Microsoft applies for Big Brother DRM patent
Digital Rights Management comes in a number of forms. It can limit your ability to copy or distribute a file or media, restrict your access to a certain period of time, or limit the number of views or times you can access the data. Microsoft Corporation's latest patent application may add another option to that list: views per user.
The patent application describes a content presentation system and method that enables content providers to regulate content presentation based on user views rather than only on time or device. The content provider may limit access to the content in a number of ways:
- Limit access to the content by number of total views.
- Limit access to a certain amount of views over a specified period of time.
- To a number of simultaneous views.
- Views limited to user age
- Combinations of 1-4
A device needs to be present that enables the monitoring of users accessing the contents to make sure that the number of users viewing the content does not exceed the licensed content. This may mean devices that monitor a room to determine the number of users in it. Two images included with the patent application depict a living room where a webcam and Microsoft Kinect are used to monitor the number of users that are accessing the contents.
The Summary clearly states the following:
The users consuming the content on a display device are monitored so that if the number of user-views licensed is exceeded, remedial action may be taken.
The patent application clearly highlights that this is consumer related, not something that you may expect to see in bars, public viewing or other locations where large numbers of people gather to consume media. It may be the next step in a system - using licensing - that is favoring content creators over consumers. Instead of just providing consumers with a license of a digital product, a game, music or video, content creators can now go a step further and limit the content to individual users.
Maybe you will have different options when you buy digital goods online, so that you need to decide whether you want to buy a one user license, a two user license or a family license. It could also be used to block the media if the system detects a group of people in the room to block "unauthorized" public viewings.
The big question though is if consumers are willed to be tracked when they consume media and whether they are willed to pay more money for multi-user licenses.. I can only speak for myself, but I do not. I won't be using a system that tracks me in my own home, nor will I make a purchase that is limiting the content to a certain number of users or views. I rather do without any of that before I willingly let someone else monitor me and my family.
Advertisement
Are these articles AI generated?
Now the duplicates are more obvious.
This is below AI generated crap. It is copy of Microsoft Help website article without any relevant supporting text. Anyway you can find this information on many pages.
Yes, but why post the exact same article under a different title twice on the same day (19 march 2023), by two different writers?
1.) Excel Keyboard Shortcuts by Trevor Monteiro.
2.) 70+ Excel Keyboard Shortcuts for Windows by Priyanka Monteiro
Why oh why?
Yeah. Tell me more about “Priyanka Monteiro”. I’m dying to know. Indian-Portuguese bot ?
Probably they will announce that the taskbar will be placed at top, right or left, at your will.
Special event by they is a special crap for us.
If it’s Microsoft, don’t buy it.
Better brands at better prices elsewhere.
All new articles have zero count comments. :S
WTF? So, If I add one photo to 5 albums, will it count 5x on my storage?
It does not make any sense… on google photos, we can add photo to multiple albums, and it does not generate any additional space usage
I have O365 until end of this year, mostly for onedrive and probably will jump into google one
Photo storage must be kept free because customers chose gadgets just for photos and photos only.
What a nonsense. Does it mean that albums are de facto folders with copies of our pictures?
Sounds exactly like the poor coding Microsoft is known for in non-critical areas i.e. non Windows Core/Office Core.
I imagine a manager gave an employee the task to create the album feature with hardly any time so they just copied the folder feature with some cosmetic changes.
And now that they discovered what poor management results in do they go back and do the album feature properly?
Nope, just charge the customer twice.
Sounds like a go-getter that needs to be promoted for increasing sales and managing underlings “efficiently”, said the next layer of middle management.
When will those comments get fixed? Was every editor here replaced by AI and no one even works on this site?
Instead of a software company, Microsoft is now a fraud company.
For me this is proof that Microsoft has a back-door option into all accounts in their cloud.
quote “…… as the MSA key allowed the hacker group access to virtually any cloud account at Microsoft…..”
unquote
so this MSA key which is available to MS officers can give access to all accounts in MS cloud.This is the backdoor that MS has into the cloud accounts. Lucky I never got any relevant files of mine in their (MS) cloud.
>”Now You: what is your theory?”
That someone handed an employee a briefcase full of cash and the employee allowed them access to all their accounts and systems.
Anything that requires 5-10 different coincidences to happen is highly unlikely. Occam’s razor.
Good reason to never login to your precious machine with a Microsoft a/c a.k.a. as the cloud.
The GAFAM are always very careless about our software automatically sending to them telemetry and crash dumps in our backs. It’s a reminder not to send them anything when it’s possible to opt out, and not to opt in, considering what they may contain. And there is irony in this carelessness biting them back, even if in that case they show that they are much more cautious when it’s their own data that is at stake.