Slashdot Mirror
Movielink Snubs DRM-less Macs
mcwetboy writes "CNET reports that the Macintosh is being shut out of online movie services like Movielink, and connects it to the Mac's lack of digital-rights management. From the article: '[Apple VP] Schiller says Apple has not released much in the way of protective technology ... because effective techniques for securing content without interfering with the experience of consumers have not yet been invented.' A consumer-friendly attitude towards DRM may be a double-edged sword (content may not be made available for that platform), but if the content is locked out of the Mac for that reason, do I really want it anyway?" In other news, the USSR provided free bread only to the poor people.
There's going to be a lot more of this type of thing.
Paladium, here we come.
I dont watch movies on my G4 anyway. If I want to watch a movie, I watch it on my TV where I can be comfortable. But I do enjoy the lack of DRM on my mac.
As Steve Jobs has pointed out is that DRM's dirty little secret is that it does not work and will always be hackable.
The answer is to make reliable, quality, fairly price downloads available. Don't assume your customers want to be criminals.
The correct quote is "Effect techniques for securing content have not yet been invented."
... to the poor. That's funny, coz its *NOT* true... -------
nuc134r m4n
In other news, the USSR provided free bread only to the poor people.
What does that mean? Are the content providers the USSR? And Windows users are poor people? No, that's not right, because you still have to pay for the content.
This is more like refusing to sell bread to brown-skinned people because "everybody knows they're all criminals".
Free bread was only for prisoners.
the Soviet Union is dead and gone.
So Apple supports the idea of DRM, just not the implementation? That's just as bad if you ask me, and I also think this looks new. In the past, I've only seen Apple on the side of "no DRM" -- now it seems they would be willing to implement DRM if it were done in a way that doesn't interfere with the user experience?
Just an observation.
-- Ken Kinder ken@_nospam_kenkinder.com http://kenkinder.com/
``if the content is locked out of the Mac for that reason, do I really want it anyway?''
Maybe not if you're an idealist. The vast majority wants the content for the content, not because it does or doesn't work on Macs.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
This whole Movielink thing suffers one point: digital video will (probably) always be either a) large, or b) low quality. Broadband has caught on to a large degree, but not as large as anyone thought it would, and certainly not enough for the huge streaming video boom that was supposed to happen. This means that while I'm not exactly sure which choice Movielink will make, either it will take 80% US users a day and a half to download a movie, or it will be so poor quality that their is no motivation not to go rent from Hollywood Video down the road. The only people who can't drive under 15 minutes to a local video rental store are almost certainly operating on 56k or less (except for those towns offering their own DSL ;-)). In either case, fine. I'll be just happy going to Mom & Pop's Video Store down the road and renting the new LOTR DVD to watch on my PowerBook.
--- What
Funny you should choose the IPod icon for this article. That is the tool of choice for all Apple Hackers.
Visit your local Mac friendly store and get a free copies of software! All by dragging it off the disk onto your firewire enabled Ipod!
Talk about user friendly! No wonder they only worry about getting $$$'s for hardware.
-S
We Apprentice Developers and Designers
in another news, book publishers association has banned selling books to people who can write or type. "once you can type, you can copy a book and sell or share a pirated book", says one of the top publisher spokesperson on condition of anonymity. this means, many internet book publishers will not be able to sell the books to people who are not using voice interactive browsers like IE. they would only be allowed to place order via voice, including credit card information. in another news, USA has banned teaching writing in schools. "Writing will only be taught on need basis in advanced courses", says LA school board district administrator.
I'm sure there are plenty of "big picture" reasons why this is bad - no mac support for other stuff like encrypted CDs, etc - but I'm going to ignore those for now and continue to be narrow-minded about this, since it's Monday and you can't stop me. To me, this article is like saying "Divx not supported on macs" - it will be met with a resounding chorus of "so what?"
(No, not that Divx. The original one. Who was the jackass that thought it would be a good idea to name a codec after the Circuit City fiasco, anyway?)
Don't steal the music.
That's it.
This is industry propaganda - they "want" to support the Macintosh, but they "can't" due to the "limited availability of Mac software".
Or, perhaps we could re-phrase their double-speak:
"We don't like Apple's attitude. Therefore, we're going to hose their customers... not by saying that Apple is wrong, but by saying that the Mac platform is poorly supported by the software industry! Heh, that'll learn them".
Again, the customers are in the middle.... between the computer industry, which has a disdain for controlling their customers and industry self-overregulation, and the "DRM" industry, whose only purpose is to control customers.
Since Apple was technically correct in their claims, the DRM folk could only counter by kicking Apple between the legs.
Let's read this article and it's topic as it should be - a power-play by the DRM industry, against Apple's ideal of fully supporting it's customer base.
Who knows, but I expect some people will try and figure out a way around it anyway. Look at how much effort has been put into cracking QuickTime in order to allow Linux users to watch .... adverts? Trailors and Apple ads basically. So I guess the answer is whether people want content or not isn't really related to the technology used.
What about the fact that nobody outside of the US can even SEE the site?
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn
...as long as Sony, AOL/Time Warner, etc will allow it to...
Well this fits with Apple's Switch campaign. After all when Ellen Feiss is inspired (by whatever means) to combine her DVD of The Wizard of Oz with a particular Pink Floyd score she has on CD. She won't be pleased when her Mac beeps at her telling her that Sony won't let her rip the CD, and Time Warner won't let her copy their film...
After all if your whole marketing ploy is that people can use your computer to do what they think they should be able to do and do it easily; then you would want them to be able to exercize their "Fair Use" rights.
credo quia absurdum
Apple is going to come under pressure from its own customers to include support for this stuff. If we want them to stay on the high road and not curb consumer's rights, we need to tell them, both in words and with our wallets when possible. The same goes for any company that takes a similar stance. It may behoove you to go to their feedback page and tell them what you think, before they become convinced that nobody cares.
shutting them out of a legit service will fight p2p how? ;/
"We didn't want to go through all of the waste of creating compatiblity with a minority of users running Apple (or Linux for that matter). So, we will use this as an opportunity to forward our own issues and blame it on a lack of suitable DRM. So, we'll deflect the issue, and advance one of our own goals at the same time."
so? Doesn't work with linux either does it? who cares? apple, stick to your guns.
-
The real question that is likely to be answered is
"Do Americans care more about the freedoms for which hundreds of thousands of their forfather's died, or the Bread and Circuses Hollywood offers?"
In truth, the question will likely become more generic when this dreck is exported to the rest of the world:
"Will people care more about the bread and Circuses America's Hollywood offers them, or the freedoms they, their parents, and their grandparents have died trying to secure for them?"
Depressingly, the former will likely fall into the "Take away any liberties you like, but don't take away my Seinfeld!" here in the states. However, with hardware made in Taiwan and GNU/Linux displacing Windows in governments (and to some degree on the street) in most of the non-American world, the answer the rest of the world gives to the question will be very intersting, and I suspect a very rude surprise to the copyright cartels of New York and Hollywood, and those software and hardware purveyors that kowtow to them.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
The story could have been writen about Linux as well. No DRM and plenty of tools for fooling around with audio and video. Bet the studios don't like us either.
This is what consumers want. Everytime business puts barriers to entertainment in front of consumers, they bypass it. People really, really like to be entertained and will go to some outlandish methods to obtain it -- Gladiators anyone?I like Apple's philosphy towards DRM, its a social issue not a technology issue. "Don't steal Music!" as it said on the sticker on my iPod.
This is no biggie for Apple. Just remember:
1) How long does it take to download a film than to drive to Blockbuster and get a DVD?
2) Would you rather watch a film on a 27" TV or a 17" Computer Monitor?
3) Apple has no DRM! You computer is free to read and write what you want! Its like Linux except it has a usable desktop environment and has great consumer apps...iMovie anyone?
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
Again: FUCK 'EM. Let them go bankrupt without my help.
sulli
RTFJ.
also from the article: But Mac choices for file swapping are severely limited compared to options for the PC. Two of the most popular services--Kazaa and Morpheus--do not support the Mac in their latest versions.
so the article is saying that there will be no movies for mac because there's no DRM on mac, and people could copy the movies, burn them to DVDs, upload them onto a windows machine, and put them on P2P networks??
silly hollywood.
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
The problem with DRM is that both parties do not necessarily want to keep it (the movie, song, etc) a secret. DRM technology attempts to create a high enough incentive for the customer to want to keep it a secret. So far nothing has been able to do this.
