Slashdot Mirror
News on TiVo, "God's Machine"
Brace for incoming TiVo news!
rtphokie pointed out that FCC chair Michael Powell got a TiVo for Christmas and calls it
"God's machine."
Powell also said he wanted to share TV shows with his sister -- but he might have to violate the DMCA to do it: TiVo wants to
join the home network
(thanks Insomniac), but parr pointed us to
TiVo's Thursday press release
in which they assure us that "every TiVo Series2 DVR contains a unique public/private key pair," so only "designated" units within your home can share programs, you "cannot send content outside the home," and transfers over your home network will be encrypted (no sniffing!). Meanwhile, on the WB (part of AOL-TW), everything old is new again, as producers and advertisers work to create a live variety show with
built-in commercials (free reg. req.) (thanks eternal_software).
And if you missed our earlier TiVoesque stories, check 'em out:
TiVo-radio wanted,
HDTV TiVo,
and
TiVo Rendezvous. Whew!
TiVo's Thursday press release in which they assure us that "every TiVo Series2 DVR contains a unique public/private key pair," so only "designated" units within your home can share programs, you "cannot send content outside the home," and transfers over your home network will be encrypted (no sniffing!).
So TiVo is going out of it's way to assure it's customers that the device has been purposely and explicitely designed so as to be less useful to them. What the fuck is going on here?????
If you're going to do so many stories on it, why not? And while you're adding icons, how about one for Google?
Let's look at this in the abstract. People love TiVo because it gives them the ability to watch entertainment they enjoy free from the distraction of intrusions they do not enjoy, and at a time that is convenient for them. Content owners do not like TiVo for precisely the same reasons. And it has absolutely nothing to do with the shows themselves.
... television shows?
Content owners (TV studios, "Hollywood") probably couldn't care less if people time-shift television. Why? Because for broadcast at least, the TV shows are almost the precise definition of a loss leader. If you time-shift your show, the local station or cable provider that is playing it has still paid the license fee to run the show. There is no change in the net income from the show. The show generates no more or no less revenue than it did before. If the show is a money-losing venture in itself - which most of them probably are - the the show is no MORE of a money-loser because it's been moved out of its time slot.
(Now, there is the possible exception that time-shifting screws up the studios' ability to generate statistics about viewing habits, etc., which could impact relationships with advertisers, but, well, keep reading.)
So, if a television show's movement through time has no impact or minimal impact on its revenue generating capacity for the studio which creates it (please note, the actors don't care because they've already been paid), why are the studios upset?
Advertising moolah.
This is not a revolutionary observation. I'm aware of that. But they're so angry about you time-shifting because you want to get rid of exactly the thing that gives them the profit motive to make the show in the first place. They can try product placement and inline ads as partial replacements for traditional block advertising, but the 30-second ad spot is still the cash cow.
And you're getting in the cash cow's way.
So the studio is upset. But let's take a step back and look at what the combat really means. (This is where this post gets flamable, so if you liked it before, stop reading.) TiVo owners are demanding a right, and spending their hard-earned money, to time-shift
What value are they to anybody? The studios don't care because they don't represent any real revenue. They will only make good shows if they think those shows will attract eyes to see ads crammed into the spaces between show segments.
And do they represent any real value to you? Eh, you might chuckle or cry or gasp or cower when watching, but after the 30 minute sitcom is over, what have you gained? A new skill? Truly reduced stress? Enlightenment? Not likely.
In fact, and paradoxically, the only benefit to the viewer in a usual TV watching session is in the ADS. It's like the old advice on how to pick up women: "Just walk up to one and ask her if she wants to f***. Nine times out of ten you'll get slapped, but that tenth time.. wowee..." That's how the advertisers see you. And with good reason: because 1 time out of 10, you're going to see an ad and think "Hey, that's neat..." And you might go buy it. If you ignore the ad the other 9 times, the advertisers don't really care, because there are 280 million other people out there deciding whether "Can you hear me now?" is going to provoke them to get or keep Verizon phones.
So, you actually derive more tangible benefit from that one time you actually are moved by an ad than you do from all the sitcom watching in the world, except in those instances where the sitcoms are so insidious as to be indistinguishable from the ads themselves.
My solution? No tv. I don't have to pay the cable company $520 a year for television I don't watch. I don't have to pay $400-6,000 dollars to replace my ten-year-old TV when it finally dies. I don't have to spend hours upon hours sitting in front of the brain control box, um, TV soaking up advertising. And I don't have to spend money to fight the advertising by buying a TiVo. I lose some entertainment, sure, but I have books, family, the Internet, and even my own imagination.
I'm not passing judgment on anybody, except the advertisers who attempt to monopolize your mind. But do me a favor, you Slashdot people I don't even know... Try going without TV (and TiVo) for a month. Completely without TV.
See if you really miss it.
But overall I think the original poster made a valid point.
Your example is rather contrived - yes there is the possibility that you'll *gasp* miss a television show despite probable repeats. But to be honest, I think this sacrifice is worth it, especially as it'll give the powers that be less ammo to attack the TiVo with.
And let's face it, you'll miss a lot more TV without it!
It will be interesting to see how the public reacts to this show that is based (in part) around ads for products. I think these genius advertisers are finally getting the hint that people are phasing out traditional commercials (just like how we rarely notice banner ads anymore) and they're scrambling for something else.
There are already plenty of TV shows with ads in them - look at sports, for instance, with ads all over the various stadiums, and even with soccer which goes commercial-free and has an ad of the sponsor under the clock. I figure it's just a matter of time before regular TV programming adopts this form of advertising, with a little logo in the corner, or maybe shrinking the screen down ala MTV to give you some ad along the side and bottom of the screen.
And we'll probably get used to it, just as we've gotten used to the logos for the channel that are always on now..
we spend so much time bitching about stupid pols writing bad laws, but has anyone spent the time to setup the kewl things they are trying to legislate into vaporware????
maybe, we need to start a campaign to give great geekware to legislators and government officials for the sake of winning their hearts (or wherever powell's god lives) to our causes. if we can make enough lawmakers into violators of the DMCA and other heinous laws on the books, or proposed and show them why we feel strongly about this. or even have the EFF donate linux boxen to lawmakers. we will gain an advantage.
at any rate. i propose we start by giving a copy of the Linux Bar Monkey to Ted Kennedy and go from there .. . .
"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
If I could buy & download high-quality divx commercial free episodes of star trek or watnot for $0.50 (way more than they make on advertizing per viewer per 1-hour show) from fast servers, then I would buy every single episode of every star trek series ever made, and a whole lot more, instead of being forced to download them illegally because I can't afford to pay $600 just for all 7 seasons of ST:TNG on DVD, and they're rarely if ever on TV. Even in the absense of copy protection, this business model would work, because almost everyone would be willing to pay that meager price just to stay legit and use the fast servers. Free, fast, commercial-free, uncopyprotected sale of TV show recordings online for say, double the amount they would have made from advertizing per viewer if it were broadcasted (a very reasonable sum always below $0.75) would be very beneficial to the consumer and they would overwhelmingly give up piracy in favor of that system, so it would also be very profitable for the makers of the TV shows.
Repeal the DMCA!
What Powell may not be aware of is that in saying so, he may ultimately have to break the DMCA to do it.
Except for the fact that it has nothing to do with the DMCA. Distributing copies of home recordings is a violation of plain old copyright law, law which has been on the books since 1790.
But making snide remarks about a 200-year-old law makes you look kind of like an anti-establishment wacko, while snide remarks about the DMCA are always socially acceptable.
I write in my journal
If i were an actor in a television show, how would you structure that contract to force them to also be commercial pitchmen? Could they demand to be paid twice? once by NBC/ABC/CBS and a second time by coke or pepsi? or do they even get a choice in the matter? "if you want this job you'll be doing three commercials per episode or a yet to be named product!"
You make a good point, but you missed the important part. The value derived from watching tv is the entertainment.
You mention you like to read, as do I. I also happen to prefer to buy my books over borrowing them (although I do borrow some), just because I like having my own little library. So, everytime I, or you, buy a non-reference book, we are essentially paying for entertainment. Reading a book, despite what some think, does not necessarily improve you in any way (you can pick up new skills and reduce stress just as well with tv as with a book), you won't find "enlightenment" (assuming there is such a thing anyway).
Ever go to the movies, a concert, a play? All of these are like tv, in the fact that you are paying for the entertainment. Hell a lot of vacations are really people just paying for entertainment, of course there's a more tangible component to that entertainment.
Fine, if you don't get much enjoyment out of tv, don't watch it. I, however, find some shows rather amusing, and enjoy watching them. The great thing about tv is that it only requires partial attention, I often do something else while watching it. You can't do that with a book.
By the way, I never got into the habit of watching commercials (even long before TiVo). I'll gladly flip or do something else for those minutes, assuming I can't find a "filler show" to use during commercials, before I will sit there and absorb the advertising.
Is it possible that you just haven't found the right things to watch?
Maybe you didn't intend it, but to me your post comes off a bit "holier-than-thou", which is a sense I get from a lot of people who don't watch tv. I have gone a month without tv. I often don't watch it while I'm travelling. Still, I do enjoy it when I'm at home, and not doing anything in particular. You could make a similar case for surfing the web, it's not much better than tv...
Down with Saudi Arabia!!!
It's not hypothetical! I've given two examples, and I can think of a dozen more.
Yes, but your examples were hypothetical ones. "What if there hadn't been a 'Shield' marathon? What if there had been no 'Buffy' reruns?" The fact is, programs (especially cable progams) are increasingly being show more than once in a given week. Unless a show is a prime-time network program, the chance that you'll miss an episode and not be able to catch it another time is very slim.
Program sharing would benefit very few people. Sure, lots of people would like it, but they'd be using it for a purpose that is not unclear, like the central issue of the VCR case was, but rather explicitly illegal. TiVo should wait (or should have waited, I guess) until the legal dust settles before releasing a sharing product.
I write in my journal
I don't know if anybody's seen BMW Films, but that's the sort of interesting thing that I think we're heading for. Basically, BMW hired a bunch of film directors (John Frankenheimer, John Woo, Tony Scott, Guy Ritchie, etc.) and had them creat short films featuring BMW vehicles in prominent roles. They're actual shorts, with discernible plots, and no superimpositions of the specs of the cars or announcer voiceovers. They've had some success getting various cable and satellite channels (DirecTV even had a special channel that just looped them continuously) to show what amounts to a series of 10-minute ads for BMW.
In a related vein, DaimlerChrysler is shopping a series of films which were entered into a competition. Apparently, they had a contest where owners of Chryslers could send in homemade films featuring their cars for a prize. Some of the entries were good enough, in DC's estimation, to warrant packaging them into a series.
I guess that's why I didn't buy Tivo. You know it's majority shareholders are the networks, right? The networks control Tivo's featureset so as not to disrupt their current business model, and sue ReplayTV (whom they do not own stock in) to force them out of the market. It's all about control, and I resent that. I resent that they're giving us a feature 'on the sly', to those in the know, as a way to get buy-in from technically-aware customers who would otherwise choose ReplayTV.
Powell said he intended to use the TiVo machine to record TV shows to play on other television sets in his home, and even suggested that he might share recordings with his sister if she were to miss a favorite show.
Now, you're the chairman of the FCC. You're deeply involved in the legality of the media business, which is currently chiefly concerned with the DMCA. You want to share recordings of television shows.
Do you seriously think he doesn't know the DMCA might be a problem there?
Michael Powell is Colin Powell's son.
Do you seriously think he doesn't know the DMCA might be a problem there?
The FCC, under Powell's direction, has let the debate of a broadcast flag go through several comment stages without letting it be dropped, right up to the point where they must now decide whether to make it a binding recommendation to the industry. A broadcast flag would pretty much smash 'trading shows with your sister', much less 'recording anything the industry doesn't want you to' at all. Oh, and yes, I think PVRs will be forced to abide by broadcast flags.
So, Powell at once enjoys the flexibility a TiVO affords him, while not realizing he is about to blatantly recommend that this capability be squelched.
You better believe I don't think he sees the problem there. Or the broadcast flag recommendation would be a dead dog right now.
No... Tivo's "plan B" is a rumor that if the central Tivo server should ever totally vaporize, Tivo devices would then forget about their need for subscription guide data, and instead behave like a normal VCR in a "gimme the channel number and time" format, and may even become Hollywood's worst nightmare by saving the data in an a standardized unencripted format with nothing preventing simple hacks to extract the video.
