Copy Controlled CD's -- is it that simple?
I just popped in a "Copy Controlled" CD that was just released this week -- Massive Attack's "Danny the Dog" Sound track. This is on my work PC running XP, with iTunes installed.
I had listened to and imported CD's with this setup before, and had had no problem. This time, though, the machine said something like "In order to listen to Compact Discs, this computer needs to install some software. Proceed? (Y/N)". Odd, I thought, not realizing that the CD was copy-controlled or that that was the reason for the message. Thinking, I had no problems with iTunes before, and I didn't want to mess anything up, I clicked "no".
Launched iTunes, and there was the CD, right there. Clicked "import", and when I was getting an import rate of 0.6x, I realized something was up, "copy-controlled" came to mind, I checked the CD case, and sure enough...
So despite a long import, the AAC files produced are perfect. Copy-control failed, simply because I didn't install the invasive software. It can't be that simple, can it?
I had listened to and imported CD's with this setup before, and had had no problem. This time, though, the machine said something like "In order to listen to Compact Discs, this computer needs to install some software. Proceed? (Y/N)". Odd, I thought, not realizing that the CD was copy-controlled or that that was the reason for the message. Thinking, I had no problems with iTunes before, and I didn't want to mess anything up, I clicked "no".
Launched iTunes, and there was the CD, right there. Clicked "import", and when I was getting an import rate of 0.6x, I realized something was up, "copy-controlled" came to mind, I checked the CD case, and sure enough...
So despite a long import, the AAC files produced are perfect. Copy-control failed, simply because I didn't install the invasive software. It can't be that simple, can it?
Comments
Interesting story, would love to here from others on this topic.
Originally posted by Carson O'Genic
Wasn't there a lawsuit to stop copy protected CDs from being called "CDs"?
Interesting story, would love to here from others on this topic.
Philips sued certain labels to prevent them from using the CD audio logo (which Philips licenses) on copy-protected CDs I think.
Originally posted by nguyenhm16
Philips sued certain labels to prevent them from using the CD audio logo (which Philips licenses) on copy-protected CDs I think.
It's not just the logo. A copy-protected disc can't be called a CD (compact disc), because it isn't one. It's something else, that happens to play on some CD players.
Amorya
Originally posted by nguyenhm16
Philips sued certain labels to prevent them from using the CD audio logo (which Philips licenses) on copy-protected CDs I think.
Yes. I think SONY was involved too. This is good of Philips to do. They should not allow the music labels to hijack the brand (which means something to consumers) and con them into buying something different.
Early disc copy programs tended to require 'perfect' copies, and when the copy program detected the 'errors' it often tried to 'fix' them, resulting in a copy without the intentionally modified areas. While from a bitwise view this copy should have been 'better' than the original, the lack of specified errors meant that the CD couldn't find its signature defects and refused to run.
Later efforts at CD copy protection from Microsoft then moved to 'overcapacity' burns which defeated most attempts to burn the content until manufacturers came out with CDRs over 650MB.
Modern copy protection tends to blend these two methods, with intentionally erroneous bits designed to flummox the internal error correction (allowing the digital CRC checking to 'defend' the original since it conflicts with the natural tendency of perfect bit-for-bit copies.) Additional efforts are sometimes seen in overcapacity burns or the equivalent of proprietary FAT table locations.
Pure cloning solved some of these issues back in the day, as well as now.
And there's always the black jiffy marker stripe that obscures some laser pits.
Originally posted by tonton
So despite a long import, the AAC files produced are perfect. Copy-control failed, simply because I didn't install the invasive software. It can't be that simple, can it?
What kind of drive is it?
CCs work on most SuperDrives.
Btw. the software it asks to install is not copy control software. It's just software to play the ripped files placed on the CC (there is also a Mac player on most CCs).
Takes a long time to mount but imports fine..if a bit noisy during ripping