Sony DRM and the New Digital Hole 184
expro writes "If the root kit scandal was not enough for Sony, Time Magazine reports that it is a delay in 'the release of copy-protection software required for the PS3's game and high-definition movie discs' giving Microsoft a serious advantage in the market place. Is there something Sony should be learning here about preoccupation copy control? With high definition writable media appearing already, will the price drop soon enough to help me overcome the real obstacle to backing up my exsisting commercial DVDs, cost of single media large enough to hold them that is playable in a player? Will the resulting new digital hole in copying existing DVD schemes to higher-density media replace the analog hole of VCRs in copying movies?"
Sony has lost it's edge (Score:5, Interesting)
No matter what DRM, watermark, or token system they release will do nothing more than frustrate their consumer base. Many consumers are now feeling for burned by Sony that they will wait until the mid to trailing edge of the technology cycle to adopt it.
Content (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Microsoft? Who knew! (Score:4, Interesting)
Nobody ever explained to me why Microsoft would inherently give a damn about DRM. As far as I know, it's the content industry that says "chain up people's PCs or we won't release high defenition material at all".
Microsoft's actual anti-piracy efforts have been a token effort at best, especially when you consider that MS actually depends a lot on penetrating developing countries with its pirated software. All other things being equal, I seriously doubt they'd give a shit less about implementing something technically very thorny and that just makes your software a pain in the ass to use.
Only reason X360 and Xbox have copy protection is to ensure developers actually pay licensing fees and don't just release software for their loss-making hardware without paying. It's got very little to do with piracy.
Don't believe the hype. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Devkits in June! Truth is Cell and tools are la (Score:3, Interesting)
If I remember correctly the story a few months ago about that artist who was fired for slamming the PS3 made some comments on the dev kits his team was using to develop their next gen titles.
Canadian RIAA says they were wrong re:file sharers (Score:2, Interesting)
Did you see an earlier story from yesterday evening, it is here [slashdot.org] and it is about how the Canadian RIAA has contradicted it's previous public statements?
Did you also see the article [slashdot.org] about how DRM costs 25% of a mobile systems battery power?
Here [slashdot.org] is an example of how the US government is investigating price fixing.
Do all the above examples validate piracy? No, I don't think so. Do they validate DRM? hell no! I will never buy media strangled with DRM. Ever.
Re:Microsoft? Who knew! (Score:5, Interesting)
Howard Stringer (Score:3, Interesting)
Putting him in charge was a solid kick to the nuts for all of Sony's hardware businesses. He doesn't control everything, but he functions as a tie breaker when the two sides disagree. And he is *always* going to come down on the side of more locked down content. I wouldn't be surprised if the decision to delay the PS3 until the copy protection could be made even more strict was his personal decision.
Maybe that what they wanted when they gave him the job. If so, it was stupid. I thought at the time that he was put in as a "chainsaw CEO" - someone that could do things (like fire lots of people) that a japanese CEO couldn't/wouldn't do. After he does all the demolition the board is *shocked* at the devastation, fires him with a golden handshake, and moves on with a leaner company. He hasn't done that. Now it seem more likely that they decided that for the 21st century "content is king" and didn't think it through to the damage it would cause the the company as a whole.
Re:The underlying problem is still piracy. (Score:4, Interesting)
The fact of the matter is that, whatever pseudophilosophical bullshit exceptions people give here (such as the "wink wink" 'backing up my DVDs' nonsense of the submitter), the underlying problem is still the willingness of ordinary people to engage in acts of willful copyright infringement simply on the basis of the belief that their chances of being caught are low.
1. Backing up our DVDs so my daughter doesn't destroy them is not a "pseudophilosophical bullshit exception;" it's a fact of life. I don't much care if other people want to make copies of DVDs to distribute illegally. That's not my concern, nor is it my problem.
2. The underlying problem is not my willingness to engage in an act of copyright infringement. It is instead the fact that I currently CANNOT make a fair use backup copy of my own DVDs without breaking the law (thank you, DMCA).
I considered defending myself against your implication that I'm lying about my daughter, but instead I'll just issue the age-old curse:
"Just wait until you have kids of your own!"