On 1/7/2011 11:42 PM, Jørgen Vigdal wrote: > Hi Brian. > > I also agree with you on these points you mention. If you guys are familiar > on how the piracy groups work on the internet, you are aware that they have > "releases" with their names on it. In the piracy "scene", some groups are > competing on getting the first release out, and could only be beaten by > another group releasing another higher quality release. Some groups (or even > individuals) are releasing their stuff that is being "ripped off" another > release, and they transcode the original release (mp3 320kbps for example) to > a flac release (that really isn't a flac). > > Some of these groups or individuals are young people, tinking that they know > everything. My idea was based on this. It would be fun stopping this, and > also, as you mention in your answer, having fun and experimenting with the > flac code. > ... that really sucks. Pirates giving a genuinely great codec a bad name because of the way their ecosystem promotes treachery. Though I wonder if they wouldn't self-regulate by requiring EAC .logs or something like that?
I think an simple tool that is run on existing FLAC files and gives a clear good/bad answer (perhaps with a probability to remain fair) could spread like wildfire amongst audiophiles if publicized in the right channels. > Thanks, > > J. -Markus- _______________________________________________ Flac-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
