That is right, CD manufacturers tweak their CDs they call it 'Copy protection' any program that can be demonstrated to overcome this protection, the creators of such programs will fall foul of the law and said creators could face large jail times. Remeber it just needs the law in place and a crazy enough company (think RIAA suing its own customers in the USA) to really put an end to any 'fair use' you have as a consumer.
September the 11th is the date for voting on this proposal goes through:
http://comment.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020505,39115479,00.htm (http://comment.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020505,39115479,00.htm)
Get onto your local MEP and voice your concerns.
No!!! This would kill EAC at least...
And I've thought that EU would be smarter than US... ;-(
I don't understand the extent of the law, can't I simply loop my Optical out to Optical in and assuming I've got a good sound card (good for music recording at least) wouldn't I get a close to perfect rip? so are sound card manufacturers screwed as well? if they're not, what do I care if they kill some of CD Rippers?
Sorry, but do you know about SCMS (Copyright bit in SPDIF)?
All cards might be obliged to support it...
No!!! This would kill EAC at least...
Maybe not kill, since it's usage is still legal in the rest of the World, but the page would have to go down and Andree would have to stop working on it. (Unless he moves from Europe)
I wonder what Ahead plans to do, since Feurio can overcome copy protection schemes as well.
Hahahaha, of course, cd ripping a "copy protected" cd is a "circunvention"
Welcome to the underground, this is the future of humankind, unless you start revolting over there In the troubled times to come, open source may have a better chance of survive. This is the ruling of corporations, a few monopolistic powers over commons. The definition is simply "Fascism". Because of this, i stand against copyrights as a whole. The time for a compromise is over, down with copyrights (and patents)! (leftish urban guerilla tactics to follow hint: read about how they do low power fm broadcasts on UK, bwhahaha )
In the meantime i suppose ill start sharing EAC in p2p networks, hehehe.
And I've thought that EU would be smarter than US...
How do you fit your head through a doorway?
ISP's might need to block p2p to survive...
Even FreeNet can be detected using a good packet sniffer.
Encryption might be banned, because you could encrypt illegal material!
Sorry, but do you know about SCMS (Copyright bit in SPDIF)?
All cards might be obliged to support it...
still there still good old digital out/in, and if that fails, good recodring cards have some good analog solutions. can't be worse than compression (if you have at least entry-pro card).
Which digital IO protocol do you speak of?
All I know of implement some kind of 'copyright control'.
The most widespread is SPDIF protocol.
I wonder what Ahead plans to do, since Feurio can overcome copy protection schemes as well.
And Nero too, although it probably doesn't have any special routine to rip protected discs.
I've ripped a CDS200 (Radiohead's "Hail to the thief") with Nero as easy as with Feurio (LG GCE-8481B).
Will programs with no special routines to defeat protections be prosecuted?
why not loop good old line-in/out (the ones that mics/headphones use)? do those have copy protection.
some cards have RCA type of plugs, it's analog, so I don't see how digital protection gonna work.
They may also require all CD-R/CD-ROM drives to not read audio digitally if the CD is marked as copy-damaged.
This is possible to do and will be hard to circumvent. (additionally doing it would be illegal)
/EDIT\
Think about this draft combined with TCPA... Horror!
\EDIT/
question: then what are all those mp3/wma/ogg/aac etc. portable players for? they can't expect people to buy music in 128 kbps quality. Well some already do, but it can't support the industry at large, and onece the flaws of low bitrate come out (and they will, couse majority can't have 128kbps as transparent quality) the sales are going to get a big dip.
So, the miserable shits managed to get September 11th as the date for voting on the proposal. No doubt any vote against their commercial interests will be seen as "unAmerican", commie pinko subversive, supporting terrorism, etc etc...
How cynical is it possible for human beings to be...?
Fuck them. Fuck anyone who tries to tell me what I may or may not do with my computer. Fortunately, over 90% of the human species is not directly answerable either to the USA or the United States of Europe. The ironic thing is, at one time I had a lot of sympathy for copyright holders, thinking (no doubt naively) that every illegally downloaded track was taking food from the mouths of struggling artists...Yeah, right. Depriving RIAA execs of their next cocaine fix, more like.
Can I say it more clearly? FUCK 'EM. I will now screw them over at every opportunity open to me, and will encourage others to do the same. What a result!!
edit: sorry, excuse the profanity, this just wound me up somewhat
thinking (no doubt naively) that every illegally downloaded track was taking food from the mouths of struggling artists...Yeah, right. Depriving RIAA execs of their next cocaine fix, more like.
Ha! Maybe time for the Larry Flynt (publisher of
Hustler magazine) approach (is he still in a posiition to do it?)
When the right wingers in Congress were clamoring for Clinton's impeachment over
Monica Lewinski, Flynt offered a bounty for the goods on adulterous "famly values"
congressmen, and 3 of them (including speaker of the house) ended up leaving after being caught with their pants down, so to speak.
Well I am also not happy with this.
But can someone explain me what the maindifference is with DMCA (The Digital Millennium Copyright Act) from America compared to this proposal from the EU ?
about DMCA see: http://www.doom9.org/index.html?/dmca_revealed.htm (http://www.doom9.org/index.html?/dmca_revealed.htm)
Thx in advance.
As with various protection proposals in the US, this one has VERY wide ranging collateral damage:
The coalition wrote that Article 21 "erodes the public's fair use (fair dealing) and freedom of expression rights by outlawing all technologies, including software, that are capable of bypassing technical restrictions."
Since one of the protection mechanisms is RFID tags which can be imbedded in clothing,
scissors and sharp knives, which could be used to cut out the bit of cloth containing
one of these rice grain size tags, would be an offending piracy technology, and illegal.
Ironic, since sharp knives have always been a tool of traditional pirates.
September the 11th is the date for voting on this proposal goes through:
No small irony that the date for voting is 9/11.
In times like these (and ONLY in times like these, usually I still believe in Law and Order) I kinda like living in a "lawless" country.
But, yeah, if this thing happens I think I will also try to screw the record companies at every opportunity I got. What a nerve they have. In my country, most of the recent high-profile CDs coming out are those of the contestants of the Mexican version of "American Idol", out-of-tune (in the BAD sense) singing of crappy tunes they don't even wrote. And they have been dropping every rock band for not being "viable" enough. And they blame it all on piracy.
Too bad there are no Mexican coders...
I kinda like living in a "lawless" country.
Same here
and onece the flaws of low bitrate come out (and they will, couse majority can't have 128kbps as transparent quality) the sales are going to get a big dip.
People already believe MP3 to be "CD quality" at 128kbps. Given that the new generation codecs are even more efficient than MP3, people can only be happier with 128kbps.
Maybe you want to read this thread out of EAC-Forum.
Click me (http://www.digital-inn.de/showthread.php?threadid=21437)
Well, I live in Germany and know a lot about this new "Urheberrecht Gesetz". Anyway, here is a list with the known applications, which will be illegal in the future:
Alcohol 52%
Alcohol 68%
Alcohol 120%
Audiograbber
BlindWrite Suite
CDex
CD Master Clone
CDR Win
CloneCD
Disc Juggler
Easy CDDA Extractor
Exact Audio Copy
Feurio!
Fire Burner
Softdiv CD Ripper
CloneDVD, WinOnCD and Nero Burning ROM remain legal, as they cannot copy protected DVDs/CDs.
Also, the new law in Germany applies ONLY to Audio CDs and (S)VCDs/DVDs. It is still legal to make a copy of a protected Data CD (although NOT if it is a game!). CloneCD for example becomes illegal because it can also clone protected Audio CDs.
[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']Edit: Fixed a grammar error.[/span]
Oh, one more thing.... The law says that it is illegal to crack an effective protection. Audio CDs have an effective digital protection, but they can never have an analog protection and therefore, it IS legal to make a copy of your CD using the analog way (CD -> MC, CD -> PC (analog), CD -> MD (analog)...).
The same thing does NOT apply to VHSs or DVDs, as the Macrovision protection is analog, while CSS (for DVDs) is digital. In this case you aren't allowed to copy the DVD at all!
There is one thing which makes me unsure... My LITE-ON LTR-52246S recognizes a with Key2Audio protected CD as a normal Mixed Mode CD. I can play back the CD (in digital mode) whithout any problems. Does that mean that the protection isn't effective and therefore it IS LEGAL to copy it?
I don't understand the extent of the law, can't I simply loop my Optical out to Optical in and assuming I've got a good sound card (good for music recording at least) wouldn't I get a close to perfect rip? so are sound card manufacturers screwed as well? if they're not, what do I care if they kill some of CD Rippers?
You're forgetting one thing the widespreading of the imbedded PC/Mac player included on the CD.
And this player reads a lesser quality stream. I wouldn't want to record it at all, I want the uncompressed full spectrum source.
And if it is prohibited legally to rip for fair use a CD well that is a big concern.
Maybe it is not far the time when you'll have to refer to web site for activating your CD.
We all know that the majors would like to rent not sell music and video. (and so does Microsoft with it's products)
Excerpt >>>
1. Member States shall provide adequate legal protection against the circumvention of any effective technological measures, which the person concerned carries out in the knowledge, or with reasonable grounds to know, that he or she is pursuing that objective.
2. Member States shall provide adequate legal protection against the manufacture, import, distribution, sale, rental, advertisement for sale or rental, or possession for commercial purposes of devices, products or components or the provision of services which:
( a ) are promoted, advertised or marketed for the purpose of circumvention of, or
( b ) have only a limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent, or
( c ) are primarily designed, produced, adapted or performed for the purpose of enabling or facilitating the circumvention of,
any effective technological measures.
<<<
Time for a new software tool, something originally designed for garden planning or printing kite templates or something, and then someone tries it for a different use and gives it a name...
CRACCIT = CRACCIT Really Ain't a Copyright CIrcumvention Tool"
>>>Future news story:
CDS meets CRACCIT...and Loses!
--No one arrested because software was only intended and marketed for designing kite templates. No one knew it would also be able to provide secure CD ripping and adaptably bypass copy protections. Plus it was never "distributed" as such, only uploaded to a private server and then mirrored by various "kite clubs". Recording industry officials are banging their heads against the wall over this one, with seemingly no legal way to stop it. Downloads topped 1.5 million this week...
Whatever the name or "original purpose", this will happen just a sure as the sun will rise. And perhaps just as soon. Another honeypot for hackers, with the added challenge of diverting the "perceived intent".
When you outlaw what is morally acceptable, then people with morals become outlaws.
so what you are saying is that my 'summer trash - part3' compilation is/will be illegal? (yes, i do own all the cd's)
There will always be ways...
Music is / was copied since the invention of the recording devices. Not so long ago, we used to copy our friends' CDs to tapes (cassettes). I still keep at home ~250 high quality cassettes (CrO2, 90 min.) with great music onto them. Ofcourse, the quality is somewhere near MP3 @ 112 or 128 kbps, but still, it's OK.
As far as I remember, copying music on cassettes (altough illegal) was never chased, at least not as much as nowadays MP3s are chased.
If this law is accepted, it will not be "The end of pirated music" but "A huge step backwards" for the quality of pirated music.
And, when I download nowadays music which I like very much (P2P allows me to get to know much more music and artists than other ways) I always go and buy the CD, for a couple of reasons. Among these - quality, portability, book, etc.
I think when I download worse quality MP3s, I'll buy less CDs, because I'll like less artists "so much, that I'll go to buy their CDs".
So, who's the looser now?
My first CD-Rom ever was an expensive 4X Mitsumi (FX-400), which works perfectly even now (~7 years old!), but it can't extract CD digital audio because of copy-protection built in. This was the first conception of CD-Rom manifacturers, but it disappeared as quick as the first non-protected CD-Rom came out.
There'll always be things such as firmware hacks, software hacks, digital-to-digital copies etc.
I think that the whole concept of "forcing customers to buy legal products" is completely, totally, absolutely WRONG.
Nobody can force me to buy anything. I could even stop buying CDs I like much, just from pure obstinacy.
The right approach would be to make these "legal products" more attractive, more sellable, to make them cheaper, for example or so.
Also, the conception of AudioGalaxy was very very good - I would like to pay a fair subscription fee, to use it.
There are ways, gentlemen.
Oh, one more thing.... The law says that it is illegal to crack an effective protection. Audio CDs have an effective digital protection, but they can never have an analog protection and therefore, it IS legal to make a copy of your CD using the analog way (CD -> MC, CD -> PC (analog), CD -> MD (analog)...).
The same thing does NOT apply to VHSs or DVDs, as the Macrovision protection is analog, while CSS (for DVDs) is digital. In this case you aren't allowed to copy the DVD at all!
Interesting...
How is it possible to tell whether a song has been encoded using the analog method, or digitally? Sure, you could tell by comparing a digitally ripped version to a questionable song, but wouldn't this comparison in itself be illegal? (I suppose not if the owner of the copyright was doing the comparison)
There is one thing which makes me unsure... My LITE-ON LTR-52246S recognizes a with Key2Audio protected CD as a normal Mixed Mode CD. I can play back the CD (in digital mode) whithout any problems. Does that mean that the protection isn't effective and therefore it IS LEGAL to copy it?
How effective is effective? If the CD has printed on it "It is illegal to copy this CD." (as a lot of non-protected CD's do), under these new laws would it be actually legal?
...I kinda like living in a "lawless" country.
The same thing does NOT apply to VHSs or DVDs, as the Macrovision protection is analog, while CSS (for DVDs) is digital. In this case you aren't allowed to copy the DVD at all!
Macrovision (at least most versions) works by inserting codes in signal which the VCR
recognizes, then it refuses the signal, so it is dependant on the cooperation of the VCR.
I have an old VHS whcih doesn't recognize macrovision to begin with; it doesn't so much circumvent macrovision as ignore it. So it wold be legal, right?
This is an odd requirement:
"Member States shall provide adequate legal protection against the circumvention of any effective technological measures"
Anything that can be bypassed must be, by definition, ineffective. So you can use any cracking tool you like, so long as it works!
I'm sure that's not how it will be prosecuted, but it's a possible defense.
Cheers, Paul
'Effective protection' in lawyer's speech means:
'Any protection which can't be copied without using special means to bypass it.'
Even modified TOC is an effective protection by that definition, because it can't be copied on some drives.
So, your line of defense is no good.
Macrovision (at least most versions) works by inserting codes in signal which the VCR
recognizes, then it refuses the signal, so it is dependant on the cooperation of the VCR.
I have an old VHS whcih doesn't recognize macrovision to begin with; it doesn't so much circumvent macrovision as ignore it. So it wold be legal, right?
As far as I know Macrovision is not a signal sent to be understood by a VCR as the SMCS (Serial Management Copy System) is for audio. It became more noticable when the HQ VCR arrived.
It is a tweak of a signal that perturbs the AGC (automatic gain control) of the VCR and that's why it perturbs also video projectors, systems that don't record video but simply show it. And anti Macrovision boxes are frequently used in that case.
Strangely I have a Thomson VCR that "feels" the Macrovision in preview of signal feeded into it, but when I launch "Record" the signal becomes perfect.
PS : Read this FAQ it's interesting. http://www.repairfaq.org/filipg/LINK/F_Mac...croVision1.html (http://www.repairfaq.org/filipg/LINK/F_MacroVision1.html)
'Effective protection' in lawyer's speech means:
'Any protection which can't be copied without using special means to bypass it.'
Even modified TOC is an effective protection by that definition, because it can't be copied on some drives.
So, your line of defense is no good.
I respectfully disagree. This defense would not die on that point, because the next step is for them to define the word
special.
"
Special means? Oh, I didn't use any special means...just the same ol' things I do every time, nothing special was required."
"I didn't even know there was copy protection on it. Written on the case? In those tiny letters? The tiny cryptic symbol? So, I guess I would need
special means to read the copy protection message." Like a magifying glass or a decoder wheel?
The recoding industry in Europe and in the US is completely screwed over this debacle. There are so many ways to shoot them down in court. We're throwing dozens of ways around on just one website, and no one has even been arrested yet (under the new provisions anyway)! Yes, they are a
huge beast with
huge armies of lawyers, but they still don't have enough lawyers to make a dent in the number of people who are going to
use no special means to bypass them.
[venting=on]
Anyway, how could they find out what's on a person's computer in the first place? Snoop? Use
special means to bypass my protections? I swear if I ever catch them doing that, I'll dedicate my time to learning how to code (or simply borrowing) some especially nasty stuff to send up the pipe to their servers. My PC is my livelihood, and I will defend my livelihood with my life. It will not be taken from me under any circumstance. My family would get a huge insurance claim if I were to die in, say, a hail of SWAT team bullets? As far as I'm concerned, they can pry my keyboard out of my cold, dead fingers. And no, I wouldn't be dying to protect my PC, I would be dying to protect a principle. I am not breaking the law. If someone says I am and shoots at me, I'm shooting back.
[/venting]
*whew* Sorry, just had to get that out. Been trying to figure out exactly how to rant in this thread for hours now. Not usually this violent...got a giant migraine, so that's probably the reason. Anyway, I use FLAC, and any of them who "snoop" would mostly be looking for MP3's anyway, I would think. So for now I guess
they're not at risk. I think I'll go take a Panlor and lie down before my head explodes...and come back when I'm not so pissy...
The problem is a possibility, that a company may block your bank accounts during the trial,
which could be very long...
Thus you would be forced to withdraw or just won't have the resources to age that war.
It is up to the member countries to locally legislate and pass laws that put into effect various directives.
In Finland the parliament already rejected the first bad proposal which was based largerly on the EU original CD Copy draft.
Now the second draft of the same Finnish law proposal is making the rounds and it allows for making copies of music for personal use. It does not allow sharing of tracks for which the copyright holder has not given permission to.
There is a borderline however on copy protected music CDs. Regardless of what EU directive says, the Finnish law proposal (if passed) will legislate that if you can accidentally circumvent the copy protection (e.g. a drive does it for you with out any special settings), then it's not really a copy protection at all.
Even if all goes to hell, there is absolutely no way for anyone to actually put a law like that into practise and foresee that everyone obeys it.
The history of legislation in most countries (free democracies at the very least) has shown that a law that criminalises more c. 50% or more of the population will get overturned some time or it will become national humour target for a while and then everybody will just forget about it. Including representatives who voted for it, legislatives who drew it up and authorities who's job it is to work with it.
The main point for me about is however the following (having personally and publicly campaigned against the first brain-dead law proposal in Finland):
1) Know what's happening on your local legislative level that concerns you as an individual or a part of a collective
2) Bring forth your viewpoint to legislators, representatives and members of the press in a calm and point-by-point analysis type of manner. Legislators are often interested (in non-case law countries at least) about equality/symmetry effects of the law. Press members are interested in the human impact and economical ramifications. Politicians care if you say that you will not vote for them if they vote to pass a stupid law.
3) In effect, stop people making stupid decision. Nobody is perfect, not even if they have ten degrees and sit on important organisations and have extensive power. Influence them and more just things are likely to happen. This may be easier in smaller and less corrupt countries (look at Transparency international scale to get a feel
I have personal objections to a law that makes it illegal to circumvent copy protections, but I cannot defend my viewpoint as the only right one. Copyright holders should have a right to protect theirabout it. Including representatives who voted for it, legislatives who drew it up and authorities who's job it is to work with it.
The main point for me about is however the following (having personally and publicly campaigned against the first brain-dead law proposal in Finland):
1) Know what's happening on your local legislative level that concerns you as an individual or a part of a collective
2) Bring forth your viewpoint to legislators, representatives and members of the press in a calm and point-by-point analysis type of manner. Legislators are often interested (in non-case law countries at least) about equality/symmetry effects of the law. Press members are interested in the human impact and economical ramifications. Politicians care if you say that you will not vote for them if they vote to pass a stupid law.
3) In effect, stop people making stupid decision. Nobody is perfect, not even if they have ten degrees and sit on important organisations and have extensive power. Influence them and more just things are likely to happen. This may be easier in smaller and less corrupt countries (look at Transparency international scale to get a feel
I have personal objections to a law that makes it illegal to circumvent copy protections, but I cannot defend my viewpoint as the only right one. Copyright holders should have a right to protect their intellectual property. No qualms about that. I just don't agree with the methods and how it's legislated.
However, I have no objections to laws that discourage swapping music illegally (there is legal swapping as well!), just as long some provisions are made to the law (special needs, library, etc) that there is no huge amounts of collateral damage like with the stupid American DMCA.
I buy my CDs/vinyl as originals and it will remain like that regardless of new laws. Maybe there'll be new formats, but I like to support the artists whose music I like.
food for thought,
Halcyon
Please restrain from such long posts...
Forum bug!
The problem is a possibility, that a company may block your bank accounts during the trial,
which could be very long...
Thus you would be forced to withdraw or just won't have the resources to age that war.
