My lack of connectivity last week kept me out of the latest round of the DRM debate. Chris Lanier started it with a very sensible post here. He makes the point that DRM is already a major part of the digital media ecosystem, and in fact most of it is practically invisible. If you watch digital cable TV, rent a DVD, subscribe to HBO, own a DirecTV or Dish satellite, or even drag out one of your old commercially released VHS tapes, you’re already dealing with DRM, and you probably don’t even notice.
Both Thomas Hawk (here) and Alexander Grundner (here and here, plus this related post) have jumped all over Chris with several passionate posts that essentially make three points (and I’m sure they’ll let me know if I’m oversimplifying):
-
Microsoft could support HDTV over cable any time they want to. The fact that they’re delaying this support is a stupid business decision and is bad for customers.
-
Microsoft is big enough to stand up to the bad guys in Hollywood. If they really cared about their customers, they would not give in to their demands for copy protection on HD content. In fact, Thomas asks rhetorically, “Would a better solution be to create a technology to capture a HDTV stream between the cable box and the TV, record it without restriction (remember BetaMax?), and fight the bastards in court? Would a better solution be to completely empower the consumer and scorch and burn the rest of Hollywood…?”
-
If Microsoft doesn’t preserve the open PC platform for high-definition video content, a competitor will. The most likely savior of the consumer and the open PC platform in this scenario is an open source solution for Linux.
Chris has had several follow-up posts (here and here), and there’s been a lot of discussion on various message boards about this. But these lofty philosophical and theoretical discussions so far have ignored the two elephants in the room:
-
CableLabs. Premium content over cable is encrypted. That’s why only a closed box (your cable company’s digital converter or an approved DVR sold by your cable company) can currently decode an HDTV signal from cable. If you want your PC (regardless of what OS it’s running) to record premium HDTV, you need hardware, and that hardware must be approved by CableLabs. You also need the cable company’s active participation in the process, because every CableCARD-equipped device is individually addressable. In a post on this site about a month ago, I provided links to all the CableLabs documents on how the approval process works, and I noted that a wave of testing of PC-compatible devices is due to complete in August.
-
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act. I’m amazed no one has mentioned this. The law is repugnant, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation makes a pretty convincing argument that it’s unconstitutional. But I have no faith in the current Supreme Court to overturn it, and unless that happens the DCMA is the law of the land. Those who say that Microsoft (or an open source competitor) should just say “Screw Hollywood, we’re giving you unrestricted, DRM-free HDTV” really need to read Section 1201. Circumvention of copyright protection systems. The civil and criminal penalties could put any company, even Microsoft, out of business. Just ask 321 Studios.
Look, if Microsoft or MythTV or Beyond TV or TiVo could get HDTV content into their platform, they would have done it long ago. Arguing that this is an epic battle of good versus evil without considering the technical and legal factors makes the debate meaningless.
Ed Bott 
If it was an important priority enough for Microsoft they could negotiate with the signal providers and essentially create a closed box within an open box. And while folks would bitch about this portion being closed it would effectively offer HDTV through a Media Center PC. HDTV recorded content is already offered through Microsoft’s Foundation box as HDTV recorded content is offered through DirecTV’s TiVo box. For the time being, allowing the owners of the digital content stream the ability to dictate the terms even if the profit split were 0% Microsoft/100% cable provider would be a smart thing to do.
Microsoft could fight and win in court. The DMCA is not a burden that cannot be overcome. No one has better legal capibilities and cash to do this than Microsoft. The problem is that if they went this route it would preclude number one being done and it would also preclude the ability to make money off of Hollywood by selling them DRM.
So stuck between the two Microsoft does nothing and sits paralyzed as their competitors devour their breakfast and eat this lucrative home media market.
Excuses, excuses. Bottom line is I’m watching Six Feet Under on my TiVo (yes, my closed box DirecTV TiVo) and not my Media Center PC. Quit being greedy and make the HDTV thing happen one way or another on the MCE box. Otherwise people won’t buy them and it will in the end become a failed product. Give up the DRM business if you have to, or give up the profit associated with the HDTV stream if you have to. Short of this at least say something, anything, other than more pie in the sky mumbo jumbo from Bill Gates in an Engadget interview.
Thomas, you obviously haven’t read any of the CableLabs documents I linked in my previous post. Sorry if all that technical stuff is boring, but that’s the reality. The output path is a key component of CableLabs certification. Without that certification, the hardware can’t be sold.
This isn’t “excuses,” it’s reality. And as for the DCMA, the law is the law. Microsoft could fight all they want, but if they were to actually produce hardware that circumvents the copy protection in a CableCARD system, they would be clearly violating the law. There wouldn’t be anything to litigate. They would be enjoined by a court almost immediately, and everyone would lose.
Seriously, you need to read the technical specs for this stuff.
If it was impossible to record HDTV right now then Microsoft would not be doing it with their Foundation software and box. It is possible with cooperation from the cable provider. It can be done today and even if a standalone mini Foundation box sat inside of Media Center PC it is indeed possible. The Foundation box does not have any technical superiority to the Media Center PC. In fact in many ways it is a dumbed down MCE machine.
The limitiation to getting HDTV on a Media Center box is not technical. It is a business decision to go a different route for a myriad of reasons that bottom line leave the end user without premium HDTV.
Why can you record HDTV on a Foundation box and not a Media Center? Basically it comes down to the fact that Microsoft negotiated control of their box over to Comcast in order to get it done. What I’m asking for is more visibility and transparency with regards to the business reasons why we are not seeing HDTV on a Media Center PC today. The CableCARD is but one way to go.
The Foundation box is a closed system. It is CableLabs approved. The output path for a PC does not currently meet CableLabs certification standards. The new wave of hardware in testing right now may get certified. We’ll see.
The limitation is indeed technical. It is not “just a business decision.” Again, read the links in my original post. Until you do that we’re not really having a conversation.
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying per se, but I don’t think it’s quite so black and white. Certainly as compared to broadcast HDTV where one day, a day that’s been repeatedly delayed, but nevertheless, one day, the government is going to tell all the broadcasters to stop transmitting and literally most all of them might just flip the switch off at the same time.
SA and Moto (via GI, via Jerrold) own the DRM aka conditional access market in cable and they both have proprietary systems with no intention of losing their cash cow. E.g., see http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detail/0,,5311_5306_23,00.html where Comcast has committed to buy $1 Billion (yes with a B) worth of Moto STB’s and that doesn’t even include cable modems and MTA’s (cable modems with embedded VoIP functionality). Note that no where in the press release do they mention any plans to use OpenCable.
OpenCable is just an “industry” standard. Of course if I buy a TV set with CableCard functionality but I decide to subscribe to DirecTV then I’m stuck because “To be a member of CableLabs, a company must be a cable television system operator… This definition does not include … DBS (direct broadcast satellite).” http://www.cablelabs.com/about/overview/Membership.html.
So far OpenCable is just a de jure standard. ISO created international standards for new and improved network protocols to replace TCP/IP (the protocols were largely pushed by DEC and were the basis for DECnet Phase IV). These protocols addressed a number of shortcomings of TCP/IP which have since been hacked around to make it work – the most infamous one being insufficient address space. However, TCP/IP is still here and DEC isn’t so just because OpenCable is a standard I wouldn’t bet the farm on OpenCable coming to a home near you any time soon.
I’d love to see everybody converge around OpenCable and have a much more open and competitive market, however, I don’t think that’s going to happen without pressure from the FCC and competition from DirecTV/Dish.
Microsoft is trying to sell their own software to run on STB’s (whether they have proprietary CA or not) so they aren’t going to try to push anyone around – well, anyone other than the lowly consumer 😦