CD Copy Protection, Are Music Industry Folks Stupid?

While I agree that the music industry has painted themselves into their own hole, you cannot help but admit that mp3's and P2P sharing over the net IS hurting sales.

I believe in buying CD's of artists. I like getting a cd and hearing the tunes at the cd quality sound (most mp3's widespread are at 128kpbs). The music industry needs to take a more agressive stance on P2P music sharing. I support the battle they are waging and I think it will be just a matter of time before LimeWire and Kazaa will be a thing of the past. Either that or music will be increasingly difficult to download.

But so long as the music industry doesn't hold up its end by releasing more CD's per year then it won't help. As mentioned before the shape of the economy is obviously impacting everyone including them.

I think these copy protection schemes they are inventing and putting into practice are working. You have got to remember. While people here are obviously going to figure out ways around it, the averge person won't. They won't think about using a marker to mark out the track that prohibits play on computers. Also the practice of record companies releasing "trick" mp3's I think works, they just need to be more aggressive.

Everyone says that they are not embracing it. Well they have been trying to but so far its not working. I mean you are not going to be able to charge for mp3's when users can EASILY get it for free. When P2P music sharing is harder and harder to where its almost impossible to get a listenable copy, thats when these services can prosper.

I'm sure we will start to see a decrease in CD price as well. We are already seeing "digi-packs" , DVD's, and other items designed to enhance the CD experience. I'm fairly certain you will be able to purchase any CD for 10 dollars or less in a few years.

I think the RIAA is taking some good steps. Besides. Napster was shutdown, which was a big step. Its just only a matter of time before its not so easy to get commercial music for free ladies and gentleman.
 
The music industry certainly deserves its share of bashing. The majority of the profits come from heavily promoted, mostly mediocre groups or from "oldies". However, I think that the radio industry (read, Clearchannel) is also responsible. In order to get a radio station to play an album or a song, increasingly the music industry has to pay the radio station to do so. Much like the food industry pays the grocery store to carry certain items.

This "ransoming" of music is largely responsible for the release of fewer albums each year. Album and group promotion becomes more and more expensive because of this. College radio, at least in the US, isn't the force it once was and every year there are fewer and fewer independent radio stations. Which of course means fewer new groups get promoted.

What we're seeing is pure and simple corporate greed to the detriment of the innovation that the largely American entertainment industry is known for.

Allan Greenspan recently made a statement to the effect that intellectual property rights are beginning to restrict rather than encourage innovation. I think he has hit the nail on the head and while the corporations and attorneys duke it out in the courts, the consumer will be the one who suffers.
 
Originally posted by Ugg
The music industry certainly deserves its share of bashing. The majority of the profits come from heavily promoted, mostly mediocre groups or from "oldies". However, I think that the radio industry (read, Clearchannel) is also responsible. In order to get a radio station to play an album or a song, increasingly the music industry has to pay the radio station to do so. Much like the food industry pays the grocery store to carry certain items.
Click to expand...

I believe this process of Payola as it is called, is illegal and not in practice since it was banned. Let me know if I am wrong.
 
I bought my first copy protected audio cd yesterday: PSB's Disco3.
I knew it was not going to play on my Mac, but I wanted to support the artist.

Ok, first and last time I do it.
I don't want to buy crappy-protected stuff anymore.
I want to support the artists I like, but if this support comes at the price of not being able to listen to the music I bought where I want... then forget about it!

Give me an International iTunes Store and I'll buy more music.

BTW, I think XNap is a nice example of java code :D

And what was the felt tip pen trick again?
 
Originally posted by lonny
I want to support the artists I like, but if this support comes at the price of not being able to listen to the music I bought where I want... then forget about it!

Give me an International iTunes Store and I'll buy more music.
Click to expand...

