ie8 fix

Forget the tethering police, the rooting police are here, led by Google

By | May 23, 2011, 5:36am PDT

Summary: Disturbing news cropped up that Google is looking for rooters and denying them full use of rooted Android devices. Content providers may push Google into full-blown DRM hysteria aimed at rooted Android devices.

One of the big draws attracting millions to the Android platform is the air of openness that Google has baked into the OS. Millions of Android device owners have rooted their devices, the first step to customization beyond mere widgets and apps for personalization of the UI. While rooting an Android device is required to install custom ROMs, most owners do it for other reasons, specifically enabling the Wi-Fi tethering built into the Android platform by Google. I’ve warned you that the tethering police, aka wireless carriers, are coming and looking for you. Now we find the more disturbing news that Google is looking for rooters and denying them full use of rooted Android devices. I fear that content providers are going to push Google into full-blown DRM hysteria aimed at rooted Android devices.

Google recently added movie rentals to the Android Market, which was quickly followed by the proof that it was denying the service to rooted devices. The reasoning behind the bizarre move was that rooted devices make it possible to do things that might bypass the content DRM, so all rooted devices get an error message when attempting to rent a movie from Google. It’s disturbing enough that content providers are able to push the DRM agenda down to the handset level, and especially so that Google itself has fallen victim to the fear.

This shutdown of service for rooted phones by Google is the most dramatic clamp-down on rooted phones, but it’s not the first. Netflix released an Android app for renting and playing movies on devices but with a huge caveat. The company only released the app for a handful of Android devices, citing the excuse that it had to verify the playback (read: DRM) handling of each and every device on the market before allowing the app on them. Yes, that’s right, Netflix must prove that each device running Android respects its DRM system before it allows the app to be installed. Given this level of DRM paranoia, how long will it be before Netflix follows Google’s own lead and denies the app and service for rooted Android devices?

So far only video streaming has drawn the attention of the rooting police, but knowing content providers I don’t think they will be alone. Google already has a tenuous position with music providers, as demonstrated with its inability to negotiate a deal for selling music in its own Google Music beta service recently launched. We know how paranoid music providers are about all things digital, and once they see the video producers are concerned about rooted Android phones how long before they force Google to take action for music?

Google has already caved to the video folks, don’t believe they are immune from intervention from the music folks too. Once you open the door it’s hard to close it.

Image credit: Flickr user Sougent Harrop

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

James Kendrick has been using mobile devices since they weighed 30 pounds, and has been sharing his insights on mobile technology for almost that long.

Disclosure

James Kendrick

James Kendrick has no affiliations or relationships that need to be disclosed.

Biography

James Kendrick

James Kendrick has been using mobile devices since they weighed 30 pounds, and has been sharing his insights on mobile technology for almost that long. Prior to joining ZDNet, James was the Founding Editor of jkOnTheRun, a CNET Top 100 Tech Blog that was acquired by GigaOM in 2008 and is now part of that prestigious tech network. James' writing has appeared in many print publications: Smartphone and Pocket PC Magazine, Information Week and Laptop Magazine to name a few. James' coverage of the mobile technology sector has regularly appeared in the New York Times, Salon.com and CNN/ Fortune online. Not just a writer, James has filmed numerous video reviews and how-tos that have garnered well over a million viewers. He has appeared on local news segments and been interviewed by the Associated Press on mobile technology topics. Additionally, James has been podcasting about mobile technology for years.

158
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

How would you handle the situation?
cidu 2nd Jun
What solution do you propose for providing content whose license forbids its playback on non-drm respecting devices? Just don't offer it to anybody? Its not like google can just go to holly wood and say "Come on guys' and the MAFIAA will suddenly say .. ohh, i guess we can totally reverse our anti-consumer position of the past decade and just let ya write your own terms... have fun with our movies? We trust you?? anyways, as long as its more inconvenient to get movies legitimately, people will find better ways that aren't annoying.... wow, i feel like im on the wrong side of this somehow...
0 Votes
+ -
Amazon has taken a better approach with Cloud Drive
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~-~ Your Linux Advocate Updated - 23rd May 2011
They (Google) should distance themselves by making the end-user responsible for his/her own actions.

Instead they will have to administer to an extra layer of security and enforcement thereof. Very costly.
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~-~ Your Linux Advocate

But Google can't do that if they want to compete in this space, if Google stands by while Apple offers these services then it becomes a differentiator.
0 Votes
+ -
Amazon has and are off to a very good start with their own
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~-~ Your Linux Advocate 23rd May 2011
@the.nameless.drifter

Market Place and Cloud Drive.

They have no proprietary lock on what they are doing, only they have a head start with excess infrastructure to do so.

Others will follow suit. Very clever and innovative. Hats off to Amazon.
0 Votes
+ -
Message has been deleted.
dustypotato Updated - 23rd May 2011
  • Flagged
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~-~ Your Linux Fanboy

I believe what he was saying was differentiator between Apple and Google, not iOS and Android overall and he is correct.
@Dietrich T. Schmitz
Makes even more sense now if you want Android, to go with the Nexus S Google Phone? No rooting required. Here's a review:
http://trial-technology.blogspot.com/2011/05/samsung-nexus-s-blackberry-replacement.html
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~-~ Your Linux Advocate Indeed but like other companies (Apple) Google has decided to become a moral compass of sort. Unfortunately the end result is going to be as much if not more of a closed garden with Android than iOS...

Thus far I will give Apple some props for not denying use of the iTunes Store (App, Music, and Movies) to those who jailbreak their iDevices even though they are partially denying use of the iBooks app (with the books, PDFs work fine) with jailbroken iDevices... and there are other book apps so that's not a real issue anyhow, even less for me since I have a NookColor (dual booting the stock NookColor OS and Froyo via an SD card using the cyanogen mod).
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~-~ Your Linux Advocate Well the truth is that they don't really have to do that. People are not trying to rip off low quality videos off of handsets. There are way better avenues to get real video from. Content providers cannot afford to not have their content on Android as it is too big. And Google can offer their own services and take over more of the mobile space. I think content providers are too anal about their DRM in places where DRM is not that much of a concern .
@Jimster480
You need to remember that on wifi they stream "HD" and many devices have HDMI out on them to watch these HD videos on their big screens.
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~-~ Your Linux Advocate Unfortunately the law would allow Google to be sued for providing the means to circumvent the DRM.
0 Votes
+ -
So much for Open
John Zern Updated - 23rd May 2011
for all their talk it's only as open as Google wants it to be, which isn't much.

@John Zern

ish. Openish. Google is only as open as necessary to deliver its product (people who use Google mail and Google Apps and Android phones) to its customers (Advertisers). When there is a conflict or a threat to its ability to deliver, Google will always side on its customers (advertisers) over its products (people who use Google mail).
@John Zern Bait and switch my friend.
0 Votes
+ -
The bait was for phone manufacturers
CFWhitman 23rd May 2011
@jeremychappell
The bait was for phone manufacturers, and they still seem to be getting what they want, so I don't see the switch.

Any user that wanted an open handset needed to buy one that actually was, which only includes a couple of Android phones. Android itself is still open (unless you are talking about Android 3 so far).

Who cares about DRM'ed content anyway? If I buy something, then I want to be able to use it on whatever device I feel like using it on. That means no DRM. If content is constrained by any DRM that I cannot easily circumvent, I'm not interested in having the content. That doesn't mean I download everything for free off the Internet. I own a lot of CDs, and quite a few DVDs, but I can rip them to a format for whatever device I have or might buy in the future. I want to use that freedom that fair use says I have.
@John Zern
This has no bearing on how open Android is; it only shows how open Google's Marketplace is. There is no requirement to use Google's Marketplace with an Android device.

As far as Android goes, providers that give you an Android that you have to "root" have already made that version of Android much less open than this requirement by content providers does.
@John Zern: I imagine this was a requirement of the agreement Google signed with the movie studios. Ultimately they hold the cards. They own the movies.
Are rooted users going to care?

They tend to be more technically minded, so know how to get movies on to Android in other ways.
0 Votes
+ -
exactly.
Shinsengumi 23rd May 2011
@bradavon
and this is the point. A rooted user won't care if they can't rent DRM protected content. They're most likely downloading everything onto their device themselves. The key thing here is being able to offer content from content providers. I work in the middle of one of the largest global content juggernauts, and the business stakeholders don't understand DRM nor care. They just need boxes checked, and they're arrogant, blinkered, and short-sighted in doing so. The funny thing is one of our content portal partners spent millions implementing lockstream DRM into their offerings, only for us to reject it at the pointy end of the project when it was demoed on their phone, and the due to the presence of a pop-up prompt asking the user for permission to install a certificate, the whole DRM implementation was no longer a 'core requirement' to launching our content on their platform. Everyone was so pissed off you could boil an egg on their heads - we'd been saying this all along, but the fried-out coke-fiend product manager, she was stuck on an infinite feedback loop of her own fried-out-ness, and was too strung out to listen to anyone.

If Google wants to offer content, then I bet they're dealing with Product Managers and Business Stakeholders just like this woman I mention above. Irrational, strung-out, generally alcoholics banging antidepressants and coke, completely paranoid head cases. These are the sort of people who you'll find all through 'Big Content'.

