RE: [MLUG] A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, Fallert, Adam Christian wrote:

> > Microsoft is doing this so they can own the entire distribution path 
> > for "premium content".
>
> Ok, let the flaming begin, but I just don't see Microsoft's intentions 
> as that nefarious.  I think in this case it is M$ legal pointing the 
> company in this direction to avoid face offs with MPAA and the RIAA. 
> Just last weekend I read an article I found on gizmodo.com that quoted 
> Bill Gates as say "If it were up to me, we would not be putting content 
> protection in Vista."  Of course that is carefully stated and pretty 
> open ended so it could really have any meaning.


Bill Gates clearly isn't in control of Vista development!  I guess the 
MPAA/RIAA is trying to make it impossible to develop a general-purpose 
computer that allows the user to read bits from some media, process them 
by any rules he wishes, and write bits to other media.  The fact that such 
a computer could be used to make an illegal copy of one of their 
copyrighted HD movies should be irrelevant.  There is no telling what 
kinds of hassles we'll be running into trying to use these restricted 
machines.  It sounds terrible to me.

The craziest thing is that MPAA wants to sell us HD movies that we can't 
watch in HD format.  It's bizarre, but I see their predicament:  They need 
to offer higher density to make more sales, but if users can extract the 
high-quality data and copy it, they might make copies which will hurt 
sales.  Unfortunately, playing an HD movie requires extracting the high 
quality data and pumping out out to some kind of display.  So if the HD 
movie can be viewed, it can be stolen.  Thus, they have to sell it (so 
they can make money) but not let you watch it (because you might steal 
it).  Vista will help them.

Mike

_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members