Microsoft Licenses Analog Anti-rip Technology 270
photojournaliste writes "CD copy-protection specialist Macrovision is to work with Microsoft to ensure their respective DRM and anti-rip technologies are interoperable, the two companies said this week. Sounds straightforward enough, but the deal runs deeper. Microsoft agreed to license a number of Macrovision's patents, in particular those relating to analogue copy protection technology and more recent extensions to that system that cover video-on-demand, pay-per-view content and support for the US 'broadcast flag', which determines whether consumers will be able to record digital TV broadcasts."
How long before ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Same for Myth TV etc
TheLogster
Broadcast Flag (Score:4, Insightful)
Interoperable? (Score:5, Insightful)
LOL!!! They will price themselves out of the marke (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How long before ... (Score:5, Insightful)
i think the key is, it's not all (or even most), but only some would hack.
Re:LOL!!! They will price themselves out of the ma (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:How long before ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, any programmer knows that if you can write the decoded video stream to the screen device, you can write it to a disk device just as easily. However, you can pretty well count on the fact that the law (DCMA and others) will be used to criminilize any software which can be used to work around the broadcast flag.
Buy now, only legal until July 1 (Score:3, Insightful)
If you ever thought you wanted a hdtv pvr, buy a card now or you will not be legal.
http://www.pchdtv.com/
I just got mine, and I am working through the mythtv setup...
I assume they have to allow for future tivo / pvrs for HDTV that will respect the broadcast flag. But what kind of respect does that entail? Some programs cannot be time-shifted at all? I really dont' know what is to come.
Broadcast flag outside US (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How long before ... (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that it'd be illegal to use the software would not bother anyone...
There is always a way... (Score:5, Insightful)
All it takes is one person to circumvent the protection (we all know how good macrovision has been in the past...) or to have access to source material to distribute it to millions using P2P.
They need to change their business model, give us what we want (DRM free mp3 or similar) for a reasonable price or eventually suffer the inevitable... (which could be a good thing too, the music industry reborn)
Re:insightful flamebiat, you pick. (Score:5, Insightful)
"DRM never has been about absolute control. It has, from its inception, been about making piracy enough of an inconvenience that regular user don't bother to do it."
And they usually don't. They just get the material they want off of somebody else who does bother.
DRM schemes ONLY stop regular users (and even then, only until someone writes up an easy to use program/utility that the public can use) while they are a mild inconvenience to the professionals.
It only takes one unscrupulous person to make one DRM-less copy of something (be it actual material or a box that ignores DRM) and distribute it and then everybody can have a copy.
I'm tired of the industry trying to use technology to solve a social problem.
Same old story (Score:5, Insightful)
Sigh... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:insightful flamebiat, you pick. (Score:4, Insightful)
The point of the broadcast flag is that the user says, "Hey I'll record the Pay per view X on the DVR so I can watch it later or so I can watch it with my wife" The DRM prevents him from doing this.
He instead just goes out and rents the DVD.
The DRM and the ways to circumvent it are not convenient enough to get him to commit the act of piracy. (and playing movies from a computer to a TV is not really that common in the mainstream)
Thus it add a layer of inconvenience to committing the act thus dissuading people from doing it.
There will always be pirates. That is a given. The inherit law of DRM is that it will be broken, eventually. That is why what I said above is insightful DRM has never been about complete control because even the movie studios know that is impossible. DRM has and will continue to be about making the piracy enough of an inconvenience that the mainstream will not do it.
As an aside,
By the way it is the convenience of P2P and bittorrent that bugs them, not the fact they exist. If P2P and BT were tiny do you really think they would be so up in arms. It is the fact that anyone can click next on a windows box to get through a default install and then have access to huge amounts of pirated data.
Re:How long before ... (Score:3, Insightful)
If you add TCPA to the mix then it seems like the media companies are trying to either seriously cripple, or get rid of, the PC platform as we know it.
As everyone knows while non-DRM media formats exist you only need to break the encryption or protection once and then the cat is out of the bag. It seems like the media companies goal is to not allow content to be accessed or decoded on any device that is aslo capable of decoding, or encoding, non-DRM formats.
Re:How long before ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Marijuana possession is illegal in most of the US. While the law is widely ignored, there are still people who are serving time in PMITA prison for violating it. How'd you like to be Tyrone's bitch for 3-5 years because you got busted for "posession of software with intent to distribute"?
