OSDIR.com on Hymn

JHymn Goes Behind Atoms and Apple To Bring DRM-Free Music

OSDir.com: What do you have to say in response to those who take issue with hymn? I’m thinking about end users, like iPod/Apple fans, who insist Apple’s DRM is “no big deal” and what you’re doing is “wrong” — not the music labels, who obviously don’t like things like hymn?

[FutureProof]: What I say is that all I’m trying to do is get the same flexibility to use my music that I’d have if I purchased a CD and ripped it myself, and that my efforts aid piracy no more than the existence of CDs aid piracy.

You run into problems using third-party products like EyeHome and Squeezebox and losing authorizations when computers break or crash.

As DRM schemes go, Apple’s is, I must say, one of the best for end users. But that’s like saying “the handcuffs are mighty comfortable handcuffs.”

Later – Slashdot’s Cracking iTunes’ DRM with JHymn

Alternative Business Models

The sweetest music you’ve never heard [pdf]

“I don’t think you can go into the record business [today] and think you’re going to sell a million records,” says [Ken] Shipley, co-founder of the re-issue label the Numero Group, from his home base in Chicago, Illinois.

“The basis of our philosophy is to have loyal people [who seek out the brand]. That’s more valuable than selling a million copies of one record.”

[…] Shipley obviously cares a great deal, and sees Rhino as a model. “That level of quality is what I see [for Numero],” he says. To that end, the CDs are beautifully packaged and filled with informed liner notes.

So if Numero sells a few thousand copies of “The Capsoul Label” or “Camino Del Sol,” that’s fine with him. He just wants to do it right.

“The windfall will be on a karmic level,” he says. “We’re helping to change the lives [of the forgotten musicians]. It humbles you in a lot of ways.”

The Music Industry Mindset

So, how to reconcile the music industry’s desire to use the latest and greatest technology to promote music, while complaining about the latest and greatest technology’s influence upon their distribution models? On the one hand, they love innovation; on the other, they wish it would go away. “Who is John Galt?”

This CNN article describes/promotes the Fraunhofer Institut’s latest MP3 variant, but the real issue is about more than just the delivery medium: Music’s future: Smaller, faster, richer [pdf]

[T]echnology is an increasing part of the business, especially as consumers show an unquenchable appetite for on-demand and on-the-go music.

[…] After a four-year slump, global sales of recorded music increased last year largely through the success of fee-charging online services and the expansion of portable music devices like Apple Computer Inc.’s iPod.

Now, music industry honchos hope gadget makers, software powerhouses like Microsoft and cell phone companies will help deliver tunes to a fee-paying public.

Perhaps the biggest debate is how listeners will receive their music. With digitized music increasingly delivered through the Internet or mobile phone, the CD could one day go the way of the 8-track.

Especially if it means that pesky RIPping can be taken out of the picture, right?

MPAA Lawsuits, Again

Speaking of lawsuits, as well as more info about Parent File Scan (see entry immediately below) see: MPAA files new film-swapping suits

Hollywood studios filed a second round of lawsuits against online movie-swappers on Wednesday, stepping up legal pressure on the file-trading community.

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) also made available a new free software tool so parents can scan their computers for file-swapping programs and for movie or music files which may be copyrighted.

Slashdot: Round Two for MPAA Lawsuit

The MPAA Releases Their Dream Tool

Go to RespectCopyrights.org, where you can now download Parent FileScan

Parent File Scan software helps consumers check whether their computers have peer-to-peer software and potentially infringing copies of motion pictures and other copyrighted material. Removing such material can help consumers avoid problems frequently caused by peer-to-peer software. The information generated by the software is made available only to the program’s user, and is not shared with or reported to the MPAA or any other body.

Talk about cognitive dissonance. p2pnet reports that mostly it flags all media files as potentially infringing. And after all, aren’t most of the “problems frequently caused by peer-to-peer software” the lawsuits that one faces? Seems like there might be other ways to limit those pesky lawsuits.

Oops – wait a minute — that’s only supposed to be alluded to in the press releases about lawsuits and public “education,” not in writeups about “helpful” software.

