OT--Big Record Companies Sue Online

[Griffinator]

Originally posted by soundscape:

The frustrating thing is that I'd rather pay for music, but a lot of material I want is actually out of print and sometimes hard to find or absurdly expensive. A lot of this material was once quite easy to obtain on file sharing services. As I've said above I wish there was some concept of "abandonware" in music where it's just not worth sorting out the legal detail, just turn a blind eye to it.

I concur. I can't buy a copy of the West Coast Pop Art Experimental Band volume 2 - so I was stuck with my beat up old record, full of static and noise. Fortunately for me I was able to find this album on Torrentspy.com, so I now have a clean, if not perfect, listenable copy of it on my hard drive, which I can enjoy at my leisure.

 

Quality albums? Many albums are full of filler.

Which was my point. People aren't willing to download an entire album when it's mostly filler. Therefore, bands with higher quality albums tend to suffer more as a result of Torrentspy than bands with filler-laden one-good-song type albums.

 

Exactly. But are singles sales up to historic levels these days? (Besides, do iTunes "Pick n' Mix" sales qualify? I mean, if you're picking a song off a 20 year old album, it's not the same as buying a recently released single.)

Not sure how this connects to the conversation, other than it speaks to the public's overall rejection of what the industry is currently trying to pass off as pop.

 

...but still inferior quality? Or are Yahoo! offering lossless encoding?

Totally inferior. 192K, if I recall correctly. However, it's still cheaper than buying the CD, and the average schmoe doesn't really give a damn about the subtle differences between mp3's and CD's when he's listening on a $99 surround system he bought from Wal-Mart...

 

These certainly empower musicians--but whether most of them are worth hearing is another matter. (I suspect a lot of them would be more empowered by a piano, lessons, and some theory textbooks, but that's another matter... or maybe is isn't.)

Whether they are worth hearing is irrelevant. The fact is, these tools empower musicians to self-produce and reach out to an audience that's begging for something other than what the industry is ramming down their throats.

 

I thought the "traditional" music industry *was* taking advantage of MySpace and the like for promotional purposes?

 

Using them to find new acts might be a problem. The music industry is all about representation, lawyers, etc.

That's the point. They won't change their talent scouting model, so they're missing an opportunity to find better talent than what they're currently serving up to the buying public...

 

The thing is, I have *NEVER* heard material on CDBaby or unsigned acts on MySpace which are superior or even comparable to the best commerical content.

I have. On MySpace, on Artistlaunch, on MP3.com when it was still doing indie material, on Garageband.com back when they were all-indie, the list goes on and on. All manner of really great acts that no one will ever get to hear on the radio or see on MTV because they're lost in the crowd. I actually did some scouting for AL back when they first launched - I managed their Metal genre, and we vetted back then - if you sucked, you got booted. I went out and actively scouted the other indie services and heard some amazing music from bands that were buried at MP3c because knuckleheads would put canned techno in every genre and auto-download it until it dominated the charts.

 

Of course I can go over to the iTunes Music Store and find the that the top 100 songs of today are largely abject garbage--whether or not they are as bad as the content on these other sites is another matter.

Trust me. If you do some real digging at some of the still-existent indie sites, you'll find great music. Phil Traynor - one of the best indie smooth jazz guys I ever listened to. Hear him at Artistlaunch. Into Hardcore? Try out Ghost of a Fallen Age at Myspace. Techno? Mike Burn, Artistlaunch. Name a genre, I'll show you some world-class stuff that you'll never see on the top 100.

[dp2]

Originally posted by soundscape:

Originally posted by ProfD:

When it comes to CDs, how can you really separate Audio from Data when both can be used to store the same series of 0s and 1s?

You'd think so, but there is actually a separate standard for Audio CD-R's than CD-R's. The Audio CD-R recorders will only record on Audio CD-R Audio, and they are of course crippled with SCMS (Serial Copy Management System.) (I'd guess that, by now, many on them record on the data discs anyway.)

 

Unfortunately for that scheme, desktop computers 'took over' the CD-R market.

 

Originally posted by ProfD:

I'm sure they are still trying to figure out how to encode a download so that it cannot be traded.

"Trusted Computing"? The problem remains with the "analog hole" (you can always record the analog audio) and the fact that downloads generally permit burning to CD. (And who's going to agree otherwise... at least for the foreseeable future.)

 

With all of the various other, well-established CD recording formats out there today, the recording industry couldn't enforce any kind of digital content management scheme--at least at the code level (which is why the RIAA has armed itself with an army of lawyers). Besides, even if such a file format--or any other "protective measures"--were created sometime in the near future, it would only be a matter of time (typically a few days) before the file format (or "protective measures") gets reverse-engineered.

 

Given enough time, free, less restrictive technologies tend to win out over time--though not in every case.

 

Trusted-computing (TC), although it sounds nice to some conceptually, it won't fly in reality with current technology, because numerous companies like MS, Apple, Intel, NVidia, ATI, etc will never ante up and fully disclose the underlying details of their software and/or hardware products. You'd need to have full disclosure and full compliance from every vendor all over the world. TC is a popular buzz-word in various server environments, and it's definitely more secure than platforms that weren't built with TC in mind. Nevertheless, even current incarnations of TC technology can get reverse-engineered.

[dp2]

Bands like the Grateful Dead and Phish have shown time and time again, that musicians, who are looking to take their music to the people, don't have to rely on the recording industry for distribution. Working with the recording industry can help a band to distribute its music, but the partnership formed will come at a cost.

 

Whether or not the associated cost is worth it, that's up to the band in question. I have friends that made out and ones that were screwed. One's milage will vary. Nevertheless, there are numerous other options out there for those who'd prefer to distribute their own stuff.

[Griffinator]

Originally posted by ProfD:

I'm sure they are still trying to figure out how to encode a download so that it cannot be traded.

They have. Yahoo and Napster both offer unlimited free downloads on a subscription - but the WMA's you download check the server periodically - like every two weeks or so. If you're not online when the timer runs out, or if your subscription has expired (or you got it from a buddy) then it doesn't play. Problem is, they can't do it to an MP3.

[ProfD]

Well Griff, once that WMA is converted to an MP3 or whatever, it is a moot point, huh?

 

dp2, you are totally correct about indie bands handling themselves. I believe this route, connecting directly to the fans is the win-win in today's music industry.

 

If folks are going to trade tunes and download them, be the first to sell your band CDs at shows.

 

Even if 100 folks buy the CD, burn and trade it, not only has the band made the initial $1k at $10 a pop but they also got ticket and merchandise $$$ too.

 

Online services a la MySpace are great in terms of establishing and/or maintaining a presence but it does not complete the circle IMO.

 

Most artists and bands have to perform in order to build a fanbase. The online thing allows them to 'keep in touch' with the fans/friends they have gained through gigging.

 

People still have a certain need to touch, feel, hear and see what they buy.

[dp2]

It's another form of "try before you buy".

 

I have purchased roughly 200 music CDs over the years. Nearly every purchase began with me checking out random tracks on various CDs in Border's. The ones that didn't begin that way, began with a tune I overheard somewhere else--like on the various jazz stations.

[soundscape]

Originally posted by dp2:

With all of the various other, well-established CD recording formats out there today, the recording industry couldn't enforce any kind of digital content management scheme

Yep.

 

Originally posted by dp2:

at least at the code level (which is why the RIAA has armed itself with an army of lawyers). Besides, even if such a file format--or any other "protective measures"--were created sometime in the near future, it would only be a matter of time (typically a few days) before the file format (or "protective measures") gets reverse-engineered.

 

Given enough time, free, less restrictive technologies tend to win out over time--though not in every case.

Well, it doesn't matter if you don't have 100% protection, I think. What's desirable are "spanners in the works" as it were.

 

What has been consistently missed, I think, is that there are really two major groups of people: enthusiasts, and everyone else. Enthusiasts don't care for restrictions! A good example is the DVD Regional coding scheme. This creates enough confusion that, even with Region-free players floating around, most "mainstream" vendors don't bother stocking discs from other regions. (Bearing in mind with the 'staggered' release schedule of American movies where other countries run 'behind'... of course in the US there might be demand for Far Eastern content such as anime, etc.) Of course, no enthusiast will put up with those constraints and the region-free players or player modifications were available, IIRC, almost since the launch of DVD, and it's also routine for cracked (or rather 'modified') firmware to be posted for DVD drives. No big deal, though, because the system basically does what it's intended to. And I doubt the most enthusiasts are too bothered about the restrictions the typical person ends up with.

