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

13468913

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 246
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post


    Lordy

    In fact you should be HAPPY that Apple has finally implemented HDCP

    support. It now means the road is paved for adding Blu-ray and other

    HD technologies. Sure...you'll have to buy a new monitor perhaps but hell

    you know you need the new hotness anyways.



    I'm not so sure this paves an easy path for Blu-ray. Apple owns Fairplay and can implement its own version of HDCP. Apple would have to license Blu-rays proprietary DRM.
  • Reply 102 of 246
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post


    Oh, Apple must love you. Such a good little boy.



    ...



    OOOOOOOH, I'm soooooo burned....







    lol



    Call me what you'd like, but you can't say I'm wrong. The only reason this was caught was because it was run on incidentally unsupported hardware (projector) that apple should have warned about. I have a 20 inch Apple display and while I wouldn't have been able to run the new laptop on it until the DP-to-DVI adaptor was available, I could still plug it in my widescreen through HDMI and I'd never had be the wiser. The only real crime apple committed here was not telling customers that this was coming down the pipe which is causing more confusion then need be. I'm sure if people had known this was happening, they just would have bought the DVD instead.
  • Reply 103 of 246
    America used to love oil and for that our car companies built cars to use MORE of it.



    America loves their technology, now it seems the tech companies are implementing features into their products FORCING you to upgrade. Or in the case of the FCC (and Apple (FW)) They are taking away features, forcing you to upgrade. In the FCC's case, at least, they know how to do a change over!!!! Hey Apple do you know what transition means?????







    Why not just add macrovision to an Analog output????(I don't really know what I'm talking about on that one)
  • Reply 104 of 246
    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.
  • Reply 105 of 246
    tbagginstbaggins Posts: 2,306member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by websnap View Post


    OOOOOOOH, I'm soooooo burned....









    It's always true that people who are first to dish out the sarcasm can never take it.





    ...
  • Reply 106 of 246
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gustav View Post


    If you really cared to make a difference, you'd not buy the content and not pirate it from a torrent. If the studios saw declining sales and declining torrent downloads, they couldn't use piracy as a lame rationalization for DRM that they do now.



    Besides, you don't have a right to use their products. They can put whatever DRM on it that they like. It doesn't mean you have a right to steal it just because you really want it.



    Simply stealing it sends them a message that you're a thief. Letting them know their product isn't important enough to you to use at all and that if they removed DRM they'd have your money will send a much more powerful message.



    I wasn't necessarily advocating stealing content. I just meant don't buy it.
  • Reply 107 of 246
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,141member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by m2002brian View Post


    America used to love oil and for that our car companies built cars to use MORE of it.



    America loves their technology, now it seems the tech companies are implementing features into their products FORCING you to upgrade. Or in the case of the FCC (and Apple (FW)) They are taking away features, forcing you to upgrade. In the FCC's case, at least, they know how to do a change over!!!! Hey Apple do you know what transition means?????







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



    Well the problem is theft.



    Once broadband took off the ability to steal covertly increased substantially. On a modem it was physically infeasible to steal a movie of DVD quality much less HD. Today it's easy to download a HD movie in a matter of minutes.



    Now with music the financial hit isn't that hard. The typical label musician makes less than a buck per CD sold. If you download a track from them you're likely costing them roughly $.08 or so. Their production costs are low with many CD cut from makeshift studios in the home. Juxtapose that with a movie. A movie worthy of theatrical release costs in the millions to produce, market and distribute. Just look at the credits for a movie and see the amount of staffing it takes to take a project from screenplay to post production.



    When you download a movie your REALLY put the creators in a pickle. Unlike the musician who recoups most of their money via touring the movie depends on the DVD release to generate much of the profits now and if you steal that you've driven a dagger through their heart.



    Apple should protect the rights of all artists who worked hard to create something from scratch and that product has value. Yes ..I'm dismayed by how greedy the majors are but someday the hope is that low cost distribution and marketing will revolutionize the Indie markets and pricing will become very affordable.



    The only way that happens though is to allow a degree of protection from theft and the ability to profit from one's creation.



    my $.04
  • Reply 108 of 246
    bageljoeybageljoey Posts: 1,749member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tibbsy View Post


    But in the case of this article, I feel that John the high school teacher should have been able to watch a movie that he purchased the rights to consume on any monitor he was capable of hooking his laptop up to. Had John used the DVD version of the same movie, I don't think he'd have had the same problem. That inequality is what irks me.



    Hey, I'm with you on that one!!

    I apologize for being a stickler earlier, but I do think it is important to be clear about what we are objecting to and why we think it is objectionable.



    This example (if true) is a travesty.



    I, too, agree that DRM is lothesome if it prevents legal use. If it can be implemented such that it never affects me when I am following the law then I really don't have a problem with it. But it should not be a burden to the legal consumer and this case does apear that it could be a real backslide
  • Reply 109 of 246
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by parky View Post


    Very silly analogies which are not actually correct.



    The analogies do seem to be pretty accurate. For example, as a user, you technically only have the right to play that DVD on an approved, licensed player, at least in the US. Any concept of fair use media shifting went out the window with digital copy protection laws. I don't remember if Europe has passed any similar laws yet on the subject.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post


    Sounds like a lot of hoops to jump through just to get DVD quality video for FREE.



    It doesn't sound like much work to save $10 if I were so inclined. If you don't mind the computer running at max for half an hour.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sausage&Onion View Post


    Well, this a another phenomenal reason to avoid ITMS and just use netflix. If netflix gets their act together and start streaming even more material, they are going to bury iTunes. I can't really say Im gonna miss it either...



    I seem to recall that Netflix applies DRM to their streaming video.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    Not likely. The DRM is implanted in the media file. Its possible to play other iTunes video files over VGA. Just not some of the HD movies.



    I think you can with an older computer without HDCP support.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    But we'll run out of IP addresses.



    What does HDCP have to do with IP addresses?
  • Reply 110 of 246
    Well, if you look back in history hardware restrictions never served it's intended purpose, but it's really annoying that these measures haven't been disclosed by Apple in any way.



    Remember all the uproar when Vista with it's copy right restrictions was introduced? People and media complaint about bad bad Microsoft fooling its customers, again.



    Now MS is on a road to a more open philosophy, forced by the industry. And what doese Apple...right...they're doing it the Microsoft way.
  • Reply 111 of 246
    (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.
  • Reply 112 of 246
    What happens on older laptops and other machines, do they not allow playing back those movies at all on an external screen? If they do play back in HD, doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of trying to block the "analog hole"?



    And when HDMI isn't available, isn't the movie supposed to still play back, just not in HD resolution?



    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?



    Because without the limitation you could just hook up the output to the input of a device that records HD and have an exact copy of the movie.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Adjei View Post


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



    I doubt people would bail on Apple/windows too much, they'll just pirate the movies instead. And haven't HD movies been cracked already?
  • Reply 113 of 246
    pxtpxt Posts: 683member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post


    Would you care to provide proof of that?



    Sorry, but I have long forgotten where I saw an article about European 'piracy taxes'. The gist was that the EU applies a percentage, I think it is to flash memory or something similar, as a result of lobbying from the record industries and this cost is reflected in all mp3 players sold in Europe.
  • Reply 114 of 246
    nagrommenagromme Posts: 2,834member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Archipellago View Post


    the cynic in me thinks that iTunes Plus was just a ruse for APple to charge more for already well overpriced content.



    iTunes Plus doesn't cost any more than iTunes regular. There was a transitional time when it did (and offered you higher quality for your trouble too) but only for singles, not albums, and only when Plus was new and the record labels were hesitant to get on board. Maybe more would be on board today if singles still cost more, but I'm glad Apple dropped the price.



    It's absurd to think Apple is driving the DRM rather than the content owners driving it. The profit Apple makes from charging .30 more for certain singles for a certain period of time is trivial compared to iTunes as a whole, which in turn is a drop in the bucket compared to the device sales that Apple REALLY cares about. Apple's motivation with iTunes pricing is clearly simplicity, not pinching pennies out of us--remember how they fought against offering certain tracks for over .99? They gave in partially with Plus--temporarily.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post


    By your own words, you admit Apple and Steve are hypocrites then.



    Can you explain?



    DRM is a necessary evil from Apple's point of view. The content owners call the shots. Apple has fought against DRM, and sometimes they've won, sometimes not. Apple's other choices were a) not to fight, and let the recording industry go nuts, or b) not to have downloadable music (which people do want) from the big content owners at all.
  • Reply 115 of 246
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tibbsy View Post


    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.



    You are clearly mistaken over what you've purchased. You do NOT own the video. You have purchased a license to play the video in compliance with the associated license agreement. Just like you cannot legally play a video from Blockbuster to a crowd of people who've paid admission, there are license restrictions on downloaded movies.



    In this case, more than ever before, the license is enforceable.



    In neither case do you "own" the movie. You do own a piece of polycarbonate (DVD), or a reel of tape. You can do with those as you wish (burn, tape over, use as a coaster). In no case do you OWN the movie itself. You are a licensee. It's the same with DVDs and VHS and vinyl.



    Technology is finally letting copyright holders control how they distribute their content. In the early history of film, it was easy. Celluloid is expensive, and requires some know-how to manufacture, expose and process. Even with a content player (projector), duplication was effectively impossible.



    Tape changed all that. Now, making copies of video or audio was relatively easy. Studios lost control of their creative works.



    If you are upset, vote with your wallet. Piracy is illegal, and isn't an alternative. You don't "need" movies or TV or music.



    The real problem is that studios are controlling the multi-purpose content delivery systems (computers), and introducing complications that I will never legally need. HDCP checking surely takes CPU time or at least space on silicon. If I run into problems with monitor connections because of ill-tempered HDCP authentication, I'll be mad. But only because it's not serving its intended purpose.
  • Reply 116 of 246
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Zauner View Post


    Now MS is on a road to a more open philosophy, forced by the industry. And what doese Apple...right...they're doing it the Microsoft way.



    In exactly is Windows on the road to an open philosophy? I see MS trying compete with everyone and to control everything the way they always have.



    Apple nor MS are to blame or have much control over these DRM policies. If they want the right to use copy written content, they are forced to use the DRM.
  • Reply 117 of 246
    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)
  • Reply 118 of 246
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    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?



    HDCP requires that every device along the path honor and enforce it.

    If the monitor doesn't enforce it, then you could put a capture device at the end of the chain.



    I'm somewhat concerned about the HDMI switcher I use, but not all that much.



    Also, HDCP doesn't mean that the picture won't display, simply that the compliance bit is switched off when it hits a non-compliant component, and the picture will be down-rez'd to, say, 480P.



    Still, its a curious choice, but no doubt geared towards securing more HD content from the studios.
  • Reply 119 of 246
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pt123 View Post


    Looks like Apple is leading the way to enabling HDCP with iTunes.



    Who else would be leading the way to HDCP on iTunes?



    If you meant in general use of enabling HDCP, yeah, they sure are are leading the way to applying it. Right after HD Televisions (and many monitors), Upscaling DVD players, HD-DVD, Blu-Ray, Cable Boxes, and Video Card manufacturers, Microsoft...



    Come to think of it, looks like Apple's late to the game!



    My 5-year old TV has HDCP. If you think this is shocking news, then you haven't been paying attention. Yes, HDCP is dumb, but if you want to watch HD material, you will need an HD display, and most all HD displays support HDCP.
  • Reply 120 of 246
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    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.





    ...



    Ahhh... what's the principle again that says that thread has ended its usefulness at the moment Hitler or Nazi's are envoked?



    Yeah... making you honor copyrights and licensing agreements is right up there with gassing millions.
Sign In or Register to comment.