Japanese not concerned with DVI-HDCP?
- Status
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
If you have noticed- MITS has not given up the fight for Firewire. The Jury is still out on this whole DVI-HDCP thing anyways. I never could figure out why a lot of people are in a panic and are afraid to purchase something that they like because of this DVI-HDCP thing. I say go for it and enjoy whats available today. Also don't forget that our A/V Receivers have no DVI and I have not read or heard anything from the manufactures about what they plan, if anything, to do. A lot of people still think that Copy-Protection is more than a few years away and by then the standard could change again.
Dave
Dave
Joined
·
482 Posts
HDCP is a joke guys. Substandard encryption that has already been broken... I'm sure it will be broke again, and we'll be able to buy HDCP to analog (component) adapters or something similar.
Dreamaster
Dreamaster
You will not be able to buy HDCP to analog component adapters. They will be illegal.
HDCP is not a joke.
The only U.S. plasma that supports Firewire is Mitsubishi. Firewire is supported in Japan for reasons that have nothing to do with copy protection.
As for DVI/HDCP:
* Toshiba now has it throughout its plasma line.
* Fujitsu is about to introduce it throughout its plasma line.
* Pioneer supports it on many plasmas via third party interfaces.
* Sony now has it on a number of its plasmas.
* Panasonic is likely to offer it on all plasmas starting next fall.
* It would not surprise me to see NEC offer it on its next set of replacement.s
By my reckoning, all the above manufacturers are Japanese.
HDCP is not a joke.
The only U.S. plasma that supports Firewire is Mitsubishi. Firewire is supported in Japan for reasons that have nothing to do with copy protection.
As for DVI/HDCP:
* Toshiba now has it throughout its plasma line.
* Fujitsu is about to introduce it throughout its plasma line.
* Pioneer supports it on many plasmas via third party interfaces.
* Sony now has it on a number of its plasmas.
* Panasonic is likely to offer it on all plasmas starting next fall.
* It would not surprise me to see NEC offer it on its next set of replacement.s
By my reckoning, all the above manufacturers are Japanese.
Joined
·
482 Posts
http://cryptome.org/hdcp-weakness.htm
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/keith...CPAttacks.html
At least they could pick something with an RSA like algorithm that is super hard to crack.
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/keith...CPAttacks.html
At least they could pick something with an RSA like algorithm that is super hard to crack.
Joined
·
482 Posts
Cencorship in action
That is so messed up. I love his analogy about the door locks.
In the last few years there have been some laws that really freak me out, DMCA, CYBERSQUATTING LAWS, and now the anti-terrorist bill. I fear I'd feel more free in a communist country.
Dreamaster
That is so messed up. I love his analogy about the door locks.
In the last few years there have been some laws that really freak me out, DMCA, CYBERSQUATTING LAWS, and now the anti-terrorist bill. I fear I'd feel more free in a communist country.
Dreamaster
DVI is good. HDCP part is bad. DVI-D link is good as the display device does not need to have Mpeg decoder. DVI will only be used for connection to display device. Firewire will handle everything else. I am sure that new Plasma models in Japan will have DVI HDCP. So far only Toshiba in US has Plasma that has DVI HDCP built in.
CKNA, you are wrong. From the stat sheets I've seen, new Japanese models do not have HDCP. For example the new Toshiba 50HP82(US version with DVI-HDCP) and 50PS300(Japanese version with iLink). And the new Sony KE-50XBR900(US version with DVI-HDCP) and KDE-P50HX1(Japanese version with iLink).
Four points:
1. wrt the original "Japanese market" question, maybe japan market will decide on some other copy protection scheme or maybe they haven't addressed the issue yet. Someone probably knows the answer to this but as a US consumer with no immediate plans on moving to Japan, I don't much care.
2. I just purchased the Hitachi 42HDT20. It has DVI-HDCP and works fine with my Sony HD-200 via the DVI. I looked at the Panasonic but it did not have DVI connection and imo the Hitachi looked better(yes I know some people have issues with ALiS but it LOOKS great
) Also see reviews in "The Perfect Vision" and "SGTHT"
3. WRT HDCP, why is there so much emotion about this issue? The artists have a right to protect intellectual property(and presumably the flags won't be turned on for *everything*--maybe first run movies etc.). Will/has HDCP be "cracked"? Sure, but it will still be illegal. You won't see Sony or Panasonic marketing decoders.
4. The legitimate concern about HDCP is the embedded base of HD displays without DVI. As the owner of a front projection system that cost about four times as much as my plasma, I am very concerned that it only has analog RGBHV inputs. I've been told by some industry insiders that there will be some sort of conversion box(at a price to be determined) but this would seem to me to be in violation of point #3. What a tangled web.......
just my 2 cents
1. wrt the original "Japanese market" question, maybe japan market will decide on some other copy protection scheme or maybe they haven't addressed the issue yet. Someone probably knows the answer to this but as a US consumer with no immediate plans on moving to Japan, I don't much care.
