Print 87 comment(s) - last by glennpratt.. on Mar 27 at 1:48 PM

Latest Blu-ray Disc copy protection circumvented by PC software

Although Hollywood movie studios have little choice in which format they release their high-definition content, companies such as Disney and Fox chose Blu-ray Disc for its added copy protection features.

Since the AACS copy protection scheme was defeated, Blu-ray Disc had BD Plus (BD+), launched in June 2007 as a secondary protection method.

Like any other software protection scheme, however, it was only a matter of time before BD+ would be circumvented. In the latest version of SlySoft AnyDVD HD, released on Wednesday, the top new feature notes that the software can now remove the BD protection from Blu-ray Discs. The release note also mentions that the removal of BD+ increases compatibility with titles released by Twentieth Century Fox.

Effectively an embedded virtual machine inside player hardware, BD+ allows content providers to include executables on Blu-ray Discs to perform specific, content protecting functions. For example, the BD+ virtual machine could run diagnostics on the host environment to see if the disc player has been modified, or to verify that the keys have not been changed.

As part of the BD+ scheme, video may be deliberately corrupted or modified to prevent the ripping of the data stream for piracy purposes. The BD+ environment, once verified, will correct and descramble the content to render it viewable.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

The definition of irony...
By phatboye on 3/20/2008 6:33:23 PM , Rating: 2
I thought the entire purpose for movie studios to move from DVD and one of the main reasons why BD had more support from major studios at first than HD-DVD was because of this additional copy protection scheme.

When will these Holywood suit ever learn. Try as you may, your DRM schemes will never prevail. Stop wasting your money on it, it only causes more headaches for those who want legally archive their media and does absolutely nothing to stop copyright infringement.

RE: The definition of irony...
By ElFenix on 3/20/2008 6:52:27 PM , Rating: 5
'you mean, if we hand someone the lock and the key, even if the key a needle in a haystack, someone can still find it and operate the lock? why didn't you tell us this sooner?'

RE: The definition of irony...
By mendocinosummit on 3/20/2008 7:04:10 PM , Rating: 5
Nowadays somebody always has a magnet.

RE: The definition of irony...
By jadeskye on 3/20/2008 7:49:24 PM , Rating: 5
ain't that the truth.

RE: The definition of irony...
By ImSpartacus on 3/23/2008 4:03:55 PM , Rating: 2
We have all these MacGyver-wannabies that carry around toothpicks, spare car tires and all kinds of other stuff.

RE: The definition of irony...
By Hypernova on 3/20/2008 8:31:04 PM , Rating: 5
or burn the haystack and filter the ashes.

RE: The definition of irony...
By feelingshorter on 3/20/2008 9:07:13 PM , Rating: 2
That was done on myth busters. I believe the best way to find the needle was to use a magnet because burning it caused a lot of problems.

RE: The definition of irony...
By Silver2k7 on 3/21/2008 5:28:27 AM , Rating: 2
Its much worse finding a needle in a needle stack..

RE: The definition of irony...
By Webreviews on 3/21/2008 8:31:44 AM , Rating: 5
Actually, finding a needle in a needle stack should be pretty straightforward... as long as you aren't looking for any "specific" needle.

RE: The definition of irony...
By ImSpartacus on 3/23/2008 4:05:27 PM , Rating: 2
Have you ever tried to mess with a needle stack? It took my appendix 8 weeks to start working again.

RE: The definition of irony...
By sporr on 3/23/2008 8:14:22 AM , Rating: 2

RE: The definition of irony...
By walk2k on 3/20/2008 7:20:13 PM , Rating: 5
and then the next time you put a new disc in the player the keys for the cracked disc will be invalidated automatically and won't play in that player any more.

seriously people. BD+ was MADE to be cracked. they thought of that.

RE: The definition of irony...
By teldar on 3/20/2008 8:48:45 PM , Rating: 3
I believe the point is you have a BD player in your computer and you can decode and export the stream. You know, copy it. It's not like they're talking about altering the bios of the player, they're talking about bypassing the security so a computer can decode it.

RE: The definition of irony...
By omnicronx on 3/20/2008 11:49:29 PM , Rating: 2
You know, copy it. It's not like they're talking about altering the bios of the player, they're talking about bypassing the security so a computer can decode it.
And hes saying, when you put in a new store bought BD which contains new updated keys into your standalone BD player, the cracked keys will no longer work. Not sure if this is true, but i think i remember hearing something similar.

