Beta
×

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!

Still More 'Copy Protected' CDs

michael posted about 13 years ago | from the drink-coaster dept.

Music 453

maniac11 writes: "This story describes new CDs planned on being released by Universal Music Group that sport anti-copying technology. Not much in the way of actual details, but a heads up on a new plan to foil." Same price, worse product -- higher sales! Universal seems to be the first company to commit to downgrading its entire lineup over the next six months or so.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I think it's time (1, Funny)

SpanishInquisition (127269) | about 13 years ago | (#2354041)

for a vinyl comeback

8 track (0)

mahtaaaain (465399) | about 13 years ago | (#2354046)

Everyone should go back to 8 track...it's rockin in the free world

Re:I think it's time (3, Insightful)

spazimodo (97579) | about 13 years ago | (#2354066)

I buy a lot of records. Most of the stuff that I get isn't available on CD. What I think would be really cool is if companies putting out vinyl would give me a cd with mp3s of the songs on the records so I didn't have to rip them. I would end up buying a lot more stuff then.

Obviously the big record companies have no interest in doing this as they are more committed to maintaining their monopolies then providing a legitamate service, but it would be pretty dope if indie labels started doing that.

Re:I think it's time (1, Informative)

EvlPenguin (168738) | about 13 years ago | (#2354076)

Vinyl has always been the only choice of audiophiles. Analogue has a warmth and richness that digital recordings will never capture. The only thing CDs give you are convinience.

Re:I think it's time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#2354195)

Analogue has a warmth and richness that digital recordings will never capture. The only thing CDs give you are convinience.

What a crock. CD's sound just as good (better in most cases) than old stretched out audio tapes or scratched up vinyl records.

Re:I think it's time (1)

ReidMaynard (161608) | about 13 years ago | (#2354199)

Does anyone (with a payroll of over three employees) make Vinyl anymore?

If we're talking fairly new Vinyl, aren't they cut from Digital recording studios?

Bye now, time to make up more stuff ...

Re:I think it's time (1)

GiMP (10923) | about 13 years ago | (#2354219)

I just bought the new Bob Dylan album on Vinyl.. it was on the Columnia/Sony label.

Re:I think it's time (3, Informative)

Zaknafein500 (303608) | about 13 years ago | (#2354248)

Audiophile labels still produce a ton of vinyl. There are even some major artists who's records are available on vinyl; R.E.M. and Radiohead both come to mind. As a matter of fact, every single album R.E.M. has ever released is availble in vinyl from Amazon.com.

Re:I think it's time (1)

EllisDees (268037) | about 13 years ago | (#2354271)

Pretty much all electronic music is still released on vinyl. As a matter of fact, there is quite a bit of material that can only be gotten in that format. I wouldn't have a clue as to the number of people employed by these companies...

Re:I think it's time (2)

JesseL (107722) | about 13 years ago | (#2354258)

I would have thought that really high speed tape would be the ultimate choice of audiophiles. Isn't that what the studio masters are (typically) done on?

Re:I think it's time (2, Interesting)

sulli (195030) | about 13 years ago | (#2354175)

A lot of the most interesting stuff is out on vinyl first or only (what all those uberhip DJs carry around in their milk crates). This is a trend we want to encourage.

What a pile of crap.. (1)

Axe (11122) | about 13 years ago | (#2354235)

Yeah, but the recording was probably done on digital equipment (albeit likely 24bit one) - and all the uber-hip stuff was created on ELECTRONIC INSTRUMENTS!! Which is a digital waveform generator, of whatever quality (albeit somethimes better then the CD fidelity). Saying that it later sounds "warmer" or "richer" when transferred to vinyl is bullshit.

CD will be just fine when we all switch to 24bit/96kHz or better..

CDs suck (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#2354047)

I hate CDs

Dog tags (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#2354205)

I just bought myself of two army dog tags with "Fuck Closed Source" embossed on them.

I'm gonna wear them always.

Copy protection isn't ALL that bad.. (3, Funny)

keyne (524280) | about 13 years ago | (#2354049)

Lets hope it isn't like those Michael Jackson CDs.. wait a minute.. depending on the music, LETS hope for it ;-)

Sony _is_ 'protecting' Michael Jackson's CD's (1, Redundant)

Mynn (209621) | about 13 years ago | (#2354214)

Sony _is_ 'protecting' Michael Jackson's CD's [thxinfo.com] Sorry slash, I sent it to you first, you didn't want it so I picked it back up.

Re:Copy protection isn't ALL that bad.. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#2354216)

People who like big breasts are fools.

Small breasts, rock hard nipples, short hair and big ass. That's more like it!

DVD (2, Interesting)

zoftie (195518) | about 13 years ago | (#2354050)

you can't damage Audio DVDs in same way. Tolerance
will be much lower for data corruption.

Re:DVD (1)

sulli (195030) | about 13 years ago | (#2354081)

they're already copyprotected, and they're incompatible with CD players, so they are even more useless.

MP3's reducing cd qualiy (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#2354056)

Who knew that a lossier product would cause cd's to follow.

Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentation (5, Interesting)

MadCow42 (243108) | about 13 years ago | (#2354059)

These products should absolutely be labelled as "non-compatible" with the CD standard if they in any way are not compatible with other CD usages.

This includes playing on a computer. Many of the other "copy protection" schemes make it impossible to use them on a computer of any sort. Others degrade sound quality.

If they're not clearly labelled as such, I could see lawsuits over mis-representation of the product.

INIAL, IAJAMC.

MadCow.

Re:Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentatio (4, Insightful)

HaeMaker (221642) | about 13 years ago | (#2354101)

Good point. Here is a question... Do they lose the ability to have the "Compact Disc" logo on thier case?

Re:Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentatio (2)

mach-5 (73873) | about 13 years ago | (#2354130)

Who "owns" the "Compact Disc" logo? Also, who is in charge of keeping the standard? I'm sure those logos will still be on there.

Re:Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentatio (1)

Teun (17872) | about 13 years ago | (#2354154)

Philips as the inventor holds the licences. How long before they'll sue?
Maybe we have to start writing them a few questions/suggestions.

Re:Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentatio (2)

rodgerd (402) | about 13 years ago | (#2354155)

Philips, IIRC.

Re:Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentatio (1)

HaeMaker (221642) | about 13 years ago | (#2354171)

Phillips...

http://www.licensing.philips.com/cdsystems/cdlog os .html

I am looking up the rules now...

Re:Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentatio (3, Redundant)

huh_ (53063) | about 13 years ago | (#2354254)

Philips does, and according to the rules stated in the rule book on their web site:
This logo may only be used on discs complying with the CD-DA specification: IEC 60908 and/or the Philips-Sony Compact Disc Digital Audio System Description (also known as the RED Book)

Re:Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentatio (2, Interesting)

Jburkholder (28127) | about 13 years ago | (#2354233)

That is a really good question (that has been asked _every_ time this issue has come up), and I would dearly love for someone to give some definitive answer.

This logo may be used on discs complying with the CD-DA specifications: the IEC 908 standard and/or the Philips-Sony Compact Disc Digital Audio System Description (the RED Book). [gnscd.com]

There are 12 different logos all with different requirements for permitted use. What I don't know is if these new discs would violate _every_ one of these standards resulting in the publisher's inability to use any "compact disc" logo.

Lawsuits have already been filed (2, Interesting)

StikyPad (445176) | about 13 years ago | (#2354141)

As reported a few weeks back, a woman has already filed suit [zdnet.com] for mislabeling of her CD. Haven't heard any updates on this though. Anyone seen anything else about it?

not to mention high-end manufacturers! (4, Insightful)

CrudPuppy (33870) | about 13 years ago | (#2354144)

I might be just a little pissed off if I was part
of a company marketing high-end home and car cd players
that utilized cd-rom drives and now Universal
decides to make their disks such that they won't
play on my head units and players...

I would be all about lawsuits for lost business
and research

Re:Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentatio (1)

monkeydo (173558) | about 13 years ago | (#2354170)

How can this be insightful if he didn't even read the article?

The protected CDs can be played on conventional CD players and CD-ROMs, Bronfman said, but safeguards will be in place to prevent copying the music onto computers or "burning" them onto recordable CDs.

Re:Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentatio (1)

Teun (17872) | about 13 years ago | (#2354211)

Not relevant in a law suit, the point is that they don't comply with the standard as required for labeling your product a 'Compact Disk'(tm).

Re:Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentatio (2)

interiot (50685) | about 13 years ago | (#2354178)

Is anyone working on a website where a consumer can go and see how broken his or her possible purchase is, before they buy it?

Re:Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentatio (1)

sulli (195030) | about 13 years ago | (#2354215)

Amazon.com and CDNOW reviews have already included this in the comments (on the crappy disc they tried it out on, I forget the title)

Re:Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentatio (4, Insightful)

Reality Master 101 (179095) | about 13 years ago | (#2354186)

Their defense would probably be that the intention of the CDs they are selling is to be used to play music in a standard CD music player. No where is it stated that they have to allow non-musical-playback purposes.

If the argument is then that they are degrading audio quality, you have to prove that audio quality is degraded. It's not that hard to design the intentional errors so that the interpolation produces the value that would normally be in the music (or very close to it).

I highly doubt that an A/B test would be able to find the difference to any ears.

"CD Logo" guidelines from Phillips (5, Informative)

Jammer@CMH (117977) | about 13 years ago | (#2354197)

The "CD Logo" agreement (zipped) is available from here [philips.com] .

According to this, the "Compact Disc Digital Audio" logo can only be used "on discs complying with the CD-DA specification: IEC 60908 and/or the Philips-Sony Compact Disc Digital Audio System Description) also known as the RED Book)."

Re:"CD Logo" guidelines from Phillips (2, Interesting)

M_Talon (135587) | about 13 years ago | (#2354259)

Which, oddly enough, means it should be able to be READ in any CD-ROM drive, since basically every drive ever made is Redbook compatible. That's what the headphone jack in the front was for. If a CD doesn't READ in a drive, then it should not carry the CD logo.

However, as the astute have pointed out, that means nothing about being able to copy the data off the CD. But, what's to stop someone *cough*Linuxdriverdeveloper*cough* from tweaking the CD drivers to make it work? You want to call it encryption under the DMCA? I bet a lawyer could easily argue it's not true encryption, merely error introduction which the developer corrected. That should make for an interesting fight.

Re:Label clearly, or get sued for misrepresentatio (3, Informative)

Tim Doran (910) | about 13 years ago | (#2354268)

There's already one [cnet.com] in progress!

Interesting to see how that turns out. I mean, they're bastardizing a published standard and selling the product as compatible with that standard. Jeez, if they weren't all in the same bed, I'd expect Phillips to sue them ;)

Joe Public doesn't care. (5, Insightful)

SilentChris (452960) | about 13 years ago | (#2354060)

"Same price, worse product -- higher sales!"

Only to the rippers, my friend, only to the rippers. The average "Joe Public" could care less.

Ask your mom if she cares that she can't copy it to her computer or an MP3 player.

"Can I still copy it to a cassette tape to play in my Suburban?"

"Yes, mom."

"Then how is it 'broken'?"

Re:Joe Public doesn't care. (2, Insightful)

sulli (195030) | about 13 years ago | (#2354099)

Huh? Joe Public buys a lot of iMacs with the "Rip, Mix, Burn" ads. I am quite sure he and his mom will care when the new Eminem (or whatever) can't be ripped.

Re:Joe Public doesn't care. (1)

Skynet (37427) | about 13 years ago | (#2354151)

Only to the rippers, my friend, only to the rippers. The average "Joe Public" could care less.

I am not a ripper and I value the use of CDs in my computer. That way I can listen to music and still hear IM sounds and other sounds associated with the use of my computer.

This is just another example of the record industry overstepping it's bounds. If we can't catch the pirates, let's just punish everyone. That's not good business sense.

Catch the criminals and punish them. Otherwise you entice "Joe Public" to copy MP3s himself.

Re:Joe Public doesn't care. (4, Insightful)

DevTopics (150455) | about 13 years ago | (#2354156)

This is not quite correct. Those copy protected cd's mis-use the error correction.

When you have a defect (fingerprint or something
nastier) on a normal cd, you won't hear it, because there is the error correction.

With a copy protected cd you will hear most effects. So a copy protected cd has a lower quality. And I'm deprived from my right of fair use, too.
And it won't play on cd players with a bad error correction - so yes, Joe Public will care.

Re:Joe Public doesn't care. (1)

Ryan Amos (16972) | about 13 years ago | (#2354159)

Yes, but these CDs aren't standards compliant, which means they're not guaranteed to work on all CD players, period. What happens if they don't work in your home deck or car stereo? Are you SOL?Besides, the rippers will find a way around it (i.e. we'll start seeing CD-ROMs that will read CDs with invalid TOCs,) but there are no workarounds for consumer audio players that may not work. We have standards for a reason.

Why Copy Protection is Irrelevent (4, Insightful)

kilgore_47 (262118) | about 13 years ago | (#2354169)

newsflash: Anything I can listen to, I can record. You can too!

Checkout This Incredible Idea: Run a cable from your portable cd player to the audio-in on your computer. Play+Record the track. Run resulting file through mp3 encoder. Viola, you now have an mp3 of a 'protected' cd. Sure, it isn't a digital extraction from the cd, but I bet the average mp3-downloader couldn't tell the difference anyway.

All it takes is one person getting a decent recording of the cd for it to get in circulation on p2p servivices like gnutella.

If you can download these copy-protected cd's for free anyway, then the copy protection is worthless!

Re:Joe Public doesn't care. (1)

phalse phace (454635) | about 13 years ago | (#2354183)

Actually, if the CDs ever turn out to be anything like the Michael Jackson ones where it prevents the average listener from playing it on his/her computer CD-ROM drive, then Yes, Joe Public WILL care.

Re:Joe Public doesn't care. (2, Insightful)

kc0dby (522118) | about 13 years ago | (#2354265)

Actually, if the CDs ever turn out to be anything like the Michael Jackson ones where it prevents the average listener from playing it on his/her computer CD-ROM drive, then Yes, Joe Public WILL care.

And on top of that, I think Gateway, Compaq/HP, and Dell might also care. Just think of the technical support costs!

User: "My CD-ROM doesn't work"
Technical Support: "What seems to be the problem?
User: "Well I've placed the CD in the drive, and it won't play. My machine is still under warrantee, and I want it replaced!"
IF $TECH_SUPT.IQ >= AVG($TECH_SUPT.IQ) THEN
Technical Support: "You don't happen to have a Universal/Vivendi CD, do you? Why don't you try another, older CD"
ELSEIF $TECH_SUPT.IQ Technical Support: "Alrighty, your RMA is XXXXXXX, and you'll receive your CD-ROM in two days with a pre-paid UPS box to send back the old one."

Two Days Pass.... User: "I think it's my sound card now..."

Well, you get the idea.
It's not just the CD-ROM manufacturers, MP3 player manufacturers, and similar software/hardware vendors that might get a little upset. There are some big-name hardware people that might get stung by this if they aren't kept on their toes....
-Got Class-Action?

Re:Joe Public doesn't care. (1)

BlewScreen (159261) | about 13 years ago | (#2354209)

"Can I still copy it to a cassette tape to play in my Suburban?"

"Yes, mom."


Son of a bitch.... I waited until I could get an mp3 player in my car to upgrade my tape deck. Like mom, I didn't want the hassle of carrying my cd's back and forth, so I burned a bunch of mp3 collections.

Now, if I don't want to carry the cd's back and forth, I'll need to buy two copies of each... And I thought I was buying the right to listen to the music whenever I wanted to...Looks like the MPAA's attitude towards copyrighted material is spreading...

Re:Joe Public doesn't care. (0)

nvrrobx (71970) | about 13 years ago | (#2354232)

Yes, but how many CDs does the average "Joe Public" purchase in a year?

I purchase approximately 5-6 CDs a month, for approximately 60-72 CDs a year. I don't like to actually haul the CDs to work and in my car, that's why I have an MP3 deck in my car. I burn CDs of the music I have purchased (this does not violate fair use, IMHO) to listen to in my car and at work.

This copy protection system "breaks" the CDs if you use them as I do. To my mother, she could care less. That's why it is our responsibility (IMHO) to help educate the average "Joe Public" on this issue.

Maybe if the record companies start seeing a decline in sales, they'll get a clue.

Watch their sales plummet (3, Informative)

sulli (195030) | about 13 years ago | (#2354063)

At least until ripping tools are upgraded. I will start asking at stores if I can rip a CD to MP3 - if not, no CD for me. Fuck 'em.

BTW, SJ Mercury has a good story on this too. [siliconvalley.com]

Re:Watch their sales plummet (1)

M_Talon (135587) | about 13 years ago | (#2354121)

You know, I find it interesting that in an economy that is seeing a massive downturn, especially in luxury sales, that the record companies would blame their problems on music pirating. *sigh* Next you'll have the tech companies blaming their layoffs on music pirating too. Oh, and the travel industry too.

Nothing offends me worse than people who twist stats for their own agendas. It's like saying the American public's too dumb to figure it out. Then again, has the public proven otherwise?

Re:Watch their sales plummet (1)

schtum (166052) | about 13 years ago | (#2354132)

Wow, where do you shop that the employees are so knowledgable about the products? I must go there!

it's time to not buy (4, Informative)

esj at harvee (7456) | about 13 years ago | (#2354064)

The only thing you can do when a vendor is providing a defective product is not purchase it. So, stop purchasing CDs, DVDs or other copy protected material. Encourage everyone you know to stop purchasing the same.

Otherwise, all you are doing is encouraging them to produce defective products.

Re:it's time to not buy (1)

Rude Turnip (49495) | about 13 years ago | (#2354229)

In the case of these CD's, I would say keep buying them and returning them constantly to the store and getting a new copy. Eventually the store will have piles of opened and returned CDs. The stores will complain to the record companies eventually.

Its been said before.. (4, Troll)

PopeAlien (164869) | about 13 years ago | (#2354065)

..It'll be said again:

Return faulty products for refund or exchange. The marketplace rules, and if enough people return these cd's this technology goes to an early grave.

Re:Its been said before.. (1)

O'Bunny (325700) | about 13 years ago | (#2354140)

Return faulty products for refund or exchange.

Every time. If the CD doesn't work, return it to the place of purchase and exchange it for another one of the same thing. Lather, Rinse, Repeat, until you

  1. get one that works, or
  2. they stop.
Be merry and wise.

