RIAA's new target: digital radio

Recording Industry Association of America has crafted a proposal to American regulator, Federal Communications Commission, that would add DRM functionality to the digital radio platform used in the United States. Organization plans to submit the proposal to FCC next week.

RIAA is concerned about the fact that terrestial digital radio stations deliver audio in "too good quality", typically bundled with meta data (such as artist name and song information) making it easy for listeners to make CD-quality digital copies of tracks played over the airwaves.

RIAA proposes restrictions to upcoming digital radio recorders that would make it possible for listeners to record digital broadcasts, but would not allow dividing the broadcasts into individual songs. RIAA also wants to add a "copyright flag" to the equation, making it possible for content owners to set up a flag that would tell the recording devices that the broadcast can't be recorded at all, not even in full form.

Over 300 American terrestial radio stations already do digital broadcasting, typically in addition to their analog broadcasting. RIAA's proposals wouldn't affect to the two satellite radio operators, XM and Sirius, as -- according to the RIAA -- they "...have an incentive to limit it [digital recording] ...".

Source: Wired

Written by: Petteri Pyyny @ 13 Jun 2004 13:28

Advertisement - News comments available below the ad

3 comments

A_Klingon

"Digital radio promises to bring CD-quality music to FM stations and FM-quality sound to the AM band." (From the 'Wired' article).

"They" have been harping on this for years and years out of mind. "They" have been promising us the moon, the sun, and the stars ever since I can remember. In 99.99999% of the cases, they have delivered squat.

What digital radio broadcasts "promised" and what they have actually delivered, are two entirely different animals.

The open-air digital-broadcast system never caught the imagination of Joe Consumer. By it's very nature, the broadcast range is extremely limited, (you never receive a "weak" signal - you either receive it *totally*, or you do not receive it at all), and the high digital quality promised, was regularly defeated by the stations themselves with their amplitude regulators (auto-level-control; dynamic-range squashers) and other self-defeating signal-processing equipment, and receiving signals (say, in a moving automobile) was and is a nightmare.

To say that the current system is "unreliable" is an understatement.

Before they start cramming their already-dismal digital broadcasts with DRM inhibitors, they first need to come up with a system worth listening to.

Digital Radio Broadcasts have always been a 'No Go' with the mainstream consumer market. To worry now about DRM is a stupid joke. (Kind of like putting the cart before the horse). You first need something worthwhile TO "protect", before you attempt to protect it.

Etc. etc.

13.6.2004 17:45 #1

strcruzer

WOuldn't you agree that this is just the RIAA trying to get their foot into thte door when it comes to DRM on the radio? I see this as a way to stop us from recording OTA and editing out the commercials (Radio or TV) since this has been a point of contention with the MPAA with TIVO like services. The RIAA is just trying to get DRM in the mainstream so they can reference it later on when they try to expand it (legal tatic).

Starcruiser

14.6.2004 09:41 #2

connectr

It is long past time to stop the stupidty of both RIAA and MPAA. We need to amend the Intellectual Property rules to say that a studio does not own IP in a movie for a period longer than a design patent. The US norm is 7 years, renewable once, for a total of 14 years. Period. After that time, it becomes public domain.

Besides, the orginal creative talents are not the folk benefiting from this overt grab for power. It is not the writers, singers and actors that really benefit, but the Hollywood pin-striped accountants and other leaches of the entertainment industry.

14.6.2004 11:42 #3

AfterDawn: News