More on copy protection

[adderslj]

Regular readers will be aware that I'm the sort of person who does not download MP3s illegally, but fill my iPod with songs from CDs I own, or MP3s I've bought from sites like MP3.com and eMusic.com. I listen to more music using my iPod, or on my computer, than I do in any other way. Thus, it annoys me no end when a CD is copy protected, because the purchase of that CD gives me a fraction of the listening opportunities of a conventional CD, at the same price. I'm not going to pay the same amount of money for less value.

Now, of all people, Microsoft have come out and said that copy protection won't work. Maybe it has the muscle to make the music industry listen.

Comments

Re:

[adders.livejournal.com]

A significant amount, I imagine. The current argument seems to be that sales are falling (but not in the UK, which has just as much access to file-sharing, but let's keep that quiet because it undermines our case) and it's all down to CD-burning and file-swapping. Ergo, if we copy protect our CDs, people won't be able to copy them and they will have to buy their own copies.

The utterly ignores people like me and you. I buy a huge number of CDs, but I will not be buying any copy protected ones. The actions of people like me and you mya drive down sales further, but the record companies will continue to blame file-swapping and not their own actions. Dumb, dumb, dumb.