|Originally posted by PJH:|
I am confused as to how DVI provides protection. The satellite boxes of the future will have a DVI output, and if you want to watch protected material, you need a display device with a DVI input. Is there a reason someone can't make a box that has a DVI input and a Component output?
|There is no need for DVI. Can you guys understand that.|
|Are any sets providing DVI and firewire inputs?|
|Originally posted by Bruce Embry:|
Since Sony and Mitsubishi are both releasing HDTVs with interanl ASTC Tuners and IEEE1394 Firewire ports with 5C now, I bete that IEEE1394 will be the standard. There is no need for DVI. Can you guys understand that. So the STBs only needs two interfaces IEEE1394 and Componant for HDTV.
|Originally posted by michaeltscott:|
I will agree that given a fair amount of intelligence, 1394/DTCP and HAVi built into the sets, DVI is not necessary. But it is desirable--it divorces the the set from the video compression standards, which are changing constantly and makes them potentially a bit cheaper, since they don't have to be smart enough to host HAVi to display overlays and such.
|Originally posted by ranold:|
> reply to;
In the case of 1394/DTCP, you have to be licensed to use it. The license agreement precludes building any such translation device. Since the use of DVI/HDCP involves shared secrets, I'm assuming that you have to be licensed to use it too, and that it's licensing would be similar to the DTLA's.
Well if this true, then there is nothing preventing an outside company [other than than the ones that agreed upon it] to reverse engineer and potentially develop a product that breaks, cracks or enhances the DVI/HDTV technology!
|Originally posted by jackmay:|
It is also desirable for high end video processing boxes since I don't believe that decryption and re-encryption will ever be allowed. For the public key system they are using, it puts everything needed to break their code into one box where it is much easier to hack.
|4. SINK FUNCTION PERMITTED OUTPUTS|
4.1 Generally. As set forth in more detail below, a Licensed Product shall not pass Decrypted DT Data, whether in digital or analog form, to an output except as permitted below.
4.1.1 Outputs, Video. A Licensed Product shall not pass any representation or conversion of the video portion of Decrypted DT Data to any output except:
22.214.171.124 Where Decrypted DT Data is output via an approved standard definition analog output in a manner pursuant to Section 4.2 of this Part of this Exhibit B;
126.96.36.199 Where Decrypted DT Data is output in a High Definition Analog Form in a manner pursuant to Section 4.3 of this Part of this Exhibit B;
188.8.131.52 Where Decrypted DT Data is output via a digital output in a manner pursuant to Section 4.4 of this Part of this Exhibit B; or
184.108.40.206 Where the Decrypted DT Data is encoded Copy Freely with the EPN Field unasserted, in which case there are no restrictions on output.
|4.4 Digital Outputs. Licensed Products may only pass Decrypted DT Data to a digital output as follows:|
4.4.1 To DTCP-protected outputs according to the Specification;
4.4.2 In the case of Licensed Products incorporated into Computer Products, as a Constrained Image to DVI outputs of devices manufactured on or prior to December 31, 2005, unless otherwise notified by the DTLA. Such Licensed Products may pass Decrypted DT Data to outputs other than as a Constrained Image (a) for content encoded other than Copy Never, for devices manufactured on or prior to December 31, 2003, unless otherwise notified by the DTLA or (b) for devices manufactured on or prior to December 31, 2005, unless otherwise notified by the DTLA, when such Licensed Products recognize and respond to the Image Constraint Token in accordance with the Specification and are
authorized by the setting of the Image Constraint Token;
4.4.3 To any digital output where the Decrypted DT Data is encoded Copy Freely with the EPN Field unasserted; or
4.4.4 Via other methods that may be approved by DTLA in the future.
|Originally posted by ranold:|
[BWell if this true, then there is nothing preventing an outside company[other than than the ones that agreed upon it] to reverse engineer and potentially develop a product that breaks, cracks or enhances the DVI/HDTV technology![/b]