Slashdot Mirror
Cable, TV Makers Agree on Digital Standard
shylock0 writes "Reuters has this article about the digital cable standard agreed upon today. Amazingly enough, it places little or no copyright restrictions on content -- and it even includes specification for 1394/FireWire output to PVRs. I think this is a victory for fair use. Let's hope the FCC approves."
not quite.
Just because it's a standard doesn't mean that anyone will actually use it.
I can hope something like this becomes a standard, but more to the point, I should rather be hoping that companies actually impliment it.
(Spudley Strikes Again!)
Originally designed to be complete by 2007, the switch to digital has yet to take off due to copyright concerns, limited programming and high equipment prices.
And mostly because they don't want to lose their existing analog signal, so they are stalling. The know that spectrum is worth big money and they are going to do everything they can to either make sure they don't lose it or make a lot of money selling it.
FoundNews.com - get paid to blog.,
I'm assuming that this will remove the "analog hole" since there will now be encrypted digital signal right into the TV, correct? Does that mean recordings can only be performed in analog?
In that case, go pick up a few HDTV tuner cards for the PC before they lock those down. Currently, you can time shift and record the full HDTV stream. But its only a matter of time before those are regulated.
Or will they change the standard such that these will become obselete? The article isn't clear on this but this would also mean screwing over current HDTV customers, since they do not have an integral decoder...
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
Living together!
...obligatory credit due to Ghostbusters for this quotationary moment.
Mass Hysteria!
Copyright is a legal issue, not a technical one. The "copyright restrictions" on the content are the same as they always have been.
What appears to be the case is that it doesn't try to put a lot of technical DRM restrictions on the content, and that is nice. DRM generally restricts use of content much further than copyright.
If approved by the FCC, the roughly two-thirds of U.S. households that subscribe to cable-TV services would be able to enjoy digital pictures over high-definition sets without shelling out more money, as some consumers do now, for set-top boxes to read the signals.
Great, so I don't have to pay for the box. I still have to pay for the service. More channels of little or no worthwhile content and a fancy menuing system (yes, nice, but worth triple the cost... no).
I'm really annoyed w/recent changes in the cable system moving premium channels to digital only. I don't think that cable systems should be allowed to do that. That's DOUBLE charging for HBO. Although w/the recent "slips" by the censors (Cher anyone?) maybe regular-old cable will end up carrying much the same content as HBO... We can always hope.
While the agreement outlines some copy-protection guidelines, it was drafted without the input of Hollywood or consumer groups, which have strong opinions and powerful friends in government. [emphasis me]
Wow! Nothing from the entertainment industry at all. There's the answer to why there's little-to-no DRM.
Somehow, I think the FCC will get some nice gifts from that industry sometime soon.
Maybe the MPAA can't afford to buy them ....
If this is just a "standard" for getting all the extra-cost set-top-boxes to talk to all the government-mandated digital TVs, then it's not much of a victory for consumers. That will just mean the government is mandating we all "upgrade" our cable subscriptions to watch plain old TV.
If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
w00h00! I am so glad to hear the people close to the consumers (we really buy from the cable company and the tv manufacturers..) are starting to get a grip on what we want and are ignoring those bastard groups.
Companies doing good! now if only i can think of something to do until 2004/7...
and so does satellite
I don't think there's any way the content industry will let this through. They have their minds set on controlling their content. Analog reproductions reduce quality, so they still have control. The industry hopes to use DTV to impose fair-use restrictions, which could not happen with this.
That's the only explanation for this article: I've fallen asleep at work and my manager is sneeking up behind me with an air horn or something...
I'll wait a few days for the retractions and such before I get excited about this. If it's true, though, it is good news.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
Why can't this half of the world simply copy what already works?
DVB/S and DVB/T work very well for all other continents already. Why is it so hard to make it work for us here? Is it because of some sort of insatiable desire for HDTV that I've never actually seen?
Oh well. At least things will get more standardized, which is good.
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
All the better to watch the CowboyNeal Variety Hour in living digital color with digital surround sound.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I think the most important part of this article was this line:
So essentially, this "standards agreement" is meaningless.
My Ass hurts.
...if the standard doesn't invole XML I'm not interested!
TV sucks and is a waste of time anyways. Who needs to watch countless ads and product placements it TV. 95 percent of the shows are crap anyways! Fuck TV and read a book, and for that show you don't want to miss, one word : KAZAA!
OTher than that, fuck TV and read a book!
"Entropy is the bad-guy, and he is everywhere"
This agreement is obviously great for cable companies and electronics manufacturers, since it provides free added value to their products. But who's missing from this little equation? Ah, yes - Hollywood. They'll certainly do what they can to subvert this agreement. And they've got a few congresspeople. This agreement is obviously great for cable companies and electronics manufacturers, since it provides free added value to their products. Fair use may have won a skirmish, but it's not a victory until the products are available in stores.
That said, it's certainly a happy skirmish win.
__
Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
To what are you referring with the Cher/censor comment?
Big deal, the TV can show you a digital picture and has a firewire port. What are you going to hook up to that firewire port? A SONY recorder? A PHILIPS recorder? A Palladium PC? They'll get their DRM on the back-end. Remember, they make the equipment and want to sell it -- they agree to nothing unless it is profitable (thay ain't doin' this because /.'ers want a prettier picture...)
It will be up to some hard-working programmer to even figure out what they are doing in the data stream and then deal with the wrath of the DMCA.
An awful lot of ambiguous things in there: "consumers can hook up everything and the equipment will ALLOW viewing elsewhere" -- at the same quality level? At the time of my choosing? The content I wish (ad-free if I want)?
AFAIK you would not be able to hook any of this up to any existing firewire recorders (Canon and Sony cameras for instance as they aren't HD) so you'd have to buy a NEW recorder with goodness knows what built-in to "protect" you from yourself. Sure you can watch it in the other room or from your camera or jukebox or network -- until Tuesday when the digital time-stamp expires in every piece of equipment.
Picture this -- someone makes DeHDTV and you have a cracked copy of Buffy on your PC! Yippee! You then go to play it and it is isn't "signed" properly so the HDTV decides not to show it. Or you spoof the signature and the TV talks upstream to report that you are playing it just to verify against the rights database -- oops you don't have that permission today! Blue Screen Of Denial. That's a cable, you know, and not RF.
Looks like a move forward, but I'll have to see...
I'm thinking about it, therefore I might be.
The title isn't suprising. With an agreed-upon standard, cable companies can charge more for HD-format programming and TV manufacturers can sell more units as everyone moves to the new systems. These parties have a lot to gain from getting together and working things out. But...
While the agreement outlines some copy-protection guidelines, it was drafted without the input of Hollywood or consumer groups, which have strong opinions and powerful friends in government.
The Hollywood crowd has a lot to loose if perfect copies of their works are easy to record, and the equipment becomes standard enough to get cheap. Given that people are pretty much accustomed to being able to record anything that comes down their cable, many more people are gonna notice when this stops working than noticed when a few Brittany Spears CD's stopped working in their computer drives. Get ready to watch an interesting fight when the MPAA and it's lobbyists are pit against the wrath of Joe Average when he finds out that his attempt to record Everyone Loves Raymond failed shortly after coughing up a good chunk of money for HD cable and a new set.
I think this is a victory for fair use.
Not yet, it's not... but since it'll put politicians in a tough spot between lobbyists and lost votes, it could become a victory if the MPAA gets too greedy with their restrictions.
I thought digital was standardised a long, long time ago. 0 and 1. Easy.
But another major question -- the extent to which consumers should be able to record shows for their personal use -- remains unresolved.
I'm sure Hollywood will threaten to pull movies from broadcast if no drm is enabled. I believe the real story involves some smart-card-based SmartRight technology that I read about in a print version of EE times
Vote for Pedro
Doesn't the POSTER even read the article?
Major screwing in the works, especially for new technology. Really for any technology except the cable companies.
... that I submitted earlier this morning can be found here from the LA Times (free reg, yadda yadda).
This article, I think, does a little better job talking about some of the controversial provisions that would come once the FCC approves.
Some day, we're all gonna miss the days of hooking up two VCRs side-by-side to dub that movie we rented, just like the Gemco salesman showed us. What? We're not supposed to be doing that?
...people never sleep and post 24/7!
... you can't afford digital TV because you're unemployed.
you were SHOT for watching tv!
Fat chance on seeing any income tax break from any new tax soruce. They will have it spent before the first cent is collected.
This agreement is still so far off its not even worth worrying about.
What may kill it is that it took so long to decide. Already there are cable HDTV set top boxes on the way.
HDTV is already coming (QUICKLY!) to cable operators. I work for a cable company in the southeast and we've already ordered all the headend gear and sample boxes to start beta tests.
By early 2nd quarter, customers will be able to get HDTV-enabled set top boxes that hook up to home TVs with svideo, component video and (optionally) DVI. This is combined with digital optical out, more 'interactivity' and more. These boxes can support ethernet, DOCSIS modems and even hard drives. How they are going to be rolled out and with what capabilities is still up in the air.
By the end of 2003, beta testing for Video-On-Demand will be ramping up.
If you want to read more, check out http://broadband.motorola.com/noflash/index.html
The ONLY problem is that there isn't that much programming utilizing HDTV. In the coming years that should change.
Analog CableTV WILL GO AWAY in the future. It accounts for most of the service theft.
Connections don't obey flags, they simply carry them. Playback devices/software do. CDs have a 'recordable' flag on them too. I've never seen a piece of software that obeys it.
Congress runs things, not the FCC. If you need proof, just look at low power FM (LPFM). LPFM was adopted by the FCC in 1999 and looked to completely change the radio landscape, which by then was dominated by a few companies. What happened? Those companies along with the NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) lobbied Congress, who responded with: (get this) "The Radio Preservation Act of 2001". This Act, in the interest of "preserving radio" essentially KILLED 90% of the LPFM's that could have been. It ordered the FCC to neuter LPFM to virtually nothing. If you don't think that Congress wouldn't do this to HDTV, think again. The MPAA and RIAA have OUR lawmakers in their back pockets!
Namely:
Now wait a minute... either you can record a copy of a PPV program or you can't. Delaying and pausing using a PVR is done by recording, so does this proposed regulation imply that a PPV program can be recorded, but is then somehow erased or locked?I have a couple of problems with this. First, I don't want the cable provider (or anyone) to have that much control over data on my media. And I think the average Joe Six-gig is going to feel the same way.
Which leads me to the second misgiving: someone will find a way around it. What if I hack my TiVo? What if I turn it off, or lose power, or otherwise interfere with the deleting or locking process? This will just give the cable companies (and Hollywood) the excuse to impose more and more restrictions on their content, or demand more and more access and control over the contents of my mass storage devices.
And why 90 minutes? Who decided that was fair? Why not 24 hours? Where was the consumer included in this decision? Oh... I forgot, this is not about the consumer, it's about 3) PROFIT!!!
Nosir, it doesn't look settled yet...
I can see the fnords!
when the MPAA says "we won't let you broadcast any of our stuff because you don't have any copyright restrictions implemented."
Any other good foreign shows besides Monty Python reruns?
The article sure doesn't elaborate, does it?
My guess is that they're saying that the cable providers have agreed to pass along straight ATSC streams, which is the encoding technique used for broadcasting digital tv (including high-def). This doesn't prevent them from enabling the existing copy-flag spec in the signal, but no broadcasters use it yet (maybe the FCC hasn't approved it's use yet). The fear is that if it's approved for use, the broadcasters will simply set it once -- No Copying! -- and never bother to switch it off, even for programs they're not concerned about people copying (like daytime shows).
CBS Will Pull HD Without Broadcast Flag
."[15] This salesman says he steers potential buyers away from HD "because they don't need it yet and they're going to end up bringing it [the sets] back. But some store visitors, he adds, say that they want to watch HD programming, citing specific shows such as CBS' CSI.[16]
a merica/video/digital_television.asp.
d s/Broadband_Market_Trends.pdf.
CBS is playing hardball on the copy protection issue, threatening to withhold its vaunted HDTV programming next fall if the FCC doesn't come up with effective rules to prevent digital piracy.
In an FCC filing, CBS parent Viacom warned that it could lose hundreds of millions of dollars in revenues if its digital offerings are illegally copied and distributed in the growing world of broadband Internet.
"If a broadcast flag is not implemented and enforced by Summer 2003, [CBS] will not provide any programming in high definition for the 2003-2004 television season," Viacom said. "Viacom believes that DTV sales and broadband subscriptions have reached the 'tipping point' at which it can no longer afford to expose its content to piracy. A broadcast flag regime is needed now to protect the value of our important assets or we must withhold our quality HD digital content."
If CBS or other networks followed through with the threat, it could be a blow to DTV manufacturers and boosters who have recently been able to point to broad availability of HD programming. CBS leads the networks with 24 hours of HD programming weekly. The network says it is broadcasting 120 hours of HD sports in the 2002-2003 season.
A spokesman for the Consumer Electronics Association, which has advocated less restrictive protection schemes than the networks, was not immediately available for comment. Earlier this year, CEA awarded CBS three "DTV Pioneer" awards for its HDTV programming and promotion efforts.
Before the
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of )
Digital Broadcast Copy Protection ) MB Docket No. 02-230
COMMENTS OF VIACOM
Viacom hereby submits the following comments in the above-captioned proceeding. As the parent company of Paramount, a member of the Motion Picture Association of America, Viacom participated in the drafting of the technology- and jurisdiction-based comments filed separately by that entity and fully supports them. Viacom's comments below, therefore, are limited to addressing the critical questions raised in paragraph 3 of the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM). Those questions pertain to the withholding of digital programming in the absence of a broadcast flag regime and the impact such a reduction in high quality programming would have on the DTV transition and on the broadcast industry. For the reasons discussed below, if a broadcast flag is not implemented and enforced by Summer 2003, Viacom's CBS Television Network will not provide any programming in high definition for the 2003-2004 television season.
Viacom's Digital Content
Viacom is a leading global media company, with preeminent positions in broadcast and cable television, radio, publishing and online. With programming that appeals to audiences in every demographic category across virtually all media, the company is a leader in the creation, promotion, and distribution of entertainment, news, sports, and music. It is a major producer of theatrical, premium cable, basic cable and broadcast television content, and syndicated programming through its Paramount, Showtime Networks, MTV Networks (including MTV, Nickelodeon, VH1, TNN, CMT: Country Music Television), BET, and CBS divisions. In addition to creating content, these Viacom divisions are also major distributors of content they license from other producers.
As a major content producer and program packager, Viacom has played a crucial role in the digital television transition. Showtime, Viacom's premium subscription television service, launched its two high definition feeds more than two years ago, in January 2000, when it aired the high-profile film Star Trek: Insurrection in HD. Since that time, Showtime HDTV has been made available directly to consumers nationwide. It is currently distributed nationally through both DBS and cable distributors and is available in 1080i, the highest transmission format available. Showtime offers high definition and other value-added DTV programming for more than half of its prime-time schedule. This past summer, Showtime aired the first-ever original series on a premium network to be completely shot and aired in HDTV, making Showtime the first premium network to create a series with complete end-to-end HD production and distribution. Showtime's HDTV programming furthers Showtime's commitment as a premium programmer to offer consumers the very best viewing experience.
Paramount, too, has advanced the transition to digital. Specifically, HDTV masters are created for all of Paramount's current major theatrical releases. In addition, HDTV masters, along with standard definition masters, are delivered for a majority of its network television series. With respect to catalog product, Paramount is in the process of converting its library to HDTV on a title-by-title basis.
And CBS, the undisputed leader in broadcast digital television, has been producing high definition programming for its affiliates nationwide since the fall of 1998, when it documented in HD the historic space shuttle voyage of Senator John Glenn and the crew of the Discovery and pioneered the first HD broadcasts of three NFL games. CBS began airing at least half of its prime-time schedule in the 1999-2000 television season in HD. In the 2001-2002 season, all but one of CBS's scripted prime-time programs were broadcast in HD. And for the 2002-2003 season, CBS is offering all 18 of its prime-time comedies and dramas in HD.
CBS has also provided an unprecedented level of sports programming in HD. In 2000 and 2001, CBS broadcast in HD the majority of its AFC Playoff games, including the AFC Championship games both years and the 2001 Super Bowl. For the last three years, CBS has produced the NCAA Men's Basketball Final Four and Championship Games and The Masters Golf tournament in HD. In the 2001-2002 television season, CBS aired in HD more than 100 hours of its premier sports events. This year CBS improved its fourth consecutive HD broadcast of the U.S. Open Tennis Tournament by expanding its HD offering to CBS's entire coverage of the tournament, nearly 40 free, over-the-air broadcast hours including the Saturday night prime time women's final and the Sunday afternoon men's final. For the 2002-2003 season, CBS Sports HD coverage will expand to at least 120 hours.
Together with its prime-time schedule, selected CBS Sunday movies, weekday ratings leader The Young and the Restless and CBS Sports' leading HD schedule, CBS will provide an average of 24 hours of HD programming per week this television season, far more than any other broadcast network.
In addition, as a leader in HD programming, CBS has had to create technical solutions where none existed before. For example, CBS pioneered both the techniques and the cost of converting film-based prime-time content to HD. CBS Sports has pioneered "unified" productions where single production facilities produce both SD and HD broadcasts, as well as developments such as "super slow motion" equipment, production switchers, and HD hand-held RF cameras.
CBS has invested millions of dollars in HD production, separate and apart from the hundreds of millions it is spending to convert its broadcasting plant to HD.
The Unauthorized Redistribution Factor
Broadcast television content, which is available over the air for free, is extremely expensive to produce: A single episode of a one-hour drama series can cost as much as $2.2 million to make. Program creators rely on a multi-window distribution plan to recoup the initial investment in the content along with a return on that investment. These windows include the first-run domestic distribution via network or syndication, domestic syndication, and foreign first-run and syndication. The shattering of any of these windows will have a dramatic effect on producers' ability to recoup their costs, let along make a positive return on their investment.
Broadcast television programming is paid for through license fees paid by program packagers (such as cable and broadcast networks) and broadcast television stations. Some television content, particularly syndicated product, both first-run and off-network, is also funded by advertising that the content owner inserts into the program. The initial release of the content usually does not pay for the production of the content. Producers who create network television series assume great financial risks in hopes that their shows will air long enough to reach the 100 episodes needed to later sell them as a package in syndication.
In addition, studios make their theatrical film titles --and sports leagues make their games and matches-- available for television for a license fee. In almost all cases, the license to televise content is limited in geographic scope in order to preserve the value of the programming for simultaneous distribution to other licensees or for later distribution domestically or to other parts of the world. Thus, a national program distributor such as a cable or broadcast network usually obtains rights to an entertainment program for transmission within the United States and to a sports program within a specified region, while a broadcast television station's rights to programming are limited to its market.
Because the number of media outlets chasing after television content has substantially increased over the last decade or so, the competition to acquire compelling content is fierce. Program creators have a wider choice of outlets and thus greater bargaining power with distributors. DTV broadcasters, who are vying for content without the ability to assure program creators that their content is secure from unauthorized redistribution, will be at a severe disadvantage in this competition. DTV's content is digitized, compressed and sent via digital transmissions to DTV receivers where the content is decompressed and made ready for viewing. It is the fact that the content is digitized and compressed that makes it easy to be redistributed. In essence, the broadcaster puts the content in a form that is ready-made for Internet distribution. Once the digital signal leaves the transmitter's antenna, a digital set-top DTV tuner with an unprotected digital output is all that is needed to take the DTV content and make it available throughout the world via the Internet. The consequences of content escaping to the Internet are very significant.
In the absence of a broadcast flag regime, anyone receiving digital broadcast television signals on a digital set-top box with an unprotected digital output or a tuner card-equipped computer is capable of distributing the television content to millions of people all over the globe through peer-to-peer file mechanisms, through e-mail, or through a website. Left unaddressed, this vulnerability to unauthorized redistribution could destroy television production economics such that the value of syndicated product would plummet, advertisers would pay far less to buy time in devalued programming and out-of-market entertainment and professional and college sports transmissions. As a self-help measure, therefore, no doubt, those who produce digital content for television are apt to provide their most compelling and high-value content only to distribution platforms that can ensure the protection of their content, that is, to those with conditional access systems or copy protection systems. Thus, the highest quality entertainment and sports programming would migrate to cable and satellite, rendering free, over-the-air television the poor stepchild of the distribution platforms, if it can even survive carrying second-rate, leftover programming.
Efforts to Resolve the Unauthorized Redistribution Problem
Viacom recognized early on the importance of protecting its crucial content assets and, as a result, Viacom's engineering personnel have actively pursued development and evaluation of copy protection technology for digital content such as movies, images, and broadcast and cable television programming since the early 1990s. These technologies include user and device authentication, Content Scrambling System (CSS), conditional access systems, Digital Transmission Content Protection (DTCP or 5C), OpenCable POD Host Interface, HDCP, the broadcast flag, DVB, encryption algorithms, fingerprinting, and watermarking. Activities include participation in industry and trade associations and standard-setting organizations along with meetings with many of the equipment manufacturers and service providers.[1] These activities have easily consumed many years of effort by Viacom's engineering staff over this period.
Protection of free, over-the-air broadcast content alone has been the subject of intense inter-industry discussions for nearly two years, having been raised by the motion picture studios in their negotiations with the 5C companies relating to the protection of encrypted conditional access content. The 5C companies rejected including such broadcast protection as part of their license agreement, but agreed to contribute to a multi-industry effort to develop a solution for broadcast content.
In May 2001, one of the major broadcast networks, Fox, proposed the elegantly simple solution of the broadcast flag, which relied on the "redistribution control" descriptor that recently had been adopted as part of the ATSC transport stream standard, as the method for protecting free, over-the-air broadcast content. Discussions with 5C ensued, but no real progress was made until October and November of that year, when a series of separate Congressional DTV Roundtables (convened by Congressmen Tauzin, Upton, Dingell and Markey, among others) and FCC gatherings separately were launched to facilitate a meeting of the minds between the studios and 5C companies. By the end of November, as a result of these meetings and the strong encouragement of Members of Congress and the FCC, the Broadcast Protection Discussion Group (BPDG) was born.
This entity is run under the auspices of the Copy Protection Technical Working Group (CPTWG), an open, cross-industry forum that includes representatives from the entertainment, information technology and consumer electronics industries, as well as consumer group representatives and other interested parties. The goals of the BPDG were to provide a detailed technical specification for the detection and response to the broadcast flag; to define the secure handling, output and recording of broadcast content marked with the flag (compliance and robustness); and to recommend how the flag should be implemented and the governmental and regulatory actions needed to support its enforcement in the U.S. market.
On June 3, after countless hours in face-to-face meetings, on conference calls and in drafting sessions, and the passing of more than one deadline for completion of its mission, the BPDG, consisting of 70 organizations, issued its final report to the CPTWG. The report demonstrated near-unanimous agreement on the broadcast flag descriptor itself. There was universal agreement that the flag would not prevent home copying of broadcast programming and would not interfere with the ability of consumers to send authorized and secure copies of digital broadcast programming around home networks. As for compliance and robustness, only 14 of the 70 organizations dissented, and of these, six were small consumer groups opposing any restraints on the reproduction and redistribution of content.
In July, Members of Congress sent letters to Chairman Powell noting the BPDG broadcast flag consensus and urging FCC action.
Effects on the DTV Transition and Broadcast Television without a Broadcast Flag
The Commission is now addressing the issue of the broadcast flag and its mandated implementation. Viacom commends the Commission for launching this important proceeding and for asking difficult, but critical, questions. Specifically, the NPRM seeks comment on whether: (1) quality digital programming is now being withheld because of concerns over the lack of a broadcast flag; (2) such programming will be withheld in the absence of a regulatory regime; (3) the absence of a broadcast flag could delay or prevent the digital transition; and (4) this dynamic would threaten the viability of broadcast television and impact consumers. We respond to each of these in turn.
* Viacom has not yet withheld quality digital programming
Viacom has not withheld any of its digital content from broadcast television up to now. To the contrary, as discussed above, Viacom's broadcast television division CBS has been the undisputed leader in moving the television world from analog to digital, well along in the process of spending hundreds of millions of dollars to convert its plant and programs to digital. It so firmly believes in digital that it has gone beyond HD content production and reached out to other industry sectors important to a digital conversion. CBS has partnered with consumer electronics manufacturers and consumer electronics retailers to identify and promote HD programming and to market DTV receivers. At the end of this past September, after four weeks of sales, for example, the CBS/Sears/ Samsung HDTV promotion of NCAA Saturday football games resulted in triple-digit growth of Samsung's HDTV set sales numbers.
As for Paramount, up to this time it has not withheld digital content which was available to it.
Viacom has continued to produce and provide digital content to broadcasters and viewers up to now because the concern for widespread piracy has been mitigated by the relatively low number of households with DTV receivers. In November 1998, the first DTV models were introduced. Broadcast television stations in eight cities were transmitting a digital signal and the average price for an HDTV monitor was $6,000.[2] From that launch through April of this year, 2.8 million DTV sales have been recorded, with an average unit price for digital TV sets and displays in 2002 of less than $1,700.[3] And in July of this year alone, DTV sales totaled 213,159 units.[4] The Consumer Electronics Association projects that 2.1 million DTV products will be sold this year, 4 million in 2003, 5.4 million in 2004, 8 million in 2005 and 10.5 million in 2006.[5]
As the digital TV receiver becomes a mainstream product, consumers will demand more and better digital programming. Content producers, in turn, will create that programming, and those equipped at home with a set-top box with an unprotected digital output or a computer and a TV tuner card will now have further incentives for distributing that content via the Internet. Like DTV, broadband Internet connections, which will facilitate and feed the incentives for distributing content, are also on a rapid upward trajectory. Sixty percent of the 20 largest U.S. cities show at-home broadband population growth of more than 50 percent for the year ending April 30, 2002.[6] And by 2004, Forrester Research forecasts, 40 million North American households will have broadband Internet connections.[7] Internationally, it is estimated that by 2005, 24.2 percent of European homes will subscribe to a broadband Internet service, and one year later, 76 percent of Taiwanese homes will do the same, with the majority of new subscribers added over the next two years.[8]
Viacom believes that DTV sales and broadband subscriptions have reached the "tipping point" at which it can no longer afford to expose its content to piracy. A broadcast flag regime is needed now to protect the value of our important assets or we must withhold our quality HD digital content. The potential loss in revenues for Viacom alone due to the unauthorized redistribution of broadcast television content and the resulting devaluation of broadcasting could reach hundreds of millions of dollars. Thus, Viacom has much at stake in the success of all affected television industry sectors and the government joining together now to establish secure measures for the transmission of digital broadcast television programming. The benefits of such measures for broadcast television will inure to the benefit of other industry sectors and the American public, as well. With a continuing and ever-increasing flow of digital content, consumer electronics manufacturers and retailers will enjoy flourishing DTV sales,[9] and with a stabilized broadcasting television system, Americans can continue to count on receiving high quality digital programming for free.
* Viacom may begin withholding digital content
Accordingly, Viacom wishes to make clear for the record in this proceeding that the absence of a broadcast flag regime in the near future will have a materially adverse effect on the levels of digital broadcast television programming it makes available. Specifically, if the broadcast flag is not implemented and enforced by next summer, CBS will cease providing any programming in high definition for the 2003-2004 television season. And, without the security afforded by a broadcast flag, Paramount will have less incentive and enthusiasm to make digital content available and will factor that into its decision-making at the time.
* Without a broadcast flag, the digital transition will be delayed and broadcasting could be threatened
That content is the single most important driver of the migration to digital is agreed upon by all. Chairman Powell recognized this last April in asking the major broadcast and premium cable networks to provide at least half of their prime-time schedule in HD or other value-added DTV programming as part of his plan to boost the digital transition. Indeed, in his letter to Congress announcing the plan, Chairman Powell cited an increase in the amount of compelling digital content as one of its two "key goals."[10] The Consumer Electronics Association recently said that "[t]he essential prerequisite for a successful DTV transition is high quality, compelling high definition (HDTV) programming."[11] Programmers, of course, know that HD will lure viewers to their product and their brand, as evidenced by recent announcements by Discovery and ESPN of their new HD launches.[12] ""HD changes viewer habits," according to Discovery head John Hendricks.[13] His family, he says, seeks out HD shows no matter what, even if they have already seen the program before in analog format.[14] And retailers, who stand on the front line of the digital conversion campaign, understand that consumers buy DTV sets to watch enticing programming. As one salesman at a Southern store owned by Tweeter Home Entertainment Group said in response to the question of whether he would buy an HD set right now: "No, because there's not a lot of HD programming. . .
Viacom alone cannot make or break the transition to a DTV era, but we undoubtedly have done more than our fair share in the digital migration, most notably through our creation of high quality, high value HD entertainment and sports programming and our provision of that product -as well as the television programming and motion picture product we obtain from other producers-- via the CBS Television Network over the air for free to all American households. If we are forced by the absence of a broadcast flag to withhold this content, millions of Americans who have already individually invested thousands of dollars in digital television receivers certainly will feel disenfranchised when they are no longer able to view current levels of CBS's HD programming. The ramifications of this will be felt in all sectors of the HDTV community. And those contemplating the purchase of DTV receivers may elect to cancel or postpone purchasing plans in light of a decreased menu of HD viewing options.
Worse, in the absence of a broadcast flag to protect against unauthorized redistribution over the Internet, not just Viacom but all content producers no doubt will be forced to reassess broadcast television as a medium for the provision of their high quality digital programming. And then the most profound concern of the day will not be how to save the transition to digital television but how to rescue digital broadcast television and, potentially, broadcast television overall. For some 50 years, the FCC has sought to preserve the broadcast network-affiliate system, that unique national-local partnership that has been a substantial engine for premier news, sports and entertainment programming that free, over-the-air broadcast television provides. Unauthorized Internet retransmission undermines the network-affiliate model and broadcasting itself.
We are all at a critical crossroads in the course to DTV. That includes not only those who create the content that drives consumer adoption of DTV, but those who distribute that content, those who manufacture digital receivers, those who design information technology, those who sell that equipment and technology, those in new wireless services who await the freeing up of spectrum now utilized for analog broadcasting, and those in government charged with overseeing the migration to DTV. Therefore, it is imperative that we all join together now, within the context of this FCC proceeding, in moving down the road that leads most directly and expeditiously to a DTV world. That road is implementation of the broadcast flag.
Respectfully submitted,
Anne Lucey
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
Viacom
1501 M Street, NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20005
Dated: December 6, 2002
[1] Industry and standards organizations include CableLabs, Copy Protection Technology Working Group (CPTWG), Digital Audio Visual Council (DAVIC), MPAA, MPEG, and the NCTA. Manufacturers and service providers include AT&T, Digimarc, Hitachi, IBM, Intel, Kowa, Lucent, Macrovision, Matsushita Electric Industrial Company, Microsoft, Motorola, NEC, Philips, RealNetworks, Sarnoff, Scientific-Atlanta, Sony, Soundtag, Telcordia Technologies, and Toshiba among many others.
[2] "Digital Television," Digital America, CEA Website, www.ce.org/publications/books_references/digital_
[3] "Digital Television Takes Off," Digital America, at id.
[4] "DTV Sales Flourish in July," September 5, 2002, Press Room of CEA Website, www.ce.org.
[5] Id.
[6] Nielsen/Net Rating, as reported by BroadJump, www.broadjump.com/mediarelations/mediakit/downloa
[7] Id.
[8] Id.
[9] In July of this year alone, DTV product sales totaled nearly $370 million. "DTV Sales Flourish in July," September 5, 2002, Press Room of CEA Website, www.ce.org.
[10] Letter from Michael K. Powell to Senator Ernest F. Hollings, dated April 4, 2002; Letter from Michael K. Powell to Representative W.J. "Billy" Tauzin, dated April 4, 2002.
[11] "Cable Compatibility, Consumer-Friendly Copy Protection and Content Availability Remain Keys to Accelerating DTV Transition, Says CEA," September 25, 2002, Press Room of CEA Website, www.ce.org.
[12] "ESPN to Add HD Channel," CableWorld, September 30, 2002; "Discovery Launching HD Theater net," April 16, 2002, www.emonline.com/news/web041602.html.
[13] CableFAX Daily, October 23, 2002, at 4.
[14] Id.
[15] CableFAX Daily, Wednesday, October 23, 2002, at 4.
...think I.P.
...wireless, ip over home phone network or power lines...firewire networking/I.P, that sort of thing. Coax should die.
1080i HDTV provides a gorgeous picture.
But TV programming is such crap who cares?
Okay, lots of Slashdot whining, but if you haven't been following events, you're sounding like an idiot.
Okay, currently, DTV (digital television) has 18 transmission settings, some of which are HDTV, some are SDTV (standard NTSC quality but digital), and some are EDTV (480p like an Xbox, Gamecube, or Progressive Scan DVD player). For a few decades, television manufacturers have had to include VHF and UHF decoders. However, most Americans get signals from cable and/or satellite (something like 10%-14% of homes are OTA only). As a result, televisions became "cable-ready" which means that your TV can tune cable channels in. Those hold enough to remember pre-'cable-ready' televisions remember having a cable box that would output on channel 3 or 4, and you'd get your channels that way. Cable-ready benefits everyone. The cable company didn't need to provide boxes, and consumers were happier.
Now, DTV is available OTA. A small handful of regions have HDTV over cable, where your digital cable STB outputs an HDTV signal via DVI, Component Video, or RGB (VGA). Many consumers with HDTV use Satellite, where their HDTV Dish/DirecTV box includes an ATSC (OTA HDTV) decoder. In fact, most OTA decoders are DirecTV boxes as well. This is a matter of economics.
DTV is an MPEG-2 stream, so OTA STBes need to decode MPEG-2 to decode OTA. DirecTV and Dish send in MPEG-2 as well. As a result, adding DirecTV or Dish to an OTA STB is pretty cheap. Dish, however, makes all their own equipment, so many OTA STBes can also get DirecTV. In fact, normally the D* boxes are cheaper, because DirecTV subsidizes DirecTV hardware. Including an OTA-only decoder is a bit silly, so some televisions that are HDTV have a DirecTV decoder built.
While this is great for DirecTV, the 70% of the contry that uses cable is left out in the cold. The FCC mandate for including a decoder was coming, so the television manufacturers were in trouble. They could include an OTA decoder that consumers had no interest in (they get signals from cable, remember), so they couldn't really pass the costs on to consumers. (Manufacturing costs affect supply, not demand, so the price goes up and the quantity sold goes down, w/ manufacturers making less per box, that's no good).
So, while every television could include an integrated DirecTV receiver, that's less beneficial to the manufacturers than a Cable tuner. To make matters worse, the cable companies aren't terribly interested in buying equipment from Motorola to rent to consumers. While they may make some money on the boxes, remember that they have to put the money up to buy it (the debt levels you hear about in telecom), and the box rentals piss off consumers so some of them stay analog.
They are rolling out Digital and have no interest in keeping analog as well, they can get 4-6 SDTV (depending on compression) signals in the space of a single analog station, or ~1 HDTV signal (if the cable companies can compress it a bit more, maybe 1.5 HDTV signals).
Everyone hates eating the costs of two systems. While the television companies have "free" bandwidth, they can't use it. Right now they are maintaining a DTV AND analog transmitter (more money) for no additional viewers (so no extra money), plus they had to buy DTV broadcasting gear.
Everyone wants the DTV changeover to end, so they need to push us to DTV. Once we are all on DTV, they can eliminate the HDTV channels that were the carrot to move us over, and put 4 SDTV signals in the place plus "value added" service like purchasing shit, etc.
So, the cable companies agree to pass along whatever the broadcasters put in that spectrum (or most, or whatever), the broadcasters shut down analog and either offer more channels, services, or HDTV, or something, and the manufacturers get to sell us all new televisions. Consumers get more/better service, either more channels or better quality. Hopefully the satellite companies offer something impressive to compensate for cable matching their previous advantages, and everybody wins.
Of course, rates go up, but c'est la vie.
Alex
Okay, they're using Digital TV and HDTV interchangeably in the article. Sorry, but they're two separate formats. Digital TV is simply a standard analog program that's been digitally compressed. Standard DTV (a.k.a. Standard Defintion Television) SUCKS!. You get all the artifacting and ugliness that you'd get from standard analog. On top of that, you get all the artifacting from digital compression. And the two have a cumulative effect. The whole reason the broadcasters like it is because they can compress HDTV is something else entirely.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I mean, if I'm not mistaken, Japan already has high definition digital TV for a few years now and it WORKS! Why didn't american's just borrow the standard. Nooooooo. They had to repeat the whole NTSC/PAL fiasco all over again with designing their own standard and locking themselves in the corner all over again. I live in North America, and I can't believe how much the engineers over here just don't get it. Horray for NORTH AMERICAN STANDARDS. So US and Canada can exchange signals freely. Don't expect the rest of the world to work with your system tough.
Why does it always have to be like this with every American standards? There's always some standard already proven to work somewhere in the world, but we get to get something else.
There needs to be a standard for uncompressed digital video, so devices such as video game consoles can output a direct digital stream to the TV, without having to convert to analog first. In other words, a consumer electronics version of DVI, or (HD) SDI.
Currently, all consumer digital video standards involve compression, which is the natural choice, if your source is already compressed, such as a DVD or satellite stream. BUT, if you're generating video/graphics on the fly, such as in a video game, it's senseless to compress on the fly and then decompress it again in the set.
The major game console players, including Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are trying to work with the electronics makers on an uncompressed consumer digital video interface.
-- Samir Gupta, Ph. D. Head, New Technology Research Group, Nintendo Co. Ltd., Kyoto, Japan.
> Why didn't american's just borrow the standard.
Because the Japanese standard was ANALOG and was a huge bandwidth hog and as far as I know been abandoned. From what I understand they are replacing it with basically the US standard.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
Although the licensed use of the broadcast radio spectrum has often been referred to, and perhaps justly, "a license to print money", the comments referring to the broadcasters intensions with respect to spectrum use are not correct.
The FCC exists as a United States federal agency in recognition that the radio spectrum is a limited public resource. The goals of this agency, like most Federal agencies, are to promote public safety and commerce. Licensing standards and regulation of this spectrum are the tools used to insure its proper use of the spectrum. A popular analogy is that they define the distance between the rails, so boxcars can be manufactured, so that railroads can be operated, so that other industries can deliver their goods to market.
So here now we have these broadcasters going along and doing business when all of a sudden some guy named Reed Hunt (Former FCC Commish) decides that to not only change the spacing between the rails but also the size of the boxcars etc, etc. Not only did this Digital TV (DTV) stuff cause the immediate obsolescence of any millions upon millions in capital funds, but it also obsoleted the consumer investment in televisions to receive the product.
While the big markets station owners and large group station owners may scream bloody murder about the cost of conversion, the reality is that the cost barely puts a dent in their bloated profits.
To the independent (non network affiliate), small market, and public broadcasters, this expense is crippling if not deadly.
If there is not an installed base of digital receivers in the market place a broadcaster simply cannot turn off their legacy analog transmission without going broke.
While the DTV standard for Advanced Compatible Digital Television (ACTV) has many great features in to improve the quality and diversity of the broadcasters product, the FCC simply did not perform the requisite due diligence to determine what would be required to perform such an industrial see change.
DTV programming is now out there in the big cities and many if not the small ones too. Problem is that the cheapest digital TV's are currently about $1500 and converter boxes to support everyone's current TV's are expensive and virtually nonexistent.
Yah, sure there's been proposals to keep by broadcasters to give them both spectrum allocations, but one takes em seriously. Yes there is big money at stake, buts its more about servalv than reselling spectrum.
The film and video production comunity has been ussing an uncompressed HDSDI (High defenition serial digital serial interface) for several years now. It has a data transfer rate of 1.53 gigabits per second.
Every time I see an article dicussing the FCCs mandate to TV manufacturers to include digital tuners in TVs I can't help but think: "These people are not Congressmen. What right do they have to regulate manufacturing?". So what is the answer? What law gives the FCC the right to mandate inclusion of certain devices, such as digital tuners with broadcast flag support, as part of television sets? It's a little scary to think the FCC has such powers. It makes me glad that the Internet is not as heavily regulated as other communications channels.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
When they say Firewire I/O they don't necessarily mean that it won't be encrypted. Yes there is equipment that sends MPEG-2 over Firewire without encryption (some HDTV cable boxes can be modified to do this), but there is also a CSS-like encryption standard for Firewire.
Also there is the possibility that the FCC will mandate a "broadcast flag" (a bit that says "no copying") in the Firewire stream; any hardware or software that doesn't respect that flag would be outlawed in the US. (much like Macrovision-free VHS and DVD players...)
As an interesting side note, the TV Firewire standard is just plain old MPEG-2, which means that once Firewire PVRs are available, they would also be able to record video straight off a DVD without any loss of image quality. (assuming you had a DVD player with Firewire output, which I expect will start to appear soon)...
I'll be able to "upgrade" to DRM for only the price of a new TV? Excellent! What am I waiting for?
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
$85 for DirecTV gets you everything. That includes locals, HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, Starz, and the Sports pack. If you want playboy its an extra $15/month. You can pick your hardware, so you can find one with a pretty quick menuing system. If you want Tivo, DirecTivo (dual-tuners) can be found for $200 (though the series 2 DTivos went up in price to $300 due to demand, I believe you get a $50 new sign-up rebate). If you have the $85 movie package, your Tivo service is free. Otherwise the Tivo service is $5/month.
If you just get HBO + Starz + Tivo (which gets you HBO Programming that rocks plus a million movies from Starz), you're looking at ~$65/month, plus time shifting. With a DTivo + Starz, you'll never lack movies waiting for you.
Don't work for them, just a VERY satisfied customer... HD-Tivo, where are you?
Alex
Digital TV in 2006? Jan 2nd, 2006, they update the boxes. All signals carry a little extra space for extra info. In Engalnd, isn't Teletext pushed that way? Doesn't radio send info to capable receivers? How much space does a no-copy byte take? Answer: 8 bits! Not hard to pack in...
The companies that are pushing digital rights management are the media companies. The TV makers and Cable operators generally don't own a lot of copyrights. Now the cable BROADCASTERS are another story.
We are the 198 proof..
Well, you are ;))
Japan had analog HDTV for a while. They started digital HDTV broadcast in 2000, two years later than in US.
NTSC/PAL fiasco?
TV broadcasts in US started in 1939, NTSC was approved in 1953. PAL and SECAM were adopted in 1967.
I've had a CD drive that would obey the "copyrighted" flag on CD tracks and refuse to rip them. It was long ago, the drive being "very fast" 2.4x (2-point-4, not 24).
The moon is not fully subjugated. I demand a second assault wave preceded by a massive nuclear bombardment.
There is. Its DVI. It was designed for any application which needs to transmit uncompressed video. Mostly computer monitors, but there has been some intrest in putting on on CE as well. It also has an encryption and protection standard, HDCP.
CableLabs article
It would be good if the actual MOU were published somewhere.
It is almost certain that 5C protection is specified for the 1394 interface. And it probably also specifies Macrovision for any analog video outputs.
Sadly, there are no fewer than 4 broadcast digital systems in use in the U.S. today: digital cable (64QAM or 256QAM modulation), ATSC (for airwave broadcast: 8VSB modulation), DVB-S for Echostar, and DirecTV's system.
All but DirecTV are based upon MPEG-2 Transport packaging/framing (but most MPEG decoder chips can handle both MPEG-2 Transport and DirecTV framing). Each has its own modulation, Forward Error Correction, and interleaving scheme, due to the differing respective characteristics of the cable, airwave, and satellite channels.
Add to this several different conditional access systems. Perhaps this agreement specifies CableLabs' POD pluggable conditional access module framework.
I don't see any victory in this for advocates of weak protection.
I also don't see a universal digital receiver coming from this alone. It is possible, though, that some receiver manufacturers will include multi-standard tuners and demodulators. The added tuner and demodulator costs should be around $14, which would show up as around $50 extra at retail, by comparison with a digital cable only receiver.
While the agreement outlines some copy-protection guidelines, it was drafted without the input of Hollywood or consumer groups, which have strong opinions and powerful friends in government.
:(
The content layer isnt standardized yet.
This is nothing to celebrate - DRM will probably still discriminate against FOSS (Free and Open Source Software).
Put the cork back on your beer.
Pixels keep you awake!
'Course, according to other posters on here, it might be easier for DirecTV signals to go through anyway, but nonetheless, everyone should be involved, or else we're back to the Beta/VHS situation again.
Don't knock our elected officials - We Have The Best Politicians That Money Can Buy...... Hmmm, I guess you all ready stated that.
Some small facts: Digital signals take up less spectra than analog. The FCC wants to make money off the spectra thus The FCC is pushing for Digital signals so they can harvest the analog bands. Current HDTV has an analog component, this is designed to screw up copying. Current HDTV takes up way more spectra than the FCC wants it to. (so it has to go) Current HDTVs are not selling. (I was not buying until they are fully digital) So the makers are willing to change. Yes if you bought an HDTV already, you are getting screwwed. There are still MILLIONS of analog TVs out here. Some small hopes: You should be able to buy a digital to analog tuner for years to come. Hook your PVR to it and you have what you got now. Someone will make a toy to get your cable into your PVR/Computer. If a $100 Walmart TV can show it, a $2000 custom decoder will be able to steal it. (whatever hollywood thinks) Best Wishes and Merry Christmas
Three words: "Set Top Boxes"
:(
I've got cable run to every room in the house. Well, except the bathrooms - my wife wouldn't let me. But then, she wouldn't let me run Cat5 to them either.
If we were to get Digital Cable, we'd need a set-top decoder for each room, plus an extra one for every VCR if we wanted to be able to watch one channel while recording another. It's just not worth it.
When manufacturers start releasing TVs, VCRs, and TV-Tuner cards for PCs, I'll probably change my mind. But not before.
LETS HOPE THE MPAA APPROVES THIS
last time i checked doesn't hollywood control the way Digital entertainment is going
/sarcasmoff
You'll watch what we want when we want and like it
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Can you just imagine the 23-hour-a-day pledge drives...
Or else Proctor & Gamble's advertising budget will need to increase a hundredfold and they'll pass the costs on to you.
The money's gotta come from somewhere, and "somewhere" is you.
Obviously the CD drive manufacturers at least have realised people wont buy DRMed hardware when unrestricted hardware is available. The only hope of selling DRMed hardware is ensureing there are no unrestricted competitors. That can be done either by licenseing the technology to require restrictions (dvd), lobbying to ban unprotected equipment (macrovision-immune VCRs), keeping details secret so only one campany can make them (magicgate) or useing lawyers to threaten unresricted products (PVRs with 30-second-skips). All techniques have advantages and disadvantages for the manufacturers and entertainment industry. They all have disadvantages for comsumers. There are no advantages for consumers in driveing off unrestricted competitors.
I stand corrected. That's what happens you talk mostly out of your ass. :-p
So why is this good?
The manufactures have so far failed to produce televisions and set top devices financially attractive to consumers that can receive the increasingly available DTV signals.
Now we have one more standard that the consumer equipment will have to support.
A consumer television will now have to support:
Vestigial Sideband NTSC legacy broadcast RF
8 VSB ATSC digital broadcasting
The new Cable TV digital distribution RF modulation standard.
NTSC composite analog video
NTSC S-Video
HDTV S-Video
Standard definition Color Diff
HD Color Diff
1394
DVI
Flash RAM
Memory Stick
USB-2
S-100
PCI
BFD
I believe that what this really represents is a strong business strategy move on the part of the Cable operators. It pushes the cost of any proprietary equipment to the consumer and weakens the position of the local broadcasters to get their signals efficiently delivered.
Adding more interfaces to the television is only going to make it more expensive. Woo Hoo!
The NCTA and Cable Labs have failed to show why 8 -VSB is a non starter for distribution on their HFC platform. This proposal is bad for the consumer, and bad for overall US commerce. The FCC should send em back to the drawing board to come up with a fully compatible standard.
I think one of the reasons the Divx (DVD's that worked more like PPV movies) system was complicated. People are used to the idea that when they buy a physical object, it belongs to them, and can be used when they want.
Even though I would have probably saved money with that idea (I've got a lot of $20 DVD's that I've watched once. And a few, not even once)... but when I get bored halfway through a movie, I like the idea that I can come back to it if I want, in a few days. Paying again to watch a movie I wasn't too thrilled about the first time?
Yep, I understand the need for content management (free TV will always be worth exactly what you pay for it).. but I hope they find a solution that gives viewers more control, rather than less, over what they watch.
MUSE. HD analog TV: beautiful but bloated: 'nuf sed.
Japan is adopting our ATSC standard, as are alot of other countries.
Basically, there will be two digital TV standards worldwide; countries will either adopt the American, or the European, standard.
Isn't Tv supposed to be non-existent within the next 10 years? I dont watch it now as it is.
The ark lands after The Flood. Noah lets all the animals out. Says he, "Go
and multiply." Several months pass. Noah decides to check up on the animals.
All are doing fine except a pair of snakes. "What's the problem?" says Noah.
"Cut down some trees and let us live there", say the snakes. Noah follows
their advice. Several more weeks pass. Noah checks on the snakes again.
Lots of little snakes, everybody is happy. Noah asks, "Want to tell me how
the trees helped?" "Certainly", say the snakes. "We're adders, and we need
logs to multiply."
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...