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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pt123
Unfortunately the teacher trying to watch Hellboy didn't seem to have the option of watching the movie constrained to 480p resolution. The dialog just said the movie couldn't be played. That part doesn't seem right. I haven't purchased any movies from iTunes but it seems like if HDCP is enabled, there should be some warnings / explanation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PXT
That's the part of the story that confuses me and makes me suspect there's a bug in play.
I thought HDCP should restrict content to 480p for non-HDCP devices. Can't remember where I read that though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder
And when HDMI isn't available, isn't the movie supposed to still play back, just not in HD resolution?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB
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.
As far as I recall, what you are talking about is a feature of the AACS copy protection, which can be set to downgrade the resolution when a Blu-ray or HD-DVD is played back over a non HDCP-protected data link, not HDCP as of itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder
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 GQB
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.
If I understand this correctly, since the decode stage is before the capture device, you would be able to capture a video stream with a 1Gbps bitrate (1080p24), plus the soundtrack? Granted, you would get a perfect bit-for-bit copy, but the file size might be… let's say impractical.
If this is what it takes to bring me Blu-ray on the Mac platform, I say bring it. It's a step in the right direction. (Also, don't buy movies off iTunes store, Apple doesn't support all that much of MPEG-4 AVC, better quality can be found elsewhere.)
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.
I currently use my Blacbook Core Duo w/ Miglia TVMini HD Tuner (via USB), connected to a Sony VPL-AW15 (is HDCP complient, however, only has 1 HDMI port (used for DishDH)) projector via. VGA. Why would they put a high resolution VGA input on this device?? For computer use you say? Hmm, so if I bought a NEW computer, are you telling me I must pay this "Apple Tax" and go buy me a HDMI switcher (HDCP compliant none the less), and also another highly expensive HDMI cable? Just to play videos from my new computer to my EXISTING HD setup. How much would that cost me in regular guy dollars (I'm not going to search for hours for the best deal)? I figure about $80+.
This would've made more sense of Apple would have done the right thing in the first place and just put a regular sized HDMI port on their damn machines. Then when they transitioned from FW to USB 3.0 (like they should have. They could also transition to DP from HDMI (if it is ever really going to be worth it...I doubt 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)
This is "proof" that HDCP "works"*.
Such a device would not be allowed to be HDCP-compliant, as it would do the very thing that HDCP is there to prevent. Even if the manufacturer were to crack HDCP, it would be very easy to shut them or their sales down due to patent laws, and the DMCA/equivalents in many countries.
If there wasn't HDCP, and the signals were sent in the clear, there wouldn't be any problem with making such a recorder, and they would likely be plentiful.
For home-video use, HD camcorders do exist, but few people would prefer to use a standalone device rather than a computer to edit/archive home videos anyway. So there is little demand for a non-HDCP high-def recorder.
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 they are afraid that you could hook up a (digital) recorder to the output device and thus record a movie.
The real issue is the blurb about DVD-Audio: all the high-end DACs hook up over standard fire-wire and have regular core-audio drivers. That means a $2k high-end DAC can't play high-def audio, because of the lack of HDCP, and we have to use the el-cheapo crap built into Apple hardware. Barf!
Hey, all those crying for BlyRay support on the Mac: this is the stuff you have been asking for: a BAG OF HURT (to quote SJ himself)
Such a device would not be allowed to be HDCP-compliant, as it would do the very thing that HDCP is there to prevent. Even if the manufacturer were to crack HDCP, it would be very easy to shut them or their sales down due to patent laws, and the DMCA/equivalents in many countries.
If there wasn't HDCP, and the signals were sent in the clear, there wouldn't be any problem with making such a recorder, and they would likely be plentiful.
For home-video use, HD camcorders do exist, but few people would prefer to use a standalone device rather than a computer to edit/archive home videos anyway. So there is little demand for a non-HDCP high-def recorder.
*By "works", I mean "stifles innovation".
I like your point of view, it's like the other side of mine. I must say I tried as a kid to copy tapes and it didn't work. So when I went about copying a DVD I didn't use another DVD recorder. I just stripped it of it's CP. Apparently that is too much for most people. They, the industry, knows this. So what they do is add a copy protection that doesn't matter, because the people that DL movies and music will always be there, always finding loop holes. All CP does it force an upgrade in equipment for people who already follow the law.
BTW I'm pretty sure a firmware hack will come along within the next six months.
Also, I don't condone the copying of movies for sale or profit. It should only be done in cases such as backing up and being able to view via handheld.
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.
I think either Apple will "fix" their miniDVI to VGA/SVideo connector and/or software or these alternatives will become ubiquitous. Like many others in the thread I think it's partly a software bug - the video should downscale to 480p - the HDCP restrictions are only supposed to be enforced in a pure HD path. Ie: you cannot connect a HD video source (MBP) to a HD Video recorder (BluRay), but there is no restriction about connecting a HD video source to a non-HD display since there has been a loss in quality.
A quick google found a few "HDCP compliant" DVI to VGA or SVideo adapters already available, but we need some reviews to be sure they do indeed fix the problem, eg:
I am a recent (last five years) Apple user. What pushed me to this side was MS' use of DRM in the bowels of their OS. If Apple is using HDCP in their newest machines I can only take that to mean it has no respect for its user community. And if Apple won't respect the community, I don't see the community returning much respect either. Psystar would never have gotten my business in the past... but if this HDCP garbage is true, now I'll consider it (and encourage others to do the same).
"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."
The requirement of HDCP for high definition digital video outputs is a given; there shouldn't be an argument there as it is standard practice on HD-DVD players, Blu-Ray players, and all new computers for playback of copywritten HD video content. Let's us not debate this, but instead focus on the primary issue here!
The real isssue here is that HDCP is only intended to restrict the digital output of specifically high definition material. The idea being that they want to keep people from being able to make a perfect high-definition copy by intercepting the video stream to a recording device.
Therefore:
If you attempt to play HDCP-protected High Definition (aka 720P/1080P) content on a display that is:
a) connected via DVI or HDMI AND does not support HDCP technology
*OR*
b) connected via an analog cable (RCA composite, RGB component, S-Video)
Then the HD video source is supposed to be down-sampled to standard definition 480P and transmitted normally. In other words, iTunes should still play the content --- just not in high definition.
Obviously something is wrong, since in this guy's case with the projector, iTunes actively refused to play the film at all. It should have just downsampled the quality to standard definition and played back like any other unprotected video content. Appleinsider should write this IMPORTANT fact into this article. Someone needs to contact Apple and tell them of this inproper behavior of iTunes. I find it very hard to believe that this is the intended behavior of iTunes (aka it won't down-sample HD video to SD for display on non-HDCP compliant (or analog connected) monitors. That would be contrary to every other implementation of HDCP and probably contrary to the HDCP licensing agreement itself.
I am a recent (last five years) Apple user. What pushed me to this side was MS' use of DRM in the bowels of their OS. If Apple is using HDCP in their newest machines I can only take that to mean it has no respect for its user community. And if Apple won't respect the community, I don't see the community returning much respect either. Psystar would never have gotten my business in the past... but if this HDCP garbage is true, now I'll consider it (and encourage others to do the same).
"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."
With all due respect will you also boycott all BluRay players, HD Cable Boxes, HD Satellites, PS3's, XBoxes and anything else providing HD content? If not you are coming off a bit hypocritical. If apple wants to deliver HD content, thy have to play by HD rules. Simple as that. as a side note, I doubt Psystar will even be in business by the time apple implements this across their product line.
The requirement of HDCP for high definition digital video outputs is a given; there shouldn't be an argument there as it is standard practice on HD-DVD players, Blu-Ray players, and all new computers for playback of copywritten HD video content. Let's us not debate this, but instead focus on the primary issue here!
The **REAL ISSUE** here is that HDCP is ONLY intended to restrict the DIGITAL OUTPUT of specifically HIGH DEFINITION material. The idea being that they want to keep people from being able to make a perfect high-definition copy by intercepting the video stream to a recording device.
Therefore:
If you attempt to play 720P/1080P HD content on a display that is:
a) connected via DVI or HDMI, and does NOT not support HDCP technology
*OR*
b) connected via an analog cable (RCA composite, RGB component, S-Video)
the HD video source is supposed to be *downsampled* to standard definition 480P and then transmitted normally. In other words, the content WILL STILL BE TRANSMITTED NORMALLY --- just not in high definition.
If everybody else is jumping off the bridge you might as well too??? That's all you have to say.
The real issue is HDCP on my machine. Any CP that in introduced is repressive to the community. Just because something is standard practice (say, racial profiling) doesn't make it right. It inhibits our rights as individuals. It is also used, as a practice, to force technological upgrade by the end user. It does little to stifle piracy.
As a T-wolves fan (NBA for you unknowers) I have always been a T-wolves apologist. It seems though this year there are no excuses, I am tired of making them for the team, I can no longer apologize for them.
Apple, I have apologized for, countless times, they have been the ones to fight the evil of CP. It seems though I can no longer apologize for a company that is no longer looking out for it's LOYAL customer base. As soon as the switchers came, guess what Apple became...a switcher. It's like having a beautiful Mac Pro, but on the inside it's slowly rotting away to Windows.
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.
I did say leading the way "with" iTunes, not "on" iTunes but I guess I can see how something like that can easily be confused. The whole copy protection thing can be confusing for the consumer.
No it's not shocking that Apple is enabling HDCP on their iTunes movies. It is actually very enlightening. The consumers should know that the HD content they buy just may not work with the equipment they own. Buyers beware.
If you attempt to play HDCP-protected High Definition (aka 720P/1080P) content on a display that is:
a) connected via DVI or HDMI AND does not support HDCP technology
*OR*
b) connected via an analog cable (RCA composite, RGB component, S-Video)
Then the HD video source is supposed to be down-sampled to standard definition 480P and transmitted normally. In other words, iTunes should still play the content --- just not in high definition.
That is not required of an HDCP link. HDCP is merely encryption for the data transport stream. It is, however, as I mentioned before, a feature that can, if the studio wants to, be enabled for AACS encrypted video. And it still doesn't resize to 480p, it resizes to a maximum of 960×540. iTunes Store video is encrypted with FairPlay DRM, not the AACS encryption scheme used for Blu-ray and HD-DVD.
The answer is pretty simple. If you don't like it, don't buy the content. Buy the DVD or a Blu-Ray player. People bitch and moan about this stuff, and buy it anyway.
So you can't take that VGA feed and copy it. The CP in HDCP is for Copy Protection. iTunes should down-convert to 480p in this case; that's the only mistake on Apple's part.
Yeah, I thought the image contraint token was a part of HDCP? It really doesn't seem right that the output isn't downgraded to 480p. The movie packaging or the equipment really should have a simple guide to copy protection they implement. A consumer isn't going to read 10 pages of technical copy protection data. If I bought a movie and it wouldn't play on my equipment, I would work hard to return it and not buy that again until it got sorted out.
Just because something is standard practice (say, racial profiling) doesn't make it right. It inhibits our rights as individuals. It is also used, as a practice, to force technological upgrade by the end user. It does little to stifle piracy.
Good point - just because it's normal doesn't mean that it's right. DRM should be working to enforce users' fair rights as well as content proverders' fair rights. And so what if the studio is forcing users to accept Terms and Conditions which abridge their fair use rights?
You could say that people must agree to these terms before they purchase the content and therefore it's okay, but even still the terms that they want to enforce don't seem fair to normal people (like not being able to show a movie on any screen you'd like for normal personal viewing) and there is no option, often, to purchase the content under different terms which are more acceptable.
I always hated even DVD region coding because it prevents me from doing fair and normal things (such as renting a DVD while in a foreign country and playing it on my own computer).
I am upset that DRM is becoming more pervasive, and especially because most people will accept this fact without too much complaint.
Yeah, I thought the image contraint token was a part of HDCP? It really doesn't seem right that the output isn't downgraded to 480p. The movie packaging or the equipment really should have a simple guide to copy protection they implement. A consumer isn't going to read 10 pages of technical copy protection data. If I bought a movie and it wouldn't play on my equipment, I would work hard to return it and not buy that again until it got sorted out.
Again, ITC is an AACS feature. iTunes Store movies are not AACS protected.
Comments
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.
Unfortunately the teacher trying to watch Hellboy didn't seem to have the option of watching the movie constrained to 480p resolution. The dialog just said the movie couldn't be played. That part doesn't seem right. I haven't purchased any movies from iTunes but it seems like if HDCP is enabled, there should be some warnings / explanation?
That's the part of the story that confuses me and makes me suspect there's a bug in play.
I thought HDCP should restrict content to 480p for non-HDCP devices. Can't remember where I read that though.
And when HDMI isn't available, isn't the movie supposed to still play back, just not in HD resolution?
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.
As far as I recall, what you are talking about is a feature of the AACS copy protection, which can be set to downgrade the resolution when a Blu-ray or HD-DVD is played back over a non HDCP-protected data link, not HDCP as of itself.
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.
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.
If I understand this correctly, since the decode stage is before the capture device, you would be able to capture a video stream with a 1Gbps bitrate (1080p24), plus the soundtrack? Granted, you would get a perfect bit-for-bit copy, but the file size might be… let's say impractical.
If this is what it takes to bring me Blu-ray on the Mac platform, I say bring it. It's a step in the right direction. (Also, don't buy movies off iTunes store, Apple doesn't support all that much of MPEG-4 AVC, better quality can be found elsewhere.)
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.
I currently use my Blacbook Core Duo w/ Miglia TVMini HD Tuner (via USB), connected to a Sony VPL-AW15 (is HDCP complient, however, only has 1 HDMI port (used for DishDH)) projector via. VGA. Why would they put a high resolution VGA input on this device?? For computer use you say? Hmm, so if I bought a NEW computer, are you telling me I must pay this "Apple Tax" and go buy me a HDMI switcher (HDCP compliant none the less), and also another highly expensive HDMI cable? Just to play videos from my new computer to my EXISTING HD setup. How much would that cost me in regular guy dollars (I'm not going to search for hours for the best deal)? I figure about $80+.
This would've made more sense of Apple would have done the right thing in the first place and just put a regular sized HDMI port on their damn machines. Then when they transitioned from FW to USB 3.0 (like they should have. They could also transition to DP from HDMI (if it is ever really going to be worth it...I doubt it).
Well I spose it's gotta be, so I can't say I'm that bothered. Just involves a bit of tinkering.
BTW I have yet to meet ANYBODY that has a high resolution (HD and up) stand alone recording unit (never mind with VGA input)
This is "proof" that HDCP "works"*.
Such a device would not be allowed to be HDCP-compliant, as it would do the very thing that HDCP is there to prevent. Even if the manufacturer were to crack HDCP, it would be very easy to shut them or their sales down due to patent laws, and the DMCA/equivalents in many countries.
If there wasn't HDCP, and the signals were sent in the clear, there wouldn't be any problem with making such a recorder, and they would likely be plentiful.
For home-video use, HD camcorders do exist, but few people would prefer to use a standalone device rather than a computer to edit/archive home videos anyway. So there is little demand for a non-HDCP high-def recorder.
*By "works", I mean "stifles innovation".
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?
because they are afraid that you could hook up a (digital) recorder to the output device and thus record a movie.
The real issue is the blurb about DVD-Audio: all the high-end DACs hook up over standard fire-wire and have regular core-audio drivers. That means a $2k high-end DAC can't play high-def audio, because of the lack of HDCP, and we have to use the el-cheapo crap built into Apple hardware. Barf!
Hey, all those crying for BlyRay support on the Mac: this is the stuff you have been asking for: a BAG OF HURT (to quote SJ himself)
This is "proof" that HDCP "works"*.
Such a device would not be allowed to be HDCP-compliant, as it would do the very thing that HDCP is there to prevent. Even if the manufacturer were to crack HDCP, it would be very easy to shut them or their sales down due to patent laws, and the DMCA/equivalents in many countries.
If there wasn't HDCP, and the signals were sent in the clear, there wouldn't be any problem with making such a recorder, and they would likely be plentiful.
For home-video use, HD camcorders do exist, but few people would prefer to use a standalone device rather than a computer to edit/archive home videos anyway. So there is little demand for a non-HDCP high-def recorder.
*By "works", I mean "stifles innovation".
I like your point of view, it's like the other side of mine. I must say I tried as a kid to copy tapes and it didn't work. So when I went about copying a DVD I didn't use another DVD recorder. I just stripped it of it's CP. Apparently that is too much for most people. They, the industry, knows this. So what they do is add a copy protection that doesn't matter, because the people that DL movies and music will always be there, always finding loop holes. All CP does it force an upgrade in equipment for people who already follow the law.
BTW I'm pretty sure a firmware hack will come along within the next six months.
Also, I don't condone the copying of movies for sale or profit. It should only be done in cases such as backing up and being able to view via handheld.
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.
I think either Apple will "fix" their miniDVI to VGA/SVideo connector and/or software or these alternatives will become ubiquitous. Like many others in the thread I think it's partly a software bug - the video should downscale to 480p - the HDCP restrictions are only supposed to be enforced in a pure HD path. Ie: you cannot connect a HD video source (MBP) to a HD Video recorder (BluRay), but there is no restriction about connecting a HD video source to a non-HD display since there has been a loss in quality.
A quick google found a few "HDCP compliant" DVI to VGA or SVideo adapters already available, but we need some reviews to be sure they do indeed fix the problem, eg:
http://www.KVMStuff.com/dvi-d-to-vga...vga-converter/
At least what this article has done is show us all what combination of movie/MBP can be used to "test" which adapters "fix" the problem.
Apart from the software "bug" I don't blame Apple for this - it's just the paranoid nature of those who license the content.
"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."
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._measures.html
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.
Well, if you feel that way, why aren't you busy hunting down the producers of 'Seinfeld'?
After all, they used the term 'Soup Nazi' quite liberally. How DARE they!
Lighten up. You'll live longer.
...
The real isssue here is that HDCP is only intended to restrict the digital output of specifically high definition material. The idea being that they want to keep people from being able to make a perfect high-definition copy by intercepting the video stream to a recording device.
Therefore:
If you attempt to play HDCP-protected High Definition (aka 720P/1080P) content on a display that is:
a) connected via DVI or HDMI AND does not support HDCP technology
*OR*
b) connected via an analog cable (RCA composite, RGB component, S-Video)
Then the HD video source is supposed to be down-sampled to standard definition 480P and transmitted normally. In other words, iTunes should still play the content --- just not in high definition.
Obviously something is wrong, since in this guy's case with the projector, iTunes actively refused to play the film at all. It should have just downsampled the quality to standard definition and played back like any other unprotected video content. Appleinsider should write this IMPORTANT fact into this article. Someone needs to contact Apple and tell them of this inproper behavior of iTunes. I find it very hard to believe that this is the intended behavior of iTunes (aka it won't down-sample HD video to SD for display on non-HDCP compliant (or analog connected) monitors. That would be contrary to every other implementation of HDCP and probably contrary to the HDCP licensing agreement itself.
I am a recent (last five years) Apple user. What pushed me to this side was MS' use of DRM in the bowels of their OS. If Apple is using HDCP in their newest machines I can only take that to mean it has no respect for its user community. And if Apple won't respect the community, I don't see the community returning much respect either. Psystar would never have gotten my business in the past... but if this HDCP garbage is true, now I'll consider it (and encourage others to do the same).
"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."
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._measures.html
With all due respect will you also boycott all BluRay players, HD Cable Boxes, HD Satellites, PS3's, XBoxes and anything else providing HD content? If not you are coming off a bit hypocritical. If apple wants to deliver HD content, thy have to play by HD rules. Simple as that. as a side note, I doubt Psystar will even be in business by the time apple implements this across their product line.
The requirement of HDCP for high definition digital video outputs is a given; there shouldn't be an argument there as it is standard practice on HD-DVD players, Blu-Ray players, and all new computers for playback of copywritten HD video content. Let's us not debate this, but instead focus on the primary issue here!
The **REAL ISSUE** here is that HDCP is ONLY intended to restrict the DIGITAL OUTPUT of specifically HIGH DEFINITION material. The idea being that they want to keep people from being able to make a perfect high-definition copy by intercepting the video stream to a recording device.
Therefore:
If you attempt to play 720P/1080P HD content on a display that is:
a) connected via DVI or HDMI, and does NOT not support HDCP technology
*OR*
b) connected via an analog cable (RCA composite, RGB component, S-Video)
the HD video source is supposed to be *downsampled* to standard definition 480P and then transmitted normally. In other words, the content WILL STILL BE TRANSMITTED NORMALLY --- just not in high definition.
If everybody else is jumping off the bridge you might as well too??? That's all you have to say.
The real issue is HDCP on my machine. Any CP that in introduced is repressive to the community. Just because something is standard practice (say, racial profiling) doesn't make it right. It inhibits our rights as individuals. It is also used, as a practice, to force technological upgrade by the end user. It does little to stifle piracy.
As a T-wolves fan (NBA for you unknowers) I have always been a T-wolves apologist. It seems though this year there are no excuses, I am tired of making them for the team, I can no longer apologize for them.
Apple, I have apologized for, countless times, they have been the ones to fight the evil of CP. It seems though I can no longer apologize for a company that is no longer looking out for it's LOYAL customer base. As soon as the switchers came, guess what Apple became...a switcher. It's like having a beautiful Mac Pro, but on the inside it's slowly rotting away to Windows.
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.
I did say leading the way "with" iTunes, not "on" iTunes but I guess I can see how something like that can easily be confused. The whole copy protection thing can be confusing for the consumer.
No it's not shocking that Apple is enabling HDCP on their iTunes movies. It is actually very enlightening. The consumers should know that the HD content they buy just may not work with the equipment they own. Buyers beware.
Therefore:
If you attempt to play HDCP-protected High Definition (aka 720P/1080P) content on a display that is:
a) connected via DVI or HDMI AND does not support HDCP technology
*OR*
b) connected via an analog cable (RCA composite, RGB component, S-Video)
Then the HD video source is supposed to be down-sampled to standard definition 480P and transmitted normally. In other words, iTunes should still play the content --- just not in high definition.
That is not required of an HDCP link. HDCP is merely encryption for the data transport stream. It is, however, as I mentioned before, a feature that can, if the studio wants to, be enabled for AACS encrypted video. And it still doesn't resize to 480p, it resizes to a maximum of 960×540. iTunes Store video is encrypted with FairPlay DRM, not the AACS encryption scheme used for Blu-ray and HD-DVD.
So you can't take that VGA feed and copy it. The CP in HDCP is for Copy Protection. iTunes should down-convert to 480p in this case; that's the only mistake on Apple's part.
Yeah, I thought the image contraint token was a part of HDCP? It really doesn't seem right that the output isn't downgraded to 480p. The movie packaging or the equipment really should have a simple guide to copy protection they implement. A consumer isn't going to read 10 pages of technical copy protection data. If I bought a movie and it wouldn't play on my equipment, I would work hard to return it and not buy that again until it got sorted out.
Well, if you feel that way, why aren't you busy hunting down the producers of 'Seinfeld'?
After all, they used the term 'Soup Nazi' quite liberally. How DARE they!
Lighten up. You'll live longer.
...
I'm as light as air.
I'm not the one who invoked the Nazi slur in defense of our god-given right to steal movies.
I'm as light as air.
I'm not the one who invoked the Nazi slur in defense of our god-given right to steal movies.
No, seriously. Lighten up.
Just because something is standard practice (say, racial profiling) doesn't make it right. It inhibits our rights as individuals. It is also used, as a practice, to force technological upgrade by the end user. It does little to stifle piracy.
Good point - just because it's normal doesn't mean that it's right. DRM should be working to enforce users' fair rights as well as content proverders' fair rights. And so what if the studio is forcing users to accept Terms and Conditions which abridge their fair use rights?
You could say that people must agree to these terms before they purchase the content and therefore it's okay, but even still the terms that they want to enforce don't seem fair to normal people (like not being able to show a movie on any screen you'd like for normal personal viewing) and there is no option, often, to purchase the content under different terms which are more acceptable.
I always hated even DVD region coding because it prevents me from doing fair and normal things (such as renting a DVD while in a foreign country and playing it on my own computer).
I am upset that DRM is becoming more pervasive, and especially because most people will accept this fact without too much complaint.
Mendosi
Yeah, I thought the image contraint token was a part of HDCP? It really doesn't seem right that the output isn't downgraded to 480p. The movie packaging or the equipment really should have a simple guide to copy protection they implement. A consumer isn't going to read 10 pages of technical copy protection data. If I bought a movie and it wouldn't play on my equipment, I would work hard to return it and not buy that again until it got sorted out.
Again, ITC is an AACS feature. iTunes Store movies are not AACS protected.