. On the other hand we should be working to make a better and friendlier gnutella like system, because sooner or later Napster is going down.

Flamebait? (5)

Chelloveck (14643) | more than 13 years ago | (#364649)

Too bad I don't have moderator points today. Can I moderate an entire article as "Flamebait"?

Look people, I know there are a lot of GNU zealots here that buy into the party line, "Information wants to be free!" So the CDDB database gets used by the Bad Guys. So what? That's the price you pay for freely exchanging information -- Someone else is free to use it against you!

Okay, so CDDB is no longer "free" in the GNU sense. That's beside the point. Do you think they're so naïve that they're not also using FreeDB as well? The only reason you know about the Napster/CDDB deal is that they had to sign a license to use the database and someone thought it would be good PR to announce it publicly. I'll betcha a dollar, though, that they also have their hooks into FreeDB and any other GPL'd free-as-in-liberty databases out there.

Freedom is a double-edged sword. You can't grab the moral high ground waving the "Information is Free!" flag, then complain when people use it for the "wrong purposes". That ain't freedom. It's a license agreement.


Chelloveck

Sharing is for losers? (2)

Alien54 (180860) | more than 13 years ago | (#364651)

That is an interesting attitude, because you only share with friends and communities you care about.

So this just adds to the apparent death spiral, since by implication friends and communities are for losers.

But strangely enough, that is probably the exact attitude of the marketroids who are abusing the community by ripping off the community effort by selling it.

This also fits in, in a weird way, to the whole Napster vs RIAA mess. Because there is a balance that needs to be reached as far as sharing vs respecting the rights of others. If I am required to share, then is that a fancy name for thievery? Are monopolies (in this case, of music) the means to achieve legalized rip offs?

Re:I understand your frustration (2)

shepd (155729) | more than 13 years ago | (#364653)

>Yet, you take the work of musicians and distribute and use it against their expressed wished.

I question whether it is the artists express wishes that music not be distributed in MP3 format (which, in and of itself is not illegal, should you own the Music already -- piracy is the problem) or if that is the motive of the RIAA.

It seems many artists (Public Enemy comes to mind) have already done their best to try to encourage this internet music revolution. Perhaps they are unhappy with the current shackles the recording industry puts on them? Maybe they see MP3 as a way out.

>You both put time and energy into creating something intangible, and you both were denied its control.

Copyright doesn't allow you to put a literal stranglehold on how people use your music. Once someone buys a CD they can use the music how they please, although copyright does seem to hold people to personal use only (which includes ripping CDs into MP3 format).

If artists don't want their music put into MP3 format, they can simply keep it to themselves, or perhaps find a less liberal country than the United States (maybe they can convince SeaLand to change their laws?) to harbour their music.

>If you use Napster to download copyrighted material and feel ripped off by the CDDB, then you are an utterly despicable hypocrite.

That is assuming you haven't already bought the CD. I've lost/broken/scratched CDs before, haven't you? Napster is a great way to replace them.

boycott (1)

shokk (187512) | more than 13 years ago | (#364654)

So now that I'm not usin Napster, I'm also not going to use Gracenote. Off to freedb I go. Of course, now that Graceland is in with Napster, they can just get all sorts of agreements with records companies to pass new CD info to them before it hits stores so they no longer really need us suckers now that we've done the work. And we didn't even get the $0.02 a day the kids in Indonesia get for making sneakers.

I wonder if I can get Winamp to use freedb or if I will be uninstalling that, too.

Re:Why is slashdot still running Napster stories? (1)

Drakantus (226374) | more than 13 years ago | (#364656)

None of the alternatives are mainstream yet. They aren't newsworthy, and when they are I'm sure slashdot will start covering them.

If you see something you think should be on slashdot, submit it.

Re:download waits (1)

dsfox (2694) | more than 13 years ago | (#364658)

Just tried it, it didn't do anything.

Can CDDB identify things per-track, then? (4)

streetmentioner (28936) | more than 13 years ago | (#364665)

As I understood it the CDDB identified track names based on the overall signature of a CD, including its ID number and the lengths of all the tracks. How can this be used to identify individual MP3 tracks? And, if it is possible, why do we not have a tool which fills in the ID3 tags for totally unlabelled MP3 files, just from the CDDB. This would be very useful. Surely if this were possible, it would have been done?!

All CDDB-listed titles are copyright? (4)

Mwongozi (176765) | more than 13 years ago | (#364667)

How can they be sure that everything on the CDDB is copyrighted? I'm sure that probably most of it is, but not ALL of it. Plus, as anyone who uses CDDB knows, the database is far from accurate, awash with typos and sometimes just outright mistakes.

Still, how long before someone makes a Napster plugin to check your MP3s against CDDB and rename them in subtle ways so that they no longer match?

FreeDB (5)

einstein (10761) | more than 13 years ago | (#364673)

those of you that are still using CDDB, and are fed up with them charging for community added content, switch to Freedb.org [freedb.org] . It's not gonna up and sell the database.
---

The real moral is stay under the radar (5)

Hairy_Potter (219096) | more than 13 years ago | (#364676)

The real moral is not sharing is for losers, but when ever you do something that the higher ups (ie your employer, the RIAA, the government) might look askance at, try to stay under the radar.

For example, LSD was legal and unknown until the media got ahold of it, in 1965-66.

The Grateful Dead were a great party until MTV's Day of the Dead in 1987.

Porn was free and unblocked by corporate networks in 1996.

I imagine that divx;) sites are going to get targeted next.

I understand your frustration (3)

qpt (319020) | more than 13 years ago | (#364677)

Many of you devoted time and effort to contributing to the CDDB database. It hurts to see your work used in a way you didn't want.

