DRM: Bulls*** on a stick!

I was excited when I heard about Netflix streaming coming to the 360, it made me hang onto the console instead of getting rid of it, since I hardly use it anymore.

Then I found out that it requires an Xbox Live Gold subscription. $50/year to use a service I already pay for, on another device. Grumble grumble...fine. I have some friends who still play games on the 360, I may play with them every now and again.

Then I read about HDCP restrictions with Netflix on the 360. It doesn't effect me since I use component with mine, but in principle, it's infuriating, and what if they arbitrarily decided in the future that HDCP connections are mandatory, and I'm SOL?

Now there's even more bullsh*t. Sony/Columbia Pictures isn't allowing their content to be streamed to the 360 via Netflix. Probably a territorial pissing match over the PS3, but as a consumer: f*ck you.

Needless to say, I'm no longer considering paying $50/year for LESS content than I already have access to via a subscription to the same provider. It transcends not making sense into pure insult.

To top it off, it appears that the new Macbooks implement HDCP, rendering existing Apple monitors and projectors useless for watching content bought on iTunes.

When are people going to get tired of paying to be treated like criminals?

Didn't you applaud DRM in Flash Media Server... hmmm?

I have no issues with monitors using HDCP (your issue with Apple.) This prevents the ability to rip the content thru the video signal. If pirating stops, the restrictions put on everyone else will ease up. Period. I have no issue with people/entities/companies getting paid for their work. I've said it before...I'll say it again.

The XBox subscription -- thats lame.

To answer your question about people being treated like criminals...once people stop acting like criminals, everyone else will not be treated as such anymore.

You're right gerbs, I did, but let me explain the difference here.

1.) I supported it for FMS because Adobe needed to have an appropriate response for Silverlight using WM. MLB.com is already moving towards Silverlight because they already have their video content and infrastructure in WM. Their usage has a lot of influence.

2.) Content authors should be able to treat digital content as if it were physical content, if they so choose. E.g. you need to subscribe to a service for access, you have to pay per copy, you can stream but not keep your own transferable copy, etc. I firmly believe that, knowing how easily the projects I work on can be taken and re-distributed and modified without my knowledge. There is a market need for DRM. Even the NYPL uses it for e-books, otherwise there would be little or no value to the content if everyone could download it for free and keep it as long as they way, they buy licenses for each e-book that only n number of users at a time can borrow.

I guess I should clarify that I have a problem with HDCP in particular, and with the bickering over licensing that has accompanied distribution in the digital age, and the consolidation of media.

DRM is one thing, say, Fairplay. It states that I own the song, and can license up to 5 devices to play it on. Due to the nature of DRM, those devices need to be capable of playback. However, I can use those devices however I please. PC or iPod, I can hook it up to a PA in a bar, my home stereo, my car, a friend's stereo at a party...despite the restrictions, they can't really stop me from consuming the media how I want.

HDCP is essentially a big burly bear of a cop standing over your shoulder making sure you're consuming the media correctly. It's a way to plug the analog hole (to make this paragraph even gayer), however it introduces obsolesence. My friend's TV or projector is not HDCP compliant, my existing monitor isn't. I'm not trying to do anything illegal, but the measures used to combat piracy severely restrict my options. What if there were HDCP for audio, that made sure you were outputting the signal to a device only capable of playback, that was approved to use a proprietary standard that someone makes massive amounts of royalty fees off of? In short, f*ck that. The media is worth significantly less because there are restrictions on how I can view it, and those restrictions are based on a standard consumers know nothing about, that effects hundreds of dollars of equipment they may own.

Whereas DRM was a necessary evil to get the music industry to feel safe enough with digital distribution, this goes one step beyond, saying the customer can't be trusted with their license. (And, as we see now, DRM is starting to fade away now that the labels realize the sky won't fall without it.)

I don't think I need to explain why the trimmed down Netflix library and required Gold subscription are bull, those speak for themselves. What I do find interesting though, is that Dexter is no longer in the Watch Instantly section. Netflix, once known for being straightforward and no-nonsense, is now involved with nonsense.

I don't like HDCP either. But, I think they have a right to take that approach if they want. I just don't think it will work for them in the long run. Non-HDCP options will eventually make gains and the lost business will be more valuable than the prevented crime.

Especially when dealing with large markets, restricting all consumers to a less valuable product to prevent crimes of a relative minority doesn't typically work. The criminals find ways around it and the restrictions can damage the brand name.

I don't agree with the concept that the people legitimately purchasing digital media are the ones illegally redistributing it. If someone aims to copy, they aren't going through legal channels to begin with so imo it hurts honest consumers more than it deters bootleggers.

It's just plain stupid, who's going to pirate the digital signal coming out of the playback device? You're going to pirate the data source. DRM on Blu-Ray and iTunes has already been compromised.

Are they worried about a pirate breaking into my apartment, splicing into my setup and intercepting the signal between the box and my TV? Or do they just want to cut off analog altogether and force people to buy new sh*t?

all tv is going to be digital very soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PAlexC

Or do they just want to cut off analog altogether and force people to buy new sh*t?

---

Theres your real answer :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silverx2

all tv is going to be digital very soon.

---

No no, I meant analog playback of local media, not broadcast. E.g. kill component, composite, s-video and VGA by refusing to support it.