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."

Comments

hmm...

[doooras]

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?

Re:hmm...

[Carrot007]

First let's take a look at your points.

> 1. Price per 1 hour episode is no more than $1

seems reasonable.

> 2. No commercials, previews, ad-banners, or other such nonsense is included

indeed in pay-per-view the adverts belong on the "preview" (advertising) channel.

> 3. The data stream is 100%. No bullshit blurring, bitrate reduction, or other nonsense like DirectTV uses. If I gotta pay, I want unreduced 1080p (not 1080i), with full 5.1 sound.

couldn't agree more, we shouldn;t have to put up with the crap.

> 4. A guarantee that there will be no dropouts, glitches, etc.

this is completely unreasonable. you couldn't guarantee this sort of thing. problems happen.
however the box could notice that a dropout occured and thus give you access to a re-view for free.

5. I can make a non-duplicatable archive copy using a durable media like DVD.

ahh but this contradicts the price in point 1. either it's gonna be cheap and you have to pay each time to watch it (i mean do youreally need to hoard a lot of stuff you don't need? (like so many people out there!!)) or it's gonna cost more and let you keep a copy.

> 6. No monthly service charges. If you want me to pay per episode, I'll only pay for what I want to watch, not for all the hundreds of hours of useless tripe.

this is entirely dependant on what they provide for the "service charge" no service charge would usually equate to mimimum usage requirement. they can't just let you subscribe and do nothing. it would make them bankrupt.

7. No time slotting. If I subscribe to a series, I expect it to be deposited for viewing or archive on a weekly basis, to be viewed when I have time and the inclination.

This would be nice and hopefully in the future. Though "deposited weelky" certainly sounds like time slotting for me ;-) though i know what you mean.

Carrot007.

How, without encryption...

[Logic Bomb]

...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.

The real Digital Divide

[Speare]

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.

Everyone will have more time for Slashdot

[2Bits]

Gee, I'm feeling squeezed.

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.

Re:OK, you *made* me do it

[statusbar]

For communicating a method to circumvent copy protection.

--jeff

Re:Fair Use and the courts?

[Waffle Iron]

Don't be a dumbass. Fair use is a privilege, not a right. You, and everyone else (this includes corporations) have the right to copy protect content however you please.

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 got me an old top-loading 4 head VCR!

[Robber Baron]

I bet it won't even notice whatever content protection scheme they put in!

Re:OK, you *made* me do it

[swordboy]

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.

Re:For the last fucking time

[TheMCP]

It's television. It's not bread, water or sleep. It isn't procreation. It isn't required to subsist. It *isn't an inalienable right*.

Actually, it *is*. The FCC grants the right to use the airwaves to television stations on the basis that they are supposed to serve the public. They're allowed to make a profit on doing so, but they're supposed to serve us. If they're going to take away our fair-use rights, the FCC should look at taking away their licenses to broadcast.

Re:Because as we all know ...

[b0r1s]

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!

January 17, 1984

[UserChrisCanter4]

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.

Re:FCC has mandated digital tv by 2006

[gorilla]

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.