Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: More Copyright Madness

  1. #1

    Default More Copyright Madness

    I'm a a fan of coldplay and this is really disappointing
    There's an insert that details what you CAN'T do with the CD in their latest album

    Read on and be amazed at how much a big corporation can screw people over without batting an eyelid

    http://itch.in/journal/bad-bad-coldplay
    Work: PicasaWeb | Play: Animus3 | Mobile: Tumblr

  2. #2
    Senior Member redstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Beyond the outer limits
    Posts
    2,898

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    They're killing their own album sales.

  3. #3

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    Think you should read up on copyright law to begin with... What they are stating is already what the law is, so the only thing they are doing wrong is bringing the law to everyones' attention.

    Quote Originally Posted by radedward
    I'm a a fan of coldplay and this is really disappointing
    There's an insert that details what you CAN'T do with the CD in their latest album

    Read on and be amazed at how much a big corporation can screw people over without batting an eyelid

    http://itch.in/journal/bad-bad-coldplay

  4. #4

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    I can't live without Coldplay in the past. Now, just download from Apple store will do. Haha.

  5. #5

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    Quote Originally Posted by waileong
    Think you should read up on copyright law to begin with... What they are stating is already what the law is, so the only thing they are doing wrong is bringing the law to everyones' attention.
    Everyone should know it then, so that they can buy their albums with their eyes wide open.
    It may be legal but that doesn't mean it's fair.

    I don't buy copy-protected discs at all. No point buying a defective product that could possibly spoil the equipment that is used to play it. (See Sony Rootkit)
    Last edited by radedward; 2nd January 2006 at 04:37 PM.
    Work: PicasaWeb | Play: Animus3 | Mobile: Tumblr

  6. #6

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    You need to examine the whole issue of copyright to begin with...

    Is it fair to the artist for the buyer who paid $10 to make thousands of copies of a CD? Every such copy made and sold robs the artist of legitimate revenue.

    Have you been to Yahoo! auctions lately? Lots of people selling copied DVD's, eg. Star Wars III. What gives them the right to do so?

    When you pay for a CD (or book or whatever), you only get the right to enjoy one copy of that CD for your own use. If the artist knew you were going to make 10,000 copies of it, he would charge you a different price. If he knew that you were going to play it on the radio, you'd have to pay him for the privilege too. Etc.

    In other words, your legitimate purchase of a CD does not grant you unlimited use of the CD.

    Is that unfair?

    The fact that somebody screwed up the copy-protection scheme does not change these principles of intellectual property rights, which is accepted worldwide. You and I may not like it, but you should look at the artists' side as well. When you make copies, how is that fair to the artist? He can't control what consumers do with the copies.

    And beyond the Copyright Act, there is also the law of contract, which each company can define at the point of sale. Since they have stated that they do not wish to allow the buyer to make backups, this should be factored into the price so that the consumer can make a well-informed purchase decision. They have made their pitch, and they will have to bear the consequences in the market.


    Quote Originally Posted by radedward
    Everyone should know it then, so that they can buy their albums with their eyes wide open.
    It may be legal but that doesn't mean it's fair.

    I don't buy copy-protected discs at all. No point buying a defective product that could possibly spoil the equipment that is used to play it. (See Sony Rootkit)

  7. #7

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    Quote Originally Posted by waileong
    You need to examine the whole issue of copyright to begin with...

    Is it fair to the artist for the buyer who paid $10 to make thousands of copies of a CD? Every such copy made and sold robs the artist of legitimate revenue.

    Have you been to Yahoo! auctions lately? Lots of people selling copied DVD's, eg. Star Wars III. What gives them the right to do so?

    When you pay for a CD (or book or whatever), you only get the right to enjoy one copy of that CD for your own use. If the artist knew you were going to make 10,000 copies of it, he would charge you a different price. If he knew that you were going to play it on the radio, you'd have to pay him for the privilege too. Etc.

    In other words, your legitimate purchase of a CD does not grant you unlimited use of the CD.

    Is that unfair?

    The fact that somebody screwed up the copy-protection scheme does not change these principles of intellectual property rights, which is accepted worldwide. You and I may not like it, but you should look at the artists' side as well. When you make copies, how is that fair to the artist? He can't control what consumers do with the copies.

    And beyond the Copyright Act, there is also the law of contract, which each company can define at the point of sale. Since they have stated that they do not wish to allow the buyer to make backups, this should be factored into the price so that the consumer can make a well-informed purchase decision. They have made their pitch, and they will have to bear the consequences in the market.
    Been there, done that, bought the T-shirt, heard the arguments.

    I have nothing against the artistes per se. It's mostly the corporations that are doing the screwing (consumers and sometimes, even the artistes). The sony fiasco was a real eye opener.

    I wouldn't be so sure about them making their pitch to the consumer in a clear and concise manner. Any and all of the terms of agreement are buried under so many pieces of legalese that you need to bring a lawyer every time you wanted to purchase anything. They hardly print anything clearly and in bold for the consumer to make any sort of informed decision

    I like the fact that corporations can dictate whatever they want in the EULA and get away with it with no one the wiser because the print is so fine that you need a huge magnifying glass to get through all of it. They could probably ask for your first born in that contract and no one would know it.

    Sample of the Sony-BMG EULA from http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004145.php

    Now compare that baseline with the world according to the Sony-BMG EULA, which applies to any digital copies you make of the music on the CD:

    1. If your house gets burgled, you have to delete all your music from your laptop when you get home. That's because the EULA says that your rights to any copies terminate as soon as you no longer possess the original CD.

    2. You can't keep your music on any computers at work. The EULA only gives you the right to put copies on a "personal home computer system owned by you."

    3. If you move out of the country, you have to delete all your music. The EULA specifically forbids "export" outside the country where you reside.

    4. You must install any and all updates, or else lose the music on your computer. The EULA immediately terminates if you fail to install any update. No more holding out on those hobble-ware downgrades masquerading as updates.

    5. Sony-BMG can install and use backdoors in the copy protection software or media player to "enforce their rights" against you, at any time, without notice. And Sony-BMG disclaims any liability if this "self help" crashes your computer, exposes you to security risks, or any other harm.

    6. The EULA says Sony-BMG will never be liable to you for more than $5.00. That's right, no matter what happens, you can't even get back what you paid for the CD.

    7. If you file for bankruptcy, you have to delete all the music on your computer. Seriously.

    8. You have no right to transfer the music on your computer, even along with the original CD.

    9. Forget about using the music as a soundtrack for your latest family photo slideshow, or mash-ups, or sampling. The EULA forbids changing, altering, or make derivative works from the music on your computer.
    All these are the reasons why I don't buy copy-protected CDs. I like the artistes but I'm not willing to deal with the corporations that represent them.
    Work: PicasaWeb | Play: Animus3 | Mobile: Tumblr

  8. #8

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    I suppose you'll be part of the anti-WTO protests at the next WTO meeting...

    Legalese? Fine print? Ever applied for a bank loan lately? Car hire purchase agreement? Bought a property? Every company does terms in legalese and fine print, what's the big deal?

    Even govt here does it. Bought a HDB flat before? Applied for a business licence from the govt? Etc. Ever read the fine print from our wonderful govt?

    What's the big deal?

    Re the Sony thing, things are not what they seem. You should get some legal advice. Not every term in a contract can be enforced, even if it's in writing. And the law of tort also can be used.


    Quote Originally Posted by radedward
    Been there, done that, bought the T-shirt, heard the arguments.

    I have nothing against the artistes per se. It's mostly the corporations that are doing the screwing (consumers and sometimes, even the artistes). The sony fiasco was a real eye opener.

    I wouldn't be so sure about them making their pitch to the consumer in a clear and concise manner. Any and all of the terms of agreement are buried under so many pieces of legalese that you need to bring a lawyer every time you wanted to purchase anything. They hardly print anything clearly and in bold for the consumer to make any sort of informed decision

    I like the fact that corporations can dictate whatever they want in the EULA and get away with it with no one the wiser because the print is so fine that you need a huge magnifying glass to get through all of it. They could probably ask for your first born in that contract and no one would know it.

    Sample of the Sony-BMG EULA from http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004145.php



    All these are the reasons why I don't buy copy-protected CDs. I like the artistes but I'm not willing to deal with the corporations that represent them.

  9. #9

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    This is a real good reason why people go for duplicated copies. No EULAs attached.


    .

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Clementi
    Posts
    2,550

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    Quote Originally Posted by waileong
    I suppose you'll be part of the anti-WTO protests at the next WTO meeting...

    Legalese? Fine print? Ever applied for a bank loan lately? Car hire purchase agreement? Bought a property? Every company does terms in legalese and fine print, what's the big deal?

    Even govt here does it. Bought a HDB flat before? Applied for a business licence from the govt? Etc. Ever read the fine print from our wonderful govt?

    What's the big deal?

    Re the Sony thing, things are not what they seem. You should get some legal advice. Not every term in a contract can be enforced, even if it's in writing. And the law of tort also can be used.
    u compare purchases of $100k with a cd purchase of $20....

    u wana sign eula agreements in the wet market when u buy vegetables?

  11. #11

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    ermmm the SONY rootkit is evil

    in case you didnt read my post last time
    it's spying ur PC activity, with very high freq reporting back to SONY server of wat site u're visiting etc etc.
    and the rootkit hides itself. if you find out, and try to uninstall it, it will disable your CDROM or DVDROM or watever optic drives u've got

    would you pay for some products that will spoil your belongings? like pumping a petrol that will make your car needs servicing every 100km? would you?

    these days, the big corporates are getting greedier. it's too many examples to be seen easily yea?

    and with the upcoming RoHS, things getting worse for us as consumers

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    near the Equator
    Posts
    1,255

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    Quote Originally Posted by waileong
    I suppose you'll be part of the anti-WTO protests at the next WTO meeting...

    Legalese? Fine print? Ever applied for a bank loan lately? Car hire purchase agreement? Bought a property? Every company does terms in legalese and fine print, what's the big deal?

    Even govt here does it. Bought a HDB flat before? Applied for a business licence from the govt? Etc. Ever read the fine print from our wonderful govt?

    What's the big deal?

    Re the Sony thing, things are not what they seem. You should get some legal advice. Not every term in a contract can be enforced, even if it's in writing. And the law of tort also can be used.

    Please don't diss the global civil society movement if you don't know some of the good/concessions that they have extracted from the fat cats up there.

    Different strokes work for different folks, and to insinuate that the anti-WTO protests have anything to do with fair dealing is quite uncalled for.
    We live in an age when unnecessary things are our only necessities. - Oscar Wilde

  13. #13

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    There's no insinuation. It's just his anti-corporate stance is so reminiscent of the anti-WTO types.

    They may call themselves the global civil society movement, but what happens outside every WTO meeting is anything but.

    Of course, they allege that there is only a small bunch of violent protesters, that the vast majority are peaceful, and there are even conspiracy theories about the police actions or inaction at times (like who the police choose to move against, etc) but the explanations just don't cut it for me.

    What is important is that, minority or not, the violent protesters have hijacked the agenda (just like the terrorists have done so to Muslims), so the public sympathy is not with the anti-WTO protesters any more.





    Quote Originally Posted by LazerLordz
    Please don't diss the global civil society movement if you don't know some of the good/concessions that they have extracted from the fat cats up there.

    Different strokes work for different folks, and to insinuate that the anti-WTO protests have anything to do with fair dealing is quite uncalled for.

  14. #14

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    You may be right from a very practical point of view, but you should also realise that there are no $$ limits for copyright acts. It doesn't matter whether you bought the CD for $1 or $1,000-- the right for an artist to enjoy copyright protection is provided in statute, and fine print appears in products big or small, cheap or expensive. Eg check out the fine print when you park your car at a private car park next time, it's quite long for a service that can cost as little as $1.


    Quote Originally Posted by hazekang
    u compare purchases of $100k with a cd purchase of $20....

    u wana sign eula agreements in the wet market when u buy vegetables?

  15. #15
    Senior Member Ansel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Land Downunder
    Posts
    2,207

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    Quote Originally Posted by radedward
    Everyone should know it then, so that they can buy their albums with their eyes wide open.
    It may be legal but that doesn't mean it's fair.

    I don't buy copy-protected discs at all. No point buying a defective product that could possibly spoil the equipment that is used to play it. (See Sony Rootkit)
    You have no choice if one of your favourite artistes is under their label. Unless you can boycott the artistes until they change label.