Stuart Eichert
DRM is only effective at keeping good, computer-confused citizens from using their computers to their full potentials.
Good IP thiefs will remain good IP thiefs indefinately.
Want to copy a DRM'd song? Wire the speaker-out to the line-in on another computer and record it as a Wav, then MP3 it. Want to copy a DRM'd video? Use a camcorder. Or better yet. Use one of those video cards that sends it to a VCR, DVD-R, or HI-8, and record the video output from the screen. Seriously, DRM will not work against pirates, and only serves to prevent legitimate users from using to their full potential.
And I spend months of my life prostituting myself working on this bunk..........
Karma: Not Particularly Funny.
Apple needs to do whatever it takes to "get 'em while they're young."
"DOS Computers manufactured by companies such as IBM, Compaq, Tandy, and millions of others are by far the most popular, with about 70 million machines in use worldwide. Macintosh fans, on the other hand, may note that cockroaches are far more numerous than humans, and that numbers alone do not denote a higher life form." - New York Times, November 26, 1991
About 2weeks before Movielink files for Chapter 13.....
\/\/oobie
One that has already appeared this year for some is the absence of Mac support for CFLIX, a content distribution model on college campuses. There is no Mac support because they use Windows Media for its DRM support, and the Mac WMP application does not support a server redirect (to balance traffic) like they do. It's a lose-lose situation....but I've already dealt with this before.
>to the poor people.
And the USSR doesn't exist anymore because people need freedom. I hope the same thing will happen to MS.
But, I see a lot of occidental democraty becaning to be another USSR.
Ceci n'est pas une Signature !
In other news, the USSR provided free bread only to the poor people.
Wait, I'm getting free bread from Apple?
That's what all this DRM crap is about. For everytime that dumbass companies try to keep music/video/pictures/etc, the 'net culture has 10 ways to get around it.
Been a Mac user since my Mac SE. One thing I've gotten used to is the fact that popular software usually comes out years later, if ever, for the Mac platform. And then only after sending repeated e-mails to the developers to let them know there's interest. Yeah, it's frustrating. Yes, it's sad. But that's what I put up with to stay with the platform of my choice.
Audible did it right by apple - you can buy their files from audible.com (and they're CHEAP ;), download 'em to your Mac and (get this): play them anywhere! You can play 'em on an iPod (or other MP3 player), play 'em on your mac or even burn 'em to CDs. You can make backups. You can transfer to different media. It's a proprietary audio format, sure, but one so transparent that the only thing it prevents you from doing is filesharing it. I mean, you can, but it won't work without your login and password. It seems like the perfect system to me: You wouldn't think of sharing it because it won't work anyway, but what's the point when what you want is cheap, easy to get and freely portable?
DRM can work for all concerned, in a way that doesn't violate anyone's rights and stil pays the artists. Why hasn't anyone else tried this?
Triv
Darn... now I have to watch movies with my DVD player. Oh, the agony! (Give me a break...)
;)
But really... DRM is something I'm glad it isn't on my Mac. Restrictions like that keep me *away* from Windows and steer my preference to MacOS X and Linux/*BSD.
But doesn't "Digital Rights Management" sound nice and happy? My guess is Joe average consumer hears that and go "Ooo, my rights are being protected online! I want that!" Anyway that's what popped into my mind when I saw that option in WMP, but I know better.
~Seth
this is my sig
Wait til Palladium. When the rest of the world snubs your platform/OS... then what are you going to do?
...And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me." - Martin Niemoeller (1892-1984)
This story is 100% bullshit. None of the pay-for-stale_media services has ever worked out. Yet, this article touts that these services are the wave of the future...?! Its not news to call listen-per-pay the future.. its and damn lie.
So the RIAA approves a few crippled download services and the MPAA approves a few crippled download services... so what? Its been done before... failures of Biblical proportions. Why didn't they report that?
In the real world, DVD's are open media (thanks to our friend who's paying for it with his freedom)... and what's going on in the world of DVD sales?
DVD sales are making them money hand over fist.. they can't buy enough trucks to take the money to the bank fast enough.
This story is bullshit because it doesn't note that 1/2 of the protection was taken off of a DVD last year in a underreported coup.. and what happend? Hary Potter.. which was both un-Macrovisioned AND was on the P2P nets long before the theatrical release became the biggest selling DVD of all time..
from the article..."[the iMac] also has a large contingent of early adopters, who likely would be interested in trying out technologies such as video on demand. "
That is not news... that is bullshit.
note to c|net... those iMac adopters can ALREADY watch Harry Potter, you NONCES!. They bought the open media format on DVD and are already watching it! Do you have to practice to be this stupid?
the real truth will be found out in the next 5 years.. who will proseper - open media or crippled formats? The trending up of DVD sales and the trending down of CD sales... which are being more and more crippled each day. Or the new cripple-ware services....
I'm putting my money on the open media standards....
What the article also doesn't do a good enough job of it pointing out WHY Final Cut Pro, TiBooks and linux renderfarms are the darling of Hollywood.. and all content creators....
The reason is.. they are not DRM-crippled.
Damnit... it should be against the law to call your site news.com when you are nothing but Microsoft and now, DRM shills... with no actual desire to report news.
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
According to the Terms of Use you need to download the Movielink Manager Software to use the service. Is there any reason why they couldn't just port this software for Mac, without breaking their DRM schema? Does the Windows operating system offer any inherent advantage to DRM over Apple, or is this just a political statement?
Every piece of software produced for mass consumption is initially for the PC because that is where the mass comsumption is. What's his name Skilling or Shill of something like that wants Apple to buy something from them or has some kind of business motive. Nuf said.
NAME: Casillas, Luis E-MAIL: casillas@stanford.edu, em@adequacy.org ALIASES: em, Estanislao Martinez, Sylvain Tremblay
NAME: Corrigan, Barry E-MAIL: barry@bjcorrigan.fsnet.co.uk, bc@adequacy.org ALIASES: bc, ktb (Kiss the Blade), Lover's Arrival, Euroderf, Erbert Paget-Paget, Anya
NAME: Dickson, Craig E-MAIL: crd@inversenet.com, mendaxveritas@yahoo.com, mendaxveritas@pacbell.net ALIASES: mv, Mendax Veritas
NAME: Flickinger, Dan E-MAIL: flikx@geekizoid.com ALIASES: flikx
NAME: Haberberger, George E-MAIL: ghaberbe@frontiernet.net, George.Haberberger@usa.xerox.com ALIASES: GeorgeHa, Hairy_Potter
NAME: Johnson, Peter E-MAIL: peter.johnson@voicestream.com, shoeboy@adequacy.org ALIASES: Shoeboy, Peter Johnson
NAME: Lockwood, Scott E-MAIL: wsl3@attbi.com, vlad@geekizoid.com ALIASES: Vladinator, Lonesome Cowboy Burt, Quick Star, Pinkerton Floyd, etc.
NAME: Linwood, Rob E-MAIL: rcl@cs.csoft.net, rcl211@is9.nyu.edu ALIASES: AuntFloyd, Con Troll
NAME: Mann, Warren E-MAIL: broken@warmann.com ALIASES: osm, OpenSourceMan
NAME: McPherson, Craig E-MAIL: craig@laceyonline.com ALIASES: craig, naked&petrified guy
NAME: Nelson, Brian E-MAIL: elenchos@adequacy.org ALIASES: Elenchos
NAME: Osborne, Michaell E-MAIL: osborm@yahoo.com, dmg@adequacy.org, michaellosborne@netscapeonline.co.uk ALIASES: dmg, Dumb Marketing Guy, Lord Hugh Toppingham
NAME: Sassaman, Esther E-MAIL: esther@antioch.edu, perdida@adequacy.org, reva_altamira@yahoo.com ALIASES: Perdida, Reva Altamira, etc.
NAME: Skinner, James E-MAIL: spiralx@spazmail.com, spiralx@adequacy.org ALIASES: SpiralX, Manifold, Jon Erikson
NAME: Stanton, Matt E-MAIL: matt@madeforchina.com, serf@adequacy.org ALIASES: Serf
NAME: Zikowski, Zachary E-MAIL: zikzak@io.com, zikzak@adequacy.org ALIASES: Zikzak, kp
NAME: ???, Ernie E-MAIL: trollmastah@hotmail.com ALIASES: Trollmastah
The lameness filter makes it impossible to post this in any sort of aesthetically-pleasing format. To paraphrase Final Fantasy Tactics, "Blame yourself or Rob!"
