Slashdot Mirror
A Copyright Cop In Every Zune
Mike writes "As if the Zune wasn't already crippled and unpopular enough, now comes a story indicating that Microsoft may build a 'Copyright Cop' into every Zune. A future update of the software for Microsoft's portable media player will likely include a 'feature' that will block unauthorized copies of copyrighted videos from being played on it. The president of digital distribution for NBC, J. B. Perrette, said the plan is to create 'filtering technology that allows for playback of legitimately purchased content versus non-legitimately purchased content.' Of course there's no way to tell legitimate content that you create from 'non-legitimate' content, so this looks like just another nail in the coffin of the Zune." Update: 05/08 20:50 GMT by T : From Microsoft employee Cesar Menendez comes this categorical denial of any such filtering mechanism.
Its just 'trusted computing' rearing its ugly head.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I've got bad news for both NBC and their friends at M$ - you have to have an audience that's actually captive before you try to screw them like this. In the mean time, Apple needs to slap them both with an anti-trust lawsuit for the attempted collusion. Both of those greedy pigs are crying about "suffering" "piracy" but most companies would be happy to suffer with their market share. Most companies would also be bright enought to milk it by delivering product that does not suck life.
Zune was never good but this will surely make it complete shit. A network that "squirts" vanishing media and advertisments. A clunky form factor that's trying hard to match competiton from three years ago. About the only thing they could do worse is make it less reliable than it already is. Bingo. They can't make Vista DRM work with quad processors and always on networking, do they really think an embedded device has a snowballs chance in hell? If you bought an old one of these on firesale, learn how to load it with free software because an auto "update" might cripple it.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=216934&cid=17629948
"...will work with [NBC] to try to develop..." is classic software marketing BS - three weasel verbs in succession, a minor masterpiece. Translation: "This feature? Oh, sure, we have it. I mean, we'll have it in the next release. I mean, the crack team of our coding monkeys is going to make it their priority. Now just sign here, initial here and here."
I can assure you, the best way to get rid of dragons is to have one of your own.
I've seen one and only one in the wild. It was bought by someone on some kind of internet firesale site. The owner was pleased but it was clunky and he'd have been better off with a much smaller and better built iPod for what he spent. He made it sound tempting to the ignorant and I half wondered if he was not tied into M$'s sleazy marketing program.
Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
"... non-legitimately purchased content"? At first I thought this was editorializing by the submitter, but no, TFA contains that exact quote. I garner two ugly conclusions from this statement from Mr. Perrette:
- 1) Your device will soon only play "purchased" content. No home movies for you.
- 2) Your device will soon only play content purchased from us.
I think Microsoft has figured out what Step 2 is:
1. Create media player with subscription services.
2. Shoot self in foot by crippling said player to the point no one wants it.
3. Profit!?
MOD PARENT UP.
"A clunky form factor that's trying hard to match competition from three years ago."
Is the Zune the Vista of music players, or is Vista the Zune of operating systems?
Microsoft seems unable to do business sensibly. Maybe Gates and Ballmer are getting tired of working every day. What motivates a billionaire to keep producing mediocre results?
Not to mention that the extra processing needed for the wiz bang water marking technology will reduce battery life.
How much? Who knows, but extra design constraints always create compromises and battery life is one place it is likely to show up.
Except that watermarks still don't work.
OK Microsoft-faithful and Apple-haters - listen up. This is why everyone says that Microsoft is 'uncool'.
In spite of a few missteps as of late, Microsoft is still the biggest, richest, most powerful company in tech today. And yet, they have their tongues so far up the record and movie industry's *ss that it isn't even funny anymore. No one respects an obsequious brown-noser. If they had any spine at all, they would tell the record and movie execs the Truth (that they're living on borrowed time) and that the only way to continue to make any money at all is to trust their customers.
Apple was upbraiding the record industry execs for a good three years during and through the Napster debacle. Apple was telling them that customer-hostile DRM that took away obvious and visible consumer rights wouldn't work, they were telling them that the bottom would fall out of the CD business, and they were offering Apple's services as a customer-friendly alternative to some of the loser businesses the record industry was trying at the time (like PressPlay). It's not like the folks at Apple were geniuses for recognizing all of these things - it's just that they have their own protected platform and they're in the software business so they know full-well how futile copy-protection really is.
When the record execs finally realized that everything Apple had been saying was right, they had lost a good fraction of their business and they were desperate to try something new.
The guys who run Microsoft will never have the balls to tell a potential business partner that. They have enough money in the bank to BUY any one of the record companies that they're sucking up to, and yet they behave like the record companies' servile bitch. And that's why they'll never be considered 'cool'.
This isn't the first time Microsoft has retrofitted already-sold products with patches or policies that remove functionality or add aggravation. From the nag they tacked on to Windows menus asking you if your copy is legit to their "This copy of Windows is not genuine" cripple to Windows Update refusing updates to a validly-licensed Windows 2000 (I typed the key in myself years prior from their hologrammed hardcopy distributed with the software, and there was no chance the key was illicit or used inappropriately) to Microsoft refusing to activate a Windows XP laptop with the license/key on the bottom of the machine -- supposedly, with the last, I can call them and plead my case with one of their phone workers.
All of this after the software was paid for. Terms introduced after the sale. All of these things kick into effect in the normal course of using the product -- indeed, you must risk experiencing them in order to keep your product secure and functional down the road. Isn't that something you would think morally would be an implicit obligation of theirs upon sale of the product, not an extra feature used to impose additional terms on your use?
So, surprise, surprise, now they're pulling it with expensive hardware. Feel free to enjoy yourselves, on your dime and on their terms. It's just the logical extension of the crap we put up with in the software world. Can't wait until the portables have to have a direct connection to the Internet to authorize your usage, you scumbag customer.
I'm sick of hearing about this. Lets dispel some myths.
1: You can copy music on and off an iPod with great ease. There is no magic DRM preventing this *at all*.
2: Apple are quite happy to let you rip their music to cd, and then to mp3. It's no different, and sounds no different from ripping a bought music cd.
3: The iPod only has DRM on it because Apple new they would get sued to fuck if they didn't, or if they went around allowing direct circumvention. By allowing copying to audio cd they avoid this via the fair use claim.
4: A *lot* of available iPod content is not DRM'd anyway.
A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
I've been doing that for years on my SanDisk MP3 player
.flv files, only buy a player that will play it.
Consumers are good at finding what they want and the features they want. Some folks will be fine with the player and it's subscription service. The rest of us will find players that will play our content ripped from DVD's, shared, and downloaded from YouTube.
I often get asked "What computer should I buy?" I always tell them "Find the software you want to run and then buy the haredware that will run it.". With portable media players, this is still very true. If you want to play MP3's and
If you want a player that plays music purchased from the Zune site, you may wish to consider one, but remember, it won't play songs from iTunes. It looks like it also won't play YouTube rips.
You can vote for DRM with your wallet, or you can vote against it. Vote wisely.
The truth shall set you free!
To the publishers these are features, not bugs.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Vista is DRM and restriction overload and doesn't sell. Zune barely sells now, it's not even available in the UK.
Good luck Microsoft. Customers buy features not ball and chains.
There are already dozens of devices that work with all the stuff I download from the internet. I gather that even the iPod will (although I think it's fairly fussy about formats), and will play purchased videos from iTunes.
So there's good reason for content providers to support it, but what reason is there to buy the thing? Why are Microsoft going the screw-the-customer route? It never worked for Sony, but at least they had an understandable concern that their chunk of the media cartel would lose out if they didn't restrict everyone.
Maybe you shouldn't be annoyed with Twitter, in this case. His extremely negative evaluation was only as negative as that of the New York Times. Quote:
"If you like to download the latest episodes of "Heroes" or other NBC shows from BitTorrent, maybe you shouldn't buy a Microsoft Zune to watch them on. [my emphasis]
"A future update of the software for Microsoft's portable media player may well include a feature that will block unauthorized copies of copyrighted videos from being played on it."
Consider this: Someone bought a Zune, believing that he understood the features of the product. But later, Microsoft, in an "update", changes the way it works. That's nasty. It teaches customers that they can't trust Microsoft or a Microsoft product.
Legally, it is not the product's responsibility. This is just MS kowtowing to the media companies in hopes of getting their content. Legally MS doesn't have to do this. They just think it will make them money, whereas Apple has been down this road before and wants as little DRM and as easy and flexible of a consumer experience as possible, because that is what they think will make them more money.
If some how I do manage to run copy protected works on the ZUNE and get hit by a law suit via the RIAA then am I protected because I assume the ZUNE as acting as a controller?Playing copyrighted works is not illegal. Making a copy of a copyrighted work is potentially illegal. MS's actions offers you no increased legal protection and, in fact, reduces the likelihood your use would be protected under the fair use doctrine.
I am not a lawyer but to me if a products goes to such an extent to enforce copy protection then the liability of infringement would fall to the ZUNE and to Microsoft...I recommend talking to a lawyer, but MS is trying to restrict playing video, not making copies of it in the first place. By the time you're trying to play it, the infringement has happened already.
Who cares if watermarks don't expire, no one is going to be checking them after the work goes into public domain.
How do they prevent you from fair use in any way?
The only downside to watermarks is if they're audible. Are they audible?
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
Sorry but MS are very good at listening to customers. Its just that they only listen to their business customers and nobody else. This worked extremely well for them with Windows and Office and in theory should have worked with the Zune too. Unfortunately they do not seem to have realized that in this case their business customers, the RIAA, are employing kamikazee tactics. They are more interested in ensuring that nobody can ever listen to content in a manner they have not personally approved than they are about making a successful, profitable product.