Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

RIAA and MPAA Developing Domain-Based DRM

Posted by Soulskill on Sat Sep 13, 2008 10:06 AM
from the if-you-can't-beat-them,-keep-trying-to-beat-them dept.
An anonymous reader points out news that the music and movie studios are attempting to develop a new type of DRM that would allow customers more flexibility in playing content on multiple devices. The Digital Entertainment Content Ecosystem (DECE) would establish a list of devices in your personal "domain" (unrelated to web domains), and minimizes or removes restrictions within that domain. TechCrunch summarizes DECE and notes that many of the big corporations have decided to support it. "The ecosystem envisioned by Singer et al revolves around a common set of formats, interfaces and other standards. Devices built to the DECE specifications would be able to play any DECE-branded content and work with any DECE-certified service. The goal is to create for downloads the same kind of interoperability that's been true for physical products, such as CDs and DVDs. Where it gets really interesting, though, is the group's stated intention to make digital files as flexible and permissive as CDs, at least within the confines of someone's personal domain. Once you've acquired a file, you could play it on any of your devices -- if it couldn't be passed directly from one DECE-ready device to another, you'd be allowed to download additional copies. And when you're away from home, you could stream the file to any device with a DECE-compatible Web browser."
+ -
story

Related Stories

by
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • qestion (Score:5, Interesting)

    by perlchild (582235) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:08AM (#24990525)

    Isn't that REALLY close to the permission system Apple has for Fairplay?

    • Yeah, except that I think this system allows you to register as many of your own personal devices as you want.

      I'll be interested to see if they follow through with their "goals"...but it's still going to be DRM, so the best-case scenario is still a bad case in my book.

    • by Simonetta (207550) on Saturday September 13 2008, @12:19PM (#24991589)

      The music 'industry' really needs to rethink their 20th-century mentality. Where one monolithic entity (posing as several individual global corporations) controls culture for everyone by distributing entertainment 'packages' from one central source. And by bringing the full force of state-controlled legal violence against anyone stepping outside of this Stalinist framework. There really is no difference in the mind-set between the RIAA and Soviet Orwellian Ministry of Culture. Neither of them work well in the real world; which consists of real people and real culture that can't be controlled by a centralized authority.

          The only thing that government-controlled (or corporate-controlled) culture does is create a vast and illegal underground counter-culture. Artists end up imprisoned or spending all their creative energy hiding, fighting, or defending their work against the corporate Stalinist cement-heads. Society suffers, people suffer, other people and nations advance and your culture and people don't.

          Culture and Art comes from the bottom up, not the top down. Especially in an era of inexpensive and widely available technology like high resolution digital video cameras, software audio mixing studios, and internet high-speed media distribution.

          My advice is to stop sucking on Hollywood's Grand Tetons, get some gear, learn some literary and music theory, create your own works, distribute them discretely among your own trusted people, and ignore the RIAA/MIAA.

          And for goodness sake's don't let the cement-heads steal your culture. We need to completely change our mentality from believing that artistic success is being a 'rock star' to a mentality where being an artistic success consists of being able to keep our important and meaningful works of art hidden from Hollywood.

      • Re:Whoring are we? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by hairyfeet (841228) <`bassbeast1968' `at' `gmail.com'> on Saturday September 13 2008, @11:34AM (#24991197)
        Actually it sounds more like a spinoff of PlaysForSure [wikipedia.org]. Personally they can keep it. I'm sick of companies either treating us like criminals or making us do a little monkey dance just to use what we PAID for. And people wonder why piracy is rampant? It is because the pirates are the only ones not having to jump through hoops just to watch or listen to the cartels precious IP. And yet here we see again that they never learn and won't be happy until they run off their very last customer. Because how many of you are going to want to buy all your media devices AGAIN just so they can support this latest DRM BS? But as always this is my 02c,YMMV
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          And people wonder why piracy is rampant? It is because the pirates are the only ones not having to jump through hoops just to watch or listen to the cartels precious IP.

          Piracy is rampant because it's easy to get stuff for free and not get caught. It has nothing to do with DRM.

          Years of watching people swap 120 minute cassettes of non-DRM'ed Spectrum games (which could be bought for less than $6 each) has made that obvious.

          It doesn't matter if the music/games/films are cheap or without DRM as you just can't b

          • by Weaselmancer (533834) on Saturday September 13 2008, @01:32PM (#24992151)

            Piracy is rampant because it's easy to get stuff for free and not get caught. It has nothing to do with DRM.

            So...if it's easy (and it is), what's the point of the DRM then? All it takes is one bored kid from the Netherlands and item X is now on the net for free. The only people the DRM hassles are the paying customers.

            It doesn't matter if the music/games/films are cheap or without DRM as you just can't beat free for a lot of people.

            And yet, these people who will never buy item X at any price, but will only accept it for free - the industry counts each one as a lost sale when they do their reports on how much piracy costs.

            These people you mention who only like their product for free - how does it hurt the industry if they cannot pirate something? They'd never buy it in the first place. It adds up to zero no matter if they get it for free or not.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            Piracy is rampant because it's easy to get stuff for free and not get caught. It has nothing to do with DRM.

            It's actually quite possible to sell people stuff they can get for free (eg., Cable TV, bottled water, DVDs of TV shows.) You just have to add some sort of value to the free product, such as convenience or quality. DRM is backwards, it lessens the value of the paid-for product.

          • by El Capitaine (973850) on Saturday September 13 2008, @12:37PM (#24991763)

            It shouldn't bother you, either. DRM doesn't affect people who aren't criminals. So don't worry about it unless you're a filthy thief, then you're only getting what you deserve.

            If only this were true...

            In reality, it only affects the people who don't pirate things.

            For example, my copy of Spore restricts my to three installations. That's it. So between my desktop and my laptop, thats two right there. Then, if I have to format one for whatever reason...there's my third. After that, I can't play it if I get a new PC, or if for some reason I have to format again, now I can't play the game I legally BOUGHT and PAID for, without jumping through all kinds of hoops with EA's customer service, with one of those being interrogated like I was a criminal for the reason I needed more than three installs. I PAID for this game!

            And then, on the other hand, you have the pirates who got the same release date, didn't pay a dime, and get MORE flexibilty with the product, and can install it on as many PCs they like. It's this kind of comparison that makes people who don't want to steal from the developers (myself included) start to seriously think about pirating in the future.

            DRM doesn't prevent piracy. It encourages it.

  • Fine in theory... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheRaven64 (641858) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:09AM (#24990531) Homepage Journal
    In practice, this can only work if the implementation of DECE is a trade secret, which means implementing it in hobbyist devices or open source software is impossible. Sounds like something the device manufacturers would love, since it gives them a nice big barrier to entry.
    • by mishehu (712452) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:25AM (#24990643)
      And thus we can forget about it supporting anything other than microsoft or apple. But then again, I doubt there are many pro-DRM linux or bsd users out there...

      I personally wouldn't by any nanny-device like this. I bought the file; I want to play it on whatever the fsck I want to without having to ask permission like a little child in school having go to the bathroom.
      • Re:Fine in theory... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Stellian (673475) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:56AM (#24990921)

        Thank you, but my devices already interoperate perfectly in my "domain": it's the free domain. Nothing beats freedom, you know.
        Someone needs to spell it out for these guys: selling digital media will cease to be a business in the near future. The digital ecosystem does not need the middle-man, the printing press or recording studio of days gone by. You might keep some control over software or things like that by means of DRM (think consoles), but selling audio/video media is a dying business.

        • by JackassJedi (1263412) on Saturday September 13 2008, @11:25AM (#24991139)
          Any business is based on the creation of goods. In the case of music, there use to be twofold goods: the music itself (created by artists), and the media on which it was being distributed (created by the record companies). The second good is not needed anymore since access to the music itself is theoretically ubiquitous, hence yes, it is dead on a dying business, and the sooner these companies realize that, the better they will be off (see disaster of e.g. AGFA who missed the digital camera boom).
          • One solution is to switch to a different business model -- make your money from touring, and treat everything else as promotional material.

            If a few million people have heard your music because it was pirated, or because it was (illegally!) attached as a soundtrack to a funny YouTube video, well, it's hard (impossible?) to buy publicity that good, and you just got it for free.

            In fact, there was a great article [salon.com] about this -- basically arguing that because of how ridiculously greedy the publishers and studios

    • by TD-Linux (1295697) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:26AM (#24990655)
      In addition, the iPod will never support it. There goes 70% of the potential users.
      • by rvw (755107) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:59AM (#24990935)

        In addition, the iPod will never support it. There goes 70% of the potential users.

        Wait until the next update of your ipod. I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't be technically possible to get this working on an ipod.

        • by TD-Linux (1295697) on Saturday September 13 2008, @12:46PM (#24991825)

          In addition, the iPod will never support it. There goes 70% of the potential users.

