Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Music Piracy Technology

Bach Launches Updated MP3 Format 279

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the more-than-just-hinderance-a-novel-idea dept.
An anonymous reader writes to tell us that Bach Technology has rolled out an updated MP3 file format in a bid to combat music piracy. Dubbed "MusicDNA," the new format offers embedded "updatable premium content" like lyrics, videos, news updates, and album artwork. "Using the new technology, music labels and bands will be able to send updates to the music files – with tour dates, interviews or updates to social networking pages – while illegally-downloaded files remain static. ... No major labels have signed up to use MusicDNA so far, but British record company Beggars Group and US label Tommy Boy are both on board. However, the files are likely to be more expensive than MP3 files – according to the BBC – and will have to compete with Apple's iTunes LP, which already provides additional content such as bonus tracks, lyrics and video interviews."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bach Launches Updated MP3 Format

Comments Filter:
  • by sopssa (1498795) * <sopssa@email.com> on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:01PM (#30894756) Journal

    with tour dates, interviews or updates to social networking pages – while illegally-downloaded files remain static.

    So if I want to buy music legitly, in addition to paying for the track I will now also get spammed with ads?

    • by BabyDuckHat (1503839) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:05PM (#30894820)
      They're not ads. They're valuable opportunities from trusted online partners. Now, where did I put that shiv?
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I hate to think what the record companies are going to include with this new format, lets face it they cannot even manage to tag mp3's properly most of the time.

      • by thehostiles (1659283) on Monday January 25, 2010 @04:30PM (#30896100)

        so?

        the "extra information" they're offering is of absolutely NO value.
        we can get tour dates, album artwork, interviews and other goodies anywhere else free of charge.

        this changes nothing. You're actually going to end up getting a normal music file that takes up a bit more space on your hard drive.

        • by Lord Byron II (671689) on Monday January 25, 2010 @05:46PM (#30897212)

          Saying it has "no value" is like saying that Wikipedia has no value because there already exist print encyclopedias. I think, done correctly, this could be fairly unobtrusive and beneficial. Imagine, you download a single you like and it already contains Amazon links to buy the full album. Or it lets you know when the band's next release comes out.

          I for one welcome this idea. Instead of penalizing the legitimate buyers of a product with DRM, they are attempting to reward the buyers with additional content. Our relationship with the content industries is always going to be one of a carrot or a stick, and I much prefer the carrot.

          • by Merls the Sneaky (1031058) on Monday January 25, 2010 @08:53PM (#30899228)

            Sounds like advertisement to me, personally I hate advertisements.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by macslut (724441)
            Saying it has "no value" is like saying a paid membership to a mirror of Wikipedia has no value. Your examples don't show any added value. "Imagine, you download a single you like and it already contains Amazon links to buy the full album." Like iTunes and any other software (and even hardware) not only can do, but do so effectively now using the meta data? "Or it lets you know when the band's next release comes out." Again, totally doable now. There are tons of apps (free) that allow you to get all ki
    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:07PM (#30894858)

      In other words, if I download a file illegally, I'm guaranteed to be left alone and my files won't be changed around without my consent or prior knowledge?

      Hm.

    • by alop (67204) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:08PM (#30894880) Journal

      Sounds like a misguided effort. What I really want, is high-quality audio in smaller file sizes. It seems like they're creating a solution without a problem, or for the wrong problem.

      I understand the point of incentivizing legitimate downloads, but the incentive here is something I (or just about anyone) can get with a quick google search.

      If they really want to incentivize legit downloads, give me exclusive content or, life-like audio... Heck, I'd take the music equivalent of "Director's Commentary" over their proposal.

      • Both you, and the grandparent post miss the point. You are not the customer.

        File sizes do not matter. Spam does not matter. You are not the customer.

        You only have one choice, to realize that you are not the customer, or ignore the problem.

        Why would you buy something when you're not the customer? Would you buy a McDonalds Hamburger, if what you got was a Spamburger instead? On the other hand, you might prefer spam to McDonalds Hamburger. I know I would!

        Except I'm Kosher. ;)

        And I figure this is cracked in 3 .

      • by InlawBiker (1124825) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:29PM (#30895184)

        Doesn't matter what we, the end users, want. The customer is big record labels. They want a format to "combat piracy while adding value and opportunities for marketing synergy in strategic channels."

