RIAA chief calls for copyright filters on PCs When is a virus not a virus? When it's sending your personal data to the Recording Industry Association of America, silly. Internet advocacy website Public Knowledge has posted a highlight reel from the State of the Net Conference, where RIAA boss Cary Sherman suggests that internet filtering sorely lacks the personal touch of …
This is the sort of thing Microsoft would be happy to add to the next release of their OS. Of course, those of us running Linux can sit back and laugh as Windows users get bogged down even more.
Scarier would be Intel and AMD hard coding it inside their processors. I find that rather unlikely without the law forcing them to.
Please implement this utter crap on every Windows machine out there. If the masses don't convert to Linux then, at least they'll use oggs.
The users would have to move to Linux eventually, though. Any compromise with Mac wouldn't last long, as they could be slapped with the virus as well. But with Linux, there are a million flavors with no concentrated company or distributor. Even if they made it mandatory for the Linux kernel somehow, you can always recompile it or go back to an old version and apply patches carefully.
1) allow keyloggers to be installed on all their machines that may (or may not) contain sensitive data, and collate data about all websites they visit
2) publish this data automatically to a public website
3) install a password-free VNC server for everyone to see what they're doing...
4) automatically assume they're guilty themselves for anything that may be legally dubious, copied, plaguarised, have a couple of bytes that coincidentally happen to be the same as someone elses couple of bytes who may have had them first, and most importantly, pay their standard "fee" to anyone who asks for it on this basis...
...THEN I might consider letting them install the same shyte on mine !
The RIAA is beyond words. Let's have them and hollywood dictate how tech is to be developed. If so, bring back LP Records and ban computers. Cuniform writing might work. Maybe reinventing the wheel but no bother, tech has rendered copyright moot and the RIAA head may as well be voicing "...the sound and fury of an idiot signifying nothing." - Macbeth, Act 5, Scene 5
So that's where the Sony-BMG folks who came up with their root kit went to! I was wondering where those idiots had gone, given recent developments there.
It's good to see they've found their spiritual home, where pirates rule the roost and try to convince everyone that the law is only what they claim it is, not what's actually written.
The RIAA can kiss my Lily white ass if they think they can some how force or trick me into installing some bullsh*t malware on MY computer. Who are they kidding, other than themselves? Filtration on my PC? Ha, just feckin' try it pal. As for ISP filtering, yeah, I can see the morons trying that one too, Comcast is already doing it. So much for the unfettered access to the Net huh?
Seriously though. Filtration malware on the PC? How exactly is that supposed to benefit me, the owner of the computer? This whole thing is taking on an Orwellian tone now. Filtered access to the net, filtered use of my computer, Are the ISPs and RIAA going to decide what I should think now? They want to control what I listen to. I wouldn't be awfully surprised to hear the MPAA wanting to control what I watch in a similar manner. How much further are we people going to allow government and corporation to reach into our private lives and heads? If I purchase a computer it's my business what I put on it and what I do on it, no one else's. If I purchase access to the net, I am buying bandwidth, not a whole host of unwanted filtration products designed to protect the commercial interests of some other organization. If AT&T and the other service providers are having capacity issues then let them start charging for the bandwidth used and not simply by the supposed speed of service. Heavy handed filtration of content by protocol sniffing or packet inspection is not the way forwards.
Heck, if the ISPs start this, what is to prevent voice carriers listening in to your conversations - analogous to protocol sniffing and packet inspection? that doesn't even cover the fact that if ISPs do anything to look inside data packets coming from a Vonage customer, then they are effectively executing a wire tap since those packets could be VOIP traffic. What's to prevent them from barging in to prevent you from oh, I don't know, using your cell phone to listen to an MP3 you ripped from your system at home? Or maybe even sending a picture to a friend?
If carriers start policing services, they won't be able to stop, and that policing will get more and more intrusive. Not to mention the fact that their 'policing' efforts have little to nothing to do with criminal behavior by subscribers, but instead have everything to do with 'protecting' their commercial partners against potential infringement. It's past time due for the so called representatives of the public to step in and end this non-sense by re-inforcing our rights to privacy, and protection against the abuses of the corporations.
I'm not gonna hold by breath though..
If anyone want's me, I'll be ripping my CDs to high bit rate MP3 and copying them to every computer in my house!
To think that there are people who will see this as a good thing makes me worried for the future. Sure they may start by merely filtering for supposed copyright infringement, but why should they stop there? Why not keeping digging further into whatever else it is that you do?
Mine's the triple tinfoil coated one, thanks.
Scanning incoming packets doesn't do it because of the aforementioned encryption. The only way to do this is as the guy said - an application running on somebody's PC looking at the raw soundcard output.
So, he's saying that ISPs should enforce the installation of software which looks for any copyrighted music playing and reports it to the RIAA? And how does this software know which music is legally acquired and which isn't? And, more to the point, what the hell is wrong with this guy?
I can't believe anyone would be as asinine as the RIAA is being about this, and be allowed to get away with it for so long, if there weren't a hidden agenda somewhere.
Being able to monitor and control content for the supposed purpose of copyright enforcement means being able to monitor and control ALL content.
Next: Word and idea filters right on the desktop. No more "controversial" ideas leaking out into the public Interwebz and tainting The Truth, and troublemakers easily detected and rounded up.
Or perhaps they'll just start putting electric shock circuitry into the keyboards? Maybe those "shocking" laptops were no accident!
This is exactly what Microsofts "Trusted Computing" is actually, specifically, designed to accomplish. Additionally, "Vista" already has most of the technology (APIs, secure media-paths, software-signing, etc.) already built into it. So does the "Mac", though Apple is apparently leaning more towards a hardware-approach ("TPMs", etc.).
Furthermore, the ability to refuse Internet-connections to any "Non-Trusted Computer" is already built into most of the routers, already in use, by most ISPs. So, if you arent running this control/monitoring-hardware/software, then you simply will not be allowed to access the Internet, at all.
And, any thought that the U.S. Government would, in any way, try to impede this plan... is utter nonsense. The simple fact is that the U.S. Government is not only, not opposing this eventuality... It is actually one of the biggest proponents of this entire monitoring/tracking/control scenario. In fact, laws imposing this very type of scheme (on ISPs, colleges, etc., for example), are already being created, and passed.
Another interesting couple of points is that, Microsoft actually started working on this very, all-controlling, all-seeing, "Trusted Computing platform" plan... just about the same time that the White-House apparently ordered the DOJ to drop the Anti-trust prosecution against the company (...after Microsoft was, in fact, found "GUILTY", and right after every one of Microsofts appeals were rejected by every court, up to and including the U.S Supreme Court). And "AT&T" (the largest single internet-access provider in the U.S., which has just announced its intentions to intercept, and monitor, all Internet-traffic for various "legal" and "copyright"-related, reasons) is set to be given full-immunity (by the Federal Government) for its various illegal-activities (with regards to AT&Ts, illegal, warrantless-spying on customers)... But, these are probably all just amazing coincidences... Right..?
I have a right to privacy, implemented by the Human Rights Act and part of the European Convention of Human Rights. Merkins have similar rights enshrined in their constitution. So, how is this twat going to pay the damages for breaching mine, and 700,000,000 others? (400,000,000 European Union population and 300,000,000 Merkins).
Additionally, there is that small inconvenience of innocent until proven guilty. To get any form of search order requires the consent of a judge and he will want to see some evidence that the search order is reasonable and necessary.
This is a very dangerous idea, it strikes at the heart of fundamental freedoms and all for a few money grubbing merkin wankers to eat better.
Then there comes the scope creep. Allowing this will place the technology to spy on everyone, so where will it stop. We already know that governments lie to implement their spying, we already know there is no limit to their deeds, we already know that both the British and Merkin governments have been involved in torture, do you really think they will be bale to restrain themselves when they already have the technology in your living room? Oh, it will be a good reason, Terrorism, Paedophilia, Animal Rights, but it is aimed at YOU.
Microsoft were a big promoter of DRM. Microsoft are known law breakers, being convicted in several countries. If you want to become a spy subject, keep them going. If you value your freedom, drop merkin based software.
And aside from all the good points against this that have already been raised, there is also a world out side the US and the range of the RIAA legal arm - I presume the legal arm is all that is to the RIAA.
And are they going to pay us to install their mal-ware, I can see it in my minds eye
ISP add
Free but locked broadband or you can pay for Free broadband.
If it's not illegal to copy to your mp3 player, or to burn to disc an extra copy for your own personal use, why kick up so much over downloading in the first place? I'd bet that the majority of downloaders do so for personal use. The labels missed a trick with online distribution. Now they're crying because everyone else didn't.
I dare you...... I'd be more irate at this if the whole notion wasn't so silly in the first place. Has anyone suggested a useful way of identifying copyright content that is being used illegitimately yet?
And as a couple of previous commenters have noted, all this means is that once again FOSS is the answer. They couldn't even crush decss on Linux. Even friendly Ubuntu installs with an 'install-css' shell script out of the box!
Are they going to require me to install listening devices in my house so they can prosecute me for humming copyright music?
Perhaps a skull cap with sensors for when I get the latest trash pop tune stuck spinning round my head, they can prosecute me for remembering it, after all it's format shifting isn't it?
Sooner this bunch of (scarily influential) morons work out that their business model is dead but not yet buried the better.
If they reduce their prices, people will buy from them instead of thieves. Their profits will rise because they will get a bigger market share, and they will also create new customers - the ones who will not pay high prices or thieves.
While they are at it, they can unbundle albums and give an explicit license that says where I can play music that I have bought. There really is no point in me buying a CD now that they will sue me for playing it on my own ogg player.
This rant by the RIAA shill is never going to happen, so let's not worry about it too mjuch. He does point out a kink in the RIAA's quest to persecute file-sharers: encryption. People are using more and more encryption and soon all P2P traffic will be encrypted making filtering impossible. That's what he's actually anticipating.
I hope the RIAA keep making more of these suggestions. Each one is sillier than the last and makes them look more and more like a joke.
Eventually the record industry that they supposedly represent will tire of their desperate ranting and realise they have lost all touch with reality.
Maybe at that point the record companies will finally take a long hard look at what it is the customers really want and adapt their business model to suit.
because as soon as it sends anything back to the US without my consent, we, in the EU can sue the ass of them and hopefully cripple the lawyers with lawsuits.
However, maybe the US method may be better....piss of some 15 year old Emo who goes trigger happy at the local office of the RIAA
Sherman: I'm boss of the RIAA.
Stan: No, you're a douche.
Sherman: I AM NOT A DOUCHE! I am trying to save the record industry from theives!
Stan: No, you are a money grabbiong, power hungry, douche.
Sherman: DONT CALL ME A DOUCHE AGAIN OR I'LL SUE YOU!
Stan: I, Stan Marsh, am saying to you, Cary Sherman, you are a douche. In fact, I am nominating you for biggest douche of the universe.
...
Voice over [Sung]: Here he is, the biggest douche in the universe,
theres no other douche, as big a douche as you!
You've reached the top, the pinnacle of douchedom,
Good Going Douche, you're dreams have come true!
Sherman: I AM NOT A DOUCHE!
-----------------------------------
Hmm, I'm quite pleased with that. For those who don't know, thats based on South Park Season 6 Episode 15: The Biggest Douche In The Universe, VERY good episode :D
Mines the orange coat with the hood.
I have no problem with them installing it on the modem as they put it.
Seeing as encryption is handled by the computer.
In other words, all the modem will see still is encrypted data making it worthless anyway whilst costing them a fortune to implement, anything that makes the RIAA lose millions without any actual benefit sounds good to me!
I wouldn't worry too much here, the reality of it is is that what he is proposing just isn't feasible. How do you successfully decide whether a file is legal or illegal? The first problem is that trying to produce a "register" of illegal files is very hard. You could try downloading loads of files from various file sharing servers and assuming they are all illegal. But in reality one person probably has the legal version of that floating around since they ripped it from CD originally. Let's ignore those problems and assume that you can successfully do that. You then have to try and detect which files are played that are illegal. You can't do a detailed comparison, or some 99.9% correlation comparison, because that would involve downloading/uploading the whole file every time you play it. So instead you would hash the file and compare hash with something up on the server. Ok, I'll "fix" that in a number of ways:
1) Only play my music on non-online boxes - move the data with external HDD or flash-key or iPod equivalent.
2) Produce some software that after downloading and during decryption of your "illegal" files does some random bit-flips in unimportant parts of the file - there are plenty of things that you wouldn't notice if they got changed - especially in the tags etc.
3) Add a 0.01s silence to the start or end of every song. Randomise the bit length of the silence to make it really hard to strip out - also make it "almost" silence so it sounds like silence but actually has really quiet white noise.
4) Re-encode your files on receipt.
Now the simple fact of the matter is the RIAA isn't protecting artists its protecting its own corrupt business models. If you look at a platinum album from an artist in the UK, they have sold 300,000 albums. The band has probably taken performance royalties of 8-10% of which there manager has taken a cut. The writers royalties are about 8-12%. Assume the band didn't write their own song, and the manager is on about 20%, and the album sells for £14; the band get to share out about £270k. That's probably for the best part of a years' work making the album. And that's assuming the thing goes platinum. A hell of a lot of albums don't sell anywhere near that number. With 4 people in the band, they get paid less than £70k each per annum for being really successful. That's about the same as being an electrician on the Heathrow T5 site. Now compare that to the music industry. The remaining 80% of the cost of the album gets split with about 50% going to the supply chain, and the rest to the record company. So expect the record company to make £1.26M from the same album. From that they have to put up a few adverts on the tube, and a couple of adverts on TV. Don't forget though, once a band has made it, a lot of the advertising comes for free by appearing on radio and MTV etc.
Where do bands make their money. From anything except selling albums usually. Ok there are exceptions. Pink Floyd have shifted 40 million copies of Dark Side of the Moon probably making them a good £15M each. But most bands make their money from touring. Putting 10,000 paying customers into an auditorium at £20-£50 a ticket where the band take 1/2 the proceeds for a night's work is far more profitable. So long as you don't blow all your money on a huge stage-show like Pink Floyd's The Wall of course.
I do have a slight problem with this.
Do they really need to know about several doomsday weapons?
Because, I am really not sure whether my encryption programs are completely unbreakable.
(I really try to keep this kind of crap off my hard drive, but it creeps in; most of it would only take out half the planet, and after all, leaving half is . . .pretty damn nice.)
It is impossible to feel any sympathy for these people. They've lost the ability to make big piles of money by exploiting the creations of others, and now they are trying to take it out on the consumer.
The thing is, if they'd moved a bit faster and understood what was happening, they'd have been able to beat Google and YouTube to the punch. Instead they're going to silently slide into insignificance over the next couple of years.
Goodbye RIAA. You won't be missed.
And how much will the bastards charge me and my friends if I want to get onto the DRM bandwagon?
Besides, if the file has DRM, and it is being played in a DRM-enabled player, an illicit copy just isn't going to work. And how else are they going to identify illicit content?
I think I'm going to go write a bright, bouncy, J-pop-style, song in which a chorus of meganeko call into question the sexual performance of coke-sniffing record-company executives.
Maybe the bastards are just jelous that the musicians get the groupies?
As it will continue to hightlight to those who may be less informed than the average reg reader, that the RIAA et all are crocks, that the music industry's business model needs updating or scrapping and that your own safety and security on your own computer is something you should care about.
Obviously people commenting on this article will have the knowledge to avoid any attempt at this (the most enlightened of us using linux already).
... where is cloud with a silver lining icon?
firstly RIAA = morons
secondly can we not have one fing article without people proclaiming linux as the messiah! its not. Linux is useful dont get me wrong i use it myself, but i also use windows because it has its uses too. until linux gets to a stage where billy bob average user can understand it its not going to be common place. stop living in a dream world and do something productive!
You won't be asked for permission. You won't even notice.
You let it get this way by letting corrupt politicians and their corporate yes-men get into positions of power, and then you continued to throw money at them for the dogshit they give you.
You made your bed; shame you didn't pick something more comfy than broken glass. for the matress
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