This could help us. (Score:2, Insightful)
We may finally get the public outcry we need to get rid of the broadcast flag and it's ilk.
Re:How long before ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:insightful flamebiat, you pick. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:This could help us. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Broadcast Flag (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually that's a good point. The broadcast flag could farther limit casual TV watching. You see an add for new program that looks interesting, but you're not sure if it's worth watching. Maybe it'll be your new favorite show, maybe you'll never want to see it again. So record it and watch it later right? Well if they now MAKE you sit and watch this new show which MIGHT be okay, then many people will probably just not watch it at all. Too bad for them I guess. Maybe people will just have to pick up hobbies other than watching TV.
Doesn't really matter if they do. (Score:3, Insightful)
Cable companies are already moving to simulcast all analog channels in digital form. At some point to reclaim bandwidth they'll drop all but the 2-13 channels from their analog service anyway, and people will have to use CableCard-compatible sets or digital cable boxes.
MythTV will never support those, as the likelihood is that there will never be a cablecard adapter for a PC, precisely because its intended to prevent interception of the digital content. Who knows if Tivo will survive long enough to come out with a CableCard unit, and who knows if the broadcast flag won't be implemented in hardware.
Re:LOL!!! They will price themselves out of the ma (Score:3, Insightful)
The provider with a strong backlist and the most wanted artists and titles.
Provider A is not Pixar or Warner Brothers, which means that it won't be shipping The Incredibles or the next Harry Potter.
Re:How long before ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Bob, Alice and Carol (Score:4, Insightful)
Broadcast Issues (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you really think that there are going to be lots of broadcasts conducted where the operators go, "Ya know, we probably don't need to prevent someone from recording this. Let it go."
No, we're screwed. Every program has at least something that the producer or the distributor will consider "theirs" and will therefore decide to limit it. Even something as simple as a logo overlay (a-la SciFi Channel, USA, et al) might be considered a "branding" and therefore something that would prevent redistribution. Probably the ONLY thing that would even come close to being open would be things like the State of the Union broadcast -- but even that would be considered proprietary, because it was a *particular* broadcast by a *particular* station with their *particular* boneheaded reporters struggling to come up with something intelligent to comment about.
I dunno. I just think the broadcast flag is a false sense of fairness when it'll turn out to be nothing but solid DRM that everyone will get screwed with.
Re:How long before ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's go all Young Republican: Who cares if they can't survive? They can get new jobs if they aren't lazy. Who said we owed them an industry? We haven't signed any contracts stating we must watch their commericals. If the Free Market says that we don't have to pay for the content, then they will go out of business. Sometimes a market really can be free. It's not the government's job to force people to watch TV commercials.
Content will either dry up, or it won't. If it does, the market will have instructed people that downloading stuff for free destroys the golden goose, and they will self-correct. If it doesn't dry up, and the content creators thrive (which seems to be the case so far, manipulated RIAA figures to the contrary), then the dubious content providers were wrong and the downloaders are right: downloads don't hurt the business model.
Either way, let them eat cake.
Re:Broadcast flag outside US (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Buy now, only legal until July 1 (Score:2, Insightful)
It would probably be illegal for US citizens to download such drivers, so I guess they won't...
Re:insightful flamebiat, you pick. (Score:3, Insightful)
My worry is that eventually the networks will get into the act and throw the copy bit on for a major network show. They'll do this to "defend" their coveted timeslot for one of their best shows. What happens next is that you will have millions of very, very pissed off people who will not be able to record their favorite program later.
The network will of course say "tough" and demand its viewers on its terms at its time. It is their dream TV back to the, watch it only when its on way from before VCRs. They'll finally be able to kill off recording like they so desperately want to. They will be happier then hell.
Until....
What I believe will happen next is that millions of people will put so much pressure on Congress. Yes, I'm serious about this. It will become one of the most important issues in the country. The media will try to poo poo it, but some will cover the controversy and word of mouth will be rampant for this.
Congress will be forced to do something to restore our fair use rights. I don't see any congressperson who doesn't restore our rights gettting reelected. Screw social security, if I can't record CSI, there will be hell to pay. It sounds silly but its true.
Its also more serious than that. If they stop the recording of TV, they will be emboldened. We will copmletely lose control of our TVs, our music, and , worst of all our PCs. We will lose control of all our devices, constantly asking (paying for) permission to do what they allow. Its utterly evil. You would think that an industry that turned its worst nightmare into a multi-billion dollar business 20 years ago would realize that they have exactly the same chance today, but they're trying the same thing today they did then. If they suceed this time, they will finally earn their reward they didn't get last time which is the death of their industry.
Jesus. (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:How long before ... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, I haven't; and there is no such thing as a "sort of contract"
"More, you've accepted a license."
No, I didn't. I didn't sign anything.
"If they have it so in the license that you agree to by watching their content that you mustn't do the things Tivo does with that content, then you've agreed not to. "Shrink-wrap" licenses are still licenses."
No, they are not. I always, as a precaution, chant "No, I do not accept your terms" as I open any package with some sort of sticker on it. It's not my fault they provide no means of communications with them on this matter
"It's their content and by watching their content, accepting their content, you must agree to a licence which they distribute it under for you. Enforcing those licences would be something that the government does."
It's not "their" content. They own the physical media on which they store their masters. They don't own the "content". They possess copy rights, not property rights, on the content. However, I have fair use rights over the content, because I have such under law, and because the media is my property, if property rights are to enter such a discussion. I do not accept any licenses as to how I use a machine I purchase, and the government be damned if they are paid to violate my rights by breaking down my door to stop me using my own property.
"Opposing libertarianism against this problem of your's doesn't work...because, sometimes, companies can get so rich they can begin to own the rulebook of the market itself, so to speak."
You're absolutely right, and I don't mean to criticize you, by the way, merely the idea of these new "rights" these rich people have recently purchased. If the U.S. manages to inflict this new idea of property on the world, its all over for freedom as we know it. Copyright and licenses and property rights will be used, ARE being used, to silence dissent in the U.S. and abroad. Petty dictators are a horror, but they eventually die and become dust. This new regime is corporate, immortal, and unkillable.
Re:This could help us. (Score:3, Insightful)
No, it's best to bite this demon before it gets its fangs dug into us.
Re:Broadcast Flag (Score:2, Insightful)
What part of Stalinist Russia do you want to live in?
Re:How long before ... (Score:3, Insightful)
bullying (Score:4, Insightful)
We may see this as other regions with similar socio-economic cultures decide to get together for their common benefit. My near term predictions are a Latin-American Union and an Asia-Pacific Union.
Re:How long before ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Once DRM schemes are fully in place no unauthorised person will be able to so much as see certain documents, let alone surrepititiously print them and smuggle them out of a government or industry office. Merely attempting to access such documents may be made a crime and will certainly be tracked in order to identify individuals who might be a "threat" (for some value of threat). The joining of technological means of limiting access to information and the wishes of the powerful to maintain their positions will result in a world in which the vast majority of people will have no clue about what's really happening. How many people would know about the Abu Graib events if the powers that be had the ability to utterly refuse access to anything incriminating simply by locking it up behind a wall of DRM permissions? A well-managed DRM scheme devoted to keeping things secret could well lead to a situation in which there is literally no clue available that something may be rotten in Denmark.
The future of political and civil rights depends on our ability to resist the drive by the rich and powerful to implement DRM technology and the laws which will make it illegal to attempt to circumvent same. No matter how attractive the "content" that is protected by DRM, in any guise, is the fact of the matter is that it's not worth it. Anyone who buys a copy-protected game, movie, music CD, DVD, etc. is only putting money in the pockets of those who would, in the end, like to see the vast majority of people reduced to "consumer units" with no political or civil rights worth talking about.
Just my $.02,
Ron
Re:How long before ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Something that you're overlooking is that those in power will want to maintain the status quo.
Hollywood, TV shows owners, etc. will want to ensure that the current format of 20 minutes of programming and 10 minutes of commercials is maintained, since it's easier to stick with what works than it would to deviate from it.
I am convinced that the market will only "self correct" when producing a TV show becomes a sure-fire way of losing money. Only when ALL the shows begin to lose money will things change. Otherwise, you'd better hope the commercials are as entertaining as the show's they're interrupting.
Re:A decent TBC makes this all immaterial (Score:3, Insightful)
the GPL is not a EULA (Score:1, Insightful)
Note that under copyright, and specifically the doctrie of first-sale, the user can do whatever he wants with the copyrighted item, EXCEPT copy/duplicate/recreate/extend it. Even then there are fair use exceptions, but they are very limited and widly abused by many here.
The GPL is what allows one to copy/duplicate/recreate/extend the copyrighted work. Outside of that, the GPL doesn't apply.