Intel Claims DRM'd Chip Is Not DRM, It's Just Copy Protection

from the um,-that's-the-same-thing dept

There's been a lot of talk this week about Intel building DRM into its Sandy Bridge chip. I had initially passed on writing this story, as we seem to hear the same thing every few years. Back in 2005, for example, there were similar stories about Intel planning DRM built into its chip. However, what got me interested enough to actually write about this is Intel's bizarre response to the press coverage, in which they play one of the most ridiculous games of corporate doublespeak in ages. First, they insist it's not DRM. They say that right up in the headline: "No, It's Not DRM" Then they kick it off with an explanation of what DRM is, followed up by again saying: "I am not going to get into a discussion about the pros and cons of DRM in this blog; but I will say that Intel Insider is NOT a DRM technology." Ok. So what is it. That's in the next paragraph:
Intel Insider is a service that enables consumers to enjoy premium Hollywood feature films streamed to their PC in high quality 1080P high definition. Currently this service does not exist because the movie studios are concerned about protecting their content, and making sure that it cannot be stolen or used illegally. So Intel created Intel insider, an extra layer of content protection.
Um. So it is DRM. You just said it's not, and then described DRM. Content protection is DRM. I'm not sure exactly what Intel thinks it's doing here. If they say it's not DRM and then explain how it is DRM, they think people will think it's not DRM? If you're going to include DRM, just admit that it's DRM. Then we can argue about whether or not it's smart (and, no, it's not).


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    icon
    Killer_Tofu (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 12:36pm

    Kowtowing

    Isn't Intel a little far removed from the MAFIAA to have to kowtow to their requests and pressures to "help us save our business from half a century ago!"?

    What do they possibly have to gain by helping those groups? I must have missed some news somewhere because I just can't see anything they have to gain, aside from maybe being paid off to do so.

    I doubt their sue the 3rd party efforts could manage to get far enough to actually sue Intel or others and not get thrown out of court.

    I must have missed something. Anyone care to fill in the blank for me here?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      :Lobo Santo (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 12:49pm

      Re: Kowtowing

      Like the song lyric says:

      Money money money money mo - - ney!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Mario, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:12pm

      Re: Kowtowing

      "Isn't Intel a little far removed from the MAFIAA to have to kowtow to their requests and pressures to "help us save our business from half a century ago!"?"

      Well, actually, Intel is quite an important part of the MAFIAA cartel because they're the ones who created HDCP for the content arm of MAFIAA. For those that aren't familiar with HDCP, HDCP is the encryption mechanism used to "secure" data going over HDMI connections. HDMI is just the classic DVI with HDCP on top.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        The Mighty Buzzard (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:51pm

        Re: Re: Kowtowing

        Now now... HDMI is also a smaller and less clunky cable too.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        BigKeithO (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:52pm

        Re: Re: Kowtowing

        HDMI is just the classic DVI with audio and HDCP on top.

        There, I fixed it for you. :D

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Mario, Jan 8th, 2011 @ 3:39am

          Re: Re: Re: Kowtowing

          "HDMI is just the classic DVI with audio and HDCP on top.

          There, I fixed it for you. :D"

          Yes, you're right:). I knew that but I didn't considered it would make a difference to my point. More likely, it would have made an unknowing reader think "Ooooh, but it adds audio as well, that really cool!", which would be completely missing the point. The point I was trying to get across was that HDMI is just Intel taking an open technology (the DVI standard interface) and locking it down with HDCP.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Eldakka (profile), Jan 9th, 2011 @ 11:44pm

          Re: Re: Re: Kowtowing

          Not quite right either.

          HDCP is not a part of, or a requisite for HDMI.

          HDMI is the physical connector and digital signalling standards for transmitting audio and video over a cable.

          The digital signalling of video is an enhancement of DVI, as it allows for greater bandwidth.

          HDCP is a device level layer (nothing to do with the cable) that adds encryption/authorization.

          You can have HDCP over DVI, you can have HDCP over HDMI, hell you can probably have HDCP over ethernet.

          You can have DVI and HDMI without HDCP.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Killer_Tofu (profile), Jan 10th, 2011 @ 7:15am

        Re: Re: Kowtowing

        Ah, I did not recollect that Intel had such a large role in the HDCP development. Thank you for the refresher.
        I still am unclear why they even got into that to begin with, short of Lobo Santo's explanation above.

        Sorry about the late reply. I usually avoid the internet on the weekends and didn't get back on TD on Friday there.

        One would think that even with HDCP being broken and cracked and worked around so much, Intel would have perhaps learned some sort of lesson about how DRM does not work.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:19pm

      Re: Kowtowing

      "What do they possibly have to gain by helping those groups?"

      Relevancy. With their continued loss of the mobile and low-power industry (like set top boxes) and now the announcement that Windows is going to run on non-Intel hardware, they need new and inventive way to keep people buying their chips. If they have a tech that the MAFIAA buys in to, they can then license that tech to other chip makers to take a cut of their profits, or keep it all to themselves and ensure people keep buying their chips.

      They have no real alliance with them, they just need to keep them buying in.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Nastybutler77 (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 12:51pm

    Force Fail

    These aren't the droids you're looking for.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Poster, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 12:51pm

    Sounds like DRM to me.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Matt Polmanteer (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 12:56pm

    Haha

    I was just about to send this link over so everyone could get a good laugh. I was actually looking at building a new computer and was looking leaning towards Intel but now I'm going with AMD. Glad this came out now.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Greevar (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:52pm

      Re: Haha

      I was just thinking about that. Homebrew system builders are going to drop Intel like a hot potato when this new DRM comes out.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Christopher (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:56pm

        Re: Re: Haha

        No, they won't. The fact is that I have NEVER had a situation where DRM such as this interfered with my doing anything on my computer, even 'illegal' stuff like ripping DVD's and Blu-Ray's.

        You also forget that this DRM will ONLY BE USED IF THE APPLICATIONS IN QUESTION ASK FOR IT TO BE USED!

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Haywood (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:12pm

        Re: Re: Haha

        My last several builds have been AMD and I couldn't be more pleased. I'm up to a 6 core, and while it may not be quite as fast as the fastest Intel, but it easily does everything I ask, at a lot better price, without trying to take over the world.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        el_segfaulto (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:47pm

        Re: Re: Haha

        I've always found Intel to be a bit overpriced compared to AMD. Granted I'm not a gamer and most of the graphics work I do gets handed off to a high-end GPU. I couldn't be happier with AMD. My laptop (non-custom build), server, workstation, and media center are all custom builds and all run with an AMD chip.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        rec9140, Jan 9th, 2011 @ 1:36pm

        Re: Re: Haha

        I've not used intel for my personal machines, all 100% personally built, nor for any clients custom built machines, or any even when purchasing items from OEM's like Dell for well over 20 years.. Since the AMD line came out I've been firmly an AMD user, and never will go back.

        AMD - CPU
        nVidia - graphics

        no thanks on intel or ati graphics (and yes I know who owns them, and I still WONT USE THEM!!)

        This just solidifies my stance against intel... now if AMD would just release a dual core atom like processor I would be good to go!

        With this DRM, and YES THIS IS DRM! Lack of Linux drivers for features which require practically bleeding edge if not development versions of libs etc.. FAIL, EPIC FAIL.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The Mighty Buzzard (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:57pm

      Re: Haha

      AMD currently has the best price to performance ratio anyway. Unless you absolutely have to have the fastest processor on the market, AMD will give you significantly better performance vs an Intel chip of the same price.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 10th, 2011 @ 7:53am

      Re: Haha

      Ah, but by using AMD you won't be able to play the movies that are exclusively available to those lucky consumers with Intel chips and their non-DRM DRM. This is also a reply to the first poster, who wonders why Intel would bother. It's for the exclusivity, of course. Intel is thinking down the road, to a utopic day when *they* control the chips that can decode the movies. And, conversely, nobidy else does. Call me paranoid, but...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:03pm

    They don't give you much info in that article, what the describe could be accomplished using encryption that the user has 100% control over, which wouldn't be DRM. The fact that they are skimping on the details makes me think that probably isn't the case though.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Christopher (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:01pm

      Re:

      Actually, it's probably an added layer of protection (probably easily broken) that will only be used if applications call for it to be used, as with the stuff that Microsoft included in Windows Vista and 7, which caused no problems to most if not all people.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        crade (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:38pm

        Re: Re:

        Sure caused me problems until I figured out how to disable it. That stuff is terrible, does anyone actually try to run with it on?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Christopher (profile), Jan 9th, 2011 @ 11:10pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Yeah, I'm calling bullshit. I do things that are not strictly 'legal' on my machine, and I have NEVER had the DRM in Windows 7 bother me one little WHIT!

          I have had DRM on some games that I have downloaded or bought bother me, but that isn't Windows 7 nor is it the in-built DRM of that OS bothering me.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            ltlw0lf (profile), Jan 10th, 2011 @ 7:53am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Yeah, I'm calling bullshit.

            I have to as well. Vista had bugs in it related to DRM, such as when I'd place a pre-written CD-R in the drive and it would tell me that the disc wasn't formatted and would overwrite the CD-R, but I haven't had Windows 7 do anything like that to me. The only thing that I've experienced with Windows 7 has existed since WindowsXP (file transfers via SMB are abnormally slow,) but I am not sure this is related to the DRM issue that has been published and not just bad network coding. (FTP takes about 30 seconds to transfer a file which takes 8 minutes to transfer using SMB.)

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Matthew (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:04pm

    The explanation is not really about DRM...

    The explanation is not really about DRM - it's a preemptive cry for mercy from the antitrust investigators.

    For the record, they aren't kowtowing - they're trying to put in a piece of DRM that will be so attractive to the MAFIAAs that their competitors get frozen out of the market for any device that plays audio or video, which these days, is pretty much everything. Bending the customers over and stuffing their rights where the sun don't shine is just part of doing business (and government) these days.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Derek, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:10pm

    Best line from Intel Blog

    This technology is built into the new Intel chips and will become even more important once wireless display technology like Intelís WiDi become more popular, as it would prevent pirates from stealing movies remotely just by snooping the airwaves.
    As if there are pirates snooping around every rock trying to STEAL YOUR MOVIES!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:10pm

    I am shocked it took this long for TD to jump all over this one.

    Hint: The future is coming, and it won't be wide open. Deal with it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      AW, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:15pm

      Re:

      Hint: it's called Anti-trust laws, deal with it.
      Locking out an operating system, which is what it would do to linux is illegal. Microsoft already got tagged for this kind of practice.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      crade (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:17pm

      Re:

      Nah, they will try to go all 1984 on us, but it's not gunna work. Common get real people have already tasted freedom, they aren't going to eat anything else.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Simon, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:18pm

      Re:

      Just like BluRay encryption and HDCP is secure...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Marcus Carab (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:20pm

      Re:

      Hint: The future is coming, and it won't be wide open. Deal with it.

      Heh. Heheh. No, sorry. Hint: The present is here, and it's already wide open. Accept it.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:20pm

      Re:

      "Deal with it."

      People will deal with it by breaking it. Those who cannot participate in this will do their part by complaining loudly.

      Don't like people complaining? Deal with it. That part isn't going away either.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:46pm

      Re:

      I will laugh a lot when pirates use the same technology to lock law enforcement out of their networks LoL

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Richard (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:40pm

      Re:

      Hint: The future is coming, and it won't be wide open. Deal with it.

      Now who should one listen to on this issue, you or widely respected security expert Professor Ed Felten of Princeton?

      Writing in his review of predictions for 2009:

      "DRM technology will still fail to prevent widespread infringement. In a related development, pigs will still fail to fly.

      By tradition this is our first prediction, and it has always been accurate. Guess what our first 2010 prediction will be? Verdict: right."

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    skyrider, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:22pm

    a pile of crap, by any other name, still stinks

    Fritz chip anyone?

    took them ten years, but they finally got their wish, and they didn't even have to ... donate any more money to congressional campaigns.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Marcus Carab (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:24pm

    Here's the crux of their ridiculous position, FTA:

    "DRM is a piece of software, not hardware."

    That's a rather obscure way to look at it (or, well, a rather self-serving way to look at it) and they are nutty if they think anyone will accept it. That article can be summarized as saying "It's not DRM, it just does all the exact same things as DRM."

    Shit by any other name...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      crade (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:45pm

      Re:

      I think the crux of their position in reality probably comes down to:
      "It's just a feature available to programers to use how they will, for DRM purposes or not"
      Without any info, I'd say it's likely probably just some sort of encryption or compression handling technology. What makes it DRM I'm guessing will come when they give some sort of key or special control over the technology to *IAA and not to the owner of the chip.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Marcus Carab (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:48pm

        Re: Re:

        Intel Insider is a service that enables consumers to enjoy premium Hollywood feature films streamed to their PC in high quality 1080P high definition. Currently this service does not exist because the movie studios are concerned about protecting their content, and making sure that it cannot be stolen or used illegally. So Intel created Intel insider, an extra layer of content protection.

        Nothing about that sounds neutral or programmer-friendly to me. They know exactly what this is for and how it will be used - and they announce it right off the bat. They clearly already have plans to use this for DRM straight out of the gate.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          crade (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:10pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          It definately sounds like the intent is to make DRM stronger, but that doesn't make it DRM by itself we really don't have any info about it. They kindof make it sound like it is some sort of encryption to protect HD video in transit

          It doesn't really matter if it's friendly, it has to be controlled somehow. For me, the question comes down to who has the keys, the customer, everyone, intel, *IAA?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:41pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Let them tbh, intel tried with processor serial numbers before and the whole market rejected them, they almost lost the sales of a whole processor series before motherboard vendors figured out how to disable the serial from being reported to the operating system.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            BigKeithO (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:58pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            I understand it as sort of another HDCP scheme. Just like how HDCP will not allow the video signal to travel from a secured video card to an unsecured monitor, Intel Insider will not allow the CPU to send data down an unsecured bus.

            It is all really quite vague right now though.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Marcus Carab (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:20pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            It doesn't just "sound" like that's the intent - they clearly state that's the intent! The very first thing they say is that it will enable streaming movies - that the studios are worried about rights management, and "so" they created this chip.

            You can argue the technicalities of whether the processor feature, in itself, qualifies as DRM - but given that they have explicitly said that its purpose is to enable "content protection" for film studios, I think it's pretty fair to call it DRM technology.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              crade (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:54pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Meh, they could be reinventing PGP for all the info they have given us. I wouldn't call it DRM just because the reason they are working on it is to strengthen DRM, all that means is that one of the uses for it (if they succede in their intentions) will be to strengthen DRM.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      TPBer, Jan 9th, 2011 @ 9:39am

      Re:

      If that's the case then breaking the hardware, that is yours and not bound to a EULA, is not circumvention :)

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    The Invisible Hand (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:35pm

    Intel is digging itself a hole. They aren't the only ones that make CPUs and the competition is not sticking restrictive measures into their CPUs. In fact, AMD has been releasing open-source drivers for their CPUs and GPUs recently, so, contrarily to Intel, they are expanding their market and making the community happy.

    Intel is going all-or-nothing on the super-performance and overclocking crowd (read: kids with rich parents or console-spawns), and expect to coax these into spreading their DRM.

    I myself will keep buying AMD. At least they know how to do floating point math and don't put remote kill switches on their CPUs.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Yogi, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:36pm

    Careful!

    I'd be very careful buying a computer with an Intel chip inside it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:40pm

    Time to quit Intel or quit Hollywood, take your pick.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:42pm

    That is not even the best part the best part is the security feature that apparently enables someone at a distance to disable the chip, they say it is for when it is stolen but one has to wonder if there is no backdoor there to make possible for them or the authorities to do it too.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:52pm

    If they say it's not DRM and then explain how it is DRM, they think people will think it's not DRM?

    Piracy is theft. Sounds familiar ?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The Invisible Hand (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:11pm

      Re:

      Piracy involves raiding towns, boarding ships, drinking grog, singing pirate-y songs, saying "ARRR!" a lot, insult sword-fighting (among other insult sports), burying (and finding) treasure and going on seemingly pointless errands that, ultimately, will allow you to find and not so pointless object that will aid you in completing you main quest.

      These activities may or may not involve theft. So just slapping the "thief" tag on pirates not only shows your ignorance, it also perpetuates the notion that pirate are mere petty crooks and overlooks their diverse array of activities and their positive impact on society (like eliminating evil pirate ghosts, for example).

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Greevar (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:55pm

    If it walks like a duck...

    quacks like a duck, it DRM.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    JMT, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 1:55pm

    Just like the US government did with the term "Global War On Terror", Intel realised the term "DRM" had developed a huge negative association, so they've dumped it and come up with a different term to describe the same unsuccessful practices.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:34pm

      Re:

      "Copy Protection" isn't a new term, and it doesn't really have any less of a negative association...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 4:20pm

        Re: Re:

        Get under your rock and go ask what people think about "copy protection" anywhere.

        If you come back and say they are ok with it with a straight face you may deserve and Oscar.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:29pm

    regardless of it DRM or not

    why would i A. buy a shitty Intel chip and B. change my MB and RAM, just so i can pay industry to watch movies i can download for free.

    This is begging to be DOA, to bad industry has a good life support system it can put things on, including itself.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    James, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:39pm

    Its not DRM...

    it just makes your content "less" useful :P

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 2:40pm

    I don't see any issues here as long as you don't want to steal stuff without paying for it. We can now watch new movies directly on pc instead of theater. The Studios and Intel want to make sure its protected, whats wrong with it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The Invisible Hand (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:01pm

      Re:

      Your software is only as good as your hardware is. If your hardware comes crippled from the factory, no amount of software is going to compensate.

      But if you want to have your hardware decide when it is going to die on you (read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_bridge#Other_Details second paragraph), by all means, go ahead and buy that piece of crap.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:38pm

        Re: Re:

        "entirely developed in Intel's research center located at Haifa, Israel."

        "include the ability to remotely disable a PC or erase information from hard drives. ... commands can be received through 3G signals, ethernet, or internet connections"

        Cyberwar aluminium foil hats at the ready then.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          The Invisible Hand (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:54pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          I actually meant the third paragraph of that link:

          "In addition, Sandy Bridge processors will implement security features that include the ability to remotely disable a PC or erase information from hard drives. This can be useful in the case of a lost or stolen PC. The commands can be received through 3G signals, ethernet, or internet connections."

          and, WTF is that about your first quote? It could have been developed in Mars for all I care. What I don't like is the fact that anyone besides me can erase my data and neutralize my CPU remotely. If you are ok with this, then please, apply a brick to your forehead until you regain your senses.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      BigKeithO (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:03pm

      Re:

      It's not like these chips won't play any old xvid or divx file from bittorrent. Nothing is protected except for the stream authorized by the studios. You make it sound like you can't get any movie online right now, what are you trying to say?

      People who want to "steal stuff without paying for it" will continue to be able to do so. All that will happen is some soccer moms somewhere won't be able to figure out why the movie they just bought won't work properly. Want to know what version of the movie will work properly? The one from bittorrent.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:28pm

      Re:

      I so no issues with the technology but as Mike pointed out, the claim that it is not a DRM is just plain silly because it is one.

      It is just one of those silly features that will never get used because it will be cumbersome LoL

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      techflaws.org (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 10:27pm

      Re:

      Now, we could watch movies directly on the PC for ages. Not authorized by the industry though so they didn't see a dime for it.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:27pm

    Hmmm...there is so concern about those processors, the "feature" that can disable your processor remotely is just scary. It is being trumpeted as anti-theft device, but I wonder if law enforcement doesn't have a backdoor there somewhere and how long until copytards start to ask for Intel to put scanners directly into the silicon and disable "criminals" LoL

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:43pm

    The idiocy of an entire industry is just amazing.

    When barriers to the products have broken down and you no longer control the distribution channel what do you do?

    If you are an idiot you try to put an artificial barrier that will be ignored by the masses and will devalue your product because it is clunkier than the competition.

    Right this will work wonders. That and the "Ultraviolet" thing will fail miserably in the near future, but don't just believe me, watch and see it happen before your eyes.

    They then will try to make it work through legislation, when the people already proved they don't care and will happily ignore it.

    Not to mention the drive that this puts on the creation of legal free alternatives that could become mainstream in the next decade, then it will be game over for them.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Bull Puckey, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:48pm

    it passes the duck test

    "If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck." - James Whitcomb Riley

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:57pm

    "Intel Claims DRM'd Chip Is Not DRM, It's Just Copy Protection

    Tobacco companies claiming cigarettes don't kill people, they're just unhealthy.

    Obama claiming that going after embarrassing leaks and resisting most FOIA requests doesn't contradict his promises for transparency, it just ensures national security.

    They're all lies and we know it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    ladyserenakitty (profile), Jan 7th, 2011 @ 3:59pm

    Think of Open Source

    If there's DRM embedded within the processor to appease the movie industry, then what's to stop a PC manufacturer like HP to use that DRM to prevent other non-Windows operating systems from running on that hardware? Additionally, when coupled with Intel's remote shut-off capability, what's to stop said manufacturer from remotely disabling the processor when they find out you're running Linux, BSD, or Solaris on a machine they built?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 4:25pm

      Re: Think of Open Source

      I think that should also concern national security for other countries, what country will let their IT run on hardware that another country controls and can shut them down?

      Time to buy from AMD or the lesser evil(compared to Intel apparent intentions) the Chinese, although I hear Koreans have a x86 microprocessor too.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 4:29pm

    Imagine Senator Lieberman calling Intel to ask them to disable all computers in the list he gave them because they are upholding the freedom of speech.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 4:43pm

    Thinking about it, this is the most stupid idea ever.

    This DRM stuff and remote disabling of hardware could lead to severe decline of sales in that particular sector for Intel.

    If I was a government I would not buy Intel ever because of the risks involved.

    If I was a company I wouldn't buy that either, since with the easy for misguided actions, errors in procedure or any other reason could lead to total loss of data.

    As a user that scares me and I'm going to stay away from Intel because I don't want them controlling what I do with my computer.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    BBT, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 7:23pm

    This is actually good news- it shows how much of a dirty word "DRM" has become in society.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2011 @ 7:30pm

    Intel: "We have always been at war with AMD"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 8th, 2011 @ 1:53am

    DRM = DIGITAL RENTAL MEDIA

    So with this chip it turns your entire computer into a warehouse of RENTAL MEDIA.

    Guess I will NOT be upgrading to these new chips

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    hmm, Jan 8th, 2011 @ 4:53am

    hold on a second...

    So this ISN'T a form of Digital Rights Management eh?

    Cool bananas! this means cracking it isn't protected by the DCMA!!!!!

    Time for Intel to do 1 of 2 things:

    1. Admit this IS DRM and seek DCMA protection (embarassing)
    2. Give up the ghost on the whole idea.....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 8th, 2011 @ 8:06am

    Boehner is pronounced Boner not Bayner no matter how you sugar coat it. No matter how much the media says it it is what it is.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    abc gum, Jan 8th, 2011 @ 8:39am

    What if I do not want

    "a service that enables consumers to enjoy premium Hollywood feature films streamed to their PC in high quality 1080P high definition."

    ... I guess in that case I should purchase an AMD cpu/mobo

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Androgynous Cowherd, Jan 8th, 2011 @ 9:49am

    1080p HD on a PC

    Intel Insider is a service that enables consumers to enjoy premium Hollywood feature films streamed to their PC in high quality 1080P high definition.


    That's funny. I've recently watched a Hollywood feature film on my PC in 1080p HD, and I did it without any help from "Intel Insider". (eMule, on the other hand ...)

    I have over 3TB of disk storage here, broadband, and a will to use it. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone.

    The morons at the film cartel better wise up or step down soon or they'll run their whole oligopoly nose-first into the Pacific and we'll have another big economic crisis on our hands. "Intel Insider" won't save them. (Watching that copy, which probably came from a screener Bluray or a cracked HDMI device, would not be affected by it.) COICA won't save them. (eMule does not depend on any particular web sites staying up and is quite comfortable using raw IP addresses.) Only business model innovation can save them.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      abc gum, Jan 8th, 2011 @ 12:26pm

      Re: 1080p HD on a PC

      I'm beginning to think that piracy is simply a distraction and from the actual goal and is an excuse for their feabile attempts to control every aspect of everyones life.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        ladyserenakitty (profile), Jan 8th, 2011 @ 1:17pm

        Re: Re: 1080p HD on a PC

        My mom said something similar.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Christopher (profile), Jan 9th, 2011 @ 11:17pm

        Re: Re: 1080p HD on a PC

        That is part of it, to be honest. However, with all due respect, I really have NEVER had these DRM protections ever bother me on my computer, and that is WITHOUT trying to actively disable them.

        These 'protections' will only be used if applications ask for them to be used, so if the applications don't ask for them to be used? You won't even notice them, it will be like they are not even there.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 8th, 2011 @ 3:59pm

    Intel Inside

    Clearly an "Intel inside" sticker is a warning label!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    zygmunt, Jan 9th, 2011 @ 8:05am

    DRM

    The sooner DRM arrives the better. It'll keep a lot of rubbish at bay. We are best off without the rubbish, Audio (noise), Video (snow) and Media (press).

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      ladyserenakitty (profile), Jan 9th, 2011 @ 9:43am

      Re: DRM

      zygmunt, DRM within the processor is inherently a bad thing. I don't like the idea of having to circumvent DRM just so I can do the odd things I usually do with a computer.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Christopher (profile), Jan 9th, 2011 @ 11:13pm

        Re: Re: DRM

        Who says that you will have to circumvent the DRM? The fact is that this DRM will ONLY BE USED IF THE APPLICATIONS ASK FOR IT TO BE USED!

        If you are using a program that DOESN'T call for the DRM to be used, you are golden. Windows 7 does N O T automatically call for all the DRM stuff in it to be used, it waits for individual applications to ask for it to use it.

        I would assume this would ALSO be true with this processor-based DRM.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Killer_Tofu (profile), Jan 10th, 2011 @ 7:24am

          Re: Re: Re: DRM

          You can say that all you want, but the history of DRM shows that most will mess with you even when you don't want them to. The largest culprits of this are those put in place by the MAFIAA, just as this is .. on a CPU. Horribly idea.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Shirkie01, Jan 9th, 2011 @ 10:34am

    DRM isn't the full issue here

    I might not have the entire aspect down, but from what I understand:

    When Intel says this is not DRM, they probably are using EA's and Ubisoft's definition of DRM. If you want to look it up, you'll see that these have been patched, due to the DRM increasing the amount of pirating, since people didn't want the DRM to control their computers. Intel Insider, though, is a hardware aspect to do the same thing, so technically not DRM, but still serves the same function.
    So, what are the difficulties and costs associated with a hardware recall and a revamp of your production line in addition to scrapping processors that are on shelves compared to issuing a software patch, anyone?

    If programmers can use this for DRM or not, according to their will, what's to stop viruses from using this "feature" to kill your processor or erase all your data? If the law authorities are the only ones who can access it, they're going to have pretty big headaches fixing it when the average Joe buys a pre-assembled computer and gets a virus of that type.

    Additionally, I don't see any protection against someone purchasing this as a second computer solely for the video streams, then simply recording them and uploading them to file-sharing programs. It wouldn't be streaming, but you would still have the quality given the right recording program.

    When this shit hits the fan, Intel deserves to be kicked down a couple notches, hopefully making chips at comparable prices to AMD, instead of a difference of ~$800 for the top models.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Killer_Tofu (profile), Jan 10th, 2011 @ 7:27am

    Waste of Money

    All the time the spend researching and developing this DRM junk like HDCP and this probably help contribute to their inflated pricing.
    Maybe if they stopped they could lower prices and compete with AMD for power per price point. ALways been an AMD loyal and this is only more reason for me to be.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This