[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Day of action against the new corrupted CDs

From: Aaron R. Kulkis
Subject: Re: Day of action against the new corrupted CDs
Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2001 00:52:23 -0400

Rex Ballard wrote:
> There are two sides to this issue.  I'd like to address both.
> phil hunt wrote:
> >
> > The next time you buy a CD, remember to ask:
> >    Will this CD really play on my equipment?
> More importantly, "Do you GUARANTEE that this CD will play on my
> equipment?".
> The clerk will tell you anything you want to hear.  He will say "yes
> it will".
> But you should only buy from a store that promises to refund the full
> purchase
> price for any CD that won't play on your system.
> Perhaps Virgin Records will put a big penguin on the cash register to
> show that they are "Linux Friendly".  Perhaps SAM Goody's will
> put the penguin in the window.
> And if they don't, you should purchase the music as cassettes, or
> via MP3 download services.
> > Why? Because the record manufacturers are secretly introducing new
> > modified CDs into the shops. Some of these corrupt CDs won't play on
> > computers, PS2 and DVD machines, and others have lower quality sound
> > and won't last as long as normal CDs. Of the CDs that will play on
> > computers, they will only play on Microsoft operating systems, and
> > using Microsoft's Media Player software - users of minority operating
> > systemsa like Linux will be deliberately excluded, as will
> > non-Microsoft music playing software.
> The RIAA and MPAA should come up with a standard piece of software
> that can log your listening habits, and send the "play list" to
> the RIAA.  In addition, when you download, the download service
> should be required to put a serial number on the media, along with
> the purchase price.  The downloader would record the IP address, date,
> and time of the download on the tracks as well.
> The source code would include license terms to the tone of
> "removal or modification of this section of software without the
> author's permission could be a felony with fines exceeding $150,000
> if used to illegally copy, defeat, or disable copyright accounting
> systems.  You are only licensed to use this software for legal
> purposes.
> To clinch the deal, each time the software is activated, the software
> would send an "integrity packet" to show that it is functional.  The
> downloads would be SSL and certificate encrypted which means that the
> user would have a valid certificate (provided by the RIAA, MPAA,
> BMI, or other royalty agent), and the vendor would have a valid
> certificate
> (provided by the same).  The certificates would be free, but the
> downloads
> would be limited based on a "bulk charge".  You get 2000 "play units"
> for
> $20.  Each time you play a song, the play is logged.  When you've
> played
> 2000 "units" (a two minute song?), you can recharge.  You can recharge
> just like you do with a prepaide calling card.  The electronic
> certificate
> would be valid for the download device.  The playlist could be
> recorded
> on a file and delivered at the next download (allowing for off-line
> use
> such as RIO).
> If you do go to a record store, you can bring the CD home and have it
> "activated" with a phone call.  They would give you the decode number
> (changes every 60 seconds), for that album.  This would enable play.
> Alternatively, you could use an infrared handshake with a device which
> connects to a telephone or ethernet device.
> Since you can't download without exchanging certificates, you can't
> publish without getting a certificate.  If you try to defeate the
> certificate and publish uncertifed, you would be very easy to catch.
> Since the royalty agents would have a common database of certificates,
> along with the IP addresses and DNS information about the servers,
> it would be a bit hard to steal a certificate and use it on your
> machine.
> At the same time, you could freely distribute personal content.  This
> would allow small bands and new artists to publish original works
> without certificates if they wished.  On the other hand, why not
> register
> the work and make a few extra bucks if you get a few hundred plays.
> This is not an original idea.  It has been suggested, and used since
> the early 1980s.  It has been used with the "micropayment system" used
> by publishers (especially the adult sites) for many years.  It has
> also been used to distribute advertizing revenue to content providers.
> Although it is possible to deactivate this feature on open source
> browsers,
> the code has been deployed since Mosaic 2.0 and few have even
> attempted
> to defeat it.  Still, adding restrictions to the license terms may be
> appropriate, given the higher perceived value of Music and Video
> content.
> > The new CDs might play fine to start with, but underneath, the sounds
> > have been subtly corrupted. After a few scratches, you'll have tracks
> > going wrong much sooner than with normal CDs. In truth, these new
> > corrupt CDs are not as good as normal CDs.
> >
> > The full story on the corrupt CDs is at:
> >    <>.
> >
> >
> > The Campaign for Digital Rights is holding a Day of Action against the
> > new CDs this Saturday. We will be distributing leaflets outside record
> > shops thoughout the UK, warning potential customers of the danger the
> > new CDs pose.
> Keep in mind that you have the right to fair use.  This means that you
> have
> a legal right to copy the content into RAM, to decode the content, and
> to
> play that content on a device capable of rendering the content.
> Theoretically,
> you have that right, even if you use DECSS on Linux to play video on
> your
> MPEG player.
> What you don't have the right to do is share that content with
> thousands of
> other people without paying royalties to the agents authorized to
> collect on
> behalf of the writers, performers, producers, promoters, and
> publishers.
> Unfortunately, early MP3 players were distributed that made no
> distinction between
> downloading from a site that had paid legitimate royalties and a site
> that had no
> legal right to distribute software.  When you purchase a CD, or a DVD,
> you really
> only have a license for your personal use (fair use).  When you start
> publishing
> content, whether that's playing it at a bar, letting 20,000 people
> download it,
> you are violating that license.  Bars pay anywhere from $200 to $2000
> a month
> to play that lovely music you hear when you are there.  Even Musak
> played on
> elevator music includes a $20-50/month ASCAP or BMI fee.
> If you want to watch a golden-oldie you rented from blockbuster with a
> few
> of your friends, that might not be a problem.  If you decide to share
> the
> movie with 30-40 of your friends, you are in violation big-time.  If
> you
> make a regular habit of it, it won't be long before one your four
> friends
> is a law enforcement related professional (lawyer, judge, officer,
> investigator, licensed social worker,...) and they have a legal
> obligation to report you to the FBI for copyright violations.
> They can lose their licenses to practice if they fail to do so.
> > You are welcome to join in!
> >
> > If, like us, you don't want to be ripped off with shoddy, sub-standard
> > CDs, you can be part of our Day of Action. For details of how to
> > volunteer, see <>.
> If you don't want to be ripped off, come up with a media player that
> requires dual-certificate SSL, records and sends play-lists, and
> reports uncertified downloaders - and publish it under BOTH GNU Public
> License and BSD public license.
> Otherwise, it's you ripping off the very artists whose music you've
> come to love.  The average artists spends 10-20 years developing his
> musical talent, plays in clubs 20-100 nights/year for 2-5 years,
> spends nearly $20,000 on musical equipment, and if he's lucky, he
> gets a record contract.  The record company spends $2-3 million
> producing the record, promoting the artist, and setting up promotional
> tours.  The record company then spends $5-10 million getting records
> printed, distributed, and placed on the shelves in stores.  They
> then spend $5-10 million on advertizing, free air-play on radio
> stations,
> music videos (MTV), and other promotional efforts.  And if they are
> lucky, they will get back 10-20% more than they put in.
> If the artist doesn't practice, he's not good enough to make music you
> want to hear.  If he doesn't play in clubs, he won't know how to
> excite
> an audience he will never see or hear.  If the record company skimps
> on production, the record won't sound very good.  If they don't
> promote
> ALOT, you won't buy the record when it hits the shelves.  If they
> don't
> advertise and floor the inventory (finance and guarantee sales), there
> won't be any records to buy, and if they don't keep promoting it,
> people
> will listen to it once, and forget about it - no long term sales from
> referrals.
> Then, when you finally go to the store, and drop your $20 for a CD,
> you put the best songs on a web site and download 20,000 copies to
> people who pay you nothing, because you "have the right" to share
> (depriving the publisher of roughly $100,000 in revenue).  And
> then you tell 20 of your friends to do the same thing (now up to
> $1 million), because you think your are "promoting" the artist.
> Tell you what.  Go to some bar on amateaur night, get an appointment
> with the third runner-up, tell him you'll record his band in your
> garage (next to the highway of course), and then you'll put it on
> the Web for millions of people to listen to.  Then tell them that
> you want an exclusive representation agreement giving you 20% of all
> the money they make playing clubs, record sales, and spin-off
> products,
> and you promise them 30% of all the money you make selling downloads
> over
> the web.
> Tell me what they say?
> Tell me how many time your boys' songs are downloaded?
> Tell me how much money you make selling those songs on Napster
> (or other download services).
> Tell me how much money you had to put out to get your first
> platinum record.
> THEN tell me that I have the right to download all of your
> songs for free, then put them on MY web site so that I can
> give away $1,000,0000 worth of free downloads.

Absolutely correct, Rex.

Having done some work as a DJ, and seeing how the music industry
runs a "conjuror's choice" method of selecting who is in the top
40..."playing the songs _you_ want to hear"

        "From this [small, restricted] list of songs, which is your favorite?"
        "I don't see 'Boris the Spider' nor do I see anything by Jean Luc Ponty"
        "We don't play that"
        "Then you're not playing the songs I want to hear, are you?"

I despise the record industry...but I hate copyright infringers
and other IP theives even more.

> > For general information on the Campaign for Digital Rights, see our
> > website at <>.
> >
> > --
> > *** Philip Hunt *** ***

Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]