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!

Microsoft Licenses Analog Anti-rip Technology

CowboyNeal posted more than 9 years ago | from the sharing-is-for-communists dept.

Microsoft 270

photojournaliste writes "CD copy-protection specialist Macrovision is to work with Microsoft to ensure their respective DRM and anti-rip technologies are interoperable, the two companies said this week. Sounds straightforward enough, but the deal runs deeper. Microsoft agreed to license a number of Macrovision's patents, in particular those relating to analogue copy protection technology and more recent extensions to that system that cover video-on-demand, pay-per-view content and support for the US 'broadcast flag', which determines whether consumers will be able to record digital TV broadcasts."

cancel ×

270 comments

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

Frost Pist! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571075)

Can they license an anaolog First Posting tech ?

Good (-1, Redundant)

plarsen (579155) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571076)

Good they lincens it, then less will use it.

HOMO (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571077)

I believe in gay love!!!! SAMZENPUS!!! fuck my hairy asshole

How long before ... (5, Insightful)

TheLogster (617383) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571078)

People hack their Tivo's to go "Broadcast flag - very nice - I'll ignore that and record it anyway"..

Same for Myth TV etc

TheLogster

insightful flamebiat, you pick. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571118)

You miss the point completely.

How long until you hack you DVR to ignore the flag, not long at all.

How long until the 99.9 percent of the population that are not flaming homosexuals and helpless linux fanboys hack their system, well, they probably never will.

DRM never has been about absolute control. It has, from its inception, been about making piracy enough of an inconvenience that regular user don't bother to do it.

Re:insightful flamebiat, you pick. (5, Insightful)

Jane_Dozey (759010) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571195)

Regular users don't really contribute that much to piracy. Lets ignore the people downloading things for a moment and concentrate on the uploaders (the real problem). The people distributing most of the content are "hard core" pirates. They are the one's who will be paying lots of money for ways to get around copyprotection (or manually doing it themselves). I should imagine that as soon as a method of getting around the broadcast flag is published every single one of the main rippers nd distributers will be using it widely and carrying like they are right now. Sure, home users wont be able to record off of the TV/Radio until startups start offering the hacks for a small fee, which wouldn't take too long.

"DRM never has been about absolute control. It has, from its inception, been about making piracy enough of an inconvenience that regular user don't bother to do it."
And they usually don't. They just get the material they want off of somebody else who does bother.
DRM schemes ONLY stop regular users (and even then, only until someone writes up an easy to use program/utility that the public can use) while they are a mild inconvenience to the professionals.
It only takes one unscrupulous person to make one DRM-less copy of something (be it actual material or a box that ignores DRM) and distribute it and then everybody can have a copy.

I'm tired of the industry trying to use technology to solve a social problem.

Re:insightful flamebiat, you pick. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571256)

I think you miss the point as well.

The point of the broadcast flag is that the user says, "Hey I'll record the Pay per view X on the DVR so I can watch it later or so I can watch it with my wife" The DRM prevents him from doing this.

He instead just goes out and rents the DVD.

The DRM and the ways to circumvent it are not convenient enough to get him to commit the act of piracy. (and playing movies from a computer to a TV is not really that common in the mainstream)

Thus it add a layer of inconvenience to committing the act thus dissuading people from doing it.

There will always be pirates. That is a given. The inherit law of DRM is that it will be broken, eventually. That is why what I said above is insightful DRM has never been about complete control because even the movie studios know that is impossible. DRM has and will continue to be about making the piracy enough of an inconvenience that the mainstream will not do it.

As an aside,

By the way it is the convenience of P2P and bittorrent that bugs them, not the fact they exist. If P2P and BT were tiny do you really think they would be so up in arms. It is the fact that anyone can click next on a windows box to get through a default install and then have access to huge amounts of pirated data.

Re:insightful flamebiat, you pick. (3, Insightful)

Psion (2244) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571379)

And why should the consumer not have the ability to record the Pay Per View X on the DVR? It seems the business model of Pay Per View is inherently flawed in that it requires the mandatory adoption of a technology that prevents the consumer from seeking the most convenient use of technology. Since the Betamax decision, consumers have had the legal "right" to record shows for their own enjoyment later. Now, because a business model shows up that depends on the customer not being able to do that, the entertainment industry should have its way and treat all customers as potential criminals?

Re:insightful flamebiat, you pick. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571392)

I never said they should not. I never made any indication of my position on the subject. I simply stated the motivation of the companies involved in the DRM.

Please move you soapbox down 3 posts.

Re:insightful flamebiat, you pick. (1)

EpsCylonB (307640) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571344)


I'm tired of the industry trying to use technology to solve a social problem.


Double plus insightful.

Why is that unscrupulous? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571444)

"It only takes one unscrupulous person to make one DRM-less copy of something"

Huh? Making a copy of a TV show is now "unscrupulous"?

Pretty soon, the Chinese will be laughing at our "freedom". Increasingly, the only "freedom" we have is the "freedom" to spend our paycheck consuming.

Re:insightful flamebiat, you pick. (1)

hachete (473378) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571540)

Agree totally. The industry should be trying to make money rather than convict their users. The best analysis I've read is that MS are trying to take the content industries down this route then own them when it fails, just like the same DRM techniques failed during the 80s.

As a supporting anecdote,when I wanted to change my mobile to another service provider, I took it to a shop and they said "no, it's locked. Take it to that bloke with a stand in the market. He'll unlock it". So, I went to that bloke, who unlocked my mobo in 2 secs flat.

You might say that I'm not the "average user" and I might agree however it turn's out that my *mother* has done this piece of piracy as well.

If there's enough incentive and enough "blokes with a stand down the market", the broadcast flag won't mean diddley squat.

Re:How long before ... (1)

sxpert (139117) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571122)

MythTV doesn't have the concept of a broadcast flag, as libdvdcss has no concept of a DVD geographic zone... what are you talking about ?

Re:How long before ... (2, Insightful)

Tassach (137772) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571157)

The problem with the broadcast flag is that it will be illegal to sell hardware which does not honor the broadcast flag, so (in theory) any hdtv card you buy after this summer won't be able to be used in a mythTV box.

Of course, any programmer knows that if you can write the decoded video stream to the screen device, you can write it to a disk device just as easily. However, you can pretty well count on the fact that the law (DCMA and others) will be used to criminilize any software which can be used to work around the broadcast flag.

Re:How long before ... (5, Insightful)

Dayflowers (729580) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571177)

Well, its not like that's really a problem. You can easily just publish the software online and claim to be from outside the US. US users will download and use it.

The fact that it'd be illegal to use the software would not bother anyone...

Re:How long before ... (4, Insightful)

Tassach (137772) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571305)

The fact that it'd be illegal to use the software would not bother anyone...
You must not have been paying attention. It'll bother a lot of people; generally the same kind of people who're bothered by "crimes" like visiting a prostitute or smoking a doobie.

Marijuana possession is illegal in most of the US. While the law is widely ignored, there are still people who are serving time in PMITA prison for violating it. How'd you like to be Tyrone's bitch for 3-5 years because you got busted for "posession of software with intent to distribute"?

Re:How long before ... (1)

Dayflowers (729580) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571403)

Worry not, that won't really be a problem for me. I'm not in the US. ;)

Anyways, warez circles are pretty active. Alot of people don't care about such things outside of work. Almost no one really cares about getting caught illegally downloadin' music/movies/tv shows/etc from the web either.

Why would this be any different?

Re:How long before ... (2, Insightful)

EpsCylonB (307640) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571304)

Of course, any programmer knows that if you can write the decoded video stream to the screen device, you can write it to a disk device just as easily. However, you can pretty well count on the fact that the law (DCMA and others) will be used to criminilize any software which can be used to work around the broadcast flag.

If you add TCPA to the mix then it seems like the media companies are trying to either seriously cripple, or get rid of, the PC platform as we know it.

As everyone knows while non-DRM media formats exist you only need to break the encryption or protection once and then the cat is out of the bag. It seems like the media companies goal is to not allow content to be accessed or decoded on any device that is aslo capable of decoding, or encoding, non-DRM formats.

Re:How long before ... (1)

TheLogster (617383) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571208)

I have never used MythTV - I have only heard of it - so I'm sorry for my ignorance

Re:How long before ... (4, Insightful)

jxyama (821091) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571124)

>People hack their Tivo's to go "Broadcast flag - very nice - I'll ignore that and record it anyway"..

i think the key is, it's not all (or even most), but only some would hack.

Re:How long before ... (4, Interesting)

sxpert (139117) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571138)

yet, some are way too many already. as only one is required for something to show up on the P2P networks...
as usual, this is just another way by the tech industry to steal money from the idiots in the content industry that are way too stupid to understand that they really are dinosaurs on the brink of extinction, and that using 30 seconds commercials to finance dubious tv shows is about to be as obsolete as dodos

Re:How long before ... (2, Insightful)

diogenes57 (43063) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571333)

Are they really idiots? How else do you propose for them to finace their dubious content? If it is worth downloading for so many people it is obviously worth something. If they are dinosaurs, who will replace them and how?

Re:How long before ... (1)

jxyama (821091) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571343)

i won't dispute your overall sentiment - i agree with you that the traditional commercial financing method is probably fast becoming obsolete.

one is enough to get it on the p2p, you say... and you are right. but p2p is another piece of technology majority of content buyers will not be familiar with, or can easily be "scared" into not using by companies threatening lawsuits, don't you think?

as the computer literacy increases in general, i completely agree with you that hacking will become more common and people will use p2p (or other tools) to get around whatever (stupid, i feel) restcitions these content providers put. but i don't think we are there yet.

Re:How long before ... (2, Insightful)

Catbeller (118204) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571473)

Dodos weren't obsolete. They survived everything except hungry Europeans who didn't give a damn about species preservation. It's hard to evolve a defense against hundreds of godwillsit types with guns in a few years.

Re:How long before ... (2, Interesting)

rokzy (687636) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571162)

the other reply talks about only 1 hack needed for p2p so I won't repeat that (oops)

I don't agree that only some would hack. sure not all, but the concept of getting rid of DVD zones is very well established in the general (DVD-using) public's mind. I expect this to be similar - people will almost expect broadcast flag hacks as standard.

Re:How long before ... (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571179)

http://msl1.mit.edu/ESD10/docs/darknet5.pdf

A Microsoft Research document that explains why it does matter even if only a few people can hack it.

Buy now, only legal until July 1 (2, Insightful)

gatzke (2977) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571160)

HDTV equipment manufactured or bought before July 1 without respect for the broadcast flag will be grandfathered in.

If you ever thought you wanted a hdtv pvr, buy a card now or you will not be legal.

http://www.pchdtv.com/

I just got mine, and I am working through the mythtv setup...

I assume they have to allow for future tivo / pvrs for HDTV that will respect the broadcast flag. But what kind of respect does that entail? Some programs cannot be time-shifted at all? I really dont' know what is to come.

Re:Buy now, only legal until July 1 (5, Informative)

gatzke (2977) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571193)

From http://www.eff.org/broadcastflag/


The Broadcast Flag:

The essence of the FCC's rule is in 47 CFR 73.9002(b) and the following sections: "No party shall sell or distribute in interstate commerce a Covered Demodulator Product that does not comply with the Demodulator Compliance Requirements and Demodulator Robustness Requirements."

The Demodulator Compliance Requirements insist that all HDTV demodulators must listen for the flag (or assume it to be present in all signals). Flagged content must be output only to "protected outputs" or in degraded form: through analog outputs or digital outputs with visual resolution of 720x480 pixels or less--less than 1/4 of HDTV's capability. Flagged content may be recorded only by "Authorized" methods, which may include tethering of recordings to a single device.

The Demodulator Robustness Requirements are particularly troubling for open-source developers. In order to prevent users from gaining access to the full digital signal, the FCC ties the hands of even sophisticated users and developers. Devices must be "robust" against user access or modifications that permit access to the full digital stream. Since open-source drivers are by design user-modifiable, a PC tuner card with open-source drivers would not be "robust." It's not even clear that binary-only drivers would qualify.

Together, these rules mean that future PVR developers will have to get permission from the FCC and/or Hollywood before building high-definition versions of the TiVo. The products that they do build will be epoxied against user experimentation and future improvement. The rules mean that open-source developers and hobbyists will be shut out of the HDTV loop altogether.

Re:Buy now, only legal until July 1 (2, Funny)

bdcrazy (817679) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571257)

Anybody else read that a couple times and read it as Riscombabulator Remodulator Requirements?

Re:Buy now, only legal until July 1 (2, Interesting)

sadler121 (735320) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571436)

Would it be really that hard to reverse engineer an HDTV tuner, possibly enough to be able to flash the card with custom software that ignores the flag? I don't think so, and I would love to have an opportunity to attempt it, just for the mere educational value of doing so...

Of course doing that would be illegal in the US, so would have to be done subvertly inside the US, or outside the US (no purpose to do it outside the US ;-))

*sigh* guess I need to makes plans to immigrate back to the land of my fore fathers IE Europe (though this was affirmed when the American majority showed how stupid they are by electing Bush for a second term, I dunno if I could stand being around the likes of idiots such as that...)

Re:Buy now, only legal until July 1 (1)

Ziviyr (95582) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571319)

Thats disgustingly expensive...

Hello my fellow inmate (1)

essreenim (647659) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571230)

People hack their Tivo's to go "Broadcast flag - very nice - I'll ignore that and record it anyway"..

I agree

Doesn't really matter if they do. (2, Insightful)

tgd (2822) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571443)

More and more people are moving over to HD sets. While some lucky people might live in an area where they can get a half dozen OTA channels, people who get satellite or cable can't use those products.

Cable companies are already moving to simulcast all analog channels in digital form. At some point to reclaim bandwidth they'll drop all but the 2-13 channels from their analog service anyway, and people will have to use CableCard-compatible sets or digital cable boxes.

MythTV will never support those, as the likelihood is that there will never be a cablecard adapter for a PC, precisely because its intended to prevent interception of the digital content. Who knows if Tivo will survive long enough to come out with a CableCard unit, and who knows if the broadcast flag won't be implemented in hardware.

New Name (5, Funny)

R0UTE (807673) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571086)

I hope Microsoft take over Macrovision, then we can have Microsoft and Macrosoft. Microsoft can deal with insecure software and Macrosoft can deal with securing copyrights, what a world it will be then!

Re:New Name (1)

EuphoricaL (567958) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571517)

would probably mean we'd have to use windows update to fix the bugs in the dvd copy protection every time we bought a movie...

The two together (1)

bryan986 (833912) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571087)

Microsoft + Antirip = Oxymoron

Broadcast Flag (4, Insightful)

gowen (141411) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571089)

I like the broadcast flag. If we couldn't record stuff off the television, perhaps the nation would find better things to do with their time that watching endless television programs. Like extra exercise, or socialising. We'd all be a whole lot better for it...

Re:Broadcast Flag (1)

bryan986 (833912) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571101)

Better things to do? Like posting on slashdot?

Re:Broadcast Flag (1)

Jane_Dozey (759010) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571117)

Or perhaps they'll just sit down and watch the programmes at the time they're aired in stead of doing something else and watching them when they come back.

Re:Broadcast Flag (1)

gowen (141411) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571137)

But that's not how most people use time shifting. We record things that are on when we have other, more pressing, things to do, and then watch them at out leisure. With the broadcast flag, we'll still have pressing things to do, but (in all likelihood) won't have our favourite shows available during our free time.

Sure, we could sit down and watch whatever's on, but that (by definition) is less appealing than our favourite shows.

Re:Broadcast Flag (2, Insightful)

archen (447353) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571398)

Sure, we could sit down and watch whatever's on, but that (by definition) is less appealing than our favourite shows.

Actually that's a good point. The broadcast flag could farther limit casual TV watching. You see an add for new program that looks interesting, but you're not sure if it's worth watching. Maybe it'll be your new favorite show, maybe you'll never want to see it again. So record it and watch it later right? Well if they now MAKE you sit and watch this new show which MIGHT be okay, then many people will probably just not watch it at all. Too bad for them I guess. Maybe people will just have to pick up hobbies other than watching TV.

Re:Broadcast Flag (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571330)

> I like the broadcast flag. If we couldn't record stuff off the television,
> perhaps the nation would find better things to do with their time that watching
> endless television programs. Like extra exercise, or socialising. We'd all be a
> whole lot better for it...

You don't have to record *everything* and watch it. You might want to just record the programs you'd miss because you're out socialising or exercising.

Also, you have to remember that Japan doesn't have a problem with obesity (it's almost unheard of there, other than people with genuine medical conditions, and sumo wrestlers!), despite being a very rich, "westernized" country with a lot of people capable of recording programs.

Re:Broadcast Flag (1)

gowen (141411) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571431)

you have to remember that Japan doesn't have a problem with obesity
I didn't suggest TV watching causes obesity. The cultural reasons -- and the cultural and physiological differences between Americans and Japanese -- run far deeper than that. But that doesn't mean that cutting down on TV would be beneficial...

