Chris Lanier's Blog

My Views on Microsoft, DRM, and Content Protection (PVP-OPM)

Today, most digital content has some sort of copy/content protection on it.  This really isn’t anything that is new, for example…

• DVDs have CSS
• HBO and other premium analog content are protected with CGMS-A
• VHS and DVDs have Macrovision
• Most Cable Providers enable 5C on everything but “must carry” channels (generally just your local channels, FCC mandated)
• DirecTV and Dish Network use Smart Cards to decrypt their protection
• CableCARD is basically an access control system for HDTV distribution
• HDTV (HD-DVD, Blu-Ray) have HDMI/HDCP for secure output
• SACD has PSP-PDM
• DVD-A has CPPM
• And so on and so fourth

We purchase and enjoy protected content all the time, why should throwing in “Microsoft” and “DRM” have any effect on this?

As I have shown you above, our current content is protected.  You can’t really argue with that, you purchase content and it’s very likely you have purchased protected content.

For any company to enable you to play this content, they must partner with and/or license the technology from the creators.  This goes with both standard set-top boxes that you purchase, and with computer software.

Now on to Microsoft, there isn’t much difference from what I just said above.  The only difference that most of the time Microsoft provides the framework in their Operating Systems to enable third parties to enable the playback.  With new methods of copy protection, this is going to start showing even more.  If Microsoft doesn’t provide this framework, the third parties can’t produce software (or hardware in some cases) to enable the playback of this media.

Now to DRM, or Digital Rights Management.  This has become a huge blanket term to describe copy/content protection or anything that might limit our fair-use and/or protect against piracy.  No one uses the term correctly.  The largest problem with this is that “DRM” scares peoples, it makes them very uneasy.  With how people use the term, it can easily to applied to any one of the protection methods above.

Microsoft’s problem and why they look like the bad guys is the PC not being a traditional media playback or capture device.  Since it’s not a traditional device, and it’s very open they have much more to do to enable the content stays protected.  Sony doesn’t exactly have to worry about a sloppy programming job showing a CSS Key.  They also don’t have to worry about a debugger being run in the background, which leads to reverse engineering whatever protection method was being decrypted in the background.  Microsoft does have to worry about these, and it is a concern in order for them to bring us (the consumer) the ability to play the media we purchase!

In the end, it comes down to a tradeoff between wanting Microsoft to die for all this, or thanking them for enabling you the ability to play the media on your PC.

View One (DRM/Protection):

• The Good:  Microsoft can give and provide the framework to playback on a PC.  With this Microsoft wins, the consumer wins, and the content owners are happier since the content is still protected.
• The Bad:  Microsoft is giving in to Copy/Content Protection (DRM) and this means a future of the same.

View Two (non-DRM/Protection):

• The Bad:  The Microsoft doesn’t build this framework, which means we can’t play the content on our PCs.  Microsoft loses and so does the consumer.
• The Good:  No “DRM” in your Operating System.  And the content owners are happy because they know a break on PCs that can’t play the content isn’t as likely to happen.

What happens if the consumer fights Microsoft and the content owners?  This is a broken argument, and it doesn’t stand up in my mind.  Microsoft can’t just play the “Screw You!” card to the content owners and expect it to work. Remember that this is all about business on both sides.  Content owners want to feel that their content is protected in hopes that they will make more money since it’s not being pirated.  Microsoft wants to sell you an Operating System for your PC, along with other programs and hardware in some cases.  Both sides feel they have too much to lose.  Content owners have sales of their digital content, and Microsoft has PC market share hanging in the balance.  Everyone has a business to run!  If Microsoft just says “Screw You” and enables playback of the content somehow bypassing the protection, the content owners are going to go after Microsoft?  They are a $40 billion corporation, smart businesses know this and will exploit it.  I would sure as hell be looking for a piece of that $40 billion pie for an exaggerated amount of lost revenue for Microsoft not respecting their views.

Microsoft would have a hard time fighting any company if they deliberately did that too, it’s too much of a gamble that doesn’t have to be there if they just build the framework!

Microsoft has the consumer in mind, trust me.  They want to enable you to playback and capture media on your PC, hell they have a whole division that would basically be out of work if they didn’t want to make playback possible on your PC.  Not much reason for the Digital Media Division if they didn’t want to make playback possible.

To backup this point, look at HD-DVD and AACS.  AACS basically picks up where CSS left off for DVDs.  One of the big differences is how Microsoft has you in mind, how about the ability to legally rip an HD-DVD onto a media server or PC?  That’s a feature of AACS and it wouldn’t be there without Microsoft.  Anyone think that this is something that Disney really wanted? Probably not! If it wasn’t for a mix of IBM, Intel, and Microsoft playing an HD-DVD in a PC wouldn’t be a feature either. After DeCSS why would the AACS LA want to enable playback of PCs? Toshiba, Panasonic, and Sony really want to sell you their HD-DVD Players, they would much rather do that then you have you play the title in your PC.

Again, Microsoft is doing what they must to make the consumer happy, it doesn’t seem like it but they are. All of this is needed in the current market and as much as we hate it, it’s going to be there. Don’t want it there? Don’t upgrade to Longhorn and don’t expect to be playing future media on your PC!

Oh, and lastly everyone’s favorite response to Microsoft and DRM is “…use Linux” or “…buy a Mac”.  Anyone think the AACS LA is going to approve a software player for Linux right away or ever?  It’s got to be secure, and an Open Source OS isn’t the best at security of this form.  Apple is going to Blu-Ray route and the only reason I have not brought up Blu-Ray is because they have yet to announce what protection system they will use.  I don’t know any other group besides the AACS LA, so the guess is that Blu-ray will adopt it.  This would mean a Mac is not going to be immune to copy protection systems if Apple plans to enable playback.

Note: Microsoft hasn’t picked sides on Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD.  They will work with Toshiba providing a Windows CE based OS for their HD-DVD Players, there video codec will be used in both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, and they are a founding member of the AACS which has currently been adopted by the DVD Forum for use with HD-DVD.

Update: Microsoft on DRM, Content Protection, and PVP-OPM