Studios Forcing ReplayTV to Collect Viewing Info

superposed writes "The San Francisco Chronicle has articles here and here about an ongoing court battle between ReplayTV and several major media organizations. A federal judge has required SonicBlue, makers of ReplayTV, to begin collecting data on how customers use the systems to swap shows and skip commercials, and hand the information over to the studios so they can make a case that copyrights are being infringed. SonicBlue is appealing the ruling, saying that collecting the data would violate their privacy policy. " It seems strange to me how much legal hoopla SonicBlue has been dragged through considering how many of these things they've actually sold. Update: 05/05 14:22 GMT by M : See the previous story as well.

Comments

A new low!

[Karl Cocknozzle]

Instead of making a case of their own, the "content-industry" has conveniently gotten the judge to order the other party to make their case for them.

Sheer genius, but also very depressing. Our legal system is more screwed up than people think. Way more...

Re:A new low!

[truesaer]

This is just discovery. Because SonicBlue has the ability to get stats on the use without much trouble, they need to provide them as part of the discovery process for a lawsuit. Your statement is kind of like saying "This deposition is crazy. Now they want the person being sued to just tell them about their actions in this case?"

SonicBlue needs to make a legal argument why ReplayTV does not infringe on copyrights. As a replayTV owner, I really hope they are able to do it....

Anyway, I think the studios will win. It can't be hard for SonicBlue to gather the data in aggregate, so I bet the court will think thats ok. And I'm not sure how beneficial the data will be for the studios....I doubt people are really swapping files much, since you can only do it with other people that have the brand new units. The commercial skip is fairly analagous to recording with a VCR and fast forwarding. Its not instant on a VCR, but its close to the same.

Re:A new low!

[stevew]

Let's look at this another way (as I'm a replay owner too). The judge has ordered the company to invade your privacy - Ever hear of the 4th ammendment??? The requirements for a search warrant are even close to being met here! Now - the judge said that our identities will be protected for the time being... how nice.

Support the EFF - they are at least looking into helping us. Whether they can or not is another matter. I was a disinterested 3rd party to this proceeding until the judge violated my rights. Wait you say - doesn't a judge have the power to do just that - yes they do, but it mustn't be a global invasion like this, but specific and for specific legal reasons. I gotta think that this is wanting in that department. I sure hope so.

Again - drop a check to the EFF. $10, or $20 or whatever you can afford. They seem to be the only people concerned about this BS.

Re:A new low!

[Anonymous Coward]

His point was that, in the process of discovery,
HIS 4th Amendment rights are being violated.
SonicBlue's records are ok to bring into the
court - but the judge is saying: reach into
HIS house and create new data based on what
you find in HIS house.

I don't see how MY constitutional rights are
somehow put into limbo because SonicBlue and
the studios are in court.

Re:A new low!

[blair1q]

Our legal system is exactly as screwed up as people think if people realize it often consists of as one overworked, possibly incompetent judge being presented "facts" by two lawyers of varying degrees of competence.

The amount of randomness that adds to the system is anathema to justice.

--Blair

Re:A new low!

[cduffy]

Even though this is a civil case, involvement of the courts still implies state action -- that's been established ever since Shelley v. Kramer -- and so the government is still responsible for the constitutionality of their courts' actions in such cases. Discovery is reasonable when it enables each party involved in a suit to requisition data from the other. Not so when innocent 3rd parties are suddenly forced to provide otherwise non-public information without their consent.

[IANAL]

Re:A new low!

[civilizedINTENSITY]

"It can't be hard for SonicBlue to gather the data in aggregate, so I bet the court will think thats ok."

Instead of "betting", read the articles. The judge specified that individual users behavior be tracked, and linked to an anonomous ID. This is *not* aggregate data collection. Somewhere there would be a record of every movie you watch, and how often, and when, and every keystroke you use with their machine.

Central District Court Magistrate Charles F. Eick told SonicBlue to gather ``all available information'' about how consumers use the Santa Clara company's latest generation ReplayTV 4000 video recorders, and turn the information over to the film studios and television networks suing it for contributing to copyright infringement.


Also:

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.

Re:A new low!

[civilizedINTENSITY]

Judge says: "Prove it! I know you have that data, now hand it over!"

*Wrong! The judge gives them 60 days to write the software that will collect more information than they have ever collected before. The fact that you think they are already collecting this data indicates you didn't read, or can't understand, the articles mentioned. Yet you suggest /. readers don't understand their rights? You misconstrue the context, creating a "straw man". The facts are that discovery is being used to generate *new* data that exceeds the privacy policy as put forth when the devices were sold.

And therein lies the problem...

[thumbtack]

The content industry sues..and sues, and sues. Rather than working things out with the developers, they bankrupt them with legal fees. Then they step in, buy the company for cents on the dollar, and either kill it, or castrate it to where it does nothing like it was orginally designed to do.

Question

[dr_eaerth]

Could someone reply to this and answer a question I have, which none of these articles has answered? Why SonicBlue, and not Tivo? What's the difference between these two PVRs that lets Tivo get off scott free?

I can't afford either, but from all I've read, they're the same thing: digital VCRs. Maybe ReplayTV should have copied Tivo.

Re:Question

[dnight]

The Replay has some sharing capabilites built in, the Tivo doesn't. I think it's the ability to swap recordings between two Replay units that they're objecting to.

But this is America, and tampering with data to manipulate the system is done every day. We should all go buy ReplayTV units from Best Buy, set it to record only the most inane infomercials, and return it within 30 days.

And Sonicblue should provide all the info in hardcopy.

Re:Question

[PhunkyOne]

Why SonicBlue and not TiVo? There are probably two reasons

The first is that you can easily send shows over the internet, etc with the sonicblue box. We know this for a fact pisses the industry off. Not only can you send shows, etc, it's marketed strongly that way.

Secondly I think they are probably attacking SonicBlue because they are the weaker company. They have less dollars and most likely less lawyers. Once they get standing and precident from a case that's easier to win they can move on to going after the big dog with that in their pocket.

Re:Question

[shokk]

Simple. Tivo has a commercial skip that the user engages (fast forward) and the ReplayTV has automated it. ReplayTV has made it too easy to ignore the media's wallets so they have drawn their collective ire. Tivo is unfortunately waiting in the wings to see the result and has not noticed that whatever paintbrush is used to color SonicBlue will be spattering on them. We as consumers are now too lethargic to protect our privacy and other rights, so we don't bother to fight it any more than to post a few blurbs in a message board. So all that is left is for these media giants to become more powerful as they steamroll over everything. So laying down for a raping is what the market will bear at this time.

Re:Question

[Tide]

Yes, there are several programs that do this. SwapDV is probably the most prominent tool, Replayer is another, and a third is ReplayPC.

SwapDV lets you pull shows from your ReplayTV and can even show up on your UPnP network as another Replay box to stream shows from, acting as a nice backup. Users can also burn the MPEGs to CDs and DVDs or swap them with P2P clients. Gnutella integration is coming also from what I understand.

Re:Question

[dumbunny]

The first article states:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation of San Francisco and San Jose's TiVo Inc. , Sonicblue's main competitor in the digital video recorder market, rushed to Sonicblue's defense, saying the order could prove a setback to consumer rights and could have a chilling effect on new technology.

It definitely sounds as if TiVo is aware of the gravity of the situation.

Here's how.

[qslack]

ATTN SonicBlue:

Hand the media companies what they want. With one catch, however. Send them the files in Claris Works 1.0 on 600 floppies. Don't forget to accidently catch a virus that just happens to latch itself onto Claris Works files.

Helping prove they are guilty

[1010011010]

"The studios" have, of course, decided in advance that SonicBlue is a criminal enterprise, and that the Replay is a tool of the devil. Now, SonicBlue is being compelled to help "the studios" prove their pre-selected conclusion.

Not only guilty until proven innocent, but they have to help win their own conviction.

Sucks.

To quote Chuck D, "Fuck Hollywood"

Gathering evidence

[Trevin]

Isn't there something in the legal system that says a defendant may not be forced to testify against himself? It sounds like that is what's going on here.

Too featureful product - court orders

[shoppa]

I think that us techies should be reminded of something by this story:

Be Careful what Features you add to your Product. They may be used in some future lawsuit as a way to violate your customer's privacy.

There have been too many instances over the years where a "feature" not really needed by anybody has been misappropriated. See, in particular, creeping featurism for other documented side-effects. Unfortunately I think legalism will soon make this entry.

How many they've sold

[truesaer]

How many they've sold is irrelevant. The studio's know that this kind of thing will probably be popular someday, so now is the best time to fight it. Why wait until lots of consumers have them and like them? They're expensive and rare right now, so they're going to have an easier job ahead of them. I have a replayTV and I like it better than TiVo....my only complaint is that the menus are too sluggish when you're scrolling through or trying to bring a different one up, but I suspect that has been improved since my model is over a year old now.

Re:5th amendment?

[aengblom]

The 5th AMendment does not apply here. The 5th Amendment only prevents companies/people from testifying against themselves. This would not be testimony, but evidence.

Partialy SonicBlue's fault?

[Tide]

As a ReplayTV 4000 owner and operator of Planet Replay a content 'borrowing' site, Im appalled by all of this. But one has to wonder - SB made sharing only possible through the use of unique internet IDs and their servers to translate and initiate the P2P. If the P2P didn't require their server, there would not be any way for them to track what we do as easily as they can now.

I'm glad SB is not just rolling over though. Just like Diamond Rio and the MP3 player suit, the Digital PVR suit needs to hit courts and law set, good or bad. People keep referring back to the Sony timeshifting case, but the problem list that was analog, this is digital. It needs to go to court and get settled, but having SB collect evidence for the plantiffs is just ridiculus.

from the man-that-sucks dept.

[Inthewire]

Taco, I never knew.

Commercial skipping on PVR and VCR

[dmanny]

I have two Tivos, love the concept but many cautions about buying in at this point.

But on the subject of commercial skipping I would point very strongly toward the better Panasonic VCRs and similar models that have automatic skipping. My techno savy 70 year mother got the first one in my circle of contacts. Now I have influenced several people to go that way. A simple demonstration is all that it takes. The only person that did not get a Panasonic after I showed them the feature in action was buying a low end deck for his toddler.

We have been working on watching Seinfeld for once and for all -- All episodes in order, as collected by Tivo, dubbed to VHS for additional buffer space. The broadcasts are frequently out of episode order. The Panasonic VCR is virtually 100% effective at catching the commercials with the only annoyance being about 50% of the time it does not detect the final short segment of the program as being non-commercial content.

Also Panasonic VCRs have about the best rating for reliability in Consumer Reports.

Here is where the problems are

[Sc00ter]

I've seen a lot of posts about why not TiVo and why Replay.. Here's the deal:

1. TiVo by default does not remove commercials. You either have to hit your fast foward button, or enable the 30sec skip backdoor code. And either way you still have to be there to do it. The new ReplayTV units remove the commercials automatically so you don't even know they are there at all.

2. ReplayTV allows sharing of problams to other ReplayTV units (also to computers running a program to make the ReplayTV think the computer is another ReplayTV). Now, again, this isn't a big deal until you realize that I can get HBO and record Six Feet Under or Sopranos and now share them with people that don't pay for HBO. This would be in effect the same as buying a movie, and copying it for others that don't own the movie.

Also, TiVo does collect user data, but it's ANONYMOUS, it does not link you to your TiVo unit unless you call in for service and they half to (they have you key something in on the remote). You can also make a 5min phone call and be removed from this.

What about the Fifth Admendment???

[3seas]

Sounds like the Judge isn't familiar with the US constitution to me.

According the the fifth admendment, one does not have to provide information that may be used against them in a court of law.

How is it that this judge does not know this?
Have they ben following the MS anti-trust case to much?