RSSStudios Approve DVD Burning Technology
By Ed Oswald | Published January 4, 2007, 1:04 PM
The ability to burn legally downloaded movies to DVD came one step closer to reality Thursday, as a studio-approved system to prevent piracy was introduced. However, there are still obstacles preventing widespread usage.
Called Qflix, the technology was produced by digital media software company Sonic Solutions. Compatible drives, media, and video services will display the Qflix logo to allow consumers to identify who supports the new technology.
The technology that powers the Qflix system is called Content Scramble System (CSS) encryption. While CSS has already been used in pre-recorded DVDs today, content owners have been reluctant to allow it to be used publicly for fear of it being cracked.
Qflix will offer a secure way for this to be done at home, as well as allowing publishers to place restrictions on content, such as how many times they will allow a download to be burned to DVD.
Missing from Thursday's announcement are any actual hardware or software announcements. Although disc drive manufacturer Plextor, along with several media manufacturers have announced their support for the initiative, none have announced consumer availability of products.
Instead, it appears that the first usage of the technology will be on the enterprise side of the market. A version of the technology called Qflix Pro will allow for the manufacture of DVDs at the time of order, opening up new possibilities for retailers, such as in-store kiosks.
At least one supporter of the technology, drug store chain Walgreens, is likely to use the technology for exactly that reason. By using kiosks rather than stocking large inventories of pre-recorded DVDs, retailers could save a lot of money, say backers of the format.
Jim Taylor, general manager of Sonic's Advanced Technology Group, says that now is a perfect time to offer a solution like Qflix. "The floodgates of digital distribution are about to burst," he argued.
"Qflix delivers this and opens many new channels for vast amounts of video programming such as TV shows, back-catalog movies, special interest programs, independent films, educational titles, and much, much more," Taylor added. The movie studios have so-far praised Sonic's efforts. ""We are pleased and encouraged to see efforts like Sonic's creation of Qflix that address the need for industry-standard protection," Warner Bros. Entertainment Chief Technology Officer Chris Cookson said.
"manufacture of DVDs at the time of order"?
Wow my greek green grocer Stavros has been on this gig for years! He's good cause for $2.50 a walk to the butcher and back, BAM! you've got yer dvd with a couple o bananas chucked in a bag for good luck. Stavros your the best!
Score: 0
|CSS was cracked – almost 8 years ago now (everyone remeber DeCSS?):
http://en.wikipedia.org/...ntent-scrambling_system
Score: 0
|What exactly prevents you from using a DVDshrink or DVDXcopy to duplicate what they just made from the download? Nothing...
Anymore so then when you make a music CD from iTunes and rip it using audiograbber freeware to make unrestricted MP3s.
So whats the point? All they did was make it so legitimate people with little experience can not back up their purchased movie. It will stop no one with even half a braincell dedicated towards this piracy pandemic they are constantly propagating about. So I just don't see the point other then to inconvenience their consumers and restrict their fair use rights unjustly.
Score: 0
|Just an FYI: Fair Use doesn't cover "I wanna listen to it on my {insert iPod incompatible device here}".
Score: 0
|Well, you learn something new everyday. I thought that was exactly what it meant. Seriously. After all, if you are not buying the medium only the rights to listen/view the content at times of your own choosing as many time as you want to, shouldn't your rights to listen/view extend beyond the method of delivery? Of course, if that were the case, the studios would have to replace any broken worn out media for only the cost of creating a new copy...and it could be argued they would have to give discounts to people who own listening/viewing rights to the same content in other formats.
So I guess I was wrong. What the heck does it mean then?
Score: 0
|Fair use is a set of guidelines for judges used to determine whether an act of infringement is, or is not justified.
From Bitlaw:Although the doctrine of fair use was originally created by the judiciary, it is now set forth in the Copyright Act. Under the Act, four factors are to be considered in order to determine whether a specific action is to be considered a "fair use." These factors are as follows:
1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
Format s***ing and backups generally fall under number 4, and are usually seen as having only marginal, if any, effect on the profitability of the copyrighted work. However, with DRM and companies now selling products in multiple formats, it is looking more and more like companies will easily be able to prove format s***ing causes loss in profits / value of the protected work.
...and since Fair Use doesn't specifically protect *any* use...
Of course, a lot of people are also mistakenly confusing Fair Use with the First Sale doctrine, which a lot of folks seem to believe allows them to do whatever they want with it once they've paid for it. First Sale, in fact, only allows them to resell or rent the product in it's original form, on it's original medium.
Grazer said:shouldn't your rights to listen/view extend beyond the method of delivery?
It's nice to want things...keeps you motivated. Unfortunately, "should" and "do" are entirely different things. :)
Grazer said:and it could be argued they would have to give discounts to people who own listening/viewing rights to the same content in other formats.
It'd be nice, but they are under no obligation to do so. Under Copyright they have full control over how their property is distributed. If they choose to go draconian, that is, unfortunately, their right.
The really sad part here is that instead of allowing the market to properly reflect our distaste and dislike of such draconian measures by simply not using the products, folks are, in effect, doing an end-run around the laws and totally throwing everything into chaos. If we just ignored these products, they'd go away and the corps would lose profits (the only thing that makes them stand up and listen).
Score: 0
|It's nice to see someone posting intelligent opinions backed up with reference to the actual, applicable laws. However, in response to your contention that things will change when consumers rebel against the draconian measures currently being imposed, you don't take into account the stubbornness of people and organizations and their resistance to change. I participated in a decades long boycott of the Kmart corporation. Did they ever change? No. Did it affect their business in a significant way? Yes. People reminisce on "the way things used to be" and there is a significant proportion of the populace in this country that has said "enough is enough" and have refused to accept content with gratuitous sex and gore that add nothing to the content of movies and songs. Yet when royalty paying rental services provided "cleaned up" content and rented videos to this significant segment of consumers, the industry shut them down. We have voted with our feet and no longer rent from any rental service. I don't believe we are the only ones in this great country of ours who have done this. If the industry changes direction, however, I will be greatly surprised.
Score: 0
|I thought CSS was cracked long ago. I must have been reading while drinking again.
Score: 0
|Has this been cracked yet? I'll give it about 2 hours.
Score: 0
|wasn't dvd decrypter and the many apps like it what cracked css ages ago?
Score: 0
|Yes it was.
Score: 0
|I am picky about what I watch, it's hard to find a movie that has no...swearing, explicit sex, torture scenes...etc. So when I find one.. and buy it...I should be able to copy it for my own use over and over...after I buy it...I thought it belonged to me. As long as I don't sell it or otherwise make profit, what harm is there in copying?
Score: 0
|"As long as I don't sell it or otherwise make profit, what harm is there in copying?"
none
while they focus on 'copy protection' the real worry is 'loss of earnings'
copying for personal use should (must) be allowed
Score: 0
|You don't buy music or movies. You license them. The artist/vendors do not relinquish ownership rights. You're paying for the right to use it, but only within the limits of the terms they provide.
Score: 0
|"You don't buy music or movies. You license them."
who told you this?
Score: 0
|Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
Score: 0
|You don't own the content but you own the media only. However to get at the content you must use a method to circumvent the copy prtection which is what the DMA prohibits. So the media is yours but not what is on it.
Score: 0
|that's not a licence, it's an act.
do you know what an act is?
Score: 0
|Not really, but I do know Hamlet has 5 of them.
Score: 0
|great,
more corporate control.
:-(
Score: 0
|The big question is will the downloadable movies using Qflix have Dolby Digital 5.1 channel surround sound or will they have crappy stereo sound like most downloadable movies. I don't think kiosks that burn DVD's will ever replace prerecorded DVD's if they only have stereo sound.
Score: 0
|I give the hackers of the world about 1 hour to be able to crack this. Come on guy'girls/its , i'm counting on ya.
Score: 0
|