GSMA opposes MPEG LA licensing scheme

[Elias]

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7356192/ so what's up with this?

[Episode]

Could be april's fools joke..

[Richard Berg]

Pretty simple story. The cell phone market is extremely competitive. Manufacturers want to cut costs. Flat licenses for DRM are a cost.

[PatchWorKs]

...switch to Xiph ! ;)

[Doom9]

actually, that's a rather old story.

switch to XiphI doubt there's an Ogg DRM ;) Greedy movie studios and record labels strongarm mobile manufacturers to put that DRM crap onto mobile phones.. manufacturers would be happy to not do it, but then users and operators are left out from the music and movie business.. it's essentially an evil circle for manufacturers.. they have to use something they don't want for cost reason, and that their customers don't want because it screws them.

[video]

Originally posted by Doom9
actually, that's a rather old story.

I doubt there's an Ogg DRM ;) Greedy movie studios and record labels strongarm mobile manufacturers to put that DRM crap onto mobile phones.. manufacturers would be happy to not do it, but then users and operators are left out from the music and movie business.. it's essentially an evil circle for manufacturers.. they have to use something they don't want for cost reason, and that their customers don't want because it screws them.

i'm totally lost near DMCA/DRM issue. as a consumer why should i pay money/license fees for a technology what forbids me copiing digital content? i have no reason to have such a technology. IFPI and movie makers have a damn good reason. they would like to protect their content, so they are the one, who should pay for protection techniques, not me...

[Elias]

Originally posted by video
i'm totally lost near DMCA/DRM issue. as a consumer why should i pay money/license fees for a technology what forbids me copiing digital content? i have no reason to have such a technology. IFPI and movie makers have a damn good reason. they would like to protect their content, so they are the one, who should pay for protection techniques, not me... Well spoken I must add ;)

[bond]

Originally posted by video
i'm totally lost near DMCA/DRM issue. as a consumer why should i pay money/license fees for a technology what forbids me copiing digital content?well theoretically the end user doesnt pay any licenses for the technology, the provider of the content or the provider of the end-product (eg nero pays mpeg-4 licenses for recode2, ateme doesnt have to for selling their codec to nero). practically of course all the costs for the provider also play a role in what price the enduser has to pay

[video]

Originally posted by bond
well theoretically the end user doesnt pay any licenses for the technology, the provider of the content or the provider of the end-product (eg nero pays mpeg-4 licenses for recode2, ateme doesnt have to for selling their codec to nero). practically of course all the costs for the provider also play a role in what price the enduser has to pay
i am very bad at theories, but, you even pay after CSS, DRM and for all the things what sucks. the license fee is simply part of the product. even mpegla is.
i wanted to build an audiophlie digit preamp. looked after vendors who are selling TMS320C80 with DD/DTS built in, and the vendor told, that they cannot sell me the DSP until i fax them my DD/DTS license forms. i've told, that c'mon i'm just an amateur, i've ordered only one f*cking DSP, but the rule is a rule - and actually, that's disgusting. market is full of crap and awful digit premaps/recievers, however... manufacturers are reducing costs of DD/DTS on the analogue parts.

huh, and i'm suffering from dysgraphia :(