Re: the DVD that keeps on giving...

E. Buzz Miller <me@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 12:21:12 -0500, Jay@xxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>>E. Buzz Miller <me@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>I'm surprised more people don't pick up on this. It's the elephant in
>>>the room. The clear implication is that the hardware will need to be
>>>connected to the company that produces the content and that company
>>>will have the ability to control said hardware remotely.
>>
>>You're making two big logical leaps to reach your conclusion:
>>
>>1) That the ability of a player to connect online means that
>>such a connection will be *required*.
>
>Well, that is a problem with how most people are looking at the issue.
>The equipment will function regardless at first, yes. The scary aspect
>is how incrementally the equipment will offer more and more incentives
>to keep it connected leading to the inevitable requirement that it be
>connected for functionality (aka Activation). Of course I am
>extrapolating, but I doubt it is an unreasonable leap.

At least you admitted that remote connection won't be a requirement
right away. You are still making the same leap before of going from
"incentives" to connect online to "requirement," as if such a
difference wasn't that significant.

>Who would have believed installing Windows would require a phone call
>or internet connection? Hardware is headed in the same direction.

Windows activation controls that and only that, activation. Microsoft has
no further remote control over your copy of Windows after that, there is
no way they can deactivate your copy of Win from remote.

Also, Windows activation only controls WinXP, not any of the other
software loaded onto your system. A "hardware" analogy would be
a Hi-Def player that is registered itself, but doesn't actually check or
registers any of the discs it plays.

WinXP requires a licence. The disc itself that it comes on is the same
for every copy. For registration of individual discs to work, you'd need
individual customization of each disc (expensive and unlikely), or a
license code for people to enter manually.

Windows activation only applies to WinXP, not any previous versions
of Windows. Hi-Def players will have to be compatable with all discs,
and all discs will have to be compatable with all players, which means
that any remote access control will have to be built in from day one.
Even you conceed this is unlikely.

>>2) That even with a connection, the studio will have control
>>over a disc beyond what the owner allows them to have.
>
>The studio? You are making a basic error since the studios are only
>part of a larger interest. The conglomerate is dictating hardware
>functionality because they now OWN them. On top of that they are
>getting the courts behind the cause. If I open up my PC and do any
>tinkering to defeat some "protection" incorporated in the software or
>hardware... I am a criminal.

If you have to open your PC to defeat any protection, you're not
doing it right. Regardless, studios *are* the ones pushing for more
copyright control and the DMCA, not the "conglomerate" corporations
asa whole. In fact, hardware divisions of a conglomerate have been
in contest with studio divisions of the same conglomerate in the past,
and probably will in the future.

And also , you completely side-stepped my point, that suggesting the
studios will eventually have control over anything the owner doesn't
want them to is a huge logical leap, especially since the owner will
have to be complicent to it at *some* point during the process.

>Consider this... When I was a kid in the 70's there was a pay service
>called WHT (Wometco Home Theater) in NY. It was a scrambled broadcast
>that showed movies. When I was a kid I opened my old tv and monkeyed
>with it until the signal was watchable. Now doing something like that
>is a crime.

So..... something widely considered unethical is now illegal. Did you
have a point with this story?

>>There's not a "clear implication" that any of what you said will
>>actually come to pass.
>
>Hey, you obviously see things differently. In my opinion you are
>uninformed. The hardware manufacturers are complying with DRM mandates
>because they are increasingly owned by the same companies.

No, manufacturers are complying with DRM mandates because
otherwise they wouldn't have *content* for their products.
Conglomeration has little to do with it.

>It's hardly a leap to realize that the hardware will be
>manufactured with every conceivable limitation in the near future and
>that online connections will be pushed on the populace aggressively
>for real time protection.

The leap is assuming Hi-Def discs will have such capability
simply because they have the *ability* to be connected to
receive additional content.

>Of course I might be wrong but after reading about the specs of the
>new dvd formats and the players required and the chips being installed
>and Windows Vista and the new Xbox 360... the writing is on the wall
>IMHO.

Could you cite any specs that say that an internet connection will
be *required* for hi-def players, and that such connection will have
remote control of content?

>The depressing part is that none of this would be needed if the media
>content providers had embraced the new medium rather than saw it as a
>foe to be defeated and subjugated. When it began they saw it as simply
>an additional revenue source but quickly fell back into a fearfully
>defensive stance.

I doubt that. Studios have always been protective of their content.

>I hope I am wrong about the outcome, but there is not much to be
>optimistic about at this point. The next wave of hardware and software
>is predetermined and the courts are backing the desires of the
>companies.

Courts aren't needed, and haven't even been used for determining
future specs of a product. If the manufacturers wanted, they *could*
produce a protectionless new format, and the studios couldn't stop
them. However, the major studios wouldn't be producing any
content on this protectionless format either. Manufacturers allow
studios say in the formats because they want the studios'
participation.

-Jay
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: the DVD that keeps on giving...
    ... >>>will have the ability to control said hardware remotely. ... >> 2) That even with a connection, ... can watch a legitimate disc? ...
    (rec.arts.movies.current-films)
  • Re: Serial Port Problem - Works under Cygwin not under Suse 9.2
    ... data from the serial port on multiple linux machines. ... There's only a three wire RS232 connection, no hardware or software ... control, 8N1. ...
    (comp.os.linux.development.system)
  • Re: Lahman, how ya doing?
    ... >>>had that heat flow calculation living in Target and responding to the E1 ... As if that's not enough, when a control action is calculate, the program ... The controller just puts out a number. ... >driver is software that is dedicated to talking to a particular hardware ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: Development process
    ... Varies widely, even within industries. ... than process control. ... There's often a separate hardware and software team. ... coding and downloading to target hardware (micro ...
    (sci.engr.control)
  • Re: Visual Studio.net Professional
    ... Error: Cannot establish a connection. ... I used a reg viewer resident on the hardware and the ... disappears very quickly and the deployment then fails. ... You're sure that you're using the new registry (and not loading ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsce.platbuilder)