Anyway, you might get that if you elected to read the EULA:

IN NO EVENT SHALL THE MPAA, ANY OF ITS AFFILIATES, ANY OF ITS MEMBER COMPANIES OR ANY OF THEIR OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, REPRESENTATIVES, INFORMATION PROVIDERS, SUBCONTRACTORS OR LICENSORS (COLLECTIVELY “MPAA PARTIES”) BE LIABLE IN CONNECTION WITH THIS WEBSITE OR ANY CONTENT, PRODUCTS, TOOLS OR SOFTWARE MADE AVAILABLE ON ANY WEBSITE TO WHICH THIS WEBSITE IS LINKED FOR (A) ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR OTHER DAMAGES, OR ANY DAMAGES DUE TO LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF BUSINESS, LOSS OF USE OR DATA, OR INTERRUPTION OF BUSINESS (REGARDLESS OF THE FORM OF ACTION AND REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE MPAA OR ITS MEMBER COMPANIES HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES); OR (B) ANY AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF THE ACTUAL, AGGREGATE AMOUNT PAID BY YOU TO ACCESS THIS WEBSITE. THE FOREGOING STATES THE ENTIRE LIABILITY OF THE MPAA PARTIES. THE LIMITATION OF LIABILITY CONTAINED IN THIS AGREEMENT IS A FUNDAMENTAL PART OF THE BASIS OF EACH PARTY’S BARGAIN HEREUNDER, AND NEITHER PARTY WOULD ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT ABSENT SUCH LIMITATIONS.

Click through to get to DtecNet Software, who tells us:

Thank you for choosing to Download DtecNet Parent File Scan.

Parent File Scan is brought to you by DtecNet Software ApS. This free program allows you to search your computer for installed P2P applications as well as movie and music files. You will then be given the option to remove the identified applications and delete infringing movie and music files in a few easy steps. The program does not distinguish between legal and illegal copies, as it is up to the user to determine, whether the files found by the program have been acquired legally, or whether the material should be deleted. Information generated by the program will be made available only to the program’s user and will not be shared with or reported to DtecNet Software or any other body.

Oh, yes – and it’s only for Windows boxes. The FAQ is quite a read, too.

Q: How do I recover deleted files?

A: You can’t. Once files are deleted, they cannot be recreated.

Q: Is it possible to hide files from the program, by changing their name or extension?

A: No. The program uses advanced binary recognition, locating all known multimedia file types and P2P applications, regardless of their name and extension.

Finally, from the About, a look at DtecNet’s business basis:

Copyright and the Internet. Two concepts, by many considered irreconcilable. How do you protect the free flow of information without breaking the financial backbone of the copyright holders?

All content on the web has an original source and a lot of the content is protected by laws of intellectual property rights or copyright.

Since the birth of the Internet as we know it, the debate has been going on. In just one year DtecNet has gained an advantageous position in the growing market for technical and legal protection of copyright considering content distributed on the World Wide Web. Through development of unique technical innovations and the ability to adapt the different perspectives of the stakeholders, this small Danish start-up has managed to create a way of seeing the possibilities of the web, rather than its limitations.

Really?

Later: Slashdot’s MPAA Releases Software For Parents; also, Ed Felten’s Review of MPAA’s “Parent File Scan” Software; BBC : Movie body targets children’s PCs

A Call To/From The Middle?

A slam on Public Knowledge’s Gigi Sohn and the state of the P2P debate – senselessly polarized like so many others (and not particularly helped by this kind of article): Content vs. file sharers leaves us out

For years I have sought not world domination (I leave that to James Bond villains), but rather a pragmatic, middle-ground voice in this debate. I thought I had found one in 2002, when a nonprofit public advocacy group called Public Knowledge was born. I knew the founder, Gigi Sohn, and I respected her greatly. I still do. But it was what Gigi said back then that really resonated with me.

At an event her new group held with the New America Foundation in Washington, D.C., in May of that year, Gigi [Sohn] gave a speech about how most of us weren’t represented in the digital content debate. She promised to use her group to bridge the gap between the content industry and the file sharers. She said she would speak for citizens and consumers.

I had been covering the high-tech policy community as a reporter for years by then, including a stint with News.com, so I should have seen the red flags. For instance, one should always be wary of someone claiming to speak for consumers. You and I are consumers, but can you remember the last time you voted for a “consumer representative”? I can’t either.

[…] I watched the Induce Act debate with some frustration. I sympathized with the bill’s backers, who wanted to target companies designed to profit from the criminal behavior of others. I also sympathized with those in the technology community who feared that such legislation could lead to unintended consequences. There were some involved in that debate, including a few software representatives, who tried to work out a compromise. But Gigi made it clear from the beginning that her only goal was to ensure the Induce Act never left the Senate Judiciary Committee. She accomplished that goal and bragged about it in a recent e-mail soliciting donations.

It may be impossible to bridge the gap between red states and blue states. But as we enter the 109th Congress with the digital content debate very much alive, I’ll be looking for anyone who wants to join me in seeking that elusive middle ground.

The Progress & Freedom Foundation’s brief in support of the petitioners in MGM v. Grokster (i.e., supporting the RIAA and MPAA against Grokster)

Later: Copyfight weighs in – Smearing Gigi; even later – Copyfight points to Gigi’s response: Getting real about the Grokster case

UK ‘Net Regulation Discussions

Net regulation ‘still possible’

Lord Currie, chairman of super-regulator Ofcom, told the panel that protecting audiences would always have to be a primary concern for the watchdog.

Despite having no remit for the regulation of net content, disquiet has increased among internet service providers as speeches made by Ofcom in recent months hinted that regulation might be an option.

At the debate, organised by the Internet Service Providers’ Association (ISPA), Lord Currie did not rule out the possibility of regulation.

“The challenge will arise when boundaries between TV and the internet truly blur and then there is a balance to be struck between protecting consumers and allowing them to assess the risks themselves,” he said.

Adopting the rules that currently exist to regulate TV content or self-regulation, which is currently the practice of the net industry, will be up for discussion.

CNN on the DVD Format Wars

The battle over next generation DVDs [pdf]

For now, Hollywood’s allegiances are split. Disney and major video game makers like Electronic Arts and Vivendi/Universal Games say they favor Blu-ray, which equipment makers led by Sony have spent years — and about $1 billion — developing.

Toshiba and other HD DVD developers have won the backing of more movie studios in recent months, with Warner Bros., Universal and Paramount all publicly embracing the technology.

Other studios so far have been noncommittal. “We are trying to play both of them off against each other,” said Fox’s [president Peter] Chernin. Calling today’s DVD “one of the leakiest copyright protections known to man,” Chernin said the company is leaning toward Blu-ray but will ultimately pick whichever format is more secure.

Both technologies claim to have strong piracy safeguards. Their primary differences are in price and storage capacity.

Technologies, Utility and Control

My wife recently bought me one of these new green laser pointers from ThinkGeek. She was in a real hurry to get it and, when I asked her why, she indicated that she expected that they would be banned soon.

At the time, I thought she was overreacting to the reports about lasers and airline pilots, but this article makes me think she might be right after all, despite my own suspicion that it would take extraordinary effort to actually “hit” one’s target with such a device: Laser Pointer Abuse Threatens Air Safety [pdf]

The government does not regulate sales of lasers, and no laws restrict their use, though laser pointers have been banned from many public places, such as sports arenas.

The Food and Drug Administration regulates the manufacture of laser products and rates them in four categories based on the power of the beam. Beams in CD and DVD players are in category 1, the lowest. Laser pointers are in category 3, and industrial laser equipment is in category 4.

What’s changed is the availability of powerful laser pointers. About a dozen years ago, a pointer with a red beam sold for about $600. Today, consumers can get a similar one for a key chain for $3.95 — batteries included.

The popularity of red laser pointers is now being overtaken by green pointers, which are visible over a much longer range.

[…] But just as red lasers were used by drug dealers to harass police helicopters and by sports fanatics to distract basketball players taking free throws, green ones have been put to ill use. And with their longer range, experts say, green lasers pose a real danger because they can render pilots temporarily blind.

[…] But the controversy hasn’t hurt business. In fact, John Acres, whose company, Bigha, sold the laser that was pointed at the plane in Teterboro, said the attention has brought in new customers.

“We’ve got more orders. We are sold out,” said Acres, whose company is in Corvallis, Ore. “The whole industry has shot up because of this.”