The MPAA has been introducing a new encryption system for the HD-DVD line, which was intended to prevent people from simply ripping the movie and distributing it online. On April 30, (no single authoritative source, just concurrence of independent sources) someone managed to crack the encryption, producing a key ([Removed - SkipMagic]) that can unlock all the data on existing HD-DVDs. (Obviously, they’ll be changing that key pretty quickly for new DVDs).
What happened, though, was that the MPAA quickly moved in to force websites showing the key to be shut down, applying pressure even to well-known sites like wikipedia, which despite their popularity cannot afford a lawsuit like that. Internet denizens, having no life to speak of, quickly spread the code to various websites faster than they could be shut down. One particularly interesting case is digg, which has a business relationship with HD-DVD and has allegedly engaged in some shady shut-downs of stories on its front page. Given its user-generated interface, people have been flooding it with articles containing the code. Interesting times. More info
And what makes you think the Chicago Reader/SDMB can afford a lawsuit like that?
Already reported.
Interesting “riddles” involving the key going around as well.
Given what’s happening one wonders whether they’ll ever get around to sending a notice here. It’ll be like trying to send a cease and desist letter to every single molecule of urine in the pool.
Looks like Slashdot is allowing the code to stand.
I wouldn’t bother reporting this thread. The number is everywhere by now and most people who’d be looking for it would hit the tech sites first.
I wonder what would happen if you bought a shirt with the code on it?
You would be sued into oblivion. I wouldn’t recommend it.
If you’re that curious…
We seem to get into this debate with some regularity. First it was the 3 lines of perl that could encode RSA, then it was DeCSS, now it’s this.
Yeah, but we’ve seen in the past that The Reader seems to feel the SDMB is its red-headed stepchild, so I figured better to be safe. Besides, ultimately it’s up to the mods to decide.
your Versace Cortex (the part of your brain that regulates dress sense) would wither and die.
I’ve got a recessive one anyway. Actually I refuse to wear anything with words and symbols on it. I was just curious how things would proceed should representing lawyer see someone walking down the street like that.
I guess I assume they’d just ignore it.
Of all the things one could try to remove from public view once it’s out there and there’s an interest in it, a mere 128 bits seems ridiculously infeasible.
So, athelas, your first thought was that, unlike Wikipedia, we could afford a lawsuit?
Do not do this again unless you want your posting privileges to come under review.
ETA: I’ve a request to re-open this thread because the discussion is worthwhile. And, I agree, but we already have another thread on the same topic going on here. Please head that way.