Anti-copying CDs up the copyright ante

Livewire ^ | March 28 2002 | Rod Easdown

[dead]

Major music labels have started releasing CDs that, they admit, might not play in all CD players. Actually they may not even be CDs, given the strict technical definitions laid down for the format by its inventors, Philips and Sony.

The new discs carry electronic measures designed to prevent them being played on computers. They contain errors in the signal that are not detected by most CD players but cause clicking and popping sounds when played in a computer. As a result, they can't be copied successfully to the computer's hard drive to be converted into a format for e-mailing or posting on the Internet, thereby infringing the recording company's copyright.

But the technology is far from trouble-free. CD players have been around for 20 years and there are thousands of different kinds. Some can't read the new discs. Some DVD players also have trouble with them.

That hasn't stopped BMG, Universal, Sony Music, EMI and Warner embracing the idea. They blame the 10 per cent drop in music sales in the US last year squarely on illegal copying. According to Philips, which refuses to have anything to do with the new discs, normal wear and tear could make such discs unplayable on older CD players, which could be overwhelmed by the errors. This has led to the odd situation where Sony Electronics, a manufacturer of CD players, is objecting to the technology that Sony Music is implementing. The company has released about 70 titles with the anti-copying measures, carrying the label: "Will not play on a PC/Mac."

Some consumers have found certain discs will play in the car but not on home equipment. Others have found the opposite. BMG was forced to drop copy protection on two CDs in Europe when buyers complained that they wouldn't play in CD players.

The general manager of copyright for Philips in the US, Gerry Wirtz, says he is worried the music companies didn't know what they were doing when they adopted the idea. Philips has warned that the discs do not conform to the specifications of the CD format and must bear labels warning consumers of this. They may not display the familiar compact disc symbol.

While the technology is not widespread, it is in use, mostly in Europe. In the US, Universal's More Music from the Fast and the Furious carries the warning: "Playback problems may be experienced. If you experience playback problems, return the disc for a refund." If you like the disc the only solution seems to be getting a CD player that will handle it.

Music companies may pay a high price for protecting their copyright - creating problems for customers is hardly good business. The website www.fatchucks.com carries a list of hundreds of CD titles it says carry copy protection and alleges that many carry no warnings at all. This has raised the concern of some rights activists and politicians in the US.

[js1138]

Since there aren't really different grades and qualities of "digital"

DSS broadcasts all shows in digital, but some in HDTV. This requires two channels, but the composit content delivered to the display really is different. In theory it could be one signal.

[July 4th]

They blame the 10 per cent drop in music sales in the US last year squarely on illegal copying.

So, what do we all think the drop in music sales will be because you can't play these things on your computer? 10 percent more? I'd guess even higher than that.

[steve-b]

hey blame the 10 per cent drop in music sales in the US last year squarely on illegal copying.

Yeah, right! With the crap they've been cranking out lately they're lucky it's a 10 per cent drop rather than a drop to 10 per cent of previous sales.

[Wyatt's Torch]

Yeah, DSS is heavily compressed. The main issue is that the native content, to be truly considered hi-def has to be shot: 1) in 16X9 format and 2) has to be 480P, 720P or 1080i. Standard digital DSS signals are none of these. The hi-def signals, from a different sattelite, are native hi-def signals. You are correct about digital but to be hi-definition it has to conform to those standards.

[steve-b]

It's also designed to enforce various infringements on fair use such as region coding (i.e. you can't use a legally purchased DVD from abroad), fast-forward lockout (i.e. you have to wait through the ads every time), etc.

[SamAdams76]

I thought they shut bad old Napster down last year. Could the 10% drop in music sales be because they are putting out total crap for music? Could it be that people just don't like Britney Spears and N'Sync?

At any rate, many people do not realize that the music industry receives royalties on blank recording media in an agreement years ago that stipulated that consumers had the right to record their CDs for personal use. In exchange, it was decided that manufacturers of blank media would pay a percentage of their revenues to the recording industry. Now that the recording companies are making it not possible to record CDs onto blank media, will the recording industries have to return the royalties they have collected on blank media?

Sounds like we got grounds for a massive lawsuit here.

Since the recording industry has taken this tack, I have drastically reduced my CD purchases and instead I am now getting most of my music from MP3s downloaded off the web. Mostly through FTP.

[SauronOfMordor]

wouldn't it be simple for every digital device to embed its own serial number as a watermark. Fair use would not be inhibited, since all copies would remain in the owner's custody. But wild copies with the same watermark would be traceable.

Yes, the watermark would show that all those copies were made by unit xxx-xxx-xxx-xxx, which was purchased from Circuit City by somebody who paid cash

[steve-b]

Could it be that people just don't like Britney Spears and N'Sync?

I'll admit that Britney is easy on the eyes, though not so much on the ears. I can't comment on N'Sync; Homey don't swing that way.

[steve-b]

Big deal -- if you can tie someone to one illegal bootleg copy (through an collection of quaint old-fashioned methods known as "police work"), that gives the link to all the rest. Thus, it makes it possible to make reasonable distinctions between petty bootlegging (which ought to be punished, but not to the ridiculous extremes written into current copyright law) and industrial-scale counterfeiting (which ought to be punished to a degree commesurate with grand theft).