p2pnet - rss feed: RIAA ‘MediaSentry’ owner hired by China
p2pnet news view RIAA | DRM | P2P:- It seems somehow fitting that SafeNet, a leader in digital wrongs and owner of seriously discredited RIAA ‘private eye’ MediaSentry, has been hired by the People’s Republic of China.
SafeNet is to provide DRM (Digital Restrictions Management) for in-country live and on-demand online video footage of the 2008 Summer Olympic Games, it boasts.
DRM consumer controls are meant to stop copying. However, companies in all sectors have long been abandoning it as expensive, impractical, unworkable —- and unethical.
However, in regimes such as China, whose citizens live under rigid control, DRM offers many interesting possibilities for suppression and repression.
“CCTV.com … owns exclusive rights to the broadcast of all audio and video content via online and mobile distribution channels across Mainland China and Macau,” says the company.
“CCTV has committed to protect the intellectual property of the IOC against piracy. They are following the China Broadcasting Copyright Protection standard.”
The copyright of the Olympic Games is, “too important to us as it affects the economic interest to the International Olympic Committee, the authorized broadcasting operators and the branding of the Olympic Games”.
So says CCTV.com boss Wang Wenbin.
‘Branding’ of the Olympic Games?
Aren’t they supposed to be held in the spirit of freedom and openness?
Not in China.
“We strongly believe that SafeNet’s DRM solution is reliable and could securely protect the intellectual property for the new media video and voice broadcasting,” says Wang.
But it’s really simple.
Anything which can be seen and/or heard can be copied
.
.Stumble It!
RIAA ‘private eye’ - More trouble for RIAA ‘Private Eye’ MediaSentry, August 5, 2008
boasts -CCTV Selects SafeNet to Secure Online Broadcast of the 2008 Summer Olympics, August 6, 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
August 7th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
I still am willing to bet some DRM-free versions will make it past SafeNet’s DRM solution. The only question involved is “how fast?”
August 7th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
If they do for China what they have done for the music labels, free speech will soon be a certain thing in China
August 7th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Hopefully all these music parasites will emigrate to crappy countries such as China where they belong.
But I believe that China is already to good for them. Let me recomand them Miramar or North Korea!
August 7th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
That not nice for the Chinese though.
August 7th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
“Hopefully all these music parasites will emigrate to crappy countries such as China where they belong”
Wow - there’s so much wrong with that - for God’s sake get a thought of your own.
Olympics will be televised around the world - what’s the point of MediaSentry securing the online portion? Maybe I’m missing something, but locking down a small piece of the event while free-airing around the world most of the same content seems more like a political showing than a practical exercise.
Is MediaSentry licensed to conduct investigations in China?
August 7th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
^^ Is MediaSentry licensed to conduct investigations in China?
Excellent question
Cheers!
August 7th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Well, is it?
August 7th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
“Hopefully all these music parasites will emigrate to crappy countries such as China where they belong.
But I believe that China is already to good for them. Let me recomand them Miramar or North Korea!”
Starting with trolls like you, next come the CEOs of the Big Four, and of course all the anti-piracy
companies. And why not also add BREIN, CRIA, RIAA, MPAA, MPA, IFPI, BPI, ARIA, and so on.
August 7th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
<strong>Security Issues…</strong>
Measures are being taken to protect the economic interest of the International Olympic committee, as we get ready to usher in the olympic games….
August 7th, 2008 at 8:30 pm
The irony is that this is basically an admission of censorship my their company, when the only valuable customers they can attract are countries directly against individual freedom.
August 14th, 2008 at 9:40 am
I see that the statement that I posted here yesterday is gone. I wonder why?
August 14th, 2008 at 11:40 am
^^ What was it? I may have deleted it accidentally. I seem to be getting more and more hand-delivered spam, and posts which try to look like posts but which are actually links to other sites.
Please post it again and if I dump it, I’ll tell you why.
Cheers!
Jon
August 15th, 2008 at 9:48 am
Maybe this story was edited? I don’t see that statement in your text that I commented on, having to do with China not having heard about the reputation of Safenet.
I felt that China would not care in any way what we felt about restrictive practices, considering their track record. I also mentioned the recent Rolling Stone article detailing China’s growing and wide-reaching surveillance program.