RFID Tags for Digital Rights Management 277
mathemaniac writes "RFID Journal is running a story about a group of researchers at UCLA working on a new RFID application that would provide consumers a means of watching DVDs of movies as soon as they hit the theaters. It could also be used to address one of Hollywood's biggest concerns: piracy of digital content. The group is researching a method of using RFID as a tool for digital rights management (DRM), wherein technologies are employed to protect media files from unauthorized use."
Pr0n example (Score:5, Interesting)
Being sophisticated and innovative in member management is one thing, but more importantly is the undeniable fact that pr0n industry actually produces something that viewers want to watch, maybe that is why people are paying to watch it. Pr0n is probably one of the most pirated product known to mankind, yet it's still a feasible business living through printed to digital materials.
There's a story about movie slump [usatoday.com], the article mentioned that the industry needs something that can get people excited about going to the movies.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Pr0n==cheap (Score:2)
Take the Star Wars series for example.
In the original series, some unknowns became big names, while some other main character actors didn't do much else.
I'm curious to see who, among the previously unknown actors in Episodes 1-2-3 are going to go back to obscurity relatively quick...
Re:Pr0n==cheap (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Pr0n==cheap (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Pr0n==cheap (Score:2)
Re:Pr0n==cheap (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Pr0n==cheap (Score:2, Insightful)
Same reason you get fined $1000 for littering on the highway. It's not that your litter costs $1000 to clean up (more like $0.10), it's that you have to pay for the 10,000 other people who littered and didn't get caught.
With actors, sure, if you hit it big you make lots of money. But for every Brad Pitt there are 10,000 Nic Wegener [imdb.com]'s. It's not really fair, but for now it's the best we've got. At least we've got the freedom to choose whether to hack code for a decent living or to risk it all trying to b
Re:Pr0n==cheap (Score:2, Interesting)
For a movie star, if one gets $0.10, and the other gets $1000, then it's not even split up. The one with $1000 gets the (almost full - minus agents, etc.) $1000, and the one with $0.10 is stuck with $0.10.
Re:Pr0n==cheap (Score:2)
Re:Pr0n==cheap (Score:5, Interesting)
The real question is, how much is someone's work worth, in purely economic terms, to the person writing the check? If I were a producer and thought that Brad Pitt's name on my movie would be worth an extra $50 million in revenues, I'd be happy to write him a check for $10 million (numbers are pulled out of the air; I don't know what Pitt typically gets paid).
Yes, the $35,000-a-year teachers who teach kids to read are making a far greater contribution to society, but the fact is, their jobs aren't generating any "cash flow."
Re:Pr0n==cheap (Score:4, Insightful)
If we pay the movie star less, where does the rest go? To the producer? Director? Company? They're not going to do something nice, and responsible and maybe make it so joe sixpack and his family can go see a movie without being gouged.
Personally, I think a lot of those people should be paid less, and let the money trickle down more to the lowest paid. if they're making sufficient funds, then they can maybe do things like make it so I don't have to spend $50 or so to go see a movie with my girl.
This is what gets me with movie stars, singers, HOCKEY PLAYERS... sure they thank their fans.. say they owe it all to them... yet their hands are in our wallets every chance they get.
Out here in Vancouver, Canada, they did some awful things to the projectionists... rolling back wages, lessening the staff... etc. They ended up striking. Now projectionists made GOOD money, so I met a lot of people who thought they were overpaid anyways, so they should just take what they could get... they figured it was such an easy job they shouldn't be paid what they were.
i find this way of thinking to be very similar to brainwashing. Instead of wishing the poor projectionist and his family to be paid less, they should be wishing themselves to be PAID MORE. Why do people always have to drag others down, instead of trying to boost themselves up?
I asked them where the money should go if they succeeded in doing this to the projectists. Back to Sony and their ilk so they can have yet another dump truck full of money sitting around collecting interest?
I'd much rather my money went to some poor joe sixpack with a wife and kids busting his ass to support them, then to some already stinking rich guy.
Re:Pr0n==cheap (Score:5, Insightful)
People used to be able to say this type of thing about good movies. Maybe the reason the studios are so worried about losses due to piracy is that it might cause them to have to worry about silly things like artistry and solid writing.
Re:Pr0n==cheap (Score:2)
Re:Pr0n==cheap (Score:3, Insightful)
blair witch project was a damn good movie and it was shot with only US$35 thousand and made more than US$200 milion in the box office. OTOH titanic was budgeted in what ? US$ 200 mil ? and made 1 bilion. 5 times the investiment. blair with multiplied the inves
Re:Pr0n example (Score:5, Funny)
The pr0n industry is successful because guys like tits.
Re:Pr0n example (Score:4, Insightful)
You could pay $20 for a pr0n DVD whose production cost something in the order of thousands of dollars.
Compare that to a multi-million dollar budget needed for a top (non-pr0n) movie and you've got a pretty different deal there.
Re:Pr0n example (Score:2)
Compare that to a multi-million dollar budget needed for a top (non-pr0n) movie and you've got a pretty different deal there.
Maybe that says more about the efficiency of the non-pr0n movie industry than anything else.
I find it strange that Hollywood needs big budgets to put colored dots on a screen. Some of my favourite movies cost next to nothing to make. e.g. Aardman animation's The Wrong Trousers [imdb.com] was basically a one man operation, every bit as entertaining as the big budget movies and better than t
Re:Pr0n example (Score:2)
Clearly you've never bought pr0n. Try $60 average for a DVD.
Re:Pr0n example (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Pr0n example (Score:2)
Don't forget that the popcorn costs 50 cents for a tub and the soda is a dollar for 2 litres.
Re:Pr0n example (Score:2, Interesting)
In my mind this is analogous to the old "security through obfuscation" argument in that when you try to defy the inevitable and control the situation through brute force of regulation and procedure, you you actually lose control--you lit
Re:Pr0n example (Score:4, Insightful)
The porn industry is a completey different beast. It is profitable because they don't pay their actors millions of dollars for each film, especially when they make a dozen "films" a week. They don't pay millions to the producer. They don't pay tens of thousands for a script, and don't worry if they use the same script over and over again. They don't pay millions on advertising blitzes before the release. They don't pay millions to build sets, but reuse sets over and over and over and over again.
The only reason the porn industry is "profitable" is because they don't have anything like the budget requirements for a large box office movie. Porn manages to survive rampant copying only because it's so cheap to produce, the only need a few thousand people to buy the product to make it profitable.
Because the difference in the number of movies made, the budgets for each movie, and the number of copies that need to be viewed/sold to make a profit, there's no way the film industry can model itself after the porn industry.
Re:Pr0n example (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Pr0n example (Score:2)
Because the difference in the number of movies made, the budgets for each movie, and the number of copies that need to be viewed/sold to make a profit, there's no way the film industry can model itself after the porn industry.
Sure they could. They could make more movies, have smaller budgets, and release on cheap media like DVD.
Netflix has 3 million subscribers. HBO has 30 million. People are willing to pay for movies, just not the $10 or whatever theatres are charging these days (I wouldn't know, I
Re:Pr0n example (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Pr0n example (Score:2, Interesting)
Of course they could. Is Ron Jeremy doing Heather Hunter really any different from Bill Bob Thorton slamming Halle Berry? Only if you note the fact that you don't see the goods with the latter unless you freeze frame the latter's performance in Monsters' Ball.
All we need it highe
Re:Pr0n example (Score:2)
Most likely they figured out it is really not a nice game. Tried it, could not figure out what to do, dumped it.
I would not be boasting about 73% not liking your game, but that is just me...
The truth about dropping theater sales... (Score:2)
The Movie Industry says that due to lukewarm sales at the box office, ticket prices have to go up. Some say the turn out is low because it's more convenient to watch movies at home. I say this is BULLSHIT.
People do not go to the theaters anymore because it's not worth $10 a crack to see a movie on a screen that is not much larger than a big screen TV. Why spend $30 to $50 for a family to go o
21st century product in 20th century market (Score:5, Insightful)
20th century film marketing was based on the pay-per-view model where a central facility (the movie theater) charged each person a fixed fee (the box office admission) for each showing of the film. It didn't matter which film was showing; customers paid the same entry fee. Unpopular product would not collect as many fees as a more-popular title.
In this model there is no price flexibility for the consumer. It's strictly take-it-or-leave-it. This model works when there is a limited number of viewing openings available (the seats in the theater) and limited product (one print of the film per theater and only a dozen copies of the film in the metro area).
This model fails when there is nearly unlimited product (all film titles from the past 50 years) on DVD or unlimited view openings. What happens in this type of market is that the consumers get to bid on what they will pay and the terms that they will pay for the product. The new technology has changed the marketplace by removing most of the previous restrictions. The new technology is not going away.
DRM is an attempt to force the previous market conditions onto the new business environment. The MPAA companies (the film studios) want to have the highly profitable previous marketplace conditions with the greatly expanded marketplace made available by DVD. Beaucoup bucks if you can make it happen.
But it won't work. What will happen if the MPAA companies actually get DRM to work is that the market for film product will shrink to a small percentage of what it is today.
Successfully integrating DRM into film industry product is not going to bring back the old way of presenting film entertainment product. It's just going to drive the current film consuming public into some other form of entertainment.
One of the reasons that parents are encouraged to read fairy tales to their children is that it is an effective way to get the collective wisdom of the ages passed on to the adults of the modern age who are too vain to listen to good advice coming from any other source. The fairy tale that the MPAA should pay attention to the story of the goose that laid golden eggs. This goose would lay one egg a day of pure gold. The villagers got greedy and decided to kill the goose, cut it open and get all the golden eggs that must be inside. This they did. And they found no gold inside. And they never got any more golden eggs.
Like the villagers, the film studios don't understand the new film market. Adding DRM to the product that is providing their golder eggs will be like killing the goose.
Re:21st century product in 20th century market (Score:4, Interesting)
It already has. Have you seen the ratio of money made between video games and movies? I remember in the 80's the idea that one day you would be able to interact with movies. That day is here.
Re:21st century product in 20th century market (Score:3)
Disney has sold about 23 million copies of "The Incredibles" in two months. Most studios would be estatic if a backlist title sold 200,000 copies in ten years.
But it won't work. What will happen if the MPAA companies actually get DRM to
Re:Pr0n example (Score:2)
Re:Pr0n example (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually we have real studios with lots of neat props and sometimes they take 2 or 3 days
I want to buy another player... why? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I want to buy another player... why? (Score:2)
Re:I want to buy another player... why? (Score:2)
Re:I want to buy another player... why? (Score:2)
Re:I want to buy another player... why? (Score:3, Insightful)
No waiting in lines at the theatre, you can just hit "play" at 12:01 AM if
Re:I want to buy another player... why? (Score:3)
And the point of selling something but setting a "can't be used until later date" is? I really never understood it. Since all those getting it are the ones who won't see it at the theatre (hence why they bought the DVD), I really can't see a point. Just typical market control which is of no benefit to the customer. If they don't like people watching it, don't sell it.
LOL, they have no clue (Score:5, Interesting)
If they really cared, they could slap together an encryption technique in an hour, and have an internet delivery system so you could watch movies on your computer. It doesn't matter that the encryption system is crappy, it'd take longer to break than it would to simply pirate the movie in conventional ways. And if the crack becomes widespread, spend 1 more hour and change the system around.
So in conclusion, they could create a content delivery system and boost their revenue on movies with code from a system that could take a good programmer less than a month to develop.
Re:LOL, they have no clue (Score:4, Insightful)
and have it broken in half an hour, Sony developed a technique that was broken with a marker pen. And I think that took them much more than an hour to "slap together"
Re:LOL, they have no clue (Score:2)
This has some possibilities... (Score:5, Funny)
What do you mean it's already been done [slashdot.org]?
Oh well, back to the drawing board.
You gotta be kidding me (Score:5, Funny)
MOD parent \/ (Score:4, Insightful)
Why do you assume that RFID is "evil" or unwanted by geeks? I use it at work to track pallets in conveyor lines. You can't imagine how much easier it is to track pallets with parts on them rather than track parts on a rolling conveyor using prox sensors.
Now, DRM is another story. I think that you've simply seen too many RFID articles on /. that link DRM, personal product, or human tracking with RFID. Those are completely unrelated to RFID in general, and are mere uses of the tool.
Overall, I think your opinion is as blindingly focused as those of the MPAA, RIAA, and all the similar organizations that you despise.
Re:MOD parent \/ (Score:3, Interesting)
I understand that DRM, while being problematic for privacy advocates and those of us who like complete control over our own computers, is, when properly applied, one plausible way of encouraging mo
Re:MOD parent \/ (Score:2)
Re:You gotta be kidding me (Score:3, Interesting)
The idea of an RFID tag makes perfect sense. With the new and shiny DMCA, it could be illegal to produce copies of the RFID tags. You could put the key on the RFID tag and manufacture some "proprietary" format with the emb
Good point; only one problem (Score:2)
Additionally, every extra layer of difficulty they add to the usage of DVDs just encourages more piracy. I can't play DVD x on my computer? Fine, I'll just go on the 'net, someone there will have it, and I won't even have to feel guilty.
I honestly can't see how the MPAA can continue to exist in its current form for much longer.
Re:You gotta be kidding me (Score:2, Funny)
The missing pieces for my sock drawer! I'm going to RFID my socks into pairs so I can track them, then DRM them out of compatibility with my flatmate's feet.
Sorted, now to work on biological DRM for my milk
Re:You gotta be kidding me (Score:5, Funny)
Networking required (Score:5, Interesting)
This technology could conceivably be used for good. Imagine a player with a hard disk as well as a network card. It could auto-download interviews, making-of documentaries and so on as they get released after the DVD ships.
Of course this is the end of privacy. The RFID tag has to be unique to each copy of the disk, otherwise you could copy it wholesale. When the player phones home with the RFID info, they know who bought the disk and maybe even how often it gets played. Ick.
Re:Networking required (Score:4, Informative)
At first this looks like DECSS all over again but with the key on an RFID tag.
DeCSS could have worked years ago, when writable DVDs were expensive. But now that I can get a dual layer writable DVD for 3 or 4 bucks, it's too easy to just bit copy the whole damn thing.
RFID tags are even cheaper, more like 30 or 40 cents. The writers themselves are expensive, but if this plan actually goes into action I bet you'll see the price of RFID writers come down real quick, which, hey, at least there'll be good to come out of it.
This technology could conceivably be used for good. Imagine a player with a hard disk as well as a network card. It could auto-download interviews, making-of documentaries and so on as they get released after the DVD ships.
You don't need RFID technology to do that. And without tamper-proof hardware, which is allegedly physically impossible, you're not going to stop piracy, because it only takes one person to break into the device and reverse engineer it.
Of course this is the end of privacy. The RFID tag has to be unique to each copy of the disk, otherwise you could copy it wholesale.
I seriously doubt the RIAA is going to be able to outlaw paying for DVDs with cash.
When the player phones home with the RFID info, they know who bought the disk and maybe even how often it gets played.
I also doubt they're going to force DVD manufacturers to build players that "phone home".
Re:Networking required (Score:2)
I'm not sure you understand how DeCSS (or, more appropriately, CSS) works. The contents of the DVD are encrypted, so "just bit copy[ing] the whole damn thing" doesn't help you at all. You still need to be able to decrypt the content to view it. The decryption key for pressed DVD's is stored in the innermost track of
Re:Networking required (Score:3, Insightful)
Networking Required is exactly the weakness here, as it was with the original DIVX. The RFID is not really a real improvement over the original scheme of "marking" the DVD with some flaws out of the normal reading range.
I see nothing inherently wrong with DRM schemes, but they need to learn from iTunes. The market has shown that a reasonable DRM that does not interfere with how honest people will want to use the content they are buying, will not meet with market resistance.
One of the legitimate thing
Advertising to the content providers... (Score:5, Interesting)
that would embed DVDs with an RFID tag and DVD players with an RFID reader so that the tagged
DVDs would play only in RFID-enabled players and only if the reader could authenticate the
DVD's tag. In order to authenticate, the player would also need to link to some type of
online network, similar to the EPCglobal Network, that would associate the DVD with a legal
sale. Through this system, the copyright owners (the film production company and any other
license-holders of the content) would have digital rights management over the work. But
viewers would not be able to play the DVDs without an RFID-enabled player because the tag
would essentially lock the disc.
I don't see anything there that allows me to exercise fair-use. I need to use some special
DVD player (the market has already proven they don't like this), I need to have an Internet
connection, and I need to buy some special DVD...
I apparently can't make a backup copy for myself, move the content to portable formats, etc.
Hey UCLA Research Team, remember this is necessary. Oh wait, you aren't being paid by the
consumers, you're being paid by the content providers...
The Motion Picture Association of America, a trade group that represents major Hollywood
studios, estimates that the U.S. motion picture industry loses more than $3 billion annually
in potential worldwide revenue due to piracy.
LOL. This is difficult to prove and we all know why. Thanks for the blantant bullshit
though.
This sounds more like advertising to the content providers than it sounds like some sort of
press release of what hey have/can do.
If you have a hammer everything is a nail (Score:3, Funny)
History shows us that people are subject to the tyrrany of small increments. Huge increments in cost , restrictions and rights are generally unacceptable, but people don't see
Potential revenue? (Score:3, Insightful)
Scratches head ...
Hey, I can play that game too ...
I lose more than $10K every year in potential revenue just because I didn't get that raise ...
I lose more than $1M every year in potential revenue because I wasn't selected to be CEO for any of several Fortune 500 companies .
Simpler solution: (Score:5, Funny)
there's always the manual method (Score:3, Informative)
Just a MPAA pipe dream (Score:5, Insightful)
Someone care to explain to me how putting a RFID chip in a DVD could prevent a computer from reading the raw content of the disc and cracking that? I think it's been shown time and time again that DRM will be cracked, especially when the new technology can be attacked with conventional hardware.
Basically, reading the article this both seems technically impossible and a far way off.
On another note, if the MPAA really wanted the DVD to be available when the movie was in theatres, they'd just make it so now. But they're smarter than that; they know people won't pay twice for the same movie if both options are available at the same time.
Re:Just a MPAA pipe dream (Score:2)
It's a genius idea frankly. something Unique is needed to be part of the the next spec...RFID is the simplest thing to use. mold it right into
Re:Just a MPAA pipe dream (Score:2)
Obviously the article is not very technical, as it is geared toward a non-techincal audience. However, I would imagine the tag would contain some sort of encrypted key [that theoretically only MPAA-licenced players would be able to decrypt] that can be used to decrypt the contents of the disc. It wouldn't have to be anything too complex, maybe something like a
So basically... (Score:2)
And if you're watching "Fahrenheit 911" on DVD... (Score:2, Insightful)
Are you kidding? (Score:2)
Burn, Hollywood, Burn (Score:5, Insightful)
Hollywood has relied more and more on the opening weekend, with unprecedented simultaneous premieres on many screens across the land. They could invest more glitz, making every premiere like the Golden Age fantasies, with skytracking spotlights, red carpets, celebrities and other hype that leverages their control of the unique spacetime event. They might hold advance ticket sale lotteries which draw stars to winning venues. They could cover the whole thing on TV, making 15-minute stars of attendees. And raise the ticket price, sell event merchandise. Ultimately, they'd have economics which demand seeding the "pirates" with copies linked to premiere sales.
The movie becomes the ad for the event, merchandise and access to the stars. They're already headed there; desperate DRM schemes like this one from UCLA just get in the way of a workable business model that exploits the Internet, rather than fighting their best customers and partners.
Re:Burn, Pirate, Burn (Score:2)
Hope it fails... (Score:2)
Forumalic Post (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Forumalic Post (Score:2)
So, um, listening to this (Score:5, Insightful)
I imagine if they try to productize this, they'll fail for the same reason DIVX failed; the technology demands far too much of and is far too restrictive on the consumer while offering no benefits to anyone except the producer.
If movie companies want DVDs available at the same time the movie comes out they can just bloody well sell them. It's amazing how much proposed technology serves no purpose except attempting to overcome corporate insecurity*.
* Corporate insecurity. "Insecurity" not as in "Inadequately guarded or protected; unsafe" but "insecurity" as in "Lacking self-confidence; plagued by anxiety".
DIVX revisited? (Score:2)
I'm refering to DIVX [wikipedia.org] the format sold at Circuit City and failed.
You buy a disc... DIVX, RFID enabled or otherwise, and you gotta wait for network authorization to play it. So no chance of the kids watching it on the road in your SUV, no chance of watching the flick on that flight with your laptop. I can only suspect loss resale rights assuming the RFID tag is locked into your DVD player.
DIVX at least had the added benifit that it was like a rental but no late fee. Cool in tha
My DRM management solution... (Score:2)
I practically stopped bothering with 'entertainment' more than a decade ago and personally think worthwhile entertainment is increasingly few and far between, getting thinner each time.
Instead of trying to produce really good stuff, studios go for the quick bucks and stretch them with DRM. From my point of view, t
What does RFID add to this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Meanwhile, people will get one of the new players, record the movie off the video output, redigitize and distribute. It is easer than smuggling a video camera into the theatre.
Re:What does RFID add to this? (Score:2)
Bullshit! (Score:5, Interesting)
"Specialized" DVD players that play "Specialized" disks to go along with the other 9, big, ugly boxes collecting dust on top of your TV (along with the other "normal" DVD player which plays only "normal" DVDs).
It won't work. History says so. [wikipedia.org] Gadh believes consumers will be interested in purchasing this moronic system because it's in his interest to believe it. He's paid to believe it.
Oh, I hope they do this! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Business and technology (Score:3, Insightful)
Every movie going to include a player & a TV? (Score:2, Interesting)
Wasn't Nintendo talking about doing this. (Score:2)
Re:Wasn't Nintendo talking about doing this. (Score:2)
Completely Screwed (Score:5, Insightful)
You have a laptop with a manual which explains how to operate the local fusion power plant...but, you cannot authenticate with a Media Protection Regime server.
Ditto for the manual on agricultural methods, repairing that '69 Chevy, treating that bacterial infection, et cetera.
And besides that, all of society is headed towards renting everything: your home, your car, your movie collection, your books, even your underwear.
You buy Star Trek: TNG with RFID. You go to let your kids watch it in fifteen years, and guess what: Paramount decides that you thieving bastards watching those old episodes are cutting into the ratings of Star Trek: Braga Does Not Suck so they shutdown the authentication servers thus rendering your $5,000 collection of Star Trek history worthless.
Ford is really hurting in 2010, so, they stop authenticating the ignition sequence in your 2006 Ford Craptang that you have kept in spectacular shape.
Fruit-of-the-Loom wants you to buy new underwear, so, they turn off the authentication for your year old undies. Now, your washing machine will not run with these undies present.
You have been warned.
Re:Completely Screwed (Score:2)
DRM underwear? (Score:4, Funny)
A true hacker would take a brute force approach and wash his or her undies by hand.
Things never do change in this area (Score:2, Insightful)
Then, cr*ppy movies got shunted to lower echelon theaters with lower ticket prices. Then to VCRs with the straight-to-video phenom
They could stop most piracy... (Score:3, Insightful)
The best way to defeat piracy is make no need. By creating more obstacles for the consumer, they make it easier to justify piracy (because Pirate copies don't have to call home to verify authenticity.)
Instead of spending money in court they should spend it on distribution. Napster only happend because it was the fastest way to get the product. If they were to release DVD videos at the time they premier in theaters they would stop camera piracy, and the motive for most casual pirates.
Re:They could stop most piracy... (Score:2)
They could stop all piracy if they just released everything for free. Of course they wouldn't make very much money that way, and no, they could make up for it with volume.
I think you overestimate the number of people who used Napster because it was the fastest way to get the product vs. those who used it because they didn't have to pay for the product. I certainly fell under the latter, and most people I knew at the time did too.
A whole lot of people don't care about seeing every movie the instant it is
Why they don't release DVDs immediately? (Score:2)
I don't go to movie theaters, so why do I have to wait months before being able to see the movie?
Could someone explain it to me?
Thanks.
Focus on content, not protecting crap (Score:3, Informative)
The digital format of most films and music released today has led to its increased piracy. The quality of video and audio recordings based in analog technology, such as cassette or VCR tapes, decreases each time an original version is copied.
No, a crappy movie is still a crappy movie, whether it is the first copy or the 1000th copy.
When digital recordings, such as CDs and DVDs, are copied, however, no quality is lost.
You can't lose what you don't have to start with.
The group will also need to develop a system for writing to the tags, a platform for associating DVDs with their purchasers or owners and a means of encrypting the tag data.
Associating a DVD with a particular owner? Right there is baaad news. What is it called, First Sale doctrine or something? I ask because I don't recall the actual name, but you get my point.
Past anti-copy technology has been foiled by simple tricks with markers and clever people cracking weak encryption. I'd bet a dollar or two that this will be no exception.
Note to the **AA: focus more on making the content/experience worth the price of admission/sale/whatever, and people will purchase it. If the public can't enjoy entertainment on their own terms, one of two things will happen:
(1) WE (as in the public) will stop paying for content, or
(2) The aforementioned clever people will break your protection and get the content for free and enjoy it how they wish.
Either way, you lose.
(BTW...the MPAA [mpaa.com] website is "temporarily unavailable.")
Network authorization - no way (Score:2)
Imagine Xmas morning, when the authentication servers are overloaded, it takes hours to get a new disk authorized, and new DVD players won't play old disks until you contact the call center for an upgrade authorization.
Control (Score:2)
Just think. Now there's nothing stopping Lucas Films from releasing 20 copies of the same movie, and FORCING you to buy them all if you want to continue to be able to watch it.
This won't take off... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This won't take off... (Score:2)
There is actually a 4-Tier income stream from Movies:
Theater->Rental->PPV->TV
This is done for a reason. As stated in the parent, they are not going to release a movie on DVD at the same time it is released in theaters regardless of some fancy RFID encryption. When we go to the theater we pay ~$7.50 or more Each Person. There is no way to control how many people view a DVD release, even on
Re:RFID Disks & Players == BAD IDEA (Score:3, Insightful)
Because conservative-indoctrinated college pinheads are somehow above such notions? Do you just go around slinging anti-liberal rhetoric where ever you think it might stick?
Sorry, champ. It's not sticking. Try a substance other than bullshit sometime, it might help.
Unless the industry happens to bribe-er-persuade the current House and Senate to make such DRM-enabled players mandatory, then they'll simply go about the tried and true method of appealin
Re:Questions ? (Score:2)
This is very unlikey to be implemented on the current generation of Standard Definition DVDs. This is Divx version 2. The consumer gets no additio
Re:Questions ? (Score:2)
Sounds like you could get around it just as easily as I got around playing Phantasy Star Online (DC ver) on the free "unofficial" servers.
Re:RFID is evil. (Score:2, Funny)
Any USC student/alum could have told you that LONG ago.