All Digital TVs To Include Copy Restrictions 436
michael hirschorn writes: "The code would sit in the guts of your digital TV or set-top box and would essentially eat up any bit of programming deemed off limits." Deja vu. It's a recurring theme: every piece of electronics in your home will include code designed to prevent you from using it in any way that Hollywood doesn't like.
Re:Uh... (Score:2)
And that is half the problem; the world has gone licence mad. Everyone who's selling something is looking for ways to squeeze more and more money out of people, while everyone who is buying is doing their best to pay as little as possible. The sensible thing to do, it seems to me, is to strive to strike a balance. Unfortunately, neither side seems willing to even try; in my experience, though, it's Business that is the most die-hard in its stance. Consumers tend to be a little more willing to put up and pay up.
And as for TV shows, you're getting them for free.
So what is my cable provider charging me for each month? If I don't pay, I don't get to watch the shows. No, I'm not paying per show, but I am paying to receive the channels that they're shown on. Doesn't sound like "free" to me.
Cheers,
Tim
Re:Planned obsolescence (Score:3)
What? Sure you have! (Hear me out...)
The big-time pirates generally don't cost these companies much, since they sell in markets the MPAAers generally ignore due to too low sales.
No, copy restrictions exist to stop that casual copying. Your copy of the "Lion King" got trashed when your kid got curious about what was behind that little door? If you had a backup copy and don't buy a new one, that's money out of Mr. Eisner's pocket. Can't have that, thus we have Macrovision. Doesn't stop your content pirate -- even small-timers could just buy a "video stabilizer" -- but it stops your average consumer.
The RIAA knows just how much extra they made selling you the same music twice, first on vinyl and then on CDs. Now there's a new format, but they don't get a cut. Horrors! Kill it quick!
Illegal copies may be the rationalization, but let's be very clear here; it's the money that *legal* copying would keep out of their pockets that they're worried about. Ditto region coding, which exists supposedly so they can sell DVDs in the US while they're in the theaters elsewhere. So why is "Casablanca" region-coded? It's because exclusive distribution contracts keep the cash flowing in.
Boycott Digital TV (Score:2)
...I plan to. I'm sort of casually boycotting DVD now. Unless "consumers" (I hate that term; I prefer the term "individuals") indicate to these industry consortiums that they aren't going to pay up if the restrictions are too annoying (as they did with DIVX), we'll be stuck with these sorts of things.
Unfortunately, people are going to see the much higher quality, and get suckered right in. (Much in the way I expect that most slashdot geeks have DVD players now because of the much higher quality, even if they are bothered by the legal assaults on DeCSS.) (And the general public probably doesn't even know about the assaults on DeCSS; if they do, they probably have the misconception that it's a piracy issue.)
-Rob
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What about computer monitors? (Score:2)
- Pay twenty bucks to have your brother-in-law's neighbor's electrician solder in that doo-hickey that defeats your TV's copy protection.
- Read a book.
From what I've seen in the news, HDTV is catching on a lot slower than originally anticipated. The protocol, as a political compromise, requires sets to support about a dozen digital TV formats, making HDTV equipment more expensive. Broadcasters, after being granted extra bandwidth from the FCC, are salivating at all the other things they could do with that bandwidth. Consumers seem pretty satisfied with the quality of regular TV.On top of that, movie-theater owners (Loews et al.) are financially crunched because they have more theater seats than they can sell; if I were a TV-industry executive, I'd look at that news and wonder how much money I should risk to lure consumers to HDTV.
--
Re:Honestly, I don't see why this is so bad (Score:2)
If I order pay-per-view for the next Super Heavy Weight fight, and tape it to watch the next day (Maybe I had to work) that doesn't mean I'm asking the boxers to come to my house and put on another fight for me. Nor would it mean the Packers and Broncos have to come play the Superbowl in my front yard either.
People that trade concert tapes are not promoting people to stay home and not go to concerts. You pay money to go to a concert (or go to the football stadium), and you get a live, visual, experience. Huge fans & completists that want as many concert tapes possible does not keep them from going to a conert. Ticketmaster prices might though.
Content providers are making money off of consumers. To stay in business they have to stay competitive to the consumers. They don't have the RIGHT to our money. They have to earn it, but the rewards can be high, of course. If they want to cripple their products, they shouldn't say Boo Hoo whent he consumers get mad.
If we were able to use VCR's when all TV content was "lo-fi", then why can't we use a similar type of Recording device once all TV content goes High-Quality?
Who is pushing the HDTV movement? Not me. THey are. A few years ago, they were even saying that all of our TV's would become obsolete once the change occurred. They are making all the rules, but they can't bitch and moan if the consumers complain. They work for our money.
If I want my future Tivo3 to record HDTV shows I'm not home for, why can't it record it in all it's splendor? Are they worried it'll cut into their DVD version they *might* sell? Bullshit, then add some features to it, put nice artwork on it, and do that. Or better yet, why don't they just come up with their OWN version of instant-access-online-watch-what-I-want-right-now service. They'd make a fortune. And do it now.
Rader
can't possibly be ALL of them... (Score:3)
--
Peace,
Lord Omlette
ICQ# 77863057
Re:Control freaks of America. (Score:2)
The DVD zoning situation is an example of consumer power! The fact is that Region 1 DVDs are usually a far better proposition for European buyers -- they come out earlier, they're cheaper, and they generally have more extra features. The situation is gradually getting better, but for the moment region-locked players don't sell. Most manufacturers seem to get around it by putting in a backdoor, then leaking said backdoor to the net. Needless to say the DVD consortium are none too happy, but screw 'em! A number of resellers also sell chipped DVD players.
The main problem brought about by the lack of 16:9 TVs in the States is the number or R1 DVDs that are non-anamorphic widescreen. This means us European viewers have to zoom the (already low resolution NTSC) picture in order to fill our screens. DVD buyers -- insist on anamorphic widescreen.
As for importing kit to the US -- I don't expect a step-up transformer should be all that expensive. I think less than $40. I suspect if you shop around a lot of the kit will be switchable to 110v, or even auto-detect the voltage -- do check this though.
--
Re:This is sad. (Score:2)
My Home: Apartment6 [apartment6.org]
Comment removed (Score:5)
millbrook toaster? (Score:2)
Or, Ford garage door openners, the door only opens for a Ford?
Or Vidal Sassoon hair dryers. They'll only dry hair that's been washed with Vidal Sassoon hair?
Wow. .
** Martin
What we need (Score:2)
What we need is a content provider that streams content on the net or makes mpeg files available for downloading and viewing at any time. The trick is how you might make money doing this, since your users could easily fast forward through any commercials and web banners seem to be a pretty weak revenue source.
Re:Far more dangerous than Adolf (Score:2)
Huh? (Score:2)
Re:can't possibly be ALL of them... (Score:2)
APEX syndrome (Score:2)
Same for HDVCR, HDVD or any other future Digital TV gear
As a matter of fact, in Europe, there is a thriving market of DeMacrovision and DeRegionCoding of DVD players.
I've already got my Fair Use Rights Enforcement System (SIMA CopyMaster) and am not afraid to use it
---
Re:Control freaks of America. (Score:2)
Yes, but supposedly you are a representative democracy. Didn't you elect your representatives to do this? How come no one who stands up to corporate-government power in the US has any chance of winning elections?
Because first, the voters must find out that they exist, are running, and that they will stand up to corperations. Unfortunatly, the primary means of finding out about a cantidate are television, radio, and newspaper. All three are owned by........THE VERY SAME CORPERATIONS THEY WANT TO STAND UP TO! I'm sure you can do the math from there.
Re:Maybe in the USA... not here in Europe. (Score:2)
I don't believe they do: however many resellers chip Sony DVD players to remove region fixing, Macrovision etc, then sell them as new with their own warranty.
--
Re:Control freaks of America. (Score:2)
Re:What about computer monitors? (Score:3)
If you're in Region 1, maybe - but here in the UK, apparently 80% of DVD players now have region coding disabled. A non-techie friend is planning to buy a DVD player for home, and I asked what he was looking for; in the list of "must-haves", he mentioned it must have region coding disabled - something along the lines of "I'm not dumb enough to pay money for crippleware!"
Plenty of people whine about MP3 being inferior quality, and no match for a CD. I can't hear the difference, TBH - and if MP3 is so poor, why are the RIAA and co so worried about Napster? Similarly, if analogue TV is so crap, WTF have we all been paying money for it all these years?!
Basically, if digital TV is crippled in this way, I won't go for it. Here in the UK, even if I do go for digital, it'll be through a set top box - which produces a nice unprotected analogue signal for my VCR and TV. You want me to "up"grade to something, where the only "advantage" is that you can prevent me doing what I want? Forget it.
Re: (Score:2)
Simple Answer (Score:2)
Only use the tools and toys you like. Nobody's twisting your arm here. It's your house, not your job.
Re:This is sad. (Score:2)
I've had my TiVo for 7 months and while I do watch fewer commercials, I do watch *some* of them. And the ones I watch I tend to notice. NBC has been putting the TiVo Select flag on their promos and I find that I use it even if it's to check that I did have that show scheduled in To Do. I think the value to advertisers is still there.
Then again, I did watch a lot of those Amazon.Com Glee Club commercials that were on last month just for yuks (amazon dot com, say it don't spray it!), but I didn't buy a damn thing from them.
Re:Control freaks of America. (Score:2)
I'm sorry you feel the need to equate the entirety of the American population with a few unscrupulous corporate types. We're really not ALL that bad.
First, I am a Citizen of the U.S.
While saying ALL Americans may be unfair, I have to admit that as a whole, American corperations and government seem to be more controling, and the rest of the people as a whole seem more tolerant of it.
The MPAA would never propose any of this if they believed that even 25% of American consumers would throw out the TV and play a board game or *GASP* have a conversation rather than put up with and pay for blatantly hostile consumer electronics.
You have the right to watch a blank screen (Score:2)
Mr. Potty-mouth rap-star can say whatever he wants and it's freedom of speech.
I can't blanket-block phone solicitations in my home because it would violate their free speech.
I can't require spammers have my permission before they fill up my HD with their BS because that violates their free speech.
I can't watch what I want to on my TV unless some company says I can.
Gotcha. So what we're saying here, is that the Soviets really did win the cold war and Josef Stalin is alive and well and in a bunker in Washington DC directing all of this.
If the technology doesn't let the people do what they want, then they don't have to buy it. I certainly won't. Dollar votes are the only ones that count anymore.
--
+++ Out Of Cheese Error +++
+++ MELON MELON MELON +++
Re:Control freaks of America. (Score:2)
All of the above employ Macrovision selectively -- specifically on the Pay Per View movie channels. They don't use Macrovision on other channels because they know time-shifting using a VCR is such a basic consumer expectation. By contrast, taping a PPV movie is not necessary (in the broadcaster's eyes) since you have 4 opportunities every hour to watch the film from the beginning.
Of course, Macrovision is fairly trivial to defeat -- there are off the shelf devices to do so.
At least some digital broadcasters are perfectly happy with the concept of timeshifting: Sky Digital (Rupert Murdoch's digital satellite network) is working in partnership with TiVo -- there'll be a TiVo unit released in Europe this year containing two Sky Digital decoders.
To an extent I can sympathise with content owners' desire to prevent or dissuade home recording for posterity. My wall full of Simpsons VHS home recordings probably explain why I haven't bought any of their prerecorded tapes... Mind you -- they're getting a big chunk of my money the moment they put an entire series, in order, on a DVD box set.
--
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This is sad. (Score:2)
As it is, a friend of mine lives in a city that doesn't carry Fox Kids programming (for some reason 'Animated' automatically equals 'Kids' for some reason). I taped a bunch of stuff for her including "The Big Guy and Rusty the Boy Robot" (based on the comic book of the same name). Unfortunately the series was cancelled after a six week run. Fortunately I've got it all on tape (I just need to move them all onto ONE tape
As far as I know this series was deep sixed and I couldn't find it if I wanted to, so I'm glad I taped it (if only for the some of the lines, like the one I'm using as my SIG). The inability to do that sort of thing would infuriate me as a consumer, even though I rarely keep things I've recorded past about a week. I also found a tape filled with some of the most god-awful stuff from the 80's while cleaning out a drawer of old tapes ("Rubik the Amazing Cube" and "Teen Turbo" to name just a few... if you recognize the names then you know how bad they are
Re:This is sad. (Score:2)
My dad got a DSS system about 5 years ago, and started taping the pay-per-view movies whenever he rented them. He's pretty fanatical about it, tapes and keeps every movie he buys, even if he doesn't like it. He once got mad that I didn't tape Mortal Kombat while I was home one Christmas break. It didn't matter to him that he wouldn't watch this movie if you paid him: I bought it over the DSS, he wanted it taped. Last time I checked, he probably had over 100 movies he'd recorded from the DSS and various other TV broadcasts.
Now, Dad's VCR is old enough that when he bought it, it was a big deal that it was a 4-head model: it's a good machine, but definitely showing it's age. I asked him one day why he didn't upgrade, pointing out that even though his still works, he could get a new one that would record in much better picture quality. He told me he really didn't care about picture quality that much: what he had was good enough for him.
The funny thing is, I don't think he probably watches any of these movies on tape. It's almost reached collection status for him. If he sees a movie on pay-per-view that he thinks is good, or has heard good things about, he rents it, tapes it, lables it, and put's it in a drawer. My mom will sometimes watch them, or they'll get pulled out if a niece or nephew comes over to borrow it, but that's about it. So in my dad's case, taping has probably added to the number of pay-per-views he's bought. Sometimes he'll rent and record shows he's not interested in, just on the off chance that someone in the family will want to watch it.
My point is, how long have people been recording TV shows, sporting events, pay-per view movies, etc? About 2 days after the VCR was invented. It hasn't hurt Hollywood one bit. Just because people will suddenly have the ability to make digitally-perfect copies doesn't mean that they'll all start their own pirating business. The vast majority will do just like my Dad does: record them, save them, and watch them once in a great while.
Hollywood, like the record industry, would do themselves a favor (and make a butt-load of money in the process) to embrace this new technology. It's not unreasonable to want payment for the product, but give your consumers viewing/listening options, and they will thank you for it.
But the kids won't take it! (Score:2)
Not a chance. My little sister is 16. She's online every day with her friends, IM'ing away and trading MP3s on Napster. She just got a CD-RW to enable her to copy CDs and burn MP3s to disk and all that. And it's not just her - damn near the entire net-enabled population between middle school and college is having a hell of a good time trading music. You think they're going to just give that up? You think that the teenagers of the world are going to just sit back and let corporations tell them what to do? You seem to be forgetting that one of the hallmarks of youth is rebellion against whoever and whatever you're not supposed to be doing. :-)
Rather, I see a generation growing up that doesn't particularly give a damn about overly restrictive copyright laws and is going to keep on having fun and using technology to do so in ever more interesting ways. I just hope that we get people in the legislature who see this way before too long.
Re:Time for a new paradigm (Score:2)
seems like a reasonable idea to me, but what happens if you leave your TV on? or watch some really bad show--can i get my money back? :)
i think ultimately the TV networks (bandwidth permitting) need to move to some sort of TV-on-demand. i think that people have already shown an interest in this with Napster: i think the real drawing point to Napster is that you can have a song anytime you want to hear it. it's that immediate gradification that's important.
first off, i should note that i don't own a TV. i hate TV, i hate most of what's on it, and i hate the way it works (networks feed you the stuff when they want it). however i would watch quite often if there were TV on demand. here's how i figure it would work:
consumers would pay a monthly fee (like they do now for cable) to have access to the "basic" shows (this pays the cable provider mostly). (Movies, Sports and Porn would be more for instance). the real difference, however, is that you get to watch whatever you want whenever you want. if i sit down at the TV and want to watch "Seinfeld" for instance, i chose it from a menu, and the show "streams" to me. note that fast-forwarding would not be possible, so commercials could stay the way they are now.
now ignore the vast bandwidth requirements for just a moment, and follow me :). the ability to watch shows whenever you want completely does away with the idea of "prime time." now of course, shows would have to be "aired" at a certain time (ie, you can't watch it before 8pm on Thursday because the show hasn't been finished/released yet), but any time after that you can watch. getting rid of primetime doesn't matter though. instead of advertisement prices being based on timeslots, they're based on popularity of the shows. the added benefit of TV-on-demand is that the networks will have exact ratings of who watched what and when. not to mention the fact that advertisements can constantly be changed to suit the relative popularity of the show, and the popularity of the episode. i think both networks and advertisers would agree this is the best way to do it.
now appart from this, you'd still need to have a "just whatever's on" type of option, otherwise you'd never really know about new shows and you'd watch only what you had seen before (and eventually get very bored of it). the difference is that the TV set knows what you've watched in the past, so when you just turn on one of the "whatever" channels, it can be better tailored to what you like. everybody will like this: consumers are more likely to see TV shows they'll enjoy, and will watch TV more often (you'll hear "there's nothing on" much less often). networks are happy because people watch more TV, and they get precise ratings. advertisers are happy as they get great market research data, exact ratings and better tailored advertisements.
note that this kind of setup completely eliminates the need for VCRs or Tivo completely! network providers can still charge extra cash for "Pay Per View" events, and "specialty channels" (really just "specialty shows based on a theme") can be added to a base "package."
of course the only thing this does require is amazing amounts of bandwidth to each home. but the day that this much bandwidth is available shouldn't be too far off.
what do you guys think of a setup like this? i'd love it!
- j
They're Targeting the Kids (Score:5)
The mass adult public will be disgruntled, but they'll accept it.
The *kids*, on the other hand, will grow up believing that the normal way of the world is for corporations to have ulimate control over everything.
This begins to sound like a paranoid statement, but I think there's a kernel of truth to it: Corporate America is making moves towards creating a society in which Corporate Government is the accepted norm, and in which citizens are, first and foremost, passive consumers of goods and, secondly, passive labourers in production of goods.
Indeed, it's like the old mining towns, reborn on a national scale. You work for the company and you spend your money at the company store, live in the company house and drive the company car.
We're condemning our kids.
--
Actually, it's "SCMS"... (Score:2)
Then again, this is the entertainment industry we're talking about. These are the same jackoffs who thought 40-bit encryption would be enough to protect their (generally worthless, come on, who would want to protect "a very brady sequel"?) intellectual property on DVDs.
- A.P.
--
* CmdrTaco is an idiot.
Re:What about computer monitors? (Score:2)
No... CDs don't offer the record industry better control. Those were just a ploy to increase profits. Wait for audio dvds. That's where they'll take to take back control. That's when they'll probably lower prices to get people to accept them quicker.
This is sad. (Score:2)
Re:can't possibly be ALL of them... (Score:2)
Re:Control freaks of America. (Score:3)
I think the idea is that things can become so intolerable that entire military divisions can become sympathetic to an antigovernment cause,
as happened against the British, and as happened when the "south" divided from the "north".
If this isn't a possibility, then things aren't
intolerable enough yet, and the revolution must wait. I think it will not occur until "they" take away cable tv. As long as they have that,
they think they are free.
Re:I wouldn't worry too much.... (Score:2)
--
If the good lord had meant me to live in Los Angeles
Let's recap (Score:2)
As I understand this proposal, in return for upgrading my TV and VCR, i get:
If I have already invested in a TV, VCR, or video digitizer for the computer, it will be worthless in about 5 years because the FCC thinks that's a small price for me and everyone else to pay in exchange for a few million more profits for a tiny incestuous group of multi billion dollar companies.
It is worth noting that HDTV is HEAVILY dependant on early adopters who have willingly shelled out a few grand for a TV that only works on one or two channels. No doubt, the purchace was made on the presumption that in a few years, all channels would benefit from it. A TV that, as it turns out, will only display snow in a short while since none of this copy prevention crap even existed when it was bought. Evidently, these new wonders of technology were obsolete before they were even plugged in.
We are supposed to trust the 'generosity' of an industry that has ALREADY gone back on one pledge before the technology even came into existance. Considering that the MPAA has been trying to kill the VCR (and later TiVo) from day one, we are to believe that they won't decide to set the copy never bit on everything but commercials?
Tell me again why I should get my wallet out and grin?
Didn't work with DVD players! (Score:2)
Re:Your are simple minded and short sighted. (Score:2)
Don't you get it? We geeks don't have enough collective buying power to make a difference. All Joe Monday Night Football is going to say is Woah! Look at that resolution! Cool! And since any DVD he'll buy is region 1, he doesn't even know region coding is there and doesn't care because he's never gonna buy an import DVD.
Just wait till he gets home from a tough day on the second shift and the nice copy of the game his friend made won't play! That's the part that has to be gotten across. The many $$$ worth of new stuff you're buying is subject to becoming just so much random junk at the MPAA's whim.
Re:This is sad. (Score:2)
It's of concern to CableLabs (who get paid to do cable TV technical work), the industry lawyers (who get paid to do research on laws, prepare all this paperwork, and enforce some), and everyone in the industry with "copyright" in their job title or description. They have to suggest something, anything to show that they're doing something.
Unfortunately, every once in a blue moon one of their documents gets approved by someone who gets carried away by the theory. And we get to pay more as the effects ripple across the industry resources.
Vauge and uninformative article (Score:2)
"If you want to watch a high definition TV program on an analog TV set, the signal will be downgraded so it's not HDTV-quality anymore."
Ohmygod. You mean I can't display 1080 lines of resolution on my old crappy TV set? No real suprise there. To watch high-res signals, you kind of need a high res display device. I don't think it's copy protection that's keeping your 10 year old RCA TV from displaying HDTV...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:First of all.... (Score:2)
That being, rather than inserting law or enforcement between the parties, the government neatly sidesteps it, as freedom of speech. Granted there are laws here and there, but they usually are backed by some other constitutional clause, like 'for the general welfare.'
Suddenly, the government is going to allow private industry to regulate what can be seen. How about if the content producers and the media manufacturers get together and agree to only make sets that work for approved signals. Then, just so americans _have_ to have one, they make new content available only through these new means. Just like that they've bottled up what the government can't or won't.
Maybe Sony can make me a phone that can't be reached by machine dialers in boilerrooms that ring just as I'm sitting down to a big bowl of grits and a good ol Hee Haw rerun.
--
+++ Out Of Cheese Error +++
+++ MELON MELON MELON +++
Re:I wouldn't worry too much.... (Score:2)
This doesn't seem to have stopped the sales of controlled substances in the US. With a bit of work I'm sure I could purchase some illegal drugs. PSX mod chips make their manufacturers good money (either directly through sales of the chips, or indirectly through sales of imported games). So long as there is a sizable market of customers, someone will be willing to take the risk for the money. Capitalism cuts both ways.
Re:What about computer monitors? (Score:3)
Wrong, on point three. The Consumer Electronics Association (ie the major consumer electronics producers) are fighting this idea, they are afraid that consumers will think these copy protection schemes are completely daft and won't buy into it, thus preventing CEA members from selling any of this new expensive new digital kit. If you read the article you'd also kmow that the CEA is considering taking legal action to prevent this proposal from happening, based on the 1984 Supreme Court Betamax decision that gave the smack-down to the MPAA/broadcasters over fair use, it was the decision that confirmed that consumers have the right to time and media shift content for personal use all they want. IMO if the CEA gets this to the SC the MPAA will get handed another beating, as the controls they are seeking with this scheme go far beyound the bounds of legal copyright protection.
On a side note I can't help but wonder if Sony's internal politics are nearing a point of civil war, as a both a major consumer electronics manufactorer and a major "content" publisher the two factions must be near blows over this issue. Executive meetings must be getting pretty heated, with electronics VP's and content VP's at each others throats. I for one would love to hear from a Sony insider about how the company's culture is dealing with this particular schizophrenia...
TV shows on DVD (Score:2)
Boycott HDTV, I guess (Score:2)
Ever since I heard about the concept of HDTV, I have been excited about the possibility of it finally coming to fruition. It's both good and bad that HDTV is coming out now. It's good because TV signals are overdue for an upgrade, IMHO. Our analog sets of today are very much based around 1930's technology. Fortunately, there have been a lot of smaller improvements in the meantime
On the bad side, I'm not sure that our technology is quite as good as it should be for what we are trying to accomplish. I get annoyed when I see compression artifacts in DVD movies running in the several Megabit/second range. I worry that we will end up with lower video quality than we should have -- if HDTV video gets used in court at all, what would prevent us from seeing things that aren't there (or vice-versa) because of compression artifacts? Though I'm probably just paranoid on the subject.
Also, we have the problem that sparked me to write this message -- overzealous copyright holders that are all too willing to pull one over on an unsuspecting public. The same public that doesn't bother with the news, especially when it comes to technology (and they get it over TV anyway, which probably wouldn't report on itself..)
So, we have to avoid buying these sets. It's not all that hard for me, as I don't have enough money for one. We also have to inform people. If you know anyone who has been thinking about getting an HDTV (look for your buddy with the Jaguar
If things go all to hell, you may still be able to knock a station off the air by telling the FCC that the station has not been working in the public interest. I'm already planning on doing something similar to my local CBS affiliate, as they always found time in their newscasts to cover the stupid Survivor show rather than real news last fall.
--
Re:This is sad. (Score:2)
One MILLION dollars!
Re:I wouldn't worry too much.... (Score:2)
----------------------------
And it'll happen, too. (Score:2)
They don't even need to include a box that blocks out certain things... they just scramble -every- channel, and say you can't watch it unless you have a descrambler. Which also happens to block stuff out.
No more buying a Pay-Per-View wrestling match and taping it for a friend. They'll have to wait four months and pay twenty bucks for the DVD.
No more taping the Super Bowl. No more taping the last episode of your favorite show. The entire home recording industry will cease to exist.
It's all a chain... just like DVD players near-universally have region coding (because otherwise mmovie companies wouldn't put out the discs), so too will this come to pass.
Re:What about computer monitors? (Score:2)
Last I heard, when they were just starting to roll out digital TV, here in the UK the plan was to stop broadcasting analogue in 2 years or so; that puts it mid 2002, if memory serves me.
I don't know about the US, but I think you may be a little off at 5-10 years.
Cheers,
Tim
Read a *&^*&% book (Score:2)
No one is forcing anyone to buy anything. No one owes you entertainment, or even distribution of entertainment. If enough people don't like how something is distributed AND don't use the aforementioned something, a new distribution channel will beat out the old, unpopular one.
In short, grow up and quit your bitching.
-jon
Re:This is sad. (Score:2)
Re:This is sad. (Score:3)
I think they're more worried about people copying pay-per-view movies.
Copying can't be stopped (Score:2)
Tell Your Cable Co About This (Score:2)
Re:I wouldn't worry too much.... (Score:2)
Take artillery, point at foot, fire... (Score:5)
I can't say I'd be totally upset at them committing what looks like it could very well be suicide, maybe someone else would come along who doesn't worship only the almightly dollar. (in America? hahahaha not a chance)
There are just way too many restrictions they're trying to get here. I know they like the copy-never idea so they can prevent the erosion of the idea of prime-time and the like which devices like TiVo are killing, and by preventing you from taping a show for a friend, or for later, they can look toward services where they can make you PAY to watch it if you didn't catch it at the "free" time (doesn't anyone else think this would be a great marketing idea? like a 'pay archive' of shows).
There has never been any sort of problem with people "copying" shows off of TV in ways harmful to the industry. I don't see how most of those controls are justified in any manner whatsoever except looking toward future profits. Profits they might very well never get if they get their way.
---
Re:millbrook toaster? (Score:2)
It's not the government you should be worried about here. The US government is bought and paid for byt he large corporations already. It has become almost nothing but a legislative mouthpiece for them. If you want to rebel against something, fight the Sonys, the Microsofts, the Qwests, the "soft money" bribery, Big Oil, the NAB... They are the ones looking to hook you up to a perma-infotainment pipe, not the government.
The preceding rant will get me labeled a Pinko Commie Whiner. Hey, that's not a bad moderator field: Score -1: Pinko Commie Whiner...
Re:Take artillery, point at foot, fire... (Score:2)
The features listed in the article sound more like requirements than specifications. IOW, that's a wish list. They don't have the technology yet, and to implement some of the things they've listed would require alterations to just about every video-capable device in your home: cable box, TiVo, PC, CD/DVD device, VCR... I predict they'll still be wishing for a long time to come.
And besides, all you need to defeat the sort of protection they want is a set top box that strips the copy protection code from the signal and provides the output of your choice: digital or analog. Problem solved.
This whole thing, if not merely another example of journalistic exaggeration in pursuit of eyeballs, is at best a pipe dream by industry execs who have little if any clue about the technical implications of their requirements.
Anyone who's worked on the forward end of new product development has seen these kind of vaporspecs before - marketing exec's who have no blinkin' clue about the potentials or limitations of the technology come up with requirements driven solely by greed and the pursuit of market share. And before they even ask you how long till you can build one, they've already relabeled their requirements document a "specification" and are out selling the damn things...
Re:Being treated like a toddler (Score:2)
How are they planning to enforce this? No CD burner available today has this access control built in, and they will be usable for years to come. Even if/when CDRs do have it built in, it wouldn't be that hard to alter the drivers for it.
Easy, unless your computer is willing to have a 'conversation' with the TV assuring it that all the hardware is compliant and that the software is officially sanctioned (that is, proprietary and incapable of talking to the burner), the signal from the video out jack simply won't be readable. You'll record nothing but static.
Planned obsolescence (Score:5)
And, as always, these devices will only hurt the average consumer who has never cost "content providers" any money at all, while the big-time "content pirates" will easily find ways around them.
But the thing I hate the most about this whole situation is that, once again, it points out that businesses think I'm a thief and should be treated like one.
Re:Uh... (Score:2)
When you pay for cable, you are paying in part for the cable itself, and in part for the fees of producing the show (actors, crew, producers, etc.) You are NOT paying to own a small piece of the show, no matter how you argue it. I don't understand why people still think this.
yet another reason (Score:2)
Re:Planned obsolescence (Score:5)
Your copy of the "Lion King" got trashed when your kid got curious about what was behind that little door? If you had a backup copy and don't buy a new one, that's money out of Mr. Eisner's pocket.
In other words, they want it both ways. When I want to publically show my tape, I paid to license the content, and the license forbids that. I didn't buy a tangible thing at all. If the tape is damaged and I still want to view the content, THEN suddenly, I bought a tangible thing and it's broke, so I should buy another one.
Home Taping (Score:2)
I can tell you from personal experience that a VCR increased the amount of television I watched. If I'm not home, I can still see the show and the commercials.
This is especially important now that I have a new baby. When she starts crying, we hit the pause button and that happens often. If it wasn't for a DVD player and a VCR, we would see anything.
At least one good purpose... (Score:2)
What about computer monitors? (Score:3)
Maybe I'm missing some of the nomenclature here, but how is a digital TV different than a computer monitor? I'd sure like to hope that these TV's (or large, flatscreen digital monitors, which is what they are) have the capability to display a computer signal on them. If this is the case, then you just don't use the tuner that's in the TV and replace it with a computer with a digital out video card, and your problem is fixed.
Piracy will always be there, this is about control. Consumers are stupid, but as we saw with Divx, they aren't THAT stupid. Those digital TV's are hella expensive, and if you think I'm going to drop a few grand on something that won't do whatever the hell I want with it, then you're dead wrong, and I think a lot of people think along the same lines.
Re:This is sad. (Score:2)
If you really want it, don't make the tape your primary source.
Re:Control freaks of America. (Score:2)
16 years of training versus a few weeks of basic training, only a few days of which covered hand-to-hand.
Hmm. Makes me wonder how badly you've been slacking off for 16 years that some bozo who barely graduated from high school and took a three-day "try not to die in a strategically disadvantageous position" course could wallop your ass.
I have no idea why these gun nuts think that a few hours of practice a week will enable them and a few of their friends to stand up to a US army battalion.
Strange. I seem to recall the British saying the same thing about the Zulus at Isandhlwana; the Soviets saying the same thing about the mujahedeen in Afghanistan; the French Foreign Legion saying the same thing about Ho Chi Minh at Dien Bien Phu; and the American saying the same thing about Ho Chi Minh during Vietnam.
Short answer: history shows that you're amazingly, staggeringly wrong if you think insurgencies are ineffective.
Re:This is sad. (Score:2)
It could even rip out things that didn't have CC, if they were bracketted by commercials, figuring that they were either previews, commercials, or news flashes.
Re:Uh... (Score:2)
But they clearly state in their products that you can't copy them. [...] You are NOT paying to own a small piece of the show, no matter how you argue it.
These aren't fundamental truths fiated from on-high; they're matters of public policy. I don't care what "they" state, and I don't care how "they" interpret my payment. I want unlimited right to copy and store shows for non-commercial use. If this conflicts with some lofty principles, I want those principles outlawed immediately. It's my goddamn country, and I want laws that serve me and the 99.999% of the population not in the "rich Hollywood slob" category. Are you trolling or forgetting that this is a democracy?
Re:Control freaks of America. (Score:3)
Sure you do, until your broadcast and media companies realize the windfall of cash they can get from going pay per view. Greed is not only an American trait (although I'll admit it's more prevelant here)
Digital TV in UK already has the ability to use copy protection - every digibox has a macrovision encoder built in. However it is only turned on for pay per view, nor is likely to be turned on for anything else in the future. How can I be so sure of this? Besides the non commercial BBC, video recording are actually included in the ratings for a programme up to three weeks after it was shown - so the commercial broadcasters still (theoretically) get paid when you watch the video recording. I say theoretically because you would have to be in one of the 4000 homes that actually create the ratings in order to have effect, but if the statistics of ratings hold true then it shouldn't matter. As for fear of Tivo's, well Sky actually have quite a hand in TiVo's UK service - providing the subscriber management and technical backend. Not only that but they are soon to release there own combind Digital Sattelite/TiVo like box.
Actually, its the corporations that now own the government. I and my mechanic friend may do everything in our power to prevent this, but our power doesn't compare with the power of the rich corporations, who can buy the government's power to do whatever they want. We face a pretty bleak future if there is nothing we can do to stand up to a corporate owned state that can do whatever it wants to us. And you guys wonder why we want to keep our guns? It's the only form of power we still maintain. I honestly hope it never comes to a revolution but how much should we take?
So your much hyped (to the point of sacred) Constitution has failed then? Really? There is nothing you can do except hold on to you gun untill revolution version 2 comes? You think the corporations can't afford bigger, better guns than average person on the street? Maybe you should actually try democracy. Thier seems to be quite a few americans on slashdot who don't like what is going, yet do nothing about it (other than complain about it to the rest of the world and/or consider moveing to canada). Organize a political movement. With so many apathetic non voters out thier it shouldn't be that hard to make a difference . So what if it is only niche - as long as it's vocal enough then people will listen - just look at the Green party in Europe. Niche they are, and while they are no where near in control thier voice is often heard and taken into account by the more mainstream groups. They certainly don't get thier own way, but at least they get some concessions in thier favour. An example here would be that while there would still be copy protection you would still have some right to make personal recordings. So no one would be entirely happy - but that's the point of compromise - better for every one to be unhappy than for one side to be happy and one side looking to violence as thier last and only recourse.
Will we have better or worse luck with Bush's FCC? (Score:3)
I think it all comes down to whether Republicans want to be more friendly to the big business of entertainment or the big business of consumer electronics. Which group gave more money to the party?
Let's wait and see what happens.
--
"How many six year olds does it take to design software?"
Re:Time for a new paradigm (Score:2)
Sucks to be you. New paradigm, new rules. Some folks might do this accidently, but if this system ever saw the light of day, you just KNOW that there's be an auto-off feature after every show. So even if you started watching Wheel of Fortune and left the room, the TV would turn off once Pat's made his last lame-ass joke and said goodnight.
Part of the problem with current TV is that the only way we can say what we want is either get a Neilson box, or vote with our wallet. The latter is extremely crude: almost a binary proposition. (You like TV? Get cable. Don't? Cut your cable.) With a pay-per-show system, you get what you want, when you want, and for as long or as short as you want.
There really is way too much TV nowadays, and commercialism is going too far. I'd dearly love to see this happen, just get less exposure to the both of them.
This is an incentive... (Score:2)
-
kill your TV (Score:2)
Under DMCA, it CAN be ALL of them... (Score:3)
Here's what you are missing (Score:2)
It would be like trying to record a TV signal on an audio cassette recorder. Yes, you could theoretically build a recorder that handles the transmission signal, but to record a 19.3 Mb/s signal takes some skill and is beyond the reach of most people.
I work in one of these large media mega-corps. The goal of all this is to prevent the casual user from engaging in copying programs. They (I should say we), all know that there will always be ways to get around the system. If you have to actually go out and buy a Macrovision fixer, most people won't do it.
The real loophole will be through the professional TV gear. No broadcaster will allow themselves to be saddled with these handicaps and concerns. Currently, professional broadcast gear ignores SCMS and all other copy protection systems. This won't change with DTV gear.
-----
Re:can't possibly be ALL of them... (Score:2)
Rights we have taken for granted for years, such as time-shifting, ownership of copied media for non-commercial purposes, even the simple act of lending a book/tape/cart to a friend, are going bye-bye.
The free market cannot save us from this, because it is the free market creating the copy control in the first place! Markets are not by nature free; they need constant monitoring to keep them from becoming immortal monopolies.
why the electronic manufacturers hate it (Score:2)
--
Re:This is sad. (Score:5)
TiVo is already giving them nightmares, but a TiVo that had access to any TV show or movie in the world with essentially unlimited storage capacity (because it would stream off the server instead of storing it locally) would be too much for them to take.
I have had my TiVo for a month, and I watch a lot more TV, but see far fewer commercials because I fast forward through them. I expect if TiVo catches on that we're going to start seeing blipverts any day now.
Re:can't possibly be ALL of them... (Score:2)
Re:Take artillery, point at foot, fire... (Score:2)
Just like the porn filtering stuff...
Republican Congress: We want porn filters!
Conservative Mothers: We want porn filters!
Worried Techies: But they don't work well enough, and there's potential for political activism by the filter companies.
Republican Congress: shhh... the parents want porn filters...
Republican Congress: We want porn filters!
--
Re:Take artillery, point at foot, fire... (Score:2)
Rader
Re:But the kids won't take it! (Score:2)
The move is distinctly toward
(1) putting unique serial number hardware directly on the controller boards for all electronics;
(2) modifying the digital data stream to insert both (a) a copy protection bit ("original media" versus "first-gen copy") and (b) the serial number of the source output unit; and, finally,
(3) installing hardware-based copy protection that (a) disallows second-gen copies and (b) disallows playback of the copy on anything but the original source output unit.
The CPRM initiative for hard drives, the copy-protection bit on all CD/DAT/Minidisc/DVD/etc media, the DCMA act, the lawsuits against Napster, CSS, region-restricted playback of DVDs, ebook copy restrictions, software lease-oriented licensing... fuck, man, *EVERYTHING* points toward greater Corporate Control of what you can do with the media you purchase.
Your "little" sister of 16 is the tail end of the generation that gets to experience copy freedom.
It's the five-year olds of today that are going to be put over the barrel as adult labourers and consumers.
Your hopes for the legislature are cute, but unrealistic. All major world governments are controlled by corporate interests at this point: any signs of them operating for the public good are, at best, an illusion to pacify the masses. Especially in the USA, money speaks -- and you, my friend, simply don't have the bucks to buy yourself the legislation you want, while the MPAA and RIAA purchased themselves the DCMA with very few problems.
You think the Corporations of the world are going to just sit back and let teenagers steal their profits? Dream on.
[As an aside, does your sister freely give money over to the MPAA, to watch whatever fetid p.o.s. Adam Sandler "comedy" they're hawking to her? Does she freely give money to the RIAA, to purchase the latest prefabricated boy-toy p.o.s. glam-band "music" they're selling? *Someone* is, and if ain't her, it's one of her tasteless teeny-aged friends.
In your dreams is Napster piracy some sort of sign that teenagers ain't doing what Corporations want. Brittany didn't get her millions because teenagers rebelled. The teenagers have plenty of cash burning a hole in their pockets, and the Corporations, from GAP to Sony to MPAA have their number. Your sister is being played like a cheap fiddle, and she *loves* it.]
--
Re:Maybe in the USA... not here in Europe. (Score:3)
Control freaks of America. (Score:5)
Digital TV is here, now, in Europe. No built in copy control. Satellite, cable and broadcast digital television.
But, I guess you'll have to go invent your own standards and multiple versions of them if your mobile phone industry is anything to go by.
Re:I wouldn't worry too much.... (Score:3)
It seems to me that the few people capable of creating PSX mod chips or DeCSS or whatever are going to grow tired of the harassment that inevitably comes with distributing things like that. As the means of tracking those people down gets better their numbers (or willingness to crack) will almost certainyl decline.
I for one would rather put some effort into trying to make sure that the people who make TVs, DVD players, movies, etc. know that I do not want them to dictate when and where I use a product that I legitimately bought. I would rather there be no need to sit back and wait for someone else to crack some new crypto. Eliminating it in the first place seems to be a much better strategy than hoping someone will crack it for me.
Does this mean a cure for dyslexia is coming? (Score:4)
So, I predict this will lead to a dyslexic lobby akin in power to the NRA. They will demand and recieve research funding the likes of which haven't been seen since trinity and the scourge of dyslexia will be finally conquered.
--
Re:Control freaks of America. (Score:3)
I sure hope your digital TV isn't at all interactive, because that'd mean it was covered by BT's patent on linking. "Oh, but that's different-- it's a corporation. You 'mericans have control over your government." What-- you don't have any control over the companies operating within your borders? Sure you do!
"Hey Americans, stand up to your government, stop being so whiny." Yes, we should. And you should stand up to all the stupid shit going on Europe. Do you? All of it? Of course not.
Let's stop the stupid flame wars (or at least put 'em at -1, so I don't have to read them WHEN I'M BROWSING AT 4, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD), because it's stupid, hypocritical, and unproductive. Let me stipulate that Americans are stupid, Europeans are stupid, and let's get on with it. Censorship is stupid, patents on hyperlinking are stupid, American TV sucks, the BBC sucks, oh, and I forgot, Canada sucks too. Get over it and say something intelligent.
Re:Will we have better or worse luck with Bush's F (Score:3)
Of course you won't see this on the slashdot front page, as just about everyone with editorial control has some kind of irrational fear of republicians in general and Bush in particular.
I think it all comes down to whether Republicans want to be more friendly to the big business of entertainment or the big business of consumer electronics. Which group gave more money to the party?
I work for money. I choose to use some of that money to contribute to organizations that share my goals and philosophies, and expect them to lobby on my behalf. I don't begrudge companies that do the same, so long as they are not a monopoly (in the legal sense, in which case they have some pretty tight limits on what they are allowed to do).
IMHO... Bill
Re:This is sad. (Score:3)
The other side (Score:5)
It's getting worse. Copy protecting will not just be an issue of you not being able to copy your favorite CDs, but it will become an invasion of privacy. In order to "enforce" their copyrighting, companies will monitor what you're doing. Sure, they'll make their mistakes such as not patenting things and the DeCSS incident (e-mail me if you want the code). However, as time goes by new formats will appear and Hollywood will stop producing for the older "non-protected" formats. You'll soon end up with movie players that decrypt the disc, encrypt the output (no in-between recorders will work), and have a TV that decrypts the input.
Of course, even with remote checking, hacks will happen. So now what do they do? They make your regster your machine, and make a license agreement that says that they can come into your house and check your equipment any time that they wish.
Think it's rediculous? Not really. All you need is a few major film companies to decide to use a particular format and refuse to publish in any other format. Either you watch their movies their way, or you don't watch them at all.
Now let us say that you get a boot-let machine and now you're going to order your favorite film, right? They'll think of that too. Each machine will have its own unique key, and in order to have anything sent to them, they'll have to call a service center, send their key and a phone number. The center calls back the number and verifies the key. Oops, now you're registered and they've got your address.
Next argument: you don't have a license on your machine. Their take: so what? We'll place a license on the film saying we can check the equipment your use to watch it, and since they've got your phone number, you're out of luck AGAIN.
Ok, so you've got your machine now, but they can't stop you from using it right? Of course they can. You've just violated their agreement by using non-approved equipment to view their materials. Next step: Court, then a fine, and jail time.
Now, please don't say they won't go that far because nobody will buy it. Give it five years and at this rate people will become apathetic. It's like the book "Animal Farm". You slowly ween them of their food/rights, and then they don't notice. And don't expect people to not go with it just because of the fact that they don't like it. Just wait 'till all the blockbusters are licensed like this. It's their way or the highway - agian.
Be afraid...be very afraid...
Like Karma doesn't matter...
Moderators: -1, nested, oldest first!
Comment removed (Score:5)
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re:This is sad. (Score:3)
But they have realized that in the reality of consumerism, the Internet must be used to distribute old media content before it will grow to have its on media content. Everything they can do to discourage the new distribution format, they believe, is in their favor.
Re:Uh... (Score:3)
What makes you think you should be able to copy them?
Because we feel like it. It's our country, not some Hollywood exec's.