Yet Another Expert Points Out That Copy Protection Doesn't Work
from the in-case-you-weren't-paying-attention dept
This has been repeated way too often, but it still appears that the entertainment industry doesn't quite get it. As they continue to insist on the need to use copy protection, they never seem to respond to the fact that copy protection doesn't work. The latest to make the case is a researcher whose PhD. covered issues related to copy protection, and is hoping the industry will finalize recognize that copy protection isn't the issue -- better business models are all that's needed. Of course, plenty of people have been saying that for years, but the industry continues to ignore it. Instead, they prefer to alienate so much of their market by treating them like criminals that by the time they do figure out the need for different business models, most of that market will have already gone elsewhere.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I'm sick and tired of Techdirt
I don't agree with this entirely anyway. The harder a copy protection is to break, the more people will be compelled to buy the original.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm sick and tired of Techdirt
Fair point. However, part of the issue is that there seem to be plenty of folks who don't understand the issue.
We've all heard it before, does not work, need better business models, where's the news?
The fact that more experts are pointing it out seems like news to us... because those who don't buy into it insist that it's not true.
I don't agree with this entirely anyway. The harder a copy protection is to break, the more people will be compelled to buy the original.
That doesn't strike me as being compelling. First of all, all it takes is one person to break it before it ends up on pretty much every file sharing system -- and there are plenty of folks who work very hard to break any copy protection as soon as it comes out.
So, the issue of how hard it is to break really isn't an issue. Someone, somewhere, will break it... and then it's game over. Thus, it has little impact on whether or not someone will buy the original. The free version is always going to be available.
So what good does it do?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I'm sick and tired of Techdirt
Serious question: is there any copy protection that hasn't been broken?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm sick and tired of Techdirt
Tech Dirt gets new readers all the time, and this may be new to them.
Plus, this is an important issue, and I, for one, want to stay current on what's happening. Including who's promoting DRM and who's panning it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm sick and tired of Techdirt
If this were the case, with all the trouble that various pieces of software have gone to prevent piracy - it would have been all but eliminated by this point. By increasing the difficulty of breaking copy protection on things people are going to treat it as a challenge, when that happens no matter *what* lengths people go to to prevent something from being reproduced with out the permission of the creator it *will* be circumvented.
However if on the other hand quality content was produced that inspired people to purchase it because of how much they enjoyed it I think that would be better route to go. The RIAA and their ilk are not looking to stop the casual pirate, they are more setting their sights on the people that *would* take the time to learn how to get around copy protection. Which as technology integrates itself into our culture at a younger and younger age, people who are currently perplexed by the tools that are used to get around current copy protection are going to start to dwindle as their numbers are replaced by the youthful masses that will take the time to learn how to get around things because they can and crucifying those that pirate isn't going to solve anything because anyone with a teenage child knows that when you say 'don't do this' it because it practically becomes a knee-jerk response to do it anyways.
By convincing the masses as a whole via a better buisiness model and better content which in turn inspires people to procure items in general rather than pirate them I feel that the extent that people go to get something that they can normally buy would decrease exponentially.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm sick and tired of Techdirt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm sick and tired of Techdirt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm sick and tired of Techdirt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I'm sick and tired of Techdirt
Thanks for keeping us up to date Mike. Thought I would put in my 2 cents, since following from the begining days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm sick and tired of Techdirt
`nuff said
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm sick and tired of Techdirt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm sick and tired of Techdirt
BullSPIT! I'll just have to settle for the old-school handi-cam copy that the junk-monkey on the corner recorded from the back row of the theater!!
...that is until I get my patch updated by one of the thousands of cracker-hackers out there eagerly anticipating the pleasure of screwing over another bastard who thinks the $25 retail he's charging on 2˘ worth of goods is considered "fair market value"!
And yes, the 2˘ includes more than just the cost of the disc. It also accounts for the rest of the gratuitous excess like the butt-load of cash they showered on the guy who promised them he could develop an effective form of copyright protection!
(Who, coincidently, was the same guy who sent me the pirated, pre-release version which the apes in the editing room misplaced shortly after interlacing it with a few subliminal flashes of fetish porn.)
Besides, face it, when you realize that your rug-rat used your Blue Hawaii Special Edition Unrated Directors Cut or his Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang disc as a coaster for his can of Jolt or to play fetch with the dog, you'll wish you still had your original discs safely tucked away in the armoire so you could make another 2˘ copy instead of shelling out another $25 when he starts bawling cause he wants his flying car movie!
When the DVD Cartels are willing to warranty my original discs for life and replace them when they start skipping, I'll be glad to forgo burning copies.
Until then, you hold your breath and I'll protect my right to back up my library by supporting those hard working code hackers.... and occasionally recoup some my losses in greyer methods.
__________________________________________
As the "HDTV" buzzword grew, DVD content producers wanted to cash in. Of course their DVDs were still only 480i, but never let the facts get in the way of a good marketing campaign. They discovered that 1080p professional digitizing equipment was being used to digitize the film content -- which was then down-scaled to 480i to be put on the DVD. And that was all they needed to know to call their new crop of DVDs "high definition" DVDs.
-Bob Pariseau
www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=477740
__________________________________________
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's a mouthful right there
A) Because the CD player is very picky about protected CDs. They may not play at all or may play erroneously.
B)The cd player does cause some wear on the CD since it will move quite a lot when jogging etc. I am not going to destroy an original with it, no way.
Sure I could buy a mp3 player but I'd have the same hassle trying to get the songs on it.
So for practical reason, I am not compelled to buy an original CD with any kind of copy protection. I do buy all my music. Those I download, I'll buy legally online.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That's a mouthful right there
which in turn are crippled with DRM, and you can't burn them to CD or play only a limited number of times, and only on the device it was downloaded to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: That's a mouthful right there
Why is it that some seem to think if it is music, it should be free to any and all, with no strings attached, play on anything they want it to play on, and be given to anyone they want to give it to?
I see so many slams on legit music sources, file types, download services, etc., that I have to wonder sometimes if these people have ever even tried one of these services out, or if they are just jumping on the bitch-and-whine bandwagon to hear themselves rant...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: That's a mouthful right there
If I buy a song or an album of songs, I'm buying the music. The media should not matter. I should be able to buy a CD and rip it to play on my MP3 player. I should not be able to make copies for anyone else, but I should be able to play the songs I paid for where and when I want to play them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copyright Reality [Re: That's a mouthful right the
INAL, but I would say you are right on the money there.
Copyrights don't mean you can't copy (media-shift) works you have purchased for your own use. Copyright law is about DISTRIBUTION.
Did you know that you can *shock* actually COPY video that you *shock* didn't pay for?
It's true... We've been doing that LEGALLY for years. The old name for the technology was the VCR. The Supreme Court of the USA said we could do it and that it was perfectly ok, and everyone was happy--except the media companies. Now they want to usurp the power of the highest court of the land with their DRM machinations...
The **AA's would like to wipe out any notion of FAIR USE and make us all criminals for things that are not a crime. Media-shifting music (ripping CD's to Vorbis for example to play them on your home LAN) is not a crime!
Redistribution of the same to others for profit is definitely a crime. However, FAIR USE allows you to redistribute copyrighted works to others legally in certain cases. Check out this comic book by a bunch of lawyers, it explains a lot of this stuff.
DRM is a racket. It's all about control. Manufacturers what to tell you how and where you can & cannot use the products you have purchased, and own.
DRM is C.R.A.P. We should stop buying (and buying into) their C.R.A.P.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Downloads != CD Quality [Re: Re: That's a mouthful
which in turn are crippled with DRM, and you can't burn them to CD or play only a limited number of times, and only on the device it was downloaded to.
Not to mention that the majority of music downloads that you purchase are coded at a much lower bitrate then a CD. Unless it's a .wav, .flac, or other LOSSLESS format, you are NOT getting what you paid for quality-wise...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: That's a mouthful right there
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: That's a mouthful right there
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Did you picture her naked? Did my telling you not to, make you instantly, for a fraction of a second, do just that?
It's human nature to do what you're told not to. Had the entertainment industry left this alone, it wouldn't have ended but it certainly wouldn't have become a challenge for everyone to do it without getting caught. Telling someone they can't do something in most cases just makes them want to do that thing more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Did you picture her naked? Did my telling you not to, make you instantly, for a fraction of a second, do just that?
It's human nature to do what you're told not to.
That's a rather specious argument...if I tell you not to go out and build a car...will you have to struggle not to go out and try and build one?
Its not like we HAVE to go and download music...or HAVE to try and break copy pyrotection...in fact, I doubt ANY of the above posters have ever cracked copy protection by themselves (they might however have followed the footsteps of others)...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm sick and tired of YOU
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When I was in my late teens, one of the local radio staions played a full album every night at midnight. another station played a six pack of albums every Sunday afternoon. I recorded a couple hundred albums that way. The ones I really, really liked I went out and bought the actual albums (my way of supporting the artists - except I later learned I wasn't really support the artists at all but the big labels).
Would I have bought every album i taped? Nope. Unfortunately like some major coprorate executive I don't make $1 million dollars a year or even $100,000. I still managed to buy on average of 100 albums a year thought my late teens and all of my 20's.
Then I suffered some financial setbacks that prevented me from investing in music for a while and by the time I was able to invest in music again the RIAA's terror campaign was starting to gear up. Even if I could invest in music at my current level (which I can't as album prices have virtually doubled while my salary hasn't - and I have more expenses these days) I wouldn't.
I've bought maybe 5 major label albums the last five years, so the industry has been losing 100 sales a years just from me alone. Recently, I've taken a more active role in disuading people from supporting the RIAA's bully tactics, with some success. I'm sure I'm costing them more sales by turning friends and aquaitances to indepedant artists and labels.
And I've never downloadeda single MP3 in my life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
/sarcasm off
LOL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM: Propaganda is our only weapon
Let's sum up why DRM is bad - again.
1. DRM hurts paying customers
2. DRM destroys Fair Use rights
3. DRM renders customers' investments worthless
4. DRM can be defeated
5. DRM encourages platform lockdown and discourages innovation
6. DRM encourages "content lockin" or "corporate authorship"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Business and Technology
Increase the technology and you have even fatter geeks in a dark room somewhere witha case of Bawls determened to be smarter than they are and crack it - then once again it's free to everyone via google, yahoo and other engines......maybe they should be the ones to blame for making the info so easy to find? Ha, just kidding. Happy Tuesday to everyone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The business
For the cost of the DRM and copy-protection efforts, plus the cost of lost business (due to pissed FANS), the businesses could spend cash on (shock!) artists who might be interesting - even if they're not the next MTV favorite. If you provide more variety of music and promote the music to the FANS, more people will purchase the music (one way or another). The more you beat on the FANS with draconian copy protection, the less FANS will buy music.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just make the player explode ;-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe we'll finally drive that into their thick skulls that it only HURTS the industry.
Maybe.
Wishful thinking. Until then, I'll just keep getting my music for free.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
male-to-male 3.5mm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copy Protection
If you purchase a car you can lend it to as many people as you choose, if you purchase a house you can choose who lives in it or does not.
I dont have an arguement with the recording industry and there fears concerning people who bootleg. What is getting annoying is that I as an honest consumer seem to be having to deal with this issue more than the very people the recording industry is after. Why should I have to deal with crazy non playing copy protected CDs or DVDs that I PURCHASE? If anything these tactics make me less likely to purchase and more likely to turn on the radio in my car or home which is still for the most part free and in case they havent figured it out is still available for recording and uploading to any site you want. There is also recording from your pay per view channel for movies.
I have yet to see one legitimate study showing the actual drop in sales of CD's or DVD's due to downloading of music.
If they spent as much time trying to figure out how to lower the price of CD's or perhaps researching ways to capitalize on this trend there would be no need for this. Its really getting to be way to much and way to Big Brother.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A very old business model
One thing Mike has not been repeating is that the recording industry has managed to keep the price of a CD at the $12 and up price even though everyone with a computer knows that the CD costs less than $1.00. Down from the $5.00 to $8.00 it used to cost for the blank CD. Fortunately, in their zeal to force everyone to pay up for every time a song is played, less and less people seem inclined to pay at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As for the new copy protections, I agree that as soon as a new one comes out, people feel the need to break it becuase of the challenge. It is exactally how I feel when i am trying to chrack the latest version of DVD burning software so it is free.
If they want this stuff to change, then they had better lower the cost of CD's and DVD's becuase like i said, the math just doesn't add up for me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Price
People complained about paying $16 for a CD that contains only one or two "good" songs. Apple responded by selling single tunes for a buck. Now the net is rife with posts about how a dollar is too high, and they'd buy if it were a quarter. Or a nickle.
The fact is that some people are going to rationalize their P2P habit regardless of price or business model.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM
An example is the connection between iTunes and the driver for your computer's sound card. I have a program that can rip the pure digital stream from any source right there. Don't use it for pirating, but I do use it to save supposedly locked Internet streams (real player) to a file that I can move to my iPod so I can listen to it away from my desk.
What the RIAA doesn't seem to get is that if they make it harder to enjoy their music I just won't buy it anymore. The media corporations keep wanting you to pay for the same thing multiple times. I should be able to buy a song once, store it as my ring tone, burn it as part of a mix, put it on my laptop, on both my iPods, stream it through my home system, back it up to disk, etc.
I can do all of that right now from the songs I buy from iTunes but not without some pain and workarounds. As soon as I can't do it at all I'll consider not buying music anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OGG vorbis, my friend.
People don't care about quality, thats why MPEG and JPEG compressions are still around. People that download music don't even know what we're talkign about :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
copywrite responses
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
copywrite responses
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fame
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RIAA scare tactics
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Own it now" advertising
What their lawsuits are saying is that we don't really own it, we're just licensing it and thus only allowed to use iit according to a license agreement with which we are not supplied.
But you don't see them advertising it as "License it now on DVD" do you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oooo, you people are forgetting one thing...
Let's look at something people seem to be ignoring: the "product" itself. Pick any product manufactured in the world EXCEPT MOVIES OR MUSIC. Tell me that when you buy a toaster, you're going to run home and clone the thing for your Mom and Dad to save a few bucks. Or, how about that $10.00 T-shirt you just bought off the rack at Wal-mart: race home now and clone that for 10 of your best buds. An even better deal can be had if you get 1000 of your closest friends to pitch in and buy a single Ferrari and then clone it so you can all have your own copy... what a deal!
If you think that sounds ridiculous, it is. But why does it sound so ridiculous??? Because THE GENERAL PUBLIC DOESN'T HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY SITTING IN THEIR LIVING ROOM TO ACCOMPLISH THAT KIND OF COPYING. But oh, guess what, we DO just happen to have the kind of technlogy that allows us to duplicate music and movies... and don't you, RIAA trample on my right (right?) to 'fairly use' my easily clonable stuff.
As far as I can tell, the grand concept of "Fair Use" is really only applied to music and movies (tapes, DVDs, CDs and electronic media), NOT to T-Shirts, toasters, or $1,000,000 Ferraris. And, as far as I can tell, forgery of any kind is still a crime punishable by plenty JAIL TIME - ask any art forger you may know.
Come on, who's lying to themselves... RIAA and the artists that create our entertainment or the self-appointed "fair use" whiners all around the world who selfishly think that the means justifiy the ends.
Get real, pay a buck a song. Good grief!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oooo, you people are forgetting one thing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oooo, you people are forgetting one thing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Oooo, you people are forgetting one thing.
You pick and choose examples to support your case and then simply choose to ignore anything else that prooves you to be wrong. The MUSIC is the product, just like the TOASTER and the FERRARI are products - no difference.
Ok Class.... can anyone pick which of those 3 in the tiny product sample above (chosen from the millions that exist) are protected by "FAIR USE"?
And if it's too hard to understand products, then how about this: go to work, do an honest day's labor, and then let your boss tell you that s/he's not gonna pay you for the product of you labor. And will the words coming from your mouth then be "Oh, well, that's fair."?
Again, get honest. Pay a buck a song.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM & Easy access to ALL forms of Content
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copy protection
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For those who bash my rights to copy: Enough is en
I mean, if I buy a movie on DVD, or a game, then I should have the right to reverse-compile, or even edit the game, or make clips of movies or music, and even mess it up anything that I wish.
It just makes me want to download a cracking software, crack the security code on the DVD, and then throw an egg at the movie producers for p_____ing me off with all that copy protection s_____t. I mean, I do support such DRM measures to prevent mass copying and stop these true pirates...the people who make 1000000000000 copies and reselling them on the streats.
And believe me, IT CAN BE DONE! All they have to do is put down the consumer number on the machine, so that I can make unlimited copies on the machines that I own. All it takes is one coding rights fingerprinting key, and if the fingerprint on the music matches the fingerprint on that piece of device, than it works.
And I tell you this, for those who support the full extent of the DMCA law and support hanious copy protection, than _____ them.
And Come on, this region junk thing. If I want to watch one of my DVD movies even though I am out of North America, where I am staying at a hotel, I mean, COME ON! It's my freak'n DVD, ma'an.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The new DMCA and Fair Use laws (coming soon)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:1:./temp/~c109utKY9y::
and I think we can be fairly pleased. Although it isn't even close to being comprehensive, it addresses all your issues, so put the gun down and step away from the RIAA lawyer!
Even the title makes me tingle all over!
For those of you who are browser challenged...
it basically says 'when we wrote this up back in '98, um... sorry we screwed up and alot of consumers got hosed in the process'.
ok, here's where Congress starts to bend over and grab their ankles...
(blah blah blah, more good stuff... go read it for yourself!... blah, blah, blah...)
Hold on... that last one kinda choked me up... getting teary...
Then there's a touching mention of how "nonnegotiable license terms" placed on works, shall not be enforsable in any state.
Now here is the part which gives the RIAA a sore bung-hole...
And here is where hackers rejoice and sing glorious praise to the heavens above...
I like the direction this is going!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]