Copy Protection? (1 Viewer)

[John Watson]

If the industry is concerned about piracy, why do more cd releases not feature copy protection?

Is it too costly, or does it run afoul of back-up copy laws (a spare copy for personal use), or does it simply screw up so many computers and players, that the negative impact would outweigh the benefits?

(I assume most of the MP3's that are "shared" on the internet were themselves derived from legitimate original cd sources.)

 

[Rob Gillespie]

Possibly because they're scared of alienating many of their customers. I know that if I could not make MP3s of the CDs I buy (I have an in-car MP3 deck), the amount of CDs I'd buy would plummet. I really just can't be arsed.

The people who make these decision are a bit thick, really. They never seem to consider the fact that people think CDs are overpriced. Drop the price and you'll sell more.

CDs over here tend to for about £12.99 new in the high-street shops, maybe a bit less if it's a really big title. Online you can get them for less than £10. However when the title moves to the 'back catalogue' it's not unheard of for shops like Virgin and HMV to charge £16, £17 even £18 for that same disc. Again, online places come out the winners (I remember buying four old Queen titles from Amazon UK a while back and saving £20 even when including the postage). If the price was £10 flat, they'd sell more.

 

[Sam Owens]

Simple: a CD with copy protection is not a CD. The red book standard doesn't allow it.

Furthermore, there have been heaps of complaints in Australia and in other places that the copy protection fitted by EMI is preventing users from playing back CDs in their car and on CD players, particularly Sony discmans.

Finally, copy protection prevents users from playing back CDs at full audio resolution on Windows PCs (and not at all on Macs and Linux computers), which is annoying for people like me who listen to 80%+ of CD music on PCs...

 

[Rachael B]

There's no such thing as copy protection as long as playback devices have analog outputs. Copy protection only means there may be additional steps in the copy sequence. Sam hit it right on the head. A copy protected disc isn't a Compact Disc. The big 5 have experimented more with copy protection in countries other than the U.S. where they, apparently, fear litegation more. Some soundtrack album was copy protected last year and it frooze up some computers and failed to play in many players. If I remember correctly, the fix was to use a marker pen on disc edge to conceal the offending codes...?

Proper terms for copy protection would include: copy delay, copy nusiance, copy annoyance, copy inconvience, and analog only copying.

 

[John Watson]

Thanks for the info. Sounds like its worse outside North America. So, I guess we should be careful about placing those disks in our pc's, I can only hope they are all easily identifiable.

I remember when I heard of Charlie Pride issuing a cd 3 or 4 years ago, and the newspapers covered that story because it was to be a copy-protected disk. I joked with a friend that no one would want a Charley pride cd anyway, but the other day I think I noticed that a new Roseanne Cash disk also claimed (or should that be warned?) that it was copy protected.

Seems like country music fans in particular must be low-down thievin' varmints?

BTW, from the sublime to the ridiculous, I remember when Garth Brooks made a big noise about 10 years ago about second hand sales of his disks, he considered that thievery of his work!!!

 

[Martin Fontaine]

Yeah, additionnal steps indeed... I found this program (Which I suppose I can't give the name of here) that lets you extract audio tracks from defective disks to WAV.

Before I officially say that I don't care anymore since I found a way around, I'd like to know something.

I know there are 2 method of copy protection used. One which involves corrupted error correction blocks which is supposed to cause problems on many non-pc devices. And the other is a 2nd session which is set to just instruct the OS that the info on the 1st session (Audio Tracks) is just not there. Making that 2nd session physically unreadable is the work around for the latter.

I have 2 recent EMI Canada releases (Melanie C - Reason and Damhnait Doyle - Davnet) which are both defective and using the same scheme.

I looked on the disk and there is no physical separation between the 2 sessions, and even with physically hiding the end of the disk (As in, the last few audio tracks would be hidden too) I still can't rip even the 1st track (Well, with my usual program that is)

So are those 2 disks using the Screwy Error Correction Scheme? They do play fine in my DVD Player (Sony DVP-S360), Portable (5 Years Old Panasonic Shockwave 10sec) and in my dad and mom's cars (Just generic came with the car player) And when loading them up in my usual program I can see the track listing just fine, it's just that when it starts ripping, it doesn't rip and eventually give an error.

But using that other mysterious program, it works perfectly. So how many people deciding to not buy defective disks, look on Kazaa only to find them available thanks to people who know the trick to figure out that they are just wasting their time!

 

[John Watson]

There was a long article in Thursdays National Post (a Canadian paper) about EMI, which seems to be releasing a lot of copy protected discs in Canada.

And it seems some of them won't play on older cd decks (let alone other uses people might have for them.)

And the response to those returning disks in some cases has been : get a newer player :frowning:

 

[Jack Briggs]

Not only that, but we don't allow for the discussion of defeating or circumventing copy-protection systems. So let's drop any further talk of your magic program. Thank you.

