Judge Says Sonicblue Doesn't Have to Monitor 295
MoD writes "From CNet: District Court Judge Florence-Marie Cooper on Friday overturned a late April ruling that required the maker of ReplayTV set-top box technology to write and install software to monitor what its customers were watching."
Strike one for the advant of spyware on TV (Score:3, Funny)
the last place I need more spyware is on my television. No one needs to know how many episodes of Star Trek I've been watching.
Re:Strike one for the advant of spyware on TV (Score:2)
I'd be more concerned about Teletubby viewing habits getting out. Not that I do that sort of thing, no sir.
Re:Strike one for the advant of spyware on TV (Score:2)
I used to wonder why Teletubbies was shown on our local PBS station at 2am. I figured that it was for really drunk people. Now that I have a toddler who sometimes wakes up in the middle of the night, I understand.
Re:Strike one for the advant of spyware on TV (Score:2)
The Teletubbies give your kid nightmares? I can understand that.
Re:Strike one for the advant of spyware on TV (Score:2)
Re:Strike one for the advant of spyware on TV (Score:2)
*waits patiently for the Bab5/Star Trek flamewar*
Re:Lifetime membership. (Score:2)
That's why you back up the HD (just like with your computer). Besides, if a service center replaces your TiVo, your lifetime subscription will be transferred to it.
(The 14GB drive that came with my TiVo was removed a few months ago; it's now in a FireWire case that I can take between home and work. I now have a 100GB 7200rpm hard drive (WD1000BB) in the TiVo. 30-some-odd hours at best quality (or is it more?) is a Good Thing.)
1984 (Score:2, Interesting)
We're not there yet.
Re:1984 (Score:2)
Re:1984 (Score:2)
No, the difference is that 1984 is fiction. Fiction intentionally twisted so far beyond reason and rationality as to shock the reader. Tivos spying on customers is reality. A reality that many have come to regard as normal and reasonable. Very bad, IMHO.
Start panicking when they put video cameras in Tivos.
I think it's time to start panicking (figuratively) when people in power think this is ordinary and reasonable.
-
Re:Don't call them "tivos"!!! (Score:2)
Yes, you're right. I was lazy and just copied TiVo from the post I was replying to.
-
Music to my ears... (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm starting to hear this more and more. I hope that this was an influence in the judge's decision. The simple fact of the matter is that markets change. You can't legally force them to stay put. Doing so will ruin this economy. There is a lot more at stake here than just ad revenue.
Re:Music to my ears... (Score:4, Insightful)
The US currently has laws against counterfeiting. Creating new laws to, for example, require all scanners to detect image signatures within US bank notes, would be completely possible yet plain silly since it could probably be easily defeated and would raise the cost of scanners. Yet this is exactly what the RIAA/MPAA wants with respect to copyrighted audio and video.
The parallels between the two situations were interesting to me. The irony that the government is more competitive than a private industry is not lost on me.
-tim
Re:Music to my ears... (Score:3, Interesting)
You know, there are laws requiring color copiers to detect US banknotes.
Just because the US Govt' does some smart things doesn't mean it doesn't do stupid things as well.
ObHeinlein (Score:3, Interesting)
-- The Judge in "Life-Line"
Re:Music to my ears... (Score:2)
Scrolling ads would be rather distracting, although a slideshow approach would be more palatable.
I think a better idea would be to offer special deals to people who can answer trivia questions. Imagine getting a free ice cream cone because somebody asked you "Which company makes the Jetta?"
But that would make SENSE... (Score:2)
Re:Music to my ears... (Score:2)
If I got "paid" to answer simple ad-questions like that, I'd be very tempted to "cheat" with smart (as can be) automation.
I think a better idea is if companies want to sell me their crap (or just burn their brand in my retina), then they should PAY ME for my attention first. As it is, they're used to captive audiences not being able to filter them out, so this is foreign idea I'm sure.
--
Re:Music to my ears... (Score:2)
The author was Heinlein, the story was Life-Line.
If the entertainment industry wants to spy... (Score:3, Interesting)
OTOH, the enterainment industry might wreck that product by not providing a commercial skip/fast forward feature. They're still deathly afraid that they'll piss of they're advertisers.
Re:If the entertainment industry wants to spy... (Score:3, Insightful)
OTOH, the enterainment industry might wreck that product by not providing a commercial skip/fast forward feature.
They might have the courage to add some features the others wouldn't, though. For instance, whenever you pause the unit, instead of showing the same screen forever, they could automatically replay recent commercials! They could also autosave commercials you might be interested in based on their similarity to other commercials that you enjoyed (i.e. watched). Then there would be the "Content Advance" feature (only works for channels that preserve the commercial marking signals) which would let you skip the tedious filler that is crammed between our beloved commercials. Just be careful! That content is there for a reason... if you only see the commercials you might start taking them for granted and getting tired of them! I think I read a science fiction story that had a scenario like that, but I can't recall the name...
Re:If the entertainment industry wants to spy... (Score:2)
Already done (Score:2)
Don't Hold Your Breath (Score:5, Insightful)
Rather than work with Replay TV or TiVo, it will only be a matter of time before the TV industry reps files for litigation that will require Replay TV to monitor their users for uncopyrighted or illegally disseminated materials, and prevent their transmission.
After all, it worked to get rid of Napster, didn't it?
Sigh.
-FC
Re:Don't Hold Your Breath (Score:2)
An open source project wouldn't concern themselves with the DCMA or network partnerships. They don't need advertisers and they don't need to make money. They just build functionality that they want.
Anyway, it's just a thought.
Re:Don't Hold Your Breath (Score:2)
Re:Don't Hold Your Breath (Score:3, Insightful)
What if instead of giving your VHS tape to grandma, you made a copy for her and gave her the copy, keeping the original yourself? IMHO, that's going beyond fair use. I've never examined ReplayTV for myself, but if it lets you send the program over the internet AND keep your own copy, then it's not really any different than making a copy of a VHS tape. The content owners are going to want to fight that more than fight the ability to fast forward over the commercials.
Re:Don't Hold Your Breath (Score:2)
BTW, I would only consider "Fair Use" for PPV. Normal TV/Cable/DSS is already paid for, I should be able to share that "Simpsons" ep with co-workers.
Not protected... (Score:2)
Fortunately, it is also not legal for the media industry to forcibly monitor what we do with our VCRs and tapes. (Of course it's not illegal for someone to produce a product that does monitor your use of that product, so maybe the media industry will find a different way of pressuring the recording devices industry... make it required for THX certification or something...)
Parity None
Re:Don't Hold Your Breath (Score:2)
There's a backdoor code to convert one of the buttons into 30-second skip, but I find fast-forward to be easier to use and more precise.
These guys [9thtee.com] have Ethernet adapters that you can add to your TiVo. Software is out there that'll extract the streams in TiVo's proprietary format and convert them to ordinary MPEG-2 video and audio streams. Once you have those, you can use your favorite editing and compression software to make VCDs, SVCDs, DVDs, Divx files, or whatever.
I have the entire first season of Enterprise (without ads) on SVCD. Most episodes came from my TiVo.
In response... (Score:5, Funny)
"Ok that's it. We've had enough with the public. Who do they think they are? Well, we have a plan.
All network TV will now be encrypted in a similar fashion to satellite TV. In order to be issued a decryption smartcard, customers will be forced to sit through 120 hours of non-stop commercials followed by back-to-back reruns of My Two Dads and Hart to Hart."
Re:In response... (Score:4, Funny)
The hacker community releases instructions for constructing an antenna capable of decrypting the new broadcasts using only spare AOL CDs, 4 paperclips and a rubber band.
Re:In response... (Score:2)
SONNY: Yeah, boob-tube... you know. I'd like to find out how the Braves are doin' after all this time. Probably still finding ways to lose.
DATA: (to Riker) Oh -- I think he means television, sir.
SONNY: Or maybe catch up on the soaps.
DATA: (to Sonny) That particular form of entertainment did not last much beyond the year Two Thousand Forty.
I'd say we might even be a bit ahead of the 2040 schedule.
Re:In response... (Score:2)
I'm not exactly sure how satellite broadcasters get around this, but I think it has something to do with the fact that for someone to tune in they must buy the dish and receiver from the satellite company.
Effects of technology on the tv industry (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Effects of technology on the tv industry (Score:3, Insightful)
[TMB]
Re:Effects of technology on the tv industry (Score:4, Funny)
Would this be the begining of the end of "free" over the air tv? I personally know of only a couple of people who do not have cable/satellite, is OTATV a dinosaur anyway?
