3 ms·

> imposes a massive (and for most people, confusing and frustrating) hindrance on honest people simply trying to easily capture high-quality (as opposed to, say

> imposes a massive (and for most people, confusing and frustrating) hindrance on honest people simply trying to easily capture high-quality (as opposed to, say, using their damn phone to take a photograph of their reflective laptop display) screenshots of the shows and movies they’re watching. Legally, public screenshots accompanied by text/audio/video commentary are fair use. When shared on social media, reviews, or fan sites with influencer commentary, they are unpaid marketing for video creators. Censorship of free advertising is against the economic interest of rightsholders. Is this checkbox compliance theatre, e.g. does everyone in the distribution chain mindlessly click a DRM button? Can Apple differentiate between DRM screen recording and DRM screenshots? Can Apple differentiate between 30-second promotional clips and longer recordings, or rate limit N captures per M wallclock time? Can rightsholders add metadata to enable screenshots on a per-title basis? If one studio can demonstrate marketing success with authorized screen excerpts, other studios may follow.

kevincox 2y ago
> Censorship of free advertising is against the economic interest of rightsholders This was literally the first time I saw this "feature". I was watching something on Netflix and wanted to share a screenshot with someone. I realized that it didn't work. Ok, I guess you don't get my top-quality word-of-mouth marketing and to allow paying subscribers to enhance their enjoyment by chatting about the show. It is just a lose-lose scenario.
benoau 2y ago
> Censorship of free advertising is against the economic interest of rightsholders. Is it though? In the old days they needed people to recommend you see a movie or listen to a song or whatever today it's hyper-personalized algorithms and if that's not enough almost every major tech company sells targeted advertising to show your <thing> ahead of the rest.
- walterbell 2y ago
  Personal recs from trusted people outweigh paid ads. Studios get free promotion that outperforms algorithmic placement. Facebook and Google may want more advertising, but that's not Apple's core business. TikTok has BookTok, FilmTok and MovieTok communities, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BookTok https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BookTok > #BookTok had been viewed over 200 billion times on TikTok with about 60 billion videos.. There are many articles that discuss how BookTok has changed reading for younger people and impacted the publishing landscape.. Another popular aspect of the community culture in BookTok is the open discussion and the idea that users are reading the books together
  - benoau 2y ago
    These views come from an algorithm shoveling it down everyone's throat based on ByteDance' preference, according to some very convincing accusations on that subject. And the most common way to "skip" the algorithm is paying TikTok to advertise your video and Meta and Twitter to promote your link.
  - redwall_hp 2y ago
    There's even a whole ecosystem of paid pitches to people who curate large public Spotify playlists. And the people who listen to those playlists are the trendsetters that the algorithmic fluff picks up on later.
gruez 2y ago
>Can Apple differentiate between DRM screen recording and DRM screenshots? Can Apple differentiate between 30-second promotional clips and longer recordings, or rate limit N captures per M wallclock time? Can rightsholders add metadata to enable screenshots on a per-title basis? DRM implementers can barely scrape together a DRM implementation that works as intended, as evidenced by all the 4K rips that are available on torrent sites. What makes you think they're competent enough to implement all the stuff you're suggesting, for marginal gains? As much as people like to dream up hypotheticals why screenshots provide "free PR" or whatever, I seriously doubt whether it's something studios care about.
- walterbell 2y ago
  > What makes you think they're competent enough to implement all the stuff you're suggesting See Nvidia GPU licensing and market segmentation of features, enforced by GPU firmware, which yields them 50% operating margins. See the enterprise browser market (e.g. Talon, Island), which has granular policy and security controls for web content. DRM is typically rooted in some kind of secure enclave, designed for granular policy enforcement.
  - gruez 2y ago
    >See Nvidia GPU licensing and market segmentation of features, enforced by GPU firmware, which yields them 50% operating margins. Disabling features, possibly at the hardware level with e-fuses is far more straightforward than trying to allow one sort framebuffer capture (screenshots) but not another (video recording). >See the enterprise browser market (e.g. Talon, Island), which has granular policy and security controls for web content. How secure are they though? It's one thing to make a chromium fork with "if is_porn_site(url): block()", it's whole different thing to implement a cryptographic system that can withstand physical attacks.
    - walterbell 2y ago
      > Disabling features, possibly at the hardware level with e-fuses They have a common hardware architecture configured by software (Ada), https://static.sched.com/hosted_files/riscvsummit2024/fe/Keynote_2024.pdf https://static.sched.com/hosted_files/riscvsummit2024/fe/Key... > How secure are they though Good question. That depends on whether enterprise insiders have more or less economic incentives than media pirates. One of the enterprise browser vendors exited for ~600M USD to Palo Alto, so perhaps the security bar is only at the level of corporate firewall rather than gaming console.
dangus 2y ago
It's not really that I disagree with your argument, but rightsholders do not have an obligation to maximize revenue or customer goodwill from their works. I can write a book and publish it. Then, one day, for no reason, I can take that book off the market and tell everyone, sorry, it's not for sale anymore. I enjoyed making my money but I am done now. There is no legal requirement to do the logical right thing. This actually reminds me of Flappy Bird. The creator took it down despite being a viral hit that could have made him massively wealthy.

kevincox 2y ago

> Censorship of free advertising is against the economic interest of rightsholders This was literally the first time I saw this "feature". I was watching something on Netflix and wanted to share a screenshot with someone. I realized that it didn't work. Ok, I guess you don't get my top-quality word-of-mouth marketing and to allow paying subscribers to enhance their enjoyment by chatting about the show. It is just a lose-lose scenario.

benoau 2y ago

> Censorship of free advertising is against the economic interest of rightsholders. Is it though? In the old days they needed people to recommend you see a movie or listen to a song or whatever today it's hyper-personalized algorithms and if that's not enough almost every major tech company sells targeted advertising to show your <thing> ahead of the rest.

walterbell 2y ago
Personal recs from trusted people outweigh paid ads. Studios get free promotion that outperforms algorithmic placement. Facebook and Google may want more advertising, but that's not Apple's core business. TikTok has BookTok, FilmTok and MovieTok communities, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BookTok https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BookTok > #BookTok had been viewed over 200 billion times on TikTok with about 60 billion videos.. There are many articles that discuss how BookTok has changed reading for younger people and impacted the publishing landscape.. Another popular aspect of the community culture in BookTok is the open discussion and the idea that users are reading the books together
- benoau 2y ago
  These views come from an algorithm shoveling it down everyone's throat based on ByteDance' preference, according to some very convincing accusations on that subject. And the most common way to "skip" the algorithm is paying TikTok to advertise your video and Meta and Twitter to promote your link.
- redwall_hp 2y ago
  There's even a whole ecosystem of paid pitches to people who curate large public Spotify playlists. And the people who listen to those playlists are the trendsetters that the algorithmic fluff picks up on later.

gruez 2y ago

>Can Apple differentiate between DRM screen recording and DRM screenshots? Can Apple differentiate between 30-second promotional clips and longer recordings, or rate limit N captures per M wallclock time? Can rightsholders add metadata to enable screenshots on a per-title basis? DRM implementers can barely scrape together a DRM implementation that works as intended, as evidenced by all the 4K rips that are available on torrent sites. What makes you think they're competent enough to implement all the stuff you're suggesting, for marginal gains? As much as people like to dream up hypotheticals why screenshots provide "free PR" or whatever, I seriously doubt whether it's something studios care about.

walterbell 2y ago
> What makes you think they're competent enough to implement all the stuff you're suggesting See Nvidia GPU licensing and market segmentation of features, enforced by GPU firmware, which yields them 50% operating margins. See the enterprise browser market (e.g. Talon, Island), which has granular policy and security controls for web content. DRM is typically rooted in some kind of secure enclave, designed for granular policy enforcement.
- gruez 2y ago
  >See Nvidia GPU licensing and market segmentation of features, enforced by GPU firmware, which yields them 50% operating margins. Disabling features, possibly at the hardware level with e-fuses is far more straightforward than trying to allow one sort framebuffer capture (screenshots) but not another (video recording). >See the enterprise browser market (e.g. Talon, Island), which has granular policy and security controls for web content. How secure are they though? It's one thing to make a chromium fork with "if is_porn_site(url): block()", it's whole different thing to implement a cryptographic system that can withstand physical attacks.
  - walterbell 2y ago
    > Disabling features, possibly at the hardware level with e-fuses They have a common hardware architecture configured by software (Ada), https://static.sched.com/hosted_files/riscvsummit2024/fe/Keynote_2024.pdf https://static.sched.com/hosted_files/riscvsummit2024/fe/Key... > How secure are they though Good question. That depends on whether enterprise insiders have more or less economic incentives than media pirates. One of the enterprise browser vendors exited for ~600M USD to Palo Alto, so perhaps the security bar is only at the level of corporate firewall rather than gaming console.

dangus 2y ago

It's not really that I disagree with your argument, but rightsholders do not have an obligation to maximize revenue or customer goodwill from their works. I can write a book and publish it. Then, one day, for no reason, I can take that book off the market and tell everyone, sorry, it's not for sale anymore. I enjoyed making my money but I am done now. There is no legal requirement to do the logical right thing. This actually reminds me of Flappy Bird. The creator took it down despite being a viral hit that could have made him massively wealthy.