Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Actually, in reality, they would sell MORE, since the pirated HD copies are out there anyways, all HDCP does is annoy the heck out of actual consumers, or people who try to be actual consumers but then give up and pirate.

Really? How many people really care if their content has HDCP encryption or not? Most people aren't even watching movies on their VGA monitors anymore. Most people watch via their idevices or their AppleTV's anymore and those who are "advanced enough" to use an HTPC wouldn't connect via VGA since they would want the best image possible (i.e. DVI/HDMI). You are very much in the minority anymore. The more time progresses, the less analog connections are going to be used making this issue less and less of a problem. In the end, no one will care....

And you may think Apple has the pull to tell the studies to go "f@#$ themselves" and not cave to HDCP, they don't. iTunes is such a small amount of part of their overall revenue stream they wouldn't care. What would they lose 1%, 5%? So they make once less crappy $200 million dollar movie a year, that's how much Apple means to them...
 
It is the proper implementation of HDCP and its designed to prevent exactly what you want to do. It has nothing to do with the quality of content once it reaches your monitor, it is supposed to protect the content from Source to Display - in this case, from stored on your hard drive to the monitor.

The fact that you have an analog display doesn't mean that you are excluded from the HDCP requirement to play the content. It is part of their system requirements to play HD content from iTunes. http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3209 . iTunes should have blocked you from purchasing the content on that machine, so unless you downloaded on another device (or had a HDCP monitor connected at the time) you should ask them for a refund.

Note you rented the same movie via Amazon in SD. You could have watched the SD version via iTunes also. You are upset with Apple, when you should be 'furious' with the content provider requiring this level of copy protection on the HD version. Do you really think Apple or anyone else can go back to the studio and say 'well, I think you should drop HDCP because someone could torrent the movie illegally for free'?

As another poster pointed out, most blu-ray players will not display full HD from their analog outputs. On Cable, DirecTV, Tivo, etc boxes you are right, they won't be pulling all their boxes that have component outputs, but they could be required to push a firmware update to prevent HD on outputs other than the HDMI. Don't think its not possible, several years ago this was done to prevent you from using analog and HDMI outputs at the same time.
 
TL;DR for this thread:

>>Guys my TV sucks
>>its apple's fault

I can't seem to get HDCP content to play on my Watchman FD210; both SONY and Apple suck for contracting with content providers.
 
They put their content on HBO and OnDemand, which goes over analog component with no problem.

For now. That is likely to end in the near future. Comcast is implementing HDCP encryption on a per program basis. HBO can transmit an HDCP flag from their end and block a program on analog.

Pay Per View will also behave similarly.
 
Really? How many people really care if their content has HDCP encryption or not? Most people aren't even watching movies on their VGA monitors anymore. Most people watch via their idevices or their AppleTV's anymore and those who are "advanced enough" to use an HTPC wouldn't connect via VGA since they would want the best image possible (i.e. DVI/HDMI). You are very much in the minority anymore. The more time progresses, the less analog connections are going to be used making this issue less and less of a problem. In the end, no one will care....

And you may think Apple has the pull to tell the studies to go "f@#$ themselves" and not cave to HDCP, they don't. iTunes is such a small amount of part of their overall revenue stream they wouldn't care. What would they lose 1%, 5%? So they make once less crappy $200 million dollar movie a year, that's how much Apple means to them...

It's my personal laptop, not an HTPC. I'm sorry I don't have every adapter and a matching 25' cable for my MBP. The VGA works well with anybody's laptop, and the analog audio allows us to split it and screw around with it as we like. I also have VGA adapters since that's what my school uses on all the screens around campus, so on the occasion I need to hook up to one, I'm all set. I can hook up to anything from my own 22" screen to a 46" one in the library, to a 20-30 foot one in some of the lecture halls.

Then Apple should have told the studios what to do, and if they refused, make it a public feud and tell everyone that the movie studios had a hissy fit, and wouldn't let them rent HD movies. It's not like Apple hasn't picked fights before.

It is the proper implementation of HDCP and its designed to prevent exactly what you want to do. It has nothing to do with the quality of content once it reaches your monitor, it is supposed to protect the content from Source to Display - in this case, from stored on your hard drive to the monitor.

The fact that you have an analog display doesn't mean that you are excluded from the HDCP requirement to play the content. It is part of their system requirements to play HD content from iTunes. http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3209 . iTunes should have blocked you from purchasing the content on that machine, so unless you downloaded on another device (or had a HDCP monitor connected at the time) you should ask them for a refund.

