Microsoft Planning Digital Restrictions Server

Jon James writes "Microsoft is pushing further into digital rights management with a plan for a DRM server due to go into beta testing later this year, eWeek is reporting. Microsoft has already applied for a patent for a DRM operating system but would not say if the DRM server would be based on this. In an interview last week with eWeek, Jim Allchin, Microsoft's group vice president for platforms, said a DRM server is but one of three server infrastructure applications coming next year."

Comments

Palladium: the dark age of computing

[cxreg]

I just hope that one day I can tell my kids about how close we came to losing our digital freedom, instead of having to explain to them why the software daddy wrote is now illegal

Re:Palladium: the dark age of computing

[MoneyT]

Crazy and paranoid? How about you try to go back to 1990 and convince people that in 10 years, the RIAA would be pushing to get a bill passed that would allow them to legaly hack your computer to see if you have any music files on there that you don't own. They would tell you you're paranoid.

Try to convince them that in 2002, you will need to report to Microsoft information about the hardware your computer is running just to get a licence key. THey would tell you you're crazy.

Try to convince them that in 10 years, linking or providing acess to code that would allow you to watch a video on a *NIX based OS would be illegal. They wouldn't believe you.

Try to convince them that the RIAA would be pushing for legislation to make it illegal for you to make a copy of your favorite album to keep at work or in the car. They would tell you to go jump in a lake.

Yet each of these senarios are equaly true today. Never underestimate the power of people with money. They can get what they want if they try hard enough and people don't pay attention.

Re:Palladium: the dark age of computing

[stratjakt]

> "Running non-secure software will become a federal offense punishable by life in prison or worse"

Yeah you'll be executed for warez. Goddamnit, get a grip on reality.

> Any and all programs not specifically authorized, approved and certified by M$ will not be allowed to run

Simply not true.

> those in power will see to it to make it a legal mandate to precent cyber-terrorism in the future

Gack, too much TV.

Remember when idiotic comments didn't get modded up as insightful?

I don't.

Frankly I'd rather see Microsoft (you know them as M$) control the world than the kneejerk reactionaries of slashdot. Though in the real world, luckily, neither scenario is likely.

Re:Palladium: the dark age of computing

[jbolden]

I know 1990 sounds like a long time ago to you but...

> How about you try to go back to 1990 and convince people that in 10 years, the RIAA would be pushing to get a bill passed that would allow them to legaly hack your computer to see if you have any music files on there that you don't own. They would tell you you're paranoid.

A few years before 1990 it would have been perfectly legal for anyone to hack into your computer; there were no laws prohibiting examing other people's computer files. At the time such legislation was passed and certainly out until 1990 it was understood that it would take time for legal issues to be worked out. The only thing someone in 1990 would have been suprised at was that it was the RIAA not not something like ATT or Exxon.

Try to convince them that in 2002, you will need to report to Microsoft information about the hardware your computer is running just to get a licence key. THey would tell you you're crazy.

Not really such schemes were in use in 1990 just not by Microsoft. During the 1980's software was very often designed to only run on a particular machine and was often licenses that way. I don't think they would have found it suprising at all.

Try to convince them that in 10 years, linking or providing acess to code that would allow you to watch a video on a *NIX based OS would be illegal. They wouldn't believe you.

I think they'd be more suprised you could watch a video on a computer. As for the rest of your statement its false: a licensed software running on 'NIX based system to watch videos would be perfectly legal. DeCSS wasn't licensed. As for linking I think there is no chance that stands up in court over the long term. No way will NYTimes, CNN... hold that providing information constitutes trafficing.

Try to convince them that the RIAA would be pushing for legislation to make it illegal for you to make a copy of your favorite album to keep at work or in the car. They would tell you to go jump in a lake.

They were doing the same thing in 1990 and 1980...

Next generation hardware

[pieterh]

So, will the next generation of hardware even be able to run Linux and display content off the Internet?

The answer is 'possibly not'. You have to assume that MS's agenda involves making this 'definitely not'.

The question will be answered when Microsoft starts producing PCs (as compared to the X-Box, which is a simpler issue). Take - for instance - the upcoming Microsoft tablet PC. My guess is that it will not only come with Windows preinstalled (that is not a surprise) but also that it will be impossible to change the OS. The hardware will be keyed to the OS, and MS will have learned their lessons from the X-Box.

If this does not already worry you, then consider the following scenario: MS then licenses this hardware platform, which will incorporate patented elements of DRM and TCP, to their current Windows licensees. The bargain will be: build PCs using our technology, or loose your margins on Windows. Once Dell produces a PC that cannot run Linux and where attempts to open the box can be countered by DCMA-style lawsuits, you wll see Microsoft's strategy.

If the US government was serious about preventing MS from becoming a monopoly, they should ban them from producing PC hardware.

Curious...

[CryptoKiller]

DRM technology enables content creators, such as record companies

Funny, I thought that artists made records...