Yes, like exercise or socialising or posting on /. (1)

P-Frank (788137) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571360)

Bazing.

oh (1)

Idimmu Xul (204345) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571094)

what a waste of money on Microsoft's part :(

Re:oh (1)

DanUK (676625) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571204)

They have money to burn bro

Re:oh (1)

Deathlizard (115856) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571250)

Not Exactly.

The VOD, PPV and the Broadcast flag make sense for their MSTV service that their trying to sell as an addon to Media center.

The analog is probably the biggest waste overall however. The only thing I can think of that they are using it for is to Macrovision the AV jacks on your PC so you can't put Media center content on a VCR. Why you would want to do that when most of these systems have DVD burners is beyond me outside of maybe to protect Broadcast Flagged content.

Interoperable? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571097)

Since when was interoperability a goal for access protection systems? Surely they mean inoperable!

song in your head (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571102)

I'm sorry but that song you can't get out of your head is in violation of copyright laws. We are going to install a little chip now to ensure we are compensated.

Re:song in your head (5, Funny)

klang (27062) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571126)

..can't that little chip just turn off the damn song?

Now THAT is a service I would pay for!

Re:song in your head (1)

wheany (460585) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571446)

If it wasn't for the money, cars and movies stars and jewels and all these things I got!

LOL!!! They will price themselves out of the marke (4, Insightful)

DenDave (700621) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571104)

Imagine Provider A sells music and other media content without restrictive technology. Provider B has strong restrictions. Artists who publish with B will not benefit from "bootleg cassettes" to gain popularity (think of Metallica...)... Artists who publish with A become popular, Provider A ends up selling the most popular artists....who makes the money?

Re:LOL!!! They will price themselves out of the ma (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571146)

Who makes the money?

A

Who complains about piracy?

B

Re:LOL!!! They will price themselves out of the ma (2, Insightful)

teksno (838560) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571148)

Lars after he sues everyone else.

Re:LOL!!! They will price themselves out of the ma (1)

samael (12612) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571249)

The problem being that _no_ major publishers are making their work available without DRM.

If they were, the others would follow, but none of them are moving in that direction.

Re:LOL!!! They will price themselves out of the ma (2, Insightful)

westlake (615356) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571457)

Imagine Provider A sells music and other media content without restrictive technology. Provider B has strong restrictions... who makes the money?

The provider with a strong backlist and the most wanted artists and titles.

Provider A is not Pixar or Warner Brothers, which means that it won't be shipping The Incredibles or the next Harry Potter.

What is this television thing (5, Funny)

exnuke (734919) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571105)

What is this television thing anyway? Does it involve moving away from my computer?

Re:What is this television thing (1)

rokzy (687636) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571115)

they have TV on television sets now!? I thought it was just computers and mobile phones :-)

Re:What is this television thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571328)

What is this television thing anyway? Does it involve moving away from my computer?

not really... My computer is connected to my tv.

Re:What is this television thing (4, Funny)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571477)

What is this television thing anyway? Does it involve moving away from my computer?


It's just like your MPEG porn only there's multiple streams all available from a single input source.

There's not much selection though. :-P

Protecting Analog? (5, Interesting)

malcomvetter (851474) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571111)


from TFA:
"An Internet-delivered movie, downloaded to a PC, can now be protected on analog video playback out of a PC"

They're actually concerned with someone outputting a digital format (MPG, DIVX, WMV, etc.) to an Analog source like a VCR? C'mon ... who does that?

I thought the purpose of ripping the media was to have a perfect (or near perfect) digital copy ...

Re:Protecting Analog? (2, Interesting)

BorgDrone (64343) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571133)

I guess this is about legal video-download services with all kinds of nasty DRM stuff. They're trying to close the 'analog loophole'.

Which, offcourse it bullsh*t, there have been 'video signal enhancers' for ages that filter the macrovision protection out of the signal.

Re:Protecting Analog? (1)

malcomvetter (851474) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571282)

Back in the day when DVD players first came out, and people would buy them but had no place to hook up SVideo or RCA on their TV (not to mention no component video), they would always hook it up over coax into their VCRs. Of course that did not work on most VCRs, the copy protection caused the signal to fade in/out and the colors never looked right.

Working for a major electronics retailer at the time, we saw a lot of DVD players get returned for PECI reasons (Product Exceeds Customer's Intelligence-- unofficial acronym). So we recommended that they buy a Philips brand VCR, which bypassed that copy protection feature and allowed the DVD playback to look OK when daisy chained through their VCR to their TV.

So MS just invested in backwards technology from 1990 then?

Recording to Analog is a way around DRM (1)

skyshock21 (764958) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571415)

If you record a digital recording to analog and then back, the resulting digital file comtains none of that DRM non-sense. You have to record to a high-quality analog format to keep it from being too lossy, but it would work effectively.

That said, I'm not so sure there *IS* a way to block people from doing this. DRM is useless when you consider the D/A loophole.

great wedding (5, Funny)

imr (106517) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571113)

The master of the eye-killer blinking videotapes gets in bed with my unfair lady of blue screens of death.
If there have any offsprings, shoot'em.

Protection of Intellectual Property ... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571116)

... is always a good thing. Good for Microsoft. As a further refinement, I hope they can help to track down and punish the punks that are stealing IP too. And a few million-dollar judgements against these skulking thieves will help implant the message.

It's coming. (3, Interesting)

DoubleDangerClub (855480) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571128)

Instead of the XBox and a PC in a home, I think they're on the way to the XBoxPC. It would make sense. The XBox plays games at a great speed with great graphics, so what's to stop MS from making their operating system run out of the XBox ONLY? They could drop licenses with other companies and force everyone to beg and pay more if they want a non-XBox version of Windows. Scary thought, but I think they might be taking a hint from apple and I think they're going to try this "digital lifestyle" thing with making proprietary hardware for Windows. Time to move to Linux I guess. *shrug*

Re:It's coming. (1)

fuzzybunny (112938) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571207)

M$'s revenue stream will collapse, due to a fairly large number of pissed off corporate customers.

Any other questions? :-)

Re:It's coming. (1)

Anonymous Writer (746272) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571251)

M$'s revenue stream will collapse, due to a fairly large number of pissed off corporate customers.

I bet that's why they are switching to G5 processors too. They're making the XBox less like PCs to keep them away from being in direct competition with PC makers.

Re:It's coming. (1)

DoubleDangerClub (855480) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571254)

Not neccessarily, think of all the happy people paying for their new $300 PC that does all the email, internet, ripping, burning, office, etc. And don't bring up eMachines or some crappy equivelent, you know what I'm talking about. :)

Re:It's coming. (1)

sadler121 (735320) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571481)

making proprietary hardware for Windows.

If I recall right another computer company did this back in the 80's and didn't fair as well as the software-only Micrsoft. What was there name pear, orange, grapfruit....

;-)

Broadcast flag outside US (4, Insightful)

Pofy (471469) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571174)

So, how will this work outside US? Or will they just assume the laws are the same in every country? And if it only applies to US, how do one determine properly if the computer in question IS in the US? I guess they simply implement it for everyone and won't care about laws in different countries.

Re:Broadcast flag outside US (1)

salec (791463) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571308)

Well, it is "take it or leave it" situation. Why should anyone in US care about others' legislation? It is clearly "not their problem". If anyone don't like it, they don't buy it.

There is always a way... (5, Insightful)

pdaoust007 (258232) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571178)

I find it amusing to see these companies invest millions in technology and licensing to fight a battle they know they are not going to be able to win.

All it takes is one person to circumvent the protection (we all know how good macrovision has been in the past...) or to have access to source material to distribute it to millions using P2P.

They need to change their business model, give us what we want (DRM free mp3 or similar) for a reasonable price or eventually suffer the inevitable... (which could be a good thing too, the music industry reborn)

Re:There is always a way... (1)

JaffaKREE (766802) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571533)

Macrovision has never been an issue on ripped/copied DVDs. DVDDecrypter and other programs strip it by default.

now, on my PURCHASED dvds (Futurama ESPECIALLY, @$40 X 4), Macrovision is a nightmare. The colors brighten and darken wildly on several tvs I have. I had to buy a Macro scrubber so I could watch my legally purchased DVDs. HOW does this help *anyone* ?

Make it free (-1, Offtopic)

Georges Roux (717743) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571184)

as here: http://www.delcamp.net Your Welcome And Forget Micro$crapp COpybuggy unsafeprotection!

Can you still buy devices that shaft the broadcast (1)

tod_miller (792541) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571192)

...flag until July 5th?

I actually am so apothetic on this issue (I rarely watch TV).

I would like adecent mythtv setup (in the works) for recording the odd stuff, the rest of my associated like to watch tv, so it gives me a platform to tinker.

I say, buyer beware, don't go paying the cost of these patents, which give little value to you.

Why should we pay the cost of DRM, i'd happily by DRM music at 25% of the cost of the non-DRM version.

The distinction? I wouldn't pay 400% the costs for a non DRM version (or buy the DRM version) that is, keep non-drm cheap, and make DRM cheaper if you will... I will not pay for DRM (or subsidise non-DRM licesing)

Put that in your | and smoke it.

Same old story (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Writer (746272) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571202)

They're focusing on how to prevent consumers from accessing material when they should be focusing on making it easier for consumers to pay for material. In the days of Napster's popularity, if the record companies decided to integrate a payment subscription system with high-speed downloading servers, then they wouldn't have to worry about piracy. People would pay to be able to download MP3s with no proper tags and no errors at the maximum speed their connections could handle rather than unreliable and unstable P2P sources. They could have worked on producing software for ISPs to use for automating the billing process. They could have bought into Napster during it's popularity and turned it into a subscription service, and even if other P2P applications were around, Napster had brand-name recognition that people would go for. But instead on focusing on how to use the technology's potential, they sent in the lawyers to block it. Brand name has more pull for consumers than cost-effectiveness. Just look at sneakers- people don't try to buy the cheapest ones around but go with expensive brand names instead.

Re:Same old story (1)

Anonymous Writer (746272) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571214)

typo correction: "with proper tags and no errors" (oops)

Best Move Ever! (5, Interesting)

Luscious868 (679143) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571227)

This would be the best move ever ... for open source that is. The minute my friends can no longer rip their CD's to mp3's, they'll ditch Windows and move on to something else. I'm serious. None of my friends are techies. They use their systems to browse the web, write email and the occasional word processing document and to manage their music and photo collections. If Microsoft ever were to cripple their OS in such a manner, they'd jump ship in a heartbeat. Especially if the alternative OS and supporting software is free and can be installed on their current systems.

Sigh... (3, Insightful)

huge colin (528073) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571253)

If it's perceivable, it's copyable. They never seem to learn.

Microsoft anti-rip technology (2, Funny)

Pan T. Hose (707794) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571259)

It sounds almost as funny as Microsoft security.

Trend (1)

BCW2 (168187) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571260)

M$ gets more involved with copy protection. M$ is pushing their "Media Center" version of Win XP Home. Sooner of later they will be able to break an old VCR by remote.

Why anyone would take things that work well and reliably like, TV, Radio, Stereo, and hook them to something with M$ track record for reliability, performance, and honesty.....? Are people really that dumb? With their push for DRM You will be lucky to record a commercial without paying some ridiculus fee.

incredible (0, Redundant)

RasendeRutje (829555) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571261)

i've said it a million times...
if you can hear music, you can record it, and copy and distribute, etc. DRM and copy protection can never work.

Is there a description of the broadcast flag? (1)

jonwil (467024) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571267)

Where can I see exactly what the possible values for the flag are (e.g. "cant record this show at all", "can record it once then not move the recorded copy" etc)?

Re:Is there a description of the broadcast flag? (1)

Ziviyr (95582) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571306)

I believe its a matter of broadcast flag up, broadcast flag down, broadcast flag up, broadcast flag down.

Rather than anti-rip... (1)

Nuffsaid (855987) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571270)

what Microsoft really needs is a good anti-ripoff solution. Sadly, I fear that will never be voluntary...

Live performance, anyone? (2, Interesting)

gelfling (6534) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571276)

All of this 'sue them until they bleed, and put a coin slot on the very air they fucking breathe' mentality I think will drive people to more live performances. Now unless the MPAA thinks it can license me my own ears we're probably going to be ok.

Who cares (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571278)

So they put even more protection on it. Does anybody really care. If they are going to want to sell this at all, they are going to have to put Composite (RCA) cables on it. Otherwise, it won't work with 95% of the equipment out there. Now, plug those into your VCR. To record use a second vcr hooked up through Coax. It won't give the best quality. But does anybody really care. I mean, for hollywood movies I want high quality. But for weekly episodes of the O.C. I could care less.

Maybe I'm a dim (3, Funny)

CaptainZapp (182233) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571283)

But I'm still unclear about the concept of DRMing analogue signals.

I mean heck! At one point you have to disseminate an analogue signal to which we are able to listen to.

Methinks that the only feasible technology is to pour tar into the ears of every citizen on earth.

And that really seems a bit intrusive.

Re:Maybe I'm a dim (2, Interesting)

Air-conditioned cowh (552882) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571449)

It's probably some kind of watermarking that may be just above or below the audio band or hidden using the spectral masking effect or something. I'm guessing here.

This is probably why MS is key in this. They effectively own most of the worlds home computers so, as far as most poor souls are concerned, they decide what the computer can and can't do on behalf of Macrovision.

This is great news for open source though because no one else's software is going to take the slightest bit of notice of any watermarking in the music or video.

Excellent! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571314)

My wife'll be all over anti-rip technology. She was just saying last night that if I let one more fart rip, I'd be sleeping alone.

This could help us. (2, Insightful)

Darthmalt (775250) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571332)

Wait until Ms. Soccer Mom finds out that she can't tape American Idol or survivor and Joe Sixpack cant tape the game while he works the late shift.

We may finally get the public outcry we need to get rid of the broadcast flag and it's ilk.

Re:This could help us. (2, Insightful)

Recovery1 (217499) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571387)

By the time that Soccer Mom and Joe Sixpack find they can't tape their favorite shows (assuming it ever got to that point), it would be too late.

Re:This could help us. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571462)

Would be nice if people read information on it before bitching about it. All it says is you can't record digital signal in the highest quality, you have to let it convert to a lower quality signal. For me personally I don't care because I'm not planning on getting hi-def until it's the only option left.

Macrovision (4, Interesting)

Matrix2110 (190829) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571418)

I would like to weigh in with a comment on these assholes.

Macrovision has been touting their "Secure" tech for a number of years.

It has been broken time and time again.

I have a hard time believing that Microstupid is dumb enough to buy into this.

After the early efforts to get a halfway good anti-spyware package together via the buying of Giant. They have to sink down to the low-lifes like Macrovision.

This is why I keep refusing the DRM "upgrades" to my media player 7.

Firefox just kicks IE up one side and down the other IMHO.

Put it this way, in the big trade shows. Macrovision employs a very humble booth.

I had such high hopes for the Bill Gates security speech.

Oh, well.

What do I say now? (2, Funny)

Hobadee (787558) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571489)

Well, normally I would make a comment stating that it's a bad thing to make a deal with the devil, however in this case, we have 2 devils making deals with each other.

Bob, Alice and Carol (3, Insightful)

colinleroy (592025) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571512)

Looks like they didn't listen well enough to Cary Doctorow explaining them the basics of cryptography. Cryptography is used to protect secrets exchanged by Bob and Alice and protect them from Carol's prying eyes. When the recipient of the message, Bob, is also the pirate, Carol, it means the pirate gets the cypher, the cypher text, and the key. As Doctorow explains, better than me, this simply cannot work, end of story.

time-base corrector (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571523)

Macrovision video "protection" is so easy to defeat, it's laughable. Go to Ebay, buy a time-base corrector, and--presto--no more Macrovision. Does anyone think that this stuff _really_ works?

Broadcast Issues (2, Insightful)

tarsi210 (70325) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571528)

The real problem with the broadcast flag is that no distributor is ever going to err on the side of openness. What modern company would? Look at the EULAs and contracts and so forth that companies pad themselves with in order to avoid frivolous lawsuits and issues with IP and ownership!

Do you really think that there are going to be lots of broadcasts conducted where the operators go, "Ya know, we probably don't need to prevent someone from recording this. Let it go."

No, we're screwed. Every program has at least something that the producer or the distributor will consider "theirs" and will therefore decide to limit it. Even something as simple as a logo overlay (a-la SciFi Channel, USA, et al) might be considered a "branding" and therefore something that would prevent redistribution. Probably the ONLY thing that would even come close to being open would be things like the State of the Union broadcast -- but even that would be considered proprietary, because it was a *particular* broadcast by a *particular* station with their *particular* boneheaded reporters struggling to come up with something intelligent to comment about.

I dunno. I just think the broadcast flag is a false sense of fairness when it'll turn out to be nothing but solid DRM that everyone will get screwed with.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>