Yet, you take the work of musicians and distribute and use it against their expressed wished. How is this any different? You both put time and energy into creating something intangible, and you both were denied its control.

You weren't robbed of the information itself, after all. If you wanted to keep a copy of the information that you submitted to CDDB, it would've been a trivial matter to make a backup. No, you were robbed of nothing.

If you use Napster to download copyrighted material and feel ripped off by the CDDB, then you are an utterly despicable hypocrite.

- qpt

Re:Ya I know I must look stupid but... (1)

shepd (155729) | more than 13 years ago | (#364678)

Uhhh... you need a P90 [or better] with a soundcard, a popular operating system, and an internet connection. Or your choice of the many other devices out there (MPTrip, Rio, Expanium).

The computer will require a data input device. I suggest a keyboard, but a mouse, or remote control will do. Speakers would probably be a good idea too...

You really weren't serious, asking that, were you?

Re:Why is slashdot still running Napster stories? (1)

Hemos (2) | more than 13 years ago | (#364680)

Drakantus is right - the other ones we try to keep an eye out for. If there's not something in the mainstream media, then write a review! Compare and contrast! Write a user guide!

I'd love to not post stuff about Napster - but right now, that's about the only option we've got.

Re:Is it just me? (2)

Enoch Root (57473) | more than 13 years ago | (#364681)

Napster is a database? News to me. It amazes me how much people stretch the truth to fit their own little opinions.

CDDB != Copyrighted material (1)

Baalam (163817) | more than 13 years ago | (#364682)

So if I burn a CD of my son singing "Mary had a little lamb" and entered it in the CDDB, that song is now filtered off Napster?

Re:I understand your frustration (2)

Sol Wientrub (324530) | more than 13 years ago | (#364683)

Can't see how you would consider the original post a troll, except that he dares to go against the Slashdot mob party line. The point is that both CDDB and Napster have used content created by outside sources in ways those sources did not appreciate. I suspect your feelings over CDDB are rather similar to those artists who do not appreciate wholesale piracy of their music.

Rebuild it and rebuild it better (3)

SurfsUp (11523) | more than 13 years ago | (#364684)

I know this will be posted 50 times to this thread, but here it is again anyway: http://freedb.org/ [freedb.org] . We're rebuilding it, we're rebuilding it better, and cddb can stew in its immoral juices.
--

Re:All CDDB-listed titles are copyright? (1)

killfixx (148785) | more than 13 years ago | (#364686)

There is already such a service www.napcameback.com [napcameback.com]

Check it out...

Uh-oh... Did they include the piglatin? (1)

CoolVibe (11466) | more than 13 years ago | (#364689)

Quote from article:

Napster actually has received a total of 6 million filenames, including spelling variations, from the recording industry, a Napster spokeswoman said. That number represented 26,000 artist/song title pairs the company said have been effectively blocked from its service.

Time for the rot-13 songname 'encoding' scheme then, or double pig-latin (remove first two letters from word and place on the end) :)
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org [hackerheaven.org] will!

Re:Can CDDB identify things per-track, then? (2)

T.Hobbes (101603) | more than 13 years ago | (#364706)

I may be wrong, but why wouldn't they just match mp3 filenames with song/album names from the cddb database? I realize that not all albums in the cddb are controlled by the riaa, but since when in this whole affair has exactitude been the prime concern?

Re:I understand your frustration (4)

Domini (103836) | more than 13 years ago | (#364707)

Point one:

Making an MP3 for me to use it in my Nomad Jukebox is not against the wishes of the Artist.

Point two:

Many artists don't have a problem with this. In fact some artists openly encourage spreading of MP3s. It is mostly record companies and BIG music stars that have problems.

Point three:

People DO lose something. What was the purpose of sending it to CDDB otherwise? Why did they do it? It was not a nessesary step to get the MP3 in the end.

Point four:

I agree with you fully.
:)
Just wanted to make SOME points clear.
You obviously are playing devil's advocate, and so am I.

Re:I understand your frustration (5)

1010011010 (53039) | more than 13 years ago | (#364708)

Napster users aren't taking someone else's music and then selling it back to them. Whereas the CDDB is taking the result of other people's labor -- a database rather than music tracks -- and selling it back to them. And now, also using it against the people and the activity that created that database in the first place.

I see a difference, once I look past the superficial similarities.



- - - - -

Re:FreeDB (1)

kohlyn (17192) | more than 13 years ago | (#364709)

They don't have to sell the database, you can download it free of charge here [freedb.org] from freedb.org

Re:The real moral is stay under the radar (1)

BLAMM! (301082) | more than 13 years ago | (#364710)

Nothing and forever are big terms. What he didn't list were the things that *are* still under the radar. And that's the whole point.

Re:I understand your frustration (2)

dattaway (3088) | more than 13 years ago | (#364711)

except that he dares to go against the Slashdot mob party line.

There's the average joe user party line, and the RIAA sponsored party line. I understand where you stand.

Re:Can CDDB identify things per-track, then? (2)

firewort (180062) | more than 13 years ago | (#364733)

[QUOTE] Sure if this were possible, it would have been done?! [/QUOTE]

I'm not so sure- if Gracenote knew they were going to abide by and aid the RIAA, perhaps they thought they'd save themselves a lot of effort and avoid stepping into the MP3 boondoggle.

Just because something is useful to the user doesn't mean a company will implement it. A shame, really.

A host is a host from coast to coast, but no one uses a host that's close

Napster napster napster (2)

deathboy (90522) | more than 13 years ago | (#364734)

It's interesting to see the bod from Gracenote talking about this being a "great opportunity to keep the Napster phenomenon alive"...

