drm
Latest
ARM seeks better security for connected devices, teams up with Gemalto and Giesecke & Devrient
ARM is famous for its low-power chip designs, Gemalto is known for its NFC security features, and Giesecke & Devrient brings some nice nano-SIM notoriety to the table. As a trio, these companies want to push forward a security standard that could be readily used in a wide range of web-connected devices, including tablets, smart TVs, game consoles and smartphones. The standard itself is built on ARM's TrustZone hardware-based security, which has been around for a while and is built into every ARM Cortex-A series processor, but which still isn't as widely used as it could be. By founding an off-shoot company with its partners, ARM hopes to nudge the things along faster and turn TrustZone into the "Blu-ray" of mobile security standards.
Kaleidescape DVD servers granted a temporary stay
Things have been looking bleak for Kaleidescape's DVD servers since a Judge ruled against them on appeal, and earlier this month issued an injunction that was to have taken effect on April 8th. We say was because CEO Michael Malcolm is now saying the California 6th District Court of Appeal has issued a temporary stay of that injunction. The court is still deciding whether or not to stay the injunction during the entire process, a decision Malcolm says could affect whether or not the company survives or has to lay people off. While the current case does not affect Kaleidescape's tethered Blu-ray servers, it's tiring to hear about all this from the DVD CCA over a DRM scheme that was cracked wide open so long ago, and a case that had appeared to be over.
Ubisoft hopes to negate the need for DRM with support and content
The contentious DRM systems that often accompany Ubisoft's PC releases may be made obsolete, should the publisher's plans for enhanced post-launch/community support prove as effective as its hoping.The plan is to make pirating the least attractive consumer option by updating, supporting and providing "companion gaming" services for Ubisoft's PC releases, similar to how MMOs generally function. "As the rest of the game industry continues to evolve, the more you hear about cloud gaming, the more you hear about companion gaming, the less a pirated game should work in all of that environment," said Ubisoft VP of digital publishing Chris Early during an interview with Eurogamer. By providing a healthy regiment of ancillary content and post-launch support, Ubisoft's PC gaming ecosystem will be so irresistible that people will stop pirating, and once that happens the publisher will be able to relax its DRM standards. Now, eradicating the whole world of theft sounds like it'll take some time, but Early maintains that Ubisoft's DRM will be as convenient as possible in the meantime: "We want to find ways that don't inconvenience that player who is paying for it. We've had a variety of degrees of success as we wind our way down that path. Our plan, our hope is we stay on the less intrusive, less cumbersome side of that path as we go on."
Amazon: Buy one, get one on Ubisoft DRM-free PC downloads
Got five bucks? Want a couple of kinda-old Ubisoft PC games? Well, if you fall within that very niche category of people, a current promotion over at Amazon may be relevant to your needs.Assassin's Creed, a few Splinter Cells and Far Cry 2 are just a few of the titles you can nab for half a sawbuck -- without that pesky Ubisoft DRM. And, as astute headline reader types will tell you, if you buy one, you'll get one free of charge. The sale ends Saturday.
Fox, Warner, SanDisk and Western Digital's Project Phenix: promotes DRM, misspelling
Studios Fox and Warner Bros. have teamed up with SanDisk and Western Digital to create "Project Phenix." Beneath the orthographically offensive name, it's pitched as DRM that'll permit you to organize, move and watch high-definition content on more than one device. It's the brainchild of the Secure Content Storage Association (SCSA), which has ensured compatibility with UltraViolet, so that users will be able to download cloud-based media to compliant WD and SanDisk storage -- to play on any alliance-approved TVs, tablets and display devices. We'll see the technology available to license later in the year, which promises to render content ten times faster than streaming media on "over the top internet" (translation: streaming services). Yes, there's PR after the break, but we'd only suggest taking a look if you've got a good pair of waders.
Samsung pairs Qualcomm and ARM DRM to get HD content on Galaxy Note Media Hub
Samsung's going to bring "premium HD video content" to Media Hub after pairing up Qualcomm's StudioAccess and ARM's TrustZone DRM systems. The first device that will benefit from the rollout is the Galaxy Note thanks to its enormous 1280 x 800 HD display. Owners of the large phone / small tablet hybrid will find HD content appearing alongside SD editions of your favorite movies and shows -- previously unavailable because of copyright concerns. There's PR after the break, but we'd suggest reading it only if you enjoy paragraph upon paragraph of executives praising DRM to the hilt.
Google, Microsoft and Netflix want DRM-like encryption in HTML5
HTML5 is supposed to set the web free. Free to deliver and shape online media in any web browser. However, several of the standard's greatest champions want to be able to restrict the use of audio and video tags through encrypted media extensions. A draft proposal has been submitted by Google, Microsoft, and Netflix to the W3C -- the curators of HTML5 -- to add encrypted media extensions to the web standard's spec. The proposed system works using a key-based content decryption system controlled by applications, thusly providing the copy protection that so many content owners desire. Naturally, the proposal specifically states that "no DRM is added to the HTML5 specification" if it's adopted, but letting apps lock up audio and video content sure sounds like digital rights management to us. However, there's already some discord amongst the W3C's members as to whether the proposal will work as promised, so its addition to HTML5 is far from assured. You can read the full proposal at the source below, and check out the more coverage links for some added perspective. and tags through encrypted media extensions. A draft proposal has been submitted by Google, Microsoft, and Netflix to the W3C -- the curators of HTML5 -- to add encrypted media extensions to the web standard's spec. The proposed system works using a key-based content decryption system controlled by applications, thusly providing the copy protection that so many content owners desire. Naturally, the proposal specifically states that "no DRM is added to the HTML5 specification" if it's adopted, but letting apps lock up audio and video content sure sounds like digital rights management to us. However, there's already some dischord amongst the W3C's members as to whether the proposal will work as promised, so its addition to HTML5 is far from assured. You can read the full proposal at the source below, and check out the more coverage links for some added perspective on the proposal.
Sky Go finally available on a few Android devices, brings some new channels
It's taken about eight months, but Sky Go is finally available on select Android handsets (HTC Desire, HTC Desire S, HTC Desire HD, HTC Incredible, HTC Sensation, Samsung Galaxy S, Samsung Galaxy S II) after launching on iOS last year. Beyond the limited hardware support, there's a few other caveats to be aware of -- the app is only supported on Android 2.2 and 2.3, so when Ice Cream Sandwich hits some of those phones soon, users will be forced to choose between upgrading or keeping Sky Go working. Another drawback is that due to DRM, the app is blocked from working on rooted devices. Once users have jumped through those hoops though, there will also be even more content available for viewing on all platforms including Sky Atlantic, Sky 1, Sky Living and Sky Arts 1, before F1 coverage launches in March. Speaking of F1 -- Sky also announced its new channel will bring 5.1 surround sound to UK and Ireland broadcasts for the first time this season.
Rayman Origins coming to PC March 29, retail versions DRM free
With the announcement of release dates for 3DS and Vita, there are vanishingly few platforms left that won't have Rayman Origins. Now the PC joins the platforming party, with a release in both Europe and the United States on March 29. The PC version retains the 4-player co-op functionality of the console versions, and also retains its local-only restriction.Surprisingly, the retail release will have no DRM. The download version, for "all e-shops including Steam," will use "only an activation key." Pre-orders of the digital Origins from the Ubishop will also include a free copy of Rayman 2.[Thanks, Mitchell.]
Anno 2070 DRM grudgingly altered as little as possible
It's hard to watch Ubisoft's abusive relationship with PC gamers, but here's another example of the publisher delivering a box of chocolates to the hospital room. Economics and ecology simulator Anno 2070 has some pretty strict DRM, allowing only three installs per copy, which is restrictive but not unusual for the publisher. The crazy part occurred when Guru3D discovered that changing graphics cards on the PC counted as an installation.The situation hit DEFCON "facepalm" when Rock Paper Shotgun followed up with the publisher to ask if the bug would be fixed, to which Ubisoft responded that the DRM was working as intended. The publisher continued, "On the rare occasion when a customer does need additional activations, Ubisoft customer service is available to quickly resolve the situation, and we encourage those customers to contact us directly so that we can ensure they are able to continue to enjoy their game."Anno 2070 developer BlueByte has since gotten in contact with Guru3D to say it has removed the graphics hardware from "the hash used to identify the PC." Customers who legally purchased the game can now switch graphics cards as many times as they want, putting them in parity with those who pirated the game.
TUAW on SOPA and PIPA: What they are and why we're against them
By now, news about two bills making their way through the US legislative approval process, Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), has spread like wildfire across the Internet, along with widespread criticism of both bills. As part of that criticism, if you're reading this on January 18, 2012 and you try to click on either of those links above, you may notice that neither of them work as expected. That's because Wikipedia, one of the most-trafficked and most well-known sites on the Internet, has pledged to "go dark" for 24 hours in protest against both bills. If you hit Google for information on the two bills that same day, you'll likely find that the Internet's most popular website is also protesting the provisions in these controversial bills. We briefly considered following suit and taking TUAW offline during the same period, but we decided that it would be better to take the opportunity to educate our readers on the implications of these two bills, and why we think they're ill-advised. SOPA is the US House of Representatives' version of a bill intended to "promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation by combating the theft of U.S. property, and for other purposes." PIPA is a broadly similar bill working its way through the US Senate, with the full title "Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act." Depending on how libertarian your mindset is, this type of phrasing either sounds perfectly innocuous or like the stamping of marching boots right outside your front window. The intent of both bills is to crack down on illegal sharing of copyrighted media content, colloquially known as "piracy," especially of films and music. Not coincidentally, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) are the biggest supporters of both SOPA and PIPA; the MPAA in particular has issued a somewhat melodramatic response to the criticism of these bills. PC World had a good overview of SOPA as far back as November -- things move slowly in the US legislature -- and Kirby Ferguson from the "Everything is a Remix" web series produced a short video, embedded below, which outlines the US Senate's similar PROTECT-IP Act, criticizing it as a lashing out against the fundamental freedom Internet users have enjoyed since day one. Essentially, both bills are designed to increase the United States' ability to enforce US copyright law outside its own borders, since the Internet knows no national boundaries. The bills specifically mention "rogue websites" that function outside the US -- and I think we all know who some of the biggest targets are -- which the various content producers have accused of being repositories of pirated copyrighted works. Court orders against such sites would be intended to block websites, financial institutions, ad networks, and search engines from linking to or having anything to do with "infringing" sites, essentially walling them off from the rest of the Web like a cyst -- or such is the intent. [Some of the most technically problematic portions of SOPA, including the ability to DNS-blacklist offending sites, are already working their way out of the bill. –Ed.] In reality, neither bill is likely to stem the tide of copyright violations in the slightest. The site blocking provisions in each bill are almost laughably circumventable -- in many cases, simply knowing the IP address of the offending site and inputting that rather than its URL is enough to get around the restrictions. What has the rest of the Internet (and us) up in arms are the rather Orwellian implications of these bills, which essentially amount to Internet censorship in the name of safeguarding the profitability of the entertainment industry. SOPA and PIPA threaten to undermine the Internet and transform it into something no one wants to see. Opposition to this bill isn't coming solely from vocal, idealistic neckbeards, either; SOPA opponents include not just Wikipedia and Google, but other organizations you may recognize such as AOL, Facebook, Twitter, the Mozilla Foundation, and the White House itself. Why the opposition? Let's take a step back and answer a question: Aside from "a series of tubes," what exactly does the Internet represent? The Internet has arguably done more for the free expression of ideas than any other invention in human history, including the printing press. I'm sitting in a swiveling office chair in my lounge in New Zealand as I type this, and these words will find their way onto the Macs, PCs, iPads, and iPhones of tens of thousands of readers all over the world. My benevolent corporate overlords at AOL have a few basic guidelines for the things I can and cannot write here, and my fellow TUAW editors have some guidelines of their own, but other than that, I can say pretty much whatever I want with a guaranteed global audience. That's an incredibly powerful set of circumstances, and it's one that virtually anyone with a computer and internet access can build for themselves. Anyone with a voice can broadcast that voice to virtually anyone anywhere in the world. That simply wasn't possible before the Internet; free exchange of ideas still existed, but the power to broadcast those ideas rested within the hands of a relatively smaller subset of society. That's no longer the case, and unless a rogue solar flare fries the electrical grid beyond repair, it will never be the case again. Here's a more pertinent example with more wide-ranging implications than anything I've said on TUAW. People have debated how much influence the Internet had on the Arab Spring riots of 2011, but if the Internet was even a minor player in the organization and communication of these movements seeking democracy in countries that have never known it, that's something worth fighting for. SOPA and PIPA are antithetical to the free expression of ideas underpinning the foundations of the Internet. The entertainment industry has been at odds with the Internet almost since its inception; the film, music, and television industries have never had customer convenience as their core principle, but rather tight control over the supply and distribution of their content. As recently as the 1960s, these three industries essentially had total dominion over the cultural landscape; with rare exceptions, you'd never see a film outside of a theater, or a television program not broadcast on one of the big three US networks, or be able to purchase for yourself a song you'd heard on the radio anywhere but inside a record store. This was a sweet setup for the entertainment industry, but not so great for consumers. Over the years, as technological improvements have made it easier to distribute such media content -- over both sanctioned and "rogue" channels -- the balance has tipped in decidedly the other direction. With few exceptions, I can go from thinking about watching a film to actually watching it within minutes. I don't even need to have a broadcast antenna hooked up to my television in order to keep up with my favorite TV shows -- and indeed, I don't have one. Using apps on my iPhone, I can hear a new song on the radio, identify it, find it in the iTunes Store, download it, and listen to it again, almost instantly. The entertainment industry has fought against that kind of user convenience every step of the way. In the 1970s and 1980s, it was all about trying to ban cassette tapes and VHS so that consumers couldn't record songs off the radio or movies off of broadcast TV. In the late 1990s, when DVDs and MP3 players first hit the market, the industry made sure to wrap DVDs in layers of copy protection and tried to ban digital music players (ask Apple how that one worked out). Remember the nearly decade-long, drawn-out battle between the RIAA and the rest of Earth? It sued Napster out of existence, pursued further suits against teenagers and old ladies, and tried its damnedest to thwart Apple's efforts at digital music distribution. As recently as a few years ago, songs sold on the iTunes Store were still encumbered with DRM restrictions -- at the insistence of the major labels and against Apple's wishes -- but those restrictions have since disappeared, and the iTunes Store is now the number one seller of music in several parts of the world. The film, television, and music industries have fought tooth and nail against technologies and distribution methods that emphasize user convenience over distributor control for the past 50 years, and they've funneled millions of dollars into Congress in order to get laws like the DMCA, SOPA, and PROTECT-IP passed. The end result of the DMCA itself has been a confusing, Balkanized landscape as far as online media distribution goes, and it hasn't affected piracy in the slightest. For all their intentions, neither SOPA or PROTECT-IP are likely to measurably impact piracy either; instead, they will make it easier for the entertainment industry to abuse its already outlandish influence over the US government, and it will make it easier for the US government to undermine the very foundation of the Internet. Here's how you stop piracy: You won't. Ever. There will always be people who want something for nothing, and no amount of trying is going to stop those people from looking for and finding it. Just accept it and move on. Here's how you reduce piracy: Make it easier for people who want to access and pay for your content. That means no more arbitrary restrictions on what devices we can view it on. That means making the same content available to everyone, worldwide, simultaneously or as close to it as feasible, and at a fair price that consumers won't balk at. No more geo-restrictions on online content -- this is the Worldwide Web. No more distribution delays to overseas territories. No more region coding on DVDs and Blu-rays. No more DRM on electronically-distributed media. And for God's sake, no more forcing me to sit through two minutes of anti-piracy propaganda every single time I insert a DVD. In short, stop punishing the people who want to pay for your "intellectual property." Oddly enough, Apple's already provided the tools to do this, from the distribution method down to the devices the content's viewed on. But in countries like the one I live in, content makers still Don't Get It. Let's try to do the simplest thing imaginable: I want to watch the latest episode of 30 Rock. It's a show made in the States, but I live in New Zealand. And... go. Right off the bat, I know I can't watch it on broadcast TV. Because of various Byzantine workings of the entertainment industry that I as a content consumer couldn't care less about, New Zealand won't broadcast the latest episode of a US TV show until weeks or months after its US airdate -- and that's assuming the show is aired here at all. To the Internet! NBC.com streams episodes for free on its site... but not to me, because I don't live in the US. Hulu is the same story. The show will find its way onto the iTunes Store a day later... but not the NZ iTunes Store, because it doesn't sell TV content. I have to switch to the US Store, which thankfully isn't as geographically limited as the rest of these digital distributors -- so long as I have my US-based credit card handy, I'm golden. But that episode of 30 Rock will only work on a PC, Mac, or iOS device. My poor PlayStation 3, which I use as my media center, just has to sit there feeling sorry for itself unless I insert a DVD or Blu-ray instead -- but I have to make sure it's a DVD or Blu-ray from the United States, because media manufactured in New Zealand won't work on my US PS3 thanks to region coding. (I can stream media to my PlayStation, but not DRM-encumbered video like the TV shows from iTunes.) If I want to watch a DVD made in New Zealand, I have to put it in my wife's MacBook, which has its DVD drive set to Region 4. If my wife wants to watch one of the DVDs we bought in the States on her MacBook, she's out of luck, because industry-mandated firmware encoding on her MacBook's SuperDrive will only let her switch DVD regions a set number of times before locking the drive down to whatever region she picked last. If I want to watch a film I purchased on DVD on my iPad, according to the entertainment industry that's just tough cookies. According to my personal code of ethics and Handbrake, the entertainment industry is on the losing side of that argument. I'm sure this is a bit of preaching to the choir, but isn't all of this more than a little ridiculous? I follow this stuff and write about it on a daily basis, yet even after reading over the past few paragraphs my head is spinning over the needless complexity of it all. And I pay for this? Here's what a "pirate" has to do: find a magnet link to a torrent, click it, and walk away. Depending on the speed of his connection, he's probably watching Tina Fey and Alec Baldwin yuk it up about 15 minutes later -- on any device he wants, with no restrictions and no BS. Do you know how much I would pay for that kind of no-nonsense, unrestricted access to content? At least as much as basic cable costs. At least as much the iTunes Store charges for its DRM-wrapped digital bit buckets. Instead, content producers keep finding new and improved ways of making their content more difficult to access, and they try to push through legislation like SOPA and PIPA -- wrongheaded bills that will do nothing to prevent piracy, but are exactly the foot in the door the US needs to make its version of the Internet look a lot more like the locked-down version you get in places like China, Saudi Arabia, or Iran. At the same time, I don't have much sympathy for an industry that's making hundreds of billions of dollars per year, giving a huge slice of those profits to studio and network CEOs, then complaining that teenaged pirates are stealing billions from them every year, when instead of embracing distribution methods like iTunes that make things easier for content consumers they go crying to the government and demand that basic freedoms be curtailed in the name of (theoretically) greater profits for themselves. The day the entertainment industry makes it simple for consumers in every corner of the world to have easy, equal, and simultaneous access to content, at a fair price, and with the ability to view it anywhere at any time without restrictions, watch how far the piracy rate drops. That initial drop is as good as it's ever going to get. You can write the rest off forever, because those are the people who were never going to pay for your content no matter what you did, and no amount of legislation is ever going to change that. In the meantime, stop punishing the rest of us. We need more freedom, not less. Photo: Paul Stevenson | flickr cc
Bell Canada will stop throttling your P2P traffic, might charge instead
Since the CRTC took a swipe at net neutrality a few years back, Bell Canada internet customers have maligned its P2P packet-shaping ways. From March 1st, however, users can file-share at the speeds nature (or your ISP) intended. In a letter to the aforementioned regulator, Bell points out that improvements to its network and the proliferation of video streaming mean that the more nefarious traffic just isn't denting its capacity like it used to. As such, the firm will withdraw all P2P shaping for both residential and wholesale customers. So, those ISPs buying their bandwidth from Bell could see the amount they need go up, and with talk of a capacity-based billing model, this could mean charges passed on to users. At least, for now, all that legitimate sharing you do will go unhampered.
Louis CK makes $1 million in 12 days, proves that DRM-free content is valued
Hear that, MPAA / RIAA? That's the sound of Louis CK's audience chuckling. Not at one of his jokes, mind you, but at the notion of strapping DRM onto everything you possibly can in order to "make people buy it." In an effort to see if this crazy idea was true or not, the famed comedian decided to sell his Live at the Beacon Theater for just $5. Procuring it was dead simple -- you could either surf over to his website and plop down a PayPal payment, or you could pirate it. Either way, no DRM was affixed. Turns out, people actually are fans of paying money for things that they see as both fair and worthwhile, as evidenced by the $1 million that currently sits in Louis CK's PayPal account. Of course, we've never advise anyone to hold anywhere near that much cash in an account that could be frozen on you at a moment's notice (not that we have experience or anything), but at least he's going to do awesome things with the proceeds. We'll let you hit the source link to find out precisely what that is. Kudos, Louis.
Tech mainstays finally come together on something: littering more HD content with more DRM
Who says the big boys can't be friends? While Samsung, SanDisk, Sony, Toshiba and Panasonic would probably disagree with each other on just about everything, there are still three magical letters that can bring even the biggest rivals together: DRM. While the consortium is doing everything it can to avoid the term, there's no hiding the truth -- the temporarily-named 'Next Generation Secure Memory Initiative' is designed to protect HD content by using "unique ID (identification) technology for flash memory and robust copy protection based on public key infrastructure." Just when we thought Louis C.K. had proven that slapping DRM around something wasn't the best approach, here we go taking a few monumental steps in the wrong direction. In essence, it sounds as if they're crafting a way to distribute Blu-ray-quality material on SD cards and embedded memory (sound familiar?), and they're also hoping that this will "enable various HD content applications such as HD network download, broadcast content to-go and HD Digital Copy / Managed Copy from Blu-ray Disc." Notably, we're told that Android-based smartphones, tablets, TVs and Blu-ray products in particular can look forward to taking advantage -- in other words, Apple's going to keep doing what Apple does. If all goes well, they'll start licensing the new secure memory technology early next year, and if we had to guess, we'd say the adoption trajectory perfectly matches that of slotRadio. Good luck, folks -- you're going to need it.
The painful sting of Serious Sam 3's anti-piracy protection
Software piracy is illegal and unfair to the people who make and sell games. That's enough of a deterrent for most people. The rest may find the giant, invincible, super-fast, assault-rifle-wielding scorpion monster more convincing. That's the new DRM measure enacted by Serious Sam 3: BFE developer Croteam. We see the potential for this to become an industry-standard method of preventing unauthorized game copying. Or, in simpler terms, if that scary-ass monster wants to go into other games, we are powerless to stop it.
Lovefilm's movie streaming will switch from Flash to Silverlight on PCs in 2012
As it prepares for Netflix's 2012 UK invasion, Lovefilm appears to be taking a page out of its competitor's strategy, and it's all because of the studios. When streaming to Windows PCs and Macs it will only support Silverlight as of the first week in January (we should mention it's coincidentally timed alongside a particular electronics show), ditching Flash encodes for its video. Like Watch Instantly, that will mean a lockout for non-Intel Macs and Linux users who don't have a player that supports the necessary DRM, but it's just those three letters that are behind this. Streaming Project Manager Paul Thompson writes on the company blog that Silverlight beat out Flash and new challenger HTML5 in order to meet studio's anti-piracy requirements, as well as take advantage of its Smooth Streaming adaptive bandwidth adjustments. Everything will stay the same on other streaming devices, while Netflix has been able to support Chromebooks via plugin and is rumored to be working on a Netflix solution, we'll have to wait and see if Lovefilm can do the same.
4.5 million pirated copies of Witcher 2 out there, according to CD Projekt
Polish developer CD Projekt claims that its Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings has been pirated more times since release than you might have expected. In a recent interview with PC Gamer, CEO Marcin Iwinski does some quick back-of-the-hand calculations according to what he saw on illegal downloading sites, and comes up with 4.5 million copies of the game obtained illegally. He also says, however, that "as of today we have sold over one million legal copies, so having only 4.5-5 illegal copies for each legal one would be not a bad ratio." He then suggests "the reality is probably way worse." Still, CD Projekt isn't interested in digital rights management, and Iwinski says that it would cause more trouble for legally paying gamers than it would stop any piracy. The solution, he says, is to both add value to buying games legally, and educate users about why it's the right thing to do. "We started offering high value with the product -- like enhancing the game with additional collectors' items like soundtracks, making-of DVDs, books, walkthroughs, etc.," he says. "This, together with a long process of educating local gamers about why it makes sense to actually buy games legally, worked. And today, we have a reasonably healthy games market." Iwinski's got a point -- it's often an easier battle just selling more legal copies of a game (by providing a better value to customers) than preventing would-be pirates from beating even oppressive DRM.
Blu-ray video encryption cracked using $260 kit
When a master key for HDCP encryption surfaced last year, Intel hardly broke a sweat. It declared that nobody could use the key to unlock Blu-rays or other protected sources unless they got into the semiconductor business and "made a computer chip" of their own. Oh Mann, didn't they realize? That sort of language is like a red rag to a German post-grad, and now Ruhr University's Secure Hardware Group has produced the ultimate rebuttal: a custom board that uses a field programmable gate array (FPGA) board to sit between a Blu-ray player and TV and decode the passing traffic. Student price: €200, and no silly bodysuits required.
Ghost Recon: Future Soldier on PC replaced by Ghost Recon Online
Ghost Recon: Future Soldier is not coming to PC, Ubisoft has confirmed -- but never fear, because it is coming to PC. Ghost Recon Online will take the place of Future Soldier on PC, as "Ghost Recon Online is the PC equivalent," Ubisoft tells Eurogamer. In February 2010 Ubisoft teased a PC version of Future Soldier and began forums tagged "PC" for the game, but apparently those plans have transformed into Ghost Recon Online, a free-to-play, non-DRM, multiplayer title that Ubisoft believes will deter piracy. If released online, 95 percent of PC gamers would download Future Soldier illegally, Ghost Recon Online senior producer Sebastien Arnoult believes, and Online is a direct reaction to that assumption. "To the users that are traditionally playing the game by getting it through Pirate Bay, we said, 'Okay, go ahead guys. This is what you're asking for. We've listened to you -- we're giving you this experience. It's easy to download, there's no DRM that will pollute your experience,'" Arnoult tells PC Gamer. Um, thanks?
No 'always-on' DRM for Assassin's Creed: Revelations
Ubisoft's always on-again, off-again relationship with its restrictive DRM policies is "off-again" for Assassin's Creed: Revelations. Rock Paper Shotgun reports word from the publisher that it will activate an initial check the first time the game boots up -- and then players are good to go with offline play. The publisher gave the Assassin's Creed series a break from its always-on DRM after the first sequel, with last year's Brotherhood spared the inconvenience. Meanwhile, other Ubisoft products, like Driver: San Francisco and From Dust, have been burdened with the internet-required protection at launch. Well, at least one thing remains consistent in the social contract between Ubisoft and PC players: there's no sign of the publisher halting its predictable staggering of console and PC launches.
