Slashdot Mirror


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.

8 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. A new low! by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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...

    --
    Who did what now?
    1. Re:A new low! by cduffy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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]

  2. And therein lies the problem... by thumbtack · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  3. Re:5th amendment? by aengblom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    --


    So close and yet so far from the world's perfect ID number
  4. Re:Question by shokk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    --
    "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
  5. Partialy SonicBlue's fault? by Tide · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

    --

    People think Microsoft is the answer. Microsoft is just the question, "No" is the answer.
  6. from the man-that-sucks dept. by Inthewire · · Score: 5, Funny

    Taco, I never knew.

    --


    Writers imply. Readers infer.
  7. Here is where the problems are by Sc00ter · · Score: 5, Informative
    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.