Microsoft's Janus DRM Software Officially Unveiled 570
hype7 writes "News.com.com is reporting the official unveiling of Microsoft's new DRM system, internally dubbed 'Janus'. Interestingly enough, a wide variety of companies including AOL, Dell, Disney, Napster and Freescale, a subsidiary of Motorola, have all signed on to the technology. Whilst some content providers and producers are keen, it remains to be seen what consumers will think - 'the new digital rights management tools include features that would protect content that is streamed around a home network, or even block data pathways potentially deemed 'unsafe,' such as the traditional analog outputs on a high-definition TV set. That's a feature that has been sought by movie studios in advance of the move to digital television.' I love the quotes from the MS rep - 'This release of technology really enables all kinds of new scenarios that are emerging now,' said Jason Reindorp, a group manager in Microsoft's Windows digital media unit. 'We're taking quite a holistic view.' It's good to see Microsoft taking a holistic view of preventing the consumer doing what they want with their paid for content, and protecting us from unsafe data pathways."
the end of computing as we know it is coming... (Score:5, Insightful)
Notice the names that are interested: AOL, Dell, Disney. Interesting that these companies not only offer what we traditionally thought they did but they are now also offering TV and music related content along with many other items they shouldn't have been allowed to control.
So here it comes... Dell is going to slowly get into DRM. You are going to see it as a benefit. You can now download a large catalogue of music easily and legally to your computer and portable MP3 playing devices. Woo! Just wait till you want to copy your old collections of CDs to your Dell computer with DRM'd BIOS and OS and then onto your portable. Can you do that? Nope. That's illegal! You aren't proving that you own that CD. What if it was burned and didn't come from the manufacturer. Ok, so let's try the old analog inputs. It's an MP3 afterall and we don't care much about quality...
Error: We notice you are trying to use inputs which are attempting to allow something to pass through our DRM system. We are now blocking access to the ports via hardware.
If you think that by running Linux you are somehow going to escape this you're wrong. The possibilities that computer HARDWARE will only work with DRM enabled BIOS's is coming. Nevermind the fact that if you want to be connected to the rest of the world you will have to have a DRM'd computer with a DRM'd BIOS in order to do so.
"Welcome to hell boys!"
With Microsoft, wait for 2.0, with DRM, wait longe (Score:5, Insightful)
Also read Rory Blyth trying to buy an eBook [neopoleon.com]. The stuff sounds made up except that I ad exact same experience with buying an eBook off Amazon for my Dell Axim, which ran Microsoft Reader. The book was DRMed and that was the last eBook I bought off Amazon, and wrote them roughly what Rory described in the complaint message.
Chicken and egg problem. (Score:5, Insightful)
That's just not going to fly in the marketplace. HDTV early adopters will just ignore the content that their units can't play back, and broadcasters aren't going to want to limit their potential audience by ruling out everybody but those who have bought certain models of HDTV hardware.
This platform will need a killer app, and I doubt Hollywood can come up with one...
It is said of code making and breaking (Score:5, Insightful)
DRM for the most part (I think) just doesn't work, being militaristic about media just sours the public opinion.
I for one don't welcome our new DRM overlords (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:With Microsoft, wait for 2.0, with DRM, wait lo (Score:1, Insightful)
Uh-huh. (Score:4, Insightful)
Codes were meant to be broken.
Re:Janus (Score:3, Insightful)
Song of the piracy apologist (Score:0, Insightful)
Song of the piracy apologist:
(1) I don't personally believe in copying CDs illegally-- but I think we should avoid using unkind words like "piracy" to describe those that do -- instead, we should describe it as an "infringement", much like a parking infringement.
(2) I don't believe in the record companies emotively abusing the word "theft," but I do believe in emotively abusing words like "information," "sharing," and "Copyright Enforcement Militia."
(3) I believe that piracy is driven by "overpriced CDs" even though CDs have dropped in price over the years.
(4) I believe that piracy is driven by overly long copyright duration, even though most pirated works are recent releases.
(5) I believe that illegitimately downloading music is giving the author "free advertising". I don't buy any of the music I download, of course--but lots of other people probably do.
(6) I believe that ripping off the artists is wrong. The record companies always rip off the artists. Artists support P2P, except the ones that don't (like Metallica), and they don't agree with me, hence they're greedy or their opinion doesn't count or something.
(7) I believe that selling CDs is not a business model, but giving away things for free on the internet is.
(8) I believe that artists should be compensated for their work -- preferably by someone else. I mean, they can sell concert tickets (which someone else can buy) or sell t-shirts (to someone else) or something. As long as someone else subsidises my free ride, I'm coooooool with it.
(9) I believe in capitalism but only support music business models which involve giving away the fruits of ones labor for free.
(10) I believe that copying someone elses music, and redistributing it to my 1,000,000 "best friends" on the internet is sharing. Music is made for sharing. It's my right.
(11) I believe that record companies cracking down on piracy is "greed", but a mob demanding free entertainment is not.
(12) I believe that it's not really "piracy" unless you charge money for it, because, receiving money is wrong, but taking a free ride is fine.
(13) I believe that disallowing copying and redistributing music over Napster is the same as humming my favourite song in public. Because when I hum my favourite song in public, everyone likes it so much that they run home, get out their tape recorders and once they've got a recording of it, they aren't interested in hearing the original any more.
(14) I believe that when illegal behaviour destroys a business, it's "free enterprise at work".
(15) I believe piracy is simply "free advertising." Even though that's what radio is, but with the legal permission of the copyright holder. Basically, what I really want is to be able to choose the songs I want, listen to them whenever I want, but I don't want to have to pay for it. Essentially, I want the whole thing for free with no strings attached.
What I find amusing is that the pirates seem unable or unwilling to distinguish between creative activity and brainless copying.
Since a lot of the people here are GPL/OSS advocates: the "OSS way" applied to this domain is to learn how to play an instrument. Or how to sing or whatever. Then get together with a bunch of other people who can also play music, and make some noise.
One of the unfortunate things that has happened to the OSS movement is that a lot of the loudmouth advocates for it don't understand what it's really about. They view it primarily as a means to get free stuff, and then they turn their eyes from the free stuff to the non-free stuff and think to themselves "maybe I'm entitled to get that one for free too". The noble ideals of grass roots participation in the creative process, and/or supporting it in a principled way (namely, boosting the "free foo" movement by preferring free foo to nonfree foo), or for that matter, any other form o
Re:the end of computing as we know it is coming... (Score:3, Insightful)
business and academic institutions simply will not accept this kind of BS. the internet, or a better version of it (i.e. without the hacked XP spam systems) will continue to exist.
Re:Chicken and egg problem. (Score:5, Insightful)
You're kidding right? There is a mandated possibility that everyone will be adopting digital technology. You won't have a choice, if you want to watch the content, but to have a receiver that actually gets the signal and can interpret it.
I am pretty certain that the sheep of the world will run out and buy whatever they need to buy in order to view their precious TV.
The media conglomorates don't have to worry about losing anyone. They have the sheep by the balls.
OH SHUT THE HELL UP (Score:2, Insightful)
Just a few days ago you were all creaming your pants over Apple's "warm and fuzzy" version of DRM. You were falling all over yourselves to be the first to proclaim how fair it is that you can listen to your songs on up to X computers, and burn up to Y CDs (or no CDs at all if the file is so flagged - but noone mentioned that yet).
DRM is an inevitability. Quit bitching about your "right" to do what you want with the content (code for "get it free off kazaa"), look at it the other way. Don't pay for content with which you cannot do what you want.
Ie; I can't watch Star Wars XIV though my VCR - I won't buy Star Wars XIV, etc.
I mean, I can't drink at Chuck E Cheeses, so I don't go there anymore. I don't write letters and throw a fit about it.
Re:the end of computing as we know it is coming... (Score:3, Insightful)
If finished, this technology will deny those who refuse to use non-free software access to many aspects of mainstream culture, but this doesn't seem to be a great loss to me.
Can't stop copying... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:the end of computing as we know it is coming... (Score:5, Insightful)
Businesses and Academia are the two WORST examples you could have given here.
Hardware distributers have most learning institutions and companies by the balls. They offer deep discounts for bulk purchases *AND* they offer the employees of those institutions rebates as well.
MS is pulling the same bullshit. Offer the software to the schools are extremely low rates and then offer the Office/etc applications for $10 to $20.
You think that schools and businesses are going to give up those deals because they don't like what MS is doing?
Communication between businesses, schools, and the rest of the world is important to those instituions. There's no choice.
What a comical spin by the marketing department. (Score:5, Insightful)
How can they keep it from analog??? (Score:2, Insightful)
Besides give it a week or two and a workaround will be available. Anyone want to donate so we can buy the cracker of Fairplay and DeCSS (JON?) a new Dell with Janus on it?
Re:Backwards compatible outputs have to go? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:the end of computing as we know it is coming... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think that's true. We're getting closer to the day when the only content we can manipulate is that generated by ourselves or those with whom we cooperate.
You know, I seem to remember John Nesbitt writing way-back-when that the information age would necessitate the re-emergence of the guild. Basically, a guild would be a trusted network of friends with whom we share work, files, and so on. I doubt Nesbitt could have imagined P2P when he wrote this -- it must have been back in the early Nineties -- but maybe we're getting closer to the idea of private "virtual internets."
We'll find ways to communicate freely, ladies and gents.
Re:the end of computing as we know it is coming... (Score:5, Insightful)
Looks to me like the days of the "home brew" computer are coming back. There will very quickly be a market for non-DRM computers. Of course, then we can expect the government to make it illegal to own non-DRM'd computing equipment. You know what this sounds like? Stallman's "right to read" dystopia. (Check it out on GNU.org).
Countering this is going to be quick an adventure. How do you convince Joe 6-pack - who already believes that the Patriot Act is necessary to prevent terrorism, that the war on drugs is a good thing and that the it's OK to give up rights for some mythical security - to object to these things and vote against people who try to impose them on him.
I don't hold out a lot of hope, but if we can keep the governement from making non-DRM equipment illegal, we may have a chance. I won't hold my breath, though.
Simple solution for .... (Score:4, Insightful)
If you are worried about not getting your share of music, entertainment, etc, then you need to see all of the alternatives out there. There are plenty of bands not caught up in this madness who are quite good. There is theater, printed books, playing sports, painting, traveling... When you come right down to it, they are really making the easier forms of entertainment (listening to music, watching TV) harder and less competitive to more fulfilling forms of entertainment (playing sports, nature walks, getting out ...). As the cost analysis is shifted for more people, I bet they experience slower sales.
I know they slowed my purchases already.
InnerWeb
Re:Hmm (Score:3, Insightful)
You have no idea what will happen. It's a very plausible scenerario based on what has been going on lately (ie. the loose partnership of Phoenix and MS).
Re:It is said of code making and breaking (Score:5, Insightful)
If the government has passed enough laws to make common bevaviors criminal, they can arrest whoever they want.
The keystone of all this "innovation" will be when they make it a violation of U.S. law to connect a computer to the Internet if it does not have this usage limitation hardware.
Re:What a comical spin by the marketing department (Score:5, Insightful)
It "enables" us to pay for things in a format that, at present, they dare not sell to us because we're a bunch of dirty thieves. If they sold us a movie over the internet NOW we might think that we should be allowed to watch it a second time for FREE.
"Paid for content" (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:the end of computing as we know it is coming... (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure the RIAA and others would love to get rid of analog inputs (unless you pay for a subscription to a trusted voicechat/recording program, of course), but this will quickly die due to the large numbers of corporations who would get mighty pissy if they suddenly had to pay a $10000 "tusted audio recording" fee just to use voip they're already paying for (either internally or to a 3rd party).
Computers are too complicated to force a DRM scheme on everyone, and there's not enough bandwidth/user available yet to divide trusted computers from untrusted ones (the trusted ones would have to encrypt their communications to prevent the evil linux pirate hooligans from defiling their pure microsoft/dell/disney/riaa approved internet).
It would take a massive mandate from all the worlds goverments to force DRM, and even then it'd take ~10-20 years for it to be implimented to the fullest. I think we can still fight off DRM.
Re:the end of computing as we know it is coming... (Score:2, Insightful)
once people see what drm really is, they are going to want to buy some non-restricted hardware. thanks to the capitalist business model (ugh... never thought i'd say that...), people will buy the better product. i'm willing to wager that drm will eventually die out due to lack of customers.
although i have heard that servers w/drm {hard,soft}ware will only allow machines w/drm to connect.... but there would be enough non-restricted users to ignore the drm people
It's sad it has to be this way... (Score:3, Insightful)
It's sad that DRM is even necessary, which it obviously is, because the masses have spoken and said that they aren't willing to respect the content producer's rights, it's turned into a battle of rights. Is it more important to protect your right to make a backup of content or the content provider's right to get paid for creating the content?
Honestly, the content providers have a lot more to lose in all of this, and will probably always need more protection of their rights as it becomes so easy to steal content. The content providers deserve the protection from how ubiquitous copyright violation has become in our culture.
Re:Hmm (Score:5, Insightful)
Buzz! Wrong, but thanks for playing! It's in the interest of companies to avoid pissing off consumers so much that they bother to remember the company's name. There's a big difference.
Re:Hmm (Score:2, Insightful)
Well, if you listen to their PR departments...
In reality, companies do whatever they can to maximize profits. If that means pissing off a percentage of their consumerbase to save some money, so be it, as long as the net result is profit.
You ever see those memos from automotive companies where they say it's financially easier for them to pay off the families of the deceased instead of improve the safety of their products?
Re:Can't stop copying... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It is said of code making and breaking (Score:4, Insightful)
It is incorrect to assume that because past weak efforts at protection have been cracked that anything can be cracked. These new protection standards use strong proven technology. It's very unlikely that someone will find a way to beat public key and AES encryption. So, they must find ways to exploit the weak links in the system -- grab the data when it is in the clear. This is what the iTunes crackers do. But, this hardware technology aims to eliminate those weak points. They will keep the data encrypted everywhere in software, only decrypting it in the chip that does the output. So, only real criminal pirates will have the resources to crack that. Those of us just wanting fair use of the material we pay for will be screwed.
The attitude is dangerous because it encourages the people who know that this is wrong to be complacent about it. "Who cares, it will be cracked anyway." NO! it's wrong for it to happen in the first place. Do something about it, or support those that do.
Join now: http://www.eff.org/ [eff.org]
Re:Hmm (Score:3, Insightful)
> only really an issue here at Slashdot. Outside
> of this niche of tech opinion, the rest of the
> world doesn't care all that much.
My experience is that people care a great deal about fair use, but that industries tend to be ahead of the average consumer and try to slip by unfair limitations in order to maximize profits. Corporations are compelled to do this - it's their raison d'etre.
What's potentially worse in this case is that the same corporate entities that have an interest in stepping on fair use in the name of profit also control many media outlets - so the potential for lost consumer rights is subject to censorship.
I'd be interested to hear any examples of those media outlets permitting or censoring reports of anti-consumer features of various DRM schemes. Anyone?
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Insightful)
Now those abilities will be hard-coded away from them. Congress won't stop it (they haven't yet) and besides they are in the hip-pocket of big business anyway.
When I tell people that the stuff they are doing... making full copies or even mixes of their CD collections and sharing them with friends is technically illegal under current law... they laugh. When I show them the law... check out the DMCA, they are shocked... but they figure no-one can stop them.
Now with the advent of DRM technology... someone can stop them (and perhaps report that they tried). It is kind of late to roll a lot of this stuff back just by voting with your dollars. That time has passed. I am afraid that it will take a LOT of messy court battles to iron this out.
Microsoft hedges bets in Movie industry (Score:5, Insightful)
But to my point:
I work in the entertainment industry (not music) and you might find it interesting MS's heavy push to position itself as the troll under the bridge.
The movie industry is struggling (for many reasons that none of us are going to solve because they're not technical) with digital distribution of assets. Microsoft is positioning itself to have at a minimum some part of that industry.
I've never worked outside the IT industry till now, and I can speak with certainty that it is indeed interesting to watch this going on.
See this: MS Digital Cinema [microsoft.com]
As the predominate software vendor in the world, Microsoft is in the unique and enviable position of defining everyone's digital rights.
Should a "monopoly" be allowed to wield this power? What oversight group is going to ensure that the People's rights are included in DRM?
As the majority market owner, does a technology company have an obligation to open up proprietary software that directly affects a consumers ability to manage / safeguard digital solutions they quiet literally own?
It's one thing with your Quicken database, you can print it out. But it's a completely different thing when you buy a song you have a legal right to copy or backup, but may not be able to because of a third parties technology solution.
There are some areas, IMHO, where some standards body has got to step up.
Best regards...
Re:Discussion Rules (Score:2, Insightful)
The level of DRM is up to the content producer. They could leave it really loose, let you make unlimited copies, etc, or they could tighten it up (no CD burning, no copying) etc..
Re:the end of computing as we know it is coming... (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, the public are dumb enough just now to accept pretty much everything they are told to swallow. I don't there's anything dumb about companies assuming the public is dumb.
When are you Americans going to use the guns your Founding Fathers guaranteed you in the constitution? Is there some kind of threshold that must be breached when the general public locks and loads? I'm not saying this should be it, just thinking out loud.
Re:Money speaks volumes (Score:1, Insightful)
Make sure you point at that Microsoft and their henchmen at Dell always want to focus on what these system can do... not what they can't do. Their PR bunnies really hate it when journalists ask questions about why these new computers are designed to prevent people from doing things rather than assist them -- and how it is a backwards step for gigantic performance. Dell would rather tell you that it will ALLOW you download music and films.
Re:It's sad it has to be this way... (Score:5, Insightful)
> make a backup of content or the content
> provider's right to get paid for creating the
> content?
That's perfectly true.
But a better question is, which is it better to do: to try and innovate DRM which offers fair rights to the consumer, or to carry on spending huge amounts of money and dollars technically preventing (or trying to render illegal) the consumer's natural response to being denied those rights?
As far as I'm aware, [i]no[/i] company is even attempting to work on DRM that will nonetheless permit fair use. And that fact can entirely be blamed on the DeCSS court decision - why should they try to keep fair use if it's been legally established that they can get away with denying it?
Re:Hmm (Score:2, Insightful)
I honestly don't see DRM making much impact outside of ventures like iTunes. Consider x509/SSL infrastructure. Its been around forever, yet most people consider it too complex to deploy. DRM is an order-of-magnitude more complex than that, so its unlikely anyone will use it unless they have a damn good reason to do so.
The biggest application of hardware DRM will probably be in things like Tivos and other home electronic components.
Why is this tolerated? (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, I'll stick with my impossible-to-control-or-limit mp3 technology, thanks. I don't care if it has to be "licensed", mp3 codecs are downloadable and usable very easily with no technical limitations at all, and that's exactly what I've been doing for quite some time now.
If legal issues arise with the mp3 format I'll just use Ogg Vorbis.
Why waste my time dealing with DRM bullshit like corporate-controlled statistics and tracking, and even worse, waste CPU time encoding the extra data used to for all of that when ripping my CDs to disk?
Also, not being able to play a WMA file on my Mac because they don't make the newer Windows Media Player for older Mac OSes is just stupid. Microsoft's "standards" cut off previous systems and formats, and we all know it. Personally, if they're going to go so far as to use DRM-enabled BIOSes, I'll stick with my 1.5ghz system, regardless of how "fast" computers get. If I'm required to use a DRM-enabled system to get online, well, guess I'll have to resort to these [personaltelco.net].
Also, my household has numerous computers of varying platforms and OSes. I'm not going to segregate my network by eliminating the current interoperability I experience by using software that isn't crippled or even better, is designed to work with other software by default.
In the end, it's just marketing. MS doesn't care about our "security". It's to protect their profits and their stranglehold upon the IT scene... this is just blatantly obvious, and I'm disappointed that people don't see this.
A few final things to consider: in the end, who does this benefit? Do we really need DRM? Are you willing to make the privacy-related sacrifices neccesary to attain the benefits supposedly only attained through DRM?
microsoft trying to see how far they can push user (Score:3, Insightful)
Fortunately for me I do just fine with OpenSource and don't need or use their products.
The real test is going to be with everyday to day users who just want to use their computer. We know DRM, etc is styfling creativity and since universities are now using a lot of OpenSource too, I see it as a race. A race between oppressive and open use. Some people and organizations stand a lot to loose/gain.
The Internet is a great place to try to control society from as it reaches so many people. See how the psychs wants to control each kid by having access to their school computers to ensure they have the "right" attitude. They lobby to replace academic score cards with "proper" attitude. Why go to school if not to learn?
It has already happend with the news media here in the US. It's controlled to keep americans afraid of each other. Just look at our neighboor Canada. They are very friendly and not at all afraid of each other. I dare you to compare the media. People in Europe sees everyday how one sided news are from the US.
The Internet is the current battle ground. DRM is in that very same line of "work". It sounds kind of dooms day like, and indeed I see our freedom is being attacked. I for one will do what I can to oppose DRM and similar technologies with both my mouth and my money.
get it right! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Backwards compatible outputs have to go? (Score:5, Insightful)
- Every CD/DVD player
- Every TV
- Every audio amplifier
- Every audio cable
- Every pair of headphones
- Every pair of speakers
In short, the average consumer will not be able to afford a system that can play media with restrictions on analog output. The few who are that rich will not be able to prop up the movie/music industry, and if they go down this path, they will utterly collapse under the force of their own greed and stupidity.Meanwhile, the independent studios will grown during the downturn, in part because they will choose to adapt to technology rather than trying to naively strong-arm technology to bend to their will.
In other words, don't worry. This is just a case of corporate Darwinism. Let a few movie companies commit career suicide and everything will just work itself out naturally.
I really hope you're right... (Score:3, Insightful)
These aren't some random chunks of bad news suddenly coming together and giving us these nightmares; this stuff has been a long time coming. Getting folks to think that software and music and television all come from magic far-away places floating somewhere above everyday life, that was important. That's why music and television programming are so streamlined, overproduced and bottom-line optimized. Meanwhile, if you buy a computer the way a normal person does, it has Windows on it. Period. Windows has traditionally been a saddle that's comfortable enough that most people don't mind the bundled blinders.
Well before the whole AOL/Time Warner thing, Microsoft, AOL, Compuserve, you name it, they were all about getting computing to work more like "big media", so that similar profits could be reaped and similar big-dollar deals made. At the same time, "big media" were seeing something on the horizon that scared them. Consumers could perfectly recreate media, be it their own or anyone else's material. If they could get their hooks into computing and somehow stop this, they too could sit tight and enjoy the same profit-reaping and deal-making that they were used to.
That so many companies are behind this from day one just shows how badly this is wanted by those at the top of those industries. And when it comes time to try and legally require all this nonsense (notice how both software companies and big media have been getting more aggressive legally? Also no accident), multitudes of deep-pocketed corporations have rather a lot more lobbying and political funding clout than do "business and academia", let alone the odd free-thinking individual who's interested in _doing_ as opposed to consuming.
I don't want to believe it either, but this is one nightmare that only gets worse when we wake up each morning.
Re:Janus (Score:2, Insightful)
What a switch! "Where can't I go today?"
Re:Song of the piracy apologist (Score:3, Insightful)
#2, GPL/OSS != music. OSS applies to software, hence the name. Open Source Software. The GPL was never intended for use with music. Get your head out of your ass.
The fact is, media corporations have no business dictating to me what I can and cannot do or run on my computer. It's MINE. I OWN MY COMPUTER.
The day that is not true, is a sad one for all our liberties and freedoms.
We do not advocate piracy. I abhor it. It is important to support the artists that make their music.
The fact remains that media corporations have no business telling me or anyone what we can and cannot do with our computers.
Security for whom? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:the end of computing as we know it is coming... (Score:5, Insightful)
You forget about the capitalist legal model where they also buy the laws that make the better, unencumbered product illegal to possess.
Books etc. (Score:4, Insightful)
You buy a book, but you're not allowed to read it in public.
You buy strawberries, but you're only allowed to eat then with yogurt brand xXx.
You buy a MS-paper, but you're only allowed to use an MS-pencil on it.
You have a Windows OS and you are only allowed to run Windows certified applications on it.
And you have to pay to get a certification of course
Re:What happens when copyright expires? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's sad it has to be this way... (Score:2, Insightful)
Copyright is not an absolute - it is one idea created a few hundred years ago by some moneyed landowners when information supply was scarce. So the question is - should commerce change with the times or should society stand still for commerce?
To put it another way - if we invented a eneergy to matter replicator tomorrow should we make it illegal to make a can of beans because it cuts into the profits of Heinz, inc?
The right to read *what,* exactly? (Score:3, Insightful)
Agreed.
I don't agree. Non-DRMed computing equipment will simply be unable to acceess DRM content. If the computer can't access DRM content without permission, authorization or payment, DRM content providers won't care. They already have all that they need: DRM software and the DMCA.
Some content providers (e.g., individuals with web pages, Google Groups/Usenet, perhaps corporate providers such as CNN depending on the market) will continue to be happy to provide non-DRM content. Non-DRM computers will be able to access that content, and some (perhaps many) will be content with that.
The key issue is not merely the "right to read," but instead the "right to read what?" or "the right to read [fill in the blank]" under what terms and conditions.
The typical Slashdot submission (including this one) assumes that everyone has the "right" to read everything on every possible device despite the fact that the content is offered subject to specific terms and conditins, and that one agrees to the terms and conditions before accessing the content.
It appears the attitude is, "Yeah, I know this is subject to agreed terms and conditions, and DRM, and I agreed to same when I downloaded it, but DAMN IT, I WANTED IT. I have a "right" to enter into a contract, and knowingly download DRM content, and then just say, screw you."
Re:taxation (control) without representation (Score:3, Insightful)
Sadly it isn't anymore, it simply has to be extended every 20yrs. And can in fact be extended in such a manner indefinately.