Note you rented the same movie via Amazon in SD. You could have watched the SD version via iTunes also. You are upset with Apple, when you should be 'furious' with the content provider requiring this level of copy protection on the HD version. Do you really think Apple or anyone else can go back to the studio and say 'well, I think you should drop HDCP because someone could torrent the movie illegally for free'?

As another poster pointed out, most blu-ray players will not display full HD from their analog outputs. On Cable, DirecTV, Tivo, etc boxes you are right, they won't be pulling all their boxes that have component outputs, but they could be required to push a firmware update to prevent HD on outputs other than the HDMI. Don't think its not possible, several years ago this was done to prevent you from using analog and HDMI outputs at the same time.

I did ask for a refund, and I got it. It probably didn't block it because it probably would have worked on the laptop's own screen, or the Dell 23" monitor that was plugged in two minutes before over DP. I didn't try them because I didn't want to watch it on those screens. HOWEVER, that doesn't change the fact that HDCP is only supposed to apply to DIGITAL connections, not analog ones, i.e. Comcast.

They should go to the label and talk some sense into them. If we had more time, I would have downloaded the 1080p mkv off of other sources. That would have given us a better experience than legally renting the movie. That's pretty ****ed up.

No one can force Comcast to do anything. Or DirecTV. Maybe a tiny little cable company can be bullied around, but the big guys aren't going to do that, as they don't want to deal with the support calls. It's cheaper for them to just let it be.

TL;DR for this thread:

>>Guys my TV sucks
>>its apple's fault

I can't seem to get HDCP content to play on my Watchman FD210; both SONY and Apple suck for contracting with content providers.

My TV doesn't suck. It has HDMI-HDCP. I have an XBOX 360 hooked up to HDMI (although that wouldn't be HDCP since it's games). I don't however own every single adapter and cable set for my MBP. There's no reason to own HDMI adapters when VGA does what I want it to do, and does it better than HDMI. I switched my main monitor over to DP because I was having issues with it on VGA (which turned out to be a bad VGA adapter). If I hadn't had that bad adapter, I would still be using VGA there too. Unless you go above 1900x1200, there's no reason to use a digital connection. I only use digital when there's a specific reason to, i.e. a second monitor off of a graphics card that has DVI and VGA ports.

For now. That is likely to end in the near future. Comcast is implementing HDCP encryption on a per program basis. HBO can transmit an HDCP flag from their end and block a program on analog.

Pay Per View will also behave similarly.

They would be morons to do so, as they would potentially lose a LOT of customers. There are a lot of boxes out there connected with component. I can't believe Comcast is allowing HDCP to block analog over their network, as it is going to increase their support calls, since people will wonder why Comcast broke their TV that worked fine before. Comcast is big enough to tell HBO or anyone else what to do. It's in Comcast's best interest to keep analog on as long as they can. I wouldn't subscribe to HBO anyways, but if we started getting programs blocked by them, that would be a quick end to that subscription.

Wow, it's like I clicked on a link and would up in 2005. Way to keep up, OP.

I'm sorry I don't buy new cables for all my stuff so that I can support some draconian DRM scheme that is not applied properly.

Lesson learned. Next time I should plan better and get the pirated mkv ahead of time, as the movie studios don't want me and my "antiquated" VGA-driven TV as a legitimate customer, and they have made that clear. I'm a tech nut, but I'm not that much of an elitist snob.
 
I'm sorry I don't buy new cables for all my stuff so that I can support some draconian DRM scheme that is not applied properly.

Lesson learned. Next time I should plan better and get the pirated mkv ahead of time, as the movie studios don't want me and my "antiquated" VGA-driven TV as a legitimate customer, and they have made that clear. I'm a tech nut, but I'm not that much of an elitist snob.

This discussion isn't about cables. It's about legislation that began in the mid 90s. I'm sorry you've received a shock about the analog sunset this week. But, how does a "tech nut" miss over a decade of news and whining about this?

We're all whined out, and have been since I don't know...2008?
 
I can't believe that this thread has gone on as long as it has. The entire reason I bought an HDMI set with Blu-Ray was the fear that everything over Analog would be either turned off or downgraded to 480p or 540p. This is nothing new. Then, shortly after Blu-ray was released I think they said they would give it till 2010 before they would start shutting off analog. Here it is 2 years later and they are just now starting to do it.
 
I'm sorry I don't buy new cables for all my stuff so that I can support some draconian DRM scheme that is not applied properly.

You seem to be confused. HDCP is supposed to be able to shut off analog outputs. You are unable to view HD content on your display because HDCP has shut off output to your VGA (analog) port. Therefore, the DRM scheme is applied properly and everything is working the way it should.

Yes, it sucks. Yes, there are probably better ways of doing this, but HDCP is properly implemented here and is "working as intended." Just because it leaves people without HDCP-compliant gear in the dark doesn't mean it's suddenly improperly implemented.
 
You seem to be confused. HDCP is supposed to be able to shut off analog outputs. You are unable to view HD content on your display because HDCP has shut off output to your VGA (analog) port. Therefore, the DRM scheme is applied properly and everything is working the way it should.

Yes, it sucks. Yes, there are probably better ways of doing this, but HDCP is properly implemented here and is "working as intended." Just because it leaves people without HDCP-compliant gear in the dark doesn't mean it's suddenly improperly implemented.

Just because there is a red button doesn't mean anyone should push it. The expectation that has been set over the past years, with the exception of Blu-Ray, which never really did analog in the first place, is that analog isn't affected. It is called High bandwidth DIGITAL Content Protection, not High bandwidth ANALOG Content Protection. This has been true for all major cable and satellite companies all along.

This discussion isn't about cables. It's about legislation that began in the mid 90s. I'm sorry you've received a shock about the analog sunset this week. But, how does a "tech nut" miss over a decade of news and whining about this?

We're all whined out, and have been since I don't know...2008?

It is about cables. Just because I choose to use one particular type of cable, I now can't get content? It's not the equipment in my case (the TV is HDMI-HDCP compliant) it's what cables I choose to use and have that they now discriminate against me. That's ridiculous.

I had no clue that I'd find HDCP on a COMPUTER where it DOESN'T BELONG. It's a horrible, atrocious technology that shouldn't exist in the first place, but it normally contains itself to TVs.

Well, it's doing a good job, working "as intended" to drive me away as a paying customer, and on to downloading mkv files, since the industry doesn't want me as a paying customer.
 
JIt is about cables. Just because I choose to use one particular type of cable, I now can't get content?

Don't like it? Too bad, it's not your choice. The movie companies make the calls, no one else. Go complain to them. I highly suggest you start investing in some good VCR's because VHS is going to be the only way you'll get content shortly.

Sometimes you just have to take the good with the bad. Deal.

----------

I had no clue that I'd find HDCP on a COMPUTER where it DOESN'T BELONG. It's a horrible, atrocious technology that shouldn't exist in the first place, but it normally contains itself to TVs.

Well, it's doing a good job, working "as intended" to drive me away as a paying customer, and on to downloading mkv files, since the industry doesn't want me as a paying customer.

Of course, that is YOUR opinion and your justification.
 
Don't like it? Too bad, it's not your choice. The movie companies make the calls, no one else. Go complain to them. I highly suggest you start investing in some good VCR's because VHS is going to be the only way you'll get content shortly.

Well, then I guess I'll have to make the choice to go download 1080p mkv files of of bittorrent. Those will work with my "antiquated" (Vizio Razer LED 1080p) TV through VGA.
 
Ok, I'll bite. Why do you even care about HD content? You have a 22" monitor. I doubt you can tell the difference between SD and HD on that screen. Just use the SD version. You wouldn't be able to tell on your laptop monitor either.
 
Ok, I'll bite. Why do you even care about HD content? You have a 22" monitor. I doubt you can tell the difference between SD and HD on that screen. Just use the SD version. You wouldn't be able to tell on your laptop monitor either.

It looks a little better. Admittedly, the WOW factor that's there on a 55" set isn't there on the 22, and digital 480p is solid.

I can tell on the laptop monitor, since I am closer to it.
 
Just because I choose to use one particular type of cable, I now can't get content?

If your original post had been only this question, there would be 39 posts after it from all the "elitists" who have the right cables that simply said:

"Yes." :rolleyes:
 
So, why not just buy the HDMI adaptor and cable and be done with this whole mess? Seriously, neither the adaptor or a decent length cable are that expensive, as both can be had for $20 thanks to monoprice.com.

Also, I actually partially agree with the OP about HDCP implementation on computers, or at least in respect to services like iTunes. Since iTunes requires authorization to play content on the computer anyway, it seems to redundant to add that second level of authorization in the form of hardware compatibility. It sucks especially if you're someone who has and uses a perfectly functional VGA monitor and can't afford to shell out the $100+ just to get an HDCP compliant monitor/TV.
 
So, why not just buy the HDMI adaptor and cable and be done with this whole mess? Seriously, neither the adaptor or a decent length cable are that expensive, as both can be had for $20 thanks to monoprice.com.

Also, I actually partially agree with the OP about HDCP implementation on computers, or at least in respect to services like iTunes. Since iTunes requires authorization to play content on the computer anyway, it seems to redundant to add that second level of authorization in the form of hardware compatibility. It sucks especially if you're someone who has and uses a perfectly functional VGA monitor and can't afford to shell out the $100+ just to get an HDCP compliant monitor/TV.

Because I don't want yet ANOTHER set of cables that do the same freaking thing just because a bunch of idiots in Hollywood are abusing and already draconian DRM scheme.

Exactly. Apple's DRM is on the file already. They are trying to stop re-capture, but it's totally pointless to bother, since the DRM on the Blu-Ray discs has been cracked anyways.
 
when there is no valid technical reason to use anything other than VGA for displays at 1080p.

The short of it is that iTunes shouldn't have ANY HDCP in it AT ALL. It's on a COMPUTER, not on a cable box or something.

First off, there's a huge reason not to use VGA: VGA is crap quality. Even displaying a black screen using VGA you can see so much noise introduced by the fact that you're doing a digital-to analog conversion in your computer, then an analog-to-digital conversion inside the television (since only CRTs actually use an analog signal). Do yourself a favor and go buy a cable: http://www.amazon.com/Mini-DisplayPort-HDMI-Adapter-Cable/dp/B003OC6LWM

That costs $8 and it would solve your problem forever. Plus since it's digital your Mac would automatically be able to choose the native resolution for the display, guaranteeing it's not going to be distorted.

Notice how you had to rent in SD from Amazon? In order to be granted the rights to HD by the studio, Amazon would have to do the same thing. You're railing at the wrong people here. Talk to the studios.

Finally, HDCP stands for High-Definition Content Protection. Not "Digital Content Protection But Not On Computers." It is designed to prevent you from getting a high-definition signal out of the protected system (including computers) by any means, not only by digital. Having all your devices support it is a good thing, due to the fact that not having it excludes you (as you've found, sort of, because you don't want to buy the right cable), and if Apple's computers didn't support it, it would be a loss for consumers because they couldn't (legally) get HD movies from most studios.

Is HDCP stupid? Of course, but not for the reason you think. It's stupid because pirates just crack the encryption on Blu-Rays and extract the full quality audio, or get a device to strip the HDCP. Only consumers lose. But if you think Apple is pushing HDCP for some stupid reason, you're stupid. The studios created it, and the studios require it. End of story.

If you want things to work well, either buy the $8 cable (I have one like that and LOVE it, because I don't have to use a stupid dongle adapter now), OR, pirate the damn movie DRM-free in 720p or 1080p and enjoy it!

----------

Because I don't want yet ANOTHER set of cables that do the same freaking thing just because a bunch of idiots in Hollywood are abusing and already draconian DRM scheme.

Oh, quit being such a curmudgeon. HDMI doesn't "do the same thing" as VGA any more than an Apple Magic Mouse "does the same thing" as a 3-button Logitech with a ball, made in 1990. VGA is a dinosaur, and if you are a tech enthusiast enough to use a modern Mac and use MacRumors, you should be ashamed to have a VGA cable in your house. Seriously. Digital IS better. It's NOT expensive, and it DOES give you other benefits besides this one.

Exactly. Apple's DRM is on the file already.

You don't understand why HDCP was invented. HDCP is the extension of DRM when the file is being played. Without HDCP, DRM on the file would be [slightly more] pointless because it would be pretty trivial (ESPECIALLY on a computer, I don't know why you think computers should be exempt) to capture the bit-for-bit stream after decryption. It would be like a cop arriving in a bullet-proof SWAT vehicle, when he gets out to go inside, wearing no vest or armor. You need both or else just one is pointless.
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Is HDCP stupid? Of course, but not for the reason you think. It's stupid because You don't understand why HDCP was invented. HDCP is the extension of DRM when the file is being played. Without HDCP, DRM on the file would be [slightly more] pointless because it would be pretty trivial (ESPECIALLY on a computer, I don't know why you think computers should be exempt) to capture the bit-for-bit stream after decryption. It would be like a cop arriving in a bullet-proof SWAT vehicle, when he gets out to go inside, wearing no vest or armor. You need both or else just one is pointless.

Well, it's not totally trivial. A movie would be 1920 x 1080 pixels, 16 bit per pixel, 60 frames per second, that's about 248 MB per second. I don't have the equipment to capture that, and most people don't. But yes, for a professional pirate it wouldn't be a big problem.

On the other hand, that encrypted signal goes into your LCD screen and is decoded there, so I'm not sure how difficult it would be for a professional pirate to grab the contents after the decoder in the monitor.
 
Actually, in reality, they would sell MORE, since the pirated HD copies are out there anyways, all HDCP does is annoy the heck out of actual consumers, or people who try to be actual consumers but then give up and pirate.

Oh, that and Netflix streams HD in the browser window over analog.



They put their content on HBO and OnDemand, which goes over analog component with no problem. So Apple's implementation is far more draconian than what other content providers (i.e. Comcast) are doing.

Good, I'll just go and pirate it, because the movie studios clearly don't want me and my analog monitor as a customer.



I think they should have held out and then publicly slammed the movie studios for not letting them rent content without HDCP.

Lol, wow. I don't even know what to say.

You are saying that If movies are readily available to download and share easily, people would rather buy the movie?
 
First off, there's a huge reason not to use VGA: VGA is crap quality. Even displaying a black screen using VGA you can see so much noise introduced by the fact that you're doing a digital-to analog conversion in your computer, then an analog-to-digital conversion inside the television (since only CRTs actually use an analog signal). Do yourself a favor and go buy a cable: http://www.amazon.com/Mini-DisplayPort-HDMI-Adapter-Cable/dp/B003OC6LWM

I don't know what crap VGA cables you use, but except for two thin cable from Monoprice that almost didn't work at all, all my VGA monitors look the same as if they were driven digitally. In troubleshooting a flaky connection, I moved my 23" 1080p Dell Ultrasharp from VGA to DP. The difference? ZIP. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA. NOTHING. It looks EXACTLY the same. The only benefit was eliminating a bulky adapter for a sleek cable.

That costs $8 and it would solve your problem forever. Plus since it's digital your Mac would automatically be able to choose the native resolution for the display, guaranteeing it's not going to be distorted.

I'm not an idiot. I know what the resolution is, and what resolution I want (usually native, sometimes I send 1024x768 to a 1080p displayed if I'm playing back SD content that won't stretch on the computer).

Notice how you had to rent in SD from Amazon? In order to be granted the rights to HD by the studio, Amazon would have to do the same thing. You're railing at the wrong people here. Talk to the studios.

As much as I think Amazon should stand up to the BS, at least they implemented it in a way so that you don't rent a movie, and THEN find out it won't play on your hardware.

Finally, HDCP stands for High-Definition Content Protection. Not "Digital Content Protection But Not On Computers." It is designed to prevent you from getting a high-definition signal out of the protected system (including computers) by any means, not only by digital. Having all your devices support it is a good thing, due to the fact that not having it excludes you (as you've found, sort of, because you don't want to buy the right cable), and if Apple's computers didn't support it, it would be a loss for consumers because they couldn't (legally) get HD movies from most studios.

First of all, learn what HDCP is. It's High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection. Apple shouldn't enable it in their OS. That would have the good side-effect of driving more people to torrent the moves instead until the movie studios got their act together.

Is HDCP stupid? Of course, but not for the reason you think. It's stupid because pirates just crack the encryption on Blu-Rays and extract the full quality audio, or get a device to strip the HDCP. Only consumers lose. But if you think Apple is pushing HDCP for some stupid reason, you're stupid. The studios created it, and the studios require it. End of story.

That's the case with most DRM. Kindle and App Store DRM is good because it would be so easy to copy books and apps, since they are small, and they are relatively new market places that need some controls. They are also good because the normal user will NEVER even know that they are there. Unlike HDCP, which when implemented in a boneheadedly ass-backwards way, is 100% intrusive to the point where it completely broke what it was trying to protect.

If you want things to work well, either buy the $8 cable (I have one like that and LOVE it, because I don't have to use a stupid dongle adapter now), OR, pirate the damn movie DRM-free in 720p or 1080p and enjoy it!


I will pirate it and enjoy it, without encumbering DRM. Too bad they don't want me as a legitimate customer.

Oh, quit being such a curmudgeon. HDMI doesn't "do the same thing" as VGA any more than an Apple Magic Mouse "does the same thing" as a 3-button Logitech with a ball, made in 1990. VGA is a dinosaur, and if you are a tech enthusiast enough to use a modern Mac and use MacRumors, you should be ashamed to have a VGA cable in your house. Seriously. Digital IS better. It's NOT expensive, and it DOES give you other benefits besides this one.

Actually the Logitech mouse would work better than Apple's POS peripherals. You see, I'm not a fanboy. I love my Macbook and my iPhone, but I buy whatever works. I'm typing on a Microsoft keyboard, looking at a Dell monitor, and clicking with a Logitech Mouse. The amazing part about open standards is that they all work together. If they didn't, I probably wouldn't have a Mac, as I'd have to deal with Apple's POS peripherals.

There is no valid technical reason to use digital. I use VGA by default, if I have a time when DVI or something else is more convenient, then I use that, but I recognize that good analog connectivity is just as good as digital. VGA is a common connection that every monitor and TV has, and works with. Component on the TV side works better with the resolution changes, so we use that.

You don't understand why HDCP was invented. HDCP is the extension of DRM when the file is being played. Without HDCP, DRM on the file would be [slightly more] pointless because it would be pretty trivial (ESPECIALLY on a computer, I don't know why you think computers should be exempt) to capture the bit-for-bit stream after decryption. It would be like a cop arriving in a bullet-proof SWAT vehicle, when he gets out to go inside, wearing no vest or armor. You need both or else just one is pointless.

Files are still protected to the point that they are decompressed. And really, at that point, who cares? Joe Average has no clue how to captured decompressed HD video from their computer. He could try to move the actual file, but Voila! it doesn't work because it has some basic, easily-crackable DRM on it. Job done.

HDCP really should just be disabled on everything, as it's utterly pointless, and in fact, counterproductive, but it was invented for the digital outputs of Blu-Ray and HDTV boxes on TV's, not for computers. It was later shoehorned into computers, unfortunately. Of course, it is completely pointless, as Blu-Ray is cracked and it's trivial to strip DRM from a .DVR-MS file on an MCE PC. Hence, HDCP should be shut down and laid out to pasture as a failed experiment in DRM, as should all DRM on music and movies that you own (including download). It makes sense on Kindle books, App Store apps, and the like.

Well, it's not totally trivial. A movie would be 1920 x 1080 pixels, 16 bit per pixel, 60 frames per second, that's about 248 MB per second. I don't have the equipment to capture that, and most people don't. But yes, for a professional pirate it wouldn't be a big problem.

On the other hand, that encrypted signal goes into your LCD screen and is decoded there, so I'm not sure how difficult it would be for a professional pirate to grab the contents after the decoder in the monitor.

That second option is hilariously genius, but they don't need to bother with either. There's also an HDMI-HDCP to component converter out there that completely makes shutting off analog pointless. They just rip the Blu-Ray, and that's the whole point, they just rip Blu-Rays anyways, so why bother with DRM in the first place?

Lol, wow. I don't even know what to say.

You are saying that If movies are readily available to download and share easily, people would rather buy the movie?

You clearly don't get it. Let me spell it out for you; They already are easily available on bittorrent and elsewhere. HDCP or not is not going to change that. What HDCP does do, is drive away legitimate customers like me who would otherwise rent the HD movie. That's true of most DRM (original iTunes music, pretty much all movies), unless it is completely seamless (Amazon Kindle, iPhone apps).
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
First of all, there is tons of HD content without HDCP. HD content doesn't necessarily mean HDCP. Apple could have not used HDCP at all on HD content.

As others stated this is incorrect. Apple has zero say in HDCP. The content providers require it on certain things, if not iTunes doesn't get to host said content.

Although I personally don't agree with HDCP (as its punishing legit users), I understand its purpose and can't blame studios for wanting to implement something to protect their content.
 
As others stated this is incorrect. Apple has zero say in HDCP. The content providers require it on certain things, if not iTunes doesn't get to host said content.

Although I personally don't agree with HDCP (as its punishing legit users), I understand its purpose and can't blame studios for wanting to implement something to protect their content.

Then Apple should have stood up and called them on their BS.
 
Then Apple should have stood up and called them on their BS.

I have no doubt that they tried, but Apple can't always win.If they want to host movies and TV shows they have to play by the content providers rules.

If I were a content provider and was approached to sell my content digitally with no way of protecting it from piracy I'd tell Apple no too.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.