Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Offers A DRM Patch
Transcendent writes "Microsoft Windows Update is offering a download for their 1.0 version of the 'Microsoft Windows Rights Management client,' if you care to download it. Seems that you need Win98 SE and up (or at least that's the minimum 'supported'). Details are here. Although it's not required or a 'critical' update, this just paves the road for all of Microsoft's software to require DRM technology on your computer. Quote from the details page: 'Installing this client allows RM-aware applications to work with Windows Rights Management Services (RMS) to provide licenses for publishing and consuming RM-protected information.' This, dubbed 'Activation', entails that 'your computer will be automatically connected via the Internet ... in order to create and save on your computer a system component that is associated with your hardware.' Hmmm... me no like ..."
This is probably the rights management system included in office 2003 which lets you sign and limit future use of your word docs. This is what end users of your protected documents will have to install to read them. In this case, the 'rights' that are managed are the ones YOU grant. No proplemo with that.
MediaPlayer 9 has them defaulted to off on install - it has an extra page you have to visit to turn all privacy stuff on and off.
That said, DRM has been in WMP since version 8 and it doesn't make the blindest bit of difference to playing non-DRM'd stuff, it just means you can play stuff that is DRM'd as well.
The Windows Update patch is sat on the optional list, not the critical list, so you'd have to conciously install it. Either way, it works in the same way as the DRM'd WMP versions - it let's you use DRM'd files as well as non-DRM'd versions - probably tying in security features in the new Office versions which are coming out soon so they can be viewed on current Office versions correctly.
"None of the information collected or generated as part of machine activation is personally identifiable. Microsoft will not retain any information collected during the activation process, except on a temporary basis where necessary to diagnose and resolve a problem with the Windows Rights Management service. Microsoft does not share any of the information collected during the activation process outside Microsoft."
No, it's NOT auto-downloaded.
No it's NOT sandwiched with other patches.
Yes, you CAN uninstall it.
you're not too far off hahaha
The MS DRM client is an Active Directory client used for sharing Office 2003 files over networks. It talks to Office servers, SQL servers and SharePoint servers and is pretty much going to be no use to any home user who doesn't have an Active Directory server on their network. It has nothing at all to do with DRM in applications, OS's, media files, it is a network DRM client for sharing stuff with coworkers using Active Directory!
Ummm...this is IRM not DRM. The difference being that IRM is a rights management deal for Office documents, targeted at corporate environments. The download lets you view IRM protected documents without having Office 2003 installed, this isn't DRM, doesn't have anything to do with MPAA/RIAA, and is optional. So stop with the whining.
"Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott
Clients don't have to use DRM in their Word documents. It's completely optional.
The fear that many users will express here is that in a future version, Microsoft will set up a future version of Microsoft Word to enable digital restrictions management by default on all new documents. The unexpressed goal here is to nip it in the bud.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I have Win2K SP4 installed, and I still see this in Windows Update:
Recommended Update for Windows Rights Management client 1.0
Download size: 3.6 MB
The Windows Rights Management (RM) client is required for your computer to run applications that provide functionality based on RM technologies. Installing this client allows RM-aware applications to work with Windows Rights Management Services (RMS) to provide licenses for publishing and consuming RM-protected information. After you install this item, you may have to restart your computer.
Read more...
It's an operating system, not a religion.
Don't you care about your rights?
Even if you don't care about your own, are you so shameless as to shout down those who do?
Here's a brief explanation of why Fair Use rights are important:
"Why does the public have a "fair use" right to use copyrighted material without the copyright holder's permission?
At the doctrine's core is a fundamental belief that not all copying should be banned, particularly in socially important endeavors. The Supreme Court explained, "the fair use doctrine exists because copyright law extends limited proprietary rights to copyright owners only to the extent necessary to ensure dissemination to the public."
Copyright law serves as a regulatory scheme designed to balance the competing rights of creators to exploit their work, entrepreneurs to receive a return on their investment, and the public's interest in gaining access to works. The fair use doctrine and other public rights are designed to further the ultimate goal of disseminating knowledge to the public. In developing an information infrastructure that serves the public interest and encourages the open flow of information, it is essential to continue to balance the competing interests and preserve the public's fair use rights in an electronic environment as it has in more traditional formats."
Understanding Fair Use Rights
Actually, digital restrictions management protects authors[1] from consumers in several ways:
The "anti-consumer" sentiment toward DRM typically relates to reasons 2 and 3.
[1] U.S. copyright law uses "author" and "works" instead of "creator" (n) and "content" (n). Mr. Stallman agrees that we should use the same terminology used by the letter of the law.
Will I retire or break 10K?
This discussion from microsoft shows where they are planning to go with this. It is going to be part of the Windows 2003 server line. Or you can use microsoft's own service (which uses passport) if you don't want to run your own server. And all of this does tie in to office 2003 as it looks like the first product to take full advantage of it. Talk about vendor lock in....
There are 3 RM downloads at the MS site. The first is the one in the article - the Client piece. There are also a part for the Server and SDKs for CLient and Server. The Server SDK is not available to just anyone. MS has to license you. They do this via a form of their security Certificate Server. The SDK lets 2 users connect for development work, but beyond that you need a license to code for it.
.NET, SOAP, IE 6 and IIS. This all has the feel of an end-to-end "solution" that they will market to the RIAA and MPAA types. It looks like a substantial infrastructure needs to be in place in order to enable Rights Management content, and the consumer^H^H^H^H user will access protected material by going to a specially engineered web site using IE 6. They also mention a "lockbox", whatever that is.
They mention some of the technologies used: COM+, an Active Directory server,
Your average hobbyist programmer or shareware programmer isn't going to be able to participate in this. Something tells me the licensing fees won't be cheap. The "right" to access protected material obviously come from certificates, and that model of PKI has proved to be troublesome at best. Furthermore, the "rights" being protected by this setup are those that perpetuate the aims of the RIAA, the MPAA and the like.
They're not about to let anybody get in on this protection racket. The certificates will no doubt be VERY expensive for the content producers so that the barrier to entry is high. They don't want some kid in Hong Kong to encode his music files using this technology and then give them away to others, fully within the confines of this system. This is really bad, because anyone even tinkering around with the technology without a license will automatically become a criminal under the DMA.
$210? The version for students and teachers should price at $140, iirc.
The upgrade version is around $220, and you can get the full and new version around $360 with minimal usage of Google. And that's professional. Considering that Office includes Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Access, Publisher, and Outlook, that comes out to $60 a program at the absolute most.
I mean, yeah, you could pay $500, and get each program at $75 or so... but, ummm... that's comparable to WordPerfect Suite... and, really, a totally normal market price for productivity software. Especially a professional quality one - which is, frankly, more than a lot of people need. Hardly any non-professionals are going to use Access. Most of them won't even use Excel, Publisher, or Powerpoint. Outlook Express is fine for most people. All most people use out of Office is Word. And most of them could use Wordpad. We're talking about what is really designed as a product to be purchased by businesses.
It's hardly Gates's fault that people buy far more powerful programs than they need. And, really, unless you're going to fault him for running a business, and seeking to make profits, it's tough to understand why you say Office is overpriced. Unless you want to go on a rant about how corporations are necessarily evil.
But in that case, please include your address for your complimentary box of tinfoil.
Philip Sandifer's academic website
File Menu >> Permission >>
select anything other then Unrestricted Access - which sounds like fear tactics to me - and this pops up
"Information Rights Management (IRM) in Microsoft Office 2003 helps prevent sensitive documents and e-mail messages from being forwarded, edited or copied by unauthorized people.
To use IRM you need to install the Windows Rights Management client. If you have an existing version.....bla bla bla....Do you want to download the latest version now?
Yes | No
I don't like this...and it just so happens that this menu command is not hidden away by default, like all the useful commands.
Options >> Customize was my only option.
Due to recent events, sig is no longer valid - this placeholder will be in effect until a suitable replacement is found.
The idea is that the DRM machine lives inside the general purpose machine. Normal content (like old mp3s) is not affected by the DRM machine. DRM content can only be accessed through the DRM machine. If you don't have any DRM content, you won't even notice the DRM machine is there.
Oh really? I was at a school last week and several teachers back from sabbatical all over the world had brought back DVDs to show the students examples of foreign filmmaking and culture. I had to break them the bad news that the reason their DVDs won't play here isn't broken DVD players, it's the region encoding. I told them I could circumvent it, but the tools to do it were illegal to use and I wasn't going to take the risk.
My girlfriend wanted me to rip a few songs and whip up a CD of MP3s so she could listen at work. No deal, the CD just wouldn't rip. I asked to look at the packaging, the 'Compact Disc - Digital Audio' logo was missing. I had to tell her that her CD was unrippable, and she'd have to tote the original to work, which she won't do because it cost her $20 and she won't risk having a coworker scratch it.
This stuff DOES affect lots of people, but most folks chalk up the failures to broken hardware, or damaged media, not DRM. The EFF needs to buy some commercial time on prime-time to teach people about this, because the problem is too technical to garner support without real-world stories getting people to call their representing officials.
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails