Slashdot Mirror
MPAA vs. Television
Today brings several articles on the MPAA's attempt to create a "broadcast flag" to kill home recording of broadcast television. Lunenburg writes "Apparently too impatient to implement the Broadcast Flag in digital media through legislative means, both Sen. Hollings and Rep. Tauzin have both sent letters to FCC Chairman Michael Powell urging him to mandate the implementation of the Broadcast Flag under FCC rules, according to the EFF's Consensus at Lawyerpoint blog." There's a CNet story about a presentation given by the MPAA to pro-business lobbying groups, and a MSNBC story about digital video recorders.
47 USC 336(b)(4), Hollings justification for the broadcast flag: ... adopt such technical and other requirements as may be necessary or appropriate to assure the quality of the signal used to provide advanced television services, and may adopt regulations that stipulate the minimum number of hours per day that such signal must be transmitted....
The [FCC] shall
I don't think any judge would believe that this provides for mandating standards to avoid copyright infringement. A change of law would be necessary if Hollings does want such a mandate.
If you read through the articles carefully, no one, not MPAA/show producers nor Tech appear to be arguing against the one-time recording (time-shifting) of digital TV programming; it's the question of whether you can save that content to removable media, watch it on another TV in your house, send it to yourself at a remote location (even if authenicated/secured), or to share it on the Internet with a single friend/family member. Some of these seem like obvious fair use, some don't, and where the line has to be drawn is what is the major contention; MPAA appears to want the push the line to limiting recordings to a single, non-retainable format, possibly viewable only once, while other groups are arguing for less restrictive measures but still limiting full-fledged wide scale distribution as today's P2P networks allow.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
Instead of posting here, find out who your reps are and write them complaining!
because people have the right to timeshift all of the tv they watch, not just the programming the broadcasters want. There is already caselaw substantiating this.
The MPAA tried shenanigans like this in '00 attacking RecordTV.com suceededing in shutting it down.
If PVRs were in every house instead of VCRs, there would be no chance of this getting by, but since this wont directly impact people for several years it will be too late to complain once the new generation of flag obeying goods arrives, and everyone will probably just accept that now, you have to PAY to record TV and watch it at a later date. Or this will kill the adoption of PVRs; once people realize that you cant record whatever you want with a flag-crippled PVR.
ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
Yes, but the broadcast industry does not see it that way, and they have enough lobbying money to overturn fair use. Turner Entertainment's Jamie Kellner claims that by not watching commercials, you're stealing TV. Notice the word stealing.
So when the broadcast industry and the motion picture industry claim they want to prevent copying (or stealing) digital content, they won't stop with the peer-to-peer file traders. They'll target time-shifting. The broadcast flags they are proposing could easily say "don't record this program." Because, after all, if you own a PVR, you'll skip over the commercials.
Time Warner cable is debuting a set-top box with a PVR. But, there is no commercial skipping available. That's right, you can time-shift the West Wing, but you cannot hit the fast-forward button. There isn't one.
Funny how that goes.
--
For the book says, "We may be through with the past, but the past ain't through with us."
IF there is an analog turn off in 2006. By now, according to the original schedule, by now every commerical station should be dual broadcasting, and every TV sold should be DTV capable, to get 85% penetration by 2006. Current estimates say there will be 30% penetration by 2006, and I personally think those are optimistic. It took the UK from 1964 to 1985 to phase out 451 line television, and this was in an era when TV's were unreliable with short lifespans.
In addition, the original reason for cancelling analog has gone. In the late 90's, spectrum was seen as a resource which you could sell almost without limit - Telecoms were on the up, and new uses were eating up more and more spectrum. Since then, telecoms haven't been doing so well, resulting in auctions in both the UK and US that have been disasters for the companies involved and the governments trying to sell the spectrum.
Though I don't advise anyone else to sell / do without their television (in my experience, people get very defensive and personal about it very quickly, as if you're attacking a member of their family), I have been without it for a few years now, and I don't miss it a bit.
I used to be a big-time TV junkie. I thought I couldn't live without Star Trek, Simpsons, Homicide, whatever... to the point where I would pass on social engagements to watch the shows, fly into rages when the VCR didn't record the show correctly (or it was pre-empted), etc. etc... and then I just stopped watching it and found out that yes, I could live without it, pretty easily.
I still do have it, for occasionally watching the movies that I own, or playing some Dreamcast when friends come over, but that's about it. But in the meantime, I've caught up on my reading, the house is quieter, the nights are longer (it's true) and I actually talk to my SO during meals again. Not a bad trade.
Oddly enough, the biggest hassle I get from not watching television is from people who can't believe I don't. I've seen reactions ranging from shock and disbelief to anger and hostility. The thing I hear most often is "Oh, so you're one of those KILL YOUR TELEVISION people?" No, I just killed mine, you can let yours live if you want.
I would like to congratulate all of you who write eloquent replies on Slashdot, however you need to write letters to your "elected officials".
Myself, everytime I read an article on Slashdot which makes my blood boil and pertains to privacy, civil liberties, anti-consumer electronic devices, and/or bad technology legislation, I contact my legislators via email, fax, or snail mail.
Your elected official needs and wants to hear from you on the issues! If they get a mere 10 letters, faxes, or emails on a topic it raises a "red" flag and forces them to look at the issue before unknowing upsetting their constituency.
I urge you to contact these people and let them know what you think on a weekly basis. America is still "Government by the people, for the People."
While you are at it, register to vote!
Lastly, we always hear talk about buying legislation in the form of campaign contributions. Believe it or not, it doesn't cost all that much to buy legislation and once we all get in the habit of contacting our legislative officials and voting, we can donate money to a PAC, donate to campaigns and hire lobbyists. Then the Slashdotter will truly be running with the big dogs, but political involvement has to begin small.
Here are some helpful websites to guide you:
U.S. House of Representatives U.S. Senate Congressional News
I fear if we do not act and unite soon, that we will lose control of the Internet and consumer electronics in the name of Patriotism and anti-piracy.
One of the proposals floating around is the signal sent from the receiver to the CRT is encrypted and only decrypted right before the electron guns. That way you would not be able to save the signal at that point. It would, however, make all existing digital TVs pretty much obsolete, so I don't know if the proposal is still being considered.
There also was talk of sending an encrypted full-resolution signal and an unencrypted , reduced resolution signal to the CRT. Then you could use the existing digital TVs, albeit at lower video quality.