Re: Windows Vista - worst OS yet?

MassiveProng wrote:

[snip]

The problem the industry content owners are trying to thwart is high
quality A/V content copying and theft, and or even bit-for-bit theft
of high quality A/V content.

Not so much 'high quality' theft, but theft in general. Lower quality
reproductions are sufficient to support most of the media black market.
Witness people sneaking camcorders into theaters or (low quality) audio
equipment into concerts. The market segment that is willing to buy
inexpensive pirated product but will not buy it unless it is high
quality is vanishingly small.

In fact, studios will benefit from the ease of making illicit
bit-for-bit copies. Digital watermarks, serial numbers, etc. will be
preserved, so copies posted on servers by lazy pirates will be
detectable by automated means (web crawlers designed to locate
watermarks, for example). Smart pirates will filter such identification
out, but interestingly enough, the MPAA's demands that untrusted
platforms downconvert playback material helps even the stupid pirates
out. Frame grabbing a 480i video signal is trivially easy and will still
make a decent 'pirate quality' DVD.

Keeping a PC from being able to do that in the future will not be
easy as processing capacity in both computing and graphics increases.

I like your model, but stifling a PC's capacity to snatch such
content is also cutting down on their ability to perform high end 2-D,
3-D, and video routines and rederings.

Its not the snatching that will be difficult, as long as the source is
available in analog or unencrypted form. So, platforms to support home
video processing, or high resolution medical image storage and
transmission will still be available. What will happen is that the
potential for the DRM modules to kick in if they mistake such inputs for
'pirated content' will drive users to select open platforms for such
uses. While newer DRM encryption schemes will refuse to play back on
such systems, that's why you'll have a $50 WalMart brand DVD player for
your TV set.

I think that software that is capable of copying such content is
where DRM should be, and in now way should it be some native routine
in the OS as it is such a mutative world.

But its too easy to strip DRM off of present day DVDs. At this point,
the copy software will treat the stripped content just like your home
movies. Copying s/w that errs on the side of treating all content as
suspect (until the DRM authenticates it) will be far too failure prone
for engineering, medical and other professional applications.

--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't hate yourself in the morning -- sleep till noon.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: So..*virtually* all evidence for evolution is fake?
    ... Dana Tweedy wrote: ... Are you aware that plagiarism is theft? ... at least steal from something of quality. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: AM stereo
    ... It has DRM! ... it manages to sound even ... >>> worse than DAB. ... That is shite audio quality. ...
    (alt.radio.digital)
  • Re: DRM at 23 kbps
    ... If that is what he calls good quality, I wouldn't like to hear something ... something that enters the heads of the majority of people. ... What I *did* find eye-watering is the price of the current DRM ... I couldn't consider DRM to be anything more than a toy to ...
    (alt.radio.digital)
  • Re: (possibly OT) DRM (opin ion from the NY Times)
    ... low quality compressed files being billed as equal to CD sound quality, ... sound quality, but I pay for someone else to still have control over what ... DRM scheme. ... or any other DRM based subscription service. ...
    (alt.sys.pc-clone.dell)
  • Re: OT: Musical Devices
    ... >MP3, but that will reduce quality and is an extra step. ... recording sofware to record the sound card buffer. ... EXACT binary copy of the sample that has no DRM. ...
    (alt.mountain-bike)