Apple, Online Media, and DRM

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
46,727
8,945
News.com has an article exploring Apple's position in upcoming online-media efforts... which is to say, a lack of Macintosh support in upcoming online-media ventures partially due to a lack of Digital Rights Management (DRM) support:

Schiller said Apple has not released much in the way of protective technology, known as digital rights management (DRM), because effective techniques for securing content without interfering with the experience of consumers have not yet been invented.
 

Fins160

macrumors newbie
Nov 4, 2002
16
0
Pay per view

Who is going to watch these things anyway? We all have pay-per-view on our TVs, and although its illegal, movies are available all over the web.
 

eric_n_dfw

macrumors 68000
Jan 2, 2002
1,507
55
DFW, TX, USA
Has DRM been hacked yet?

I know absolutely nothing about DRM and how it works. Does anyone out there know if it has been hacked yet?

Every time someone comes up with a way to copy protect media, it seems that hackers find a way around ASAP.

Also, truthfully, how many people watch movies on their PC/Mac besides proofing iMovies or the like? I know that I have watched exactly 1 DVD on my Mac in the past 4 years and that was to test it out. I promptly bought a new home theatre with a DVD player and have never wanted to sit in front on my computer to watch a movie again.

I think Apple is taking the right position on this. I don't believe a huge demand for downloading movies exists outside of people wanting to burn them to DVD-R(W) or VCD on CD-R(W) - both of which could then be copied at will.
 

dricci

macrumors 6502a
Dec 15, 2001
537
0
Yeah, I don't think I'd want to pay for a movie if I couldn't burn it to a DVD and watch it on my big TV, which with DRM, you wouldn't be allowed to because, well, that's just what DRM does... It's the same way with a lot of the (windows-only) pay music download services.. You can download as many as you want, but you can't burn them to CDs or put them on an mp3 player.
 

rjgjonker

macrumors member
Dec 7, 2001
62
0
That doesn't sound too promising…

What Phil Schiller is actually saying is that if there was an effective DRM solution, they would implement it? Sounds quite scary.

No-one would want his or her computer to be controlled by the records industry.
 

dricci

macrumors 6502a
Dec 15, 2001
537
0
Not so..

With real DRM, you'd be able to do whatever you want to the file in a standard format, and do whatever you want to do like put it on a CD or iPod, but you just wouldn't be able to give it to anybody else (or else the file wouldn't work)...

But, that's an impossible task, so it'll never happen.
 

arn

macrumors god
Staff member
Apr 9, 2001
14,499
1,783
Re: That doesn't sound too promising…

Originally posted by rjgjonker
What Phil Schiller is actually saying is that if there was an effective DRM solution, they would implement it? Sounds quite scary.

No-one would want his or her computer to be controlled by the records industry.
Well... I think implied is that they are too restrictive... and that there could be a better compromise between security and un-restricted use.

arn
 

rugby

macrumors regular
Feb 21, 2002
222
0
chicago
One thing about DRM is that they don't have to make it any more lenient or change it in any way to help consumers. Because they can just cut you out of the technology loop altogether unless you comply with their "standards". Say Apple says no DRM in our computers. Now let's say audio cd's will require a DRM key to put the mp3's on your computer. No key? Tough, no songs.

That's how they get you to comply with their "standards"
 

crush7

macrumors newbie
Sep 9, 2001
19
0
Germany, Heilbronn
DRM

Phil also said in a recent interview that, essentially, people want to "stay legal" and would pay, if the fee were "reasonable". What this implies is something we all probably feel: DVDs and music DCs are , at the moment way too expensive for what they cost to make and deliver for the customer. The music business is really in a "lose-lose" situation. They will not lower prices because they sell so little and the stuff is so easy to copy. And they will never find a way to make products available over the web that is not "hackable".

The way I see it, all will remain as it is for some time. Those that want, will always copy and share. We hold tools in our hands that are very effective.
 

hesdeadjim

macrumors regular
Jul 17, 2002
194
0
Austin, TX
Re: Re: That doesn't sound too promising…

Originally posted by arn


Well... I think implied is that they are too restrictive... and that there could be a better compromise between security and un-restricted use.

arn
I agree, I think Apple is supportive in protectin copyright material but not at the expense of the conumser being unable to use the purchased material as he/she may desire. I for one would never buy/download a song that I couldn't then import to mp3, burn, or place on a mp3 player. The same with movies, I would only do it if I could burn it to VCD or DVD. Now, I don't think people should share this material, and that is the problem. I agree with Apple that ppl should stop stealing music and movies, but should be able to do anything with the music or movies they had bought.
 

rmac

macrumors member
Mar 5, 2002
36
0
Hanover, NH
Scary Stuff

If you think DRM sounds bad now, read this:

www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html

I have trouble believing it's as bad as Ross Anderson thinks, but who knows?

I personally don't find Phil Schiller's remarks disturbing at all. If Apple knew a way that you could use copyrighted materials fully WITHOUT being able to use them illegally, there's no reason why they shouldn't. The problem is that DRM as Microsoft and others have it set up takes away a people's fair rights to use copyrighted material.

Talking about copy-protected CDs one article pointed out, "... the move will 'anger millions of [the music industry's] best-customers who have become accustomed of making copies [of CDs] for their own use,' which is allowed under 'fair use' provisions of copyright law."

Actually part of the above quote in there is from Congressman Rick Boucher....nice to know that there are some congressmen with our rights in mind, because quite a few only are considering the idustry side of things.

So anyway, DRM seems opposed to both current US law ("fair use") and also a lot of what Apple is trying to do. Apple wants sharing music to be easy, but not copying it. Look at the iPod...Apple hasn't made it impossible to copy music from it to another computer...they just don't make it as easy as it could be.

A huge problem with all this DRM stuff is that once an illegal copy is made of a movie or song, the game is over. "Break once, play anywhere." Copy protected CDs and other such technologies are just going to push more people, who up to now have been playing by the rules and buying everything, to find file-sharing services to get copy-able versions of music/ movies they have purchased but can't use fairly. Will these people still want to pay $18 for CDs once they know how to download the music for free?

People will ALWAYS break these systems. 1. It's a challenge that many people like to take on. 2. If it's worth protecting, it's probably worth the money to break the protection. 3. The "analog hole"...eventually you have to put all of this into sound waves and an image on a screen. There's lots of equipment out there that can capture information in these forms....quite easily actually.

I've heard that with Windows Media player, music you rip can't be moved to another computer unless you you turn off DRM before ripping it (please correct me if this is wrong....I do all my ripping in iTunes, of course). Worse yet the latest version of Windows Media Center has statements in the EULA (where you have to click "Agree" to install and use the software), that gives Microsoft the right to go into your computer at any time and change your software and OS or even deem that your older music isn't legal and shouldn't be playable anymore.

How dumb is Microsoft? I hope that all this stuff they're trying to do turns off lots of people who'll then turn to the Mac as a better alternative....a system designed with them primarily in mind rather than the music and movie industry.

I'm sure people at Apple have looked long and hard at this trend. Usually they tend to call such shots better than others, and I'm pretty sure they're doing the right thing in regards to DRM. They're R&D money is better placed elsewhere.

Sorry this was so long...my job involves looking at TCPA and Palladium and so a lot of this has been on my mind...I'm especially interested in how Apple fits into all this...now we know at least a little better.
 

eric_n_dfw

macrumors 68000
Jan 2, 2002
1,507
55
DFW, TX, USA
Re: DRM

Originally posted by crush7
What this implies is something we all probably feel: DVDs and music DCs are , at the moment way too expensive for what they cost to make and deliver for the customer.
(I'm assuming "DCs" == "CDs")
I agree on CD prices but no on DVDs.

With must CD's, my price point is around $10 for a single CD, $15 for a double. Best Buy and Target used to "get it" and price their CD's there but not usually any more. (I think I read that the record companied pressured them to "comply")

With DVD's, though, the $19.99 price that most bring in seems pretty fair to me.
 

Nebrie

macrumors 6502a
Jan 5, 2002
573
65
Re: Re: DRM

Originally posted by eric_n_dfw

(I'm assuming "DCs" == "CDs")
I agree on CD prices but no on DVDs.

With must CD's, my price point is around $10 for a single CD, $15 for a double. Best Buy and Target used to "get it" and price their CD's there but not usually any more. (I think I read that the record companied pressured them to "comply")

With DVD's, though, the $19.99 price that most bring in seems pretty fair to me.
Why are you buying retail? I get all my cds for ~$10-11