Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Data Storage

Your Old CD Collection Is Dying 329

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the you-mean-you-don't-store-your-discs-in-nitrogen? dept.
Hugh Pickens DOT Com (2995471) writes "Adrienne LaFrance reports at the Atlantic that if you've tried listening to any of the old CDs lately from your carefully assembled collection from the 1980's or 1990's you may have noticed that many of them won't play. 'While most of the studio-manufactured albums I bought still play, there's really no telling how much longer they will. My once-treasured CD collection — so carefully assembled over the course of about a decade beginning in 1994 — isn't just aging; it's dying. And so is yours.'

Fenella France, chief of preservation research and testing at the Library of Congress is trying to figure out how CDs age so that we can better understand how to save them. But it's a tricky business, in large part because manufacturers have changed their processes over the years and even CDs made by the same company in the same year and wrapped in identical packaging might have totally different lifespans. 'We're trying to predict, in terms of collections, which of the types of CDs are the discs most at risk,' says France. 'The problem is, different manufacturers have different formulations so it's quite complex in trying to figure out what exactly is happening because they've changed the formulation along the way and it's proprietary information.' There are all kinds of forces that accelerate CD aging in real time. Eventually, many discs show signs of edge rot, which happens as oxygen seeps through a disc's layers. Some CDs begin a deterioration process called bronzing, which is corrosion that worsens with exposure to various pollutants. The lasers in devices used to burn or even play a CD can also affect its longevity. 'The ubiquity of a once dominant media is again receding. Like most of the technology we leave behind, CDs are are being forgotten slowly,' concludes LaFrance. 'We stop using old formats little by little. They stop working. We stop replacing them. And, before long, they're gone.'"
You can donate CDs to be tested for aging characteristics by emailing the Center for the Library's Analytical Science Samples. I haven't had much trouble ripping discs that were pressed in the 80s (and acquired from used CD stores with who knows how many previous owners), but I'm starting to get nervous about not having flac rips of most of my discs.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Your Old CD Collection Is Dying

Comments Filter:
  • Grammar (Score:4, Informative)

    by alta (1263) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:28AM (#46999419) Homepage Journal

    Please proof read proof read!

    "you may have noticed that many of them won't play won't play."

    • Re:Grammar (Score:5, Funny)

      by decipher_saint (72686) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:29AM (#46999437) Homepage

      That's the CD skipping

    • Re:Grammar (Score:5, Funny)

      by ameen.ross (2498000) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:32AM (#46999475)

      All of my old CDs will play will play, albeit with some skipping.

      • Re:Grammar (Score:5, Insightful)

        by postbigbang (761081) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:40AM (#46999583)

        Oxidation will eventually render them useless. Rust never sleeps.

        • Re:Grammar (Score:5, Informative)

          by ShanghaiBill (739463) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:52AM (#46999717)

          Oxidation will eventually render them useless. Rust never sleeps.

          Aluminum doesn't rust. When exposed to oxygen, it forms a permanent single layer of a oxide, and then the oxidation stops. I have never had a single pressed CD fail, other than from physical damage. Most should still work a century from now if stored properly. CD-Rs are, of course, completely different technology, and will only last about a decade.

          • I've had pressed CDs fail - a long while ago now - with a kind of mottled effect that the word "bronzing" could describe. I get the sense they were pressed on a cheap process.

            New CDs are more prone to physical damage - the data layer is right under the label laquer. Older ones sandwiched the data layer between multiple layers of plastic and I think it's these ones I've had fail.

            • One of the effects you can see on older (and newer) CDs is that the plastic itself yellows with age, which of course affects the optical properties of the data layer sandwiched in between.

              And any disc that is a foil layer printed onto a plastic disc is essentially disposable.

              I just finished re-importing my CD collection and getting rid of the originals -- despite being in properly stored CD binders (sealed with no-scratch cloth pockets and rarely seeing the light, a few were starting to show signs of aging.

              • I've now got everything stored on multiple HDDs instead of questionable optical disks -- which, while not having the same physical appeal, means I'll likely have my music itself (plus all the metadata that the originals never had) for decades to come.

                I'm in the process of ripping all my CDs and pressing them onto 78 RPM records, so after the next Carrington event destroys the power grid, I can still listen to "Call Me Maybe" on my spring-motor Victrola.

                Because it never hurts to be prepared!

        • by NotDrWho (3543773) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @01:09PM (#47001213)

          My Tears for Fears mix CD will never rust. My love will preserve it forever.

      • It's not that they skip- they start crackling and have a gravely kind of noise. Noticed this on my early 80's copy of 'Are You Experienced' almost 15 years ago.

    • by Mini-Geek (915324)

      Maybe they were just trying to show how the CDs might might sound if you try to play them? play them?

    • Try singing that phrase using "El Condor Pasa" as background.
      "You may have noticed / that many of them // Won't plaaaaay // WoOon't plaaay..."

    • Please proof read proof read!

      "you may have noticed that many of them won't play won't play."

      Why? Normal people realize Slashdot is nothing more than a glorified forum where you can only reply to stickies. Grammar/Spelling Nazis should avoid this site... and especially my posts.

    • by alta (1263)

      For those who don't understand my comment... They edited the OP. But didn't put the handy little "Edited: Fixed grammar" tag at the end...

  • by Cito (1725214) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:29AM (#46999433) Homepage

    Vinyl is still fairly superior for physical archiving

    • by gl4ss (559668) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:32AM (#46999481) Homepage Journal

      sure if you don't actually listen to them.

      just rip the friggin cd or burn a backup and tape it to the case, if you really think you can't find the song online afterwards... then it's not really gone and you have the item token to show off if you want.

    • by CRCulver (715279)

      When I learn of an older recording I might like, I tend to torrent a FLAC of it right away, and then go off in search of a physical copy because I like having the physical artifact. I would love to buy more vinyl, because there is so much artistic cover art out there that looks great at full size. However, labels are doing such limited pressings that by the time I discover a recording, the vinyl has all sold out.

      For example, I've been trying to purchase Belle and Sebastian's discography, and I was able to g

      • by JaredOfEuropa (526365) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:59AM (#46999807) Journal

        labels aren't letting us buy what we want.

        No shit. For a lot of music, I'd love to buy MP3s of the studio masters made vor vinyl. I don't believe that vinyl is a superior medium compared to CD or MP3/FLAC, but in many cases there's a huge difference between the masters produced for vinyl and for digital media. And in a lot of cases, those "digitally remastered" recordings are crap even compared to the old digital masters, with a lot of "loudness war" added. Sadly it is hard to come by a digital file produced from a good master.

        • by CRCulver (715279) <crculver@christopherculver.com> on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @11:08AM (#46999891) Homepage

          I don't believe that vinyl is a superior medium compared to CD or MP3/FLAC, but in many cases there's a huge difference between the masters produced for vinyl and for digital media.

          Yeah, I hear you. For R.E.M.'s Accelerate and Rush's Clockwork Angels albums a few years back, I bought the CDs to support the artists, but I put them on only to discover that the CDs were compressed to hell. The vinyl, however, had been mastered with the preference of more audiophile-y people in mind. So, I just went to a torrent community and downloaded a high-quality vinyl rip to FLAC, and now I play exclusively this.

          It's sad that in order to get real dynamic range and avoid the loudness-wars sludge, one has to resort to this workaround. Even if these vinyl rip uploaders are using the highest-quality rig, some fidelity is inevitably lost in the process.

      • by mark_reh (2015546) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @12:30PM (#47000835) Journal

        " is only available used (so I cannot even support the artist by buying it)"

        That's like saying you don't buy weed from your local dealer because you'd prefer to support the farmer.

        Buying used supports the artist. By buying the used disc you're creating an aftermarket for the artist's stuff which ultimately enlarges the primary market because people who buy new in the primary market know they will be able to sell the item if they decide it isn't right for them or they tire of it. If you buy the disc, used or new, and like it, you're likely to play or at least recommend it to others who may then also decide to buy the artist's stuff.

    • Vinyl is still fairly superior for physical archiving

      The problems they're having with CDs also exist with vinyl... it's just a lot worse. Don't get me wrong, I have plenty of Vinyl myself because it's fun. My Steve Martin records are great at parties. But I'm under no audiophile allusions about their superiority. I had one very old classical record literally turn into a puddle of goo for reasons that still aren't entirely clear to me.

      • by jrumney (197329)

        I had one very old classical record literally turn into a puddle of goo for reasons that still aren't entirely clear to me.

        You'd never heard of wax melting before?

  • by Overzeetop (214511) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:29AM (#46999439) Journal

    And with shared backups I don't even need to upload all of them - I just use the backups of others in case I need to restore!

  • Apparently this post was transferred on a CD before being published.

  • Woo! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by alexmogil (442209) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:30AM (#46999451) Homepage Journal

    As if this couldn't have worked out better for those pining for a DRM future.

    Are we licensing music? Truly? Then if I show that I bought this album in 1985 am I licensed to download the song?

    Oh.

    • Are we licensing music? Truly? Then if I show that I bought this album in 1985 am I licensed to download the song?

      You have a license to that particular collection of bits that is no longer available for purchase. Cake/eating it.

  • by scorp1us (235526) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:30AM (#46999455) Journal

    10 years ago I ripped my collection to FLAC, set the read-only bit and never looked back.
    Now when my MP3s get fucked*, I just resample from the FLAC version.

    * Technical term. There was a ulitility called "unfuck" that would repair the MP3

    • by crow (16139) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:45AM (#46999653) Homepage Journal

      That doesn't quite do it. FLAC is great for the individual tracks, but there is also information about inter-track gaps. If you lose that, playing the album won't sound right if any of the tracks are supposed to flow into the next one. This isn't an issue for probably 90% of the CDs out there, but for the remaining ones, it's important to get them to play correctly.

      I've noticed the same problem when ripping old vinyl albums and playing them on an MP3 player. When the tracks used to flow, there's now a gap, and it can be really annoying.

      • by Poeli (573204)

        Rip the entire cd to one flac file and a cue file?

      • by xorsyst (1279232) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:56AM (#46999761) Journal

        Rip to single-track flac with (embedded) cuesheet, and build individual-track mp3s from that however you like. That's what I do (well, I use wavpack and ogg, but the same applies)

        • ... and here I thought I'd just finished ripping my CD collection for the last time.

          Thanks for the tip. :bittersweet:

          FWIW, none of my CD's from the 80's had trouble ripping. 0/200 or so, but having them online and mounted via mp3fs makes syncing to the phone somewhat reasonable. Still trying to work out id3fs stacked on mp3fs or vice-versa for picking favs.

      • Encoder delay isn't as rigidly defined for MP3 as it is for Vorbis. Because it's defined for Vorbis, decoders can correct for it. Unlike ripping to .mp3, ripping to .ogg should allow true gapless playback.
      • I always save the cue file when I rip to FLAC, but not for that reason. Gapless playback isn't a problem on any of the players I've used with FLAC files. If anything, you may LOSE the inter-track gaps, if any were inserted.

    • I have 20k mp3s and none of them ever "get fucked". You most likely have a hardware problem with your machine if this is routinely happening to you.

      And hey, if an album ever got fucked, well just redownload it!

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Hearing the difference now isn't the reason to encode to FLAC. FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is 'lossy'. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA - it's about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don't want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media.

      I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, eve
  • Give me a break here. Assuming the laser isn't powerful enough to melt the foil pits, the type of laser in my CD player is going to make no difference to the media life whatsoever. It might be that the mechanism that holds the disk in place may be better or worse, but a read laser? I'd be more concerned about oxygen getting between the sandwiched polycarbonate and attacking the foil or issues with the hub than I would about the read laser's quality or type.

  • by Russ1642 (1087959) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:31AM (#46999465)

    I have a box of CDs somewhere. Anytime I want to listen to something I usually just download it off BitTorrent. Faster than ripping the CD and I can do it all on my phone.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:32AM (#46999483)

    It's fortunate that the recording industry has never made a fuss about people backing up their CD collections.
    Oh, wait...

  • Under usual copyright terms you should be able to legally download the .flac version of any CD you own as a personal backup. Hell, just throw out the bloody CD, FFS!
    • copyright is still pretty much tied to physical copies. It is, of course, another example of law not keeping up with the technical reality. I've even heard it surmised (possibly here) that putting a computer program in memory for execution is technically a copyright violation. It will never be tried in court as it goes way beyond the idea of common sense (even in today's corporate controlled courts), but it could be true.

      It's going to take a long time before we have copyright reform that makes sense when

      • by Rakarra (112805) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @11:23AM (#47000049)

        I've even heard it surmised (possibly here) that putting a computer program in memory for execution is technically a copyright violation. It will never be tried in court as it goes way beyond the idea of common sense (even in today's corporate controlled courts), but it could be true.

        But it was tried in court (sortof) in the Federal case Mai v. Peak [wikipedia.org]. The court ruled that according to the rules of copyright, technically loading a program into RAM for execution does violate copyright, partially because RAM can be easily copyable (Anything that places a program in storage that is trivially copyable is a copyright violation).

        The US Congress, Orrin Hatch in particular, thought this was silly, and amended the copyright code. Section 117 of the Copyright code [cornell.edu] currently reads:

        "(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.— Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
        (1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner, or
        (2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful."

        #2 is your backup copy provision, #1 means you can run a program without infringing it, as long as you're just running it (and not decompiling it or something else of that nature).

      • I've even heard it surmised (possibly here) that putting a computer program in memory for execution is technically a copyright violation

        It's more than surmise, it's the entire "reasoning" for EULAs having any force.

  • by UnknownSoldier (67820) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:36AM (#46999527)

    I rip my CD with Exact Audio Copy to FLAC and/or use iTunes and rip to Apple Lossless.

    These days Amazone has "InstantRip" so I can immediately download and listen as 256 kbps .mp3s are "good enough" for most music.

    • I rip my CD with Exact Audio Copy to FLAC and/or use iTunes and rip to Apple Lossless.

      I want to mention something with regards to Exact Audio Copy that some/many people here may not know. EAC has a longstanding bug that has never (as far I know) been fixed, despite being known for years. If you try to rip from a BluRay drive, the ripping slows down to a crawl and can take an hour or more to rip a single CD. Notice that I said "or more". This problem does not exist on drives that can't read BluRay discs. Ripping on those drives happens at reasonable speeds.

  • by FictionPimp (712802) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:37AM (#46999533) Homepage

    I ripped my whole collection to mp3 years ago.

    Recently during a move to a new computer I discovered that many of my songs had been corrupted from years of moving without any check-sums to validate the copies (just drag a folder from finder window to finder window or explorer window to explorer window, etc).

    I had to go back and re-rip most of my collection (this time to flac).

  • ...the quality of the CDs and whether they were factory or home made since I have some factory made ones from the mid- to late 80s and they are fine.

    • by iggymanz (596061)

      depends on the manufacturer, my USA made ones from 1980s are fine. some of my wife's asian made ones have died, but she's moved on to file based media anyway

    • by Jahta (1141213)

      ...the quality of the CDs and whether they were factory or home made since I have some factory made ones from the mid- to late 80s and they are fine.

      Agreed. I have a *lot* of CDs, but only started buying them seriously in the 1990s and they still play fine. It does depend on how you store them though; things like direct sunlight and extremes of heat and cold can damage the discs. And for discs you burn yourself, a lot depends on how you burn them; YMMV.

  • My CD collection features such gems as "Microsoft Windows 95", "Turbo Tax Deluxe 2003" and "The Logical Journey of the Zoombinis"
    • But do you have the boot floppy that goes with that Windows 95 CD and do you have the floppy drive for that boot floppy? If not do I have a deal for you.

    • by toejam13 (958243)

      While the article specifically discusses audio CDs, I see the lifespan and preservation of data CDs being an issue too. And unlike audio CDs, many data CDs include copy protection that hinders easy archival.

      To my understanding, you generally can't strip the copy protection of data CDs the way you can video DVDs. The copy protection comes along. Either you use a virtual optical drive program like Daemon Tools or Alcohol 120 that can emulate the protection or you need a fancy burner that can reproduce the

    • by bkmoore (1910118)
      What, no AOL CDs????
  • by sribe (304414) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:44AM (#46999633)

    Because just last month, I re-ripped well over 300 old CDs into a lossless format, and had 0 problems.

    • Re:Really??? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by AmiMoJo (196126) * <{ten.3dlrow} {ta} {ojom}> on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @12:27PM (#47000799) Homepage

      No problems that you know of. The drive you used for ripping will silently correct errors, or just pad with interpolated data if it can't. Some software can read the amount of errors and you will probably find that older discs do have a lot more.

      • by bheading (467684)

        Use dbpoweramp/PerfectRip.

        When ripping it checksums the CDs and confirms that they match in a database where others have submitted their checksums of the same CD.

        I have CDs which date back to the 80s which, according to this checksum, are bit-for-bit accurate.

        Try doing that with an LP.

  • by toejam13 (958243) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @10:53AM (#46999739)

    People with LaserDisc movies started learning about disc rot the hard way about a decade earlier than people with audio CDs. LaserDisc movies store video using an analog PWM scheme, so any defect in the pits and lands of a disc show up as snow in the video.

    Audio CDs, being a digital format with error correction, have the benefit of the digital cliff effect to mask minor defects. So it takes more significant rotting of the reflective layer before the player exhibits playback errors.

    Luckily, audio CDs can be ripped to lossless formats such as FLAC, WavPack, Monkey and the like, so making an exact archival copy is possible. Ripping tools such as Exact Audio Copy assist in that effort by examining the quality of your rip (drives can mask error when ripping audio CDs) against a database.

    I'm sure that DVDs will also start to show disc rot in time. Tools such as CloneDVD can make an exact ISO image that you can archive as well.

    But LaserDiscs don't have that ability. At best, you can capture an exact copy of the PCM digital audio via the SPDIF output, but the video will always be a best effort when captured from composite or Y/C component. And with so many discs showing rot these days, it is probably too late to save them.

    • At best, you can capture an exact copy of the PCM digital audio via the SPDIF output

      Also AC3, on some discs - and in a lot of cases, it's a superior mix to what eventually ended up on the DVD.

      As for the video, I'd think there's probably only a handful of laserdiscs that haven't been superseded by superior DVDs or Blu-rays.

  • I have CDs going back to the 1980s which still play. This article confirmed my suspicion that they will not last forever and I don't want to spend the $$$ to replace my 400+ CDs with another media that the record cartels control like BluRay with the movie cartels. When the mp3 format came along, I found an encoder (RazorLame) that did an excellent job of maintaining the fidelity of my CDs so I proceeded to rip my entire collection. I heard some horrid fidelity mp3s on filesharing sites due to bad encoder
  • if you know you really (i mean really!) purchased a CD years ago, shouldn't that make it ok to download the same CD in FLAC or 320vbr from your fav pirate site??

    i was/am a huge Who fan, and think Quadrophenia is simply epic...it was, in fact, the first CD i ever bought back in 1984...doesn't that mean I purchased the right to the content forever?

  • by jaymz666 (34050) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @11:02AM (#46999833)

    Two years ago I ripped (to FLAC) about 1000 CDs my wife and I had collected since the early 90s.
    The only ones that wouldn't rip were the ones that had deep scratches on them. We still have the CDs in our posession and still buy new ones and rip them to FLAC when they come into the house.

    Seems like a sound plan, they are backed up and uploaded to Google Music, too, so we can listen to them anywhere

  • I had a collection of somewhere slightly over 250-260 commercial music CDs (about half of which I sold off last year o various online web-sites who bought used CDs).

    The sites doing the buying were extremely picky (to the point where they'd refuse to pay for a disc, even if it was the exact album they said they wanted, if its ISBN number didn't match the exact one they were after), and I was billed for replacement jewel cases in several instances, simply because the ones I provided with the CDs had small cracks in them.

    Not a single disc I sold them was refused or returned for failure to play or for skipping though.

    Meanwhile, I've had absolutely no issues playing any of the remaining discs in my collection. (I had to re-rip many of them just a few months ago, when I discovered a lot of the MP3 rips I made years earlier had some issues.)

    What I can say, though, is, I've been very good about always putting my CDs back in the jewel cases whenever I finished playing one, and they all sit in a big, revolving CD storage tower in the house. I have to wonder if some of these complaints of "edge rot" and "bronzing" of the media and so forth are with discs people left sitting in hot cars in the summer, didn't put back in the cases often, etc. ?

    • Unless your CD jewel cases and tower are hermetically sealed, oxygen can still get in there and potentially cause problems.
  • by Jeff Flanagan (2981883) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @11:11AM (#46999923)
    >Library of Congress is trying to figure out how CDs age so that we can better understand how to save them.

    Here's a idea, if you must be stuck in the 1990s with physical media, just rip the CD to a media server when you get home. It only has to last long enough to get it home and copy it. That or just subscribe to Spotify. Being able to pick just about any song wherever you are is far superior to a music hoard.
  • by cyn1c77 (928549) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @11:25AM (#47000071)

    I haven't had much trouble ripping discs that were pressed in the 80s (and acquired from used CD stores with who knows how many previous owners), but I'm starting to get nervous about not having flac rips of most of my discs.

    Don't worry so much! The music industry has your back. For a small fee (equivalent to the current price of the media), they will provide you with the media that was lost.

  • Ok, so we all know how to rip our music CDs, hopefully to lossless format.

    How about CD-based video games? Long ago I used Daemon Tools to create a virtual CD drive so I didn't have to break out the CDs to play a game; is that still a thing?

    I still have King's Quest II and Ultima III on original 5.25" and 3.5" floppy disks. I'll bet those don't work anymore.

    • by ledow (319597)

      You could have googled it.

      Yes, it's still a thing. Still works on modern Windows. You'll have infinitely more problems getting the things to run than you will do accessing the original CD's.

      But, to be honest, there's a plethora of one-click installs of any game you can mention, legit and dubious, out there - complete with emulation and fixes for modern OS.

      There's also zero point archiving something that people have ever heard of. DOOM isn't going to drop off the face of the earth but, say, some ancient o

  • Heh, I like the "firstworldproblems" tag.

    You would have to be pretty naive to have gone all this time believing that CDs would last forever. Sure, all the salespeople back in the 80s and 90s told us this, but they only knew what they had heard or been told, and to be fair, they were drawing a comparison to casette tapes.

    I don't know anyone who has a CD collection, who has not ripped them to some sort of digital format. True, if they were ripped to mp3s there was some loss, but most people couldn't tell yo

  • by NynexNinja (379583) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @12:19PM (#47000727)
    There was a story [slashdot.org] back in 2003 that talked about CD's degrading after less than 2 years.
  • by the eric conspiracy (20178) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @12:27PM (#47000809)

    I have about 500 studio pressed CDs dating all the way back to the freebies that came with my first CD player (one of the very first Sony models, a CDP-200) back in 1983.

    Last year I re-ripped them to flac using dbPoweramp. A few of the 500 had issues due to physical scratches which I was able to handle by buying replacements off Amazon Marketplace. NONE had problems from general bit rot. The 1980's vintage CDs all ripped bit perfect according to the track checksums.

    Now maybe you would have a problem due to some of the fungi that are known to attack CDs in tropical climates but I bet if you are like me and kept your CDs in a temperate zone air conditioned home you are fine, and will remain so.

    By the way, NONE of the other media I have dating back to the 1970's is usable. Even the LPs are no good - worn out long ago.

    Good luck trying to maintain bit perfect rips for 30 years.

  • by aaronb1138 (2035478) on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @12:33PM (#47000855)
    How about we make the copyright holder responsible for providing suitable replacements as part of their copyright renewal process. It would be preferable to require a new stamping off a master every 5-10 years and provide identical media replacements - certainly to the Library of Congress and other designated archives (CD for CD, Book for book, VHS for VHS). I could see some wiggle room where digital downloads of equal or greater quality be made available to consumers.

    Even if we say fuck the consumers, the copyright holder should certainly be responsible to provide replacements to archives as part of the copyright registration. I would see such as minimal evidence for copyright enforcement.

If God had a beard, he'd be a UNIX programmer.

Working...