The AACS protection system clearly appears to have been too weak. Yes, we all know that the encryption has NOT been cracked (as stated on my site), but the "system" has allowed Volume keys to be found, which will result in both Bluray and HD DVD movies being compromised.

I wouldn't say that the "AACS protection system" is "too weak". WinDVD didn't implement it properly. It's like a locksmith doing a piss-poor job on making the locks for your house. After your house gets robbed, you don't blame the "lock system", but the implementor of that system wrt your house.

According to a couple posts above, WinDVD will get fined $8 million for their sloppiness. Where you might be right in "AACS protection is too weak", is that the penalty should have been much higher, like $80 million. Then WinDVD wouldn't have been so lax.

By "system" I mean the whole "system", including the process for inspecting the players, even software players, before granting them a license.

It does very little good to revoke a software players license after the horses have left the barn.

What if there had been 10,000 titles out when a player was cracked? They would all still have been accessible since the keys were already out.

The "system" was flawed, in that it could so easily be bypassed, and this applies to Bluray as much as it does to HD DVD.

Hindsight is 20/20 of course, but it now seems obvious that AACS-LA should have been far more active in checking that these players weren't blatantly weak.

The AACS protection system clearly appears to have been too weak. Yes, we all know that the encryption has NOT been cracked (as stated on my site), but the "system" has allowed Volume keys to be found, which will result in both Bluray and HD DVD movies being compromised.

You mean something like this:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070115-8622.html

...

It does very little good to revoke a software players license after the horses have left the barn.

...

Well, 150 horses have left the barn ... and there are 300 more left in the barn for this year?

Well, 150 horses have left the barn ... and there are 300 more left in the barn for this year?
Not to mention another 300 for the Bluray barn also ;)

And people wonder why the studios aren't releasing the "crown jewels" of their content yet.

AACS was never going to stop piracy. Windows Activation doesn't stop piracy. They both simply make life difficult.

AACS LA should inspect the software players and when they are able to duplicate the issue then they revoke the players. Once the players are revoked new movies will only play on new players, plus discs will include the player keys in the host revoked list. Once one of the flawed players reads a disc that has it listed on a host revoked list it will not be able to playback anything. The user will be forced to upgrade to new version which is not flawed. Plus the studios can re-release the current titles with newer volume keys and listing the flawed software players in the revoked host key list.

Fast Forward a few months. Multiple copies of movies each with incompatible keys. Sure the serenity key is on the web but is it the same version of serenity that you have. For hackers if they put the wrong disc in the drive the host revocation system will prevent the flawed software from running. Upgrading to the new version of powerdvd or windvd won't affect legitimate users but it will prevent stealing future and even current titles.

See how confusing of a mess it creates? Now compare that to CSS where one piece of software can make a perfect copy of every disc every made and every disc in the future. The AACS flaw relies on finding not just this exploit but finding a future exploit once this hole is closed. Combine that with the ability to release the movie with multiple keys and the ability for future versions of older movies to kill the flawed software and you have a system that only the diehard will try to hack.

AACS was never going to stop piracy. Windows Activation doesn't stop piracy. They both simply make life difficult.

AACS LA should inspect the software players and when they are able to duplicate the issue then they revoke the players. Once the players are revoked new movies will only play on new players, plus discs will include the player keys in the host revoked list. Once one of the flawed players reads a disc that has it listed on a host revoked list it will not be able to playback anything. The user will be forced to upgrade to new version which is not flawed. Plus the studios can re-release the current titles with newer volume keys and listing the flawed software players in the revoked host key list.

Fast Forward a few months. Multiple copies of movies each with incompatible keys. Sure the serenity key is on the web but is it the same version of serenity that you have. For hackers if they put the wrong disc in the drive the host revocation system will prevent the flawed software from running. Upgrading to the new version of powerdvd or windvd won't affect legitimate users but it will prevent stealing future and even current titles.

See how confusing of a mess it creates? Now compare that to CSS where one piece of software can make a perfect copy of every disc every made and every disc in the future. The AACS flaw relies on finding not just this exploit but finding a future exploit once this hole is closed. Combine that with the ability to release the movie with multiple keys and the ability for future versions of older movies to kill the flawed software and you have a system that only the diehard will try to hack.

I think that you may not be seeing the forest (pirating) cause you're too close to the trees (AACS key revocation procedure) :)

The path you are going down is a demonstration of how the studios expect the system to work in the real world. Yes, new HD-DVD's with new keys will disallow older versions of software players and hacked hardware players from playing them. I'm not even going to go down the path of how unbelievably complex that entire process is going to get once they start doing it... Suffice it to say that it's a wonder anyone can reliably watch any HD content as it is, let alone with content providers intentionally trying to shut viewers down. Go read up on the D* HR20 thread over at dbstalk.com to see what I mean here.

But I digress from what I think the "forest" part you are missing is. There is, apparently right now (don't know for sure cause I don't use the software), a ripped copy of the Serenity movie out on one of the torrent systems. It's there, and you can get it right now. It's probably been done thousands of times as you read this....

Now, you can start telling me how expensive it is to store those 19GB on a hard drive, which is about $6.00 today, $3.00 next year and $1.00 the year after that. And you can also tell me how expensive blank HD-DVDR's are, $19.00 today, $8.00 next year and $4.00 in 2009, you get the idea. And you can also tell me about how really hard it is for someone to burn this torrent copy of a HD-DVD onto a HD-DVDR and play it on a player of some kind. And this I believe hasn't actually been done yet. But, there are *hundreds* of people trying to do this cause thats what they do. Then someone will write a nice GUI front end just like was done for DeCSS, and about 1 year from now we are at the point where a moderately computer savvy J6P can roll his own, for less than the cost of buying the product at retail.

I'm not saying that I think it's right, I don't condone piracy and don't do it myself. But for goodness sake, theres entire web sites just dedicated to doing it.

Bottom line is that, from my perspective at least, the content distributors are making things pretty complex. Just look at the key revocation and all the problems that is going to cause. J6P goes and buys a player, and one fine day it stops playing all his new HD-DVD's. I guarantee that is going to happen, simply because anything that complex is going to be absolutely riddled with problems and unforeseen issues. I think that is going to be more of a problem for the long term viability of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray than rampant piracy. This coupled with things like the newly released "Joost" where other content providers can get in the game, even the HD game though not right now, and I think the people who are providing the current HD content are going to find that the market for such content isn't going to be as great as they had hoped. They will blame the pirates, and come up with AACS-2, which will increase the complexity of the anti-piracy system by a couple orders of magnitude. When what it boils down to is that their greed is what will have doomed them from the beginning.

JMHO,
Robert

Now, you can start telling me how expensive it is to store those 19MB on a hard drive...

What HD Movie is only 19MB?

Challenge the information, do not attack the poster...I want the information, not wishful comments repeated by a member. It's the fact that HD DVD has been cracked, looking away from it helps no one.

By the way, why not change the thread title to a more appropriate one? It's very confusing.

What HD Movie is only 19MB?I assume he meant 19GB and was talking about Serenity.

--Darin

And people wonder why the studios aren't releasing the "crown jewels" of their content yet.

From news reports on the net, the Serenity rip is 19GB. That's a lot of data to download over current Internet connections which makes the impact of piracy somewhat less.

For some AVS readers, I can imagine the technology could have a "legal" use since they would rip their HD DVD's and put them on their media servers (while not having to wait for Managed Copy)

But what happens if the rip technology get into the hands of pirate duplicators (say in Asia). I understand that HDDVD can be produced on DVD lines with minimal changes so it's theoretically possible for pirate HD DVD's to be produced and sold cheaply from the usual places :)

BluRay might be slightly more immune to this sort of piracy since there are few BluRay mastering plants so less opportunity for pirates to find a place to press their releases. Now could a ripped BD be re-mastered for HD DVD? Technically possible I guess - those pirates are pretty ingenious folks!

Food for thought I guess

I think that you may not be seeing the forest (pirating) cause you're too close to the trees (AACS key revocation procedure) :)

The path you are going down is a demonstration of how the studios expect the system to work in the real world. Yes, new HD-DVD's with new keys will disallow older versions of software players and hacked hardware players from playing them. I'm not even going to go down the path of how unbelievably complex that entire process is going to get once they start doing it... Suffice it to say that it's a wonder anyone can reliably watch any HD content as it is, let alone with content providers intentionally trying to shut viewers down. Go read up on the D* HR20 thread over at dbstalk.com to see what I mean here.

But I digress from what I think the "forest" part you are missing is. There is, apparently right now (don't know for sure cause I don't use the software), a ripped copy of the Serenity movie out on one of the torrent systems. It's there, and you can get it right now. It's probably been done thousands of times as you read this....

Now, you can start telling me how expensive it is to store those 19GB on a hard drive, which is about $6.00 today, $3.00 next year and $1.00 the year after that. And you can also tell me how expensive blank HD-DVDR's are, $19.00 today, $8.00 next year and $4.00 in 2009, you get the idea. And you can also tell me about how really hard it is for someone to burn this torrent copy of a HD-DVD onto a HD-DVDR and play it on a player of some kind. And this I believe hasn't actually been done yet. But, there are *hundreds* of people trying to do this cause thats what they do. Then someone will write a nice GUI front end just like was done for DeCSS, and about 1 year from now we are at the point where a moderately computer savvy J6P can roll his own, for less than the cost of buying the product at retail.

I'm not saying that I think it's right, I don't condone piracy and don't do it myself. But for goodness sake, theres entire web sites just dedicated to doing it.

Bottom line is that, from my perspective at least, the content distributors are making things pretty complex. Just look at the key revocation and all the problems that is going to cause. J6P goes and buys a player, and one fine day it stops playing all his new HD-DVD's. I guarantee that is going to happen, simply because anything that complex is going to be absolutely riddled with problems and unforeseen issues. I think that is going to be more of a problem for the long term viability of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray than rampant piracy. This coupled with things like the newly released "Joost" where other content providers can get in the game, even the HD game though not right now, and I think the people who are providing the current HD content are going to find that the market for such content isn't going to be as great as they had hoped. They will blame the pirates, and come up with AACS-2, which will increase the complexity of the anti-piracy system by a couple orders of magnitude. When what it boils down to is that their greed is what will have doomed them from the beginning.

JMHO,
RobertI agree with much of that. Joost has potential, look at what Skype has done with VOIP. The anti-piracy DRM schemes will hurt the MPAA in the long run. The companies the RIAA represents never imagined Apple's iTunes would be what it has become. Apple's DRM may be one of the few examples of "successful" DRM, but who does that benefit? The content providers? No, not really. Apple could care less about pirated music, the stuff filling most iPods out their. They're interested in selling iPods. In the aftermath of Napster, Apple trotted out their DRM secured iTunes in an attempt to woo the the MPAA that was scared $h**less about these 'internets.' They ran to Apple, giving Steve Jobs the chance to pick the pricing for their precious content, just as long as it was "secure." But a funny thing happened. The DRM that the RIAA was looking to as its savior, has benefited Apple MUCH more than the RIAA. Now they are forced to have Steve Jobs assess the value of their precious content, and he doesn't give a crap about them. Just as long as people buy iPods.

DRM will never work the way the content providers want. The more restrictive it gets, the more JP6's will start wearing eyepatches. And yes, their are people, websites, and some fledgling political organizations growing to remove the shackles of DRM and contents provider's nihilistic dreams. Look at the Pirate Bay, they're actually attempting to buy their own country (http://buysealand.com/).

DVD-Jon defended himself in court twice using the "Wanted to play on Linux" story.
Doom9 allowed publishing the keys on his site using "Want to watch on a non-HDCP display" angle.
We were told for over a year what a smart bunch of people have developed AACS.
And a person just reading its whitepaper breaks the first player in existence.

Doesn't it sound like somebody is holding customers for idiots?
If there is a conspiracy here, that it's on studio's behalf: calling content protection a system that can't be called as such.

DIogen.

Yep - Muslix keeps *saying* he's going to do a Bluray version, but yet happily continues milking the publicity for the HD DVD keys he's releasing.

I'm fairly convinced it's an anti-HD DVD campaign at this point, and until he writes a Bluray version and provides the means of obtaining the Bluray keys, I will not change my mind.

Forgive me if I predict that he will not do this until after the "powers that be" discover and close the "weakness" he claims to have found...

The cost of entry to verify and exploit is considerably higher with BD. What's the cheapest PC drive? $500?

It may be anti-Microsoft, but I think it is overly paranoid to make it a format thing. Those exploiting it, and copy titles to the P2P are surely interested in BD titles too. Why don't some of those dozens or hundreds look into it?

Gary

Yep - Muslix keeps *saying* he's going to do a Bluray version...Lie. He never said that.
...but yet happily continues milking the publicity for the HD DVD keys he's releasing....Lie. He himself never released a single key.

"Milking the publicity" would be much more applicable to your post here and on your site where publicity comes from Amir's positive remarks about your "petition" activities.
Forgive me if I predict that he will not do this...My advice - not that you asked for it or ever will - would be to ask for forgiveness for your past lies before you do this for the future predictions.

Diogen.

I wonder if HD DVD and BD are not getting more news and interest now by being cracked then they ever did by being released. ;)

- Tom

I wonder if HD DVD and BD are not getting more news and interest now by being cracked then they ever did by being released. ;)

- TomNow there is a very good observation! :)

I want the information, not wishful comments repeated by a member. It's the fact that HD DVD has been cracked, looking away from it helps no one.

By the way, why not change the thread title to a more appropriate one? It's very confusing.
I suggest that *you* are the one "looking away".

It's pretty obvious that if the PC playback software is leaving the Volume keys in memory when playing the HD DVD discs, it is going to leave them in memory when playing the Bluray discs also.

Your "upset" at this statement seems to be denial.

A Bluray exploit on the back of this "muslix" episode is inevitable - I still think that "muslix" did this for negative publicity, so I'll bet a hypothetical $100 (forum rules, and all) that "muslix" will never release a Bluray version of his exploit.

And I'll bet another hypothetical $100 that someone else DOES.

Is that what you misunderstood?

And for the record, AACS has not been cracked, merely bypassed, so the thread title is accurate in my view.

I wonder if HD DVD and BD are not getting more news and interest now by being cracked then they ever did by being released. ;)

Definitely so among nerds & hackers. Among J6P ... no.

Lie. He never said that.did so... :) He said he was going to figure out why IME HD DVD titles were giving trouble, then move on to a BR version. My expressed view is that he will never "get around" to the BR version.

Lie. He himself never released a single key.He was very active in helping discover where the keys were and stated himself in his first posts that he would be releasing some keys. Go check the thread if you want.

"Milking the publicity" would be much more applicable to your post here and on your site where publicity comes from Amir's positive remarks about your "petition" activities. Oh lord, that's what activism is. You think we (meaning HD DVD supporters) all just sit down in a dark room waiting for "divine intervention"? You would try to grudge one member the ability to talk and promote one viewpoint, while "choosing and deciding" which other members are allowed to promote theirs??

My advice - not that you asked[quote] for it or ever will - would be to ask for forgiveness for your past lies before you do this for the future predictions.

Diogen.You've called me a liar three times in one post, yet feel it is I that should seek forgiveness? ;)

Perhaps now the studios will find a ~50gb file generated by a high bitrate mpeg2 encode a little more attractive! ;)

did so... :) Muslix has 13 posts on doom9.
His last says:
>>Congratulations!
>>So now you see BackupHDDVD is not a fake...
>>Now we have to make movies with the IME feature playable with PowerDVD.
>>Then, ... BD+!
Where does it say _he_ is going for it?
...stated himself in his first posts that he would be releasing some keys. Go check the thread if you want.I did. His first post states:
>>This software don't provide any cryptographic keys, so you have to add your own keys.
Oh lord, that's what activism is....I used your words, if you didn't get the quotes.
You've called me a liar three times in one post...I did. And still believe I had every reason to do so. You haven't proven any of your outlandish claims since Jan. 2.
"Milking publicity" - I would never be able to find a better definition.

Diogen.

Muslix has 13 posts on doom9.
His last says:
>>Congratulations!
>>So now you see BackupHDDVD is not a fake...
>>Now we have to make movies with the IME feature playable with PowerDVD.
>>Then, ... BD+!
Where does it say _he_ is going for it?
I did. His first post states:
>>This software don't provide any cryptographic keys, so you have to add your own keys.
I used your words, if you didn't get the quotes.
I did. And still believe I had every reason to do so. You haven't proven any of your outlandish claims since Jan. 2.
"Milking publicity" - I would never be able to find a better definition.

Diogen.
Well, you found the right post, out of the 13 - http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=933549#post933549

But you don't understand what he is saying? He clearly says he's going after Bluray next (unless HD DVD has started talking up BD+ without me catching the memo...)

And his releasing a thread, advertising it in another thread, creating a promotional video on YouTube, and "responding" to media comments, is NOT "milking publicity"?

And the Bluray PR company sending out press releases about it on the 5th of January was just "alertness"? ;)

There just doesn't seem to be a need for anyone to take my position on this matter so personally... does there?

Somebody is jealous of Muslix! :)

rdjam == HD Hell? (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=936747#post936747)

Somebody is jealous of Muslix! :)
heh! hardly... :)

rdjam == HD Hell? (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=936747#post936747)

Certainly sounds like it...

Certainly sounds like it...
More likely a kindred spirit (or one of about 6,000 HDNOW subscribers)... There are a LOT of us out here, now... not that you should be worried or anything ;)

Somebody is jealous of Muslix! :)

Hey, a lot of us are jealous of Muslix. ;)

I probably wouldn't have done what he did and published the crack that way. But I'm envious he had the talents to do it.

- Tom

rdjam == HD Hell? (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=936747#post936747)

LOL. Good catch.

Perhaps now the studios will find a ~50gb file generated by a high bitrate mpeg2 encode a little more attractive! ;)

Now thats funny but true. In order to prevent piracy, the studios will increase the size of the stored movies to the largest extent possible allowed on the media. This will have the unintended consequence of also providing the absolute best possible picture and sound quality ever :)

Sweet.

Now thats funny but true. In order to prevent piracy, the studios will increase the size of the stored movies to the largest extent possible allowed on the media. This will have the unintended consequence of also providing the absolute best possible picture and sound quality ever :)

Sweet.

I wouldn't be at all surprised either. In the early days of DVD-5 and DVD-9 (when dual-layer burners weren't yet available), I remember reading at some point that DVD-9 was preferred by the studios, with the video portion exceeding the one-layer limitation of DVD-5, just to ensure that most hackers couldn't just do a simple ISO (decrypted) copy to a single layer disk.

But you don't understand what he is saying?I bow my head to your abilities to see the real meaning of every post even if it has nothig to do with what the post says.
Now, can you disclose the magic behind your deductive method about him "having released and/or planning to release" keys?

Diogen.

I bow my head to your abilities to see the real meaning of every post even if it has nothig to do with what the post says.
Now, can you disclose the magic behind your deductive method about him "having released and/or planning to release" keys?

Diogen.
Oh wise one, clearly you know what he must have meant when he said BD was "next". Clearly, then you feel that he did NOT mean Bluray ;) :p

Now thats funny but true. In order to prevent piracy, the studios will increase the size of the stored movies to the largest extent possible allowed on the media. This will have the unintended consequence of also providing the absolute best possible picture and sound quality ever :)

Sweet.

BR movies can be released at 50GB and HD-DVD at 51GB (supposedly), but at a higher cost to the producers (who will pass on the cost to the buyers) and with the side effect of screwing anyone that had planned to use managed copy media servers, as the storage capacity of those servers is cut by more than half. I don't think that's a good thing.

And the more likely scenario is that rather than release all moves on 50GB discs, software players simply aren't allowed to play movies, period, again screwing over HTPC users.

Sorry, but I don't cheer on pirates. If it weren't for pirates, there'd be no DRM in the first place.

Sorry, but I don't cheer on pirates. If it weren't for pirates, there'd be no DRM in the first place.

If you believe that then you have not read this story. (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070115-8616.html)

That story is conjecture centered on an unattributed quote from a studio exec who said he didn't like Apple's user rules. I'm not sure you can draw conspiracy theories from that.

That said... I'm quite sure the content providers don't like it when end-users pass around copies of their content, however legitimate people think the practice. To Hollywood, you own the right to use the disk, but you don't have the right to do whatever you want with the contents of that disk. They don't have a problem with you lending the disk to someone else, just as long as you can't both "lend" it and keep it for yourself at the same time. Apple's rules essentially allow you to listen to music and simultaneously allow several of your friends to do the same. I'm unsurprised content owners would express misgivings with this model.

International Herald Tribune: Computer hackers poke another hole in HD DVD's armor (http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/17/business/dvd.php)

Some reactions:

- A spokeswoman for Universal, the only film studio to back the HD DVD format exclusively, said that no executives were available to discuss the HD DVD issue.

- Michael Ayers, a lawyer for Toshiba who is also chairman of the business group of the trade organization that administers AACS [AACS-LA??], acknowledged that the intrusion was serious, but said that he viewed it as an attack on DVD-playing software and not on the overall HD DVD protection system. "It's like somebody picked the lock on an individual house, but he has not discovered the secrets to lock- making at the master padlock company," Ayers said. He added that AACS was explicitly designed so that compromised players and programs like WinDVD could be disabled remotely by revoking their licenses. He said that the AACS group might take that approach after an investigation.

- Bill Rosenblatt, president of the consulting firm GiantSteps, which specializes in content protection issues, said the intrusion was less of a crisis than the 1999 defeat of the encryption that protects standard DVDs, which allowed movie files to be freely copied and shared online. "It's a pretty nice victory for hackers, but this newer scheme was designed to fail more gracefully and not be as brittle as the DVD scheme," Rosenblatt said.

International Herald Tribune: Computer hackers poke another hole in HD DVD's armor (http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/17/business/dvd.php)Thanks for the info, that's what we're waiting for!

Thanks for the info, that's what we're waiting for!

Exactly why were you waiting for this? And what did it add that has not been talked about here ad nauseum?

saw this on doom9..... made me laugh

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/9972/bhdvdjs6.png

So I picked up a Xbox HD-DVD drive from CC last night, downloaded backuphddvd and the key file floating around (currently some 54 entries), and then did a backup of one of my HD-DVD titles (Sahara). All went without a hitch and it played back fine using PowerDVD 7.1 Ultra via DVI out to my Dell 2405 with no HDCP.

Picture quality was excellent, so I then proceeded to copy the Sahara files onto my HTPC feeding my Pearl, did A/B testing against A1 (via HDMI switcher), and they looked about identical with a slight edge going to the HTPC (likely due to it running 1080p24). But the movie is broken down into 2 parts (Feaure1 and Feature2), and all the menu stuff is gone. Also, it doesn't work at all with HDi titles.

So at this time, I don't really consider BackupHDDVD a viable solution to being able to move ones HD-DVD collection onto a media server. I look forward to MMC, which presumably will allow all the features of the original HD-DVD to be preserved.

Your simple description of what you did belies the hidden complexity of the process. But it's interesting that you were able to achieve this so readily. It can't be long before we start to see HD divx videos of HD DVD's out there on the net. Downloading 19G is not a reality for most people but 2G say for a movie is quite doable.

I have seen a few divx HD videos and the quality is much better than DVD though not as good as HD DVD or Blu Ray but a step up nevertheless.

Larry

The question is: can a Divx re-encode save the same proportion of bits as on DVD? VC-1 and AVC are very efficient. Much of Divx's value was that it was a more efficient encoder than MPEG-2.

While I'm sure a 2GB re-encode would be in great demand compared to the original size... would a 17GB?

A good comparison is the T2 Extreme edition DVD. It has the 2 hour movie in WMV HD (which is a form of VC1) on it and that is 4G. And it looks pretty good. With a few more compression tweaks perhaps that could come down a bit so that internet delivery is feasible.

I guess that is the fear of the content owners from this AACS bypass

Note that pclausen did the rip pretty easily but that the end result, while eminently watchable, didn't suit his needs as a way to store HD content on a media server since it lost menus, divided the video up etc. So for "legitimate" use, the process is not quite there yet but Pirates presumably do not care!

Larry

I can't believe this, but they actually mentioned this on my local news in SPRINFIELD, MA.... I can't believe it's that big of a story. Of course, they got it wrong kind of , but....

AVC is no better than VC1 (i.e. they are about the same). That being said, MPEG2 re-encoding of DVDs was a popular practice for many a hardcore Doom9 folk that wanted to squeeze a movie onto DVD5s (not talking about transcoding here but full multipass encoding using tools like CCE). Problem is, any artefacts on the DVDs resulted in having to encode those artefacts taking bits away. With the HD-DVD releases being very good in respect to artefacts, re-encoding to lower bitrate AVC might still be acceptable, the quality will obviously drop if one goes too far. As far as I am aware, with many encodes, the compressionists could indeed have compressed further without taking much away from the movie but since they hit their target size already, there was no need. Of course in saying this the leeway is not in the vicinity of 20 gigs down to 8 gigs, more like 20 gigs down to 18gigs etc.

Cheers...
Duy-Khang Hoang

IIRC (... and I am not an expert in cryptology) as the number of instance values are found for a particular key, it increases the likelihood of determining what the other keys are (the ultimate and final "crack" ... a la DeCSS) or at least reducing the 2**128 search space substantially for the media key.

From Video Business (http://www.videobusiness.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6408426)

High-def hack puts movies online
AACS Licensing Authority investigates system ‘breach’



[...]

A spokeswoman for Corel, which acquired WinDVD publisher InterVideo last month, said investigators had not yet determined if those players were in fact at fault but that the company had taken steps to change some codes in its software in an attempt to limit potential damage.

“Our main concern is that the content remain protected, so we’re taking proactive steps to try address any problem that may have occurred,” the spokeswoman, Gail Scibelli, said. “We’re cooperating with the folks who are investigating this.”

It’s unclear at this point whether Muslix has also found a way to uncover the device keys, which would be a more serious breach of the system. If the device keys are uncovered, they could be used to decrypt any movie without needing the title codes. Some cryptography experts have speculated that a hacker who uncovers a set of device keys might keep that information secret, so as not to invite revocation.

Even so, the posting of particular title keys on the Web is an ominous sign for the studios.

In a long series of posts analyzing the purported hack, noted Princeton University computer scientist Edward Felten said that, over time, hackers could compile a substantial online database of title keys, which would gradually erode the effectiveness of AACS while making it harder to implement targeted countermeasures.

“Decryption tools will evolve,” Felten wrote on Jan. 10. “Somebody will make an online database of title keys and will modify BackupHDDVD so it automatically consults that database and gets the title keys it needs. This new decryption program will be able to decrypt any disc whose title key appears in the database. This decryption software and database don’t exist yet, but they seem inevitable.”

Wow,
Those guys work 10x faster than the companines that are doing the content protection. Of course, lawyers will no doubt get involved, but those guys work 1000x slower than anything on the net. I wonder where the ****** website is located? Could someone try and take it down due to DMCA problems? Surely the only purpose of the website is for using it to bypass security measures in place in the software. It must be an overseas site...

Robert

P.S. It never ceases to amaze me how fast these stories evolve.

mod

PLEASE do not post keys or links to keys on AVS

"... The [AACS] proposal was voted one of the technologies most likely to fail by IEEE Spectrum magazine's readers in the January 2005 issue ..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AACS

Q.E.D.

Looks like the site that has the keys is located in Texas, Not a smart move by whoever owns it.

For the record, despite my earlier skeptical comments in this thread, it looks like I was wrong here.

I no longer believe it was an hoax. :(

This exploit appears to be true and its seriousness has yet to be determined.

For the record, despite my earlier skeptical comments in this thread, it looks like I was wrong here.

I no longer believe it was an hoax. :(

This exploit appears to be true and its seriousness has yet to be determined.

I think the post of a member in this forum describing how he got the software, bought a Xbox 360 drive, decrypted one of his titles and played it shows how real this is. As to how serious it is - well it's not as universal as the DECSS crack but there is certainly a hole in how AACS was implemented.

Larry

Exactly why were you waiting for this? And what did it add that has not been talked about here ad nauseum?

A look at his posting history should give you your answer.

Also, it doesn't work at all with HDi titles.

Ha ... all this while we thought HDi was for interactivity :D

Ha ... all this while we thought HDi was for interactivity :D
This is exactly what I was going to say! HDi: HD-DVD's answer to BD+! :)

Dunno if this has been posted but so the BD fans don't feel left out I notice that today Muslix64 announced on doom9 he had also decrypted his first Blu Ray movie.

- Tom

Well, if this is limited to the movies already released, applies to both HD DVD and Blu-ray and only allows for now HDi or BDJ movies and allows only 1 at a time home copies instead of mass piracy, then its not a big deal.

Revoke the player, legit owners need a new firmware to play any new releases and the old exploited player without software patch can only play old releases.

Thats a lot of ifs though.

Dunno if this has been posted but so the BD fans don't feel left out I notice that today Muslix64 announced on doom9 he had also decrypted his first Blu Ray movie.

- TomHmmm! So it has happened! This thread will be much more friendly now! :)

Dunno if this has been posted but so the BD fans don't feel left out I notice that today Muslix64 announced on doom9 he had also decrypted his first Blu Ray movie.

- Tom
According to him/her the movie Lord of War.

Dunno if this has been posted but so the BD fans don't feel left out I notice that today Muslix64 announced on doom9 he had also decrypted his first Blu Ray movie.

But, but... how can this be?
Only HD DVD has been compromised. Blu-ray has BD+!!! And the ROM mark!!


Anybody feel stupid? ;)

But, but... how can this be?
Only HD DVD has been compromised. Blu-ray has BD+!!! And the ROM mark!!


Anybody feel stupid? ;)

rdjam ought to...
There goes his conspiracy theory.

This is exactly what I was going to say! HDi: HD-DVD's answer to BD+! :)

Just wait for BD-J .... even unhacked movies won't play ;)

But, but... how can this be?
Only HD DVD has been compromised. Blu-ray has BD+!!! And the ROM mark!!


Anybody feel stupid? ;)

It's been stated both HD-DVD and BD insiders that BD+ hasn't been used yet. So, it's not surprising that muslix64 could do the same thing to BD.

Wow! Keys for 6 BD titles published and muslix64 released BackupBluRayV001 java decrypter program. Others have used it successfully. Again it was WinDVD being the culprit by having the keys easy to grab.

AACS LA needs to get moving fast!

It's been stated both HD-DVD and BD insiders that BD+ hasn't been used yet. So, it's not surprising that muslix64 could do the same thing to BD.

Of course it isn't surprising. I just found it funny how we've been told so many times that only HD DVD got compromised, and that Blu-ray is safe(r).

Even if they do at some point include BD+ (does anybody even know by now what exactly it is?), it's gonna get cracked in no time.

AACS is probably the best security mechanism there is. Whether there's BD+ or not won't really make a difference.

in Kevin Collins of Microsoft interview

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/011507htfchat.html

AACS was designed from the beginning to be recoverable and renewable. While I have not seen an official response from AACS, they are still investigating this, it appears that a software player was able to get a key from a HD DVD title. This was not a hack of AACS, but a breach of a player. with software players, regardless if they are HD DVD or BD, AACS requires that they have their key renewed every 90 days. In this instance, if the software player was breached, the key will have to be renewed and that would be when the player is corrected. However, I don't have the specifics on this. Where ever there is a problem, AACS can recover and renew to keep moving forward. If anything, this is or will be a good test of those capabilities of AACS. AACS requires that they have their key renewed every 90 days. In this instance, if the software player was breached, the key will have to be renewed and that would be when the player is corrected.


This is the first I heard of this requirement.

I have not following this that closely, but has this discussed? :confused:

Yeah, this has been discussed before (the early threads, last year and before), though it's seldom mentioned anymore. For hardware players, this is not the case, but long ago it was decided that AACS implementations on the PC needed to have (in)frequent updates. Presumably people could disconnect and muck with the system clock or registry settings to avoid this, but if new content comes out which blacklists their player key even this will not help.

90 days sounds wrong. I thought it was 18 months to start off with the ability to go shorter (maybe 90 days is the min?). Go back to around early to mid 2005 and you will find some discussion on the subject . The reason is that SW players don't have individual keys like HW. There is no way to differentiate between one instance of the player or the other. And computers tend to naturally be more hackable

As a provider you want the key to change, but there are consequences
1) growing revocation list (let’s say there are 10 keys for SW players that would mean 10*4= 40 keys a year that would need to be added just for maintenance reasons. )
2) annoyed customers (you buy a brand new movie and come home and it won't play until you "upgrade" the player. )

Still need a lot of work for the BackupBluray.

BackupHDDVD however works fine. The movies itself are in two separate files so you have to join them to make one big file. I was able to stream this through my network using Power DVD with no stutters. Some movies with IME are still problematic playing the ripped HD DVD. Decrypted movie file size averages about 25 gb. Soon I can rip my HD DVDs to a hard drive inside my media server(s) where it can stream the file throught my HTPC(s).

But right now I will stick with hardware players. The software players for this are just mediocre.

For the record, despite my earlier skeptical comments in this thread, it looks like I was wrong here.

I no longer believe it was an hoax. :(

This exploit appears to be true and its seriousness has yet to be determined.
Hi Kosty - I'm willing to revise my feelings on the matter also if he gets a proper version of Backupbluray working. So far it is a little crippled, but the appearance of more and more Bluray "keys" on the internet will accelerate other people developing the BD code.

If muslix releases a full working Bluray version tomorrow, I'll be the first in line to change my tune (although the timing of the HD version is still rather unfortunate).

Hi Kosty - I'm willing to revise my feelings on the matter also if he gets a proper version of Backupbluray working. So far it is a little crippled, but the appearance of more and more Bluray "keys" on the internet will accelerate other people developing the BD code.

If muslix releases a full working Bluray version tomorrow, I'll be the first in line to change my tune (although the timing of the HD version is still odd).

Not at all. It's cheap for hackers to get into HD DVD.

The inexpensive entry to HD DVD with add-on is being touted as a key benefit. However, when it works to what you perceive as a disadvantage you suddenly want to ignore this factor?

Gary

If muslix releases a full working Bluray version tomorrow, I'll be the first in line to change my tuneBTW, Here is a new version:

http://www.XXXXX.com/file/XXX....I can confirm that this is good.
Ripped an entire movie.
Perhaps this will end the speculation?

I can also confirm its good. A little buggy but good.

Any bets on when the software company will announce a mandatory firmware fix and when the new HD DVD and Blu-ray titles will be released with the player blacklisted in their new masterkey list?

Perhaps this will end the speculation?
Hi Mark - I'm hopeful too. But as I said, the BR version is still incomplete and so is limited. It cannot use the Volume Unique Key at this point. There has been some limited success on certain titles, but it doesnt function like the HD version yet, where you are guaranteed of a full rip with a VUP code.

Rest assured I have pen in hand (well keyboard actually) for when and if this occurs...

"I take back the things I said about Muslix64. I said he was probably a Blu-ray shill, but now I see the light and know that he is a kind-hearted format-neutral hacker who has everyone's best interests in mind."

:D

"I take back the things I said about Muslix64. I said he was probably a Blu-ray shill, but now I see the light and know that he is a kind-hearted format-neutral hacker who has everyone's best interests in mind."

:D
:D :D

I'm not sure it would be *exactly* like that :)

"I take back the things I said about Muslix64. I said he was probably a Blu-ray shill, but now I see the light and know that he is a kind-hearted format-neutral hacker who has everyone's best interests in mind."

:D
:D

"I take back the things I said about Muslix64. I said he was probably a Blu-ray shill, but now I see the light and know that he is a kind-hearted format-neutral hacker who has everyone's best interests in mind."

:D

Every once in awhile here there is a post that really cheers me up after a long day. :)

- Tom

Muslix and his merry band of fair use brothers have just demonstrated playback of a burned Blu-ray disc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfzLVogXOpM), YouTube style.

I must compliment them in particular on their choice of music for this piece. ;)

Muslix and his merry band of fair use brothers have just demonstrated playback of a burned Blu-ray disc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfzLVogXOpM), YouTube style.

I must compliment them in particular on their choice of music for this piece. ;)The use of a continuous camera shot was a nice touch to convince us skeptics.

Just a thought, since he's using just the movie file and not the interactive menu system of the disc, wouldn't that make this less desirable on the part of many consumers?

I mean the HDi menus won't play with the LG BH100 hybrid player as it is basically doing the same thing, or does the Win DVD player or Power DVD player automatically properly use those menus if they are in the file structure?

If these copied discs won't have the HDi, BD-J, BD-Live menus and interactivity, that would seriously reduce common consumer interest in doing this.

Not to say this is at any way good, as HD copies can now be bit torrented until the player is revoked, and guys who just want to play the movie can copy one, and mass replicators can have had access to digital copies and .......oh cripe, nevermind..... this is still not good for the studios....

...no wonder why HD DVD is not releasing a lot of new titles now.... :mad:

The use of a continuous camera shot was a nice touch to convince us skeptics.

Just a thought, since he's using just the movie file and not the interactive menu system of the disc, wouldn't that make this less desirable on the part of many consumers?


I believe the menu's didn't work in WinDVD from the original Blu-ray Disc either. Probably a WinDVD bug. He is going to test the burned movie on a PS3 when he gets a hold of one. That will be interesting! :)

from the news thread

Interview with muslix64, Developer of BackupHDDVD (http://www.slyck.com/story1390.html)

Will be interesting to see how The Industry responds...

I believe the menu's didn't work in WinDVD from the original Blu-ray Disc either. Probably a WinDVD bug. He is going to test the burned movie on a PS3 when he gets a hold of one. That will be interesting! :)I've read that the PS3 will not be able to play non-AACS encrypted video off burned Blu-ray media, at least for a while. A future firmware upgrade should fix this, but I don't think this will be a high priority for Sony. ;)

I've read that the PS3 will not be able to play non-AACS encrypted video off burned Blu-ray media, at least for a while. A future firmware upgrade should fix this, but I don't think this will be a high priority for Sony. ;) that doesn't sound right. The PS3 has been shown to be capable of playing home recordable discs so if it recognizes the MPEG-2 , VC-1 or AVC stream it should work.

I pretty sure it can play a home made MPEG-2 file, why would a ripped Blu-ray movie file be any different. I don't think it has to have ACS to play.

Am I wrong?

Something about BDMV vs BDAV, I think. BDAV is more flexible and intended to be used for home video. BDMV contains menuing, etc. I seem to recall that BDAV burned to recordables needs no AACS, but that for BDMV the answer is more ambiguous. And BDMV is what is used for commercial movie releases, so if it's a straight copy with AACS stripped off it might not play, but if they've somehow stripped out the underlying MPEG-2 and audio and remuxed it into BDAV, there shouldn't be a difficulty.

but if they've somehow stripped out the underlying MPEG-2 and audio and remuxed it into BDAV, there shouldn't be a difficulty.

IIRC AACS and ROM Mark are mandatory on every Bluray movie ROM. Are you saying a player would still play a ROM disc without AACS&ROM Mark given it is BDAV?

IIRC AACS and ROM Mark are mandatory on every Bluray movie ROM. Are you saying a player would still play a ROM disc without AACS&ROM Mark given it is BDAV?

Not at all. I'm talking about recordables only, and this is only what I've heard. I'm trying to suggest a possible rationale for why some players (the PS3 was mentioned by Low Roller) might not play cracked BDs directly burned to recordables: if they expect only BDAV on recordables and encounter BDMV, they could choke and fail. Realistically such limitations wouldn't be a barrier to inspired hackers, who would eventually find a way to "transcode" from BDMV to BDAV, but they could explain Low Roller's comments.

The amount of FUD spread is insane.

First of all there was no hacking on the encryption. The software was designed piss poor. The real world analogy would be a massive bank vault with the combination placed in plain view. There was no excuse for PowerDVD making such a stupid mistake. Encryption keys can and will be better protected.

Second BD-ROM Mark would not have prevented this "hack". The drive would have detected a valid ROM Mark and begun the hardware level decryption. The AACS stream would have been passed to the player and then the title key would have been grabbed. Same exact outcome. One the title is decrypted and stored on a HDD it can be burned to EITHER BD-R or HD DVD-R. Both systems would simply look at the recordable disc as a user created disc and playback without issue.

Lastly 128bit encryption has 2^128 possible values (not 128 billion). Brute force simply will not work on AACS (which is based on AES). Given a computer than can try 1 trillion possible values per second (well beyond current computational abilities) a computer would need 5,395,141,535,403,010,000 years working 24/7 to try just 50% of the possible codes. Given a network of 1 million such computers (each trying 1 trillion codes per second) it would take still nearly 5 billion years just to try half the possible solutions. If AES can be cracked on a home PC in our lifetime we have some huge problems. AES is used to protect everything from banking interchanges, nuclear missle launch codes, and classified documents.

Let's get the facts straight before this thread goes any further. This is not a hack of AACS rather it shows a sloppy implementation by a vendor. AACS was designed to heal around such an issue. First a new version of powedvd will be created. This version will protect the cryptographic data. Next a new AACS device key will be created for the new version. Next the old version's device key will be added to the blacklist. The old version will not be able to decrypt future movie releases.

The only titles affected are the 150 or so HD DVD titles (plus any currently in the pipeline). If the exploit affects the BD version also (which we don't know yet) then it would affect the 100 or so BD titles. All future titles can be protected by creating a new version of the software that solves this flaw. Even the at most 250 affected titles can be encrypted with new title keys and new device keys which would prevent their decryption on the old software. Once the movies who have their title keys revealed have sold out and/or recalled by the studios they will be replaced with the same movie having new titles keys and a new device blacklist.

This is exactly the kind of issue that AACS was designed to handle. If handled quickly and properly it can show the studios that AACS is indeed robust enough to handle exploits from faulty software.

So if my stand alone player has its software key revoked then well you see where i am going, I would not be able to watch future movie w/o a firmware update. The AVERAGE consumer cant do that on their PC let alone a dvd player.

AACS says keys in the wild :(

http://www.aacsla.com/press

RESPONSE TO REPORTS OF ATTACKS ON AACS TECHNOLOGY

AACS LA has confirmed that AACS Title Keys have appeared on public web sites without authorization. Such unauthorized disclosures indicate an attack on one or more players sold by AACS licensees. This development is limited to the compromise of specific implementations, and does not represent an attack on the AACS system itself, nor is it exclusive to any particular format. Instead it illustrates the need for all AACS licensees to follow the Compliance and Robustness Rules set forth in the AACS license agreements to help ensure that product implementations are not compromised. AACS LA employs both technical and legal measures to deal with attacks such as this one, and AACS LA is using all appropriate remedies at its disposal to address the attack. AACS was designed to address a number of potential attacks with minimal impact using a variety of means including the ability to renew or upgrade players.

First of all there was no hacking on the encryption. The software was designed piss poor. The real world analogy would be a massive bank vault with the combination placed in plain view. There was no excuse for PowerDVD making such a stupid mistake. Encryption keys can and will be better protected.

There was a front page story in the business column of the L.A. Times today. The title of the story was "Hackers find key to DVD piracy", and here is the first paragraph of the story:

The much-vaunted anti-piracy protection on the next generation of DVDs has been cracked, leaving films in the new high-definition formats vulnerable to copying.

So, here you have a very respected, depending on whom you talk to, newspaper where the first line of the story says the piracy pretection has been cracked. Namechamps earlier quote I believe completely misses the point. I use his analogy of the bank vault where the combination was in plain view. While the thieves may not have laboriously picked the lock, they still managed to get away with the money. It is no consolation to the back that the thieves didn't "crack" the lock. Their money is gone, end of story.

While I can appreciate the wonderful technical details concerning how the piracy protection hasn't been cracked, and how the system is working as designed, it doesn't change the fact that the raw data for the HD-DVD movies is out on the file sharing sites. The big picture there being that those 150 or whatever movies are essentially out in the public for general consumption. Yes, yes, yes, I know it takes a gazillion hours to download at 1,200 baud, and it costs hellacious amounts of money to store on a hard drive, and I even know that it isn't economical to transfer them to burnable HD-DVD's. All the trends concerning the pricing of all those are working in the wrong direction for the content providers however.

I guess the movies are only playable on a software player, and not on a regular HD-DVD hardware, once they have been burned onto a writable disk? Not sure about that, anyone know? If those burned disks can play on a hardware player without problems, it really is bad news.

Robert

....Namechamps earlier quote I believe completely misses the point. I use his analogy of the bank vault where the combination was in plain view. While the thieves may not have laboriously picked the lock, they still managed to get away with the money. It is no consolation to the back that the thieves didn't "crack" the lock. Their money is gone, end of story.
....
While I can appreciate the wonderful technical details concerning how the piracy protection hasn't been cracked, and how the system is working as designed, it doesn't change the fact that the raw data for the HD-DVD movies is out on the file sharing sites. The big picture there being that those 150 or whatever movies are essentially out in the public for general consumption. Yes, yes, yes, I know it takes a gazillion hours to download at 1,200 baud, and it costs hellacious amounts of money to store on a hard drive, and I even know that it isn't economical to transfer them to burnable HD-DVD's. All the trends concerning the pricing of all those are working in the wrong direction for the content providers however.

I guess the movies are only playable on a software player, and not on a regular HD-DVD hardware, once they have been burned onto a writable disk? Not sure about that, anyone know? If those burned disks can play on a hardware player without problems, it really is bad news.

Robert

Couple of points.

1) I think the title of th thread is wrong. Not only can are AACS keys easy to aquire on xp with a couple of software players, it is not really possible to stop this on vista. An even biger problem for AACS is that that keys can be taken from stand-alone players as well. You can get a memory dump from a stand alone player. It requires some equipment and knowledge, but this is not something everyone needs to do, only the volume keys need to be seeded to the wild. Revocation of player keys based on publication of title keys is unworkable.

2) I think the analogy of the bank vault is problematic. This process is not illegal everywhere, it is not illegal in all cases, and in many many cases it is certainly not unethical or equal to theft.

Do you realize the net consumer investment in non hdcp dvi monitors is probably in the hundreds of millions of dollars? Perhaps a billion dollars? If a person purchasing hd material wishes to view this material on their set it does not mean they are going to sell or seed the material to others. If a person rents it for one time viewing it is also hard to justify an analogy to taking from a bank vault.

In a third case a person wishing to back up their purchase is also not in the same ethical category as a thief, pirate, bank robber and that hyperobole by the content industry is part of why they are not taken seriously.

3) your point on both net speeds and storage costs is well made. To expand it further HD DVD and Blu-Ray are well behind were SD DVD was in both those areas at the same time in product marketing. HD and Blu Ray films are about 25 gb. This is roughly five times the file size of SD. Early adopters buying SD DVD's when they were first introduced could well have been early adopters of fast consumer net connections and may have had 128k ISDN which was contemprary to early SD. Burner at the time were about $900 and dvdr media cost about 25 times what it costs today. HDD media cost about 25 times as much as well. Moderate consumer broadband is now 3 to 5 mps (25 to 40 times as fast as isdn), HDD storage is $0.25 a gb. and dvdr burners are $25-$30 and dvdr5 media costs about $0.25 ($0.06/gb).

The math is simple. The increase in size did not take us back ten or even five years relative to SD. It went back about two years. The protection method is eroding not just faster but incredibly faster than SD DVD.

Lastly I would say I very much support very tough enforcement against persons who pirate material onto the market. This is a very different thing than making assumptions a) about the natural inclination to disassemble something, made even more tempting by its categorization as illicit, b) or categorizing the many people with perfectly ethical reasons to strip the protections off of material for their own use after they have bought, or in some cases rented the material.

in Kevin Collins of Microsoft interview

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/011507htfchat.html

AACS requires that they have their key renewed every 90 days. In this instance, if the software player was breached, the key will have to be renewed and that would be when the player is corrected.


This is the first I heard of this requirement.

I have not following this that closely, but has this discussed? :confused:

Unfortunately Kevin misspoke. AACS requires that players that utilize proactive renewal must update the keys once every 18 months.

I guess the playing field is leveled now: First Blu-ray rip out. (http://www.hdtvblogger.com/2007/01/30/)

Are we ever going to change the thread title?

- Tom

Are we ever going to change the thread title?

- Tom
I'm waiting for Muslix to release a full version that can handle Volume keys - I'm not sure why he's taking so long with that...

This is a bit OT, but I would love to see video of the Microsoft Vista launch press conference from Romania (http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/02/romania_gates_piracy_good/). :p

Apparently Volume ID has been found...

Like dominoes.....lol

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=121866 (Doom9 thread....)

Apparently Volume ID has been found...

Like dominoes.....lol

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=121866 (Doom9 thread....)
Not so fast. Finding volume keys is not the problem.

Muslix has not given the ability for the Bluray version to be able to utilize these volume keys to decypt bluray discs, as he did with the HD version.

So my commentary stands...

Actually I wasn't attempting to refute your commentary...lol

My interest lies with HD-DVD. Maybe I should append my remarks with "HD-DVD"...

This has got to be the jumpiest thread on AVS...lol

Commentary on endgadgethd:

Hackers discover HD DVD and Blu-ray "processing key" -- all HD titles now exposed (http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/02/13/hackers-discover-hd-dvd-and-blu-ray-processing-key-all-hd-t/)



[...]

DRM hacker arnezami has found the "processing key" used to decrypt the DRM on all HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc films.

Let's break this down for what it is: instead of needing individual keys for each and every high-definition film -- of which there are many -- the processing key can be used to unlock, decrypt, and backup every HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc film released so far.

As arnezami points out, "nothing was actually hacked, cracked or even reverse engineered." All he had to do was keep an eye on his memory, watch what changed, and voila... the processing key appeared. [...]

No wonder Universal and Fox have delayed releases. :mad:

No wonder Universal and Fox have delayed releases. :mad:
Did Universal delay releases?

No wonder Universal and Fox have delayed releases. :mad:

Doubt it. That happened way before this and the fact that this affects both formats does not help them to stay safe from it.

Note by the AACS LA on its website:

Regarding the reported attacks on 2/13/2007, AACS has confirmed that an additional key (called a ‘processing key’) has been published on public websites without authorization. This is a variation of the previously reported attack (a compromise of a specific implementation) on one or more players sold by AACS licensees. Although a different key was extracted, this represents no adverse impact on the ability of the AACS ecosystem to address the attack. All technical and legal measures applicable to the previously reported attack will be applicable against this attack as well.

DVD file has posted an editorial filled with anger:

The HD Disc Hacks - A few depraved criminals risk spoiling it for us all (http://www.dvdfile.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5932)

Woah that article seems to imply that this AACS crack has the possibility of slowing down any future HD DVD or Blu-ray software releases.

That would be really really really bad. :mad:

That would be really really really bad. :mad:
Yes, it would.

But honestly: Which copy protection has not been cracked yet? There simply is no unbreakable copy protection - because in the end someone somewhere somewhen has to be able to decrypt the data to make it visible on the display. The only really safe copy protection is to not make the content available at all. But that doesn't work out for the studios. After all they want money from us consumers. So they have no choice but to make their content available. And no matter what kind of copy protection they'll invent, it will probably be broken sooner or later. And I think in the end the studios know that. So I hope that these AACS cracks will not stop studios from releasing Blu-Ray and HD DVD movies...

I bet all Windows XP software players get zapped. Maybe software players allowed on Microsoft Vista. That would make the current crackers sad.

Pardon me if I would not shed many tears.

Its not the encrpyption that is compromised, its the software implentation.

Its not the encrpyption that is compromised, its the software implentation.

Right! There is still no way to burn the ripped files to a disc an play it on a standalone player...

... yet!

Note by the AACS LA on its website:



DVD file has posted an editorial filled with anger:

The HD Disc Hacks - A few depraved criminals risk spoiling it for us all (http://www.dvdfile.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5932)

Wow, they even played the terrorist card.

When any anarchist decides that the law does not apply to him and he does harm, he deserves to be apprehended, tried, and if found guilty, punished and fined. Such criminals threaten to destroy the home theater technical progress that can bring pleasure to millions. The mentality of such a sociopath is equivalent to those who release computer viruses and Trojan horses into the wild to wreak random havoc. They are anarchists intent on destruction. They are no better than terrorists.

That's getting sort of old these days.

- Tom

I sure hope that does not stop the flow of HD DVD or Blu-ray movies. :mad:

DMCA takedown notice for BackupHDDVD at Soundforge.net (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=122770)

And so the battle continues!

WOW! That DVD File article is worth a read!

I haven't laughed that hard since I saw Borat. Talk about self-seving zealotry! I found it especially hilarious reading the utopian musings about banning ROM drives for PC's and such. And then the terrorist card.

There's no need to write an accompanying satire to that DVD File article. Its a 2-for-1 special!

Oh my God!!!!! That DVD File article was the funniest thing I have read in ages!!! I really wonder whether the author honestly believes what he wrote, it was that far out there. He honestly sounds as rabid as the people who believe they have been abducted by aliens for the sole purpose of anal probing and experimentation :). Thanks for an article that made me laugh so hard I woke my wife up :)

The DVDfile article is surely a subtle parody? :rolleyes:

Someone located the Host Private Key for WinDVD and posted it on Doom9 this morning. This is the last item needed to roll your own homebrew player that can play any HD-DVD created before the point at which AACS-LA changes keys.

I sure hope that does not stop the flow of HD DVD or Blu-ray movies. :mad:

That has been a real possibility since the first day the "hack" was announced -- nothing new there! Since then, it's just been a question of seeing what happens next. We've already seen a number of "delays" from studios since then, though we've no way of identifying/verifying the causes.

The DVDfile article is surely a subtle parody? :rolleyes:

Someone located the Host Private Key for WinDVD and posted it on Doom9 this morning. This is the last item needed to roll your own homebrew player that can play any HD-DVD created before the point at which AACS-LA changes keys.
And Bluray, but they'll just get it again now that they know how. It's over for AACS, and good riddance.

Actually, it was PowerDVD's key that was exposed today.

Link (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=122969)

:)

And Bluray, but they'll just get it again now that they know how. It's over for AACS, and good riddance.
But if AACS revokes the keys for WinDVD and PowerDVD, and any other software players that work under XP/Vista 32-bit, how would they discover the new keys?

But if AACS revokes the keys for WinDVD and PowerDVD, and any other software players that work under XP/Vista 32-bit, how would they discover the new keys?
Well, I think the Toshiba HD DVD players are running some kind of Linux. I'm sure with enough effort somebody somewhen will be able to read out the keys those players are using. I think the PS3 could also be a weak link in the picture which might be used sooner or later to retrieve some keys.

Just to let you know I am using an xbox 360 HD-DVD drive plugged into my PC.
The latest version of AnyDVD HD removes all protection from HD-DVD and supposedly everything but region coding from BluRay.

I can't work out how to do screen caps from a VC-1 stream, but the movie playing/ripping of the DRM is pretty much gone.

Seems AACS was broken with relative ease. It almost makes me wonder if this isn't a honey-pot of sorts. Get the unfinalized AACS authorized content out in the wild, see how they'll attack the scheme and then use that information to tighten the noose.

There is no way to tighten the noose. No matter what they put in place, it's going to be hacked. I'm not sure how many times this needs to happen before they figure it out.

The latest version of AnyDVD HD removes all protection from HD-DVD and supposedly everything but region coding from BluRay.

I'm curious to see whether that product becomes disabled with a new AACS disallowed key list.

The latest - 6.1.2.9 - removes region coding as well.

Diogen.

Its the MPAA's lawyers who will benefit most from this crack/revoke scenario that will probably resemble a scene from Groundhog Day. The consumers and the studios will both lose, and the rigidity of Hollywood will stop them from seeing the forest through the trees.

I can't say I'm overly worried, as most movies churned out these days are garbage, hi def or not. If Hollywood continues to center its 21st century business model on DRM, I suspect they'll atrophy over time.

http://www.aacsla.com/home

AACS LA Announces Security Updates
In response to attacks against certain PC-based applications for playing HD DVD and Blu-ray movie discs, Advanced Access Content System Licensing Administrator, LLC (“AACS LA”) announces that it has taken action, in cooperation with relevant manufacturers, to expire the encryption keys associated with the specific implementations of AACS-enabled software.

Consumers can continue to enjoy content that is protected by the AACS technology by refreshing the encryption keys associated with their HD DVD and Blu-ray software players. This refresh process is accomplished via a straightforward online update.

Through this online update process, manufacturers are also able to see that consumers update their player implementations prior to distribution of encryption key expiration information via new movie discs.

Consumers are advised to check with the manufacturer of their AACS-enabled Blu-ray or HD DVD PC-based player to make sure you have installed the latest version.

http://www.intervideo.com/jsp/Press.jsp?mode=04-06-2007

Corel Releases Important Update for InterVideo WinDVD
A Message to InterVideo WinDVD Customers

April 6, 2007

To our valued InterVideo WinDVD Customers,

Today Corel is releasing an important new security update for InterVideo WinDVD. We have taken this step to ensure that our customers continue to enjoy the latest HD DVD and BD content.

Our decision stems from recent reports that hackers have illegally obtained certain software licensing keys and have used them to duplicate copyrighted content without prior authorization. Corel takes this situation very seriously. We have been working closely with our partners and other industry organizations to ensure we take the steps necessary to prevent copyright infringement from happening in the future.

WinDVD customers who are currently using either HD DVD or BD playback will need to download the free security update from your PC or Drive manufacturer's websites.

This update includes security enhancements as well as updated licensing keys that will be required to view both newly purchased HD DVD/BD titles and those in your existing HD DVD/BD collections. By downloading Corel's free update, you will be able to continue to enjoy the latest HD DVD/BD content, while ensuring that copyrighted materials are properly protected.

Please be aware that failure to apply the update will result in AACS-protected HD DVD and BD playback being disabled.

Your continued enjoyment of our software is Corel's primary concern. If you have any questions about the WinDVD security update, please contact Corel's Customer Support Team at www.corel.com/support or by calling (800) 772-6735.

We thank you for your cooperation, continued loyalty, and support.

...start the timer...NOW!!! :p

...start the timer...NOW!!! :p
Not quite.

...start the timer...NOW!!! :p

lol, agreed. I'm curious to see how long it takes to get by AACS this time :D

There's almost an entertaining anticipation behind this in the flavors of lifespan of a Matrix cycle or like that Battlestar Galactica episode "33". ;) Will it happen in the exact amount of time as last time, will it be shorter, will it be longer with each succeeding player update?...

Given the news of the Xbox HD-DVD player's firmware being hacked, I doubt the clock will get to do much ticking. The longest wait will be for one of the newly coded disks to make its way into 'pirate' hands.

The final AACS agreement (if it ever arrives) will probably contain provisions such that it is not legal to sell discs to anyone with a parrot and an eye patch. That should protect them for awhile.

- Tom

http://www.aacsla.com/home

http://www.intervideo.com/jsp/Press.jsp?mode=04-06-2007

Thats not a ringing endorsement for the agility of AACS. It took them atleast 3 months to get this done.

Thats not a ringing endorsement for the agility of AACS. It took them atleast 3 months to get this done.
And I bet the new keys are out in 24 hours from the first disc release. Long live fair use!

And I bet the new keys are out in 24 hours from the first disc release. Long live fair use!Aaarrrrrrrr!!!!


*we need an eyepatch smiley* http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/9427/pirate05hu8.gif

I'm not betting :(

I have donated YTD $200.00 to some of my smarter friends over when and how long it will take for AACS to look like a joke!

This whole DRM thing is pretty funny though! :eek:

Aaarrrrrrrr!!!!


*we need an eyepatch smiley* http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/9427/pirate05hu8.gif

I am in no way endorsing piracy.

I am in no way endorsing piracy.I never said you were. However, the MPAA/RIAA want to classify any breachers of drm 'pirates.' I completely disagree with that, but under the law the DMCA trumps fairs use. If this makes me a 'pirate,' then I embrace that label. You may not like this, but I do endorse such 'piracy.'

Mark Shuttleworth, founder of the Ubuntu project, posted a great article on the news of AACS being hacked: Note To Content Owners: DRM Doesn't Work (http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/96)I was thrilled to see recently that the processing key for *all* HD discs produced to date has been discovered and published. I expect this to lead to the complete unraveling of the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD content protection schemes before even 1% of the potential market for those players has been reached. Good news indeed, because it may inspire the people who setup such schemes to reconsider.....

......The music industry’s fear of Napster led them down the DRM rabbit-hole. Microsoft, Apple, SONY and others all developed DRM systems and pitched those to the music industry as a “sane ” approach to online music distribution. It was a nice pitch: “All the distribution benefits of download, all the economic benefits of vinyl”, in a nutshell.

Of these contenders, SONY was clearly ruled out because they are a content owner and there’s no way the rest of the industry would pay a technology tax to a competitor (much as Nokia’s Symbian never gained much traction with the other biggies, because it was too tied to Nokia). Microsoft was a non-starter, because they are too obviously powerful and the music industry could see a hostile takeover coming a mile away. But cute, cuddly Apple wouldn’t harm anyone! So iTunes and AAC were roundly and widely embraced, and Apple succeeded in turning the distribution and playing of legal digital music into a virtual monopoly. Apple played a masterful game, and took full advantage of the music industry’s fear.

The joyful irony in this of course is Steve Jobs recent call for the music industry to adopt DRM-free distribution, giving Apple the moral high ground. Very, very nicely played indeed!

A few years back I was in Davos, at the World Economic Forum. It was perhaps 2002 or 2003, a few years after the dot-com bust. It was the early days of the iPaq, everyone at the conference had been loaned one. I remember clearly sitting in on a session that was more or less a CEO confessional, a sort of absolution-by-admission-of-stupidity gig. One by one, some well known figures stood up and told horror stories about how they’d let the inmates run the asylum, and allowed twenty-something year olds to tell them how to spend their shareholder capital on dot-com projects. This was really interesting to me, as I’d spent the dot-com period telling big companies NOT to over-invest, and to focus on improving their relationships with existing customers and partners using the net, not taking over the world overnight.

But the real kicker came at the very end, when the head of SONY USA, also responsible for its music division, Sir Stringer, stood up to make his peace. He gloated on at length about how SONY had NOT invested in the dot-com, and thus how he felt he must be the only person in the room who had not been taken in by the kids. It was a very funny, very witty speech that earned a round of applause and laughter. I was left wondering whether he had any clue whatsoever how many songs would fit on the iPaq in his pocket, or how long it would take to download them. I suspected not. Of all the CEO’s who had spoken that day, I thought he was the one most likely to be hit hard, and soon, by the digital train.

Sir Stringer is now CEO of SONY worldwide. Funny, then, that the SONY PS3 should have been delayed so that work could be completed on its DRM system.

Some bad ideas are just too attractive to die, once and for all.

I'm sure content providers aren't too happy about this either. I don't think the content providers, like Universal and Fox, really cared about the 1st quarter sales. They are traditionally low anyway.

It would have been different if this took 3 months out of the rest of the year, or a diasaster if it occured in the 4th quarter.

I don't think the content providers, like Universal and Fox, really cared about the 1st quarter sales. They are traditionally low anyway.

It would have been different if this took 3 months out of the rest of the year, or a diasaster if it occured in the 4th quarter.This is going to be a "Groundhog Day" scenario for the movie studios. The response time of AACS LA may quicken in the future, but is it really going to matter? Who honestly believes AACS can be remedied quicker than the fair use warriors pirates can remedy their hacks? If the studios delay releases because of DRM breaches like this in the future, they will indeed suffer a disaster.

Do the studious really believe someone who goes through the time and effort to download and play a 20 gig+ HD movie over a p2p network = a lost HD-DVD/Blu-ray movie sale??? If so their shareholders should sue these studio execs for incompetence.

A recent doom9 forum thread seems to indicate that the Xbox 360 HD DVD add-on drive's unmodified firmware already contains a debugging command that can return the Volume ID without authentication.

They are claiming that the recent WinDVD AACS update is moot (that is not necessary) when used with the Xbox 360 HD DVD add-on drive to get the Volume ID.

Hong.

I never imagined MS's "security" record in software (Windows?) would actually end up extending to their hardware. :p

.....They are claiming that the recent WinDVD AACS update is moot (that is not necessary) when used with the Xbox 360 HD DVD add-on drive to get the Volume ID.I never imagined MS's "security" record in software (Windows?) would actually end up extending to their hardware. :pThat's no bug, its a feature. ;)

There is always the possibilty that the AACS update did plug the easiest holes (check the PC's memory ....egads) and that the crypto strength might come into play again.

Betch the studios paid somebody to check out the software players....really really good....this time....

Honey? Did you remember to take the keys out of the door?

No AACS update is going to fix the Xbox 360 HD-DVD player vulnerability.....

Yankee Group guru Josh Martin hits the nail on the head in this Cnet article (http://news.com.com/Analyst+Corels+DRM+patch+only+a+bandage/2100-7355_3-6174893.html)."Let's be honest," Martin said, "next-generation DVDs offered the promise of managed copy, which was the ability to rip your DVD and put it on your PC and stream it around your house and all this other stuff...None of that has come to fruition. So why don't these guys focus on enabling those functionalities instead of trying to thwart the minority that are trying to hack content?"

"Our recommendation is for anyone using HD DVD or Blu-ray disc playback to download the update in order to ensure that both their existing titles and newly purchased titles will continue to play," Hughes said. "If someone inserts an HD or Blu-ray disc with the new licensing keys, it will result in HD/BD playback of previous titles being disabled until (users) install the free update."

According to this a new disc can disable a player even from playing older titles. I didn't know that (and don't like it much).

- Tom

According to this a new disc can disable a player even from playing older titles. I didn't know that (and don't like it much).

- TomNice catch. These a$$holes aren't just content with replacing keys, it looks like AACS LA is hell bent on installing malware on consumer PC's!!! :eek: :mad:

You'd think they'd learn to respect their consumers, especially Sony after the rootkit fiasco. Apparently they did not receive the message. I wonder what other goodies we're in for with these new disks?!?! Well, as long as I'm going to be treated like a pirate.....

AAARRRRRRR!!!

Wait there, now...why do you think this little detail is malware? As long as you keep your software player updated so that AACS can do its job, your discs will play. Why wouldn't you want to keep up to date?

:D There is always the possibilty that the AACS update did plug the easiest holes (check the PC's memory ....egads) and that the crypto strength might come into play again.

Betch the studios paid somebody to check out the software players....really really good....this time....

Honey? Did you remember to take the keys out of the door?

LOL!

Wait there, now...why do you think this little detail is malware? As long as you keep your software player updated so that AACS can do its job, your discs will play. Why wouldn't you want to keep up to date?That's the choice I get to make. If one of these disks changes my PC configuration or software's functionality without my permission, I'm inclined to call it malware if it disrupts the functionality I desire.

Legally recognized or not, I believe I have the right to make a copy of the of the disks I purchase.(on a moral basis) You may not share this opinion, I suspect many here don't. That's fine by me. You may not be inclined to label this as malware either. For me it will likely depend on how aggressive this patch is. Given the history of the parties involved, I admit being a bit cynical.

I think that formality is handled when you click "I Agree" on the EULA. ;) Now if you were lying when you clicked "I Agree", when you really meant "I Disagree", then who here has run afoul first? :p

I think that formality is handled when you click "I Agree" on the EULA. ;) Now if you were lying when you clicked "I Agree", when you really meant "I Disagree", then who here has run afoul first? :pLets just say I haven't needed to click the "I Agree" button on the EULA. ;)

Now how are you going to hold anyone responsible for something done to your computer by something that was never "officially" installed on your computer, in the first place? :p

WinDVD customers who are currently using either HD DVD or BD playback will need to download the free security update from your PC or Drive manufacturer's websites.

http://www.intervideo.com/jsp/Press.jsp?mode=04-06-2007

Where can you download it? I cannot find the free security update anywhere. :confused:

Now how are you going to hold anyone responsible for something done to your computer by something that was never "officially" installed on your computer, in the first place? :pI know, I know. Its all fun and games till someone's crypto gets circumvented! :D

Where can you download it? I cannot find the free security update anywhere. :confused:You need to go to your drive maker's website for the update. Most PowerDVD and WinDVD software versions capable of BR/HD-DVD playback were only sold as OEM, so bang on your drive maker's inbox if they don't release an update soon.

CD Freaks: WinDVD patch to block AACS hack ineffective (http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/WinDVD-patch-to-block-AACS-hack-ineffective.html)

Despite the recent revoking of WinDVD 8's key where consumers have to update WinDVD and their HD DVD / Blu-ray drive's firmware to play upcoming titles, hackers have managed to break the AACS Volume ID check. With this hack, it prevents the mandatory check where the disc authenticates itself with a volume ID, thus allowing discs where the volume ID has been revoked to be played back. As a result, this also prevents any future revocations from taking effect unless the AACS LA revoke the actual Toshiba Xbox 360 HD DVD player!

So for those using the new hack mentioned on Doom9, they can allow their drive to play the discs with the revoked Volume ID as well as use the existing processing keys to decrypt and backup discs or play them on a digital monitor regardless of HDCP support.

Hackers have exposed new hole in AACS encryption (http://www.heise-security.co.uk/news/88089)

Shortly after the AACS LA, which is responsible for AACS key assignment, put the compromised version of WinDVD player on the black list to prevent new movies from being played with this software, hackers have exposed a new hole in the security system for HD DVD movies. According to a posting in the Doom 9 forum, a hacker named xt5 has found a way to read out the volume ID, which is necessary for decryption, by using an unmodified Xbox 360 HD DVD drive(Toshiba SD-S802A), which can be connected to a PC via USB. This volume ID can be used to disclose all keys necessary for copying HD DVD movies without requiring player software such as WinDVD.

To close this new hole, AACS LA would have to put the Xbox 360 external HD DVD drive on the "revocation list", completely preventing the playing of HD DVD movies on this drive. However, it would be legitimate users who would suffer, while hackers could continue to use the drive to copy movies.

Alternatively, Microsoft or the drive vendor Toshiba could fix the vulnerability with a firmware update. Drives with a secure firmware update would not be put on the revocation list and users could continue to play HD DVD movies with these drives. However it is doubtful that such a firmware update would provide a permanent solution, since in the past, two hackers named arnezami and Geremia were able to modify the firmware of the drive to read out the volume IDs of movies, bypassing the AACS copy protection.

While no such hole has so far been detected for Blu-ray drives, corresponding postings in forums show that hackers are already searching for a similar vulnerability.LOL!!!

I hope the studios are proud of themselves, and Microsoft, oh Microsoft.....its going to be fun watching how you handle this as a member of AACS LA, and the maker of the Xbox HD-DVD add on. Its quite an entertaining dance to behold! Thanks for the amusement. :)

Watch how agile the fair use warriors pirates become as they'll unravel these 'fixes' quicker and quicker as they familiarize themselves with the AACS 'process.'

http://www.blueblood.net/boards/images/smilies2/popcorn.gif

Not that I think it will take them very long... but has blu-ray been compromised again as well, or only HD-DVD?

Not that I think it will take them very long... but has blu-ray been compromised again as well, or only HD-DVD?Blu-ray is kind of safe for now, as no BR player has given up the ghost quite like Microsoft's Xbox HD-DVD already has.

However, since BR also relies on AACS, the Xbox 360 HDDVD player will give the 'pirates' quite a head start on compromising the software players' new 'fixes' making the rounds. Once that happens, its 'goodnight sweetheart' time for AACS BR as well......all over again.

And sooner or later, a PC BR hardware player will fall too. The simple reason M$'s HD-DVD player fell first is because it the cheapest PC HD disk player, by a large margin.

Not that I think it will take them very long... but has blu-ray been compromised again as well, or only HD-DVD?
Bluray has been compromised also. The AACS hacks and AnyDVD apply to both formats.

However, the Xbox HD DVD addon on has been so wildly popular due to the price, that more folks (and hackers) have gotten their hands on them.

The PS3 internal drive is likely to be compromised in exactly the same way, once the fiends have had their way with it.

Both formats are caught in the same compromising position, holding their underpants with one hand while pointing with the other. And BD Plus is nowhere in sight, and as yet completely unproven.

The real problem is that AACS perhaps needs to get their thumb out, I think...

HD DVD, Blu-Ray protection in question after attacks (http://news.yahoo.com/s/infoworld/20070416/tc_infoworld/87720_1)

Next week, new HD DVD movies will hit the shelves that won't play on some players, the first countermeasure by the content and software industries to combat intensive efforts by hackers to break copy-protection technology.

The move comes four months after hackers first poked a hole in AACS (Advanced Access Content System), the complex encryption scheme used to protect HD DVD and Blu-ray Discs. In the interim, they've been able to decrypt HD DVD movies and, theoretically, upload them to file-sharing networks.

That security gap will be closed, at least for some time, with the new discs. But earlier this month, hackers scored another success in compromising AACS technology, an effort cryptography experts say foreshadows a difficult road ahead in keeping pirates at bay.

The development, disclosed on the Doom9.org forum for video technology aficionados, ironically involved the use of an HD DVD drive within the
Xbox, the gaming system from Microsoft, one of the backers of the AACS system.

The new method uses the Xbox's HD DVD drive to read the volume ID for a disc, one piece of information needed to eventually decrypt and copy a disc.

