How “Dirty” MP3 Files Are A Back Door Into Cloud DRM | Hacker News Reader

How “Dirty” MP3 Files Are A Back Door Into Cloud DRM

techcrunch.com

22 pointsthomasreggi8 comments

Wait, I thought the point of anti-DRM was to do whatever we want with the music. We can now do that. As far as I can tell this article calls anything that inconveniences rampant theft DRM.

Almost true. I can do anything with it apart from sending it over a not protected network (for example streaming from a shared drive on an open wifi). If anyone captures such file with a sniffer in such situation and publishes over p2p, it's my details that stay in the file.

On the other hand if anyone really cares about such contrived scenarios, they can just recode the file and tag it again - most simple watermarks should be removed that way. And since it's already an mp3, you're not losing that much quality on such operation.

On the other hand if anyone really cares about such contrived scenarios, they can just recode the file and tag it again - most simple watermarks should be removed that way.

Unless your name is Aphex Twin.

(http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2002/05/52426)

Is ripping your CD collection to play on a player theft or fair use? These proposals mark any file not bought from a marking service illegitimate and may be unplayable on the iPods of the future.

"Apple, Google and Amazon are all reportedly in discussions with big labels to provide a cloud music service. ... The labels, say our source, are demanding that a user can only stream music that is watermarked to their username. Change the username, or try to stream music that you’ve ripped from a CD, and those songs won’t play."

It's a stupid idea to propose that you wouldn't be able to access music you put into the cloud that didn't have your personal watermark in it.

Let's assume Johnny has an all-legal music collection dating back 10 years - consisting of iTunes (watermarked) MP3s, Amazon (non watermarked) MP3s and a ton of self-ripped MP3s from his old CD collection (non watermarked).

There is no way Apple, Amazon or anyone else would find success and adoption in a system that would only let him play the watermarked files purchased from iTunes but deny him playing the rest of his legal collection.

Anyone building such a system, regardless of the music industries demands, needs to find a new product manager.

This is really the only way to crack down on copyright issues, watermark each file with some information pining it to the buyer. When you combined this with the cloud, only or someone with your username can access the media (I'd bet they'd rather some biometrics). Interesting stuff.

Seems like a good compromise to me.

Shows how much you know.

I unknowingly buy tainted MP3s from a retailer. Under the doctrine of first sale I can re-sell these MP3s. So now I legally sell a full mp3 player or maybe lose it and someone hands it into the police but I never claim it. The new owner now has a means to do me harm.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com