Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's Janus DRM Software Officially Unveiled
hype7 writes "News.com.com is reporting the official unveiling of Microsoft's new DRM system, internally dubbed 'Janus'. Interestingly enough, a wide variety of companies including AOL, Dell, Disney, Napster and Freescale, a subsidiary of Motorola, have all signed on to the technology. Whilst some content providers and producers are keen, it remains to be seen what consumers will think - 'the new digital rights management tools include features that would protect content that is streamed around a home network, or even block data pathways potentially deemed 'unsafe,' such as the traditional analog outputs on a high-definition TV set. That's a feature that has been sought by movie studios in advance of the move to digital television.' I love the quotes from the MS rep - 'This release of technology really enables all kinds of new scenarios that are emerging now,' said Jason Reindorp, a group manager in Microsoft's Windows digital media unit. 'We're taking quite a holistic view.' It's good to see Microsoft taking a holistic view of preventing the consumer doing what they want with their paid for content, and protecting us from unsafe data pathways."
We are getting closer and closer to the day when NOTHING will work on any electronic device without a conglomerate corporation's device allowing it to go through. We are allowing for a bad precedent to be set here.
Notice the names that are interested: AOL, Dell, Disney. Interesting that these companies not only offer what we traditionally thought they did but they are now also offering TV and music related content along with many other items they shouldn't have been allowed to control.
So here it comes... Dell is going to slowly get into DRM. You are going to see it as a benefit. You can now download a large catalogue of music easily and legally to your computer and portable MP3 playing devices. Woo! Just wait till you want to copy your old collections of CDs to your Dell computer with DRM'd BIOS and OS and then onto your portable. Can you do that? Nope. That's illegal! You aren't proving that you own that CD. What if it was burned and didn't come from the manufacturer. Ok, so let's try the old analog inputs. It's an MP3 afterall and we don't care much about quality...
Error: We notice you are trying to use inputs which are attempting to allow something to pass through our DRM system. We are now blocking access to the ports via hardware.
If you think that by running Linux you are somehow going to escape this you're wrong. The possibilities that computer HARDWARE will only work with DRM enabled BIOS's is coming. Nevermind the fact that if you want to be connected to the rest of the world you will have to have a DRM'd computer with a DRM'd BIOS in order to do so.
"Welcome to hell boys!"
Also read Rory Blyth trying to buy an eBook. The stuff sounds made up except that I ad exact same experience with buying an eBook off Amazon for my Dell Axim, which ran Microsoft Reader. The book was DRMed and that was the last eBook I bought off Amazon, and wrote them roughly what Rory described in the complaint message.
HDTV tuners and sets are already in the market, and they know nothing about this Janus technology. If a broadcaster were to use this technology to "protect" its content, these older devices won't know how to make heads or tails of the restrictions, and therefore are going to have to be considered "untrusted" and not allowed to have the content.
That's just not going to fly in the marketplace. HDTV early adopters will just ignore the content that their units can't play back, and broadcasters aren't going to want to limit their potential audience by ruling out everybody but those who have bought certain models of HDTV hardware.
This platform will need a killer app, and I doubt Hollywood can come up with one...
If any human can create it, any human can break it.
DRM for the most part (I think) just doesn't work, being militaristic about media just sours the public opinion.
Error 407 - No creative sig found
Why are companies always trying to push this shit on to the consumer? People need to learn if you don't like DRM then don't buy products that use them. This includes MP3 players, online music stores, DVDs, CDs, and Tvs. Other then DVDs I have been religious about boycotting anything that uses DRM. If more people did this then consumers will have more rights in the end. Just using their new formats only encourages companies to abuse their consumers more and more.
Codes were meant to be broken.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
I was thinking along similar lines, except more with the idea that Microsoft is the two-faced party here. Think about it. They market themselves as "user friendly" yet they make something so blatantly unfriendly to the user that it won't allow them to do things they're legally allowed to do. Two-faced, indeed.
The Analog Hole will never die. If content is to be displayed to humans, it's going to have to go get to light waves and sound waves somehow, and content can always be captured by kinescopes and acustic couplers. Sure, there's going to be some quality loss by resorting to those technologies, but there's no way to defeat them from making a copy, and those copies can then be encoded into digital format. There's always going to be a point of demarcation where the digitally encrypted stream must become a plaintext analog signal in order for the monitor or speakers to function, and anything that copies the signals at that point will have a pretty good looking copy as well. Unless the digital demarc point is installed after our eyes and ears on the way to the brain, I just don't see how this is going to work...
If you are worried about not getting your share of music, entertainment, etc, then you need to see all of the alternatives out there. There are plenty of bands not caught up in this madness who are quite good. There is theater, printed books, playing sports, painting, traveling... When you come right down to it, they are really making the easier forms of entertainment (listening to music, watching TV) harder and less competitive to more fulfilling forms of entertainment (playing sports, nature walks, getting out ...). As the cost analysis is shifted for more people, I bet they experience slower sales.
I know they slowed my purchases already.
InnerWeb
Freud might say that Intelligent Design is religion's ID.
It "enables" us to pay for things in a format that, at present, they dare not sell to us because we're a bunch of dirty thieves. If they sold us a movie over the internet NOW we might think that we should be allowed to watch it a second time for FREE.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
You can't blame the providers unless you blame the general population's lack of ethics.
It's sad that DRM is even necessary, which it obviously is, because the masses have spoken and said that they aren't willing to respect the content producer's rights, it's turned into a battle of rights. Is it more important to protect your right to make a backup of content or the content provider's right to get paid for creating the content?
Honestly, the content providers have a lot more to lose in all of this, and will probably always need more protection of their rights as it becomes so easy to steal content. The content providers deserve the protection from how ubiquitous copyright violation has become in our culture.
Buzz! Wrong, but thanks for playing! It's in the interest of companies to avoid pissing off consumers so much that they bother to remember the company's name. There's a big difference.
All's true that is mistrusted
That's because people don't realize that half the stuff they do with their own technology ("that they paid for") is illegal under current law... they have sat quiet for too long.
Now those abilities will be hard-coded away from them. Congress won't stop it (they haven't yet) and besides they are in the hip-pocket of big business anyway.
When I tell people that the stuff they are doing... making full copies or even mixes of their CD collections and sharing them with friends is technically illegal under current law... they laugh. When I show them the law... check out the DMCA, they are shocked... but they figure no-one can stop them.
Now with the advent of DRM technology... someone can stop them (and perhaps report that they tried). It is kind of late to roll a lot of this stuff back just by voting with your dollars. That time has passed. I am afraid that it will take a LOT of messy court battles to iron this out.
Ah, the subject that cost me Karma when I jokingly said "sounds like anus. As in ripped or torn..." Got tagged as a troll; some ppl can't take a joke.
But to my point:
I work in the entertainment industry (not music) and you might find it interesting MS's heavy push to position itself as the troll under the bridge.
The movie industry is struggling (for many reasons that none of us are going to solve because they're not technical) with digital distribution of assets. Microsoft is positioning itself to have at a minimum some part of that industry.
I've never worked outside the IT industry till now, and I can speak with certainty that it is indeed interesting to watch this going on.
See this: MS Digital Cinema
As the predominate software vendor in the world, Microsoft is in the unique and enviable position of defining everyone's digital rights.
Should a "monopoly" be allowed to wield this power? What oversight group is going to ensure that the People's rights are included in DRM?
As the majority market owner, does a technology company have an obligation to open up proprietary software that directly affects a consumers ability to manage / safeguard digital solutions they quiet literally own?
It's one thing with your Quicken database, you can print it out. But it's a completely different thing when you buy a song you have a legal right to copy or backup, but may not be able to because of a third parties technology solution.
There are some areas, IMHO, where some standards body has got to step up.
Best regards...
/me sips his coffee and ponders a new sig...
How long is it going to take before people realize that corporations creating "standards" is just their way of ensuring that people continue to buy their proprietary non-"open" products?
Sorry, I'll stick with my impossible-to-control-or-limit mp3 technology, thanks. I don't care if it has to be "licensed", mp3 codecs are downloadable and usable very easily with no technical limitations at all, and that's exactly what I've been doing for quite some time now.
If legal issues arise with the mp3 format I'll just use Ogg Vorbis.
Why waste my time dealing with DRM bullshit like corporate-controlled statistics and tracking, and even worse, waste CPU time encoding the extra data used to for all of that when ripping my CDs to disk?
Also, not being able to play a WMA file on my Mac because they don't make the newer Windows Media Player for older Mac OSes is just stupid. Microsoft's "standards" cut off previous systems and formats, and we all know it. Personally, if they're going to go so far as to use DRM-enabled BIOSes, I'll stick with my 1.5ghz system, regardless of how "fast" computers get. If I'm required to use a DRM-enabled system to get online, well, guess I'll have to resort to these.
Also, my household has numerous computers of varying platforms and OSes. I'm not going to segregate my network by eliminating the current interoperability I experience by using software that isn't crippled or even better, is designed to work with other software by default.
In the end, it's just marketing. MS doesn't care about our "security". It's to protect their profits and their stranglehold upon the IT scene... this is just blatantly obvious, and I'm disappointed that people don't see this.
A few final things to consider: in the end, who does this benefit? Do we really need DRM? Are you willing to make the privacy-related sacrifices neccesary to attain the benefits supposedly only attained through DRM?
It will be very interesting to see how far microsoft can push their users before they say Enough!
Fortunately for me I do just fine with OpenSource and don't need or use their products.
The real test is going to be with everyday to day users who just want to use their computer. We know DRM, etc is styfling creativity and since universities are now using a lot of OpenSource too, I see it as a race. A race between oppressive and open use. Some people and organizations stand a lot to loose/gain.
The Internet is a great place to try to control society from as it reaches so many people. See how the psychs wants to control each kid by having access to their school computers to ensure they have the "right" attitude. They lobby to replace academic score cards with "proper" attitude. Why go to school if not to learn?
It has already happend with the news media here in the US. It's controlled to keep americans afraid of each other. Just look at our neighboor Canada. They are very friendly and not at all afraid of each other. I dare you to compare the media. People in Europe sees everyday how one sided news are from the US.
The Internet is the current battle ground. DRM is in that very same line of "work". It sounds kind of dooms day like, and indeed I see our freedom is being attacked. I for one will do what I can to oppose DRM and similar technologies with both my mouth and my money.
"Those who would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Every CD/DVD player
- Every TV
- Every audio amplifier
- Every audio cable
- Every pair of headphones
- Every pair of speakers
In short, the average consumer will not be able to afford a system that can play media with restrictions on analog output. The few who are that rich will not be able to prop up the movie/music industry, and if they go down this path, they will utterly collapse under the force of their own greed and stupidity.Meanwhile, the independent studios will grown during the downturn, in part because they will choose to adapt to technology rather than trying to naively strong-arm technology to bend to their will.
In other words, don't worry. This is just a case of corporate Darwinism. Let a few movie companies commit career suicide and everything will just work itself out naturally.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
...But I fear you're not. You'd think businesses and schools would be the last stronghold, but those have been "infected" too. Microsoft makes schools and businesses alike offers they can't refuse. Even if those groups resisted with all their might, there is something bigger at work here.
These aren't some random chunks of bad news suddenly coming together and giving us these nightmares; this stuff has been a long time coming. Getting folks to think that software and music and television all come from magic far-away places floating somewhere above everyday life, that was important. That's why music and television programming are so streamlined, overproduced and bottom-line optimized. Meanwhile, if you buy a computer the way a normal person does, it has Windows on it. Period. Windows has traditionally been a saddle that's comfortable enough that most people don't mind the bundled blinders.
Well before the whole AOL/Time Warner thing, Microsoft, AOL, Compuserve, you name it, they were all about getting computing to work more like "big media", so that similar profits could be reaped and similar big-dollar deals made. At the same time, "big media" were seeing something on the horizon that scared them. Consumers could perfectly recreate media, be it their own or anyone else's material. If they could get their hooks into computing and somehow stop this, they too could sit tight and enjoy the same profit-reaping and deal-making that they were used to.
That so many companies are behind this from day one just shows how badly this is wanted by those at the top of those industries. And when it comes time to try and legally require all this nonsense (notice how both software companies and big media have been getting more aggressive legally? Also no accident), multitudes of deep-pocketed corporations have rather a lot more lobbying and political funding clout than do "business and academia", let alone the odd free-thinking individual who's interested in _doing_ as opposed to consuming.
I don't want to believe it either, but this is one nightmare that only gets worse when we wake up each morning.
My imagination...
:)
You buy a book, but you're not allowed to read it in public.
You buy strawberries, but you're only allowed to eat then with yogurt brand xXx.
You buy a MS-paper, but you're only allowed to use an MS-pencil on it.
You have a Windows OS and you are only allowed to run Windows certified applications on it.
And you have to pay to get a certification of course
Privacy is terrorism.
Not anymore. Copyrights have been granted a 25 year extension just about every 25 years. At the rate we've been going, the Disney copyrights will be permanent.
I know this won't be a popular argument on Slashdot, but I can think of one scenario where DRM is potentially enabling.
Take, for example, the fact that you can't download The Lion King on the Internet right now (I mean from Disney, not BitTorrent). I'd guess that this is because Disney can't afford to put such valuable IP on the Internet without being able to control its distribution...yeah, yeah, information wants to be free and whatever, but can you REALLY blame Disney for not liberating something that DESERVEDLY makes them money?
The only way we're going to see experimentation with content distribution is with DRM like this. It's better to boycott Disney's draconian DRM and have them loosen it than to not have any DRM and content distribution at all.
And to those of you who will say "but Apple got music distributors to accept DRM that doesn't include analog out screening!": in my opinion, this may be a slightly different beast. Today's music industry is pop hit obsessed -- the business model is based on short-term success. With movies, it's a little different. Even though rentals occur most frequently soon after a movie's release, I'd think the tail stretches out much farther.
Well you see, as society came to rely more and more on industrial technology - a skilled and mobile workforce became essential. This was a disaster to the plantation system that relied on just the opposite to uphold slavery.
At first the southern states tried to react to it by imposing harsher and harsher laws, to where you couldn't even legally teach a black person how to read, and slavery was made to last forever and for every generation. Then they tried to micro-regulate the industrial northern states, who eventually completely got fed up and went gung-ho anti slavery. Then they tried to react to it by fencing themselves off from the northern states and forming a seperate country, at that point all hell broke loose.
Well now we are in the information age which demands the uninhibited flow of open information. Is it a disaster for those who rely on the copyright monopoly system. At first they tried to extend copyrights to forever, and impose insane punishments. Then they tried to microregulate everybody with the DMCA. Now they are trying to fence themselves off from the rest of the world by using DRM.
Brace for impact, all hell is almost certainly about to break loose.
Considering you can get "The Lion King" from BitTorrent and many other ways, why wouldn't Disney sell it? How does this technology actually propose to prevent people from getting access to the digital content? I don't believe that this will really keep people from making a conversion program/process any mroe than CSS did for DVD, so why would Disney start releasing films under it?
-no broken link
You're naive. When movie companies start producing DRM-encumbered content, the people will follow. VCRs were replaced because the movie companies decided that they perferred the DVD format, and gradually switched to that format, while killing off the VHS tape. The DVD player was expensive when it was first released, but now it's a cheap commodity-- I bought my neighbor a $29 model for Christmas. In a few years (2, 5, 10, 20, who cares?), those same cheap commodities-- which everyone will have-- will be "protected".
If you think that if it takes 20 years it doesn't matter, then you're not just naive, you're a damned idiot.
When mass-produced entertainment becomes protected, the masses will buy protected playback system. Those protected system are, or will be, backed by government law, thanks for big business lobbyists. Then your small studios will be forced into using old technology, and old technology breaks. How long do you think you can keep your current DVD player in good working order? Can you get your tape player repaired? How about your 8-track, or laser-disc player, or TV? The market for "iold technology" will become smaller and smaller, until the independant studios can't produce goods any longer, or there isn't anyone left with working playback systems.
Oh, that'll take 75 years, you may say. We're talking about rights here; who cares what the timeframe is?
You know the story about boiling a frog? You stick a frog in a pot of boiling water, and he jumps out real fast. You stick it in cool water, and it stays there while you turn up the heat. Before the frog knows whats going on, it's dead.
Consumers are the frog.
Submitted for your aproval. A studio that takes stories that are in the public domain and animates them.
Then after that studio releases this movie and makes a healthy profit and against the public good, they pay to lock these movies out of ever moving into the public domain. The "IP" value is to high to allow this.
A movie studio afriad to let the public view a movie because it's IP value is so great.....only in the DMCA zone
vi +
This is the whole point of an effective antitrust system (which we certainly do not have) versus what comes close to laissez-faire economics. If there were another platform with an even remotely significant percentage of the user base, no customer in their right mind would swallow Janus; they would gravitate toward the inevitable alternative. In this real world, however, there is not going to be any other alternative that runs on Windows -- Microsoft can make sure of that. Sadly, in a monopolistic world, our rights diminish every day. *This* is the reason why we need open standards and, apparently, open source.
My company manufactures speakers for the Australian market. They are assembled in Australia, but all the parts come from China.
Trust me, our Chinese friends will happily continue to make devices with analogue inputs and outputs as long as we continue to order them.
What's more, the Chinese don't give a shit about American patent and copyright issues. Where do you think those region free DVD players come from? Do you think they're approved by the DVD consortium? But can you get one? Of course you can!
And this situation will remain. Even when DVDii (I like that :-) becomes available, the market will demmand features we all love, like being able to copy things, and the consumer will simply choose the device which meets their needs; of course, as the device they need will be a 'grey-import,' it will be much cheaper than the alternative, just as region free DVD players are cheaper now.
Plus the fact that many, many people will interpret any restriction on our digital freedoms as a challenge, new firmware and hacks will be available to 'unlock' your devices so quickly that it will appear within 24 hours as the top response for the google search term 'unlock my tv.'