First, let me start off by saying that I think that artists should make money on their work, and I am not for sharing entire albums of music.

However, record labels are really pushing my limits of tolerance.

I just heard that Universal has decided to change their CD format so you cannot record the album on computer. Obviously, it will not take long for some hacker to break that code, and if they dont, I will not buy their CD's until they can be recorded. i would rather have some friend make me a copy of teh album then buy it then.... it is the principle of the matter.

I dont understand why they feel they need to do this... they already show they have not lost money with Napster around, but they just continue to play games with people. I am frankly getting sick of it.

Sorry about the rant, but this is just SO f*cking stupid!

personally i think music sharing is great, but that's not the point here i guess...

There's a fair bit about the current life of encoding things like cactus midbar around, try these links, it's really nice to see someone as prominent as Philips sticking their neck out to go against the recordign industries. If indeed as the second story says the protected discs are not allowed to be called CD's.. then that'll possibly prohibit it's use to an extent.

i do think that this current free for all on free music isn't going to last. Maybe i'm being narrow minded, but Napsters in the past now, and whilst you can't stop gnutella, i somehow think it'll end up very different to how it is nowadays.

But i don't think it will ever be possible to not be ablt to record a disc at some level. Especially as things like TiVo's and similar start blurring the gap between tv and computer, there will have to be such compromises made by protection jobbies to enable sony and panasonic to build the next generation of entertainment hardware that it's going to stop making sense i think, and the issue will dissapear, and then be embraced i guess. if they know what's good for them.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/23207.html
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23736.html

can they do that, i thought the government made the law stating that anyone who buys software, cd's and such have the right to make their own backup type copies.. so if they make it so you can't record onto a computer or put on computer.. it shouldn't stop you from copying the disc to another disc.. or whatever.. ????

me personally, i usually buy my albums due to the fact that i am a musician and hope to one day make an album and would love to make a living off of it..and that means people would have to buy the album. now i don't agree with what some bands like metallica are doing, if my band made that much money, there would be a point where all our music would just be free after we have millions or whatever..... or if you want to buy it then go ahead but would make it free for download or such.

oh well..

-trickykid

There will never be a way to stop copying entirely. If you can play it, that means you can copy it.

I am hesitant to buy CDs because I'd rather not give my money to the record companies, but I do encourage bands that I enjoy to make their music available online. I'd much rather pay a dollar a song straight to the band for CD-quality audio than pass my money through record companies.

I know that the DMCA in America actually takes away some of your rights as a consumer. Things like copies are not a right, for instance, with some eBooks. The data is encrypted (apartently not the best encryption either) to stop a simple paste and copy. Yet what if the person needs to read the txt in a specific font size due to their eyesight ability? Different media I know but similar scenario for the CD's.

Just where does it end??

the ebook encryption was less than weak - it could have been broken with a 1954 lil'ophan annie decoder ring. literally. adobe should have thanked skyralov (??) for informing them that they had been ripped off by the company that sold them the "encryption". instead they sic'ed the FBI on him.

they've got some scary-sounding laws on the dockets - luckily, even microsoft knows better than to back anything worse than the DMCA. it's the major media congolmerates (AOL being a slight exception in this case) that are the problem. essentially, they're going to be replaced by the napsters of the world, and there's not much they can do about it EXCEPT to get laws passed. they're becoming obselete.

yea, the law trickykid mentioned above was back in '98 or so, called something like Home Recording Protection Act or some such. It was supposed to allow people to make recordings for their own use from CDs they own.

So now there's a new law cancelling that one...

I used to spend big bucks on CDs, but I wont buy any that are copyprotected. If I want to compile some of my CDs onto 1 CD then I damn-sure want to be able to. Besides, half the CDs they put out are only 30-40 min. long.

Isajera wrote:
This is another fine example of why you DO NOT EVER try to be helpful to a company. They always seemt to punish people for being nice.

My company used me for 7 months when I broke the NT admin code to setup PC's for people and repair problems since our stupid admin guy could take a week or more to do it.

Then one day, they up and said that since I stole the admin code, they were going to fire me, but decided to instead make me do a data entry job between network admin functions.

Now thats gratefullness for ya.