|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Digital Out on DVD-A: An Open Challenge posted by tenor39 on May 05, 2003 at 04:38:51:
The IEEE1394 digital audio spec requires key managment and encryption (among other things). The 5C/4C committees' approvals are then needed before material can be sent across the interface. Finally, anyone providing decoding of hirez onto unprotected digital outputs would be in a great deal of legal trouble - DMCA would be a formidable barrier, indeed.
Follow Ups:
Well, since not all DVD-A material is copy protected I don't see a problem. Even if Firewire were not used one could still find the correct signals at the inputs to the internal DAC's. I guarantee that someone will find a way around this, even if only to stick it to the record companies. I have no such desire, and simply want a way to keep my present player from becoming obsolete without spending as much as a new car would cost. This is the reason both Hi-rez formats will continue to be niche markets, unless Sony has its way and forces hybrid discs on consumers. I'm involved in the music industry and I think the whole thing stinks, FWIW.
Hey Mike,Where can I pick up all the non-CP'd DVD-A's? I tried Best Buy, but out of the hundreds of disks there, I couldn't find any that weren't CP'd.
If you go into a player to pull digital out of a CP'd stream, you're in violation of the DMCA pure and simple. Selling such a modified device, you're in violation of the DMCA. Buying such a device, you're in violation of the DMCA. Using such a device... are you seeing a pattern here?
Are you aware of how IEEE1394 for digital audio is implemented and/or licensed? Start with the DVD-Forum website and then 1394ta.org and then go to TI's website and pull the specs for the 1394 interface chipset. That should be enough to get you started. After you know how the interface is architected and licensed, you can start reading the DMCA to see how tampering with content-protection mechanisms is against the law (Federal law, BTW). The simple fact is: modders need not apply to reworking 1394 digital interfaces.
I doubt you could find the music I'm interested in at Best Buy, Austin. Several of the smaller labels that record classical music, like AIX for example, have made a point of the fact that they don't use watermarking. Hundreds of DVD-A's, Austin? I think you'd better check your math again. Or did you get it confused with DVD-V? Do you work for the RIAA? It sounds like you do. I could really care less what the music nazi's think. If I choose to modify a player that I OWN, for my OWN purposes, then I will. Let them try to tell me I can't. I'm quaking in my boots. As I said, I'm not interested in pirating music. I wasn't suggesting that someone sell this tweak. I'm simply interested in better sound quality, something the music industry doesn't really care about anymore. This has been the complaint from the audiophile community from the get-go, and rightly so. But I digress...so I'm in violation of the DMCA, huh? Do you ever speed while driving, Austin? I think that there needs to be a 'Spirit of the Law' priciple here. Do you know that these same people are trying to make the ANALOG outputs of every video device illegal? Say goodbye to your Hi-def TV if you bought it in the last 4 years.
You're still defeating a content control device. Section 1201 of the DMCA. Even talking about it is illegal.No, really. Even talking about how to do it is illegal. It doesn't matter if you "own" the music. It doesn't matter if you "own" the player.
No one here, I don't think, is saying the DMCA is a great thing. But we're stuck with it and there isn't much we can do.
If this thread continued and began talking about how to actually how to do it, there's a very good chance that some folks could end up in trouble.
It has very little to do with whether or not you pirate music or not. It's just about control.
Look up the text of it. Technically, defeating pig latin is now illegal. The law has serious, serious sharp teeth.
If you decode: "evitcirtser oot si acmd eht"
and I say you aren't allowed to because the statement is (c)2003 me, congratulations, you've just committed a felony.
Is this what we've come to in America??? The thought police, speech police? I didn't want this to become a political isssue, but it seems to be. I'm as conservative as the day is long, but this stuff is just plain wrong. Another industry that I operate in, pyrotechnics, is suffering a similar fate. It's attitudes like the one's that I'm hearing that cause me to despair. At least the pyro industry is taking on some of the ridiculous legislation making its way out of Washington. Why are so many in the music and audio industries such weenies? If we do nothing then we deserve what we get. Write to your Congressmen! Elect people that will stand up to this nonsense! I am utterly amazed at the fear this topic has generated, even so much as just talking about it. BTW, pulling the data signals off of the DSP chip in a DVD-A player, to bypass the internal DAC's, in no way defeats CP, at least from what I've read. CP is accomplished before the DAC's so I don't see a problem here. Maybe someone more knowledgeable could enlighten me on this point.
Mike,Content production is a multi-billion dollar industry that considers copy-protection essential to its long-term profitability. Many of these billions are sent to Washington in the form of taxes. For lawmakers, it's a simple proposition - no CP, no taxes from content. How much do you think Uncle Sam collected in taxes from CD music producers over the last couple years? Right, so DMCA and FCC regs supporting MPAA and RIAA. Your feelings have no part in this contract so save your postage. You will buy CP'd content and equipment when CP'd content and equipment is all there is to buy. As will we all. Simple.
As for HD, there will be substantial but declining sources of HD through component video for some time to come. As the vast majority of people have not yet purchased HDTVs, any downrezzing of HD content over component video will not affect them and will therefore not represent a serious problem for HD content distribution. The big deal in HD is HD-DVD and by the time it arrives (2 years), CP'd digital interfaces on HDTVs will be ubiquitous.
Austin, you either work for one of these organizations, or you have the most defeatist attitude I've heard in a long time. What does this have to do with growing up, Austin. Because I refuse to accept the plans and schemes of the corporate/government machine? Thankfully in this country, at least up to now, the marketplace has rejected similar attempts to dictate what consumers can do with items or content that they have purchased(DIVX, for example). I do not believe that consumers will allow the industry to make their existing equipment obsolete. I am not so dependant on entertainment that I can't live without certain forms of it. I refuse to buy formats that promote extreme forms of CP. I can vote with my wallet as well as my pen. If the day comes when this country allows the Hollywood types to do all of things that they wish to impose on us, then we no longer live in a representative republic, but a socialist state. I, for one, will fight against this to my last. We just fought a war to end oppression in another country. Why are we so eager to allow it in our own?
Mike,I neither work in the industry nor do I have a "defeatist" attitude.
As a matter of fact, I embrace the technology and promote it every chance I get. The more people that buy into hirez and hidef, the more content will be made available. That benefits me directly.
With this content comes copy protection. You may not like it but it's a fact of life. No CP, no hirez or hidef content. I don't consider CP and the mechanisms to enforce it a defeat in any way - I consider them a victory for all of us. CP provides content producers a means to claim their fair share of the pie. By doing so, it simultaneously provides consumers assurance that high quality content will continue to be produced and distributed in accordance with the rules of the marketplace. This is good.
I think you misunderstand to some extent how our system works. When an inordinate ROI is obtained in one sector, capital quickly moves into that sector which then lowers the ROI. ROI is thus effectively equalized over all sectors over time. Impediments to this mechanism generally do not serve either the supply or demand side in the long run. Without CP, the price mechanism is broken and while demand will certainly hold steady (something for nothing), supply cannot operate on this priciple. Supply will inevitably dry up and we are all the losers for it. With CP, the price mechanism is re-established (and regulated by ROI equalization) and supply and demand can go merrily on their way. That's the view from the big table.
It's distressing to me to see such behavior out of so-called "audiophiles". Whomever you are, Austin, you obviously have a direct involvement with the CP issue. Your economic theory is tainted with ideology. Austin, you're a 'true believer', and that group has convinced themselves that what they want to impose on the marketplace is 'good' for us. My goal in starting the thread was not to spur a political debate, but to try to give those of us that can't afford the 'latest and greatest' a chance to enjoy our systems. I'm in the recording industry myself, and what I see happening is not an attempt to prevent property theft, rather it is an attempt to control what an individual can do with a purchased item or service. This from an industry that has colluded to keep the price of CD's artificially inflated for the last 18 years. If people don't support these things then they can't succeed. But when it's the ONLY source available, as you imply it will be, then they are no better IMO than the drug trade: Create a dependancy, and then become the only source for it. I love the attempt at trying to convince all of us how it will benefit us. Gee, and I thought we lived in a capitalist society. When choice is taken away we all suffer. Just because the industry/government has put a modus operandi in place doesn't make it right. Support labels that don't subscribe to this nonsense. If we don't buy the product it can't succeed. But I'm distressed by the willingness of our audio community to line up for the slaughter just to have the latest thing. Come on folks, let's be pro-active here.
Mike,This stuff is all a done deal, my friend.
Check out the hirez and hidef specs - they're on the net in various places. The first bullet point in every one of their statement of objectives is copy protection - has been for YEARS! DVD-Audio, DVD-Video, SACD, IEEE1394, DVI/HDCP, HDMI, etc.
Check out congressional testimony from content producers (Audio and Video). Opposition group materials are also plentiful. Copy protection is the number one issue.
Did you know that DVD-Audio sat on the shelf for over a year because the proposed CP mechanism (CSS) had been cracked for DVD-Video and the audio boys took a "time out" until they could come up with a more robust CP scheme?
What were you doing during the public comment periods when these issues were being debated and decided. What groups (there are many) that were (and are) fighting these CP schemes have you joined or supported or made any effort to become aware of? What are doing THIS MINUTE to make your views known about the upcoming HD-DVD format?
Yeah, that's right - NOTHING. You're clueless about CP, DMCA and the equipment manufacturers' complicity (either forced or willing) in de facto enforcement of this regime. Rather, you make pewling posts here where your views can have no effect at all on the reality of the situation. You're distressed? OK. But don't bitch at me, buddy.
You're the one who's been sitting on his hands while others acted in their own self-interest. You expected they would act in YOUR interest, perhaps? Well, they made decisions and now you don't like them - tough. You're goddamned right I have an involvement in CP. It's going to affect my choices and freedom - of course I'm involved. I've met, phoned, mailed, emailed, posted and otherwise engaged players on both sides of these issues for years. I know the positions, I know the technology and I know the economics. Given this knowledge, I've decided that CP makes sense in maintaining the exchange of hirez and hidef content for cash.
You can be people or you can be "sheeple". You missed the people boat on CP. Don't blame me.
Me thinks you protest too much, Austin. OK, let's look at your points on by one, shall we:1. "Check out the hirez and hidef specs - they're on the net in various places. The first bullet point Me thinks you protest too much, Austin. OK, let's take your points one by one:
in every one of their statement of objectives is copy protection - has been for YEARS! DVD-Audio, DVD-Video, SACD, IEEE1394, DVI/HDCP, HDMI, etc."-I have been. For 4 years now. But the same arguments they make about the new formats and data transmission protocols are the same arguments they made about analog cassette, VHS tape, CD copying, and so on.
2. "Did you know that DVD-Audio sat on the shelf for over a year because the proposed CP mechanism (CSS) had been cracked for DVD-Video and the audio boys took a "time out" until they could come up with a more robust CP scheme?"
-No kidding?? Gosh, Austin, you must think I've lived in a Biosphere for the last 20 years. Regardless of what "scheme" they come up with for CP it WILL be hacked.
3. "What were you doing during the public comment periods when these issues were being debated and decided. What groups (there are many) that were (and are) fighting these CP schemes have you joined or supported or made any effort to become aware of? What are doing THIS MINUTE to make your views known about the upcoming HD-DVD format?"
-I'm a member of the AES, Austin, and there are groups of us in the audio world that provide content that are actively fighting what's happening. Personally, I could care less about HD-DVD because it’s another excuse to buy the same movies all over again. Though the blue laser technology is now a marketable reality, it will be years(5) before software is available, mainly because of the CP issue.
4. "Yeah, that's right - NOTHING. You're clueless about CP, DMCA and the equipment manufacturers' complicity (either forced or willing) in de facto enforcement of this regime. Rather, you make pewling posts here where your views can have no effect at all on the reality of the situation. You're distressed? OK. But don't bitch at me, buddy."
-Hmm...you're either a psychic or you're making a huge ASSumption(I'd bet on the latter). I've had many conversations with content providers and equipment manufacturers. Because I'm in the music side of things I think I've gotten to know this issue intimately. I bring it to the attention of the Asylum because I DO believe my views can have a positive effect. I've petitioned my Congressman, John Mica, MANY times over DMCA, and the petulance that Sen. Fritz Hollings is trying to sneak through. If consumers refuse to participate then the market will not support it, as long as we have a market-based economy, that is.
5. "You're the one who's been sitting on his hands while others acted in their own self-interest. You expected they would act in YOUR interest, perhaps? Well, they made decisions and now you don't like them - tough. You're goddamned right I have an involvement in CP. It's going to affect my choices and freedom - of course I'm involved. I've met, phoned, mailed, emailed, posted and otherwise engaged players on both sides of these issues for years. I know the positions, I know the technology and I know the economics. Given this knowledge, I've decided that CP makes sense in maintaining the exchange of hirez and hidef content for cash."
-Again, how the hell would you know? Answer: You don't have a clue as to what I know or who I am. I NEVER expected the powers that be to make decisions in my, or anyone else’s behalf. They exist solely for their own self-interest. Follow the money trail and you'll always find the truth. You say you're concerned over choices that affect your freedoms, and yet you've decided that those freedoms aren't worth fighting for so long as you have what you wanted, be it Hi-rez audio/video, money, whatever.
6. "You can be people or you can be "sheeple". You missed the people boat on CP. Don't blame me."
-Based on what I just said above who looks like the "sheeple", Austin? I'm not blaming you for anything, but you still haven't addressed many of the questions that I've put to you in previous posts. I didn't start this thread to make a political statement, but you've declared yourself an 'expert' on this issue. What I'm expressing is my OPINION, nothing more. Though I operate in circles that deal with content questions daily, I would never say I have it all figured out. And so what if I'm "late to the dance", in your opinion? Maybe if enough of us remember what our gonads are for(sorry, ladies)we could change the direction of this thing. Or maybe we should all just lie down and take it up the ying-yang. There are definitely much larger issues here than CP. But this is where the battle is for us, at the moment.
Mike
Mike,I apologize for getting the wrong impression from your previous posts. To my reading, they did not evidence the depth of knowledge that one should have acquired given your stated involvement in these issues over a long period of time. Good for you. You researched, you understood, you interacted and YOU LOST!
CP is here, it's going to stay here and your options to avoid it are severely restricted both by statute and the marketplace. Your "fight to the last" stance is, you must admit, a bit Quixotic given the circumstances. Perhaps you can "borrow" a few tapes from your workplace from time to time to substitute for commercial content that you won't be buying in the future. Or take walks in the park and read books instead of viewing HDTV. Perhaps your return to nature will inspire other people to follow you - but not me.
I'll be fully wired into the Matrix - on demand HD PPV and hirez PPL at locations and times of my choice! CP is the price I must pay - so be it.
Here's something I posted last year on a different forum. It applies every bit as much to hirez as to HDTV. Maybe it'll give you some understanding of where I see things going and why I support rapid deployment of digital media.
July 2002
As to my point of view, I guess you could call me a "rent" freak. We're not on this earth permanently so in the final analysis, all we can do is "rent", never own. That said, what you really want to "own" (call it a long-term lease
) are appreciating or income-producing assets. Financially speaking, it's a loser to put equity into depreciating (or obsoleting) assets. Much more efficient to determine an acceptable cost for ongoing use of the asset and budget for it as a recurring expense. This normalizes your budget and frees capital to invest in assets that make sense to "own". Let's put some practicalities on this foundation.
When you own something, you're the one left to deal with its inevitable obsolescence. In terms of media content what happened to all the "equity" in the huge record and cassette collections we all had a few years ago? It's in the trash can, that's where. Thinking back, would you have rather owned these formats or simply rented the content? Keep in mind, the same original analog master tapes were used to source the same content in LP, cassette, CD and now DVD-Audio/SACD. Rebuying the same thing over and over again is the ultimate waste of resources.
Then there are the maintenance costs associated with ownership. You've got to have space to put the stuff, a system to index it all, mechanisms to replace broken items, etc. Then, if you want to use the item in more than one location, you've got to physically truck it around or even worse, buy a duplicate. Much more efficient to have a flexible distribution system.
Finally, and most importantly, there's the time element associated with ownership. It takes time, lots of time, to build, maintain and distribute your own media collection. How long to add one additional CD or DVD to your collection? Research, get in the car, go to the store, stand in line, get back home, open the d*mn security wrappers, spin it, categorize it, index it, input it and store it. WHEW!
I consider time the most valuable and limited resource both in absolute and relative terms. I am more than willing to pay someone else for their time in setting up and maintaining a media distribution system that I can use whenever I want. The best part is it will end up saving me money as well!
Yes, I'm renting. No, I don't have "ownership" of the content. But neither do you when it's certainly going to be obsoleted in the future. Here's the biggie: by renting, I free large quanitities of time and financial resources to invest as I see fit on assets that generate a return to me. I can put dollars into nice HT furniture, lighting, artwork, investments, etc. rather than into depreciating content. I can INVEST in good quality audio amplification and speakers (low depreciation and obsolescence). I will minimise the EXPENSE of everchanging pre/pro, receiver and TV features. I'll buy a relatively cheap receiver or RPTV, expect it to last two or three years and consider it an ongoing EXPENSE. I will NOT spend $10,000 on a plasma or high-end pre/pro that will be obsoleted over the same period. When I feel that these big ticket items have reached a technology plateau where they will hold their value and currency, I WILL invest in them.
Buy content? NEVER! Add up 400 DVDs at $15 each. That's $100/month for 5 years!! You'll be able to watch a different one every day for over a year. But then you've got to watch them all over again the next year and the next and so on. Do you really think 480p DVD will be around in 5 years? NetFlix has got it right except for the snail mail interface. On the other hand, if it was PPU at $1/viewing, I'm going to see over 1800 different movies in the same time for less money. And when HD-DVD content pops up, I'll be watching it - you'll be rebuying your 400 DVDs in the new HD format. We'll both be buying new TVs
! That's the view from the "renter's" side.
Alright. Now I understand WHY you're OK with this whole thing. Let me give you my take on this."I apologize for getting the wrong impression from your previous posts. To my reading, they did not evidence the depth of knowledge that one should have acquired given your stated involvement in these issues over a long period of time. Good for you. You researched, you understood, you interacted and YOU LOST!"
That's an opinion, Austin, not a fact. Most consumers want products in their hands, not vaporware that they have to pay for again and again. The final chapter hasn't been written yet.
"CP is here, it's going to stay here and your options to avoid it are severely restricted both by statute and the marketplace. Your "fight to the last" stance is, you must admit, a bit Quixotic given the circumstances. Perhaps you can "borrow" a few tapes from your workplace from time to time to substitute for commercial content that you won't be buying in the future. Or take walks in the park and read books instead of viewing HDTV. Perhaps your return to nature will inspire other people to follow you - but not me."
CP may be here to stay, but the marketplace has yet to weigh in on the implementation of it. I think you misunderstand why I believe what I do. Don Quixote, I'm not. I'm talking about principles that go far beyond just the entertainment industry. I think I'll have plenty of options outside of "a few tapes". It's a shame that you compare LIVING life to just VIEWING it. I think you're missing out on a great deal.
"I'll be fully wired into the Matrix - on demand HD PPV and hirez PPL at locations and times of my choice! CP is the price I must pay - so be it."
Fair enough. I may choose to participate-or not. It depends on price, quality, selection, etc. But the key is I can live without it.
"As to my point of view, I guess you could call me a "rent" freak. We're not on this earth permanently so in the final analysis, all we can do is "rent", never own. That said, what you really want to "own" (call it a long-term lease ) are appreciating or income-producing assets. Financially speaking, it's a loser to put equity into depreciating (or obsoleting) assets. Much more efficient to determine an acceptable cost for ongoing use of the asset and budget for it as a recurring expense. This normalizes your budget and frees capital to invest in assets that make sense to "own"."
OK. I agree with this to a point, but I'm not convinced that owning 'depreciating' assets is always a bad choice, fiscally speaking. If you choose not to own your own car, home, or audio system you can't really tweak them to your liking. It's also very hard to establish a credit rating as a renter. Are you going to rent a HDTV? How about the digital front end of your audio system? What about a computer? These items are becoming obsolete at an increasing rate as technology moves faster and faster. But I don't see "Rent-a-Center" offering these things in the near future.
"When you own something, you're the one left to deal with its inevitable obsolescence. In terms of media content what happened to all the "equity" in the huge record and cassette collections we all had a few years ago? It's in the trash can, that's where. Thinking back, would you have rather owned these formats or simply rented the content? Keep in mind, the same original analog master tapes were used to source the same content in LP, cassette, CD and now DVD-Audio/SACD. Rebuying the same thing over and over again is the ultimate waste of resources."
Sentence one is true. However, I think a large group of vinyl enthusiasts would strongly disagree with your next few statements. How much music that came out on LP is still not available (and never will be) on CD? In keeping with your philosophy, aren't you really "Rebuying" the same thing again each time you rent it?
"Then there are the maintenance costs associated with ownership. You've got to have space to put the stuff, a system to index it all, mechanisms to replace broken items, etc. Then, if you want to use the item in more than one location, you've got to physically truck it around or even worse, buy a duplicate. Much more efficient to have a flexible distribution system."
True. But ALL distribution systems need an interface to connect to the outside world. Unless you're supporting Alpha Wave, direct- connect to the brain, you're going to need multiple interfaces.
"Finally, and most importantly, there's the time element associated with ownership. It takes time, lots of time, to build, maintain and distribute your own media collection. How long to add one additional CD or DVD to your collection? Research, get in the car, go to the store, stand in line, get back home, open the d*mn security wrappers, spin it, categorize it, index it, input it and store it. WHEW!"
This assumes that the outcome is the only important thing. How about the joy of the journey? You remind me of the science-fiction writers of the late '60's-early '70's, that thought we would have a pill for everything. Why do anything to have a real feeling or experience when you can pop a pill and avoid all of the risks? Kind of like the "Virtual Reality" freaks. No risk, but not real either.
"I consider time the most valuable and limited resource both in absolute and relative terms. I am more than willing to pay someone else for their time in setting up and maintaining a media distribution system that I can use whenever I want. The best part is it will end up saving me money as well!"
So you can use your time to do what? This is truly outcome based thinking. As far as saving you money, that will depend on how much the content providers charge you. Do you believe for an instant that as they become a monopoly that the price will stay static? Or do you beleive in government regulation? I don't like either option.
"Yes, I'm renting. No, I don't have "ownership" of the content. But neither do you when it's certainly going to be obsoleted in the future. Here's the biggie: by renting, I free large quanitities of time and financial resources to invest as I see fit on assets that generate a return to me. I can put dollars into nice HT furniture, lighting, artwork, investments, etc. rather than into depreciating content. I can INVEST in good quality audio amplification and speakers (low depreciation and obsolescence). I will minimise the EXPENSE of everchanging pre/pro, receiver and TV features. I'll buy a relatively cheap receiver or RPTV, expect it to last two or three years and consider it an ongoing EXPENSE. I will NOT spend $10,000 on a plasma or high-end pre/pro that will be obsoleted over the same period. When I feel that these big ticket items have reached a technology plateau where they will hold their value and currency, I WILL invest in them."
Good luck on this one. This is the biggest flaw in your argument. To truly enjoy your rented, hi-rez content, you'll need state-of-the-art gear. While SOME technologies will stay the same, MOST will not, even amps and speakers. Compare the best speaker from 10 years ago with what you can buy for half of its original cost today. Do you really beleive there will ever be a "technology plateau"? I think this is wishful thinking. If anything, obsolecence will increase in speed, not decline.
"Buy content? NEVER! Add up 400 DVDs at $15 each. That's $100/month for 5 years!! You'll be able to watch a different one every day for over a year. But then you've got to watch them all over again the next year and the next and so on. Do you really think 480p DVD will be around in 5 years? NetFlix has got it right except for the snail mail interface. On the other hand, if it was PPU at $1/viewing, I'm going to see over 1800 different movies in the same time for less money. And when HD-DVD content pops up, I'll be watching it - you'll be rebuying your 400 DVDs in the new HD format. We'll both be buying new TVs!"
I don't disagree with you here, especially when it comes to movies. I own very few DVD's, mostly because I'm very choosy. I'd rather rent most of them, and do. It will be YEARS before digital-only video is a reality, mostly because the enthusiasts that want HD have been early adopters of the present technology. HD is not for the masses at the present, and may never be.
If you want to base your life, Austin, on this theory you've stated, you're more than welcome to. But don't expect the rest of us to agree with it, or not object when it's trying to be forced on us. I think the fact I stated to you about not needing to have every new thing that comes down the pike is really quite freeing. I no longer feel addicted. I belong to "Audioholics Anonnymous".
Mike
Mike,You seem to be in substantial agreement with my POV. Buy the stuff that has long-term meaning and value to you. Expense everything else.
One point you're not quite getting. We are quickly moving (or being moved) from having to personally purchase, install and maintain the infrastructure needed to deploy digital services to a model where these things are "given" to us. The infrastructure costs are recovered by all of us paying a small continuing "upgrade" fee to the service providers.
Examples abound. Internet access via cable modem - cable already in place, modems effectively "free", monthly access charge. HDTV - effectively "free" cable STB or DBS dishes upgraded for "free" financed by higher monthly service charges. I expect all advanced services to adopt this deployment model as time goes on.
The important thing is that the conduit is built. Anything that helps to build this digital services conduit is good. At the moment, the major impediment to this process centers on copy protection. The content producers have delayed infrastructure rollout until they get assurance that what they put into the pipeline will remain their property. I could care less. As long as the pipeline is built.
Let's fast-forward a few years. Analog TV is history. Analog music is history. It's all digital. The pipelines are in and content is flowing. Now stay with me here. Do you consider there is a limit on the "appetite" of 300 million (US only) people for content? Look at all the "narrow-cast" cable channels (the FOOD channel?). Of course there's no limit. So here's this gaping maw demanding an infinite amount and diversity of content with a payment mechanism for that content already established. What's the entry price to become a content producer given the infrastructure to deliver your content and get paid for it is already in place? It's next to nothing.
You're a new musician just starting out - you appear on one of the Emerging Artists channels and do your thing in HDTV and hirez audio. You don't pay to get on the channel - there's 50 of 'em and they need content 24/7 but you don't get paid either unless people click on "download this music". If they do, you get paid and the EANet takes their cut. Movie fan, same deal. Like porn, help yourself. Civil war buff, watch McPherson lecture in real-time.
The point I'm making is that once the infrastructure is in place, the existing barriers to content distribution evaporate and the free market rules content production. This is where we're headed and CP is a very small price to pay.
My take.
Austin
I think, Austin, that we have SOME agreement on certain issues. But you still haven't answered the pertinent questions that I put forth to you. These have more of a spiritual component to them, and you have avoided them in your replies. Your very good at spinning things to fit your world-view. This discussion is now beyond the scope of this forum, but as I've said repeatedly, I don't have to have these things to have life. This, to me, is the ultimate victory over any system that is being forced on the rest of the public. Life is not a spectator sport, Austin. Peace to you, my friend.
...That's exactly the issue: It isn't about piracy prevention, it's about control and forced repurchasing, collusion, and limiting consumer options.The industry knows very well that 'digital downloaders' don't much care if its a bit for bit copy, since their "product" isn't bit for bit, anyways. All it takes is one mediocre analog rip, one pirate to take the time to do that, and the Kazaa masses are satiated.
The "industry" would like nothing more than for us to pay-for-play, and if not that, then buy a DVD-A version for home, CD version for the car, and a separate digital download license for every player/computer we own.
CP protects from casual copying, not mass piracy. Serious pirates will find a way around it. I do not think the industry's woes can be traced back to Bob lending a copy of his Steely Dan DVD-A to Ed down the road and having Ed burn a CD-R instead of buying the thing. That's all that CP prevents.
"the big table" is trying to commoditize an artistic pursuit. This works up to a point but, as we now see, it is pretty hard to worry about copy protection when the likes of Metallica and the Eagles are concerned. The Artists, who we actually care about, have made oodles of money on these releases and we have probably bought the same music from them several times, in different formats. There is no connection to the "companies" behind these artists cause the consumer just does not care. As a consumer I am not compelled to pay for bad management decisions. Why should I have to subsidize EMI for paying Mariah Carey off? Why should I pay for "arist development" that companies overpay in hopes they are then "next big thing"? We don't care what the business mechanics are for the music industry cause we have had no input into the current structure. Until the industry wakes up and realizes the current model does not work, these companies will continue to lose money. I want artist x, I don't want to pay more for this artists' work because the management of the company has screwed up in other areas. Go back to your big table cause you are going down the tubes with your current business model and copy protection will not change that!
Commoditization of artistic pursuits? Where have you been the last 20 years - in Tibet? This whole country is all about brand management. Go to any strip in the country - without the mountains in the background or the sound of the ocean, you wouldn't have a clue where you are. Wendy's, Blockbuster, Home Depot, BB&B, Petsmart, etc., all branded to the max. Why on earth would you think music or movies or any other entertainment vehicle would be different? It's not - it never has been - it never will be.This is not about struggling Artists (love the cap), fighting the "machine", it's about efficiently moving massive amounts of content from producers to consumers and moving equally massive amounts of money from consumers to producers. Period. It's like the old saw "TV programs are the filler between commmercials". What don't you get about this?
Paying for mismanagement? Of course you pay for mismanagement - who else is going to pay for it? When the government screws up and nails a bunch of those nice $600 toilet seats, who pays? When the WTC disaster sucks $50 billion out of the insurance industry, who's rates go up and who pays for it? When pro sports players won't accept a salary cap and TV pays additional billions for broadcast rights, who pays for it?
YOU PAY FOR IT! The actual dumbasses who made the fateful decision are either uncollectable or long gone by the time the bill comes around. To keep the puck in play, there's only one source for the money - YOU! You talk about broken "models" - you obviously don't understand the first thing about business. Nobody can compete with free. Therefore free has to go or everybody competing with it has to go. Our "model" says free has to go. Therefore CP, therefore live with it.
Austin
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: