From: WMTalk
[mailto:WMTalk DISCUSSMS.HOSTING.LSOFT.COM] On
Behalf Of Charles
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 9:48
PM
To:
WMTalk DISCUSSMS.HOSTING.LSOFT.COM
Subject: Re: Windows Media
Database
well based on what we know you cannot detect the watermark after
the file has been encrypted.
Ah! I
understand what you’re saying now, thanks. I think of watermarking as
mainly being useful post-crack, in which case that can be done.
[Christopher
Levy] Well actually some of the online video sites are looking at using
Watermarking to “allow” content into their systems I.E. if you try
to upload a John Stewart clip and it doesn̵7;t have the right watermark in
it then it won’t publish. This is one approach to using watermarking.
There is then of course the conventional “detect and protect221;
approach to compliance and monitoring of premium content which is where most of
the market is focused today.
I have not seen any real good personalized watermarked content
business models yet but am sure they exist or will shortly.
DRM and
watermarking aren’;t business models any more than alarm tags on clothing
are business models (unless you’re the person selling alarm tags and the
rest of the infrastructure required to support them, of course).
[Christopher
Levy] Clearly they are technologies that businesses are selling in the
marketplace as they are needed and in some cases required. I think you
know this J
For
everybody else, DRM and watermarking are means for making digital shoplifting a
bit harder and detecting/tracking illegal redistribution, respectively.
[Christopher
Levy] Agreed. I think I was referring to that above. You said the same thing I
did only you moved your hands differently ala the FedEx commercials J
|