on the issue of flags:HDCP - Page 2  

Rubbish,

Comparing this to something dishonest such as satellite hacking is not the same. I agree that we should not discuss the mechanics of how to steal a satellite signal.

However the HDCP discussion is not analogous. How can I steal a signal that I have already paid for? How is protecting the investment I have made in my legitimately purchased (and very expensive) HD Projector some how nefarious?

Discussions on workarounds to these ridiculous schemes should be encouraged. We are all law abiding citizens on this forum, and I don't think anyone here is seeking commercial gain from circumventing these technologies. We're just seeking to realize the value from our very significant investment in HD displays. Protecting our investment and our hobby is a noble pursuit.

Keep in mind one of the primary functions of this forum is to enable people to realize the full potential of their equipment. Discussions like this only facilitate that goal.

Richard

I have been asking these questions for over a month now.........

I (like many others) am planning on getting the Panny SD 42" display. This is not a HD set as you know, but is perfect for watching SD TV and DVD's (my primary habits.) I do not have HD cable (and AT&T/Comcast in Lansing MI had no info much less an ETA), and will never use a dish system. For the time being, until OTA STB come down in price (or rendered useless by HD cable), I won't be seeing any HD OTA either. I have NO interest in PPV movies, HD or otherwise. My only real concern is the future of HD-DVD players and how that will be handled. Given all these factors, I still think that waiting another year for a product that uses features that I may not need would be silly. Everyone has their own needs of course.

I think the problem is that the DCMA makes "workarounds" illegal.

You will face the same risk with HD-DVD that I face with D-Theatre on my D-VHS recorder. Currently it has component output so that I can use it. However at any time the studios can decide to restrict output on specific movies to 1394/5c or DVI/HDCP(on a future recorder). In that case I won't be able to see any more new movies.

If DVI/HDCP prevails then it is likely that HD DVD recorders will have DVI/HDCP output.

I think the only reason the studios have allowed component output for now is that it is currently too expensive to recompress the data.

No one knows how long the "for now" will last.

To repeat a point I made earlier, if you buy a set without DVI/HDCP and HD DVD comes out with only DVI/HDCP output, don't say you weren't warned.

But will it ONLY have the DVI output? As I stated, I'm not buying a true HD set anyway, so HD content sould be irrelevant right? Will the new devices have component outs or not, and will they at least support 480p (the max res on the SD Panny) signals on HD content? If the answer is yes, then Panny SD users will have no complaints.

I do agree that if you are investing in a TRUE HD plasma, then DVI/HDCP might be the way to go.


This is also a 2 way street. Maybe if consumers refuse to purchase sets that have HDCP (and by proxy not purchase/rent/PPV HDCP content) maybe the Hollywood Government will realize that they boned themselves. Maybe I'm naive, but last time I checked, CONSUMERS decided what will be a viable format, I say let the marketplace decide.

I have to disagree with the comments about the security of HDCP.

At least four separate groups of researchers have written papers on the lack of security in the HDCP 1.0 protocol from a technical analysis of the encryption, before the products have even shipped. I imagine the chipset implementations themselves will be subject to more analysis in the year ahead.

Yes, HDCP is more sophisticated than CSS but it is basically subject to the same weaknesses. One researcher believes the key algorithim is so weak that a dedicated attacker could recover the master key within weeks, which renders the whole system useless.

As Gary noted, one of these papers wasn't published because the author feared repercussions like the Skylarov case (although he also may have just been politically grandstanding).

I can't see how linking to a theoretical discusson of the potential weaknesses in HDCP is against forum rules. It's not like anyone here is a crypto and FPGA expert and will be able to do anything with the link. We aren't posting software or hardware details because they don't exist.

Also, the bald assertion that a device which bypasses HDCP is illegal in the US under the DMCA is not strictly true. You could argue that such a box is exempt as it has substantial non-infringing uses i.e. allowing millions of HD set owners to watch PPV. Of course, I am sure the MPAA et all will pay off Congress to close this exemption as soon as it becomes an issue for them.

The real issue is this for those waiting to buy sets. If HDCP 1.0 is so flawed, in due course the MPAA will want HDCP 2.0, and even current HDCP 1.0 sets will be just as useless as those without HDCP at all. The nature of this type of closed cryptosystem is that there is no backwards compatibility.

I think lawsuits will also throw a spanner in the plans of an orderly transition to HDCP DVI for HD content. Many consumers will believe they were not warned of HDCP making their HD set useless for some HD content. If some two million consumers get cut off from HD PPV, there will be a consumer revolt.

Here is a prime example of the hot water the industry seems to be getting themselves in without thinking. The recent PR for HDMI makes a blatantly false statement on DVI and HDCP:

HDMI FOUNDERS HITACHI, MATSUSHITA (PANASONIC), PHILIPS, SILICON IMAGE, SONY, THOMSON AND TOSHIBA RELEASE FINAL HDMI 1.0 SPECIFICATION AMID BROAD INDUSTRY SUPPORT

[snip]

"A growing number of DTVs and set-top boxes on the market today already feature Digital Visual Interface (DVI) connections. HDMI builds upon the capabilities of DVI, adding a number of attractive new features designed specifically for consumer electronics applications while maintaining full backward compatibility."

Explain to me how HDMI is backward compatible with DVI again? This statement is wildly inaccurate.

Mark, will this topic be posted in all display forums? Certainly ought to be. Last january I purchased the original sony gw for $6900. At that time I wasn't aware of the looming dvi issue. Anxious to learn more about my hd set, I found this forum and discovered the copyright issues regarding future hd content. Then sony announces that their new sets will have dvi. I call sony. In a nutshell I was told that" technology advances and products improve at a brisk pace in the electronics world". Unfortunately there was nothing sony could do for the model I purchased regarding dvi. So after signing multiple email petitions and positioning myself to oppose the copyright issue, I saw the writing on the wall. I returned the set. Now the new 60" model is 3k less expensive and has dvi. There's no way to divert the current and future hd display buyers from purchasing dvi equipped sets.

HDCP 1.0 may be as flawed as CSS, but it does not follow that HDCP 2.0 will be rapidly imposed to correct the flaw. Afterall, there is no CSS 2.0 yet.

I assumed, and it's just an assumption, that HDMI is backward compatible with DVI for video directly, but that the audio has to be supplied separately. I thought that HDMI was DVI with audio over the same link. Please supply corrections.

In any event, I am holding off buying a plasma until I see the Fujitsu 50 with HDCP.

Strike just helped confirm what I have been saying all along. There are two million consumers out there who are going to hit the roof when they can't watch the LOTR pt 3 in HD in 2004 because they don't have HDCP on their HD set.

The MPAA has made it pretty clear in recent articles in Multichannel News that this is their plan. All that is in question is the timing.

Those people with current plasma's who think they are 'future proof' and are waiting for an upgrade path from third parties may also be out of luck. I suspect the delay in some of the HDCP enabled DVI expansion boards for plasma (i.e. the Pioneer) which I have been reading about since last year are more to do with the licensing of the HDCP chipsets which is strictly controlled by Intel.

Depending on the design of the card interface to the plasma, an EE worth their salt may be able to take such an expansion card and use it as the basis for a generic device that removes the HDCP encryption from a DVI connection. I doubt the plasma vendors had this in mind when they designed the card interface bus several years ago.

I'd be interested if anyone has information to the contrary. There could be another completely valid reason those cards haven't shipped 12 months after being talked about here.

HD DVD will effectively be CSS 2.0. I doubt the MPAA has much incentive to move before then.

The vendors claiming HDMI is fully backward compatible is less than honest IMHO.

Let's say I rush out and get the latest STB next year with HDMI. How is that 'fully backward compatible' with my 12 month old plasma with DVI, unless I have HDCP? I am sure HDMI - DVI cables will appear on the market, but 'fully backward compatible' ignores the issue that HDCP content will not be available to me.

What i wrote was too much in shorthand. I should have said HDMI is DVI/HDCP with audio over the connection. The backward compatibility will only be HDMI video to DVI/HDCP and the display will need audio over a different link. I think. Those with non-HDCP DVI would be out in the cold here.

I agree with you. However, the HDMI folks seem to be intent on omitting that fact from their PR and propagating false statements like these ones
from http://www.hdmi.org/faq/faq.asp

Is HDMI backward-compatible with DVI (Digital Visual Interface)?

Yes, HDMI is fully backward-compatible with DVI using the CEA-861 profile for DTVs. HDMI DTVs will display video received from existing DVI-equipped products, and DVI-equipped TVs will display video from HDMI sources.

Will current HD TVs and set-top boxes using DVI-HDTV be compatible with HDMI devices?

Yes. Currently there are TVs with DVI-HDTV inputs available from a variety of manufacturers. Those devices will be compatible with future HDMI-equipped products.

I don't know, I looked at that flyer, and to me at least that seems unlikely. I seriously doubt that DVI/HDCP will support ANY PVR device as this would seem to contradict the whole point. Hell, this thing is even a music jukebox! It sounds like a Hollywood nightmare! "Now you can record HD movies and download songs from the net and send them to all the tv's and stereos in your home at the same time!" Isn't this EXACTLY what the lawyers are trying to prevent with DVI/HDCP?

Side note, this Motorola box looks sweet! Too bad it will probably end up too crippled by the time it's on the market to be useful.

Hard boxes or software solutions will pop up to get around HDCP, and I'll be the first in line. Whatever encoding the industry comes up with, there's a way around it. Look what happened to DVDs with CSS.

Now, I just bought a Fujitsu 5004, and I'm not about to give up HD (or watch it down-rezzed). I don't care if it's legal, because I would only be accessing what I subscribed to, and bought the equipment for. I knew about the whole HDCP issue, and pulled the trigger anyway, but what about the people who don't know this? The last thing we need is a standard that slows HD adoption down even further.

srgilbert --

There is no reason why an STB with DVI/HDCP can't include a PVR function because it is the STB that is doing the encoding. The decoding must take place in the display "head".

-- Gary

Mark, Maybe you should change the title of this thread to what you just said: "Buyer Beware: HDCP" a lot of us are not that HD savy and your current title doesn't sound that important to the average member and may just pass up reading this important subject.

Tony

I suggest the following for the FAQ:

Anyone who buys a plasma without DVI/HDCP runs the real risk that some HDTV channels will not be available or only available at a reduced resolution. At least one member believes that this could start happening as early as the summer of 2003 with expanded HDTV PPV offerings for DVI/HDCP owners only.

I obviously think the implementation will be much slower but I wouldn't mention that in the FAQ. The idea is to try to protect those who will have serious regrets later. They need short and direct information.

The powers that are have already said- Leave OTA alone. HD-DVDs will be coded to prevent copying- okay. I will not pay any money for PPV- this only makes the studios more powerful. If I am left with only DVDs and OTA, so be it. I will cancel D...TV, not get cable or submit to their demands.
The average Joe will follow blindly- they don't know any better. I still think if you found something you like, buy it and enjoy it. People are working themselves into a frenzy over this. Be informed, yes, thats a good thing, but let them control our every move, I think not. Think about it just a little and you will see how they are stirring people right into their trap.

Just MHOP- no more, no less.

Dave

This was in the LA Times yesterday: http://www.latimes.com/technology/la...s%2Dtechnology

"Viacom Asks FCC to Prevent HDTV Piracy
By Jon Healey

Viacom Inc., parent of the CBS television network and Paramount Pictures, has threatened to stop all high-definition TV broadcasts on CBS unless federal regulators mandate certain anti-piracy technologies by this summer.

CBS is the leading source of free, over-the-air HDTV, transmitting most of its prime-time programs and many sports broadcasts in the format for the last four seasons.

In comments filed Dec. 6, Viacom told the Federal Communications Commission that it would transmit no HDTV in the 2003-04 season unless the commission mandated "broadcast flag" technology to deter digital TV broadcasts from being retransmitted over the Internet.

Viacom warned the FCC that without protections for free over-the-air broadcasts, HDTV programs would shift to more secure cable and satellite services. Some Viacom programs already are heading in that direction: On Wednesday, HDNet of Dallas announced a deal to rebroadcast several defunct TV series from Paramount in HDTV on cable and satellite.

A variety of programmers, TV manufacturers and high-tech companies have backed the concept of a broadcast flag, which would require future TVs, computers and other digital devices to block digital TV shows from moving onto the Internet. But the proposal has drawn sharp criticism from some technology companies and consumer advocates, who warn that it would hamstring innovation to guard against a nonexistent threat.

Jon Healey"

Good article Gary.

What I want to know is, Who the Hell wants to go through all the trouble of recording OTA which is full of commercials and then put it on the internet and who in the hell is stupid enough that they must down load it and watch it.

Again HD-PPV, thats another story. We'll have to wait and see what the FCC decides.

Dave

I agree that it's naive to call HDCP a 'flag' in the same way something like SCMS in the audio world is a do-not-copy flag. HDCP encrypts the entire video stream. If you don't have HDCP, you end up watching snow, unless the box your are using allows you to watch a down rezzed version.

IMHO it is naive to assume that once there is a sufficient set of HDCP enabled STB's out there, the various content providers won't start mandating HDCP wherever possible, and slowly switching off analog HD. DirectTV and the MPAA are already heading this way. The statement from Viacom is just more of the same. I also note a recent post from a vendor doing some tests which mentions one of the recent Sony STB's with HDCP is sending the HDCP signal all the time on all content, so it can never be used with a regular DVI connection.

The reality is in the next 6-12 months, many of the 2 million owners of existing HD sets are going to begin losing access to HD content because they don't have HDCP and there is no upgrade path except replacing their entire HD set. I predict this will culminate in 2-3 years when HD-DVD comes out and inevitably supports HDCP-DVI as the only HD interface.

As I posted on a recent HDMI thread on this topic, last week I contacted a CA firm of class action lawyers that I have dealt with previously to brief them and get their opinion on this topic. Of course, they are interested and I am having further discussions with them during the coming week. I'll keep everyone updated as much as I can.

I'm sure any number of class actions could arise, and there will no shortage of class members. I notice the editor of Widescreen Review has written he will support a class action on this issue.

"It's like somebody selling a digital crowbar. It's like breaking into the castle if you will,'' said Patricia Benson, an attorney for the studios."

Since when is it illegal to sell or purchase real crowbars?

Ironic she chose that as an analogy, goes to show you the level
of intelligence at work here.

Dreamaster

Just think about how Congress extends the term of copyright protection every time just before Disney would lose it's protection of Mickey Mouse.... Come to think of it, Mickey Mouse is apt!

The company mentioned in that NY Times story about DVD X Copy (321 Studios) appear to be extremely naive. I've read that the president didn't even seek legal advice before releasing the software. The MPAA has already sued over DeCSS, so you have to imagine a packaged product to copy DVD's would get their attention.

Back on the topic of HDCP enabled HD content:

The only crooks in this case are the industry who kept the details of HDCP quiet and allowed millions of consumers to spend many millions of dollars on HD sets which will rapidly become obsolete under the new copy protection regime. They are now talking about our HD sets as 'first generation' sets.

What really galls me is the recent press releases talking about 'consumer benefits'. How is having to buy a new HD set a consumer benefit?