RSSMicrosoft says it 'has always preferred' DRM-free content
By Angela Gunn | Published November 20, 2008, 6:13 PM
REDMOND, WASH. - Microsoft has been working for years to be your TV-time buddy, while yearning also to forge deep relationships with Hollywood and other content providers. But Microsoft wants you to know it's always liked you better.
At a Media Center-centric event here Wednesday, Microsoft's new Media Center marketing manager Mike Seamons, charged with demonstrating the charms of the Windows 7 version of Media Center, said that "Microsoft has always preferred DRM-free" content, adding that the company nonetheless understands the need for protections.
They've certainly understood it well enough over the years. Microsoft was an early member of the consortium that developed AACS, the DRM system for HD-DVD and Blu-ray. The infamous Sony "rootkit" DRM debacle was specific to Windows machines. The WMA format is critical to various media-restriction efforts, such as those in the Napster subscription model. The Microsoft Reader DRM effort prescribed some onerous twists on DRM for texts, including a version that only allowed buyers to view the content for which they paid on the screen of the machine on which it was purchased.
And the beat goes on. Vista's ferocious copy-restriction controls attempt to dictate how content files are handled based on the system's opinion of their legitimacy; one security researcher said after viewing an early iteration of the OS that "the Vista Content Protection specification could very well constitute the longest suicide note in history." And Microsoft notoriously even hamstrung its own DRM efforts, introducing the byzantine PlaysForSure program and then ignoring it when it released the Zune.
One Microsoft spokesperson yesterday quoted a statistic that 80% of computer users between 18 and 29 prefer to get their TV through their computer screens. So as demand rises, and installations become potentially more complex and more media-inclusive, something's got to give, because even top brass at Microsoft can get the DRM blues.
Later in the day, a group of reporters and bloggers toured the new, ultra-wired home of one of the company's top executives (who, by our agreement with Microsoft, shall remain anonymous). The executive described with great enthusiasm the three-year project, which incorporates three Blu-ray players and Xbox 360s, the service formerly known as XM Radio, comprehensive security and environment controls, a VPN for remote system management and upgrades, a whole-house UPS configuration, nearly a dozen ginormous LCD screens including several for which he'd "waited 'til [he] could slurp up the first batch" from Samsung.
All of it runs on an in-house point-to-point gigabit switched network and and of it is operated with one -- just one -- big green button on the remote control.
In other words, it's not just your dream house; it's the dream house of a guy who's got access to very nearly unlimited money, technology and assistance (though time is trickier, since our exec did the all but two or three days' worth of the work on nights and weekends). So what hangs up a system like that? Getting the numbers of buttons from two down to one was tricky, but it's done; finding an enthusiastic and competent installation crew was crucial, but a determined interview process paid off. Even a retrofitting late in the process -- out with the HD DVD, in with the Blu-ray -- was a temporary issue.
No, it's DRM that can still twist up a system. Our Microsoft exec described in detail the problems of simply making it possible to watch paid-for DVR recordings on a paid-for system when the recording was on a machine other than the one directly connected to the screen in whichever room he happened to be in. His solution involves a complex system of record replication -- the only portion of the project that isn't built from off-the-shelf gear and software.
Yes, the exec says, something's got to give. With even less-monied users wanting to watch TV, HDTV, disks and online content, "ultimately we'll come up with another generation of DRM where you don't have to [go through such contortions," he says.
A system in which the right to view and enjoy paid-for content is paramount? "That's a long-term dream the company has."
What to be my "friend" bring DOWN my media costs!!! it's simple
Score: 0
WTF's DRM?
Have been reading about this here on board for many a m0(read crack here)0n, still have no idea what it is.
Cheers,
Score: 0
Done Really Mundane. Sometimes also called Dumb Retarded Moron.
Score: 0
Oh, morriscox, be sweet. How sad and cranky would you be if your Wikipedia was broken and you couldn't figure out that DRM meant digital rights management?
(Plus, you forget Deliberately Ruined Media... :-) )
Score: 0
In a broad sense, you might think of it as a loose combination of copyguard and access control.
Score: 0
"But Microsoft wants you to know it's always liked you better."
Well, tha't actually true in part. The devs always hated DRM but were constrained by marketing whose main push was to stroke the entertainment companies, so the statement does have some truth to it.
Unfortunately, the dev engineers get their marching orders from the marketing execs - you know, the heads on the desk with dollar signs between the ears.
I've heard more than a few of their engineers rail privately about that.
Score: 0
...Depite the fact that ALL of their significant ptoducts emply access and authorization controls that pre-date digital 'entertainment industry' DRM controls.
Yeah, it must pain them terribly.
Score: 0
F**k Microsoft. Their time is over. They shot themselves in the foot long ago. They can try anything they want now but it will only result in failure.
Score: 0
Morsel,
By name by post perhaps, @#$%# MSFT. Should read their time has just begun, they never do self harm.
Perhaps the occasional misstep every half a decade or so, yet this is part of being the end all and be all!
Kind regards,
Stevie B (Jobs real lover)
Score: 0
In effect:
The Last Nail?
I've seen this posted before. It's remeniscent of the stock: "Year of the Linux Desktop" meme.
Microsoft will no doubt be around for a while yet, as will Apple, Linux, etc.
This is a good thing. It gives us choices. While I may dislike some of those choices, the fact that they exist and compete with the choices I do favor, advances them all.
Score: 0
ha....
Score: 0
One can focus on music or video, but it is just slightly ironic that one of the first companies to routinely require online authorization and activation of material claims to have "always been" against DRM.
Oh, but they must be referring to how "they" - you know, how others do it! LOL!
Score: 0
Yeah. And do not forget DRM comes in many ways, for example, proprietary file formats. Microsoft and Apple talk how they "hate" DRM, yet each pushes its proprietary file formats for music and video. Those locked up formats restrict how and where you can access the material.
And Microsoft is even worse...Silverlight and MS-OOXML. If they want to give you freedom, why not license Silverlight under a real liberal license like MIT or Apache? Why create MS-OOXML when ODF already existed?
This is all marketing BS.
Score: 0
Hey TexasFox, my good old home *DUDE*. Do me a favor and check out my last response in the supercomputer thread. Unfortunately it's dropping off the front page but I'd hate you to miss it.
You are just too entertaining! Can I pay you somehow? You seem to be out of a job at the moment judging by all the frantic round the clock posting. Would be a shame if they cut off your internet connection when you fail to pay the bills.
Score: 0
Its called "Choice" you know the thing everyone complained about MS for years and years.
Silverlight is available for all platforms, so not sure how this could be proprietary...
AAC is not a proprietary format either, the reason these formats exist because the companies that make music require this, MS and Apple are a business they want to make their product as appealing to the industry as possible so if the industry wants DRM, then DRM it gets...
The DRM that people are complaining about in Windows is to protect their product from being stolen, I don't see a problem with this, a minor inconvenience that takes 2-3 mins tops as long as you ahve a legit version.
Finally, the driver model that I am sure someone will bring up, curse MS for not allowing me to put unstable drivers in their OS. You can always disable the check by hitting f8 before windows starts if its that much a big deal to you
(not all this is directed towards you fatty, its just general)
Score: 0
Can i implement Silverlight without getting any licenses from Microsoft? That is my point...same principle as DRM.
AAC requires a license to build an encoder.
Score: 0
Sorry to burst your bubble dimwit, but I am up talking to clients in Eastern Europe, India and China, running at a 12-14 hour average offset.
And pushing your buttons is a great, if cheap, 30 second distraction from real world issues. You still haven't figured out that its your reactiuon that is what is rewarding. And its SO easy to push your buttons.
You won't forget to pet a Roma for me, will you?
Edit to content: You know, as I sit down to peruse my email and to see how I can intensionally aggravate and play with you and a few others here, I also notice that the posting time is NOT correct. It is not 1:xx something here! It is 2 hours fast!
Now whether that is system imposed or something established during registration, I neither know nor care, but thanks for calling my attention to just one more inconsequential and inaccurate aspect of the form.
So there you have it, you have accidently contributed to the forum, even if your actual observation is inaccurate. LOL!
Score: 0
And now our good, but lonely, Eurobuddy is openly soliciting on BN. How quaint. Sorry buddy, but what happens in the EU should stay in the EU.
Besides, aside from the fact we are incompatible simply due to the fact that I am straight and into sex with only humans, you couldn't afford me - even if I was in to the lunacy you continue you espose.
And just out of curiousity, aside from the fact that you are preoccupied about me personally - a bit wierd in itself - do you EVER contribute comments germaine to the topic at hand?
As usual, neither your comments here, nor in your 'MP complexes are experimental' rant, add anything of substance to the topic at hand.
Score: 0
"Silverlight is available for all platforms, so not sure how this could be proprietary..."
That's like saying M&M's come in many different colors so the name and logo are not proprietary.
Score: 0
This machine specific DRM algorithm is quite possibly the worst thing that has been shoved down Microsoft's throat. The MBA's who are running Hollywood and so hell bent on their profits are the people to blame here. If any of you remember there was no DRM on a computer before XP service pack one. It was because of the incessant whining and belly aching the studios did to congress about how their pathetic, uninspired, untalented content wasn't making them any money that congress had to step in and force Microsoft to do something about it. Kinda like what the insurance company's had to do back in the 50's when they were all about to go under because no one wanted their product back then either, force legislation to carry it or else. Look where that's gotten us, hundreds of billions of dollars wasted on pubic hair waxings and back shavings.
Score: 0
my thoughts exactly
Score: 0
Isn't that cute of likkle likkle Microsofty.
Score: 0
Wow. Microsoft effectively just DRM'd all of the BBC's content this week. Whatever Microsoft says, the opposite is true. Next thing they'll tell is that Vista is good... oh wait, crap.
Score: 0
without DRM, you wouldn't have much BBC content online... BBC wants to guard their content, thats not microsofts fault
Score: 0
Tell that to all the Doctor Who fans out there who will have the new holiday episode up 3 hours after it airs and then all of us fans in the US who don't want to wait A YEAR for the next season to hit BBC America will have it about 3 hours after that.
Can't forget this great moment in history either...
"Oh lets burn a bunch of classic episodes to clear space in the archives". And we're still suffering for it. Most of those have been recovered but some probably are completely lost in the sands of time. This is why we copy and archive EVERYTHING we can.
Score: 0
Oh, so the fans are 'entitled' to the material?
And you wonder why producers have resorted to DRM...
Score: 0
Exactly.
It's often not even the BBCs fault either.
Programing that isn't made by the BBC but is broadbast by them has the uses restricted by the supplier/producer.
Thus why most BBC produced programs are available online for longer than 7 days now.
Top Gear (BBC produced) episode 1 of the new season is online until 4th January, and it was first broadcast 2nd November.
Score: 0
So Microsoft forces the BBC to encumber their content with DRM?
I would think it was the BBC forcing DRM on the content to restrict it's usage to only approved software/devices (Microsoft's for example).
I highly doubt Microsoft had a choice in the matter.
It's kind of like their HDCP support in Vista. Many people have made the claim that Vista is riddled with DRM. it's partly true, but it suggests that Microsoft actively placed DRM on the content, which they did not. The DRM support in Vista is just that; Support for playback of DRM encumbered content.
If you aren't viewing protected content; It's not there, somehow restricting how you use your existing content.
Score: 0
Yes they are if they're willing to pay for it and it's ready. Making me wait just annoys me to the point of going through illicit means to acquire it.
Score: 0
So, not only are you 'scary', you brag about becoming a criminal.
Its always fascinating to listen to an idiot entitle himself to another's property.
F O Mr. Pathological.
Score: 0
Microsoft has had this stance for awhile now, its the content distro and rights holders that love DRM.
Score: 0
"The infamous Sony "rootkit" DRM debacle was specific to Windows machines."
You cannot blame that on Windows, I'm afraid.
Score: 0
In a way you can. It exists on Windows machines because they have most of the market share and therefore application support. This is why Sony only concentrated on Windows.
Sure the logic is twisted, but it works.
Score: 0
No, it's because Sony only builds Microsoft machines. The profit margin is greater and it's easier to get your hands on hardware. If Sony did the rootkit thing on the Mac they wouldn't be making them any more.
Score: 0
sorry but you can't place the blame of the malicious act on anyone else except the one who performed such malicious act, even if the platform it was done on is standard or in the majority. in this case. It's sony's product, it's sony's fault.
Talk like this is no wonder parents blame everyone else except them and their kids for their kids screw-ups.
Score: 0
Anyone who finds the need to blame someone other than the guilty party, has an agenda.
That's not logic, but Common Sense, may it Rest in Peace.
Score: 0
That is like saying it is ok to attack Chinese people because there are more of them, and it will be their fault.
Score: 0
And certain reporters need to not throw things on a list without either referencing some of the rumors about that (maybe it wasn't just the market-share thing?), or forbear the list item. Heaven knows there's enough to list without it. I erred on that one. Now, am I cranky enough to do a *comprehensive* list of eyebrow-raising MS/DRM moments, or do I go have myself a nice weekend...? :-)
Score: 0
Who is the bigger fool?
The fool or the fool that follows?
You say that like MS has no blame here.
This was the straw that broke the back for me...I haven't bought a sony product since then.
Score: 0
"...them and their kids..."
Sony AND Microsoft
Content providers AND content owners
riaa AND mpaa
marketing AND lies
It was given at the behest of BOTH...for the increase of power and wealth of BOTH.
Score: 0
The rootkit came on a CD, not preinstalled on their IBM clones loaded with Windows.
Score: 0
I'm not blaming someone other than them, I'm blaming them both.
Also I already said the logic was twisted. BTW "Common Sense" < logic most of the time.
Because "common" sense is getting dumber right along with the masses.
Score: 0
No, if you really want to go that route it's like saying American's are stupid for buying substandard crap from China so it's America's fault for the poor quality of items exported from China because we're cheap.
Score: 0
Common sense doesn't change. It is being replaced by stupidity and questionable rationalization.
I don't care that it's Microsoft. It could be any company. They offer a product in the only way the copyright holder will allow them to. The only alternative is to simply not offer it at all, and that's not an option for content as popular as much of the BBC content is.
Recently, many dining establishments have been forced to ban smoking. As a smoker, would you blame the establishment, or the people who placed/enforce the ban?
Score: 0