Good point--cable television is widespread and fairly affordable; and it offers high signal quality even if the content does suck.
I really hope the TV broadcasters don't take a cue from web advertising. I can imagine it now:
Joe SixPack hits "power" button on remote to turn off his TV, only to get bombarded with six pop-up advertisements. He hits the power button to get rid of the pop-ups, and gets two more for every one he "turns off." The whole TV display goes blue and dumps a whole bunch of technical gibbersh, then goes black as a wisp of smoke escapes from the back of the set.
Re:Effects of technology on the tv industry (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Effects of technology on the tv industry (Score:2)
product placement
it's already used all over the place...i imagine if commericials go the way of the dodo, we'll see the t.v. shows become more of a commericial then they are.
Re:Effects of technology on the tv industry (Score:2)
Before every bedroom scene, there is a brief 30 second speech from the woman and another 30 sec speech from the man about which contraceptive is preferred by 4 out of 5 adulterers.
Re:Effects of technology on the tv industry (Score:2)
My guess would be "in band" commercials. Direct overlaying of banners (ala last World Cup) and advertising "tickers", similar to sports/news tickers (though tickers could be easily defeated by some contraption). And yes, more product placement in new shows.
Re:Effects of technology on the tv industry (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Effects of technology on the tv industry (Score:2)
1 - It's possible to have TV without advertisments. Look at HBO and their award-winning programming. I'd gladly pay for a FOX channel that played good shows (Futurama!) without commercial interruptions!
2 - I imagine it's been tough for the TV stations since cable. They used to share with a small handful of other stations in any particular market. Now the value of an ad on a channel has shrunk since viewers are spread among many more channels.
(Disclaimer: I'm not a media market analyst, but then when does not being an expert in anything prevent anyone from saying anything on Slashdot?
Re:Effects of technology on the tv industry (Score:2)
Or are you talking about the pay channels? I don't see that replacing commertial tv anytime soon.
Two FALSE assumptions (Score:2)
In general the majority of the population will not use commercial skipping technology. I know that most of the people that I've sat around with when watching a tape recorded show, rarely if ever hit the forward button and I think this is similar with the PVR folk. Additionally people will skip commercials even during live broadcasts, they'll flip channels (mostly the men) or find something else to do (especially if you have kids or your multitasking TV with some other chore). I would say that skipping technology would be statistically insignifant in it's effects on the ad market. I'd love to see someone come up with independent results to show one way or another.
My Prediction (Score:2)
Of course, since the TV networks see a very sizable chunk of their revenue from their non-broadcast divisions it really doesn't matter much. They'll scream and kick their way to Congress and the FCC who will accomodate their lockdown on program "sharing", but boradcast TVs days are numbered anyway. I give it until 2009 which is a few years past the mandatory digital changeover before people no longer care just as they no longer care about boradcast radio.
Re:Effects of technology on the tv industry (Score:2)
Yes, this is obviously true. BUT, if a PVR (or whatever) can be programmed to detect the presence of a commerical, then it can be programmed to automatically do something else when a commercial comes on, say switch to different channel (as a matter of fact, if the thing were real good, it could be scanning the other channels to figure out which out of a preset list is currently NOT showing a commercial, and switch you to that, in prioritized order). Heck, one could even imagine a station that is designed with this in mind and pumps some amusing content to you in 30-60 second blocks. Since it can do minor time shifting, if you missed a small portion of programming (say you went to the kitchen and it took a minute longer than you thought it would) then it could simply buffer the show and let it run into the first minute of the next commercial break (bascially the "pause live tv" feature, but commercial space aware). Lots of possibilities.
I wouldn't mind, but only if... (Score:4, Insightful)
This tragic ruling (Score:5, Funny)
This is a sad day for us lying bastards. I was just beginning to relish the idea of hacking the reporting mechanism. Then I'd be able to influence network programming without even viewing the shows. This way I could dictate the mindless drivel without having to watch any of it - a double win! Create enough spurious reports and the system would have been useless. *evil grin*
Re:This tragic ruling (Score:2)
There aren't enough people doing that kind of thing to skew models... it's why they've worked for so long. I have a friend who is on some grocery tracking system - he scans everything he buys and reports it back to some company. His buying habits are pretty damn weird too -- single male with two cats. He buys everything in MASSIVE bulk (witness the 30 packages of jello in his pantry - which haven't been touched in months), he feeds his cats Sunkist tuna, and so forth. So are his unusual buying habits going to skew the resulting data and render it all useless? Nope. Because if he's sufficiently outside the median the data will be thrown out through statistical methods. It won't even be a blip.
And small scale attempts to hack reporting software like you suggest won't even be a blip either. Sorry to make you realize that you aren't the world-changing, corporate-overthrowing, l33t hax0r you think you are.
A serious note (Score:2)
And small scale attempts to hack reporting software like you suggest won't even be a blip either. Sorry to make you realize that you aren't the world-changing, corporate-overthrowing, l33t hax0r you think you are.
My post was intended to be humorous, although the content was serious. You raise a objection which deserves a response.
You argue essentially that the actions of one man can't change the world. To recast this statement, you claim that a single write-in vote has little effect. I agree.
My argument is a little different. If the channel is open and the protocol broken, I can create many spurious activity reports, effectively 'stuffing the ballot box'. If only 20% or better yet 50% of the votes are mine, I'd have a significant influence.
To make this possible, three criteria be satisfied. One, the channel needs to be open and cheap. Using the internet to sending reports meets this criteria. Two, the protocol must be broken. This is the achilles heel. Clever encryption techniques would prevent an attack, but, ReplayTV doesn't have any incentive to do this well. On the other hand, the studios might be able to dictate the protocol. Fortunately, their track record hasn't been very good, so I'll suppose that their protocol can be broken. *smile* Three, the reports must avoid fraud detection mechanisms. Here I only need to make sure that my fake results model the statistics of the real ones close enough to fool the filters. Of course, my personal goals could be even weaker - I can corrupt the system by just casting doubt on all the legitimate results.
Finally, I'd like to commend the judge for this result. Unfortunately, not every spyware mechanism will be thrown out. As another reader has mentioned, the studios could just as easily build their own digital VCRs. If the existence of the spyware cannot be attacked, go for the protocol. If that doesn't work, try something else. Just keep fighting.
Re:This tragic ruling (Score:2)
Hmmm, according to this several hundred of our viewers watch nothing but stupid judge shows - People's Court, Moral Court, Judge Judy, Kid's Court, 65536 hours of Night Court, and ahh.... it seems Sylvester Stallone was quite popular in Judge Dredd.
-
Sonic Blue & ReplayTV are not protecting your (Score:2, Interesting)
This [216.239.51.100] cached google page is why I will not be buying a replaytv. When will device manufacturers make a decent product and leave me the fuck alone after the sale. I have money to spend and I will not support companies that harass me.
Re:Sonic Blue & ReplayTV are not protecting yo (Score:2)
First of all, the fact that you had to get that page from the Google cache and not from Sonicblue's own web site is a major clue that it is out of date information.
Second of all, I've owned a Replay for going on 3 years and I can report (accurately) that:
(a) So far there have been no banner ads in menus as you suggest. I'm not sure this feature even exists in the current software.
(b) While the "ad on pause" feature does still exist, it hasn't been used for a paid ad in over a year. The only ads that have appeared there recently are ads for discounted versions of Sonicblue's new products, to reward loyal Replay customers. And frankly they are not that intrusive, all you have to do is hit the EXIT button to clear them off and see the paused screen underneath.
So much hysteria, so few facts.
UK: Data Protection Act (Score:2)
Is there any law like this in the US? I'd love to see users being given the right to see the data on these boxes (when inevitably it is harvested), especially via some kind of telnet login ;-) then you could hack the contents and send their statistics to hell. Big brother, go away.
The business needs to change (Score:2)
Re:The business needs to change (Score:2)
Of course you remember. That's the most remembered commercial of all time. [ciadvertising.org] Made for Anacin, by Ted Bates.
sounds good to me (Score:2)
Spyware on the TV.. (Score:5, Insightful)
I already had a device that would allow me to record a live television program, skip all of the commercials and for a small fee send the ENTIRE program to my friends.. It's called a VCR.. It use to come in two flavors, Beta-Max (the Macintosh of VCR's) and VHS (the DOS of VHS, does 70% of Beta-Max, with better marketing).
I really think that the people who should have pressed the suit in the first place were the Nielson folks. They're the ones who really need to know that I've watched the entire Band Of Brothers series about 80 times so far....
The only reason that the first judge didn't make RCA/SONY/et al write software for VCR's that reported who was recording what was the simple fact that NOBODY knows how to program a VCR...
Good ruling, but we're screwed anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
The skipping-commercials feature gets Hollywood steamed. And I don't blame them -- it is the crux of their business model. No one likes their business model ruined, just ask the RIAA. The thing is, in the USA we get free, over-the-air TV in return for advertisements being pushed into our houses. That isn't going to change. Instead, where the advertisements are put will change.
On the third-to-last ER of the season, in the ultra-emotional opening segment where we saw people's reactions to Carter dying, the local NBC affiliate had a scrolling text banner across the top of the screen. "Important Details About The Crisis In Boston's Catholic Churches -- stay tuned to Channel 7 The News Station for an important news story tonight at 11!" (Or something close to that.) To the people that really care about ER, this was a major distraction and hurt the content.
It isn't just local affiliates that do this sort of thing. Sticking with NBC for a minute (though they aren't the only ones who do this), is anyone else sick of the text overlays when they come back from commercial? They state the show that you are watching (NBC logo + "The West Wing"), but right before they wipe it away, they REPLACE IT WITH AN AD for something else like "The Friends Baby Is Born This Thursday! (Check local listings.)"
This is only going to get worse. I'm not talking about product-placement stuff that has gone on for decades, I'm talking about how our television will very quickly resemble a poorly-designed web page. Navigation banner on the top, news/stock/other update scroll on the bottom, advertisement on either side and less than 40% of the on-screen space used for content, right in the middle. This will be extra-great with the poor NTSC standard we have in the US.
Sigh. [STRIKETHRU]At least we can point out drastic flaws in our administration when we need to.[/STRIKETHRU] The United States will win the war on terror, and dissenting voices will be quashed. This is wartime, people!
Re:Good ruling, but we're screwed anyway (Score:2)
The problem is channel stamping (I dont know why they do this - seems dumb to me), product placemnet (Ever seen an episode of friends - unintrusive adverts inside the program are much more influencing then adverts outside programs).
What I worry about is when they are going to have adverts at the same time. Mix a faint image of a coke can into the program etc.
Personally I'm all for paying for quality tv directly (in which case the cost of a can of coke should drop thanks to a reduction in advertising expense). if it gets too much I'll get the episode (in glorious high quality mpeg) of the internet. Hell, I'll pay for a decent fast internet source where I could download and burn shows before they come to air here in the UK. I've got a 10mbit line available, I want to be able to stream at svcd quality minimum)
As for crap TV? Either broadcast with normal adverts, I'll watch it if I'm bored. If you dont then I wont watch, end of story.
Re:Good ruling, but we're screwed anyway (Score:2)
Re:Good ruling, but we're screwed anyway (Score:2)
Carter didn't die - it was Dr Green.
Re:Good ruling, but we're screwed anyway (Score:2)
Carter didn't die - it was Dr Green.
Dr. Green didn't die - it was Dr. Greene.
Consequences of these devices (Score:5, Interesting)
Another example is on the Rosie O'Donnel show she recently shilled for Wendy's new salads, saying how great they were. I wasn't watching, but apparently while she was talking her producer said "Take a bite", "What?" "Just do it."
Another good example is the TV morning "news" shows on the day Coke launched Vanilla Coke. The Daily Show did a wonderful send up of this. "The Today show host then informed the Coco-Cola spokeswoman that it was time to go to a commercial break, at which point she just allowed her to continue speaking."
I can picture this getting a whole lot worse, as it's the enw hot trent in advertising. I've basically stopped watching TV altogether except for the Simpsons anyway.
Re:Consequences of these devices (Score:2)
I turned off the cable when they raised the rates again last summer, and never bothered to hook the antenna back up. What I miss: Buffy (but our cable company doesn't carry UBN anyhow). And it sounds like there's some good stuff on the Sci-Fi channel, which you also don't get here no matter how much you pay those !@#$%^&* freebooters at the cable company.
I'm just hoping enough people will get disgusted with 50 channels of crap and join me, so it becomes more profitable to release good shows to DVD than to the dying networks.
Re:Consequences of these devices (Score:2)
Ugh. That's just tacky, and I say that as an Apple shareholder. I much prefer the Mac placements in shows like Buffy and 24, where they fit right in and none of the characters give them a second thought. By not beating it over the viewer's head, it creates the impression that of *course* Willow would use an iBook for her white hat jobs, and of *course* a high-tech antiterrorist facility would have lots of Powerbooks and Cinema Displays.
Product Placement in a bizarre place (Score:2)
Even public radio and TV have fallen victim to product placement. :(
The other night I went with some friends to a Karaoke Box (basically, you do karaoke but instead of it being in a big bar in front of everybody, American style, you go in a room just big enough for you and your friends.. like what they do in Japan.
Anyway, I was disturbed that in the background video for one of the songs (you know what I mean, the really cheesy low-production-values video that they play as a background to the lyrics on the TV screen), some woman was wearing a denim jacket with Coca-Cola patches sewn all over it.
Given the patches and how they didn't really go with the jacket at all, it is pretty much impossible that the jacket just happend to have Coca-cola patches on it for no reason.
I guess they'll stick an ad anywhere.
Ad model that could work... (Score:2)
Imagine buying a Cell phone from AT&T, but getting $25 off for being able to answer this question: 'Q. What AT&T plan offers one low rate for any time, any where? A. One rate'
If somebody doesn't know the answer to this, they could go look it up on the net or watch TV with the ads and figure it out.
If somebody does know the answer, then what's the point in pummeling them repeatedly with ads? Annoyance is a big reason that people want to skip the ads. Well, if I'm willing to remember the 'One Rate' plan, then the advertiser's done their job, lets stop bugging me about it until it's interesting to me.
The big advantage of this idea is that it gives people incentive to watch the ads, instead of trying to strap them to their chairs.
Re:Ad model that could work... (Score:2)
Coming soon to a popup near you. Or a DVD. Or your cable box. See U.S. Patent #5,855,008.
Re:Ad model that could work... (Score:2)
Actually I was thinking about something like this for PC's. Download a show, install it, and you have to answer a few questions like this first. Once you've done that, you've permanently unlocked that episode so you never get bugged for ads again with that particular show.
It may seem annoying at first, but if that means content is free, I say go for it.
Patent 5,855,008... (Score:2)
The only reason why they haven't set up an "attention brokerage" is that it's deuced hard to manage with what we've got in place and the people buying the ads and selling the ads still think the old ways work.
Two stories on PVRs (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.wnyc.org/onthemedia/transcripts_0601
Which talkes about TiVo, and then in intresting fact, it seems that someone was reporting that the BBC had down loaded a show or two to all TiVo machines that could not be deleted, had to wait one week before it was removed. Thus hoping I guess for people to watch it. ( Could be full of add
And http://www.wnyc.org/onthemedia/transcripts_060102
another story:
On what the advertisers are doing to get their products in front of people's eyes.
-Scott
POOOOOF!! (Score:2)
firewalls? (Score:2, Interesting)
With a network probe or phone-line tap you could easily reverse engineer the protocols used to transmit this data.
You get a small box with a low-powered CPU, 2 network cards and modem interfaces and plug the Replay in to the "safe" side ports, and plug the others in to the wall.
Whenever the replay goes to send viewing data to SonicBlue, the fierwall changes all the data. It could either be random data or you could tell them you watched the NASA TV all day every day.
Fed up with invasive PVRs? (Score:2)
The PVR itself is easy to use, and allows you to record any show you want! Unlike Tivo's poor hardware model, I have designed a system with unlimited storage, in the form of inexpensive 'cartridges'. Unlike Sonic Blue's cold digital picture, Steve-O's warm analog signal gives every character a healthy, ruddy glow! Buffy never looked so good!
Steve-O's excellent service is unrivaled in the industry! Find out what's playing anytime, day or night by calling the Programming Line: Steve Ballmer at 1-888-Vel-0P3R. He will be happy to answer any questions you may have, as well as offer program selections! (MSNBC is always a favorite!) Your information is safe because he never writes anything down!
Steve-O's start at just $299! That includes a lifetime subscription to the Steve-O service and three empty cartridges! Call now!
A battle won, but the war's not over (Score:3, Informative)
By the way, the whole "file sharing" issue has often been misinterpreted. ReplayTV's file sharing is not an unlimited sharing tool like Napster was. You can only share a file with up to 15 other people, and once the recipient receive the file, they cannot share it further. Yes, itis file sharing, but it's been designed to be somewhat limited.
Prediction (Score:2)
I predict that the lawyers will refile with an eye to what will be billed as a "compromise".
Namely, instead of recording what viewers watch and when, they'll be under court order to record and report any "copyrighted material" that viewers send ("broadcast") to their friends.
Napster all over again.
Free TV is a myth (Score:5, Interesting)
This is largely false, and has been false for going on 30 years.
How many of you actually get most of your TV from an antenna on your roof? I didn't see many hands go up. The fact of the matter is that most people in the U.S. (even in urban areas where good broadcast signals are readily available) get their TV from satellite or a local cable TV provider (or both). Of course in rural areas this is the ONLY choice as broadcast signals are usually too poor.
Now lets disregard subscriber-only channels like HBO, which clearly get close to 100% of their revenue from subscriber fees.
What does that leave? Well I know of five categories, broken down strictly by where they get their revenue.
Shopping channels. In general, these channels PAY YOUR TV PROVIDER for the right to be fed into your home. They get their revenue by you buying things. So nevermind them.
Publicly supported channels. PBS and your local cable access channels are supported via various methods of funding such as grants, taxes, direct donations from viewers, etc. So we can somewhat disregard them.
Basic cable channels. Some of these run advertising, some don't. However ALL of these channels collect a small fee from the cable operators per subscriber per month, on the order of a few cents. Of course something like 10 cents per month per subscriber can really add up, that could easily be $100 million a year for somebody like CNN or The Weather Channel who is nearly on every cable or satellite line up out there.
Satellite fed broadcast stations. As you can see here [copyright.gov] the copyright law specifically spells out the fees that providers like DirecTV must pay to network stations, superstations and even PBS stations for the right to feed them to customers. It's 18.9 cents per month per subscriber for a superstation, 14.85 cents per month per subscriber for network stations and PBS stations.
Cable fed broadcast stations. (i.e. your local stations being re-fed down your local cable company's wire). As far as I know, this is the only category that does not get a cut of your TV provider fee (your monthly cable or satellite bill).
So as you can see, almost all TV channels have alternate sources of revenue that in some cases significantly outweigh the revenue they get from advertising. These channels are not going to go bankrupt tomorrow, though they may have to consider increasing their fees or finding other revenue streams if advertising continues to slump. Just like any business that has to adapt to changing market conditions. Just like the business you work for has to.
But most important: You are already paying for the shows you watch on these stations, bundled into your cable bill. They are not free, and they never have been.
(I also find it irresistable to point out that almost all of the channels under the purview of Jamie Kellner of Turner, who famously was reported here [slashdot.org] as denouncing commercial skippers as thieves, do in fact charge subscriber fees).
The only stations that are truly at risk here are the traditional true broadcast networks, i.e. ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, WB and UPN, as well as your local independent stations. These stations are a tiny percentage of the array of programming sources available. I have something like 120 stations on my cable provider, and these are only 7 of them.
BOTTOM LINE:Why should we, the consuming public, bend over backwards just because a tiny minority of the industry is using an old and backward business model?
Re:nothing new (Score:2)
It'd take an extremely over-simplified point of view to say 'oh this happens all the time'.
Re:Judge Says... (Score:2)
/. repeats stories occasionally, but not this time. don't yell at them for something they didn't do.
Re:Judge Says... (Score:2)
I really should go back to my code now...
Re:Judge Says... (Score:2)
Re:Judge Says... (Score:2)
Slashdot didn't repeat a story. You cited a temporary stay--this is a permanent ruling which overturns the lower court.
<sarcasm> Sheesh. To hell with reading the articles, let's not even bother reading the editorial blurbs anymore. </sarcasm>
Re:Rights (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Rights (Score:2, Interesting)
All of the people that I exchange recordings with have already or will soon migrate to this type of VCR. It only takes one demo. It is very convincing.
Re:We'll never get targeted advertising at this ra (Score:2, Insightful)
Girlfriend/wife goes to bed. Boyfriend/husband stays up and watches pr0n (without girl's knowledge). Next day, watching telly together, ads for "the hottest new sex channel" come up.
Man in trouble.
Just a random example. I'm sure there are many other less-morally-dubious ones
Re:We'll never get targeted advertising at this ra (Score:2)
Suppose you're in a bitter custody battle for your children and the ex says you're a terrible parent and you're violent. Her lawyer would subpoena the cable company and then hire a psychiatrist to analyze your viewing habits and give expert testimony against you based on information that is totally irrelevant. And you know most judges would believe them.
Or if you want to go with Big Brother conspiracy theories, then lets assume that the new and improved FBI/CIA is going to make a new Carnivore program that will analyze your viewing habits and flag you as a murderer, rapist, child molester, terrorist, etc..
Of course these are extreme views, but are they really that far out there when compared to recent laws?
Re:We'll never get targeted advertising at this ra (Score:3, Interesting)
Suppose you're in a bitter custody battle for your children and the ex says you're a terrible parent and you're violent. Her lawyer would subpoena the cable company and then hire a psychiatrist to analyze your viewing habits and give expert testimony against you based on information that is totally irrelevant. And you know most judges would believe them.
1. Large, bluechip companies (believe it or not) are terrified of mismanaging your data. When they sell you to third parties, you're likely to complain, maybe file a suit or two if they violated their User Agreement as it pertains to your data. But if they start sharing this data with the feds, they know they'll never have a hope in hell of getting your permission to collect this data. The first time something like your scenario happens, everyone will complain
Or if you want to go with Big Brother conspiracy theories, then lets assume that the new and improved FBI/CIA is going to make a new Carnivore program that will analyze your viewing habits and flag you as a murderer, rapist, child molester, terrorist, etc..
Do you really think that collecting the viewing habits of users watching legal, mainstream television are going to help tip FBI/CIA off to trouble-makers. Its not like Bomb Making - A Guide to Anarchists is on every Wednesday at 7pm or something.
I really dont think aggregated viewing habits is data that is too sensitive to be collected. The only thing I'd be scared about is the media buys getting too granular, and having that turn advertisers off when their buys suffer from a low ROI (due to viewer burnout.) Then, they turn around and devalue the media, thus fueling the need for more advertising. Sometimes targetted advertising can suffer from tunnel-vision blindness.
Re:We'll never get targeted advertising at this ra (Score:2)
Maybe I can clarify I meant only large, blue chip retail/service companies who know that they are known by name by a large portion of the population. The type of company that takes out media buys on cable and network television. The McDonalds, the Nikes
I believe your story, but I'm interested in knowing, who is this credit reporting agency? I'm guessing they are not really in the general public conciousness, so needn't be as concerned about data mismanagement turning into PR nightmares.
Asides, sounds like they fucked up your data by accident - I was refering to companies using your information in purposeful unscrupulous ways (like selling _correct_ information behind your back.)
There is a world of difference between REQUIRE (Score:2)
The proposed settlement would REQUIRE them to monitor. If they decide that *as a part* of their business model, they would like to monitor viewers habits, they can do so. They can make it voluntary. They can make it opt in. Then can make it opt out. The point is, the government should not be the one telling them what their business model should be.
Re:We'll never get targeted advertising at this ra (Score:2)
I don't know, and I don't care. They fact that they would like to know doesn't make it any of their damn business.
Re:We'll never get targeted advertising at this ra (Score:2)
If you think that was a guy I'd say either your memory needs work or your TV set does :-)
Re:We'll never get targeted advertising at this ra (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:We'll never get targeted advertising at this ra (Score:2)
Re:We'll never get targeted advertising at this ra (Score:2)
...I'm not sure what you'd do with the feminine hygiene products, but I'm sure the manufacturers would love to have you buy them whether you need them or not.
Re:Hurrah! (Score:5, Funny)
George W.'s campaign slogan for 2004 has been leaked apparently.
Re:Reason: (Score:2)
I wonder if that means anything...
What the hell are you talking about? (Score:2)
- A.P.
Re:What the hell are you talking about? (Score:2)
Yep, I am. Thank you for pointing it out, I'd have lived the rest of my life never knowing if you hadn't told me.