Vote

we can't go against the tech. But we can say what we like and will buy!

I will boycott any watermarking. There is no way I'm going to imprint personal information about myself, my credit-card number and address, etc., onto all music. No way, no how, no matter what.

Vinyl is my medium - so what

Music lovers, whether "self-proclaimed audiophiles" or not, should receive as much of the music that originally exists as faithfully as possible.

If this helps to deter the amount of black-market or illegal copies, then great. if not, then what is the point? I am still upset that the music industry has to make a format war over DVD-A and SACD. It makes me upset to the point that I do not want to support either one . . . or even think about watermarking.

The fact that it can be detected by trained listeners means it is audible. How can this be allowed to happen? I do not want my music tampered with. What are "normal listening conditions"? Equipment as good as mine or yours? I think not. Maybe if the music companies would reduce the prices of the software (music) to a reasonable level, there would not be a market for pirated versions. I would certainly purchase more CDs, tapes, etc. of music I already have on LP if the prices were cheaper. I have a significant LP collection. Thank God it was not copy-protected or watermarked.

What the hell are you talking about? I listen to mostly vinyl anyway.

Sorry, but SDMI is audible if you know what to listen for. Once you do, it is annoying.

...Big Brother is watching! What's next? Music that can only be played by the purchaser's matching fingerprint??!!

Who cares? is what I think relative to what the giant mass merchants (e.g., Sony) do. They control the world; we are mere puppets. All products are planned to be obselete anyway. Can you say Betamax or 8-track or reel-to-reel or maybe Elcassette?

Although I understand that somesort of protection against piracy is necessary for the music industry, I find that any method that might compromise the sound quality of the new high-resolution formats in the slightest way is absolutely unacceptable.

Why waste space that could be used to encode music?? Paranoid companies should price their products so there is no need for copy protection. Besides, it ain't going to stop those enterprising pirateers. Only recording companies can stop these entrepreneurs—by selling the public recordings at a fair price. What don't they understsnd about this? Bring on digital FM. Better yet, let's sue this monopoly.

Even assuming inaudibility, the one-copy limit is an outrage. There are a lot of legitimate reasons why the original owner might want to copy a disc, or portions of a disc, for personal use.

Evil, everything the record companies does make me nervous anymore. First it was the home recording of the cassette they didn

WITH HI RESOLUTION CLOSE OR EQUILE TO THE MASTERS I UNDERSTAND.

One would think the entertainment industry would learn from their past attempts to limit proliferation of technology. Apparently, they still don't get it. I do not believe one iota of recording-industry or hardware-manufacturer claims that the watermarking will be "inaudible." With the Internet taking up more of people's time, and the apparent implosion of the popular music industry, it may all be moot.

Another proof of the music industry's contempt for its customers

I'd have to hear it first, although this "inaudible" claim somehow reminds me of the Copy Code Notch idea of years ago.... But it seems to me that copy protection of any sort would not be so necessary if recordings were less expensive to start with....

anything that corrupts integrity of the original master should be sent to the tar pits!

What happened to the presumption of innocence!

The content creators'/owners' need to particiapte in the revenue. If they don't, there won't be any content. High quality and conviendient digital distribution is good for consumers. So, this should be a win/win situation.

First, I,m paying for something I don't need. Second, it's only a recording of a piece of music anyway. Give me a break. I am really getting sick of the whole thing. I feel like selling all my equipment and taking up a new hobby. But when I put on a record and relax in the sweet spot I realize that new formats and watermarking and sampling rates and all the other causes of digital angst can't touch me. I do not care one bit.

how am I supposed to make vertually perfect copies with this protection?

It won't work anyway -- It's meant to stop "music piracy", ala MP3, and every good encoder out there will absolutely destroy a watermark.

You know, alot of us thought DIVX was a bad idea and therefore we didn't buy it. Subsequently, it died an expensive death. Same with MD(and with MP3 I hope). Just because manufacturors and retailers push it with big ad campagnes, doesn't mean that we have to support it. We control the market and not them. If you don't like the idea of watermarking, then don't fall into the old "gotta have it RFN, before my neighbor gets it" mind-set and don't support it with your money. They'll do as we want, or we won't buy it.

some geeks will figure out how 2 hack around this anyways~~