Let's take a non-roseyeyed look at Napster. Forget what the Napster apologists have spun out since the RIAA began looking at them - Napster is only good for getting copies of MP3s of songs you don't want to pay for. I'll admit quite readily that I've downloaded copyrighted songs that I have no intention of ever buying. Sometimes, I'll get the song of a band I saw for 5 seconds on MTV, and just MAYBE it'll tempt me to buy the album.

If you take the copyrighted mp3s off, all you're going to be left with is a bunch of crap mp3s of people's bands, which you're never going to find anyway because you don't know what you're looking for. Also, just because a big record company isn't behind a band, doesn't mean that said unsigned band wants the world to get mp3s of its songs for nothing.

Napster is dead without its illegal aspect, for unsigned bands promoting their music, a far better option is mp3.com [mp3.com] which at least has music grouped into categories, so you can find songs that bands want you to download, since I believe they get royalties based on advertising revenue.

Goodbye Napster, it was nice while it lasted

Re:The real moral is "licenses matter". (1)

Eight Star (67539) | more than 13 years ago | (#364735)

So, what? A license like the GPL or BSD License would be better? A license that allows Free redistribution and commercial or non-commercial use, but not if part of a filtering system? That seems too draconian for my taste.

The problem here is not who owns the database, or who they're giving it to, or what that party is going to do with it. The problem (IMHO) is that napster is being forced to muzzle itself, or die trying.

This is probably redundant by now.

Re:The real moral is stay under the radar (3)

sammy baby (14909) | more than 13 years ago | (#364736)

Porn was free and unblocked by corporate networks in 1996.

And God only knows, it's hard to find porn on the Internet nowadays without a credit card.

-----
"You owe me a case of beer. Sucka'."

This is a GOOD thing... (3)

Basje (26968) | more than 13 years ago | (#364737)

Alert: this is not a troll!

All that has happened, basically, is Napster asked permission to use the database, and got that permission. Of course they pay for it's use, which is good. Thus, the company has no excuse to let individuals pay for their services: the costs will already be covered.

CDDB is a public database(sort of). Napster wants to use that database to prevent the illegal copying of music. Of course a lot of moral issues are involved. Should all music be free/Free? Is the RIAA's greed justifiable? Is copying music wrong or right? Who owns information? Etc.

The issue here is none of our business. A company using data from a _public_ database to control the use over it's _own_ application, is up to them. They don't claim to own the information. They just use the information which they have access to. What they do with it is up to them.

----------------------------------------------

Re:Why is slashdot still running Napster stories? (1)

Eloquence (144160) | more than 13 years ago | (#364738)

2001-03-05 14:22:14 Decentralized Networks Picking Up Speed (articles,internet) (rejected)
2001-03-02 03:11:47 Usenet, The Next Generation? (articles,internet) (rejected)
2001-01-12 01:21:38 Anonymous publishing: Does anyone need it? (articles,Privacy) (rejected)

Sorry, but I don't get the impression you really want to report about the alternatives. Having once story after the next rejected without any reason is not exactly encouraging. You see, many of these projects were slashdotted once when they started -- but forgotten about later, when they became usable. It's useful to remind people again when projects become usable.

--

Correct me if I'm wrong.... (2)

Prisoner 655321 (317527) | more than 13 years ago | (#364739)

... but couldn't there be something uncopyrighted on cddb? In this case some starving artist out there may have a great system for distributing his music and getting his name out, but just because he's in the cddb databases (which used to be a complement to his success) he will get screwed and will no longer be shared amongst the people.

Artists aren't compenstated anyway (1)

Vollernurd (232458) | more than 13 years ago | (#364740)

Excuse me, but it's the labels who own the copyrights on the work that is distributed, not the artists. All the artists get is the result of their contract with the label.

In other words, Napster is only hurting the bottom lines of the labels and companies making this music, not the "poor artists".

For those of you who know of Jamiroquai, a UK hip-hop artist, you'll know what I mean. I.e. "Save the rainforest" and then he goes out to buy 2 Lambourghinis and a mansion.

Why should I care about a frankly small dent in their income?
---
Vollernurd.

Re:Rebuild it and rebuild it better (1)

Chelloveck (14643) | more than 13 years ago | (#364741)

http://freedb.org/. We're rebuilding it, we're rebuilding it better, and cddb can stew in its immoral juices.

And if Napster, the RIAA, or Her Majesty's Secret Service wanted to harvest track names from FreeDB for their own purposes, how would FreeDB stop them? How would FreeDB even know the Bad Guys were even in there?

If you can't answer these questions, what makes FreeDB superior to CDDB in this situation? Is it any more moral for FreeDB to say, "Well, the RIAA is using our database, but at least we're doing it out of the goodness of our hearts and not charging them for the privilege."?

Let's say you do find a way to detect and block the "unauthorized" uses. Now your information is no longer free (as in 'freedom'); it's restricted to those who agree with your licensing terms. How then can FreeDB claim to be any better than CDDB?


Chelloveck

Re:I understand your frustration (1)

Sol Wientrub (324530) | more than 13 years ago | (#364742)

Point taken. I agree he could have phrased it better, but looking at the point of the post, he was making a rather astute observation in my view. I realize that there is music legally available for download on Napster. I'm sure there is also information available in CDDB that was placed there by people who don't give a damn about how it's used.
I guess where I'm coming from, and I believe the original poster was coming from, is that a lot of content creators get screwed over in each situation, and that's wrong. But there shouldn't be a distinction between the two situations, in my mind.

