Blog von fugaL

IMMS was complaining to me that sox couldn’t read mp3 files to alalyze them. I wasn’t about to let this go on too long, I want IMMS to work to it’s full potential. I tried installing liblame0 and liblame-dev, I even tried libmad but all to no avail. Finally I did apt-cache policy sox. The installed version was some studio version from DeMuDi. I thought if any of the available packages would support mp3 it would be the one from demudi, alas this was not the case. I installed the version from ftp.easynet.fr (PLF) and now I have (readonly) support for mp3. Good enough for me.

DRM has always left a sour taste in my mouth. I sympathize with those whose tools ‘support’ DRM. I sympathize with music junkies who buy and buy from labels only to be betrayed with a broken product.

It has heretofore been a removed sympathy. I don’t buy a lot of CDs and what I do buy I try to buy from independant/smaller/DRM free labels. Where I do end up with a DRMed disc, I hardly notice as my software doesn’t ‘support’ it.

Then today I took a trip into a parallel universe. This trip was spurred by articles concerning Sony’s attrocities. I found my most recently favourite band, Switchfoot, is infected. I imagined the sorrow had I thought Switchfoot was for it. I’m glad the same article cited Switchfoot’s dismay and prevented rifting me from them.

I plunged into the parallel universe. There I buy CDs more than 1 or 2 a year. There I bought Switchfoot, Foofighters and other deranged Cds. I played them on my windows computer and it broke. I couldn’t use the music how I wanted. My computer got infected with more viruses than normal. My faith in the bands waned. My trust in CDs was betrayed. I came back shaken.

Back in this universe, I’m saddened that my ethics rival purchasing the infected switchfoot CD which very likely would have been CD #2 for this year’s 2.

Those of you on the music frontlines, you innocents taking shrapnel and crossfire, my heart goes out to you, more than ever.

If you don’t know what the broadcast flag is, or why you should care, read this:

What the Broadcast Flag is and Why You Should Care

An aptly named 3 minute guide.

Why is Google wrong in the GooglePrint endeavors? There are many opinions. Each one I’ve seen doesn’t even argue anything pertinent. Oh they can argue their points till blue in the face, even come up with some sound conclusions. The newest one I’ve seen is that publishers find and nurture talent, and google destroys that. Whether or not google destroys publishers and whether or not publishers actually find and nurture talent are both moot.
These were argued in the comments from this post and here’s an excerpt of my thoughts expressed therein.

Certainly a good NFT strategy could go a long way and may be worth defending. However, I don’t think that ‘publishers’ necessarily represent a ‘good strategy.’ … who’s to say the next strategy, perhaps Google, won’t be better?
…

Is Google wrong because it supplants the current arrangement with publishers? I think it’s safe to say that Google will supplant that arrangement, but I don’t think that makes Google wrong, that’s called competition.

Is Google wrong because it will stagnate the realm of knowledge? This is the fair question. After all, the entire point of copyright laws was to prevent stagnation, not for some ‘holy right’ for somebody to own knowledge. For what it’s worth, I think Google will stir up the pool of knowledge into a rich environment.

More publishers are suing (this time the American Association of Publishers) and more issues are taken against Google.
One of my favorite quotes from the article:

“On one hand, they make it pretty clear that what you’re accessing and looking at is copyrighted material,” said Mr. Kessler. “Notwithstanding that, they make it available to whomever. It’s like making a DVD copy and giving it away, but making it clear to people that it’s copyrighted.”

Ah, the spin. Pull out some magic words, “copy” and “dvd” and “give away” to bring out the worst “eek piracy” feelings and associate it with google.

Another great spin in the article is when Google rejects an alternative plan involving the ISBN system. There’s no chance Google would accept that plan. It’s not in any way an ‘alternative’ for what Google wants—the ability to index works for which the copyright holders can’t be tracked down. A.K.A orphan works.
This alternative was only proposed so they could say in some roundabout way that Google is against ISBN and copyright. Pretty clever, I’ll give them that.

James Boyle delivered an excellent article on copyright tendencies about a week ago. It’s a refreshing clean and simple look at how these tendencies have developed, where they’re going, and why. I completely agree with Boyle. He addresses the fears and reservations I have concerning copyright with an expression I lack. It’s a short article, and very worth the read.

A story on Copyfight talks about authors and publishers conmplaining about Amazon.com selling new and used books. They say that the used book sales detract from sales of new books. I see three scenarios

• Readers who will buy the new book regardless, yes, they do exist, esp. for a reasonably priced book.
• Readers who want to save money and will buy the book used if available, or will buy it new and hope to resell it.
• Readers who will only buy the book if it’s under X dollars.

The first group would not likely resell thier books, so resale has little effect in regards to this group.

The second group is much more likely to buy a book, new or used, if resale is allowed AND effective (which is where Amazon.com helps). Resale only boosts the market here.

The third group may only buy the book at a lower resale price. These will add to the pool of those buying used, and will increase the number of new books that must be bought.

The net effect of embracing used book sales and Amazon’s rediculously effectiveness at selling them is increased value and revenue. Authors and publishers should be thanking Amazon, not biting.