The people:1, The Man:0
October 7, 2003 12:49 PM Subscribe
If you've bought one of BMG's new copy-protected CDs, remember to hold down the shift key while loading it into your PC. That one keystorke will let you be free to rip, mix, and burn it.
"This is something we were aware of," BMG spokesman Nathaniel Brown said. "Copy management is intended as a speed bump, intended to thwart the casual listener from mass burning and uploading. We made a conscious decision to err on the side of playability and flexibility."
Seems almost reasonable.
posted by anathema at 12:55 PM on October 7, 2003
Seems almost reasonable.
posted by anathema at 12:55 PM on October 7, 2003
Will this software be recognized as the trojan it is by various Anti Virus software? Does this not leave these companies open to lawsuits?
posted by shepd at 12:57 PM on October 7, 2003
posted by shepd at 12:57 PM on October 7, 2003
Since it's an autorun thing, and I have autorun disabled, I wouldn't ever notice it anyway, right?
The keystorke brings baby keys?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 12:59 PM on October 7, 2003
The keystorke brings baby keys?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 12:59 PM on October 7, 2003
In order to fully prevent the antipiracy software from loading, a listener has to hold the Shift key down for a long period of time, at exactly the right time, every time they listen to the CD on a computer.
Unless you have 0.1g of sense and have disabled autorun.
posted by signal at 12:59 PM on October 7, 2003
Unless you have 0.1g of sense and have disabled autorun.
posted by signal at 12:59 PM on October 7, 2003
News of the future:
RIAA sues to ban 'Shift' key
"When Shift keys are banned, only criminals will have keyboards with Shift keys," the RIAA's Cary Sherman said in a statement.
posted by pmurray63 at 1:00 PM on October 7, 2003
RIAA sues to ban 'Shift' key
"When Shift keys are banned, only criminals will have keyboards with Shift keys," the RIAA's Cary Sherman said in a statement.
posted by pmurray63 at 1:00 PM on October 7, 2003
Yes crash, but under the DMCA you have committed a felony. You'd better re-enable autorun.
posted by shepd at 1:02 PM on October 7, 2003 [1 favorite]
posted by shepd at 1:02 PM on October 7, 2003 [1 favorite]
mr_crash_davis and signal both beat me to it.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 1:08 PM on October 7, 2003
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 1:08 PM on October 7, 2003
Does the CD include a version of its "protection" for Macs? (I won't even bother asking about Linux.) If not, does that mean the "bonus features" won't be available to non-Windows users?
posted by Acetylene at 1:10 PM on October 7, 2003
posted by Acetylene at 1:10 PM on October 7, 2003
The RIAA could help out a lot of the starving artists that they love nattering on about with the money that they spend coming up with ineffective schemes like this.
posted by bshort at 1:11 PM on October 7, 2003
posted by bshort at 1:11 PM on October 7, 2003
"Copy management is intended as a speed bump, intended to thwart the casual listener from mass burning and uploading. We made a conscious decision to err on the side of playability and flexibility."
I don't think the casual listener is the listener they need to be afraid of. How many "casual listeners" do you think are swapping files?
This sounds like a giant disconnect between the recording industry and their understanding of music listeners and file sharers.
posted by eau at 1:17 PM on October 7, 2003
I don't think the casual listener is the listener they need to be afraid of. How many "casual listeners" do you think are swapping files?
This sounds like a giant disconnect between the recording industry and their understanding of music listeners and file sharers.
posted by eau at 1:17 PM on October 7, 2003
You know what would be a better deterrent of digital music file swapping? Vinyl.
posted by ZachsMind at 1:18 PM on October 7, 2003
posted by ZachsMind at 1:18 PM on October 7, 2003
Zachsmind, would that make me a pirate, because I own one of these?
Clearly, I was thinking ahead, getting ready to produce counterfeit vinyl!
posted by mosch at 1:31 PM on October 7, 2003
Clearly, I was thinking ahead, getting ready to produce counterfeit vinyl!
posted by mosch at 1:31 PM on October 7, 2003
Halderman's paper
Does the CD include a version of its "protection" for Macs? (I won't even bother asking about Linux.)
Mac OS X, yes; Mac OS 9, no; Linux, no.
Since Linux lets you copy these CDs, does that make Linux a violation of the DMCA?
I'd say of course not, because the DMCA requires that the protection method effectively control access to the work.
posted by oaf at 1:34 PM on October 7, 2003
Does the CD include a version of its "protection" for Macs? (I won't even bother asking about Linux.)
