[opendtv] Re: Hollywood may demand DRM for larger harddrives

John -

Do you think of anything except the possibility of taking cheap shots at 
people?  Please go back and read my post.  Nowhere did I blame Hollywood 
for anything.

- Tom

John Willkie wrote:
> so, Hollywood is responsible for your downloading a screener instead of
> seeing the content in a theater?  I suspect you don't have a f*****g iota of
> what a screener really is, you are just using that term as well as you use
> any term.
> 
> Hint: a screener is a copy of a movie that is made available to academy and
> guild members for voting at Oscar time.  It replaces the "for your
> consideration" showings in Hollywierd theaters and the vcr copies that
> preceded dvd screeners.  In otherwords, these are pristine -- and recently
> watermarked -- DVDs that are never intended for commercial release or
> redistribution.  (Academy and guild members are now routinely kicked out of
> their group if one of their screeners gets out.)
> 
> In other words, only an idiot -- I'm sure you qualify on this point -- would
> call a shitty internet copy a screener.  I think you're actually talking
> aboutrips from conformance copies with visible time codes.
> 
> And, Hollywood is somehow responsible for a consipracy to induce you to
> download these things?  I should turn you into hollywood for the reward and
> the pure fun of it.  (second time this year I've used that line, but it's a
> keeper.)
> 
> You're so dumb that you admit to consipracy to violate copyright laws on a
> public email list that is read by Hollywood types ($150,000 per title, you
> could be charged) , and you think that Hollywood is a co-conspirator.  Geez
> ...
> 
> John Willkie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Tom Barry" <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 4:30 PM
> Subject: [opendtv] Re: Hollywood may demand DRM for larger harddrives
> 
> 
> 
>>
>>Silvio Macedo wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>Without going into the details of the ongoing mail exchange, I would
>>>point out that nothing can be worse than XVid/DivX screeners. Yes -
>>>people do actually go into a theatre and tape the movie on a camera -
>>>and this  sort of, kind of, "movies" get distributed and very much
>>>seen by "that" most profitable segment of man-25-to-35 year old.
>>>
>>
>>Yes.  Screeners are some kind of a crime against video nature. (not a
> 
> joke)
> 
>>I can't think of much else that can do more to damage the economic value
>>of movie making while at the same time giving very little benefit to the
>>public at large.
>>
>>I downloaded a screener of a recent blockbuster and totally ruined my
>>enjoyment of something that I had been looking forward to and that had
>>taken a lot of effort creative effort to make.
>>
>>It would be nice if the Hollywood PR Flacs invented a new word for these
>>screener distributors (something better/worse than pirate) and convinced
>>us all to separately censor them.  This should be a totally separate
>>campaign than the usual tirades against file swappers of most other types.
>>
>>If done right this one might even gain popular support, and somewhat
>>succeed, even among "pirates".
>>
>>- Tom  (again, not joking here)
>>
>>
>>
>>>Whatever the DRM technology we pick, pointing a camera to a plasma
>>>screen or patching your graphics card DirectX drivers to dump every
>>>frame or anything else of the sort, will provide many times the
>>>quality of a screener - and hence, will be far more appealing for
>>>pirates, and uncontrolled revenue.
>>>
>>>Watermarking ? - first, few of these users will care, and secondly,
>>>there is a huge amount of things you can do to a video to destroy its
>>>watermark. In this race, too, pirates will always win - and one cannot
>>>continuously distribute firmware to hardware devices for security
>>>updates (unless they are networked, of course).
>>>
>>>My conclusion, as I've said many times, and inline with others that
>>>wrote before in this mailing list, is that the solution is: cheaper
>>>content, far easier to get ( one click away max or pushed (user
>>>profiling)) and a different value chain - in particular, geography can
>>>no longer be a factor in distribution - the pressure for distribution
>>>is simply too much  - and more intrusive advertisements.=20
>>>
>>>Silvio
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
>>>>[mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Willkie
>>>>Sent: 25 July 2005 16:54
>>>>To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>Subject: [opendtv] Re: Hollywood may demand DRM for larger
>>>
>>>harddrives
>>>
>>>
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>yeah -- another disconnect from reality.   Only the extremely poor
>>>
>>>or
>>>
>>>
>>>>avaracious will watch pirate content over paying for the=20
>>>>rights to watch
>>>>professional content.  Note that DVDs cost less than 2x the cost of
>>>
>>>in
>>>
>>>
>>>>person admission.  When was the last time you ACTUALLY paid=20
>>>>money to see an
>>>>independent film?  Are you an IFC subscriber?  I suspect=20
>>>>you're just deeply
>>>>into cost-avoidance, and figure any content is better than=20
>>>>paid content.
>>>>=20
>>>>It's funny that you bring up the Hollings suggestion -- dead=20
>>>>for more than
>>>>half a decade -- and call it a Disney move.
>>>>=20
>>>>You are unlikely to ever get the ability to grant a MS DRM license.
>>>>=20
>>>>While computers will continue to play unprotected content, my=20
>>>>point was that
>>>>content can decide what platform is appropriate for being=20
>>>>copied to: the
>>>>EXACT opposite of what you extracted, yet within what I said,=20
>>>>since content
>>>>can decide not to care what the platform is.
>>>>=20
>>>>John Willkie
>>>>----- Original Message -----=20
>>>>From: "Tom Barry" <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 2:55 PM
>>>>Subject: [opendtv] Re: Hollywood may demand DRM for larger
>>>
>>>harddrives
>>>
>>>
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>John Willkie wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>so, you know about hell, too?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>A little bit.  But only in the visions of the older
>>>
>>>Disney/Hollings
>>>
>>>
>>>>>proposals where all computers would be locked such that=20
>>>>
>>>>they could not
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>play any unprotected content.  This is still very unlikely=20
>>>>
>>>>to come about
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> since the cost to competitive American computing would be=20
>>>>
>>>>immense and
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>too many folks would squeal vigorously.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>They may not demand, but they can determine the=20
>>>>
>>>>conditions for their
>>>>content
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>to be stored, once it's in DRM form.  A harddrive lacking=20
>>>>
>>>>a certain key
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>could be easily prevented from storing content.  Many=20
>>>>
>>>>companies have
>>>>been
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>working on this technology since the middle of the=20
>>>>
>>>>previous decade.
>>>>Much
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>hype, too.  It's turned out to be a MS DRM world.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And, Tom, you must have missed several recent=20
