Comments on: ‘New’ kind of DRM http://www.p2pnet.net/story/3329 p2pnet.net - reader powered Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:30:38 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/3329/comment-page-1#comment-7833 Reader's Write Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:49:55 +0000 #comment-7833 It is best not to confuse these laughable copy protection schemes with actual Digital Rights Management (DRM). The Audio CD format is an open vendor-neutral standard, and you can't add DRM to a system without breaking vendor neutrality. The copy protection schemes you are seeing seek to confuse specific media players. In most cases they target Microsoft Windows and seek to confuse the operating system into not playing the CD. If you are using a different operating system (I use a Linux Desktop) the scheme isn't even noticed and you interact with the CD in the normal way. Real DRM involves using file formats and cryptography such that "unauthorized" player can not read the contents. The purpose of DRM is to insert the DRM manufacturers as an intermediary between the copyright holder and the audience such that the DRM manufacturer is in control of the communications device (CD/DVD player, VCR, home computer, whatever) and not the owner. I find it frustrating to see copyright holders supporting DRM as DRM will have a far greater negative effect on their bottom line than copyright infringement. Copyright holders can never control communications devices, they can only digitally encode their content and license agreements and let those files be distributed. They must then trust either DRM manufacturers or citizens to obey those license agreements. While a small percentage of citizens disobey copyright license agreements, the fact majority of people obey them and agree that creators should be compensated for their work. On the other hand the DRM manufacturers have one interest: to control communications to benefit their bottom line. The worst thing that could happen to culture and creators like musicians is if DRM is allowed to take off. They really are digging their own grave with their current misguided support. Russell McOrmond Canadian New Media: Why creators should oppose DRM http://www.flora.ca/cnm20040908.shtml For Canadians: Summary of Interim Report on Copyright Reform http://www.digital-copyright.ca/node/view/550 It is best not to confuse these laughable copy protection schemes with actual Digital Rights Management (DRM). The Audio CD format is an open vendor-neutral standard, and you can’t add DRM to a system without breaking vendor neutrality.

The copy protection schemes you are seeing seek to confuse specific media players. In most cases they target Microsoft Windows and seek to confuse the operating system into not playing the CD. If you are using a different operating system (I use a Linux Desktop) the scheme isn’t even noticed and you interact with the CD in the normal way.

Real DRM involves using file formats and cryptography such that “unauthorized” player can not read the contents. The purpose of DRM is to insert the DRM manufacturers as an intermediary between the copyright holder and the audience such that the DRM manufacturer is in control of the communications device (CD/DVD player, VCR, home computer, whatever) and not the owner.

I find it frustrating to see copyright holders supporting DRM as DRM will have a far greater negative effect on their bottom line than copyright infringement. Copyright holders can never control communications devices, they can only digitally encode their content and license agreements and let those files be distributed. They must then trust either DRM manufacturers or citizens to obey those license agreements. While a small percentage of citizens disobey copyright license agreements, the fact majority of people obey them and agree that creators should be compensated for their work. On the other hand the DRM manufacturers have one interest: to control communications to benefit their bottom line.

The worst thing that could happen to culture and creators like musicians is if DRM is allowed to take off. They really are digging their own grave with their current misguided support.

Russell McOrmond

Canadian New Media: Why creators should oppose DRM
http://www.flora.ca/cnm20040908.shtml

For Canadians: Summary of Interim Report on Copyright Reform
http://www.digital-copyright.ca/node/view/550

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/3329/comment-page-1#comment-7826 Reader's Write Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:20:07 +0000 #comment-7826 I seriously don't get why music companies even bother with DRM. An individual with a decent digital recorder can flawlessly record and recompress any cd into mp3 as long as it can be played. I seriously don’t get why music companies even bother with DRM. An individual with a decent digital recorder can flawlessly record and recompress any cd into mp3 as long as it can be played.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/3329/comment-page-1#comment-7809 Reader's Write Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:35:40 +0000 #comment-7809 I dont want their DRMed tracks. When i buy a cd i want to rip it to an obscure lossless audio codec of my choice at a bitrate of my choice from the original cd session. If you hide the cd session, my unix machine will find it and mount it. If you try autorun executables my unix machine will be incapable of running it. If you try error embedding my machine has tools to compensate. Anything else would be incompatible with the CD standard, but is crackable anyway. I wish you good luck. And as a programming student who makes a hobby of constructive defiance, you can count on my mind and machines to be right in those trenches pounding away in order to nullify your insult to your legitimate customers. I will work to save you from yourselves, in spite of yourselves, you idiotic record conglomerate. I dont want their DRMed tracks.

When i buy a cd i want to rip it to an obscure lossless audio codec of my choice at a bitrate of my choice from the original cd session.

If you hide the cd session, my unix machine will find it and mount it. If you try autorun executables my unix machine will be incapable of running it. If you try error embedding my machine has tools to compensate.

Anything else would be incompatible with the CD standard, but is crackable anyway.

I wish you good luck. And as a programming student who makes a hobby of constructive defiance, you can count on my mind and machines to be right in those trenches pounding away in order to nullify your insult to your legitimate customers.

I will work to save you from yourselves, in spite of yourselves, you idiotic record conglomerate.

]]>