http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06/04/biometric_drm/
In an attempt to stop piracy the RIAA have developed a 'super secure' way of preventing us from copying music. Only allow you to use music if oyu have your fingerprint... Heh, why do I think this isnt going to work? ::)
But I have no fingers..I have to type on the forums by flinging very small rocks from my eyelids. Just don't buy this stupid player..and you have defeated the RIAA.
I've heard people have cracked this already by using various household products to create fake print.
I found the quote from the newsgroup i saw it in:
"A Japanese cryptographer has demonstrated how fingerprint recognition
devices can be fooled using a combination of low cunning, cheap
kitchen supplies and a digital camera.
First Tsutomu Matsumoto used gelatine (as found in Gummi Bears and
other sweets) and a plastic mould to create a fake finger, which he
found fooled fingerprint detectors four times out of five.
Matsumoto tried these attacks against eleven commercially available
fingerprint biometric systems, and was able to reliably fool all of
them.
Noted cryptographer Bruce Schneier, the founder and CTO of Counterpane
Internet Security, described Matsumoto's work as more than impressive.
"The results are enough to scrap the systems completely, and to send
the various fingerprint biometric companies packing," said Schneier in
yesterday's edition of his Crypto-Gram newsletter, which first
publicised the issue."
ALSO....
Doubt cast on fingerprint security
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1991517.stm
"Fake fingers made out of common household ingredients can fool
security systems that use fingerprints to identify people.
Experts say the experiments cast serious doubt on any claims that this
type of biometric system can be made fully secure."
The RIAA are morons.
The more they try to stop piracy, the more people they piss off (thus less people buy CDs and start downloading)
Whatever method their people come up with to stop piracy, some 15 year old kid in his parent's basement will find a work around.Ã, Then it's back to square one for the anti-piracy people.
When will they learn?
[RIAA Idiot] "I have a great idea, let's spend even more money trying to stop piracy, thus having to keep CDs so rediculously priced" [/RIAA Idiot]
I won't buy CDs anymore.
And I won't buy mp3 either (now).
Until they lower the price of online mp3 stores to like 5 cents a song I'll just continue dl'ing them for free.
This is rediculous.... did I even spell that right? I've borrowed a few CD's from my friend during the past months, listened to them for some time, and in case of every one of them I've decided to buy it. If this kind of system appears, how do people lend CD's to each others? I think I'll just need to start downloading music illegally then...
And when they fine you for pirating CDs, abslutely nothing goes to the author of the CD.
If that isn't smart, nothing is. I'm going to apply for a job there.
It gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "digital music"
Quote from: SSH on Mon 07/06/2004 17:56:13It gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "digital music"
Ha!Ã, That's a good one!
Quote from: 4Dsheep on Mon 07/06/2004 17:47:16And when they fine you for pirating CDs, abslutely nothing goes to the author of the CD.
If that isn't smart, nothing is. I'm going to apply for a job there.
They've yet to fine anybody for downloading the music.Ã, It's those who provide the downloads they go after.
Anyway ... I'll take my chances.
The artists get [practically] nothing from CD sales.Ã, When bands that I like (and there aren't many) come in concert I pay to go see them.Ã, That's where the artists make their money.
There would, to me, seem to be a simple solution here.Ã, Lower the prices of CDs and online music shops per song.
Once they realize this they'll see their sales skyrocket!Ã, Sure, they might have to lower the price by 4/5, but they'll sell 20 times as many if they offer them for cheaper.
To me ... this just seems obvious.Ã, Granted, I don't work for the record companies, and I'm sure there's more involved than I'll ever know.Ã, But I've worked enough retail jobs to know that when you lower the prices you sell more.
The RIAA sucks, I bet their kids all use kazaa. If you dont want piracy then eliminate the cd, No one pirates cassetes!
Bwahahahah. Not anymore, no, since the CD exists. But they most definitely did before the CD existed. Take away the CD, and people'll soon be copying tapes again...
Nya nya nynya nya! Downloading's legal in Canada!! I stick my tongue out at you Americans and your RIAA! *Goes on a mad downloading spree*
Ahem.
I have to admit, the gummibear fingerprint thing is quite cool.
Anything that produces sound can be recorded as a wav and compressed down to mp3.. this only adds an extra step in the process. A very costly, probobly won't go very far, and stupid step.. but a step none-the-less.
Oh god, I always hated ripping stuff from tapes as its mostly in mono. My disco stuff like Donna Summers never sounded right! >:(
Quote from: Darth Mandarb on Mon 07/06/2004 20:08:58
The artists get [practically] nothing from CD sales. When bands that I like (and there aren't many) come in concert I pay to go see them. That's where the artists make their money.
That's exactly how I feel about the situation, and there are pleanty of bands that I've seen, which I've quite happily paid to see their concerts (sometimes even twice in the same tour [which can end up costing more than the albums]) yet never buy their albums and can feel I deserve to downlaod them.
In the end more of the money is going to the right place
As far as this stupid idea goes, I can't believe people would seriously feel the need for it.
Paranoid greedy fucks
:S
This is plain sick. What about the legitimate right of a person to make backup copies of their legitimately bought music? I always back up my CDs into MP3 form and burn a second copy, just in case they get lost or stolen. Would making backups with this technology be possible and allowable? What about converting them into MP3 form for personal use? Huh? HUH?
QuoteAnything that produces sound can be recorded as a wav and compressed down to mp3
Yeah, but recording requires special equipment (to get proper sound quality), and not everyone can afford those. Making backups will get damn hard then.
Anyway, just keep in mind that they're the american (and swedish) people working on this project... :P no offence!
Quote from: Timosity on Tue 08/06/2004 08:42:50
Quote from: Darth Mandarb on Mon 07/06/2004 20:08:58
The artists get [practically] nothing from CD sales.Ã, When bands that I like (and there aren't many) come in concert I pay to go see them.Ã, That's where the artists make their money.
That's exactly how I feel about the situation, and there are pleanty of bands that I've seen, which I've quite happily paid to see their concerts (sometimes even twice in the same tour [which can end up costing more than the albums]) yet never buy their albums and can feel I deserve to downlaod them.
In the end more of the money is going to the right place
If you started a band and ended up selling 1 million copies of your first album, you'd be a multi-millionaire, it's not like the bands don't get anything. If they write their own songs you'd be surprised how much they get, which is why all these pop-stars get hardly anything unless they're as big as Britney Spears. Also that's why you see less rock bands on TV, they don't need the money from the show as much.
I always buy the albums of my favourite bands.
Quote from: TheDude on Tue 08/06/2004 13:55:24
If you started a band and ended up selling 1 million copies of your first album, you'd be a multi-millionaire, it's not like the bands don't get anything. If they write their own songs you'd be surprised how much they get, which is why all these pop-stars get hardly anything unless they're as big as Britney Spears. Also that's why you see less rock bands on TV, they don't need the money from the show as much.
I always buy the albums of my favourite bands.
not necessarily true, if you sold 1milliion copies of your first album you'd probablly get a nice sum of cash, but the band would still probably be in debt to the record company, after a few albums if still successful you might become a multi-millionaire, but it also depends how many people are in yout band.
of course it's very rare to sell that many albums first up without a hell of a lot of promotion, and expenditure from the record co, and that's where the debt comes from, but if they don't fuck you over, eventually you might be on the healthy side of it all.
most of the bands I like aren't too big anyway, so their concerts are where they make most of their money. And I do buy albums occasionally, I don't d/l that much music, there isn't much out there that I like. (quite often the albums or EP's that I actually buy are at the gig, sometimes from a band I've just heard or are hearing)
Tim you said it, pay them not the record label, the record label isnt making the music.
The digital millenium copyright act enables anyone to make backups.
Quote from: Darth Mandarb on Mon 07/06/2004 20:08:58
There would, to me, seem to be a simple solution here.Ã, Lower the prices of CDs and online music shops per song.
This, is in my opinion, one of the most overlooked parts of the fight for online piracy. Recording companies have been heavily ripping off consumers for well over 5 years now. The cost to mass press and produce CD's is reativley dirt cheap as compared to the late 80's and early 90's. As the price for production has decreased so has the cost for the product.. right? Hell no! The cost, in many cases, has increased. This was proven last year (or two years ago?) when all those record labels admited they have been overcharging for cd's the past 7 years and anyone can get a refund (if they still have the receit.. yeah).
Since that happend have prices gone down? Nope.. And they aren't going to either. If anything they are gonna sit rock solid until DVD-A or Super CD's or whatever has the bronze enough to take the throne from CDs as the major music medium and the common cost for an 'album' (I use that loosely) will slowly climb in the 20 dollar range.
You want to fight the RIAA on something that actually has weight in the water (because online swapping is illegal and you will never ever ever ever win) Start fighting the cost for CD's.. I garuntee you will pull a lot more strings and get a lot further then something like..
"I totally buy cd's after downloading them.. what's the big DEAL?!?!"
That just gets a rock to your head.
The RIAA may have the upperhand, legally, when it comes to swapping songs.. But we got the upper hand in not putting up with bullshit cd prices.
Funnily enough, in Australia, CD prices have gone down, largely thanks to the ACCC, and their crackdowns on uncompetitive practice.
The local industry rallies against piracy by claiming CD sales are down. Whilst the figure in dollar terms has gone down, the overall number of albums sold has risen. I suppose the kazaa boogieman is good to keep shareholders at bay.
Soon, new developments like Super Audio CDs, which are made using DVD discs, and DVD-Audio discs, which likewise use DVD discs but consist of audio tracks instead of video data, will be the new wave along with various others in an attempt to stop people from ripping music.Ã, But, so far, people have been able to hack and rip any form of multimedia that they can get their hands on so I don't believe they can stop it unless they stop people from having free will.
Edit: Actually, DVD-Audio discs have video data on it as well, but it mainly constists of audio tracks.Ã, You can find more information about these on Afterdawn (http://www.afterdawn.com) and Disctronics (http://www.disctronics.com).
One reason companies might not be making enough money on music is because people are buying more second-hand stuff.
I did a news story on music piracy for our uni radio show. One of the people I spoke to was a music lecturer who said he rarely bought a lot of new music. He mainly bought stuff from secondhand stores.
It's also a little interesting that music companies in Australia are complaining. Earlier this year, they released a media statement on their sales for 2003. They reported that their single sales for the year was at their lowest ever. What they didn't mention (and was fairly obvious from the figures) was that they recorded their highest CD music sales.
Here's that radio story I did (2.6 Mb):
http://www.sylpher.com/DGMacphee/Photoshop/Music%20Rebels2.mp3
I submitted it for assessment and it scored 19 out of 20. I lost 1 mark because the audio with the founding chairman of AMRA was sucky (He was on his mobile).
I downloaded that MP3 from the internet. NO ROYALTIES FOR YOU!
I was waiting for someone to say that. And in under half an hour too. ;D
Quote from: DGMacphee on Wed 09/06/2004 04:23:16
I was wating for someone to say that. And in under half an hour too. ;D
Barely more than a minute, actually.
Quote from: DGMacphee on Wed 09/06/2004 03:52:41
They reported that their single sales for the year was at their lowest ever.
what they probably also failed to mention was that they released the fewest singles in a long time.
the trend of selling singles is becoming much less popular these days but albums are selling much better.
there's a few ways to look at this, but here's one: maybe a lot of singles are being d/l and not so much albums as most people still only have dial-up internet. this would reduce the demand for singles therefore they would release less singles.
this would also dramatically effect the singles charts, and the record co's would have much more control of which 'artists' (models that can't sing) will be up the top. which makes it also cheaper for them to promote, so they still rake it in.
I have no idea who's in the charts these days anyway.
singles are just a way to get more album sales anyway, so if they freely let people d/l music, it's proven that more people will hear their music and buy the album.
so I have no idea what they're complaining about
Record comapnies say the main argument against Kazaa etc is that declining single sales means emerging artists don't get the enough royalties from the music.
However, you can also use the flipside argument that record companies don't properly finance emerging artists.
To my understanding, the way the industry usually works (and correct me if I'm wrong) is the artist fills out a contract that states the company will pay for production, promotion, distribution, etc but these amounts need to be paid back on the single and albums sales.
So, if an emerging artist makes an album that hits low on the charts, he or she makes nothing.
In my opinion, the music industry is ruthless and exploitive with emerging talent. Case in point: Australian pop icon Vanessa Amorosi scored a number one album called 'The Power'. Now she builds fences, plays the odd smallish concert, but hardly anyone remembers her.
Occasionally, you get a Madonna or a Kylie or a Britney, but these are rare considering the amount of singers out there.
And even Kylie had to struggle during the 90s.
Also, here's the news article (the top one) that I based my radio story: http://www.imdb.com/news/sb/2004-04-29
My policy in buying CD's is that if the pricetags has four numbers on it, and the first one is bigger then one, I don't buy it, unless I really want it. None of those come up yet... I buy singles rarely (as well as albums, actually) and I'm not ready to pay more then the 'usual' two and a half or so euros for one or two songs.
One way to make a little profit is to do what these guys (http://www.kingowar.org) do; make your music freely downloadable, and sell the albums separately as self-produced. I've bought two of those albums, the ones that still had covers left for.
Maybe it's just me getting old, but music is turning into total bullshit. There's nothing good to pay for, anyway. Just an ear ache.
An increasing number, sometimes even the majority, of songs on the charts are not released as singles [charts are based on radio airplay]. With that in mind, a decrease in singles sales is not incredibly surprising.
It depends because there are a number of different charts.
There's a chart for albums sales, a chart for single sales, and a chart for airplay.
The charts for albums and single get the most press in newspapers and are recorded by ARIA, whereas charts on airplay at determined by requests on a radio station.