<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

[IP] Revoking DVD viewing rights AFTER legit purchase?





Begin forwarded message:

From: Ken Horowitz <kenh@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: June 16, 2005 2:40:29 PM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Revoking DVD viewing rights AFTER legit purchase?


This article postulates that the rights to watch or play an HD DVD could be revoked *after* purchase, creating all sorts of consumer and retailer problems. Sweeting is unusual in the trades, in that he has an understanding of both the technology and
business issues involved.

PRIVILEGES REVOKED
Paul Sweeting
Video Business 6/10/05

http://videobusiness.com/commentary.asp?articleID=10700&catID=13

JUNE 10 | With the high-definition format-unification talks at an apparent impasse, both sides have turned their focus to completing work on the copy- protection scheme
each side plans to use.

Called Advanced Access Content System, the system was developed jointly by Sony, Toshiba, Warner Bros., Panasonic, Microsoft, Intel and IBM, making it the one area in the entire high-def contest in which the two camps have been able to cooperate
effectively.

Sort of effectively, anyway.

The DVD Forum has already adopted AACS as the mandatory copy-protection
scheme for HD DVD, based on an early version of the spec. The Blu-ray Disc Assn. has not yet formally endorsed the system but is expected to include it when final Blu-
ray specs are released.

What remains is to get final approval from the studios, the hardware camps, the PC industry and other interested parties on the exact set of features and capabilities to be included in the final spec and agreement on how the scheme will be implemented
on a worldwide basis.

Two groups not being formally consulted, however, are DVD and consumer
electronics retailers.

Copy-protection, of course, has generally been considered the domain of the studios and hardware makers. But AACS represents such a departure from earlier copy- protection schemes that it could provoke widespread consumer confusion, especially
in the early days of the formats, and perhaps even a backlash.

And as always, retailers will be the industry's first line of defense.

At the heart of AACS is the ability to "revoke" compromised playback devices.

Under the AACS scheme, each individual high-def DVD player will be issued a
unique set of decryption keys for decoding encrypted content. In normal
circumstances, any subset of keys can be used to decrypt any encoded movie.

If a particular device is used to rip a movie, however, the unique set of decryption keys issued to that device can be "revoked" on all future releases, turning the
compromised device into an expensive paperweight.

That, of course, requires that the studios be able to trace an unauthorized copy of a movie back to a particular set of device keys, and AACS includes forensic elements
to make that possible.

Unfortunately, some hacks are likely to be widely repeatable on other devices, the
same way DeCSS can be widely used to rip today's DVDs.

In that case, the studios' only effective option would be to disable an entire class of devices, such as a particular make and model, sweeping up the innocent along with
the guilty.

That, obviously, is not a very practical option. But one partial solution might be to pressure hardware makers to recall that particular class of device from retail shelves.

In that case, retailers could find themselves playing a central role in the enforcement
process.

Some studios are pressing for an additional level of protection that would allow
specific titles to be revoked.

Under that approach, dubbed the Virtual Machine, high-def DVD players would be equipped with updatable "firmware," which could be "patched" to prevent the playback of any title that has been found to have been ripped and widely copied.

The patches would be delivered either through an Internet connection on the player,
or through code embedded with all future titles.

Once a new, coded disc is inserted in the player, the device would be automatically
updated to prevent playback of the revoked title.

Once again, however, the system would not always be capable of distinguishing between illegally obtained (i.e. downloaded) copies of a movie and legitimate copies.

Revoking a movie like Shrek 2 would ultimately create 30 million bewildered and
angry consumers whose legitimately purchased discs would no longer play.

So once again, the likely partial solution would be to recall all copies of a movie from retail shelves until a new, updated version could be pressed and distributed.


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/