Conference cookie::notes$archive:cd_v1

    There are two problems with your argument:
    
    First, violating the copyright laws is WRONG.  People who make and
    sell records, CDs, etc., including musicians, engineers, producers,
    etc. have a right to make money from their efforts.  I believe the
    prevailing opinion is that it's ok to buy CDs and records and then
    tape them for your own use, but it is illegal to borrow/rent stuff
    to tape, and it is illegal to give/sell tapes you make of records
    or CDs that you own.  THAT's what everyone was hollering about in
    note 816.
    
    Secondly, the CBS CopyGuarding scheme threatens everyone NOW.  It
    is not some vague fear for the distant future.  CBS proposes removing
    part of the audio signal from all records, tapes, and CDs so that
    the mechanism in the recorder (DAT or analog) will know that it
    is copyrighter material, and will prevent recording.  However, there's
    a very real danger that just removing that part of the audio signal
    will damage the music, even if you never plan to record it at all.

    .1 I believe, begs the question a bit.
    
    Take the example of the neighborhood video store.  The rental of
    video tapes is clearly legal.  The "gray" area would concern the
    copying of a rented tape.  But, how is the copying of a rented
    tape ( to be viewed later, for instance ) any different from
    "time shifting" the same movies off of a cable channel? 
    
    In both cases a fee has been paid to rent the material.  The 
    royalties are paid on the PURCHASE of the tape by the video store.
    
    Yes, artists are entitled to compensation for their work.  And,
    I am completely opposed to the theft of copyrighted material.  But
    I also question whether or not the copying of a rented tape/CD/
    or whatever is either illegal or unethical.
    
    Any lawyers out there listening????
    
    						Regards
    						Doug Dickerson
    

    Re: .2
    
    In the case of "time shifting" movies, the studio has been paid
    a LARGE sum of money for the mass distribution rights to the
    movie.  And in fact the Supreme Court explicitly made this legal
    last year.
    
    The notion with renting is that only one person at a time can
    "enjoy" the work.  If you make copies, you are thwarting that
    idea.
    
    To me, making copies of audio and visual works I don't own is
    theft.  You have to decide for yourself what your ethics are.
    
    				Steve

I've got some real beefs with Copyguard:

1.  Copyguard may destroy the music.  I've never heard music with a "notch"
taken out of its spectrum, but I imagine it could be VERY noticeable under
certain conditions.  I got my CD player because (a) the CDs can be played
as often as I want with degradation and (b, relevant here) what was
recorded is what I get.  Copyguard may well negate one of the main reasons
why I bought the CD player in the first place.  Copyguard therefore stands
to cause me economic damage in the form of the reduced utility of my CD
player.

2.  Copyguard is only "a foot in the door".  If you think it will stop
with a law requiring the Copyguard circuit only on digital audio tape
recorders, you are sadly mistaken.  If it shows up on one, there will be a
strong precedent set, and soon there will soon follow laws putting
Copyguard on analog audio and video recorders.  Hey, what's good for the
goose is good for the gander.  Fair's fair.  And all that.

3.  Copyguard prevents legitimate copying.  Copyguard is a dumb circuit
which can have absolutely no knowledge of whether or not we have a
legitimate right to copy something or not.  (An example being our right to
view/hear a performance scheduled for a time that we are not available.)
The machine will simply negate that right.

3A.  As a corollary to the above, what happens if I am trying to record some
non-copyrighted something and it happens to sound like copyrighted material
to the Copyguard circuit?  My recorder suddenly quits, that's what.

4.  The benefit of Copyguard is small to the majority of recording artists.
The artists who REALLY need to get all the possible benefit of their works
are the starving "fringe" types:  jazz bass men, 3rd violins, whatever.
The people who WILL get the vast majority of the benefit are the record
companies and the big stars.  I do not offer this point as a justification
against Copyguard, but only to refute the propaganda being put forth about
Copyguard being a benefit to the artists.  It will NOT substantially help
the people who really need it.

5.  Taping is the ONLY competition against high prices for works done by
artists under exclusive contracts.  Very often the big stars are under
exclusive contract to one record company.  If you want to get the works of
these artists then you are dealing with a monopoly and must pay the asking
price however bloated that is.  Taping is competition, but not without its
own price: master + player + recorder + tape + time all have to come
together.  If the original recordings are reasonably priced then this will
be less likely to happen.  Oh, by the way, there is all sort of legal
precedent against monopolies based on the unfair commercial behavior they
ALWAYS generate when left on their own, so I am very much offering this
point as an ethical justification against Copyguard.


