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 been doing that for years on my SanDisk MP3 player: downloading the .FLV videos from YouTube and converting them to SanDisk compatible videos. So now you can't do that on the Zune? Wow...
First Post w0000t :)
I've heard of this Zune, but never actually seen one out in the wild. Do they actually exist? In other words, the Zune can have as much DRM as it likes. No one who cares about that sort of thing will buy one anyway. In fact who does buy them?
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
This is a demonstration of Microsoft's new media-compatibility standard. They're calling it "Plays? Yeah sure!"
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
I hear that if you're wiling to pay a premium, they'll arrange for Steve Ballmer to come over and kick you in the nuts, personally.
Although, I expect that's only for corporate customers, OEMs, since Steve's time is valuable.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
"...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.
According to TFA, Google and other companies are exploring having filtering technology similar to this to eliminate copyrighted content from their shared video sites. Unless/until that happens, I can't really see even Microsoft making this move.
As TFA points out, MS is way at the back of the portable mp3/video/etc. pack and it knows it can't afford to stick more "features" in that will drive users away. Now, the NBC dude quoted in the article brings up the idea that through whatever the Zune store is called they'd have options to offer whole seasons of a show at a discount instead of being forced to the $2/episode no matter what pricing standard of iTunes, and I could see that drawing people to buy the episodes from Microsoft -- but not so long as the alternative is to get them free for the iPod from YouTube. A generation raised with free TV and VCRs hesitates even less about 'stealing' TV episodes than it does about songs.
So unless YouTube etc. put a filter in place that successfully blocks this same content I can't see it going anywhere on portable players so long as Apple refuses to do it to the market-dominant iPod.
Sure Microsoft makes plenty of bad decisions, but there's no way they're dumb enough to think that zunes aren't selling because customers want more content restrictions.
On the other hand, I suppose they are dumb enough and arrogant enough to believe that they could compete with itunes if they kissed the asses of enough content providers. They can't, nor can anyone else really. That battle has already been fought and apple is winning by an overwhelming margin. Their best bet is to make quality players with as much compatibility as possible and forget the music stores and DRM ass-kissing that comes with running one.
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.
I have a zune and I love it. These replies are hurting my feelings.
I just couldn't deal with the small screen of the similarly priced ipod. The downside though is that there are no freaking accessories. You can go to any online site and find 150 different cases for the iPod. From diamond encrusted cases to cases cut from the t-shirts of workers from sweatshops. Same online store you'll find like 2 for the zune. And they both cost $249.99.
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'.
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
An iPod does not require using iTunes. You can put Rockbox on an iPod and simply drag the music files directly onto the iPod mounted as a drive. There's also plenty of other programs that can read and write to an iTunes database.
Finally, a reason not to buy a Zune.
Game... blouses.
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.
In today's world, Microsoft MUST continue to put out new versions of Office and Windows, otherwise people will not give them money. But would you put out $400 for a new copy of Office 2007 to replace your copy of Office 2003, just to get the Ribbon bar, or to get the new and improved Pashtun grammar checker? And if so, will you put out another $400 in 2009 for another new copy, to get the ultra-dynamic margin tool? Probably not. So in Microsoft's eyes, you are not sending them enough money.
Microsoft's business plan has no way to continually extract money from its customers over the long haul. So they are forced to invent new "features" to keep people upgrading, in order to churn that money. But Office and XP are "good enough" for most people. The churn is slowing.
Where Microsoft is trying to go tomorrow is the subscription model. You'll buy a subscription to Office Forever which will cost you only $9.99 per month, (or whatever the rate will be.) The OS in conjunction with the TPM chip will enforce that only a legitimate, paid subscription will be able to run. Illicit copies will be prevented from saving, or crippled from editing, or whatever.
Microsoft believes they need the lock-in DRM model to work in order to survive over the long term. They are deathly afraid of Linux, because it's nipping at their heels of functionality and usability already, and a free alternative that runs whatever software you want is the only thing that could stop their model from working. Look to the future for Microsoft to push for incorporating the TPM chip into the BIOS, so only a blessed and approved (and paid for) OS will boot on the hardware of the future. So, any technology or business deal that helps them leverage DRM is a step in the right direction -- for them.
John
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.
"non-legitimately purchased content"
How do I non-legitimately purchase content? Are they talking about black-market Seinfeld videos?
