is the madness finally ending?

http://www.boingboing.net/2005/11/20/sony_insider_drm_is_.html



How long have people been telling that to the record labels? I really hope they're finally getting it. Now if only software makers would learn that same lesson.

>How long have people been telling that to the record
>labels? I really hope they're finally getting it. Now if
>only software makers would learn that same lesson.

You're the one who isn't getting it...

The antipiracy measures debate is not about binary either/or, but instead about shades of grey.

People will still buy a product if it is crammed with anti piracy measures, but there is a point where they won't! Sony's job is to find out where that point is, in order to maximise profits and increase shareholder value.

In the old days there was a saying 'The customer is king', but as mom and pop shops have disappeared and the megacorporations have taken over, the saying is now 'Shareholder value'. The best way to achieve shareholder value is not to do your best, but to do well enough to compete. To do your very best requires a skilled workforce(higher wages), but to succeed on the playing-field of mediocrety requires only low pay and mediocre products.

If you don't like it, then vote with your money. Don't feed the Fony!

Andy

Eh?

Well, I have been reading all week about how amazon has been refunding sony music products that use the sony rootkit DRM stuff. Seems to be quite a backlash.

Also was listening to NPR on the way home from picking the wife up. And some place is offering movie purchasing and rental via downloading off of the net. Got me thinking, and I actually think I'd do that if they had movies I wanted to see at an acceptable quality.

You know it's sad but true.

CORPORATION, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce "The Devils Dictionary"

Amazon didn't have a choice. A week ago Sony recalled all the CDs with the questionable protection. Take the CD back to whatever store you bought it at and they will refund the money paid (At least, thats how a recall works here in the USA)

Sadly, DRM is all around, and the way things are heading, will become more and more intrusive. Hopefully this sony debacle will be a bit of a wakeup call to big business to slow things down.

Unfortunately, with most of the general public still being clueless about where things are heading, and the majority legislative branch being populated by people who probably haven't ever been within a hundred feet of a computer, things will likely get a lot worse before they'll get better... If they get better, that is.

There's still countless other 'gems' ahead, like the nice 'next gen high-definition DVD's needing a special DRM monitor to be viewed with windows Vista, or you would either see a much lower resolution crappy version or even a nice black screen instead.
The music industry is also hoping to push 'smart' speakers, where the computer sends encrypted data directly to the speakers to be played, so you wouldn't be able to tap into the soundcard data to record a digital copy of something either.

Of course, and disgruntled customers no longer buying movies/music will simply be 'proof' that people are 'stealing' media online, and have the studios look into even more restrictive DRM trying to lock everything up for good.

I already no longer buy Sony. I also plan to lock out Windows Vista support in any games I produce. If you buy Vista, you are buying into a big-brother dream that I am pledged to fight against.

DRM is evil, don't buy into it.

Neither do I. But not out of some misguided political principle. I don't buy Sony music for the same reason I don't buy EA Games. They don't release anything I want to buy.

They don't even release something I want to steal for that matter.

I'm sorry you feal DRM is misguided, I am sure a future in 1984 will be very liberating for you.

I buy whatever is best... Unfortunately, a rootkit on my computer is not even close to "best". So I won't buy sony as long as their DRM is insanely intrusive. When they get rid of that I'll buy it again...

I do. Not only that, it's also pointless, as it only harms legitimate customers.

However I'm not going to not buy something because it uses some form of ineffective protection I can circumvent or disable entirely using a 5 minute google search or 2 cents worth of non-transparent tape.

If Sony et. al. want to help legitimize quasi-legal practices in the name of consumer rights, then I'm all in favour of that. I have a few mates who could potentially make a small fortune selling circumvention devices they give away for free today.

I mean sure it sucks for anyone living in US territories where the DMCA is in effect, but that's democracy for you - a form of government that ensures people are governed no better than they deserve.

You must not have read 1984, if you think it was about DRM.

It wasn't about DRM specifically, but it was about oppressive government control and elimination of individual freedoms. Man, if you're that much of a literalist about things, don't read any book ever. Authors tend to be fond of this thing called metaphor, in part because it allows their work to be relevant even to things they couldn't possibly know about.

I'm more worried about the nanny state the UK is becoming. Since I moved to the states, I've becom pretty patriotic, and find anmmount of what the Labour party does more offensive than any DRM.

Allthougth I too stopped buying sony products 2-3 years ago, ever since I got sick of Sony PS2 Test kits breaking at work, becomng one of the primarly reasons for enforced crunch.

Well lets not get too political and have the thread Shagwanna'd, the activities of the Labour party havn't gone un-noticed by everybody this side of the pond either. Neither have the activities of other governing parties for that matter - but discussing it here is a shorefire way for Flameduck's misinterpretation of metaphor disapearing into the overflowing recycle bin of non-Blitz discussion.

But DRM is not about government control, nor elimination of personal freedoms, so I still don't see how it relates to the specific situation (except tangiently in the US perhaps).

So you say. Never the less, I still fail to see how a satirical political story reflecting the UK in 1948 from Orwells perspective (I assume we're talking THAT 1984) relates to 20th century corporate DRM, metaphorically or not. Particularly when non-political and more suitable metaphors exist.

Fahrenheit 451 as you may know, is a book about someone who wishes to control access to certain works of art (in this case books, but I'm sure you'll agree it applies equally well to digital media). Now while the reguators (the firemen) in Ray Bradburys books aren't the same as the people who originally wrote and/or published the books, I'm sure that someone who has such a deep and profound understanding of metaphors as you, can still appreciate it.

I beg to differ -- every mechanism that prevents me from making a personal backup copy or enable me to copy snippets of an audio or video production for illustrative purposes or whatever *is* an elimination of personal freedoms, since these have historically been classified as 'fair use', and are completely legitimate.
DRM locking everything down while throwing the key away means one can no longer practise those privileges. How is that not an elimination of personal freedoms?

If the end result is that 99% of the population loses these freedoms that they did have in the past, something is wrong.

There are many good reasons for things like backup copies: Not having to leave your original CD's in a 100F+ degree car in the summer, not having sticky toddler fingerprints all over your original DVD's, being able to have an off-site backup copy of a $$$$$$ product CD in case of fire or what not. Anything that prevents those fair use copies from being carried out, does infringe on personal freedoms. Current legislation specifically allows people to make those backups, except more and more the media companies are essentially preventing you from doing exactly that by technical means... so the end result is "Sure, you can make a backup copy -- good luck trying, especially since it's a DMCA violation to try to figure out how the lock-out works"

I never read Fahrenheit 451 and it isn't sufficiently popular as a phrase of pop culture to understand what you mean when you use it metaphorically. So no, I have not got a clue what your flaming about.

Whether 1984 works as a metaphor or not is merely a matter of communication, most people understood what I meant by it - as evidenced by the replies - as my point was understood I clearly suceeded in communicating, except to you, for which I hang my head in shame.

Perhaps we have a difference of opinion of what constitues a personal freedom. In my book, personal freedom is about the right to self-realization. Fair use IMHO is not a personal freedom. It's just common sense.

Also I don't think anything Sony Music produces and/or publishes deserves to be preserved for posterity. I'll be happy to bury it alongside the CD player.

Ofcourse there are. I'm not saying there isn't. I'm not saying I support or even understand Sonys position, and I certainly don't aprove of music CDs covertly installing software (much less rootkits) on my computer. I'm saying there's nothing you can do about it except prove to Sony that Copy protection doesn't work.

Unfortunately it seems that so far copy protection companies have succeeded in convincing publishers they need protection from so-called "casual pirates" and ofcourse since "A thief believes everybody steals" and publishers being the worst thieves around, it's hardly surprising it comes to this. Never mind the mountain of factual studies that indicate the contrary. Never mind that quality has gone down, and prices up, Sony et. al. are convinced that you'd buy a 15 quid CD with one track you like, and 16 tracks of garbage. Sony are convinced that "if you don't have anything to hide, you have nothing to fear".

And I'm affraid no "Two minute hate" against Sony (who are not exclusive with regards to wanting DRM) is likely to change that.

To Sony it's such a mystery why iTunes was so successful.

Much like the term "Hacker", 1984 is often used incorrectly, by people unaware that Orwell was not writing about a future society, but about the post-war UK (and to a lesser degree the US). Thus the notion that the society described in 1984 is futuristic is nonsense.

Incidently you should read Fahrenheit 451. I think you'll like it.

Don't count on it, when it comes to books i'm as soppy as the next girl. There's nothing quite like having a good cry over a fictitious relationship.


When a misconception becomes the norm then the metaphorical meaning of it changes to the misconception. Although i'm not in complete agreement with you over either the term hacker or 1984, it is as always a matter of interpretation.

For instance most people think vikings had horns on their helmets, which was just a Christian demonic characterisation of the Pagan religion despite being nigh-on impossible to make a horned helmet with the tools of the day... They didn't have superglue and you can't stitch horn to metal or leather and have it stay in the right place without sagging. No archaelogical evidence have ever been found to support the horned helmet, and yet if I said to you somebody looked like a Viking you'd think of a fat man with a horned helmet who stank of open campfire. Incidentally it was around 800 years before other races started maintaining a similar level of personal hygeine as the Vikings - another misconception.

If I used the term Viking in metaphor I would be highly suprised if it conjoured an image of a clean and well turned out dark ages man, possibly with a helmet but definately no horns, who was more interested in trading with you than raping your wares and stealing your women, and who did all he could to fit in, adapt and accept local customs and culture.

Likewise there are a group of people who consider themselves "hackers" who are nothing to do with computer security. They consider themselves intellectual elites and they believe this gives them the right to use the term "hacker" with their own definition and dismiss the "common misconception" of it's meaning.

Both of these uses are wrong. Especially when using metaphor but true in all communication a word means what the person or people you are talking too thinks it means.

ROFLMAO

@Becky:
to add to the insult, many people from my country call themselves Vikings, just because they're from Scandinavia (Norway, Sweden and Denmark).