[opendtv] Re: CGMS-A issues (was: HDMI issues)
- From: "Stephen W. Long" <longsw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 07:59:11 -0500
Kilroy,
Thank-you for such a well thought out and lucid description. Hope you are
well.
Stephen Long
At 11:05 PM 3/1/2006 -0800, Kilroy Hughes wrote:
>I recall a 90 minute time limit being negotiated with CableLabs years
>ago for the DFAST agreement intended to cover then hypothetical PVRs
>that might be built in cable boxes (that was around the time hard drives
>crossed the 40MB barrier). That applied to "copy never" content, but
>"copy no more" couldn't be cached. Don't recall the policy on "copy
>once". Hard disks have to be encrypted with a device specific binding.
>Outputs have to be protected and convey the CCI state (e.g. "copy once"
>> "copy no more").
>
>Nobody agrees on what "copy once" or the other two states mean when you
>put it to the test. There are pages and pages of legal explanation and
>robustness rules in various 5C, DFAST, DVD-CCA, etc. contracts; but when
>you try to turn that into machine parseable XML rights expression
>language (like MPEG-21 REL), you can't find two broadcasters or movie
>studios or CE manufacturers who will agree at that level of precision.
>The legal descriptions are ambiguous and don't consider numerous
>technical combinations already here or on the way (DRM, P2P, streaming,
>IPTV, wireless LAN, UWB, iPOD, SlingBox, 16GB memory sticks, USB, HDMI
>...). The experts have explained to me that copy policy and fair use
>need to be decided by law suites. That has been the existing practice;
>there's almost nothing about fair use in copyright law, unless you're a
>library or school. (Home recording rights act was the first real law,
>as opposed to "law", like the Betamax decision.)
>
>Any consumer or device that "circumvents" these crude "secure link"
>systems is an evil doer under the DMCA, even if the result in a
>particular instance is considered "fair use". Copy protection systems
>like this don't know what your intended use is, so they have to block
>anything they don't understand. With encrypted content (DRM), you can
>control at the time and place of use, so copies and connections can be
>freely made, but if you email a million copies to friends, they won't
>play unless the license allows, or they purchase their own license, etc.
>After about a year of "in the clear" HDTV broadcasting, Japan switched
>to encrypted broadcast and ID/authentication cards that look like memory
>sticks (and they probably had more OTA receivers in use than the US does
>now). They knew it was the only way to protect the content. Now they
>are discussing relaxing the copy policies defined for "copy once", "copy
>never", etc. because the system actually worked and everyone hated it.
>(The majority of DVD "players" sold in Japan are actually DVD disc
>recorders with hard discs that grab broadcasts on hard disk and allow
>burning to optical disc. They used to only encode analog signals, but
>newer models grab encrypted ARIB HDTV streams on 250GB or 500GB hard
>disks.)
>
>A bunch of Congressmen figured out they should define Fair Use and give
>it precedence over DMCA if they legislate Broadcast Flag, but by the
>time they get industry agreement on what Fair Use is, the problem may
>have died of old age. =20
>
>Kilroy Hughes
>Sr. Media Architect
>Digital Media Interoperability Team
>Microsoft Corporation>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts: