Slashdot Mirror


Translation of Macrovision Response to Jobs on DRM

BoboB-69 writes "Daring Fireball has posted a humorous, and accurate PR-speak to Plain English translation of Macrovision's CEO's response to Steve Jobs' Open Letter on DRM. Highly recommended reading for slashdotters everywhere."

7 of 284 comments (clear)

  1. that's beautifully worded by jessecurry · · Score: 5, Interesting

    and much more to the point. Why can't all execs speak like that?

    --
    Those who know, do not speak. Those who speak, do not know. ~Lao Tzu
    1. Re:that's beautifully worded by encoderer · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I agree entirely.

      Well, mostly.

      I'm not really against DRM per se, but I am against how it's currently implemented.

      In my opinion, if DRM existed just to prevent me from sharing my content with somebody else, that would be OK with me. As long as it lets me format-shift it to any device or future device, make self-destrutable copies for a friend that blows itself up, say, 3 days after being watched (like lending a DVD), and generally stays out of my way, I'm fine with it.

      Unfortunately, they can't figure out how to do that, so instead they give us draconian content locking.

      But what I _do_ agree with is that companies are now, for the first times, starting to realize it's not going to work.

      Who remembers SDMI? The Secure Digital Music Initiative was created right about the time the labels sued (unsuccessfully) to have the Rio pulled from the market. It was a consortium of all the big companies--MSFT, SONY, etc. Probably no apple back then, tho--and they took like 18 months to come out with this way to "protect" music and, I swear to god, it was broken in like days.

      The reason I bring this up are two fold:

      1. It was the first crack at DRM and the first time DRM was cracked.
      2. Maybe if it hadn't been cracked, things would be marginally better now. Just a thought, but maybe we'd have a single standard.

      Point one is significant because every time DRM has failed the makers say "We've learned from our mistakes, wait until you see the NEXT version"

      And now, finally, after hearing these promises from the likes of Macrovision, the industry has FINALLY started to get fed-up. When their hundreds of millions spent on securing HD content was just evaporated in the first few months of comming to market I swear you could just smell 1000 execs puking in their mouths.

      The DRM battle has been a horrible experience for both consumers and content companies. The companies, each go around, get their hopes up. They're psyched to go out drinking. They slap hands, talking about all the bitches they'll pick up. All the fun they'll have. They change their shirt 4 times and use a can of Pomade in their hair. But every single time, without fail, they wake with a serious fucking hangover.

      Meanwhile, Macrovision and the ilk already collected their huge development and licensing fees. To hell with the fact that what they produced doesn't actually _work_.

      It would really be funny to watch the content companies in this self-destructive behavior if it wasn't such a shitty deal for consumers.

  2. Re:Fairly amusing but not overly informative by drdanny_orig · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, duh! (And I mean that in the nicest possible way.) I think that was the entire point. Macromedia's letter was a fairly entertaining, but ultimately content-free rebuke of Job's equally self-serving pronouncement.

    --
    .nosig
  3. Dream the impossible dream by Linker3000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If I could implant all my media devices with a unique-to-me identifier and then transfer any content I have paid for *from any source* to any of my devices then I'd be happy with such DRM. Trouble is, this implies all companies with a vested interest in DRM cooperating and the system actually working.

    Until that time, I am forced to live in a world where I can listen to an MP3 file at home on 'Player A'. I can also take and use 'Player A' in my car, round a friend's house (and let them listen!), whilst shopping, on the train, plane etc., but heaven forbid I should try and copy or move my MP3 file from 'Player A' to my in-car 'Player B' which is designed to be operated whilst driving, unlike player A which is about as big as a small box of matches and is bloody dangerous to fiddle with whilst on the move.

    --
    AT&ROFLMAO
  4. Jobs in plain English by solevita · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Of course, you could also argue that Steve Jobs' letter said little in plain English apart from "Hey Europe, don't get upset with me, the content producers make me do it". Norway saw through it and actually replied in plain English (Norwegian?) when they said "Jobs, stop making excuses, you're still breaking the law by selling your lock-in products in Norway".

  5. Re:the text by jc42 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The translation by itself isn't nearly as entertaining as reading both.

    This is why it's always a good idea to present the original texts alongside a translation. Sure, as in this example, most people won't be able to read and understand the original. But some will, and (again as in this example) those people can help verify that the translation is accurate.

    Just think of all of history's warfare that could have been prevented if if were a legal requirement that translations always be presented side-by-side with the original. Holy books would always include the original, so the mistranslations would be visible to those with a bit of knowledge. Politicians wouldn't get away with "straw-man" distortions of their enemies' statements, because the distorted version would be accompanied by the original.

    But I guess we know why such an idea couldn't possibly be accepted, especially not by our religious or political leaders. Probably not by our corporate leaders, either.

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  6. Re:Great.... by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yup. Been there, done that.

    Worked for a small company of about 11 people - an IBM Series 1 VAR and PC VAD.

    CEO brought in a new guy. Held a party. Told us everything was great - company profitable. The new guy was going to be CEO, the old CEO was going to be Chairman of the Board.

    A week later, they fired six of the 11 people (not including me - they sent me home that afternoon to avoid the bloodshed).

    Week later, the new CEO moved on to Honeywell.

    A couple months later, I moved on, having seen the writing on the wall. And that was after he'd sent me back to Atlanta to go through IBM PC tech school. I came back, new job waiting for me, I reported on my experience at the IBM school - and then, "Oh, by the way, I'm quitting!"

    He offered me a significant raise to stay on.

    Yeah, right, asshole CEO. Sayonara!

    Anybody who believes anything a manager says is seriously naive.

    The icing on the cake is that this guy got his MBA on a thesis about "employee relations" - and he was one of the biggest assholes I ever worked for in any company. I mean, not just because he fired everybody. I mean, he was a SERIOUS asshole in normal conversation. Everybody at the company couldn't stand him.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!