Slashdot Mirror
Open Cable Standard Not So Open
Mike Hicks writes "A few days ago, I heard about the FCC approving new rules for standardizing digital cable in the US. This involved using a set top box or tuner integrated into a TV along with a smart card (much like digital satellite services). Unfortunately, it looks like the standard (believed to be OpenCable) is meant to tightly control the hardware and software that can be used, probably making any open-source implementation very difficult if not impossible. I seem to be having a case of deja vu"
Satellite TV was the best thing that ever happened to cable TV. Satellite boxes will still be required for this aspect, bypassing this new standard entirely. This should not affect the geek world much.
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
That is exactly what Micro$haft thought when they released the X-box.
From excellent karma to terible karma with a single +5 funny post...
I don't see the problem with open source set-top boxes. If people want to pirate stuff, they will, regardless of whether or not they use a different PVR system. Seeing as most people who pirate satellite can barely use a computer(as they just know someone who programs the cards.) This is probably just going to be so they can get kickbacks from retail PVR companies.
i use linux and windows oh god how can i have an opinion
I wonder if the "legitimate" hardware list will include TV cards for PCs or TiVo. I'm sure they're trying their hardest not to allow it (especially since TiVos run Linux)
Actually, what about the U.K? Does anyone know if current UK digital cable systems are based on any single standard? I ask simply because the Pace box my cable company uses is simply crap, and I'd love to be able to use an alternative if possible. Am I dreaming here?
Anyone with an abysmal Motorola DCT2000 terminal can tell you, this is a damn shame. Channel changes take over a second, the online menu and guide are slow as molasses, the GUI is clumsy and inefficient, and it's pretty much the only choice in Comcast areas. An integrated PVR and cable terminal would open up a ton of possibilities for consumers. Unfortunately it looks like the FCC and cable providers will be dictating what features we are allowed to have out of our TV.
Now the fears about open source aren't completely irrational - it's true that closed implementations make hacking digital cable much harder. There is currently no working digital cable descrambler, and DSS is getting harder and harder to decrypt. The industry knows that restricting the information and licenses does work. It's just too bad that this means consumers are stuck with a minimal set of features, ugly, slow, beasts like the DCT2000, and higher prices due to proprietary technology.
"Open" means non-proprietary, free for public perusal. This could mean open hardware specs, open source, open meetings, etc. "Open Source" means that the source code is freely available to the public. Why the hell do half the front-page stories that mention open hardware/open standards/open foobar use "Open-Source" and "Open" as if they mean the same thing? They don't, so STOP DOING IT.
Maybe I've just being stupid because I've got a case of the Mondays, but how can it be open if the all of the key buzzwords are trademarked?
To wit, from the nav menu on the front page:
Cable Modem/DOCSIS(TM)
CableHome(TM)
PacketCable(TM)
OpenCable(TM)
Go2Broadband(SM)
VOD Metadata
Well, OK, VOD Metadata isn't, but still, doesn't the trademark/servicemark grant the markholder the right to control ALL use of the said mark, thus restricting non-partners from using them?
Have other "open" projects TM/SM their key buzzwords?
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
Of course, if they rigged it so they only sent you the channels you pay for, they wouldn't care what set-top box you used. Then you could have an open-source solution - a box from the store, your PC running an app, whatever.
How difficult is this for the cable companies - obviously the sat company can't do it, but since the cable co knows who's paid for what, and has control of the cable running all the way to their door, then controlling what gets sent shouldn't be too difficult. Or am I being a touch naive?
This reeks of something those in the Department of Homeland security would love. I mean an all in one access system. Although there is no mention of monitoring one could infer that if they can auth and or revoke info remotely, then there is a possibilty of monitoring which means I, for one will not fsck with it.
Conventional wisdom suggests that one could take the specification and build an open implementation around that would interoperate with the cable company's proprietary POD and everyone would be happy.
This wording is a bit dangerous. On the one hand the author is concerned with bringing an Open Source solution to the community, mainly Linux as mentioned in his comments. On the other hand, the cable companies probably don't want to share their proprietary information which wouldn't make sense and wouldn't be 'Open".
My suggestion, wait about a month or so after this implementation is out, and it's likely someone will end up reverse engineering it. Now opinionated, I would really love to know who the hell watches cable television on their PC's. Me personally I have an HDTV which stomps any of my compmonitors to the ground... Sure it would be nice to have an option to do so, but (now this is a question not some sarcastic remark) honestly how many people are using their machines for cable...
MoFscker
If they are standardizing digital cable to use a certain set of codecs, encryption, etc... What will happen to all of the people who have purchased set top boxes today? I realize this is just the definition of the format to use for TV tuner cards, but as a result, you have to figure the change in format is going to impact all of the people currently using a digital set top box today. I myself almost purchased a Scientific Atlanta set top cable box, as the monthly cable fees my provider charged ( Rogers ) for the box rental were insane. Is this change basically going to screw all the people that bought a box in the past few years?
;-).
;-) Hopefully, this goes through... but also, hopefully there will be some form of backward compatibility so everyones current cable and satelitte boxes still work.
Also... given that this is a PnP standard for integration into TV sets themselves, I wonder if the satelitte industry is going to follow suit itself. I sure as hell hope not... as my quasi legal DirectTV box no doubt isnt going to get that much support
Although, it is kinda good to see a standard ratified... HDTV has been delayed wayyyyyy too long. Im sick of seeing "HDTV Ready" boxes... knowing fullwell, that means if I want HDTV, im going to have to buy a 300$ tuner sometime down the road. It has been what has prevented me from buying a nice 42+ inch display all these years... well... that and lack of cash!
Stop caring about TV so much. I mean, if your freedom to control the way you access information is that important to you, than any of the few (what seems to me at least) shows that might be worth watching are worth giving up.
Just opt out. If enough people do, that would change the industry quick enough. Chances are that won't happen, most people don't feel like these types of restrictions interfere with their freedom in a significant way.
Chances are that people who do care are just going to have to get used to opting out more, like people I know that feel strongly about worker rights won't buy stuff from companies that abuse them. You really don't need those designer Nike sneakers in the end, if you think about it.
People who have strong political feelings about things are willing to put up with the troubles, and something dangers, of living a life in accord with their beliefs.
All you can do is try to raise awareness of the issues, lobby for change, and try to not be too dissappointed from time to time when the powers that be exercise their power. Offering an alternative is also good, like trying to promote using the internet as a way of accessing news and entertainment.
Peace, or Not?
Peace, or Not?
Actually, the whole point of OpenCable is that you'll buy your own box in the future. Renting a $500 cable box for $5/month isn't a business the cable companies want to be in.
I know it's not my point - other people have said it before me, and probably more succinctly. But piracy is boarding a ship on the high seas, robbing the ship and possibly kidnapping or killing the people on board.
Theft of information is still theft. Stealing is still stealing and violating a copyright is still violating a copyright. But none of those things involves boarding a ship on the high seas.
Equating those things with killing people for what they have on their boats is an attempt to increase the perception of the magnitude of the crime. There IS a tangible difference between physically robbing someone, and stealing information. Both are wrong, but both are not "piracy".
On another note, September 19th (this Friday) is talk like a Pirate day.
Arrrr.
They want to cut out MythTV, Tivo, splitters, H-cards, and cable descramblers. It's becoming too easy to get at the current data, so they want a change. with the analog system working (fairly) well as is, why else would they create a new 'standard' for the digital system? It certainly isn't in the interest of the consumer.
Although I agree with alot of what you are saying, I believe you are missing the point on the above statements. The primary purpose for the "open" standard is so that hardware ( namingly TV's ) can start encorporating TV tuners ( like they have now with analog ) right into the tv, as to remove the setop boxes. Go shopping for HD tv's and find out how many dont have tuners built in? Thats because there is no major standard on how signals are broadcast... I for one like the idea, as I could get rid of my RCA direcTV box... or could apply for digital HD ready cable, without having to add, yet another decoder box, to my entertainment system.
The other part of this is, I believe the FCC has a mandate for all signals to start being broadcast in High Definition, within the next 3 or 4 years. In order to meet that criteria, the industry is going to have to standardize on the format those broadcasts are going to be in. I imagine the TV industry went through this before with the analog signals, and then the switch to colour broadcasting... but thats so far before my time I dont remember it. Things get a bit more complicated once you start talking digital vs analog, as now you also have things like security, codecs, etc... to consider aswell.
All that said... I dont doubt in a heartbeat that the major cable companies and satellite companies would *LOVE* to kill of TIVO like devices. I just dont believe that is their motivation behind this standard.
It is illegal for your complex to charge you a deposit in order for you to have an antenna on your porch if it is a private area that you rent. You cannot legally put your dish in a common area without your aptartments permission but any private area you rent is fair game and it is against the law for your complex to charge a deposit as this causes an avoidable delay in you installing an antennae. Check out this site [http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html] for more info, this is a ruling that the dish networks bought specifically for apartment and rental home dwellers.
You missed *my* point. ;) It was merely a joke, but it certainly illustrates what they likely think of anyone interested in building such a box. Even if they have techies inside the company explaining that the encryption is separate, they see the sat card drama and all this other stuff with all these people who want *free* this and *free* that and the last thing they're going to is hand them the specs for the set top box. They probably don't understand it very well, so it's easy for them to just want to say "fuggit" and lock everything down for some hope of preventing more "piracy."