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 to Become Mobile DRM Standard?

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the through-the-backdoor dept.

179

An anonymous reader writes "It seems most of the media has missed the significance of Microsoft's recent partnership with DoCoMo to put Windows Media DRM on i-mode handsets. If all the i-mode players adopt Windows DRM, that gives Microsoft access to a significant chunk of the mobile market. Couple this with the more recent MTV Urge announcement and you've got Microsoft set to own the DRM space - at least on mobile devices - by stealth. Telecoms.com has a take on the situation, but also reveals that the GSM Association may be on the verge of recommending Windows mobile DRM to all its members. Puts the French copyright and DRM legislation in a whole new perspective - interoperability issues can be solved by removing the competition."

cancel ×

179 comments

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

GNAA/loli-chan FP (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15342792)

lol! [lurkmore.com]

ACK! (5, Funny)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342801)

Microsoft, DRM and Standard in the same sentence!

Dude, be careful with your words, I almost had a heart attack...

Re:ACK! (1)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342832)

A nearby sentence also contained "MTV." I have to go stick pencils in my eyes, now. Bye-bye.

Re:ACK! (3, Insightful)

Ckwop (707653) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343320)

Microsoft, DRM and Standard in the same sentence!

Dude, be careful with your words, I almost had a heart attack...

Ahh yes, Microsoft must love this. This is the one standard where breaking interoperability is a feature rather than a bug!

Simon

Re:ACK! (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343616)

Yeah...but, a confusing article....took reading into the article to find out this was for a mobile 'what'. Mobile phone? Mobile music player.....etc. Are that many people really using their phones for music? iPod isn't good enough?

Also, what the hell is i-mode? Never heard of it and never saw a good definition of it.

Lastly, it had a blurb about MS's wmv format being the most popular format people used for music.....have they never heard of mp3?

Re:ACK! (1)

omglol (913666) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343554)

That's probably more a result of the Mountain Dew and cheeseburgers, though I suppose such an inflamatory article blurb could push you over the edge.

A _standard_ for DRM?! (5, Funny)

Bromskloss (750445) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342824)

Heh, looks kinda funny to see "standard DRM". While standard is all about being open, fair and compatible with others, DRM makes me think more about hiding in the dark, afraid of the light, keeping ones dirty secrets and trying to suppress the breathing of others. Doesn't come together.

Re:A _standard_ for DRM?! (3, Insightful)

Tx (96709) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342931)

While standard is all about being open, fair and compatible with others

Well, in reality it's just about the last of those three. But hey, one out of three aint bad ;)

Re:A _standard_ for DRM?! (1)

Maset (190867) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342932)

Where does a standard propriety?

Re:A _standard_ for DRM?! (1)

Maset (190867) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342973)

hmmm 'lessthan|greaterthan' symbol doesn't come up.

Where does a standard not equal proprietary?

Re:A _standard_ for DRM?! (1)

Tx (96709) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343045)

hmmm 'lessthan|greaterthan' symbol doesn't come up.

What? You mean the < and > sybols? You must be doing something wrong man ;)

Re:A _standard_ for DRM?! (1)

Maset (190867) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343117)

But when you juxtapose them slashcode must construe them as HTML

Re:A _standard_ for DRM?! (1)

LordOfTheNoobs (949080) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343621)

Type the HTML entities :: &gt; > :: &lt; < :: &amp; & :: etc

Nope. No MTV. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15342826)

MTV doesn't even play music. I don't expect them to sell music. MTV is a pointless marketing creation designed to push an image onto a line of mediocre products purchased willingly by an unsuspecting public with way too much money and zero common sense.

That's why I'm sticking with Apple.

Re:Nope. No MTV. (1)

MrHeartbreak (959513) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342903)

Apple? iTMS? 128Kb/s? Thanks, I'll wait.

Re:Nope. No MTV. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15342925)

MTV is a pointless marketing creation designed to push an image onto a line of mediocre products purchased willingly by an unsuspecting public with way too much money and zero common sense.

That's why I'm sticking with Apple.


You know you can replace MTV with Apple in the first paragraph and it still makes sense...

Re:Nope. No MTV. (1)

Moqui (940533) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342976)

Good point, but I will back up Apple because I have become acustom to iTMS and my iPod. With this new MTV venture, they have no track record to convince me to move formats. My guess is that I am not the only one that feels this way.

