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."
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.
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
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
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.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
This signature intentionally has just seven words.
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
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
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).
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
TheyRule.net does a good job of showing who's in charge of what. It's scary...
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
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.
/. 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.
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