I think this is blurring the line between what constitutes DRM and what constitutes a proprietary streaming protocol. The article doesn't really go into any technical detail about what they're referring to, but I take it they're referring to RTMP. This isn't DRM as the files inside the protocol are the same video formats that would be streamed over the web. DRM tends to be applied to the files directly.
To assert that RTMP is a DRM scheme would imply that it's primary purpose is to lock out unauthorised users. From what I gather, this isn't its primary purpose at all - it's just supposed to make streaming objects over the web to flash more flexible and efficient. >From what I've read of the protocol written up in OS Flash, it's pretty obtuse but there doesn't seem to be any great effort made in it to lock out unauthorised users. Therefore RTMP is not DRM and that article is reactionary guff. Iain On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 10:42 AM, Dave Crossland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > :-) > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: John Gilmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 29 Feb 2008 03:31 > Subject: [Gnash-dev] EFF: Adobe Pushes DRM for Flash > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/02/adobe-pushes-drm-flash > > ... most sites that use these [Flash and FLV] formats simply serve > standalone, unencrypted files via ordinary web servers. > > Now Adobe, which controls Flash and Flash Video, is trying to change > that with the introduction of DRM restrictions in version 9 of its > Flash Player and version 3 of its Flash Media Server software. Instead > of an ordinary web download, these programs can use a proprietary, > secret Adobe protocol to talk to each other, encrypting the > communication and locking out non-Adobe software players and video > tools. We imagine that Adobe has no illusions that this will stop > copyright infringement -- any more than dozens of other DRM systems > have done so -- but the introduction of encryption does give Adobe and > its customers a powerful new legal weapon against competitors and > ordinary users through the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). > > Recall that the DMCA sets out a blanket ban on tools that help > "circumvent" any DRM system (as well as the act of circumvention > itself). When Flash Video files are simply hosted on a web site with > no encryption, it's unlikely that tools to download, edit, or remix > them are illegal. But when encryption enters the picture, > entertainment companies argue that fair use is no excuse; Adobe, or > customers using Flash Media Server 3, can try to shut down users who > break the encryption without having to prove that the users are doing > anything copyright-infringing. Even if users aren't targeted directly, > technology developers may be threatened and the technologies the users > need driven underground. > > Users may also have to upgrade their Flash Player software (and open > source alternatives like Gnash, which has been making rapid progress, > may be unable to play the encrypted streams at all). ... > > > _______________________________________________ > Gnash-dev mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnash-dev > > > -- > Regards, > Dave > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please > visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ > - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
