Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Security Privacy Sony

Sony Pulls Controversial Anti-Piracy Software 389

An anonymous reader writes "Bowing to public outrage, Sony BMG has temporarily halted the use of its controversial anti-piracy software in all of its music CDs, the company said in a statement today. The move comes just a day after a top Bush administration official chided Sony and the entertainment industry for going too far: according to this story over at Washingtonpost.com, Stewart Baker, the Department of Homeland Security's policy czar warned would-be DRM makers: 'It's very important to remember that it's your intellectual property -- it's not your computer. And in the pursuit of protection of intellectual property, it's important not to defeat or undermine the security measures that people need to adopt in these days.' The Post has the full text and video of his commentary." We've reported on this story previously.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony Pulls Controversial Anti-Piracy Software

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 11, 2005 @04:22PM (#14011065)
    Check this out:

    http://www.webwereld.nl/articles/38285 [webwereld.nl]

    Someone in the Netherlands claims to have found certain strings from Lame's source code in Sony's app. Did Sony steal LGPL'd code?
  • by kevin_conaway ( 585204 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @04:25PM (#14011097) Homepage
    I believe US-CERT [us-cert.gov] falls under DHS [dhs.gov]
  • Homeland Security (Score:5, Informative)

    by QuaintRealist ( 905302 ) <quaintrealist&gmail,com> on Friday November 11, 2005 @04:25PM (#14011103) Homepage Journal
    The dept of Homeland Security has been worried for some time about the possibility of foreign nationals creating botnets which might allow them to ddos critical online national assets. That's what has them interested (and wierdly on the right side) in this case.

    So now, can Sony be pursued for violation of the USA/Patriot act? /me gets migraine from wishing ill on everyone involved
  • by max born ( 739948 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @04:30PM (#14011150)
    It's already happened. Sony Slammed with Suits over Rootkit [newsfactor.com]

    Among other things, Sony is specifically accused of fraud, false advertising, trespass and violation of state and federal statues prohibiting malware, and unauthorized computer tampering,
  • by cagle_.25 ( 715952 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @04:32PM (#14011180) Journal
    FTFA,

    "If we have an avian flu outbreak here and it is even half as bad as the 1918 flu epidemic, we will be enormously dependent on being able to get remote access for a large number of people, and keeping the infrastructure functioning is a matter of life and death and we take it very seriously."

    Makes reasonable sense to me.

  • Why DRM won't work (Score:5, Informative)

    by Arend ( 170998 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @04:36PM (#14011221) Homepage
    An interesting read at: http://www.changethis.com/4.drm [changethis.com] :

    "DRM punishes honest people!" ... "Without DRM, people will steal and artists won't get paid!" ... Usage of Digital Rights Management (DRM) has been hotly debated since a college student threatened to put an entire industry out of business with a little application he built in his spare time, Napster. In this transcript of a speech he gave at Microsoft's campus, Cory explains why DRM doesn't work, why DRM is bad for society, bad for business, bad for artists, and a bad move for Microsoft.

    Using Sony and Apple as examples of companies that are using DRM to *punish* consumers, he suggests Microsoft use the opportunity to once again champion users' rights. To follow our current path, Cory argues, is to stifle innovation and contradict the purpose of American copyright law: to promote the useful arts and sciences."

    I always find it very remarkable that the content industry treats the people who pay for their products -- in other industries also known as customers -- as criminals. People don't buy cd's because they want to screw the people who made them and make a zillion copies. Those people buy the damn things because they do *not* want to wast their time on copying!

    And I also don't think the way customers are treated is in the interest of the artists, in whose name this whole mess is being created. Take a look at an excellent article by Janis Ian, a respectable musician:

    http://www.janisian.com/article-internet_debacle.h tml [janisian.com]

    "They told me downloads were "destroying sales", "ruining the music industry", and "costing you money".

    Costing me money? I don't pretend to be an expert on intellectual property law, but I do know one thing. If a music industry executive claims I should agree with their agenda because it will make me more money, I put my hand on my wallet...and check it after they leave, just to make sure nothing's missing."

