Media Player and DRM

MS security patch EULA gives Billg admin privileges on your box on The Register talks about the new EULA for the recent patch to Window Media Player. It seems to involve some wording that allows Microsoft to upgrade your machine and software automatically to conform to DRM standards it, and its content providers, have agreed to. Whether you’ve agreed to it doesn’t matter. Your agreement is implicit in your use of the patch for the security holes in their software. That’s right, they ship Windows Media Player with security holes; then, when they patch it, they enforce a new EULA that they know you’ll click right through that gives them quite expansive rights on your machine.

The New Scientist has Microsoft’s anti-piracy plans spark controversy, has the particular text that should raise eyebrows: (emphasis added):

“In order to protect the integrity of content and software protected by digital rights management “Secure Content”, Microsoft may provide security related updates to the OS Components that will be automatically downloaded onto your computer.”

That is, you are agreeing to updates that will be installed automatically, which may or may not disable other players on your system and may invalidate media you already have installed on your system. The problem with this approach is that this is essentially blindsiding most people who may install the patch (which addresses quite large security holes and pretty much must be applied if you use Media Player) into agreeing with the entertainment industry’s current and future assessments of copyright and fair use.

As an alternative media player, I recently tried Real One, marking the first time in a long time that I’ve dared install any software from Real on my machine, and I’m quite happy with it. It has all the functionality of iTunes for MacOS and more.

As for DRM, perhaps a software solution isn’t best. As Gordon Mohr proposes in DRM Helmets: An Idea Whose Time Has Come, the numbers argue for a simpler solution at the source of DRM infractions: the person committing the infraction. Since the U.S. is the only country considering putting this into law, take as given that there are far fewer people (300 million) than devices capable of committing infractions. With that kind of math, the notion of simply issuing a helmet capable of enforcing the law of the land becomes much more attractive.

“I humbly suggest the most cost-effective and reliable solution to the copyright industries’ troubles will be DRM helmets, bolted onto each dutiful consumer at the neck. When these helmets sense watermarked audio or video within earshot/eyeshot, they check their local license manager and instantly “fog up” if payment has not been delivered.”