Blu-ray's Managed Copy explained, a Movie Jukebox is possible
We'll be honest, while others were predicting how poorly implemented the new Managed Copy system for Blu-ray would be -- mostly because the studios can charge for copies -- we were dreaming of new ways we'd like to enjoy our favorite movies. With DVD's CSS, everything was very restricted; simple tasks like transferring a movie to your PMP or storing 'em all on a Media Center PC was way, way more complicated than it should be -- not to mention a violation of the DMCA. Obviously we wanted to know more, so we went straight to the source and asked the AACS-LA exactly how it'll work, as well as how it'll handle things like rent, rip and return. Surprisingly, we were actually happy after the call and contrary to what you might believe, Managed Copy was actually designed with the consumer in mind.A Movie Jukebox!
We believe the coolest possibility that Managed Copy could enable is a Blu-ray Jukebox, so you can imagine how pleased we were to hear Michael Ayers, the chair of the AACS Business Group, mention it specifically when we asked him how he envisioned Managed Copy would be used. He tells us that not only is it possible, but the technology was designed with that use in mind. Of course storing full Blu-ray Discs on a Media Center would take up a lot of space, but luckily it's not an all or nothing proposition. So in other words while studios have no choice but to offer a full copy of the disc, the possible combinations are pretty limitless, but are unfortunately dictated by the studio. The studio can "tailor" offers, so for example, you could copy just the main movie and one audio track in full quality -- or in lower quality to save space. Some flexibility is required based on the destination format that media will take, but for more details you'll want to check out the C1 table in the compliance rules (PDF) for all the nitty gritty details.
Rent, Rip and Return?
We've heard the studios are worried about people renting a disc, ripping it and then returning it, so we figured the AACS had to have an answer for these concerns. Interestingly, while it is possible for the studios to disable Managed Copy on discs specifically intended for the rental market, it might actually be in the studio's best interest not to. The way we see it is that if a copy costs enough, the studios would be more than happy to sell you one while leaving the burden and overhead involved in a physical disc inventory to the likes of Netflix. This would obviously be an great way for consumers to try before they buy, while at the same time getting the highest quality movie experience around. And to top it all, they could get all of this without the need to store a ton of shinny discs.
Managing the copies.
Now the studios have the option to serialize the discs and thus limit you to the single mandatory copy, but we don't see why they'd do this either. Effectively this would be like limiting the number of copies someone can buy. We could totally see how this would be useful if the first copy was offered at a lower rate though. It is even possible to make copies of copies, but this really depends on the rules of the output technology. So if a full disc copy was made, AACS would not permit a copy of the copy, but if Microsoft DRM is used, then the restrictions of that technology come into play (for example).
Another concern we had was the internet connection requirement. The good news is that a connection is only required to make a copy and after that it depends on the output DRM technology used. In fact if the disc has a CCI flag like Copy Freely, no network connection is needed. So when making a full copy of a disc, just like the original, you don't need to be connected to play it back. This may or may not be the case with Microsoft DRM or others depending on how it is implemented, but it is up to the approved technology to decide and not the studios -- although we're sure they have a hand in approving output DRM technologies at some level.
Who can play
The most notable missing output DRM technology at the time the AACS license was finalized is Apple. Michael tells us that adding additional output DRM technologies is a very open process and that 3rd parties can even deal directly with the studios to offer special services -- he referred to this as a permissive list vs a required list. So in other words, there is nothing preventing Apple from getting all board before this goes live in 2010.
How to pay
At this point we don't expect many, if any, of these copies to be free. We're not exactly sure how this will work, but envision it'll be something like most online media stores. You'll go to a web site and enter your credit card information, then when you're ready to pay for a copy, you'll simply put in your user name and password and it will use the card on file. Hopefully they'll find an easier way to this than to try and enter a user name and password with a remote, just like many of the BD Live accounts are configured, but we'll have to wait and see. For the studios who don't want to procure their own online transaction server, the AACS-LA is in the process of ensuring a default server (safety net server) is available.
This is really cool, but when?
If you haven't noticed so far, we're really excited about this. How could we not be after living under the heavy handed reign of CSS for so many years. We still can't believe we're actually going to have more ways to enjoy our favorite movies. We have to say we would've never imagined that Hollywood would have the vision required to develop AACS with all of this in mind. It is just crazy that AACS includes this and it isn't some sort of add-on hack.
As to when discs might start supporting this -- the agreement went live about a week ago and as soon as a studios sign it, it can start making discs that will support Managed Copy even though the hardware isn't out yet. When the mandate goes into effect early next year every disc will support Managed Copy, but until then there will be a logo on the box so that you can tell which discs support it and which don't.
The bottom line
Managed Copy has tons of potential, but even though it is mandatory it is up to the studios to make it work. Our biggest concern is what it might cost. We kind of wish the AACS would've put in a maximum price per copy, but recognize that in the end, the market will set the cost. If it's convenient and inexpensive enough, we have little doubt that most will prefer to go legit. On the other hand if it is buggy and over-priced, we won't blame most for getting their copies elsewhere.





















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
aaron @ Jun 19th 2009 5:50PM
So there will be an extra cost to have a copy of the movie beyond paying a premium for a bluray? That is not going to convince anybody to stop pirating movies if you have to pay for managed copies.
If they dont want this to fail from day 1 they better allow people to copy just the movie and the main audio track free of charge for any move you purchase. Or start pricing blurays at 9.99 and getting people who want managed copy for an extra charge.
junk @ Jun 20th 2009 12:02AM
Ya'll are not doing the math. Movies are around 30 gigs. and you will need a terabyte of storage for every 30 movies. But that's ok, just go buy a QNAP SAN......
DWells55 @ Jun 20th 2009 12:01AM
Agreed, this is totally ridiculous. I already paid for the movie; I'm not going to allow movie studios to bully me with the DMCA into thinking I'm obligated to pay for it again. I purchased the disc; therefore I see myself entitled to use the content on it as I see fit.
Dear Blu-ray and the clowns behind AACS: take your broken copy protection and "managed copy" and shove it. In the meantime, I'll be using AnyDVD HD to backup my movies to my media server and stream them to my HTPC.
EatingPie @ Jun 20th 2009 11:51AM
Okay, c'mon Ben!
I was... WOW!... reading about how great Managed Copy is, and thought all the previous press just didn't talk to AACS-LA to get the real scoop. Designed with the consumer in mind! W00t!
But then, there's the deal killer, BURIED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ARTICLE, that each copy will probably cost money? w00....whoa!
Seriously, Ben, you didn't think that was THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT OF ALL? You don't even mention it in your opening! You waited till about half-way through, when the majority of readers have probably already dropped out (Inverse Pyramid of Journalism). Why!?!
I'm all in for BD. Love the technology! I am also fine with Digital Copies to my iPod, so right now Managed Copy isn't a big deal for me. IE I'd probably be called a "fanboi," and I *still* think you blew this one.
:-(
-Pie
John @ Jun 19th 2009 6:29PM
Agreed. On the other hand, if I'm reading this correctly, the other copy really is a truly secondary, independent copy which I've read elsewhere will also be possible to burn back to another disc. If that's the case, I can see the studios making the argument that it makes sense to make the copy just as expensive as the disc itself. On the other hand, the market reality will probably mandate either a cheap copy or a cheap disc. I bet studios will go the cheap copy route counting on a decent percentage of the disc buyers never using Managed Copy.
It will be interesting to see how this goes once everyone upgrades their Blu-ray players to support this. Just when you thought Profile 2.0 and advanced audio bitstream capabilities meant you could finally have a feature-complete Blu-ray player....
badweasel @ Jun 19th 2009 6:50PM
They're still trying to charge you for something that you already purchased. That's like selling you a song but then charging you to rip it and put it on your ipod, which today doesn't cost anything extra.
I buy bluray because I want the highest possible quality for the real movie home theater experience. But once I've paid even $20 for that movie I should be able to watch it however and whenever I want as long as I don't share it with others. AND I should be able to make a backup of the movie for my own uses to protect against any kind of damage to the original vehicle that movie came on. For example, I have a 3 year old and her movies are going to get scratched. Why should I have to rebuy her movies over and over - especially when I've tried to do the right thing in buying them to begin with. If I'm purchasing a license to use and watch the movie then it shouldn't matter if I convert it to a file on a media player so that my original copy can stay safe on the shelf.
If the studios charge for each and every viewing, or if they charge too much for each copy made, people will eventually figure out how to copy it illegally - just so they can use it in a reasonable fashion. Fair Use should be about fairly being able to use the products that we buy. If copy protection blocks me from being able to use the product at all, then it's reasonable to break that copy protection in order to be able to watch it. The DCMA even sort of contains a provision or exception for this, although the specific case it refers to is that Sony CD protection that ended up containing some kind of malware. In that case it's legal to remove the protection in order to prevent the malware.
Jake @ Jun 19th 2009 9:20PM
If you buy the disk, you can make a copy legally for backup purposes or for format shifting.
NodNarb012 @ Jun 20th 2009 10:57AM
@Jake
badweasel knows that he would be able to make a legal copy of the disks that he purchased. His complaint is that the article implies that he would have to pay an additional fee in order to make that legal copy of the disk that he already purchased. An example might be paying $20 for the BD + $5 to make the managed copy (I'm just throwing numbers out there, we don't know how much copies will cost).
@badweasel
I could see the studios selling dual versions on BD, one with MC and one without, and they would of course charge a slight premium for the discs with MC on them. Then the MC discs could include a coupon for a free managed copy, that would cover people buying discs, yet still allowing for rent, rip, & return customers to pay for their managed copy. Also, I think MC is going to require new hardware (not sure if this is accurate), so selling dual versions would allow customers to get the latest movies on BD without upgrading their players. That's what I'm hoping will happen.
Chris H. @ Jun 20th 2009 9:24PM
@Jake: this is why non-lawyers shouldn't hand out advice on the Internet.
It is NOT legal to make a copy for backup purposes or format shifting if the content is encrypted. Go read the DMCA. Yes, it does seem to conflict with fair use, but it hasn't been struck down by any court.
I agree that the whole idea of paying for managed copy is stupid, and I have no interest, but you should be aware that using AnyDVD or some other method to decrypt/rip your Blu-Ray (or DVD, or...) is a violation of the DMCA and against the law.
Jake @ Jun 20th 2009 10:47PM
@Chris you're actually wrong. It's wrong to "circumvent" the encryption, but you can make legal backups in many ways that do not involve either circumventing it. Here are 2 ways:
1) Project the image to a wall or display on TV and record using a video camera. The MPAA has actually cited this as a legal means of making copies of DVDs.
2) Make a bit-for-bit copy with the encryption intact. If you didn't decrypt it, you didn't violate the law.
There are no doubt many other ways. Don't fall for the FUD folks-- making backup copies & making copies of any media, DRM encrypted or not, is perfectly legal.
**This has been a public service announcement**
EGOvoruhk @ Jun 19th 2009 8:25PM
Dear movie studios,
You are a bunch of idiots. Blu-ray is still nothing but a "bag of hurt" when it comes to computer use, and this managed copy doesn't look to be changing that. So you know what I'm going to do? I'm going to download my own managed copy, for free. I'll still support you guys, because I want to support my favorite films, but not by buying your outrageously priced Blu-rays. I'll buy DVDs like I've always been doing, and you know why? Because no matter which device I put it in, it actually plays. No worrying about drivers, HDCP, or Power DVD updates. I put it in, it plays. I don't need to buy a managed copy just so I can play it without problems. So here's some advice: When designing your QuadHD format, try making "just works" one of the features
Signed,
Everybody
Rob78 @ Jun 19th 2009 8:39PM
Don't we have the jukebox model already with the likes of Netflix, Vudu, Apple or Amazon?
We'll a 'jukebox' that gets new stuff automatically, has no upfront software investment and allows you to only pay for what you watch?
I just don't see the point anymore in managed copy now that you get every thing on demand.
NoAndThen @ Jun 19th 2009 10:46PM
The point is that 95% of on demand media is poor quality 480i/p (if you're lucky) and the stuff that is 720p usually borders on unwatchable, over-compressed crap. Same deal with cable, unfortunately.
Jake @ Jun 20th 2009 12:36AM
Really quite pointless. No one is going to pay to make copies that they are legally entitled to make. The studios are wasting billions introducing a feature that no one wants.
Here's my advice: go ahead and find some software to make the backup copies and do the format shifting that you are legally entitled to do. I'll never pay one penny for a copy, and this whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I will probably never buy a BluRay player, at least not for more than $50. It's customer-hostile policy like this that will kill the format before it's ever had a chance.
If I owned stock in companies, I would do what I could to fire the CEOs. They've squandered billions in shareholder equity with their backwards-looking approach. I honestly hope all these media companies end up in bankruptcy court.
Bryan @ Jun 22nd 2009 8:43PM
"Really quite pointless. No one is going to pay to make copies that they are legally entitled to make. The studios are wasting billions introducing a feature that no one wants."
They're spending money to protect their DRM schemes. Next time the DCMA exemption for fair use is brought up, they will list this feature as a reason why legal circumvention is not needed. It will at least get less of a laugh then the camcording a tv argument. This is all about protecting their encryption. If they manage to create an additional revenue stream from the clueless, even better.
AltairAntares @ Jun 19th 2009 9:32PM
It's not really bluray's fault, imo they're the one caught between a rock and a hard place. Movie studios and their type are obsessing over themselves and won't let bluray be what it needs to be to succeed, and consumers are (obviously) unhappy with what blu-ray is being made to be, and so bluray is failing.
I've met very few average people who are even mildly interested in blu-ray, and it's all because the movie studios are screwing themselves and the bluray technology.
The Avatar @ Jun 19th 2009 9:47PM
Geez, copy protection of any form eventually will be overcome. How about selling reasonably priced discs for our $100 BR players? I'd rather pay for this than having to torrent a bootleg one!
the_bear @ Jun 19th 2009 9:53PM
I do not see how this is any different than the posture the studios and the RIAA have right now. They want to charge for every copy of a work for each device you want to put it on. It is actually worse than the audio situation, where at least if you keep the music within a DRM ecosystem you can put it on a few devices for no extra money.
I cannot see how this was "designed with the consumer in mind". Maybe with their wallet in mind. Charging for additional copies only appears to truly benefit the CE companies like Kalidescape, by giving them a legal avenue by which to offer their jukeboxes to the very top echelon of consumers, who probably are not going to realize they paid twice for the content on their $50k whole house server.
The media corporations have not changed and will not until they are staring bankruptcy in the face. Even then I am sure they will sue somebody because that is easier than innovating.
Randomness @ Jun 19th 2009 10:07PM
So we still get to pay twice for the content we bought? YAY! REJOICE! THANK YOU!
wait....
Amun @ Jun 20th 2009 4:23PM
I will never pay for a digital copy of a movie I own. Honestly I think that simply streaming everything from netflix will end up being the path to the future. =/
SirBC @ Jun 19th 2009 10:46PM
.... Or, I can rip it for free to my XBMC server using AnyDVD. Suits, if you want me to play by your rules you have to bring something to table worth playing for.
John @ Jun 20th 2009 12:07AM
If this requires new hardware than does that mean all the people that bought PS3 to be able to watch blu-ray need to go out and buy another PS3?
I will be damned that I will need buy another PS3 to watch blu-rays or another blu-ray player for that matter. I would rather just go back to DVD's.
Nicholas @ Jun 20th 2009 3:59AM
It shouldn't be a problem if you have a PS3, it has everything you need :)
Jazper @ Jun 20th 2009 12:48AM
Ben, you drank the koolaid!
As most everyone else pointed out, they're graciously allowing us to pay them to do something we've done free up till now? Um, no. I'll do DVD or I'll find "other ways" to do what I want. I'll happily buy a disc, but then get your grubby little paws outta my wallet!
DustoMan @ Jun 20th 2009 1:08AM
How come you didn't ask why this couldn't work with existing hardware? Seems to me that BD-Live capable players have everything they need to get Managed Copy to work.
gt350 @ Jun 20th 2009 1:34AM
maybe they should sell some more blu ray players before they worry about this. its not like people even care or know what this is. most are still figuring out what blu ray is.
fin @ Jun 20th 2009 1:56AM
I think I will stay with dvd renting and streaming. Good luck to all HD enthusiasts. I hope they get this right, I know I wanted this about 5 years ago. Very cool that they are going to do this.
Cory @ Jun 20th 2009 4:45AM
This could be very cool but it won't be. I can see the price of copying to be just as outrageous as the price of the hard format. This is why pirating will never die. Honestly how many people would continue to download illegaly if the industry would just lower there prices for hard formats.
mitchelljd @ Jun 20th 2009 9:38AM
i don't know why blu-ray is worried about apple ... apple has been taking advantage of blu-ray
Blu-ray issues films with digital copies for sale, which is entirely compatible with itunes whether on a mac or pc. Sadly Apple has been stonewalling inclusion of Blu-Ray in their products. they don't have a single computer which can playback an BD movie. nor do they offer blu-ray in any of their products.
Derek @ Jun 20th 2009 9:49PM
Am I reading this right? If I buy the blu-ray and want a managed copy stored on my media server, I have to pay to get that? That is insane.
The Black Ninja @ Jun 20th 2009 10:51PM
I still dont understand why they even investment millions of dollars on something pointless like copy protection. Since there is hacker who breaks there "advance code" 2 day after its release.(example iphone os3) I personally believe it counterproductive. you make something just to break it. cant sony and other company work on something that actually matters like i dont know alternate fuels, missile systems, government level encryption. but no they work on something "really" importance stuff like preventing people from copying there bluray movies ......Sony Keep Up Good Work. we dont need to think about terrorism or how to power the world a few year from now.