Posted on 12/23/2006 5:51:48 PM PST by IncPen
Several times a second the OS will check all the hardware to makes sure it is in compliance with the HD encryption standard. It will look at the video card and display and other parts too It will also phone home to ask for a key to start playing.
It would vary easy to track every movie watched in the world at any given time.
The battle over the encryption schemes has delayed HD for years.
You put your disk in to play a movie it checks all the hardware even checks to make sure you don't have two LCD plugged in and if everything is OK then it will phone home to ask if it is OK for you to watch the movie. I’m sure this will never be abused. S/C
ping
I thnk microsoft painted a HUGE bullseye on vista.
Thank you!
Because in order to protect your "rights", you are penalizing 99.99% of the people for the actions of 0.01%. NOT equitable. Most people ARE honest.
And Jim Baen has settled the issue by actually doing the experiment. "Piracy" in actual fact acts as free advertising.
And the copyright laws today are ludicrous. A patent only lasts for a very limited time compared to copyright. AT MOST, a copyright should be for the author's lifetime (if you want a legacy for your offspring, save and invest the money you make from the copyrighted material, and will THAT to them).
I don't steal, I share.
Matt 10:8 Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.
KJV
Merry Christmas to you as well, and everyone else. I even have good will towards the excessively rich and greedy Bill 'Money' Gates right now. Probably the homemade apple wine kicking in. As Granny Clampett once said, "I think this cider's done turned."
Not if there are direct hardware calls... Some things simply can't be virtualized. While virtualization is a wonderful thing, there are simply some things that it can't do. And in a dual boot environment, once MS has written apps to work exclusively with Vista, you'll have to run it on Vista compatible hardware.
Mark
I am sorry that your only measure of value is monetary. Words do mean things.
"Dollars or Euros?' No, payment is exchange of value for the valued. The thieves take what they value, regardless of the cost in coin, and pay what they deem appropriate.
Re 'market or marketeers,' read a bit more closely.
Tagline...
"I wish you luck if your employer upgrades to Vista."
Exactly. How can we avoid not doing it? The majority of them are currently Windows 2000, which is more reliable than XP, but we are starting the shift to XP.
I have heard that Microsoft only supports two OSes at the same time with patches, currently XP and 2000, but with Vista will drop XP. Can anyone verify this?
In theory I do not think it is evil.
In its current incarnations....yes.
A better word would have been "undeserved." While promotion, marketing, and financing are important in content utilization, the actual content creators usually see little of the profits (pennies on the dollar), simply because they are forced to sign over their rights to their creation in order to have it promoted. I'm sorry, but that has more to do with media monopolies than market practices.
What is a "reasonable duration" of copyright protection, and why?
O.K., I'll bite. For the time being (at least until we can look at a universal ten year copyright): A work would be copyrighted by the creator for his or her life, with rights assignable for ten years to any corporate entity. Note that this would change the "work-for-hire" copyright provisions drastically (making far more content creators contractors rather than employees). At the end of any ten year period the creator could reassign the rights for another ten years (which, of course would probably mean more negotiations, contracts, and ultimately income for the creator and more competition for the corporations). Should the ten years lapse and the author be deceased, the copyright expires and the product enters the public domain.
Way too much content is bottled up in permanent corporate holdings. How many companies are simply living off of their libraries of content? I would suggest there are many... many who are producing very little new content and living off of old content that finances them (the exact opposite of the Founding Father's rationale for copyright protections). Sure, your mega-content-holders like Sony are producing new things... but usually not in the realm in which they hold their vast libraries (Sony's music division is subsidizing their massive battery recall and the sales of their PS3s). Breaking up the monopolies is a good thing.
Once a large number of persons come to believe they have the right to enjoy free music, movies, and other IP, why would they ever pay a dime for it?
There will always be thieves. The trick is to convince the average person to obey copyright. How much of the music download scene is new releases? How much is legacy tracks (stuff that is more than ten years old)? I doubt anyone knows... but this is an important consideration. Likewise, it is much easier to protect something for a short period of time, rather than a long one. Companies would have an incentive to maximize the profits early... as they know a new contract or loss of copyright is only years away. It focuses the industry on finding new and great things, rather than jealously guarding the few things they already have. That difference alone would radically change the system (and help the problem. If you make most of your money in the first two years of marketing something, who cares if the hackers crack it in five?). You'll never get rid of piracy. But you can change the marketplace so piracy is less valuable (hey, why steal when I just need to wait a few years...?).
"Not if there are direct hardware calls... Some things simply can't be virtualized. While virtualization is a wonderful thing, there are simply some things that it can't do. And in a dual boot environment, once MS has written apps to work exclusively with Vista, you'll have to run it on Vista compatible hardware.
Mark"
Yep!
Also Games SUCK running on Mac's. I have tried. Flight Sim X, Battlefield 2142, Splinter Cell Double Agent... All suck. I can't even get Battlefield 2142 to run.
Lest one thinks this is strictly a game problem...
Access on Mac = no go.
Adobe Indesign/CS2 on Intel based Macs = Good luck getting anything to run.
Hardware based Graphics acceleration = Forget it.
Mutiple Monitors = No Go (I currently run 3 on my XP Box)
The list goes on. Macs are a great product! They are not the end all be all answer for everyone. I wish they were I would love to kick M$ to the curb. Just not gonna happen anytime soon.
You should have just used the music... you weren't selling it... yout use would have been too small for them to care except for sending a "Cease and Desist" letter, which would, chances are, never happen.
Now if you were making 10,000 units and planning on selling them for 14.99 each at your daughter's game, I would be more concerned...
No, they won't. Because the problem in DRM is basic physics (every addition of information requires additional energy spent somewhere: entropy)... and you can't beat that. Digital signals are simply ones and zeroes, usually represented by electrons or photons, that carry information. These ones and zeroes (whether electrons or photons... or marks on a piece of paper) could be carrying your grocery list, greetings to a relative, your child's homework, or copyrighted content. How can you tell without marking, encrypting, or translating them? Regardless of scheme, DRM will require restrictions on your ability to manipulate all of those ones and zeroes in order to protect a few of them. You will have to convince your DRM that the ones and zeroes are yours or licensed to you before the DRM will let you manipulate or display the content. No matter what scheme you can imagine, DRM can only work by restricting you, the user. And convincing the DRM always requires processing power, and always is prone to error. It will always increase the price of the equipment, and it will always increase the difficulty of basic tasks (as DRM must monitor everything or it is useless).
So there is no quick fix. Only by taking your ability to freely manipulate those ones and zeroes away can DRM "protect" content...
"I have heard that Microsoft only supports two OSes at the same time with patches, currently XP and 2000, but with Vista will drop XP. Can anyone verify this?"
On June 30, 2005, the Windows 2000 product family (including Windows 2000 Server, Advanced Server, Datacenter Server, and Windows 2000 Professional) transitions from the Mainstream Support to Extended Support phase. This transition marks the progression of Windows 2000 through its product life cycle, originally announced in 2002. The Windows 2000 family entered the marketplace in February 2000 and remains a robust, mature product as it enters its 5-year Extended Support life-cycle phase.
Overview
• On June 30, 2005, the Windows 2000 product family enters the Extended Support phase, which continues for at least 5 years through June 2010.
• Microsoft offers a minimum of 10 years' support (5 years Mainstream plus 5 years Extended) for business and developer products. The Microsoft support life-cycle policy provides predictable coverage of Microsoft products and continues to set the standard for product support policies industry-wide.
• Microsoft is not ending support for Windows 2000. During the Extended Support phase, Microsoft continues to provide security hot fixes and paid support but no longer provides complimentary support options, design change requests, and non-security hotfixes.*
Security updated for Win2k will still happen for a while to come. XP obviously longer than that. My office just started the migration to XP and does not plan on moving to Vista in the forseeable future, maybe not at all. No business case has been made for the upgrade.
Ding Ding Ding, we have a WINNER!
Yeah, even if it is not protected I am not buying it either,LOL! Don't like the style, but hey I have to run, need to DOWNLOAD some music...........
As I said in my first post, dishonest people impose costs on all of us. I do not like it; I wish it were not so. I wish it were not necessary for me to have locks on my doors or to present ID whenever I have to cash a check or to remember a password to log into a favorite web site.
I am not saying that I approve of what Microsoft et al. are doing to protect IP rights. Personally, I do not enjoy having to deal with yet another burdensome security measure. And as some suggest, it may very well backfire as a business decision.
What I am saying is that those companies have every right to protect their IP. In so doing, they are not the villains in this tale. Instead of condemning them, anger should be directed toward those who would violate their IP.
American copyright law is a joke. Good post.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.