PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS -- Write the Copyright Office
The DMCA is up for review by the Copyright Office next month and I encourage everyone who reads this forum to take action by going to the site below and following the instructions to submit your concerns.
Reasons to write
+ It is legal to rip a CD to your iPod, but illegal to rip a DVD to the iPod Video or just a HDD in general for watching on the road, in the office...
+ It is legal to make archival backups of CDs, but illegal to do so with DVDs or expencive software that uses media based copy prevention techniques
+ It should be legal to circonvent copy protection in cases of, for example, dongle loss or failure if the company can not provide a replacement dongle for ANY reason and you legaly own the software.
+ it should be legal to unlock ITMS files to work on non-apple players and WMA files to work on Apple players as well, you bought it, you should be allowed to use it.
+ If iTms or WMA protected authorization servers are inaccessible for any reason and one is unable to access the music that one owns, you should be allowed to circonvent the protection
There are many more examples, feel free to add them if you think of them. Please, if you choose to participate, do not use a form letter, weeite it your self, and send it snail-mail.
Link to the Copyright Offive site
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/comment_forms/index.html
Mods: Please make this sticky till the end of the comment acceptance period (ends 12.1.2005) as it is very important to the tech community and has the piotential for a far reaching impact.
Reasons to write
+ It is legal to rip a CD to your iPod, but illegal to rip a DVD to the iPod Video or just a HDD in general for watching on the road, in the office...
+ It is legal to make archival backups of CDs, but illegal to do so with DVDs or expencive software that uses media based copy prevention techniques
+ It should be legal to circonvent copy protection in cases of, for example, dongle loss or failure if the company can not provide a replacement dongle for ANY reason and you legaly own the software.
+ it should be legal to unlock ITMS files to work on non-apple players and WMA files to work on Apple players as well, you bought it, you should be allowed to use it.
+ If iTms or WMA protected authorization servers are inaccessible for any reason and one is unable to access the music that one owns, you should be allowed to circonvent the protection
There are many more examples, feel free to add them if you think of them. Please, if you choose to participate, do not use a form letter, weeite it your self, and send it snail-mail.
Link to the Copyright Offive site
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/comment_forms/index.html
Mods: Please make this sticky till the end of the comment acceptance period (ends 12.1.2005) as it is very important to the tech community and has the piotential for a far reaching impact.
Comments
Originally posted by a_greer
+ it should be legal to unlock ITMS files to work on non-apple players and WMA files to work on Apple players as well, you bought it, you should be allowed to use it.
When purchasing a song from iTMS you agree a Terms of Service. If you don't agree with the terms of service find a service whose terms you do agree with. Your iPod can play formats other than ACC.
Originally posted by a_greer
+ it should be legal to unlock ITMS files to work on non-apple players and WMA files to work on Apple players as well, you bought it, you should be allowed to use it.
No. You purchased a protected AAC file of the song you like. You are free to also purchase a protected WMA version of the file. You can also try to find an online store that will sell you an un-protected MP3 file.
Just because I bought a new album on CD, I'm not entitled to receive the vinyl version.
Originally posted by audiopollution
Just because I bought a new album on CD, I'm not entitled to receive the vinyl version.
That is a terrible argument. You are comparing two entirely different mediums with no similarities other than they are both round. What if your situation were switched? I have a vinyl version and I hook my record player up to my computer and make an AIFF. That is legal.
In the digital world, this scenario doesn't apply because while the digital information may be organized differently, the content is the same. Locking formats, preventing transcoding, and sectioning the market is nothing more than a marketing ploy to squeeze every ounce of money out of the consumer. Heeding your word, if I buy a song from a artist I like from iTunes, I would have to re-buy it as a MP3 to work on my TDK Mojo 128. I would buy it yet again as a WMA to work with my network server. I am paying 3 times for the SAME CONTENT. Is this where you want the future headed? In a digital world, this should NOT happen.
There is too much greed!
Originally posted by Ebby
That is a terrible argument. You are comparing two entirely different mediums with no similarities other than they are both round. What if your situation were switched? I have a vinyl version and I hook my record player up to my computer and make an AIFF. That is legal.
Yes. You seem to have grasped that, completely separate, concept well. In doing so have completely missed the point of my post.
When I buy an original CD I do not get an original piece of vinyl just in case I want to play the recording on a different piece of hardware. I buy the format which I believe is more suitable for my needs and which my hardware supports.
Your line of reasoning seems to suggest that when I have bought an original CD, and at some point I've upgraded my system to include a player which plays a different format of recorded music, that I should expect compatibilty. That I'm in some way owed this? Odd.
Quote:
In the digital world, this scenario doesn't apply because while the digital information may be organized differently, the content is the same. Locking formats, preventing transcoding, and sectioning the market is nothing more than a marketing ploy to squeeze every ounce of money out of the consumer. Heeding your word, if I buy a song from a artist I like from iTunes, I would have to re-buy it as a MP3 to work on my TDK Mojo 128. I would buy it yet again as a WMA to work with my network server. I am paying 3 times for the SAME CONTENT. Is this where you want the future headed? In a digital world, this should NOT happen.
There is too much greed!
Then buy a player which supports all of the formats.
Alternatively, burn a CD of the track and reimport it and suffer the compounded lossiness.
It's called the music business for a reason.
Originally posted by audiopollution
Just because I bought a new album on CD, I'm not entitled to receive the vinyl version.
Bad analogy -- It is more like My JVC deck will not play my buddys new CD when I pick him up for the game because he owns a Pioneer deck -- I dont care what the license is, market confusion is bad.
If an un-savvy person buys an iPod after useing Napster (hey, it is still a household name) to buy a song or two, why should those songs be prevented from playing on the iPod, and the reverse is true.
Also: I am looking into using my old 766MHZ box as a home media server, maybe hook it up to a stereo and a TV and use Myth and Linux, There is no legal way to play MY music that I PAID FOR from iTunes or Napster (yes I tried both) on linux/myth when the 10,000+ tracks that my buddy got of of warez would work fine! I try to be honest and I get screwed? FUCK THAT
Originally posted by a_greer
Bad analogy -- It is more like My JVC deck will not play my buddys new CD when I pick him up for the game because he owns a Pioneer deck -- I dont care what the license is, market confusion is bad.
If an un-savvy person buys an iPod after useing Napster (hey, it is still a household name) to buy a song or two, why should those songs be prevented from playing on the iPod, and the reverse is true.
In what way is it a bad analogy?
It's more like: I have an old JVC CD player which won't play a HDCD, or I have a record player that won't play that big 'ol pile of 78 RPM records 'cause it only has switches for 33 and 45.
Again, it's the music business.
Originally posted by a_greer
Also: I am looking into using my old 766MHZ box as a home media server, maybe hook it up to a stereo and a TV and use Myth and Linux, There is no legal way to play MY music that I PAID FOR from iTunes or Napster (yes I tried both) on this device when the 10,000+ tracks that my buddy got of of warez would work fine! I try to be honest and I get screwed? FUCK THAT
Then the answer is clear.
Fuck the music industry.
They aren't doing you any favours, and it's not likely that they'll start.
Originally posted by audiopollution
In what way is it a bad analogy?
It's more like: I have an old JVC CD player which won't play a HDCD, or I have a record player that won't play that big 'ol pile of 78 RPM records 'cause it only has switches for 33 and 45.
Again, it's the music business.
you could buy/build a turntable to play all three without breaking the law! that is the differance
Originally posted by a_greer
you could buy/build a turntable to play all three without breaking the law! that is the differance
The point is that the consumer should have no expectation that an iTunes file will play on any device that they should choose to purchase.
Apple, MS, Sony and any other manufacturer who has devised their own DRM schemes has done so to lock the consumer into a subset of devices.
Big business for them.
Shit luck for us.
Apple, in my eyes, are the most egregious of all. iPod or nothing!
Those pesky licensing agreements with the labels.
Can't win.
Originally posted by audiopollution
The point is that the consumer should have no expectation that an iTunes file will play on any device that they should choose to purchase.
Apple, MS, Sony and any other manufacturer who has devised their own DRM schemes has done so to lock the consumer into a subset of devices.
Big business for them.
Shit luck for us.
Apple, in my eyes, are the most egregious of all. iPod or nothing!
Those pesky licensing agreements with the labels.
Can't win.
All this sorta makes me bitter, the pirates have more freedom than the honest, and the honest get fucked...I remember a time not so long ago when the just and honest were free to move about and happy, and the crooks were locked up, oh how the tables have turned...
All I want to know is how can we fix it? I dont have a 50,000$ cheque for every senator like the **aa does, I just want my freedom back, I want the freedm that my criminal friends have.
Originally posted by audiopollution
The point is that the consumer should have no expectation that an iTunes file will play on any device that they should choose to purchase.
Apple, MS, Sony and any other manufacturer who has devised their own DRM schemes has done so to lock the consumer into a subset of devices.
Big business for them.
Shit luck for us.
Apple, in my eyes, are the most egregious of all. iPod or nothing!
Those pesky licensing agreements with the labels.
Can't win.
Your reasoning is wrong on many levels. It's like with e-mail: if I send you an e-mail from @gmail.com you should in no way expect that to arrive in your @mac.com inbox because, well, they want to lock you in - in their respective e-mail service. And you accepted the Terms of Service.
Strong argument.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
Your reasoning is wrong on many levels. It's like with e-mail: if I send you an e-mail from @gmail.com you should in no way expect that to arrive in your @mac.com inbox because, well, they want to lock you in - in their respective e-mail service. And you accepted the Terms of Service.
Strong argument.
Without flaming and recieving my third warning i'll say I disagree with you, again.
Originally posted by ZoranS
Without flaming and recieving my third warning i'll say I disagree with you, again.
Look, no one here wants the artists to suffer, we can all agree that artists (and technicians, and engineers and CD factory workers and download servece sys admins) should be compensated for their work, and we will pay a fair price for it. The problem starts when they take away the fair use rights that have been there for at least 20 years (probably longer, I ma young and thus have a small frame of referance) things like transferring formats, making "mix tapes/discs" letting friends borrow a recording, and so on. Why should we have less freedom? A lot of DRMed content can be burned to CD then re encoded to an open format, but that takes 3 generations of digital lossiness. (original-> 128k DRM -> CD->open format).
CDs are even starting to force DRM when run in windows PCs, not appearing as music CDs and allowing only the aquisition of low-quality DRMed files (of cource this doesnt effect mac users (YET) or windows users who can press and hold shift while inserting the CD, but the un-savvy again get screwed coming and going.)
Originally posted by ZoranS
Without flaming and recieving my third warning i'll say I disagree with you, again.
Provide some argumentation as to why. Don't flame - discuss. I'm open to discussions.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
Your reasoning is wrong on many levels. It's like with e-mail: if I send you an e-mail from @gmail.com you should in no way expect that to arrive in your @mac.com inbox because, well, they want to lock you in - in their respective e-mail service. And you accepted the Terms of Service.
Strong argument.
There are many times that email will not arrive at your in-box because one provider has deemed the other to be a large source of spam and have blocked all messages from Domain X to Domain Y.
I'm not seeing where my reasoning is wrong. It seems that you are, in fact, agreeing wth me.
Originally posted by audiopollution
The point is that the consumer should have no expectation that an iTunes file will play on any device that they should choose to purchase.
i agree, consumers shouldn't expect a music file to work everywhere. but with music equipment of old, like say my radio+tape+cd player, it was possible to (legally) convert from one format to another. i could nic songs off the radio/cd onto tape. with computers, i could rip cds to aiff/wav and eventually mp3. my tape player was pretty shitty, so i made lots of mix cds. DRM techniques have made this slightly more difficult from a technical perspective, but the legal challenges are the scary part.
the DMCA makes it illegal to circumvent copy-protection, to the point where you cannot convert a DRM to a non-DRM, unless permitted by the author in certain circumstances (like AACs being burned onto CDs). you're not allowed to attempt to break the protection of a drm'd file.
Originally posted by audiopollution
There are many times that email will not arrive at your in-box because one provider has deemed the other to be a large source of spam and have blocked all messages from Domain X to Domain Y.
True, but they don't block e-mails just because they come from a certain provider. Like for example: Yahoo blocking all e-mail sent from @hotmail.com addresses. Not just spam, but any e-mail.
I'm not seeing where my reasoning is wrong. It seems that you are, in fact, agreeing wth me.
No, I'm not.
Originally posted by a_greer
All this sorta makes me bitter, the pirates have more freedom than the honest, and the honest get fucked...
i think they take the "illegal cable" approach, where you see the tv ads saying to report people of stealing cable (and the implied message is if there were no more illegal cable pilfering, you wouldn't pay so much...). i don't mind reporting illegal activity, but i do mind the self-righteous bullsh!t from the companies who imply that roudning up the criminals will somehow bring down the honest consumer's prices... um, no. they won't.