"Magic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> James Tisdale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > If this CD is going to have a compression-proof watermark, how will the MD
> > get "around" this watermark?
> >
>
> The way I read it, the compression proof part just means the watermark can
> still be read after compressing the audio, not that it will stop you being
> able to record the music in a compressed format.
>
Right, recording to MD won't disturb the watermark. But since MD is
not SDMI compliant, it will ignore the watermark and keep on recording
audio (analog or digital) just the way it always has. Note however
that you can't get raw audio on or off of an MD, it's always slightly
corrupted (i.e. suffers generational loss) during each transfer. If an
MD unit allowed you to get at the raw audio losslessly, it would have
to be SDMI compliant (likely meaning that it would only play audio
that you owned, and your music wouldn't play in a friend's unit).
Rick
p.s. Rambling side issue (OT): How should it work, "One artist one
vote"? If so, then all the millions of amateur artists will happily
vote out copy protection being put in place "for the sake of the
artists". What do we have right now, "One fan (one dollar of recording
revenue) one vote"? If so, things will likely remain as they are. How
will this get decided? Well, to the extent that artists embrace open
MP3 through the Net, the Internet really could change everything.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
