UnBox, Keep Your Grubby Mitts Off My Hard Drive

[kisrum]

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=091306D

"This isn't as bad as the disastrous Sony spyware scandal -- which also involved problems with uninstallation. But it's bad enough. As much as people in the entertainment business go on about their intellectual property, they're pretty cavalier with other people's personal property."

[CrayonEater]

I strongly suspect - I CANNOT PROVE THIS YET - that most of the proprietary software e.g. Cinemanow is spyware, by necessity. It already has to authenticate you and and report that you watching your download, using up your allotted burns, etc. in order to enforce license compliance, so that is spywareish behavior in and of itself. That's precisely why I won't use one of these services - it's strictly store-bought DVDs for me!

[ssj2_goha]

To be upfront I'm an Apple fan and a Apple user (not that anyone couldn't tell with my avatar). But this is why I still say Apple hit the nail right on the head with the iTunes music store. And with the release of the "iTV" early next year there is nothing more I personally could ask for. You Buy one file that you can play on your computer, your iPod, or on you tv. The prices are good and really why would you want to burn a movie to a dvd and it take up physical space instead of it just sitting on your Hard drive. I know alot of people will say I want to take the dvd to my (fill in the blank)'s but really you can easily hook an iPod up to any tv like a dvd player and they play the same. That and you can carry hours of video on something that weighs less than a pound instead of a bulky dvd case. I know my opinon is biased but I still don't see why people hate Apple so much.

[MozartMan]

I know my opinon is biased but I still don't see why people hate Apple so much.

Yeah, I hate Apple because it has one mouse button.
On a serious note I hate Apple because it has one mouse button and because it sucks!!!

[ssj2_goha]

Just to clarify apple computers DO have 2 mouse buttons (mighty mouse). And that mouse does come standard with both the iMac and the Mac Pro.
The part of you saying it sucks is just your opinon. Like me like it is my opinon that i think they are great computers. I use both windows and apple computers. (yes I even have a linux machine in my house)

[gadgetguy]

I would want to burn to DVD because I don't have an iPod and I have no intention of getting one. I have DVD players for my TVs and a portable DVD player for on the go. If I can't put a video on DVD, then I'm just not interested in purchasing it. It has nothing to do with whether I like Apple computers or not.

[b1tchm4gn3t]

I would want to burn to DVD because I don't have an iPod and I have no intention of getting one. I have DVD players for my TVs and a portable DVD player for on the go. If I can't put a video on DVD, then I'm just not interested in purchasing it. It has nothing to do with whether I like Apple computers or not.

same here

[CrayonEater]

Well said. Plus, I don't want to be tied to a specific manufacturer's hardware (iPod, etc.) Giving one company too much control over a market is inherently dangerous.

[yoda313]

Well said. Plus, I don't want to be tied to a specific manufacturer's hardware (iPod, etc.) Giving one company too much control over a market is inherently dangerous.

That is the one good thing about the wma playforsure architecture for the non ipod mp3 players. You're not tied to one player or one store. I can buy songs from yahoo music or napster or other wma stores. I can alos play them on my iriver or any other of the numerous "playforsure" compatible mp3 players. I'm not locked into to having just Ipod or just x player. Its a much more "open" system believe it or not.

[oldandinthe way]

The same problem occurs time and time again..

To offer content from the studios, the network service must accept the paranoia of the studio and attempt to do the impossible, prevent misappropriation of the studios property.

The only studio Apple has reached terms with is Disney. Therefore we have to wait for the other shoe to drop.

Its really too bad that so little quality content is offered that everyone wants a limited amount of what is available. If there was greater appeal and lasting interest, piracy would be lost in the noise. Everyone wants the same limited number of pirated movies, songs, tv etc

A failing industry won't be able to use technology to stem the tide. In the absense of real market demand for the music, movies and television being offered, the industry will spend its time managing court cases, and crypto-geeks.

And their desire to recoup their investments will make the entire entertainment industry what "basic" cable has become, a dumping ground for reruns, remakes and trash.

[Conquest10]

With Apple's monitor's resolution going higher and higher and that itv with an hdmi and component outputs I find it odd that they only offer 640x480. If they really want people to watch these videos on something other than an iPod, they should really take advantage and at least offer 960x540 or something like that.

[kisrum]

So has anyone used UnBox??

[ssj2_goha]

With Apple's monitor's resolution going higher and higher and that itv with an hdmi and component outputs I find it odd that they only offer 640x480. If they really want people to watch these videos on something other than an iPod, they should really take advantage and at least offer 960x540 or something like that.

The problem with the higher resolutions is that the files size is bigger and it would require more cpu power to play it. The current iPod don't seem to have the CPU needed for that type of power. The other thing is if the file is bigger it takes longer to download. Well yeah it would be nice to have the nice big HD file but the current internet connections most people have it would take way too long for people to download. The reason they chose the 640x480 resolution is becuase it gives near dvd quality with a resonable file size.

[ViRaL1]

I have UnBox and have used it (I downloaded the 'Rick James' episode of Chappelle's Show). I haven't had any problems with the program and so far I haven't seen anything that would make me uninstall it. If the author of the article has been using computers for years, you think he'd have noticed by the name (ADVWindowsClientService.exe ) that the executable was running as a SERVICE and not an APPLICATION, which is why it's not going to show up in MSCONFIG. Services are easily stopped and or disabled in Computer Management if you don't want them to run, it's nothing difficult. I doubt I'm the only one who noticed when I installed UnBox, but one of the features is that it contacts Amazon to see if you have purchased content and then downloads it versus you having to open it and tell it to download. I'm not going to sit here and say that I know everything that the application transmits because I don't, but I do know ONE legitimate reason it wants to connect. It's quite possible (and reasonable) that it transmits usage data such as what you watch and how many times. I'm not terribly concerned with this either as Amazon KNOWS exactly what content I have because I have to purchase it through them. I'm not saying there's nothing at all to it, but it's hardly enough to make me paranoid or prompt me to uninstall it.

[thecoalman]

Services are easily stopped and or disabled in Computer Management if you don't want them to run, it's nothing difficult.

Joe six pack is not going to know about that and probably won't be aware it even exists. It's not needed therefore shouldn't be there.

It's quite possible (and reasonable) that it transmits usage data such as what you watch and how many times.

I would find that very unreasonable and invasive. It's none of their damn business what I watch or how many times I watched it. I don't have someone looking over my shoulder when I read the paper in the morning. I should expect the same when watching a video...

[BobK]

Another view of the Unbox agreement:

http://www.boingboing.net/2006/09/15/amazon_unbox_to_cust.html

[ViRaL1]

Services are easily stopped and or disabled in Computer Management if you don't want them to run, it's nothing difficult.

Joe six pack is not going to know about that and probably won't be aware it even exists. It's not needed therefore shouldn't be there.

It's quite possible (and reasonable) that it transmits usage data such as what you watch and how many times.

I would find that very unreasonable and invasive. It's none of their damn business what I watch or how many times I watched it. I don't have someone looking over my shoulder when I read the paper in the morning. I should expect the same when watching a video...

Do you expect that when you watch video-on-demand?

I think a lot of it is overblown. If I set the service to manual, it only runs when I open the app, and when I close the taskbar icon, it's gone. It's really nothing special.

[somebodeez]

http://www.boingboing.net/2006/09/15/amazon_unbox_to_cust.html

(snip)

Amazon Unbox's user agreement isn't just galling for its evilness -- it's also commercially suicidal. No sane person will agree to this. Amazon Unbox user agreement is only a couple femtometers more dignified than being traded to another inmate for a couple packs of cigarettes.

(snip)
The software you're agreeing to install today isn't the software you're going to have to run. Tomorrow, the day after, next week, and ten years from now, we plan to be forcing you into ever-tighter nooses. You don't have to install the updates, but if you don't, kiss the movies we sold you goodbye. We're going to update the software any time Hollywood tells us to, in order to protect their "safety." You might be used to disabling the DRM on your DVD player (Amazon even sells region-free players that come pre-hacked!), but forget about doing the same thing for your Amazon Unbox property: if someone figures out how to add a feature to your Unbox player, we will promptly confiscate that feature.

(snip)
Amazon says it respects your privacy, but this clause tells the real story. Click "I agree" and you've just signed away permission for Amazon to wiretap all of your viewing habits, and to search your entire hard drive continuously and report back on all the software you've installed. The entertainment industry can produce a blacklist of legal software that it just doesn't care for -- say, software that lets you take screenshots, or screen-movies -- and refuse to allow your movies to run if you've installed it. In other words, this clause lets Hollywood specify how you must configure your PC.

(snip)
Surprise! If you delete our software, we delete your movies! Imagine if selling your old DVD player gave Jack Valenti permission to come over to your house and take away all your DVDs, too.

(snip)
If we think you've done something naughty, we can take away all the movies you've bought, without appeal. Better not do anything we think is naughty. What do we consider naughty? We're not telling.

(snip)
We can change the terms of this deal at any time. Today you can play it on two portable players -- maybe it'll be zero tomorrow. Today you can only watch these movies in the US, tomorrow, maybe only west of the Mississippi.

Check the link for the full article.

Edit:
Oops! My apologies to BobK who already posted the link

[somebodeez]

... It's quite possible (and reasonable) that it transmits usage data such as what you watch and how many times. I'm not terribly concerned with this either as Amazon KNOWS exactly what content I have because I have to purchase it through them. I'm not saying there's nothing at all to it, but it's hardly enough to make me paranoid or prompt me to uninstall it.

I don't have a problem w/Amazon knowing what I have purchased through them.
I would have a problem if Amazon pried into what all I have purchased some where else or pried into every other software, video or music file I access on my PC.

From the article:

Click "I agree" and you've just signed away permission for Amazon to wiretap all of your viewing habits, and to search your entire hard drive continuously and report back on all the software you've installed.

[adam]

I don't have a problem w/Amazon knowing what I have purchased through them.
I would have a problem if Amazon pried into what all I have purchased some where else or pried into every other software, video or music file I access on my PC.

From the article:

Click "I agree" and you've just signed away permission for Amazon to wiretap all of your viewing habits, and to search your entire hard drive continuously and report back on all the software you've installed.

According to the User Agreement, this is not done.

Amazon respects your privacy, and the Software will not access computer files or other information on your computer that are not used by or otherwise related to the Service.

I don't know what this service does or doesn't do so I can't really comment on it. But that blog poster's interpretation of the User Agreement is ridiculous and childish.

[gadgetguy]

I don't have a problem w/Amazon knowing what I have purchased through them.
I would have a problem if Amazon pried into what all I have purchased some where else or pried into every other software, video or music file I access on my PC.

From the article:

Click "I agree" and you've just signed away permission for Amazon to wiretap all of your viewing habits, and to search your entire hard drive continuously and report back on all the software you've installed.

According to the User Agreement, this is not done.

Amazon respects your privacy, and the Software will not access computer files or other information on your computer that are not used by or otherwise related to the Service.

But "otherwise related to the Service" seems pretty vague in that monitoring your viewing and computing habits to provide more targeted advertizing could be considered "related to the Service".

[somebodeez]

Seems very conflicting to me.

The Software may also provide Amazon with information about your Authorized Device's operating system, software, amount of available disk space and Internet connectivity, such as whether your computer or other device is available online.

[adam]

I don't see the conspiracy and I don't see the point of analyzing what a piece of software does based solely on a ridiculously broad and loose interpretation of a user agreement. I read the "privacy" sections of the User Agreement and it seems that it gathers general information about your access device and then tracks all content purchased through their service. I do not see how other audio/video content on your pc, not obtained through the service, could possibly be considered, "related" to the service. Unless someone can look at the actual software's activity and determine otherwise than its just a conspiracy theory, and worse yet, one started by some anonymous poster on a blog who is clearly just ranting. The initial article doesn't go into any of this, it was just complaining that the service couldn't be shut off, or rather that he/she couldn't figure out how to do it.

[somebodeez]

I don't know about a "conspiracy" but

Amazon respects your privacy, and the Software will not access computer files or other information on your computer that are not used by or otherwise related to the Service.

and

The Software may also provide Amazon with information about your Authorized Device's operating system, software, amount of available disk space and Internet connectivity, such as whether your computer or other device is available online.

seems to be vague and at opposite ends to me.

I do not see how other audio/video content on your pc, not obtained through the service, could possibly be considered, "related" to the service.

Me either.

[CrayonEater]

One thing I can tell you from my own experience is that Amazon has an abysmal track record relating to privacy issues. I've been buying from them since around 1997-1998 and their privacy standards weren't too good then. Fortunately, I had the presence of mind to lie about my name, use checks when possible, always buy things claiming them to be "gifts" when they started offering that option, etc. Amazon is also one of the pioneers of the data vacuuming that is becoming standard these data. This is simply an extension of that.

But, I read most of the unbox privacy policy, and there is no way I would tolerate my media - MY INVESTMENT - suddenly being rendered useless because I cannot get or will not agree to an update. That is positive stupidity and anybody who tolerates it deserves to get f---ked. It would be somewhat like me (I'm a security consultant) telling my customers their network will shut down automatically if they refuse to update their firewalls and proxies.

But it's amazing what bull$h!t people put up with for a cheap download. It's amazing how cheap it is to buy and own them.

[ViRaL1]

One thing I can tell you from my own experience is that Amazon has an abysmal track record relating to privacy issues. I've been buying from them since around 1997-1998 and their privacy standards weren't too good then. Fortunately, I had the presence of mind to lie about my name, use checks when possible, always buy things claiming them to be "gifts" when they started offering that option, etc. Amazon is also one of the pioneers of the data vacuuming that is becoming standard these data. This is simply an extension of that.

But, I read most of the unbox privacy policy, and there is no way I would tolerate my media - MY INVESTMENT - suddenly being rendered useless because I cannot get or will not agree to an update. That is positive stupidity and anybody who tolerates it deserves to get f---ked. It would be somewhat like me (I'm a security consultant) telling my customers their network will shut down automatically if they refuse to update their firewalls and proxies.

But it's amazing what bull$h!t people put up with for a cheap download. It's amazing how cheap it is to buy and own them.

Who owns their network? We're talking about the Amazon's own player not working on content licensed through them if the player is not kept up to date. Not that it's terribly popular, but this doesn't sound any worse than WGA. From what I'm seeing it's their way of being able to say, 'if we find a hole / flaw or DRM gets hacked and our licensed info is able to be unlocked and made freely available, we reserve the right to update to newer more secure code.' Maybe that's not what they're saying, but it very well could be. I haven't come across anything I'm surrendering in the process.

[SCDVD]

I'm concerned that stuff like this can "creep" into more and more serious intrusion. As long as some of these companies think they can get by with it, they will be tempted to glean more and more data once they have the "keys" to your computer. While some may think step one is benign enough, step two may not be so benign. The more the bright light of day shines on this, the better. The simmering outrage may tend to make these companies think twice about their step two.

[CrayonEater]

If I pay to download it, it's mine, at least to the extent that it's my investment. No one, regardless of licensing terms, has a right to deny me the protection of that investment, least of all without adequate, fair-market compensation. This is the most fundamental principle of any stable, survivable, and peaceful social or economic system.

[ViRaL1]

You don't lose your investment. Th material that you've downloaded is still available for you to download even if your entire PC went up in flames. Asking that you keep their player compliant doesn't diminish your investment.

[lantern]

What happens if Amazon should go belly up and no longer supports their player or just stops supporting the player/format because it is not profitable? Is the content then useless if you cannot download their software? Will Amazon be required to support/offer already purchased content in perpetuity?