Originally posted by: CalvinHobbes
They should make it so that you can't open the jewel case. That's the ultimate protection.
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
F#&@ the RIAA.
Originally posted by: dainthomas
They should go back to these.
Try ripping one of those to your ipod.
Originally posted by: Frodolives
So it's okay to violent my content but not theirs? Man do I hate them!
Originally posted by: mezrah
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
F#&@ the RIAA.
Cary Sherman: There is nothing unusual about technology being used to protect intellectual property. You can't simply make an extra copy of a Microsoft operating system, or virtually any other commercially-released software program for that matter. Same with videogames. Movies, too, are protected. Why should CDs be any different?
Cary Sherman: The problem with the SonyBMG situation is that the technology they used contained a security vulnerability of which they were unaware. They have apologized for their mistake, ceased manufacture of CDs with that technology,and pulled CDs with that technology from store shelves. Seems very responsible to me. How many times that software applications created the same problem? Lots. I wonder whether they've taken as aggressive steps as SonyBMG has when those vulnerabilities were discovered, or did they just post a patch on the Internet?
Cary Sherman: One other thing to point out: The music industry has been more permissive about copying of its copyrighted product than virtually any other industry. How many burns are you allowed of a movie? None. How many of a videogame? None. You get the idea. Even the CDs with content protection allow consumers to burn 3 copies or so for personal use. The idea is not to inhibit personal use, but to allow personal use but discourage (not prevent, you can never prevent) copying well beyond personal use.
Originally posted by: MrChad
Typically terrible Inquirer article. What Cary Sherman said:
Cary Sherman: There is nothing unusual about technology being used to protect intellectual property. You can't simply make an extra copy of a Microsoft operating system, or virtually any other commercially-released software program for that matter. Same with videogames. Movies, too, are protected. Why should CDs be any different?
Cary Sherman: The problem with the SonyBMG situation is that the technology they used contained a security vulnerability of which they were unaware. They have apologized for their mistake, ceased manufacture of CDs with that technology,and pulled CDs with that technology from store shelves. Seems very responsible to me. How many times that software applications created the same problem? Lots. I wonder whether they've taken as aggressive steps as SonyBMG has when those vulnerabilities were discovered, or did they just post a patch on the Internet?
Cary Sherman: One other thing to point out: The music industry has been more permissive about copying of its copyrighted product than virtually any other industry. How many burns are you allowed of a movie? None. How many of a videogame? None. You get the idea. Even the CDs with content protection allow consumers to burn 3 copies or so for personal use. The idea is not to inhibit personal use, but to allow personal use but discourage (not prevent, you can never prevent) copying well beyond personal use.
He never backs Sony's use of a "spyware rootkit" per se, but rather it's use of "technology ... used to protect intellectual property". As much as I abhor the particular technology that Sony has chosen, Sherman is only defending DRM technologies in general here. Sherman acknowledges the security vulnerabilities of Sony's implementation even if he does understate their severity.
Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
Wait a minute... going back to theoriginal CD specifications... I don't remember these mechanisms being OK'd by the makers of the CompactDisc... Of course, Sony is one of them, but still... they should't even be able to use the CompactDisc logo, under these circumstances.
