Slashdot Mirror
FCC to Rule on Request to Limit Recording From TV
q2k and many others sent it in, and the original Inter@ctive Week story has been republished all over the place. The deal is that the MPAA and other copyrithg holders want copy protection built into VCRs and other recording devices that will keep users from recordings some shows broadcast in digital format over cable. On the other side, the Home Recording Rights Coalition, made up of consumer electronics manufacturers, wants people to be able to tape shows for later viewing (or whatever). The FCC is accepting comments on this matter through Sept. 7, and may issue a ruling as early as Sept. 14.
HDTV is not the same thing as DTV. HDTV is the new specification(s) for things such as picture resolution, scan lines, etc. DTV is just a new way of sending any TV signal (either Standard Definition or High Definition) over the airwaves. DTV is what the FCC has mandated must be in place over the airwaves by 2006, which means that people will still be able to watch stuff on their old television sets, but they will no longer be able to receive a signal over the airwaves without a digital receiver/converter box.
So really, there are four possible combinations (excluding cable, satelite, etc): HDTV over analog airwaves, HDTV over digital airwaves, SDTV over analog airwaves, or SDTV over digital airwaves. The only thing that, according to FCC mandates, must be in place by 2006 is that last one; Standard Definition TV over digital airwaves.
Today in my PC I can have a full resolution frame grabber (about $50!), a processor that is fast enough to compress in real time, and a disk that is big enough to store the results. It's sort of out there at the leading edge, but it's feasible. Tivo and Replay deal with the processing problem (made more acute since they need to do simultaneous encode and decode) by using a hardware encoder to do the compression but soon enough it will be affordable to do it with software. Converting from digital on the cable to analog NTSC and back to digital costs you one or two dB in signal-to-noise, which is barely visible to trained viewers. So with negligible degradation, I can still make a digital copy of the content.
Unless the studios and networks can get rid of analog altogether, I'm always going to be able to make reasonable digital copies using the above kind of equipment.
Shoot one, teach a hundred.
.............................................
.............................................
Boy, you people sure are stupid.
I'm with you on this, comrade. But...
Whatever appeared on television was fair game for taping (well, aside from HBO and other specifically copyrighted materials).
There you have it. What if, using this digital tech, they only keep you from taping said specifically copyrighted materials? Would that be acceptable?
Thinking about it, I'd say no. I'm a big supporter of copyright law, but on the other hand, that would let them get a foot in the door. Hmmm....
-J
Karma: T-rexcellent.
I've been wondering about that lately.
Either they're up for being nailed like MS is in the process thereof...
...or, they're open for a big, nasty RICO suit.
They're certainly guilty of both.
I'm thinking it may be because nobody's been complaining until recently (when the DOJ and States started taking RIAA and it's member orgs for price fixing on CDs...).
I think we need to start complaining loudly.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Actually the correct URL is: Here.
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
www.haidacarver.com
Sure you can make existing hardware illegal -- for example, some states have made radar detectors illegal, and that doesn't just mean new ones. Of course, most legislators are smart enough to know that it's a bad idea to turn your constituents into criminals, at least retrospectively, so this doesn't happen much.
Well once again it looks like more rights are to be taken away from us because the corporations (i.e. THE RICH) do not have enough money already and are scared that we might record something off of a service we pay for anyway (i.e. Digital Cable/Satellite) and take more money from them. It looks like the MPAA is trying to stop something like napster for TV shows before it starts. God forbid we should be able to watch a program more than once, or even at a..(oh my god!) DIFFERENT TIME! Imagine, employers having to schedule work around TV shows because we could not record todays episode of Bill Nye the Science Guy. Church would be in the offseason during football season. Ok, this is all ridiculous and radical but why is it different now than when VCR manufacturers were origianlly taken to court over VCRs? Because it is digital? Because now there is no degradation when we record? It hardly sounds like that would make or break a case. But the real issue is that both the RIAA and MPAA want to change everything they deal in (music, TV, Movies, etc.) to a license and not a purchase. This will get them out of their long time battle with fair use. If it is licenced you can only use it by the terms of the license, not however you want. It is starting now and if nothing is done about it not only are we going to have to license every form of entertainment, but give up our privacy by entering into a license where the MPAA and RIAA will know everything each of us has licensed. This looks pretty scary to me and things are just getting started..... Big Brother is not only the government, but also the corporations who own it.
-- Legalize Freedom
Why _shouldn't_ buying a ticket be a contract? Surely there's something that can be done to lay out a movie-viewer's contract, perhaps in fine print near the ticket booth. Buying the ticket means accepting the contract. It's not even 'virtual', but real money and a real ticket!
Then the contract merely has to punish transfer of the movie's intellectual property with death, or imprisonment :)
Perhaps a desperate attempt from the MPAA? As an amateur radio hobbyist (KE4QKT) I can only say that the FCC seems to be concerned with emissions compliance and bandwidth allocation. This doesn't fall anywhere near those categories.
But browsing the FCC's major initiatives page shows that the FCC does handle issues not necessarily related to communication equipment (telecommunication mergers, for example.)
I particularly found the blurb on the "What We're All About" handbook interesting:
What We're All About: a Consumer's Guide to the FCC. We're about communications! Whether you are listening to the radio, watching TV, talking on the phone, using your pager - you're involved in communications. We, at the Federal Communications Commission, are working to make sure that the nation's communications systems are operating in your best interest.
Sounds pretty general to me.
Which nightly news? The one owned by Waner Brothers? The one owned by Microsoft?
Like the nightly news programs are going to run a story their owners want killed.
As for archival storage, CD-R is probably the most archival storage available to consumers right now. Magnetic media are less reliable.
I don't remember when this was exactly, but Chrissy Hines of the pretenders had some comments about other "artists" who didn't like people recording songs off the radio. Its simple greed, nothing more. Lee
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
For example, what happens when some hacker works out a way to program his set-top box (whatever that turns out to be) to record programs without commercials? We all know this is going to happen, and you can bet that the broadcast industry does, too. With copy protection hardware in place, they could go back to the FCC and insist that this invalidates the basis for time-shifting, and that they should be allowed to protect all programs.
And how about video on demand? Once this is available, couldn't the industry argue that this obviates the need for consumer time-shifting, and that all programs could be protected.
I am not trollish.
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
I haven't had cable in years, and it's just fine with me. When I want to watch a movie, I rent it, and usually watch it with friends.
Maybe it is just time to stop watching TV, and start watching the web.
It would be wonderful to be able to convince enough people to boycott Sony & AOL/TimeWarner for the release of one movie/video (6th Day or next years Matrix 2). Granted that happens when they put out a dog, but to do it intentionally, that would put a dent in their stock value. Ideally it should be all product lines for a week, and Christmas would be to much to hope for.
And now, the nominees for most cowardly disclaimer in a Slashdot comment ...
that no one seems ot have mentioned that it is Jack Valenti's birthday. He's 79.
;D
I'm really not sure if I can bring myself to wish him a happy birthday, though...
-J
Karma: T-rexcellent.
OK, so I'm probably the only devil's advocate here but I can see why the MPAA has their skivvies in a bunch. As it stands now, recording off analog cable provides a decent to poor quality recording. With digital, the recording will be exactly what you get in the stores (with the commercials and lack of fuckshitasswipedickweed etc.) On HBO etc. it will produce an exact copy. As long as the MPAA doesn't try to ban analog recording I have no problem whatsoever with the prevention of digital recording. This is what MPAA is after. There's a lot of people who produce these videos aka "content" that need to get paid. Its business. Without business there would be nothing...
It is issues like this which drive home the fact that people need to vote.
Use it or lose it. Either exercise your power to shape and define our government, or slowly lose it to corporate greed and unethical politicians.
The choice is yours.
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
It was made into existence by way of an Ammendment (that was subsequently repealed by another one...)
Income tax, is also Constitutional- but not in the form we know of it today.
There's so many things that just aren't Constitutional- it's a shame that people don't have the right things in their heads in that regard.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Right... that's why there wasn't an impeachment trial right?
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
If they were going to send everyone an email, they would probably not expect a response from the recipients, but instead they'd send an email containing a phrase like "By reading this message, you agree to ... If you do not agree, click here.". The "click here" would link the recipient to a CGI which harvested their email address, so that the MPAA can keep a watch on them.
It would be about as legally sound as getting people to accept an agreement through email, but this sounds much more like a scam they'd pull.
--
Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
In a related development, the MPAA filed suit against God seeking a ban on memory, arguing that consumers that remembered movies were depriving large corporations of profits. "Say a viewer sees a movie and doesn't like it. Under current rules, they can remember not to watch that movie ever again. That's unfair, and we're going to seek chemical solutions to prevent such behavior", a MPAA representative whined. God could not be reached for comment.
I can't begin to tell you how difficult this makes my life as an artist. I have to bounce things through my computer (an additional digital copy, so who cares) just to make backups of my work.
Either that, or I shell out thousands for a 'professional deck' that lacks these protections.
It always seems to me that these protections are designed to limit copying and the quality of a small artist's work. When a small artist cannot have access to 'major label recording studios' and 'professional major label audio quality', people turn away from their work.
how people record. There would be hacks out for it shortly after it came out to circumvent the copy protection because it's such a crappy idea.
-motardo
In a move to rightly protect their copyrighted content, the MPAA asked the FCC to rule on what the viewers have the right to remember from a show. An MPAA representative have told us: "We are aware of viewers remembering great parts of a show and then telling the punch to other people. This is clearly an infringement on our copyrights. We want to have all TV's equipped with MIB flashing devices automatically activated at the end of each show."
Opus: the Swiss army knife of audio codec
But compare that 128 kb/s file to a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it made from a copy of it and see if you can hear a difference.
power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutly.
Pair up in threes. - Yogi Berra
It's only frightening because you care, arguably, TOO MUCH about this form of entertainment.
As for me, I tape just about EVERYTHING I watch, because I'm usually too busy to be around when things are broadcast.
If the MPAA gets something like this through, they lose a customer. That should scare THEM.
But what do I know, I'm just supposed to be a freakin' media zombie.
sig fault
If they could, they would. Remember, this is the same organization that requires retail stores to pay royalties for playing the radio over the in-store PA system. Yes, that would be the same radio signal that originated at a station that already paid royalties to broadcast songs to anyone with a receiver. Their audacity is only amazing to us because we could never get away with the ludicrous feats of artist-shafting and double-dipping that they can. It no doubt seems perfectly reasonable to them, because every time they stroke the belly of that giant Buddha that is the United States Congress, money shoots out of its ass. Wait -- that's our ass.
If you want to screw the MPAA and the RIAA, broaden your interests. Spend less time buying their fifth-rate, predigested pap and go see some live bands and theatrical performances. Visit the nearest bookstore (new and used). Or hell, go to the library, where what remains of your tax dollars after the Reagan administration got done with them are going to provide copyrighted material to all comers for free! Hang out somewhere and meet people. (People are so cool -- you can talk to them, play games with them, and sometimes even have sex with them. Can the MPAA deliver that?) Maybe learn to play your own goddamn guitar -- if Lars can do it, how hard can it be?
Hell, maybe my life would strike some people as boring, but it's been keeping me entertained for years, and neither the MPAA nor the RIAA make much money off me.
--
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
- Do you know how much of a pain in the ass it is to program these protections in? It's gonna cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars to invent some protections and some smartass kid in Sweden will break it in a week (Go smartass kids!)
