Labels tight-lipped on copy-proof CDs

vbimport

#1

I just posted the article Labels tight-lipped on copy-proof CDs.

Here is an article on MarketWatch.com about audio copy protections, probably the most useless technology of today. Record companies are planning to use them a lot, but they know they are easy to…

Read the full article here:  [http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/2636-Labels-tight-lipped-on-copy-proof-CDs.html](http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/2636-Labels-tight-lipped-on-copy-proof-CDs.html)

Feel free to add your comments below. 

Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

Nice to know we are not alone with these silly protection schemes. I am more pissed bout not being able to make a copy of a cd for my car player than listening on the puter via mp3! :c


#3

A Very interesting article and at least someone out there has some brains to realize this is a lost cause. I keep saying BMG, SONY and et al… need to take good money and figure ways to get people to back to the legal ways of d/l music. They are taking their good money and throwing it away with companies like MIDBAR(Cactus Data Shield 100 a joke-Love Parade 2001-cracked) SUNNCOMM (Napster proof CD -Charley Pride- another joke-cracked 4 ways) This only antagonizes people and you don’t win fans this way. You just tend to make them say Copy Proof-Let me show you how fast this become Non copy proof. Why is the concept difficult to understand"If it plays it records -one way or another. Every protected CD i have seen has been hacked digitally. Volumnia(Purr) had SCMS protection along with some other garbage, but simple insertion in cdrom and extracting out with soundforge 5.0b solved that problem. Maybe perhaps if those record companies lowered their prices and gave decent music perhaps the problem of file sharing could be partially solved. There is always going to be sharing of sound files and trying to eliminate that is like saying in Florida during the summer months its going to snow. It ain’t gonna happen.


#4

its ooolld, but still true i guess MAKE CD’S CHEAP(ER) !!! => No one would bother to d/l a ripped one anymore => and we’d have a nice cover too besides a perfect cd and quality :wink: => other advantages: less pubs or http space used and less file sharing programs necessary! etc… etc…


#5

can we just move on to 6 channel 24 bit / 96khz DVD-A audio already - then Cd rips will be like having the cassette…


#6

There were some interesting points in the article such as copy procted Compact Discs not working correctly or even preventing copying. As we all know if the CD can be played it’s contents can then be copied. I do not think music companies understand the reason why people copy CDs and down load music. The fact is no one wants to spend upwards of thirty dollars to import a CD from the UK or other parts of Europe where Electronic music such as Drum ‘N’ Bass or Break beat is massive to only get one good track that can be used in a mix. The music companies and the artists have to put out better music and lower the prices of the CDs.Their refusal to do so will only cause the numbers of people who copy music and download music to increase exponentially. We have seen the music companies best attempt at copy protection and it has failed. There is no way that they can protect the digital stream through an optical or coaxial cable from a stand alone CD player.


#7

Didn’t you read the extracts from the music industry’s meeting. They never plan to lower prices or do anything like that. They simply want to gain full control again so that they can rip us off even more and basically have a Monopoly. Although it isn’t one company, they work hand in hand so they act as a big monopoly and fuck us over big time. Someone needs to take them to court just like Microsoft got taken to court!


#8

nila, that’s called a kartel :4


#9

Loose lips cause copy protection schemes to be defeated therefore one must use tight lips to try to keep cd’s protected for at least a day.


#10

Personally, I have always bought most of the CDs that I own (just last week even, I bough “Whoa, Nelly” by Nelly Furtado). I own some 150 original CDs, compared to 20 copies of which I do not have an original (15 of these copies are of CDs of which I could not even find any originals anymore when I went looking for them…) Now, with all this talk about all kinds of copy-protection schemes, of which the consumer may not even be informed when he/she considers buying a CD, I will simply and squarely STOP buying any more CDs. I mean, I refuse to show any respect for an industry that shows nothing but disrespect to me–all out of pure GREED. I almost feel like a criminal, just because I do most of my CD playing on my PC… Yuck!


#11

Making CDs cheaper is bollocks. I will still download until commercial CDs are free, and even then, only if by free delivery cos i cant be arsed to go to town. Record companies arent stupid, and ppl screaming about USE MONEY FOR OTHER MEANS are just trying to lie to the Record Companies. They arent stupid, they are doing what any huge companies holding copyrighted material would do, and that is protect their material and protect their sales figures. I dont care how cheap CDs get, they are NEVER going to get to a price that will even begin to dent the millions of users involved in filesharing. I wish people would shut up about trying to change the Record Companies minds. It’s kinda like Soccer players ganging up on the referee when a decision goes against them, a referee has never changed his mind, and any who have are probably not in the refereeing business anymore. THIS is the most effective way for Record Companies to combat file sharing. Why would anyone who could ever contemplate piracy have any second thoughts about going ‘legit’ because CDs are cheaper, they are either free or they aint. I do buy CDs yes, but most of the CDs i buy are usually of a rarity that its too much hassle for me to find online. Hence, the more rare the music is which may become of protected music, the more likely i am to fork out for it. I have a friend whose absolutely loaded, his dads on 400k per year, he even got a 10k ford focus for his birthday, but hes got the largest mp3 collection I personally have ever seen of around 40Gigs. Money matters less to him than to anyone else I know because he can get pretty much anything he wants within reason. CD Protection may not have much of an impact in his means to get 40Gig of mp3, however lower CD prices also aint gonna mean that much to him. What else can the Record Companies do? I’m sure theyve thought of whatever you can think of, and Im sure theyve weighed up the pros and cons and feel this is the most effective means. At the end of the day, they have very few obligations to consumers, as you cannot pick and choose the label you buy the latest Number 1 Album from. Im sure they arent trying to be nasty, and anyone who takes this personally is just causing themselves unnecessary discomfort.


#12

Record companies make no excuses for putting that crap on the CD therefore i make no excuses for showing them their weak points.


#13

The players don’t pay the referee. Businesses get their money from consumers. Consumers control What they buy. They will always be able to get around protections. Digital noise protection makes the product less appealing to the consumers. The only way to make more sell is to STOP SELLING CRAP AND SELL YOUR GOODS FOR LOWER PRICES. The record industry is full of FOOLS who are TOO STUPID TO REALIZE THE CONSUMER PAYS THEM. I know someone who works at a record store who constantly hears bitching about cd prices every day. File sharing should be viewed more as competition. Some people think their time is worth a lot.