Mac OS X, yes; Mac OS 9, no; Linux, no.
Since Linux lets you copy these CDs, does that make Linux a violation of the DMCA?
I'd say of course not, because the DMCA requires that the protection method effectively control access to the work.
posted by oaf at 1:34 PM on October 7, 2003
You know what would be a better deterrent of digital music file swapping? Vinyl.
Oh, is that so?
posted by Pollomacho at 1:36 PM on October 7, 2003
Oh, is that so?
posted by Pollomacho at 1:36 PM on October 7, 2003
"...under the DMCA you have committed a felony. You'd better re-enable autorun."
Actually, I used Microsoft's own Tweak UI to disable that. Does that mean that MS is also in violation of the DMCA?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 1:40 PM on October 7, 2003
Actually, I used Microsoft's own Tweak UI to disable that. Does that mean that MS is also in violation of the DMCA?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 1:40 PM on October 7, 2003
Sheesh. I forgot autorun even existed. When I first read about this scheme, I couldn't for the life of me figure out how they were going to get users to install copy protection software on their own computers. Idiots.
Their real problem isn't people ripping CDs, it's people downloading music when they don't have the CDs. It only takes one hacker supergenius to find that mysterious "SHIFT" key, and the music will be available to everyone.
The only thing this could possibly accomplish is frustrate a few computer newbies trying to to transfer some of their CDs to that weird MP3 thingy they got for Christmas.
posted by straight at 1:44 PM on October 7, 2003
Their real problem isn't people ripping CDs, it's people downloading music when they don't have the CDs. It only takes one hacker supergenius to find that mysterious "SHIFT" key, and the music will be available to everyone.
The only thing this could possibly accomplish is frustrate a few computer newbies trying to to transfer some of their CDs to that weird MP3 thingy they got for Christmas.
posted by straight at 1:44 PM on October 7, 2003
As if you couldn't let it load once to check it out and then press the shift key the next time for ripping it.
For anybody that works in any technical field and has to deal with marketing people this should sound familiar. Completly dissconnected from reality until it comes back to bite them.
posted by golo at 1:45 PM on October 7, 2003
The idiocy about the whole concept of copy protection is, of course, that any CD, video, ebook etc. only has to be transferred once into an unrestricted format. At that point it is easily replicated by millions of file sharers. The people hurt by these measures are not file sharers but average people with relatively little tech literacy.
posted by Eloquence at 2:03 PM on October 7, 2003
posted by Eloquence at 2:03 PM on October 7, 2003
(Sorry for redundancy in above post with previous post by straight.)
posted by Eloquence at 2:04 PM on October 7, 2003
posted by Eloquence at 2:04 PM on October 7, 2003
mosch -
not to derail, but you wanna cut me some vinyl??? ;)
posted by iamck at 2:14 PM on October 7, 2003
not to derail, but you wanna cut me some vinyl??? ;)
posted by iamck at 2:14 PM on October 7, 2003
I despair of ever seeing the recording and motion picture industries ever ever ever obtaining a clue. The television industry, oddly enough, seems almost subdued in comparison.
posted by WolfDaddy at 2:28 PM on October 7, 2003
posted by WolfDaddy at 2:28 PM on October 7, 2003
Well, they've convinced me. I'm going back to downloading free MP3s, this new shift key thing is too confusing.
What they really should do is make the whole CD copy protected so it won't play unless you run their virus on your computer, that also blows up your computer if you download MP3s, and tells your wife if you're cyber-cheating. That would be pretty cool.
posted by Outlawyr at 2:33 PM on October 7, 2003
What they really should do is make the whole CD copy protected so it won't play unless you run their virus on your computer, that also blows up your computer if you download MP3s, and tells your wife if you're cyber-cheating. That would be pretty cool.
posted by Outlawyr at 2:33 PM on October 7, 2003
yay, an arms race. exactly what this retarded little war needs!
how the hell can that be legal, anyways?
posted by shadow45 at 2:42 PM on October 7, 2003
how the hell can that be legal, anyways?
posted by shadow45 at 2:42 PM on October 7, 2003
...would that make me a pirate, because I own one of these?
Whoa. Must have one. Korg is listed as the US distributor, but I don't see this thing anywhere on their site. Where can I get one in Ami-land?
posted by ubi at 2:48 PM on October 7, 2003
Whoa. Must have one. Korg is listed as the US distributor, but I don't see this thing anywhere on their site. Where can I get one in Ami-land?
posted by ubi at 2:48 PM on October 7, 2003
"How many "casual listeners" do you think are swapping files?"
