[font=Garamond][size=2][color=#666666]Hi I'm new to this forum and I realise that copy protection is pretty much against the MP3 grain. That said I read a post from 2006 http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/lofive...php/t49772.html
and wonder if there is any update on what is possible. I have an audio product I want to sell in parts of the world that are notorious for ignoring any type of copyright and yet having spent years working on this I don't want to give away my IP and need to make a return on my investment.
The point is is there anyway known to provide an MP3 file and restrict the numbers of copies made of it? i think the answer is no but any info gratefully received.
Thanks
Full Version: Copy protection on MP3 files
No. Maybe with WMA or DRM'd AAC, go talk to apple or microsoft, they might be able to do a deal.
QUOTE (woywegian @ Aug 3 2007, 19:36) 
copy protection is pretty much against the MP3 grain. That said I read a post from 2006 http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/lofive...php/t49772.html
and wonder if there is any update on what is possible. I have an audio product I want to sell in parts of the world that are notorious for ignoring any type of copyright and yet having spent years working on this I don't want to give away my IP and need to make a return on my investment.
The point is is there anyway known to provide an MP3 file and restrict the numbers of copies made of it? i think the answer is no but any info gratefully received.
and wonder if there is any update on what is possible. I have an audio product I want to sell in parts of the world that are notorious for ignoring any type of copyright and yet having spent years working on this I don't want to give away my IP and need to make a return on my investment.
The point is is there anyway known to provide an MP3 file and restrict the numbers of copies made of it? i think the answer is no but any info gratefully received.
Well, the answer is NO and will always be NO. You can make digital copying a bit difficult (like WMA; side effect: playing problems as well), but even then, anybody can pick your music from audio output of the player and re-digitalize it. There is a loss of quality, but still the quality of the copy can be fairly good if done carefully.
Probably final list of your options:
- Not release at all (no piracy, no income, no trouble)
- Release for free (no piracy, no or little income)
- Release for money, prohibit copying by words only (some income, much piracy)
- Release for money and copy-protect (still much piracy, less popularity, some income, make "good" customers angry)
PS: MP3 is not THE free format. It's patented, and has some DRM "enhancements" available as well. They are just not very popular, and don't really (unsurprisingly) work - don't prevent piracy.
QUOTE (DOS386 @ Aug 4 2007, 09:47)
Well, the answer is NO and will always be NO. You can make digital copying a bit difficult (like WMA; side effect: playing problems as well), but even then, anybody can pick your music from audio output of the player and re-digitalize it. There is a loss of quality, but still the quality of the copy can be fairly good if done carefully.
Exactly.
People that want the pirate version, would always get it.
On the first years of the PC, there where a lot of methods to protect normal copying, and so, special copy cards, special software, cracks appeared.
If your product is good enough, and there is desire for it, people would crack it and copy it.
But the people normally getting the cracked versions are the ones that won't get your product if they need to pay for it.
QUOTE (kwanbis @ Aug 4 2007, 19:12)
But the people normally getting the cracked versions are the ones that won't get your product if they need to pay for it.
Important point imho. While illegal copying has increased dramatically, sales stats of music distributors didnt decline much. What does that tell us? Right, people now simply consume more music than they are able or willing to pay for. A copy is not equal to a lost sale. Just because more music is consumed, doesnt automatically mean that people have more money in their pockets.
The main issue though, is that copying nowadays isnt related to much effort. Creation however is. Since people should be compensated for their effort, the logical answer would be: be compensated for the act of creation, not for the act of copying. Downside is that this is purely theoretical for now, because there is no infrastructure for this kind of economy.
- Lyx
[quote name='Lyx' date='Aug 5 2007, 09:24' post='508473']
[quote name='kwanbis' post='508446' date='Aug 4 2007, 19:12']
The main issue though, is that copying nowadays isnt related to much effort. Creation however is. Since people should be compensated for their effort, the logical answer would be: be compensated for the act of creation, not for the act of copying. Downside is that this is purely theoretical for now, because there is no infrastructure for this kind of economy.
- Lyx
[/quote]
Yes well that's the whole point isn't it, creation takes effort. If you are an independent such as myself you don't have the influence or money to hit a market hard and fast and absorb the pirated copies but you don't have choice.
Maybe DOS386 nobody should create anything or make it all for free and some beneveloent being will pay all the bills.
In my case I am going to stick with the words, hope that puts a few off, and include a digital signature woven into the product, knowing that, although I haven't the resources to do so, I could at least prove that the product was/is or was derived from mine in a court of law.
In my case I am not worrying about an individual copying the product but the case of a company in say China or Russia wholesale taking it and rebadging and presenting as their own.
As everyone says, not a whole lot can be done about it.
Thanks for sharing your opinions.
[quote name='kwanbis' post='508446' date='Aug 4 2007, 19:12']
The main issue though, is that copying nowadays isnt related to much effort. Creation however is. Since people should be compensated for their effort, the logical answer would be: be compensated for the act of creation, not for the act of copying. Downside is that this is purely theoretical for now, because there is no infrastructure for this kind of economy.
- Lyx
[/quote]
Yes well that's the whole point isn't it, creation takes effort. If you are an independent such as myself you don't have the influence or money to hit a market hard and fast and absorb the pirated copies but you don't have choice.Maybe DOS386 nobody should create anything or make it all for free and some beneveloent being will pay all the bills.
In my case I am going to stick with the words, hope that puts a few off, and include a digital signature woven into the product, knowing that, although I haven't the resources to do so, I could at least prove that the product was/is or was derived from mine in a court of law.
In my case I am not worrying about an individual copying the product but the case of a company in say China or Russia wholesale taking it and rebadging and presenting as their own.
As everyone says, not a whole lot can be done about it.
Thanks for sharing your opinions.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.