Copies of Blu-ray disc content to depend on approval of copyright holders

A third Blu-ray DRM technology called ROM Mark encodes discs with a certain watermark that can only be read by supporting players. Conceivably, even players without ROM Mark reading devices can be encoded in such a way that they cannot play movies without the watermark having been authorized. This could render some future low-end Blu-ray PC-based drives inoperable with some movies.

Peterson acknowledged this system is a bit more difficult to adopt for PC-based players than for set-top players, but also implied that the studios whose decisions appear to count most, don't consider PCs a very important issue. "The studios are obviously wanting the most robust content protection they can get," he said. "So by adopting BD+, they've got extra incentive now to support Blu-ray Disc, because it's more robust than HD DVD as a content protection system."

These comments, coupled with Paramount's announcement yesterday, point to the very real possibility that the HD DVD support announcement by the world's leading PC proponents - and thus, by association, the parties linked to the devices that make content piracy possible in the first place - may have backfired on them.

With all three technologies in place concurrently, will consumers be able to make managed copies of their Blu-ray discs, despite what Microsoft and Intel are saying? Yes, said Josh Peterson. "BD+ and ROM Mark are going to be transparent to the end consumer. The only consumers that will be affected by BD+ will be the people that are trying to hack the code illegally." Managed copy distribution features have been adopted in AACS, he stated, and none of their functionality will be reduced by the other two technologies. "So everything that HD DVD could do from a user flexibility perspective," Peterson added, "is also going to be supported by Blu-ray Disc."

However, Peterson pointed out, whether a Blu-ray user will be able to make a managed copy of a movie will be directly dependent upon whether the studio responsible for that movie, approves the copy. This approval process will be part of the AACS communications scheme. "It's really up to the studios whether they're going to allow their content to be copied through managed copy," said Peterson. He added he was worried that some consumers would come to believe they could make illegal and unlicensed copies of any movie they wanted to, simply because managed copy was present. Not so, he repeated, "it's up to the movie studios to enable this."

"There is misinformation coming from their announcements," stated Peterson, frustrated, referring to Intel and Microsoft. "Whether that's misinformation that they've been fed, or maybe the lack of participation in the working groups have set up incorrect perceptions of what reality is, I [don't know]. HP's been working on Blu-ray Disc technology for over two years now; Sony's been working on it for close to ten years, Panasonic for over five years. This technology has been developed over years of time, and Microsoft and Intel have not participated at all."

That lack of participation, Peterson argued, may render the two companies minor players in this dispute. "I think the value of the Microsoft/Intel announcement is purely a PR value," stated Peterson. "They're joining the HD DVD Promotions Group. The value there is primarily a P.R. value, because they're not going to put products on the shelf." He referred to Microsoft's earlier statements that they have no current plans to release HD DVD editions of Xbox 360. "So this doesn't change the hardware landscape," he added, "and the hardware landscape is where this format war is going to be fought, along with software titles - not Microsoft titles, but movies, Hollywood titles. We're making good progress there, and we have very high hopes that we can still avoid a format war in the marketplace."