All of them?
I remember days of yore, when fileswapping was an underground thingy, there were rules of conduct and a sense of community. Days and nights spent in determined searching, looking for that one particular song.
All that has changed now; a friend of mine works in a hi-fi boutique and told me this tale of the granny who comes in to buy a digital, portable mp3-player.
She asks all these questions about wether she could upload any mp3 to it, or if there were any DMCA protection software built in? Could she download mp3s from it to any computer?
posted by spazzm at 3:21 PM on October 7, 2003
All of them?
I remember days of yore, when fileswapping was an underground thingy, there were rules of conduct and a sense of community. Days and nights spent in determined searching, looking for that one particular song.
All that has changed now; a friend of mine works in a hi-fi boutique and told me this tale of the granny who comes in to buy a digital, portable mp3-player.
She asks all these questions about wether she could upload any mp3 to it, or if there were any DMCA protection software built in? Could she download mp3s from it to any computer?
posted by spazzm at 3:21 PM on October 7, 2003
CD. HiFi. Player. Amplifier. Slots. PC. Slots. Cables.
And now they tell me I have to press the frigging shift key.
I forgot - the point was...?
posted by psychomedia at 3:58 PM on October 7, 2003
And now they tell me I have to press the frigging shift key.
I forgot - the point was...?
posted by psychomedia at 3:58 PM on October 7, 2003
mmm. I work in a record store and have macosx and 9 at home, but i've NEVER run into any cd that i couldn't play or rip. The only difference is that i get 2 disks on the desktop. Copy protection doesn't work in my computer, something must be wrong with me....
posted by SoulNoise at 2:14 AM on October 8, 2003
posted by SoulNoise at 2:14 AM on October 8, 2003
don't think the casual listener is the listener they need to be afraid of
Actually, they are precisely afraid of the casual listener (i.e. 80% of people). They want to keep copying music difficult enough that these people won't bother. They'll never stop the hax0rs, and I'm sure they know it, they just want to raise the bar enough to keep regular people from finding it less trouble to "share" the music than to buy it.
I think they're too late but I don't blame 'em for trying.
posted by kindall at 7:23 AM on October 8, 2003
Actually, they are precisely afraid of the casual listener (i.e. 80% of people). They want to keep copying music difficult enough that these people won't bother. They'll never stop the hax0rs, and I'm sure they know it, they just want to raise the bar enough to keep regular people from finding it less trouble to "share" the music than to buy it.
I think they're too late but I don't blame 'em for trying.
posted by kindall at 7:23 AM on October 8, 2003
They'll never stop the hax0rs, and I'm sure they know it, they just want to raise the bar enough to keep regular people from finding it less trouble to "share" the music than to buy it.
But that's what's so stupid. Their problem is not that lots of people are sharing, but that lots of people are receiving from those who share.
Like someone said above, this means that, for the technphobe, it will be easier to download a song and share it than to buy a song and share it.
posted by straight at 8:13 AM on October 8, 2003
But that's what's so stupid. Their problem is not that lots of people are sharing, but that lots of people are receiving from those who share.
Like someone said above, this means that, for the technphobe, it will be easier to download a song and share it than to buy a song and share it.
posted by straight at 8:13 AM on October 8, 2003
Thanks for that link, Pollomacho. My dance group has a lot of music on vinyl that is irreplaceable as new cds.
posted by theora55 at 8:26 AM on October 8, 2003
posted by theora55 at 8:26 AM on October 8, 2003
Their problem is not that lots of people are sharing, but that lots of people are receiving from those who share.
Which is why they're also suing Kazaa users who share a lot of files. If few people are sharing, the network becomes a lot less useful and nobody will bother trying to find songs on it. They go at it from two directions. They're not going to sue someone who's only sharing a few files but if they can prevent a certain percentage of them from ripping them in the first place, that'll help.
You've got to remember, most people buy at most a handful of CDs a year. Most CDs sold are sold to people like this. They were worried with Napster that "sharing" was going to go mainstream, that the people who are their bread and butter would find it easier to download the music they wanted than to buy their one or two CDs a year. Music "sharing" is now safely underground, though. Their goal now is to make that it never escapes to anything resembling the mainstream.
The strategy is similar to the one software companies have used for decades. But it's doomed in the end, I think, because the software companies have one advantage the music companies do not. A large portion of software is sold to corporations, usually in bulk. It is a lot easier to sue a few big companies with illegal software and receive significant damages for the effort. But companies generally don't buy music, which means you have to go after a bunch of individuals, which is unpopular and unfruitful. I think the music industry is going to have a real tough time making its lawsuits pay for themselves, and when they twig to that, it'll be the beginning of the end.
posted by kindall at 9:08 AM on October 8, 2003
Which is why they're also suing Kazaa users who share a lot of files. If few people are sharing, the network becomes a lot less useful and nobody will bother trying to find songs on it. They go at it from two directions. They're not going to sue someone who's only sharing a few files but if they can prevent a certain percentage of them from ripping them in the first place, that'll help.
You've got to remember, most people buy at most a handful of CDs a year. Most CDs sold are sold to people like this. They were worried with Napster that "sharing" was going to go mainstream, that the people who are their bread and butter would find it easier to download the music they wanted than to buy their one or two CDs a year. Music "sharing" is now safely underground, though. Their goal now is to make that it never escapes to anything resembling the mainstream.
The strategy is similar to the one software companies have used for decades. But it's doomed in the end, I think, because the software companies have one advantage the music companies do not. A large portion of software is sold to corporations, usually in bulk. It is a lot easier to sue a few big companies with illegal software and receive significant damages for the effort. But companies generally don't buy music, which means you have to go after a bunch of individuals, which is unpopular and unfruitful. I think the music industry is going to have a real tough time making its lawsuits pay for themselves, and when they twig to that, it'll be the beginning of the end.
posted by kindall at 9:08 AM on October 8, 2003
This isn't like locking your front door. This is like sticking a Post-It note on the doorknob that says "Please Don't Rob Me." After you've already sold the house to somebody else.
posted by Foosnark at 9:38 AM on October 8, 2003
posted by Foosnark at 9:38 AM on October 8, 2003
RIAA are price fixing crooks. Stealing from crooks is the honorable thing to do.
posted by HTuttle at 10:25 AM on October 8, 2003
posted by HTuttle at 10:25 AM on October 8, 2003
cheers to HTuttle. there's nothing wrong with stealing from thieves, though it's a hard sell to convince a lot of people that downloading a song you don't pay for is even stealing at all. it's just borrowing, you know, b/c these cheap-ass blank CDs don't last forever, and i'm gonna be sick of that fucking song in less than a week.
the recording industry is *way* screwed. sound capture, file compression, etc. technologies are only going to get better and better. memory is only going to get cheaper and cheaper.
people don't care about "master" copies. they just want to listen to music they like, and they don't think it's stealing. how can the recording industry possibly survive when eventually no one will buy their product? unless there are massive global restrictions placed on Internet usage (which i can't imagine just yet), there will always be free options, which i see getting bigger and bigger.
the recording industry is just trying to maintain profits as best they can b4 they flame out and try to take over the concert promotion and ticketing businesses.
my prediction (not very bold, but): CDs will be produced at a lesser rate than vinyl records in less than 5 years.
posted by mrgrimm at 11:00 AM on October 8, 2003
the recording industry is *way* screwed. sound capture, file compression, etc. technologies are only going to get better and better. memory is only going to get cheaper and cheaper.
people don't care about "master" copies. they just want to listen to music they like, and they don't think it's stealing. how can the recording industry possibly survive when eventually no one will buy their product? unless there are massive global restrictions placed on Internet usage (which i can't imagine just yet), there will always be free options, which i see getting bigger and bigger.
the recording industry is just trying to maintain profits as best they can b4 they flame out and try to take over the concert promotion and ticketing businesses.
my prediction (not very bold, but): CDs will be produced at a lesser rate than vinyl records in less than 5 years.
posted by mrgrimm at 11:00 AM on October 8, 2003
Coda : Now the student is being lined up for a suin'. Surely this is ridiculous? He's using a documented feature that's been in Windows since '95. Very daft...
posted by punilux at 4:31 AM on October 10, 2003
posted by punilux at 4:31 AM on October 10, 2003
Just saw that same thing on MSNBC, punilux. What's up with that....
posted by djspicerack at 6:48 AM on October 10, 2003
posted by djspicerack at 6:48 AM on October 10, 2003
« Older The 5pm Deadline is approaching, | Virus replication is a feature! Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Though simple, the act of holding down the Shift key in order to enable copying does let computer users know they're doing something unauthorized, he said. That alone will dissuade many people from making copies, he added.
Someone must have invented a new drug, and he must be the first addict.
posted by jon_kill at 12:53 PM on October 7, 2003