O'Bunny

Re:Its been said before.. (1)

monkeydo (173558) | about 13 years ago | (#2354204)

Did any of you moderators even read the article? It says:

The executive envisioned protection software that placed no restrictions on conventional cassette copies of CDs and some restrictions on digital copies. The executive also held open the possibility of the software including interactive features for consumers. "We're not trying to create a quid pro quo situation," the executive said. "But at the same time, if you're going to place restrictions on your customers, you have to offer them something of value that will make the product attractive."

Obviously they are not trying to conceal this new "feature" and are going to somehow "enhance" the CD in some way to make up for it. Seems quite sporting of them if you ask me.

Sad thing is... (3, Insightful)

M_Talon (135587) | about 13 years ago | (#2354078)

The majority of consumers will never know the difference. The only people the record companies are offending here are the "geeks" who play CDs in their computers. Unfortunately, we're not the largest chunk of the consumer base (right now, it's teenagers), so they really don't give a rat's butt. The record companies are of the impression that we're not worth their time, since we take all the CDs and make illegal copies of them (heavy sarcasm alert).

I for one think it's exceptionally unethical to muck with standards like this. Of course, someone will figure a way to work around it, and the files will end up out there anyway. Those files will probably get pirated more just out of spite. The best thing any of us can do is boycott any "modified" CDs like this, and tell our friends to do so as well. It's been said before, speak with your wallet. That's what I intend to do.

Re:Sad thing is... (2, Interesting)

ByTor-2112 (313205) | about 13 years ago | (#2354112)

I think you are underestimating the impact CD burners in every cow box has had. I know people who are the dumbest red-necks you have ever seen that mix and burn their own CDs. Joe Public probably burns more CDs than the geeks do!

Re:Sad thing is... (2, Interesting)

M_Talon (135587) | about 13 years ago | (#2354191)

It's his right to burn a CD if he owns the music. The issue isn't with burning copies, it's with distributing them. However, the record companies don't want to deal with that fight, so they're taking the easy way out. By doing what they did, they unethically took away fair use rights for many people who aren't law breakers. In my opinion, that's boycott worthy.

Re:Sad thing is... (1)

LavaDog (120310) | about 13 years ago | (#2354253)

I didn't own a burner until my wife wanted to burn mp3's.

I have an idea... (0)

Weffs11 (323188) | about 13 years ago | (#2354087)

Reverse Enginner!!

Analog recording... (2, Informative)

-=OmegaMan=- (151970) | about 13 years ago | (#2354090)

Loop your line-out to your line-in, dump that all to WAV, encode to Ogg Vorbis.

Ta-da.

Re:Analog recording... (-1)

ArchieBunker (132337) | about 13 years ago | (#2354113)

Even better, get an Sblive! card and pick the recording source called "what u hear" and then fire up soundforge or a realtime mp3 encoder. Vorbis won't make a dent in mp3. Its almost as dead as VQF.

Ogg Vorbis shall prevail! (2)

Jeppe Salvesen (101622) | about 13 years ago | (#2354247)

Why? Because it has no licensing issues, silly. And - guess what - this is just ideal for high volume, low cost enterprises. Once Linux devices really start to take off, (and they will - people just won't know what they really are) - you will hearing gorgeous Ogg Vorbis sound everywhere.

Besides, Ogg Vorbis should win on it's fantastical name alone..

Gee, I submitted this yesterday. (0, Offtopic)

ByTor-2112 (313205) | about 13 years ago | (#2354091)

2001-09-26 01:03:41 More 'protected' CDs (articles,news) (rejected)

Re:Gee, I submitted this yesterday. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#2354177)

Wow. It must be because you're black.

Re:Gee, I submitted this yesterday. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#2354227)

Nah. He's an Arab American.

Re:Gee, I submitted this yesterday. (0, Offtopic)

Sam Jooky (54205) | about 13 years ago | (#2354223)

Gosh, with timely news like this, I can see why you'd be bitter than your submission wasn't chosen and a day later someone else's was. Think of all the lives that could have been saved if you had gotten the chance to see your name on the front page yesterday!!

DAMN YOU, TACO!!!!

DAMN YOU!!!

Re:Gee, I submitted this yesterday. (-1)

Spootnik (518145) | about 13 years ago | (#2354251)

Your submission was too much accurate, and lacked misspelling. Try to be more inflammatory next time, it's bad journalism that generates hits.

Possible Consequences (5, Insightful)

Bonker (243350) | about 13 years ago | (#2354103)

"Dude, sweet tunes! When did you buy the new XXXXXXX album?"

"Oh, I didn't buy it. I downloaded it. I woulda bought it, but you can't play CD's in your computer any more."

