Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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

Thank you!

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

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

Install Copyright Filters on PCs, Says RIAA Boss

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the one-solution-not-my-favorite dept.

Music 391

Don't squeeze the Sherman writes "At a conference last week, RIAA president Cary Sherman said he didn't support mandatory filtering by ISPs, but in a video clip posted by Public Knowledge, Sherman offers a far more troubling 'solution': installing filters on users' PCs. From Ars Technica's coverage: 'The issue of encryption "would have to be faced," Sherman admitted after talking about the wonders of filtering. "One could have a filter on the end user's computer that would actually eliminate any benefit from encryption because if you want to hear [the music], you would need to decrypt it, and at that point the filter would work."'"

cancel ×

391 comments

LOLOLOLOLOL (5, Insightful)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338474)

How the hell did these clueless fucks get so much power?

Oh yeah. Lobbying. God bless free speech!

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (5, Insightful)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338536)

You laugh, and while I agree he is an idiot, if they built DRM into CPU microcode we're fucked. They are already laying the foundations with crap like TPM and the like.

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (1)

mrxak (727974) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338578)

Nah, somebody will always crack these things, or somebody out there won't have it. I'm quite certain it'll never come to this anyway.

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (4, Insightful)

GregPK (991973) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338662)

Then, no one will buy a new CPU. Intel and AMD aren't stupid. they know the consumer will run if they add this crap to thier products.

Personally, I might buy a new CPU, but I'd never use it for music. If they suddenly required that I had to have a new CPU to play or download new music then I'd just stop buying music and just listen to the classics I do have and only buy the independent artists out there who don't use the DRM like I do now. I'm not alone in my practice. I personally know a half-dozen people who follow the same practice.

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (5, Insightful)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338798)

You could buy the cpu if you want and let it attempt to work out whether the result of this innocuous calculation results in a waveform or bitmap which happens to be contained somewhere in its enormous brain.

Besides, there is a bigger reason this will never be implemented:

How can it detect infringement without having something to compare it against?

Remember, google have pretty much said to the big movie people "Sure, we will block all your shit but you have have to give us a copy of everything you want blocking first".

Do you think the RIAA will give us all a full copy of everything we aren't allowed to view or listen to?

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22338852)

How can it detect infringement without having something to compare it against?

Oh noes, everyone is going to house copies of everything in the entire library of congress, prior to about 1930!

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (4, Funny)

jandrese (485) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339010)

The solution is simple: Just don't play ANYTHING unless it passes the DRM check. After all, if people are creating their own music they're just stealing from the music industry anyway. Easy fix. It's pretty much in line with the current industry thinking anyway.

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (3, Interesting)

KublaiKhan (522918) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338860)

Or maybe someone'd come out with an open-source CPU--by the time that they'd be able to implement such a thing, those desktop fabrication plants would probably be capable of wrangling silicon.

Or we could buy from a Korean manufacturer or something. Imagine, an underground CPU market...that'd be something to write dystopian sci-fi about.

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (4, Informative)

ushering05401 (1086795) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338984)

"Or maybe someone'd come out with an open-source CPU--by the time that they'd be able to implement such a thing, those desktop fabrication plants would probably be capable of wrangling silicon."

http://www.news.com/Sun-makes-Niagara-an-open-source-chip/2100-1006_3-5984935.html

UltraSparc T1.

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (4, Insightful)

RobertM1968 (951074) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339438)

Then, no one will buy a new CPU. Intel and AMD aren't stupid. they know the consumer will run if they add this crap to thier products.

This is where I sadly think you are wrong - in what would happen - even though you are right in what consumers' reactions should be.

Most "high end electronics" consumers do not have the knowledge or tech savvy to make such a decision, and will continue to buy the "latest and greatest" they are told to buy - unless it sufficiently curtails their actions. Most of the people who will be affected by such a theoretical move (by the CPU manufacturers) are the tech savvy computer community - not the computer users who are otherwise (technologically) computer illiterate.

Unfortunately, they comprise the far larger share of computer users, leaving those of us who are technologically literate, stuck with such theoretical choices because that will thus become all that is available.

It didn't matter how many video geeks knew and understood that Beta was better than VHS, did it? They were the small minority of video users... the same sadly applies to the computer world.