    For what it's worth: this is a women who made more then 25 albums and wrote some very well known songs for other artists. One of her most known songs is "At seventeen", which can be downloaded for free, just like some other songs of her:

    http://www.individualidade.com.br/janisian/mp3/jan isian_atseventeen.zip [individualidade.com.br]
    http://www.janisian.com/mp3_downloads.html [janisian.com]
  • by Arend ( 170998 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @04:42PM (#14011279) Homepage
    English translation at
    http://dewinter.com/modules.php?name=News&file=art icle&sid=215 [dewinter.com]

    "A computerexpert, whose name is known by the redaction, discovered that the cd "Get Right With The Man" by "Van Zant" contains strings from the library version.c of Lame. This can be conluded from the string: "http://www.mp3dev.org/", "0.90", "LAME3.95", "3.95", "3.95 ".

    But the expert has more proof. For example, the executable program go.exe contains a so called array largetbl. This is a part used in the module tables.c of libmp3lame."
  • Wait a minute... (Score:5, Informative)

    by chipster ( 661352 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @04:50PM (#14011345)
    FTFA:
    The Sony copy-protection software does not install itself on Macintosh computers...
    Either Sony is lying, or they have no idea of what their DRM vendor is up to [slashdot.org].
  • by timster ( 32400 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @04:51PM (#14011367)
    It's not like we should be surprised. Does nobody remember this from five years ago? Emphasis mine.

    "The [music] industry will take whatever steps it needs to protect itself and protect its revenue streams. It will not lose that revenue stream, no matter what. Sony is going to take aggressive steps to stop this. We will develop technology that transcends the individual user. We will firewall Napster at source - we will block it at your cable company, we will block it at your phone company, we will block it at your [ISP]. We will firewall it at your PC. These strategies are being aggressively pursued because there is simply too much at stake." --Steve Heckler, Sony senior VP, 2000
  • by rsmith-mac ( 639075 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @05:14PM (#14011559)
    AFAIK the current working theory is that those are strings the program is searching for, not that it's built with parts of LAME in it.
  • by God'sDuck ( 837829 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @05:15PM (#14011566)
    Will sony give removal instructions? Their downloadable "patch" only updates their rootkit, but doesn't uninstall it.

    yes, they will [sonybmg.com]. but you have to ask and wait on customer service to get the uninstall program, and once you've run it your computer can no longer play the CD (without reinstalling the rootkit).
  • Re:Wait a minute... (Score:5, Informative)

    by mean pun ( 717227 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @05:19PM (#14011604)
    Either Sony is lying, or they have no idea of what their DRM vendor is up to.

    The old /. article is misleading.

    Assuming there is Mac DRM software on the CD, a user still has to (1) explicitly start the installer (no autorun on Mac), and (2) type in a password to authorize the installation of root-priviledged software. Thus, for once Sony is correct and only mildly spinning.

  • by TheUnknownCoder ( 895032 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @05:40PM (#14011778)

    "We also intend to re-examine all aspects of our content protection initiative to be sure that it continues to meet our goals of security and ease of consumer use," Sony BMG added.
    I really can't believe this clown is saying that. Did they ever have a security goal in mind??? Does this statement mean that they continue to do business as usual???

    I went back to their FAQs [sonybmg.com], and found a few interesting lines:

    - You must log on to your computer with Administrator rights or Power User rights to fully use the disc.
    So I must be an admin just to listen to Ricky Martin??? Gimme a break.

    - To date, Apple has not been willing to cooperate with our protection vendors to make ripping to iTunes and to the iPod a simple experience.
    And hopefully it'll stay that way for a long, long, long time...

    - the protection components are never installed without the consumer first accepting the End User License Agreement.
    But nowhere in the EULA [sysinternals.com] it is mentioned what the user is in fact installing.

    - If at some point you wish to remove the software from your machine simply contact customer service through this link. You will, though, be unable to use the disc on your computer once you uninstall the components.
    Now this is another issue. Sony is marketing their discs as CDs [sonymusicstore.com], but their are not campatible with standard CD players??? They can't slap the CD [wikipedia.org] logo anywhere they want and get away with it. They have to follow the standards [wikipedia.org], or call their DRM discs something else and anounce in big bold letters that such disc may not be playable in all devices.


    Let's take advantage of this whole mess with Sony. Right now is the perfect time to create some awareness on the average Joe about the implications of DRM and how the insdustry is going way too far with it.
  • by amliebsch ( 724858 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @05:43PM (#14011812) Journal
    NOBODY goes to jail in civil suits, unless you refuse to pay your judgement, and usually not even then. You're thinking of a criminal case, in which case the culpability would fall on individual executives.
  • by SideshowBob ( 82333 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @06:04PM (#14011947)
    Unauthorized use of a computer is a criminal offense, I believe. See here:

    http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/1030_new. html [usdoj.gov]

    Sentences ranging from fines up to 20 years imprisonment.
  • by Tsiangkun ( 746511 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @06:05PM (#14011959) Homepage
    It might not hurt to use a page from turd blossom's handbook. Say, start an outrageous rumor on the web, and let SONY present the other side of the debate.

    I heard Sony might ship the PS3 infected with DRM [playstation.com] that will only allow the games to be played a set number of times before the license expires. I for one will not be upgrading my PS2 to the PS3, the risk is too great.
  • by d3ac0n ( 715594 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @06:59PM (#14012301)
    "In August of 1998, Clinton ordered an air strike against bin Laden and his compatriots because of "compelling information they were planning additional terrorist attacks against our citizens and others with the inevitable collateral casualties and .. seeking to acquire chemical weapons and other dangerous weapons." Many Republicans denounced the bombings as an attempt to divert attention from the Monica Lewinsky affair."

    Hmm.. was that the one where he ordered the missle bombardment of an aspirin factory, or the one where the beaurocratic shackles he had previously placed on the CIA, the FBI and the military caused the information about Bin Laden to arrive so late that we blew up an empty mud hut? Could you refresh my memory?
  • by j-turkey ( 187775 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @07:20PM (#14012468) Homepage
    but why can't people go to jail for these kinds of things? Why isn't this thousands of counts of unauthorized use of a computer?

    Perhaps we should consider the actual damage done. Is the damage so severe and widespread that someone needs to (essentially) pay with their life? I believe that many of the felons convicted for computer crimes probably shouldn't have been felony convictions in the first place. Most of these (in the early days, especially) were just kids trying to prove a point (or proof of concept). When caught, they were usually to make an example of by a DA or judge. However, just because it happened to one group of people, making the same thing happen to another group doesn't make it right.

    Do you really believe that it's fair to interpret these new laws so broadly and liberally hand out prison sentences?

    Is this really a terrible abuse of power? It didn't take long for the information about the rootkit to become publicly available, and those who care decided not to buy any of the Sony CD's. In this case, I don't think that there is some executive sitting in his huge leather chair manicly laughing about owning another PC every time that a user inserts a CD. This sounds more like a company (Sony) made an uninformed decision to purchase a bad technology. Microsoft is just as culpible for their administrator-rights-for-everyone and allowing autorun by default. Further, the end users should know better and turn autorun off, as well as not using superuser level rights for day-to-day use. Should Steve Ballmer be thrown into jail, or the users for making the 'net a less safe place? These could all be constrewed as negligent acts, especially by the standards that you're holding these businesses to.

    Before we get into this any further, I'll suggest reading up on Sarbanes Oxley [wikipedia.org]. It was put in place to hold senior management responsible for their financial indiscretions...mostly for financial record keeping, but really -- it was set up so that company officers couldn't claim igorance of their company's misdoings. So to answer your question, what you've asked for has been done. Perhaps you could give the law a chance to work. It does take a while. There will also be class action suits filed against the company. This will hurt management, as well as the shareholders.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 11, 2005 @08:45PM (#14012917)
    I'm sure everyone here must remember that Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) publicly endorsed malicious software to protect copyrights:

    http://anandtech.com/news/shownews.aspx?i=19802 [anandtech.com]

    "If that's the only way, then I'm all for destroying their machines"

    I guess Sony must have felt they got the green light from Mr. Hatch when they put this genius plot together... A Holes

    Hatch 4 President!

The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the `social sciences' is: some do, some don't. -- Ernest Rutherford

Working...