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.

Comments

computer geeks = target market or no?

[Kargan]

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?

Shame

[johnburton]

Just when personal video recorders were starting to look good they do this. And tivo (in the UK at least) have decided that they, not you control what you record. Are there no honest companies left out there who just want to make their money by selling a good product, and not by trying to exploit their customers in some underhanded way?

Re:Shame

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

Yes, there are. The reasons you haven't heard from them are because they're usually gone within the year.

Of course, it's true that

Statistics indicate that 80% of all new businesses fail within three to
five years.

(InterOffice Memo, emphasis added)

In other words, it's not obvious that nice businesses fail because they're nice. They might fail just because new businesses fail. Likewise, rotten companies get more press and more attention, but that doesn't (necessarily) mean there are more of them or that their rottenness enhances their survivability.

Re:Shame

[Graspee_Leemoor]

It's funny that in the UK all the ads for SKY+ feature Joe Average and his family stealing a sky+ box from a X-Files style bunch of black-clad people who chase them in black cars and helicopters.

The idea is to make the sky+ system seem like an alien technology that must not fall into the public's hands but I found it funny for other reasons.

graspee

Re:Shame

[McSpew]

...tivo (in the UK at least) have decided that they, not you control what you record...

Oh, for Pete's sake!

Have you not bothered to read what actually happened with the UK TiVos? There is space on TiVos reserved for sponsored content. TiVo will record that sponsored content to the reserved space on your TiVo if and only if you have nothing else already scheduled to record during that time.

You can ignore the sponsored content quite easily and it goes away by itself after a few days. Honestly, if that's as intrusive as TiVo gets, it's a tradeoff I'm more than willing to make in order to get my PVR fix.

Re:Shame

[dubl-u]

In other words, it's not obvious that nice businesses fail because they're nice.

This is very true. Look at Newman's Own, Paul Newman's food company, which gives 100% of its profits to charity.

But I'd bet that it is an additional risk factor. If your only question about an activity is "does it increase profits?" that's easier to sort out than "will this increase profits in a way that fits with our mission statement?"

On average, non-profits that I've dealt with seem much more chaotic than for-profits of the same size. I'm sure there are many factors, but the snarling dogs of capitalism provide a whole lotta discipline.

Re:Shame

[Amazing Quantum Man]

I don't think that Newman's is a good example. Note that it specifically says "profits", not "gross".

Newman's, being privately owned by Newman himself, doesn't have to worry about shareholders bitching about the "give all profits to charity". He's independently wealthy and probably gets a hell of a tax write-off as well.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a Good Thing(tm) that he's doing. But it's not a valid business example.

Does not comply

[dybdahl]

That kind of enduser agreements does not comply with the consumer protection laws of most countries and are therefore not legal.

Overreaction

[spullara]

These terms are identical to those terms that are present within the Tivo service license agreement. I think you can expect terms like this from whomever you get your PVR service from. They are here to Cover Their A$$. You can find more information about Tivo's license here:

Tivo's Service Agreement

Re:Overreaction

[spullara]

Hmmm, then I am pretty sure you didn't read the agreement, for instance:

TiVo retains the absolute right to immediately suspend or terminate your account, and terminate this agreement, if the charges to your credit card for the fees described in the "Subscription Fees and Payment Authorization" paragraph above are refused for any reason, if you breach any provision in this agreement, if you misuse the TiVo Service, and/ or if you alter the Recorder or use the TiVo Service in such a manner as to infringe upon the intellectual property rights of TiVo or any third party.

and

Any attempt to disassemble, decompile, create derivative works of, reverse engineer, modify, sublicense, distribute or use for other purposes either the authorized product or software of this system is strictly prohibited.

and

You may access and use the TiVo Service only with a product authorized to receive the TiVo Service and you agree not to tamper with or otherwise modify the authorized product.

and

TiVo may, at its discretion, from time to time change, add or remove features of the TiVo Service

IANAL, but I think it is fair to say that these terms are exactly the same.

Re:Overreaction

[_Sprocket_]

These terms are identical to those terms that are present within the Tivo service license agreement.

Well, no, they aren't. But lets just say they are for the sake of argument.

Just because an industry decides to go in a certain direction, it doesn't mean it is good for consumers. Alerting consumers to less-than-favorable policies is the first step to putting pressures on companies (and the industry) to change those policies.

Granted, consumers have to give a damn. In most consumer markets, issues like this are lost on the masses of that market. However, PVRs still remain an early-adopter market. Early adopters tend to be more tech-savvy and an issue like this may register to that market.

Re:Overreaction

[Anonymous Coward]

Once again /. readers look at the issue backwards. WHY do you think a business is even remotely concerned with what is good for consumers? Why should they be? Do you want the whole world to be looking out for you? Oh no, you can't have a car that goes too fast, you might crash! You can't have inline skates, people have broken bones with those! You can't have a home loan because it would be unfair to make you pay interest!

Consumers don't have to do anything. Especially they don't have to buy a product they don't like, or agree to terms they find unfair. But if they accept an agreement without bothering to read it they are just plain stupid and deserve what happens.

On the other hand, Sonic blue can ask you to agree to anything they fucking like. If they make money out of it they'll keep doing it.

Re:Overreaction

[Gleef]

Anonymous Coward:

Once again /. readers look at the issue backwards. WHY do you think a business is even remotely concerned with what is good for consumers?
Why should they be?

Because healthy, happy, non-screwed-over customers:
* Buy more products and services from them in the future; and
* Tell their friends and acquaintances how great the company is, and encourage other people to become customers; and
* Don't involve the company in expensive lawsuits.
Well-run businesses that take the long-term view realize this and treat their customers with respect. After all, the customers are the people who are feeding them.

The trouble is, poorly run businesses are rampant, and almost nobody cares what they're doing 20 years from now. Most companies don't seem to look much farther than next year (many no farther than next quarter).

Do you want the whole world to be looking out for you? Oh no, you can't have a car that goes too fast, you might crash! You can't have inline skates, people have broken bones with those!

This is off-topic fluff, we're not talking about laws designed to "protect" you whether you like it or not, we're talking about a company reserving the right to screw their customers royally, taking their money and withholding service, and hiding this fact in the fine print of a contract they expect less than 5% of their market to read.

You can't have a home loan because it would be unfair to make you pay interest!

This one is actually on topic. Many strict Christian (and I assume other religions) sects consider Usury (the charging of interest) to be a sin. In the early days of the US, many of the northeast states had laws written by strict Christian fundamentalists, and it was actually illegal to loan money for interest. As the population became less fundimentalist, the people made a conscious decision to allow limited Usury (there still are limits on how much interest can be charged) for the practical consideration of having a market for loans.

Consumers don't have to do anything. Especially they don't have to buy a product they don't like, or agree to terms they find unfair. But if they accept an agreement without bothering to read it they are just plain stupid and deserve what happens.

People have been conditioned (I suspect deliberately) to not read boilerplate contracts. They are long, hard to read, and often oddly worded to make them more confusing. More and more often lately, most people only have access to read the contract after they have already paid their money.

While this contract is actually accessible online, most consumers won't even see it until after they've already shelled out $450 for the product. Not agreeing to it means they will have to return their product, something that is anywhere from annoying to impossible depending on the circumstances.

On the other hand, Sonic blue can ask you to agree to anything they fucking like. If they make money out of it they'll keep doing it.

Actually, they can't. There are laws limiting what can be agreed to in contracts. In most states, there are laws further limiting what can be "agreed" to in a non-negotiated contract (such as a boilerplate terms of service). I am not a lawyer, but I suspect if they use this agreement to disable the device of a New York State customer within 90 days of the customer purchasing the product, they will be in violation of NYS law.

Re:Overreaction

[jjo]

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'.

Re:Overreaction

[cybercuzco]

(there still are limits on how much interest can be charged)

Except in Delaware, which has No Usury laws. Which is why there are alot of banks and credit card companies based in delaware.

Re:Overreaction

[Gleef]

Sorry, I posted too early in the morning as I was rushing and I left out the bit tying them together. Both the outcry over this contract and the historic outcry over Usury are people upset over a contract term they consider morally wrong. In the Usury case, it was against their religion, in this case there is an expectation that if you pay for something, you actually get it, and they don't take it away from you. Discussing the morality of the contract, and comparing it to another "morality of the contract" issue is on-topic, in my opinion.

There would be far less outcry if they were just talking about stopping the service if they didn't like you (assuming these boxes are useful without the service), but they are reserving the right to actively disable the box that you spent at least $450 to own. I consider this immoral.

Re:Overreaction

[ChaosDiscordSimple]

These terms are identical to those terms that are present within the Tivo service license agreement.

They most certainly are not identical. Tivo makes no restrictions on hacking the hardware, ReplayTV does. Also, while Tivo can cancel my service if I actually infringe someone's copyright, with ReplayTV, Sonicblue can cancel my service if I am "alleged to infringe." Tivo's license agreement isn't perfect, but it has limits and yields the customer some reasonable freedom.

Re:Overreaction

[AxelBoldt]

If they make money out of it they'll keep doing it.

The point of publicizing their license agreement, in case you hadn't noticed, is precisely to prevent this from happening.

Re:Overreaction

[Nightpaw]

Because healthy, happy, non-screwed-over customers:
...
* Don't involve the company in expensive lawsuits.


Someone will always sue.

Re:Overreaction

[dcgaber]

Deleware also has no corporation taxes. That is why many businesses are incorporated there.

Re:Overreaction

[Gleef]

Anonymous Coward wrote/flamed:

If you don't like usury, don't borrow money.

Actually, those who are religiously opposed to Usury can't receive interest either, which makes it very difficult for them to get bank accounts, but that's a tangent.

If you don't like the agreement, return your ReplayTV.

Returns are at best annoying, at worst they can be impossible, depending on the store and where you live. Some stores in some states won't accept returns except under very specific circumstances, and "not liking the service agreement" isn't one of them.

Are you deliberately being stupid? So you don't like the fact that they can "actively disable the box that you spent at least $450 to own" - then WHY THE FUCK DID YOU SPEND $450!!! You IDIOT! Who FORCED you to buy, and keep, a ReplayTV!

I am more familiar with Tivo than ReplayTV, I am assuming ReplayTV is similar enough for my argument to make sense. If I go to the store to buy a Tivo, I have a very useful and flexible digital recording device, if I pay for the Tivo service then my digital recording device also knows alot about upcoming shows. If I cancel my service, I still have a useful device it just doesn't know about upcoming shows anymore.

My limited understanding is that older ReplayTV boxes are the same way. This new box with the new service agreement has the added "feature" of, if someone accuses me of copyright infringment, then with no due process I not only have no service, but they've made my device not work as well, no refund. No actual infringement is necessary, just someone accusing you of breaking a civil law against someone unaffiliated with ReplayTV.

My cable provider has no right to destroy my TV, my "Digital TV Guide" provider has no right to destroy my digital recorder. A non-negotiated contract should not be sufficient to give them that right.

Your morals are no basis for forcing anyone to offer you a contract that you like.

My morals are a basis for what I will and won't accept, which is the whole basis of a contract. My morals are also one of the guides I use in deciding which laws I do and don't support.

While Contract Law has a great deal of breadth and power, it is not limitless. This is a Contract of Adhesion (i.e. no negotiation has taken place), and the power of such contracts is even more limited. I feel it is (or if not, it ought to be) Unconscionablefor such a contract, where I am merely purchasing a service, to give someone the right to damage or destroy my property. Actual negotiation for mutually agreeable terms is required before I can accept that I have agreed to give someone the right to destroy my property.

Re:Overreaction

[Gleef]

Anonymous Coward wrote:

This is a common myth. Regardless of health or happiness levels, it has been shown time and time again that the vast majority of (American) consumers:
* Shop for price and are easily conned by 'safe' and 'convenient' features
* Tell their friends where the good deals are


I disagree partially. My (admitedly anecdotal experience) is that I have seen a great deal of brand loyalty to brands that have proven themselves to a consumer's satisfaction, and I've seen this brand loyalty override both price and competitors advertisements. It is tricky to do this, since "to a consumer's satisfaction" is different for each and every consumer, but offering a good product at a fair price and not screwing the customer over is a healthy start towards this path.

When a consumer is in a market where they haven't developed any brand loyalty, you are completely right, most consumers choose on the basis of price and half remembered lies from advertisements.

* Can't muster up enough energy to put down a bag or Doritos, let alone participate in a lawsuit.

This is America we're talking about here, land of the lawyers. If your typical American is merely annoyed, sure, Doritos not torts. If he's a little more than annoyed, he'll say "sure" when the lawyer calls to ask if he wants to be in on the juicy class action suit (which will end with the company paying $10 million, the lawyer getting $5 million and the actual people getting $2.13 each). It doesn't take much more beyond that point for someone to call a lawyer and ask how much they can get from the bastard company with deep pockets. Sure, not everyone is going to do this, but it doesn't take very many lawsuits to destroy the profits from a product.

You just signed up for Business 101, right? It shows.

Nope, computer programmer, no formal business education. But I've observed that a business doesn't have to be slimey to succeed.

The 'best', most compassionate companies do respect their consumers. However, many 'decent' companies go under with barely a whimper.

Yes, and so do many slimey ones. 95% of new business fail from what I've heard.

And when you've got shareholders (ie, you and me and our fund managers) screaming for profit or growth, then the board (and hence, the executive) have little choice but to steam ever forward in search of the quick profits and/or growth for the next quarter or else be out of a job.

Yes, this happens far far too often. This doesn't excuse a company for screwing their customers in a way that doesn't result in quick profits and growth. Disabling peoples boxes will generate ill-will and lost sales.

Much like politics, you're remembered for what you did just before election time. Politicians can't buy into 10- or 20- or 50- years plans that are good for the country and not for their careers and lifestyle.

I'm not talking about good for the country, that's a lot to ask out of a corporation, even for an idealist like me. I'd like good for the company and their customers. I'll settle for good for the company and not bad for their customers. Good for the company and bad for the customers is parasitic and bad but understandible.

The ReplayTV thing strikes me as potentially bad for both the company and their customers, and that's just stupid. Not to blow this out of proportion, in this case we're talking about them reserving the right to do something stupid, they haven't actually done it, but still.

So yeah, I mostly agree with you, the greed and stupitidy is par for the course given the current crop of laws and people. I just don't feel it is necessary given the current crop of laws and people. Since I think we both feel it's not 'Good', I try to nudge a little bit of laziness away when I can, and suggest that long-term greed is more productive than short-term greed.

Re:Overreaction

[Danse]

Two things. First, Tivo does not seem to claim the right to make changes to your hardware without your consent, only to the services offered. Second, they don't seem to claim that they will shut you down due to the mere allegation that you are infringing on someone's copyright. Those are substantial differences.

Re:Overreaction

[milo_Gwalthny]

Actually, Delaware does have corporation taxes. In fact, the corporation taxes on the 300,000 companies that are incorporated there mean that there is no sales tax. Companies incorporate in Delaware because the corporation law there is very favorable and the chancery courts (courts that deal with corporate matters) are knowledgable and relatively speedy.

Re:Overreaction

[milo_Gwalthny]

In short, if a consumer reads/hears a constant barrage of ads ... Then nine times out of ten, that's where the consumer spending and financial investments go.

In the advertising business they have an old saying: "Good advertising kills bad products faster than bad advertising."

Advertising, in general, is meant to get someone to try something or to remember to buy again if they liked the product. Advertising can't make bad products good, and word of mouth is much stronger than a TV ad (thus the mostly unsuccessful attempts at "grass-roots" marketing.)

In support I cite the Pets.com sock puppet and the Taco Bell chihuahua, two of the best advertising campaigns of the '90s from every point of view except sales of products. Nothing would have sold those products, not because of bad advertising, but because they were bad products.

Re:Overreaction

[jafac]

Because healthy, happy, non-screwed-over customers:
* Buy more products and services from them in the future; and
* Tell their friends and acquaintances how great the company is, and encourage other people to become customers; and
* Don't involve the company in expensive lawsuits.

* Fight wars to protect businesses from those evil, evil communists. Come on, people gave their LIVES to protect this shit, and this is how they repay us?

Re:Overreaction

[hawk]

>Companies incorporate in Delaware because the
>corporation law there is very favorable and the
>chancery courts (courts that deal with corporate >matters) are knowledgable and relatively speedy.

Also, because they don't know that Nevada's law is even more friendly to corporations (or at least to the directors :), while eliminating the corporate tax entirely (OK, you pay a few bucks each year to file your list of 3 officers and director(s).

hawk, esq.

Re:Overreaction

[milo_Gwalthny]

Nevada is like the Bermuda of the US, tax-wise :-). I think it must be Delaware's longer history of corporate friendliness that gives the lawyers comfort. Interestingly, there was an article in the WSJ yesterday noting that Delaware judges were starting to backslide a bit in their race to the bottom.

My company once had a subsidiary incorporated in Nevada, for tax reasons. Had to go to Vegas once a year for the annual meeting. Those were the days.

Re:Overreaction

[hawk]

>Had to go to Vegas once a year for the annual meeting

For a very loose definition of "had to" :)

I usually made sure that the bylaws allowed (but didn't require) phone meetings--I could sit in my Nevada office on a conference call and put words into my clients's mouths to conduct the meeting . . .

hawk, esq.

Re:Overreaction

[milo_Gwalthny]

Phone meetings? The annual meeting in Vegas and the annual meeting in Bermuda (another sub that held some foreign assets) were the high points of my wife's year. She would have killed me if I suggested phone meetings.

Unfortuneately, the tax advantages work the other way when the subsidiaries in question are *losing* money :).

Re:Overreaction

[hawk]

Oh, yes. that's why you "have to" go for the meeting--even though you don't have to :)

hawk

Re:Overreaction

[Suppafly]

yeh but delaware was the first to be pro business.. other states are catching up now but delaware was the first so it has a lot more .. its not like existing business are going to up and reincorporate in another state

Re:Overreaction

[Gleef]

Anonymous Coward asks:

> I suspect if they use this agreement to disable the device of a New York State customer within 90 days of the customer purchasing the product, they will be in violation of NYS law.

SONICblue is based in California and has no business presence in NY. Where's the jurisdiction?

Jurisdiction is one of those thorny issues which you need a real lawyer to properly sort out (I am not a lawyer, nor is any of this legal advice). My limited understanding of it is, if a company screws over a consumer in NYS they don't need an office there to get sued under New York law in a New York court.

The bit of my rant you quote is referring to the product's warranty, even if my other argument (i.e. SonicBLUE damaged my property) doesn't hold any water, when a company sells a consumer product, they warrant that it will function for a set period. Even if the ReplayTV box comes with no paper warranty, in New York State (and many others) the product has an "implied" 90 day warranty. In retrospect, the warranty argument is a bit hazy (although I'd call a product defective if it stopped working because I used a service run by the manufacturer in accordance with all instructions and service agreements).

Re:Overreaction

[hawk]

I don't know of any state other than Nevada that could be fairly described as "catching up" with Delaware--and Nevada has gone far belong catching up, and has left Delaware behind.

No, we don't have Chancery courts, but our regular system functions well enough that this isn't a problem . . .

hawk

Re:Overreaction

[_Sprocket_]

Once again /. readers look at the issue backwards. WHY do you think a business is even remotely concerned with what is good for consumers? Why should they be?

...

Consumers don't have to do anything. Especially they don't have to buy a product they don't like, or agree to terms they find unfair. But if they accept an agreement without bothering to read it they are just plain stupid and deserve what happens.

Go back and re-read the post. There is no looking at the issue backwards.

Consumers DO have to do something. At the least, they should be aware of anti-consumer practices and refuse to support those companies who operate on those policies. It would be nice if they also voiced their displeasure and made others aware of these same issues.

This has happened in the past, will happen in the future, and if we're lucky will happen more and more often. In this environment, it is in a company's best interest to keep consumer interest in mind less they find that they have created policies that push them out of the market.

Hate to burst your little "greed is good" bubble, but there are limits to acceptable business practices. There is a difference between producing a powerfull street car that can be dangerous in the wrong hands and producing the Pinto. There is a difference between a loan with a steep interest rate and a con. Legitimate business should have no problems operating within those limitations.

just in case the server becomes unavailable...

[Kargan]

...like that ever happens!

---------
REPLAYTV 4500 Digital Video Recorder
Activation and Service Agreement

This Agreement applies to your use of the ReplayTV Service and is a legally binding agreement between you SONICblue Incorporated and its wholly owned subsidiary, ReplayTV Inc. (collectively "ReplayTV"). By clicking the button marked "I Agree" below or by otherwise communicating your acceptance to ReplayTV or by using the ReplayTV Service, you agree to all the terms and conditions in this Agreement. IMPORTANT NOTE: Your ReplayTV 4500 works only by receiving the ReplayTV Service offered and provided by ReplayTV. If you do not agree with all the terms and conditions of this Agreement, you are not authorized to use the ReplayTV Service, and you may return the ReplayTV 4500 to ReplayTV or the authorized retailer from whom you purchased the product for a full refund.

1. Use of the Service

A. Authorized Product. You may access and use the ReplayTV Service only with a ReplayTV 4500 product authorized to receive the ReplayTV Service and you agree not to tamper with or otherwise modify the authorized product.

B. Personal Use Only. The ReplayTV Service is for personal, residential, non-commercial use. Any other use is not permitted under this Agreement. You may not re-sell the ReplayTV Service in whole or in part, nor, except as part of your transfer of the ReplayTV 4500 unit as provided in this Agreement, may you transfer the ReplayTV Service.

C. Eligible Subscribers. You represent that you are at least 18 years of age. You may permit minors to use the ReplayTV Service under your account, but you agree that you are fully responsible for the minors' use of the ReplayTV Service.

D. Accurate Information. You must give us accurate and complete information when you activate and use your ReplayTV Service. If you do not, ReplayTV may terminate your account at any time.

E. ReplayTV's Privacy Policy. ReplayTV respects the privacy of your information and will not disclose any of your information except as permitted in ReplayTV's Privacy Policy. A current copy of ReplayTV's Privacy Policy is included in the Privacy Policy section of the main menu in the ReplayTV software included on your ReplayTV 4500 and on the SONICblue website www.sonicblue.com. Please read it carefully before using your subscription for the ReplayTV Service. By using the ReplayTV Service, you understand and agree with how ReplayTV handles your information as described in our Privacy Policy. ReplayTV will use commercially reasonable efforts to notify you of any substantial and material changes to the Privacy Policy. However, you are responsible for viewing the latest Privacy Policy which can be accessed through our website at www.sonicblue.com.

F. TV Programming. The ReplayTV Service gives you the ability to see and record televised programs. However, ReplayTV exercises no editorial or programming control over these programs ("Third Party Content"). You understand that (a) ReplayTV does not guarantee the access to or recording of any particular program, (b) programming is not under ReplayTV's control, (c) ReplayTV is not responsible for and has no editorial control over any Third Party Content, and (d) ReplayTV has no control over the distribution of programs. You also understand that television programs, films, videotapes, and other materials may be copyrighted. Unauthorized recording and sending of such material may be contrary to the provisions of the United States copyright laws. The rights of copyright holders are subject to limitations when persons are engaged in "fair use" or are protected by other provisions of law. You are responsible for complying with these laws.

G. Changes to ReplayTV Service. At its discretion, ReplayTV may automatically add, modify, or disable any feature or functionality of the ReplayTV Service or on the ReplayTV 4500 when your unit connects to our server or at other times with or without notice. In addition, ReplayTV may modify the terms and conditions of this Agreement from time to time (and will notify you of these changes to the Agreement)

H. Software. ReplayTV provided certain software with the ReplayTV 4500 unit you purchased, and may provide replacement (for example, bug fixes, updates or upgrades) and additional software to you from time to time (which may include by automatic downloads to the ReplayTV 4500 unit), in order for you to access and use certain features of the ReplayTV Service. Your use of all such software is subject to the terms of this Agreement. However, if a software license agreement is included with any such software, then those terms (and not this Agreement) will govern your use of that software. You have a limited, non-exclusive right to use the software only with the ReplayTV 4500 unit with which the software was provided or for which it was downloaded. You may make one copy of the software you download for backup purposes only, provided that such backup copy must include all copyright and other proprietary information and notices contained on the original. You acknowledge and agree that the software is copyrighted and contains material that is protected by copyright, trademark, trade secret and other laws and international treaty provisions relating to proprietary rights. You may not remove, change or hide any of ReplayTV's or its licensors' or suppliers' proprietary rights notices on or in the software or on output generated by the software. Except and only to the extent permitted by applicable law and this Agreement, you may not copy, decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, modify, rent, lease, loan, distribute, assign, transfer, or create derivative works from the software. You acknowledge and agree that any unauthorized use, transfer, sublicensing or disclosure of the software may cause irreparable injury to ReplayTV, and under such circumstances, ReplayTV shall be entitled to equitable relief, without posting bond or other security, including but not limited to, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief.

I. Ownership; Certain Rights. ReplayTV and its licensors and suppliers retain title to and ownership of all the ReplayTV software. ReplayTV and its licensors and suppliers own the intellectual property rights in and to the ReplayTV 4500 unit and the ReplayTV Service, including the copyrights and trademarks associated with the ReplayTV 4500 unit and the ReplayTV Service.

2. Fees and Term of the ReplayTV Service

A. Subscription Fees. Your use of the ReplayTV Service is subject to your payment of the subscription fee in advance. The subscription fee covers only the basic ReplayTV Service, and does not include charges or fees (a) for premium or other additional services offered as part of or through the ReplayTV Service for which ReplayTV charges additional fees, or (b) to third parties for telephone service or broadband access, if applicable. You are responsible for any such telephone or broadband service charges and acknowledge and agree that you shall be solely responsible for all disputes with any third party related to the same.

B. Lifetime Service. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, once you have paid the Service Activation Fee for your ReplayTV 4500 you will not incur any additional charges to receive the basic ReplayTV Service during the lifetime of that product. The ReplayTV Service will be provided only to that particular ReplayTV 4500 unit for which you paid the subscription fee and cannot be transferred to any other units you may purchase. However, the ReplayTV Service will still apply to that unit even if you give it or sell it to a friend or family member. Thus, any service that is activated follows the ReplayTV 4500 unit and not the person.

C. Termination of Service; Your Indemnity Obligations. Notwithstanding any term of this Agreement, ReplayTV has the absolute right to immediately suspend or terminate your account, and terminate this Agreement, if you (a) breach any provision of this Agreement (including but not limited to altering the ReplayTV 4500 unit or related software), (b) misuse the ReplayTV Service, or (c) infringe (or are alleged to infringe) upon the intellectual property rights of ReplayTV or any third party in your use in any way of the ReplayTV Service. You further agree that you will defend, indemnify and hold harmless ReplayTV and its affiliates from and against any and all claims, actions, suits, liabilities, losses, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees) arising out of or relating to any of the actions described above that would entitle ReplayTV to terminate this Agreement.

3. DISCLAIMERS AND LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY

A. Warranty Disclaimer. THE REPLAYTV SERVICE IS PROVIDED "AS IS," "WITH ALL FAULTS," AND "AS AVAILABLE." REPLAYTV AND ITS SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND REGARDING THE REPLAYTV SERVICE (INCLUDING THIRD PARTY PROGRAMS), WHETHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED, OR STATUTORY, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF TITLE, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. ReplayTV makes no warranty that (a) the ReplayTV Service or its content will meet your requirements, be uninterrupted, error-free, secure or timely; or (b) that the information obtained through the ReplayTV Service (including but not limited to Third Party Programs) is accurate, current, complete or reliable. Some jurisdictions do not allow the disclaimer of implied warranties, so the above disclaimer may not apply to you. You may also have other legal rights that vary from state to state.

B. NO INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. IN NO EVENT WILL REPLAYTV OR ITS LICENSORS OR SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO YOU OR ANY THIRD PARTY FOR ANY INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, INDIRECT, OR SPECIAL DAMAGES OF ANY KIND (WHETHER FOR LOST PROFITS, LOSS OF DATA OR OTHERWISE) ARISING FROM OR RELATING TO YOUR USE OF THE REPLAYTV SERVICE OR THIS AGREEMENT, EVEN IF REPLAYTV HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

C. LIMITATIONS OF REPLAYTV'S LIABILITY. IN NO EVENT SHALL REPLAYTV'S AGGREGATE LIABILITY TO YOU (AND ANYONE ELSE WHO USES THE REPLAYTV SERVICE THROUGH YOUR ACCOUNT), FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ON ANY BASIS, WHETHER IN TORT, CONTRACT OR OTHERWISE, EXCEED THE TOTAL AMOUNT YOU PAID TO REPLAYTV FOR THE REPLAYTV 4500 UNIT AND THE REPLAYTV SERVICE. YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THESE LIMITATIONS OF REPLAYTV'S AND REPLAYTV'S SUPPLIERS' AND LICENSORS' LIABILITY ARE A FUNDAMENTAL PART OF THIS AGREEMENT, AND REPLAYTV WOULD NOT ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT WITHOUT SUCH LIMITATION. Some states do not allow the exclusion or limitation of incidental or consequential damages, so the above limitation or exclusion may not apply to you.

4. Miscellaneous

This Agreement (including referenced documents) constitutes the entire agreement regarding your use of the ReplayTV Service and supersedes any and all prior statements, agreements or understandings with respect to the ReplayTV Service. This Agreement is governed by and will be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California without regard to its conflict of laws principles. If any provision of this Agreement is invalid, illegal or unenforceable, such provision will be deemed changed only to the extent necessary to make it valid, legal and enforceable; all other provisions of this Agreement will continue in full force and effect. Any failure by ReplayTV to strictly enforce any provision of this Agreement will not waive ReplayTV's right to later enforce that provision or any subsequent default or breach of the same or a different kind.

BY CLICKING ON THE "I AGREE" BUTTON BELOW, I REPRESENT THAT I HAVE READ, AND I UNDERSTAND AND AGREE TO, THE TERMS STATED ABOVE.

Re:just in case the server becomes unavailable...

[serutan]

Yeah, it looks like the agreement only governs the use of the service, not the hardware. It doesn't seem to address the possibility of using the hardware for something other than their service. Not that I could think of anything.

Easy way out

[alexburke]

The solution is simple: Instead of reading the agreement and agreeing to it, don't!

Re:Easy way out

[alexburke]

It's quite simple, really -- not once did you ever see the agreement, and therefore you couldn't possibly have agreed to it.

Need it spoonfed to you? Okay, keep reading.

By beginning the activation of your new ReplayTV unit here, you will be activating the unit without agreeing to the agreement that seems to have Slashdotters up in arms -- in actual fact, you won't even have seen such an agreement, period.

In some jurisdictions, click-through agreements are legally binding -- but I've yet to hear of a jurisdiction which would consider you bound to an agreement you didn't see or agree to whatsoever.

Re:Easy way out

[DarkEdgeX]

but I've yet to hear of a jurisdiction which would consider you bound to an agreement you didn't see or agree to whatsoever

Tell that to American Medical Response (AMR) when they pick you up and take you to the hospital, then send bill collectors after your ass to get their fees when you manage to live. No kidding, they charge $150/mile, and a minimum of around $300 ('location fee') to start the journey. I'm still amazed they can run a business when they're taking people who aren't even conscious to the hospital, without having signed a contract. (Or worse, signing a contract while still in a barely lucid state.)

Of course, to claim that defense in court you'd probably have to assert that the retailer you bought your ReplayTV from beat you unconscious with a baseball bat, then threw you out the door with ReplayTV in hand.. then, I've seen a lot of Circuit City employees with Louseville Sluggers recently.

Re:Easy way out

[jbarr]

Um, I don't think so. Activating it on the web is only half the process. You have to go through activation screens on the ReplayTV box itself, and it asks you if you agree to the terms of the service agreement. Besides, the Agreement specifically states:

"...by using the ReplayTV Service, you agree to all terms and conditions in this Agreement."

So in using the service, you are agreeing to be bound by its terms.

Re:Easy way out

[RelliK]

It's quite simple, really -- not once did you ever see the agreement, and therefore you couldn't possibly have agreed to it.

There is a legal concept called "willful blindness". When you are intentially "blind" to the facts, you can still be held accountable, since it can be shown that you knew or should have known what's going on. The keyword is intentionally, as is clearly the case with your suggestion.

but I've yet to hear of a jurisdiction which would consider you bound to an agreement you didn't see or agree to whatsoever.

I can name two: Virginia and Mariland. Those are the two states that passed UCITA -- a law that legalizes exactly that. Of course this law is so blatantly unconstitutional that it will be struck down by the first judge who looks at it. But hey -- so is DMCA :-)

Re:Easy way out

[DarkEdgeX]

You are a hairy cockmonger, bastard. =)

Re:Covering their butts

[ScottKin]

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

Copies of the contract??

[lrohrer]

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?

Re:Copies of the contract??

[ncc74656]

Not true, by providing contract in a TEXTBOX HTML element, an argument could be made that SonicBlue is implicitly allowing editing AND submission of your changes to the contract.

That depends on whether the edit box is, in fact, editable. I don't have much experience with HTML forms (specifically, I don't know if an edit box in a form can be made read-only), but in the software I write, an edit box can be marked read-only. The program can dump text into it, but the user can't change the text. If you can do the same with an HTML form, Sonicblue would be crazy to leave the box editable.

(Of course, if it is editable, just make whatever changes you want and make a screen dump before you click "I Agree." If they bitch at you for doing something they don't like, you have documentation to back up your position.)

Why NOT get one?

[Winterblink]

I really don't see why this should affect the poster's take on getting one of these. The manufacturer's covering its ass in all ways possible. If you say you agree to it and hack the machine, pirate programs, whatever, you're at fault not them. They're simply making that clear. Get the machine, hack it, do what you want. Why would the license agreement change your mind, when you're going to do it anyway? :)

Read Tivos agreement lately?

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course not, that would be balanced research, and Slashdot editors/authors don't have time for that what with keeping so busy being liberal reactionaries.

I can't stand Replay for a myriad of technical reasons, but read Tivos license agreement - it says all the same things, sometimes in nearly the exact same words.

"Using the TiVo Service. You may access and use the TiVo Service only with a product authorized to receive the TiVo Service and you agree not to tamper with or otherwise modify the authorized product..."

"TiVo retains the absolute right to immediately suspend or terminate your account, and terminate this agreement, if the charges to your credit card for the fees described in the "Subscription Fees and Payment Authorization" paragraph above are refused for any reason, if you breach any provision in this agreement, if you misuse the TiVo Service, and/ or if you alter the Recorder or use the TiVo Service in such a manner as to infringe upon the intellectual property rights of TiVo or any third party."

They have to say those kinds of things to keep their legal options open should someone do something they feel they have to respond to. Until they give some sign of enforcing their agreement more rigidly than Tivo getting your panties in a wad over what some standard legal disclaimer says is a bit premature. Of course premature and uninformed ranting is what Slashdot is all about these days, isn't it?

Re:Read Tivos agreement lately?

[echucker]

Well, I guess you're at least one step ahad of the rest of us- you actually read them! ;-)

Re:Read Tivos agreement lately?

[ImaLamer]

Slashdot editors/authors don't have time for that what with keeping so busy being liberal reactionaries. Right, right....

The agreement only covers the service and IP rights of TiVo.

This covers a modified box, which they (ReplayTV) will damage it if found modified.

Tivo just doesn't want you to expose IP rights and/or steal service. ReplayTV doens't want you to modify the hardware in anyway.

The problem is you don't know the story (as expected). ReplayTV is using their service as a backdoor method into checking your box for 'hacks'.

If you open your VCR it's legal, if you smash your TV with a hammer it's legal.

They could say "no mo' service fo' you" but instead they are DISABLING IT!

Wolcott

[Graymalkin]

Section 4B: Do not taunt ReplayTV 4500.

Section 4C: If you hack ReplayTV 4500 and it begins to smoke, get away immediately. Seek shelter and cover head.

Geez, talking about infringement.

Bad Press for Microsoft competitors

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting coincedence that we are getting so much bad press on Microsoft's competitors these days. Newgroups are flooded with TiVo = SPYWARE FUD and of course, the TiVo forces it's customers to watch programs they don't want to watch FUD and Replay is changing it's licensing --ohh it's so bad... looks like the only place to go for real choice and quality is Microsoft!

Well, I'll keep my Dtivos as long as I can, I am one of those extremely satisfied TiVo owners that is in the 90% customer satisfaction group TiVo talks about. Furthermore I recomend TiVo to everyone I know.

Of course I do believe TiVo days are numbered. Alas , even though TiVo is great, the best by far, with the highest customer ratings, it all means nothing....

The merger gets approved, Echostar already announced it's alliance with MOXI and Moxi was sold to Microsoft's Paul Allen,....don't you just love it when a plan comes together to to allow a corporation to use it financial gains from one monopoly to create another....

Microsoft takes two loosing products, Ultimate TV and Xbox , combines them, Paul Allen buys a company called Moxi and controls it all....

who wants it that bad?

[slaida1]

Even if they gave those boxes free, they would be useless in a world where everybody everywhere would follow The Rules and The Laws by the book. I mean have they even bothered checking if any of those cross any laws in all the countries they're selling?

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?

You are wrong

[cat_jesus]

Actually most of the hacking being done has nothing to do with illegal reception, whatever you mean by that. Most hacks are for things like increasing storage space, running web servers, making email interfaces, ugrading memory, etc...

Normally I wouldn't respond to such a troll but this kind of misinformation needs to be stopped. It is what leads to things like the DMCA.

Cat

oh the money!

[DarkHelmet]

And Term 2C 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 it--the agreement indemnifies them completely.

And of course, for $49.95, we can look past this injunction and set you back up again. Of course, in doing this we take no responsibility for the system kicking you off again.

But that's okay. 49.95 gets you back up and running again... For a while.

Legally binding or not, that is the question

[fisman]

Generally people are quick to indemnify themselves from everything that may ever happen but usually these statements are not worth the paper they are printed on in a court of law.

Now I am no lawyer but would Microsoft for example be indemnified from the antitrust allegations if they put a clause to that effect in their licence agreement?

More often than not copyright notices and licence agreements are there purely for FUD purposes. I have always seriously doubted the legal grounds a company has to stand on if they claim things in a license agreement which nobody really reads, seeks legal council on or sign.

I would go out and buy one and claim that I never received the licence agreement! Would they then have to prove that I received, read and agreed to it before they can take further steps?

Come-on you Law-infested-geeks out there! What is the answer?

Re:Legally binding or not, that is the question

[cyril3]

To activate you have to click through the agreement. To do that you accept the terms. It's legal if the terms are legal.

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.

Re:Legally binding or not, that is the question

[Zeinfeld]

To activate you have to click through the agreement. To do that you accept the terms. It's legal if the terms are legal.

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.

tick tock tick tock

[drDugan]

you see... companies are figuring out that it's
way LESS profitable to actually sell you something
compared to makign you licence it, and
then controlling how you use it. Software
companies figured this out a while back. People
joke, but if there is more profit in
it, companies will do it. "Please sign
this EULA before you buy this car." Its coming.

Re:tick tock tick tock

[werdna]

"Please sign this EULA before you buy this car." Its coming.

nah, its been here since forever.

Have you actually ever read any of the documents they make you sign before you buy a car? rent a car?

for enforceable provisions that you don't ever read, have you looked at the backside of your plane tickets lately? almost any theatre or park admission ticket? utility tariffs?

Re:tick tock tick tock

[PhxBlue]

"Please sign this EULA before you buy this car." Its coming.

More likely we'll see something like this:

By driving this car, you agree to the following End-User License Agreement (EULA):

1. User assumes all responsibility for any defects on the part of the Vehicle, including defects sold to the User as Features;
2. The User may not sue the Seller under any existing or future laws that ever existed or ever will;
3. User may not user the Vehicle in a manner which violates any laws, bylaws, whims of our Corporate Dictatorship, or guidelines of Grannie Mae, that ever existed or ever will;
4. We reserve the right to remotely detonate the Vehicle if the User is found in violation of the EULA. If later determination finds that the User did not violate the EULA, we will modify the EULA retroactively.

Re:tick tock tick tock

[ncc74656]

Have you actually ever read any of the documents they make you sign before you buy a car?

If I want to add nitrous to my S10, lower it so that it scrapes the pavement, replace its cargo box with an RV body, or whatever, there's not a thing Chevy can do about it (except maybe void the warranty if too much nitrous causes the engine to blow up). The only condition on my continued ownership of the truck is that I carry comprehensive-loss insurance coverage until the loan is paid off. If I had paid cash up front instead of financing it for the next five years, even that condition wouldn't apply. Beyond that, I can do what I want with it. Any attempt to impose restrictions would be laughed out of court.

Re:Bring on the whining!

[Technician]

Some people purchase hardware with the intent on using it "their own way". Having your VCR (digital) under a third party's thumb is very scarey. I'll stick with a PC based solution to avoid the big brother problems. The option of subscribing to the program guide, etc. is one thing. Having the ability of a EULA enforced open back door, that can kill your hardware investment remotely, is another!

an opportunity

[drDugan]

I've been thinking on this a bit. I want input.

I think it would be great to start a non-profit technology company. ... 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.

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?

Re:an opportunity

[richieb]

But to be able to record shows of TV you'll have to sign some kind of agreement with the media cartels, to follow their "standards".

Look what happened to the free (!) DVD players for Linux. People are not allowed to write one without paying a licensing fee to the DVD secret holders.

Of course with DeCSS out you can build a DVD player for Linux, but try and sell players based on this code without paying the licensing fees and you'll see hordes of lawyers on your tail.

Also, nobody really needs a PVR. We'd be better off not watching TV at all (or less anyways).

Loophole in the first paragraph

[Technician]

If you do not agree with all the terms and conditions of this Agreement, you are not authorized to use the ReplayTV Service
They are selling the service with the restriction, not the box. Use what is in the above quote to not agree to the service, then modify the hardware to suit your needs. Remember to not use their service, that would be theft of service since you did not agree to the terms.

