U.K. Group Wants DRM'd Media Labeled

peterfa writes "The BBC reports that the U.K. 'All Party Parliamentary Internet Group' wants companies to label their DRMed products. Consumers will see a label on the product before they buy. The label will spell out clearly just how easy it is to copy media, and what they can and cannot do. This is in response to Sony BMG and their virus-like DRM. The group claims the industry is turning media into a rent system, rather than a purchase system."

go even further

I wonder what their response will be to the request to label their products and how their DRMed, and make it "crystal clear" (nice irony) to the consumers. I propose they go even further.

I've encountered a couple of CDs which had some message to the effect, "while every attempt has been made to ensure an enjoyable experience, blah, blah, blah, ... we cannot guarantee this disc will play on every and all of your devices." And, all of those (btw, the print is so small, it's unreadable) actually did play on my computer, and not in my car, and I had to go through a few hoops to return what the store claimed was "non-returnable".

Since they are knowingly creating a corrupt version of what is or should be a standard format (compact disc), it should be their responsibility to allow the consumer to know positively for sure what devices and manufacturers their product will be guaranteed to play on. This, in addition to the clear and explicit list of how the tracks may be copied, .... all of the other suggestions in the article.

From the article: "The group claims the industry is turning media into a rent system, rather than a purchase system." If that's the case, and it does appear that's the industry's direction, they're changing the rules as they previously existed, even more reason they should list the constraints and restrictions of their product. By visual inspection alone, it is impossible to look at a CD and know whether it is of the "corrupt" ilk.

Does it seem ironic there are laws requiring "explicit lyrics" warnings on CDs, and not information that explains whether or not you can even play the damn things?

(would have posted this a moment sooner, took me a second to find the "Read More..." link. ;-) )

Re:go even further

I think that the DRM sticker would be more welcomed on the face of the CDs than the Explicit Lyrics one, since DRM, as proven by Sony, can be much more damaging to the consumer than swearing in songs.

Re:go even further

even further still, keep all the DRM'D crap in a completely different display.

Re:go even further

Someone ought to complsin to Trading Standards about false advertising.

Don't forget, boys and girls, that when you are dealing with the UK retail trade, the phrase "I'll call in the Trading Standards people" is the magic spell that converts "Sorrimate, not our problem" into "Here is your money back, sir." I have seen this demonstrated on at least one occasion.

Re:go even further

Damn you Brits, not only do you get Doctor Who first, and also have much more interesting political meetings, you also have a magic spell that converts "Not our problem" into "Here is your money back"! This is why Brits are healthier than Americans.

Re:go even further

I think that the DRM sticker would be more welcomed on the face of the CDs than the Explicit Lyrics one, since DRM, as proven by Sony, can be much more damaging to the consumer than swearing in songs.

In many cases, it is actually in the record label's interest to post the "Tipper Tag" (Explicit lyrics label) because it will, quite frequently, boost sales.

The DRM warning, on the other hand, will most likely cut sales, ergo it is not in the label's interest.

Re:go even further

In many cases, it is actually in the record label's interest to post the "Tipper Tag" (Explicit lyrics label) because it will, quite frequently, boost sales.

The DRM warning, on the other hand, will most likely cut sales, ergo it is not in the label's inter

Re:go even further

I had to go through a few hoops to return what the store claimed was "non-returnable".

I think perhaps phrases like "not fit for the purpose for which it was bought" may have been helpful, along with "I'll see what trading standards has to say about that then" if that doesn't work.

It's being sold as an audio CD. You have a reasonable expectation that it will work in your audio CD player(s). If it doesn't, then as far as I'm concerned either the CD or the player(s) is faulty. Assuming your player(s) work(s) with other CDs, the implication would be that it's the CD that's faulty. Therefore, you're entitled to a refund, end of story.

I don't buy very many CDs anymore, but if that happened to me and the store refused to accept the return, I'd definitely be contacting trading standards.

Re:go even further

It's being sold as an audio CD. You have a reasonable expectation that it will work in your audio CD player(s). If it doesn't, then as far as I'm concerned either the CD or the player(s) is faulty. Assuming your player(s) work(s) with other CDs, the implication would be that it's the CD that's faulty. Therefore, you're entitled to a refund, end of story.

Actually, right from the beginning, Philips has made a stand that these copy protected CD's are never sold with the 'CD-Compact Disc [wikimedia.org]' label on it, since they do not comply with the Red Book standard Sony and Philips published back in 1982.

So if you're shopping for a CD and the logo is not on it, it's a good signal to read a the small print. In my experience, you'll often find copyright notices for the copyprotection on there somewhere. :-P

However, it seems to me that right from the beginning this stuff has gone the wrong way. Hackers and pirates are way more inventive that 'regular' consumers, so any copy protection will be cracked (after all, if it was IMPOSSIBLE to get the audio off there, it would never sell), while Joe Average will never get it to play on his car stereo.

I rip all my CD's to my harddisk, since I like variation, and a big harddrive with WinAmp [winamp.com] is a much better CD-changer than a real CD-changer ever will be. I have over time bought several DRM'ed CD's, and none of them have EVER given me much trouble ripping them. Most work was one that required the 'black marker on the outer ring' [interesting-people.org] trick.

My two cents...

Re:go even further

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, but I have returned quite a few copy-protected CDs.

It's on the rack with the other audio CDs, in a record store. You therefore have a reasonable expectation that it should play.

Despite any labelling, if you didn't notice the labelling (and many copy-controlled discs in the UK - including all of the sample ones I have from Sony BMG UK containing XCP "Aurora" - are NOT labelled as such in any way, other than the absence of the Compact Disc(TM) logo, which also happens on a huge variety of unprotected audio CDs as well), or if you noticed the labelling and queried the retailer and they said it ought to play, then you can return it under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) on the grounds that it's not fit for purpose.

They cannot refuse a refund on the grounds that it has been opened. (After all, you're not psychic, you don't know it was faulty until you try to play it, and it's going to be mighty difficult to do that without opening the case.)

They can offer a refund or replacement - at YOUR option. (They can only refuse one and offer the other if it's highly disproportionate, but no CD costs even remotely enough to bring that argument into play.) Obviously, choose the refund, as of course any replacement would be very likely to be protected as well, and would be no better than the first.

It's a criminal offence to display a sign saying "No Refunds", or to have (and stick to) a no refunds policy.

If you get any problems, threaten to call Trading Standards, and if they persist, do so.

Re:go even further

Actually, right from the beginning, Philips has made a stand that these copy protected CD's are never sold with the 'CD-Compact Disc' label on it, since they do not comply with the Red Book standard Sony and Philips published back in 1982.

Ah, but they get around this by showing the CD "Text" logo... when they print it on the disk, it, to all intents and purposes, looks just like a normal CD logo, but you have to look very closely to see it's really the CD text one... so these disks have a CD logo on them, but they're not audio CDs, they're "text" CDs...

Re:Look for the logo

By visual inspection alone, it is impossible to look at a CD and know whether it is of the "corrupt" ilk.


I look for the Philips Compact Disc logo. If it's missing, then the product may be incompatible. I wish more people refused to buy stuff without the logo. It would enforce a standard upon the industry. Use the logo or don't sell.

The logo use requires technical standards to be met. When the standards are met, then it should play with no issues an any compliant device.

Look for the logo. Get the clerk to help you look.

And sell it under a misleading, standard name...

Since they are knowingly creating a corrupt version of what is or should be a standard format (compact disc)...

...they should go to jail?

Unfortuately that's not disproportionate by their own standards: There are countries where (for several years already) one could not go (or take one's kids!) to the movies without being exposed to media companies' threats of detention and rape [heise.de].

Re:go even further

I had to go through a few hoops to return what the store claimed was "non-returnable".

Interestingly, CDs (and other digital media) are exempt from the returnability requirements of a few laws (e.g. the Distance Selling Regulations, which require you to be

Re:go even further

Just to be clear: the Consumer Protection Distance Selling (Returns) Regulations allow you to return anything you buy at a distance (i.e. mail order, online, telephone) within 7 days of receipt for any reason, at no charge. They're aiming to give you the s

Re:go even further

You're talking of unconditional returnability. Even if you don't have unconditional returnability for a product (as in, you may return it and demand your money back without stating a reason, and without the product being faulty) you can offcourse still ret

Go the opposite way!

Wouldn't it be better to do just the opposite: "This media is free from DRM" or "Play it anywhere anyhow"?

Re:Go the opposite way!

Wouldn't it be better to do just the opposite: "This media is free from DRM" or "Play it anywhere anyhow"?

That exists. It's the old compact disc logo that you don't see on these DRM'd albums. That one already went too court too, the result being that CDs that didn't accurately conform to the standard aren't allowed to use the logo. There was even a Slashdot article [slashdot.org] at the time (beginning of 2002).

The trouble is that the logo doesn't have high enough brand recognition - people will buy silver disks in jewel cases and expect them to work the same as proper compact discs.

Anyway, now that you know, only buy genuine CD-DA disks! Look for the logo!

-- Steve

Re:go even further

Cigarettes in the UK have a large government health warning saying 'Smoking Causes Lung Cancer,' or similar. This takes up about a third to a half of the front of the packet.

I propose the same system for DRM's media. Not less than one third of the front

It's about time.

This is about as fair they can make it. Label it as crippleware so we can all know what not to buy.

Labelling suggestions...

1. "Infected with DRM".
2. "Statutory warning: DRM is injurious to your sense of fair-play".

etc... and meanwhile:

Why not label devices and products that support DRM? That would be a more effective step to 'inform' consunmers, one would've thought...

-

Crack information

They should go one step further and include information on how to crack the DRM on each label.

Demand a refund.

I have never bought anything that contained DRM, but if I did accidentally buy something, I would simply demand a refund.

Anything with DRM should have a message on it similar to the "WARNING: SMOKING KILLS" warning. I don't want a small label I have to search for - it should be big, clear, and standardised. The exact same logo/warning message should appear on every product. Something like "Warning: This product uses Digital Rights/Restrictions Management" would do the job.

Anyway, if anyone accidentally buys a product with DRM, they should be entitled to a refund. It is for all intents and purposes a defect, if you thought the product you were buying was a movie/music that you could use however you like.

Re:Demand a refund.

Isn't this exactly what the All Party Parlamentaric Group in the UK is proposing?

Re:Demand a refund.

It is for all intents and purposes a defect, if you thought the product you were buying was a movie/music that you could use however you like.

Except you can't. Re-read the copyright disclaimer when you play a DVD. By buying it, you have paid for the right

Re:Demand a refund.

Nonsense.

Whatever conditions appear when you play the disc are not part of your agreement to buy the disc. You bougth one copy of the DVD, you own it. No question about it.

It's still true that you cannot do everything you migth like with it. But that's because of copyrigth-law, and not because of any legal-sounding bullshit on the disc itself.

Copyrigth-law prevents you from, among other things perform the work in public and make new copies of the work.

Re:Demand a refund.

I have never bought anything that contained DRM,

Wow! I can't remember how long it's been since I've heard from someone who has never bought a single DVD (CSS).

Or any digital audio recorders (SCMS).

Never owned any videogames.

Doesn't subscribe to digital cable or satellite TV...

etc.

label

The label will spell out clearly just how easy it is to copy media
I'd suggest a color coded advisory system.

Whoopsiedoodles

"The group claims the industry is turning media into a rent system, rather than a purchase system." Uh oh, I hope they don't give out late fees (knowing Sony, they probably would). Or "ripped the songs and shared them all over the internet" fees.

Nice idea

Well, this is refreshing. I mean, lets face it, vendors are peddling crippled products for their convenience, not the customers'. Often, people don't even realize what they're buying, so it would be nice to have a notice.

This reminds me of a prediction I made about the iTMS - I think a lot of people are OK with paying $.99 per song *now*, but in a few years when perhaps they've gone through a couple more computers, and the iPod isn't as in-style as it is now, there will be a backlash of customers realizing that they paid for something they cannot easily use on "other" players (the burn-to-CD-and-rerip technique notwithstanding). I can visualize a similar diffculty with these crippled CDs - they will want to play them in a laptop or similar device that won't handle the DRM gracefully, and only then will they discover they paid for something only to find that it doesn't provide the value expected. It makes sense to notify the customer of what they are buying up front, rather than hiding it and hoping they never notice (obviously, some never will).

But, as my sister told me when we discussed this, they will likely chalk it up to "technology has moved on" and view it the same way they view VHS as not playing in DVD players, and simply rebuy the same movie/album, again. I sure hope that doesn't become the mainstream attitude - it will give the record companies and movie studios yet-another-reason to implement DRM any chance they get.

Or tapes

But, as my sister told me when we discussed this, they will likely chalk it up to "technology has moved on" and view it the same way they view VHS as not playing in DVD players, and simply rebuy the same movie/album, again.

Another even closer example is cassette tapes, many people had huge collections when the switch to CD's was made...

I'm not sure either how consumers will respond to the natural evolution of digital music. With ITMS stuff they would still be able to play it on a computer even if a newer kind of non-iPod came along that people really wanted, so in a way it's not as lost as tapes were after players were really phased out.

The question I have though is what would really come along that would be compelling enough to supplant the iPod for the market at large? The iPod grew because you could rip CD's and easily get them on your iPod where they are more accessible... and now the library grows through ITMS purchases (for many people, not all). So that would indicate that in the future the iPod lockin effect Apple seeks would indeed grab hold as many people's whole music libraries are digital now and they'd be more likley to buy a player that would work with it, probably a lot more likley. Between tapes and CD's you had the change to random access, but what is compelling about a change from one digital format to another? With video you can go with quality but with audio a lot of people really can't tell if an MP3 is better or worse than FLAC and so efforts for improved digital audio formats are stillborn, like SACD.

Once in digital form I don't see any given player offering so much of an advantage that it overcomes the simple ability to use all the music you already have. The only way for anyone to break Apple's hold on the market is to start selling all music in MP3's, then that allows people to choose whatever player they like and possibly have even more players, some of them more specialized. But the music industry itself is steadfast in actions that ensure Apple will remain at the helm - and they've just given Apple a few more years by contract to work on pulling the noose tighter.

Perhaps if eMusic really takes off we'd see more record companies finally wake up and sell MP3's (like Werkshop). If enough major labels did that it would free up the logjamm, and then Apple could release an official version of JHymn to unlock all the ITMS music so it would just be straight-up AAC.

Re:Nice idea

I don't think people did buy cassette copies of vinyl LPs they already owned. When cassette was king, everybody I knew bought vinyl LPs, taped them at home on their music centres [1970s] or midi systems [1980s], and listened mostly to the cassettes. And

Re:Nice idea

apparently you can install iTunes 5, open a new account, never upgrade the software, and JHymn will still work). Hmmm...maybe I should just try that.

Yes, that works. Older iTunes versions downloadable here [oldapps.com]. I went back to iTunes 4.9 myself, I think the S

Take a lesson from our Canadian friends...

Copy this media and face the wrath of Captainnnnnnnnnnnnn COPYRIGHT!

Three-Pronged Evaluation

I thought about this idea some time ago, and came up with a system where the media's friendliness was measured according to three aspects:

1. Ability to Copy
   The media should contain no measures to prevent or deter duplication, nor should it require measures on the part of the playback platform to support such deterrents.
2. Ability to Distribute
   The media should contain no measures to prevent or deter redistribution, nor should it require measures on the part of the playback platform to support such deterrents.
3. No Usage Monitoring/Metering
   Usage of the media should not be monitored, metered, or compromise the user's privacy or usage habits in any other way, nor should it require measures on the part of the playback platform to support such monitoring.

Each aspect would represent one leg of an iconic triangle. The triangle logo (and sub-permutations thereof) would be trademarked so it could only lawfully be used by the authority performing the evaluations. So all you'd have to do to know which media were safe would be to look for a complete triangle.

Schwab

Re:Three-Pronged Evaluation

1 and 3 are cool, but 2 kinda implies you can freely bung the music you bought onto emule for everyone to enjoy. Thats the bit that has really irked the content providers, and rightly so, as the supply of music is what pays for the whole business, artists

Definitely, DRM products should be labeled.

Definitely, DRM products should be labeled.

Notice, however, that genetically modified food is not labeled. That was accomplished by corrupting the U.S. government. Probably that will happen in the case of DRM, too.

Re:Definitely, DRM products should be labeled.

I have heard this (the GMO argument) or at least similar arguments before. This points to a problem with the term 'Genetically Modified'. Is there a better term? One that would make it clear when one is speaking of rat asshole corn, and not of things that occur in nature?

AllofMp3.com

In the old days I'd buy records and copy them to tape - only play the record once. Later I'd buy the cd's and rip 'em to mp3's. Until I bought a few 'unrippable' cd's. I can't be bothered searching for notices, stickers etc... got burnt to many times.
Now I just obtain unrestricted mp3's wherever I can eg AllofMp3.com. They say the return royalties to the artist, and that's good enough for me. I'm sure the RIAA etc.. are more than willing to sue if they think they have a case :-)

I'll buy from the labels when they make media that's usefull to me.

Knowledge is power

"If consumers even know there's a DRM, what it is, and how it works, we've already failed"

- Peter Lee, Disney executive [economist.com]

Re:Knowledge is power

I think the average person (say 99% and I am being optimistic - sigh!!) knows nothing about DRM and most likely will not care until they want to save their purchase to a different format because their original purchase is now obsolete, but by then it is fa

I have a suggestion for the label.

Something like

WARNING
This product contains popular culture known by the
state of California to cause brain damage. Always
wear earplugs and a blindfold when handling a disc.
In case of accidental exposure, you might as well
just kill yourself right there and get it over with.

rendered in twenty-six languages, just like the please-feed-this-bag-to-babies warning Microsoft prints on its keyboard packaging.

Their Website

I don't know why this wasn't in the summary, but they have a website here. [apig.org.uk]

Launch of the APIG report on DRM

Given that the launch of the All Party Internet Group report on Digital Rights Management only started at 10 pm and that the BBC printed this the day before it was out they must have got their hands on a advanced copy some how.

The All Party Internet Group will launch its report on Digital Rights Management at the British Library on Monday June 5th. A press release with the key aspects of the report's findings will be available on the day and will also be posted on the APIG website at that time, along with the report itself and all of the written and oral evidence received by the inquiry.

If you can not wait till 12:00pm UK time the Open Rights Group [openrightsgroup.org] (Think UK EFF) have a lot of information about the APIG DRM Public Inquiry [openrightsgroup.org] here.

More information on the press conference:

Balancing Opportunities in a Digital Age

Keynote speech: Derek Wyatt, Launch of the All Party Internet Group report on Digital Rights Management

10.00 - 12.00pm, 5th June 2006
British Library, Euston Road

Speakers Include:

• Lynne Brindley, Chief Executive, British Library
• Laurie Kaye, Laurence Kaye Solicitors
• Other speakers to be confirmed

As well as launching the All Party Internet Group report on Digital Rights Management, this seminar will look at the different opportunities, and threats, digitisation and new media provide for content creators and information providers, both public and private.

The great promise of the internet is to provide us with all the information and learning materials we might need. Free internet access is now within walking distance of close to 100% of the UK. In many senses, digital inclusion is no longer about access to technology but access to content.

Libraries and archives across the world are currently involved in a number of digitisation initiatives, enabling wider access to the works of cultural and historical importance they stores. At the same time, commercial content and information providers are seeing threats to their existing business models emerge. On the one hand, they wish their content to reach as wide an audience as possible, on the other the commercial model for providing such information is potentially undermined by both content aggregators and consumer demand for 'free' information.

Publishers and libraries both fulfil an important function in our democracy,widening access and inclusion to democratic debate and adding greatly to the public sphere. But all have commercial imperatives to consider, and intellectual property rights to enforce or comply with.

WARNING: Will NOT play on iPod

"WARNING: Will NOT play on iPod" will be understood by 99% of the population, resulting in lost sales.
"Contains ENHANCED DRM" will also be undersood by 99% of the population .. as something good .. it's ENHANCED, right?

Re:Evil geinus 101: Market it right

If they call it Dope-ass Rap Muthaf*ckas on CD packaging, I'm sure it would sell!

Re:Evil geinus 101: Market it right

I'm not entirely sure how they would do that.

What's so cool about...
1. Rated R? Because it's what only adults can see.
2. Explicit Lyrics? Because it's how only adults can talk.
3. DRM? Because it's, um.. adults can, um...

I'm sure they'll try, though.

Re:Evil geinus 101: Market it right

I'm sure some sold-out artists will do something like promoting DRM in their subliminal lyrics like;

"my juice is flowin' like a man with a mission / my words are blowing your minds into a submission /
you can't copy my style 'cuz you ain't an original / DRM on my record 'cuz my lyrics aren't replaceable"

Of course, there are reason why I am not a rapper... or a poet...

Re:At least someone is thinking about the consumer

When the first wave of "enthusiatic" DRM measures for CDs came out in the UK, a few major magazines took to making note of it in their album reviews. e.g.

Major Artist - New Album
Doesn't actually work in the office CD player due to "rights management". So we've no idea. The boxart is nice, though.
0/5

and so on.

Re:This needs to be serious

That, and I think any DRM media should be disallowed from being included within 30 feet of non-DRM music in physical stores, and they must be segragated in online stores. For example, a search for "music" must me mutually exclusive with "DRM music", so tha