Microsoft-Sony Plan: A Media-Rights Ploy?

sk8rboi writes "Missing in Wed.'s (CNet) reports about the Digital Home Working Group (DHWG) effort from âoeMicrosoft and Sony to make sure DVD players and cell phones can communicate with each other over a home wireless networkâ is the real reason for the work--it's a DRM (digital rights management) play in disguise. Look at it logically. Why would an industry alliance need to define a standard to share an MP3 file between a smart phone and a PC? According to EmbeddedWatch, the answer is, it wouldnâ(TM)t. The file can already be shared via wireless email or WiFi. And both can read the file, since both support MP3. Consumer-electronics systems and computers can already interchange all sorts of files. But what they canâ(TM)t do--and what companies like Microsoft and Sony wish they could--is regulate the transfer of such files (aka block them if theyâ(TM)ve been downloaded for free from KaZaa). (DHWG, by the way, is actually led by Intel.)"

Comments

I don't see why

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft would do anything with mp3 more than is necessary. They'd much rather have people using their WMA format.

Re:I don't see why

[Talez]

Thats good because the standard allows consumers to "access and share digital content" which presumably includes WMA along with MP3 and probably AAC.

The reason I think Microsoft is involved is because of one thing. If theres a definate standard it allows Microsoft to easily build support into its OS or Media Player of the month. Look at the Camera and Scanner wizard found in Windows XP and tell me with a straight face that Microsoft isn't planning some easy to use Wireless Media Wizard.

wrong

[cristofer8]

I disagree. It's not just for smartphones, but a way for you dvd player to talk to you pc, which, currently, it can't. Granted, it's more than likely that whatever scheme they come up with will have DRM (sony is an riaa member after all), but I don't necessarily think that the driving point is to add drm to already existing standards.

The more these things creep in

[fr0dicus]

The more I'll switch to alternative media. Modern music is overproduced and boring anyway.

Re:The more these things creep in

[mig0]

speaking of which.... no one was crying and whining about "rights managements" when music was sold on vinyl.

You must've missed the whining and complaining from the recording industry about how home taping was going to destroy the record business. Thats why dual tape decks were expensive and difficult to come by even in the mid 80s.

Just an FYI, this was essentially the same argument mouthed by the movie industry when they believed that VCRs were going to destroy them as well.

You can leave junk like Kazaa out of this

[sdo1]

aka block them if theyâ(TM)ve been downloaded for free from KaZaa

You know, even bring up Kazaa and the like only hurts the cause because (and I don't think anyone will dispute this) the vast majority of the files available on Kazaa and the like are copyrighted.

The better tact would be to say "even if they've been downloaded from any of the hundreds of free (or pay) and legal sources of .mp3's all over net" or "if they've been ripped from CDs that you bought."

This isn't about being able to share content downloaded from Kazaa. Oh boo-hoo, you can't play the copyrighted song that you didn't buy. The much bigger problem is the content that I paid for, was actually free, or that I have fair use rights to play. If DRM gets in the way of that, then's when I get angry.

-S

Re:You can leave junk like Kazaa out of this

[moncyb]

While we're being nitpicky, I have plenty of audio files (ogg/wav/flac, not mp3. As if it makes a difference) which I never downloaded (or ripped from a CD). Nor are the copyrights owned by the RIAA--unless you think they own the birds outside my window...

For that matter, just because a file is on Kazaa doesn't mean it's illegal RIAA child pr0n music. Kazaa isn't any different (in terms of what files will work on it) than the web, Usenet, M$'s file sharing, NFS, or any other systems which will send files across a network. Only idiots who believe the RIAA's propaganda think this.

You answered your own question

[no reason to be here]

[I don't see why] Microsoft would do anything with mp3 more than is necessary. They'd much rather have people using their WMA format.

exactly.

anything that makes MP3 less convenient for people in M$'s mind is a good thing. time to start pushing ogg to your friends and neighbors.

I hate the idea of DRM I can't control, but...

[chundo]

...the EmbeddedWatch article is just a little paranoid. While I have no doubt that the companies with interest in this group wish to push DRM technologies, there is a second very legitimate reason to have such a group. And it's spelled out very clearly in the CNet article - working together to create communication standards. EmbeddedWatch shouts, "Just use Wi-Fi!". But how did WiFi come to be popular? Only after millions of dollars in wasted R&D for other technologies that didn't pan out (HomeRF is mentioned). This group will allow companies to communicate during the R&D phase, and ideally agree on a standard before investing millions of dollars in incompatible (and competing) ones. Be skeptical if you want, but don't cry wolf and immediately delcare the entire purpose of the group to subversively destroy our media rights.

-j

Wolfe paranoid? Say it ain't so!

[Keith Russell]

Alexander Wolfe's EmbeddedWatch.com has just dropped somewhere below the Inquirer on the credibility scale. First, Wolfe claims that a few piddly Microsoft patents cover the entirety of digital video-on-demand. Now, he sees Microsoft and Sony in the same working group, and concludes that it must be a DRM scheme that will retroactively lock down every file on your system.

Note to Timothy: You are being TROLLED! For free publicity, apparently. How else could you explain this block at the top of EmbeddedWatch's front page?

Don't forget to read "Microsoft gets video-on-demand patent", our still-hot story, which has over 100,000 hits and links on Microsoft-Watch and Slashdot.

DRM is ok by me

[pstreck]

First off I'd like to make a point to say that I support DRM. I support it if it keeps people from doing something illegal, ie. downloading movies, music and software for that matter that is copyrighted without paying for it. There is nothing wrong with that. The only problem I do have with DRM is if it prevents me from using the media that I have acquired legally, that pisses me off.

Next, we do need a standard so that mulitple devices can talk to one another over a wired or wireless network to share media files. You call e-mail a way to do this. Sure it works, but it's cumbersome and barbaric. What I want is the abillity to turn on my set top box connect to my pc, and stream some music to the whole house. Anyways, the point is that we do need proper protocols for this kind of thing, sometimes I think people scream wolf way to much.

Re:DRM is ok by me

[zakezuke]

The thing about DRM I do not support is that whole need a computer based authorization in order to play media. What is to stop a media giant from changing the terms on our media. Before you say it can't be done, look at all the annoyance with SCO and their attempt to revoke their contracts. With DRM a company like SCO would have the power to shut off access to material we bought in good faith.

Good gawd, now i'm starting to understand why people like physical books, hard to revoke a license on a book.

As far as the piracy thing goes, i've ALWAYS been an advocate of a little piracy. Works like word of mouth advertising. If you disagree with this form of media propigation, then I guess you never visited a local library. While they are not pirates in the conventional sence, they do allow multiable people access to media.

Re:DRM is ok by me

[Anonymous Coward]

"we do need a standard so that mulitple devices can talk to one another over a wired or wirel....."

We already have them, they are called cat 5 and speaker wire.

Run some cat five from your main pc to a slave pc running linux sitting on top of your reciever.

Run cat 5 where-ever else you need it as well. Set up unix boxes as clients on the ends of all those wires.

Note that: Unix is a very powerful OS for sharing files, cat 5 is very reliable and well thought out at this point, stereos in some sense have practically been around since the advent of recorded sound.

Take the client pc and run a video out from a decent video card to your decent tv/monitor.

Run RCAs, optical, whatever, wires from your client PCs sound card out to your reciever.

Run the speaker wires to all rooms of your home.

Problem solved using off the shelf components.

There seems to be a lot of people moaning and groaning about stuff that already exists, I see nothing anyone has been suggesting that they can't go buy today.

English, do you speak it?

[blowdart]

Microsoft and Sony to make sure DVD players and cell phones can communicate with each other over a home wireless network

Way to go. Lets look at CNet's article. It states

set to unveil a joint effort to make sure that their products--from computers to DVD players to cell phone

Note this doesn't limit the communication to swapping between phones and DVDs as the article author seems to think. Note the slashdot article seems to leave out the computers part of the CNet article. Add that back in, and what do you have? A standard protocol for your home devices, computers, Pocket PCs, Palms, mobile phones, printers to swap files.

Lets now look at the example use given in the Cnet article

people would be able to play digital audio on their living-room stereo even though the music files themselves are stored on a computer in the den.

Sounds useful doesn't it? Does it sound like extending DRM? Probably note, especially as Microsoft and Sony each have their own DRM technologies.

The slashdot "article" justifies itself by pretending

The file can already be shared via wireless email or WiFi

Really? I don't know of a common mobile phone with WiFi, or a home stereo system, or a DVD. Strange, I don't have an email option on my stero.

I wish you could moderate slashdot parent articles, this one is either a Troll or Flamebait. Nice lack of checking even the CNet article Timothy.

Re:Microsoft: "The Master of None"

[chmilar]

This is part of "trustworthy computing", which is more accurately called "we don't trust you computing".

Trustworthy computing is Microsoft's attempt to embed Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) into the Longhorn OS.

this is stupid

[pair-a-noyd]

The whole article is stupid. What the hell would my cell phone have to do with my DVD player or MP3's in my living room??

You know, here's two things.
1. The music that I listen to is NOT under the control of ANY of the RIAA crowd, in any shape, form or fashion. They have ZERO claim on the music I listen to, they will NEVER have claim to it or be allowed to lay claim to or control it. The artists that I listen to have sworn to that.

2. I just ran cat5 everywhere in the house. I have a box full of my music in the computer room and it runs GnuMP3d (get it at freshmeat).
I have an *OLD* PC in the garage running Damn Small Linux (a Knoppix knock off, get it at ibiblio) with a sound card and speakers. I can go work on stuff in the garage and browse to the page created by GnuMP3d, with a few clicks I'm listening to my favorite music as I work. A full entertainment center in my garage. I rescued the PC from a trash pile, cleaned it up and made use of it. It was free. It cost me ZIP...

I've got some old Packard Bell desktop boxes too that lay flat. They cost me ZIP also.. I'm going to paint one black and slide it in with my AV equipment as an MP3 receiver, just like in my garage.

And for video, I plan to pick up a used Xbox soon for about $150 and turn it into a PVR. I've already got housewide satellite and AV wires run. I can control the AV center in my living room from any room in the house.

I want to know why I should throw all this out and replace it with M$, RIAA and MPAA approved equipment???