          Wait until the next update of your ipod. I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't be technically possible to get this working on an ipod.

          Of course it's technically possible, but when was the last time you saw an iPod with a PlaysForSure logo?

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        In addition, the iPod will never support it. There goes 70% of the potential users.

        And the largest music store in the US. But that's exactly what this is about, isn't it? Reinventing Fairplay so they can re-establish their cartel... Too bad for them, since to do it, they need a vertically integrated solution like iTunes/iTMS/iPod. Apple makes everything from the hardware all the way down to the QuickTime file format. That's why everyone who attempts to compete with Apple fails. Tougher still: They not only have to make all the pieces to succeed, they have to do a better job of it tha

    • Yeah, reminds me of the HDMI thing. In theory, any device capable of outputting HDMI should work with any device capable of receiving HDMI. But due to its complexity in implementation, at least in the first generation devices, it was pretty hit or miss. So you've got a shiny new PS3 and a shiny new TV, but HDMI won't work, and you're stuck doing the digital->analog->digital transcoding for no good reason.

      So with this DECE thing, even if users play by the rules, will it actually work?

      What if one dev

      • by RulerOf (975607) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:49AM (#24990859)

        So with this DECE thing, even if users play by the rules, will it actually work?

        IMHO, the *AA could create a DRM scheme so advanced that it it powered by AI and knows, with 100% success, whether or not you're using content in a method that constitutes fair use...and it would still be bullshit, because no one should be able to tell you what you can do with what you own.

        There's a difference between breaking the law, and not having the choice to.

  • DRM... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:09AM (#24990533)
    You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.
    • Re:DRM... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by poetmatt (793785) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:18AM (#24990605)

      For once, an accurate phrase.

      The fact that this DECE will be easily crackable (there is nothing that isn't, especially when hackers have an incentive to spite riaa/mpaa), and a complete failure, apparently has been neglected.

      I mean haven't these guys learned that renaming DRM doesn't make it any less annoying? Did they forget about that "digital enablement" or whatever it was called?

      Sheesh.

    • Re:DRM... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by RDW (41497) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:38AM (#24990757)

      'So far, the list includes several big-name brands in computers, networking and consumer electronics, but there are some glaring absences, including Apple'

      FAIL!

      If the lipstick isn't even compatible with your favourite breed of pig, their silly little 'coalition' is just as doomed as all the others before it.

    • Re:DRM... (Score:4, Funny)

      by Frosty Piss (770223) on Saturday September 13 2008, @11:03AM (#24990961)

      You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.

      What does Sarah Palin have to do with this?

  • by Nursie (632944) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:11AM (#24990545) Homepage

    Because I've never taken a cd to a friend's place, used it in someone else's car (or a hire car), or given one away to a friend when I didn't want it any more.

    Fuck that, I'll stick to the CD, which I can rip myself.

  • DRM is still DRM (Score:5, Insightful)

    by QuietLagoon (813062) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:13AM (#24990569)
    No matter how much lipstick you put on DRM, it is still DRM.
    .

    The problem with DRM is that DRM requires a server out on the Internet to give me permission to listen to the music, or to watch the movies, I have purchased. Without that server, the content I purchase are little more than a random collection of useless data bits.

    Look at those people who foolishly bought into Microsoft's DRM for music. In a short while, Microsoft will be turning off the DRM server, and all the music thus "protected" by Microsoft's DRM will be unusable.

    Do you really want to give the RIAA an on/off switch for your ability to listen to your media collection?

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      Technically, users who bought MS Fairplay 1.0 can still play their music because their machine is still authenticated. The problem will be if anything ever happens to the machine like a re-install of the OS or the music owner decides to buy a new machine. There are no more servers to authenticate the new/re-installed machine. As someone who had to re-install XP many times because of stability/malware issues, re-installing Windows happens a lot.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      "Do you really want to give the RIAA an on/off switch for your ability to listen to your media collection?"

      Precisely why I don't buy anything I can't rip, or can't shift wherever I want to, or sell if I get tired of it.

      I'm not interested in "sharing" it with the world. But I want to do whatever the hell *I* want to with it on *my* devices.

  • by CaptainPatent (1087643) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:15AM (#24990581) Journal
    Blackhat developing domain-based crack.
  • by nathan.fulton (1160807) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:16AM (#24990587) Homepage Journal
    A few problems:
    1. Co-Option! TFA: "it [DECE] could be a very good thing for consumers." Ever heard of the concept of a co-option? The anti-DRM movement has so much public support (outside of /. et al) because of its downfalls in terms of flexibility. Take that away, DRM seems more reasonable to Joe College, his parents, and his little sister.

    2. More centralization, more big corporations, less privacy, and another chance for IE to redeem itself. TFS: "you could stream the file to any device with a DECE-compatible Web browser" And what exactly does DECE compatability mean? Does this mean my real identity is broadcast when I use a browser? If so, Will it be disabled by default?

    3. Use your MP3 player/computer for storage of non-music files? Think again.
    TFA: "The caveats: the devices have to be registered electronically to that user, and the copyright holder gets to limit the total number of devices customers may register."
    Considering the history of DRM, I wouldn't be surprised if this means both corporations AND whoever cracks their methods gets to see everything.
  • by TD-Linux (1295697) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:18AM (#24990601)
    ... as long as it's IE (possibly Opera or Safari).
    Unless this form of DRM is radically different from its predecessors, it will only be supported on closed-source browsers, which eliminates Firefox, Chrome, and Konqueror.

    I really don't see anything new here - we already have standard formats like mp3 and mpeg-4 (aka XviD) that play on a variety of devices. This new plan looks like a great way for DECE to profit from licensing and certification fees, but not much else.
  • Sorry, what's a "web domain"?
  • Insanity (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anomalyst (742352) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:23AM (#24990627)
    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
  • A compost pile is an ecosystem. So I'm suggesting HEAP - Helpless Effort to Accumulate Profit (of shit)
  • by EllynGeek (824747) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:33AM (#24990705)

    Something that always gets overlooked is how this is also an attempt to kill off the second-hand market. As has been said before, their ultimate goals are to get paid for every viewing and listen, and to cut those pesky greedy artists out of the deal entirely.

  • by mgkimsal2 (200677) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:54AM (#24990891) Homepage

    What do you bet that was the original full project name? ;)

  • by Phoenix666 (184391) on Saturday September 13 2008, @10:59AM (#24990937)

    You really have to think that after 10 years of consumers telling the labels and studios what they want, and then voting with their feet when they don't get it, it would have sunk into even the head of the thickest *AA dinosaur. In the annals of colossal stupidity, the last 10 years of IP wars will have to rank pretty near the top.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      You really have to think that after 10 years of consumers telling the labels and studios what they want, and then voting with their feet when they don't get it, it would have sunk into even the head of the thickest *AA dinosaur. In the annals of colossal stupidity, the last 10 years of IP wars will have to rank pretty near the top.

      10 years? Try 100.

      Radio will kill the live music industry. Vinyl will kill radio and live music. Home taping will kill vinyl, radio and live music. Copying CDs will kill music. MP3s will kill music.

      It wasn't true back then and it isn't true now. People want to listen to music, plain and simple. The RIAA know that damn well, they're not that stupid. Quite why they're so keen to describe every new piece of technology as the thing that will eventually kill them, I don't know. Some sort of control thi

  • by Dirtside (91468) on Saturday September 13 2008, @11:35AM (#24991211) Journal

    Repeat after me: All DRM is inherently defective and bad for consumers. Consider the baseline: completely unfettered media. You can do with it whatever you want.

    All forms of DRM add fetters to that situation without giving any additional abilities or functionality. There is absolutely nothing that can be done with DRMed media that cannot be done (in a technical sense) with unfettered media.

  • The "same" as CDs (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Adrian Lopez (2615) on Saturday September 13 2008, @12:03PM (#24991437) Homepage

    ... the group's stated intention to make digital files as flexible and permissive as CDs, at least within the confines of someone's personal domain.

    In other words, not at all the same as CDs.

    • How about we make sure(that means testing) that if the server is unavailable, the music is unlocked.

      That way if the server ever goes out of business, the music goes into the public domain.

      • by BlueParrot (965239) on Saturday September 13 2008, @02:10PM (#24992407)

        Right. Which is why we all are still listening to analog media.

        Sound is analog. ""Digital" music is simply a digital encoding of an analog signal, if you convert it back to analog, copy the analog signal, and then re-encode it into digital you will have a digital signal, but this time without whatever bullshit encryption was on it to begin with. Yes, you will get some degradation in the process, but I can guarantee you that this can be made VERY minor, and certainly much less significant than the compression algorithms used to reduce the file size. Any statistical noise can be dealt with by repeating the process and average the result, systematic errors will be no worse than those inherent in the equipment you end up using to listen to it.