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."
Tag this Vista only. I ain't got no problems like that with XP.
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.
I buy sheet music online - the site only allows you to print to a physical printer NOT a PDF recorder (it also prints my full name on the sheet music). I'm sure there is someone who is smart enough out there to bypass this, I've thought about it (for the technical challenge) but really I'm probably just to lazy to even try.
This was one of those "features" of Vista that I heard about in the earlier days of the hype. There wasn't a clearly defined explanation of how they would indeed tie DRM to your HD monitor but I guess the results are starting to show. Someday maybe all of our hardware will be locked down so that if you don't buy content with appropriate DRM, it simply won't play. Hurray for freedom!
This perhaps doesn't directly address the problem mentioned, but this is what I do. I only bother with Netflix DRM because I get it "free" anyway with my subscription.
Anyway, using a script I wrote, I parse the HTML saved from Firefox (pretending to be IE7) and download the highest bandwidth version of a movie. I then cringe and for the only time each month boot Windows and using Mirakagi, FreeUse4Win, WMP and unDRM the file. Then I can play in perpetuity in Linux/MythTV.
The size of the files is normally 1-2GB. Yes, that's less than DVD quality, but pretty acceptable in most cases. You can fetch the keys for 9 hours of movies per month (for the basic subscription), but they round up, so if you do it carefully and get keys for 8.5 hours of movies, you can make the last one a 3 hour epic - about 5-7 movies total.
This is all based upon information I got from here: http://forum.rorta.net/showthread.php?t=1134&page=6 (link to last page)
Kaffeine didn't play the resulting WMVs very well. mplayer and VLC do a better job.
Read the F'ing EULA my friend.
And if you don't stop fast-forwarding through those Axe commercials we're going to deactivate your reproductive module.
Oh, I wish I'd copied the text while it was still mysterious red. Anyway, he provides screenshots, model numbers, and so forth. There's a "DRM reset" tool that Netflix recommended that they say will nuke anything from other vendors. It's clear that his digital restrictions keystore became corrupted somehow, and Netflix, Amazon, and Microsoft all directed him to each other. In the end he wonders why he bothered paying at all, noting that he could obtain higher-resolution rips for less money using bittorrent.
Okay, I won't buy from Netflix, especially since they don't "sell" digital downloads. What they do offer is an online-viewing service that's included "free" (currently) with their standard by-mail service. A service which, I might add, happens to work beautifully if you're running XP. It looks like this guy's problems stem from the fact that he's running Vista and has decided to change his hardware (even if it is only the monitor). We were given plenty of warning that Vista would do this, so we shouldn't be surprised when it happens.
This guy's the limit!
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
I don't see why all the antipathy against Netflix exists - it's not even Netflix that is distributing the files he would lose, just that the streaming player will not work because of a corruption in the DRM database.
Blame Windows for not having a better handle on backing up that data, sure. Blame UnBox for selling such crippled media - OK then. But Netflix has no other choices because content providers will not accept other solutions. They aren't even storing anything locally, just streaming.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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
This is a bug that only affects Windows Vista (defective DRM is prevalent). Upgrading to Windows XP will solve the problem.
Portable versions of Firefox, GIMP, LibreOffice, etc
Chickens! Why it seems they've come home to roost!
I always said that as soon as customers started loosing legally purchased media and having real difficulties with brand new hardware that the days or DRM would be over. Could that day be here already?! Happy 2008 all.
To boldly use to and too two times and get it right too! They're not gonna believe their eyes when they see it there!
He changed the monitors, which caused Vista to invalidate the DRM, much like a Windows Genuine Advantage. Now his Netflix account is invalid and has to revalidate it and for this the application will scan all his licenses and reset all license it finds (which means he would have to contact Amazon and all the other companies and request to have the licenses activated again). Or something like that.
Even though I'm an HDTV fanatic, it wasn't until this past weekend, that I finally made the jump to an HD monitor. While I don't have HDTV tuners on my Media Center, I do have an HD camcorder and it was important for me to be able to edit my high resolution videos.
After doing a little bit of research, I decided to pick up a SyncMasterTM 226BW from Samsung. Between the new monitor and my ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT video card, the resolution looks absolutely stunning. Even my home movies look fantastic in HDTV. I really couldn't have been happier with the upgrade.
Unfortunately, Hollywood isn't quite as thrilled about my new HD Media Dream Machine and they've decided to punish me by revoking my Watch Now privileges from Netflix.
I first found out about the problem on New Year's Eve, when I went to log into my account. When I tried to launch a streaming movie, I was greeted with an error message asking me to "reset" my DRM. Luckily, Netflix's help page on the topic included a link to a DRM reset utility, but when I went to install the program, I stopped dead in my tracks when I saw this warning.
[img]
The minute I saw"this will potentially remove playback licenses from your computer, including those from companies other than Netflix or Microsoft" I knew better than to hit continue. Before nuking my entire digital library, I decided to call Netflix's technical support, to see if I could get to the bottom of my C00D11B1 error message.
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.
Technically, there is a way to back up the licenses before doing a DRM reset, but it's a pretty complex process, even by my standards. When I asked Netflix for more details, they referred me to Amazon for assistance.
Perhaps even worse than having to choose between having access to Netflix or giving up my Unbox movies was the realization that my real problems were actually tied to the shiny new monitor that I've already grown fond of.
Netflix's software allows them to look at the video card, cables and the monitor that you are using and when they checked mine out, it was apparently a little too high def to pass their DRM filters.
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.
As part of their agreement with Hollywood, Netflix uses a program called COPP (Certified Output Protection Protocal). COPP is made by Microsoft and the protocol restricts how you are able to transfer digital files off of your PC. When I ran COPP to identify the error on my machine, it gave me an ominous warning that "the exclusive semaphere is owned by another process."
My Netflix technician told me that he had never heard of this particular error and thought that it was unique to my setup. When I consulted Microsoft, they suggested that I consult the creator of the program. Since Microsoft wrote the COPP software, I wasn't sure who to turn to after that.
The irony in all of this, is that the DRM that Hollywood is so much in love with, is really only harming their paying customers. When you do a DRM reset, it's not your pirated files that get revoked, it's the ones that you already paid for that are at risk. I'm not allowed to watch low res Netflix files, even though I have the capability to download high def torrents? How does this even make sense? It's as if the studios want their digital strategies to fail.
While I understand the need for the studios to protect their content, I believe that these measures g
And you're neatly sidestepping the issue altogether. Nice trick, that. The issue is that switching to a "free" (however one defines that, which is a discussion unto itself) OS will not solve the problem at all. All that will happen is you'll have to pirate your videos, which is the same damn solution that you'd have to go to under Windows... so the OS change has netted you no benefit whatsoever with respect to this DRM issue.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
Sorry everyone /. was a little too powerful for my hosting company and they won't let me up my quota. If anyone knows of any webhosting companies that can handle the /. effect, I'm in the market for a new one. In the meantime, here is a link to another copy of the article in case you would like to read it. If someone can get Commander Taco to update it in the main article, I would appreciate it. Thanks for all the support and I hope that you don't hate me too much for making the mistake of buying Vista and DRM movies. Sometimes you have to experience how crappy DRM is first hand, in order to realize how much value it strips from your content.
Never Pick A Fight With Someone Who Buys Ink By The Barrel.
You Free(TM) OS fanboys are all fucking idiots.
The original poster proposed using a Free(TM) OS as a method of fighting DRM.
The next poster correctly pointed out that using a Free(TM) OS has absolutely nothing to do with the issue.
Then you idiots keep railing about how using a Free(TM) OS will somehow solve the DRM problem - completely ignoring (and seemingly ignorant of) the fact that DRM can be implemented in ANY operating system with or without cooperation from the authors of the OS.
The issue is DRM and protected content, not operating systems. You can choose not to purchase and consume protected content weather or not you run a Free(TM) OS or not.
I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
- Organisation acquires vendor's DRM-protected video disc, gets temporary license to try it out.
- Staff member sits on it 'cause she's busy, temp license runs out.
- Second temp license requested, IT manager attempts to get videos playing. Any attempt on the laptop he's current using results in a crash.
- IT manager puts it aside long enough for the second temp license to expire, then hands it to me.
- I don't know any of the above as I try to get it working. Ironically, since I'm on a Vista PC all the Media Player DRM works perfectly, but the license isn't current.
- Call vendor to try and get license sorted out, they refuse to help saying we've already had plenty of time to try it.
- I explain DRM to the involved staff here.
- We contact the vendor to say that since we've never been able to get it working, we don't want it.
- Vendor panics at missed sale, gives us third trial license.
- We get videos playing, finally, on a laptop that can be used for presentations.
- We buy product (sigh).
I should find out if it's still working or if it's fallen over in the few months since I last saw it.Umm, the issue is DRM content AND operating systems. Vista added all sorts of "features" whose only point is to restrict the way that videos can be played back and make overly restrictive digital rights restrictions easier. DRM "could" be implemented under Linux, but there is not pervasive rights restrictions throught libraries, the kernel, and the X server as there are rights restrictions in Vista through libraries, kernel, and video system. A "protected video path" type setup under Linux would simply not be very possible, and if someone tried it, the source is available so it can be circumvented trivially.
The primary reason for free software being a good antidote to DRM is that I am voting with my wallet. Buying or staying with XP "instead" of Vista doesn't send Microsoft the message -- they may want you to get Vista, but you are still sending money Microsoft's way. OSX is also a big DRM supporter. So, by not purchasing OSX or Windows it sends the message to Apple & Microsoft that I will not spend money with DRM supporters.
And he's requested Google to not cache it? That was helpful!
He DID request in his robots.txt for Google to cache it. Unfortunately his robots.txt file got invalidated during a server upgrade and Hollywood revoked his right to allow Google to copy it.
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.
I remember reading 2-3 years ago research articles claiming that state-of-the-art image watermarking techniques were pretty robust against alterations and 100% undetectable even though their algorithms were known. Which makes sense, this is the same principle as in cryptography: the security of the mechanism should not rely on the secrecy of the algorithm itself.
Now I understand that video watermarking techniques is an entirely different domain, but I am surprised by your comment... So are you talking about watermarking of images or videos ?
In theory, future HDCP content could invalidate whatever key it is using to decrypt the signal; in practice, the makers of the HDFury probably cloned the keys of something extremely popular (for example, a Sony Bravia or Sharp Aquos television), so revoking the key would infuriate thousands of HDTV owners.
The manufacturers of HDFury say that it is a totally legal conversion device, but they're either ignorant, or lying. The specifications for HDCP-protected content state that it is up to the content provider whether analog outputs on the device are enabled. Something tells me they're not exactly honoring what the content provider tells them to do.
(I probably don't have to tell you that even attempting to purchase an HDFury makes you a criminal in the United States thanks to the DMCA, but if you're the sort to buy one I doubt you're very worried about that.)
Strange game... only winning move is not to play.