Re: BPI's reply to a complaint about protected CDs

Jim Peters wrote:
> Someone has forwarded a reply that he has received from BPI to a
> rant of his on the copy-controlled CD issue.

I have sent a message to the guy at BPI, and we'll see what happens.

Jim

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

To: Matt Phillips <Matt.Phillips-WcQI5Ly86Rxaa/[email protected]>
Subject: Technical misunderstandings in your copy-controlled CD argument

Matt Phillips

I run the UKCDR.org anti-corrupt-CD campaign, and someone forwarded to
me a reply you made to them some time ago.  Your arguments seem to me
to be totally bogus, and seem to rest on an incomplete technical
understanding of the issues.  For this reason, I thought I would point
out these errors in the hope that a more informed discussion might
take place.


> 1) Actually all CDs manufactured by the industry conform to clear
> standards.

That is not true.  Copy-controlled discs do not conform to any known
standard.  In fact, if they conformed to a standard, then they would
no longer be effective, as everyone could make their drives read them
correctly.  For example, Midbar's Cactus Data Shield changes format
from one revision to the next.  Copy-controlled discs are a moving
target, and intentionally so.


> 3) I don't blame the record industry for the fact that I can't play my
> CDs in my cassette player. Different format.

Yes, we would be very happy if you would sell 'copy-controlled' CDs as
a separate format, in their own section of the shop, and with clear
labelling on all the E-tailer websites indicating that these are not
in fact CDs, but in fact some other format.  However, as it stands,
these are being sold as CDs, so consumers rightly expect them to
behave as CDs.


> 4) The Red Book is not an "industry bible" merely a definition of what a
> CD is (according to those that patented it in 1980). Strangely enough
> times have moved on - something that the car manufacturers should be
> fully aware of.

But what do you expect car manufacturers to do about it given that
there is no standard that they could adhere to that would guarantee
that their players would play all current and future copy-controlled
discs?


> 5) Some car manufacturers installed cheap CD-ROMS in cars rather than
> audio CD players (not that I wanted to accuse VW of this). They got
> caught out when copy-protected CDs refused to play on them. Well over
> 95% of copy protected CDs will play on standard audio CD players -
> conforming to the Red Book standard. FACT. If the car manufacturer has
> failed to install an audio player it's not our fault.

It is very clearly your fault because you are creating non-standard
discs.  Okay, these discs happen to play on most "Red Book"-compliant
hardware, but the entire purpose of these discs is that they do not
play on *all* "Red Book" hardware, but only on some of it.

Not only does this hit car players, but also many other high-end
systems that use high-end transports, which are typically based on
CD-ROM drives because they are more advanced and take more care of the
quality of the data.  Just because most CD players are stupid enough
to carry on despite the errors intentionally introduced into these
discs does not make CD-ROM drive based transports inferior.


I am unsure as to whether you have merely misunderstood these
fundamental technical issues regarding the CD format, or whether you
are actually presenting arguments knowing full well that they are
technically incorrect.

I would be interested in your response.

Yours faithfully,

Jim Peters

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

-- 
 Jim Peters                  (_)/=\~/_(_)                 [email protected]
                          (_)  /=\  ~/_  (_)
 Uazú                  (_)    /=\    ~/_    (_)                http://
 Brighton, UK       (_) ____ /=\ ____ ~/_ ____ (_)            uazu.net

 SBaGen: binaural beats for brainwave entrainment:  http://uazu.net/SB