British game developers have launched an all-out war against illegal file-sharers. They're not about to take piracy in the industry sitting down. But the music industry, another victim of the pirates, aren't backing them up on this cause. It's an apparent disagreement in approach and disposition.

Hardware pirates are about to get another force to contend with: The new EPIC chip locking system developed by computer engineers at the University of Michigan and Rice University. While not infallible, the new locking technique should make things very difficult and costly for hardware pirates to copy chips that come armed with it. More in the full article.

In an attempt to block other media players from synching with the new iPod models, Linux users now find themselves unable to use their third-party software of choice to load songs into their new iPods.

An article in the ipodminusitunes blog states that there is a code embedded in the iPod, locking the iTunes database to a specific iPod. Any attempt to do modifications on the code will result with the iPod thinking that there are "0 SONGS" in its memory, even if there are songs uploaded into the iTunes database.

Other online sources think that this is not a measure to prevent piracy in itslef, but rather to eliminate competition of the iTunes store. Since most major music labels have eliminated DRM from their digital tracks, the likelihood of other music players that automatically load DRM-free music is very high, thus competing with iTunes Store.

This new move limits the choices of software to be used with the iPod, and since iTunes doesn't work on Linux, Linux users may need to either change to Windows or Mac, or not buy the newer iPods. Does Apple really want to lose its iPod Linux users? More updates as they come!

Earlier in the week, we reported a deal between EMI and Apple regarding selling Digital Rights Management (DRM)-free content which has pleased digital music fans around the world. In a move to react with the status quo, Microsoft has followed by announcing that it, too, will do the same for the Zune community.

In a statement by Katy Asher, a spokeswoman for Microsoft, it was revealed that the company has also been holding talks with record outfits in an attempt to cut the consumers some slack.

It can be remembered that there has been an outcry both in the U.S. and in Europe against DRM because the policy essentially restricts compatibility and transferability of content in an attempt to curb piracy of copyrighted material. Apple and Microsoft has embedded DRM code in their media formats, making consumers clamor for a more flexible policy.

"We plan on offering it (DRM-free content) to them as soon as our label partners are comfortable with it," says Asher. She said that Microsoft has recognized what the people want and is working on giving them what they desire.

Analysts suggest that the move by Microsoft is based on Apple's policy because of the influence that the iPod line of players have over the community. We'll keep you posted as the situation brews in the ranks of the Zune team.

 

Here's an interesting, and somewhat unorthodox, justification for pirating cooked up by The Ish blog. As the author notes, what happens if the stuff you get for free is flat out BETTER than what you get by paying iTunes?

The above picture reflects the differences that can occur between using iTunes and piracy and, as noted in the article, there's quite a large difference between the two:

As you can see in the above image, by purchasing the episode from iTunes rather than just pirating it, i actually get less of the show. Â?and to be honest, pirating this episode took maybe 2 to 3 minutes more work (emphasis theirs).

Of course, that isn't to say it's full proof. DRM is still an issue, even if Steve Jobs himself is trying to make it a non-issue. Quality will also be an issue depending on how much "ARR!" you put into your piracy activities. Still, there's an important point to be made here: If a service can't live up to the expectations of consumers, and there's a free alternative that's equal to or better than the service given, what good would it do for us to pay?

Unless you're a professor for movie studies, there's no way you can copy your DVD movies, thus breaking the DVD encryption protection law. So, if you're planning on ripping your DVD movies onto you iPods and other devices, you might wanna rethink your option, or at the very least, do so at your own risk.

This comes in the wake of the US Library of Congress' rejection of a petition that would give US iPod users the right to break the encryption technology on DVDs so that they can copy it onto their iTunes or iPods. Looking into it a step further, it could be because approving the petition might lead to the opening of floodgates as to the protection of these materials.

Particularly threatening in the status quo is the steady proliferation of piracy. And of course, no matter how much you say that breaking the encryption code is legal, as it will be with consent from the government, you still cannot deny the fact that it is but another form of piracy, only placed in a pedestal and tagged as legit.

At least, that could be one of the reasons behind the rejection. It simply might set a bad precedent. And with all the brouhaha about intellectual property nowadays, it just could prove to be a good call.

Does this seem all right to you? There is a company that sells pre-loaded iPods, charging people for the service of buying specific DVDs, loading them onto iPods, and then selling them to you. Customers pay for the DVDs, the iPod, and the loading service, and they get everything they bought in the transaction, DVDs included.

For people who don't know anything about video loading or who just want to make a special gift for someone tech-savvy, this doesn't really sound like such a bad deal. For the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), however, it's something they don't like. The MPAA is suing Load 'N Go Video for performing said actions because, according to the MPAA, ripping a DVD is against the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and, thus, a violation of copyright.

Here's a problem to think about though. Is it illegal to rip the media you legally purchased onto your iPod? One thing the author of the article brings to light is something Apple did during the early years of the iPod, citing an article from MacWorld and putting in the forefront the idea of fair use:

At the end of the event, we all took home pre-release versions of the iPod, which were already loaded with music. To make the point that the iPod wasnÂ?t meant as a vehicle for music piracy, our iPod packages also contained a stack of audio CDs, the contents of which matched the music pre-loaded on the iPod.

That being said, why can't these DVDs be fair use as well?

Tag this under general WTF-ery. During slow news days, and you need to get stuff, you start looking for the weird. This bit of "news" basically ties in with anything relating to copyright, intellectual property rights, and piracy. That means this touches upon anything you download online, from game demos to and homebrew goodies... well sort of.

Get this: Boy Scouts in the Los Angeles area will now be able to earn a patch for learning about the evils of downloading pirated movies, music, and other material on the internet. What does the patch look like? Look at the image on the right.

The scouts will be instructed on the basics of copyright law and learn how to identify five types of copyright works and three ways copyrighted stuff can be stolen. Activities for the scouts include visiting a movie studio (to see how much money employees lose due to piracy) and creating public service announcements urging others to be good copyright observing people.

So will kids carrying PSPs that have questionable media in it or gamers with mod-chips in their consoles start saying "Run! Here comes the boy scouts!" ...or something like that?

We know, we know, there are arguments as to whether or not things like mod-chips, hacks, emulations, homebrews, and even plain YouTube videos infringe on intellectual property rights. It just came to mind that given recent news - the ones about console companies filing lawsuits left and right on grounds of infringed intellectual property rights - perhaps instead of them spending money filing law suits, they could just send creepy Boy Scouts to the offending party to "weird them into submission."

Ergh. We should stop eating bad pizza before. I'm ending this before anyone thinks I'm drunk.

Holdout artists, come out, come out, wherever you are...

In this iPod day and age where CD sales are continually dropping and more and more people flock to the Internet to download and buy songs, analysts say that bands and artists (or what we call 'holdouts') would inevitably have to give in to Apple and allow their songs to be purchased on the company's download site if they don't want to be left behind in the industry.

Andrews, manager for Bob Seger and Kid Rock, is amazed at the popularity of Apple's iTunes in the music industry (about 70 percent of the legal downloading market) having sold over a million songs in the last three years. Bob Seger has decided to release his classic 1976 album "Night Moves" but is still in negotiation to have his entire album downloadable and not just some of his select songs.

Metallica, who ironically was one of the bands who petitioned for Napster to be shut down, has also given in to iTunes and released their songs for sale late last month. The Red Hot Chili Peppers did the same thing in April with "Stadium Arcadium," their first album in three years. The band, along with Bob Dylan, has also used the site to sell concert tickets.

Holdouts such as the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Garth Brooks, Radiohead and Kid Rock still avoid iTunes because of piracy and artistic integrity concerns (with their songs being sold for just 99 cents each). Also, online distribution leaves them with a very small profit.  Andrews similarly revealed that artists are now earning less than a dime for each song sold, as compared to the 30 cents that they used to get.

Other record labels won't release statements (just yet) about allowing their artists' songs to be downloadable in iTunes but admit they're working with their artists and bands to keep their options open about their music and album sales, especially online distribution.