FEATURE-CD-creator Philips blasts labels over protected discs

17 Jan 2002, 4:50pm ET

- - - - -
By Adam Pasick

NEW YORK, Jan 17 (Reuters) - As major record labels roll out a new breed
of compact disc designed to prevent Napster-style piracy, Dutch consumer
electronics
maker Philips (
AMS:PHG),
the co-creator of the CD, is refusing to play along.

The new discs now making their way into record stores in the United
States and Europe contain countermeasures that prevent playback on
computers and, in
some unintended cases, normal CD players as well.

"What we've seen so far is troublesome and cumbersome," said Gerry Wirtz,
general manager of the Philips copyright office that governs the compact
disc
trademark. "We worry (the labels) don't know what they're doing."

The five major record labels -- Bertelsmann AG's BMG, Vivendi Universal (
SBF:EAUG),
Sony (
TOKYO:6758),
EMI Group (
ISEL:EMI)
and AOL Time Warner's (
NYSE:AOL)
Warner Music -- hope that by preventing the use of audio CDs in
computers, users will be unable to "rip" or copy the music into the
easily traded MP3 music
format.

In the wake of Napster, the popular music-trading service that allowed
consumers to rip and trade MP3s with a minimum of effort, the music
industry was
forced to investigate ways to limit rampant CD copying.

The controversial new anti-copying technology introduces minute errors to
the CDs, or changes the location of data on the discs to prevent them
from being
played back on computers. In theory, most consumer CD players can correct
the errors and decipher the structure, unlike the more finicky computer
CD drives.

None of the companies have publicly committed to a full-scale
introduction of the discs, yet "it sounds like the record labels are
still very much behind
the idea and are in the process of rolling out an unannounced number" of
discs, said Jupiter analyst Aram Sinnreich.

WHEN A CD IS NOT A CD

Philips, because of conformity issues, has warned the record labels that
the discs are actually not compact discs at all, and must bear warning
labels to
inform consumers.

"We've made sure they would put a very clear warning that you're not
buying a compact disc, but something different," Wirtz told Reuters.
"We've been warning
some labels to begin with, and they've adjusted their behavior."

That means labels would also be barred from using the familiar "compact
disc" logo that has been stamped on every CD since Philips and Sony
jointly developed
the technology in 1978.

The five major labels declined to comment.

POST-NAPSTER CDs

The attempts to graft protective measures onto the 20-year-old CD
technology have had mixed results. Because there are hundreds and perhaps
thousands of
different CD players on the market, it's likely that some will be unable
to read the new discs.

"It's extremely difficult to retrofit the system with copy protection
without losing the ability for all CDs to play on all players," Wirtz
said.

In one of the first protected CD releases from BMG, Natalie Imbruglia's
"White Lillies" prompted numerous returns in the United Kingdom.
Universal's "More
Fast and the Furious" disc release in the United States featured a label
warning that the CD would not play on a small number of CD players.

Even when the protection technology works as intended, Wirtz said that
normal wear and tear could eventually overwhelm the error correction for
the altered
discs, causing them to become unreadable within a few years.

"We fear some of these so-called copy-protected CDs will play at first,
but will eventually show problems and break down," he said.

DMCA DANGER?

Aside from its ownership of the compact disc trademark, Philips is a
major manufacturer of CD burners, and Wirtz said future Philips machines
will likely
be able to both read and burn the protected CDs -- a proposition that may
land the company in the crosshairs of the U.S. Digital Millennium
Copyright Act,
or DMCA.

The far-reaching DMCA, enacted in 1998, bans any attempt to circumvent
copyright protections. Critics complain that the law puts too much power
in the hands
of media publishers, denying consumers the right to use products bought
for personal consumption in whatever ways they see fit.

Philips contends that the protected discs do not fall under the DMCA,
since they restrict the playback of music, not copying itself.

"It is not a copy-protection system, it is not doing anything to
recorders or copy devices," Wirtz said. "It would not qualify as
copy-protection under
the DMCA, or the new European laws."

However, the broadly worded DMCA bars the circumvention of any method
used to protect the property of a copyright holder, and experts on the
law said Philips
may be treading on dangerous legal ground.

"The record companies would contend that the protection is encryption
within the meaning of the DMCA, because it is designed to protect
copyrighted material,
and originates with the owner of the copyright," intellectual property
attorney Leonard Rubin of Gordon & Glickson said.

Attempts to circumvent encryption are explicitly barred by the DMCA.

"The way that statute has been interpreted, it's illegal to bypass those
types of digital access controls," said Robin Gross of the Electronic
Frontier
Foundation, a public advocacy group which opposes the law. "All you have
to do is attempt to put some kind of technological protection system that
controls
access to the work -- it doesn't matter how effective it is."


VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask]  In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
 VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html