CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum

[justtaint]

http://www.audioholics.com/news/industry-news/aacs-hdmi-kill-component-2010

I was thinking of buying one eventually, but if they enable the ICT (Image Constraint Token), will the HDFury still work?

[WanMan]

Like Hollywood can stop the forces of nature. Same panic took place before HDFury showed what a handful of motivated people were able to do.

[ecrabb]

The Image Constraint Token specifically relates to the analog output of HD material, meaning when the content owner sets the ICT, existing players with analog outputs will disable or downscale the video on those outputs to 480i. Remember this: ICT has nothing to do with the HDMI output (or the HD fury).

The only way anybody could disable the HD fury would be to revoke the keys the HD fury uses to decrypt the encrypted stream... But, since the keys the HD fury folks use are the same keys several display manufacturers use, if there were a key revocation, there would be hundreds of thousands of people with flat panel displays that won't work in addition to the (relatively) small number of HD fury users.

Of course, the stupid thing about all this is just like CSS on DVD's, AACS/BD+ has been cracked, and therefore anybody who wants to make copies of content on Blu-ray can ALREADY do it. Not only that, but those copies are perfect, bit-for-bit identical digital copies, not crappy analog copies. In short, this whole analog sunset accomplishes nothing but pissing people off and breaking their equipment. It's just stupid.

SC

[MikeEby]

I'm still using component on my CRT RPTV for Dishnetwork Sat Receiver....Wonder if it will effect that?

This is too funny from the same article.

AACS is really hosing the legitimate consumer with this change. They will turn upside down those users who have earlier pre-HDMI custom installations, forcing them into alternative (and expensive) connectivity options or causing them other costs that they would otherwise have not needed to incur - just to get them back to where they were in 2010. Add to this the complete conundrum companies like Kaleidescape will face as they continue their MPAA-thwarted attempts to expand their business model. We've even read stories about Hollywood-based mastering engineers having to use Slysoft AnyDVD HD software in order to circumvent AACS and BD+ restrictions just to get their work done.

Mike

[AnalogRocks]

[AnalogRocks]

[VideoGrabber]

SC's comment here was so on-target that the Hollyweird folks should have it branded into their foreheads:

> "anybody who wants to make copies of content on Blu-ray can ALREADY do it." and "those copies are perfect, bit-for-bit identical digital copies, not crappy analog copies." <

Duh. Morons.

> "this whole analog sunset accomplishes nothing but pissing people off and breaking their equipment. It's just stupid." <

Totally spot on. Bravo!

There will be a whole lot of time and money spent to deal with this issue, when it starts breaking things. And when that is all said and done, you'll be right back where you started, with NO advantage over what you had before you spent all that $$$. I.e., it's all a complete waste.

What pisses me off about it is that they've sneakily used relatively secretive contract law to circumvent consumer protections that preserve the rights of purchasers to use what they've paid for, in whatever way they choose to, so long as it does not infringe on content-owners exclusive rights of rebroadcast/retransmission/public presentation. And these pompous asses will claim that we can still do whatever we want, if only we could find the equipment to do it, which they cunningly engineered the demise of.

Oh, and that we're just sitting here bitching about it, and letting them get away with it.

[zaphod]

a lot of this stupidity has to do with the circular reasoning of "the law" and lawyers. if you aren't seen as clamping down and actively protecting your intellectual (media) property then it can be argued that you don't deserve that ownership. Disney takes this approach and this is why they clamp down on every daycare and so on that has a picture of mickey in the window. If they don't force licensing or removal of the image by a daycare, then it can be argued that they allow use of the image and the precedent is set to let anyone or any business to use the Disney images. Their control of their images went so far as to famously try and stop a huge tattooed disney fan from visiting the park because they didn't like the use of the disney images as tattoos.

it's a stupid argument on the part of the law, but there you have it: if you don't vigilantly protect your stuff, and someone uses (steals) it, you have less of a case in the eyes of the law. it's like a judge saying that my neighbour down the street is allowed to borrow my lawnmower every saturday because i was letting my nextdoor neighbour use it and i kept it in the sideyard without a lock on it. stupid.

so if the MPAA and the AACS and all the other owners of IP aren't seen to be trying to actively protect their IP, it makes it harder for them to prosecute. even if the protection schemes aren't effective, they have to be seen to do something.



i worked with a guy once who had a habit of wandering over to the admin area late at night and use the phones in the cubical to call all sorts of stuff - across the planet, selling crap, harrrassing people, porn. they couldn't stop him because the whole admin area was an open concept that everyone could and did walk in and out of to get forms, drop off things whatever. The only solution was to put up a folding gate that was locked every evening so that they were seen to be keeping out people after hours.

did this stop the guy? not really. he could go to another section/cube/whatever of the building and continue, but now there was a message that this is wrong and the company took actions to prevent it. all the gate really did was get in the way of people who needed to pick up a dental form after 5.

[kal]

[kal]

[zaphod]

[kal]

[kal]