ClumsyMonkey.net

...wrong thread?

good call

Henrietta wrote:That's crap man.

*thanks stars I haven't put the cd in Harry*

He's really feel violated.

.............Harry?

Check a couple pages back in TTYNKAM for how I sold her Josh's ass.

So, Josh's ass is named Harry? Boy am I confused!

happening fish wrote:That.. It.. that's fucking... THAT'S GOTTA BE ILLEGAL?

I think it is. In America anyway. If anyone has spysweeper, you might have read it in the news a while ago, that a new law, the "spy act" was passed. It prohibits this kind of installation of spyware and crap under strict federal laws. Unless I'm mistaken.

That is stupid. I hate not being able to listen to a cd on my computer after I buy it. I tend to spend a great deal of money on cds whenever I can, now we're getting even less for the money we spend. The system sucks.

I am so digusted with this.

Firstly, thanks to Axtech for giving me the opportunity to save this and adjust it. Sometimes, I'm a long-winded bastard and I post to save and then edit. Unfortunately, I posted this missive in the wrong forum to start with and had some wording issues. I'm grateful for the opportunity to re-post this polemic:


I've been stewing on this for quite some time and now with the recent exposure of Sony Music's "rootkit" scandal, I feel I should post on this.

For those not aware of the scandal, Sony Music/BMG have equipped most of their CD's in the past few months with a piece of digital rights media software (DRM) purportedly designed to protect the content. Some copies of Healthy in Paranoid Times force PC users to install a proprietary music player that prevents you from copying the content in certain circumstances. No problem right? Well, consider the fact that Canadian/US legislation practically gives you the right to fair/reasonable use. On the one hand, you've paid for a CD that comes under that policy and Sony has effectively stripped you of that right. That's wrong in and of itself, but Sony does have an interest in protecting that content.

Only a tad miffed? Here's the kicker: the software makes use of a strategy called a "rootkit" that works in much the same way spyware and trojan viruses work. The software EDITS YOUR COMPUTER'S REGISTRY AND IF YOU TRY TO REMOVE IT, IT WILL NUKE YOUR COMPUTER'S ABILITY TO USE THE OPTICAL DRIVE. It also opens a backdoor into your system that allows any knowledgable cracker to infest your computer with all sorts of viruses.

Think of your computer as a house. This software basically opens the door to your house, invites in anyone it pleases, and if you try to remove it, it trashes the place.

Is this what you expect when you buy a CD? I didn't think so.

Here's a link describing this in better detail:

http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pageto ... 406178.stm

Now, where does OLP come in? Well consider the fact that OLP has a piss-poor record these days of policing the quality of their discs. Anyone remember the DVD recall of a few years back? They should have been aware of this to start with and notified us. But assuming even then, that they have no control or knowledge of this DRM software, there's a strong argument saying they should have known. It's possible Coalition dropped the ball here or had no power to deal with it, in which case, OLP are as much a victim off this as anyone else. But I think one should be able to expect better from an artist like OLP who one would think could throw around a little weight at least with the Canadian arm of Sony. If not, they should be pissed right off and I'd like to know they are. (OLP could even be a victim of a Sony breach of contract here depending on the deal.)

Now take into account the rumours of OLP's active effort to thwart digital sharing prior to the release date. It's been mentioned that management or current/former employees of management have made active efforts to spoof these file sharing services with fake copies of the record.

There's no doubt it's been done repeatedly and I don't suppose that they are at all apologetic for it, if they are indeed responsible. I've even heard that fans from here have even been enlisted by some to do this dirty work! But that's second-hand and I don't know that for sure...but assuming it is true....

Looking at Sony and OLP you have one common principle: They are treating their casual money-paying customers as criminals.

Just look at some of the comments already cropping up on Amazon in response to this: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... c&n=507846

I don't suggest that OLP is as culpable as Sony in this respect, but I'm very reluctant to purchase OLP's CDs when such software is included. Not to mention it makes it very difficult to endear yourself to a fan when you're already treating that prospect as someone who would steal from you.

In short, it's not merely downloading that is causing the declining sales of CDs, it's archaic policing efforts such as these that stop some people buying music!

Now I know OLP likes the hub and haven't moved to go after anyone with that, but one could argue the point that this has much more to do with furthering its own ticket sales as a live act than respecting the interests of the fan. If I'm wrong, it behooves band/management to make a statement.

These ham-handed acts with regard to digital music consumption need to be stopped. I know OLP have a great history of treating their fans well, but there is a strong argument they need to stop these tactics themselves and call Sony out for their repugnant -and I'll say possibly criminal- treatment of their fans, or risk being tarred with the same brush.

Stace? Anyone else have an answer for this? Anyone here a victim of this?

I think most bands around aren't quite as cknowledgeable about computers as some of the people around here, and I wouldn't expect them to realize that the drm software Sony uses can be a problem/malicious/illegal, even if they know a little bit about it.

As far as spoofing mp3's of Healthy in Paranoid Times, I did that, and I wasn't "enlisted" by Coalition or Sony. We were asked by Stace to keep an eye out for the CD to leak and, if possible, to keep it from spreading before the release date. Some of us came up with the spoofed files after the actual leak turned up, to help slow things down. OLP wanting to keep the album out of circulation until its release date doesn't seem related to this topic, as far as I can see. It's not like they asked us to try to keep any of the older albums or other commercially available tracks from circulating.

Harry is my computer!

Perhaps I should warn my brother not to put cd in his computer. Shoot, I'll bet he already did.

faninor wrote:As far as spoofing mp3's of Healthy in Paranoid Times, I did that, and I wasn't "enlisted" by Coalition or Sony. We were asked by Stace to keep an eye out for the CD to leak and, if possible, to keep it from spreading before the release date. Some of us came up with the spoofed files after the actual leak turned up, to help slow things down. OLP wanting to keep the album out of circulation until its release date doesn't seem related to this topic, as far as I can see. It's not like they asked us to try to keep any of the older albums or other commercially available tracks from circulating.

Actually, it sounds exactly like you were enlisted.

It seems to me the desire to hold material back to the release date presumes that people who get it beforehand won't buy it when it gets out. Spoofing and actively obstructing people from getting what's already out there seems a bit paranoid. That practice and DRM are both representative of the same ethos: people who download, won't buy so we should obstruct their ability to rip/download/burn.

Whether or not this practice is morally right or not, doesn't have to be the issue. Obviously, these two parties have a duty to each other to protect their investment both artistically and in terms of recouping capital spent. My problem starts when these kinds of activites start to impinge on the consumer's ability to make informed choices and enjoy the product they work so hard to market.

Concealing software and obstructing a person's ability to preview a CD on their own terms before/after release are two birds of the same variety. Now you can disagree with my "previewing on own terms" philosophy, but people who disagree rarely come up with a better alternative.

The other side of the story in this case seems to be treating prospects as potential criminals. Not a sound business practice really and that sort of mindset is probably more representative of why the music industry is suffering than any 17 year old using bit torrent.

I think OLP are better than that, and they usually treat fans pretty well. However, I don't think its right to hold them blameless here. As I've said, they've had experience in the past dealing with defects in production, and I don't believe they're not tech-savvy. Both Sony and OLP have got a whole arm that deals with marketing their image online and within technology.

DRM is a huge music industry issue and I don't believe for a minute they could have been completely ignorant of that software's inclusion on the release.

Just to be clear, the sony scandal is not the main reason I'm upset here, it's the mere inclusion of DRM that bugs me. The scandal just illustrates the chickens coming home to roost.

Oh yeah, I left out a few important words. We were asked to keep it from spreading on the hub, which we operate. We chose to go after file sharing programs and bit torrent trackers with spoofed files. We weren't asked to.

Wanting to keep your work secret until it is meant to be released and circulating spoofed files before a release date seems to me like it can serve a different purpose than DRM and circulating spoofed files after a release date. I do agree with your "previewing on own terms" philosophy, and I do that frequently. But anyway, it is illegal and the record companies feel like it makes them lose money, so we should have no expectation for them to make it easy for us to do that.

DRM obstructs ripping and burning, which targets only people who have a legitimate copy of the album. They paid money for it, and want to listen to the album on their ipods because they're cool people with ipods, but can't. Even though that is considered fair use. DRM is supposed to stop piracy except for its one major flaw:

The music pirates really really want to copy music off of CD's and put mp3's on the internet where anyone can download it. They're more focused on doing this than the average fan who wants to put the album onto their ipod, and also usually more computer savvy, and thus they will find a way to bipass any DRM that any record company will ever come up with. So in the end, the DRM doesn't stop the piracy, but it does stop all the average fans who just want a CD-R copy to play in their car CD player that scratches discs, or in their ipod, or whatever.

Then the mp3 files go from the pirates onto the internet.

People download it, some of them want to preview the album, some of them want to hear it with no intention of buying it, and some of them already own the album and just want to get it onto their ipod. Whichever the case is, I have a feeling that downloading these files probably wouldn't be considered fair use. They didn't really come from the CD you bought, they came from another copy. While spoofing mp3's is annoying for those of us who want to preview an album, or put it onto an ipod, or whatever, it doesn't inhibit fair use. You might argue that spoofing mp3's still inhibits those people who own the album and just want to put it onto their ipod, but if it weren't for the DRM, that wouldn't be an issue to begin with.

That's the main difference in my mind between DRM and spoofed files. I agree with a lot of what you're saying here, I just think that there are some differences between DRM and spoofed files so that, even if the record companies like both for the same reason, they should be considered separately.

Oh yeah and the "better solution" to previewing on own terms:

People should be able to return CD's to stores after they've been purchased and opened.

If someone takes the time to go buy a CD, and go return the CD, I have a feeling that at least 95% of the time it would be because they thought it sucked, not that they liked it and made a copy to keep. With how easy it is to get pirated music online, they're not going to spend the gas money to go buy it if they just want a pirated copy.

I mean, plenty of food and stuff has a money-back satisfaction guarantee sort of thing, and it's not like that can just be packaged and resold. So why not CD's too? If people were allowed to return CD's after buying and opening them, that could be a major step in the record industry's fight against piracy. But yeah, they don't have the mentality to realize that.

Yeah, it looks like we agree on most points.

I just think DRM and Spoofs are illustrative of the same goal. Sure they are different ways of getting to the core of the issue, but the same goal remains. In either case, you're obstructing the listeners ability to consume the product. Downloading without purchase is wrong, but when your record company manufactures desire and loads DRM to nuke someone's PC, you don't leave the consumer with many other options.

Spoofing your product is just icing on the shitaake. If OLP had nothing to do with it, then fair play. But it doesn't sound like they're entirely blameless here.

I dunno. I mean, I'm not exactly knowledgable on the subject, but I imagine if Sony described it to them, they didn't describe it as, "A program similar to a virus and that makes use of a strategy called a "rootkit" that works in much the same way spyware and trojan viruses work. The software EDITS YOUR COMPUTER'S REGISTRY AND IF YOU TRY TO REMOVE IT, IT WILL NUKE YOUR COMPUTER'S ABILITY TO USE THE OPTICAL DRIVE. It also opens a backdoor into your system that allows any knowledgable cracker to infest your computer with all sorts of viruses."

So I don't think OLP would be too much at blame, as I doubt they would done it if they thought it was in any way harmful to... me. So even if they knew about it, it's not like Sony would describe the bad parts of it as a selling point.

Assuming OLP has much choice in the matter...

+ramble

egotist wrote:Spoofing your product is just icing on the shitaake. If OLP had nothing to do with it, then fair play. But it doesn't sound like they're entirely blameless here.

OLP had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO with the spoofs.