Apple Wants To Make DRM Extortion Explicit

from the fair-use-costs-extra dept

For years, DRM critics have been arguing that the technology isn't so much about stopping piracy as it is about taking away traditional fair use privileges and then selling them back to you. I've agreed with this for a while, but I never thought I'd see a major DRM vendor admit it so candidly: Steve Jobs has apparently been pitching Hollywood studios on the idea of selling "premium" DVDs that include an iTunes-compatible version of the movie. For an extra $3 or $4, you can buy the privilege of playing your legally-purchased movie on the device of your choice—well, the Apple-manufacturered device of your choice, anyway. Only the DMCA makes this kind of extortion possible. Tools like HandBrake make it possible to convert a DVD to an iPod-compatible format without any help from Apple, but Handbrake is an illegal "circumvention device" under the DMCA. Compare that to the CD, which was developed long before the DMCA and comes without copy protection. The courts have held that "space-shifting" your CDs to a portable music device is a fair use. So you can legally import your CD collection to your iPod, or any other device, without paying a penny. But Steve Jobs apparently wants to charge you $4 for the privilege of doing the same with your DVDs.

Filed Under: business models, drm, itunes
Companies: apple

If Microsoft's WGA Is So Successful... Why Change It So Completely?

from the not-quite-so-successful,-huh? dept

Microsoft's Windows Genuine Advantage program has been nothing if not controversial. The anti-piracy system tries to determine if you're using an unauthorized version of Windows, which it will then disable. That works great for Microsoft if it's actually catching unauthorized copies -- but the problem is that it was catching an awful lot of legitimate users at the same time, causing plenty of damage in the process. However, Microsoft has continued to stand by WGA, and just last week the Associated Press ran an article highlighting what a huge success WGA has been, not only in slowing piracy, but in encouraging others that similar means could be useful in slowing piracy elsewhere.

Perhaps that article was a bit premature. The Associated Press is now running a new article about some fairly significant changes that Microsoft is making to WGA, including that it will no longer disable copies of Windows that do not pass the WGA test. Instead, it will just make those copies annoying, by making the wallpaper black and putting a white notice on the screen alerting the user to the fact that his or her copy is unauthorized. Every time the user logs in and once an hour a reminder will pop up, asking the user to buy a legitimate copy. However, it will continue to work. And, if a user does decide to buy a legit copy, he or she will get a 50% discount... meaning that if you want to buy a legit copy, you're now better off pirating a version and then buying a legit replacement. So, for all that talk of how successful WGA has been, it appears that the collateral damage of effectively bricking many computers simply wasn't worth it. Those rushing to implement similar solutions to WGA after last week's article may want to think again.

Filed Under: drm, piracy, wga, windows genuine advantage
Companies: microsoft

Hollywood DRM Hasn't Stopped Piracy, But It Has Boosted the Antiguan Economy

from the prohibition-doesn't-work dept

We've noted for a while that just like every other DRM scheme, the AACS copy protection scheme at the heart of both the HD-DVD and Blu-Ray formats accomplishes little more than irritating paying customers. The system got cracked within months of its release, and the studios have been playing a losing game of cat and mouse with hackers ever since. The AACS system is more ambitious than previous copy protection systems in that it attempts to control not just players but also any device connected with the player. If you try to play an AACS-protected disc on an unapproved TV, the player is required to reduce the quality of the video, or refuse to play the video altogether. As a consequence, there are a lot of customers out there who would like to play their legally-purchased movies on their legally-purchased TVs, but whose legally-purchased HD-DVD or Blu-Ray players refuse to cooperate.

Ed Felten notes that the limited functionality of the official players has created a market for software that will allow them to play their movies on "unapproved" hardware. And thanks to the DMCA, such players cannot be legally developed in the United States. So not surprisingly, overseas firms are taking up the slack. One of the leaders is Antigua-based Slysoft, which makes the AnyDVD HD software. It advertises that its software will allow users to "watch movies over a digital display connection, without HDCP compliant graphics card and HDCP compliant display." There's a basic lesson here about the economics of prohibition. As Hollywood develops ever-more-elaborate and restrictive copy protection schemes, those copy-protection schemes come to inconvenience more and more customers. That, in turn, creates a larger market for circumvention software, prompting software companies to invest more in developing more powerful and user-friendly tools for removing copy protection. All Hollywood has accomplished, in other words, is providing a small boost to the overseas software industry.

Filed Under: drm

Music Retailers Beg Recording Industry To Drop DRM

from the who-is-it-helping? dept

We've already seen more and more musicians tells the recording industry to drop DRM policies that hurt the consumer. And, of course, we know that consumers prefer non-DRM'd music (which sorta goes without saying). Now even music retailers are wondering what the recording industry is thinking. A group of UK retailers have banded together to urge the industry to drop DRM altogether in order to help boost holiday sales this year. Of course, in the past, we've seen the recording industry insist DRM was needed to protect both the artists and the retailers -- but it certainly looks like both are finally realizing what many have said all along: the only thing that DRM "protects" (and it does a piss poor job of it) is the obsolete business model of the record labels.

Filed Under: drm, recording industry, retailers

'Open DRM' Is Snake-oil

from the oxymoron dept

A Pioneer spin-off called SyncTV has launched. Consumers will apparently be able to subscribe to "channels" of content, and eventually you'll be able to play those channels on a variety of devices around the home, as well as portable devices. So far, it looks like little more than vaporware, as their public website doesn't have any real details about pricing, supported devices, etc. What really irritates me about the coverage of the launch is the description of Marlin as an "open-source DRM system." This phrase is a contradiction in terms, and anyone who claims their DRM scheme is open source, or based on open standards, is either confused or trying to mislead. For a product to be considered open source, not only must the source code be publicly available, but there can't be any legal restrictions on the modification and re-distribution of the product. On the other hand, DRM works by ensuring that approved devices won't perform certain operations, such as converting content to an unencrypted format. The two sets of requirements obviously can't be reconciled. SyncTV's site phrases things slightly differently, describing its platform as "completely based on open standards." But this, too, is deceptive. An open standard is one that anyone is free to implement without asking for permission. HTML is an open standard: you don't need a license from the W3C to create a new web browser. On the other hand, a DRM scheme requires a licensing authority to verify that each new device to verify that it complies with the rules of the DRM scheme. And we've seen incumbents use this approval process (and the DMCA, which gives it the force of law) to squash innovative competitors that threaten their business models. Marlin could turn out to be marginally better than some existing DRM schemes if it employs less restrictive licensing terms. But it's still a DRM scheme, and that means there's nothing "open" about it.

Filed Under: drm, open drm
Companies: pioneer, synctv

News Flash: Consumers Prefer DRM-Free Music

from the no-brainer dept

The evidence that consumers like DRM-free music just keeps pouring in. The latest is a story from 7 Digital, a small online music store in the UK, which is reporting that DRM-free formats are outselling DRM-encumbered formats by a 4-to-1 margin. This isn't too surprising, given that DRM-encumbered music sold by anyone other than Apple won't play on the iPod, the world's most popular portable music player. Obviously, when given a side-by-side choice, the vast majority of consumers are going to choose the format that works everywhere. I suspect that name recognition is also a factor in MP3's favor: almost everyone has heard of MP3s, so someone who doesn't know anything else about digital formats or DRM is going to go with MP3 as a trusted "brand." One other interesting point in the article is that 7 Digital now has 60 percent of its music available in DRM-free formats, and expects to get that figure close to 100 percent by next summer. They appear to carry a wide variety of music from both major and independent labels. Until this year, iTunes was the only legal way to get your major-label music on your iPod. That was great for Apple, but not so good for the major labels. Now that the labels have come to their senses and started allowing DRM-free music sales, we're going to see, for the first time, a genuinely competitive market for online music with a lot of different music stores, all carrying both major-label and independent fare, and all selling music that will work with any device. Apple's music store will finally have to compete on its merits, rather than being propped up by its DRM monopoly. It's an exciting time to be a music fan.

Filed Under: drm, drm-free, music

Still More Bad DRM News

from the slow-motion-train-wreck dept

As you might have gathered, we don't much like digital rights management, which doesn't stop piracy and doesn't create value for consumers, but does irritate them and create security problems. This week there are two more stories illustrating these problems. First, there's been another Blu-Ray crack. Blu-Ray discs employ two different DRM technologies. One, called AACS, was cracked back in January. The other, called BD+, was supposed to provide an added layer of "security" and differentiate the format from HD-DVD. The specifications for BD+ were released just last June, and the first discs using the technology were released a month ago. Now, to no one's surprise, a company called SlySoft has announced a BD+ crack. The second development is likely to prove even more embarrassing to DRM supporters. Macrovision, the company made famous when its anti-copying technology was incorporated into VCRs in the 1980s, also sells DRM technology called SafeDisc used by Windows computer games. Ironically, "SafeDisc" turns out not to be so safe for your computer, as Microsoft is warning that the technology opens up security vulnerabilities on Windows XP and Windows Server 2003. Malware running as an unprivileged user could use vulnerabilities in the software to gain administrative privileges. DRM is bad for everyone: technology companies, copyright holders, and their customers.

Filed Under: blu-ray, drm
Companies: macrovision, microsoft

MLB's Latest Efforts To Screw Fans: All That Content You Bought? Gone, Thanks To DRM Change

from the swing-and-a-miss dept

It's really amazing how far Major League Baseball goes towards pissing off its fans. From trying to limit fantasy sports by insisting that MLB owns facts, to deleting fan websites, to trying to stop fans from using a Sling Box to watch games, to the ridiculous blackout policies that stop fans from watching games, to the decision last year to prevent certain TV providers from showing Major League Baseball, it just seems like the sports actively tries to antagonize some of its biggest fans. The latest may be the most ridiculous. MLB.com was certainly a pioneer in offering video online, including the ability to purchase and download videos of games. Like so many content companies, MLB.com falsely believed that it needed to wrap the content in copy protection software. However, as read tijir alerts us to, the DRM that MLB chose involved having the content always check in with an MLB.com server to make sure it could be played. That's just dandy... until MLB.com changes its DRM provider and takes down the old authorization server. At that point all of the content everyone had purchased becomes totally useless. True to its fan-unfriendly nature, MLB.com's response has basically been "tough cookies." Specifically, a representative from MLB.com claims that since the products were "one-time sales" there are no refunds. Of course, if they were one-time sales... then why do they need to get approval from MLB.com every time they want to play? They're clearly not one-time sales. The sale was for a service -- which included regular authorization to play the content. MLB has now failed to live up to their end of the deal and should provide at least some kind of refund.

Filed Under: baseball, drm, fans
Companies: mlb

Using The DMCA And DRM To Prevent Innovation

from the not-quite-what-it's-supposed-to-do dept

Earlier this year, we wrote about the bizarre story of how the entertainment industry could misuse the law to effectively ban DVD copying -- even when it's allowed by fair use. It involves a bit of sneaky lawyering, but here's how it works: the group that creates the DVD spec could just create a new spec that would ban any product from making DVD copies. Since the DVD spec includes a totally pointless bit of DRM known as CSS which has been broken for ages, anyone who makes any copies without licensing the spec, has then violated the DMCA's anti-circumvention clause -- even if the use was perfectly fair. The specific case where this applies was with a $20,000 DVD jukebox that would make copies and store your DVDs on a hard drive. It had all sorts of copy protection built in itself, so it was clearly not a tool for unauthorized use. A court agreed that it was perfectly legal.

However, for some bizarre reason, the movie industry fears this perfectly legal jukebox and has resolved to kill it. Since the law isn't on its side, it's getting around the ruling by using the DMCA to its advantage. It's made an amendment to the DVD standard that effectively makes it impossible for a company to allow DVDs to be copied. Thus, even though the law is clear that it's perfectly legal to make a personal copy of a DVD, the makers of the DVD standard (the movie studios) are now saying that you can't license the necessary standard to playback movies unless you don't allow any copying -- and if you do so anyway, you are circumventing the DRM and therefore violating the DMCA. In other words, rather than protecting copyrights, the movie industry is using the DMCA and DRM to define what's acceptable innovation in terms of how a DVD jukebox can work.

Filed Under: dmca, drm, dvd-cca, dvds, innovation

Basing Your Business Model On Copy Protection Perhaps Not Such A Good Idea

from the making-things-worse-for-consumers-isn't-a-recommended-strategy dept

I have to admit that I never understood the purpose behind Snocap, Shawn Fanning's "second act" after Napster. The idea was that it would help artists sell music... by wrapping it up in DRM. As we pointed out when it launched, any business model based on DRM is doomed from the start. So, just as many bands start rushing to free their music from shackles, it should come as no surprise that Snocap is laying off 60% of its workforce and trying to sell itself. It may find someone out there willing to buy the company, but it's a sucker's bet. The very core of the company's business model is based on limiting what customers can do -- just as bands are figuring out how to provide more value to customers by not limiting them.

Filed Under: copy protection, drm, music
Companies: snocap