I signed one of those online petitions about the need to go international. There may be some legal reasons for the delay, but I don't think you have much longer to wait. After all there is money involved. <my Amercian Express account shows the effects of one click.>

If using P2P bothers you for ethical reasons, do what I do: download the song, and if it turns out to be one I actually want to listen to, then buy the CD, protected ot otherwise. Then you can have it both ways.:D
 
Originally posted by baldprof
Eons ago when I was about the age most of you are now, we swapped music files using cassette tapes (new then). The response of the RIAA was to get a law passed that added a small fee on to the price of each blank cassette, regardless of wether it was actually used for music. The idea was that this way they could recover some of their losses.
Now lest you think I am going to argue for a similar "tax" on blank CDs the answer is no. The reason is simple. None of that cassette tax money ever makes it back to the artists who are the ones that do all the work. That's right, it just goes to the big music companies. "Well there's no way to fairly allocate it. " What's so fair about the big music conglomerates keeping all of it?:mad: If there was a way to guarantee the money went to the artists, I would be all for a "tax."
Click to expand...

in italy they actually passes a law a few months ago - ALL BLANK CDs cost now about the double they did before (and that was already far more than in US).

and also all HARD DISKS cost more because the tax was applied to hard disks as well.

all because of the local version of RIAA.

none of that is going to the artists.

and what is even worse, if i use my computer for other purposes than p2p and storeing pirated music, i still pay. if i use cds to store my works, backup system etc etc and not copying cds, i still pay the tax. so as presupposition, EVERYBODY IS GUILTY and EVERYBODY pirates music, and the RIAA there wants the money out of it.

the reasoning "everyone is guilty" pisses me off. but at least i know what to bring as souvenirs when i'll pass in europe. ;)
 
lonny, to make you able to play your protected cds with a mac ... draw a straight line with the filtertip pen on the music side of the cd, in a position that it cuts the outer lines of the cd (the non-musical rounds in the outer side of the cd). it'll look ugly with the line, but it'll play.
 
Back to the beginning of the thread:

1) Yes, they seem to completely ignore that back door and

2) They don't seem to get that it takes ONE person that goes through this loop in order for MILLIONS to download a track.

However, I think they just do a mixed approach. They're letting people like Apple create good online music stores while hindering more users on the other side. I think the real problem is that it's quite EASY to sell the music industry copy protection schemes. "Hey, I've got a good copy protection mechanism for your CDs." I'm pretty sure you'll get some money if you say that to somebody important there.
 
I think I'd put more money into CD's if they cost $8 than if they cost $18. I usually buy 1-2 CD's at the store because they cost so much, especially the Wherehouse, but if they cost $6-8 I'd probably buy 4 or 5, or even more, per pop. Let's see: 2 CD's at $18 = $36, 5 CD's at $8 = $40... wow, more money put into the industry!

I have already made several comments about the music industry on Petition Online. The petition is called "antiriaa," and the url is http://www.PetitionOnline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?riaa&1. They take up 3 signatures, by the name of "Joseph", "Joseph 2", and "Joseph 3", and are numbers 192-194.
 
C'mon everybody, let's face it. Copy protection is nothing more than a padlock.
All it does is keep honest people honest. Anybody who want to break in and "steal" will figure out how to do so without any problem.
 
curious, My friend bought ben harpers new album - diamonds on the inside. He cant listen to the CD on his PC as it wont recognise the disk. It says on the package you need a pentium blah blah with this and that for the copy protection to work!! I put it in my powerbook and it worked straight off. Just like regular CD except the cd was partitioned and the other partion had a windows autorun file in there

They are obviously not interested in stoppng everyone from copying disks - just those with PC's!
 
kinda stupid question... but isnt copy protecting a cd to the point of it not being able to play in a computer and some personal players rather stupid?

also... isnt it our legal right to do whatever the hell we want with the music we buy as long as it stays within personal bounds?

:thumbs down: to mr. RIAA
 
i dunno but i wouldnt buy a cd with copy protection that meant it wont work on my mac. I have a mp3 cd player that i keep all my fav tunes on and listen to all my music on my powerbook. Its too hard to find cds that have a particular track you wnat to listen to NOW.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top