Slashdot Log In
Studios OK Burning Movie Downloads
Posted by
CowboyNeal
on Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:24 AM
from the so-long-as-it's-paid-for dept.
from the so-long-as-it's-paid-for dept.
SirClicksalot writes "The DVD Copy Control Association has released a statement (pdf) announcing that it will make adaptations to the Content Scramble System (CSS) used to protect DVDs. The association, made up of Hollywood studios, consumer electronics and software companies, licenses CSS to the DVD industry to protect content. The changes will allow home users to legally burn purchased movie downloads to special CSS protected DVDs, compatible with existing DVD players."
This discussion has been archived.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.
Further evidence... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Further evidence... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, it is a nice gesture of how sincere they are about making you pay twice for the movie. Once for the download and again for the blank media to burn it to.
Parent
Re:Further evidence... (Score:4, Interesting)
It would seem a logical step that if this becomes a standard we might see network-capable DVD players that can play all this media without it being burned.
Parent
Re:Further evidence... (Score:5, Interesting)
As per TFA:
If this paragraph is accurate, and changes need to be made, then as I said, these new-CSS-format DVDs will not play on old players without a firmware update, which will not be forthcoming for most of them.
Parent
Re:Further evidence... (Score:5, Informative)
Popular DVD "ripping" tools that make the ISO's actually decrypt the content first so that you can burn it to another disc in an unencrypted format.
Parent
WRONG (Score:5, Informative)
YOU need to read TFA:
http://www.dvdcca.org/data/css/DVDCCArecordrlsFIN
"Both would require special blank DVD discs that will use the Content Scramble System (CSS) for encryption and will be compatible with the millions of existing DVD players in the marketplace today."
If you had a clue about what you're talking about, you would know that CSS keys cannot be written existing DVD blank media, which is what makes CSS semi-effective in the first place. Otherwise, you wouldn't need to decrypt a DVD to copy it; you could just copy the whole encrypted disk, including keys, which would kinda defeat the entire purpose of CSS.
Parent
Re:Further evidence... (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple showed that people will pay for downloads, if they are presented with few enough restrictions. So, the MPAA is trying to pre-empt the P2P people by getting legal downloads in place before illegal ones take off.
Parent
Re:Further evidence... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Further evidence... (Score:4, Insightful)
It was at this point I realized that they needed to start selling the stuff or the "problem" would only get worse. As I told a coworker at the time, 'net surfers are going to take the path of least resistence. If they can get music more conveniently than dealing with ratioed FTP sites (I hated those things), they will happily pay a reasonable fee.
Unsurprisingly, the RIAA members ignored the wonderful business opportunity that was staring them in the face. So then they had to contend with Napster. By the time the entire debacle was over, every person on the planet now knew about the convenience of online music! To get support from congress for their legal tactics, they actually started claiming that they would have a music store out Real Soon Now(TM). Of course, one never materialized. (At least the MPAA members were smart enough to launch MovieLink.) If it hadn't been for Apple, Lord knows what would have happened.
Parent
Re:Further evidence... (Score:5, Insightful)
How does it prove that?
The RIAA's members continue to sell unencumbered media for the most part. The DVD-CCA has merely announced a minor modification to CSS (actually probably to recordable DVD media) that will allow DVD-burning kiosks to be set up. These DVD burning kiosks will still end up generating discs that are illegal - as in jailtime - to play with an unlicensed DVD player.
I haven't seen the RIAA pushing for jailtime against people who write audio ripping software let alone CD players. And while there may be occasional glitches in its current stategy, so far it seems to be aiming to punish only those who actually willfully infringe copyright (by putting copies of their member's music onto file copying networks.)
Neither are perfect bodies, but the RIAA so far hasn't tried to micromanage how I listen to music. The MPAA really does think, very strongly, that you should only watch its member's content on it's members defined terms, and is willing to promote mechanisms with draconian legal backing to enforce this. They're a bunch of scumbags, and this article does nothing to disabuse me of that notion.
