# The Christina Aguilera virus, and how the RIAA can prevent McAfee from mentioning it **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 1, 2001, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-christina-aguilera-virus-and-how-the-riaa-can-prevent-mcafee-from-mentioning-it/64005 "2001-05-01T23:01:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![capacitor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e47774/32.png) [@capacitor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/capacitor)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2001, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-christina-aguilera-virus-and-how-the-riaa-can-prevent-mcafee-from-mentioning-it/64005/41 "2001-05-04T22:12:41Z")
To be fair to sailor, a month ago I would find these potential scenarios my devious mind made up to be bordering on the ridiculous side as well. Not even executives without any scruples whatsoever wouldn’t think of these methods. Then, when libraries, libraries now, start to protest these rulings, I was compelled to look at them further. Now I am not advocating total relaxation on the user side of copyright material. There are parts of the DMCA that are quite clear about what to do and not to do in terms of pretecting copyright and how not to violate copyright. The problem is that the unclear parts of the law are interpreted in such a one-sided matter in favor of the content providers and legal distributors, that the legal concept of fair use on the public’s part has been effectively repealed. ---
**Author:** ![SimonA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@SimonA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SimonA)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2001, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-christina-aguilera-virus-and-how-the-riaa-can-prevent-mcafee-from-mentioning-it/64005/42 "2001-06-15T13:26:15Z")
Fundamentals: musicians can sell you their music over the web if they prefer. Some do. Others want money. In my experience muso’s are like programmers, they want copyright enforced - but only on their own works. What is this thread trying to prove? That MS et al are only in it for the money? No, really? Save your breath and organise an alternative market for the next generation of musicians, maybe use the shareware model. Charge $1, pay the artist 10c per copy. Off you go… > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by The Ryan \* > \*\*Do programs use a different type of bits or something? I mostly use my modem for downloading data. If I want to download programs, should I get a new modem? \*\* Ryan, think about someone taking dictation. Some of what he hears gets written down, other things don’t (“Do you mind staying util we’re finished?”) Still other words like ‘New paragraph’ are called _metacommands_ and should be interpreted carefully. Context is all. The crux of the CD issue is that your old HIFI CD player probably treats everything it reads off disk as music data, and if a CDROM may blow your speakers with noise. A DVD or computer CDROM drive however, _expects_ to read program commands like autorun, but can play just music if that’s all there is on the disk. So music _could_ be sold on a CDROM with a copy protection program which checks up on you first. But would these CDROMs play on a HiFi? Guess they must, else everyone would buy the regular ones. ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2001, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-christina-aguilera-virus-and-how-the-riaa-can-prevent-mcafee-from-mentioning-it/64005/43 "2001-06-16T23:12:39Z")
Just for everone’s information: the “Crack SMDI” contest came in two phases. Phase One consisted of an attempt to crack the watermarking schemes on a number of audio tracks, and involved no restrictions on publication of methods used. At this, Prof. Felton suceeded completely. Phase Two consisted of additional tracks, but had no objective measurement of success, which was pretty unscientific, and which would allow Felton to learn nothing new. To participate in Phase Two, researchers had to accept restrictions on publication rights. By declining to participate in Phase Two, Prof. Felton retained the legal right to publish, yet was still attacked by RIAA’s legal team. From [The Register’s](http://www.theregister.co.uk) SDMI Crack archive: > [@](#): > > A prize of $10,000 has been offered to any hacker who can break through the security put in place by the Secure Music Digital Initiative (SDMI), a coagulation of 175 companies from the IT, electronics and music industries… > > …SDMI’s head honcho Leonardo Chiariglione issued a challenge to hackers to remove the watermarking and other protection systems from each song. The challenge is posted in “An Open Letter to the Digital Community” on the SDMI site He said: “Attack the proposed technologies. Crack them. By successfully breaking the SDMI protected content you will play a role in determining what technology SDMI will adopt.” Despite all four schemes being used in the contest being soundly cracked, SDMI watermarking schemes were never changed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-christina-aguilera-virus-and-how-the-riaa-can-prevent-mcafee-from-mentioning-it/64005.md?page=2)