UnBox Calls Home, A Lot

SachiCALaw writes "It turns out that to use UnBox, the user has to download software from Amazon that contains a Windows service (ADVWindowsClientService.exe). Tom Merritt over at C|Net reports that the service tries to connect to the internet quite frequently. Even tweaking msconfig could not prevent it." From the article: "So, in summary, to be allowed the privilege of purchasing a video that I can't burn to DVD and can't watch on my iPod, I have to allow a program to hijack my start-up and force me to login to uninstall it? No way. Sorry, Amazon. I love a lot of what you do, but I will absolutely not recommend this service. Try again."

Re:Sounds like iTunes on Windows

[goombah99]

please correct me if I'm wrong but other then the intial authrorization, I think the only phone home that itunes does is to plug things for the mini-store advertisments at the bottom of the page. ANd you can turn that off. I don't think it runs services that phone hope besides the application itself. Perhaps on windows it's different than on macs?

Re:What is the point?

[11223]

This raises an interesting question: now that Amazon is in the business of competing with physical DVD purchases, will Amazon prices for DVDs rise until it's cheaper to buy via UnBox?

Re:Sounds like iTunes on Windows

[Tim C]

I don't believe that the services that iTunes install phone home (although I could be wrong), but iTunes does indeed install a service that runs all the time (ie whether you're using iTunes or not). This is the "iPodService", that is described as being "iPod hardware management services". If you stop it, iTunes restarts it. If you set it to disabled then run iTunes as an admin, it sets it back to manual and starts it. At install time, it's set to automatic - ie it runs when Windows starts.

I wouldn't mind, but I don't own an iPod and so for me this is just a pointless waste of resources. Imho there ought to be a config option to allow you to specify that you don't have an iPod and so won't be needing the service, but it appears that that was too much to ask for.

Well what did you expect?

[gnu-sucks]

Amazon is clearly catering to a single party -- motion picture copyright holders.

I've outlined my opinions here [lfnet.net] (warning: web site plug).

But it's pretty simple. Costs too much, doesn't provide value, intentionally confuses customers, and doesn't support the right hardware.

If this software has blatant spyware in it, I wouldn't be surprised a bit.

NO Congressional Action!

[Sloppy]

You don't need Congress to persuade you to not choose to run spyware. A little self-discipline will be quite enough.

Say all you want about the inevitability of DRM and the media companies' requirements for it, but one thing is for sure: DRM-compliant software is always (there has never been an exception) intended to serve someone other than the user. You can candycoat this ugly fact all you want, but if you choose to run a proprietary player because you want to watch some DRM content, you accept that you are telling your computer to do things that are contrary to your self-interest. It's just a matter of whether these things are worth it or not. Take responsibility for this choice instead of crying to Congress. JUST SAY NO is just as viable an option for spyware, as it is for cocaine.

If you want to cry to Congress because making choices is too hard for your delicate psyche, then tell them to change copyright law so that protection doesn't extend to DRMed content. Then the media companies, instead of the pathetic users, will have to make a choice: put their trust into the law, or put their trust into technology?

Re:This is not the first time I've seen this

[iminplaya]

Most people don't even rip up their credit card receipts. I doubt they're interested or aware of what "wipe the drive" means. "Should I do it with a mild detergent and a lint free cloth?"

Nope, capitalism can take care of this

[bigtrike]

These companies typically lose money because the consumer realizes that their products aren't worth the price. Also, any bill related to this would have to be far too technical for congress to wrap its head around, resulting in something either ineffective or harmful.

Re:The same old bad deal. Non free sucks.

[gnu-sucks]

re-reading your comment, twitter, I have to reply again...

That's the way non most non free software works. It's non free because the author wants you to do as they say in one way or another

If you consider gnu gpl software to be 'free software', by your reasoning, than you're seriously mistaken. GPL licensed works have very specific license requirements. If I'm to distribute my GPL'd app, you better believe it absolutely has to include the source code. And, if anyone wants to use it for their own purposes, their works have to be covered by the same license. And I have to include an obvious copy of the GPL license. I'd say this certainly falls under your thesis of DRM being bad because the author requires one to "do as they say in one way or another".

In a way, this is a form of DRM. Digital Rights Management. Use our code, and your code from this must be under our (GPL) license. (The analogy is, use our song or video material, and you must have it licensed by our publisher, etc.)

Consider how GPL advocates cry 'code theft' whenever a company sells a product with embedded linux, and doesn't offer up the source code. Have they really stolen anything? Is this not similar to copying a music cd? Why is a restrictive software license much different than a restrictive music or video license?

By contrast, yes, I do prefer BSD-style licenses. And probably LGPL, though I haven't sat down and read it yet.

And also, I much prefer a license that allows for copying (though with restrictions) to one that doesn't.

Re:What is the point?

[Overly Critical Guy]

It's the reason Amazon has so many studios on board, while Apple will (reportedly) only have Disney next Tuesday. Steve Jobs wants to sell for only $9.99 or $12.99, while the studios wanted higher prices (yeah, I want to pay as much as a DVD for an online video version...right). Jobs wouldn't budge, so they went to Amazon. I'm sure the disaster of Amazon's service compared to the inevitable success of Apple's will put the ball in Jobs' court, and the other studios will come around.

Re:Sounds like iTunes on Windows

[ucblockhead]

Be aware that the Windows OS provides hooks to run programs when devices are attached, so there's no reason for a device vendor to have a program always running in memory waiting for the device to be attached.

The reason they put "iTunesHelper" in memory at all times is merely to make their program appear to load faster.

Re:NO Congressional Action!

[Anonymous Coward]

Take responsibility for this choice instead of crying to Congress. JUST SAY NO is just as viable an option for spyware, as it is for cocaine.

Who the crazy fuck are you to tell me not to go crying to Congress (MY elected representatives) when all the media companies do so constantly? And for the explicit purpose of fucking me personally. How the hell do you think DRM legality and the satanic DMCA came into being?

I fucking WILL cry to Congress -- it's my ABSOLUTE, Constitution-given right as an American to do so. Ergo, STFU, asshole.

I do however, constantly keep in mind that congress, as used in the Kama Sutra, is nothing but a synonym for fucking.

Re:What is the point?

[MrAnnoyanceToYou]

See, that's not the way it works. There's no competition here; UnBox is for buying everything you want to watch on your Computer Machine. You're going to have to buy yourself the DVD to watch it on the TV machine. And to watch it on the iPod Gadget, you're going to have to buy it again. And circumventing any of these purchases is a crime.

Re:UnBox Video Player License

[kimvette]

FWIW, I'd rip a DVD right in front of an MPAA rep. When he threatens to sue, I'd point at the interoperability clause in the DMCA, and point at the fair use clause in Copyright Law, as well as DVD advertisements which state that I OWN the DVD, along with various court precedents pertaining to the first sale doctrine. Providing I am not violating Copyright Law by distributing the content in violation of it, there isn't much they can do. There's not much they can do if I rip all of my DVDs to xvid to keep readily available on my HDD, and nothing they can do about my copying them to my PocketPC for mobile viewing.

Why fear the MPAA when merely exercising your rights?

Re:Should Congressional Action Be Warranted?

[ForumTroll]

You and fotbr are exactly right. Unfortunately, most people aren't willing to make any sacrifices whatsoever and instead prefer to whine about it incessantly. I'm so sick of hearing people say that they don't have a choice. I stopped watching TV and mainstream movies completely just over a year ago and there are plenty of alternative forms of entertainment to keep me amused.

I have no problems with people who choose to partake in these forms of entertainment, however, I do have a problem with people who whine constantly about having no choice in the matter. Especially those who advocate that the government or groups like the EFF should step in and force the media companies to deliver the content in a manner that they personally prefer.

Re:Sounds like iTunes on Windows

[ucblockhead]

Let me be more clear: Using the correct registry entries, you can make any application run when your particular device is connected, regardless of whether or not it is a "mass storage device". I know this, because I have done this for devices my company makes. It's not a "workaround". It's the Windows mechanism for detecting and dealing with devices. Sitting in memory all the time to do the same thing is the hackish workaround.

The issue isn't that a particular program takes "just a little" memory. It's that every goddamn application vendor takes "just a little memory" and "only one tray icon", etc, etc. It's a tragedy of the commons scenario that files up everyone's machine. Still, if you at least give the user control, that's not so bad. When, like unbox, you don't allow the user to say "no, I don't want you to run every time I boot", it sucks.

Re:So what exactly is it doing? It doesn't matter

[JetScootr]

"If it's sending performance stats...'
NO. It is never OK for the software to connect to the internet without informed consent of the OWNER of the computer. That's where security problems start - an app that isn't talking over the internet is very unlikely to get hijacked. An app that is using internet access without the computer owner's knowledge or consent is far,far more likely to be attacked.
Again, NO. It is never OK for someone to use MY computer to analyze the performance of THEIR software, unless they're willing to pay me bucks to do it. Would they let me login an use their bandwidth and one of their computers for free? Don't think so, why should I be expected to let them use mine? Just cuz I'm not a billion dollar bizniz?
Still again, NO. It is not OK to insert software into my boot sequence without my consent. That's another chink in the armor.
A thousand times, no. It should be just as easy to remove the software as it was to install it - and internet access is not a part of file deletion.
This is very, very much "an argument about substance".

this is what happens ...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is what happens when companies forget who they are and how they became successful.

Amazon succeeded long ago because they were less expensive and more convenient.

Unbox is neither.

Re:Well what did you expect?

[ben there...]

I can't believe you'd be anti-Amazon while still pro-Apple. Here's my take:

• Amazon videos are about the same price as iTMS
• Amazon videos are roughly 3 times the filesize/bitrate, at 3 times the quality (subjectively)
• Amazon gives you 2 copies: one for your computer, one for your portable
• Amazon's videos look at least as good as DVD, while Apple's look more like pirated quality
• Did I mention iTMS videos are 320x240?
• Amazon's DRM has been cracked, iTMS's hasn't
• Amazon lets you redownload your entire collection, iTMS doesn't

I've explained the article author's claims about "phoning home" elsewhere [slashdot.org], so I won't go over that FUD again.

I use both services, depending on who has the episode I want, but prefer the DVD if it's available. But I've redownloaded some episodes from Amazon that I had purchased from iTMS, because the quality is so much better and there's a method to regain fair use. From now on, I'll likely be holding out on getting anything from iTMS until it's on Unbox, because I really don't like being stuck with poor quality videos only playable in Quicktime. I honestly can't believe iTMS doesn't offer anything greater than 320x240 iPod videos.