Zune Won't Play Old DRM Infected Files 463
Spritzer writes "According to the EFF, the new Zune portable media player from Microsoft won't play files infected with the old Microsoft DRM. It seems that all of the 'PlaysforSure' media that has been sold and is currently being sold will not play on the Zune. In addition, Microsoft has now advocated violating the DMCA in order to transfer files to the player. Microsoft Zune architect J Allard was quoted as saying there's 'Lots of DVD ripping software out there that encodes to those formats, so the most popular formats out there, whether it's MPEG-4 or H.264, we'll support those.'" ZDNet offers up additional commentary on this revelation.
Re:DRM (Score:5, Interesting)
This was bound to happen. Let's see if anything good comes of it.
Re:PlaysForSure? (Score:3, Interesting)
End to End Solution (Score:5, Interesting)
RealNetworks and Sandisk have already stated their intent to do something similar, which reeks like all the PlaysForSure partners aren't too impressed with this move by Microsoft.
How cute! (Score:2, Interesting)
____________________
Free iPods? Its legit [wired.com]. 5 of my friends got theirs. Get yours here! [freepay.com]
It's a trap! (Score:5, Interesting)
Just think about it.. just how dumb do you think MS are?
Legal format conversions? (Score:4, Interesting)
Makes Sense (Score:4, Interesting)
While the decision will surely harm MS in the short term, and completely alienate all the other PlaysForSure software and hardware licensees (probably killing the format), it would definitely improve MS's long-term prospects, assuming it isn't pulled off the market after a year of dismal sales. If history is any indication, MS will stick with it, keep improving their offerings, and eventually have something that appeals to the lowest common denominator on the market.
Re:Hold up a sec (Score:1, Interesting)
Even if Zune doesn't use Playforsure, how do we not know that the software included with Zune will allow the DRM to be modified to run on Zune. And before someone pops off about changing the DRM violates the DMCA, that is not true if you have the proper permissions from copyright holders/distributors.
Hate to defend M$, but... (Score:2, Interesting)
I hope that I'm wrong about this, as it would be too funny if the Zune couldn't play DRMed music.
Re:Legal format conversions? (Score:3, Interesting)
Nope. Changing DRM means you have to remove the old DRM and then add the new DRM. By the time you add the new DRM, you have already violated the law. It's not like adding the DRM somehow retroactively makes the earlier violation become not a violation.
Sure, it's ridiculous. But it's also ridiculous that playing a DVD without permission from the copyright holder is a violation. Yet it is. What can I say? It's a ridiculous law that no honest person voted for. It was intended to harm the innocent, and be as bewildering and unfair as Catch-22.
Re:PlaysForSure? (Score:4, Interesting)
AllOfMP3 plays for sure (as long as the site is up).
supernova &&|| all it's vairents tend to play for sure as long as the torrent isn't comprimised.
While the legality of the former is questionable and the latter is, well, known for sure, these are still legitimite competitors to the DRM media.
-nB
To clarify legitimate competitor != legal competitor. The media companies need to understnad that if they break their own rules then they are opening the gates to others ignoring the rules a bit wider every time.
-nB
Re:Buy hardware and music without DRM. (Score:3, Interesting)
They're being phased out, and the next generation of content containing media will ALL have DRM deeply embedded into them. So the only choice, if you don't want DRM, is to abstain from buying ANYTHING at all.
How many do you think will do that?
Re:You know what they say about assumptions (Score:2, Interesting)
Its like reading some whare that IPods and import MP3 and since protected AACs are listed assuming IPods won't be able to play its own format. STUPID article!
Much ado about nothing? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm hardly what you'd call a Microsoft fan-boy (I'm not even a Microsoft user), but I'm not seeing where it says that it can't play this stuff. I haven't seen any confirmation from the horse's mouth. I mean, this is all coming from a footnote in a PR document which says:
It doesn't say that other applications can't put protected music onto the device, nor does it say that it can't play that stuff. It just says that the built-in software can't do it. Which makes sense, really, because it would imply that Microsoft is ready, willing and able to break the protection applied by a partnering online music store. That's pretty nasty, even for a "stab your partner" company like them.Of course, that won't make it much of an iTunes killer. "Oh, you want to import music from some other store. Okay.... open their player app, and see if they'll let you export each individual piece of media to the Zune. Including the stuff you ripped from CD and it helpfully 'protected' for you. Then, if you're lucky and they haven't changed the terms and conditions or you've moved computers or devices or something..."
Re:Free download of same title, different format? (Score:3, Interesting)
Probably because of the "copy" in "copyright". Every new copy they allow you to download is presumably another copy they have to pay for to the RIAA, regardless of whether you owned it or not (unless the RIAA made an exception for the above situation and refused money in that case... yeah right).
Re:Buy hardware and music without DRM. (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, a recent study suggested only 10-15% of iPods are populated with iTunes downloads. So the integrated solution is not an absolute necessity to being successful in this space. I think ipods are more successful due to a) well engineered, b) highly usable, and c) good advertising. But Microsoft doesn't want to leave any stone unturned, they're fighting uphill here.
Frankly, I didn't realise that 10% of the iPod user base was stupid enough to buy overpriced music via iTunes. I figured it was just useful as a podcast aggregator, but then again the Home Shopping Network is profitable too.
Re:DRM (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not sure he's advocating breaking any law, including the DMCA. He just maybe has a little different interpretation of the law than some. But neither his interpretation, nor the interpretation of those on the other side of the fence has actually been tested in court to my knowledge.
The DMCA makes a specific exception to itself for fair use provisions. In essence, it says that if you previously had a right to do something under existing copyright law, you still have a right to do that thing. What the DMCA does is ensure that DRM is protected against those trying to break existing copyright law. It says "if you break DRM for the purposes of infringing copyright, then you are breaking the law." (The fair use exception comes after the actual restrictions, but you have to read everything together to know what the law itself actually is. I'm convinced some people just stop reading once they've read the restrictions.) But since fair use is codified into copyright law, you're not breaking the law by breaking DRM. At least, that would have to be J. Allard's interpretation of the DMCA.
The ZDNet article says the DMCA makes certain exceptions, "none of which apply here." That's not necessarily true. The author is apparently assuming that breaking DRM to move your DVD's from disc to Zune or your PlaysForSure files from one device to another would not be covered under fair use provisions of copyright law. He may or may not be right, but the Supreme Court has in the past used format-shifting as an example of fair use, going all the way back to the Betamax decision. (The examples listed as fair use in the law itself are just that, examples. They do not encompass all potential fair uses.)
The DMCA is no doubt a draconian law. But a) it has not really been fully tested in court yet, mainly because the individual users it most directly affects don't have the money to pursue a lengthy court case, and b) it is open to as much interpretation as the fair use provision in existing copyright law.
The long and the short of it is I think this whole Zune thing is a big fiasco for Microsoft, but I don't necessarily agree that J. Allard is telling people to break the law.
A real lack of confidence for consumers... (Score:4, Interesting)
Even for someone who's tech savvy, the uncertainty is disconcerting...
You must be reading different history books. (Score:3, Interesting)
If history is any indication, MS will abandon it for something else when they think it convenient, just like they're doing with Plays For Sure.
They Think They are Above the Law (Score:3, Interesting)
This is exactly what you should expect from M$. Yes, they are going to encourage people to "steal" other people's copyrighted material and break the laws they promoted. From their point of view, this is natural. M$ has been the primary benefactor of software "piracy" all along. They thought that DRM was the same thing, just another "speedbump" to keep "honest users" paying. Wink wink, "steal" Windoze, photoshop and autocad they want you to know how to use it! Sounds familiar? The problem for them here is that the primary rightsholders in this case, the RIAA, is bigger than anything M$ has been up against yet. They are also more important for media players. If they get away with it, it's only because they came to an agreement with big media.
I don't think that the RIAA is that smart. They demanded DRM to lock out competition and expand their little broadcast and physical media monopoly into cyberspace. The way they see it, Microsoft has just crossed the line between being a promoter of that monopoly and an a competitor making money by copying ancient recordings. The only worse thing M$ can do is promote "unsigned" bands and dilute the top 40 rip off.
None of this will be pleasant for users. DRM will be the pain it's supposed to be. Users will have to creep around "pirate" sites to find the software they need to do the conversion. What they find will be a cesspool booby trapped by the music industry and spammers. Then the RIAA might come and sue them too.
The best thing that can happen is for people to circumvent all of the greed heads. Musicians can go with less greedy promoters and users can buy unencumbered music from them and all this non free shit can die.
Re:Buy hardware and music without DRM. (Score:3, Interesting)
I think you might be in with a chance if it made it as far as a Court of Law. I doubt you'd be able to find a jury of twelve people who understood what "digital restrictions management" is. At least Beta and VHS cassettes were visually distinguible. The end result might be a chilling effect, with stores not daring to stock portable devices lest they be accused of misleading customers.
I want a branded what now? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:PlaysForSure? (Score:4, Interesting)
Until then, I'll fulfill my music downloading tastes with unencrypted MP3, AAC and FLAC from Bleep, Tunetribe and 4AD.
Please note: I'm not knocking eMusic or legal downloads in general (indeed, I spend about £20 a month buying tunes online compared to £0 on music two years ago). I just don't trust the way their UK store seems to be working. And yes, I did want a chance to try it out.
Re:DRM (Score:5, Interesting)
-Kurt
Re:You know what they say about assumptions (Score:4, Interesting)
I've accidentally tripped on an encrypted message in this statement. I'm posting it here for your own conclusions:
"We were like: we wanna copy iPod, the branding and all, but everyone wants to sue us for abusing monopoly and other such crap. So we're like: we'll make the platform and open it for anyone to license.
So we, like, waited and waited and waited and the competition never managed to outdo iPod since they are too many and they compete among each other instead of complement each other, and iPod is one: it's easy to market, and recognize.
So finally we said: well, screw antitrust cases, screw PlaysForSure: we're ripping iPod."
Re:He lives under a rock with a library... (Score:3, Interesting)
DRM prevents an unlicensed user from accessing the legitimate content which I have.
Yes, DRM is access control.
It also prevents me from copying the content to a different media and/or format, which is fair use.
No. Bits are bits. You can copy them to another player/medium, but other devices won't be able to decrypt them to play them.
Access control, not copy prevention. Nothing stops you from copying DRM'd music, you just can't access it if you move it elsewhere.
Re:PlaysForSure? (Score:2, Interesting)