May 7, 2006
French Court Drops DRM Interoperability Provision
A higher French select legal committee has dropped the contentious provision from its copyright law that would have placed the onus on companies using DRM on music services, to license it to other equipment makers.…
Posted by Jaani at 10:49 AM | Comments (0)
Not So Fast, Forward
According to an editorial being run by the New York Times, the ability to fast-forward through television commercials may soon be curtailed as part a plan being ushered in by the next generation of home entertainment devices:
THEY will take my remote control away only when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.
This thought followed my first reading of a patent application for a new kind of television set and digital video recorder recently filed by a unit of Royal Philips Electronics at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The design appears to threaten the inalienable right to channel-surf during commercials or fast-forward through ads in programs you've taped.
A second, calmer reading of the patent application revealed that the proposed design would uphold the right to avoid commercials, but only for those who paid a fee. Those disinclined to pay would be prevented from changing channels during commercials. If the viewer tried to circumvent the system by recording the program and skipping the ads during playback, the new, improved recorder would detect when a commercial segment was being displayed and disable the fast-forward button for the duration.
As a business proposition, the concept appears dead on arrival: what consumer would voluntarily buy a television designed to charge fees for using it?
Posted by Jaani at 10:43 AM | Comments (0)
December 13, 2005
Sony Repents Over CD Debacle
'schnikies79 writes "Sony BMG is rethinking its anti-piracy policy following weeks of criticism over the copy protection used on CDs. The head of Sony BMG's global digital business, Thomas Hesse, told the BBC that the company was 're-evaluating' its current methods. This follows widespread condemnation of the way anti-piracy software on some Sony CDs installs itself on computers. The admission came as Sony faced more censure over the security failings of one of its copy protection programs."'Posted by Jaani at 2:34 PM | Comments (0)
October 15, 2005
EC moots pan-European music licensing
The European Commission today set out measures for updating the management of online rights in musical works, recommending that an EU-wide copyright licensing system be established.…
Posted by Jaani at 6:37 PM | Comments (0)
Automatic software licence checks are 'users' choice'
Most business enterprises are finding it increasingly difficult to keep track of software licence compliance, with 72 per cent of firms manually tracking compliance, or carrying out no tracking at all, according to a report from the Software and Information Industry Association (SIIA).
Posted by Jaani at 6:36 PM | Comments (0)
September 20, 2005
Artist Encourages Record Purchasers to Circumvent Copy Protection
'Switchfoot's new album, Nothing Is Sound, shipped from Sony with copy protection software on the CD, much to the dismay of thousands of iPod-wielding fans. The band posted a response on their official forum apologising for the protection and detailing ways to circumvent the protection and rip their songs to PC. Switchfoot linked to open-source program CDex's download page with instructions on disabling the autorunning protection and ripping the files to MP3. Many of Switchfoot's fans have been upset by the copy protection measures, and it's nice to know the artists seem to care about the issue.'
Posted by Jaani at 5:18 PM | Comments (0)
September 4, 2005
A Guide to Online Music Stores: Licences and DRM
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has posted a guide to the licence terms of major online music retailers. From their comparison, it appears that very few, if any, of the online stores confer proprietary rights in the music they purport to ‘sell’: in most cases, the vendor reserves the right to modify the terms of the licence at any point; alienability (resale) is either restricted or completely prohibited; in short, dealing with the music as owner seems impossible. The result is, I suppose, a bare licence:
Imagine if Tower Records sold you a CD, but then, a few months later, knocked on your door and replaced the CD with one that you can’t play in your car. Would you still feel like you ‘owned’ the CD? Not so much, eh?
But Apple reserves the right to change at any time what you can do with the music you purchase at the iTunes Music Store. For instance, in April 2004, Apple decided to modify the DRM so people could burn the same playlist only 7 times, down from 10. How much further will the service restrict your ability to make legal personal copies of your own music? Only Apple knows.
Another hallmark of ownership is the right to give away or sell your property. That’s called ‘first sale’, and it’s explicitly protected under [United States] copyright law. Yet Apple’s DRM frustrates first sale — just ask George Hotelling, who had to give away the login and password to his iTunes Music Store account in order to resell a single song.
This wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t for the fact that the music is marketed as if full possessory rights were being conferred: Apple trumpets loudly, ‘Own it forever and a day’. Microsoft says, ‘It just works!’ (if only). Consumers expect ownership, and get something less. The disappointment is even more pronounced in the case of a purchaser who acquires a CD encumbered by DRM. Their rights in the chattel itself do not translate into absolute personal ownership of the album. Such consumers are thus understandably frustrated when they discover that they cannot archive it in a lossless digital format or make a backup copy for their car.
Posted by Jaani at 10:41 AM | Comments (0)
September 3, 2005
'DVD Jon' targets Media Player file encryption
Programmer develops tool for removing encoding surrounding multicasts in effort to give open-source media players access.Posted by Jaani at 8:34 PM | Comments (0)
August 24, 2005
Sun Proposes Open-Source DRM
Sun Microsystems stepped into the fractious arena of digital copyright protection this week with plans for an open-source, royalty-free digital rights management ('DRM') standard. The Open Media Commons initiative aims to address concerns that a growing number of incompatible download schemes might frustrate consumers and hold back growth in the download market.…
Posted by Jaani at 12:13 PM | Comments (0)
August 11, 2005
Textbooks With EULAs
overshoot writes "We all knew it was coming, didn't we? Now Princeton University and nine others are introducing DRM'd textbooks. For a 33% discount, students get a 5-month node-locked e-book instead of all that glossy paper. Maybe Congress should just get it over with and change the law to allow EULAs on printed works?"Posted by Jaani at 12:25 PM | Comments (0)
February 20, 2005
Users Circumvent Proprietary Coffee Machine DRM
Increasingly, manufacturers of non-electronic products are using Rights Management technology to enforce an artificial monopoly over the supply of aftermarket service and maintenance. The Senseo espresso machine is one such example; it utilises what its manufacturer calls ‘protected’ coffee pods that are only compatible with Philips’ own pod system - similar to the way DRM is used on portable music players to prevent alternative codecs being used. Unsurprisingly, the official Senseo pads are rather pricey (much more so than its competitors’).
Fear not, coffee lovers, a circumvention technique is here:
Take the pad and keep it vertical, with the opening in the 12 o’clock position. Gently insert the funnel using your other hand, and then use your thumb and index finger to hold the assembly, using just a little pressure to hold it all together, thus freeing your other hand again. Use that other hand to pour some of your finest coffee into the funnel, filling the pad just the way you like it… [You’re] left with an exquisitely filled coffee pad – that still has a small opening.
The technique described will allow users to utilise cheaper, alternative products, such as this one. It also (probably) violates the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Epinions.com may even be liable for vicarious infringement. If invoked, the Act would be used to limit consumer freedoms, stifle an innovative technique, and enforce a private company’s right to charge unrealistic prices.
Clearly, this would be an undesirable application of expansive legislation. Thankfully, however, it looks like Google will get the last laugh: consumers who search for ‘senseo coffee filter pad’ see the unofficial circumvention techniques before the result for the official product. With any luck, this page will join them in liberating coffee enthusiasts from the shackles of proprietary refill technologies.
Posted by Jaani at 4:14 PM | Comments (3)
February 16, 2005
Napster: Unwitting Perveyor of Free Music, DRM Notwithstanding
‘When Napster launched its new subscription Napster-To-Go service two weeks ago, they touted it as a low-cost way to access thousands of songs without having to buy them. For $14.95, customers can copy all the tracks they want from Napster’s catalog to digital music players. There’s even a 14-day free trial. Of course, when the subscription expires so does the music [renting music? What a horrid idea!].
However, in a flashback to the heyday of the original Napster in the late 1990s, a rediscovery by a few users of an old Winamp trick has resulted in subscribers being able to download any number of tracks, which are then no longer tied to the subscriber’s PC and digital music players. Using only a slightly-tweaked version of Winamp, it’s possible to convert the DRMed WMA files used by the music service into much larger WAV files. Those can then either be burned to CDs, or converted to another lossy format.
Upon being contacted for comment, a Napster spokesperson noted that the company has long been aware of the potential to bypass the subscription system, and claimed that the hack does not threaten their subscription model… However, Napster is counting on free 14-day trials to Napster-To-Go as a way to sell people on the idea that rented music is a Good Thing so they can challenge Apple’s lead in the online music scene.’
Source: Eric Bangeman, Ars Technica
Posted by Jaani at 8:22 PM | Comments (0)
February 7, 2005
Napster Struggles for Marketshare, Adopts New Pricing Model
Los Angeles-based Napster, now a legal music site, has a mere 270 000 subscribers and struggles to attract new users. In an attempt to differentiate itself from Apple’s offering, Napster will relaunch its online subscription service under a flat rate pricing model. Users will soon be able to download as much as they like from a library of 1 million songs for $US15 a month.
Alan Cohen, chief marketing officer for Napster, told reporters ‘the 99-cent-download model will be a thing of the past’:
Why would anyone spend $10,000 with Apple to get 10,000 songs when they could have 10,000 for $US15 a month from Napster? The flaw in the argument is that most buyers have iPods and most buy only a few hundred songs, making $US15 a month for rental of Napster’s library not as cheap as it sounds.
It’s interesting to see just how much Apple is benefiting from locking down their proprietary digital rights management API. The very technology that hinders and frustrates users of their products is seemingly being used as their primary draw card. Apple exploits FairPlay both defensively (to prevent distribution by casual users) and offensively (to provide a disincentive for users switching to alternative products). The effect is to create an artificially-supported market for their iPod while discouraging users from trying other music services.
The irony is all too clear: just two years ago, Apple was themselves conducting their famous ‘switch’ campaign. Now — like they accused Micrososft of doing - they’re using technology to monopolise their market and maintain an immobile user base. Customers at Apple’s iTunes Music Store are now unable to change their digital audio player, effectively locked into a single hardware and software platform if they want to continue listening to songs they purchased. I fear that — unless Apple begins licensing their DRM technology to other music stores — the online music market will falter and stagnate.
Source: Garry Barker, The Age
Posted by Jaani at 10:45 AM | Comments (0)
January 25, 2005
Consumers Flock to Apple Music Store
Apple today announced that users have purchased some 250 million songs from their iTunes Music Store (‘iTMS’). Daily downloads are hovering around the 250 000 mark, totalling some $500m annually. (Incidentally, although the press release proudly points to the store being available in ‘more than 70 percent of the global music market’, it’s still not here in Australia.)
That iTMS clearly establishes consumer willingness to pay for electronic music formats can no longer be questioned. The sheer volume of sales more than attests to that. However, it also means that when record companies speak of ‘diminishing [retail] sales’, they are going to be faced with more plausible explanations than those evil pirates or organised crime; namely, the proliferation of new online distribution models.
What’s curious is that Apple’s success isn’t rubbing off onto other online music stores nearly as much as one might expect. The Napster, Ninemsn and Walmart stores are reporting extremely disappointing sales levels. Then again, perhaps it isn’t so strange: a quick look at Walmart’s DRM requirements shows that downloaded music is not compatible with many portable music players, cannot be transferred between computers, and requires a slow, proprietary, and poorly featured media player to be used on the latest verion of Microsoft Windows. So much for digital ‘rights’ management. And to think: Ninemsn is pretty much the only online music store in Australia, faces no competition from iTMS, yet still struggles with lacklustre sales. The market speaks!
Posted by Jaani at 10:44 AM | Comments (0)