Yours,
Jeff Barry,
Non-taper (of anything).  Husband of former starving artist.

    
    	I am not completely informed on the technical aspects of the
    copyguarding.  Why does everyone believe that people will not be
    able to break the code?  Look at what has happened to micro computer
    software.  Bit copiers on bullitin boards etc...
    
    	I do not think this is a solution, and do not suggest braking
    the law, but the record companies must believe 'breaking' will not be
    done very easily.  WHY???  What is this technology?
    
    Peter
    

>    	I am not completely informed on the technical aspects of the
>    copyguarding.  Why does everyone believe that people will not be
>    able to break the code?

It's not a code, it's a mangle.  Read topics 782 and 783.  In 783.11, there is
a copy of the Senate bill, which explains exactly how it's done.  There's no
secret to break.  The only way to defeat it is to disable the chip or to
introduce even more noise into the source material.

The serious problem with copyguarding isn't the copyguarding; it's the absolute
destruction of any audio quality.

Yesterday I attended a concert by the Jazz group Full Circle, who will have an
album coming out on CBS at the beginning of next year.  After the concert I
talked to their producer.  He's really proud of the job he did putting the
album together, totally digital, sounds great.  We then talked about copyguard-
ing, which he realizes is an abomination from an audio quality standpoint.

When I asked him if he could prevent the album from being copyguarded, he said
he had no control over that.  I suggested that he let CBS know that he, too, is
displeased with the copyguard idea, and he said he has no contact with the
people at CBS who make decisions like that.

So, so much for the idea that it's to protect the musicians.

/john

        There are several interesting new CBS CDs at Lechmere this week.
        It is my intent to stop buying CBS when they start copyguarding.
        Anybody *know* when it will start? Has it started?
        
        JimB. 

        Re: .7
        
>        There are several interesting new CBS CDs at Lechmere this week.
>        It is my intent to stop buying CBS when they start copyguarding.
>        Anybody *know* when it will start? Has it started?
        
        I have stopped buying CBS CDs altogether, and wrote a letter to
        CBS stating this position. 
        
        The sooner that companies realize that they will lose money by
        mangling music, the sooner they will stop and the fewer releases
        will get mangled.  You will most likely be able to purchase
        those new CBS CDs in the future, but delaying the purchase can
        help place pressure on CBS. 
        
        [I would also like information on when the copyguarding is
        planned to start, and what labels are planning to do it.  Does
        anyone have any ideas on how to publicize the `don't buy CBS'
        message?] 
        
        					B.J.

I just talked to Bob Altshuler at CBS Records.

RIAA has asked CBS to delay copyguarding until the NBS report is out.

But Altshuler spent most of the call telling me the tired old baloney
about the notch being inaudible, DAT recorders being the death knell
for the recording industry, and on, and on, and on...

Write your congresscritters and CBS, if you haven't already done so.

/john

    Who is this Bob guy at CBS Records?  Do you have his
    telephone number so that we can call too?  Calling
    would be much easier than writting and therefore I
    think more people would respond.
    
    			Thank-ya

    Is this guy at CBS someone who can actually do something about this
    copyguard stuff?  Will a few hundred phone calls from angry DECies
    actually do any good?  If so, how about putting the phone number
    out on a few bulletin boards.
    
    D

        re .11 and "phone calls from angry DECies..." - please, don't,
        don't ANYONE mention Digital or this conference in any phone
        calls or mail to CBS or Congresspeople.  The last thing
        we want is for the government, CBS, the business or the
        public in general to think that Digital is in any involved
        in this issue.
         
Jim Stratton
        

    While it's much easier to call than to write, writing provides
    doumentation. It's much easier for someone at CBS to drop a
    folder with _n_ letters in front of someone to indicate how
    unpopular the idea is than to say, "Oh, I got _n_ phonecalls
    objecting to the idea."
    
    --- jerry

Write to:

Office of the President
Columbia Records
CBS Inc.
51 W. 52 St.
New York, New York

You don't have to say much, and you just have to throw it into a 22 cent
stamped envelope; a call to New York will cost you a lot more.

I doubt that this guy can do anything, and ten phone calls probably wouldn't
convince him even if he could; he's pretty sold on the idea.

/john

Not to be obnoxious or anything, but do you have a ZIP code for the address
in the last note.  I always try to give the Post Office a break.

						Tim

I have just received a reply to my letter to CBS.  It was written by Seymour
L. Gartenberg, Senior Group Vice President, CBS/Records Group, CBS Inc., 51
W. 52nd St., NYNY 10019.

Dear Mr. Covert:					July 23, 1987/c

I am replying to your letter of June 19th that you addressed to the
President of Columbia Records about "copyguarding" recorded material.

In response to your comments, please note the following:

      .	The copy-code system, which has been tested exhaustively by
	the engineering committees composed of representatives of the
	member companies of the United States and Europe recording
	industry trade associations, does not degrade the sound quality
	of recordings.  We are so certain of this, that when Congress
	asked us to submit the copy-code device to the National Bureau of
	Standards for an unbiased evaluation, we agreed to do so with
	no hesitation whatsoever.

      .	Whether or not audio home taping for personal use is fair use
	under the copyright laws is a matter for Congress to decide and
	the Congress is in the process of deciding that at this time.

      .	There are numerous research studies that deal with the subject
	of the effects of audio home taping.  The one I think you are
	quoting from was prepared by the Audio Recording Rights
	Coalition, recently renamed the Home Recording Rights Coalition.
	Recording industry studies, including one prepared under the
	supervision of Dr. Alan Greenspan, the current nominee for
	Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, and used by him in
	Congressional testimony, shows that the loss of profits
	caused by home taping of copyrighted materials to the record
	companies, and in royalties not paid to artists, composers
	and the unions, is a staggering amount.

Whether you buy CBS Records compact discs in the future, of course,
is at your option.  I can assure you, however, that no compact discs
have been commercially encoded and they will not be encoded unless
the Congress legislates the inclusion of a copy-code chip in digital
audio tape recorders imported and sold in the United States.  Should
that event transpire, then I assume your position will be that you will
not buy any compact discs manufactured by any record company in the United
States, or likely anywhere in the world, since all of them will be
encoded.

Very truly yours,
Seymour L. Gartenberg

re .16

>In response to your comments, please note the following:
>
>     . The copy-code system, which has been tested exhaustively by
>	the engineering committees composed of representatives of the
>	member companies of the United States and Europe recording
>	industry trade associations, does not degrade the sound quality
>	of recordings...


How can he say it does not degrade the sound quality?  I saw the news cast
that gave us a sample of what the copyguard sounded like.  Over the tv set
you could hear the difference!  What's it going to sound like on a decent
stereo system?  WORSE!  I wonder if this guy, and the others of the trade,
have had any hearing tests lately?

Don

Th recording industry has an answer to that, of course.  (You would expect them
to, wouldn't you!)

The guy at CBS I talked to a few weeks ago claimed that demo was prepared by
the Audio Recording Rights Coalition and was deliberately made to sound bad.

While we're waiting for the NBS to make it's "unbiased" report, write to your
Senators and Representatives!

/john

    Re: .16
    John Covert,
    
    You should send a copy of that letter to your congressman.
    It shows what a bunch of arrogant bastards are running the recording
    industry.
                          
    -John

    I'm new to this notesfile and not very technical, but can I ask
    a simple question:
    
    Wouldn't it just be easier not to allow the sale of blank DAT tapes?
    I realize that some could get bootlegged in, but this does seem
    to be a fair compromise.  I don't see bootlegging being a major
    problem.  
    
    Bruce

    Since the DAT is going to be a (relatively) inexpensive way for
    people to make digital recordings of all the things people make
    recordings of now, limiting the sale of blank tape isn't a reason-
    able thing to do.  While some people may use blank tape to pirate
    recordings others will use them to record their children's first
    words, thunderstorms, high school band concerts, etc.
    
    The problem (if it's really going to exist) is an interesting one,
    but the solution is not to DESTROY MY MUSIC!

    The other problem that always comes up whenever the sales of any
    sort of blank tape are threatened (by taxes, etc) is that all you
    need to do is pre-record them with something not very interesting
    and in the public domain. The additional costs are minimal and the
    tapes aren't blank, but the user just records over them.
    
    wrh

    I believe this question may have been asked before, but I haven't
    seen an answer to it: does anyone know what is the situation regarding
    the COPYGUARD system in countries other than the US?  Specifically,
    I am obviously concerned with what will happen here in the UK. 
    As I understand it, parliament here has now decided that a 10% levy
    is going to be imposed on the sale of blank audio tapes here, which
    I think means that it consumers would have the right to make copies
    of recordings.  If that is the case then that would seem to imply
    that recording companies here would not have the same justification
    for COPYGUARD systems.  Does that mean that there will be un-COPYGUARDED
    material available here, or would we just get the same stuff as
    that released in the states (assuming that COPYGUARD becomes a system
    accepted over there)?  Also, is it worth while people in
    this country writing either to CBS here or members of parliament
    etc.?

    nick

    Here is note 838.0 moved to it's proper place:

    Scary thought:
    
    My father is only 44,  (I guess you know how young I am now!)
    and here really can't tell the difference between good
    and bad stereo sound.  He doesn't work in a factory
    or anyplace loud, his hears are just not sensitive enough.
    
    When he has the stereo on, the bass is WAY too heavy and the
    high end makes my ears RING.  What's the average age of
    a record company executive or a congressmen? What percentage
    of people suffer significant changes in hearing as they
    get older?
        
    Maybe those CBS people really believe what they say because
    they can't tell the difference.  
    
    Bill O.  
    

    Before those of us over 35 do you in entirely, keep in mind that
    encroaching indolence may not be the root cause of your father's
    idiosyncratic approach to music.

    
    I'm sorry, I didn't make myself clear; my father is 44, I think
    that is by no means old.  My point was that someone who doesn't
    have a hearing problem, who is healthy in every way, can miss those
    frequencies and subtle sounds that make CopyGuard evil.
    
    I do not know what the cause of this insensitivity may be,
    it may not be time, it may be, as some people have pointed
    out, due to a lifetime of not training the ear.
    
    Believe me, I meant no offense.  Years have little to do
    with age. (as I digress, sorry) I know people who are
    22 who are older than my parents. 

    re .26 re .25
    
    The problem with those silly smiley faces is that they make people
    take everything said by those of us who refuse to use them seriously...

    Typical CBS bull____.  The only company whom I have ever dealt with
    which had a UNIFORM 100% rate of being arrogant jerks was CBS. 
    From the lowest account rep, up to a Senior VP, 100% arrogance, 100%
    jerks, and 100% willing to take whatever advantage they could of
    you.
    	
    I haven't bought CBS products for quite a while now.  And I'm quite
    proud of it. 

John F. Kerry
Massachusetts
		   U n i t e d   S t a t e s  S e n a t e

						August 5, 1987

Mr. John R. Covert
Acton, Massachusetts 01720

Dear Mr. Covert:

     Thank you for contacting me to express your concern about my
support for S. 506, which would require digital audio tape (DAT)
recorders to contain an anti-copying device.

     This legislation has been referred to the Senate Committee
on Commerce, whose Communications Subcommittee held hearings on
the subject on May 15, 1987.  The hearings strengthened my
conviction that the piracy and burgeoning mass-copying of music
is a problem that will only get worse with the introduction of
DAT into the American marketplace.  The livelihood of tens of
thousands of struggling American musicians, performers and
composers is at risk.  In my view, it is appropriate for Congress
to consider changes which seek to protect intellectual property
whether it be music, computer software, or an industrial process.
I simply do not agree with those who argue that intellectual
property -- because it is intangible -- is somehow less deserving
of protection than physical property.

     I am concerned, however, by questions raised at the hearing
about the potential that the copycode scanner will be audible, or
will in some way have a damaging effect on pre-recorded music.
As one who himself has appreciated the incredible advances in
consumer electronics technology over the past two decades, I have
grave reservations about imposing any technology which would have
such an effect.  Therefore, I joined several of my colleagues in
requesting that the National Bureau of Standards conduct an
impartial engineering and acoustical study of the copycode
scanner.  This study -- which will be conducted with input from
representatives of both the DAT manufacturers and the copyright
owners -- will take four to six months to complete.  If the study
shows an audible effect on the music, I will oppose the copycode
scanner and encourage the music industry to seek another remedy,
such as a new royalty arrangement.

     Again, I want to thank you for sharing your thoughts with
me.  Although we may disagree on this issue, I will certainly
keep your views in mind as legislation proceeds and I encourage
you to contact me in the future on any issue of concern.

					Sincerely,

					John R. Kerry
					United States Senator

Edward M. Kennedy
  Massachusetts
		   U n i t e d   S t a t e s  S e n a t e

						July 31, 1987

Mr. John R. Covert
Acton, Massachusetts 01720

Dear Mr. Covert:

     Thank you for letting me know of your concerns regarding
proposed royalty fees on blank tapes and recording equipment.

     The practice of home taping of copyrighted music is a
growing phenomenon.  During hearings on this issue in Congress,
it was revealed that nearly half of all home taping is carried
out as a substitute for purchasing commercial records and tapes.
As a result, over $1 billion was lost in retail sales of the
recording industry in 1982.

     This loss has had serious adverse effects on the industry,
especially on new and struggling recording artists.  The decline
of revenue has resulted in cutbacks in employment in the
industry, and increased reluctance to risk the release of new
recordings and undiscovered talents.  From 1978 to 1982, record
releases fell by more than 30%.

     During the last session of Congress, the Home Audio
Recording Act was introduced.  I supported this bill, which
sought to address these problems by imposing a modest royalty gee
on blank tabes and certain recording equipment.  When considered
by the Judiciary Committee, the provision imposing a fee on blank
tapes was removed.

     I believe that the Home Audio Recording Act fairly balances
the legitimate interests of consumers and creators of artistic
works.  The 99th Congress did not take final action on this bill,
and I look forward to its re-introduction during the course of
the 100th Congress.

     Again, thank you for writing.

					Sincerely,

					Edward M. Kennedy

    Kennedy blows smoke...
    
    Record releases down 30% between '78 and '82? Is he trying to say
    this was due to piracy? Seems to me there were petroleum shortages
    at that point...
    
    Edd

    The 30% drop was more likely due to no good music to be released.
    
    tom  (stuck in the 60's)

    re:.29
     I got exactly the same letter, dated the same day.  He must be
    getting a lot of complaints, and has set up a form letter.  (Not
    saying I'm surprised, but I thought I'd mention it.)
    
    	Steve

Kerry's letter is probably form also, but at least he put some thought into 
it, and didn't display extreme arrogance as Kennedy did (typical for him).

Kerry brought up legitimate concerns.  Kennedy did not.  Rather, I find it 
hard to believe his "statistics", and find it ironic also that none of his 
propaganda is newer than five years old!


				Mark

re 817.30
Edward M. Kennedy
  Massachusetts
		   U n i t e d   S t a t e s  S e n a t e

						July 31, 1987

>...During hearings on this issue in Congress,
>it was revealed that nearly half of all home taping is carried
>out as a substitute for purchasing commercial records and tapes...

Will someone tell me how they reveal a FACT(?) like this?  Is this a
best guess by someone, or is there some substantial evidence which
backs this up?

Don

    According to "Inside the Recording Industry -- a Statistical Overview"
    published by the Recording Industry Association of America:
    
    MANUFACTURER'S UNIT SHIPMENT:
    Between 1978 and 1982 there was a 20% drop in shipments and a 12%
    drop in revenue.
    
    Between 1978 and 1985 there was a 21% drop in shipments and a 6.2%
    INCREASE in revenue!
    
    PRODUCT RELEASE:
    A previous reply feeling there was not as much good music released
    came close to the mark:
    Between 1978 and 1982 there was a 37% drop in LP _new releases_ and
    a 47% drop in LP new releases between 1978 and 1985; an 11% drop
    in new prerecorded cassette releases between '78 and '82 and 21.5% 
    drop between '78 and '85.  CDs held 12% of the new release market
    in 1985.
    
    TOTAL NEW RELEASES:
    Between 1978 and 1982, for LP, cassettes, and 8-tracks showed a
    41% drop and between 1978 and 1985 (dropping 8-tracks in favor of
    CDs for the '85 figure) a 39% drop.
    
    I'll leave it to some analyst to play with the figures, but it seems
    that, sure, sales are down, but is it due to junior's illegal copying
    or is it because there were fewer new releases out there?
    
    For what it's worth:
    TOTAL PURCHASED BY CONFIGURATION IN 1985:
    CD 2.9%
    LP 33.7%
    *Prerecorded* cassettes 58.9%
    
    If I can get these figures for 1985, why can't Kennedy?
    
    BTW: Kennedy also sent a similar form letter to my response regarding
    the proposed tax on prerecorded video tape a couple of years ago.
    
    > R.Michael

    re:.36 correction
    
    The letter was in response to the proposed tax on _blank_ videotape.
                                                                   
    >R.Michael

    Does anybody have any statistics on the amount of money that is LOST
    due to home taping vs. the amount of money GAINED by the tape deck
    and blank tape manufactures?
    
    I'll bet more money goes into the economy, if copying is permitted.
    
    
                                                       -Paul
    

    re: .29
    
    OH BROTHER!  What ever happened to representational government?
    Kerry's response is laced with "I"s.  In fact, this last statement
    just wipes me out:
    
>          Again, I want to thank you for sharing your thoughts with
> me.  Although we may disagree on this issue, I will certainly
> keep your views in mind as legislation proceeds and I encourage
> you to contact me in the future on any issue of concern.
    
    Beautiful!  To me this says "...I don't give a !@#$%^& what YOU
    think, *I'm* the Senator, but I'll pretend that I value your inputs
    so that you will continue to vote for me...".  What a crock!
    
    David.   :-(

    There are three articles in today's Boston Globe regarding
    DAT and copygaurd.
    
    Edd

RE: .39

I have to take exception to your criticism.  It is your right to prefer 
populists over independent thinkers, but both types of politicians (to use the 
broad categories you have inferred in your note) fit comfortably within the 
context of representational democracy.

Kerry is showing that he is a responsible senator, doing his homework, and 
that a major part of his homework is listening to what constituents have to 
say.  We don't have all the facts, and neither does he.  That's essentially 
what he's saying; that he needs to take a balanced view based on what EVERYONE 
has to say.

I'm not a big Kerry fan, and voted against him, but I was impressed with the 
political maturity shown in his response.  I've ALWAYS hated the Kennedys, but 
STILL was shocked at Teddy's response.  Maybe all the near-misses of the last 
few weeks (hardly a week goes by that he doesn't almost get killed in a 
suspicious car or boating accident) will shake off some of his arrogance, but 
I doubt it.


				Mark

Tell me, why isn't Ted K. worried about people who copy books and magazines?
I have to admit it -- I'm guilty -- I sometimes use the copier down the hall
to  copy a magazine article, and put copies in the mailboxes of my coworkers
for  their  interest. Now I suppose I could run down to the store and buy 20
copies  of  the  mag  and  put  them  in  peoples mailboxes.. after all, the
magazine  is  copyrighted  and somewhere there are poor starving editors and
publishers who aren't getting the extra money from sales. 

But face  it  --  if  I  couldn't  copy  the  article  I'd just circulate my
magazine. I wouldn't buy 20 magazines. I wonder how many people who may copy
records  and tapes wouldn't buy them anyway. And on the other side, by being
able to tape records, I believe I extend the utility of the records and thus
am  more  likely  to buy more records, not fewer. Once I tape a record (or a
CD)  I  play  listen to it in my car, in my office, on a long plane trip, or
while  I jog. Take away all those uses of my rightfully owned record and you
decrease  its  utility  to me. I will thus consider longer and harder before
shelling  out  $9.00  -  $15.00  for  something  with reduced utility -- and
ultimately I WILL NOT BUY AS MANY records and CDs.

 re .40 

>    There are three articles in today's Boston Globe regarding
>    DAT and copygaurd.
    
I saw the two in the editorial section, but where was the third ?

Btw, the two I did see were very interesting.

Peter.

    There are 2 on the Editorial Page (I take it you found those) and
    a third in the Living Section.
    
    Edd

 re .44

Found it, thanks. Good description of all the infighting going on !

Peter.

    ...all of those letters are created by a program running on a PRIME
    computer in Maryland; the staff pick and chooses from a number of
    things to say and poof! out comes a neatly typed letter.  This service
    is sold to many on Capitol Hill.
    
    GAS
     

    re: .41
    
    Sorry if I offended anyone.  I re-read Kerry's note and admit that
    I may have over-reacted.  On first reading he just hit me the wrong
    way and before I knew what was happening I was keying in a reply.
    
    I guess we'll just have to wait and see how he votes (once all the
    facts are in) before passing judgment.
    
    David.

    The August Stereophile had an "editorial" on DAT and copyguard.
    I don't have it handy, but the gist seemed to be that the notch 
    covered ?5? notes in the middle of the audible range and during the
    testing people were easily able to distinguish between sources with
    and without the copy guard.  Also, supposedly several CD manufacturers
    have flatly refused to indulge in anything that would degrade the
    audio quality.
    
    D

    RE: Teddy's Letter
    
    "... over $1 billion in lost sales"  Bullsh*t!  It is not a valid
    argument for him to say that if I buy a record, and make 10 copies
    for my friends that they have just lost 10 record sales.  I seriously
    doubt that even a small percentage of those who receive home taped
    albums or videotapes was ready to race out to the store and pay
    full price if they hadn't gotten them for free.
    
    -ral

    
    RE: Teddy's amd Kerry's letter
    
    I wonder how much money the recording industry contributed to their
    re-election fund?   With all the serious problems this country has,
    the budget and trade deficits, Iran, Central America, Acid Rain, 
    Saving the whales, and the New Coke/Old Coke controversy, why else 
    would senators spend time dealing with such a Chicken-S#$T issue 
    as compact disk copying?                               
    
    -John

    re .50
    
    A previous note said that Kerry was a sponsor of the copy guard
    bill.  As you know most bills that pass have many back slapping
    deals that go along with them.
    
    Mayby there is a deal in the works to protect Software, that would
    be of great intrest to Kerry and Kenedy, in return for protection
    of music.
    
    Jeff

    A London newspaper reported on Saturday that SONY is trying to buy
    CBS! Apparently SONY isn't very keen on "copycode" (the newspaper's
    term) and wants to hasten the introduction of DAT. CBS are not
    commenting at present.
    
    I also read earlier last week that the copyguard bill had passed
    its first hurdle in the House but with the proviso that it would
    be withdrawn if the Secretary of Commerce (I'm not sure if I remember
    the secretary, exactly) decides that the copycode "notch" degrades
    the sound quality. Lets hope he changes his hearing-aid batteries!
    (Just kidding.)
    
    wrh
    

     
    [reproduced from the October edition of "Q" magazine.....without
     permission, naturally. :-)]
     
    COPYCODE HORROR
    
    Demonstrations of CBS's Copycode system to prevent the recording
    of CD's onto DAT were held for the benefit of trade and press recently,
    in response to speculation that Copycode not only prevents copying
    but also spoils the quality of the music on the disc which the code
    is installed.  CBS were hoping to convince sceptics that their system
    was innocent of the speculative charges against it.
    	The Copycode system works by sucking a narrow notch out of any
    sound recording.  This notch is recognised by matching circuitry
    in a DAT recorder, which ensures that no recording can be made.
    CBS want it made law that any audio or video recording sold or
    broadcast to the public will be 'notched' and that all new recorders
    will incorporate the spoiling circuitry.  They claim that the notch
    does not affect the quality of the music, but many experts in the
    USA are already denouncing the Copycode system as a step backwards
    from High Fidelity music reproduction.  Dave Stewart of Eurythmics
    was quoted in Billboard recently: "I just don't understand why CBS
    chose to devise a system that interferes with an audible portion
    of the frequency spectrum.  If they really had to devise an
    anti-copying system, why couldn't they have placed the signal to
    be read by the chip above the range of human hearing?  The way it
    stands now, it seems certain that the system will interfere with
    phasing and harmonic overtones.".  Stevie Wonder, Joe Jackson and
    Frank Zappa are also among the first to publicly denounce the Copycode
    system.
    	In the recent press demonstrations in London's Abbey road studio,
    almost all of the invited hi-fi press could hear the effects of
    Copycode for most of the time.  High piano notes clunked, solo voices
    were ragged, and the cutting in and out of the system was audible.
    By the end of the demonstration, CBS had abandoned it's claim that
    Copycode was inaudible and asserted instead that it was an acceptable
    compromise.
    	CBS does admit that they are not quite ready to put Copycode
    into operation, and they haven't yet encoded any of their records.
    They say, however, that they intend to build 100 encoders - 45 for
    their own use and the rest to be sold off to whoever wants them
    at around 2000 pounds each.  But unless there is a complete change
    in the operation of the system it seems highly unlikely that it
    will ever be acceptable to the music industry as a whole.

    
    ...an ACCEPTABLE COMPROMISE?!?!?!?!?
    
    Edd

    I've always wondered if there's another problem with the copyguard
    scheme, a contrary one, sort of...
    
    As I understand it, the circuit will detect a notch in the spectrum
    to be recorded. But what if I want to record something that doesn't
    have any energy in that notch in the first place? Say, I want to
    use a high-quality microphone and a DAT recorder to practice my
    English pronunciation (a little overkill, maybe, but a real example).
    I'd say that a male voice doesn't have much energy in the copyguard
    notch. Would a DAT recorder the deny to record my voice?
    
    Also, how can they make sure that the circuit cannot be disabled
    by clever hackers? How about feeding some pink noise to the recorder
    in the copyguard notch? (This would obviously also make the recording
    worse, but the total energy of the noise would be quite small with
    such a narrow bandwidth).
    

The Friday edition of the Wall Street Journal did not mention a connexion 
between CBS' copyguard proposal and the Sony sale.  Instead, the mentioned 
that CBS/Sony has been an ongoing partnership in Japan for years, and that CBS 
turned down a full partnership last year and may do so again unless the offer 
is sweet enough.

Note that this covers only their record division.  Since books/magazines have 
already been pretty much liquidated or sold off, there wouldn't be much left 
to CBS except TV if the sale goes through.

Current leadership at CBS wants to get away from entertainment and become a 
more traditional conglomerate holding-company.


				Mark

    Re:.55
    
    My understanding is that the chip looks for the presence of a signal
    on either side of the notch and the absence at the notch.  If this
    occurs, then the recorder is disabled for some period of time.
    

    re:.55
    
    Isn't it also possible that the copyguard circuit is placed so
    that it's only affected by a signal coming through the line
    inputs and not the mike inputs?
    
    It's interesting to note some of the artists denouncing CBS's
    copyguard plan. Isn't the whole idea of copyguard, or so I'm
    sure CBS would like us to believe, to "protect" the rights of
    the artists?
    
    --- jerry

    re .58: Wouldn't make sense, then you could use the mike inputs
    for recording other things too (at least by using a simple
    impedance/level matching circuit).
    

    < Note 817.56 by REGENT::SCHMIEDER >


> The Friday edition of the Wall Street Journal did not mention a connexion 
> between CBS' copyguard proposal and the Sony sale.  Instead, the mentioned 
> that CBS/Sony has been an ongoing partnership in Japan for years, and that CBS 
> turned down a full partnership last year and may do so again unless the offer 
> is sweet enough.


    I don't know if the article I read was speculation on the part of the
    newspaper (The Independent) but they cited the copycode/DAT issue
    as if it was the reason for Sony's interest. It did mention that
    it was only the record division.
    
    wrh

The pattern looked for is not a simple notch, but a notch that comes and
goes at around 400 times per second.  So if you record something with no
energy at the notch frequency at all, the detector will not say "aha!".

"Gramophone" is a very prestigious magazine published in England and
dealing mostly with reviews of classical recordings.  They also cover
equipment to a slight degree.  In the September 1987 issue I just received,
on page 505, is a review of the Pioneer D-1000 digital cassette recorder.
Here is one sentence from the review:

	"Not only does this recorder incorporate the normal anti-
	copying circuitry which shuts off the record mode if one
	attempts to record the digital output of a CD having the
	copyguard subcode (which most CD's now have) but Pioneer,
	in common with most others, have also built in a record
	defeat processor for all incoming digital signals having
	the 44.1 kHz sampleing frequency.

At first I thought they were talking about CBS copyguard, and I was alarmed
that they considered it "normal" and that "most CD's" now had it.  But
reading more carefully I think they are talking about a DIGITAL subcode
recorded on the disk, which prevents digital-to-digital dubbing.  In fact
later on they say "You will need to use the standard analogue outlets."

By the way, in their opinion DAT recordings do not sound as good as CD.
They mention "a tendency to rob occasional 'busy' passages of some of
their sparkle", whatever that means.

    re. -1	I'm confused. I thought digital-to-digital recording
    		was impossible because the 'digital frequency' of the
    		DAT recorder was different from that of a CD. Does the
    		Pioneer deck you mentioned contain some sort of rate
    		conversion circuitry?
    
    Ken....

It would not be very difficult to do oversampling and anti-aliasing to convert
digital recordings from one sampling frequency to another.

--PSW

I think what they mean is that the DAT recorder will record direct digital
streams, but NOT ones at the standard CD frequency of 44.1kHz.  They will do
digital dubs from other DAT players (which use a different frequency), but NOT
if a special "don't copy me" digital subcode is present.  (Digitized audio
formats contain more than the digitized sound waves;  there is room for other
info as well, like the track markers.  Presumably this subcode is in there.) 

It sounded to me like this Pioneer deck WILL record anything at all coming into
its analog ports.  Note that this deck is not yet available in stores in the
UK.  The magazine said that it was against their usual policy to review stuff
before it was available, but they were going to do it anyway this time. 

There was brief note in the news yesterday (radio and newspaper) that
the National Bureau of STandards has found the copyguard design "flawed."
There was no elaboration as to whether this meant the circuitry was easily
defeated or if it was found to degrade fidelity.
Does anybody have any more information (or has this dicussion just moved to 
AUDIO)?

- tom]

It moved to AUDIO.
-M.