2. I just purchased the Hitachi 42HDT20. It has DVI-HDCP and works fine with my Sony HD-200 via the DVI. I looked at the Panasonic but it did not have DVI connection and imo the Hitachi looked better(yes I know some people have issues with ALiS but it LOOKS great
) Also see reviews in "The Perfect Vision" and "SGTHT"3. WRT HDCP, why is there so much emotion about this issue? The artists have a right to protect intellectual property(and presumably the flags won't be turned on for *everything*--maybe first run movies etc.). Will/has HDCP be "cracked"? Sure, but it will still be illegal. You won't see Sony or Panasonic marketing decoders.
4. The legitimate concern about HDCP is the embedded base of HD displays without DVI. As the owner of a front projection system that cost about four times as much as my plasma, I am very concerned that it only has analog RGBHV inputs. I've been told by some industry insiders that there will be some sort of conversion box(at a price to be determined) but this would seem to me to be in violation of point #3. What a tangled web.......
just my 2 cents
Joined
·
70 Posts
Quote:
Do you lease your HT equipment from Hollywood? Of course not. It's my f* equipment and I resent it being under control of the owners of the media. No form of digital copy protection from a read only source, such as a D-VHS, DVD or OTA is really copy protected. The only thing you need to copy an encrypted document is a good copy machine. I can take those signals, record them bit for bit and replay them later without decrypting them in between.
There is no such thing as secure digital rights management, and it is impossible to restrict duplication of any digital stream fed to a consumer. Two things need to happen to realize that goal: 1) there has to be a private two way communication to exchange a unique key, and 2) the equipment has to be a black box in order to deny digital access to the decrypted stream. In short, so-called copy protection requires control over the consumer's equipment.
Since the case we are talking about here involves one way communication only, you can always replay the encrypted stream, and thus make a perfect copy of it. So Hollywood is focusing instead on forcing our equipment to be black boxes.
The real reason for these schemes are not really copy protection, but control of consumer equipment. It is to make it illegal under the DMCA to manufacture equipment that doesn't make the media owners happy. This costs all of us money for unnecessary circuitry in our equipment and restricts LEGITIMATE USE of our equipment.
This is why no consumer DVD players that aren't HTPC's will scale the MPEG in the digital domain to the native resolution of your display. This is why DVD publishers can screw consumers in certain markets to pay more for their DVD's than others. And don't forget somebody is collecting a lot of money to license these so-called copy protection schemes, and has the right to deny these licenses to companies it doesn't want entering the market.
So you can see this has little or nothing to do with artists protecting their work, and screws the legitimate user.
So tell me again why this shouldn't this p* me off?
| Originally posted by sner Four points: 3. WRT HDCP, why is there so much emotion about this issue? The artists have a right to protect intellectual property(and presumably the flags won't be turned on for *everything*--maybe first run movies etc.). Will/has HDCP be "cracked"? Sure, but it will still be illegal. You won't see Sony or Panasonic marketing decoders. |
There is no such thing as secure digital rights management, and it is impossible to restrict duplication of any digital stream fed to a consumer. Two things need to happen to realize that goal: 1) there has to be a private two way communication to exchange a unique key, and 2) the equipment has to be a black box in order to deny digital access to the decrypted stream. In short, so-called copy protection requires control over the consumer's equipment.
Since the case we are talking about here involves one way communication only, you can always replay the encrypted stream, and thus make a perfect copy of it. So Hollywood is focusing instead on forcing our equipment to be black boxes.
The real reason for these schemes are not really copy protection, but control of consumer equipment. It is to make it illegal under the DMCA to manufacture equipment that doesn't make the media owners happy. This costs all of us money for unnecessary circuitry in our equipment and restricts LEGITIMATE USE of our equipment.
This is why no consumer DVD players that aren't HTPC's will scale the MPEG in the digital domain to the native resolution of your display. This is why DVD publishers can screw consumers in certain markets to pay more for their DVD's than others. And don't forget somebody is collecting a lot of money to license these so-called copy protection schemes, and has the right to deny these licenses to companies it doesn't want entering the market.
So you can see this has little or nothing to do with artists protecting their work, and screws the legitimate user.
So tell me again why this shouldn't this p* me off?
I posted extensively about the weaknesses of DVI HDCP in another thread, so I won't repeat all that info here.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...5&pagenumber=6
I will point out that it is almost inevitable that someone will build a box that removes HDCP from DVI streams, given the number of published weaknesses in HDCP, the large number of chips available on the open market and the relative ease of building such a device.
Although such an HDCP converter box MAY be illegal in the US under the DMCA, it certainly won't be illegal worldwide. Hence the stated aim of HDCP in stopping professional pirates is null and void.
I fully respect the rights of content owners to profit from their works. IMHO, the net effect of HDCP will be only to inconvenience consumers, not pirates. Since there is no known consumer level mechanism AFAIK to record a DVI stream, HDCP only forces interoperability issues for consumers with no appreciable benefit.
For those advocating holding off until HDCP/DVI is widely available, I have one question. Once HDCP v1.0 cracks are available and become an issue for the industry, are you all prepared to buy new sets with HDCP 2.0 chipsets? (and ad infinitum) By definition, any new version of HDCP will not be backwards compatible with the HDCP 1.0, which has already been demonstrated to have weak crypto in the same fashion as DeCSS.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...5&pagenumber=6
I will point out that it is almost inevitable that someone will build a box that removes HDCP from DVI streams, given the number of published weaknesses in HDCP, the large number of chips available on the open market and the relative ease of building such a device.
Although such an HDCP converter box MAY be illegal in the US under the DMCA, it certainly won't be illegal worldwide. Hence the stated aim of HDCP in stopping professional pirates is null and void.
I fully respect the rights of content owners to profit from their works. IMHO, the net effect of HDCP will be only to inconvenience consumers, not pirates. Since there is no known consumer level mechanism AFAIK to record a DVI stream, HDCP only forces interoperability issues for consumers with no appreciable benefit.
For those advocating holding off until HDCP/DVI is widely available, I have one question. Once HDCP v1.0 cracks are available and become an issue for the industry, are you all prepared to buy new sets with HDCP 2.0 chipsets? (and ad infinitum) By definition, any new version of HDCP will not be backwards compatible with the HDCP 1.0, which has already been demonstrated to have weak crypto in the same fashion as DeCSS.
Joined
·
161 Posts
Quote:
I think the designers understand that HDCP isn't really able to stop "professional" pirates but it *could* stop the casual consumer from easily becoming one.
The industry has learned enough from the Napster/Music debacle to put *some* barrier in place at the beginning. Coupled with aggressive prosecution and an evolving technical standard, they might have a chance to keep the pandora's box at least partially closed.
Quote:
Simply put, yes. If the only way large quantities of HD material will be available to me is through HDCP in the next two years, then I want insure the opportunity to get it.
All we're really doing by waiting is making a bet that a few months wait might allow us more HD content into the future before the next technology wave (bigger/better displays or HDCP version X) compells us to buy again.
For those buying non-HDCP displays now, their decision to upgrade might simply happen somewhat sooner.
There's really no *right* or *wrong* here.
| Hence the stated aim of HDCP in stopping professional pirates is null and void. |
The industry has learned enough from the Napster/Music debacle to put *some* barrier in place at the beginning. Coupled with aggressive prosecution and an evolving technical standard, they might have a chance to keep the pandora's box at least partially closed.
Quote:
| For those advocating holding off until HDCP/DVI is widely available, I have one question. Once HDCP v1.0 cracks are available and become an issue for the industry, are you all prepared to buy new sets with HDCP 2.0 chipsets? |
All we're really doing by waiting is making a bet that a few months wait might allow us more HD content into the future before the next technology wave (bigger/better displays or HDCP version X) compells us to buy again.
For those buying non-HDCP displays now, their decision to upgrade might simply happen somewhat sooner.
There's really no *right* or *wrong* here.
Quote:
I disagree. IMHO only professional pirates could have access to DVI based recording mechanisms capable of handling uncompressed HD content at up to 1.7 gigs per second. I'm not aware of any equipment which would be able to do anything useful with DVI data at that rate, except maybe some theoretical high end duplication system designed to store raw digital streams on several terabytes of disk and then recompress it for distribution on HD-DVD's. That doesn't sound like casual consumer piracy to me.
Just on raw bandwidth requirement alone, 1.7 gigs per second is beyond what even serial ATA can handle, so for the next 5 years there are unlikely to be many PC based devices capable of pirating content at that sort of speed.
I have no problem with folks waiting for HDCP 1.0 products to become available. Just don't blame the rest of us with HDCP-less products when we throw a few large spanners into the industries plans to potentially orphan us.
I don't think orphaning 99% of existing HD users from the next generation HD products is a wise business strategy, because they are burning the early adopters. If you read the articles in Multichannel News etc it seems to me the industry is heading down that path rather rapidly by mandating DVI HDCP and closing off the 'analog hole', leaving owners of todays HD sets out in the cold.
| Originally posted by fishferbrains I think the designers understand that HDCP isn't really able to stop "professional" pirates but it *could* stop the casual consumer from easily becoming one. |
Just on raw bandwidth requirement alone, 1.7 gigs per second is beyond what even serial ATA can handle, so for the next 5 years there are unlikely to be many PC based devices capable of pirating content at that sort of speed.
I have no problem with folks waiting for HDCP 1.0 products to become available. Just don't blame the rest of us with HDCP-less products when we throw a few large spanners into the industries plans to potentially orphan us.
I don't think orphaning 99% of existing HD users from the next generation HD products is a wise business strategy, because they are burning the early adopters. If you read the articles in Multichannel News etc it seems to me the industry is heading down that path rather rapidly by mandating DVI HDCP and closing off the 'analog hole', leaving owners of todays HD sets out in the cold.
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
- Status
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!