DRM - Digital Rights Management Comments

Natt: Output Content Protection (DRM) and Windows Vista

(Natt) — Sat, 8 Jul 2006 23:05:20 -0500

XP is definetely the last Windows OS I'll ever use. We need Linux to be taught in schools and universities, so that Microsoft will start thinking b/f stripping us of our basic rights!

yudi: The DRM Cycle

Hidayat_yudi@yahoo.com (yudi) — Mon, 3 Jul 2006 12:21:42 -0500

help me find to article and thesis drm system arsitecture and DRM Under Attack, Weaknesses in MS DRM (wmv adn wma fles), encryption

: The DRM Cycle

() — Sat, 24 Jun 2006 13:29:29 -0500

"The fact that ripped content from DVDs does end up on P2P networks shows why Studios can not sell content unencrypted or with weak DRMs, because people will put the content on P2P networks, sell it, or use it to support their own business models (ad supported)."

You just pointed out a flaw in their business model with your cyclical logic.

What you basically said was:
Because encrypted dvds are pirated, they need to keep encrypting dvds or else they would be pirated, which they are already being."

nhan tran: DTV + HDTV + HDMI + HDCP + DVI = BAD DRM

nhantran69@gmail.com (nhan tran) — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 13:30:33 -0500

help..

i haven problem recieving HDTV from telewest HD Box.. From HDMI to dvi.. My sony plasma support HDTV with 1080i resolution have a DVI single digital connection.. can someone help me..

my email
nhantran69@gmail.com

random walker: The DRM Cycle

randomwalker@yahoo.com (random walker) — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 19:51:27 -0500

Its childish to call someone a troll just because they have a different view than yours

I wrote very specifically about movie content on P2P networks. Most of the MOVIE content (excluding porn) is theatrical window content.

Most non theatrical window content on P2P networks (which is smaller amount) is ripped from DVDs. DVDs could be said to be almost DRM less as they are rippable.

The origonal article stated that pirate networks are cheaper and better than Studio distribution, but the main point of the article seem to be about why restrictive DRMs are bad. I was trying to point out that most of the movie content on P2P networks is theatrical content and is not there because of anything to do with DRMs.

The fact that ripped content from DVDs does end up on P2P networks shows why Studios can not sell content unencrypted or with weak DRMs, because people will put the content on P2P networks, sell it, or use it to support their own business models (ad supported).

The analogy with cars has holes (as was pointed out), but the the biggest difference is who owns the asset. Its okay to lock your car when you own it, buts not okay for Studios to lock their content when they own it. You own the media (disc), not the content.

Its easy to write and complain about DRM, many people do. Why not try to design something better, which meets the needs of everyone (consumers, producers).

I hope this blog is not just going to be DRM is bad because ..... articles, but an open discussion without name calling.

Notso Random: The DRM Cycle

(Notso Random) — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:08:23 -0500

I know Random Walker is just a troll but I must respond...

----"Most of the movie content made available through torrent sites is content still currently in theatres.."----

Sorry guy but this is very incorrect. The vast majority of content available on torrent and P2P is older content.

----"then you would be encouraging car makers not to put locks on cars, and praising car theives for selling cars cheaper than car dealers"----

Obviously you did not read the same article I did. DRM Blog specifically suggested that the MPAA go after the theives that are actually stealing the content and not the end users who are downloading it.

Your car analogy is way off also. DRM does not equal locks. When you buy a car you get the keys and you own the car and you can do whatever you want with the car - Sell It - Modify It - Destroy It - basically you can use it any way you see fit.

If we were to put DRM on cars then it would be something more like this:
1. You can only use brand X gas.
2. You can only use brand Y oil.
3. You can only use the car on roads approved by the dealership.
You see Door Locks help protect the consumers investment. DRM does what for the consumer?

random walker: The DRM Cycle

random624590@yahoo.com (random walker) — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 10:20:47 -0500

"They sell your own wares cheaper and faster than your outdated
infrastructure can. Remove your restrictions, lower your prices, speed up your release schedules,
and make your products easier to purchase so that pirated versions don't look so attractive to fans. "

Of course content is cheaper on P2P networks, they don't have to pay for the movie production.

To use an analogy, if instead of movies we were talking about cars, then you would be encouraging car makers not to put locks on cars, and praising car theives for selling cars cheaper than car dealers.

Random Walker: The DRM Cycle

random624590@yahoo.com (Random Walker) — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 10:10:59 -0500

Most of the movie content made available through torrent sites is content still currently in theatres, and not available for sale yet. Shutting down those sites has nothing to do with DRMs, as the content is yet available to consumers.

Jimmy: HDTV and HDCP and DRM Questions

jimmypalmer@gmail.com (Jimmy) — Sun, 11 Jun 2006 19:02:40 -0500

Joseph,

It is my understanding that your TV should work with HDCP. According to a press release by Sony in October 2004 there Grand Wega series of televisions that have HDMI support HDCP.

---------From Sony-----------
HDMI technology with HDCP (High Definition Multimedia Interface with High Definition Copy Protection) technology, which is the latest interconnect between digital sources, supporting both uncompressed high definition video and multi-channel digital audio through a single cable. HDMI is an enhanced version of DVI-HDTV and is backward compatible;

KDF-42WE655
KDF-50WE655
KDF-55WF655
KDF-60WF655
----------------

These are 2004/2005 models and I can't imagine that any newer models are not HDCP compatible if they have HDMI inputs. I would double check with my Sony dealer and see what they say. I am going to email Sony and ask but I do not know your exact model number.

Joseph Russotto: HDTV and HDCP and DRM Questions

joer1212@optonline.net (Joseph Russotto) — Sat, 10 Jun 2006 22:35:14 -0500

Just bought a $2,500 Sony Grand Wega 50 inch HDTV. I am fuming mad that the $200 HDMI cables that I bought for it do not work with my HD DVR box when I plug them in. The cable company's website states that "your tv must be HDCP compliant in order to use the DVI/HDMI interface"!! Who actually owns an HDCP compliant HDTV? 99% of all tv's sold today are NOT HDCP compliant. What do I do now?

Brian: Output Content Protection (DRM) and Windows Vista

(Brian) — Fri, 9 Jun 2006 02:03:42 -0500

I just came accoss this blog. What scares me the most is that someday it will be on all the hardware and it will be illegal for Linux hackers to write drivers, because it will be a cercumvention of copyright protection.

Chris Taylor: DTV + HDTV + HDMI + HDCP + DVI = BAD DRM

drmblog@nerys.com (Chris Taylor) — Tue, 30 May 2006 21:58:50 -0500

It might not be the best path for you but my solution would be to return the box and demand a non HDCP box (does not exist but make it known you want one and don't like it)

Chris Taylor
http://www.nerys.com/

KEN: DTV + HDTV + HDMI + HDCP + DVI = BAD DRM

ktt_57@yahoo.com (KEN) — Tue, 30 May 2006 11:12:23 -0500

Same problem. I have an 8300HD cable box from Oceanic Time Warner Cable with an HDMI output, but I have to use the component inputs. I was hoping to capitalize on the newer/better method of delivering digital signals and since the NEC 50MP1 plasma I bought two years ago does not have an HDMI connection, I purchased an HDMI to DVI-D adapter to allow the signal to input to the TV. Once hooked up, the TV tells me it is an "illegal signal" and will not accept. Is there something I can do to fix this? I have discussed with the cable company and they say it is an issue with the TV. NEC verified that it's "older" (two years and thousands of $$$) are not HDCP compatible and offered to sell me a "New" TV. Is there something you know of I could hook up to allow the TV to process the better signals like an external in-between connections/processor/adapter? If not, no biggie, the component inputs are good, I was just hopeing to get the best I could for all the money I've spent.
THANKS!

RBBrittain: DTV + HDTV + HDMI + HDCP + DVI = BAD DRM

rbbrittain@yahoo.com (RBBrittain) — Thu, 25 May 2006 21:27:38 -0500

Steve: Comcast HD STBs will output true 1080i or 720p thru the component output as long as you don't use the DVI or HDMI output. In fact, Comcast installers use only component because it's more universal, the cables are cheaper (if you've never heard of Monoprice.com, that is), and it avoids HDCP issues on both ends. Most of their DVI-HDCP outputs (including my first box) are buggy; if you have HDMI, I suggest asking Comcast if you can swap out for a box with HDMI output, as I did. That should assure your set will still work even if Comcast is forced to become 100% HDCP-compliant (which may or may not happen since Comcast now owns a piece of MGM).

Matt: HDCP is part of the HDMI standard, so your HDMI inputs are almost certainly HDCP-compliant.

Chris Taylor: DTV + HDTV + HDMI + HDCP + DVI = BAD DRM

drmblog@nerys.com (Chris Taylor) — Mon, 22 May 2006 23:17:34 -0500

In a word ? YES your TV is worthless now (for HD movies) in reality not yet. the studios have "realized" how bad an idea instant implimentation of HDCP is. so "for now" they all claim they will not turn on the HDCP trigger so you will be able to see FULL HD from these players (dont ever connect it to the internet if you don't want to be sorry)

Chris Taylor
http://www.nerys.com/