The co-writer I've been having to deny in an earlier part of this thread, called me the other day to continue asking for my advice on this. He apparently contacted said company and got a response from the woman in charge. Simply put, her reply unfortunately made her sound like a moron. She crossed her definitions of fingerprinting and watermarking. Essentially making it very clear her company is not well versed in the matter.

The problem is, he's now been talking to his other co-writers who spent more time on the contract than I did and found other problems with their deal. Yet he still, still, still, wants to get someone on board to sign up for this garbage.

Simple reality is, fingerprinting will work and is already proving to work without altering the audio files. Watermarking requires an alteration of the file to embed information and then requires special software to read/hear it. Plus as the woman put it in her response - they would have to have a minimum of 30 seconds and either the head or end of the song to track it with watermarking. Well that's not gonna work very well in reality. Fingerprinting doesn't need a specific part of the song, it just needs to listen and determine the DNA.

He's learning. Slowly but surely that his co-writers are not keen on this stuff of retitles.

Jody Whitesides
A Funky Audio Lap Dance For Your Ears!
www.jodywhitesides.com