Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple's New MacBooks Have Built-In Copy Protection

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the presumption-from-on-high dept.

Portables (Apple) 821

raque writes "Appleinsider is reporting that the new MacBooks/MacBookPros have built-in copy protection. Quote: 'Apple's new MacBook lines include a form of digital copy protection that will prevent protected media, such as DRM-infused iTunes movies, from playing back on devices that aren't compliant with the new priority protection measures.' Ars Technica is also reporting on the issue. Is this the deal they had to make to get NBC back? Is this a deal breaker for Apple or will fans just ignore it to get their hands on the pretty new machines? Is this a new opportunity for Linux? And what happened to Jobs not liking DRM?"

cancel ×

821 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

To Steve (5, Insightful)

JYD (996651) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825303)

Built-in copy protection is a bag-of-hurt.

Sincerely,

Mac Fan who wants Blu-ray

Re:To Steve (1)

Midnight Thunder (17205) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825469)

Built-in copy protection is a bag-of-hurt.

Good luck finding a computer without it.

PS There are surely ways around it.

Re:To Steve (4, Insightful)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825617)

Good luck finding a computer without it.

A 2007 MacBook.

The fact that the same video will play fine on a 2007 Mac but refuse to play on a 2008 Mac proves that the copy protection is not necessary -- if it was necessary it would be applied to all computers equally.

Re:To Steve (5, Insightful)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825919)

PS There are surely ways around it.

Doesn't matter. I shouldn't be restricted. I shouldn't have to go 'underground'.

The fact that I can is irrelevant.

The fact that you could still get alcohol during the prohibition doesn't make prohibition any more palatable.

Re:To Steve (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825611)

Enjoy your DRM macfag.

When all you do is suck on Steve's dick then you should have known you where going to get fucked.

Re:To Steve (5, Funny)

Wowsers (1151731) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825657)

Without seeming to flame (flame mode if you like), we've had experience of locked down platform with Apple's iPhone. Now Apple join Microsoft in having a locked down OS for media playback, nobody can feel smug or superior (apart from Linux users).

Re:To Steve (5, Funny)

khellendros1984 (792761) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825747)

And we Linux users have been feeling smug and superior all along! ;-)

Re:To Steve (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825727)

Dear "Mac Fan who wants Blu-ray",

Any major company making a Blu-ray player has 5 options:
1) Do not support playback of copy-protected content. This means most Hollywood stuff won't play, so your Blu-Ray player is useless.
2) Try to hack the copy protection. You may fail; if you succeed then pay big fines and get a court order preventing you shipping products, for violating the DMCA. Go bankrupt. Your employees might go to jail.
3) License Blu-Ray. When playing back Blu-Ray, do not support external screens - restrict it to the laptop's internal display.
4) License Blu-Ray. When playing back Blu-Ray, require HDCP for any external screens.
5) License Blu-Ray, but ignore the license terms. Pay big fines and get a court order preventing you shipping products. Go bankrupt.

Which do you want? You may not like any of the options, but unfortunately there's no other practical option. Apple's choice of (4) is probably the least bad.

These options are due to the requirements of the Blu-Ray spec, and were demanded by Hollywood in exchange for their support. Short of government intervention, Hollywood are unlikely to support any HD format without DRM in the foreseeable future. And Hollywood own the US government (see Disney's perpetual copyright extensions to ensure that Mickey Mouse never ever leaves Copyright), so don't expect any action there.

Re:To Steve (5, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825913)

You forgot the best of all options:

6) License Bu-Ray. When playing back Blu-Ray, require HDCP for any external screens trough a updatable firmware. Then "leak" a "hacked" firmware (the original one) which does allow playback everywhere. And be sure, to make a big press release, that you will get "them" and sue "them", for creating such an incredibly well working "hacked" firmware *hint* *hint*.

At least that's what I would do. And I'm pretty sure some companies already did similar things.

old (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825307)

I liked this story better when it was on Digg.

Re:old (5, Insightful)

Surt (22457) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825799)

Please go back to Digg. Slashdot is not better than Digg because of the timeliness of the stories. Slashdot is better than Digg because of the user community.

Suddenly glad I bought the previous version. (4, Interesting)

jbeach (852844) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825311)

I don't think that's ever happened to me before.

Ha! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825327)

"priority" You sure that was the word you were looking for?

Don't really care (4, Insightful)

Trillan (597339) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825329)

I don't buy any videos from iTunes: I prefer to rip my own.

Re:Don't really care (5, Informative)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825497)

"I'm sorry Dave, but I can't let you do that."

Re:Don't really care (1)

Golias (176380) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825937)

I don't really care either, not just because of how I get my content, but how I consume it.

I'm pretty much positive that I purchased my last MacBook (or laptop of any sort) two years ago. When I'm away from home, I now leave it behind and do everything with my phone.

A "desktop replacement" which you lug around has become an obsolete concept. The only time I really need a full-functioning "personal computer" in the traditional sense is when I'm *creating* content.

I've got a Mac mini driving my media center right now, but I could see a day when an "X-Box 4" (or whatever) could end up replacing that, too. Worst case, if Apple doesn't play nice with rights-management, I can always go back to Linux Purgatory (on the very same box) for a while until consumer demand shakes them back to their senses.

My guess is this is what they had to do (3, Insightful)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825331)

in order to get Blu-Ray playback licensing

Re:My guess is this is what they had to do (5, Informative)

StarManta.Mini (860897) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825633)

....buuuuuuut..... they don't HAVE Blu-Ray drives....

not blu-ray content (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825941)

But the video in tfa is no blu-ray.

Questions? Answers. (4, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825337)

Is this the deal they had to make to get NBC back?

It seems likely enough to me. I guess I have no proof either way, but I wouldn't be surprised in the least to find that this was NBC's idea.

Is this a deal breaker for Apple?

No.

Will fans just ignore it to get their hands on the pretty new machines?

Yes. Just like they always do.

Is this a new opportunity for Linux?

No, since it won't hurt Apple.

And what happened to Jobs not liking DRM?

Nothing. That was a lie then, and is still a lie. Apple puts DRM in their flagship product, and you actually believe them when they spout bullshit about disliking DRM?

Re:Questions? Answers. (4, Insightful)

onefriedrice (1171917) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825605)

Sweet. Once MS put DRM in the OS layer of Vista, Apple felt the need to one-up them with DRM built right into the hardware. Take that, Microsoft.

Re:Questions? Answers. (3, Interesting)

That's Unpossible! (722232) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825643)

That was a lie then, and is still a lie.

I hate taxes. I try not to pay them.

Yet, in order to keep living outside of jail, I keep paying them.

Am I lying about hating taxes? Or am I playing the game that needs to be played?

Re:Questions? Answers. (4, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825903)

Interesting point of view, but I don't think that applies to Apple. In the case of taxes, there is more or less a gun held to your head that forces you to do such a thing. Not so with Apple.

Re:Questions? Answers. (1)

JPortal (857107) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825983)

Mod parent up. I think Jobs realizes that he must compromise sometimes.

Re:Questions? Answers. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825953)

And what happened to Jobs not liking DRM?

Nothing. That was a lie then, and is still a lie.

To be fair, in Steve's essay about DRM, he specifically pointed to music that should be DRM-free. He said that consumers already have DRM in their DVDs (assuming he's talking about CSS and maybe macrovision, which aren't really DRM in the same form as "FairPlay"), so we should just expect to continue to have it.

I don't agree with that reasoning at all (since all of my DVDs will play on any DVD player sold in North America without me having to register a username and password with the player and have it authenticate to DVD-CCA servers to permit me to play the disc), but that's what he said.

Re:Questions? Answers. (1)

TrekkieGod (627867) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825985)

And what happened to Jobs not liking DRM?

Nothing. That was a lie then, and is still a lie.

Indeed. I've posted my interpretation of events [slashdot.org] a year ago, and nobody believed me then. Some claimed I had invented some type of "conspiracy theory" when all I did was describe the effects of competition.

Steve Jobs never hated DRM. When dropping DRM became a good business decision for him, with fairplay lawsuits on the horizon, he added the whole, "we dislike DRM" as a marketing ploy. Why wouldn't he? To actually believe that he wants to sell music and videos that will play on non-apple products is naive at best.

Obligatory Apple reality check (3, Insightful)

i_want_you_to_throw_ (559379) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825339)

If you remove the cloud of the the hipster-doofus lovefest for Apple you realize that Apple only has one obligation as a publicly traded company

Making a profit for shareholders

Why anyone is surprised that Apple (and Google) act like real companies is always a surprise to me.

Apple needs to turn a profit and make concessions to satisfy stockholders.

Re:Obligatory Apple reality check (1, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825457)

Agai, that's not true. What they are obligated to do depends on their missions statement.

You, like every dumbass on /., oversimplifying things to the point of absurdity. i.e. Reductio ad absurdum

Re:Obligatory Apple reality check (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825551)

Tragically, Agai is right. It's one of the flaws of a publicly owned company.

Mission statements and noble goals may steer the company for a time, but at the end of the day it comes back to profits. Without them, no company can survive. Publicly traded companies are worse because profit isn't enough: you have to make *enough* profit. (See: Electronic Arts, Yahoo.)

At Apple, one needs only go back to the teutonic days of Michael Spindler. Spindler of course was going to focus on quality while also reducing costs, and gave us that great PowerBook of yore the 5300 series. You can google it if my sarcasm isn't enough for you. (I owned one of those things.)

I think The Steve can keep the Apple ship steering in a noble direction. I've much less confident in what comes afterwards.

Re:Obligatory Apple reality check (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825921)

i_want_you_to_throw_ You can post anon all you want but your writing style gives you away.

Re:Obligatory Apple reality check (5, Insightful)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825473)

The problem is that, in a sane society, a company makes a profit for its shareholders by producing products that customers want to buy, and in general by treating the customer as king. Remember the old phrase, "the customer is always right."

So how does screwing over your customers and making them angry equate to making a profit for your shareholders? The giant media companies aren't the ones giving money to Apple, it's regular people buying their hardware, software, and stuff on iTunes.

Re:Obligatory Apple reality check (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825637)

I dunno. Instead of planning for good products you could make crappy, unimaginative cars and perpetuate thousands of awful dealerships.
Then, when things finally go south, you can run to the government and get a giant bailout package to keep your failed business model afloat while you dish out large bonuses to yourself and all the vice presidents.
Does that work?

Re:Obligatory Apple reality check (5, Insightful)

Free the Cowards (1280296) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825675)

The problem is that the obligation is getting twisted into "make a profit for shareholders soon", with an almost total lack of concern for the long term.

Apple is actually one of the better companies in this regard, but a lot of companies are running into trouble because they think that shareholder value means pumping up their upcoming Q7 results no matter what.

How many people care? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825717)

Outside of Slashdot's readership, nobody cares about DRM.

There are vanishingly few "screwed over" customers "angry" about HDCP. Most people never even see the "restrictions" on their "freedom." They subscribe to cable, buy their BluRay players, buy their disks, and it all works just fine. If they didn't, then these stories would be in Time Magazine (or, better yet, TV Guide) and not on Slashdot.

Re:Obligatory Apple reality check (2, Insightful)

jonico (1376909) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825811)

This is not how things work in a capitalistic society. It is usually not the case that companies produce products that people want; the largest companies manufacture needs, brands, and lifestyles, and then tell the consumers that if you want to live your life in that way then you need buy these products.

Re:Obligatory Apple reality check (1)

bill_kress (99356) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825837)

Ahh, debugged your brain for you!--the problem was here: "...in a sane society,"

Re:Obligatory Apple reality check (4, Interesting)

onefriedrice (1171917) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825839)

Probably because Apple's customers are not angry. Apple's DRM doesn't usually get in too many peoples' way. For example, most people don't have >5 devices where they want to have their music play at the same time, and if they do, they can always just burn it to CD. It's still the most liberal DRM that I know of.

That's why consumers don't have a problem with it. The only ones extremely opposed to Fairplay are the idealists who are against the very idea that they can't be trusted to obey the law. Those types of people aren't in the target market for iTMS anyway, so Apple isn't hurting at all by making profit for shareholders, appeasing media content providers, and giving (actual) costumers what they want.

Re:Obligatory counter-reality check (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825607)

If you remove the cloud of the the hipster-doofus hatefest for Microsoft you realize that Microsoft only has one obligation as a publicly traded company

Making a profit for shareholders

Why anyone is surprised that Microsoft (and Apple) act like real companies is always a surprise to me.

Microsoft needs to turn a profit and make concessions to satisfy stockholders.

--
This statement will work for future MS-bashing articles, right?

Re:Obligatory Apple reality check (1)

That's Unpossible! (722232) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825695)

If you remove the cloud of the the hipster-doofus lovefest for Apple

Ad hominem attack. Must not have a point.

Apple only has one obligation as a publicly traded company

Making a profit for shareholders

What does this have to do with this story? The point is, DRM could hurt Apple's profits if people start buying other hardware that doesn't use DRM. So your implication that Apple doesn't have to give a shit about what people think doesn't really hold water.

Do I think this will really impact their bottom line? Not really.

Apple needs to turn a profit and make concessions to satisfy stockholders.

Again, what does this statement have to do with putting HDCP into a Macbook?

Re:Obligatory Apple reality check (1)

djfake (977121) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825783)

"hipster-doofus lovefest" - oh how I love that phrase when properly used. mod up parent to 5

Re:Obligatory Apple reality check (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825801)

You know, Apple doesn't even pay a dividend, even thought they always post an excellent EPS.

MOD Parrent troll until he learns. (1, Informative)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825879)

Would you please just STFU about Google already, you little karma whore..

Below are the parents previous posts...

Why anyone is surprised that Apple (and Google) act like real companies is always a surprise to me.

Once Google became a publicly traded company their only obligation transitioned to making a profit for their shareholders.

Honestly why anyone is surprised at Google acting like a real company is a mystery. Since Google became a publicly traded company they only have one obligation.....

Do no evil? Hardly,... when Google became a publicly traded company their obligation became one thing..

and finally, from your own words...

Seriously is there anyone on /. that isn't a "me too, me too" Microsoft sucks, Linux is good person?

Why don't you eat them and STFU about Google in stories nothing to do with them.

What will fanbois think? (4, Interesting)

duckInferno (1275100) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825379)

I wonder if this will help jolt people towards reality: Apple's just like Microsoft. The only real difference is that Apple makes somewhat better gear.

Oh, Steve Jobs is still an asshole [danstechnstuff.com] .

Re:What will fanbois think? (3, Informative)

Seakip18 (1106315) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825721)

Wow. This got knocked down as a troll pretty quick. While his comment about Steve Jobs being an ass is uncalled for, I don't see the need for a -1.

Anyways, I think Apple is starting to think that they're island of a system is going to be brought into contact with more competition, like ragnarok and other software. This is one of the preemptive measures to assure that Apple's flagship software stays that way.

Re:What will fanbois think? (5, Funny)

duckInferno (1275100) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825905)

Eh, I should have thought about it a little more before I posted something critical of the Almighty ;)

Seriously, this is not a troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825807)

I can't see why people why moderate this as a troll. It simply isn't.

Of course, "troll" generally means "I don't like it" around here, but hell, isn't that what a discussion board like this is for?

As for Steve Jobs being an asshole, if that email is real, then yes, he qualifies as an asshole.

"Built-in" my ass.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825399)

..it's part of the special OS X version sent along with these specific machines. It is not present in the other ordinary versions.

Er, it's HDCP. (5, Informative)

MetaPhyzx (212830) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825411)

I don't think you can buy a mid to high end vid card these days that doesn't have HDCP baked in; I'm not surprised.

Note that I didn't say I was enthralled, just not surprised.

Re:Er, it's HDCP. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825997)

Exactly. If it wasn't in this iteration, it probably would have been in the next one.

That being said, HDCP sucks, no matter what the device. It's evil because it blocks legitimate uses as badly as illegitimate ones, and it adds a whole new layer of potential incompatibility. There are ways around it [hdfury.com] with extra hardware, but it's stupid to have to pay hundreds of dollars to get around a built-in product defect.

One more reason to download the pirated version of the media even if you bought the legitimate one.

Where is the tag.... (1)

genghisjahn (1344927) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825415)

defectivebydesign? It's DRM right? That's bad right? Don't we HAVE to pronounce it defective?

Re:Where is the tag.... (1, Troll)

TailGunner (461259) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825867)

You must be new here..just a hint, /. is nothing but a bunch of hypocritical punk kids, just agree with the hive before you get modded troll.

Will fans just ignore it? (5, Funny)

klapaucjusz (1167407) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825423)

will fans just ignore it

No. They'll start explaining why it's actually an advantage for the user.

Re:Will fans just ignore it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825519)

This is entirely too close to the truth for the fanboys to ignore. Good thing you have karma to burn.

Re:Will fans just ignore it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825849)

It's not a bug, it's a feature!

Re:Will fans just ignore it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825965)

And here you go [slashdot.org]

 

Who cares? (4, Insightful)

vanyel (28049) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825439)

If you don't buy crippled content in the first place, it's just wasted, unused, hardware.

Re:Who cares? (1)

That's Unpossible! (722232) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825713)

What if all new TVs required HDCP streams to function?

Re:Who cares? (1)

MeNeXT (200840) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825791)

Then they would NOT sell. Could you imagine people returning set because they can't watch their holiday videos?

First thing I'd do is bring it back and call it broken. I would make such a stink that not only would I demand my money back I want to be compensated for my wasted time due to the salesman's greed for commission that he neglected to inform me of the defect.

Re:Who cares? (1)

That's Unpossible! (722232) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825831)

My camera and my TV both use HDCP already.

Re:Who cares? (1)

xZgf6xHx2uhoAj9D (1160707) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825857)

Your TV requires HDCP input? As in if you borrow a friend's DVD player or camcorder, it absolutely 100% will not work on your TV? Why did you buy it?

Re:Who cares? (1)

vanyel (28049) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825939)

All new hd tvs support hdcp, they don't require it (though some hd content providers like tivo do, but that's only link encryption); I play uncrippled HD content regularly. Likewise, sd cards were created to support drm, but no one uses it. Likewise, the macbooks may support drm, but can't require it (or the vast majority of content wouldn't work, which would kill them dead).

Re:Who cares? (1)

sidb (530400) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825949)

If you don't buy crippled content in the first place, it's just wasted, unused, hardware.

...that you paid for, and for which a licensing fee got forwarded to a hateful organization. The hardware is harmful even if you don't "use" it.

Many Apple fans will actually enjoy DRM (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825445)

As they like getting fucked in the ass.

When will people get a clue? (1)

unit8765 (1411141) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825517)

I wonder why consumers don't seem to care about this stuff. Personally, I refuse to buy something that I can't guarantee that will play my stuff. This should end up being a huge pain in the neck for mac users.

Re:When will people get a clue? (2, Insightful)

Voyager529 (1363959) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825659)

because their pr0n still loads...for now.

what will they think of next? (1)

Wansu (846) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825541)

Do these guys just lay awake a night trying to think up new and different ways to screw things up? They'll never rest until all media is pay-per-view.

Two screen dilemma (5, Interesting)

coxymla (1372369) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825545)

I think one of the most worrying things about this story is the claim that you can't watch your content while you have any non-HDCP device connected, even if you're not watching it on that screen!

For someone like me who has a Dell 20" screen that supports HDCP, but also an Apple 20" screen that does not, we're expected to unplug one screen every time we want to watch something protected in this manner? Get real!

Re:Two screen dilemma (3, Interesting)

torstenvl (769732) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825693)

As a Switcheur of two years now, one thing that STILL bothers me is that I can't take screen grabs while a DVD is playing -- even if DVD Player is in a different space or on a different display!

Grrrrrrrr

On the other hand, DVD Player is lightweight enough and good enough at remembering where it is that I can cmd+tab/cmd+q/cmd+tab/cmd+shift+3/click and the movie interruption is something like 4-5 seconds.

But still.

Re:Two screen dilemma (1)

Megane (129182) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825883)

Solution: don't use Apple's DVD player. The usual reason for this (at least on Windows) is that DVD playback is done with assistance from the video card, in such a way that screen grabbers can't see the output. Try using VLC, though you may have to tweak its output settings to output directly to video memory.

Re:Two screen dilemma (5, Insightful)

Free the Cowards (1280296) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825709)

Think of it as an implicit endorsement of piracy. If you can't play purchased media on your 100% legitimate hardware, then the choice is clear.

Problem Solved.... (-1, Offtopic)

bagboy (630125) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825553)

buy your tunes from Amazon. .....or buy the actual CD and rip away.

Re:Problem Solved.... (1)

g0at (135364) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825673)

Did you read the fucking article?

We're talking about HDCP.

What does ripping CDs have to do with playing video over DisplayPort?

Re:Problem Solved.... (1)

bagboy (630125) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825847)

guilty as charged. I didn't read it.

Re:Problem Solved.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825755)

Now class, pay attention, this has nothing to do with MUSIC dork!

buy your movies from Amazon. .....or buy the actual DVD and rip away.

There fixed that for ya!

Apple has become ... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825555)

a digital rights management company masquerading as a fashion business.

Excellent news! (5, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825557)

Steve, whose care for his children passes understanding, knew that many buyers of new macbooks yearn in their hearts to purchase new Apple monitors to go with them. He knew further that for the many crying out, oppressed by old Apple monitors that they already owned, following their desire would be difficult.

And thus, by his hand, a gift was bestowed. His people would, with Him as a purveyor of protected premium content by day and by night, be led away from the old and to the new monitor of their desire.

Re:Excellent news! (1)

Foofoobar (318279) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825803)

Sorry but I love my Macbook Pro an I want to kick him in the balls for this.

FYI? (2, Informative)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825573)

Vista has the same kind of so-called "protection". Just so we're clear on that. Thanks.

In other, unrelated news, it should be easy to crack [slashdot.org] . The ghost of Bruce would also like to say "Software copy protection doesn't work"... and since this is a download... well then. So there you go. Nothing to see here, move along.

Lies (5, Insightful)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825585)

This article is totally misleading. It's just HDCP. The media has to be HDCP aware in the first place.

If you don't by defective DRM laden media, then you do not have a problem.

In some ways, this is actually a GOOD THING. Now the hardware can actually communicate with other media devices that demand a HDCP connection.

So to SUM UP, all the PIRATED MEDIA WILL STILL PLAY.

Re:Lies (5, Informative)

Jherek Carnelian (831679) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825785)

Now the hardware can actually communicate with other media devices that demand a HDCP connection.

No such devices exist. HDCP is strictly transmitter enforced. All HDCP-enabled display and audio devices are fully capable of doing their job without HDCP being turned on.

However, by enabling HDCP on their video hardware Apple has actually increased the opportunity for compatibility problems. If the Apple video hardware tries to do an HDCP handshake and fails - for any number of reasons, like data corruption or a bug in the implementation on either end, etc - then the end result is likely to be a completely blank screen (it should be obvious that if HDCP is turned on, but isn't working right, the only logical result is for the video hardware to stop transmitting, else it risk transmitting sooper-secret-video in the clear). There have been many reports of just this sort of handshaking failure with all kinds of HDCP-enabled devices like ps3's, blu-ray players, amplifier/receivers, etc.

Re:Lies (1)

Neffirithion (950526) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825973)

In some ways, this is actually a GOOD THING.

said slightly above this post...

will fans just ignore it

No. They'll start explaining why it's actually an advantage for the user.

I just figured it would take a bit longer than 4 inches down in the post count...

DisplayPort (5, Informative)

mpaque (655244) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825595)

This is all part of DisplayPort, the display connection. Like HDMI, the digital display connection for HDTV gear, DisplayPort includes an end-to-end encryption mechanism. (Take a look at HDMI/HDCP.)

The end-to-end secure data path is something the HD content providers insist on.

Need to think of a different Christmas present (0)

orgelspieler (865795) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825603)

I was going to get my wife a MBP for Christmas, but this is a deal breaker. If they really want iTunes HD videos to sell well this season, they shouldn't make it dependent on having a HDCP compatible display device. I'm not going to buy it and just hope that my TV will work with it. Actually, it wouldn't matter since I don't have an HDTV, so I wouldn't buy HD iTunes videos. So maybe it's not a deal breaker, but it sure is making me think twice.

I guess the good news is that this gives us all a legitimately legal reason to defeat the latest copy protection schemes on iTunes. Research for interoperability is allowed under the DMCA; however, it appears that exemption only applies to computer programs. Is there a copyright lawyer who knows whether an iTunes video would count in this regard? Alternatively could you use the exemption as it applies to the actual iTunes application, since that surely qualifies as a program?

And what happened to Jobs not liking DRM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825615)

Money.

HDCP, not "built-in copy protection" (1)

Alereon (660683) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825639)

This is the same technology used by the non-free HDTV you get out of your cable box and on BluRay discs. There is a requirement that every device in the playback path support HDCP in order for the video to display. The key difference that makes Apple jerks are that they are not exempting analog displays from this requirement. Previously, HDCP support was only required for displaying video over a DVI or HDMI connection, any analog format wasn't affected. This is because of the image quality degradation caused by an analog signal, the key point of HDCP is preventing digital copies.

Re:HDCP, not "built-in copy protection" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825845)

That is assuming that one is willing to put up with hassles created by DHCP in devices like cable boxes, and Blu-Ray dvds.. Which is far from the truth.

More and more

Just paving the way... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825641)

for the Apple TV Monitor... with HDCP.

Sensational Much? (1, Insightful)

macs4all (973270) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825651)

How frickin' disingenuous. It's not the "deal they had to make to get NBC back", but rather the "deal" they had to make to allow HDCP output.

And if you read /., you should already know that.

This is NOTHING like the all-pervasive DRM that infests Visturd(TM) at every turn.

And if they DIDN'T allow HDCP-"protected" content to be played, the people would whine about "Where's the Hi-Def"?

So, please tell me, just how does Apple keep up with (icky) "modern" video standards, and NOT do what it takes to keep from being sued to death by the MAFIAA?

You'll note that, unlike similar apps in Vista, there don't seem to be widespread reports about Final Cut (or even 3rd party apps like Premiere) not being able to read/edit/write HD content.

So, as I said, this seems to be confined to as little of QuickTime and OS X as possible.

Unauthorized playback protection != copy protect (5, Informative)

penguinstorm (575341) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825661)

Playback protection is part of a strategy of copy protection, but it's not the same thing.

Playback protection can hurt me even if I'm *not* trying to copy the media in question, which is my main objection to it.

Copy protection is arguably more legitimate, but it does depend on the specific copyright laws of your jurisdiction.

Up here in Canada the fair use doctrine suggest that it *should* be legal for me to rip a copy of a DVD for my personal playback in another medium (it's roughly the same as making an audio cassette copy of a vinyl record.)

I'm generally of the view that the companies that market media products should focus on improving the quality of those products in order to encourage us to buy them, rather than branding us as criminals. Then again, I still buy music whereas some people seem to not do that at all anymore.

Hey Apple you just lost a client! (0, Redundant)

MeNeXT (200840) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825687)

I AM NOT A THIEF! DO NOT TREAT ME AS SUCH!!!!

I will NEVER buy any product that is so encumbered!

Re:Hey Apple you just lost a client! (1)

l0ungeb0y (442022) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825809)

Well, then never buy a BluRay Disc player or any other media device that uses HDCP. Because that's all that it is.

Re:Hey Apple you just lost a client! (1)

mr_matticus (928346) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825917)

And your option is what, then?

HDCP is in most monitors and most video cards these days. Where, then, can you take your business? If you say Linux, then its presence in the hardware is irrelevant, and in any case you already had a laundry list of reasons to use Linux.

For this to be a dealbreaker just means that you're looking for a reason. All you have to do to avoid it is...not buy HDCP-enabled (or disabled, rather) content. Yeah, it sucks that Apple finally caved, but there's a small revolt brewing over the lack of Blu-ray (Why? Who knows), and the studios just won't ever allow 1080p digital distribution without HDCP or a successor, because they suck like that.

But since no one else seems to be stepping up to compete in HD video content without DRM, then it's their ball and their game.

Ahhh the arrogance of Apple (1)

greentshirt (1308037) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825731)

Displayed at its best. Look, DRM does only one thing: stop people from purchasing digital media. I bought a CD recently, not because I wanted to hear what was on it, but because I had already downloaded it and decided I want to support the artist because it was good. Most PC games I ever purchase are ones I've actually downloaded and finished already, but I felt like I had to support the devs. Sony and Apple will continue to fight a battle they cannot win.

*sigh* (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825765)

The more I hear about Apple, the more I like Microsoft because they did the same thing years ago, thus proving they have a better understanding of the business.

I didn't really mind when Apple locked their hardware. After all, it's their hardware. I didn't really mind when Apple locked their iPods. After all, I could use a Creative Zen. I didn't mind when they refused to remove the iPod-only DRM on ITMS. After all, I prefer buying CDs and ripping them myself, since it's almost the same price, with virtually no hassle or copy "protection". But now, one of the best OS on the market will feature built-in, OS-level DRM? Fuck that. I won't be buying an Apple any time soon, which is a shame because I was planning to do just that with the Chrismas money.

So Microsoft is barely starting to play ball. Apple is locking it's products more and more, and locking the users of the products. Google starts forking Open Source projects to proprietary code (OpenID). The IT world is becoming more and more confusing.

I think it's time to read In the Beginning was the Command Line [shand.net] again.

So... (4, Funny)

Hennell (1005107) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825769)

if MacBooks have copy-protecion now, does this mean I'll no longer be able to copy and upload them to Pirate Bay?

Not a deal breaker... (1)

vistic (556838) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825773)

...I never buy DRM infested music.

You have to consider all factors when buying a computer, or anything.

I will still stick to Macs because they have the best OS.

And I will continue to not buy DRM infested music.

Buying Content? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825893)

I'm even more shocked that people pay for content. I would be glad to pay a reasonable price for media if I could control it how I wanted. But if they won't allow me that courtesy then I've no intention on paying for stuff I can get easier and cheaper.

Whatev. (1)

Duncan Blackthorne (1095849) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825909)

There'll be a hack released within a week. Hell, I wouldn't even be surprised if there's a hack released same day.

It will never stop (4, Insightful)

www.blogLinux.org (1401783) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825963)

Yet another example of the grip proprietary corporations will continue to impose on their users.

Apples just work (1, Interesting)

fermion (181285) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825993)

The reason I buy an Apple is because they just work. The OS will no randomly ask for verification, or threaten my livelyhood because it has decided that there is a slim chance I might have not paid full price for the OS. When I put in a DVD it plays. When I play a movie, in any format, it works on either VLC, QT, or Realmedia. I have not seen a song that has not played. It will read the vast majority of USB devices without driver, the same with firewire.

So if this is just an issue with the ITMS, then it will probably not affect my choice to buy an Apple. It will just mean that Amazon gets my music and movie business. If there actually comes a time where I try to play some media, and I get an error, then yes, I will look for other option.

Of course, since MS has created a market where most OEM created cheap, ugly, non functional, and generally useless machines, there options are few and far between. Apple took a *nix and built an OS out of it. As reported here, HP was very unhappy about some Vista decisions. HP also has experience with *nix. HP also has experience with building extremely reliable, functional, and exquisite machines. It is a pity that they no longer have the spirit of innovation to build the ultimate HP-UX laptop, instead of just being the lapdog for MS.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?