Vote

iwould never kowingly buy a restricted cd;but according to fatchucks.com i already own 2.

Would avoid it unless it could play in my car computer, and home theater DVD player

As long as it sounds at least as good as an unrestricted use CD. Who will tell us? Will Stereophile?

What about the Fair Use Doctrine? Does any company care about keeping to the spirit as well as the letter of the law? I still purchase vinyl records by the way. No audible watermarks, only pops, hiss, and crackle.

Just bought the new Elvis Costello CD. Does't work on my Linn player but it works on an Akai portable and the DVD player. There is no indication of restricted use so I ask what's up?

I have been boycotting CD purchases for months, out of concern that a CD I purchase might possibly be corrupted. My CD purchases used to average about $50 per month. Now they are zero. It's my money. The recording industry will not get any of it unless the product is exactly as I want it.

Restricting my capability of making my own compilation CD's, as well as the type of consumer electronic appliances I can play them in, will make my decision to Not purchase this type of disc very easy. I strongly believe and support Phillips, on insisting the Music companies provide warning labels on this type of disc, stating that it is not a (redbook) CD, so that a consumer can make an informed choice.

I guess it would all depend on if I could hear the protection... The other option is that I may buy one unknowingly. I am not a fan of this type of copywright protection, but but but, sorry I lost my train of thought, but I am sure there was some logic to this argument that was fleetingly obvious to me. Maybe Sony could refresh me!

WHY?

I pay for a CD and have restriction to use it? Does a car company tell you where to drive your car and where not?

These copy-protected (read: corrupt) CDs are inferior product not guaranteed to be playable on any equipment. Why would I want to blow my money on that? If I accidentally buy a corrupt CD, I will immediately return it as DEFECTIVE as well as writing the record company to let them know that selling a copy-protected CD that isn't clearly marked as such, and passes itself off as a real CD (read: red book spec CD) COULD be a violation of the law. We shouldn't have to put up with this!

they crack it anyway

if i own any, i don't know it

The only reason I would by a "copy protected" CD would be to return it after copying it with a note about how ineffective this was to the record label, (and including the copied disk). I think that is a great protest form.

I'll never buy a restricted or hardly protected CD, first because this is not a Red book CD I can play on any player. In second place probably restriction is adding noise and alteration to the sound which hadn't be present. I'm paying for clean and pure music (pretty bad quality are average CD's) not for music plus noise, jitter and extra bits.

Why should I pay to be restricted in my usage of it..

I thought by law we were allowed to be able to make a copy for ourselves. How are they allowed to restrict our rights with no consequences for them??

i play them on my computer while i'm working, and worry about decreased sound quality on my home stereo

1 - Inadvertantly. 2 - Music I just must have and it's not available on vinyl. But if there was a glitch, I'd raise all kinds of hell about it, not that it would matter.

If recording companies stop charging outrageous prices people might start paying for music again.

No, no way, never. I have a Linn Knekt "music server". You copy your CDs to it's hard drives and then play your own playlists from your entire collection. Copy protection would render my CD player and all music servers useless. This is a total and complete violation of my fair use. If I buy a restricted CD and it does not work on my "music server", then it goes back to the store the next day for a refund. "Music servers" are the next logical step in CD players, this technology must not be thwarted.

As long as the sound quality is not degraded I dont mind.

Perfect Sound Forever now becomes Corrupted Sound Forever with copy protected CDs that are really not "CDs" insofar as they violate Red Book CD standards. By law all such CDs should not be labled with the compact disc insignia but marked as copy protected discs.

Since the bulk of my purchases is classical or old (>20yr) popular music, really not an issue for me, since restricted disks are current "hits" directed to the kids.

Apparently, the consumer is a plague against the recording industry.

Fortunately, most of the artists I like are on smaller labels or independents, and I can readily pass up the "big name" popular releases with restricted use. If they want restricted use disks, issue SACD's- preferablly dual layer hybrids, though!

I just added Fat Chuck's that I found on this week's soap box to my Internet favorites. When Checking out this site, much to my displeasure, I found Celine Dion's new CD on the copy protected list. I would have bought it but now it is big NO! I use two DVD players to feed digital to my two systems using MSB Gold DACs. If I understand correctly my DVD players may not be able to read her new, restricted CD. I do plan to go to my local music retailer where they have CD players the customers can use to listen to CDs before they make a purchase. I am a "frequent flyer" at this store and they let me plug my Sennheiser HD580 headphones directly into thier players. I am very interested to see if the sound quality is effected to a degree that I can hear. I may even bring it home to see if my DVD and MSB can read it. Of course, I will take it out and see if the Alpine system in my Lincoln LS will play it. Word is some car players won't play these restricted CDs either. Of course, my friends at the store will know up front I am not going to buy the CD. We have talked about this before.

I will buy a restricted- use CD if it doesn't inhibit the sound quality. I don't understand the point of this "restricted use", because all I have to do is use an analog output, and i can record the "copy-proof" CD onto a computer. It would be hard to tell the difference, because of the limitations of the MP3 format that it would most likely be converted into.

It would have to something I really, really wanted. It's not like I'm going to knock it to cassette any more.

If I purchase a car does the manufacturer have the right to tell me I can't put it in my garage (computer/mp3 player). Making bootleg copies is wrong and the companies and law enforcement should go after those who make mass copies of cd's. But I must be among the few who only make the copies for use in my car and keep the originals for my home system. The music companies must be suicidal.