> I'm not sure what your expectation that "HDMI LA to be very very strict in enforcing actions against HDCP strippers" means in this context.
It used to be the case that HDMI LA would act very swiftly on any keybox leaks and revoke the certificates, as well as pursuing legal actions against sellers of HDCP strippers. These devices were sold by fly-by-night eBay and darknet sellers, not right on the storefront of Amazon.
> Indeed, your second paragraph seems to be an expression of consternation that manufacturers would go through the trouble of implementing HDCP given how easily it can be circumvented.
Manufacturers do because HDCP is a requirement to even be allowed to use the HDMI trademark, in contrast to DisplayPort. I was referring to HDMI LA and the goons of the movie rightsholder industry that insist on continuing this pointless arms race.
It used to be the case that HDMI LA would act very swiftly on any keybox leaks and revoke the certificates, as well as pursuing legal actions against sellers of HDCP strippers. These devices were sold by fly-by-night eBay and darknet sellers, not right on the storefront of Amazon.
> Indeed, your second paragraph seems to be an expression of consternation that manufacturers would go through the trouble of implementing HDCP given how easily it can be circumvented.
Manufacturers do because HDCP is a requirement to even be allowed to use the HDMI trademark, in contrast to DisplayPort. I was referring to HDMI LA and the goons of the movie rightsholder industry that insist on continuing this pointless arms race.