Did that work for copy-protected CDs? People will notice this one doesn't work but when something else comes out that they want they'll get it. Will take a few tries until they realize that's a pattern and after that they might just decide to buy compatible hardware instead of missing out on their latest Hollywood produce.
W2k will react to a HD video disc in the same way a CD player reacts to a DVD: Read error. The drive won't read the disc unless the OS has the matching HD video disc drivers and it won't have them without supporting the standards which include blocking unprotected digital connections.
Vista is basically the same as XP, except it has more DRM, why wouldn't you just buy Windows XP?
Because the default state for DRM content is "doesn't play at all" instead of "plays always". Means with DRM you get the state dictated by the DRM, without DRM you get nothing. That's kinda like uninstalling PGP and expecting all emails to come in plain text because of that.
While it'd technically be possible for any device in a HDCP chain to simply ignore the copy protection you cannot get a license for the patents that cover HDCP (nor the cryptographic keys used) without having your device conform to the specifications. That means if MS wants Vista to be able to play back copy-protected HD media they must implement HDCP like this. Any OS that doesn't is not allowed to play copy-protected HD media back and would be unable to without something that breaks the copy protection and thereby violates the DMCA.
Last I checked you can't get refunds on opened media. Especially not when it doesn't work because your hardware isn't good enough (in this case, lacking HDCP) because that's your fault.
DRM is entirely optional, it only matters if you deal with data that has DRM on it. As long as you don't do that it doesn't matter if your OS has DRM or not. If there were pay-per-view movies on the internet (probably are already) you still wouldn't be forced to buy them. Once you start dealing with DRM files a DRM capable OS will obey the restrictions and may be able to play it back while a DRM-less OS will not play it back at all. There's no reason for anyone to restrict access to non-DRMed files. MS could try intentionally encrypting all data on a partition that belongs to Windows but that would give them no advantage other than locking themselves out of corporate environments where interoperability and data security are of importance.
And hey, Linux supports DRM, too! What else are user permissions if not a digital means to restrict the rights a user has on a system? Just in this case it's a local user that determines who can access what instead of a remote system.
Usually it'd be damn difficult to figure out who left a fingerprint on something public unless you already have them in your database. You'd have fingerprints but no real way to match them to people.
One million is still less than the number retailers would keep in stock. Later on it becomes a more exact measurement but currently retailers have little data to determine what numbers to order and many just assume that because it's called Playstation and supply is limited they can just safely order as much as they can get. I don't think the shipped numbers mean much yet. The disparity is probably not that bit but right now the shipped numbers are more indicative of their production capabilities than the demand for the system.
Luxembourg has allies that would help them if they were attacked, Sealand has no allies. They annoy Britain and if they were worth more than one torpedo they'd get wiped out in no time.
Luxembourg has allies. Sealand doesn't. As such Luxembourg's firepower is roughly equal to that of the EU while Sealand's firepower is roughly equal to that of the average pirate ship.
That would work for a website that's supposed to cover only a small area. I'd expect a.com to cover multiple countries while ccTLDs would cover a country (often websites filed under a ccTLD redirect to the country-specific version of the main website) and more specific domains would apply to websites meant for even smaller scopes. Generally anyone would try a ccTLD and then the generic TLDs when looking for a company, if the company offers region specific services those would be reached through ccTLDs, if the website has no country-specific services (e.g. Slashdot) the generic TLD would be correct.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, they should be happy Yamauchi is no longer in charge or there might be a series of mysterious traffic accidents near their workplace.
Oooh, Simpsons references!
So, do you disagree that hypothetically you can be forced into a situation in which all of your possible choices are morally wrong?
Yep, that's called a dilemma.
Did that work for copy-protected CDs? People will notice this one doesn't work but when something else comes out that they want they'll get it. Will take a few tries until they realize that's a pattern and after that they might just decide to buy compatible hardware instead of missing out on their latest Hollywood produce.
W2k will react to a HD video disc in the same way a CD player reacts to a DVD: Read error. The drive won't read the disc unless the OS has the matching HD video disc drivers and it won't have them without supporting the standards which include blocking unprotected digital connections.
Vista is basically the same as XP, except it has more DRM, why wouldn't you just buy Windows XP?
Because the default state for DRM content is "doesn't play at all" instead of "plays always". Means with DRM you get the state dictated by the DRM, without DRM you get nothing. That's kinda like uninstalling PGP and expecting all emails to come in plain text because of that.
While it'd technically be possible for any device in a HDCP chain to simply ignore the copy protection you cannot get a license for the patents that cover HDCP (nor the cryptographic keys used) without having your device conform to the specifications. That means if MS wants Vista to be able to play back copy-protected HD media they must implement HDCP like this. Any OS that doesn't is not allowed to play copy-protected HD media back and would be unable to without something that breaks the copy protection and thereby violates the DMCA.
Last I checked you can't get refunds on opened media. Especially not when it doesn't work because your hardware isn't good enough (in this case, lacking HDCP) because that's your fault.
DRM is entirely optional, it only matters if you deal with data that has DRM on it. As long as you don't do that it doesn't matter if your OS has DRM or not. If there were pay-per-view movies on the internet (probably are already) you still wouldn't be forced to buy them. Once you start dealing with DRM files a DRM capable OS will obey the restrictions and may be able to play it back while a DRM-less OS will not play it back at all. There's no reason for anyone to restrict access to non-DRMed files. MS could try intentionally encrypting all data on a partition that belongs to Windows but that would give them no advantage other than locking themselves out of corporate environments where interoperability and data security are of importance.
And hey, Linux supports DRM, too! What else are user permissions if not a digital means to restrict the rights a user has on a system? Just in this case it's a local user that determines who can access what instead of a remote system.
Didn't a lack of HDCP still allow SD playback of the media?
Interesting, it didn't say anything about that on my MSDNAA copy.
His url ends with a period.
Even so, they're also selling their website.
Don't worry, they'll just make the movies bloat enough that some will take two discs.
Not if your computer has a brain the size of a planet.
If Disney were to make a real castle, it would look like this.
Real castle as opposed to a facade like Neuschwanstein?
Man, it's 2007. You'd get whacked by Julius Belmont.
4 millions euros a year in profit. Thats almost $8 million a year.
The dollar hasn't fallen THAT low yet.
Usually it'd be damn difficult to figure out who left a fingerprint on something public unless you already have them in your database. You'd have fingerprints but no real way to match them to people.
One million is still less than the number retailers would keep in stock. Later on it becomes a more exact measurement but currently retailers have little data to determine what numbers to order and many just assume that because it's called Playstation and supply is limited they can just safely order as much as they can get. I don't think the shipped numbers mean much yet. The disparity is probably not that bit but right now the shipped numbers are more indicative of their production capabilities than the demand for the system.
How does the customer verify if the device he's been presented with actually conforms to any standards or is just a memory system in a pretty case?
Luxembourg has allies that would help them if they were attacked, Sealand has no allies. They annoy Britain and if they were worth more than one torpedo they'd get wiped out in no time.
Luxembourg has allies. Sealand doesn't. As such Luxembourg's firepower is roughly equal to that of the EU while Sealand's firepower is roughly equal to that of the average pirate ship.
That would work for a website that's supposed to cover only a small area. I'd expect a .com to cover multiple countries while ccTLDs would cover a country (often websites filed under a ccTLD redirect to the country-specific version of the main website) and more specific domains would apply to websites meant for even smaller scopes. Generally anyone would try a ccTLD and then the generic TLDs when looking for a company, if the company offers region specific services those would be reached through ccTLDs, if the website has no country-specific services (e.g. Slashdot) the generic TLD would be correct.
They'll make something as a placeholder that JUST evades your definition of not genuine.