Parent
Re:Further evidence... (Score:5, Informative)
I'll also add a comment to your "for the most part" argument: look at how often and in how many ways they've tried to put (sometimes artificial) barriers to CD-ripping. With the iPod and other MP3 players being so popular now, too many people stumble upon those limitations, the RIAA can't get away with it.
Parent
Re:Further evidence... (Score:3, Interesting)
A large number of new release CDs are getting DRM type protections. The only time these things get any real press or notice though is when Sony screws up big time and installs a root kit without permission. Most of the methods invented can be circumvented, but the CSS was circumvented LONG AGO.
The illegality of the issue, which could result in jail time, is actually a result of the DMCA. The RIAA could go after people for circu
Re:Further evidence... (Score:5, Funny)
Run, Johnny Depp, run!
Parent
Re:Further evidence... (Score:4, Interesting)
The closest any case actually came to enforcing the criminal provisons of theDMCA was in the Skylarov/Elcomsoft case. The facts of the case fell square under the text of the DMCA, and copyright industry commentators even said it was hard to imagine any more clear and exact violation of these DMCA provisons. The jury simply refused to vote to convict, unanimously.
The jurors had asked US District Judge Ronald M. Whyte to clarify the definition of 'fair use' shortly after deliberations began. [JuryForeman] Dennis Strader said: "Under the eBook formats, you have no rights at all, and the jury had trouble with that concept."
The DMCA is used to terrify corporations into compliance and to keep products off of the market, but the law itself is so unconcionable that an entire jury from the general public unanimously refuse to enforce it.
-
Parent
How "nice" of them... (Score:5, Funny)
stupid
Re:How "nice" of them... (Score:3, Interesting)
Hence my support for the PIRATE PARTY.
Re:How "nice" of them... (Score:5, Funny)
You must be an MPAA shill, because their position is not, repeat not 100% in agreement with the Slashbot position. In particular, they are using css. The "Slashbot position" as you call it is that both CSS and region coding are objectionable, and should never be used. DVDs work just fine without any CSS at all, and CSS does not prevent copying, so why do they use CSS? Purely legal reasons, and poor ones at that, designed to prevent us from exercising our fair use laws, through application of the DMCA.
You fail the test! Hand in your geek badge on your way out.
Parent
Nice troll (Score:3, Insightful)
In fact, the rest of the parent post pretty much confirms the subject line: "whine", "whining", "whiny babies", "cheap bastards"...
Grow up.
For the record, charge me money for a product with no restrictions and no ads. I'll pay. I'll pay a lot, as is evidenced by my large CD col
Re:How "nice" of them... (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, I'm not sure what the 'Slashbot position' is - sounds faintly kinky - but my view on the matter has not changed:
If you want to sell me your content, then do so without DRM. I have a lot of devices that can play audio and video. I reserve the right to choose which one I use to play back content that I have bought. I reserve the right to play a movie backwards. I reserve the right to format shift it to play on a mobile device, optionally with more lossy compression. I reserve the right to chop it apart and create derived works, although I understand that I will be required to pay royalties if I distribute them, as per copyright law. I reserve the right to do absolutely anything I want with the content that does not contravene copyright law (i.e. anything other than distributing modified or unmodified copies). You, as the copyright holder, have the right to control distribution. You have no other rights related to your content.
If you want to try putting restrictive DRM on your content, then I reserve the right not to buy it. I also reserve the right to keep proposing to my elected representatives that copyright protections only be extended to works distributed without DRM.
In the UK, you are allowed to lock your doors. If someone breaks in, you are allowed to use reasonable force to protect yourself and your property. If you shoot someone because you think they might break into your house, or even because they did break into your house, then you will go to jail. Our legal system does not condone vigilante actions in other areas, and I see no reason why copyright should be a special case.
that's all you whiny babies really want, and nothing less is going to make you cheap bastards happy.
Do you hear that sound? That was your credibility flying away.
Parent
We need a "no nonsense license" for CDs/DVDs... (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd be fine with a "no-nonsense license" akin to Borland's:
"You may rip, burn, format-shift, edit, mangle, karioke, or whatever the hell else you want to do with this CD or DVD, within the privacy of your own personal equipment. However, you may not redistribute it in any form, except as permitted under Fair Use."
That's all either users or the content providers really need. Watermark the damned things if you like, I don't care. But don't inconvenience me beyond what I expect f
Slashdot position (Score:3, Funny)
It's kind of like the Missionary Position, but without the other person.
"special" discs? (Score:5, Interesting)
Besides, haven't these morons figured out yet that CSS is borderline useless?
Re:"special" discs? (Score:2)
They'll make very expensive coasters too if you're not careful when burning... I'll stick to HMV for the meantime.
Re:"special" discs? (Score:4, Funny)
Useless? Useless? Are you kidding? The hack of it made a great t-shirt!
Parent
Re:"special" discs? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:"special" discs? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:"special" discs? (Score:3, Informative)
as for reading the article, I quote:
"Soon, people will be able to copy a digital movie onto a specially made DVD"
What it sounds like to me is that they plan on distributing discs with CSS keys already burned on them instead of the discs that exist now having the CSS ring zeroed out.
Re:"special" discs? (Score:5, Informative)
This isn't just a software change. See, the whole reason CSS is effective (to any extent) is that DVD burners and blank DVD media are designed to prevent you from writing CSS keys to a disc. The media comes with the key area pre-burned with zeros (or physically embossed, for RW discs) and the burners refuse to write there anyway. Even with the expensive DVD-R for Authoring format, you can't burn a CSS protected disc today, AFAICT.
Parent
Re:"special" discs? (Score:4, Informative)
Even with the expensive DVD-R for Authoring format, you can't burn a CSS protected disc today, AFAICT.
As I understand it, that was the whole point of DVD-R for Authoring. They did let you burn CSS to Authoring discs ("authoring", after all, means making an exact image of what is going to be pressed at the factory), but they made sure that Authoring discs wouldn't be burnable in regular drives, and (for some reason I can't comprehend), Authoring drives wouldn't burn regular discs.
The original intent was that the only people with Authoring drives and using Authoring discs would be the few pros who needed them. And they would pay big bucks for what was esentially a drive with different firmware, and a blank disc made with different header info, further limiting use to pros only.
Parent
Re:"special" discs? (Score:3, Informative)
Are customers finally winning? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Are customers finally winning? (Score:5, Interesting)
If you copy a DVD by breaking the CSS and re-encoding it, you've got a completely DRM free disk. You can do whatever you want with it, and copy it with any burning software. It becomes clean data. This new system will let you burn copies of that same disk, except they re-encrypt it for you and re-apply the DRM. Isn't that nice of them?
Parent
Re:Are customers finally winning? (Score:3, Insightful)
Did we finally get a message through that the majority of us aren't criminals?
To whom are you trying to deliver this message? The MPAA members?
A criminal can make a perfect copy of a DVD and resell it without touching the encryption. A criminal can point a video camera at a TV playing a DVD and make a file. A criminal can break the encryption anyway, since it is weak and the only thing stopping them is the law. A criminal can download a cracked copy from the internet.
All of the the so called "copy prot
If it works with existing DVD players... (Score:5, Informative)
The articles I'm reading suggest the service will be limited to kiosks. This makes sense, as any consumer based DVD burner that can burn CSS discs will be ultimately possible to modify such that it can copy regular DVDs too.
Re:If it works with existing DVD players... (Score:5, Interesting)
you mean like how I can copy any DVD right now without effort?
BTW, I can make CSS "protected" DVD's right now with DVD-R media and a old Pioneer A-06 DVD burner. I did it last month for a client that paid for their CSS key and I used Scenerist to creat ethe DVD structure and apply the CSS encoding key.
Plays in DVD players nice and DVD decryptor and my other tools for ripping DVD's shows it as having CSS protection.
I am unsure as to this special area you are speaking of but it's not needed to make your own CSS encrypted DVD's. (although CSS is 100% useless for protection of any kind.)
Parent
"Special" DVDs (Score:2)
Re:"Special" DVDs (Score:5, Funny)
To compensate you for your trouble "Weekend at Bernies - Blank Edition" will be between $1.23 and $1.56 cheaper than "Weekend at Bernies" original that will be on sale right next to "Weekend at Bernies - Blank Edition", and between $1.56 and $1.93 cheaper than "Weekend at Bernies - Directors Cut" and "Weekend at Bernies - Now in HD", which will be the next two DVDs over.
