Slashdot Mirror


BD+ Resealed Once Again

IamTheRealMike writes "It's been a few months since we last checked in on how the Blu-Ray group was doing in their fight against piracy. In December 2008, a new generation of BD+ programs had stopped both SlySoft AnyDVD HD and the open source effort at Doom9. At the start of January, SlySoft released an update that could handle the new BD+ programs, meaning that Blu-Ray discs could not be decrypted for a period of time about the same length as SlySoft's worst case scenario. The BD+ retaliation was swift, but largely ineffective, consisting of a unique program for every Blu-Ray master. Users had to upload log files to SlySoft for every new movie/region. They would then support that unique variant in their next update, usually released a few days later. Despite that, the open source effort never did manage to progress beyond the Winter 2008 programs and is currently stalled completely; SlySoft is the only group remaining. This situation remained for several months, but starting around the same time as Paramount joined Fox in licensing BD+, a new set of programs came out which have once again made Blu-Ray discs unrippable. There are currently 19 movies that cannot be decrypted. It appears neither side is able to decisively gain the upper hand, but one thing seems clear — only full-time, for-profit professionals are able to consistently beat BD+."

10 of 460 comments (clear)

  1. maybe by speedtux · · Score: 5, Funny

    only full-time, for-profit professionals are able to consistently beat BD+

    Maybe open source developers have better things to do than to do legally questionable things in order to circumvent copy protection on an overpriced, obsolete distribution format?

    1. Re:maybe by sleeponthemic · · Score: 2, Funny

      I heard they all bailed out when they found out bluray doesn't run linux, linux runs bluray. Which, according to some sounds awfully soviet.

      --
      I record my sleeptalking
    2. Re:maybe by gbarules2999 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe open source developers have better things to do

      Like fixing Pulseaudio?

      Ooh, I said it. And I'm fairly pro-Linux around here, too. Ouch.

  2. Re:I win against blue ray every day by sleeponthemic · · Score: 1, Funny

    Vote with your feet.

    I call bullshit. Only Chuck Norris could possibly pay for goods with roundhouse kicks.

    --
    I record my sleeptalking
  3. Silly BLU-Ray and your silly child's disks by AtomicDevice · · Score: 2, Funny

    30Gb can't possibly deliver the definition I require for my 90,000p 200' television. That's why I use LTO tapes exclusively for my video pleasure.

    --
    Ze Atomic Device! It iz Ztolen!
  4. Re:The summary is missing something... by sexconker · · Score: 3, Funny

    "... the 1952 version of the Day the Earth Stood Still ... I have no intention of watching."

    Fuck you.

  5. Re:The summary is missing something... by sexconker · · Score: 4, Funny

    *Whip cracking noise*

  6. Re:The summary is missing something... by Rayban · · Score: 3, Funny

    Gort? Is that you?

    --
    æeee!
  7. Re:I win against blue ray every day by Captain+Spam · · Score: 3, Funny

    They invented Blu-Ray to fully monetize the high-def video market, which includes all those things in the first sentence.

    That is funny. I thought you needed customers to fully monetize something.

    Oh, heavens no. That's so 1970s of you. As is trying to be proved every day nowadays, what you need are defendants, not customers. Far more lucrative.

    I mean, it has to work, else these fancy MBA-toting executives wouldn't keep doing it, right?

    --
    Demanding constant attention will only lead to attention.
  8. Re:give it some time... by complete+loony · · Score: 2, Funny

    Sony are writing all the test cases one at a time, drip feeding the hackers with examples of how their VM implementation is flawed so they can fix it. It's like the ideal implementation of extreme programming ;)

    --
    09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.