If a
company directly blocks my bank accounts, then I become a hacker immediately, and dedicate my life to taking them apart. I'll also go on their payroll immediately in order to cover my
resource needs if they decide to engage me. All nice a legal, with their own approval documentation to back it up, even. It'll take them longer to dislodge me from their throats than it will for them to sue me per their original intent.
If a company instead files a lawsuit to have my accounts blocked, then I shop for judges during the first cycle of actions, one of my favorite moves recently (well, since 1999). You simply refile with multiple courts/judges in the same district (local/federal/whatever) and effectively nothing can happen or start until all such actions are acted upon by the courts. Kind of like hiding a hundred easter eggs, and forcing your opponent to deal with each one while you "prep". By the time they can get action on a motion to freeze my funds, my funds will be long gone (from them, anyway). Hell, all I need is an hour, and I'll have at least a day. I'll leave them one checking account with $0.99 in it, just for the principle of it (as long as it's disconnected from my SSN).
Their main problem is that there will be ten million people on my side. The faster they move on this "provision", the faster people will polarize against them. The slower they move, the more time people will have to prepare/experiment as they hear of the first few cases and gather details on them. It's what happens when you take on the world...you lose. If
they take on the world, they will lose too. We are the world. They are not. Information is power, and there is too much technical expertise out here for them to survive it.
Their power is at
our fingertips. Literally.
Edit: Sorry...not mad at anyone here. This topic just peeves me more than any other (well, the topic of limiting freedom in general), and it is seriously what I would risk everything to protect.
I support you in full.
Even if I have to resort to drastic measures to protect liberty.
The only question is: how many Average Joes will take that course of action?
ScorLibran, the Paladin of Freedom!
You have my support as well. Heh. At least morally.
~Dologan
The only question is: how many Average Joes will take that course of action?
About the time the hundredth person is "hunted down" over this. Once enough cases hit the news from anywhere in the world, the other 9,999,900 people will not visibly form into an "army", but they will be in communication with each other, mostly using the internet. And communication is the medium behind the power of information...it's the "carrier wave" so to speak. The
people I refer to are the people of the world who care enough about music to get involved initially, and who care enough about freedom to stay involved to the end. And ten million might be too small of an estimate, but I'm just using a nice round number to state my point.
Ironic...the internet, very platform causing US and European recording industries to think they have to take these steps is the same platform that will be their end.
There will always be ways...
Music is / was copied since the invention of the recording devices.
it will not be "The end of pirated music" but "A huge step backwards" for the quality of pirated music.
My first CD-Rom ever was an expensive 4X Mitsumi (FX-400), which works perfectly even now (~7 years old!), but it can't extract CD digital audio because of copy-protection built in. This was the first conception of CD-Rom manifacturers, but it disappeared as quick as the first non-prottability, book, etc.
I think that the whole concept of "forcing customers to buy legal products" is completely, totally, absolutely WRONG.
Omit repeated paragraphs.. stupid ipb 1.2 BUG 1I agree there will always be ways. The genie is out of the bottle, as they say... p2p will just improve, they can't get rid of encryption in fear of losing "e-business", they will attempt to control the internet and the computers, they have been trying for decades, but they will never achieve full control, there are always holes, and people will use them.
2I don't agree with the "huge step backwards for the quality of music", again their dream of bringing back the self-destructive analog medium won't be possible anymore. People themselves are mastering digital formats, it is a control they have already lost. In the worst case scenario of analog play and digital capture, it only takes a good recording to spread the music again in digital in good enough quality. What they want is just not enforcable, these laws will have to go. And the few companies backing them too.
3A lot of people are going to be opressed with these laws, just to guarantee a safe revenue for a selected few. The people are not gonna stand this, its pretty much an aristocracy of sorts, and if they keep doing it, i have no doubt revolutions may start. Also not all countries are gonna accept this. Yes, most 1st world countries will, and most 3rd world countries in bed with first world countries will also follow, but don't think for a minute that everyone accepts washington's or europe's policy.
4I own a Mitsumi FX-001D (2x), complete with propietary interface card (still works, but not perfectly). What Mitsumi did in the early days was plain silly. They made the raw read command actually do a "play" command instead. Thieve full control, there are always holes, and people will use them.
2I don't agree with the "huge step backwards for the quality of music", again their dream of bringing back the self-destructive analog medium won't be possible anymore. People themselves are mastering digital formats, it is a control they have already lost. In the worst case scenario of analog play and digital capture, it only takes a good recording to spread the music again in digital in good enough quality. What they want is just not enforcable, these laws will have to go. And the few companies backing them too.
3A lot of people are going to be opressed with these laws, just to guarantee a safe revenue for a selected few. The people are not gonna stand this, its pretty much an aristocracy of sorts, and if they keep doing it, i have no doubt revolutions may start. Also not all countries are gonna accept this. Yes, most 1st world countries will, and most 3rd world countries in bed with first world countries will also follow, but don't think for a minute that everyone accepts washington's or europe's policy.
4I own a Mitsumi FX-001D (2x), complete with propietary interface card (still works, but not perfectly). What Mitsumi did in the early days was plain silly. They made the raw read command actually do a "play" command instead. They started this with my drive (2x), and up until around their (6x/8x) drive if i recall correctly. At the time, Mitsumi was the only manufacturer doing this on their own iniciative. People figured, Sony and Panasonic drives will rip no problem, only Mitsumi was the culprit, so ppl simply dumped Mitsumi the same way the original DivX (disposable DVD) concept was disposed by customers putting their money where it was worth.
5Their first 1x drive (with manually ejectable tray) actually accepted the raw command just fine, go figure But they learned the lesson, hard way...
6Good example of marketing? Look at the japanese market. Look what they do with CDs, what they sell, they have smalle not gonna stand this, its pretty much an aristocracy of sorts, and if they keep doing it, i have no doubt revolutions may start. Also not all countries are gonna accept this. Yes, most 1st world countries will, and most 3rd world countries in bed with first world countries will also follow, but don't think for a minute that everyone accepts washington's or europe's policy.
4I own a Mitsumi FX-001D (2x), complete with propietary interface card (still works, but not perfectly). What Mitsumi did in the early days was plain silly. They made the raw read command actually do a "play" command instead. They started this with my drive (2x), and up until around their (6x/8x) drive if i recall correctly. At the time, Mitsumi was the only manufacturer doing this on their own iniciative. People figured, Sony and Panasonic drives will rip no problem, only Mitsumi was the culprit, so ppl simply dumped Mitsumi the same way the original DivX (disposable DVD) concept was disposed by customers putting their money where it was worth.
5Their first 1x drive (with manually ejectable tray) actually accepted the raw command just fine, go figure But they learned the lesson, hard way...
6Good example of marketing? Look at the japanese market. Look what they do with CDs, what they sell, they have smalle not gonna stand this, its pretty much an aristocracy of sorts, and if they keep doing it, i have no doubt revolutions may start. Also not all countries are gonna accept this. Yes, most 1st world countries will, and most 3rd world countries in bed with first world countries will also follow, but don't think for a minute that everyone accepts washington's or europe's policy.
4I own a Mitsumi FX-001D (2x), complete with propietary interface card (still works, but not perfectly). What Mitsumi did in the early days was plain silly. They made the raw read command actually do a "play" command instead. They started this with my drive (2x), and up until around their (6x/8x) drive if i recall correctly. At the time, Mitsumi was the only manufacturer doing this on their own iniciative. People figured, Sony and Panasonic drives will rip no problem, only Mitsumi was the culprit, so ppl simply dumped Mitsumi the same way the original DivX (disposable DVD) concept was disposed by customers putting their money where it was worth.
5Their first 1x drive (with manually ejectable tray) actually accepted the raw command just fine, go figure But they learned the lesson, hard way...
6Good example of marketing? Look at the japanese market. Look what they do with CDs, what they sell, they have small and cheap 8cm "singles", they have lots of custom jewel cases with pretty gifs inside, they have 8cm DVD "singles" too, instead of 4 audio songs, it can have 2 promotional videos, etc, etc. They have a much more lively scene there. The japanese artists are working hard, doing commercials, their own TV shows, acting in jdrama or movies, not to mention live concerts and such.
7The American counterparts are very lazy in comparison. They just want to sit, do nothing and earn money selling "copies" and sending lawyers. Well this at least from the record labels, the real culprit here. The artists themhey started this with my drive (2x), and up until around their (6x/8x) drive if i recall correctly. At the time, Mitsumi was the only manufacturer doing this on their own iniciative. People figured, Sony and Panasonic drives will rip no problem, only Mitsumi was the culprit, so ppl simply dumped Mitsumi the same way the original DivX (disposable DVD) concept was disposed by customers putting their money where it was worth.
5Their first 1x drive (with manually ejectable tray) actually accepted the raw command just fine, go figure But they learned the lesson, hard way...
6Good example of marketing? Look at the japanese market. Look what they do with CDs, what they sell, they have small and cheap 8cm "singles", they have lots of custom jewel cases with pretty gifs inside, they have 8cm DVD "singles" too, instead of 4 audio songs, it can have 2 promotional videos, etc, etc. They have a much more lively scene there. The japanese artists are working hard, doing commercials, their own TV shows, acting in jdrama or movies, not to mention live concerts and such.
7The American counterparts are very lazy in comparison. They just want to sit, do nothing and earn money selling "copies" and sending lawyers. Well this at least from the record labels, the real culprit here. The artists themselves should know better and get rid of those dinosaurs of the past.
8In my opinion "copyright" is a myth, they want to apply common property laws to intangible objects, that don't really ever exhaust. The knowing artist will know better, and know they have to do what artists have been doing in all the history of humanity: Performing in public to earn money. The making money selling "Records" was a short lived utopy, which was only exploited by the record labels anyway, leaving the artists as usual in the mud.
9So, Let the Music Play (http://www.eff.org/share/).
IIRC, the new law forbits to knowingly circumvent a copy protection. But if I rip a CDS200 CD in my Memorex DVDMaxx 1648 drive, I don't know that it is protected, since I disabled autorun, and the copy controlled statement is written in english, that I can't speak.
What much more frightening was that project to embed a special protocol in CPU themselves, that would only allow authorized programs to run on the computer, turning programming impossible for anyone (the compiled programs wouldn't run beccause the required activation key would not be found in it). I don't remember how it was called... a few letters, remember ? This one that stated that even the chip in your watch would be protected...
I quickly forgot it as a joke, since I thought it was unthinkable, since all airports, libraries, stations, colleges, etc would become outlaw for using illegal computers, and even more, universities, banks, NASA, scientific centers, meteorology, etc would be prevented to develop any program...
But after a second thought, I realized that this is perfectly possible thank to the professional computer market. Just implement the thing in all consumer CPUs (Pentium, Athlons, Durons, etc), and let professional CPUs free of it. Where can you buy Intel Xeons CPUs ? Servers ? Workstations ? All these computers found in companies would be able to compile code, and all future consumer computers would not.
TCPA!!!
We all are against TCPA!! Visit Against TCPA (http://www.againsttcpa.com/what-is-tcpa.html)
Brrr... Gives me the shivers even in melting-hot Europe.
~Dologan
I fail to see TCPA working simply from the amount of modding available on PS2's and xBox's Heh, chipping your pc to run warez.. it just sounds wrong..
Bomb the capitalists I say
Bomb the capitalists I say
yeah, I'm sure this argument gonna fly high on Sep. 11
There is one thing which makes me unsure... My LITE-ON LTR-52246S recognizes a with Key2Audio protected CD as a normal Mixed Mode CD. I can play back the CD (in digital mode) whithout any problems. Does that mean that the protection isn't effective and therefore it IS LEGAL to copy it?
This is a feature of firmware.
Omit repeated paragraphs.. stupid ipb 1.2 BUG
OT: It was not IPB bug.. it was some Apache2 mimetype/php parsing weirdness which occurred with the new server...
It's now fixed, but you need to edit your post again...
3
A lot of people are going to be opressed with these laws, just to guarantee a safe revenue for a selected few. The people are not gonna stand this, its pretty much an aristocracy of sorts, and if they keep doing it, i have no doubt revolutions may start. Also not all countries are gonna accept this. Yes, most 1st world countries will, and most 3rd world countries in bed with first world countries will also follow, but don't think for a minute that everyone accepts washington's or europe's policy.
Actually the revolution has already started, though there was no announcement made. Revolutions generally don't start with an act of motion, but rather with a word between two or more people. The American Revolution didn't begin with the first shot fired, but rather with one person saying to another, "You know, we shouldn't have to live this way..."
And I think there may be a fairly strong incentive to fight this kind of action even in the US. My previous posts reeked somewhat with "Live free or die", but that's actually an engrained concept for many Americans. And not just for Americans, but for people in countries all over the world who live free and would not accept an alternative. Freedom doesn't dissappear at once...it erodes. The RIAA is the source of erosion in my country. Consider them a slow mudslide, or maybe a sinkhole. May the revolution grow.
The link you made to the EFF site made me realize something (though this wasn't the first time I've seen their site). Notice right in the middle of their home page, there is a discussion of how the artists and producers can keep making money in this age of file-sharing. While the RIAA only does exactly what you said...throw copy-protection and then lawyers at us. It's a war of morality, with the EFF wanting to protect our freedom
and protect the artists' livelihoods, while the RIAA only wants to protect their own livelihood. That makes it easy to pick a side.
IIRC, the new law forbits to knowingly circumvent a copy protection. But if I rip a CDS200 CD in my Memorex DVDMaxx 1648 drive, I don't know that it is protected, since I disabled autorun, and the copy controlled statement is written in english, that I can't speak.
Hmmm...that gives me an idea. If I could only buy CDs with copy protection statements written in Chinese... "I didn't know it was copy-protected! Those are words? I thought they were just cool looking graphics..."
What much more frightening was that project to embed a special protocol in CPU themselves, that would only allow authorized programs to run on the computer, turning programming impossible for anyone (the compiled programs wouldn't run beccause the required activation key would not be found in it). I don't remember how it was called... a few letters, remember ? This one that stated that even the chip in your watch would be protected...
I quickly forgot it as a joke, since I thought it was unthinkable, since all airports, libraries, stations, colleges, etc would become outlaw for using illegal computers, and even more, universities, banks, NASA, scientific centers, meteorology, etc would be prevented to develop any program...
But after a second thought, I realized that this is perfectly possible thank to the professional computer market. Just implement the thing in all consumer CPUs (Pentium, Athlons, Durons, etc), and let professional CPUs free of it. Where can you buy Intel Xeons CPUs ? Servers ? Workstations ? All these computers found in companies would be able to compile code, and all future consumer computers would not.
There is no intellectual property in a corporation that can't walk out the door and be taken home with someone, no matter how much security a company may try to have. After all, security officers are not ever as computer-savvy as the IT people they are watching, and won't know what can really be done with a piece of plastic the size of a stick of gum with an encrypted file on it. If a security officer
were very computer-savvy, he'd be transferred into IT and replaced with a new security officer. Dumb, but it's often how it's done.
I would never condone the theft of intellectual property, but any scheme to restrict what can and cannot be done on a certain CPU will always be bypassed by people who would.
Anyway, widespread keying of CPUs would also potentially lock out all the open-source and freeware developers of the world. Five years ago? Possible. Now? Too late..there are too many of them, and too many of us non-programmer-types who would do anything to support them. That would be yet another revolution...
Oh, one more thing.... The law says that it is illegal to crack an effective protection.
do they actually use the word effective? Because It could be argued that the existence of methods to circumvent the protection renders them ineffective...
Oh, one more thing.... The law says that it is illegal to crack an effective protection.
do they actually use the word effective? Because It could be argued that the existence of methods to circumvent the protection renders them ineffective...
The original text goes like this:
"Das Gesetz unterscheidet nicht zwischen analogen und digitalen Träger- oder Aufnahmemedien. Verboten ist das Umgehen eines wirksamen Kopierschutzes."
The word "wirksam" means "effective".
Oh, one more thing.... The law says that it is illegal to crack an effective protection.
do they actually use the word effective? Because It could be argued that the existence of methods to circumvent the protection renders them ineffective...
The original text goes like this:
"Das Gesetz unterscheidet nicht zwischen analogen und digitalen Träger- oder Aufnahmemedien. Verboten ist das Umgehen eines wirksamen Kopierschutzes."
The word "wirksam" means "effective".
What seems strange to me about this: With some drives e.g. CDS200 "protected" disks can be read digitally (=playback or extraction) by any player/ripper. No circumvention ("Umgehen") by software is needed. In cases like this (probably applies to all audio CD protections that exist so far) there are 2 possibilities:
1. The copy protection ("Kopierschutz") is regarded as not effective, so there's no prohibited circumvention
2. Copy protections are regarded as effective by definition, i.e. a company that has invented a copy protection has to claims its effectiveness et voilà - it's "circumvention" is illegal (including hardware and software able to play back / extract "protected" audio unintentionally).
But where would this stop? What if a company prints on a CD case
"This case is an effective copy protection. Do not remove the CD unless you want to put it in a standalone CD/DVD player for playback only. After finishing playback you have to put it back into the case immediately."
...?
Exactly, this is what I mean. My LITE-ON drive plays CDs with Key2Audio perfectly like any other Mixed Mode CDs. Is the protection effective in that case?
Anyway, I am sure that people would be glad to pay for a CD if they know that the CD works good and that the music is worth the money. I was just looking at some CDs at Karstadt (a German store) and noticed that Pink Floyd costs as much as Britney Spears. Also, a single with three or four tracks costs ~7 €. I know that there is a lot of money going out for making videos (making a video-clip costs ~50.000 €), comercials and other stuff, but I am sure that if the CDs would be a bit cheaper, everyone could win. We would buy more CDs and the industry could earn more money.
Well, I live in Germany and know a lot about this new "Urheberrecht Gesetz". Anyway, here is a list with the known applications, which will be illegal in the future:
[...]
Who's the originator of this list? Is it something official, or just a list you've compiled by yourself?
But where would this stop? What if a company prints on a CD case
"This case is an effective copy protection. Do not remove the CD unless you want to put it in a standalone CD/DVD player for playback only. After finishing playback you have to put it back into the case immediately."
...?
Oh that would be lovely! And I think the RIAA chairman should come over and put the CD into my player, and then fetch my coffee and slippers for me. And since I need the convenience of 200 discs in my car, all ready for play on demand, he'll have to sit in my car with a bog box of CDs and change them in my head unit. He'll have to be fast, though...I demand gapless playback and instant disc changes. Perhaps I'll keep a rolled up newspaper in the front seat to hit him against the head with everytime I hear a gap. If they want to take away my current functionality, it's their responsibility to replace that functionality to my satisfaction.
I agree with your point, though, about the limits of their definitions. My attitude is as before. If they don't ever bother me, I will give them ignorance. If they do bother me, I will give them whatever it takes to protect my freedom. I refuse to tolerate them. We are the ones keeping them in business. We are the ones buying twice as many CDs per month as JoeAverageMusicListener (my personal budget is about 20 CDs per month). We are the ones who want to
rightfully copy the music to our portable devices for
our own use. When they go too far with us it will be the beginning of their demise, and I think it already is.
Artists should not suffer...they can run to all the very deserving indie labels when the big ones fold under the collapsing RIAA umbrella. Hey, maybe we'll all get better production and mastering out of the deal?
-=| Forward The Revolution |=-
Well, I live in Germany and know a lot about this new "Urheberrecht Gesetz". Anyway, here is a list with the known applications, which will be illegal in the future:
[...]
Who's the originator of this list? Is it something official, or just a list you've compiled by yourself?
I have compiled the list from sources on the Internet. Computer Bild, CHIP Online and other magazines wrote about some programs which will be illegal in Germany (and some other parts of Europe).
CDex isn't European software, it's software of European origin.
It's a project on SourceForge now. Can't be killed, but still can be outlawed (who cares... ).
Not that I'm behind warez, buy software if you like it or try free alternatives.
I have one exception - don't pay for something two times or more. (like the OSes, I've bough TWO of them already)
Hail the M$, creator of Palladium.
BTW, should they even try to outlaw or disable (TCPA) free and open software,
the opposition would be fierce, much more aggressive than against copyrights.
The original text goes like this:
"Das Gesetz unterscheidet nicht zwischen analogen und digitalen Träger- oder Aufnahmemedien. Verboten ist das Umgehen eines wirksamen Kopierschutzes."
The word "wirksam" means "effective".
The reason I ask is (at least in English language and law) the word "effective" is a synonym for "completely successful" as in "effective prosecution"...
So AFAIK if translated and passed by the UK parliament in that wording it would mean absolutely nothing, as the copy protection is not completely successful in protecting the data from being copied.
(just a clarification for those who don't see the funny side to an otherwise dark situation)
CDex isn't European software, it's software of European origin.
It's a project on SourceForge now. Can't be killed, but still can be outlawed (who cares... ).
Worst thing that can happen to CDex is that Faber can be forbidden of working on it.
Then, he just hands project ownership to someone else, drops from the scene and things get rolling again. :B