Feeds

How fat is my DRM?

Sony rootkit settlement prompts Bloatware Disclosure

Next gen security for virtualised datacentres

Some CD buyers in Texas and California can claim up to $175 each from record company Sony BMG as a result of a legal settlement this week.

Both states took action against the music giant over its "rootkit-style" DRM, designed to prevent PC users from copying music CDs to their hard drives.

The complaints allege that Sony BMG failed to notify consumers of the presence of the DRM on the outer-packaging, and therefore loaded unauthorised software onto their PCs.

Sony used software called XCP (Extended Copy Protection) created for it by British company First4Internet Ltd to prevent copies being made. XCP was dubbed a "rootkit" because it took over basic system level functions, then concealed its presence. The DRM compromised users' security and knocked some CD drives out of action. Uninstallation was only possible by sending a request to Sony BMG's customer support line.

CDs with the DRM had been on the market for several months before a security consultant described its nefarious technical practices. Sony eventually issued an uninstallation tool, and settled a class action suit late last year (site here).

The lawsuits also compensate punters for CDs encumbered with SunComm's MediaMax's 3.0 and 5.0 DRM, which "phoned home" - transmitting user information back to SunnComm.

Sony agreed to pay each state $750,000 in costs, and individuals can claim from $25 to $175, depending on the damage the DRM incurred.

The settlement includes some interesting new disclosure obligations for Sony BMG. For the next 12 months, such DRM should be clearly labelled on the packaging, and also:

In Clear and Conspicuous language, the range of computer system resources, if any, which the DRM software may consumer after installation when the CD is not in use on the computer (e.g., "between .5 per cent and 3 per cent depending on the configuration of your computer");

So the settlement doesn't prevent Sony BMG from trying such tactics again - merely making them more obvious, and these disclosure requirements only lasts a meagre 12 months.

But it's the first time we've seen such a Bloatware Disclosure - unless readers know different? ®

Related links

Information for Californians and Texans; the latter includes lists of CDs. Last year's class action settlement expires on 31 December.

The essential guide to IT transformation

More from The Register

next story
Goog says patch⁵⁰ your Chrome
64-bit browser loads cat vids FIFTEEN PERCENT faster!
e-Borders fiasco: Brits stung for £224m after US IT giant sues UK govt
Defeat to Raytheon branded 'catastrophic result'
Chinese hackers spied on investigators of Flight MH370 - report
Classified data on flight's disappearance pinched
NIST to sysadmins: clean up your SSH mess
Too many keys, too badly managed
Attack flogged through shiny-clicky social media buttons
66,000 users popped by malicious Flash fudging add-on
New twist as rogue antivirus enters death throes
That's not the website you're looking for
prev story

Whitepapers

A new approach to endpoint data protection
What is the best way to ensure comprehensive visibility, management, and control of information on both company-owned and employee-owned devices?
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Maximize storage efficiency across the enterprise
The HP StoreOnce backup solution offers highly flexible, centrally managed, and highly efficient data protection for any enterprise.
How modern custom applications can spur business growth
Learn how to create, deploy and manage custom applications without consuming or expanding the need for scarce, expensive IT resources.
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.