Slashdot Mirror


SonicBlue Ordered to Spy on ReplayTV Viewers

An Anonymous Coward writes: "Got outrage? According to a story on SiliconValley.com, a federal magistrate has ordered SonicBlue to track ReplayTV users' every click to see what they're watching, recording, skipping (commercials) and e-mailing to friends. The info is to be given to the entertainment industry control freaks who are suing SonicBlue for allegedly abetting copyright violations."

426 comments

  1. Disney needs a boycott by woyouwenti · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First Disney sponsors Hollings bill. Then Disney does this to SonicBlue users.

    BOYCOTT DISNEY.

    Don't buy Disney products. Don't go to DisneyWorld, Don't go to Disney flicks.

    1. Re:Disney needs a boycott by ClarkEvans · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      First Disney sponsors Hollings bill. Then Disney does this to SonicBlue users.BOYCOTT DISNEY.
      Don't buy Disney products. Don't go to DisneyWorld, Don't go to Disney flicks.


      The above is not "off-topic" as it was so moderated. In fact, it is probably one of the more intelligent posts that we will see.

    2. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Silver222 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Yep, good idea. However, here is what will happen.


      Slashbots will all proclaim their hate for Disney, and will refuse to buy Disney products, right up until Miramax or Touchstone or Hollywood Pictures releases a film they want to see. Then, they will flock to the theater in droves.


      How else do you explain the fact that a quarter of the stories on Slashdot are condemnations of the entertainment industry, and another quarter of the stories are slobbering writeups about Sci-fi movies or the X-files?

      --
      "It's not a war on drugs, it's a war on personal freedom. Keep that in mind at all times." Bill Hicks
    3. Re:Disney needs a boycott by teslatug · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Boycotts almost never work...can you imagine the kind of thought and commitement that would have to go into a successful boycot? No one will go through the process of actively making sure that they are not buying any Disney products unless they have a serious personal reason to do so. Unless Disney starts killing off some nerds, I don't foresee a boycott coming.

      The only thing that will work, is money, and the only way that we will pay is if it becomes easy and safe to do so. One way to do this is to send something like a $500 yearly check to some organization to hold (SLashdot can do it, they get to keep the interest and maybe even make more money through investing that money - sort of a pseudo bank) and every time something like this happens, Slashdot can have a money hammer on top of the offending Senator's head. One click of the hammer, bamm $10 bucks against him or her. Pool that money and somehow display how much money has been gathered so far so as to encourage more donating...MAYBE then something will get done through Slashdot. Any other way will not work.
      Boycotts will not work and letters will not work.

    4. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Wolfier · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Don't boycott, just PROTEST.

      Set up some Mic**y M**se parody web pages that spread the message, and let the whole Internet mirror them, until it shows up first on Google.

    5. Re:Disney needs a boycott by BrookHarty · · Score: 5, Insightful

      About a handful of People make the rules in the usa, they are the ones who the representatives listen too, they are the ones with the deep pockets that get them elected. Maybe you should look at who is behind the company, instead of the company itself.

      Sam Nunn
      Donald F. McHenry
      Donald V. Fites
      Helene L. Kaplan
      Franklin A. Thomas
      Michael A. Miles
      Carl E. Reichardt
      Michael Eisner
      Howard Stringer

      You can boycott disney all you want, but until the top few people agree with us slashdot minorities you will have an uphill battle.

    6. Re:Disney needs a boycott by joFFeman · · Score: 0

      i can't stand when losers like you turn legitimate issues into ones of race. what the hell does black history month or anything like that have to do with this? nothing. you're just a bigot who's trying too hard to fit your white-supremacy agenda into every conversation you have. a nation of whites? ok, mr. duke, let me fill you in: the united states is a relatively new country, populated by immigrants of many different races, in addition to native americans. it's always been that way, and it always will. you're just as much of an immigrant as any black, asian, or hispanic.

      now that i've gotten that out of the way: i agree with the boycotts of major studios. i make it my business not to support the large corporations anymore than is necessary to survive. i don't like mainstream film or music in the first place, but when i purchase something in the store, you can bet i take into consideration the companies from which i'll purchase. sometimes boycotting means going without something you want. refusal to buy shows companies you're not a consumer-drone, and are able to survive without their products. when people bitch and complain, it means fuck all. if their profit margins stay the same, it's as if you never raised the issue. some people who say they're boycotting disney today will be buying films from touchstone studios tonight. boycotts don't work if the target doesn't know the effects.

      --
      "Life is great; without it, you'd be dead." -Harmony Korine
    7. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 2

      Finally, a proper use for those "punch the monkey" ads.

      --
      I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
    8. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

      Ahh, first on the issue of those damnable human tracking implant things, and now on Disney;

      what will Christian Fundementalists and Computer Nerds agree on next? ^_^

      Seriously though, any chance somebody can dig around in the DMCA and find something that is potentialy anit-christian in a very blunt and obvious (or at least obtuse and stupid) way? it is alledged that the DMCA cover everything at least once, so it must have something to say on the topic. . . . -_^

    9. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While you're probably just being a troll, you're absolutely right. Racism in America in the 21st century has almost exclusively been aimed at white Americans. Do you see any lunch counters that don't let blacks in anymore? Do you see any professional sports not completely dominated by "minorities"? Even golf, the mainstay of white anglo-saxon American businessmen is dominated by a black man. Do you see any white-only colleges? There ARE black-only colleges though. Are there special grants just for white people like there are for blacks? When whites finally become a minority in this country, will we then be able to turn around and claim that we must be protected by equal opportunity laws? I should have gotten that job but I was put out because I was white?

    10. Re:Disney needs a boycott by peddrenth · · Score: 1

      BOYCOTT DISNEY.

      We already do. Have done for years. I don't think intelligent people are in their target audience.

      (apart from "Tron", I mean)

    11. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Jebediah21 · · Score: 3, Informative

      So do you watch ESPN? ABC? If you do you're not boycotting them. Many radio stations and magazines are owned by Disney as well. They are not easy to avoid. I won't pretend I'm all holy. I still watch ESPN, but if ever called upon by Nielson Ratings I have never watched ESPN.

      --

      Everytime you look at porn a devil gets their horns.
    12. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      You forgot to include Jack Valenti.

    13. Re:Disney needs a boycott by smagoun · · Score: 5, Informative

      TheyRule.net does a good job of showing who's in charge of what. It's scary...

    14. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Zathrus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I generally explain it as the odd concept of "individualism". Some weirdo right wing thing that tries to convince Us that We don't all think the same exact thing.

      Fight it. Discontinuity can only follow. If We are not all the same, society will certainly crumble!

      Seriously - just because a story gets posted by the editors doesn't mean that everyone on /. agrees with the political slant on it. I personally believe that the DMCA and related laws are likely to permanantly cripple the Western economy, just like religious laws did so in SW Asia (aka Middle East) and manufacturing-oriented labor laws have done so in parts of Europe. But that doesn't mean that everyone else agrees with me, and while I can try to convince them, I can't expect them to do as I would do.

    15. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, no Disneyland, ABC TV, or Disney movies for me and my kid this summer.

      I'm staying away from those clowns until Eisner is outta there.

    16. Re:Disney needs a boycott by hummassa · · Score: 1

      I have said it once, and I say again: the solution is not political, but technological. every ReplayTV owner, hook up some filter/proxy generating artificial traffic to SonicBlue HQ and presto... GIGO :)

      --
      It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    17. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Stoutlimb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well said! It irritates me whenever I read a post that assumes that Slashdot and their readers are all of one mind. We are not the borg collective! I hope we never will be!

      Some people say: "Boycott Disney!
      Some people say: "I'm going to watch whatever I feel like!"
      And yet others say: "whut??" as they scratch there ass...

      THERE IS NO SLASHDOT COLLECTIVE

    18. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Stoutlimb · · Score: 1

      If I had any moderation points handy, I'd mod you up. Thats a really neat, informative, and eye-opening site. Gives me a list of people I should get to know in my social circle. ;-)

    19. Re:Disney needs a boycott by ethereal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree that there is no /. collective agreement on these issues, and really you can't fault thousands of people for not agreeing to the exact same positions.

      But the onus on the editors is a little stronger - they are always making editorial comments about non-free software, restrictive legislation, civil liberties on the 'net, etc. Yet they also support the latest DVDs, movie reviews every weekend, and playing non-free games on their Windows partitions that they sometimes forget that they have.

      So while you can't really expect the /. readership to agree on anything, I think it is more reasonable to expect the /. editorial staff to put forward a cohesive editorial policy on what they support and what they oppose. They have a "bully pulpit", but right now the message from that pulpit is sadly inconsistent. Until that changes, we won't be seeing any /.-launched boycotts doing any real good in the world.

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

    20. Re:Disney needs a boycott by ethereal · · Score: 1

      If you have digital cable, your cable company already knows that you watch ESPN.

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

    21. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Silver222 · · Score: 2
      Exactly! I don't expect all the readers of Slashdot to agree, but the editors seem to have pretty much the same ideas. I'm know I'm not the only one to point this out, but the fact that they keep posting Star Wars stories right after condemnations of the entertainment industry is kind of like listening to Jimmy Swaggart preach on the evils of prostitution, no?

      --
      "It's not a war on drugs, it's a war on personal freedom. Keep that in mind at all times." Bill Hicks
    22. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Zenjive · · Score: 1

      Heh, I've been boycotting diznee for years!

      --


      A vacuum is a hell of a lot better than some of the stuff that nature replaces it with. - Tennessee Williams
    23. Re:Disney needs a boycott by clmensch · · Score: 1

      AWESOME. I'm sending all of my friends to theyRule.net. Excellent interface and totally interesting content.

      --
      There is no gravity...the earth just sucks.
    24. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      Should the site reflect the editors' viewpoints or the readers? Traditionally, newspapers and other media outlets have reflected the editors' beliefs and thoughts. I think /. (and perhaps kuro5him even more so) is designed to break away from that and allow the readers to choose as much of the content as possible.

      All you are asking is for the editors to push your agenda. That's no different from what the original poster was saying.

      And know what? Both of you have missed the boat entirely on the entire concept of free speech.

      Don't want to read about the latest films, Windows games, or whatever? Turn them off in your preferences. Or go to a site that will happily insulate you from all those things you don't want to hear about.

    25. Re:Disney needs a boycott by chewedtoothpick · · Score: 0

      I think thatmy topic about the real racism which runs through american is well on-topic because disney was one of the pioneering companies in "Equal Opportunities." Companies like disney are the reason why gay people get their annual million man march and why here where I live, more than half of the city speaks ONLY MEXICAN damnit... I take it you are a black or asian, or some other minority. I am not at all trying to say we should revert to slavery or anything... once again, I am just saying tone it down. We should have holidays like Martin Luther King Day to celebrate black people who deserve it, just not things like at the local JC they are having a cinco-de-mayo celebration with mandatory attendance by all classes in session to "pay tribute to the minority of mexicans" who vastly outnumber the whties, asians and black COMBINED for the whole Valley... and that number of mexicans in in this city ALONE (anotherwards all the whites, blacks and asians in the whole valley are less than the mexicans in this city which is one of eleven!)

      Now, are you sure that I am just some biggot asshole who is a white supremesy (sp?) advocate? NO I AM NOT!!! I am just pointing out that if we were to try a "White history" month or even an "Asian history" month then everyone would be on us like stink on a sewage plant! The people who get the most benefits in this country are black women followed by black men then all of the Asians etc... with the least benefitted being the Native indians ant #3 least... White women at #2 then white men being given what leftovers have not been picked clean. I especially loathe that I have lost 3 jobs now to people less qualified than I am just because they are another race!! And By the way... being that my family lineage reaches as far back as the original settlers.. I do not think that I could be considered an Immigrant...

      --
      Erutangis ym si siht.
    26. Re:Disney needs a boycott by chewedtoothpick · · Score: 0

      We are the Borg... We will assimilate you... Resistance is Futile... (just JOKING!!) :)

      --
      Erutangis ym si siht.
    27. Re:Disney needs a boycott by ethereal · · Score: 1

      I don't want them to push my agenda, necessarily. Although that would be nice :)

      I do want them to have a consistent agenda, though, because for better or for worse /. is a big component of the voice of the tech community, and it influences a lot of people every day.

      I have no problem with free speech; Rob & Co can do whatever they want with their site that they have so graciously allowed me to post on for free. I don't want to tell them what to say or do, or enforce any sort of conformity of opinion or speech. But I'm pointing out that most "real" interest groups have a focused message that they communicate and that makes it more effective. If /. (and its readers/posters) wants to aspire to the mantle of leading boycotts and being an effective force for change, the message needs to be more well-defined.

      If /. doesn't want to do that, then that's OK. But that means that /. won't be the force of change that at least some of its readers and editors seem to want it to be.

      I will point out that the difference in "choice of content" is night-and-day between /. and k5. The current size of the /. submission queue means that there will always be a story that an editor is comfortable running, so other users' submissions can be disregarded. Until /. has a user-operated submission queue like k5, the content selection will remain squarely in the hands of a few editors. You can't really call /. user-centered publishing at this point, although maybe it was when it started.

      Think that the users can still introduce alternate content through their posts? Read Slashdot Moderation: Exercising Agreement

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

    28. Re:Disney needs a boycott by scm · · Score: 1

      Too bad it's a Flash only site...

    29. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Jebediah21 · · Score: 1

      I don't. We are supposed to have digital soon, but I am unsure what I would do. I love Football games, but all the other stuff I can live without. It's those accursed Sunday Night games they have.

      --

      Everytime you look at porn a devil gets their horns.
    30. Re:Disney needs a boycott by joFFeman · · Score: 0

      "more than half of the city speaks ONLY MEXICAN damnit"

      no comment.

      --
      "Life is great; without it, you'd be dead." -Harmony Korine
    31. Re:Disney needs a boycott by HiThere · · Score: 2

      You've wait 'til now to start?

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    32. Re:Disney needs a boycott by joFFeman · · Score: 0

      ...and btw. i'm 100% white. blue eyes, blonde hair, broad shoulders- i'm a prime example of an aryan male. hell- i even live in the deep south, in a rural area. i was raised as a 'christian', just like almost everyone else in the area. i'm about as close demographically to the 'average white male' as one can be. the kicker? i don't believe in being a racist bastard.

      they are having a cinco-de-mayo celebration with mandatory attendance by all classes in session to "pay tribute to the minority of mexicans" who vastly outnumber the whties, asians and black COMBINED for the whole Valley
      well, if that is the case, there's even more of a reason to celebrate cinco-de-mayo. there's a large amount of people who will appreciate it.

      am just pointing out that if we were to try a "White history" month or even an "Asian history" month then everyone would be on us like stink on a sewage plant!
      every month is white history month.

      Companies like disney are the reason why gay people get their annual million man march
      gays are finally getting the recognition they deserve as human beings. homosexuality isn't a 'disorder', a 'disease', or a 'crime'. why can't people get over it? are gay men coming to your house and forcing themselves upon you? i doubt it. homosexuality is here to stay. deal with it.
      i thought 'the million man march' was attended by primarily black males, not homosexuals, anyway. maybe you should write down lists of different groups you hate, and the reasons you should give for hating them. it'll make it a lot easier when you attempt to make legitimate arguments out of bigoted propaganda. you can even take some magic markers and make it really colorful. you may even get a sticker for your effort.

      --
      "Life is great; without it, you'd be dead." -Harmony Korine
    33. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, my wife and I are on our way to Florida next week for a vacation. She wants to go to Epcot but instead we are making alternate plans. Disney will not be getting any of my money, I'd rather spend my time at a competetor's park.

    34. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Sloppy · · Score: 2

      TheyRule.net does a good job of showing who's in charge of what.

      No, it does a horrible job. This is great example of how to present information in a cumbersome and relatively difficult-to-access manner. It's a shame, and a little bewildering, that someone who actually has something to say would obfuscate their own message like this.

      Imagine how much easier-to-understand and just all-around-better this could be, if it were presented in the form of a website. And imagine how many more people would see it if the search engines could visit it. Instead, it uses a weird UI, requires proprietary software, and is doomed to net.obscurity. The small group of people that it talks about, are no doubt relieved.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    35. Re:Disney needs a boycott by peddrenth · · Score: 1

      Okay, you're logged in so I'll reply even to an old comment:

      So do you watch ESPN? ABC? If you do you're not boycotting them

      No, I don't. I watch the BBC. I watch commercial channels only if there's something specific which interests me, and not as an evening-filler.

      I get a number of american TV stations on my house's cable-TV (mostly news) and I cannot stand their patronising attitide. If anyone wants evidence of TV stations being utterly "we believe the sun shines out of our Secretaty of State's ass" then they only have to watch CNN for a while.

      I dread to imagine the attitudes of those who've watched US news programmes long enough to believe their views.
      "You are nothing. You're a peasant so you're wrong. I'm a newscaster for a big TV station so I'm right. Repeat after me: anyone who argues against the government's ideas is filth and should be shot"

    36. Re:Disney needs a boycott by Jebediah21 · · Score: 2

      It is bad in the states as far as the media goes. The brainwashing is so complete and ingrained it's amazing. I had no clue of the depth of deception until I stopped paying attention to TV News and its affiliates.

      Too many people do use TV as an evening filler, and I can't blame them. Anything to numb a full day of work.

      --

      Everytime you look at porn a devil gets their horns.
  2. I'm not surprised by jred · · Score: 1, Insightful

    My first reaction to that is "Damn! I can't believe they're doing that!" My second is, "Yes I can, it doesn't surprise me a bit."

    If you expect the worst of people, you'll never be disappointed, but you can sometimes be pleasantly surprised.

    --

    jred
    I'm not a mechanic but I play one in my garage...
  3. One more nail in the privacy coffin by BorgFear · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Where will this all end ? I read today that the entertainment industry considers skipping ads as "stealing" content that we have "contracted" with the networks to receive! These types are really getting up my nose. Excuse me while I go down to CompUSA for another 100GB drive for my downloaded mp3's :-) Gotta pay 'em back somehow, huh ?

    1. Re:One more nail in the privacy coffin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you'll have to wait in line behind me while i purchase half a dozen 160GB drives to accommodate the music i will be downloading in the next week or so.

    2. Re:One more nail in the privacy coffin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well you will have to wait while I.... oh never mind it's not worth it.

    3. Re:One more nail in the privacy coffin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You ... nevermind.

    4. Re:One more nail in the privacy coffin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SUCK IT, TREBECK.

  4. Isn't this unconfisituional or something? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Isn't tracking what a user does in their home (esp if they haven't agreed to it when they bought it) unconstitutional? Something about privacy has got to be in there somewhere... They aren't criminals, so why are they treating the customers like them. This, among other things, makes me want to build a place like the guy in Enemy of the State has...

    Tibbon

    1. Re:Isn't this unconfisituional or something? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dubya and his cronies are moving to have the constitution declared unconstitutional.

      we are well and truly fucked.

      kiss your ass goodbye.

    2. Re:Isn't this unconfisituional or something? by MoneyT · · Score: 2

      You do realize that the conservative viewpoint is to have as little government control over people as possible? The whole idea that we make our own decisions and call our own shots. Just because the conservative viewpoint promotes big business does not mean they're out to take your freedoms away. Remember, Bush wanted to give the extra money you gave the government (tax surplus) back to you. Gore wanted to put it in a "lock box".

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    3. Re:Isn't this unconfisituional or something? by StillaCoward · · Score: 1

      That would be the Libertarian view point. The conservative viewpoint is....well, conservative. In general, use government to regulate your morality.

      That they promote big business is a side effect of our political structure. Republicans are just more honest and up front about it than Democrats.

      Oh, and don't fall for that, Republicans are going to give me my money back stuff. Both groups will suck you dry in a heart beat. The difference is one group seeks to use the money to set up income redistribution programs. The other group seeks to use it mainly to build cool toys (read: weapons of mass destruction).

      In short, if you really want to be consistent in your political stance, vote either Libertarian, or Green....
      --
      Stupidity is the only crime punishable by nature.

  5. Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by pgrote · · Score: 5, Interesting

    is slashing their own throats.

    It's an escalation of arms at this point. Total war. Never in our histroy have we been subjected to such comprehensive privacy invasion.

    It doesn't matter that the data doesn't say Mr. Smith watched such and such. The thought that the entertainment industry will have access to this data implies that they will use it against the viewers. Incredible.

    Maybe they should read what the court has said in the past about privacy and viewing habits.

    Here is the link to Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984

    Assholes.

    1. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by windchill2001 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      It doesn't matter that the data doesn't say Mr. Smith watched such and such. The thought that the entertainment industry will have access to this data implies that they will use it against the viewers. Incredible.

      It may not directly say the users name, however acording to the article, all the data will be associated with a unique identifer for each viewer. I dont think it would be that difficult to find the way back to the origional user

      The idea that a judge would order this is just sickening.
      --
      -Windchill2001 The One, The Only, The Cold...
    2. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by pgrote · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Bingo. That is exactly what I was saying. It doesn't matter if it doesn't link someone's name with the data. There are ways around that.

    3. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by windchill2001 · · Score: 3, Informative
      I was reading through the CTPA and came across this interesting quote:
      " A governmental entity may obtain personally identifiable
      information concerning a cable subscriber pursuant to a court order
      only if, in the court proceeding relevant to such court order -
      (1) such entity offers clear and convincing evidence that the
      subject of the information is reasonably suspected of engaging in
      criminal activity and that the information sought would be
      material evidence in the case; and
      (2) the subject of the information is afforded the opportunity
      to appear and contest such entity's claim.
      "

      So they have proof that every subscriber is useing it for illigal activity?

      Also i think that this means we might see a million geek march up to this courthouse, as we are all entitled appear in court and contest the records collected and all allegations against us.
      --
      -Windchill2001 The One, The Only, The Cold...
    4. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by AJWM · · Score: 5, Interesting
      This gets interesting. Quoting from the Cable TV Privacy act:
      h) Disclosure of information to governmental entity pursuant to court order

      A governmental entity may obtain personally identifiable information concerning a cable subscriber pursuant to a court order only if, in the court proceeding relevant to such court order -

      (1) such entity offers clear and convincing evidence that the subject of the information is reasonably suspected of engaging in criminal activity and that the information sought would be material evidence in the case; and

      (2) the subject of the information is afforded the opportunity to appear and contest such entity's claim.

      Two key questions: does the unique identifier make it "personally identifiable" information? (I'd say yes -- a Social Security Number is a unique (well, almost) identifier, for example.) and even though the plaintiff isn't a governmental entity (unless I missed something), the court surely is.

      So, has the court offered clear and convincing evidence, etc? If not -- and seeing how this is information that is not being gathered at the moment, then the court seems to be exceeding its authority here, and should issue wiretap or search warrants for each subscriber it wants SonicBlue to monitor.

      I hope SonicBlue is appealing this.

      --
      -- Alastair
    5. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uh, why don't people just get rid of their TV's? We got rid of ours ten years ago, and I have the only 3 1/2 year old who doesn't know who "Barney" is. I've always preferred plays, live music, and dance anyway. One of the funnest protests I've ever engaged in.

    6. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by An+Audience+of+One · · Score: 1
      ...does the unique identifier make it "personally identifiable" information? (I'd say yes -- a Social Security Number is a unique (well, almost) identifier, for example.)

      In the UK at least someone's IP address in your apache logs is considered personal information. This makes it quite inconvenient as a sysadmin, because over here there are really strict rules about what you can do with those.

      In fact, I think that this might be illegal in the UK at least - under the Data Protection Act. Unfortunately, I don't think the states has an equivalent

    7. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by Zazm · · Score: 1

      Well actually if I read the article correctly it was not a judge that ordered this invasion but rather a magistrate. The smarts threshold for magistrates is significantly lower than for judges.

      I'm pretty confident that the JUDGE will see the fatal flaws in this ruling and overturn it.

      Still even if the bar is set a little lower for magistrates it doesn't excuse this sort of lunacy.

    8. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by Kindaian · · Score: 1

      The courts aren't a governmental entity at all. They are a neutral entity which can't be considered as government or not. In all cases the courts personificate either the defendent or the plaintiffs side. NEVER a third party, unless the case is enlarged and another partie joins the case (in one or the two positions). So, even if the court is a governmental organization, they don't act as one. As the plaintiffs aren't a governmental organization, the h) clausule doesn't fit and thrus they don't have to disclose anything! The court order is thrus illegal and should be overrulled as it makes SonicBlue liable for that!

    9. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by PhilHibbs · · Score: 1
      The court order is thrus illegal and should be overrulled as it makes SonicBlue liable for that!
      should is a big word - it has to be declared illegal by the appeal panel. Laws are all just theory, you have to get a judge to apply the law for it to actually work. Hopefully they will, though, if SonicBlue have a good lawyer.
    10. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by peddrenth · · Score: 3, Funny

      the court seems to be exceeding its authority here, and should issue wiretap or search warrants for each subscriber it wants SonicBlue to monitor.

      I believe that american courts can already do that, by using the "John Doe 1" through to "John Doe 112,300" naming convention.

      Makes you wonder how useful it would be to name yourself John Doe. Would utter confusion at the courtroom suffice, or would you be able to cause a divide-by-0 error on your speeding tickets?

    11. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by erasmus_ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think like many other laws, they start out assuming innocent until proven guilty, which is what this excerpt says to me, and now are more and more turning into guilty until proven innocent. The great reasoning here is that the accuser (Disney) can't prove the clear and convincing evidence unless the accused, SonicBlue, cooperates.

      If only the rest of the justice system worked that way. The police, when not able to produce evidence that someone is engaging in illegal activity, would require individuals to wear tracking devices to prove that they're not doing anything bad.

      I think this is exactly what's going on in this case, except the accuser will be able to get away with it.

      --
      Please subscribe to see the more insightful version of th
    12. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by jbarr · · Score: 1

      FYI, every ReplayTV box has a unique "serial number" that identifies the box. This is necessary for the ReplayTV servers to validate the box is "eligible" to receive channel guide data when it does its nightly dial-in.

      Though this serial number is typically not associated with a specific person, if you have registered for the myreplaytv.com site to remotely control your ReplayTV from the web, then the serial number is associated with that account.

      --
      My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
    13. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by jbarr · · Score: 1
      Two key questions: does the unique identifier make it "personally identifiable" information?
      The unique identifier itself does not make the data "personally identifiable", but when you "register" your ReplayTV box, you must provide name, address, phone number, etc. which is linked to the unique identifier. A simple join would yield "personal identifiable" data.
      --
      My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
    14. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by jbarr · · Score: 1
      So, has the court offered clear and convincing evidence, etc? If not -- and seeing how this is information that is not being gathered at the moment, then the court seems to be exceeding its authority here, and should issue wiretap or search warrants for each subscriber it wants SonicBlue to monitor.
      It looks like SonicBlue is the one being required to provide the "clear and convincing evidence!"

      I hope SonicBlue is appealing this.
      The article states that they are.
      --
      My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
    15. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by looseBits · · Score: 1
      An Ode to TiVo

      Oh, TiVo, you are my dearest PVR.
      You've allowed me to scrap my VCR.
      I watch my shows on my time,
      Not necessarily during prime time.
      The networks claim I no longer watch their commercials
      (I don't, TiVo has gotten me over those thirty second hurdles).
      Turner, NBC, CBS and Fox all want to sue.
      I guess their business models are all snafu.

      They will hire their lawyers and file their briefs,
      Tell the judge about their beefs.
      The judge will ask "Do you remember Sony?"
      They will reply "Yes, but now we're talking about real money."
      "Yes, but this is about the copyright laws
      not about your business flaws."

      Things will go on as they are
      Until everyone has a PVR.
      Then the networks will no longer be free
      And we will have to pay a lot more for Cable TV.
      I guess I will continue to sing TiVo's praises
      Until TV really starts to cut into my wages.

      --
      Lord, bless my users that they may stop being such fucking idiots!!
    16. Re:Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry....where does it say that Sonic Blue is a cable TV company? Unless they're a cable operator, then the Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984 wouldn't apply, right?

  6. Centralized data gathering? by rjamestaylor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are times that DDoS makes sense...

    --
    -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
    1. Re:Centralized data gathering? by UncleFluffy · · Score: 2

      Much better than a DDoS would be for SonicBlue to suddenly announce a conversion to the world of Free Software and GPL the ReplayTV software... I suspect the problem would be solved for them in less than a week.

      --

      What would Lemmy do?

  7. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    According to a story on SiliconValley.com, a federal magistrate has ordered SonicBlue to track ReplayTV users' every click to see what they're watching, recording, skipping (commercials) and e-mailing to friends

    In other news, a federal magistrate has been ordered by ReplayTV users to kiss their collective ass.

    1. Re:In other news... by Gyorg_Lavode · · Score: 1

      Apon hearing this, the federal magistrate remarded that he/she was too busy kissing other asses to take any more orders.

      --
      I do security
  8. Can't VCR's do the same thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..with a little more work by the user?

    Tibbon

  9. Re:Bad Linux Expierence by BorgFear · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Wot the fuck has this got to do with ReplayTV .........stay on target ................staaaaayy on target

  10. a major dilema by cdf12345 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ok I'm stuck, do I avoid Sonic Blue's PVR's because it will invade my privacy, or do I buy PVR from Sonic Blue, because they are as outraged about this as I am. I suppose I could record all kinds of crap on it too, that would at least subvert their data.

    Hmmm, maybe if we could get everyone to do nothing but record Tech TV for 24 hours as a protest of our privacy being violated.

    --
    Chicago2600.net more than a lifestyle, its a survival trait.
    1. Re:a major dilema by soulsteal · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ok I'm stuck, do I avoid Sonic Blue's PVR's because it will invade my privacy, or do I buy PVR from Sonic Blue, because they are as outraged about this as I am. I suppose I could record all kinds of crap on it too, that would at least subvert their data.

      What to do is easy.... get 3 SonicBlue PVR's. Set them ALL to tape the Golden Girls everytime it comes on Lifetime, Law & Order everytime it comes on A&E, and grab as much Cinemax softcore porn as possible. Make sure to have the three PVR's just randomly grabbing so that the monitors catch your "unique viewing habit."

    2. Re:a major dilema by Melantha_Bacchae · · Score: 5, Insightful

      cdf12345 wrote:

      > Ok I'm stuck, do I avoid Sonic Blue's PVR's because it will invade my
      > privacy, or do I buy PVR from Sonic Blue, because they are as
      > outraged about this as I am. I suppose I could record all kinds of crap
      > on it too, that would at least subvert their data.
      >
      > Hmmm, maybe if we could get everyone to do nothing but record Tech
      > TV for 24 hours as a protest of our privacy being violated.

      If Sonic Blue is indeed the victim here (along with their customers), you could try to help them by carefully using your unit so the info they get supports their case: record and view all commercials (from the kitchen if necessary), erase programs frequently so you are not "stealing", etc.

      Since they will be watching email as well, be sure to email all of your "friends" (on hotmail or wherever you can pick up some free accounts for all of your pets, pet rocks, stuffed animals, etc.) on how unconstitutional the judge's ruling is (cite quotes from the US Constitution with plenty "IANAL"s). General rants on the idiocy of the MPAA and RIAA on IP issues would also be apropos (don't forget Eisner's act of piracy -- showing a pirated Sony movie -- during the Senate Hearing with Hollings). Long discussions of the relative merits of the various open source licenses might also be educational (again, lots of "IANAL"s).

      This privacy invasion stuff has long since gotten out of hand. I live in Missouri and in the spring here we get so much pollen that it coats everything outside in yellow powder. I have chronic sinusitis, and I imagine lots of people have bad hayfever. Imagine my surprise when I went to the Walmart pharmacy to pick up some over-the-counter decongestant and they not only asked for photo ID, but also took down my name and address (and possibly phone number or social security/driver's license number)! This, as the sign proudly informed me, was for "the safety of our community"!!! Yes, of course I know Sudafed is used to make an illegal drug. It is also the only decongestant on the market (brands don't matter, they all use the same chemical), and antihistamines don't do me any good. I'd switch if I could find another choice that worked for me, believe me.

      So I (and all my fellow nasal and sinus sufferers) are such dangers to our community that they need our names and addresses?!? Is the Constitution null and void if your sinuses are swollen? Most importantly: Is my personal info going to appear on ebay tonight to be sold to the highest bidder (all they had was a sign and an ordinary notebook -- this could have been some kind of a scam)?

      "War on Piracy" (not coined yet, but it will be), "War on Terror", and "War on Drugs": they all sound so heroic and protective. But they arise out of the same mindless, false patriotism as resulted in pink and white rags on sticks, and pathetic little flags lying in the road. Americans, especially after 911, are like frightened children, seeking any promise of safety, at any price. The power hungry vultures in Washington, and the greedy sharks of the corporations (particularly members of the RIAA, MPAA, and Microsoft) are more than happy to give it to them, at the cost of their freedom.

      The way I see it, we can either stand up for our freedom now, or we can suffer four more years and await the great couch potato riots of 2006. That's when all the TVs in America stop working, either due to not being HDTV, or being too early a version of HDTV, or because Windows for TVs bought each American $4 million worth of content licenses then crashed and lost them all. Regardless of the cause, American couch potatos will rise up and demand the right to have working TVs and VCRs. Hopefully some wise person will also throw in a recommitment to ideals expressed in the Bill of Rights (but don't hold your breath).

      Or we could call Mothra:

      "They bind our hearts: 'Let's sell them again and again!'
      Our plan understands the sea; we can wait for her coming.
      At the end of noon we will make our prayer."
      From the song "Infant Girl" in the Japanese version of Mothra (1961).

    3. Re:a major dilema by nexex · · Score: 3, Interesting

      just run it through a firewall and filter whatever data it sends; err, would that break it? (i dont have one:))

      --
      Winter 2010: With Glowing Hearts
    4. Re:a major dilema by CantGetAUserName · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's worth pointing out that in 1984 (a book that includes, among other things, TV sets that send data back) the populace is kept in check by war. War is regarded to be the only thing that can generate so much hysteria that people will give up all freedoms. And now we have a war on terror. Cute, isn't it?

      --
      Semper en excreta sumus solum profundum
    5. Re:a major dilema by Alsee · · Score: 2

      Hmmm, maybe if we could get everyone to do nothing but record Tech TV for 24 hours as a protest of our privacy being violated.

      Better yet set it to record every dopey "judge" show for a week - Judge Judy, People's court, Moral court, Divorce court, Judge Mathis, Night court, etc.

      Might be simpler to just record the CourtTV channel for a few days straight.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    6. Re:a major dilema by Keith_Beef · · Score: 1

      Right, so you avoid using the product, or you could avoid Disney stuff. Cut off your nose to spite your face, while you're at it.

      You want the convenience of this product, don't you? How feasible is it to build your own?

      The administrators of my building took the antenna off the roof, and replaced it with cable from the local operator Noos (formerly Lyonnaise Cable). I get something like ten channels out of a coaxial socket. Now, with Xawtv or Kwintv I can watch these on my Linux box. Maybe one or both of these can be improved to record straight to disc... making a PVR.

      Oh, and I suppose I should add that I watch DVDs on my box. Any zone, CSS no problem. Ogle is great. The menus work: subtitles, languages...

    7. Re:a major dilema by Elmar_Stoned_at_Work · · Score: 0

      Hmmm, maybe if we could get everyone to do nothing but record Tech TV for 24 hours as a protest of our privacy being violated.

      Or you could just plant the ol' vicegrip on the remote control.. give them 4 days straight of "channel up" (a few hundred users doing this should get the point across)

      --
      -elmar-
    8. Re:a major dilema by erasmus_ · · Score: 2

      And continue this line of thought, next year, 2003, we're set to get a brand new season of that show we love best, War. The villain in this series of episodes will be Iraq. Not that I would question my government - that would be unpatriotic, and that kind of speech is not allowed.

      --
      Please subscribe to see the more insightful version of th
    9. Re:a major dilema by kenthorvath · · Score: 2

      I will not be helping their case by forfeiting my right to time shift, skip commercials, and record whatever I damn well please. That is the reason most of us bought the box to begin with. It is NOT illegal, and this whole thing is just the beginning of a greater movement by the government to force us into communism. China tells its people what they can and can't watch on the internet and TV. The US tells its people what they can and can't watch on the internet and TV FOR FREE. Utter bullshit...

    10. Re:a major dilema by Sophacles · · Score: 2, Insightful

      War is regarded to be the only thing that can generate so much hysteria that people will give up all freedoms.

      Along a similar line of thought (I can only speak from my experience in the US):

      The hysteria you speak of also causes those who want to take away rights to sound rational. I see a few things happening here. First the US constitution is about protecting rights, many laws are made to protect people, the police protect us from criminals, the common theme being protect. Protect protect protect.

      Along these lines, protection is everywhere, theres a subtle indoctrination towards the idea that everyone and everything needs to be protected. This is dangerous.

      Every time someone wants to impose more controll over anything, they just invoke the magic protection backdoor. Suddenly its a rational thing to do, these people simply want to protect us, or their stuff, or the country and W. We should let them do it, its for PROTECTION!

      Then someone sees how bad of an idea this is, and says, "no way, this is terrible!" Of course by then this great idea has been vaunted for its unheard of levels of protection. The naysayer is just a "far left" or "far right" (exactly opposite of your stance actually no matter where (s)he actually lies on the spectrum) crazy.

      I find myself feeling this sometimes. I can rationally agree with the "crazy", and even feel that they are in the utmost right, but for some reason in the back of my mind, the dark part where conditioned responses lie, there is a little voice shouting "NUTCASE SHE WANTS TO TAKE YOUR PROTECTION!". And when I hear this voice I am afraid.

      It extends even further though. Even though I am infuriated by the person who is stealing my rights and defending his point by not answering questions and instead uttering his invocations "for your protection. Yes mam, this means you will be forced to have sex with any police officer to prove you aren't a terrrorist, but it only for protection. Yes sir, you can't read any book without registering with the FBI first, but its for your protection, protection, protection." THe intellectual fury I have for this person is offset by that little voice saying, this guy is being calm and RATIONAL (yes the feeling that this guy is rational). Then I wish the person opposing this would be rational, but then I realize that they are, not shouting, not ranting, but being calm and cool. Then I am terrified.

      Im not trying to wax conspiracy theorist, I just feel that this is good intentions gone wrong. There initially was no intentional evil, but then once the people trying to do good had made protection a warm fuzzy word, the evil got a hold of it and abused it. Scarey neh?

      Oh well, sorry that my rant isnt better organized, Im still struggling to identify this concept more than a fleeting thought and a few moments of metacognition. I hear Canada is pretty this time of year, maybe Ill move there.

      --
      To live till you die is to live long enough. -Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching
    11. Re:a major dilema by Mike1024 · · Score: 1

      Hey,

      record and view all commercials (from the kitchen if necessary)

      I don't know about you, but my PVR (Non-ReplayTV, non-US) has a one-way connection to my TV. I can watch adverts without even putting the TV on.

      Perhaps someone could reverse-engineer the protocol, so you could use your PC modem to distribute false statistics...

      -Michael

      --
      "Goodness me, how unlike the FBI to abuse the trust of the American public." -- The Onion
    12. Re:a major dilema by slumos · · Score: 1

      Well, one point of view is that I know my name won't be in the data because SonicBlue doesn't have it! The only way for a company to truly protect their customers is to not demand and record personal information in the first place, and I greatly respect SonicBlue for operating that way. (Who else does? An online bookstore that did not retain a record of my purchases would get a lot of business from me.)

      The most interesting part of the article for me was:

      SonicBlue said it stopped collecting anonymous user data in May 2001, after a furor erupted over competitor TiVo's practice of secretly gathering information about its users' viewing habits. TiVo's machine would collect viewing data and send it over a phone line back to the company.
      Until now I had assumed that ReplayTV was "just as sleazy as TiVo, but at least they don't have my name". They just went up a notch in my book.
  11. Somebody tell me by Cornelius+the+Great · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This really goes back to what slashdot covered earlier how AOL-TW CEO said that PVR users were stealing when they skipped over commercials, but it also applies here... the users are not bounded to a contract to watch the ads.

    It's also interesting to see the hypocrasy when AOL-Time Warner's CEO denouncing products like TiVO and ReplayTV while AOL is making deals with Tivo...

    It adds somewhat of a twist when Sonicblue is ordered to infringe on its user's privacy and not TiVo.

    --
    Sigs are for losers
    1. Re:Somebody tell me by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      Bloody hell. Does nobody read the articles anymore? This was even in the header, not the body.

      AOL-TW CEO said that PVR users were stealing

      No. That was the Turner Network CEO. Which is not Ted Turner. Turner Networks is a subsidiary of Time-Warner Entertainment, which is a subsidiary of AOL-TW. He has about the same relationship to AOL-TW's CEO as the head of the English department has to the University president (hint - there's a dean in between somewhere).

      And believe me, if Mr. Keller's idiotic statement gets enough press, he'll get summarily thwapped by the head corporation. Doubtful it'll be fired, but he won't be doing any interviews for a long time. And he'll tow the party line on how PVRs are great, especially if they're integrated with the All New AOL Version 345739847.1, now with 402 free hours!

      Mod me down for flamebait, but mod the moron above me down for not being able to read too.

    2. Re:Somebody tell me by jbarr · · Score: 1
      It adds somewhat of a twist when Sonicblue is ordered to infringe on its user's privacy and not TiVo.
      That's because SonicBlue's PVR, unlike unhacked TiVo models, allows for program sharing among users outside the house via the Internet, as well as auto-commercial skip.

      Also note that the article specifies the "4000" series box which is the only box capable of sharing and auto-commercial skipping. I wonder if the "spying" will occur on other model boxes too?
      --
      My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
  12. Re:Bad Linux Expierence by cdf12345 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "A new copy of Win 200 XP; 199.99"

    huh huh, you got took.

    --
    Chicago2600.net more than a lifestyle, its a survival trait.
  13. Just let the bastards tax us! by NewtonsLaw · · Score: 3, Funny

    It strikes me that the whole music/movie piracy issue could be solved in one fell swoop if the industries involved simply lobbied government to add another 2% onto income taxes and then give the music away for free.

    Sony, BMG and the others could then set up "free download" sites where Net surfers could drop in and grab as much music as they wanted, absolutely without further charge.

    The huge revenues thus generated would be paid back to the recording/music industries and apportioned according to the number of downloads of each album/movie.

    Likewise, some of the money would be aportioned to video libraries to compensate them for the losses they'd suffer.

    Hey, it's a win-win-win situation.

    The big companies get massive wads of cash. They can then pay the artists. Copy-protection is no longer an issue. Plus, you could then afford to listen to (and perhaps grow to like) a much wider range of music/movies.

    Even though I'm just kidding, I suspect that it's only a matter of time before someone seriously suggests such a plan.

    Just look at the lame technology/IP bills proposed already!

    1. Re:Just let the bastards tax us! by stevenprentice · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So you're saying that I should pay $2000 a year for music/videos even though I have *never* purchased a CD and have *never* purchased a movie and only rent a few a year...sounds like a great deal to me. Communist.

    2. Re:Just let the bastards tax us! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. A direct capitation tax collected by the government at the behest of a single private entity?

    3. Re:Just let the bastards tax us! by dkleinsc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It seems, given the current political situation, that the 2% tax would pass, the money go directly to RIAA members, and the "free download" sites would mysteriously never appear. Remember, this comes from an industry that's perfectly willing to rip off artists and consumers (and I say this as a musician, not as a disgruntled customer), and I'm sure they're not above forcing everyone in the country to line the pockets of record company executives.

      Copyright law was intended to protect writers, musicians, actors, etc from being exploited by groups of people who want to profit off of mass reproduction of creative work. Record labels fit that definition exactly. As long as the people who put actual artistic effort into a work are payed, then it is a valid copyright system.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    4. Re:Just let the bastards tax us! by Dr.+Awktagon · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sure, a good idea, music and art are public goods, so lets have the public pay for it.

      So. 2% of income you say? Well I think it should be 3%. No actually, 5% sounds pretty fair. I mean, think about all that music that's been stolen over the years. Billions of dollars lost, thousands of musicians died of starvation. Okay, you got me, I made the last one up completely. But then again I'm in the entertainment business, we make stuff up for a living.

      And of course that will have to be increased by 1/2% per year. For inflation, DUH! What? I don't know what 95 times 2 is, why do you ask?

      And of course we'll have to figure out the best way to distribute the funds to the artists. I say we go by top-40 radio airplay. We can just review everybody's contract and be good to go.... No I've never heard of "Independent Artists" is that the new group on Arista? Eh? You mean there are musicians who don't have record deals with us? Well, fuck 'em, they can get their own percentage, we got ours already.

      This tax sounds like a good plan to me!!

      Sincerely,

      Record Company Executive

    5. Re:Just let the bastards tax us! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They already tax us. Look at the AHRA, which imposes taxes on consumer digital audio recorders and media for the benefit of the music industry. Then look at what we got.

      Look at how most record companies refused to release prerecorded DAT content.

      Look at how DVD-Audio, Super Audio CD, DataPlay, and SDMI introduce copy protection that goes beyond the SCMS framework.

      Look at the failed lawsuit against the Rio - a computer accessory that is exempt under the AHRA. This was a lawsuit filed under a law that was supposed to be about protecting vendors and the public from anti-technology lawsuits.

      Look at how the AHRA begat the DMCA begat the SSSCA / CBDTPA.

      Then tell me with a straight face that ripping off the American public for 2% of their income ($600 per year for a family of four making $30K, compared to current music industry revenues of about $1/person/week or $200/family/year) is a good idea.

    6. Re:Just let the bastards tax us! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Taxes should be 95%. Just THINK of all the services we would get!

    7. Re:Just let the bastards tax us! by Magnus+Reftel · · Score: 1

      Well, a version of this is being proposed, but not by the people you might think; read The Right Way to Tax DAT.

      --
      print "Yet another p{erl,ython} hacker\n",
    8. Re:Just let the bastards tax us! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Notice the date ... that proposal's 10 years old. I rather suspect that Stallman isn't actively pushing it anymore, but just keeps it around for anyone who wants to read it.

    9. Re:Just let the bastards tax us! by deadl0ck · · Score: 1

      Ya like standing in line for bread and building a wall around our country so nobody can get out.

      --
      --
    10. Re:Just let the bastards tax us! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a better idea. How about we eliminate all intellectual property laws? Copy whatever you want. The artists that are good enough will be supported by donations and by rich benefactors like during the Renaissance. Want a copy of that software? Make a copy of it. Like that book? Make a copy. The recording "industry" has turned artists into perfect little laborers able to generate a set amount of revenue per year in their perfect little cost models. Sure, we may end up with less bubble-gum groups like Nsync and O-Town, but is that a bad thing? Maybe it would benefit humanity if our children weren't brainwashed to thing that crap is "cool" and to go out and buy more of it like perfect little consumers.

    11. Re:Just let the bastards tax us! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      In the Uk it's called the BBC...


      If you own a TV you pay a license fee, that funds the BBC...

    12. Re:Just let the bastards tax us! by jbarr · · Score: 1

      Um, I don't think so. Let's be honest here...the demographic of the majority of the people who "abuse" the system are college-aged and younger people whose incomes are far lower than those who aren't "abusing" the system.

      Why should I have to pay a portion of my income (that I use to legitimatly pay for CD's and DVD's) to support someone who wants a free ride?

      --
      My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
  14. Re:Bad Linux Expierence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are you on glue? corel (dead) on old hardware compared to winXP?

    sorry you were too stupid to get it working, but it is your own fault for not knowing what you are getting into.

    linux & win32 plug'n'pray is about equal these days

    use the right tool for the job

    never buy winhardware without understanding what you are buying (and what you aren't)

  15. blank ?? by thanjee · · Score: 1

    This is no more an infringement of copyright than those companies that create blank CDs, video cassettes, etc, or anything that allows you to make copies, also double tape decks, those sony cd burning stereos, and well anything that allows you to produce a copy. They all have legitimate and illegitimate uses, depending on the user. If you bring one down you have to bring them all down.

    Plus I dispise the fact that they have been ordered to spy on us.

    --
    Saying your OS is the best because more people use it is like saying MacDonalds make the best food
    1. Re:blank ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who buys these cd burning stereos? Certainly if they burn cds they're defective???!!!

    2. Re:blank ?? by Kalabajoui · · Score: 2

      It's not the fact new technology has a different end result than old technology, so much as it presents a brand-spanking new opportunity for content producing lobbyists.

  16. Re:Bad Linux Expierence by TibbonZero · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Asides the fact that it is OT, Linux is GNU based, and you could have downloaded or burned a copy from someone else. IF you have that many problems with the distro, try another one. The Corel Linux is by no means the best, or only one, not to say that it doesn't have its strong points, but it just isn't all there is.

    Please mod his thread down! :)

    Tibbon

    --
    Tibbon
    tibbon.com
  17. Its Just wrong... by Quicksilver31337 · · Score: 2, Funny

    How anal retentive can these freaks get, its becomming more and more impossible not to give out your personal information, now they wanna know what people are watching...rewinding....then watching again....then rewinding...then watching again. HOW STUPID ARE THEY, I can save them the trouble and tell them right now. ITS PORN!!!!!!!

    --
    _______
    Death wish, n.:

    The only wish that always comes true, whether or not one wishes it t
    1. Re:Its Just wrong... by Quicksilver31337 · · Score: 0

      I mean how slow are they, why else would someone be need to "replay" TV.

      --
      _______
      Death wish, n.:

      The only wish that always comes true, whether or not one wishes it t
  18. gorilla haiku by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am gorilla
    I do not eat banana
    I eat leaves and grubs

  19. Disneyism by Vainglorious+Coward · · Score: 1
    Michelle Bergman, the Disney spokeswoman : ``We respect viewer privacy and the order we obtained respects that important right. We are simply protecting our copyrighted content''

    Translation : What's mine is mine and what's yours is mine too.

    --
    My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
  20. Does this remind anyone of .. by shadowbearer · · Score: 1, Interesting

    "The suits allege these features effectively deprive networks of the means of paying for their programs -- advertising revenue. And they allow people who paid for premium programming -- say HBO's ``Six Feet Under'' -- to send it to consumers who haven't."

    Does this remind anyone of Senator D^H^H^H^H^H Holl^H^H^H^H 's antics???

    SB to advertisers: Boo Friccing Hoo. I've been putting up with your advertising on various media formats from TV to Internet for 25 years - and I HAVE NEVER BOUGHT A SINGLE PRODUCT BASED ON THAT ADVERTISING - simply because I am capable of deciding what I wish to buy and can do my own research.

    If I sound Pissed Off, I am. If your product can't sell to the people within your market who might actually look at, research, and make an intelligent decision on it, than I have no sympathy nor pity for you.
    Make a Better Product. Deal with it. The masses are waking up to your brainwash-style marketing.

    Get your crap off of the media I pay for! Welcome to the Internet Business Model - I pay for NO ADVERTISING, not MORE.

    (Yes, sad acronym, that - IBM = Internet Business Model)

    SB

    --
    It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    1. Re:Does this remind anyone of .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The masses are waking up to your brainwash-style marketing.

      Uh, no they aren't. That's why they're "the masses". That's why the Britneys and the latest piece of animated tripe from Disney and George Lucas' ham-fisted crap-a-thons are so popular. Because we're told that they're popular, and that if we like them, we'll be popular, too!

      The educated "elite" maybe are waking up to this, but then again, most of them don't even care, even if they are aware of it. They don't want to rock the boat, they just want to have a couple kids and keep up a steady stream of distractions from letting them realize that they're living basically meaningless lives. By the way, I'm not talking about some Great Unwashed here, people. I'm talkin' 'bout YOU.

      Think I'm wrong? Call for a boycott of these strongarm entertainment conglomerates. Oh, wait - there's a new "Star Wars" movie coming out. And Spider-Man! Let's wait on that boycott for a couple months. Oh, shit, the new LOTR movie will be out then.

      They've got you (and me) in their grips as much as anyone else, even if the Slashdot crowd likes to pretend they're savvy enough to see through the manipulation. Maybe you are, but if you know you're being manipulated and still do what they want, isn't that much, much worse than being ignorant of it?

    2. Re:Does this remind anyone of .. by shadowbearer · · Score: 0


      I think they are. Certainly one can't argue that we aren't seeing more and more opposition from ordinary people and in the prime time media against spam, intrusive advertising, corporate idiocy and mismanagement (Enron)and like behavior.

      This doesn't mean that the penduluum has swung over, just that it is not swinging quite so far as it used to.

      Also I'll point out that just because people are going to go see Star Wars epII, or because they're buying Britney Spears albums, does not mean that they aren't becoming aware of what is going on. I'm very much against large corporate crap tactics and the intrusiveness of advertising, but boycotting Star Wars would be ridiculous. Why is it that some zealots can't seem to get it thru their heads that boycotts accomplish just about zero? Look at what happened during the so-called "Slashdot boycott" last month and you'll see what I mean. Just what did it accomplish? Zip.

      Change is going to happen not because a few people boycott popular entertainment but because the corps/companies involved are publicly shamed or legally forced into changing their tactics.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  21. Childhood in America by small_dick · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When young, the media constantly warned that America should be ever vigilant for threats from overseas enemies who hated the American people.

    Welcome to the new millenium. The enemy is wealth and control, they have no borders, and it appears they have won.

    --


    Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
    See my user info for links.
    1. Re:Childhood in America by BrookHarty · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What pisses you off more, Knowing there are powerful interest groups that are attacking your rights and freedoms, or that most of the people in the usa will let it happen.

      we seem to be the minority.

    2. Re:Childhood in America by freshmkr · · Score: 1
      Welcome to the new millenium. The enemy is wealth and control, they have no borders, and it appears they have won.

      I don't think this is a novel situation.

      --Tom

    3. Re:Childhood in America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Bear with me a moment can we speak in code?
      These words passed through some listening node
      This prior to your receiving what I upload
      Look you see the white van down the road?
      Transmissions scrutinized quick as they pass
      Live automatons charged with tapping that ass
      Tapping the phone for an evidence mass
      That includes when you talked about mowing the grass
      Force-locked eyes watch hypnotic light show
      Feel the oozing creep of gray matter outflow
      Not even knowing which way does the wind blow
      Been inside all day long how the fuck do I know?
      From the start they taught us all about democracy
      They said smile kids you're in the land of the free
      I know you weren't in the same schools as me
      But you think we heard a peep about plutocracy?
      Someone close by said, "Don't like it then leave"
      And there had to be a microphone up that sleeve
      The next thing that happened I couldn't believe
      The white van pulled up and it meant to retrieve
      Ninjas hopped out each had a mouse patch on back
      They rushed in the building prepared to attack
      Surrounded encircled my jaw went slack
      They said, "we're here to make sure you keep on track"

      T-Bone McGillacutty

    4. Re:Childhood in America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess that this is the downside of living in a capitalist society which also incorporates soft money and gives corporations the same rights as an individual.

    5. Re:Childhood in America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incorrect corporations have more rights than the people. Check out this article explaining how a 1886 court decision gave corporations more rights than the people.

    6. Re:Childhood in America by T-BoneMcG · · Score: 1
      //shnip
      ..."on track"
      //shnup

      Read: ..."on crack"

      Sorry, pulled an obligatory all-nighter and wasn't thinking quite like myself at the time.
      Now with even less sleep I'm thinking much clearer... honest! I am!
  22. Hate to say it... by Aniquel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... but as much as this pisses me off (the invasion of privacy part), isn't this exactly what the industry needs?

    Seriously, once stats like this are collected, either they'll realize that this isn't a threat (and then really start pushing digital tv, stop suing companies like sonicblue etc..), or we'll be right back to where we are right now.

    I understand the slippery-slope argument and all, but how the hell are you going to convince tv networks that piracy isn't happening unless you do something like this?

    And if piracy *is* happening, wake the fuck up. It's illegal. You knew the free ride wouldn't last forever. Being able to freely copy anything you want isn't a constitutional right, even under the guise of fair use (which, by the way, isn't even established by the constitution).

    1. Re:Hate to say it... by devin15 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Seriously, once stats like this are collected, either they'll realize that this isn't a threat (and then really start pushing digital tv, stop suing companies like sonicblue etc..), or we'll be right back to where we are right now.

      All I have to say to this is appeasement didn't work against Hitler. If they realize no one will stop them they will just get more and more greedy, maybe shows will become 15 min instead of the 20ish min they are now to make more room for advertisements.

    2. Re:Hate to say it... by Aniquel · · Score: 1

      Fine. But either way, in order for any progress to be made on this whole fair-use/copyright nonsense, somebody is going to have to come up with evidence showing that fair-use, as *we* mean it, is in the best interests of those corporations that own the copyrights.

    3. Re:Hate to say it... by Linuxthess · · Score: 1
      Aniquel said "Seriously, once stats like this are collected, either they'll realize that this isn't a threat (and then really start pushing digital tv, stop suing companies like sonicblue etc..), or we'll be right back to where we are right now."

      Hmmm... Diamond Rio anyone?
      This was the first of many mp3-related lawsuits. Later Napster, ScourMX and all their P2P derivatives.

      Did this change anything? All the stats in the world show that they are actually beneficial to the artists.

      Point: Stats won't help anyone jack shit in this one.

      -------------

      --

      I sig, therefore I was.
    4. Re:Hate to say it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being able to freely copy anything you want most certainly is a constitutional right.

      "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;"

      Congress may, only to promote progress not reimburse or recognize ownership, grant exclusive right to authors and inventors. Disney is neither author nor inventor. Nor are the RIAA nor MPAA. Britney Spears and TNT do are not progress in art or science. Thus none of these hold copyright. So you see, I do have the absolute right to freely copy anything. The only time this can be infringed is for the above, which is not what is happening today.

    5. Re:Hate to say it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being able to freely copy anything you want isn't a constitutional right, even under the guise of fair use (which, by the way, isn't even established by the constitution).


      You've got it backwards. There is no Constitutional entitlement to copyrights. Copyrights are not a recognition of any sort of natural property right in so-called "IP". As Thomas Jefferson wrote with regards to patents, society may grant copyrights, OR NOT, according to its will and convenience, with no cause for complaint from any body.

      As for Fair Use, it does indeed come from the Constitution. The courts refused to enforce copyright laws in situations where they thought that said laws conflicted with the First Amendment or with Article I, Section 8 (the "copyright/patent clause"). Eventually Congress wrote Fair Use into the text of the copyright law in an attempt to codify court guidelines.

      While it may be argued that some types of Fair Use could be outlawed (if the population was stupid enough to go for it -- and why should they?), there is no way that you could outlaw all the things that Fair Use allows without making the revised copyright laws unConstitutional.
    6. Re:Hate to say it... by DarkZero · · Score: 1

      The problem is that they're never going to wake up and realize that piracy isn't really hurting them as much as they think. If the data that they collect says that piracy isn't a problem, they'll just hide the results, keep claiming that piracy is a problem and that more levies must be legislated in their interests, and then use the data to plot consumer viewing habits and find a way to make the viewer tolerate more invasive advertising.

      These people are never going to wake up to the idea of anything but that which helps them make more money, and acknowledging that piracy isn't the problem that they currently think it is does not help them make more money. But then again, that's what they're supposed to do. They're corporations. They're here to make money. We're consumers. We're here to pay as little as possible. This is how the two main groups of a capitalist society are MEANT to function. The only problem is that the corporations are winning a few too many battles recently in this eternal struggle for money.

    7. Re:Hate to say it... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 2

      Humorously, the codification of the judicially crafted Fair Use guidelines in 17 U.S.C. 107 has been interpreted by the courts, IIRC to not be binding, but merely to be a restatement of the judicial doctrine, which remains alterable should the ocassion present itself.

      But the general point still holds -- copying is the norm, and exceptions carved out of that, themselves with exceptions again.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    8. Re:Hate to say it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use of copyright for anything other than the progress of science and art is unconstitutional. Reimbursement cannot be a consideration when granting rights to works. The only consideration taht can be made is for that of progress. What is needed if voting fails is armed revolution. Do as you the Constitution directs and ignore laws that contradict it. If they come for you shoot them. Rally your neighbors and defend your homes and property.

    9. Re:Hate to say it... by BinaryC · · Score: 1

      > Hmmm... Diamond Rio anyone?

      To make it more ironic, Sonic Blue bought Diamond Multimedia a while back. It's now the Sonic Blue Rio.

      --
      Ne Quid Nimis - All things in moderation
    10. Re:Hate to say it... by CantGetAUserName · · Score: 1

      While I concede that laws are passed by the entertainment industry for the entertainment industry, copyright itself was never supposed to help authors. It's supposed to give authors some incentive to contribute, to enrich society. How you explain locking everybody who isn't a multi-billion dollar company out of the creativity business I don't know, but it is my suspicion that such an argument will never be made.

      --
      Semper en excreta sumus solum profundum
    11. Re:Hate to say it... by Babbster · · Score: 1
      Unfortunately, I don't think that Replay has a leg to stand on in terms of their "show-sharing" feature since everything recorded from broadcast television (including PBS, it's worth noting) is covered by copyright.

      What I would be more afraid of, however, is if part of the data collected included the use of the very cool "Commercial Advance" feature. This is older tech (originally in VCRs) that skips commercials automatically with about 95% accuracy. The beauty in a hard drive-based PVR, of course, is that this skipping happens virtually instantaneously instead of with a VCR-type fast forward, thus allowing you to miss even the fast scan of the commercials.

      Why should that scare me? Because judges aren't immune to pressure from corporations and other branches of the government, and a creative lawyer could make an argument that the feature violates the "rights" of the broadcaster to have their commercials viewed. Admittedly, it would take a lot of circumlocution, but we've seen strange stuff in the legal system before ("If the glove doesn't fit...").

      -Aaron

    12. Re:Hate to say it... by Daengbo · · Score: 1

      So is it now the "Sonic Blue Savage 4," as well?

    13. Re:Hate to say it... by ratboy666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The airwaves are a public commons. If you
      put it there, and I take it, well, you had
      NO expectation of privacy.

      Cable wants to be a common carrier. And,
      where I live anyway, its a monopoly. Certain
      rules apply.

      So you wake the fuck up, it is legal.
      Of COURSE the "networks" want to control
      how, what, and where I watch the feed.
      They would love to feed advertising.
      But... my cable company pays for programming,
      and some is supplied for a cost of $0. If that
      model doesn't work, ITS NOT MY FAULT.

      Remember, I pay $20 a month for cable tv,
      and $40 a month for broadband. The gov
      takes around 8 bucks in taxes. I PAY FOR THIS.
      And, "copying" notwithstanding (no, I don't
      share copyrighted material with anybody), I
      HAVE PURCHASED THE MATERIAL AND I WANT TO
      USE IT WHEN I WANT TO. This isn't a question
      of "fair use", by the way. Fair use means
      I copy material for others, breaking copyright,
      but am allowed. Not happening, I don't do that.
      Read my lips: I BOUGHT THE MATERIAL, AND AM
      USING IT MYSELF.

      Now, the cable provider charges between $20
      and ?? for the service. "Basic" cable (the
      so-called "free" networks, plus some specialty
      stations) is at the bottom, then you can
      add "premium" content for an additional amount.
      Given that the delivery cost is the same for
      ANY of the content, the additional cost must
      be going for the content. Got it?

      So, people are paying for the content. Given
      that fact, why is there still advertising?
      Because the networks think the "free with
      advertising" sponsorship model works?

      And that's it. Now, I don't live in the
      good 'ole US of A, but most of this applies
      there as well.

      If the "free" tv advertising model ain't
      working, well then, fix that.

      Alternatives:

      1 - make commercials compelling
      2 - fund raising drives
      3 - sell the material to cable providers
      4 - get out of the business
      5 - product placement

      And I haven't even really thought about it!

      Ratboy.

      --
      Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
    14. Re:Hate to say it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      once stats like this are collected, either they'll realize that this isn't a threat (and then really start pushing digital tv, stop suing companies like sonicblue etc..), or we'll be right back to where we are right now.


      Give em' an inch ...

    15. Re:Hate to say it... by Aniquel · · Score: 1

      When I first read your reply, I had to admit that I almost changed my mind. Then I realized one important fact:

      It currently is illegal, vis a vis current copyright law, to copy and publicly display this material. How we want the law to be (or don't want) doesn't matter - That's how it is in the U.S. Period.

      Now, I fully agree with your analysis of the different ways that a TV network could change s.t. it no longer relies strictly upon advertising. I wish it would happen. It'll probably take a renegade network to do it though. (btw, PBS does the fund raising thing. It works, after a fashion - with the addition of gov't funding.

      Having no expectation of privacy doesn't matter, btw. That only applies to trade secrets. Copyright law does not protect secret information.

    16. Re:Hate to say it... by grmoc · · Score: 2

      Distributing snipets of said material in a meaningful manner, or changing and redistributing (as long as such changes are substantial) falls under fair use.

      Merely catalogueing the data in copyrighted material is completely legal and doesn't even fall under fair use doctrine because it doesn't break copyright at all.(IANAL!)

      Tiny technicality: Copyright law DOES protect secret information if it is copyrighted- You can't copy it! It doesn't protect the information itself, but rather the statement of it.

      Furthermore- If there can be only one way to state something (for example a recipe), then copyright doesn't apply. If it isn't a unique and creative statement, then it cannot be copyrighted.

      (i.e. databases cannot be copyrighted, unless the law has changed in the past few years.)

    17. Re:Hate to say it... by 5KVGhost · · Score: 2
      Unfortunately, I don't think that Replay has a leg to stand on in terms of their "show-sharing" feature since everything recorded from broadcast television (including PBS, it's worth noting) is covered by copyright.


      Er, what difference does that make? Have you ever exchanged videotapes with someone, or asked someone else to record a show for you while you're away on vacation? How is this any different?
    18. Re:Hate to say it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But even if it does show that it isn't a threat, they'll spin it into one. Remember Napster? The recording industry had 4% growth and managed to blame Napster for a 16-20% loss in phantom sales. Just like the jackboot BSA thugs do with their statistics.

      This poster's name secretly replaced with Folgers Crystals

    19. Re:Hate to say it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Seriously, once stats like this are collected, either they'll realize that this isn't a threat (and then really start pushing digital tv, stop suing companies like sonicblue etc..), or we'll be right back to where we are right now.

      Those statistics will show that x percent of viewers skip over commercials. It does not matter if it's 10% or 70%, the statistics are worthless. How many VCR users skip over commercials? Without some baseline to compare with, the statistics are completely useless. VCRs do not have the ability to track people's viewing habits, thus we will never see a baseline case.

      The statistics should not even be admissable as evidence.

    20. Re:Hate to say it... by Babbster · · Score: 1

      I have indeed exchanged videotapes. I've recorded movies and loaned them to friends. I've, yes, made MP3s of CDs and given them to friends. Guess what? None of those things are legal. :)

  23. This goes further than what Tivo does by Otto · · Score: 2

    From the article:
    The court ruling also requires SonicBlue to track individual users -- not by name, but through ``unique identification numbers.''

    This goes further than what Tivo does, as Tivo sends no unique ID with the data it collects. Wholly anonymous.

    --
    - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
    1. Re:This goes further than what Tivo does by Babbster · · Score: 1
      Well, even Tivos have unique serial numbers (which is how they know if you paid your bill or not for guide service). Of course, even if there weren't a unique serial number on each device, since 99% of ReplayTV 4000 owners are connected via broadband, their IP addresses (certainly at least the static ones) could be used for tracking as well when they contact the ReplayTV server to get guide data.

      -Aaron

    2. Re:This goes further than what Tivo does by Quixote · · Score: 2

      This goes further than what Tivo does, as Tivo sends no unique ID with the data it collects. Wholly anonymous.
      Wrong. TiVo's data is keyed to the ID of your TiVo unit, which is unique.

    3. Re:This goes further than what Tivo does by Otto · · Score: 2

      Wrong. TiVo's data is keyed to the ID of your TiVo unit, which is unique.

      Wrong. The ID of your unit is not sent with the anonymous data that Tivo collects. Check the Tivo Underground for more details on how to examine the data yourself.

      --
      - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
    4. Re:This goes further than what Tivo does by Otto · · Score: 2

      Those are separated. The ID is sent to determine if it's a valid subscription, true, but it is not sent with the data.

      It sends the data using HTTP POSTs to Tivo's servers. Basically, it's as if I submitted two web forms, one with my serial and another with my viewing data. The only way to correlate those two bits of info is by noticing that they were sent at around the same time (sequentially, in fact). However, with 300k subscribers calling in daily and only 86k seconds in the day, it's a bit difficult (read: impossible) to backtrack from the access logs to determine who sent what when.

      --
      - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
    5. Re:This goes further than what Tivo does by Babbster · · Score: 1
      Don't misunderstand. I know that Tivo's system has been scrutinized to a ridiculous degree and taht their claims as to keeping data nonspecific regarding individuals. I was merely pointing out that the ID number IS there, so they could potentially do the same thing, i.e. if they were ordered to by some numbnuts of a magistrates. :)

      -Aaron

    6. Re:This goes further than what Tivo does by Babbster · · Score: 1
      Wow, that was an incredible mess. Trying again:

      "Don't misunderstand. I know that Tivo's system has been scrutinized to a ridiculous degree and that their clamis as to keeping data nonspecific in an individual sense have been demonstrated (through examination of logs and code) to be true. I was merely pointing out that the ID number IS there, so they could potentially do the same thing, i.e. if they were ordered to by some numbnuts of a magistrate. :)" (Note that this is the first time I haven't bothered using the "Preview" button; must stay in that habit.)

      -Aaron

    7. Re:This goes further than what Tivo does by Otto · · Score: 2

      Yes, well, whether they can or not seems irrelevant. SonicBlue claims they couldn't and the judge simply said for them to write code that could, and to do it within 60 days.

      Assuming some idiot judge ordered them to do it, then it can be done. Or the people who don't do it get shut down. So the law sucks. Nothing new there.

      --
      - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  24. this is bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    since when the fuck did i sign a contract with the networks to watch commercials. there is no such thing and they are public airwaves, there can be no such thing. they can fuckoff.

  25. Their collecting aggregate statistics only though by EMIce · · Score: 1

    It says they are collecting data anonymously by ID number. This is no worse than when you use a shopper's club card at the supermarket or when the scan your license at the bar. This is something that Sonic Blue has already reserved the right to do, so they shouldn't be pandering to us with this "spying" propoganda just because it's convenient at the moment. Both sides are being unethical if you ask me. I don't agree with this kind of data collection and it's becoming near impossible to avoid without paying penalties.

  26. NONONONONO by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You do not know anything about bussiness people. You think if they get a 2% tax they'll shut up? Certainly not - they will keep the money and try to find other ways to charge us with improved services. Oh yeah and that 2% will slowly increase as well.

    Oh sry i just read that you were kidding. Still a bad idea imo.

  27. It is too late. by Fuzquat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The entertainment industry is fighting a losing battle here. Anyone who has purchased a TIVO or similar hard disk recorder will absolutely never go back to watching ads.

    I personally have a hard disk recorder, and since having it I cannot stand to watch live tv, because I now percieve how much of my time is wasted by ads.

    My guess is that eventually the entertainment industry is going to have to modify their revenue system, because no one will willing submit to ads again after being free of them.

    What is interesting is that the TV industry will has a system allready in place that could be switched to an ad less system. All they would need to do is charge more for cable or satellite service, or something along those lines. They would probably be forced to take an income cut, because people will not be interested in paying very much more for ad less TV then they do for regular TV today.

    If media corporations think they have a problem now, wait until hard disk recorders drop below $200....

    They are facing a losing battle, just like the music industry.

    1. Re:It is too late. by AJWM · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Heck, with a couple of rare exceptions -- and most of them PBS -- I haven't watched live TV in years. Even before PVRs, recording on a good old analog VHS VCR still let you fast-forward over the commercials, pause to go to the bathroom or get a snack, etc. Sure, the image quality wasn't quite up to what a digital recorder with a digital feed will give you, but it's Good Enough.

      And time shifting (which is what the above is) was ruled legal in the courts, as I recall.

      --
      -- Alastair
    2. Re:It is too late. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although it shouldn't have to come to this, but I don't watch TV anymore.

      Never really like having it around anyway .. occasionally I would waste too much time staring at the toob and then I'd feel like I just ate a gallon of triple-chocolate chocolate ice cream.

      Got laid off, ventured into a new career, and now $50/mo for cable isn't even in consideration. Just cancelled my home phone, too. Keeping DSL and cell (live in NYC), but the rest can rot.

