New HDTV Encryption Obsoletes Sets 372
Brian Weatherhead writes "I wrote an article, detailing the MPAA's control over your HDTV. Their new standards will make any HDTV bought before 2002 obsolete!
Consumers will be upset to say the least." Talks
about the different formats for video signals, and
copy protection methods for those signals. And yes,
if this goes down, anyone with an HDTV without DVI input
could very well be watching 480p signals when HDTV
standardizes. Fortunately at the rate this stuff has
been happening, those TVs will long since have died.
But one thing is for sure- with the DMCA, and these
new video formats, PVRs could become a thing of the
past.
Glad I didn't buy one.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Glad I didn't buy one.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Glad I didn't buy one.... (Score:3, Funny)
Seriously, unless or until television is rejuvenated with "The CowboyNeal Show", I think that concerns about the RIAA and MPAA hijacking HDTV are little more than alphabet-soup hysteria.
Re:Glad I didn't buy one.... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Glad I didn't buy one.... (Score:2)
This will be prevented by stupidifying the populace even more.
Re:Glad I didn't buy one.... (Score:5, Informative)
Nobody is broadcasting in HDTV? All major networks are broadcasting things in HDTV. Hook up an antenna. Here are the following shows I can watch _just tonight_ on my HDTV:
ABC: Tarzan, Alias, The Practice
CBS: Eduction of Max Bickford, Rosa Parks Story
Fox: Simpsons, Malcom, Bernie Mac
NBC: Winter olympics
UPN: Buffy
and more.. movie channels HBO, Showtime, etc.
Unless you live in the boonies, most major networks are indeed broadcasting in HDTV OTA. HDTV programming is available via satellite for DirectTV and Dish network. HDTV is available via cable for those with certain cable companies (time warner and a few others).
Next time you post something, try getting a clue and stop karma whoring with your political rhetoric.
Re:Glad I didn't buy one.... (Score:2)
Or unless you live in the NYC area, because most of the HDTV antennas went down with the WTC....
Re:Glad I didn't buy one.... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Glad I didn't buy one.... (Score:2)
At this point I have no doubt that a HDTV that does not support PVR use is unsaleable. The people who are early adopters for HDTV are precisely the people who are buying PVR.
At this point the main reason to buy HDTV is to use it with a DVD player. There is no HDTV broadcast content worth speaking of. So people are buying a widescreen TV to watch movies.
I don't think that the format that broadcast TV uses is very important at this point. Who wants to watch a film ruined with numerous adverts? People who care about HDTV will be watching on HBO or the like. Just what content do NBC, CBS and the like that is in the least bit interesting?
Best way to watch the Olympics was via Canadian satelite.
Re:Glad I didn't buy one.... (Score:3, Insightful)
When is someone going to stand up for the individual?
How about when we start doing our part and snail mailing our represenatives in congress and our state government just what we think of this?
And no form letters, be orginial!
House.gov's representative lookup site [house.gov]
Re:Glad I didn't buy one.... (Score:2)
This is looking more and more like expensive sucker-bait. People do not buy expensive toys to be hassled and made to look foolish.
Look at it. See it for what it is. Snicker politely, and leave.
DVI = Digital Visual Interface (Score:2)
Kjella
Suggestion (Score:5, Funny)
Let's all get together and rent a cargo plane, load up all our newly obsolete HDTV equipment, and drop it on the MPAA's headquarters. It's pretty heavy stuff; should make a lot of nice holes in the roof, and will hopefully squash some of those responsible.
Re:Suggestion (Score:2)
Certainly the history books shall forever remember such great and tragic events as the Nazi movenment, Women's suffrage, the Civil Rights Movement, and perhaps most of all, the great HDTV Technology March.
Clearly this *is* a call to arms - and a necessary one at that. Leave no man or woman responsible left to stand!
(Read: I agree you guys should bitch about this - it's not fair.. but let's not compare it true moments in history..)
Re:Suggestion (Score:2)
You know, I debated whether I should bring up far more important historical issues, because the present battle is less important. One can not compare the gravity of Women's Sufferage, the Nazi and Civil Rights Movements to copyright and fair use.
But, while the gravity of the wrongness may be different, the principle isn't. The only difference is that it will take longer for the outrage to grow, and, in the end, some of it will be misplaced (hating corporations simply because of their wealth, rather than how they got it).
This does not mean, however, that we should accept the status quo. After all, I bet that, at the time, the Civil Rights Movement, was percieved by many as "just the grumblings of some ornery niggers". I've heard many arguments that "slavery was all right at the time", for example. Frankly, while my garden does need to be fertalized, I never bought that line of crap.
Re:Suggestion (Score:3, Insightful)
Want to trade videos of your son's birthday party with the family? You must use the MPAA tax paid approved recording media so the elite can get their cut. Its all to support their vision of making sure the Top Artists have a decent home.
When you buy media sponsored by the RIAA or MPAA, you are supporting their lobbying efforts to help squash our independent recording technology. Patents and copyrights are only going to become more draconion. Its already a criminal offense to watch DVD's on my Linux box (I'm one of those nuts that just can't get along with Windows.) When will the persecution begin? Raids! Fines! Prison time!
Do not... (Score:3, Insightful)
What the hell is this?!?!?!?!?!?! (Score:4, Funny)
My car is now obsolete...
My existing collection of Blade Runner is now obsolete...
My copy of Photoshop is now obsolete...
Sun is obsolete...
My jacket is obsolete...
My understanding of copyright laws are obsolete...
And my abandonware games are obsolete...but they were to begin with...
: (
Re:What the hell is this?!?!?!?!?!?! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:What the hell is this?!?!?!?!?!?! (Score:2)
--Blair
People just keep forgetting... (Score:5, Insightful)
If it's viewable, it's recordable. If there's money to be made modding TVs and PVRs to be recordable, someone will be selling mod-chips.
"But that's illegal!"
That's for the courts to decide. Perhaps the primary purpose of mod-chips will be allowing viewers to exercise so-called 'fair use' rights of a personal copy for private viewing, and piracy is only an unintentional side-effect.
You know, like Napster.
Re:People just keep forgetting... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:People just keep forgetting... (Score:2)
Last time I checked, you could get a $100 dvd player on amazon that didn't require anything but the factory remote to change the region.
Kaplan Kangeroo court (Score:4, Insightful)
Where the only parts of the law that matter are those that can be used to find you liable, and not those that can be used to exonerate you.
And what will people do when the DMCA is tightened so that even owning a mod chip becomes an automatic felony with a 10 year prison sentence?
It is no longer just a game of tecnological cat and mouse. We are the mouse, and the gov't will stomp us to death if we try to run away from the cat - it is a no win situation - UNLESS WE GET THE LAWS CHANGED OR OVERTURNED.
Re:Kaplan Kangeroo court (Score:5, Funny)
I mean... look at the horrible assinine things that the MPAA and the RIAA are doing, then look at the state of movies and music. Sure there's some good stuff coming out, but compare either to the 60's and 70's and, there just isn't the kind of creativity in the business that there once was. And I don't think that's because there aren't any good ideas left, I just think somewhere someone discovered that shit is easier to sell.
So we should get up and leave.
Re:Kaplan Kangeroo court (Score:2)
Our politicians can be bought the same as yours, so you better move your ass, because you can vote on this things, but we can not (we have unelected bureaucrats making the calls, see the EU patent office).
Re:Kaplan Kangeroo court (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Kaplan Kangeroo court (Score:2)
Re:Kaplan Kangeroo court (Score:2)
The only "tightening" needed is dropping the 5 years + $500,000 for first offense. Second offense is already 10 years + $1,000,000.
-
Re:People just keep forgetting... (Score:5, Interesting)
It doesn't even have to be viewable to be recordable. Anyone with a DirecTV Tivo is doing everything necessary today to work with an encrypted or compressed video stream. The DirecTivo boxes take the unadulterated downlink signal right off the receiver and spew it onto the hard drive. It's only decoded during playback.
It's a no-brainer to record the HDTV signal, regardless of its format, and save all the bits, and then stream them out later in time shifted form to the HDTV receiver.
Of course, all the encryption scheme would have to have is some sort of time based encoding synced with the TV's clock to render time shifted playback impossible, but how smart have the industry protocol designers been so far?
Oops! They're reading this post! We're doomed now.
(And of course, it presupposes that people can set the clocks on their TVs. Given the number of flashing "12:00" displays on the world's VCRs, this doesn't seem likely...)
People aren't aware that it's happening... (Score:2)
Article: http://www.digi.no/dtno.nsf/pub/dd20020221155040_
Law:
http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/e
We're saved! Well, some of us... (Score:4, Informative)
The article predicts that hardware with analog outputs will become harder to find in the future, but that doesn't mean they'll disappear completely, and by the time they've nearly gone, I'll bet I'll have reason to upgrade anyway.
Re:We're saved! Well, some of us... (Score:2)
But what are you going to do in a few years (2006-2007 IIRC) when TV stations will be forced to go all-digital?
Re:We're saved! Well, some of us... (Score:2)
As such, I purchased my TV with the understanding that extra money would be required for an HD decoder box, and thus I wasn't upset about it. I will be very upset if, once HD is actually broadcast (assuming that I've not died of old age before that happens) I cannot view the signal at anything better than 480p because of unneeded DVI "standards", and I'll happily look into any illegal mods that would allow a set-top decoder to output the analogue signal in a 1080i format.
Re:We're saved! Well, some of us... (Score:2)
Re:We're saved! Well, some of us... (Score:5, Informative)
Take a look at the box your HDTV Set Top Box came in, or look at the manual. It includes the capability to "down-res" the analog output, if copyright holders so choose.
That is what is obsoleting your old set. When the industry decides that DVI is the only acceptable interface, they flip the switch, and the 1080i signal is now down-res'd to 480p.
What a luxury, to be an industry that can spit on consumers & still flourish. In fact, HDTV owners are often some of the biggest movie fans, trying to get the best quality possible for their movie viewing. And the movie industry says "screw you"!
Re:We're saved! Well, some of us... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:We're saved! Well, some of us... (Score:2)
Assuming it's your set that's reducing the quality of what you see, and not the transmitter that's transmitting reduced quality, you can quite legally build a circumvention device, since reducing the quality is not a right enjoyed by copyright holders under current legislation.
That's not to say that the current totalitarian regime in the US (and by extension the rest of the world) won't make it illegal at the drop of a "campaign contribution".
Re:We're saved! Well, some of us... (Score:2, Interesting)
Why HDTV anyway? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'll never pay for an HDTV and I can't afford one. So why do I need to pay out my wahzoo for one of eighteen methods of viewing HDTV?
I'd rather go to Europe and watch my stuff on PAL. At least PAL is affordable and widely available and also has a much better picture than NTSC.
HDTV will just suck too much to gain any viewing pleasure from it.
TV is laim... (Score:2, Interesting)
The way to break the MPAA is for a different industry to come and provide the public with something better/more versatile than TV.
Honestly I'm typing this on an HDTV (Score:2)
As for my set's obsolesence? I get my tv shows off the net anyway- the set is for games and dvd's
Sometimes, older is better. (Score:3)
I'm not touching DVD's until the decss and region encoding issues are resolved (putting my money where my mouth is and voting with my wallett), and the way they have screwed up HDTV since it's original version 10 - 12 years ago is disgusting. This is absolute proof of entropy.
Someday I may replace my cassettes with CD's, but I'm waiting for the technology to prove itself...
Master of the Obvious. (Score:3, Interesting)
No kidding? Anyone with any technical savy knows that there is virtually nothing that the MPAA nor any other entity can do that can effectively control the dissemination of information at this point in history. Seems this guy is just parroting what is taken to be obvious around here - the traditional content provider business model is dead, or at least mortally wounded. Must be a Katz deciple.
On the plus side, this article may actually inform more people besides the
Geez - I'm sounding like Katz too. Maybe he's right? Naaaa....
Soko
Just called dad. (Score:2)
Either have a 65" tv for a couple years or have a 65" tv for many years, but you have to wait a little while first..
either way, I don't think he is giving it up quite yet.
If only... (Score:5, Insightful)
People knew what they were buying in to.
The problem with things like this is the fact that people don't know they're being cheated. If everybody knew that recording your favorite episode of while you're out for dinner is illegal under the DMCA due to the (Begin Rant) legal crap the sleazebag lawyers who work for the MPAA think up (End Rant), then people would not buy it.
So if people knew what the MPAA, etc... is doing behind our backs, they wouldn't buy it - instituting a sort of boycott. Then, maybe the MPAA would realize that we are the source of their money and better suck it up and make us happy.
We're always complaining about how deep corporate pockets can be, but if we have a probem with it - then don't buy it - we're the ones giving them that money.
Re:If only... (Score:2)
I think companies should be required to clearly mark crippled products as such. The average customer expects that when he buys a video recorder, he can use it to record any films he likes. If that's not possible, the recorder should be sold with an obvious label on the box that says "will not record some movies."
I know that some so-called liberals will scream about such requirements being overregulation, but they are not. Free markets are all about being able to chose the product you like best. How can you make a purchase descision if you don't know all the facts?
In Germany, many lawyers argue that if you purchase a music CD and it doesn't play in your computer, you have the right to return it, unless you knew about the restriction before. Interestingly enough, many new CDs (mostly the mainstream chart music) now carry a label that says "will NOT play on PC/Mac," and are not labeled "compact disc digital audio" any more. I haven't purchased any of them yet, and will avoid doing so as long as possible.
Re:If only... (Score:2)
The result is that you put a LOT of pressure on the electronics companies by killing their market. If there is no market bacause people think that their equipment will be made obsolite, the electronics industry WILL NOT build these new devices. The RIAA/MPAA's schemes are all at the mercy of the electronics manufactureres. If they don't build the hardware, these schemes will fail on the drawing board.
Re:If only... (Score:3, Insightful)
Be honest - how many of you did NOT see Lord of the Rings? How many saw it more than once?
I haven't seen it. I also don't own a DVD player. By the time I get home and contemplate video entertainment, I am tired. Too tired to fight with a device I supposedly own just to get it to do what it's capable of. I will buy one when it's designed to do what I want it to do, not what the MPAA wants it to do. If MPAA wants it to do their bidding, let them pay for it.
Unfortunatly, the majority are buying these consumer hostile appliances anyway. It seems that their fine public education never covered the basics of supply and demand. They never learned that if the majority demand, someone will supply. If you want something to go away, DONT BUY IT!
I will finally see Star Wars Ep. I soon though. I bought the VHS tape used for $6.99.
Re:If only... (Score:2)
Except that it's not on broadcast. Rugrats is on Nickelodeon, which is owned by... [wait for it]... Universal.
Re:If only... (Score:2)
Right. BUt what if the actual act of recording will be possible only if you bypass access controls - otherwise DVRs will not work.
Talking about DVDs, not broadcast (Score:5, Insightful)
At the current rate of HDTV adoption, there is no chance of the FCC agreeing to allow encrypted broadcasts - one of the FCCs rules is to promote the use of the airwaves, and nothing stops that quicker than calling the early adopters who invested thousands of dollars "suckers."
Being unable to view high-res DVD-NGs on older HDTVs sucks, but it's not as bad as the broadcast getting encrypted.
Re:Talking about DVDs, not broadcast (Score:5, Interesting)
The first example of this threat is satellite TV. DirecTV. Almost all HDTV decoders today also do DirecTV. These boxes carry a warning saying they can down-res the signal if the copyright holders choose. So, when DVI is set as the standard, they tell HBO & DirecTV, and they flip the switch. After that, my HBO-HD is no longer 1080i, it is now 480p.
Broadcast TV is another matter. I think that broadcast TV will not be effected by this. But, given the history of this stuff, I am not willing to assume that.
Broadcast TV is included (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, the new standards are intended to be used by OTA local TV stations. They plan to instruct decoders to down-res any non-secure compliant setups.
So, people that watch over the air HDTV now and enjoy 1080i & 720p broadcasts, will eventually be watching 480i/p versions unless they upgrade to the new compliant hardware.
Insane? Yes.
Foolhardy? Yes.
Sorry, but HDTV w/ encryption won't sell. (Score:2)
Bottom line, encrypted HDTV is not something I would buy even if there was no other alternative available.
Let it go, man (Score:5, Insightful)
If they would just sell DVDs for $11.99 and and provide movie downloads for $5.99, only a very few would bother pirating their stuff. Forget the encryption mumbo-jumbo. Make it easy for your customers to have a good experience.
Every time somebody sneaks snacks into a movie in their purse, the movie industry loses a few dollars of revenue that should have been spent on outrageously priced candy. However, if people were strip-searched entering the theaters so that the few 'snack-pirates' would be caught, there would be a huge backlash, so they live with the illicit food munchers. As it happens, 99% of the people buy the food in the theaters anyway. No need for high-tech countermeasures or a Concessional Millenium Snackfood Act to protect the theater owners..
It's too bad that the media corporations can't seem to apply real-world customer relations common sense to the digital realm.
Before 2002? It's worse than that.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Contradicting this stance on encryption, JVC and a few of the studios just announced last week that they will be selling HDTV movies on D-VHS tapes this year. The content on the tape is copy protected, but the link to the display is plain old unencrypted component video.
Also, the argument they make to justify this requirement is that they don't want people to be able to make "perfect digital copies" of their movies. That's very reasonable, I am fine with that. But, component outputs are ANALOG. To record a movie via the analog outputs does not create a perfect copy. And the equipment to do so is not cheap or accessible. How many of you have seen a VCR capable of recording a VGA output? That's what would be needed (in fact, the output of my RCA HDTV decoder is VGA).
DVI is solving a problem that does not exist. They try to put spin on it & represent it as a benefit to the consumer. But, that is the opposite of the truth. On my tube based HDTV, component or VGA inputs are capable of sending an image better than the set can display. There is no quality advantage. It only adds cost / complexity / and obsoletes a lot of hardware.
You know what's funny.... (Score:2, Funny)
All somebody has to do to ban Calculus class forever from all highschools in the US is make some encryption based on integration or differentiation. I'm sure that's already happened.... I can see it now: "Calculus, the study of Differential Equations, and all of number theory have been declared unlawful because their primary purpose has become the circumvention of encryption."
[Moderators - it's supposed to be a joke. Mod appropriately]
_Knots
Does this affect PCI cards? (Score:2)
Re:Does this affect PCI cards? (Score:2)
Re:Does this affect PCI cards? (Score:2)
Re:Does this affect PCI cards? (Score:3, Informative)
Something is gonna change... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Something is gonna change... (Score:2)
If you keep giving someone the stick they then use to beat you, who is at fault?
Re:Bzzzzt try again (Score:2)
Someday... (Score:2)
---
Please give me the strength to turn off my TV!
Don't you think it more likely (Score:2)
Re:Don't you think it more likely (Score:2)
It's only media (Score:4, Informative)
One note we can take from the history of a commercially unsuccessful product is DAT copy protection. DAT had the potential to become a consumer audio format, but the industry was really worried about copy protection since with DAT you can make perfect digital copies. They put in a copy protection "feature" called SCMS Serial copy management system [club-internet.fr]. After a few years deck manufactures started producing decks that defeat SCMS. Maybe this will happen with HDTV media protection. If not, I'm sure somebody will figure out a way to bypass it or reverse engineer it.
Re:It's only media (Score:2)
Namely- if these guys are going to carry on like this, save your money- their product's gonna die, and it'll be THEIR loss if you have the sense to ignore them.
why don't we think realistically... (Score:2, Interesting)
the movie industry is actually worth my money.
maybe the actors are overpaid, and there are scores of shitty movies...
...but...
i'd drop $15 for a good DVD over a good CD any day.
why? hundreds of people put their effort into making one movie, while only a hand-full put their efforts into making a cd. not only that... but a movie is more engrosing than a cd will ever be because you're using both visuals and sound.
what about fair use, you cry? give me one good example where you *need* to copy a movie that you own. i can think of a few for music, namely transfering music to another format to be portable, such as an mp3 device. but what about movies?
finally... be realistic here... you can bet your sweet ass that someone will make a box which strips out whatever encryption they throw into this new movie medium --> tv format.
(side note) it's funny how the networks are so against PVRs, yet you see their commercials ON TELEVISION. funny to see that networks will help pimp the product, but hate the errosion of their business model as well. that's hypocracy at its finest.
Re:why don't we think realistically... (Score:2, Insightful)
> what about fair use, you cry? give me one good example where you *need* to copy a movie that you own
Fair use? Let's suppose I want to use clips from a movie in a class I'm giving about filmmaking. Not the whole movie - just a few scenes. Almost everyone would agree that this should not be illegal. Indeed, it is in the publishers interests that I can do this so that future artists can create new content. And yet, this is not possible.
But copying is not the real issue - it's about control. Look at the DVD furore about DeCSS. Professional pirates don't need to break encryption - they make bit perfect encrypted copies using professional mastering encryption. However, DeCSS (and the DMCA) makes it illegal for me to write my own DVD player so I can watch *my* DVD on my Linux machine.
I could (maybe) accept the loss of ownership if the consumer saw some benefit - e.g. if I could pay $2 to watch a time-limited movie over the net, or continue to pay $15 to buy the DVD. But as proposed, I don't have that choice.
I'm not saying Copyright is wrong - content producers need protection. But a balance must be struck.
Re:why don't we think realistically... (Score:2)
then you can use an copy prohibition bit-stripper or de-css box. i'm sure your school would have one available to use. besides... dvd is random access. how hard would it be to swap a few discs around?
You mean those devices which the kangaroo courts decided have no legitimate use (and thus are illegal to produce or even link to in the U.S.?
You also assume that they won't decide that you must view the FBI warning for a full 15 seconds and a few 'important messages' before accessing the content.
if it were really important to linux users to be able to watch their dvd movies, why hasn't red hat stepped up to plate and built their own legit dvd player for their own distro?
Pobably that up front fee + royalties for the right to produce such a thing + not being able to make it Open Source (much less Free software).
Slate article (Score:3, Interesting)
It seems that unless you're buying the TV so you can watch your DVDs on a nicer screen, it's probably not a good idea. You're going to be watching a lot of NTSC 480 line video for quite some time whether your TV can handle the extra resolution or not.
Annoying but ultimately will they be sucessfull ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Are we not heading towards a global resession ? will people surely not be buying less? will people
The big problem
which limit x and y is that all of these standards basicly require you to buy new hardware.If This hardware does not offer a signifigant improvement which is obvious to the consumer , the consumer will not buy it,especialy not if cash is tight.
The efferts of the music industry and the film industry to pull off this sort of trick will only really occur when they offer something which people regard as a valuable feature which incorperates whatever drm the entertainment industry wants as a consequence of using this attractive new feature. I think that aol/time warner and sony are the two companies in the best position to pull this off.What they basicly need to do is offer access to a large library of content for a set fee
People got a taste of napster and they liked it, it was easy to use and allowed them to listen to what they wanted when they wanted, it allowed them alot of choice and freedom to explore and expand there musical tastes. soon companies like aol/time warner and sony will set up shop offering for a monthly fee access to large libraries of content encoded and protected by what ever means they want.Basicly it will be like pay tv.
The danger with all of this in my opinion can be seen with aol/time warner and the danger in my mind is with the link bettween content provider and isp , over the next couple of years, I think what will happen is that for an isp to be successfull it will have to offer exclusive content, the isps with the biggest content librarise will be the biggest isp's.I can see these isps locking down what there users can and can not do
will have there hotmail account,they will be able to send there free sms and use there favorite im and shop till they drop with there credit card.
Privacy,freedom of speech and certain rights will be the price along with a a scabby corkscrew price styled uncompetitive media system which we will all have to put up with if we want access to the majority of music/film/tv/games.
But is this really the case ?Will things be so absolutely terrible , will there be no independent networks , no truely free content,(as in freedom), or indenpendent music which will not require the permission of the system lords to played ? There will alwasy be the internet or some remains of what it once was and this is some thing which may offer a little glimmer of hope, Independent labels and film makers could open ther own site and these sites could become popular, bored people could hear of these independent networks and go visit them
The only differences between the future net I describe and the net we use today is control and the implications of this control on culture and inovation.If the net is not to become basicly tv , it will be due to a signifigant amount of people not adopting drm technologies
do you really think they are ever going to stop? (Score:2)
There is a very simple solution to this: kick the habit. Don't buy a TV or a PVR. Read a good book instead, go see a play, or spend time with friends.
Money Money Money... (Score:2)
This Really Sucks, but there is some hope... (Score:4, Insightful)
However, there is a good chance for those manufaturers to promote some really strong customer loyalty from those same customers. The manufaturers had best oppose this, loudly and they had best put their money behind it. The next bit, is that they will want to provide to all the customers who own an earlier model HDTV with a converter box to convert the signal to something their TV can handle.
As long as we are at it, why dont the DVD and TV manufaturers take a lesson from the PC industry, and create some removable hardware cards that can be used to adapt their hardware in the event of a standards shift? This feature alone could put a TV manufaturer ahead of the game since it appears obvious that encryption standards will be a moving target.
I dont exactly like the current Copyright situations, but at least the hardware manufaturers can make things easier for the consumers.
END COMMUNICATION
Re:This Really Sucks, but there is some hope... (Score:2, Informative)
See Preston Padden, VP at Disney play spin doctor on this one right here:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s
Again... (Score:4, Interesting)
They are doing EVERYTHING to kill their own buisness. They put crazy protection schemes that screws up joe nobody's CD in his old CD player, they do everything to kill online music sharing instead of building a successful buisness model on top of it, they put up stuff like DMCA that upsets just about everyone exept large corporation that don't even think before publicly using hot terms like "terrorist" to describe some developpers, and now, with such an announcement, they simply WACK in the face the people WITH MONEY (because, you NEED money to buy a half decent TV with hdtv support, and you need LOADS of it to buy a decent screen size with HDTV support). What message are all these moves sending to the consumers?
"We can't decide on a standard, but be an early adopter with only 1% support of channels for the technology you payed good money for, and we'll make it obsolete even before getting to 2%"
"We want your money, once we have it, we don't give a rats ass about you anymore, get on with it"
And the most lame but starting to become excusable: "Well I've got ripped once, twice, now I'll support the piracy system because I have to buy one hacked hardware and I don't have to deal with this shit no more!"
Protecting content is one thing, I had nothing against DVD being encrypted BEFORE becoming public and mainstream, at least then, NOBODY was had, everything was "standard" and you knew that it would probably take something like a new format before everything you bought got obsolete, and that new format would be backward compatible like dvds are to CDs.
TVs aren't cheap like DVD players, and especially HDTV units with decent size and features. If this passes, you just gave a go to pirates to make devices to "clean the signal off that dirt and make it work on older sets" (or circomvention device under the DMCA I guess), for a totally legit use. You'll have fun in court because IANAL but I'm sure there's going to be a big grey zone if such an issue arises.
God I'm glad I'm living in Canada sometimes, we have a clown as a prime minister, but at least they aren't pulling that kind of pathetic moves on us, yet
DIVX, anyone? (Score:5, Interesting)
PVRs vs HDTV (Score:2, Interesting)
In a battle between PVRs and HDTV, PVRs will win. Much as I want the quality of HDTV, if I can't watch it when I want to, or even when I can, then it doesn't exist. And my family is much less techo/videophile than I am --- quality really doesn't matter that much to them.
I have a nice analog NTSC box. (Score:3, Insightful)
The thing will probably last me another 20 years.
In fact, I have no intention of replacing it until it dies, during which I can only hope this content control bullshit is sorted out.
If I'm going to so much as subscribe to anything on HDTV, there had damn well better be some way for me to record the shows I want to see. I don't really watch TV now, but I did when I had a satellite feed. I'd do it all over again, but I'd have a satellite TIVO this time.
I'm bitching because I would love to eventually set up my home theater with a widescreen HDTV setup, but I will seriously think twice about it with content controls...even if they don't affect my viewing habits.
Suuuurrrre it will..... (Score:2, Insightful)
2. HDTV Programming while becoming a bit more common, is still few and far between by comparison.
3. Who actually watches that much TV anyway? (Sorry, but really) The only things I watch on TV anymore are low-res, low-quality by nature. (Simpsons, Family Guy, South Park, and I only watch them when i happen to be bored and they are on)
As I remember it, there's some kind of loopwhole where providers can use the HDTV space to provide more low res channels and thats about all I see happening in the forseeable future. I regard HD as dead in the water.
There is no way in hell they will stop tvrs (Score:2, Insightful)
So you can always get your signal from there. Sure some more hacking will be required, but that doesnt stop people from putting chips in their consoles.
PVR only semi-impossible, but there are other ways (Score:2)
If they wanted to get picky they could broadcast it with timestamps and bits that tell the TVs not to play it back at any other time than live. While the supreme court ruled that timeshifting is legal, it's uncertain if that means they are required to make it easy or possible.
That leaves you with opening up your sealed decrypting TV and decoding the analog signals going into the CRT, or putting a camera at the screen. Not going to be very common.
There is another solution, however, which is to change the nature of how advertising integrates into TV. Make TV pay TV but give people a discount, all the way to free, every time they really watch a commercial. Then you don't need to put the decryption in the monitor, which is good, but you still need DRM to make the pay TV work.
Details on my page on the future of tv [templetons.com]
Re:PVR only semi-impossible, but there are other w (Score:2)
(In fact other than pausing you must be able to fully decrypt it to do any of these things.)
fraud? (Score:5, Interesting)
If this is the case, wouldn't consumers be able to file a class action lawsuit? They should, and it should cost all involved dearly. Possibly, it should even be severe enough that the government should dissallow the use of encryption by the broadcasters.
At the rate this is going, I think people may need to consider government oversight of the mpaa, and to a limited extent, the studios. Although that goes against many capitolistic ideals, these groups seem to embrace every thing bad about capitolism. It sure wouldn't hurt the quality of media -- tv sucks so bad, I'm surprise people aren't embarrased to be in the industry, The stupidity most programs amazing. Very few movies are worth the price of gas to get to a theater, and most musicians are less creative than a person making $10 an hour on an assembly line.
Another option would be to do it the right way -- independant artists selling their wares via the net. Remove the current media houses from the process entirely. This will allow the true artists to not get lost in the shadows of mass marketted corporate garbage we are currently exposed to.
pain-in-the-ASSES? (Score:3, Funny)
MPAA does not control what is broadcasted (Score:2, Informative)
Opens the door for tiered pricing (Score:2, Insightful)
Lawyers and the Average Joe (Score:5, Insightful)
All of these ignorant little schemes whereby the movie/music/content industry slowly work towards implosion will most likely be killed within the next couple of years. Look at the Charly Pride fiasco - they seemed to get enough people together to get a class action lawsuit and force a settlement out of the industry. What happens when 24-49 year old people begin to feel the effects of the RIAA/MPAA's poor business decisions and governmental influencing?
More and more people are getting connected, want to take advantage of all that "new" technology. What will happen when millions of those people are forced into adopting that technology and find that it does little that they want it to and far less than what they've been able to do in the past. Lawyers are probably chomping at the bit waiting for this day to come so that they can chew into the cash cow that is the RIAA/MPAA.
Most of us here are of a small vocal minority. In the "grand scheme" of things it's seen that we have little power over the outcome of these decisions. But is that in fact true. Everyday I come in close contact with at least 20 people, 10 of which I have regular conversations with. Almost every person within my sphere of influence knows about these issues because I've taken the time to communicate them and worked it into conversations about things that are already happening in their lives. How many people within your sphere know about these issues? What will you do to change that?
This issue stirs up so many past issues not just in the music industry but also in how the government is run (US and Global), how laws are passed/enforced/judged, Intellectual Property, "freedom" of information, telling the truth - ethics in company and government communication, etc. It's crazy that there's a connection between wanting to tape Dawson's Creek and the need for US government political finance reform. That connection shouldn't even be there, companies should not be able to shape the policies of a government, only individuals should have that power. No corporate junkets, hosting, food, clothing, ad time, benefit dinners, fund raisers, trips, private meetings. These are PUBLIC officials, everything that they do outside of their personal life should be OPEN AND AVAILABLE TO PUBLIC SCRUTINY. If individuals mass and make requests that are beneficial to the corporations then GREAT that means it's probably beneficial to the public/consumer also. I don't want to hear that Merk/Medco, Phillip/Morris, SONY, AOL/TW endorse candidate X or that GM's local union whatever endorses candidate Y. I don't want to hear about how many lobbyists that MS has hired out from under AOL. I definitely do not want to hear about how some company or corporate rights group is influencing the EU or China or India or other foreign government. That's just crap and more and more they are the reason that the US gets shat upon by other countries. India and Pakistan population were mad because several companies pulled out after 9/11 and that meant jobs and livelihood lost to those people, people already underpaid for their quality work.
We should limit companies ability to influence any government. Companies should not be allowed to voice their issues through the same means meant for individuals. Does that mean that I think government should ignore the needs of business - No - I just think that it should be through a seperate channel that takes the issues and stores them like data and all of that government/corporate/public communication would be free and viewable to the people (public would be anonymous by request... comments would be posted without ID). The government should take the data and be proactive in it's use, not reactive to the corporate needs but forecast those needs based on what the public is telling them is the real need. I know that's all idealistic, but why can't idealism create realism? Why can't what we dream and think be manifested into something tangeable?
The average Joe does not yet see these issues as a problem and won't until they effect him or someone he knows. Therefore it's our task to communicate how it is or will be soon effecting us (and them) and make it very REAL for average Joe. The other issue is that the people we really need on our side couldn't care less about this issue because they are struggling on issues of food or daycare or healthcare and not "can I watch my otaku goodies". Until we show them that, eirily enough, this does/can/will effect them then we won't have the votes necessary to really do some damage
Re:Lawyers and the Average Joe (Score:2)
This is where you're wrong. In a Constitutional republic scheme like the U.S.'s founding fathers created, it is not business that is limited, but Congress and government. Our Constitution specifically forbids Congress, the President, and any federal body from subsidizing or restricting any business.
This is a key feature of our Congress -- the right to free trade. Instead of "protecting" the U.S. business, what needs to be done is let U.S. businesses compete on a world-scale. Instead of extending copyright to 150 years, return it to 7+7 years maximum, and you'll see a great deal of growth in authorship.
Don't limit businesses, campaign finances, or anything like that. Return our federal government to their constitutional, basic authority, and you'll see a lot of these problems will disappear -- taking along with them the income tax, welfare, property taxes, etc.
Timely story for me! (Score:3, Interesting)
However, before leaving I just happened to check
It seems I keep watching less and less TV, and fewer and fewer movies. I'm sure these new "standards" will only help me reclaim more time.
It's amazing that in their greedy quest for money, they actually deter me from giving them more!
Frankly I dont care. (Score:3, Interesting)
Sorry TV Industry, you need better content before you can convince me I need to be punctual.
Re:a lesson.. (Score:2, Informative)
I paid $239 for my Toshiba SD-5700 progressive scan DVD player. It has built in DVD-Audio and MP3 support. It's amazing how cheap devices can get when there are competing standards (SACD).
Re:Not a surprise (Score:3)
The ATSC digital broadcast standard is well defined. MPEG2 in the data stream is well defined. 1080i, 720p, 480p, and the other video formats are well defined. THESE are HDTV.
What is being discussed in the article is the digital connection between a computer (set top box) and a display device. HDTV can be done without this. DVI is simply an add-on to HDTV to limit access to the data.
Re:Will they allow PC-HTDV cards ? (Score:3, Informative)
You'll never be able to legally feed HD DirecTV into your PC, though.
Re:When will the hardware industry get sick of thi (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem is, quite often the hardware makers are also the culture industry. Take Sony, for example.
Re:Not quite... (Score:2)