Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Security Your Rights Online

Sony Settlement Start of DRM Protection Act? 258

Posted by CmdrTaco from the this-ought-to-get-interesting dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Sony BMG and a group of class action lawyers have reached a provisional settlement in the U.S. Sony rootkit class actions. Sony will pay cash compensation and give away free downloads from a choice of music download services including Apple iTunes as part of the deal. The settlement includes a host of restrictions on future Sony DRM use, which Michael Geist argues provides the starting point for a future Digital Rights Management Protection Act."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony Settlement Start of DRM Protection Act? More

Sony Settlement Start of DRM Protection Act?

Comments Filter:

  • Outrage! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Concern ( 819622 ) * on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:29PM (#14361057) Journal
    These people literally have their boot on Sony's throat. This could be a watershed moment in the "IP" war for individual rights. And instead, what do we get?

    • Sony does not have to undo their vandalism to anyone's computers or provide cash compensation for their victims to do so (although they may have to fix unintentionally created security vulnerabillities)
    • Future similar DRM schemes are legitimized as long as they are disclosed on the jewel case and in the EULA, and an uninstaller is provided
    • The role of the EULA in this fiasco is implicitly legitimized (the
      entire concept of a "EULA," for those few who don't know, is largely an obnoxious legal fiction - sans UCITA, anyway)
    • Collection of personal information in media products is legitimzed ("only for purposes of providing enhanced functionality" - LOL!)


    This is a love letter to Sony, and a "go ahead" signal to expand "open season on your computer" into the entire market. It is a shocking, audacious outrage, and I have no doubt Sony et al would love to see it made the basis for future statute.

    Ladies and gentlemen, this is it. We have to immediately mobilize and derail this "settlement."

    This is not settled until Sony repairs each vandalized computer... and then we can talk punitive damages...

    • Re:Outrage! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Yahweh Doesn't Exist ( 906833 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:36PM (#14361093)
      solution: never buy another Sony product for doing what they did, and never buy another MS product for enabling them to do it. most people aren't focusing any of the blame on MS, but imo they should since this is exactly the sort of thing people have warned MS's crap security and disrespect of the user would lead to.

      but are you really prepared to make the effort necessary to prevent this happening again?

      most people aren't bothered enough, and I didn't buy Sony/MS before this happened anyway, so can hardly claim I'm doing much either.

      • Re:Outrage! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Concern ( 819622 ) * on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:49PM (#14361166) Journal
        I'm a hotdog vendor.

        If I think you're stealing my hotdogs, and I break into your house and spy on you to find out, and while I'm there I take piss on your carpet, your solution is not to... not buy my hotdogs anymore?

        Fuck no, I go to jail. I'm "moderately" suggesting Sony could skip harsher criminal penalties that would be leveled at non-mega-rich, non-multinational-corporation ordinary people who tried to do what they did, and at least get a proportionate financial penalty.

        • Re:Outrage! (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Yahweh Doesn't Exist ( 906833 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:54PM (#14361190)
          >your solution is not to... not buy my hotdogs anymore

          yes, because at the end of the day the only thing that will make Sony/MS/whoever change is if people stop buying their products. legal fines are just the cost of doing business, and U.S. courts have shown repeatedly that they aren't prepared to punish businesses properly. everyone who takes part in this particular class action will just end up with yet more Sony products.

          • Re:Outrage! (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Concern ( 819622 ) *
            U.S. courts have shown repeatedly that they aren't prepared to punish businesses properly.

            True. But by studying history we can see that the judicial system is acutely aware of it's social context, and (as has happened in the past) if we stop taking it lying down, we will find that the courts can hold even the most powerful men and women accountable once they see the climate for doing so is favorable.
          • So we're not allowed to want the U.S. courts to punish businesses properly, then? 'Cause I'll happily do that and boycott Sony!

          • Re:Outrage! (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Shanep ( 68243 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @06:27PM (#14361345) Homepage
            yes, because at the end of the day the only thing that will make Sony/MS/whoever change is if people stop buying their products.

            But the problem with this, is that people WON'T stop buying Sony products. Sure a few die hards like myself and maybe you might (I still refuse to buy French products 10 years after the nuclear testing in Mururoa Atoll). But look at the situation right now. Most Sony consumers right now are probably either unaware of the rootkit (even though it has had so much mainstream press) or don't understand what the story means for themselves or what it reveals about Sony. That is a sad situation right now while this actually is news. The latest cool Sony gadget will come out and people will buy them TODAY and tomorrow. A few people won't buy them and Sony won't give a crap. They would just be a barely measurable short lived notch on their profits.

            Power to the people? I would love to beleive that is true, but it seems "the people" don't care about much more than their own comfort and only a few of them are made uncomfortable by situations like this.

            My biggest dissapointment is "the people". They have the power, but don't exercise it. So I guess they don't really have the power.

            • Re:Outrage! (Score:4, Funny)

              by Rob the Bold ( 788862 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @08:46PM (#14361954)
              I still refuse to buy French products 10 years after the nuclear testing in Mururoa Atoll

              This is harder than you think: first you have to find French products to not buy, only then you can start not buying them.

            • Re:Outrage! (Score:5, Insightful)

              by ultranova ( 717540 ) on Friday December 30, 2005 @04:08AM (#14363515)

              A few people won't buy them and Sony won't give a crap.

              Sony is incapable of giving a crap, since it doesn't really exist; it's just legal fiction, a figment of several people's collective imagination. For the same reason, Sony did nothing wrong, since a fictitious entity is incapable of doing anything; someone working at Sony did.

              What I'm getting at is that it's completely pointless to punish corporations. They don't exist so they can't be punished in any meaningfull sense. What you want is to imprison the persons responsible for these decisions. Throw the entire Sony leadership into prison and make them pay millions in fines personally, and perhaps the next bunch will think twice about what is and what isn't acceptable behavior.

          • Re:Outrage! (Score:5, Insightful)

            by funkdancer ( 582069 ) <funky@NoSpaM.funkdancer.com> on Thursday December 29, 2005 @08:41PM (#14361925)
            YMMV, but I was tempted to buy a record the other day - it was not a Sony. Having passed that, looking closely at the jewel case, however, I couldn't see if it was actually a CD. So I assumed it was DRMed and dropped the thought.

            The case is this: I won't buy any "CD" that is not a CD. Add to the fact that there's a lot less interesting albums, or maybe the interesting albums are all in hiding from the one hit wonders they'd rather have us buy, and I'm amazed sales haven't dropped more than they've done.

            Whatever the reason, I buy less music and spend more on online games like World of Warcraft. At one stage I used to buy several CDs every week, meaning I probably have about 400 or 500 CDs in my total collection. In the past two years however I've bought less than a handful.

            The publishers do everything in their power to piss off their once faithful customers, what do they really expect? It is much easier and safer for me to torrent a new album and burn it to a CD - not that, as said, I can find that much of value anymore. If I did, and I had some EASY SURE-PROOF way of knowing that it didn't contain any DRM, I'd much rather be buying it.

        • Re:Outrage! (Score:5, Interesting)

          by bblboy54 ( 926265 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @06:45PM (#14361418) Homepage
          My dad told me of a story of back in the 60's and 70's when he used to work for Howard Johnsons. When you were hired you were specifically told that you would not be paid overtime as the law states. Yes, this was illegal, and yes, they got fined.... but the reality of the situation was that it was cheaper for them to pay their fine every month than to pay overtime to all of their employees.

          The only way to show them that you dont agree is to quit.... The same rule applies here.
        • Yeah, 'cuz that rug tied the room together, man.
      • solution: never buy another Sony product for doing what they did, and never buy another MS product for enabling them to do it. most people aren't focusing any of the blame on MS, but imo they should since this is exactly the sort of thing people have warned MS's crap security and disrespect of the user would lead to.

        Here on Slashdot, we can turn *anything* into Microsoft-bashing, even when it has nothing to do with them !

        • Re:Outrage! (Score:4, Informative)

          by Yahweh Doesn't Exist ( 906833 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @06:16PM (#14361299)
          1. MS doesn't take security seriously. Has broken permissions.
          2. People point out Windows's flaws, dismissed as MS bashers.
          3. Company uses MS's broken permissions to threaten security.
          4. People point out Windows's flaws, dismissed as MS bashers.
          5. Rinse and repeat.

          • Re:Outrage! (Score:3, Informative)

            by drsmithy ( 35869 )
            1. MS doesn't take security seriously. Has broken permissions.

            False.

            You may argue that they have poorly chosen defaults, giving users Administrator accounts (although in context I'd consider it justifiable), but the permissions themselves are not broken.

            2. People point out Windows's flaws, dismissed as MS bashers.

            Blaming Microsoft because Sony installed malicious code is bullshit. Unless you can think of some platform that can magically tell whether or not software is "good" or "bad".

            3. Company uses

            • Re:Outrage! (Score:3, Insightful)

              by mrchaotica ( 681592 )
              Poorly chosen defaults are broken permissions! If Microsoft had chosen good defaults, then everyone wouldn't be running as Administrator, now would they? The fact that everyone does run as Administrator is Microsoft's fault.
              • Poorly chosen defaults are broken permissions!

                No, they're not. You are trying to conflate two distinctly different things.

                Broken permissions would be if the system directories and files were writable/changeable by any user and the system itself depended on such permissions to function. For an end user, fixing such a problem would be exceptionally difficult, if not impossible.

                Defaulting to Administrator, on the other hand, is trivial for an end user to address.

                You cannot say "default user is admin == b

                • and the system itself depended on such permissions to function. For an end user, fixing such a problem would be exceptionally difficult, if not impossible.

                  If you consider "the system" to include applications -- and most end users do, then the system does depend on such permissions and fixing the problem is exceptionally difficult, if not impossible.

                  Defaulting to Administrator, on the other hand, is trivial for an end user to address.

                  Only if they sit at their computer using only Solitaire, Notepad, and I

                  • If you consider "the system" to include applications -- and most end users do, then the system does depend on such permissions and fixing the problem is exceptionally difficult, if not impossible.

                    No rational definition of "the system", with regards to Microsoft's responsibilities, can include third party applications they have no control over.

                    When applications require higher than necessary permissions to run, generally meaning needing to use an Administrator level account, then it is wholely and solely th

                • Would you blame Linus if someone wrote a Linux app that required root privileges to run ?

                  No, but I would blame Mandriva if they released a version of OpenOffice.org that required me to run it as root.

                  Microsoft apps often required root priviledges, and for a LONG time, various Microsoft tools encouraged app writes to use root priviledges. One of the biggest draws for Microsoft Operating Systems is backwards compatability. Apps that require you to run as root often fit into this category.

                  I do not have a list
                  • No, but I would blame Mandriva if they released a version of OpenOffice.org that required me to run it as root.

                    And that would make sense.

                    But why do you blame Microsoft because id released a version of Doom 3 that (ostensibly, it's pretty easy to fix) requires Administrator privileges to run ? Because that's the point I'm trying to make.

                    • Re:Outrage! (Score:4, Informative)

                      by drsmithy ( 35869 ) <drsmithy@gmai3.14159l.com minus pi> on Friday December 30, 2005 @05:39PM (#14367512)
                      And the point everyone else is trying to make is Micorsoft encouraged ID to make Doom 3 use administrator to run by making half of the API's that Doom 3 uses only accessible by administrator (like writing directly to hardware to increase performance).

                      Bullshit.

                      Doom 3 "needs" Administrator privileges because some dipshit at id thought it would be a good idea to store configuration data in the application's directory, rather than the user's profile where it belongs. Changing the permissions on a single .cfg file is all it takes to run Doom 3 under a non-Admin account, with no performance impact whatsoever.

                      99% of programs that "require" Administrator access "require" it because of stupidity like this - stupidity that is 100% the fault of the software developer.

      • I like Sony.
        I wasn't affected by this for I don't buy music with the Sony label nor am I a Microsoft user.
        I don't agree with what they did and they should be punished for it however I like most of Sony's electronics.
        As long as I can do waht I want to do with my stuff, I'm OK (which is why I canned MS) and I'm watching this Blu-Ray thing and as long as I get to view my content without phoning home or restrictions, I'll be OK.

        [rant]
        Now, on a side note, I hate the way most of these studio DVD's are being relea
      • As for never buying Sony again, I've been convinced of that since I bought a Sony laptop some years ago... CRAP crap crap crap... couldn't believe the crap... wish I did my homework.

        As for not buying Microsoft, I think the majority of the Slashdot demographic already agrees with that notion.

        Most people aren't bothered enough because they STILL don't know what happened. There have been news stories in papers and on TV but people don't quite get it until it bites them personally. One reporter put it perfect

      • Re:Outrage! (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Vhalkyrie ( 472794 )
        I was the biggest Sony geek. My TV, DVD player, receiver, console - all Sony. After the rootkit trick, I will no longer buy Sony electronics. Sony was great when they were an electronics company, and not a content owner. They are more concerned with making sure their electronics protects their content rather than building consumer electronics people want. I'm very disappointed, but there's plenty of other quality electronics companies that I can switch to - Toshiba, Samsung, etc.

        I doubt that my boycott
        • >Same thing would have happened on OS X where the user is not administrator by default.

          I disagree, but no matter which of us is right regarding the average user I know for a fact that at least *I* would have questioned a music CD requiring admin priviledges. so for me the choice would be
          1. use MS and get infected despite saying no.
          2. use Mac and not get infected (refuse to enter password no matter what).
          the fact that the DRM is able to install even though you click no is *precisely* why MS is to blame.

          wh
    • I disagree. Term #6 requires Sony "..obtain an opinion from at least one qualified, independent third-party that the content protection software used on any such CDs is effective..."

      In other words, if enforce, Sony is no long allowed to use any DRM software that doesn't work. And none of it works.
      • I disagree. Term #6 requires Sony "..obtain an opinion from at least one qualified, independent third-party that the content protection software used on any such CDs is effective..."

        In other words, if enforce, Sony is no long allowed to use any DRM software that doesn't work. And none of it works.

        That term does not mean what you think it means. It means anything that you must specificly break (i.e. something you can't just ignore, like a "no-copy" bit or autorun software) such as anything from CSS, Apple's

    • You left out that, according to Geist, the settlement only binds Sony to the aforementioned restrictions until 2008. Why the hell should it be sunsetted at all? After 2008, our computers are open season again? Is that cause they expect the market to have completely forgotten this fiasco by then, like we all forgot the iMac one [boingboing.net] they pulled just three short years ago?

    • The role of the EULA in this fiasco is implicitly legitimized (the entire concept of a "EULA," for those few who don't know, is largely an obnoxious legal fiction - sans UCITA, anyway)

      Not sure what you're trying to say here. To wit, EULA's have been legitimate contracts even after the purchase transaction since 1996. The strongest argument against click-wrap EULA's is that you are only bound to the "shrink-wrap" terms, which you are aware of at time of purchase. Shrink-wrap is one contract to which you are
      • I wholeheartedly disagree.

        Leave aside the U.C.C. and common law for a minute and just do a thought exercise.

        Once upon a time, a contract was a formal agreement between parties. It required certain standards of execution in order to be enforceable in certain ways. Signatures on paper, for instance. Representation. Notaries. My buying a hotdog has some legal dimensions - but we do not get our expectations down on paper (that my money won't be counterfiet, that the hotdog won't poison me). Also, let me add, co
      • It's really worth looking at a specific case like Step-Saver Data Systems, Inc. v. Wyse Technology [wikipedia.org]. Again, from the reference:

        Step-Saver Data Systems, Inc. v. Wyse Technology, 939 F.2d 91 (3rd Cir. 1991) was case in which the legality and history of computer EULAs was explored. The court noted, "When these form licenses were first developed for software, it was, in large part, to avoid the federal copyright law first sale doctrine" thus the intent of EULAs after 1990 were to preempt federal statutes using c
    • These people literally have their boot on Sony's throat.

      Really? Are you sure you aren't using the word literally to mean "figuratively, but very emphatically"?

  • Absurd (Score:4, Interesting)

    by dbucowboy ( 891058 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:32PM (#14361074) Homepage
    Once again the big company gets a slap on the wrist and everyone effected gets the peace of mind of knowing that the cd they bought still has the DRM on it and will still act the same way the next time they put it in a computer. Thanks for the great customer service Sony.

    • Re:Absurd (Score:2, Informative)

      by Television Viewer ( 941923 )

      Sony will pay cash compensation and give away free downloads from a choice of music download services including Apple iTunes as part of the deal.

      Thanks for the great customer service Sony.

      Isn't this the same thing that happened before? I forget the specifics, but a music company lost in court for keeping CD costs inflated, and they were ordered to give away free CD's to libraries. They ended up giving a library 50 copies of the same CD- "christmas songs" or "western songs". Not popular songs that are in

  • New York? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tacokill ( 531275 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:33PM (#14361079)
    This is for the New York case only. What about the Texas case brought by the Attorney General of TX?

    There are lots of cases against Sony. This is only one of them.

    • Re:New York? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by drhamad ( 868567 )
      The Texas case is not a class action suit. It is a state action alleging violation of the Texas CPA. So Sony will have to satisfy the Texas Attorney General, not a lawyer for a citizen (who supposedly represents all other citizens in the area, in similar circumstances).

      Still, I'm not sure what you guys expect? They aren't going to be banned from including DRM, unless they agree to that, which they won't. It's also unlikely they'll be hit with any MASSIVE fine. Although $7.50 per CD is actually a go

      • Re:New York? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by mikerozh ( 710568 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @07:18PM (#14361580)
        Still, I'm not sure what you guys expect? They aren't going to be banned from including DRM, unless they agree to that, which they won't. It's also unlikely they'll be hit with any MASSIVE fine. Although $7.50 per CD is actually a good amount of money (not to mention if people go for iTunes downloads, and the like), if the theoretical number of people all take it (unlikely).

        If I scrap your car with a nail and you sue me, you'd expect to get the amount of money that would be enough to repaint the car or at least the scraped parts of it. If my lawyer would propose you 1/2 price of the nail as a compensation, you'd sure refuse.

        What is the difference?

  • In the Texas Case I want... (Score:4, Funny)

    by dbucowboy ( 891058 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:36PM (#14361095) Homepage
    A new computer to replace the infected one that I have now.

    Any of these will work great!

    http://alienware.com/alx_pages/main_alx.aspx [alienware.com]

  • Carrot, meet stick (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Gothmolly ( 148874 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:37PM (#14361103)
    No, this means that companies like Sony can trample your rights (i.e. sell you a rootkit you didn't know about) and get away with it if they pay enough. How many retards out there won't get the incremental-cost-to-sony "free" downloads or rebates? How many people will stop buying their stuff? None. Its a trial balloon - and Sony now knows what the market will bear. Like MS continuing to violate monopoly laws, or the famous exploding Ford Pinto, companies will break the laws of the land and of decency when it makes them money. note that you don't have a "right" NOT to be rooted, or a "right" to free music, or a "right" to much else other than "this product is exactly what is advertised, no more, no less, and since it is a product, I have right of First Sale".
    • No, this means that companies like Sony can trample your rights (i.e. sell you a rootkit you didn't know about) and get away with it if they pay enough. How many retards out there won't get the incremental-cost-to-sony "free" downloads or rebates? How many people will stop buying their stuff? None. Its a trial balloon - and Sony now knows what the market will bear. Like MS continuing to violate monopoly laws

      A couple of comments-

      I would not call people retards. That is mean, you are attacking the victim

    • Outraged? File for exclusion from the settlement! (Score:5, Informative)

      by MacDork ( 560499 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @07:00PM (#14361494) Journal
      How many retards out there won't get the incremental-cost-to-sony "free" downloads or rebates? How many people will stop buying their stuff? None. Its a trial balloon - and Sony now knows what the market will bear.

      I wouldn't call them retards. I'd say uninformed... anyway the key is on page 17 of the settlement.

      D. Defendants' Limited Right To Withdraw From Settlement
      Defendants have the right to withdraw from the settlement, if the number of timely and valid requests for exclusion from the Settlement Class exceeds 1,000.

      1000 requests for exclusion is a pretty low bar guys. If only those qualified reading slashdot filed for exclusion, you could pull this off. Sony should be in a lot deeper shit that this settlement provides. Filing a request for exclusion from the settlement class should send a message to these people... I'm as mad as Hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore! [soundclick.com] If the settlement is approved by the court, everyone here should file for exclusion. Don't let them get away with a slap on the wrist this time. I personally would not be happy until someone responsible for this at Sony was facing criminal charges.

  • cash settlement and free downloads?? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Russ Nelson ( 33911 ) <slashdot@russnelson.com> on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:38PM (#14361104) Homepage
    "cash settlement and free downloads?" How much do you want to bet that the lawyers will get the cash settment, and the much buyers (aka victims) will get the free downloads?
    -russ
    p.s. yes, I AM that cynical.

  • Jail! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Just put some Sony guys in jail and everyone will be happy!
    • Not just any Sony guys, some execs and board members - the ones who made the decision that DRM is good for everyone.

  • Punishing the Meek (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Paladin144 ( 676391 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:39PM (#14361108) Homepage
    From the Geist blog, is a list of 10 things that Sony has provisionally agreed to do, at least until 2008:

    1. No further use of XCP or Media Max
    2. Ensure that the DRM will not be installed on users' computers until the user accepts the end-user license agreement
    3. Ensure that an uninstaller for the copy-protection software is made readily available to consumers
    4. Fully disclose any updates to the copy-protection software
    5. Ensure that the EULA accurately discloses the nature and function of the software in plain English
    6. Obtain comments about the EULA from an independent oversight person
    7. Obtain an expert opinion that the copy-protection software does not create security vulnerabilities
    8. Only collect limited personal information necessary to provide enhanced CD functionality
    9. Include full disclosures of the copy-protection software on the CD jewel case
    10. Fix any software vulnerabilities that may arise from the copy-protection software

    Number 3 probably interests me most. Anybody in the know will be able to download the uninstaller at any time and get that filth off their hard drive (or likely: not put it on there to be begin with). But what about those who are not tech-savvy at all?

    It seems to me that the main result of copy protection so far has been to punish the honest and control the meek. Smarter, savvier people get around it and are privy to software and music unencumbered by the DRM that works quite well against those foolish enough to uniwittingly install it. So what's the point? Are the DRM-proponents trying to drive a wedge between power users and the techno-illterate? Do they plan to blame the foul side-effects of DRM on the pirates who are not encumbered by it? "We only put DRM on our products because pirates like Joe Blow download it. Blame him!"

    I'd bet that 90% of the population doesn't know what the heck DRM is. We'd better be damn sure to educate the masses or the cartels will do it for us - by smearing the savvy.

    • Let alone the fact that EULAs are bullshit anyway, and this only legitimizes them!

    • Re:Punishing the Meek (Score:3, Insightful)

      by shawb ( 16347 )
      While number 3 is important, I feel that number 9 is the most important. I feel that Sony or any company would be completely within their rights to put DRM or whatever into their music, as long as they let the customer know this before actually paying for it or installing potentially spyware laden software on the computer (if the media company contracted for the software, it would not be trivial to insure that spyware's not bundled or if the software opens up backdoors, even intentionally.

      If someone sti
      • If media companies are allowed to put DRM in their products, then they should be forced to show public service announcements to educate users, just like how tobacco companies are forced to do PSAs about why smoking is bad.

      • Re:Punishing the Meek (Score:3, Interesting)

        by splanky ( 598553 )
        I am with you. First, my bias, I own a chain of stores that sell their stuff. So, imagine how frustrating it is to try to help (i.e. protect) your customers when it is almost impossible to reliably know which CDs have DRM and which don't! I think once they clearly label the packages, the free market will drive them to really change the way they handle DRM -- because I think music fans will be far less likely to buy DRM-ed CDs because of this fiasco...and who can blame them!

        SonyBMG's first reaction to us
    • So in short, nothing happened. Total cost of this to Sony: close to zero, considering that their lawyers are already paid for and the music downloads are essentially zero cost to them. No fine. No jail time for trespassing or computer "hacking".

      Watch as countless media conglomerates will do the same stuff again and again, until people have finally come to accept that getting shafted is just the way it'll be. A solid "Booo!" to every lawyer involved in this settlement. Sony won handily.

    • WTF is with #8??? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by interactive_civilian ( 205158 ) <mamoru.gmail@com> on Thursday December 29, 2005 @08:11PM (#14361809) Homepage Journal
      8. Only collect limited personal information necessary to provide enhanced CD functionality
      Very serious "WTF??" happening here. Enhanced CD functionality? How many people buy music CDs for anything more than the ability to listen to the music on them?

    • Re:Punishing the Meek (Score:3, Insightful)

      by FS ( 10110 ) *
      There are multiple problems with this list.

      1. XCP or Media Max? Why not? They should have learned from this mistake and are unlikely to do it again. It won't change my position on never purchasing a music CD again (I am a Rhapsody user), but it certainly makes sense that they should use someone who has learned from mistakes rather than another 3rd party without a clue.

      2. There needs to be a more streamlined way for this to happen. Joe Average isn't going to bring back music just because it pops up in typica

  • Three Simple Steps (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mpapet ( 761907 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:39PM (#14361109) Homepage
    1. Contrition
    Sony Corp. says "sorry" for something they didn't really do with malice. After all, it's our music, not the consumers so there's nothing wrong with the steps we took.

    2. Negotiate Good Deal
    Sony gives away stuff that costs me little to nothing over a long period of time, that no one likely wants and put our version of "market value" on them. The States will like it or they'll see you in court until Sony gets your Administration voted out of office.

    3. Profit
    The PHB's get their bonuses for proper crisis management and get back to business.

    I'm sick and tired of all of the clamor surrounding this stuff. Especially on /. Good corporate citizen Sony gets back to DRM'ing and nothing changes. Nothing!

  • Digital Rights Management Protection Act (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PCM2 ( 4486 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:48PM (#14361157) Homepage
    Haha! Michael Geist is a cut-up. When I first read the topic I thought, "Damn straight it does, Michael! You tell 'em." Then I RTFA'ed and I realized he's saying this opens the door for a law protecting us from corporations.

    Holy Dudley Do-Right, Michael! What country do you live in -- Canada?

    This certainly does open up the door for a Digital Rights Management Protection Act. Here's how: Sony goes crying crocodile tears straight to Congress. It petitions every congressional representative in its pocket to draft a new law that indemnifies corporations from any damages resulting from software that gets installed on a customer's computer when he/she makes use of a company's product. Those same representatives, wiping their mouths, will get up on TV and proclaim to the world how this new legislation will protect us all from the frivolous lawsuits that are driving up the costs of everything, depriving Americans of their God-given low low prices.

    Because this lawsuit against Sony only serves to point out the failures of our legal system, don't you see? Sony was trying to innovate with new technology and got slapped down by evil, profiteering lawyers. The corporations must be protected!

  • Why only Sony? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by necro2607 ( 771790 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:52PM (#14361184)
    "The settlement includes a host of restrictions on future Sony DRM use"...

    Sony DRM use? Why only Sony? Are all other companies guaranteed to maintain ethical & reasonable DRM implementations?

    If they're going to come up with some big guidelines on DRM usage they should apply to any/all DRM implementations. Maybe such stuff can stop maniacal levels of DRM before it's too late..?

    • Re:Why only Sony? (Score:2, Informative)

      by benjamindees ( 441808 )
      Sony DRM use? Why only Sony? Are all other companies guaranteed to maintain ethical & reasonable DRM implementations?

      In case it isn't obvious, this settlement only applies to Sony because they are the ones being sued. I would expect other businesses to take this as a sign that they can get off the hook easily for breaking into people's computers and vandalizing their software.

  • Not nearly enough (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dachannien ( 617929 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @05:58PM (#14361207)
    For real protection against egregious DRM, fair use rights must be protected. DRM isn't really about piracy prevention, after all - it's merely a red herring. If content companies were only interested in piracy prevention, the Blu-Ray spec would be finalized by now. [slashdot.org]

    The real reason for DRM is control over the consumer, ranging from hardware or software lock-in to captive audience advertising. Fair use lets us escape such abuses by allowing us to time- and space-shift content, allowing us to move legally-purchased content to other playback devices and to skip unwanted advertising. The DMCRA [wikipedia.org] would be a good start - if anything, this proposed DRMPA should be added to that legislation.

    Besides, the complaints regarding Sony's DRM are the same as the complaints surrounding a lot of spyware and viruses. Why should Sony's status as a multibillion dollar corporation cause it to be painted with a different brush (and have different laws applied to it) than, say, Claria?

  • its a backdoor way to get more DRM integrated into our lives.. This time we "agree" with it..
  • These companies ASSUME that file sharing is evil...and therefore a proper punishment would be to post free files on those networks. That is completely bogus! Actually, it is great advertising for Sony and their products. It is not a punishment at all...it's an incentive.

    Perhaps ENRON should have been forced to provide free ENRON bumper stickers at gas stations as a penalty for their coroporate wrong-doings. Maybe Microsoft should be forced to give free software to students as a penalty for abusing their mon
  • But how average Joe will know they have a hidden rootkit in a CD from trusty Sony/BMG?

    I bet theyll never know, at least until their machine starts to behave strange, so no compensantion for them.

    A better compensation would be to Sony publicize the problems of DRM.

  • I'm not usually a fan of class settlements, but... (Score:4, Informative)

    by JoeShmoe ( 90109 ) <askjoeshmoe@hotmail.com> on Thursday December 29, 2005 @06:13PM (#14361275)
    After reading the linked document, there are a lot of interesting points. While none of these points are watershed moments in consumer rights, I think that they are really going to make Sony grit their teeth. Consider:

    1) Sony now has to release "clean" CDs with NO content protection...which means that they are effectly out of the DRM business for at least two years. That's going to make their music execs hopping mad.
    2) Not only do consumers get their DRM CD replaced at no charge with a non-DRM CD (something they could not have gotten before anyway), they also get either a) $7.50 b) a free CD from a list of at least 200 or c) three free albums from a downloadable service. That certainly better than the whopping $5 coupon I got back from the RIAA settlement. This is probably the least offensive section.
    3) Sony has to make "all resonable commericial efforts" to allow the above downlodable albums from iTunes. Youch. That's pretty much an admission that Sony's own music service is crap and iTunes is the definitive standard for downloadable music. Boy, what fun Apple's PR group could have with that! This has really god to piss Sony off. Now they essentially HAVE to crawl to Apple and negotiate some deal to offer Sony customers the ability to download Sony music...for free...in UNENCRYPTED MP3 FORM...from Apple's music service.

    The final part is that Sony has to restore people's computers back to the pre-rootkit way. Of course, we have to assume they can do this properly. If this part of the settlement gets screwed up, then all the free downloads in the world won't make up the cost of repairing or reloading a PC. So, potentially, this settlement might be letting Sony off. But really, what could we expect? While it's possible that there are some people out there who had their computer crash or die because of this software, let them opt out and get a settlement in small claims or some other method. The vast majority of the people would be happy just to have all traces of the software removed (safely) and some bonus music for their troubles.

    So, I have to say...of all the settlement offers, I think this one by far is the best one I can remember. Especially from the standpoint of sending a message. You can damn well bet that Sony (who will I'm sure accept this because they publicity of this issue going to trial is their worst nightmare) is going to have some heads roll over this, and combined with pressure from upset Sony artists, might actually usher in a new crop of executives who are more willing to listen to the pro-consumer voices in their hardware divisions instead of heeding the horrible advice from their content divisions.

    -JoeShmoe
    .
    • "The final part is that Sony has to restore people's computers back to the pre-rootkit way. Of course, we have to assume they can do this properly."

      That's easy, it's called format and re-install. Use Powermax to do a complete low level format of the hard drive, re-install Windows and all drivers, and then re-install all of your applications. I've had to do two so far at the white box store I'm a tech at. Pain in the ass - yes. I will save mydocs and pictures, but no music files. Cost? $75 - $85 for Windows,

      • That's easy, it's called format and re-install. Use Powermax to do a complete low level format of the hard drive,

        Why does everyone talk about doing a low-level format these days. Since I'm not the best at explaining things... from wikipedia:

        Physical formatting, or low-level formatting, is the division of hard disk platters into tracks, sectors, and cylinders. Tracks, sectors, and cylinders define the divisions in which a hard disk accesses a data from a hard disk platter. This was considered to be a

    • Hopping mad... for a while (Score:5, Interesting)

      by rewt66 ( 738525 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @06:44PM (#14361412)
      Sony now has to release "clean" CDs with NO content protection...which means that they are effectly out of the DRM business for at least two years. That's going to make their music execs hopping mad.

      Maybe by the end of the two years, they will have figured out that non-DRMed music sells better than DRMed music. Maybe this settlement forces them to run the experiment that shows them that they can make more money if they don't act like the other music companies.

      Think they're bright enough to see the trend in their data?

    • Um, no. (Score:2, Interesting)

      by flamingweasel ( 191775 )

      1) Sony now has to release "clean" CDs with NO content protection

      No, they just have to "stop manufacturing SONY BMG CDs with XCP software ("XCP CDs") and SONY BMG CDs with MediaMax software ("MediaMax CDs")." The settlement doesn't seem to say anything about no content protection. I'd wager those products will undergo a namechange, a 6 month retool, and then be back to being installed the first time Timmy puts his new [insert corporate rock band here] "CD" in his computer.

      3) Sony has to make "all resonabl

  • More information available at SonySuit.com (Score:5, Informative)

    by marklyon ( 251926 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @06:14PM (#14361288) Homepage
    There is much more information available at SonySuit.com [sonysuit.com], including information on how you can pursue your own litigation against Sony BMG.

  • The Titanic Toddler Problem (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Crash Culligan ( 227354 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @06:23PM (#14361328) Journal

    There's one problem at the root of all of this. And Sony's rootkit hijinx and crappy advertising techniques, Microsoft's monopolistic practices, and the despicable actions of dozens of other megalithic companies are all symptoms of it. Look at the common factor among all cases (size), and you'll see:

    Modern justice lacks scalability.

    Think about it. We have these immature, almost psychopathic corporate constructs wandering the landscape. They're greedy like children, live in their own world like children, and have an unnatural knack for breaking things like children. They're gigantic, amoral, know only enough to get into trouble, and don't think much about consequences. And why should they? In this case, it's taking a whole gaggle of government lawyers bearing class action suits to spank them, and even then they're doing a poor job of it. Admittedly, it might help if the government didn't dote over them so, tsking at them for running roughshod over their toys (customers), but ever so happy with them when they perform vital household duties like collecting information and marketing government policies.

    The death penalty exists for individuals who are convicted of crimes. (Note: guilt never enters into it; the only important aspect is the conviction.) For corporations, legal contrivances that they are, the best the government can do is dissolution. The last time they did that was the breakup of Ma Bell, and we know what happened there: the individual enterprises have each grown up in their own special, horrid ways.

    And the mallet needed to properly smack them down and make them stay down we can't trust in the government's hands. So how do you spank a toddler that big?

    • And the mallet needed to properly smack them down and make them stay down we can't trust in the government's hands. So how do you spank a toddler that big?
      Dissolution, jail for the entire board of directors and senior management, and siezing all assets to be given to the plaintiffs (if a class-action) or as a tax refund to the general public (if the plaintiff is a single entity or the government itself).

      Of course, we all know this is wishful thinking...
    • Simple: rewrite (or amend) their corporate charter.

      • Re:The Titanic Toddler Problem (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ajs ( 35943 ) <ajs.ajs@com> on Thursday December 29, 2005 @07:31PM (#14361649) Homepage Journal
        Simple: rewrite (or amend) their corporate charter.

        Whose? Sony Corporation of America? Sony Electronics Inc.? Sony Entertainment Inc.? SONY BMG MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT (50% ownership)? Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc.?

        Sony Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo? I'd like to see the U.S. court that could re-write a Japanese company's charter!

        Which head of the hydra would you like to cut off (and watch regrow) first?

    • They're gigantic, amoral, know only enough to get into trouble, and don't think much about consequences.

      Friends, I don't think there's anything we can do. Kind of like the Twilight Zone with the kid with the gnarly powers. All we can do is try not to provoke them. They own the government. You and me, we can't come up with the kind of cash it takes to buy congresspresons.

      Perhaps the good news is that there are multiple sociopathic toddlers. Maybe we can get 'em to fight among themsleves to their mut

    • So how do you spank a toddler that big?

      Use a 2,000ft tall Martha Stewart?

  • Fuck "Protection"... (Score:4, Funny)

    by YuppieScum ( 1096 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @07:02PM (#14361504) Journal
    What's needed is a DRM Prevention Act.

  • I cant boycot MS...School wont let me do it! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by a_greer2005 ( 863926 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @07:04PM (#14361516)
    I am about to take a CIS capstone cource that DEMANDS the use of a Microsoft press book on Visio, and a license to use Visio at home...

    The school is making me give MS money, along with the money that they get from our tech fee, what can I do? how can one in my position tell MS that I hate their shenanigans without flunking a class for not buying the book?

  • The settlement I want! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The settlement *I* want with Sony is unlimited backdoor access to all the computers in their entire corporation and total indemnity for any illegal actions I might use them to commit. I will also need to get files with the personal information of all their employees to be used in "customizing" my software.
  • Let's just write him in, kicking and screaming if necessary.

  • Match copyright infringement penalties (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mcubed ( 556032 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @08:14PM (#14361822) Homepage

    Shouldn't Sony at least have to compensate purchasers with the amount those purchasers would have to pay if an infringement judgement was issued against them? The maximum penalty for copyright infringement is, I believe, $150,000 per song. If someone buys a rootkit CD with 10 songs on it, that person should be entitled to a maximum of $150,000 per song, for a total of $1,500,000.

    I mean, isn't the crime Sony has committed at least as serious as infringement? Why should the penalty be any less?

  • We need 1000 people to opt out - now (Score:3, Informative)

    by Animats ( 122034 ) on Thursday December 29, 2005 @09:29PM (#14362167) Homepage
    This settlement is terrible. Almost everything Sony is agreeing to, they've already done to avoid prosecution in New York and Texas. In exchange, they get unlimited relief from lawsuits from everybody whose systems were damaged by their program. That's a giveway.

    One of the terms of the settlement is that if more than 1000 people opt out of it, the deal goes bust. There's going to be an opt out form [sonysuit.com] soon. Check it out, and take the opt-out option.

Slashdot Top Deals

The herd instinct among economists makes sheep look like independent thinkers.

Close