Slashdot Mirror
EFF Begins Digital Television Liberation Project
Dozix007 writes "One year from today, on July 1, 2005, an FCC
regulation known as the
Broadcast Flag will lock up your digital television signals. But EFF's
"DTV Liberation Project"
aims to help the public keep over-the-air
programming free. The Broadcast Flag, which places copy controls on DTV
signals, attempts to stop people from making digitally-perfect copies
of television shows and redistributing them. It also stops people from
making perfectly legitimate personal copies of broadcasts. More
disturbing, the Broadcast Flag will outlaw the import and manufacture
of a whole host of personal video recorders (PVRs), TiVo-like devices
that send DTV signals into a computer for backup, editing and playback.
After the Broadcast Flag regulations go into effect, all PVR
technologies must be Flag-compliant and 'robust' against user
modification -- and that means, once again, that the entertainment
industry is trying to tell you what you can do with your own machines."
If content producers want to control how their content is distributed, isn't that the content producer's perogative?
It's not so much telling you what you can do with your machine as telling you what you can do with their content.
paintball
Our right to fair use has ended. The conglomorates have convinced the dumbasses in the world that they have no right to fair use and the dumbasses are starting to believe them.
It would seem that the lawmakers are dumbasses too but unfortunately for us they are getting paid to make desicions that benefit the conglomorates.
Do NOT support law makers that support these corporations and do NOT support companies that sell devices with the broadcast flag. While we will likely NOT win please do you best to educate the rest of the dumbasses to their rights that they are slowly losing.
Seems to me that they are spending more money developing all these technologies than they stand to gain by knocking out piracy. I mean, you average Joe probably isn't going to go to the internet to look for his favorite show that just came out on DVD. Most times I won't either, if it's worth watching, it's worth supporting, esp. if they throw in lots of extras like commentaries and whatnot. Are they worried that people will pirate sportscasts? What is the fun of watching a game that has already been played? Chances are the people trading these would not be buying a copy anyway, so I think they are managing to piss off consumers and lose money simulatneously.
Because we all know it's impossible to get dvd quality of our fav. TV shows over the net
"Any devices made this year can be re-sold in the future."
So I can buy a thousand of these and make a killing in a few years when they're illegal?
It's not so much telling you what you can do with your machine as telling you what you can do with their content.
Yes but once you buy that content it becomes YOUR content (not in the IP sense) and you should be free to do with it as you wish (for personal use of course). We actually have laws in place to ensure that we have the right to make personal copies and this would eliminate that right.
but we *used to* have the right to take their content and record it for our own use (such as watching it at a later time when it was conveinient for us).
While they own the content and we are unable to redistribute it as our own or for profit we are able to use it the way we want to.
It's about time for everybody to stand up to those fuckheads at the FCC. They will push and push and push until they get pushed back. They know that people are generally lazy, apathetic, and stupid, and they are going to take advantage of it as much as they can. It is our responsibility to do something about it. Whether it be in spreading information about the FCC's ridiculous plans or volunteering with EFF. The time for action is now.
As long as Fair Use laws aren't abrigated in the pursuit of telling us what we can do with their content. And the Fair Use laws are...Fair.
All in all the only people this will harm are the legitimate paying customers. How long can a business model last that pisses of the people who pay the wages?
Web Sig: Eddy Currents
By the way, it is not intended or permitted for this post to be replied to. Anyone illegally replying to this post will be arrested.
I wouldn't worry too much. There are about 100,000 of us in the world that even know about this. When non-techie folks find out what it means, the industry will suddenly tank and content producers will demand that the broadcast flag go away.
I hope.
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong."
H.L. Mencken
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
If content producers want to control how their content is distributed, isn't that the content producer's perogative?
Distributed yes.
It's not so much telling you what you can do with your machine as telling you what you can do with their content.
Two things: it is telling you what you can do with your machine leading to all sorts of annoyances (and disasters) with stupid hardware and programs that prevent entirely legitimate use.
Secondly, I don't like a world in which content users have so much power over the potential uses of their content. It stifles innovation and creativity and leaves culture locked up in the hands of those who want us to pay every time.
--- Hot Shot City is particularly good.
I don't see what the problem is ... it is the originators of the broadcasts who own that material. The term copy-right means that they have a right to control who can get a copy of whatever has a copy-right attached to it.
What's egregious is that the entertainment companies (TV, music, movie, etc) were warned 20+ years ago that the rise of digital devices would lead to problems around their copyrights. That the digital devices would create a situation where perfect copies of their copyrighted material could be made quickly and cheaply. 20+ years ago. And, did they do anything? No, they sat on their thumbs ignoring the warnings until it (Napster, etc) nearly killed them. Stupid idiots.
But the existance of Napster and friends does not negate the validity of the idea of copy-rights. Neither does the existance of digital media. It just changes the playing field. And rather than learn how to exploit the easy copyability, the entertainment industry is throwing up roadblocks. More stupidity on their part.
e.g. it would be way cool if they distributed their entertainment products in digital files over the Internet that automagically provoked the recipient to pay a few cents to their coffers. That would exploit easy copyability, while hewing to copy-rights.
Unless you bought it with the implicit agreement that you wouldn't do X, Y, or Z with it. And you did agree to that, by buying content that has the flag bit.
Peter wants a new vcr for Christmas because of what happened to his old one.
They flashback to Peter standing by his tv with a football game on and pushes a button on his vcr, then cops come busting through the door and ask if he has permission from both CBS and the NFL. Peter sheepishly admits that he only has permission from the NFL, and the police then proceed to destroy his VCR.
Truth is stranger than fiction it seems
*sniff* *sniff* Anyone else smell astroturf?
I give it two to three years, max. it's inevitable. nothing anyone, including slashdot and the eff, can do about it. get ready for a new class of TV criminals.
"what are you in prison for?"
"I recorded a TV show illegally."
just a matter of time.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
Unless you bought it with the implicit agreement that you wouldn't do X, Y, or Z with it. And you did agree to that, by buying content that has the flag bit.
You're right. Unfortunately this is the direction that we're headed in. Pretty soon all content will be licensed to you. You won't own anything and what you can and can't do with that content will be strictly controlled. Ugh... What a great future we have to look forward to.
You're apparently unfamiliar with the concept of fair-use rights. I mean, who cares that it's part of the US Constitution? Rights? Who needs 'em.
Although I don't agree much with that regulation, I don't understand the whole "companies telling you what to do with your own machine" concept.
Noone is forcing a gun to your head and saying "BUY THIS ITEM". You are all doing it on your own, knowing all full and well what you are buying and getting into. By buying it, you know what restrictions there are and what there aren't.
And if you really have that much of an issue with it, build your own! Granted it won't be easy, but at least you'll learn something along the way. And who knows, maybe enough people will like it and will want to buy one from you.
The greatest experience we can have is the mysterious.
- Albert Einstein
My answer to this is, and has always been, "Screw 'em."
I will not pay money to companies that behave in this manner. Many Slashdot readers are vociferous opponents of Microsoft, but they continue to pay money to the media establishment for such things as Spiderman II and cable television.
Perhaps it's time to find ways of entertaining ourselves other than media worship which enriches these gigantic conglomerates.
Is television all that good anyway? I personally have not watched broadcast or cable television with any regularity for 15 years. From 93-01 I did not even own a TV set-- I grudgingly got one to pacify friends who called me deprived because I did not have one, and for a while I actually tried to force myself to sit down and watch the thing, but I couldn't stomach it-- nothing on cable that appealed to me even remotely.
So, if they're going to behave this way, let them behave this way, and leverage all the technology we have at our disposal to support independent media groups. If you have to have Star Trek Voyager, there's always BT.
Intolerance for ambiguity is the mark of the authoritarian personality.
Not salient. The solution is not simple, or neat, or wrong. When was the last time you sat down with a pen and paper, wrote a letter to your congresscritter telling him/her why you were dissatisfied with how they voted on an issue, put in in an envelope, and sent it? When was the last time you walked out of a store with inane prices, but asked to see the manager to say why you were leaving? You might be an exception, though, so ask the person on your left these questions, then the person on your right.
Most people couldn't be bothered to blow their own nose.
If opportunity came disguised as temptation, one knock would be enough.
3^2 * 67^1 * 977^1
TV rots your mind. If you can't copy it, good!
The last thing you need is a recorded TV show.
If all news stations used this flag (After all, it is THEIR intellectual property), it would be soo much easier for - oh, for example - state leaders to smooth over earlier statements that might have been slightly wrong.
Not that it is shown that often anyway, but images like those of Mr. Powell in front of the U.N. pointing at satellite photos would be available for replay by a lot less people (The news stations, national archives, etc.). Right now you see some debate about who said what at what point. Using Patriot($nr) to stop stations from sending (and stopping from telling they are not sending) a certain case is not that unthinkable. Those amateur documentary makers on both the right and left side of the fence (Check e.g. suprnova for 9-11 related amateur documentaries) will not have much content to use.
If stopping certain content from surfacing again is just a matter of limiting a few companies and organizations, we might even start doubting things we knew happened.
Funny. Reminds me of a book I once read.
And yes, yes, turban of tinfoil and all that, don't give me that bullshit. If I said three years ago that law agencies some time in the future will be able to get lists of who-reads-what from libraries in secrecy, you would laugh and ask me to stay off those late night X-Files reruns.
I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone plans to murder him.
seems like a good time to stock up on old hardware. make a killing selling them back to folks who wanna tape the latest version of {reality show x}
Sounds a lot like the Windows world that took over. But I've heard there's some weird thing that some people use instread. A penguin with open sores or something. Maybe the same thing will happen for television.
Or maybe not. :-(
People won't want it, once they find out what has been foisted on them, once they run into ever more problems taping shows and using their Tivos, and they will find alternate entertainment. People may be sheep, but if sheep find the gate to the stream locked, they will eventually find another gate or another stream. Then the MPAA and RIAA and Disney and even the various Senators from Disney will find themselves leading where no one is following. They can lock their lowest common denominator crap up all they want because no one will want it.
Infuriate left and right
Piracy is not an issue any more than it has been in the past. The dirty secret is that most people really don't care. They know it's wrong, or just want to avoid the dirty feel of it.
a me =News&file=article&sid=946&mode=thread&order=0&tho ld=0
Why do all of this then?
Control. This is the primary issue. It is not about dollars, though they stand to make a bunch of them if we cannot easily archive things.
If we cannot easily produce and distribute our own content, they will continue to profit from being the only ones to do so. Today it is possible to make music on your own, distribute it and perform it, with results on par with the big productions. This is quickly becoming true for movies as well.
What happens when we start enjoying our own stories and music again? The megamedia corps lose plain 'n simple. Prior to the electronic age, this is how things were. I believe we are headed back that direction, if they don't suppress the movement first via legal and technological means.
Think about governments too. Don't you just love what Michael Moore has recently done with F911. How about when people call their leaders in their lies and manupulations and bad calls with actual published proof. Controlling what gets recorded and what does not puts the megamedia companies in control of our culture, expression and access to recent history.
All of these things limit the voice of dissent. All of these things make it easier for those in a position to govern to do so without the proper checks and balances.
There is a growing movement toward both openness and closedness in our society today. It it beginning to trancend the technology issues. Make no mistake, dollars are behind it, but control is at the root.
I own a ton of DVD media. As far as I am concerned, DVD is pretty damn open, just like CD is. In a short time, DVD authoring tools based on open software will be perfectly useable. The megamediacorps are looking *hard* to prevent this mistake from happening again.
They will continue their attempts at legal means to close the door for us until they succeed in getting a platform to profit from. They will never stop because they know their longer term days are numbered due to increasingly powerful technology solutions being delivered to the masses.
If this flag is not neutered, they will lock open technologies out of the next round of hardware developments. If that happens, we all begin to lose our freedom of expression and basic rights to control our own computing environments. Look at DVD. CSS was not a big deal. I play media on Linux every day because its easy and it works. Why don't the distros put in DVD support? Because of legal entanglements. Look at cell phones and how content is handled there. I wrote this:
http://www.osviews.com/modules.php?op=modload&n
[google search for "Closed Computing a Future Look Today" if the link is too mangled.]
Coming to hardware near you simply because they think they can.
This flag will prevent us from easily building our own solutions. Now the geeks will continue to do what they do and will likely be affected little, if at all, but they will never be able to compete with the established interests.
Why not? Every last one of these established interests was started by some geeks in a garage. All of them know their demise is cooking in a garage near you. Rather than compete, they would kill the innovation we all deserve.
Sucks doesn't it?
Get pissed, donate to the EFF, write your leaders, tell your friends and buy open technology. Work hard to understand the differences between open and closed. --You will be glad you did.
Blogging because I can...
how can the fcc fine a broadcaster if the evidence of an indecency infraction cannot even be legally recorded
They bought out politicians.
Another reason why we need to stop campaign contributions from big business.
You can almost be certain that some little Chinese manufacturer(s) will produce some little PVR device or even a PCI card that has some secret backdoor (up, down, left, right, hold down B and press start) that will make the device ignore the flag. All it takes is a couple of these devices to make it into the US or Canada or where ever and CSI.NewYork.2x06-1080i.avi.torrent will be available to everyone and their grandma.
Or the other situation that is just as likely is Hauppauge releases their PVR-550 or whatever and some dude(tte) with a hex editor "fixes" the firmware that is loaded when the driver loads.
It's pointless.
"the entertainment industry is trying to tell you what you can do with your own machines."
... ... ...
... ...
...
... ...
...
Hey There,
I'm the first to admit I'm "legally" challenged.
But I don't think that this is an attempt to tell us what we can do with our machines.
But rather, it is an attempt
to tell people who want to sell goods and services in the public venue
what we as a community will and will not tolerate
if you want to operate in the community.
I think the community has not only the right
but the responsibility
to make these sort of decisions.
Do I "personally" agree with this decision?
No.
But it doesn't limit me as an individual.
Or what I can do with a personal device.
I can create my own personal device that does what ever I wish.
I may not be able to share it with anyone else
but I can create a machine to do what ever I wish.
And given the day and age that we live in,
Give me a computer
A piece of hardware
And I'll write a device driver that does whatever I want it to.
I assume my personal rights would end just before
The distribution of that software.
But I still have rights!
Don't I?
Cheers,
-- The Dude
Ask the folks at Coors or Smith & Wesson. In those boycotts, people just bought other brands of beer and guns. In the case of DRM, an entire industry has to be targeted. While it is hard to boycott a necessity like gasoline or electricity, digital entertainment is a sitting duck for this type of strategy. It's time to speak to the MPAA & RIAA using a language they understand.
We long ago moved from the model of buying media with a recording on it under the assumption we owned both the object and the right to do anything we wanted with the recording that the law allowed. Now we only buy an option to listen to a song, watch a movie, play a game, or even use an application at the copyright owner's discression. Consumers of entertainment own less with every new format.
Read books. TV is constantly going down the drain. The quality gets more and more simplified and generalized so anyone can be mildly entertained by it. TV shows and movies cost so much to make that they have to entertain a wide variety of people in order to pay them off. Books on the other hand are usually written by one person. A tiny fraction of a cost compared to a movie, so books only need to be targeted towards a tiny amount of people to pay them off. I'm sure many people here have a show that didn't stay on the air long because of poor ratings. Extremely entertaining to you, but not generally entertaining to the average person. Farscape anyone?
Movies are mildly entertaining to a large group of people while books are extremely entertaining to the niche market they cater to. Plus no one says when I can read, how many times I'm allowed to read it and if anyone is allowed to borrow it.