Sure, Google has the choice to walk away and keep their platform open. But this will explode all the paranoia inherent in these Big Content juggernauts, and will torpedo all the hard work they've gone to so far in getting contracts signed. Or, Google can give in to some of their draconian demands in the 'courtship' phase, and once the contracts are signed and money flows, 'Big Content' don't really care. The deal's done. The cashflow is rolling. And Google can then use their proven revenue stream + existing Big Content partnership to reassure other Big Content providers to jump on board, and then the power dynamic changes. Big Content now runs the risk of -losing- Google as a revenue stream, and the Content Providers will be fighting to keep Google as a client.

See? This is why Google has to suck a bit of @#$% in the beginning. Just like our Telco partner, when it finally came to the crunch, the DRM solution we'd insisted so fervently on was binned and we offered the content without all the DRM we initially 'had to' launch with.

I don't think you tech guys properly understand the kind of fried-out illogical and irrational fear & greed that rules Big Content providers. If you did, you'd understand why Google is doing whatever it can in the courtship phase to get the ink on the paper and then things become a lot more flexible.
Sounds like you can still root away if you dont care to access this content. Surely you're not suggesting that all android device owners get unrestricted access to all content from all sources are you?
0 Votes
+ -
Why not?
Pete "athynz" Athens 23rd May 2011
@Johnny Vegas I have a jailbroken iPhone and I'm able to get content from Apple's iTunes Store with it as well as stream Netflix... Why should Android devices be limited in that fashion? I also have a NookColor that runs Froyo - why should I not be able to access the same content as someone running a stock Galaxy Tab or Motorola Xoom?
@Johnny Vegas No, which is why I didn't say that. I do believe folks should be aware that the benefits of rooting devices is getting narrower.
It's like parents taking their young kids to the candy store and then telling them now you have to pay for candies yourselves kids! Google is now shunning their user-base who's used to rooting and hacking to getting things for free. Your type is not allowed to play with our brand new movie streaming service, kids.

If Google wants to get into the content game then they will find themselves having to choose between satisfying their core base and satisfying content providers. Maybe they should have just steered clear of content and just left it to third party instead.
0 Votes
+ -
Message has been deleted.
Robert Hahn Updated - 23rd May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
Meh
rshol 23rd May 2011
It'll be fixed in a week. A patch will come out will make the rooted phones look like they are virgin pure. DRM exists to be broken. No scheme has survived longer than a week.
@rshol This is so true. With root privileges you can replace the scripts and binaries and/or patch the kernel to report it's NOT rooted. :3
This is funny. I can play Netflix on my rooted Nook Color but not on my stock HTC Inspire. What do the content providers think we are going to do? Record the movie on our phones? We have Netflix so we do not need to copy the movie. However, if we can't get the movies on the devices we want, some of us might resort to illegal means to get what we want, where we want. If the content providers want to reduce illegal copying they would allow Netflix on MORE devices, not less.
@BoloMKXXVIII Netflix has certain obligations based on their contracts with distributors. They don't follow the rules, they get no movies. Plus a hefty lawsuit.
Record to you phone? Maybe not, but perhaps through your phone to a removable sd card. And I agree that content providers are not being rational about this.
@BoloMKXXVIII

well said.
my tablet has hdmi output.
does that mean that i will pirate movies just because i can?
no.
get a grip MPAA, RIAA, etc.

happy
.
@BoloMKXXVIII. EXACTLY! The more the media police try to crack down on people who are trying to follow the rules - but still have freedom of choice, the more we are forced to follow the path of blatant copyright violation. It's about convenience and flexibility - if they can't offer that, then they have no right to complain. My favorite example is the digital copies of movies provided "free" with a DVD. You bought it but can only watch it on one device - and then the license EXPIRES after a few months! I think after I pay via credit card, my payment should expire before they can cash in on it...!

Stop fighting this crowd and work with them instead of against them - you'll come out ahead in the end!
0 Votes
+ -
Digital copies do not expire
oncall 23rd May 2011
@dhuhtala@...

Once they are downloaded. I have been buying them since they were first offered, not one single expiration. However, the ability to download the digital copy is a "limited time" offer, typically a year. But what's the complaint? Typically they thrown the digital copy in anyway for next to nothing. I guess it helps with their marketing, kinda like a built-in product registration.
@dhuhtala@... So let me get this straight, you believe that if the owners of the content do not make it convenient for you they have no right to complain when you blatantly violate the copyright, in other words steal the content?
@BoloMKXXVIII
I've been wondering whether I could play Netflix on a rooted Nook Color. Can you tell me what instructions/web site you used to root your NC? I'm a novice, but I think I should be able to accomplish the rooting...
@srittenhouse Do you want it to be rooted or be able to run Froyo or Gingerbread from an SDCard and still have the stock Nook Color OS? I mentioned above I'm running Froyo using the Cyanogen Mod 7 on an SDCard but I can still boot using the stock OS if I need to. The process for getting Cyanogen on an SDCard is pretty easy and you can use any size from a 2GB to a 32GB card.

Hope This helps: http://www.addictivetips.com/mobile/install-cyanogenmod-7-android-2-3-gingerbread-rom-on-nook-color/
@athynz Cyanogen Mod 7 for Nook is Gingerbread, isn't it? Not Froyo. CM7 is Android version 2.3.3 or 2.3.4. Froyo is version 2.2.
@BoloMKXXVIII and everyone else!

Content providers act rationally? PURLEASE? these are the same people that recently filed a lawsuit for more money than there has ever been.

The same people who should have spotted the digital media long before everyone else who didnt and dropped the ball and as such are now running round trying to shut stable doors after the horse not only bolted but settled down and had a family then ended at the glue factory.
"While rooting an Android device is required to install custom ROMs, most owners do it for other reasons, specifically enabling the Wi-Fi tethering built into the Android platform by Google."

Actually, I'd be willing to bet that most "rooters" do so to remove the unistallable crapware put on their phone by the carrier, rather than to merely enable free tethering.
0 Votes
+ -
I rooted my to remove
Broggy69 23rd May 2011
@NetAdmin1178 the crappy Sprint Apps they was taking up my space. I do not need the Nascar, Stocks, NFL, Sprint TV, Sprint Music, Sprint Navigation, or Sprint whatever. Removing the unwanted apps freed up a lot of Space. So if an update comes that makes my phone unrooted so be it, I did what I wanted, what Sprint should have allowed in the beginning. It is no difference then removing the unwanted programs on a computer.
@Broggy69

"It is no difference then removing the unwanted programs on a computer."

Yes shouldn't be no difference but there is. You are not penalized for removing unwanted programs on a computer. Now you're penalized by both the carriers and Google for rooting your device and removing crapware.
@NetAdmin1178

I have to agree. I'm rooted on my DroidX, my OG Droid (now my wife's phone), and my Xoom. Not using tethering, but have gotten rid of the bloat and tweaked things to my liking. Not all rooters are doing it for tethering. If you check with much of the rooting community, you'll find the same. But, that wouldn't make as nice of a 'haxorz' story, would it?
0 Votes
+ -
@javelin682 nt
@javelin682 Exactly. Mine and my wife's phones are both rooted. Her Eris runs KaosFroyo rom and mine is currently running Liquid Gingerbread (far better than Cyanogen 7 lately). If Google wants to lock us out of the "privilege" of buying overpriced bad Hollywood movies, I could care less. Control of the devices I own and the comfort and freedom of knowing what is ON them at all times is FAR more important to me than kissing MPAA/RIAA/Google(?) behinds.
@NetAdmin1178

I'm inclined to agree, while there will always be a subset of folks who want "free" movies, I don't want the crapware that comes pre-installed thanks to my provider - if we could simply get rid of the junk there would be a lot less of an incentive to root...
@NetAdmin1178

Exactly my experience. Some people do that, but most of the people I know who have done it do so to have a clean and standard android build. Plus, if you are a samsung user, it may be the only way to get an upgrade.
@NetAdmin1178
... and as a Linux user, I want and I am used to root access! Barring that is much worse than forcing me to Windows happy
@woiski@... here here.. I have a rooted phone ... I would never use tethering (Australian data plans are terrible)... However I do get the ability to underclock the CPU on my HTC Desire and get better battery life.. run Gingerbread and get better battery life .. and some apps simply run better...

The original reason though was to put an ext3 partition on the SD card and give myself more space for apps.. (The desire has a terribly low amount)..

of course as a linux user I like being able to ssh into my phone as root and make minor mods... but I'll admit that puts me in a minority.. but more control over the phone is a big thing..

The irony of it is I pay for my downloaded music (although I only buy from DRM free stores) and would be happy to pay for movies that are DRM free (but I doubt I would watch them on my phone)..
0 Votes
+ -
@NetAdmin1178
....there were a phone supplier who would stand up for users and not allow carriers to put all that crapware on their phone. Then you wouldn't have to root.
Oh, wait..........
0 Votes
+ -
Talking about the Nexus phones?
CFWhitman 23rd May 2011
@Userama
@NetAdmin1178 That is certainly true too. Clean phones are a very good thing.
I can watch any movie I rent from Amazon (via flash).

Netflix and other content providers need to realize that DRM is stupid and only hurts business.
0 Votes
+ -
What solution do you propose for providing content whose license forbids its playback on non-drm respecting devices? Just don't offer it to anybody? Its not like google can just go to holly wood and say "Come on guys' and the MAFIAA will suddenly say .. ohh, i guess we can totally reverse our anti-consumer position of the past decade and just let ya write your own terms... have fun with our movies? We trust you?? anyways, as long as its more inconvenient to get movies legitimately, people will find better ways that aren't annoying.... wow, i feel like im on the wrong side of this somehow...

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix