Slashdot Mirror
Info on Intel's Viiv DRM
An anonymous reader writes "CNET went to Intel's Viiv launch in Australia and scored some interesting info about Viiv's DRM scheme. From the article: '[Don] MacDonald also told CNET.com.au that Viiv won't be testing to see if the content being played is pirated from networks such as BitTorrent. He believes that it's not Intel's job to be policing downloads and that it's wrong to assume that all consumers are criminals. As such, Viiv won't test for watermarks or other red flags that reveal pirated content, allowing any type of media to be played.' Another choice quote from the article: 'MacDonald is confident that piracy won't be a significant issue for Viiv, as Intel promises to make content easier to buy than it is to pirate.'"
It's funny that he thinks it's wrong to treat consumers as criminals, yet endorses DRM.
The entire idea of DRM seems to be that you prevent people from passing the file to someone else. This idea is flawed, because the "someone else" will always be able to get the file from elsewhere, illegitimately, and the "original customer" will probably end up doing the same because DRM is an inferior product when compared with illegitimate versions of the same thing.
This idea assumes that the original customer is a criminal. All DRM treats the customer (the person who has decided to pay for the file) as a criminal.
Well, idunno if I'd call Apple's DRM "really restrictive"..
Intel is pushing a technology called Treacherous Computing, which will prevent unsigned code from running on their hardware. So even if you have the source code, if you try to remove the DRM restrictions, the hardware will refuse to run the modified binary.
The Free Software Foundation admits that the anti-DRM provisions in the GPLv3 will not be enough on their own to prevent the nightmare scenario where users can't trust their own computers.
People who understand the dangers of Digital Restrictions Management at a technical level (ie.Free and Open Source software developers) should warn the general public to avoid buying DRM-crippled hardware. Consumers should know about the great variety of DRM-free computers and accessories built specifically to work with Linux, the KDE desktop, and other Free and Open Source applications.
On the music side, there are plenty of websites that legally sell DRM-free, RIAA-free music by independent artists. Consumers can use a cross-platform, iTunes-like application called Songbird to easily download songs from these sites.
As for movies, building a Linux media center works just as well as the DRM-crippled offering from M$FT. Just download MythTV and run it on a computer equipped with the pcHDTV HD-3000 card and the PVR-350 card -- these will capture both standard definition (NTSC) and Digital/Hi-Definition (ATSC/HDTV) signals.
Get computers and accessories from Linux-friendly manufacturers
Now throw DRM into the mix and what am I going to buy? A DRM enabled chip that costs more, or a chip that is DRM-Free, costs less, and performs better?
If you're looking for "DRM-free" you're not going to find it from AMD. AMD is a founding member of the Trusted Computing Group, along with Intel, and is building the exact same functionality into their processors.
Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
Yes it would. And this is the fundamental failed assumption of your entire post. The only difference DRM makes with respect to iTunes is that it appeases the record industry enough that they are willing to sell online. All of the songs sold through iTunes are already available on p2p networks. The content industry had nothing to lose by selling non-DRM music. People would have purchased it just as (if not more) often. The reason being, most people are not the crooked criminals the record industry alleges them to be.
right now I cant copy a DVD legally to my PC. My entire house is networked, and if I can get a video onto my PC, I can enable all sorts of video distribution scenarios in my house (watching tv downstairs, pause it, go to bedroom, lay down and finish the movie there). Perhaps DRM will allow this scenario
DRM is the only thing preventing this scenario and it does so intentionally. The movie industry is not going to allow you to transfer the content unless it can collect a transfer fee. Were it not for DRM, there would already be many products on the market that would allow you to transfer content in the manner you described. And it would allow you to do a lot more, such as search through the subtitles for a favorite quote, hyperlink to a clip on the DVD, allow churches to distribute mods that cut out 'offensive' content, reencode and transfer to your PDA so you can watch the movie on the plane, or even archive the content for future generations to study and enjoy.
example cited.