        The folks who designed the format know perfectly well it will never go anywhere. So what! They're getting paid.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by sageres (561626)
        There is ogg vorbis for that
        • Vorbis files can compress to a smaller file size and still sound fine; Vorbis' better compression will cut down on bandwidth costs and keep you from being a victim of your own popularity.
        • Vorbis' standardized, easily-edited comment header provides a space for you to scribble all sorts of notes about yourself to distribute with the music; this helps fans find you, your site, and where to buy your stuff.
        • If you decide to sell your music in MP3 format, you are responsible for payin
      • by Jeremy Erwin (2054) on Monday January 25, 2010 @04:16PM (#30895892) Journal

        HILDEBRAND Hi. I'm Andy Hildebrand, [wikipedia.org] and I'm here with my good friend Paul Northfield [wikipedia.org], and we're here to discuss why this albums sounds the way it does.
        NORTHFIELD: What's so impressive about this album? I'd like to point out that this track is particularly loud. By keeping the basic beat at fairly steady -0.5 dbFS, we were able to achieve a dynamic punch heretofore unrealized in the industry.
        HILDEBRAND: One of the problems with singing that loudly, of course is that sometimes a singer's voice distorts. By applying a proprietary algorithm, we able to ensure that the distortion is minimal.

    • by infinite9 (319274) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:09PM (#30894914)

      I hope it's an open standard so someone can write a utility to strip all the crap from the "new and improved" mp3 files.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      Opt-in, not mandatory.

      So if you want to buy music legitly, you have the option of having the bonus features, similar to those on a DVD or Blu Ray. Its just incentive to buy over pirating.

      Which is the best way to go about it, and we all know it. That way they can have their cake and we get to eat ours.

      • by unformed (225214)

        If I want to receive information from a given band, I can put my email address into their newsletter.

        • Perhaps you misread the first line of my post?

          Or perhaps you misunderstood it?

          Or perhaps you missed everything altogether...

    • by jollyreaper (513215) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:14PM (#30895000)

      So if I want to buy music legitly, in addition to paying for the track I will now also get spammed with ads?

      But wait, there's more!

    • by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:41PM (#30895350) Homepage

      From TFA:

      Dubbed MusicDNA, the files contain embedded additional content including lyrics, videos, news updates and album artwork.

      Ok, so lyrics and album art totally makes sense, but... can't you already do that with ID3 tags? But videos? Why would I want to store a video in my MP3 file instead of as its own video file? And the news updates, as you said, sound like spam.

      To include some context to your quote:

      MusicDNA was developed by Norwegian firm Bach Technology, the company that also created the MP3 file, in an attempt to combat illegal file-sharing. Using the new technology, music labels and bands will be able to send updates to the music files – with tour dates, interviews or updates to social networking pages – while illegally-downloaded files remain static.

      Ok, so to me this makes it sound like, if I want to avoid getting spammed, I should listen to "illegally-downloaded files". This also implies that these files have some sort of phone-home DRM when the music is played, which is a potential privacy violation.

      You know, when I'm listening to music, I often do think, "The only way this could be better is if it had DRM and reported my listening habits back to record labels, and if I was getting spammed right now. If only someone would develop the technology!"

      • I think the coolest format is actually Matroska. Cover, a playable album in one file. Alternate versions / remixes, lyrics, and free metadata / attached files of choice.
        Of course, ID3 & co can already do most of that.
        But I would love to see more files ending in MKA. :)

    • by mariushm (1022195)

      They can do everything the description says with id3v2 tags. Perhaps just an extension to the id3v2 tag standard that would allow embedded javascript or html would be enough for all interaction they would need.

  • Extra content (Score:5, Insightful)

    by e2d2 (115622) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:04PM (#30894808)

    Given that one of the main reasons for buying music over simply downloading it is art work, lyrics, and extra content, this might not be a bad idea. IF you can truly restrict access. Otherwise you're just giving more reason to pirate the format.

    • With the spam factor that other posters have already mentioned, this only means the right time to pirate it is once artwork and lyrics have been added. At that point, any further "content" is likely unwanted.

      This said, if the copyright owners play it smart, they might be able to delay the inevitable rise of pirate editions by a few months. Release an album with the bare minimum of content, then keep adding bonus tracks and more artwork for some time. That gives a reason for either buying it or waiting. Peop

    • by PopeRatzo (965947) *

      Given that one of the main reasons for buying music over simply downloading it is art work, lyrics, and extra content

      That's just industry nonsense.

      The main reason for buying music over simply downloading it is six-figure fines if the RIAA goes after you.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Or if you want lossless encoding for some reason; it is pretty rare to find FLAC files on file sharing networks.
    • by Wuhao (471511)

      The counterpoint to that would be that in exchange for excessive restrictions on my bought-and-paid-for music, I am now also getting excessive restrictions on my bought-and-paid-for music, liner notes and artwork.

      Most of what they're saying not only has no place in the file, but is easily found for free on the Internet. I can typically find all the tour dates, lyrics, band photos and interviews I want between the band's website and the first few hits on Google. MusicDNA seeks to aggregate all of this inform

    • Except that all this can be freely had with many of the media players out there.

      I don't know if iTunes player does this (don't use, but I suspect it does), but both Rhythmbox and Amarok can get all this information automatically through plugins.

    • As a person who's probably paid for 3/4 of a rather large collection let me point out that for artwork and extra content scene releases usually trump paid releases. And it really makes sense because labels could give two shits about the content of their product while the people involved in the scenes are often actual music fans.
  • What? Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DigitalGodBoy (142596) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:04PM (#30894814) Homepage
    This was dead before they wrote the first line of the spec. The MP3 genie is out of the bottle and there's no amount of wishful thinking that can be done by the record companies to stuff it back in.
  • No thanks, Bach (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mcgrew (92797) * on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:05PM (#30894824) Homepage Journal

    Just when the patent on MP3 is set to expire they "update" it with DRM? WTF? This will ensure that the old, soon-to-be free file format will stay around.

    I hope Ogg doesn't think since MP3 has this cruft they have to too. Of course, MP3 may be playing catch up with Microsoft; WMA files have had DRM for a long time. The DRM was in fact (and still is) a security risk.

    I'll stick with OGG and even better, SHN and FLAC.

    • Re:No thanks, Bach (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Sir_Lewk (967686) <sirlewk@NospAm.gmail.com> on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:11PM (#30894950)

      Don't worry. "Updating" MP3 like this will not extend the coverage period of the patents on the original MP3. The patents on MP3 will still expire on schedule, though I can't say I actually care enough to look up when that may be.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by mcgrew (92797) *

        That's true, but they'll do their damndest to make the new format the new default.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Yeah. I'm sure they'd like that. And I'd like Scarlet Johansen to slob my knob tonight. The probability of the two happening are about the same.

      • Re:No thanks, Bach (Score:4, Informative)

        by Zerth (26112) on Monday January 25, 2010 @05:03PM (#30896684)

        The patents on MP3 will still expire on schedule, though I can't say I actually care enough to look up when that may be.

        In the US, December 2012 at the earliest, their main submarine patent surfacing in 1995.

        There's some others that might last until 2017, but they were put in well over a year after the mpeg standard was published(and thus technically void). Won't keep them from suing, but you might win if you aren't crushed by your own legal costs:)

        As for other countries, damned if I know. A bunch of other companies copycatted a lot, so there might be other patents in play elsewhere.

  • Wrong Audience? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Nemyst (1383049) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:05PM (#30894826) Homepage
    Maybe I'm really bad at marketing, but this seems like it's targeting the wrong audience. Those who download illegal music probably do not care about going to concerts or reading up on interviews - they only want the music. This will at best be another marketing tool for the most hardcore audience, at worst a total waste of time and money.
    • Re:Wrong Audience? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:12PM (#30894974) Journal
      I don't know if anybody cares about interviews; but research tends to demonstrate that pirates are, as a body, more enthusiastic about(and bigger consumers of) music than non-pirates.

      Now, if anybody actually thinks that this magic new format will be able to distinguish between the evil and the good when it comes to updating with exciting new stuff, I have some very exciting prospects in the field of bridge-related real estate to share with them.
      • Re:Wrong Audience? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by mcgrew (92797) * on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:35PM (#30895262) Homepage Journal

        I get all the free RIAA downloads I need from the radio! Just like I used to tape the radio, now I sample it. The only internet downloads I need now are indie music, and they WANT me to download their stuff.

        If the RIAA didn't have radio they'd be tickled pink to have you smple their wares from the internet, too. Their true enemy isn't "piracy", it's legitimate competetion from the independant artists, who have discovered that the majors are no longer needed for anything except getting your work on the radio.

        If you're in St Louis, KSHE plays seven albums every Sunday night, uncut and uninterrupted and have been doing so for decades. I had Ted Nugent's Stranglehold album on cassette a full week before it went on sale, thanks to KSHE. [kuro5hin.org]

        This new format does solve one interesting problem -- how to extend the patent on MP3, which is set to expire soon. Too bad copyrights aren't as short a length as patents, and a good thing patents don't last as long as copyrights. If they did, technological progress would be as slow as artistic progress is today. Like science and technology, art draws on what has come before.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      No, you are correct.

      This is a perfect example of a techies invention looking for a solution.

      Sometimes things like this takes off and other times it doesn't. I think this is a dead end as far as an into-piracy technology. OTOH, I see this being used by the recording industry to increase profits - in the meantime, the RIAA continuing with its anti-piracy legal system shenanigans.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by odin84gk (1162545)

      Not really. I don't pirate, but then again I don't go to concerts. (I really don't care that much about music).

      However, my friend who downloads a bunch of music goes to concerts and buys CD's. (He loves music, but can't afford to buy everything that he wants).

      So, in my mind, it is an appropriate audience.

    • Re:Wrong Audience? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Korin43 (881732) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:17PM (#30895030) Homepage
      Actually, pirates are the music industry's more valuable customers [torrentfreak.com]. It turns out that people who download the most music actually go to the most concerts and buy the most music also. It's still a terrible idea though, since it's basically mp3's with built in ads. I'm not sure where they will find people willing to pay extra for that.
      • by tacokill (531275)
        since it's basically mp3's with built in ads

        Right. That, and the fact that this isn't an MP3 and it's an entirely different format. But yes, aside from that fact, you are correct it's just like an MP3.
      • by mcgrew (92797) *

        What you say is true, but torentfreak isn't a good citation, as it has an obvious bias. How about the Guardian? [guardian.co.uk]

        Study finds pirates 10 times more likely to buy music
        According to research, those who download 'free' music are also the industry's largest audience for digital sales

        Everybody knows that music sales have continued to fall in recent years, and that filesharing is usually blamed. We are made to imagine legions of internet criminals, their fingers on track-pads, downloading songs via BitTorrent and ne

  • by FooAtWFU (699187) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:07PM (#30894854) Homepage
    Yes! Embed video interviews that are 10 times as big as the mp3 itself, because that's exactly what I want to squeeze onto my music player's limited space.
    • by Rockoon (1252108)
      MP3 players have not had what would be described as 'limited space' for a very long time. Most people have MP3 players that can hold hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of music, and those are the small ones.
  • Of FLAC, OGG and (probably to a huge extent) LAME. After all, Lame Ain't an MP3 Encoder, right?
  • Comical (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rbrander (73222) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:08PM (#30894882) Homepage

    ...a "successor to MP3", which removes the most popular feature of MP3, the ability to control your own purchased copy of the property. Yeah, that'll bring back the customers you chased away with the last 3 attempts at controlled digital content.

    It can be "updated"...who wants to bet that one kind of "update" is like the Amazon "update" of their sale of Orwell's '1984'...total deletion.

    Do not pass "Go", do not collect millions of customers...go directly to the ash-heap of computer history.

    • Exactly what I was thinking.

      Users who give a damn about their fair use rights will stay well away from anything that even HINTS at the ability to make it UN-content.

      What I'm eagerly awaiting is a complete sea-change in musicians/artists where they start realizing that the former barriers to entry no longer exist and go direct to self-publishing. /now that we're agreed that we are living in the future, where is my flying car?

  • by Adult film producer (866485) <van@i2pmail.org> on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:08PM (#30894888)
    I'll just keep ripping cds to .flac and distributing them so others can convert them to whatever audio format they prefer. Seems like a reasonable compromise.
    • What CDs? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by tepples (727027) <tepples@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:22PM (#30895096) Homepage Journal

      I'll just keep ripping cds to .flac and distributing them so others can convert them to whatever audio format they prefer. Seems like a reasonable compromise.

      Do the record labels even make Compact Discs anymore? I thought they all switched to non-conforming discs compatible with some CD players.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by kipling (24579)

        Do the record labels even make record labels any more?

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by proxima (165692)

        Do the record labels even make Compact Discs anymore? I thought they all switched to non-conforming discs compatible with some CD players

        The backlash against those copy-protected discs was strong enough that I haven't seen one in a while. The CD these days is still the best way to get a non-EULA encumbered, lossless version of the vast majority of music. The loss of "first sale" rights may be one unfortunate consequence of moving to online distribution. I prefer my music to come without a license.

  • Now I'll have music DNA smeared all over my HDD? Like having DNA smeared all over my keyboard wasn't enough, thanks Corporate Overlords!
  • by Attila Dimedici (1036002) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:11PM (#30894946)

    Using the new technology, music labels and bands will be able to send updates to the music files – with tour dates, interviews or updates to social networking pages

    They forgot to mention that this would also provide an exploit for malware writers to use to get into people's machines.

    • No more exploitable than downloading a file from anywhere ever would be. Less exploitable than those who download music for free off of torrents and P2P apps.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Khyber (864651)

        Umm, are you serious?

        They can update the file with new information at their whim if you opt-in.

        That's a HUGE potential exploit. Outside access to modify files? How long until someone figures out a way to use this to gain write access to root?

        • Outside access to modify A file, if you choose to.

          In order for the file to be modified it has to come from the authenticated source - probably the band, which means it'll have to come from a server owned by the band - or the band will entrust it to a music company.

          In order for someone to exploit this not only do they have to spoof their way into making the MP3 file - but they have to magically make it so that they can access root by the limitted permissions within the one file they can edit.

          How many people

      • No more exploitable than downloading a file from anywhere ever would be. Less exploitable than those who download music for free off of torrents and P2P apps.

        The difference being that when I download a new file, I know there is a potential that it will be malware rather than what I am looking for and can take steps to minimize the risk. With this new format, I have a file on my system that can be "updated" at any time by someone remotely, what makes you think it will only be "updatable" by authorized people?

        • The difference being that when I download a new file, I know there is a potential that it will be malware rather than what I am looking for and can take steps to minimize the risk. With this new format, I have a file on my system that can be "updated" at any time

          When you want it to be - you by no means HAVE to receive ANY updates AT ALL.

          And if its "updatable" by unauthorized people, then it would be prone to "Creed Sucks!" and all the other opinionated Crap flying around the internet. There is obviously some system in place to make sure that it is actually the band's newsletter or RSS feed or Twitter Feed getting put through to the file.

  • Oh Great! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by pm_rat_poison (1295589) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:11PM (#30894956)
    More expensive DRM-laden adware music! This is JUST what we need to change our minds about NOT CARING about music enterprises! Making the lives of the pirates easier compared to those who pay for the content is such a great idea! It's worked before, hasn't it?
  • FTA:

    Only last week it was reported that the first file-sharing trial in the UK had ended in acquittal. Alan Ellis, the founder of large-scale pirate music website Oink's Pink Palace, was cleared of defrauding thousands of pounds from record labels and musicians on the grounds that Oink did not host any music itself, but simply indexed the files users had available on their computers. “All I do is really like Google, to really provide a connection between people,” he told police officers.

    The Int

  • Will this (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rossdee (243626) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:15PM (#30895008)

    be compatible with my existing MP3 player(s)

    Thought not..

  • use a regular mp3 and put a unique identifier to the music in the id3 tag.
    Do you think I can patent my update to mp3 ?

  • The best way to combat piracy is to stop spending money on tighter controls that are cracked a week after being released into the wild; stop spending money on formats that users don't want; just generally stop spending money on things that don't work and don't have value and instead spend money on good song writers and good performers and make good music. People are willing to pay for quality.

    And, more specifically, the best way to combat piracy is to realize you're not going to succeed and instead find a
    • by LWATCDR (28044) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:26PM (#30895148) Homepage Journal

      You left out drop the price.
      Really folks when a song is less than 99 cents it isn't worth my time to pirate it. If I like it I will buy it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by godrik (1287354)

      instead spend money on good song writers and good performers and make good music.

      But that's difficult to find. It is easier to spend money on crappy engineers.

    • by c0d3g33k (102699)

      I agree with your opening statement, but ...

      And, more specifically, the best way to combat piracy is to realize you're not going to succeed and instead find a new business model that works. You'll notice that the bands who are highly profitable have figured something very important out - CD sales are not the road to riches - concert tours are where you make truck loads of money. The _experience_ of music is something people are willing to spend a LOT of money on. Listening to music just entices them to spend $200 a ticket to see the live performance on stage. Once more music people figure this out - once more music people figure out that the old way of becoming rich in the industry is dead - the better off everyone will be.

      This will last until people can record binocular video and binaural surround audio of their surroundings using body mounted nano- cameras and microphones that aren't easily detectable (or until "personal experience capture for digital life archiving" is protected by law so 'life recording equipment' doesn't have to be hidden), and social crowdsourcing sites allow people to combine a montage of different perspectives from everyone in attendance so equipped into a n

    • by mcgrew (92797) *

      Listening to music just entices them to spend $200 a ticket to see the live performance on stage.

      Lining the pockets of ticketmaster, an entity possibly more evil than the RIAA labels. In 1976 a ticket to see ELO, Journey, and Golden Earring together at Kiel auditorium in St Louis (all three bands, one after the other) cost $5 -- and those were the expensive seats. The cheap seats cost $3. That was the going price. Googling shows the price of bread four years later at fifty cents; I pay a dollar now at Count

  • It won't be sucessfull (who wants that stuff?), and even if it were, it wouldn't reduce piracy (what is stopping people to pirate the new content, every time it changes?). But it is at least a step on the right direction. The way to fight piracy is offering added value at the legitm copies, not subtracted value, and they got that right.
    • by b0bby (201198)

      The way to fight piracy is offering added value at the legit copies, not subtracted value, and they got that right.

      Except they didn't, because the DRM subtracts more value than the extra content adds.

  • > "Using the new technology, music labels and bands will be able to send updates to the music files - with tour dates, interviews or updates to social networking pages - while illegally-downloaded files remain static. ..."

    So, if I'm reading this correctly, if I buy a legitimate copy of the file I get spammed mercilessly, but if I download the file illegally I don't?

    Cool!

    • by natehoy (1608657)

      Actually, given the quality of music of late, I wonder if I could just download tracks of static. At least that way, I'm not breaking the law, and I know the tracks will remain static.

      Until someone copyrights white and pink noise, then I'm screwed.

  • They didn't mention the most used implanted data. Rootkits and virus's...... This won't keep the Russians happy.

  • by Pojut (1027544)

    ......I could be wrong here but the kind of people so interested in the extras noted in TFA they want them included with their digital purchase are likely the kind of people who abhor piracy anyway, or at least wouldn't pirate the music of their favourite artists. Also, it is worth nothing that the extras they mentioned are all things that could be found elsewhere online. I don't really see how collecting that information into one place and adding to the storage space required for a music collection would

  • by GreatBunzinni (642500) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:34PM (#30895248)

    If you happen to be one of those lucky persons who happen to have adopted a media player such as Amarok [kde.org] as their media player of choice then you can simply open Amarok's script manager and install the LyricWiki plugin [wikia.com]. That enables your media player of choice to just dish out any particular words to a song you wish to access. The beauty of this plugin/site combo is that you can get any lyrics you wish for any obscure artist and perfectly independent of any corporation, media player and even format in which your songs are stored. And album artwork? You already get that by default in Amarok.

    So where exactly is there a need for an encumbered, defective, unsupported and obscure format to be able to do exactly what countless people are already doing at this very moment?

  • uh huh (Score:3, Interesting)

    by koan (80826) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:35PM (#30895258)

    Sounds like a perfect vector for malware, and (glances at watch) it's hacked....next!!!

  • I hope it's cheaper to buy the ad/interview/cover art/lyrics free file since it'll be smaller. I have no interest in downloading a 20MB .mp3.

  • The article was particularly thin on the mechanism for this push technology. It sounds a lot like you'll need to install their rootkit^Wmaintenance program which will spend endless resources on your machine and network indexing your files and listening out for the mothership to apply updates. This could add up to a lot of data traveling about. I've got a modest collection of about 8500 tracks - all ripped from CDs I've purchased. Now, of course they're not in MP3 format - I got fooled once ripping to a loss

  • Bach mp3? no-way (Score:5, Informative)

    by McNihil (612243) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:40PM (#30895334)

    It wasn't Bach it was The German company Fraunhofer-Gesellshaft that did mp3 in the first place. Extremely shoddy article.

  • So the idea is to discourage piracy trying to sell people additional content that, by the very act of pirating music, they have indicated they can happily live without?

    Marketing people aren't just idiots, they're idiot-savants. If a planet-killer asteroid was entering the atmosphere at this very moment, they'd be scheduling a meeting for later in the week to discuss how to put a banner ad on it.

    • If a planet-killer asteroid was entering the atmosphere at this very moment, they'd be scheduling a meeting for later in the week to discuss how to put a banner ad on it.

      Can you imagine the impact of that advertisement though. DODGE TRUCK, BUILT ASTEROID TOUGH

  • and to make this work does the mp3 phone home or does it require a new player that phones home.

  • Another 10,000 files on my computer regularly sending autoupdate requests and using my internet connection at random times without my knowledge!
    I HATE autoupdate functions that run an applet in the background (java, acrobat reader, etc). Is it really too much to ask to only do a version check when I run the program, or put it in the task scheduler to run an applet occasionally rather than keep another process alive at all times?
  • the irony is that the company is named after the father of western classical (and therefore rather, contemporary) music, father Bach. but they, in lieu of his generousity, openness and productivity that ushered in a global era of music, are trying to make music closed. shameful. despicable.

    and as we all very well know, your format is as good as its acceptance. if the 'internet and digital community' does not accept your format, and players and sites support it and propagate it, you can only shove a format u

  • by thetoadwarrior (1268702) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:48PM (#30895474) Homepage
    I buy my MP3s from Amazon now. They're high quality, cheap, lack DRM and it has what I want in the meta data, the title, album, track no. and album art. There are a lot of unnecessary fields already, like lyrics that I find no one uses and for good reason, it's an MP3 and no one cares.

    It's bad enough Amarok has decided to put a big freaking wiki window in the middle of the player making me uninstall it, I certainly don't want blogs, videos, tour dates and, rest assured, security risks in my music.

    Anyone that has seen the joy of WMA and WMV files polluting porno on P2P networks knows this is a bad thing We don't need a platform independent version of shitty media files.

    Without a doubt if this format took off I would quit paying for music until it dies.
  • Really, who cares. mp3 is pervasive. Companies have been bslapped for not supporting plain ol' mp3s. (Sony AAC only devices... die quick deaths.)

  • by sageres (561626) on Monday January 25, 2010 @03:59PM (#30895636)
    Ok the article states:

    "MusicDNA was developed by Norwegian firm Bach Technology, the company that also created the MP3 file, in an attempt to combat illegal file-sharing."

    (emphasis mine) Ok well I am sorry but I do not understand. According to ematch.eu:

    Founded in March 2007, BACH is a new and fast growing music technology company. BACH has achieved a strategic partnership with Fraunhofer IDMT, an internationally proven and trusted institution in the music industry. In December 2009 BACH finalized it's first major investment round. Shareholders include Karlheinz Brandenburg (one of the inventor of the MP3 algorithm), 247 Inc. (the company of Shigeo Maruyama, the former Sony Music and Sony Computing CEO) and the German VC b-mt.

    So, how is the company responcible for mp3 format, because Karlheinz Brandenburg was responsible for one of the mp3 algorithms? And, he is just a shareholder. By far, he was not the only one who brought it about, and his implementation was one of several that made it into market. But as you can see -- the major shareholders are the music industry, specifically 247 Inc, the arm of Sony who are interested in it. In short Bach Technologies are overstating their credentials. They did not create MP3 and this was done for no other reason then an attempt to bring more DRM into the fold of the market.

  • by vlm (69642) on Monday January 25, 2010 @04:09PM (#30895790)

    You guys are missing the real, secret marketing plan. Those files will be available P2P. The "album art" will not be the tiny little CD cover, but a goatse. Fans of music that would like a goatse will get a different yet equally offensive picture. The "social networking" will not "friend" you to the band, but to alqada or some other james bond-ian villian. Instead of the web integration making the band your new homepage, it will make 4chan your new home page (assuming it isn't already, of course). You get the idea, basically it'll be trash.

    And those "bad" files will be widely distributed P2P by the music middlemen themselves, to poison the well. I can see the whiny public service infomercial now... "remember when you could download music safely? Well those days are over, now a simple music file and totally screw up your computer and ipod. But on the good side, you can pay a mere $2 per track for one of our guaranteed SAFE music files at our new web store."

Loan-department manager: "There isn't any fine print. At these interest rates, we don't need it."

Working...