Interview With The MPEG Committee's Founder

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."

Comments

Some people will love it, just not users

[eclectro]

From the interview;

For example, you could play a specific title until a certain date, or you could buy a subscription allowing you to play anything you want for a given period.

That's what he is working on. I'm sure the RIAA loves the idea of "rental" music.

Apple not only has a more solid model of music ownership with itunes, they will have done it first. Luckily this project is going to show up late to the party when they unveil it two years from now.

Nothing new here. Move on.

Re:YAGDS

[abiggerhammer]

Takes a Long Goddamn Time, but it can be done.

Besides, the question's irrelevant. DRM via encryption to a subscriber's key? Whatever. If the subscriber can generate a listenable stream (which is, duh, kinda the point), then it's possible to turn that stream into a non-DRMed file. Anyone with legitimate access can create illegitimate access if they're so inclined and have the technical skill to do it. And, if the readership (postership) of /. is any indication, there's no shortage of people who are so inclined.

Any "standard" which you need a licence for...

[jonwil]

Any "standard" which you need a patent licence for is not a good standard.

Any standards body worth dealing with should insist that patent holders licence the patents such as is necessary to implement the standard with no royalties.

Re:Any "standard" which you need a licence for...

[JamesKPolk]

Patents and standards are opposing forces.

The point of a standard is to get everyone to use it.

The point of a patent is to grant a monopoly.

If you want everyone to use something, it's stupid to then claim a patent on it.

Re:YAGDS

[Ogerman]

I have yet to see the uncrackable DRM scheme, and no reason to assume one can ever exist.

Lets be even more to the point: It is physically impossible for there to exist a non-proprietary DRM scheme. DRM, by very nature, is security through obscurity -- hiding the secret key *somewhere* on the users' own machine. DRM is incompatible with the concept of general purpose computing and most certainly with Open Source software. As an analogy, think of those old pay-TV decoder boxes that were filled with epoxy or tar to prevent tampering.. Is that what you want your computer to become? Just say no to DRM-laden hardware, software, and content! And do support independent media!

Bullshit Warning!

[infolib]

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.

Chiariglione states, then ignores, the benefits.

[SgtChaireBourne]

Everyone expected that these technologies would bring huge benefits to everybody along the value chain. Creators would be given new ways to express themselves, end users would enjoy new kinds of experiences, and industries would find new opportunities for business. Ten years later, this is not happening. I don't see any industry that is really thriving on digital audio and video

Sounds like a myopic view. Creators were given new ways to express themselves and are using them:

Any band, big or small, that goes on tour has it's own CDs, I've even seen buskers in the subway with their own CDs.

Old and young people are compiling playlists from CDs they've bought or been given and playing them on the stereo or via a jukebox on their computer.

Amateur films and short films have been made very easy. No need to book time weeks in advance on equipment costing hundreds or millions. Go see a short film or youth film festival these days.

Home films and photography have taken off. Even retired people are sending around digital images, raw or touched up, of family and friends. I know people pushing 70 that edit and burn their holiday videos to DVD. Try that with 8mm or Super8.

Many musical instruments now have MIDI ports -- and they're being used.

There are more and more Zines on every subject imaginable. 15 years ago these were made with effort, but now there are many tools like Quark, Illustrator, PageMaker, etc.

Plain old books are being written and published like never before.

So, yes, maybe industry has missed the boat like he says, but let's not forget that industry is the result of customer demand not the other way around. If no one is buying buggy whips, then stop selling them, look around and sell what people are buying. The end users are enjoying new kinds of experiences as predicted, but some of the former players in industry have ignored or fought the new opportunities for business. Why should they be subsidized with our effort if they cannot find a profitable business model that suits the times and technology?