So you guys honestly think that corporations are going to make it to where I can't walk into a store and buy a PC that will play the DVD of my sister's wedding without first paying for a license for it? I understand the concern as the industry is relentless with their drive against piracy, but Vista is hardly going to take things that far. Heck, they aren't even requiring the down conversion in standalone players unprotected outputs, but rather leaving it as an optional flag up to the studios to do with as they like.
The Great HDCP Fiasco
- Thread starter Arty
- Start date
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
Yes. They don't want people to easily produce their own content, because that might threaten their positon as a middleman. You might want to watch your sister's wedding, but the next guy might want to distribute his hit songs or videos, just like the Arctic Monkeys just did. It made them famous got them money and hits, and all without the record companies.kyleb said:
What if what's on your disc is a shakey-cam of the latest blockbuster movie? What is the physical difference between the recording of your sister's wedding and you sitting in a cinema with a camcorder? You think all these DRM systems are going to go into place and the people who forced their implementation are going to still allow shakycams, telesyncs or DVD rips that have been re-encoded to different file formats to play without any problems at all?
One of the P2P companies is already planning on doing this in order at the behest of the media cartels in order to become cartel "approved". All content will have to be licenced. Anything not licenced will be blocked. Anyone (ie Joe Public) wishing to distribute their own content will need a licence saying "this is my content and is freely distributable" and they will have to pay an administration fee at the very least. Don't want to pay to distribute your legally owned content? It gets blocked. The same philosophy will be applied to all cartel approved media - if it's not licenced, it's not played. Legitimacy will have to be proved, not just assumed.
No. It's time that people stop using (I'm not even saying "buying") things they don't like. Hardware assisted DRM is pure evil. People who apathically insist that someone will crack it for them, shrug, and still move to the platform that enables all that shite the week it gets released are only strengthening that evil, by building up the market penetration.pascal said:Will I have to buy an whole new expensive PC to play HD content?
It is time to HDdecrypter
This is a simple carrot-and-stick issue. Vista is holding up two carrots called "Direct3D 10" and "LDDM". Far smaller carrots were sufficient in the past (such as 3DMark05 preview videos encoded in a format requiring infection with DRM software to view). I have little hope left that the ... sheep ... will think before "deciding" this time around.
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
kyleb said:
It's one of the stepping stones. Microsoft wants an uncopyable, online authenticated OS and applications. They already made moves towards changing their business model and have already mooted a possible rental model for their OS and Apps. MS want also want to be centre of the media living room, and they need the media companies on board for that, and the media companies want content control from MS in return.
Why do you think the HDMI encrypted link end-to-end is being implemented? You've seen the greed that is exhibited by the media cartels, complete content control gives them additional mechanisms for charging and they will take it as soon as they can. Given the opportunity to screw more money out of customers as well as prevent casual piracy, the cartels will grab that opportunity with both hands, just as they did with the recent P2P Grokster case, just as they did with the arrival of CDs and DVDs, just as they did with DCMA.
Miksu said:
Nothing is compatible yet. it needs to be a fail-safe end-to-end solution, that means, no separate add-on connectors you can buy at a later dat.
And don't think it will be "entertainment" only, it will include software, documents.
Besides, when there is CONTROL there is also FEEDBACK
http://www.againsttcpa.com/
geo said:
The point is that I should be educated by reading the specs - not having to find info everywhere else. This is similar to the advertized but non-working purevidio in the original GF6800.
It is not that serious a concern for me, I am more anoyed/angry about the fact that you can not trust what the manufactors write in the specs, than I am about any consequenses for me personal (or rather lack of).
Not that much, I am most likely not going to buy one of the first blue-ray or HD-DVD drives availeble, but I was planing on using the same graphics card for a few years in the HTPC as 3D performance is no big concern.
Heh, no asterisk but it is a bulet point under a bulit point:
# Dual integrated dual-link DVI transmitters
* DVI 1.0 compliant / HDMI interoperable and HDCP ready
http://www.ati.com/products/RadeonX1900/specs.html
And I'll bet that is the case; the DVI transmtters are complaint with HDCP standards exactly as advertised while getting the HDCP protected signal onto the card is were the problem lies.
# Dual integrated dual-link DVI transmitters
* DVI 1.0 compliant / HDMI interoperable and HDCP ready
http://www.ati.com/products/RadeonX1900/specs.html
And I'll bet that is the case; the DVI transmtters are complaint with HDCP standards exactly as advertised while getting the HDCP protected signal onto the card is were the problem lies.
