HighDef Content to Require New Monitors

QT writes "Ars Technica has an interesting article on how HDCP figures into Microsoft and Apple's future OS plans. Not only will future HD content not play in pure HD on most existing monitors (it will be degraded, or not shown at all), but high-end monitors today don't support HDCP yet. HDCP has been coming for 3+ years, but geek fantasy items such as Apple's $3,000 30" Cinema Display don't even have support for it yet! The end result is that when Windows Vista ships (and Apple's next OS), most people won't be able to watch protected HD content on their computers."

Comments

My god: it's struck already!

[gardyloo]

Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.

Re:My god: it's struck already!

[Anonymous Coward]

Um ... I thought selling more hardware is the poiint of new "standards" and "enhancements" like DRM etc.

Re:My god: it's struck already!

[Izago909]

Well, I guess that I might have to wait a few days until someone releases a crack for the new protection scheme so that I I can enjoy content that I've already paid for. Unless MS or Apple pay for my new hardware I won't have any other choice.

Re:My god: it's struck already!

[cgenman]

The question is whether it makes sense to them to release a system like this at all. They're basically saying "you can't watch our videos if you don't spend a lot more money on hardware." From the perspective of people who can't or won't "upgrade" their monitors, why spend 20 dollars to buy a video that is intentionally downsampled to exactly the same bitrate as a pirated version? The idea is that you would be paying them for quality, but the reality for a lot of people is that it will just degrade their experience.

Time and time again, DRM systems have been shown to hurt paying customers. Apple's DRM is probably the most widely accepted because it is the least restrictive and doesn't pull stupid requirements on the end-user like this. DVD's DRM is accepted because it is invisible. Divx, however, required players to "phone home," and lasted in the market just a few months before being killed off by lack of interest. I think we'll find that if people have to replace their TV sets to play Blu-ray disks, they're just going to stick with DVD's.

I'm not opposed to DRM... my livelyhood to some degree depends on it. But putting restrictions on the end-user like this will alienate a lot of potential buyers. Why spend 200 dollars for a player that doesn't provide any advantage over the current standard if you don't invest hundreds more in your monitor / television?

DRM should be invisible, or it shouldn't be on the market.

No, only what he THINKS Apple will do

[SuperKendall]

Yes Microsoft has plans to incorperate full-on video DRM.

But Apple has never said they will - this article just postulates they will have to.

Well, before ITMS would not people have also postulated that it would be impossible for Apple to sell songs without DRM that would restrict CD burning? After all, that was the standard of the time.

Some companies are smart enough to realize that obsoleteing millions of monitors is Not Smart, and will avoid doing so if they can. And Apple has shown they can avoid the more onerous restrictions set forth by giant industries that would rather have it otherwise. And making millions of computer monitors obsolete is right up there in terms of gall.

So the story poster would have been wise to note the speculative nature of the topic instead of proclaiming it as fact from Apple.

Re:No, only what he THINKS Apple will do

[RetroGeek]

And making millions of computer monitors obsolete is right up there in terms of gall.

Yup.

But only if you want to watch HDCP on your monitor. Moreover if you also use an affected OS.

I wonder how long before we have a box which sits between your monitor and your video card which reports itself as HDCP compliant, but in reality outputs a digital signal for recording.

Re:No, only what he THINKS Apple will do

[Wesley Felter]

I wonder how long before we have a box which sits between your monitor and your video card which reports itself as HDCP compliant, but in reality outputs a digital signal for recording.

The box exists already, but it's illegal thanks to the DMCA.

Re:No, only what he THINKS Apple will do

[ratboy666]

Apple WILL. End of story.

Because if they DON'T, they will not be able to play the content at all.

(more technically, if Apple doesn't implement signal decimation filtering on un-encrypted outputs, they won't be given the keys to display the content AT ALL).

Re:No, only what he THINKS Apple will do

[trewornan]

Illegal in America.

Re:No, only what he THINKS Apple will do

[LarsG]

...and in Europe and countries where USA holds enough economic power to dictate 'IP harmonization' as a part of trade agreements.

Re:No, only what he THINKS Apple will do

[NotoriousQ]

Of course what that really means is that politicians outside the US can write all the laws they want, and divert all blame to US. European version of DMCA? Blame the US. And the people actually do, instead of fighting the laws.

Who is more foolish? The fool, or the one who follows the fool.

Circumvention

[Adrilla]

Well from simply reading the summary it sounds like all the protection is being held in the OS, therefore couldn't an Open Source OS circumvent this protection. Just load it up in Linux and none of us nerds have anything to worry about. In fact, we could put it in Linux rip off the DRM and burn it to whatever media we need, then we're home free for whatever format we need, DVD, CD, Blu-Ray, even playable back in Windows and Mac.

Re:Circumvention

[sqlrob]

You need the driver that authenticates to the display. I doubt very much that will be (legally) in any OSS drivers.

Re:Circumvention

[xjerky]

I don't think there's any guarantee that the DRM can be easily stripped. Has anyone successfully removed DRM from WM 10 content yet?

Re:Circumvention

[chill]

Look up "Trusted Hardware" and you'll have your answer.

The black magic needed to run those components dealing with DRM most likely will NOT be open sourced, or made available to FOSS programmers.

FOSS will be limited to "degraded" output -- until it is hacked. Then the lawyers will be turned loose...

Re:Circumvention

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but those were implementation bugs, not full blown cracks - and one needed to have a license to some of the content to begin with. The holes were patched by MS very quickly and new content depends on a patched media player.

I managed to break WMAs however with a high success rate, but newer ones are again fixed against that patch.

Nonetheless, it will happen, there just isnt enough demand yet.

Re:Circumvention

[mcelrath]

Then I will never, ever use it. I will never purchase hardware which makes me jump through hoops to do legal things.

And to the content industry, I will never buy or rent, or watch your content on these terms. You will be replaced by artists who do not insist on such things.

-- Bob

Re:Circumvention

[Spy der Mann]

That's the point of these new monitors. There are no unprotected channels.

At least not until you open the monitor in question and put your modchip in there.

Nothing new under the sun...

Re:Circumvention

[kwark]

There's a world outside of the USA, and not every country has a DMCA equivalent. Quite the opposite - there are many European countries, for example, where "fair use" actually still means something.

I guess you never heard of EUCD? Already enforced in most EU countries :(

Re:Circumvention

[PingXao]

Guess again. The recent CAFTA trade treaty forces the banana republics of Central America (no offense intended) to adopt virtually every Copyright, Patent and Trademark law verbatim as dictated by the USA (I refuse to use the term "intellectual property" because there is no such thing in the eyes of the law. At least no yet.)

Every country will eventually be coerced into doing the same, either with trade/financial incentives and punitive sanctions for the unwilling, or worse. Worse would come later, of course, but it will happen if necessary. Treaties will be enacted that will force every country who wants to play in the international technical markets to comply. The USA produces virtually no hard goods anymore. Steel? Autos? Electronics? Manufactured goods of every kind? These hard goods are not made in the USA anymore.

Wake up and smell the coffee. "Intellectual Property" (OK, so I lied) is the mainstay US export for the rest of this century. The rest of the world is not safe and should be very worried.

Re:Circumvention

[ratboy666]

AES-256 is "harder" than 3DES, and 3DES has yet to be cracked. The AES-256 is going on the chip.

Give cracking it a try.

Yes, Linux is used in the set-top boxes (Scientific Atlanta comes to mind). Try loading an alternate OS on these boxes. Done "properly" its impossible (or close to).

The easiest scheme is to have an MD-5 hash of the software load, and refuse to load anything else.

Now, you are thinking "the load will have the key". It may... or the key is in the box. Usually, the key will be wrapped by another AES-256 layer, that the loader knows NOTHING about. FIPS-140 stuff...

Now, the system WON'T be entirely secure -- you could always resort to chip-scraping, or thermals, etc. to break the key. As to the "Hardware to incorporate the technology to decrypt at 30 fps, full screen". Lets see -- using a Xilinx FPGA, I can decrypt AES-256 at a rate of ~500 Mbps. About 10x what is needed. Custom logic? why not. Costs less...

Note that the Linux NEVER KNOWS THE MEANING OF THE DATA. It just shoves it to the monitor. Which already has expensive glass parts, etc. The cost of an additional chip in the monitor is even more easily absorbed.

FOSS DRM? Sure, why not. The job of the FOSS DRM software will be to mediate keys, and establish a trust relationship. IT IS NOT GOING TO DECODE THE DATA.

Ratboy.

Re:Circumvention

[oliverthered]

If media player can be made to run under wine then you can get a raw output to make a ripped copy from.

Re:Circumvention

[Grishnakh]

The USA produces virtually no hard goods anymore. Steel? Autos? Electronics? Manufactured goods of every kind? These hard goods are not made in the USA anymore.

This isn't quite correct. Lots of cars are still manufactured in the USA. Honda has two plants in Ohio, Toyota has various plants in the south, BMW and Mercedes have plants in places like South Carolina and Alabama, etc. Of course, none of these companies are US-owned (Ford and GM build all their cars in Mexico now). Apparently American labor is cheaper than Japanese and German labor (the savings in not having to ship probably helps a lot too).

There's also other manufactured goods still made in the US, but they're either really cheap mass-produced stuff (for instance, various building materials are still made here), or really expensive specialty items (like $50k Agilent test equipment).

Also, a lot of raw materials are still produced here, I believe, such as copper which is mined in various places in the Southwest.

Re:Circumvention

[holt]

Heavy equipment like John Deere's ag, construction, and consumer equipment is still produced in the US, and will be for some time. They have a few factories outside the US, but the vast majority of the equipment sold here is made here.

Wait for it...

[Anonymous Coward]

and DVDJon, our Lord and Saviour, will break this nonsense scheme in 3..2..1..

Good

[Anonymous Coward]

That means nobody will watch "protected HD content," thereby killing this idea from the get go.

Re:Good

[uradu]

IF it is transparent, and (s)he has to spend no extra money on new equipment. But judging by the fragility of many of the new DRM schemes being tried out, I doubt DRM will end up being so smooth and transparent as to not upset the Wal-Mart crowds. After sufficient returns of Scream 10 because Bubba "The Tooth" McFartsy couldn't play it on his 19" Orion TV because its DRM was incompatible with his Memorex Blu-Ray player, which was three firmware versions behind and required a broadband connection to update itself (which Bubba of course doesn't have), Wal-Mart may just have to back off supporting such Bubba-defying DRM schemes.

Re:Good

[dubious9]

Try explaining to a customer why his existing (expensive) HD capable monitor will not play files at it's highest quality. He already watches some stuff at that resolution. Why is it that he now can not?

When you are getting less quality with DRM than with current systems, the end consumer will notice. Maybe not everybody, but I know enough AV geeks who are not "tech/computer/slashdot" geeks who would go nuts if they had to upgrade their perfectly capable equipment just because producers want to treat them like thieves.

If this does really happen end users (a la joe sixpack, etc) *will* give a damn.

Re:Good

[ratboy666]

The idea won't die that easily.

In a nutshell:

- The quality of the FILTERED output will be DVD level. Which is at or beyond consumer expectation.

- New gear will have HD option, and as people upgrade, they will get 10x better than DVD quality.

- You can STILL record at DVD quality, just not HD (and HD does take 10x)

- As monitors are upgraded, the content will be ready.

- Anyone can WATCH "protected HD content" -- at DVD quality. Which happens to be good enough for 40"+ screens.

- We are talking about 1080 line resolution; very few people run monitors at these resolutions (1920x1080). The DVD quality will be perfectly acceptable (1280x480 - with a bit of twigging)

So its likely going through.

Re:Good

[rodgerd]

The only point at which the shit might hit the popular fan is if we start seeing mass key revocation and Joe User suddenly finds his expesives DVD player/TV don't work any more for no good reason.

Of course, for this to enter the popular conciousness, you'd need the popular news media to report on it fairly. I expect Rupert Murdoch's TV stations and newspapers will do a bang-up job of reporting on how Rupert Murdoch's movie studios are fucking over the average citizen.

Damn copy protection...

[Anonymous Coward]

Are they going to use region-encoding as well, so you can't look at a US monitor in Australia?

Re:Damn copy protection...

[Skiron]

You would need fucking good eyesight, so I doubt they would enforce that... or would they?

More info

[SirJorgelOfBorgel]

There's a bit of info about all this over at DRMadness as well, though it's aimed specifically at Blu-ray and HD-DVD (but that's HighDef content as well, isn't it)...

1. Load gun.

[pair-a-noyd]

2. Aim at foot.
3. Pull trigger.

Re:1. Load gun.

[R3d M3rcury]

4. Sue gun manufacturers.
5. Profit!

(Sorry. Couldn't resist.)

correction

[Lumpy]

The end result is that when Windows Vista ships (and Apple's next OS), most people won't be able to watch protected HD content on their computers LEGALLY."

about 30 days after the first piece of media is released I'll be able to watch it under linux and BSD in full resolution as someone will have foundand released a crack/hack/mod/whatever.

They are wasting their time trying to "protect" this stuff. all they are doing is finding new ways to piss off the legit consumer.

Re:correction

[Kjella]

Don't be so sure buddy. It took years to crack the DVD's CSS and its much simpler.

DVDs came in 1997, and DeCSS was released in 1999. I believe that it took so long to ensure that the market was entrenched, they couldn't just retract and switch formats. Imagine a crack shows up practicly at launch, they'll pull it from the market because all the movie companies won't release on an already cracked format, unless there's such a big market there that they can't afford not to.

So don't buy their crap

[maynard]

Seriously. Hollywood has an organized boycott coming for this. Not only are they screwing every HDTV owner who lacks HDMI or DVI/HDCP inputs (a huge number of sets were sold with component only inputs), but now they plan to screw computer owners over too. Just don't buy their shit. Let the new Blu-Ray and/or HD-DVD decks sit unsold on shelves for a year or two and watch the these cartels shit their pants with all that unsold inventory. Maybe they'll even respond to consumer wishes afterward!

But it won't happen spontaneously. An organized boycott is the only solution. --M

Re:So don't buy their crap

[PolyDwarf]

The issue with not buying their crap is that they will not see it as a boycott of their policies.. They'll see it as more evidence of "evil hackers" (tm) stealing their content. After all, no one can not watch Hollywood's movies and listen to Hollywood's music, right?! Ticket sales falling at the box office? Nope, it's not because Hollywood's movies are junk, it's "teh hax0rs" releasing movies on the Internet. CD sales falling? Nope, it's not because of the drivel that's being released as today's "mainstream" media, it's "teh hax0rs".

I would be more willing (note, more willing does not mean willing) to believe the line of mp3's hurting music sales, because mp3's sound (to most people) to be pretty good. Screeners, etc, of movies, not so good quality, and why would I watch it on my monitor in my office when I have my TV in the living room?

I agree that the largest part, by far, of Hollywood's slide is Hollywood itself, and they have no one to blame but themselves. They don't see it that way, so the lawmakers don't see it that way (Money talks, after all). They will paint an organized boycott as an organized piracy ring, with the lawless hackers trading music and movies amongst themselves.

Re:So don't buy their crap

[OpenGLFan]

Possibly, but perhaps in another form. Bandwidth is going UP while the cost of production is going DOWN. The highest-ranking shows lately are the ones with the lowest production values -- reality shows and cheap recycling of old ideas. Linkdump has hundreds of nifty five-minute videos every day, and people are getting (slightly) more sophisticated about computers.

For $2000 worth of cameras, lights, and duct tape an RTF major on summer break could shoot something good. His CS-major roommate can upload it to a media site, put it on newsgroups, and start a torrent over the weekend. The barrier to entry is low, and the only reason this hasn't taken off already is that we engineering types don't know enough pretty girls to attract an audience.

Prediction: In three years, if the choice is between buying a new $3k TV for Survivor 4 or watch TorrentStation's "Austin: Survivor Town Lake", they will have lost.

What this will cause

[CrystalFalcon]

1) Ordinary people won't bother watching HD content on their computers - it will be too cumbersome.

2) Pirates won't care, as always, ripping to DivX or whatever and then watching as usual.

3) Ordinary people will discover DivX rips (family, friends of pirates) and watch HD content, not knowing that they're not supposed to. The pirates will mumble something about bad big corporations but they won't really care as long as they can watch the latest episode of Lost.

When Will These Idiots Get It?

That's OK, I wasn't going to pay for it anyway...

[javaxman]

The end result is that when Windows Vista ships (and Apple's next OS), most people won't be able to watch protected HD content on their computers.

That's OK, I was planning on boycotting and/or stealing and/or disabling the DRM on any such protected content anyway. If they don't want me to see it, I'll avoid buying it, thanks anyway. I'd download or create ripped DRM-less versions if forced too.

Spending a lot of time and effort downloading or ripping content will still be a lot cheaper than buying a multi-thousand-dollar monitor. Besides, most NTSC content is acceptable anyway...

Content should be free then!

[Spy der Mann]

If they want us to invest so much money in friggin' DRM'ed players, why don't they just give away their content in lo-res so only those wh ocan afford it, will be able to see the HD?

I ain't spending any money on a HD movie if all i'm getting is lowdef. If I already paid for it, why should spend even more? I just hope someone declares DRM to be inconstitutional or something...

It's getting to be time

[Nom du Keyboard]

It's getting to be time for a consumer revolt, along with a few decapitations.

What if they threw a Hi-Def party and nobody came?

Or to put it another way, just how many times are you going to let these people pick your pocket? We could just say that what we all have today is already good enough! .

Re:It's getting to be time

[Red Flayer]

What if they threw a Hi-Def party and nobody came?

If they throw a HD party, everyone will.

Remember, it's the pr0n industry that drives computer video tech.

Dongle anyone?

[Rude Turnip]

Can't this problem be solved by the simple addition of a dongle that connects between the video port and the monitor? The dongle would then give the pre-HDCP monitor the capability of receiving HD video that requires HDCP.

Re:Dongle anyone?

[EvanED]

The studios don't want this because then you just hook up a recorder to the output of the dongle. Sure, it won't be quite the quality of if you were to get the clear content, but it'll be as good as what you would see on the TV.

The idea of HDCP in the first place is to make it nearly impossible to put a recorder anywhere behind the actual screen.

Re:Dongle anyone?

[GigsVT]

Such a dongle would be illegal under the DMCA.

Re:Dongle anyone?

[chowells]

Such a device already exists, it was created by a German company (can't remember the name). Unfortunately the decryption key could it contains could be revoked. And it might be illegal in the US.

score!

[justforaday]

Score one for the little guy!

And by "little guy" I mean "multinational media conglomerate."

Brilliant!

[Retired Replicant]

"The end result is that when Windows Vista ships (and Apple's next OS), most people won't be able to watch protected HD content on their computers."

And thus prompting people to search for ripped/pirated HD content that is free of HDCP. Brilliant!

Oh The Humanity

[MightyMartian]

You mean I'll have to turn on my TV to watch shows?!?! Oh the humanity!

"..won't be able to watch protected HD content.."

[Brian Stretch]

..until it shows up on Bittorrent an hour later.

C'mon, there has to be someone in Hollywood smart enough to figure out that copy protection this draconian is going to seriously encourage cracking? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to do everything possible to make it easier for their paying customers to get to their content rather than making it more irritating, unreliable, and expensive?

Oh, right. Oh well, not much worth watching anyhow.

Market forces

[ka9dgx]

If I just spent $5000 on a computer and a monitor, I'd be pissed as hell if things weren't as sharp as a tack. I'd take it back, and spread the word.

Market forces won't let this one stick. People need lee-way, something that DRM systems don't do, so they are forced to go around them. Once that's done, they keep going around them.

--Mike--
Capitalism sees Capitolism as damage, and routes around it

Re:Market forces

[dbIII]

If I just spent $5000 on a computer and a monitor

There's an increasing amount of expensive home cinema out there - plus other infrastructure like digital projectors in cinemas and workplaces. When that big expensive water cooled three tube projector that can easily do the resolution and has years of tube life remaining won't work because of copy protection then people are going to be pissed off. I suggest that people import the non-US version of the software to get their gear to work, since there is no way this stupidity is going to stick outside of a country where Hollywood can pay "lobby" money for votes for laws like the DCMA.

Consider DVDs: is there really anywhere outside of the USA where people can't legally get and use a multi-region player? Where I live they all come multi-region by default.

They didn't have to put DRM in iPod.

[Anonymous Coward]

They didn't have to put DRM in iPod.

But they did.

Steve Jobs will again be the great enabler for DRM.
Next time it's video.

Re:They didn't have to put DRM in iPod.

[Jeffrey Baker]

What DRM did they put in the iPod? You can copy songs off of and on to the iPod freely. You can output the full quality of all music (such as it is) to any device. You even get unprotected digital outputs from iTunes with the Airport Express or other digital device. Where's the rights management again? We're talking about a system that would NOT SHOW CONTENT on unapproved devices. There are no parallels in iPod/iTunes.

Re:Microsoft?

[OG]

The idea is that Vista will determine whether or not your system has an HDCP monitor. If it does not, it will either play the video at non-HD quality (downsampling, I suppose) or not play it at all. Thus, the OS will force you to upgrade your monitor to an HDCP compliant one if you want to watch HD.

Microsoft could choose not to implement this, thus allowing HD to be viewed on Legacy monitors.

Component

[jbeaupre]

Component video might not be protected. HDMI/DVI transmit digitally, which is what has content providers worried. Since component is analog, and because of the large install base you noted, it might not require HDCP. (pure speculation)

more of the same

[mkcmkc]

I will never purchase hardware which makes me jump through hoops to do legal things.

I certainly sympathize, but you do realize that all (legal) DVD players already have this property...

Mike

Re:more of the same

[mcelrath]

I generally don't watch movies at home. When I do it's on VHS. Occasionally I go to the theater (but rarely in the summer -- too much drivel). On one computer I have a tv tuner (pchdtv) with MythTV. So I watch some TV.

For a short time this year I signed up for netflix and watched things on my laptop (because I was laid up due to surgery). I put a few films in, played them for 5 minutes then they quit due to this region coding bullshit. Then my girlfriend got to watch me fiddle with the fucking computer for an hour, all the while looking like a moron because I can't play a DVD. This only cemented my previous decision to forgo DVD's altogether. I did install the RPC-1 patch though. More recently I bought a DVD burner. So I can burn DVD's (only for data storage so far), but the RPC patch for this burner didn't work at all, so I won't be playing DVD's on that computer anytime soon...

I've been using free-software only for about 10 years now...the freedom and power that gives me is far more valuable than an hour and a half of the latest car crash scenes.

As time goes on more and more film makers will release things on unencrypted DVD's, using bittorrent, etc. I already go out of my way to buy indie music. I will go out of my way to pay for their films too. The real power of the consumer is in his use of his wallet.

-- Bob

Re:more of the same

[Fweeky]

The region-free DVD player we've got downstairs was sold to us by Asda.. seems legal enough to me; it even happily ignores UOP's.

Oh, did you just mean all the ones in *your* country? Aren't you allowed to remove region coding on the basis of interoperability, BTW?

Re:more of the same

[hacker]

If you use *nix you can watch "protected" DVDs using any number of players such as Mplayer or Ogle, and libdvdcss for authentication.

Note that doing so, is against the law in every single state in the US. If you're caught doing it (or owning a copy of libdvdcss), you can be prosecuted for it.

Re:more of the same

[vertinox]

Or do you expect someone here to admire you for...what...nothing really.

If he has given up a form of entertainment because he feels that they violate his rights and instead of just complaining, he has actually given them up (and then complained)... Then he is stronger than you or I. Frankly, I would admire him for that and wish that the world was inhabited with more people like him.

Let's see you go without some form of entertainment to make a point to a world that doesn't act like it cares about whether if you live or die. I know I couldn't.

Re:That's OK, I wasn't going to pay for it anyway.

[MightyMartian]

Actually, I was just considering not watching TV or movies any more, reading a good book and using my computer to access a few forums and do some writing. The kind of output coming out of the entertainment industry is so bad nowadays that I can't imagine anyone putting any effort into protecting it, or stealing it. It's all crap, and it isn't worth consideration. The whole battle seems like a bunch of silly bastards battling over who gets to eat the most shit from the dungpile.

Protected?

[Dragoon412]

"The end result is that when Windows Vista ships (and Apple's next OS), most people won't be able to watch protected HD content on their computers."

So, we'll just have to settle for unprotected HD content, then?

Isn't this just another instance of the entertainment industry not getting it? They're sabotaging their own business. How many people do they expect to be interested in downloading HD content? Probably not that many. Now, how many of those people do they expect to go and shell out an obscene amount of money for a new HDCP-compliant monitor that offers no additional benefit to the end user?

Essentially, what they're doing here is presenting consumers with a rather lopsided decision: spend more money on a monitor just to have the privelage of spending more money to view paid-for HD content that may or may not actually materialize, or don't spend any extra money and continue to download what you want off of BitTorrent/eMule/usenet.

Tough call, eh?

HDCP Already Exists On Current HD TVs

[zach_smith]

Remember the limitation here is on computer monitors. I don't plan to watch Blu-Ray discs on my computer, I've got a dedicated HDTV in front of my couch for that. Most HiDef TVs (plasmas, LCD, DLP, CRT) have supported HDCP for about 2 years. So unless you have one of the early ones with only component connections, you should be fine.

Dear MPAA/RIAA

[circletimessquare]

If it is something that has to be visible to the human eye, your DRM can be broken.

If it is something that has to be audible to the human ear, your DRM can be broken.

Welcome to the age of computers, have a nice day.

Re:Dear MPAA/RIAA

[Kjella]

But the copy will be of much lower quality than the original, which is the point.

Get a full-res monitor. Do a proper color calibration of the monitor. Grab a bunch of cameras/sensors, place them in front of the TV. Make sure you get pixel-accurate images (in total) and color calibrate these too. Capture the uncompressed output, frame accurate & recompress. Sure, you will get one more round of artifacts from reencoding, but you have a HD stream extremely close to the original. It only needs to be done once. Right now, there's simply so many easier ways but that is the real analog hole - your eyes.

Kjella

I Want My HDCP ...

[WillAffleckUW]

Lookit that yoyo, trying to watch content.
He's got a box and hooked up his HDCP.
Tries to turn it on and all he gets is static.
So he throws it back in his hovercar.

refrain I want my, I want my, I want my HDCP.
I want my, I want my, I want my HDCP.

He can't use it to watch his microwave oven.
It won't show Showgirls in wide-screen full DPI.
But he don't worry cause he's really stupid.
So he shalls out another $1000 for an extra day.

refrain I want my, I want my, I want my HDCP.
I want my, I want my, I want my HDCP.

Can't watch anime from Japan cause he's in North America, can't watch Italian soap operas if he's in Germany, can't even watch the Olympics in High Def, cause they won't let you see the CBC in DC ...

refrainI ditched my, I ditched my, I ditched my HDCP.
I ditched my, I ditched my, I ditched my HDCP.

.

.

.

can you say refund?

Re:Crack

[phalse phace]

A week?

You don't seem to have much faith in us...

Hollywood is dreaming!

[mjh49746]

There is no way in hell I will ever replace a perfectly good monitor just so I can watch their precious HD garbage. No way. No how! I don't need their stinking HD if that's the game they want to play.

Mounts as drive

[SuperKendall]

Sorry, but I can get them out easily as the iPod simply mounts as a drive and I can copy what I like out. Yes the filenames are obscured but since the ID3 data lives in teh file it's a moot point. 3rd party tools just make it a little handier.

Re:Mounts as drive

[Jerk City Troll]

Yes the filenames are obscured but since the ID3 data lives in teh file it's a moot point.

True, and it's worth pointing out that the file names are not mangled to make it harder to copy them. They are mangled because they become unique identifiers. This is so that when you change the ID3 information, iTunes knows which files to replace, thus avoiding duplicates.

Re:Mounts as drive

[homesteader]

If I had to guess, I would say that the names are mangled to make the iPod more efficient and thus make the battery last longer. Minimizing the length of file names(song names) should minimize the size of the directory database, which I would think would also maximize read/query times for the directory. Normally this is not possible, but since iTunes is the only sanctioned interface for putting music on the iPod, there would be no need to use human readable filenames. The iPod designers could look at what is most efficient from a directory access point of view.

Re:Mounts as drive

[Kadin2048]

This might be completely untrue, but I was told once it had something to do with filename length restrictions in the iPod's embedded OS.

The song names that you see aren't taken from the file names, they're taken from the ID3 tags, and from a database which cross references song names to file names.

Thus, the iPod's embedded system never has to deal with long file names, which are pretty common if you name your music according to the "[Artist] - [Song].mp3" form, especially if you don't abbreviate anything.

This might be completely wrong, but it's the best explanation I've ever heard of that particular oddity. The iPod can carry files with long names just fine, but the internal software doesn't ever work with them.

Dell 2005FPW Users Already Effected

[SlashdotOgre]

The popular Dell 20" wide screen (2005FPW) is already a victom of this. The monitor's native resolution is 1680x1050 and so it should be able to render 720p without a problem. However, you can't get HDTV content from either digital cable or directv receivers via DVI. Currently, going analog via Component In will get you HD, but unfortunately the monitor only offers DVI, VGA, S-Vid, & Composite. I use a Component to VGA transcoder, but the solution is neither cheap nor elegant.

Re:Dell 2005FPW Users Already Effected

[PoderOmega]

I have a Comcast Motorola box with HDTV and DVR and it is currently plugged into my TV via DVI. If you turn the power off on the box, then hit the "Menu" button on the remote you can have some more advanced output settings. I know some people have said that the DVI port is disabled on these boxes, but I have had 2 of these boxes in the city of Chicago (so I dont know if it is a regional comcast thing) and both had DVI out enabled.

Re:no

[Axess Denyd]

Well why not make the dongle emulate a monitor and just pass the signal straight through to YOUr monitor?

TFA mentioned revoking the keys that such a device would use, but it seems to me that it would be easy enough for someone to give the passthru a flashable firmware. I don't see it being impossible to read a key off an existing device, either.

And imagine if someone got the key from a Viewsonic (or even better, a Dell) monitor and it got put n everyone's dongle....the only way to stop that would be by cutting off everyone who bought that monitor. And that might open us up a nice little class action lawsuit.

Link: fully comprehensive guide to windows DRM...

[plasmacutter]

how microsoft is selling out the public to please hollywood

microsoft is incorporating a lot more than HDCP restriction requirements in their winhec standards. They are also building in encrypted "protected media path", allowing revocation of components in vista based PC's and requiring hardware and driver based DRM for "windows logo testing approval"

They are also requiring a new form of device ID which is designed to prevent any emulation without contacting the emulated device's originator

I tried to give slashdot the heads up on this over a month ago and, like a fellow poster, my story was rejected.

There's a reason Vista took so long to develop, and that reason has nothing to do with consumer-centric design

Re:funny thing...

[IAmTheDave]

So, no hardware supports is officially yet, but with Vista you can watch it on you pc (under reduced resolution anyway)...

no hardware save almost all HDTVs made these days, as well as the HD-DVD and (rumored) BluRay. this is much bigger than just PCs - your TVs, cable boxes, cable cards, etc, will all include HDCP of some sort (and most TVs with HDMI input already do support it.)

of course, you could go shopping before the MPAA starts with the lawsuits...

Re:Until High Def is below $300

[Richthofen80]

This isn't exactly High Definition Television, which is a video standard (1080i, 720p or 480p). This is a delivery method for HD resolution video, which is HDCP. HD is available over analog delivery through component video wires. I don't think that this CP will really affect most users.

Anyways, your $600 figure exists for 27 inch Samsung HD set. Actually, according to Sears the tv is $449.

HDTV got a lot of bad press; Most people still dont' know what it is, how to get it, and what it means for them.

DRM is just another way of saying

[WillAffleckUW]

nothing left to lose ... [copy completed]

I'm so disappointed.

[Typingsux]

I really wanted to see the matrix once again in super HD, and get an even better look at Morpeus's pockmarks. Here's to dropping 3K on a new monitor so I can!

We can't control their spin

[maynard]

Look. They control the media / entertainment industry and will use TV and Cable News to propagate their message. They have huge war-chests for campaign contributions. They essentially control access to policy and the consensus opinion management. There's no way to change that fact without a sea-change in anti-trust law, as in Teddy Roosevelt's days with the collapse of the Gilded Age.

Boycott is the only effective counter to their power (even given the problems you present) because to do nothing is even less effective as a consumer strategy to corporate abuse of power. Or can you recommend a better alternative? --M

Re:Obligatory Wikipedia Link

[Nova77]

Interesting article:
"Researchers demonstrated fatal flaws in HDCP for the first time in 2001, prior to its adoption in any commercial product. Scott Crosby of CMU authored a paper with Ian Goldberg, Robert Johnson, Dawn Song, and David Wagner called A Cryptanalysis of the High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection System. This paper was presented at ACM-CCS8 DRM Workshop on November 5th, 2001."

I LOVE wikipedia! :)

Re:Microsoft?

[pavon]

Microsoft could choose not to implement this, thus allowing HD to be viewed on Legacy monitors.

No they couldn't. The DRM algorithms for HD content are patented and controlled by a media consortium. Furthermore the keys for the system are protected as trade-secrets. This consortium will refuse to license the algorithms or keys to anyone who does not sign a contract agreeing to play thier rules. It would be illegal for Microsoft to create an implementation that was not blessed by the patent/key holders.

So the choice that Microsoft and Apple have is to either play HDCP'd content the way they are told to play it (which is downgraded on non-HDCP monitors) or to not play it at all.

HDCP on DVI/HDMI is stuipd

[IcePop456]

A quick calculation shows 1280x720 60fps at 24 bit color is 1.5Gbps. I don't know about you, but my computer cannot possibly capture that. I don't know of a single hard drive or RAID system that can write 190MB/s that does not cost as much as my Nissan 350z. To buy hardware to copy this stuff is just as dumb as buying a Toyota Hybrid to save money on Gas. (10 years at 15k miles per year to make up the cost difference from a civic).

Re:HDCP on DVI/HDMI is stuipd

[TheRaven64]

190MB/s is feasible even on a moderate RAID array, but you probably wouldn't do that. You'd almost certainly stream it straight through a hardware H.264 compressor and then to disk at a more moderate bitrate.

Re:HDCP on DVI/HDMI is stuipd

[dvdeug]

A quick calculation shows 1280x720 60fps at 24 bit color is 1.5Gbps. [...] I don't know of a single hard drive or RAID system that can write 190MB/s that does not cost as much as my Nissan 350z.

Uncompressed video is unheard of and irrelevant. Even losslessly compressed video is very rare; I'm sure professional processing uses it, but the consumer gets lossy compressed video from every form of digital input, be it DVD or BlueRay or satalitte.

DRM is not the issue

[Alioth]

HD DVD technologies will probably take years to go anywhere anyway, regardless of DRM or no DRM.

Why was the CD a big success? It offered enormous convenience over the existing forms (records and tapes) and an enormous leap in quality - cracks and pops gone. Wow and flutter gone from tapes. No rewinding necessary.

Why was DVD a big success fairly quickly? It wasn't just the improved quality over VHS. Mostly it was the ease of use. A small disc that doesn't have to be rewound, doesn't snag, doesn't have tracking that goes out of alignment, and the quality was much much better.

But for most people, DVD is good enough. A new format will offer no extra convenience, and will cost a lot to buy - certainly for a fair while (high quality displays have always been expensive). Therefore, high definition disc formats will probably be relegated for years, perhaps decades, to the audio/videophile segment - a very small fraction of the market. Just like LaserDisc really. For everyone else, normal DVDs are cheap and good enough.

Re:DRM is not the issue

[Jeff DeMaagd]

and will cost a lot to buy - certainly for a fair while (high quality displays have always been expensive).

So? The cost of HD capable displays is dropping at a dramatic rate, and the available sizes have been increasing too. Now one can get a flat-panel ~30" 720p display for about what it cost to get a 30" 480i screen five years ago, a little less than $1000. That's quite a leap, IMO. LCD panels of many kinds and sizes have been dropping in price too, two years ago a 17" LCD monitor was $500, a better one can be had for $250. I remember a time when it was over $1000.

When DVDs first came out, the cost of players was about $1000, look where they are now, eight years later. The first HD-DVD player has already been announced at $1000. I would expect that HD-DVD and/or Blu-Ray players to cost $500 the year after that, and $250 the following year and on down to where DVD players are now.

Re:DRM is not the issue

[angle_slam]

But for most people, DVD is good enough

It's only good enough until you actually see HDTV in action. I don't have HDTV and have never seen HDTV outside of Best Buy. Most of my friends don't have HDTV. Except for one. I was at his house this weekend and watched a movie in full HDTV glory. As he readily admitted to me, he can barely stand to watch DVDs or SD broadcasts now because the quality is so much lower than HDTV.

Boston HDTV Party

[Archalien]

For some reason a Boston HDTV Party comes to mind.

Capitalism is just like Democracy: a majority of idiots put abusers of power into power by buying what they were selling.

It's a system of the people and in order for it to work some people have to lose. Now, who wants to draw straws? :)

Re:I bought this awesome VCR a while back...

[zakezuke]

It's great. High quality video. I can even record my own stuff right off TV!

I heard of this upcoming thing called DVD... supposed to be a lot better than VHS, but it will require an entirely new player! I can't even play my existing tapes on this new hardware!

Funny thing is DVD recording is relativly new. That old VHS VCR to this day is still useful for recording video. It remained a viable standard for 20+ years and this is a very good run.

In this 20 years, we had a ton of options including super vhs, 8mm/high 8, and digital tape, but for home use the VHS VCR was never really replaced.

The problem is people who plopped down $2000+ for a new fancy HD-monitor/tv, perfectly good units that meet the parameters of displaying content in higher resolutions than before, being locked out not because their monitor isn't able to display the content but because their player tells the monitor not to display it.

VHS copy protection i.e. macrovision didn't really require you to buy new equipment with some exceptions, and even so that equipment didn't cost a few grand. More advanced DVD protection for the most part doesn't require you to get a new player, and even so a new player won't cost you a few grand.

We've become habituated to the fact that while content devices may change, display and output devices change less frequently and represent a more stable investment. This isn't about needing a new player to play new media but about new players refusing to play on your output device not due to a technical limitation but because the player is told not to play on older stuff.

/giggle

[WhiteWolf666]

1. Don't buy it. It's all crap anyways.

Yes, it is possible to go through life without TV. I do, everyday, and I'm not some kind of weird recluse or anything. I have friends, and a girlfriend *gasp* (yes, she thinks slashdot is super-nerdy), and I spend a lot of time playing video games. That's my replacement for crap TV.

Movies? I go and see them at the theater. Yes, I'd like to watch more at home. But I can't buy DVDs that I can do what I like with, so I don't buy them, period.

2. Pirate it. This is where the /giggle comes in. Lets assume you absolutely have to have your movies/TV shows. Lets assume you absolutely have to have it in HD.

You can either a) use a spatzbox (linked elsewhere in this conversation) to convert the HDCP content to HD component analog or digital DVI, or b) grab the HD-DVD that was burned unprotected using said spatzbox in some copyright-loving area like, say, Hong Kong.

The up market leather goods brands (Gucci and above) have been trying to stop pirate manufacturing of their products. In Iran, you can get any software you could possibly want for $1 a disk.

Do you *really* think that the MPAA will be able to stop this? What magic powers do they have the all the other companies don't have? It doesn't matter if the Blue-Ray or HD-DVD content protection can be broken. All you need is a HD-DVD/Blue-Ray player, and a spatzbox, in order to produce 1 digital master, HD, no content protection.

Its already avaliable!

Then it'll go through the usual distribution channels. Wholesale pirates->streets of hong kong->american tourists->usenet/limewire and CO.

And it's only going to get better and better as internet connections get faster. Think Windows Vista is going to DRM its way out of that? Nonsense-> You're forgetting that these will be unencrypted streams.

The only thing that this nonsense does is economically punish those who do the valid thing and actually purchase the disks.

For those like me, who will abstain, it does nothing.
For those like many others, who will pirate, it does nothing.

And I see *nothing* wrong with pirating. Copyright is an economic right (not a system of ethics) designed to promote the arts and sciences. Once someone abuses Copyright (like, say, by eliminating fair use/controlling playback through the DMCA), they are actively stopping the promotion of the arts and sciences. As I see it, the *only* reason to respect copyright is the promotion of the arts and sciences, and once they stop doing that, they forfeit their government-sponsored monopoly.

That's all it is, you know. Copyright was not handed down by God to Moses as a command. The Buddha did not tell us about Copyright, and evolution did not cause Copyright to evolve as inherented human behavior. Copyright is a government-sponsored monopoly, established for the *sole* purpose of promoting/protecting artistic and scientific economic activies.

And contrary to what you learned in grade school civics, what the government tells you is not always the definition of 'good and right'. Don't call me a deviant--> If I was a weird, social outcast, and the only one who thought like this, then 50 million Americans (sayeth the RIAA) would not be participating in illegal P2P activities. While those Americans may not directly communicate their beliefs they way I am able to explain my own, it is most likely because they simply haven't though about it at any length, and if they had, would agree with me.

But, I don't bother to pirate. Instead of paying attention to one-way content, I prefer to interact with two-way content, and I see enough value in that interaction that I purchase it. I vote with my dollar--> I buy things (read *games*) that I think are good. And between Guildwars, Half-Life 2, Eve Online, and World of Warcraft, I have my hands full for the indefinite future.

Or maybe...

[sterno]

Or maybe, I'll just watch all the old unprotected content that I have lying around. Heck, maybe I'll just read a book. They still let us do that right?

Re:Or maybe...

[Fweeky]

Sure, but you'll need to make sure you have a government approved electrical pulse generator implanted into your hippocampus and motor cortex to prevent you forming long term memories or making any copies while doing so.

Re:Or maybe...

[gardyloo]

you'll need to make sure you have a government approved electrical pulse generator implanted into your hippocampus and motor cortex to prevent you forming long term memories or making any copies while doing so.

    Damn. Dubya always gets the most advanced technology long before the regular citizens do.

Re:Or maybe...

[chill]

I'm too lazy to dig for the link, but check recent /. stories for the one on the school that is ditching textbooks for electronic versions. Time limitied, DRM, electronic versions...

Then check out RMS' short story The Right to Read

  -Charles

Re:Or maybe...

[smackjer]

Nah, he just doesn't know how to read.

Three questions about HDCP

[Zurbaran]

1. Why bother protecting DVI? Have any prior DRM systems been attacked through DVI?
   No, because cracking CSS was easier. And chances are the next generation will be cracked in a similar manner. I have not yet seen any DRM research suggesting otherwise. But any measure against hacking makes sense only if you make all other possible attacks equally difficult. (Why have a steel door if there is an open window?) Why the inconvenience for your customer, if you know it will have almost no positive effect?
2. About key revocation (part of HDCP afaik): What is the benefit of being able to revoke keys known to be compromised?
   Yes, you can prevent a hacked player from playing back a legally purchased copy on a unprotected device. But apparently most piracy today comes from P2P networks. How will you be able to tell which key was used to decrypt a DRM-free copy that shows up on a P2P-network? Release groups would probably just keep their cracked key secret. (Watermarks? Not robust against removal afaik.) Revocation can neither prevent spreading of content to P2P, nor playback of unprotected files obtained from P2P.
3. A little revocation scenario: Company X sells 10 million HDCP-enabled devices. Someone devises a crack that theoretically compromises the key on all those devices (e.g. by finding a flaw in X's key generation). Media companies consequently block all 10 million devices. Does X have to replace 10 million devices for free, or are 10 million customers stuck with a useless device?
   If you sell HDCP-enabled products, make sure that you know your cryptography very, very well. Or you might go out of bussiness soon.

Bonus question: why would I want this crap? I tend to like movies for their storytelling, and am quite happy with the quality that DVDs offer me. If this stuff ever takes of, I'll just be happily buying used DVDs from suckers who upgrade their collection to HD.

Re:No new monitor needed: get a HDMI - DVI convert

[TheRaven64]

HDCP and HDMI are not the same thing. HDCP is an interface which is a proposed successor to DVI and also includes audio. HDCP is an DRM scheme which is compatible with DVI and HDMI. Converting DVI to HDMI is relatively simple as the pins in DVI all have direct equivalents in HDMI (at least, the digital ones do, not sure about the analogue), much as converting DVI to VGA was easy.

Let's try that again!

[merreborn]

I bought this awesome VCR a while back... It's great. High quality video. I can even record my own stuff right off TV!

I heard of this upcoming thing called DVD... supposed to be a lot better than VHS, but it will require an entirely new television/monitor!

It's crap if you ask me! Down with these evil companies trying to force me to buy a new television/monitor!



You can make a DVD player work with a 20 year old TV, no sweat. This standard, on the other hand, obsoletes every display currently on the market.

HDCP, DRM, and why we should chill.

[Njall]

More than 5 years ago Circuit City was selling a DVD format called DVIX, as I recall. I remember when I was looking for my first DVD player how hard the salesdrone tried to get me to buy a DVIX player. As I recall the "movies" were as little as $4 but could only be played on a DVIX player which had to be hooked up to a phone so the player could dial home and validate the disk. I looked at the restrictions and figured out that the system was an ugly grab for my wallet. It relied on a supposedly free system which would fail because it could not support itself. I didn't care for the idea that I could buy a movie and not be able to take it to my friends house to watch it together. DVD's were, I decided, a much better deal.

      Long and short... DVIX and all it stood for died. Died hard. Died ugly. Died and left customers holding useless garbage that, AFAIK, they can no longer play. So much for trust. This is a very abbreviated description of DVIX I know; however, I believe I have the essential points more or less correct. To this day I have never bought anything in a Circuit City store. To me DVIX, it's completely dishonest representation of value and functionality, and Circuit City are irrevocably maligned together. And I didn't even get burned by them.

      My son just learned that he cannot play Windows Media Player files on his new iPod. Some time ago I'd tried to him into ripping his CDs to MP3 using CDex. However, Microsoft made Windows Media Player so EASY to use. So my lazy, instant gratification, boy learned a hard lesson about DRM and industry standards. CDs, $85. Refurbished iPod, $200. Look on his face when he tried to rip the newest DRM protected Foo Fighters album he'd bought. Priceless!

      So, what about the new methods of DRM? I believe everyone needs to take a deep breath. Step back. Relax. With DVIX, DRM was relatively new. It is not as new any more. The only hope for DRM in the entertainment industry is for Congress, et al in other countries, to enact laws requiring it. On the other hand I think the only hope for Congress is that they don't. The people are actually fairly slow to learn collectively and the world does seem to be changing pretty fast these days. However, collectively, given time, a majority of people will come to realize that they are being lied to and will assert their rights. And when they do? I believe all hell will break loose and both Congress and the entertainment industry will fall victim to an electoral enema.

Re:Component output will be down-rexed to 480p

[Temsi]

I have a 30" CRT Philips HDTV monitor I got about a year and a half ago. HDTV looks fantastic through the component cables, which are my only means of getting an HD signal into the monitor, seeing as the set doesn't have DVI/HDCP.

If these bozos think they're going to force me to shell out another grand or two for a new set, they've got another thing coming.
I will personally break the protection if I have to (I'm a pretty smart cookie), but I will not participate in a scam of these proportions. If you have to buy a new TV to view the content, it's not just copy-protected, it's view-protected.

I have a 1080i capable TV. If I have a player that can play 1080i, why should I be required to buy a new TV just to be able to connect?

What happened to letting the market decide?
It seems corporations have no problem with protectionism and market regulations when it's designed by them in order to pad their pockets. Then they get all riled up when regulations are made that protect consumers, whining about how it's costing them money. Well, this is going to cost US money. And I say we fight this tooth and nail.

These money grubbing bastards been bitching for years about the slow growth of the number of HDTV households. Then, when that number is finally up to a level where they feel it's profitable to start offering content for sale, they expect us to buy new sets in order to use it, thereby setting the number of households back dramatically. I'd be willing to bet that at least half the HDTV sets in the US don't have HDCP.

Just goes to show that executives have no clue what the hell they're talking about... let alone what they're doing.

Memo to Hollywood executives: Remember DVDs? We sidestepped your stupid protection then, and we'll do it again. Stop wasting your time. While you sit around wondering how to protect your stuff, terabytes of HD content is being freely shared online, captured off cable/satellite boxes.
You'll never stop sharing - you'll only annoy legit customers with this kind of paranoid BS.

Re:Component output will be down-rexed to 480p

[maynard]

That's exactly the way they want it to go down. Your best option right now is to check if your cable company provides a digital box with firewire out (cable companies are now forced to provide firewire out if you ask). If so, buy a D-VHS videotape recorder and timeshift / archive to tape. The JVC HMDH40000 and HMDH5U both offer 1080i component out (the 5U also offers HDMI). But the format will die as Blu-Ray / HD-DVD comes to market due to pressure from Hollywood. --M

Re:That's OK, I wasn't going to pay for it anyway.

[Geof]

I have done just that. I cancelled cable, and pretty much stopped going to movies. Without the advertising on TV, I no longer have awareness of or desire for what I'm missing (some of which is surely very good).

The problem is, I don't enjoy funding the folks who are stealing my culture. Besides, there's more entertainment out there than I could see in a lifetime. The Net, books, and library videos are plenty, and the quality is generally much higher.

Re:But not REQUIRED

[Kadin2048]

Everything you say is true, except for one bit, when you say the words "re-rip lossless." While you can definitely re-rip the burned CD in a lossless format, the entire burn-out and rip-in transaction WILL incur a serious sonic loss. If all you're ever going to do is play the music on iPod headphones, a budget car stereo, or computer speakers, you might never notice though, but it's there.

Re:Component output will be down-rexed to 480p

[Temsi]

Yes, I'm aware of the Firewire option... and I've threatened my cable provider with an FCC complaint (looks like I'll have to make good on it), since they've been required to provide firewire when requested, since July 1st, 2004.
However, you can't copy anything via Firewire if it's copy protected - so there's really no point in wasting money on a D-VHS.
Over The Air channels I can already record on my PC using an HDTV Tuner, so that's not an issue. The issue is premium channels, PPV and Movies On Demand. If I pay for it, I expect to be able to keep a copy for personal use, just like I've been able to do with the Standard Definition material for the last 25 years.
This is a ginormous step backwards in terms of customer rights.

Not if...

[SuperKendall]

Heck, maybe I'll just read a book. They still let us do that right?

Not if you buy your Harry Potter too early.

Re:Component output will be down-rexed to 480p

[maynard]

Not true. I'm with Comcast/Boston and am able to copy all the cable and premium chanels, except for pay per view. If you're only able to copy OTA broadcasts then your local head-end is misconfigured. There are three levels of copyprotection: none, or unencrypted; copy-once, or encrypted with the right to copy to tape once; and copy-never. Cable and premium chanels are supposed to be set to "Copy Once". Your HTPC can't record these files because they're encrypted and the PC doesn't have a driver with the proper decryption keys. But the D-VHS deck will. Please see this thread over at AVS Forum for details. --M