Even Apple tells you how to defeat their DRM. Burn the songs to a CD. Rip the CD. You now have files with no DRM and proper tagging (thanks to iTunes using CDDB).
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
Have you noticed a new trend in digital media? NBC has most of their shows online for free. South Park has all of their online for free. Hulu.com hosts more TV shows that most people would want to watch in a lifetime online for FREE!
The problem with all of these services is that you have to put sitting in front of a computer to use them. IF these media companies can figure out a way to put their content (and with it, their ads) onto a portable device...well, then DRM be damned, I'm buying whatever device that IS.
This is a strategic, relationship building move by microsoft. NOthing more.
NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
http://zuneinsider.com/archive/2008/05/07/just-so-no-one-gets-the-wrong-idea.aspx
They say this isn't coming or planned.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Are there any alternative firmware projects for the Zune? I haven't found any. It seems like decent hardware with the wireless and FM, and reasonably priced. But I wouldn't give the standard MS firmware 5 minutes of my time, for many reasons.
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.
So, all I've read here is complete garbage on how Microsoft's Zune sucks...when no one here has ever even seen or used a Zune more than likely...as some have stated at least. So let me break it down for you...the Zune as a HDD player is better than the iPod Classic, the Zune as a flash player is just as good as an iPod Nano. I've own 3 iPods, and I've own 1 Zune 80. So far, I love the Zune much more than the iPod; just yesterday I received a Zune software update which has finally made the software not a complete piece of crap. There are great social features, radio, wireless, a slick interface, a "squircle" which is surprisingly easier to use than a scroll wheel. Go to Best Buy and play with a -new- Zune...aka second generation. The first generation, I frankly found to be a brick with a screen; however the Zune 80 is a different beast. The screen is beautiful and it has so many more features than an iPod equivalent. Now you can sync your Zune with WMP or iTunes thanks to a hack (Google it.)
It really is a good device and Microsoft is making steps to combine the Xbox Live Marketplace with the Zune marketplace, which (in my opinion) will finally give iTunes a competitor. Anyhow I am willing to bet this technology never sees the light of day, a) the source is a blog on at New York Times and b) DMR has been a market failure. Just because Microsoft has blueprints of it, doesn't mean it will go to market; Microsoft will likely filter it through market testing or dumb it down just enough so they can find a happy medium for publishers and customers. The problem is that Microsoft needs to listen to the publishers, because they have such a small marketshare; Apple doesn't have an obligation...yet because of its massive marketshare; like I said though, Microsoft has plans to combine the Zune Marketplace and the Xbox Live Marketplace...and I think that could eventually compete with iTunes quite nicely, especially with the Zune's wireless syncing capabilities and the Xbox's user base.
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.
Or you can not install Rockbox and still do the same thing.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
I love my iPod, and although I acknowledge that I think it's "cooler" than other players, that's not the main reason.
I should acknowledge that I got mine for free by winning a musical contest, so cost wasn't a factor. I had been listening to mp3s in WinAmp at home for years, and burning mp3 CDs to listen to in the car, so I was pumped.
But what really got me excited was when I installed iTunes. Yes, it's bloated and slow, but it scratched a major itch for me: a way to organize my music collection. I had cases full of CDs that I had started to get tired of alphabetizing. iTunes made my collection easy to organize, easy to sort into playlists, and let me see the lovely cover art. I know, who cares, right? But I like my music collection. I like to see it as well as hear it.
Syncing is easy, ripping is easy, etc etc. DRM isn't a problem because I pretty much only buy CDs, and if I buy more music online I will make sure it's DRM-free (maybe via Amazon).
Now for this "style" factor you disdain so much. My wife had a Sandisk mp3 player that was ugly, needed batteries (which means that the battery door can get knocked open), had a terrible and confusing user interface, and needed to be put into an armband to strap on for a workout. After it died (my fault (sarcastic) for formatting it, because I couldn't find any other way to delete some music off it), I got her an iPod Shuffle, which is easy to use, smaller, has no battery compartment, and has a built-in clip. For working out, it's perfect.
My Nano has a great UI and is a pleasure to use. The whole experience, from ripping a CD to selecting songs on the device, is a pleasure. How is that irrelevant?
There may be other good products on the market, but frankly it's easier to buy something I know will be well-designed than try my luck on another product.
What would make me switch? Well, maybe if something else became popular. Am I a sheep? Nope. I call that "not volunteering to be a beta tester."