Slashdot Mirror
New HDTV Encryption Obsoletes Sets
Brian Weatherhead writes "I wrote an article, detailing the MPAA's control over your HDTV. Their new standards will make any HDTV bought before 2002 obsolete!
Consumers will be upset to say the least." Talks
about the different formats for video signals, and
copy protection methods for those signals. And yes,
if this goes down, anyone with an HDTV without DVI input
could very well be watching 480p signals when HDTV
standardizes. Fortunately at the rate this stuff has
been happening, those TVs will long since have died.
But one thing is for sure- with the DMCA, and these
new video formats, PVRs could become a thing of the
past.
Message to HDTV equipment owners:
Let's all get together and rent a cargo plane, load up all our newly obsolete HDTV equipment, and drop it on the MPAA's headquarters. It's pretty heavy stuff; should make a lot of nice holes in the roof, and will hopefully squash some of those responsible.
But one thing is for sure- with the DMCA, and these new video formats, PVRs could become a thing of the past.
;)
If it's viewable, it's recordable. If there's money to be made modding TVs and PVRs to be recordable, someone will be selling mod-chips.
"But that's illegal!"
That's for the courts to decide. Perhaps the primary purpose of mod-chips will be allowing viewers to exercise so-called 'fair use' rights of a personal copy for private viewing, and piracy is only an unintentional side-effect.
You know, like Napster.
People knew what they were buying in to.
The problem with things like this is the fact that people don't know they're being cheated. If everybody knew that recording your favorite episode of while you're out for dinner is illegal under the DMCA due to the (Begin Rant) legal crap the sleazebag lawyers who work for the MPAA think up (End Rant), then people would not buy it.
So if people knew what the MPAA, etc... is doing behind our backs, they wouldn't buy it - instituting a sort of boycott. Then, maybe the MPAA would realize that we are the source of their money and better suck it up and make us happy.
We're always complaining about how deep corporate pockets can be, but if we have a probem with it - then don't buy it - we're the ones giving them that money.
Actually, No..
Take a look at the box your HDTV Set Top Box came in, or look at the manual. It includes the capability to "down-res" the analog output, if copyright holders so choose.
That is what is obsoleting your old set. When the industry decides that DVI is the only acceptable interface, they flip the switch, and the 1080i signal is now down-res'd to 480p.
What a luxury, to be an industry that can spit on consumers & still flourish. In fact, HDTV owners are often some of the biggest movie fans, trying to get the best quality possible for their movie viewing. And the movie industry says "screw you"!
A point everyone seems to be overlooking is that this article is referring to next generation DVDs, not broadcast HDTV. The latter must be broadcast "in the clear," but the MPAA has been only been willing to release relatively low-resolution formats.
At the current rate of HDTV adoption, there is no chance of the FCC agreeing to allow encrypted broadcasts - one of the FCCs rules is to promote the use of the airwaves, and nothing stops that quicker than calling the early adopters who invested thousands of dollars "suckers."
Being unable to view high-res DVD-NGs on older HDTVs sucks, but it's not as bad as the broadcast getting encrypted.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
If they would just sell DVDs for $11.99 and and provide movie downloads for $5.99, only a very few would bother pirating their stuff. Forget the encryption mumbo-jumbo. Make it easy for your customers to have a good experience.
Every time somebody sneaks snacks into a movie in their purse, the movie industry loses a few dollars of revenue that should have been spent on outrageously priced candy. However, if people were strip-searched entering the theaters so that the few 'snack-pirates' would be caught, there would be a huge backlash, so they live with the illicit food munchers. As it happens, 99% of the people buy the food in the theaters anyway. No need for high-tech countermeasures or a Concessional Millenium Snackfood Act to protect the theater owners..
It's too bad that the media corporations can't seem to apply real-world customer relations common sense to the digital realm.
Nobody is broadcasting in HDTV? All major networks are broadcasting things in HDTV. Hook up an antenna. Here are the following shows I can watch _just tonight_ on my HDTV:
ABC: Tarzan, Alias, The Practice
CBS: Eduction of Max Bickford, Rosa Parks Story
Fox: Simpsons, Malcom, Bernie Mac
NBC: Winter olympics
UPN: Buffy
and more.. movie channels HBO, Showtime, etc.
Unless you live in the boonies, most major networks are indeed broadcasting in HDTV OTA. HDTV programming is available via satellite for DirectTV and Dish network. HDTV is available via cable for those with certain cable companies (time warner and a few others).
Next time you post something, try getting a clue and stop karma whoring with your political rhetoric.
Either the courts are going to keep passing dehabilitating laws such as the DMCA and allow the RIAA and Movie industry to keep screwing its customers or its going to realize "Oh gee... I didn't realize that all this piracy was a result of the entertainment industry fattening its wallets with the money of joe consumer, who doesn't really have the money to buy a hdtv but is told by the guy at "Tv world" that he needs it to watch tv and movies". I think that at some time, like with the recent napster thing, that maybe the courts will realize that they are here to defend the best interest of its citizens... not its corporations. Everyone bitchs about this... but i don't see anyone standing outside of radioshack, best buy, audio visual or circuit city with little flyers and such. I mean the hippies do it for starbucks, etc... why don't the nerds unite. We should use our knowledge of technology for good purposes and spread the info that joe consumer doesn't have. I'm sure this could lead to laws like the dmca, etc being looked at more seriously by the courts and maybe even some hilarious hyjinx along the way.
can't sleep slashdot will eat me
I've been thinking about this. And I don't think it's possible to get the laws overturned. Congress is far too addicted to the media industry's money. So I say that all concerned artists and appreciators of art (and I mean art in the general all-media sense) pick some country - say... oh, Spain, I hear the weather's nice - and move there. We could establish a new world worth living in.
