dvd Encrypting

[rago88]

just curious here..
why do the Movie companies continue to create new encrypting code on new release dvd movies when they know the many software ripping powers to be break the codes within a day like clockwork.
been going on at that rate for years all the way back to the original ripping programs, has never changed and doesn't appear to any time soon especially since most of the focus past few years has been on illegal bit torrent downloading and not on the copying of disks..

[admin]

Most DRM will be cracked given time, but they will all still remain deployed. This is because there is legal protection given to DRM even when the technological protection has failed, as if you try to hack DRM (even if it's trivial), you are breaking the law in the US (DMCA). I think content holders are relying on the legal protection aspect of DRM more than the technical protection, so they reserve the right to sue anyone that hacks the DRM. They of course know that it offers zero protection when it comes to actual copy control, but they don't really care.

I've been thinking about writing an article on the "perfect DRM" and how it will probably never exist. For the DRM to be perfect, it has to be technically advanced and resilient, but not against the average consumer, but the best hackers out there. All it takes is one really smart guy (or a really dumb mistake by the DRM makers) for DRM to fail, and so this is why most of them eventually fail. And once the DRM fails, even dumb guys like myself can just use a readily available tool to make copies and distribute it on the Internet (not that I would ever do it, of course), so it's paramount that the DRM has to be technically perfect.

On the consumer side, the "perfect DRM" has to be completely transparent, by that I mean that it should not hinder or stop consumers from doing what they would normally do with their media that is within their legal and fair use rights (ie. to use the content without having to jump through hoops, and without forcing additional requirements on them, for example, requiring an Internet connection for accessing content that does not use the Internet. If fair use states they can format shift or copy/backup their content, then the DRM should allow this, but not allow say mass distribution of copies of the content). Basically, a typical consumer should not even notice that the DRM is present, until they actually try to do something illegal like mass distribution. Again, this seems quite hard if not impossible.

But my argument is that if the DRM isn't perfect, that if it doesn't really protect the content, or it fails the consumer friendly requirements, then it becomes a liability, and sometimes a costly one too when you add in the cost of licensing the DRM and on-going costs like authentication servers. Current copyright laws already provides content holders many avenues to pursue infringers, for content with or without DRM, so unless the DRM is "perfect", it really is just a big waste of money.