Slashdot Mirror
ReplayTV 4500: No Hacking, or Else
mcglk writes "I was happy to see that SonicBlue had released its new generation of ReplayTV, the 4500. And it was $250 cheaper than the 4000. Except for that $250 one-time service activation fee. Worse is the agreement that goes along with it. Term1A basically says, No more hacking. Term1G says that they can enable or disable anything they want without notice. And Term2C says that if someone even alleges you are infringing on copyright, you can be shut down with no notice, no recourse, and there's nothing you can do about itthe agreement indemnifies them completely. I was really looking forward to getting one of these, too." Under that agreement, SonicBlue claims the right to destroy your device when you connect for updates.
I would think so, but to turn around and try to apply all these restrictions implies a fundamental lack of understanding of what computer geeks do!
Or, a complete understanding, and overly restrictive agreements to try and somehow compensate?
Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
The solution is simple: Instead of reading the agreement and agreeing to it, don't!
If they do scan your ReplayTV box every time, it's their perrogative because it's their product!
Three cheers for the makers of ReplayTV to hit the CONTENT THIEVES right in their 'nads!!!
Also, they'll know EXACTLY who you are by the unique Serial# and Unit# burned into the non-eprom chips.
Interestingly enough, Napster filed for Chapter 11 protections today.
Enjoy the Ride!!
ScottKin
I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
This contract is almost a Ferenge contract "...If you read this document you violate the terms of the contract..."
So with a a bit of html magic one could submit the form with a different contract -- one the is more user friendly to the consumer. Does thier software check that it is the original contract??? If it does not then THEY will then have aggreed to "our" obnoxious terms.
If you user their service and it works does this not violate the agreement?
Today a contract should actually state all of the details that each US state applies to such agreements and to each country as well. It should be a nicely format XML contract with all of the details downloadable to your machine. If they can't give you a copy automatically it should not be enforceable.
If you sue them and win it seems you still have to pay their costs or am I wrong?
What good is it if they give 50 pages of utter, complete bull in 5 different languages if even one rule is conflicting? Why should I care about papers where they have apparently copypasted everything even remotely affecting rules and demands from all laws they could find? It surely seems like it.
Is competition really this fierce that bare products with only kind suggestions of how to use it are impossible? Can't they just sell their things and be happy that people even buy them? Are these the symptoms of too broad rights given to businesses?
Preserve old classics: copy your collection onto all hard drives.
I've been thinking on this a bit. I want input.
... one that had consumer interest in mind. no need to really innovate on NEW products, just make products that do what corporate, money-sucking products do with the consumer interest in mind.
I think it would be great to start a non-profit technology company.
PVR are perfect examples. How hard is it to build a PVR? With technology today, not too hard. How hard would it be to build one that didn't put all these absurd money-grubbing restrictions on it? not hard at all. How many people would chose to buy a product designed to MAKE CONSUMER'S LIVE BETTER instead of MAKING CORPORATE EXECS and BUSINESS OWNERS RICH?
SocialTech. would you choose it?
Do you really think any court is going to accept a defence of "oh I really didn't read the licence thing. I didn't think it was legally binding if I didn't read it."
In Australia and other common law countries I think you'll find that shrink wrap licences and post purchase licences are quite legal and enforcable where the terms and conditions aren't illegal.
I often use the example of car parking stations. You generally just drive in and get a ticket and there are no terms obvious. Somewhere just inside the carpark will be a big sign with the terms of use displayed. If you don't like the terms you can generally go back out without payment but continuing on implies your acceptance of the terms. That's settled law in Australia at least.
As for Microsoft, the licence agreement is irrelevant to the question of whether they infringe an anti trust law. And in any case you generally can't indemnify yourself from consequences of an illegal act as a matter of policy.
Yes you did.....
Allwell set top box - metallic version - $325.00
cheap bt878 video capture card
Hollywood+ mpeg playback card
DVD rom
$500.00 looks better than your design, works better too (because of the hardware mpeg playback.. NOTHING can beat the hollywood+ for playback quality in the consumer video arena.)
in fact, I have one now... works great. No on screen crap, I program it completely from a webpage and the remote allows me to select what show to watch.
you want one too?
do a search for linux VCR. and there's your start. you also need Mplayer and lirc.
So what if you don't agree to these terms? You save $250, obviously, but you're left with an unworkable piece of hardware.
Well, what if you could make it workable? Can a *nix be ported onto it? Add a video codec, and create an open-source PVR OS?
Maybe this is something SonicBlue is hoping for. They've got a nice piece of hardware, and they can keep making 'em, just as long as it's someone else who takes the blame for that 30-second commercial skip.
will scream :P
/., about a quarter of the posts are "Let's make our own!" posts. Yet, there are NO viable alternatives out there. Yes, alternatives exist, but none are as user friendly or work across as varied a user base as the Tivo or ReplayTV.
/. before, etc) has found a way to change the channels on the CABLE box when you want to watch something else. This is something so incredibly obvious, and ridiculously needed to get ANY decent functionality on 90% of the televisions in the US, yet NOT one project supports this. TIVO and ReplayTV both have support by placing these little emitters above the cable box that sends the correct IR codes when a channel change is needed.
Basically, WHENEVER there is a TIVO/ReplayTV device story on
Sure, if I lived in Europe and had satellite television I'd be set with a DBS setup. Sure if I had a direct tuner on my tv (not a cable box) I'd be set.
But NOT one project I've seen (including the Linux VCR, the Linux-Tivo thing on
Simply, you can't use the built-in TV tuner for most analog cable hookups and ALL digital cable hookups.
Does ANY project do this? I'm working on coding my own using the TiVo emitters, but I really don't want to duplicate work.
I'm sorry, but I didn't see the part of the TiVo agreement that makes the mere allegation of copyright infringement grounds for immediate termination (as the SonicBlue agreement does).
Without this, the TiVo agreement is not 'identical'.
I am not a lawyer, but you don't have a clue.
The courts are the ultimate arbiters of contract law. If the courts decline to enforce contract terms then they are void.
Shrinkwrap type 'contracts' are problematic in many ways, not least because there is unequal bargaining power. It is a unilateral declaration by one side of what the terms of the agreement are. Such can be declared 'contracts of adhesion' and considered invalid by the courts. Invalid does not mean illegal, a term may be perfectly legal in a contract negotiated between two parties but not legal when it is unilaterally imposed.
I often use the example of car parking stations. You generally just drive in and get a ticket and there are no terms obvious. Somewhere just inside the carpark will be a big sign with the terms of use displayed. If you don't like the terms you can generally go back out without payment but continuing on implies your acceptance of the terms. That's settled law in Australia at least.
Actually it is settled law but not the way you think. In contract law it is impossible to exclude claims in negligence. So if a multi story car park collapses due to lack of maintenance the owner/operator is liable irregardless of what he put on the ticket. In fact there can even be a contract term stating that the owner is not liable in that precise circumstance and it is still invalid.
Incidentally that is why legal constructs such as bills of lading and letters of credit are so interesting, they are not contracts and are not subject to contract law and cannot in fact be constructed using contract law. That is why the digital signature acts were required to recognise the legality of digital signatures on such documents.
Clauses that attempt to restrict remedies were almost always thrown out by the US courts 20 years ago. Today clauses that restrict redress to arbitration are sometimes recognised, but by no means in every case. I suspect however that the provisions put in to many cell phone contracts that prohibit class action lawsuits are unenforceable.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
You just rented "service," equipment and all, at a monthly rate, and you could do with it only what the telephone company wanted you to do with it.
It should be clear at this point that the pendulum is swinging back, and that the Tivos, the cable providers, and the software vendors of the world are trying to turn back the clock to that comfortable time when you didn't own and couldn't control ANYTHING in your house that was wired for communications.
It's only a matter of time before video recorders and computers are not sold at all. You simply get to choose the one that's provided free (or for a $1000 installation charge?) with your subscription service.
Nice over-reaction, but you are forgetting one MAJOR point... the telephone company at the time had a huge monopoly!
There is no similar monopoly in the hardware markets that could make me rent all my equipment and not keep control of it.
In order for this to happen, you'd have to have some new type of hardware come out, completely patented, with no alternatives available that could do something similar. And everyone would need to have one of these. THEN and only then could you do something like what ma bell did with rented telephones.
"And like that
I seem to recall some software hacking law that allows you (the owner) to reverse-engineer your software, to 1) make it work or 2) to make it work better than it already does. Does this not apply for hardware or embedded software etc?