What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
95 Comments
- chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -2/+57"I paid to have it aired during the superbowl"
"wow"
"not on the same channel of course" - Langford, on 10/12/2007, -1/+54This kind of ad needs to be on TV. I have nothing against youtube, but most of the people who see it here already agree with it.
- Shorties, on 10/12/2007, -2/+48Start a fund get it as a superbowl Ad.
- EGOvoruhk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+38Very creative
Now only if someone would back it, and throw it on TV - dargon, on 10/12/2007, -5/+41but then you run into the crap like sony's rootkit
- streetstealth, on 10/12/2007, -3/+40As you, um, 'crassly' put it, yes, I don't think too many would disagree that there are indeed more important causes. That said, I don't think rescuing our media culture from future inoerability is an unimportant cause, and that's why I'm glad this video got dugg!
By the way, your name calling isn't really helping those good causes you mention. - Kusgam, on 10/12/2007, -5/+32Awesome.
- SteveR4376, on 10/12/2007, -1/+25I never have, and never will buy any media on-line solely because of DRM. I buy my music on CD and my movies on DVD and rip them as I see fit. DRM, MPAA and the RIAA can kiss my ass.
- arthurbarnhouse, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22Are you people really having an arguement about war on a post about DRM?? Please, please, PLEASE stop.
- Spacemanspif, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20For one thing it does not stop piracy. People will get the music from other sources, or strip the DRM and share it on peer networks.
For average Joe, it means that the music he bought for his iPod cannot play on his new non-ipod player.
I know that despite DRM'd CDs people still have illegal copies of the music that was on them. Sony's attempt to enforce DRM by installing root kits caused many computers to be vulnerable to viruses and such.
Conclusion: DRM hurts average Joe, but does not hurt pirates. - macfanboi, on 10/12/2007, -9/+27The only way to stop DRM is to stop buying music online. Go back to buying CDs. It's that simple.
- drakonite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14...except every time you buy a CD you are putting $10+ in the RIAA's pocket to use for developing more DRM and taking more innocent people to court.... oh, plus more ivory back scratchers for the RIAA execs.
- antoniojvr, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18Why is he being dugg down? He is right! We should all go to buying CDs and then the online music stores will see how we feel about DRM. If iTunes and other DRM using online music stores keeps selling music at the rate, they will never see the need to strip the DRM.
They won't change until we hurt their bottom line. - Grimdotdotdot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Especially YouTube ;)
- EGOvoruhk, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15It's pretty clear to me. They're basically saying that a few years down the road, who knows if you can still play the DRMed music you paid for. As opposed to knowing that you'll always be able to play a CD
- mantlepro, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16Yes, but re-ripping a song from iTunes doesn't improve on the quality. Once you purchase a song at 128k, it's going to sound like 128k even if you re-encode at a higher bitrate.
- byte, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12No, that's not a great point. Here's why:
If say in the days of vinyl records I bought a record, I could play it on my player, my friends player, everyones player. Even if my player was a different brand to everybody else's, I could still play it.
That versus today when I am locked into a specific brand of player. Say I buy a song off iTunes, I will only be able to play it with an iPod. No chance of ever playing it on, say, a Creative Zen. Worst off all, say Apple dies tomorrow. What will you do when your iPod goes out of date? If you throw it out, your entire music collection goes with it.
See the problem now?
p.s. I'm not trying to pick on Apple. Just using them as an example. Sorry Steve!!
-- /usr/bin/byte - jacobmar1ey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Unless you buy a CD from a record company that isn't part of the RIAA.
http://www.cstrecords.com/
http://www.matadorrecords.com/
http://www.fatwreck.com/
http://www.kranky.net/
et al:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_record_labels - forteller, on 10/12/2007, -7/+14"In war, there are NO rules"
Uhm, yes there are
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_war - thatsmyaibo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14ok, I'm not looking to be dugg down, i just want information and hopefully by answering my question it will raise awareness to others who don't know. But what exactly is so bad about DRM? I kind of understand that DRM prevents the file from being transferred over the net to a mass amount of people (which is understandable with piracy and all). But for private use, I have never had a problem with burning protected music to a cd and being able to rip the cd DRM free. With other types of media like cassettes and cds etc.. people were not able to send music to a mass amount of people until it hit the computer.
- dargon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9That DRM can also keep you from burning a copy to cd and if you buy such a song then you obviously can't play it on every device you want. Shoiuld the decision of what you want to do with your music be yours or someone elses? I have no problem with the creator wanting to limit peoples ability to share files, but should they have any abilities beyond that?
- Skeuomorph, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Here's a contrarian point of view:
According to the first 90 years of this video, people couldn't copy music stuck in vinyl at all since there were no tape decks. So you paid for your record, and you listened to it till it wore out. Every time you played it, it degraded a little. When it was too bad, you bought yourself another one. You still can't go from vinyl or tape to CD or PC without going through analog.
While half-life of hardware accelerates (60 yrs vinyl, 30 yrs tape, 15 yrs CD, 7 yrs WMA, etc), lock-in hasn't changed much: you can still go from DRM content to PC or tape through analog line as well (or through one generation of transcoding: burn an audio CD from the bought files and rip that).
Do people not remember the first decade of digital audio CDs were not "DDD" but usually "ADD" or "AAD"? Unless you bought Telarc. Chesky, or other audiophile CDs, you happily listened to digital CDs recorded through an analog line, and you didn't complain.
Nothing's changed over the course of that video except people's sense of entitlement to infinitely and losslessly duplicate the master. - bblades, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Emusic should really get on the ball and support ads like this, because they are one of the few non DRM'ed music download sites on the web. Hard to believe in a few short years it has gone from unadulterated piracy, and now has turned into paying a company money to listen to songs only where they want you to.
- elbeano, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11I know it doesn't improve the quality, I meant you get to pick the bitrate when you rip a regular cd. However, the DRM is gone in one simple step, and you can also play your music on a 20 year old cd player which kind of defeats the purpose of the "ad".
- DecoyQ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Is it me or did they completely skip over the 8 track? :-)
- digitaloxygen, on 10/12/2007, -8/+14This one is even better > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mywgsXBGD68&NR
- WinterSolstice, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Exactly... and what is wrong with getting a lossless (well, near-lossless) version of the master I purchased?
Each media that has come out has been a theoretical improvement over the previous one. Wax cylinders sound like crap. Records sound... well, ok. Tapes are versatile and sound ok. CDs were supposed to be the "Last media you'd ever need" or some such. I don't really remember the ads, since it has been a while. We were told that the reason we were paying so much more for CDs than for tapes and records was because they wouldn't wear out, they wouldn't degrade, and the signal was "superior" (that last part is open to interpretation, of course).
Now we have computers with the ability to store an actual master without even having it downmixed first. We have a common knowledge that media doesn't need to be damaged in use. We (in some cases) have spent 10s of thousands on getting the best possible sound out of a device.
So what's your point? If I paid $20 for a CD and it gets scratched, am I not entitled to make another copy? What if I paid $4.99 for it? What if I just bought the one song that didn't suck?
I'm not really pro/anti-DRM, I just am very concerned about the quality and longevity of my music. I happen to like quite a few comedy routines and pieces of music that are only available on Reel-to-Reel. So we converted them to CD. This required servicing and keeping a 40 year old piece of equipment - then analog line recording the output and cleaning it up with a computer. Will I have to do the same to an iPod to ensure that I will be able to listen to today's music in 40 years?
-WS - kidtwist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'm sure the record companies agree with you 100%. The RIAA too.
- extols, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10@gleem
If there are no rules, as you put it, how can there be such a thing as a 'war crime'. If there are no rules to break a crime cannot be committed. And do things such as the Geneva Conventions not exist in your world? - woxidu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"Every format gets outdated and hard to use with newer equipment, whether with DRM or not"
But the point still isn't that it will get outdated someday; the point is that the media that you buy is tethered to some company. The format might still be alive and kicking in 5 years, but if my online music store (read: DRM provider) tanks then I'm out of luck for listening to my music on anything but an old/rotting program or device. - thatsmyaibo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I don't know why I'm being dugg down. I just want more information. I don't support DRM or anything.
- GarySZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Because they'd never think of trying to put DRM restrictions on the actual CD, right?
/hello Sony! - imightbewrong, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6great ad! DRM blows~
- Skeuomorph, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@Winter Solstice :
I know people who have this level of concern, I'm one of them. Talking 40 year timeframes, I'm sure you remember how this was handled for vinyl -- we bought two copies. One to play all the time, and one as our "master". Then we bought the most expensive needle we could afford and a high bitrate digital audio tape deck, and we recorded them. And then the digital audio tape decks disappeared... So then we (as you mentioned) recorded at high bitrate into a computer, cleaned it up with ProTools or whatever, and sit on that. (But that has to be downsampled for iPods, etc, resulting in a generation loss.)
