Skip to content

This Ain't No Party

Is the music you buy online going to be worth less down the road?

A new study by the Electronic Frontier Foundation says digital-rights management (aka copy protection) limits what you can do with the songs you're bought in ways that aren't immediately evident:

In other words, in this brave new world of "authorized music services," law-abiding music fans often get less for their money than they did in the old world of CDs (or at least, the world before record companies started crippling CDs with DRM, too). Unfortunately, in an effort to attract customers, these music services try to obscure the restrictions they impose on you with clever marketing.

The study looks at iTunes, Microsoft, Napster 2.0, RealNetworks, examing how different software restrict the number of copies or mix CDs one can make.

Jason
Posted 09/01/2005 12:53:50 PM
There's a much broader undertone to all this.  Apparently, content (music, movies, games, books, magazines, etc) providers want to have hardware support for DRM.  Built into our computers, cd players, dvd players, etc.  Since hardware is just a bunch of metal and plastic, software will have to support this stuff.  There's a big movement going on, has been for a few decades, called open source.  If the software that open source people write will no longer work because of DRM hardware, open source will cease to exist.  Or exist in the past, on old hardware.  This DRM software to run the hardware will remain closed because what good is it when one person gets a hold of it, edits it to disable DRM, and distributes it to everyone?  Another implied requirement is  every piece of content, and possibly software, that you download will have DRM.  If it doesn't require DRM, someone could write a program that strips DRM, disabling its "benefits".  It would make new software and content also not work on old hardware, without a "strip" hack.   This will hurt the Linux movement in particular.  You can't have an operating system running on DRM hardware that doesn't interface with DRM.  I'm sure they'll make it so the hardware doesn't even work without the DRM software running.  However, this is many years off.

Sadly, it will move forward.  Makers of new media, like Sony, have made it a point to make DRM part of their new media, like "BluRay" discs.  Try to get every major content provider on board, then the format will enjoy mass market success.

Sun to the rescue.  I wouldn't mind DRM and the hardware counterpart as long as I can still enjoy free software.

Read more here
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/08/22/sun_open_source_drm/

You can see a problem in this "idea" though.  Content providers will support both pre-HWDRM (pre-hardware drm) and HWDRM because, initially, more people will own the old hardware, unless they're forced (like TV signals going digital in 2009).  The market could take many, many years to develop.  They can try to force it, obviously, but it could backfire.  The customer is always right :)

DRM right now is a joke.  There's a program that strips it from iTunes downloads at the rate of about 1000 songs a second, and that Sony rep publicized the workaround for their DRM'ed CDs!!

Sorry for the length, I had to cover all the points
Daniel Rubin
Posted 09/01/2005 01:06:26 PM
no, that's a great comment.
Jason
Posted 09/01/2005 03:06:18 PM
Thanks!

There's so much more though :p

These presenters make a couple of great points:
http://www.w3.org/2000/12/drm-ws/pp/cloakware.html

It's part of a workshop of DRM:
http://www.w3.org/2000/12/drm-ws/Overview.html

Lots of techno-babble but they cover some points that I did in the "Hardware Solutions" section, and instead suggest Tamper Resistant Software (TRS).  I agree that a software only solution is a much better solution, since hardware can be cracked as well (the article uses an example of smartcards used to decrypt satellite TV signals that were cracked months after they were introduced).  Software can be updated much easier, and at practically no extra cost to the consumer, if it is cracked.

However, I disagree that TRS is even achievable.  The architecture of the CPU is still the same.  It will be harder to figure out if they put millions of dollars of research into a technology they claim to be tamper resistant, but it won't be tamper resistant.

The article also says Cryptography is part of the solution.  It is, no doubt.  "RSA" and "DES" are good algorithms.  Public key for encryption, private key for decryption.  This makes a perfect model for secure internet connections.  You connect to a server, get its public key for encrypting the data, send the data encrypted, then the server uses its private key to decrypt it.  However, on a single computer, there is no locked down server with the private key.  Everything is on that computer!  Finding the key is just a matter of searching the right places.  One-way encryption is obviously not a solution (like MD5), since they're usually just hash algorithms or just plain old irreversible!  Most two way algorithms require a key, one that will be located somewhere in the vicinity.

So, it gets me thinking that its not even possible.  I'm glad I read that, I feel much better now about the whole thing :)

Although, Intel already has DRM built into its latest chip.  I don't know much about it, like if it uses an open-standard DRM or an in-house solution.

http://www.digitmag.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=4915

Another good article.
http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050830_142112.html