OSDN | Our Network | Newsletters | Advertise | Shop     X 
Welcome to Slashdot Science Microsoft Technology Intel The Almighty Buck
 faq
 code
 awards
 journals
 subscribe
 older stuff
 rob's page
 preferences
 submit story
 advertising
 supporters
 past polls
 topics
 about
 bugs
 jobs
 hof

Sections
apache
Sep 13

apple
Sep 15
(2 recent)

articles
Sep 16
(34 recent)

askslashdot
Sep 15
(5 recent)

books
Sep 13

bsd
Sep 14
(2 recent)

developers
Sep 16
(1 recent)

features
Jul 18

interviews
Sep 12

radio
Jun 29

science
Sep 16
(7 recent)

yro
Sep 16
(3 recent)

Microsoft Planning Digital Restrictions Server
MicrosoftPosted by michael on Monday September 16, @01:01PM
from the one-server-infrastructure-solution-to-bind-them-all dept.
Jon James writes "Microsoft is pushing further into digital rights management with a plan for a DRM server due to go into beta testing later this year, eWeek is reporting. Microsoft has already applied for a patent for a DRM operating system but would not say if the DRM server would be based on this. In an interview last week with eWeek, Jim Allchin, Microsoft's group vice president for platforms, said a DRM server is but one of three server infrastructure applications coming next year."

 

 
Slashdot Login
Nickname:

Password:

[ Create a new account ]

Related Links
· Jon James
· plan for a DRM server
· More on Microsoft
· Also by michael

<  More on GM's New Fuel Cell Cars | Ununoctium Wrapup  >
Microsoft Planning Digital Restrictions Server | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 206 comments | Search Discussion
Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2 (Slashdot Overload: CommentLimit 50)
Security (Score:2, Interesting)
by Valiss on Monday September 16, @01:05PM (#4266729)
(User #463641 Info | http://www.pctoolbin.com/)
Again we all must wonder how secure this is. But really, I'm more worried about a patent - which might give them exclusive rights to thier little piece of technology. Arg.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Palladium: the dark age of computing (Score:5, Insightful)
by cxreg on Monday September 16, @01:06PM (#4266732)
(User #44671 Info | http://www.godfuckingdamnit.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday January 15, @02:25PM)
I just hope that one day I can tell my kids about how close we came to losing our digital freedom, instead of having to explain to them why the software daddy wrote is now illegal
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:Palladium: the dark age of computing by hendridm (Score:1) Monday September 16, @01:18PM
  • Re:Palladium: the dark age of computing by ciole (Score:2) Monday September 16, @01:55PM
  • In Other News by cmdr_beeftaco (Score:1) Monday September 16, @02:20PM
  • It isnt the "Palladium spec" alone thats dangerous by cxreg (Score:1) Monday September 16, @01:42PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Re:Palladium: the dark age of computing by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday September 16, @01:43PM
    • Re:Palladium: the dark age of computing (Score:4, Insightful)
    by gilroy on Monday September 16, @01:49PM (#4267149)
    (User #155262 Info | http://www.ubidubium.net/ | Last Journal: Saturday August 24, @12:47AM)
    Blockquoth the poster:

    Lay out the scenerio: EXACTLY how will Palladium make "software that daddy wrote" illegal.

  • MS offers Palladium and convinces everyone (in Washington, DC) that it's the only safe, secure operating system.
  • Some cracker or terrorist (or malcontent script kiddie or...) finds the Holy Grail of cracking, a heretofore uber-error that cripples all web-servers and desktops on the Net.
  • The economy shudders.
  • Congress mandates that the only computers allowed back onto a rebuilt Internet must run a guaranteed, safe, secure operating system -- including hardware lock-outs.
  • Since there, at that time, exists precisely one such OS -- Palladium -- it earns huge market share. And because MS owns the patents on DRMOS and related topics, it becomes difficult and impossibly slow to develop an alternative.
  • If Palladium is indeed a safe, secure OS, then it hardly makes sense to allow anyone to run anything else. Only crackers, terrorists, and the ilk would really want an open, "insecure" OS.
  • While you might have the legal right to write any code you wanted, you would face charges if you distributed anything other than Palladium-signed code.
    • [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    • Re:Palladium: the dark age of computing by Reality Master 101 (Score:2) Monday September 16, @01:52PM
        Re:Palladium: the dark age of computing (Score:4, Insightful)
        by MoneyT on Monday September 16, @02:00PM (#4267260)
        (User #548795 Info | http://home.cyberarmy.com/omega81584)
        Crazy and paranoid? How about you try to go back to 1990 and convince people that in 10 years, the RIAA would be pushing to get a bill passed that would allow them to legaly hack your computer to see if you have any music files on there that you don't own. They would tell you you're paranoid.

        Try to convince them that in 2002, you will need to report to Microsoft information about the hardware your computer is running just to get a licence key. THey would tell you you're crazy.

        Try to convince them that in 10 years, linking or providing acess to code that would allow you to watch a video on a *NIX based OS would be illegal. They wouldn't believe you.

        Try to convince them that the RIAA would be pushing for legislation to make it illegal for you to make a copy of your favorite album to keep at work or in the car. They would tell you to go jump in a lake.

        Yet each of these senarios are equaly true today. Never underestimate the power of people with money. They can get what they want if they try hard enough and people don't pay attention.
        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:Palladium: the dark age of computing by cosmosis (Score:2) Monday September 16, @01:53PM
  • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
Hey (Score:4, Funny)
by GigsVT on Monday September 16, @01:07PM (#4266744)
(User #208848 Info | http://www.electronicschat.org/ | Last Journal: Wednesday August 21, @09:01PM)
"Personal information such as medical and financial data; corporate information such as legal and business documents; and commercial content such as software, music and movies may all require DRM," said a Microsoft spokeswoman, in Redmond, Wash."

In other news, shares of all Linux companies soared 1000% for unknown reasons.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:Hey by sulli (Score:1) Monday September 16, @02:00PM
  • Re:Hey by MoneyT (Score:2) Monday September 16, @02:03PM
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
More on this from CounterPane (Score:5, Interesting)
by muonzoo on Monday September 16, @01:08PM (#4266751)
(User #106581 Info | http://polyphase.ca/)
The latest Cryptogram has more links on this... Shamelessly ripped from the latest [counterpane.com].
Possible Palladium patents from Microsoft:
  • 6,330,670 Digital rights management operating system
  • 6,327,652 Loading and identifying a digital rights management operating system

You can probably find others pending in Europe, where you have to disclose upon filing.

At a panel on Palladium at the USENIX Security Conference in August, Microsoft representatives claimed that there was no way Palladium could be used to enforce Digital Rights Management. In response, Lucky Green invented a bunch of ways Palladium could be used to enforce DRM and then filed for a patent.

  1. http://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography@wasabisys tems.com/msg02506.html [mail-archive.com]
  2. http://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography@wasabisys tems.com/msg02554.html [mail-archive.com]
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Patented? (Score:4, Funny)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 16, @01:09PM (#4266767)
Oh great! Microsoft is working on server technology that enables the RIAA and MPAA to control what I can watch and listen to. Super!

Well, at least this technology is heavily patented, so no other companies will be able to ship crap like this.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
What do they have to hide? (Score:5, Insightful)
by Storm Damage (st0rmdNO@SPAMhotmail.com) on Monday September 16, @01:10PM (#4266772)
(User #133732 Info)
From the article:

Microsoft has already applied for a patent for a DRM operating system but would not say if the DRM server would be based on this.

In days past, and in some industries still, companies proudly announce(d) that their technologies were patented. "Check out our patented device for X," they'd say. It's kind of telling that a company won't even admit whether or not something's patented even when asked nowadays...like they're hoping someone infringes so they can leverage a better deal for themselves after the fact, or they're pushing for wide adoption so they can extort license fees from the rest of the industry. These IP tactics are getting so shady, it's almost as if they're ashamed to admit the truth about what they're doing.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
I don't get it (Score:5, Interesting)
by Spencerian on Monday September 16, @01:11PM (#4266781)
(User #465343 Info | http://macosprose.blogspot.com/)
I don't get Microsoft's motivation in this, to a degree. This thing would be a superfilter, and given how nasty MS generates some code, it will likely restrict access to legitimate resources if not configured properly (assuming the server would allow itself to be configured properly).

I don't get what they're trying to make with this. Are they trying to actually be innovative and propose something that hasn't been thought of by some other company?

I would think that such a device would run amuck with the file sharing and "digital hub" features already found in Windows products. Heaven help us if they consider making this monitor *nix system access.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Peek at the future (Score:1)
by Winterblink on Monday September 16, @01:11PM (#4266782)
(User #575267 Info | http://winterblink.com/)
Other company officials are positioning the DRM server as an attempt to define read and write privileges more broadly than they are currently defined.

Little peek at the future (read:Palladium), perhaps?

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Should there be an open source DRM server? (Score:5, Interesting)
by Dan Crash on Monday September 16, @01:13PM (#4266800)
(User #22904 Info | http://www.apocatopia.com)
Some folks support open source software because they think the open source paradigm is a superior way to develop software. Others support it because they think open source is the right thing for society. Some people think both.

Given that there's at least some conflict between open source ideals and DRM, is an open source DRM server something to work for or against? Seems like this could have profound ramifications down the road either way.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
DRM server?! (Score:1)
by Whatthehellever on Monday September 16, @01:14PM (#4266808)
(User #93572 Info)
No worries here. I use Linux.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Scary... (Score:2, Insightful)
by grip on Monday September 16, @01:16PM (#4266821)
(User #60499 Info)
Consumers have figured out the MHZ myth -- and aren't rushing to upgrade so fast anymore.

They also figured out that Office 97 works just fine, so why upgrade to 2000 or 2002?

Intel and Microsoft can read the writing on the wall -- revenue decline, so...

Are they racing to get this DRM hardware and software in place to force upgrades? Think about it, if it requires secure hardware to talk to secure software, then the chance that Intel will give the hardware specs to open source communities is slim to none.

So, will the next generation of hardware even be able to run Linux and display content off the Internet?

Grip
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Next generation hardware (Score:5, Interesting)
    by pieterh on Monday September 16, @01:33PM (#4266982)
    (User #196118 Info)

    So, will the next generation of hardware even be able to run Linux and display content off the Internet?

    The answer is 'possibly not'. You have to assume that MS's agenda involves making this 'definitely not'.


    The question will be answered when Microsoft starts producing PCs (as compared to the X-Box, which is a simpler issue). Take - for instance - the upcoming Microsoft tablet PC. My guess is that it will not only come with Windows preinstalled (that is not a surprise) but also that it will be impossible to change the OS. The hardware will be keyed to the OS, and MS will have learned their lessons from the X-Box.

    If this does not already worry you, then consider the following scenario: MS then licenses this hardware platform, which will incorporate patented elements of DRM and TCP, to their current Windows licensees. The bargain will be: build PCs using our technology, or loose your margins on Windows. Once Dell produces a PC that cannot run Linux and where attempts to open the box can be countered by DCMA-style lawsuits, you wll see Microsoft's strategy.

    If the US government was serious about preventing MS from becoming a monopoly, they should ban them from producing PC hardware.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:Scary... by siskbc (Score:1) Monday September 16, @01:53PM
  • Re:Scary... by MrResistor (Score:2) Monday September 16, @02:11PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
skepticism is a good thing (Score:4, Insightful)
by bashbrotha (todd@t[ ]g.net ['odd' in gap]) on Monday September 16, @01:16PM (#4266824)
(User #41617 Info | http://www.toddg.net/)
The article was a fairly non-biased look at DRM, and I particularly liked the quote from Dave Debona, who works at a company that might use DRM to aid in IP protection. His quote:

"But, of course, any technology [DRM] can be twisted and misdirected. Anyone proclaiming to protect assets for others is scary. We typically feel safer guarding our own chicken coop," DeBona said. "We will evaluate Microsoft's DRM offering, with extra attention paid to security. A healthy dose of skepticism never hurts."

DRM, to me, is merely a tool, like you would call the Internet a tool or even a gun a tool. From a business standpoint (not just record companies,etc)DRM is not essentially evil, however, in agreeing with the above quote, DRM patented and controlled by one company is very scary. Don't let DRM == absolute evil, but instead, let the "one company to rule them all" mentality be attributed to evil.

If DRM has to exist, it needs to exist with more than one entity (i.e. not even one goverment) controlling it.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Damn... (Score:1)
by Dr. Bent (ben AT int DOT com) on Monday September 16, @01:17PM (#4266830)
(User #533421 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
Wow...DRM technology protected by lame patent law and made by Microsoft. Who'll gimme odds that when they turn it on for the first time it opens a gateway to Hell?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:Damn... by sulli (Score:1) Monday September 16, @01:23PM
Personal Info, Medical Records, DRM? WRONG (Score:1)
by fire-eyes (sgtphou&fire-eyes,dynup,org) on Monday September 16, @01:19PM (#4266844)
(User #522894 Info | http://fire-eyes.dynup.org/)
"Personal information such as medical and financial data; corporate information such as legal and business documents; and commercial content such as software, music and movies may all require DRM," said a Microsoft spokeswoman, in Redmond, Wash.

Like hell. I would use all possible avenues at my disposal, and I do mean all, to prevent MY information mingled with this shit!

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
"Palladium will not require DRM..." (Score:3, Informative)
by dpbsmith on Monday September 16, @01:19PM (#4266852)
(User #263124 Info)
Just a couple of months ago microsoft was insisting [microsoft.com] that they had nothing to do with that nasty DRM stuff: "Palladium will not require DRM, and DRM will not require Palladium. Palladium is a great complementary technology to the DRM solutions of tomorrow, but the two are separate technologies," spin, spin, blah blah blah.

All Microsoft was going to do was provide a nice NEUTRAL technology whose main use was going to be to allow you and me to set policies on our personal machines to stop spam, viruses, and international terrorists.

All that stuff about their patent on a "DRMOS" was just a misunderstanding.

And already they're selling a DRM server. Come on, Microsoft, our memories are short but they're not THAT short.

If proof were needed that Microsoft's interests are no longer aligned with those of end-users, this is it.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
someone please (Score:1)
by mrpuffypants (tcook@mok[ ]o.com ['otc' in gap]) on Monday September 16, @01:21PM (#4266867)
(User #444598 Info | http://www.mokotco.com/)
clear up for me what DRM is and why these companies want me to get in with it

thanks
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
Microsoft Owns Your Soul (Score:2, Funny)
by doublem on Monday September 16, @01:22PM (#4266878)
(User #118724 Info | http://www.matthewmiller.net/ | Last Journal: Wednesday August 14, @11:51AM)
In related news, the RIAA announced Microsoft as the "One True OS," and declared that the only computer systems that will be able to play CDs manured after Jan 1, 2003 will be Microsoft's new OS, "MS, We Own You."

Hillary Rosen is quoted as saying "This new system will finally give us the ability to destroy IP Piracy. Once Microsoft flips the global kill switch on Windows 95, 98, ME, 200 and XP, the only computers left will be ones running the new OS. We're very excited about the new pending legislation that would make it illegal to run Hacker Operating Systems like the degenerate Apple or Communist Linux systems. We will control what you see, we will control what you hear, and soon, we will control what you think! MWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Good thing about patents? (Score:2)
by teetam on Monday September 16, @01:26PM (#4266911)
(User #584150 Info | http://www.etash.com/)
There are two facts here:
  1. Microsoft has plans to incorporate evil stuff into its future OS.
  2. MS has patents on this stuff.

This might be a good thing as this will prevent other operating systems from incorporating similar evil technologies.

Why don't we go ahead and gift patents for fraudulent accounting and industrial pollution to MS. This way we can prevent all the other companies from cooking their books or polluting the environment. MS' lawyers will do a better job of enforcing this than the government!

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
It's time to start patenting any kind of ideas (Score:2)
by GauteL on Monday September 16, @01:28PM (#4266931)
(User #29207 Info | http://www.linuxguiden.org)
.. that can be used to spread evil all around the world. So that the next time Dr. Evil tries to take over the world we can sue him for patent infringement.

Seriously though, patenting really evil ideas and refusing to let them be implemented would be kind of nice. Too bad DRM isn't already patented by someone who seriously don't want to see it used.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Governing (Score:2)
by olman on Monday September 16, @01:29PM (#4266947)
(User #127310 Info | http://koti.welho.com/omannist/)
Weird as it might sound, I'd feel a lot safer if Your Elected Reps were behind this kind of scheme. Instead of Uncle Bill. At least there are laws about liability and the like.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Ok... (Score:1)
by Dragonshed on Monday September 16, @01:29PM (#4266952)
(User #206590 Info)
Everyone thank microsoft for introducing the notion of different operating systems performing different functions (for a seperate fee, ofcourse).

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Microsoft Multiple Personality Disorders (Score:1)
by MECC on Monday September 16, @01:31PM (#4266960)
(User #8478 Info)
When seeing msft trying to place all kinds of restrictions on what people can do on the one hand, and trying like hell to remove every possible inconvenience (to the point of crashing entire networks) on the other, it looks like a case of corporate multiple personality disorder. Makes you wonder which personality you're dealing with at any given moment....
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
At least my personal files will be safe... (Score:2)
by javacowboy on Monday September 16, @01:31PM (#4266964)
(User #222023 Info | http://www.geocities.com/bohemianbrewbaron)
... because nooone can possibly hack into any server running Windows, right?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Windows-Users, Just Keep Telling Yourself: (Score:1)
by Shuh on Monday September 16, @01:33PM (#4266984)
(User #13578 Info | Last Journal: Thursday February 14, @03:53PM)


"It's just an option! It's just a checkbox! I'm really in control! M$ is spending all this money to help me!"

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
Quite Obvious (Score:2)
by vlad_petric on Monday September 16, @01:35PM (#4267001)
(User #94134 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
Microsoft's plan is quite obvious - they want the lionshare of the media distribution in the "new" digital world. That's the whole point of DRM - you *can't* distribute digital media using today's technology, the p2p piracy would be simply too large. Screwing other OSs in the meanwhile is just an added bonus, but certainly not their main goal - I mean, if you look at the numbers, they don't really have a competition


The Raven.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Another switch ad? (Score:2, Funny)
by SensitiveMale on Monday September 16, @01:38PM (#4267035)
(User #155605 Info)
Hello,

My name is Jimmy Joe and I bought a PC. I wanted to listen to CDs while I was browsing. I got the new microsoft OS and now I I have a 3 cent charge to my visa everytime I listen to a CD track, 5 cent if I listen to an MP3 if it is encoded over 128k, and a quarter for every DVD I watch. I switched to Mac OS X because my visa bill was over 10 pages a month.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
legalizing the mob (Score:1)
by octalgirl on Monday September 16, @01:40PM (#4267054)
(User #580949 Info)
It is rather chilling when a tech company as large as Microsoft is now pairing up and kissing ass with enormous organizations like the RIAA and MPAA. Together, and with the help of a few good purchased senators (seriously) they could end up forming the largest controlling cartel in the United States. Even switching to Linux won't help.

Sorry to sound all doom and gloom. But this is like two great dragons teaming up on the helpless village
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Whee! This can't be cheap. (Score:2)
by RyanFenton on Monday September 16, @01:42PM (#4267074)
(User #230700 Info)
As an added bonus, such technology can't be cheap - meaning you have to be pretty wealthy to be able to actively control the flow of information, meaning the ability to create content will be even more limited - whoopie!

Business models are becoming yet more insane. Wasn't intellectual property first built in this nation on the concept that people should be encouraged to share information, rather than horde it, so a very limited monopoly would encourage more people to take the time to build new things? Now the idea is that people shouldn't be able to share ideas, but instead should have to pay money to horde them on their system, so established interests can keep their source of income... there's no way such a system can continue, if it gets what it wants... I don't understand how even those with finantial interests in such a system can't see that. The very utility of information is at stake, and very few people seem to care, except in how it can directly contribute to the bottom line.

Ryan Fenton
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
chinfsck (Score:1)
by guacamolefoo on Monday September 16, @01:44PM (#4267092)
(User #577448 Info)
> Jim Allchin, Microsoft's group vice president

Is this the same guy who narrated the Rocky Horror Picture Show?

guac.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
If they can call copyright infringement (Score:2, Insightful)
by acceleriter on Monday September 16, @01:45PM (#4267110)
(User #231439 Info)
"piracy" and "theft," then I can call DRM "Digital Restrictions Management." It is henceforth so named.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
MS caught in a lie... (Score:2)
by Derek on Monday September 16, @01:46PM (#4267123)
(User #1525 Info | http://warnick.fws1.com | Last Journal: Tuesday February 12, @02:07PM)
...or just naive? These posts are from the "The Cryptography Mailing List". A man named "Lucky Green" posts that a mid-level MS manager attended panel discussion at the USENIX conference and, during the panel, denied any knowledge of how to use Palladium as a control for software piracy. This didn't sound right to many people, so the next day, Lucky submitted several patent applications to the USPTO doing exactly that.

I don't know who "Lucky Green" is or whether or not this actually happened, but the posts are worth a read!

http://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography@wasabisys tems.com/msg02506.html [mail-archive.com] http://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography@wasabisys tems.com/msg02554.html [mail-archive.com]

-Derek

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
When will the *AAs and MS realize... (Score:2)
by intermodal (`moc.liamwocsom' `ta' `ayanreves') on Monday September 16, @01:48PM (#4267139)
(User #534361 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
that this is like trying to stuff the Nuclear Genie back into a bottle. Computers without DRM are so widespread that it would be ridiculous to make anything previously unrestricted illegal, as well as an infringement of the First Amendment to make Linux illegal as source code has been declared as a form of free speech. The way I see it, either this will drive an additional nail into the coffin of the DMCA, or I'll move to another country. If you tell Jimmy Sixpack that his computer that he uses to play Deer Hunter on is now illegal to own or use just because it doesn't have a palladium chip or something to that extent, he's gonna be pissed. There is little to no chance of the citizens standing for this shit, as well as large corporations who don't need copyright law to keep them going, I.E. banks and accounting firms who have thousands upon thousands of computers in use every day, who would fight against this as well, I would think. Or at least hope. So this will be either extremely good, or extraordinarily bad. There is no in-between.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Why get run over by the DRM Bandwagon? (Score:3, Interesting)
by rosewood (`ur.tahc' `ta' `doowesor') on Monday September 16, @01:55PM (#4267203)
(User #99925 Info | http://slashdot.org/~rosewood/journal | Last Journal: Sunday August 25, @02:47AM)
Obviously, there is a market out there right now for DRM. If there wasn't even a tiny market, MS would not be tossing its weight around.

So, instead of dragging our feet, why arent we comming up with a better DRM solution? One that takes care of medical documents, etc - things that aren't art, etc. and even gives a sense of security to the music people, w/o infringing on fair use rights?

It can be done and the linux world has the talent to do it.

ALSO - If a group could QUICKLY get a DRM OS even in a shoddy developmental state, then MS's patent would be null and void.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Intel and Microsoft (Score:5, Interesting)
by jbolden on Monday September 16, @01:56PM (#4267214)
(User #176878 Info)
Neither Intel nor Microsoft has ever shown much sign of being ideological companies. I think it’s rather unfair to both to act as if they are the driving force behind harsh DRM; rather I think it’s more reasonable to see them as facilitating it.

Both Intel and Microsoft face the problem of trying to find an app that requires way more computing power than current systems. Customer satisfaction is a bad thing for durable goods, sold by growth oriented companies, that aren't on a subscription model, and have a very high degree or market penetration. MPAA and RIAA could easily replace television as the primary passive entertainment medium in the United States if they have vision and are willing to cut prices in exchange for massive volume. The possibilities are impressive. Having Wintel systems own home entertainment could lock them into massive sales of equipment for many years. How many homes have multiple television sets today?

OTOH neither company is unaware that they live in a country which:

1) Does not have a national ID card for privacy reasons

2) Does not have centralized health documentation primarily for privacy reasons

3) Has a 2nd amendment which is still very much in effect, primarily because of fear of central control

4) Has the strongest guarantees against government controls on private property almost anywhere

Etc... Palladium might go over like a lead balloon in the US and both Microsoft and Intel are well aware of this. Notice that even when they talk about DRM/Palladium they speak in terms of things like viruses not in terms strong content control.

The most likely scenario is that they offer these technologies and they become niche technologies due to the RIAA and MPAA not being able to get broad support for inexpensive individual distribution. The fact that neither agency is yet working on a detailed pricing policy; means that there is not anywhere enough of a consensus within the music and move entertainment industry for them to be able to push through a radical change in pricing. They will quickly find themselves in a chicken and egg situation. They can't see Palladium only movies / music because not enough customers don't have Palladium hardware; and customers don't pay extra for Palladium hardware because they do not offer anywhere near enough of an advantage.

Another point is that the Windows/Unix model is really not the best model at all for DRM. Operating systems like Eros already have very strong controls in place; and with minor hardware tweaks could very easily the levels of DRM (though at the time this was about security not money) that OSes like Multics used to provide. As history clearly shows people may say they want ultra secure systems but in reality almost always purchase low security systems because they value freedom; organizations like the military being exceptions but exceptions that prove the rule, even they have generally chosen feature rich over highly secure except when the absolutely have to.

While I think it’s worth throwing some bucks at the EFF, I don't see this as likely to take off. To really have strong DRM you really need to make changes like getting rid of the file system and those types of changes require a great deal of work.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
where do we do (not) wont to go today? (Score:1)
by hany (hany@NOSPAM.terminus.sk) on Monday September 16, @01:56PM (#4267216)
(User #3601 Info | http://terminus.sk/~hany/)
Well, it looks like world is speeding directly to Hell (or Dark Age or some other equivalent) with Microsoft at the leading position.

What else is humanity going to achieve by restricting access to data (data = knowlegde)?

Maybe in short term, market can gain from such restrictions but what is market good for if there is no civilisation (maybe just very small group of "gods")?

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
With Rights Come Responsibility: (Score:2, Insightful)
by Shuh on Monday September 16, @01:57PM (#4267233)
(User #13578 Info | Last Journal: Thursday February 14, @03:53PM)


"You have the Right to use your computer however you want, but you have the responsibility to let "us" know exactly what you are doing at all times!" -- Official DRM Creed

and on a related note:

"You're not doing anything illegal, are you? What do you have to fear?"

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
MS needs to secure themselves first. (Score:2)
by MongooseCN on Monday September 16, @01:57PM (#4267236)
(User #139203 Info | http://www.mongeese.org/)
MS has enough trouble securing their own servers, never mind other peoples software.

Wow, 1 million people just registered to use MS Office last night!

That's not what the accounting appartment is telling us.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Curious... (Score:3, Insightful)
by CryptoKiller on Monday September 16, @01:59PM (#4267248)
(User #78275 Info)
DRM technology enables content creators, such as record companies

Funny, I thought that artists made records...
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
You keep using that word (Score:2)
by drew_kime on Monday September 16, @02:08PM (#4267322)
(User #303965 Info | http://z.iwethey.org...board/show?boardid=1 | Last Journal: Friday July 12, @03:21PM)
"Personal information such as medical and financial data; corporate information such as legal and business documents; and commercial content such as software, music and movies may all require DRM," said a Microsoft spokeswoman, in Redmond, Wash.
So home movies are now "commercial?" And music that I and my band record in the garage and want to relase to build a following is "commercial?" And software that I write and release for the world to use freely under an open license is now "commercial?" Here's a clue: If no one is asking for payment, it's not commerce.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Bill the Gates is Coming (Score:1)
by eno2001 on Monday September 16, @02:09PM (#4267330)
(User #527078 Info)
Aaaaaaaackphft!!
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Err, patent!? (Score:1)
by SlashDotterX on Monday September 16, @02:09PM (#4267331)
(User #608955 Info)
They can't even explain what ".Net" is. I would love to have been a fly on the wall in the Patent Office when they tried to explain this one... I'd probably have fallen off the wall laughing!
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
I don't care if I have to.... (Score:1)
by The Analog Kid on Monday September 16, @02:11PM (#4267340)
(User #565327 Info)
Rip the **** DRM chip out of my board, and have to sodder the entire thing back together. Microsoft can go take there DRM OS and shove it up there ***. :)
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
More Specifics (Score:1)
by ziadleb on Monday September 16, @02:12PM (#4267358)
(User #188867 Info)
A few clarifications would be welcomed on this article, especially towards a layman as myself.
1- Isn't DRM about giving the correct rights to the correct user. So on the server side it would be akin to file privileges. Something we already have on all 'nixes.
2- DRM is scary whereas somebody would come snooping on your own property to check for the validity of your files, but isn' t restricting the access to these files on the server side something that we are all doing already?
3- If by DRM server is meant as a deamon that goes in each one of the client machines and check for the validity of files, then the corrrect DRM OS is needed on the client machine for this two-step dance to work. In that case the answer is easy, Use open source :-)

If all of the previous is a rambling in the dark, please press restart on my brains
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Discrete vs. integrated DRM (Score:1)
by writertype on Monday September 16, @02:13PM (#4267361)
(User #541679 Info)
I find it interesting that Microsoft is apparently developing a dedicated DRM server. Given the trend towards integration, at least on the hardware side, it seems that new functions are developed as standalone devices first, and then integrated in subsequent products. I don't know if this is traditionally done on the software side, too.

However, I believe it's a logical assumption that Microsoft assumes all software should be DRMed to some extent. (In other words, that DRM could become a "feature" of >NET or subsequent OS platforms.) It seems that this DRM server is a test vehicle in many ways: from a legal, product and security (can it be hacked?) standpoint.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Services? (Score:1)
by Vinnie_333 on Monday September 16, @02:15PM (#4267377)
(User #575483 Info)
It's funny how MS can keep adding restriction on top of restriction in their software, and label them as "services".
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Just to play devils advocate (Score:2)
by MoneyT on Monday September 16, @02:17PM (#4267390)
(User #548795 Info | http://home.cyberarmy.com/omega81584)
What are the chances that M$ is working to patent all this stuff to prevent companies from trying to enforce it on the tech world? Think about it, if M$ held the patent to this, and the RIAA somehow got a bill passed for a hardware/software encryption on music to become mandatory, M$ could sit on it claiming it's in the development stages, and it would never see the light of day.

Possible?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Property (Score:1)
by chris_mahan on Monday September 16, @02:18PM (#4267402)
(User #256577 Info | http://www.christophermahan.com/)
Since property is a legally defined term, and that countries around the world claim (and rightly so) the right to enact laws that define what property is, I would assume that the MS DRM server will have a "Chinese" option that will allow it to comply with the laws of China.

Now, laws concerning intellectual property in China are rather unpalatable to western standards.

So MS is either planning to implement a server which helps enforce "immoral" and "against humanity" laws (again, in the western view), or it will be in direct violation of the Right to Self Govern of a Sovereign nation. One, I might add, which sports permanent membership in the United Nation Security Council, a nuclear arsenal, a two million-plus man army, membership in the World Trade Organization, and Preferred Trading Partner status with the United States.

Either way, they're going to have huge cojones to make it our of this one without seriously pissing off a large number of people.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
The Fellowship of the OS (Score:2)
by Ride-My-Rocket on Monday September 16, @02:18PM (#4267406)
(User #96935 Info | http://www.supersaiyan.com/)
... One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Redmond where the APIs lie.
One OS to rule them all, some DRM to find them,
One OS to bring them all and with their EULA bind them
In the Land of Redmond where the APIs lie.
 
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
MS will die (Score:2)
by WildBeast on Monday September 16, @02:20PM (#4267424)
(User #189336 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
As soon as an organisation or a country starts caring too much about security, it's doomed to failure.

Only time will tell but I'm positive
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Sleazy Friends Will Defeat DRM (Score:2)
by 4of12 on Monday September 16, @02:23PM (#4267444)
(User #97621 Info | http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Wednesday May 08, @05:12PM)

For a while in all the anti-terrorist rhetoric it may be possible for these kinds of DRM (I still prefer to call it CUR, Content Use Restriction) to be introduced without much noticeable resistance from the masses, but there's a significant market segment that will resist.

Can you picture the average pr0n user happily letting his/her/its computer hook up with the Microsoft DRM server every time they want to watch their favorite titles?

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 27 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • (1) | 2 (Slashdot Overload: CommentLimit 50)
    		  Amoebit: Amoeba/rabbit cross; it can multiply and divide at the same time.
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2002 OSDN.
    [ home | awards | contribute story | older articles | OSDN | advertise | self serve ad system | about | terms of service | privacy | faq ]