I'd expect (most) everyone here on /. who has the friend/relative/neighbor who comes to them to solve (what to us are simple) computer problems, would remember that when looking at the tech world, what is better (technology wise, user rights wise, performance wise, could keep on going on this list all day) is irrelevant to the mainstream user community, regardless of what the small (yet vocal in places like this) tech oriented community knows is the actual truth.

Just my thoughts... which covers my quota for thinking for the week... :-)

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (4, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338904)

"Analog Hack". There is always the Analog Hack, Get an audio cable plug one end into Line Out and then the other end into Line In or microphone, Play and open up an other app to record... There you go. If you want to get more detailed take your sound card figure out where it goes the DA Conversion and reroute it to a input device (a harder hack but heck it will work too, and without any loss in quality). It only takes one person to de DRM a file then it can be spread. If there is DRM in the microcode there is no reason why you can't do the work on an older computer wihtout it. Yea it will take longer but once it is done you can share it with the world.

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339318)

There is always the Analog Hack, Get an audio cable plug one end into Line Out and then the other end into Line In or microphone, Play and open up an other app to record... There you go.

What makes you think they'll allow recording?

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (5, Insightful)

spazdor (902907) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338960)

It doesn't matter. The DRM can go as deep as they like but they will never be able to escape virtualization. Alan Turing has already explained, better than any of us ever could, why their goals are impossible.

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (1)

tuffy (10202) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339078)

They'd like it to work, but it won't. Ever.

The whole system relies on everybody, everywhere, having a piece of filtering software on their PCs working at all times. There's no conceivable mechanism to get anything like that to work, even if it provided value to the people running it - which this doesn't.

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (1)

gotzero (1177159) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339498)

Sony already gave it their best effort... I assume the chip companies will tell them to piss off. They cannot possibly make an argument that a microprocessor encourages piracy.

TCPA != DRM (3, Informative)

pipatron (966506) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339510)

As IBM says themselves in their paper Clarifying Misinformation on TCPA [ibm.com] :

The terms copy protection and DRM do not appear anywhere on www.trustedpc.org. They were not the main business objectives, and the resultant chip is not particularly suited to DRM, being poorly defended against owner tampering. The main goals are to secure the user's private keys and encrypted data against external software attack.

They have more reasons in that paper why their chip won't work with DRM.

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339570)

How about Vista Antipiracy? [arstechnica.com] remember when vista was telling people to register their PCs due to doing this on a semi-hardware level? [slashdot.org] Didn't end well, did it? If I recall they removed it within days, and the only people they screwed were those who bought legitimate copies.

There are many methods, this one just happens to be as much fail as the other non-methods. I hear ya though, and only hope they never try to do full on-die DRM, but if they did? Hey, we'd know what not to buy, at least.

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (5, Funny)

evilklown (1008863) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338584)

Why don't they just say what they really want: have everyone pay for music and never get to listen to it.

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (1)

Bobb Sledd (307434) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338906)

What they want is a giant jukebox that they control, that plays tunes at your request, but there's no way to record the audio in any way. Preferably, you wouldn't even be able to remember it so you can't whistle it. Oh and they want you to pay $1 every time you play, and they want to pay the artist only $.01 and the content provider $.01.

What am I thinking. They don't want to pay the artist or the content provider anything at all.

Re:LOLOLOLOLOL (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22338696)

How the hell did these clueless fucks get so much power?

Oh yeah. Lobbying. God bless free speech!
Just wait for Windows 7. If it doesn't include this Windows 8 most likely will.

Not nice. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22338922)

How the hell did these clueless fucks get so much power?

That's no way to talk about the GOP.

Re:Trusted Computing (1)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339138)

Probably the same way these guys did [trustedcom...ggroup.org] .

Seriously, this sounds very much like Trusted Computing, only making it mandatory (heh, good luck with that, Mr. Sherman). Install a Fritz chip [wikipedia.org] in every computer and make all content slowly slide toward only being usable through the TC subsystem. Extend that to players and formats, and you've got your monopoly, especially when the operating system itself can only be used on a certified system and starts only running certified applications.

The TCPA FAQ [cam.ac.uk] gives an insightful perspective on it, what they want you think it can do, and what it will probably actually be used for.

Nope (4, Funny)

Futile Rhetoric (1105323) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338480)

Not out of touch with reality at all!

Brainstorming broken? (5, Interesting)

FredFredrickson (1177871) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338490)

It's funny how the RIAA and MPAA both seem to be using a public forum for their brainstorming technique. Most groups would come to a conclusion in private and announce their final and ultimate strategy. Nope, these guys just come up with idea after idea and announce them before they've even contemplated what they mean or their reprocussions. If my company announced every brain-dead idea we came up with before bouncing it around in the brainstorming sessions we had- we'd kill ourselves off with bad PR alone!

If you read TFA he goes on to admit that it's unlikely to get people to install the filterware themselves, but maybe if they put it into routers and modems....It's worth noting that the decryption doesn't take place there, and it'd be no more effective.

It just seems like this guy has it figured out- he understands what won't work, but he still wants to move foward with the bad plan. If you're going to go down, might as well go down swinging..?

Re:Brainstorming broken? (5, Insightful)

orclevegam (940336) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338582)

Seriously, it makes me wonder why these people are even let out in public without chaperons. At the very least they should have a lawyer and someone technical around at all time. The technical guy to hopefully whisper "uh, that won't work, and it's a bad idea" in their ear every time they come up with one of these stupid ideas, and the lawyer to say "that's not our official opinion, and this is all off the record" every time one of these guys opens their mouths.

Re:Brainstorming broken? (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339136)

No doubt. These guys are seriously stupid. This just has to be the most hair-brained scheme I've ever fsking heard in my life.

In order to pull this off, you've gotta take the raw data and compare it against a massive database of everything copyrighted in the world.

Who's got the computing power to run this thing? Lawrence Livermore? Sandia? Yeah, I think they've got a few more important things to spin their supercomputers on than protecting RIAA copyrights.

How much CPU power is this gonna take locally? What about network impact?

Gimme a fscking break.

Oh yeah, we'll put the filterware into routers and modems! Aside from it not working upon encrypted stuff, most routers and modems have what kinda of processing power? And what kind of storage capacity?

Hey, RIAA: Before you go spouting your stupid fscking mouths off, why don't you try hiring a few IT experts and maybe run it passed them first. Then, maybe, just maybe, you won't sound like a bunch of ignorant fscktards.

even funnier (1)

Deanalator (806515) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339228)

"One could have a filter on the end user's computer that would actually eliminate any benefit from encryption because if you want to hear [the music], you would need to decrypt it, and at that point the filter would work."

Isn't he describing exactly why DRM can never work? I love that these companies are spending so much money on crypto research, and in the end, it's things like TPM that are going to be what stops them from being able to install their anti piracy rootkits.

Re:Brainstorming broken? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22339354)

Maybe what these people do is brainstorm up a bunch of crazy ideas, release them to the public, then check sites like this to find out if they're good ideas or not.

What we should do as a community is all claim that one of these ideas is perfect and watch them run with it.

PAH! (5, Funny)

c0l0 (826165) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338494)

Having implemented RSA public key encryption/decryption on my malleus, incus and stepdius, I listen to digitally archived music by dd'ing the GnuPG-encrypted files directly into /dev/dsp, deciphering the tunes on the fly, in-ear, using my memorized private key.

NOW HOW DOES YOUR FILTER WORK FOR THAT SETUP, SUCKERS???!11

Re:PAH! - simple solution (2, Funny)

petes_PoV (912422) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338622)

They'll rip your ears off (or transplant them onto your a.... which they think they already own)

Re:PAH! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22338646)

Wow, I wouldn't want to be around when they come around to confiscate your decoder. Will they at least pay for the cleaning afterwards?

Fiddling while Rome Burns. (5, Interesting)

colmore (56499) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338500)

Yeah you guys go spend a bunch of money on that.

We are so fast approaching the time when bands just have concert promoters rather than record labels. I think this is a very good thing.

Re:Fiddling while Rome Burns. (2, Funny)

nyo nyo (794661) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338732)

You fail it. Information wants to be *free*. Why should I pay hard-earned money just to listen to a band for an hour or two, and end up empty-handed? I deprive *no one* of *anything* if I have a mate let me in the back entrance of a club. Sneaking into concerts is the new downloading music.

Re:Fiddling while Rome Burns. (4, Informative)

C0rinthian (770164) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338958)

You fail it. Information wants to be *free*. Why should I pay hard-earned money just to listen to a band for an hour or two, and end up empty-handed? I deprive *no one* of *anything* if I have a mate let me in the back entrance of a club. Sneaking into concerts is the new downloading music.
Nice try, but fail. Your body takes up space that otherwise could be occupied by a paying customer. Until they start building 'Nightclubs of Holding' that is.

But does it (1)

rossdee (243626) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338506)

work under Linux

Re:But does it (5, Funny)

Helmholtz (2715) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338652)

Of course not. Linux is a "hacker" operating system that is only used by people who try to circumvent safeguards that are used only for the protection of the children and good of the economy. Anyone using such a nefarious operating system doesn't deserve to be entertained, individually, at the low low fee of 0.01c per frame, per eyeball, per single non-sharable viewing.

Re:But does it (4, Interesting)

russ1337 (938915) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339184)

Of course not. Linux is a "hacker" operating system that is only used by people who try to circumvent safeguards that are used only for the protection of the children and good of the economy.
You jest, but a colleague of mine has accused me of being a Pirate (copyright, not ARRR) just because I use Linux.

Re:But does it (1)

leenks (906881) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339304)

My university nearly did the same thing when I was a student. Linux wasn't in the code of connection.

Warner and Sony BMG run Solaris (4, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339250)

Of course not. Linux is a "hacker" operating system that is only used by people who try to circumvent safeguards that are used only for the protection of the children and good of the economy.
But what's the big difference between Linux and Solaris in this respect? The web sites of two of the four major members of the IFPI and RIAA are hosted on the Solaris operating system, which is under a free software license [wikipedia.org] .

Furthermore, one of the partners in Sony BMG makes the PLAYSTATION 3 video game console that is designed to run GNU/Linux.

Re:But does it (2, Insightful)

orclevegam (940336) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338668)

[But does it] work under Linux
Work? Why on Earth would the RIAA care if it works? In fact it's better if it doesn't work at all, less chance of people cracking it.

Re:But does it (1)

fremean (1189177) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339320)

Of course it'll work on Linux.

If not immediately then within days if not weeks of it's release, and knowing the Linux community it'd probably work better with more features and less bloat.

The Linux folk will GPL it, and the Windows/Mac folk will download it and port it.

Too timid an approach (1)

lurker412 (706164) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338520)

They should demand that everyone have a cerebral implant that would block all unauthorized content. I mean, serious problems demand serious solutions.

The guy needs a good thrashing (2, Funny)

Nomen Publicus (1150725) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338526)

I'm glad the guy doesn't have a clue. It would be so lonely in that big empty head...

I have a business model! (5, Funny)

erroneus (253617) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338544)

But to make this business model work, it requires that the entire planet changes the way it does things and I get to control when, how or *if* how you use the stuff I sell to you. Sound good to you?

Re:I have a business model! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22339166)

Isn't that the entire premise of copyright in the digital age?

Well I won't install that (2)

alextheseal (653421) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338562)

I simply will not be installing that on my PC. Please feel free to not pocket my $$$ and to not sell me any of your product. Enjoy your unemployment Mr RIAA.

Right... (3, Interesting)

camusflage (65105) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338564)

So we're talking ubiquitous DRM that is transparent (or at least, not terribly intrusive upon the overall user experience), doesn't piss people off, doesn't get broken, can be deployed everywhere, does not add too much complexity to playback devices.

So, is Mr. Sherman planning on buying every music consumer a pony too? That has as much likelihood of happening as the DRM.

Re:Right... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22339382)

He better not buy me a fucking pony. I'm not cleaning their crap off my lawn as well.

Ignorance is bliss (5, Interesting)

KublaiKhan (522918) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338570)

I think it's apparent that it's only their complete ignorance of how technology works--evidenced by these ridiculous statements--that lets them have any hope that their organization can possibly continue to be relevant in the face of the increasing numbers of technological workarounds for every countermeasure that they come up with.

One might get the impression that were they to receive adequate education in The Way Things Work, they might possibly lose all morale altogether...not necessarily a bad thing, methinks.

Perhaps we should sign them up for a correspondence course in basic computer science?

Re:Ignorance is bliss (1)

CSMatt (1175471) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339466)

One might get the impression that were they to receive adequate education in The Way Things Work, they might possibly lose all morale altogether...not necessarily a bad thing, methinks.
The Way Things Work hasn't been updated to include digital technology. You want The New Way Things Work.

Re:Ignorance is bliss (1)

KublaiKhan (522918) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339558)

Oh, it's been updated? Nice. It was one of my favorite books as a kid.

job safety for RIAA exec (2, Insightful)

justdrew (706141) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338574)

this is total BS. just a worthless executive filling the people who pay his wage with a load of nonsense so they'll keep paying. stop funding RIAA now and the companies would save a hell of a lot of money.

Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22338600)

Isn't the magical "free market" supposed to settle all of this?

Re:Question (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338856)

I think the 'Free Market' concept assumes competent/informed consumers.

Re:Question (1)

rk (6314) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339350)

Funny thing is, copyright and patent law require restrictions on the free market to work at all. By having a law that specifies what one can and cannot do with their own physical property like "you can't type this person's book, print it on your press and sell it", and "no, you can't make that novel device with your own equipment unless you come to an agreement with the patent holder", you ipso facto do not have a free market. A fully free market does indeed settle this issue: They can publish it, we can copy it without repercussions.

Wonderful (5, Funny)

Realistic_Dragon (655151) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338618)

If they manage to get this into Vista Service Pack 2, 2009 really could finally be the year of Linux on the desktop.

Re:Wonderful (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22338752)

At long last Linux will rise. For a GNU dawn, for freedom !

Ob (5, Interesting)

Tom (822) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338666)

The Right to Read [gnu.org] . If you haven't read it yet, read it now, while there is no filter preventing it.

Wait... (2, Interesting)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338680)

Does this mean that copyrighted Microsoft software won't run (assuming hardware-based encryption)?

What an asshat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22338694)

I just bought my 1st album in years from amazon (mp3 download). Fuck the RIAA; I'll amazon indie stuff and p2p the RIAA's.

Here's where it gets tricky (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338734)

How do filters know whether something's copyrighted or not?

There are many situations where nobody is sure.

Re:Here's where it gets tricky (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339106)

How do filters know whether something's copyrighted or not?
why would they need to do that? everything created in the entire history of the universe is copyrighted to the RIAA.~

And just how... (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338748)

...do they intend to force people to install it? Something like InterActual has with DVDs?

Re:And just how... (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339560)

By congressional mandate of course. They'll probably integrate it directly into the hardware. Mod chips disabling this "feature" will be illegal.

By the Understudy to the Wizard of Oz (1)

BoRegardless (721219) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338768)

""The issue of encryption "would have to be faced," Sherman admitted after talking about the wonders of filtering."

Sheesh!

Tech Support conversaton (2, Interesting)

qwertphobia (825473) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338774)

ISP: Hello, how can I help you?
Advanced User: My Internet stopped working. I can't figure it out.
ISP: Hmmm... What version of Windows are you using?
User: Well, It's umm... It's not windows. It's OS/2.
ISP: Sir, if you read the contract changes we made last week, you would know that the Internet needs Windows now.
User: ???

Re:Tech Support conversaton (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338968)

And thus the Underground Internet is born!

Re:Tech Support conversaton (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22339418)

Don't laugh. I was helping someone who had their Westell (if I recall) from Comcast that was reconfigured by their tech support to be a firewall during a previous help call. They owner wanted it back to "bridge mode" and use their router/firewall. I was on the phone with the tech asking how to convert it back. They were giving me instructions. One step was to start Windows and check the IP. I said I didn't have Windows and asked what does that have to do with a DHCP server giving out IPs anyway.

The support stopped immediately with we don't support non-Windows machines.

How about installing a greed filter... (5, Insightful)

syousef (465911) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338806)

...on his PR statements, and a bullshit filter on his mouth?

I have better things to do with my PC than protect your artificial and increasingly indefensible "rights". People and organizations buy PCs to conduct business, science and for their entertainment, not to put money in your coffers you greedy fuck!

just enforce the law as it exists (3, Insightful)

Grampaw Willie (631616) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338834)

Notes

a PC is not primarily a music recording device. thus it does not qualify for protection under HMRA. thus if I copy music to a PC I have committed a copyright violation.

now if I copied to a local directory probably no one will care

but if i copy to my web site or to a p2p share directory then my evil deed is presented in public ( bad move on my part )

now if RIAA has trouble locating copyright violation copies on p2p machines they could just hire some college kids to help them learn how

and when the find the offending material, just ask the owner to remove it from the public/share area. if the owner does not cooperate then take whatever action is warranted

this ain't rocket science kids and we don't need to stay up nights fussing over it

It'll never work (1)

stuporglue (1167677) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338838)

Customers would never install this on their own. For this to work, they'd have to find some large OS maker who would accept a large payment in order to implement it directly into the OS. And as far as I know, none of the major OS makers would be willing to accept a ton of money if it meant a worse experience for their users.

:-)

Re:It'll never work (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22339168)

I can think of two...

Don't underestimate this.... (1)

AmeerCB (1222468) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338872)

I realize most people are pushing this aside as something users would never do. But consider the scenario where a hardware decryption device is marketed as something else. Is it that unreasonable to think we could have devices like an "apple itunes box," a dedicated music downloading device that also happens to integrate RIAA's "copyright filter?"

Of course, this would only affect people CHOOSING to use the device, but that doesn't mean it can't become the norm.

they already tried this (1)

jt418-93 (450715) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338874)

it's called vista aka WinMe2.0

this doesn't make any sense (1)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338884)

Okay so when people hack and unencrypt or digitally re-record the music as it's playing and put it on a p2p network, this stops it how? They're saying it will filter encrypted music that you don't own and not let you play it? That's what they're doing now! It's called DRM! The only difference is adding encryption. Anyway, I can record straight from my soundcard's output internally at basically 99% quality. Newer motherboards and all Vista machines can't do that apparently because that's the ultimate encryption and DRM buster. There's just no stopping it. So if they really mean a "filter" it would have to be a content filter which of course wouldn't work because how could it tell an legal, bought downloading song from a p2p downloading song? All it has to do is block one single legal file and they've got a law suit. So until they find a way to telepathetically beam the music only into my head and not the air as sound waves based on my DNA or retina, they're out of luck. Too bad their product actually has to be played! If only they could charge us for owning the song and then not let us listen to it at all.

Wow!!! (1, Troll)

superwiz (655733) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338888)

Microsoft would love it, love it, love it. This would mean that any operating system whose kernel can be recompiled by the end-users would be illegal under DMCA -- because it would become a device for circumventing copyright protection mechanisms built into the computer system. Say, how do we get the OTHER half of the server market? Well, let's make the competition illegal.

Dear Mr. Sherman: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22338898)


To paraphrase President-Vice Richard B. Cheney, go @#$#$%$!!@#!@#@&#$%~!$*)(__+(%^$@!!@!~ yourself.

Thank you for your consideration.

PatRIOTically,
Kilgore Trout

King George III of RIAA ??? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22338978)

Does anyone else remember the Second Amendment? You know, the one forbidding the Government to station soldiers in people's homes without their consent during peace time?

Just make a few substitutions, and it's clear that this "proposal" completely violates the spirit (if not the letter) of that Amendment.

"Government strongarming citizens" ===> "Corporations strongarming citizens with the aid of Government and device vendors"
"Soldiers quartered in your home against your will" ===> "DRM stationed in your home against your will"
"Entire population presumed to be criminals" ===> Check!
"No freedom in your own home because the unwanted guests can tell you what to do" ===> Check!

Correction: Second - Third Amendment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22339130)

NT

Out of Touch (1)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 6 years ago | (#22338990)

If this doesn't clearly demonstrate how completely out of touch with the current era (and reality) the RIAA top brass is, then nothing will. I would think that the client-companies would be eager to replace him (and all others who are similarly out of touch). That or I'd think the client-companies' shareholders would be looking to make some replacements... With people like this running the show, it's no wonder the client-companies are losing money...

I'd like to believe that this would not happen... (5, Insightful)

argent (18001) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339000)

But in 1995 I honestly believed that no company would be stupid enough to automatically run code delivered in an email message, and in 1997 that Microsoft would be forced by public opinion to back down on the obviously absurd integration of the browser and the desktop, and in 2000 that people would reject an operating system with components to lock them out of their own computer... after all, dongles had proven to be a passing fad, surely people were wising up to things like this.

I no longer believe in any limits to the complaisance and naivete of the computer-using public.

um... (1)

kabocox (199019) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339016)

What planet is that guy from? We don't encrypt our music we compress it. Why would I download or install any codec that the RIAA supports? MP3 will rule for years into the future mainly because its a standard that RIAA can't kill as of yet.

I've never paid for any music in my life other than some music appreciation cds that I had to get in college. I've never felt the need to go out and buy any form of recorded music. Radio has been fine for me. This doesn't mean that I don't have many mp3s. I have tons. The RIAA would like to put a RIAA listened hearing aid in everyone's head and filter out any RIAA that you've not paid for from ever being heard.

I'm sick of the RIAA, but I'm not going through any additional effort to actually fight them. I don't buy any music, so I can't boycott selected music. I've been boycotting it most of my life. You know every video game or movie that I buy has background music in it. I hear music on the radio. I'd really like to have all RIAA actually filtered out of my life, but without RIAA methods. I can't buy a video game, TV DVDs, or movie that hasn't already paid into the RIAA or MPAA scheme of things.

You know this reminds me of why I'd like the IRS and think that all taxes of that nature removed and it all just go to some magic percentage sales tax. Because people/companies/assorted government offices can't cheat their way out of paying taxes then. You know if they really wanted to secure it they'd stop selling all music, movies, and TV DVDs and make the mediums all ad supported or where you have to show up a specific place and pay a cover charge before you can listen/watch the content.

Listen up folks of the RIAA/MPAA. We aren't in the 1500-1600s any more. The citizenry has gotten used to radio, TV, and now the internet. Face it, your content's price is dropping fast and if the government really was pushed by the citizenry it would go the whole bread and circus route which means we get the radio, TV, movies, and internet at the expense of content providers. That's why the RIAA/MPAA has been truly panicking about their business models.

*rolls eyes* (0, Troll)

joeytmann (664434) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339088)

While I am all for making backup copies of CD/DVD's or transfering ripped CD's to my iPod-esque device, I do think sharing my ripped files with the rest of the world is wrong. As we see it there are two groups affected by RIAA's attempts to secure the media music is on, the people like me who just want a backup and transfer to a iPod and then there are those that want to do those things AND be able to share their music with their friends/families/12th cousin 3 times removed/bum on the corner/whoever. Which of those does RIAA not care about, the first group. Why? As was stated in the video, yeah when it comes down to it, its illegal but they aren't going to enforce it....how could they with no way to track? The second group on the other hand is basically walking into whatever record store and using their five-finger discount to get music for free. Yeah a bit simplified, but the basic principles work. Everyone needs to remember that to RIAA, music is a product and if someone is stealing it, that means stealing money....and they will come after you. If artists truely wanted their music to be free don't you think they would just submit them to torrent trackers themselves and create a license saying basically the same thing as GPL? Well not very many of them do that. Why? Its hard to be rich and famous with out any FUCKING MONEY. Which is paid to them by the companies that participate in RIAA and pay the artist huge sums of FUCKING MONEY to make their music *cough*product*/cough*. So when it all comes down to it, its the artists fault for demanding such large sums of FUCKING MONEY to make their music. So, don't blame RIAA, blame the artists out there that have made more FUCKING MONEY than the yearly budgets of some 3rd world countries.

Re:*rolls eyes* (2, Insightful)

pryoplasm (809342) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339582)

"yeah when it comes down to it, its illegal but they aren't going to enforce it"

Time shifting and fair use are both legal examples of non infringement of copyright. Just because you take a copy of something you own and put it on a device does not make you a pirate. That would most likely involve ships, murder, rape, and actual stealing, not any of this denying a sale crap....

This already exists (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22339118)

It's called blu-ray. The filter will stop unauthorized playback to unauthorized hardware. If all media was on blu-ray, they'd get what they want. And, comments around here excepted, there is at least some degree of acceptance.

They just reframe the argument.

Lucky For Him... (1)

His Shadow (689816) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339126)

Microssoft's Vista is already on the way to the everyone-pays-for-everything-everytime utopia this jackass is imagining. Does anyone really believe that the DRM laden OS Microsoft has released *isn't* an attempt to get a never ending revenue stream from record labels who believe MS has the power to completely lock down what users see and hear?

MAFIAA to Bully ISPs? (3, Insightful)

Silentknyght (1042778) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339144)

FTA:

The only way to make it work is to mandate the filters or have ISPs mandate that users install them to get on the Internet. The consumer backlash from such a plan would be like the force of a thousand supernovas, and it's hard to visualize this happening.


