Google Won't Let You Rent Movies If You Root Your Device
from the open? dept
For all the talk from the entertainment industry about how anti-copyright Google is, it's really quite amazing to see how the company seems to bend over backwards on most issues to please copyright holders at the expense of users. The latest is the news (submitted by a few folks) that Google's annoying movie rental offering won't work on rooted Android devices, because of Google's fear that it could get around the DRM of the movie service. Of course, this is silly. All of that content is already available from unauthorized sites. Purposely punishing those who want to buy but who use more open devices is pretty counterproductive.
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
Short sighted ...
That's really a shame as one of the first things I do is root all my Android devices. My EVO hasn't seen HTC Sense since day 1 and I have become a huge fan of cyanogen.
I wonder if this means that NetFlix and other types of content services will also stop working on rooted devices?
Freedom
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Short sighted ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Support reference
https://market.android.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1306490&topic=1100171
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Your money is no good here
Oh, but Jane can't pay to rent because her device is rooted. (Or what iPhone users call "jailbroken".)
The clear message is: go download your movie from somewhere else!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This has been my argument
This is exactly what I tell people and they just stare at me blankly. They haven't slowed down the pirates at all but sure do limit the paying customers options. Funny how they don't see the correlation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This has been my argument
Given that, if someone believes that X set of circumstances is unfair, or that they're entitled to "cheat" under Y set of circumstances, then Google has no reason to believe that they won't rationalize their way into cheating under other circumstances as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This has been my argument
You really don't know much about what you're talking about, do you? Have you ever even read the Apache and GPL licenses Android is licensed under?
Given that, if someone believes that X set of circumstances is unfair, or that they're entitled to "cheat" under Y set of circumstances, then Google has no reason to believe that they won't rationalize their way into cheating under other circumstances as well.
Given that if someone makes crap up about one thing, then there's no reason to believe that they won't about other things as well. Congratulations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: This has been my argument
The source may be "open", but the Samsung Super Epic X (or whatever) itself is locked down. Root it, and you violate the terms of your agreements.
That's the deal you signed when you bought the silly thing.
So no, coward, I'm not making up "crap"...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This has been my argument
"The Customer (hereforward known as 'The Mark') shall agree to not use his Fake Automobile Qompany (hereforward known as 'FAQ') product (hereforward known as 'vehicle we would like to pretend we still own') in any illegal act, including but not limited to: drive-by shootings, hit-and-run attacks, bank robberies, illegal speed racing, ramming cop cars, and checking out rival companies' products.
The Mark shall also agree not to have his vehicle we would like to pretend we still own checked, modified, fixed or sold at any dealer not officially licensed (hereforward known as 'suckers forced to pay silly money to have the license to do what any backstreet mechanic can do') to FAQ to do any authorised maintenance or system checks (hereforward known as 'rip-off look at the on-board computer'). Unauthorised maintenance of any kind will void this EULA and require The Mark to return the vehicle that we like to pretend we own to FAQ and forfeit all sums already paid on said vehicle that we like to pretend we still own.
Additionally, any form of access to the electronic subsystems of the vehicle that we like to pretend we still own (hereforward known as 'fake electric wires, sensors, lights and encryption a 2-year-old child could bypass') shall trigger the full authority of the DMCA, the MAFIAA and every single department of the DHS (hereforward known as 'our pals') and lead to you being publically labelled as a "pirate and pirate sympathiser" (hereforward known as 'person who has too much brains to have really bought our product but we had better treat all our customers like dirt just in case')."
To the eedjit, etc.
Do you see "Department of Health and (Social) Security" when you see "DHS"? I also keep mixing them up with "DFS", the sofa company that always runs half-price sales.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This has been my argument
Mine doesn't.
As does the typical manufacturer EULA.
Again, mine doesn't.
So no, coward, I'm not making up "crap"...
You did and you are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This has been my argument
Suddenly I'm a criminal just because I want to tinker around with my own hardware.
And from the free software community viewpoint, the use of DRM by Google's service shows that they couldn't care less about the spirit of free software licences that they purportedly propagate Android under. Plus the fact that the phone has been rooted doesn't necessarily mean that any agreement has been violated - although it may indicate that the user has the technical ability to get around other booby traps.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: This has been my argument
Like I said. Read your carrier service contract and your device EULA. I'll bet dollars to donuts that rooting your phone and installing "unauthorized" software is prohibited, and a violation of your agreement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This has been my argument
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This has been my argument
It is legal to jailbreak/root phones.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This has been my argument
I don't have Verizon, which you apparently do. According to my carrier service contract, I am free to do whatever I want to the phone, but my carrier will not support the phone if I do so. Says nothing about installing "unauthorized" software, and the device EULA just has the various open source licenses that I agree to follow.
Dude, Verizon is your problem. Go with a company that responds to its customers wishes and doesn't try to lock them into crazy and anti-customer contracts. I cannot believe people still use them. My parents bought new phones that specifically had GPS capability, only to find out that Verizon disabled the GPS they bought until they paid the $20/mo to activate it. My phone comes with GPS, and my carrier does nothing to disable it. I use it with third-party software all the time, and I've never heard them complain (except when I reinstalled the OS on my phone...I got a phone call from them asking me if the phone was having technical problems, and I told them that I just wanted to upgrade the software on the phone. They said no problem, and when I took it in for problems I was having they still supported the phone under warranty.)
Ditch your current provider...they just aren't worth it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This has been my argument
Please read my comment properly. Note the word "necessarily". One or two carriers may put in the clauses you mention, but they may not be legal in some states/countries, and other carriers don't do it.
Besides even if the contracts are legal - they are effectively agreed under duress and hence immoral.
I'm sure Jesus broke a few rules when he overturned the money changers tables in the Temple.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rooting
Michael, you make many assertions without any facts.
My carrier works for me. I don't work for them. I pay them, like I would any employee, and they provide the service I've contracted them for. No document gives them the legal right to dictate what I do with equipment I own. And they know that. You're the only one who doesn't seem to understand what's going on.
If you with to claim I am "violating my contract", you will need to provide a direct quote from that contract. Same with the mythical EULA you claim I violate.
The worst they can threaten me with is that I may "void my warranty". That's the extent of their powers in this matter -- and it's a pretty empty threat.
You think rooting is illegal in some way? It isn't. You claim it "violates my contract"? It doesn't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rooting
Actually, technically speaking, rooting an Android device could very well run afoul of the DMCA anti-reverse-engineering clauses. However, since iPhone jailbreaking has been granted a DMCA exception, I consider that to also cover Android devices. A clever (or very loud) lawyer would probably try to make the argument that the iPhone exception does not cover Android devices, much as they say it does not cover rooting gaming consoles.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Rooting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Rooting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This has been my argument
If you're correct, wouldn't that be exactly the sort of person who's already torrenting movies? Isn't that exactly the person who you might have an opportunity to convert from non-paying to a paying customer given a compelling service? Isn't it very very stupid to ensure any group of people don't have the ability to give you money?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google Profits
The same reasoning they cripple their Google Apps functionality. Force paying users to make additional purchases through the marketplace...
Because they profit when you rent the movie a second time?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Google Profits
"They"? Now who would that be? Google developers? Independent developers? Third party companies? Who? And are "they" all in on this conspiracy together?
"Cripple"? And how are they "crippling" their apps? Examples?
Nice troll. Now back it up with some facts. "Facts"? You know, examples that prove you are not totally full of *cough*BS*cough*.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Google Profits
The API's (Shared Contacts & Provisioning) provided as a 'work around', don't actually provide you with the tools you need to achieve this task. Unless you feel like hardcoding passwords and maintaining a static system...
The other 'work around' is to purchase a 3rd party app from... the google application marketplace... and hope the said 3rd party doesn't sell off your companies contact data.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just Say No To DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Placing artificial limits on normally unlimited technology is SOP for them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's no excuse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
In my opinion, it actually *is* a pretty good excuse. If they have to promise not to allow rooted phones access to that service in order to get the entertainment industry to come on board, I absolutely don't blame them. Furthermore, it's a completely ridiculous rule anyway, since by nature of being rooted, the device does not have to "admit" to being rooted, but can easily respond back as a regular unrooted device.
Rest assured, if any rooted user even wants this service (which I doubt), it will be available to them in less than a week after rollout.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Meanwhile, Google is being spat in the face by the same moneygrubbing entertainment industry-scum claiming that it's so anti-copyright.
Seems to be that Google is more like a masochist, who likes to be tortured and comes back for more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Why not place the blame where it really belongs? With the paranoid movie industry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'll go where there are no limitations on it and I don't have to watch piracy warnings at the start. Sounds fair to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perhaps Google has no choice: no DRM, no movies from the studios?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
What, do you really think they're being forced? Maybe the president of the MPAA is holding a gun to the head of Google's CEO or something? I doubt it.
no DRM, no movies from the studio
That's still a choice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Google Won't Let You Rent Movies If You Root Your Device"
Use Google to search for the torrent of your favorite movie title. Or The Pirate Bay, or.... ;D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Google Won't Let You Rent Movies If You Root Your Device"
The best way to get adults to act like a criminal is to treat them like one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "Google Won't Let You Rent Movies If You Root Your Device"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A different title for the article
The title for this article should be changed to 'Google Issues New Challenge to Android Developer Community.'
I would give full attribution to the commenter and/or the website that had the comment, but I don't remember either one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If Google was smart they would make their DRM so easily broken that all the end user has to do is side-load an app (should be easy for someone that has already rooted their phone) and it works. Google would still be holding up their end of the deal to the MPAA, the content has DRM...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blaming Google
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pure Logic
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh, The Irony ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Simple solution
Hurt Locker lawsuits against anyone and everyone?
People, the solution is not bittorrent. The solution is to do something else with your time! My family and I go out on the weekends. We play games with each other and friends. We go hiking. Visit friends. And you know what? I can rarely find the 2 hours to watch a movie! I fill my life with active activities rather than passively watching the next POS from Hollywood.
Here is a concept. Instead of spending the 2 hours/week watching a movie spend those 2 hours learning a new language. You will will be a much more interesting person.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rooting Devices
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rooting Android Device
[ link to this | view in chronology ]