Print
Some German movie goers were a little disappointed yesterday when faulty DRM caused major issues in their advanced screening of Avatar in 3D. The special 3D version was delivered to a number of cinemas in Germany, but some of them were unable to decode the files. The overtly draconian system relies on multiple certificates and time-sensitive keys from online servers to decode 150GB of 3D information. It would seem that it’s that 3rd dimension they really want to protect, the other two not so much.
The employees tried for several hours to get the system to work, but they eventually gave up and showed the 2D version instead. When asked about the incident Oliver Fock, general manager of CineStar Group said, “We regret the failures and the associated discomfort, but we are confident that we will be able to play the premiere both in 2D and in 3D.” It does appear that the system has been worked out and the house of cards that is the 3D DRM scheme is currently functioning in the cinemas.
Comments are closed on this article
Hg Dragon
December 22, 2009 at 11:05am
Sounds like either a screw-up or malfunction to me. There are several "handshakes" that have to happen before a digital movie even plays. There's one at almost every step along the way from hard drive to screen. A failure at any one of those points usually means that the film simply doesn't play, not "No 3-D for you!" The main "DRM" is the unlock key, which is coded for a specific projector unit, time-frame to play the movie, and the print. The other handshakes are more for signal integrity to make sure there isn't something in between any of the components intercepting the content. It detects this, it cuts the feed and shuts down.
This sounds more like the theater had a problem with their equipment not working properly, or they only had the 2-D version loaded and unlocked, be it through the fault of the theater, booking agent, or as has happened at one of our theaters, the disrtibutor sent the wrong key.
And 150GB is about right for a digital movie, 2-D or 3-D.They literally ship in on hard drives that the data loads off of. Depending on the system being used at the theater, they either insert the hard drive into an open bay and pull it that way, or via a USB interface. And yes, the USB is a slooooow as you think it is. Some systems allow the theater to play the feature streaming straight from the HDD if need be, but it doesn't always work real well.
QUINTIX256
December 20, 2009 at 12:32pm
That is only 3 times bigger than bluray. Since I am sure the film is shot and projected a 4k, and the standard stream for projection is a collection of 12bit per subpixel JPEG2000 pics without predicted frames, I'm sure the interviewee missed the word x in x hundred fifty.
Which only serves to show how unnecessary the DRM is, because the few cinemas that have the tech to do 3D 4k would be part of a major chain. Piracy would be suicide for such theaters.
You can have your recession. I'm not participating.
Asevening
December 22, 2009 at 2:02pm
3D wasn't continuous throughout the whole movie, maybe the 150GB was the 3D portions of the movie and they are only speaking of that. In some crazy insane world, like ours. If not, then yeah, that's a little on the low-end for size.
DBsantos77
December 20, 2009 at 11:16am
Heh, the DRM sucks, more of an iron fist if you ask me.
Went to see Avatar in 3D last night, amazing movie, if you get a chance to watch it do it.
-Santos
Teh Rig:
AMD Phenom 720 (Unlocked to Quad, Stable @ 3.6 Ghz 1.47v)
Gigabyte Micro ATX 785gx Motherboard
G.Skill 4GB 1333 DDR3 8-8-8-21 @ 1.6v
HIS ATI Radeon HD4670 (CCC OC'd)
550w Corsai
arosadler
December 20, 2009 at 8:04am
There is only one way to deal with companies selling drm. DONT BUY. It's the only way they'll learn. And I'm not saying steal their product. Buy drm-free products from competitors. Except for apple. Just don't buy apple.
snapple00
December 19, 2009 at 9:43pm
It is unfortunate that there is so many thieves out there that think its no big deal to steal.
DRM isn't there for no reason...
Tenhawk
December 20, 2009 at 3:32am
Ironically, it's a scam on the studios. It doesn't work, it never has worked, and it never WILL work. But so called security companies keep selling the idiots at the studios, who don't even know how to program their own VCRs, on the next 'perfect' security system to protect their precious products.
It would be funny, except that the people who are footing the bill for it are the consumers who actually PAY for their products. Pirates never EVER suffer under the boot of DRM because they strip it off the media immediately and make it available DRM free.
So yes, please, tell me about how DRM is there for a reason.
Am I pro pirate? No. I'm Anti-Stupid. If I go to the store and buy food, I expect said food to be edible, non toxic, and tasty. If the store's anti shoplifting security irradiates the food at the counter with toxic, foul tasting, ink in order to track it better... I'm going to get me a five finger discount the next time I go shopping.
Cause if the only way for me to consume the product without being poisoned by the 'protection' is to steal the product... hey, you know what? Arr Matey.
snapple00
December 20, 2009 at 8:33am
Ok... Am I just supposed to take your word for it?
Do you have any proof that it doesn't work at all? Do companies not do any research at all on this DRM scheme?
I'm sorry. Your post just sounds like a rant. Absolutely no proof.
compro01
December 21, 2009 at 8:53am
The simple fact that this movie was pirated BEFORE it was even shown in theatres, despite DRM sufficiently restrictive that it locks out legitimate theatres that purchased the film would seem to support the "DRM is completely and utterly worthless in addition to being harmful" argument.
Caboose
December 20, 2009 at 5:33pm
You sound just like that guy who was convinced that Windows 7 was nothing but a way for everyone to spy on you, and no amount of proof otherwise convinced him.
If you think that DRM works to prevent piracy, then you're sadly mistaken. If DRM worked properly, this article never would have been written, Avitar 3D would have been screened flawlessly. You'd never have PC games leaked to the web the day of or before their release, you'd never have movies leaked to the web while in theaters, or once they're on disc.
If DRM worked, consumers wouldn't feel like they're being hindered when they attempt to use the software, watch the movie, or listen to the music. I like to rip all my movies to my HTPC. That way my discs don't run the disk of being damaged, and it's easier to playback my music or watch my movies when they're on my HTPC and no physical media is present. Sure movie companies have started including the option to make a "digital copy", however that's limited to one PC only. If my HTPC dies, or if I add a 2nd HTPC to my network and want to stream an HD movie over my Gigabit LAN, I can't. because the movie is linked to one PC. How does that help me?
Just because you want to believe that DRM works and is useful and helps, doesn't mean it does. There's enough information out there to counter your beliefs!
-= I don't want to be dead, I want to be alive! Or... a cowboy! =-
Tenhawk
December 20, 2009 at 1:53pm
Napster. Limewire. Torrents. The Piratebay. Usenet.
These are proof, dude. Have you EVER heard of ANY movie that wasn't released on the net within hours of the DVD release, if not before? All of those DVD's had DRM. Is there any music tracks that can't be found available on the internet? The preponderance of proof is on my side. There is, to date and to the best of my knowledge, no existing DRM scheme that can be considered successful.
In gaming the closest thing to a success would be console systems, but even they are constantly cracked. In music even the studios are giving up on DRM and are now beginning to release music unemcumbered because some of them are beginning to realize that what I posted was the gospel truth. Movie studios, however, are still still in denial.
So what I ask you is to show me the proof that DRM exists for any reason more than padding the pockets of the so called security companies that develop it. Because the evidence on my side is legion. The evidence on your side is nonexistent.
The only DRM scheme even close to successful that I'm aware of is the use of Dongles to provide part of the decryption scheme. That's notoriously hard to crack, and usually goes uncracked because it's not worth the effort. That said, just a couple months ago, some of the highest end software that used dongle based security were hacked and released over the net. Mostly Dongle schemes rely on the same Security through obscurity that Linux and Mac use to counter virii attacks. There are almost always other targets, just as fat, that are a lot more open to attack so why bother attacking something so few people care about?
So I reiterate, if a grocery store tagged your food at the counter with radioactive and toxic dies in order to better track it... would you thank them for it? Especially if the shoplifters they claim they're fighting are getting the grub clean and pure?
You know what, maybe you would thank them. But I won't.
I'm Not Pro-Pirate. I'm Anti-Stupid.
snapple00
December 20, 2009 at 1:56pm
I'm sorry you had to type all of that. Your personal experience and hypothetical situations are not proof.
Also your analogy about radioactive food doesn't make the least bit of sense.
Good luck on that whole 'Anti-Stupid' thing you got going...
Tenhawk
December 20, 2009 at 2:13pm
Fine. What's proof by you?
Name a movie, I'll find a link to it on the net. A Piece of software? No problem. Music? Not my thing, but I bet I can still find it.
In return, my challenge to you. Find me an example of DRM that works. The only requirement I have is that it can't be brand spanking new, it has to be tested in the field.
Oh, and for the record, personal experience is proof when I can back it up with actual evidence. As in, actual movies that have been stripped of their DRM. Actual music. Actual software. That's proof. Period. If you think it isn't, tell me what you would accept as proof because I can't imagine anything more rock solid.
And the analogy about toxic dyes in food is exactly what they're doing to your media, though I will admit that it is a shock based example. The only difference is that if it truly followed DRM schemes the grocery store would have bribed the government to make it illegal to clean your food after you bought it.
Studios pay billions of dollars, costs which are passed on to us, for security that doesn't work. They've been doing it since the days of VCRs anyway. I guess it must work, huh? Cause no one ever managed to copy VHS tapes, right? DVDs are uncopyiable, and Blueray? Don't even try to copy blue ray, the FBI has teams sitting on the roof of your house right now waiting for the Go order.
So I ask again. WHAT. IS. PROOF?
snapple00
December 20, 2009 at 11:13pm
Proof is an actual analysis that DRM is, or is not, working to curb piracy.
Not "OMG any movie is on the internet just name one!!".
And definitely not, "You like radioactive food? That is DRM, you sheep, the FBI is waiting.."
Oh and saying "It doesn't work... So I guess it must work?" Is proof you are an idiot.
I don't know if DRM is working on any scale. I just asked the question, and I always get ridiculous answers. I wish someone could communicate intelligently.
Let's start by asking: What is the piracy rate (and actual number) of movies? Music? Software? Was it greater in games before lots of DRM was added? (Can Steam count as DRM?)
See how the process goes? Finding 1 example on the internet is a tiny, tiny, piece of evidence. Not proof.
MeTo
December 21, 2009 at 9:58am
Every time a movie comes out its on the net for download Striped of DRM. If DRM worked it could not be striped out of the movie. Its just that simple.
Tenhawk
December 21, 2009 at 2:34am
Ok, I understand what you're saying, but you're not going to get numbers of that nature that we would both agree on. The studios OWN numbers would indicate that DRM works even less than I would credit it for, however. Most numbers they publish are just insane. By the Studios way of thinking, I guarantee that they consider you, me, and everyone on this site to be a pirate.
That's by the STUDIO'S numbers, mind you, as published in various reports over the past few years. By their OWN numbers, as DRM has been introduced Piracy has skyrocketed.
Now, I'm going to be fair to your side of the debate and state unequivocally that the Studios numbers are complete bullshit. They used faulty methods for determining those numbers in order to make them sound bigger and badder while pushing through DRM legislation.
The real numbers don't exist, however. That said, we do know a few things that indicate trends. Such as the game Spore, which had by far the most draconian DRM in the last few years, is one of the most heavily pirated games of all times. Not sure why exactly, doesn't look interesting to me, but the data is there to prove it.
As for music, DRM is a known joke. I work on computers, and I don't remember the last time I had to dig through an OS without finding gigs of music, generally downloaded through Limewire in my area. Complete PC illiterates have this software on their systems and know how to use it, such as it is. My money says DRM has a net zero effect on music downloads. Anyone who wants it can get it.
Movies are a bit tougher, since you need a certain level of PC knowhow to get movies off the net. Most of the older people who's systems I work on don't have many, if any, movies. All of the younger ones do, however. So DRM has at least a minor effect here. That said, every I know DOES have tons of copied DVDs, usually from rented netflix stuff. Overall, movie DRM is probably not a net zero effect, but it's not a huge effect either. Additionally movie DRM is known to cause problems to paying consumers, particularly with HD films.
Games and Software, the spot where DRM probably has the greatest positive numbers effect... yet the least actual real world effect. This is a weird category in a lot of ways because it's not a huge audience to begin with, and the target audience is generally more computer savy than say, for movies. DRM certainly keeps out a lot of the average computer users. How many of them would actually buy the product anyway, however, is impossible to gauge. Certainly Adobe software is probably among the most pirated software around (besides Windows itself), yet I don't think Adobe really cares much. Pros pay for it, and Pros are their market. You'd have to be beyond stupid to use a pirated copy of Photoshop to, say, put out Maximum PC. It's just not done. So net effect for DRM in this category? Who the hell knows? There is literally no way to judge, the numbers just don't exist in any meaningful way.
So, summing it all up. DRM for music? Clearly worthless. The studios agree with me on this one as well, apparently, as they have begun dropping it from their roster of tools. So we only paid for their little experiment for... oh, 15 years or so? before they woke up and realized that it didn't work.
Movies? Less clear, getting movies off the internet is a bit more complicated than music (not much, but a bit) which does raise the access bar a tad. The Studios are still unwilling to give it up, however, so we keep footing the bill for their ongoing experiments.
Games? Even more murky than movies. Getting a hacked game running takes some skill, as a rule. At least basic knowledge of Windows Explorer and the file system, as well as burning disks. However the target audience for games is also one of higher computer skill. The studios here are fragmenting, with some pushing more and more draconian DRM (EA) and some saying screw it, it doesn't work, and dropping DRM altogether (Stardock). Results remain unclear.
Apps. This is an area where I can't even hazard a guess. Some apps need DRM, some probably don't. Ironically, it's the low end apps that need it. The pro level ones are probably better off without it. Still, I don't think DRM affects sales much in this category either way. people who need them mostly buy them. people who just want to play around with them, mostly do not.
Basically it comes down to ease of access. That's why music studios are the first to drop DRM. Small music files are so easy to get and use that DRM is pointless, and hardcore audiophile formats just never caught on. As the products become harder to access on the net, things become less clear.
Arrowdodger
December 21, 2009 at 12:15am
I'd say DRM is keeping honest people honest. It's really only as effective as people's willingness to go along with it. Piracy rate is however much someone wants it. Spore, with it's relatively heavy DRM was pirated over 1.8 million times. DRM obviously didn't help all that much to prevent piracy. If someone wants it without paying, they're going to get it, DRM or no, all it does is inconvenience honest people.
Arrowdodger
December 20, 2009 at 12:24pm
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the prevalence of piracy kinda proves how defunct DRM is. It all boils down to this; you can either support the developer, pay for the game, and deal with their restrictions (which usually range from acceptable to utterly ridiculous), or you can not pay a dime, download it off bittorrent, and not deal with their restrictions. As far as companies doing research on DRM goes, they don't care. The publisher is the one who makes all the decisions, if they think it'll work, they'll do it. The music industry is just now starting to take a look at their DRM usage and are starting to go DRM free, because, well, that's what the customer wants.
riopato
December 20, 2009 at 12:34am
people who actually pay for there products, only to have their purchase not work properly. Thievies don't care if it doesn't work right or doesn't look good because it didn't cost anything. They'll just go after the next thing that does work flawlessly and "promote" that product til the new version comes out. Or something better comes out.
Anything that is DRM should have a life time warranty and full free tech support 24/7. On top of this, companies should be 100% liable for any damge, alteration or personal grief to the consumer and should be equally penalize as would any thief who would steal from them.
Apple's os and most of their products along with their third party coders never have DRM and Apple basically dictate what you can do with it. Mac-heads will follow Apple without question even though they will be abandoned if the user's product is a year old, hold the user responsible for maintenance, and even though their "genius" support is a contradiction, they work banker's hours.
is anybody paying attention? DRM is still a fear tactic, it's meaningless and doesn't work! Apple doesn't use it and not only people "borrow" their product, not 1 but 2 companies along with a huge modding group have blatantly abused their DRM free product for each iterniation of each of Apple's product release!
snapple00
December 20, 2009 at 8:38am
Another rant post.
You guys can cry about DRM all you want, but at least get some proof that it is a 'scam' or a 'fear tactic'.
Here is a thought, pretend you are in the company's shoes who makes the product. Stop thinking about ME ME ME.
I guess DRM just popped out of nowhere right?!
Liable for personal grief? You have got to be kidding me...
nekollx
December 21, 2009 at 10:14am
Except all you have to do is look though articles right on this site to find reports of Honest costomers who, because of DRM, could not use their product soPirated a DRM version so, you know, they could USE the product they bought...For example i BOUGHT Spore but since it has Bricked other laptops like mine i'll only install the DRM free pirate version.
------------------------------
Coming soon to Lulu.com --Tokusatsu Heroes--
Five teenagers, one alien ghost, a robot, and the fate of the world.
Caboose
December 18, 2009 at 9:03pm
Another prime example, of why DRM doesn't work!
-= I don't want to be dead, I want to be alive! Or... a cowboy! =-
