Tauzin Sets 2006 Deadline For Digital TV Signals

randomErr writes "Yahoo! News says that 'Television broadcasters would be required to switch entirely to digital, copy-protected signals by January 2006, under a proposal released on Thursday by House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Billy Tauzin.'"

Comments

Free Market

[Analog Penguin]

"In a statement, the Louisiana Republican said the lack of progress meant that government might have to step in. 'While we prefer marketplace solutions, clearly it's time for us to provide leadership in this area,' Tauzin said. "

I wonder if the ink on his check is dry yet?

A comprimise?

[stefanlasiewski]

(... sometime in the last 5 years ...)

TV Network owners: We won't upgrade our equipment to digital, because it's too damn expensive, and people won't switch the new TV's because they're too damn expensive

Government: Well, what if we added this new copyright protection scheme as a comprimise. Would you upgrade your equipment if we included copyright protection?

TV Network: Deal!

So now the masks are off

[sdjunky]

So now the whole mask of "we want to use the bandwidth" is off and it's in plain sight that they only want this for anti-piracy.

At least they're coming out and saying that they're interested in the restrictions of consumer rights.

Can't wait for the Supreme Court to get a case of somebody who is suing the government for destroying their fair use rights.

In other news..

[Anonymous Coward]

Congress has mandated that all computers will run a distribution of Linux by 2005.

"We feel that there's not enough progress being made in the area of computer operating systems, so it is time for government to become involved," one representative was quoted as saying.

Seem ridiculous? It does, doesn't it? Sure, operating systems and digital tv are somewhat different, so how about another example?

Should the government step onto the internet and demand we all get rid of TCP/IP in favor for, say, a more secure protocol? Hey, maybe they could step in and force fuel cells and electric cars.

Shit, why don't we throw it all to hell and just cash in our Constitution for some nice socialist papers?

I could see the government becoming involved in business when lives are at stake. (Say, a company selling death machines on shoddy tires.) But lack of digital TV isn't causing the death of anyone.

Ah well. I propose changes to our currency. It should read, "E Pluribus Unim. In god we trust. Bling bling bling!"

tauzin bill

[gordona]

The original driver was the telecommunications act back in 1996. The purpose of reclaiming the analog broadcast spectrum was to be able to resell it in order to reduce (or pay off) the national debt. Originally, this would happen only if there was 85% conversion. The new bill by Tauzin and Dingell removes the 85% requirement. It would not only add a digital tuner for broadcast to TVs, but a QAM tuner for cable as well as requiring the carriage of broadcast signals over cable (8-VSB over MPEG, my how inefficient). I think the main reason for this bill is due to the lack of interoperable standards in the affected industries. However, remember, this bill is only a draft and not going to the floor of the house anytime soon. However, in spite of the rhetoric, the consumer will get screwed in the end.