Excellent Summary of the Sony Mess

Bruce Schneier posted an excellent summary if this mess. This could have gone into the Virus/Spyware forum also, but this article focuses on the ethics of Sony's nd AV vendors actions.

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/11/sonys_drm_rootk.html

Being that I have alternatives, I know I for one, won't be buying any Sony products for a long time.

<sub>Jeff
[purple]It's never too early to begin preparing for [/purple]International Talk Like a Pirate Day

"The software I buy sucks, The software I write sucks. It's time to give up and have a beer..." - Me</sub>

 

[grande]

I'm just waiting for a company that makes Discmen, CD-Rom drives, etc that have the most advanced DRM software possible. The only one garunteed to prevent people from pirating software.

Imagine peoples surprise when they insert a burned CD and the player EXPLODES IN THEIR HANDS!

-------------------------
Just call me Captain Awesome.

 

[Thadeus]

Thank you jsteph, mrdenny and pmonett... I sometimes wonder if I'm just off my rocker.

I had a friend in college who was Czechoslovakian. He would relay stories of LP swap meets that would occur once a month. He said that a random location would be decided each time as this entire operation was illegal. Those interested would be let in on the location at the last minute and on a Sat. morning they would meet and swap LPs until the authorities busted up the event. Then next month it would be somewhere else.

Trading of music cannot be contained. Which is why Live Performance is the only way to go in the long run.

~Thadeus

 

[grande]

And what I really dont understand is why there's this big outcry now.

People have been sharing ("stealing") music for decades. My parents have dozens of illegally recorded cassettes, taken from the radio, and friends LPs. It's far to silly to try and stop it now.

-------------------------
Just call me Captain Awesome.

 

[Stella740pl]

Thadeus,

For some reason (maybe that's because I grew up in Soviet Union), I think that you slightly misunderstood your Czechoslovakian friend from college.

LP swap meets ... a random location would be decided each time as this entire operation was illegal. ...they would meet and swap LPs until the authorities busted up the event.

It looks like the whole illegality of the meetings had nothing to do with copyright protection (at least I would be VERY surprised if it was the case). Most likely, the LPs they swapped were illegal in Czechoslovakia back then. They probably were records from capitalistic countries and/or of the content and/or by artists not approved or outright prohibited by socialistic/communistic authorities.
It is also possible that (in case money were involved) that resales of almost anything at a profit was also illegal, as it was in the Soviet Union for many long years.

As for swapping/copying records - they had to! If those records were prohibited in the country, they were not sold there in the stores. If someone was able to obtain a copy, it was a result of a chance/luck/hard work, with some danger involved, and others could get that music only through copying/swapping.

 

[Thadeus]

Thanks Stella, and no I didn't misunderstand... I never said it had to do with copyright.

The point is that even in countries that make it illegal to even own certain music, it is impossible to stop the swapping. Even a country that actively enforces those laws.

In the US, where it is not illegal to have digital music, it will be equally impossible to stop the swapping... particularly since owning computers and downloading (for a fee) MP3s is encouraged. Encouraged even by the music industry (iTunes, Napster, etc).

But thank you for adding clarity to my anecdote.

~Thadeus

 

[jsteph]

Years ago, just prior to the onset of CD's, there was a push to impose a tax on all blank cassette tapes, the revenue was to be divided amongst the record producers.

Interestingly, in this case it was *only the country music producers*, because they were the ones bringing the bill to congress.

Either way, even if it were to be divied up between all musicians, it was obvious that the bill was ridiculous--it assumed that either each and every tape sold would be used for copying, or some known percentage would be, and that it was then fair to tax everyone for *possible* lost income on a crime that *might* be comitted.

Personally, I buy most of my music song-by-song from either Real Rhapsody music store, but I resample it because Real has it in .rax format, which is protected, and I want to be able to make a CD or put it in an MP3 player--I have that right and I don't feel I'm breaking the law doing so. I don't publish any of it on any site, though I have been known to give my wife or friends a cd with a mixed playlist I created.

Since most cd's have only 2 or 3 songs I want anyway, paying .99 per song means an effective cost of $3 per cd, as opposed to ~ $15.00 per CD. If the CD isn't available track-by-track, the entire CD is usually ~$8 to download, and that to me is better than the pain of trying to find it all on some napster-like illegal site, with the security/spyware risks, prosecution risks, etc.

I haven't bought a real CD in over a year, but I've legally purchased hundreds of songs in that time. In time I think all new music will be available online as the primary sales outlet, and I think that physical CD's in "record" stores, maybe even record stores themselves will be obsolete soon.
--Jim

 

[Stella740pl]

Thadeus,

The point is that even in countries that make it illegal to even own certain music, it is impossible to stop the swapping. Even a country that actively enforces those laws.

I would phase it differently: it is impossible to stop the swapping, especially in countries that make it illegal to even own certain music (or books, or whatever).

Say, alcohol prohibition not only didn't stop people from drinking, but created a whole illegal industry of home-making and smuggling of alcohol.

In the US it is not illegal to have digital music, so the swapping has different reasons. Often cost is high for many people, so by sharing/swapping people avoid or share the cost. It could be also due to many other reasons.

 

[mrdenny]

Sharring on music in the US is so common place that a radio station here in Los Angeles has a weekly show called Head Sets where they play an entire album on the radio without inturuption. The DJ that runs the show actually tells the listeners when to start recording. He then stops the disk so that everyone can flip over the tape and start recording again.

If a radio station is sharring music (isn't this basically pirating the music) why would any one else think that sharring music was bad.

Denny
MCSA (2003) / MCDBA (SQL 2000)

--Anything is possible. All it takes is a little research. (Me)

http://www.mrdenny.com

 

[sleipnir214]

The "Head Sets" show may actually be entirely legal. I believe that the U.S. courts have stated that time-shifting (recording a broadcast for later viewing/listening) falls under acceptible use. If the radio station is paying the standard royalties for playing the album on the radio, the entire thing could be above board.




Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!

TANSTAAFL!!

 

[EBGreen]

Yes, time shifting is the specific use that kept VHS taping form being infringement if I recall correctly.

[red]"... isn't sanity really just a one trick pony anyway?! I mean, all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you are good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit!" - The Tick[/red]