AACS uses a system of numeric keys on playback software and discs to allow a movie to play. Once a hacker obtains a "device key" -- a numerical code within the playback software -- that key can unlock other mechanisms in place designed to block decryption of a movie.

Through sophisticated software probes, hackers found the device key in InterVideoDVD, a software program now owned by Corel. On April 6, Corel issued an update for the InterVideo WinDVD playback software that refreshes and further obscures those device keys. New HD DVDs issued after April 23 will not work on players running the old software.

The technique is known as "device key revocation," a feature of AACS that allows it to block players running software whose device key has been compromised. The upgrade is mandatory, as new movies have been programmed to not play on the old software.

It's the first time the content industry has used the revocation feature, and probably not the last. But supporters of AACS said it is designed to roll with the punches from hackers.

"The attacks -- all of them -- represent only attacks on individual players," said Michael Ayers, an attorney who is chairman of the business group of AACS Licensing Administrator, the trade group that represents vendors supporting the technology, which include Sony, Toshiba, The Walt Disney, and Warner Bros.

"They don't represent hacks of AACS itself," he said, adding that the industry expects more hacking attempts.

Ayers said a lag between when a system is attacked and when the industry can respond is inevitable, given that it takes time to investigate what the hackers are doing and eventually give the film industry and manufacturers enough time to respond. He defended AACS as "robust."

Cryptography experts tend to differ since the determination of the hackers and the availability of tools to analyze software puts AACS at a disadvantage. They think hackers will be copying the new discs sooner rather than later.

That's because each time around, the hackers gain more and more knowledge about AACS, and efforts to restructure playback software to make it more impenetrable are more difficult, wrote Ed Felton, a professor of computer science and public affairs at Princeton University in New Jersey.

What Corel has essentially done with its update is obfuscate where the device key is now located in the software.

But "it's a game that inherently favors the attackers," Felton wrote on his blog, Freedom to Tinker. "My guess is that the attacks will extract keys from the new software within about three weeks of its availability."

That will require software makers to issue new software again, which will have to resist further attacks, Felton wrote.

Alex Halderman, a doctorate candidate in computer science at Princeton, said the latest Xbox attack showed a sophisticated level of reverse hardware engineering.

"This may be the test in whether AACS is going to provide any value to the movie studios in the long run," Halderman said. "If the new version is broken very shortly ... then it looks like the long-term prospects of AACS are very bleak. We'll probably see this game repeated forever."

The HD-DVD add on drive for the XBOX 360 has been permanently hacked through modifying its firmware.


There is no way that HD-DVD can ever be protected again as long as the 360 add-on can still play the disc.


It doesn't matter how many keys they revoke, the 360 add-on is permanently under the control of the hackers now.

Will encryption be the deciding factor between HD DVD and Bluray?

After an avalanche of attacks by hackers of all stripes against HDCP, studios are developing a weapon to curtail the onslaught.

http://www.audioholics.com/news/industry-news/bd-plus-bd-bluray-enhanced.html

Will encryption be the deciding factor between HD DVD and Bluray?

After an avalanche of attacks by hackers of all stripes against HDCP, studios are developing a weapon to curtail the onslaught.

http://www.audioholics.com/news/industry-news/bd-plus-bd-bluray-enhanced.html

I give BD+ less than 30 days after it is released to be worthless.

The HD-DVD add on drive for the XBOX 360 has been permanently hacked through modifying its firmware.Heck, right now volume ID's can be read off the 360 add-on without touching its firmware.

Mr. Horse, meet Mr. Barndoor

The HD-DVD add on drive for the XBOX 360 has been permanently hacked through modifying its firmware.

There is no way that HD-DVD can ever be protected again as long as the 360 add-on can still play the disc.
Please don't forget that the current Xbox drive hacks "only" read out the Volume ID. That's only one part of decrypting the movies. You still need processing/device keys.

Well here is the latest twist in the saga of HD-DVD keys out in the wild. Numerous web site are all reporting the same story, or a variation on it, so I'll just provide one link for those interested:

http://www.dailytech.com/AACS+Key+Censorship+Leads+to+First+Internet+Riot/article7129.htm

You have got to love a headline that contains the phrase "Internet Riot" :)

Basically the web site digg.com was removing all posts that contained the magic keys. Apparently they got a cease and desist order from the AACSLA. Well, the web sites users just kept re-submitting posts over and over that contained the key. The founders of the web site finally decided that they would not try and go against their users wishes any longer and allow the posts to remain on the site.

Now it will be interesting to see if the AACSLA can shut down digg.com, slashdot.org, wikipedia.com and maybe even the entire WWW in order to protect their intellectual property. So, if the web is no longer here shortly after you read this, you will know why :)

One of the morals to the story, at least one that I'm getting from reading todays news, is that the creators of the AACS encryption system didn't account for the possibility that there would be the equivalent of an "Internet Riot" in support of the posting of those keys once they were discovered. If every web site on the internet starts posting the keys, is the AACSLA going to shut the entire web down? Interesting times indeed...

Well here is the latest twist in the saga of HD-DVD keys out in the wild. Numerous web site are all reporting the same story, or a variation on it, so I'll just provide one link for those interested:

http://www.dailytech.com/AACS+Key+Censorship+Leads+to+First+Internet+Riot/article7129.htm

You have got to love a headline that contains the phrase "Internet Riot" :)

Basically the web site digg.com was removing all posts that contained the magic keys. Apparently they got a cease and desist order from the AACSLA. Well, the web sites users just kept re-submitting posts over and over that contained the key. The founders of the web site finally decided that they would not try and go against their users wishes any longer and allow the posts to remain on the site.

Now it will be interesting to see if the AACSLA can shut down digg.com, slashdot.org, wikipedia.com and maybe even the entire WWW in order to protect their intellectual property. So, if the web is no longer here shortly after you read this, you will know why :)

One of the morals to the story, at least one that I'm getting from reading todays news, is that the creators of the AACS encryption system didn't account for the possibility that there would be the equivalent of an "Internet Riot" in support of the posting of those keys once they were discovered. If every web site on the internet starts posting the keys, is the AACSLA going to shut the entire web down? Interesting times indeed...

This reminds me of the DeCSS leak that happened a few years ago. They actually made a logo that contained the code and it was posted everywhere, you could even get t-shirts with it.

Slightly out of context but I tried to reply to that other thread here about the Digg stuff a few hours ago before it disappeared and the following was still in my copy buffer so I might as well post it here:

----

This all has nothing to do with the format war. It is about civil disobedience, the consumer revolt against the unreasonable user burden of certain copy protection technologies, and the right of free speech on todays Internet.

It is silly to think someone should be able to copyright a number such that nobody else is allow to say or write it.

And Digg has now given in to consensus and pledged to stop deleting such posts.

- Tom

I give BD+ less than 30 days after it is released to be worthless.Do you really believe BD+ will ever be released? At this point it is a carrot trying to entice some studios into believing their content will be safe. If BD+ gets released, it most assuredly will get cracked at some point (maybe even in the time-frame you suggest ;)) and then the carrot is gone. It's better for Blu-ray to keep promoting BD+ and never releasing it, at least that way it looks promising and worthwhile. :p

Yep. Esp by people who had nothing to do with the "cracking" ....

Right - and your point is...?
I cannot see why shouldn't people welcome such a good news like breaking/circumventing AACS.

Now it will be interesting to see if the AACSLA can shut down digg.com, slashdot.org, wikipedia.com and maybe even the entire WWW in order to protect their intellectual property. So, if the web is no longer here shortly after you read this, you will know why :)

One of the morals to the story, at least one that I'm getting from reading todays news, is that the creators of the AACS encryption system didn't account for the possibility that there would be the equivalent of an "Internet Riot" in support of the posting of those keys once they were discovered. If every web site on the internet starts posting the keys, is the AACSLA going to shut the entire web down? Interesting times indeed...I'd love fo be a fly on the wall of AACS LA today. They'll win some battles if they continue to press this, but in doing so they'll ensure they lose the war of trying to put the genie back in the bottle.

It is indeed reminiscent of DeCSS, only this time its happening at light speed, and the backlash is much greater. MPAA vs. The Internet............place your bets

went to digg yesterday and somebody posted a key code for blu ray as well but nobody seemed to care. :confused:

why the hoopla on one format only? seems like they're both just as cracked.

went to digg yesterday and somebody posted a key code for blu ray as well but nobody seemed to care. :confused:

why the hoopla on one format only? seems like they're both just as cracked.

D9 already has a long-running BR key forum...

I don't envy the position Kevin Rose is in. Watching him back early on from the TechTV days, its good to see his conscience prevail over his wallet.

The MPAA might be able to take down Rose's creation. The internet, not so much.

Why is it so hard for studios to figure out how to prevent piracy, without using all this encryption stuff? The answer is easy.

Optical movies need to be released on a disc format that is not available as a PC storage format. There, look how simple that is.

Or, if you do want it as a PC storage format, the patent holders for that format need to agree to regulate the price of recordable media to $20 per blank disc or so.

I would not spend hours downloading a 20-30 gig movie, and then have to either:

A: Compress it further to fit on a DVD, or to burn it to another optical format that isn't compatible with my standalone player

B: Spend $20 to get a blank disc to illegally make a copy of a movie I could get for $20 anyway.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to combat piracy.

The only type of piracy this might not address are those with a HTPC that would download to a hard drive and play back directly from the HDD. I think this would be a small segment of "pirates" though, when looking at the overall piracy picture.

Why is it so hard for studios to figure out how to prevent piracy, without using all this encryption stuff? The answer is easy.

Optical movies need to be released on a disc format that is not available as a PC storage format. There, look how simple that is.

Or, if you do want it as a PC storage format, the patent holders for that format need to agree to regulate the price of recordable media to $20 per blank disc or so.

I would not spend hours downloading a 20-30 gig movie, and then have to either:

A: Compress it further to fit on a DVD, or to burn it to another optical format that isn't compatible with my standalone player

B: Spend $20 to get a blank disc to illegally make a copy of a movie I could get for $20 anyway.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to combat piracy.

The only type of piracy this might not address are those with a HTPC that would download to a hard drive and play back directly from the HDD. I think this would be a small segment of "pirates" though, when looking at the overall piracy picture.

Your use of the word "pirates" in this instance is ill-informed and is very telling concerning your knowledge on the subject. How in the world do you figure that people that simply want to back up their media or play their media on their choice of hardware are pirates? Are they stealing the media? NO. Are they copying and then distributing for free? NO.

Un-freaking believable....

Slightly out of context but I tried to reply to that other thread here about the Digg stuff a few hours ago before it disappeared and the following was still in my copy buffer so I might as well post it here:

----

This all has nothing to do with the format war. It is about civil disobedience, the consumer revolt against the unreasonable user burden of certain copy protection technologies, and the right of free speech on todays Internet.

It is silly to think someone should be able to copyright a number such that nobody else is allow to say or write it.

And Digg has now given in to consensus and pledged to stop deleting such posts.

- Tom

By law it is illegal to hack content protection schemes.
Anyone posting a key openly on the web is a suspect hacker. By law web page owner and even his content provider can be held resposible. They can be forced to hand over the information that makes it possible to identify the suspect hacker.
If they can't they can be in trouble if they don't moderate the illegal content.

If Digg owners think they can get away with this by leaving the keys up they could be in for a very nasty surprice.
(Everyone understands this if stolen credit card numbers and childprn is posted by Digg users)

Also hackers that posting these keys do probably not realize that they also post the identity of the player that is used for the hack.
The individual player license can be revoked by means of device revocation tables in every future disc release...

a format that can't play on a PC just won't succeed...

Your use of the word "pirates" in this instance is ill-informed and is very telling concerning your knowledge on the subject. How in the world do you figure that people that simply want to back up their media or play their media on their choice of hardware are pirates? Are they stealing the media? NO. Are they copying and then distributing for free? NO.

Un-freaking believable....

Yes, pirates isn't the correct word.

It should have been 'criminals'

It is silly to think someone should be able to copyright a number such that nobody else is allow to say or write it.

Great point. Nobody should be able to own numbers.


Post all of your credit card numbers now, please... in the spirit of "right of free speech on todays Internet".

Yes, pirates isn't the correct word.

It should have been 'criminals'

No, to steal the movie you don't need the code, all you need is an internet connection and a torrent or newsgroup access. Almost all of them are already available if you have the space for it.

You only need the code to take the movie from the disc to your harddrive.

The only criminal that uses the code is the original ripper, or the consumer who rents (netflix) and rips.

People who buy and rip for convenience (htpc as a jukebox) should not be considered criminals, especially considering that you cannot purchase a downloadable version of the movies with the same quality.

No, to steal the movie you don't need the code, all you need is an internet connection and a torrent or newsgroup access. Almost all of them are already available if you have the space for it.

You only need the code to take the movie from the disc to your harddrive.

The only criminal that uses the code is the original ripper, or the consumer who rents (netflix) and rips.

People who buy and rip for convenience (htpc as a jukebox) should not be considered criminals, especially considering that you cannot purchase a downloadable version of the movies with the same quality.

So when I use or buy something knowing that it's stolen I'm not braking a law?
Think again.

If someone steals your cc number and post it on a website and I use said number to unlock the contents of your bank account. I'm not in trouble?

Yes, pirates isn't the correct word.

It should have been 'criminals'

Call me a criminal then and I will call you a sheep...

It's my content and I will play it and protect it as I see fit. Until the studio's agree to place their media on non-degradable formats OR replace the degraded media for free then I will make back ups to protect my purchased media. I will also choose how I listen to my music and watch my movies.... via a whole house media server.... with or without the consent of the studios. Criminal? Hardly.... If you so choose to bend over to these greedy studio's, so be it, just keep your KY jelly handy...lol

Frank, I think you missed Jiffylush' point. He's saying if YOU buy the disc (over the counter) in a HD-format, then download the exact same version over the internet, it can be used in a jukebox - and since you own the original, it shouldn't be considered criminal.

In many "respectable" countries, this is absolutely legal. (not sure about the US though). In fact, some countries considers it illegal to prevent anyone from limiting moving the material from one medium to another. Case in point, if you download from iTunes, you should be able to play it on any player. There are actually several governments in Europe going after Apple for this.

Another frequently used example is, if you buy the dvd, why can't you make backups of the movie, so that the kids use this instead of the original. Kids are notorious at scratching/damaging discs, so it would be better to make one copy and hide the original. once the copy is damaged, toss it and create a new copy etc. You are never using more than one copy.

Frank, I think you missed Jiffylush' point. He's saying if YOU buy the disc (over the counter) in a HD-format, then download the exact same version over the internet, it can be used in a jukebox - and since you own the original, it shouldn't be considered criminal.

In many "respectable" countries, this is absolutely legal. (not sure about the US though). In fact, some countries considers it illegal to prevent anyone from limiting moving the material from one medium to another. Case in point, if you download from iTunes, you should be able to play it on any player. There are actually several governments in Europe going after Apple for this.

Another frequently used example is, if you buy the dvd, why can't you make backups of the movie, so that the kids use this instead of the original. Kids are notorious at scratching/damaging discs, so it would be better to make one copy and hide the original. once the copy is damaged, toss it and create a new copy etc. You are never using more than one copy.

I was saying that the only person who uses the AACS code is the person who rips the media.

The majority of people who steal or buy pirated movies would never have any use for the code because the movie has already been ripped or copied.

The only criminal that uses the code is the one who rips the movie then uploads it, or the person who rents then rips the movie.

Every other person who steals the film has no use for the code because the copy protection has already been removed or circumvented.



The cat is already out of the bag, no point in attempting to pull the code now. Their only option is to change the code, forcing updates to every player.

The main focus of their operation needs to be stopping the distribution of the content after the copy protection has been removed. Also they need to make legal ways to obtain the media more convenient than illegal ways. (think iTunes v. Napster 5-10 years ago)



edit: Wasn't talking about buying the movie then downloading illegally over the internet. I was referring to buying the movie, then making a copy of it on your harddrive so you can watch the movie using an HTPC without having to swap media.
You would be making use of the code for this, which is why I was saying that many uses of 'the code' would not be for piracy per se.

Frank, I think you missed Jiffylush' point. He's saying if YOU buy the disc (over the counter) in a HD-format, then download the exact same version over the internet, it can be used in a jukebox - and since you own the original, it shouldn't be considered criminal.

In many "respectable" countries, this is absolutely legal. (not sure about the US though). In fact, some countries considers it illegal to prevent anyone from limiting moving the material from one medium to another. Case in point, if you download from iTunes, you should be able to play it on any player. There are actually several governments in Europe going after Apple for this.

Another frequently used example is, if you buy the dvd, why can't you make backups of the movie, so that the kids use this instead of the original. Kids are notorious at scratching/damaging discs, so it would be better to make one copy and hide the original. once the copy is damaged, toss it and create a new copy etc. You are never using more than one copy.
Well, since the disc can't be copied without breaking the DRM, it would still qualify as an effort to circumvent it. On the other hand, the RIAA have been very careful not to target downloaders (not uploaders and using the word downloader to scare people), because of the thin legal ground they would have to tread on and the precedent it would set if they lost the case.

Well, I guess I'm a criminal.....I jaywalked yesterday.

Well, I guess I'm a criminal.....I jaywalked yesterday.

I ****ing hate jaywalkers, I work downtown and am able to understand the difference in a red hand and a white walking man, why can't you?

I ****ing hate jaywalkers, I work downtown and am able to understand the difference in a red hand and a white walking man, why can't you?hmm....I suggest running one over then. If it doesn't solve your problems, it might at least make you feel better for a while.

Your use of the word "pirates" in this instance is ill-informed and is very telling concerning your knowledge on the subject. How in the world do you figure that people that simply want to back up their media or play their media on their choice of hardware are pirates? Are they stealing the media? NO. Are they copying and then distributing for free? NO.

Un-freaking believable....

Whatever dude... I know maybe three people who rip discs to their HDD and then keep the discs, playing from their HDD or copies made from the HDD. Everyone else downloads ISO's so they can get it for free without paying. This includes the one guy in the next county over who has over a Terabyte of DVD ISO's, and once put a flyer up on the Wal-Mart bulletin board, "Any movie on DVD only $5."

He basically rents every DVD he can get his hands on locally or via Netflix and rips an ISO. You would be amazed at the number of people who live in poverty (Kentucky is a poverty state) that would rather pay him $5 for a copy, rather than $20 at Wal-Mart.

Probably less than 5% of people would fall under "fair use" and the rest are pirates. If you are using it under fair use, you have no need for downloads of the content, as you should already own the optical disc. I'm referring to the majority.

Also, the area of ownership and fair use is very gray.

When a studio sells you a movie on disc, they are selling you the box, box art, physical medium and a copy of a digital movie. The real question is, if you buy one digital copy of a movie, do you own ANY digital copy, or just the one you purchased?

Once you copy it to your PC, it is a copy of a copy of a copy, of a master, when what you purchased was a copy of a copy of the master. It's no longer the same item. It resides on a different medium, it is not the same copy, etc.

I understand both sides arguements on "fair use" and I think it is an area the courts/law need to better define. The way I see it, if you make a copy of a disc, and alter even one bit of what you were originally leased, then you have probably violated the terms of your lease. Even though it is digital, there is still error, and I bet any copy results in at least one bit being altered. When you buy a disc, you are being licnesed by the studio to play their content on that type of medium (if you buy a VHS copy, it doesn't mean you are entitled to the same content on DVD), for personal viewing. If you play it in public, use a medium other than the one licensed, or alter their content in any way, you are violating the license, which means they should be able to revoke it, or impose a penalty.

AACS shows no signs of backing down:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6623331.stm

Also, the area of ownership and fair use is very gray.

When a studio sells you a movie on disc, they are selling you the box, box art, physical medium and a copy of a digital movie. The real question is, if you buy one digital copy of a movie, do you own ANY digital copy, or just the one you purchased?

Once you copy it to your PC, it is a copy of a copy of a copy, of a master, when what you purchased was a copy of a copy of the master. It's no longer the same item. It resides on a different medium, it is not the same copy, etc.

I understand both sides arguements on "fair use" and I think it is an area the courts/law need to better define. The way I see it, if you make a copy of a disc, and alter even one bit of what you were originally leased, then you have probably violated the terms of your lease. Even though it is digital, there is still error, and I bet any copy results in at least one bit being altered. When you buy a disc, you are being licnesed by the studio to play their content on that type of medium (if you buy a VHS copy, it doesn't mean you are entitled to the same content on DVD), for personal viewing. If you play it in public, use a medium other than the one licensed, or alter their content in any way, you are violating the license, which means they should be able to revoke it, or impose a penalty.

I personally know dozens on people that back up their BOUGHT and PAYED FOR dvd's and of those, probably 5 of which serve their media throughout the house... Just guess my circle of friends are different than yours. Please provide your source for your statistics you stated above that only 5% of fair use would apply to all copies.... <crickets chirping> Secondly, If you want to be the Barney Fife for the MPAA then I would say to you.... "whatever dude" I sleep very well at night knowing I payed for every DVD title in FULL that is on my server and I also sleep very well knowing I have a copy of each and every one of those movies in storage in case of damage.

Your macro answers to your micro world you live in is just silly dude.... You sound like you are a walking bill board for the MPAA....lol Bought and payed for...

Good luck with all that.

Before any more discussion on this please read this.


http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=843386

AACS shows no signs of backing down:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6623331.stmThey have to do this. They look like a bunch of fools and must do everything they can to save face with their creditors......which is, of course, the studios.

Currently, they have the law on their side. The reality of the internet is another matter. I guess mass litigation seems more feasible to them than changing an obsolete business model. That will come back to haunt them, no matter how long they keep shoveling more sand on top of their heads.

The studios can take comfort in this (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/newmedia/la-ca-webscout29apr29,0,2757497.story):The Internet sure loves its outlaws

Despite the MPAA and the Swedish police, the Pirate Bay's file-sharing ways are popular.

By David Sarno
Times Staff Writer

April 29, 2007

THEY may not wield battle-axes or wear horned helmets like their Viking forebears, but today's Swedish pirates are still wreaking some pretty heavy-duty havoc.

The Pirate Bay file-sharing collective, one of the world's largest facilitators of illegal downloading, is only the most visible member of a burgeoning international anti-copyright — or pro-piracy — movement that is striking terror in the heart of an industry that seems ever less capable of stopping it.

When the Pirate Bay's Stockholm headquarters were raided last May and their servers seized, the Motion Picture Assn. of America thought it had scored a major victory. "Swedish Authorities Sink Pirate Bay," trumpeted its news release. (As has since been pointed out, this is a mixed metaphor.) But the rejoicing didn't last long. The site was back online three days later, and worse yet for Hollywood, the raid and several mass protests afterward generated so much sympathy for the pro-file sharing cause that both candidates for prime minister announced publicly that they did not think young file-sharers should be treated as criminals.

Sweden's state-registered Pirate Party also benefited from the raid's fallout. Its membership has now grown to almost 9,000, closing in on the nation's Green Party (9,550), which holds 19 seats in Parliament.

But the renegades back at the Pirate Bay don't care for politics. They are, after all, pirates. The group's website is a database of 500,000 copied movies, TV shows, songs, games and software titles. Instead of pointing you directly to a downloadable song or movie — like Napster used to — the Pirate Bay provides a kind of digital treasure map. The map, called a torrent file, points your computer toward all the little fragments of the booty that are hidden around the Internet. Feed the torrent file to your downloading software, wait a couple of hours, and ta-da! You now have a shiny new copy of "The Bourne Supremacy."

Also, you have become a criminal.

Well, join the club. The Pirate Bay alone claims more than 5 million active users. According to Internet traffic ranker Alexa.com, it's the 292nd most popular site in the world. (Netflix is 382; the U.S. Postal Service is 385; Wal-Mart is 391.) Some estimates say that file sharing accounts for 80% of the Internet traffic generated by home users. Last year, the MPAA released the results of a study it had commissioned to gauge the effects of illegal copying. In 2005, the report said, the worldwide motion picture industry lost more than $7 billion as a result of Internet piracy.

This number was widely quoted as evidence of piracy's economic harm.

Even Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa jumped in. "It's not just Hollywood that is affected," he said in December. "It's not the big stars. It is the people behind the scenes and small mom-and-pop video stores and hometown theaters."

(The MPAA used remarkably similar language in a statement for this article: "It's not just Hollywood that feels the impact; piracy hurts Mom and Pop video stores, hometown theatres … everyone involved in making and distributing movies.")

However, critics have been skeptical. As Timothy B. Lee, an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, points out, the report was just a summary, not the study itself, meaning neither its results nor its methodology can be independently verified.

Lee is not surprised by the MPAA's decision to keep the details of the study away from public scrutiny. "What they're interested in is having a big number for the headlines," he said.

Could be. But if so, who can blame them? For a decade, the industry has shut down one file-sharing service after another, each bigger, faster and harder to dismantle than the last.

"The technology will always be one step ahead," said Peter Sunde, the Pirate Bay's head software designer. The Pirate Bay "is not going to be needed in a couple of years — there will be better systems. Everything is going to evolve. It's just getting easier and easier to connect."

Sunde also spoke about the Pirate Bay's upcoming project to design its own next generation file-sharing technology, one of its goals being to make every transaction completely untraceable. The project will be open source, meaning programmers from all over the world will be able to contribute.

The Pirate Bay has built its reputation on taunting big entertainment and scoffing at copyright law. One of its claims to fame is its online gallery of legal threats, each of which is appended with a less-than-polite riposte from the pirates. One reply to DreamWorks' legal team read, "It is the opinion of us and our lawyers that you are … morons, and that you should go" — etc.

But the Pirate Bay does have a more adult side. Its guiding principle is that the current copyright system is outmoded. "The culture is growing from using file sharing," Sunde said. "A basic human feeling is the need for new ideas and new concepts. We need to be influenced."

Nor are the pirates so base as to be against paying artists for their work. In fact, the group's next venture is a music sharing site called Playble.com, where users will have the option of paying whatever monthly subscription fee they can afford. Every time a user downloads a song, the artist gets a portion of his fee. Sunde says he approached a major record company — he wouldn't say which — about a partnership. An executive did not take kindly to the offer, and, according to Sunde, accused the Pirate Bay of perpetrating a disturbingly Viking-like act on the executive's livelihood and family. Hint: He didn't say "pillage."

I understand both sides arguements on "fair use" and I think it is an area the courts/law need to better define.

Agreed.

The way I see it, if you make a copy of a disc, and alter even one bit of what you were originally leased, then you have probably violated the terms of your lease.

I disagree.

Even though it is digital, there is still error, and I bet any copy results in at least one bit being altered. When you buy a disc, you are being licnesed by the studio to play their content on that type of medium (if you buy a VHS copy, it doesn't mean you are entitled to the same content on DVD), for personal viewing.
When I plop down the cash at the checkout for a DVD, I'm purchasing, the case, the artwork, the supplemental materials, the polycarbonate disc, and the data on the disc. I'm not "licensing" it, I'm buying it.

I'm looking at a brand new, still in the wrapper right now and nowhere does it provide an End User License Agreement that I must agree to before opening the packaging. Nowhere inside the packaging is any such license agreement. When I put the disc in the player, I am not given the opportunity to Accept/Reject the terms of an EULA.

Until they start a) providing and b) forcing me to accept/reject and EULA, they are not "Licensing" the disc content to me, they are selling me a polycarbinate disc with data and associated packaging, and I can do what I please with that data within the bounds of Title 17.

If they were to "license" movies instead of "selling" discs, I would expect the same things I expect from software:
Free or nominally priced upgrades to better versions.
Free or nominally priced replacement disc in the event the original is lost/damaged.
An EULA so I know what usage exactly the license allows.
Some level of support
etc


Content owners want it both ways, they want to "license" the use of movies on their terms, but they want us to think we've bought it, and they don't want to provide the services associated with a licensed product.

They can't have it both ways.

Now, a counter example, videos from Xbox Live Video Marketplace. When you go to rent/"buy" a video from XBLM, you are provided a very clear description of exactly what you can and can't do with the product, you are provided an EULA. I've read it and I don't agree with it, so I haven't rented or purchased anything from XBLM.

If you play it in public, use a medium other than the one licensed, or alter their content in any way, you are violating the license, which means they should be able to revoke it, or impose a penalty.

No, you are violating Title 17. You are not violating a license because there was no license agreed to.

Agreed.



I disagree.


When I plop down the cash at the checkout for a DVD, I'm purchasing, the case, the artwork, the supplemental materials, the polycarbonate disc, and the data on the disc. I'm not "licensing" it, I'm buying it.

I'm looking at a brand new, still in the wrapper right now and nowhere does it provide an End User License Agreement that I must agree to before opening the packaging. Nowhere inside the packaging is any such license agreement. When I put the disc in the player, I am not given the opportunity to Accept/Reject the terms of an EULA.

Until they start a) providing and b) forcing me to accept/reject and EULA, they are not "Licensing" the disc content to me, they are selling me a polycarbinate disc with data and associated packaging, and I can do what I please with that data within the bounds of Title 17.

If they were to "license" movies instead of "selling" discs, I would expect the same things I expect from software:
Free or nominally priced upgrades to better versions.
Free or nominally priced replacement disc in the event the original is lost/damaged.
An EULA so I know what usage exactly the license allows.
Some level of support
etc


Content owners want it both ways, they want to "license" the use of movies on their terms, but they want us to think we've bought it, and they don't want to provide the services associated with a licensed product.

They can't have it both ways.

Now, a counter example, videos from Xbox Live Video Marketplace. When you go to rent/"buy" a video from XBLM, you are provided a very clear description of exactly what you can and can't do with the product, you are provided an EULA. I've read it and I don't agree with it, so I haven't rented or purchased anything from XBLM.



No, you are violating Title 17. You are not violating a license because there was no license agreed to.

But you aren't buying the data on the disc, you are leasing it from the copyright holder. If you owned the data on the disc, you could do anything you want with it, including those things mentioned in the FBI warning.

The back of the case does usually say that the material is copyright whatever studio, so when you buy it, you agree that Studio XYZ is the copyright holder of the material. It says so on the box before you buy it. That copyright extends to the data on the disc, per copyright laws.

In essence, there is a very limited EULA on the back of every case, in the form of the copyright disclaimers. The studios are telling you THEY own the content on the disc, not you. It has always been this way for as long as I remember.

The studios should just all put a limited EULA on the stickers sealing the case shut, with the words, "By breaking this seal, you agree to the EULA". Problem solved.

But then I guess you would just stop buying optical discs all together then... :rolleyes:

Also, why would you think you are entitled to free upgrades. If you lease a car for three years, you don't just get to go get a new car next year, because it is an "upgrade". You sometimes have that option for a fee, but it is not typical.

All studios also already offer a nominally priced replacement disc in the case of damage. No one uses that feature. I think it is $6 from Buena Vista. Fox is $5 or $6. These prices include shipping to you, and a pre-paid envelope for return shipping. Universal, Warner, and Sony also all offer such replacement services. Get with the program...

These studios also already offer "some level of support", in that you can contact them for replacements or ask questions about performance problems. Of course, they can't offer help with player specific problems, but then those problems should go to the manufacturer anyways. They can say, "yeah, we screwed up the menu and that menu item doesn't work, so just go to chapter 3 to watch that feature".

Didn't we have this Copyright / License argument about ten years ago? And haven't the courts and international laws pretty much decided this issue?

But you aren't buying the data on the disc, you are leasing it from the copyright holder.

No, I'm buying it, I'm not signing a lease, I'm not agreeing to an EULA, nothing, I'm exchanging money for a product.

If you owned the data on the disc, you could do anything you want with it, including those things mentioned in the FBI warning.

So if I own a gun, I can run around shooting people, because I own it?

No, because there are laws that govern what I can and cannot do with a gun (a product I purchased). Same is true of a DVD. It's a product, I purchased it, but there are laws (Title 17) which govern what I can an cannot do with copyrighted material that I purchased.

The fact that there are legal restrictions on what I can and cannot do with a DVD does not mean I didn't buy it, it does not mean that I'm licensing the content, any more than the fact that it's illegal to shoot someone means I'm leasing the gun.

The back of the case does usually say that the material is copyright whatever studio, so when you buy it, you agree that Studio XYZ is the copyright holder of the material.

Yes. It says the content is protected by Title 17 of the US Code.

It says so on the box before you buy it. That copyright extends to the data on the disc, per copyright laws.

Yes, Copyright protects the content on the disc, not some "license" between me and the Copyright holder.

In essence, there is a very limited EULA on the back of every case, in the form of the copyright disclaimers.

No, it's not a license, it's a warning that there are legal statutes governing the use of the content you purchased on the disc.

Very similar to speed limit signs, signs that say "Fines Double In Work Zones", etc.

The studios are telling you THEY own the content on the disc, not you.

No, it's saying that the law states that the Copyright holder retains limited exclusive rights. It does not say that the Copyright holder owns it, or that I'm agreeing to any sort of usage agreement with the Copyright holder, only that the content on that disc is protected under Title 17, and that if I violate Title 17 I'll be subject to punishment, just like violating any other law.

It has always been this way for as long as I remember.

Copyright has been around as longer than I've been alive, yes.

The studios should just all put a limited EULA on the stickers sealing the case shut, with the words, "By breaking this seal, you agree to the EULA". Problem solved.

Agreed, if they want to say I'm bound by some license, they must provide me with that license up front, such that I can evaluate the terms and if I wish to accept them or not.

But without providing that license up front, they can't say I'm bound by any "phantom" license. I'm bound by Copyright, and that's it (the way it should be).

But then I guess you would just stop buying optical discs all together then... :rolleyes:

Depends on the terms of the EULA. For the record, I have not purchased a single HD disc yet because I don't like the restrictions placed on them.

Also, why would you think you are entitled to free upgrades.

If I purchase a piece of software, say, Microsoft Office. I expect to be provided an upgrade opportunity for free or a nominal fee (note I didn't say I was entitled free upgrades), because I'm purchasing the use of the software, not the software itself, I'm licensing the software. When the next great version of MS Office comes out, I expect to be able to upgrade (for free or at least a discounted price). I shouldn't have to pay full price again.

Same is true of a movie, if I'm simply licensing the movie, ie paying for the right to view it, then the disc is simply a delivery method and when the next great delivery method comes along, the next "version", I should be given the opportunity to upgrade to the latest version for some nominal fee.

If you look around the software industry, you'll find that the vast majority of software packages offer free or discounted upgrades for new versions, and that those packages that don't aren't very popular.

If we're going to use the same type of "license" model for movies, why should they be any different with regard to upgrades?

If you lease a car for three years, you don't just get to go get a new car next year, because it is an "upgrade". You sometimes have that option for a fee, but it is not typical.

You don't license a car, you lease it. That's entirely different. We're talking about "licensing" movies, something we do currently with software.

I'm just saying, if we're going to go down the path where movies are licensed like software is, then they should be treated in the same way, ie, when new versions come out, we should have the option to upgrade (free or for a fee).

All studios also already offer a nominally priced replacement disc in the case of damage. No one uses that feature. I think it is $6 from Buena Vista. Fox is $5 or $6. These prices include shipping to you, and a pre-paid envelope for return shipping. Universal, Warner, and Sony also all offer such replacement services. Get with the program...

Never had to do it, so I acknowledge my mistake in this area.

The fact remains, the studios want to "sell" you a product (the DVD), but they want you to only use it under their terms (license). However they don't provide a license agreement. They can't have it both ways. Either acknowledge you sold it to use, as a product, or provide an EULA (and scare away your customers).

And haven't the courts and international laws pretty much decided this issue?

If they have, I'd love to see the resolution.

So, the MPAA's 21st century business model is......

Sue your customers.

Yep, that's bound to take off. Just look how well its working for the RIAA. Oh, wait.....


Its so refreshing to see the MPAA isn't nearly as rigid :rolleyes:

...Its so refreshing to see the MPAA isn't nearly as rigid :rolleyes:By looking at their reaction to the revelation of the processing key discovered... 3 months ago,
they are not only not as rigid, but also not as... nimble? (or should I say "smart") :p

Diogen.

No, I'm buying it, I'm not signing a lease, I'm not agreeing to an EULA, nothing, I'm exchanging money for a product.



So if I own a gun, I can run around shooting people, because I own it?

No, because there are laws that govern what I can and cannot do with a gun (a product I purchased). Same is true of a DVD. It's a product, I purchased it, but there are laws (Title 17) which govern what I can an cannot do with copyrighted material that I purchased.

The fact that there are legal restrictions on what I can and cannot do with a DVD does not mean I didn't buy it, it does not mean that I'm licensing the content, any more than the fact that it's illegal to shoot someone means I'm leasing the gun.



Yes. It says the content is protected by Title 17 of the US Code.



Yes, Copyright protects the content on the disc, not some "license" between me and the Copyright holder.



No, it's not a license, it's a warning that there are legal statutes governing the use of the content you purchased on the disc.

Very similar to speed limit signs, signs that say "Fines Double In Work Zones", etc.



No, it's saying that the law states that the Copyright holder retains limited exclusive rights. It does not say that the Copyright holder owns it, or that I'm agreeing to any sort of usage agreement with the Copyright holder, only that the content on that disc is protected under Title 17, and that if I violate Title 17 I'll be subject to punishment, just like violating any other law.



Copyright has been around as longer than I've been alive, yes.



Agreed, if they want to say I'm bound by some license, they must provide me with that license up front, such that I can evaluate the terms and if I wish to accept them or not.

But without providing that license up front, they can't say I'm bound by any "phantom" license. I'm bound by Copyright, and that's it (the way it should be).



Depends on the terms of the EULA. For the record, I have not purchased a single HD disc yet because I don't like the restrictions placed on them.



If I purchase a piece of software, say, Microsoft Office. I expect to be provided an upgrade opportunity for free or a nominal fee (note I didn't say I was entitled free upgrades), because I'm purchasing the use of the software, not the software itself, I'm licensing the software. When the next great version of MS Office comes out, I expect to be able to upgrade (for free or at least a discounted price). I shouldn't have to pay full price again.

Same is true of a movie, if I'm simply licensing the movie, ie paying for the right to view it, then the disc is simply a delivery method and when the next great delivery method comes along, the next "version", I should be given the opportunity to upgrade to the latest version for some nominal fee.

If you look around the software industry, you'll find that the vast majority of software packages offer free or discounted upgrades for new versions, and that those packages that don't aren't very popular.

If we're going to use the same type of "license" model for movies, why should they be any different with regard to upgrades?



You don't license a car, you lease it. That's entirely different. We're talking about "licensing" movies, something we do currently with software.

I'm just saying, if we're going to go down the path where movies are licensed like software is, then they should be treated in the same way, ie, when new versions come out, we should have the option to upgrade (free or for a fee).



Never had to do it, so I acknowledge my mistake in this area.

The fact remains, the studios want to "sell" you a product (the DVD), but they want you to only use it under their terms (license). However they don't provide a license agreement. They can't have it both ways. Either acknowledge you sold it to use, as a product, or provide an EULA (and scare away your customers).

Well, here is the verbaitim text, right off the back of a DVD case.

c1999 Warner Home Video. All rights reserved.

This means that Warner holds the copyright and they are not releasing any of their rights to the content on the disc. All their rights are reserved.

WARNING For sale or rental for private home use in the USA and Canada only. Federal law provides severe civil and criminal penalties for the [b]unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or exhibition of copyright motion pictures, video tapes, or video discs.

So it says right there, for sale or rental only. Exporting outside the US or Canada is prohibited. It also says that you must have authorization to reproduce (copy) a video disc.

We you rip a DVD to your HDD, you are making a reproduction of the copyrighted data on the disc. You argue that there is no EULA that prohibits this, but it is right there on every box of every disc sold.

Can you provide something in writing that indicates you are authorized to copy any studio's DVD's? If not, then you are not authorized to do so, and in violation of the terms printed ON THE BACK OF ALMOST EVERY DVD.

I'll agree that you own the physical disc. You can use it, blow it up, or fly it to the moon. But the rights to the content stored on the disc are reserved and remain property of the movie studio. By buying the disc, you are not buying those rights, and you agree to that term at the time of purchase (it is spelled out for you on the box). You can't buy a product that has a 90 day warranty, spells it out on the box, and then after you get home, demand it be a 1 year warranty because you didn't read the box, and that is what you thought you would be getting.

...

Can you provide something in writing that indicates you are authorized to copy any studio's DVD's? If not, then you are not authorized to do so, and in violation of the terms printed ON THE BACK OF ALMOST EVERY DVD.
....

I thought I read somewhere that Kaleidescape had a favourable ruling in the courts about their system and the way it copies DVD's to a hard drive because it doesn't actually decrypt them - it stores them in the original encrypted format.

http://www.kaleidescape.com/company/pr/PR-20070329-DVDCCA.html

I am guessing (though haven't tried) that if you were to rip a DVD to a hard drive yourself but retain the encryption, any authorised PC DVD player should be able to play it. So this should a clear conscience approach for anybody who is of that mind.

Of course this thread is about AACS - again no idea if such a parallel exists viz. you rip a HD DVD or BluRay title to your HD retaining encryption and then use an authorised player with its authorised keys to play it. Based on the court decision in the Kaleidescape situation, this might also be considered legal.

Larry

Well, here is the verbaitim text, right off the back of a DVD case.c1999 Warner Home Video. All rights reserved.This means that Warner holds the copyright and they are not releasing any of their rights to the content on the disc. All their rights are reserved.

So it says right there, for sale or rental only. Exporting outside the US or Canada is prohibited. It also says that you must have authorization to reproduce (copy) a video disc.

We you rip a DVD to your HDD, you are making a reproduction of the copyrighted data on the disc. You argue that there is no EULA that prohibits this, but it is right there on every box of every disc sold.
You can rip CD's legally, and they also contain such "All Rights Reserved" fine print. So did tapes and vinyl. Regardless of any nonsense spouted by the RIAA, anybody got a link to show somebody being prosecuted for ripping their legally purchased CD to their computer?

I'd love to see it..........I'm waiting......



Moving on, the legal ground that "prevents" DVD's from being leagally copied is the DMCA. "Fair Use" still applies to content legally purchased, but if you have to bypass DRM, then you're treading in 'dangerous' legal territory. Movie studios have the law on their side here. Reality is another matter.

The studios face a growing international anti-intellectual property movement from their heavy handed legal tactics. Go ahead, AACS LA....sue the pants off Digg and that little b!tch Kevin Rose. Go after millions of internet users. Google, well, just throw them in there too!!!

I plead to the MPAA, please, do all of the above to make an example for everybody to see what a piece of crap the DMCA is. Expose it, I dare you. When the next key gets leaked, start the whole process over again. The law is on your side, what are you waiting for???

If I were a conspiracy theorist, I'd say the MPAA is a master of viral marketing and lobbying.

....nah, that would give them waaaaaay too much credit. Draconian enforcement of 20th century copyright laws in the 21st century ain't going to cut it, no matter how many lawsuits they serve.

<In my best Gomer Pyle voice> Citizens arrest, citizens arrest!!!!!

Two letters.... KY

...We [sic] you rip a DVD to your HDD, you are making a reproduction of the copyrighted data on the disc. Doesn't it say exactly the same on a VHS?
Doesn't the Sony vs. Universal Supreme Court case give you a legal right to make a copy?
Did a court ever ruled that this doesn't apply to DVDs?
Can you provide something in writing that indicates you are authorized to copy any studio's DVD's? Per above, it's your job to prove I'm not authorized to do this. In writing.

You think it's not allowed to do - by all means, be my guest.
Buy new copies every time something happens - it's good for the economy.
You want prevent me from doing this because you think so - good luck. You'll need it.

Diogen.

Doesn't it say exactly the same on a VHS?
Doesn't the Sony vs. Universal Supreme Court case give you a legal right to make a copy?


That only applied to timeshifting not duplication.

That only applied to timeshifting not duplication.Again, I ask for proof showing somebody has been successfully prosecuted for ripping their legally purchased CD to their computer.......

anybody???

Even the MPAA has begun to recognize the consumer's fair use right. (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070426-mpaa-drm-must-be-interoperable-dvds-should-be-rippable.html) And this happens at a DRM conference. :rolleyes: At a LexisNexis conference on DRM this week, MPAA boss Dan Glickman said the movie studios were now fully committed to interoperable DRM, and they recognize that consumers should be able to use legitimate video material on any item in the house, including home networks. In a major shift for the industry, Glickman also announced a plan to let consumers rip DVDs for use on home media servers and iPods.Boy, I feel their sincerity on this one. They mean it. This time.


excuse me while I go puke......

The short story is that a lot of "rights" we have become accustomed to as "fair use" came from the era of analog media. The advent of digital media also brings with it a considerable change in the limits of fair use. CD's and mp3's are digital, but retained much of the analog age fair use properties, simply because there was no way to enforce "digital fair use". Later digital formats were conceived with integrated drm properties, and thereon came the age where digital fair use could actually be leveraged (sometimes effectively, sometimes not).

It is a dubious justification if you think you have the right to do something just because that was the way it was in the past. The digital age is a whole new ballgame with new rules. Either you are using the digital media as it is directly intended, or you are intentionally circumventing the drm measures and hence violating the terms of use of the product. There is no "doing it my way, because I was able to do it that way in the past".

While I don't doubt that drm measures will continue to be broken, circumvented, or compromised, and that will allow certain persons to do as they see fit. I also don't see that as any more of a just act as the enforcement of drm, itself. It just perpetuates a battle that makes digital formats increasingly frustrating for legitimate users. I don't just hold the big business and property owners, at fault. I feel those who deliberately consort to break drm schemes as equally part of the problem.

That's my 2 cts.

Doesn't it say exactly the same on a VHS?
Doesn't the Sony vs. Universal Supreme Court case give you a legal right to make a copy?
Did a court ever ruled that this doesn't apply to DVDs?
Per above, it's your job to prove I'm not authorized to do this. In writing.

You think it's not allowed to do - by all means, be my guest.
Buy new copies every time something happens - it's good for the economy.
You want prevent me from doing this because you think so - good luck. You'll need it.

Diogen.

The argument that people need copies 'in case something happens' is bogus.
That's what insurance is for.

If you wreck your car you are not getting a free replacement either.
You also not make a copy of your car. You buy another.

You can have the right to copy.
Hacking and circumventing copy protection measures is still illegal.

We would not be in this mess if people kept these copies for their own personal use.

It's stupid to blame the 'companies' they just trying to protect their property against the criminals that make the copied content available.
It's because of them we are hindered in our fair use rights.

The argument that people need copies 'in case something happens' is bogus.
That's what insurance is for.

If you wreck your car you are not getting a free replacement either.
You also not make a copy of your car. You buy another.




Please provide links to insurance companies that carry policies for individual DVD replacement due to scratches on the readable surface... <crickets chirping>

Man, that analogy isn't even in the ball park....lol

Homeowners insurance will cover replacement cost in the case of a fire or flood but as to individual cd's and dvd's every time little johnny scratches one.... not so much....actually not at all.

It is a dubious justification if you think you have the right to do something just because that was the way it was in the past.

wha? you're saying that centuries-old English common law sets no precedent for today?

There is no "doing it my way, because I was able to do it that way in the past". Really? Their is 'do it my way, cause I'm able to do it now, easier than I could before.'

Yeah, its technically illegal to do it. If studios and their sympathizers take solace in that, good for them. Its doing them a lot of good......NOT!!! :D

Now, back to reality......I can't wait to see how Apple's new DRM-free EMI music experiment turns out. I've never purchased a thing on iTunes, but I'll definitely be spending some money to support this approach. The studios need to get the message. Consumers don't like DRM.

If Hollywood could just understand they need to meet consumers' expectations, and then make is as easy as possible for that to happen, much of this will go away.

Well, here is the verbaitim text, right off the back of a DVD case.



This means that Warner holds the copyright and they are not releasing any of their rights to the content on the disc. All their rights are reserved.

Yes it says they hold the copyright, but Copyright doesn't allow them to keep all rights, only those specified under Title 17.

So it says right there, for sale or rental only. Exporting outside the US or Canada is prohibited. It also says that you must have authorization to reproduce (copy) a video disc.

We you rip a DVD to your HDD, you are making a reproduction of the copyrighted data on the disc. You argue that there is no EULA that prohibits this, but it is right there on every box of every disc sold.

I argue that what's on the box is not a license agreement, but a statement of the protections under Title 17.

Can you provide something in writing that indicates you are authorized to copy any studio's DVD's? If not, then you are not authorized to do so, and in violation of the terms printed ON THE BACK OF ALMOST EVERY DVD.

No, there's just the concept of FAIR USE, (which is a vaguely specified in section 107 of Title 17, and was solidified by Sony vs Universal), that copies of copyrighted material for personal use are not infringing on copyright.

I really wish there was a clear, concise law or legal finding out there that showed exactly what fair use is, and is not.

I'll agree that you own the physical disc. You can use it, blow it up, or fly it to the moon. But the rights to the content stored on the disc are reserved and remain property of the movie studio.

Some of the rights.

By buying the disc, you are not buying those rights, and you agree to that term at the time of purchase (it is spelled out for you on the box).

But outside of the limited rights retained by the Copyright holder, I can do what I want with the product I purchased.

You can't buy a product that has a 90 day warranty, spells it out on the box, and then after you get home, demand it be a 1 year warranty because you didn't read the box, and that is what you thought you would be getting.

But with a warranty, you get a warranty statement with the product (usually inside the box). As far as media goes, all there is is the reference to Title 17, nothing more nothing less.

When I buy a movie, I'm bound by Title 17 what I can and cannot do with it, not a "license" between me and the studio.

That only applied to timeshifting not duplication.

True but it also set several precedents, precedents on the "test" for whether a particular product/use in infringing, and somewhat layed the foundation for what Fair Use is.

The short story is that a lot of "rights" we have become accustomed to as "fair use" came from the era of analog media.

True.

The advent of digital media also brings with it a considerable change in the limits of fair use. CD's and mp3's are digital, but retained much of the analog age fair use properties, simply because there was no way to enforce "digital fair use". Later digital formats were conceived with integrated drm properties, and thereon came the age where digital fair use could actually be leveraged (sometimes effectively, sometimes not).

I disagree. Fair Use, what it is, what it allows, has not changed. Fair Use, in a nutshell, is I can do what I want with content, as long as it's for my own personal use. I can copy it to different media, different formats, I can edit it, whatever, so long as it's for my own personal use.

What I can't do is upload it to the internet, make copies and give them to friends etc.

The only thing that has changed in the digital era, is that the technology now exists to disrupt Fair Use. Fair Use is still just as valid as it ever has been, it's just that it's now possible for technology to prevent it.

It is a dubious justification if you think you have the right to do something just because that was the way it was in the past.

No it's not, our entire legal system is based on precedent. If I could make a copy of a Tape, why can't I make a copy of a disc?

The digital age is a whole new ballgame with new rules.

Why? With analog media it was legal to make a copy of a tape to take with you in the car, but it was illegal to make a copy of a tape and give it to a friend. The same thing is true of CDs, and DVDs, HD DVDs, etc.

Either you are using the digital media as it is directly intended, or you are intentionally circumventing the drm measures and hence violating the terms of use of the product. There is no "doing it my way, because I was able to do it that way in the past".

Now, copy protection and DRM, that's a different issue from Fair Use. With DRM Fair Use is superseded by the DMCA and a license, and Copy Protection (AACS) Fair Use is superseded by the DMCA.

If you actually look at the DMCA though there is interesting wording in it, specifically it distinguishes between "technological measures" that prevent access (ie the encryption on cable and satellite) and those that prevent copying.

DMCA, CP, and DRM are things I'd really like to see tested legally some time (though not by me). Note that the court was very careful to avoid Fair Use at all costs in the Kaleidescape vs DVD CCA case, I find that somewhat interesting.

While I don't doubt that drm measures will continue to be broken, circumvented, or compromised, and that will allow certain persons to do as they see fit. I also don't see that as any more of a just act as the enforcement of drm, itself.

I'm not sure how I feel about it yet... On the one hand, DRM and CP are futile and the content owners need to be made aware of this, especailly since they only hinder "legitimate users". On the other, illegitimate usage is what's been allowing CP/DRM to gain traction.

It just perpetuates a battle that makes digital formats increasingly frustrating for legitimate users.

Six months ago, I might have a greed with you, now I'm not so sure. In the music industry, there are signs that they've given up on DRM. EMI is beginning to sell music downloads DRM free. I hope this trend continues and that it moves to the movie industry too.

DRM and CP serve no purpose on purchased content. On purchased content, CP/DRM only serves to make usage more difficult for legitimate users, it doesn't do a thing to stop illegitimate ones.

Now on rented/leased content, there is a very legitimate case for DRM.

I don't just hold the big business and property owners, at fault.

I do, to a degree, they should have realized by now the CP/DRM, and their heavy handed tactics for dealing with violators are bad for business.

I feel those who deliberately consort to break drm schemes as equally part of the problem.

Those who distribute copyrighted material are definitely the problem. Those people should be gone after with everything the law can muster.

Would it be that difficult for an ISP to detect an HDM download, and verify that it is from an authorized source?

Would it be that difficult to require BD and HD reproduction lines that self-identified on each disk?

With these two we could dump the whole DRM approach

I disagree. Fair Use, what it is, what it allows, has not changed. Fair Use, in a nutshell, is I can do what I want with content, as long as it's for my own personal use. I can copy it to different media, different formats, I can edit it, whatever, so long as it's for my own personal use.

This is what I was referring to when I mentioned fair use in the analog days and fair use today in the digital era. They are different. The things you say you are allowed to do are specific things that were covered in the fair use policies for analog media. You will find a lot more restrictions to that when it comes to fair use policies for digital media. What it comes down for digital media, is you are only allowed to do things that the property owners allow you to do via the drm layer. They are calling the shots, not you (unless you seek to circumvent the drm illegally).

So the argument you really want to pose is that you feel digital fair use should include all elements of analog fair use. As it is now, you don't have the same rights as you did before, by virtue of the nature of the media.

No it's not, our entire legal system is based on precedent. If I could make a copy of a Tape, why can't I make a copy of a disc?

A precedent for analog media does not necessarily make a precedent for digital media.

Why? With analog media it was legal to make a copy of a tape to take with you in the car, but it was illegal to make a copy of a tape and give it to a friend. The same thing is true of CDs, and DVDs, HD DVDs, etc.

I don't think it is true. CD's were a "gimme" because there was no integrated layer to implement drm. DVD's were broken, of course, but it is still technically illegal to duplicate the digital program. Obviously, it is not true with HDVD, since that is why we are here in the topic, in the first place. The only instance where it really is "true" free and clear, is the tape, and that pertains to the analog media era.

This is what I was referring to when I mentioned fair use in the analog days and fair use today in the digital era. They are different. The things you say you are allowed to do are specific things that were covered in the fair use policies for analog media. You will find a lot more restrictions to that when it comes to fair use policies for digital media. What it comes down for digital media, is you are only allowed to do things that the property owners allow you to do via the drm layer. They are calling the shots, not you (unless you seek to circumvent the drm illegally).

No, there is no inherent difference in Fair Use between digital and analog media. Fair Use is not a "policy", copyright holders did not "allow" fair use with analog media, they did not make a choice to allow us to copy analog media (just look at Sony vs Universal).

Copyright holders have always opposed Fair Use. And in the digital era, Fair Use is exactly as it was in the analog era. You mention CDs below. CDs are the perfect example, they're digital, yet they work in every way the same as analog media as far as Fair Use goes.

So the argument you really want to pose is that you feel digital fair use should include all elements of analog fair use.

I do, but that's not exactly what I'm getting at...

As it is now, you don't have the same rights as you did before, by virtue of the nature of the media.

Fair Use has not changed. What has changed with digital media is the tools the content owners can wield to circumvent Fair Use. DRM and Copy Protection are not inherent in digital media, and they don't mean that Fair Use has changed. What DRM and CP are, is barriers to Fair Use.

A precedent for analog media does not necessarily make a precedent for digital media.

A precedent is a precedent. Fair Use has not changed, it is, as it has been. As far as Copyrights, and Copyright Violations go, nothing has really changed. What has changed is the tools available to block Fair Use (DRM/CP). And in the era of DMCA, DRM, and CP, what we have is a conflict between Fair Use, the limited rights of the Copyright holders, and the desires of the Copyright holders.

Copyright allows the creator to retain certain limited rights (control over distribution namely). What it doesn't do is allow the creator to retain any control over how the end user views/enjoys the content. If the end user wants to play it backwards, so be it.

DRM/CP (backed by DMCA) lets Copyright holders overstep their rights with the content, it allows them control over where, how, when, on what equipment, and even if, the end users uses the content.

I don't think it is true. CD's were a "gimme" because there was no integrated layer to implement drm.

What does that have to do with anything, CDs were digital, and retained all the rights associated with analog media.

And on that subject, remember, analog media wasn't without it's attempts at DRM, remember VHS tapes had Macrovision on them.

DVD's were broken, of course, but it is still technically illegal to duplicate the digital program. Obviously, it is not true with HDVD, since that is why we are here in the topic, in the first place.

There's nothing inherent about digital media that makes Fair Use any different. If I buy a CD, it doesn't have any CP/DRM, and I can use it as I wish. DVDs are available without CSS, and with those I can legally do anything I could with analog media, same of HD DVD (but not Blu-ray since AACS is mandatory on BD).

Oh, and on the issue of DVD, it's potentially questionable whether it's really illegal or not to decrypt them:
Title 17, Chapter 12, Section 1201a)
(1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
...
(B) a technological measure "effectively controls access to a work" if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.

The only instance where it really is "true" free and clear, is the tape, and that pertains to the analog media era.

There are many places where Fair Use is alive and well in digital media, as noted, CDs, some DVDs, some HD DVDs, the new EMI releases on iTMS, etc.

A precedent for analog media does not necessarily make a precedent for digital media.I don't think it is true. CD's were a "gimme"YOU don't think its true. So I'll ask.....again.....can anyone provide a link(or something else) proving somebody has been successfully prosecuted(or sued) for ripping their legally purchased CD to their PC??? maybe their iPod??? (personal, fair use here, not for intent to distribute)


tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick .........


I'll go take a nap now....somebody wake me when... ;)

A precedent for analog media does not necessarily make a precedent for digital media.

It absolutely, definitely is. That is the whole reason DMCA was enacted by Hollywood - so that they can prosecute people for breaking DRM - irrespective of usage. DMCA was created essentially to run around the Fair Use doctrine.

Afterall Fair Use doctrine didn't start with "analog" electronic media. It started with things like books and newspapers.

Would it be that difficult for an ISP to detect an HDM download, and verify that it is from an authorized source?

I don't know what HDM is, but if you use an encrypted connection no one except you and whoever you're communicating with know what is being transmitted*. To everyone else it looks like random noise. Of course your ISP knows what address you're communicating with** and how much bandwidth you're using.

* unless the encryption scheme is broken
** the address can be a proxy that forwards the communication to the actual recipient


By the way: Xylon wouldn't be able to post those wonderful screenshots if he didn't circumvent the copy prevention measures. Who thinks what he is doing is wrong just because it's illegal in the U.S.? I don't.

At the bit level, wouldn't there be a distinctive repetitive pattern associated with a HD picture? May be different for BD and HD-DVD, but still characteristic.

DMCA was created essentially to run around the Fair Use doctrine.
DING, DING, DING!!! Ladies and Gents, we have a winner!!!

Besides generating unprecedented consumer apathy and even spite(see Digg fiasco), the RIAA/MPAA are getting little else from the DMCA. Piracy??? Its thriving like never before.....to the point of Pro-Piracy political movements being generated all over the globe.

As long as stopping piracy is the focus of the RIAA/MPAA, they will be fighting a losing battle. They'd be better off to ignore it, and focus on making it easy for the consumer to do the right thing, letting them enjoy their paid for content on the device they choose.


Remember 'Managed Copy' promises??? We get nothing, instead the studios are too busy trying to keep their jewel AACS in tact. Boy, that's working well..... :rolleyes:

By the way: Xylon wouldn't be able to post those wonderful screenshots if he didn't circumvent the copy prevention measures. Who thinks what he is doing is wrong just because it's illegal in the U.S.? I don't.

We should lock him up and throw away the key. How blatant of him to show-off how he is bypassing/circumventing the DRM on such a public forum.

/sarcasm now off.

As I recall, anti-fair use legislation flourished under under Valenti who gave great examples of how H'wood buys pols. End of an era?

...You can have the right to copy.
Hacking and circumventing copy protection measures is still illegal.I understand and frankly don't have anything much against this standoff.

On one hand, there is the Sony vs. Universal case (I do think it applies today).
On the other - there is DMCA (for the digital age). They didn't overturn the first.

I don't expect them to make it nice and easy to make a copy (just have a look at MMC's fate for hidef formats).
But I don't give a rats ass what others think about what I do with my purchased copy of a movie - being it MPAA, DVD Forum, AACS LA or people like you.

And when this option to make a copy will be taken away for good (key revocation, etc.) I'll stop buying.

Diogen.

The short story is that a lot of "rights" we have become accustomed to as "fair use" came from the era of analog media. The advent of digital media also brings with it a considerable change in the limits of fair use. CD's and mp3's are digital, but retained much of the analog age fair use properties, simply because there was no way to enforce "digital fair use". Later digital formats were conceived with integrated drm properties, and thereon came the age where digital fair use could actually be leveraged (sometimes effectively, sometimes not).

It is a dubious justification if you think you have the right to do something just because that was the way it was in the past. The digital age is a whole new ballgame with new rules. Either you are using the digital media as it is directly intended, or you are intentionally circumventing the drm measures and hence violating the terms of use of the product. There is no "doing it my way, because I was able to do it that way in the past".

While I don't doubt that drm measures will continue to be broken, circumvented, or compromised, and that will allow certain persons to do as they see fit. I also don't see that as any more of a just act as the enforcement of drm, itself. It just perpetuates a battle that makes digital formats increasingly frustrating for legitimate users. I don't just hold the big business and property owners, at fault. I feel those who deliberately consort to break drm schemes as equally part of the problem.

That's my 2 cts.

Exactly. You used to be able to challenge someone to a duel, and if they agreed and were killed, you were not charged with murder. It also used to be in many states that a man was entitled to beat his wife with anything that would fit inside his wedding band. Anyone still doing that?

Just because a right was extended in the 70's does not mean you still have that same right today. As for CD's copied to PC, I believe the music industry allowed this to happen intentionally. They were looking for new ways to distribute content, and with the advent of the MP3, they decided not to take the stance of the villianous company who wants to make you pay for the CD, and then again for the MP3. So the RIAA allowed copying to occur (even enocuraging it), without knowing the full repercussions (rampant file sharing).

There is such a thing in copyright law, that once you relenquish your right, you can basically never get it back. Or, if I write a book and copyright it and then multiple websites copy the book and present it online, if I do not challenge those websites legally (stand by and do nothing), I've basically forfitted my right to challenge the copying and posting of my book in the future.

The CD industry did this with MP3, then things got out of hand and the RIAA wanted to try to make it a no-no again. But the genie had been let out of the bottle, and there was legally nothing the RIAA could do, except go after online file sharers.

However, the MPAA has always actively challenged cases of copying, where they are aware of it, so they have yet to relinquish their rights to controlling the delivery and usage of their content. There was even a case once where a movie studio heard that a single comic book store (not even part of a larger chain) was showing some of their cartoon episodes in the store. The store was hit with a lawsuit that wasn't dropped until they agreed to sign an agreement stating they would never play that type of content again, unless appropriately licensed to do so. If they knew you were doing it at home and could get their hands on some evidence, they would come after you personally as well. The MPAA is serious about maintaining the full rights of the studios.

It absolutely, definitely is. That is the whole reason DMCA was enacted by Hollywood - so that they can prosecute people for breaking DRM - irrespective of usage. DMCA was created essentially to run around the Fair Use doctrine.

Afterall Fair Use doctrine didn't start with "analog" electronic media. It started with things like books and newspapers.


Yes, it started with books and newspapers, at a time when you could just photocopy the material. If you wanted to copy it, it had to be handwritten. Individuals didn't own their own personal printing press.

Times have changed, and so have the ways "fair use" applys, and how copyright is enforced.

Would it be that difficult to require BD and HD reproduction lines that self-identified on each disk?

that is the ROM mark on BD

Just because a right was extended in the 70's does not mean you still have that same right today.Yes, it does.
Unless overturned, ammended, replaced, etc.
You think DMCA replaced it? I don't. A court case has to set a precedent.
And it doesn't look like the copyright holders are very eager to go this far.
They believe it can be resolved in their favour using technical measures (rootkit, AACS).
Time will tell.

I think the computer age is both a blessing and a curse for the RIAA/MPAA of this world. DVDs are playable and copyable on a PC and were a smashing success. Sony's SACD never was and its marketshare is a zero by any meaningful measure.
...a man was entitled to beat his wife with anything that would fit inside his wedding band. Anyone still doing that?And this is not happening as often as before because...?
Men smartened up and realized they don't "have that same right today"? You must be kidding!

Diogen.

Just because a right was extended in the 70's does not mean you still have that same right today. As for CD's copied to PC, I believe the music industry allowed this to happen intentionally. They were looking for new ways to distribute content, and with the advent of the MP3, they decided not to take the stance of the villianous company who wants to make you pay for the CD, and then again for the MP3. So the RIAA allowed copying to occur (even enocuraging it), without knowing the full repercussions (rampant file sharing).

You actually believe that?

The industry has never liked copying, there's no way there was an intentional "Let's let people make copies of these discs to improve distribution" decision. It was probably a combination of two things, the technology wasn't there to stop it, and the technology wasn't there for it to be a problem when CD was created.

There is such a thing in copyright law, that once you relenquish your right, you can basically never get it back. Or, if I write a book and copyright it and then multiple websites copy the book and present it online, if I do not challenge those websites legally (stand by and do nothing), I've basically forfitted my right to challenge the copying and posting of my book in the future.

And I'm not saying they shouldn't challenge copyright infringers.

The CD industry did this with MP3, then things got out of hand and the RIAA wanted to try to make it a no-no again. But the genie had been let out of the bottle, and there was legally nothing the RIAA could do, except go after online file sharers.

And that's exactly how you deal with copyright infringement, go after those who violate your copyright, and those who make the tools which don't have substantial non-infringing uses (MGM vs Grokster).

However, the MPAA has always actively challenged cases of copying, where they are aware of it, so they have yet to relinquish their rights to controlling the delivery and usage of their content. There was even a case once where a movie studio heard that a single comic book store (not even part of a larger chain) was showing some of their cartoon episodes in the store. The store was hit with a lawsuit that wasn't dropped until they agreed to sign an agreement stating they would never play that type of content again, unless appropriately licensed to do so. If they knew you were doing it at home and could get their hands on some evidence, they would come after you personally as well. The MPAA is serious about maintaining the full rights of the studios.

No, they're serious about gaining full control, not maintaining any rights. It's all about the movie industry wanting you to pay every time you watch something (DiVX), not about copy protection, not about copyright violations, it's about control and revenue.

You actually believe that?

The industry has never liked copying, there's no way there was an intentional "Let's let people make copies of these discs to improve distribution" decision. It was probably a combination of two things, the technology wasn't there to stop it, and the technology wasn't there for it to be a problem when CD was created.

Exactly. The CD was created long before there was a way to copy it. By the time it could be copied, it was far too popular and entrenched for them to just stop producing (as it still is today).

The LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-revolt3may03,1,1685537.story?page=2&cset=true&ctrack=2) has a good read on the Digg hullabaloo.

Coming to grips with the backlash, the Times' piece hints a lawsuit against Digg for not removing links to the code is no sure bet.But once the site gave in, even some of the executives who support the encryption code said they had little appetite for a suit.

"The law says they have to take it down when they're told about it," said one technology executive who declined to be identified. "But no one ever envisioned that the users would lock the system to stop it from getting taken down."

Michael Avery, a Toshiba Corp. attorney who manages the encryption consortium, declined to discuss his next move. But he acknowledged that the legal threats had spread the offending sequence and that a suit might do more of the same.

"If you try to stick up for what you have a legal right to do, and you're somewhat worse off because of it, that's an interesting concept," Avery said.Mr. Avery, that's called reaping what you sow.

The article concludes with this gem.One Digg member, Grant Robertson, said the incident reminded him of a quote from "NewsRadio," the 1990s TV show: "You can't take something off the Internet. That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool."Maybe I'm the only nerd here who listens to podcasts. I was listening to Adam Curry's Daily Source Code (http://adam.podshow.com/) the other day, and one of the songs he played and discussed was "Digg The Code" by an artist named Geoff Smith (http://www.thegeoffsmith.com/). Cali Lewis(she goes easy on the eyes) of the podcast Geek Brief (http://www.podshow.com/shows/?mode=current&show_id=365) made a video to that song featuring her, Digg's Kevin Rose, and Diggnation co-host Alex Albrecht. This song was written, performed, and put to video within a ~24hr time span, and its not that bad!

Contrast that with the stagnant, stale, and regurgitated crap coming from Hollywood these days.

Times have changed, and so have the ways "fair use" applys, and how copyright is enforced.

I don't understand your point.

The question was will analog precedent apply to digital. My answer is definitely yes. Making personal copies - for time & space shifting - is the same whether it is analog or digital.

While we are talking about this - there is a bill in congress to change DMCA to gaurantee fair use.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h1201/show

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070227-8934.html

"Historically, the nation's copyright laws have reflected a carefully calibrated balanced between the rights of copyright owners and the rights of the users of copyrighted material. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act dramatically tilted the copyright balance toward complete copyright protection at the expense of the public's right to fair use," Representative Boucher said in a statement. "The FAIR USE Act will assure that consumers who purchase digital media can enjoy a broad range of uses of the media for their own convenience in a way which does not infringe the copyright in the work," Boucher added.

I hope, one day, a bill like this becomes law. Boucher brings it(or legislation like it) up in congress every year. While it has an uphill battle given the lobbying of Hollywood, every time he brings it up it gets more and more support.

If AACS LA sends the dogs after Digg, the backlash against AACS LA might give legislation like this a real boost. Just look how fast the telco bill was sunk over the 'net neutrality' uproar, and the subsequent concessions forced on AT&T to get the BellSouth merger approved. Now the telcos are playing defense.

The last thing Hollywood should want to do is stir up an angry, organized web mob. They could jeopardize some of the legal shield the DMCA provides against the consumer's right to Fair Use.

I hope, one day, a bill like this becomes law. Boucher brings it(or legislation like it) up in congress every year. While it has an uphill battle given the lobbying of Hollywood, every time he brings it up it gets more and more support.

If AACS LA sends the dogs after Digg, the backlash against AACS LA might give legislation like this a real boost. Just look how fast the telco bill was sunk over the 'net neutrality' uproar, and the subsequent concessions forced on AT&T to get the BellSouth merger approved. Now the telcos are playing defense.

Well, there were big companies for net neutrality (like MS and Google).

The sad truth is there is little to no traction on this in mainstream. Neither party will support legislation that hurt big business/hollywood.

Well, there were big companies for net neutrality (like MS and Google).

The sad truth is there is little to no traction on this in mainstream. Neither party will support legislation that hurt big business/hollywood.Neither party will support legislation that Hollywood says(and buys) will hurt it. Hollywood is hurting itself in truth, but that matters little ATM.

AACS LA might get digg shut down, but they'll just shed more light on how much Fair Use has been eroded by the DMCA. Does the MPAA want to kick the hornets nest more? You are correct there is no Google behind Boucher's bill, so things won't happen nearly as quickly as net neutrality. That doesn't mean it'd be a smart move for the studios. Then again, I wouldn't accuse them of being smart.

BTW, the BBC has now aired the key. AACS LA lawyers: Man battle stations!!!

Neither party will support legislation that Hollywood says(and buys) will hurt it. Hollywood is hurting itself in truth, but that matters little ATM.

Thats the big trouble with our "democracy". We have the best legislators money can buy :mad:

AACS LA might get digg shut down

I doubt it.

BTW, the BBC has now aired the key. AACS LA lawyers: Man battle stations!!!

On what ? DMCA obviously doesn't apply in UK.

I hope Digg keeps going. Although I must say, for selfish reasons, I'd like to witness the uproar it would cause, if Digg would be targeted, shedding more light on how absurd this whole thing is.

Your right, the BBC doesn't apply in Briton, but it does get shown here in the US on some cable/sat feeds. Not that it matters now, my point with bringing that up was just to show just to another example of this cat being waaaay out of the bag, the lawyer remark was obviously a bit of sarcasm.

Yes, it started with books and newspapers, at a time when you could just photocopy the material. If you wanted to copy it, it had to be handwritten. Individuals didn't own their own personal printing press.


Newsflash: almost every industrialized nation have a built-in fee in the price of every photocopier/writeable CD etc sold for a reason...


Times have changed, and so have the ways "fair use" applys, and how copyright is enforced.

Really? And how so? :rolleyes:

Nothing has changed except some perhaps someone's twisted mind and logic, after being force-fed by MPAA/RIAA of their practice, the clearly illegal abuse of our rights they do every day since they bought the anti-constitutional DMCA.