CFB, take my earlier post at the literal level. If I owned a major record label my best capitalistic interests would be in implementing a foolproof copy protection system. That is how I would best protect the economic well-being of my shareholders and myself. However, if there was money to be made in putting out high quality sound recordings, my fictional major recording company then would do that too. Unfortunately, there is a very limited market for high quality sound recordings. Audiophiles , of which I am one, are a very small minority of the music buying public. In the real world, record companies only have two choices assuming they decide to continue to produce high quality sounding music. They could either subsidize the high end product line through the profits generated by mass music sales, or they could charge the audiophile buyer the true cost of production. Which route do you think the corporate conglomerates that run the modern music industry will take?
Copy-protected CDs - philosophical discussion
My previous copy-protection thread probably deserves a follow-up since the issue is just as troubling ethically/legally/philosophically as it is technically.
Record companies are selling CDs which do not play on a PC's CD player. However, the CDs are not identified as such and, according to at least one source, may have trouble playing on high-end systems and car CD players.
Here's the news story:
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-6604222.html
Here's an unofficial list of copy-protected CDs, authored by a guy whose opinion on the matter should be quite obvious:
http://fatchucks.com/corruptcds/corrupt.html
Reserving the technical discussion and "can you actually hear it" discussions for my previous thread, what are your feelings on the softer side of this issue, especially given the vast amount of software that we collectively gave/received over the past couple of weeks?
Don't hold back, now!
FWIW, my take is that this is just another case of technology scaring the crap out of a lumbering entrenched industry with severely dated business models because the geeks are infinitely smarter and more creative than the suits can ever hope to be. Just like the lawsuit against Napster, it may succeed in its immediate goal (for a month or so), but misses the real point completely. Alienating customers who are not criminals is bad business. For many of us Audiogoners, I imagine the presence of "all but inaudible" distortion on a recording is reason enough to avoid it like the plague. The music business is not about “clicks and pops”; it's about music.
Record companies are selling CDs which do not play on a PC's CD player. However, the CDs are not identified as such and, according to at least one source, may have trouble playing on high-end systems and car CD players.
Here's the news story:
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-6604222.html
Here's an unofficial list of copy-protected CDs, authored by a guy whose opinion on the matter should be quite obvious:
http://fatchucks.com/corruptcds/corrupt.html
Reserving the technical discussion and "can you actually hear it" discussions for my previous thread, what are your feelings on the softer side of this issue, especially given the vast amount of software that we collectively gave/received over the past couple of weeks?
Don't hold back, now!
FWIW, my take is that this is just another case of technology scaring the crap out of a lumbering entrenched industry with severely dated business models because the geeks are infinitely smarter and more creative than the suits can ever hope to be. Just like the lawsuit against Napster, it may succeed in its immediate goal (for a month or so), but misses the real point completely. Alienating customers who are not criminals is bad business. For many of us Audiogoners, I imagine the presence of "all but inaudible" distortion on a recording is reason enough to avoid it like the plague. The music business is not about “clicks and pops”; it's about music.
- ...
- 31 posts total
- 31 posts total