DVD DRM row sparks user rebellion

robgt

Guess again - THAT would be stealing...

tekniaxp

GJ Patrick, < The issue over the DRM key has nothing to do with wanting the disc for free - it has to do with wanting to watch the movie YOU BOUGHT on a device other than the DVD player the content producers tell you you can play it on. > It also has to do with playing the Music and movies You Bought on your network in your home that you expect to work with 'Whole House' Media Systems It also has to do with 'the legal endeavor' of making a personal backup copy.

Jim Crafton

I'm afraid he'll Copy and Paste me to death! That or expose the deadly double entendre that we've all come to grasp! Either way he makes me 'ascared! :)

¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog

MitchAubin

You're f***n dumb to think RIAA and MPAA puts drm to avoid pirating movies and stuff. From the beginning of computing people stole code, programs and data everywhere. That is not new. But manufacturer are always trying to boost their profits because a company that does not grow, is shrinking. So, if you don't find ways for making your customer buying your stuff, you'll be constrained to bankruptcy. Media giants are selling a whole lot of music, movies and other contents, but the offer is always very high and the demand tend to diminish due to all the free media content on the net, so they are trying to sue everybody that is posting media content under copyright to the www and obligate people to buy their stuff instead of sharing it with each other. That a reaction of the industry to boost their sales. For sure, that is not to protect artists and movie makers. They are all very rich and they don't care about people who buy their disc. If they did care, they'll sell them at much lower prices so we'll prefer to buy a real genuine version for 10$ of quality instead of a crappy, poorly compressed version that we download and delete after viewing it. I'm sure that a dvd doesn't cost 30$ to make, I can buy a pack of 50 dvds for 16$... so stop trying to make us pay too much, sell at the real price and we'll buy it. Until then, happy downloading for every one.

W Balboos GHB

This ultra-pro-business will hopefully begin to reverse after the 2008 elections. So much media protection has been lost for 'the people': former regulations that prevented a single media corporation from dominating the media in a single market (multiple TV stations, for example) are gone. I'll cut short my desire to launch a tirade of how much damage has been done through buyouts, mergers, and acquisitions from regulatory agencies that don't regulate anything if you have enough PAC money. The issue here would seem to be that if a new DRM scheme comes out, and requires any sort of new equipment, then that should be clearly stated on the packaging (in a legable font). After that, it's the same as buying any media: if you buy a DVD and all you have to play it on is a VCR, then you need to consider purchasing the player or returning the disk. BUT, by the same token, it should be illegal for a piece of media to modify the operation of your PC (etc.), and the corporations that do so should be subject to severe criminal and civil fines. It's not their right to modify YOUR equipment. Period. To do so MUST be at their risk in every sense of the word. The scenario becomes, more and more, one of laws preempting rights in order to prevent 'crimes' that didn't occur, and might never occur. Damn - outlaw matches - just in case you might use them to commit arson.

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein

l a u r e n

idiot

"there is no spoon" {me}

Richard Andrew x64

creep

-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke

Grimolfr

You seem to lack general reading comprehension skills. Nobody has said anything (that I've read) about copying DVD's. The guy that first hacked the DRM says he did it because he bought an HD-DVD that wouldn't play on the equipment he already owned. An "approved hardware" list for being able to watch a DVD is absolutely ridiculous.

Grim

(aka Toby)

MCDBA, MCSD, MCP+SB

Need a Second Life?[^]

SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue IS NOT NULL GO

(0 row(s) affected)

Austin Harris

Richie308 wrote:

So I guess you won't mind at all if I remove any and all limitations from PimpFish

So PimpFish wont be limited to being a browser plugin?:laugh: What limitations would you remove? I'm sure Michael Dunn would love to get some insight on the limitations of Pimpfish and how you think they could be removed.:-D You seem confused. PimpFish is not some media content you purchased that requires a special hardware device to decrypt it.

Richie308 wrote:

and freely distribute it to whomever I please for no charge and with no compensation to you.

This obvously has nothing to do with DRM. I think you are confusing pirating with removing DRM.

Richie308 wrote:

Plus, I'll have your complete blessing to reverse engineer it, and include its functionality in MY application, also with no compensation to you.

Again this is pirating that your talking about. Removing DRM = Decrypting your media Decrypting your media != pirating Thanks.

WiseHacker

I agree. It's unfair to Digg that its own users put it in a state where it can be prosecuted.

WiseHacker

OH! That's below the belt!

JMOdom

:doh: Please excuse the ingnorance. Just what is a "PimpFish", and what does it do? :confused:

JMOdom

:~ I have what may be a reaaaally dumb question. Is there any way to make the media used, free to use any type of player and yet NOT be copied? :confused: If that were so it might limit some of the problems from both ends. ;) I don't know if it is possible or not. Maybe somebody with a lot more experience in this area might think about looking into the subject. :sigh: Just my one and one half cents worth. :laugh: P.S. - By the way the name calling is Sooooo childish. Theoretically we're all adults here (Although some seem to be more than others). :rolleyes:

reshi999

Not really, as I understand it all DRM can hope to do is limit the options available by: - Encrypting the media, requiring license to decrypt - Degrading the media, so after a few copies it becomes unwatchable - Creating new media formats which only play on protected hardware (as per subject of this post) Theoretically as long as you can input the media into a PC, there will always be a way to copy it to a non-DRM format - PC's are open framework by nature. But then again why would you not want to copy media? Think MP3\video players, backups, etc - Its sensible in some cases to make copies of media, but it leaves the system open to abuse. My own theory is that certain software, CD's, and DVD's are overpriced - Particularly 'classics' per se - If the media companies were to drop their prices then there would be less incentive to pirate as there would be less commercial value in it.

a_horse_with_no_name

WiseHacker wrote:

I agree. It's unfair to Digg that its own users put it in a state where it can be prosecuted

Unfair nothing! Digg's business model is built on user-contributed content; if Digg doesn't like what users are posting, they have two choices:

Allow the undesirable posts to continue and keep the user community happy 2) Restrict/delete the undesirable posts and live with the consequences of an unhappy user community that happens to drive their revenue
Digg made a choice about how to handle the situation, and they will have to deal with the consequences

a_horse_with_no_name

Richie308 wrote:

No, I've just exposed the double standard of some people who make their livings via intellectual property, yet who disrespect the IP rights of others.

You mean like the way the entertainment industry disrepects my fair-use rights?