Slashdot Mirror
Longhorn to Require Monitor-Based DRM
Mr_Silver writes "Engadget has an interesting article regarding a new feature in Longhorn entitled PVP-OPM (Protected Video Path - Output Protection Management) which detects the capabilities of the display devices you are using and manages how (and if at all) content is sent to it. In short, this means that if Longhorn detects that your monitor is not "secure" enough, then your premium video content won't play on it until you buy one that is. Who gets to decide? The content providers of course." From the article: "So what will happen when you try to play premium content on your incompatible monitor? If you're "lucky", the content will go through a resolution constrictor. The purpose of this constrictor is to down-sample high-resolution content to below a certain number of pixels. The newly down-sampled content is then blown back up to match the resolution of your monitor. This is much like when you shrink a JPEG and then zoom into it. Much of the clarity is lost. The result is a picture far fuzzier than it need be."
As we live in a capitalistic society this of course means the end of Microsoft as an os providor as people generally don't want to buy crap (tm). I mean who would "want" to buy this?! I hope Linux is ready for the desktop (at least for Joe SP) when this rolls out because this is THE chance for linux to explode into the market.
"It's so convenient to have a system where everyone is a criminal" - A. Hitler
As ever, this won't stop anyone serious about circumventing DRM, and will only fuck over the innocent. Do they never learn?
It doesn't matter. Dumb people would still buy Longhorn anyway.
Or maybe would it finally pursuade people to migrate onto Mac? (I don't dare to say "linux" yet).
The problem is not things that *CAN* operate with a wide variety of DRM option. The abilty to support DRM isn't a problem at all.
:)
The solution, as always, is simple. Vote with your wallet for either (a) DRM solutions that make sense, or (b) for solutions that don't take advantage of the richly enabled DRM fabic available to content producers.
If I produce content, I should be able to decide what's done with it (for a reasonable time, anyway). If I want it to be one-peek-per-customer, that's my right, it's my content.
You...just shouldn't be stupid as to buy it
Say goodbye to sending a signal to your livingroom TV, LH users.
Guys, I don't think you really understand the "choices" being offered.
Company's who wish to provide Hi-Def content to PCs won't want to do it if it gets stolen/copied easily. With a secure copy-protection mechanism, far more companies will be willing to offer content.
This will create a large marketplace with lots of competition because it won't be just the big companies that can swallow the piracy loss entering the market.
So your choice isn't really between viewing this hi-def content as you wish or viewing it on a secure setup. It's a choice between content or no content.
Wouldn't you rather have at least the option of content that you wouldn't normally have?
So please, stop crying that Microsoft is out to get you and that they're infringing on some rights you think you have. Since when did the consumer of a service have the right to dictate how the company in question provides the service? You either use the service, or you don't... if it sucks and nobody uses it, the company will change the service or go out of business. Simple as that.
Microsoft will be creating MORE opportunities for services and products that can't really exist without their technology.
Don't buy the content that requires this.
Create your own content and sell it to others that with no restrictions.
III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIII
This is just wonderfull. Just think instead of finishing most of the features, that were to be included in the newest Windows family member, they (MS) decided to integrate DRM, in lie of the file system, and all the other features that were pushed out, or for inclusion much later in the products dev cycle. Well, I know I am not going to partake of the latest offering from Redmond now. I wonder how much Macrovision is getting to cross license this sceme?
My cat's picked up a Hammer. HEY! Put down that Hammer. Put Down that Hamm...THUNK!
If you need a certified monitor then you can't play your premium content out to an monitor emulator for recording the video signal to rip content to strip the DRM.
Kind of like how now I can play my DRM'd music through my lineout and record it on line-in in any format I choose.
It will be like DeCSS all over again but this time instead of DVD players it will be monitors.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
So, let me get this straight. If I so chose to upgrade to Longhorn, I'd have to buy a whole new videocard and monitor to actually view the OS and any other programs tailor written for it? I am not aware of any videocards that currently offer DVI ports that actually also have HDCP standard (although I could definitely be wrong). Does this mean we'll all have to upgrade to videocards with HDMI ports built in?
I think this is pure idiocy. And people thought Apple moving to Intel based processors because of built-in DRM was a step over the edge...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
"we're not gonna take it. da da da da da-da da. we're not gonna take it da da da da da-da da"
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
So, of the major features that were originally supposed to be the selling point in Longhorn...
WinFS pretty much seems indefinately stalled.
Avalon seems to be delayed until after release.
The new shell will not be available until the Server release.
But the crippling DRM feature that requires me to have an MPAA approved monitor to get "premium" video quality is right on schedule.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
IMHO, this is another example of the industry shooting itself in the foot, only moreso than they previously have.
It's one thing when joe-consumer downloads a song from the Microsoft music store, and can't copy it to his iPod. It's one thing when joe-consumer buys a DVD, and has a hard time making a VHS copy because his kids keep scratching the crap out her DVDs. Both of these things the average consumer accepts will not work, because consumers are used to different technologies not playing nicely together. They don't know about DRM, but they do know that they could never get those photos aunt Kathy sent to print on their printer, and figure this is more of the same.
If Morgan Freeman has his way, though, and movies are delivered to our homes by internet, consumers will be calling tech support in droves; "I can't watch my movie? What's wrong?" And those consumers will not be happy when they're told the 19" LCD monitor they bought two years ago needs to be replaced. Consumers DO expect to be able to watch a movie they download.
I think, ultimately, this is a nail in the coffin of the unborn movies-by-internet industry, which is a shame.
How long until we see something similar with audio? "Users without an appropriately DRM-equipped soundcard will hear down-sampled audio played back through the Windows PC Speaker driver"
The beauty of capitalism is that bad ideas usually die. The consumers dictate whether they will accept this by purchasing or not purchasing it.
Unfortunately, there is such a thing as marketers who create markets where there is none and desire where there should be none. If MS markets this correctly, people will want to give up their freedom.
Are you talking about the same Apple for which playing full screen video is an extra feature that needs to be paid for?
I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
As far as Linux, expect that it won't work at all unless someone can manage to find a crack to unprotect content.
I think the point is that making sure the monitor is "trusted" means you don't simply have a video caputure device plugged in.
Of course, you might have your "trusted" monitor plugged in and simply sniff the signal (via a little box between the monitor and the computer that only "listens" to the outgoing analog signals).
This is not a "real" solution, but yet another clue barrier... So now, if you want to build a VGA video capture device, you need to make it just a pass through that passivly observers and does not participlate as if it was a monitor... Simple.
Spell check? Why bother. That is what grammer/spelling Nazi freaks who waiste band width posting "spell right" are for.
The problem is, people won't KNOW what it is
What this means is, WE HAVE TO TELL THEM.
People aren't going to refrain from buying Longhorn. People in a year or so literally won't have a choice; if you want a new computer you'll be buying Longhorn. However, we can make an impact on the secure monitors. It wouldn't be that hard to convince people (friends, family, neighbors, etc) that the new secure monitors and video cards are to blame (which they are, because if the secure monitors aren't picked up then the feature won't be used by content providers). Explain the feature enough that they'd understand it-- perhaps explain that the movie companies and microsoft want to stop you from doing certain things with your computer, and they can only do it if people buy these monitors-- them that and try to get them to pick some other brand.
Longhorn is unstoppable. Microsoft can and will do literally anything it wants. However a consumer backlash against the feature itself is possible as long as the hardware is targetted. Unfortunately I fear the American consumer is so weak right now no one will bother to try.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
I think you're assuming that the signal between the computer and the monitor will be analog. For this to work, it would likely be an encrypted digital stream that would take more then even a fourth year EE to decode.
The keyword is encrypted. It's not just a matter of 'figuring out the protocols', it's also necessary to defeat encryption that is specifically designed to stop folks who are trying to do what you describe.
Is it impossible? No. But it's a lot more complicated then just downloading the protocol, taking a scope to the wires, and hacking together an interface.
This WHOLE thing is moot. We all know that DRM does't work and people go out of their way to avoid DRM content.
.wmv to secure online video, we use XviD. They region encoded DVDs, China starts pumping out millions upon millions of region free DVD players.
For instance, they made ATRAC as a secure format for digital music, we all still use mp3. They made
So who wants to bet that this DRM will die still born along with the rest of the attempts to restrict media?
Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
GNUstep is an amicable project. What they are trying to achieve is great for the community, no doubt. But it is not anywhere near useful for the average user. Unless some miracles happen, it won't be usable as a Mac OS X -> Linux transition desktop.
Now, there are some people who are going to say, "But I can already check my email with GNUMail!", and to them I say, "Yes." But the fact remains that the NeXT-style vertical menus are too powerful for the average user. Apple realized that, and ditched them. While it is claimed that horizontal menus can be used when using bundles, it is far beyond the capabilities of your typical user to make such a change.
While it would be fantastic if GNUstep and Linux were able to replace Mac OS X for most people, that just isn't the case, unfortunately. They'll still be stuck dealing with crippled Longhorn.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
... a mouse which can't click on certain links due to 'drm' constrictions, where the OS determines the user is not allowed to use the supplied anti-MS, anti-profit making link?
Veni, Vidi, Velcro!
and I did not speak outbecause I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak outbecause I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak outbecause I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
First they DRM'd the software and I did not speak out because I used non-DRM'd software.
Then they came DRM'd the OS and I did not speak out because I stuck to non-DRM'd OS.
Then they DRM'd the firmware and I did not speak out because I used non-DRM'd firmware.
Then they DRM'd the hardware and there was no where to run my non-DRM'd firmware, OS and software.
--Me
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
Unfortunately the choice the public will see is likely to be between:
- Buy Longhorn, and be able to view this premium video content.
- Run Linux/MacOS/BSD and not be able to view this content.
Sure, it may be possible for someone to crack the encrypted path, and distribute unrestricted versions online. But you can't exactly advertise that in your marketing campaign, whereas Microsoft can advertise this premium content as only being available on Longhorn.I think this can only hurt other OSes.
You don't think Apple is going to do this too? What will happen with Linux though?
In ten years, through the DMCA, it will be illegal to have an operating system that does not enforce DRM. Anything that does not enforce DRM will be considered a circumvention.
First of all, it means they've failed to put their CrapWare(tm) in the computer's firmware. Less cruft in my motherboard is a Good Thing. Not that it would have killed Linux, anyway -- the Open Source community is pretty good at working around things like that. But still.
Second of all, this means that in order to access their movie content and so on, you'll have to have one of the "special" monitors, but the system will only work through Windows -- it's primarily a software solution which looks for the monitor feature, and fucks up the imagery if it doesn't find it. So, again, Linux remains unaffected.
Third, if we Linux guys decided to buy something like a future game console or set-top box (we wouldn't run a Windows computer per se, of course, because we're already wonderfully served by our Linux boxen) it would probably have this built-in, and we'd be able to do what we wanted with it.
I'd say it's not a bad idea overall.
Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
Sad but true.
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/pro/
Apple's crazy-stupid when it comes to QuickTime Pro.
Full Screen should NOT be a professional feature!
Ultimately hardware options are not a solution pirates can use, since watermarking could easily identify which person freed some content from DRM. The number of people capable of freeing content is directly proportional to the ease in identifying them (and thus shutting them down).
The big problem in terms of maintaining freedom over your own computer is the BIOS. Nowadays it is compressed and encrypted, so if one day it started refusing to load non-authorised operating systems you could easily have a situation where only longhoard would load, it wouldn't let you load drivers or even read the decoding software instructions to simulate it, etc. So that's the key piece, since if that goes DRM-only then the only options are to a) hack the os or b) emulate the entire computer. But to do (b) you'll have to read keys, etc from hardware which can be made extremely difficult.
Of course hacking longhoard will be easy, for now, but ultimately that's a losing proposition. So people with the skill and that care should contribute to the open bios project.
> We should charge MS for something that was guaranteed to happen anyways!
If you're the kind of ninny that throws things away and buys a new one even though the old
one was still working fine then Congratulations! You're part of the problem.
Not everybody does that, believe it or not. Even if you feel the need to constantly stay on
the upgrade treadmill, you could always donate your old stuff or sell it at a garage sale.
Now, there won't be much use of the old tubes at all since they won't be compatible with the
newest software.
But I know, I know, suggesting that any corporation be responsible for the damage it does
means I'm a communist, or a terrorist, or an America-hater or whatever the new buzzword is.
25% Funny, 25% Insightful, 25% Informative, 25% Troll
That's precisely the question, and we'll just have to see.
Generally, when one asks "Will it run ____?" the blank is filled in with some commercial piece of software, usually a game or a productivity app. And the answer will always be yes: Photoshop, MS Office, Half Life 83, etc. will all run beautifully on this. Probably even the old versions will, since they're not video players. The same will apply to all of the most common media players; in fact, Windows Media Player will run right there.
The most obvious question from the slightly more insightful user is, "Will it play my existing DVDs?", and that's the biggest question mark. If the answer turns out to be "No", if somebody upgrades their laptop and discovers the next time that they board an airplane that they have to read the in-flight magazine rather than watch Tomb Raider 9 3/4, then you're going to see some serious, serious backlash.
I'm going to assume that MS knows that, and so existing DVD formats will probably play exactly as they do now (which does have various protections anyway, though they're easily bypassed.)
Instead, I expect that this will apply primarily to new content (or rather, newly-coded content). For that, question would be "But will it run NFF (New Fangled Format)?" and the answer is "Yes". The flip side, "Will NFF run on my existing box" will be "No", but I think that user backlash on that is smaller than you might expect. They could take it as an opportunity to switch to Linux/OS X/PDP 11, but as long as they're buying a new computer, they could buy one with Longhorn, which will run NFF along with all of their old programs.
The user is kept on the upgrade treadmill because at each step the logical choice will be "forward" rather than "right" or "left". That's partly because they expect that a side-step will just put them on a different treadmill, which is a whole different debate.
So I don't expect this to cause a mass defection from Windows, at least not by itself. Other factors (cheaper Macs, improved Linux, the stunning revival of the Timex Sinclair) will make it hard to tease out whether I'm right or wrong, so maybe all this is moot, but, well, it's Slashdot and I get to shoot my mouth off anyway.
No, I do not think you are correct.
Yes, the worst enemy of capitalism is capitalism. What that means is that as MS continues to become less and less paltable, competitors will take their place.
People are much more willing to engage in the little 'r' revolution, than to start over with a new system
The unencubered nature of OSS, and the much more limited DRM of apple-like systems will simply be another feature that savvy salespeople will use to push competitors products.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
'why' MS is doing this.
It's evident that there are plenty of people who are now less likely to buy Longhorn *looks around*, but surely making your product unattractive is not really any way to be a capitalistic market gorilla.
So - there must be an upside to this somewhere. Maybe there is, I hate the idea of DRM, but think of the iPod/iTunes. All those nifty litttle DRM devices suddenly spawned an online music market. Maybe when there is a large market of DRM supporting desktops out there, we'll suddenly get some other legitimate services - video on demand, software on demand? Not sure I like it myself, but surely you can all devote a little more thought to it other than "MS Baaaaad"
As soon as you need actual hardware to pirate the signal, copying movies becomes a restricted occupation again, just like selling free cable boxes.
No, copying movies the first time becomes a restricted occupation. Once a single unencrypted copy exists, then making a million more is no more difficult than it is today.
Whip out your favorite P2P client, and search for some copyrighted video. Do you see a hundred different rips made by each of the hundred different people sharing a copy? No, you see one or two of the best rips, each with hundreds of identical copies shared, in part because the swarming download protocols and hashing algorithms fundamentally encourage that behavior.
So what difference will in-monitor DRM make? Instead of having a few zealous groups using software to rip tons of movies that are then shared by millions of people, we'll have a few zealous groups using hardware to rip tons of movies that are then shared by hundreds of millions of people.
Wait - why will there be more people sharing these rips? Because most people will own some of the billions of non-DRM-capable monitors in existance, and the moron DRM-using publishers will have thus made it impossible for them to play a full-quality copy of these videos unless they have an illegal copy. Publishers couldn't do anything more stupid if they put a "Download free movies on P2P! It's the best!" advertisement at the start of every show!
/* You are going to have to make a device that can read the output of 3 color electron gun drivers, a vertical position control, and a horizontal position control and decode it all back to an image. */
;-)
I believe there are devices that actually could do that - they are commonly refered to as "digital cameras"
Seriously, any image visible to human eye could be copied - this kind of "protection" is dead by design.
Although your post was insightful, I had to force myself not to laugh, because your punctuation was so poor. Please learn how to use apostrophes, for your own sake. I'm sure plenty of people will read "mark's" and think: "Twelve-year old".
It's not enough that the majority of installed PCs probably don't have the horsepower to run Longhorn, now M$ wants to force people to buy new peripherals. I hate to compare them to Apple, but I was using the old OS 9 on an old computer that wouldn't run OS X. So, I bought a used B&W G3, plugged in my ADB keyboard and a beige, Performa-era monitor, and installed OS X 10.3 which runs flawlessly. The OS was literally more expensive than the computer.
M$, on the other hand, would force me to buy a new monitor in addition to a faster computer to view content that I'VE ALREADY PAID FOR? Once again, I'm having difficulty seeing Windows as a value added product.
Make love, not reality television.
Will this affect 500+ GB *ripped and _reencoded_* .avi Video Libraries? I mean, I hear some people have them...
Not I, of course. Just sayin'...
Akarsz Magyar Gentoo fórumot? Akkor
Otherwise, I think it's very short sighted to think that CRTs are going to be around much longer no matter how well they work. How many black and white tv's do you have around? Should you keep them because they still work? Sure, a huge 21" CRT still looks better than an LCD, but how long is that going to last?
I think you answerd you're own question. B&W tv screens is a poor analogy, since they don't look better than a color tv. Maybe when CRT's look as good as LCD's (according to these die-hard CRT fans), then they'll switch, but when the CRT works better for them, why should they be forced to "upgrade" to something that's less useful?
As an aside, I don't really think you can blame MS , but then again, I don't think CRT is dead quite yet either.
How hard would it be to build a dongle to insert between the computer and any existing monitor, video distributor, KVM, or recorder, that would mimic the response sent to the computer by these new DRM enabled monitors? I'd bet it will be pretty simple. ...
...
Computer: "Hey monitor, are you DRM safe?"
*dongle intercepts and responds on monitor's behalf*
Dongle: "Yes, I'm the new S0ny SE770LCDRM!"
Computer: "Oh, ok, then in that case, here's your
unrestricted HD video feed."
*dongle passes video feed through to untainted hardware*
Besides, you could probably implement it as a hacked device driver, the method by which many hardware dongle software protection schemes have been circumvented.
I'm not scared. I'm bored. I've got my IDE open and my soldering iron warming up as we speak. And I doubt I'm alone on this.
Just look at the superior copy protection of modern video gaming consoles... *cough* modchip *cough*
It seems like all these copy protection efforts do is create niche businesses designed to bypass them. I better file to get a tax license...
Pretty soon, computers will not have a video port, and they'll be bundled with the monitor as an all-in-one unit. Maybe Apple will come out with this... *cough, again*
That's just my stream of thoughts...
-@
I swear the instinct to buy the more expensive option and feel proud of it is one of mankind's strongest instincts.
...and yes, I *am* preaching at you -- all of you who fall into this trap. And I'm just as guilty of it as anyone too, so I'm also preaching to the man in the mirror.
You're absolutely right, it is one of man's strongest instincts right alongside the need to eat, survive and reproduce. It is fundamentally built into the design of human beings by God who designed us with an inherent need to worship, but since He also gave us free will, some of us will choose to worship Him, which was His intent, but unfortunately most of us prefer to worship things instead, and our pride also makes us want to desire to be "worshipped" by our fellow man in the form of impressing them with our buying power and extravagent tastes. What a bunch of depraved losers we actually are. We should all make it a point to spend our money more wisely and if we want to impress someone with our wealth and tastes, we should instead brag about how many how many people we've helped with our money instead of what toys we've bought to gratify ourselves.
You know, the one who is supposed to be always right, or mostly right. It's obviously not the end user anymore. Typically a copy of Windows is purchased by guys who make the PC, so it's not really up to the end user to concern himself with these things. So MS cuts a deal with Dell, and cuts a deal with a consortium of content providers and the vast majority of the people don't know a thing until their computer tells them they can't do something. With the exception of better USB support in newer systems. I have no qualms with continuing to use Win 98 SE.
The whole thing is a war of egos over a market which doesn't exist. Who really wants to intercept video going to their monitor anyway? DVD sales are dropping in general because the sad reality is that for all the movies produced in a year, damn few are worth watching once, never mind more than once. The whole idea probably stems from the idea that if you don't prove you are defending your copyright, you lose it. This is just another frontier on which you have to prove you are defending your copyright. I think it's pretty obvious from X-Box sales that Microsoft isn't going to own the living room in our lifetimes. So they should develop a better strategy for holding the office before somebody makes Linux palatable enough for the masses.
Big OS is the same damn thing as Big government. To get the 1% you want you have to finance the 99% you don't want. If Microsoft is going to keep developing for the interests of people other than the end user, they should really just give the OS out. There has to be an end to how much you can force people to buy upgrades that have nothing they want in them. You may be able to mess with ignorance of the home user, but small business owners tend to get pissed being charged something for nothing over and over. I know a lot of shops that still use old Windows variants and even a few DOS shops. They don't even think about it until they try and add a workstation and get some crap like XP pre-installed.
When DRM starts really hitting users in the face, they will look for alternatives, or just look away. None of this amounts to a serious business model for content providers, because they really haven't been putting nearly as much effort into the content as they have into the delivery systems. Their sloth is coming home to roost, and all the DRM in the world isn't going to save them.
The problem with this (and many, many other issues in toay's world) is not lack of education. People have been educated to death. I mean, look at obesity. Everyone knows, even the folks who pretend they're so stupid that they didn't know that eating at McDonalds every day would turn them into gasping, rotund lardasses, that eating crap makes you fat. And yet millions of people still do it every day, willingly and gladly.
The problem now is that people have been educated, and don't care.
I don't know how you fight apathy. Education doesn't work. Scare tactics don't work. Protests don't work. Maybe it's time for some good old-fashioned violence, as at least people still seem to pay attention to that, although even that seems to be losing its motivational value.
Boycott everything - they're all trying to fuck you one way or another
If you read Microsoft's little plan for drm, you might notice subtle hints on video card design. These hints could be interpreted as:
"You may want to include lots of undocumented interfaces for you video card, as that will make it easier to certify your card. Try to conceal the exact functionality from the dirty Linux hippie thieves."
However, I haven't used Linux in a long time, having switched to Macs. Perhaps obfuscation of video hardware is now the norm.
But the last time I checked, DeCSS was a dubious procedure at best. With the DMCA, everytime you use DeCSS you are committing a federal felony by breaking a form of digital encryption. A handful of major Linux distributions have stopped supporting DVD playback in their "out of the box" distribution for this concern. Yes Linux will play it, but it will be illegal. Im sure the same can be said about a windows user who goes to similar lengths to play a movie through one of these new encryptions.
The bottom line is that as bandwidth and network performance increases and peer-to-peer use becomes more pervasive and legitimate (e.g. built into opera browser), the circumstances allowing people to receive high quality (in terms of a/v resolution) digital content over networks comes into place simultaneously with the means for effortless piracy.
a u67ur080j3
I would love to be able to buy "I'm Alan Partridge" directly from the BBC without having to wait for it to come out on DVD (let alone come out on DVD in the US). I would love to watch the SABC news from south africa, in High Def. I would love to buy out of print records in full SACD quality, but only pay for the B-side.
Imagine an online record store that sold everything on allmusic.com!
http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:6
instead of an online record store that looks like a local sam goody (itunes)
One of the major things preventing these products from being available is the lack of a universal, accepted DRM systems.
As far as keeping "backups" of your purchased content, if all of the content is purchased over a network, then certainly if local copies of your purchased content are damaged or lost, then you'd be able to re-download it, the DRM system would easily identify the download as legitimate (because you already paid for that item) (I know itunes doesn't do this, but others do)
And if it all is too cumbursome (which it doesn't have to be e.g. itunes) people will bag it and continue to purchase content by traditional means.
If, however, the product is better quality, more convienient, cheaper, and there is a greater selection, then by all means bring it on.
Most people don't care about watching video on their PC. I know someone who was all excited about his new "Media Center" PC when he got it. Then he discovered he can't play DVDs he recorded on anything else - including his DVD player in the living room. He doesn't talk about it any more, and obviously he doesn't bring over any cool shows he recorded either. The only thing I've ever really said about it is "why do you want to watch TV on a 17 inch monitor?". Now he's got a DVD recorder by the TV. It's just stupid, and when these issues come up, Joe consumer is just going to buy an HD-DVD player and connect it to his TV.
The real key to all this is to spread FireFox. If web sites decide they have to support alternative browsers, there just won't be any DRMed content anyway. The stuff you buy in the store most people don't view on the PC. This is an attempt by Hollywood to eliminate the distribution channels (and costs), but people just don't want to download movies and watch them on a PC - not most people.
People almost all of you are part of the problem. Not just non-geeks. Why do go around calling people consumers?? You've already been brainwashed. You're citizens or people!
Who the hell cares if you can't see some dumbass movie or the listen to the latest manufactured pop star's video???
I'm gonna be labelled a troll for sure, but hell this mentality burns my butt. The problem isn't DRM the problem is that you all believe you *need* to see the lame things being offered up.
Come on. You got better things to *do* than just be a content "consumer". And for those that don't they deserve all the DRM and rights violations that are happening. Look at where you've been lead to think. If you don't think the content is worth the price they are asking for it then clearly the answer isn't to fight DRM.... the answer is just don't buy it.
MacroVision for VHS wasn't 100% effective either, but it was enough to stop the vast majority of people from copying video tapes.
I can spend a hour trying to find a bad overly compressed screen capture of a movie off BT, or $15 for a new one at Target, or $3 for a rental at BB. Which one is a better use of my time? Which course of action gives me a better movie experience?
All the studios need to do is protect the majority of their market, while not pissing them off by being too heavy handed, and they'll succeed. And don't think for a second they haven't been observing the music/mp3/itunes battles with great interest.
I don't think they're going to make all of the same mistakes, but I do expect them to do what they can to protect their investments.
And if P2P and Freenet become perceived as too much of a problem, those protocols will be monitored, banned, disrupted, blocked, and/or the users fined or jailed. Too many people think that because their computer is sitting down in their basement that their internet access is "private" and unmonitored and untraceable.
I've said before, and I'll say it again. The key here is not to crack and steal their work, but to create and patronize new models and new works. Do the first, and you enter into an arms race. Do the second, and they have no choice but to embrace them... or die.
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.