Damn Straight! (2)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 13 years ago | (#364743)

I was sharing a few minutes of my time to enter some CD titles and tracks into CDDB (Ages ago, I use freecddb now) and those fuckers went and stole it. They never asked me if they could change the license. They never offered to remove the tracks I entered. They just stole my work.

Damn that pisses me off.

Re:All CDDB-listed titles are copyright? (1)

bare_naked_linux (306356) | more than 13 years ago | (#364760)

An open and free DB that is freely used by everyone would do no good. What's to stop Napster and/or the RIAA from using it too in order to compile more lists? Nothing, because it's open and free. This is one time where open and free wouldn't do the community any good. Ironic, isn't it?

--

Is that so? (2)

Carnage4Life (106069) | more than 13 years ago | (#364761)

Drakantus is right - the other ones we try to keep an eye out for. If there's not something in the mainstream media, then write a review! Compare and contrast! Write a user guide!

You say this now but Slashdot has never acted like it's interested in lengthy user submissions. I've stopped bothering when my last attempt at an editorial sat in the submission queue for about week and I had to mail you guys about it only to be told someone would get around to reading it "soon". That's why my stories go on kuro5hin [kuro5hin.org] because I know they'll get read and I'll get feedback.

As for short submissions, I've basically stopped those as well after this story [slashdot.org] where you editted all the coherence out of my submission and made me sound like a raving zealot instead of maintaining the original theme of the submission [slashdot.org] .

Quite frankly I don't understand why with the authors slashdot has [slashdot.org] no one writes anything longer than a paragraph about a submission. Is reading submissions that much work that we can't get the kind of review, comparison, or user guide that you've just suggested?

Re:Ya I know I must look stupid but... (1)

Wire Tap (61370) | more than 13 years ago | (#364762)

I think he was being serious. Don't be _that_ suprised, not everyone knows about computers yet.

Re:I understand your frustration (1)

Sol Wientrub (324530) | more than 13 years ago | (#364763)

If artists don't want their music put into MP3 format, they can simply keep it to themselves, or perhaps find a less liberal country than the United States (maybe they can convince SeaLand to change their laws?) to harbour their music.

Hey, I know, if you don't want to pay 50% of your gross income in taxes, don't make any money, or go find a country to live in where they don't have taxes.

Re:All CDDB-listed titles are copyright? (1)

Stormie (708) | more than 13 years ago | (#364764)

How can they be sure that everything on the CDDB is copyrighted? I'm sure that probably most of it is, but not ALL of it.

I'd be interested to hear from someone like, say, Chris Johnson [slashdot.org] on this one.. I remember him saying that he'd love to have his music blocked by Napster so he could kick their arses for restraint of trade (or something like that). So.. although I don't see any of your stuff on the CDDB.. it could well be put there. And then would Napster ban the trading of it? And if so, what would happen?

Re:I understand your frustration (2)

Shadowlion (18254) | more than 13 years ago | (#364765)

Can't see how you would consider the original post a troll, except that he dares to go against the Slashdot mob party line.

Actually, I consider the original poster a troll because he made no distinction between the copyrighted songs on Napster that have not been permitted to be distributed, and the copyrighted songs on Napster that are allowed to be distributed by the people who recorded them. Not all songs on Napster are copyright violations, you know.

And if some of those CDs that contain music that is freely distributable on Napster are in the CDDB - guess what? That music gets filtered by Napster and doesn't get distributed.

I'd like to see somebody sue on behalf of the artists that Napster - and by extension, the RIAA - have prevented from legally distributing their music.



--

Re:Flamebait? (2)

grappler (14976) | more than 13 years ago | (#364766)

Not only that, but if information really "wants to be free", why do we have such a problem with marketers collecting data on customers and selling it? Privacy concerns would be invalid.

Obviously this isn't my own line, but I like it so much I'm going to say it: Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

--

Re:I understand your frustration (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#364767)

This (root) post isn't a troll and should be moderated way, way up.

For those of you griping: You voluntarily gave data to the CDDB. The vast majority of artists did NOT voluntarily give their data, revenue and food off their table to Napster.

Piracy of music = Piracy of software = theft of intellectual property = theft from the skilled artisans who created the original product. Don't try to colour it any other way.

Napster isn't a saviour, it's yet another faceless corporation (just like the ones you're claiming to be rebelling against) except it creates nothing of value -- its prime product is stolen from others.

Re:I understand your frustration (1)

dennism (13667) | more than 13 years ago | (#364768)

Point two:

Many artists don't have a problem with this. In fact some artists openly encourage spreading of MP3s. It is mostly record companies and BIG music stars that have problems.


I wouldn't say that the BIG music stars have the problems... the only reason they are so vocal is that the industry realises that because of their status, they can use them as the vocal point against MP3s. Nobody is going to side with a suit spouting off about how MP3s is cutting into their profit (yeah right). But, when Britney Spears stands up and says MP3s are bad, millions of teenage girls are going to listen.

This whole issue is all about PR. Whoever wins over the public opinion will prevail in the long run... if the public feels that MP3s are no more wrong than listening to the radio, the RIAA is effectively screwed, because no matter how many laws get passed, they will be worked around. But, if the RIAA succeeds, they won't need to get new laws... society will shame those who do trade music into conforming... much in the way we look down on someone who would walk into a bank with a gun.

Actually... (1)

gfxguy (98788) | more than 13 years ago | (#364769)

First, I don't think this post was a troll, it was a pretty interesting post, in my opinion.

Second, I think what's going on is actually the complete opposite. Almost. People dontated their time by entering the CDDB information, and were under the impression that the information would be free and available to everyone at no cost. Now they turn around and take money for supplying a list that they didn't create and giving it to Napster to make doing something people want to do more difficult.

Virtually everyone who contributed to CDDB wants their information to be shared for free for the good of the community. You can't say the same thing about artists with respect to Napster. Quite the contrary - many of them applaud and encourage the sharing that goes on. Many do not.

If Metallica doesn't want me downloading their MP3s, they've got nothing to worry about.

Now, what would be more interesting is if the artists were the ones to come forward to say "I don't want MY music traded on Napster." That I could respect. Some artists have made it quite clear, and I guarantee that I have not downloaded a single song by any of them!

Re:It's not sharing... (1)

Vortran (253538) | more than 13 years ago | (#364770)

If you do what you love and are lucky enough to get paid something for it, would you stop doing it just because you stopped getting paid for it? A true creator MUST create.. it is an immutable compulsion. A pilot will fly... a programmer will write code... an artist will paint... for love if not money.

Money is not everything. Our society is so muttled in money. We are imbrued with the stain of a currency-based economy. It is our bane and it will be one of our greatest downfalls.

Re:Is it just me? (2)

(void*) (113680) | more than 13 years ago | (#364771)

Napster is a database. It is also a communications protocol. It is a search engine and a GUI. It is all of those things and more.

This is silly (2)

bildstorm (129924) | more than 13 years ago | (#364772)

For one, this will only help stop mass producer's of MP3's who can't figure out how to do stuff properly (like renaming).

What I would propose to beat the RIAA is to develop a plug-in for Napster that allows the client to search and share for scrambled names. The key would change every day, and be hosted on several servers outside the RIAA's extent of power.

Every time the system connected to Napster, it would connect to the servers, which would also update the list of mirrors.

I know this is a bit vague, but I hope somebody will figure out what I mean.

Re:Rebuild it and rebuild it better (2)

SurfsUp (11523) | more than 13 years ago | (#364773)

And if Napster, the RIAA, or Her Majesty's Secret Service wanted to harvest track names from FreeDB for their own purposes, how would FreeDB stop them? How would FreeDB even know the Bad Guys were even in there?

The bad guys are allowed to access the database just like anyone else, that's not the point. This [freedb.org] is the point. Anybody at any time can get the complete archive and start their own FreeDB, so if FreeDB ever gets driven underground by legal minions of the evil music distribution monopolies it will just spring back up instantly in a 100 different forms. Probably it will just get better. This is the meaning of freedom.
--

Sure if napster is king... (5)

Pengo (28814) | more than 13 years ago | (#364774)


But napster is not king. Opennap for example gives you 100% of the functionality of Napster without having to deal with the RIAA.. yet. There will always be up-and-down servers, etc.. but thats alright. The list of servers right now is centralized with Napigator, but how hard would it be to reverse engineer the napigator ? Damn easy..

I put up a opennap server on my cable modem one night.. within 2 days I had over 300 users using the server and 250GB of songs indexed on my system.

RIAA is nothing more than a speed-bump... honestly I think it's the best thing to happen to push people out of using a centralized and corparation controlled service.

RIAA may of made their worst mistake by not settling something a bit more reasonable with Napster.. it's going to push people to other avenues. (No, I am NOT talking about Gnutella... ) I can see the RIAA board all start laughing when they talk about gnutella as a threat.

anyway...




--------------------
Would you like a Python based alternative to PHP/ASP/JSP?

Re:Can CDDB identify things per-track, then? (3)

RatFink100 (189508) | more than 13 years ago | (#364775)

CDDB gets used by ripping programs to name the mp3s when they are taken from the CD in the first place, so that information is available then.

What Napster will be doing is working on the principle that the CDDB track name database is a big old list for working out what rippers would have named files.

But I thought.... (1)

NonReal (248836) | more than 13 years ago | (#364778)

I thought the party line here was that you only used Napster for uncopyrighted songs, right? So if they choose to filter out songs by RIAA clients how does that stop you from sharing your authorized songs? Am I missing something?

I think it went more like this: (5)

Aggrazel (13616) | more than 13 years ago | (#364785)

RIAA: Here is a list of 150,000 songs that we want you to block. You have 3 days.
*THUD*

Napster Admin: OK.

*2 days later, Napster Admin wakes up from a hangover*

Napster Admin: That was some party, hey? Oh shit. The RIAA thing. Holy Mother of Perl! I don't want to mess with typing or OCRing all that in!

*an idea forms...*

Thanks For Helping The RIAA (1)

Sinesurfer (40786) | more than 13 years ago | (#364788)

if the RIAA are smart enoenough to use technology to persue technology then why is it taking soo damn long to implement a technology which we'd want to pay for and use!! [has the idiot who suggested that p2p sharing of audio files would never work been fired]?

suppose this means that if there is a tagging service for movies, DON'T USE IT!! cos it will only be sold to the movie industry and aid in their crusade against the [theft and] sharing of motion pictures

It's not sharing... (2)

JimPooley (150814) | more than 13 years ago | (#364790)

It's denying the rights of the artist.
It's theft. Pure and simple.
But you "I want it all for free" thieving scum don't understand that.
Or do you actually want an end to reward & creativity?

Hacker: A criminal who breaks into computer systems

Is it just me? (4)

Placido (209939) | more than 13 years ago | (#364792)

Or does this seem strange...

Napster - A database of Song Names - ordered by the courts to remove the song names

GraceNote - A database of Song Names - helping Napster to remove the Song Names.

Re:The real moral is stay under the radar (1)

DrPsycho (13308) | more than 13 years ago | (#364798)

I'd have to agree. P2P filesharing was going along for years on networks such as IRC, with nary any interference from the "outside world." Granted, when Napster rolled around it added a couple of neat features like being able to view connection-quality status, and more data on individual MP3 files... but it essentialy Microsofted the MP3 trading scene by delivering an idiot-proof interface which brought MP3 trading to the masses. Even my brother can use Napster, and my brother - when it comes to anything digital - is an idiot.

Couple that with the hype machine that surrounded Napster... not exactly something they tried to stop... and it's no wonder they managed to get up everyone's noses.

I'm forced to sit back and laugh at the people who come up to me in the hallways distressed about the demise of Napster. "What am I going to do now?" There are alternatives, and always have been... mostly overlooked because everyone was using big bad Napster. Now that they're scrounging for MP3 sources... even the alternatives have their numbered, thanks to the whole Napster song-and-dance.

MP3 trading. DivX movie trading. Piracy. By dancing buck naked in front of the regulatory agenices, it is any wonder we see Slashdot being overrun with stories about the big corporations and their draconian copy protection schemes-to-be?

--- [DrPsycho [zombo.com] ] Coping with reality since 1975.

Re:Can CDDB identify things per-track, then? (1)

streetmentioner (28936) | more than 13 years ago | (#364799)

Aha! I was thinking more along the lines that somebody would write an open-source tool to do this, using FreeDB if not CDDB.

Re:All CDDB-listed titles are copyright? (2)

cyber-vandal (148830) | more than 13 years ago | (#364800)

FreeDB [freedb.org] is what you want.

Re:I understand your frustration (1)

dopefishdave (165892) | more than 13 years ago | (#364801)

Finally. someone with something intelligent to say about this.

Information may want to be free. But information is expensive. You can't freely share information, against the creator's wishes (mostly, i accept some artists couldn't give a toss if their music is traded on napster). And then complain in the same breath that YOUR information is being used in a way you object to. By the usual arguments heard here, once you released that informational genie into the world, you lost control of it.

So quit your bitching and realise that if you live by the sword you will die by the sword.

I can appreciate people's anger that the CDDB was a community effort and now its being used against the very community which created it. A quite incredible irony I hope is not lost on some of the people here.

Re:It's not sharing... (2)

cyber-vandal (148830) | more than 13 years ago | (#364802)

Creativity is not rewarded by the music industry - being the same as any 10 other artists is. And the 'reward' is 40 cents of a $15 CD.
I use Napster to hear songs from bands that I've heard of and am curious to hear more, or to work out a track on the guitar without having to go to the library and hire the CD. Being without the ability to do this wouldn't make me buy more CDs, it would make me buy less as I don't tend to buy albums when I've not heard at least one track from it. The RIAA is removing something I find useful that has cost them very little money and has given them a lot more targetted free advertising than MTV or the radio stations.
Had they taken the intelligent step as per Bertelsmann and instituted a subscription service I would have signed up in a second.
But no, the real scumbags in this have to stick to their olde-worlde business model for fear of losing even a single cent of the obscene profits they make on the back of those they're pretending to defend. Roll on MP3-only record labels.

Re:I understand your frustration (1)

Domini (103836) | more than 13 years ago | (#364803)

NOTE: may be OFF TOPIC
(Thus I have removed my Score +1 bonus)

Point taken.

But it's not always so simple.

I have discovered artists unknown to me through illegal MP3 files, and have bought their CDs (IF I could find them). To every 1 mainstream artist, there are hordes of talented artists who will fail.

In my country, the BIG station (Radio 5) have singled out a couple of artists, and only those artists have made it. They would be the only ones to lose on MP3 copying.

I take your point, but, contrawise: copyright MP3 spreading is the PR of struggling artists.

Re:I understand your frustration (1)

Sol Wientrub (324530) | more than 13 years ago | (#364804)

Not even close, son. To say there are only two sides to this is narrow thinking. The RIAA can rot in hell for all I care, but what I will not apologize for is believing that the creators of content have the right to be compensated for the use of that content, if that is what they desire. I have no problems with MP3s, internet distribution, or new methods of payment. I see what the CDDB did and what most Napster users do as the same thing, screwing over the content creators, and that sucks.

Can one fool apps into using FreeDB instead? (4)

ElVee (208723) | more than 13 years ago | (#364805)

If I monkey with /etc/hosts (or whatever the Winduhs equivalent is), can I silently redirect *.cddb.org to my choice of freedb mirrors without causing undue pain and hardship on myself?

What the 'notice' must include (1)

RatFink100 (189508) | more than 13 years ago | (#364806)

From the napster site.

The court has issued an injunction directing Napster to block the sharing of specific music files after we receive appropriate notice from the copyright holders

So it's not blanket blocking.

That notice must include the following information: the work's title; the name of the featured recording artist performing it; the name(s) of one or more files containing the work available through Napster's file-sharing service; and certification that the rightsholder owns or controls the rights to the work they want excluded.

So the 'full CD signature' is not supplied. But then Napster is track based rather than album based (actually I suppose really it's file based).

Re:Flamebait? (3)

ethereal (13958) | more than 13 years ago | (#364807)

Okay, so CDDB is no longer "free" in the GNU sense. That's beside the point.

But that's exactly the point - people submitted information on the understanding that it would continue to be freely available to all, and now it's not. I don't think many people would have a problem with Gracenote operating under the same terms as Red Hat, for example - anybody can grab RH Linux and sell it. But even though I submitted info to CDDB on the understanding that it was a free, open, and redistributable database, now I can't grab my own copy and distribute it. It's the change from "free" to "non-free" that is the big issue. The fact that the information is available for use by everyone, including the RIAA, doesn't come as a surprise and is really a logical next step.

I'll betcha a dollar, though, that they also have their hooks into FreeDB and any other GPL'd free-as-in-liberty databases out there.

Good point - I hadn't thought of that but it isn't really surprising. I suppose their welcome to it - I'm willing to accept the consequences of a truly free database.

This could be the best thing ever... (2)

TheDude2084 (214602) | more than 13 years ago | (#364808)

Let the RIAA make it as hard as they like for people to share music from their artists. Give them enough rope to hang themselves. If the only tunes on Napster are free [ram.org] tunes, then free tunes will get traded and free tunes will get heard.

The more draconian the RIAA gets, the more people will want and seek out alternatives. This could be the start of something wonderful.

Ya I know I must look stupid but... (1)

ishrat (235467) | more than 13 years ago | (#364811)

I have been reading a lot about Napster and MP3. Now the question is do you need an MP3 player that they are advertising, to play from Napster or a real player will do? What other requirements are there, if any.

Copyright field in ID3v2 tag (4)

Domini (103836) | more than 13 years ago | (#364815)

For those unsure of how they propose to implement this:

There is a copyright field in the newer ID3v2 tad info.

Since the CDDB was a community based system, it would thus rely on the people ripping it to enter the correct information. There is also a field which specifies: "Encoded by".

These fields are all good and well, but it will take a lot of time and effort for them to verify these.

:)

The real moral is "licenses matter". (4)

Paul Crowley (837) | more than 13 years ago | (#364817)

Sometimes those who say "I don't like to use or contribute to that piece of software, because although it's free beer, I don't like the license" get accused of whining: "hey, it's free, if you don't like it don't use it but don't whine about it". The real lesson to draw from this is that licenses *do* matter and it's worthwhile discussing what we want out of them.
--

Why is slashdot still running Napster stories? (2)

Carnage4Life (106069) | more than 13 years ago | (#364819)

At the height of Slashdot's reporting on Napster (twice or thrice a week) I couldn't understand what relevance it had with regards to being "News for Nersa" or "Stuff that Matters", some service that is primarily used to pirate songs was getting sued, big deal.

Now that Napster has been rendered useless as a file sharing service by the RIAA and a court of law, why is Napster still news? Everyone I know has moved on from Napster and now uses a service that surpasses Napster's poorly designed service in one way or the other. For simply sharing and obtaining music there are iMesh [imesh.com] , Audiogalaxy [audiogalaxy.com] , Music City [musiccity.com] , Ohaha [ohaha.com] , Gnutella [sourceforge.net] and a host of others. For uses of P2P beyond simply grabbing MP3s we have Mojo Nation [mojonation.net] , Freenet [sourceforge.net] and Publius [nyu.edu] .

Why doesn't slashdot start reporting on these systems instead of beating the dead Napster horse?

Re:I understand your frustration (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#364822)

Yet, you take the work of musicians and distribute and use it against their expressed wished.

You know what's great? To have recording technology throughout the years hobbled and rendered total crap by pressure from the RIAA. That makes my opportunities for recording difficult and expensive. There are many local bands and people who love playing the garage, but do not have money for the equipment that is out of reach.

The entertainment industry has been protected by laws to make it a profitable industry. This helps the "popular" artists, but makes it difficult for entry into the market, or locals to simply share their works with the public at large. Enter the pitfalls of capitalism. Confuse this with communism and I'll give you the RIAA as an example of it. We are talking about government control here.

Re:I understand your frustration (1)

shaka (13165) | more than 13 years ago | (#364823)

All your wished are belong to us.

No seriously - if the artist wanted to keep a copy of the song he/she submitted to Evil Record Company, it would've been a trivial matter to make a backup. No, the artist was robbed of nothing.

Re:I understand your frustration (1)

Drakantus (226374) | more than 13 years ago | (#364825)

Shouldn't reply to a troll, but anyway....

Your reasoning is: I use napster to steal music, yet I don't want CDDB to steal my work- and that makes me a hypocrite.

That isn't the case. It's like this: sharing music on napster is okay, and I don't care if CDDB is useing "my work". Suddenly napster decides to block sharing, while CDDB goes on and uses what you helped create to block you out.

There isn't any hypocracy here.

Whatchu talkin' bout Willis? (1)

Kletus Cassidy (230405) | more than 13 years ago | (#364829)

Napster users aren't taking someone else's music and then selling it back to them. Whereas the CDDB is taking the result of other people's labor -- a database rather than music tracks -- and selling it back to them. And now, also using it against the people and the activity that created that database in the first place.

So if CDDB allows Napster to use their database for free, you'll no longer have any complaints? The arguments of the pro-Napster clique on Slashdot are so inconsistent it gives me a headache trying to keep up.

Re:Flamebait? (5)

f5426 (144654) | more than 13 years ago | (#364830)

Too bad I don't have moderator points today. Can I moderate an entire article as "Flamebait"?

I would have modded it up as "Funny".

Of course Napster is going to get its info from wherever it can find it. Hell, the RIAA can give them the list of all song names, authors, albums, etc, etc. Napster could take its data from FreeDB, but it would not be as funny. After all, FreeDB give free information, for the good and the evil.

The CDDB steal data from people that were riping CDS to put the on Napster which now sleeps with RIAA and uses the very data those people typed in and can't have free access to, to prevent them access to the song they ripped.

It's... marvelous. Really. It is a splendid shortcut of what the net have become.

Cheers,

--fred

Re:All CDDB-listed titles are copyright? (1)

Mwongozi (176765) | more than 13 years ago | (#364832)

True, but most people who rip their CDs get the names from CDDB, so it has the exact mistakes that the RIAA is looking for.

Also true, but people won't search for those same typos, they'll search for the correct spelling or introduce wholly new typos. So it could be said that the files with typos are already blocked, since a correctly-spelled search won't find them.

I guess this is how they do it (1)

Hugonz (20064) | more than 13 years ago | (#364833)

Well, they just got the string that identifies mp3's that Joe User automatically rips and renames using CDDB. That's enough, isn't it?

Hugo

Re:I understand your frustration (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 13 years ago | (#364835)

Yet, you take the work of musicians and distribute and use it against their expressed wished. How is this any different?

I don't think this is a troll, just a very confused question.

What the question should be is: would it be right for MegaRecordCorp to take some independent artists' MP3's off of Napster, slap a "MegaRecordCorp" sticker on them, and then try and sell them back to the artists that produced them?

Re:Is it just me? (2)

radja (58949) | more than 13 years ago | (#364837)

And it does windows [microsoft.com] too //rdj

Helping the RIAA? No. Helping Napster? Yes. (2)

Temporal (96070) | more than 13 years ago | (#364838)

I think that the RIAA would just assume have Napster completely shut down. Napster is lucky that there is such an easily accessable database of music titles to use as a filter.

OK, assume for a moment here that they have some way to separate RIAA music from independent music. In that case, why does anyone object to this? It will only help them block the illegal stuff. Are you upset that your contributions to the CDDB are helping to prevent you from illegally downloading copyrighted music? If so, are you also upset that the money you pay in taxes helps prevent you from stealing your neighbor's car?

On the other hand, if they don't have any way to separate RIAA music from independents, then this is bad. Some of the musicians with matierial listed on CDDB might want their music to be shared on Napster, in which case it isn't illegal. I would expect that Napster and Gracenote have figured out some way to separate RIAA music from independent music, though. One easy way they could do it is to get a list of artist names from the RIAA and filter the CDDB stuff based on that (would be *much* easier then getting the whole list of songs from the RIAA).

------

An open letter to the recent anti-napsterers: (1)

T.Hobbes (101603) | more than 13 years ago | (#364839)

Man, dude, you used to get it. You'd point to Chuck D; you'd let others know that the average napser used buys more records than the average music-listener, and that cd sales have been going up every year napster has been around. You'd be calm when people called you a theif, and tell them about how the record contracts before napster were shit for the artist, and how the idea of copyright should be put into serious question because the record companies wern't needed anymore. That the RIAA was a group of middlemen desperatly trying to regain control of a market whose whole existance was owed to the fact that, in bygone times, you had to buy a phyiscal record to be able to play music at home. You'd give all the old platitudes about how the cat can't be put back in the bag. Most importantly, you'd know that you spent more money on music after napster than before. You'd know that your the amount of music you knew after napster was much greater than before. You'd know that you really wanted that special-edition LP by that band you heard on napster.

But you've changed, dude. Now, you sit quite as people call you a thief; or worse, you jump on the bandwagon yourself can say that the whole napster thing was nothing more than a mass looting of the riaa's accounts. Man, I hate to say it, but.. you're conforming. And, by the speed of your change, I might even think that you were conforming while napster was around.

Re:All CDDB-listed titles are copyright? (1)

Corrado (64013) | more than 13 years ago | (#364840)

No. It's fine that FreeDB could be used this way. What CDDB is doing is making *me* pay for my own content. That sucks!

OTOH, I guess if Prince or Sting walk into WalMart to get their latest release, they have to pay for it too. Right? :)

Later...

Re:All CDDB-listed titles are copyright? (4)

Col. Klink (retired) (11632) | more than 13 years ago | (#364841)

> the database is far from accurate

True, but most people who rip their CDs get the names from CDDB, so it has the exact mistakes that the RIAA is looking for.

"You Used To Be Cool": An open letter to Napster (5)

tenzig_112 (213387) | more than 13 years ago | (#364842)

Man, Napster, you used to be so cool. But what happened to you? The minute the heat is on you, you up and rat on everyone.

One day I'm "sharing" tracks with "friends" I've never met. The next day, I'm "stealing." What the hell happened to you, Napster?

This reminds me of that guy we all knew in high school who used to let us borrow his car all the time. Sure he was friendly when we were hanging around and borrowing his car. But once we crashed it into a tree, he wasn't very friendly anymore.

Everything was cool when you were cool, Napster. Remember? We were all having fun until the cops came a'knocking. Hell, half the stuff I stole I didn't even like.

Well, I've gotta go shave my donkey ears. [ridiculopathy.com]

Re:All CDDB-listed titles are copyright? (1)

bleh-of-the-huns (17740) | more than 13 years ago | (#364845)

I believe that is the whole point, due to the typos and spelling mistakes people have used intentionally to get around napsters filtering, napster is now going to use the database at cddb which is riddles with mistakes in spelling to filter on.

Now I am glad I never submitted anything to the cddb. What we need is an alternate DB that is open and free.

download waits (1)

spongman (182339) | more than 13 years ago | (#364848)


why bother waiting for downloads when you can just stream the music you want to hear from all over the web? No charges, no registration necessary, no adverts, no delays.

http://www.friskit.com [friskit.com]

Unfair (3)

clare-ents (153285) | more than 13 years ago | (#364852)

I hope this isn't blanket blocking.

I have material to which I own the copyright which is entered into the CDDB.

So now I'm blocked from distributing my own music over napster because someone who bought a CD typed the information into Napster?

Hopefully the record industries will have to supply a full CD signature to CDDB and then they block all tracknames with a matching signature.

Now is the time for independent producer to make albums with identical CDDB signatures to RIAA music.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...