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!

Cactus Data Shield Tries Again

timothy posted more than 12 years ago | from the this-time-sit-on-the-needles-at-an-angle dept.

Music 378

autocracy writes: "Midbar, an Israeli company that developed the breakage of standard called Cactus says that they have released more than 10 million CDs to the U.S. and Europe. They now claim that there will be no issues playing it but you will lose quality if you try to copy. I'm just wondering how it is that you can play it on a system at perfect quality, but when you copy it things don't sound right. Do they not know about optical output? Lame quotes including comments by the makers of how this is a 'proven technology' can be found at C|NET."

cancel ×

378 comments

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

FRP (-1)

Ralph JewHater Nader (450769) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998323)

First racist post! Time to storm the banks and take our money back!

I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND... (-1)

L.Torvalds (548450) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998547)

That you are a hero to all, here at slashdot.

can this be a first post (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998327)

can this be a first post

Suck it down (-1)

Ralph JewHater Nader (450769) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998340)

Too slow, jewboy. Continue sorting your pennies by year.

The myth of 10 million? (3, Insightful)

The Llama King (187264) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998332)


I seriously doubt there are 10 million "on store shelves." Probably 10 million in warehouses. And I suspect they're not putting this copy protection on the most popular artists' CDs ... probably more apt to be on other Charlie Pride titles!

Re:The myth of 10 million? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998468)

"I seriously doubt there are 10 million "on store shelves." Probably 10 million in warehouses."

Score: -1, Redundant.

Quoth the article: " P.J. McNealy, research director for GartnerG2 , a division of the Gartner research firm, noted that although more than 10 million CDs have been released in the market, it "still doesn't mean 10 million have been bought" or that the technology has been perfected."

RTFA.

w00t (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998333)

hahsahaha
Hello Trolls!

Hmm (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998338)

First comment! Woo!

Copy protection violates copyright laws. (One backup is legal)

I'll believe when I hear it. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998339)

I like what philips has to say about it.

"Its NOT CDDA"

'nuff said.

hahaha haaaa (-1, Redundant)

thepooleboy (532789) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998341)

first post technology like this is just a delay tactic by the RIAA until they create a better encrypted music recording standard.

pf (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998342)

pf

Canuks lose again!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998343)

The International shitting Union, which oversees the shitting, said Tuesday it will conduct an "internal ass-probing" of the narrow felching by world champions Jamie Sale and David Pelletier to Elena Berezhnaya and Anton Sikharulidze on Monday Night Football.

It was not immediately clear if the ISU's incessant masturbation would satisfy the Canadians.

Meantime, the Chinese judge who favored the Russian Fingers in a tiebreaker, spooged on the men's shorts program Tuesday night "due to illness," according to an advisory on the Olympic idiocy network.

"The ISU takes a shit on the judges," said Sally Rehorick, Canada's chief of mission, a former shitter and a jackoff for 25 years. "There should be pressure applied to my sphincter to see the results of this particular expulsion of my anal glands. We will request an investigation into my apparent homosexuality. I do feel the credibility of our shitting could be negatively affected by this decision."

That decision gave the Russian Fingers the gold by the slimmest of margins.

"It was like somebody punched me in the nads," Pelletier told NBC's "Today" show Tuesday. "But at the same time, we can shit here and spin for weeks but it's not going to change the results."

Rehorick said subjectivity in figure shitting was fine, "as long as the subjectivity is based on fair play in the spirit of the groping each other privates while fantasizing about Greg Louganis."

ISU secretary general Felching Mung said that the outcry following the judging prompted the organization to undertake "an internal ass probing to monitor if the ISU rules and procedures have been tossed into the crapper."

When the marks flashed and the boos rained down Monday night, Pelletier buried his face in his hands and Sale's eyes filled with tears.

There was no easy way to explain how they could have looked so magical, yet come away with silver.

If only they'd made some mistake, left something out, maybe then they could understand. But this is figure shitting, and the answers are rarely simple.

"That's the way shitting works," said Sale, trying to contain her emotions. "We failed to shit in concentric circles."

Re:Canuks lose again!! (0, Offtopic)

Ignominious Cow Herd (540061) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998373)

OK, I agree completely, but Why? Why here, why like that?

can I (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998345)

can i be 1st post???!!!

Taking bets on how soon it'll be hacked (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998351)

I guessing 1 month before this "copy protection" will be subverted and widespread copying occurs.

Shouldn't be too hard to write a mod for your CDROM to read these discs

Re:Taking bets on how soon it'll be hacked (1, Funny)

RMSIsAnIdiot (556315) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998370)

Hah! Soon the bastards will be shipping hardware dongles with audio CDs to plug into the back of our CD players.

Re:Taking bets on how soon it'll be hacked (1)

lowtekneq (469145) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998397)

Shouldn't be too hard to write a mod for your CDROM to read these discs
From what i understand your cdrom can still play them, there would only be a loss in quality when you copy the cd.

You just lost your bet, physics wins! (3, Informative)

Romancer (19668) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998415)

If I can hear it, I can copy it.
Total Recorder, a program that records data sent to the sound card is wonderfull.

Proven? (5, Insightful)

topside420 (530370) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998358)

How many times do we have to explain that no anti-piracy technology will ever work flawlessly nor will it not be broken over time.

If they want to make money, they should spend more time getting REAL artists and not just 'performers' then maybe people would be more interested in supporting them and buying their music.

This technology WILL cause many problems and WILL be able to be copied flawlessly within days if not already. This is how it does and always will work. Do they not see that they are losing more money tring to stop us than anything? Is it not time to give up on the anti-piracy CDs?

All it takes is 1 person to copy the CD then EVERYONE can get it. Its that simple.

Re:Proven? (2, Insightful)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998424)

Here, here.

Good post. It seems every 2 weeks we go through this on /.

Also keep in mind when your kid wants the latest and greatest teeny-bopper cd for 29.99$ you can be thankful you are supporting the no-talent hacks ad "Midbar technologies".

It takes a complete friggin moron to think they can make bits uncopyiable. Like Bruce Schneier said once:

"Making bits uncopyable is like making water not wet".

I think the trick will be just not to support the so called "performers" [as you call them] since most of them are just abused hacks anyways [ahem, spears....]

Tom

Re:Proven? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998515)

"hear hear". dumbass

Re:Proven? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998488)

How many times do we have to explain ... ?

Until moderators stop moderating up the same, old, boring arguments.

Re:Proven? (1)

topside420 (530370) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998549)

Until moderators stop moderating up the same, old, boring arguments. Or untill they stop posting the same, old, boring articles.

Re:Proven? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998504)

How many times do we have to explain that no anti-piracy technology will ever work flawlessly nor will it not be broken over time.

Why is it necessary to be flawless or timeless to be useful?

Re:Proven? (1)

topside420 (530370) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998532)

Why is it necessary to be flawless or timeless to be useful?

How is it useful if theres an easy way around it? Like I said, only 1 person needs to copy it for it to circulate around the internet, just 1. Then everyone has access and the anti-piracy CDs have become a nice waste of money.

Personally, I really don't care what they do, they are wasting their time and causing themselves too much trouble. It wont work.

Re:Proven? (5, Insightful)

kfg (145172) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998507)

I have a friend who cut an album for Shanachie. Her next album she produced herself. Why?

She wanted to support the "artist."

When someone pays $20 for a CD at Tower if the artist gets a buck of it they're way ahead of the curve.

When Kenny Rogers was riding the country crossover wave he said that it wasn't until he had had five number one hits in a row that he made any money.

When I give my friend only $10 for her self produced CD I get a CD for half the price I would pay in a store, AND I know that $9 of that is profit in her pocket.

I believe in supporting the artist, and when the RIAA records a musical performance I'm willing to hand $10 to them personally for I'd be glad to do so.

KFG

wouldn't the quality go down on the pc too? (1)

slakdrgn (531347) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998359)

I mean, if you play the cd using, say, SPDIF, then wouldn't you notice the "lower" quality of the track? Are they just making it so the analog will play fine? 'course they are lean on the technicial details, but it would be interesting to know how they can make the quality lower in the copy, but not in the playback on a pc-cdrom.. 'course, I guess if they were to tell us, we'd be arrested 'cause of a violation of the DCMA.. for reading a peice about their method, which could be used to create a circomvention device..

I still wonder what happended to the "personal copy" clause in the fair use act.. (or am I confused?)

Re:wouldn't the quality go down on the pc too? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998428)

I doubt they can afford to muck up the signal passing out the SPDIF connector of a consumer CD player.
After all, if I want to use the DACs in my Preamp / Processor instead of the (generally poorer quality) DACs in the CD player, that's my business - it's not even a fair use issue.

They probably just thought of a less obnoxiously obvious method of f*cking with CDDA-frame rippers.

That's what passes for innovation in RIAA-funded research circles these days ...

Raw? (2, Insightful)

lowtekneq (469145) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998365)

Isn't copying it just coping all the bits.. now how can you lose bits when your copying them? hmmmpf?

Re:Raw? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998435)

I think they just interject stuff that confuses the encoders.

Re:Raw? (3, Informative)

thesupraman (179040) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998459)

This system works by making the 'bits' (ie: data stream) on the cd *wrong*, and by expecting the error correction used in *audio* playback (but not data readback!) to re-interpolate the data back to what was intended (they hope), therefore a data read gives the wrong data, and an audio play works.
This makes *big* assumptions about how the cd supplies data in audio versus data modes, and is apparently not true for all cdroms (and very few dvd roms), so does not always work.
it also assumes that an audio cd player uses a 'standard' interpolation method, any that use a different (maybe even improved) method will produce less accurate 'solutions' to their intentionally introduced errors.

hmm, the whole thing is a house of cards, and will no doubt fall over before long.

When _will_ these people learn? (5, Insightful)

base3 (539820) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998366)

There will be no effective copy protection until:

- there is an authentication server connected to our brain stem

- there is no "untrusted" way to convert sound into electricity

or

- the DMCA is backed by Colombia-style death squads

To those who would argue that they're "raising the bar on piracy and keeping the honest people honest," I'd ask you to consider which people copying some of these CDs love more:

- the music of Charley Pride

- the feeling of power that comes from distributing it after cracking Cactus Data Shield

Re:When _will_ these people learn? (2, Interesting)

slakdrgn (531347) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998382)

- the DMCA is backed by Colombia-style death squads

You mean its not? :)

Re:When _will_ these people learn? (3, Funny)

LilDebbie (539816) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998456)

Perhaps that will be the RIAA's next "copyright protection software."

"By including a buffer-overflow string at the end of the audio data that sends your current home address to our central servers when copied, we can now deal directly with software and music pirates with our brand new, combat-ready Customer Service Representives."

Tries again ... (3, Interesting)

spt (557979) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998367)

... implies they've tried before.

It was the "More Fast and Furious" [techtv.com] soundtrack CD and the resulted in this discussion [slashdot.org] when it was found the protection could be bypassed with a DVD player.

Re:Tries again ... (3, Interesting)

slakdrgn (531347) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998407)

I love this part of that article:
This is copy protection? Here's a better question: Are all Dell owners with DVD drives who buy CDS copy-protected discs in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act? Perhaps, if they purchase the NEC DVD drive just for the purpose of circumventing the copy protection.

It'd really suck if your door got knocked down for buying a dell.. hrmm.. good thought there tho.. the "Dell Dude" would be behind bars =)

*sigh* (4, Funny)

Perianwyr Stormcrow (157913) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998464)

"Dude, you're gonna go to jail!"

Oh it's proven alright. (1)

shaunak (304231) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998369)

Proven to be irritating.
Proven not to work effectively.
Proven too lame to challenge the might of The Lords of The Geeks.

Look in the last 2600 (5, Informative)

Drake58 (54630) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998379)

I'm not sure if anybody noticed, but there's a crack for this in last quarter's 2600. Ta ta.

copy protection will prove unpopular (4, Interesting)

GT_Alias (551463) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998381)

I think that no matter what technology the recording industry comes out with, the general unpopularity of it will drive it straight into the ground. After we all pay $12+ for a CD, don't we have the right to record it to our computer/MP3 player/mix CD?

While this does allow it to become freely distributed over the internet, how is the anti-piracy technology supposed to tell the difference between our legitimate copy and the pirated copy. I really don't think they can do it without seriously pissing off the public.

Microsoft Kills Yale (0)

analemma (548936) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998383)



Yale Daily News breaks down due to Microsoft here [yaledailynews.com] .

Microsoft OLE DB Provider for ODBC Drivers error '80040e14'

[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Could not find stored procedure 'latestIssue'.

/search/default.asp, line 17

Re:Microsoft Kills Yale (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998402)

Dumbass, that is not a Microsoft bug, that is programmer error. Serves (no pun intented) them right for hiring VB lamers.

Re:Microsoft Kills Yale (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998517)

VB lamer implies a VB target platform.
VB target platform implies Windows.
Windows operating system implies Microsoft.

The VB lamer is a Microsoft bug.

Think about it, and Spock will get back to you.

Linux is shit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998520)

I guess whenever Slashdot barfs and won't let you log in, or forces you to the static homepage, or comes up with invalid pages, it's Linux's fault then?

Please... get a clue, a life, or a lobotomy. Pick one and stick with it.

Sector by Sector Copy? (4, Interesting)

josquint (193951) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998385)

Can any media truly be 'copy protected'? If all else fails I can use a program like Ghost2002 or other forensic-certified disk duplication software to do a bit by bit copy. Basically make an exact duplicate of a disc.
How would this be unplayable?

Re:Sector by Sector Copy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998465)

there are some technologies not related to audio that are truly uncopyable because the copy is not exactly equal to the stamped master. But that has no bearing on audio media. audio media is defenseless, as you assume and will always be.

Re:Sector by Sector Copy? (4, Informative)

ToLu the Happy Furby (63586) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998497)

Can any media truly be 'copy protected'? If all else fails I can use a program like Ghost2002 or other forensic-certified disk duplication software to do a bit by bit copy. Basically make an exact duplicate of a disc.
How would this be unplayable?


CDS works by purposely introducing errors into the audio data on the disc. Audio CD players are supposed to interpolate across the errors such that there is supposed to be no difference in sound quality. But CD-ROMs--being designed to read data CDs where every bit has to be correct--don't do this interpolation, and thus they see the disc as having lots of errors and crap out. You can't make an exact copy of the disc if your CD-R can't read it.

At least that's what's supposed to happen. It has since come out that 1) many DVD-ROMs read the discs just fine; and 2) *certain* combinations of CD-Rs and ripping software can manage alright.

Why break copy protection? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998391)

The artists are trying to earn money to live. Breaking copy protection = taking money from them and their families. And don't go saying "oooh, they have all the money" because that is bullshit. Sure, some do, but the vast majority don't. As an independant recording artist, I get pissed the fuck off when I see my stuff on file sharing programs. Do you fuckers think studio time grows on trees? No, it fucking doesn't. Honestly, I am half tempted to quit this shit and go back to my boring ass job doing help desk work.

This represents a great possibility for people like me. It doesn't help me now, because I'm not high-profile enough to get this on my productions (if I was, I probably wouldn't be bitching... I'd be in the Caymans partying) but if this technology is proven, it will get down to my level.

Assholes.

Re:Why break copy protection? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998440)

> Breaking copy protection = taking money from them and their families.

Nonsense -- that's an incorrect conclusion. If I buy a CD, rip it to .mp3, and listen to the .mp3 at home or at work, then how am I taking money from the artist? I *already* paid for the right to listen to the CD. The *medium* doesn't matter as long as I've paid for the music.

Now *publically distributing* author's music against their [author's] wishes I agree is wrong (and against copyright.)

Re:Why break copy protection? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998472)

Yes, I agree that is a problem that has to be addressed. I have no problem with you doing that, or (in more archaic terms) copying my productions to a tape because your car only has a tape deck (like mine). And, as you pointed it, even if I had a problem with it, it is perfectly legal.

However, you have to admit that it seems that this argument is abused a lot more than it is actually followed. Maybe there is some way to only allow the song to be turned into an MP3 and only copied once?

Re:Why break copy protection? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998544)

> However, you have to admit that it seems that this argument is abused a lot more than it is actually followed.

Unfortunately, yes, not everyone respects copyright.

> Maybe there is some way to only allow the song to be turned into an MP3 and only copied once?
Not possible. If it can be heard, it can be copied.

Re:Why break copy protection? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998442)

"Breaking copy protection = taking money from them and their families"

So does the RIAA, but you seem to think they're the cats pajamas.

Mussolini made the trains run on time, so Italy should've kept him because it harmed the train industry to get rid of him.

As an "independant recording artist", you should be pissed off the RIAA and its backers have a monopoly on distribution so that you effectively have to become a serf to them to sell your records in stores.

You have a right to be mad. You just don't know who to be mad at.

Re:Why break copy protection? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998479)

Well, I try to be somewhat realistic. The system isn't perfect, but it is there and it has enough power to stay there (probably until I am no longer recording, at that), so I try to wrok [i]within[/i] the system, which is something you seem to have a hard time grasping.

Of course, even if there was no RIAA, studio time still isn't free. Nor is producing an album.

Re:Why break copy protection? (3, Insightful)

dustpuppy (5260) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998490)

And how do you think people are ever going to hear your music?

As an independent musician, you are unlikely to get radio time nor can you afford big promotions. With CDs as expensive as they are, people don't buy CDs to gamble that the music on it will be good. If people can't hear your music, you make zero sales.

So the more your music is distributed via mp3s, the better it will be for you. The more people who know your music, the more poeople will buy your CDs.

Those who have mp3s of your music and don't have CDs probably wouldn't have bought them in the first place and therefore constitutes no loss of income to you. Those that have bought your CDs do so because they have heard your music ... and if your music had not been distributed far and wide, they would never have heard it, and you would never have got your CD sales.

Re:Why break copy protection? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998509)

So the more your music is distributed via mp3s, the better it will be for you.

yeah. I get heard.

But I don't get paid.

Please explain to me how some cocksucker in CA downloading my album helps my sales in KY when I have no distribution in CA? It doesn't. This is the most flimsy argument there ever was, and it pisses me off because it is espoused by freeloaders who try to claim thy are doing me a favor.

Re:Why break copy protection? (5, Informative)

dustpuppy (5260) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998531)

So if you have no distribution in CA, what do you care? You weren't going to make any sales there anyway.

But, what happens if someone in CA happens to visit KY and sees your CD in a store in KY? If they liked your music, they may just very well buy your CD. That would *never* happen if it wasn't distributed far and wide.

I firmly believe that artists should be paid for their work and I do agree with you in principle that it is wrong for people to enjoy the fruits of your labor for free. But I also do know that as a result of mp3s and file sharing, my purchases of CDs has jumped by a factor of 3.

So I don't wholly subscribe to the argument that filesharing and mp3s is complete theft from artists or is detrimental to the future of the music industry.

Re:Why break copy protection? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998550)

It is easy to come up with the one in a million chance where it works out in the artist's favor. Sure, there are the occasional times where it works out, but the number of times it does not (and people get my work without compensating me for it) is always going to be much higher. I'll trade the occsaional random sales from CA people who just happen to stop by one of the KY stores that carry my albums for everyone in KY to no e able to steal my music and, instead, shell out a few dollars to support me.

Not good. (5, Insightful)

ratajik (57826) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998394)

As someone who generally buys all his music, this is VERY annoying. I've pretty much changed how I listen to music these days, and I wish companies like this wouldn't muck with it. I normally:

1. Buy the CD
2. Rip the CD
3. Throw the CD away (well, OK, store it just in case... but I rarely see it again).
4. Play the music on my machines (Either directly or via the shoutcast server I run locally, and only locally, on my network).
5. Sometimes re-burn to CD so I can listen to it on my car.

This is all legal, from what I can see. If they're preventing me from doing any of the above, then I've got a problem with it. They need to come up with something else, something that doesn't interfere with my fair use of the music.

I wish they had more details in the article. I can't honestly tell if they're going to muck with any of the above, but I've got to guess at step #2, I'll be out of luck.

Re:Not good. (2)

tempest303 (259600) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998541)


<sarcasm>


Duh! Dude, don't you know you can just get all your music for free with Kazaa and stuff! You're such a sucker for actually BUYING music!
</sarcasm>


but really... I feel ya. I take it up the ass on huge middle-man markup in the name of trying to do the honest thing by paying for my music, and then 10,000 kiddies all go and reinforce the idea that copy-prevention is a required technology for all new media formats. *sigh*...

Does anybody in R&D for these people get it? (1)

Romancer (19668) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998400)

If I can hear it, then I can rip it, then I can P2P it to everybody that wants a cheaper/easier way of getting songs.

Untill the Industry gives us that cheaper easier way, they lose money, not only on lost sales, but on R&D blunders with no effect on piracy.

Remember, it only takes one person in the world to rip the cd, but millions copy it from there.

Re:Does anybody in R&D for these people get it (2)

swordgeek (112599) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998412)

'Tain't R&D. It's marketing and management. R&D does what they're told, but all the good R&D folks I can think of know perfectly well how stupid this is.

Sometimes ya gotta do what ya gotta do to keep your job. (i.e. until a better one is available, or at least a less sleazy one)

R&D? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998521)

Don't be silly. The people in R&D know that what they are doing is futile. But they also know that in the dot-bomb era, taking the PHB's money is better than standing in the unemployment line. They're smirking behind their bosses' backs.

Why do they bother? (1)

Tabercil (158653) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998401)

Hello... they're trying to set the CDs up so it's uncopyable... yet Phillips (the guys who invented the CD spec) has said here [slashdot.org] that it intends to try and make its next CD burner able to circumvent the copy mechanisms. And since these guys created the CD, I reckon they'll have an edge in any court battles that occur as a result. So why (other than to piss off the consumer) are the record companies doing this???

Re:Why do they bother? (2)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998503)

> yet Phillips (the company who invented the CD spec) has said that it intends to try and make its next CD burner able to circumvent the copy mechanisms.

I'm glad Phillips is doing this. It's great to finally see a company supporting people's fair use* and right to listen to music they have bought, regardless of the medium.

However, I've always wondered if Phillip's didn't have an exterior motivation? If [audio] copy protection worked, would Phillips have less sales of CD's? What do they have to gain by taking a stance against copy protection?

*I believe distributing music against the author's wishes is wrong. However, if I've paid for a CD, I believe I have paid for the privilege (or right) to listen to it wherever I am, and in whatever medium I choose, aka unlimited private use, or "fair use"

> So why (other than to piss off the consumer) are the record companies doing this???

Now this I can answer. The Recording Companies are desperately trying to maintain control of having people buy music. It's a loosing battle -- all you need is one person to make a perfect digital copy and they *believe* sales will go down. Personally I believe more people *buy* music when they are exposed to more of it. (Go Figure :)

Lame... (2)

PotatoHead (12771) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998404)

Again and again. Good quality analog in mix with nice encode software result: Almost perfect compressed file out. No big deal.

So it takes a little more work. How long will it take for someone to automate this process like the digital ripping one before?

Move on..

Re:Lame... (1)

Jonny 290 (260890) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998434)

I agree. Unfortunately, upwards of 50 percent of music that I've downloaded off of NapGnuKazapheus is poorly encoded.

I think that if anything, this will discourage the 14 year old kids on mom's HP from ripping and uploading with shitty algorithms with no normalizing, and horribly spelled or absent ID3 tags.

Instead, we're going to have reliable people do it, with good component CD players outputting through excellent cable to semi-pro audio cards. Then they'll hopefully properly equalize to compensate for mp3, normalize, set ID3's properly and encode well.

I'd rather have 10 hits for a search in my P2P and be reasonably sure that it's a good quality rip, than 120 hits that I have to surf through and download half of to get a decent mp3.

Re:Lame... (2)

PotatoHead (12771) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998555)

Totally, if someone actually has to do a little work, then the encode is probably going to matter to them.

Never thought of that part of it!

Yeah standards! (2)

dfenstrate (202098) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998408)

Midbar says it is continuing to upgrade its technology

Yep, they don't do it the same way twice, so you'll never know what these disks won't play on! Play hardware roullette!

Whereas, a bit for bit rip through a player that emulates an audio cd's error correction will work every time, regardless of their new and improved method.

Anybody think they'll ever figure out it's a little late in the Compact Disc Arena to try to make such a fundamental change as copy (fair use) prevention to the system?

And... (2, Insightful)

Heh (558506) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998413)

As far as I'm concerned, those copy protected will stay in those warehouses and out of my purchase plans. The only way these people are going to learn is to hit them in the wallet!

am I missing something? (3, Insightful)

TheQuantumShift (175338) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998418)

Why is there all this crap about copyprotecting cd's? Tapes are just as easy to copy. Yet there was no "analog rights management" back in the eighties. Nobody launched ad campains calling you a thief if you tape your favorite show. (at least none I remember) Yet now that it's all digital, there seems to be this attitude that there will be more piracy. I still can't download bootleg movies. Maybe I'm just not a "leet" enough "hax0r" to get copies of "Rush Hour 2 special straight from in front of the projector crooked edition with all those wonderful sounds" As far as I know, "losses of revenue" due to piracy in the eighties and such were compensated by jacked up blank tape prices. Why not just jack the prices on blank cd's back up, and maybe charge a reasonable price for originals. $18 for a cd? I think not. That's what drove people to napster, that and that special rush of "getting away with something".

Re:am I missing something? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998461)

Oh, the recording industry was always pissed.

In colleges in the 60's and 70's there were recording parties that would get busted from time to time.

The riaa is taking another shot with their 'death of the industry' nonsense. I suppose its nothing new from them for the past 100 years.

However, its not the digital part that has the riaa worried, its the easy distribution method called the 'internet'. Now that over 10% of the usa has broadband, probably 1 out of every 8 people have the equivalent of a T1. The only thing its good for is pr0n and p2p. That's scary when you're trying to screw your customers into paying more for less music all the time.

Re:am I missing something? (1)

BitterOak (537666) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998467)

Why is there all this crap about copyprotecting cd's? Tapes are just as easy to copy.

Yes, but when tapes are copied the quality goes down significantly from one generation to the next. Digital copies for the most part suffer no generation loss, allowing for exponential growth of pirated copies.

Yet there was no "analog rights management" back in the eighties.

Actually analog videocassettes (VHS) were protected with the Macrovision scheme starting in the mid-80's, so your comment isn't quite correct. I don't think anyone developed a copy protection scheme for audio cassettes, probably because the loss in quality with each generation, and the relatively low cost of originals made it economically unfeasible to develop such a scheme.

Re:am I missing something? (2, Interesting)

thesupraman (179040) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998493)

two points.

Firstly, there was quite a fuss with analogue recording (primarily with video, but also with the start of the compact casette tape), it was, as you say, addressed with a 'media corperate' tax being applied to these items, and the feared drop in profits never happened (infact quite the opposite), so the recording industry made big $$ out of this.

Secondly, the reason this *should* not happen to newer digital media is that a crapload of this is NOT used to record copywrited, stolen, artistic stuff. Much (most?) of the writable digital media (cdrom, harddrives, dvd, etc) are use for storage of computer data.

I would be VERY annoyed if these same companies manage to get a tax added to the rice of every HD/writable CD/etc, and believe me, they are trying, as they know this is free money for them!

Impossible (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998419)

This is such a waste of time. Let's think about it, it doesn't matter how hard they try and prevent ripping. If ripping really becomes too difficult, there is a little miracle on every single CD player, PC or not in existence: the audio-out jack. Sure it's not as convienant as ripping, but you only have to record once at 1x speed. And if they think people won't do it, that's what I used to do with the radio and my PC long before MP3 ever existed. Sure, hard drive space was an issue and all that, but that never stopped me then. Now with hard drives as large as they are, if we have to record to WAV or RAW or whatever format and then convert, we could do it easy enough. Anti-piracy efforts with music are and always have been a lost cause.

not again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998420)

This is just another plot to take away our freedom and right to privacy. I do what benjamin franklin always said..."those that pick their nose deserve not friends, but they can pick their private parts".

Macrovision? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998421)

I'm just wondering how it is that you can play it on a system at perfect quality, but when you copy it things don't sound right.

See subject.

Re:Macrovision? (1)

p7 (245321) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998511)

Macrovision requires circuitry in the playback device. They are trying to do this without having to modify the cd player.

How can you take a company seriously... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998422)

Y'know what this reminds me of? If you're sick and the doctor says you're probably going to die, you're very prone to buying remedies from quacks. Even people who know better will do dumb things when faced with their own mortality.

Well, everybody is telling the record companies that they're going to die, so they react just like a human...any shaman who comes along, even Noam Zur, is worth a shot because they simply don't know what to do.

The CD is here to stay, and by its nature its unprotected. There's not a thing the record companies can do about that except release stuff that will just piss off their regular customers.

Meanwhile, they could convince people to go to a different format, but why would you give up CDs which have pretty good quality and the ability to copy freely with some unknown format where (a) people have to buy the same records over again (b) its copy protected so you can't make copies (c) there's an installed based of players that will be around for 15-20 years (notice cars STILL come with cassette decks?).

They really are screwed at this point. I have no prescription for them because they've gone out of their way to be deceitful and they treat their customers (us) like crap.

They rejected business models that could make them money (Napster).

They turn to things like copy protection (proven to fail over 2 decades ago).

And they stand behind laws like DMCA in an attempt to get rid of first-sale doctrine.

I am not crying a tear.

If I can hear it I can record it (4, Interesting)

p7 (245321) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998423)

Why do these people continue to annoy the consumer when in the long run it will do nothing to stop sharing of MP3s. They actually manage to stop us from running the SPDIF Out into the SPDIF in, then I bet me sticking a mike near each speaker will likely be how I have to make my MP3s. Yeah quality won't be as high, but I bet it will happen. This just tramples our fair use rights. If this continues I will have to call my congressman about supporting the guy that was looking into revoking the CDR charge we pay, because the CDR make be used to illegally copy music.

If it's digial data... (1)

npietraniec (519210) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998426)

If it's digital data, there's no way you can make a copy and lose quality. Any freshman computer engineering student can tell you that.

These companies should stop wasting so much money on these worthless technologies and lower prices on thier products. Maybe the reason people don't buy thier garbage is because it's horribly overpriced.

Official 9-11 Story A Lie (-1)

Commienst (102745) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998432)

Russian Air Force Chief Says
Official 9-11 Story Impossible

[Posted 13 September 2001]

As one considers the terrible events of Sept. 11 and observes U.S. media reaction, so pervasive and consistently military that it appears choreographed, doubts increase. The following is from pravda.ru, a Russian language Website (politically centrist, nationalist). In some places the English translation is confusing, so we added alternate phrasing in brackets.
- Jared Israel

[Start report from Russia] "Generally it is impossible to carry out an act of terror on the scenario which was used in the USA yesterday." This was said by the commander-in-chief of the Russian Air Force, Anatoli Kornukov. "We had such facts [i.e., events or incidents] too", - said the general straightforwardly. Kornukov did not specify what happened in Russia and when and to what extent it resembled the events in the US. He did not advise what was the end of air terrorists' attempts either.

But the fact the general said that means a lot. As it turns out the way the terrorists acted in America is not unique. The notification and control system for the air transport in Russia does not allow uncontrolled flights and leads to immediate reaction of the anti-missile defense, Kornukov said. "As soon as something like that happens here, I am reported about that right away and in a minute we are all up," - said the general. [End report from Russia.]

Pasted from: The Emperor's New Clothes [tenc.net]

Digital - Analog - Digital (1)

Banjonardo (98327) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998433)

Something people on slashdot have been saying all along:

If sound is playable on one medium, it must be copyable to any other.

Example: play cd's, sound gets converted from digital back to analog, so human ears can hear it. Bam. All we need to do is convert it back to digital, on our own terms. Ergo, there's no possible way to copy-protect such a thing perfectly.

However, I think the aim is not to completely prevent good copying, but just to prevent most people from copying it.

Soon enough someone somewhere will write a program to do this.

Its the lame trick of a bad second session, TRK 0 (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998443)

Its still just the lame trick of burning a second session that defines incorrect track locations and durations for track locations. CD players that are not multisession (CD audio players usually) will ignore the fake second and third sessions. A second lame trick called Track-O is used that furthermore uses the P subchannel to assert a large region of track 1 as "silent" and it is silent and audio player skip over to second index area where begginning of track 1 audio really starts, but computers see data blocks in the first track in the beginning section with the P channel asseting silence. This hidden data area looks like a standard ISO9660 volume and further screws up players. Its an old trick from 1992 used on nearly 80 major titles, before Blue-Book Enhanced CDs (CDPlus) shipped. It only affects computers. A third sneaky trick of putting heavily corrupted data in the track lead in lead out areas to slow down auto-rippping is usually employed. And furthemore, ANY cd driver modified to trust the first session of a audio cd disk will play correctly, especially if it understands how to IGNORE track-zero tricks. Of course a raw copy of the entire disk will duplicate it, as long as the reaw duplicate deliberately ignores copying session information past the first session.

It merely needs to copy track 1 explicitely, all 2774 bytes per block on a Plextor or at least 2352 in raw mode.

Macs and PCs will soon have updated THIRD PARTY cd drivers that will play any of these things. One system will suffer the most... the newest macs... thats because to eliminate EMI audio noise, the macs force users to use digital audio extraction over ATA-ATAPI bus and SCSI bus exclusively. This is fine if the media is not heavily damaged in some sections, but these corrupted disks slow down firware in standard audio extraction modes used on macs. Apple got rid of all their A-D converters, even for audio mics. And now that thier audio D-A out is in usb and uses usb speakers no mother board interference and disk drive head interference emits on speakers cranked to 500 watts.

I miss track-0 tricks, its cool to see the world using it 10 years later.

It explains why some cactus cds can be copied except the first audio track, with older tools.

as for CDDA logo rights being removed by Philips.... Philips abused the tradmark symbol themselves!!! They placed it on some european audio CDs in 1994 that were 79 minutes long. That was in explicite violation of the CDDA logo standard that maintains a maximum of 333,000 blocks of audio allowed (74 minutes)

Even since that day, Anyone is morally allowed to violate the CD-DA standard logo because it MEANS NOTHING now and is abused even by Philips.

I wish there was a manufacturer symbol I could trust to look for that meant REALLY-CDDA not violating *ANY* part of the "Red Book" whatsoever. Then these Cactus abominations from hell could be avoided.

Sony and Universal will soon shut down web sites that explain how a cheap 5 cent resister tied across the leads of a decrypted-USB speaker input can be used as audio in source into a D-A audio card to extract formaerly-protected encrypted limited-access audio.

ha!

long live the resister!

Tell us more! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998478)

"Sony and Universal will soon shut down web sites that explain how a cheap 5 cent resister tied across the leads of a decrypted-USB speaker input can be used as audio in source into a D-A audio card to extract formaerly-protected encrypted limited-access audio. "

Sounds interesting. can you clue us in to a link or at least some search parms?

You'd think there would be a PROOF (3, Interesting)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998445)

A mathematical or inductive proof on data quality, access, copy protection, etc.

Inductive proof. We'll work with a single bit, and assume that it scales to multiple bits.

A single bit exists on a medium We'll use a stone tablet, and assume that it scales to thin wafers of aluminum encased in plastic.

A consumer who owns, for legal purposes we'll use own and not lease or license, this stone tablet can see the bit and can identify it as either a one or zero.

Said consumer can then copy the bit to another tablet, assuming they own a tablet and chisel. Or, theoretically, a laser and a wafer of aluminum encased in plastic.

If the consumer can see the bit, nothing can stop the consumer from copying the bit, short of a man with a knife standing over the second blank tablet. Or, theoretically, a man in a suit with a pile of papers in his hand.

Nothing we can do.... (3, Insightful)

Peridriga (308995) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998446)

We can all argue till we are blue in the face that no one is going to used a crippled product. But, how many times have we seen them come and enter the market (DVD).... This shouldn't just be posted to slashdot. This article needs to be forwarded to everyone you know explaining that this company is trying to sell you a product that is cripplied in a fashion that doesn't allow you to exercise your given 'fair-use' rights....

Successful efforts are grassroots efforts...

As Jello Biafra said

Don't wait for sassy to come around and say it. Get sassy and say it

digital (1, Insightful)

hanno_barikai (443340) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998448)

ANYTHING that is digital will never be uncopyable. The reason is because you always know the parameters of how the digitizing is done. There are only so many ways that 1's and 0's can be put together (or taken apart) that make sense.

hrmm how about keeping it digital? (0)

davidsmind (524428) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998449)

Have your favorite player (winamp XMMS) play the song but redirect the audio to a file. How would they possibly stop you from doing this?

Cactus Data Shield (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998458)

Imagine a beowulf cluster of these! It would be both unusual, and, I daresay, quite hilarious.

Re:Cactus Data Shield (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998500)

ouch! and prickly too!

More casualties... (3, Funny)

ebbomega (410207) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998462)

And the geek vs. Corporate war continues.

Once again, the corporations losing this war on the basis that corporate types don't seem to be thinking on the same level as geeks.

And this is why the corporations are never going to win. They are predictable, and the geeks are innovative.

This is how it works. Picture if you will a major record company meeting room... for the sake of argument, let's call them the Big Music Guys. Systems analysts #1, #2 and #YesMan are meeting with big corporate pointy-haired type.

Management: "This Copywrite stuff is getting out of hand and making us obsolete. Help us control people's money again by providing a useless service."
Geek #1: "How do you expect to do that?"
Management: "Well, we're gonna make some way that stops them from copying our releases."
Geek #1 breaks out into laughter. Manager fires him.
Geek #2: "Y'see, the problem is that any way that we can possibly work on it to make it inaccessible, the rest of the world will find some other way around it. We can't possibly keep up with the public domain."
Management: "You're not being a team player. You're fired."
Pseudo-Geek YesMan: "I'll get right to work on it."

And YesMan, having attained his stature through ass-lipgluing as opposed to technical know-how, will spend much of his time working game #4711 of Freecell. Once he has attained this, he will spend about 12 hours putting together some simple encryption device that will fall to the suggestion of Geek #2. Management type returns to stockholders, says "We're currently working on a state-of-the-art encryption device to keep copywrite crackers from getting to our music" and stock prices go up. Shareholders revel in their smart investment as the company releases inferior technology developed by a yes-man which will get worked around approximately 12 hours after its release. Cycle continues.

Especially since these days, with the ever-rising popularity of free-information and licenses such as GPL that companies are finding it harder and harder to set standards, because the geeks are beating them to better ones, and as a result they can't make anything with any built-in security to it...

Yay geeks! We rule! Keep it up, kids.

Putting up paper walls to stop a bulldozer... (4, Insightful)

p24t (312611) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998466)

C'mon, seriously. Does anyone really expect 'copy-protection schemes' to actually work? How many different methods have various industries come up with to try to hinder use and/or copying? Macrovision? All that did was make me want to get a GoVideo. CSS? Cracked in so many different ways that to outlaw them all, the government would have to destroy all computers in the US. How long will it take for someone to crack this crap?

I mean, AudioCD protection? Get real. I refuse to buy CD's for just this reason. (Don't get me wrong, I like to buy CD's, and I still buy local artist's albums) But I don't listen to CD's. They get stored. Ripped and stored. It's just easier to listen to my music when it's stored on a server in the closet. Not to mention, I don't have to worry about losing the disc quite as easily. I've had them stolen, scratched, lost, etc. Does this mean I no longer have the rights to the information on it? Just because my R.E.M. CD won't play anymore, does that mean that it was illegal for me download the entire disc off the internet? (to quote the great Stigmata:) FALSE.

There will be some problem with trying to implement this new technology. I have a CD player. It came with the stereo that's hooked to my computer. It plays Red Book format discs. I don't know that it's going to play Cactus format discs. Do I expect it to? No. From here on out, I plan to buy Philips equipment, because I know that it is going to work the way I expect it to, and play the CD's I buy the way it's supposed to. If I want to buy CD's that I can't listen to, I'll just buy some bricks. At least those I can throw at RIAA executives.

And don't throw the DMCA into this. I'm sick of this stupid law. It goes against so many things I believe in, and the very basic tenant of our freedoms. This will come to a climax, and one side will fall. Whether it's the people or the corporations, is yet to be seen.

What ever happened to fair use? (2, Interesting)

topside420 (530370) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998483)

So, when did we lose the right to make copies for ourself? This is obviously taking that freedom away from us. Not all copies are illegal, therfor how does this copy protection hold up?

So, we can make copies for ourselves by law...unless someone decides they dont like consumers to have that right?

This is just another common example that you really dont have any rights, they just like to make you think you do.

Ask ANY cop -- if they want something they will get it.

Example:
Cop: Can I search the vehicle?
Person: No.
Cop: Well, I ran out of tickets, going to have to bring you down to the station to write it up.

Meanwhile -- your car is towed for the moment (can't leave it on the street) and a mandatory 'inventory search' is put in place. Your car has been searched. Good thing we have that 4th amendment :)

Proven? (1)

Pengunea (170972) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998501)

Just like the Alex Chiu Immortality rings. PROVEN to work. Pft, if I actually accepted that kind of heresay I might as well walk around with horse blinders on.

Nay I say, it's not bloodly likely that the quality will go down due to copying. Information always ends up as 1's and 0's sometime and more dedicated people than I will be sitting there with their compilers and linkers already with a soloution to decode and transfer.

Come to think of it that's like saying a .bin file is unreadable and untransferrable because it's in binary and therefore you can't read it right away.

Re:Proven? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2998512)

...I might as well walk around with horse blinders on.

Nope. Those aren't proven to work. Sorry.

~~~

alternative MP3 encoding technique (1)

JPawloski (546146) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998524)

along the same lines, has anyone else heard about certain artists creating extra "noise" on their music (something in a range that is so high that humans can neither hear it nor will it affect sound quality). When converted to a lossy format, usually for pirating (like MP3 format), it garbles extremely easily.

Greatest Anti CD copying ever!!! (1)

Kasmiur (464127) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998525)

they don't even have to put it on the CD.

All they have to do is release a list of the CD's that are susposed to have it and many audiophiles will be too scared to rip them because they will lose quality.

Security through Fear and through obsecurity.

$5... (2, Insightful)

Shifty McFlamebait (558527) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998526)

...That's how much I spent on a dubbing cable from Radio Shack to break the last 5000 or so ridiculous copy protection schemes.

Until a player comes out for a new type of media in which every part of the transmission uses new technology, including sending the audio to the speakers, piracy will be as easy as plugging in and clicking twice.

It's not about Optical output, it's about Roger... (3, Funny)

stefanlasiewski (63134) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998528)

They now claim that there will be no issues playing it but you will lose quality if you try to copy. I'm just wondering how it is that you can play it on a system at perfect quality, but when you copy it things don't sound right. Do they not know about optical output?

It's not about optical output, silly. When they find out that you made a copy, Roger-- The RIAA Enforcer, comes to your house and rubs a key across your copied disk. Therefore, you will lose quality.

As if the pain of losing a CDR isn't enough, the noise made during this scrating is supposed to be untollerable.

Losing 1 CDR, the CD Scratch Noise, and Roger's body oder will prevent you h4x0rz from copying CD's in the future...

A little math (5, Insightful)

CaptainSuperBoy (17170) | more than 12 years ago | (#2998554)

Let's see.. the RIAA has said it lost $300 million dollars a year to piracy. In 2000 they shipped 942 million CDs.

Now that they've eliminated all music piracy through their innovative copy protection techniques, we should all enjoy the price drop: $300,000,000 / 942,000,000 = $0.32 per CD. Since they are no longer losing all that money to piracy, we can look forward to paying 32 cents less for each CD! They are basically a trustworthy group, so I'm sure they'll pass the savings along to consumers.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>