How to protect your video content

Sometimes it is necessary to protect video content against unauthorized redistribution. Here's an overview of the main ways of doing this.

Visible Watermarking

This involves placing text or a logo over the video to show the name of the company owning the content.

Pros

• Simple and free
• Doesn't require specialist software to create or view
• Its obvious visibility provides a deterrent
• Difficult to remove if placed in an area that cannot be cropped out

Cons

• Disrupts the movie
• Does not provide any physical protection mechanisms
• No feasible way to tie a movie to a particular person
• May increase movie encoding times

Invisible Watermarking

Some companies offer invisible watermarking by tagging content with a fingerprint. One such example would be Digimarc Guardian.

You would tag the movie and give it to the end user, then if it appears on a file-sharing website you can download it and read the tag to find out which user shared it.

Pros

• Quick to apply to an existing movie without re-encoding
• Can be tied to a specific user
• Does not disrupt the movie

Cons

• Requires specialist software to create and view
• Does not provide any physical protection mechanisms

Content Protection Plugins

Browser plugins like Flash and Silverlight offer their own Digital Rights Management (DRM) protection systems.

Pros

• A lot of control over exactly what the user can and cannot do. For example, you can make a movie unplayable after a certain time period.
• Offers a physical protection mechanism

Cons

• Requires a plugin, which may cause problems with less tech-savvy users
• May not be playable on mobile devices
• May be too expensive for smaller publishers (Adobe does not publish Adobe Access pricing)

HTML5 Content Protection (Encrypted Media Extensions)

This uses web technologies to allow content protection without the need for a plugin. It is frequently misunderstood as a protection mechanism in itself, but in actuality it is just a means of linking HTML5 web video with existing third-party protection systems, so a lot of the pros and cons of plugins still apply.

Pros

• No plugins needed
• A lot of control over exactly what the user can and cannot do. For example, you can make a movie unplayable after a certain time period.
• Offers a physical protection mechanism

Cons

• Currently very little browser support
• Needs to be integrated with an existing DRM system
• Expensive

Streaming

Streaming a file can make it difficult for users to download it, and for someone people this is all that is needed. This can be achieved with proprietary technologies like Adobe Media Server or HTML5 technologies like HTTP Live Streaming.

Pros

• Difficult to download files
• Fast playback times
• Additional features can be added like automatically changing playback quality to match the user's connection

Cons

• Requires preparation of the files in advance
• Can still be downloaded by tech-savvy users with specific software
• Some technologies require a streaming server

So which is best? That entirely depends on the content you are trying to protect.

• If you are trying to prevent a paying viewer from sharing a movie, DRM is the best way to go.
• If you are trying to prevent clients from using work in progress media without paying you, visible watermarking and/or streaming may be best.
• If you are trying to prevent a movie being leaked before its release, a combination of physical preventions, user tracking and deterrents may be required.