Skip to content

Posts from the ‘DRM’ Category

Nov 18

digitalblus
18 Comments

Digital Copy Blu’s

Today we (my family) received a 3-disc special edition of Disney’s Wall*E, which includes two Blu-ray discs and a DVD with a digital copy of the movie in iTunes and Windows Media formats.  I was particularly excited to have the digital copy which can be transferred to a personal computer or iPhone for playback.  I popped the DVD in my MacBook Pro and was immediately greeted by a Disney application called Wall*E, which “activates” the digital copy before transferring to ITunes or Windows Media.  Oh no, DRM rears its ugly head.

In the Blu-ray case, Disney includes a leaflet with an activation code.  As I read the information contained on this leaflet, I was drawn to the fine print at the bottom.  Reading carefully, I learned the activation code expires one year from the date of release of the Blu-ray, so you must transfer your digital copy to a computer withing one year of release of the Blu-ray movie or you are out of luck. I wonder how many people will take the time to read the fine print?  I imagine there will be some very disappointed consumers who neglect to activate their digital copies in time.  What about the people that buy Wall*E after November 18, 2009?

My next thought was whether the activation code was single-use or multiple-use.  I thought, I better do some more research and understand all of the DRM rules before I transfer this movie to my laptop.  Fortunately, Disney includes links to online help which help explain the DRM rules which apply to the digital copy.  After, ignoring the Flash based demos of how to transfer the movie to my computer, I found a link with more information, including this FAQ.

Turns out, this is a one-time activation code.  This means, you can transfer the file to one and only one computer–EVER!  I don’t think my family, with multiple computers is out of the norm, so which one?   My laptop?  My wife’s? The kids iMac?  If I transfer it to my laptop, I can watch it when I travel, transfer it to my iPhone and iPod, but what about my kids?  What about their iPods?  They won’t be able to enjoy this movie without sync’ing to my iTunes library and erasing their content and playlists.  So, I could install it on the family iMac, but then I won’t have a copy when I travel.  So far, neither options seems like a good solution.

And herein lies two of the major problems with DRM.  First, confusing usage rights and second, incoveniencing the very customers who purchase legitimate copies of content.  I will include a portion of the Disney FAQ.

Can I use my code more than once?

No, you are permitted to use your unique code only once.

How many times can I transfer my DisneyFile Digital Copy?

For the Windows Media version you can only transfer your DisneyFile Digital Copy to your computer once. After you transfer the movie to your computer, you can then transfer the movie to your compatible portable device. For the iTunes version, standard iTunes usage rules apply.

What types of portable devices will my DisneyFile Digital Copy be compatible with?

For the Windows Media format, portable devices must be Windows Media PlaysForSure compatible or Certified for Windows Vista compatible. For the iTunes format, portable devices must be an iTunes video-enabled iPod, iPhone or Apple TV.

What happens if I delete my DisneyFile Digital Copy from my portable device? Is it possible to transfer it again?

For the Windows Media format: Yes, as long as you did not delete the Windows Media file from your computer.

For the iTunes format: Standard iTunes usage rules apply.

I followed the on-screen instructions and the movie did not transfer. What do I do?

Please call 1-800-723-4763 (US)/1-888-877-2843 (Canada) for technical assistance and/or customer service.

I live outside the United States and Canada. Can I transfer the DisneyFile Digital Copy?

No, at this time, the DisneyFile Digital Copy is accessible only in the United States and Canada (excluding Quebec).

Does the unique code for the DisneyFile Digital Copy expire?

Yes, the unique code expires 12 months from the initial release of the DVD or Blu-ray disc. The unique code for The Nightmare Before Christmas will expire on August 26th, 2009.

Can I give my DisneyFile Digital Copy to someone else?

No, your movie is non-transferable and is tied directly to your computer and will not play if transferred to other computers.

How much space does the DisneyFile Digital Copy use on my hard drive?

DisneyFile Digital Copies take up to approximately 2 Gigabytes of free hard drive space. This number can vary and it is best to check the minimum requirements on the packaging.

If I delete my DisneyFile Digital Copy from my computer, can I transfer it again later?

For the Windows Media format: No. When you transfer your DisneyFile Digital Copy, to your computer you use your unique code. Codes can only be used once. Therefore if you delete your movie from your computer and attempt a second transfer, the unique code will not work. Disney strongly recommends backing up files to avoid losing your DisneyFile Digital Copy.

For the iTunes format: Standard iTunes usage rules apply.

If I cannot connect to the internet, can I still transfer my DisneyFile Digital Copy to my computer?

No, in order for the DisneyFile Digital Copy code to be verified, you must be connected to the internet. However, you only need to be connected when you first transfer the movie to your computer, not each time you watch your DisneyFile Digital Copy.

Do I need the DisneyFile Digital Copy disc every time I want to watch the movie?

No, once the transfer is complete you no longer need your DisneyFile Digital Copy disc and can enjoy your movie whenever you like.

How many times can I watch my DisneyFile Digital Copy?

You may watch your movie as much as you like, there is no limit to the number of plays.

How many computers/portable devices can I transfer my movie to?

If you select Windows Media format, you can transfer your movie to one computer and one Windows Media compatible portable device as set forth in the end user license agreement (Terms & Conditions). If you select iTunes format, standard iTunes usage rules apply.

Part of this dilemma could be resolved with a home media server with lots of storage, but I still wouldn’t be able to transfer the movie to my laptop or iPhone for playback when I am on the road.  But it does not alleviate the fact that DRM is restricting the legitimate use of content I purchased.

Two simple ideas to allow fair use

Two simple ideas to alleviate the DRM restrictions and allow fair use.  First, link the activation code to an iTunes account and allow multiple uses by that account.  Second, allow families to “aggregate” iTunes accounts under a master account.

Link activation code to iTunes account

By linking the activation code to an iTunes account, content owners could be assured that the same consumer is using the activation code and it is not being passed around the Internet.  Because Apple requires a legitimate address and each iTunes user must provide a credit card, the risk of fraud is greatly reduced.  If the content owner becomes aware of fraud, they could appeal to Apple to investigate and if fraud has occurred, the iTunes account could be deactivated–rendering the content disabled.

iTunes master account

Aggregation of iTunes accounts under a master account structure (think .Mac and MobileMe Family plans), is an idea that makes sense for a number of reasons including alleviating the restrictions of DRM.  By aggregating accounts, content I purchase on iTunes could be synchronized by family members under the same account.  This includes the digital copy of Wall*E and other Blu-ray digital copies.  Account aggregation allows us to use the digital copy in the exact same way we use the physical copy (Blu-ray disc).

This post started as yet another rant against DRM. However, since most content owners haven’t seen a DRM scheme they don’t like, I don’t believe DRM is going away anytime soon.  So, what do you think?  Would my two proposals make DRM more palatable?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Mar 26

DRM, Digital Content, and the Consumer Experience: Lessons Learned From The Music Industry

DRM, Digital Content, and the Consumer Experience: Lessons Learned From The Music Industry

Dec 3

The Most Anti-Tech Organizations in America

History is replete with examples of products, companies, and industries that fail to adapt and adopt to new technology.  An article @PCWorld by Mark Sullivan on the 5 most anti-tech organizations in America.

Their names keep coming up over and over again in courtrooms and corridors of power across the country–those groups whose interests always seem to run counter to those of technology companies and consumers. They come in many forms: associations, think tanks, money-raising organizations, PACs, and even other tech-oriented industries like telecommunications.

The tech issues that they’re concerned with are what you might expect: digital rights management and fair use, patent law, broadband speed and reach, wireless spectrum and network neutrality. I talked to a good number of tech and media policy insiders in Washington, D.C.–mostly off the record–to find out who these groups are, how they operate, and who pays their bills. We’ll start with the biggest offenders first and work our way down.

  1. RIAA
  2. The Pharmaceutical/Biotech Industry
  3. Big Telco Companies, Industry Group USTelecom
  4. Verizon, AT&T, Progress and Freedom Foundation
  5. Large Wireless Carriers and the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA); TV Broadcasters and the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB)

Ok, I buy the RIAA argument. I can even see how one can make an argument about big telcos and their industry organizations are slow to adopt new technologies. But the RIAA’s biggest crime, as it were, was not being anti-tech, but being out of touch with consumers–it’s customers.

Opposition to “net neutrality” is not by definition anti-tech. Case in point broadband. Take the MSOs and the introduction of cable modems. The cable industry moved at “broadband speed” to develop, test and deploy cable modem technology to the market. Why? They understood upcoming technology and bandwidth requirements and they anticipated customers demand. The cable industry took a risk and made investments assuming returns on those investments.

I’m not sure where net neutrality got off track.  The initial mantra was equal access to information flowing over the Internet.  Sounds great.  Unfortunately proponents call for government to enforce equality.  If you follow the major tech press you’ve undoubtedly heard the pro net neutrality arguments.  For a look at an opposing viewpoint, The Cato Institute has prepared a policy analysis document which can be found athttp://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-507es.html.

Such rhetoric and calls for preemptive regulation are unjustified. There is no evidence that broadband operators are unfairly blocking access to websites or online services today, and there is no reason to expect them to do so in the future. No firm or industry has any sort of “bottleneck control” over or market power in the broadband marketplace; it is very much a competitive free-for-all, and no one has any idea what the future market will look like with so many new technologies and operators entering the picture. In the absence of clear harm, government typically doesn’t regulate in a preemptive, prophylactic fashion as CBUI members are requesting.

Moreover, far from being something regulators should forbid, vertical integration of new features and services by broadband network operators is an essential part of the innovation strategy companies will need to use to compete and offer customers the services they demand. Network operators also have property rights in their systems that need to be acknowledged and honored. Net neutrality mandates would flout those property rights and reject freedom of contract in this marketplace.

The regulatory regime envisioned by Net neutrality mandates would also open the door to a great deal of potential “gaming” of the regulatory system and allow firms to use the regulatory system to hobble competitors. Worse yet, it would encourage more FCC regulation of the Internet and broadband markets in general.

waterslidesGovernment regulation of the Internet or broadband providers is a proverbial slippery slope–or in this case maybe better described as a slippery water slide.

The rest of the original article can be found at PCWorld

May 12

Is a $200 Billion Suit Headed Microsoft and Apple’s Way?

Is a $200 Billion Suit Headed Microsoft and Apple’s Way?

All I can say, for fear of being sued, or should I say it, for fear of being sued for NOT saying it??? We have sunk to a new low…

With the rise of intellectual property (whether it be patents or content, like Pirates of the Caribbean, for example) has come a rise in the number of patent suits. Unfortunately, this has meant the emergence of companies like Acacia Technologies, which has used the IP laws to its advantage, acquiring patents and filing lawsuits against any number of industries, including porn providers.

The way a suit usually works, however, is that Company A sues Company B for “infringing” upon its technology, or using it illegally. On Friday, however, a startup sent a number of cease-and-desist letters to several tech bigwigs (Microsoft, Adobe, Real Networks and Apple) accusing them of not using their technology. This could be a first.

According to a press release, a company called Media Rights Technologies and BlueBeat.com, an Internet radio station that is owned by MRT, said that it has developed and tested the X1 SeCure Recording Control, a technology to prevent digital audio streams from being “ripped,” or copied.

What MRT claims, however, is this: “MRT asserts Apple, Microsoft, Real and Adobe have produced billions of these products without regard for the DMCA or the rights of American Intellectual Property owners, actively avoiding the use of MRT’s technologies. Failure to comply with this demand could result in a federal court injunction to any of the above named parties to cease production or sale of their products and/or the imposition of statutory damages of at least $200 to $2500 for each product distributed or sold.”

What this says to me is that the companies may be sued for not infringing upon MRT’s technology, a rather novel take.

May 1

Apple Stokes a Digital Music Standards War

Apple Stokes a Digital Music Standards War

The accord marks a fundamental change in the digital music landscape, a feat Apple is pulling off with increasing regularity of late. If I were an employee of Microsoft and involved with its confusing digital-music efforts, built around its highly DRM-protected WMA format, I’d be sweating right now.

But one of the truly remarkable aspects of the pact is how Apple is pulling it off. Having floated the rhetorical trial balloon for selling unprotected music files via iTunes in his landmark essay “Thoughts on Music,” Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs in hindsight appears to have been deliberately ambiguous about the file format he preferred. It’s now clear why. He didn’t mean selling unprotected MP3s, but unprotected AAC songs. The decision will have important long-term effects, especially as more labels follow EMI’s lead.

Using AAC is brilliant for several reasons. First, for Apple, whose stated market aim is to do everything in its power to sell more of its highly profitable iPods (and beginning in June, presumably profitable iPhones), the choice of AAC means more non-Apple devices will be able to play songs purchased on iTunes.

Before the EMI deal announcement, the AAC-formatted songs sold on iTunes were encoded in Apple’s DRM technology called FairPlay (see BusinessWeek.com, 10/25/06, “Apple, Tear Down This Wall”). When FairPlay is no longer an obstacle, other players that support AAC can give their owners a ticket to the iTunes party.

Mar 1

TiVo Tells You How To Defeat Their DRM To Keep You From Canceling

Tivo LogoWant to cancel your TiVo? When you call to tell them about it, they might just try to teach you how to defeat their DRM in order to keep you as a customer. That’s what happened to Tino, and he wrote all about it….

I explain to her that I know I can move the files over but raw TiVo files are encrypted and useless. She said you can just download an application to convert them yourself. I explained this would be illegal under the DMCA and TiVo somewhat agressevly tries to enforce the encryption. She said so there is no way you can get an application to convert the files. I told her that I could get such an application but that it is quite illegal and Tivo could sue me or worse. The total times she tryed to get me to do something illega so I would keep the TiVo service, about 4. If I wanted to be illegal I could just dump the cable too and friggin download everything DRM and commercial free, DUH.

read more

Mar 1

RIAA slams FAIR USE Act

Although the FAIR USE Act introduced yesterday will have little more than a symbolic effect on the DMCA, that isn’t stopping the Recording Industry Association of America from unloading on the bill with both barrels.

“The DMCA has enabled consumers to enjoy creative works through popular new technologies,” the RIAA said in a statement.”

LOL!

read more

Feb 23

1 Comment

Steve Jobs’ iTunes dance

tied-purple-picketOver at Salon.com, Cory Doctorow, who has written some of the best articles and papers on DRM, has written a piece in response to the Steve Jobs Thoughts on Music open letter. Generally, I agree with Cory’s stance on the impacts of DRM on consumers. In fact, I agree with the general thesis of this article–that Apple is using DRM protected iTunes content to prevent iPod owners from switching to competing MP3 players. However, as Steve Jobs pointed out in his letter, the average iPod owner has only 3% iTunes DRM protected music. 97% of the music on iPods is DRM free. So while this amounts to a “switching” tax, the average iPod owner is accustomed to paying more than 3% in sales tax.

Cory’s article really is just a collection of anti-DRM arguments, and while many of them are great arguments against DRM, they don’t succeed in refuting the Jobs letter. I think he misses the spot.

While I dislike DRM, even the so called FairPlay, I believe it was a necessary evolutionary step for the music industry. Of course it is easy to break. That wasn’t the point, the point was to prove to the music industry that ease of use and good design could once again get people to buy and download music rather than copy off a P2P network.

iTunes is a superior to P2P. It is easier to find and download from iTunes than from P2P, with better results for most users. But DRM won’t go away in a day, however the record lables must remove it from all of their libraries simulaneously.

Now that the first step has been taken, let’s hope that Steve Jobs is sincere and will actually remove DRM from music when the record labels come to their senses.

Read more

Feb 22

How to Explain DRM to Your Dad

Excellent Wired Listening Post article on how to explain DRM to the layman.  Some very interesting examples on the real impact of DRM on consumer. Be sure to check the comments.

Feb 21

1 Comment

Why I joined the EFF

EFF LogoRecently, I joined the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). Some might equate the EFF the ACLU of the digital world. So, those of you that know my political leanings might ask, why? Let me try to explain.

Regular readers of this blog know that I work in the telecommunications industry. Specifically, for the last 10 years, I have been working to create products that allow telecommunications service providers (specifically telcos) to deliver broadcast quality video over Internet Protocol (IP) over their networks. Our customers, the service providers, demand we create innovations in IPTV which give them competitive differentiation over the incumbent video service providers–typically the MSO (Multiple Service Operator) the cable company, or the Direct to Home (DTH) satellite company. Our ability to deliver these innovations is constantly under threat from traditional media sources which continuously fight new competitors. The EFF, is working to protect the rights of consumers to fair use which I believe protects our ability to innovate.

Does the EFF sometimes come into conflict with technology companies, yes. In many cases, the same companies that lead the innovation charge are also working with traditional media companies on schemes to “protect” digital content. Where this “protection” limits consumer freedom, the EFF steps in to fight for consumer rights. Interestingly, it appears to me, that wherein the EFF and technology companies are in conflict, such conflict is limited to the short-term interests (some would say shortsighted) of that company. Protection of consumer rights, is to the long-term benefit of all technology companies–whether they recognize this in their frenzy to generate quarterly results, depends on their ability to look beyond the numbers.

The EFF is fighting to protect consumer rights to fair use of content, whether it be in analog or digital formats.

Check out the Intellectual Property section of the EFF website. Two areas of particular interest are Digital Rights Management (DRM) and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA). I encourage you to read the EFF information on both topics DRM and DMCA. For those of you who have PVRs or are contemplating a new HDTV purchase, the Digital Video Restrictions information is eye-opening.

EFF RSS Feeds can be found here.

1 of 21 2