‘Copy-proof’ CDs not copy proof.

C

cclear

Registered
This is Soo funny..

they still don't have a "secure" copy-proof cd

http://www.msnbc.com/news/754854.asp?0si=-

" Technology buffs have cracked music publishing giant Sony Music’s elaborate disc copy-protection technology with a decidedly low-tech method: scribbling around the rim of a disk with a felt-tip marker."

Monday, Reuters obtained an ordinary copy of Celine Dion’s newest release “A New Day Has Come,” which comes embedded with Sony’s “Key2Audio” technology.
 After an initial attempt to play the disc on a PC resulted in failure, the edge of the shiny side of the disc was blackened out with a felt tip marker. The second attempt with the marked-up CD played and copied to the hard drive without a hitch.

:D

 
i was excited about this until I read that he copy protection scheme has been updates so you cannot see the line between the data and the music. :mad:
 
they will keep trying to make these so called copy proof CDs but 10$ says that within a month of each "new improved" copy protection measure release, some method of getting past it will appear. Be it printable stencil for each CD or whatever happens to be the protection scheme. As long as it is still readable in standard cd players it will be hackable and people probably won't switch from the standard cd player just for some copy protection scheme.
 
Where there's a will, there's a way :D

The Record Industry should sell MP3 tracks for $1 a piece on line for about 192 encoded quality. You can bet I'd buy a lot more audio discs. But $25 for a CD I only want one song off of!? Um, no.
 
I don't know about anyone else, but I listen to MP3s almost exclusively. I have a set of Monsoon speakers hooked up to my G4, and my stereo collects dust. I buy CDs. I'l be purchasing 1 or 2 today. But, if I find out that one of the CDs I want has copy-protection, I'll be on Limewire downloading it. You know it's not impossible to copy these CDs, and they will be floating around online. The CD is useless to me if I can't get it onto my computer or iPod.

I don't know how many people there are who share my philosphy on MP3s but if there many at all, this is going to backfire horribly. I have never seen an industry to go so far out of its way to keep people from getting what they want. They need to realize that that is not a good business model.
 
I agree totally with dlookus. When I buy a CD, the first thing I do is rip a high quality MP3. My iBook is plugged into my stereo and I have an MP3 player on my cellphone.

NB it is possible to copy these 'CDs' (for want of a better name). However it is not possible to convert them from one format to another (unless hacked of course). I believe Sun used to protect their install CDs in a similar manner (change the sector size or something), but using the 'dd' command in UNIX it is possible to create a backup of these CDs. I have managed to get the dd command to read the CD, but I have not managed to be able to write the data anywhere at the moment (try to put it to file system and the sector size is wrong).

R.
 
Same thing here. I barely ever use my stereo except as an alarm in the morning... I hooked up my computer to a set of Altec Lansing ATP3s and the sound quality and realism is better than what you get from a stereo. If it's not on my iPod or hard drive, I don't listen to it.
 
I'm different. ;)

My stereo is of quite high quality and I use it for my video projector (5.5 meters is a good, reasonable screen width for good movies) and - of course - for music.

Anyway, you can still use a felt tip marker, even if you don't see the line. If you scribble over the last track in error (CDs have the index at the center and the first track next to that) you'll only lose the last track. So you'd best start to scribble out a small part and if it's not enough, scribble out some more. Very analogue, I know, but it'll work.
 
Why buy an inferior product? I'd rather buy the CD and then burn it myself. Plus I don't burn to mp3 anyway. Why support another proprietary format? Proprietary formats are ways to insure extortion from you. Why is Office the defacto standard? Because of the "doc" format that they keep secret. Star Office is the closest thing to ever reading it properly. Of course, this means that the next version of Office will change the doc format again.

I just hope that Apple will provide ogg vorbis support in their next iPod and iTunes. Then I'll be running down to the store to get one.
 
I see what you're saying, jocknerd, but I am not in total agreement.

Specifically, my hearing is not as good as some of the younger members on the boards, so I can't hear a difference between MP3 and CD. I am perfectly content to listen to MP3s encoded at 96 KBps, and at 128 KBps it sounds just as good to me as at 320KBps. I guess I'm lucky that way. ;)

MP3 may be a proprietary format, but it is definitely not a closed format. StarOffice may be the only office app to read .doc files accurately, but how many MP3 players are on the market? Lots. True, the creators of the MP3 format may decide to close it up so they can make more money, but I don't see a problem with supporting it right now.
 
There is a difference between mp3 and CD audio. I didn't notice until I played them though a reasonable stereo, and now I will only listen to mp3 128 or over (in fact, I only rip at 192). Some tracks still have artefacts at that bit rate as well.

However I still predominantly listen to music via MP3 for ease - I can access all my collection instantly. Sometimes I listen to the CD directly when I first buy it.

R.
 
I prefer to think of mp3's as an evaluation medium mainly. I download mp3's, listen to them, and if I like the tracks enough, go out and buy them on 12", if not, on CD, and if they're not available at all, just keep the mp3's, or sometimes burn them.

They're also nice for getting hold of radio broadcasts that just are not available on cd legally.
 
I can hear a difference between 160 and 192, but 192 just takes up too much extra space for the slight difference in quality. 160 bitrate really does sound close to CD-quality, and hey, it's a lot more convenient than carrying around 160 CDs everywhere I go! (I LOVE MY iPod!)
 
Stereo? Uh... you mean that ancient box that house a radio tuner, tape decks, turntable and CD? You mean they still make those???!!! No fregging way - you're kidding me, right? :D

I threw mines away when we moved - uh, what, 2 years ago? :D

I don't own a stereo, I don't own an exclusive audio CD player (unless you count my MP3 CDRW Portable Player [Rio Volt] but apperantly that counts as a "Computer CD Player" than an "Audio CD Player") nor am I going to go out of my way to purchase one!

Well... now that I remember I did keep the Audio CD player from my old stereo but it does not work anymore, tried to play a CD in it to test it but failed. And I don't plan on replacing it! I have THREE computers with CD Rom Drives and Audio output - no way am I going to buy a stand-alone audio player! Sorry!

I WANT MY MP3!!!

And I totally agree - I'll be more than happy to pay $1 (no more than $3) per MP3 to have a RIAA aproved copy of my favorite music...

Until then - BUCK RIAA I WANT MY MP3!!! :)

PS. I no longer download nor listen to RIAA music anymore... I am totally disgusted with their pratices and the way they turn GREAT artists into crud! :p
 
I use my Cube with its SoundSticks for listening....I have all my CDs (as well as my girlfriend's) ripped to my external HD, in MP3. I can only play CDs on my computer and my DVD player, which I only have because sometimes I just want more than a 17" screen for viewing The Emporer's New Groove. I will never buy a copy-protected CD, and I will actively steal music that appears on those CDs from wherever I can, even if I did not want it. Of course, that partly has to do with my music collection: I have 5000+ songs, most of which are not from CDs I paid for. However, due to my limited funds, I would not have bought any of those CDs anyway, and when I can I buy the ones I like (also because I like to record my own MP3s at highest quality VBR). It is late, I am tired, I should stop rambling and go to bed. bye for now.
 
Originally posted by Tormente
Stereo? Uh... you mean that ancient box that house a radio tuner, tape decks, turntable and CD? You mean they still make those???!!! No fregging way - you're kidding me, right?
Click to expand...

Stereo: High Definition Sony CD Player, high quality Pioneer DVD player, a Yamaha Natural Sound Dolby Digital amplifier with five great quadral speakers plus a BOSE subwoofer. A philips video projector and a Sony MiniDisc deck. And I guarantee that there's a *big* difference in the dynamic range compared to the small speakers of my TiBook. :p There's *still* a very large dynamic range difference when I connect the Ti to the stereo.

MP3 may be 'good enough'. But there's a BIG step between that and 'good'.

Like, Windows may be 'good enough'. But there's a big step between that and Mac OS X.

See?
 
fryke - we are agreeing a lot recently.

It may not be possible to hear the difference between mp3 and cd audio when playing on computer attached speakers. However as the stereo equipment gets better the artefacts become more pronounced. It is like a print of a painting. Prints look OK, but put them next to the original and you will see a lot more detail in the original.

On my current stereo equipment 160kb mp3s are good enough for most songs. However I rip at 192kb because I know that in the future I will be able to hear the difference on better equipment. I should really rip at higher bitrates, but as far as I know that is the max that iTunes will rip at.

I would not want to purchase mp3s. A lot of people complain that they can hear the difference between analog and CD - think of the difference between analog and mp3 - a much larger gap.

R.
 
iTunes can rip at higher than 192kb... i saw the option somewhere.

Also, I rip my cd's to MP3. I Can't wait to get my iBook, because then I can move the TOWER of CD's off the desk in my room, and put them in the cupboard!

That way I still have them when I need them, but I have my 192kb MP3s all the time :p

I will NOT buy copy protected CDs. Period.
 
Btw everyone, iTunes rips to 320. If you find that you can hear the difference between 256 and 320, I congratulate you on your inhuman hearing. :) If you can hear the difference (seriously!) between 192 and 256, that's also pretty incredible. I pride myself on having very good hearing, but I really can just barely tell between 192 and 256, and for most things the difference between 160 and 192 is not even all that much. As I said, I rip at 160 for filespace constraints. I have to say though, I can't stand 128 :) The problem with 320 kbps is that the files are more like 2 megs a minute, which is, I think, way too big. So the iPod could hold 2500 minutes of music. That's it. That'd be about 500 5-minute songs... not too good.
 
YES! I just listened to a report on All Things Considered about the "low-tech" workaround to Sony's copy-protection. Go NPR! Keep spreading the news! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top