How do I add DRM to iMovie/iDVD?
Hi all, I was wondering how to actually add DRM to iMovie and iDVD projects.
If I spend 100 hours on a mini movie using iMovie how can I give it a reasonable protection is there an Apple way?
A third party?
I googled the query and even checked version tracker for an app, still no answers.
So, I put it out there to the collective brilliance of the forum members.
Any answers?
edit:
Just noticed that this might be in the wrong forum. could some admin or mod move it?
Or, just answer my question and I will move along
If I spend 100 hours on a mini movie using iMovie how can I give it a reasonable protection is there an Apple way?
A third party?
I googled the query and even checked version tracker for an app, still no answers.
So, I put it out there to the collective brilliance of the forum members.
Any answers?
edit:
Just noticed that this might be in the wrong forum. could some admin or mod move it?
Or, just answer my question and I will move along
Comments
Anyways, most DRM schemes require expensive licensing so they are not freely available. There is a way to DRM a Audio CD by intentionally introducing errors to a disk image before burning, but none I can think of for video. DVD Studio pro can set region codes, but even the encryption is done from a 3rd party I believe.
This way if someone did intentionally copy a demo disk that I gave out I would have that extra bit of proof that it had occurred.
This is with a specific scenario involved. I make a substantial 20 minute movie and show the disk to the client. The client then copies the disk and doesn't pay me.
I know that I should throw a Watermark on the movie, but that looks so S*itty.
A little DRM would be nice.
For the record, your use of DRM will land you a special place in hell, bastard.
NOTE: All of the copy protection noted above is actively used by hollyweird and very much cracked, so dont waste your time.
If you don't want people copying demos though then mark it and remove it for the final version. This is similar to marking draft reports with a big fat draft across them.
Yes, I know I will rot in hell. Sorry.
However funny as this might seem, the target market is about as computer illiterate as they come. Totally fertile ground.
More like an: "oh gee, I can't copy his work...oh well, i give up"
Ripe.
I just want it more difficult than a quick copy paste or a disk image.
Really simple..
In this market.
Otherwise, yes, I know that I am FS*Cked and I wouldn't really bother.
edit:
let me emphase that this is a VERY small market but a VERY LARGE client and I just want a bit of copy protection on this job.
Geeze, these people actually have their secretaries print out their e-mails and read them and have never thought of a DVD for any promotion..
low hanging fruit..
This isn't Star Wars!
Originally posted by Ebby
Oh, this hurts. Consumers wanting DRM. Disastrous!
There is a difference between a "consumer" and a person/artist/company that creates media content and would like to have their IP rights respected and protected. It is pretty hard for the average "consumer" (ie, a person that is not involved in creating any kind of media but is merely a consumer of it) to understand/care about this, but if a person wants to add DRM to THEIR intellectual property, why call this "disastrous" and facetioulsy (I hope) suggest that they will rot in hell for doing this? I understand the pro/con arguements on both sides of the DRM arguement, however, I reject the extremes on both sides; on the business side, the idea that companies can lobby congress to retroactively extend the protection period for intellectual property, thereby keeping a lot of IP from reaching the public domain (Sonny Bono Act, etc.), and using measures that seek to substantially curtail the average person's first amendment and licensing rights in the IP they LEGALLY purchase. On the other extreme, there are those that feel (for too many reasons to list here) that there are really no legitimate reasons why artists and companies should use DRM (or any other means) to protect THEIR work. Hopefully, in twain the solution shall be.
BTW, I work at a high school computer lab, and I can tell you from experience that on a daily basis the kids download between 400 and 500 illegally downloaded files (movies, mp3s, very conservative estimate). When I ask them if they know that they are stealing the artists' work and that they should buy the content, the look at me, totally dumbfounded and say something along the lines "Why would I buy this when I can get it for free?". So now, we have to get a packet sniffer and block all p2p traffic.
BTW, yes, I am aware that the media companies are partially responsible for this due to their sheer reluctance to offer legal digital content. Now, however, a lot of this material can be purchased legelly, so that excuse is less moot.
Look at what Apple is facing with the pirating of OSX86? And yet people still question the company's attempts to thwart this.
Let the flames begin ;-)
Originally posted by Neruda
BTW, I work at a high school computer lab, and I can tell you from experience that on a daily basis the kids download between 400 and 500 illegally downloaded files (movies, mp3s, very conservative estimate). When I ask them if they know that they are stealing the artists' work and that they should buy the content, the look at me, totally dumbfounded and say something along the lines "Why would I buy this when I can get it for free?". So now, we have to get a packet sniffer and block all p2p traffic.
Dare I ask why the kids can run any app they please on the school computers, including P2P apps? Sure there are legitimate uses but I doubt these apply to high school curriculum. A college CS course on networking is another story however.
Originally posted by Xool
Dare I ask why the kids can run any app they please on the school computers, including P2P apps? Sure there are legitimate uses but I doubt these apply to high school curriculum. A college CS course on networking is another story however.
There are several reasons: at first, the user accounts had some privileges so that the kids could customize their accounts. Then modified permissions so that they were not supposed to be able to download or install any programs through their accounts (OS X) (cat and mouse game where we implement a strategy to stop it and the kids somehow find a way around it). After this, it didn't help that one of our student workers was giving out his password (some admin privileges) to his friends (although this does not account for all of the p2p programs being installed and used, since there are other ways to do this). I would have fired him at that point, but I'm not the one running the place.
We are about to stop all p2p traffic through the server using packet sniffing, and that should be the end to it (I hope).
These kids are really computer savy and see our efforts as a challenge to be overcome and not as a complete barrier.
*Starts to type frantically*
*Realizes he has an essay due tomorrow and hasn't started*
Originally posted by Neruda
There is a difference between a "consumer" and a person/artist/company that creates media content and would like to have their IP rights respected and protected. It is pretty hard for the average "consumer" (ie, a person that is not involved in creating any kind of media but is merely a consumer of it) to understand/care about this, but if a person wants to add DRM to THEIR intellectual property, why call this "disastrous" and facetioulsy (I hope) suggest that they will rot in hell for doing this? I understand the pro/con arguements on both sides of the DRM arguement, however, I reject the extremes on both sides; on the business side, the idea that companies can lobby congress to retroactively extend the protection period for intellectual property, thereby keeping a lot of IP from reaching the public domain (Sonny Bono Act, etc.), and using measures that seek to substantially curtail the average person's first amendment and licensing rights in the IP they LEGALLY purchase. On the other extreme, there are those that feel (for too many reasons to list here) that there are really no legitimate reasons why artists and companies should use DRM (or any other means) to protect THEIR work. Hopefully, in twain the solution shall be.
BTW, I work at a high school computer lab, and I can tell you from experience that on a daily basis the kids download between 400 and 500 illegally downloaded files (movies, mp3s, very conservative estimate). When I ask them if they know that they are stealing the artists' work and that they should buy the content, the look at me, totally dumbfounded and say something along the lines "Why would I buy this when I can get it for free?". So now, we have to get a packet sniffer and block all p2p traffic.
BTW, yes, I am aware that the media companies are partially responsible for this due to their sheer reluctance to offer legal digital content. Now, however, a lot of this material can be purchased legelly, so that excuse is less moot.
Look at what Apple is facing with the pirating of OSX86? And yet people still question the company's attempts to thwart this.
Let the flames begin ;-)
Well said. Sorry, but I work in Hollywood, and although I don't agree with the larger studios vs consumer sales model sometimes, having some protection for work done is what keeps me putting food on the table and clothes on my kid.
That said, going into something like Photoshop and putting a very, very (we're talking a few pixels worth) of "signature" that watermarks into the corner of the frames is very acceptable (can't really see it way down in the corner in any way) and useful in court. I had done a roughcut on a feature and someone tried to run with it. Funny thing, when it got to court and the corner of their own "Exhibit A" (can't actually remember how it was numbered) was shown to have my "signature" on it, I won the countersuit, no problem (and promptly took some of the money and got my 17" PB).
If they're particularly computer un-savvy, I'd recommend trying something like that.
My 1 cent.
I should try that with a photoshop file.
Oh, and I used the word "consumer" to label both Avrage Joes and artistic types not affiliated with the entertainment industries, who have access to all sorts of DRM technologies. I too have created a few movies and photographs, but include myself under this category. Poor use of words, perhaps out of habit.
Originally posted by TednDi
I know. It seems kind of stupid. But having the ability to lock out a bit of the ease of copy in a DVD might be nice.
This way if someone did intentionally copy a demo disk that I gave out I would have that extra bit of proof that it had occurred.
This is with a specific scenario involved. I make a substantial 20 minute movie and show the disk to the client. The client then copies the disk and doesn't pay me.
I know that I should throw a Watermark on the movie, but that looks so S*itty.
A little DRM would be nice.
You HAVE to watermark or down-res for client previews. Make a contract for each job. Get some substantial, negotiated portion your payment up front, then the rest after the piece is finished. If the client wants a full res or non-watermarked version of the piece, make them pay the rest of your fee. The video industry has been around a long time without DRM for that kind of stuff. You just have to make contracts.
DVD Studio Pro can prepare a disc for CSS and/or Macrovision, but cannot actually add it... this is done at the mastering plant.
Besides, there are already tools like DeCSS and Popcorn that demonstrate that any protection can be cracked.
All you can do is due diligence to make it tougher and obviously an infraction of your IP... watermarking/NDA does the same, and is tougher to get around legally, if not technically.
YMMV
Originally posted by Xool
A college CS course on networking is another story however.
even that stuff is done on private LANs/WANs (via a few routers) to A) not waist main internet pipe bandwidth and