Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GStreamer Might Tackle DRM, Blu-Ray Support

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    The only way an "open source" implementation of DRM could work would be if the actual DRM decoding would be done remotely, ie. the local open source player would send the encrypted data to a remote server, which would stream back the decrypted video. The remote server would act as the black box in this.

    Of course, you don't have to be a genius to figure out a million flaws in this idea.

    On the other hand, GStreamer developers could simply break the blu-ray encryption, and create an open source implementation that plays back DRM'd content without the DRM. That'd be fine. Commendable, even. Isn't DVD playback already pretty much done in this way anyway?

    Comment


    • #17
      "It's always possible to use GPLed code to write software that implements DRM." -- A Quick Guide to GPLv3

      Even that, I don't think GStreamer's solution for Blu-ray will be open source. It could be in a form very similar to their DVD playback solution: commercial closed-source product with required license and patent from Blu-ray group, based on GStreamer technology.

      Still, I think it's good to have it on Linux, just as Steam.
      It's a historical burden Desktop has to carry until we reached DRM-Free world.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by lovenemesis View Post
        "It's always possible to use GPLed code to write software that implements DRM." -- A Quick Guide to GPLv3
        I think you're misunderstanding what that chapter means.

        GPLv3 is designed specifically to prevent using laws against users in the form of DRM. That means if you write a DRM scheme and license it under GPLv3, then by the GPLv3 license, you can't sue anyone else for bypassing this DRM scheme, because the GPLv3 license protects users against DRM.

        Now with blu-ray this is entirely different, we're talking about an existing DRM scheme, and in order to write an open-source implementation that would allow the use of DRM-restricted content, there's only two possible solutions: one, GStreamer figures out and breaks the DRM restriction, and writes an implementation to exploit its weakness, or two, GStreamer gets specs from blu-ray and uses them to implement their DRM scheme. But since doing an open source implementation would effectively nullify the DRM restriction, number two is never going to happen.

        So the only way it could work would be a closed-source binary blob.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by dee. View Post
          I think you're misunderstanding what that chapter means.

          GPLv3 is designed specifically to prevent using laws against users in the form of DRM. That means if you write a DRM scheme and license it under GPLv3, then by the GPLv3 license, you can't sue anyone else for bypassing this DRM scheme, because the GPLv3 license protects users against DRM.

          Now with blu-ray this is entirely different, we're talking about an existing DRM scheme, and in order to write an open-source implementation that would allow the use of DRM-restricted content, there's only two possible solutions: one, GStreamer figures out and breaks the DRM restriction, and writes an implementation to exploit its weakness, or two, GStreamer gets specs from blu-ray and uses them to implement their DRM scheme. But since doing an open source implementation would effectively nullify the DRM restriction, number two is never going to happen.

          So the only way it could work would be a closed-source binary blob.
          The link I provided to GPLv3 is my opinion to your words of "The problem is, DRM is fundamentally incompatible with open source." in #14.
          It's possible to write a DRM in an open source way. From this aspect, not fundamentally incompatible.

          I agree the rest of your saying, just as the 2nd part of my post saying: in the case of Blu-ray with an existing DRM, it could be another a closed-source implementation as their current DVD one.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by lovenemesis View Post
            The link I provided to GPLv3 is my opinion to your words of "The problem is, DRM is fundamentally incompatible with open source." in #14.
            It's possible to write a DRM in an open source way. From this aspect, not fundamentally incompatible.
            It's also possible to build a car with rectangular wheels. Doesn't mean the concept is feasible, and it doesn't invalidate the fact that rectangles are fundamentally incompatible with the idea of wheeled transportation.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Kivada View Post
              And? Who cares what they think? There are plenty of us that would like to get Bluray support so we could rip the free Bluray discs at the library and the $1.25 24 hour rentals from Redbox for our HTPC.
              May I ask why? When downloading a rip of it is faster?

              If you already had free access to the disk via your local library, you can't really make the argument that downloading it instead is somehow wrong.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by dee. View Post
                It's also possible to build a car with rectangular wheels. Doesn't mean the concept is feasible, and it doesn't invalidate the fact that rectangles are fundamentally incompatible with the idea of wheeled transportation.
                Please take a look at that and tell me how it wouldn't apply to a DRM scheme.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by lovenemesis View Post
                  The link I provided to GPLv3 is my opinion to your words of "The problem is, DRM is fundamentally incompatible with open source." in #14.
                  It's possible to write a DRM in an open source way. From this aspect, not fundamentally incompatible.

                  I agree the rest of your saying, just as the 2nd part of my post saying: in the case of Blu-ray with an existing DRM, it could be another a closed-source implementation as their current DVD one.
                  The GPL protects the right to freely modify the works covered under it. Therefore, a GPL-covered implementation of DRM can be modified to remove the restrictions. The article you linked specifically goes on to state that the DMCA would not prohibit such behavior. To expand on this point a little: the DMCA has a clause which prohibits circumvention of what it calls "effective access control technology". Seems to me that, because the GPL requires the source code to be made available and because the GPL explicitly permits modifications to the program, the assumption is that no US judge would consider a GPL-covered implementation of DRM to be effective access control technology.

                  This, of course, only applies to the US. Other jurisdictions may have other laws covering "access control technologies" and DRM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by curaga View Post
                    May I ask why? When downloading a rip of it is faster?

                    If you already had free access to the disk via your local library, you can't really make the argument that downloading it instead is somehow wrong.
                    Because you payed at least 1.25$, a fee or taxes (depending on how the library is financed) And downloading is only an option if you're not living in a "internet developing country" like I do :-( 16kbits and they now want to limit it volume based (e.g. after xGB of downloads you get downgraded to 2kbits). So yeah, real BD support would be nice.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Germany is that bad? Is it only some places?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by curaga View Post
                        Germany is that bad? Is it only some places?
                        Some places already have 100Mbit/s, slowly growing.

                        The Deutsche Telekom and some others throttle their customers connections when they reach certain limits but other ISPs don't so droste should switch his ISP asap.

                        See http://werdrosselt.de for more informations.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I'm all for functional and easy Blu-Ray playback on Linux. I own hundreds of movies and having Blu-Ray playback on a multi-media notebook is something I want for my next laptop purchase so getting that on Linux would mean I could ditch Windows.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by curaga View Post
                            Germany is that bad? Is it only some places?
                            It is. You have some places with 100mbit _down_stream but no more than 10mbit upstream. But the pricing is ridiculous and you get down to 16kbits after a few GB of downloads.

                            Originally posted by TAXI View Post
                            Some places already have 100Mbit/s, slowly growing.

                            The Deutsche Telekom and some others throttle their customers connections when they reach certain limits but other ISPs don't so droste should switch his ISP asap.

                            See http://werdrosselt.de for more informations.
                            Look around to other countries near Germany. Germany is far behind regarding internet speeds and costs, it's not even funny anymore.

                            /edit:
                            And don't get me started on mobile internet...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by droste View Post
                              It is. You have some places with 100mbit _down_stream but no more than 10mbit upstream.
                              If you want symmetric bandwidth up- and down-stream you shouldn't buy an asymmetric service (guess what the A in ADSL stands for).
                              But the pricing is ridiculous and you get down to 16kbits after a few GB of downloads.
                              You really should change your service. It is no problem here to get fast Internet cheap without artificial bandwidth limit based on traffic.

                              This is not a Germany wide problem, it is the problem of you choosing a crappy ISP.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
                                If you want symmetric bandwidth up- and down-stream you shouldn't buy an asymmetric service (guess what the A in ADSL stands for).
                                You really should change your service. It is no problem here to get fast Internet cheap without artificial bandwidth limit based on traffic.

                                This is not a Germany wide problem, it is the problem of you choosing a crappy ISP.
                                So tell me how. I live near Stuttgart. There's no cable or fiber near my home. What should I do? I have friends that have 6kbits (unstable) and this only since this year (before it was 1-3kbits). When they switch ISP all they get is a cheaper connection that sometimes disconnects. Good for you, that your town has good internet connection but that is not something wide spread. I know more people with slow/problematic connections than with good speeds and low prices.

                                Also:
                                http://www.statista.com/topics/1145/...speed-ranking/

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X