engadget.com— Fred Amoroso, CEO of Macrovision, the original DRM company whose fair use crippling technology dates back all the way to 1984 (no joke), Replies to Steve Jobs' "Thoughts on music".
Feb 16, 2007View in Crawl 4
@geekee Yes we can. Don't be stupid - DVDs are essentially completely DRM free (because everyone now knows how to copy them with a few simple web searches) and a LOT of people copy their rentals. Yet rental businesses and sales of DVDs STILL THRIVE.Don't be so stupid.
warragul, nicely said. geekee can you reply in a non-rantish way? Or do you just love DRM? Jobs said he would get rid of DRM if allowed by the content copyright holders. If taken at his word, he should immediately remove the DRM from labels that do not require it. The only possible hold back would be if he isn't allowed to sell non-DRMed audio because of contractual agreements with the other studios. I've asked this a few times, but can anyone verify one way or another if this is the case?If Jobs and Apple CAN sell it without DRM when allowed by copyright holders and doesn't relatively soon, then his whole open letter means nothing.
1 possible solution is to digitally watermark files. the watermark would not include any personal info (that's bad for privacy). however, they would contain copyright information and the point of purchase (ie online music store). the watermark would not impact the quality of playability of the media.this way files could be audited. if i've got thousands of files on a sharing site watermarked for an online music store, but there is no record of purchase - i could be prosecuted.of course this could be easily overcome by transcoding the files (which may reduce their quality). that's also possible with any of the available drm technologies, so what's the difference?a watermarking system that doesn't impact playability but provides an audit trail on purchased media would discourage sharing of original files (just as well as any current drm without limiting playback to specific devices).
charronFeb 16, 2007
"... is that a pihkal reference?+++ for you, good sir."....dear Lord.
kyferezFeb 16, 2007
@geekee Yes we can. Don't be stupid - DVDs are essentially completely DRM free (because everyone now knows how to copy them with a few simple web searches) and a LOT of people copy their rentals. Yet rental businesses and sales of DVDs STILL THRIVE.Don't be so stupid.
nace33Feb 17, 2007
Macrovision, did you step in dog s**t?
macparrotFeb 17, 2007
warragul, nicely said. geekee can you reply in a non-rantish way? Or do you just love DRM? Jobs said he would get rid of DRM if allowed by the content copyright holders. If taken at his word, he should immediately remove the DRM from labels that do not require it. The only possible hold back would be if he isn't allowed to sell non-DRMed audio because of contractual agreements with the other studios. I've asked this a few times, but can anyone verify one way or another if this is the case?If Jobs and Apple CAN sell it without DRM when allowed by copyright holders and doesn't relatively soon, then his whole open letter means nothing.
riverbelowFeb 17, 2007
We actually learned about this in English class today. Its called "Faulty Reasoning".
motionaestheticFeb 17, 2007
You may bash Ubuntu or like Sony, but one thing you NEVER do here is support DRM.Sorry dude.
sh4rkb1t3Feb 17, 2007
What a load of f**king blogspam. Digg seems to have turned into a place where a couple of bloggers can advertise their sites.
remotecontrolFeb 19, 2007
1 possible solution is to digitally watermark files. the watermark would not include any personal info (that's bad for privacy). however, they would contain copyright information and the point of purchase (ie online music store). the watermark would not impact the quality of playability of the media.this way files could be audited. if i've got thousands of files on a sharing site watermarked for an online music store, but there is no record of purchase - i could be prosecuted.of course this could be easily overcome by transcoding the files (which may reduce their quality). that's also possible with any of the available drm technologies, so what's the difference?a watermarking system that doesn't impact playability but provides an audit trail on purchased media would discourage sharing of original files (just as well as any current drm without limiting playback to specific devices).