Slashdot Mirror
Sony, Intel To Push Content Protection
prostoalex writes "Intel and Sony are trying to please the copyright-alerted content publishers and privacy-aware consumers by supporting and pushing Digital Transmission Content Protection standard. New technology allows the consumer to use the downloaded content, but not distribute it outside of their home. A PDF presentation from an Intel engineer is available on dtcp.com."
New technology allows the consumer to use the downloaded content, but not distribute it outside of their home
So, what happens if I turn up to volume a bit?
All errors in this comment are mine. Corrections are considered a derivative work, and punishable under copyright law.
God this sort of stuff pisses me off -
The analogy that springs to mind is that if you go to the public library, they let you borrow a book, only if you let them chain it to your wrist first.
Information was, is and should be free.
tom-george.comBecause geeks rate higher t
> New technology allows the consumer to use the downloaded content, but not distribute it outside of their home.
Dang, I used to hand out mp3 cdr's on the street corner. Now I have to resort to sharing on kazaa inside my home.
It is interesting, because when it all comes down to it, the "good guys" are hurt due to restrictions, and the "bad guys" always end up pirating, etc. I am not sure there really is an answer as to how to protect information 100% without it both hurting the consumer and being crackable by a cracker. Of course, the governments can keep passing laws that make reverse engineering illegal, etc, but again, that's just going to scare the average Joe much more than it would scare someone who really wants to crack a DRM transmission. Only time will tell where the DRM issue ends up.
the new 40gig ipod
"Allow" the customer to use digital content at home. You mean the content you payed for? As opposed to not allowing you to listen/watch/use content you've payed for?
They always word these things like they're *granting* new rights instead of taking them away. I don't know whether to be amused at the balls of the PR makers or dismayed at the fact that there are twits who will read a press release like that and think "Oh goody, I've been wanting to do that."
Unbreakable toys can be used to break other toys.
My current setup means that I can't play DVDs on my PC, because I *might* be outputting the signal via TV-out (PowerDVD 4 on Win2000 Pro, generic DVD-ROM and GeForce2MX400 gfx).
:-)
What makes you think you'll be allowed to use a projector?
If you can put it through speakers, you can copy it. Simple. It's only a matter of time before someone with high quality gear decides to make a copy for everyone. Sure it might slow down the spread of stolen music, but it can't be stopped.
I can't see any way to enforce that. Of course assuming you are using linux or other open source OS.
And what makes you think that Linux or any other open source OS is going to be able to view any media in the future? (At least legally?) Heck, it's already illegal, technically, in the USA to watch DVDs with open source software, even DVDs that you have legally purchased.
-Rob
That won't make much difference.
In the worst case, I'm moving to China to buy a Chiniese PC. Runs linux.
Yeah, because China is such a hotbed for freedom...until you do something the government doesn't like. Oh, and there's nothing stopping them from putting DRM into Linux.
sheesh, someone tells you to plug something into your soundcard and it gets a plus 4 insightful? whilst i'm here, anyone want to mod me up if i tell you how to unplug your keybo....
Well, I actually did RTFA (forgive me!) and note with some concern that the standard provides for "device revocation" under some clearly-defined terms, though those terms are unspecified. Can anyone shed some light on what those might be?
The obvious concern here is that the devices will be sold under some sort of license agreement that will permit unspecified others to figuratively fry your hardware if they suspect it's compromised (or are otherwise displeased with you). I imagine that one's recourse as a consumer (remember: we're "consumers" and not "citizens" here!) will be quite limited. Sigh.
What does it do?
The Microsoft(R) Windows(R) Rights Management (RM) client is required for your computer to run applications that provide functionality based on Windows RM technologies. Installing this client places software on your computer that allows RM-aware applications to work with Windows Rights Management Services (RMS) to provide licenses for publishing and consuming RM-protected information.
Now what interests me is, who is going to be the first software company to embrace this? Probably the next version of Media Player.
New technology allows the consumer to use the downloaded content, but not distribute it outside of their home.
Because you should have to pay twice if you want to play the music on a portable mp3 player.
And of course, no open source mp3 software, because I could compile it with -DNO_DRM.
Well, Sony, guess what? Having my music conveniently on my PC and on my mp3 portableplayer is what motivates me to buy the music in the first place.
And guess what? I do respect copyright; I won't even burn a CD for close friends, or rip their CDs -- despite the 32 GB of free space on my portable.
And I'll continue to respect your copyright: I just won't buy your cripple-ware.
I can find plenty of great music on old LPs, on real (Phillips-Sony Red Book Standard), from emusic.com, and from independent labels.
Let me repeat: I don't want your cripple-ware. It does me no good since it won't play on the hardware I control (it only plays on hardware I buy and you control). So it will do you no good -- I won't exchange my money for it.
The more new releases you distribute exclusively as cripple-ware, the more alternatives will be produced. And that's what I'll be buying.
Opinions on the Twiddler2 hand-held keyboard?
The problem is that copy protection has failed every time. From the first attempts from 8bit game producers over hardware dongles and broken audio-"CD"s, nothing has ever really prevented illegal distribution of media and software. But each new attempt has made life worse for the honest paying customer. Currently, I can't play a lot of my "CD"s in my computer or car stereo, because the music industry is deliberatly breaking standards - I could still grab it from Kazaa, of course, and use it without any hassle. What will those DRM-style things bring - will I be able to make a backup of my legally purchased files if I get a new computer or hard drive? Will I be able to use them if I chose to use an operating system the DRM software providers might never have heard of, or simply don't consider big enough a market?
I still think that on the long run it's a better idea to offer your customers good products at a fair price rather than treating them as a bunch of worthless criminals.
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.