Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Interview With The MPEG Committee's Founder

Posted by timothy on from the moving-pictures dept.

JasonFleischer points out this "interview with Leonardo Chiariglione, digital video pioneer and founder of the MPEG standards committee, is available on the public access section Scientific American's website. In the interview Chiariglione explains the motivations and hopes for his new Digital Media Project -- an attempt to integrate existing technologies to create a transparent, universal, non-proprietary system for digital rights management. Of particular interest to some /.ers may be his old article from Linux Journal that talks about the relationship between Open Source and MPEG standards."

11 of 91 comments (clear)

  1. YAGDS by abiggerhammer · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Standards are standards; the trick is getting people to adopt them.

    DMP sounds like a nice idea on paper, but will the recording studios ever go for something that will allow people to share files, even if playback is (supposedly) limited to subscribers-only? How long before such playback limitations are cracked just like the DRM for iTunes?

    I have yet to see the uncrackable DRM scheme, and no reason to assume one can ever exist. If humans can write it, humans can break it.

    --
    Dance like nobody's watching. Sing like you're in the shower. Fuck like you're being filmed.
    1. Re:YAGDS by abiggerhammer · · Score: 2, Interesting
      OTOH, going back to your earlier example, if I can find the person who does have the key and figure out some way to weasel either the key or the decrypted text out of them, it won't take nearly that long. :) Compromising the messenger is often far easier than compromising the message directly, and it's a damn shame how often this is forgotten when it comes to information security.

      I actually see "un-DRM"-ing a file by porting the output stream to some DRM-free format as a case of compromising the messenger, but perhaps this is unnecessarily subtle.

      --
      Dance like nobody's watching. Sing like you're in the shower. Fuck like you're being filmed.
  2. Re:Some people will love it, just not users by Ziwcam · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I remember hearing about some pre-release DVD, which had to be watched within 72 hours of opening the case. Something about oxygen starting a reaction which turned the entire disc black after that time. With that being possible, I'm surprised it hasn't found its way to a consumer good yet (ie: disposable rentals... no late fees)

  3. Re:Some people will love it, just not users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    neat-o idea but similarly, what's to stop someone from copying the DVD before it self destructs?

  4. Unsettling by leomekenkamp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    (...)many users will continue to steal music(...)

    Is it just me, or is it very unsettling that the mastermind behind the revolution that has brought MP3, DVD and digital television into the lives of millions does not know the difference between illegal copying and theft? They are even in very different parts of the justice system (civil vs. criminal law IIRC, IANAL).

    --
    Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
  5. Re:Any "standard" which you need a licence for... by wine · · Score: 4, Interesting
    If you want everyone to use something, it's stupid to then claim a patent on it.

    Unless of course you want everybody to pay you for the use of this standard, which is what the majority of these companies want.

    Put out a standard and have everybody use it. Then after a while pull out your patents and force everybody to start paying you money or stop using your standard.

    It's a sleazy business tactic, but we have seen this happening with gif and mp3 for example.

  6. Eleventh president indeed... by adamofgreyskull · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Small niggle, Mr. James K. Polk, if that is your real name....

    The "point" of a patent is to reward sharing an innovation with a temporary monopoly. Although this has been subverted in such a way that permanent monopolies are granted for lack of innovation, that's not the point...

  7. Re:Any "standard" which you need a licence for... by BabyDave · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think the point that the parent was making is something like this:

    What if I patent $TECHNOLOGY, and say "I will grant an implicit (and free-as-in-beer) patent licence for $TECHNOLOGY to anyone, on the condition that their implementation must conform to my standard, without proprietary extensions.".

    Would this kind of defensive licencing have prevented the Microsoft Kerberos fiasco?

  8. Bullshit Warning! by infolib · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Now where did your hear the name Chariglione? Could it have been during the Felten dispute? (He was executive director of the SDMI standards body). This guy's a member of the industry that has sprung up, complete with lobbyists and all, trying to deliver "secure content" (read: snake oil).

    If we look at what he wants it's clear that he has already chosen DRM to be the solution, and now we must find some way to make end users "accept" it. He talks a lot about "mapping traditional usage rights to the digital space" but the fact is that he's trying to replace court rulings on fair use with software. I wonder how well software will replace judges and jurors? (Remember, the preciousss "content" should at all times stay "protected") Someone please mandate "open" standards for playback devices!

    He's sweet-talking, and politicians will really want to believe his promises - too bad that he's earning money from seeing DRM as the solution rather than the problem.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
    1. Re:Bullshit Warning! by ahfoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I wasn't going to put it quite that way because the paper on his historical contributions made me think he's not such a bad guy, but I did definitely notice something I thought was a bit contradictory in the Scientific American article.
      On the first page he says
      "The culture of theft that turns around MP3 is detestable, and I'm very disappointed about that."
      Which made me think this guy is on the wrong side of the fence using phrases like "culture of theft", but then in the second page he goes on to say
      "I also see a great potential for peer-to-peer. It's a wonderful system. If it is used to distribute contents legally, it will create new business opportunities."
      But by definition peer-to-peer means that the content is being hosted and distributed in a non-commercial exchange. He conveniently skips the part about why consumers would pay for the right to freely exchange data in a non-commercial exchange. So, he seems to be simply playing games in order to appear to straddle the fence.
      One can only guess his intentions, but perhaps those vineyards cost money to maintain.

  9. three years old from Linux Journal, 2001/03 by SilverSun · · Score: 2, Interesting

    L. Chiariglione
    Open source in MPEG
    Linux Journal, 2001/03

    I wonder what he would say today.

    Cheers

    --

    KdenLive/PIAVE - non-linear video editing