Parent
Re:"Special" DVDs (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, CSS is hardware as well as software, because the key is stored in a spacial place on the disk, and existing disks do not allow that special place to be written. So it is impossible to make CSS-protected disks with current domestic DVD writers.
Special media? (Score:4, Insightful)
Sadly encouraging, but.... (Score:4, Informative)
This is a Good Thing (Score:2, Interesting)
Give these guys credit. Anything that even smells like it would endanger the all powerful Bottom Line and drop share prices is taboo for all major corporations.
Why Bother? (Score:4, Insightful)
Countdown to crack (Score:5, Funny)
What's that? CSS got cracked years ago? Look, behind you - a three-headed terrorist! Think of the children!
*runs*
What am I missing (Score:4, Interesting)
Misquoted (Score:5, Funny)
The simple summary - encryption must live on (Score:5, Interesting)
Fromt the desciption and my palty knowledge of the DVD format, it seems like they're simply going to make everybody capable of burning in the key area with approved software. The end user part is to allow electronic distribution through a pay-per-download scheme. That scheme can also be used to digitally watermark the downloads and monitor infringing uploads, which is a bonus for them. More people with bigger pipes will be necessary for that to really take hold.
As for the end user burning a CCA encrypted disc, thay pretty much have to keep that part in order to retain much in the way of legal protections. Consumers keep crying "fair use" as a way to format shift, and to them format shifting is pronounced "lost sale". If drop the encryption, it's just like a CD, and there are already services which will format shift your CDs to MP3. All legal through fair use and unencrypted content. By encrypting the content, they keep their DMCA protections - it's not legal anyone else to help you format shift, in any way shape or form. For the vast majority of the population, that means format shifting is done via additional purchase.
Everyone here seems to think that the MPAA is trying to stop pirates, and we bubble with exhaspiration over the fact that the encryption has been broken and is useless. The MPAA doesn't really care about big time pirates all that much - it's a small market, mostly in asia, and mostly in places where the disposable income isn't high enough for the average person to afford a price that would turn a profit for the member organizations. No, the pirates the MPAA is concerned about are the casual ones - the guy next door who will burn his also-tech-unsavvy neighbor a quick copy on his consumer DVD recorder. That's more likely to be a lost sale than some chick dropping $1US on a pirated Malasian jewelcase on a street corner or a pimply faced 14 year old downloading a torrent. They won't admit it in public, but they know its true. Keeping Jim and Billy Bob from swapping discs will generate more revenue than stopping a dozen teenagers from getting an image off the eDonkey.
Screw'em (Score:4, Insightful)
See, here's one way to look at the problem. Let's say I subscribe to HBO. HBO plays "Tears of the Sun," to use an example. I record it on my VCR. That's legal. If I take an A/V output from the satellite box and record it, that's fair use as well. If I then convert the VCR or whatever recording and convert it to a DIVX so I can play it on my PC, that's legal. But if I skip the work myself and grab a copy off the Internet, that's illegal.
The person who is effectively breaking the law by default is the guy who is uploading the movie, not the person downloading it. That isn't to say that the guy downloading it isn't breaking the law as well, but there are plenty of legitimate ways that he could have obtained the same exact result, legally, making the entire argument stupid.
Major(s) costs saving (Score:3, Informative)
- They don't need to edit a DVD structure with bonuses and such
- They donc have to create the media, the jacket and such
- They don't have to manage media storage
- They don't have to manage media transportation
But you pay the same: They earn 35% more.
Same for downloadable manazines and news papers: same price, but the company saves paper, printing costs, transportation, unsold idtems,
Don't run that! (Score:4, Funny)
Friends don't let friends execute perl scripts they didn't write.
Parent
Re:TV? (Score:3)
They can bitch and moan all they want...
I think pretty much everyone commits a copyright violation atleast once a day wtihout even realizing it or doing anything wrong because of how screwed up the laws are.