What good is a BD if you can only play it from a computer, most people don't have HDMI out, and it is very hard to set up lossless sound.

RE: The definition of irony...
By walk2k on 3/21/2008 12:26:34 PM , Rating: 2
computer players are no different than stand-alone players.

maybe you can rip the stream and convert it to DIVX or something, but only at a loss of quality.

of course that's probably what the bittorrents will do anyway.

RE: The definition of irony...
By Noya on 3/20/2008 11:25:20 PM , Rating: 2
Can't you just not connect the monitor my use...I mean Ethernet port?

RE: The definition of irony...
By boogle on 3/21/2008 5:33:25 AM , Rating: 2
and then the next time you put a new disc in the player the keys for the cracked disc will be invalidated automatically and won't play in that player any more.

So you transcode the movie so there's 0 remnants of the original encryption - Sony are going to find out the cracked keys... how?

To put it another way, I pick up a car with various ID numbers on the chassis. I'm going to 'clone' this car, so in the process I put new plates on it, and sand off all the ID numbers. How is the original manufacturer (or anyone for that matter) going to know what the numbers were?

RE: The definition of irony...
By rninneman on 3/21/2008 10:18:38 AM , Rating: 4
AnyDVD removes all traces of copy protection from the disc so the player has no "keys" to even bother with at all.

You are think of Media Key Blocking which is designed to revoke compromised player keys. For example, PC software players, such as PowerDVD and WinDVD, were first utilized to crack AACS. Shortly afterwards, movies released with a new MKB table revoking the keys of the compromised players.

While BD+ will most certainly change over time. DVD copy protection still changes and Slysoft is all over the updates on a regular basis so I have no doubt that anything the studios do will be futile.

RE: The definition of irony...
By Bogus1 on 3/26/2008 11:00:53 PM , Rating: 2
If you keep the price of the blank media near the cost of the movie, it isn't cost effective to copy.

1 blank $15
1 hour to rip and burn (guestimate)
1 Sheet of photo paper for the cover + ink
1 clam shell
time searching for, or scanning, or creating cover art.

Personally, my time(that it takes to copy)is worth more than the cost of the $25 movie.

as always, your mileage may vary.

RE: The definition of irony...
By glennpratt on 3/27/2008 1:48:03 PM , Rating: 3
For many of us, this isn't about piracy, it's about re-encoding movies for our portable devices, streaming it to other devices in our house or backup to storage array. It's about letting me play movies I paid for on devices without HDCP encryption and a Blu-ray drive.

Most pirates don't care about HD yet anyway. The 'pirates' I know watch movies compressed far below DVD quality and couldn't care less. It's just some strange obsession with collecting movies for free.

Why bother
By nismotigerwvu on 3/20/2008 7:07:32 PM , Rating: 2
Why even cook up new schemes? There is no way this is cost effective.

RE: Why bother
By BZDTemp on 3/20/2008 9:49:16 PM , Rating: 3
Sure it is.

Those making the copy protection know that it will not work forever the real point is to make copying impossible for the average Joe. Sure us geeks will find a way but it will take some time for the tools to be wide spread meaning the copy protection will work fine for the majority of the products sold.

It is the same thing with for example copy protected PC games. You and I know how to make a disc image and download a No-CD crack in minutes. But the less computer savvy do not so they are not able to make a copy and/or pass on the game while still being able play on their own system.

Of course eventually even the average Joe catches on and find out how to get copies of whatever but even then it still leaves Joe Stupid to "benefit" from the copy protection.

RE: Why bother
By bill3 on 3/20/2008 10:17:45 PM , Rating: 1

Take say, pirating Xbox 360. Is it possible? Sure. Is it easy enough for the average mainstreamer to do without a lot of hassle? No, not really.

Therefore the copy protection is successful.

RE: Why bother
By feraltoad on 3/21/2008 1:52:03 AM , Rating: 2
You mean it's not worth the trouble of modding Xbox360 replacements over and over. :)

j/k point taken. I also think the companies have to exist in a sweet spot, and don't want the piracy of console games to get too hot. When that happens a man of letters will be knocking on their door.

RE: Why bother
By Alexstarfire on 3/20/2008 10:33:14 PM , Rating: 2
That is just faulty logic to me. I agree that protection is used to keep the average joe from copying it. Hell, even now most people don't copy DVDs even though it is INSANELY EASY. The problem with using that argument for newer protections is that if the average joe can't copy the old discs with the old protection, why implement a new protection. That's just stupid. Of course, without knowing how much they spend on researching new copy protection schemes it's impossible to say, though I think we can safely say it's not going to be less than $1000.

RE: Why bother
By MrDiSante on 3/21/2008 12:28:09 AM , Rating: 3
Two problems:
1) They'll wrap a nice GUI on it, make it a one-click process and then it won't be (see DVD-ripping these days)

2) Filesharing: average Joe will download the movie.

RE: Why bother
By Timeless on 3/21/2008 2:13:54 AM , Rating: 2
One problem with your problem:
1) Does the average joe have a fast enough connection to download HD movies?

RE: Why bother
By Webreviews on 3/21/2008 8:44:06 AM , Rating: 3
You've gotten to the heart of the matter. Bandwidth.

Having cracked BD+ and "liberated" the bits, it will be tough to share a 30-50GB image (for the time being - but perhaps easier in 5+ years).

Most likely, the image will be transcoded to something like DivX HD, which is a more efficient HD encode, so allows sharing of a smaller file.

There will be a trade-off between having a portable DivX HD and the real thing with uncompressed audio and video streams.

So this liberation and transcoding means that there will still be sharing and trading of these unlocked movies, but they will not be true HD quality.

The same thing happens today, the Torrent sites have DVD "rips" which are seldom the whole 8GB DVD, typically transcoded down to 4GB, 1.4GB, and 800MB sizes. This liberates the locked content from a DVD, but this is "good enough" for most average Joes.

RE: Why bother
By rninneman on 3/21/2008 9:31:31 AM , Rating: 4
Divx HD is MPEG4 just like most Blu-ray discs. All a lower bitrate is going to do is reduce image quality which kind of defeats the purpose of watching it in HD. The reason why DVDs can be shrunk so much is because the difference between the efficiency of MPEG2 and MPEG4 is significant.

RE: Why bother
By Yawgm0th on 3/21/2008 11:17:38 AM , Rating: 3
You can convert a BD rip or HD-DVD rip into H.264 in a Matroska container. That's how people share BD rips now. No one shares BD images. I do see some DivX HD, but H.264 Matroska files are much more common.

Your average 1080p film is 8-11GB, but I can still download most of them on my Comcrap connection in under three hours. I'm not aware of any real quality loss in the ripping or converting procedures, though I'd imagine there is some. But 9GB or so is very reasonable if you've got a 6-10mb cable connection to saturate.

RE: Why bother
By Shawn on 3/22/2008 2:13:26 PM , Rating: 2
that's assuming that the whole movie takes up 30-50gb. it does not. once you rip out the special features, menus, and extra audio tracks it is much smaller. Around 10-15gb for just the movie.

RE: Why bother
By gramboh on 3/24/2008 2:06:46 PM , Rating: 2
The way the HD 'scene' works now is private torrent trackers where both the original untouched Blu-ray/HD-DVD image is uploaded (20-35GB usually) as well as x264 encodes in the .MKV container. As said above, for 720p (with DD 5.1) these are roughly 4-5GB (fit on a single DVD) and for 1080p with DTS 5.1 audio they are 8-12gb depending on the length of the movie. People also encode to WMV-HD for streaming via the Xbox 360.

On one hand, the userbase doing this is relatively small and sophisticated due to the bandwidth and HDD space requirements, so Hollywood probably isn't too concerned versus DVD piracy, but on the other hand, they are probably upset it is happening so easily/quickly with HD content.

Still a game of cat and mouse...
By Aaron M on 3/20/2008 11:06:22 PM , Rating: 4
From the press release at

We are rather proud to have brought back to earth the highly-praised and previously "unbreakable" BD+. However, we must also admit that the Blu-ray titles released up to now have not fully exploited the possibilities of BD+. Future releases will undoubtedly have a modified and more polished BD+ protection, but we are well prepared for this and await the coming developments rather relaxed".

Looks like, unlike with DVD, BD+ will be a moving target, forcing Slysoft to continually create hacks around newer movies. Like someone said, earlier, BD+ was created with the assumption that it would eventually be cracked.

I guess, one could see this as a compromise for movie studios and consumers. I see it like this: A movie comes out with updated protection. Now Slysoft needs to work on a new hack for it. Well, that gives Blu-ray timed-exclusivity, the period in which the movie is likely to earn the majority of its sales. The hack comes later, when sales have already tapered-off. I see this as an "as good as it gets" scenario for movie studios, in a world where no copy protection can be assumed to be uncrackable.

RE: Still a game of cat and mouse...
By Choppedliver on 3/20/2008 11:19:23 PM , Rating: 5
I love these guys... I bought all of Slysoft's products because I love their company and their products and want to support them.

I don't find many products worth buying, in fact I could probably count the ones Ive bought on one hand over the last 20 years. Slysoft software is worth 10x what I paid for it, mainly ANYDVD.

Their software is incredibly good. It is updated with a regularity that amazes me. And they give you free updates for life.

As far as moving target goes, even with DVD's this is true. They are constantly releasing new ANYDVD updates to deal with the latest feeble attempt at keeping people from copying DVD's.


RE: Still a game of cat and mouse...
By Webreviews on 3/21/2008 8:46:11 AM , Rating: 2
AnyDVD and / or DVDFab might be all anyone with a passion for sharing needs.

RE: Still a game of cat and mouse...
By ATC on 3/21/2008 11:44:42 AM , Rating: 2
DVDFab has been nothing short of amazing for me. Nothing has stumped it yet and is updated constantly for free. A Mac version is officially in the works too.

RE: Still a game of cat and mouse...
By SiN on 3/22/2008 2:19:56 PM , Rating: 2
I smell a sales pitch!

RE: Still a game of cat and mouse...
By RaulF on 3/21/2008 10:14:42 AM , Rating: 2
Thank you, what everyone forgets is that, BD+ is like a rolling encryption technology, it will be ever rolling and changing. So it might be able to crack it, but you will have to take time to look for the updates. I wonder who has more money and time on their hands to encrypt and break then system...

By rninneman on 3/21/2008 11:45:26 AM , Rating: 2
DVD DRM is still changing even though CSS has been fully reverse engineered for almost a decade. Slysoft manages to stay on top of new DRM schemes for DVDs. There is no reason to believe they or someone else won't be able to do the same thing.

By hellokeith on 3/21/2008 2:34:29 PM , Rating: 2
AACS is also a rolling DRM technology. The problem with BD+ is that once it is broken, you don't even have to deal with AACS since BD+ has direct access to the unencrypted content.

Fair Use
By Chosonman on 3/21/2008 9:46:58 AM , Rating: 3
I think the media companies are confused as to what the definition of Fair Use is. Or they're marketing their products deceptively when they advertise " Own a copy of XXXX today"

RE: Fair Use
By JKflipflop98 on 3/21/2008 11:37:29 AM , Rating: 3
Someone with some cash to burn and a big set of cajhones should sue for false advertisement.

ALL the commercials I see for DVD's on TV have that catch phrase "OWN a copy of blahblahblah TODAY!"

Well, Sony said in court that you don't actually own jack shit when you buy a dvd.

RE: Fair Use
By AlphaVirus on 3/25/2008 4:27:34 PM , Rating: 2
" Own a copy of XXXX today"

Seriously, that is what makes me so upset at the MPAA and their goonies. How is it that after I BUY a product, they still basically own it? After I make a purchase, it is up to me to decide what I want to do with that product. No non-government agency should be allowed to dictate what goes on with the product I just purchased legally with my earned money.

I wish Ford would tell me I couldnt give other people a ride in my car because they did not pay for it. God forbid I give someone the keys to my car to drive to the corner store.
I also hope Hanes and Fruit-of-the-Loom don't get in contact with me because my wife wears my clothes to sleep in, clothes that she never paid for.

I understand these are not cases where a 'true copy' was not made, but it has similar principles. These entities do not want other people using or having what they have not paid for, and it just makes it worse when these other people have an actual copy.

By Cullinaire on 3/20/2008 7:29:47 PM , Rating: 5
Remember, the hollywood men in suits needed to be shown some placeholder encryption (amongst other mandatory things) for BD to get a foothold. BD+ has done its job. Now we'll all go on in our merry way like DVD has...has deCSS prevented DVD from earning billions upon billions of dollars for people? I am sorry I don't have hard numbers, but I'd say nope.

RE: Politics
By BansheeX on 3/21/2008 9:23:18 AM , Rating: 2
Yep, and let's not forget the fearmongering HD-DVD fans were pushing about BD+, like it was some terrible behemoth in comparison that would never be killed.

By Kishkumen on 3/20/2008 9:14:57 PM , Rating: 5
And praises to Slysoft. Well done lads. Well done.

HDMI based HDCP stripper
By mvrx on 3/20/2008 11:49:46 PM , Rating: 2
Even if you can't crack the BD+ or other schemes, you can capture video at 1080i using a Black Magic Intensity Pro video capture card. It features component and HDMI capture.

To get around it not working with HDMI, I purchased one of the new HDCP strippers for HDMI. These are popping up from Asia, so keep an eye out if you want one. It basically makes the player believe it is connecting to a valid device and the stripper passes the data thru to the HDMI capture card. It is really quite nice.

I give it a year or two before so many of these HDCP strippers are making it into the USA that you'll be able to find them online without worry.

RE: HDMI based HDCP stripper
By SiN on 3/22/2008 2:32:31 PM , Rating: 3
Something about the name HDCP strippers kinda turns me on.

here we go again
By denass on 3/20/2008 11:33:40 PM , Rating: 2
The big thing most are forgeting is if BD decides to change or modify the copy protection will it cause more headaches --stand alone instability problems.There is enough problems already with players having to be firmware updated.I think it would become a vicious circle with more players having more problems playing discs.Some stand alone manufactures are not on the ball keeping up.The possibility for players to not even be able to play the discs is a very real possibilty.

RE: here we go again
By ATWindsor on 3/21/2008 6:42:43 AM , Rating: 2
If they want to make life bad for their paying customers by continuing the "war" in that fashion, let them. Then hopefully more people will see that the protection is nothing but a hassle for the paying costumer.


Why don't they drop it?
By jvillaro on 3/21/2008 1:30:03 AM , Rating: 2
I understand why movie studios and other media companies try to protect "their" property. But considering anything they come up with will be cracked/bypassed etc., why dont they just drop the efforts.
I've always thought that they spend way to much resources on copy protection and such, and that reflects in the final price of their products (movies, music, games and other software.
If they could cut prices by droping this "investment" wouldn't it possibly help to actualy reduce piracy in some amount, I mean copy-protection maybe slows it down for a little while sometimes but at the end "resistance is futile".

Just a thought, what do you guys think?

RE: Why don't they drop it?
By Chosonman on 3/21/2008 9:56:25 AM , Rating: 2
They could cut prices and sell a lot more dvd's, but their strategy is to maximize their profit and screw anyone in their way (even legitimate buyers)

You see it all the time, people on the streets hawking low quality $5 knock offs. If media companies were selling DVD's for $5 each I doubt you'd see as much piracy as you do today. And they wouldn't need copy protection and they wouldn't screw Joe average DVD owner in the process, and they wouldn't piss everyone off with DRM.

Honestly how much does it cost to produce a DVD? 10 cents? At $20 a DVD that's a lot of money. They're probably seeing the situation in green colored glasses.

Media companies have the right to protect their intellectual property from abuse, but if they played the market right, they wouldn't need to use DRM and cry about illegal copying etc.

By mobutu on 3/20/2008 6:21:06 PM , Rating: 2

PS3 Pirating?
By makots on 3/21/2008 7:03:50 PM , Rating: 2
The question is when will they ever crack the PS3 so all the peasants can enjoy "complimentary" games like we all have been doing for a while on the Xbox 360

It was coming!!!
By Fusible on 3/20/2008 6:36:59 PM , Rating: 1
I mean seriously, there are alot more hard working independent programmers (HACKERS) here to show them that the will of the people will be done. And we want to burn our movies, of course solely for our use. We want and need that option. Either way most pirating is done on online Bit clients.

Once again...
By AToZKillin on 3/20/08, Rating: -1
RE: Once again...
By therealnickdanger on 3/20/2008 6:26:14 PM , Rating: 5
Not a fan of your choice of words, but yes. I do like the idea of storing HD movies on a server and streaming them about the house. So long as they continue to drag their feet with the fair-use copy scheme, I guess methods like this will be necessary.

RE: Once again...
By phatboye on 3/20/2008 6:37:26 PM , Rating: 1
I don't think there is anything else that anyone could have said that would have done a better job at describing the situation that just simply saying "raped". Well done OP.

RE: Once again...
By drzoo2 on 3/20/2008 6:50:59 PM , Rating: 2
I couldn't agree more. I purposely built my file server and coupled it with XBMC for this purpose. (Ya I know the original won't play HD) With a 5 and 2 year old running around I don't have to worry about the disc I buy. They are opened long enough to be ripped and then put away. When the time comes for all HD content and the 360 finally get owned all the better.


RE: Once again...
By griffynz on 3/20/2008 6:53:04 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft will be happy again, now you can do more than just watch Blu-ray with your PC. You can 'back-it-up', stream it, soon even modify it...

RE: Once again...
By Scrogneugneu on 3/20/2008 9:59:42 PM , Rating: 4
Although, preferably not on WHS.

RE: Once again...
By Gnoad on 3/20/2008 11:25:47 PM , Rating: 1

RE: Once again...
By mattclary on 3/21/2008 3:24:03 PM , Rating: 2

RE: Once again...
By sweetsauce on 3/20/2008 10:29:13 PM , Rating: 2
What does the 360 have to do with BD getting cracked? You lost me there.

RE: Once again...
By jtesoro on 3/20/2008 11:29:49 PM , Rating: 2
I think he's saying that right now he's still using his original XBOX Media Center (?) for playing ripped SD movies since he's still not on HD. Once he moves to HD, that's when he'll get a 360.

RE: Once again...
By therealnickdanger on 3/21/2008 1:09:54 PM , Rating: 2
You can stream HD content over a network from a server to your entertainment system via the 360. Ripping HD-DVDs and BDs to MPEG-4 or WMV-VC1 files will work this way. You save wear and tear on your discs and have the added convenience of simply selecting your movie by name in a list and pressing "play". Great for kids and a very high WAF (Wife Approval Factor - a necessary component of any home theater).

RE: Once again...
By lexluthermiester on 3/20/2008 6:36:26 PM , Rating: 2
Also not a fan of that choice of word. Still it had to happen sooner or later and I'm glad that it has. Kudos to Slysoft.

RE: Once again...
By Protozero on 3/20/2008 6:42:53 PM , Rating: 3
It makes me happy inside when I see Hollywoods protection schemes fail. They should do like some game companies. Make there games ( in Hollywoods case movies ) incredibly large and not worth it to pirate. I know I wouldn't want to waste my time download 5+GB movies.

RE: Once again...
By Rockjock51 on 3/20/2008 6:54:39 PM , Rating: 2
Do you watch your downloads from 0-100%? If not, and you're not using all your bandwith, you're not wasting time.

RE: Once again...
By cmdrdredd on 3/20/08, Rating: 0
RE: Once again...
By joex444 on 3/21/2008 4:13:06 PM , Rating: 2
That isn't even close to being what others feel. Just visit any torrent site and see how many people think it is worth it to download a 5+ or even 8+ GB torrent. Whether its a game or a movie in 720p or 1080p, you'll see people by and large will take whats free.

And to the person wanting lossless -- BluRay isn't lossless. As in, not even close. You could store a very small amount of video in full lossless on a double layer BD-ROM. Just by my quick calculations, I estimate 335 seconds. Yep, full lossless 1080p with no audio, and no menus, and no free bytes left on a 50GB disc will net you about 335 seconds.

BluRay (and HD-DVD for that matter) uses a VLC-1 compression scheme. Turns out that is the same codec as H.264. This is an extremely good codec, albeit a little bit CPU intensive. On average, a full length film will be about 20-30GB with the audio (which isn't lossless, though a disc may have such an option, the standard is Dolby Digital 768kbps or DTS 1536kbps, both in 7.1), without the menu and extras. So, if you have 30GB at 1920x1080, figure you downsample it to 1280x720 -- that should knock out 55% of the space required to maintain the same quality. So, a 13GB 720p file has the same quality as 30GB 1080p file. Clearly, a 20GB 1080p file can fit on a DVD+DL disc when converted to 720p. So, throw in a little more compression from the release group and you can easily fit 1080p on a DVD+DL, and 720p can even be compressed down to DVD+R, though excellent quality can be achieved on DVD+DL. Not to mention the initial 30GB includes foreign language tracks, which are generally discarded.

So, my point is that you are not getting lossless quality from a BluRay disc. And from a compression standpoint, its totally feasible to make a BD video fit into DVD+DL or DVD+R size restrictions without much noticeable video quality loss. Atleast, if we restrict ourselves to consumer products.

RE: Once again...
By TerranMagistrate on 3/20/08, Rating: 0
RE: Once again...
By DigitalFreak on 3/20/2008 8:02:38 PM , Rating: 5
Lol, not so fast there champ.

BD+ was implemented with the thought of it inevitably being cracked. You'll have to circumvent the BR hardware to get any real use out of this exploit.

Oh really, thou who knows all?

People have already used this to re-encode formally BD+ protected movies into different formats, and have burned the unprotected output to BD-R discs and played them in set-top players and the PS3. BD players will play discs with no content protection, which is exactly what you get after using the new version of AnyDVD HD.

RE: Once again...
By RaulF on 3/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: Once again...
By drank12quartsstrohsbeer on 3/21/2008 10:40:51 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, please show a picture of yourself ripping a BD+ movie. Be sure to include your name and social security number as well (for verification purposes)

RE: Once again...
By Suomynona on 3/21/2008 11:15:47 AM , Rating: 3
I don't want to spend time hunting down public posts, but it's very much real. I'm on a private backup site (i'd link you but it's private) where the users were posting about trying the new AnyDVD with known BD+ movies (ice age, simpsons, live free, I Robot...). it's been agreed upon that it works for most movies. this is not a "huh look at me i did it first" site, this is real discussion. i've seen before and after screenshots of BD+ playback before and after AnyDVD. with BD+, the playback is garbled. they were testing the beta that was accidentally put up on wednesday, the final may work with all BD+ movies. you're right to doubt, but i can tell you that it works, at least for most current movies. i'm sure they'll try to change the BD+ on new discs to stop AnyDVD.

RE: Once again...
By rninneman on 3/21/2008 11:32:22 AM , Rating: 2
Do you even know what AnyDVD is? The point of AnyDVD is to remove the DRM from the discs so that you may use it as you please. He doesn't need proof because Slysoft said it works. I would tend to believe them based on the history of their products.

Quoted from AnyDVD HD changelog
New (Blu-ray): Removes the BD+ protection from Blu-ray discs!
(for increased compatibility with titles released by Twentieth
Century Fox :-) )

It looks like it says removes BD+ to me.

RE: Once again...
By gramboh on 3/24/2008 2:08:36 PM , Rating: 2
It's already widespread on privte torrent tracker sites, people have ripped and encoded via x264 movies like the new Die Hard, Ice Age etc.

RE: Once again...
By rninneman on 3/21/2008 11:27:18 AM , Rating: 2
Why does the hardware have to with circumventing BD+? If all traces of DRM are removed from the disc during the ripping process as AnyDVD does, the player thinks it is just a regular unencrypted disc.

RE: Once again...
By DigitalFreak on 3/20/2008 7:58:02 PM , Rating: 1

In the ass, even.

RE: Once again...
By Mike Acker on 3/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: Once again...
By pedigree on 3/21/2008 9:30:38 AM , Rating: 3
DCMA? Whats that? No such law where I live :) Damn I love not being an American

RE: Once again...
By Chaser on 3/21/2008 1:44:57 PM , Rating: 2
So are we.

By mrdeez on 3/20/08, Rating: -1
By lexluthermiester on 3/21/2008 7:25:33 AM , Rating: 1
Ok, that was disturbing...

By eye smite on 3/21/2008 8:40:57 AM , Rating: 3
Police in Radnor, Pennsylvania, interrogated a suspect by placing a metal colander on his head and connecting it with wires to a photocopy machine. They placed the message "HE'S LYING" in the copier, and pressed the copy button each time they thought the suspect wasn't telling the truth. Believing the "lie detector" was working, the suspect confessed to the police.

By SiN on 3/22/2008 2:27:57 PM , Rating: 1
wish i could rate that up!

"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki