Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > General > Decrypting

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 22nd February 2012, 07:37   #1561  |  Link
setarip_old
Registered User
 
setarip_old's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,267
@SamuriHL

I fully understand the majority opinion about this, but you never know (I keep harkening back to the SONY CD "Track -0-" debacle).

If nothing else, it'll be simple to perform the test and shouldn't take more than 30 minutes of standalone player time...
setarip_old is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2012, 14:33   #1562  |  Link
xenex
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 82
setarip_old-

Since the player itself, PS3, standalone, or whatever, detects the Cinavia audio watermark itself, it doesn't seem to matter WHAT the "video" output is at all.

A player of any kind using component or composite output just sends the video signal out. It doesn't even know if a TV or display is connected. Why do you think this would make a difference?

-xenex
xenex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2012, 14:46   #1563  |  Link
SamuriHL
Registered User
 
SamuriHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,351
He just wants someone to actually TRY it to confirm what we think we know. I see nothing wrong with that. I'd have done it already if I had component cables kicking around for the ps3. In any case it's a pretty easy thing for someone to confirm.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
__________________
HTPC: Windows 11, AMD 5900X, RTX 3080, Pioneer Elite VSX-LX303, LG G2 77" OLED
SamuriHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2012, 15:41   #1564  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,769
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenex View Post
It doesn't even know if a TV or display is connected.
Technically, this is wrong. I can't say ALL of them can do this, I can only say a player can know this and several actually do implement it.

EDIT: Just remembered it -> wasn't supposed that the medium (the disc) should mandatory contain DOT (DIGITAL ONLY TOKEN) according to AACS agreements of 2006 and newer? In other words, the players that still have analogue outputs MUST NOT deliver usable analogue signals?
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)

Last edited by Ghitulescu; 22nd February 2012 at 16:19. Reason: new info
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 02:15   #1565  |  Link
setarip_old
Registered User
 
setarip_old's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,267
Could there be a light at the end of the tunnel (Not a train coming at us) regarding Verance/"Cinavia" and other types of copyright "protection"?

Read the Digital Digest posting at: http://forum.digital-digest.com/f145...ead-95624.html
setarip_old is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 02:22   #1566  |  Link
SamuriHL
Registered User
 
SamuriHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,351
Very unlikely. The exemption wouldn't preclude the studios from attempting to protect their content. If the exemption is granted, it'd allow us to bypass the copy protection for the purpose of "ripping" to make a legal, fair use, backup. It doesn't, however, give you the tools to do so or require that the studios make it easy for you to exercise that right.
__________________
HTPC: Windows 11, AMD 5900X, RTX 3080, Pioneer Elite VSX-LX303, LG G2 77" OLED
SamuriHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 03:15   #1567  |  Link
setarip_old
Registered User
 
setarip_old's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,267
@samuriHL

You've got to start somewhere, hence my question, "Could there be a light...".The first baby step, in what's described at that link, would be removing the cloud of (questionable) illegality from users' efforts to remove or circumvent copy protection. Who knows how far a genius like "LIGHTNING UK" could have gone, if he/she wasn't coerced into "retiring"?

The second step would be that the studios/MPAA/Verance etal could possibly be taken to task legally if, in defiance of such a ruling, they continued efforts to either create new or enhance existing protection schemes.

It would be supremely ironic if the eventual demise or circumvention of Verance/"Cinavia" (and other protections) proved to be not solely through the technical efforts of the Community but rather as the consequence of "THE LAW" as well ;>}

Last edited by setarip_old; 23rd February 2012 at 03:23.
setarip_old is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 03:21   #1568  |  Link
SamuriHL
Registered User
 
SamuriHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,351
Sorry, setarip_old, I wasn't trying to sound negative. It's a very positive development. I'm pessimistic that it'll be granted give the SOPA/PIPA/etc legislation recently brought through the US congress and senate. Still it would be nice if they would grant this exemption.

Let's talk about what happens if it passes because there is precedent here. A similar ruling was made for jailbreaking. And your assertion that "The second step would be that the studios/MPAA/Verance etal could possibly be taken to task legally if, in defiance of such a ruling, they continued efforts to either create new or enhance existing protection schemes." is completely and 100% wrong, I'm afraid. All it says is that users can legally jailbreak. That has NOT stopped Apple or Motorola or a myriad of other companies from putting technical measures in place to prevent so called jailbreaking. The same pattern will apply here. We may get the exemption which says end users may do it, but, it does NOT prevent the studios from putting technical barriers in your way to stop you.

So no, if you're hoping that an exemption means you can force them to remove it by force of the law, I'm afraid you are going to be incredibly disappointed.
__________________
HTPC: Windows 11, AMD 5900X, RTX 3080, Pioneer Elite VSX-LX303, LG G2 77" OLED
SamuriHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 03:27   #1569  |  Link
SamuriHL
Registered User
 
SamuriHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,351
Please don't get me wrong. I'm HIGHLY in favor of the exemption being granted as it would give us the right to backup our movies legally. THAT is a VERY positive thing. The thing I'm pessimistic on is A) Getting it passed and B) Forcing the studios to stop protecting their media. That's just not going to happen. But, if the exemption is given, we can rely on companies to provide those technical solutions to allow us to exercise our right granted by the exemption. So still a VERY positive thing if it passes!
__________________
HTPC: Windows 11, AMD 5900X, RTX 3080, Pioneer Elite VSX-LX303, LG G2 77" OLED
SamuriHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 03:31   #1570  |  Link
setarip_old
Registered User
 
setarip_old's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,267
@SamuriHL

I don't want to really drift off-topic, but I have to address this. You say:
Quote:
pessimistic that it'll be granted give the SOPA/PIPA/etc legislation recently brought through the US congress and senate.
As far as I know, ALL of that legislation has been shelved indefinitely - as a consequence of the "Petition the White House" procedure.

See the following: http://forum.digital-digest.com/f145...aim-95582.html

setarip_old is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 03:33   #1571  |  Link
SamuriHL
Registered User
 
SamuriHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by setarip_old View Post
@SamuriHL

I don't want to really drift off-topic, but I have to address this. You say: As far as I know, ALL of that legislation has been shelved indefinitely - as a consequence of the "Petition the White House" procedure.

See the following: http://forum.digital-digest.com/f145...aim-95582.html
I'm afraid not.

http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/201...-senate-82141/

In any case, I agree, we shouldn't take this further off topic. I only brought those up to show why I'm not optimistic for the exemption to be granted. I REALLY hope so. I REALLY REALLY do.
__________________
HTPC: Windows 11, AMD 5900X, RTX 3080, Pioneer Elite VSX-LX303, LG G2 77" OLED
SamuriHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 09:19   #1572  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,769
Frankly I don't see the connection to cinavia. Nor to its technical means for circumvention. But since it was brought by the thread starter it must not be off-topic .

Cinavia is wrong because in junction with AACS (and it is) it extends "de facto" the effects of the copyright and ancillary rights forever, ie long after the legal frame allows. Then the inability to copy for personal use a cinavied material questions the legality of the copy tax on recorders and media. That has nothing to do with the internet SOPA, PIPA, ACTA and the like. Cinavia is not wrong simply because the internet lock will prevent people from downloading AnyDVD or materials under rule #6 .

One thing is clear. People begin the realise the danger, now when they finally see the "blackout", like in the well-known story on boiling the frog. Before it was simply, they didn't care too much what laws and directive they implement as long as they could "hack" those DVDs and BDs in the darkness of their basement, like the Middle Age alchemists. Now those brilliant guys that made the copying possible were banished outside their reach, damn Hollywood. Now it's a fine time to kiss some a*** !!! But now an entire consolidated block of laws must be nullified, not just one.
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 15:42   #1573  |  Link
rotty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghitulescu View Post
Frankly I don't see the connection to cinavia. Nor to its technical means for circumvention. But since it was brought by the thread starter it must not be off-topic .

Cinavia is wrong because in junction with AACS (and it is) it extends "de facto" the effects of the copyright and ancillary rights forever, ie long after the legal frame allows. Then the inability to copy for personal use a cinavied material questions the legality of the copy tax on recorders and media. That has nothing to do with the internet SOPA, PIPA, ACTA and the like. Cinavia is not wrong simply because the internet lock will prevent people from downloading AnyDVD or materials under rule #6 .

One thing is clear. People begin the realise the danger, now when they finally see the "blackout", like in the well-known story on boiling the frog. Before it was simply, they didn't care too much what laws and directive they implement as long as they could "hack" those DVDs and BDs in the darkness of their basement, like the Middle Age alchemists. Now those brilliant guys that made the copying possible were banished outside their reach, damn Hollywood. Now it's a fine time to kiss some a*** !!! But now an entire consolidated block of laws must be nullified, not just one.
Hi Ghitulescu

Quote from your post: "the effects of the copyright and ancillary rights forever"

They could well argue that the algorithm(s) for current watermarks will be ignored by players that are updated in the future, i.e. each years older algorithms can be ignored by the players year by year in the future and will play as backups after that date.

Not saying that it will happen, but does get round the "forever" probelm for them.
rotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 16:14   #1574  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,769
Nope, this is exactly the same issue that the authors of time-limited shareware/trialware must face. How to be sure that disc A (a movie made in 1917 by Chaplin) those rights will expire say in 2027 can be copied and watched on the same device that should prevent the playback of a copy of disc B (a movie made last year) those rights will expire long after your player would have been "ecologically recycled", you know like grandma's gramophones ? Do we need to buy players with various "end of intellectual properties rights" years? Like player A limit date 2012, player B limit date 2013 etc.

This is our problem, not theirs. They locked everything, just to be sure: it's better to kill 1000 innocents than to let a criminal escape. As one can see, the lobbying is much profitable than being tipped at horse races or stock exchange, even than a Russian pyramidal money game. With a meagre contribution to the elections campaign, some may gain billions.
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 16:36   #1575  |  Link
rotty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghitulescu View Post
Nope, this is exactly the same issue that the authors of time-limited shareware/trialware must face. How to be sure that disc A (a movie made in 1917 by Chaplin) those rights will expire say in 2027 can be copied and watched on the same device that should prevent the playback of a copy of disc B (a movie made last year) those rights will expire long after your player would have been "ecologically recycled", you know like grandma's gramophones ? Do we need to buy players with various "end of intellectual properties rights" years? Like player A limit date 2012, player B limit date 2013 etc.

This is our problem, not theirs. They locked everything, just to be sure: it's better to kill 1000 innocents than to let a criminal escape. As one can see, the lobbying is much profitable than being tipped at horse races or stock exchange, even than a Russian pyramidal money game. With a meagre contribution to the elections campaign, some may gain billions.
No, player A, player B, etc all have the same expiry date for each year stamp of the watermark.

All players are kept up to date via F/W updates.

FOR EXAMPLE

You insert a disk etc,
The player says, this media has the watermark,
Is it trusred source,
NO,
What year stamp is the watermark,
Is that year now outside the protection.

If it is outside the protection then play without restrictions else mute after 20 mins (or whatever the restriction is).

Last edited by rotty; 23rd February 2012 at 16:55.
rotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 17:00   #1576  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,769
There is no year in the watermark (there is however a year in the UDF fields, but who controls the info there for an original and for a copy ). I agree that the player can be "stamped" with a nonwritable/nonerasable year by FW upgrades (downgrades ), again who controls this, but AFAIK the copyright holders managed twice to extend the term so I am pretty sure they won't accept this anyway.
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 17:13   #1577  |  Link
rotty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghitulescu View Post
There is no year in the watermark (there is however a year in the UDF fields, but who controls the info there for an original and for a copy ). I agree that the player can be "stamped" with a nonwritable/nonerasable year by FW upgrades (downgrades ), again who controls this, but AFAIK the copyright holders managed twice to extend the term so I am pretty sure they won't accept this anyway.
You missed my point.

There can be any info they wish to put in the watermark modulation.

However, I dont suppose they do put date info.

That wasnt my point.

I was just saying that if they wanted a way out of the argument, re, "Copyright forever", then they easily had one simply by adding date info.
rotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 17:36   #1578  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,769
My two points were:
  • the studios want to have the IP rights as long as they can (and I've seen missing or even misleading infos on both media and internet) - a limit date set means it is set (written in stone), but maybe they manage to extend the terms to 350 years before the limit date set in the watermark so they have lost your (great)n grand son's money for the remaining 255 years
  • They cannot be sure who controls the date in the player (or worse, in a PC) - lots of people began refusing to upgrade, not for fear for cinavia, but because newer FWs have been proven several times to be worse than the precedents

The only solution is to attack the legal validity of their claims, and to restrict the term of copyright and ancillary to max 51.97 years (optimal 15) as Pollock said it in 2007.
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 17:59   #1579  |  Link
rotty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 518
If a user does not update the player then that is of course down to them and the blame for a disk not playing is down to them.
rotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2012, 18:28   #1580  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,769
And still there are problems to be solved:
  • the same disc played in the US is ok, in Canada not - various countries with various terms
  • reissues of copyrighted works or extentions of term for a particular work - it happened several times with some movies
  • fair use issues where applicable
and last but not least, to keep the humour side
  • the studios must know beforehand when eg George Lucas will die (maybe they'll prepare the engraved grave in advance as well)
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:48.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.