Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

DRM Group Set To Phase Out "Analog Hole"

Posted by kdawson on from the next-we-encrypt-the-output-of-your-optic-nerve dept.

eldavojohn writes "In yet another bid to make your life a little more annoying, our DRM overlords at the AACS Licensing Authority have released a new AACS Adopter Agreement. The riveting, 188-page PDF will inform you that — in the name of Digital Rights Management — there will be new limitations set on devices that decrypt Blu-Ray discs. HDMI already has the awesome encryption of HDCP between the device and the display unit. But Blu-Ray still has the Achilles heel of analog players that allow someone to merely re-encode the analog signal back to an unencrypted digital format. So if you have an analog HDTV, hang on to those analog decoders and hope they never break; by 2013 you won't be able to buy a new one. Ars points out the inherent stupidity in this charade: 'Particularly puzzling is the fact that plugging the so-called "analog hole" won't stop direct digital ripping, enabled by software such as AnyDVD HD. And even the MPAA itself recommends using a camcorder pointed at a TV as a way to make fair use copies, creating another analog hole.' And so the cat and mouse game continues. On that subject, DVD Jon's legit company just brought out a billboard ad for his product doubleTwist next to Apple's San Fransisco store. It reads, 'The Cure for iPhone Envy. Your iTunes library on any device. In seconds.' So while he's busy taunting Apple, I'm certain there are others who might have some free time to look at Blu-Ray and the 'uncrackable' AACS."

42 of 417 comments (clear)

  1. DRM by portnux · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That is one compelling reason to not upgrade to Blu-Ray, if you ask me.

    1. Re:DRM by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sadly, there are no non-DRM'ed alternatives. The downloaded stuff is the only other option and it has even *WORSE* DRM.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:DRM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's funny, I've never seen any DRM on the stuff I download ;)

    3. Re:DRM by qortra · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I haven't upgraded for that same reason - however, keep in mind DVDs had DRM too. It just sucked.

    4. Re:DRM by tjonnyc999 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, me neither. Also, what are those "previews" and "FBI warnings" people are complaining about?

    5. Re:DRM by Abcd1234 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Piracy. No, seriously. These people are creating new rights for themselves, by locking up their content in a way that was never intended by those who invented copyright. Copyright exists for one single purpose: to create an incentive for the creation of new content, and it was structured as a time-limited monopoly, not a perpetual one. As such, I have absolutely no qualms with breaking the laws they've bought over the past 50 years.

      Now, if you do have problems with piracy, might I suggest this alternative: by the Blu-ray disc, thus paying the content creator for their work, and then download a pirated copy. At least then you can still avail yourself of the rights (such as format shifting) that they're trying to take away from you. Of course, this still rewards the content creators, thus encouraging further attempts to restrict your use of the material you bought with your hard-earned cash...

    6. Re:DRM by silanea · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The users of ThePirateBay may beg to differ. It is maddening, really. I can get everything there in wonderful quality, convenient and widely usable formats, and usually in a timely manner. Music in lossless quality, current episodes of US TV shows in HD quality and without any commercials, HD films with both original audio and translations - no regional discrimination, no formats that only Windows Mediaplayer can handle, no forced trailers, anti-piracy propaganda or "you may not do x, y and z with this film" nonsense, no annoying menus that take the better part of a minute to actually present me a button to watch the film, and I can freely convert all of it for my portable devices and take it with me. Plus the catalogue is huge! Even really obscure stuff that no retailer carries is available there. I have yet to see any commercial offering that even remotely comes close to this. The only feature I miss in the Bay is an option to directly send money to the artist(s).

      --
      Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
    7. Re:DRM by Abreu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or buy the Blu-Ray disc and support the efforts of those who develop ways to bypass the restrictions of the media you have bought so that you can view it on Linux, create backups, etc.

      God knows I have had to make several copies of my kids' DVDs (once I had to use gdd_rescue!)

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    8. Re:DRM by Enuratique · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Now, if you do have problems with piracy, might I suggest this alternative: by the Blu-ray disc, thus paying the content creator for their work, and then download a pirated copy. At least then you can still avail yourself of the rights (such as format shifting) that they're trying to take away from you. Of course, this still rewards the content creators, thus encouraging further attempts to restrict your use of the material you bought with your hard-earned cash...

      Would you feel morally justified in buying the DVD and downloading the Blu-Ray? It might send the message to them that DVD is worth more to consumers than these latest shenanigans.

      --
      A black hole is where God divided by 0
    9. Re:DRM by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Now, if you do have problems with piracy, might I suggest this alternative: by [sic] the Blu-ray disc, thus paying the content creator for their work, and then download a pirated copy.

      You have got to be kidding me. You want me to go through hoops in order to play content, then pay them for it? This would give them reason to put even more draconian policies in place since they are actually making money.

      The only way to hurt these guys is to hit them in the wallet. If I can't get the movies and music I want legally without hassle... I will simply seek out different movies and music.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    10. Re:DRM by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And that's the problem.

      When you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.

      Since they are so late to the game at even thinking of providing legal downloads, and those downloads are still so amazingly technically inferior, they couldn't compete with piracy even if they were free, and they're not.

      The sad thing is, it's trivially easy to compete with piracy, but so far, I don't see anyone besides Hulu even making a decent effort -- and even Hulu is questionable, as piracy is still a convenient way to break them out of that player and skip the ads.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    11. Re:DRM by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, it's not even that...

      The fact is, none of these are so much the creator's rights, as their ability to restrict yours. Put in that context, it suddenly becomes very clear whose rights are being violated.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    12. Re:DRM by Abcd1234 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe it is different in the US than here, but I'm not sure why you expect rights like format-shifting and time-shifting - who granted those rights to you?

      Because those rights always existed until the media cartels decided to try and take them away? Again, the VCR is a classic example. It embodies both format and time shifting, and was ruled entirely legal by the US legal system. To be specific, the right is called "fair use", and it's pretty well established in law. In fact, format- and time-shifting is *still* legal, and considered fair use, even in the wake of the DMCA. What's *not* legal is the distribution of a device who's purpose is to bypass DRM... and that's the case because the media cartels managed to by the DMCA.

      A better question you should be asking is, why *don't* you expect rights like time- and format-shifting? How dare the owners of the copyright to these works attempt to dictate what you can and can't do with the copy you purchased with your hard-earned dollars? Who are they to decide if, for your own personal use, you should take a CD and rip it to an MP3? Or copy a DVD onto your media server so I can watch it without needing to pop in a disc?

      I think the nerd community's expectations of digital rights is tainted by the availability of ripped downloads

      And I think your expectations are coloured by the fact that you've just come to expect content to be restricted (heck, depending on your age, you've probably become fully indoctrinated in the idea). But, historically, it's a relatively new phenomenon, and it's one we shouldn't simply accept as not only inevitable, but moral, as it's neither.

    13. Re:DRM by Gerzel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You are not a customer. You and everyone else who pays for their content is a potential criminal. The only thing keeping you from being a criminal is your regular payments to them for the content you watch, and you have to be careful only to keep and watch content that you have paid for.

      The **AAs have a very difficult job of keeping these maybe criminals from becoming real criminals and all they get is flack and complaints from the people they serve; which just goes to show just how criminal those people really are.

    14. Re:DRM by Rary · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, that would be nice. However, because you don't have that option, you /are/ paying for the original product before downloading in this super-convenient format, right? Because you think that you should be paying for products and services you enjoy?

      But, by doing that, people would be discarding their ability to influence the market, thus causing the market to fail.

      You see, if a producer is providing a product that isn't to your liking, what is supposed to happen is that you turn to the competitor instead, thereby informing the producer through your lack of purchasing their product that the product is not what you want. This, ideally, will influence the producer to change the product in order to compete.

      If, however, the black market is the only competitor, and you try to "do the right thing" by buying the product and then getting its more convenient equivalent from the black market, you are telling the producer that their product is what you want, and therefore failing to influence the producer to change their product in order to compete.

      So, most people see the choice as this: either buy the product as its offered and accept its limitations, or go to the black market to get what you want and send a message to the producer that their product is not acceptable.

      What GP was saying is that he'd like to send the appropriate message to the producer, while still rewarding the creators for their effort (note: creators != producers).

      --

      "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

    15. Re:DRM by justwill · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Somehow I feel like the "spirit of copyright" is used as a red herring by people who'd rather all this just came free to them. And that's fine, but don't pretend there's some righteous cause behind it.

      The "spirit of copyright" is not a red herring. There are a large number of people who are becoming more and more concerned about the vast amount of our shared culture that is being locked away from us. A large and expansive public domain is a good thing and I, for one, find it disturbing how few works are allowed into public domain anymore.

      Hey - I'm all for finding ways to ensure there are incentives for the creation of new work. I want to see artists rewarded for their labor. I don't want to see the shared fabric of our collective culture held off-limits by a few corporations with a profit motive. Without the ability to use, discuss freely, and transform cultural artifacts we lose the ability to participate in culture. I don't like the direction that path leads - where the vast majority of our society is a passive consumer of culture which is 'owned' by someone else who dictates how we can experience it.

      While there are some who jump on the bandwagon because they simply want things without having to pay for it, there are definitely others who feel this is an important struggle to retain the ability to participate in our own culture.

      I'm reminded of the introduction to my much-beloved edition of Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card; he says something to the effect of (paraphrasing) "The story isn't something that I create on my own. The story grows and transforms with each reader and ultimately the story is what is created in that interaction." I really believe that to be the case. The 'culture' created there has as much to do with the people experiencing the artwork as it does with the creator. We are in danger of losing this aspect of our collective interaction with art.

    16. Re:DRM by Abcd1234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It appears timeshifting and formatshifting for personal use does satisfy 1), although since we're discussing the "spirit of the law" in regards to copyright I'd say the spirit of fair use in this particular clause is for copyrighted works to be used in nonprofit educational settings, which private viewing at home isn't really. I'll leave a lawyer to work that one out.

      They already did. That's why VCRs are legal. :)

      So, I don't think fair use is a good argument against DRM, since it doesn't say anything about whether the content must be provided to be fair-usable.

      Well, you are technically correct, in that fair use isn't an affirmative right, but rather a legal defense. That said, fair use, even just for education, research, commentary, or parody, is an extremely valuable activity, and making that activity difficult or impossible deprives society as a whole. As such, DRM actively *hurts us all*. All to enrich a few robber barons.

      Again, copyright is a *privilege*, granted by the government, providing a limited monopoly to the rights holders in order to encourage creation. But it's a *compromise*. The rights holder gets a monopoly for a short period of time, and then the content is given over to the public domain, enriching everyone. Or, at least, that's how it was supposed to work.

      I just wish other people did as well, and and don't act like they somehow deserve this kind of access straight from the manufacturer.

      Umm... why don't they? If they've purchased a copy of the content, and that copy is now their property. Why *shouldn't* they have the right to use their property in whatever way they please? Again, it's about the work, not the media. When I buy a CD, I bought *the music on the CD*. Once I've paid for that music, I think it's completely reasonable, and in fact entirely rational, to believe that the copy of the music I purchased is now mine to do with as I please. That includes shifting the format, playing, manipulating, citing portions of it in scholarly works, creating parodies of it, and so forth.

      Honestly, I find your attitude utterly baffling. You ascribe rights to the copyright holder that are entirely unreasonable... after all, if I buy an iPod, am I not free to open it up and modify it as I see fit? Heck, if I had the wherewithal, am I not within my rights to make a duplicate of it for my own use? Or do you believe that Apple has the right to dictate what I can and can't do with the item I've purchased? And if not, why on earth do you believe copyrighted materials should be treated any differently?

    17. Re:DRM by Abcd1234 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well there is no DRM on an oil painting. Suppose I want to format shift it to acrylics. Assuming a device that could do it, would it be ethical?

      If you owned the painting, yes, why not?

      Would I have the "right" to sell the oil painting and keep the acrylic version?

      No, as that would be distributing a copy of the work, a right you do not have (legally and, IMHO, morally).

      It feels like petulant children who have been told that they are not entitled to the cookie after all.

      Read again. I'm far more concerned with the robbing of the public domain, and the attempt by the media cartels to lock away large portions of our collective culture simply to enrich themselves.

      See, your mistake, I think, is that you believe the copyright issue is a small one, unimportant in the grand scheme of things, and really just about people wanting to download things for free. But in that, you are wrong. What we're seeing the the progressive destruction of culture. I mean, imagine if Shakespeare's works had been protected under a DRM layer? The works would likely have been lost to us, and I think it's safe to say that that would've been disastrous.

    18. Re:DRM by Abcd1234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you broke your disk or it got scratched up, can you take it to the reseller and demand a new copy because what you own is the content, not the media?

      Well, no and yes. No, in that part of the cost I paid initially was for the cost of the media itself, as well as for the copy of the content resident on that media. But my answer is also yes, in that I believe I should be able to pay for the replacement cost of the media and receive a new copy. Of course, the media cartels wouldn't want that, so of course the service isn't provided.

      As such, I should be allowed to create a backup copy of the content in case something happens to the copy I purchased. Or do you not believe people should be allowed to backup their PCs, either?

    19. Re:DRM by Pentium100 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Choose:
      If I purchase the media, not the content, then me copying the content onto another media and giving it away/selling it does not deprive the copyright holder of anything (since they are selling plastic disks (not the content) and I am selling FTP access).

      If I purchase the content, not the media, then I should be able to access the content even without the media, however, I cannot copy the content and distribute it.

  2. BluRay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is that still around? Everywhere I see that carries any BR disks, the inventory is next to nothing now.

    When are these companies going to give up with BR? The format just wasn't going to catch on since most people see plain DVD as "good enough". And, in fact, it is, for the most part. Sure, BR is "better" but when you're watching a movie, you're not going to be able to tell the difference unless you're watching closely, most of the time.

    Also, they can take my SD CRT television when they pry it from my cold, dead hands. This forced upgrade to a technology with a terrible, inherent flaw (tearing and lagging from any significant motion, even with the best, most current technology) is unacceptable. When they wise up and replace LCD/plasma with viable technology, I'll be on board but until then, to hell with this cheaply done forced upgrade crap to appease people who like shiny new things.

    1. Re:BluRay? by FredFredrickson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As somebody who crossed to the other side- I can agree.

      I got a nice 50" plasma and decided it was time to upgrade to blu-ray to make sure I'm geting the most out of my set. So I went out and bought myself a nice Sony Blu-ray player and set out for an adventure. At first I was a little dissapointed, I needed a flash drive to get BD-LIVE to work, but none the less I was determined to get everything out of my $300 that I just plopped down. I plugged in my USB drive and started up BD-Live, only to find out it's literally just trailers for other movies. Why is this a feature? There are other "BD-Live" apps, which if I recall correctly, are written in Java. I always thought the idea of Java really opened up the doors for the platform, but it turns out nobody cares, nobody's trying for anything revolutionary. There's a program to Re-Edit a movie with your own notes and captions, and there's this trailer app. And you need the disc in to use them.

      To keep this short, I'll say this, the BD-Live features seemed like something the studios should be paying me for. I really don't understand why a new venue for advertising to me is a feature I should be excited about.

      Anyway, the picture quality itself was good, but rewind, fast foward and similar features responded so slowly, that they were useless. It felt like the remote just wasn't connecting- but if you pressed the button once and waited five minutes, it would eventually pause/rewind/fast foward.

      I decided I didn't like it, and returned it for a samsung with netflix and pandora- oh what a mistake that was. The features were minimal. No animated menus, clunky browsing, impossibly slow, same issues as the last- but this one had tracking off on both digital and analog audio signals. I can't make my audio receiver make the audio faster- only delay. The TV, unfortunately, don't have any such feature for the delay. How annoying.

      TLDR; Blu-Ray has been aroung long enough that it should be a stable technology. They're selling shit for big prices trying to convince people it's better, but it's worse than DVD (and dvds and players are cheap). There's no reason to upgrade. Even if the picture is nicer, I don't care.

      P.S. I'm returning my last Blu-Ray and not buying a new one.

      --
      Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
    2. Re:BluRay? by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      BluRay really does look better. A lot better than a DVD. However, most people aren't willing to pay extra to get that better experience. Just like everybody could spend $3000 on a computer to play all their games at ultra high resolutions with really high framerates. But they don't. Because whatever quality they get is good enough, and the extra money doesn't justify the cost. If they really wanted to make BluRay catch on, they would price the discs the same price as DVD. A new movie isn't worth an extra $10 just because the resolution better. I'd rather buy 3 DVDs than 2 BluRays.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    3. Re:BluRay? by DrLang21 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My biggest problem with Blu-ray is that there's a huge entry cost and the return is little to none. Most of the movies in my collection were never filmed in high definition, so the quality improvements in switching to Blu-ray would be minimal. To get those minimal improvements, I need an HD TV, a Blu-ray player, and then I need to pay the exorbitant extra cost for Blu-ray media. I can understand why the entertainment industry doesn't understand this though. They still have not figured out that originality and quality of story are far more important than special effects and rehashed garbage if they want people to continue to legitimately purchase their product.

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    4. Re:BluRay? by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most of the movies in my collection were never filmed in high definition

      I thought about this too, but I realized something: movies shot with analog film have a much better resolution than the DVDs they were later transferred to. Unfortunately I can't find a nice link right now for it, but ultimately the resolution of an analog film is determined by the size of the light sensitive crystals used on the film roll when it was shot. Regardless of what that is, it's much better than the 720×480 (for NTSC) that DVDs are. A blu-ray is getting closer to the resolution of the original film that was lost with the DVD that followed television standards. E.g., when I watched full metal jacket on blu-ray on a big monitor, you could actually see the graininess of the film. I don't remember seeing the last time I watched the movie on DVD. Maybe it's because they needed to do a restoration and re-master before they cut the blu-ray, but I was impressed.

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    5. Re:BluRay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So be it. After midnight tonight, it will never work again.

      SD CRT != OTA analog

      It'll work just fine for anyone with cable, a satellite dish, DVD player, Blu Ray player with composite outs, etc.

    6. Re:BluRay? by zmollusc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Blu-Ray will keep on improving as time goes on, you say?
      That's what I was hoping for with ordinary DVD.
      They are cutting it a bit fine if they are going to bring in all the different camera angles and alternate endings and stuff that we were promised when DVD came out.

      --
      They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
  3. Not true... by Jaysyn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... This will only annoy people who *buy* their crap. Problem solved!

    --
    There is a war going on for your mind.
  4. Sound Familiar by segedunum · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Presumably, this it the 'analogue hole' that they have talked about 'fixing' for a number of years now with a number of DRM companies coming out of the woodwork to say they can do it, ripping off some money and then disappearing with their directors retiring to some island somewhere with naked women?

    Any techology that relies on a device sold and physically owned by a consumer denying access to said consumer is doomed to failure. Rinse and repeat.

    It's one of the reasons, but certanly not the main one, why I am totally non-plussed by so-called 'High Definition' and BluRay. I did try setting up a theatre system once for someone with a receiver box relaying video through HDMI to a TV. HDCP refused to play ball because the BluRay player didn't like the arrangement. Hmmmmm. Not only do I get to not watch something because of a DRM system, I also have to buy completely new content that is currently a lot more expensive. Bound to be a success.

    1. Re:Sound Familiar by segedunum · · Score: 4, Insightful

      On another related note, I was going to say that if BluRay and AACS do end up getting reliably cracked and 'free' copies of films can be made then the bizarre twisted thing is that it might just end up making BluRay ubiquitously popular and give it the critical mass it needs to pull DVD back.

  5. Ignore them? by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > "I'm certain there are others who might have some free time to look at Blu-Ray and the
    > 'uncrackable' AACS."

    On the other hand, one could simply ignore BlueRay altogether. Believe it or not, you almost certainly can live without it.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  6. Just wait... by ThePhilips · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And even the MPAA itself recommends using a camcorder pointed at a TV as a way to make fair use copies, creating another analog hole.

    Just wait for MPAA to get a wind of watermarking and demand camcorder makers to embed watermark recognition to disable video capture of the oh-so-precious intellectual property of theirs.

    --
    All hope abandon ye who enter here.
  7. opting out by viridari · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't own a Blu Ray player. I briefly owned an HDTV but went back to the old analog TV. Sorry, but I'm opting out. The digital entertainment revolution today isn't selling anything that I'm buying. If that means I miss out on things, so be it.

    When it was easy to back up a DVD, I legitimately purchased over 600 movies. As the copy protections became increasingly difficult to work around, I simply stopped buying. Hollywood stopped getting my money. I took all that money that I was spending on DVD's and bought a motorcycle instead. Now instead of sitting on the couch wasting 90-120 minutes of my life at a time, I'm spending that time enjoying getting around (rain or shine) like never before.

    It's been a year since I ditched the HDTV and maybe 2 years since I stopped buying DVD's. I don't miss it.

    Don't like the terms they are giving you? OPT OUT!

    1. Re:opting out by MaWeiTao · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't like the terms they are giving you? OPT OUT!

      This is a very important point. Far too many people nowadays complain about some service or technology but hand over their money anyway. It reminds me of this idiot post I read recently where people were complaining about a game developer. This guy actually posts that he was going to buy this particular game anyway, but he was going to give them the finger on the way out the door.

      Congratulations, what this guy has accomplished is the equivalent of being kicked in the nuts and giving the attacker a back rub in response.

      The clearest message a consumer can make is to not buy products from companies they're not happy with. And this means not pirating as well, because by pirating you're merely saying that the demand exists and thus justifying the constant push for DRM. These companies are obviously convinced that some day they're going to develop totally effective DRM.

      Don't like it? Don't buy it. Especially considering that none of this is really a necessity for living. There are other, potentially more fulfilling, ways to entertain yourself.

  8. Re:I, for one, welcome our new DRM overlords. by GreenTech11 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I hope they have baked cookies for the angry mod that will be outside thier offices tomorrow morning

    Angry mobs like cookies..

    --
    Laughter is the best medicine, except if you have a broken rib.
  9. will blu ray succeed? by fermion · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I certainly wonder if Blu Ray is going to replace the DVD. The DVD certainly took long enough to replace the VHS, even though the VHS has disadvantages. Though the VHS was infinitely more user friendly, put it in, watch a movie, no 5th grade animation, no unskippable adverts, things like audio commentary made the DVD a compelling alternative. Combine this with the fact that the DVD was simpler to copy than the copy protected VHS that were popular at the time, and it was a reasonable choice.

    But the DVD did not have netflix streaming. The DVD did not have online instant download purchase and rental. The DVD did not have the legacy of broken promised that the DVD delivered. Who believes that producers are going to invest in fully utilizing the Blu Ray features.

    It seems to me that given the increases in bandwidth and processing power, in five years the movie industry will be at the place that music industry was a few years ago. Desperately trying to protect content, adding increasing layers of copy protection to the media, and losing sales because they made the purchase product so much less attractive than the alternatively acquired product. The reality is that the DVD is easy to crack, but sales are still very strong. Back in the VHS days, the copy protection did little to stop the coping of tapes.

    If the copy protection is done right it will be transparent. More than likely no one will care. But I suspect that the copy protection will add costs to the products, which will make them less attractive. I suspect we will see DVDs for a long time, and when they are gone, people will just download the content. I can't imagine that Blu Ray will ever be a major player in the average household. It will be like plasma tv. An interesting plaything for people who can afford it.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  10. Re:"Good enough"...to pirate. by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It lets you easily copy things.

    You can make 10 copies with one click of the mouse.

    You can back up your stuff multiple times and even have an offsite backup.

    You don't have to buy the next format that the industry tries to shove at
    you. You can just setup your own PC based player to play back whatever you
    happen to have.

    Admittedly, these are "consumer" benefits and don't really do the media moguls any good.

    I never have to buy "Escape" ever again regardless of what new formats the industry comes up with.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  11. Just delayed the analog hole. by jellomizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even with modern electronic equipment. I don't see why you cant just Tap the signal after it has been decoded and before it goes to the display. Sure it is a hardware hack but like all DRM technology it just needs to be broken once for it to be useless and spread on the Internet.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  12. Phase Out... by hAckz0r · · Score: 2, Insightful
    What is really "phasing out" is my money going into their bank account.

    With DRM you can never win. No matter what they do, since you have the keys, the published algorithm, and the encrypted data, you can always reproduce the output. If they lock the keys in the hardware it is still obtainable. They can only blacklist large sectors of hardware after you do that. Blacklisting everyone's high priced video player equipment after they spent big bucks on the device is financial suicide to say the least. What, you think that polititons and layers won't buy the same equipment you do? The DRM Group may control the specification for the system but systems can always be reversed engineered, holes in the data pathway can always be leveraged, tapped, diverted, or recorded, etc. The outcome will never be any better than a pure escalation of the age old measure, counter measure, counter counter measure, at infinitum. I ask the 'DRM Group' to just remember, it only takes one person to copy the media to an unprotected format and the game is over. Hundreds of millions of dollars in research, design, and remanufacturing all wasted because of one person that didn't like not being able to watch the movie that [s]he just bought. And then there are always the professional bootleggers that have REAL resources. When does it all end?

  13. Re:Not-so-awesome encryption by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    this is another reason to boycott drm that is part of bd.

    the 'disable' list.

    do you want your video card, tv (etc) marked as 'do not run' ?

    its RISKY to even mount a BD disc, given that it has unknown malicious (truly, if you think about it) code.

    "a virus with every movie. for no extra charge."

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  14. Re:Not-so-awesome encryption by AcidPenguin9873 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Device keys have to be issued by the HDCP key authority because all the HDCP device keys have special numeric properties that make the two-way handshake possible. Both sides of the connection have to arrive at the same 56-bit number to successfully encrypt/decrypt stuff. The only way to give out keys that have the correct properties that make them usable is for the HDCP key authority to control distribution of said keys [1]. And if the HDCP key authority revoked this manufacturer's keys once, they're not likely to give them more keys.

    I suppose you can try to obtain a different device's HDCP key(s) and program those in. But once the HDCP authority notices that a different device's device keys have been compromised, it may revoke those keys too.

    Of course, say it's one of Sony's HDTV models whose HDCP keys get compromised, and the HDCP key authority revokes those keys. Sony HDTV owners will be furious that new Blu-Ray discs don't work on their TV, and Sony will have to issue a firmware update to get new keys and somehow "protect" them better this time. All in all, a total losing proposition.

    [1] See http://www.cs.rice.edu/~scrosby/pubs/hdcppaper.ps for more info. I read this a while ago and it's pretty foggy now, but it gave a good overview of HDCP and the key/encryption math behind it.

  15. Re:Not-so-awesome encryption by domatic · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I suppose you can try to obtain a different device's HDCP key(s) and program those in. But once the HDCP authority notices that a different device's device keys have been compromised, it may revoke those keys too.

    Of course, say it's one of Sony's HDTV models whose HDCP keys get compromised, and the HDCP key authority revokes those keys. Sony HDTV owners will be furious that new Blu-Ray discs don't work on their TV, and Sony will have to issue a firmware update to get new keys and somehow "protect" them better this time. All in all, a total losing proposition.

    If one has obtained the keys for a number of popular devices then you could force the HDCP authority to DDOS itself. Done correctly it would be quite the nice black eye for DRM.