Hackers, Apple, MS music codes
p2pnet.net News View:- I’m always surprised when the fact that people can circumvent DRM is reported as news, such as this report by Ina Fried on CNET News.
The language used in the article is incorrect, using the term "codec" to describe an encrypted file format rather than the coder-decoder used for the audio/video itself, and the use of "crack" to describe situations where a TPM is unlocked with a provided key (IE: the cryptography isn’t cracked in this case).
The basic problem is this:
For a user to enjoy digitally encoded media in their homes the encrypted content, the decryption algorithm and the decryption keys must all be present in their home.
A technologically competent infringer will always be able to put those three pieces together and decode the digital content as if the TPM never existed. Then, with the TPM out of the way, they, and everyone else, can share the unencrypted content.
This problem is made amusing by the fact that it only takes a single person out of of the 6.5+ billion on the planet to decode the file.
To the people intending to infringe copyright, the fact that decrypting these files without permission is illegal (anti-circumvention laws) is irrelevant, given that they’re already decrypting the files to violate copyright law.
We need to always remember this, and remember that DRM is only able to regulate the lawful activities of law abiding citizens, and can never do anything to stop copyright infringement.
In fact, many of the activities that DRM enables for device manufacturers and copyright holders would otherwise be recognized as unlawful under competition, privacy, copyright and other laws.
Russell McOrmond – p2pnet contributing editor
[McOrmond is an independent author (software and non-software) who uses modern business models and licensing (Free/Libre and Open Source Software, Creative Commons). He's also the CLUE policy coordinator.]
Also See:
CNET News – Hackers crack Apple, Microsoft music codes, September 1, 2006
p2pnet newsfeeds for your site.
rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss
Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
September 1st, 2006 at 9:33 pm
U can always just record the analog audio outputs & then write as a digital file. U hardly notice the difference if done correctly. If U can see it & hear it, U can record it.
Btw, HD-DVD’ll be recorded with hi-def camcorders pointed straight @ a hi-def set if the encryption isn’t cracked fast. I don’t know anyone who cares about it because it A) costs too much B) people are satisfied w/ their regular DVD collections & aren’t interested in replacing movies again. How many times can U buy the same crap. Will they have Super Mega Deluxe Special Edition Collector’s HD-DVDs in special shrink wrap??? Who gives a fuck?
September 3rd, 2006 at 3:14 pm
There are two reasons why you don’t want to rely on the analog hole for your discussions:
(What is the Analog Hole? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_Hole )
a) Forcing people to go Analog creates some of the quality degradation that the industry relied on to make their origionals seem more attractive. Having identical digital copies has been one of the things that differentiated digital redistribution from analog redistribution.
b) Technical measures aren’t only applied to content, but they are applied to devices as well. We most often talk about TPMs which involve a digital lock on content that is then tied to an access device with a compatable TPM applied to it, but there are also TPMs applied to devices that disable the devices when they detect that they are recording from a watermarked source. This is intended to close the “Analog hole”, and would be effective if it were not for the failure that applies to all TPMs applied by other than the owner of the device. Any TPM will always be able to be circumvented by a technologically sophisticated device owner, as they will always be able to decode the content (first type of TPM) or disable the watermark detector (second type of TPM).