I mean... look at the horrible assinine things that the MPAA and the RIAA are doing, then look at the state of movies and music. Sure there's some good stuff coming out, but compare either to the 60's and 70's and, there just isn't the kind of creativity in the business that there once was. And I don't think that's because there aren't any good ideas left, I just think somewhere someone discovered that shit is easier to sell.
So we should get up and leave.
In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
DIVX was cleanly destroyed by a concerted early-adopter-consumer effort which led to a total lack of support for the format. I remember the rather quick decline amongst million dollar ads that was due to nothing more than those "in the know" informing Joe Q Public; "DIVX? Don't buy that, it's worhtless." I don't see why that couldn't happen here. Make a big stink beforehand; you'll never buy a set that supports this. It's worthless and forces the user to follow corporate mandates. Then make sure you tell anyone who'll listen. No money-hungry corporation will be able to resist for long; one or more will break ranks and offer non-DVI devices that (hopefully) will sell like hotcakes while the DVI boxes rot on the shelves.
"The electronics industry kept this secret under wraps as long as they could. "
If this is the case, wouldn't consumers be able to file a class action lawsuit? They should, and it should cost all involved dearly. Possibly, it should even be severe enough that the government should dissallow the use of encryption by the broadcasters.
At the rate this is going, I think people may need to consider government oversight of the mpaa, and to a limited extent, the studios. Although that goes against many capitolistic ideals, these groups seem to embrace every thing bad about capitolism. It sure wouldn't hurt the quality of media -- tv sucks so bad, I'm surprise people aren't embarrased to be in the industry, The stupidity most programs amazing. Very few movies are worth the price of gas to get to a theater, and most musicians are less creative than a person making $10 an hour on an assembly line.
Another option would be to do it the right way -- independant artists selling their wares via the net. Remove the current media houses from the process entirely. This will allow the true artists to not get lost in the shadows of mass marketted corporate garbage we are currently exposed to.
All of these ignorant little schemes whereby the movie/music/content industry slowly work towards implosion will most likely be killed within the next couple of years. Look at the Charly Pride fiasco - they seemed to get enough people together to get a class action lawsuit and force a settlement out of the industry. What happens when 24-49 year old people begin to feel the effects of the RIAA/MPAA's poor business decisions and governmental influencing?
More and more people are getting connected, want to take advantage of all that "new" technology. What will happen when millions of those people are forced into adopting that technology and find that it does little that they want it to and far less than what they've been able to do in the past. Lawyers are probably chomping at the bit waiting for this day to come so that they can chew into the cash cow that is the RIAA/MPAA.
Most of us here are of a small vocal minority. In the "grand scheme" of things it's seen that we have little power over the outcome of these decisions. But is that in fact true. Everyday I come in close contact with at least 20 people, 10 of which I have regular conversations with. Almost every person within my sphere of influence knows about these issues because I've taken the time to communicate them and worked it into conversations about things that are already happening in their lives. How many people within your sphere know about these issues? What will you do to change that?
This issue stirs up so many past issues not just in the music industry but also in how the government is run (US and Global), how laws are passed/enforced/judged, Intellectual Property, "freedom" of information, telling the truth - ethics in company and government communication, etc. It's crazy that there's a connection between wanting to tape Dawson's Creek and the need for US government political finance reform. That connection shouldn't even be there, companies should not be able to shape the policies of a government, only individuals should have that power. No corporate junkets, hosting, food, clothing, ad time, benefit dinners, fund raisers, trips, private meetings. These are PUBLIC officials, everything that they do outside of their personal life should be OPEN AND AVAILABLE TO PUBLIC SCRUTINY. If individuals mass and make requests that are beneficial to the corporations then GREAT that means it's probably beneficial to the public/consumer also. I don't want to hear that Merk/Medco, Phillip/Morris, SONY, AOL/TW endorse candidate X or that GM's local union whatever endorses candidate Y. I don't want to hear about how many lobbyists that MS has hired out from under AOL. I definitely do not want to hear about how some company or corporate rights group is influencing the EU or China or India or other foreign government. That's just crap and more and more they are the reason that the US gets shat upon by other countries. India and Pakistan population were mad because several companies pulled out after 9/11 and that meant jobs and livelihood lost to those people, people already underpaid for their quality work.
We should limit companies ability to influence any government. Companies should not be allowed to voice their issues through the same means meant for individuals. Does that mean that I think government should ignore the needs of business - No - I just think that it should be through a seperate channel that takes the issues and stores them like data and all of that government/corporate/public communication would be free and viewable to the people (public would be anonymous by request... comments would be posted without ID). The government should take the data and be proactive in it's use, not reactive to the corporate needs but forecast those needs based on what the public is telling them is the real need. I know that's all idealistic, but why can't idealism create realism? Why can't what we dream and think be manifested into something tangeable?
The average Joe does not yet see these issues as a problem and won't until they effect him or someone he knows. Therefore it's our task to communicate how it is or will be soon effecting us (and them) and make it very REAL for average Joe. The other issue is that the people we really need on our side couldn't care less about this issue because they are struggling on issues of food or daycare or healthcare and not "can I watch my otaku goodies". Until we show them that, eirily enough, this does/can/will effect them then we won't have the votes necessary to really do some damage
"Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon