Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Displays Operating Systems Software

HighDef Content to Require New Monitors 607

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the upgrade-fever dept.
QT writes "Ars Technica has an interesting article on how HDCP figures into Microsoft and Apple's future OS plans. Not only will future HD content not play in pure HD on most existing monitors (it will be degraded, or not shown at all), but high-end monitors today don't support HDCP yet. HDCP has been coming for 3+ years, but geek fantasy items such as Apple's $3,000 30" Cinema Display don't even have support for it yet! The end result is that when Windows Vista ships (and Apple's next OS), most people won't be able to watch protected HD content on their computers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

HighDef Content to Require New Monitors

Comments Filter:
  • by gardyloo (512791) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:06PM (#13374562)
    Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:14PM (#13374642)
      Um ... I thought selling more hardware is the poiint of new "standards" and "enhancements" like DRM etc.
    • by Izago909 (637084) <`tauisgod' `at' `gmail.com'> on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:34PM (#13374785)
      Well, I guess that I might have to wait a few days until someone releases a crack for the new protection scheme so that I I can enjoy content that I've already paid for. Unless MS or Apple pay for my new hardware I won't have any other choice.
      • Or maybe... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by sterno (16320) on Monday August 22, 2005 @05:10PM (#13375033) Homepage
        Or maybe, I'll just watch all the old unprotected content that I have lying around. Heck, maybe I'll just read a book. They still let us do that right?
  • by SuperKendall (25149) * on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:06PM (#13374568)
    Yes Microsoft has plans to incorperate full-on video DRM.

    But Apple has never said they will - this article just postulates they will have to.

    Well, before ITMS would not people have also postulated that it would be impossible for Apple to sell songs without DRM that would restrict CD burning? After all, that was the standard of the time.

    Some companies are smart enough to realize that obsoleteing millions of monitors is Not Smart, and will avoid doing so if they can. And Apple has shown they can avoid the more onerous restrictions set forth by giant industries that would rather have it otherwise. And making millions of computer monitors obsolete is right up there in terms of gall.

    So the story poster would have been wise to note the speculative nature of the topic instead of proclaiming it as fact from Apple.
    • Apple WILL. End of story.

      Because if they DON'T, they will not be able to play the content at all.

      (more technically, if Apple doesn't implement signal decimation filtering on un-encrypted outputs, they won't be given the keys to display the content AT ALL).
  • Circumvention (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Adrilla (830520) * on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:07PM (#13374571) Homepage
    Well from simply reading the summary it sounds like all the protection is being held in the OS, therefore couldn't an Open Source OS circumvent this protection. Just load it up in Linux and none of us nerds have anything to worry about. In fact, we could put it in Linux rip off the DRM and burn it to whatever media we need, then we're home free for whatever format we need, DVD, CD, Blu-Ray, even playable back in Windows and Mac.
    • Once they realize that, we'll be fighting to keep that ability in F/OSS operating systems. They'll try to make the protection mandatory, and ban or severely discourage the use of operating systems that don't support it.
    • Re:Circumvention (Score:5, Informative)

      by sqlrob (173498) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:10PM (#13374600)
      You need the driver that authenticates to the display. I doubt very much that will be (legally) in any OSS drivers.
      • Re:Circumvention (Score:5, Insightful)

        by mcelrath (8027) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:16PM (#13374657) Homepage
        Then I will never, ever use it. I will never purchase hardware which makes me jump through hoops to do legal things.

        And to the content industry, I will never buy or rent, or watch your content on these terms. You will be replaced by artists who do not insist on such things.

        -- Bob

        • more of the same (Score:5, Insightful)

          by mkcmkc (197982) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:23PM (#13374709)
          I will never purchase hardware which makes me jump through hoops to do legal things.

          I certainly sympathize, but you do realize that all (legal) DVD players already have this property...

          Mike

          • by Fweeky (41046)
            The region-free DVD player we've got downstairs was sold to us by Asda.. seems legal enough to me; it even happily ignores UOP's.

            Oh, did you just mean all the ones in *your* country? Aren't you allowed to remove region coding on the basis of interoperability, BTW?
    • Re:Circumvention (Score:3, Interesting)

      by xjerky (128399)
      I don't think there's any guarantee that the DRM can be easily stripped. Has anyone successfully removed DRM from WM 10 content yet?
      • Re:Circumvention (Score:3, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Yes, but those were implementation bugs, not full blown cracks - and one needed to have a license to some of the content to begin with. The holes were patched by MS very quickly and new content depends on a patched media player.

        I managed to break WMAs however with a high success rate, but newer ones are again fixed against that patch.

        Nonetheless, it will happen, there just isnt enough demand yet.
    • Re:Circumvention (Score:5, Insightful)

      by chill (34294) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:11PM (#13374610) Journal
      Look up "Trusted Hardware" and you'll have your answer.

      The black magic needed to run those components dealing with DRM most likely will NOT be open sourced, or made available to FOSS programmers.

      FOSS will be limited to "degraded" output -- until it is hacked. Then the lawyers will be turned loose...
  • by sulli (195030) *
    So Hollywood will lose a bundle on this harebrained scheme.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:07PM (#13374577)
    and DVDJon, our Lord and Saviour, will break this nonsense scheme in 3..2..1..
  • Good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:07PM (#13374581)
    That means nobody will watch "protected HD content," thereby killing this idea from the get go.
    • Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ratboy666 (104074) <fred_weigel@NoSPaM.hotmail.com> on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:49PM (#13374900) Homepage Journal
      The idea won't die that easily.

      In a nutshell:

      - The quality of the FILTERED output will be DVD level. Which is at or beyond consumer expectation.

      - New gear will have HD option, and as people upgrade, they will get 10x better than DVD quality.

      - You can STILL record at DVD quality, just not HD (and HD does take 10x)

      - As monitors are upgraded, the content will be ready.

      - Anyone can WATCH "protected HD content" -- at DVD quality. Which happens to be good enough for 40"+ screens.

      - We are talking about 1080 line resolution; very few people run monitors at these resolutions (1920x1080). The DVD quality will be perfectly acceptable (1280x480 - with a bit of twigging)

      So its likely going through.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    Are they going to use region-encoding as well, so you can't look at a US monitor in Australia?
  • More info (Score:4, Informative)

    by SirJorgelOfBorgel (897488) * on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:08PM (#13374586)
    There's a bit of info about all this over at DRMadness [drmadness.com] as well, though it's aimed specifically at Blu-ray and HD-DVD (but that's HighDef content as well, isn't it)...
  • Um, what the hell has this to do with Microsoft? HDCP has to do with hardware, and last I checked, Microsoft doesn't sell monitors.

    Somehow it's always their fault, I guess.
    • Re:Microsoft? (Score:5, Informative)

      by OG (15008) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:19PM (#13374687)
      The idea is that Vista will determine whether or not your system has an HDCP monitor. If it does not, it will either play the video at non-HD quality (downsampling, I suppose) or not play it at all. Thus, the OS will force you to upgrade your monitor to an HDCP compliant one if you want to watch HD.

      Microsoft could choose not to implement this, thus allowing HD to be viewed on Legacy monitors.
      • Re:Microsoft? (Score:5, Informative)

        by pavon (30274) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:55PM (#13374933)
        Microsoft could choose not to implement this, thus allowing HD to be viewed on Legacy monitors.

        No they couldn't. The DRM algorithms for HD content are patented and controlled by a media consortium. Furthermore the keys for the system are protected as trade-secrets. This consortium will refuse to license the algorithms or keys to anyone who does not sign a contract agreeing to play thier rules. It would be illegal for Microsoft to create an implementation that was not blessed by the patent/key holders.

        So the choice that Microsoft and Apple have is to either play HDCP'd content the way they are told to play it (which is downgraded on non-HDCP monitors) or to not play it at all.
  • by pair-a-noyd (594371) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:09PM (#13374596)
    2. Aim at foot.
    3. Pull trigger.
  • correction (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Lumpy (12016) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:11PM (#13374609) Homepage
    The end result is that when Windows Vista ships (and Apple's next OS), most people won't be able to watch protected HD content on their computers LEGALLY."

    about 30 days after the first piece of media is released I'll be able to watch it under linux and BSD in full resolution as someone will have foundand released a crack/hack/mod/whatever.

    They are wasting their time trying to "protect" this stuff. all they are doing is finding new ways to piss off the legit consumer.
  • by maynard (3337) <j.maynard.gelina ... m ['il.' in gap]> on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:12PM (#13374617) Journal
    Seriously. Hollywood has an organized boycott coming for this. Not only are they screwing every HDTV owner who lacks HDMI or DVI/HDCP inputs (a huge number of sets were sold with component only inputs), but now they plan to screw computer owners over too. Just don't buy their shit. Let the new Blu-Ray and/or HD-DVD decks sit unsold on shelves for a year or two and watch the these cartels shit their pants with all that unsold inventory. Maybe they'll even respond to consumer wishes afterward!

    But it won't happen spontaneously. An organized boycott is the only solution. --M
    • Component (Score:4, Interesting)

      by jbeaupre (752124) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:20PM (#13374692)
      Component video might not be protected. HDMI/DVI transmit digitally, which is what has content providers worried. Since component is analog, and because of the large install base you noted, it might not require HDCP. (pure speculation)
    • by PolyDwarf (156355) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:45PM (#13374870)
      The issue with not buying their crap is that they will not see it as a boycott of their policies.. They'll see it as more evidence of "evil hackers" (tm) stealing their content. After all, no one can not watch Hollywood's movies and listen to Hollywood's music, right?! Ticket sales falling at the box office? Nope, it's not because Hollywood's movies are junk, it's "teh hax0rs" releasing movies on the Internet. CD sales falling? Nope, it's not because of the drivel that's being released as today's "mainstream" media, it's "teh hax0rs".

      I would be more willing (note, more willing does not mean willing) to believe the line of mp3's hurting music sales, because mp3's sound (to most people) to be pretty good. Screeners, etc, of movies, not so good quality, and why would I watch it on my monitor in my office when I have my TV in the living room?

      I agree that the largest part, by far, of Hollywood's slide is Hollywood itself, and they have no one to blame but themselves. They don't see it that way, so the lawmakers don't see it that way (Money talks, after all). They will paint an organized boycott as an organized piracy ring, with the lawless hackers trading music and movies amongst themselves.
      • by maynard (3337) <j.maynard.gelina ... m ['il.' in gap]> on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:52PM (#13374917) Journal
        Look. They control the media / entertainment industry and will use TV and Cable News to propagate their message. They have huge war-chests for campaign contributions. They essentially control access to policy and the consensus opinion management. There's no way to change that fact without a sea-change in anti-trust law, as in Teddy Roosevelt's days with the collapse of the Gilded Age.

        Boycott is the only effective counter to their power (even given the problems you present) because to do nothing is even less effective as a consumer strategy to corporate abuse of power. Or can you recommend a better alternative? --M
    • Possibly, but perhaps in another form. Bandwidth is going UP while the cost of production is going DOWN. The highest-ranking shows lately are the ones with the lowest production values -- reality shows and cheap recycling of old ideas. Linkdump has hundreds of nifty five-minute videos every day, and people are getting (slightly) more sophisticated about computers.

      For $2000 worth of cameras, lights, and duct tape an RTF major on summer break could shoot something good. His CS-major roommate can upload it
  • by CrystalFalcon (233559) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:12PM (#13374619) Homepage
    1) Ordinary people won't bother watching HD content on their computers - it will be too cumbersome.

    2) Pirates won't care, as always, ripping to DivX or whatever and then watching as usual.

    3) Ordinary people will discover DivX rips (family, friends of pirates) and watch HD content, not knowing that they're not supposed to. The pirates will mumble something about bad big corporations but they won't really care as long as they can watch the latest episode of Lost.

    When Will These Idiots Get It?
  • by javaxman (705658) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:14PM (#13374635) Journal
    The end result is that when Windows Vista ships (and Apple's next OS), most people won't be able to watch protected HD content on their computers.

    That's OK, I was planning on boycotting and/or stealing and/or disabling the DRM on any such protected content anyway. If they don't want me to see it, I'll avoid buying it, thanks anyway. I'd download or create ripped DRM-less versions if forced too.

    Spending a lot of time and effort downloading or ripping content will still be a lot cheaper than buying a multi-thousand-dollar monitor. Besides, most NTSC content is acceptable anyway...

    • by MightyMartian (840721) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:25PM (#13374719) Journal
      Actually, I was just considering not watching TV or movies any more, reading a good book and using my computer to access a few forums and do some writing. The kind of output coming out of the entertainment industry is so bad nowadays that I can't imagine anyone putting any effort into protecting it, or stealing it. It's all crap, and it isn't worth consideration. The whole battle seems like a bunch of silly bastards battling over who gets to eat the most shit from the dungpile.
  • If they want us to invest so much money in friggin' DRM'ed players, why don't they just give away their content in lo-res so only those wh ocan afford it, will be able to see the HD?

    I ain't spending any money on a HD movie if all i'm getting is lowdef. If I already paid for it, why should spend even more? I just hope someone declares DRM to be inconstitutional or something...
  • by Nom du Keyboard (633989) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:14PM (#13374641)
    It's getting to be time for a consumer revolt, along with a few decapitations.

    What if they threw a Hi-Def party and nobody came?

    Or to put it another way, just how many times are you going to let these people pick your pocket? We could just say that what we all have today is already good enough! .

  • score! (Score:5, Funny)

    by justforaday (560408) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:15PM (#13374647)
    Score one for the little guy!

    And by "little guy" I mean "multinational media conglomerate."
  • Brilliant! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Retired Replicant (668463) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:16PM (#13374658)
    "The end result is that when Windows Vista ships (and Apple's next OS), most people won't be able to watch protected HD content on their computers."

    And thus prompting people to search for ripped/pirated HD content that is free of HDCP. Brilliant!

  • by MightyMartian (840721) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:17PM (#13374661) Journal
    You mean I'll have to turn on my TV to watch shows?!?! Oh the humanity!
  • by Brian Stretch (5304) * on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:17PM (#13374669)
    ..until it shows up on Bittorrent an hour later.

    C'mon, there has to be someone in Hollywood smart enough to figure out that copy protection this draconian is going to seriously encourage cracking? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to do everything possible to make it easier for their paying customers to get to their content rather than making it more irritating, unreliable, and expensive?

    Oh, right. Oh well, not much worth watching anyhow.
  • Market forces (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ka9dgx (72702) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:19PM (#13374684) Homepage Journal
    If I just spent $5000 on a computer and a monitor, I'd be pissed as hell if things weren't as sharp as a tack. I'd take it back, and spread the word.

    Market forces won't let this one stick. People need lee-way, something that DRM systems don't do, so they are forced to go around them. Once that's done, they keep going around them.

    --Mike--
    Capitalism sees Capitolism as damage, and routes around it

    • Re:Market forces (Score:3, Interesting)

      by dbIII (701233)

      If I just spent $5000 on a computer and a monitor

      There's an increasing amount of expensive home cinema out there - plus other infrastructure like digital projectors in cinemas and workplaces. When that big expensive water cooled three tube projector that can easily do the resolution and has years of tube life remaining won't work because of copy protection then people are going to be pissed off. I suggest that people import the non-US version of the software to get their gear to work, since there is no w

  • Protected? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Dragoon412 (648209) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:25PM (#13374722)
    "The end result is that when Windows Vista ships (and Apple's next OS), most people won't be able to watch protected HD content on their computers."

    So, we'll just have to settle for unprotected HD content, then?

    Isn't this just another instance of the entertainment industry not getting it? They're sabotaging their own business. How many people do they expect to be interested in downloading HD content? Probably not that many. Now, how many of those people do they expect to go and shell out an obscene amount of money for a new HDCP-compliant monitor that offers no additional benefit to the end user?

    Essentially, what they're doing here is presenting consumers with a rather lopsided decision: spend more money on a monitor just to have the privelage of spending more money to view paid-for HD content that may or may not actually materialize, or don't spend any extra money and continue to download what you want off of BitTorrent/eMule/usenet.

    Tough call, eh?
  • Dear MPAA/RIAA (Score:5, Insightful)

    If it is something that has to be visible to the human eye, your DRM can be broken.

    If it is something that has to be audible to the human ear, your DRM can be broken.

    Welcome to the age of computers, have a nice day.
  • by WillAffleckUW (858324) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:29PM (#13374751) Homepage Journal
    Lookit that yoyo, trying to watch content.
    He's got a box and hooked up his HDCP.
    Tries to turn it on and all he gets is static.
    So he throws it back in his hovercar.

    refrain I want my, I want my, I want my HDCP.
    I want my, I want my, I want my HDCP.

    He can't use it to watch his microwave oven.
    It won't show Showgirls in wide-screen full DPI.
    But he don't worry cause he's really stupid.
    So he shalls out another $1000 for an extra day.

    refrain I want my, I want my, I want my HDCP.
    I want my, I want my, I want my HDCP.

    Can't watch anime from Japan cause he's in North America, can't watch Italian soap operas if he's in Germany, can't even watch the Olympics in High Def, cause they won't let you see the CBC in DC ...

    refrainI ditched my, I ditched my, I ditched my HDCP.
    I ditched my, I ditched my, I ditched my HDCP.

    .

    .

    .

    can you say refund?
  • by SlashdotOgre (739181) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:34PM (#13374791) Journal
    The popular Dell 20" wide screen (2005FPW) is already a victom of this. The monitor's native resolution is 1680x1050 and so it should be able to render 720p without a problem. However, you can't get HDTV content from either digital cable or directv receivers via DVI. Currently, going analog via Component In will get you HD, but unfortunately the monitor only offers DVI, VGA, S-Vid, & Composite. I use a Component to VGA transcoder, but the solution is neither cheap nor elegant.
    • by PoderOmega (677170) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:41PM (#13374843)
      I have a Comcast Motorola box with HDTV and DVR and it is currently plugged into my TV via DVI. If you turn the power off on the box, then hit the "Menu" button on the remote you can have some more advanced output settings. I know some people have said that the DVI port is disabled on these boxes, but I have had 2 of these boxes in the city of Chicago (so I dont know if it is a regional comcast thing) and both had DVI out enabled.
  • by plasmacutter (901737) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:39PM (#13374823)
    how microsoft is selling out the public to please hollywood [corante.com]

    microsoft is incorporating a lot more than HDCP restriction requirements in their winhec standards. They are also building in encrypted "protected media path", allowing revocation of components in vista based PC's and requiring hardware and driver based DRM for "windows logo testing approval" [eff.org]

    They are also requiring a new form of device ID which is designed to prevent any emulation without contacting the emulated device's originator [eff.org]

    I tried to give slashdot the heads up on this over a month ago and, like a fellow poster, my story was rejected.

    There's a reason Vista took so long to develop, and that reason has nothing to do with consumer-centric design

  • by Typingsux (65623) on Monday August 22, 2005 @04:44PM (#13374864)
    I really wanted to see the matrix once again in super HD, and get an even better look at Morpeus's pockmarks. Here's to dropping 3K on a new monitor so I can!

  • by IcePop456 (575711) on Monday August 22, 2005 @05:00PM (#13374968)
    A quick calculation shows 1280x720 60fps at 24 bit color is 1.5Gbps. I don't know about you, but my computer cannot possibly capture that. I don't know of a single hard drive or RAID system that can write 190MB/s that does not cost as much as my Nissan 350z. To buy hardware to copy this stuff is just as dumb as buying a Toyota Hybrid to save money on Gas. (10 years at 15k miles per year to make up the cost difference from a civic).
    • 190MB/s is feasible even on a moderate RAID array, but you probably wouldn't do that. You'd almost certainly stream it straight through a hardware H.264 compressor and then to disk at a more moderate bitrate.
    • A quick calculation shows 1280x720 60fps at 24 bit color is 1.5Gbps. [...] I don't know of a single hard drive or RAID system that can write 190MB/s that does not cost as much as my Nissan 350z.

      Uncompressed video is unheard of and irrelevant. Even losslessly compressed video is very rare; I'm sure professional processing uses it, but the consumer gets lossy compressed video from every form of digital input, be it DVD or BlueRay or satalitte.
  • by Alioth (221270) <no@spam> on Monday August 22, 2005 @05:00PM (#13374973) Journal
    HD DVD technologies will probably take years to go anywhere anyway, regardless of DRM or no DRM.

    Why was the CD a big success? It offered enormous convenience over the existing forms (records and tapes) and an enormous leap in quality - cracks and pops gone. Wow and flutter gone from tapes. No rewinding necessary.

    Why was DVD a big success fairly quickly? It wasn't just the improved quality over VHS. Mostly it was the ease of use. A small disc that doesn't have to be rewound, doesn't snag, doesn't have tracking that goes out of alignment, and the quality was much much better.

    But for most people, DVD is good enough. A new format will offer no extra convenience, and will cost a lot to buy - certainly for a fair while (high quality displays have always been expensive). Therefore, high definition disc formats will probably be relegated for years, perhaps decades, to the audio/videophile segment - a very small fraction of the market. Just like LaserDisc really. For everyone else, normal DVDs are cheap and good enough.

    • and will cost a lot to buy - certainly for a fair while (high quality displays have always been expensive).

      So? The cost of HD capable displays is dropping at a dramatic rate, and the available sizes have been increasing too. Now one can get a flat-panel ~30" 720p display for about what it cost to get a 30" 480i screen five years ago, a little less than $1000. That's quite a leap, IMO. LCD panels of many kinds and sizes have been dropping in price too, two years ago a 17" LCD monitor was $500, a better
    • But for most people, DVD is good enough

      It's only good enough until you actually see HDTV in action. I don't have HDTV and have never seen HDTV outside of Best Buy. Most of my friends don't have HDTV. Except for one. I was at his house this weekend and watched a movie in full HDTV glory. As he readily admitted to me, he can barely stand to watch DVDs or SD broadcasts now because the quality is so much lower than HDTV.

  • /giggle (Score:4, Interesting)

    by WhiteWolf666 (145211) <(sherwin) (at) (amiran.us)> on Monday August 22, 2005 @05:09PM (#13375029) Homepage Journal
    1. Don't buy it. It's all crap anyways.

    Yes, it is possible to go through life without TV. I do, everyday, and I'm not some kind of weird recluse or anything. I have friends, and a girlfriend *gasp* (yes, she thinks slashdot is super-nerdy), and I spend a lot of time playing video games. That's my replacement for crap TV.

    Movies? I go and see them at the theater. Yes, I'd like to watch more at home. But I can't buy DVDs that I can do what I like with, so I don't buy them, period.

    2. Pirate it. This is where the /giggle comes in. Lets assume you absolutely have to have your movies/TV shows. Lets assume you absolutely have to have it in HD.

    You can either a) use a spatzbox (linked elsewhere in this conversation) to convert the HDCP content to HD component analog or digital DVI, or b) grab the HD-DVD that was burned unprotected using said spatzbox in some copyright-loving area like, say, Hong Kong.

    The up market leather goods brands (Gucci and above) have been trying to stop pirate manufacturing of their products. In Iran, you can get any software you could possibly want for $1 a disk.

    Do you *really* think that the MPAA will be able to stop this? What magic powers do they have the all the other companies don't have? It doesn't matter if the Blue-Ray or HD-DVD content protection can be broken. All you need is a HD-DVD/Blue-Ray player, and a spatzbox, in order to produce 1 digital master, HD, no content protection.

    Its already avaliable!

    Then it'll go through the usual distribution channels. Wholesale pirates->streets of hong kong->american tourists->usenet/limewire and CO.

    And it's only going to get better and better as internet connections get faster. Think Windows Vista is going to DRM its way out of that? Nonsense-> You're forgetting that these will be unencrypted streams.

    The only thing that this nonsense does is economically punish those who do the valid thing and actually purchase the disks.

    For those like me, who will abstain, it does nothing.
    For those like many others, who will pirate, it does nothing.

    And I see *nothing* wrong with pirating. Copyright is an economic right (not a system of ethics) designed to promote the arts and sciences. Once someone abuses Copyright (like, say, by eliminating fair use/controlling playback through the DMCA), they are actively stopping the promotion of the arts and sciences. As I see it, the *only* reason to respect copyright is the promotion of the arts and sciences, and once they stop doing that, they forfeit their government-sponsored monopoly.

    That's all it is, you know. Copyright was not handed down by God to Moses as a command. The Buddha did not tell us about Copyright, and evolution did not cause Copyright to evolve as inherented human behavior. Copyright is a government-sponsored monopoly, established for the *sole* purpose of promoting/protecting artistic and scientific economic activies.

    And contrary to what you learned in grade school civics, what the government tells you is not always the definition of 'good and right'. Don't call me a deviant--> If I was a weird, social outcast, and the only one who thought like this, then 50 million Americans (sayeth the RIAA) would not be participating in illegal P2P activities. While those Americans may not directly communicate their beliefs they way I am able to explain my own, it is most likely because they simply haven't though about it at any length, and if they had, would agree with me.

    But, I don't bother to pirate. Instead of paying attention to one-way content, I prefer to interact with two-way content, and I see enough value in that interaction that I purchase it. I vote with my dollar--> I buy things (read *games*) that I think are good. And between Guildwars, Half-Life 2, Eve Online, and World of Warcraft, I have my hands full for the indefinite future.
  • by Zurbaran (909430) on Monday August 22, 2005 @05:31PM (#13375154)
    1. Why bother protecting DVI? Have any prior DRM systems been attacked through DVI?
      No, because cracking CSS was easier. And chances are the next generation will be cracked in a similar manner. I have not yet seen any DRM research suggesting otherwise. But any measure against hacking makes sense only if you make all other possible attacks equally difficult. (Why have a steel door if there is an open window?) Why the inconvenience for your customer, if you know it will have almost no positive effect?
    2. About key revocation (part of HDCP afaik): What is the benefit of being able to revoke keys known to be compromised?
      Yes, you can prevent a hacked player from playing back a legally purchased copy on a unprotected device. But apparently most piracy today comes from P2P networks. How will you be able to tell which key was used to decrypt a DRM-free copy that shows up on a P2P-network? Release groups would probably just keep their cracked key secret. (Watermarks? Not robust against removal afaik.) Revocation can neither prevent spreading of content to P2P, nor playback of unprotected files obtained from P2P.
    3. A little revocation scenario: Company X sells 10 million HDCP-enabled devices. Someone devises a crack that theoretically compromises the key on all those devices (e.g. by finding a flaw in X's key generation). Media companies consequently block all 10 million devices. Does X have to replace 10 million devices for free, or are 10 million customers stuck with a useless device?
      If you sell HDCP-enabled products, make sure that you know your cryptography very, very well. Or you might go out of bussiness soon.
    Bonus question: why would I want this crap? I tend to like movies for their storytelling, and am quite happy with the quality that DVDs offer me. If this stuff ever takes of, I'll just be happily buying used DVDs from suckers who upgrade their collection to HD.
  • by Njall (132366) on Monday August 22, 2005 @05:58PM (#13375347)
    More than 5 years ago Circuit City was selling a DVD format called DVIX, as I recall. I remember when I was looking for my first DVD player how hard the salesdrone tried to get me to buy a DVIX player. As I recall the "movies" were as little as $4 but could only be played on a DVIX player which had to be hooked up to a phone so the player could dial home and validate the disk. I looked at the restrictions and figured out that the system was an ugly grab for my wallet. It relied on a supposedly free system which would fail because it could not support itself. I didn't care for the idea that I could buy a movie and not be able to take it to my friends house to watch it together. DVD's were, I decided, a much better deal.

          Long and short... DVIX and all it stood for died. Died hard. Died ugly. Died and left customers holding useless garbage that, AFAIK, they can no longer play. So much for trust. This is a very abbreviated description of DVIX I know; however, I believe I have the essential points more or less correct. To this day I have never bought anything in a Circuit City store. To me DVIX, it's completely dishonest representation of value and functionality, and Circuit City are irrevocably maligned together. And I didn't even get burned by them.

          My son just learned that he cannot play Windows Media Player files on his new iPod. Some time ago I'd tried to him into ripping his CDs to MP3 using CDex. However, Microsoft made Windows Media Player so EASY to use. So my lazy, instant gratification, boy learned a hard lesson about DRM and industry standards. CDs, $85. Refurbished iPod, $200. Look on his face when he tried to rip the newest DRM protected Foo Fighters album he'd bought. Priceless!

          So, what about the new methods of DRM? I believe everyone needs to take a deep breath. Step back. Relax. With DVIX, DRM was relatively new. It is not as new any more. The only hope for DRM in the entertainment industry is for Congress, et al in other countries, to enact laws requiring it. On the other hand I think the only hope for Congress is that they don't. The people are actually fairly slow to learn collectively and the world does seem to be changing pretty fast these days. However, collectively, given time, a majority of people will come to realize that they are being lied to and will assert their rights. And when they do? I believe all hell will break loose and both Congress and the entertainment industry will fall victim to an electoral enema.

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (2) Thank you for your generous donation, Mr. Wirth.

Working...