 

[RaulR]

Yeah, additionnal steps indeed... I found this program (Which I suppose I can't give the name of here) that lets you extract audio tracks from defective disks to WAV.

I know a one-step solution: Get a Mac. I've never had a copy-protected CD that I wasn't able to make copies of on my iMac using ordinary CD-writing software.

 

[Sam Owens]

Raul, go and get yourself a first generation pressing of the European copy-protected Massive Attack album. :p)

(better have a paper clip handy to open the drive, and don't leave your PhD thesis/tax return/anything else important unsaved)

 

[RaulR]

Raul, go and get yourself a first generation pressing of the European copy-protected Massive Attack album.

(better have a paper clip handy to open the drive, and don't leave your PhD thesis/tax return/anything else important unsaved)

If you're talking about "100th Window", I have it. No problems playing or copying it.

 

[Sam Owens]

But the original Euro version wreaked havoc with Macs though. I don't think the copy 'protection' elsewhere was as nasty...

 

[RaulR]

I told you I have the original Euro CD. I didn't even realize it was copy-protected until someone on a message board complained about not being able to play it on their PC.

Do you even use a Mac, or are you just repeating stuff you heard on the Web? I'm not trying to attack you, but stating that copy-protected CDs don't play at all on Macs is just plain wrong and so much the opposite of the truth.

 

[Doug Pyle]

I for one think the US Fair Use standard is dead-on correct. It may have been the single biggest catalyst for VHS player sales & the associated success studios enjoyed in videotape sales & rentals (which led to LD then DVD). Perhaps since people don't yet watch DVDs in their cars much, it is less annoying to DVD film buyers that one can't easily make personal-use copies. Music labels seem somewhat more aware they will lose customers (like me) if we cannot copy for personal use the music we buy.

I find it odd that music (and books, even copy-protected DVDs!) can be commercially resold as "used" without royalties to the artist or publisher. Yet here all this studio/label hand-wringing over how to prevent the original purchaser from making a backup copy for their own use in the car or PC.

I use the music I buy, and expect to have that fair use or I won't buy. I put my Tascam CD-R to good use, even recording SACDs redbook layer for playback in the car (I don't want to risk damaging the SACD in the car). On the other hand, I would have no qualms about increasing legal penalties to thwart redistribution or sharing of purchased music. I always say "no" when anyone asks for a copy of music I own - if it is good music, go buy your own and support the artist. It seems to me used resale should include some royalty to the artist / studio / label. I don't blame Garth Brooks for his comment, if he was referring to used resale.

 

[Sam Owens]

Raul, in your second post, you didn't say it was the Euro version, and the CD itself was subject to a hurredly introduced recall.

Anyway, my mistake...

It was White Lilies Island by Natalie Imbrulia :b

 

[John Watson]

I don't understand your last sentence?

Garth Brooks eventually gave up, but he was in effect saying second hand sales deprived him of fresh sales.

To me that sounds like lunatic gall.

 

[LanceJ]

To me that sounds like lunatic gall.

I totally agree.

And if someone really tried to enforce second-hand sale royalties, HOW in the heck could you do such a thing?? Second-hand sale sensors on every street corner?

Or maybe mandatory brain implants endorsed by the RIAA.....

LJ

 

[RaulR]

Anyway, my mistake...

It was White Lilies Island by Natalie Imbrulia

Fair enough. It still doesn't justify a sweeping statement like what was included in your first post.

Anyway, I think we both agree that copy protection sucks regardless of how much or how little it affects us personally.

 

[Eric Peterson]

My biggest issue with the whole "Copy Protection" thing, is the lack of labeling on the discs. The Massive attack album was one of the first that I've dealt with.

As far as my knowledge goes, there is no requirement to tell the customer that the disc cannot be copied or ripped. This really, really, really pisses me off. I bought an MP3 deck for my car specifically so I could rip my discs and not risk having a bunch of valuable CDs in my car for some thief to take. If this disc had been labeled, I would not have purchased it and was tempted to try and return it as is. I own all of the "Massive Attack" albums and now I can't make a comprehensive MP3 disc.

I will be writing a letter to the record company and stating my anger. If this practice continues, they will stop receiving my money and I WILL start pirating and waiting for discs to come into the used shop. I buy 1-2 new CDs per week with the rest of my purchases being used, but the remaining 1-2 will rollover to the used bin if the studios continue to be stupid.

RANT OFF!!

 

[Anthony Hom]

I think pricing is part of the issue, too. Look at the typical DVD movie and look at the price of its companion soundtrack CD, it costs about the same, and in the cases of older films, the CD costs more. That's a pretty specific example, but it applies in general, why is the price of movies going down and music going up?