As for DRM licenced files, we can copy them onto as many backups as you like, and we can backup our license files as often as we like, store them offsite, etc. It's somewhat easier to protect those than tape or vinyl, and the backups are lossless. Sure, unrestricted use on more than one device requires a generation loss, but once you've taken that hit, infinite copies are not an issue. But audiophiles don't start with someone else's encoded file anyway, regardless of DRM, since the quality starts out too compromised.
In the meantime, if we want unrestricted use, we set up our own archiving approach that gives us the best quality technology affords today (just as you describe doing in the past), and we use that to make unrestricted archival copies that we can then continue to nurse along through however many generations of technology we choose. As I wrote in the post above, each successive generation of tech is obsolete faster, so having a plan is important but you probably won't be babying the iPod 40 years from now.
Last year, I got a Sony XL1 400 CD changer with auto-ripping so I could re-rip 20 years of CDs into WMA-lossless. I did this so I could automate transcodes from those into bitrates targetting each separate digital device, since each device has a different sweet spot for playback.
In the meantime, we should count our blessings that Macrovision for audio hasn't caught on, because that would take away the analog copy we've been able to make since the day the first reel to reel was released. - piwy, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11uhm, he has to be dugg down cause cd's also come with drm these days. and far more intrusive than say fairplay. with stuff like iTunes you allready know it comes with drm and what said drm does or doesn't do to your system. unlike what you get when you pop a store bought cd in your drive (sony's rootkit comes to mind here) .
- uidzer0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4A little off topic but does anyone know what band was playing in the video? They were pretty slick...
- colincornaby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"It's pretty clear to me. They're basically saying that a few years down the road, who knows if you can still play the DRMed music you paid for. As opposed to knowing that you'll always be able to play a CD"
My computer can't play any cassette tapes I paid for and you don't see me complaining. I'm sure in 10 years I won't be able to play CD's on new computers either. Every format gets outdated and hard to use with newer equipment, whether with DRM or not.
And technically, once you've authenticated with the server for your account once, you can always play a DRM'd file for that account. - kaddar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Elbeno: it still is, but in videos, hit "view all", it's not in technology
- mantlepro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I got'cha. Yeah, ripping normal CDs is definitely the way to go until mainstay music stores lower their prices and/or release higher quality music files.
- anonydigg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@Skeuomorph
You seem to like to write your ideas everywhere, multiple times.
Here is a reply to you from a Youtube user, just in case you missed it:
"The video isn't talking about replication; it's talking about playability. You cannot play DRMed material in a device that doesn't support that specific DRM - and can't play it after you have changed players a certain number of times(5 pcs for itunes).
And it's not even like how a tape can't play in a CD player, it's like how it would be if a Sony tape wouldn't play in a Pioneer one, and wouldn't play if you changed 5 Sony tape players and would have to buy another tape. You must get paid by RIAA to say that." - sciencebase, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Better still....don't pander to the A&R guys' whims, instead check out the thousands of great bands who give away their demo songs, the independents who haven't tied their repertory up in DRM, or just listen to the radio. People used to take pride in having an enormous record collection, CDs changed all that cos those ***** jewel cases and miniature "covers" just don't give you the same buzz as a full 12 -inch gatefold with insert. Does anyone care how big anyone else's playlist is?
- vectorprime, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@Skeuomorph:
"[Y]ou can still do with that file what you could always do with a cassette tape, vinyl, the radio, etc: make a recording through an analog line." Yes, we can, but that's part of the point. Even perfect DRM can't ever stop piracy because of the analogue hole.
"Also, the "right" to avoid obsolete technology, or "fair use" to make a lossless backup of the source media never applied to vinyl or tape. Who granted you this right? When?" Congress did, repeatedly, by failing to explicitly give those rights to the copyright holders. We've technically had these rights for centuries, we just haven't had the technology to exercise them. If DRM was just an enforcement tool for a publisher's copyright privelages, that would be one thing, but as it is now they are using the technology to give themselves privelages well beyond what the law grants.
"As for this new "I want to play it anywhere" right, that's something new too." Again, not quite. Noone expects their mp3s to play on their dishwasher, but that's not the debate. The debate is that you have to get permission from the publisher to use your media in a certain way, in this case on the computer or mp3 player of your choice. - pronto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@colincornaby
yes your comp can play cassette...
just get this : http://www.thinkgeek.com/computing/drives/7a8d/
A Cassette Deck for the PC - hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That's like saying if people were really upset about imperialism they'd be complaining about the Roman Emipre. They only complain about the United States because it is popular.
- Skeuomorph, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@anonydig: the quotes make it seems your whole paragraph was a quote, but in any case:
Try to get around the emotionally charged reactions to DRM, and realize that a device that doesn't support "a specific DRM" is precisely like a record player that doesn't suppot a specific belt speed, or the cassete and VHS decks that don't support the same EP/SP speeds. You can't use other records or tapes unless you match the original technology. Or, in a currently available technology, it's like a camcorder that doesn't support the same digital video codec on tape. The tapes physically fit, and contain digital data, yet are incompatible.
If you can think of DRM as just a technology, then choose your technology and devices appropriately so they do interoperate, or transform your music into a usable form. You're just as free to transform it today (with a generation loss) as you have been since the introduction of reel-to-reel tape (with a generation loss).
@byte: You're mistaken. Not every vinyl works on every record player. Even in some of the (high end) current record players, you must disassemble the record player to swap the drive mechanism if you want to play a different speed record. It's possible to make it compatible, after some effort. Even after your record works, you're listening to an analog rendition which does not match the original. DRM protected content may require a couple clicks of effort as well, and after transformation, you may hear a version which does not match the original.
As for your "throw away the ipod, all your music stops working", yes. Just as if you throw away your record player all your vinyls stop working. This is why Winter Soltice and I both described painstaking processes of transforming your music collection into a technology you, personally, believe will be futureproof or more readily transformable in the future.
Again, forget DRM as being a "restriction" which is emotionally charged, as though it's "good or evil", and think of it as a "feature" you can choose to accept or workaround or not buy, as you wish. Vote with your freedom of choice, and an appropriately usable technology will win, like Betamax vs VHS, UMD vs MemoryStick, or HD-DVD vs Blueray.
@hackwrench: I didn't say they *all* wore out, I said audiophiles bought two copies. Both cassettes and vinyl are scientifically proven to degrade with eacy play, which is why there's a variety of software to "restore" recordings made from vinyl.
Regarding, "which is it", the two statements are not mutually exclusive, and the context makes it clear what the word "nothing" refers to. Each technology supplants the next, and you still have the ability to make an analog copy.
@vectorprime: I'll answer that in the thread above, as it's slightly different topic. - EGOvoruhk, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6I'll gladly help get the ball rolling by donating, but I'd need quite a few hands if I want to get it shown during the Superbowl
- Catchpen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2DRM aka C.R.A.P. http://news.zdnet.com/2036-2_22-6035707.html
- CeeJayDK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Good movie .. Another good movie is "Trusted computing and you"
The main website is here http://www.lafkon.net/tc/
And if you just want to see it quickly : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1H7omJW4TI&search=trusted
or
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5115609628556940516&q=trusted+computing - Phoenixfury, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I can not play my iTunes purchased tracks on my Xbox360 with out breaking the law. Sure I'm authorized to use them on my computer and on my iPod, and despite still being on the iPod I can't play them on my Xbox360. That's just plane BS! In my opinion this is a bad move on Apple's part not to allow this and will only make the Zune even more palatable to 360 owners. They will either have to allow their DRM to work on the 360, or lose sales to Zune.
On the other hand if they want to sell even more iPods, they should just scrap DRM altogether from the iTunes store. Yes I know this means their music will then be able to play on anything. Here is how I think they can keep their customer base loyal. Every song you purchase would count towards a point system that would allow you to buy just about anything from the Apple store or let you cash in towards a coupon towards a purchase of a new iPod. This wouldn't be enough to get you an iPod for free, but could take a huge chunk out of the total cost for you. The only bit of DRM that should even be on your purchases and I think would be extremely fair is a watermark that personally identifies you should your music wind up on a file sharing site. Now wouldn't that be even more fair than fair play? I think this would be even more profitable to Apple too. - pkulak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3So how do I get that record to play in the tape or CD player? They break their own metaphor.
-
Show 51 - 95 of 95 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is