Vista DRM Domesday Scenario rebuttals
There's usually another side to any story, and the one about Digital Rights Management in Windows Vista is no exception. As I mentioned Peter Gutmann's A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection in an earlier blog post, which in turn was picked up by The Free Software Foundation's BadVista campaign site, I thought it would be only fair to cover some of the rebuttals of what the DRM in Vista is alleged to do.Another reason is that Steve Gibson's getting all hot and frothy over the issue. That alone makes me wonder how accurately it is being reported... Gibson's fond of sensationalising even trivial matters, like when he got a bee in his bonnet about Windows "raw" TCP sockets a while ago.
Ryan Bemrose's The Audio Fool blog on MSDN says Gutmann's article has "spots and grains of truth" in it, as it references official Microsoft documents. However, Bemrose says these get lost in "ranting FUD" in which Gutmann paints a DRM Domesday Scenario that will never appear.
Says Bemrose:
A content producer that angers a significant portion of their customers can't expect to sell very much more content, and they know this. They may be misguided, greedy, and completely without a moral compass, but they're not stupid.
While I agree with Bemrose's characterisation of content providers, I'm not so sure that they aren't stupid as well however. Let's not forget the Sony rootkit scandal, or the annoying regional lockout for DVDs. History says if content producers have the option to use DRM that locks out customers or even damages their systems, they will use it. No moral compass indeed.
Bemrose says Microsoft had to take the pragmatic approach here and go with the flow - if it didn't, it would get flamed for denying users access to High Definition content. This is probably a correct assessment. At the same time, even the faintest whiff of Microsoft pushing DRM that restricts what users can do with their computers will cause massive public relations fall-out; and, it'll be exploited to the full by those with ideological axes to grind. High-Bandwidth Digital Copy Protection or HDCP is for instance an Intel standard. Microsoft had to follow the specification, or face being sued by content producers.
Microsoft Most Valued Professional (MVP) Paul Smith picked up a claim in Gutmann's paper, namely that Super Audio Compact Discs won't play on Vista because of the DRM. That's correct, Smith Says, but he points out that SACDs won't play on any personal computer, be they Windows, Macintosh or Linux/BSD machines, because Sony-Philips won't allow it. In other words, it's existing copy protection and not something introduced in Vista.
Likewise, Microsoft's Lead Program Manager for Vista Video Dave Marsh says DRM technologies have been in Windows for a while now.
If the above Microsofties are to be believed, there will be no degradation of existing content. The DRM will only activate if the content producer requires it - something Smith says isn't likely to happen until 2011 - and only apply to protected content.
- Standard definition DVD playback has required selective use of Macrovision ACP on analog television outputs since it was introduced in the 1990s. DVD playback on and in Windows has always supported this.
- The ability to restrict audio outputs (e.g., S/PDIF) for certain types of content has been available since Windows Millennium Edition (ME) and has been available in all subsequent versions of Windows.
- The Certified Output Protection Protocol (COPP) was released over 2 years ago for Windows XP, and provides applications with the ability to detect output types and enable certain protections on video outputs such as HDCP, CGMS-A, and Macrovision ACP.
Existing content won't be affected, like medical imagery being degraded if you playback HD material for instance. Neither will S/PDIF and Component Video outputs be disabled in Vista by default, only in the (rare) case of protected content requiring it - and in that case, it'll only apply for the protected content, according to Marsh.
The same goes for the driver revocation: it looks like Microsoft will take a very cautious approach to this, and work with hardware vendors to make sure a new driver is available before the existing one gets revoked. Either way, it won't affect non-protected content.
Unified graphics drivers won't go away either in Vista, Marsh says, and any performance impact from the one-key message authentication code which is encrypted will only be felt when protected content is played.
Marsh agrees with Gutmann though that drivers are more complex to write and it's inevitable that Vista uses more CPU cycles because of the DRM. He also fudges the question on echo cancellation not being available somewhat by saying: "we believe that Windows Vista provides applications with access to sufficient information to successfully build high quality echo cancellation functionality." We'll see how that goes.
I also thought what one commenter on Smith's blog was pertinent: he purchased a system from HP that included an HD-DVD player and got The Bourne Supremacy disc to go with it. However, his 24" HP monitor isn't HDCP compliant, so he can't watch the movie. HP only HDCP-compliant monitors offer lower than 1080 resolution he says, which is quite ironical really and in line with part of the scenario Gutmann sets out.
It's interesting to follow the debate, which is quite complex as you can see from the above. Microsoft's caught in the cross-fire over DRM but the content producers that enforce usage restrictions escape scot-free.
Ultimately, you can't help thinking that entertainment content doesn't warrant the huge amount of analysis and effort expended on it. Sure, it's big business but the content producers are protecting it the wrong way.
Tag(s):
Other related posts:
Today’s incomprehensible Windows security warning
Today's strange Internet Explorer 8 error message
Microsoft takes the wind out of Windows 7's sails
Comment by Jason, on 22-JAN-2007 12:31
I was to assert what has been said regarding the DRM. I'm surprised that the people like myself, who have actually been using the final version of Vista, can stand to hear a lot of this DRM stuff. I have not experienced any sort of quality degradation nor the blocking of specific content during my entire Vista experience. I output 1080p to my HDTV through HDCP - I did it with XP, and I'm doing it with Vista, and it's not acting any differently than it did before. Sure, games run slower, but that's been entirely proven to be the absolutely horrid nVidia drivers. nVidia should really get a move on with the retail Vista fast approaching.
That being said, I've used Vista to watch several 720p and 1080p video files (the 1080p things were mostly trailers - shows you how much content is really out there to block as of right now), and, again, no quality degradation. Nothing was blocked. Vista is faster than XP.
Honestly, I can't see where any of this DRM stuff comes from. It says quite plainly that it only activates when DRM-protected content is being used by the system. Otherwise, nothing is going on to stop you from doing what you did with XP.
Comment by Titan, on 22-JAN-2007 14:06
Jason has "actually been using the final version of Vista". Is it a:
a) Business version of Vista?
b) Cracked version of Vista?
Jason has an Nvidia graphics card and the horrid ForceWare Release 95 drivers (Version: 97.46, Release Date: January 5, 2007, WHQL Driver, Windows Vista Certified) have nothing to do with Vista DRM. Jason please read the materials pointed by this article first. (Too late!)
Jason has "used Vista to watch several 720p and 1080p video files" and "no quality degradation. Nothing was blocked". From the article you can read: "Existing content won't be affected, like medical imagery being degraded if you playback HD material for instance. Neither will S/PDIF and Component Video outputs be disabled in Vista by default, only in the (rare) case of protected content requiring it - and in that case, it'll only apply for the protected content, according to Marsh." You just didn't play any protected HD content. And again Jason please read the article first. (Too late!)
Jason says: "Honestly, I can't see where any of this DRM stuff comes from." And indeed, Jason has NO CLUE WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT.
Comment by Xiata, on 22-JAN-2007 18:01
@Titan
Or, c. He was an official beta tester for microsoft and was granted a full version of Windows.
I too am using the full version of Windows Vista, and I too was granted a full version for being a good beta tester.
This being said-- The release 95 drivers (97.46) are beta drivers, clearly you should know this because you have done enough research into finding this information. However, they are, as Nvidia will tell you, incomplete. Features will return once the drivers are a) fully compatible with the feature set defined by Microsoft (WDM) and/or their own, b) the drivers perform as well as the xp drivers, c) the vista launch as they very well could just be hidden from view in the GUI, or d) any of the above.
As for the HD Protected Content argument: the MPAA and RIAA have made it very clear that they will do everything in their power to shoot themselves in the foot. I know it sucks that they have effectively forced Microsoft into bastardizing their own operating system for their own hideous intents, but Microsoft had no choice. Microsoft wants to be a content-centered company as they know their market is being threatened by alternative operating systems. Microsoft could ignore the wishes of the content providers and fail to achieve what they are trying to do, or, do evil things to their own product so that the *really evil* folk (RIAA/MPAA/etc) will give content.
The improvements made from XP to Vista are too great for me to ignore it and not use it. However, I will not buy Blu-Ray or HD-DVDs specifically because it is trampling upon my rights to fair-use. I vote against DRM with my own money, I suggest you do the same.
Comment by james barlow, on 23-JAN-2007 01:12
Steve Gibson was right about the raw sockets. MS finally blocked them with a firewall after many security problems. You say "bee in his bonnet" as if he was wrong about it. You're and idiot.
Comment by Glock, on 28-JAN-2007 19:39
It is really sad, to see what Internet has done to this world. Every retard thinks he is an authority on some subject, so he goes ahead and makes a fool out of himself.
Steve Gibson, and his "followers", for example, who still don't seem to understand what raw sockets are or how they work.
Some people still think reading an 1-page article about some technology makes it possible for them to understand technical implications and complexities of said technology. I mean, why'd you need to spend years in some field, when you can get it all from 1-page article?
I am glad I got out of computer related work (spent 15 years in computer/network/GSM security world), and don't have to deal with retards any more.
And you Juha - just ignore the retards :)
Comment by CatoTheYounger, on 30-JAN-2007 00:22
"Microsoft's caught in the cross-fire over DRM but the content producers that enforce usage restrictions escape scot-free."
Microsoft is acting as their proxy and enforcer and shall reap the whirlwind for it.
maybe a larger context will help
free culture, How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity
flash presentation, Lawrence Lessig Professor Of Law Stanford University
Comment by Louis, on 1-FEB-2007 14:44
You make too many apologies for Microsoft. If it wasn't their greed to monopolise premium content then PC users wouldn't be saddled with the bloat of DRM overheads.
Sure the providers are the the main culprits but I'd rather they took the SACD route and stopped it playing on any PC then MS would have left us alone and put the extra work into the promised enhancements that Vista should have had.
To affect the whole PC's open architecture for the sake of one industry that many (most) people won't even use seems like madness or wait.... perhaps that's the point. If not that many people will use it - (people buy home theatres with wall sized plasma screen for this kind of content why would they watch it on their damn pc anyway), then perhaps Microsoft implemented this with a hidden agenda. Now that would make more sense to me, this DRM stuff can be used of a lot of things and given they've protected their code so well who knows what else is going on in Vista.
Comment by HSChronic, on 3-FEB-2007 05:14
I love Vista, but I will never poison my system with anything DRM. I hear people in locked controversy over DRM, its simple, we as the consumer have the ability to prevent this. The only problem is that most of the people out there in the world have no idea what DRM is or how it effects them. They only know they get pissed off when their media doesnt work anymore. Take the Sandisk Sansa Rhapsody's, you get access to all of Rhapsody, but if you don't keep an active subscription you lose all your music. 2011 is when HD Providers have set the date to when HDCP must be enabled between 2 devices, and you can bet your bottom dollar this will happen. God forbid Mr AOL, or some Buena Vista execs can't afford to take their Mistresses to the Caribbean, and the Bahamas in the same year.
Don't let DRM keep you from enjoying this OS, just don't use DRM bullshit or crack it and not have to worry about it. I don't sit here and sell copies of The Guardian on the street corner, god forbid I want to do something with my movie other than watch it on only one thing.
Add a comment
Please note: comments that are inappropriate or promotional in nature will be deleted.
E-mail addresses are not displayed, but you must enter a valid e-mail address to confirm your comments.
Are you a registered Geekzone user? Login to have the fields below automatically filled in for you and to enable links in comments.
If you have (or qualify to have) a Geekzone Blog then your comment will be automatically confirmed and shown in this blog post.
Comment by Lrn2Spl, on 22-JAN-2007 11:59
Dear Moron,
Learn to spell.