Re:Possible Consequences (1)

birder (61402) | about 13 years ago | (#2354152)

Or the reversal

"Dude, sweet tunes! Why aren't you playing it on your PC"

"Oh, I bought it. I woulda warezed it, but you can't play CD's in your computer any more. But this way I can play it on my boom box and play Max Payne at the same time!"

I'm hoping to not find one on my digital stereo. (5, Informative)

dave-fu (86011) | about 13 years ago | (#2354115)

Yeah. Seeing as how I play CDs through my DVD player which has a digital coax out into my receiver, I'll be in touch with my lawyer with a quickness if I run into a CD that restricts my ability to listen to music that I've bought on my home system.
Someone needs to reverse-engineer these systems and release their findings in an encrypted format. You'll have violated the DMCA, but they'll have violated the DMCA proving it.

Maybe this is what the Audophiles were talking... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#2354119)

about when they said vinyal is better than digital.

Not a downgrade, people... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#2354123)

"Same price, worse product"

Ahh yes, the common misinformed sentiment that the ability to copy (and pirate, steal, etc.) was a planned feature of CD's from the beginning.

Re:Not a downgrade, people... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#2354143)

you're a moron

Well... (1)

jokrswild (247507) | about 13 years ago | (#2354142)

For the most part, I Rip my own CDs, for convinience. Though from time to time I may download a song or rip a friends CD as well.

As a consumer, though, I would dislike not being able to rip my own CD's to my computer. I don't want to search through a vast CD collection, then fumble around swapping CD's every hour or so. It makes for a cluttered desk. I could always go back to the old days when ripping a CD meant playing it and recording it off the computer's mixer with Windows Sound Recorder. Heh. Just my thoughts, though.

Nathan

CD sales down - what would you do? (1)

petis (139263) | about 13 years ago | (#2354164)

I just saw on the news here that cd sales are down 10% in sweden compared to last year, and it is going down in the rest of europe as well. They (the record industry) blame it on cd-w, mp3:s etc.

The Swedish CEO of one company (Warner, I think), said that they had no way to compete with the price. I guess that is true, although they probably could lower the price a bit. I started to think of their options. Trying to prevent copying is probably the first thing that the average record-company-member-of-the-board would think of, but that has never worked in practice.

So, what are their options? I have absolutely no idea.

Can Vivendi be sued? (1)

Ececheira (86172) | about 13 years ago | (#2354167)

Aside from any fair use issues with regards to restricting all copying, could Vivendi be sued for knowingly selling/distributing a defective product? Since the CD's no longer fall within the set standards for CD audio, and they won't work in some devices, the CD's would seem to be defective.

Is there anything that could be done legally about this?

Just quit buying music altogether! (5, Interesting)

jcoleman (139158) | about 13 years ago | (#2354168)

The easiest way to show record labels that you won't buy their crap is to not buy their crap.

Seriously, I have bought maybe 15 cds in the past 3 years. Three of those were replacements of cds I'd have for years had been remastered, and the rest were by bands that allow me [jambands.com] and others like me [etree.org] to freely record and trade their live concerts. Radiohead and U2 are two big name acts that have recently figured out that people who trade their concerts are more likely to buy their albums and attend their concerts than someone who doesn't trade.

Check out the links above, there is something for all tastes. There is plenty of music to be had for the price of your bandwidth and blank CDs.

Re:Just quit buying music altogether! (1)

jcoleman (139158) | about 13 years ago | (#2354256)

I should also state that in that time, thanks to the efforts of the phine pholks at etree.org [etree.org] , I've amassed a collection of over 1500 cds and 600 concerts. It's addictive. "Hi, my name is John and I listen to Phish."

Car Audio (3, Insightful)

CoffeeJedi (90936) | about 13 years ago | (#2354173)

How will this affect car audio systems? I know alot them can play burned CD-R's and CD-RW's as well as pulling data like track names off, so I assume that they use the same type of drive as a computer does.
Also, most of the old CD-Rom drives, as well as some new ones, have stereo miniplugs for headphones in the front, will you be able to play these cd's through that? I doubt it based on the previous reports of "no disc detected" but you never know.
I think most people buy cd's to listen to in their car anyway, or at least, that's where the majority of music listening takes place, so if they're not compatible with car audio then the industry is going to have a lot of irate consumers on their hands.

No access at all to the disks? (1)

no-body (127863) | about 13 years ago | (#2354179)

Can't you read the raw device and disect the data retrieved. Or is the stuff scrambled? What are the issues?

Stop bitching about copy protection (3, Insightful)

Starship Trooper (523907) | about 13 years ago | (#2354182)

It is the record companies' right to protect their investment in finding, recording and promoting artists. Studio time and advertisements aren't cheap, you know. The record companies spend millions trying to find selling artists, and they need to make that money back in order to keep music coming.

