Sony DRM hacking into your PC (rootkit and all apparently) Merged threads

[smtkr]

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/

That is the most ridiculous article I've ever read. She's trying to say that the bands are hard up for cash, as she lives up her lavish lifestyle. I especially like the part where she says they might as well work at a 7-11.

PS: I sent this article to Attack of the Show yesterday and they ran a brief (maybe ten seconds) of it on G4TV and posted it on their website. It's not huge exposure, but the more the better, and TV is a always good.

[Knoxville]

That is the most ridiculous article I've ever read. She's trying to say that the bands are hard up for cash, as she lives up her lavish lifestyle. I especially like the part where she says they might as well work at a 7-11.

PS: I sent this article to Attack of the Show yesterday and they ran a brief (maybe ten seconds) of it on G4TV and posted it on their website. It's not huge exposure, but the more the better, and TV is a always good.

Have you ever dealt with a record company? She's right tbh, artists make next to nothing from cd sales, moneys made on tours and merchandising and if you don't make enough there to cover what you owe the record company your outta luck in a major way, thats why bands that are broke tour for 2 years, not just to boost cd sales but because it earns them the money they need to live.

[Rave]

Before anyone here gets too uppity about it, I'm pretty sure that the DRM program referred to in the article is not used over here in the UK (since, as others have said, it more than likely contravenes the Computer Misuse Act). If I was American I'd be fuming though.

[chrestomanci]

Before anyone here gets too uppity about it, I'm pretty sure that the DRM program referred to in the article is not used over here in the UK (since, as others have said, it more than likely contravenes the Computer Misuse Act). If I was American I'd be fuming though.

Are you sure about that? Most other juristictions arround the world including the US have similar legislation, and Sony has been selling these malware CDs there. I think that Sony is ignoring the law, and thinks that their EULA will absolve them of any blame.

[+Murphy+]

this violates two laws - the Copyright Designs & Patents Act 1988, and the EU Copyright Directive 2001.

Not strictly true. The copyright directive is just that - an EU directive, it therefore does not have direct effect in the UK like an EU regulation would have. The relevant law is covered by the CDPA'88 only, which has been amended and updated a numebr of times to incorporate changes such as those required by the EU directive mentioned.

There are specific provisions in the CDPA in relation to backup of computer programs, section 50A, if it says it in the law, then it is legal until amended. Recent case law suggests that this will be interpreted very narrowly, as the legislation says 'necessary' copies and the burden of proof will rest with the copier to show that they were required. There is no such right in relation to other materials, such as music. You are right that we dont have 'fair-dealing' in respect of copies, but many European countries do, its not just the US. There are often levies collected on blank disks which are used to compensate rights holders for their 'loss' in people buying one original and making copies for use elsewhere in their home/car, the UK is one of the exceptions in this respect - but hey, we should have cheaper CD-R's ... I'm sure that one pans out in practice.

Consent to copy doesnt have to be in writting, you just need a licence, which can be in writting, oral or even implied. Only assignment of copyright must be in writting.

I cant really comment on the impact of Sony's software on the users rights, I'm not familiar with the Computer Misuse laws.

Useful link for general copright info -

http://www.patent.gov.uk/copy/index.htm

S.

[TheAnimus]

Before anyone here gets too uppity about it, I'm pretty sure that the DRM program referred to in the article is not used over here in the UK (since, as others have said, it more than likely contravenes the Computer Misuse Act). If I was American I'd be fuming though.

Your kidding right? 'It' was made by a british firm.

I'd be suprised that they would of bothered, sony records would just sue the frim in question or play pass the buck over any legal issues, that small firm would fold, and the managing directors would of only made a few million... poor little lambs.

If your really not sure, i'll ask all my friends until we find someone with a sony DRM enfored CD, and i'll have a looksee at what i get left with.

[Paul Adams]

The article Mark points to has some interesting comments:

First4Internet's XCP has been used previously on prerelease CDs only. Sony BMG is the first to commercially deploy XCP.

First4Internet's other clients -- who include Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group and EMI -- are using XCP for prerelease material.

Sony BMG expects that by the end of the year a substantial number of its US releases will employ either MediaMax or XCP. All copy-protected solutions will include such extras as photo galleries, enhanced liner notes and links to other features.

The makers of XCP have their own press release info here.

And they have an overview of the XCP protection system here, with such comments as:

By using a range of methodologies, including the construction of multiple protection layers, limiting the ROM player accessibility to the provided player software and encapsulating the Red Book audio content, XCP can be used by content owners to help protect digital content from unauthorised copying.

It will be interesting to see if an EULA can cover rootkit installations... if anyone has a CD with that protection on and puts it into a PC I'd like to know if it prompts for installation or is entirely silent...

[smtkr]

Have you ever dealt with a record company? She's right tbh, artists make next to nothing from cd sales, moneys made on tours and merchandising and if you don't make enough there to cover what you owe the record company your outta luck in a major way, thats why bands that are broke tour for 2 years, not just to boost cd sales but because it earns them the money they need to live.

I understand that musicians don't make a lot of money (if any) from record sales, but she was going as far as to say that musicians don't make money touring either. That's simply not the case. While it's good that a musician is willing to speak out against the RIAA, I have trouble feeling sorry for any of the musicians living the good life.

[Knoxville]

I understand that musicians don't make a lot of money (if any) from record sales, but she was going as far as to say that musicians don't make money touring either. That's simply not the case. While it's good that a musician is willing to speak out against the RIAA, I have trouble feeling sorry for any of the musicians living the good life.

90% of muscians aren't living the good life, yes moneys made from touring, but touring also costs alot of money so they don't make as much as you'd think, normally enough to live on while they record the next album (records not easy wither). The majority of stuff you see on cribs is rented, the cars the houses even the furniture. The only musicians that are really living the "high life" are ones in legendary bands - Aerosmith, The Rolling Stones, Metallica etc. Or ones that really know how to market themselves/invest - Russel Simmons, Gene Simmons, Motley Crue (released everything on they're own record label).

Personally I'd love to be a musician for a living not for the "cash, cars and fame" (although they would be nice benifits) but so I could spend my life doing something I enjoy.

[mmh]

tis true... bands dont make alot of money at all, if more than a 9-5 job.

i met corey taylor (slipknot, stone sour) for the third time, and was actually talking to him for a while and he was saying how crap the money was, and if he didnt enjoy it he wouldnt be doing it because there isnt really any cash benefits. in a band as Global and popular as Slipknot, you would expect them to be making a fair bit of money, but by the time it gets split to the band, theres practically nothing, and then they gotta split it 9 ways, they come out with not enough to live from being in the band - why do you think theyre all in side projects - its like working two jobs for these guys just to make enough money to live.
corey told me in person that the reason he gave up all the drink/drugs etc, was because they didnt make enough money to do all that stuff!

[autopilot]

Sony eh?

Who would have believed it.

Nothing to do with piracy control though is it. They just want total control over what we do so they can make more dosh. Even make us have to pay for the same record more than once in order to play it on different devices if they can.

[Rave]

FWIW I was moderately interested in the 'britpop' scene in the mid '90s (as an outside observer- showing my age here- I'm 26) and the same was true then (I read as much at the time, about a band you've probably never heard of and whom I've forgotten). Almost none of the bands were making serious money. Blur and Oaisis were apparently coining it, and Pulp must have made enough for Jarvis to keep doing what he enjoyed since he's not been reported as working in a chippy. As for the rest of them though: who knows what the hell Menswear, Gene, Elastica, Powder etc. are doing now. Even Suede and Dubstar (who wrote some IMO brlliant songs) seem to have completely dropped off the radar. I can totally believe Courtney Love when she says that te whole economics of marketing 'alternative' bands is based around them selling 500,000-1,000,000 records and just keeping 100% of the profit since they'll never stop owing you for 'expenses'.

[XA04]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4400148.stm

[Lee H]

For those interested, Sony have bit the bullet caused by this uproar and released a "Service pack" that makes this non-hidden on your PC.

See http://cp.sonybmg.com/xcp/english/updates.html for more info

[directhex]

it doesn't remove the low-level device filter, it simply disables the $sys$ masking

[Lee H]

it doesn't remove the low-level device filter, it simply disables the $sys$ masking

oops - editted to reflect this

Cheers for pointing that out hexxeh