Re:What a comical spin by the marketing department (Score:5, Insightful)
Take, for example, the fact that you can't download The Lion King on the Internet right now (I mean from Disney, not BitTorrent). I'd guess that this is because Disney can't afford to put such valuable IP on the Internet without being able to control its distribution...yeah, yeah, information wants to be free and whatever, but can you REALLY blame Disney for not liberating something that DESERVEDLY makes them money?
The only way we're going to see experimentation with content distribution is with DRM like this. It's better to boycott Disney's draconian DRM and have them loosen it than to not have any DRM and content distribution at all.
And to those of you who will say "but Apple got music distributors to accept DRM that doesn't include analog out screening!": in my opinion, this may be a slightly different beast. Today's music industry is pop hit obsessed -- the business model is based on short-term success. With movies, it's a little different. Even though rentals occur most frequently soon after a movie's release, I'd think the tail stretches out much farther.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:OH SHUT THE HELL UP (Score:3, Insightful)
Just kidding : )
You are actually right. I see that same bias. Oh look it is from Apple so it is OK. I personally think that any DRM is bad and will not purchase media with it. If that means I never buy a single audio CD or DVD again, so be it. The problem is lazy people who do not want to be inconvenienced and so just accept what they are given just to hear a song or watch a movie. It is really sad.
Happened in industrial revolution too (Score:5, Insightful)
At first the southern states tried to react to it by imposing harsher and harsher laws, to where you couldn't even legally teach a black person how to read, and slavery was made to last forever and for every generation. Then they tried to micro-regulate the industrial northern states, who eventually completely got fed up and went gung-ho anti slavery. Then they tried to react to it by fencing themselves off from the northern states and forming a seperate country, at that point all hell broke loose.
Well now we are in the information age which demands the uninhibited flow of open information. Is it a disaster for those who rely on the copyright monopoly system. At first they tried to extend copyrights to forever, and impose insane punishments. Then they tried to microregulate everybody with the DMCA. Now they are trying to fence themselves off from the rest of the world by using DRM.
Brace for impact, all hell is almost certainly about to break loose.
Re:It is said of code making and breaking (Score:1, Insightful)
Slashdot posters have always spun DRM as something that would scan your harddrive and delete all your MP3s and make Kazaa stop working. Which is a bunch of baloney. Frankly if you are in the "sharing" crowd, you probably won't be *buying* DRMed content anyway. If anything, DRM is only a big annoyance for the loyal customers, not the pirates.
This is silly... (Score:3, Insightful)
Slashdot wants me to think that DRM-protected MP3s downloaded from an official website is somehow going to prevent people from communicating freely unless we form Internet guilds.
I mean, really...do people think about their own viewpoints before expressing them? I just don't see what the big deal is about this, but then again, I don't often share the majority hivemind viewpoint.
Re:It is said of code making and breaking (Score:3, Insightful)
Won't have to. Bypassing works just fine since the devices can't be physically secured.
But, this hardware technology aims to eliminate those weak points. They will keep the data encrypted everywhere in software, only decrypting it in the chip that does the output.
Two problems with this scenario. First of all, these chips are going to have to be produced in mass quantity. Heaven forbid they make a mistake, or there turns out to be a vulnerability. This is also the most expensive option. For this reason, I seriously doubt that particular method will fly with manufacturers. It also could turn out to be a consumer disaster, like DiVX discs, so they'd be left holding the ball, with millions of these worthless chips stockpiled. No, I'd say the first approach is going to be a computing device that'll be more general in nature, probably with firmware that can be updated, and a separate chip for video processing and amplification. Second, since these devices are going to be everywhere, many manufacturers are going to have their hands on the specs. That information will make its way out in the open.
Re:What a comical spin by the marketing department (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Backwards compatible outputs have to go? (Score:3, Insightful)
If you think that if it takes 20 years it doesn't matter, then you're not just naive, you're a damned idiot.
When mass-produced entertainment becomes protected, the masses will buy protected playback system. Those protected system are, or will be, backed by government law, thanks for big business lobbyists. Then your small studios will be forced into using old technology, and old technology breaks. How long do you think you can keep your current DVD player in good working order? Can you get your tape player repaired? How about your 8-track, or laser-disc player, or TV? The market for "iold technology" will become smaller and smaller, until the independant studios can't produce goods any longer, or there isn't anyone left with working playback systems.
Oh, that'll take 75 years, you may say. We're talking about rights here; who cares what the timeframe is?
You know the story about boiling a frog? You stick a frog in a pot of boiling water, and he jumps out real fast. You stick it in cool water, and it stays there while you turn up the heat. Before the frog knows whats going on, it's dead.
Consumers are the frog.
Re:I for one don't welcome our new DRM overlords (Score:2, Insightful)
That is exactly why I only buy my music on vinyl. The format has been tested and true, relative ease to rip into mp3 and it always, always sounds better than any other format.
Re:What a comical spin by the marketing department (Score:4, Insightful)
Then after that studio releases this movie and makes a healthy profit and against the public good, they pay to lock these movies out of ever moving into the public domain. The "IP" value is to high to allow this.
A movie studio afriad to let the public view a movie because it's IP value is so great.....only in the DMCA zone
Re:The right to read *what,* exactly? (Score:2, Insightful)
your web page would not be "DRMed", but your hosting provider's router may drop packets that don't come from a suitably restricted (in hardware) machine. your hosting provider's big accounts have such machines so it's no big loss if they lose the small accounts (like you).
you are free to look for another hosting provider, but probably each first-level's upstream provider is in the same boat. at the root is some vaguely named Law of the Land (backed up by 5AM raids and the like) mandating information infrastructure "cleanliness", "security", "safety" and so forth.
so, the first question to ask is: can it be done? if the answer is yes, the second question -- will it be done? -- has an automatic answer: yes. if you cannot figure out why, that does not reflect upon the questions, only on your ability to figure out why. that will come w/ age and experience (unless you cling to blissful ignorance, as is your right).
in the end, the flow of information is a question of rate. a slow enough rate is almost like no information. a large enough rate differential between sanctioned and unsanctioned is enough for purposes of control. that is the point of the game that those in power play.
Re:Backwards compatible outputs have to go? (Score:1, Insightful)
Over time, the generations will grow up with DRM and think its commonplace, they might never know what the world was like before you have to pay for 5 versions of the same song just to play it on all your cd players.
With time comes acceptence and indifference. We used to care about some advertisements on the web. Now we have to get programs to block it, its so bad, but it was allowed to become that way.
Re:Backwards compatible outputs have to go? (Score:2, Insightful)
Incidently, what shops are still selling VHS tapes? I was in Best Buy this past weekend, and I don't remember seeing VHS tapes, just racks and racks of DVDs. Similar thing with Circuit City and Good Guys. The only place I remember seeing predominately VHS tapes for sale is rental places clearing out their back stock.
What I should have pointed out what was that, yes, entertainment companies will bundle some extra goodie to give the consumer some incentive to purchase the "protected" goods. I agree that DVDs are better than VHS tapes, in terms of content. But would you rather have 15 extra commentary tracks, or your freedom of creative reuse for personal purposes and to make backups so you don't need to "purchase" another copy when your computer crashes?
Re:the end of computing as we know it is coming... (Score:3, Insightful)
Not to name any names [insert innocent look] but there might already have been people doing this. Say a group of friends who have known each other personally, all sharing their CD collections, but not with the masses on p2p networks. With each other, through disks in the mail, or password protected, PGP encrypted files. And say this group coordinated their purchases so no one ever bought the same CD. A group like that could build up quite a music collection.
All the focus on file sharing got me to starting thinking about making my own music, which turned out to be more fun and better than crap I was buying.
The harder corporate entities try to lock up what people do with media...music and movies, the more of a market it spawns for individuals and groups providing material without all the restrictions. If big media somehow got the idea that the world owes them a living, I think they're in for a big surprise.
It has to be said (Score:3, Insightful)
All we need is some sort of STANDARD DRM container for all formats. Look at the mess apple's DRM has caused because so few portable MP3 players support it.
DRM may be evil. But it's also a necessary evil, and we need a standardized DRM format to allow content-providers to be able to set their own terms. Janus looks like the closest thing to that... as much as I like apple, the iTunes DRM is too closed.
nonsense (Score:2, Insightful)
There's NOTHING stopping mandatory DRM schemes of various types in hardware within politics. And who knows what they might think proper. How about no way any more anonymous surfing? they could mandate that if they wanted to, with your normal serious fines and jail ties associated with it to "stop child molestation and to catch crooks and terrorists and hackers" and whatnot. make you have a signed cookie thing follow you, connected to a real name. there's any number of schemes they could come up with. I had this same conversation just a few years ago with people when I told them that pretty soon tracking chips would become mandatory in all goods traded, they told me it would never happen, tinfoil hat. Well? Sure looks like it'll all be here soon, doesn't it? Isn't RFID now the hottest thing since burgers in a bag with industry now, and with government? See? Stuff happens.
This is the US, enough "campaign contributions" above board exchanges hands, and the usual hookers and whatnot behind the scenes, you get "laws passed". the one rule on that is, "no rules"on what they can pass. Then your entire market becomes your "choice" of this hardware which conforms to the new standards or that hardware which conforms, or used. In fact, you ALREADY have hardware which must conform, the US regulates the heck out ofhardware now, has certain standards for manufactured goods of all types, espeically electronics. Look at refrigeration, heck, look at the it now takes two flushes to work johns they mandated to "save water". You can NOT buy a new john made like the older ones now, stroke of the pen, law of the land deal. Like, where's my "free market choice" to buy one? It don't exist except used now, at least inside the borders, and if ya get caught selling or smuggling, yep, fines, jail time, whatever they think is cool.. Just like they passed mandatory auto emissions, which morphed from what used to be an automobile about anyone with a box of tools could work on now takes a trained specialist in a particular car maker, subset a particular system and there is NO choice there to get just a clean simple new car without all the crap on it, even if it ran clean with a nice tuneup, like they used to do anyway. The problem with cars and smog is using petroleum based fuels, they are dirty, but I don't see a choice for me at the pumps if I want to run a new simple car designed to run on something that runs clean out of the box, like ethanol for instance. No cars sold new without every piece of crap computerised system they can think of now on them. No "free market choice" there except used, and even then you with your older used hardware ride you still got to follow a lot of "laws" that weren't even in existence when your older machine was built. If they did it with cars, why not with computers, or TVs, or digital recorders? Nothing stopping them, and they are always aware that attrition will get rid of the old hardware eventually, and it don't take too long.
