----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Jason,
Let's say I own two apartments. Each one is identical. I can only live in
one at a time. The other I consider a marketable asset for the building of
my estate. I invested in my apartment (software) to create that asset and
because I built two units at the same time the cost per unit was less than
had I built only one. Someone comes along and says, "Dale, it's obvious that
you can only live in one apartment at a time so I am going to take the other
one. You are not deprived of a thing you don't already have enough of and
you have the power to reproduce more apartments from your template even at
an increasingly lower unit cost. But, there may be a problem with your
estate building plans because another person took your apartment from me
just as I took it from you and your market is sure to be saturated by all of
the copies of the apartment that guy is making. I have no power to stop him
either."
Once it's loose and in the clear, it's gone. Or, do you see that you get to
make a copy but along with comes the rights to control to prohibit someone
else from making a copy of your copy?
I think the fair use as we have known it will be restored if its, in fact,
eaten away by these DRM measures.
_Dale
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Hugh, I respect your opinion and this is probably a philosophical discussion
with no easy answer. There is one key point that I would like to bring up
and that is the idea of software vs hardware. Stealing a car is theft
because the person you stole it from is now deprived of its use. Stealing
software is not theft because nobody has been deprived of the use of it. If
there were a matter generator that allowed me to make a car, we would likely
have a public discussion of whether people should be allowed to use the
matter generator. Some would argue that cars are so important to our world
we should be using the matter generator, while others would say what about
the inventor of the car? This is the situation we are faced with software.
We can't blindly apply the rules of physical objects to binary data. We have
to take the principles we have learned and try to apply them where
appropriate, but let them evolve along with the technology. I'm not saying
copyright is not appropriate, but if it were as black and white as stealing
a car, there would be no open source community based on giving it away, no
copyleft movement to limit the power of software authors, etc.
I'm glad you brought up Napster, because I think it illustrates a great
point. You purchased a CD and made the judgment call that you were entitled
to a copy on MP3. But who are you to decide that an MP3 version is yours for
the taking? If you bought it on vinyl, then 8 track, then cassette, would
you have made a copy of it from a friend since you had paid several times
over? It's arguable in either direction, and your own morals would have to
be your guide. This judgment call is a huge grey area, and one which
millions of people find themselves in. I don't want that full CD, I just
want the one song; I just want to hear how it sounds before I buy it; I just
want to play it once for my girlfriend; I used to have the CD but I lost it
- everyone has their own reasons for copying things and because they don't
have to "take" anything to get it, it's easy to rationalize - right or
wrong.
I'm not condoning content piracy en masse. I'm saying that I see it from
both sides and we are so far down that road that there is no easy way back.
If piracy were ground to a halt today, would these supposed trillions lost
suddenly reappear in the form of reduced prices for content? Hardly. Are the
numbers of real theft cases around the world shooting through the roof? Not
that I've heard. So my contention is that software, by its nature (or lack
thereof), will never be taken as seriously as hardware. With that in mind,
we must evolve markets and business models into something that works for
everyone better than it does today.
One last point: I believe that if Hollywood did nothing, and I mean
absolutely nothing, to prevent unauthorized duplication of their content,
that we would be no worse off than we are right now. Chinese pirates would
still be selling DVD's, people would still be filming movies at the theatre
to put online, Apple would still be selling a million songs a day, etc.
Their efforts do NOTHING because people don't need Hollywood to tell them
what is right and wrong for them. How much more copying could possibly be
going on? I can already buy D-VHS copies of bit for bit 1080i movies from
cable and when MPEG-4 gets here with 1080p/DTS++ versions get here, you can
bet they'll be out there, too. And I'll be first in line for a
computer-based blu-ray/hd-dvd player that I download software from the
internet to allow me to rip the files and play them on my home theater. Does
this make me a pirate? According to Hollywood it does - even though I won't
make copies for friends or upload the files to a peer to peer network for
others to download.
Hugh, I'm glad you replied, even if we don't agree. I wonder if anyone else
will offer their take. It's exactly this kind of dialog we need to have at a
national level. It would be very interesting to hear the thoughts of 15-20
years olds versus 30s and 40s versus 50+.
Jason
-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Hugh Campbell
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 8:29 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: Illegal BlueRay / HD -DVD players
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Jason,
While this is really not the time or place for this discussion I feel so
strongly about it that I find I must comment. What you are saying is that
it is all right to steal the thoughts, ideas and creativity of others if it
costs too much to purchase it. An entire generation or two grew up after
1985 thinking that if it was on a computer it was ok to "borrow" it or "use"
it for one's own purposes. This is stealing and it is illegal and wrong and
if one does it they are a thief and should be punished accordingly.
The early Napster is the biggest example. I used it myself and figured
since I had purchased, at an earlier date, every song I downloaded I was
entitled to use them on my computer. I still feel ok about it. But the
vast majority of people who were trading songs never bought a single one and
that was wrong. Now Napster, etc. sell the songs and everything is legal
and perfectly ok. But the point is that millions of people are used to
getting something for nothing........be it software or songs or movies.
So now these people are in a culture, which you described perfectly, of
thinking it is morally and legally ok to steal the property of others as
long as it comes off the internet. You say the sellers are the problem,
well if the sellers had no buyers there would be no problem. Just because
there was no legitimate way to do it is not justification. This is not a
grey area.
You said and I quote ".....I think we have to recognize that copying a cd or
dvd is NOT theft. It's just not that simple. It may be illegal, and
possibly unethical, but
not theft." If it is illegal it is theft. How would you like to create
something and have millions of people use it without be paid for your
creation? A song, a movie, a piece of software are all creations. And
all of these items should be protected as they currently are by the laws of
this country.
Saying that all computer experts and the work they do would not exist is not
reason enough to allow using the work of others without compensation. This
is all that Hollywood and the everyone else is trying to protect.
Admittedly they go overboard in their zeal to protect their property but
when you consider the consequences if they did nothing I can't really blame
them.
I sincerely hope that we are not encouraging children to "find clever
solutions" to cracking a "copy protection scheme". The kid you mentioned
was simply a vandal, not someone to be held up as a role model. The
"ultimate empowered consumer" is rather Orwellian to my way of thinking. I
believe that several countries have already tried this method and failed
miserably.
Nothing personal, just my opinion.
Hugh
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jason Burroughs" <
[email protected]>
To: "HDTV Magazine" <
[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: Illegal BlueRay / HD -DVD players
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Dale, all the philosophy in the world won't change the economics of
> piracy.
> Yes, we need to educate our children and ourselves about the importance of
> copyright. But I see that as a separate endeavor than how we protect and
> market copyrighted material. Teenagers are not the problem - the
> commercial
> sellers of pirated material are.
>
> We all know that serious pirates thrive with our without copyright
> protection - just like serious thieves break into our homes if they really
> want to. We've all heard the statistics about Asian bootleggers selling
> product by the truckload for pennies on the dollar. They do it with shoes
> and watches, so of course they'll do it with computer software and
> audio/video titles. I'm all in favor of prosecuting and persecuting these
> commercial pirates. But let's take the downloading of songs via limewire
> or
> napster. Would these 12 year olds really be going out and buying a $15 CD
> if
> they weren't getting it online? Maybe, if that CD had more than one good
> song on it. More to the point, maybe if that CD had more than one song
> with
> a video on MTV. So what we have is a product (CD) that contains many
> subproducts (songs) bundled together. Most people don't want those other
> songs, so they download the song that they want and ignore the rest. Give
> them a legitimate way to do say, and they will (as evidenced by the
> 1,000,000,000 songs purchased on itunes).
>
>
> Also, I think we have to recognize that copying a cd or dvd is NOT theft.
> It's just not that simple. It may be illegal, and possibly unethical, but
> not theft. If it weren't for software piracy, I sure wouldn't know how to
> install Windows a million ways from Sunday, how to do pivot tables in
> Excel,
> or many of the things I learned early on in my computer career by
> borrowing
> software from friends. However, now that I am an expert in these
> technologies, I will purchase them for my business, recommend them to
> friends and colleagues, and there are millions just like me. So if all
> digital 'copyright infringement' were gone, an entire generation of
> computer
> experts, and the software they endorse, would not be here today.
>
> What we're seeing is a revolution by the consumer in the way they choose
> to
> consume goods. Adults are voting with their pocketbooks and kids are
> voting
> with their keyboards. School age children are encouraged to find clever
> solutions to problems, and they are great at it - just ask the 15 year old
> from Sweden who cracked the CSS copy protection scheme. He wasn't a
> pirate,
> and he certainly wasn't selling bootleg discs on the street corners.
> Unfortunately, the market for these products has not evolved fast enough
> to
> keep up with the changing demand, so you have people getting the content
> on
> *their* terms - the ultimate empowered consumer. Whether it's wrong or
> right
> is not so easy to answer.
>
> My personal passion in life is alternative energy. I'm involved with a
> biodiesel startup company in non-profit mode. I attend conferences and
> read
> trade journals about the ridiculous price of petroleum and the business
> practices of those involved. What we are starting to see in this industry
> is
> people taking hot water heaters from junkyards, taking used grease from
> restaurants, and making a fuel for their vehicles. There's a National
> Biodiesel Board that represents the soy industry and frowns upon people
> making their own fuel. They say it can't be done at the quality levels of
> the big boys (large scale biodiesel producers), and basically ignore the
> homebrewing community. This is the wrong approach. They should recognize
> that what we are seeing nationwide is a grass roots movement to free
> ourselves of corporate greed. The same goes for the entertainment
> industry.
> Major league sport ticket prices, films at the local googleplex, CD prices
> close to $20, and people have simply had enough. Until every industry
> whose
> products are produced in binary terms evolves their business model to
> match
> demand, we will continue to see consumers find a way to see and hear
> content
> on their own terms, while their trading mp3's/avi's/etc is portrayed by
> Hollywood to be on the same level as a million DVD per year copying
> operation in Hong Kong.
>
> I hope this doesn't sound like an anti-corporation or anti-hollywood rant.
> I
> love movies as much as the next guy, live in the home of the SXSW film
> festival, and operate a small business renting out high def movies. I
> certainly don't want someone to rent a movie from me and put it on the
> internet. But I recognize that until it as easy to rent or buy these
> products at a reasonable price as it is to download them from napster, I
> don't really have a mass market.
>
> Jason
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Dale Cripps
> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 2:09 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: Illegal BlueRay / HD -DVD players
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Dear Readers:
>
> Permit me to make this comment a little broader than what the specific
> topic
> in question would suggest. I am sending a copy to Brad Hunt at the MPAA
> who
> is at the front of this copy protection issue.
>
>
> .....
> This whole issue of copy protection is not without its reasons. While we
> can
> individually lay claim to a high moral order and never be found with our
> fingers in another's cookie jar, that is not so for the less scrupulous.
> This new high-def DVD player is a commercial product open to anyone's
> acquisition. With each disk that anyone can buy and play on that machine
> the
> entire value of a movie studio is potentially transferred. With
> infringement
> the entire process for movie making could crumble.
>
> Well, that may be an exaggeration. In our nation, at least, all but a few
> pay our taxes without strong arms enforcing it (other than a threat of
> having our lives destroyed, which tends to keep the honest even more
> honest). That same level of honesty is likely to carry over to our
> personal
> management and our respect of copyrights. That same level of honesty in
> our
> society is would carry over even to banks...yet there is not one bank to
> which the public has access that doesn't have its steel-lined vault. I
> have
> no doubt that we would be quite concerned for the security of our own
> safety
> deposit boxes were there any less than those measures guarding them.
>
> I have talked with the MPAA over the last two years about how we here at
> HDTV Magazine can help present copy protection as a necessary preemptive
> measure without Hollywood coming off like a remake of Dracula. Until a few
> weeks ago I thought that we were finally about to enter into a
> constructive
> dialog about it, but the steps they need to take that would assure me that
> the receptivity needed for an honest exchange of ideas were not taken, so
> I
> withdrew from the scheduled (and rescheduled and rescheduled) discussions.
> No good comes from offering one's self anyway, so we will wait until
> called
> upon to help or accept the fact that we are not going to ever be called
> upon.
>
> This copy protection issue goes far beyond Hollywood. With more and more
> of
> the infrastructure of the world being digitally controlled the management
> and the security of those controls is of the utmost importance to
> everyone.
> More than to argue over a disk, and how it is protected, this nation needs
> to enter into a profound discussion that will lead to a broad general
> public
> understanding/philosophy/policy on why and how we protect publicly
> "exposed"
> copyrighted content. This discussion will have to take into account the
> public's responsibility and willing cooperation as co-defenders of
> copyright
> values, or we, as a society, will have to face more and more
> market-confounding prophylactic measures to keep the few dishonest among
> us
> at bay. Do we, as a people, accept or not accept that we have a permanent
> social flaw that requires our engineers--social and otherwise--to make our
> values as secure as possible? Or, do we live in some fantasy world that
> says
> "all disease is eradicated" and then watch unarmed as the system upon
> which
> we all depend be eaten away bit by bit by the ever-present malicious among
> us? Hollywood, because of its high-profile product and the mass digital
> master-quality distribution, is at the public forefront for this much
> bigger
> issue. They know they have a monstrous public relations problem with their
> part in it. It will hurt them if they fail to make their case and that
> will
> hurt us when their products correspondingly suffer. Regardless of what
> they
> do, technically speaking, they have to sell their reason for doing it to
> the
> most influential leaders among us or let the masses scream rape by the
> "fat
> cats" without a counter. This influencing of the leadership in our
> community
> has not been done by the motion picture industry nor has there been a
> visible attempt to do so. We will listen to the cries of "fat cat" rape
> until they do.
>
> Should any misinterpret what I am saying, let me put it in one sentence:
> The
> world has not proved to me that we can leave unguarded our private or
> cultural treasures without a negative consequence to our society.
>
> Dale Cripps
>
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> It's highly unlikely you'll see those with HD DVD or Blu-ray. The
> protection
> scheme on these(you can find a primer on the LG Electronics site) is an
> order of magnitude more secure than DVDs. It's also has adaptability
> features designed in, such that anyone cracking a disc today can be
> countered with updated security on future releases.
>
> There are ROM watermarks and all sorts of obstacles. Not the simple hack
> that the script kiddies could jump all over previously. If you're holding
> your breath for a black market player, you'll be waiting quite awhile,
> IMO.
>
> Bob
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>> Alan Crawley
>> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 9:20 AM
>> To: HDTV Magazine
>> Subject: Illegal BlueRay / HD -DVD players
>>
>> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>
>> Remember those "quasi-legal" up-converting DVD players that output 720P
>> over
>> component, and could be set to any region? (like the Bravo D1)
>>
>> Will we see a blue laser universal BD and HD-DVD player? When, who?
>>
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
>>
>> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
>> same
>> day) send an email to:
>>
[email protected]
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
>
[email protected]
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
>
[email protected]
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
>
[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected] 