- Oh, we'll see you a DVD player too, but some smartass kid already broke that (Yay smartass kids!) Rather than figure out what to do about that, they decided to start suing everyone. We've got no direction here, and it's fucking up our logistics! God that pisses us off (It's not the smartass kid's fault though.)
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
OK... So I record a show. Whats the difference when I watch it and why does the MPAA care when I watch it?? Either way, it won't be long till there are "mod-chips" for VCR's.
Petition?! Bah! Bullets are cheaper and far more effective.
[Disclaimer: I am not insighting a riot.]
You assume that the MPAA is solely planning on preventing the ability to make analog copies of digital broadcasts. I think that their goals are more focused on the future when we can make digital copies of digital television broadcasts.
Just like you rip MP3s from an Audio CD, the MPAA forsees individuals sitting with their TV encoders tuned and ready for the 5th season of Survivor. They'll edit out the commercials, post episodes to alt.binaries.movies.survivor5.mongolian-desert, then compile all the episodes and give them away on one big fat DVD. Many many dollars are to be lost.
Hey Jack, maybe it's just me, but if you want to control your content so much, don't broadcast it and certianly don't broadcast it for free.
--
Think about how the net is getting more common and easier and faster to use. Everything (including broadcasts) is getting more and more native to it every day.
They're probably most worried about the possibility that someone could purchase a device that would allow them to plug their cable box into the net (directly or indirectly), and broadcast the digital signals around for free.
Personally I think a better way around this would be to encrypt digital signatures into the broadcasts from their end that are unique to each viewer. That way whenever an unauthorised broadcast gets out onto the net, they can trace it back to who it came from.
===
The good news about this is that SCMS (the copy protection system for digital audio) is really easy to defeat - it only requires stripping a single bit periodically from a data stream. The truly evil thing about SCMS is that its copy protection not only applies to copywrited work, but to anything recorded with the SCMS controlled device.
Good heavens Miss Sakamoto - you're beautiful!
I had to check the date when i saw this posted. Hasn't this already been thrown out??? Are we going to be trying restrict copying of tapes again? Every time i think 'The Man' has hit the bottom of the well of intelligence, he digs a new hole...
(end rant)
There... got that out of my system. Do they really expect this to hold up? It would be insane! I want to say that everyone would toss their VCRs out the windows, but i somehow doubt that would happen. Hot damn we need open source media or something to that effect. Or we need Nader in office for the next 8 years (or 4 at least) BTW, Vote Nader!!!
-Elendale (Do it! At least look at the site...)
IANAT (I Am Not A Troll)
If all it requires is a hack then I don't see the reason why people wouldn't do it
A good comparison with all this debate is drawn by looking at the Playstation - they have hardware to prevent games from other regions being played. And what happens? In just about every computer swapmeet venue across the country you have Playstation conversion booths that'll hack your Playstation for you for AUS$30 or so.
Of course, I know in America they've got the DCMA to try and stop this sort of thing, but luckily the rest of the global community haven't followed the example of that ridiculous law.
What difference does it make if the recording is analog or digital?
Really now. If I watch a vcd that was recorded from a VHS +vidcap, is it any different than if I watched the same movie that was ripped from a DVD? The MPAA is still losing the same thing (err, what was that, again?). I'm still watching something I didn't pay for.
The MPAA and RIAA are just using digital as an excuse to make everything illegal. It disgusts me that I have to pay extra for audio media because someone else might (might!) use the media to copy protected works. I sure as hell don't think it's fair to charge me more for hardware copy protection just because someone else might do something wrong. This is anti-American. Both of these organizations describe themselves as American, but they're really just greedy bastards. They're already rich. People are going to buy to their stuff anyways (some, nay, most people actually prefer that formulated junk). It's been pointed out before, but the easy distribution of high quality material often increases sales, not decreases.
It's stupid. Hopefully the FCC won't screw this up.
-tsunake
The thing going on here is not comparable to MacroVision, however. MacroVision is intended to stop you from making copies of purchased materials. It does fulfill this requirement. The special (and wonderful, as far as the industry is concerned) thing about macrovision is that even when you use hardware to allow you to copy MacroVision-protected titles, your quality is decreased with your copy.
However, what they're trying to achieve here is to stop you from recording programs from broadcast media. This hasn't really been an issue in the past, because broadcast tends to reduce the quality (though this is less true with Cable and Satellite than it has been in the past) and what you really pay for when you buy a movie is a lack of commercials, an early release, and/or higher quality than you would receive from taping from the air. I strongly suspect that Pay-Per-View costs reflect the fact that you will most likely be copying the movie, or the assumption, in any case.
The industry has not traditionally been very worried about people taping things off of the air. Now that they are able to get them at the same quality they would receive if they bought it, since digital entails no loss of quality, they're going to worry. This is, of course, just evidence of that. The problem to my mind is that this will in fact end up stepping on devices like TiVo and ReplayTV. Having them restrict your recording the movies onto permanent devices is fine - It's not technically legal anyway, but if the companies try to go after some people and not everyone (which is impossible) then it's arguable that they're targeting individuals and they will lose their ability to prosecute, because the courts would get tired of them.
If they don't stop this now, they can't stop it later. Again, the problem is that the short-term recording devices like ReplayTV and TiVo are going to get screwed by this. Philips is behind TiVo and they obviously won't sit still for it, but who knows how far that's going to go. We've all seen how powerful the movie and music industries can be in a nation which puts way too much emphasis on them on a day to day basis.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
That's already implemented. Sophisticated, new color copiers have some kind of currency detection functionality -- if they didn't, counterfeit money would be a breeze to make!
Don't get me wrong, I still want the ability to timeshift or permanently archive the things I see on television...
--
"A witty saying proves nothing" - Voltaire
If you ask me, it's pretty damn sad that we have to rely on one deep pockets industry-funded group to protect us from one with even deeper pockets. As it becomes more and more expensive to affect the political process, I can't see this situation getting much better. Face it, with billions in profits it only takes a few tenths of a percent to buy several slightly used senators on key committees. Companies have become so large that even if they only devote a few cents of every sale they can afford lobbying and cotributions on a huge scale. I'll never miss the money that goes to taking away my freedoms, but I'll sure miss the freedoms. The EFF is a good start to pooling the power of freedom-minded individuals, but it's small and doesn't have the same level of funding. Ironically, people who have become wealthy in the last few years due to their success in technology, and should know better, are not helping out. Paul Allen owns a bunch of cable companies, for instance. You don't see him offering millions to the EFF to allow them to hire a full time staff of technical experts to advise all the clueless people in Washington. Instead, by conglomerating cable companies he is contributing to the imbalance.
I don't mean to be so negative. All is not lost; all it takes is consumers waking up and realizing that there are a lot more of them than there are CEOs.
Walt
"I think that their goals are more focused on the future when we can make digital copies of digital television broadcasts."
Maybe so, I can agree that they are looking to the future however, you stated also "the MPAA forsees individuals sitting with their TV encoders tuned and ready for the 5th season of Survivor. They'll edit out the commercials, post episodes to alt.binaries.movies.survivor5.mongolian-desert, then compile all the episodes and give them away on one big fat DVD. Many many dollars are to be lost."
I don't agree with this at all. How is this any different from today. I can use a tv tuner card in my computer and do the same thing. I can compile these on cd's and give them to friends sans commercials. It may not be digital quality but so what.
Advertisers already paid for the airtime so the industry is making money no matter what - they won't lose money off people taping TV episodes. Some would argue that mp3's cause a loss of revenue but this, can in no way cause a loss at all. The MPAA is overstepping their bounds and they are going to get slapped just like Microsoft did.
MPAA, keep it up... you'll be broken down for being the monopolizing, unfair, greedy bastards that you are. You will be the next target of huge lawsuits and anti-trust litigation. Unfortunately, the Microsoft example means nothing to you. Guess you'll learn the hard way.
OH MY GOD!!! MY VCR, CAMERA, PAD OF PAPER, PEN, CHAULK, STICK AND DIRT, AND MEMORY ARE ALL ILLEGAL!!! AHHHHH!!!!!! ...well there goes a couple of karma points for that little outburst.
If you think education is expensive, you should try ignorance -- Derek Bok, president of Harvard
I believe that what the MPAA is worried about here is digital cable.
They want to make sure that people with digital cable cannot record movies digitally, remove the ads, and start swapping them over the internet.
There would be no loss of quality due to analog - the quality of the MPEG 2 compression of digital cable would be preserved. These files are not impossibly big either - typically, digital cable is not quite as high quality as DVD - a 2 GB file can hold an entire movie at quality considerably higher than VHS.
There is no need for further lossy compression - MPEG 2 is already lossy compression. TiVo is different - they take analog inputs, digitize them, and compress them to the hard drive in a proprietary format.
Torrey Hoffman (Azog)
Torrey Hoffman (Azog)
"HTML needs a rant tag" - Alan Cox
yeah, but what if you don't watch 'til the very end of the show? It should be something like setting up a motion sensor in the TV itself, and anytime you make major movements during the course of your TV watching (ie stand up, or if you are disabled, moving your chair), then turn on the MIB flash. But then, what if you were transported out of the room or blind to begin with? hmm....
Its no longer profitable. We're all criminals, because then the MPAA & friends can make money off us citiz^h^h^h^h^h consumers faster and easier than ever before. And you now have to be glad about it, because they're letting you see their valuable IP that they've spent sooooo much sweat and blood on....
Ok, I'm done now. Any more questions?
-RickHunter
Right on! Let's take this philosophy a few steps further!
My suggestions for the RIAA / MPAA / DMCA / and the like...
1) My they should put 30% royalties on all of the paper, notebooks, printed and printable materials out there JUST IN CASE someone decides to copy a book or magazine word-for-word.
2) Have the copy / cut / paste buttons in your favourite OSs directly linked to an internet database holding all content that is not allowable to be copied and pasted. Therefore, when some pirate decides to copy and paste a quote from a website for his school report, they can catch him in the act! As well as a DB connected to internet ready TVs so that they can control how you watch it (and know what and when you are recording).
3) New paper for books that when exposed to light for more than 15 minutes the ink disappears. Therefore, you have 15 minutes to read the page, or else you lost your PRIVILEGE.
4) Now more VCRs / Blanks Tapes / CDRs period. They cost the RIAA / MPAA way too much already. Hell, why stop at that. No more flash memory / hard drives / stones to write on to make Hieroglyphs.
5) Reward all children by giving them higher marks in school and scholarships for ratting out their parents and friends who are committing or planning on committing these heinous crimes to corporations. 1-888-RIAA-RAT
Down with piracy!, Down with Freedom!, Down with Fair Use!
One world, one internet, one media company!
Cd
(/Sarcasm)
---
This
Remember those absurd laws us Aussies were trying to prevent passing? With things heading the way they were heading, some companies were declining to use a Squid proxy/cache or similar because technically it could constitute a copyright violation.
Full instructions on how to file are available through the FCC's site as well as the special interest group already cited. The already submitted comments are reachable by pressing the search button. The MPAA's most recent comments basically say ``trust us, we'll let people copy appropriate things.'' Um, sure.
Jason
Warning: "Commercial Advance" is patented.
1. I'm not talking about commercial advance, I'm talking about COMMERCIAL ERASURE..
2. I don't believe this would affect a private citizen from distributing an open source video processor that advances past commercials, would it?
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
It would definitely be considered a derivative work, and therefore the property of the copyright owner.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
I'm really worried about the anti-consumer legislation that the MPAA
and friends have been purchasing recently. As a computer scientist
here at CMU, I already feel the effects of the DMCA. It scares me to
know that program code I write might be "illegal". It scares me that I
didn't even hear about the possibility of this law until it went on the
books.
Restrictions on time- and space-shifting broadcasts would be hurtful to
consumers, and would contradict precedent (as you know...).
Concrete example of digital recording as I use today (which might be
made impossible or illegal should this proposed change be made):
Every day I have my dorm-room computer time-record a cable
(analog) broadcast of my 2 favorite shows. These (digital) recordings
are recompressed off-line into relatively small mpeg files, which I can
watch at my lesiure. Sometimes I download these via CMU's wireless
LAN and watch them on my laptop during my office hours. If I'm busy
one evening I can watch them the next day. I can archive a series on
CDR to watch 20 years from now for nostalgia.
When digital TV becomes pervasive, I want to have these same
abilities. A broadcast is a broadcast.
Please keep the interests of consumers in mind when considering
policy change! We can't afford the lobbying and lawyers that the
movie industry can...
Fearfully,
Tom 7
Here's a form letter which I didn't write but which I agree with:
I understand the Commission soon will be deciding whether VCRs
can be hooked up to digital cable systems, and whether home
recording from digital cable will be allowed. Hollywood studios
apparently claim that home recording is the same as theft of service
and that this justifies limiting home taping. Your agency should protect
consumers' rights to record and view DTV signals. The Commission
should respect the Supreme Court's ruling in the Betamax case, and
not equate private, noncommercial home recording with theft of
service! In short, the Commission should take action to protect the
interests of consumers in this proceeding. Thank you for reading my
views.
Seems to me that this proposal unmasks the true intentions of the MPAA: the total elimination of the Constitutional right of "fair use". And they are doing this thru a bureaucratic agency (FCC), made up of unelected government drones who usually rubber-stamp the will of the rich and powerful.
This is an attempt to end-run the Supreme Court and the Congress. BTW, it can be argued that the FCC has no right to regulate what you do with a recording in your home anyway, as this is not interstate commerce, but I digress.
Obviously the solution to this is public outrage. Send in your comments to the FCC. Call your congressman, and tell people about it. Sooner or later the public at large HAS to get outraged at such behavior, or else all is lost anyway. And this may just be the case that does it
Think about it, DECSS and Napster are technical and vague, and thus the average Joe Blow doesn't understand it. THIS is a case EVERYONE will understand: If the MPAA gets away with this, you can't tape from your TV anymore. Everyone has done this. Everyone will be affected in one way or another.
In 2000 America, is a non-lawyer truly free?
That's quite the coincidence... I'm working on a method to install a copy protection device up the MPAA's ass.
yes, but imagine the analogy of renting a video. Sure, you can watch it as much as you like, but you have a contract with the rental agency, and you need to return it. Now imagine trying to make a copy of a rental and claim fair use. If you want to watch it again, you need to rent it again. However, this is not quite the case with pay per view. Sorry if I am taking both sides of the issue at once... :-/
Did you mount a military-grade, variable-focus MASER on an unlicensed artificial intelligence?
Hmm. I remember reading a short short story once along these lines. The main character went to a live concert and beforehand had to take a pill that interrupted the STM->LTM storage process in the brain, effectively making him only live the moment and nothing more. And he was quite happy because he got a good deal on the concert tickets, and how live music was so much better than recorded -- if he just remember how... Quite creepy.
Where's the submit button??
One thing that has come out of the recent spate of lawsuits, and stories like this invloving the MPAA/RIAA etc. is the total disregard for the people purchasing their products.
Actually, this is incorrect. The MPAA doesn't produce a damn thing, they're just a front group/lobby point for the large movie studios. Keeping us focused on the MPAA makes us forget the real bastards here, the large studios that lay out the cash for these hideous legal actions.
This arrives to you (and all) kinda late. We still own the airwaves; Licenses to use same are what's for sale.
.gov doc inclined).
Here's the relevant link at the FCC: http://www.fcc.gov/cib/handbook.html#mmb
The rest of the FCC's site is sweet, too (if one is
-EC
The Constitution says we are to: "promote the Progress of Science and the useful Arts"
To me the majority of the music sold and swaped on services such as Napster are not useful art but rather means of corrupting young minds. As for TV save for a few shows the majority is absolute trash. Movies... about 5 (if were lucky) come out of hollywood a year which are worth seeing, i dont mind paying to see these but if it ever reaches tv then its free game.
IMO very little of todays commercial art (esp. music) is 'useful'. However i find computer code and written work to be useful art, but i dont think it can be patented only copyrighted.
oblisk
...my ass is already filled up with RIAA dick, could you please wait your turn before raping me? There isn't enough space in there for two of you at once.
non recordable radio music, unprintable html pages, unchachable pages, well whatever.
Once those stupid chips are put into your VCR, just yank it out =)
------------------------
Is your sig file boring?
Welcome to the new world order. Read books instead.
You mean like these books?
--
--
The real Captain Derivative has a Slashdot ID.
Earlier today The CEO of The Devil (tm) corporation made a statement regarding this issue after hearing it on a local station.
He basically stated (paraphrase) "The MPAA has little ground to stand on as they are basically saying that any comercial device that reads content delivered to consumers via the standard methods must adhear to their copyright protection rules."
"But that would be infringing upon The Devil's teritory as we hold the patent on ones and zeroes, thusly it would translate to saying that they regulate any content delivered using our patented methods."
According to Satan, Devil Corp has held the patent on ones and zeroes for a little more than a millenium with no chance of expiration as it was gained before the expiration rules were in place, effectively giving them 'grandfather rights. This would seem to preempt Microsofts claim to the patent.
Later in the interview Satan indicated that he might be willing to make a trade to the MPAA and their followers but the price would be very steep.
When asked what the exact price might be he said that The Devil would be willing to offer them the same deal they offer anyone.
I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
Kinda neat how it all works, really...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
It is for this reason alone, that I justify my personal use of Napster and the like. I am a musician myself, and since I have to pay extra for blank media when I'm recording my own copyrighted material, then I feel I have the right to copy the MPAA/RIAA's copyrighted material. Since they receive compensation in the form of these surcharges, my duplication is not piracy or any other negative connotating verbage!
I AM, therefore I THINK!
He addeed: "Furthermore, our internal studies have clearly shown that people remembering they have seen a show are much less likely to watch it again then those who haven't seen it. The result is a big loss of revenue for the MPAA members. This new habit of remembering shows to stop watching it again must not be tolerated."
Opus: the Swiss army knife of audio codec
The MPAA has sent cease and desist orders to all the major TV, monitor, LCD & video camera manufacturers requiring that they cease making their devices as the provide a means for circumventing the copy protection of their copyright material.
"I have been around the world and found that only stupid people are breeding" -- Harvey Danger
Doesn't RCA have content connections too? Does RCA even still exist?
It would be nice if somebody would track the extent of these monopolies, and publish a nice diagram or something.
MSK
Hmm. I wonder if this can be killed like the single play video disk. Sir your programming is incompatabile with my hardware. I am not going to upgrade to a restrictive system. Get a clue. Why don't you think SONY Minidisks are rare and MP3 players are plentiful. Could it be the built in encumberments? Thats why I do not own a minidisk. Do you think I am going to upgrade a RIO just so I can play a Liquid Audio file? I don't think so. I wanted a minidisk but the additional required and unwanted anticopy stuff added to the cost so much they are not cost effective or useful. CDR, CDRW and MP3 players all have come from behind and taken the market. MP3 players have fit the small portable player market the minidisk was supposed to have. No players/recorders, No viewers, no revenue, no problem. You get what you pay for. If you pay for restrictions you will get them. Make them follow the target audience, not the other way around. Support free TV.
The truth shall set you free!
The service? Why, free broadcast programming. Commercials subsidize the cost of quality television programming. But this valuable service is threatened by "time shifting" devices such as VCRs.
Time slots are an imperitive part of the commercial television method. Prime time advertisement rates are based on the limited time periods when a majority of viewers will be available to view and advertisement. Its the rates that these prime time slots attract from advertisers that help fund the better quality shows. Remove these prime time slots and you damage the funding model.
But that's only the beginning. New electronic VCR devices such Tivo take this threat one level further. These devices not only threaten to shift prime time slots, but it also allows complete removal of commercials. Complete destruction of the revenue model that supports your favorite programs.
We know you'd hate to loose your favorite shows. We would hate to be forced to stop showing them. That is why we are taking steps to enable viewing enhancements that prevent unauthorized copying of our Intelectual Property and destruction of our revenue.
At least, this will be their explanation when your new VCR is unable to record anything that's not on PBS.
Isn't ANALOG vcr recording of DIGITAL programs sort of like taking a tape recorder and recording the music coming out of your super-surround, 1000+ megawatts CD player SPEAKERS?
VCR recording sucks in terms of quality. If it was digital maybe they would have a case. I record on VCR only because it is not possible to view the program otherwise (time conflict, watching another show, etc). The visual quality, frankly, sucks. The program might show up clearly on your tv but the quality will degrade when moving to the tapes. Everyone who's recorded a tape of a cd music knows this.
Hey MPAA, there is a large difference between digital and analog. Why do you think people buy DVD players in the first place? Get a damn clue already!
Didn't someone against napster say the issue is difference because the quality is still retained in the mp3 format as opposed to the bootleg tapes of before? Do I sense schitzo-paranoid industry in the air?
enol
Mod this up ? I think this is a very interesting addendum to the oft expressed fact that as all media has to interface to human senses, that you can bypass any security mechanism. Neat idea Interiot :)
Winton
The FCC has been regulating the design of television sets for a long, long time.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
You scepticism is rightly placed when it comes to the MPAA and cronies in the entertainment industry. Remember when they said that region encoding would only be used on the newest release DVDs?
I went to my local DVD vendor to have a look at their range. Out of over 100 DVDs available from them, there were only two which weren't regionally encoded, and both of those were classical music performances. With no joke, after looking at all the regionally encoded disks, and reading about the lengths the MPAA has gone to to "keep honest people honest", I feel truely violated.
Amoung those movies with regional encoding.. Twister (1996) and Gone With the wind (some time in the 40s?). Neither of those could be considered as new releases by any person.
You can't trust the MPAA. I really really hope that FCC stops them before they go too far. I know none of the players here are really looking after our best interests, but it's really the best chance we've got.
send letters to the FCC along the lines of:
But it's not fair. Those meanies are trying to take my VCR away. I deserve my VCR. Waah!!
Those letters will do nothing but irritate the powers that be. Use strong reasoning that quotes laws (section and paragraph), and case law. This is what the commissioners understand. They assume that the majority of the populace are a bunch of crybabies who'll accept anything as long as they get their bread and circuses. They actually get scared when the find that they are coming up against a large group of people who actually know stuff.
Go forth. Scour the internet for information where Congress/courst/State legislatures have deemed that people actually have rights to information that is broadcast over public airwaves and facilities (the controlled monopoly nature of most cable systems make them a public facility in my view). Let the FCC know that they can't pull a fast one here without someone taking it to court.
Also, remember, your Congresspeople have more pull than you. Be nice to them. Some of them seem to be on our side, despite their initial support for DMCA. Some of them might actually be looking for retribution over how that one went.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Yoy know, I'm pissed at certain DVD's that FORCE you to sit thru their previews and commercials. I mean, I PAID for this disc, yet I'm not allowed to control how it's played back.
In fact, it's stuff like that which makes me wonder if the transfer of control in the new digital technology (TV, DVD, VCR, etc) makes the marginal gain in quality over the older analog technology worth it? No analog VCR will ever stop you from fast forwarding anything, because it's a largely mechanical device and you control it.
Basically the mask is off, and the purpose of the MPAA is clear: They want TOTAL 100% control of when and how all media is played. They want recording to be impossible.
If this level of control by a monopolistic, corporate cartel over everyday technology doesn't scare you, what will? I see no difference between government control (1984), or corporate control, the end result is the same.
In 2000 America, is a non-lawyer truly free?
MPEG-2 is a lossful compression, but after the initial encoding it can be copied without further loss. MPEG-2 is currently higher quality than any consumer products, so the loss is hardly noticable.
Yoy know, I'm pissed at certain DVD's that FORCE you to sit thru their previews and commercials. I mean, I PAID for this disc, yet I'm not allowed to control how it's played back.
In fact, it's stuff like that which makes me wonder if the transfer of control in the new digital technology (TV, DVD, VCR, etc) makes the marginal gain in quality over the older analog technology worth it? No analog VCR will ever stop you from fast forwarding anything, because it's a largely mechanical device and you control it.
Basically the mask is off, and the purpose of the MPAA is clear: They want TOTAL 100% control of when and how all media is played. They want recording to be impossible.
If this level of control by a monopolistic, corporate cartel over everyday technology doesn't scare you, what will? I see no difference between government control (1984), or corporate control, the end result is the same.
In 2000 America, is a non-lawyer truly free?
Here's my take: If the MPAA limits TV recording, a large chunk of TV viewers would no longer be able to watch their favorite shows. This would hurt ratings, which would hurt revenue from advertising. Allowing people to watch their favorite programming again and again at the viewer's discretion builds a fan base, which obviously results in secondary markets (tshirts, action figures, etc) and that is very profitable for all. But I digress... I hope the politicians realize that the MPAA is really going too far; TV recording has been around for nearly 20 years! If we loose this freedom, the RIAA will jump on the bandwagon and will probably move on to radio broadcasting. We have to stick together as a community on this and defend our rights.
I wouldn't worry even if the FCC ruled in favour of the MPAA on this one. We all know what the MPAA thinks is involved in technologically protecting works, just look at CSS. I'd be SO scared if the MPAA chose to use CSS or an equivalently inept strategy to protect digital broadcasts. Wouldn't it be fun to go through the whole DeCSS shit all over again with VCRs?
*sigh*
(For the humour impaired, this is a joke, I'm as concerned about these issues as you.)
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
I find it funny that the MPAA is actually going this far to swindle what else they can from people. But even if they succeed, and get some kind of protection built into the hardware, someone somewhere at sometime will get bored, and decide to hack it. It won't be the cleanest, most easily reproducable hack, but they'll do it.
Famous Quote I like to go by: "Make something idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot."
So they stop us at the VCR Level. At some point along the path from the cable input to the television, there will be a decrypted video signal, just waiting for someone to snatch up and redirect to a VCR.
If your really that deperate, break out the old camcorder, take a set of headphones and cut the jack off. Wire the jack to the speaker in your television, plug it into the camcorder's "Audio In". Face the camcorder at the TV Screen, press record, and watch as the camcorder captures both video and sound (you can use the microphone if you want...)
In the end, MPAA and RIAA are trying to resist change rather than adapting to it. And this will be the final nail in their coffin. Change is here, and they need to learn to adapt to it rather than trying to twist it to their own devilish schemes.
Had the MPAA/RIAA worked out a business plan that used these new and emerging technologies, they would be leaning back in their chairs, enjoying a nice cuban cigar, while they continued to make money, rather than wasting it on endless lawyer/legal fees to fight it.
I honestly think that in the end, the Consumers will win this. It may take many years, but in the end, we will win.
This link says it all: Explaining the CSS Decryption Source Code to the MPAA
--Kumba
As I wrote this I could see someone with very little else to say pointing out what I thought everyone else would have understood anyway.
The MPAA are just a body made up of all the real bastards you mentioned. So the comment still stands.
Just that "their products" refers to that of their members:
Walt Disney Company.
Sony Pictures Entertainment. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.
Paramount Pictures Corporation.
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.
Universal Studios.
Warner Bros.
The MPAA ARE the real bastards. They are the best target for your anger because they are all the bastards in one place!
"How much truth can advertising buy?" - iNsuRge - AK47
"How much truth can advertising buy?" - iNsuRge - AK47
Why, of cource not! You are inciting a riot!
No comment at this time
So in the future they'll leave that cola can blank on Friends and digially label it later once they get a contract from Coke or Pepsi. During the basketball game, you might be able to click in an icon to get more info about Michael Jordan's shoes. The shows and the commercials will merge and the world will happily induldge in its orgy of consumerism. Ahem. Sorry, got a little carried away there.
This post brought to you by FLERN. Making fine products since 1855.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
In fact, the DMCA and this rule would affect radio. Especially since some form of digital radio will be a reality in the next few years.
All the more reason why I'm glad that since the Internet, I spend very little time watching TV or listening to homogenized FM radio.
In 2000 America, is a non-lawyer truly free?
If I can see it, I can copy it. 'Nuff said.
-Splat
That's exactly one of the issues I raised when I sent a letter to the FCC - it gives broadcasters control over historical record of what was actually broadcast! Without proof something was ever broadcast, how could you complain to the FCC or sue for slander?
Another issue I raised was that it works against the disabled, in that they cannot later review portions of the broadcast to gain a better understanding of the content.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Not existing models, but new models would have to contain the circuit to detect the signal and refuse to record certain programs for you. In other words, Yes.
This of course is a Bad Thing (tm). On the plus side, I'm sure it will be easy to mod your devices to not care about the signal. If people design the devices properly, then it should be as simple as cutting one trace or pin. To wit: If the signal is detected, a line can be brought active. If it is not, the line remains inactive. If you cut the line, it is always inactive.
Manufacturers: I urge you; If you are forced by the Bad Guys(tm) to put this circuit into your devices, make it easily defeatable. Those of us with technical skill WILL help our non-technical friends (yes, we do have friends) defeat the method provided you make it easy for us! Your devices need not remain crippled if you are forced to cripple them at the factory!
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I don't know about Russia or China, but perhaps in USA...
Perhaps someday. I avoided mentioning this possibility since I'd just be labelled a Troll -1 for it.
--
>We want to have all TV's equipped with MIB flashing devices automatically activated at the end of each show
which also allows endless reruns, series consisting of exactly one (1) episode, and the 24 hour Friends channel. They won't do it though.. interferes too much with advertising..
//rdj
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
That happens, you know. Especially when those rights only affect peripherally their entertainment. The concept of a vanguard can't be explained and comprehended by someone who doesn't care :(
--Perianwyr Stormcrow
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
Some channels, at least in the UK, are already making digital broadcasts with Macrovision on, to prevent analogue recording. Some of the movie channels do, and one of the Asian channels (SETA?) recently got a fair bit of bad press for Macrovisioning *everything* without warning, leading to people time-shifting a lot of garbage.
There's nothing needs doing to stop people making analogue recordings of digital TV - the technology is out there.
Now stopping people making digital recordings, that may be another kettle of fish. What do things like the Tivo make of Macrovision?
Regards,
Tim.
Shortly thereafter, the MPAA asked for a ban on negative movie reviews, which contribute to reduced number of moviegoers and thus infringe on MPAA members' income. MPAA spokespeople had no comment on the Movie Reviewers Association response that it would be smarter for MPAA members to make good movies instead.
It's a good read, for those of you who haven't had a chance to check it out yet.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
There needs to be a petition started for this kind of thing.
d ir=hrrc&comptype=agency&agency=112&message =101
What kinds of petition campaigns have been successful online? Usually, those involving ensuring the rights of those who sign it.
The question the answer to which I would like is: Is there a petition for this sort of thing?
The following link is a direct message to the FCC. Speak. Make your voice known. Let US lawmakers know what they would do if they further hampered the rights of consumers.
http://congress.nw.dc.us/cgi-bin/oo_compose.pl?
This is amongst the utmost importance of anyone remotely interested in freedom. Free software users, especially, should be aware of this!
Speak!
-- This message posted by Konqueror.
|/usr/games/fortune
I can't believe napster started such a spark! This is absolutely ludicrous. What's next, it will be illegal to record from the local radio station? I seriously hope this doesn't happen, at least not in this lifetime.
I became aware of this problem when, much to my dismay, the killer Creative Labs video card I bought last year has A ANTI-COPYing DEVICE built into the Fsking TV-OUT. It specifically blocks
DVD content (and probably VCD) with an algorythm called MACROVISION. Not only does this ruin the picture, it also makes it harder to record.
IF I HAD KNOWN IN ADVANCE OF THE PURCHASE, I WOULD NOT HAVE BOUGHT THE DAMN THING. I would have bought a much cheaper video card, and spent the rest on a VGA to TV converter. I've spent hours writing code and rewriting drivers to get rid of these features. Noe the bastards want our vcrs, too. Man.
I can see the headlines now: "MPAA nuked by 'Matrix' style attack."
Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
What's almost as ridiculous than the MPAA requesting this, is who they are requesting it from. The FCC's justification for existing does not intersect this issue at all. Perhaps they have the right to dictate how stuff is broadcasted, but they shouldn't have any say at all as to what goes into television sets, except in regard to stuff like RF leaks.
Whoever at FCC is working on this, should probably be fired for goofing off on the job -- unless they're just spending a few minutes writing a polite reply to MPAA telling them that they're barking up the wrong tree.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
This is just dumb. Oh well, many of the shows on now aren't worth watching any ways....
Geeky.org
Warning: "Commercial Advance" is patented.
But, yes, I'd like my TiVo to have that capability. My RCA VCR has it and it kicks ass.
I think this battle took place in the early 80's over the VCR with regular analog signals, didn't it? And they determined that we, as consumers, have the right to time-shift shows off TV.
I hope that ends up being a precident in this case.
æeee!
CD-R is NOT an archival storage medium - I seriously hope that you do not store anything you care about (eg. important company backups etc.) on CD-R, CD-R degrades where are DLT tapes are an archival storage medium, quote from quantum DLT media guide document:
"Quantum DLTtape media has an archival life of more than 30 years"
by some estimates CD-R can become useless within as little as 3-10 years.
Please please don't rely on dds2 / CD-R for REAL archives
If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let'em go, because, man, they're gone.
I tried to comment on stuff before, and the process they had was completely clueless.
See your tax dollars at work.
Has it gotten any better? I got an automated reply, and then nothing after that; it was *so* stupid.
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Don't pass up the opportunity to submit comments to the FCC on this. You don't have any right to complain about what happens if you don't make your voice heard. Let's seize this opportunity to strike a blow against intellectual property and protect our freedom to fair use.
Of course, as you might guess, I've never gotten it to record anything. Record is only active if a server enables it, and of course no one ever does.
This, of course, wasn't mentioned in the marketing that explained why one might want to buy the paid real player upgrade.
Wonder if Real is any more honest about this yet?
If they have their way, it will only get harder for artists not affiliated with them to have their content seen, despite the fact that the internet should allow anyone to publish content they've created with minimal difficulty.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I have this nasty vision in my head, how the MPAA can easily "win the war" in two rounds. This is Round One. Set laws that allows them to have copy protected material streams through the airwaves and cable lines. "Digital Reproduction" is their gimmick to make this law. What happens? Some very intelligent/motivated poeple make a product/code that defeats this protection. This is the setup for Round Two (One-Two Punch boys and girls) They then go back to the FCC, screaming bloody murder. FCC then grants the next, devistating part: The TV will only accept Copy Protected Content Streams. CPCS will be a bit like CSS. It means that non CPCS VCR's cannot play to CPCS TV's. Since all new TVs will be CPCS, in about 20 years, after all of the old VCR/TVs have broken, and been replaced, CPCS will be everywhere. PTV units (the new VCRs) will be CPCS compliant, but due to the fees for being compliant, they will be forced to use advertising THAT CAN'T BE FAST FORWARDED. CPCS could also open the door to "yearly usage fees" for PTVs. Why? Because every year, you need to keep renewing your CPCS license to continue to use your PTV unit. Translation: Even if someone breaks CPCS (DeCSS anyone?) The next year, the hole will just be plugged. Now, here's the next thing: Free Speech on TV? Forget it. You'll need to pay a hefty license to redistribute CPCS material. Right now, for a few thousand dollars, I can put together a small, makeshift studio, and make copies of those tapes, and distribute them. Under CPCS, I'd have to pay for every tape made, and to pay a yearly fee to keep my license. If they don't like what I'm making, they won't approve my license, and the next year, none of my material will be playable in CPCS OR NonCPCS devices. Why? remember, CPCS is updated every year. And non CPCS devices can't play CPCS content! CPCS is the world the MPAA and RIAA wants to make, Undoing the past 20 years of Fair Use with VCRs.
There is nothing unconstitutional at all about congress passing laws that secure " for a limited time " rights to reproduction of "useful arts" . The Supreme court has made rulings that establish fair use as a protected right of consumers . Congress has no real incentive to protect consumers on these points at all . They receive money from those interested in shifting importance from consumer's rights to authors rights . Congressman listen to them because no one else is talking to them about the same issues or has access to their ears . People do not list these consumer rights high on their priority lists as so few individuals ever get prosecuted . This is very much an issue for open source as we encounter the same economic model abuses . The MPAA would like nothing more than to have us pay for each instance of viewing ... as though their product were being performed each time like a theatre troop .
The MPAA would very much like to push tha older econmomic model into a newer ( since the days of radio ) distribution model as it promises to give them the same magnitude of income enjoyed by software companies like M$ .
What do you think ?
Your Squire
Squireson
The MPAA's not a corporation nor has a bottom line. It's an association that represents the interests of its members and the industries they are part of.
To say it in my own words, it seems as if certain corporations hold the mistaken view that the public airwaves are not public, but are instead owned by them.
Ok. This statement has me worried. The FCC decided to auction off the airwaves recently. If we've granted rights to corps through this action, the airwave may not be public property in the US anymore. Could someone with better insight on this speak up?
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
They may not be my friend, but they can still help me.
---
END OF LINE
Divx may have met a swift demise but Hollywood, through the MPAA, is slowly laying the groundwork for a pay-per-view system anytime you wish to see a movie. You don't want to pay each time? Okay, then buy the DVD for $29.95 (and up!). Otherwise, it's $8.95 a pop.
This is a classic bait-and-switch. They lull the public with arguments about thwarting pirates but in the end, they will wield technology (through legislation) to utterly control their programming. Folks, we are watching a monopoly use their monopolistic power to stiffle innovation. My question is why are they proposing legislation instead of being investigated by the DoJ for anti-trust violations?
-------
We want some answers and all that we get
Some kind of shit about a terrorist threat
- Ministry
...is all I've got to say about this. After the DeCSS trial, and the issue with Napster (which I think is half-right and half-wrong, sure artists should get compensated for their work, but for a community as large as Napster, it'd be impossible to police it in a way that someone wouldn't overcome in short-order) people should be writing in en masse to voice their opinions about the MPAA' actions and the proposed limitations on recording from television. IMHO: If it's broadcast over the airwaves, it should be free game, not subject to some sort of control-freak legislation/ruling that the MPAA wants, beyond the obvious limitations on not re-distributing it.
All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
Do you get the impression that the MPAA just hates democracy? I mean lawsuit after lawsuit they have to slowly pull consumer's rights away with expensive lawyers(what a pain in the ass, Am I right?). If only we'd just give up and instate a supreme ruler over the world; They could use those expensive lawyer salaries to bribe the ruler, instate a couple pages of law about how they invented and own all information including the letter 'E' and the number '1' and just get it over with. At least then they wouldn't have to slowly screw us over with new laws, they could do it once and get it over with!
Besides... Have you ever listened to radio stations in New York? Good God, man. You'd think that one of the world's hippest places would have some decent radio stations. They all suck, save for the college radio stations which at least have some unique and interesting content that doesn't repeat on the hour every hour. Props to Boston and Washington - which both have awesome stations, somewhere around the 99.something area.
Long live Napster. As long as I can find something online or borrow it from a friend, the music gestapo that is RIAA and MPAA can kiss my ass! They're not getting a penny more of my money, thank you.
I think you're assuming that recording/storage technology will remain as it is, and that VHS is forever. MPAA is not.
This is about digital TV. Within a year or two (maybe already?) there will undoubtably be digital TV capture cards that you'll be able to stick inside your personal computer. You'll be able to make perfect digital copies, or get a good compromise using some MPEG variant. MPAA fears this, since they equate the ability to infringe copyrights with actually doing it.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I think that their goals are more focused on the future when we can make digital copies of digital television broadcasts.
Presumably in that digital future we'll also have video on demand, something that will make the record-now, watch-later issue relatively moot.
They'd be pretty foolish to enforce such a thing any sooner.
--
Some people have a way with words, and some people, um, thingy.
That's plain simple. They want you to pay them three times for the same thing - once for TV show on the cable, once with the hidden fee in your VCR tapes and now once more for the right to record these shows on VCR. Why not, if they have the power? Give them more, and you'll be paying for advertisements they put inside, because this is copyrighted material, and you must pay for viewing it, other wise you'll be violating the copyright!
-- Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
"..., this statement charges Congress with the duty of enacting Copyright and Patent laws..."
No it does not charge Congress with the responsibilty of enacting IP Laws at all ! It gives them the ability to do so but does in no way require them to do so . This is principle to the interpretation that Author's rights are artificial ( that is that they are not constitutionally protected rights but rather enacted by congress ) . Consumer rights ( read citizen's rights ) are protected and are superior to artificial rights as far as the courts are concerned .
Your Squire Squireson
Maybe you haven't heard, but MP3 is what's called a lossy compression format. That's why they're so small. (This is the same reason why JPEGs are smaller than GIFs.) Yes, most of the time you won't notice, but I have several tracks that despite tweaking of bitrates and trying different encoders, don't come out sounding quite like the original once converted to an MP3.
I'd bet that they're more concerned about the digital recording devices like TiVo and the set-top boxes you can get with services like Dish Network. Those can get you very high quality digital capture, and when it's from a digital source, the results are excellent. A computer savvy user could easily set up such a system to capture a bunch of programming, and later spool it off to a machine that compresses it with DivX and uploads it or re-formats it to be burned onto VCDs. They have good reason to be scared about that (although they won't be able to stop it).
CVS is teh suck. Use Vesta instead.
Minidisc players, DAT, etc. have copy protection built into them. The MPAA is big enough and powerful enough to get the same thing for digital video equipment. It is only a matter of time before we see this. Just another example of how the monied elite will always get their way.
Does this sound reminiscent of the my.mp3.com case? MP3.com made internal copies to make access more convenient for its users, for which it got sued for.
--
Later he said: "Of course if the marketplace requires it, consumers will pay for it, and we want to charge for it".
In a related development, the authors of DeCSS said "We are looking forward to the FCC's ruling, which we hope will provide us with a new and exciting challenge."
Hehe. Your right of course, much easier that way. And if your willing to do something like that, no telling how far you can take it.
The Scene: A man enters his living room, and plugs his PDA into the universal sync-cradle on his 60-Inch Digital TV. He grabs the remote, and powers on his TV. He is greeted by the following message from his TV's OS.
TV: Good evening, Mr. Blank. Tonights TvOS is brought to you by AOL: so easy to use, and now pre-installed on every TV, no wonder it's #1! It has been 12 days since your last pay-per-view purchase. Please note that you must order another pay-per-view movie or event within the next 2 days to keep your "frequent watcher" preferred rate. Would you like to see a list of current pay-per-view titles available?
Mr. Blank chooses Yes on his remote, and is promptly greeted with a list of categories to choose from. After 10 minutes of searching, he finds the title he wants, Slashdot: The Movie.
TV: Thank you for your purchase of Slashdot: The Movie. Before we can begin the show, please take a moment to review the terms of Slashdot: The Movie's Licensing Agreement, which will be displayed in a moment. Under the terms of the 2011 Consumer Protection Act, you are authorized to have a lawyer present for the License Agreement and viewing. If you do not have a lawyer, an e-lawyer can be provided for you at an additional charge. Do you wish to contact your lawyer, or recieve more information about obtaining an e-lawyer?
Mr. Blank chooses No, as by now he nearly has the license agreement memorized. What follows is approximately 10 pages of leagal documents that scrolls slowly by on his screen. Mr. Blank agrees to never record or rebroadcast the following material (not that he could even if he wanted to), or to publically release any description of said film, through any media. He also agrees to not comment on said file, either in the form of review or personal opinion, without the express written permission of the MPAA.
Mr. Blank stares at the TV through the whole 10 minutes of the document: if he gets up from his seat, the infrared sensors in his cable box will detect his absense and pause the license agreement until he returns. At the end of the agreement, Mr. Blank digitally signs 3 forms, legally acknowledging that he has read and understands the license agreement. Copies of these documents are uploaded into his PDA, and also transmitted to his cable company and the MPAA.
CSS ????
Why is there only one Monopolies commission?
And wasn't home television recording hashed out (and decided by the Supremes) quite some time ago?
Joe Average may not care about DeCSS, but tell him he can't record Monday Night Football (or Buffy, or whatever) and you just may have a revolt on your hands. I can only hope so!
---
MSK
This may be what the decss fiasco really neads, a little awareness. When joe sixpack at home get's affected by the dmca then the shit will hit the fan.
Got Code?
They're just a bunch of corporate types; here's how to contact the chairman and commissioners of the fcc:
Chairman William Kennard: bkennard@fcc.gov
Commissioner Susan Ness: sness@fcc.gov
Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth: hfurchtg@fcc.gov
Commissioner Michael Powell: mpowell@fcc.gov
Commissioner Gloria Tristani: gtristan@fcc.gov
-brian
But wouldn't a recording made from an HDTV source suffer from the same problems recordings from regular TV sources suffer from, namely analog degradation. I can understand they may want limitations put into future pure digital recording devices (NOTE I said I can understand why they would want that, not that I agree with it).
:) ) I can attest that after the first couple of dupings any advantage HDTV would have had is completely lost.
Right now this seems very analogous to the whole Napster is/isn't home recording debates. So I've got a DVD or HDTV broadcast of a great movie. I make an analog copy of it - some loss of quality. My buddy wants one so I make an analog copy of my analog copy - starting to look worse now. As the owner of a 3rd generation copy of Mafia vs Ninja (those who appreciate truely awful Kung Fu should check it out
Supoosing that the MPAA is worried about digital recorders ala Tivo or ReplayTV - those still implement lossy compression schemes when making recordings so wouldn't the net result be the same?
And yes, I did RTFA, I just don't get quite what their new problem is.
Ad in classifieds: Pandora's Box (no box) $5
Next, I expect to see no more radio-tape recorder hybrids. After all, the information that's being sent out through radio waves can be copied instantaneously to another media.
The MPAA has really shot itself in the foot, IMHO. Before, I could see their side of the story (albeit limitedly). A digital copy of a work (DVD, and even MP3 for the RIAA) is an exact copy. Quality is not degraded through the copying process. But now... Have any of you watched a video recording recently? I taped a TV program just last night (hope the MPAA doesn't find out about it!) and watched it this morning; the quality compared to even regular TV, much less DVDs, was terrible. Even if the feeds are coming in through digital means, VHS tapes are a horrible representation of the original.
What's more, if I buy a Pay-Per-View event, I am paying for the rights to watch that movie/event. I am not paying for 2 hours of television time; I am buying a license, and that license should entitle me to watch it whenever I want, whenever I want. This is akin to buying a computer game, watching the media it came on disintegrate, and then "acquiring" a copy from another place (this also happened to me just recently). I pray that this will not be upheld by the FCC.
------
FYI, this "Home Recording Rights Coalition" has related info on their website, including details on how to comment to the FCC. (see http://hrrc.org/html/what_s_new_at_the_fcc.html)
It has the duty to, but as you point out, IP rights are artificial rights! I agree! I think we're in violent agreement here.
--Joe--
Program Intellivision!
callum
Does this mean my old (not intentionally crippled) JVC machine might be worth some money some day? I paid $250 for the damn thing _Just_ before DVD was released and 4head HiFi VCR's plummeted to $100. Maybe now I can sell it to someone who cannot buy a new uncrippled VCR. Way to legislate obsolesance, just like they did to scanners that could reach into cell ranges.
Macrovision doesn't have to affect anything that doesn't want to be affected....as long as you have good vsynch sensitivity. Your TV never has a problem with displaying a program with Macrovision because it was designed with a better ability to pick out weak vsynch signals....your VCR was intentionally not designed this way so that Macrovision would prevent copying. Any device that wants to accept video in can get around Macrovision by simply having a higher signal sensitivity and being able to pick up the weakened vsynch signals...the same as your TV.
When I was hacking my way through university, one of my friends built a circuit board that would detect a weak vsynch signal on a video input and re-insert a stronger vsynch signal on a video output...which otherwise was a pass-through. In otherwords it removed Macrovision from a video signal...and that was an undergrad project almost 10 years ago. I would assume TiVO could do something equivalent if they tried.
1 - I don't trust it deleting parts of my TV shows. It's good, but not perfect.
Ummm, how do you know how good it is? What I proposed has not even been invented yet. Besides, even if it was not perfect, you could decide whether or not you want to use it on a show by show basis.
I'm not talking about the current mechanisms that are used, which are dealing with an analog video signal. Who knows what kinds of techniques could be used for digital video signals. Perhaps special signals are sent indicating when an advertisement is being sent. Who knows... The fact that it is in a digital format holds many possibilities. Or... Since the signal is digital, it would be exactly the same for everyone that receives that signal, the device could download "signature" files for commercials that recognize a commercial and skip it. That's just a couple of ideas. More is possible with digital.
2 - It would if you're infringing on anyone's patents. And they found out about it.
First of all, no one has pointed out the patent in question. Would it even apply? I doubt it. I imagine their patent is on a specific technique to remove advertisements from analog video signals. If a different technique is developed for removing ads from a digital video signal, I doubt the original patent would apply.
Secondly, I am not talking about a company releasing an add-on that violates a patent. I am talking about Joe Blow releasing an open-source video processing add-on. If he feels he is violating a patent, it could be released anonymously. You can't stop something like that with a patent, and I don't think you should be able to...
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
I'm having a hard time caring about whether what I do is legal or not. As laws get more and more complex and unrealistic, more and more people will stop worrying about trying to obey the law and just blatantly flout it.
Look at the tax law, almost nobody fills out their taxes correctly. In fact it's not hard to argue that no one _can_ fill out their taxes correctly. How long does it take for people to give up and just start cheating on purpose... after all if you get caught you're screwed either way.
The media giants ultimately want to force us to pay for every single time we view or listen to media. I'm sure ASCAP would love nothing more than to charge every birthday party in the country for using the copyrighted song "Happy Birthday", and I'm sure their working on a way to solve that problem through technology.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Here's the link that the Home Recording Rights Coalition has set up for people to send comments (in support of the HRRC) to the FCC.
We have also made special modifications to the flashy device to allow viewers to remember only cirtain aspects that we deam "rememberable". Such as sponsor advertising, and subliminal messages.
1 Most people already have VCR's, and can record to content, unless you scramble it somehow.
2 People have been recording from TV for years, it's a good thing. Now you want to take that away to bleed us even more
3 If you're going to broadcast it, you should be prepared to at least allow people to record it. You don't own the ground lines over which this is broadcast
4 Don't you make enough money not to have to harass us even more?
Eh...
want to control everything. God forbid anyone should be able to look at anything at all except that the big companies should have control over it. This is so stupid. I'm thinking we need widespread civil disobedience to show them that this kind of sh!t will not be put up with. Soon all of the records of everything will be in the hands of big companies and government and they will control the past and he who controls the past... well you know the rest of it.
Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
That'd be exactly what they'd want. Everytime we stood up to go get a drink, some munchies, bathroom, turn off the TV or whatever, it'd flashy thing us, we'd then forget why we got up, sit back down to watch more tv. Hell, then we'd be sitting on our asses all day watching their ads, getting flashy thinged, watching their ads, getting flashy thinged........
Then they'd probably sue the first person to figure out how to make the sunglasses they use to keep themselves from getting their minds erased.
-- Bucket
It's a damn poor mind that can only think of one way to spell a word. - Andrew Jackson
Not to be confused with Androo Jaxon?
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
What's next? You can only tape a limited amount from the radio? The FREE radiowaves that permeate the air all around us?
Enough is enough already!
The article says that time shifting of material for later use is fine... so what is all the fuss about?
If VCR's are just time shifting devices then what is the problem. As long as the data is not "archiveable" then I can't see there being a problem. Currently there is not a problem as there is no way of providing long term archive of digital data at a reasonable rate. CD-R is not a long time archive format as they degrade. Unless people are going to archive their data to DLT tapes then they only use for short term time shifting.
However what happens when hard-disk video units can be connected up to DVD-RAM drives? Will this be seen as archiveable media and then be restricted? Are DVD-RAM disks viable long term storage?
At the end of the day I don't understand what the problem is CD-R hasn't killed the CD market, so why would DVD-RAM kill the TV market? What are they affraid of, and why has "digital" changed anything? I think it is just another excuse to try and ban video type devices becuase they failed the first time ;)
If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let'em go, because, man, they're gone.
If this were true, there would be no deadlock. Fortunately, it's not true. The only company this vertically integrated is Sony, and they're not the only or even the dominant supplier of VCRs and televisions. Matsushita (Panasonic, etc.), Mitsubishi, Philips (Magnavox, etc.), Samsung, Goldstar, etc. etc. all have economic interests in this regard. Not being content companies, they're copy-protection agnostic or hostile. They just want to move hardware. (I'm personally waiting for Philips' portable MP3 CD player; the ones currently on the market have fit-and-finish issues. We'd never see such a device out of Sony.)
-Isaac
I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
Submit your comments via the two step process into the FCC's automated system for recieving comments from the public -- ECFS:
r =hrrc&comptype=agency&agency=1 12&message=101
http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html
Submitting your comments is apparently a two step process -- the first is to fill out the form with your personal information (the "proceeding" heading at the title should have 00-67 put in there)
Next, you use your browser to send the file. I put my comments in ASCII text, and pretty much took the boilerplate letter from here:
http://congress.nw.dc.us/cgi-bin/oo_compose.pl?di
and added my signature to the bottom.
Then there's a confirmation page, and your comments are on file with the FCC.
(I think this will work better than bulkmailing the inboxes of the FCC comissioners, which will likely be tuned out.)
o/~ Join us now and share the software
I sent it on September 7th, which was (accoring to the Inter@ctive Week story) was the last day for public comments.
Any comments on my letter would be welcome.
Free Hans!
Home Taping Is Killing Music!
Anyone remember that slogan from all those years ago? What the MPAA and RIAA would like to do, in the ideal world, is to confiscate everyone's VCRs, tape recorders, etc., and even then they would not be happy because people could hum tunes or act out what they'd seen on the TV.
I really don't see how their insistence that copy protection should be installed into VCRs would help. Let's see, there are how many VCRs currently in use? 100 million? 200 million? Even if new domestic machines did not have the ability to record certain shows, all they would be doing is preventing Mr/s home consumer from copying them - big time pirates with lots of $$$ would surely have devices available to break protection. I bet the pirates are rubbing their hands together with glee!
What can I say? Cable companies suck. The have a local monopoly in practically every place they exist. Their service is the worst of any business in any industry, with the possible exception of "mob boss" or "drug kingpin". Their technology is crap too. That Scientific Atlanta garbage changes channels slowly, and the digital cable looks worse than the analog cable.
Satellite companies like Direct TV don't necessarily *have* to be better than the cable companies, but there is always the possibility of competition which usually improves service and quality of a product. That's why I always try to get my friends to subscribe to satellite TV and drop their cable.
If your cable company buckles in and makes you jump through hoops to record your favorite shows, you are SCREWED. There is one cable company and nobody else.
If your satellite provider does the same thing, then you might have a choice of another satellite provider.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
...but whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
The deal is that the MPAA and other copyrithg holders want copy protection built into VCRs and other recording devices that will keep users from recordings some shows broadcast in digital format over cable.
Heh. I recently signed up for the Digital Cable from AT&T, and if it wasn't for the fact that it was the only way I could subscribe to NHL Center Ice (I'm in an apartment with no facing for a dish), I would dump it in a heartbeat. Yes, there are 500 more channels -- too bad they're all worse looking than the average videotape rented from Blockbuster.
...at this url.
This is just plain *wrong*. The MPAA is trying SO hard to take advantage of the digital age to take away our rights to record and archive our own media.
We need to beware reasoning like "We want to make sure that [the device] has the ability to provide copy protection, but it doesn't mean all product running into the box won't be able to be copied" -- this kind of vague, "honor system"-based lingo doesn't limit what they can later decide to do with the technology. Once it is in place, they can do whatever they want with it.
Honestly, the MPAA frightens me.
Why are they even bothering to deal with VCRs? I've never seen statistics, but I'll be willing to wager that VCR is going the way of 8-track cassettes. DVD and whatever other digital technology comes along, has and will continue to have, a clear advantage over what VCR offers.
Regardless of that fact, what is the point? Even if they claim it's to protect copyrights, I'll be willing to wager even more money, that 98% of the people who record shows, do it for the express purpose of watching it later, and not for nefarious purposes.
So they're going to spend millions of dollars developing this technology that someone is just going to crack a few weeks later anyway. Someone better keep those references handy of the discussions about DeCSS. We might need them again real soon.
The fight's not over until the winner is tired.
--
1 - I don't trust it deleting parts of my TV shows. It's good, but not perfect.
2 - It would if you're infringing on anyone's patents. And they found out about it.
[The MPAA] believes an open signal to a VCR would make the risk of widespread copying of hot movies far outweigh the potential profit from broadcasting the material.
If this were true, there wouldn't be any movie studios which would put movies out on pay per view. The fact that they do put them out on pay per view shows that they think the risk of loss from widespread copying is less than the potential profit from broadcasting it (unless their goal with pay per view is to lose money, if that is the case then the MPAA is correct).
WTF?
Are these...*idiots*...so completely and fully absorbed with the concept that they control what we see and hear to the point where it's no longer a recording, but a 'time shift?' TIME SHIFT? This is insane. The intro to 'outer limits' seems to be coming true.
We control the horizontal...we control the vertical....
Snarf up those tivos, replays, svhs decks and digital camcorders. Stockpile your blank media NOW!
DivX turned out to be a failure in the marketplace with it's pay-per-play model, now they think "hey we just won't give them the choice! If they want to watch it more than once they'll have to buy it *chaching*" How much you want to bet that macrovision becomes standard equipment on all HD->NTSC converter boxes as well???
I wasn't too upset until I read that. F*cking time shift, indeed.
Blech. Signatures.
The FCC is accepting comments on this matter through Sept. 7, and may issue a ruling as early as Sept. 14.
Why are you teasing us? Where is the announcement/instructions on how to submit comments?
If this (Digital TV) is the mandatory broadcast standard (I've heard by 2006, IIRC), looks like I'll be getting all my entertainment the old-fashioned way. Books, learning a musical instrument, whatever. But I _sure_ as hell won't be buying digital TV widgetry (unless, of course, somebody is selling hacked ones). If it comes in over my cable and I've paid for it, end of story; If I like it and want to, I'm recording it, because I bought it. RIAA and TV networks, if you don't like it, don't broadcast it, keep it in a theatre. The sooner most of you are off the air and out of business, the happier I'll be, less tripe out there that way.
Hrmm. If they (MPAA) were really sincere about wanting to allow time-shifting, they'd have to come up with a method that allowed it, but somehow tied the recording to the individual unit, or owner (in the latter case, a removable smart-card or something like that) or something -- for instance, using strong encryption on the stream of data. The problem then boils down to mass-producing individual keys and getting folks to toss out their old VCRs and any other recording media (TV tuner card? Hrm.)
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
This reminds me of the times I fought with my brothers when I was younger:
"Mom, Raymond's punching my face!"
"Don't punch your brother in the face!"
"Mom, Raymond's kicking my leg!"
"Don't kick your brother in the leg!"
"Mom, Raymond's biting my foot!"
etc.
I fully support copyright holders who want some compensation for what they own, but this is getting ridicuolous. Whining to governments to put in new laws for every stupid situation that comes up is unworkable, and at this point they are making life difficult for everyone, even the people who fully respect them and have no intent of abuse. If their business model no longer works, they need to change it. These legal contortions will only annoy people, and will not extend their lifetime for very long.
If you are modding me down because you disagree with me, use the "Flamebait" category, not the "Troll" one.
Ugh... this is ridiculous!... When does it stop?
It seems to me that the MPAA, and related bodies have got far too many lawyers with far too little to do!
One thing that has come out of the recent spate of lawsuits, and stories like this invloving the MPAA/RIAA etc. is the total disregard for the people purchasing their products.
I'd say that if you are using a BROADCAST (that's the key word here) medium you have to accept that it's going to be broadcast all around the place. You should also accept the possibility that because it's a one-to-many medium that you can't please all of the people all of the time.
Hence, you might be prepared to think that some of those 'many' may not be quite happy with what you broadcast, and when. So, maybe they'd like to be able to make some of their own arrangements!
But can they do that? No! That might require a concience, and I think we're all aware that lawyers don't have one!
"How much truth can advertising buy?" - iNsuRge - AK47
"How much truth can advertising buy?" - iNsuRge - AK47
Start messing with what people have already come to accept as a God Given Right (the right to watch the porno they taped off of The Hot Network at 2am anytime they please) and you'll rampant, flagrant violations.
Essentially, a congressman pays a little attention when a small group affected by a ruling writes. But when a vast majority of MiddleAmerica(TM) begin to get pissed off, that congressional representative starts to hold hearings to guarantee his constituent feel he is doing his job.
I can't wait for this to play out.
This is not the way to build a lasting empire.
Maybe. Do HDTVs have a digital output? I'd be surprised, I thought the industry heavies got on that one already.
But is it relevant? I don't think that the BetaMax decision said anything about the quality of the recording, they just affirmed that home recording (for time-shifting, etc) was legal.
---
People have been recording analog signals with VCRs. With the advance of digital-based recorders and digital signals (HDTV, etc), however, the MPAA and others are worried about what you would do with a digitally recorded copy.
You could easily upload it to the 'net for others to download *without commercials*. They could enjoy the same high-quality show you got (no degredation since it is digital)*for free*. This would be against their idea of copyrights. You could record it to a DVD and bootleg it (think about HBO sending a digitally recordable movie).
Heaven forbid!
It is the same reason that you will never see a digital video out on the back of a name brand DVD player - it would allow for too easy of a non-encrypted digital copy (the same problem the MPAA has with deCSS).
My opinion? As someone who is big into high-quality home theatre, I hope I am able to record digitally (maintaining the same quality of the original source) for later viewing. I hope the FCC rules in favor of the populace. I, for one, am not really against protections that allow for one generation digital copies and no more. I do want that one generation, though.
- (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
The report says nothing about limiting the use of recording regular television. This new law would protect copying of events such as Pay-Per-View and etc. Although, there is still a problem with that, it doesn't affect us as much. I don't see what the big deal is, if you don't want it to be copied don't release it on TV. How much money can they really lose from copying. All I have to do is call all the people over I was going to lend the tape over and let them watch it when it comes on originally. Unless, of course they put a per-user license on TV also.
--Reggie
--Reggie
The courts would have to abide by that law unless it conflicts with the Constitution. I don't recall that there's a whole lot in the Constitution on the subject of IP law (I could be mistaken; IANAL and it's been a while since I've read it.)
While your congressman knows that voting yes to such a thing would make him somewhat less popular with his constituents, the RIAA and MPAA have a lot of money to sling around, and your congressman can be sneaky in a variety of ways in order to reduce the danger that he'll be accountable for such a vote. Which is probably how a good bit of the erosion of the constitution and the rights of the people has occurred over the years.
Of course, the ultimate power still rests with the people. A jury charged with prosecuting a case stemming from these laws could refuse to convict the defendant under such a law. Betting on jury nullification to save your ass isn't particularly safe, but it may end up being the final refuge against laws some company has bought from Congress.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
According to the Home Redording Rights Coalition homepage (the 'defendants' in the case) at HRRC.org, the case number is 00-67, ""
.sig!
This link should take you to the Electronic Comment File Submission for 00-67 where you type your complaint.
The HRRC has provided a form letter here Please remember to add a personalized
Get even more educated! read A summary on fair use w/r/t this case, and A PDF of the HRRC comments on the issue.
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
Here's what I just sent. (Starting with the HRRC boilerplate and expanding on it.)
I understand the Commission soon will be deciding whether VCRs can be hooked up to digital cable systems, and whether home recording from digital cable will be allowed. Hollywood studios apparently claim that home recording is the same as theft of service and that this justifies limiting home taping. Your agency should protect consumers' rights to record and view DTV signals. The Commission should respect the Supreme Court's ruling in the Betamax case, and not equate private, noncommercial home recording with theft of service! In short, the Commission should take action to protect the interests of consumers in this proceeding.
Enough of the form letter. To say it in my own words, it seems as if certain corporations hold the mistaken view that the public airwaves are not public, but are instead owned by them. As we all know, this is not the case. Restrictions are put on the use of the airwaves only in order to prevent uses not in the interest of the public and not, as many of these large corporations seem to think, in order to enhance their profits. Enhancing of profits is fine, as long as it is done in a fair manner. It is not fine when it crosses into anti-social territory.
In the past, both the courts and the FCC have taken a reasonable, balanced view, not trampling on the rights of the the true owners of the airwaves while also preventing the sort of anarchy that would prevent individuals and corporations from being fairly compensated for their creations. It is my hope that both the FCC and the courts will continue to find that balance, protecting profits, but not at the expense of completely reasonable use of the airwaves by private citizens.
And in my mind, that fair and reasonable use is quite simply. If I pay, either explicitly, or implicitly through watching advertising, for signals to be sent to my house, I have the right to view those signals in any way and at any time that I see fit, provided I do not transfer those signals to someone who hasn't so paid. That is fair and reasonable. It imposes no onus on the private citizen and yet provides a fair profit to the creator of those signals.
Thank you for reading my views.
Sincerely,
Steven R. Burnap
The cake is a pie
The writing is on the wall. The suits can see TiVo and ReplayTV becoming REAL popular as digital TV (i.e. compressed video signals which can be stored very efficiently on hard drives) becomes more popular with consumers.
You can bet that TiVo or ReplayTV or one of their upcoming competitors would love to add a nice "ad-blocking feature." It makes sense. These devices allow you to capture all the shows you want, and watch them later, even more easily than with VCR's.
How many more TV shows would fit on a drive if the ads could be blocked?
This is the real fear for the suits... not whether Joe Blow is going to have a perfect digital recording on his DVD-RAM. (Hell, they know as well as we do that copy protection will never stop a committed pirate.)
-thomas
P.S. Wouldn't it be cool if TiVo/ReplayTV/et. al. allowed consumers to write video-processing add-ons for their units? Gawd that would be awesome! Imagine how many ad-blocking units would be written in a few weeks. Talk about adding value to your product! (id Software has proved this technique time and time again.)
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
Most of us agreed, when TiVo started hitting it big, that the establishment would either have to fight the saturation of "personal television" devices (i.e., TiVo, Replay, etc.) or adapt. Television earns its keep through drawing in viewers to watch advertisements. Now, more and more people are circumventing that mechanism by, via one medium or another, recording television programming for later viewing and skipping the commercials.
Clearly, it is far simpler for the MPAA to decry change rather than to adapt. The MPAA and the RIAA have taken horrifically similar approaches to the vagaries of the recently commercialized digital distribution channels. While the RIAA attacks Napster and dogs MP3 player manufacturers, the MPAA attacks DeCCS, 2600, and now you and everyone else with a VCR-like device.
Isn't it wonderful how, in this modern day and age, that the first and seemingly most popular approach taken by establishment against innovation is a law suit?
So would I be retroactively prosicuted for all the taped episodes of MST3K in my closet?? How could we seperate digital content from analog? weren't they going to phase out analog?????? I'm moving to Mexico.
Dirty Pirate Hooker
The cost bearier to enter the DTV market is very steep. A friend of mine purchased a DTV and receiver last weekend for almost 7000$. The current FCC rules are aiming for a total migration from the current analog format to the digital format by 2006. However, not allowing the recording of DTV programming in a similar fashion as current analog programming is only going to slow down the migration. You will have fewer early adopter which will keep the prices higher for longer.
I know I will not be tempted to by a digital TV until both the price comes down and there is a Digital Tivo.
Quack
of course, so was prohibition, income tax, etc...
I seek not only to follow in the footsteps of the men of old, I seek the things they sought.
*sigh*
--
--
The New World Order is upon us, and it's about damned time.
The HRRC is only concerned about the MPAA's proposals inasmuch as they might
Given that the MPAA/networks won't budge on the copy-protection point, I'm not surprised the issue has gone to the FCC to decide.
And as a licensed amateur radio operator (KC4TQP), I can tell you the FCC is the fox guarding the consumer henhouse. If a consumer-friendly ruling comes down from the FCC, it will be purely coincidental.
-Isaac
I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
The MPAA has begun to contract out brain surgeons to figure out how to implement copy protection devices into the brain of human beings.
"The reasoning is simple," says a spokesman of the MPAA. "Say Joe goes to the movie theatre and pays his hard-earned $10 to see a movie. He then goes to his friend Bob and tells him the entire plot of the movie, start to finish. Bob has now been enriched with the storytelling of the movie without paying a cent. Bob, therefore, has an illegal copy of the experience in his brain."
The MPAA has contracted out BigBrotherInYourBrain, Inc. to develop the copy protection devices. "The device is simple," stated Dr. Reginald Buttplug. "While viewing a copy protected movie, undetectible waves will be emitted and picked up by our chip. During the time that the chip is active, every thought and experience will be treated as normal. However, when the movie is over and the waves stop, the chip will force the brain to 'forget' everything that occured during that time."
"This is the next step into stopping the community from stealing our products," said the MPAA spokesman. "It is atrocious how many people copy our stories via their brain functions. We estimate that it has cost the movie industry millions of dollars in unspent ticket money."
Of course, having this implant is not manditory. However, movie theatres will not admit anyone not carrying an identification card stating that they have successfully completed the procedure.
Expect these to hit the airwaves Real Soon Now(TM).
(My karma was too high. I needed to get it down somehow.)
What this probably comes down to is analog vs. digital recording technology. With analog VCR's the industry introduced 'Macrovision', which played with the vertical synch on the VCR's output. Thus the VCR could tape TV shows with good quality (for the day) but VCR to VCR dubbing led to fairly crappy looking tapes due to vsynch signals being lost along the way.
The concern of the big media companies is that digital content isn't as easily toyed with as analog. They probably couldn't give a crap about you taping HDTV Buffy with your analog VCR, but the thought of someone taking the HDTV signal, piping it into their PC and putting a hot new pay-per-view movie up on the internet as an MPEG two hours after its first showing probably scares them shitless. So they want some digital version of Macrovision. Being 'content' people and completely nontechnical they don't know what that is, what it means or how to do it...but they'll spend whatever amount of money it takes to get it done...the only problem is the electronics guys are looking at putting TiVO-type tech. into every TV/VCR/blender/whatever (and charging you $200 extra for it) and they don't want their cash cow messed with.
The only reason this is news is because the big 'content' companies and the big 'device' companies can't agree. If someone had found an easy way to do this 6 months ago it would have been signed, sealed & delivered without ever popping up on SlashDot and this time next year all the digital VCRs on the market would have some "MacroVision II" lobotomy built into them that people would be trying to hack their way around.
Welcome to the new world order. Read books instead.
This proves a theory that I have had regarding the MPAA and RIAA. That they don't treat their product (music, movies, television) as such, they treat it as a drug.
Follow me on this rant for a bit.
A drug dealer does what? They will generally give you small, low quality samples of merchandise. Then, once you are hooked, they up the quality to get you completely addicted to their merchandise. Then, if you want to get it from somewhere else, large men with baseball bats show up and make you "want" to go back to your original dealer.
The MPAA/RIAA does what? They will generally give out low quality, free samples (radio, television, etc.) You decide that you want the real thing, so you buy the CD, VHS tape, or *gasp* DVD. You then decide that you want to use your stuff in your own way, and not go through their channels, be it in the form of an mp3 file, watching your DVD on a linux box, whatever. What happens? The big boys generally don't send large men with baseball bats, they send lawyers instead.
Note to Hillary Rosen and Jack Valenti: Once something has entered my house, either in DVD/CD/broadcast form, that I have PAID FOR, you damn well better believe that its mine, and NOT yours.
"See, we plan ahead! That way, we never have to do anything now."
I've always thought that the fact that VCRs were made so hard to program by mere mortals was actually a result of the hardware companies striking back: "You wanna record our stuff? You'll have to be able to set the time first... MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"
Maybe I should switch to decaf.
FJ!!
..I can see in certain controlled societies (Russia? China?) that news broadcasts would be unrecordable, so that people could not bring up inconsistencies later.
--
Its so easy to get past its not even worth counting it as a valid means of control any more. Every time they update it to include some new encoding its quickly defeated.F /...
---
Solaris/FreeBSD/Openstep/NeXTSTEP/Linux/ultrix/OS
--- I do not moderate.
....and then there'll be a crack/chip/hack/something for it.
It will never be real, they'll just slap a tax on something somewhere like always.
---
whats next, xerox machines that won't copy certain publications if they have a special barcode copyright? Pencils that require a user to scan publications with the same barcode method above or else the user is shocked? Monitors that won't display certain information if it thinks it came from an invalid copywright holder?
-- MrMud
Let this happen. Let the MPAA have its way, such that digital stuff can't record or timeshift or whatever.
We *want* consumers to see the effects the MPAA have on all of us. We want them to see the fact that TiVOs, HDTV, digital cable, etc, doesn't work. We want them to see that the MPAA is doing some stupid stuff. I think it would be reasonable to suffer this sort of inconvenience if it can topple the MPAA entirely. It's sort of an entrapment case, but in this situation, we let the MPAA set the trap and the bait itself, and we pull the trigger/noose later on it!
Let the MPAA take away *all* the rights consumers are used to. Don't let them record from DVDs->VCRs, don't let them copy CDs to mp3s, tapes, or other CDs, don't let them copy broadcast shows onto VCRs, TiVos, or mpgs, etc. See what happened when we let Circuit City debut DiVX? It *died*! Let the MPAA do what it wants, and let it collapse on itself!
Of course, if the people are all as stupid as *they* assume, they'll just win the battle...
The nick is a joke! Really!
GPL Deconstructed
Some of the wording in this case makes me think that they want to be able to claim ownership of any information stream. In this case, any content provider would be able to stop people from recording any part of it, unless they pay royalties of some sort to the content provider. While this may sound a bit innocent (though not entirely), there are some eery ideas that could come of this.
Think for a minute if someone like @home were to say that you could not record any of the data stream that was routed through them to you. You would not be able to save any files from the internet, even ones sent to you through email!!! Admittedly this is a very far fetched idea, but it is one that could be possible if this line of reasoning is brought to its logical conclusion.
This is probably a stupid question, but what business really does the FCC have in making this decision? They are (am I wrong?) not an elected body, so their decision doesn't reflect what the public wants. Democracy anyone?
Rant Time: It seems the MPAA won't be satisfied until they control all media with an iron fist. Usually I scoff at people who talk of things like "The MPAA is Big Brother", and "Your being spoon-fed what they want you to have", but after reading articles like this, I wonder if, to paraphrase the X-Files, I'm not paranoid enough.
I can't belive the MPAA has the balls to do something like this. They can talk all they want to about "artists rights" and "copy protection", but I think it's pretty clear that this whole issue is about one thing: executives making money. This is even more offensive with TV shows, where advertising already permeates nearly show in existence. So now, not only do I have to endure 10 minutes of ads, but I cannot record it and fast forward through them? Sad thing is, it'll get worse before it gets better. Hey MPAA, many people have e-mail accounts now. Why not send e-mails to everyone, and make them digitally sign and return the e-mail as proof that they won't record, rebroadcast, or distribute a show, and that they will watch all the advertising like the good little sheep they are?
OK, rant over. It's funny, though: since I got my cable modem, I spend most free evenings either playing D2 and Team Fortress Classic online, or just generally surfing Slashdot and the like. About the only TV shows I watch any more are SouthPark, Simpsons, X-Files and sporting events, and even then it's hit or miss. I think organizations like the MPAA, RIAA and their ilk have known for a while what I'm just figuring out: that they are pimping a dying media, and they must squeeze it for every nickle while they still can.
Let's pass a law requiring a tithe to the MPAA. They can just dock 10% directly from the salary of every American. (Australians to follow.) That would be so much simpler than the tax on blank videotapes or making us pay for extra crypto hardware on HDTVs.
Unlike Circuit City's DivX content control system, there is not a simplistic stance people can unite behind. There is no blatant nor immediate threat to privacy nor obsolecense of their current DVD players.
Furthermore, unlike DivX, an attempt by a minority media player to get an advantage over its competitors (encouraging dissention.) This current issues is a push by the majority media players as a collective, united in effort.
Copyright control has advanced to the point that older arguments based on innovation hinderances or fair usage isn't nearly as clear cut. The MPAA will no doubt argue that a compromise (certainly in their favor) can be reached with modern technology and legislation.
Lack of public awareness; lack of connection between the people and representative; and lack of chrismatic politically or economically powerful figures leaves the people at a deciding disadvantage. Help raise awareness... and remember some inconsitencies in belief are allowed, as long as the core principles are shared by all advocates of a position.
Businesses have the distinction of being resistent to political change. Politician's have multitudes of checks and limits in place. 20 year long-term plans are impossible or extremely difficult because administrations are against each other. However, businesses with large warchests can affort to lobby political generation through generation.
"'Try' or 'Try Not'; there is no Yoda" -me =)
Ideally, they should take casual copying into account in the license fee structure for rebroadcasting shows. I'm sure they already do, though, and they'd have a hard time justifying this to the broadcast/cable companies that are already paying for this. And what about digital satellite? That's been out a long time, rebroadcasting DVD-quality signals. You can already copy DVDs and digital satellite. Why is cable any different?
I think we'll be seeing a lot of this crap in the next few years as last desperate gasps of a dying industry.
---
I am the dot in slashdot.org
Ok, maybe it is just me and my paranoid mind, but am I the only one that can see that the big corps are planning something. It has always been said that the next great war will not be one of guns and bombs, but one of information. Well, what I see hapenning is that they are removing our tools to fight, does any one remember why all you Americans have the right to have guns in the first place??? I think that in the same spirit we should have the tools to fight a war of information, but all the big corps are disable all out tools to fight this war, we are not allowed to record information, what next? Well maybe I am just nuts, but this is my two cents.
If I'm paying for a cable connection and all the frickin' movie channels and a descrambler box. I should damn well be allowed to tape the movies/shows I want to see that I payed for when I want to see them.
I should be allowed to place them into a format that makes them accessible to me for my own personal use.
This whole idea seems pretty simple to me, I really don't understand how one can even consider the MPAA's arguments.
If all it requires is a hack then I don't see the reason why people wouldn't do it. I mean how easy it is to apply some hack to a program on your PC, not too hard. In fact, most computer savvy 12 year olds can easily install any crack or serial you give them. What your talking about are the older generation who don't even know what a "hack" is. But I wouldn't concern myself too much with this generation since they probably aren't the ones recording shows with their VCRs anyway. Lets face it the people the industry is concerned about are the younger generation who are willing to try a few things, unfortunately this same generation is also more than willing to try a simple hack if give that option. Therefore, a new encryption ruling would simply be in vain.
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
www.haidacarver.com
Thats stupid, the only reason why I bought a VCR instead of a DVD player is so I could make recordings. If they do that then I'm sure many people will not purchase VCR's. Even still.. people will find ways around the protection, whether it consists of purchasing an old VCR or some mod chip dealio.
I represent a group of pencils and stickynotes that holds the copyright on the term "copyrithg" in any electronic forum. You now owe us a medium sized plate of nachos. This letter does not remove our remedy to ask you for nachos in the future.
JET Program: see Japan, meet intere
As another poster pointed out, VCR's are just a memory-augmentation device. It's something we already do, and it's something that may eventually be incorporated into our bodies more intimately. What then?
--