Slashdot Log In
The Day The Music Died: Windows Media and DRM
Posted by
michael
on Thu Aug 15, 2002 09:17 AM
from the coming-soon-to-a-computer-near-you dept.
from the coming-soon-to-a-computer-near-you dept.
SampleMinded writes "The Guardian reports on an early glimpse of what a DRM controlled future looks like. Imagine backing up your files, reformatting your hard drive, then copying the files back over only to find your music no longer works. It happened to this guy. Now That's what I call Xperience!"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
It's already happening (Score:5, Informative)
As always, the honest people suffer.
Re:It's already happening (Score:5, Insightful)
Tom
Parent
Re:It's already happening (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
not anymore (Score:4, Informative)
Winamp 2.61:
* In accordance with Microsoft's license agreement, we no longer allow you to use DSP plug-ins or alternate output plug-ins when playing WMA files.
So you'd have to find a version older than 2.61 for that trick to work.
Parent
Re:Ah That's nothing (Score:3, Funny)
(Well, maby they have a smarter boyfriend who anticipates these things...)
-On a Mr. fixit note, NEVER destory your source. Copy info to new media, and verify functionality on that new media, THEN format the source...)
Re:It's already happening (Creative Labs DRM) (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:It's already happening (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Who Else thought Story #2 was more intersting? (Score:5, Funny)
Given the state of most web pages, it appears to be <body> ... </body>.
Parent
Windows Media Player?? (Score:5, Insightful)
That was the first mistake...
Re:Windows Media Player?? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Windows Media Player?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, his first mistake was not disabling the 'Personal Protection' feature
How long will it be before this option is no longer there. MS keeps chipping away at your freedom one bit (no pun) at a time.
Consume, Marry and Reproduce, Obey.
Parent
Re:Windows Media Player?? (Score:4, Funny)
To paraphrase: "If it hurts when you hit yourself in the head with a steel hammer, try using a lead hammer instead. Lead is softer."
Parent
Re:Windows Media Player?? (Score:5, Insightful)
AND.. the program was easy to use until he reinstalled, then it was pure hell to use. It was a mistake because the program became unproductive working with the same files after just a reinstall.
This thing gives me chills. He has to connect to the internet to restore his music? This really points to the disturbing trend (Palladium anyone?) that says you have to connect to the internet to even use your computer. Half of time I'm using my computer at home, I'm not connected to the internet (yes I still have dial up). As much as I would like always on broadband, I really pisses me off that companies are trying to implement technology to force me to check with them to see if its "OK" to do something.
Damn right it was their first mistake, a damn big one at that. Technology like this should be shunned as if it has the plague.
Parent
It's an "Internal Security" issue, too. (Score:4, Insightful)
A bomber the FBI was hunting recently discovered something similar about his cell phone.
He had driven halfway across the country from the area where he had been planting bombs in people's mailboxes. Somewhere in Nevada he powered up his cellphone. And when the cellphone identified itself to the network, the new "locate the 911 call" system (which actually tracks the phone any time it's on) reported his location to the cops (who had already notified the phone company to look out for him). They had him captured within half an hour.
Of course the first time the general population heard about this capability was when it was mentioned in a news story about the capture. (If the cops hadn't told the reporter it had been used, even those of us who knew it was possible wouldn't have known it was already deployed.)
This digital rights management registration has the same properties, but for any type of line:
Turn on your computer while it's attached to the internet and it "phones home" to check your licenses, which are identified to you personally.
This identifies the IP number you're currently using.
The IP number - even if it's dynamic - identifies the ISP, and the port within it.
The ISP can track the port to a physical connection - either hardwired or dialup - and can do this either in real-time or from logs after the connection is dropped.
The location can be identified immediately for hardwired connectinos. For dialups the phone company or companies handling the call can track it - again either real-time or from logs. (Both the ISP and the phone companies can tie this to your name, bank account, and so on.)
The entire process CAN be automated (if it has not been already), much like Carnivore, giving the FBI or others instant access to the information.
This may already have been authorized by the Patriot act. It's directed at enemy non-citizens and intended to be used by the "intelligence community" and so claims to escape many civil-rights safeguards (such as the need to get a warrant before using it), much like the incarceration without recourse to courts used against Johnny Walker Lindh and others associated with the Taliban.
Of course if this facility is used to capture an actual bomber and save lives, that's good. But if it's used to capture somebody some law-enforcement or spy agency THINKS is the bomber, it's not so good. And if it's used to harass opposition political figures, anybody some bureaucrat or cop doesn't like, or random citizens, it's called "a police state".
Please don't tell me "It can't happen here." Because it DID happen here. Repeatedly. (Look up COINTELPRO - or the general history of the FBI - for examples within the computer era.) And don't tell me it USED to happen but doesn't anymore, either. It takes decades for this stuff to come to light, so the recent stuff is still not general knowledge. (I remember people saying it doesn't happen anymore when COINTELPRO was happeneing.)
But the "digital rights management" hook is just the last straw, tying your personal identity to your computer's identity in advance. The bulk of this has already been deployed - at least in Microsoft systems and possibly in others.
Microsoft system installs attempt to configure your network connection. If they succeed, it's "PC Phone Home". They have your Software Product Key (a unique identifier for the software distribution), the serial number of your CPU if it exposes one, the MAC address of any ethernet cards (which can serve as a hardware unique identifier if your CPU doesn't expose a serial number), and any info you entered during the setup - like to sign up for network service. Of course the connection itself gives them your call trace information.
A few years ago Microsoft found a new use for spam: They sent out a series of "developer conference" adds. The remove-me email address would bounce. But the remove-me URL would load a mix of HTML, Javascirpt, and VBscript which would construct a URL containing your registry information and use it to query register.microsoft.com. (The registry contains your Software Product Key, ethernet card MAC address, etc.)
Some of the file formats used by Microsoft tools embed identifying information in files they store or exchange - which can also get it into email. An example is Microsoft Word, and the identifying information has already been use to arrest at least one macro-virus author.
Parent
Don't even have to do a reinstall (Score:5, Informative)
I was less then pleased, for obvious reasons. It was just a minor headache remaking files using other programs and such, but it was a minor headache I could have lived without.
This is why (Score:4, Insightful)
Can you imagine what will happen when Mary Jan Mathteacher and her husband Joe Sixpack run into this? I mean, you and I are above average with respect to our computer knowledge and this is a pain the in the butt even for us. To Mary and her brethren, this is just one more reason why "the computer hates me". I can't thing of any better way to stifle online music sales (if there ever becomes a market for them)
Parent
Maybe It's Not So bad (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course it may not really be that easy, and it still is a pain, but that doesn't seem like that big of a deal, IF what they say is true in this case. Yes, this is a pain, but it could've been worse. If that's the future, it doesn't look as bad as I thought it did.
Windows Media Player...? (Score:4, Funny)
In all fairness (Score:5, Interesting)
What I don't understand is the reason the files could be "re-licensed" was because they were legit in the first place. Well.... isn't this true for any copy? (at some point down the line it was legit)
Re:In all fairness (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, it did sound pretty simple...for us! Now, imagine trying to explain to a non-technical person that they have to "Relicense" their own music because Windows thought they were a pirate. I can just imagine trying to explain to my mom over the phone why she can't play the Sinatra CD I ripped out to her PC anymore. (Fortunately, I won't ever have to deal with this scenario; my mom runs Linux
The fact is that DRM walks a VERY fine line between legitimate copy control & utter user frustration. If you go even slightly over the line, users will (eventually) rebel. Copy-protected CDs prove this point extremely well, as do proposed bills like the SSSCA (Sen. Holling's office has still not received one positive phone call from citizens over that bill).
Parent
Because of what MS isn't telling you (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
RTFM! (Score:3, Insightful)
that's no excuse (Score:5, Insightful)
In this case, an unobvious (mis-)feature caused a user to lose hours of work. That's a software problem, and specifically, a problem with a particular software feature, DRM. It shows that DRM reduces usability in practice. The burden of proof that this isn't necessarily true is on proponents of DRM to find workarounds.
Also note that this particular implementation of DRM is deliberately not secure; an implementation of the form that the music industry might like might simply not let the user recover their music when they reformat their drive no matter what they do. That is, after all, effectively how CDs used to work (if the medium went bad, you lost the music), and the music industry would love to get back to that kind of environment.
Parent
Re:that's no excuse (Score:4, Funny)
You'd love the way the IS guy at my office installs new software on our machines (he has to do it himself, 'cause nobody else has local admin rights). He runs the installer, then hits enter as quickly as possible until the install completes. Never reads a single word. I'll give him this, though - it's the fastest install I've seen!
Parent
me like (Score:3, Informative)
2) Techies that already hated DRM but are not listened to by Joe Public don't use silly WMP and are not hindered by this.
What's the problem again?
Re:me like (Score:4, Informative)
You won't pick up any quality converting an already-mp3 file to ogg - it's still lossy compression on top of lossy compression. Anyone know of a batch cd-ripper/robot arm disc changer combo??
Parent
They know what you listen to... (Score:5, Insightful)
Updated? How did they get the original and how would they know that your files are the right files, etc... because they are watching what you are listening to. Time to read that EULA Mr. End User. Problem is, most bloody end users really don't care. I've talked to many a person and they really think it's ok. I guess that means that I _can_ put that hidden camera in their daughter's bathroom Boy, I certainly hope noone takes that one literally. ;)
EULA In General Are User Hostile (Score:4, Insightful)
Having said this, the way most EULA are presented are HOSTILE to the user. Confusing legalese language presented in a tiny scrolling text box smaller than the text area I'm writing this response in. What is your recourse if you have a question about a clause? Stop the installation and e-mail MicroSoft? You bought the software today and would probably like to use it today. Waiting for a response from MS and then possibly consulting your private lawyer is a laughable action to take for minor piece of software. Then step it up a notch: Window's Media Player is tightly integrated. You can't PATCH the system properly unless you take all of the parts which requires reading multiple EULA which are all different. What happens if you agree to one but not another? Your installation (and your computer) is probably now unusable or will have incompatible hiccups.
I am still waiting for EULA in general to be challenged in court. Where did the consumer right for quality assurance and regress go? Why does one have to sign away more rights to get bug fixes?!?
Parent
Have no problems with this (Score:4, Insightful)
You know that line from Star Wars applies (paraphrasing): The more control they take over your system, the more users they will lose.
If you had actually remembered the quote (Score:5, Funny)
"The more you tighten your grip, the more Dell Systems slip through your fingers."
Parent
This may be repeating the obvious, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
* If a file format becomes undesirable for some reason, switch formats. The shift from GIF to JPEG was accelerated when CI$ wanted royalties for GIFs. if MPEG becomes untenable, switch to a format WMA/Windoze, etc, wouldn't tell from any other binary.
I think all people are proving is that they can muck up a file format or two. But there are a number of ways of encoding music after the fact. Just, you may need to convert your precious MPEGs to a more modern (and less policed) format.
The real problem (Score:4, Funny)
RTFA, nothing to see here (Score:3, Insightful)
1. 'When you first run Windows Media Player, it will ask if you want to keep copy protection on, and you can turn it off if you wish.'
and
2. 'We did anticipate this scenario and developed a tool to help them update their licenses: the Personal License Update Utility.'
What's the big deal here?
p.s. What's funny is, My Lyra requires a funky DRM'd MP3 format that only uses their propietary software to create it...those files won't work on anything else either. BUT, copy any kind fo WMA file directly to the CF card and it works fine.
They Say Recovery is Easy...Yeah Right (Score:5, Insightful)
According to Microsoft's lead product manager of Windows Digital Media:
There is still a way to get these licenses back and it is pretty easy using our Personal License Migration Service (PLMS), [which] was designed to address the exact situation you outline.
It's morning and I'm still feeling pretty alert, but even the acronym PLMS is enough to make me think, "this is going to be a gigantic pain in the ass." Would it be possible to come up with a more intimidating bit of tech-speak for a product's name?
More to the point, can you picture an inexperienced user having to track down the Personal License Migration Service utility and get it working? Just the name of it alone makes it sound like an afternoon's project.
Looks like Windows users who want to maintain rights to their music libraries are going to have to regularly clear some rather intimidating hurdles every time they buy a new system or reformat their drive. I wonder how Apple will handle the same situation. Somehow, I can't picture Steve announcing iPLMS at an upcoming MacWorld ;)
Re:They Say Recovery is Easy...Yeah Right (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder how Apple will handle the same situation.
