Japanese Digital TV Viewers Complain About DRM Restrictions

Riktov writes "The Japan Times reports that that viewers of digital broadcast TV, which started this past April, are complaining to national broadcaster NHK about restrictions on recording. Many of the complaints seem to arise from viewers who are confused as to why they can't copy rather than angry that they can't copy, but in the end all viewers are learning the hard way about content restrictions."

Comments

Uh oh, We've got to the explaining to do...

[LostCluster]

The scary aspect of this story is that the people who are buying the DRM-encumbered TVs don't even seem to understand what they're giving up compared to traditional TV signals. Because, afterall, they CAN record the shows, but just to one copy. It's the second copy that is blocked, and most people don't think of their computer as a video editing device, and as a result they don't even comprehend the need of having anything more than one copy.

The market isn't rejecting the DRM, instead their turning to us geeks and saying "What are you kids making a fuss about?" That's not a good sign for us at all...

Re:Uh oh, We've got to the explaining to do...

[Timesprout]

You can start with me. What exactly are they giving up by only being able to copy once? Seriously how many times do you want to copy the same program from tv ? You didn't create the content, you dont own it so what divine rights do you have to it?

Re:Uh oh, We've got to the explaining to do...

[MBCook]

Let me ask you this. I am allowed to "tape" a show to DVD so I can watch it later, right? Of course. So I record a Spongebob marathon so my hypothetical 2 year old can watch it any time. I used to tape cartoons to watch later when nothing was on, it was legal.

But I always had a second copy. The first copy would degrade (it was VHS, so repeated watchings would do that), or get lost, or get jammed in the machine and become worthless. By having a second copy I'm still safe.

So now my 2 year old scratches the disk and it's ruined. Now what? My second copy wasn't part of a piriting scam. It was just backup. Legal, didn't hurt anyone or devalue the property. It was just for me. Now I won't be able to do that. I've lost a perfectly fair right to use something I own in a valid way.

Bricks can be used for evil (many people use them every year to bash someone's skull or break windows) but bricks aren't outlawed. People run over other people in cars PURPOSLY, but cars are still legal.

If you take away everything that can be used illegally, you'll have nothing. You'll be naked and cold. But you could still use your arms to puch someone or strangle someone so...

It's a slippery slope. The above paragraph is hyperboly, but you can't ban something because a few people use it wrong. When 70% of people use it for illegal stuff, then you can talk about banning it. But when 1-5% do (I would bet lower than that in many circumstances) you shouldn't ban it.

PS: Every time something is copied, put a unique identifier into the video that tells what machine duplicated/edited it. That way you can trace the pirated copies to where they came from and shut 'em down. I wouldn't mind that. I keep my rights, and the studio can shut down the pirates.

But as a consumer I would win in that situation so I guess it's not a option, huh.

Re:Uh oh, We've got to the explaining to do...

[Doppler00]

TV signals being broadcast are in public air space, unencrypted, and you don't have to pay a fee to watch them. Why should DRM apply to them?

I usually support the software and music industry regarding their copyrights but in this case it doesn't make sense. When I purchase a piece of software I'm bound by a licence agreement, a contract on my use of the software that I paid for. With broadcast TV, you have not agreed nor signed to such a contract, therefor, how can DRM be enforceable?

How do you define a copy of broadcast TV anyway? It's being transmitted from a base station that could reach an infinite number of devices. The issue is really about a consumers ability to TIMESHIFT the video so they can watch it at a later time.

Re:Uh oh, We've got to the explaining to do...

[JofCoRe]

When 70% of people use it for illegal stuff, then you can talk about banning it.

OR, you could examine the law that is making it illegal, and wonder if maybe it's time to change the law, since it doesn't seem to be in concert with "the will of the people" anymore...

When a large section of the population does something that's against the law, the solution is not to ban it, it's to update/change/revoke the law to more match the current climate.

But hey, banning something worked so well for marijuana, it will probably work just as well here, right? :)

Re:Uh oh, We've got to the explaining to do...

[gcaseye6677]

As scary sounding as the DMCA may be, copyright law is worse. Look at the penalties listed at the beginning of a movie in the FBI warning. Yet people copy movies all the time knowing there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of getting caught unless they're doing it on a large scale. It will be the same for DRM mod chips. A few guys will get busted selling them, but many people will use them undetected. This will be just like every other pointless and unsuccessful copyright scheme, easily defeated, inconveniencing legitimate customers, and having no effect on real piracy.

Re:Uh oh, We've got to the explaining to do...

[tkrotchko]

" you dont own it so what divine rights do you have to it?"

Pray tell, why do you think there is a divine right to copyright protection?

Confused Japanese customer = pissed off US one

[saikou]

I bet the "confusion" is due to famous cultural differences. Where Japanese customer would politely note that "I am confused on how this feature work. Perhaps it's just me, but I can't record the show from tv", US one would spray phone with saliva and salty words, demanding to know "who's that @ssh0le who put this piece of s..t into production"

Hopefully something good comes out of it, and industry would get its nose rubbed into real life customer experience...

Confused = angry

[12ahead]

Comes with the culture. Japanese hardly get angry - being confused is already quite a strong word in their culture. In addition, the article does not mention confusion, but rather the customers being upset and complaining. Sorry, if the slashdot blurb makes such a big point of this confusion vs anger thing, I had to set this straight, before the readers get confused themselves.

I think the thing we might need to get used to

[m2bord]

is that fact that the consumer holds no rights over anything anymore. we have the right to buy the product and that's pretty much it. when you buy a new car, there is a black box in it that records what you do and it's built into the cars computer systems and cannot be removed. to remove it not only voids your warranty, it renders the car useless. cd's and dvd's are being made only to play on industry approved machines. thanks to backwards lawmaking...industry tells the consumer what to do with their product much in the same way a home-owners association can tell you what you can and cannot do with your home. the only way to fix it is to remove the whole of congress with new elected officials and that's not likely to happen. so i reckon that we should get used to it.

Re:Best part of the story:

[LostCluster]

Actors and singers actually love for their work to appear on TV and for it to be as much in the open as possible. Afterall, only the most elite actors and singers (who are so rich most of them don't care how much money they get... their biggest problems in life are not money-based) are paid based on the gross of the movie, or ever get positive royaties from the record companies.

It's the major copyright holders, who just happen to also be better known as the MPAA and RIAA member companies, who don't want to see movies and songs copied. Major actors and singers might go along with their handlers in backing anti-copying campaigns, but if they didn't want to take part in TV, then there'd be hundreds of people glad to take their place.

PSST... the kids appearing on American Idol are not being paid cash for doing so. They're given free accomidations in Hollywood and taken care of nicely while they're with the show, but they're not promised a financially rewarding expirience by the producers. However, people are lining up like crazy to audition for the show because even so-bad-it's-funny suinger William Hung is making money after appearing on the show. The grand prize winner isn't even given a direct cash prize, they're given a recording contract that they're required to agree to as a condition of the contest. It's the people who come in runner-up or even unranked positions who stand to profit more than that...

Only One Way to Prevent this

[nightsweat]

Don't buy the TV's, don't watch the shows.

Is your life really incomplete if you don't find out what happened on Enterprise or the Sopranos? TV isn't a given. Its relevance is likely to be transient. Transition it along faster by refusing to watch DRM encumbered broadcasts.

Greed

[manitoulinnerd]

It isn't the fact that corporations want to see a profit from their products that bothers me. Corporations are around to make money. That is what they are around to do. Producing music, television, movies, etc is just a byproduct. Don't kid yourselves. What bothers me is that are now starting to have expectations about how much they should be making (and that their profits should be constantly increasing) and have started to view all of their customers as criminals. As mentioned, advertisements are a crucial part of any "free" media. Internet and television are prime examples but the advertisers don't seem to know the bounds. Commercials have been taking more and more air time. Pop-ups were just the beginning and I have now seen some websites with an add directly on top of the page that prevents me from reading it. Because of the views and actions of these corporations and the inability for them to cooperate with a changing marketplace they will ensure their doom. Unfortunately most people don't notice the heavy hand that has come down on them, and when they do they are confused. Most people (outside /.) don't understand the implications of DRM or why they are coming about. Regardless of any DRM imposed the determined (some are righteous, some are criminals) will find a way around these. If only the errors could be seen, but greed can effect sight in many ways.

This is a key problem with the whole issue...

[DaftShadow]

Your post brings to mind a major perspective issue that has been shoved down the throats of consumers for a while: That we are here to serve industry.

Of course, we all "know" that industry is here to serve us, but we've given them free reign. Industry (particularly the media, and other "celebrity" industries) is under the impression that we should pay what they think. This is because their previous leaders (the ones with intelligence) have brilliantly conditioned us as consumers to believe them!

Your quote says it all to me. For the love of God, Why should any consumer fall for the scam that if copyright is easy to violate, then all those great celebrities will just up and vanish? Brad Pitt is just going to go on strike until we as consumers realize that he deserves our cash for his hard work. Bullshit! If he stops working for us, we stop paying.

And not only that, we should be telling him how much he's worth! We should be making the prices! The cost of a movie should be decreasing, not increasing!

But we consumers don't see it like that anymore. We see the world thru those damn glasses they give out with Spy Kids 3D, and believe that if Brad stops working, we will be the ones lesser off for it.

The media's argument is far more effective than it should be. Consumers should realize the bullshit, and yet we cannot. We believe the media projections of the end of TV as we know it, in the same way that we have been trained to.

I'm not sure I see an end to this issue. Consumers will have to wake up to the whole system before noticing even the smallest of transgressions... and right now, we've been run so ragged that we can do nothing but absorb our daily hit of Friends re-runs.

- DaftShadow

It's not about rights, it's about power

[nysus]

Let's not forget the overarching logic (or lack thereof) behind our copyright laws, or any law for that matter. The dirty secret is that they are all completely contrived. There is no property, there is no ownership. We have merely thrust these social contrivances on a universe that is amoral and lawless. The only true law that exists is the law of power, which says that he with all the power can do whatever the fuck he wants.

People who argue that corporations have certain "rights," just don't understand how the world works. You have consumers, who are trying to get as much content as possible for as little money, and you have media conglomerates, who are trying to give away as little content as possible for as much money as they can get. From this built-in confrontation we've created a social contract in the form of laws to settle disputes and smooth the way for transactions which makes most people happy.

Problems arise, however, when one side gets too much power. And that's exactly what's happening in the content distribution business. If the law doesn't suit the needs of media outlets, they can change it. If the economic playing field isn't in their favor, they will work to tilt it. In short, media giants are abandoning the symbiotic social contract they once had with consumers. They are basically saying "fuck you" to consumers. "We have the power to have absolute control over our content so we will," they say in so many words. Of course, consumers also pretty much said "fuck you" to the media corporations when they started downloading, copying, and distributing content when the power to do so became available. But my goal here is not to try to point blame.

My real point is that the media companies have much more power than consumers to change laws in this age of technological disruptions. Consumers are just too divided and powerless to compete in the political world where all these decisions are made and will come out holding a very short end of the stick. This isn't good for me and it isn't good for you, unless you are Rupert Murdoch or Ted Turner.

So now that you know how it all works, go out and organize and "Fight the Power" and always remember which side you are on.