7 ms·

The author is mixing together several problems here. 1) Amazon bundling a video service with their free shipping program. 2) Amazon's proprietary software loc

The author is mixing together several problems here. 1) Amazon bundling a video service with their free shipping program. 2) Amazon's proprietary software locking in you into whatever platforms that are in their business interests. 3) Panasonic's proprietary TV platform that people can't be bothered to develop for. 4) Digital Restrictions Management that prevents one from downloading a movie via Amazon Prime and playing it in any other video player on any other platform. This is just the usual awful situation when you rely on proprietary software. Stop using Amazon Prime to watch videos. Write to them about the problems you have. I recently wrote to Audible because their ebooks come with DRM and cannot be played on GNU/Linux using Free Software.

taybin 13y ago
Did you get a response? The author mentions that he wrote to Panasonic and Amazon and was basically brushed off.
- davexunit 13y ago
  Yeah, not exactly a satisfactory one, though. Just something along the lines of "We have sent your request to remove DRM to our audio team. We value your feedback." It was a nice way of saying that mail has been forwarded to the audio team to throw in the bin. Still, better than being ignored outright.
  - bowlich 13y ago
    Demand a refund. My girlfriend ran into this problem (we're pretty much a Linux household). Just could not get the audible books to run on Ubuntu and I wasn't willing to spend the time hunting around for a way to get around it. Fortunately, Audible was pretty gracious about the refund.
    - davexunit 13y ago
      Are you me? That's the exact problem my girlfriend and I had and she did receive a refund.
- qznc 13y ago
  I once asked Lovefilm about their video streaming (Silverlight) on Linux. I got a relatively honest answer: Movie studios required them to use DRM and no DRM solution is available on Linux. They will "keep looking for opportunities". I translate that to "waiting for the movie industry to give up on DRM".
  - lyndonh 13y ago
    "no DRM solution is available on Linux" DRM is basically digital signing w/encryption right ? Linux doesn't have that ?
    - vidarh 13y ago
      It's decryption of encrypted contents with a key that you're not meant to have access to, and with measures to try to prevent you from accessing the decoded video and audio on its way to the screen/speakers, despite the fact that the key is on your system and it's being played back via hardware that's physically under your control. It's a bit like trying to stop a sieve from leaking with your fingers. The only way of making it sort-of, maybe achieve anything in software is through obscuring the key and decrypted data sufficiently to make it more effort than it is worth. This means the DRM implementations are all closed source, and Linux ports are pretty much bottom of the priority list of any of the companies providing DRM solutions, not least because it gets massively harder to lock down access to the data on a system where tons of people know how to rebuild the kernel and modify drivers and otherwise try to intercept it.
      - lyndonh 13y ago
        "... it gets massively harder to lock down access to the data on a system where tons of people know how to rebuild the kernel and modify drivers and otherwise try to intercept it." Because proprietary systems never get cracked; and it always takes more than one person to do it. For example, geohot. My point is that Linux DRM is possible. But all DRM sucks anyway, because ultimately to lock down the system implementors choose to reduce the number of devices that can operate with it and sooner or later it's just one or two devices.
dmlorenzetti 13y ago
There's also a hardware ecosystem problem. Apparently we live in a world where people expect a TV to have a web browser with Adobe Flash on board. I have a 30-year-old amplifier that still works just fine, despite having been built before CD players and MP3 players came along. Sure you could buy an all-in-one device that integrated the amp and the tape deck, but a lot of people avoided those because they wanted flexibility, expandability, and robustness. Similarly, back in those days it was quite common to see little TVs with an integrated VHS player. But if you were the sort of person who bought individual audio components, you probably also avoided those things, because you recognized that the function of projecting a moving image on a screen was independent of the function of reading a signal from a strip of magnetized tape, and so keeping them in two separate devices bought you flexibility, expandability, and robustness. Now, apparently, those old lessons are still useful. I'm not very much into TVs, so I don't know, but to me the real "ecosystem" problem here is that the TV apparently is not just a display device. It's pulling double duty as a web browser also (and who knows what else is in there). Unfortunately, a year and a half is a long time in terms of web technologies, so a perfectly good device for projecting moving images onto a screen is now deemed obsolete.
- mitochondrion 13y ago
  This arguably happens in every context. What keeps these "integrated" devices useful is the (hopefully) open nature of the software running them. A TV that supports open web standards will last a helluva lot longer than one that supports a vendor standard abandoned after a couple of years. In other words, a TV that also plays online video is great as long as there's an open, standardized method of delivering it.
- rthomas6 13y ago
  This is a great point. My Roku works great for Netflix, Spotify, HBO Go, and Amazon Instant Video, all on my "dumb" TV.
- commandar 13y ago
  >Now, apparently, those old lessons are still useful. I'm not very much into TVs, so I don't know, but to me the real "ecosystem" problem here is that the TV apparently is not just a display device. For a while, the appeal was that it was cheaper and simpler to just buy a smart TV that had Netflix, etc integrated than it was to put together some other solution yourself. Turns out the reality is that the integrated smart functionality tends to be slow, clunky, and rarely updated. Now that things like Roku, Apple TV, and Chromecast are so cheap and easy, the tides have turned there. While I was somebody that bought a smart TV a few years ago for those reasons, I've gotten to where I haven't touched those features since Chromecast launched. If anything, it's become an annoyance that my TV has a 15-20 second boot time when I turn it on. I know I've decided that my future TVs will be TVs only, and that seems to be a common theme among others I've talked to with smart TVs.
npsimons 13y ago
That's a cogent point, but those are all symptoms of the same problem, which I'm guessing from your last sentence, you are already aware of. The OP is merely using them as examples (again, demonstrable symptoms) of the illness that is "intellectual property", so that when people say "so what?" to the likes of EFF, you can show them articles like this. As another example, on the same front page of HN that this article is on, is another entitled "When is it Stealing?", whereby the author begs the question by just blithely assuming that bits can be owned like physical property. Don't get me wrong, I think attribution is a very important part of sharing information, but at the same time, too many people get caught up in believing they are special, when history has shown time and again that most "new" ideas were built upon the bedrock that is the thousands of years of our civilization, and usually multiple people get the same idea around the same time.
warfangle 13y ago
The DRM is pretty limited (afaik) to the free streaming stuff included with Prime. If you pay to "own" (heavily scaremarked), you can download a copy yourself (some titles only allow you to "rent" the ability to stream; others wont let you download ieven if you pay to "own" the ability to stream). Panasonic, a company not known for quality software -- what was he expecting? Just get a freaking $50 rokubox and be done with it. Then it won't matter if android or his tv doesn't make coffee to go with his salty tears. And it'll work with whatever shitty Smart TV he decides to buy into next.
- claudius 13y ago
  So, hum, why would I accept the hefty price increase on Prime if I get quite literally nothing in return? I do not own a single one of the ‘compatible devices’ and apparently my browser (which works just fine on Youtube…) is not ‘compatible‘ either. I just wanted fast shipping with no additional costs ¬.¬
  - warfangle 13y ago
    Do you run lynx or something? Edit: it's probably not your browser, but you do have to install silverlight.
    - claudius 13y ago
      Opera 12.16 on Debian, no Silverlight here. I even have a Firefox installed, too, but that still needs Silverlight which is not available for Linux (at least not in any of the official repositories).
      - warfangle 13y ago
        Yep, that'd be the issue.
    - dllthomas 13y ago
      Wait, Lynx runs youtube just fine?

taybin 13y ago

Did you get a response? The author mentions that he wrote to Panasonic and Amazon and was basically brushed off.

davexunit 13y ago
Yeah, not exactly a satisfactory one, though. Just something along the lines of "We have sent your request to remove DRM to our audio team. We value your feedback." It was a nice way of saying that mail has been forwarded to the audio team to throw in the bin. Still, better than being ignored outright.
- bowlich 13y ago
  Demand a refund. My girlfriend ran into this problem (we're pretty much a Linux household). Just could not get the audible books to run on Ubuntu and I wasn't willing to spend the time hunting around for a way to get around it. Fortunately, Audible was pretty gracious about the refund.
  - davexunit 13y ago
    Are you me? That's the exact problem my girlfriend and I had and she did receive a refund.
qznc 13y ago
I once asked Lovefilm about their video streaming (Silverlight) on Linux. I got a relatively honest answer: Movie studios required them to use DRM and no DRM solution is available on Linux. They will "keep looking for opportunities". I translate that to "waiting for the movie industry to give up on DRM".
- lyndonh 13y ago
  "no DRM solution is available on Linux" DRM is basically digital signing w/encryption right ? Linux doesn't have that ?
  - vidarh 13y ago
    It's decryption of encrypted contents with a key that you're not meant to have access to, and with measures to try to prevent you from accessing the decoded video and audio on its way to the screen/speakers, despite the fact that the key is on your system and it's being played back via hardware that's physically under your control. It's a bit like trying to stop a sieve from leaking with your fingers. The only way of making it sort-of, maybe achieve anything in software is through obscuring the key and decrypted data sufficiently to make it more effort than it is worth. This means the DRM implementations are all closed source, and Linux ports are pretty much bottom of the priority list of any of the companies providing DRM solutions, not least because it gets massively harder to lock down access to the data on a system where tons of people know how to rebuild the kernel and modify drivers and otherwise try to intercept it.
    - lyndonh 13y ago
      "... it gets massively harder to lock down access to the data on a system where tons of people know how to rebuild the kernel and modify drivers and otherwise try to intercept it." Because proprietary systems never get cracked; and it always takes more than one person to do it. For example, geohot. My point is that Linux DRM is possible. But all DRM sucks anyway, because ultimately to lock down the system implementors choose to reduce the number of devices that can operate with it and sooner or later it's just one or two devices.

dmlorenzetti 13y ago

There's also a hardware ecosystem problem. Apparently we live in a world where people expect a TV to have a web browser with Adobe Flash on board. I have a 30-year-old amplifier that still works just fine, despite having been built before CD players and MP3 players came along. Sure you could buy an all-in-one device that integrated the amp and the tape deck, but a lot of people avoided those because they wanted flexibility, expandability, and robustness. Similarly, back in those days it was quite common to see little TVs with an integrated VHS player. But if you were the sort of person who bought individual audio components, you probably also avoided those things, because you recognized that the function of projecting a moving image on a screen was independent of the function of reading a signal from a strip of magnetized tape, and so keeping them in two separate devices bought you flexibility, expandability, and robustness. Now, apparently, those old lessons are still useful. I'm not very much into TVs, so I don't know, but to me the real "ecosystem" problem here is that the TV apparently is not just a display device. It's pulling double duty as a web browser also (and who knows what else is in there). Unfortunately, a year and a half is a long time in terms of web technologies, so a perfectly good device for projecting moving images onto a screen is now deemed obsolete.

mitochondrion 13y ago
This arguably happens in every context. What keeps these "integrated" devices useful is the (hopefully) open nature of the software running them. A TV that supports open web standards will last a helluva lot longer than one that supports a vendor standard abandoned after a couple of years. In other words, a TV that also plays online video is great as long as there's an open, standardized method of delivering it.
rthomas6 13y ago
This is a great point. My Roku works great for Netflix, Spotify, HBO Go, and Amazon Instant Video, all on my "dumb" TV.
commandar 13y ago
>Now, apparently, those old lessons are still useful. I'm not very much into TVs, so I don't know, but to me the real "ecosystem" problem here is that the TV apparently is not just a display device. For a while, the appeal was that it was cheaper and simpler to just buy a smart TV that had Netflix, etc integrated than it was to put together some other solution yourself. Turns out the reality is that the integrated smart functionality tends to be slow, clunky, and rarely updated. Now that things like Roku, Apple TV, and Chromecast are so cheap and easy, the tides have turned there. While I was somebody that bought a smart TV a few years ago for those reasons, I've gotten to where I haven't touched those features since Chromecast launched. If anything, it's become an annoyance that my TV has a 15-20 second boot time when I turn it on. I know I've decided that my future TVs will be TVs only, and that seems to be a common theme among others I've talked to with smart TVs.

npsimons 13y ago

That's a cogent point, but those are all symptoms of the same problem, which I'm guessing from your last sentence, you are already aware of. The OP is merely using them as examples (again, demonstrable symptoms) of the illness that is "intellectual property", so that when people say "so what?" to the likes of EFF, you can show them articles like this. As another example, on the same front page of HN that this article is on, is another entitled "When is it Stealing?", whereby the author begs the question by just blithely assuming that bits can be owned like physical property. Don't get me wrong, I think attribution is a very important part of sharing information, but at the same time, too many people get caught up in believing they are special, when history has shown time and again that most "new" ideas were built upon the bedrock that is the thousands of years of our civilization, and usually multiple people get the same idea around the same time.

warfangle 13y ago

The DRM is pretty limited (afaik) to the free streaming stuff included with Prime. If you pay to "own" (heavily scaremarked), you can download a copy yourself (some titles only allow you to "rent" the ability to stream; others wont let you download ieven if you pay to "own" the ability to stream). Panasonic, a company not known for quality software -- what was he expecting? Just get a freaking $50 rokubox and be done with it. Then it won't matter if android or his tv doesn't make coffee to go with his salty tears. And it'll work with whatever shitty Smart TV he decides to buy into next.

claudius 13y ago
So, hum, why would I accept the hefty price increase on Prime if I get quite literally nothing in return? I do not own a single one of the ‘compatible devices’ and apparently my browser (which works just fine on Youtube…) is not ‘compatible‘ either. I just wanted fast shipping with no additional costs ¬.¬
- warfangle 13y ago
  Do you run lynx or something? Edit: it's probably not your browser, but you do have to install silverlight.
  - claudius 13y ago
    Opera 12.16 on Debian, no Silverlight here. I even have a Firefox installed, too, but that still needs Silverlight which is not available for Linux (at least not in any of the official repositories).
    - warfangle 13y ago
      Yep, that'd be the issue.
  - dllthomas 13y ago
    Wait, Lynx runs youtube just fine?