Slashdot Mirror
SonicBlue Going w/ReplayTV 4000 Despite Lawsuit
Ughhgu writes "Looks like SonicBlue is going to go ahead and start shipping. The Cnet article even has a quote from SonicBlue. It seems they can't understand why the industry would sue them. Sign me up for one!" I'd dearly love to test one of these.
These units have the capability to send shows from one ReplayTV unit to another. There's not a whole lot of detail given about this functionality, but I wonder whether it can be fooled into thinking your PC is a ReplayTV unit. I slobber uncontrollably when I think about a DVR that would let me archive shows to my file server.
I've been a Tivo owner for almost a couple of years now, and in that time I've modified mine with extra disk space, a web interface, an ethernet port, and a shell prompt on a serial port. :> And there is some work going on right now to play raw video streams from the unit streamed over the network (Andrew Tridgell of Samba fame is the main culprit there), but something like this -- and the stand that SonicBlue is taking on this issue -- makes me sorta want a ReplayTV 4000.
For those interested, there's very little information on the "Send Show" functionality listed on the ReplayTV web site, but I am curious how a user with multiple ReplayTV units and a broadband hardware firewall would allow people to send video to them. I assume it's a TCP session and let-'er-rip, but the site is annoyingly lacking on details. I'd love to know.
I find it interesting that many of these companies could be throttling this sort of device as an oligarchy, yet have little or no influence on the use of the technology. Actually that's a good thing, because of many concerns about there eventually being only a few companies, some years down the road, through which internet service will be provided and dictating what technology would be available and how it could be used by consumers.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I'll buy it when I can use a SMB or NFS drive over my network to store an amount of video only limited by my hard drives, and I can access the files from my PC (to play on the PC, to extract clips, whatever I feel like doing).
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
but shouldn't the networks be going after the individuals who utilize the features of replayTV to violate copyright and not replayTV itself? Just because replayTV has the capabilities to allow users to violate copyright, it doesn't mean that all users will or that relayTV is forcing them to. Sure, going after users is difficult and expensive, but they are the ones actually breaking the law.
I guess the same argument could be made for Napster, and look where that ended up.
-B
Fishy policy, I'd say...
Tired of free ipod spam sigs? Opt ou
What is needed is a way to have a fully functional system that doesn't take the software upgrades that will inevitably be coming to disable the sharing features and other features that the networks are complaining about. To compare it to TiVo, to use the full TiVo features you must leave a phoneline plugged in to "phone home" and take whatever software upgrades are forced on you. Pull the phone line for more than 30 days and you basically have yourself a glorified VCR. At some point in SonicBlue is going to be forced to send a software update to disable or alter some of the features of the 4000. Unless there is a way to hack the software to have a fully functional system without taking software updates, you're just wasting your money on this.
* Ban the programatic detection and elimination of ads. Do this either with laws, or de-facto, by owning media "browsers"
* Make ads use non-standard and random time lengths, sizes, volumes, ect., so that ads cannot be programatically detected
* Interrupt TV, web pages, and even music CDs and movies with ads at irregular intervals so that ads cannot be even generally anticipated
* Supperimpose ads on the sidelines of shows, web pages, CD covers etc. with a constant, nagging presence so that it is difficult to escape from ads even after they have been identified
* Work ads into the background of the action of shows, web pages, etc. to make it more difficult to mentally "tune out" the ads' presenece
* Work ads into the hearts of the plots of fictions, the comments of characters, and the opinions of pundits so that it becomes difficult to even distinguish ads from non-ads
* Replace entertainment, information, opinion, and art with ads wholesale; completely removes the troubling burden of somehow "integrating" ads with non-ads
* Attempt to ban the use of all mass media except for ads; eliminates non-ad competition
What will they think of next?
The bottom line is, I think TiVo is doing a very good job of making both the viewer and the network happy. The sonicBlue box can share over the internet out of the box - on the TiVo, mods are necessary that put this out of the reach of Joe Blow on the street. And TiVo underground has "secret" remote sequences.. once of which gets you a 30 second skip button on your TiVo. I've actually gone back to using the Fast Forward button instead. The automatic backup when you exit makes it easier.
Such devices, the suit contends, deprive the networks of revenue and reduce their incentive to produce new shows.
We could only hope! Network TV is a black hole of intelligence so the sooner these dinosaurs disappear from the landscape, the better. Of course the networks are only pleasing their viewers. All the smart viewers have gone elsewhere...
I'd rather see these major media companies bleed through their network outlets and not have the profits to pour into further eroding individual rights and freedom. Hopefully, devices like this can get a marketplace foothold such that a legal block is impossible.
But then, I dream a lot lately!
"Insanity is doing the same thing over again expecting a different result."
Ok, slashdotters, think outside the "box" will ya...
Ok, it is a little about broadcast material. It will allow transfer of information outside the advertisor's area. (look at the SHIVA laws regarding protection of local broadcast rights and the effect it is going to have on picture quality of DBS systems)...
But here is where it really matters. ALL PAY PER VIEW material. This includes Actual PPV, Premium Channels, DVD's, and Video's from blockbuster. Since the Replay will be able to record anything coming in on a given channel (like channel 3) at high resolution, and then distributed across the Internet to those that have not payed for the privelage, a technology like this, will result in less potential income to content producers. Less money to HBO, less to Disney, Less to Don King, less to the WWF.
The biggest difference between this and VCR is convenience and distribution. Distribution of Video tapes is so limited to not really matter in terms of money. When distribution becomes "easy" (And in this case, Napster is an appropriate analog), then non-payment use of PPV material becomes rampant and uncontrolled.
In this case it will only be a matter of creating "replay" groups that will create material that will be "easy" to get... "Hey, I missed the last episode of the Soprano's can someone send it to me?" "Does, any one have "Shrek?""
Fair use laws never intended to allow easy distribution of copies of material in a fashion that allows use outside of the intended commercial distribution method. It is meant to allow fair personal use.
IANAL but I think that they can demonstrate that this moves from personal use, to extra-commercial distribution of intellectual property, without compensation to the owners of that property.
I'd rather not see the average consumer wasting any bandwidth of the internet sending episodes of soap operas to each other. Besides wouldn't an hour of high quality video require sending something like 500MB to 2.0GB of data anyway?