European DRM News 143
burgburgburg writes "Two new fronts opening in the battles over digital rights management. First: news.com is reporting how French authorities are investigating EMI France and music retailer Fnac over anticopying technology included on CDs that allegedly renders them unplayable on some systems. The investigation began after the Bureau of Competition's antifraud unit (DDCCRF) received complaints from a consumer group known as UFC-Que Choisir. Second: BusinessWeek reports that the EC is investigating Microsoft to make sure that they don't illegally dominate the field of digital rights management. Regulators have told Microsoft and its partner Time Warner that they are looking into their plan to acquire the company ContentGuard, which makes DRM software because of concerns that it will create or strengthen Microsoft dominance of the field."
Kudos to Europe (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Kudos to Europe (Score:3, Insightful)
Although, might not be that much better...
Re:Kudos to Europe (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Kudos to Europe (Score:2, Insightful)
has any corp in europe been found to be a monopoly and then let off the hook?
welcome to the United Corperations of America, did you get the memo, and have you been a productive worker today?
Re:Kudos to Europe (Score:3, Informative)
Also, it you take France for example, democracy is not a two-party system. Which means a government is in fact a coalition and that is far more difficult to buy.
Re:Kudos to Europe (Score:1)
French democracy is not a two-party system, but almost : small parties have a very small place in the system (a very few parliement members or not at all, and never presidents and - almost never - government members).
But it's true that it is illegal for corporations to finance parties. However if that's how it works in France, in Germany and some other countries corporations have this right.
Re:Kudos to Europe (Score:5, Insightful)
In case you've forgotten, we have the EUCD over here just as you have the DMCA overe there - the effective privatisation of copyright law (Corps now write their own rules - trying to circumvent those rules brings in the law).
Our governments are just as 0wnz0red by media corporations as America's, I'm afraid.
...and about time too (Score:1)
Re:...and about time too (Score:2)
Re:...and about time too (Score:1)
Re:...and about time too (Score:2)
Browse the archives of news:fr.misc.droit for numerous similar stories.
FWIW I still buy at FNAC store or at whatever store (including small ones when I find some).
And if the huge corporations won't take something back when they obviously should, well... Let's say that I find it cheaper than the movies and a lot more entertaining
Well.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Article 2 is interesting....Here's a quote -
"Regulators put Microsoft and partner Time Warner on notice that it intends to investigate their plans to jointly acquire Bethesda (Md.)-based ContentGuard, which makes digital-rights-management (DRM) software to prevent music and movie piracy.
Call me crazy, but wouldn't each content company want their own DRM software? I mean, if you've got one lock, and a whole hell of a lot of people trying to open it, once it is open, you're screwed. Furthermore, content companies wouldn't want to pay a MS tax on each piece of content that is protected with MS-DRM. They'd be better off with their own DRM scheme......A monopoly in the DRM arena seems stupid at best - but am I wrong?
-thewldisntenuff
Re:Well.... (Score:3, Informative)
The whole thing is completely speculative, anyway. There is no significant DRM market, no dominant player and at the moment, Microsoft doesn't even own anything. I'm inclined to agree with you that the content providers would be better off with a standard than with giving Microsoft control over them but, at the moment, this is just EU regulators grandstanding.
Re:Well.... (Score:1)
As far as the tax, Microsoft is more likely to pass the costs off in the other direction. The content providers won't pay because they've agreed to adopt it. Rather, they will pa
Re:Well.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Just fidgeting with the DRM stuff is a crime even if you're just curious and even if you're not successful.
Re:Well.... (Score:5, Insightful)
If there are six big content providers each with their own system, and one of their DRM systems screws up on one the players, the manufacturer of the player will say "The DRM is screwy and we don't support it. Bitch at the content provider." If there are six big providers who all use the same system, and it doesn't work on one player, then the player is broken and it will be "fixed" to work with the DRM.
Remember, DRM isn't about stopping piracy. It's about controlling how the everyday user consumes content and allowing the content providers to build a revenue structure as they see fit without having to worry about users circumventing it through things like (time|space|format) shifting.
Re:Well.... (Score:5, Interesting)
DRM is actually a beautiful catch-22 for MS. They can cash out any way you build it, because all they need to do is break/leak competing software, and competitors are screwed. (And as history shows, MS has no problem doing this when the situation calls.) So, MS builds a system, IP's it to death, and gets to call the shots on who gets to do what. Even if someone were to do the same for another OS (not that OSS folks are real big on the DRM idea), they're risking MS's ire.
So, in one smooth "righteous" move, MS automatically sweeps up the competition. Thanks to the DMCA and other fine laws, reverse engineering and so on means that no other OS users will be able to listen to music on their PCs. Then, while sales fall, those laws will get tightened even more , until using another OS is all but illegal.
It kind of reminds me of school. Someone would screw things up for everybody else, because the boneheads in charge (in this case, congress), can't see that they need to deal with the real problem (putzes that load 500 CDs onto the internet). Instead, they want to "protect" everybody, so we all have to sit back and allow our computers to be loaded down with stuff to protect us from what we MIGHT be tempted to do.
Meanwhile, the majority of people respond with, "Baaa. I just want to listen to music. Baaa!" People often can't believe that the Inquisition happened without more people standing up against it, yet we're watching it unfold right in front of her eyes. Gotta love how history repeats itself.
Re:Well.... (Score:2)
Second, they're going to push this via the OS no doubt, and Joe 6 pack is going to be screwed out of making copies of his CD's. This won't, of course, stop pirates and IT people, much less those who want their systems hacked up so they're usable. I know if DRM comes out in the next version of longhorn there won't be a single computer in my house that'll run the DRM part.
Frankly,
Re:Well.... (Score:2)
Currently, several companies seem to be eager to gain access to Apple's DRM scheme so their content can be played on the iPod. I suppose they don't want a repeat of t
Region oding.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Region oding.. (Score:1)
Re:Region oding.. (Score:5, Interesting)
too lazy to put the correct link...
important facts:
date: 11/06/2001 (not iso, so don't know if june or november)
subject: speech from Mario Monti, European Commissioner for Competition Policy
extract: Another area where the Commission is giving direct follow-up to the concerns of individual consumers is that of Digital Video Disc pricing. We have received a significant number of complaints from private citizens on this matter. In each case, the complaint is virtually the same namely, that DVD prices are significantly higher in the EU than in the USA.
Whilst the prices of many products are higher in the EU than in the US, the major film production companies in agreement with the major equipment manufacturers have introduced a worldwide regional coding system for DVDs. Under this system, a DVD sold in one of the world's six regions cannot be played on a DVD player sold in another region. The thrust of the complaints that we have been receiving is that such a system allows the film production companies to charge higher DVD prices in the EU because EU consumers are artificially prevented from purchasing DVDs from overseas.
As a direct result of these complaints, we have initiated contacts with the major film production companies. We will examine closely what they have to say. Whilst I naturally recognise the legitimate protection which is conferred by intellectual property rights, it is important that, if the complaints are confirmed on the facts, we do not permit a system which provides greater protection than the intellectual property rights themselves, where such a system could be used as a smoke-screen to allow firms to maintain artificially high prices or to deny choice to consumers.
My services have had contacts on this issue with the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, which has also sought clarifications from the major film production companies. I have noted with great interest the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission's conclusion that the regional coding system imposes a 'severe restriction of choice' on consumers. The Commission will need to determine whether there are similarly negative effects in the EU which could fall within the scope of the competition rules.
concrete actions : none to my knowledge as of 3 years later
Only in the EU! (Score:3, Interesting)
we do not permit a system which provides greater protection than the intellectual property rights themselves
followed by, "... and we've given you enough protection. In fact, we're thinking of repealing some if you don't go out and do what you said you would!"
Does anyone remember the legislative reason for the DMCA? The reason was to encourage copyright holders to increase the availability of music and video online to accelerate the transi
Re:Region oding.. (Score:1)
Re:Region oding.. (Score:1)
Re:Region oding.. (Score:2, Funny)
Oh...wait a minute!...
Its just a fund rasier (Score:4, Insightful)
Its the way of the government...
Re:Its just a fund rasier (Score:3, Interesting)
DRM (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:DRM (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:DRM (Score:3, Interesting)
The first rule of computer programming states:
1. You must start somewhere.
The first rule of computer hacking is:
1. Since you have to start somewhere, then that "somewhere" is where you start hacking.
To put that in English: In order for your program/music/movie/whatever to be readable you have to provide some mechanism so the information becomes usable by the computer. Whereever that location is - that is where you start from to pick
Re:DRM (Score:2)
In order for your program/music/movie/whatever to be readable you have to provide some mechanism so the information becomes usable by the computer. Whereever that location is - that is where you start from to pick apart what they are doing and how they are doing it.
In Trusted Computing the data will only be readable inside the CPU itself. And as if ripping a CPU open isn't hard e
Re:DRM (Score:3, Insightful)
1. If I ever have a power failure in my house or the battery dies in the computer the encryption key will explode. So I sue Intel over this in a class action suit and they have to fix everyone's cpu chip. Massive recalls, etc.... I can't see Intel doing that.
1a. Besides which - you can buy CPU chips by themselves and they don't have any power being applied to them. You think Intel would develop something that you can only plug in once? Not likely. Man! Would Tom's Har [tomshardware.com]
Re:DRM (Score:3, Informative)
power failure in my house or the battery dies in the computer the encryption key will explode
I've read detailed specs on the external Trusted Platform Modules, not embedded i
Flogging a dead horse (Score:3, Informative)
I am not trying to talk down to you. This is not to say I am better than you or greater than you or god-like in my knowledge. Nor am I trying to make you mad/glad/happy/sad or anything el
Re:DRM (Score:2)
Blackouts are not a problem because of the built in battery. and I guess I assumed they would have the battery deal too, but packaging a battery on a CPU does seem awkward. I can't say for sure how they plan to handle this.
Answer: Batteries generate ma
Re:DRM (Score:2)
The fact that you are familiar with assembly language and CPU's will be a big help - usually I need to avoid getting technical. However you do not appear to be adaquately familiar with assymetric public key cryptography (PKI)
Re:DRM (Score:2)
1. I put a CD into my CD reader
2. The OS detects the CD
3. The OS starts the CD reader
4. The CD reader talks to the CD Drive and gets the key.
5. The CD reader talks to the CPU and gets that key and does whatever it wants to with it.
6. The CD reader talks to the speaker and gets that key and does whatever it wants to with it.
7. The CD reader verifies everything and begins sucking in the file
Re:DRM (Score:2)
Public key cryptography (asymmetric keys) inherently requires much bigger keys. A 2048 asymmetric key is about the same strength as a 128 bit normal symmetric key.
which slows everything down again
Yes, 2048 bit asymmetric keys are very very slow. This is why they don't try to encrypt actual data under them. They are only used to encrypt the 128 bit n
Re:DRM (Score:2)
I am inserting the following:
0. I boot up my computer.
0a. I load in my OS.
0b. I load in my watchdog program.
0c. I log on to the network.
(1) You contact an RIAA music sales server and provide your system credentials. These credentials include secure signatures chaining back to the Trusted Computing Group's root key, and a public key. They also contain a signed hash bound to and identifying the currently running program.
1a. I do not use my system's credential
Re:DRM (Score:2)
Normal cryptography u
How do you prevent key leakage (Score:2)
Am I missing something important?
Re:How do you prevent key leakage (Score:2)
Chuckle. The public half will be, well, public. Kinda funny to talk about it leaking
Anyway, you're right. If the root private key were to leak it would be a mess. Hmmmm..... thinking... thinking....
