New Patent on TV Forces You to Watch Ads 470
WebHostingGuy writes "A patent application filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office says researchers of the Netherland-based consumer electronics company have created a technology that could let broadcasters freeze a channel during a commercial, so viewers wouldn't be able to avoid it. Philips acknowledged that this technology might not sit well with consumers and suggested in its patent filing that consumers be allowed to avoid the feature if they paid broadcasters a fee."
Summary (Score:3, Interesting)
No, we couldn't, because the content provider will set the "ad" flag during key parts of the actual program, which you don't want to miss.
OMG Clockwork Orange jokes.
'Nuff said.
"PAY TV" (Score:5, Interesting)
What happened? How incredibly greedy can people become? Television shows make millions, and cable providers make millions, etc. etc.
I remember they once talked about showing ads while shows aired, an almost Truman Show-esque "Joey drinks Coca-Cola" while watching Friends.
And now they wonder why people pirate television programs, movies, games, music, etc.? Because it has become not only inconvenient to watch, use, or play due to the number of advertisements in everything nowadays, but we are PAYING for them.
Just like buying clothes at the Gap, and billboarding their logo to everyone, what's next? Car Insurance companies will require you to paste their logo on your car? Or how about when you see the dentist? Will they make you wear a hat pointing downward saying "This smile brought to you by Dr. Dentafark".
Now possibly moving outward to an off-topic, but people question why youth today are so different, have a look at how many advertisements they see, and wear every day!
Re:There are other TV manufacturers, too. (Score:4, Interesting)
They never learn (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Seriously? (Score:3, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Bad enough already (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Dear broadcasters: (Score:4, Interesting)
Being in a similar situation, I certainly understand. I too work from home and I need some video noise to help me through the day sometimes. But I do it in a different way. I have a second monitor which is routinely playing TV shows. I've been re-running entire series (Did all the Star Treks last year, on the 3rd season of Northern exposure right now).
I like the noise, but commercials would actually distract me from work. No way I'd put up with that. I recommend you try getting commercial free versions of your favorite shows. I won't comment on where to get them...
clarification please (Score:3, Interesting)
I would really like to know exactly what this technology is about because I see it in two contexts, one annoying, and the other evil (and maybe not legal?).
I can't tell from the article if this technology relates to constraining a viewer to watch commercials when watching a pre-recorded show, i.e., something on a Personal Video Recorder (like a Tivo), or if this is something that prevents a viewer from channel surfing while a channel breaks for commercials.
The former (pre-recorded show viewing) is something I've heard about for a long time, for example I've heard Tivo has played with instantiating "popup" ads if you fast forward through commercials while watching a recorded show. Regardless, while this is annoying, I guess it's their call -- but for sure, it'll cut back on how much I'm watching -- it's already borderline for what I find tolerable with encroaching advertising (product placement, etc. -- anyone see the pandering "sidekick" product placement in Tuesday's Gilmore Girls? For Heck's sake, it was actually written into the script!).
However, if this is about locking in to a station during commercial breaks, I would be (and I assume the viewing public) outraged! How dare they. Aside from the egregious nature of this, I can't imagine it would be a legal tactic. Certainly any potentially "competing" channel would be up in arms over something like this, unless of course there is future collusion to ensure commercials are all aired at exactly the same time, thus attenuating the incentive to surf during commercial breaks.
Anyone know the answer to exactly what this technology is?
So who exactly is going to pay (Score:2, Interesting)
for all the content you want to watch. Leaving to one side all the DRM arguments it actually costs quite a bit of cash to make a decent TV program. Either you pay through public subscription - like the TV license fee here in the UK, or you pay via advertising. And if you pay via advertisong then it's down to the advertisers to say what ads they want to show.
And the annoying ones - they're the ones that work. Ask any Brit about the most annoying add ever and you'll hear 'shake'n'vac' mentioned. Ask any Brit if they know of any other carpet cleaner...
Re:TV through your PC (Score:3, Interesting)
Now the question is... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Wow, this technology works! (Score:3, Interesting)
Well if this were to happen. I would be one of the first to make a counter hardware device that sits between the cable box and the tv that switches that flag off in the signal. For the flag to work, it would have to sit in a predictible place in the signal's bit-stream, so you just make a tv commercial-flag-bridge to take the signal in, modify the flag, and spit it out. That way the tv would always think it was on a show, and never in a commercial.
I would go this route as well. However I can't see it happening because it completely breaks the ability to flip through channels at all. Imagine flipping through channels - as soon as you hit one showing a commercial you get stuck there for what, minutes? Just not possible, nobody would buy that. Actually people would buy it, and then immediately return it - "TV is broken, it doesn't change channels..."
On the plus side however, since they patented it, nobody else can implement it either (at least for the next 20 years *laugh* Way to go Philips! - I knew you were looking out for the consumer!)