Slashdot Mirror
Broadcast Flag All But Approved
Are We Afraid writes "The FCC is about to approve the broadcast flag for HDTV, according to Reuters. The EFF has been vocal in its disapproval, but the suits appear to be pushing ahead anyway. We may soon need an updated dystopian parable: The Right to Watch."
i can tell you that as a musician, the copyright bit on the personal dat recorder i purchased did a pretty good job of stopping me.
well, until i spent $1500 more on a professional dat recorder, that didn't contain it.
it's ridiculous. i wasn't even allowed to copy my own recordings. it's not like dat is a hotbed of piracy, i only recall one riaa album *ever* released to dat.
it's nice to see bogus legislature used to stop useful technology from taking hold, and the common man from being able to compete with those already in power.
Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20554
Dear Jonathan Adelstein,
Commissioner Kevin J. Martin
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20554
Dear Kevin Martin,
Commissioner Michael J. Copps
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20554
Dear Michael Copps,
Commissioner Kathleen Q. Abernathy
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20554
Dear Kathleen Abernathy,
Chairman Michael K. Powell
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20554
Dear Michael Powell,
Please allow me to take a few moments of your time in order to express my opposition to the proposed adoption of the "broadcast flag" for digital televisions. I strongly believe that this misuse of technology will do little but stifle legitimate innovation (including slowing the adoption of digital television) and infringe on the consumer's fair-use rights.
One of the most serious problems with the "broadcast flag" proposal is that it places control over marketplace innovation in the hands of the MPAA, an organization with no vested interest in innovation. In fact, the MPAA can be viewed as having more of an interest in the LACK of innovation, in that they are rooted firmly in the current technology and content distribution model. Allowing the MPAA to veto new features in digital television equipment is like giving organized crime the power to veto new wiretap laws. As a business organization, the MPAA will always act in the interest of it's members, and not the public. The result is that marketplace innovation will suffer, and consumers will have to make do with fewer features and no way to exercise their legally protected fair-use rights.
In conclusion, I urge to you avoid "broadcast flag" technology at all costs. It is a system tailor-made to appeal to the Hollywood content providers, striving to protect their distribution-based business model in the face of new technologies. Rather than adapt to the realities of the current situation, they choose to adapt the current situation to that which they desire to be reality. This situation is unworkable, in that it places unreasonable restrictions on both consumer electronics manufacturers and the consumers themselves. Please do not adopt the "broadcast flag" technology. It benefits only the MPAA, and abridges the rights of consumers.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
YOUR SIG HERE
Check out my eclectic infosec blog at InfoSecPotpou
The last Slashdot article on this topic had a post that contained the various lengths of time within which you could view a HDTV recording. After "forever" the next longest length of time was "one week".
One measly week.
Well, one week might be fine if you record something becasue you know you're going out for the night, but what the hell do you do if you're going away on a two-week vacation? What choice do you have except to miss out?
Can you imagine missing the last two weeks of 24, The West Wing, ER or whatever you're hooked on because some silly timestamped restriction is set to one week (or less)?
How do you tell your young kids that the show that you promised they could watch when they got back home from a long car journey to visit the grandparents can't be watched anymore because you exceeded the time limit? Ever tried explaining silly things like that to a screaming three year old?
Let's face it, for a lot of people, life is more hectic now than it was ten years ago. Ten years from now, it'll probably be more hectic still. What good is a timeshifting device like a VCR or a PVR if you can't timeshift with it?
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
The more I think about it the more I agree this is [i]exactly[/i] what the broadcast flag is about. It's not about stopping piracy*. It's about stopping low-budget Mac-wielding filmmakers from threatening Hollywood... Amazing consumer-level media tools do no good if they can't record anything. *I love how the article positions the broadcast flag as a "magic bullet" against internet piracy. As if one bit is going to stop anyone from doing anything...
These broadcast flags may be a Bad Thing. But, if we all watch less TV, the world may be a better place.
More time to learn, to play, to volunteer, to socialise.
Maybe, parents will actually raise their children, take care of their households, and improve the lives of their loved-ones.
People will have the time to learn about the things their government is doing, how the politicians who represent them are acting, what the issues really are, and how to change things for the better.
Or not. I could just be dreaming.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
Analog transmission stops in 2006.
The US's metric conversion act of 1975 stated that the US would be fully converted to metric by 1992. Right.
I used to wonder what was so holy about a silent night, now I have a child.
So basically what you're telling me is not that I'm missing something about the broadcast flag but the slippery slope argument that it's a foot in the door for those evil thought control media corporations that own the Congress. I see.
:-)
Dang, and I thought my tinfoil hat was tight...
How do you reconcile the fact that hardware/software vendors and consumer groups with an interest in innovating technologies are also large contributors to political campaigns? This is a big complicated issue, and the fact that it's taken this long to get this "mandate" tells me that it's a long way from over. There are just too many diverse interests in the mix.
I'm very worried about technological mandates, and I don't like the broadcast flag because I think it puts unnecessary inhibitions in the path of users, but I think your conclusion here is a little tenuous and contrary to pretty much all of recent consumer, technological, legislative, and judicial history.
For myself, if I can't get the use I want out of a device or content, then it's irrelevant because I just won't buy the shit. DVX comes to mind as a perfect example of how consumers voted with their wallets to give a big FU to an overly restrictive technology.
Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.