Slashdot Mirror
HD Monitor Causes DRM Issues with Netflix
Jeremiah Cornelius points us to Davis Freeberg's blog, where he discusses his "nightmare scenario" of losing access to his DRM-protected purchases by upgrading his PC monitor.
"When I called them they confirmed my worst fears. In order to access the Watch Now service, I had to give Microsoft's DRM sniffing program access to all of the files on my hard drive. If the software found any non-Netflix video files, it would revoke my rights to the content and invalidate the DRM. This means that I would lose all the movies that I've purchased from Amazon's Unbox, just to troubleshoot the issue. Because my computer allows me to send an unrestricted HDTV feed to my monitor, Hollywood has decided to revoke my ability to stream 480 resolution video files from Netflix. In order to fix my problem, Netflix recommended that I downgrade to a lower res VGA setup."
Yet another reason to pirate all the content you want.
Looks like I'll be cancelling my Netflix account for awhile then. Once again, it proves that companies make it easier to just pirate stuff than it is to try and legally pay for it.
Do not buy from Netflix. If they are this stupid, then simply quit buying from them. More importantly, let them know why. Once that happens enough, they will quit doing this. Until then, the MPAA (who is really behind this) will continue to do this.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
This sounds suspicious. If this story is true, then all the more reason to be extra mistrusting about the pay-for video download sites. For audio (at Amazon), it's dumb simple: click the song you want, & download your mp3(with one-click service). Why shouldn't it be this simple with video (I haven't tried Unbox yet)?
Actually how about simply "do not watch it". Pirating is simply an excuse to have laws made that invade your privacy to discovery your piracy. It is not a morally appropiate option to disagreeing with a method of sale.
A Microsoft problem? No. The feature is implemented correctly. If the monitor does not have the authorization chip that the new drivers in Vista are set to check for (thus closing the analog hole), the DRM will not play. Because VGA is older, the content will play on that. It's a feature of Windows Media, that might be fixed if Microsoft does not implement the monitor check in Silverlight which they are switching to. Since they want to support Macs, and Apple isn't that stupid, hopefully they won't be able to.
--Sam
I guess you'd argue that since I'm not in prison, I not really free, since I don't have the freedom to enjoy their nice stripped outfits? What part of Free OS didn't you understand?
No, I'd argue that you don't understand the issue. A Free OS doesn't fix the problem.
I don't know what's up with this so-called story, but the link provided in the story (along with the entire domain it comes from) is requiring username/password authentication, and in the fist 10 comments someone is alleging that the story is a complete fake to start with. WTF? Someone please take the story down until someone makes sense out of it?
That doesn't work because watermarks are incredibly easy to get around. Simple signal processing techniques will eliminate most watermarks without noticeably affecting the output. In many cases you can just add your own watermark over the top and either destroy the existing watermark or no-one knows which one is the original watermark.
Pretty much all watermarking research assumes that an attacker does not know how the watermarking technique works and does not intelligently attack the watermark. That assumption is hopelessly unrealistic. It's 100% security by obscurity.
The problem is that to view some drm'd content* on a digital monitor you need to have a secure pathway from the computer to the monitor. The idea is that if you didn't have a secure pathway then it would be trivially easy to record the content being outputed and bypass the DRM.
So the reason he cant view his files now is that (from TFS) his computer allows him to send an unrestricted HDTV feed to his monitor. It has really nothing to do with a new monitor other than the fact that his new monitor is digital, while his only monitor was analog (VGA), and apparently his video card is too old to support the digital encryption.
*note it is the content providers choice whether their drm'd content will require a secure digital pathway from videocard to monitor. The fact that Amazon sets this flag on its SD content is extremely stupid. This kind of DRM was designed to prevent bluray and HDDVD movies from being easily ripped.
Finally I don't agree with any of this DRM crap at all. I think it's all bullshit and will never purchase any DRM'd video files, ever. But I don't like untrue FUD being tossed around even if it is against a MS product. Hell, it's not like the content providers will ever let their crap play on an OS without the ability to use this kind of DRM - what was MS supposed to do, not support the DRM and not even give consumers the option of watching DRM'd files? That's like throwing the baby out with the bathwater (even if in this case the baby is a seriously ugly SOB that few - but some - would want).
And this is the problem with most DRM schemes. They do nothing to solve the real problems of pirated media, and instead put all kinds of shackles on the people who actually pay good money for their music, movies, and software; in the process making pirated media superior to bought media.
This ad space for rent.
It strikes me that we sit here on /. and say, "Nyah, nyah, no DRM, icky-ick," and in passing realize that we're not in the target market, and any so-called boycotts we attempt to do will be meaningless.
But there is another side to it...
This guy is an early-adopter, and he's just been screwed. The next tier of customers frequently don't jump until they've gotten a warm fuzzy feeling from the early adopters. This guy's friends and acquaintances aren't going to get that feeling, and hold off a bit longer.
Originally one of the scary things about DRM was that most of it was going to be turned off - at first. My sinister presumption was that that would let the early adopters have their day - and make their recommendations. By the time they started turning the DRM on they would hopefully have significant market penetration, and assuming they were careful with their staging of turning it on, they'd likely get away with it.
If this is any sign, that plan hasn't come to pass.
This is Good News.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
Yes they should have said stuff it to the studios. Microsoft controls over 90% of the desktops on the planet. For once they could have used their monopoly position to some good.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
This is a reason why piracy is becoming such a problem.
Not only is it cheaper to download it off the net some where (pick your favorite source) the people who rip the content rip out the drm which makes it just easier to use. No worries about licenses , no worries about 2 services destroying each other, no worries about changing hardware and having to repurchase half your library because one service uses it and the other doesn't.
These companies just don't realize that drm is draconian. Multi Os platforms and easy to use video content that will play any where is what the future should hold. instead they try ad put a strangle hold on the content and tell us we can only use it on windows , and maybe if your lucky a mac. Basically telling me what OS and what hardware I should run by placing system requirements on the content , meanwhile on a Linux or Solaris box, I don't need anywhere near those resources to watch a downloaded movie.
Draconian restrictions were also used at the fall of the roman empire. I think we (the US) is really shooting ourselves in the foot with these restrictions.
And Yes I have seen these errors on my wifes Vista computer. God how I'd love to strip out vista and install ubuntu or fedora for her. Im tired of cleaning out windows systems !
This package Does Not Contain a Winner
So, to summarzie:
He tried to play some NetFlix "Watch Now" content. It didn't want to play back, probably due to some issue with the DRM licensing scheme, which might have tied his montor and video card to the playback license. When looking for help, NetFlix just redirected him to run the COPP tool.
What he really needs to do is to delete the NetFlix license and get a new one that maps to his new hardware. Instead of giving him a tool to remove only the NetFlix license, NetFlix took the low road and recommended a utility that is meant to remove all licenses cleanly.
Not only that, but there is a way to back up the licenses he already has so that after COPP removes his licenses, he can reinstate them for the content he already has. He'll need to get a new license for the NetFlix "Watch Now" content, which is really all that he needs to do anyway.
So Netflix recommended a tool that will make life hard on him, but he has a means to backup the licenses, delete the existing ones, and then reload the licenses from the backup, but he doesn't want to do that.
Unless I completely missed something from the article text... (Always possible.)
it seems like all these companies have forgotten that their users are the source of their income.
keep treating us this way, and see what happens!
I have always found services like netflix to be unnecessary. I use a little-known service called bit-torrent to get my movies. the selection is good and the price is great. best of all, no region restrictions, and no DRM! everyone should use it!
-I only code in BASIC.-
Bad situation, definitely...
And before I say this and everyone mods me for flamebait, i'm just echoing what I think is right...
STOP BUYING DRM PROTECTED MEDIA. Problem solved. Read a book, peruse Slashdot, talk to your wife... i dunno, but giving the hollywood pigs their chow will not bring about any change.
mod away, sry.
No words of wisedom here.
Ironic 'taint it matey?
:-)
Honestly though, there is little to no competition to a fully "pirate" setup.
* XBMC on old Xbox with component video cables (720p max, but that's what my LCD is
* LAMP media server, exports *everything* on simple usr/pwd shares
* movies transcoded from my library
* MP3's transcoded from my library
* BBC shows and other public broadcasting shows I like
No real reason I couldn't add an RSS feed to TPB and autograb shows other than WGHB and BBC stuff (or movies etc.)
According to the **AA my copies of my music/movies are not proper and thus "pirate" etc. and it blows absolutely every other option I've tried out of the water. In theory I could add a myth back-end server and capture off the air/cable with a DVB card or a hauppage + cable box setup, but honestly there is no need.
XBMC is even better than myth in my opinion, and both of them kick the pants off of XP-MCE.
-nB
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
But... this is ridiculous, and this poor guy shouldn't ever have to go through this step.. or any other asinine hoops. Think what would happen to a less savvy Vista user. pwn3d!
;-)
I hate DRM. No wonder people are turning to piracy.
Oh well, add it to the list of things that Ron Paul will solve within 1 week.
This should not be called DRM.
This should be called illegal restraint of trade and monopoly abuse.
It should be also dealt with accordingly.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
I just don't get this. I have a 22" LCD widescreen Acer monitor - 1680x1050, and it only has a VGA connector. It looks beautiful.
To be honest, I'm fairly skeptical about the claims of superiority of HDMI. Are people being suckered?
Easy workaround - BitTorrent.
To some degree you're right. But in some ways, you've got it backward.
DRM has managed to make "pirates" out of people. Sharing music through various means has been a part of human culture since the dawn of time. We sing to each other, play for each other, perform for each other. By natural extension, we loaned or copied sheet music to to each other, we loaned or copied player piano tracks to each other, we loaned or copied records and tapes to each other, and now more recently, we share and copy MP3s to each other.
The industry has taken a human social behavior and have criminalized it for their own profits adding "force of law" to their business model.
This stuff has gotten out of hand long ago and it is taking far too long to set things straight. The best answer is to restore copyright durations to their original time frame. There's no need to extend it to over 100 years as we seem to have it now. In fact, under present law, there is very high risk of losing the public domain entirely as well as losing access to artistic works in the future! Consider the issues we have seen with document formats and the push to get them into open standard formats. The purpose? To avoid having important and public information being lost due to the format no longer being supported while remaining secret. Right now, we're collecting our music in digital formats that are locked away by both technology and law where neither accounts for an "end" of the duration of copyright. It accounts for nothing about what happens when the works are no longer covered under copyright. The works are lost!
Yes, the fall of the Roman Empire can be traced directly to restrictive DRM schemes imposed by the media of the day ;) So restrictive were they that it was often easier to just pirate the town criers announcements by listening to friends repeat what he had to say then trying to listen to him directly.
Sorry for the sarcasm, I largely agree with what you had to say up until this. It might have been better to say that corruption played a part in the downfall of Rome -- corruption triggered by people with financial interests to protect. That actually sounds kind of familiar.... :(
And Yes I have seen these errors on my wifes Vista computer. God how I'd love to strip out vista and install ubuntu or fedora for her. Im tired of cleaning out windows systems !What's stopping you? Ironically enough my girlfriend (the artist) is less locked into Windows then I am (the IT person). She needs a PC to be able to surf the web (Firefox), do document production for her graduate courses (Open Office) and read e-mail (any number of free clients). She didn't even notice when I switched her to Firefox and isn't really locked into anything that requires Windows.
I'm screwed, because I need MS Abscess^WAccess for work and the ability to join my PC to our Active Directory. Even on a personal level I'm more locked in then she is, because I'm into gaming and keep all of my finances in Quicken.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Amen! I've been saying for years that I wish they could come up with a DRM scheme that truly is uncrackable. Not only for audio and video media, but for software as well. And I hope that Microsoft, Apple, the MAFIAA, and everyone else uses the hell out of it to lock everything down so tight that no one can get access to anything. Most people look at me like I'm crazy.
The reason, of course, is because right now, DRM is still viewed by a lot of people—even technical people who ought to know better—as a problem limited to software and media "pirates". They've grown accustomed to buying and re-buying the same videos and songs in multiple formats, or being locked into one device to play their stuff for so long, they have no idea that there should be alternatives.
If DRM were locked down so tightly that it affected every aspect of your entertainment as much as those who implement it want it to, everyone from the most technical of gurus down to your average schmoe on the street would finally understand why this issue is so important. They wouldn't be able to ignore it any more. Maybe, just maybe, people would start fighting back for their rights to use the software, watch the video, and listen to the music they rightfully own. Until it's a problem that affects average, normal people in a tangible, impossible-to-ignore way, it will continue to be out there on the fringes of what people get upset about.
I don't think "the free flow of information" was ever intended to include Halo 3 and episodes of Lost. So yes, I think piracy is a problem.
Proud member of the American Non Sequitur Society. We might not make much sense, but boy do we love pizza!
Moral of the story. Excessive DRM in music, movies, games, etc is ridiculously bad for the consumer that eventually finds another solution. It often prevents purchasers from getting at what they paid for and is the source of countless hours of tech support calls. I'll echo the "you're essentially harming the buyer" sentiments. Out sheer frustration/aggravation some of these consumers may go on to become pirates for any number of reasons .. essentially RIAA/MPAA are creating their own "enemy". Or perhaps this is a larger RIAA/MPAA strategy to make more money via lawsuits than actually attempting to sell or rent music and movies. Certainly keeps their attorneys fat and happy. Apparently HDCP is necessary if you want HD content between your HDDVD/Blu-ray and your HDTV, but it's not so good if you want to hook up a monitor to your computer.
.. you will never stop the true determined hacker. What RIAA/MPAA and game/software companies will hopefully begin to understand is that something like watermarking and software keys are preferable. It's the whole locked house scenario. Basic locked doors keep mostly honest people from entering a home. But if one releases the hounds on all visitors you eventually stop getting mail, never have family come over, and might end up with a few teeth marks in yourself. Some might prefer to live this way, but most do not.
Let's face it