or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple's new MacBooks have built-in copy protection measures
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's new MacBooks have built-in copy protection measures - Page 6

post #201 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

That's a long-dead anti-Apple myth. Content owners (RIAA, movie industry) are the drivers behind DRM. Apple's devices sell just great on their OWN merits (no lock-in needed) with ease-of-use being an obvious benefit of iPod-iTunes integration. The iPod was a runaway success before the iTunes Music Store even existed.

Apple has stated clearly that they oppose DRM, and have put their money where there mouth is, offering DRM-free iTunes Plus tracks that will play on any device modern enough to support MP4/AAC.

Does anyone really think that the RIAA would have allowed the iTunes Music Store to exist without DRM? That they were fine with the music being DRM-free but Apple imposed DRM anyway? That history is well-established, and it's the content owners who demand DRM.

Why are only some songs available DRM-free? Because not all content owners will ALLOW iTunes sales to be DRM-free. Why do those same labels allow DRM-free on Amazon? Because they want to punish Apple's success and promote a strong competitor. They are giving Amazon an intentional advantage that they won't give Apple--or won't give it unless Apple pays extra for it. (And for once I like the result of the content-owners actions: their support for Amazon gives me a nice alternative store that I'm glad to have.)

Interestingly, a rumor today is that Apple will even start selling MP3 tracks. Don't know about that one!

more rubbish, if Apple was serious about getting rid of DRM then iTunes plus would sell at the same price as normal and EVERY track would be DRM free.

ITMS is now one of the worlds biggest vendors of music surely they can stand up to this if they 'really' wanted to do this..?

You can tell when Jobs lies...his lips move.
post #202 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archipellago View Post

more rubbish, if Apple was serious about getting rid of DRM then iTunes plus would sell at the same price as normal and EVERY track would be DRM free.

ITMS is now one of the worlds biggest vendors of music surely they can stand up to this if they 'really' wanted to do this..?

You assertion that being the largest US vendor or largest online vendor of music means that Apple doesn't have to follow legal contracts is absurd. The content owners have the right by ownership and the contracts Apple signed to make sure that DRM is included.

PS: iTS DRM-free music is the same price as their DRMed music.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #203 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archipellago View Post

more rubbish, if Apple was serious about getting rid of DRM then iTunes plus would sell at the same price as normal and EVERY track would be DRM free.

Your information is outdated by over a year. iTunes+ tracks cost the same now and has since October 2007. I don't know how you can be credible in this discussion if you use that obsolete of a point in the argument.

I haven't thought of the possibility of Apple bullying the labels into providing iT+, though maybe it's a bit of a detente, the labels want more money, Apple wants no DRM. If Apple wanted DRM, I don't see why they'd bother offering iT+ at all, or ever offered it without DRM.
post #204 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archipellago View Post

more rubbish, if Apple was serious about getting rid of DRM then iTunes plus would sell at the same price as normal and EVERY track would be DRM free.

ITMS is now one of the worlds biggest vendors of music surely they can stand up to this if they 'really' wanted to do this..?

You can tell when Jobs lies...his lips move.

You have to go back and read up on the battle between Apple and the record labels over this very issue. Apple wants no DRM the record labels want the ability to charge more. This battle has somewhat been repeated with video on iTunes.

I'm not sure why you think Apple is holding the superior position when they don't own the music or video. Without the music or video their is no iTunes store.
post #205 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

You assertion that being the largest US vendor or largest online vendor of music means that Apple doesn't have to follow legal contracts is absurd. The content owners have the right by ownership and the contracts Apple signed to make sure that DRM is included.

PS: iTS DRM-free music is the same price as their DRMed music.

my bad on the price..fair enough.

when apple comes to RENEW the contract then they could do something about the DRM if they cared..but they won't 'cos deep down they don't..
post #206 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

You have to go back and read up on the battle between Apple and the record labels over this very issue. Apple wants no DRM the record labels want the ability to charge more. This battle has somewhat been repeated with video on iTunes.

I'm not sure why you think Apple is holding the superior position when they don't own the music or video. Without the music or video their is no iTunes store.

Apple hold the superior position cos they have the customers and the market share. The industry CANNOT drop Apple or ITMS or they lose millions.
post #207 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Your information is outdated by over a year. iTunes+ tracks cost the same now and has since October 2007. I don't know how you can be credible in this discussion if you use that obsolete of a point in the argument.

I haven't thought of the possibility of Apple bullying the labels into providing iT+, though maybe it's a bit of a detente, the labels want more money, Apple wants no DRM. If Apple wanted DRM, I don't see why they'd bother offering iT+ at all, or ever offered it without DRM.

Apple offered IT+ on a very limited number of tracks to gain the moral high ground and to make people think that DRM free is what they want.

In truth iCon doesn't give a rats about it. But DRM free is where public opinion is and thats right where he's heading in a very well orchestrated PR move.

He becomes the 'good' guy.

all consumers should just buy CD's, rip them as they see fit and then give the discs to charity.
post #208 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archipellago View Post

when apple comes to RENEW the contract then they could do something about the DRM if they cared..but they won't 'cos deep down they don't..

Yet as JeffDM pointed out, if Apple wants DRM so bad they why did they offer all EMI audio without DRM? On top of that, why has Steve Jobs made mention of DRMed audio as being a failure before and during iTS reign?

I don't see how you can say that Apple wants DRM on all their audio when they were able to get one studio to not offer it and there is plenty of evidence of Jobs clearly stating that DRMed music is a dead end. I think you've dranken too much of the "kool-aid" if you think Apple is so great that they can easy convince the music studios that DRM is bad when their executives have publicly stated (once in a rebuttal to Jobs' open letter) that DRM is necessary.

BTW, you haven't made a case as to how DRM-free audio on iTS would hurt iPod sales. Now people can have the convenience of iTS and the audio that Amazon is hosting, except in the slightly better AAC format. As the article stated, the whole purpose of the gruff studios going to Amazon with DRM-free audio was to unhinge Apple's control over them. DRM was the only card they had left to play!
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #209 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archipellago View Post

Apple hold the superior position cos they have the customers and the market share. The industry CANNOT drop Apple or ITMS or they lose millions.

I think it was Universal that negotiated their music contract to be able to pull songs from iTS at any time or only release songs at their discretion on iTS so that other, more profitable revenue streams would get tapped first.

It was NBC that pulled all their shows from iTS. They are now back, but lost a great deal of revenue over the months, including the Olympic iTS revenues which would have topped the charts for 2 weeks.

Both wanted variable pricing, You are right that they can't, but don't think that they won't try it. These examples are proof of the clashing between the content owners and Apple.

PS: I would like to hear a reason as to why you think Apple would need or want DRM on the music they sell when the iPod, iTunes, iTS integration already holds people to their money maker, the iPod.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #210 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Both wanted variable pricing, You are right that they can't, but don't think that they won't try it. These examples are proof of the clashing between the content owners and Apple.

Yes they have and still are attempting various measures to break iTunes hold. Withholding content, pulling content from iTunes, and giving special favor to other media services.

Its true Apple is able to maintain because they have the highest marketshare, but they do not hold all the power.
post #211 of 247
This media protection scheme is the reason Apple chose Intel. They've been planning this the whole time.
When will the governments realize it's got to be funky, sexy ladies?
-Flight of the Conchords
Reply
When will the governments realize it's got to be funky, sexy ladies?
-Flight of the Conchords
Reply
post #212 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archipellago View Post

more rubbish, if Apple was serious about getting rid of DRM then iTunes plus would sell at the same price as normal and EVERY track would be DRM free.

ITMS is now one of the worlds biggest vendors of music surely they can stand up to this if they 'really' wanted to do this..?

You can tell when Jobs lies...his lips move.

In case you don't know. iTunes Plus songs are also twice the bit rate as regular iTunes songs. It's not just DRM free. You're (were) actually paying more for a higher quality song. Not the fact that it's DRM free. As DRM free songs from iTunes sells for the same price as the songs with DRM.

Apple main concern is to provide a legal way to get contents for iPods owners. If the music studios won't allow iTunes to sell DRM free songs. Then Apple's choice is to either offer the song with DRM or not offer the song at all.

It's kind of hypocritical of you to accuse Jobs of always lying when you type out FUD on nearly every one of your post.
post #213 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheIguana View Post

People will notice this, if they have an monitor that has a DVI or VGA port that doesn't have HDCP support and they rent a movie to play on it, they will get this error and they will notice

Hey, one thing that's unclear.
Is this copy protection on High Def versions of the movies, or on Standard Def too?

We knew Apple wanted to control their HD movies, since they only allowed them on their HDCP enabled AppleTV. Now that the laptops have HDCP, they may be allowing HD downloads to their MacBooks.

Can anyone confirm or deny this?

On a related note - an option for HDCP is supposed to be that it downscales the HD content to 960x540. Apple's SD content is less than that anyway, so why enforce it? (Perhaps it was an error of enforcement?)
post #214 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Messiah View Post

I think my problem is that Apple is continuing to sell equipment to customers without informing them of the restrictions. I don't have a problem with HDCP per se, I understand the reasons behind it. But Apple's roll-out of this new standard (where the nature and timescale of the roll-out is completely controlled by Apple) seems like one step forward, two steps back to a lot of users. It's the law abiding users that lose out here.

Apple continue to tell customers that they can use their existing displays with the new MacBooks. That clearly isn't true. For instance, if you buy an Apple Cinema Display (that's an ironic name now isn't it) it's not going to work fully with the current laptop offerings or any future Apple hardware sporting the DisplayPort interface. When I say work 'fully' I mean you can't continue to enjoy the same functionality you enjoy today.

So Apple have adopted a video interface where:

1. CPUs without a DisplayPort interface cannot drive a DisplayPort monitor
2. CPUs with a DisplayPort interface cannot drive anything but a DisplayPort monitor

Which effectively means that this new video interface is neither backwards nor forwards compatible, and the iTunes content you have already bought is now worthless. Will Apple be offering refunds for affected iTunes content? Probably not.

So, the stark reality is that if you are planning to purchase a new Cinema Display, that display won't work properly with any future hardware produced by Apple. Likewise, if you're planning on purchasing a new Apple Mac mini, iMac or Mac Pro, those CPUs will never be able to drive any future displays produced by Apple.

Way to go Apple!

The standard is not new. Apple did not invent it. HDCP is built into BluRay, display port, HDMI and DVI. Apple is only complying with the standards so that they can offer HD contents. Your statelite and cable network had to comply with this standard before they could broadcast HD. BluRay player makers had to comply with this standard before they can sell a BluRay player.

1 is correct.
2 is incorrect

All existing and new displays, without the mini display port, will work with all present CPU's and mostly all CPU's in the near future. Apple has a mini-display port to DVI adapter for CPU's that has the mini-display port. I believe, but not positive, that this adapter contains the chip that enables HDCP. So all of your old and new contents with HDCP encoding should be playable. If it plays when you bought it. It should play in the future.

Their new mini-display port, LED, display will only work with a CPU with a mini-display port. You most likely wouldn't be buying one of these usless you already have a CPU that has the mini display port.


Now some of the HD movies you buy today may require you to have a mini display port (or HDMI) before you can output it to an external display. In which case you couldn't output it today anyways (at least not in HD), if you don't already have a CPU with a mini display port (or HDMI). You can only play it on your laptop or iMac screen. Or get an Apple TV. (I think Apple TV is HDCP compliant. It has HDMI. ). So any future CPU purchase with a mini display port would actually allow you to play this content on an external display. You wouldn't be losing it.

MacPros and PowerMacs are highly upgradable. I don't see why you couldn't buy a graphic card with a mini display port or HDMI when (if) they become available.

As for buying the Mini or iMac today. I wouldn't count out Apple TV as a way to of displaying contents on an Apple display with a mini display port.
post #215 of 247
I'm abit confused with how this works?

Does it only effect things playing through iTunes and if you put none iTunes bought films in there it wont display them?

What if i just download a quicktime trailer onto my desktop i cannot watch it?

How about my holiday video in qucktime, i wont play on quicktime or vlc or anything, just through iTunes?
post #216 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

This is similar to some of my frustrations doing a screen grab. If the DVD Player program is running, I can't do a system screen grab of anything or anywhere on the screen, even if the playback window is covered, hidden or minimized. I don't really see a decent reason for the DVD format or the movie industry to object to that, it's just a single frame and it's certainly not worth the work to piece together a frame-by-frame reconstruction of the movie.

The screen grab only don't work when you're using the OSX DVD player. Use a third party DVD player like VLC and the screen grab will work just fine.

I use VLC mainly because I have some region 2 movies that won't play on my region 1 DVD drive. I can only reset the region code on the DVD drive 5 times. The 5th time is for good. VLC doesn't care about region codes. There will always be a work around for DRM. And I have no doubt that by the time I need (or want) to own HD contents, the work around will be in place.
post #217 of 247
I too am disheartened (that's putting it mildly) at Apple's implementation and will seriously reconsider purchasing a new Mac in 2009. I believe (IMHO) they are only required to prevent full HD signal from going to the analog device and could under the agreement allow a lower level signal through.

But its all moot - just google HDFury.

There never was a horse that couldn't be rode, nor a rider that couldn't be throw'd. Think about it.
post #218 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

The purpose of HDCP is to stop an analog hole. If you could plug display port or DVI into an VGA cable. Recording devices could record a pristine and DRM free copy of the content.

I understand your argument here, but I think the real question is would making a recording in this way be illegal?

In my opinion this is not necessarily an illegal way to make a copy of a movie. According to the law in Canada, if I buy a movie on iTunes I have the legal right to make a copy of that movie for my own personal use. Right now iTunes does not allow movies and TV shows to be copied to DVD, even though doing so is not necessarily illegal. Recording my legally purchased movies from iTunes to a DVD using a VGA cable would be totally legal, as long as its for my own use and I dont give or sell the copy to anyone else. But they are plugging that loop hole anyway, even though it violates our rights to legally copy our media and treats us all like criminals.

The huge sin of the movie and music industry has been convincing us that all copying of movie and music media is illegal and we should all be stopped!! This is not true. According to the law when one purchases a music CD or movie DVD or digital file, one has the right to make a copy for their own use. The music and movie industries have always tried to stop this. Years ago they tried to stop the selling of blank cassette tapes and VCR tapes, but that was unsuccessful, because its was never illegal to record your legally owned vinyl albums to cassette tape or a movie to VCR tape. Modern digital computer files are no different, we all have a right to make copies! This is a right the industry giants have continually tried to kill.

Now they (Apple and movie studios) want to tell us what projector or Display we can use to view their content!!! No way man!!!! This is total bull crap, and it constitutes a violation of our rights as owners (or licensed viewers) of recorded media to view or copy our legal property in the way in which we want. There are very limited ways of making copies of iTunes movie and tv files and its all together too difficult to transfer files around to other legal devices, and now we may run into problems with our displays being nonfunctional with the property we have legally purchased. What if I want to view my HD iTunes movie somewhere else other than where my computer or apple tv are located and I dont have an ipod that can transport the video file (can an ipod play HD in full resolution?) I should have the right to copy this HD movie to a DVD so I can view it elsewhere. Not all copying of movies and TV media is illegal, and until iTunes gets this right Ill stick to DVD. I buy lots of DVDs and I can copy them and use them on different devices and displays without any problems, and thats not illegal.

Why would I switch to digital download and face the heap of corporate red tape that goes with it!
post #219 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Because they found some hack around HDCP doesn't mean they are supposed to be doing it.

Except it isn't a hack. It's DESIGNED that way. Which brings me back to my point that Apple's implementation is broken... no other HDCP compliant devices deny access over VGA. It's considered to be a "secure" connection despite having no encryption, likely do to the lack of VGA recording devices on the market.
post #220 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by infinitespecter View Post

Except it isn't a hack. It's DESIGNED that way. Which brings me back to my point that Apple's implementation is broken... no other HDCP compliant devices deny access over VGA. It's considered to be a "secure" connection despite having no encryption, likely do to the lack of VGA recording devices on the market.

AnyHDDVD is a hack though. But as far as I know, HD DVD and Blu-Ray do allow HD over analog, the worst that would happen is that the image is down scaled to 480p if ICT is enabled. This is the first I've heard that completely prevents playback.
post #221 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

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!



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.

Actually, my research shows the complete opposite. Apple was a huge supporter of DRM for many years and I believe that they still are. I am a huge Apple fan, but many of their products show up on shelves(or online) with some form of DRM implementation. They usually only remove the DRM after a large amount of complaining from their customers, and when they do they do it with great reluctance. Yes, I know Steve Jobs has spoke against DRM, but I don't believe for one second that Apple really wants to completely remove DRM from their products.
post #222 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

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?

Acutally yes, I can shed some light on your question. They are trying to control something called the Analog Hole. This is DRM's biggest weakness and it simply refers to the idea that all digital media must be converted to an analog signal to be enjoyed by the end user. The problem is when something with DRM protection is converted to analog it loses all DRM protection and can be copied by simply recording the analog output. They hope to control this by stopping the use of hardware recorders.
Hope that helped!
post #223 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by jawadde View Post

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.

I agree!
post #224 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonard View Post

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...

Maye you wanted this, but I want blu-ray without DRM thank you!
post #225 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by tibbsy View Post

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.

\

CD's are a digital format...
post #226 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimzip View Post

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

Good luck Jimmy, DRM has been around for more than 25 years and we still get stuck with it.
post #227 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feste View Post

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...

You're right it's not legal, but whats the point of building a fast car that can't go fast. Or buying a movie that you can't watch whenever you want. I'm sorry but once anything goes digital it cannot be protected by any company, agency, or government. If they do start putting speed regulating chips in cars, you can bet that there will be someone who learns to hack them and I for one will use that hack. The government should be on the public's side with this, it will most likely help the end users and the producers in the in.
post #228 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archipellago View Post

if the general populous want to start a serious uprising then you all need to stop buying the affected content and ALL of you need to torrent download whatever you like.

The problem with this is that most of the "general populous" is still oblivious to this, doesn't know how to get around DRM, or is to lazy to care about it. The number of us who are against DRM and are willing to do something like this isn't large enough yet.

Someday we will see an end to DRM and that is the day when I will start buying downloadable content. Until then I will continue purchasing DVD's (from people I think deserve support) and then making copies for myself or downloading others via torrents to avoid DRM. As for blu-ray...meh there will be a player that will play non-HDCP content trust me.
post #229 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post

WOW. This is pretty lame.

Now I'm REALLY glad I bought the previous gen MacBook Pro (Amazon, $1444) instead of one of the latest machines.

Looks like I'll still get screwed eventually by this Nazi BS, but not for 4 years or so.


...

Nazi BS? Gonna go that far eh?\
post #230 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbow03 View Post

I had to learn this lesson the hard way. I remember trying to sell a legit copy I owned of AutoCAD on ebay. After my auction was booted and my account frozen I learned that just because I had purchased the software and license, it didn't mean I could do whatever I wanted to (which included reselling it). I was "leasing" the intellectual property under certain terms and conditions. There was no gun held to my head when I bought it. Did I like it? No. In fact, there was something very un-American about the whole thing. But that's the way it is!

If you "just won't stand for this" and expect Apple to change... you might as well get good at creating hand puppets with that non-HDCP projector!

It's one of those times when you ask yourself "what's getting upset going to do?"

Actually if enough people get upset and actually do something, say not buy DRM content/hardware then we well see a change...really think about it....don't just lay down and roll over if you believe something is wrong then do something to stop it.
post #231 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by m2002brian View Post


Why not just add macrovision to an Analog output????(I don't really know what I'm talking about on that one)

Macrovision is a form of DIGITAL Rights Management. You cannot(at least not to my knowledge) to this date manage analog media. It can only be enforced on content in the Digital form. Once it is converted to analog the digital controller is lost.
Hope that helped...if I am wrong on this feel free to correct me!
post #232 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zok2000 View Post

Legality, freedom, etc. aside. Technically speaking, I don't understand why on earth Intel and the movie studios felt the need to combat piracy by placing restrictions on video transmission between the payback device and the monitor. Piracy is accomplished 99% of the time by decrypting the DRM of content digitally on a computer - not through (possibly expensive) external recording devices. Possibly piracy groups could begin to do this if DRM became too difficult to crack, which I HIGHLY doubt. However, even for those who do pirate films, for whatever reason (free or freedom), the probability they will actively search out for a device to copy a film and then PAY for it is absurd.

Basically, technically speaking, IMO they are attacking the wrong link in a weak chain and, in doing so, ONLY hurting legitimate users - it doesn't affect piracy groups in the slightest. If they really wanted to effectively combat piracy, they would either (A - technical) be working on more effective DRM protections on the content itself or (B - socioeconomically) actually work to make legal video content "purchases" easier, more convenient, etc. Apple has done an excellent job of B for music and a decent job at A. However, video is not quite there yet.

BTW - my first post here.

They are stuck in the 80's
post #233 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

On a modem it was physically infeasible to steal a movie of DVD quality much less HD.
my $.04

Says you!
post #234 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eduararipe View Post

(xvi) HDMI. An HDCP connection is required in order to view movies (purchased or rented) and TV shows transmitted over HDMI.

http://www.apple.com/legal/itunes/us/service.html

This problem is only with iTunes purchased content, I think it shouldn't cause the flickering on the monitor.

The problem with the flickering has to do with the software written to comply with HDCP its glitchy still. Hopefully we will see that fixed in the near future!
post #235 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by m2002brian View Post

These tech companies are using HDCP as a way of forcing a monitor(TV) upgrade. In the case of the FCC it's just greed. US government (of the people, by the people) is making 100's of millions of dollars off of the analog spectrum auction. Yet, they're taking away my signal, replacing it with a new one (hey apple, what you think of that idea (FW)), and ultimately FORCING me to spend money on something I never needed before, and for what. Higher resolution? Do people realize HDTV came about because houses are too small in Japan and they sit too close to the TV. Do we in the U.S. do that? Now I love HD, but hey, I pay for it.

Now Apple, and others, are using HDCP as an excuse to upgrade my monitor. How much "Apple" tax do we have to take.

Sure, go ahead, say it's not Apple's fault. In the end though we all know who AGREED to implement it.

BTW I have yet to meet ANYBODY that has a high resolution (HD and up) stand alone recording unit (never mind with VGA input)

Ummm....if you don't want to upgrade then don't upgrade. It's not like anybody is forcing you to upgrade your mac to the new version. Just a thought.
post #236 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

Is it possible to bypass this crap with software?

Well I spose it's gotta be, so I can't say I'm that bothered. Just involves a bit of tinkering.

If someone hasn't already figured it out already they will.
post #237 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Originalme8 View Post

Acutally yes, I can shed some light on your question. They are trying to control something called the Analog Hole. This is DRM's biggest weakness and it simply refers to the idea that all digital media must be converted to an analog signal to be enjoyed by the end user. The problem is when something with DRM protection is converted to analog it loses all DRM protection and can be copied by simply recording the analog output. They hope to control this by stopping the use of hardware recorders.
Hope that helped!

It did, thanks a lot.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #238 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by infinitespecter View Post

Except it isn't a hack. It's DESIGNED that way. Which brings me back to my point that Apple's implementation is broken... no other HDCP compliant devices deny access over VGA. It's considered to be a "secure" connection despite having no encryption, likely do to the lack of VGA recording devices on the market.

I agree that something is broken, because the "DVD-quality" SD videos you rent from iTS should not have HDCP since the downgrade would still be the same resolution, and you can't currently rent or buy HD content from the iTS, so what content wouldn't play. Has this data been disclosed anywhere?

PS: When Apple finally does offer HD content from iTS with HDCP will iTunes check your system to see if the HD content will be able to be played in HD. Warning you if the rental/purchase will not play in HD if proper HDCP HW is not attached. Maybe you have HDCP 1.0 and the content requires v1.3. I think it's important that Apple make iTunes check your system or at least warn you if you are on a PC (assuming iTunes can't check for HDCP compliance on Windows).


Quote:
Originally Posted by Originalme8 View Post

Acutally yes, I can shed some light on your question. They are trying to control something called the Analog Hole. This is DRM's biggest weakness and it simply refers to the idea that all digital media must be converted to an analog signal to be enjoyed by the end user. The problem is when something with DRM protection is converted to analog it loses all DRM protection and can be copied by simply recording the analog output. They hope to control this by stopping the use of hardware recorders.
Hope that helped!

That was stated nicely.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #239 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

.. and you can't currently rent or buy HD content from the iTS, so what content wouldn't play. Has this data been disclosed anywhere?

A poster on another forum said that the MacBooks could download HD content from the iTS, since they have HDCP.
No-one else has confirmed or denied this that I've seen.

We need someone with a new MacBook to rent a HD movie. Anyone out there? (You don't have to watch it straight away, you've got a month... but it'd be good to know if you can download it!)
post #240 of 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post

A poster on another forum said that the MacBooks could download HD content from the iTS, since they have HDCP.

No-one else has confirmed or denied this that I've seen.

Give me a minute and I'll confirm/deny it. I never thought to look.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple's new MacBooks have built-in copy protection measures