Actually, it's not hard to visualize this happening. Most people connect with what, one of four major ISPs in the US, and there are usually no more than three competing ISPs, except in big cities? That's only four companies, each headed by a relatively few number of individuals whose motives are driven by shareholder (not necessarily customer) demands. If the MAFIAA writes a solid-gold check to Comcast, Qwest, Verizon, and Time-Warner, you can bet that find ways to impose an end-user filter on your PC as a requirement to connect, and with a limited number of broadband ISPs in the area, you can bet that people will suck it up and deal with it.

~SK

If you ask me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22339164)

It sounds like an attempt to plug the customer's a-holes [uncyclopedia.org] .

I say we put filters on Cary Sherman's PC (1)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339260)

Let's all see what files Cary Sherman has on his PC/Laptop/hard drives? Who does he talk to? What does he like? How can we invade his privacy? Turnabout is fair play.

well then its time for plan B (1)

Coraon (1080675) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339316)

sorry but if you setup content filters on my hardware then you will have to scan my information to make sure the filter works, if you scan my data and get a copy of something that I have written (the the virus thats set to be transmitted to you) then you will be committing corporate espionage as I have a corp (costs about $250 bucks to setup in Toronto)and you are viewing corporate data. I'll take my millions now, save you time.

I don't know much about technology.... (2, Funny)

wiresquire (457486) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339340)

...but a friend of mine knows a little bit.

He tells me that lots of people already have copyright filter software on their machines. I think it was called bittorrent or something....

Turning the tables on a hypothetical situation (1)

DanMelks (1108493) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339344)

If in theory, the ISP could mandidate that a user had to install their spy software to use the internet connection, I would only have to write a short program (or ask a DVD John type friend to write one) to isolate said spy software and feed it false and misleading data while encrypting my regular data.

Responding for friends who write their own operating systems or use various forms of linux, "I DON'T THINK SO DEAREST ISP!"

HA (1)

SilverBlade2k (1005695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339428)

Good luck getting ME to install any filters on my computer. It is *MY* computer. Not yours. Back off.

the last straw (1)

sphere (27305) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339432)

I have had enough of the RIAA and its ilk. I have been spending most of my money on indie/underground music anyways but now I am putting my foot down and joining the embargo. Sorry Rhino Records, but I had to do it.

But what if I (1)

The Mighty Buzzard (878441) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339452)

don't want to hear the music? What if I just want to share it with a few million of my closest friends?

This boils down to tagging (2, Informative)

MooseTick (895855) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339480)

This boils down to tagging. A file would have to be tagged in some way that is has a copyright. It would also need to know who DOES have the right to listen and distribute. Don't forget that every work not 95 years old is out of copyright in the US and can be freely shared, copied, traded, etc. Also, there is the possibility that people may have been given the right to share, copy, trade, etc a piece of music that has a current copyright.

I'm just not sure how any filter could determine all of the characteristics without some sort of tagging. Following that logic, all that would need to be done to circumvent the DRM would be to remove/modify such a tag. DRM like this is easy to defeat and has been done.

Ok but... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22339496)

You want me to run your software? I'll consider it, but you have to remember that my computer is just that... MY computer. Time on it will cost you just like it would cost from a mainframe from IBM. How much are you willing to pay me to run this software that only benefits you? If this takes too much RAM, CPU the overflow charges may be... up there.

Your security is not my concern, and should not be expected to be my concern. Otherwise you also have a responsibility to make sure no one breaks into my house. (You should be happy to, they could steal my CDs!)

Of course, the conditions under which I'm willing to run your software may change without announcement from time to time but will still be considered binding, much like whatever the "licensing" consists of on a CD is this week. Like your CD licensing, the wording behind this agreement will never be readily available. Perhaps I'll add extra charges for running the software on weekends...

Two words (2, Insightful)

MrNougat (927651) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339504)

Analog hole.

We already have one - Its Called Vista (1)

ScaredOfTheMan (1063788) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339522)

You mark my words, the next version of MS OS will have even more copyright "features".

Vista and its HDCP is just the start. I really don't like these people.

On another note, was /. so sloooooooow lately!

when will they learn DRM is useless... (1)

shadylookin (1209874) | more than 6 years ago | (#22339564)

when you can just record the output and BLAM DRM free media. A million encryption algorithms can't stop one man with a microphone right next to his speakers.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

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

Loading...