Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Buzzword du Jour: DRM

Posted by timothy on from the digital-recording-monopoly dept.

mattmcal writes "Though the RSA Conference in San Francisco and Bill Gates' keynote were expected to stir up several headlines on 'security' today, the news coming from 3GSM in Cannes seemed to deliver more tangible results. From Qualcomm's new DRM chipsets to NDS' mobile VideoGuard, several interesting 'DRM (digital rights management)' announcements raise the bar for distribution-shy media companies who may have increasing opportunities for driving content to mobile devices. But Intel's Barrett knows this is only the beginning of a complicated standards problem."

18 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. It will take years for these standards to settle d by Tangential · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If history is any guide, the corporate positioning, coupled with the slowness of standards bodies will make this a mess for at least 2-3 years.

    --
    Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
  2. It's fundamentally silly by Theatetus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    DRM simply cannot work without enforcement in the hardware. It it's in memory and it's an architecture remotely similary to what we now consider a "personal computer", I can copy it.

    --
    All's true that is mistrusted
    1. Re:It's fundamentally silly by LousyPhreak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      how true...

      but i guess the main point is not absolute security but to make copying as hard as possible until joe sixpack just doesnt care to copy but instead just buys it.

      i dont know anyone who is not quite a bit into computers wo knows how to copy one of those 'wanna-be' audio cds, let alone copmuter games.

      the point is its no problem for 99% of the /. crowd but remember not everyone spends enough time and effort just to get things going or else almost no one would be running windows ;)

      --
      -- Karma: beyond good and evil - mostly affected by posting political
    2. Re:It's fundamentally silly by asdf+101 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree.

      In fact even with a routine that marries DRM to hardware, there will always be instances where the content is never completely "locked-in".

      Why do I say this? Simply because computers (the digital beings that they are) are not the ones paying for use of media content in the manner that we are? Which computer do you know of today that wants to watch a movie or listen to a song? And the analog-perception beings that we are, there will always be a need to convert from the secured digital format to unsecure analog format for "playback". And therein lies the greatest weakness of any DRM technology.

      Or atleast they find some way to directly bridge the gap between the digital stream of ones and zeroes within computing devices and our senses of perception.

      Till then, this is all goobledegook, albeit always at a higer plane than the last time round.

    3. Re:It's fundamentally silly by Sven+Tuerpe · · Score: 5, Interesting
      DRM simply cannot work without enforcement in the hardware.

      Bzzzt. Wrong! DRM serves as an anchor for legal enforcement. You are right in that it certainly won't work without hardware support. However, that's not the point. The whole point is to make you, or anyone who does manufacture devices without DRM support in their hardware, look like a villain -- a "hacker", a thief, a criminal.

      An example: German news site Heise reports that the music industry here started to go after people who sell software able to copy music CDs. So this is what does happen:

      1. Music industry claims there is copy protection (aka DRM) on some of their CDs,
      2. Music industry claims this copy protection is "circumvented" if certain tools are used,
      3. Music industry sues those who sell those tools,
      4. Music industry assumes new_world == old_world - evil_tools, and claims that there is a working copy protection scheme (aka DRM).
      5. Repeat ad infinitum.

      It does not matter what works and what doesn't from a technical point of view. What matters is that the legal system accepts claim No. 1, and is sufficiently forgetful to not notice the loop when they return to claim No. 1 for the next iteration.

      --
      http://erichsieht.wordpress.com/category/english/
    4. Re:It's fundamentally silly by k_head · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is a good thing. Trust me joe average is not going to pay for windows and office. If it comes with the computer they are not going to upgrade.

      If the people in the third world are unable to pirate they will turn to open source or at least cheaper alternatives.

      The worst thing that can happen is that MS will also press non DRM CDs and look the other way while the third world pirates them.

      --
      The best way to support the US war effort is to continue buying American products.
    5. Re:It's fundamentally silly by mirko · · Score: 5, Insightful

      but i guess the main point is not absolute security but to make copying as hard as possible until joe sixpack just doesnt care to copy but instead just buys it.

      When I was using an Acorn RiscPC, I used to pay for my softs, then I switched to PC and, because of the volume of this mass market, I suddenly became reluctant to pay such amounts of money for buggy software, then I switched to Linux, then to OSX where I began paying for software.
      The moral of this story is that I think if you want people to purchase your product, you have to act with them as if they were worthy customers, not as if they were just a mass market supposed to inflate your statistics.
      DRM will fail because windows users are pissed off to be treated anonymously and believe me, like a hundred million monkeys coding on a hundred millions windows, they'll end up finding the flaw that will demonstrate how impossible it is to implement a definitely 100% secure DRM system.

      (Note that the 100% security may come from ever-changing security schemes)

      --
      Trolling using another account since 2005.
  3. Please, let's call it what it is... by TheLoneDanger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Digital Restrictions Management. Let's let the less technical people know what it really is.

    --

    "But I trust in the people's capacity for reflection, rage and rebellion." -Oscar Olivera
  4. New Oxymoron? by Bobdoer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Intel's Barrett calls for more flexible DRM system" If I recall correctly, isn't DRM all about removing flexibility for the end user? CDs are "flexible"; you can do anything with them. Heck, I would even say that DRM is the opposite of flexibility.

    --
    EVERYDAY IS CATURDAY
    1. Re:New Oxymoron? by Daneurysm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      DRM doesn't seem so purposely intent on removing flexibility for the end user so much as enhancing the level of control for the content producer/distributor.

      While this is merely a matter of symantics, and you have no argument from me about 'removed flexibility' being the end result, it is key to be even handed in reading, interpreting and explaining what they say, what they mean and what that means to us.

      ~Dan

    2. Re:New Oxymoron? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No kidding.. it's funny to hear the suits talk about "finding the right balance", especially during the Napster era. (Though, to be honest, I consider Craig Barrett more than just a suit.)

      They would look at the completely unprotected MP3 which the music listeners where downloading in droves, and say with a straight face that they would work to find the right balance between what the customer wanted, and was currently consuming, and what nobody wanted. Huh??

      MP3's are cheap to produce, have minimal technical support issues, and play in almost any device.

      So what do these geniuses do? They adopt DRM-heavy formats and are *shocked* that they didn't succeed.

      It took Apple to prove that, duh, minimal DRM is better.

      Now that they've got most of their heads out of their asses, lets move to the next obvious step: NO DRM! You might just be shocked that enough people will pay for your content!

      What's the first thing I do with my iTunes downloads? That's right, remove the useless DRM and convert it to MP3 so I can play it on my non-Apple stuff.

  5. DRM is only putting off the inevitable by Mrs.+Grundy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's really pretty simple. The media companies are and always have been in the business of distribution. Distribution used to be hard and they earned their keep. Now distribution is easy (as any teenager with a internet connection will tell you) and there is little reason for creators and consumers to pay media companies a huge chunk of profit for a service that is essentially free today. DRM is the media/software corporations' attempt to make distribution difficult once again. Let's not be suckers and buy into it.

  6. It's a marketing set up... by wiresquire · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Average Joe: MS Security sucks
    MS: DRM = security
    Average Joe: So, I must need DRM

    Game over.

    --

    So does Anonymous Coward have good karma?

  7. Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't DRM a little heavy handed for any society that wishes to proclaim "freedom" as one of its virtues.

    We're talking about installing a little policeman in every concievable piece of hardware. What the fuck is happening to this world? What the fuck is going on here?

    Do free born human beings need to have an overseer partake in every aspect of their lives, just in case a crime might happen? We're going straight to hell, folks. And we won't have to die to get there! Weeeeeeeeeee!

  8. Remember the "science" part by Xcott+Craver · · Score: 5, Insightful
    My standard response to people who want DRM on computers:

    Fine, go ahead and put together a DRM system, as long as we let the scientific community verify that it actually works before forcing companies to implement it, and people to put up with it.

    No fair waving around white papers or assuring us that someone says this-or-that technology really works, and then demanding an act of congress. Let's see a working system first, and let's let the cryptographic community inspect the system's inner workings (if you can't even reveal how it works, it's not a secure system,) and let them decide if it can be trivially circumvented by any teenager.

    I have a feeling that developers of many DRM schemes dread, and would rather avoid, such independent review of their systems.

    Xcott

  9. Re:DRM === All Yuor Base R bLong 2 US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Asia seems to be only place which won't succumb to this kind of crap.

    Main reason for this is huge potential in the internal market (>50% of world population).

  10. Re:just my .02 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We already know most cell phone users are rude (... high pitch high volume speaking)

    I believe there's a physiological reason for that. None of the cell phones that I have ever used echoed the speaker's own voice back to the earpiece like land-line telephones do. So, people using cell phones don't hear themselves talking and they start shrieking to compensate. They're not aware that they're doing it.

    In the few instances that I've ever used a cell phone, I just pivoted the earpiece a little bit away from my head while speaking, and brought it close to my ear when I want to hear the other person's response. This provides me with a simple way to avoid sounding like the vast majority of oblivious cell phone users.

    It also helps me focus on where I am and what's around me while using a cell phone. If I don't make a conscious effort, my mind tends to wander into the conversation and away from my physical surroundings. I believe this to be true for many others as well, as evidenced by how easy it is to stand near an oblivious cell phone user and listen to every word of their conversation. Try it!

  11. It's not just the media companies... by Media+Withdrawal · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yes, media companies will fight to own all distribution of old content. But watch out for the hardware companies. They're already trying to own all distribution of new content. It's slick. Just visit their online store, download the content, and it only runs on your phone/PDA/laptop/whatever. Until it breaks, that is.

    As an artist, you'd think I'd just love this scheme. Hah! The problem is, once a company thinks it owns your distribution, it thinks it owns you! When I fell for DRM and the lure of easy money, all of a sudden I was spending months fighting to retain designs and customer relationships that had taken years to refine. All this fussing cut into my productivity, and my fans noticed.

    For the record, when I dropped copy protection completely, sales doubled almost immediately.

    So don't be fooled by the current battle between the media and hardware companies. They're just fighting for who gets to own the artists and milk their audience. I'm not falling for it again, and I hope you won't, either.