HDCP and HDMI

1458 Views 20 Replies 8 Participants Last post by elvisahmed, May 14, 2006

Wayder

Discussion Starter · May 10, 2006

Hi, can someone direct me to where I can read more about a lack of HDCP enforcement on new Blu-ray discs?

I was under the impression that HD disk media would be downrezzed through analogue connectors. I read stuff like this back in Jan .

now I am hearing the initial Blu-ray and HD DVD movies won't be released using the HDCP protection. When did this come about?

Sorry to start a new thread on this one I've been searching around for awhile and it's a hard question to pinpoint in a refined query.

Status: Not open for further replies.

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

archibael

· #2 · May 10, 2006

HDCP: the technology that encrypts the digital path between player output and display input

AACS: the technology that encrypts the data on the disk and sets the rules for which display technologies are permissible

HDCP is enforced on all disks for digital outputs: non-HDCP displays-- whether HDMI or DVI-- are not supported. No image will get to the display, downrezzed or otherwise.

AACS, on the other hand, sets the rules for which outputs are permissible on a per-disk basis. The DOT flag can shut off analog completely, the ICT flag will downrez analog displays.

Currently, ICT is not being used, though there is nothing stopping content owners from activating it (except self-restraint). DOT is not currently permissible to activate, but that may change in the future.

See less See more

Wayder

Discussion Starter · #3 · May 10, 2006

Thanks for the concise definitions and answers.

I guess what I had heard about was that the ICT flag would exist (last winter when the AACS was still hammering this stuff out) and I assumed that existence meant it would indeed be activated.

So, since it's not activated does this mean full 1080P will be viewable (where display is capable) through your component cables from a high def disk(either hd dvd or BD)?

Thanks

archibael

· #4 · May 10, 2006

1080p will not be viewable over component, since AACS does not ever permit it on analog, regardless of flags. 1080i is the max analog resolution. There are many discussions about whether this makes a difference or not, given the number of sets which can even accept 1080p on component, as well as the fact that all 1080p-capable sets should be able to deinterlace 1080i content anyway.

But 1080i is currently viewable over component. This may change eventually, but right now it's in the clear.

Wayder

Discussion Starter · #5 · May 10, 2006

Well that's great, thanks a lot for that. You saved me a lot of research looking for those exact answers.

1080i through component is still pretty darned good considering the flag would have damned us to 540P.

orogogus

· #6 · May 11, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayder
Well that's great, thanks a lot for that. You saved me a lot of research looking for those exact answers.

1080i through component is still pretty darned good considering the flag would have damned us to 540P.

Well beyond the ICT flag, which hopefully will never get flipped for any studio ever, there is the spectre of the DOT flag (digital only token, which flat out DISALLOWS ANY analog output). That would suck if they ever turn that on. I guess they will but not until laws that protect analog outs sunset (after 2010 IIRC). The joys of modem DRM.

AnthonyP

· #7 · May 11, 2006

Quote:

HDCP is enforced on all disks for digital outputs: non-HDCP displays-- whether HDMI or DVI-- are not supported. No image will get to the display, downrezzed or otherwise.

is that true? that is the first I hear of this

Wayder

Discussion Starter · #8 · May 11, 2006

Anthony, I notice you're from Canada too.

I've heard of a problem with Rogers and Bell HD channels through HDMI. Apparently (and I'm not one of them) people with a receiver that includes HDMI switching aren't able to run HDMI through their receiver. The reason I guess is that Rogers/Bell arent' licensed to use HDCP (??)

I don't have all the facts but have only heard that Rogers and Bell are to blame for not getting licensed to be fully HDCP compliant. It might even be common with other cable / satellite providers in the US.

Rogers uses Scientific Atlanta's HD8300 (which I use) and I know that box is in use in the US.

But I've gone way off topic here.

See less See more

Mr. Hanky

· #9 · May 11, 2006

Fwiw, consider that the DOT flag could potentially be as PR destructive to the studio that uses it, as the negative impact to non-hdmi-compliant users. Compare this to the response Sony/BMI got when they trialed the rootkit on CD releases. This got more than a few people up in arms, and ultimately the restriction was retracted/disabled. The CD become unsaleable once it became known which ones were applying rootkits to the owner's computer. This was not good PR for Sony/BMI at all, with an attached risk to future sales on already fledgling music sales. The implementation certainly put a clamp on digital piracy, but there was also considerable backfire to deal with. Arguably, they had to realize that the costs may outweigh the benefits. So they will think twice about applying heavy-handed DRM functions in the future. It will also be a lesson for other studios who might consider similar restrictions on their product.

So I imagine the decision to use it can be just as heavy and grim for them as it is for us.

I do predict the first to use the ICT flag will be some hd remaster deluxe Star Wars trilogy set. That's my prediction. It just seems it would be a property like that where they would be so bold as to push their luck on a "hot property".

See less See more

archibael

· #10 · May 11, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by AnthonyP
is that true? that is the first I hear of this

What part?

archibael

· #11 · May 11, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Hanky
So I imagine the decision to use it can be just as heavy and grim for them as it is for us.

I do predict the first to use the ICT flag will be some hd remaster deluxe Star Wars trilogy set. That's my prediction. It just seems it would be a property like that where they would be so bold as to push their luck on a "hot property".

I predict it will be on a low-profile title, to test the waters. And that it won't be Star Wars, as Fox has expressed not just indifference but disdain for ICT.

My crystal ball says a Warner Bros. title in 2007 or 2008.

Mr. Hanky

· #12 · May 11, 2006

I'm curious- why would Fox have disdain for ICT? (not trying to disagree, just curious if there is a story behind this)

archibael

· #13 · May 11, 2006

I don't know. It seems weird to me, too, given the fact that the reason they ostensibly signed onto BD was more content protection capability, but for whatever reason they've come across as almost hostile toward ICT whenever the topic has been brought up. Even before the AACS spec was finaliized, Fox was saying in public appearances that they would not use it (as opposed to Warner, who has made no secret of their desire for it, but who has for the moment, thankfully, refrained).

GFletch

· #14 · May 11, 2006

Me too. Wasn't Fox one of the more Paranoid studios about this.

rlsmith

· #15 · May 11, 2006

Studio policies can change very quickly. Studio execs tend to come and go pretty quickly, and decisions made today with seeming firmness can be changed tomorrow on a whim.

I think the studios are getting a much-needed dose of consumer viewpoints on some of these issues now. Up until now, the "format war" has been which CE group could provide the most studio-friendly capabilities. The ICT flag is not playing well anyplace.

Mr. Hanky

· #16 · May 11, 2006

Maybe they are doing good cop/bad cop on us?

It's a big pro-wrestling script for our edification...

AnthonyP

· #17 · May 12, 2006

Quote:

What part?

the part I quoted

that AACS does not allow for unencrypted digital. Obviously if the player is sending encrypted and the display does not have HDCP then it can't decrypt and show. But I did not know that the player had to send HDCP

AnthonyP

· #18 · May 12, 2006

Quote:

I'm curious- why would Fox have disdain for ICT?

I won't use the word disdain, but they basically said that they considered it completely useless, it will only inconvenience honest users but not even be a speed bump for pirates.

Mr. Hanky

· #19 · May 12, 2006

Interesting twist...by that statement, they give the impression that they are looking out for honest user's interests, but at the same time, their real concern is that it doesn't protect the property enough.

Interpreting further between the lines, I'm guessing they are expressing grief over the downrezzing that results for the user when using component, and also realization that pirateers (ahhhrrrrrr!!!) will be just as happy to rip analog copies at 540p, if need be. I think I'm seeing where they're coming from with this.

archibael

· #20 · May 13, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by AnthonyP
the part I quoted

that AACS does not allow for unencrypted digital. Obviously if the player is sending encrypted and the display does not have HDCP then it can't decrypt and show. But I did not know that the player had to send HDCP

Actually, I was referring to all current studio plans. I should have been more specific. There is probably a "turn off encryption entirely" flag in AACS... but I question why you'd even use AACS at all if you've just shut down the enryption on the digital outs. I mean, if people think AACS/HDCP is futile now...

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

Status: Not open for further replies.