The End of DRM, But Not Control over Music?
Posted 09/12/07 at 04:20:24PM | by  

Mark Soper

It's been three years in the making (since May 3, 2004, to be precise), but Microsoft has now won a patent (number 7,266,697, for those of you keeping track at home) for what it calls 'stealthy audio watermarking.' In plain English, this new technology is designed to enable a song vendor to keep track of the origin of a digital music track, no matter how many times it's converted to other formats or distorted.

Beating 'Plausible Attacks'

According to ArsTechnica, the technique is designed to defeat a series of so-called 'plausible attacks' as identified by the RIAA, including sucessive digital/analog and analog/digital conversions, MP3 and other lossy conversion techniques, frequency response distortion, and others.

An End to DRM Without Losing Control? Implications of the Patent

If Microsoft's patent works as well in practice as the description states, it could enable music vendors to dump DRM via encryption without losing control of their content. As discussed previously here, some major music vendors are already selling unencrypted MP3 audio tracks as a premium-quality, more flexible to use alternative to standard encrypted WMA audio tracks. However, without watermarking, vendors can't be sure if their music is being redistributed en masse by purchasers. Digital watermarking can fix that, especially if each download is individually watermarked.

Beating 'Big Brother'

Although watermarking digital audio tracks doesn't run the risk of "I can't play this on my device" the way that current DRM methods do, it's still a potential privacy invader. Don't like the idea? Do something old-fashioned: create your own digital music tracks from your own CD collection. If you originate the digital music, the only 'watermark' you need to worry about is the one you left on the jewel case from setting a cold drink on it during the ripping process.

View / Add Comment(s)


-ADVERTISEMENT-
RELATED CATEGORIES
RELATED ARTICLES
EMI to offer digital downloads free of DRM The #3 music publisher will sell unencumbered music starting in May at Apple's iTunes store
Apple Takes a Bite out of DRM Our listening challenge reveals that songs encoded at 256Kb/s are only slighty better than 128Kb/s tracks.
The Fight Against DRM is Just Beginning EMI is un-DRMing all its music (well, except the Beatles) and selling it online. That's great, but the fight's not done yet.
Do Higher MP3 Bit Rates Pay Off? In this Maximum PC Challenge, we pit three different levels of losslessly-compressed audio against each other to determine whether we can hear a difference in encode quality.
RELATED LINKS

Comments

login or register to post comments
I'll buy music downloads...
Submitted by yagisencho on Wed, 2007-09-12 16:09.

when they stop publishing CDs. And not a day sooner.

Then again, where's the guarantee that CD-ripping software isn't already leaving fingerprints on the resulting files? Or won't begin doing so in the future?

Like yagi said, not until
Submitted by sackynut on Wed, 2007-09-12 20:46.

Like yagi said, not until CDs stop being published.
Although, not having privacy of you music is VERY lame, and not a good move, the only reason you should be worried is if you torrent and distribute music. therefore, since that is illegal, you cannot complain about anything.

also, if current CD rippers are watermarked it would not matter at all, unless they somehow water marked it with your name and address....

No piracy concerns here.
Submitted by yagisencho on Thu, 2007-09-13 12:46.

I'm not worried about piracy, since I don't 'share' copyrighted music. But I want to be able to rip a single set of files and then copy them to my DAP, make mix CDs for the car, move them to other machines on my home network, etc.

Name and Address
Submitted by Darth Ninja on Fri, 2007-09-14 14:03.

Ripping software could be puting your IP address on the media and then whoever could track you down that way, However I think that would create a LOT of anti-trust issues if anyone found out or it was ever used in a court of law.

not to mention privacy
Submitted by MacKinnon on Sun, 2007-09-16 09:06.

not to mention privacy violations.



- Advertisement -