Say Hello to Watermarks and Goodbye to DRM

[James Fee]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=2210&tag=nl.e539' target='_blank'>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=2210&tag=nl.e539</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Despite what naysayers have to say about looking at small displays, taking recorded video on the run is a great idea. Given the choice between nothing and a small display, many people will take the small display. So, TiVoToGo as a concept makes perfect sense. But, along with that sort of portability of content (from DVR to MCP) comes the risk that the content will end up being pirated into unintended distribution channels. By restricting the "ToGo" part of TiVoToGo to specific playback devices, TiVo was doing its best to prevent such leakage and business model disruption. But, in doing that, there were other unintended consequences. With more MCPs coming out, many of which are not compatible with Microsoft's technology (eg: Apple's video iPod), TiVo was denying itself access to the entire market."</i><br /><br /><img src="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/TiVoToGo.png" /><br /><br />We all know what pisses us more about DRM that practically anything else? The plain fact you can't use PlaysForSure on iPod or iTunes on any non-Apple device. Well TiVo is running into that problem right now. How do you allow your TiVoToGo recordings to play on both your iPod as well as your PDA? The solution is actually very simple, MPEG-4 which has no DRM. But in the process TiVo sticks a watermark on the recording that can be traced right back to your TiVo account and your credit card. <br /><br />Say hello to fair use again. Do whatever you want with that recording, but don't share it with others. Isn't this all that we have been asking for? So ignore Sony, Apple or Microsoft and just record what you want with your TiVo and then do what you want with recording. Such a no brainier, no wonder <a href="http://www.pvrblog.com/pvr/2005/11/nbc_makes_noise.html">NBC wants to sue over it</a>. Like we'd expect a company that thinks <a href="http://www.pvrblog.com/pvr/2005/11/nbc_makes_noise.html">Joey is worth saving</a> to understand why this is so important.

[Felix Torres]

One of the ebook vendors does this; they encrypt the files and the decryption password is the valid credit card number of the purchaser.

I guess somebody *might* post such a file online.
But not twice! ;-)

[rlobrecht]

The ebook provider is eReader, and its fantastic.

The watermark idea for video is a good one, as long as its not too obtrusive. I can't imagine dealing with a watermark that covers the entire image.

[James Fee]

The watermark idea for video is a good one, as long as its not too obtrusive. I can't imagine dealing with a watermark that covers the entire image.
It would just be a "pattern of bits" that would id the file as being created by you. It isn't the same as a "classic watermark" as you are probably thinking of.

[Doug Johnson]

Current watermarking technologies are all but invisible.

[gibson042]

I think this is a great idea. It will be just as ineffective as DRM on those who view early content distribution as a challenge from the media producers, but unlike DRM it won't interfere with the lives on the non-infringing. I personally go out of my way to get only unencumbered files (and in some cases open up the files myself), but I have no problem with transparent watermarks.

My only requirement is that they do not provide information that can be used to commit fraud... after all, my mp3 player could be lost or stolen, my network could be hacked, or any number of other events could place my files into another person's possession without my permission. So credit card or social security numbers (for example) would be unacceptable, but I have no problem with something like TiVo account numbers.

[Damion Chaplin]

Excellent!
This is exactly what I've been preaching for since the word DRM was coined - A DRM scheme that will not impinge our fair use rights.
Thanks TiVo. Let's hope other companies follow your example...

[OSUKid7]

Excellent!
This is exactly what I've been preaching for since the word DRM was coined - A DRM scheme that will not impinge our fair use rights.
Thanks TiVo. Let's hope other companies follow your example...
Indeed. Now the real question is can they use the same technology to use watermarks on music files. This sounds like the first win-win DRM solution. Let's hope it's not the last.

[Felix Torres]

Now the real question is can they use the same technology to use watermarks on music files.

Not doable. Compressed audio codecs generally strip inaudible waveforms from the audio stream so any watermark has to be encoded within the audible portion. So far, nobody has suceeded in embedding any kind of watermark in the audio stream that doesn't introduce some level of distortion.

However, file formats with built-in DRM options, like WMA *can* carry a watermark like this inside the file but outside the audio stream. The approach, however, is not doable for DRM schemes that rely on external DRM-wrappers like Fairplay.

BTW, this kind of DRM-protection has long been a feature of the MS-DRM suite used by Windows Media and MS Reader. Its called inscription and content providers just refuse to use it, except for some public domain ebook providers.

This isn't a technology issue per se, but a business model issue.
The tools are readily available.
They just need to be used.