Ah, I just thought of a way they could mitigate the damage and "reboot" the system. They make a new root key, revoke the old root key, and "grandfather in" explicit trust for the list of authentic existing manufacturer keys. They'd
Whoops.... (Score:2)
-
Re:How do you prevent key leakage (Score:2)
Although DVD-CSS wasn't PKI-based, it was broken initially in exactly that fashion; Xing failed to keep their player key secret, and the knowledge gained by using Xing's key showed that the system was weak. Xing's key was promptly revoked, and as a minor player, this caused no major hassle for anyone, but since the system was weak, DVD-CSS was dead.
In this sy
Re:DRM (Score:2)
The idea is not to go through the DRM, but around it.
Random: Nonsense. Nothing in the universe is random. It may seem random to you but it is not random. Even using Quantum Physics - it isn't random. It is though, algorithmic. Again, meaningless garbage is just that - meaningles. Both to DRM as well as
Re:How do you prevent key leakage (Score:2)
With PKI the manufature private keys can be issued only within a tamper resistsant self-destructing chip. No one will be able to see this key. No one will be able to copy this key. All they need to do is mount this chip inside a 12-ton block of concrete (overkill, but quite doable) in their manufacturing plant and use it to
Re:DRM (Score:2)
This is a totally irrelevant tangent, but essentially every physicist on earth says you're wrong. Quantum mechanics *DOES* inherently involve unpredictable and non-algorithmic randomness. This is excatly what prompted Einstein's famous objection that "God does not play dice with the universe".
But as I said, it is irrelevant. For our purposes merely tossing a coin is "random" in that no one can predict or use results unless I somehow tell t
Re:DRM (Score:2)
I know that (from the calculations) a 2048 key making 128 bit encryptions is 1.36054607784341261505197379778e+5472 (courtesy of MS's sci-calc). But that is the number of permutations and not the number of combinations which, when groups of these are put to one machine, begins to drop to the possible well below 16 million machines.
So I do believe it will be cracked and most probably before six months are up. But let's wait and see. If you are completely correct and no one can get arou
Re:DRM (Score:2)
When you say "internal", would that include a TPM embedded within the CPU itself? My huge worry is that Intel is ALREADY shipping chips with some at least a preliminary version of an embedded Trust processor, as seen in Prescott micrographs. Would it still work with the initital Trust Measurement code within the CPU itself? Would it still work if code and data were to be encrypted (and secured by encrypted hash) before leaving internal cache and sent to ext
Analog copying (Score:1)
</paranoia>
Re:Analog copying (Score:5, Insightful)
- We will never see audiophiles agreeing to replace their multi-thousand dollar speakers.
- There's no such thing as a digital speaker. They are, by their very nature, an analog device. An analog waveform causes the cone to move. Therefore, at the point where the signal enters the speaker's voice coil, it must, by necessity, be an analog signal. It takes a dollar's worth of hardware to adapt an 8 ohm impedance speaker signal into a line level input.
If you can change the laws of physics to make a digital speaker possible, you -still- haven't solved the problem. Buy a good microphone, put it in front of a good (hypothetical) digital speaker. Record. What? You've made microphones illegal somehow? Well, I guess the recording industry won't be making any more recordings, either....The only way it would be possible to remove the analog hole would be to remove the human being from the mix---hardwire it into your brain somehow. I know I won't be the first to sign up if they try that.... Maybe it's just me....
(Mutters something about always mounting a scratch monkey.)
Re:Analog copying (Score:1)
Nope, but these people aren't the targets, either. Real audiophiles (the psychotic ones, not the ones that are wannabes) buy masters, not CDs.
There's no such thing as a digital speaker. They are, by their very nature, an analog device. An analog waveform causes the cone to move. Therefore, at the point where the signal enters the speaker's voice coil, it must, by necessity, be an analog signal. It takes a dollar's wo
Not quite true (Score:1, Insightful)
analog speakers and mics will start to disappear from the market
There is no such thing as a "digital speaker" to be in opposition to an analog speaker. There are digital-grade speakers, which are constructed and optimized to play the frequency range of a CD, but they are no more digital than the speaker in your 1930's vintage RCA Victor. There are PCM-based speakers, but their utter output is still t
Re:Not quite true (Score:2)
Re:Not quite true (Score:2)
That said, those bits would not be encrypted at the final step, making that even -worse- for the industry as far as making it easy to copy the signal. With such a design, you could then get a bit-for-bit perfect copy by merely attaching a parallel-to-serial converter off the piezos (and figuring out how the heck to clock it....) :-)
Tamper-evident speakers (Score:1)
Want to capture the sound? A 2 dollar inductor around the electromagnet will do the trick. Amplify, convert, record.
Won't help much if the PCM loudspeaker's construction is tamper-evident, and the speaker feeds such evidence back to the DRM module on the player.
Re:Tamper-evident speakers (Score:2)
Unless the enclosure was 100% effective magnetic shielding (whilst still letting the sound out) then you wouldn't even need to open it.
and the speaker feeds such evidence back to the DRM module on the player.
This would make the speaker considerably more complex and expensive. Especially since it would need to proof against a small hole drilled anywhere in the case.
All of this complex engineering still being trivial to defeat with
Re:DRM (Score:1)
Or people will stop buying CDs like I did two years ago. Computer-illiterate people accept a lot of things until something fuck with their own life. What will happen when they have no more consumers to lock? I hope it happens sooner than I think.
I agree with Phillips... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I agree with Phillips... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I agree with Phillips... (Score:2)
Re:I agree with Phillips... (Score:2)
Direct Matches schizophrenic behaviour (Score:1)
If we chose not to buy it.... (Score:5, Insightful)
(above excerpt from the USA today article.)
People will buy anyways (Score:5, Insightful)
It would need to be a massively coordinated effort to get a huge band's copy protected CD boycotted. You'd need mass targeted media, such as MTV or P. Diddy, to lead the charge. I figured it would be bad for them to lead the fight, and I doubt most people would care.
Re:People will buy anyways (Score:1)
That's exactly what I'm trying to do with Prodigy's last album. Spread the word and explain what's happening.
We need balance back in the system (Score:5, Insightful)
Set the copyright system back to the default 14+14 years. If the record companies decide to use DRM on their stuff, make it illegal for them to apply for the 2nd 14 years. That way people can make backups of their stuff unhindered by sh*tty copy protection, and they get to make a little more money.
-=OR=-
Let them keep their Life+70 terms and DRM. In turn file sharing must be legalized and royalty-free sampling and public performance made legal for everyone who buys a CD.
Re:We need balance back in the system (Score:1)
And what are the chances of that ever happening? In order to change laws, you need money for big campaign contributions. Who's going to donate to reduce IP rights? Certainly not any big corporations.
Copyright windfalls are irreversible (Score:1)
Set the copyright system back to the default 14+14 years.
How is the United States going to get out of the Berne Convention in order for that to happen? In addition, doesn't the Fifth Amendment prohibit Congress from taking [google.com] private property such as so-called "intellectual property" for public use?
Re:Copyright windfalls are irreversible (Score:2)
The US manages to ignore all sorts of treaties anyway. What's one more...
In addition, doesn't the Fifth Amendment prohibit Congress from taking private property such as so-called "intellectual property" for public use?
AFAIK the US Constitution never makes use of the term "intellectual property" in the first place.
Re:Copyright windfalls are irreversible (Score:2)
Oh...then its a good thing (Score:3, Funny)
Previous judgement (Score:4, Informative)
I guess this is some followup to this judgment
Re:Previous judgement (Score:2, Informative)
The judgement was not at all about the fact that this "protection" took away the possibility for the user to make legitimate copies for his own (family) usage (which, in France, is accepted by the law even if it's not considered a right in the strictest sense).
This investigation is all about fair use, and if it is won by the consumers (through UFC/Que Choisir) this may be a great vict
Experience with Fnac (Score:5, Informative)
I recently bought a CD from Fnac - "Face A/Face B" by Axelle Red [axellered.com]. It says right on it that it incorporates copy-protection technology, though it also carries the official CD logo.
The results:
Linux: plays.
Windows: loads their CD player without asking, crashes system.
Car CD player: plays.
Portable Discman-style CD player: doesn't play. Each track plays about 9 seconds in then gets stuck in a loop skipping back a couple of seconds.
"My name is L...Laura..."
Sorry. Friday afternoon. A bit punchy.
...laura
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Experience with Fnac (Score:3, Informative)
try holding shift before loading CD and hold until CD stops spining in drive.
What are we worried about? (Score:5, Funny)
Let Microsoft get the monopoly! If MS is controlling DRM technology, then it's sure to be completely insecure and easily hacked.
Still, I'm glad I've hung onto all my old LP's.
DDCCRF ? (Score:1)
Palladium (Score:5, Interesting)
Seems to me that Palladium is the uber-DRM trump card that Microsoft has up its sleeve - just far enough off that it doesn't warrant "investigation" (yet), but still close enough that it makes me worry for the future of personal computing.
Gov't's motivation ... ? (Score:3, Informative)
So how big a problem is this at this moment? On most supposedly-DRM'd albums the protection doesn't work most of the time; most of the people who want to play the CD are able to do so. Not to be a tinfoil-hat theorist, but why should the government step in now unless it's to set a precedent of some sort? i.e. "Software DRM is obviously not working, so we need hardwired anti-copying chips mandatory in all systems by 2010..."
Re:Gov't's motivation ... ? (Score:1)
I say 2007, not 2010.
p.s. someone help me, please! I've chipped in to the community. You should too. Besides, if I do get a free iPod, it could help me get laid. [freeipods.com]
Re:Gov't's motivation ... ? (Score:2)
Re:Gov't's motivation ... ? (Score:2)
It appears that the French courts recognise the right to make copies for personal use as a right, i.e. something that you are entitled to, rather than something that is allowed on sufferance. Most other countries allow you to make personal copies, but if DRM, Macrovision or whatever gets in the way, it's touch luck.
The motivation for this ruling is that this particular DRM interfered with the right to copy, and as such i
Back story of ContentGuard (Score:1)
The reason for DRM in Europe (Score:5, Insightful)
Imagine launching a copy-protected CD on the US market and ending up with a 1 or 2 million people demanding damages.
This just shows how judicially insecure media companies feel on that subject.
Re:Don't get your hopes too high (Score:1)
Re:If people would just stop stealing... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:If people would just stop stealing... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:If people would just stop stealing... (Score:2)
sans, profit.
After all if the parent poster wants to make a broad unrealistic statement about DRM and people stealing then isn't it only fair that I can reply with the same kind of broad unrealistic statement?
Re:If people would just stop stealing... (Score:1)
I do remember all the talk about how we all needed to ditch our tape players, bec
Re:If people would just stop stealing... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that was in relation to supply if I'm not mistaken...
What is the fair value when the supply is for all practical purpose instantaneous and infintely repeatable?
Re:If people would just stop stealing... (Score:2, Insightful)
I think that was in relation to supply if I'm not mistaken... What is the fair value when the supply is for all practical purpose instantaneous and infintely repeatable?
Only problem with that is...people still need to get paid. What you pay for a CD or Movie, doesn't just go to the artists. There are millions of workers living off of the money. Studio techs, salesmen, marketers(shudder), attorneys, IT workers, secretaries/clerks, warehouse workers, PHBs, etc... etc... etc...
If a company decides to
Re:If people would just stop stealing... (Score:1)
So, which is it? Are you gonna talk about supply-and-demand, and take your lumps when the obvious fact that supply of electronic data is infinite and inexhaustible is mentioned?
(Let's see... demand is fixed, and supply is infinite. What happens to price in this situation? This is
Re:If people would just stop stealing... (Score:2)
So why is manufacturing and selling drugs illegal, if there is so much money to be made and a lot of people could live off it? The answer is simple: because drugs are detrimental to a society.
The same goes for monopolies, media cartels, price fixing and copyr
MOD THE PARENT UP! (Score:2)
Re:If people would just stop stealing... (Score:2)
Re:If people would just stop stealing... (Score:2)
Re:If people would just stop stealing... (Score:2)
Did I say that?