Now, obviously the Slashdot vibe is that this is a flawed model for making music, and I'm inclined to agree. That is why you should be supporting independent artists who don't pull this copy-protection bullshit on their listeners. The media cartel only exists because people keep fueling it and voting with their dollars; if we want to beat it, we need to make our own content. Support independent films, musicians, and other artists who do their work for the love of it. Hell, make your own music and give it away on the Internet; there's bound to be somebody who likes it, no matter what it is. Hell, there are people who like listening to white noise.

As long as you continue to buy mainstream CDs and DVDs, you are going to have to take whatever copy-protection measures the publishers decide to incorporate. If you don't like their terms, take your money elsewhere. That's how our society works.

Artists? (1)

litewoheat (179018) | about 13 years ago | (#2354184)

I love it when they talk about giving the artists their due. For the most part that's crap. Most record deals rip off the artist to begin with. Most bands make money from touring and merchandise such as concert T's etc. Free music swapping benifits them. The record companies trying to hold on to their outmoded models are the only ones who benifit from these kinds of things.

Great, now there's no excuse (5, Interesting)

DJerman (12424) | about 13 years ago | (#2354187)

If the industry is losing billions to copying, and they've made it impossible, we can expect to see prices fall to say $4.99, right? Or were they lying about napster....

Political Action Against UMG (1)

ScumBiker (64143) | about 13 years ago | (#2354194)

It's time to take up the discussion from a couple of days ago. Slashdot as a politcal force. One of the simpler things we could do is form a boycott. Boycott UMG at first and then all of the other music monopolists. I for one usually buy $100+ worth of music a month. I hereby declare that I will immediately stop buying music from the UMG until they make the anti-copy noise go away. Who's in?

Not CDs? (0, Redundant)

crushinator (212593) | about 13 years ago | (#2354198)

Isn't it true that the little "Compact disc" logo which appears on every jewel case of every CD is licensed from Phillips, and that it indicates an adherence to some sort of standard, as set out by the patent held by Phillips? And isn't it also true that if a CD doesn't adhere to that standard, it presumably can't be licensed, and so it can't be assigned the logo, and can't precisely be called a "compact disc."


So does this mean that the new, crippled CDs will still be sold under the name "CD"? Wouldn't Phillips want to protect their patented technology's name from being misapplied to products which don't adhere to the standards which they established? And, on the flipside, if these new things aren't CDs, then do the companies pressing the new, flawed discs still have to pay licensing to Phillips? Could it be that there's an additional financial incentive to switching over - a marginal savings in cost in avoiding those fees?


Maybe I'm just paranoid, or misinformed... but I can see how this would read as win-win to record companies: Cheaper bulk disc fabrication, and the elimination of all that pesky fair use!

Okay, we need to organize something. (4, Redundant)

Wakko Warner (324) | about 13 years ago | (#2354200)

Someone set up a domain. "CopyproofCDs.org" or something. Make a list of every copy-proof CD out there.

Then we need to get people to sign up and deliberately go out and buy them.

Here's the fun part.

Once you've bought them and opened them up, return them.

Do this ad nauseum. On your way home from work or school, on the way to the store, or when you're at the mall. Just return a copy. They'll have to throw it out. Ask for another copy of the same album. Bring in a laptop to prove to them that it doesn't play in your computer. What can they do? They HAVE to give you your money back or give you a new copy of the damned CD.

Now, if we get THOUSANDS of people doing this -- and we can, this is slashdot we're talking about -- record companies will soon realize that there's NO money to be made in copy-proof CDs.

Good idea?

Re:Okay, we need to organize something. (2, Interesting)

xkenny13 (309849) | about 13 years ago | (#2354231)


  • Bring in a laptop to prove to them that it doesn't play in your computer.

Most music stores I've seen have a sign posted: "If it plays here, it's not defective".

Bringing in a laptop probably wouldn't prove the case, as they'd pop it in their system and it would play fine.

However, you could eat up about 20 minutes of their time anyway. :-)

Re:Okay, we need to organize something. (1)

Mike McTernan (260224) | about 13 years ago | (#2354264)

Presumably the non-PC readable CD's will be those that *aren't* in the CDDB databases?

Easier than making a list!

Summary of all comments in this article (3, Insightful)

Denor (89982) | about 13 years ago | (#2354210)

How about we return it for a refund? If enough people did that they'd have to stop!

You know, I bet we could just take the digital-out of the cdplayer and pipe it into our soundcard....

Even a D-A-D conversion would be a little lossy, but after that we could copy as much as we wanted.

Damn those RIAA bastards to hell! They're releasing defective CDs!

These go against the redbook standard. For shame.

Hey, I think I'm witty! I'll make a list of all the comments that people will make in the article because that's all people ever say in these articles! Oh, wait....

Crack (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#2354212)

We all know that it's only a matter of time before someone finds a way to by pass the copy protection.

I know that I'll be focusing the majority of my CD purchases on music released by independent labels. Major lables are the corrupters of good music and they can kiss my ass. MTV too.

well, crap (2, Interesting)

mrsmalkav (33086) | about 13 years ago | (#2354217)

And I just spent $500+ on my spiffy Kenwood MP3 player. I guess I'll just have to get my MP3s to play in my car off those war3z sit3z and ftp3z.

Shame too, because all I was doing was making it more convenient to keep lots of music in my car. It also makes me happier as the person(s) who broke into my car is just a little more screwed since they won't be able to profit (oh, and not pay royalties) off the cds s/he stole.

So I take it this means that cd-duping is supposed to be eliminated ("more difficult")?

Really... I wonder when they're going to demand that used cd stores pay the record industries for the lost profits.

Idiots. All of them.

boycott, sing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#2354220)

We could boycott them. Stop buying cd's and we'll all start singing.

Next they will get rid of all trees so there will be no sheet music. For those that can learn by listening well then The atmosphere will be sucked off into space.

Scratch Tolerance Lowered? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#2354224)

Since this copy protection method works by throwing in errors which (most) CD players will simply interpolate over, won't this make these CDs much less tolerant to scratches & fingerprints? If this is the case, this would be a pretty big reason to stay away from these CDs. Blah. Time to invest in a new needle for my phonograph...

Record Industry Morons (3, Funny)

daviskw (32827) | about 13 years ago | (#2354236)

The reason why the record industry is doing poorly is because they sued Napster and shut them down. I used Napster to listen to music I liked but couldn't find on the radio. If I liked a song enough I went out and actually bought the CD that the song existed on. It isn't enough for me to download the song onto the one machine I have dedicated for that task, I wanted to be able to listen to the whole CD and that meant that I bought it.

The music industry shuts down Napster, which automatically makes me angry at the music industry. So I stop buying CD's from the music industry. Not only that, but I also stop buying things I can copy music onto. Like blank CDs and disk drives and such. Those companies loose sales because not only do I stop buying CDs, but also so did two million other people. This means that probably a dozen, maybe two dozen companies suddenly can't pay their bills. They start laying off people and maybe they go out of business and maybe they just scale back but the fact is, they are in a recession. So those dozen or two dozen companies employ something like a quarter of a million people and of those maybe something like fifty thousand are now out of work. Those people now half to scale back on everything if they don't want to loose what they still have. No to mention the 200,000 people that are still working but are now terrified that they are next. But these people aren't the only ones who are scared. People read about it in the newspapers and they begin to think: "I don't think I'm going to buy that new cell phone today. I can afford it, but God, look at the economy." Before you know it we are in a full scale recession. This is because some record executive was afraid he might loose sales on CDs for Twisted Sister or Metallica.

They have their cause and effect really screwed up. They say, "It's all those people out there copying this stuff that's hurting us." It isn't that. Most people I know are fairly honest and if they make copies its almost always for themselves to use on some medium the record company didn't think of. Most people aren't buying music from these companies because they see how much the artists and the companies themselves hate their customers. It is this contempt for their customers that has put them in this pickle. Now they grind salt into their own self inflicted wounds and make it so that you can only copy onto a blank CD. This ought to make there customers happy.

CD Logo (3, Redundant)

HaeMaker (221642) | about 13 years ago | (#2354238)

The Compact Disc logo is owned by Phillips.

http://www.licensing.philips.com/cdsystems/cdlog os .html

The right to use the logo is as follows:

"This logo may be used on discs complying with the CD-DA specification: IEC 60908 and/or the Phillips-Sony Compact Disc Digital Audio System Description (also known as the RED Book)"

Players have similar restrictions. So if the disc dosen't play on your "Compact Disc" labeled device and it is labeled "Compact Disc" one of them is lying, or the spec is too loose.

Practical question (2)

Reality Master 101 (179095) | about 13 years ago | (#2354243)

This only works as long as computer CD-ROM drives don't allow interpolation of digital data. Are there any drives out there that allow that as an option? If not, I wouldn't be surprised to see them spring up soon.

This is step 1 of 2... (1)

Lazlo Nibble (32560) | about 13 years ago | (#2354266)

This is step 1: establish a "copy protection scheme" on CDs. Step 2 will be the real killer: going after each and every application that's capable of defeating it, using the DMCA as the Big Stick.

List? (2)

supabeast! (84658) | about 13 years ago | (#2354270)

Does anyone know of web site that lists such albums. I would like to start purchasing them and returning them as defective to every record store in a 20 mile radius.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?