MLB Fans Who Bought DRM Videos Get Hosed
Billosaur writes "Major League Baseball has just strengthened the case against DRM. If you downloaded videos of baseball games from MLB.com before 2006, apparently they no longer work and you are out of luck. MLB.com, sometime during 2006, changed their DRM system. Result: game videos purchased before that time will now no longer work, as the previous DRM system is no longer supported. When the video is played, apparently the MLB.com servers are contacted and a license obtained to verify the authenticity of the video; this is done by a web link. That link no longer exists, and so now the videos will no longer play, even though the MLB FAQ says that a license is only obtained once and will not need to be re-obtained. The blogger who is reporting this contacted MLB technical support, only to be told there are no refunds due to this problem."
Excuse me while I enjoy my NHL feed on YouTube :)
I Like Pie...
This is one more reason not to pay money to watch grown men sweat a lot and scratch themselves. A few more of things like this and I am going to just give it up completely.
In a highly litigious culture, about a sport which borders on an obsession, about access perceived as a right...?
I predict the big winners in this one will be the lawyers....
I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
I'm pretty sure we're not allowed to talk about this without the express written consent of Major League Baseball.
duh, this is slashdot. wild speculation of those that clothe themselves in tinfoil is taken as the gospel truth, no questions asked.
turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
Yeah BUT...
If it was 20 CHILDREN then my god something must be done! WHAT about the children?!?!
It's MLB.
The videos already wouldn't play if it was Cold. Or Raining. Or Night. Or Outside.
Fixed the headline for you.
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
He said "fact", can't you read? This is the internet, when someone says "fact" it has to be.
For reference, see "obviously".
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If the product is defective by design, and you buy it, and it turns out to be defective, the product is working as intended. I don't see what the problem is.
Jimmy Stewart: "Well I don't have your rights here, they're in Bill's house, and in Steve's house..."
Steve Ballmer reads Slashdot?!?? *grin*
Bark less. Wag more.
...especially when the alternative is suffering the look from Wife 2.0 (I upgraded to the model with the nicer case) when, Cthulhu forbid, she can't watch Dancing with the Stars because of some HDMI BS.Completely off-topic, but I think using phrases suchs as "Wife 2.0" and "I upgraded to the model with the nicer case" are the real reasons you get that look in the first place.