I just tried it on a doze box and the damn site wouldn't accept my creditcard. (I hope it's cause of the site and not the NSF : -)
1) Listen to what customers want 2) Create a product around their customers' desires 3) ????? 4) PROFIT!!!!!
Just to let you guys know, I'm in canada on shaw cable, yet I've found a US proxy that lets me user Movielink (at least the base site, haven't streamed a movie yet). Go to http://tools.rosinstrument.com/cgi-bin/fp.pl/showl ines?lines=100&sortor=3 and use the info for the 24.171.... proxy. BTW, I guess this may only work on the 24.* subnets, but at least that's a lot/most of Cable-connected canada :-)
With the number of producer wannabees, and the poor quality of pro studio films, I expect the film (and music) industrie(s) will be feeling the heat from free media alternatives within a few years.
Enjoy your copyrights!
Gene Davis
www.genedavis.com
isn't linux drm-free as well?
Apple has also fallen behind the PC pack in popular music file-trading software
Err... they won't support Mac because Rights Restrictions aren't native... meanwhile, Mac users are at the bottom of the P2P curve. LOL.
help me i've cloned myself and can't remember which one I am
DRM simply will NEVER work. If a DRM'd movie can be seen on a computer screen, the video can be captured. If the DRM'd sound file from a movie or CD can be heard on a computer speaker, the audio can be captured. Steve Jobs mentioned that an upcoming version of iTunes would be able to play MP3's from another Mac over a network but not be savable. That too has already been beaten. A program for Mac OS X called "Audio Hijack" can be found on Versiontracker (http://www.versiontracker.com/macosx/) that STEALS audio from any program you specify from an Audio Hijack file dialog box. Audio Hijack then saves the file to a location you specify in AIFF format. I've used it and it works very well.
The proliferation of the digital lifestyle has educated the masses and produced many a nerd/geek. It isn't difficult to write these programs to capture audio once one knows the inards of an OS like Mac OS X. Audio Hijack clearly exemplifies this. The audio at some point has to converted from digital to analog, and capturing it on its way to the speaker doesn't seem to be problematic. And once the keys to Palladium are leaked/stolen/misused by some programmer who was wronged by a lame-ass company, the program would lie to the OS indicating the customer paid for the content. Hence DRM will NEVER work.
The bottom line is that if it can be seen or heard, then it can be stolen and reproducible. The best DRM is to think of a movie or song and never make it/release it.
I don't think anyone's forefathers died for the freedom to steal films or music. So the fact that DRM is coming has nothing to do with "freedom", in any sane sense of that word.
"without interfering with the experience of consumers have not yet been invented".
...etc...). Right now there isn't a foolproof method of DRM, that doesn't affect a user's fair use of copyrighted material.
Amen! Thank god a computer manufacturer is finally thinking of the consumers that use it's products, rather then trying to make alliances with the *AA crowd (RIAA/MPAA, movielink,
I want my rights back. I was actually using them when our government stole them after 9/11.
This is all rather besides the point. Even if Apple doesn't provide system-level DRM, application-level DRM works just fine in the formats MovieLink is using (RealMedia and Windows Media). And Windows, while they talk about system-level DRM eventually with Palladium, doesn't have it either today.
So, whatever MovieLink might claim is their reason, they aren't technical. They probably don't want to do it for marketshare reasons, and are using Apple's DRM statements (which are really rather mild) as an excuse/flogging horse.
My video compression blog
P2P distribution is a hassle and selection is limited. On-demand movie services just need to become cheap and convenient enough that consumers are willing to pay for the convenience. Then DRM isn't needed.
Apple's in a hard-spot with the studios because:
1) It doesn't support DRM, which doesn't work anyway, and already has an inherently limited market - the DMCA only applies to the U.S., so DRM stuff outside the U.S. might be legally hackable elsewhere.
and...
2) Macs somehow suck because Mac users can only use LimeWire if they want to steal software, and because you can't have Morpheus or Kaazaa to install spyware on your machine... while you steal software? The author is terribly confused. I sincerely doubt that Hollywood considers the lack of software that, in their view enables piracy, to be a disadvantage to the Mac. If they *do* they're idiots.
The idea of Movielink sounds destined for death anyway, at least until I have a nice fat data pipe into my house that costs fifty bucks a month.
all software is equal, but some software is more equal.
-- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
Anyone know what the best webpage or email addy at Apple is for this kind of feedback? Standard "feedback" webpages are usually about "how do you like our site?" or will go to a customer-service person who thinks "oh, that's nice" and moves on, since there's no complaint or problem that they have to resolve.
"We don't like Apple's attitude. Therefore, we're going to hose their customers... not by saying that Apple is wrong, but by saying that the Mac platform is poorly supported by the software industry! Heh, that'll learn them".
A more likely interpretation, in my opinion:
"We don't have the technical competence to even attempt to support macintosh users, and we can't be bothered or can't afford to spend even a nominal sum on researching how this would be done, so we're going to pretend this is apple's fault somehow."
It's the same principle as when a cat runs headlong into a wall and then walks off nonchalantly in an attempt to pretend that it did that on purpose, and it is very common in the world of macintosh software ports. See also "half-life".
(My first guess at an interpretation was going to be "We locked ourselves in to a propeitary, windows-only solution for streaming our movies, and we're going to pretend that it's apple's fault that we're short-sighted and don't care about marginal markets.", but that apparently isn' the case as they're using WMP and RealPlayer, both of which are available for the mac!)
IIRC, either Kazaa or Morpheus or both collect info on the user's surfing habits and report them. I don't know how easy it is to make this work on the Mac, especially on OS X. Perhaps the problems in collecting this info are part of the reason to not port these?
Software DRM may always be hackable, but hardware DRM could be a much tougher nut to crack.
"Depressingly, the former will likely fall into the "Take away any liberties you like, but don't take away my Seinfeld!" here in the states. However, with hardware made in Taiwan and GNU/Linux displacing Windows in governments (and to some degree on the street) in most of the non-American world, the answer the rest of the world gives to the question will be very intersting, and I suspect a very rude surprise to the copyright cartels of New York and Hollywood, and those software and hardware purveyors that kowtow to them."
Maybe, but more out of nationalistic pride than "we dislike DRM". Remember the US isn't the only place that produces content. Also the US isn't the only place that has people "borrowing" content. As well as the US isn't the only place that has companies that don't like the loss of income resulting from it. People are people regardless of geography, and the consequences of that fact, respect no boundaries.
Some technical points on Mac DRM:
m 7/ drm/offering.asp
Windows Media for MacOS only supports WM DRM v1, which only supports the older WMV7 codec, not the WMV8 MovieLink is using. Presumably they're using DRM 7.1 (7.0 was cracked). However, MovieLink will run on Windows 98, which doesn't support the Secure Audio Path, so there isn't a huge technical DRM difference here.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/w
Real's subscription service is available for MacOS X with the full functionality of Windows, so their DRM is presumably feature complete cross-platform. And I believe for Linux as well, but I haven't checked.
My video compression blog
Unless I misread when I visited the site, it's pretty obvious that the DRM functions are part of the player software, not the operating system.
IM(NS)HO, somebody in control was "convinced" to use some proprietary code that uses a lot of obscure Windows API calls or is "tuned" for Windows in some way or the other.
The only reason they don't have a Mac version is because they were too lazy to design it platform independent in the first place.
Or perhaps the fact that the data is downloaded to the hard drive means somebody will be cracking the scheme soon. And perhaps they don't want to have to "fix" more than one version when that happens.
Nothing to do with DRM built into the OS for sure.
P.S. Quicktime has had DRM capability for as long as I remember - it's called "Media Keys".
And except that it's not free as in speech, free as in beer, or portable to non-Apple hardware. No easier, really, than saying "it's like Windows except that it has no DRM, it's based on BSD, it doesn't have as many games, and it doesn't run on commodity hardware." Or maybe we ought to just say "there are three different desktop OSes out there, each with a whole list of advantages and disadvantages." I don't think any one of them is any more like any other. They're different. Different aspects will be important to different people, and you're not going to change a Linux fanatic into a Mac fanatic by saying "they're really similar," because the core philosophies are totally different.
I'd also take issue with your assertion that Linux does not have a usable desktop environment. It may not be a brilliant desktop environment. It may not be your preferred desktop environment. You may even consider it a sub-par desktop environment. However, it is quite usable.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
Are we really losing anything is my question? Who wants to spend 3 bucks to download a 700mb file of crappy video? Even with the fastest broadband it is still going to take a hour or two to download the thing. I don't know about a lot of people but I don't want to watch a movie on my computer anyway. I want to watch it on my 52" HDTV.
No thanks. When I want to rent a movie I will just pick it up at blockbusters.
Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification
So, of course, it wasn't mp3, or mpeg, or realaudio. It was the Liquid Audio format...
I downloaded and installed the player, which runs under classic a-ok, until you actually try to play the files. Upon searching, it is explicitly incompatible with MacOS X, as are the RealPlayer plugins to listen to the files as well. There are no alternative players. In reading a bit more, I also found that Microsoft bought all of the intellectual property rights from the creators of Liquid Audio in September, so now the task of writing a player for MacOS X falls into their lap...
Fair use rights...? What are those? I paid money for this song, and can't listen to it. In speaking to cdnow's customer service, they informed me that I needed to get the proper player for my operating system. This was in reply to my saying "There isn't a player for OS X."
So, Mac users, linux users, BSD users, and the rest of the gang unfortunately get it up the poop chute when it comes to DRM-based media. I paid for a song and couldn't listen to it, as the DRM won't let me! I'd be more bitter about my lack-of-refund if I didn't get the song 10 minutes afterwards from my local friendly P2P clients... at a much higher bitrate, too... If getting things LEGALLY were as easy as getting them pirated, maybe people wouldn't be stealing so much music, eh?
-agent oranje.
Do you throw it thru a store window, then run inside and steal CDs and games?
If Apple includes DRM, they lose sales (especially the 'Alpha Geek' crowd who are flocking to Macs for OSX, and more importantly, *me*). If they don't include it, moronic sites like this try to block Macs as a whiny political protest against Apple's free will.
If the customer has to go against his ethical code to own some movie he could just buy at the corner store anyway, is it really worth it? I've always bought all my media stuff in 'real' versions, and I'll keep doing that. Downloading movies ain't really practical on a 33.6 faxmodem... And watching them on a computer screen, even the superfine TiBook LCD, just can't beat my Sony bigscreen, and pisses off the missus to no end.
This is merely another example of Windows-based coders ignoring the rest of the world, just with a politically-correct excuse this time. I'm still waiting for Counterstrike on the Mac, btw. Not gonna happen? Fine. I don't plonk, I boycott. Me and my friends present our 'boycott list' to each other every week and then try to kill sales. Good fun, and plotting goes great with chicken wings and beer.
And when Movielink fails in 6 months, as it probably will, the studios will inevitably find a scapegoat besides their own stubborn stupidity. Probably piracy, hackers, or muslim terrorists, despite the fact that they've been refusing customers and have a bad dotcom-like business plan. Stupid.
And this article tries very hard to make the Macs' nearly complete lack of DRM sound like *A Very Bad Thing*. AS IF. Nice spin, Big Brother. Freedom is Slavery. Good is evil, evil is good. Trust Big Brother.
BlackBolt
They have it all covered. At the bottom of anything that mentions iTunes it says "Don't steal music."
Who is going to disobey that?
part of the crossover plugin windows media player instalation....
Of course, the website tells me I need to be on a Windows machine all the same.
"The Most Fun Possible on 4 wheels" is at SunBuggy in Las Vegas
What liberties? You must be joking. Free speech in your precious USA was done in by Wee-Willy Clinton back in '98 and your privacy left last year when the Trade Center collapsed. Sorry to be the first to tell ya son.
"Apple invented the best DRM scheme to date. It's a transparent sticker aposed on all iPods. It's says :
Don't steal the music."
That's a great idea, I think. I very much support Apple on this. They're really saying that theft of music is a social problem, whereas the (RI|MP)AA tends to think it's a technology problem.
Look, if I _WANT_ to steal (books|music|movies|software), I'm going to steal them. When I first ripped my own MP3s, I actually played back the CD on my computer and recorded it to a wave (and got some ambient noise from the microphone, to my dismay). I then ran an MP3 encoder over each wave file. In retrospect, this was an extraordinary amount of work; at the time, however, it was well worth it - I didn't have to switch CDs every time I wanted to listen to Everlong.
There will always be a way to crack the high-tech (or low-tech in high-tech clothing), even if the solution results in loss of quality. I can always setup a microphone to record the sound from my speakers. The question is, how much of this crap will people put up with before they stop supporting these Draconian conglomerates? I haven't bought a new CD in at least two years because of this crap.
Do YOU vote with your wallet?
A piece of music I composed was used in a radio piece on NPR, but sadly, NPR only provides RealAudio files for download online. Now, I hate RealAudio, and wanted a nice mp3 for archival purposes, so thanks to AudioHijack, I now have such a copy. The beautiful thing is that I was within my rights to do this, as my original composition was licensed as linked, thus allowing me to absorb anything that the piece is used in for re-use. Provided, of course, I realize that whatever I re-use is also covered by same said license.
- Eat it.
As mentioned by others, any content that is meant to be viewed or heard can never be secure to the point that piracy can't happen. It would be naive to think that Hollywood isn't aware of that, what they want to control are the channels by which a consumer pays for the content. If you can get the consummer to pay for the content in several different ways without allowing them to reuse content across formats and viewing mediums, then you stand to make more money.
I bought a Mac a year ago and love it. Before that it was PCs and linux. Does anyone have a link to a good person in Apple (not necessarily SJobs) I can email? We need to tell them we CARE about Apple's stance on DRM and we use them because of Apple's support for consumers rather than for big companies.
Apple is feeling A LOT of pressure from companies and others with "power". It needs to hear from its customers that they'll keep buying because its still open. It might not be GNU'd like Linux, but it is certainly more open.
I hope Apple can withstand the increasing pressure for DRM and whatever else over time.
Macs are broken or bad BECAUSE they don't support DRM. The average consumer just has to be confused enough for this to make them stick with M$.
iTunes 3.0 has built in support for audible.com content. It even requires you to have an account with audible.com to access the recordings.
Isn't this a pretty good indicator that Apple is willing to embrace DRM?
-- "The reward of suffering is experience." - Aeschylus
OK, #1, how do you know that his computer's bad? Maybe his TV's just even better. And, #2, do you define "bad" as "doesn't have a huge screen and incredible speakers"? I sure don't. I would say that having those things would be a big bonus, but it's silly to say that one's computer is bad because one's television is better for watching movies. I mean, what the heck's a TV for , after all?
Also, just because your computer is big, has good speakers, and is in a comfortable location doesn't mean that everyone has your fortune. I imagine there are more people (and more Mac owners) who use their TV as their primary media viewing station than their computer.
Just a little dose of perspective...
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
It doesn't, does it? That's still years in the future, right?
So what exactly are these people talking about?
This is precisely why I should support the platform which does without silly DRM garbage. When it starts being imbedded in hardware I will do my utmost to NOT use the features. The last time I watched a movie (not even on a computer) has been several months hence all this is hogwash. The quality of films has to go up before I even think of trading my computing freedoms for some movie flick.
Please stop this DRM misinformation. DRM does not stand for "Digital Rights Management" it stands for "Digital Restriction Mechanisms". This mistake has been circulating around the internet for several years now and its about time its corrected. People's opinions are being tainted by this blunder as "Rights Management" sounds like a good idea. If you don't want people to accuse you of spreading RIAA FUD please stop propagating this name.
Apple computers feature DRM-free environments, Palladium is a non-DRM free environment. which sounds better?
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Free speech in your precious USA was done in by Wee-Willy Clinton back in '98
The U.S. Congress passed both the DMCA and the Bono Act by "unanimous consent" aka "voice vote", a measure that requires the support of 81 percent of each house. (The Constitution provides that 20 percent opposition can force a roll-call vote.) The President can veto a bill, but it only takes 67 percent of each house to override the veto. So even if then-President Clinton had vetoed the DMCA, it wouldn't have made much difference.
Will I retire or break 10K?
ooh big loss...NOT! All your missing is the chance to over pay for low quality video that takes and hour or two to download. Rent the DVD it's cheaper, better quality, and you don't have to wait for the damn download.
I jumped the boat two years ago. So I didn't pay $300 to upgrade from NT 5.0 to NT 5.1, and I upgraded neither.
Which means that while you do have the right to murder me in my sleep or burn a hole through my burners, you do not have the right to pull my plug.
Am I still bound by the agreement after I ceremonially burn every last copy of winshit (3.51 and 1.0 included)?
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
Get it together. Are we already so besotted with the dreck this industry calls entertainment that we cannot imagine saying no?
illegitimii non ingravare
My computer is in the home office, although I sometimes pop my laptop open on the couch. I got two couches and a chair around the home theater. I watch DVDs, because there isn't enough easily accessible HD Content, but DVDs are decent. DivX is unwatchable, sorry. I think its great that you love you 21"/23" monitor, whatever.
I had an HTPC hooked up to my system, wasn't worth the trouble. However, your computer can't compare to a reasonable home theater system.
Projectors can be powered via computer, terrific. If you are blowing it up on a projector, you're NOT going to want DivX or other crap. You're going to want a MINIMUM of DVD quality, to minimize the MPEG artifacts.
An HTPC can power a projector quite nicely (there was a Yamaha that I fell in love with at Tweeter, but can't justify dropping $10k on it...), scaling video from DVDs up to 720p, etc., but it doesn't change the fact that you are customizing a computer to serve as AV equipment.
Sorry, but a cheap 27" television, w/ mediocre DVD player, and a low-low-low end surround sound system (we're talking $500 total) is going to blow away watching a computer monitor with "AWESOME" computer speakers.
A reasonable HT system ($5k-$10k, so midrange) really blows it away, and the good systems are even more impressive.
Alex
Or better yet. Use one of those video cards that sends it to a VCR, DVD-R, or HI-8, and record the video output from the screen.
The DMCA states that in addition to it being illegal to defeat transformation-based copy protection (i.e. encryption), it's also illegal to defeat Macrovision's analog video copy protection systems.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Is there any reason why they couldn't just port this software for Mac, without breaking their DRM schema? Does the Windows operating system offer any inherent advantage to DRM over Apple
Under Windows, it's possible to draw DirectShow video to a DirectDraw surface that no other program can read. That handles the video side.
Under Windows, if a driver is not signed by Microsoft with Secure Audio Path permissions, Windows Media Player will not play copy-protected audio over it. Microsoft won't sign a driver unless it refuses to mix Secure Audio Path signals into its cleartext digital outputs. This plugs the Total Recorder hole on the audio side.
I don't believe that Mac OS X has either of those features. But then, I haven't looked into Mac API since OS 8, so I'm probably mistaken. Anybody?
Will I retire or break 10K?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Some will say the sacrifice is nothing to them, because Freedom is more important. Others will disagree, but bear the burden. And other people will choose to not be Mac users at all, and will give themselves to the dark lord in Redmond instead.
And that is when the people at Apple will have to decide whether to give their customers what they want (ability to play with the mainstream) or give their customers what they want (remain free of this stupidity).
I remember the last time Mac users wanted to play with the mainstream. Apple got a license from the DVDCCA and now their machines come with DVD player software, which works ... in an arbitrarily-crippled manner, in accordance with DVDCCA's wishes.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
In other news, the USSR provided free bread only to the poor people.
What does that mean? I dont get it.
Why stick up for big business?
They are locking out Macs because Macs are less than 2% of computers and they can't be bothered to port their software to OS X. Can't say I blame them; everyone is cutting costs nowadays.
The Movielink people are interested in making the most amount of money possible, as quickly as possible. Since Windows (various flavours) has such a huge market share, most developers interested in making a quick buck will only develop their software or service for Windows.
Platforms like Mac OS or Linux lose out in the quick-bucks scheme because their market share is so small that it's not profitable to provide the service to those people.
I don't think the argument is really about DRM - it's about the cost-effectiveness of developing anything for low-market-share operating systems.
I wish only the best luck to any business that wants to exclude me (and others on the same platform I have) from its pool of potential customers. They will need all the luck they can get if that's their approach.
And if being excluded from surrogate couch-potato activities like this is the price I pay for owning a machine and OS that isn't tainted by shortsighted DRM concepts, then so be it. It's more than worth it to me. Besides, when I sit down at my computer, I do so to work or to absorb information or to communicate. On the rare occasion that I want to veg, I do it in from the TV anyway. I think these business ventures of delivering entertainment via the Internet are bizarre. Do people really want to use their computers and the Internet as a TV/cinema substitute?
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
So movielink is ignoring mac users - should I be surprised? Maybe they are specifically shunning us for lack of DRM, but it's just as likely they wouldn't have bothered developing for the platform anyway since it's a smaller market. To say nothing of Microsoft pressure. This could just be a cheap, convinient jab on their part. And a meaningless one at that, since this service is a few dollars too expensive and a few years too early for anyone.
If there's one thing Mac users are used to, it's getting locked out of content. Realplayer and windows media player took forever to make it to Mac OS and then Mac OS X. Every codec in development always makes it to the mac platform last, often long after it's available for Windows.
DivX:) AVIs still aren't supported properly even with the codecs, because Quicktime still can't handle variable bitrate AVI audio (a problem people have been complaining about for years now) - which is not part of the official AVI standard but is nonetheless the defacto standard for this supposedly obsolete but nonetheless popular format.
As far as know, content is something you fight for. The only solution that even comes close to no-hassle, no-conversion, no-wait playback is the cross-platform Video Lan Client, although it has a lousy interface. Thank god for OS X, which tied us into the *nix community, which has many of the exact same problems.
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
I know I speak for alot of Mac users when I say the day Apple implements DRM in Macs, is the day I stop using them forever and move on to another platform. Apple knows they're dead if they do. The Mac is about freedom to think and create and when those rights are taken away, its no longer a Mac.
CDE open sourced! https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/
Hmmmm... y'know, I really don't need to download that copy of Ocean's Eleven from Movielink. I think I'll make my own movie instead. Or should I make my own photo album? Or write some original music? Wow, so many choices...
Visit me on the web at Permanent4.com.
I wonder if the lack of poor quality MPEGs will inspire Mac OS X users to go out and create their own content? After all - if you have the tools such as iMovie, the iLink video camera, a little creativity and some time (since you're not wasting time watching movies you've already seen), it's not too hard to imagine you'd at least experiment with making a movie, is it?
No doubt when you've made your movie, you'll share it with your housemate. What about the rest of the world?
Imagine when Gnutella is full of home-made movies - we'll have an entire community based around producing, viewing and critiquing home-made movies. Maybe one day we'll have a "Videoforge" component of the OSDN network?
Perhaps I'm being a little too optimistic, but I expect that between the affordablility of production equipment, the ease of use of Apple's movie making software, and the lack of conventient alternatives, we'll see many more independent movie artists flexing their wings.
Freedom to write code. Code is a form of expression. DRM makes certain code illegal, *no matter how you use that code*. When such code becomes essential (e.g. DRM hard drives) expressions like Linux effectively become illegal.
Gutenberg
Project
http://www.gutenberg.org
I was like all for the freedom thing, but then someone told me that it wasn't free and that the price was something outrageous like eternal vigilance or something. That's crazy! I mean who needs that when I can watch 'Friends' for free and 'Legally Blonde' at Blockbuster for $4?!?
C'mon, the founding fathers should have thought their marketing plan through a little bit better. Instead of having you pay this big long term fee, they should have made it more a la carte. For example, give the base freedom of the right to breath away for free. Then every month you would get the chance to get an additional freedom by paying a small fee. People would pay extra for the right to speak, the right to pursue happiness, etc, etc. It's quite different than what most are used to, but remember they only pay for what they use and they can the stop the program at any time. And if they act during one of the infomercials, they can get the right to read the freedom EULA free, just for being a loyal customer. How great is that!
Artist's rights != DRM, and for that matter, copyright infringement != piracy. The corpos love to hear people use and perpetuate these terms, because they can use them as leverage to manipulate how the public views and treats such concepts.
Re: artist's rights, I'm fine with artists getting paid for what they do. I'd go so far as to venture a guess that most other people are fine with it too.
What I'm not okay with is being treated like a criminal every time I buy an overpriced CD, the profits from which go to fund more research into ensuring that I am treated like a criminal more effectively. Ineffective legislators, greedy content distributors, Hollywood-sympathetic tech companies, artists who need to eat (face it, superstars are rare, and some of the best music comes from people who would eschew that lifestyle anyway), and general customers disgusted with the prices of CDs (the file-sharers) are equally responsible for the current state of affairs.
< tofuhead >
It is still the dark of night.
Most of you have missed the point. The point is, Movielink cannot legally RENT movies to mac users because they have no mechanism to make the file expire after a week or so. I said months ago this would be a problem when everyone was cheering about Macs not using DRM. This is not unexpected.
Vote for Pedro
As a mac user, I must say I don't care all that much. I'm a bit peeved that Quicktime has the DRM that it does, like the ability to flag certain movies as being unable to save/copy from, like The Two Towers preview.. which means every time I open it up, I have to go and delete all the crap sprite tracks so I can just watch the promo.
:)
Small price to pay for actually having control over the data on my hard drive and the easy ability to back it up
DivX is unwatchable. That's why it's so popular I guess.
We all know DIVX is not the same high quality as a DVD. We know this right away because of the really tiny size compared to DVD.
I don't know about you.. but I watch movies to get a laugh, to hang out with friends, and to just generally see something new; I don't do it so I can hear and see very tiny spec of detail in the movie, so I can critique how "good" my home theater is.
I've had several movie parties driven by divx.. and the room full of laughing, joking, relaxed people watching that new movie that just came out on the little 24" TV in my house tells me DIVX is just fine.
Never mind that DRM is also about raising the cost of PARTICIPATING in the film/music industry.
A mac and an $800 audio interface (or an $800 camcorder and final cut) is equivalent to about $100000 of gear in 1990. Up that to millions in the mid 80s.
Right now, the same production facilities that studios use are falling into the hands of the masses. And, for the first time the means to distribute ones work to a widespread audience has never been easier or more apparent. Many (real) bands nowdays will actually buy their own studio setup for less than it costs to record for a few days in a professional studio. The movie production equivalent cannot be far off.
By locking down consumer machines so they can readily access only DRM media, the ball is kept in the studios court. Because you can bet that licensing DRM technology will not be cheap.
I have a Netflix account and a DVD drive in my iBook. I couldn't give a hoot about MovieLink.
Besides, if it's really good (and for some reason still proprietary) someone will find a way to get it to work (if Apple doesn't). It might take longer than on the PC, but we'll get it sooner or later.
---
Open Source Shirts
How do you "misinform" the applet as to
what type of system you have
This message is encoded in a cryptic scheme known as ASCII, that substitutes numbers for English letters, spaces, and punctuation. I don't wish anyone to view it and hereby declare it to be copyrighted to me with no privileges given to any other party to view the material that begins on the next line.
Hello.
There. If you were able to read the above line, you just broke the law under the DMCA. Who cares that ASCII isn't very good encryption because every Tom, Dick, and Harry has tons of software that renders it into human readable form. According to the DMCA, how widespread the decryption knowlege is is not relevant to the issue.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Years ago, Apple began including a very small microphone with their macs. It may have been with the Mac Classic, but I'm not sure (and I bet someone will check out apple-history and find out). Anyway, a bunch of recording industry giants, specifically Apple Records, if I'm not mistaken, got all upset because they though the inclusion of a microphone would begin to undermine the musical industry. Why, I really have no idea.
Apple's response? An included system sound entitled "sosumi." Say it out loud...you'll get the joke.
As far as I know Apple has included a microphone on every model (save maybe a few of the original Powerbooks) since then.
http://www.walkingtaco.com
The studios couldn't care less about geeks with Linux and video/encryption tools. You're not even on their radar.
From The Onion, May 2000
s .html
http://www.theonion.com/onion3618/kid_rock_starve
Thank you for your interest in Movielink. We want you to take part in the powerful Internet movie rental experience that Movielink delivers, but it is presently unavailable to users outside of the United States.
This is not a "two sides" issue.
There are the starry-eyed idealists, who think that all information must be free. Sounds cute, but also sounds like the intellectuals promoting (and promising) communism, the five hour workday, global cooperation after the Leage of Nations was formed...
There are the teen thieves (you sorts, don't give me flack for using this term -- it has no legal meaning, and is only linked to the common usage of the word "theft", not the legal term). They want to be able to copy whatever they want to because they expect that somehow their Eminem will be made for them for free.
There are the artists and proponents of such (a far smaller group than you might think). They see sharing of music as a useful distribution channel for demos and teasers, and possibly even for eventual sales, if a tip-based market *turns out to be viable*, but are concerned that they might not have any stable source of income under such a scenerio.
There are the record publisher types, who combat copyright infringement wherever they find it, in the fear of losing control and profits.
There are the waverers (big group) who agree with most groups right after a rousing article from one side, but don't really feel "right" about any of the solutions so far.
There are the ulta-libertarians, who have decided that file sharing constitutes a free speech issue, and are battling based on constitutional grounds.
There are the pragmatists (kind of like most of the judges so far), that ignore the ideology or individual impacs, and have only interest in the long term impact of DRM or a lack thereof and the costs to the country/world/society.
There are the people who feel that creators have a moral right to whatever they create -- that they should *never* lose control over it. Courtney Love, I believe, said something along these lines.
There are the engineer types, who's main objection is having a really unpleasant (from the user perspective, in privacy or reliability or price) DRM system forced upon the user.
There are the hacker types, who are worried that DRM will keep them from mucking around with the guts of their systems.
All of these groups are quite distinct. There are sub-categories, and more groups I haven't listed. None of these agree particularly well with others. Apple doesn't fit in *any* of these factions above, though there's probably a fair number of their customers that fall into the "artist" group.
Anyway, to sum up -- there aren't two sides in this. There are a lot of major concerns. Apple has no interest in "taking sides" against anyone.
Apple does hardware. They really don't want it mucked up with a lot of poorly-done DRM crap, so they partly have an engineer perspective. They're worried about upsetting their users, both the "teen thief" and the "artists" variety. They probably also don't want to be at the recieving end of a lawsuit if their DRM is bypassable. Apple's already built DRM into their OS once (see the archaic and long-obsolete Copy Protect flag), and firmly decided that it was ineffective, and a complete pain in the ass.
May we never see th
I certainly support freedom. Of course, that freedom includes the freedom of people to add DRM to the computer systems they sell, and the freedom of people to choose whether to buy or not buy it.
The Founding Fathers didn't give a rat's ass about whether you can get a weekly free beer at a bar. Their freedom of speech was to ensure that political speech wouldn't be silenced.
May we never see th
"We don't like Apple's attitude. Therefore, we're going to hose their customers... not by saying that Apple is wrong, but by saying that the Mac platform is poorly supported by the software industry! Heh, that'll learn them".
Actually, I'd say they have a good reason for not supporting the Mac: it's less than 10% of the market...
What's important here is that they said "we won't write software for the Mac because of it's lack of DRM" instead of "we won't write software for the Mac because we don't think the market is big enough (yet) to recoup our costs."
Devious, but pretty smart on the studio's behalf: they get to punish Apple for it's lack of DRM AND save money by not writing a Mac client.
I have no sympathy at all, given how little Apple users care that Apple has conspired with Microsoft to lock Linux users out of streaming media -- can you say Sorenson? I knew you could. Get bent, Apple.
I fear the answer from the rest of the world will be the same as in the USA. i.e. "Politicians can be bought by cartels". Business has already bought the Europian Union. Levi charges Europians higher prices for their jeans. When a retailer (Tesco) started buying Levi jeans from outside Europe and selling them in the UK. It was told this is against the law. BBC Article
This is just the latest example of the challenges facing Apple in its battle to dominate digital media and other niche markets.
They have it backwards. Apple is dominating the digital media market when "[m]any--if not most--production studios use Apple's top-rated QuickTime Final Cut Pro content-creation and video-editing tools." Apple is being dominated when they add Digital Restriction Mechanisms to their software and hardware, to tempt movie moguls into providing video services for their customers.
It's important to remember that DRM does not enable digital content to be delivered online. DRM hog-ties consumers which makes them an attractive and helpless market for digital content. Big difference.
Macs have Real player and Windows Media Player, so why is Movielink concerned with Quicktime? All they would need to do is provide content in Real or WIMP formats for the Mac users as they do for the pc users. Would save them one step plus Real and Microsoft would be rather pleased as Quicktime would not be promoted. .
I'm sure it's not just an attempt to adjust Apple's attitude toward DRM... they wouldn't do that would they?
Apple is going to crumble on DRM, just like everyone else.
Why do I care about paying more money to wait longer to get an inferior showing of widely available media again?
He commited a crime via free speech!! Call the FBI and shutdown slashdot.org. Clearly this post is a circumvention device intended to bring down capitalism hollywood as we know it. Senator Fritz will not be pleased.
http://saveie6.com/
This doesn't matter, and Apple will remain the prefered of digital content creation because no one enjoys the fair and open use of media more than the artists themselves, in truth.
Movielink also snubs non-US based users by IP address! That's right. I live in Japan, and I get an error screen saying 'sorry, Movielink is only offered to customers within the US' when I go to their webpage. When going through a proxy w/ a US based IP address, I go to the front page no problem...
I'm sure they have several reasons for doing this (most importantly because they don't want to hear from people who have slow download speeds complaining) but it is discrimination regardless...
The story you're about to see is a fibb -- but it's short
What is this from?? I'm sure I recognize it, but I don't know where from...arrgghh! Please help me!
Delvin Anaris
told you they were punishing Apple
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
GIven their single-digit market share, one nomrally would think they would buckle under pressure to install DRM. Contrast their honorable stand with Gate/Ballmer, who having over 90-precetn market share and the power to lead, choose instead to buckle to pressure and install DRM. Sad really.
I crack myself up. I fired off VirtualPC on the 'ol Mac. Inside that running Windows 2000 "Professional" loaded Internet Explorer and went to their web site to watch some trailers.
The VirtualPC, being at 800x600, is well below by normal screen size of 1280x1024. More than enough horse power to watch multi-media on a "fake" PC as well.
What's normal DVD video at? 640x480 or about?
I, of course, was recording this (video and stereo audio) to a MP4...and emailed it to them with a polite "FUCK YOU". I wonder if they'll even begin to understand. Dumb asses.
Just when I ran out of mod points...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Now John Lott's book, "More guns, less crime" is a bit thick for a casual read, so I'd reccommend Poe's Book, "The seven myths of gun control", based on the work of Lott and others. Read an interview with Lott about his book here: Reason Magazine It's worth noting that Lott started out with an anti-gun stance, but being academically honest, changed his mind after reviewing the facts.
I'd quote statistics for you, but I don't have any of these texts handy.
I'll leave your knock on the second amendment and the subsequent flamebait alone for now, because I should be doing some work, and if you're actually curious about the facts of the matter, and not just throwing stones (while living in a glass house, I might add), I've given you enough to consider.
Gun Control is hitting the bullseye
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
Apple's doing the right thing. If everyone jumps on the wrong technology for protecting movies, it will become entrenched no matter how bad it is. That will inhibit better technologies from taking hold. It's a classic scenario in the computer world.
On the other hand, Apple is taking a chance by not getting involved now, but I think their customers will respect them for it and appreciate it since Apple's image, at least, is more about freedom than lockin.
I wasn't aware that Palladium would make Linux illegal. I just though it meant that unauthorized software won't run.
Although the company went out of business there are still thousands of servers out there.
MacOS classic was the reference platform for Hotline and works MUCH BETTER in MacOS than in
Windows.
By using the same connection (10/100Mbps ethernet) and old G3 powerbooks running OS 9.2 and a 10Mbps network card yields transfer rates 4-5 bigger than a Windows machine with a 100Mbps ethernet card. Typically, for the same server, if the download rate on the mac is 500-600k/s, on a Windows PC one gets only 80-90k/s.
The same is true for the Unix hotline clones. For example, under Mac OSX it is much better to run Hotline 1.8.x under Classic, rather than a UNIX Hotline clone.
then just get netflix
The expiring movie business (DIVX) was a failure. Expiring downloads will fail for the same reason. And even if the DRM was 100% perfect I could still tape it with a digital camcorder.
I'm stunned. That's all I can say.
I am the hub of Jack's digital lifestyle.
Apple has been noted for trying to take the high ground with the DRM issue. They're not forcing anything down consumer's throats, and make an effort to actually (*gasp*) trust their customers.
I'll admit, the only time I've used DRM to get a 7-day access to a movie on adultdvdempire.com that I was to lazy to wait for on DVD. (hey, at least I'm honest).
Was it worth it? Probably not. I bought it with my Mac, but could not view it with my Mac. I had to use my PC laptop, and it was a tremendous pain to install the Windows Media DRM software on Windows 2000. And I felt dirtier installing the software than actually watching the movie.
With all this hassle, and such limited use of the content, how successful can this model be? Sticking within the same industry, netvideogirls.com manages to have tremendous amounts of content for a reasonable subscription fee, and you always have access to what you downloaded!
When it comes to information, it's an experience good. And the more rights a person has to experience it, the more valuable it is to that person. DRM really seems to miss that. They've also seemed to miss that the rental market (i.e. Blockbuster movies) is REALLY hurting -- people are BUYING movies more than they're renting, for some reason.
On another note, the tone of this article concerns me. It's as if the author was trying to find any bit of mud to throw at Apple in hopes it would stick. Does this make good journalism?
-Stu
Some of the most creative people I have ever met
love their Macintoshes. A step son, who is as
smart and creative as one gets is a MAC Fanatic.
Piss him off, and DRM is cracked in a week.
By Staff Writer ablair
November 18, 2002, 10:30 PM EST
Ottawa - Recently, an online movie download service backed by five major studios opened for business, marking one of the industry's biggest moves to date into Internet distribution. Movielink is a the joint project by MGM Studios, Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Universal Studios and Warner Bros. Studios
Canadian users will have to wait for a sequel to the initial Movielink service, however, since the service only works on computers with US IP addresses.
Last week's slight from Hollywood is an embarrassing rebuff for Canada, which has positioned itself as one of the leading countries for broadband adoption per capita. It also has a large contingent of early adopters, who likely would be interested in trying out technologies such as video-on-demand.
This is just the latest example of the challenges facing Canada. For years, many developers have ignored Canadian users entirely or forced them to wait months for region-specific versions of products, citing its relatively small market share. Canadians account for less than 5 percent of total desktop computing sales, according to industry research.
Movielink isn't the only online video service to dis the Mac. CinemaNow, an Internet movie site backed by studio Lion's Gate Entertainment, offers its wares to Windows customers only. In addition, Yahoo's Launch music video service also does not support the Mac, according to a recent test of the site by CNET News.com.
Canada clearly covets the market that the download service is meant to attract, having recently launched CA*net 4.
But if Canada has sometimes broken new ground, it has also frequently been left on the sidelines in the fast-evolving field of entertainment convergence.
In related news, Movieline.com reportedly does not allow connections from anywhere other than within the US, effectively rebuffing most of the world's online users.
You cannot just ignore these problems, no matter how badly you want the solution to be "an armed populace". The simple fact is that in reality, this "solution" only works in a small percentage of cases.
Gary Kleck, Criminology Proffessor at Florida State University, did some research, and estimates that guns are used defensively and legally anywhere between 800,000 to 2.5 million times per year. Even the lower end of the scale is plenty of instances- but you never hear about them on the news, because which is more interesting- a dead subway commuter who got killed by a mugger with a gun, or the same mugger turning tail and running when the commuter pulls a gun on him? You don't believe the media tells both sides of any story equally, do you? Maybe, just maybe, they report only the most sensationalistic stories, so they can get the highest ratings?
Medical Malpractice, on the other hand, kills three times as many people per year as guns do. Maybe we should outlaw doctors, because they're an obvious threat to society. (Roam around that Guncite site I linked to for kleck- you'll find the figure)
Thats true, but then, look at the USA's example: its one of the countries with the highest homicide rate, much higher than most of the European countries where guns are outlawed. You have to wonder why.
Give England some time. Now that they've disarmed all honest people there and made defending yourself more or less illegal, they're fast on track for catching up to our murder rate. You're now twice as safe in New York City as your are in London.
Oh, and by the way, Japan, with guns completely outlawed, has a much lower murder rate than the US. But on the other hand, they kill themselves often enough to make up the difference. And the criminals still have guns there, too.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
I have a couple of buddies in Eastern Europe (met them on irc, icq...) and they said that as soon as the government changed (Milosevic went to hague) M$ moved in almost immediatley! They even had the Synnergy conference the very next year! Anyway back to the point: They offered the amnesty period; and they also had Office XP and Win XP sold at pretty DARN LOW prices! (Of course after the amnesty period M$ hooligans (literally) started comming into business offices, Ma & Pa PC stores...to check weather they are complying with their rules. And worst of all (correct me if i'm wrong) the government gave them the full go-ahead. So tell me how can a country with one of the lowest GDP's in whole Europe affrod windows, let alone give M$ the carte blanche to do whatever it pleases...am i missing something? I wonder why they didnt go with linux?
Live for the present, learn from the past, and dream of the future!
Here they are, for what they're worth:
/.ers seem to ignore the world is much larger than US. They should probably think different.
- This DRM stuff matters for a small percentage of human beings only. Much less than the starving one. (Speaking about free bread?)
- I'm not an US citizen, nor living in the US, so I can break DRM without violating DMCA. Don't take me wrong, sharing a movie, be it DRM'ed or not, still IS an offence. And maybe breaking DRM would be an offence too, but NOT against DMCA.
- Fair Use, fair play. To me, is fair what is respectful of both parts, customers AND providers. Providers include majors, sure, but authors and artists too. This DRM war is all about a "Major vs user" war. The true authors/artists have been enslaved for years, and no one cares, it seems. Fight the good fight, help THEM. They're slave of both the majors and the customers.
- There's no such thing as a "free meal forever". I'm ashamed to see the blank CD-R shelf in dept stores. How much CD-Rs sold in a day? And what for? If we don't respect the professionals, don't expect them to respect us. Or so did my parents teach me when I was young.
- There's no such thing as a "free meal forever" (again). Majors will have some bad kickback for their abuses, eventually. Let's hope it won't kill creativity. I like good movies.
- DRM is NOT the right solution, technically speaking. As long as my computer is able to play a movie, it was able to decrypt it. So it's possible to reverse engineer the decryption process. Period. See CSS. And, by the way, there is not A CSS key, but 816 player keys. Yes, 816, not 408.
- Palladium and such... What prevents me to build a non-palladium compliant computer, and use different techniques to run/debug/patch/reverse engineer palladium compliant OS and software?
- About competition. No real competition is the personal computer market? Get Windows. No real competition among majors? Get DRM. Oh, and get Bush, too. And threaten those pesky "little" countries who dare to help their own movies industries against US majors, and enslave their people who like to watch local movies, with local cultural conventions. There's not only US, there's not only Europe. There's much much more on Earth. e.g.: Indian movies industry. Oh, how much Indian people on earth? That much? And, of course, mock these guys, their lifes are worthless, their kids are stupid, and their wife are just ugly. Will you guess from which part of the world I am? No, not India, Europe. But I respect anyone who respects me. Be it black, yellow, white, or E.T.
Executive summary:
Many
In order for this to be a proper analogy, it should go like this, "Well, I had it coming; I shouldn't have left all the doors and windows and the gate OPEN, and the door to the safe held shut with a 3-inch piece of masking tape." Depending on how stupid the DRM technology is, it could actually go more like this, "Well, I had it coming, I shouldn't have hung paper bags full of money on the outside of my fence, with a note saying, 'Opening these paper bags full of money is a violation of the DMCA.'"
The law doesn't expect you to have an impenetrable fortress for a house in order to receive legal protection, but it also doesn't have much respect for the opposite end of the spectrum. That's why we have legal ideas like criminal negligance and why people are expected to take "reasonable measures" to protect their property.
Now, when someone sells you something, like a DVD, it becomes your property. Except the DRM supporters want to be able to still treat it like *their* property, after you buy it, and be able to revoke ownership if the product isn't used in a way that they like. They also want to be able to do a strip-and-cavity search on every customer that enters their store to purchase their products. I imagine a grocery store that did that wouldn't last too long.
No, I'll just pick up a VHS while I'm out getting needles for my record player.
You got any printer ribbons, by chance, for my dot matrix printer? I had some in the box where I keep my 5.25" disks but I can't find them now. I was watching Miami Vice and...........
PS - And it's "you're" you lazy bastard.
- I am made of meat.
That's the wrong analogy. Illegally copying copyrighted materials is already against the law, just like illegally entering a house is. The DMCA would be comparable to a law that says "you cannot make, own or use (even for legal purposes) any object that could be used to break into a house." That would be plainly ridiculous and unacceptable, and it goes to show how low the political and judicial systems of the US have sunk for actually allowing such a ridiculous law to be purchased...
I demand my 41" widescreen rear projection set.
Apple isn't really that saintly as some Mac Fans make it out to be; they'll also gladly get their legal dept. out if they feel they need to. The reason behind Apple's stance is one of economics. Apple is a major creator of digital content creation software and hardware (your Mac plus FCP and Logic Audio). Apple needs an image of freedom to create (the DRM issue as well as APSL) in order to make it stand out from the rest of the market.
However, I think this movielink thing is not destined for happy times. They only service that really makes money online is porno (I used to work in that branch, content editor and website creator) and the larger sites have the whole thing down pat already and have been international for years already. I cannot imagine normal users enjoying the tiny on screen movies and long waits for regular Hollywood content (where the porno goes on behind the scenes instead of on camera)
You make a very convincing argument, as many pro-gun-control people do. Unfortunately, most of it is totally unsupported by the facts available, which is invariably where such arguments break down.
Muggers do not generally shoot first. The cycle of hate you describe, where surviving muggers learn their lesson and get more vicious next time, doesn't generally happen. Disarming everyone might be a great idea, except that it's totally impractical (said the poster from the UK, where only criminals have guns and gun crime is up 50+% since they banned the few handguns that were allowed before).
I have reservations about a massively pro-gun attitude, such as many US citizens appear to have, but I don't think mass disarming is even remotely plausible from your current starting point. That being the case, I'm more in favour of letting everyone have basic firearms than just the bad guys.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
After the 'great' news about Palladium and DRM, me and my friends have all considered buying Macs. When the shit hits the fan, Apple could do very well out of this fiasco.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Issue #1.
You don't want the internet to become TV!
Issue #2.
Stop this nonsense.
Oh wait, this is about movies... right. This topic probably has nothing to do with the future control of internet content.
Nah, surely not.
Do some letter writing today! If nothing else the voice of dissent must be heard.
Issue #3.
Agreed -- if these schemes are any good they will become standard. Phil Schiller actually has the level head in this debate -- wait and see. Most of it will be dead in 6 - 8 mos.
Microsoft and the copyright cartels have monopolies that prevent the people from having such a choice. Microsoft's monopoly may be ill-gotten, and perhaps a more lawful Justice Department, free from the stain of presidential bribes, might have brought it into check, but the copyright cartels are granted monopolies by government fiat, and sustained by a regime of copyright law designed expressly for that purpose.
The Founding Fathers didn't give a rat's ass about whether you can get a weekly free beer at a bar. Their freedom of speech was to ensure that political speech wouldn't be silenced.
The constitution does not limit freedom of speech to political speech. It is clearly written and intended to protect all speech. As for the founding father's "giving a rats ass" I suggest you take a remidial course in basic US history.
You demonstrate the achilles heel of the Libertarian philosophy, namely their inability to differentiate between individual freedom, which the constitution was designed and intended to protect, and corporate freedom to run roughshod over those same individuals, which the founding fathers were nearly unanimous in opposing and even fearing. That they could never have forseen the corporate fascism to which our once great democracy has degenerated, and the willful attempt of Microsoft and Hollywood (through Palladium and DRM, as well as other measures) to usurp governance responsibilities (such as policing and enforcing the law) from its rightful authorities, namely a democractically elected government of, by, and for the people, is hardly their fault, but implying that the would have endorsed such a thing is an insult both to them and to the intellegence of anyone reading your post.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
The DMCA is an American law. There are plenty of countries where you can legally decrypt something you bought.
The country where Slashdot's server is physically located is not one of them.
By the way, the UK has had an equivalent to the DMCA since 1988.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Netflix are spammers. They will sell your information, and they buy unconfirmed lists and spam them.
Google evidence
I won't do business with them, and I would counsel anybody else to avoid doing business with them.
I *LIVE* in a podunk town (200 residents). I can still get videos from the local gas station/bait shop/quickeemart on the corner. There are alternatives.
Obviously, if you wish to do business with a spammer, that's your call. But I do want folks to know that Netflix are spammers.
www.eFax.com are spammers
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
tell that to 2600.org
Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!