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.
So the FCC won't let me be or let me be me, so let me see........
the MPAA will start distributing movies with only two minutes of actual story line and filling the remaining 88 minutes with explosions, noise, bad dialogue, and product placements to prevent the unauthorized distribution of its intellectual property.
It's just Macrovision for broadcast, basically; the MPAA notes that "legislation would be required", and that's because without it manufacturers or third parties will quickly develop means of circumventing the protection. Of course, whatever happens, there *will* be the means of recording any broadcast stream -- these people need to recognise that, if it's human-recognisable, it's machine-recordable. All that's achieved by these kind of nonsensical restictions is a) increased costs for the manufacturers, which lead to b) increased costs for the consumer, and c) a less satisfactory user experience. But that media will continue to be recorded, nobody should have any doubt.
And besides, will anyone really stand for this? The idea of recordable media -- vcrs, in particular -- is very deeply ingrained, and most people probably consider it their "right" to record their television. And rightly so!
It's incredible to me that so many presumably intelligent people waste so much effort on these draconian measures. Corporate greed is to blame, of course - but, with a little thought, it seems to me that many of these people could do better by *not* alienating the populace, and by finding some other, better way of making their money such that everyone could be happy. The MPAA and their kind are scared of technology that they don't really understand, and they're losing their grip on the industry. Tough luck. Legislation shouldn't be put in place which will serve big business at the expense of the consumer. Rather, big business needs to learn to evolve to the consumer's wishes, or it needs to die.
At what point in time will the government and big business understand that watermarks and "broadcast flags" will not work? I can't imagine the ammount of money spent on technology that will (and has) failed in persuit of curtailing piracy...
When will they figure out that P2P file sharing networks (not to mention IRC, which apparently they are oblivious to) won't be going away? They need to play the cards life has dealt them and figure out how to use these to their advantage or provide a system that is better and more aligned with their business (selling commercials). The world is about change, did all the radio stations get angry when they invented TV? No, they all became TV stations too!
For example, if you assume all TV brodcasts are going to be pirated. Make it easier for the people downloading these shows by providing them for free on a website and keeping the commercials in the show. If you stream them then they cannot fast forward through commercials. So you basically provide all of your content on demand with commercials (more air time for advertisers thus more expensive commercials). Personally, I'd go watch Alias streamed (if it was a good 300k stream) with commercials rather than sifting around and waiting in queues on IRC or spending days trying to get it on gnutalla. And if we are worried about modem users, they can't download pirated TV anyway, files are too large.
Just a thought.
"There has grown in the minds of certain groups in this country the idea that just because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary to public interest. This strange doctrine is supported by neither statue or common law. Neither corporations or individuals have the right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back."
-Robert Heinlein, Life Line, 1939
nuclear iraq bioweapon encryption cocaine korea terrorist
When no one is in his office, 'he' quickly opens his chest plate and drinks some more oil. (You can see the Bush connection rather easily.)
Senator Hollings and his rampage of bad legislation MUST be stopped. 'He' will let nothing stand in his way of his goal of Total Disneyfication of the entire world.
'His' Achilles Heel?
Pies.
Throw pies at the Senator. That will interfere in his 'Small World Reasoning Center'. Only you can stop the madness.
The FCC is an executive agency. It should not be making policy, especially policy of this scope. Haven't you been paying attention to the disastrous results of FCC policy changes in the 1990s? Consolidation of radio into one or two companies. Creation of horizontal media empires. Extensive and undisclosed cross-branding. Death of HDTV.
This is not two elected officials taking the high road out of the muck and mire. This is two elected officials who know that there is no way they can get something like this through Congress -- most voters like their VCRs very much, thank you -- and thus these two elected officials want to do an end-run around the democratic process.
In an administration explicitly modeled on and sympathetic to big business, of course the bought senators would rather deal with the bureaucrats. The bureaucrats are much more likely to have at heart the interests of the senators' masters, Big Media.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
That "tar pit" you speak of is also known as the democratic process and it exists for VERY good reasons. It exists so that people who might possibly disagree have a chance to express their disagreement. Legislation by executive fiat is a very dangerous road to travel.
Historically democracies are destroyed, not by external forces, but rather buy a growing internal dislike of the corrpution and tar pit characteristics of the process. People feel like democracy doesn't ever get anything done, and while it is true to some extent, it is also democracy's methodical checks and balances that protects us from fascism. Fascism gets things done, it just sucks to be you when the boot heel comes down on you and those you love.
This sort of move seems indicative of what I fear may be dangerous times for our democracy. All sides of the political spectrum are convinced that the system is fundamentally broken. Government, unable to trust it's own ability to get things done has been setting up these little extra-democractic bureaucracies to run the show without public input, in the hopes of getting something accomplished. ICANN is a perfect example of this dangerous trend, a bureaucracy outside of democratic controls, created by a government convinced of its own ineptness to manage things correctly.
Maybe the distance between manipulating the FCC to get copy controls into broadcasts and electing Hitler is wide, but it seems that the same motivations drive either. We're fed up with the system, and we want somebody to fix it and increasingly we seem willing to give up our democracy just to get something done. It's that kind of desperation that destroys democracy.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Sell your TV.
Try, just try, life without a television. You'd be amazed how little you miss it, and how much other stuff you'll do instead. If you have a significant other, you'll have time to actually spend with that person, instead of sitting on your arse and not looking at each other. If you don't have an SO, you'll drastically increase your chances of finding one. If you're not looking, you'll at least have time to pursue other hobbies, like coding, or cooking, or bungee jumping, or whatever the heck else trips your trigger. Just try it. You may very well love it.
We live in a capitalist society. If you don't like what the businesses are trying to do to you, then stop using their product. What the hell does a federally-mandted broadcast flag matter to you when you don't watch TV?
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
Why isn't the current laws enforce instead of introducing new ones? I just don't get it.
You posted this AC and I'll never know why. At first glance it looks like a troll, but it's not.
The NRA has advanced this argument for years. It's summed up in their bumper stickers "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." As much as I hate to say it, they're right.
DVRs don't commit piracy, people commit piracy.
The NRA has launched a succefull and powerfull campaign in American government to portray guns as tools, not weapons. The MPAA and the RIAA are launching a similarly successfull campaign to portray P2P networks, DVRs, CD burners, DVD burners, Computers, Abaci, and Pencils as criminal skills development equipment.
I only wish the technical professionals in the US had the gumption to organize like the AARP has. There's a reason why everyone's afraid to touch Social Security but no one thinks twice before trying to outlaw something like floppy drives.
Killfile(TGK)
No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
I'm working my way through "A People's History of the United States" and find the current tactics of the RIAA and the MPAA very similar to those described throughout the book. The use of ostensibly neutral "laws" to further enhance the pocket books of monied interests.
.
Prior to 1910 the law was used to protect the land owners and property owners, with numerous examples throughout the book of the courts upholding what were essentinally very unconstitutional laws favouring monied interests over blacks and poor whites (i.e. those without property)
With the RIAA and the MPAA we are seing similar sorts of laws proposed, only this time to protect the monied interests (those that "own" intellectual property) against those who don't.
Why do the monied interests have the power to pass and uphold these laws? Because they control the legal systems - they are better able to afford lawyers, better able to lobby congress, better able to propogandize against those that hold alternate views.
To me, this is all part of the tragedy of America these days.
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
People like Hollings for non-re-election? Perhaps we need "The Geek Lobby Page" where information about key publicly elected officials is kept.
When is Hollings up for re-election?
Who is running against him?
Are the opponents views any better?
We all grumble, complain, and flame. We also say we're too small. But have we tried yet to use tried-and-true mainstream political techniques?
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
"Which is why people need to inform them of issues that should matter to them."
Why should this matter to them? Seriously. Have you ever tried to talk to average people about this stuff? I come from a fairly typical blue-collar community. I've tried explaining these types of things, using some of the most easy to comprehend methods around. The great majority still either do not get it or could care less. They just want tax breaks, decent schools and other public services, and health care. Recording TV shows is going to be about last on their list.
"Why do candidates always talk about a few key issues when they're up for office?"
Because thats what matters to voters, no matter how it starts, opinion poll research will still say campaign finance, abortion, etc. That's what matters to everyday Americans. And I can just imagine the first average person raising a ruckus about recording TV shows. His neighbors would quickly label him an idiot, since there are so many other, more compelling things to be concerned with, like better schools and health care.
This is _not_ a sexy issue. It will not be a big attention grabber. The average voter is not going to be the one fighting this, it will be the companies who stand to lose if it happens. VCR makers, TIVO, etc. Joe Sixpack just wants the potholes on his street fixed, a safe school for little Jimmy, and health care thats good enough so he can afford it if he takes ill. Frankly I can't blame him.
What matters to you and I is generally no one elses concern.