:
People don’t like DRM, perhaps that’s just because it’s such a smelly word. HBO’s chief technology officer Bob Zitter thinks so, he wants to ditch the term DRM in favor of “DCE,” or, “Digital Consumer Enablement.” Speaking at the National Cable & Telecommunications Association show in Las Vegas, HBO’s top techie said the new term would better describe all the peachy ways that copyright holders and providers could dictate how consumers access content:
Digital Consumer Enablement, would more accurately describe technology that allows consumers “to use content in ways they haven’t before,” such as enjoying TV shows and movies on portable video players like iPods. “I don’t want to use the term DRM any longer,” said Zitter, who added that content-protection technology could enable various new applications for cable operators.
Zitter notes that HBO has HD on Demand movies ready to go, but can’t serve them up due to piracy fears until it has better DRM in place. Excuse me, I should have said DCE in place. HBO’s big concern is the analog hole–in essence the gap in DRM that lets consumers capture the unencrypted analog signal from an HD signal. He, apparently, would like to plug the hole, but can’t due to meddlesome laws.
Theoretically, says Zitter, those analog outputs could be disabled, forcing consumers to use a secure digital connection to watch HD content. But current FCC rules don’t give HBO or cable operators that power, in order to protect consumers who bought early HDTV sets that don’t support digital copy protection. “They say we can’t turn off the analog output,” Zitter notes.
These a-holes will never give up in their attempt to screw the consumer. Unbelievable…
Instead of “unscrupulous crooked jerks”, must we now label them as “wonderful media providers?”
“Enablement” – that’s a beaut.
Straight outta Orwell.
Vote with your wallets folks.
There was a time it was only with politicians and lawyers I had to automatically assume, no matter what they said, the exact opposite was true.
The blatant dishonesty disease seems to be spreading further every day.
Why shouldn’t HBO be allowed to do that? Also, why did the FCC mandate that all TV sets be HD capable in the first place? I should be allowed to manufacture and sell an analog non-HD TV set if I want.
7. “Also, why did the FCC mandate that all TV sets be HD capable in the first place? I should be allowed to manufacture and sell an analog non-HD TV set if I want.”
The FCC controls the airwaves. The FCC decided to take back the analog signals from the TV broadcasters and give them digital signals in return. Legally, you’ll be able to make analog TVs, but I’m not entirely sure why you would if there is no content they can receive.
“to use content in ways they haven’t before,”
lol, we sure didnt have restrictions before. boy am i glad i have them now
New name is fine with me. “Digital Consumer Disablement” it shall be.
All hail Digital Consumer Disablement!
Digital Consumer Enablement huh? I don’t think they know what those words after “digital” mean.
To put this story in context…
The De La Hoya/Mayweather fight was done by HBO PPV, and was on YouTube shortly after it aired. It took over a day for YouTube to respond to HBO’s request to take the video down.
The question, from HBO’s point of view, is how many PPV buys were lost due to people waiting for the fight to show up on the Internet.
As long as the question is out there then this issue will be in play, despite the fact that there’s no scenario where it can successfully play out. Nevermind the fact that the answer to the question is 0, because no one who would have otherwise purcahsed the fight decided not to because it might be on the Internet in a reduced quality.
Uh, I find no link or attribution to the original story…
Am I (or my browser) just missing it?
I should look for a job with these media outfits. I could think up these pointless names all friggin’ day long! Strange how this stuff impresses the pointy-haired managers everywhere.
Double Plus Good.
George Orwell
1984
Are these folks not aware their content is available for free unencumbered by DRM. There are ways to beat the free model. Better quality, better packaging better delivery. I guess name games are easier
C’mon, if you’re going to change the name, I say it should be IMGCSCR (Ignorant Money-Grubbing Corporations Stealing Consumer Rights) – apologies that its unpronounceable – I’m not the US Congress, after all
“Digital Rights Management” itself is a horrible euphemism that I try to avoid. “Copy protection” is much better. If I have to use DRM, I expand it “Digital Restrictions Management” the first time I use it.