  16. #16

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    I have no problem with them protecting their CD ..... but I have a problem with them selling me a product that might not work and getting away with it by the "Attention" ....

    I had bought a "Copy protected" CD and it can't play on my discman and my computer. It will only work with a HI-FI set. When I try to bring it back for replacement, the salepeople just say, it is written on the CD-Cover it might not work with CERTAIN equipment, so tough luck. I called the recording company, the answer is the same..... if they want to sell this thing, they should print out which CD Player it WILL NOT work with or which CD Player it can work with.

    I bought a CD to listen when I am on the road, I do not expect to bring a Hi-Fi set and a power generator along to listen to it...... since it does not work with a CD-Discman (now come the fun part, the brand of the Discman and the company who sold the CD are the same company)

    After that incident, I had not bought any CD from that company anymore, not because of the Singer, but because there is a chance, big chance, it will not work with anything.
    Last edited by blurblock; 3rd January 2006 at 11:36 AM.

  17. #17
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    Is the CD COver notice big enough to be prominent? Or is it fine print? If it is not sufficiently brought to your attention, I would think that the "notice" is ineffectual. Might even fall under the Fair Trading Act.

    Quote Originally Posted by blurblock
    I have no problem with them protecting their CD ..... but I have a problem with them selling me a product that might not work and getting away with it by the "Attention" ....

    I had bought a "Copy protected" CD and it can't play on my discman and my computer. It will only work with a HI-FI set. When I try to bring it back for replacement, the salepeople just say, it is written on the CD-Cover it might not work with CERTAIN equipment, so tough luck. I called the recording company, the answer is the same..... if they want to sell this thing, they should print out which CD Player it WILL NOT work with or which CD Player it can work with.

    I bought a CD to listen when I am on the road, I do not expect to bring a Hi-Fi set and a power generator along to listen to it...... since it does not work with a CD-Discman (now come the fun part, the brand of the Discman and the company who sold the CD are the same company)

    After that incident, I had not bought any CD from that company anymore, not because of the Singer, but because there is a chance, big chance, it will not work with anything.

  18. #18

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    when i LL have to buy a copy-control CD, i'll just use my favorite CDRipper and extract all the CD-DA data tracks, while at the same time discarding those data tracks and put them into the standard CD audio format. makes them more playable on CD players.

    serves a good purpose. to have a backup of the original one while at the same time not really flouting the laws, since the duplicate copy is purely for my own usage.

  19. #19

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123
    Is the CD COver notice big enough to be prominent? Or is it fine print? If it is not sufficiently brought to your attention, I would think that the "notice" is ineffectual. Might even fall under the Fair Trading Act.
    Well, it is big enough to tell you it MIGHT not work with CERTAIN players. Getting 2 of 3 that can't work, I guess it should say, It MIGHT WORK with CERTAIN players.

  20. #20

    Default Re: More Copyright Madness

    that's why those record companies put a fineprint sticker on their copy-control CDs, that unless the disc is defective during manufacture, no exchange or refund will be possible, as the implementation of copy-protection severely reduces the playability/compatibility on CD players.

    if they wanna enforce, they shd put their album into SACD, where this format itself already has integral/mandatory anti-piracy features built in.

    but then again, SACD is no way as popular and widespread as the CD which is developed in the early 80s (where the pple that put together this format din even anticipate that piracy is so rampant).

    as what redstone have said, either way, they kill themselves.

    Quote Originally Posted by blurblock

    I had bought a "Copy protected" CD and it can't play on my discman and my computer. It will only work with a HI-FI set. When I try to bring it back for replacement, the salepeople just say, it is written on the CD-Cover it might not work with CERTAIN equipment, so tough luck. I called the recording company, the answer is the same..... if they want to sell this thing, they should print out which CD Player it WILL NOT work with or which CD Player it can work with.

    I bought a CD to listen when I am on the road, I do not expect to bring a Hi-Fi set and a power generator along to listen to it...... since it does not work with a CD-Discman (now come the fun part, the brand of the Discman and the company who sold the CD are the same company)

    After that incident, I had not bought any CD from that company anymore, not because of the Singer, but because there is a chance, big chance, it will not work with anything.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •