grazzhoppa
06-01-05, 03:39 PM
Here's the article: http://www.digitmag.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=4915
I believe having DigitalRightsManagement control in a computer's harddware is a great idea compared to software solutions. In all fairness, I do believe obtaining high quality, copyrighted media files is illegal without paying for them. That does not stop me from breaking the law though because I believe those media files should not be as expensive as they are.
It only takes 1 person or organisation to crack media protection methods for the media to be released without copyright protection. So no matter what software/hardware protections a media file may have, the odds that a version will be released without protection, on the internet, are high.
Hardware support for DRM files helps to level the scope of how DRM affects users. Currently, people have cracked various DRM protections or created software that allows people to play a DRM file without a license. For people who really want to play that DRM file, they are able to. For people who are apathetic about finding ways to play it, they are at a "disadvantage" because of the technical knowledge they might need to implement the DRM crack.
The embedded support of DRM files in your cpu will up the level of "expertise" required to play a DRM file without its license.
Basically I believe having embedded support is not wasting companies' time and money like current DRM/copyright protection methods.
The goal of security devices are not to prevent things from happening but to deter. It will require a great deal of collaboration between media publishers and computer parts manufactures to create a security system that makes playing/viewing/"experiencing" copyrighted files, without their licenses, difficult enough to stop a good percentage of the people who view copyrighted files illegally.
Publishing companies, law makers, lawyers know that its impossible to eliminate all crime. But with the right deterance, crime can be prevented. Other than create harsher penalties for breaking the law, (a method I think is ridiculous considering that we're dealing with the crime of copy right infringment), making it difficult to commit the crime is the optimal solution.
I think obtaining copy righted material without paying for it is far too easy and that's the primary reason why it is happening so much. (Another reason I believe is that governments/schools, media outlets, and parents have not hammered in the morals of holding a copy right as much as other "basic" legal issues such as stealing, murder, abuse..etc - But this cause is far too involved in a society's ethics for it to be changed or delt with in a legal way or in the short term.)
I think this is a great step towards creating a deterance big enough so that the RIAA/MPAA and can stop with their overly aggressive and somewhat intrusive campaigns of law suit deterance.
Intel is also supporting another new techology:
Intel is heavily promoting what it calls "active management technology" (AMT) in the new chips as a major plus for system administrators and enterprise IT. Understood to be a sub-operating system residing in the chip's firmware, AMT will allow administrators to both monitor or control individual machines independent of an operating system.
Additionally, AMT also features what Intel calls "IDE redirection" which will allow administrators to remotely enable, disable or format or configure individual drives and reload operating systems and software from remote locations, again independent of operating systems. Both AMT and IDE control are enabled by a new network interface controller.
I have a slight fear that virus's could go nuts if they would get access to this AMT stuff.
I believe having DigitalRightsManagement control in a computer's harddware is a great idea compared to software solutions. In all fairness, I do believe obtaining high quality, copyrighted media files is illegal without paying for them. That does not stop me from breaking the law though because I believe those media files should not be as expensive as they are.
It only takes 1 person or organisation to crack media protection methods for the media to be released without copyright protection. So no matter what software/hardware protections a media file may have, the odds that a version will be released without protection, on the internet, are high.
Hardware support for DRM files helps to level the scope of how DRM affects users. Currently, people have cracked various DRM protections or created software that allows people to play a DRM file without a license. For people who really want to play that DRM file, they are able to. For people who are apathetic about finding ways to play it, they are at a "disadvantage" because of the technical knowledge they might need to implement the DRM crack.
The embedded support of DRM files in your cpu will up the level of "expertise" required to play a DRM file without its license.
Basically I believe having embedded support is not wasting companies' time and money like current DRM/copyright protection methods.
The goal of security devices are not to prevent things from happening but to deter. It will require a great deal of collaboration between media publishers and computer parts manufactures to create a security system that makes playing/viewing/"experiencing" copyrighted files, without their licenses, difficult enough to stop a good percentage of the people who view copyrighted files illegally.
Publishing companies, law makers, lawyers know that its impossible to eliminate all crime. But with the right deterance, crime can be prevented. Other than create harsher penalties for breaking the law, (a method I think is ridiculous considering that we're dealing with the crime of copy right infringment), making it difficult to commit the crime is the optimal solution.
I think obtaining copy righted material without paying for it is far too easy and that's the primary reason why it is happening so much. (Another reason I believe is that governments/schools, media outlets, and parents have not hammered in the morals of holding a copy right as much as other "basic" legal issues such as stealing, murder, abuse..etc - But this cause is far too involved in a society's ethics for it to be changed or delt with in a legal way or in the short term.)
I think this is a great step towards creating a deterance big enough so that the RIAA/MPAA and can stop with their overly aggressive and somewhat intrusive campaigns of law suit deterance.
Intel is also supporting another new techology:
Intel is heavily promoting what it calls "active management technology" (AMT) in the new chips as a major plus for system administrators and enterprise IT. Understood to be a sub-operating system residing in the chip's firmware, AMT will allow administrators to both monitor or control individual machines independent of an operating system.
Additionally, AMT also features what Intel calls "IDE redirection" which will allow administrators to remotely enable, disable or format or configure individual drives and reload operating systems and software from remote locations, again independent of operating systems. Both AMT and IDE control are enabled by a new network interface controller.
I have a slight fear that virus's could go nuts if they would get access to this AMT stuff.