On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:46:17 -0800, "Drew Cooper [MSFT]"
(snipping all but windowsxp.security_admin)
Here are some docs that look like they're geared toward content providers:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/drm/whitepapers.aspx
Hm. I see:
- enablement for "spam" distribution
- built-in DoS payload
- built-in call-home
Not much to like, from a consumer's perspective. What if the site it
calls home to does somethiong other than offer a license?
I'm assuming that's for folks who are going to put content servers on the
net - probably a steep investment for the average musician.
The first paper didn't talk costs, more a matter of boasting how the
natutral advantages of digital data have been broken.
I looked at "personal licenses" and that was a brave-spin on how to
stop DRM from killing your "protected" material when changing PCs etc.
I found this:
" The license acquisition process allows companies to gather targeted
customer information. For example, many music distribution Web sites
now request the consumer's e-mail address in exchange for audio file
licenses. Music distribution companies can then use this e-mail
address to keep the consumer up-to-date on concert schedules and new
compact disc (CD) releases, or to market related merchandise."
Yep; goobye privacy, hullo spam.
Ah; here's the barrier to entry:
The DRM Web site and database require the following minimum software
configuration:
* Microsoft SQL Server 2000
* Windows Media Rights Manager SDK version 7.1
* Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) version 5.0 +
* Microsoft .NET Framework
Is this a single-vendor solution, or can one accomplish the same
results via open-source software?
I think it's the "service providers" I'd be most interested in, i.e.
those who encryt your content for you without coming to own it
themselves, and without requiring you to buy a ton of costly software
your old PC is too frail to run anyway
http://www.streameu.com/pricing/calculator/streamukcalc.htm
That's what I'm clicking through now, a no-nosense way to find out
what it costs (in this case, for one 4 minute clip).
While waiting, I spotted this...
"...the Packager.aspx page could potentially locate files on a network
drive and encrypt them..."
....which looks like an invitation to malicious use. MS are famous for
ASSuming technologies will only be used the way they had in mind; else
how else could one explain:
- granting scripting rights to unsolicited email "message text"
- allowing scripts in cookies
- auto-running macros in RTF, TXT etc. where they shouldn't exist
- hiding the .exe extension + allowing .exe to set their own icon
- allowing Outbreak to be scripted to read addybook, sending email
- "blank" pwd as "no pwd" when pwd is all that stops pwd being set
Something that encrypts your data, then calls home to offer you a
license to it is quite a neat extortion racket.
Interesting that in the same page, MS recommends that content
providers do NOT allow users to backup their licenses. Rather
different to promises made elsewhere that you can do this.
Still no answer from the "calculator" site. Never mind; here's
http://www.buydrm.com/
"We have seen the enemy - and she's a 12-year-old girl"
Charming. Rule number one; hate your customers.
The next link is: "Securing your future with DRM [Warning: This links
to an adult resource]" ...interesting. Sure enough, it's the flesh
pimps this time, who note they have similar concerns as the RIAA...
"If you want to take trailers or full-length movies, and drop them
safely into P2P networks to drive traffic to your front door, then DRM
provides a viable and affordable option."
Hullo spam, part 2.
This looks interesting:
http://www.music2clear.com/index.htm
The URL stays unchanged when you click into topics like "Gaet-A-Seal",
which looks like what we as value *creators* (as opposed to pimps,
i.e. middle-men or "football owners") might be after. But as the FAQ
says, Get-A-Seal doesn't give you DRM content protection, so I guess
it isn't relevant to "how much does it cost to DRM my own material?"
The calculator still isn't calculating, so I'm giving up there. The
links from the MS site are all pretty glossy large operations, often
with web site that have the "MS look", but that's to be expected;
after all, you can't expect to find links to the mom-and-pop
operations from a huge site like MS's.
DRM's a hard sell, because basically it's a matter of more money for
crippled material. It only sells against natural content if natural
content is made to be a worse product, e.g. by harrassment risk.
I'm not adverse to anything that empowers value creators to derive
revenue for their value, preferably under their direct control.
Technology drops the barrier to...
- content creation (hi-quality consumer video cameras,
PC-based recording plus a consumer taste in music that
is computer-creation-friendly)
- content distribution (p2p, free hosting etc.)
- marketing (create a buzz; let consumers GoOgle
their way to you)
....which basically kills off most of the value one had to submit to
the media pimps to attain. What it has yet to do is...
- find a way to secure payment for value created
....and that's what the search is for.
DRM could be a problem, a solution, or an irrelevancy. From what I've
seen so far, it looks more barrier than bridge.
I don't know whether they count as "media pimps" or not, but (and I'm
assuming again) there are probably companies out there that release
DRM-protected music for a fee.
Yes, that's what I was hoping for; something menial like a
photocopying service, print shop, CD pressing plant etc.
I've BT and DT in my time, I had a cassette label in the 1980s to make
available music that the industry wouldn't touch. There were only two
record pressing plants in those days, run by dudes who were on
first-name terms with each other, which saved the regime of the day
from having to impose a more obvious censorship.
Even if you went to these places on the basis that you pay X per copy
of (say) 1000 disks with white sleeves, they could (and often did)
refuse to take the order. So we went cassette label instead, thus
sidelining the whole mess, as a way to get our stuff into ppl's ears.
The relationship between value creator and media "label" is long
overdue for revolution. Just as the railroad tycoons were the money
kings in the days of the wild west, so these corporations were the
robber barons of the late 20th century. I'm not saying they should go
to the wall; more that what they earn should be more in line with the
value they contribute to the process.
I'm not an RM guru, although I do see them in the hallway. A few links is
really all I have to offer. Hope they help.
They did, thanks! Generally, from a PC perspective, I think it is
VERY foolish to give any files (and especially code - noting how MS
allows media content to script and URL about) stronger rights than who
gets to sit behind the keyboard.
On that basis alone, DRM is a menace.
------------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
The rights you save may be your own
