some one to write to this companies
and to tell them that if the have surplus money to
spend maybe guys form mplayerhq.hu will sell them
the same thing :)))))))

http://www.mplayerhq.hu/homepage/design6/info.html

I downloaded this and installed it on my Redhat 9.0 system at work today and it ROCKS!!

Yup this player is awsome. I use it quite a lot to watch movies.

Who cares about those bad Windows Media formats. There are a lot of free open and crossplatform formats that are much better and have no bad digital restriction managment s*** included, which is here only to make rich monopolies even richer and have even more control over us. Just use Ogg Vorbis or FLAC or XviD or some other open format and say no to low quality, freedom restricting, propriatery and anti-crossplatform formats.

DRM or no I think this is a step in the right direction for bringing linux to the desktop, I have seen plenty of conversations on irc about playing the Windows Media format on linux.

Remember everyone has different opinions on what a movie player should be, IMO you can't currently beat the offerings of Mplayer.

great that's all we need more DRM (Digital Rights Management) enabled software. Do they really think that the Linux community will sit back and not reverse compile their software and then rerelease their own version of it without DRM??

Sheesh!

If you are not doing anything wrong what is so bad about DRM?

"Do they really think that the Linux community will sit back and not reverse compile their software and then rerelease their own version of it without DRM??"

Comments like this are one specific reason why some software vendors are reluctant to support Linux. Some see it as too risky to release a program that they spent their own R&D money on, if it could be compromised.

I'm not a big DRM fan either. However, 1) this is not for open distribution to Linux in general; 2) it is all being licensed, so it's not free and available to whomever pleases. It's merely providing functionality to consumer electronics (like TiVo). What's wrong with that? Wouldn't you want a electronics device, that you paid a lot of money for, to be able to play as many formats as possible?

So if you were trying to distribute sell something on the 'net, you wouldn't care one bit about securing your rights to how it should be distributed? Is DRM so bad if it means maintaining a channel of income, or restricting access to the content to only those you intend? DRM is only there for that reason, not to magically take away your ability to do what you want with anything else.Feel free to correct my interpretation of DRM as you see fit.

rather than defend my moral integrity I only have a URL that might be interested in taking a look at.

http://www.againsttcpa.com/tcpa-faq-en.html

My problem with DRM is with the principal in general. The idea is nice, but what can be interpreted as fair usage? If you sit down and read the DMCA it can be interpreted that it is illegal for a individual to create a Mod for his or her favorite game, or heaven forbid if they want to put a mod chip in their PS2 or X-Box or Game Cube to play imported games from japan, or to create new Operating systems or Games for their console. Microsoft developed a very bad taste in their mouth when people figured out how to install and run Linux on a Modified X-Box

All in all DRM infringes on the Rights of Individuals. Yes it should be illegal to pirate software, music, etc. but where does the Line get drawn as to what corporations are allowed to do to stop it?

This is my point. If things are allowed to continue the way they are trying to go, then I forsee a future where there is no longer any truly free software and that day will be the day they burn the GNU and GPL Licensing agreement, and Linux will no longer cease to exist as a open source operating system.

rather than defend my moral integrity I only have a URL that might be interested in taking a look at.
http://www.againsttcpa.com/tcpa-faq-en.html";

Same old URL. It makes absolutely no useful arguments against TCPA in spoecific or DRM in general, though it does make a lot of bogus "scare tactic" claims about what "could" happen in the future.

"My problem with DRM is with the principal in general. The idea is nice, but what can be interpreted as fair usage?"

See USC Title IV. It's all spelled out there in black and white. Most "fair use" arguments against DRM involve things that peoiple want to do that are not actually "fair use" by law.

"All in all DRM infringes on the Rights of Individuals."

Perhaps you vcan name one of these so called "rights" that are being infringed upon? (and some legal guarantee of that right?)

"Yes it should be illegal to pirate software, music, etc. but where does the Line get drawn as to what corporations are allowed to do to stop it?"

Well we could start with a system whereby copyrighted materials (music, software, etc.) are encypted and protected so that specific access keys (provided to you when you licence those works) are necessary in order to use them. (i.e. DRM) We could further tie that licensing into specific hardware based security so that compromised access keys don't allow unlimted pirating of those works (i.e. TCPA)

So far I have yet to have seen or heard of one single case where DRM has been abused to the users detriment (except for the obvious "It isn't letting me make illegal copies anymore")

A lot of people scream about the "evil" of DRM, but 99% of their arguments boil down to the fact that they want to steal other peoples work product and intellectual property without paying for it. (See almost any WPA related debate, including the current one on BEtanews, for plenty of samples.)

that's OK Wendor you ride your bandwagon and I'll ride mine. I'm going to try my best to stay away from anything that uses DRM or TCPA technology. If it means that I have to switch totally to Linux and use a computer system that is sadly out of date then so be it. Thank goodness I'm a Fan of AMD CPU chips and VIA or NVIDIA based motherboards though, so far I haven't seen any plans by them to incorporate TCPA.

That's also the beauty of using Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) Encryption. Even if they reverse engineer the code used for decryption, they'll need to know the secret key. What's more, the code they use is probibly already a public, and well established, open security method. Unlike CSS, it would be tough to crack.

You should get your vision checked then. AMD and Intel are both working on the support for Paladium. Which should be a great thing right?

Locking files (lets say, a .doc) to be opened ONLY by Office. Oh yeah, monopoly is great and surely, those law will ONLY help the good users who buy all their software.

Whoever says "Oh yeah those laws are a good thing", think again. Microsoft doesnt care about the users. They care for the money the users have. Having laws like those forces everybody to pay more. I'm not talking about anti-piracy stuff, but more about people using OpenOffice not being able to open a file anymore because Microsoft decided that a .doc should be opened by the one and only Word. While there are laws against monopoly, they are bending these laws to have more money.

This post might sound a little extremist, but Paladium will lock down the file formats. What will happen then? Death of open-source (on i386 anyway). I think they are going too far with those laws. Whoever holds the money right now (companies) is pulling the strings. While these laws may look like a "good way to prevent copyright theft", they actualy encourage monopoly. And weirdly enough, which companies are pushing to have those laws? The ones that are accused of monopoly.

your argument is a bit more refined than mine, but I definately agree with you.

Well, first of all, if you weren't doing anything illegal, it wouldn't matter.

Second, DRM is OPTIONAL for Windows Media formats.

first off I never said nor implied that I was doing anything illegal. It's funny, just mention that you don't want big brother trying to tell you what to do with your computer, and everyone comes out of the woods accusing you of doing illegal stuff. For your information my child I am a beta tester for microsoft, other than the Digital Rights Management stuff I don't have a problem with their products. I support product activation, and think it's great, it has all but stopped the rampant software pirating that used to go on in the area where I live. Also I use both Linux and Microsoft software depending on what the situation is and what I need to do. it is for this reason that I not only have Microsoft Office 11 Beta 2, and OpenOffice.Org installed on my Windows system at my house. I am currently beta testing Office 11, Windows 2000 Service pack 4, and I just got invited to test Messenger 5.0. my point being is that I don't have to do anything illegal to have great software installed on my computer, having a NDA on record with microsoft and the fact that I am not afraid to use open source software means I always have the newest toys to play with.

ok ok I will get off my bandwagon, and I apologize for ranting, but it really ticks me off when people accuse other people of doing stuff without knowing the facts.

I didn't accuse you of doing anything, I said that you have nothing to worry about with DRM unless you are doing something illegal.

BTW, what does you beta testing anything have to do with this?

nothing other than the fact that I was proving my point that I don't have to do anything illegal to get free software be it open sourced or a commercial beta.

Windows Media DRM has nothing to do with software piracy.

and neither did my original posts yet people keep making the snide comments about why should DRM bother me if I am not doing anything illegal.

You are the ONLY one who said ANYTHING about software piracy.

We are saying the only people who would have a problem with DRM are the ones that are pirating the music. If you aren't doing anything wrong, DRM shouldn't be a bother to you.... ESPECIALLY since DRM is optional on ALL forms of Windows Media.

feel free to read wickedsun's post below. I may not have presented my case as well as he did but that is what my stance on the subject.

also DRM encompasses much much more than something as simple as Music piracy.

DRM has the potential, and probably will, to become more than just something to deter music piracy, however today, that's it's main function.

Of course, I say again, you should have no trouble with DRM unless you are in non-compliance with the license agreement.

As much as Microsoft would like to think that the world will only ever use Windows for all their multimedia purposes, the reality is that the increasingly vocal segment of *nix computer users will demand that they can view and access Windows Media content. With this deal, Microsoft also goes a long way to legitimising their media format as cross-platform. I say, good luck to them. They'll need it if the open source formats are more properly advertised/used/popularised.