Just When You Thought DRM Protection Schemes Couldn't Get Any Stupider

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://www.betanews.com/article.php3?sid=1080606040">http://www.betanews.com/article.php3?sid=1080606040</a><br /><br />"Published reports have indicated that Microsoft is busy readying a secure clock DRM technology dubbed "Janus." Janus enables songs distributed under a subscription model to be transferred to portable devices, with a built in "time bomb" that enables songs to expire in the event that a customer's subscription lapses."<br /><br />This is just what I was looking for the other day, a place where I could go and rent some music and worry about whether or not the rental would expire mid-way into my vacation. To make this extra-reliable I am sure it will somehow be tied to PassPort, which I can honestly say is the most trouble free, reliable and user friendly single sign on service Microsoft operates.<br /><br />"It is unknown whether the same technology will be put to use in the MSN Music service, but Microsoft must still clear the hurdle device synchronization poses. According to Jupiter Research, synchronization is one of the top three features customers look for in portable music players. Microsoft has hinted that it will leverage its software portfolio to tether MSN Music snugly into its product mix."<br /><br />By leveraging their software portfolio, I wonder if they mean using ActiveSync? For what it is worth, I don't see any mention of this working with Pocket PC or Smartphone devices, despite their support for the Windows Media 9 codecs, something <a href="http://news.com.com/2100-7351-5151260.html">emphasized in this comment</a>: "However, Microsoft hasn't made a strong move to focus its Smartphone or PocketPC software on media devices. Toward that end, it is touting the Portable Media Center, a design for a small handheld device that will store and play audio and video. Versions of this, developed by Creative Technology, will be on the market later this year."<br /><br />I do think it is bad they are not supporting the millions of mobile devices in our hands right now, but on the other side, I personally would never consider such a rental. I'd sooner use a hardware dongle.

[Jonathon Watkins]

Rent music? :huh:

No thanks. I like my CDs - I can rip into any format and still have a physical copy with the artwork. Why would I want to rent?

[dean_shan]

Yeah casue when I buy music I only want to keep it for a week :roll:

[shawnc]

The strange thing is I used to be a HUGE Microsoft fan......until I started purchasing PPC's. Slowly but surely they have turned me into an anti-MS person who constantly roots for the DOJ and European Union to tear the company apart. It is inexplicable things like this that make me realize that as a monopoly, MS simply can not be trusted to be even-handed when dealing with the public/consumers.

[Jason Dunn]

Ultimately the market will decide the success or failure of a venture like this. I predict a massive failure. :roll:

[DarkHelmet]

The strange thing is I used to be a HUGE Microsoft fan......until I started purchasing PPC's. Slowly but surely they have turned me into an anti-MS person ...

That is so right - I feel like I rented my iPAQ 3900 from Compaq, HP, and Microsoft - I can't even find anyone who will let me pay them for a WM2003 SE update...

I think it's sad how the sycophant OEM hardware producers have become lap-dogs of Microsoft. One by one, the amazing engineering companies like Toshiba, HP, and others (scratching my head) have followed the indifference model of customer relations.

Anyone want to rent an iPAQ?

[tigerbyte0]

:evil: I think Jason's right this will be a massive failure. I think it could hurt Microsoft as alot of people may not know what they're agreeing to and when they find out will be hopping mad at Microsoft. Its one thing for them to mess up with DRM and eBooks...its quite another to do it for music consumers have paid for.

[JohnnyFlash]

I wouldn't worry too much about all this, folks. There will ALWAYS be people creating ways around DRM.

The more they try to overcharge and control us, the more people like me will continue obtaining their work for free, and stripping out the copy protections.

They'll never learn...and they will NEVER win.

[Jason Dunn]

I think it's sad how the sycophant OEM hardware producers have become lap-dogs of Microsoft. One by one, the amazing engineering companies like Toshiba, HP, and others (scratching my head) have followed the indifference model of customer relations.

I find it interesting that you're blaming Microsoft for the way HP and Toshiba are acting. Microsoft releases the OS upgrade to the OEMs, and they're the ones that decide if they should sell it to customers or not - Microsoft has nothing to do with it, largely because the OEMs say "This is OUR customer Microsfot, back off!".

Methinks your anger is mis-directed. :?

[Lynn]

Are we missing the dark underbelly of this concept? It they can arrange to "rent" you a song, then Microsoft can also accomplish it long term goal of renting you an Operating System.

Picture this: You buy your flashy new PPC with 2006. A few months later you turn it on one morning and get a Blue Screen with the message:

NO OPERATING SYSTEM DETECTED. YOUR LICENSE MAY HAVE EXPIRED.

Contact Microsoft to procure an extension of your Windows Mobile license.

You know this is where Uncle Bill has always wanted to go.

[jlp]

I wouldn't worry too much about all this, folks. There will ALWAYS be people creating ways around DRM.

The more they try to overcharge and control us, the more people like me will continue obtaining their work for free, and stripping out the copy protections.

They'll never learn...and they will NEVER win.

F.R.E.E.D.O.M !!!! 8)

[DarkHelmet]

... Methinks your anger is mis-directed. :?

Perhaps you are correct - I find that I get as much attention from Microsoft as I am willing to pay for (MSDN Universal subscriber - CHA CHING!)...

I would like to have similar pull with the OEMs - as a former Audiovox - a Toshiba-neglected model - and current ViewSonic and HP/Compaq owner - I find that they view hardware purchases in the same way that Microsoft view software updates. A 15 month old iPAQ 3955 is not so old - heck - I paid the $29 for the WM2003 upgrade.

Clock based DRM will fail because it flys in the face of the fair use doctrine.

By the way - did I thank you for this forum?

[dhpss]

Read this: http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=37499

[phillypocket]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but all this is, is an option for content providers. There is nothing intrinsicly wrong with this. (and actually I thought this was one of the features all along). It's still up to you to vote, with your dollars, if you want to rent music. I personally may not want to, but does that mean someone can't offer the service. I can't see how this is dumb at all. Remember, this is not a product for us directly. It's a product for content providers. And frankly, if someone percieves that there is a market, if microsoft didn't provide it, someone else would. And just as frankly, if I were Microsoft, and trying to entice people to use my content protections systems, it's to my advantage to offer as many variations as I can. It's up to the providers themselves to decide if that method will work for their market.

[Jason Dunn]

You know this is where Uncle Bill has always wanted to go.


Absolutely! There's HUGE money to be made in transaction-based systems with recurring charges. Remember that for a while, Microsoft was talking about doing the same thing with Office - renting it to people. Personally, I think that might have been an interesting idea, especially if you could use it on multiple devices once you authenticated. But the market really disliked the idea, and Microsoft abandoned it.

I think ultimately as long as we have a choice to vote with our dollars to what we want and don't want, things like this are ok. It's not markets evolve - good ideas winning out over bad ideas.

[Jason Dunn]

Remember, this is not a product for us directly. It's a product for content providers. And frankly, if someone percieves that there is a market, if microsoft didn't provide it, someone else would. And just as frankly, if I were Microsoft, and trying to entice people to use my content protections systems, it's to my advantage to offer as many variations as I can. It's up to the providers themselves to decide if that method will work for their market.

Hey now, no fair bringing logic into this! ;-) You bring up a good point - people shouldn't blame Microsoft for offering the technology to do this, because the only reason they're offering it is because content providers have asked for it. Ultimately it's up to us, the consumers, to reject models like this and vote with our dollars.

[JonnoB]

Ultimately it's up to us, the consumers, to reject models like this and vote with our dollars.

If that is the case Jason and my $1USD is equal to 1 vote, does that mean your vote is equal to .68 of mine? :lol:

[Jason Dunn]

If that is the case Jason and my $1USD is equal to 1 vote, does that mean your vote is equal to $.68 of mine? :lol:

HAH! :lol: It's worse than that, most of these services don't allow people from outside the US to buy songs (iTunes, Napster, etc.) so it's up to you Yanks to do the voting for us. :wink:

[Mojo Jojo]

I think I would be interested in seeing this idea and the devices hit the market. Mind you I am not rooting for this type of DRM, in fact I have some sorta twisted and sick need to laugh maniacally as it burns lots of money to create and isn't accepted.

BUT... the market has to start somewhere.

I am actually rooting for Apple to take notice of a portable media player and create their own (expanded iPod with video) then expand iTunes Music to iTune Media for $5 dollar movies and a FAIR digital rights management.

[CTSLICK]

2 words for any company who uses this DRM technology...bite me. :evil: If digital music gets this complicated I'll just buy CD's...assuming I don't have some demonic DRM scheme built into my CD player :roll:

And for those who believe that MS is simply "offering" this technology ...I have to side with a previous post. Mr Gates ultimately wants everything to be a subscription. I think this is just another piece of his plan.

[rock]

Another loss for DRM, another win for piracy. When will they learn? :roll:

[bspline]

Pardoning the pun (and the rudeness, but that can be blamed on DRM),
this is a classic example of protection up the janus...

Really apropriate codename, isn't it?

BTW: if I'm to be censored, please do so, don't want to offend anyone, it's just that the situation calls for it.

[Jonathan1]

Two words......

Chronically stupid. :twisted:

[Jorgen]

Why do they hate us?

Jorgen

[OneAngryDwarf]

You people are short sighted... this DRM scheme is not an attempt to replace old schemes but rather complement them. This is the kind of DRM I have been waiting for. Consider this... you could pay a company such as Napster a monthly fee (say 10 bucks) for unlimited song downloads. As long as you keep paying you can have a song collection limited only by your hard drive... paying a monthly fee sounds a lot better than paying a dollar a song but hey thats just me. If the system works out and companies use it effectively I will become something I've never been becauses of stupid models...a legal song downloader for the first time... I can't wait!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[n4cer]

This technology is already offered in Windows Media DRM, it just didn't have a portable device implementation yet because most devices didn't have clocks. There have been articles about this since at least last year. Betanews is pretty late with this info.

Here's a News.com article from last year:
http://news.com.com/2100-1027-1009794.html

This technology enables greater flexibility with allowing sharing of content between devices, especially pay-per-view and preview content. How about you pay a VOD company to rent a movie in WMV format and get rights to watch the movie on your desktop or any other device that supports this DRM implementation. You can view the movie at any time on any supported device for a week, for example, (any Desktop, Pocket PC, Portable Media Center, XBOX, digital content jukebox, etc.).

Also, things like the full album previews that MS sometimes gets permission to offer, can become more flexible with this option. At the content provider's descretion, you could be granted access to the contents of the full album free for a limited time, and during that period, listen to the songs on any device that supports the DRM implementation.

[bjornkeizers]

I don't buy music anymore, because if they want to treat their own customers like criminals anyway, I certainly have no problem with actually being one - I only use Kazaa for my music needs, and with stupid ass **** like this, can you really blame me?

[Ed Hansberry]

I don't buy music anymore, because if they want to treat their own customers like criminals anyway, I certainly have no problem with actually being one - I only use Kazaa for my music needs, and with stupid ass s**t like this, can you really blame me?
Yes. Just because you don't like the RIAA and the record industry doesn't mean you have to steal music and not give money to the artist. I still buy all of my music, mostly at www.cdbaby.com

[Rob Alexander]

If that is the case Jason and my $1USD is equal to 1 vote, does that mean your vote is equal to $.68 of mine? :lol:

HAH! :lol: It's worse than that, most of these services don't allow people from outside the US to buy songs (iTunes, Napster, etc.) so it's up to you Yanks to do the voting for us. :wink:

No worries, Jason. For every song I don't buy on my own behalf, I'll not buy another on your behalf. That way, they'll be hurt twice as badly and you'll have had an impact on the market. :lol:

[Rob Alexander]

You know this is where Uncle Bill has always wanted to go.


Absolutely! There's HUGE money to be made in transaction-based systems with recurring charges. Remember that for a while, Microsoft was talking about doing the same thing with Office - renting it to people. Personally, I think that might have been an interesting idea, especially if you could use it on multiple devices once you authenticated. But the market really disliked the idea, and Microsoft abandoned it.

Did they abandon it? I recall hearing lots about how they were using strong-arm tactics to force large companies to buy their software under a time-based license (i.e. no more site license deals on perpetual licenses), but I didn't read about them discontinuing that. I know they aren't doing it with individuals yet, but I find it hard to believe they've abandoned the concept. There's just too much money in it if they can eventually get us to fall into line.