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!

What Counts as Music and Why?

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the perl-jam dept.

Music 324

The Importance of writes "There has been much discussion about compulsory licensing schemes. Most of the debate has been about music. But what happens when any file can easily be converted into a sound file and back again? Can shareware authors convert their software to digital music and get paid for sharing it? Can pornographers get paid for turning images into sound? Scott Matthews has written a program (Ka-Blamo) that does the conversion. LawMeme looks at some of the issues. This raises the question, what should count as music and why?"

cancel ×

324 comments

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

suck it! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129176)

fp FAILURE! ddddddddd

Re:suck it! (3, Informative)

PepsiProgrammer (545828) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129291)

According to websters: Music \Mu"sic\, n. [F. musique, fr. L. musica, Gr. ? (sc. ?), any art over which the Muses presided, especially music, lyric poetry set and sung to music, fr. ? belonging to Muses or fine arts, fr. ? Muse.] 1. The science and the art of tones, or musical sounds, i. e., sounds of higher or lower pitch, begotten of uniform and synchronous vibrations, as of a string at various degrees of tension; the science of harmonical tones which treats of the principles of harmony, or the properties, dependences, and relations of tones to each other; the art of combining tones in a manner to please the ear. Note: Not all sounds are tones. Sounds may be unmusical and yet please the ear. Music deals with tones, and with no other sounds. See Tone. Rap contains only beat, and is therefore not music,

Re:suck it! (2)

TrbleClef (13447) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129405)

Ever hear of atonal music?

Re:suck it! (1)

rssrss (686344) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129449)


Ever hear of atonal music?

Yup. And I have also heard of Giant Shrimp.

Re:suck it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129444)

Webster's defines excellence as the quality or state of being excellent.

Re:suck it! (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129495)

The "Rap contains only beat, and is therefore not music," line is misleading : Webster doesn't state anything like that.
And actually, most percussion instruments have a tone, so _your_ statement is bogus.

Re:suck it! (1)

PepsiProgrammer (545828) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129520)

Yes that was my statement, sorry for the formatting error, I did not mean for it to appear as part of the websters definition.

Re:suck it! (1)

I(rispee_I(reme (310391) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129522)

Rap contains only beat, and is therefore not music
br>Until your favorite song is sampled in a rap song, I suppose...

Transacting the undefined (5, Interesting)

Empiric (675968) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129181)

IMHO, this is a fundamental problem with this kind of non-transactional pricing scheme. Our categories such as "music", "noise", "data", "spam" are fundamentally perceptual definitions. Once you try to divy up a share of profits among a variety of things that people are accessing with their bandwidth, there are no objective criteria by which to separate one from another. It becomes an issue of who is making the most noise and can muscle their way into greater (non)-market-share, which is why this issue is being discussed in relation to music in the first place. The determination of who gets what share becomes a contest of politics, rather than quality. It becomes rather like the attempts of socialist governments to control pricing; even with the best of intentions there is no way to make this fair. Either we vote with our dollars or let someone else vote with them, based on their perceptions.

Re:Transacting the undefined (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129199)

< tapping your subscriber star > DO THE DISHES!

Re:Transacting the undefined (3, Insightful)

Davak (526912) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129277)

Really instead of thinking of changing things into music... we are really just looking at different mechanism to change things into a common format.

Prose, news, music, poety, pictures, movies -- it is really just o's and 1's.

If pictures were receiving the same laws, we could easily change pictures to music as well. We can change text to music without any difficulty.

Everything goes down to binary... changing it from format to format is trivial.

Davak

I CAN PLAY THE SHIT FLUTE VERY WELL (-1)

1113Coder (710677) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129575)

Is that music?

A Challenge (5, Funny)

hondo77 (324058) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129193)

If he can convert the new Metallica album into music, I'll be impressed.

Re:A Challenge (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129217)

When you chuck it like a Frisbee(TM), it makes a really cool *whirring* sound...

Re:A Challenge (0)

Kedisar (705040) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129326)

BING! Zap it in the microwave!

Funny funny lightning! So it doesn't make a sound... which is exactly what you want a Metallica CD to do anyway.

Radiohead (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129200)

doesn't count as music at least. it counts as pretentious liberal-arts wank.

Re:Radiohead (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129392)

Personally I prefer the Term "media-whoring" ...

It's just some dork trying to get publicity to a point that's null and void.

Well, IMHO (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129209)

I LOVE TO DOWNLOAD MUSIC, MOTHERFUCKERS. I'M NEVER PAYING FOR IT AGAIN. FUCK THE RIAA. FUCK THE MPAA. FUCK ALL OF THEM. I'LL ENJOY MY RIPS, AND GIVE THE ARTIST THE MONEY THEY RIGHTLY DESERVE AT THE CONCERT. PROPS TO THE NEW BUSINESS MODEL. THE REST OF THE SMARMY PRODUCER TYPES CAN KISS MY WHITE MUTHERFUKCING ASS.

Ripper

Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account. Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal.

Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account. Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal. Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account. Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal.

Re:Well, IMHO (5, Insightful)

curtlewis (662976) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129286)

While I can appreciate you displeasure with the RIAA, MPAA, etc, your approach is fundamentally flawed. Not to mention your language...

If all you pay is at the concert, you are contributing to skyrocketing ticket costs for concerts. Composing, recording and producing an album takes time, talent and money. Artists and technicians involved in that process deserve to be paid for their work just as you are paid for yours.

I do believe the system contains massive amounts of unnecessary overheat. The meat isn't very lean, so to speak. Record executives rake in huge salaries, while most artists, which pay those execs, are lucky to make gas money. This needs to change. It will be a long, slow and painful process, but I think we are in the beginning stages of that now. Just remember, the execs won't give up their fat salaries without a fight.

I remember when concert tickets for a major act were $20 at a major venue. Going to a concert was affordable then. And I went to a fair number of concerts. Today, the major acts are pulling in $75 for those same seats. Sure, you can go to some shows for $35, but those are generally acts from the 80s or emerging bands. Even so, it's nearly double what it was less than 20 years ago.

If concerts were affordable, I'd go far more often. Paying your fair share at every step of the process (not just for concerts, but for the CDs, too) will help.

Piracy only makes the problems worse and it's a lame excuse to break the law.

Hmmm.... (0)

Durin_Deathless (668544) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129229)

Perhaps it has to sound different if played backwards to be music?

Re:Hmmm.... (4, Funny)

spektr (466069) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129264)

Perhaps it has to sound different if played backwards to be music?

Nowadays that's an outlawd technique. Decrypting satanic messages by playing tracks backwards is prohibited by the DMCA (Demonic Message Comprehension Act).

Music is Music (4, Interesting)

Vaevictis666 (680137) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129231)

Anything created with the purpose of being listened to should qualify as "music" - yes I know that this also would include radio broadcasts of news and whatnot that's just ppl talking, but as far as it goes audio is audio.

Making a software program and converting it into an audio file is idiotic. If the purpose of the file is not to listen to, don't even try to argue its consideration in any kind of licensing scheme...

Re:Music is Music (1)

WesG (589258) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129274)

This might be along the same vein as those companies that can take information extracted your DNA and created an artwork from it.

Now what if someone else painted the artwork by hand.

Could you sue them?

Re:Music is Music (1)

Davak (526912) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129304)

You are missing the point. Music is protected by laws that software is not. By converting and exchanging your software as "music", you gain the protection of these new laws.

Yes, it is laughable. These are the problems a society creates when it tries to create laws to control the flow of data.

Davak

Re:Music is Music (1)

anthony_dipierro (543308) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129434)

Music is protected by laws that software is not.

Please explain what law protects music which doesn't protect software. I thought software had more protection.

OK, there's public performance/display, but I don't see how that matters, since you can't publically perform software, and publically displaying software doesn't make much sense.

Oh Why (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129380)

do you wish to discriminate against Yoko Ono? What has she ever doen to you?

Re:Oh Why (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129577)

She ruined the Beatles, that what she did to me! Imagine how many more Beatles records there would have been if she didn't come around and fuck things up!!!

Re:Music is Music (3, Funny)

Houston_(WeHaveAprob (713227) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129431)

"Making a software program and converting it into an audio file is idiotic" I beg to differ. Following in the footsteps of the world renowned Books on Tape, I have founded Software on Tape. My company specializes in transferring software developer's favorite listings into audio. With optional extras like regional accents. Our latest new line "IBM Direct Access Storage Devices of the late 60's" is apparently a winner with insomniacs. In future I would appreciate it if you would refrain from referring to my enlightened endeavors as idiotic!

MOD THIS UP (1)

narftrek (549077) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129491)

This is freakin hilarious.

Oh and I for one welcome our new Software on Tape masters.

Re:Music is Music (4, Insightful)

Yobgod Ababua (68687) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129436)

Indeed, media type is (and should be) defined by content, not by encoding. The type reflects the manner in which the author intends the content to be enjoyed, and the manner in which the consumer intends to enjoy it.

If I take a photograph of a tree and encode it into bits, those bits will always represent the content of an image, even if some stupid Baudio-like program presents those bits as though they were some other sort of media. Even if I'm the one pretending it's a .wav file, I intended it to be an image, and you probably intend to view it as an image. If you honestly intend to listen to my image file (which I suspect don't even follow the appropriate standards of the file formats they purport), then maybe we can talk about it's merits as music/line noise.

This is crucially different from some of the examples he gives, which don't really apply to his "codec" at all.

In steganography, two different works are combined into a single encoding. This does -not- make the resulting file a single work, nor does it make the included image a song, or the included song an image.

The DeCSS song is a little more complicated, depending on whether you believe it is intended to (and can be) enjoyed as pure music, or whether it is merely intended as a vector for code. In any case, there is real audio content that's been provided.

4'33" was meant to be enjoyed as audio content, so it is, even though the 'art' is actually in the lack of audio content. It's not like the silence (or in Baudio's case, noise) is really meant to be pornography.

Hmm... I think a key differentiator might be what -analog- formats the content exists as. We live in an analog world and digital encoding can really only exist as a means of temporarily storing something inherently analog. Content is analog.

This whole argument just seems... stupid.
Stupid enough to make me actually post...

Re:Music is Music (2, Insightful)

gryface (702149) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129494)

Compare the source media to a version run through a lossy compression algorithm. If the two are recognizably similar, then you have determined that media source's originally intended format.

Running an audio file converted to an image through a JPEG or GIF compressor will result in irreversibly useless garbage. This has a lot to do with the vast differences in different media types' notions of space over time. Audio frames are much smaller than video frames.

Considering there are entire musical genres consisting of people just talking (think poetry/spoken word), along with other non-musical copyrighted audio (very popular in reggae and dancehall, for example), I doubt the industry juggernauts would bother to flinch at the idea that audio valuable enough to trade in any significant amounts isn't worth manually examining and cataloguing.

Re:Music is Music (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129525)

GIF is lossless.

Re:Music is Music (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129514)

Anything created with the purpose of being listened to should qualify as "music"
Of course we all know what music is.

The real point of the question being asked here is how in the world is a dumb computer supposed to interpret this "intent"?

So if a computer can't actually interpret the intent of a file (except perhaps by filename suffix or header information, both of which are all too easy to forge if one was trying to be deliberately deceptive), the answer to the question being posed in this article becomes much harder to answer.

What counts? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129233)

Simple - just click here [67.37.24.195] and type cat /dev/dsp > MyFile.raw

Re:What counts? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129278)

no such file or directory, fool

Re:What counts? (2, Funny)

AnimeFreak (223792) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129305)

cat /dev/sda > /dev/dsp

That's much more fun.

Re:What counts? (1)

arcanumas (646807) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129458)

while i was there i god the message that someone deleted /bin .

There is always one idiot who will abuse something...

Re:What counts? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129498)

overcome by /.

Trying 67.37.24.195...
Connected to 67.37.24.195.
Escape character is '^]'.
telnetd: All network ports in use.
Connection closed by foreign host.

Okay, I'll Bite On This... (5, Funny)

tds67 (670584) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129243)

Can pornographers get paid for turning images into sound?

Yes, but just remember, it's not the size of the song that counts. Even a short song like this could deeply penetrate P2P networks.

RNA as music for an example (5, Interesting)

killthiskid (197397) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129248)

From http://whozoo.org/mac/Music/Sources.htm

Imagine the mRNA to be like a long piece of magnetic recording tape, and the ribosome to be like a tape recorder. As the tape passes through the playing head of the recorder, it is "read" and converted into music, or other sounds...When a "tape" of mRNA passes through the "playing head" of a ribosome, the "notes" produced are amino acids and the pieces of music they make up are proteins.

They go on to say:

Music is not a mere linear sequence of notes. Our minds perceive pieces of music on a level far higher than that. We chunk notes into phrases, phrases into melodies, melodies into movements, and movements into full pieces. similarly proteins only make sense when they act as chunked units. Although a primary structure carries all the information for the tertiary structure to be created, it still "feels" like less, for its potential is only realized when the tertiary structure is actually physically created.

Ok, this makes sense to me but we also do the same thing with words... and words can be made into speach. Why not say the same thing of patents... Our minds take existing ideas and change them... thoughts get put into actions, actions into motion, motion in physical parts, physical parts into machines, machines into processes, processes into... well, you get the idea.

All of our existence as humans (including our own being) is parts being put together into something greater than the whole, and this happens to include music... music has bizarre rules, and most everything else can be made into music. Does this mean the rules of music apply to the other items?

Reminds me of the DeCss as free speach argument.

So be it.

Re:RNA as music for an example (1)

MadBiologist (657155) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129299)

Way to bring that biology into it! I'd love to use siRNA (a short segment of RNA that is exactly opposite to the mRNA strand, and which binds to the mRNA strand to silence it's transcription) to shut up N'Sync...

Ok, maybe I'm taking the metaphor too far....

Re:RNA as music for an example (1)

Davak (526912) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129333)

Ahhhh... a biology geek!

Welcome to my friend list.

Davak

What about the other way? (1)

Ammishdave (688623) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129251)

Hypothetically speaking, is it still considered music if it was converted to a non-music format? If not, why not convert to another non-music format for filesharing purposes. I wouldn't mind downloading an image that just happens to be a converted song if it meant the RIAA couldn't intervene.

Re:What about the other way? (1)

jdray (645332) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129341)

I was thinking along the same lines. See my comment [slashdot.org] below.

Does the amount change? (1)

MadBiologist (657155) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129258)

Does the amount of $$ put into this scheme change? That is, does the amount of money just become divied amoung more people, or is there a set minimum that is guarenteed?

The reason to ask this, is .... that is the amount is just split amoung more people... who cares? It's better than the system now, where there is no compensation...

If everyone gets a minimum, then yes, we should care because the total cost of the system is increasing as more people grab from it...

reminds me of... (1)

Mod Me God (686647) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129259)

...that dance artist (about 3 or 4 years ago IIRC) who made the graphic thing in Windows Audio Player show a (somewhat poor but still discernable) picture of himself.

It is only a picture, though, if it were being interpreted in this way.

Re:reminds me of... (2, Informative)

Doomrat (615771) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129346)

> ...that dance artist (about 3 or 4 years ago IIRC) who made the graphic thing in Windows Audio Player show a (somewhat poor but still discernable) picture of himself.

That "dance artist" (I dislike that description, he's more than a generic techno musician) is in fact Aphex Twin. You can see the image through a spectrograph. Old Slashdot article here [slashdot.org] .

Oh Dear Lord (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129261)

turning images into sound?

Please don't make me list to goatse!!

yeah, i'm a coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129266)

> Can pornographers get paid for turning images into sound?

The question is, can it turn an image into the real thing?

Program Renamed (2, Insightful)

Vaevictis666 (680137) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129281)

Seems the program has been renamed from Ka-Blammo to Baudio, and Not-Ka-Blammo to Baudio Decoder.

Simple (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129290)

If it was made to be listened to by a human ear and only by a human ear, it's music.

If the end consumer is a computer, it's not music.

Re:Simple (-1, Interesting)

WellAren'tYouJustThe (705433) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129317)

Well aren't you just the president of the junior hig logic club.

Music (1)

cubicledrone (681598) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129303)

music The art of arranging sounds in time so as to produce a continuous, unified, and evocative composition, as through melody, harmony, rhythm, and timbre.

Random sounds are not music.

Re:Music (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129357)

>music The art of arranging sounds in time so as to produce a continuous, unified, and evocative composition, as through melody, harmony, rhythm, and timbre.

Britney Spears doesn't qualify than.

Re:Music (1)

TrbleClef (13447) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129362)

Whose definition is that?

"Harmony" as it is today has existed for a few hundred years at most.

And "evocative" seems subjective to me, at best...

Re:Music (1)

TCM (130219) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129516)

What a narrow mind.

Re:Music (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129565)

Aphex Twin disagrees [wired.com] .

Steganogrphic obfuscation of copyrighted works..? (4, Insightful)

jdray (645332) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129308)

Okay, it's a heady subject, I'll admit. I read this article in Linux Format magazine [linuxformat.co.uk] about steganography, wherein the least significant n bits of an image's pixels are hijacked for hiding data. The image changes so little that the average viewer can't detect it, and heaps of data (pardon) can be hidden there. Will the next P2P app use steganography to hide (music, et al) files in very large graphics? I'd think that courts would have a hard time determining that the original file wasn't just coincidentally the same as the encoded bits.

Re:Steganogrphic obfuscation of copyrighted works. (1)

Coryoth (254751) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129518)

You would do far better to piggyback music on another music track. Steganography will work on pretty much any binary file, it's just that some work better than others because the format provides more "tamper area" of relatively insignificant bits to play with.

I'm sure if you have a low enough bitrate MP3 you can encode a reasonable amount of data in it without a overly perceptable change in the audio.

The real problem with all of this is that steganograhy of this kind requires sender and reciever to have a copy of the original binary file - which means you need to have the original image/music available as well, otherwise no one can extract anything. At that point it is pretty easy to show that the binary diffs amount to some encoding of the copyrighted work.

Why go to all this trouble? I mean really, if you want it that bad why not just BUY it?

Jedidiah

Stop. (0, Flamebait)

Izeickl (529058) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129309)

Trying to be clever and inventing some idiotic scheme like converting some program files into a sound file and calling it music. Crap like this just makes people look foolish rather than actually bringing up a thought provoking argument and discussion.

Re:Stop. (0, Redundant)

Izeickl (529058) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129468)

Bah mod me flamebait if you want. Im sticking with my opinion though. You know im right.

Concealing Code (2, Interesting)

tds67 (670584) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129313)

What a great way to exchange code that violates laws against decrypting encryption schemes...turn it into sound, post it on a website for downloading, and reconvert it back to code at the other end!

Technically, you're not distributing this code, are you?

Compulsory licensing is a bad idea. (4, Insightful)

geekee (591277) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129314)

This example just goes to show what a mess will be created if the govt. simply collects a pot of money from ISPs and then tries to divy it up to the recording inductry. Everybody and his lawyer will be in line for a piece of the action. In the Soviet Union people stood in lines too for similar reasons, and look how that turned out. The system is inherently unfair because the one who gets the most money will be the one with the best lawyer and the most lobbying money, instead of the person with the most talent and the ability to write something someone wants to hear.

Re:Compulsory licensing is a bad idea. (2, Insightful)

CoughDropAddict (40792) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129476)

This example just goes to show what a mess will be created if the govt. simply collects a pot of money from ISPs and then tries to divy it up to the recording inductry.

Who said this is what compulsory licensing will do?

As I understand it, compulsory licensing means just that: publishers are compelled to offer licenses at a predetermined rate. That means I can download any song from anywhere, and as long as I send the predetermined license cost to the owner of the copyright, that copy is legal.

What does this have to do with collecting money from ISPs?

A whole new world for obfuscated code ... (4, Funny)

IntelliTubbie (29947) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129316)

Wow, I think obfuscated code is pretty 1337 now (e.g. Perl code in the shape of a camel [perlmonks.org] ), but I'll be seriously impressed when someone writes a "Hello, World" program that converts to an audio file of them saying "Hello, World." Any takers? :)

Cheers,
IT

hmmmm.... (0)

cRueLio (679516) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129328)

anyone tuned around their radio lately? well if some of the stuff you can hear on the radio is considered music, then by all means random binary data should have as much of a chance or better at being considered music... also think about this: if they decide to define "music" as something created by humans, then where would something like electronic music stand, since that's created with a computer. also, what if mit's music synthesis program (it was posted on slashdot a while ago) releases a hit single? Can tha be considered music? dunno

Re:hmmmm.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129347)

the sound of you shooting yourself in the head would be music to all our ears. plx die, thx.

big deal.. (1)

profet (263203) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129334)

Whats the big deal with this Kablamo program?

People have been converting thing to "music" for quite some time...ever hear of a telephony modem?

Music analysis and DRM (1)

AtariAmarok (451306) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129335)

If the RIAA can use this kind of technology to come up with country music that cannot be played outside of Arkansas, I'm all for it.

M$ Music (3, Funny)

WebMasterP (642061) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129336)

I imagine if you converted Windows into music it would probably be a pirates tune with some background singers saying things like 'World Domination'.

Re:M$ Music (0, Flamebait)

Doomrat (615771) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129370)

Ooh, you wrote MS with a dollar sign instead of an S, and suggested that Microsoft are evil. Looking for a +5, Funny are we? You are a pitifully fucking awful person.

Re:M$ Music (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129540)

Arrr! Walk the plank!

Re:M$ Music (1)

nite_warrior (151737) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129548)

I imagine if you converted Windows into music

Now I guess that when u get it to work, if u listen to it backwards you would get demonic messages for sure

holy god (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129337)

I just search though the comments and there hasn't been a single debian user figure out a way to mention debian yet and talk about how great it is. Did all 5 of them die?

Compulsory licenses? (2, Insightful)

anthony_dipierro (543308) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129352)

Can shareware authors convert their software to digital music and get paid for sharing it?

Why would they want to do that? It's better for a copyright holdere not to be forced to offer a compulsory license.

Um... (1)

fizban (58094) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129355)

If it's got a good beat and you can dance to it???

Re:Um... (1)

nite_warrior (151737) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129490)

If it's got a good beat and you can dance to it???

can u dance to Creed's My own prision?? if not creed is not music

wahoo! (4, Funny)

Joe the Lesser (533425) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129371)

Boy bands aren't musically talented, so they're music must be free! ... Wait, that doesn't help us at all!

But your honor... (0)

Xconnect (577318) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129571)

Exactly! Can you imagine those who're sued by RIAA saying this in the court room?

"But your honor, I was only trying to make a point to my friends by sharing with them the kind of noise these boy bands make however much they want to call it music! Not in my books they aren't!"

OGG! (1)

snillfisk (111062) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129403)

Great! Another possiblity to show off the wonders off Ogg Vorbis! I can't even wait to see how OpenOffice works after encoding :>

maybe we'll just lose some random featrEUs? (liek spellcheeeking)

Defining the terms (1)

sakusha (441986) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129422)

I once heard a musicologist say "music is just pure tone plus noise, and everyone has their particular preference for their favorite type of noise."
Damn I wish I could remember who said that, it was brilliant.

I know, I know. (2, Insightful)

Ridge (37884) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129439)

If you're being sued by the RIAA, it's 'music'.

That's Why (0, Redundant)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129440)

We have jury trials.

We can't define what's music, but we know it when we hear it.

But I'm drunk and didn't read the f-ing article.

Maybe it has something to do with having a beat and chords . . . ?

-Peter

Re:That's Why (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129560)

beat? no. chords? not necessarily...

the arrangement of sounds for the purpose of listening, perhaps?

imagine this.. (1)

nite_warrior (151737) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129443)

Can pornographers get paid for turning images into sound

when u download their new audio files instead of the pics would it sound like a girl, then you could then make a copy of that, decode into the image file and u get porn with audio included

cat /usr/bin/nautilus /dev/audio (1)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129446)

This program sure is nice, but the fact that I could 'cat /vmlinuz > /dev/audio' was the thing that got me started with Linux and saved me from windows years ago. Nautilus sounds better though

nonsense (1)

netbornmusic (710332) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129452)

That is one of the examples how any idea could be turned into total nonsense :). You don't even need to convert something, just generate random data... But actually this can be solved quite easily. First, one will be unable to prove his copyright for that as music, as noone will be able to recognize it by ear. Or just get say 15 people, and ask them is that music or noise :). If 14 of 15 say it's noise, then ban it :).

Re:nonsense (2, Funny)

iNetRunner (613289) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129529)

Or just get say 15 people, and ask them is that music or noise :). If 14 of 15 say it's noise, then ban it :)
Wouldn't that ban all boy bands? .. Oh yeah.

Re:nonsense (1)

netbornmusic (710332) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129563)

Always care to have 2 young girls among these 15 people :)

this is the best argument i have heard yet (2, Funny)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129470)

this is the best argument i have heard yet against this scourge on the face of humanity:

The OpenBSD 3.4 Song: Theo Sings Back-up [slashdot.org]

A picture is worth a thousand words (1)

anagama (611277) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129482)


A thousand sounds is worth a picture.

Well... (1)

DruidBob (711965) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129499)

If it is so easy to change everything to wav. what is going to stop people from converting .mp3 or .wav into text files - ect, and then simply sharing those?

What the fly are you talking about? (1)

rufusdufus (450462) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129523)

At first this seemed like a clever idea, turning binaries into music and then getting paid for sharing them as music.

But wait a minute here.

Nobody gets paid for sharing music. The RIAA does collect fees and pay royalties for licenced copyrighted works that have been registered under them; but not just any musical work is covered by them. I mean, there is a procedure for this that is a little more complicated than just declaring it so. They have to agree, in a contract, to include your work. If they dont then even if you have legitimate music you don't get to collect royalties from them.

This whole idea is a total red herring.

Re:What the fly are you talking about? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129557)

Hey doofus!

You missed the "compulsory" part. What they're talking about here is that _ALL_ recorded music will be licensed this way.

Didn't Commander Data convert a task into music? (1)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129537)

"Life forms.... You tiny little life forms..... You precious little life forms.... Where are you?"

Damn, just broke the law.

On a side note. (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129542)

If you have ever read "Dirk Gently's Holistic detective agency" by Douglas Adams, you might recall that the piece of software that was being written by one of the main characters Richard, was called "Anthem" and converted factual data or basically anything with numbers into music.

Art and life eh?

Hey, Guess What? You Have To Use Judgement (3, Insightful)

istartedi (132515) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129549)

Hey, guess what? You have to use judgement. In fact, they actually have people in court called judges. You know. Those guys and gals in the funny black dresses and/or wigs depending on where you hail from. Last I heard the judges--get this--actually have to judge things. They haven't been replaced by referees who simply follow the rules as written. We know that because they aren't wearing black and white striped shirts, and they don't blow whistles (or whatever it is refs do in other games and countries besides USA football).

Of course there are guidelines. Personally I'd say anything that can be played live and sound enough like the recording for a jury to identify the tune as unique from other tunes, and to name that tune, is music.

Thus, bit barf dumped to a .wav file is not music because nobody can play it on an instrument, and most bit barf would sound very similar to the jury.

But of course you'd have to use judgement. Some wrapper stopping and starting bit barf while bragging about his sexual conquests might fall into the grey area, but if enough people testify that they find it entertaining and prefer Cornrow Groovy bit-barf fine ladies to other works of the same genre, then guess what: It's music.

But the bottom line is that somebody will have to make up their minds, it may be subjective, and the loser will have to live with the answer.

Yeah, that's tough. Nothing's perfect.

Can shareware authors convert their software to... (1)

vpetersen (1008) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129554)

> Can shareware authors convert their software
> to digital music and get paid for sharing it?
> Can pornographers get paid for turning images
> into sound?

Unix has done this for years, without a conversion program. I remember telnetting to classmates' Suns where /dev/audio was world-writable by default and doing 'cat ~quincy/myhomework/* > /dev/audio', watching them jump up startled as if a train ran through their heads.

BTW, what if pornware authors convert their .mov and .avi into binary files... We need to come up with a new crash signal, like `SIG69: Erection fault, load dumped'.

Music, sure, that's not the problem (1)

sammy.lost-angel.com (316593) | more than 10 years ago | (#7129555)

The music produced by Ka-Blamo can be copyrighted by the owner of the material used to produce the music. Not nearly enough of the original art is being changed. For you to turn an mp3 into a wav file.

What's more interesting in this type of music is the way in which it is translated from it's original source into music. That is also something that could be copyrighted.

Quite simple; country, rap.. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7129567)

Not music.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?