Downloading case in the High Court

Jonathan

From rte.ie

Downloading case in the High Court


Four record companies have brought a High Court action to compel Eircom - the State's largest broadband service provider - to prevent its networks being used for the illegal downloading of music.
It's the first case to be aimed at the service provider rather than at individual illegal downloaders.
The four record companies taking the action are EMI, Sony BMG, Universal Music and Warner Music.
Advertisement

Willie Kavanagh, Managing Director of EMI Ireland and Chairman of the Irish Recorded Music Association, said because of illegal downloading and other factors, the Irish music industry was experiencing a "dramatic and accelerating decline" in income.
He said sales in the Irish market dropped 30% in the six years up to 2007.
EMI and the other companies are challenging Eircom's refusal to use filtering technology or other measures to voluntarily block or filter illegally downloaded material.
Last October Eircom told the companies it was not in a position to use the filtering software.
Eircom also told the companies that it was not on notice of specific illegal activity which infringed the companies' rights and it had no legal obligation to monitor traffic on its network.

Irishdudedave

I was listening to something recently (Cant remeber what) and they were discussing this new approach of attacking the ISPs for illegeal downloading. They compared the situation to a shoplifter taking a bus to a music store, stealing an album, then taking the bus home again.
By the record companies new logic they could take the bus company to court to compel them not to provide transport to the shoplifter...which obviously wouldn't be held by a court! So why should this apply to eircom or any other ISP?

paulm17781

Fair play to Eircom for saying no. I wonder what the "other factors" could be. Perhaps people buying music online for cheaper? I also notice it is once again a group of record labels and not musicians... You know who downloading really hurts.

PogMoThoin

Even some artists are moving along a different road to the record companies. I've posted here before that

Radiohead have reported that they (the artists) made more money from their latest album, than they have on all their other albums put together, which they offered for download on their website & let the downloader name their price.

Now Nine Inch Nails have followed a similar path and uploaded the first part of their album to torrent sites, offering the second part at a cost of $5............and have reported to be happy with the money they are earning. more info here.

Seems like everyone's had enough of the record companies. Fair play to Eircom for standing their ground.

smellslikeshoes

Irishdudedave wrote: »

I was listening to something recently (Cant remeber what) and they were discussing this new approach of attacking the ISPs for illegeal downloading. They compared the situation to a shoplifter taking a bus to a music store, stealing an album, then taking the bus home again.
By the record companies new logic they could take the bus company to court to compel them not to provide transport to the shoplifter...which obviously wouldn't be held by a court! So why should this apply to eircom or any other ISP?

Theres a flaw in that logic though the shoplifter could simply walk to the shop if he wanted to, while the downloader must use an ISP to get online to download Illegal stuff. This will end up happening in some shape or form in my opinion, But
IMO is far too late to stop the decline in sales of hard copies of albums. If plans to stop downloading happens in a serious way worldwide there will be ways around it.

messinkiapina

Do other Irish ISPs like Esat, UTV and Smart monitor downloading traffic? Is this the beginning of a major crackdown on individual downloaders in Ireland?

jimmycrackcorm

smellslikeshoes wrote: »

Theres a flaw in that logic though the shoplifter could simply walk to the shop if he wanted to, while the downloader must use an ISP to get online to download Illegal stuff. This will end up happening in some shape or form in my opinion, But
IMO is far too late to stop the decline in sales of hard copies of albums. If plans to stop downloading happens in a serious way worldwide there will be ways around it.

Then you might argue that the council shoul block the roads to stop people from getting to the shop. The comparison is valid.

Gu3rr1lla

Maybe if the music was worth buying these days. Like, for a example, a friend of mine illegally downloaded Arcade Fire's album, he liked their music so much he went out and purchased their albums. If he had never downloaded their albums he would never hear them and wouldn't of purchased their albums. So there's positives to it too

smellslikeshoes

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Then you might argue that the council shoul block the roads to stop people from getting to the shop. The comparison is valid.

No sorry that doesn't make any more valid, I understand where you are coming from but the different costs involved between two things like that straight away makes the comparison not valid. Even if the original comparison was valid you could also argue that naturally the bus driver would comply with the authorities to help track down the suspect through identification.

Silly comparisons aside this is going to happen at some stage in some shape or form, there is too many people employed in the Music industry, Movie industry, Game industry and software industry for it not to happen.

Scram

Was just gonna post about this news story yikes didnt think this kinda think da think would happen here. I try to not download music i buy from itunes the odd time.

i cant see how records companies expect an ISP to do this? Has this happened in the UK and the states?

Boggles

I'd like to see the music industry tackle the real problem of a decline in music sales. Lack of any decent music!!

Oh dear

http://www.rte.ie/2fm/charts/albums.html

The defence rests!

Scram

Boggles wrote: »

I'd like to see the music industry tackle the real problem of a decline in music sales. Lack of any decent music!!

Aye just 10 years ago there was a great period of music the "Brit pop" years Oasis, Blur,Supergrass,Ocean Color Scene etc nowadays theres a few good bands here and there but nothing that "Special". I cant even think of any album i would even bother to download atm well maybe one or two but id rather pay for it tbh if its good.

Marlow

Well,

in Denmark, IFPI (International Federation of the Phonographic Industry) had got a court injunction to force Tele2's danish branch to block access to the IP's of Pirate Bay.

Once they announced, that they are fighting the court case, most of the other ISPs actually joined in there: http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/02/13/Danish-ISP-prepares-to-fight-Pirate-Bay-injunction_1.html

Ironic part is, that after Tele2 blocked Pirate Bay, traffic from Denmark towards Pirate Bay shot up by 12% due to Media Coverage

/Marlow

Scram

Boggles wrote: »

I'd like to see the music industry tackle the real problem of a decline in music sales. Lack of any decent music!!

Oh dear

http://www.rte.ie/2fm/charts/albums.html

The defence rests!

lol true only album id even consider would be
Alive 2008
Daft Punk

The rest are pure ****e.

Boggles

Scram wrote: »

lol true only album id even consider would be
Alive 2008
Daft Punk

The rest are pure ****e.

Indeed, I count 9 greatest hits aswell.

The music industry would never just flog old ****e that was out years ago and is equally crap now, would they?

- What do you mean those downloading freeloaders won't buy the same music twice from us???

Surely they would never try and profit from someones death, Mr. Dolan?

Gu3rr1lla

Scram wrote: »

lol true only album id even consider would be
Alive 2008
Daft Punk

Any good? Is it worth downloading? :rolleyes:

kin9pin

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Then you might argue that the council shoul block the roads to stop people from getting to the shop. The comparison is valid.

....or maybe they should pursue the guy that sold the person the shoes that were used to walk to the shop......I say go for the parents for teaching the damn kids to walk in the first place.

bigpaddy2004

At the end of the day the guy who walks into the shop and lifts items is a thief the same as peer 2 peer's knowingly download copyrighted music and pay nothing. Its all theft I believe Eircom could of made a better move twoards this an be an example for every other ISP out there.

thefinalstage

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

At the end of the day the guy who walks into the shop and lifts items is a thief the same as peer 2 peer's knowingly download copyrighted music and pay nothing. Its all theft I believe Eircom could of made a better move twoards this an be an example for every other ISP out there.

Not theft as theft implies that the original owner no longer has use of the item in question.

bigpaddy2004

thelastangryman wrote: »

Not theft as theft implies that the original owner no longer has use of the item in question.

Nonsense.

I come accross circumstances everyday where I find people downloading music, films, etc not even released over here or in the cinemas as of yet.

If you go into a record store pick up "2008 best singles" or what ever latest album is out now then proceed to walk out the door without paying for it, thats theft.

Downloading the same album from these file sharing clients is practically the very same, you dont pay for your new album?

Im sure there is lots of people who will try to make this situation seem different in their own favour.

Everyone is complaining about the lack of music out there these days, and why should'nt there be? They are looseing millions every year due to p2p, millions which is not going back into the music industry to strengthen it.

Boggles

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

Everyone is complaining about the lack of music out there these days, and why should'nt there be? They are looseing millions every year due to p2p, millions which is not going back into the music industry to strengthen it.

That old chest nut. We don't have money to reinvest in the talent. What cliched crap. The music industry is money driven, they will not invest in anything unless they get a return, they have created a market where they will pluck some 18 year old from obscurity, force her to release an album of covers while making a fortune from the 12 year olds who buy this crap who woundn't know talent if it kicked them in the Ipod. The 18 year old has a number one selling album, her eagerly awaited 2nd album is her own material, it sells 3 records and the label drops her like a ginger step child. She then spends the next 10 years appearing in show's like "I was kinda famous once, throw stones at me", etc.

Does this sound familair to you?

messinkiapina

Ok, I agree that downloading music is theft, but you will have a hard time convincing 99.9% of the population that a crime that primarily affects the fat cat records bosses is a serious offence. It's no different to copying an album onto a blank cassette back in the day, and anyone who says they never did that is a bare faced liar.

So do you equate everytime you copied something to your blank cassette back in 1988 to sticking a CD under your jumper in the local record store? Get real, the whole country would be under lock and key.

mjsmyth

I love the way record companies blame illegal downloading for drops in their revenue....

It could have absolutley nothing to do with the ****e they release on a weekly basis and the fact that people cannot truly be arsed buying it.

It could also have absolutley nothing to do with the fact there are many more options for buying music more cheaply over the internet than going to your local Golden Discs, HMV or Zavvi (Virgin). I can't remember the last time I bought myself a CD in a store. I use CDWow practically all the time. I am sure I am not the only one.

Anyway... what would i know!

mj

DJ_Spider

Think yourselves lucky you're not in the UK. This has been worrying DJ's since it came out in June 2005. http://www.pcdj.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=13 Luckyly in Ireland we have a more simpler/cheaper system where the venue has to have the licence. But I'm sure soon IMRO will follow the UK and so DJ's will have to raise thier prices.

GhostInTheRuins

rte wrote:

the Irish music industry was experiencing a "dramatic and accelerating decline" in income.
He said sales in the Irish market dropped 30% in the six years up to 2007.

First of all - lol at "Irish music industry".

In my opinion people that buy cds are still going to buy them anyway. The majority of people that download music wouldn't have bought the stuff they download if they didn't have the option of downloading. IMO the vast majority of their loss of income is because people are wising up to the extremely overblown cd prices in this country. Why the hell would I pay €20+ for an album in hmv/golden discs/Sound Cellar/virgin etc when I can get the exact same thing for €7 or €8 delivered directly to my door?

mjsmyth

According to the Digital Rights Ireland website, CDWow say they have over 120000 registered Irish users........ and that was back in late 2005.

http://www.digitalrights.ie/2005/11/16/irmas-legal-action/

mj

radiospan

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

If you go into a record store pick up "2008 best singles" or what ever latest album is out now then proceed to walk out the door without paying for it, thats theft.

Downloading the same album from these file sharing clients is practically the very same, you dont pay for your new album?

Downloading isn't the same as theft. If you steal a CD from a shop, the shop no longer has it, it's not able to sell that CD + plastic case on to someone else, and it would have if it hadn't been stolen.

If I pick a random song to download, say one I've never heard of, is that theft?

JC 2K3

Emm, how the hell can Eircom block illegal downloading? They can't block P2P traffic, as P2P isn't illegal...

jor el

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

Downloading the same album from these file sharing clients is practically the very same, you dont pay for your new album?

Stealing from a shop results in an actual loss for the shop. Downloading results in a possible loss of a potential sale, vastly different things. The music industry quotes their losses based on the number of songs they estimate are circulating freely, and saying that everyone who downloads the song would have paid for it, therefore they have lost all that money. However some people will just never pay for certain things, so if it's not available for free, they do without. Others will even go and purchase after they have illegally downloaded, try before you buy style. I've done this many times as it save me wasting money on crap, and I've bought more music since P2P has become available than I ever did before. I'm sure I'm not the only one either.

I'd love to know what portion of the 30% drop in sales was picked up by the likes of CDWow, Play.com, Amazon, eBay and all the other sites where you can pick up CDs, legally, for half the price you pay in Ireland? Conveniently forgetting the actual facts are lies well versed by the likes of IRMA, IMRO, etc.

It would also be interesting to know what kind of filtering software the record companies are talking about. Does this actively monitor the contents of everything you download (serious privacy concern) or does it just blanket block certain traffic?

I hope nothing will come of this, as it's really just another attempt by the aging giants to protect their cozy little cartel now that they've realised their days are numbered. Artists don't need the record companies any more. All you need now is the talent (seriously lacking in a lot of what's in the charts) an Internet connection and MySpace. That gets you known, it gets you played, you don't need the record companies to run PR or get you on the radio any more.

niall mc

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Emm, how the hell can Eircom block illegal downloading? They can't block P2P traffic, as P2P isn't illegal...

Thats what I was thinking, P2P is used for lots of legal downloads as well.
Linux distributions are most commonly downloaded using torrents.

Also, I cant see Eircom spending money on new ways of blocking the pirates.
The download methods will always be ahead of the anti-piracy measures.
Will they block access to Google, rapidshare, torrents, IRC and any new methods that surface?
It will just cost too much, if its even possible...
The only way to stop it is to go after the people who upload, not downloaders, which they have been trying to do.

bigpaddy2004

plazzTT wrote: »

Downloading isn't the same as theft. If you steal a CD from a shop, the shop no longer has it, it's not able to sell that CD + plastic case on to someone else, and it would have if it hadn't been stolen.

If I pick a random song to download, say one I've never heard of, is that theft?

Is it not true that if you download an album from a file sharing client, you will not be paying the music industry for that album? Is that not stealing? As for what I can make out they will be looseing out on the sale of that record.

bigpaddy2004

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Emm, how the hell can Eircom block illegal downloading? They can't block P2P traffic, as P2P isn't illegal...

Rubbish. Its quiet easy for an isp to block regular and encrypted file sharing programs.
There is even a firewall out there which can distinguish between copyrighted material and homemade material.
Im not sure if its and ISP in the UNITED STATES or the UK whom have installed such a firewall a few months back to filter out copyrighted material.
I will dig up the news story however and post it here when I find it.

nilhg

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

Is it not true that if you download an album from a file sharing client, you will not be paying the music industry for that album? Is that not stealing? As for what I can make out they will be looseing out on the sale of that record.

If you download it, listen to it, don't like it and delete it, is it still stolen.
If you go into a shop and buy an album, listen to it, don't like it and bring it back to the shop will they refund you?

The big problem for the "Music Industry" is that most of their customers and a lot of their artists, perceive themselves to have been (legally) quite royally screwed over the years.

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

Rubbish. Its quiet easy for an isp to block regular and encrypted file sharing programs.
There is even a firewall out there which can distinguish between copyrighted material and homemade material.
Im not sure if its and ISP in the UNITED STATES or the UK whom have installed such a firewall a few months back to filter out copyrighted material.
I will dig up the news story however and post it here when I find it.

Can they do it without affecting the quality of service for everyone and without interfering with peoples privacy. There is a presumption of innocence in our system, you can't just open somebodys communications without fair cause.

paulm17781

Anyone saying there is no good music around is clearly not looking. If you think Britpop was the best last "scene" you're probably getting old (honestly). There is so much good music around these days, I have found most of it by downloading, I've then bought a load of the stuff online. The problem is record labels screw artists and most talented ones are going online instead, they have more hope that way then ending up in debt to a label. FWIW NIN made $750,000 on day 1 from the 'ultimate' version of the album. I'd say that's more than They'd get from sales in a year, it doesn't include the downloads or anything. The reason MTV isn't playing good music is because little of it is promoted by labels as the good acts aren't trying to get signed any more. Do you see where this is going and why it is always labels suing?

