Biometrics + RFID = DRM nightmare

What do you get when you combine RFID, BIT and DRM? Other than a completely unpronounceable acronym, you get a licensing scheme so restrictive that it could even please Dan Glickman. Researchers at UCLA are working on a system that could require purchasers of DVDs to provide a biometric key — such as a retina scan or fingerprint — to unlock the disc. The data would then be stored on an embedded RFID chip, making the disc unusable by anyone but the original purchaser. The system would require consumers to purchase new RFID-enabled DVD players, and would pretty much end the practice of sharing and reselling — not to mention renting — DVDs. Not too surprisingly, developer Rajit Gadh told Wired News, "I don't know quite what is going to work in the real world." Here's one clue: not this.

[jake @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

that is retarded.

[www.mygadgetbag.com @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

This will never happen.

This guy needs to be introduced to the "real world".

[Baker @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Seriously, what a waste of developmental funds...this has no chance of being implemented in any kind of consumer environment. Now, this could do well for security type information (eyes only type stuff), but that's about it.

[John @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

This is idiotic. So I buy a DVD and my kid can't watch it? Morons.

[Eric @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Right. Let's tack on, say, $50 to the list price to add this to dvd players, and a couple $s to the dvds. Pass that on to the consumer saying "It's a feature, pay for it. You have to use it; can't make a personal backup; and can't resell the dvd!". Torch a whole host of consumer rights in doing so.

Mmm, gonna have to give that a big NO.

[lupinstel @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

This will go over as well as Divx (the format, not the codec). What is Divx you ask? It was a DVD format which you would pick up at a store (for free, or cheap), then you took it home and put it in your Divx player. Then your player phoned out to Divx headquarters and charged you money everytime you wanted to see. And that is the reason you never heard of it, or forgot completely about it.

[macus13 @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

I could see it working for computer files that someone wants to keep secret; not for movies.

[tigerXP @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

BUT... this could work for archived national security documents or HIPAA related medical documentation.
however, other then the storage medium/format, aren't there already software/encryption schemes that could handle this sort of thing...

[telstar @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

What? No semen sample necessary? Guess that'd sorta slant the gender demo for DVD-watching.

[Jeff @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

"RFID, BIT and DRM"

Here's an acronym for you guys: BITE ME.

The day this happens is the day I stop caring about DVD's.

[Rocket Punch @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Wait a minute... So bascially Kim Jong Il is now the head of UCLA. What a better way to Invade your privacy and flush the whole , you know, freedom thing down the drain.

If they put something like out the market, the terrorist wins.

[Jon B @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

This is ludicrous - the amount of money it would cost to implement this system and the price that would get passed onto the consumer would only fuel the hacking/cracking community to create a workaround and start ripping films to an open format - it's corporate greed that drives piracy, when they realise that and just drop their prices slightly they'll start to cut into piracy - I love watching the industry throw millions of dollars into anti-piracy only for some geek to crack it wide open for absolutely nothing.

[Grendel @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

It's a scam by the cinema's to get everyone away from movie rentals and back into the theaters. Get your HD HandiCams ready......

[David @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

So I guess it doesn't matter who I leave my DVD collection to since they'll be unable to play the damn things unless they keep a thumb and eyeball.

[Nate @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Jon B: good point! Since the product is overpriced, some individuals resort to piracy. Piracy causes the industry to throw millions of dollars at the problem. Those millions of dollars result in raising the prices of their products causing more piracy

[Dave @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

So much for buying DVDs as gifts.

[Charles @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

The morons who consider using such technology in the consumer market are simply digging their own grave. Either these developers didn't think this through (says a lot about UCLA), or there's some sort of ulterior motive.

[dancnpete @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

okay okay every body is pissed about this, good, hopefully it won't get off the ground in teh consumer market. BUT i kind of like the idea of this being implemented in the medical field, allowing me to limit the number of people who have access to my medical records maybe? the tech itself may have some uses just not mainstream

[michael @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Bigger question than "How stupid is this?" is "Would I be able to use my remote or would I have to drag my ass off the couch to use the dvd player?"

[Craig @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

This is an excellent idea for certain uses -- military, government, corporate IP -- but certainly nothing that consumers will ever put up with.

[Dustin Rodriguez @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Hehe, this is almost as insane as how the government drives people to the illegal drug market by making information unavailable and any drugs that make you feel good illegal. If the entertainment companies want to play hardball, they're going to lose.

People really need to start being more aware of this concept of purchasing a "license" rather than a product. You pay $15 for a DVD, which is really just a license. Would you pay $15 is that license was no longer transferrable? What concessions will you make and still pay $15?

The entertainment companies realize that we live in a society where people are absolutely incapable when it comes to viewing a product of any sort and saying "I want that, but it is not worth the price." People just don't do that. They either buy it and complain about the price, or they lobby Congress to steal money from the rich people and buy it for them with the loot. The concept of going without is completely unknown. That's why boycotts never work. People think it's a good cause, but because they WANT it, they think their gratification is more important.

I'm a big fan of a consumerist society, but only if the consumers are smart and moral, as well as the producers being smart and moral.

[Eric @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

If something like this actually gets implemented, I wouldn't mind personally protesting in front of DVD studios/UCLA/etc.

[Finishing.Law.School @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Would this screw all DVD rental companies?
I think so.

Would this make purchasing a DVD actually purchasing a license to watch it and include restrictions on that purchase to make DVD purchases useless?
Maybe - probably - very likely.

If implemented would it reduce the need to buy a DVD player for each room in your house that has a TV?
Yep.

Would this make consumers hate media companies more and give them more reasons to download media instead of buying it?
Absolutely.

Is this a really good example of rampant dumbfuckery?
You bet your ass.

[ShiroX @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

NATE!! IT'S A VICOUS CYCLE! Hey I'm all for it you know. I would just love to see them spend the 10's of millions of dollars to emplement this crap and then see some 14yr old from the Netherlands crack this wide open for NOTHING. Yeah, even less money for um.

[Gary E. Brant @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Professor Gadh is a copy cat, VeriTouch pioneered and invented biometric DRM over two years ago, and we have a United States patent pending for it.

What's more, it's all embodied in a cool, wireless mobile media player , the VeriTouch iVue, that protects the identity and privacy of the user, opposite of what Gadh proposes.

Next?

Gary E. Brant, CEO
VeriTouch Ltd. - New York

[Gary E. Brant @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Professor Gadh is a copy cat, VeriTouch pioneered and invented biometric DRM over two years ago, and we have a United States patent pending for it.

What's more, it's all embodied in a cool, mobile media player , the VeriTouch iVue, that protects the identity and privacy of the user, opposite of what Gadh proposes.

Next?

Gary E. Brant, CEO
VeriTouch Ltd. - New York

[R. Bencheikh @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

The article gave us an example of an application, i.e. a movie DVD, surely it wouldnt be used in the entertainment sector, it will too expensive to purchase a music CD or a DVD. As macus13 said, it can be used for computer files that someone wants to keep secret; not for movies. For example government agencies and secret services who use top secret information, it can be protected by using a hybrid system combining RFID, BIT and DRM.

regards
Ray

http://www.thebiometrix.com
http://biometrix.blogspot.com

[R. Bencheikh @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

The article gave us an example of an application, i.e. a movie DVD, surely it wouldnt be used in the entertainment sector, it will too expensive to purchase a music CD or a DVD. As macus13 said, it can be used for computer files that someone wants to keep secret; not for movies. For example government agencies and secret services who use top secret information, it can be protected by using a hybrid system combining RFID, BIT and DRM.

regards
Ray

http://www.thebiometrix.com
http://biometrix.blogspot.com