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!

MySpace to Use Audio Fingerprinting

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 7 years ago | from the your-server-is-listening dept.

210

dptalia writes "MacWorld reports that MySpace is going to start implementing audio fingerprinting to prevent copyrighted material from appearing on their site. The new technology will be used to review all uploads and prevent 'inappropriate' material from ever seeing the light of day."

cancel ×

210 comments

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

Just like real finger printing today... (0, Troll)

jackb_guppy (204733) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655685)

Will it be based NOT on science?

What is an audio finger print really? If it is sample of 10 notes, is that enough? What of 200 notes?

How does "I want a new drug" and "ghostbusters" match up? Are they the same tune even though they are half a bar out of sync. A court had to deside that one.

Will there be a court to deside when it is wrong? Or has GOOGLE crossed the evil line?

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16655713)

Google? Where?

This is MySpace, not YouTube.

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (1)

Zaatxe (939368) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655777)

Or has GOOGLE crossed the evil line?

Hmmm... Google? Did I miss something?

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (0)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655819)

Nah, just the little fact that Google OWNS YOUTUBE now, so yes, google.

In response to gp, Google crossed that line long ago. The 'Do no evil' slogan was just that, a slogan.

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (4, Informative)

IKnwThePiecesFt (693955) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655857)

But... we're talking about MySpace, not YouTube?

I think this is where the confusion comes in...

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16655861)

This article is about Myspace, not Youtube.

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (1)

Zaatxe (939368) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655899)

Am I the only one getting crazy here or the only one NOT getting crazy? As a good slashdotter I didn't read the article (well, now I read and it's pretty short, by the way), but I found reference to Youtube or Google nowhere! Are we using the same internet?

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (1, Funny)

TobascoKid (82629) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656385)

same internet, different tubes.

DUDE, ITS MYSPACE, NOT GOOTUBE! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16656133)

We are not talking about anything related to Google. Enough of the "Do no evil" crap.

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (3, Informative)

arun_s (877518) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655787)

The 'article' is woefully low on information, apart from a mention of Gracenote MusicID being used. From Gracenote's own page [gracenote.com] (Its on mobile music recognition, but I assume the principle is the same):
How it Works
1. When music fans hear a song they want to identify, they tap a command on the phone keypad to start the audio recognition process, and then hold the phone up to the music source.
2. The phone captures a few seconds of the audio and extracts a waveform fingerprint of the snippet. The snippet can be from any section of the song, even the last few seconds.
3. The fingerprint is sent to the Mobile MusicID recognition service from the service provider that may be located anywhere in the world.
4. The Mobile MusicID recognition server compares the fingerprint to its database of reference fingerprints and responds with the exact match.
5. The artist, song title and related information, as well as content like album art and download links are relayed to the fan.

even more relevant (1)

RMH101 (636144) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656265)

is http://musicbrainz.org/ [musicbrainz.org] . It's an open source music fingerprinting project that can, for example, take a hard disk full of untagged MP3s, and tag them all up fairly accurately. It's free, and it works. I *think* it uses the same engine as the UK Shazam! mobile phone service where you could ring a premium rate phone number in a club, hold your mobile up near the speaker for 15 seconds, and it'd text you back the track/artist details seconds later.
Presumably it'd be trivial for Myspace to run this in the background on the boxes where they keep user audio content...

Re:even more relevant (1)

jackb_guppy (204733) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656403)

15secs us not enought to tell the difference.

Look songs like "Cheokee People" and Tim McGraw's "I am Cheokee", there are other examples of riffs that are the same for more than 15secs. But then these are stil commerical songs (all songs are copywritten).

Now take a sound track that is open to copy, say Bethoven (he been dead along time). Have 15sec riff in a song that is his but is also in another currently commerical copywritten source. Does it pass or fail?

What happens if the beat been sped up or slowed down. To most they sound the same. But some one with prefect pitch they are different. A math model normally is prefect pitched, unless you want to get alot of false positives!

Re:even more relevant (1)

Afrosheen (42464) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656505)

I vaguely remember the 5 civilized tribes from school, but I don't remember anything about Cheokees.

Re:even more relevant (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16656511)

I see a python wrapper around a C++ lib and I'm not sure what the analyser is doing. [musicbrainz.org] C++ really isn't my thing, what I can tell you is that there's nothing clever that couldn't be easily defeated if this is the fingerprinting code.

How can the Gracenote DB not be "infringing"? (1)

mwa (26272) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656499)

Just asking...

Re:How can the Gracenote DB not be "infringing"? (1)

geoffspear (692508) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656605)

Umm, they can be licensing the right to use whatever music they're using from the owners of the music.

I'm not asserting that they do so, but the fact that they license song lyrics from the publishers makes me think it's pretty likely that they do.

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (1)

BoberFett (127537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655877)

Funny, I never realized that about those two songs.

But beyond that example, all music is derivative. There are a number of chord progressions that lots of music uses. Standard blues riffs are the basis of countless songs. I highly doubt that at this time there's a way for software to accurately recognize songs. Similar songs? Sure, but there's no law against creating music that sounds similar to other music. The false positives will make it difficult to upload damn near anything.

Others have already commented on the Google thing, I'll just chalk it up to being early in the morning.

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (1)

kjart (941720) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655909)

Will there be a court to deside when it is wrong?

You do realize that this is MySpace trying to police what is uploaded to their (free) service? I imagine there will also be mechanisms in place to have things that get through removed. So what would courts have to do with this?

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (1)

TobascoKid (82629) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656475)

The funny thing about the Google/MySpace confusion is that I noticed recently that some of Google's services will now integrate with MySpace (and will flat out mention MySpace, as in post to blog/MySpace buttons). And then there's that Google being the search provider for MySpace.

I really wouldn't be surprised if one day Google takes over the day to day running of MySpace as a service provider for Fox/News International.

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (1)

Tim C (15259) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656031)

Will there be a court to deside when it is wrong?

Why would there be? We're not talking about prosecuting people (yet...), just about filtering copyright materials that legally people shouldn't be uploading anyway.

Why would a court be involved?

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (1)

Kijori (897770) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656239)

I think his point was that since it took a court to decide whether the two songs were legally different, will such a recourse be available in the even of something similiar happening - the MySpace audio fingerprint detecting a new composition as copyrighted, for example. I suspect there won't be.

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (1)

Jekler (626699) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656123)

One of the classic signs of getting old is when you can't tell the difference among the things kids are into these days (MySpace, YouTube, you know, one of those social thingies; Iron Maiden, Megadeath, whatever, one of those noisy bands).

I'm not knocking you, I don't care to make such distinctions myself, but it's still funny to witness.

Rupert Murdoch (FoxNews, Sky, etc.) owns MySpace (1)

Dr. Spork (142693) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656363)

Sorry, Murdoch's NewsCorp never had a "don't be evil" policy!

Re:Rupert Murdoch (FoxNews, Sky, etc.) owns MySpac (1)

Legion303 (97901) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656617)

To expand on that a bit, Murdoch has a "DO be evil" policy.

Re:Just like real finger printing today... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16656371)

Or has GOOGLE crossed the evil line?
This comment here is the perfect example of why we need a -1 Idiot/Stupid modifier.

How soon before this is widely defeated? (1)

davidwr (791652) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655687)

Add a little noise here, stretch and squeeze some sounds there, change some frequencies over in that corner, and pretty soon you'll either have false-negatives or the potential of false-positives.

If it defeats the filters expect such tools to become widely used within a few months.

Re:How soon before this is widely defeated? (2, Insightful)

tibike77 (611880) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655765)

How about the "fair use" dispute ?
You know, as in parody, for instance, to name but just ONE of the legitimate "false positives".

Re:How soon before this is widely defeated? (1)

kjart (941720) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655933)

How about the "fair use" dispute ?
You know, as in parody, for instance, to name but just ONE of the legitimate "false positives".

What does fair use have to do with anything? This is MySpace filtering what can and cannot be uploaded to their (free) service. Nobody is getting charged with anything here - they just can't upload their sweet, sweet Britney Spears music to MySpace (or whatever the kids are listening to nowadays).

Re:How soon before this is widely defeated? (4, Funny)

tehwebguy (860335) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655837)

the great part about it is that there will be a huge number of false positives since half the songs the big 5 put out are all the same.

Re:How soon before this is widely defeated? (1)

ja (14684) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655961)

If it is from big 5, it is by definition not a false positive ... Perhaps you meant that a single fingerprint would be enough to identify most of their songs?

Re:How soon before this is widely defeated? (1)

Bromskloss (750445) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656243)

the great part about it is that there will be a huge number of false positives since half the songs the big 5 put out are all the same.
Note from Big Five: For increased diversity, and your listening pleasure, Sony has teamed up with BMG, so from now on, you may refer to us by Big Four. Thank you.

Re:How soon before this is widely defeated? (1)

groovelator (994174) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656109)

You have far-sighted vision. Who could imagine 'such tools', being able to manipulate sound in this way?

And anyway, who cares?

Watch how many bands get mad and leave (1)

WilliamSChips (793741) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655693)

when their songs are (wrongly either because it's their original song and it's copyrighted by them or because of a technical glitch) forbidden from being uploaded.

Re:Watch how many bands get mad and leave (1)

SnoopJeDi (859765) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655941)

I think this is more targeted to people who create their own bands as personal audio collections, then just upload songs for their own personal use (usually illicit songs, that is).

On a side note, embed will almost certainly stick around, and I can't see any way to "fingerprint" anything embedded, because youtube/google/etc. videos use it. So this is really just a defensive move, if you will.

Re:Watch how many bands get mad and leave (1)

edgr (781723) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655975)

Yeah, I've seen plenty of major bands (like top 10) on MySpace with clips. Will they have to get special exemptions? If it's just an automated tool, they'd have to some how.

Re:Watch how many bands get mad and leave (1)

TobascoKid (82629) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656549)

I'd bet that now that big media is getting involved with MySpace, they'll have more than just special exemptions, they'll have their own deals with MySpace and maybe even a private API at some point.

What's going to be interesting is when Big Media and the small bands clash. A few weeks before FX in the UK launched the TV show Brotherhood, they had promos stating that the first episode would be available the week before on myspace.com/brotherhood. I went and checked it out and that page was already taken by some metal band from Texas. Oddly enough enough, the weekend before the episode was supposed to be on MySpace, the promos changed the URL to myspace.com/brotherhooduk and about a week after, the URL changed to a location on FX UK's own website. However, I'm wondering if in future, the small bands might get bumped off when Big Media needs the URL.

or the MPAA and viral marketing efforts (1)

sjwest (948274) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656247)

http://myspace.com/StepUpUK [myspace.com] Mind you if that horrible attempt is /dev/nulled I've no compliants.

I've been waiting for this moment (1, Funny)

dino213b (949816) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655695)

Now I can definitely pat myself on the back for not having a myspace account. Another freedom of ours eroded away - the ability to infringe copyright, ignoring the consequences. It's kind of like the seat belt thing. I don't have to wear it (if I'm stupid enough) but no one else gets hurts in the process.

Re:I've been waiting for this moment (1)

Zaatxe (939368) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655763)

It's kind of like the seat belt thing. I don't have to wear it (if I'm stupid enough) but no one else gets hurts in the process.

It's in moments like this I wish there was a "-1 Bad Analogy" mod point.

Re:I've been waiting for this moment (1)

tibike77 (611880) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655825)

Well, depends... if in his country (I suppose the USA) they don't HAVE to wear the seatbelt, it would be a good analogy.
Quite frankly I hate having to wear it myself, but it's the law here, so... no choice.

Re:I've been waiting for this moment (1)

Psiren (6145) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655901)

Quite frankly I hate having to wear it myself, but it's the law here, so... no choice.


So, if it wasn't the law, you'd choose not to wear it? I can't even begin to imagine why you'd not want to. There is absolutely no way on earth I would drive or be a passenger in a car without wearing a seatbelt.

Re:I've been waiting for this moment (-1, Offtopic)

truedfx (802492) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655807)

In several countries (including my own -- the Netherlands), you do have to wear a seat belt. I don't know where you're from; in which country is it optional? The USofA?

Re:I've been waiting for this moment (1)

truedfx (802492) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656071)

Fine. Re-phrased: there are laws in several countries against not wearing a seat belt. For those they apply to, such laws invalidate the GP's on-topic analogy. This is rather obvious, so I wish I didn't have to spell it out, but apparently someone didn't get it...

Re:I've been waiting for this moment (1)

twistedsymphony (956982) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656299)

In the USA it's based on the State. Most states require a seat-belt other states do not. I live in New Hampshire and beyond a certain age (I think it's 16 or 18 now) you don't have to wear a seat-belt if you don't want to. Similarly motorcycle helmets are optional.

It's really quite comical, we get a lot of vacation traffic on the weekends from Massachusetts, it's not uncommon to see bikers cross the state line pull off to the side of the highway and take their helmets off. I wouldn't be surprised if there are some people who unclick their seat-belts when crossing the border as well.

Re:I've been waiting for this moment (2, Informative)

IDontAgreeWithYou (829067) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656181)

No one else gets hurt? Let's just imagine that you are in a moderate accident. Say another car's tire blows out. Their car loses control and crashes into yours, legally making the accident their fault. Your car rolls over an embankment and you are thrown out of the car and killed. Now the person has to live with causing an accident that killed you, when you would have been fine had you worn a seatbelt. Plus, do you really think that first responders enjoy scraping your dead ass off the highway or that other motorists want to see your internal organs spread out all over the road, all because you weren't quite comfortable enough with a seat belt on. No, it definitely does hurt other people.

Re:I've been waiting for this moment (2, Informative)

stunt_penguin (906223) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656207)

Excuse the fuck out of me, but when the vehicle you are travelling in hits a solid object (like another vehicle) then most of your momentum remains until *you* manage to hit something solid. If you're a passenger in the back of a car, then that solid object is likely to be the person in the seat in front of you. If you're in the front and it's a side impact, then there's a 50% chance that you're going to slam into the driver at most of the speed your vehicle was travelling at. The results are never pretty.

It's bloody minded ignorance like this that makes the roads a more dangerous place. I don't mean this unkindly, but I just hope you get a harmless scare that is bad enough, or see an accident victim cut up bad enough to make you wear your belt. You sure as hell aren't going to listen to reason.

Re:I've been waiting for this moment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16656683)

Americans are never passengers in a car, the point in moot.

Re:I've been waiting for this moment (1)

ricepudd (960850) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656365)

I think you'll find if you're sitting in a rear seat, and the car stops suddenly, the poor soul in the front seat can get seriously injured when your body is thrown into the back of them. A road safety advertising campaign in the UK showed this all too graphically.

Re:I've been waiting for this moment (1)

EssTiDee (784920) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656497)

It's waaaay too late to expect that this post will see the light of day on anyone's screen, but i couldn't pass up the mention of the taxpayer dollars that pay for your trip to the hospital, life-or-death major surgery, rehabilitation, and pain killers as they put your broken body back together at the public hospital since you weren't wearing your seatbelt. Assuming you were actually fairly well insured, then your insurance will cover most of the costs... except as a general trend people like you cause the rising costs of healthcare as the insurance company simply ups your rates (and everyone else's in your statistical grouping) to offset their losses. It MOST DEFINITELY hurts everyone else in the society around you. Perhaps not physically (although plenty of others responded with scenarios in which physical damage takes place) but certainly in the pocketbook... and assuming USofA, that's really where it hurts most anyway :)

Silver lining... (1)

stanleypane (729903) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655725)

I takes forever for a video feed to start with a 6Mb/s downstream. WHat going to happen when they start analyzing that data on there end also?

Here's to hoping MySpace bloats their site out of existence.

Re:Silver lining... (1)

hadhad69 (1003533) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655849)

My 2Mb connection handles streaming video quite well. And bandwidth doesnt have anything to do with the analysis, as the software will run locally on their servers its limitation would be CPU power.

Re:Silver lining... (2, Informative)

joshetc (955226) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656145)

Its ok because they analize it when it is uploaded and block it from being uploaded.. not every time the file is downloaded.

spelling error (1)

Bloke down the pub (861787) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655729)

review all uploads and prevent 'inappropriate' material from ever seeing the light of day.
The author of TFA appears to have misspelled "obstruct people posting legitimate content in myriad frustrating, confusing and probably threatening ways".

Re:spelling error (1)

Tim C (15259) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656067)

The author of TFA appears to have misspelled "obstruct people posting legitimate content in myriad frustrating, confusing and probably threatening ways".

So you've used it then? Or are you just using wild, unfounded speculation to spread FUD?

SHA256 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16655737)

Wouldn't a simple SHA256 check against a list of known copyrighted files work as well, albeit with more human work needed?

At least they would only have to ban any single file once.

Re:SHA256 (1, Insightful)

tibike77 (611880) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655753)

Ah, yes, because every MP3 file playing a certain specific song is identical in length/checksum ... [/sarcasm]

That'll take care of audio... (1)

mgscheue (21096) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655761)

...asuming it works as claimed. Myspace is chock-full of copyright violations of still pictures and videos and the typical Myspace user seems to not have a clue.

Re:That'll take care of audio... (1)

phatmonkey (873256) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655811)

The audio track on video can probably be used in a similar way. Fingerprinting still pictures can't be that difficult either.

Yea, well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16656015)

Well, maybe it's because this kind of infringement doesn't hurt the artist in any way.

Maybe the record companies ought to get a clue and just say, "hey teeny-boppers sharing clips of music on the site. That's probably a good thing in the long run"

instead we get:

"OMFG! Infringement! This is costing me...I mean the artist.... Billions! Filthy scummy pirates! We need a law that the FBI needs to track this down! America in the balance! Terrorists use this kind of stuff to fund...uh... terrorism! And kill people in tall buildings in new york!"

and then we get people on /. who are either astroturfing or just one of those internet do-gooders who say stupid stuff like:

"Well, this is their property and who are we to infringe. You people on /. are just filthy scummy pirates and the guys from the RIAA and MPAA are just honest businessmen trying to run a garbage company in New Jersey...oh wait, that's Tony Soprano... no no, I mean, they're as honest as Donald Rumsfeld talking about how 'victory is at hand...' "

Shame on the lot of you.

Don't worry about fair use (1)

trezor (555230) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655779)

I am absolutely certain that this audio-fingerprinting software is aware of the concept of fair use and has embedded logic to handle cases where fair use is employed.

Ok. I'm having troubles writing that without losing my face.

Re:Don't worry about fair use (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656063)

MySpace doesn't have to respect fair use. They can remove anything they want from their servers. Willy-nilly removal of stuff just to cover their ass is a great reason to avoid dealing with them, but they can do whatever they want. They can even change their mind, at any time, about what they want to do:

http://collect.myspace.com/misc/terms.html?z [myspace.com]

Fair Use. (1)

/dev/trash (182850) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656645)

Show me where it's codified into law, that I am able to take any copyrighted piece and place it onto an open network for all to take free of charge?

The evaders will win (3, Insightful)

Paul Lamere (21149) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655851)

I wonder how well this will actually work. Audio Fingerprinting is designed to be insensitive to most 'naturally occuring' music distortions such as encoding artifacts, noise and changes in equalization, but I don't know of any audio fingerprinting system that will work well when faced with people who are actively trying to evade detection. It won't be too difficult for a properly motivated MySpace user to find a set of filters that can be applied to any song that will allow the song to get a unique fingerprint, without actually changing how the song sounds. A quick trip through Audacity to apply a micro-pitch change, a little equalization, and perhaps a slight tempo change will probably do the trick. Of course, the folks over at Gracenote are pretty smart and may be able to adapt to evasions, but this will no doubt lead to even more sophisticated evasions. In the end I don't think it is possible to create a fingerprinting system that will be able to deal with people who are actively evading the system. In the end, the evaders will win.

Re:The evaders will win (1)

bhpratt (975195) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655927)

In the end I don't think it is possible to create a fingerprinting system that will be able to deal with people who are actively evading the system. In the end, the evaders will win.

Yeah, all ten of them.

Seriously, do you think the average MySpace user will want to go through all that? The big boys know that this kind of detection software can't do everything, just as the DRM folks know that their DRM *will* be defeated--by a tiny minority of "hackers."

They don't have to cover everybody, just 99% of them. And let's face it--that's just not that hard.

Re:The evaders will win (1)

jackbird (721605) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656173)

When somebody wraps it in a neat little bow, makes it available for download, and maintains it through the escalation of the arms race, sure. See also Peerguardian, keygens, DVD ripping, etc.

Re:The evaders will win (1)

NickFortune (613926) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656187)

One way around that would be to increase the tolerance to distortion until the filter matches everything from white noise to Toccata and Fugue in D Minor.

They'd have to add a whitelisting mechanism to allow legitimate music through, but I don't suppose News International will see a problem with tighter control what content they allow on MySpace. All in the interests of protecting their users, obviously.

Re:The evaders will win (1)

advocate_one (662832) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656513)

They'd have to add a whitelisting mechanism to allow legitimate music through

How's it gonna cope with a recording of a symphony done in 1920 and a recording of the same symphony done in 1990??? the notes are the same. What about me doing my own performance of a blues number written way back in 1920 and (say) a recording of Stevie Ray Vaughan doing the same blues number??? (apart from the fact I couldn't possibly hope to fill SRV's shoes though)

the problem is you have the copyright on the recording and the copyright on the composition...

Re:The evaders will win (1)

Dr. Spork (142693) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656437)

I'd agree with you if, for some strange reason, MySpace were the best way of trading music online. Even as things stand now, it is far from that. Once the fingerprint censors step in, the reaction I expect is: "Oh, fine, we'll just trade music in some other way" - and that will be the end of it. So I think this is a smart move by NewsCorp (parent of MySpace).

Re:The evaders will win (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656585)

if ytou want to know how this works, watch an animal planet special on primates. See how they puff up and beat their chests to intimidate each other? that is exactly what is going on. Lawyers are very much identical to primates as in they rely solely on intimidation by making themselves look bigger or make it look like they actually have an advantage when they in truth do not. It's a bunch of huffing, puffing and making each other look bigger to the wild pack of roving lawyeramotous primates that seem to have taken over business in this land and as they puff up at each other things like this audio fingerprinting made out of 99% pure unobtanium is simply a puff-and-show by a set of lawyers to the current set of intimidating lawyers that are currently all puffed up.

Crikies! I cant wait until they all start flinging their poo at one another!

Re:The evaders will win (2, Informative)

upeters (1008355) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656641)

I developed a system using AudioID technology (http://www.m2any.com) from IIS Fraunhofer (the people who created MP3) during the past year. I can assure you, a few distortions won't harm the audio recognition at all. The company I developed the project for works with commercials which should be aired several times each day by radio stations. To check if the commercials were actually broadcasted, the whole radio programming was recorded during 12 hours, and then analyzed with AudioID. Note that some radio stations (AM and FM) were pretty distant, so distortions were a given. And to keep the recording in managable sizes, the recording was sampled with "telephone" quality, keeping the 12 hours recording about 40 MB in size. The files were scanned with AudioID in about 5 minutes (or a bit more if the audio had lots of background noise), and was able to find commercial spots, most are only 30 seconds, with 100% confidence. The software uses overlapping time frames, and if the sound pattern of any part of the recording was similar to a fingerprint stored in the database, where we kept our commercials which should air during that day, a log was produced pointing where a spot was found. Naturally, if a spot uses a certain background music, and the radio station happens to play that music, an entry is created as well. However, the confidence will point out that this isn't the spot and it won't reach 100%. To evade the software, there can't be no 4-seconds interval where the song still sounds similar to the original, or else it will be matched against the fingerprint. I am not sure if the Gracenote software (licensed from Philips) is as powerful as the Frauhofer's product, though. It was too expensive to even consider it for testing.

YES! (1)

Bega (684994) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655859)

Sweet! I'd better make some noise music quick, I'll have the rights on white noise on MySpace in no time!

Too late (1)

yoprst (944706) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656137)

Aphex Twin already holds copyright for all kinds of noises.

It's good. (1)

TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655863)

It's good. Good idea. Should cut out much of the copyrighted content posted on MySpace.

Oh wait, this is /. What about false positives? How can they be accurate? Why do the RIAA think the world revolves around them (at the inconvenience of others)?

Sounds like... (1)

Agram (721220) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655905)

... a death sentence to the Weird Al's MySpace page to me.

Am I the only one... (1)

Skater (41976) | more than 7 years ago | (#16655945)

That thinks this is a GREAT development? No more music playing when I visit someone else's page...finally! Why people think they must play a song when I visit their page is beyond me. It was popular back in '95 or so, when the web first became popular, but then common sense broke out and everyone stopped doing it...until MySpace came along. (And don't get me started on the awful designs people use - backgrounds that make the text impossible to read and slow to scroll, etc...)

Re:Am I the only one... (1)

ahsile (187881) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656075)

Maybe it's because you're the only one here who likes myspace?

You're the only one, just because. (1)

slaida1 (412260) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656421)

..hehehaCut it. That rebellious act stops right here and right now. Either you're with slashdot or you're with myspace. I'm seriously suspicious if you live in a basement even.

This myspace story is here only to make fun of myspacers and you blatantly abused the goodwill of the poster by not ridiculing them. Immediate remedy is required here, do something fast, even poor joke about myspace and you can keep your license to nerd.

Re:Am I the only one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16656473)

Actually, a lot of the music playing on individuals sites are linked from the band's myspace page. This means that the music is there with the permission of the artist. So, I guess you are going to have to continue to live with the music.

Wasting their time (1)

packetmon (977047) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656055)

What's to stop someone from simply (drum roll):

posting an off-site link to illegal content

ripping and saving under a different file type

stop using MySpace and moving on to the next big hype It's their money let em waste it how they want. They should know by now its only a matter of time before whatever solution they use will be defeated.

lmao, myspace can't get simple stuff right! (1)

porkThreeWays (895269) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656077)

Is there any chance at all this will work? Myspace can't even handle basic uptime issues, let alone complex audio fingerprinting technology. I'm not even 100% sure they have a test environment yet (for many years they didn't). Half the time you go to the site at least one part of it is completely broken. Will we start getting messages from Tom, "sorry guys, every song thinks that it's hey ya. We'll fix it. In the meantime don't email us. We know.".

not necessarily automated. (1)

radarsat1 (786772) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656097)

The story says:
MySpace will review all music audio recordings uploaded by community members to their profiles, identifies that which is copyrighted, and blocks the uploading of such music as appropriate.


It says NOTHING about how this will be implemented. For all we know, they are not cutting the human out of this process. It's very, very possible that they'll be using fingerprinting to flag potential copyright violations, and have a human review it before deciding to reject an upload.

Besides this, audio fingerprinting is not a binary process: "is a known track / is not a known track". Many implementations return a "confidence" value, or even the top 3 "best guesses". Thus, it could automate the process for, say, hits where the system is 98% sure that it's a copyright violation or above, but notify a human for hits that are between 80% and 98%.

I really don't see a problem with utilizing statistical techniques to determine whether or not a song is likely copied off of a CD. There's nothing unethical about identifying music. I'm really surprised at the number of negative posts here...

Reminds me of the Titanic (0)

Toby The Economist (811138) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656107)

Glug, glug, glug, glug, glug...

fingerprinting to prevent copyrighted material... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16656127)

The statement about fingerprinting to prevent copyrighted material to appear on their site is very misleading. Most material posted by MysSpace member is copyrighted (by the members). Copyrighting is automatic; it is not a privilege of big labels.

What is meant here is unauthorised/infringing publication/redistribution of copyrighted material.

Oh No!!!!! (1)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656175)

Millions of 13-year-olds will no longer be able to spread plastic, manufactured "build-a-songs" puked from the mouths of talentless indivduals elevated to stardom by millions of brainless Pop Idol fans...

I'll never be able to sleep soundly again!

I'm glad they're working on this important feature (1)

AEton (654737) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656231)

...and not on, say, responding to emails from my friend. He's being stalked on the Internet by a ruthless AOL-using lunatic who has conjured death threats against his ex-girlfriend while faking his identity, using publicly available information from Yahoo & Facebook & a personal blog. Whoever this is has convinced the police in three different states that my friend is writing these death threats (and thereby gotten him questioned and an investigation ongoing) and has convinced my friend's ex-girlfriend to file a restraining order.

It's a terrible mess, and Myspace is dragging their feet. Average age of each new profile created by the stalker: weeks to months, even though they're contacted promptly by email each time. Amount of uniquely identifying information provided about the stalker to police by Myspace: zero.

This is the kind of situation you would expect a very large, very public Web site to have some defined policy for. As far as I can tell my friend has not been able to find this policy. (Or to find a working phone number for these folks.)

But instead of worrying about little details like freakish Internet stalkers who pose a significant danger of actually hurting someone, they're working on bottom-line things like "not getting sued by recording industry".

Color me surprised?

(Poor "my friend", though. At least all I have to worry about is problem sets.)

Re:I'm glad they're working on this important feat (1)

geoffspear (692508) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656725)

I agree. The programmers working on integrating music fingerprinting technology into their website really should be more involved in making sure your friend doesn't get harrassed online.

Just like all of the theoretical physicists out there should be working on a cure for cancer. Dumbass.

Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16656253)

So as well as viewing web pages by people who can't design web pages, I have to listen to music written by these same people who can't write music :(

Having music playing on a web site is crap as it is, but forcing them to use crap copyright free music is worse.

Only possible advantage (1)

aadvancedGIR (959466) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656273)

Maybe it could block a few of the jackass wanabee videos by mistaking pain screams for Celine Dion.

Not that I care anyway. When they are trying to remove themself from the gene pool, at least, they're not playing M-rated videogames.

Macwold? (1)

franksands (938435) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656297)

Found it strange that macworld reported this story?

Its to bad... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16656305)

Its to bad they can invest the time and the money to keep music from being pirated, but they cant implement any kind of security on their login page to keep peoples user names and passwords from being sent in clear text.

Not much music then (1)

crosbie (446285) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656315)

Apart from a few dusty 78rpm shellacs, pretty much all music recordings are copyrighted, so MySpace is going to find itself pretty barren.

DMCA "safe harbor" provisions (1)

yuna49 (905461) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656375)

Under the terms of the DMCA, ISPs cannot be held liable for copyright infringments by their users if they follow certain procedures, particularly the "take-down" procedures whereby a copyright holder can request the removal of allegedly infringing material.

This provision applied a "common-carrier-like" regime to ISPs, treating them as conduits rather than as publishers or editors. Once you start reviewing uploads for potential infringment, doesn't this undermine the conduit model and open the ISP to potential claims of contributory infringement? Once ISPs begin reviewing content, they become editors and not simply conduits. I would think this is a dangerous road for an ISP to tred.

Re:DMCA "safe harbor" provisions (1)

Cynshard (752469) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656579)

MySpace is not an ISP.

Oof (1)

Lewrker (749844) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656391)

I misread "Myspace" as "Youtube" and I almost cared.

HAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA (1)

Se7enLC (714730) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656397)

We can only hope that myspace puts as much effort into this feature as they did into all the other great and well-designed features on their site. BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHA

Simple Remedy - Avoid MySpace (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16656509)

Build a website from scratch instead. It might be harder, but the results are

more flexibility than using MySpace,
can use music that is in the creative commons or any music, in any format.
Don't have to worry about false positives as opposed to using musing music on myspace.

Conclusion, who needs MySpace?

It's amazing (1)

gelfling (6534) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656517)

We have officially invested more brainpower, money and technology into correcting and restricting technology compared to simply using it to its own best expression.

Why can't someone somewhere do something like this for identity theft? Oh yeah I forgot, because WE'RE ALL FUCKING SHEEP BEING LEAD AROUND BY CORPORATE ATTORNEYS !!!

My bad.

"Speak Softly..." (1)

EssTiDee (784920) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656567)

lest someone hear you say something copyrighted... then you'd better be carrying a big stick. Of course I think that's paraphrased from somewhere else =] -- now that it's in writing is that suddenly copyright infringment? If this is truly "MySpace" through which I'm allowed to express myself, why should I not be allowed to post content that I legally own in a manner in which other people can enjoy it and perhaps share something in common with me (thereby gaining insight into who I am). How is this different than playing your favorite song for someone? Is a public broadcast of music from a CD I bought now illegal? I guess I'd better not EVER let anyone listen to a song off my iPod anymore -- they didn't buy the CD so unless they're lucky enough to hear the song on the radio between the 45 minutes of advertisments per hour they're just simply S.O.L.

How does it work? (1)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 7 years ago | (#16656689)

I've wondered about this, ever since buying a Neuros mp3/ogg player, which theoretically could identify for you which song from the radio you were recording.

It seems like the most naive approaches would be far too brittle: a bit-by-bit comparison or an MD5 sum, for example, would be thrown off by just eliminating or adding one audio sample in the song.

Even something like spectral analysis would be subject to errors: unless the reference copy they kept of a spectral analysis was produced using exactly the same start- and end- sample in the recording, as was used when checking a newly submitted recording, even the spectra might mismatch.

So how do they do it without getting a ton of false positives and/or false negatives? (Or do they not even manage to avoid those errors?)
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?