WillieFlynn

I feel that one of the reasons why illigal downloading of music became such an issue, is that the record companies made it difficult to buy music online leagly, in a usable form (ie with out DRM).

I don't buy CD's anymore because of the hassel of ripping the tracks. Then the physical CD just sits around creating a mess, until I trow it out.

The only way I will by music, is if it can be easly purchased online DRM free, for a reasonable price. While things are slowly moving in the right direction, we are not there yet.

So in my case the record companies loss of sales, is purly due to them not offering to sell me music in a usable convient format.

gurramok

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

Is it not true that if you download an album from a file sharing client, you will not be paying the music industry for that album? Is that not stealing? As for what I can make out they will be looseing out on the sale of that record.

Its called 'copyright infringement' and thats what the labels have sued people for, they've never sued for stealing as they know it would be thrown out of court straight away.

10% of a sale of a cd goes to artists, a fact. Nice little chart here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7265070.stm

Sparks

From a technical point of view, how are Eircom to distinguish between my downloading an ISO of Ubuntu from someone downloading copyrighted material when they use the same protocol over the same ports, unless Sony et al are suggesting that the courts order Eircom to monitor the contents of the packets being sent?

AngryHippie

My opinion on the matter is that I will go and see any act whose music I like, I will pay through the nose to go and see them, I would have no problem paying them 10% of the cost of a cd to get a copy of their album, But if an act never comes to the country or relies solely on income from their records then they will suffer.
I also agree with the view that the major record labels have been pumping out far too much bland ****e pop music and marketing it at kids, who are only listening to it and buying it for peer image, That is totally unethical and those guilty of the practice deserve to be hit in the pocket. Louis and Ronan I'm lookin at you......
Real artists are prepared to tour not just to get known, but to actually earn a substantial part of their income I think this is a better system than relying on promotion of a cd, for which they get a 10% slice at best.....

Having said that, the radiohead experiment did show just how tight people will be given the opportunity, so any system you put in place will be abused.
Am I gonna shed any tears because sony music or capitol records or geffen's profits are sliding ? NO, They are essentially a marketing company anyway, and I'm with Bill Hicks on marketing....

bigpaddy2004

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

Rubbish. Its quiet easy for an isp to block regular and encrypted file sharing programs.
There is even a firewall out there which can distinguish between copyrighted material and homemade material.
Im not sure if its and ISP in the UNITED STATES or the UK whom have installed such a firewall a few months back to filter out copyrighted material.
I will dig up the news story however and post it here when I find it.

Whats this magical firewall called?
If you are referring to Sandvine (used by Comcast in the USA), this is a technology that throttles the bittorrent protocol, regardless of whether you are sharing legitimate files or not.
Other than that I havent come accross anything that can differentiate between warez and legal files.

bigpaddy2004

Deleted User wrote: »

Whats this magical firewall called?
If you are referring to Sandvine (used by Comcast in the USA), this is a technology that throttles the bittorrent protocol, regardless of whether you are sharing legitimate files or not.
Other than that I havent come accross anything that can differentiate between warez and legal files.

No im not referring to sandvine, or netequaliser or any other bandwidth limiter
Companies such as Allot communications provide firewalls which can distinguish between copyrighted material and not.

watty

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

.....provide firewalls which can distinguish between copyrighted material and not.

A bit like spam filters, IMO. You are going to get a lot of false positives and false negatives and it can't really do anything with encrypted or multipart (multipart is where the individual bits in a word come from different peers).

It's slightly more reliable to look for uploaders. For various reasons.

Copyright infringement is wrong, aside from how broken or greedy or not the Music publishers are. But you can't beat up the carrier. Should DHL vans be stopped and searched or DHL staff search parcels for Child porn or weapons manuals?

How can a copyright filter know if a download is BBC/C4 Sky P2P or warez?

It's all a bit like King Canute. They need to tackle their problems a different way rather than arguing with the tide coming in. Build seawalls. Make Viking / Pirate raiding unattractive.

Why do few people smuggle Brandy, Silk, tobacco compared with 17th & 18th Century? Because it is easier to go to Tesco, not because of better Excise men.

Cabaal

The only good thing about this case is we all know Eircom doesn't like being told what to do (years of seeing Comreg and Eircom in court proves this) we also know Eircom doesn't like spending money if it doesn't have to.

As such I'd expect this to be in court for bloody ages and even if the record companys win Eircom are likely to appeal

If the industry wants this issue sorted in the long term then they need to change there business model, setups like iTunes for movie and music rentals/buying are a good start but the best example so far has been from the BBC in the UK....sadly this service isn't available to those outside of the UK.

No other solutions will work in the long term, sure ISP's can limit P2P traffic with the likes of sandvine.com (Comcast in the US use it, CPW in the UK and its thought UPC in Ireland) but people will always find a work around...in this case download from usenet instead or download to a deadicated servver and then download normally via http and/or FTP. (sandvine can't tell if the http/ftp traffic is illegal or not it also can incorrectly throttle legit applications and sometimes even games by accident)

There's too many variables to all this, its not as simple as black and white.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying copyright infringement is right and should be allowed, hell I know that downloading the latest episode of CSI, Heroes, Lost that aired on NBC in the US lastnight is illegal.

But the fact remains is the vast majority of people are sick to death of hearing about for example CSI airing on CBS lastnight in the states and then RTE doing a half arse job showing it by canceling eps, airing them in the incorrect order or just not showing eps at all so then people have to wait for DVD's and fork out money just to watch a TV show that their local channel/network should show.

At this stage its gotten to the point where the majority of people just don't view it as wrong,

We've all seen that the movie industry has massively decreased the time it used to take for a movie to come to Ireland after showing in the states.

Years ago it could be many many months now its down to weeks, this wasn't down to marketing this used to be down to the fact that the industry wanted to save money so they used the same film reels in the US and then shipped them to other countrys when they stopped showing in the states.

However with all these changes in the end of all this whats happened? Profits have gone up!! (thats even with movie piracy on-line)

Additionally the movie industry has massively decreased the time it now takes for a movie to go from cinema to DVD/Video and this has also helps, but again in many people's view 22-29e for a new film on dvd is a massive ripp off.

So now we come to the music industry, ah yes....they want to ideally rent music to people on a monthly rate, they also have fought ever change tooth and nail, hell they've fought Apple many a time over the amount of fee's they make from iTunes.

They constantly bitch about lack of sales yet they continue to produce ****e track after ****e track, its not just the price of music and piracy that "may" be affecting the industry its also the quality of the music and in my view its pretty poor indeed.

Cabaal

On a light note, I guess this sums things up regarding how the industry wants to deal with people

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTbX1aMajow

I always find it amusing that the industry view movie, music and tv piracy as stealing, well it is and it isn't,

In one way it is from the side that if you download it your perhaps less likely to watch TV so your less likely to view adverts and less likely to buy products etc, however stealing also suggests somebody actually takes a physical copy and all there anti-piracy adverts also suggest this.

However thats not what happens

JC 2K3

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

No im not referring to sandvine, or netequaliser or any other bandwidth limiter
Companies such as Allot communications provide firewalls which can distinguish between copyrighted material and not.

lol, that's the biggest load of crap I've ever heard. How can software distinguish between copyrighted and non-copyrighted material?

The only thing I can think of is that it would be a keyword filter, which would be highly ineffective and also quite annoying for all the false positives it'd produce.

Cabaal

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

No im not referring to sandvine, or netequaliser or any other bandwidth limiter
Companies such as Allot communications provide firewalls which can distinguish between copyrighted material and not.

Perhaps there firewall can distinguish between copyright material and non-copyright material on paper but not in practice.

The only way such a system would work is if you apply a digital signature to everything and those items without/with a signature are then treated as copyright material and can't be copied, such a system is unlikely to happen due to the costs involved and many other outside factors.

Plus you'll find that as with any "copy protection" such as CSS its likely to be removed, as I always say if people can make it then people can break it

I believe that unless they do add digital sigs to everything then this "firewall" to which you refer is about as much use as a chocolate teapot.

Off hand looking at there website I see this http://www.allot.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=612&Itemid=88888930, this is the exact same as Sandvine and can easily be worked around. If you have info regarding this "firewall" then please post away

bigpaddy2004

JC 2K3 wrote: »

lol, that's the biggest load of crap I've ever heard. How can software distinguish between copyrighted and non-copyrighted material?

The only thing I can think of is that it would be a keyword filter, which would be highly ineffective and also quite annoying for all the false positives it'd produce.

You have seen this product in action so I take it?
If not its probably better not to comment on a product you know nothing about.

ianhobo

When I go into a music shop, the music that I always end up buying is older, 70's, 80's. As was said before, I have no interest in current music because I simply don't like any it, it just isn't very good.

Rather than the Record Companies wasting time trying to prevent the transport mediums (ISP's) from stopping illegal downloads, they should look at the source.

An archaic (in technology terms) and inferior music delivery system i.e the cd.

The CD is their current problem. It's too easy to take the music off a cd

(i'm not saying it's an easy or cheap problem to fix now, before I get jumped on! but it's very easy to identify this as the main problem)

Music has been a consumer digital product for over 20 years. What other piece of technology has remained unchanged for over 20 years? Nothing!
What other "system" has remained secure for that long? none.

I'm aware that previous attempts to move the technology along have been tried and failed - super audio cd etc and the sony fiasco of cd copy protection over the last few years, but they just got overly aggressive with an antiquated data format that simply couldn't handle it

DVD is already on its way out! Why? Because their expensive copy protection system was cracked. A complete format change is now happening

Major worldwide encryption standards are changed quicker. DVD has been changed. Blu-ray protection was broken almost immediately, and re-engineered. Chip and pin has replaced your signature.
At least these industries are trying to stay ahead. The music industry did nothing...until it was too late

I'm not happy with how I've explained my point, hopefully some people will understand what I mean.

Do I mean It's their own fault for resting on their laurels for so long with the cheap money spinner that Compact Disc presentation and delivery allowed them? maybe I do......

bigpaddy2004

Cabaal wrote: »

Off hand looking at there website I see this http://www.allot.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=612&Itemid=88888930, this is the exact same as Sandvine and can easily be worked around. If you have info regarding this "firewall" then please post away

I have been speaking with Allot about this, this is there number one sales pitch about their product. I doubt they would lie about something about like this.

Is it not difficult for the music industry to partner up with a software giant like Allot to embed a digital signature in their music for a firewall to pick up on?

JC 2K3

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

You have seen this product in action so I take it?
If not its probably better not to comment on a product you know nothing about.

It's also probably better not to comment on technology and telecommunications when you know nothing about them.

JC 2K3

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

Is it not difficult for the music industry to partner up with a software giant like Allot to embed a digital signature in their music for a firewall to pick up on?

Eh, all someone has to do is remove the digital signature from the file. Sounds too easy? Well I'm afraid it really IS that easy.

ianhobo

bigpaddy2004 wrote: »

I have been speaking with Allot about this, this is there number one sales pitch about their product. I doubt they would lie about something about like this.

Is it not difficult for the music industry to partner up with a software giant like Allot to embed a digital signature in their music for a firewall to pick up on?

it will be a big expense, with little rewards at the end. As cabaal said, anything that is developed will be broken in a matter of weeks by some-one with the know how

MPEG css has been broken, blu ray disc encryption has been broken, HD-DVD was broken, iTunes DRM has been broken, Windows DRM has been broken, "insert name here" has been broken

Any potential development would be quickly broken, maybe even quicker than it took to develop