Coffeehouse Thread

11 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Will Microsoft make a stand?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    My money says no, since they bent-over for the restrictions on the Zune.

    Anyway, according to some website, the big media people want you to pay to transfer music between devices. So that "My Music" SMB share on your computer? Yeah, that'll be illegal.

    Would Microsoft bend over and prevent sharing of DRM'd files (or rather, any media files) over your LAN, the Internet (via IIS), or anything?

    Consider the Zune, that puts a 3day/3play limit on any "squirted" music, regardless of its license (and thanks to a technicality they couldn't be sued for breaking Creative Commons or Copyleft).

    So who'se to say Windows Vienna or Windows VII won't?

    Discuss.

  • User profile image
    phreaks

    W3bbo wrote:
    My money says no, since they bent-over for the restrictions on the Zune.

    Anyway, according to some website, the big media people want you to pay to transfer music between devices. So that "My Music" SMB share on your computer? Yeah, that'll be illegal.

    Would Microsoft bend over and prevent sharing of DRM'd files (or rather, any media files) over your LAN, the Internet (via IIS), or anything?

    Consider the Zune, that puts a 3day/3play limit on any "squirted" music, regardless of its license (and thanks to a technicality they couldn't be sued for breaking Creative Commons or Copyleft).

    So who'se to say Windows Vienna or Windows VII won't?

    Discuss.


    it will never happen.

    The would have to argue (successfully) that the fair use act limits an item to a device, and not to an individual.

    Ain't gonna happen.

  • User profile image
    Tom Servo

    If they prevent sharing with the built in means, someone will write their own applications to share the stuff. E.g. there's already a reference implementation for SMB, called Samba.

  • User profile image
    esoteric

    Windows Vii - Wii want it!

    There are some sad developments taking place. And some sad politics as well. But outlawing shovels to prevent misuse, is...

    Should Windows DRM ever become a means of general censorship, then that's going to be the end of my use of Windows. But let's not entertain that thought.

    DRM has the potential to be used for censorship. Should that happen, I foresee a dramatic uprising.

    There is also search engines. It's possible that we may see biased search engines in the future. I'm sure some companies and regimes would love that. But that will require an overwhelming marketshare and presumably alternatives will be used then.

    As a concrete example the Chinese population is trying to circumvent censorship. Too bad major search engines implement filters so they can be allowed inside "the wall" - but they may perhaps quietly become trojan horses of free information dissemination.

    Let's not hope western countries ever become what they're fighting against in some eastern regimes atm.

    Although I truly dispise ads and commercials, I think there's some place for ad-supportet software for poorer nations and people. That's the opposite of monetizing information dissemination - to a certain extent of course - the true opposite would to give away software with no strings attached, but that's not quite how the bussiness world works.

    Smiley

  • User profile image
    alwaysmc2

    W3bbo wrote:
    Would Microsoft bend over and prevent sharing of DRM'd files (or rather, any media files) over your LAN, the Internet (via IIS), or anything?


    Isn't that the point of DRM anyway?  It doesn't matter if I shared my Music folder over the network, because the music that I downloaded from Urge is DRM'd, so even though you may have access to the files you still can't play the music.  Microsoft would effectively just be blocking access to random piles of bits, because that's all the DRM'd files are without the keys.

    Somehow detecting stripped DRM, though... now that would be evil.

  • User profile image
    Larry​Osterman

    W3bbo wrote:
    My money says no, since they bent-over for the restrictions on the Zune.

    Anyway, according to some website, the big media people want you to pay to transfer music between devices. So that "My Music" SMB share on your computer? Yeah, that'll be illegal.

    Would Microsoft bend over and prevent sharing of DRM'd files (or rather, any media files) over your LAN, the Internet (via IIS), or anything?

    Consider the Zune, that puts a 3day/3play limit on any "squirted" music, regardless of its license (and thanks to a technicality they couldn't be sued for breaking Creative Commons or Copyleft).

    So who'se to say Windows Vienna or Windows VII won't?

    Discuss.


    Right now, there's a huge grey area associated with multimedia content.

    In the US, the courts have clearly stated that you are allowed to make backups of media you have purchased, that right is unambiguous under current law.

    It is NOT clear if you have the ability to transform the content on the media you have purchased - so ripping a CD to MP3 might not be allowable (nobody knows - it's never been adjudicated, and the law is ambiguous).

    And if it IS allowable, it's not clear if you have the ability to store that content in a playable form on more than one device (so you MIGHT be able to put the content on your MP3 player).

    And if that IS allowable, it's not clear if you have the ability to play that content from more than one place at a given time (IANAL, but I suspect that if you are allowed to rip the content to MP3, you'd be allowed to play it back from a player other than an analog CD player (but I'm not sure)).

    If it IS allowable to play back content from more than one place at a time, it's not clear if you can share that content with the members of your family.

    It is quite clear that once you have ripped content, you're not allowed to share that content to anyone else - there are plenty of court cases that make that clear (for instance, the original Napster case).


    So there's a broad spectrum of rights from the clearly legal to the clearly illegal.  Right now where we stand on that spectrum is ambiguous - we literally don't know, and we won't know until the courts (or Congress) step in and define our rights.

    IMHO, the content owners would love it to be all the way at the restricted form of the spectrum (you can make a CD backup of the content but nothing else), but I suspect that the consumer backlash would be significant.  Again, IMHO the content owners know this and they're only going after the clearly illegal cases.

    They're not going to waste their time on the other parts.

    But this is ALL my opinion.

  • User profile image
    Rossj

    LarryOsterman wrote:
    Right now where we stand on that spectrum is ambiguous - we literally don't know, and we won't know until the courts (or Congress) step in and define our rights.


    The thing is, Microsoft has shown in the past it is willing to lobby on political issues, and certainly donates more than any other IT company to achieve this - so why won't they lobby on this? Why won't the biggest IT company on the planet make a stand now and push for what the users want*?

    I can only think of two reasons, it doesn't want to upset 'content providers', or it doesn't have the grapes for it, I am sure there may be more. Oh yeah, we don't care might be number three. I am sure the real reason probably involves money, Microsoft is after all a company - but at what point is shareholder value not so much about short term monetary benefit, but as much about keeping users happy so that there is a greater source of money in the longer term?



    * More correctly I should have said, the users who know what DRM is and how it affects them, rather than include users who don't know what it is but only see the end-result and think something must be broken.

  • User profile image
    MB

    Personally, I don't use my computers for anything other than the most trivial of multi-media (the odd youtube or video embedded on a website) and I can understand the desire of music, movie, video producers to control their copyright.

    However, where I have an issue with MS, is in their decision to act as DRM police, and embed DRM code control into Windows ...JUST IN CASE... you are a naughty person and don't abide by someone else’s content rules.

    I have yet to see clear and unequivocal performance impact figures, but even if that impact is minimal, I don’t see why I should be asked to pay a price, just to satisfy the demands of a 3rd-party corporation whose product I never use on my PC.

    DRM needs to be modular (i.e. I install it if I want to play DRM protected music or video on my computer) and specific to content.

    Policing of DRM copyrights needs to be the problem of the external content provider to resolve... and resolved in a manner that does not involve imposing of condition V for product W from company X, just in case you ever decide to use product Y from company Z.

  • User profile image
    esoteric

    Copyright is becomming a time-infinite right. I see this as a direct consequence of the major economic interests of record companies. The middle-men can make money centuries after an artist has died. On an even larger scale, I believe politicians may wish to keep IP in place post humus, in order to keep monetizing it on the global marketplace. The US is quite aggressively lobbying in several countries for IP protection. Piracy parties are even forming in some countries to counter that political influence. Of course lobbying for IP protection in and of itself is not a bad thing.

  • User profile image
    brian.​shapiro

    Rossj wrote:
    
    LarryOsterman wrote:
    Right now where we stand on that spectrum is ambiguous - we literally don't know, and we won't know until the courts (or Congress) step in and define our rights.


    The thing is, Microsoft has shown in the past it is willing to lobby on political issues, and certainly donates more than any other IT company to achieve this - so why won't they lobby on this? Why won't the biggest IT company on the planet make a stand now and push for what the users want*?

    I can only think of two reasons, it doesn't want to upset 'content providers', or it doesn't have the grapes for it, I am sure there may be more. Oh yeah, we don't care might be number three. I am sure the real reason probably involves money, Microsoft is after all a company - but at what point is shareholder value not so much about short term monetary benefit, but as much about keeping users happy so that there is a greater source of money in the longer term?



    * More correctly I should have said, the users who know what DRM is and how it affects them, rather than include users who don't know what it is but only see the end-result and think something must be broken.


    Yay for buying political influence

  • User profile image
    MB

    I see that Nokia is supposedly using DRM code from Microsoft to run on it's upcoming models ? I'm not sure I get what that's all about ??

    http://www.nokia.com/A4136001?newsid=1143974

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.