I’ve never been able to find how to get around the serial number (and, as a matter of fact, have been unable to verify for certain that it is a serial number. Some sources state that it’s a different coating on the CD. It doesn’t look like that, but…)
There’s an mind-bogglingly easy way to get around the need to purchase Audio CDRs (without any sort of piracy whatsoever) for one of those units that someone here suggested to me:
[ul]
[li]Buy one (1) grossly overpriced Audio CDRW[/li][li]Copy 65 year old record that you’re legally allowed to make an archival copy of onto Audio CDRW.[/li][li]Take Audio CDRW to computer and copy it to a “normal” CD[/li][li]Erase Audio CDRW and start again.[/li][/ul]
The beauty of this is that it’s all perfectly legal and moral (I wish I could take credit for it!)
I have no obligation to pay royalties to back-up an album I’ve already paid for.
Look in section 2-4, esp. starting at 2-4-3. 4 and 1/2 audio copy protection schemes are discussed. Links to other info is also given.
There is some concern expressed on http://www.Slashdot.org that one or more of these schemes might violate RedBook standards. I.e., the discs should not be legally sold with the “CD-Audio” logo. Also, some might actually damage (cheap) audio CD equipment. One method in the FAQ prevents users from using the digital cable connection on a fancy CD player, thereby “enhancing” listening pleasure.
The FAQ is brief on much of this since the protected discs are just now appearing. In 6 months they will all be either cracked or found to cause so many store returns that the companies that purchased licenses for these methods will have to write off quite a few $s.
Note, that if any one of these or future schemes is found to work, the next generation of firmware for computer CD-ROMs will work around them. Most are made in the PRC where copyrights are viewed more "generously.
Remember, if a computer chip in a $40 CD-Player can read the bits off before correcting and sending to a D-to-A converter, so can a future CD-ROM (sans correction and D-to-A conversion). The raw bytes will be sent down the IDE cable where software can manipulate the bytes into the right form.
At this point the music companies will give up on CDs and we’ll all “have to buy The White Album again”.
The authors homepage dates from March of last year, which I assume is the last time the program was updated and long before this new CD protection scheme was announced. There are literally dozens of freeware CD ripping and encoding programs available on the Internet and through alt.comp.freeware
The program is slow and a bit clunky but it works. I don’t have any of these new copy-protected CDs to try out, so I deliberately fed it some of my old CDs that were in really rough shape and it didn’t have any trouble extracting the tracks. (The pops and clicks were still there, but there is other software available to remove that as well).
(This idea of deliberately corrupting small sections of CDs reminds me of the old Commodore 1541 disk drive protection schemes. Some of these schemes involved corrupting sectors on a floppy disk in a particular pattern and then thrashing the stepper motor on the drive to seek them out within a particular time period. Some of these schemes were so bad that the drive head would actually get knocked out of alignment over time.)
As if this “copy protection” business is anything more than a corporation wasting millions to prevent a few people from ripping MP3s. I can think of a LOT of better ways that R&D money could be spent if this is the best they can come up with to thwart the average consumer.
Hell, with just the idea tagline I can already think of a dozen different ways this will not be affecting my CD-to-MP3 habits.
Nice try… in the future, try to spend your money on more important things for your company. Like magic markers.
Here is the most comprehensive discussion I have found to date of the process my OP asked about.
http://www.cdrfaq.org/faq02.html#S2-4
Here is some additional information about another copy protection scheme music and entertainment companies are pursuing.
“THE RECORD INDUSTRY is experimenting with a new strategy for protecting CDs from being copied in CD burners or on computers. Unlike previous anti-copying measures, this plan will place two versions of an album on a single disc: one in standard CD form, modified so that it can’t be transferred to a computer hard drive, and another in Microsoft’s Windows Media Audio digital format, rigged so that files can be copied to a PC, but with some restrictions on how they can be used.”
Fail to see how any of these processes will actually render consumers unable to trade and share music files on the internet. Distributing the CDs with the songs ALREADY in a Windows Media Format will make such a process even easier.
True, WMF isn’t MP3; however, there are various programs (even freeware versions) that will convert between the file formats. As someone who writes software, I can tell ya that individual data files (WMF, MP3, etc) that contain music data don’t have ‘embedded restrictions’. One way to look at it is to say that a file is just a package of data, and the software will determine what to do with the data. It’s up to a program to determine how to play an MP3 or WMF file, or even to disregard any restrictions placed in it. On the other hand, if we’re talking about file encryption, that’s a different thing. Certainly, CD companies can choose to encrypt a music file, but that would be pointless considering they will be played on the same platform regardless of whether or not they’re on the CD. Proprietary file formats are a silly notion, as well, considering the variety that would be needed to keep up with the latest conversion technologies. And, as always, an end consumer can simply play the music CD in Windows and record from the mixer, if all else fails. This is why I don’t see how this is ever going to work.
