3 ms·

> Aside from the high number of 1-star reviews complaining about the gadget dying fast - how in god's name is this thing still selling assuming it can actually

> Aside from the high number of 1-star reviews complaining about the gadget dying fast - how in god's name is this thing still selling assuming it can actually strip HDCP for modern HDMI standards? How is 1 review a "high number of 1-star reviews"? There are a total of 32 reviews for this device, 2 of which are 1-star reviews. Only one of those warns "Stopped working in 5 minutes". The other 1-star review notes (in translation) "When I tried this device, I got another very bad device at a lower price". I'm not sure what your expectation that "HDMI LA to be very very strict in enforcing actions against HDCP strippers" means in this context. Indeed, your second paragraph seems to be an expression of consternation that manufacturers would go through the trouble of implementing HDCP given how easily it can be circumvented.

mschuster91 1y ago
> I'm not sure what your expectation that "HDMI LA to be very very strict in enforcing actions against HDCP strippers" means in this context. It used to be the case that HDMI LA would act very swiftly on any keybox leaks and revoke the certificates, as well as pursuing legal actions against sellers of HDCP strippers. These devices were sold by fly-by-night eBay and darknet sellers, not right on the storefront of Amazon. > Indeed, your second paragraph seems to be an expression of consternation that manufacturers would go through the trouble of implementing HDCP given how easily it can be circumvented. Manufacturers do because HDCP is a requirement to even be allowed to use the HDMI trademark, in contrast to DisplayPort. I was referring to HDMI LA and the goons of the movie rightsholder industry that insist on continuing this pointless arms race.