Re: [dvd-discuss] A TPM without use limitations -- thoughts?

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

On 11 Nov 2002 at 0:18, John Schulien wrote:

Date sent:      	Mon, 11 Nov 2002 00:18:35 -0600
From:           	John Schulien <schulien@speakeasy.net>
To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject:        	[dvd-discuss] A TPM without use limitations -- thoughts?
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> Having read the original article that started this thread, it appears to me that
> what they are talking about is not adding any sort of identifying information at
> all, but devising an algorithm to make an acoustic "fingerprint" of existing,
> unmodified songs.  In other words, this "fingerprint" isn't something that is
> added to a song -- it is a digital summary of the song -- used for recognizing a
> song.  
> 
> It isn't a DRM measure at all.

No but with all the downloading they'll have to do, weekly, daily, or hourly 
(depending upon their level of paranoia) it almost is a DoS attack as they 
police the networks to protect the flowers of intellectual property from the 
evil wicked mean and nasty hackers that want to rape, pillage and plunder...etc 
etc.

> 
>  > Audible Magic's technology aims to get around the problem of
>  > matching digital copies of songs that do not use a universal
>  > naming convention or format. Audio fingerprinting captures
>  > characteristics of a song that can be compared to files found on
>  > peer-to-peer networks and elsewhere regardless of the file
>  > name or type.
> 
> The reason for such a scheme would be to set up computers to
> download files at random, and mechanically determine whether
> the files are MP3s of one of their songs,  regardless of the
> (possibly misleading) filename.
> 
> All of this discussion about adding false fingerprints,
> removing fingerprints, and adding meta-data to fingerprints is
> very interesting, but it doesn't appear to have anything to do
> with what the article is talking about.
> 
> 
>