Re:Loophole in the first paragraph

[Mr. Sketch]

Actually, you're missing the sentance before it:
Your ReplayTV 4500 works only by receiving the ReplayTV Service offered and provided by ReplayTV
So, by not using the ReplayTV Service, your ReplayTV will (supposedly) not work, hmmm, I wonder how well it "won't work" and if it *can* work after being removed from the ReplayTV Service it would make that sentance null and void and I wonder if a skilled lawyer could void the entire agreement, or at least large portions of it. So, in theory, as long as it's disconnected from the service, you may hack to your hearts desire as long as when you reconnect it, it doesn't try to use the service, because as soon as it uses the service you would be in violation of the license agreement.

Re:Loophole in the first paragraph

[Technician]

by not using the ReplayTV Service, your ReplayTV will (supposedly) not work
Umm, did you miss the part about modifying the unit? True it is designed to use their service. However if you don't use their service, because you want to modify the unit.... Um what was the question again?

Why accept *their* agreement?

[devnullkac]

Try mine:

REPLAYTV 4500 Digital Video Recorder
Activation and Service Agreement

1. Use of the Service
You may use the service for any purpose and SonicBlue can't say "boo" about it.

2. Fees and Term of the ReplayTV Service
SonicBlue would like for you to pay for the service, but if you figure out how to steal it, well we can certainly respect such an achievement.

3. DISCLAIMERS AND LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY
If you use the ReplayTV 4500 to store emergency response procedures for a nuclear reactor and the product fails to function during a disaster due to neutron flux, SonicBlue accepts full responsibility for the resulting environmental damage.

4. Miscellaneous
You may modify this agreement at any time in any way without notice to SonicBlue. Failure of Sonicblue to notice or respond will constitute our agreement to the new conditions.

BY CLICKING ON THE "I AGREE" LINK BELOW, I REPRESENT THAT I HAVE READ, AND I UNDERSTAND AND AGREE TO, THE TERMS STATED ABOVE.

I Agree

Re:Build Your Own?

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Why NOT get one? The EULA - that's why

[jmichaelg]

Because the EULA says they can turn the damn thing off if THEY decide to. Moreover, the EULA says if they decide to, they don't owe you anything.

In the pre-EULA days, when you bought something, you owned it. Now both Sonic and TIVO are saying that despite you giving them money, they still own the device and can do whatever they want with it, including disabling it.

An example of where this will get unpleasant is if they start using the machine in some way that you hadn't anticipated. TIVO just force fed their UK subscribers a show the subscribers didn't ask for. What if the machine starts forcing you to wacth an ad before they'll let you see what you bought the machine for? What can you do? Not a thing according to the EULA.

What if a competing service that doesn't monkey around with the basic service springs up and offers their wares at a lower price? Can you switch to them? Nope - the EULA forbids modifying the software. If Sonic or Tivo figure out that you switched, they can legally turn off your machine.

The really ridiculous thing about all of this is there isn't enough worthwhile stuff on TV to warrant watching TV in the first place. How many times have you gotten up after watching TV and thought "That was a waste?" Maybe deleting the ads would have improved the signal to noise ratio but now the machine you bought to skip the ads is beginning to force ads down your throat.

Not a worthwhile purchase in my book.

So what if you don't agree?

[TheSHAD0W]

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.

Does this violate merchantability?

[MobyDisk]

In the US, all products must carry an implied warranty of merchantability. If the product can be disabled for any reason, wouldn't that violate the agreement? Thus, this product cannot be sold in the us? Any lawyers care to comment?

Re:Does this violate merchantability?

[Zeinfeld]

In the US, all products must carry an implied warranty of merchantability [google.com]. If the product can be disabled for any reason, wouldn't that violate the agreement? Thus, this product cannot be sold in the us? Any lawyers care to comment?

IANAL but you are correct, I spent a fair bit of time wih lawyers who write such stuff and they wory a lot about enforceability.

Many shrinkwrap products disclaim merchantability but it is unlikely that the courts would consider the clause enforceable and bar a claim on the basis of it.

The more relevant consideration is in what circumstances would ReplayTV activate the clause? I suspect that if they get that desperate that there is not much ReplayTV left to go sue.

These stupid clauses do however have material effect, but not the one you think. They allow ReplayTV to recognise revenue that otherwise they would have to defer since there is an ongoing service commitment. No 'commitment', no need to defer the revenue.

Re:Does this violate merchantability?

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

In the US, all products must carry an implied warranty of merchantability

(gdb) show warranty
NO WARRANTY

11. BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE IS NO WARRANTY
FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN
OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES
PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS
TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE
PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING,
REPAIR OR CORRECTION.

12. IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING
WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR
REDISTRIBUTE THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES,
INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING
OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY
YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER
PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

(gdb)

Re:Does this violate merchantability?

[TheSHAD0W]

11. BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE...

I don't think a $250 set-up fee counts as "free of charge".

Re:Not Whining

[hagardtroll]

Same here, and...

I am stillllll waiting for someone to come up with a generic programmable VCR like PVR device that doesn't come with all those strings and monthly payments attached.

I thought free markets were supposed to provide what is in demand. It must just be the two of us then.

An argument may be made.

[Typingsux]

Since it is their intellectual property, they can have any agreement they like.
That's the way I see it. You don't like the agreement? Don't buy the replay.

Exactly. I don't like it, so I won't buy it. The power of the consumer wins again.

Re:An argument may be made.

[jgerman]

that's a valid opinion, but not everyone shares it. Many of us don't believe in the concept of intellectual property at all. Furthermore, I'm sure that others share the view that the only contract that they feel obliged to stick to is the exchange of money for goods. Once it's in their (your) hands it's theirs to do with what they will. That hardware is certainly your property, they have no right to render it useless. Disable service, yes, disable the hardware, no.

DMCA

[stud9920]

I assume you clicked the "I agree" button for us. Therefore, you are a circumvention device and illegal under the DMCA. Your mother will bue sued.

And the problem is?

[Pedrito]

Look, it's their device and their service. They're not going to go cutting it on people for no reason. That only serves to hurt their reputation and reduce their consumer appeal. On the other hand, the terms protect them and allow them to provide the service you're paying for.

Look, if you hack a satellite T.V. box, you can go to jail. At least if you hack a ReplayTV box, all they'll do is cut your service. So again, what's the problem?

Re:And the problem is?

[Pedrito]

Once I've paid my $450, it's my property as far as I'n concerened.

But the service is still theirs, unless you want to buy the company.

This is bad?

[kmellis]

"And Term 2C 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 it--the 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.

Oh, pshaw!

Look, people can argue about the ethics of true copyright violation; and, in fact, people have offered reasonable arguments concluding that there's nothing wrong with it. I disagree. Many other people disgaree, as well.

But what all of us agree upon is that within the boundaries of fair use, we should be able to do what we want with copyrighted material. It is absolutely ridiculous that everyone's ability to utilize content in a way that the law has recognized as benign is essentially illegalized in order to control the people who are violating copyright law. It's outrageous.

Now, since we all agree on this regardless of whether or not we fundamentally agree on the legitimacy of intellectual property, shouldn't we concentrate on this battle first?

And what SonicBlue is doing is to enforce copyright protections while still fighting against draconian controls. Hooray for them! Everyone who complains about this and everyone that uses a ReplayTV to violate copyright laws are undermining the effort to fight against these outrageous laws that effectively invalidate fair use.

Re:This is bad?

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

But what all of us agree upon is that within the boundaries of fair use, we should be able to do what we want with copyrighted material.

But SONICblue doesn't recognize any sort of "fair use" safe harbor:

Notwithstanding any term of this Agreement, ReplayTV has the absolute right to immediately suspend or terminate your account, and terminate this Agreement, if you ... (c) infringe (or are alleged to infringe) upon the intellectual property rights of ReplayTV or any third party in your use in any way of the ReplayTV Service.

(emphasis added)

So you might be making Fair Use, but if the Copyright Cartel doesn't like it, phffft! $250 paperweight. Well, at least, when you demonstrate to SONICblue that your use was, indeed, a Fair Use case, they will apologize and reinstate the Service, right? Wrong:

You further agree that you will defend, indemnify and hold harmless ReplayTV and its affiliates from and against any and all claims, actions, suits, liabilities, losses, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees) arising out of or relating to any of the actions described above that would entitle ReplayTV to terminate this Agreement.

So no, this is not justifiable CYA. They're saying, "We know that our service could get you into a slapping match with the Copyright Cartel. And we don't want to fight that. But we really do want your money for as long as we can get it."

Peh. I was looking at getting one of these, but now I'll just look into building my own.

Wow, reminds me of the CueCat...

[TrebleJunkie]

...and we all know how long *that* lasted, don't we?

If I hear Linux Tivo-like Device one more time I..

[NickV]

will scream :P

Basically, WHENEVER there is a TIVO/ReplayTV device story on /., 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.

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 /. 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.

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.

Great Opportunity for Tivo!

[statusbar]

Imagine, tivo can obliterate their competition just by telling them that EVERYONE is performing hacks and copyright violations! ReplayTV will have to shut down all of their own customers! A great Denial Of Service attack!

--jeff++

Don't get bent out of shape

[beagle]

Come on, people. This is nothing to get bent out of shape about -- this is exactly what the free market is for! Yes, it might be a kewl product, but if you don't agree with the license, don't purchase the product. Get a TiVo or other similar device that doesn't have these ridiculous limitations. The policy will die a natural death when market share dries up because people who refuse to abide by the policy don't buy the product.

Note, too, that if you do disagree with the policy, and yet still purchase, you will have lost. Sonic Blue will have gotten your money, and that tells other companies that people accept this asanine policy. Don't buy!

Also, remember that click-through licenses are as yet unenforceable (but keep watch the DMCA, SSSCA, and sister laws). But I doubt any of us wants to be the guinea pig to drag this through the legal system.

As for me, I will not be buying this product, but I will be writing Sonic Blue to tell them just exactly why I won't be buying. To make it easier for you, here is Sonic Blue's contact page. I urge you to send them a similar letter if this policy bothers you.

Re:Don't get bent out of shape

[bluebomber]

But the Punters aren't well informed... so Mom and Pop will buy the kids (who will hack it) a new toy

You are correct here, but the difference is that replay will get whacked on the other end when the backlash comes after people start getting shut off from the service for hacking/accused of copying/etc. "But you signed the contract" is what the customers will hear. And then people will start to realize, "hey, what a crappy service." And Replay's business will tank. (Yeah, yeah, this is all in theory, and pure speculation.)

Re:Bring on the whining!

[Zathrus]

Go ahead and kill my TiVo. I have it backed up. And there's nothing they can do to stop me from restoring it and then going and using 3rd party services to get program information, etc. -- at that point I consider the informal contract between myself and TiVo to have ended (and it's not so informal in my case - I have a lifetime subscription, and both my TiVo's are prior to the "you must use this with our service" clauses).

What, you don't have your PVR backed up? You should. It's really quite easy.

And no, there are no hardware kill switches. Or none that have been found at least - and I doubt the first generation boxes had them at all. Even if they were to tell the BIOS to kill itself, the BIOS can be replaced too.

Bad old days when you couldn't own your phone....

[dpbsmith]

...you had to pay a dollar a month FOREVER, a dollar-fifty if the phone was any color but black, two dollars if it had Touch-Tone. If you wanted a phone made by any manufacturer but Western Electric, you couldn't connect it. You couldn't connect any device to the phone line. Indeed, you couldn't even attach a mechanical muffler (the Hush-A-Phone) to the mouthpiece that made it harder for people to overhear your conversations.

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.

Re:Not Whining

[Zathrus]

The reason you're waiting is because it's not a trivial problem. People who think it's a trivial problem don't have a clue what the problem is.

Recording the data stream, keeping it all perfectly synched, allowing fast forward/skip/rewind at various speeds/intervals and still keeping it synched, the program guide data, the user interface, reasonable indexing of recorded data, and everything else - these aren't simple problems. The first being the hardest. And the guide data isn't free - you have to pay someone for it. To get it in the level of detail and quality that TiVo has you have to pay a good bit (more than what you can download from the net or hack off your cable/DSS).

Free markets do provide what is in demand. But nobody believes that the average consumer will $2k for one of these boxes - which is about what you'd have to charge to recoup R&D costs since you have no ongoing revenue.

There's a reason that TiVo and Replay have done well. And why nobody's sufficiently duplicated them yet on the PC. One of these days you'll realize that.

Re:If I hear Linux Tivo-like Device one more time

[shepd]

>But NOT one project I've seen (including the Linux VCR, the Linux-Tivo thing on /. before, etc) has found a way to change the channels on the CABLE box when you want to watch something else.

They have their own domain, lirc.org. Like you're about to say, this is exactly the other half of the equation you need -- just add the glue code now and you're done.

>I'm working on coding my own using the TiVo emitters, but I really don't want to duplicate work.

Visit the site above and let us know when its complete!

HTH.

Re:Covering their butts

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

I seriously doubt that a device designed to replace VCRs is going to shoot itself in the foot and actively scan your system each and every time you update it.

There have been a lot of people making similar claims -- "They're just CYAing. They don't intend to actually ever enforce these provisions." Bull-crap. Lawyers don't put in clauses for the fun of it. You can be sure that SONICblue's legal team pored over this and every word fully represents the intent of the company. If they never, ever meant to do this, they wouldn't bother reserving the right...

Re:Not Whining

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

And the guide data isn't free - you have to pay someone for it.

Umm, I use Yahoo!TV listings, and they're free. I don't use Replay or Tivo, so maybe I'm missing something. But I don't see why I'd need much more than program name and time.

Re:Covering their butts

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

Interestingly enough, Napster filed for Chapter 11 protections today.

Proving that any company, no matter how small, can indeed be crushed by the combined might of an entrenched industry, no matter how unjusitified. Yay for our justice system.

Less Whining

[Greyfox]

More contributing to the OpenPVR project. For the price of a Replay TV or even a Tivo, you can put together a very nice system, one or two tuner cards and internet connectivity and have the same functionality under your control. The hardest part of the whole thing is getting channel listings and if you poke around on the net a bit you can usually find listings for your area. tvguide.com's a good place to start, though I expect if a bunch of people start sucking listings off their page, they'll start making it harder to get them.

Re:Less Whining

[NanoGator]

The advantage to PC based TiVo functionality is that you can archive your shows.

The main reason I built a PVR out of an old PC is because I want to watch shows like Farscape from the beginning. With gigs of storage and MPEG 4 compression, you can keep recording eps until the show loops back around. Then you can start watching.

It's a different market from the 'I want to catch impulse shows', which Tivo excels at.

To put it another way, I could use both my PC and my TV and not pick one over the other.

Re:Less Whining

[gfxguy]

Could you please let us know how your home made PVR is working? I have an old Celeron 433 I'd like to use for this. I'd buy a new video card with TV out, and some capture card. It'd be dedicated to this, so there wouldn't be any other software interfering with it, although networking it to my other computers (where I'd be able to copy movies to) would be nice, too.

But it's not worth it if the quality isn't good, frames get dropped, that sort of thing...

So I'm wondering, if you really used an "old" PC, what are the specs, and how do you feel about the quality?

Re:Less Whining

[NanoGator]

Thanks for asking. :)

I use a Pentium 2 400 with 128 meg of RAM. OS: Windows 2000. Capture Card: Hauppage WinTV PCI. Capturing Software Snapstream (www.snapstream.com.)

The way it works is Snapstream has a nice scheduler (plus a freebie version to try it out) that records from the capture card to Windows Media format. The compression is done in real time so once it's finished, it indexes the file and then it's ready for the next one.

Quality? Well, for me, I tweaked it to capture at 330kbits a second at a resolution of 320 by 240. It's very watchable, but some may think the quality's too low. Personally, I think it's perfectly acceptable considering I can get 4 hours a CD.

I have a TV with VGA input on it that the computer is hooked up to, and I use it to watch the shows full screen. It's not half bad once you get used to it. :)

Could you do it with your celeron? Probably. You can find out before you spend any money on it, just go to snapstream.com and download their test version. Worst case scenario is you buy a TV card for $50 at Best Buy.

Re:Less Whining

[NanoGator]

You can capture at 640 by 480 in software if you use PicVideo's 'Motion JPEG' codec. You have to pay for it, but it's cheap. They have a freebie watermarked version you can play with to figure out if it's interesting to you or not.

If you're willing to add a second step to the process, you can use Virtual Dub in combination with a plugin called SmartBob which will expand 30fps interlaced video to 60 fps .AVI. I've been trying to figure out a way to automate that process, but the problem I have now is that it doesn't detect even or odd fields, so it requires user intervention to capture one show. *blah*

However, as the other guy pointed out, 320 by 240 is fine. The only real advantage to 640 by 480 is that the compression artifacts get smaller. But that's your call.

If you want to get the best TV experience, you should consider the 60fps bit I mentioned. Although I wish there was a viewer that'd play back interlaced video at 60 fps. The PicVideo codec encodes interlaced fields into individual frames, so the hard part's already done.

:)

Re:Less Whining

[Greyfox]

There are several projects out there for the integrated guide data. tvguide.com provides all the data you need, including VCR Plus codes (Which allow you to record the show whenever) and local time listings. Conflict management is an issue but it's not an insurmountable problem either. I've seen professional outfits struggle with those issues too. And you can put a CD Burner on the PVR under your control. Very handy for archiving all those "Ally McBeal" episodes that I have to watch so I can give professional legal advice here on slashdot (Damn, I was laughing so hard I just fell out of my chair...)

Warranty call in mcglk and michael's world

[gad_zuki!]

Replay: "How may I assist you today?"

michael: "My Replay isn't working, smoke is coming out of it!"

Replay: "Really, what happened?"

michael: "I was trying to overclock it with a home brewed water cooled system like I saw on slashdot and spilled water everywhere!"

Replay: "Holy shit, sir. We'll send another $500 box to your house for free!"

muchael: "Cool. I'm gonna try to submerge the new one in a fishtank."

Replayl: "Awesome, do you believe the corporate pricks at Tivo won't even let you open the box without voiding the warranty? They got some fascist sticker and everything!"

michael: "How do they sleep at night?"

---

BTW, where's the obligatory link to SonicBlue's page and a link to the model discussed? Bad /. editor bad.

Re:Warranty call in mcglk and michael's world

[Alsee]

This has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE WARRANTY.

Lets say the fan is making an annoying humming noise. I open the case, adjust the fan, and all is well. I voided the warranty. Fine, no problem. Warranty is gone, I don't care. Any further mention of warranty is OFF-TOPIC.

Your ReplayTV 4500 works only by receiving the ReplayTV Service offered and provided by ReplayTV.

You may access and use the ReplayTV Service only with a ReplayTV 4500 product authorized to receive the ReplayTV Service and you agree not to tamper with or otherwise modify the authorized product.

I fix the fan I lose ReplayTV Service. I lose ReplayTV Service my ReplayTV 4500 no longer works. I now have a $450 paperweight.

At its discretion, ReplayTV may automatically add, modify, or disable any feature or functionality of the ReplayTV Service or on the ReplayTV 4500

ReplayTV may, at will, turn my hardware into a $450 paperweight.

Termination of Service... if you ... are alleged to infringe

Anyone may turn my $450 hardware into a paperweight merely by making a false allegation that I commited copyright infringement.

There is ONE good section of the agreement though:

If you do not agree with all the terms and conditions of this Agreement, you are not authorized to use the ReplayTV Service, and you may return the ReplayTV 4500 to ReplayTV or the authorized retailer from whom you purchased the product for a full refund.

I encourage people to do exactly that. Buy a ReplayTV 4500. Open it. Decline the licence. Return it. Use the refund to buy a TiVo on the spot.

According to that clause, it sounds to me like you could drop your Replay4500 in the fishtank, dry it off in the microwave, and accidentally drop it out a 10th floor window, and still return it if you haven't agreed to the licence agreement yet. I am not a lawyer, do so at your own risk LOL.

-

Re:If I hear Linux Tivo-like Device one more time

[Fapestniegd]

Buy a RedRat http://www.redrat.co.uk It's worth it
I've been using one to switch channels before executing a vcr http://www.stack.nl/~brama/vcr/ command for a while now. In conjunction it works great.

Re:Not Whining

[Zathrus]

If you want an absolute brain dead PVR, that may be all you need. But anyone who's used a TiVo won't use a brain dead PVR again - it'd be nearly as bad as going back to a VCR.

TiVo provides name and time, plus episode name, category (and there's 20 or so categories plus sub categories for each), primary actors, director, rating, new/rerun, and a few other markings I'm forgetting now. All of this is useful for searching, indexing, and automatic recording of interesting shows (the new/rerun and episode name are biggies -- so I can select only new programs, or I can decide to not record any episodes I've recorded in the past 30 days).

Looking at Yahoo's listings, some of that is available, but it's very very random and the classifications for some shows appear to be off. And it requires you to drill down on every link, which is not how you want an automated update to work.

Accuracy is another issue... I have no way to comment on the accuracy of Yahoo's data, but I've rarely seen TiVo's data wrong. When it is you can call them up and they'll yell at the company that provides it to them.

Re:Build Your Own?

[Zeinfeld]

Allwell set top box - metallic version - $325.00
cheap bt878 video capture card
Hollywood+ mpeg playback card
DVD rom

Going to the allwell web site the box looks OK but only has two PCI slots so using them well is going to be critical.

I would really like to be able to put a firewire card into at least one of the slots so that the device can output to an external disk. There is a version of the box that comes with an MPEG2 decoder which looks a better option in that case.

Also I would probably look for a satelite TV interface card as I use dish TV. I have seen ads for such but they are pricier than normal interface cards. This choice may well mean going the windows XP route since I have no intention of writing my own drivers (been there, done that).

The problem with this build is that it doesn't leave space for a radio card as well. The problem we have found with the Dishplayer PVR (based on ultimate TV we think) is that we keep wanting to rewind and playback radio as well...

Re:TVGuide is $3.95...and it's free via your cable

[Zathrus]

Why not release such a device with the same VCR-style interface everyone is used to

Because the VCR interface is pretty universally hated? Very few people actually use their VCRs for recording because they find the interface confusing. Why do you think there are so many jokes about it?

And yes, I'm happy for your parents. Now get me data that I can actually use. See my other post for why that data is not sufficient.

And no, you don't know what channel the Simpsons are on. Not all of them at least. Which channels are playing the syndicated reruns? At what times? And do you know when they're going to change their schedule? Or show a special episode?

You don't NEED to know any of that with a good PVR like TiVo or Replay. All you need to know is what the name of the show is... or (with TiVo) the name of an actor. Or the director. Or even a general category. And you can record it, whenever it comes on, whatever channel it comes on, no matter how many lineup changes occur or special episodes are shown.

PVR's are truely freeing... it's not a matter of watching more TV (although you may), it's about watching what you want when you want. Like a show that's on at 8 pm for 30 mins and another that's on at 9 pm for 30 mins? Great. Now you don't have to watch the trash that's on between. You don't have to worry about being home to watch it at 8 pm either. And you don't have to wonder about if there's a tape in the VCR, if there's enough space left on it, or if another show is about to come on that you want to tape so you can't watch that first one.

Re:Not Whining

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

And it requires you to drill down on every link, which is not how you want an automated update to work.

Fair enough, except way back in 1994, I wrote a script that pretended to be a Netscape browser and read the day's schedule off TVguide.com... and I know next to nothing about the http protocols. If the info is out there and human-readable, then it can be automated.

If you want an absolute brain dead PVR, that may be all you need. But anyone who's used a TiVo won't use a brain dead PVR again - it'd be nearly as bad as going back to a VCR.

But I suspect that there is a large market for people who just want an enhanced VCR and who haven't yet become addicted :) to the TiVo features.

Re:Not Whining

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

they present you with a description of the program (so you can decide whether to record this episode of DS9), a genre (so you can record all Sci-Fi program), actors (at least in the case of TiVo, so you can set up a "wishlist" to record all shows with Avery Brooks), a "rerun" flag (so you don't get 15 copies of the same episode), etc, etc..

I actually don't think I'd use those features, so my original post stands. But it doesn't matter: Not a one of those is missing from the Yahoo! listings.

And of course those sites pay for the info at some point. (One could argue that users of public spectrum should have to provide this info as a cost of doing business, but ....) And maybe they'd drop the service or use account logins or whatever.

But why do the people providing the hardware also have to be the ones providing the programming info? Other than locking you into their business plan, of course. From the consumer's point of view, it doesn't make sense. With XML looming, one imagines a working group could define an open standard for TV info, and let competition come to the service market. And if several PVR makers agreed to utilize the open standard, they could leverage that freedom (I believe) into real cash.

Turner Broadcasting Corp alleges...

[j-turkey]

Turner's CEO has already alleged that anyone using a PVR is guilty of IP theft. According to term 2, section C (subsection c) of the agreement:

ReplayTV has the absolute right to immediately suspend or terminate your account, and terminate this Agreement, if you ... infringe (or are alleged to infringe) upon the intellectual property rights of ReplayTV or any third party in your use in any way of the ReplayTV Service.

I guess SonicBlue will have (the absolute right) to cancel every subscription to its service.


-Turkey

Warranty call in the real world

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Replay: "How may I assist you today?"

Joe Blow: "My Replay isn't working. Fix it now!"

Replay: "Really, what happened?"

Joe Blow: "I put it in the fish tank so it wouldn't clutter up my bookcase."

Software licenses for embedded products

[Craig Maloney]

As products become more and more sophisticated, it seems they're taking more and more licenses like software products instead of the "It's hardware; do whatever you wish with it, but don't bitch if you break it." I'm waiting for the day when a new microwave comes with the license "You agree to not nuke your cat. You agree not to put metal in the microwave. You agree that violating the previous clauses invalidates your license to use this microwave. Microwave will not operate without a valid license".

Rubbish Agreement

[dbretton]

To brush off the dust from a well worn expression:

That agreement is just a scrap of paper.

Though ReplayTV can initially claim the right to shut off your service, they have no legal grounds for altering your device, or changing your service simply because you bang/scratch/open/modify/mutilate your equipment, provided that you are not, in any way, affecting the service provided.
You would need to do something to the effect of altering their advertisement storage mechanism in order for ReplayTV to have legal grounds for their agreement.

Most of that agreement is just a scare tactic.

Re:Rubbish Agreement

[eples]

Most of that agreement is just a scare tactic.

I'd tend to agree, as I spoke with a lawyer just last week and he said the same thing about restrictions in contracts.

Just because it's on paper doesn't mean it is a law, or that violating it is grounds for any legal action. (but, IANAL)

They're pretty close though

[Otto]

Well, no, they aren't. But lets just say they are for the sake of argument.

Well, why don't we simply READ the two and note that at least two of three are the same.

Replay 1A: A. Authorized Product. You may access and use the ReplayTV Service only with a ReplayTV 4500 product authorized to receive the ReplayTV Service and you agree not to tamper with or otherwise modify the authorized product.

Tivo: Using the TiVo Service. You may access and use the TiVo Service only with a product authorized to receive the TiVo Service and you agree not to tamper with or otherwise modify the authorized product....

Replay 1G:
G. Changes to ReplayTV Service. At its discretion, ReplayTV may automatically add, modify, or disable any feature or functionality of the ReplayTV Service or on the ReplayTV 4500 when your unit connects to our server or at other times with or without notice. In addition, ReplayTV may modify the terms and conditions of this Agreement from time to time (and will notify you of these changes to the Agreement)

Tivo: Changes to TiVo Service. TiVo may, at its discretion, from time to time change, add or remove features of the TiVo Service or change the terms and conditions of this agreement. Such changes shall be effective upon notification by TiVo. You are responsible for viewing any new terms and if you are dissatisfied with any such changes to the TiVo Service or this agreement, you may immediately cancel your subscription as provided in the "Termination of Service" paragraph below. TiVo also reserves the right to discontinue the TiVo Service altogether at any time in its discretion.

Okay, so there's no easy direct correlation for Replay's 2C Clause. Still...

Re:They're pretty close though

[batkiwi]

Here's the big difference:

Tivo: Changes to TiVo Service. TiVo may, at its discretion, from time to time change, add or remove features of the TiVo Service or change the terms and conditions of this agreement. Such changes shall be effective upon notification by TiVo. You are responsible for viewing any new terms and if you are dissatisfied with any such changes to the TiVo Service or this agreement, you may immediately cancel your subscription as provided in the "Termination of Service" paragraph below. TiVo also reserves the right to discontinue the TiVo Service altogether at any time in its discretion.

They say they can change TIVO SERVICE. Not your tivo. They can stop doing season passes, stop giving you guide data, whatever they want. But they NEVER claim to be able to disable your tivo.

Replay says they can mess with your replay unit at any time, even disable it.

THAT is the difference.

Re:Bad old days when you couldn't own your phone..

[Rob Parkhill]

Gee, this sounds a LOT like cell-phones. Gotta buy the phone from the company providing the service, no chance to use a phone from elsewhere even if it is compatible with their network. The only difference is that they make you -buy- the phone that you can't use elsewhere instead of renting it.

Or at least that's the way things are run here in Canada.

Sure. They can claim that.

[mindstrm]

But as they are selling you the device outright.. they may still be up against a stiff lawsuit if they trash someone's device.

You can't sell someone something and then dictate what happens afterwards. Sorry.

They can refuse to provide service, of course.. but a service contract and a sale of a device are totally different things.

This is just more incentive to hack the damn thing and make sure they can't wipe it.

Re:Bad old days when you couldn't own your phone..

[tswinzig]

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.

There isn't much of a free market here folks

[FreeUser]

Come on, people. This is nothing to get bent out of shape about -- this is exactly what the free market is for! Yes, it might be a kewl product, but if you don't agree with the license, don't purchase the product.

The problem is, there really isn't a free market. The copyright cartels, and their goons, are strongarming ReplayTV, TiVo, and other PVR manufacturers into disabling features they don't like (commercial skipping) and possibly even requiring features they do like (embedded commercials, coming to a PVR near you?).

Those that want to make a kick ass PVR and sell it face the daunting certainty of being sued into oblivion by such household cartels as the MPAA and, if the device allows the sharing of music, the RIAA. So long as these monopolists can send their IP lawyer/thugs around shutting down businesses they don't like, intimidating the rest, and even absorbing the more successful (mp3.com), no free market will ever really exist because consumers will be prevented from having the choice of buying what they want altogether.

The invisible hand of the free market doesn't work when this sort of coercion is in play, and whether the terms of this particular license are to protect Replay from the copyright cartels (and whatever court orders their copyright priveleges may result in), or to take advantage of their customers down the road is quite irrelevant. Either way, it is the customer, that's you and I folks, who gets screwed, and the only viable alternative is to give up a little convinience and roll your own GNU/Linux based PVR (it is with pleasure I hear the screaming and wailing of the naysayers now, as I watch my Max Headroom episodes in resolutions they can't even dream of :-).

As for me, I will not be buying this product, but I will be writing Sonic Blue to tell them just exactly why I won't be buying. To make it easier for you, here is Sonic Blue's contact page [replaytv.com]. I urge you to send them a similar letter if this policy bothers you.

That is excellent advice ... and about the only way a consumer can wield any power in an oligarchical market: vocal boycott of the entire product. (It is the copyright cartels, not the PVR makers, who are the oligarchs, but since they effectively decide which PVRs are legal and which are not it amounts to much the same thing.)

Re:There isn't much of a free market here folks

[beagle]

no free market will ever really exist because consumers will be prevented from having the choice of buying what they want altogether.

The free market does not guarantee that every product every consumer wishes to purchase will be made available for sale. You must recognize that, in this situation, you do still have the option to purchase or not purchase the specified product with the specified fine print.

Also, remember that in any contract negotiations -- and that's esentially what this is -- you can take the proposed contract and make a counteroffer without the offending parts. They may not accept your proposed contract, but you still have that right.

Here's another example: cell phones: I want a cellphone that includes 3000 minutes a month for $30 -- with no contract. One cannot get that service anywhere -- so would you argue that there isn't a free market in cell phones? I would hope not, because, while there are stupid rules and bogus choices in the cellphone industry -- so bogus that the industry is imploding as we speak -- there certainly is a free market there.

Remember that a free market is any place at which buyers and sellers exchange goods/services/money on mutually agreeable terms. Why "agreeable"? Well, if you don't agree to the terms, whatever they are, then you won't buy. Buying inherently means that you accept all terms of the sale. They might be grudgingly accepted, but accepted they are.

Re:There isn't much of a free market here folks

[Steve B]

The free market does not guarantee that every product every consumer wishes to purchase will be made available for sale.

You are sidestepping the issue -- which is odd because you correctly describe it later:

Remember that a free market is any place at which buyers and sellers exchange goods/services/money on mutually agreeable terms.

If you can't get what you want because nobody has the desire or ability to produce it at a price you are willing to pay, that's just life. If, however, you can't get what you want because some third party has coercively interposed himself between buyer and seller, then the free market has been subverted.

Re:There isn't much of a free market here folks

[beagle]

If, however, you can't get what you want because some third party has coercively interposed himself between buyer and seller, then the free market has been subverted.

That hasn't happened here -- yet -- because you can still go buy a competing device that doesn't have the ridiculous contract.

Re:Bring on the whining!

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

Just buy a tivo, and never hook up the phone line. It doesn't use telepathy to contact Tivo headquarters, you know.

And you don't have to live with crappy PC based solutions. Some day, a PC based solution will be more than powerful enough to never drop frames, glitch out, etc... but that day isn't today *or* tomorrow.

Tivos just kick ass, and I haven't had trouble not using their guide data. Even over the 9600baud serial link, it's small enough to upload quickly (and before anyone says that I should up the baud rate, I have close to 200 ft of cat5 between the tivo and my linux server). The only thing that bothers me at all, is the third party guide utils want to suck 28 megs of html per day. Oh well, that's what my cable modem is for, I suppose.

Re:If I hear Linux Tivo-like Device one more time

[BitGeek]

I'm working on this problem. ITs a difficult one- here are some of the issues:

1) IR codes vary greatly from device to device. But more importantly, they are not explicit. In other words the "ON" code is "On" when the machines off, but if the machines on, then it will turn the machine off. so there's no way for one to say "on" and *know* that you're going to get the machine turned on, rather than off. (in many cases)

2) There seems to be no good hardware. What makes sense is to both send and recieve IR signals. so you can control your pc based PVR from a remote... but there is little hardware that will do this and what is there won't do both really elegantly. Making custom hardware is possible, but that involves a lot of issues as well.

3) The setup of the home entertainment system affects how this works. Is there a VCR between the cable box and the PVR? which output of the VCR is the PVR hooked up to? Whatever system will have to either force people to set up their system in a way the PVR IR controller can control, or have a way to teach the PVR about the setup.

But my biggest concern is finding all the codes, and translating them into a format I can use... manufacturers make variations on the even the same model of VCR...

Re:you left out a few items....

[Dread_ed]

A1. Use of ReplayTV as a Cupholder. No individual, owner or otherwise, may place on, above, or even near, the ReplayTV Digital Video Recorder, without first purchasing an additional license to do so, a cup containing liquid, hot, cold or even luke warm. Furthermore, any such container and its contents immediately become property of ReplayTV upon the occurence of said item coming into contact with the ReplayTV 4500.

F1: TV Programming Ownership. Upon viewing any programs from the ReplayTV Service, any and all devices used to capture such programming information immediately come under the soivereign control of ReplayTV and its subsidiaries, agents and legal representatives. This includes eyes(retinas, cornea, fovae, irises, vitreous humor, and any other part involved in the acquisition and conveyence of said programming), nerves(Optic, individual rods and cones, neurons, gray matter, and any other part involved in the acquisition, conveyence and comprehension of said programming), and any device used to aid in viewing said content such as glasses, contact lenses, or hearing aids.

X1. Disagreements with ReplayTV. Anyone who disagrees with ReplayTV with regard to this agreement will be sacked. Those who are responsible for said sacking and who do not fulfil their responsibilities to sack, will be sacked. Upon the occurence of said sackers of the sackers not sacking thee sackees, a low yield thermonuclear device will be detonated over the city containting said individual who disagreed with teh Replay Terms of Service AND those sachers who did not sack the sackers of the original sackees sackers'ers, oh whatever!

Saving $250

[AxelBoldt]

Can I save $250 if I just use the box for ad filtering and time shifting don't sign up for their spy-service?

Deceptive sales tactics? No such thing as a PVR?

[markwelch]

What store is going to sell a $400 product where the consumer must pay another $250 to use the product? I expect the return rate will be huge for this product.

The stated reason for reducing the pricing was because the extra $250 for a "prepaid lifetime subscription" was reducing sales (especially since the product's remaining lifetime seems likely to be substantially less than a year), so they were going to switch to a monthly subscription model. Instead, they are just playing a "hide the fee" game, hoping that idiots who get the box home will agree to pay another $250 instead of returning the box.

If the fee is properly disclosed (to avoid lawsuits), then nobody will buy this version if they didn't buy the prior version, since the features are unchanged and the net price is unchanged. But we all know that the fee will not be properly disclosed, so there will be many returns and there will be lawsuits by various consumer groups and state AGs, which may be simply part of ReplayTV's "publicity" strategy.

And as noted, the deal is basically that if the company folds, the box can self-destruct and you have nothing, period, for your $650.

In April, I wrote an essay chronicling my efforts to buy a PVR, and nothing has changed since then. Nobody sells PVR technology to consumers, period. For those who are willing to do a lot of "do it yourself" work, and who trust that the companies will "do the right thing" despite the lack of any legal obligation to provide service, it is technically possible to get PVR technology working.

I would gladly pay $300 to $500 for something like a TiVo or ReplayTV, plus $10 to $15 per month for programming data, if I thought I could get an actual service that would last for a year or more. I am absolutely unconvinced that any company can or will provide service for a year.

If you don't like it, don't buy it!

[Leto2]

I don't see why people get so outrageous about this. If you don't like the product someone is selling, don't buy it!

If I'm at the grocery, and I see rotten apples, I'm not going to sue the store, I'm just going to take my business elsewhere. I'm getting rather tired of all these people _expecting_ certain licenses. "But it takes away my Freedom"? Replay has the freedom to put whatever license they feel on their product. Hey, and know what, if you don't hack the thing, they won't cancel your service!

It's not like there's no competition around to buy your PVR from.

Re:If I hear Linux Tivo-like Device one more time

[GoRK]

I'm working on this problem. ITs a difficult one- here are some of the issues:

Geez. Do you research anything before you code?

1) IR codes vary greatly from device to device. But more importantly, they are not explicit. In other words the "ON" code is "On" when the machines off, but if the machines on, then it will turn the machine off. so there's no way for one to say "on" and *know* that you're going to get the machine turned on, rather than off. (in many cases)

A PVR system pretty much requires the cable box to be on all the time. TiVo and Replay don't bother toggling the power to these. It's not like they use that much electricity. Leave it on and stop worrying about discrete on/off codes. If your power goes out or something, you probably have more to worry about than your cable box not powering bacvk on.

2) There seems to be no good hardware. What makes sense is to both send and recieve IR signals. so you can control your pc based PVR from a remote... but there is little hardware that will do this and what is there won't do both really elegantly. Making custom hardware is possible, but that involves a lot of issues as well.

LIRC supports a ton of good IR hardware including many devices that send and recieve CIR signals just fine. Many are commercially available, and as you said, you can roll your own if you are looking to add IR support to an embedded device or want to "do it on the cheap" if you will.

3) The setup of the home entertainment system affects how this works. Is there a VCR between the cable box and the PVR? which output of the VCR is the PVR hooked up to? Whatever system will have to either force people to set up their system in a way the PVR IR controller can control, or have a way to teach the PVR about the setup.

Why on earth would you hook up a VCR between your cable box and PVR system and then expect to be able to do anything useful with it? The cable box should be somehow directly connected to your PVR system and then somehow to a video output device -- TV, video switcher (reciever), or maybe connected to the TV through the VCR so that you could actually archive a program on your PVR to video tape if you felt so inclined... The only thing you might want the PVR to be able to do is tell the VCR to start and stop recording for automatic show archival.

But my biggest concern is finding all the codes, and translating them into a format I can use... manufacturers make variations on the even the same model of VCR...

You don't necessarily have to distribute the code library for every cable box on the planet. Just include an option under some setup menu that lets you teach the computer PVR the codes from the cable box remote.

Your half-baked planning is useless. Don't claim to be "working on the problem" until you are actually working on it.

~GoRK

Unenforceable terms

[John Jorsett]

Keep in mind that just because an 'agreement' contains something doesn't make it enforceable. They could put "hack your Replay and you must give us your first-born" in there and no court is going to make you live up to it. If they actually do wipe out some Replays under this agreement, courts are going to be the ultimate authority on whether they can get away with it (assuming, of course, that the users file lawsuits).

Reverse-Engineering law?

[MoogMan]

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?

Re:Deceptive sales tactics? No such thing as a PVR

[kindbud]

Dude, I've owned a DirecTivo for going on two years now. The warranty expired months ago, so I went ahead and did the hard drive upgrade. I've long since made up for the $149 lifetime subscription, vs. the monthly fee.

I read your essay, and while you make some good points about the retailers not having a working product for display, you also implied that you couldn't care less about the "many months hearing friends and colleagues boast". I guess you aren't swayed by your friend's recommendations, word of mouth is not good enough for you? The lame salesman was more convicing? Whatever dude.

I bought mine at Good Guys, a Philips DirecTiVo unit, the first day it arrived. Several other people were there to snatch them off the palette too. I couldn't be happier with my purchase. Of course, word of mouth means nothing to you, so never mind...

According to TiVo's telephone support staff, the TiVo unit doesn't offer any kind of "commercial skip" or even a "fast-fast-forward" mode, so it offers few benefits compared to a traditional VCR (in a later call, a TiVo supervisor claimed that TiVo has 15x, 30x, and 60x fast-forward speeds -- a contradiction that made me wish I could see an actual working TiVo unit).

Now I am beginning to wonder if you, or the TiVo rep you talked to, have English comprehension difficulties. Did you not see the FF and RW buttons on the remote control at the store display? I think it is rather funny that for a time, you thought the TiVo could not FF or RW. That's rich.

Lastly, did you spend this much time and angst trying to buy a dishwasher? Did they let you try a load of dirty dishes in it before taking it home? Some of your expectations are unreasonable.

There is SO much information about the TiVo on the web, I find your ignorance of the device and its capabilities to be incongruous. I mean, who calls 800 numbers to get product info from live humans anymore? Did you do NO research at all on the web? Your essay didn't mention it...

Re:Bring on the whining!

[ncc74656]

When you buy a VCR you agree not to make copies of copyrighted movies and sell them with it...

Where's the piece of paper you signed that says that? Yeah, I didn't think so...the closest thing to an "agreement" regarding the purchase of your VCR is that you gave Best Buy, Circuit City, or whoever $X and they gave you a VCR in exchange. I'm not saying that making and selling moviez is a Good Thing, but let's try to avoid distorting the truth, m'kay? The MPAA does enough of that.

Re:Bring on the whining!

[NanoGator]

"Even though anyone here can easily purchase TiVo instead, I predict a flood of whiners complaining about ReplayTV"

Exactly! I don't know why you guys don't just go around and spend $500 every time a selfish company makes unreasonable demands!

Man, in the old days...

[NanoGator]

"And Term 2C 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 it--the agreement indemnifies them completely."

In the old days, you were innocent until proven guilty. Anybody remember that?

Re:Bring on the whining!

[walt-sjc]

Questions: Will the average consumer know about the policy BEFORE they buy? Is the policy on the OUTSIDE of the box, or do you only find out once you open it? What about companies like Circuit City where you buy on the floor from a salesdroid and don't even see the box until you pick it up at the front? Is there a separate contract you sign?

Hmm.

Like shrink wrap license terms on software, it will be interesting if this is challenged in court.

That's not a difference...

[Otto]

...except in slight wording.

Note the portions in bold:

Replay 1G:
G. Changes to ReplayTV Service. At its discretion, ReplayTV may automatically add, modify, or disable any feature or functionality of the ReplayTV Service or on the ReplayTV 4500 when your unit connects to our server or at other times with or without notice. In addition, ReplayTV may modify the terms and conditions of this Agreement from time to time (and will notify you of these changes to the Agreement)

Tivo: Changes to TiVo Service. TiVo may, at its discretion, from time to time change, add or remove features of the TiVo Service or change the terms and conditions of this agreement. Such changes shall be effective upon notification by TiVo. You are responsible for viewing any new terms and if you are dissatisfied with any such changes to the TiVo Service or this agreement, you may immediately cancel your subscription as provided in the "Termination of Service" paragraph below. TiVo also reserves the right to discontinue the TiVo Service altogether at any time in its discretion.

They are the same basic thing. They simply used the word "remove" instead of "disable".

And contrary to the original article, Clause 2C talks about suspending or canceling the Replay service if they think you're infringing copyright, not about them breaking your box. Tivo's and Replay's agreements both basically allow them to disable the service portion for any reason (or none) whatsoever. So this copyright infringement thing is not a major difference, they already covered themselves on that score.

Re:Bad old days when you couldn't own your phone..

[tshoppa]

Were those days really so bad? For a buck or two a month you got a good-quality, heavy-duty, engineered to withstand a nuclear attack phone. If it broke, they came and fixed it, no charge, no questions asked.

Most of today's phones are cheap plastic and don't even have a real bell inside.

Re:Deceptive sales tactics? No such thing as a PVR

[markwelch]

> Best Buy has an exclusive contract with TiVo.
> So go to Best Buy and demand to use the product
> in action. Inform them of the demo account above.
> If that fails, try another store. Or call TiVo
> and tell them that Best Buy refused to show you
> the product in action.

Good advice -- and this is exactly what I did, back in April. After running in circles with store staff and store manager, and TiVo's low-level support folks, I ended up speaking with some pretty high-level folks, including the actual TiVo buyer at Best Buy (whose butt is on the line with this exclusive deal) and his contact at TiVo. They agreed: no demo accounts, period. They were abused (as you noted) and store personnel couldn't be trained adequately to show the unit's features anyway, and the stores all power down nightly so data got lost. There are no store demo accounts any more, period (maybe there are store demo units for the DirecTV version of TiVo, but I couldn't find any in my area).

Best Buy shows a canned video demo on a TV monitor (with intense static that makes it almost unwatchable).

Finally, the issue of TiVo "dying" is exactly the issue I'm concerned about. No, they don't want to annoy their customers, but my understanding is that at any moment they could cease operating, and then I'd have a worthless box. I could deal with that, indeed was prepared to deal with that risk, until I learned that I simply cannot see a TiVo in actual operation. As I explained, I've been burned so many times by false promises that I will not trust that the TiVo unit I buy will do what they promise, unless I actually see it in use.

Now pay attention....

[Danse]

This time I'll put the actual relevant portions in bold.

Replay 1G:

G. Changes to ReplayTV Service. At its discretion, ReplayTV may automatically add, modify, or disable any feature or functionality of the ReplayTV Service or on the ReplayTV 4500 when your unit connects to our server or at other times with or without notice. In addition, ReplayTV may modify the terms and conditions of this Agreement from time to time (and will notify you of these changes to the Agreement)

You'll note that while they both claim the right to add/remove/change services, only Replay claims the right to change your hardware.

Re:Bring on the whining!

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

Yeh, though it's taken me a little while (almost 3 weeks). And I don't like the perl script I found to do it, 28 megs per day is just ridiculous (though I don't think it could ever be more than that, set it up for 4 channels or all 80, still 28 megs).

The Tivo has 4 serial ports, 3 of which are available to the user (4th is some kind of debug port, internal maybe?). The first is the 56k modem, which would be hard as hell to use, but is still available (just lots of processes to get in the way). The second is an IR blaster infrared remote interface. The third is a regular serial port, with an RCA stereo type plug (made my own cable for $3 from ratshack). Getting a bash prompt on the serial was easy, a ppp link a bit harder. You could concievably do alot of stuff with this...

For instance, my universal remote won't speak tivo, and I don't like having 2 remotes. I plan on trying to get the tivo to understand the universal remote (which will think it's talking to a VCR). No progress on that yet.

I plan on installing ethernet, and backing up to a huge raid5 array I'm building. Why install internal drives? Besides, this way I can just barely fit an episode of the Simpsons on a single CD, minus commercials. Or stream it to any of the computers in the house (like the I-Opener that folds up underneat my kitchen cabinet).

And then, the coup de grace if I can manage it. Automatic commercial clipping. Here's how I think it will work... whenever I push a button on the remote, Tivo will know that I've spotted a commercial... and it will go back through up to 30 seconds or so, looking for the blank transition screen. When it finds it, it then forwards to the first frame that actually shows a picture, and hashes it. It stores this hash in a database afterward, and whenever it sees a blank transition screen, starts comparing... if it sees that commercial again, it just blanks it out until over. Hell, maybe I'll get a clip of the Monty Python Holy Grail intercession, and play that instead. Or just a still picture of a Tivo with a bloody axe, hacking a marketdroid to death...

Could even compare databases with other people, and distribute the work, to catch commercials more quickly.

And never forget, it's more reliable than PC based stuff, at least for the next few years. There are some things that a generic PC does well, but this is just one thing I think is perfect for a dedicated device (even if PC's do become robust enough).

Re:Not Whining

[ncc74656]

Umm, I use Yahoo!TV listings, and they're free. I don't use Replay or Tivo, so maybe I'm missing something. But I don't see why I'd need much more than program name and time.

How do you sort out new episodes from reruns? Going into more detail, can you build up a listing of what particular episodes have been recorded recently, so that you don't re-record them unless asked to do so? That's why a TiVo (or anything that claims to provide similar functionality) needs more detailed information to function properly.

Re:Not Whining

[ncc74656]

they present you with a description of the program (so you can decide whether to record this episode of DS9), a genre (so you can record all Sci-Fi program), actors (at least in the case of TiVo, so you can set up a "wishlist" to record all shows with Avery Brooks), a "rerun" flag (so you don't get 15 copies of the same episode), etc, etc..

I actually don't think I'd use those features...

That's what everybody who's never used a TiVo says.

Re:Bad old days when you couldn't own your phone..

[stienman]

There are several similarites and differences between the early phone system/market and the PVR market.

• By the time it became widespread the phone system and components used in various markets were standardized. Right now there is no standardization in the PVR market.
• Phones, eventually, were gov't subsidized as they were considered necessary. PVRs will never be necessary - they are merely a convenience.
• When the phone companies had different standards/protocols their customers had to use their phones (though they did extend that rule well beyond the standardization period). Right now we have different PVR protocols/systems and you must use their equipment. Their equipment could be used seperately from the service, but it takes special knowledge and the results may not be satisfactory (just as with the early phone devices)
• There are many other devices and services which one can use to duplicate much of the functionality of the PVRs without having to deal with TIVO or ReplayTV. Hauppage makes some hardware that is suitable, and much more empowering to the user. There are several TV listing sevices. VCRs have advanced programming capabilities and if all else fails you can use LIRC to connect your VCR to your computer and duplicate all of the functionality.

The only pendulum that is 'swinging back' never swung in the first place. The owners of copyright material always had tight fists and never loosened them. They are certianly considering the situation (but are far from worried), and are putting out feelers to see what's next for them. The distributers are overreacting, as they always do when major shifts occur in how/when/where people use their material.

Just as the transition that took live shows to radio, to records, to film, to tv, to tape, to vcr, to CD, to HD, to internet, ... some companies will go out of business, some new ones will spring up, the way we buy and sell copyrighted material (which, even now, are commodities) will all change. Maybe slightly, maybe drastically, but the world will continue to rotate, stuff will continue to be sold, and the consumers ultimately pay for it.

In short, the industry isn't trying to stick it to the user (though they do have to look profitable to their shareholders), they are simply (and blindly) lashing out in all directions to reduce the risk of losing the people who create material for them.

blah blah blah, blah blah blah.

-Adam

Crack their systems, get their customer list &

[crovira]

Have fun turning everybody into a pirate. Just keep reporting people, at random.

I mean, if they're customers, they're automatically suspect. Nobody who isn't one has any incentive for being one. The ONLY way to have any incentive to crack their system is to be a customer.
That way you can create a nice adversarial and non-sustainable climate for the company and its revenue base. It'll be expensive to investigate all the claims of cracking and create a lot of bad press and resentment.

With luck, it'll destroy the company and make it into an example of how NOT to set up a product/service curtomer relationshim management process.

Nope nope. YOU are wrong :P

[BlueboyX]

Dude, actually read someone's post before you tell them they are wrong. Your 'correction' has nothing to do with cat_jesus' post.

ScottKin said that the hacks are mostly evil, for things like 'illegal reception.'

cat_jesus correct him in saying that most of the hacks have nothing to do with pirating; the single most common 'hack' is to replace the origional harddrive with a bigger one. Nothing evil there.

Then you 'corrected' cat_jesus by saying ReplayTV has the absolue right to terminate accounts etc... which has nothing to do with cat_jesus' post! They were talking about the nature of the hacks, not ReplayTV as a company.

Then we can just charge sonicblue with vandalism

[Alex Belits]

I don't see ReplayTV device being rented or Sonicblue having a lien on it, so formally any kind of intentional destruction of it after it's purchased by the user will be a destruction of personal property, what is very, very illegal. Illegal clauses in contracts don't make attempts to implement them any less of a crime, no matter what the other side does, or is alleged to do.

they actually can't do this

[BlueboyX]

If they actually did start 'nuking' user's firmware for doing harddrive expansions, they will face a class action suit.

Yeah, that won't magically prevent them from doing it in the first place, but it will make them wish they didn't.

Realistically, they aren't going to use this 'feature.' It is just to say that they can stop people from pirating or whatever (which is kind of a bogus claim to begin with. Broadcasters never have been guaranteed that people must watch the commercials. People who cut the commercials aren't stealing, they are very legally viewing the signal as they see fit. Now the part about forwarding shows to friends may be legally questionable, but that too is something that can basically be done with vcrs. Vcrs are not illegal yet!)

sure

[SethJohnson]

Sure it is possible.

Feasible is the bigger question.

If their protocol implements any kind of proprietary encryption scheme, it could take a very long time do decipher. It could also be illegal to do so in the US per the DMCA.

Re: DirecTivo

[kindbud]

OK, it seems you know NOTHING about the Tivo, having passed by all the previous articles posted here about the device and all the things it can do (documented and un-). So let me tell you this:

Because of pressure from broadcasters, TiVo hides the commercial skip function from Joe Enduser. It can be activated by pressing a sequence of keys on the remote. There are numerous other backdoors that can change how the TiVo works. Because they do things that advertisers and media owners might find actionable, TiVo doesn't publicize them, but they also do not block efforts by people to discover the backdoors. In fact, they tacitly support such efforts if it makes their customers happy.

You can easily find this stuff if you are interested. It's all over Google. Search for "Tivo hack" and you'll find it.

Re: DirecTivo

[markwelch]

And as noted, this hidden feature was once disabled, and might again be disabled with an upgrade. Hardly a strong endorsement.

Look, I am not an idiot, I just act like one sometimes. I am confident that I could go out and buy one of these things and get it to work, and maybe it would be 80% what I wanted and expected, or maybe 90%. Or I could go buy the Hauppauge card for my computer, too.

But what I am looking for is something simple, that doesn't require work-arounds or tricks. And damn it, I'm sick and tired of being told by a manufacturer that their product is great, I should buy it, but they won't let me see the damn thing in use, which almost always means it does NOT do the things they promise, or is not as helpful or convenient.

This Way to the Great Egress.

good points... here's another few

[SethJohnson]

6. Watch a recorded show and tape another at same time.

7. Builds viewer profile and records stuff you 'might' like.

8. Record any show with a specific celebrity appearance (SNL, Conan, Letterman, etc.)

Re:Build Your Own?

[RelliK]

Does Linux support TV tuners with built-in MPEG2 encoders? Receiving an MPEG2 stream from the card would certainly be a lot more efficient. You could even put multiple cards in the box and be able to receive several channels at once. How much power do you need to encode in software? I expect it would be very problematic with 2 or more TV cards due to the limited PCI bus bandwidth if nothing else.

Re:If I hear Linux Tivo-like Device one more time

[isorox]

I've seen an amiga changing channels on a pace sky digital box, it was a simple hack I believe.

Re: DirecTivo

[SethJohnson]

Mark,

I am not trying to flame you or criticize you. Just thought I might offer you some insight.

In the research I assume you have done (I didn't read your essay because your post suggests that it's just going to be the internet rantings of a crank), I doubt you found any purchasers complaining about how crummy TiVo is. You dismiss the word-of-mouth endorsements of your out-of-state friends because they're "techno-geeks". Think about this: Sony is selling TiVo boxes with their logo. Sony. That's not some crazy group of people selling some collection of parts off the internet to people with EE (Electrical Engineering) degrees.

Because you seem interested in the convenience of a PVR, I recommend that you actually take the plunge and buy a TiVo. Most stores have a 30-day, "no-questions-asked" return policy. If you get it home and are unsatisfied, you probably can even get a refund on the subscription fee, too.

I am pretty confident, though, that you'll fall into the overwhelming majority of purchasers who recognize that PVRs (like TiVo) are the future of television watching.

As for your concern about the future of the product, it'll be there even if TiVo goes bankrupt. Do you think Sony is going bankrupt anytime soon? The cash-burner in this market is the building of the console. The post-sale service is the profit stream. Do you think all the existing owners would be ignored by third-parties as well as Sony? Those people are FREE MONEY for anyone who can provide a simple replacement for the TiVo service. Heck, if you look close enough, you'll see that there are already people within the TiVo hacking community who have the wherewithall to provide this service out of their bedrooms, but they're currently not because they don't want to threaten the TiVo business model.

DONT GO TO PICVIDEO.COM!! It's Porn. :P

[NanoGator]

Dude, I'm sorry, I should have given you a link to the MotionJPEG Codec instead of just telling you the name of it. PicVideo.com is a porn site. *just discovered that*

Here's the link you want:

http://www.jpg.com/video/mjpeg.htm

I apologize for not giving you this link earlier.

Re:Covering their butts

[Archfeld]

That is a FACT, though the producers of this stuff would have you think otherwise. Using a hcked box to access their network IS a violation of your agreement, and is a crime according them, and even might be construed as such by a court of law if it is ever challenged.

Re:Bad old days when you couldn't own your phone..

[dubl-u]

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.

Yet.

But RIAA and the MPAA are sure trying to get it that way. Note the efforts of the senator from Disney, for example.

And consider that most cable companies (which 80% of american homes get most of their content though) are regional monopolies that can mandate the use of particular hardware on their networks.

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.

Thank goodness that could never happen. Oh, except for the DVD player, which is controlled by a cartel. Or most video game consoles, where the companies involved exercise complete control over who makes games and what goes in 'em.

A thought regarding the "free market"

[Rogerborg]

Like Communism, it works well... in theory.

In practice, it requires a hell of a lot of finessing and regulation; anti-trust laws to name but one.

Specifically regarding this situation:

• You can sell any kind of shit if you like, but you can't call it Shinola. ReplayTV can sell any product they like, but if the post-purchase substance and small print doesn't match the pre-purchase claims on which it's sold, they'll get bitchslapped, and rightly so.
• You're allowed to screw customers (as long as you tell them about it) and competitors until you have 70% of the market, at which point you're an abusive monopoly. If all of the suppliers in a market are colluding to fix prices and screw customers, that's a cartel. It's debatable whether PVR's are a subset of VCR's, or whether they form their own market. If the latter, then there's already clear evidence of a cartel. If the former, it's only a matter of time before there's one, and it'd be nice to see the FTC getting its act together before the fact for once, instead of shutting the stable door after the horse is over the horizon.

Re:Build Your Own?

[Rogerborg]

And it changes channels on your decoder box how exactly? Oh, silly me, it doesn't.

Re: DirecTivo

[markwelch]

Nice points, except: Sony only sells the TiVo for DirecTV users, and as I noted earlier in the thread, I cannot get DirecTV. And the only store that sells TiVo is Best Buy, 'nuff said about return policies.

Re:Covering their butts

[zeno_2]

Bull-crap. Lawyers don't put in clauses for the fun of it. You can be sure that SONICblue's legal team pored over this and every word fully represents the intent of the company. If they never, ever meant to do this, they wouldn't bother reserving the right...

The terms of service at www.adelphia.net (cable modems) state that I can break these rules by using excessive bandwidth. They classify excessive as more then 3.5gigs a month. Ive transferred up and down more then 30 gigs in a month with no problems. I believe they use a lot of that for people that are actually causing the company some sort of problems, they can use it to back them in court if need be. We will have to see what happens when someone starts messing around with it, but I would be pretty suprised if they were hardcore with it.

Has anyone else noticed ...

[B.D.Mills]

... how many companies with online click-through agreements with harsh terms are placing the text of them in HTML text areas that are far too small? It sure makes it easy to bury the terms in a manner that is hard to read. I have found such use of text areas to be a sure sign that the company is trying to hide something.

Also notice how section 1E of the agreement refers to a website with the privacy policy, but the use of the text area convieniently makes it impossible to present the website as a clickable link?

The obvious solution to this agreement and the way it is presented is to get a minor to click on the "Agree" button. Muhahaha. That way, the agreement is not binding. (I.A.N.A.L.)

For extra fun, you could also pretend that you don't know how to use a scrollbar and claim that the agreement you agreed to was what you could read on the screen, namely:

REPLAYTV 4500 Digital Video Recorder
Activation and Service Agreement

This Agreement applies to your use of the ReplayTV Service and is a legally binding agreement between you SONICblue Incorporated and its wholly owned subsidiary, ReplayTV Inc. (collectively "ReplayTV"). By clicking the button marked "I Agree" below or by otherwise communicating your acceptance to ReplayTV or by using the ReplayTV Service,

People have successfully sue McDonald's for not knowing that coffee is hot, so surely someone with a slick lawyer could pull this off in court sooner or later.

Re:If I hear Linux Tivo-like Device one more time

[BitGeek]

Your ignorance does not mean my planning is "half baked". Apparently you have no clue about the issues around this area, other than what you've read on some website.

A PVR system pretty much requires the cable box to be on all the time. TiVo and Replay don't bother toggling the power to these.

If you'd bothered to pay you'd notice I'm talking about dealing with devices other than the cable box in the loop.

Plus it seems pretty silly to simply not record a show because someone turned the cable box off.

Supporting this issue is not being "half baked" on my part.

LIRC supports a ton of good IR hardware including many devices that send and recieve CIR signals just fine.

Maybe they do. However, I was unable to find any commercial that fit my requirements (ie: USB), weren't do it yourself projects (I can build my own if I want to) or weren't absurdly expensive. Most all of them *don't* recieve.

Its one thing to post erronously a comment to slashdot. Its completely worse to flame someone who's right, calling them half-baked when it is YOU who is ignorant of the state of things.

Why on earth would you hook up a VCR between your cable box and PVR system and then expect to be able to do anything useful with it?

Because most people in the world are hooked up this way-- they have a VCR and aren't ready to get rid of it. Support for that is a nice thing to do-- not an example of being "half baked"... unless you live in the world where everyone should do things the way you want-- otherwise they are stupid and you flame them. Well, youre reality distortion field doesn't extend very far.

You don't necessarily have to distribute the code library for every cable box on the planet.

No, but it would be a good idea to ship a decent code library that works with whatever piece of hardware you end up supporting... and hopefully that hardware works with a variety of CIR devices (again, most of the hardware is not well baked.)

I don't see how attempting to support a wide range of devices is "half baked".

Piss off, idiot.

Re: DirecTivo

[SethJohnson]

Sony has the SVR 2000 available from Amazon dot com. It's not the cheapest, nor what I would recommend. I just mention it as an example of how simplified this technology is. If Sony sells it, it's dumbed down enough for mainstream consumers like yourself. I had brought up sony to demonstrate to you that although your friends who own TiVos are techno-geeks, their embrace of the TiVo simply exhibits their foresight. It doesn't imply the product is a pain in the ass.

I don't know what problem you have with Best Buy's return policies. I purchased my TiVo from Circuit City. They flat out said if I wanted to bring it back within the month, they'd give me my money back with no questions. 15 minutes after I got home, I knew there was no chance I would exercise that option.

Because you completely misconstrued my reference to the Sony TiVo product as an encouragement to purchase it, I suspect that the complication you are facing in this purchase is your own doing. Perhaps you're not ready for this technology.

Re: DirecTivo

[markwelch]

Circuit City does not sell TiVo, except the special version for DirecTV. As I noted in the essay that I linked to in my original reply here, there was still a store display at the Good Guys promoting TiVo and DirecTV when I visited the store, but the sales clerk assured me that both products had been discontinued, and my only option for PVRs would require that I buy DirecTV.

I was surprised to see a TiVo product sold by Amazon, since the TiVo folks assured me that their non-DirecTV unit was sold exclusively through Best Buy. I suppose I might be inclined to buy a TiVo through Amazon, if I believed the unit did what I wanted -- but if it then turns out that it doesn't do what I want, then I face the hassle of boxing it up and paying for return shipping (you can't use those Amazon USPS return labels if you want proof of shipping, I went through that with a purchase from Wal-Mart.com, and ended up paying for shipping both ways).

Oops, look again: Amazon does NOT sell the Sony TiVo unit. They have a listing on their site, showing a list price of $400 but there is no link to buy it or even pre-order it. Your only option is to buy a used unit from someone other than Amazon. Is this even the new TiVo technology, or is this the original version of TiVo with much less storage and which is already at the end of its life cycle (TiVo's promises last until the end of the product "lifetime," which means that whenever they decide the product is done, you lose any support, and program schedules need not be provided at any price.)

About Best Buy returns: Whenever I have bought any product from Best Buy, then discovered a defect (and I do mean defect, not just a change of mind), I have to argue for 20 minutes and escalate to the store manager before they refund the full purchase price. One time, I discovered at the register that the product wasn't actually what I wanted to buy promised, and they tried to charge me a 15% return fee! After some discussion, the buyer for Best Buy promised that I could, in fact, return the TiVo unit within 30 days for a full refund, if I bought it at Best Buy (I assume that if I wanted to exercise that right, I'd need to call the buyer in Minnesota and get him to talk to the store manager here).

But this begs the question: I still can't test it out before buying it, and it's not actually in stock at Best Buy anyway. What is a retail store here for, if not to show me and sell me the product?

Quite simply, I will not buy a complex product if the company requires that I do many hours of research and then buy the product without ever actually knowing how it will work until after I've bought it, installed it, and paid them additional money for a service subscription.

What I want is pretty simple: I want what Best Buy promises in its TV ads: the ability to actually try out a product in use at the store, before buying it. I'm not going to spend $400 for a TiVo or $700 for a ReplayTV if all I'm buying is a "pig in a poke." These companies are in business to sell their products, not to produce a product that people must buy, sight unseen, without knowing what the product really does and without much probability that the product will be useable six months later.

My essay made it pretty clear: after spending many hours doing research, I felt that it was not time to buy a PVR. Nothing anyone has said today has changed my mind, although I did learn one new thing (the fact that Amazon offers a Sony TiVo unit online).

Re:If I hear Linux Tivo-like Device one more time

[GoRK]

hahahaha you were so trolled

Certainly applies in UK

[Martin S.]

A supplier or manufacturer cannot change your statutory rights after the fact.

In the UK, your rights are fixed when the sale is made (i.e. when you swap the box for cash at the checkout).

Breaches GPL

[Martin S.]

I thought the Tivo was Linux based, if so then surely this breaches clause 6 of the GPL (http://www.linux.org/info/gnu.html), which to paraphrase prevents TIVO from giving its purchasers less rights than they have themselves.

Re:Not Whining

[Zathrus]

One could argue that users of public spectrum should have to provide this info as a cost of doing business, but

What public spectrum? The broadcast channels use public spectrum, sure, but the cable companies don't.

I actually don't think I'd use those features

Yes, and back in the late 70s nobody thought they'd use a VCR either.

But why do the people providing the hardware also have to be the ones providing the programming info?

In the case of TiVo it's not. TiVo isn't providing the hardware. At least not directly. Sony, Phillips, Hughes, etc. make the TiVo boxes and TiVo doesn't see a dime of that revenue - in fact, they used to pay Phillips, et. al. (and they may still, I'm not sure). So if they don't charge you for services exactly where is their revenue going to come from?

Sure, you can scream faulty business plan all you want. But the alternative is to produce the boxes and charge $2000 for them. Because there's no other way to recoup R&D costs on the software otherwise.

Speaking of which, TiVo's fee isn't just for guide data... it's also for the software. In fact, I'd say it's primarily for the software. I bought my TiVo(s) with 1.3 installed. I've since gotten 2.0 and 2.5 and will receive 3.0 in the next couple months. They've added significant features since I bought my TiVo too, so people who say the fee is only for guide data aren't seeing the whole picture.

And yes, I paid lifetime for my units... one is well over the breakeven point now, the other is about halfway.

Re:Bring on the whining!

[Technician]

I'm guessing by "their own way" you mean illegal or illicit way.
Sometimes some agreements and intended uses cross paths. For instance after having a copy of MS Office shred itself in a 52X CD on instalation, (legal install BTW), I finished the install from a burned copy of the same software from another machine. By the agreement installing from a backup for another machine is a big No-No as I haven't uninstalled it from the other machine. I have the original scratched (unreturnable) original which I tried to install from to prove one copy per machine, but the install by defination is illegal.
I also have a few copies of software picked up at the local Goodwill. These are marked For distribution with a new machine only. I also picked up a USED laptop without the books and disks. I have found original copies with Certificate of Authenticity of OEM Windows 95 and Office 97 Small business edition. Buying all the pieces to assemble the complete system including the software should not be illegal, but it is. Buying the software media seprately should not have been illegal. So by who's deffinetion do you decide whether I have pirated the software. I feel I bought it legaly. It is on original media. I have a sales receipt and Certificate. I feel I have done nothing wrong. I found the missing parts of my laptop and bought them, not stolen them. The BSA and EULA state otherwise.
So AM I A THIEF?
I do use Right of First Sale software. I assume it has no support and use it with the understanding as Used Part is sold As Is. I should post as AC as the BSA may read /. and think easy target.
Just to reduce exposure to Legal action, I am migrating to open source.