Apple's new MacBooks have built-in copy protection measures

[AppleInsider]

Apple's new MacBook lines include a form of digital copy protection that will prevent protected media, such as DRM-infused iTunes movies, from playing back on devices that aren't compliant with the new priority protection measures.

The Intel-developed technology is called High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP) and aims to prevent copying of digital audio and video content as it travels across a variety of display connectors, even if such copying is not in violation of fair use laws.

Among the connectors supported by the technology are the Mini DisplayPort found on Apple's latest MacBook, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air, in addition to others such as Digital Visual Interface (DVI), High-Definition Multimedia Interface (HDMI), Gigabit Video Interface (GVIF), and Unified Display Interface (UDI).

ArsTechnica reports that Apple has apparently acquired a license for the technology and is now using it across its DisplayPort-enabled MacBook lines to to prevent transmission of purchased iTunes content to devices that don't include support for HDCP.

"When my friend John, a high school teacher, attempted to play Hellboy 2 on his classroom's projector with a new aluminum MacBook over lunch, he was denied by the error you see [below]," writes Ars' David Chartier. "John's using a Mini DisplayPort-to-VGA adapter, plugged into a Sanyo projector that is part of his room's Promethean system."

The report adds that only a portion of Tunes Store video content is presently HDCP-aware, and in each case the protected files are wrapped in either version 2 or 3 of Apple's FairPlay digital rights management software.

Apple has said that it plans to adopt Mini DisplayPort across its entire product line, meaning that all future Macs from the Cupertino-based company are likely to include the same restrictions experienced by users of its latest notebooks.

iTunes denies playback of Hellboy 2 on a Sanyo projector | Source: ArsTechnica

As a licensed adopter of HDCP, Apple agrees to pay an annual fee and abide by the conditions set forth in Inte's HDCP License Agreement [PDF].

For example, the terms stipulate that high-definition digital video sources must not transmit protected content to non-HDCP-compliant receivers, as described above, and DVD-Audio content must be restricted to CD-audio quality or less when played back over non-HDCP-digital audio outputs.

Hardware vendors are also barred from allowing their devices to make copies of content, and must design their products in ways that "effectively frustrate attempts to defeat the content protection requirements." As such, the technology sometimes causes handshaking problems with older high-definition displays, which may explain the intermittent connection problems experienced by some other Unibody MacBook and MacBook Pro adopters.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[0SX]

Fail!

[Blippio]

ah great. here come the headaches!

[wally007]

wow what a BS. such a tough choice , dowload movie for $20 and be able to play it only where apple / movie studios feel that's apropriate or pay nothing, download even better quality and do whatever i feel like doing. tough choice.

better donate same amount to tracker than to throw it away on drm junk.

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Apple's new MacBook lines include a form of digital copy protection that will prevent protected media, such as DRM-infused iTunes movies, from playing back on devices that aren't complaint with the new priority protection measures. ...

Boo Hiss!

[JakeTheRock]

This is some of the ridiculous bullshit that I can't stand about Windows and MS. This means that i can't play back videos that I buy off of iTunes on my external monitor, if I attach it to my MacBook Pro. That's really going to keep me from pirating my movies now.

EDIT:
Wasn't it a few months ago that Steve was all "I am in favor of removing DRM on songs."?
I wonder how he feels about this.

[hillstones]

Originally Posted by JakeTheRock

This is some of the ridiculous bullshit that I can't stand about Windows and MS. This means that i can't play back videos that I buy off of iTunes on my external monitor, if I attach it to my MacBook Pro. That's really going to keep me from pirating my movies now.

You can still display videos on an external monitor, as long as that monitor is HDCP compliant. The analog Sanyo projector in the story is obviously not HDCP compliant since it is an analog device. This is nothing new. Most HDTV's have HDCP restrictions as well.

[JakeTheRock]

Originally Posted by hillstones

You can still display videos on an external monitor, as long as that monitor is HDCP compliant. The analog Sanyo projector in the story is obviously not HDCP compliant since it is an analog device. This is nothing new. Most HDTV's have HDCP restrictions as well.

That's the thing, though.. I don't want to have to go buy a new monitor just to watch movies. I already have a huge monitor that works just fine. I only have a VGA connection on it though.

[FineWine]

A simple and stark warning to Apple:

YOU WILL LOSE SALES of your hardware with this BS.

But much more importantly, you will lose the SYMPATHY AND GOOD WILL of users.

That latter is devastating. For awhile, everything will seem to go well, and then, people will defect - IN DROVES.

This is a deadly serious matter. Some things are non-negotiable. If this BS goes on, time to consider another platform. Thank god for Linux.

[Applecrisis]

If that is true, my last MBP was the last Appleproduct i bought. I have been Macuser since the first Mac 128, bevor that i used an Apple IIe. My first personal Mac was the IIci, thereafter was the Powermac 6100. I had 4 Powerbooks but THIS IS THE GREATEST BULLSHIT EVER. It REALLY keeps me away from Apple

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by hillstones

You can still display videos on an external monitor, as long as that monitor is HDCP compliant. The analog Sanyo projector in the story is obviously not HDCP compliant since it is an analog device. This is nothing new. Most HDTV's have HDCP restrictions as well.

You are missing the point though. The cause of frustration is that:

1. It's totally unnecessary to have the "protection" in the first place (historical proofs abound)
2. Some ridiculously high percentage of the time (99% plus?) the monitor is going to be analogue

The whole HDCP thing just adds another point of failure for what is already a complex, frustrating process for many if not most consumers.

This was one of the biggest complaints about the horror that is MS Vista, that these kinds of "protections" were getting in the way of normal law-abiding people with legal content to display. They also failed a certain percentage of the time even when the equipment was correct.

[nagromme]

Having copy protection support in the machines' DisplayPort hardware doesn't bother me so much--it's part of the DisplayPort standard. But what does bother me is that Apple is USING that copy protection in the movies they supply via iTunes! Obviously that decision is likely from the content owners, not from Apple themselves, but I'd sure be unhappy if I couldn't watch a movie on my big external screen!

Originally Posted by Applecrisis

If that is true, my last MBP was the last Appleproduct i bought. I have been Macuser since the first Mac 128, bevor that i used an Apple IIe. My first personal Mac was the IIci, thereafter was the Powermac 6100. I had 4 Powerbooks but THIS IS THE GREATEST BULLSHIT EVER. It REALLY keeps me away from Apple

Apple stands up against DRM all the time. They don't always win. What computer company are you thinking of switching to that does a better job than Apple at getting content owners to abandon DRM?

It's bad news, but it's a stretch to think that it's Apple who drives the use of DRM. Apple OPPOSES DRM, publicly, and in some cases they get their way. Look at music--the Store couldn't have ever existed without DRM, but once it took off, Apple has gotten EMI to abandon it. Others may follow suit, or they may choose to keep punishing Apple's success, but either way, the DRM on those other songs is not Apple's choice. And looking at movies, it seems that SOME movies have this HDCP protection and some don't, so I think once again you can bet it's the content owner, not Apple, who is behind it.

[PXT]

Presumably the studios have been busting Apple's balls about this as part of letting Apple have greater access to content. I wonder if we will see an expansion of movies to rent in coming months, perhaps towards Netflix levels? Not such a 'hobby' then if we see DisplayPort on a new AppleTV in January.

[wobegon]

Ah, well we can all thank the paranoid movie studios for this.

@ JakeTheRock,

The reason Jobs has called for the removal of DRM on music files is because the music labels already put out their artists' music in DRM-free form on CDs. It was totally hypocritical when they claimed (and still do) that legal, DRM-free digital downloads would lead to piracy when they were selling (and still are) millions of unprotected CDs.

On the other hand, movies have never really been available in DRM-free form, so Jobs, nor anyone else, can make nearly as good an argument for removing DRM from that medium. At the end of the day, the movie studios hold the copyrights, so they can do what they want in terms of copy protection.

With that said, I don't really get the point of HDCP, which requires an HDCP-enabled display. Why do they want to protect the output device? Anyone have any insight on this?

[Jimzip]

Edit: I'm keeping the below because it's kinda funny in retrospect... this is why I shouldn't write in the heat of the moment I suppose. I regret nothing! Enjoy.

Absoultely, feverently stupid and totally unnecessary. I'll be recommending people download their movies off torrent sites instead of buying them thanks to this. Not only that, but I will no longer be buying a new computer from Apple.

Well done studios, you now look more idiotic and backward than ever before.

Jimzip

[Retrogusto]

We all know that there are a lot of silly lawsuits out there against Apple for stupid things, but this seems like a pretty reasonable one just waiting to happen--they do not make it clear that the new computers are only fully compatible with "HDCP compliant" displays, and this is clearly a serious limitation. I haven't yet tried connecting my new MBP to my HD projector, but one of these days I will need to, and if it doesn't work, I'm going to be furious (as will anybody who spends $29 on the adapter only to discover the restriction surprise).

[jawadde]

my bet : in less than a few months, we'l have $15 converters that are DHCP-to-unprotected-VGA flooding the market from some cheapo taiwanese factory. That or DVD-jon will break DHCP.


dumbass users won't know it, but these dumbass users would not be pirating anyway
pirates will know about it, get the tools and happily keep on pirating

the net result ? millions of dollars invested in a technology that didn't do diddly squat to stop the target they aimed at. A bit like manufacturing a gun especialy designed to shoot fish that live in the sahara and piss in your oasis well.

i'm not worried at all about this technology : they'll never learn


this kinda reminds me of the DVD do-not-pirate-intro's : in singapore, you can buy DVD players for 15$ that automatically skip ALL dvd content that is marked as "not skippable". Talking about major LOL

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2

You are missing the point though. The cause of frustration is that:

1. It's totally unnecessary to have the "protection" in the first place (historical proofs abound)
2. Some ridiculously high percentage of the time (99% plus?) the monitor is going to be analogue

The whole HDCP thing just adds another point of failure for what is already a complex, frustrating process for many if not most consumers.

This was one of the biggest complaints about the horror that is MS Vista, that these kinds of "protections" were getting in the way of normal law-abiding people with legal content to display. They also failed a certain percentage of the time even when the equipment was correct.

While all true, this was inevitable. The only shocking thing to me is that it wasn't included earlier. However, if you didn't want to use ITS because of DRM then you aren't losing anything as this doesn't affect DVDs.

PS: I wonder how many AI posters are against this HDCP, but also keep asking for Blu-ray.

[parky]

Originally Posted by Jimzip

Absoultely, feverently stupid and totally unnecessary. I'll be recommending people download their movies off torrent sites instead of buying them thanks to this. Not only that, but I will no longer be buying a new computer from Apple.

Well done studios, you now look more idiotic and backward than ever before.

Jimzip

That's a very grown up response!

[Leonard]

Everybody seems to be pointing at negatives, here, but I thought us Mac users wanted this. Didn't we want HDCP compliant displays and the software and hardware to handle this, so that we could watch Blu-Ray movies???

Edit: I see solipsism asks about this too...

[parky]

Originally Posted by Retrogusto

We all know that there are a lot of silly lawsuits out there against Apple for stupid things, but this seems like a pretty reasonable one just waiting to happen--they do not make it clear that the new computers are only fully compatible with "HDCP compliant" displays, and this is clearly a serious limitation. I haven't yet tried connecting my new MBP to my HD projector, but one of these days I will need to, and if it doesn't work, I'm going to be furious (as will anybody who spends $29 on the adapter only to discover the restriction surprise).

Read more carefully.
It will work, it will just play content from the iTunes Store.

[tibbsy]

It's not really any wonder why piracy is so rampant: the solution chosen by various media industries - DRM- realistically can't compete with the alternatives.

The simple fact is that the movie and music industries are pretending that they can apply laws that worked for tangible items like books to batches of 0's and 1's. It's apples and oranges. This HDCP trash is like going to a grocery store, buying a box of Corn Flakes and then being told that you can only eat your Corn Flakes with a Kellogg's approved spoon in a Kellogg's approved bowl. Or like going to a bookstore and picking up JK Rowling's latest Harry Potter novel and then being forced to read it under a JK Rowlings approved lamp.

Meanwhile, you can with relative ease get near-similar quality products, for free, without restrictions from a never-ending list of sources. The biggest irony of it all is that, like the story illustrates, DRM typically impacts legitimate users the most, which only pushes them further away, while the pirates continue to enjoy their DRM-free media any way they choose.

[sflocal]

This is the sign of the times boys. Get over it. Yes, a huge amount of people are going to be inconvenienced by this since a majority of users do not have HDCP-compliant equipment. This is certainly nothing new and if anything, Apple is one of the last folks to be forced (??) to get on the bandwagon if the studios are to allow their media to be distributed via iTunes.

You can gripe and moan all you want. Anything digital is going to have this kind of lock-down. HD TV's have them, HDMI equipment, DVI, etc.

If this means you will never buy Apple again, then by all means... go to an alternative vendor then. Oh wait... they do it too and they have been doing it far longer than Apple has. Quite possible, Apple arguably may have implemented it in a way that is not a major headache compared to the other solutions offered by other systems.

Everyone is beating a dead horse here folks. I don't like it any more than anyone else. Fortunately, most of my equipment is already HDCP-compliant and has been that way for a couple years now.

Don't beat up Apple. Apple is at the whim of the studios. You want change? Point your rage at them, not Apple.

But I feel your pain. I raise my glass for a goodbye-toast to an era now past.

[PXT]

Originally Posted by Retrogusto

We all know that there are a lot of silly lawsuits out there against Apple for stupid things, but this seems like a pretty reasonable one just waiting to happen--they do not make it clear that the new computers are only fully compatible with "HDCP compliant" displays, and this is clearly a serious limitation. I haven't yet tried connecting my new MBP to my HD projector, but one of these days I will need to, and if it doesn't work, I'm going to be furious (as will anybody who spends $29 on the adapter only to discover the restriction surprise).

Surely it is only HDCP-protected content that is restricted to HDCP displays by the Macbooks. Nothing has changed here. HDCP content has always been restricted this way.

The warnings about this will be displayed on the content itself, which you can read when you buy the content. For example, see the section in the iTunes Terms of Service at: http://www.apple.com/legal/itunes/us/service.html

What MAY change, is that we could see a major increase of content in iTunes.

[ajmas]

Originally Posted by FineWine

A simple and stark warning to Apple:
YOU WILL LOSE SALES of your hardware with this BS.

I wish that were true, but the truth is that most hardware is going in this direction. MS-Windows also has this imposed limitation. This is where ripping your stuff becomes so much more tempting. Like overzealous security, which causes people to deactivate security (think Windows Vista), overzealous DRM causes people to rip their content on principle and makes them more willing to accept less legal means.

Sometimes when you have laws that only a mad man can follow, then you will only have mad men in liberty.

[parky]

Originally Posted by tibbsy

It's not really any wonder why piracy is so rampant: the solution chosen by various media industries - DRM- realistically can't compete with the alternatives.

The simple fact is that the movie and music industries are pretending that they can apply laws that worked for tangible items like books to batches of 0's and 1's. It's apples and oranges. This HDCP trash is like going to a grocery store, buying a box of Corn Flakes and then being told that you can only eat your Corn Flakes with a Kellogg's approved spoon in a Kellogg's approved bowl. Or like going to a bookstore and picking up JK Rowling's latest Harry Potter novel and then being forced to read it under a JK Rowlings approved lamp.

Meanwhile, you can with relative ease get near-similar quality products, for free, without restrictions from a never-ending list of sources. The biggest irony of it all is that, like the story illustrates, DRM typically impacts legitimate users the most, which only pushes them further away, while the pirates continue to enjoy their DRM-free media any way they choose.

Very silly analogies which are not actually correct.

[anilsudhakaran]

I don't understand why the restriction should apply to VGA displays. I understand HDMI and DVI requiring HDCP compliance.

[PXT]

Originally Posted by anilsudhakaran

I don't understand why the restriction should apply to VGA displays. I understand HDMI and DVI requiring HDCP compliance.

Yes, I remember reading somewhere that HDCP would transmit HD content to an HDCP display, but force-downgrade the content to a non-HD resolution for non-HDCP displays. The intention being to prevent HD copying via cable.

I wonder if this is a Macbook bug?

[Adjei]

Originally Posted by Applecrisis

If that is true, my last MBP was the last Appleproduct i bought. I have been Macuser since the first Mac 128, bevor that i used an Apple IIe. My first personal Mac was the IIci, thereafter was the Powermac 6100. I had 4 Powerbooks but THIS IS THE GREATEST BULLSHIT EVER. It REALLY keeps me away from Apple

Hey smart ass, this is the same stuff found on Windows, aren't y'all the same dudes that want blu-ray, well this is the stuff blu-ray comes with, I guess Apple is setting the stage for the hell that is blu-ray.

[Jimzip]

Originally Posted by parky

That's a very grown up response!

Should I have made it ... less grown-up?

In all seriousness though, this is such a ridiculous measure for the studios to enforce. If I buy or rent a movie from the iTS, why should I not be able to watch it on my HDTV, my laptop, or my projector?

"High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP) ... aims to prevent copying of digital audio and video content as it travels across a variety of display connectors, even if such copying is not in violation of fair use laws."

What's the deal there? Like many others have said, it's far more attractive to download a higher-quality copy of the movie from a tracker and use it as you wish, than go through the rigmarol of buying it 'legally' and then playing russian roulette on your devices to see if it works.

My prior response may have been heated, but as a consumer who purchases legal music, movies and software, these ludicrous methods of protecting their interests is severely decreasing the value and quality of the experience for me, a customer, and is, ironically I suppose, pushing me ever-closer to persuing other means...

Jimzip

[tibbsy]

Originally Posted by parky

Very silly analogies which are not actually correct.

The point is that they illustrate the same point - consider the three following scenarios:

1) You buy an apple. The second you pay for it, you have the right to do anything you want with it. You can eat it, you can throw in the garbage, hell you can put it right back on the shelf. It is for all intents and purposes yours to do as you wish.

2) You buy the Wall-E DVD. You paid for it, it's yours. You can (try to) eat it, you can watch it as many times as you want, on any DVD player, you can throw it in the garbage the second you get it, and you can give it to someone else. It is for all intents and purposes yours to do as you wish.

3) You buy Wall-E off a digital movie vendor. Now, if you paid for it, it's yours right? You can do whatever you want with it right? If you wanted, you could take the file and delete it. So why is it that someone else is getting to decide if and how you can watch it? Who knows - maybe in clicking through those terms of service, people agreed that they didn't actually own those digitial items they paid money for and figured they'd own like a real DVD.

Now, look at the alternative to option 3: you can download a DRM-free, near-same quality product for free from who-knows-where. And you can delete it, you can give it to someone else, and you can watch it wherever you want in whatever way you want. DRM woefully restricts rights you should have to something that you pay money for and thus (theoretically) own. Understand that my point isn't "piracy wins, legitimacy loses": it's that right now, scenario 3 and scenario 2 are black and white different, even though for consumers the end is the same. I buy music on iTunes and I think it's a fabulous service. I just think that when I buy the songs in a digital-only format, I should be able to treat them like songs I own on CDs.

[Adjei]

Originally Posted by Jimzip

Absoultely, feverently stupid and totally unnecessary. I'll be recommending people download their movies off torrent sites instead of buying them thanks to this. Not only that, but I will no longer be buying a new computer from Apple.

Well done studios, you now look more idiotic and backward than ever before.

Jimzip

So where will you buy your computer, from other PC manufacturers who also have this on their system.

[Johnny Mozzarella]

Originally Posted by FineWine

A simple and stark warning to Apple:

YOU WILL LOSE SALES of your hardware with this BS.

But much more importantly, you will lose the SYMPATHY AND GOOD WILL of users.

That latter is devastating. For awhile, everything will seem to go well, and then, people will defect - IN DROVES.

This is a deadly serious matter. Some things are non-negotiable. If this BS goes on, time to consider another platform. Thank god for Linux.

DROVES of people will switch to LINUX???
The only people who will switch to LINUX are the Freetards who refuse to pay for anything anyway. As far as the movie studios are concerned, they could care less.
Apple is a CONSUMER electronics company and their goal is to be able to SELL High Definition content to CONSUMERS. Why do you think we can't buy HD content today on a Mac or PC? Because until HDCP is commonplace, the movie studios won't allow it.

Originally Posted by Applecrisis

If that is true, my last MBP was the last Appleproduct i bought. I have been Macuser since the first Mac 128, bevor that i used an Apple IIe. My first personal Mac was the IIci, thereafter was the Powermac 6100. I had 4 Powerbooks but THIS IS THE GREATEST BULLSHIT EVER. It REALLY keeps me away from Apple

I call your bluff. If you have been a Mac user for 24 years I highly doubt this will be the straw that breaks the camels back. I remember hearing the same threats from long time Mac users when SCSI was killed, when Floppies were killed, when OS 9 was killed...

The reason is because something better always comes along to replace it.
Sure we are losing our precious analog displays and projectors, but sometime next year Apple will announce that you can rent/purchase HD content on your Mac.
Now you have a choice keep your old Mac and cling to your 640X480 videos, or
upgrade and enjoy convenient HD video delivery.

[i386]

Not really Apples fault, dumb Hollywood are to blame. Well I don't intend to buy a Blue Ray player let alone a BD disc. This HD protection stuff is a pile of dog turd and it's overpriced. Another way to screw us into buy new stuff that does the same thing every couple of years. I reckon the recession will hit blue-ray hard - and they deserve it.

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by solipsism

... PS: I wonder how many AI posters are against this HDCP, but also keep asking for Blu-ray.

My guess is at least 90%

[webhead]

This is the exact reason why I don't buy movies online form iTunes or anywhere else. I can't stand all the DRM and restrictions all of the content providers are trying to implement. If blueray brings more of this type of crap you can keep it! I'm fine with DVD quality on my digital projector. I can rip the DVDs with handbrake or mactheripper in order to have a legal backup for personal use (legal in Canada), record HD TV and paypervu movies on my bell express vu PVR, which I can then record to DVD on my home DVD recorder.

I am a huge Apple fan but TV and movies on-line from iTunes just doesn’t’ work for me yet, too restrictive, too many hoops.

Steve Jobs: no one has gotten this right ...still!!!

[Jimzip]

Originally Posted by Adjei

So where will you buy your computer, from other PC manufacturers who also have this on their system.

Nope, I'll stick with my trusty ole' MBP until this whole silly DRM game explodes in the studios' faces and they realise what morons they've been, then I'll buy whatever lovely little piece of hardware Apple has brought out by then. It may be ten years from now, but I'm a patient fellow.

Jimzip

[bambuhiphop]

This is just not a good move for anyone. Now I will have to think twice before buying my content on itunes. Right now I have a Mac Mini hooked up to an older 4:3 TV via the composite connector. I am looking to buy another mini after the next refresh (assuming there is one) and still hook it up to the older TV for awhile. I would imagine that I have nothing to worry about at the moment as this is not built in to my Mini but this changes quite a lot about any future purchases.

The argument that this will allow for more content on itunes is back ass backwards. If I have a wew Macbook connected to the PC port on a flat panel or in a setup like I personally have I would not care if there is 1 title or 2,000 titles on itunes. If I cannot play it on my monitor or TV I am going to go elsewhere. Simple as that.

[Tofino]

Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella

I remember hearing the same threats from long time Mac users when SCSI was killed, when Floppies were killed, when OS 9 was killed...

SCSI is dead? Nooooooooo!

[Feste]

Originally Posted by tibbsy

The point is that they illustrate the same point - consider the three following scenarios:

1) You buy an apple. The second you pay for it, you have the right to do anything you want with it. You can eat it, you can throw in the garbage, hell you can put it right back on the shelf. It is for all intents and purposes yours to do as you wish.

2) You buy the Wall-E DVD. You paid for it, it's yours. You can (try to) eat it, you can watch it as many times as you want, on any DVD player, you can throw it in the garbage the second you get it, and you can give it to someone else. It is for all intents and purposes yours to do as you wish.

3) You buy Wall-E off a digital movie vendor. Now, if you paid for it, it's yours right? You can do whatever you want with it right? If you wanted, you could take the file and delete it. So why is it that someone else is getting to decide if and how you can watch it? Who knows - maybe in clicking through those terms of service, people agreed that they didn't actually own those digitial items they paid money for and figured they'd own like a real DVD.

Now, look at the alternative to option 3: you can download a DRM-free, near-same quality product for free from who-knows-where. And you can delete it, you can give it to someone else, and you can watch it wherever you want in whatever way you want. DRM woefully restricts rights you should have to something that you pay money for and thus (theoretically) own. Understand that my point isn't "piracy wins, legitimacy loses": it's that right now, scenario 3 and scenario 2 are black and white different, even though for consumers the end is the same. I buy music on iTunes and I think it's a fabulous service. I just think that when I buy the songs in a digital-only format, I should be able to treat them like songs I own on CDs.

Yeah, this is pretty much completely wrong. The problem is with your number (2): You own the DVD, but you don't own Wall-E, and you CANNOT do whatever you want with the DVD's content (including, by the way, fast forwarding past the portion of the DVD that lists all the things you're not allowed to do with it--or hadn't you noticed?). You can give the DVD to someone else, but not the files on it. You can't show the DVD to a room full of people and charge money for it. (People do that all the time, but hey, that doesn't make it legal...)

To a certain extent, what's going on generally is that we're moving toward the equivalent of a society in which automobiles have chips that prevent them from moving faster than the legal speed limit. The mere fact that every driver on the road speeds, and 99.9% of them do so with impunity, does not mean that they have the right to do so, and if cars suddenly began to prevent them from speeding, there wouldn't really be any available non-childish, non-selfish argument against that technology...