Slashdot Mirror
Anti-Copying TV Technology Creeps Forward
An anonymous reader writes: " After CDs, then comes TV? Although the technologies
being spoken about are supposedly to prevent online sharing of television
content as digital network television is born, the extents of the
control being spoken of is alarming. When I purchase my next television recording device, will I be able to chose to record my
favorite show while I am away from home? Will I be able to record one show while watching another? Or will I be at the mercy
of the network ... only allowed to record should they *want* me to record. It could be possible to prevent the recording of first-run
shows, forcing either-or choices (and affecting ratings and advertising rates,) rather than allowing us to watch one, record another."
seems kinda funny... anti-copy TV broadcasts at the same time as ST:TNG being released on DVD. good thing i already have the good eps taped. could this possibly mean that other series will be released on dvd as well, so recording won't be necessary?
For the networks to keep the viewing totals up for the major advertising bucks they want (the article implies that the networks would ban recordings of shows on certain times so people would watch during the week ad prices are calculated), all that would need be done is to count all the VCR's recording the shows as a viewer. I don't suppose the technology to do that would be very hard at all
This may not relate directly to the article at hand, but it is important to many /. readers. Check out this thread on a previous discussion that received a record 122 (!) moderations. This by itself would not be cause for concern. But the editors didn't seem to like this thread, so the entire thread was "bitchslapped" down to (-1, Offtopic) several times.
I would like to ask the editors, why did you feel this was necessary? The parent post was at +5 at one point before getting slapped down to (-1). It received some more positive moderation up to +4 or so and got slapped down again. Currently it is at +2. Why was it necessary to drop a +5 user moderated post down to (-1) on multiple occasions? And why did you drop the entire thread (70+ responses) down with it? Many of those responses made valid points yet they got the same (-1, Offtopic).
...are they supposed to be able to achieve this? The article's point about a 'flag' having to be universally accepted and followed is right on. But unless they try to actually encrypt the full signal, anyone could manufacture a non-compliant device, and it'd be an instant mega-seller. I don't even see the point of this initiative. Without the force of law or unbreakable encryption, it's useless.
I see this as the real "Digital Divide," a recurring pattern using this new medium as a force to separate and distinguish the two classes, but in a new configuration. In the past, the producers were the paeons and the consumers were the elite.
This development shows how this is reversing: the producers are the elite who have licenses to clone costless data and the consumers are the powerless drones who pay their wages and freedoms away per every view.
Same class model we've had for centuries, and the digital realm is nothing new.
[
First, I stopped going to theater coz I'm pissed by MPAA. And I stopped renting movies for the same reason. Then I stop buying music CDs coz I'm pissed by RIAA. And I refuse to buy DVD player because of this stupid zoning scheme and DMCA.
And now TV. Well, not that I watch any TV at all, as I don't even have cable. But still.
Great, everyone just spends more quality time on Slashdot, then. Let it be the geek's new year's resolution.
For communicating a method to circumvent copy protection.
--jeff
ipv6 is my vpn
You're right. Fair use does not guarantee that it should be easy to record a copy for personal use.
However, broadcasting is a pivilege, not a right. Getting an easement on everybody's property for cable is a privilege, not a right. Parking a satellite in a geosynchronous slot is a privilege, not a right.
I think that it's only fair that in return for using their government granted monopolies on these publicly owned channels for their content distribution, broadcasters, satellite and cable companies should not be allowed to thwart reasonable fair use by their customers.
If they don't want to allow fair use, that's fine. They would just have to distribute their content in an entirely private distribution channel, like delivering DVDs via UPS.
With the current corporate-controlled political climate, however, I doubt that my argument will get very far.
I bet it won't even notice whatever content protection scheme they put in!
You're using her as bait, Master!
Don't worry... The only way that they can prevent copying is if they were to replace every TV in the world with TVs that can decode an encrypted signal *after* it enters the TV. Since this would be very cost prohibitive to undertake even within the next 25 years, you can expect that, until this day, there will be a device that can copy the video signal on standard 75ohm coax that is used in the tens of millions of TVs in use today.
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
Dont allow the slashdot editors to hide information from you.
READ IT FOR YOURSELF.
Make sure you note the massive amounts of -1 moderations, all done simultaneously, obviously by an editor.
Stand up. Make your voice heard. Tell the slashdot staff you will not tolerate editor moderation on large scales, such as this!
Mooniacs for iOS and Android
I find it exceedingly interesting that this discussion is being posted EXACTLY 18 years after the landmark supreme court case (Sony Corp. vs. Universal City Studios, Inc.) was settled.
Just a little food for thought.
Yes, but the schedule they set is not being followed in the slightest, and even the FCC chairman admits that the date might slip, and unless things change they will slip.