A Copyright Cop In Every Zune

Mike writes "As if the Zune wasn't already crippled and unpopular enough, now comes a story indicating that Microsoft may build a 'Copyright Cop' into every Zune. A future update of the software for Microsoft's portable media player will likely include a 'feature' that will block unauthorized copies of copyrighted videos from being played on it. The president of digital distribution for NBC, J. B. Perrette, said the plan is to create 'filtering technology that allows for playback of legitimately purchased content versus non-legitimately purchased content.' Of course there's no way to tell legitimate content that you create from 'non-legitimate' content, so this looks like just another nail in the coffin of the Zune." Update: 05/08 20:50 GMT by T : From Microsoft employee Cesar Menendez comes this categorical denial of any such filtering mechanism.

Nothing new there

Its just 'trusted computing' rearing its ugly head.

Re:Nothing new there

For the most part, people just don't care about DRM or trusted computing because it doesn't affect them. However, this "copyright cop" sort of thing is sure to be noticed by the average user. Microsoft seems to be betting heavily on selling DRMed platforms, and I wonder whether they've lost their way, and are listening to partners instead of customers. The Zune has not been an astounding success, and going out of their way to antagonize their customers in a market where they don't have any sort of market dominance seems like hubris on Mocrosoft's part.

Re:Nothing new there

I'm not sure M$ ever did really listen to their customers; they certainly have never seemed to put them ahead of their partners.

The music companies have been sort of backing away from DRM, but the movie industry isn't. It's not clear if they're getting industry pressure to support DRM in exchange for some sort of agreement (exclusivity?) allowing video downloads for the zune. After the "play for sure" debacle, who would trust them anyway? There are plenty of fine alternatives to Ipod and Zune anyway.

Microsoft seems to be unable to deliver.

MOD PARENT UP.

"A clunky form factor that's trying hard to match competition from three years ago."

Is the Zune the Vista of music players, or is Vista the Zune of operating systems?

Microsoft seems unable to do business sensibly. Maybe Gates and Ballmer are getting tired of working every day. What motivates a billionaire to keep producing mediocre results?

Re:Microsoft seems to be unable to deliver.

Have you ever actually used the Zune interface? Personally I find it far easier and quicker to navigate than any other portable media player on the market, including the iPod and the iPhone. IMO it's one of the few things they actually got right wit the device.

This new DRM "feature" is another story, but don't troll on something you know nothing about just because you're an Anti-MS fanboy.

The New York Times says not to buy a Zune.

Maybe you shouldn't be annoyed with Twitter, in this case. His extremely negative evaluation was only as negative as that of the New York Times. Quote:

"If you like to download the latest episodes of "Heroes" or other NBC shows from BitTorrent, maybe you shouldn't buy a Microsoft Zune to watch them on. [my emphasis]

"A future update of the software for Microsoft's portable media player may well include a feature that will block unauthorized copies of copyrighted videos from being played on it."

Consider this: Someone bought a Zune, believing that he understood the features of the product. But later, Microsoft, in an "update", changes the way it works. That's nasty. It teaches customers that they can't trust Microsoft or a Microsoft product.

Huh? Zune?

I've heard of this Zune, but never actually seen one out in the wild. Do they actually exist? In other words, the Zune can have as much DRM as it likes. No one who cares about that sort of thing will buy one anyway. In fact who does buy them?

Re:Huh? Zune?

I was kind of wondering how many nails you need in the coffin of a dead product?

Its not so much the nails in the coffin you need as stakes in the heart. Unfortunately Zune's can only be killed by legitimately purchased stakes.

Re:Huh? Zune?

There are people who enjoy getting their nuts stepped on too. To each his own I guess.

Apple DRM is irrrelevent

I'm sick of hearing about this. Lets dispel some myths.

1: You can copy music on and off an iPod with great ease. There is no magic DRM preventing this *at all*.

2: Apple are quite happy to let you rip their music to cd, and then to mp3. It's no different, and sounds no different from ripping a bought music cd.

3: The iPod only has DRM on it because Apple new they would get sued to fuck if they didn't, or if they went around allowing direct circumvention. By allowing copying to audio cd they avoid this via the fair use claim.

4: A *lot* of available iPod content is not DRM'd anyway.

Re:Apple DRM is irrrelevent

1: You can copy music on and off an iPod with great ease. There is no magic DRM preventing this *at all*.

YOu're right, they would never Intentionally take measures [arstechnica.com] to prevent third parties from writing software that allows for transfer to and from the ipod.

2: Apple are quite happy to let you rip their music to cd, and then to mp3. It's no different, and sounds no different from ripping a bought music cd.

You're right! How gracious of apple to ALLOW you to transfer a piece of your property to another piece of your property! Its almost like we're PAYING thing for this or something.

3: The iPod only has DRM on it because Apple new they would get sued to fuck if they didn't, or if they went around allowing direct circumvention. By allowing copying to audio cd they avoid this via the fair use claim.

Please cite at least 1 example of a company being sued for creating a device that allows people to play MP3s. You might want to let Justin Frankel know that he should have been "sued to fuck" (whatever that meansd) for creating winamp instead of chilling in his multi-million dollar home studio.

4: A *lot* of available iPod content is not DRM'd anyway.

Right AGAIN! How GRACIOUS of apple to allow you to play the music that you purchased on anything other than their blessed device!

Re:Apple DRM is irrrelevent

2: Apple are quite happy to let you rip their music to cd, and then to mp3. It's no different, and sounds no different from ripping a bought music cd.

This isn't quite true. Most music on iTunes is lower quality than a CD and in a different format. Burning it to CD results in a slightly lower quality yet and significantly lower than a purchased CD. Ripping it to a new format will depend upon what quality you normally rip content at, but it will be less than what is available on a purchased CD and worse than a purchased iTunes song.

That said, the quality may be acceptable, and in fact I don't have a problem with the audio quality of songs ripped in this way. I'd further argue that the way most CDs are mastered these days results in a much bigger hit to actual audio quality than anything Apple is doing.

3: The iPod only has DRM on it because Apple new they would get sued to fuck if they didn't, or if they went around allowing direct circumvention. By allowing copying to audio cd they avoid this via the fair use claim.

This is just untrue. Apple not including DRM does not give them any real legal liability, even for contributory copyright infringement. Apple included DRM to get buy in from the RIAA. Without that buy in, the iPod would have had a much slower uptake and been less popular. They needed a way to buy and load mainstream music easier than going to the store and for that, they needed the cooperation of the RIAA... hence DRM. Fair use has basically nothing to do with Apple themselves.

4: A *lot* of available iPod content is not DRM'd anyway.

This is true for audio, and Apple has been pushing hard to get rid of it, both for ease of use reasons to sell more iPods and because it is a potential antitrust issue.

Re:They exist.

An iPod does not require using iTunes. You can put Rockbox on an iPod and simply drag the music files directly onto the iPod mounted as a drive. There's also plenty of other programs that can read and write to an iTunes database.

PlaysForSure

This is a demonstration of Microsoft's new media-compatibility standard. They're calling it "Plays? Yeah sure!"

thankfully, it's BS

"...will work with [NBC] to try to develop..." is classic software marketing BS - three weasel verbs in succession, a minor masterpiece. Translation: "This feature? Oh, sure, we have it. I mean, we'll have it in the next release. I mean, the crack team of our coding monkeys is going to make it their priority. Now just sign here, initial here and here."

They clearly just don't get it -

"In the short term, this will not win us a lot of friends,â he said. âoeIn the long term, the consumer wants there to be quality premium-produced content, and in order for that to continue to be a viable business, there needs to be significant protection around it."

Yes, the consumer wants quality premium-produced content, and they want to be able to play it on what they want when they want. And unless that is what they are offering, pirates are going to take the time to remove any protection around it no matter how significant, and give it away for free. As long as this their view, they aren't going to have a viable business, but when it dawns on them that the consumer is ultimately in charge of the situation now, and network stooges aren't, they will release content in an intelligent manner - so the consumer can access it when they want, and on what they want.

Battery Killer

Not to mention that the extra processing needed for the wiz bang water marking technology will reduce battery life.

How much? Who knows, but extra design constraints always create compromises and battery life is one place it is likely to show up.

The 'Uncool' of Microsoft

OK Microsoft-faithful and Apple-haters - listen up. This is why everyone says that Microsoft is 'uncool'.

In spite of a few missteps as of late, Microsoft is still the biggest, richest, most powerful company in tech today. And yet, they have their tongues so far up the record and movie industry's *ss that it isn't even funny anymore. No one respects an obsequious brown-noser. If they had any spine at all, they would tell the record and movie execs the Truth (that they're living on borrowed time) and that the only way to continue to make any money at all is to trust their customers.

Apple was upbraiding the record industry execs for a good three years during and through the Napster debacle. Apple was telling them that customer-hostile DRM that took away obvious and visible consumer rights wouldn't work, they were telling them that the bottom would fall out of the CD business, and they were offering Apple's services as a customer-friendly alternative to some of the loser businesses the record industry was trying at the time (like PressPlay). It's not like the folks at Apple were geniuses for recognizing all of these things - it's just that they have their own protected platform and they're in the software business so they know full-well how futile copy-protection really is.

When the record execs finally realized that everything Apple had been saying was right, they had lost a good fraction of their business and they were desperate to try something new.

The guys who run Microsoft will never have the balls to tell a potential business partner that. They have enough money in the bank to BUY any one of the record companies that they're sucking up to, and yet they behave like the record companies' servile bitch. And that's why they'll never be considered 'cool'.

Something we all needed

Finally, a reason not to buy a Zune.

Learn from Vista

Vista is DRM and restriction overload and doesn't sell. Zune barely sells now, it's not even available in the UK.

Good luck Microsoft. Customers buy features not ball and chains.

I'm probably too late to get in on the discussion

Have you noticed a new trend in digital media? NBC has most of their shows online for free. South Park has all of their online for free. Hulu.com hosts more TV shows that most people would want to watch in a lifetime online for FREE!

The problem with all of these services is that you have to put sitting in front of a computer to use them. IF these media companies can figure out a way to put their content (and with it, their ads) onto a portable device...well, then DRM be damned, I'm buying whatever device that IS.

This is a strategic, relationship building move by microsoft. NOthing more.

Re:Watermarks

Except that watermarks still don't work.

• * They don't expire when the work goes in the public domain after its copyright also expires.
• * They do not take into account Fair Use exemptions.
• * They do not equally protect all content producers; only those who can pay the cartel licensing fees.

Re:Watermarks

To the publishers these are features, not bugs.

Re:So no more ripping FLV vids from YouTube?

I've been doing that for years on my SanDisk MP3 player

Consumers are good at finding what they want and the features they want. Some folks will be fine with the player and it's subscription service. The rest of us will find players that will play our content ripped from DVD's, shared, and downloaded from YouTube.

I often get asked "What computer should I buy?" I always tell them "Find the software you want to run and then buy the haredware that will run it.". With portable media players, this is still very true. If you want to play MP3's and .flv files, only buy a player that will play it.

If you want a player that plays music purchased from the Zune site, you may wish to consider one, but remember, it won't play songs from iTunes. It looks like it also won't play YouTube rips.

You can vote for DRM with your wallet, or you can vote against it. Vote wisely.

Re:Getting with the times.

Nope. You are forgetting what drives Microsoft (and all corporations, really): money.

In today's world, Microsoft MUST continue to put out new versions of Office and Windows, otherwise people will not give them money. But would you put out $400 for a new copy of Office 2007 to replace your copy of Office 2003, just to get the Ribbon bar, or to get the new and improved Pashtun grammar checker? And if so, will you put out another $400 in 2009 for another new copy, to get the ultra-dynamic margin tool? Probably not. So in Microsoft's eyes, you are not sending them enough money.

Microsoft's business plan has no way to continually extract money from its customers over the long haul. So they are forced to invent new "features" to keep people upgrading, in order to churn that money. But Office and XP are "good enough" for most people. The churn is slowing.

Where Microsoft is trying to go tomorrow is the subscription model. You'll buy a subscription to Office Forever which will cost you only $9.99 per month, (or whatever the rate will be.) The OS in conjunction with the TPM chip will enforce that only a legitimate, paid subscription will be able to run. Illicit copies will be prevented from saving, or crippled from editing, or whatever.

Microsoft believes they need the lock-in DRM model to work in order to survive over the long term. They are deathly afraid of Linux, because it's nipping at their heels of functionality and usability already, and a free alternative that runs whatever software you want is the only thing that could stop their model from working. Look to the future for Microsoft to push for incorporating the TPM chip into the BIOS, so only a blessed and approved (and paid for) OS will boot on the hardware of the future. So, any technology or business deal that helps them leverage DRM is a step in the right direction -- for them.