Michael Foreman: Music player hums a sinister undertone

By MICHAEL FOREMAN

The latest Mp3 player to come on the market, Intel's Pocket Concert Audio Player, lives up to its name in more than one way.

The player fits easily into your palm or pocket, but its 128 megabytes of memory can store up to four hours worth of digital music.

The sound quality delivered through its geeky-looking headphones is superb, with distortion-free volume to burn, and there's plenty of bass if you want it.

It's going to be hard to give the evaluation unit back, but I won't be rushing out to buy one.

The reason being that Intel's player, like many others produced by companies such as Philips, Sony and Samsung, supports the Secure Digital Music Initiative (SDMI).

This is one of the clumsier attempts by the recording industry to close the gate that file sharing services such as Napster and its numerous successors have opened.

SDMI-enabled Mp3 players contain a programming code called Phase 1 screening, which could be likened to a Trojan back door that is waiting to be triggered by embedded electronic watermarks in future SDMI-protected music.

When a compliant Mp3 player detects the watermark it will request to be upgraded to Phase 2 screening. If the user elects not to upgrade, the player will continue to function as before, but will not play SDMI music.

But SDMI is facing a few problems, not the least of which is the failure to finalise the protection system that Phase 2 screening will use.

An open letter at the SDMI website assures us that whichever system is chosen, SDMI will not stop people playing existing Mp3s.

I think the supporting manufacturers are jeopardising their reputations by expecting consumers to take such a plunge into the unknown.

After all, would you buy a new car if you knew after a few months it would be recalled for some as yet undecided modification that might limit its performance?

Another thing I don't like about the Pocket Concert player is the fact that its Intel Audio Manager software, which shunts Mp3 files between your PC and the player, attempts to force you to register online. Now I'm sure the internet will enable businesses to explore all sorts of new relationships with their customers, and some of these will no doubt be quite beautiful - but it would be a good idea if they were consensual relationships, wouldn't it?

Once again, Intel is not alone in trying this sort of thing.

Microsoft, which started the ball rolling with the compulsory registration of its Office software suite, seems to be moving towards compulsory upgrades of some of its products.

For example, the present version of Windows Media Player insists that it must go online to check to program updates at least once a month, and programs like the Real Player will only stay offline if several, sometimes difficult to find, options are switched off.

In my view, software companies who pursue these policies, which can sometimes amount to a form of online stalking, should be told where to get off.

One way you can stop programs going online of their own accord is by using the popular firewall program Zone Alarm, (available free at Zone Labs website).

By allowing users to decide which applications may access the internet, Zone Alarm puts control back where I believe it belongs. But this option might prove to be short lived.

Microsoft has stated that its forthcoming Windows XP operating system will protect users from worms and viruses by providing a built-in firewall program like Zone Alarm.

On the surface this seems like a laudable move, but will the bundled firewall do to Zone Alarm what Internet Explorer did to Netscape Navigator? And will Microsoft's firewall be as vigilant in controlling the behaviour of Microsoft's programs as Zone Alarm is?

If it is not, then in the coming battle between consumers and copyright holders over digital content rights, the whole area of compulsory registration, compulsory upgrades and compulsory "relationships" may have to be seen in a more sinister light.

BOOKMARKS


STILL WORKING ON IT: Secure Digital Music Initiative

The latest news release on the homepage of the Secure Digital Music Initiative (dated May 18) states that the SDMI plenary determined "there is currently no consensus for adoption of any combination of the proposed [Phase 2] technologies". It says "SDMI participants will meet again in September to reassess technological advances in the light of emerging consumer needs".

Another part of the site assures us that the SDMI has "engaged in dialogue with critics of the SDMI effort", such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the open source community.

"We have agreed to disagree on certain details," says the SDMI.

Advisory: Cheer up - it may never happen.

ANY IDEAS? Ministry of Economic Development

The Ministry of Economic Development has begun consultation for an overhaul of the 1994 Copyright Act in the light of digital technology.

Does this country already provide enough protection to copyright holders, or do we need a New Zealand version of that draconian United States legislation, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act?

Your submissions could help to decide.

Advisory: Stand up for your digital rights ...

* mforeman@ihug.co.nz

* Peter Sinclair is on leave

Links


The Secure Digital Music Initiative

Zone Labs

Digital Technology and the Copyright Act 1994: A Discussion Paper