 

Originally posted by dp2:

Trusted-computing (TC), although it sounds nice to some conceptually, it won't fly in reality with current technology, because numerous companies like MS, Apple, Intel, NVidia, ATI, etc will never ante up and fully disclose the underlying details of their software and/or hardware products. You'd need to have full disclosure and full compliance from every vendor all over the world. TC is a popular buzz-word in various server environments, and it's definitely more secure than platforms that weren't built with TC in mind. Nevertheless, even current incarnations of TC technology can get reverse-engineered.

I'm not up to speed on the full details of it. However, I know that Apple were using trusted computing based DRM for their developer releases of OS X for Intel, and I'd guess they're using it on the released version. These were, of course, cracked, but anyone lacking technical skill or who needs to use OS X reliably (esp. for professional or academic purposes, and I guess few people own a Mac who don't use it for that some of the time) really needs a Mac anyway ("spanner in the works".)

[Griffinator]

Originally posted by ProfD:

Well Griff, once that WMA is converted to an MP3 or whatever, it is a moot point, huh?

You do realize that in order to convert a secured WMA to an MP3, you have to real-time playback-record it...

 

That's a big PITA - more hassle than most are willing to deal with...

[ProfD]

Originally posted by Griffinator:

You do realize that in order to convert a secured WMA to an MP3, you have to real-time playback-record it...

 

That's a big PITA - more hassle than most are willing to deal with...

True. But, it is one an audiophile will endure in order to make available to the masses. Y'know, like those cats who tape live shows.

[soundscape]

Originally posted by Griffinator:

Originally posted by ProfD:

Well Griff, once that WMA is converted to an MP3 or whatever, it is a moot point, huh?

You do realize that in order to convert a secured WMA to an MP3, you have to real-time playback-record it...

 

That's a big PITA - more hassle than most are willing to deal with...

See above post on "spanner in the works.

[Griffinator]

Not quite understanding what exactly you mean by "spanner in the works"...

 

My point is that the more difficult the industry makes it to pirate, the more marginalized pirating becomes. If it's easy, everyone does it. If it's hard, only the hardcore people will do it.

 

I actually looked into batch-converting WMA's to MP3's back when I was a subscriber at Napster. The whole "have to be connected to the internet to play it" thing really got on my nerves.

 

The response from nearly all the hacker circles was the same - get stream-recording software, and sit there blankly one-by-one and convert them. Can't do anything else with the system while you're doing it, though, or you'll have skips. Talk about a nightmare. Finally, I just scrapped it, cancelled my subscription, and went back to buying singles periodically on iTunes.

[soundscape]

Originally posted by Griffinator:

Not quite understanding what exactly you mean by "spanner in the works"...

 

My point is that the more difficult the industry makes it to pirate, the more marginalized pirating becomes. If it's easy, everyone does it. If it's hard, only the hardcore people will do it.

Well, that's pretty much along the lines of what I mean--a 100% "uncrackable" system isn't necessary to have a decent level of effectiveness.

[Griffinator]

OK, then I concur. The idea isn't to completely rid the world of piracy, because that won't ever happen. Just make it too difficult for every tom dick and harry to pull off....

[dp2]

Originally posted by Griffinator:

Not quite understanding what exactly you mean by "spanner in the works"...

 

My point is that the more difficult the industry makes it to pirate, the more marginalized pirating becomes. If it's easy, everyone does it. If it's hard, only the hardcore people will do it.

 

I actually looked into batch-converting WMA's to MP3's back when I was a subscriber at Napster. The whole "have to be connected to the internet to play it" thing really got on my nerves.

 

The response from nearly all the hacker circles was the same - get stream-recording software, and sit there blankly one-by-one and convert them. Can't do anything else with the system while you're doing it, though, or you'll have skips. Talk about a nightmare. Finally, I just scrapped it, cancelled my subscription, and went back to buying singles periodically on iTunes.

Not that I intend to teach people here about stream-recording, I will state that it doesn't have to require one to dedicate the resources of one's machine to that single task. Usually, the code running with those requirements was implemented inefficiently. There's nothing new, novel, or difficult about stream-recording. Stream-recording software has been around for decades. Satelite, cellular, and other RF transmission media have been using this technology for years to implement things like repeaters, routers, etc.

[dp2]

Originally posted by soundscape:

Originally posted by dp2:

Trusted-computing (TC), although it sounds nice to some conceptually, it won't fly in reality with current technology, because numerous companies like MS, Apple, Intel, NVidia, ATI, etc will never ante up and fully disclose the underlying details of their software and/or hardware products. You'd need to have full disclosure and full compliance from every vendor all over the world. TC is a popular buzz-word in various server environments, and it's definitely more secure than platforms that weren't built with TC in mind. Nevertheless, even current incarnations of TC technology can get reverse-engineered.

I'm not up to speed on the full details of it. However, I know that Apple were using trusted computing based DRM for their developer releases of OS X for Intel, and I'd guess they're using it on the released version. These were, of course, cracked, but anyone lacking technical skill or who needs to use OS X reliably (esp. for professional or academic purposes, and I guess few people own a Mac who don't use it for that some of the time) really needs a Mac anyway ("spanner in the works".)

Ever heard of crack patches? It only takes someone with sufficient technical skill to perform an arbitrary crack. Anyone with sufficient computing resources can (re-)distribute the patch.

 

If more companies devoted more time and resources for designing and implementing their products cleanly using open standards, then trusted computing could become a more viable platform.

 

Abandoning proprietary standards and technologies, and embracing open standards and technologies will go much further to eliminating piracy than any of that DRM crap.

 

By the way, don't assume that illegals are the only ones who reverse-engineer various products. They're not the only ones. The government has all kinds of agencys staffed with people who reverse various products. The MPAA and RIAA have people on staff who reverse for them--that's partly how they're able to discover that a particular asset has been reversed. Ligitimate companies also have people on staff who reverse the products of their competitors--oh but in these circles, reversing is called 'competative product research'. Data recovery specialists have to reverse to recover various forms of data.

[Griffinator]

Metal not your bag, I'm guessing

 

I used to be a reviewer over at Artistlaunch, but that was a couple years ago. I'll have to go back over my notes from back then.

 

Hey, this sounds like a weekly thread idea...

[soundscape]

Originally posted by Griffinator:

Metal not your bag, I'm guessing

LOL... I suppose it depends on what you call "metal" but for sure not that stuff!

 

Originally posted by Griffinator:

I used to be a reviewer over at Artistlaunch, but that was a couple years ago. I'll have to go back over my notes from back then.

 

Hey, this sounds like a weekly thread idea...

That's a great idea. I for one am always keen on hearing new music.

[Griffinator]

Well, tonight, I'm burnt, but, just to see if there's interest, I'll give it a shot tomorrow.

[TaurusT]

Originally posted by Floyd Tatum:

Good taste is an illusion. In reality, the more people that like it, the better it is.

 

Oh, sorry, wrong thread.

Right on the spot

 

Sadly though

[dp2]

Originally posted by TaurusT:

Originally posted by Floyd Tatum:

Good taste is an illusion. In reality, the more people that like it, the better it is.

 

Oh, sorry, wrong thread.

Right on the spot

 

Sadly though

It's a funny thing about that "taste," . . . many innovations in music were initially perceived, by the established players of an arbitrary period of time, as junk.

 

John Phillip Sousa, as many of his day, couldn't bend his mind around Jazz. Anyone familiar with his music would recognize the militaristic precision he placed on the beat. Songs like "Stars and Stripes Forever," which ever American brass-player I know loves (and it helps that Sousa was also one of us), marched along with gusto on 1 and 3--you could set a watch to his beat. I believe that was why Jazz didn't make sense to him; he played on top of the beat; most Jazz players--especially when swinging--play behind the beat.

 

Yet, many people who had a thing for Swing just couldn't get into "that noise"--that many of us here love--called Bebop. People, like Miles Davis, initially didn't like Free Jazz. He went on record calling it junk, and he ended up--not only digging, but--playing that junk several years later.

 

Rock usually doesn't do it for me. I'd prefer to listen to some--not all--Rap any day instead. On the other hand, there are some Rock groups (and players) that I dig. For me, it's all about the music. Nevertheless, I admit the Jazz tunes probably outnumber the Rap tunes at least 200:1. That's a lot of tunes, though.