Re:Nope. No MTV. (1, Funny)

MooUK (905450) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342960)

Damnit, I spent my last mod point this morning. You need a funny.

Re:Nope. No MTV. (1)

The Lerneaen Hydra (885793) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342979)

I'm not sure what's funnier, that parent should be modded +4, Funny, or that parent was modded interesting.

Re:Nope. No MTV. (1)

creepynut (933825) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343005)

Funny or not, it's true.

Re:Nope. No MTV. (1)

The Lerneaen Hydra (885793) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343473)

The part about MTV is true, whereas the part about apple was much more in jest.

Re:Nope. No MTV. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15343011)

I sense some sarcasm in that post. If not meant to be it's pretty funny that it can be understood that way.

Re:Nope. No MTV. (1)

flyweight_of_fury (972871) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343054)

It isn't so much MTV as it is its communication powerhouse parent Viacom [cjr.org] ... Big V + M$ = Oh noes! Look out Apple!

Re:Nope. No MTV. (1)

amliebsch (724858) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343269)

Big V + M$ =

VMS! Everything old is new again!

Re:Nope. No MTV. (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343121)

MTV doesn't even play music. I don't expect them to sell music. MTV is a pointless marketing creation designed to push an image onto a line of mediocre products purchased willingly by an unsuspecting public with way too much money and zero common sense.


I have to say that is is one of the most refreshingly accurate descriptions of MTV I've yet come across.

Re:Nope. No MTV. (1)

BecomingLumberg (949374) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343128)

Have you seen the new M:HD? Its their new high def channel, and actually has lots of music, mainly entire concerts. Their programming is a bit limited right now, but they have some pretty good acts on there.

Re:Nope. No MTV. (1)

Generic Guy (678542) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343533)

Have you seen the new M:HD? Its their new high def channel, and actually has lots of music, mainly entire concerts. Their programming is a bit limited right now, but they have some pretty good acts on there.

Don't worry, I'm sure as soon as their studios get more HD cameras they'll buff out that limited programming schedule with plenty of HD:Real World, HD: True Life, and whole varieties of HD college-age bimbo game shows.

Re:Nope. No MTV. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15343147)

Wow! I feel the same way... About Apple!

Anyhoo, your opinion doesn't matter when millions of tweens say otherwise.

Neither M$ nor *AA get it . . . (0)

mmell (832646) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342833)

DRM is dead. Unfettered formats exist and are in widespread use. Try as they might, they can't unring the bell.

Neither M$ nor *AA get it -The quest for "IT!" (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15342871)

""It seems most of the media has missed the significance of Microsoft's recent partnership with DoCoMo to put Windows Media DRM on i-mode handsets. If all the i-mode players adopt Windows DRM, that gives Microsoft access to a significant chunk of the mobile market. "

They get "it" just fine. Question is; do you get "it"?

Re:Neither M$ nor *AA get it -The quest for "IT!" (1)

mmell (832646) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343401)

Just how popular do you suppose this device will be when a competing device (not encumbered by DRM) comes along.

Oh, gee . . . the DRM'ed version can handle WMV files, the non-DRM'ed version can only handle MP3's. Gee . . . I guess I'll get the DRM'ed version (even though virtually all of my music is in MP3's). Gotta be able to handle that Microsoft proprietary format!

Nope. Unless this device can also handle unencumbered media, I predict a short, painful death.

Re:Neither M$ nor *AA get it -The quest for "IT!" (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343595)

Sadly, it won't be like that.

Instead it will be like, I can get this with regular stuff but if i buy this microsoft enhanced version i can get this too wich isn't avalible any other way.

Now all they need to do is find something people want and lock it into DRMed media. It shouldn't be hard seeing how people have been told what they want with some deal of success for years now.

Re:Neither M$ nor *AA get it . . . (5, Insightful)

PFI_Optix (936301) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342872)

DRM is far from dead. Right now, they're trying to make it harder to create, distribute, and find pirated material implementing those unfettered formats. What they need to be doing is making DRM-enabled content affordable, accessible, and useable.

What the industry needs is good, common-sense DRM. Today's DRM doesn't allow for things going public domain. It's not flexible enough to allow users to do what they want (and is legal) with what they paid for. They are presently erring on the side of profit...that's not going to work with consumers long-term.

Re:Neither M$ nor *AA get it . . . (4, Interesting)

dpilot (134227) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342966)

If I had pile$ of money, it seems to me that there's a Constitutional case here that could play before the Supremes.

Regardless of any specific time limit, be it "eternity - 1 day," the Constitution says that patents and copyrights last a limited time. DRM incorporates NO expiration mechanism, whatsoever. The reason for wanting DRM is that "bits last forever". If so, then those bits will outlast their copyright. The DRM needs to expire, and currently doesn't.

Therefore, current DRM is unconstitutional.

Re:Neither M$ nor *AA get it . . . (1)

bheer (633842) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343124)

Hmm, that's actually a good idea. I wonder if they'll try to weasel out of it by saying you can try reverse-engineering it when its copyright expires?

Re:Neither M$ nor *AA get it . . . (1)

dpilot (134227) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343276)

In that case, the DMCA would need a clause allowing reverse engineering of DRM on expired works. Obvious flaw - since the DRM hasn't changed, you've just reverse-engineered the DRM on non-expired works, as well. Its just plain simple, to be consistent with the Constitution of the United States, DRM needs a copyright expiration mechanism.

Re:Neither M$ nor *AA get it . . . (1)

amliebsch (724858) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343286)

That's a loser of a case, because there's nothing in the Constitution or any law I know of that makes it illegal to encumber public domain materials. You just can't stop anyone else from unencumbering them.

Re:Neither M$ nor *AA get it . . . (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15343309)

Bullshit. DRM is based on encryption. It is therefore limited by how long it would take to brute-force the encryption key. It is therefore, by definition, time limited and not eternal. The DRM on DVDs is worthless because the effective number of bits in the key was brought down to the point where it can now be brute-forced in a reasonable amount of time. Therefore, movies are now traded on the Internet due the DRM scheme on DVDs becoming effectively obsolete.

DRM isn't eternal. It lasts until computers become powerful enough to be capable of brute-forcing it. Your argument holds no water.

Re:Neither M$ nor *AA get it . . . (3, Insightful)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342890)

DRM is dead. Unfettered formats exist and are in widespread use. Try as they might, they can't unring the bell.
Maybe so, in the long run, though I'm not as optimistic as you are. In the short-run, the people who make lots of money controlling distribution of content like DRM, and will do everything they can to get it adopted in order to continue to profit from that control, and lots of people will go along because it will be the easiest way to get access to the most popular media content.

Re:Neither M$ nor *AA get it . . . (2, Insightful)

JWW (79176) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343065)

Maybe so, in the long run, though I'm not as optimistic as you are. In the short-run, the people who make lots of money controlling distribution of content like DRM, and will do everything they can to get it adopted in order to continue to profit from that control, and lots of people will go along because it will be the easiest way to get access to the most popular media content.

And as they try and invent this future they miss out on the massive amount of money they could make by just giving up on DRM and creating a fair market for digital music. Their insistance to DRM will ensure that illegal copies survive. They have to make illegal downloading not worth it in comparison and the wasy to do that is to make legal downloading easier, not harder (read DRM enbumbered up the wazoo).

Neither M$ nor *AA get it-Legalizing Gimme Gimme (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15343163)

"They have to make illegal downloading not worth it in comparison and the wasy to do that is to make legal downloading easier, not harder (read DRM enbumbered up the wazoo)."

And the way to eliminate murder is to make it easier, not harder.

Hate to say it (3)

Blinocac200sx (955087) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342835)

but I think it'll be a good thing. Mostly because I'd like to see some kind of set standard, so I can listen to my music from any service on any player. Thats not too much to ask, right?

Re:Hate to say it (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15342942)

... and I think Macs and Linux should be outlawed because I want be able to run my apps from any software provider on any computer. That's not too much to ask, right?

Oh yeah, sun workstations, too. I never could run those damn solaris binaries...

Re:Hate to say it (1)

Blinocac200sx (955087) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343158)

Thats really a very poor analogy.

One Standard to Rule Them All? (1)

Infonaut (96956) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343430)

...I'd like to see some kind of set standard, so I can listen to my music from any service on any player.

No DRM at all seems like a better set standard than one particular flavor of DRM, don't you think?

However, even if there were no DRM, there would still be competition between music providers. MP3 would be the standard format, but AAC, Ogg Vorbis, et al would be offered by different music stores. Basically, I don't know that it's possible to have one Holy Grail Music Format. The days of the phonograph and cassette tape are dead, because computer technology has opened up format competition.

Now that the cat is out of the bag, I don't see how it can be put back in, except by settling on some sort of anti-competitive monopoly standard, which as we've seen with Windows, isn't such a good thing for competition or for consumers.

Oh, nicely done! (1)

Crash Culligan (227354) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343605)

Hate to say it, but I think it'll be a good thing. Mostly because I'd like to see some kind of set standard, so I can listen to my music from any service on any player. Thats not too much to ask, right?

Excellent work, sir! That was some wickedly subdued sarcasm! I look forward to the flamewar the misunderstanding of that statement spawns downthread.

It's true (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15342843)

Bush is gay

Re:It's true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15342998)

But he still won't give you the loving you so crave. Sucks, don't it?

Oh no! (1)

Pichu0102 (916292) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342852)

Microsoft will gain control over the market of 5 people that like DRM!
Quick, someone sue them for monopolisic practices!

Does Microsoft NOT know they should be attempting to distance themselves from DRM?

Re:Oh no! (3, Insightful)

macpeep (36699) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343012)

I think the success of the iTunes Music Store has shown that people don't care too much about DRM as long as it is transparent enough. Look at what URGE will offer. 9.95 for unlimited music. Anything you want. For those not willing to break the law to pirate music, or too lazy to do so, or both (this third category includes me) this is an awesome deal. For just 10 bucks a month, it's as if my music collection was essentially infinite. I don't care if I don't "own" the music. Why should I? For movies, it makes even more sense (because the replay value is much lower than for music) to have some sort of subscription-type system so that you just pay a flat fee per month and have unlimited access to unlimited movies. But to have such systems (either music or movies) be viable, it has to be protected so that you can't just have one person be a subscriber and then that person can copy the stuff to the whole world. That's just a fact of life. Because people can't be trusted NOT to copy, there has to be some system to prevent it. Or at least prevent it for the "casual user" that won't go jump hoops to crack it. I think it was Steve Jobs who said "to keep the honest people honest".

The future will have DRM in the main-stream whether you like it or not. Of course you can always choose to get your media through some other channels, but if you think that "5 people" (obviously you didn't mean it literally) will be using DRM at the end of 2006, then you are seriously mistaken.

Peppe

Re:Oh no! (1)

geoffspear (692508) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343016)

And those 5 people have each spent millions of dollars buying songs from iTunes, presumably also buying the not-widely-known 500GB iPod Macro?

The number of people who care enough about DRM to boycott it is far closer to 5 than the number of people who are willing to buy DRMed content is.

Re:Oh no! (1)

FellowConspirator (882908) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343241)

There's an ever increasing number of people that won't purchase or use Microsoft products of their own volition. If the average consumer won't buy your product, market it to an industry infatuated with itself (the recording and movie industries) who is already making money despite their contempt for their clientele.

Personally, I think it's a brilliant strategy on the part of Microsoft. They've spent billions on developing an underwhelming polished turd of an OS (VISTA) that they may never see a profit on, but they spend pennies on a DRM scheme and sell it at a zillion-fold mark-up to an industry richer than Croesus that couldn't tell DRM from a hole in the ground (much less deduce that it's a waste of time and money that cuts into their net profit).

Go-go gadget marketing!

rohypnol (2, Funny)

towsonu2003 (928663) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342866)

so this is how Microsoft flirts [slashdot.org] with open source :)

What a bitch! (1)

babbling (952366) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343131)

Microsoft has been fucking the RIAA *and* the MPAA behind our back!

This sounds like their old haibts. (1)

mikesd81 (518581) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342869)

If all the i-mode players adopt Windows DRM, that gives Microsoft access to a significant chunk of the mobile market.

Won't the government have a problem with this? Again they're squeezing out the competition due to it's monopoly status? Of course all companies can compete with each other, but when you get into the power that MS has and you start essentially killing off competition, well that's just wrong.

Re:This sounds like their old haibts. (1)

PFI_Optix (936301) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342915)

If Microsoft's DRM becomes the industry standard, that's hardly a monopoly. It's like saying the makers of QWERTY keyboards are killing off the makers of alternatives like Dvorak.

Re:This sounds like their old haibts. (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343130)

That's not comparable. Any text you can type with QWERTY you can type with Dvorak. However music encoded with MS DRM cannot be decoded with any other DRM.

Re:This sounds like their old haibts. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15343327)

Are you seriously arguing that there isn't enough competition in DRMing our shit? Are you out of your fucking mind?

Re:This sounds like their old haibts. (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343367)

Did you even read the post I replied to?

Re:This sounds like their old haibts. (1)

IflyRC (956454) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342920)

Doubtful. Apple and it's DRM that is in use for iTunes and the iPod will be a huge competitor. You can't argue monopoly when, if anyone, Apple holds the significant market share.

It's 1996 (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15343021)

"Netscape and its HTML Rendering Engine will be a huge competitor. You can't argue monopoly when, if anyone, Netscape holds the significant market share."

...We're talking about Microsoft leveraging its monopoly power to diminish Apple's strength as competition in this area. And the U.S. D.O.J.--as it is currently staffed--won't do a damn thing to stop it from happening and/or punish Microsoft after the damage has been done.

Windows DRM coming to a Linux handset near you! (1)

CockMonster (886033) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342897)

Hardy har har har!

Apple's answer to DRM (4, Funny)

Douglas Simmons (628988) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342909)

Of all the DRM tools I've encountered, the one that struck me as being most effective has got to be Apple's "Please don't steal music" sticker.

Re:Apple's answer to DRM (1)

WankersRevenge (452399) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343000)

Why? Has there been a notable decrease in shoplifting in your area?

Re:Apple's answer to DRM (1)

creepynut (933825) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343141)

For me at least, there's less incentive to avoid them. Rather than all the DVDs that I've purchased/rented recently (not many mind you) that accuse me of being a thief before the menu even shows up. Apple is high on my list for not getting in my way of doing what I want to do. "Please don't steal music" is nice. "You wouldn't steal a car? Why would you steal movies? Stealing is a crime" Mind you, that isn't an exact quote, the second one, but it's pretty close. It feels like the "ad" is accusing me of stealing, nothing more than a guilt trip, when the only "crime" I've committed is giving my money to the people who produced the disc.

Forgot to set to plain text... (1)

creepynut (933825) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343166)

Sorry about the formatting there..

Re:Apple's answer to DRM (1)

ghost of perception (974605) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343223)

I've actually seen a sign like that in a shop in Edinburgh (UK.) It reads "Karma is Real so Please Don't Steal from us"

Microsoft mounting the wrong horse (2, Insightful)

Starker_Kull (896770) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342924)

Boy, they know how to pick a loser. Assuming the carriers go along with this, all Microsoft will have is domination over a standard that nobody will want to use. DRM is annoying enough when it comes to file transfers on computers. Can you imagine how annoying it will be with phones? Will your files survive your phone dropping into the toilet? Or will they be easily transferable to a new phone with the same mobile number assigned to it? You know the answer - and of course, you won't be able to redownload files you've paid for.

It's interesting to see what they waste brainspan and dollars on.

Re:Microsoft mounting the wrong horse (1)

Tx (96709) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342993)

and of course, you won't be able to redownload files you've paid for.

Of course that's down to the vendors. I've bought a fair few DRM'd Microsoft Reader ebooks, and the main vendors do allow you to redownload those, for example. It should be a legal requirement for all vendors of DRM'd media files to do that IMHO, but I guess that's about as likely as a very unlikely thing.

Re:Microsoft mounting the wrong horse (1)

Starker_Kull (896770) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343120)

Of course that's down to the vendors. I've bought a fair few DRM'd Microsoft Reader ebooks, and the main vendors do allow you to redownload those, for example. It should be a legal requirement for all vendors of DRM'd media files to do that IMHO, but I guess that's about as likely as a very unlikely thing.
Very true - and you make a real good point. If a vendor wants to lock-up a file with DRM, meaning that you have bought the rights to VIEW something instead of OWN something, then they should also be responsible for fixing problems that occur when you can no longer VIEW the content due to technical problems.... sadly, I feel we are dreaming. We need some congresspeople to actually possess a large collection of DRM'ed material and have it all wiped by a technical glitch before they are likely to notice the problem. What this probably requires is new, younger congressfolk! (Apologies to the older folk who are with it - but this is a generational thing)

Knee-jerk misconceptions (2, Interesting)

GringoGoiano (176551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343221)

I've been using Microsoft DRM with the Napster subscription service for over a year now on an iRiver H10 hard-drive device. You can't beat the convenience and the price -- the cost of a single CD per month for lots of great music.

It's such a good model I even bought four more iRiver devices for others.

To clarify some points in the original comment:

  • you can download files multiple times (unlike Apple iTunes where you download a file only once and need to copy to other devices)
  • it's easy to transfer to multiple mobile devices with Windows Media Player
  • there is a limit on how many total times a file can be downloaded, but when I had to wipe a hard drive and re-install the OS on a particular machine a quick call to Napster got me past that issue -- they'll work with you

The pricing and model beats iTunes. Many, many services will end up using Microsoft DRM. When people wake up and look beyond the fatuous Apple image to practical realities, Microsoft DRM will come out the winner.

Re:Knee-jerk misconceptions (0, Flamebait)

BVis (267028) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343297)

Is it just me or does this post sound like "marketing shill" to anyone else?

Re:Knee-jerk misconceptions (1)

el cisne (135112) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343403)

"The pricing and model beats iTunes. Many, many services will end up using Microsoft DRM. When people wake up and look beyond the fatuous Apple image to practical realities, Microsoft DRM will come out the winner."

Well, maybe fine for you and others, but for me...my own personal "practical reality" is that there is no way in hell I am gonna pay a monthly subscription fee. No frakkin way. It has absolutely nothing to do with cutesy products, what the 16-25 year old set think is hot, the color of the headphones. I don't know of any other unquestionably legal service that will 1) let me only pay when I want to 'buy' something, and 2) will work on our non-Windows machines.

Re:Knee-jerk misconceptions (1)

Starker_Kull (896770) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343410)

I've been using Microsoft DRM with the Napster subscription service for over a year now on an iRiver H10 hard-drive device. You can't beat the convenience and the price -- the cost of a single CD per month for lots of great music. It's such a good model I even bought four more iRiver devices for others. To clarify some points in the original comment: you can download files multiple times (unlike Apple iTunes where you download a file only once and need to copy to other devices) it's easy to transfer to multiple mobile devices with Windows Media Player there is a limit on how many total times a file can be downloaded, but when I had to wipe a hard drive and re-install the OS on a particular machine a quick call to Napster got me past that issue -- they'll work with you The pricing and model beats iTunes. Many, many services will end up using Microsoft DRM. When people wake up and look beyond the fatuous Apple image to practical realities, Microsoft DRM will come out the winner.
Funny, I didn't mention Apple at all in my original post. Got an inferiority complex going there? ;)
My point was DRM in general is a pain, and Microsoft has a pretty consistent history of keeping it painful. You are right, I shouldn't pre-judge what they will actually do, but history makes me skeptical. And I like NO DRM, Apple, Microsoft, or otherwise.

Re:Knee-jerk misconceptions (0, Flamebait)

Evangelion (2145) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343546)


So how many posts do you have to make a day to meet your quota?

Just curious, I'd like a job shilling if I'm ever layed off.

Building your own cellphone (4, Interesting)

btarval (874919) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342930)

Since there's been no coverage of this outside of Silicon valley and the San Jose Mercury News, let me point out that people are starting to build their own cellphones. [revejo.org]

Let the media giants DRM what they want. They'll only succeed in pushing people to other alternatives.

Re:Building your own cellphone (1)

plopez (54068) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343087)

Until it gets banned. Because, as you know, terrorists and drug runners will want custom phones with custom encryption on them. Or so they will tell people, and most of the sheep will just buy it; hook, line and sinker...

Re:Building your own cellphone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15343389)

Considering that you can attach these GSM chips to your PC via a USB interface, it's going to be quite hard to ban these. The only real alternative is to kill the GSM chip industry, and that's unlikely to happen.

Nokia Linux to the rescue (1)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342939)

come on Finland !!

http://explorer.altopix.com/map/lqoqnr/Nokia_Headq uarters.htm [altopix.com]

damn, wait

http://www.engadget.com/2005/02/14/nokia-and-micro soft-get-friendly-over-windows-media/ [engadget.com]

Nokia ... revealed their plans to add support for Windows Media Audio files, Windows Media DRM 10 and Media Transfer Protocol to their handsets.

Could be good (1, Interesting)

GrouchoMarx (153170) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342957)

OK, hear me out before you string me up...

1) MS is a monopoly. Legally defined as such in the US, and I believe EU now as well.

2) MS gets DRM monopoly through wheeling and dealing.

3) Competitors cry anti-competative behavior.

4) A non-corporate-stooge-necon is elected US President. (Let's hope for this anyway, regardless of MS, but I digress...)

5) DoJ sues MS yet again, forces them to open Windows DRM. With a non-stooge in office, they bother to enforce it this time.

6) Open DRM is by definition ineffective. Thus the monopoly DRM system is now effectively useless, as forced by the DoJ.

7) Profit.

OK, so it's a stretch, but a guy can wish, can't he? There's got to be some good news for people who give a damn about freedom.

Re:Could be good (1)

towsonu2003 (928663) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343018)

4) A non-corporate-stooge-necon is elected US President.
you forgot to add the /sarcasm attribute to your argument...

You lost me at #4 (1)

spun (1352) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343339)

A non-corporate-stooge-necon is elected US President. might as well wish for a magical unicorn from happy land. Oh wait. Did I parse that wrong? Okay, is it (non-corporate-stooge)-necon or non-(corporate-stooge-necon)? Because the first doesn't exist. If you meant the second, I agree, but it really wasn't clear.

Re:You lost me at #4 (1)

GrouchoMarx (153170) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343627)

Ha! Yes, I did mean "!(corporate stooge neocon)". I was referencing the fact that in 1999-2000, the DoJ had MS on the ropes and on the verge of being broken up. The first act of the Bush DoJ was to tell Microsoft "bad boy, don't do it again, now go back to business as usual."

Re: MS + DRM = GPS-DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15343462)

The most likely technical enhancements Micorosft will make to DRM is embellishment with GPS tracking technology to ensure the MS name (Maximum Surveillance) is earned by every device with the MS label.

That's Fine.... (3, Insightful)

eander315 (448340) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342961)

Use all the Microsoft DRM you'd like, I'm not buying that device.

Another great decision from post-Gates-era MS (5, Funny)

kahei (466208) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342978)


Brilliant. By partnering with bloated, overprotected, "Hey, our shares cost 3 million yen each so the hoi polloi can't buy them" merchants DoCoMo, inventors of the phone-that-is-mostly-only-big-in-Japan, MS have gained a foothold in the crucial 'things that people actively want to not have' market.

Next up, a partnership with Freddy Krueger to gain a foothold in the 'things that shoot razor blades into your hand when you pick them up market'. Followed by a partnership with the earth's ferrous core (a major player in minerals circles) to get into the 'things that are thousands of miles below the earth's surface and vaporize human flesh on contact' market.

And of course, a strong position in the market for technologies that customers actually pay to avoid could also lead to other key advantages, such as losing money (investors are always suspicios of cash-heavy companies) and being widely ridiculed (a new, positive, clown-like image).

'DRM market space', yeesh. Make some forking products already. Where's my sub $100 tablet PC?

OK, let me try to make sense of this... (2)

acvh (120205) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342987)

A Japanese mobile telecomm provider will use Microsoft's DRM on its phones.

Therefore all other DRM systems, portable music players, and Apple, will cease to exist?

Hell, I still can't find anyone who listens to music on their phone.

Re:OK, let me try to make sense of this... (1)

ran-o-matic (667054) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343208)

This is off-topic, but: I listen to music on my phone every day. It's a 6700 that has MS Media Play 10 built-in, but I never use that MS junk. I use TCPMP - it works great.

That's going to be one big battery (2)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 8 years ago | (#15342996)

When people aren't listening to music, they'll need a good charge in case they have to make a long phone call. I think that is reason enough to not worry about "one device to rule them all."

We've gone back to books. (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15343037)

I recently rented a DVD for my family and I to watch. We have our DVD player attached to one of those combined VHS/TV televisions. Apparently the Macrovision copy protection on the DVD prevented it from playing very well. The picture would brighten and darked repeatedly. We weren't even recording onto a VHS tape, so we aren't sure why we had problems.

Regardless, we promptly returned the DVD to the video shoppe, and went to the library. My son and daughters each selected a number of books, as did my wife and I. For the past few weeks, we have been reading instead of watching TV or movies. To be frank, we are far happier. It costs us far less, and the quality of the content is often far higher. We often learn, rather than mindlessly digest.

I wish to thank those who advocate the use of DRM. It has successfully turned us away from using such products, back towards books. We are far better off for that.

Re:We've gone back to books. (1)

babbling (952366) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343192)

Thanks for this post. Allow me to explain...

Recently, me and my girlfriend were at the cinemas, looking for a movie to watch. We noticed that there was nothing on except for V for Vendetta (which we had already seen) appealed to us. We almost decided to see a movie just for the heck of it, despite this, but I pointed out that we were seeing a movie even though everything on looked crap.

We ended up not seeing a movie, but we'll surely run into this same problem again. You've inspired me to next time get some books and go somewhere to read those, instead. I haven't read a book in a while.

And in a related note... (3, Informative)

hullabalucination (886901) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343357)

I recently took the $300/year I would have probably spent on commercial music this year and spent it on a new guitar instead, and started playing again in earnest (after about 10 years of on-again, off-again).

I've been extremely disappointed with 90% of the albums I've purchased over the past decade. One half-way decent song and 7 to 9 other Contractual Obligatory Offerings for $13.95 is just way too out of line with market realities. I guess I'm the last person on the planet who doesn't own an iPod (actually, I've been told there's another person in Mauritania who also doesn't own one), so I'm not buying my music alacarte. I'm not sure that even if I could purchase by the song I would find enough good stuff to be satisified with the Standard Product coming out of the music industry these days.

On the plus side: playing music makes you smarter (pretty sure I've read that research has indicated this; back in the 70's, IBM used to use programming aptitude tests that looked closely at musical skills as an indicator of possible programming aptitude in non-programmers), it's a great stress-reliever and no matter how bad you are as a musician, you'll never be as bad as The White Stripes.

Seriously, though, several friends have told me that an hour of me for free is a better deal than 42:30 of Beck at any price. I tell them to bring the beer and everybody's happy.

Nokia (1)

traveller604 (961720) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343082)

I think N91 was delayed because they wanted to make it work with WMP11 and the DRM thingy. Anyways I'm very happy with my phone :D

Standards? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15343160)

What happened to the idea of all the big boys sitting down and drawing up somethings? What about governments sitting down and saying we need something?

Surely the model of the internet working as it does sets some level that we can aspire to in other markets?

There already are DRM standards "in the wild". (2, Insightful)

Hast (24833) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343194)

Funny thing is that the article seem to miss one small point. They talk about how Microsoft *may* become a standard on DoCoMos FOMA networks. The thing is that the OMA DRM specification already exist and run on millions of phones in Europe. (And anywhere else which has GSM/UMTS phones.)

I fail to see how this new architecture can hope to jump in and replace something which has already been in use for a couple of years.

Of course a lot of people probably don't realise that they have DRM on their phones.

Well, that's alright then (0, Troll)

A nonymous Coward (7548) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343224)

Microsoft owns the mobile DRM space? Great! Now they will fuck it up like they fuck up everything else, it won't even be marginally functional until release 3.1, and that will take them years. Everybody will hate it and its bugs and misfeatures, it won't work, content factories will come to realize DRM doesn't restrict anything except their ability to attract new customers, and DRM will get the bloody black eye it deserves.

That's alright then.

Leveraging monopolies, to create more monopolies (3, Insightful)

guidryp (702488) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343258)

This really isn't a surprise. Just business as usual. Microsoft has vast monopoly power that will allow it to gain monopolies in any emerging computing connected/related device.

PDA's previously owned by Palm, will soon be a microsoft monopoly.

Gaming. Sony faces the biggest threat ever and yet managed to make incredibly stupid moves that will make the move to microsoft gaming domination even faster. Microsoft is using it's clout with gaming house/publishers and outright buying them if all else fails. The end is microsoft will dominate console gaming. Only when is the question, not if.

Media. Microsoft is agressively pusing it's DRM/codecs everywhere. It managed to get it's codecs into both HD-DVD and Blu Ray standards. It has just about every online media shop except Itunes. Itunes is an anomoly and it will be interesting to see how weathers the microsoft onslaught. I predict in 10 years. More than half the music sold will be using microsoft DRM.

Re:Leveraging monopolies, to create more monopolie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15343578)

This is a very astute observation. How can anyone involved in antitrust not come to the conslusion that Microsoft is 8,000 times more a monololy today than it was when the trial was determining whether MS Office and Windows constituted a monopoly? Then, the issue of servers and devices were not even factors. Now that MS represents a quasi-governmental agency with total disregard for business ethics and consumer privacy, there is little chance that the antitrust laws that all other businesses have to abide by will be applied to MS.

Independent Company (1)

Midnight Thunder (17205) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343497)

If we have to have DRM, then I for one would feel much more comfortable if it was an indepdent company, where DRM was their only line of business. This way you could feel safe that you don't have companies like Microsoft and Apple with what would appear to be a conflict of interest.

MS! (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | more than 8 years ago | (#15343540)

Making the trains run on time!
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>