Basically, this would be the last act of a company that has already been bankrupted, so it'd have nothing left to lose from Hollywood lawsuits.
So, I've started wondering lately. Is the TiVo going to cut down on the TV I do watch?
I got my wife a TiVo for our anniversary last year. She LOVES it.
We spent the first while or three configuring the thing, then selecting all the shows we liked. We told it to record EVERYTHING, first runs and reruns. We spent hours a day watching it. We recently realized how much time we spent watching it. For 2 months, we spent 2-4 hours a weekday watching TV, and more on the weekend. It was entertaining, but there was more to life. Part of it was just getting through it so we would have the hard drive space (on an 80 hour unit) to not miss anything.
So, we pared it down to the TV shows we really enjoy, and first runs of those.
I'll be honest. We fast forward through the commercials. Not all of them, we actually stop, rewind and play ads that catch our eye with a visual joke or breathtaking nature view (or the like). Mostly those are for products, like a cola or a car or other tangible thing. I don't think we've ever stopped to watch a TV ad for a TV program. Which brings me to this observation: If we're not exposed to new shows, how will we decide what new shows to record? Will we just reach the point where the TiVo records a show a week that's requested? What happens when that's cancelled?
We don't watch TiVo's recommendations. They're just WAY off. TiVo may as well get paid to record episodes that the networks want us to see that we haven't specifically "thumbs downed" as far as I'm concerned, they're that relevant most days.
So, now we limit ourselves to an hour of TV a day. We see only the show or two that we really want to see, and nothing else. When the new season stops, will we bother to turn the TV on? I don't know. With Firefly and Birds of Prey going away, we may not bother.
So, here's my real question. If TiVo is going to help us find only shows we want to watch, are we going to get to the point where TiVo hasn't found any first runs that we want to watch? Will we then not turn the TV on every day? If we get to that point, will we eventually just forget that we have a TV?
I did a little write up on epinions to describe the machine shortly after we got it because I didn't see many reviews on the TiVo 2. (If you're not into blatant plugs, don't click the link -- it's my write-up.)
"every TiVo Series2 DVR contains a unique public/private key pair," so only "designated" units within your home can share programs, you "cannot send content outside the home," and transfers over your home network will be encrypted (no sniffing!)
I read the "TiVOGuard" portion of the press release. But it leaves me curious about how they determine the bounds of one's 'home'. Is this subnet masking or something that determines what IP addresses are inside my home? What if someone wants to designate their own weekend cottage or parents' home as shareable? Care to speculate?
File sharing w/ the ReplayTV is GREAT. I bought the 40 hour model and move files to cheap 120GByte hard disks (the equivelent of 120 hours each) on my PC to either archive or watch later (streaming back to the ReplayTV).
Makes for cheap(er) expandable storage than buying the larger more expensive models.
Another problem I forsee is the law (well regulations rather than law). Here in the UK product placement in shows is not allowed, plain and simple. If you are selling the product (i.e. infomercial, shopping channel etc) that's fine, but it has to be obviously an advertisment (including the "This is an ad" text if required). But regular TV shows cannot advertise, and have to avoid making brands too obvious. For instance shops will sell made up brands, presenters will refer to "a popular cola flavoured beverage" etc etc.
Now this may not be the case in the US, but a lot of your shows get sold over here, so unless they were edited we couldn't buy them. I believe that's the case for much of europe. Therefore, your network is going to lose all that lovely foreign money (believe me, it's a lot of cash).
Just a thought...
---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"
From the article:
...
Powell said he intended to use the TiVo machine to record TV shows to play on other television sets in his home, and even suggested that he might share recordings with his sister if she were to miss a favorite show.
"I'd like to move it to other TVs," he said of his digitally recorded programming. A number of products already allow that.
He says nothing about the DMCA or copyrights.
I suspect Mr. Powell is aware of copyright law. On the other hand to have the FCC chairman give an enthusiastic endorsement of PVRs and indicate a desire to share recorded material with others is a pretty major coup. I'm sure Mr. Valenti fuming right now.
Now to get Sen. McCain using a PVR as well
Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.