Details Coming Out On Intel's DRM-On-Chip
from the it-won't-work dept
Andy Grove tried to coin his own law a couple weeks ago, declaring that "technology will always win." Of course, he doesn't explain who will win when technology goes up against technology. His former company may just find out. Stories started popping up last week that Intel's latest Pentium chip was going to include some sort of secret DRM technology built into the chip. This has been talked about in the past, but now it appears to be coming true, with a few details spelled out by Intel's VP of Technical Policy & Standards, who goes on and on about how important it is to protect content within a home network, and only throws in a nod to the entertainment industry at the very end by saying this: "enables greater consumer flexibility & use of premium entertainment content." First off, can we please stop claiming that copy protection "enables greater consumer flexibility?" By its very definition, it does the opposite. It limits flexibility. Second, like any DRM technology, this one won't work. People will figure out ways around it, and all of this content will still find its way to various file sharing networks just as quickly. So, it won't actually stop any content from being shared. However, it will probably annoy plenty of legitimate users who can't understand why the computer they bought won't do what they want it to do. Since when did Intel think it was necessary to bow to the entertainment industry at the chip level?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
No Subject Given
Seriously, what are these guys thinking?!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
AMD would have more at risk in integrating such a feature that will irritate some customers, since they don't have an 800-pound gorilla like Dell to pump out whatever they make regardless of specifications.
I've been holding off on buying new PCs for home until the dual-core chips are shipping in quantity. The Pentium D looked like a decent price point, and had been my plan because of the announced pricing of the AMD chips. However, if the AMD solutions avoid this nonsense, at least initially, AMD will get my money for the first time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ahhhh the Dell with this.
Would love to see both INTEL and DELL be taken down a notch as both are a bit to monopolistic (is that a word) at this time. Geeks understand that the AMD chip is an option; generally a better one; but most consumer's understand "I'm getting a Dell" ... ignorance is an incredible force for evil.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MUCH worse than it looks
(1) "The DRM on a chip" goes into wide use, controlling people's access to audio and video.
(2) A virus modifies the DRM logic, preventing all of its victims from accessing what they've bought.
Maybe that will lead to:
(3) The final overthrow of DRM.
Or maybe it will lead to:
(4) A million lawsuits against MSC for failing to prevent loss of acess to each person's media. A class action suit will not be necessary, as there will be an incredible number of people able to claim losses in the thousands.
- PB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]