computer doesn't recognize CD

[shadowfox]

I was trying to install a program which included 4 CDs. The first 2 work fine but when I get to the third one it doesn't recognize it and it says to insert the disk. For some reason my computer doesn't recognize there is something in the drive. Anyone know why this is happening?

[deckard8]

Cdrom probably getting a bit worn or slight surface damage to cd. Try ripping it with to an iso with Isobuster, burning it to another cd, or mount it with Daemon Tools.

[mats.hogberg]

...or it's a copy, and the installer is picking up on that it's not the "real thing"?

/Mats

[Nelson37]

Assuming your drive can still read other disks and did not suddenly fail, that would indicate the disk is either damaged, blank, or has serious surface defects. Try cleaning it. I am assuming that even Windows Explorer shows no file content on this disk?

I have never encountered a copied program disk which is not recognized because it is a copy.

[mats.hogberg]

So, you're admitting you have used copied program discs?
Well, I have seen some installers that, when presented with a backup, just exects it and just tells you to insert a disc.
If Windows can't read it, it's another business.

/Mats

[Nelson37]

Any program I own that has any significant value gets backed up right out of the shrink wrap, then the original stored away. Perfectly legal, and if it wasn't I would do it anyway. I advise my customers to do the same thing.

Never had a copy fail, at least not since the old floppy days, like with MS's CAB format or Lotus's hidden file trick, there where a few others that used special format methods. Never heard of anything similar since CD installs became the norm.

[ROF]

You advise your customers to violate the law?

[rhegedus]

Really? So official programs like Alcohol that bypass copy-protection to make backups 'violate the law'?

[ROF]

It depends on the usage of the software in question, but yes you can violate the law with the alcohol application. read the eula.

[Nelson37]

It is not a violation of the law to protect your investment by making a backup copy of software installations disks that you own. This is in fact specifically allowed by copyright law and is mentioned in many software licensing agreements.

[Treebeard]

Not another copyright discussion

[Cornucopia]

(Here we go again...)

Yes, ROF. I would do the same thing and advise my clients to back up (just about) ALL their (legally obtained and OWNED) software. Why?

#1 - Common sense --AND MANY INSURANCE COMPANIES AND COMPUTER SECURITY FIRMS--dictate that should accidents like fires occur, you want to have your originals "off-site".

#2 - The laws AND LONG-REGARDED CUSTOMS regarding single backing up of saftety copies of software, while they may conflict with certain points in the DCMA, would probably ultimately prevail when push comes to shove in court, rendering your arguement of it "being illegal" moot. And I'm willing to bank on that AND recommend it to my family, friends and clients.


Scott

[ROF]

It is not a violation of the law to protect your investment by making a backup copy of software installations disks that you own. This is in fact specifically allowed by copyright law and is mentioned in many software licensing agreements.

Which copyright law allows you to make backup copies of computer software? It's a violation of the law in the US punishable by up to 5 years in jail for each offense.

[ROF]

(Here we go again...)

Yes, ROF. I would do the same thing and advise my clients to back up (just about) ALL their (legally obtained and OWNED) software. Why?

#1 - Common sense --AND MANY INSURANCE COMPANIES AND COMPUTER SECURITY FIRMS--dictate that should accidents like fires occur, you want to have your originals "off-site".

#2 - The laws AND LONG-REGARDED CUSTOMS regarding single backing up of saftety copies of software, while they may conflict with certain points in the DCMA, would probably ultimately prevail when push comes to shove in court, rendering your arguement of it "being illegal" moot. And I'm willing to bank on that AND recommend it to my family, friends and clients.


Scott

1) I'd be interested to know which insurance companies are making backups of software and keeping their originals elsewhere. You are not licensed to make backup copies of your software.

2) You say it may conflcit with the DMCA (AKA a law) and yet you'd beat it in court. I'd be interested in knowing which case you can point to as precedence for your confidence?

[Nelson37]

In the US Copyright Office Section 104 report, archival copies of computer software are specifically mentioned as NOT a violation of copyright law, as referenced in section 117(a)(2). There was in fact a concern that the SALE of such backups may actually be permitted under section 109 and that this permission needs to be specifically revoked, that is, the possible permission to sell the backup.

The DMCA applies largely to circumvention of copy-protection schemes to make a backup, I have yet to see a software installation disk which uses any such scheme.

There is a specific Fair Use exemption to this circumvention, the copyright office itself was uncertain whether the archival backup right was itself a Fair Use case and therefore an acceptable exception to the DMCA itself. This is largely moot as copy-protection schemes are seldom, if ever, used on such disks.

The language used is unusually clear for a government report. It also mentions the pre-existing right to make these archival copies, which without a specific removal of this right is still in effect.

[ROF]

In the US Copyright Office Section 104 report, archival copies of computer software are specifically mentioned as NOT a violation of copyright law, as referenced in section 117(a)(2). There was in fact a concern that the SALE of such backups may actually be permitted under section 109 and that this permission needs to be specifically revoked, that is, the possible permission to sell the backup.

The DMCA applies largely to circumvention of copy-protection schemes to make a backup, I have yet to see a software installation disk which uses any such scheme.

There is a specific Fair Use exemption to this circumvention, the copyright office itself was uncertain whether the archival backup right was itself a Fair Use case and therefore an acceptable exception to the DMCA itself. This is largely moot as copy-protection schemes are seldom, if ever, used on such disks.

The language used is unusually clear for a government report. It also mentions the pre-existing right to make these archival copies, which without a specific removal of this right is still in effect.

Interesting. 117 says you can make backup copies as long as the backups are not backups of copyrighted material. It also states that the softwares EULA prevails when it restricts section 117.

[Nelson37]

Never seen an EULA which prohibits this.

Archival backups of computer software disks are specifically mentioned as previously legal, and not prohibited by the DMCA, except possibly by the copy-protection circumvention provisions, which really does not apply.

Such a backup would also not comprise any substantial risk of loss to the copyright holder, as it would not give the backup holder any additional capability he or she does not already have, as in to loan the original disk to someone else to install. Additionally, in the case of software using registration codes and online activation, no one other than the legal owner would be able to use the software without detection, thereby eliminating the risk of damage to the copyright holder.

Believe as you wish, it's a free country. I will continue to advise my customers as I have been for over 15 years, and am quite confident that 1. Such a case will never be brought to court, and
2. If it is, I will win.

[shadowfox]

Those were interesting arguments, but in my case I am using the real CD, and my cd-rom drive works fine. The CD must be damaged. Guess thats what I get for buying it at Costco.

[Nelson37]

You should be able to exchange it at the store, and in fact most companies will send you a Back-Up copy as a Rightful Owner, but they will usually charge a service fee and there is time delay involved.

If you have a disk polisher it is well worth a shot, this has saved me many disks that were unreadable. But the fact that it does not recognize at all indicates a serious problem, like its blank.

Exchange time is usually limited, take it back fast. Preferably with the receipt.

[shadowfox]

Thanks. I did end up returning it. What a waste of time though. Thats never happend to me before.