What exactly is the problem with Copy Controlled CDs?

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by Jack White, Nov 2, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jack White

    Jack White Senior Member Thread Starter

    Location:
    Canada
    I understand that Copy Controlled CDs do not play in some CD players, especially computers.

    And I understand that some people are upset that they cannot (easily) transfer and copy the songs from a CC CD.

    But, does the CC information on the CD actually affect the sound of the recordings (as some people believe it does)?
     
  2. House de Kris

    House de Kris VVell-known member

    Location:
    Texas
    Most of the schemes for copy protection that I know of don't mess with the audio data. So, no, it shouldn't have any impact on sound. It does seem a little silly that people get upset they can't copy a copy controlled CD, huh?
     
  3. biggerdog

    biggerdog Senior Member

    Location:
    MA
    If you put the CD in your computer, it installs a program that's difficult to detect or remove, and slows down the computer slightly. It only degrades your machine's performance by a couple of percent. But I think it's an ominous trend.
     
  4. GregY

    GregY New Member

    Location:
    .
    No.

    I'm legally allowed to back up CD media.

    I also don't like being told what I can do with something after I've paid for it. If I stay within my legal rights, I don't need a large corporation dictating what I can and can't do.
     
  5. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    The sound quality is not the point. It's that they are now planting stealth software on your computer without your knowledge or consent, and that software intergrates with the operating system. They can also make it easier for malicious code to attach themselves to them. This software, called a rootkit, is potentially dangerous as a class. Never mind that installing software without consent is illegal!

    If a disc cannot play on all equipment that it is supposed to, you are not getting what you paid for.

    Because this software changes the way your OS behaves and operates, and that it is depesited without your consent, the companies could be sued, and probably will.

    The record companies have finally really gone too far!
     
  6. Ed Bishop

    Ed Bishop Incredibly, I'm still here

    It is a big deal to me, and beyond the rootkit situation. How am I supposed to burn a copy for the van(which would be more prone to scuffs and scratches in spite of my best efforts to avoid them?), or use tracks to make mix CD-R's or other custom comps? I can understand the problem with new music that sells millions; I'm not unsympathetic to the label's wish to curb piracy. But when copy protection extends to vintage titles with a limited audience, you gotta wonder if they've lost their minds.

    That they've lost untold millions by not releasing certain vintage music apparently is irrelevant compared to making trouble for those willing to buy what they do put out. Copy protection, relative to oldies, is a ridiculous waste of time--hacks will be found, if they haven't been already--and a detriment to what sales there are to be had once word gets out and people like us get royally pissed--and vocal.

    :ed:
     
  7. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    Yes! How may people are going to mass copy Denice Williams or Dion and put them up on Kazzaa? People who use those sites are looking for the latest Santana or Alecia Keys! Copyguarf them, not Dion! Geez! Leave the oldies alone, for cryin' out loud!
     
  8. Metoo

    Metoo Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Spain (EU)
    While what you mention might be OK to many (or not), there is one thing I just haven't been able to get over: the purchase a non-marked copy-protected CD which I have not been able to play on my standalone player of choice or on my computer (no interest in copying it). I find this to be preposterous!

    I did fin later on that I could listen to it on my second player, but by then I was so p****d off that I haven'r played the album much. BTW, the CD was Tears For Fears' latest album.
     
  9. House de Kris

    House de Kris VVell-known member

    Location:
    Texas
    Before this gets out of hand, GregY and others, believe me I'm on your side and fully support what is being said here. I was just making a comment on the, rather ironic, wording in the original poster's words. To remove the emotion, substitute the word "widget" for "CD." Then we get things like, "Man, I'm really disappointed I can't copy this copy protected widget." Sounds a bit odd, right?

    This has nothing to do with the insidious wrecking of consumer's computers, the original poster was asking about sound quality. There are plenty of other threads that talk about trashing computers, or copy guarded CDs that aren't labeled as such. WRT the inability of some CD players to play some copy protected CDs, yes, I will amend what I originally wrote, that IF a CD is playable, then there should be no impact on the sound quality of the copy protected CD. Just trying to keep true to the original question.

    Personally, I'd love to see a class-action suit against all the big labels doing all these shenanigans trying to copy guard a medium that wan't intended to have such technology tacked on.
     
  10. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    I say to simply confirm that the sound quality is unaffected seems to ignore and condone this practice of depositing software on computers without permission.

    We realize that there are those who have zero interest in playing a CD on a computer or copying it for whatebver reason. They may not even care if the disc doesn't play on everything it's supposed to. But there is a bigger picture here.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine