Studios, Blu-ray system manufacturers, and consumers have different requirements with respect to the DRM measures adopted in Blu-rays. The ideal scenario for consumers would be the complete absence of DRM, but this is obviously unacceptable to the content owners. The Blu-ray industry seems to be under the impression that consumers are fairly happy with the current state of content protection used in Blu-rays. Is this really true?

In our opinion, it is the studios and the Blu-ray system manufacturers who have had the say in deciding upon the suitability of a particular DRM scheme. Consumers have had to put up with whatever has been thrust upon them. The rise in popularity of streaming services (such as Netflix and Vudu) which provide instant gratification should make the Blu-ray industry realize its follies. The only reason that streaming services haven't completely phased out Blu-rays is the fact that a majority of the consumers don't have a fast and reliable Internet connection. Once such connections become ubiquitous, most of the titles owned by consumers would probably end up being stored in the cloud. The Blu-ray industry has thankfully taken note of this and started in earnest towards making their UltraViolet initiative successful amongst consumers. Before talking in detail about how Blu-rays tend to frustrate consumers, we will take a small detour to analyze the effects of Cinavia.

Cinavia: An Exercise in Futility

Does Cinavia really help in tackling the piracy problem? We make the following assumptions:

  1. People interested in pirating movies are looking for instant gratification
  2. 'Piracy' has moved on from disc based copies (i.e, counterfeit DVDs) to standalone files (i.e, MKVs) when it comes to high definition content.
  3. People interested in backing up their purchased Blu-rays on hard drives do so in the ISO or folder backup format

As justification for (1), we note that most of the content available on P2P channels and one-click filehosters is in the form of MKVs with varying resolutions. When DVDs were popular, the Digital Media Adapter category of products was almost non-existent. Therefore, the bulk of piracy involving DVDs were based on disc-based copies. Counterfeit DVDs were common in the street markets of India and China. Nowadays, the same places are selling hard disks filled with pirated movies (MKVs, MP4s and AVIs).

The move from optical media to hard drives has been enabled by the rapid rise of Digital Media Adapters. We present this as justification for (2). Despite storage becoming cheaper by the day, pirates are still hesitant to spare 35 - 50 GB for a single movie. Only users who are ready to spend money to purchase Blu-rays are likely to spend money on storage to safeguard their investment.

Backups in the ISO or folder structure format retain all the information present on a Blu-ray after decryption. This removes all the annoyances associated with a protected Blu-ray disc. There are a host of other advantages to backing up Blu-rays on a hard drive which we will cover in the next section, but we present the above facts as justification for (3).

Now, consider the following 'piracy' scenarios involving Cinavia-infected soundtracks:

  • User downloads a CAM print or similar copy of a theatrical screening protected by Cinavia: The Cinavia watermark detection will trigger only when the CAM print is played back on a suitable Blu-ray player. No 'pirate' worth his salt will be without a PC (with VLC) or a cheap $40 media player capable of playing back scene content of such quality. The Cinavia issues are easily bypassed by just using a media player which doesn't have the watermark detector.
  • User purchases a Cinavia protected Blu-ray and backs it up in ISO / folder structure / MKV: Though the law might be taking a dim view of this process, it is only logical that a consumer who has already paid for a Blu-ray be able to enjoy it in any manner he wishes. The number of licensed Blu-ray players capable of playing unprotected ISOs is dwindling as the days go by. Recently, the Oppo BDP93 removed the unofficial capability of playing back Blu-ray ISOs in a firmware update. They cited pressure from studios as the main reason. In the absence of Blu-ray players with ISO support, users opt for DMAs such as Popcorn Hour A300 / WDTV Live / Boxee Box / etc. which have varying levels of support for Blu-ray backups. None of these are BDA certified and so they don't have a Cinavia watermark detector. Once we get open source software support for Blu-ray ISOs with full menus, Cinavia in such a situation will be rendered useless. Some positive steps have already started taking place in this respect, with VLC planning support for playback of Blu-rays with menus.
  • User unknowingly purchases a pirated Cinavia protected Blu-ray disc under the impression that it is actually legal: In this situation, the Blu-ray player recognizes the Cinavia watermark, finds that the Blu-ray disc is not protected by AACS, and mutes the audio. This is one case where Cinavia is actually effective. However, the affected party is actually a counterfeiting victim himself. The case that the user has knowingly purchased a pirated Blu-ray disc doesn't arise (under our second assumption outlined at the beginning of this subsection).

Having followed the Blu-ray industry closely since its beginning, I have not heard claims from anyone about pirated Blu-ray discs being a problem. The MPAA believes (rightly so) that most of the piracy is happening on P2P networks and through one-click filehosters. We have seen that Cinavia is effective only in one piracy scenario, and that scenario is actually quite unlikely in real life.

Cinavia: The Truly Inconvenienced Minority

At this juncture, why are we devoting so much attention to Cinavia? As mentioned in an earlier section, there are premium DMAs like the Popcorn Hour C300 and the Dune Smart series that have a Blu-ray license also. The next generation version of these players may be forced to implement Cinavia support. Users with legitimate backups wanting the full Blu-ray experience and using such players will end up being affected. Our main aim with this piece is to appeal to the Blu-ray industry to consider personal backups as fair use and exempt ISO capable DMAs from Cinavia.

We hope the industry sees reason with the argument that ISOs are not the preferred medium for pirates. Instead, it is files in MKV format with sizes ranging from 4 to 20 GB that are most popular. The latter category is not played back with Cinavia enabled players, and hence, Cinavia is rendered useless. Once premium DMAs get infected with Cinavia detection routines, legitimate purchasers of Blu-rays who back up their collections will see no point in investing in optical discs. Their money would be better spent on purchasing movies from Vudu or any other similar avenue. If it comes to the worst, the Blu-ray industry may even end up driving the legitimate consumers to piracy. The word-of-mouth from such 'power consumers' will also lead to a negative impression of the Blu-ray industry amongst consumers.

The Blu-ray industry believes that a majority of the consumers don't back up their Blu-ray purchases, and may even try to convince them that Cinavia doesn't affect them in any way. Let us take a moment to analyze the people who really benefit from Cinavia. Is it the studios? As I clearly explained above, Cinavia is not going to help deter piracy or playback of (most) pirated material. Is it the consumer? Not really, as it is just a hassle at best and never a direct benefit. The real beneficiary is Verance.

Disc replicators / content providers pay four cents for each disc with Cinavia protected content. Production houses also have to provide $50 for each watermarked track. Blu-ray player manufacturers have to provide anywhere between $10,000 to $300,000 per annum depending on their unit volume if they want to embed a Cinavia detector in their firmware / software. Of course, Verance also strongly encourages its licensees to purchase the code for the watermark detector from them. We were not able to obtain an estimate of the price for the software. All these costs borne by the studios and the player manufacturers are eventually passed on down to the consumer. Note that these costs get amplified as they go through various middle-men down to the retail market. With licensing costs of other Blu-ray technologies going down as time goes by (and making Blu-ray discs and equipment cheaper for consumers), the BDA / AACS LA seems to have bucked the trend by burdening the consumers with another licensing entity to satisfy.

Cinavia: The Lowdown Miscellaneous Notes on Blu-rays
Comments Locked

121 Comments

View All Comments

  • ganeshts - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    We are really sorry for using DailyMotion, but the fact is that there is a risk of copyright infringement or similar action notice sent to YouTube from the studios (further considering the fact that what we have written in the piece is a bitter pill to swallow for them).

    YouTube's policy is 3 strikes and channel closed (no questions entertained). We can't take the risk of endangering the official YouTube channel for this purpose. However, I have taken the risk of uploading the videos on YouTube from another account after reading your comment. The links are here:

    Cinavia - Message Code 01 - The Wolfman.MTS : http://youtu.be/rtw2RvoBxCE

    Cinavia - Message Code 03 - Battlefield LA - 20 Minutes Delay.ts : http://youtu.be/5TEw0dsWU1Q

    Cinavia - Message Code 03 - The Losers.MTS : http://youtu.be/KYbR0WSkxaM
  • strangevil - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    Cinavia is one of the main reasons why I stopped using my PS3 as a media playback device and have moved to the 360. I loved the UI of the PS3 as it lets you skip by looking at frames, but I bought my PS3 from the US and I live in UK, so every time I buy an official Blu-Ray, it doesn't work due to some stupid region restrictions. and for the ones that do work, I have to sit through 10-15 min of commercials and stupid warnings. So every time the warning pops up, I just plug my HDD out of the PS3 and pop it into my 360 and continue watching.

    I do what most other 'sane' people do... I pirate sh!t off the internet now. I tried to go the official route... I really tried, but you get treated like some garbage and have to sit through 10 min of studios flashing warnings that I'll go in jail if I pirate this even though I just legally bought it. Fu*k that sh!t.
  • cjs150 - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    I am a legitimate customer. I buy Blu-rays. What I want to do is as follows:

    Rip down to NAS and watch them anywhere in house or portable player (Tablet, Laptop, PSP). That means I also need to have a SD version for some of the smaller screens.

    I do not want all the health warnings etc.

    Scrub regional coding

    Does that make me someone who is ripping off artists - no it does not.

    And finally the price is way too high in the UK
  • khory - Thursday, April 5, 2012 - link

    This describes my situation perfectly.
  • Willhouse - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    Is this article about the downfalls of DRM or a gripe about how Blu-ray discs contain too many difficult-to-skip trailers? If there were no trailers, why would one bother stripping the DRM? Further, what does anybody care if there is DRM if it can simply be stripped off and the content then streamed? Is the argument that spending money on DRM ultimately raises the cost of Blu-ray discs.

    If so, just vote with your wallet. We're not talking about bread here folks.

    Ah well, I guess it's not my issue. I'm fine just renting Blu-rays.
  • fuzzymath10 - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    Agreed. I don't think I've ever had a BD fail to play, and it takes seconds to skip the previews after pressing [>|] a handful of times (yes, a bit inconvenient but we have remote controls and it sure beats fast forwarding a VHS tape).

    The crux of the problem is "why get something for $X when you can get it for free?", where X>0. Of course more people would pay $2 vs $20, but not 10x as many, and there will still be plenty of folks who won't even pay $2 even if they could afford it.

    What I don't understand is that part of the argument is that the movies offered are "crappy", i.e. not worth paying for. Yet once it's free, it's worth wasting 2 hours watching/having on a hard disk. Pirated crap is still crap.

    Unfortunately, neither side is willing to give the other the benefit of a doubt.
  • colonelciller - Wednesday, March 28, 2012 - link

    the point is that DRM = Pain in the @ for the person who purchases the product

    DRM has ZERO impact on piracy and as such is an abject failure.
    What is the point of DRM since all it accomplishes is forcing legitimate folk to suffer and stare confusedly as their home entertainment system that is talking about firmware upgrades... I can guarantee you my parents haven't got a f'n clue what firmware is.
  • lundman - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link


    I do occasionally buy Blurays, as it is currently my only way to support movies I like. I never play the actual retail disk though. One of my recent purchases was The Thing (2011) bluray, which comes with UltraViolet.

    Curiosity over-powering me, I thought to check out UltraViolet. I typed in the WWW address, and the numbers, and in less than a second, I was told that "UltraViolet is not available in your country". With no option to do anything else, but close the browser. The disk is not region protected either, just not for "my kind".

    Why is it *my* money is no good anyway? What is it about my cash that stinks so much :)

    I would even be happy with a system where I can just "donate" money to the movie makers directly, and only get a receipt back (for legal defence). I'll get the movies by other means...
  • otbricki - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link

    Netflix and Hulu are non-starters for anyone who cares enough about the fidelity of what they are watching to want a BD. The user experience is awful by comparison. The fidelity is crummy, sound is barely passable, and the content choices very limited.

    And guess what - the studios will keep it that way because they want to preserve their optical disk market.

    Throw monthly bandwidth caps on top of this, plus the fact that studios can (and do) pull content from streaming distribution you have a situation that clearly points to the fact that physical media are going to be with us for the forseeable future.

    Personally I'm fine with that because I want something that gives ME control over what I can watch. Not some studio or streaming service executive.
  • Sasparilla - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link

    "...and the content choices very limited. And guess what - the studios will keep it that way because they want to preserve their optical disk market."

    Bingo.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now