Blu-ray anti-consumer management
p2pnet news | DRM:- The folks over Blu-ray still think DRM (Digital Restrictions Management) consumer control is a going concern.
They say they’reusing it to try to stop piracy. But who keeps getting it in the neck? Consumers, the people who ultimately pay for all the so-called copy protection junk that’s being used against them.
EMI and Universal have given up DRM as a bad job and it’s only a question of time before the other two members of the Big 4 organised music cartel, Sony BMG and Warner, do the same.
But, “The latest effort to stop hackers from copying high-definition movie DVDs has resulted in some inconvenience for early adopters of the technology,” says the Wall Street Journal.
“Some machines won’t play the latest discs.”
PortalIT is even more to the point:
“The Blu-ray camp has been playing with the anti-piracy protection fire and once again consumers got burned,” it says.
“The addition of the BD+ copyright protection technology rendered recent Blu-ray discs basically unplayable, as several such players don’t support the new protection software.”
If you can see it and/or hear it, you can copy it by one means or another.
Full Stop. Period. End of story.
But the entertainment cartels don’t seem able to grasp this very fundamental fact.
Now, “Two latest Blu-ray releases from Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment, The Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer and The Day After Tomorrow cannot playback on at least LG Electronics BH100 and Samsung BD-P1200 players due to the fact that currently those players do not support BD+ copyright protection technology,” states XBitLabs, going on:
“Apparently, the hardware developers need to release new firmware that featured the BD+ tech, whereas end-users should flash their players to enable playback of protected content.
“The Sony S1 and various Panasonic Blu-ray disc players can play the BD+ movies, but have extremely slow load time issue. Sony PlayStation 3, is also capable of BD+ movies playback, once firmware version 1.93 is loaded, reports Ars Technica web-site.”
Nice. Not only can you not do what you want with something you’ve paid a lot of money for, you can’t even play it properly.
The “cat-and-mouse game between hackers and moviemakers may force consumers to continually download firmware updates over the Web like they do for their PCs, industry experts suggest,” says InformationWeek.
And, “In the ongoing battle between Hollywood and film thieves, consumers - especially early adopters - are the real losers.”
Adds XBitLabs
Additional security software, firmware or hardware technologies not only … increase the ultimate costs of high-definition video players, which are not really popular on the market even now and are likely to remain in a similar positions for another 18 months, but may also raise support costs, as if content owners alter security keys more or less regularly, hardware makers should prepare new firmware on a regular basis, something that consumer electronics makers generally do not like to do. But while the leading manufacturers can afford supporting players with new firmwares for a decade, smaller makers may not be capable of doing that.
As a result, thanks to additional security layers, such as BD+, not only [do] end-users need to learn how to update their DVD players, but they will eventually have to pay for that inconvenience.
Stay tuned.
Also See:
Wall Street Journal - DVD Tactic Keeps Some in Dark, October 10, 2007
PortalIT - Blu-ray Security Update is More Anti-Consumer Than Anti-Piracy, October 12, 2007
XBitLabs - New Blu-Ray Copyright Protection Tech Makes Discs Unplayable, October 10, 2007
InformationWeek - Consumers Losing In High-Def DVD Copyright Protection Fight, October 11, 2007
October 12th, 2007 at 11:11 am
DRM is dumb. If I can read it I can copy it including Blue ray!
Ha!
October 12th, 2007 at 11:12 am
If I can not play it I don’t buy it.
Dheu!
October 12th, 2007 at 11:22 am
“The “cat-and-mouse game between hackers and moviemakers may force consumers to continually download firmware updates over the Web”
What a pain in the Neck!
That will definitively kill the standard blue ray.
October 12th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
is it not true that once the affected players are updated(firmware upgrade) these problems are resolved. (seriously who has a ps3 or blu-ray player and cant afored a internet connection?)
on a different note i got 300 on blu-ray(promotion made it cheaper than the dvd in store) and i was amazed no adverts, not forced to watch these trailers, just a quick copyright notice(which i could fast forward if you cant stand the few seconds its on screen) and the main menu. finally i think they are learning!!!
one also has to remember that all the security on these blue ray disks is optional so its up to the studios which are used so you could find a blue-ray disk with no DRM atall.
at least with BD+ and HD-DVD DRM they talk about introducing managed copys so a hard copy(the original) and a legal copy on my media server could be posiable.
October 13th, 2007 at 8:08 am
” at least with BD+ and HD-DVD DRM they talk about introducing managed copys so a hard copy(the original) and a legal copy on my media server could be posiable. ”
That’s already possible, and much more consumer friendly, WITHOUT ANY DRM.
Fair use makes it LEGAL to copy a DVD YOU OWN to YOUR OWN server .. for
YOUR OWN personal use.
DRM never ‘makes possible’ anything.
It only makes whats already possible, impossible, but only for those
who purchase it legally.
Ironic.
October 13th, 2007 at 8:12 am
Let’s see if I understand this
They want me to pay a LOT of money for hardware that I don’t have the right to
use as I wish, and buy media that I don’t really own to use in it ?
i’ll pass
October 13th, 2007 at 8:30 am
Same problems with my HiMD (minidisc) player. I bought it to record my music in PCM format while DJing at clubs. When i got home, it wouldn’t let me convert my recording to WAV format (when recorded via optical cable).
A total waste of money. Luckily there was a hacking software that allowed me to extract my recording.
Sony give it up. 10% of consumers cheat, 90% of us don’t ! Stop alienating your PAYING CUSTOMERS!
October 13th, 2007 at 8:31 am
[ con't .... ] on a side note… blu-ray is awesome. I was sold the very first time i thew Planet Earth Blu-Ray into my PS3
October 13th, 2007 at 11:55 am
I’m currently saving up for a high def player. The dual format players from Samsung and LG are the ones I’m most interested in, but this article is giving me second thoughts. I see 720p movies on the torrent sites all the time, but never bother with them. Maybe I should start. I can’t say I’m all too enthusiastic about giving away tons of my money just for the privilege of being treated like a criminal when I can just save my money and actually be one, all without the hassle lol.
October 13th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
cant they just release a firmware update for the 2 players? cause like… according to blu-ray.com, THATS what they’re doing.
and everyone is happy about it- including me. : /
I dont want people copying blu-ray… is 20 bucks honestly too much to pay for a quality product? CDs are different- they are overpriced, and far from quality.
Download the crap out of CDs, not blu. do you really want a 50 GB movie on your computer? They’ll be releasing a 200GB model soon as well.
200GB movie anyone? boy would that one take a while to download…
And Amit C - Hell yes!
October 13th, 2007 at 12:23 pm
” I dont want people copying blu-ray… is 20 bucks honestly too much to pay for a quality product? ”
You entirely miss the point.
20 dollars IS too much to pay for a product that I CAN’T do what I want with it.
If I WANT to copy it to my movie server, I should be able to easily, with a disc that
I PAID FOR.
“do you really want a 50 GB movie on your computer? ”
Why not ?
With storage medium cheaper than ever, it’s very feasible.
” I dont want people copying blu-ray ?
Tough shit.
If I bought it .. paid money for it, I should be able to do whatever I
want with it for my OWN PERSONAL USE.
That’s called Fair Use.
October 13th, 2007 at 10:35 pm
“You entirely miss the point.
20 dollars IS too much to pay for a product that I CAN’T do what I want with it.
If I WANT to copy it to my movie server, I should be able to easily, with a disc that
I PAID FOR.”
yes, very true. but you wouldnt… no, you (i say “you” as basically meaning “Everyone”) no, you would want it copyable so that you can download the movies from torrents for free.
thats a fact. dont get me wrong, i may have downloaded hundreds of movies. …maybe.
but at the same time, i would much rather buy it. it seems im the only one in the world who would rather NOT be a cheap ass and steal my movies.
“Why not ?
With storage medium cheaper than ever, it’s very feasible.”
Sure… i guess. but what would be the point if your not DOWNLOADING it from torrents? why would you buy a movie, then put it onto your computer?
Doesnt that defeat the purpose of buying the movie? and for backups i suppose- but how many movies are you gonna fit onto your computer? no matter how big your HDD is- you cant fit many on there.
“Tough shit.
If I bought it .. paid money for it, I should be able to do whatever I
want with it for my OWN PERSONAL USE.
That’s called Fair Use.”
if your own personal use is stealing, then no you cant.
thats like saying “Hey! I own my house… why cant i blow it up?”
Why cant you blow your house up? well… cause it would start a fire- making people suffer.
Why cant you copy a blu movie? well… cause it would make companies lose money- making people suffer.
October 13th, 2007 at 10:37 pm
also, unlike DVDs or HD-DVDs- BD has a scratch protection layer… making your blu movies virtually indestructable. again, no need for backups.
October 14th, 2007 at 2:44 am
Woah there Josh.
Any particular reason you sound like a PR rep for Sony?
And a PR rep with their facts completely backwards at that. That’s pretty sad man. At least have the courtesy to counter fair use arguments with factual information rather than your slightly delusional dreams. Now, I’m referring to US fair use doctrine here, YMMV.
It is perfectly legal for a consumer to make backup or format shifted copies of their legally purchased media for their personal use. So I have every right to copy any movie I buy to my computer. Now, if the DVD is protected by DRM technology an interesting legal situation appears. I still retain the legal right to make personal use copies of the DVD but the DMCA has made it illegal for me to circumvent the DRM in order to use my DVD in a perfectly legal fashion.
So here I am with a crippled disk on hardware that’s been overloaded with an entire extraneous set of chips in order to decode the d@mn DRM. Funny thing though….within hours of that very DVD’s release countless full quality copies have appeared on the internet, DRM free and incredibly convenient. They can be played on any device I might have and I can make as many backups as I wish.
Now, I’m an honest individual and I despise piracy. I will not download pirated movies. So tell me.
Why am I being punished with an expensive product that is inferior in every measure to the free pirated version on the internet?
Why do they try so hard to drive me into the arms of the pirates.
October 14th, 2007 at 4:40 am
” if your own personal use is stealing, then no you cant. ”
If my own personal use is …
1. copying to my home server ( fair use )
2. making a backup ( fair use )
3. copy to different media for other devices that I own ( fair use ).
Then yes, I should be able to.
Do you lump all of these uses under the ( incorrect ) term of ’stealing’ ?
” Doesnt that defeat the purpose of buying the movie? and for backups i suppose- but how many movies are you gonna fit onto your computer? no matter how big your HDD is- you cant fit many on there. ”
So, you’ve never heard of home theatre servers then ?
Storage for about 50 to 100 movies, that can be veiwed on any screen in the home.
A glorified Tivo basically.
Doesn’t defeat the purpose at all.
Perfectly legal too ( fair use ).
” Why cant you copy a blu movie? well… cause it would make companies lose money- making people suffer. ”
This has been pointed out many times.
a download does not equal a lost sale … never will.
compare the most downloaded movies the largest sellers and you find the lists to
be nearly identical .. at least it WAS that way before the *AA’s started suing
There is NO demonstratable, provable loss … none.
” thats like saying “Hey! I own my house… why cant i blow it up?”
Why cant you blow your house up? well… cause it would start a fire- making people suffer. ”
This has got to be the stupidest comparison I have ever read.
This isn’t even close.
sorry.
But …
Suing someone for building a house that looks exactly like mine .. that’s a little closer.
See, those folks haven’t deprived me of the use and benefits of my home by making
one just like it.
So ..
” if your own personal use is stealing, then no you cant. ”
What if it isn’t ? Why can’t I ?
Why don’t you ever directly address fair use issues ?
Why do you assume the only reason to copy is to infringe ?
After all .. NONE of those protections have ever been successful.
All of that stuff is still available through any search engine.
Why can’t a paying customer have the same benefits as a copyright infringer ?
you are sounding more and more like a shill.
October 14th, 2007 at 7:18 pm
are you stupid manufacturer retarted, who want to buy you stink player when we cannot use it, download is the BEST & FASTEST way, retarted law finally fuck up your factory, hope you bankrupe now.