Fox internet video, now with watermarks in every packet
by Steven Kim 
posted Apr 7th 2008 at 11:28AM
The cat-and-mouse game of DRM is probably never going to end, but 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment has signed up with USVO's MediaEscort technology to add watermarking to its arsenal. MediaEscort is suited for the growing internet streaming market, and embeds watermarks during content delivery. Thus, if either the legitimate recipient or an online interloper decides to "share the wealth," there's forensic evidence that can be used to figure out both where the leak occurred and how big it is. While we aren't big fans of DRM, it's really because of all the problems it inevitably causes legitimate end-users; watermarking is a different story. As watermarking grows in popularity, we'll see if efforts to strip watermarks grow to the level we currently see in DRM removal.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Marshall @ Apr 7th 2008 11:46AM
As long as watermarking is transparent to the end-user (i.e. I can play my media on my DVD player, computer, zune, ipod), I'm all for it.
All though, if they're going to keep track of my info and the media I purchased, they should also offer to let me re-download for a small "bandwidth fee" any media which I have deleted or lost.
Marshall
The Real HT Info Podcast
mitchelljd @ Apr 7th 2008 12:00PM
I agree, there is nothing wrong with Watermarking. i am not infavor of people illegally sharing via p2p. but i am in favor of being able to watch quality programming via web, disc and directv.
if watermarking will allow us to enjoy more programming without HDCP content flags, no problem from me. i just want to be able to watch, dvr and backup onto disc
Truth Teller @ Apr 7th 2008 12:34PM
Sharing is not illegal, certainly not here in the UK - despite all the ridiculous attempts to shape public opinion on this
This is merely yet more of the 'security' gravy-train rolling along - at (ultimately our) huge expense.
This is just more of the pointless 'King Canute' routine.
calc.exe @ Apr 7th 2008 1:04PM
I would be careful with watermarked content. How are you identified by it and what is your liability for protecting it? If your watermarked content gets out without your consent are you guilty until proven innocent?
Could be used for blackmail -- steal someone's watermarked media and threaten to broadcast it.
Sean @ Apr 8th 2008 5:21PM
Typical Fox. Oh well, they are the example of failed DRM measures.
Pingmeister @ Apr 7th 2008 3:16PM
I am getting pretty sick of having to work around DRM crap to play my media legitimately.
So I have the same concerns regarding this: If it swings around to bite the paying customer in the butt then they need another plan.
If somebody cracks this method they could start distributing content with randomly generated user codes and then seeding torrents with them.
Another way of punishing legitimate customers.
Mark @ Apr 23rd 2008 8:24PM
Don’t fear watermarking. Unless you are deliberately copying and distributing copy written media.
This first contract between Fox and USVO will not affect the retail market.
Fox is protecting their post-production and pre-release copies of their media.
It is however possible to, and the industry will eventually, mark each download uniquely but that is not what this agreement is about.
Watermarking also works against people who use camcorders in theatres. Apparently one of the biggest sources of video pirating is from theatre projectionists. Some projectionists have the opportunity to set up a screen for optimal recording without being disturbed. In the near future though every copy of a film received by a theatre will be marked with the chain and location information. This is going to force the theatre to protect the film. Again this is not what the Fox / USVO deal is about.
If I was to give the pirates some career advice I would suggest investing in USVO.