Slashdot Mirror


Disney Suggests Mandating DRM On All Media

Ethan Butterfield writes "Cory Doctorow posted this on his blog this morning. Essentially, Disney wants the FCC to regulate all devices capable of recording from any audio broadcasting medium or from the Internet."

14 of 433 comments (clear)

  1. Could this... by Tuxedo+Jack · · Score: 5, Funny

    Could this possibly tie in with their crappy newly-released PCs? I'd love to get one of those and tear it apart to see what DRM they've put in.

    Mickey with a shotgun saying something about a "motherfucking IP infringer" comes to mind...

    --

    Striking fear in the authors of godawful fanfiction, I am here, appearing in darkness, Tuxedo Jack!
    1. Re:Could this... by danamania · · Score: 5, Funny

      Could this possibly tie in with their crappy newly-released PCs? I'd love to get one of those and tear it apart to see what DRM they've put in.

      You can do that, as soon as you buy a DRM-enabled screwdriver to undo the DRM-enabled screws on the DRM-enabled case.

    2. Re:Could this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You can do that, as soon as you buy a DRM-enabled screwdriver

      That'd be license the DRM enabled screwdriver.

    3. Re:Could this... by fireman+sam · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not quite... In Soviet Disneyland the DRM-enabled licenses screw you

      --
      it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
    4. Re:Could this... by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Sometimes I have to wonder if this is how it happened to the Flower* Power generation.

      No. How it happened to the 'Flower Power' generation is that there was no Flower Power generation out of a very few small local areas, i.e. San Francisco. Most of the 'coopting' occured simultaneous with the development of the myth that there ever was a mass 'hippie' movement. The hype turned into the 'reality' by the time most people found out there was anything happening. By that point it was a marketing operation, i.e. 'hippie' carnies selling t-shirts at concerts. Same as it ever was, essentially.

      --
      resigned
  2. In other news.... by josh3736 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Disney also suggests copyright be extended to an indefinite amount of time.

    Because, as we all know, once something falls into the public domain, no one will want to keep it around anymore and it will forever be lost.

    1. Re:In other news.... by adjuster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Disney also suggests copyright be extended to an indefinite amount of time.

      It's this kind of stuff that should make all of us look up and see what's going on. We are facing a serious cultural dilemma, as a people. Our "intellectual property" system is creating a climate that allows works to disappear forever, and creates no legal alternative.

      Corporations "own" the works, and the works remain "protected" by copyright. Meanwhile, works that are not economically viable to be "sold" by the "owners" simply become unavailable, however the "protection" of copyright makes it illegal for individuals to simply reproduce these works themselves. Today it's acetate films rotting in vaults, and books that have "fallen out of print" on acidic paper. Tomorrow it will be video and audio "locked up" in encryption algorithms that may well be trivilly easy to break, but are legally protected.

      Corporations are doing what corporations are supposed to do-- returning value for shareholders. We can debate globaliation and corporatization and the like all day long-- but not here. The change needs to come by way of changes to "intellectual property" law. Laws are made for the good of society, not for the good of corporations, per se. As a society, we all need to become informed about these issues and work to address them. It may not be glamorous, but it's necessary.

      I know there are people who agree with me, but I have no idea how to get the idea out to the public, where the real changes can happen.

      Licensing your own work with trendy licenses like Creative Commons or GPL isn't the answer. Violating current "intellectual property" law to show "civil disobedience" isn't the answer. Doing nothing most certainly isn't the answer. The answer is to get the average person involved.

      I fear that most people are already too far gone. Most poor bastards don't have enough independent thought left to even think that it's possible to question a notion like "A creator should receive economic compensation every time their work is copied". People simply think that the current system is "just the way it is", and their hobbled minds aren't flexible enough to even comprehend that things could be different.

      The message I'd love to get out to the street is this: When you download an MP3 or a movie, you're not hurting the artists or creators-- you're hurting their PUBLISHER. When you buy a CD or software, you're not helping the artists or creators, you're helping the PUBLISHER. Publishers are a scourge upon us-- a plague of leeches. If we can get the public behind new models of economic compensation (or old ones-- live music has been around for millenia), we can break the publisher's grip on our "intellectual property" system, and start to have a reasonable hope of preserving a record of our culture.

      --
      The Attitude Adjuster, I hate me, you can too.
  3. Re:So... by jejagua · · Score: 5, Funny

    Up next: DRM for your brain. Maybe now I can get rid of all those silly TV theme songs constantly playing in my head.

    --
    http://www.techyrants.com
  4. They're scared... and they're rich. by sglider · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've been following this for a while, and until now I haven't said much, instead I've had the thought that since they own the copyright, it's their right to ask the FCC to do this. Until now.

    The FCC and other regulatory commissions are there to two do things, the first being make sure that the public interest is taken care of (since they are a by-product of a democratic republic), and the second is otherwise regulate until #1 is met. In this end, they regulate the airwaves, but they've never regulated the technology, only what it can do. For example, you can't make a remote control that operates on the same frequency as other products, and you can't show a nipple on television. What you are allowed to do, however, is to record music and television shows for private use (not public use). Where Disney and other companies miss the mark is that they believe that their customers are inherently bad, and to that end, they should prevent people from taking away from their business venue, and they sincerely believe that they are right by asking the FCC to stop allowing devices to record broadcasts. Disney and other companies must work within the established guidelines set out by the FCC, and what we are witnessing is their attempts to change that landscape to maximize their profits, and minimize piracy. Unfortunatly when they do that, they minimize fair use rights.

    --
    War isn't about who's right. It's about who's left.
  5. Re:Only a matter of time before it happens by dTaylorSingletary · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > Buy prison stock now.

    Isn't that voting with your dollars? Profiting from heinous acts is nearly as bad as commiting them.

    --
    d. Taylor Singletary,
    reality technician techra.el
  6. I find Disney's copyright stance highyly ironic by Infonaut · · Score: 5, Insightful
    given that their best work is usually their most derivative work.

    From Lessig's book Free Culture:

    "Indeed, the catalog of Disney work drawing upon the work of others is astonishing when set together: Snow White (1937), Fantasia (1940), Pinocchio (1940), Dumbo (1941), Bambi (1942), /Song of the South (1946), Cinderella (1950), Alice in Wonderland (1951), /Robin Hood (1952), Peter Pan (1953), Lady and the Tramp (1955), Mulan (1998), Sleeping Beauty (1959), 101 Dalmatians (1961), The Sword in the Stone (1963), and The Jungle Book (1967)--not to mention a recent example that we should perhaps quickly forget, Treasure Planet (2003). In all of these cases, Disney (or Disney, Inc.) ripped creativity from the culture around him, mixed that creativity with his own extraordinary talent, and then burned that mix into the soul of his culture. Rip, mix, and burn."

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
  7. Deregulation is a crock by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Deregulation seems to only work one way, in favor of the major corporate interests that the FCC is supposed to protect us from. Instead, in this environment of deregulation, which allows more and more power to be concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, we see who is going to be regulated: the consumer!

    Thank you, my fellow Republicans, for blindly following ideology as if it were holy writ.

    --
    It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  8. Not going to work by 0x0d0a · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There are three main approaches to implementing DRM:

    * Disable use on systems after a leak and redistribution. Generally done with some kind of watermarking scheme. Never going to happen. Watermarking is a cute research idea, but it turns out that efficient compression (eliminating data that isn't visually/aurally important) eliminates the same set of data that watermarks need to play with. There are a host of other problems as well -- generally, if someone can detect a watermark, they can remove it. Caught a bit of interest early on, pretty much went away.

    * Stop redistribution after a leak. The RIAA/MPAA are still working on this, but it's ultimately a doomeed effort. Computers and networks were made to copy data.

    * Try to prevent the inital copy from leaking. Never going to happen. There are too many places for an initial leak to come from with any kind of widely-distributed data. There's a hybrid approach using this and watermarks to identify initial leaks followed by legal action against the source of the leak. This doesn't even work against small-scale distribution systems like screener DVDs -- it will *not* work for a large-scale system.

    That's not so bad. It just means that the econonmy of our society is changing once again. Attempts to keep the rules from shifting and the econonmy from adjusting are as useless as the feudal lords trying to keep merchants from becoming the new powerful class.

  9. How about we add DRM to paper? by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Then Disney wouldn't have been able to steal also many movie plots from Rudyard Kipling and the Grimm Brothers and Hans Christian Anderson.