Rights Management Add-on for Internet Explorer
Posted by Tom Warren on 20 May 2003 - 22:18 · 12 comments & 590 views
About the Author
Full name: Tom Warren
Forum name: creamhackered
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Tom Warren
Forum name: creamhackered
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
#1 Posted by Mr. Black on 20 May 2003 - 23:13
- Too bad it's in beta, otherwise i'd download it.
-
#2 Posted by gameguy on 20 May 2003 - 23:21
- will this let me keep them from viewing the source of my files :rofl:
-
(4 replies)
#3 Posted by Quick Reply on 20 May 2003 - 23:56
- Great! Now I need to buy Microsoft Office, Microsoft Windows, and get Microsoft Internet Explorer to view the internet!
[/sarcasm] -
#3.1 Posted by JaggedFlame on 21 May 2003 - 00:35
- Not when most Linux distributions are going to have this eventually as well.
-
#3.2 Posted by aristotle-dude on 21 May 2003 - 01:37
- [neoquote=#3.1 by JaggedFlame]Not when most Linux distributions are going to have this eventually as well.[/neoquote] Why would they?
-
#3.3 Posted by JaggedFlame on 21 May 2003 - 05:27
- So people can view DRM content? Who cares about the viewer? If you hate DRM, go after the content providers. If enough content providers provide DRM content, you'd have to be stupid not to offer a DRM client.
-
#3.4 Posted by Quick Reply on 21 May 2003 - 07:30
- but if making a drm client was so easy (and legal), then what's to stop the linux writer from making it so you can print the document dispite print being disabled? I say that it will take as long as DVD did to get cracked.
-
#4 Posted by EnIgMa-PenGuIn on 21 May 2003 - 05:25
- hehehee im gonna give it a go...... if i dissapear you know that they got me ^_^
-
#5 Posted by kioria on 21 May 2003 - 06:19
- interesting to see your reactions to such a beta-based program. i do not know why linux was mentioned, but i do believe that it is worth mentioning it when it comes to anti-ms.
you don't have to comment on how shit every single ms products are; just shut up about it and keep it to your selves from now on.
and as a matter of fact, im more than happy to try this beta. so gentlemen, if you please excuse me.
-
#6 Posted by Quick Reply on 21 May 2003 - 07:39
- we're not anti-ms, ms is anti-linux, that's the pont: documents are exclusively only openable by microsoft applications. If DRM is put into an mp3, then linux won't be able to play it, and you will need to buy an mp3 player with a Microsoft DRM chip in it. If on the other hand, this was made by a standards organisation (ie ISO, W3C), then there would be no problems and the market wouldn't be so monopolistic.
-
#7 Posted by wheelca on 21 May 2003 - 13:08
- Why does this kind of story always have to turn into a MS vs. Linux fight? This technology gives "document authors, Web site authors, and creators of Web-based applications" the ability to protect their files. It does not make it so that all files can only be opened on MS products. It is very possible that MS will let other software companies incorporate this into their products. This feature is something that many people (companies especially) have been asking for for a long time. For example, you create a document that you only want certain people to see. An employee that has access to the file might not realize that it was not meant to be shared. As it stands now, all they have to do now is copy the file or attach it to an email. With rights management, the permissions that are set by the author are kept by the file and not based on where the file is stored. While I agree that we need standards, does that mean that we have to wait until a standards organization agrees on something before we can use a new functionality that a software comapany has developed?
-
#8 Posted by Mgz on 21 May 2003 - 22:49
- NO DRM CRAP. THANKS
(stick with FireBird 
Document authors, Web site authors, and creators of Web-based applications can deliver protected information by restricting permission. This provides protection, not only while the information is in transit, but also after the recipient of the information has received it.
Authors can set restricted permission to limit what a reader can do with the content they receive. These restrictions are customizable, that is, one person may view the document but not print it, another may do both, and a third person may view and print the document, but only for five days.
Authors can restrict permission to Web-based information as they create it, and then save the content as a rights-managed HTML file (with the file name extension .rmh). If the readers have installed the Rights Management Add-on, they can open the file and use the contents, based on the permission that the author has given them.
CAUGHT OFF GUARD
The International Federation of Phonographic Industry (IFPI), the global trade organization that represents the music industry, was caught off guard by the launch. An IFPI spokesman said they were reviewing the site, but had not decided if they would be taking action against it.
Puretunes will sell subscriptions allowing consumers to download songs by virtue of licensing agreements it has struck with various Spanish trade associations that represent performers and recording artists.
Puretunes will compensate the artists and labels from subscription proceeds, Siguenza said.
The site carries thousands of songs from Madonna to the Beatles. Consumers can download songs in hourly blocks.
Eight hours of downloads cost $3.99 while unlimited downloads for a month cost $24.99, a steep discount from industry-sanctioned services such as Pressplay and those operated by Britain's OD2.
Siguenza said the new service does not need individual authorization from the major music labels, a point the industry is likely to contest as they have insisted Web sites wanting to sell downloads secure the appropriate licensing contracts.
In fact, a number of labels have sued another Spanish firm, Weblisten.com, that has been selling music online.
Adding to the intrigue, Puretunes has signed Grokster, the free file-swapping network that won a recent U.S. legal decision against the music labels, as a marketing partner. Grokster will get a cut of sales leads it brings to Puretunes.
"We've been doing everything we can to sell authorized music and basically this has been our only option," said Wayne Rosso, president of Grokster. "We're out to prove a point: we can sell the music."