An interesting juxtaposition seems to be occurring as the Napster saga continues to unroll.

You'll recall that Napster creator Shawn Fanning, now an independent entrepreneur, is reportedly looking for people to back his latest venture - an app which would recognize copyrighted songs on p2p networks and let the owners price them for downloading.

"It relies on audio fingerprinting that identifies every song being offered by users on a file-sharing network," says a July 21 LA Times story.

"As the user submits the song, it would be checked against a database at Fanning's company to see whether it is copyrighted. If it is, the song couldn't be distributed without payment."

OoooK.

Enter the Blue Meanies ...
And while we wait to see how this'll pan out, "Kokopelli Networks announced the BETA release of its BluFilter software that should help protect copyrights," says an Ottawa Citizen item.

How does it work?

By, "analysing the digital signatures of downloaded music files and cross-referencing results with an online database provided by copyright holders," says the Citizen.

"The software examines the waveforms that make a piece of music sound the way it does. A particular song generates the same signature every time, regardless of the individual file.

"Once a download is complete, the software scans the file for copyright and alerts the user if there is a fee owing. The downloaded file is rendered unusable until the fee is paid."

Stay tuned.

Funny. And the reason I'll install this software is...?

Oh, the fee is paid huh? To whom, may I ask? The artist? Of course not. To FatCat Exec and his cronies of course. No thanks.

...You love acting like an idiot?

That's easy enough... I'll just record a split second of silence (or maybe me laughing really loud) at the beginning or end of the song and the waveform will not be the same... what a bunch of idiots... that is the stupidest idea I've ever heard from this industry.

Heh, or better yet just add a *hair* of reverb and the ENTIRE waveform will be different without having to hear something that wasn't originally there.

Again, these guys are the creme de la creme of the idiots.

Give me a break! :roll:

I would like to know how software like this would fair with the shitty encodings. C'mon, half of the stuff out there was encoded with the crappiest encoders. No need to add reverb, laugh, etc.

Oooh, what a great idea! It probably takes about 10 hours to analyze the entire waveform and match it against an extensive database of all known recorded songs. Gee, that's so practical. Where do I sign up?

Some talented audio encoding engineer is going to make a FORTUNE suing the pants off of Kokopelli Networks.

All you have to do is create an _original_ encoding (of which the encoder will instantly own the copyright) with a "ghost" waveform that matches the pattern of a copyrighted song. Depending on the recognition algorithm this could be as simple as a precisely matched beat or even mechanical noise. Downloaders of this new song will then be informed by the good folks at Kokopelli that they must pay a fee to the WRONG copyright holder.

Legal hijinx ensue. Kokopelli's backers (RIAA) would, in effect, be attempting to profit from someone elses copyrighted work.

Stardaemon, how did you know?

Well... bad encoding or not... as long as there aren't audible clicks and skips in the file, the waveform should be very very close... but as I said, if you CHANGE the waveform at all (adding a little reverb would be the easiest and best sounding) then it doesn't matter if it was *perfectly* encoded... or even if it was a .wav file or some other type of audio file that maintains *most* of the original audio integrity, the waveforms WILL NOT match up, and you will never have to pay a fee based on this system.

It doesn't matter. 2 days after it is released someone will have a crack to let you listen without paying.

lol...ubenripped is right!

Oy.

I like that method better ubenripped... much less effort (for me)!

Sorry man.

We'd all be happy to pay for music. We wouldn't even mind if it was *kind of* pricey. Just give the ARTISTS the money.

We want napster. We want to pay the artists. We want NOTHING MORE.

THE END.

I'm with Sherm on this one. I know all we see are these artists with all their money and cars and houses and bullshit etc.. And I realize that our dollars are paying for that. However, if these bigwig assholes weren't sitting between us and the artists, then people like Aguilera and whatever artise d'jour being offered up will have all the luxury without us being shafted. I have no problem giving money in return for GOOD music (though none of the music i listen to has any affiliation with RIAA). But I sure as hell am not going to shell out 20 bucks knowing the vast majority of it is going to buy some sweaty lawyer his cherry red, 240 horsepower solution to his midlife crisis. Rip out the intermediate parasites so the music can once again be about the music, not lisences and fees and lawsuits.
Boycott.
Register.
Vote.
Be heard.

I recently found out about napster 2.0, and i have been through many a p2p prog, i have been swimming in the shallow end of the net for a while an all I can see is alot of hot air being over-publicized by the media. If they really think that people are going to be afriad forever, then they are really more stupid than they would like us to know, as for napester 2.0 i rather just stick with K++ and E-Donkey. I recomend that people that upload really just be carefull about what they keep in there shared folder, keep the FREE P2P alive and screw napster 2.0!

That is a silly idea. Just zip the whole album and share it as they do in eDonkey...

Why go through all the trouble of actually encoding it using some sort of a waveform? Its simple really.

Download the file, encrypt it, and zip it. Then put it up for download. P2P apps out there could simply come with a piece of crap encryption algorith that becomes the standard to decrypt after the file is unzipped.
Possibly you could just zip the file up, not even worry about encrypting it, depending on the scanning software.

Whatever they create, we can destroy. its as simple as that.

ok kiddies, it has come to this.

I was reading through the catch phrase dictionary and took the following words to use in my proposal.

compromise
value enhanced entertainment
fair usage
p2p
dumbass
copyright infringement
greedy soul sucking entertainment industry (RIAA)

Here's what I came up with when I put all these things together.

Artists want copyright protection but since they don't actually own their own music (the RIAA does)most of them don't really care about filesharing. Let's try this.
1. In all cases copyrights should revert back to the originator of the work after three years. This way the labels can screw the artists with their rapist contracts but only for a short while. They still get to make their money but future proceeds will benefit the artist.

2. In the interim, all files with a bitrate of 192 KB or less should be legal for public fileshare services. That way you can download and see if you like but if you want the higher quality value enhanced entertainment you can go down and purchase the cd.

3. The RIAA can pull their heads out of their asses and compromise on the fact that no matter what dumbass crap they want to pull, filesharing isn't going to go away. It doesn't take a genuius to realize they are outmatched. They might catch a few people here and there but that will just force people to go to private networks and encourage the situation to get even worse.

4. The greedy soul sucking entertanment consortium (RIAA)still gets to pillage everyone who has to have an intial release copy but at least the artists whom they profess to be so concerned about can look forward to future revenue from greatest hits compilations and the industry will be forced to look at and develop new talent that is actually going to stick around rather than flash in the pan bubble gum crap that we get a steady diet of now.

This isn't so hard. everybody can profit here. The greedy bastards just don't seem to realize that the more they pull the reins the more the horse will buck. Does this sound like fair usage? I think so. No record label should have the rights to any artists work for more than three years. I can see them saying they are allowed to make back their investment but a lifetime screwing not helping the ones they claim to be protecting.

This is simplified fersion of what I have in mind but the key elements are here. I would be great if some congressional people were to look at this and say, hmmm maybe these outdated copyright laws do need to be worked on. I'm open to suggestion if anybody can come up with additional thoughts or even something better. Until then I plan on putting together a proposal for my congressman to look at if he will.

Hope somebody reads this . the capt

I like AdmiralSinep's idea. And what captdunsel said makes sense.
But i still dont get it:
what good duz this software do 4 the riaa?
u hav 2 b stupid enough 2 install it 2 work, rite?

that's what they're banking on. they want a cheap and easy fix that allows them to maintain control. that's why they want to change music formats and offer "discounted" price schemes that amount to the same screw job they've been putting out. The reality is that the RIAA is never going to change and never going to negotiate. that's why they have to be displaced. boycotts, protests, emails to congress are good but they fact is they have so much clout that they can deal with short term losses. as long as they survive they win. that's why we have to hit them from every side. we need to show them that they have their pants down and the world is going to kick their ass. If we can win the support of the artists by offering them the chance to get their copyrights back we can hit them from the inside. if we can have success in boycotting and protesting their tactics we can hit them from the front side. and most importantly if we can convince some of these lawmakers that the whole system is grossly antiquated and needs to be revised we can hit them from the backside. they're not going to back down. they have too much to lose and they don't believe that we are organized enough to fight them. I think they're wrong. I've seen too many talented people posting here and this is only a small segment of the world. what has to happen is that they have to be taken out of the equation. the record companies will get their dues no matter what but if the 90% of the world that's getting shafted takes it to them and is serious about it we can make a change for the better.

i wont stop sharing the capt

I didn't realize my typing was so bad. sorry about the misspelled words.

but i still won't stop sharing. the capt

@Jefrystube:
Because that's the only reason I can think of

i bet ya, that the riaa tryes to implant it as KaZaA or LimeWire or BearShare spyware.

captdunsel...speLLing be damned...keep the great ideas and observations coming!
~code

The RIAA may have money and political influence and shysters out the wazoo, but they don't hold a candle to the ancient Romans...the Romans feel because of several things...internal intrigues and decadence, and "barbarians at the gate"...I'm proud to be a barbarian...and for one, they have earned a place on my "Remember My Name" list....As a people, we have LOOOOOOOOONG memories...and we have an extremely talented group of people in our army.
we work as IT people, tech support,lawyers,cable installers,doctors,nurses,investment brokers...and old big lipped Cary "Where's my shot of collagen" Sherman has gotten his fat face plastered on the TV and now, we have a picture and name of the new kid on the block, Itchy Bunghole...they are making enemies in every walk of life from their butcher to the waiter at the restaurant they go to (hint, ad some special sauce for us in their food), and on and on....you have a nation of enemies now you arrogant bunch of arseholes...I sure am glad 60 million people don't hate me and wish me evil...some bad waves heading for old Cary and the boys at the RIAA>>>>

i mean romans fell...not feel..typo..sorry

Anyone know anything about DSP? Adding silence, volume changing, time scaling do nothing to change a song's frequency domain (normalized of course). Even pitch shifting is easily matched up in the frequency domain.

And reverb isn't impossible to detect either, after all it's just convolving the audio with some all-pass filter. Divide the frequency spectrum of the database copy with the downloaded copy and if a nice result comes out; chances are quite good they're the same song.

Bottom line, there are certainly ways to detect songs despite the obvious ways you guys would think to change them up.

appropriate comments from Dr. Strangelove...(Replace the word commie with RIAA)
speaking about the lawsuits...
"Well, I've been to one worlds fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones."

"Your Commie(RIAA) has no regard for human life. Not even his own."
--General Ripper
on Kazaa:
"I don't think it's quite fair to condemn a whole program because of a single slip-up."
--General Turgidson
On our need for proper media coverage:
"Gee, I wish we had one of them doomsday machines."
--General Turgidson

On the boycott and denying the RIAA our money...
"I do deny them my essence."

On a message to Cary:
"I think you're some kind of deviated prevert. I think General Ripper found out about your preversion, and that you were organizing some kind of mutiny of preverts. Now move!"
--Colonel Guano