The siamese twins Government and BigBrandBusiness does this all the time, and believe me, big giant business doesn't allow laws to be passed they aren't in favor of, even if they cry big sobbing crocodile tears over them in public. If the bigboys want uber nasty DRM in everything, it'll happen, and you'll be stuck with used or smuggled in questionable quality hardware, or really learn to solder some teeny tiny stuff, and that's about it. And government won't care about the
I am not saying it WILL happen, just that it easily COULD happen, they do it everyday to something. What are we at now inside the US, 5 MILLION laws, maybe more? Think they are gonna just STOP making new ones???
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What a comical spin by the marketing department (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What a comical spin by the marketing department (Score:3, Insightful)
My company manufactures speakers for the Australian market. They are assembled in Australia, but all the parts come from China.
Trust me, our Chinese friends will happily continue to make devices with analogue inputs and outputs as long as we continue to order them.
What's more, the Chinese don't give a shit about American patent and copyright issues. Where do you think those region free DVD players come from? Do you think they're approved by the DVD consortium? But can you get one? Of course you can!
And this situation will remain. Even when DVDii (I like that :-) becomes available, the market will demmand features we all love, like being able to copy things, and the consumer will simply choose the device which meets their needs; of course, as the device they need will be a 'grey-import,' it will be much cheaper than the alternative, just as region free DVD players are cheaper now.
Plus the fact that many, many people will interpret any restriction on our digital freedoms as a challenge, new firmware and hacks will be available to 'unlock' your devices so quickly that it will appear within 24 hours as the top response for the google search term 'unlock my tv.'
No big deal (Score:2, Insightful)
Why in the rat's ass do I have to shell out tons of money and struggle with technological crap like DRM just to do something simple like reading a book? Granted, ebook is very handy when you want to bring that War & Peace together with the complete Lord of the Rings, but if being able to do that means that I have to do lots of work and PAYING for it instead of getting paid, I'll just buy and use an old-fashioned-works-well book instead. Cumbersome but less stressful. Besides I'll look more like an intellectual and less of a geek.
Remember the DIVX fiasco few years back (this is DIVX as in DRM-heavy version of DVD, not the file format). Many people here are scared shitless of DIVX at that time and the same thing happened to slashdot then. Now DIVX is a museum piece of what's not to do(tm). Simply put, any DRM that's restrictive and uncompromising will not survive. Ever.
The typical scenario is this:
Joe: I want them new DVD shit.
Seller: Ah, this new DVD player is a good choice. It's much improved from the older DVD. But to play this you also need this TV and this amp and this speaker because it's a new thing from Microsoft.
Joe: Oh, can I use my old ones? I got them for $100,000. Top end shit.
Seller: Sorry but no. (long sales pitch follows).
Joe: Bye.
I agree that copyright is needed for the artist's protection, but since the one ripping off the artists are the studios themselves, the copyright law as we know it is biased more toward the studios.
DRM is not created for the artists. It's for the studios in a Frankensteinian twist of the copyright law. Apple's DRM succeeded mostly because it fits fair use in most people's mind, and the price is right at $1. At that price you can throw Janus or Anus or whatever and I won't care. If they want to twist DVDs this way, they better make it $1 a pop as well. I won't pay $30 for something that I can't use the way I like it. So is Joe.
On a lighter note, China practically ignores world standard and create their own. If ever this DRM stuff get a little out of hand, we can always use Chinese stuff. They have their own DVD-like format, and I'll bet it's free of any DRM whatsoever.
Re:Janus (Score:1, Insightful)
Yet utterly consistent with the new business paradigm where the consumer is little more than a distasteful albeit necessary evil.
Re:the end of computing as we know it is coming... (Score:2, Insightful)
Somehow, the whole public accepted the DVD-Video standard, even though they included CSS, region codes, user operation prohibitions, and macrovision. If they can minimize negative impact upon the wishes of the majority while increasing some ease of use and/or desired content, they can successfully phase it in.
I don't even consider the present music services DRM as unbreakable because they all let you make at least one analog CD through the front door.
Since when are audio CDs "analog"? Little by little, step by step. You can make 10 CDs from the songs you purchased. Wow. That's actually a lot. Oops... now you can only make 7 CDs. Eh. It's still a lot. See how easy that was? Relatively little impact, too.
While I tend to agree with your sentiment, it is the modern copyright laws that scare me, and, IMHO, they should scare everyone, because it is only by the power of law that strict DRM will succeed.
Random thought... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:vote with your wallet (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What a comical spin by the marketing department (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What a comical spin by the marketing department (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:the end of computing as we know it is coming... (Score:2, Insightful)
They'll try to do it little by litte, it will no be incompatible from the start.
Do you see how many people use MSN Messenger while they could continue with ICQ or use Jabber ?
MSN is not better than others IM, but MS wanted people to use MSN so they put it in Win XP and now everybody use it. And people not running Windows with the official MSN Messenger are not officialy allowed to connect (even if a lot of people do it). And when MS will think it is the good day for that they'll make so that anyone not running windows cannot connect at all on their servers. But most of the people will aldready be using MSN without problem and they probably will not want to move to something else for the few linux users. And that's what is happening