ATI Claims HDCP Then Covers Its Tracks

BigControversy writes "It looks like a big can of worms is being opened. The DailyTech.com is reporting that ATI sold millions of video cards knowing that HDCP support was not enabled. Despite that, the cards were sold and advertised to its customers as having HDCP capabilities. A day or two after this information was revealed, HDMI.org went completely password protected and ATI is now modifying key areas of its website, removing any mention of 'HDCP-ready'."

Comments

Whoa... How did they get away with this?

[beacher]

"Some products boast HDMI connectivity, when they do not even have a physical HDMI connector nor do the products ship with an adapter. Even if they do, having a HDMI connector does not mean the board is able to output a HDCP-DVI signal."

How in the world can they ship this? It's not even a firmware bug.. It's missing in its entirety! Been disliking ATI recently.. this dropped them down to the "I'd rather buy a S3 Virge" video card level..
-B

Re:Awww

[StikyPad]

It's no mixup, as the "related story" (aka dupe) explains. There's no method of retroactively enabling HDCP. From TOldFA:

"The boards themselves must be designed with an extra chip when the board is manufactured. The extra chip stores a crypto key, and you cannot retrofit an existing board after the board is produced."

ATI knew this. Everybody knew this. Somebody in marketing decided to advertise it anyway, nobody corrected them, and now they're trying to clean up the mess.

Re:devil's advocate...NOT A DRIVER ISSUE

[Nom du Keyboard]

That being said, of course ATi should roll out a driver that has hardware HDCP enabled, or offer some form of compensation to previous buyers whom were mislead.

You can't fix this with a driver. If you could this would be a non-issue. The video card needs a Trusted Computing Module chip installed that contains secret keys that the user cannot access. No chip = No HDCP. And it's not like there's a socket on most video cards waiting to be populated.

Re:Whoa... How did they get away with this?

[ScottLindner]

HDMI does not inherently include HDCP. The specific is a bit loose in the way people interpret it. HDMI is the physical standard, HDCP is essentially a data layer standard. It's the same as wondering why you only get two channel audio if you use an SPDIF interface (AC-3/Dolby Digital). Sure, SPDIF can carry full 5.1 audio, but that doesn't mean it has to. This is the same with HDMI and HDCP. What I think most people are confused or frustrated with is some displays say HDMI support, and don't tell you that they require HDPC as well. You gotta figure that one out by visiting forums.

This WAS going to happen

[ratboy666]

Of course all those video cards are "HDCPI Ready". They *can* generate the encrypted content. No sweat.

But (and here's the rub), the content providers (strike that, the "copyright industry", or CI) have decided to not trust any "home-brew" system. Which means that the keys won't go to the cards (because the *system* isn't trusted) and the feature is now useless.

Of course, a new system can have exactly the same chip, and it will then work.

Its the CI backlash against the DVD crack (which, of course, a vendor of playback equipment was responsible for -- which is NOT being forgotten). Coupled with some bad crypto choices, and DVDs are now wide open. The CIs would want to prevent this, and are now qualifying everything (my opinion).

External boxes can only produce SD (DVD) quality output on analog, which is what Vista will generate as well.

ATI make chips, boards and drivers. They (in my opinion) couldn't care less -- they just implement the spec. They put it the feature, and now can't use it because of key control concerns; they have been caught with their pants down.

Is is possible for ATI to sue the CIs? Because if I were in ATI, I would be as mad as a wet hen right now.

Ratboy.

Re:I'm getting a feeling that DRM will self-implod

[WhiteWolf666]

The 3rd technology has already emerged.

H.264 on standard DVD, with the upgrade path being ANY sort of higher capacity device.

H.264 means you can do 1080p (not 1080i, but 1080 progressive) with 5.1 audio in 1 MB/sec. That's about 3.5 GB per hour. That gives you 2.5 hours of 1080p on a standard DVD disk. You can squeeze the main title in 2, and then use the remainder for all the other stuff in SD. Or, make it a two disk set. Both of these will cost FAR, FAR less than blu-ray or HD-DVD.

H.264 enables SD TV over standard broadband, NOW. Take a look at this: http://www.apple.com/macosx/cnbc/ . Thats technically 480p content. Its playing at 675 kbit/sec, or 84.73 KB/sec. 720p content is similarly small; you'll have no problems whatsoever fitting everything you'd want on a single title blu-ray disk onto a standard dvd if your encoding with H.264 on 720p.

I suspect with a really smart encoder, using intelligent VBR type stuff, you can get 1080p down to an average of 800-900 KB/sec. Perhaps even less. If someone can get the standard DVD above the 3 hour of footage barrier, blu-ray/HD-DVD immediately become a niche market, at least until HDTV 2.0 comes out. Oh; and new displays, as well. But even with _today's_ setup, you can fire up Final Cut Studio, and produce a 2.5 hour feature length movie, slap in on a standard DVD in 1080p, and then put all your extras on the second disk.

H.264 enables 1080i HDTV on a standard dual layer DVD. You need a beefy processor to play it back, but various manufacturers have already produced embedded decoders. H.264 is the future of IPTV, of satellite transmission, even cable transmission. Most likely, the "upgrade" path is H.264 on standard disks, and then the elimination of disks altogether.

Why would I _EVER_ carry a pile of blu-ray disks around when I could simply walk with an iPod, or a mobile phone, or a flash disk, or some other portable media library, and wirelessly (bluetooth 4.5, or 802.11n, or whatever) "rent" a video from the blockbuster kiosk? Heck; strip out the middleman; just buy the movie from iMovie store, or Amazon's movies, or Walmart Video Online. Whatever; it doesn't matter.

The thing is, the entertainment industry is trying to drag us kicking and screaming towards a "secure" disk format, and they are about to be absolutely blindsided by the U.S. retail/rental entertainment industry. Walmart alone dwarfes the RIAA; Walmart+Apple+Blockbuster+Target+Amazon+NetFlix+Al l the other outlets versus RIAA is a joke.

Especially when Walmart can distribute videos at a cost of 5-10 cents via electronic (or rental, or flash) distribution, and blu-ray disks cost $23 wholesale! Ever met a Walmart purchasing agent? Those guys give new meaning to "hard barginer", and make your look like a fool and his money.

A properly devised mobile media library will end physical media. You'll carry 30% of your media around with you, with the other 70% being stored securely over the internet, either streamed from or from your media center system at home. Microsoft and Apple are both going this direction; the lack of HD-DVD on Xbox 360 has locked them into this path, and Apple's been dreaming of running the TV/Video market with H.264 Quicktime. Much of the consumer electronics industry is interested in Blu-ray/HD-DVD, but retailers are going to squeal when they see how much it costs, and are going to squeal again when one of their competitors ships standard DVD products with the same features at 1/10 the price; with the only disadvantage being 2 disk sets versus 1 disk.

HDCP, HDMI, Blu-ray, HD-DVD; whatever. Not that this is the end of DRM, that'll certainly be in both Apple's and Microsoft's schemes. But the content distribution of tomorrow won't be run by the RIAA/MPAAs of the world; it'll be run by the computer side of the tech industry.