>>>>
>>>>announcements from MS and
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Hollywierd.  Work continues, and "Longhorn" will be=20
>>>>
>>>>called "Vista."
>>>>What do
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>you think their talking about viewing?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>The Trusted Computing platforms, or whatever they will be=20
>>>>
>>>>called next,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>will still probably allowed unprotected media to play.  And if the
>>>>>burden to play protected media is too large then people=20
>>>>
>>>>will probably
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>avoid it.  And frankly, if only certain sub-systems and media are
>>>>>protected then I could probably live with that.  But I don't
>>>
>>>expect
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Hollywood to accept reasonable compromises yet.  For instance, my
>>>>>experiences trying to get fully licensed phone-home MS-DRM were
>>>>>completely unworkable with the couple of discs I bought.
>>>>>
>>>>>Meanwhile, there is a hidden assumption that nobody would=20
>>>>
>>>>have any media
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>to play if Hollywood was not satisfied.  I expect the amateur and
>>>>>independent movie makers and the pirates all will continue to
>>>
>>>supply
>>>
>>>
>>>>>whatever the big Hollywood concerns withhold.
>>>>>
>>>>>- Tom
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>John Willkie
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>----- Original Message -----=20
>>>>>>From: "Tom Barry" <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 4:50 AM
>>>>>>Subject: [opendtv] Re: Hollywood may demand DRM for=20
>>>>
>>>>larger harddrives
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Jeroen Stessen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Hollywood may demand DRM for larger harddrives - analyst
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>People in Hell want ice water.  Hollywood is in no=20
>>>>
>>>>position to "demand"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>- Tom
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Hello,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>See: http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050720_191403.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Hollywood may demand DRM for larger harddrives - analyst
>>>>>>>>>By Scott Fulton
>>>>>>>>>July 20, 2005 - 19:14 EST
>>>>>>>>>(...)
>>>>>>>>>The moment you become capable of reading and writing movies
>>>
>>>and
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>transporting that content across borders, Cai said,=20
>>>>
>>>>"Hollywood can
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>get really concerned. What if you can carry like 20=20
>>>>
>>>>movies with you
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>all the time, and they can't control the content any=20
>>>>
>>>>more?" It's the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>possible crossing of geographic boundaries that's the=20
>>>>
>>>>problem, Cai
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>said - a problem that wouldn't crop up if the media=20
>>>>
>>>>device were made
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>to sit on your desktop at home, no matter how small it
>>>
>>>becomes.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>(...)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Greetings,
>>>>>>>>-- Jeroen
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>+-------------------------------+-----------------------------
>>>>-------------+
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>| From:     Jeroen H. Stessen   | E-mail: =20
>>>>
>>>>Jeroen.Stessen@xxxxxxxxxxx |
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>| Building: SFJ-5.22 Eindhoven  | Deptmt.: Philips=20
>>>>
>>>>Applied Technologies
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>|
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>| Phone:    ++31.40.2732739     | Visiting & mail=20
>>>>
>>>>address: Glaslaan 2 |
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>| Mobile:   ++31.6.44680021     | NL 5616 LW Eindhoven,=20
>>>>
>>>>the Netherlands
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>|
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>| Pager:    ++31.6.65133818     | Website:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://www.apptech.philips.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>|
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>+-------------------------------+-----------------------------
>>>>-------------+
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>=20
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>-----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>-----------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user=20
>>>>
>>>>configuration settings at
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>FreeLists.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
>>>>
>>>>with the word
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>unsubscribe in the subject line.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>=20
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>----------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user=20
>>>>
>>>>configuration settings at
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>FreeLists.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
>>>>
>>>>with the word
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>unsubscribe in the subject line.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>=20
>>>>
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user=20
>>>>
>>>>configuration settings at
>>>>FreeLists.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
>>>>
>>>>with the word
>>>>unsubscribe in the subject line.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>=20
>>>>
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>>>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>>>>>
>>>>>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration=20
>>>>
>>>>settings at
>>>>FreeLists.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
>>>>
>>>>with the word
>>>>unsubscribe in the subject line.
>>>>
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>
>>>
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>>>>=20
>>>>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration=20
>>>>settings at FreeLists.org=20
>>>>=20
>>>>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with=20
>>>>the word unsubscribe in the subject line.
>>>>=20
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>>>
>>>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> 
> FreeLists.org
> 
>>>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> 
> unsubscribe in the subject line.
> 
>>>
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>>
>>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> 
> FreeLists.org
> 
>>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> 
> unsubscribe in the subject line.
> 
> 
>  
>  
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> 
> - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at 
> FreeLists.org 
> 
> - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
> unsubscribe in the subject line.
> 
> 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at 
FreeLists.org 

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts: