BD+ cracked.

[Jobber8742]

I find it funny that it is totally legal to make backups of your own media (see US vs. Betamax case), but yet not only is it legal for companies to stop you from doing it, its illegal for you to break the encryption to achieve a right that was granted to you by the courts. Shows you what money can do.

[Mr. Furious]

I think the important question is whether you are being given a limited license to view the film or whether you're actually purchasing the medium and have no rights (what-so-ever) to the contents. It's a subtle difference, but important. My understanding is that we've been given a limited license (with transferable rights) to the film. The license does not permit you to have public showings or give away copies of the film, but we do have limited rights to copy the film for our own usage. Selling the original media indicates transference of the license.

However, I believe this decades old policy is in the process of change. I don't think Hollywood was ever happy with the market of "used" films, games, etc. They're doing their best to kill it by pushing an "on demand" model and pushing legislation outlawing backups. I'm also not thrilled with having to pay for every different type of medium I want to view my legally acquired license. For example, if I buy a DVD, I'm technically supposed to rebuy the movie if I want to watch it on my iPod. Obviously people don't like having to buy a movie again if they just want to watch it on various devices. Plus, my kids are destructive. I'd rather just give them copies of the movie to watch rather than the original. However, if I were to take my legal copy and transfer it to a backup DVD or to my iPod, in the process of doing so I'd be breaking the law. That really seems unfair.

I don't have a quick answer for Hollywood. I greatly sympathize with them. I know I'd be trying to protect my content if people were stealing it at a breakneck pace. However, I believe the current strategy of making it complicated, intrusive, expensive, and targeted primarily at law abiding customers to be foolish. I personally have bought TONS of movies I might have otherwise passed on just because Target had then in the $9.99 rack. Hollywood should work on making their products accessible and affordable while going after the big offenders. It may even be time to rethink the current payment model. However, I can't see those people willingly changing so it may take massive, uncontrolled piracy to force a switch. Not a pleasant thing, but who knows.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Jobber8742

I find it funny that it is totally legal to make backups of your own media (see US vs. Betamax case), but yet not only is it legal for companies to stop you from doing it, its illegal for you to break the encryption to achieve a right that was granted to you by the courts. Shows you what money can do.

And with that conflict, that is why it is really a legal grey area. If a company tried to prosecute you for decrypting a disc, then you could point to the Betamax case. The studios don't want to open that can of worms because if they lose (very likely), then their DCMA BS gets flushed down the toilet permanently.

So this is one of those laws that will never be enforced with consumers because it directly contradicts another law. It would be horrible PR as well. I'd love for a studio try to prosecute me for putting my owned movies on a media server - then I'd let some TV shows/papers come in and photograph my 1000+ DVD collection and 150+ HD DVD collection - all originals. PR nightmare for the studios, as they'd be prosecuting their best customer.

[Jobber8742]

PR nightmare for the studios, as they'd be prosecuting their best customer

Exactly, that is why suing your customers is quite possibly the dumbest business strategy ever concieved. The only ones they and the RIAA should be going after are the commercial pirates of the world. These people are the industries real enemies, not the parents of the world who don't want to have to rebuy a movie because their kids ruined the original. Consumer rights have completely gone down the drain in the US today partly because of pirates and partly because of corporate greed.

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by Jobber8742

The only ones they and the RIAA should be going after are the commercial pirates of the world.

You don't think they don't and aren't?

Peace...

[rixrex]

There's no such thing as a lock that can't be broken or picked, with the knowhow, equipment and time to do it.

Any copyright protection devised will eventually be rendered useless by those who really want to do it, and find it profitable somehow, with the protection of nations who'll benefit from it too. The only thing intruvise software or protection does is annoy and irritate consumers.

The way to stop pirates and bootleggers is to use standard law enforcement methods to track them down and build cases against them, not by creating problems for consumers or arresting the dope who doesn't know a bootleg from an original. But that's too hard for law enforcement, it requires work and they can't make the same money as they can by fining ordinary folks.

[Mr. Furious]

The problem with any encryption scheme is that the person doing the attacking is also the one viewing the content. At some point in playback, the key has to be used. Essentially, they're going to have to get to more and more machiavelian schemes to "protect" their content. In which case, it will make more and more people interested in pirating out of sheer frustration. I suppose the possibility will exist that people will just plain avoid it out of frustrating, but that's hard to imagine now.

It's really a case of "killing the goose who laid the golden egg."

[ganthc]

Originally Posted by rixrex

The way to stop pirates and bootleggers is to use standard law enforcement methods to track them down and build cases against them, not by creating problems for consumers or arresting the dope who doesn't know a bootleg from an original. But that's too hard for law enforcement, it requires work and they can't make the same money as they can by fining ordinary folks.

How would a dope NOT be able to tell a bootleg from the original? If the "dope" is going to Walmart, Amazon, BB, or CC to buy his movies, then he's getting an original, and paying for that price. If he's getting a free copy from his friends, or downloading it from limewire, then he's likely getting a bootleg...and not paying for it. I don't see how there is any confusion or gray area in there.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by ganthc

How would a dope NOT be able to tell a bootleg from the original? If the "dope" is going to Walmart, Amazon, BB, or CC to buy his movies, then he's getting an original, and paying for that price. If he's getting a free copy from his friends, or downloading it from limewire, then he's likely getting a bootleg...and not paying for it. I don't see how there is any confusion or gray area in there.

ebay.com - if I got a nickel for every criterion bootleg on ebay, I'd have a shitload of nickels; they look nearly identical to the real thing. And thats one of the most popular places to buy movies. You also find them in small video shops in big cities - they pop up in small used DVD stores as well.

Would suck if you bought what looked like a legit BD movie off ebay and put it in your player only to have BD+ lock your player down and label you a pirate... Or the trojan BD+ advanced countermeasure malicious payload scenario slapped on your bought disc for kicks, for that matter

[ganthc]

Originally Posted by Ruined

ebay.com - if I got a nickel for every criterion bootleg on ebay, I'd have a shitload of nickels; they look nearly identical to the real thing. And thats one of the most popular places to buy movies. You also find them in small video shops in big cities - they pop up in small used DVD stores as well.

Would suck if you bought what looked like a legit BD movie off ebay and put it in your player only to have BD+ lock your player down and label you a pirate... Or the trojan BD+ advanced countermeasure malicious payload scenario slapped on your bought disc for kicks, for that matter

But that's a risk you could have for any movie you buy off ebay, right? I mean, you could have dvd that looks like a movie, but is actually a firmware virus that could kill your player. I still would argue that most Americans don't buy their movies from ebay.com or even online. At any rate, the instances of bootleg versus legal copies are very distinct and rare. Most people that get a bootleg were probably seeking it.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by ganthc

But that's a risk you could have for any movie you buy off ebay, right? I mean, you could have dvd that looks like a movie, but is actually a firmware virus that could kill your player.

No, you wouldn't have that risk because HD DVD and DVD do not have built-in to their spec the ability to run native code and executables upon disc insertion like Blu-Ray/BD+ does. For a rogue firmware update, you'd have a number of prompts and firmware screens to accept before the disc actually did anything; disc-based firmware updates dont just run an executable off the disc, they use software built into the player to update.

Not the case with BD+ Advanced Countermeasure, it can zap you as soon as you put the disc in.

I still would argue that most Americans don't buy their movies from ebay.com or even online. At any rate, the instances of bootleg versus legal copies are very distinct and rare. Most people that get a bootleg were probably seeking it.

Yeah, so everyone who shops for Criterion DVDs on ebay are seeking bootlegs.

[ganthc]

So how many Criterion bootleg dvds do you own, Ruined? And if so, how did you know they were bootlegs. Was it the packaging when you got it? Was the quality of the film bad? I guess you can always report those people on ebay that are selling bootlegs as pirates. I'm sure there are legal consequences that can come from doing that.

[Ruined]

Now officially available for download. They have some good points in the release notes too

Removed name of ripper & download link.

Originally Posted by SlySoft

****** 6.1.9.6 Beta 11/07/2007 [removed download link from post]

* New (Blu-ray): ****** ripper copies BD+ titles
* New (Blu-ray): Removed "BD+ not supported" warning, as all available BD+ titles can be copied with ****** ripper, or can be watched on HTPC without HDCP using PowerDVD 3104 and ******. Reports indicate, that burned BD+ titles work on PS3 and standalone players as well.
* Note to Twentieth Century Fox: As you can see, BD+ didn't offer you any advanced security, it just annoyed some of your customers with older players. So could you please cut this crap and start publishing your titles on HD DVD? There are thousands of people willing to give you money.
* Note to people considering to invest in HD media: Please buy HD DVD instead of Blu-ray. HD DVD is much more consumer friendly (e.g., no region coding, AACS not mandatory). Don't give your money to people, who throw your fair-use rights out of the window.
* New (HD DVD & Blu-ray): Support for more MKBv4 titles
* Some minor fixes and improvements
* Updated languages

I guess when that guy said BD+ would be unbreakable for 10 years, he really meant 10 days.

[brian]

Nice.

[Derb]

"Note to people considering to invest in HD media: Please don't buy into my nonsense. HD DVD is much more consumer friendly (e.g., no region coding, AACS not mandatory). I know because I am a die-hard fanboy and can prove it. Don't give your money to people, who throw your fair-use rights out of the window, instead give me your money and I will make sure it gets to the right people."

Fixed.

[Mr. Furious]

So wait... the guy hacked BD+ just to give a Pro-HD DVD rant? Am I the only person here going, "WTF?"

As a side note, as the IT Manager for our company, we've already had discussions about BD players in desktops. We've decided that as a storage medium they have promise, but we're extremely nervous about possible unsigned code execution. The Sony rootkit debacle tells me not to trust the manufacturer for assurances. We've made the decision to prevent the adoption of the format in our network until more is known about possible exploits and security compromises.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Mr. Furious

So wait... the guy hacked BD+ just to give a Pro-HD DVD rant? Am I the only person here going, "WTF?"

Makes a lot of sense. BD+ being cracked weakens Blu-Ray because BD+ is the primary reason Fox went BD-exclusive instead of HD DVD exclusive. If SlySoft can demonstrate BD+ to be no better than AACS, then that may cause Fox to rethink their BD-exclusive stance and hence possibly go neutral.

People have to understand, many hackers AREN'T money-hungry pirates. Many of them buy movies just like everyone else. But when they buy that movie, they like to own it. They like to be able to copy it to their hard drive if they want, or even burn a backup copy to take to a party so their original doesnt get trashed. Bottom line they like to OWN the disc they bought and do what they want with it. DRM, of course, attempts to prevent this. BD+ is by far the most intrusive DRM we have ever seen on a disc; IMO, comparable with Divx in intrusiveness, perhaps worse because at least Divx didn't allow executables to run. Slysoft, and many consumers for that matter, want to be treated like consumers and not criminals (even if in Slysoft's case it may mean they have to go into a legal grey area to provide consumers with fair use rights).

Slysoft is going to continue to go after with BD+ with full force and studios can't touch them because of where they reside. The "freedom to tinker" community fully supports HD DVD over BD because HD DVD has far less draconian copy protection measures (i.e. no BD+ Advanced Countermeasure Rootkit). So, just like the bravado we see from the BD camp, I expect Slysoft to continue pointing out the shortcomings of DRM in future releases. If anything, its a matter of principal and consumer rights; ironically SlySoft is essentially the "little guy" fighting against the big bad studios for consumer rights here by busting through the ridiculous DRM hoops that studios want consumers to jump through - in a way, the consumer could almost consider SlySoft the good guy! Bypassing DRM could be considering a legal grey area due to the ridiculous DMCA that Bill Clinton signed into law, but on the other hand it is the only way to provide consumers with Fair Use rights.

[ganthc]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Makes a lot of sense. BD+ being cracked weakens Blu-Ray because BD+ is the primary reason Fox went BD-exclusive instead of HD DVD exclusive. If SlySoft can demonstrate BD+ to be no better than AACS, then that may cause Fox to rethink their BD-exclusive stance and hence possibly go neutral.

Or when it shows that pirates are pro-hd-dvd, it might convince studios that they made the right decision to not support hd-dvd, and to keep working on drm security.

People have to understand, many hackers AREN'T money-hungry pirates. Many of them buy movies just like everyone else. But when they buy that movie, they like to own it. They like to be able to copy it to their hard drive if they want, or even burn a backup copy to take to a party so their original doesnt get trashed. Bottom line they like to OWN the disc they bought and do what they want with it. DRM, of course, attempts to prevent this. BD+ is by far the most intrusive DRM we have ever seen on a disc; IMO, comparable with Divx in intrusiveness, perhaps worse because at least Divx didn't allow executables to run. Slysoft, and many consumers for that matter, want to be treated like consumers and not criminals (even if in Slysoft's case it may mean they have to go into a legal grey area to provide consumers with fair use rights).

Note you are saying that they don't want to own the disc, because they already own that. They want to own the content. They want to have bought a $100 million dollar movie for $25 bucks and be able to do whatever they want with it. It seems to me to just be a license to steal movies. Why pay for them when you can just download them for free because Slysoft has now provided the method for copying and getting the material for free? And this makes you happy?

Slysoft is going to continue to go after with BD+ with full force and studios can't touch them because of where they reside. The "freedom to tinker" community fully supports HD DVD over BD because HD DVD has far less draconian copy protection measures (i.e. no BD+ Advanced Countermeasure Rootkit). So, just like the bravado we see from the BD camp, I expect Slysoft to continue pointing out the shortcomings of DRM in future releases. If anything, its a matter of principal and consumer rights; ironically SlySoft is essentially the "little guy" fighting against the big bad studios for consumer rights here by busting through the ridiculous DRM hoops that studios want consumers to jump through - in a way, the consumer could almost consider SlySoft the good guy! Bypassing DRM could be considering a legal grey area due to the ridiculous DMCA that Bill Clinton signed into law, but on the other hand it is the only way to provide consumers with Fair Use rights.

Yeah, Slysoft is the good guy that has allowed consumers to get movies for free and not have to pay for anything. I don't see the end of copy protection as some hallelujah moment. Intellectual property theft isn't something to be celebrated.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by ganthc

Or when it shows that pirates are pro-hd-dvd, it might convince studios that they made the right decision to not support hd-dvd, and to keep working on drm security.

Of course pirates are pro HD DVD for the reasons I outlined in my above post. People who know a lot about computers do not want BD+ Advanced Countermeasure anywhere near their PC due to its capabilities. Obviously, hackers know a lot about PCs. And they don't want to have their fair use rights stripped away either; if you are comfortable with that, fine - but others aren't.

Note you are saying that they don't want to own the disc, because they already own that. They want to own the content. They want to have bought a $100 million dollar movie for $25 bucks and be able to do whatever they want with it. It seems to me to just be a license to steal movies. Why pay for them when you can just download them for free because Slysoft has now provided the method for copying and getting the material for free? And this makes you happy?

No, they want to own the disc which includes full access to the data on it - not own the content. If I owned the content that means I could go set up shop and sell copies of my HD DVDs because I own the content and hence sell it and profit off of it. That is obviously not what people want. They want to be able to OWN the disc they bought (which includes full access to the content on it), meaning taking it and doing whatever they PERSONALLY please with it. As long as they aren't profitting off of it or causing signficant financial harm to the studio, I see it as fair use. It would be ridiculous to think that to have a movie on your media server and on disc you'd have to buy the same movie twice, when all the data you need is on the disc you already OWN.

Also, your $25 for 100 million dollar movie argument is hilarious. Studios don't get $25, they get $25 per person that buys it. Do some multiplication of the transformers numbers and you can see studios did just fine. That doesn't mean that people should be forced to buy like 12 copies of the same movie - one for each device they own - because of restrictive DRM licenses that do not allow you to use the data you bought on the disc in the first place.

Yeah, Slysoft is the good guy that has allowed consumers to get movies for free and not have to pay for anything. I don't see the end of copy protection as some hallelujah moment. Intellectual property theft isn't something to be celebrated.

And thats not what is being celebrated. Reread my post and the posts of others in this thread because either you missed the point or you are choosing to ignore it and are more concerned with labelling people thieves - because you know the damage that cracking BD+ will do to the BD format as a whole. BD just lost its "edge" in the DRM department - and thats a big win for consumers.

[brian]

Originally Posted by ganthc

Why pay for them when you can just download them for free because Slysoft has now provided the method for copying and getting the material for free? And this makes you happy?

I don't know why the same arguments are posted again and again. Some people want to make LEGAL backups of products they PURCHASED as not to ruin the $30 disc they just got. I've purchased about 500 albums, and I copy them all to my harddrive. And if I want a copy to listen to in the car, I make a CDR backup - if that gets stolen, no big deal. People should be able to do the same things with their movies. Ruined isn't telling people to go out and pirate Blu-Ray discs. He's advocating the right to back-up something you paid for. There's hardly anything immoral with that.

[Ruined]

Wow, MGM (published by Fox) just cancelled all of their BD catalog titles for the rest of 2007 save 1 release. BD+ crack?

[Moonraker]

Doubt it. Those titles were cancelled like a month ago to retailers, this is just the public news.

[tomdkat]

Why were the catalog titles canceled?

Peace...

[Moonraker]

They gave the reasoning as marketing. And in some ways, I can buy that story, as shelf space is limited during the holidays when day and dates will be everywhere and titles like that will get overlooked.