Re: Corrupt CD updates, Jun-2004

Jim Peters wrote:

> Peter Kuhm wrote:

>>BTW, EICTA and BSA are lobbying for DRM and against levies with
>>their new collaborative website: -> http://www.europe4drm.com/
> 
> This looks interesting as an overall summary of DRM.  There is a vast
> amount of wishful thinking going on here, though.  For example:

[...]

>   With CD audio content, the situation is slightly different.  [...]
>   Today conventional CD protection is offered by several different
>   proprietary technologies from vendors Macrovision and Sony that are
>   proving both effective and popular with content owners.
>           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^   !!!
> 
> It must be some imaginary fantasy world they are writing about, not
> the one that I live in.

Pardon me if I'm misunderstanding here, but surely these *are* popular
with content owners --- the record companies / distributors rather than
the people who buy the CDs, that is. I wonder if that slight ambiguity
is intentional for lobbying purposes?

The "effective" bit is probably best judged by looking at how prevalent
songs from "protected" CDs are on file sharing networks --- that's
surely what the record companies will be looking for. I have no idea how
this has changed since DRM's introduction --- anyone? Of course, it's an
unacceptable compromise for people who want to use the lossless copying
possibilities of digital music for personal reasons or who really care
about the sound quality, but I sense that doesn't enter into this
definition of "effective".

Andy

-- 
Andy Buckley, HEP Group, Cavendish Lab, Cambridge
http://www.insectnation.org