At EFF, we've been attending the meetings of the Analog Reconversion Discussion Group (ARDG, or "Arghhhhhh!"), the MPAA's inter-industry group that's trying to "plug the analog hole" (that is, make it impossible to digitize an entertainment program without the rights-holder's permission). The group is yet another secretive consortium where representatives of major corporations meet, excluding the press, not publishing proceedings, and deal away fair use rights.
But now it's not clear what, exactly, the group intends to do. My cow-orker Fred von Lohmann attended the most recent ARDG meeting in DC and he describes the "analysis matrix" the group is producing, a mysteriously useless-seeming document that the IT, CE and film companies are devoting all this effort to.
The "analysis matrix" consists of several dozen questions regarding the technical capabilities of available "rights signaling" technologies. Once the "matrix" of questions is completed and embraced by ARDG, technology vendors will be invited to respond to the questions, thus vetting their own "rights signaling schemes." The outcome will look like those big product review charts in computer magazines, comparing products by various performance criteria.
Interestingly, the major industry groups at ARDG appear to agree that this collection of self-reported information will constitute the final ARDG product. At least that's what I thought I heard Brad Hunt (MPAA), Jim Burger (Computer Industry Group) and Seth Greenstein (5C Companies) agree to in the meeting. No consensus recommendation of any particular technology, no probing evaluation by the ARDG of any of the technology claims made by vendors.
Just a stapled together collection of vendor-provided marketing hype about the characteristics of various watermarking schemes. Doesn't seem like much, does it? It remains unclear to me who this ARDG final report will be sent to, or for what purpose.