      I'm pretty much down to DVDs (Netflix recently opened their east coast facility).

      I guess I also feel like given how much news currency these subjects have had, and how many organizations are out there publishing information on these issues, the general population is happy enough to let legislation walk all over them.

      On what grounds do we have cause to feel optimistic that the complicated issues of "privacy" can be sold to a general populace? I don't see many, and I've been active politically for years (yes, I've volunteered many times, supported through donations many charities, stumped when it was time, blah blah).

    3. Re:It is too late. by deadl0ck · · Score: 1

      I have a Tivo also. I don't feel my time is being wasted by ads. The only problem I have is my time being wasted by ads that are not targeted towards me. I'm not saying women don't watch the SciFi channel, but why the heck was there a Tampon commercial on there the other day? :-)

      --
      --
    4. Re:It is too late. by mlippert · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except that the same way they are going to modify the software on the PVR you currently own and use to record your actions, they can change the software to force you to watch the commercials also.

      I don't think (I don't own one so I'm not sure about this) that you can prevent a software upgrade [sic] from being downloaded and installed unless you never connect to the SonicBlue or Tivo service.

      Mike

    5. Re:It is too late. by Babbster · · Score: 1
      You're quite correct, and in fact there is a disclaimer on the ReplayTV 4000 product that tells the consumer they have the right and ability to remove/change features at any time. I'm sure a marketing person would be mildly deceitful and say that the disclaimer is there so that they can update the software with new functionality, but anyone who knows anything about the current lawsuits knows that the disclaimer is there so that they can point to it when people try to send their boxes back after show-sending and/or Commercial Advance have been disabled on their boxes.

      I would note, however, that if they try to jam commercials down our (PVR owners/users; I have Replay 2004 and Panasonic Showstopper [Replay-based]) throats, we just won't buy another one. I have no use for a PVR (or TV for that matter) if the broadcasters are going to take over to that extent. After all, I enjoy books and video games too, and there are plenty I haven't read or played yet.

      -Aaron

    6. Re:It is too late. by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 1

      Except that two of my three PVR rigs aren't ReplayTV's they're computers that _I_ built. They're not reporting anything to anyone I don't WANT them to report to (Linux firewalls are a wonderful thing).

      If "they" attempt to change my single Replay 2020 (upgraded to 100GB space) based on the order of some pissant magistrate in LA, in violation of current legal prescident (Sony v. Betamax, etc) I'll fight.

      --
      "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
    7. Re:It is too late. by Silverhammer · · Score: 2
      What is interesting is that the TV industry will has a system allready in place that could be switched to an ad less system. All they would need to do is charge more for cable or satellite service, or something along those lines.

      Wasn't that the original bloody point of cable - paying a monthly subscription for ad-free programming? They managed to do it just fine until the late 80s. How did they eventually convince us that it's perfectly normal to pay $40-50 a month for JUST the copper wire?

      Right now I can think of a dozen different channels that show no original programming whatsoever, just infomercials and reruns. What the hell is all that ad revenue and subscription money paying for?

    8. Re:It is too late. by SamTheButcher · · Score: 1
      And when they move to "adless", be on the lookout for the ad companies to start asking commercial building owners for space on their buildings, talking to governments about "sponsoring" stretches of road and the like, and we'll be living in "Blade Runner" before long.

      The thing is, most of America has NO idea this stuff is going on.

    9. Re:It is too late. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lose the cable television. About 5 years ago we were in a bad way financially and decided to dump cable tv. Never looked back. Forget tv. It's not worth your time, much less your money. Want some mindless fun for the whole family, and slashdot just won't do? Buy a Playstation or Nintendo or something. Rent some movies--Disney does not own everything. Or buy some over the internet. You have more to choose from that way.

      Every once in while we get some junk mail from a television company, and I always check to see if they can offer me anything worthwhile. But the way they package programming is a farce, and it is not yet possible to pay for and receive ONLY those channels I want. It's a pathetic business model, and once you are free of it you will see with greater clarity the meagerness of it and it's deleterious effects on your intelligence and humanity.

      You, my friend in tvland, are not a sucker. So stop letting yourself be treated like one. You are mad as hell, and you're not going to take it anymore.

      It's your money, damn it. Use it to make yourself happy. Dump your cable subscription and never see another infomercial again. Do it.

    10. Re:It is too late. by porkface · · Score: 0

      Ads pay for TV everytime you purchase anything. Those payments are so hidden and micro, that we don't mind paying that much. Shifting the cost of all those pennies to one single cable bill won't fly very far because TV isn't that important to most people. Advertising is here to stay. Just be happy you're one of the lucky ones who has a PVR, and do your best to fight the big lobbies.

    11. Re:It is too late. by Silverhammer · · Score: 2
      You, my friend in tvland, are not a sucker. So stop letting yourself be treated like one. You are mad as hell, and you're not going to take it anymore. It's your money, damn it. Use it to make yourself happy. Dump your cable subscription and never see another infomercial again. Do it.

      I already plan to, in 2004. Why then? Because that's when a) my current lease ends and I'll probably buy a house, b) I'll be 30 years old and it seems a nicely grown-up thing to do, c) the digital switchover will be getting really obnoxious, and d) Farscape finishes its five-year run.

      Yes, really, I like Farscape that much.

    12. Re:It is too late. by Animats · · Score: 2
      The entertainment industry is fighting a losing battle here. Anyone who has purchased a TIVO or similar hard disk recorder will absolutely never go back to watching ads.

      I feel that way since I installed WebWasher. I'm barely aware that the Web has ads.

      • WebWasher Statistics
        Filtered images: 187,103.
        Filtered windows: 10,998.
        Filtered cookies: 85,542.
  28. Redundant by Em+Emalb · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Ok so many things about this piss me off I don't really know where to start, but I had to get it off my chest;

    First off, the lesson we seem to be teaching our youth today is this:

    If you have lots of money, you can buy anything, judges, freedom, not guilty verdicts, senators, government.

    Everyone wonders why my generation, (stuck between the 70's crap er disco and GenX) is so frigging jaded. We see it, we see it, but we can't do anything about it.....all I gotta say is, when it's OUR generations turn to run things, look out, cause obviously, the generation doing things now plain DOES NOT GET IT(TM).

    One last (-1 Redundant) thing:

    I bought the damned thing, didn't sign any contracts that state I must watch commercials, *OR* that you would be able to see my viewing habits. BTW, are viewers being told their data is being recorded? As Bart would say, I didn't think it was possible for something to suck and blow at the same time.

    Any IRS agents read /.? Check this judges financial statements next year, I bet he has a nice "donation" from an "un-named source".

    Bah, piss on them, just wait til it's our turn to screw up the country :)

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
    1. Re:Redundant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      As someone from your generation, you and i should both be deathly afraid of when we come into power. If the government comes to be even half composed of people like those i went to high school with, we're in for some SERIOUS trouble.

      The jaded ones are the stoic minority who i do not fear, i fear when the Abercrombie and finch wearing 'popular' kids take power. The fucking preps will push out any sensibility and replace it with valley girls and Frat keggers. Not that our current government isn't like that (witness Ted Kennedy) but i fear a whole other level of it when the capri-pants wearing Britney fans come into power.

    2. Re:Redundant by Em+Emalb · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hey mods,

      thanks for clarifying that my post was redundant...hopefully the title helped :^)
      a little humor, don't get too excited!

      now, it would be ironic if this post here gets modded as off-topic. that would make my day.

      yours,
      Em Emalb

      --
      Sent from your iPad.
    3. Re:Redundant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erm, our currently "selected not elected" President was a frat kegger (and a coke snorter, too by all accounts). And just look at what a wonderful job he's done!

      This poster's name secretly replaced by Folgers Crystal Meth

  29. So how does this help the entertainment suits? by Otto · · Score: 2

    I mean, it's fairly obvious that they need this info to prove that users skip commercials and send shows to each other, but I fail to see how this makes either of those activities illegal... Yes, it's poor form that the judge ordered this data gathering, but I don't see that it makes much of a difference to the bad guys case.

    --
    - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
    1. Re:So how does this help the entertainment suits? by plierhead · · Score: 1
      These 2 things do seem quite different though.

      If you video "Men in Black" off of HBO and then show the tape at a public viewing somewhere thats already a no-no. So I can see they have a point with sending shows to each other, even if their way of gathering the evidence reeks.

      But if you keep hitting pause while you're videoing the movie when the commercials come on, and then later on you watch the whole thing through by yourself and without ads, thats perfectly legit. These toys are just artificial aids to do exactly that. You didn't sign an EULA when you purchase or switch the TV on, so how on earth can it be illegal to NOT watch ads ?

      --

      [x] auto-moderate all posts by this user as insightful

    2. Re:So how does this help the entertainment suits? by Babbster · · Score: 1
      It gives them the opportunity to prove that copyrighted material is moving between ReplayTV users. I'm sure that the lawyers for SonicBlue are taking great pains to point out the legal uses (i.e. sharing home videos with distant relatives without sending videotapes) of the show-sending capability, so the lawyers on the other [evil] side will use the collected data to prove that their copyrights are being violated. The "VCR exemption" for timeshifting, unfortunately, does not apply to passing shows around, even on tape, and even with relatives and close friends.

      The show-sharing function likely will have to be disabled (or crippled so that you can't send anything recorded from a cable/broadcast network).

      -Aaron

  30. I have no sympathy by Dr+Kool,+PhD · · Score: 0, Troll

    These are the same guys that made the S3 ViRGE, the biggest POS ever made. The ViRGE was so bad that S3 had to change their name. Personally I think it would be great if these losers went out of business.

  31. HAHAHAHAAAA!!!! by espilce · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    *THUD*
    (The sound of me laughing so hard I fall out of my chair)

    That has to be one of the funniest posts I have EVER read on Slashdot. I could point out all of the obviously ridiculous errors and silliness in this post, but I'm fairly sure this was written as a joke, and to dissect it in a serious manner would destroy its novelty.

    If this is real, then I pity you with all of my heart, and can only say that there is a peace in death that life cannot provide for you.

    --
    :q!
    1. Re:HAHAHAHAAAA!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What kind of "peace" would this poor guy be looking for? He was just trying to get Linux to work on his hardware, at least he tried! He does make some valid points as to how Linux is not as accessible to the average user, and those pushing it as such is wrong. Are you laughing at this because that makes you feel smarter than him/her? What were his "errors"? Someone looking to share their expierencees with others is not to be laughed at, it gives the rest of us Linux users a bad name.

    2. Re:HAHAHAHAAAA!!!! by espilce · · Score: 1

      ok, well I'll explain myself a little...

      For one thing the post seems rather incredulous due to the fact that the author's knowledge of Linux, Open Source (or OSDN as he likes to call it), and computers in general varies from decent to, well...

      I called AOL to have them send me a Linux version

      yeah.

      i excitedly bought Corel Linux Delux with Wordperfect for 79.99 at CompUSA

      hmm.... signs of trouble emerging...
      And just to throw in a final little tidbit:
      Microsoft made a standard, and it prevented me from the hassles of Linux and hardware, maybe the OSDN should work on Plug and Play in the OS
      basically my thought was that this was either a really funny joke, or a REALLY confused person. I mean who the hell just goes out and starts throwing money around and blames it on his operating system? looks like He's "out" $500 on a printer and video card he already owns, because he decided to try Linux.
      Ok, I just realized I wasted way to much of my time explaining this. Yes I was a bit harsh, (that last line was a paraphrase of a line out of From Dusk Till Dawn) but sadly I have little sympathy for stupidity/ignorance these days when getting information is as simple as typing a word into a little box at google.com.

      --
      :q!
  32. Umm...Replay Hackers? by Will_Malverson · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I know that there's a RePlay hacking community, though it's not as big as the TiVo hacking community. Anyone know how to completely mess up the data in my RPTV about what I've been watching and how I've been watching it?

    1. Re:Umm...Replay Hackers? by rusty0101 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While I do no own a replay, nor do I know any owners who hack their systems, I do have doubts about the reliabiliy of the data being collected.

      They have 60 days to build a database that reports all clicks, skips, and passes. I.e. in less than two months, they have to construct, test and distribute bug free software.

      This I would love to see.

      Why bug free? Do you want to explain that the reason that the database shows all of the comercials on all of the 4000 series Replays were the only material passed from one PVR to another, and that the data shows that the viewers were watching the comercials and skipping the shows, was a bug in the software? To a Judge?

      If they pull it off, I will be impressed. If they do so without making it possible that even one of the pvrs could be hacked to start reporting the lowest rated shows as the only shows being recorded, I will really be impressed.

      -Rusty

      --
      You never know...
    2. Re:Umm...Replay Hackers? by Hans+Lehmann · · Score: 1

      Most of the sites about hacking ReplayTV seem to be focused on increasing the storage space. Couldn't one connect to the ReplayTV through some sort of a proxy application that makes it appear to the Mother Ship that all you ever watch is Gilligan's Island? Of course, for some people, that wouldn't change anything at all.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    3. Re:Umm...Replay Hackers? by CityZen · · Score: 1

      Okay, here's the hacks we need:

      1. Hack the PVR to avoid updating itself to the new spyware. Can you just unplug it from the phone-line?

      2. Make an emulator that allows any garden-variety PC to transmit bogus or interesting programming info back to SonicBlue.

    4. Re:Umm...Replay Hackers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're going to hack your PVRs to send back tainted results, go full steam ahead and have it report back that you watch 16 hours of PBS a day. That'll give them something to think about.

    5. Re:Umm...Replay Hackers? by CityZen · · Score: 1

      >...phone-line?

      Oh, this new model uses an ethernet connection, not a phone line. I guess that means making a firewall for your PVR.

  33. I guess we're all thieves by Fizzlewhiff · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I had no idea that not watching commercials equated to stealing televison shows. My cheesy RCA VCR marks commercials after recording and skips them during playback. This has been around for a while. How does ReplayTV make it different?

    So what happens to people who have sent a copy of Six Feet Under to their non HBO subscribing friends? Will they get jail time for this?

    --

    'Same speed C but faster'
    1. Re:I guess we're all thieves by Babbster · · Score: 1
      I don't think the Commercial Advance will be ruled anything but reasonable. You are correct that it is functionally no different (and in fact the exact same licensed technology) from the same feature in some VCRs. The only difference in functional terms is that with a PVR, unlike a VCR, skips the commercials instantaneously because it is a random access device.

      As for the show-sending feature, I would seriously doubt that anybody who is "proved" to have sent a copyrighted show will suffer any penalties. The likely outcome is simply that that functionality will be ordered to be removed in a software revision.

      By the way, the distinction between sharing shows recorded from HBO and sharing shows recorded on ANY other network is irrelevant. ALL of the shows you would record off a cable, satellite, or even just a regular antenna, are protected by copyright and it IS technically illegal to distribute them, whether for money or not, and whether to family and close friends or not.

      I think, in retrospect, that SonicBlue made a huge mistake in including this feature (cool and handy though it is) in their boxes in the first place. Unfortunately, they could suffer pretty severe penalties for having provided a distribution method that is used 99.999% of the time for redistributing copyrighted material.

      -Aaron

    2. Re:I guess we're all thieves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I had no idea that not watching commercials equated to stealing televison shows.

      I'm so conflicted now that I've learned this.

      I used to get up to get a beer during commercials. I always thought that's what they wanted me to do, consume mindlessly. Now, I guess, the rules say I have to watch the commercials and get that beer during the show.

      Wait, what was the reason I bought a TV?

  34. Re:Bad Linux Expierence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look, I DID know what I was getting into, I thought I was joining into this great alternative to Windows

    You've said it yourself, that you _THOUGHT_ you were joining into this great thing... so if you only _THOUGHT_ it, then you did not _KNOW_ what you were getting into. You only thought you knew. QED.

    Anyways, Linux is _NOT_, as you have observed, an alternative to Windows. People who try to pitch it as such are usually more interested in advocacy debates than actually personally trying to select the best tool for a given job. I'm sorry you were misled. In all honesty, Linux is an inexpensive and reliable alternative to Unix, nothing more, nothing less. The only way that Linux can really be considered an alternative to Windows is that it works on the same hardware (most commonly), and is easily affordable by anyone who can own a computer that can run Windows, so there's absolutely no reason to not have Linux on your computer if you want it there.

    By the way, just for the record... if you don't learn Unix sometime during your career, your career will probably be short-lived.

  35. Neither example is "anonymous" by coyote-san · · Score: 2

    Neither of those examples is either "anonymous" or "aggregate."

    As I've told some of the marketing droids so confident that they would "never" misuse information gathered by shopping cards, if they truly respected my concerns there would be a basket of shopper cards at the service counter and I could just grab one and walk away. They could collect all of the information they wanted about me... except who I am. (That's also why I pay with cash, etc.)

    But when they want me to fill out a form, then it's not anonymous. It may be pseudonymous (if I use a bogus name and address), but that's not the same thing as anonymous.

    As for aggregate data, that's what the stores collect when they ask you for your ZIP code and cross-correlate purchases, ZIP code and store location. It would be the number of people in a square mile (or greater) watching HBO at 10 PM on Sunday night. It's not something tied to your individual PVR.

    --
    For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
    1. Re:Neither example is "anonymous" by jareds · · Score: 2

      As I've told some of the marketing droids so confident that they would "never" misuse information gathered by shopping cards, if they truly respected my concerns there would be a basket of shopper cards at the service counter and I could just grab one and walk away. They could collect all of the information they wanted about me... except who I am.

      And how old you are, and what sex you are, etc. Also, how do you propose they get people to keep the cards in their wallet rather than throwing them away and grabbing a new one next time?

    2. Re:Neither example is "anonymous" by jackal! · · Score: 1
      if they truly respected my concerns there would be a basket of shopper cards at the service counter and I could just grab one and walk away.

      My local Safeway issued me a card without name or address. The clerk filled in the zip code (and the card number) on the application, and that's it. No hassle or anything. It was like she was used to it. (Of course I *do* live in a geek-heavy area more likely to be aware of privacy issues.)

      They get to see the profile of someone from my zip, and I get access to all their clubmember savings. I'm pretty okay with that.

      --

      Who moderates the meta-moderators?

    3. Re:Neither example is "anonymous" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My Jewel issued me an anonymous card as well. Most of those cards double as check-cashing identification as well, but if you just want to use it for the in-store discounts, they will just issue one to you.

      The card is still useful to them because it allows them to correlate purchases. For example, if they find that by offering a 25 cent discount on a bag of potato chips, they can trigger the purchase of a $2.50 can of chip dip 5% of the time, that's valuable information.

  36. Re:Disney: faggotry's best friend by jwilcox154 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

    Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

  37. The problem is not with the tv companies by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 2

    The problem is that sonic blue were gathering the informastion to begin with.

    Since they already have access to the info it is normal court procedure for the court to request that they preserve it if it may be evidence.

    In the article a Sonic Blue manager is complaining "we are being asked to invade the privacy of our customers". No buddy- you are already doing that you are being asked to share the data.

    As long as somebody is gathering your info your privacy is being invaded. It doesnt matter what their privacy statement says, because:
    a. you can never know if they follow it or not
    b. even if they follow it once there is a court order they have to turn it over.

    Court orders and search warrants cannot be stopped by privacy statements.

    There is no reason why a some tv device has to send information about the viewing habbits of the user. If you want privacy get one that doesnt.

    The fact that there isnt one on the market only proves that companies dont really care about consumers that much.

    By the way do you guys think that if someone figures out how to port linux on the Xbox it could be programmed to be an open source tv recorder? That would be nice.

    Lately having open source devices has been the only way to ensure your privacy.

    1. Re:The problem is not with the tv companies by Jack+Porter · · Score: 2, Informative

      Read the article.

      "The plaintiffs asked SonicBlue to turn over information on how individuals use the recording devices. SonicBlue said it does not track that information. The magistrate, who is supervising discovery, ordered the company to write software in the next 60 days that would record every ``click'' from every customer's remote control."

    2. Re:The problem is not with the tv companies by JDAustin · · Score: 1

      How about reading the entire article...

      If you would have done so, you would have noticed the statement in which SonicBlue states they havn't collected data since May 2001. So tel me this; How can they share data they do not have?

    3. Re:The problem is not with the tv companies by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 2

      yes but they used to track it. So their davice so made so it can track it, without the owner being able to do anything about it.

      I had a small error but i think my points are correct - if they really cared about privacy they wouldnt have that functionality in their device to begin with. Or they would have it but give the owner a choice to turn it off.

      The problem is that the owner does not have power over his own damn digital vcr. If he did then it would be much harder for the court to get that information.

    4. Re:The problem is not with the tv companies by rusty0101 · · Score: 1

      So far as I know, and I could be wrong, Replay has never collected such information. Tivo has, but has done so in an aggrigated form. I believe Tivo does so by zip code and reciever type, but I don't know that for any certainty.

      Then again, I could be wrong.

      -Rusty

      --
      You never know...
    5. Re:The problem is not with the tv companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "By the way do you guys think that if someone figures out how to port linux on the Xbox it could be programmed to be an open source tv recorder? That would be nice."

      Unless someone comes up with drivers for the few USB TV tuners/capture devices available, I'd say the answer is NO. 'course, someone would also half to make/sell an adapter that would let you use said USB devices on the oddly shaped ports on the X-Box.

      Did you even think about what you were typing before you did so?

      Mike
      digi-tal@starband.net

    6. Re:The problem is not with the tv companies by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2


      So far as I know, and I could be wrong, Replay has never collected such information.


      From the article:

      SonicBlue said it stopped collecting anonymous user data in May 2001, after a furor erupted over competitor TiVo's practice of secretly gathering information about its users' viewing habits.
    7. Re:The problem is not with the tv companies by civilizedINTENSITY · · Score: 2

      Wrong. They used to collect data. They quit. They never used a unique ID. They have a time limit to implement *new* software that will provide user behavior data with said unique user ID. This isn't about "you are already doing it, share the data". This can't even be about, "we want to know what percentage are doing it, because we want to shut your business down". The *only* reason to tag the consumer is to be able to come back latter and say, "Judge, we have proof that user #abc123 violated our copyright, and we now want to nail his/her/their ass to a prison cell wall." Be afraid. Be very afraid. Next step: tap every phone/ethernet/cable modem?

    8. Re:The problem is not with the tv companies by n6mod · · Score: 2

      You're really not paying attention.

      "SonicBlue stopped collecting data in May 2001..."

      SonicBlue is being sued over the 4000 models, which didn't start shipping until November 2001. *This* device never collected any user data. Ever.

      --
      You have violated Robot's Rules of Order and will be asked to leave the future immediately.
    9. Re:The problem is not with the tv companies by Babbster · · Score: 1
      Ah, but in May 2001 the ReplayTV 4000 series didn't exist yet, and those are the devices that the magistrate wants to collect information from despite the fact that those devices have never had that capability. If this were about the older Replay devices (Replay 2000/3000/Panny Showstopper), then the discovery might be reasonable. As it is, they truly would be invading the privacy of customers who never had that problem before.

      -Aaron

    10. Re:The problem is not with the tv companies by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2


      Ah, but in May 2001 the ReplayTV 4000 series didn't exist yet, and those are the devices that the magistrate wants to collect information from despite the fact that those devices have never had that capability.


      Maybe I'm missing the point... but I don't see how this makes that much of a difference. With the earlier products, SonicBlue included firmware (I'm assuming its "firmware") that allowed them to collect data. They saw Tivo get burned over this practice and promptly stopped doing so themselves. Later product lines didn't include software/firmware to perform a function SonicBlue had deemed a PR risk and wouldn't use.


      BUT.. they did continue to leave the clause in their EULA and had already proven that it was possible to do with earlier products.


      Sure - its outlandish for a court to demand that they develop code to reimplement this invasion of privacy (rather than turn over any existing records from previous data collection). But at the same time, SonicBlue DID collect data in the past.

  38. And why does the industry care? by CptnKirk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Now I could be wrong, but get this. The industry has no way of knowing exactly how many people actually watch their shows. Sure based on a sample of people who agree to be polled, they're able to estimate. And based on these estimations they're able to charge for advertising.

    If you think about it, at this point they have their money. Nealson has already counted these views, whether or not commercials were skipped via conventional (bathroom) means or electronic means. I find is suspicious that these companies are now asking for this type of information. I could see the various companies who advertise complaining, but they don't seem to be. And if they did the TV industry would say that since taped views don't add to the ratings, those views aren't represented. So either quit bitching or we'll have to count those views in our ratings and raise rates accordingly.

    Either way I don't really see how the industries argument carries any weight. This is a game of averages folks and advertisers know this. Plus the industries accounting mechanism rounds for the industry anyway. I just don't see what their problem is.

    1. Re:And why does the industry care? by CptnKirk · · Score: 2

      And about HBO. Again, this should be good for HBO. It gains loyalty and brand recognition.

      As for being illegal. ReplayTV only allows a limited number of show 'sends'. Also given the reality of most people's internet bandwidth. ReplayTV will be used for the most part to send shows from a TV in one room to a TV in another (via local lan). Also these limited sends should be no more illegal than having people over to my house to watch HBO. They don't pay for the service, but I'm still allowed to let my friends watch my TV on my dime.

      Also since people are watching and sharing these shows off of a hard drive HBO no longer pays the cable companies for distribution over their lines. If anything the cable companies are the real loosers in this whole mess, and the court has already ruled on this issue.

    2. Re:And why does the industry care? by Babbster · · Score: 1
      You're talking about two different functions, however. There is the LAN function where two PVRs can stream off each other (very nice feature, BTW) and then there is the Internet sharing function which allows the sending of shows to boxes outside the house; one can be used exclusive of the other.

      The simple fact is that every show sent from one Replay box to another *over the Internet* is, most certainly, a violation of copyright unless it is a program (i.e. home video) produced by the sender. The whole HBO example is a more clear-cut example of the point, however, every other network would fall under the same protection. For example, Fox can distribute copies of The X-Files all they want want, in any format they wish, since they hold the copyright. However, if I decide to send someone a VCD with an episode on it I am violating copyright law. This holds true in terms of electronic transmission as well. It doesn't matter one whit that The X-Files is available - being broadcast over the air, cable and satellite - potentially to every person in the country. The minute I distribute a copy of it, I'm in violation.

      There's no way for SonicBlue to win on the show-sending issue, and I certainly hope that they cut their losses ASAP.

      -Aaron

    3. Re:And why does the industry care? by CptnKirk · · Score: 2

      It's sticky. However I think that courts have said that it's ok to do the following.

      1. Invite friends over to watch X-Files.

      2. Tape X-Files for later viewing, with friends, or alone.

      3. Tape X-Files for later viewing without commercials.

      4. Tape X-Files and watch it at a friends house on his VCR.

      5. Tape X-Files for a friend who would have otherwise missed the show, and give them the tape .

      I believe that courts have upheld this type of fair use. You're allowed to tape stuff off the TV and Radio. You're allowed to consume these tapes in any way you wish, and are allowed to share with family and friends as long as you're not profiting. You are not allowed to share with everyone. I think the friends and family aspect is what SonicBlue is going for. They only let you share a show like 5 times, eliminating the risk of proliferation to the world, while providing a service that allows you to essentially let a friend borrow your CD or tape.

    4. Re:And why does the industry care? by Babbster · · Score: 1
      The usual IANAL applies, but my understanding of the case was that it addressed "timeshifting" (recording something for later viewing) and that was all. In fact, what I recall from reading about it is that even the judges who aligned with Sony in the Betamax case had concerns about the possiblity of even the archiving of shows for the long term, thus potentially taking away from later profits off rebroadcasting or selling/renting of copies of the program.

      You can head over here for the EFF take on "fair use," and note that there is no mention of distribution of copies.

      As a bonus, here is the relevant portion of the opinion in the infamous Betamax (Sony v. Universal) case:

      (c) The record and the District Court's findings show (1) that there is a significant likelihood that substantial numbers of copyright holders who license their works for broadcast on free television would not object to having their broadcast time-shifted by private viewers (i. e., recorded at a time when the VTR owner cannot view the broadcast so that it can be watched at a later time); and (2) that there is no likelihood that time-shifting would cause nonminimal harm to the potential market for, or the value of, respondents' copyrighted works. The VTR's are therefore capable of substantial noninfringing uses. Private, noncommercial time-shifting in the home satisfies this standard of noninfringing uses both because respondents have no right to prevent other copyright holders from authorizing such time-shifting for their programs, and because the District Court's findings reveal that even the unauthorized home time-shifting of respondents' programs is legitimate fair use. Pp. 442-456.

      -Aaron

    5. Re:And why does the industry care? by Xader+Vartec · · Score: 1

      ". . . had concerns about the possiblity of even the archiving of shows for the long term, thus potentially taking away from later profits off rebroadcasting or selling/renting of copies of the program."

      This shows just how out of touch with reality these people (the broadcasters) are. Last night I watched Return of the Jedi on T.V. GOOD GOD I OWN MULTIPLE TAPES OF IT!!! I STILL watched it on T.V.

      They could be making SOOOOO much more money if they utilized human nature more (much like software companies have and look at how much more successful they are).

  39. Hi, I'm Em Emalb, and I am a thief by Em+Emalb · · Score: 2

    Article time:
    "Attorneys for the studios say they need this information to determine the extent to which the ReplayTV 4000 allows consumers to steal copyrighted movies and television shows."

    So, in reality, they automatically assume that everyone who uses this is stealing. Nice, guilt until proven innocent.

    Could we please get a judge who says it is not my responsibility to legislate your problems. If you are losing money, change your business model. BTW, I don't believe I have *EVER* EVER...YOU HEAR ME YOU MARKETING F*cktroids? EVER bought something because I saw it on TV.

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
    1. Re:Hi, I'm Em Emalb, and I am a thief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The truck I bought was advertised on TV. Did that mean the commercial was effective? So, since it was advertised, I saw it on TV, and bought it, your advertising made me do it? Marketing Majors, wake up. Your commercial played no part in why I bought the truck.

      I agree with those of us who "Don't buy from commercials". I did see a commercial for a new dealer yesterday, and I went in and looked. Oh nuts, the commercial got me.

  40. Contact Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you would like to send a letter of protest to the "Honorable" Judge from Disney, you can get the contact info here, Telephone number (213) 894-5234, or Fax (213) 894-3335. Be sure to thank him from the bottom of Disney's wallet.

    This poster's name secretly replaced with Folgers Crystals

  41. Judge Eick by guygee · · Score: 5, Informative



    Let the
    "Honorable" Charles F. Eick know what you think of his decision:
    give him a call at (213)894-5234, fax to(213)894-3335, or write him:

    The Honorable Charles F. Eick
    United States Magistrate Judge
    United States District Court
    United States Courthouse
    312 North Spring Street
    Los Angeles, CA 90012

    1. Re:Judge Eick by Wolfier · · Score: 1

      Should read "not-so-honorable" instead

    2. Re:Judge Eick by travis7 · · Score: 5, Informative

      FYI everyone, he's a Magistrate, not an actual federal judge. What this means, basically, is that he does not have lifetime tenure (as do "real" federal judges).

      Might be worth letting your US Senators and Representatives know that something is smelling in the LA District Court....

    3. Re:Judge Eick by guygee · · Score: 4, Informative

      FYI everyone, he's a Magistrate, not an actual federal judge. What this means, basically, is that he does not have lifetime tenure (as do "real" federal judges).

      Good point, somebody mod this guy up.
      According to this site:
      "The current Magistrate Judge system was begun by Congress in 1968 expanding on the 175 year old United States commissioner system. The Magistrate Judges are appointed based upon the recommendations of a citizen's merit screening committee. In 2002, in addition to the 471 full-time Magistrate Judge positions authorized there were 59 part-time judges and 3 combination Clerk of Court/Magistrate Judges who serve four year terms."

    4. Re:Judge Eick by Quixote · · Score: 2

      The Magistrate Judges are appointed based upon the recommendations of a citizen's merit screening committee.

      Wanna bet that this "committee" is packed with media flunkies (in LA)?
      People, November is coming up. *VOTE* . Make your voices heard. You can rant and rave all you want on /., but it'll have the same effect as a flea on an elephant's rump. When the geek crowd gets organized and STARTS VOTING in large numbers, then the congresscritters (and magistrates) will sit up and take notice.

    5. Re:Judge Eick by mestreBimba · · Score: 1

      How do you pronounce that last name... ?

      Yickie?

      Ick?

      last name sums up his ruling.

      --
      Fly Fish? Participate in our forum
    6. Re:Judge Eick by Dimensio · · Score: 1

      Smelling? It reeks of scandal. I'm willing to bet that this "Magistrate" is on the take of the plaintiffs of the suit. Only someone truly corrupt could issue a ruling of such lunacy. Either that or Magistrate Eick deserves a horrible, painful death for being so criminally stupid.

    7. Re:Judge Eick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I might be pronounced "Eek", but that still sums up the ruling.

  42. Invasion of Privacy? by cvanaver · · Score: 1

    The court order seems to only be aimed at collecting aggregate data on user habits (though perhaps specific habits of users will be available as well), but regardless, the information is only going to be used in a civil suit against Sonic Blue.

    It seems to me that neither the court, nor the plaintiffs, can use this information against any of the individual users in civil or criminal suits because of the lack of proper search warrants. While this case is still very concerning for the privacy violations, it only really gets interesting when you analyze what the data is used for and who obtains it. I think the court system, if they are not extremely responsible with controlling this data, is going to leave itself wide open to class action civil suits.

  43. Typhoon Lagoon by iamjim · · Score: 1

    But it's so cool :)

    "Chief, can I hold my gun sideways? It looks so cool."

  44. Can't they plead the Fifth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't they refuse to do this based on the Fifth Amendment? After all, they're being asked to submit newly created evidence that could serve to incriminate them.

    It would seem the me that the burden of proof of infringement falls on the plaintiff, not the ability to go on a fishing expedition for data that *might* prove their case.

    1. Re:Can't they plead the Fifth? by ewhac · · Score: 2

      It's a civil case. The right to refuse to self-incriminate is only available during criminal proceedings.

      Schwab

  45. ehhhhh..... by pc486 · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't care if anonymous data was collected much. I wouldn't mind too much if a random number was to be assigned to my actions. I will mind being called "Mr. 34F78AC1426B" in the court room when charges of piracy and stealing are brought forth.

    My deepest sympathy is out there to the owners of ReplayTV owners.

    1. Re:ehhhhh..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so you wouldn`t care about this as well i guess...

      http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=30042002-113 90 1-6626r

  46. Mixed feelings by vanyel · · Score: 2

    While I don't like the concept of people watching what I do, in fact I sorta want them to do that with my PVR, since what gets aired is based on ratings. If they see that people record this show and not that one, then maybe the shows I watch will stand a better chance of sticking around. And if they see that I backed up to watch that good commercial and skipped all these sucky ones, maybe commercials will improve. Yeah, I'm tilting at windmills, but one can dream...

  47. If I were trying to create a stereotype by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A stereotype of a money-grubbing, greedy ethnic group without the least concern for the people of America if not the world but only for their own financial interests, I would invent antics like these.

    And if you can identify that group from the description and from these actions do not blame me for the stereotype's existance. Ask who is reinforcing it at every opportunity. It is not me. Blame me if you wish for pointing it out. Messengers should not be shot.

    This is one atrocity on top of a stack of others. Their objective is nothing short of crippling every computer in the country to squeeze every penny of profits not only out of the consumer but the entertainers.

    These people claim to be so creative yet they are as unable to create a way to deal with computers as were the buggywhip makings with cars. Their only solution is to cripple all computers and end all innovation that does not put a dollar in their pocket. But just wait for all the legal exemptions for "their" computers. And don't thingk it will not be a crime to break their source to discover they are using GNU code.

    Obviously they lied when they claimed to be creative. They are an enemy to progress. They already destroyed DAT in the US, crippling it by law. They tried to destroy VCRs altogether.

    If they can not deal with progress these Luddites better diversify and get out of the entertainment business. Tobacco companies have done it. It is nothing new. And it was not a disaster save for smokers who get not benefit but that is another story.

    Their approach is about as creative as their entertainment. As we all know, they own the professional entertainment critics. We know they are not creative telling the same stories over and over with different scripts and different special effects. That is not creative. That is only entertainment. Drive in theater stuff as a filler for social activities.

    Speaking of which, some 15 years ago after congressional hearings it was observed if the average person reported their taxes the way the entertainment industry does they would be in prison for a very long time. But they sent entertainers to Congress and bought off the tax reform.

    They are immoral to the core. There has to be some way we can deal with them. We cannot be less creative than they are.

    Hollywood wants to cripple your computer, pass it on in clever ways.

  48. Lite judges by Animats · · Score: 2
    Federal magistrate judges are sort of "lite judges". They used to be called "Unites States Magistrates" or "United States Commissioners". They usually handle minor cases, pretrial motions, and such. Normally, they only handle entire cases when both parties consent to the use of a magistrate judge. They don't usually make major decisions.

    An order like this one, one that affects third parties, needs to be kicked up to the district judge level for a more thorough examination. Hopefully some outside party will file a motion to do that. Anyone whose clicks are being recorded is probably an eligible party.

  49. Not if PVRs get banned by Gorimek · · Score: 2

    That's a little naive.

    Of course you (and I) will go back to regular ad based TV the day our Tivos are made illegal.

    1. Re:Not if PVRs get banned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a little naive.

      Of course you (and I) will go back to regular ad based TV the day our Tivos are made illegal.


      Trading copyrighted music over P2P networks is illegal too, but people do it all the time. If Tivos are banned then we'll just setup our computers to record the content. The entertainment industry revenues are MINISCULE compared to other industries like the computer industry. In the end, they're basically irrelevent to the economy if it means hurting a thriving tech industry with idiotic anti-piracy restrictions and specialized copy-protection circuits being mandated to be in every computer system.

    2. Re:Not if PVRs get banned by JofCoRe · · Score: 1

      No, then we'll just go back to our old backups of our Tivo's that had the old software (giving us the old functionality of the fast forward, assuming they were to change that), unplug the thing from the phone line, and enjoy the functioning the way it currently is. Sure, we won't have the nice TiVo guide, but it's still easier to program (by time/day method) than a VCR...

      --

      Place sig here.
    3. Re:Not if PVRs get banned by Christov · · Score: 1
      PVRs like Tivo and Replay, etc. are the exact same technology that the broadcasters use themselves. Many of the TV stations (and all of the big cable outfits) are broadcasting from "video servers" that are exactly like the PVRs except a lot more expensive. Yeah, the inputs are different as befits a professional machine (SDI or composite video, AES/SBU audio in many channels), but the function is the same.


      Here's how a disk recorder is used in practice at insert big broadcaster here. New material is delivered on some sort of video tape, often DigiBeta, sometimes even old AMPEX 1 inch. That material is played on a VTR and digitized by the disk recorder into an MPEG2 file on its internal disks. Information about the clip is entered into an automation system so that the clip can be scheduled to air at the needed time(s). Usually that MPEG file is copied from the encoding machine to one or more playout machines over fibre channel or gig-ethernet. Sometimes that video clips is archived onto a computer tape library. (That's where I come in professionally.)


      These professional video recorders are starting to outpace VTRs at least in broadcast. They are hideously expensive ($100k or more), but in all salient points are identical to a Tivo. They take normal video in, encode it to MPEG2 with no watermarking whatsoever, and record that on a hard drive or three. In fact the ability to move digital video files between machines at faster than realtime with no re-encoding is a big selling point.


      The really ironic thing is that disk recorders were first used to insert commercials because you didn't have to prepare so many short video tapes. That's funny. I say that if the CDPT-whatever bill goes forward, we must make sure that professional video equipment is NOT exempt. Really put the fuckers out of business.

  50. How sonicblue can help by DEBEDb · · Score: 1

    If they are geniunely outraged, they can
    open the protocol they will be using to
    collect the data and look the other
    way when people subvert it :)

    --

    Considered harmful.
  51. Heisenberg-esque, don't you think? by Dr.+Awktagon · · Score: 3, Funny

    So, now a few geeks know that they're being watched more carefully. They can tell other geeks, who will make a fuss, and maybe even the general public will hear about it. Maybe you have to do some protesting or set yourself on fire or something.

    Then, everyone who gives a toss will modify their behavior (Skip every commercial or watch only one show over and over. Or set up a robot arm to push the skip button once a second. Get creative.)

    Then, when SonicBlue goes back to the court, they can say that the data are obviously flawed, because the rats knew they were being watched and changed their behavior.

    SonicBlue must've been keeping data previous to this, anyway, they could compare and prove the behavior changed soon after the ruling.

    Also, anybody know how this machine would store all this data? I can't imagine it streams it off to HQ everytime you push a button. Sounds like good hack possibilities to me. "Your honor, viewer #23489A somehow managed to skip 10,000,000 commercials last weekend. I think if you just arrest him the TV industry will be good to go."

  52. making TV shows doesn't have to cost so much by martyn+s · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I read this article which talks about Dick Wolf's (creator of Law & Order) philosophy about paying TV actors. According to him, people don't watch TV shows for stars, they watch it for the good writing, and he claims this is different than movies. But the studios don't believe it and are willing to pay the actors on friends 1 million dollars each. I'm not saying friends would still be popular if they were all suddenly replaced, but the fact is, TV studios, even now have pretty slim profit margins, so if ad revenues went down across the board, most likely actors' salaries would go down too, because profits couldn't get any lower. I think it's pretty sick how the government thinks they need to baby the TV and movie industries, as if they'd suddenly collapse without sticking to their age-old business model.

    1. Re:making TV shows doesn't have to cost so much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We need somebody like Jack McCoy to represent us in court. I'm sure he could roll our collective opinions into one succinct sentence.

    2. Re:making TV shows doesn't have to cost so much by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      That's so true. That makes me want to go and watch Law & Order now.

      It's kind of interesting the affect that show has on me, and I'd imagine many people: it makes me, one of the staunchest constitutionalists around, say to myself "god damn that judge, why can't he just give that warrant already." When the show is from the perspective of cops it makes you think like them.

  53. Re:Bad Linux Expierence by mark-t · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    (Disclaimer) I'd normally email this kind of comment, since it's so off topic... My apologies to the moderators but the above poster does not have make his email address available. I would encourage any responders to my comments to resort to email rather than post here further. My email address can be deciphered above.

    There are soooo many ways that you can get Linux without paying a single dime to anyone other than those who provide you the facilities to burn the CD. You can go to an internet cafe; if you're a student, you can probably use the school's internet connection; you can maybe even go to a friend's house, who may already have Linux; or, probably the best idea of them all, find a local Linux user's group. Heck, you may even find someone there that will up and give you a CD for free. You claim to be computer savvy, but the most knowledgable people are those that regularly push themselves outside of their comfort zone, exploring what they don't already know, and, god forbid, it may mean that they'd have to do some actual research. By your own admission, you were unwilling to take those extra steps. That's why other responders to this thread are saying you are stupid.

    Think about it.

  54. Lobotomy Time by huntdwumpus · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm sorry folks, your brains are now property of Disney. How many images of Mickey Mouse have you illegally recorded in your memory? How many movies, books and songs? All the knowledge and experiences in your memory are stolen intellectual property. Confess now, and we'll offer you a special discount rate to license your brain back for limited periods of regulated thought.

    1. Re:Lobotomy Time by T__ · · Score: 1
      The funny thing is, this isn't really funny. Our brains are information processors, and any controls on processing information is really controls on what we think. So in the end, intellectual property law results in mind control.

      I mean, if we did have photographic memories and could store what we see and hear and recall it perfectly, and communicate this to others perfectly, it would currently be illegal. And yet, that is what we already do with smaller amounts of information (e. g. speech). All these devices that we create to help us improve our information processing capability (writing, the abacus, sound recording, film, computers) are just extensions of our brains, and in the not too distant future, these capabilities will be built right into our minds (Kurzweil).

      So like I said. This isn't really funny. Intellectual property really means controlling what we think.

  55. ObHeinlein by sconeu · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Quote:
    There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or a corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years , the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped ,or turned back, for their private benefit.
    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    1. Re:ObHeinlein by MasterKayne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is from Robert Heinlein's Life-Line and it is written in 1939! All the players change but it is still the same game.

  56. Entertainment industry has reached critical mass by Fastball · · Score: 2
    Let's face it. The entertainment industry is suffering from poor timing with a receeding economy and discovering that there is a limit to how much money we're will to shell out for their goodies. Actually, I believe a lot of industries are running into a revenue wall.

    You can imagine these people getting spoiled the last few years, and then when our disposable income becomes less disposable, they wig out. Has anyone else noticed how prolific our corporations have become at perverting capitalism? Enron, Worldcom, AOL/TW. And those are just the tip of iceberg that we can see.

    I see a trend of corporations looking to government to bail them out of jams they created for themselves, and I don't like it. It's funny that some want government regulations (RIAA, MPAA to name a few) and others don't (MSFT) AND they're all wrong!

  57. Re:Bad Linux Expierence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone is saying how stupid this guy is, but I think you are the stupid assholes.

    This has to be one of the most classic trolls I have ever seen.

  58. Re:Bad Linux Expierence by merdark · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    "linux & win32 plug'n'pray is about equal these days"

    LMAO

    Before you go off with your elitist attitude towards this poor guy, maybe *you* should know what you are getting into. Myself, I use both unix and windows and know quite a bit about both.

    Have you actually used windows plug and play lately? Since, say windows 2000 maybe? As much as I am pro open source and pro unix, I don't think anyone who knows even a bit about what their talking about can seriously say that linux is anywhere remotely close to windows plug and play. Never mind being equal. Most devices *just work* in windows. They may not by default get the latest drivers, and the newest hardware may require a driver disk, but compared to linux even installing a driver manually (which no company requires a user to do) is easy.

    If your going to be a hotshot please be an informed hotshot. This guy's points are completly valid for an average to moderatly advanced computer user out there. I think people who live and breath computers can get a little detached from reality sometimes.

  59. Re:Bad Linux Expierence by joFFeman · · Score: 0

    ...and Linux tells the government when i watch DuckTales and skip the commercials!

    --
    "Life is great; without it, you'd be dead." -Harmony Korine
  60. Slipping on the Slope they Made by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I'm mixing two apt metaphors. "Starting down a slippery slope" and "sleeping in the bed they made."


    SonicBlue (and Tivo) laid the foundation for this sort of action with their EULA and origional policy of collecting user data ("anonymous" or not). They removed this functionality when, suprise, there was a public backlash. But by then, the damage is done. They have demonstrated the ability for those who would abuse it.


    Enter the entertainment industry. Sure, I'm dismayed that a court would force this kind of action. But I'm sad to say I'm not shocked - we've all seen this kind of attitude from the entertainment industry and the legal and political system that seems to favor it, and these kinds of tactics.


    But let us not forget that it is the current PVR industry (SonicBlue AND Tivo) who have created the industry standard that allows invasion of consumer rights. It is their short-sightedness that gave the entertainment industry this option to push for in court.


    They created the slippery slope and despite their attempts to get off of it, they will now be forced to continue their slide.

  61. Re:Bad *.* Expierence: some advice by shadowbearer · · Score: 0

    "but how am I going to do that without an OS to begin with" + plus other gripes about not having the knowledge to know how to install Linux.

    Ask your local experienced tech. You can usually find at least one person who is willing to help. In most towns there is generally at least one Linux geek who would be willing to help. If he/she isn't, then *fsck* him - and find someone else - there are many of us who spend uncountable volunteer hours doing just that sort of thing. You also might try going to a local computer users club and swallowing your pride (no offense meant) and listening to what they say.

    Then again, if you want to do it yourself, don't bitch if you don't know how. Those of us who have spent thousands of hours learning all of the ins and outs will be happy to help you. We might charge you for it, but hey, we have to pay the bills somehow. If you don't want to pay, then spend the time reading, learning, making mistakes, and figuring out how to do it, just like we have.

    Before anyone mods that as flamebait or troll, let me remind you that the vast majority of people can't build a stable windows install by themselves, either. I know of what I speak, I've been doing that (+ tutoring + teaching + service & repair) for more than half a decade.

    As an example with windows installs, a new (non OEM) motherboard/setup nearly always requires

    1) fdisk and format the HD
    2) run the windows installer (if you don't have a bootable CD, as in
    windows 98 installs, then you have to do it from floppy.
    3) After windows install, load MB drivers, Vid, Sound, Modem, and
    any other drivers, and configure things such as your network connection.
    4) Update the windows installation and deal with old/non-funct. WDM drivers and update other drivers as neccessary. (yes, that requires an internet connection.)
    5) Windows updates. Not always necessary, but sometimes are, and often can break your system - MS Win Update is not perfect, either.
    6) Software Installation and the associated problems;
    7) Fixing the odds and ends problems such as unstable drivers, software conflicts, and tweaking the system to fit your needs.

    If you feel confident and do accomplish that, then congrats! You are a beginning Windows Geek. Now: Repeat for linux( Minus most of the above, if you get a good distrib like Mandrake or Redhat). Then, repeat for the next system you do....with different circumstances to deal with.

    For those of you who buy OEM systems, if you have a stable system, great. You got lucky. Most people don't get lucky that way. I've lost count of the systems I've fixed/repaired/troubleshot for people who bought some piece of crap from Walm^^^whomever that doesn't work right, for various reasons (and often they come to us Geeks because they either have to pay for tech support from their OEM or they got frustrated dealing with min wage techs who don't know what they're doing)

    So my point is, where is Linux any different than windows as regards installation? Except, of course, that I can install Mandrake on most generic systems and it recognizes nearly all devices, installs and configures them properly; the hardest thing to learn is setting up the network and deciding what DE to use)

    There is not now, and probably never will be, an OS that installs without at least some Knowledge Required from the installer, whether a average user or a Geek. This also applies to a great degree to software installation on a preloaded OEM system. It's going to apply even more as computers get faster and more complicated. The analogy to new cars is hard to avoid - but applies just as much, there are a lot fewer backyard mechanics then there used to be.

    Then there is always the first and foremost important thing to do: Do Your Research On What You Are Buying and The People You Are Buying It From. I cannot stress this enough! You are not buying a VCR - you are buying a very complex piece of hardware that is going to, now or later, require you to Learn Something. One of the most important things to look for is local tech support - to save you the telephone time and save shipping your system back to some OEM who will not transfer your data nor set up your internet config for your or customize your system to your liking.

    Also, remember something: We are Human Beings Also, and can get just as frustrated with stubborn stiff necked users as the users can get frustrated with clueless techs (and there are plenty of those out there). Have some patience. Rome was not built in a day, either.

    An example of my day today ( a slow but typical day): Today I dealt with 2 Klez virus repairs, a user who had a newsletter crashing Netscape 4.x, a really odd problem with ghosting an installation that was ultimately determined as being caused by a weird difference ? between the old MS fdisk and the new version that is supposed to deal properly with 80GB+ HDs, two people who after several years still have not learned how to cut&paste, and someone who screwed his mobo down to the case plate with no standoffs ( and blew it up), plus the odd and end calls. Just....another day.

    My personal feeling with what you encountered: No offense, but most of the problems you encountered were caused by a lack of knowledge about what you were doing. Next time, find some help. You wouldn't try to tear apart and fix your own car without some help, now, would you? (unless, of course, you are a experienced mechanic - and I'll say without modesty that I learned to do that for myself 20 years ago when I was in High School, but the, I'm an unusual type of person...masochistic, some say)
    Swallow your pride and ASK someone for help!

    SB

    --
    It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  62. Mess with their stats! by shuane · · Score: 5, Funny
    Here's what the users should do:
    • Pause during ads, rewind over a particularly annoying one and run it through several times.
    • Record programmes and then do not watch them.
    • Record programmes and watch them entirely in fast-forward.
    • Record infomercials and leave them running while you go out.
    • Generally do anything you can to skew the statistics (people seem to really like infomercials, perhaps we here at OmniCorp should bring out an infomercial-only channel?)
    --
    This signature intentionally has just seven words.
    1. Re:Mess with their stats! by weinerdog · · Score: 1

      Please, the last thing we need is more all-infomercial networks.

      It seems to me that people really do watch infomercials. They used to be confined to late night TV and limited to a few standard scams, but they're now creeping into mainstream broadcasting. We have the Shopping Channel in Canada (I think QVC is the US equivalent) which is an all-infomercial channel. Specialty channels with no original programming and short schedules, like A&E and TLC, now run infomercials during the morning. On weekend mornings, every network seems to run them. Some of those DIY home rennovation shows are now fundamentally nothing more than infomercials for Home Depot and whichever tool company sponsors the show. It's not too hard to envision a future where the primary purpose of all TV is product promotion and the distinction between advertisement and show will have been erased.

      Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go back to my job of placing tiny classified ads for misleading 900 services in newspapers, at least until my $19.95 (+S&H) plastic egg-microwaving cup arrives so I can have a healthy delicious breakfast. Then I'm going to paint my house with my $70 (+S&H) paint roller and prepare a healthy dinner of sliced tomatoes and aluminum cans using my $19.95 (+S&H) Ginsu knife that looks a lot like the $4.95 crappy knives in the kitchen gadget section of my grocery store.

      --
      There's no such thing as Scotchtoberfest!
    2. Re:Mess with their stats! by shuane · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that people really do watch infomercials.

      I agree, here in New Zealand we have a similar proliferation of infomerical programming. It must make someone money because it's only increased in frequency over time! Hell, people have become famous here, just because they had an especially noticeable (read: annoying) set of infomercials.

      It's not too hard to envision a future where the primary purpose of all TV is product promotion and the distinction between advertisement and show will have been erased.

      I shudder to think, it's possible, probable even. ..

      --
      This signature intentionally has just seven words.
  63. Holy wow! by Ace905 · · Score: 1

    Wow, talk about being outraged at SonicBlue. My company was recently denied a TradeMark Application on the name SolidBlue because SonicBlue beat us to the punch in Canada.

    Now they're in the news? Who are these guys? Satan?

    --

    Ace
  64. What a load of old Bollocks my dear by BorgFear · · Score: 0

    By the way, just for the record... if you don't learn Unix sometime during your career, your career will probably be short-lived. What a load of crap ! There are positions for all of us, you fucking tyro. What a completely elitish thing to say.
    BTW - I have been a UX gearhead since before you were probably born, and you are just showing your ignorance by emitting this bullshit

  65. Re:Bad Linux Expierence by NanoGator · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "I don't think anyone who knows even a bit about what their talking about can seriously say that linux is anywhere remotely close to windows plug and play.."

    I'm glad somebody else said this. Every time I say it I get modded down. Believe it or not, there are things that MS does right. If some people were to look at what MS is doing right and get Linux doing it just as well, then you'll find that Linux is a much stronger Windows contender. \

    There's a lot more value to having your computer 'just plain work' than most of the Linux zealots out there realize. Make Linux as easy as Windows for installing drivers and troubleshooting problems, and I just may switch to it.

    *realizes this will get modded down, but damn I feel better letting that out.*

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  66. And So It Begins... by ewhac · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Consider: A US Federal Court -- not some backwater municipal or state court -- has just ordered a wholesale invasion of citizens' privacy and personal information without a search warrant.

    Consider further: This action was ordered, not in the name of "National Security" or "Anti-Terrorist Investigation", not on behalf of the government at all, but on behalf of a monsterously wealthy corporation bleating about "theft" and illusory "lost profits".

    It has begun. The last bulwark against tyranny has been swept aside by a sitting Federal Magistrate without the slightest qualm.

    Ladies and Gentlemen, I offer the following admittedly foolish, idealisic counsel:

    Close your wallets.

    Buy nothing.

    See no movies. Rent no videos. Buy no music CDs. Purchase no computer software that isn't Open Source/Free Software (remember, the BSA members are in on this, too).

    "But what do I do for entertainment?" Easy. Fire up your Web browser and/or go to your local government building and start digging for incriminating dirt on every elected official you can find. Once you find it, publish it. Read the dirt other people have dug up. Learn as much as you can. Discovering incriminating secrets about other people is endlessly entertaining, especially with that whole "betrayal of the public trust" angle going for it.

    And once you've learned everything you possibly can about the people ostensibly representing you... VOTE!

    Too many Attorneys General simply refuse to bring malfeasance charges, so relying on criminal prosecution to delete these people won't be very effective. Get out there this upcoming November and vote the bastards out. They are your employees. They are betraying you and selling you out. They are embezzling your earnings and selling your personal secrets to the highest bidder. Fire them. Hurl them out the door so fast that you can see a redshift on their ass.

    Apathy about our government is a luxury we can no longer afford. We will only have one or two more shots at this before the courts decide that EULAs really are binding, that your property isn't really yours, that the monopoly of copyright trumps Freedom of Speech (q.v. Keith Henson) and Freedom from Unreasonable Search and Seizure (this case). At that point, we all become serfs, and, "Your papers, please," will become a phrase heard all too often in our places of work and our homes.

    Schwab

    1. Re:And So It Begins... by Elmar_Stoned_at_Work · · Score: 0

      Fire up your Web browser and/or go to your local government building and start digging for incriminating dirt on every elected official you can find.

      Or hell, just pick up a newspaper, there's plenty of incriminating evidence against public officials if you just pay attention to what's going on and think for yourself.

      Get out there this upcoming November and vote the bastards out.

      Couldn't have said it better.

      --
      -elmar-
    2. Re:And So It Begins... by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ... and start digging for incriminating dirt on every elected official you can find.

      Shouldn't you be digging up dirt on corporate executives? Lots of people have done things they aren't proud of, and some of it is probably prosecutable. Getting some VPs convicted under 3-strike drug laws could be lots of fun.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    3. Re:And So It Begins... by ethereal · · Score: 1

      Hell, those crimes just make them eligible for high office in the U.S. :)

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

    4. Re:And So It Begins... by stripes · · Score: 2
      Consider: A US Federal Court -- not some backwater municipal or state court -- has just ordered a wholesale invasion of citizens' privacy and personal information without a search warrant.

      Ummmm, wouldn't the court order be the search warrant?

      (yes, I do think it is a crappy order, but...)

    5. Re:And So It Begins... by Dimensio · · Score: 1

      Not to mention checking to see if they've been making any unsual money transfers to US Federal Magistrates.

      I can't think of any other explanation for this idiocy.

    6. Re:And So It Begins... by nerdsv650 · · Score: 1
      You write: vote the bastards out.

      You forget perhaps that there is no mechanism to do this? We can only vote someone IN. Your approach conveniently leaves no space to discover someone good. You can not build a system upon negativism, that is what Hollywood is trying to do and it won't work. Funnel some of that energy into positive action.

      -michael

  67. Re:Entertainment industry has reached critical mas by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2


    It's funny that some want government regulations (RIAA, MPAA to name a few) and others don't (MSFT) AND they're all wrong!


    Actually, the RIAA (and likely MPAA) both want and don't want government regulations depending on the situation.


    Hilary Rosen of the RIAA has received awards for her fight against censorship and Government intervention / control over what her member companies can sell. Obviously, this interferes with the revenue stream and can not be allowed.


    At the same time, Rosen is a champion of new law and court intervention concerning content found on the Internet. If it circumvents the revenue stream then it can not be allowed.


    Sure, its not shocking. But I still find it an interesting observation.

  68. Just one word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spyware

    The last site that I posted the above regarding Tivo players (I forget which site it was), numerous posts followed, explaining that data was only gathered in aggregate, that you had to examine the privacy policies, that you could opt out, that your privacy wasn't really at risk, etc. Well the truth finally comes out. Using any of these personal recorders invades your privacy, creates the possibility of logging all of your viewing habits/travels, enables creating an extensive profile on you, and ultimately endangers your personal identity, and ability to buy health/life/other insurance and other services. How? By tying it all together, which databases will allow. The government is already buying preference/marketing information in the name of national security. Doubleclick already tried, and has the ability at anytime in the future, of tying together emails, individuals, surfing habits, catalog sales, and other databases.

    The same naysayers who say how great these time shifting recorders are, and that they aren't spyware, are the same type of individuals who still say there is nothing wrong with IBM GXP hard drives because theirs hasn't failed yet.

    WAKE UP.

  69. I have two words to say to EICKIE.... by Newer+Guy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Fuck you!

    1. Re:I have two words to say to EICKIE.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aa Smokey Robinson always says: "I second that Emotion"

  70. Re:Disney needs a boycott/it all needs a boycott by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    don't you see that the problem isn't disney? the problem isn't the music industry..... There are fundamental issues here being persued to insane extremes by money hungry soulless corporations.

    IF THE POPULATION HAS FREEDOM POWERS LOSES THEIR ABILITY TO CONTROL THE POPULATION.

    IF YOU CAN'T CONVINICE JOE AVERAGE THAT HE IS WORTHLESS BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE A SHINY NEW CAR THE WHOLE MODEL FALLS APART.

    CENTRALIZED CONTROLLING POWER STRUCTURES ARE LOSING CONTROL.

    the battle is coming, don't boycott disney, boycott it all! Throw away your TV, spend your time doing what YOU want to do and what YOU want to think about in any way that YOU can.

    YOU have the power and create your own realities. Imagine what the world would be like if everyone realized this.

  71. Who is going to pay for the development? by jriskin · · Score: 1

    My question is, if this isn't a capability of the existing system, how can the courts order a company to develop specific software for spying on the users?

    What if being rushed through development it turns out buggy? Who pays for the QA? How long of a development schedule does this version get?

    Besides the 100 reasons why I think this is all wrong.

    Since when did courts start doing software? If I we're them and they get forced to do this, I would make the courts pay for it!

    1. Re:Who is going to pay for the development? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The company is being forced to develop software? Let's see now.....by court order you are being forced to cure cancer, go from NY to London in 5 minutes, etc?? Don't see how a court can enforce an order to "create" something......unless one quibble with how successful the creation really is.

    2. Re:Who is going to pay for the development? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's see now...the company is being ordered to create technology? Can this work---will a judge now order someone to cure cancer, fly from NY to London in 5 minutes, etc? Don't see how a court an enforce such a "create" order unless it doesn't really consider how "good" the end product turns out to be

    3. Re:Who is going to pay for the development? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the company is being ordered to "create" software. Let's see now----can a judge order someone to find a cure for cancer, fly to London from NY in 5 minutes, etc?? Can't see how such an order could be enforced---as there is never a guarantee of results when dealing w/creative efforts

  72. This needs more than just a boycott by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could you post home addresses, or names of schools where their children (or grand children) go to school? Such info might be much more useful than just the bare names.

  73. Ha Ha Ha, fools! by Alcimedes · · Score: 4, Informative

    you think that advertisers are going to let you get around watching commercials by just skipping through them? you think that they haven't thought of all of your ways to skip them already?

    there are new methods in place already to take care of this, and have been going on for years.

    images are placed, products are placed, entire scripts are rewritten to take products into account. it's integrated advertising, and it's where television is going.

    you won't be able to watch your tv show w/o getting force fed advertising. now the smart companies will do this so that you don't hate them. but how many you think are going to be smart about it?

    lol, i majored in marketing, they are well aware of the limitations of commercials in today's tech society, and are already well on the way to fixing the problem.

    one little example. remember sienfeld? those boxes of cereal in his apt. were digitally changed based on the market and who paid the shelf space, and that was years ago. they're better at it now, and you never notice 90% of the time unless you've been trained to watch for it.

    and for those saying that they've never bought a single thing due to advertising, you're flat out wrong. you may not realize it, but advertising has measurable, consistant effects on sales in markets. if nothing else it will make you aware of a product that you wouldn't have known about otherwise.

    -alcimedes

    1. Re:Ha Ha Ha, fools! by Xader+Vartec · · Score: 1

      This commment should not be underrated. I have personally become more aware of this affect on me in the last couple of years.

      Example 1: I have noticed that after seeing a commercial for a fast food product a few times I start to crave the product. The first few times I see it I don't think anything of it. But after seeing it a while I think to myself "Hm, I think I'll try that".

      Example 2: I have been in a store buying a product I have never really bought before (or don't buy on a regular basis). After looking at the choices I have become aware that I desire the choice that I am familiar with. How do I become familiar with one product over another without ever really using the product? I realize that I have seen it on T.V. I thought process is "well, the have the money to advertise so I hope the have to money to develop a good product".

      It is only after trying different products that I might figure out that a brand not advertised is better. And if I don't really have the regular need of the product to try it guess who won that "customer battle" for me. . . the advertiser.

      It's funny. I remember when T.V. shows weren't allowed to show brand names. I guess they changed that because I noticed (I think Seinfield was the first time I noticed) that brands were "back". I thought they had product placement in T.V. way back and then removed it?

  74. I'm game by tester13 · · Score: 2

    Ok the disclaimer is that I watch about 2 hours of T.V. a week (at a friends house).

    Hey man, I would be more then willing to pay for what I watch. I frankly would love the oppotunity!

    I wonder what the networks would feel that my contribution would be to offset adverts?

    Anyone know, because I would pay it if reasonable.

  75. All responders HBT. YHL. HAND. Fucking idiots. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fucking mods on crack, too. Doesn't anyone understand what a troll is? That's why people have such a field day on this fucking site. Retarded people that get trolled way to easily by any obvious anti-linux troll. People don't even know what trolling means anymore! They think it's page-widening or crapflooding or just saying dumb shit...Trolling is an art, and most of the people here are too dumb to understand it. Fucking network-monkey IT majors who have never written real, decent code (perl and VB don't count, both are lame)!

  76. Hahahah....that ^H antic is hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keep it up; me and my Linux friends are thinking you're really fucking lame^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H ^H^H^H^H^H^Hlaughing it up over here. Heh heh.

  77. Nice that they warned us,,, by pyrote · · Score: 1

    so until this blows over, everyone watch the commercials and fast forward through the shows.

    That'll give em some data to munch over :)

    --
    THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
  78. WTF? by Big+Nothing · · Score: 0

    WTF?

    --
    SIG: TAKE OFF EVERY 'CAPTAIN'!!
  79. But it is able to by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 2

    Otherwise the court order would be pointless.

    1. Re:But it is able to by SEE · · Score: 2

      The device has a general-purpose microprocessor, data storage, and a network connection; therefore software can be written for it that collects data about its use and sends it in. Equivalent software not only could, but has been invented for coroporations to monitor use of their PCs, even though those PCs were not ever specifically designed to collect and send in such data.

  80. Shoot them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Judges like that should be shot. As well as the lawyers.

  81. It just keeps getting better. by mesozoic · · Score: 1

    So now companies are responsible not only for making sure their products don't violate copyright or patent laws, but for making sure their users don't as well. Everything gets so much easier when the burden of proof is placed on the accused.

    When this all wraps up (probably more than a decade from now) I see one of two possible outcomes.

    1) We will be transformed into an amazingly media-rich society, powered by the Internet. Artists will no longer need record companies for publicity; they'll sell out their concerts just by putting their music online for free. Broadcasters won't be able to make billions by simply selling the same damn product to every person in the country; in order to turn a profit, they'll have to come up with services that can be individually tuned to fit their customers' needs. (God forbid an aging industry should have to change its business model to remain profitable; that's just not the American way!)

    ...or, 2) The American judicial system will become a puppet for the disproportionately wealthy entertainment sector, making every other industry in the country accountable for enforcing copyright law (except for the copyright holders--why should they do any work, right?). America will cease to be the driving force in technological development, and hordes of companies and individuals will leave the country for someplace a bit more level-headed. (I know I will.)

    Place your bets, people.

    1. Re:It just keeps getting better. by blinx_ · · Score: 1

      ..or, 3) While America heads for it's doom - other countries will follow it blindly cos what America does we must do too.. (I know my country will) and there will be no where to go. Here in Denmark we already have taxes on blank cdr media the various organizations for "protection" of the artist are pushing for taxes on other medias like compact flash cards and harddrives because those can also be used for piracy. Your rotten companies and organizations are just a step ahead, but ours are surely getting there..

      --
      Resistance is not futile - www.gnu.org
    2. Re:It just keeps getting better. by green1 · · Score: 1

      The way I see things up here in Canada we tend to follow the states blindly in this regard (we even "lead the way" by implementing tariffs on all blank media assuming all people guilty untill proven guilty (no, innocent doesn't factor in to it anymore))
      so given your two options I think we will eventually get to number 1... the main problem is that we'll have to go through a long period of number 2 to get there...
      I don't think that people en-masse will let us be that oppressed (look at history, oppressed people tend to revolt) the problem is that the general public won't see themselves as oppressed for a long time to come. Things will have to get a lot worse before the general public gets upset enough to do something about it. And it certainly will be messy when they do...

  82. Business model protection... by scd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So it would appear that we again have a case of a company believing that they have a legal right to preserve their business model in perpetuity.

    This is, of course, the same thing that the RIAA thinks: they've made lots of money in a certain fashion, therefore they are OBVIOUSLY entitled to the continued existence of that revenue stream.

    Pure rubbish.

  83. On another thrend: Judge found guilty... by Kindaian · · Score: 1

    Central District Court Magistrate Charles F. Eick, You are found guilty of privacy infringement and contributory aid to privacy infringement.

  84. This is indeed very simple. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Let's talk to our friends at ReplayTV. I can do a random access/programming/adskipping log generator for them. They will run it in their machines as a daemon and it will generate data as the real surveillance would, but inside some predetermined parameters. Easy, ain't it? It's the same as doing a Carnivore jammer... set up 2 machines in generating HUGE amounts of artificial network traffic, eliza-style ;) I've seeing it done in ISPs to "beef up" log analysis, and once in a private company to justify firing a guy. Hehehe. Is this wicked or what?

  85. Re:Great Idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NO JAM!

  86. PARENT IS A TROLL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Geez people, read the Slashdot Trolling Guide. This is a pathetic troll. Too obvious. It follows the trolling guide step by step.

    Or tries to anyway. If it had succeeded, it could actually have been less obvious.

  87. That's how it's done in Germany! by jeti · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In Germany and other European countries, you pay extra for every CDR blank and similar 'taxes' on CDRW drives, PCs and HDDs are in the discussion.The money is distributed among the labels according to market share. The same system (different institution) is applied to printers and copiers.

    For the money I pay, I'm granted rights of fair use. I can make personal copies and I'm even allowed to share with personal friends. You can also use text excerpts for educational purposes.

    Oh - and it looks like we are also getting some DMCA-like laws that make it illegal to circumvent copy protection. Even if we're explicitly charged for the right to copy the content.

  88. Re:Its Just wrong...yes it isand shameful too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    its becomming more and more
    impossible not to give out your personal information, and if you really are upset go read this article... you will get even more upset... with good reason...

    http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=30042002-113 90 1-6626r

  89. Because they can? by Craig+Maloney · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is crap. Nobody in their right mind would ask VCR users to report back how many commercials were skipped, yet Sonic Blue is expected to comply with this from a judge. I'm not a PVR user, but I'm outraged at the sheer lack of respect this judge is demonstrating. I'm sure these numbers will be aggregate numbers, but honestly I think the judge should be given one of these and have his entire viewing habits made public record, including his thieving ways of fast forwarding through commercials.

  90. Fishing for a Neilson replacement by Big+Jojo · · Score: 2

    I seem to recall more than one failed "dot-com" business model that was set up to spy on users in this way ... emphasis on failed. Neilson (et al) can't give that kind of information, this is a marketeer's wet dream.

    If the entertainment industry can get someone else to spend a small (or larger) dot-com sized fortune collecting this information, from an unwilling set of customers to be sure ... it's no wonder they're trying to do so.

    That's what's really going on here: not just a massive invasion of privacy, unjustified by even a (so-called) PATRIOT act level terrorist threat. Not just trying to scare customers away from PVR vendors on a wholesale basis, while undermining the future growth of the market.

    But also finding someone else to pay for a level of market information collection that would otherwise be impossible to collect, since the financials don't pass a first level smell test and customers would never willingly commit to that level of surveillance.

    1. Re:Fishing for a Neilson replacement by Mr.Sharpy · · Score: 1

      I seem to recall that Neilson has some patents or IP that they use hedge out any competition with legal action. Now that I think about it, I wonder what one is to do if you are bound by a court order to violate someone elses IP. Are you personally liable for the violation? And if you are not, since the no one can sue the court, does the IP holder simply have to eat any loss of revenue?

  91. very little tv by BlueboyX · · Score: 2

    More and more I am waiting until a series comes out on dvd (or HK vcd) and buy the whole series. A HK vcd set for a whole season is usually $25. No commercials. Or, if it is something I really want I get a dvd set (legit + better quality;costs a ton though). Either way, I am not getting brainwashed by commercials anymore.

    --
    "Never, never suspect the dreams within the dreams of dreaming children." ~The Amazon Quartet
  92. WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You are hereby ordered to gather incriminating evidence that can be used to prosecute you?" How can this be legal?

  93. Get your own lawyer! by stinkydog · · Score: 2

    Owners of Replay need their own lawyer!

    File for an injunction based on the Cable Act of '84. IANAL but could you not get someone that is to draft a 'form' injunction request(Call in the EFF?)? Send a few thousand of these to the magistrate to bolster SB case. Call it a legal DDoS. At worst you should be able to win the ability to opt-out and at best you will stop the whole deal.

    SD
    Don't wait to get screwed, fight back!

    --
    âoeWho knew something as harmless as willful ignorance could end up having real consequences?â
  94. Couple Sites for Replay 4000 hacking by Reylas · · Score: 1

    Here are a couple of sites that I use to keep up with the hacking scene for a Replay 4040. These sites are about using your Computer to download the content from the Replay. I wonder if SonicBlue can track what you are taking off?
    AvsForums (Great site in general)
    PlanetReplay
    It really makes a 4000 series worth the money. Using the Ethernet port, you can make a computer emulate a Replay Server.

    marks

  95. Call for a 2 month cable subscription blackout by ScrewTivo · · Score: 1

    Cancel your cable subscription for 2 months and tell them it is because of the sonic blue trial.

    That'll wake them up!

  96. a little more by BlueboyX · · Score: 2

    Maybe I better elaborate on that a little bit. I am not the Super Piracy King. My collection of 'real' vhs and DVDs is unreasonably large.Most won't tv shows come out on DVD ever (or hd vcds, for ebay nuts who would want to buy from them) but there is alot of stuff out on vhs. Once you watch a tv series on vhs/dvd you won't appreciate watching live cable so much. My point is that there are alternatives to watching cable associated commercials.

    --
    "Never, never suspect the dreams within the dreams of dreaming children." ~The Amazon Quartet
  97. I guess you're all thieves... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... just becouse it is happened to you to live in such time. (i _didn't_ said in 'such country') I think that time will set all things up to proper places... Just don't wait staying aside (yes, maybe you'll life will be longer then, but will it be happier/meaningfull? i have some doubt).

    nothing personal

    p.s. forgive bad english, i'am not a native speaker

  98. Boycott..... or just buy a TiVo? by Ride-My-Rocket · · Score: 1

    Isn't it as simple as buying a TiVo instead of a ReplayTV unit? Granted, it's not the company's fault that it now has to invade its users' privacy, but that's moot -- the fact is that users' privacy will be knowingly violated going forward. Or am I missing something?

  99. SonicBlue can now counter-sue by petard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They now have real damages to countersue for. I was going to buy one of the units (they really look cool) but now refuse to. I will not submit to this sort of monitoring. Period. They lost my sale. Am I alone? I am sending a message to this effect to privacy@replaytv.com, informing them of this and suggesting the countersuit. Maybe if they get more reports of real damages, a counter-suit will be filed.

    --
    .sig: file not found
    1. Re:SonicBlue can now counter-sue by jerrytcow · · Score: 1

      Don't feel too bad for sonicblue, I would guess that their complete lack of customer support is more damaging than this will be. They have an unsatisfactory rating with the Better Business Bureau for a pattern of non-response to consumer complaints. This is the lowest rating the BBB give. For well over a year on various online forums I have read countless complaints about the company, and would never buy anything from them.

    2. Re:SonicBlue can now counter-sue by evilmrhenry · · Score: 1

      I was going to buy one also, but all TV sucked, removing any desire.

  100. Interesting Implication For Privacy Agreements by dcollins · · Score: 1
    From the article:

    A Disney spokeswoman accused SonicBlue of a ``deliberate and completely misleading'' characterization of the court's order. The studios and networks are merely seeking access to the same kind of anonymous data that SonicBlue's privacy policy says it is entitled to collect about its users, she said.


    This may be the first, excellent counterexample to the the standard policy of writing a company's EULA or privacy agreement such that, by default, it reserves every theoretical (even if currently unused) right the lawyers can think of to the company -- just to be safe.

    As this case shows, you may actually be forced through a court action to mandatorily perform all of those reserved rights; apparently it can serve as evidence that you've asserted you can technologically accomplish something, even if you never expected to. Watch out, legal staff...

    --
    We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
  101. Doesn't this violate existing privacy laws? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shouldn't the users be given the opportunity to opt-out?

  102. They have to develop and deploy new software too! by dmmjr · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's part of the actual order. On April 26, Judge Charles Eick of the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, gave SonicBLUE 60 days to:

    (1) take the steps necessary to use their broadband connections with ReplayTV 4000 customers to gather all available information about how users of the ReplayTV employ the devices, including all available information about what works are copied, stored, viewed with commercials omitted, or distributed to third parties with the ReplayTV 4000, when each of those events took place, and the like;
    (2) implement Defendants' offer to collect available data from a second source -- the MyReplayTV.com web site -- about how users of the ReplayTV employ the devices, but for all time periods for which that data can be collected, rather than just for a short period;
    (3) provide the foregoing data to Plaintiffs in a readily-understandable electronic format and provide any technical assistance that may be necessary for Plaintiffs to review the data;
    (4) provide Plaintiffs with all documents about Defendants' consideration of what data to gather or not to gather about their customers' uses of the ReplayTV 4000; and
    (5) provide Plaintiffs with any other documents (such as emails or logs) reflecting what works have been copied with the ReplayTV 4000 and how those works have been stored, viewed, or distributed.

    Now who gets all of this data? The plaintiffs in the case against SonicBLUE (the makers of the ReplayTV 4000). Roughly, Time Warner, HBO, Warner Brothers, TBS, New Line Cinema, Castle Rock Entertainment, WB TV, MGM Studios, Orion Pictures, 20th Century Fox, Universal City Studios, Fox Broadcasting, Paramount Pictures, Disney, NBC, Showtime, United Paramount Network, ABC, Viacom, CBS, Columbia Pictures, Columbia TV, and Tristar. The plaintiffs are also ordered to pay 3/4 of the cost of gathering the data.

    Come on. Our courts have no business ordering a company to spy on its own customers just because big media wants to put the company out of business. We at the Privacy Foundation saw a lot of consumer outrage after we released our report about TiVo's privacy disclosure and practices. TiVo did a pretty good job of responding to the situation; they spent a lot of time with the press, and they wrote a white paper explaining what had happened. (We still have some gripes about their system, but that's another story.) The point is that companies are very sensitive about tweaking their customers' privacy, because they know customers don't have much patience for it. So when the court orders a company to spy on their customers, it's basically a punitive act. The customers will revolt and get mad at everyone. I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty sure the discovery of evidence phase of a lawsuit isn't supposed to be punitive.

    In this case it's worse than just a privacy squabble. Either the court doesn't understand or the court doesn't believe ReplayTV's repeated explanation that they simply don't have the information demanded by this order. See, in April 2001 some months after our TiVo report came out, I showed a ReplayTV exec my traces that proved that their current model also collected some type of viewing information. This scared them, and in May 2001 - before the ReplayTV 4000 existed - they disabled the collection function, since they had never used the data for anything. This is what they told me, and this is what they've sworn to the court in testimony.

    Now the ReplayTV 4000 is a different product than the one I investigated, and ReplayTV has said that they never reenabled the old tracking code, nor did they update it to make it monitor the newer features - like automatically skipping commercials and sending recordings to other ReplayTV 4000 units. But that's precisely the type of data that the plaintiffs are demanding to see in this case!

    So what we have is a court ordering SonicBLUE to prepare a new software release that implements new spying features, and then ordering them to force it upon all of their customers, out of fairness to Big Media in their case against them. Considering that SonicBLUE has probably updated their customers' software only a few times ever, this is like ordering Microsoft to create, distribute, and maintain a new version of Outlook that checks to see if any of its users are sending MP3s as attachments!

    I guess this is a sneak preview of the type of consumer broadband "protection" we can look forward to in the very near future.

    What happens next: SonicBLUE is planning to file papers with the overseeing judge in U.S. District court objecting to this order. If that doesn't go their way, then I guess they'll be working on a new software release.

    David Martin
    http://www.cs.bu.edu/~dm

  103. Replay owners should sue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the entertainment industry. They spent $600 for something that the EI has made worthless to those that cherish privacy. I wonder if you could win this in small claims court HA HA! That would blow their minds! Sending lawyers to every small town in america! Now that would be entertainment!

  104. my solution by gimpboy · · Score: 2

    well, when i got my card for the giant eagle, they sent me a card and two of those keychain things. one day i was in line and the person in front of me asked me if they could borrow my card since they lost theirs (we get a discount when we use cards). i pulled out one of the keychain ones and said sure, keep it.

    so no they are tracking the speding habits of a 23 year-old white guy and a middle aged black woman.

    --
    -- john
  105. I've voted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I pulled the plug on my TIVO last year.

    1. Re:I've voted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ooh, I'm sure you've got 'em quaking in their boots....you've actually done exactly what the entertainment industry wanted you to do.

  106. We could still be riding in horse buggies by sdo1 · · Score: 2

    It's a good thing that the manufacturers of horse-drawn carriages were unable to sue automobile makers out of existince. This "horseless carriage" completely messed up their business model, didn't it? And damn it, they have a RIGHT to keep making money even when something better comes along! "Judge! You have to watch Ford, and Olds, and Benz! Their plan is evil and YOU CAN'T LET THEM MESS WITH OUR PROFITS!"

    No, not quite.

    Look, this whole thing is pissing me off to no end. I pay for satellite TV. What I do with those TV signals once their decoded IN MY OWN HOUSE is my own damn business. If I want to capture every frame on my computer, print them out, and piss on them... I can do that. If I want to put them on video tape, toss the tapes into a bonfire, and dance around it chanting anti-Disney phrases, fine. Skip commercials? Fine. Watch commercials again and again. Fine.

    How are the capabilities of a ReplayTV unit at all different from what I can do with a VCR, a video tape, and the US Mail? What are they going to do? Sue VCR makers out of existance? Oh wait, they already tried that!

    -S

    --
    --- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
    1. Re:We could still be riding in horse buggies by MikeBabcock · · Score: 2

      What really makes me laugh is how many people would come up to me (and I've done it too) to say "have you seen the new xyz ad? Its amazing" and we'd go check it out on adcritic (before it disappeared). There are ads that are _good_ ... and people enjoy them. I've fast forwarded through stuff then gone back to see it because it looked interesting.

      If consumers don't like the ads, the ads aren't working.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
  107. Search Warrants? by IMWakko · · Score: 1

    In essence they (Disney again) are claiming that EVERYBODY that owns a ReplayTV device is using it for illegal activities. Guilty until proven innocent.
    This sounds like something that should require a search warrant.
    You can't just invade people's privacy like this. Cops need a search warrant to invade the privacy of a murderers or rapists home. I guess the real criminals have all the rights (after all, they're the ones that make the laws, so of course they'll protect themselves).

    If I were a software engineer for SonicBlue and ordered to write this software, I'd either quit, or write a backdoor (ie a way to NOT have your choices tracked) and tell my friends and family about it.

    How can they tell if you click the commercial skip button that you're really skipping a commercial?
    I guess it's more for the "sending what you recorded to another box" feature. What if you're forwarding it to your box in the bedroom where you don't have cable? I see no problem with that. It's like taking a VHS tape from one room to another.

    1. Re:Search Warrants? by porges · · Score: 1

      In essence they (Disney again) are claiming that EVERYBODY that owns a ReplayTV device is using it for illegal activities. Guilty until proven innocent.
      This sounds like something that should require a search warrant.


      No. They're claiming that they have the right to find out if Replay users are using it for illegal activities, given that sharing of programs under copywright is the expected use of the feature.

  108. Send to another Replay = Space shifting by alexhmit01 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have a Panasonic branded Replay 2000. I'm really intrigued by Tivo Series2 and Replay 4x00, but I can't justify jumping to this generation, I'll upgrade in generation 3.

    Now, one of the problems with the Replay and Tivo is that while you can conveniently time shift with them (great to not miss shows and have them waitting for me when I get home at ~9:30 PM), you can't conveniently space shift. When I move out of my dinky apartment and into a large apartment or small hour, I'll have more than one television. I then have the choice of building an advanced audio/video distribution system (which are VERY cool, BTW, but don't exist for DTV/HDTV and DD/DTS signals, just NTSC/Stereo), or placing a Replay/Tivo in every room.

    Being able to send from one ReplayTV to another in the house is a useful feature. It's part of an attempt to also sell multiple ReplayTVs to people. My understanding was that the shows could be sent over the LAN or Internet. LAN would be quick, a few minutes to grab the show, Internet would take a while.

    Sometimes my friends miss shows that I want. Sometimes my IR blaster fails to change the channel and grab the show. I'd love to be able to have someone send it to me so I can watch it.

    Ironically, with ReplayTV, I don't spend commercial breaks in the kitchen getting more food. It's probably helped me lose 2-3 lbs., reduce my television watching, and increase my commercial viewing. Sure I only watch really well done and funny commercials, but I used to watch no commercials.

    For any industry people watching, grabbing the last advertisements on action shows/movies may help. I got yelled at by the fiancee for over skipping and seeing the resolution of a cliff hanger then going back that we usually end up watching 1-2 commercials to avoid it.

    Alex

  109. Time for the homebrew DVR kit? by Jason0x21 · · Score: 1

    So what about a company that sells DVRs that don't talk over the internet or collect information? Maybe. It's sounding like the because SonicBlue simply makes these things, they can be forced to monitor them against their users wishes.

    What sort of company could one form that would be immune to such a request? Selling kits with a little software? Selling the hardware only? The software only?

    1. Re:Time for the homebrew DVR kit? by gimpboy · · Score: 1

      sounds like something the dave/dina project would be capabable of in the end.

      it's currently in the pre-alpha phase at sourceforge, but perhaps stuff like the main story will encourage people to contribute and get things going.

      There is also DVR which is a bit more simple and to the point.

      perhaps elements of these two projects (dave/dina's interface, and dvr's recording/streaming abilities) could be combined to make a linux dist for set top dvr boxes.

      then someone could put together some specs for desigining an enclosuer then tida!

      the point is that the necessary tools are here, we just need some people with the time and energy to put it together. i would we more than willing to work on the hardware side.

      --
      -- john
  110. Thats what they want you to do... by derrickh · · Score: 2

    But that's what they WANT you to do. Tivo(as great as it is) is in bed with a number of entertainment companies.(NBC and TW/AOL for example) This entire situation was created to kill Replay TV so the entertainment industry's golden child(Tivo) would have a clear path to victory.

    D

  111. other word for 'steal' by konijn · · Score: 1
    From the article:

    Attorneys for the studios say they need this information to determine the extent to which the ReplayTV 4000 allows consumers to steal copyrighted movies and television shows.

    As a lot of people have already pointed out 'stealing' copyrighted material (e.g. a movie in digital form) is not the same as 'stealing' a physical object (e.g. a bike). The former bike owner has lost his bike, the movie owner still has his copy of the movie.

    It occurs to me it might be a good idea to introduce a new word other than 'steal' to emphasize this difference.

    1. Re:other word for 'steal' by mitheral · · Score: 1

      We have a word (two words actually) Copyright Infringement. We just can't get the media companies (who by coincedence have large amounts of IP) to use the term.

  112. We may not like it, but... by jbarr · · Score: 2, Informative
    ...ReplayTV users agreed to it in accepting their privacy policy:
    SONICblue may disclose Personal or Anonymous Information if required to do so by law or in the good faith belief that such action is necessary or appropriate to conform to the law or comply with legal process served on SONICblue, to protect and defend the rights or property of SONICblue, the ReplayTV Service or our viewers, whether or not required to do so by law, or to protect the personal safety of our viewers or the public. SONICblue reserves the right to contact appropriate authorities and disclose Personal or Anonymous Information to them at its discretion when it appears that individuals using our products or services are engaged in activities that are illegal or violate the ReplayTV Service Terms of Service.
    --
    My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
  113. Sadly enough�. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The American people are also somewhat responsible for this....for far too long we, meaning the American citizens, have been more than willing to just bend over and take whatever the government sees fit to thrust upon us. Look at income tax for example there were damn near riots in the streets when it was first instated now we just sigh and become more complacent and take it, we have allowed everyone but ourselves to run our lives while being blind to the fact we weren't really in control...the minority now rules the majority and it just isn't right, seems most of the people in America has lost their desire to truly be free, we've given up our backbone for "comfort and security" and allow everyone else run our lives and it's all for our own good never mind we know everything about you....

    -those who are willing to trade freedom for security deserve neither freedom nor security

  114. Why did SonicBlue by usurper_ii · · Score: 1

    build a box that had the abiltiy to record every single click a user makes...AND everyone that you freaking e-mail??? Ok, the courts were wrong, but SonicBlue should be questioned about its overly zealous logging system. I mean, just because it is possible to log every person who scratches his or her butt during a commercial, doesn't mean you should.

    The box has to send this information back to someone. How hard would it be to filter that infomation out?

    Usurper_ii
    Go that way, really fast. If something gets in your way ... turn.

  115. no right to business model success by cowtamer · · Score: 4, Interesting
    What I find most troubling about these Media Company vs. New Technology cases is that the companies are seeking legal protection for their business model.

    It is patently unfair to sue someone because they make a product that is _too useful_ (such as a PVR, mp3 player, file sharing program, etc.).

    The law is not there to guarantee the viability of a business model. If advertising fails, then use something else (such as product placement), but do not seek to destroy or block technology that gives the users more power. If I were to invent a car that ran on cold fusion, the oil companies would not have a legal case against me, even if I end up destroying their business model.

    Of course, this has not kept companies from trying to save their business model in the past. A good example of this is the "Red Flag" laws that were passed in the 1860s to block the automobile industry:


    As the world leader in steam propulsion during the 1860s, for example, Britain might have expected to pioneer many of the automotive advances that in fact were made on continental Europe and in America over the following decades. But British railroad and stage-coach companies recognized that the automobile was a threat to their future, and lobbied for the notorious red flag laws. These prohibitive laws, which insisted every self-propelled vehicle be preceded by a pedestrian waving a red flag, were on the statute books for 31 years. By the time they were repealed, Britain had missed a huge opportunity.


    (taken from http://www.dana.com/corporate/history/history3.htm . I have nothing to do with the Dana corporation!!!)
  116. Re:Disney needs a boycott - So Does Star Wars by Lonath · · Score: 2

    I keep burning karma writing this, but...

    Boycott Star Wars. There are no other movies where a lack of geek support can make a big difference. If we boycott Star Wars, they might actually notice.

  117. Hmm...obfuscation? by Shoten · · Score: 2

    Idea...how hard might it be to reverse-engineer the format of the data going to SonicBlue, and salt it with all sorts of stuff? Might it be possible to give them enough false data, perhaps even pertaining to multiple users, to make the data useless to those who are demanding it?

    --

    For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
  118. Re:Disney needs a boycott/it all needs a boycott by ethereal · · Score: 1
    YOU have the power and create your own realities. Imagine what the world would be like if everyone realized this.

    P.S. There is no spoon.

    --

    Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

  119. copyright your mouse data! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since you create your mouse coordinate then its your data!

    Sell it :)

  120. Charge MORE?! by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry, but the idea that anyone c/w/should pay more money for television service is preposterous! The only real way that people can get more value from TV is by eliminating the middlemen, and their share of the profits.

    Fundementally, these industries all believe they have something that people want and need. People go out and spend thousands on a "home theater system!" Disposable income aside, WTF?!

    I would love to see a statistical breakdown of (1) distribution of number of hours people watch commercial television, premium television, and pay-per view
    (2) comparison of this data to video/dvd rentals
    (3) distribution of cost of entertainment systems, qty. per household...

    Anybody know where this info is freely available?

  121. Doesn't seem to work . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Buy nothing


    I've been doing this. For well over a year now. I haven't bought any new movies or music for a long, long time. I don't even *have* a TV anymore. I know I'm in the minority, but it doesn't seem to be working. Not that I'm going to give up. My reason for not buying is first and foremost that there is nothing worth buying. I have found better, freer content on the Internet. I just hope that others realize this and wake up. Unfortunately, my experience has shown that this probably will not happen. I've been fighting Microsoft and trying to open people's eyes to their complete lack of regard for their customers for well over a decade now; even now, even when I hold my tongue when I'm tempted to say "I told you so", people still don't get it, or just don't care. I weep for humanity.

  122. Not legal ? by terrymr · · Score: 2

    It seems to me that this order is wrong for at least two reasons :

    A) Discovery in a case is normally limited to parties turning over information to each other that is in their posession - not being ordered to go out and collect new information and then turn it over.

    B) It's already been ruled illegal to spy on your wifes internet surfing habits - yet suddenly the movie industry is allowed to spy on your viewing habits - I don't think so !

    With any luck this ruling will be overturned very soon.

  123. The problem started with Replay and Tivo by Toolman91 · · Score: 1

    I do not own a Replay or a Tivo but I do own MANY VCRS. Everything I watch has been previously recorded. I will never own anything (knowingly) that was designed to spy on me! It has always pissed me off that Replay and Tivo were allowed to build such an invasive and easily exploitable privacy invading device! I have no sympathy for the people who own them and their compromised privacy, they knew what they were buying. I am also not surprised that the entertainment industry has found a way to use this technology against us! I am only surprised it has taken them so long.

    Every day our privacy and rights are being compromised by the rich and powerful corporations who are allowed to buy government protection for their stupid business practices. I am so sick of their attitude; "we made billions before so we are entitled to continue making billions regardless of what is/has happened in the real world"!

    It would be great if somone could come up with a "patch", that could be easily installed, would skew the logging beyond the point of uselessness, and send a message like "encroachment on my privacy strictly forbidden". There is little chance of this I am affraid. There is also little chance of stopping the entertainment industry from dictating the conditions of our surrender. After all they have the money and the (paid for) government on their side. Enjoy your remaing "fair use" while you have it.

    On the bright side, after the entertainment industry has succeeded in hosing all of us (their customers) with all of their restrictions, regulations, hard-wired encryption, etc. etc. we will have more time to read books or go to the park. God knows it will be way to difficult to watch a sitcom or listen to music.

    Just my .02

  124. TiVo already gathers this data by netringer · · Score: 1
    I own two TiVos. TiVo keeps track program information, which they sell to Nielsen for TV ratings and they record every key press on the remote, for useability data.

    They offer TiVo owners the choice to Opt-out of supplying the information if they choose.

    From TiVo's DVR Privacy policy
    The TiVo DVR collects certain types of information from its users, including Anonymous Viewing Information, Diagnostic Information, Commerce Information, and Service Information.
    I'm cool with that. I haven't even chosen to Opt-out. I hope I have some influence on the ratings so we get more decent shows.
    --
    Ever dream you could fly? Get up from the Flight Sim. I Fly
    1. Re:TiVo already gathers this data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You did read the topic, didn't you?

      and you still believe that you can opt out? Or believe the company? Or believe that your data won't be called up at a later date for a court order, or change in privacy policy?

      Do you believe the world is flat?

  125. German TV works like that by BlowCat · · Score: 2

    If you have a TV set and live in Germany, you have to pay a TV tax. This still involves privacy invasion, because the inspectors can come to my house and check if I have a TV.

    1. Re:German TV works like that by frost22 · · Score: 2

      You can politely tell them to go home. They are not entitled to anything.

      --
      ...and here I stand, with all my lore, poor fool, no wiser than before.
  126. Jealousy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...the Electronic Frontier Foundation and others have been saying was going to happen now for some time. Basically, under the guise of copyright laws, courts are going to be put in a position of telling technology companies how to build their products.

    The media industry is just jealous because the government already tells them what they can produce.

  127. Hollings Privacy bill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Especially in regards of the Hollings Privacy bills, they should amend it to include this sort of activity, if it has any real weight.

  128. Can it be appealed? by PW2 · · Score: 1

    There's higher judges? right?

  129. Breaking news? by T-BoneMcG · · Score: 1

    This just in:

    Widespread rioting broke out today as the broadcast industry united in a lawsuit against "the people" charging that, according to a member of the legal team, "the remote control blatantly facilitates the circumvention of our clients' bullshit by the mooks in this country."

    Conpensatory damages are being sought in the amount randomly generated during a late night dart game to represent as accurately as possible, the revenue losses that have accumulated over the past thirty or so years. This came out to just over $4.587219*10^16.

  130. If Hollings has any worth... by geistbear · · Score: 1

    He would include protections, from these kind of orders in his new privacy bill, but considering that Disney wouldn't like that, I doubt it. Seriously people should write their Senators and Congresscritters about including/adding these protections against this kind of privacy invasion in ANY legislation proposed right now.

    Keep them off my computer, tv, and me, thank you very much.

  131. Absolutely Correct - DIY Is The Answer by sulli · · Score: 2

    This is why DIY PVRs will be the best choice. A home-built recorder running on open source (GPL preferred) on one's own PC, with tv listings pulled from a reliable, public source, and with NO spying of any kind, will be the answer. I know there are various projects like that out there on sourceforge etc. - perhaps someone can create a nice component-shaped device to do all this?

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
    1. Re:Absolutely Correct - DIY Is The Answer by Thing+1 · · Score: 2
      This is why DIY PVRs will be the best choice.

      I completely agree.

      I recall that the "TiVo community" has been reluctant to produce software that works around the $10/month charge that subscribers pay.

      I wonder if the "ReplayTV community" is so reluctant to do this in order to avoid the (government-mandated!) spying. SonicBlue recently announced that they'd be moving to a subscription model, but for the existing units it wouldn't cause any loss of revenue.

      For the 4000 series, it's easy (and I think has already been done), since they have a broadband connection.

      But I own a 2020 model (no captions even!), which only connects through the phone line. Considering a solution, I would have to put a phone-line-simulator on it, so it would get a dial tone. Then put a modem on the other side of the simulator. The easy part is then just figuring out the protocol. ;-)

      The only problem with DIY PVRs is the box and the remote. I wonder if it would be possible to look to SonicBlue's suppliers, so we could have a custom-made box and a remote to go with it. Most everything else is standard, inside. Could be marketed as "Convert your old PC into a PVR!" or something like that.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  132. A public service for wannabes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Okay, a quick explanation, since you've apparently seen other people do it, but don't really know what it means:

    The ^H thing means a backspace. So when a Slashdot idiot^H^H^H^H^Huser does that, it's a "sly" way of acting like they edited their post, but you still get to see the edits. Funny!

    Your post reads: "Senator D^H^H^H^H^H Holl^H^H^H^H 's antics", which translates into "Sena 's antics". Not so funny.

    Next time, try this: "Senator Disney^H^H^H^H^H^H Hollings". Man, that's comedy.

    Or better yet, don't just blindly repeat things you've seen in other people's posts unless you know what they mean.

    1. Re:A public service for wannabes by shadowbearer · · Score: 0

      Well, I thought it was obvious.

      senator D (isney deleted) Holl (ings deleted).

      It's not blind repetition, I learned to code long before cut&paste came around and used to know my shortcut keys extremely well.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  133. Perhaps there is a way to block the release? by sulli · · Score: 1

    I'm no Replay hacker but you'd think there could be some way to prevent the release from being loaded.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
  134. Radio TiVo by kindbud · · Score: 2

    I am so used to my TiVo that even when I am in the car listening to the radio, if I hear a part of a news story, or something else that catches my ear, my first thought is to rewind. Only then do I realize that my car radio has no TiVo-like functionality.

    But wouldn't it be cool if it did? Does XM Radio offer this, by chance? It should be rather easy to do with some modest components. Audio takes up far less storage bandwidth than audio+video. A TiVo device for radio ought to be able to buffer 30 minutes of a dozen preset stations, simultaneously, so that you had a pre-recorded buffer no matter which of your presets you switched to at any given moment.

    --
    Edith Keeler Must Die
  135. Re:Disney needs a boycott - So Does Star Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Troll.

    What does Disney have in common with LucasArts? NOTHING!
    What can you expect Disney to do if you boycott an unrelated company? NOTHING!

    How much thought did you put into your post? NONE!

  136. THE argument by obtuse · · Score: 1

    I was thinking this morning of expanding this very thought into an essay. This is the only argument against corporate pillaging of our rights that might sway conservatives.

    Legislating a business model must harm the market, just as other laws that regulate the market do.

    Patents and copyrights exist to encourage innovation, not legislate profits. FCC licensing keeps me off the airwaves to protect them as a public resource, not to ensure that Disney makes money.

    --
    Assembly is the reverse of disassembly.
  137. Re:Disney needs a boycott - So Does Star Wars by chris_mahan · · Score: 1

    Actually, no, that would not hurt them. They are not aiming Star Wars at 10 million geeks. They are aiming Star Wars at 800 million teens worldwide.

    If you want to hurt Disney, bug them. Send Disney nastygrams; Tell your congressman you hate them; make a web page that spells out the greed. Or even better, scavenge their best talents, encourage their competitors, tell the Fast-food operators you don't appreciate their marketing tie-in with Disney, yadda yadda

    --

    "Piter, too, is dead."

  138. Re:They have to develop and deploy new software to by dmmjr · · Score: 1

    By the way, I put up the relevant court document PDFs on my Web page (where I also managed to capitalize SONICblue correctly): http://www.cs.bu.edu/~dm/pubs/replaytv.html

  139. Let's start the WAR! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Time for a real WAR!

    I'm sick of this crap. F the corporations. Let's fight back.

  140. Good idea idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While we are at it why don't we just pay for everything out of taxes? That way the sources of goods and services will have no incentive to serve the public at all, they get paid already.

    It's called communism and it is based on the notion that need in an individual is an asset while ability is a liability. It is a sure way to empower worthless parasites.

  141. Oops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I should have read the entire post before I got pissy.

  142. What's next for VCRs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will they attempt to ban the FF button on my VCR? Probably not the rewind button so you can see that commercial again...

  143. Tivo already tracks every click by JoeBuck · · Score: 2

    A friend of mine who has hacked his Tivo verified that Tivo already does exactly this: every click by the user is sent to Tivo, along with the exact context, in an XML format.

  144. missing the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The television industry is missing the whole point on recording. They assume that because I want to record it, the show has great value. The realty for me is the exact opposite. The show has so little value that if I can not time shift it and strip the commercials, I wouldn't bother to watch it at all. So, once again the TV industry is whining about "lost " profits it never would have gotten. I don't care that their revenue model is broken, criminalizing me won't improve their bottom line.

  145. go to the bathroom during a commercial go to jail by mcmcaughan · · Score: 1

    Ok I don't have the cash to upgrade from my replay tv 2020 to the new 4000 series but I can skip commercials and I do it all the time. The question is why collect data on something you already know the results to.

    ** NEWS FLASH ** The results are in 99% of replay tv users press the skip button to not watch commercials. They are in violation of the you must watch the commercial policy set forth by cable providers.

    Why collect this information? To be completely fair shouldn't the federal magistrate put observers in the homes of non-replay tv owners to record the went to the bathroom, went to the kitchen or dare I say changed the channel during a commercial violators. They are in violation of the same must watch the commercial act as well.

    Shame on all of you who don't watch the commercials. You are getting all of us in trouble. My advice is if you have a replay tv 4000 and you are being tracked show your support and press the skip button say an extra 1000 times just so they get clear results. We don't watch commercials!

  146. Easy... You DON'T buy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They purposely built the silly system capable of tracking every damned user interaction and reporting it. They did so for, well, reasons of their own and far less open to public scrutiny.

    Whatever "outrage" they're putting out is nothing more than a publicity stunt. They're just pissed this sorta lets the world know what slime they are.

  147. Maybe they should also spy on people who... by marusin · · Score: 1

    mail video tapes using the good old USPS...

  148. Re:Collective: Disney needs a boycott by SkyLeach · · Score: 2

    We collectively agree: there is no collective.

    --
    My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so :-p
  149. Punch the monkey anyone? by SecGreen · · Score: 1

    I'm sensing that Turner networks are going to lose this battle, but in the long run, the viewers are going to be the real losers. The advertisers are going to realize that nobody is actually paying attention to the spots, (Technology advancements or not... except for the SuperBowl of course...). Next thing you know we'll end up with banner ads on all of our tv content. Maybe this would be a good use for that extra screen real-estate on the 4:3 TVs once all the programming switches to 16:9... Then the TiVo engineers will figure out how to mask the ads, so the networks will decide that they need to "integrate" the advertising into the programming so that it can't be ignored. Sports teams will have to wear "ad-jerseys" (And tonight on TNT, its Pepsi vs. Coke in the most anticipated basketball game of the year!), and your favorite TV roll models will start developing almost addiction-like preferences for certain products... It's a brave new world...

    --
    Dupe posts are /.'s tacit protest on the rights of users to time-shift content...
  150. Constitution idiocy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Being able to freely copy anything you want isn't a constitutional right, even under the guise of fair use (which, by the way, isn't even established by the constitution).


    Christ, don't you trolls ever learn? Oh well, here we go again.


    No fair use is not guaranteed by the constitution. Neither is copyright, patent or trademark. Intellectual property is a COMPROMISE between creators and the public. A COMPROMISE means that both parties give something up in order that both may benefit. When one side steps too far over the line, they have officialy forfeited on the compromise.


    Wake the fuck up. Companies don't care about you. The real reason people are fighting shit like this is that they know that companies will do everything they can get away with just to make a buck. This includes screwing over the public. So when some of us complain, don't label us all as freeloaders. I, for one, haven't ever pirated ANYTHING. Even if I did, it doesn't give others the right to infringe upon my rights.

  151. Disney will get their come uppance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every time I walk past a Disney shop I hex the window display. Make a fist, pop your index finger and pinkie out and point it at the window and glare. It's easy. It used to be kosher deli's but they just kept rekoshering the meat. It was fun but a bit short lived.

  152. Reuters has picked up the story... by travis7 · · Score: 1

    Main stream media has picked up on this. Story here

  153. How is the court going to consider this data? by pamzella · · Score: 1

    What is the magistrate judge going to do with this data that could possibly explain why he went along with this idea? What do they plan to compare it to, my AT&T box that stays on sometimes when I'm not watching? What about when I vacuum or do the dishes or go to the bathroom during the commercials?? How about when I record something on my old VCR and fast-forward through the commercials when I watch it later? The studios don't have accurate information on us regular cable watchers, so I don't see how this could end up fair in court. We're all about to be taken for a ride....

    I don't have money for a $2500 Replay, but I'm furious about this anyway. Let commercials compete for my attention on their own merits- I'll watch that iMac commercial, or the Yahoo one with the dolphin any day, because they entertained.

  154. Mandatory spying? by dr_eaerth · · Score: 1

    A judge mandates that a company spy on its users? How long until Kazaa spyware is not just legal, but mandatory (and the programmers at Lavasoft are sent to prison)?

  155. What about Microsoft? by Convergence · · Score: 2

    What happens when some magistrate decides to make the exact same order and passes it to Microsoft.

    ``Microsoft is hereby ordered to record all programs run by users of their operating systems, and also record information about the files that their OS users copy and transfer.''

    How long till *this* order goes out?

    There's a reason my windows install doesn't know about the existance of the internet or what my name is.

  156. Re:One more nail in the privacy coffin-Deja Poo. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I read today that the entertainment industry considers skipping ads as "stealing" content that we have "contracted" with the networks to receive!"

    Now were were these guys and their argument when VCRs came out? People have been "skipping ads" aka *stealing* for years. Didn't hear a peep out of them then. Ask yourself "what has changed?".

  157. Re:It is too late.-TVcasting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well why not? We have radio via the web. Why not homegrown TV broadcasting via the internet. WE create our own programming, no ads. Pay if we want to. Truely remove the middlemen.

  158. Re:Disney needs a boycott - So Does Star Wars by Lonath · · Score: 2

    What does Disney have in common with LucasArts? NOTHING!
    What can you expect Disney to do if you boycott an unrelated company? NOTHING!

    How much thought did you put into your post? NONE!


    No really. I have thought this out. I've decided that I want to minimize how much I spend on movies and DVDs and videos. I haven't given them money in about 6 months and I intend to continue. I pick starwars because it's the one thing that people want to see. I actually want people to boycott ALL movies and music (or at least minimize their purchases). All the dumbshits who complain about the DMCA/SSSCA/CBPDTA and then go out and go see the movie are the stupid ones. I just want to back up my bitching with (a little) action. It won't matter, but I'll feel better about myself.

  159. Re:Disney needs a boycott - So Does Star Wars by Lonath · · Score: 2

    I don't make a distinction between movie companies. Disney says what the rest of them are thinking. I would rather that people not see any movies or buy any music at all. I recommend a boycott of Starwars because 10 million geeks might make a noticeable difference. Especially since geeks are repeat customers (at least I was seeing the other ones several times each in the theatres).

  160. Re:other word for 'steal'-gimme,gimme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "the movie owner still has his copy of the movie."

    Wich he can no longer sell because everyone already has a "copy" Kinda takes the incentive out of being creative and making money off of it.

  161. Re:And why does the industry care?-Microsoft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "They could be making SOOOOO much more money if they utilized human nature more (much like software companies have and look at how much more successful they are)."

    Yup, MS is successful because of this.

  162. FORGET IT--IT'S FLASH by mkcmkc · · Score: 1
    Flash. Grr...

    Mike

    --
    "Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
    1. Re:FORGET IT--IT'S FLASH by BrookHarty · · Score: 2
  163. Let Them Eat Clicks- Screw Their Data-Total Warr by Beebos · · Score: 1

    People with Replay 4000s should destroy this as a method of collecting data. Please spend ten minutes a day just hiting the commercial skip button on your remote over and over. If enough people do this for a few weeks it should be enough to distort the collected data and make it useless for any real world analysis of consumer behavior. Could you imagine a court or media company looking at the data. They'd say something like, "What the hell are these people smoking??? All they do is press the button over and over and over!!" Maybe we could add a few billion erronious clicks.

  164. Restrictions on the use of discovery information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are there any legal restrictions on the use of discovery information? Like would it be legal for Disney to use the ReplayTV data for marketing purposes, or Microsoft to use the Lindows mailing list information as part of a marketing campaign to get them to use Windows? Or is the use of discovery information restricted to matters related to the lawsuit?

  165. This is an analog device! by n6mod · · Score: 2

    What's shocking is that this is an analog capture device. First of all, it goes against the the notion that somehow digital copies are different, since this device doesn't get "pristine" digital copies of the content, it just captures them from analog inputs.

    And that's where this gets really interesting. The Content Cartel can only infer that their precious content is actually being traded by circumstatial evidence. Sure, the box sent the right IR commands to set a cable box to channel 2. And it recorded for three hours while channel 2 was showing Return of the Jedi. But unless they force the box to send them a copy of the video as well, they have no way to know that the video on the Replay's disk is actually Return of the Jedi. For all they know, I could have the video input connected to a webcam pointed at my fish tank. And while that's copyrighted, (Berne Convention, you know) it's not copyrighted by THEM.

    So they have only circumstantial evidence of infringement.

    --
    You have violated Robot's Rules of Order and will be asked to leave the future immediately.
  166. Great comment by Raul654 · · Score: 1

    Hurl them out the door so fast that you can see a redshift on their ass.

    Most humerous. I'm definetely going to have to remember that one.

    --


    To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
    --E.C. Stanton
  167. we're not necessarily on the same page, though by timothy · · Score: 1

    ethereal wrote: " ... So while you can't really expect the /. readership to agree on anything, I think it is more reasonable to expect the /. editorial staff to put forward a cohesive editorial policy on what they support and what they oppose. They have a "bully pulpit", but right now the message from that pulpit is sadly inconsistent."

    Hmmm. Lots of people seem to feel the same way, but it's unlikely to happen. Why? Because we (Slashdot editors) don't necessarily agree on many issues, and we live too far from each other for frequent boxing matches or something ...

    - I think it's safe to say that all the /. editors like (read "prefer") free / Free software. :)

    - We have differing ideas about free speech and what exactly that includes. (For instance, is "commerical speech" easily separable from non-commercial speech? Would you like to buy a Nixon-face showerhead?)

    - We have differing ideas about the role government should play in people's lives.

    - potaytoe, patahtoe

    For instance, I think that the State should stay out of Microsoft's hair, and that it is Microsoft's perfect right to raise their prices stupendously (raise! raise!), bundle a blender along with each copy of their operating system (Hey, banks give toasters) and use their dominance in the operating system field to push hair creams and gels. That's because in a truly free market (the U.S. market is partly free, better than most), you have an important right to be annoying, and to offer bad deals. This is important because it's what makes it possible for others to enter any given market. If Microsoft Office cost $4000 instead of $400 (that's about today's cost, right?) but with the same features as it has right now, more businesses would be willing to try competing products. (Look at the cost of software 20 years ago to see what a good deal today's software is by comparison. At least, if you consider it a good deal ...)

    The U.S. government at the very least (YCMV) has a Constitutional responsibility to benefit the commonwealth, and to that end, I think Free software is a more rational way to spend tax dollars (which are borrowed) than is spending on Microsoft or most other proprietary software, because software is part of that commonwealth. If the Federal and assorted State governments made it a policy that all software purchased on these borrowed dollars (and ones with specifically listed allowed uses, too!) had to guarantee at the very least continued ownership by the purchasers (taxpayers), would anything other than open-source software (GPL, BSD, whatever) even fit the bill? It takes a much more indirect route to prove that a given State employee's copy of Office is providing a benefit to the commonwealth than that $400 donated to KDE, GNOME, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, OpenOffice.org, Mozilla, GNU, or some other producer of explicity free software would be. Rather than 2 hands taking away, perhaps we could reduce it to 1 and a half.

    Note: this is a long-standing rant. Probably you don't agree, but I'm not kidding -- I really would like to see a free market in software, and in everything else, so long as no coercion or fraud is used. And to the degree that we should tolerate the somewhat-necessary evil of government, it should always be evaluated to see how it's extra-market activities can nonetheless be used to benefit mankind. This is one way.

    As the logician on the MP&tSftHG soundtrack points out, "I seem to have strayed somewhat from my original point." But I think it's still on-topic there ;)

    timothy

    --
    jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
    1. Re:we're not necessarily on the same page, though by ethereal · · Score: 1

      Wow, it's not every day that I get a response from an honest-to-Bob editor. In fact, it was four days ago that this happened :) Sorry about my late reply.

      I agree with your points on free software. Was that rant a long time in coming or something? Not sure how I set that off, but I'm not arguing with that. Makes sense to me.

      The only thing that I'm trying to say is that /. would be a great voice for change and for what's "right" (at least somewhat in my opinion of right and wrong, and maybe yours too). But the voice is only powerful if it's consistent, and right now it's not too consistent.

      It's OK with me if you guys like it that way; it's not my job to tell you how to spend your time one way or the other. And in reading back over the posts, it looks like I was a little off the topic to suggest that the editorial voice should be more consistent. I've just read the "slashdot as a whole is hypocritical" thing one too many times, I guess. I can see that it would be tough to herd geeks into thinking and speaking the same way, and I don't envy anyone who tries.

      But this does happen to be my viewpoint - that your (editors as a group) great articles exposing the DMCA are undermined by your weekend movie reviews, etc., etc. The lack of a coherent message is OK if you're just reporting the facts, but by adding (often opposing) editorial viewpoints (both implicit and explicit) throughout the various stories, the overall impression turns out to be more schizophrenic than just incoherent.

      Not necessary a bad thing; no value judgements here. But there is a potential, IMHO, for something more, at the expense of some of the wide-ranging editorial freedom that y'all now enjoy.

      Anyway, not that I'm going to convince anyone here, but I thought I'd spew out my stream of consciousness for a while. If anybody ever reads this I'll be pretty impressed.

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

  168. ReplayTV data.. Contact Judge Eick. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If TV and Film want usage data, they should buy it from a research firm. If they don't like media-reuse, they should repackage their products, and re-engineer their distribution.

    Consumer products companies must be allowed to create products that do not spy on the public.

    It's not the business of the courts to protect legacy advertising, and distribution models.

    Contact the ruling judge, Hon. Charles F. Eick
    Central District of California U.S.D.C.
    Magistrate Judge
    Phone: (213) 894-5234
    Fax: (213) 894-3335

  169. Re:Disney needs a boy, caught? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now that's the kind of scandal that could seriously erode Disney's market power.

  170. So TiVo is having AOL sue Replay? by GrendelWraith · · Score: 0

    Time Warner is one of the Plaintiffs in the case.

    TiVo's will be able to be programed using services provided by AOL.

    Replay = No Subscription
    TiVo = Monthly Tithe and monitoring.

    So now TiVo can get Replay Users info?

    Maybe their Idea of "Provding the Data in Electronic Format and provide support for the transfer of data" means that TiVo's monitoring service will go on all Replay's

    Subscription Services is probably the biggest buisness war in the next decade.

    All the big guys want subscriptions. Monthly installments it's the way to hell. It seems so easy. Next thing you know.
    All programming available for free will be 50% or better advertising.
    To get shows that are worth listening to. Or music other than the latest top ten. You will have to pay for the privledge monthly.

    TV $100
    Music $100
    Internet Access $100
    Motion Picture $100

    Per person per month. Nonrecordable Nontransferable. With full data gathering of what products are in use when iwhat combinations with which users.

    Anyone think that "The Matrix" isn't big media's wet dream. think of the captive audience!

    --
    One good thing about music... when it hits you, you feel no pain. So hit me with music. -Bob Marley
  171. Without ads it'd be $5 a channel by yerricde · · Score: 1

    So, people are paying for the content. Given that fact, why is there still advertising?

    Without some sort of advertising, each channel would cost at least $5/month, up next to the "premium" channels such as HBO and Di$ney. I don't know about you, but I'd rather not pay $200 in cash per month for basic cable.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  172. Illegal to own a camcorder? by yerricde · · Score: 1

    Why not homegrown TV broadcasting via the internet.

    So you're talking about the type of narrowcasting that goes on public access channels. Interesting. Go on...

    WE create our own programming

    Unless it becomes illegal to own a camcorder without a license, because camcorders could be used to pirate a movie during its theatrical release.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  173. $1/ch vs. $5/ch by yerricde · · Score: 1

    How did they eventually convince us that it's perfectly normal to pay $40-50 a month for JUST the copper wire?

    By threatening to raise the monthly rate from $1 per channel to $5+ per channel, like the "premium" channels.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  174. gov't has too much power by wessman · · Score: 1

    Government's dirty, special interest paid-off hands are reaching too far this time.

  175. All you want to be radicals kill me by RodeoBoy · · Score: 1

    I don't give a fuck, because a. I do not have a TV. b. I do not go to movie, especially Dizme. This rule applies to my 4 kids. This knee jerk PC reaction doesn't go anywhere. Every move like this just makes me glad that I am not some salivating dog of american media. It is not big business without customers that can't think for themselves, or have you not learned anything from the Microsoft experience.

    That is what I love about /., the land where hypocracy lives.

  176. complexity vs. consistency by timothy · · Score: 1

    You wrote:

    "But this does happen to be my viewpoint - that your (editors as a group) great articles exposing the DMCA are undermined by your weekend movie reviews, etc., etc. The lack of a coherent message is OK if you're just reporting the facts, but by adding (often opposing) editorial viewpoints (both implicit and explicit) throughout the various stories, the overall impression turns out to be more schizophrenic than just incoherent."

    Well, each of us (people in general, slashdot editors included) have various viewpoints on various topics, some of which jostle uncomfortably with each other. When you look at stories posted by several people, all of whom are affected by this, the result is bound to look a little strange if you're looking for consistency of message! We don't have ideology meetings or anything to make sure we present a single common face to the world ...

    I like movies and music (a subset of them, of course ;)), including some made by people who belong to or support organizations I don't agree with ... it's a tradeoff. I enjoyed watching Lord of the Rings more than I would have enjoyed depriving the movie industry of a small portion of my admission price. The world isn't always convenient that way ... I prefer Free software, but if I found a greater benefit from using source-secret software, would I do it? Sure. I might gripe, and look for alternatives, but we all draw different lines in different sandboxes.

    timothy

    --
    jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
    1. Re:complexity vs. consistency by ethereal · · Score: 1

      Fair enough, and I find that I follow the same tradeoffs too. Maybe it's for the best that y'all aren't a bunch of ideological hotheads; your readership seems to have that covered all on their own :)

      Thanks for taking the time to reply - you've given me some things to think about.

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and