CD copy protection lawsuit in California

[GoldenBoy]

Here's an interesting article from the NY Times about a CD copy protection lawsuit. I thought some of you all might be interested in this:

CD-Protection Complaint Is Settled

February 25, 2002

By AMY HARMON




The makers of the first known copy-protected CD released in
the United States, a recording by the country singer
Charley Pride, have agreed to warn consumers that the CD is
not designed to work in computer CD-ROM drives or DVD
players.

The agreement is part of an out-of-court settlement of a
lawsuit filed last September by a California resident,
Karen DeLise, who was upset that she was unable to play the
CD. She charged that Music City Records, Fahrenheit
Entertainment (news/quote) and Suncomm, a digital rights
management firm, had violated California's consumer
protection laws by failing to include an adequate
disclaimer on the CD's packaging.

The recording, "A Tribute to Jim Reeves," is one of several
CD's to be released recently with copy-protection
technology that blocks people from listening to songs or
trading them on computers. But as the record labels
experiment with technology that prevents music from being
swapped over the Internet, many CD's are being distributed
without disclosing their limitations.

The Charley Pride CD did include a label that stated it was
"designed to play in standard audio CD players only." But
Ms. DeLise took issue with what was left unstated. The
Suncomm technology enables owners of the CD to visit a Web
site where they can download songs that will play on their
computers. But for now, the downloads only work on
computers with Windows 98 or more recent versions of
Microsoft (news/quote)'s operating system.

As part of the settlement, the CD's distributors will list
the compatibility requirements on the label. They will also
stop requiring consumers to enter their names and e-mail
addresses as a condition of downloading the music.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/25/technology/25PROT.html?ex=1015648639&ei=1&en=17399c05b9cd6dd1

[Grant]

Here is a related article:

Consumer Lawsuit Victory

By Jon Iverson



February 25, 2002 — In the record industry's ongoing battle against its customers, score one for the consumer. Amid recent industry rumors that Universal Music Group has retreated from its position of adding restrictions to all of its new CDs, a lawsuit over a Charley Pride release has been settled in California, paving the way to alert the public to playback restrictions on discs.
Last September, Californian Karen DeLise sued restriction technology company SunnComm along with Fahrenheit Entertainment and its record label, Music City Records, on behalf of the General Public of the State of California, "to enjoin them from selling music compact discs that have been designed, programmed, and implemented to defeat the rights of consumers [and] that include misleading advertising, defective notices, and invasions of privacy."

DeLise wanted to end what she and her attorney, Ira Rothken, perceived as threats to consumer privacy as implemented by Music City and SunnComm's CD restriction system. The suit alleged that the Pride CD included technology that "tracks, stores, and disseminates specific consumer personal identifying information, listening data, and downloading habits to entities beyond the control of the consumer." The suit also pointed out that there was no practical way to opt out of the data collection or destroy the data once it had been collected.

According to Rothken, the companies named in the suit have agreed to clearly alert consumers to playback problems with the CD in DVD players, MP3 players, and CD-ROM drives; they will also stop tracking private and identifiable information about consumers and will destroy all data collected to date.

In announcing the decision, DeLise stated, "I am very satisfied with the settlement we obtained for the benefit of the general public. I applaud Music City and Sunncomm in deciding to resolve this case and to give consumers better notice, so consumers can make an informed decision as to whether they want to purchase such functionally impaired CDs."

Arizona-based SunnComm also announced last week that its chief technology officer and director, John Aquilino, has departed the company to "pursue other opportunities."

[Beagle]

The Charley Pride CD did include a label that stated it was "designed to play in standard audio CD players only." But
Ms. DeLise took issue with what was left unstatedWhich was....?

Are people that stupid and uninformed or are they just illiterate?

What's next? Some idiot suing because a DVD-V won't play in their CD player?

[GuyDon]

Beagle, I think that is a bit harsh. I would bet that the vast majority of music consumers (re: casual listeners) out there don't fully understand what that means.

[RetroSmith]

Beagle, no offense to you, but you are so busy defending the record compnaies (yet again) that you missed the point!!!

Karen was Mostly upset (and rightly so) that to get versions of the songs SHE HAD ALREADY PAID FOR to play on her computer, she had to enter in personal, private information.,........or not be able to get the songs.

I mean...WHAT!!!???

Since when do you buy a Cd and HAVE to give out FREE, personal and private information?

Just another sample of the Record Companies incrediblly selfish Greed and Mentality. Way to Go Karen!!

[Sckott]

Actually, with what Beagle said (and all due respect to the fact OF the lawsuit) yeah, people aren't that bright. We're talking average people, here. A lot of us think quite differently, and I'm not putting anyone down. I think you know what I'm talkin' bout. I know Bob Dylan might!

Interview with Nirvana after they released "Nevermind", when the album went gold, they interrupted production with an RE-1 pressing CD. The band & DGC threw in a noisy, madcap track called "Endless Nameless". It starts almost 10 minutes after "Something In The Way" ends with that 10 minutes of digital 0.

So, the last track goes all calm, ten minutes later, you're all snoozin' on the couch while the CD changer hasn't moved yet.

Crunch! Bam! AAAAAHHH! It was put there on purpose, for a short 3-4 month run of pressings. It was there to upset and disturb people who fell asleep (just as the weirdness at the end of Sgt Pepper on a run-out groove) and hold the attention of your CD changer if you were too lazy to change it. People were not happy, thought it was poor marketing and returned the Cds, not liking the technial joke.

Lots of artists do this sort of thing now. Hidden mystery tracks. It's sometimes easy to spot right on the CD.

"Endless Nameless" doesn't have any sonic or musical glory, but a very neat artifact. They're now rarer than the un-modded CD in the used racks. Collectors find plenty of them tho. I thought it was cool, and lots of people didn't like the idea they were getting almost a bonus track. (I can say it wasn't much, but fans were paying $30 for Japanese CD-EPs for MORE noisy Nirvana extras without hesitence).....

Also, originally, the CD's infold has Kurt flipping you the bird when you open the Cd. The original DGC LP isn't like that, unless you open the MFSL Lp. That wasn't accidental either.

[Rspaight]

I guess I'm of the opinion that "standard audio CD players" is a bit vague. DVD decks are marketed as "DVD/CD players," so one would reasonably assume it would play CDs. How about an SACD/CD deck? My guess is that these mutant discs won't play on those, either. Ditto standalone CD player/CDR burners.

How about a portable with skip protection? The copy-protected discs don't work in some of those. Is that a standard audio CD player? How about a car deck with skip protection?

I guess computers and Playstations and XBoxes are different enough that that warning would suffice, but I'd still like to see more complete compatibility info.

The bottom line for me is that these discs are being tossed into the maketplace with little or no guarantee they'll play on *anything.* Sounds like someone took "security through obscurity" a bit too seriously.

Ryan

[Sckott]

It's a good point. Short of CD Text and Enhanced Cds (that haven't hurt CD play in a normal player) it's best to leave a CD alone. Macrovision CAN do weird things to portable CD players with the 40-Sec buffering technology. Some in-Dash car stereos had em, and weirdo-error correction made for car stereo. So, is it all that financially worth it if the disc can't carry it's weight into most every piece of 5 1/4" disc playing hardware?

[TSmithPage]

Originally posted by Beagle
Which was....?

Are people that stupid and uninformed or are they just illiterate?

What's next? Some idiot suing because a DVD-V won't play in their CD player?

I suspect that, in reality, the consumer in this case wasn't the least bit surprised by what she bought. This lawsuit was merely the first salvo in an effort to prevent the labels from trying to copy code their CDs. Phillips, the originator of CD technology, also wasn't too happy about this release, noting that it didn't meet red book specifications and shouldn't carry the CD symbol you used to see on most CDs. The Pride CD was heavily advertised, at least in some circles, as being the first to incorporate this technology. The point that has been made elsewhere is that this technology doesn't really stop someone from burning the CD, but they have to convert it to a wav file first and can't burn it directly on a computer from one CD to another.

In any event, in lawsuits, as in many things in life, you have to read between the lines to see people's true motives.

[Beagle]

Originally posted by mikey5967
Beagle, no offense to you, but you are so busy defending the record compnaies (yet again) that you missed the point!!!

Karen was Mostly upset (and rightly so) that to get versions of the songs SHE HAD ALREADY PAID FOR to play on her computer, she had to enter in personal, private information.,........or not be able to get the songsHow was I defending the record companies? And why does she have to play it in a computer? Why not use a Discman while you fiddle on your computer? Why did we have to buy the CD or cassette in the 80's to get the bonus tracks? Why no lawsuits then? She will probably bitch again when they make it illegal to use a cell phone while driving. Dunces like this are the reason they put "Do Not Eat" on that little moisture-absorbing bag that comes inside bottles of vitamins.

[mcow1]

Originally posted by Beagle
And why does she have to play it in a computer? Why not use a Discman while you fiddle on your computer?

I think the point is more why shouldn't she be able to play it on the computer, it has a cd-rom that is supposed to be able to play CDs. Maybe she doesn't have a discman or a real stereo system. Lots of people only listen to CDs on their pc. The (supposed) point of the suit was to have the record companies label the music to say what it will not play on, though this list is starting to get longer than what it will play on.

[Rspaight]

Why not use a Discman while you fiddle on your computer?

Because it won't work on a lot of Discmen either, because of the skip protection.

This was not a frivolous lawsuit -- this was about telling the record companies they have to find a better way to fight piracy than releasing crippled product.

You know, like lowering prices, better product, innovative marketing, stuff that's hard to do compared with paying some data security company to make your discs incompatible with a huge portion of playback systems.

A nice fat lawsuit is a good way to get their attention. The rumblings that Universal is dropping their plans to "protect" all future discs is a sign they got the message.

Ryan

[RetroSmith]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Beagle
[B]How was I defending the record companies? And why does she have to play it in a computer? Why not use a Discman while you fiddle on your computer?


1) Every post you have made defends the Record Companies.

2) You EXPECT and are SUPPOSED to be able to play a CD in your computer. Thats why Windows has a "CD Player" program.

3) Should you have to go out and BUY a Discman? You think thats "fair" and "right"?

[Beagle]

Originally posted by mikey5967
[B1) Every post you have made defends the Record Companies[/B]

Wrong. This is about copyright and principle. I think the gov't rips us off day and night, but what if everyone stops paying taxes?

Should you have to go out and BUY a Discman? You think thats "fair" and "right"? No, you could steal one, that's fair and right, according to you. They only cost about $10 to produce but $100 to buy, so certainly you must have it in for electronics manufacturers the way you do for record companies right?

Yes, by all means, we should put a stop to this watermarking and copy protecting. Then, in order to prevent piracy, they can do away with CD's altogether, and we can only access music by downloading crappy music files that we will pay $3.00 a song (or 4 for $10). How's that sound? Think of the improved depth and soundstaging LOL!

[Rspaight]

Piracy is wrong and inexcusable, but crippling CDs is not the answer. If they start making all CDs this way, I'll just stop buying them, since I have no way to play them. Not on the DVD player in the home theater, not on the SACD player in the music system, not on any of the computers, not in the car, not on the Discman. The only thing I've got that I am fairly sure will work is a $80 boom box. No thanks.

Will I just download it? No, but I know lots of other people will. You've got to love an anti-pirating scheme that sends people running into the arms of the pirates.

Somehow I don't think that's what the record companies are hoping to achieve with this plan, but that'll be the result for many, many people.

Ryan

[Beagle]

Originally posted by Rspaight
Piracy is wrong and inexcusable, but crippling CDs is not the answer. If they start making all CDs this way, I'll just stop buying them, since I have no way to play themI'm sorry, I was terribly wrong....

Sticking to "principle", I forgot the "music fan" here. I don't blame people who don't buy a crippled CD. I guess they (companies) have a tiger by the tail and they don't know what to do. It seems like a simple solution, a COMPACT DISC designed to be played in audio COMPACT DISC players.

However....

After doing some thinking, I figured that a crippled CD should only become the only physical retail game in town after they have also set up the online download option from their own website. In other words, if you want the audio CD, you buy a copy protected one, which has a hidden serial number. If you want it in your computer, you should be able to put that audio CD in your computer, go to their website, provide the serial number and get it for free for your computer. If you lend it to your friend, he cannot download for free or copy because that serial number has been used already. Would this work or do I need more drugs?

[Rspaight]

That'll work for people that want to listen on a computer, but I'd prefer uncompressed (at least not lossy compressed) files, which would be a looooong download, and I'd need to be able to burn them to disc, which I doubt record company paranoia would allow.

I'd settle for a migration to SACD, though. :)

Ryan