My iPod has a little "Don't steal music" on its back. That simple suggestion and linking the iPod/iTunes synchronization to a single machine (not really much of a hurdle when you have Appletalk over TCP/IP and can mount a remote drive containing the music anyway) is all Apple has done. I don't see them doing a whole lot more. Their market is made up of a lot of people who create the content that MS is trying to control.
Parent
Now imagine if you paid for those tracks (Score:4, Interesting)
But what if they had paid for them? Even a trivial amount like 25 cents adds up extremely quick. At least in their case, though, they still have the files. Hard drives fail.. the Windows Registry can be corrupted.. what then? Do you re-purchase all the files you've already bought once?
This should be yet another compelling reason to dump Windows in favor of Linux on your PC's.
* I can't feel too sorry for anyone using Windows Media Player Spyware.. Is it really Microsoft's business that I spend a large part of my work day writing code and listening to (legal) mp3 rips of my Ozzy Osbourne cd's?
Bring it on (Score:3, Insightful)
I've made similar comments like this before, but in this case it is worth repeating (well, I'll find out whether it is).
The sooner the general public begins to experience the real issues behind DRM, DMCA, Palladium, UCITA (or whatever they're calling it this week), etc, the sooner the issue will rise to the importance of other issues that get real (ie political, financial) attention.
It will probably be painful for a while, since the entire public won't realize the impact of this sort of thing at first, but give it time... the general public let their opinion be known about DivX and it didn't take long for CC to back down and toss that idea (or at least table it for a while).
This too shall pass? I hope so.
Look at the bigger picture here people! (Score:4, Insightful)
While those things may apply to this case, DRM is a scary thing where it would be very easy to make it so it doesn't matter what app you use, DRM could be embedded in your processor (Palladium). They could make it so that you can't turn off DRM in the apps, or there is no manual to read, it will all just be built in so you don't have to "worry" about it.
And since when did it become a REQUIREMENT to be connected to the internet to listen to music that you own?! Sure, internet access is more widespread than ever, but required? That's BS. That just means that Microsoft is watching and controlling what you are listening to. How long before it goes beyond that to cover every app on your system?
I talk to some of my friends about this stuff, and they think it will never happen. They also don't know about the DMCA and the CDPDTA-E-I-E-I-O. This shit is real, and it is very scary. I have heard people say "Well, I don't care if they know what I do." Well dammit, I DO! It is none of their business, and that is the first step down a long, dark path. You want to tell them what you are doing, what web sites you are visiting, where you are shopping? Fine. Opt-in. But don't force that on everyone. Some people may actually want some of these dumbass services that Microsoft and other companies offer. Maybe they like targeted advertising. I don't, and I should not have to jump through hoops to NOT get it.
Think it won't happen? Who is going to stop them?
DRM is guaranteed to fail, except for Microsoft. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's an absurdly complicated cage, with hundreds of potential points of failure. Even if it's the best designed cage in the world, with encryption and booby-traps at every joint and hindge, someone in a good lab in Hong Kong is going to arrange a jailbreak anyway. And you know it's not going to be the best designed cage in the world. It's going to suck, maybe slightly less than CSS sucked.
Once the content is out of it, that's it. You can't make a computer that refuses legacy data and applications (mp3s). That might be what Hollywood wants, but it's the only thing Microsoft can never do. At least not in the next 10-20 years - they'd have to work up to it very gradually. And even then, there are a million problems.
The real purpose of DRM is to act as a shield against free software technologies interoperating with commercial products. MS has been considering fighting compatible free software with patents and bribes and EULA suits (and probably would, but for the awkwardness of doing it during their anti-trust trial), but by far its best weapon is to pretend to ally with the content people. They, after all, own Washington, and they were the geniuses that engineered the DMCA. The law that will make Samba, or the encrypted-WindowsDRM-filesystem module, or any number of other enabling technologies illegal... because it's trying to "bypass Microsoft's access control features."
People will point out that the DMCA has provisions for allowing interoperability. That's right, it does. That's called a "bait exception." Sort of like the distributor price caps in the California electric utility deregulation, they're there for show; they can have no real effect. DeCSS, after all, is meant to allow free softare to interoperate with DVD's. But tell that to all the people in court all around the world right now. When deciding on whether there's a "significant non-infringing use," it turns out that it's quite easy to make a non-savvy judge (and how few of them are savvy?) believe the worst. DVDs are case in point.
DRM will accomplish none of its stated goals. But it will be great for Microsoft. Paladium is a big deal to them because it will be the first Windows which can't be emulated by Wine, for instance, or interoperated with by other software, without risking the appearance that one is interoperating in order to open the cage. And if you mess with cages, you know we're not just talking about a civil trial and bankruptcy. We're talking about a good long stretch in federal prison.
Why DivX died? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have been told, and I believe even read in dead-tree publications, that the reason the DivX plan died was that people were creeped out by having to dial someone up and transfer information. Even with the *promise* of anonymity, this is guaranteed to scare some people away, since they worry "What if?" (Like "What if the company goes bust and they sell their database to someone that doesn't make the same promise?" or "What if they get hacked and someone takes my credit card number or personal viewing habits?")
Add into this that much of media innovation and format decisions are apparently driven by the porn production industry, and the reason for media without a tether to home base becomes more clear. No one wanted to buy a DivX disc that phoned home to validate and no porn movie maker really wanted to go that route because they know their audience.
Having to phone home has got to be the Achilles' Heel for this kind of stuff. I sure as hell don't want it, and I imagine most people would feel the same way, even if they aren't watching dirty movies.
Re:Why DivX died? (Score:5, Interesting)
Yup. That's why, nowadays, companies simply don't tell you that they're doing this. Let's see a show of hands -- how many people knew Windows Media Player kept a list of your "allowed" tracks? And that the list was kept on Microsoft's servers?
Parent
Re:Why DivX died? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Or, behind door #3... (Score:4, Insightful)
If you're lazy and use MS products just because they're already there, you're likely to keep running into this problem.
Re:don't use media player? (Score:3, Interesting)
I was very happy about this - I run OS X fulltime, and was recently given one of the original Creative Nomad 6G MP3 jukeboxes. The bundled software was SoundJam MP, but for OS9. I hooked up the Nomad (USB, ugh), fired up iTunes, and it recognized it right away and I could drag/drop MP3s from my library to it.
Re:don't use media player? (Score:4, Informative)
"Casady & Greene, Inc. ceased publication of SoundJam MP on June 1, 2001 at the request of its developers. We believe that SoundJam MP will continue to give our customers long and useful service, and, in keeping with our philosophy of putting our customers first, Casady & Greene will continue to offer tech support to SoundJam MP owners. The SoundJam development team is now working for Apple on their popular iTunes jukebox software, and will continue to work on exciting and innovative products for Mac use"
Parent
Re:Oh No!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
People shoplift from grocery stores every day also, but I don't have to get new licenses for my soup if I move it from one cabinet to another. Let the RIAA etc. do what grocery stores do and add the "losses" due to piracy onto everyone else's bill.
Looking at the price vs. cost of production of CDs, it appears that they must already do this. Not to mention that they get a chunk of every blank CD Audio disc sold. Bingo, problem solved. Now quit with the DRM shit, you bastard record companies!
Seriously, how can they expect consumers to put up with that much hassle to "protect" their multi-billion-dollar industry from the miniscule sales they really lose to piracy?
Parent
Re:Oh No!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, but there are no "Soup-uters" out there that allow you to make unlimited, perfect copies of your can of soup and instantly deliver the soup to millions of people around the globe for free. If there were, you can bet Campbells would be very interested in controlling what you did with your can of soup.
Parent
Re:Oh No!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
One of them is called allrecipies.com.
Parent
Re:Oh No!!! (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, so you're a food pirate! Stealing your recipes instead of supporting the chefs that give you those recipes, by eating at their restaurants.
I bet you even have a "burner" in your kitchen, you THIEF!
signed,
President, Chefs Association of America
Parent
Re:Insanity (Score:3, Insightful)
By any chance, are you in your in your mid- to late- twenties? Many people stop getting into new music in that timeframe, and have been for 25-30 years.