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
It stifles innovation and creativity
In what way? What about a do-not-copy flag inhibits your ability to create, and send out all the copies you like without the flag? After all, nothing about the flag prohibits you from placing your work in the public domain, and nothing requires you to master media with a do-not-copy bit set.
Oh, that's right. You can't create. You just want to copy some else's creativity and innovation without paying them for it.
Flame me all you want but I think big media companies have other things to worry about than controlloing what their users watch on tv.
Quality content is really a big problem, I'm not living in the States so sometimes I don't share the same sense of humor or editiorial judgements that I watch in the american channels. But unfortunately local canadian production is non-existent, all we get is american channels.
Besides watching the news (when I'm not on the net) and some PBS specials I stopped watching tv most of the time. I know the situation is different for people with kids or spouses demanding to watch something at a particular time. But is not to hard to just stop watching tv altogether and find something else to do (internet, magazines, books).
Think about it, how many reality shows can you watch before stupidity starts oozing out of your ears!!!
When said content producers alter the law in order to make it impossible for open source software to be used in PVRs and make decent homebrew PVRs all but impossible to make, then they are telling me what I can do with my own hardware.
like every other type of tampering to stop anything digital, someone will make a program, device, whatever to counteract it, so why worry.
Besides, the FCC is a joke.
We have seen that living things are too improbable and too beautifully "designed" to have come into existence by chance.
VCRs were useful in the 3 channel TV world and became irrelivant once cable carried 300 channels.
Likewise, PVRs will become irrelivant in the 100 million channel world and we are inexorably heading that way.
Copyright makes sense if there is money to made from copies, but as the cost to make copies approaches zero, no amount of markup can make copyrights a viable business model.
Oh well, what the hell...
He doesn't mean just the broadcast-flag.
Think for a while of what the only perfect copy protection ever is. It's to prevent anyone from recording music, be it their own, or someone else's.
You can always copy by recording, even without the analog hole or whatever you want to call it.
By preventing anyone from recording music/whatever without a certain entity's permission, you're not only preventing piracy, you're also preventing anyone else from creating and publishing music except for the few who have the legal right to record.
This would mean that, besides playing gigs, getting signed would be the only way for a band to spread their music around, because obviously the record companies would be the only "trustworthy" enough entity (for the government) to hold the rights to recording.
No i don't like that idea for a future either.
What stops you from intercepting the video/audio over the RCA or Coaxial cables, just like people do now with their VCRs?
Also what is to happen to our current TIVOs? Will they no longer record digital cable?
I'm tired of hearing the "It's THEIR property, if you don't LIKE it, don't BUY it, it's not your ENTITLEMENT to free entertainment," et.al. argument.
What these Joe Public (and even Joe Slashdot) morons don't grasp is that yes, it IS our property! When someone writes/sings/films/programs something, it IS THE PROPERTY OF THE PUBLIC.
However, they are given, as an incentive to KEEP creating these useful things, a limited monopoly. This was formed by the Congress, by the will of the people. However, thanks to the media cartels becoming bigger and more influential than the actual voting block, the "limited" part is sent right out the door. So even though the people gave these rights to the content creators, they now find themselves unable to take them away...even though the numbers clearly don't lie (Isn't it like 60 million fileheads in the US?)
The public has lived up to their part, by saying "yes, we'll pay you for these things."
However, those in "the business" haven't lived up to their end of the bargain - eg; releasing control of their works to the public domain in a limited, reasonable period (95+ years ain't it, folks. I don't care how big-media friendly you are, 95 years isn't within "the spirit of the law" by any stretch of the word...)
And human beings DO have an ENTITLEMENT to be entertained and have fun! Music, words, and images belong to ALL of us. They do not belong to any one person. It is certainly right to give incentive and rewards to those who can MANIPULATE these forces, but to say they can do no wrong, simply because it is "theirs" is bullshit, plain and simple.
I agree totally, I mean it's the broadcaster's Intellectual Property and they have the right to decide what you can do with it. You don't have any right to use it in a different way than was intended by the distributor. ;)
yap
The less I want their products. Not only that but with the quality of programming spinning round the bowl about to go down, is there anything worth recording anyway? If you do record anything there is that stupid transparent station logo in the lower right corner all the time. What I have been doing is finding something else to do and it works just great!
But once "their" IP hits the airwaves, the rules do get changed a bit.
A Shadeless room is a brighter room.
That post is freakin' genius. Possibly the best i've seen here in a long while.
The roll over to digital will be full of problems, but I doubt the public will view this as a major problem. This isn't going to out law PVRs. It may make it very difficult to dump content from the PVR to a DVD burner. Shows will be time stamped, so they could be locked on a PVR after a period of time. For years to come, many households will be using a DAC device to watch TV on a NTSC set, or getting conversion from a cable box. The cable companies are the ones to watch. They would love to put TIVO out of business so they can push their own devices and Video on Demand.
...this "everyone is a pirate" mentality. I think most people's thinking is "Well, if you're already treating me like one, why not fucking be one?" P2P networks are developing at an enormous pace. Easier, faster, better all around. Anonymity in numbers. Anonymity by design. Trust-based networks. Decentralized networks. Scalable networks.
If there's something similar to "TCO" that is "Total Value of Acquisition", including rights, limitations, legality etc. I'd say bought content is getting lower, while pirated content is getting higher. That can't be good for the RIAA/MPAA...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Forgive me, but I have never heard of a single consumer that has been looking for DRM to be integrated into their tv sets.
Its kinda funny that they're fighting for the adoption of the new HDTV technology and at the same time invent new ways to prevent people from using it. People don't give a shit about the quality of the recording, why do you think people go into theaters with camcorders. All this fear of people making digital perfect copies of TV shows... Who cares!
If Beastie Boys release and get flamed for it, and therefore sales drop - all these genius executives that think that they'll still have a market once they effectively lock everything down.
Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
Just because you were allowed to do it doesn't make it a right - that's a common problem with a lot of people who post on Slashdot - they can't tell the difference between a right and a privilege.
Your assertion makes about as much sense as saying you have the RIGHT to get on an airplane without a photo ID. You don't. You USED to be able to do it, but your ability to do so in the past wasn't a right, just a privilege.
paintball
That makes no sense - so you're arguing that people won't record anything because that'll be the only way to prevent copying....
But if it's not recorded, how are they going to sell it? They'd be better off selling 100 copies and having 1 million copies made for free than making no copies at all.
paintball
Copyright wasn't designed originally to limit copying, but provide the right to copy. There is a reason why it was originally only 14 years of restricted use.
The whole point of copyright law was to let people copy things after they were brand new.
Under the original law, the first tv broadcasts and movies would all be public domain now and we could all make our own copies of them. It was designed to make sure that works of art wouldn't lost. Think about it, can you find really old TV shows?
CitrusTV (http://www.citrustv.net): the Nation's Oldest & Largest Entirely Student-Run Television Station
They're betting that these mechanisms will establish control.
They could just as easily push everyone to use the content that doesn't use these mechanisms.
paintball
What!! I'm still not done being pissed about how every time I hook up my DVD player through my VCR the macrovision kicks in and screws it up so I cant watch the DVD on the TV or make a "low quality" VHS recording for the Van (so the kids can watch the DVD I just bought on the road). I had to go out and spend 100 bucks on a sima color corrector (and macro vision defeater).
He desires it.
http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuradio/hdtv-samples. html
Actually, I was referring to the Broadcast Flag as the "simple, neat, wrong" solution.
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
he DESERVES it?
However, I say it is a very safe bet given the relative apathy we see today in most ordinary people.
Blogging because I can...
"How else can I help the EFF," you ask? 30% of the profits from book purchases at No Starch Press (when follow the link from the EFF's website) are donated back to the EFF.
Just because you were allowed to do it doesn't make it a right - that's a common problem with a lot of people who post on Slashdot - they can't tell the difference between a right and a privilege.
We look to the glorious future, the removal of uncertainty, the time when everything not explicitly permitted is forbidden. For after all, the "rights" you have are made explicit in law. Anything else is merely "privilege".
Unfortunately, Fair Use permits certain activities as a right, not merely a privilege. So Fair Use must go, we must abolish it. It is rediculous to think that a citizen has the "right" to view a TV show at a time other than the time the producer wishes it to be seen at. The citizen's only "right" in this matter is the right to purchase the products advertised in the show.
There are NO RESTRICTIONS ON ANALOG OUTPUT in the broadcast flag ruling. There are restrictions on digital outputs only. You will still be able to use your analog outputs to record signals at the full resolution possible.
I will quote from page 41 of the FCC Broadcast Flag ruling straight from the EFF site:
In other words, you can't pass Marked Content (ie. content marked with the Broadcast Flag) to anything except analog output (and some other things). That is, analog output is perfectly permissible for flagged content.
The part about downrating the video quality only applies to digital outputs, and is discussed later on that page:
That's a little complicated but it amounts to saying that they have to downgrade the resolution if they produce unencrypted digital output in DVI format.
As you can see, the EFF has misrepresented this part of the Broadcast Flag requirement in order to make it seem worse than it is. They make it sound like there is no way to record flagged HDTV content without DRM restrictions. But actually, analog recording will still be possible, just as it is today, under the currently proposed regulations.
The Broadcast Flag is bad law, but we should be honest in our claims about what it does and doesn't do. Exaggerating it to make it seem worse than it is does a disservce to everyone who relies on the EFF as a source of honest and unbiased information.
IANAL, but from reading both the EFF webpage and the PDF of the FCC report and order - it would seem that one loophole is for devices sold only intrastate. I would presume that CA would probably ban the manufacture of such devices, but some states may not give a rat's behind about the MPAA.
A Shadeless room is a brighter room.
If content producers want to control how their content is distributed, isn't that the content producer's perogative?
Good point, I agree. In that case, they are welcome to not use public television frequencies.
All terrestrial digital (that's ATSC for you) broadcasts in Japan have been copy protected since the day they started.
All Satellite (think Dish Network, etc) programming has been copy protected since April 4th 2004.
At least be happy you are living in a country where people can actually complain and make a difference.
Enjoy your "right" NOT to to purchase the products advertised in the show while you can.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=111408&cid=945 2468
[Philip K.] "Dick was one of the rare SF writers of 1950's and 1960's who understood that human race will enter the world of powerful future technologies keeping their minds as fragile as ever, and was quite accurate in predicting the outcome (paranoia, drug addiction, escapism, the rise of omnipotent corporate moguls)."
STUPIDITY IS THE GOAL. Stupid people are happy. It's all escapism. Escape from the pain of existence, for those too cowardly to kill themselves.
nt == no text
"So, I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now and go the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell, "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!!"
Howard Beale (Peter Finch) - Network (1976).
The whole speech is here. Inspirational - and it was 1976!
Bah - there's nothing on tv i want to record anyway. Watch dvds, it's better for your health.
Bah bah bah. Humbug.
... freeking rubber stamped perpetual license to use the PUBLICS airwaves forever and ever to print money with. The government and the FCC is so dang much in the pockets of the big broadcasters they won't even let joe little guy operate a 5 watt simple radio station on an unused frequency legally, nor will they cut you a permit if you ask for it. And forget TV, unless you are in a position to drop thousands in under the table cash "consultationm fees" then millions in overt legal licenses, you just can't do it, no matter how simple or low power beyond a few yards range.
It was ABC, not CBS. And he only had permission from ABC, not the NFL. I know this because I saw that episode on Cartoon Network a few days ago. Sorry to be a Nazi, but I love The Family Guy so much that I cannot let people mix up the details.
If you find this post offensive, don't read it! THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING! I am what I am because of how apes behave.
This brings up a point that it was too late for me to bring up in the movie theatre thread.
Cell phones now have camera built into them, and some if I am not mistaken allow you to actually record video. For example there was a video going around the net advertising a "phone video" of a cat swinging around on a fan and then hitting a wall.
Does that movie theatre law mean that anyone who brings such a phone into a theatre is now a criminal? It would appear so! And with every cell phone out there packing the features in these days it's only a matter of time before a good portion of the population is in violation of a law which could result in up to a year in jail.
corporations aren't too powerful. everyday citizens (the other people...) are too weak.
corporations will fight tooth and nail to not lose any power, but citizens will welcome additional power.
make normal people more capable; don't waste time trying to cut corporations down.
to become the Mecca for personal rights in the future.
Just because you were allowed to do it doesn't make it a right - that's a common problem with a lot of people who post on Slashdot - they can't tell the difference between a right and a privilege.
Yeah, well now there's an economic fact that these yahoos haven't kenned yet. By locking up my ability to time shift my enjoyment of their product, just as I can do now for a purchased book, they will have lost a quite noticable count of their audience because regardless of how great and good it is, there are those of us who will not give up that personal freedom. No smancy movie, treated as such, deserves to make its dvd/tape production costs back if it cannot be backed up in the event the original is destroyed, worn out, or playback equipment upgrades rendering it impossible to play the older format on the newer machinery.
I feel that I bought a copy of that work, in perpetueum, its now my property to do with as I please as long as I don't make a copy, and pass it on, while I retain the original. That I'd interpret as a copyright violation, as would any court in the land.
Personally, I see absolutely no difference in my buying the book, and my buying a copy of the work in *any* other format as far as my rights to enjoy that work are concerned. There isn't anybody standing there with a shotgun to my head telling me I cannot read that book again without paying for the "priviledge" again. In neither case am I about to drop it on a copy machine (of any kind) so I can pass it on to someone else, and I will argue that point at length that their treating me like a common music pie-rat when I have personally bought the cd's for at least 95% of the music I have. The rest is even older, and I have in most cases the original tapes unless they've been destroyed by player malfunctions. In an elementary schoolroom environment, that does happen.
in other words, they've lost me as an audience forever when that takes place. I'm not a rabid tv viewer anyway, and probably don't actually watch more than 2-3 hours a week, usually news. Its been at least 2 years since I walked into a movie too.
Jack Valanti and his just named successor, take note please, shoot too close to the target and you get powder burns or worse from the ricochet. The diff is that the powder burns will be on your shoulders (or lower) at the board meetings, occuring while discussing the money that never gets to your wallet because lots of us will simply 'opt out'. Your so-called per-perfomance rights are no big deal to me.
Hell, when I go to the movies, the ticket price usually isn't a huge deterent, but we all know the ticket is priced at a narrow profit margin per seat for the theater owner since he often charges as much for a 10 cent bag of Orville R.'s Finest as they do for the ticket price and thats his profit motive, not your overblown movie. Its just a draw to sell popcorn at a 1,000% profit. Hell Jack, you've been in the wrong business for 50 years!
Cheers, Gene
If the FCC wants to ban us from recording television by "flagging" it and outlawing all equipment that bypasses that, does that mean that: 1. Every TiVo in the US would become illegal, and in this way create 100s of disgruntled TV junkies that saved up for months of one (might be good in the end, as they'd protest this up many a congressman's rear end) 2. Every TV Tuner card would become outlawed, as well as the software that would be written in... say... a week after this goes live, that would bypass this? 3. If the cards + software are all only parts, and the real 'tool' being used to defeat copy protection is your own CPU/RAM/Hard Drive, does this make computers illegal, too? Methinks that even if this bill will actually stand before congress, it reeks of MPAA bullshit too much for even them to accept it. Then again, if you believe Michael Moore...
Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped.
1.) ripping GD-ROMs wasn't developed until the "sunset" period in the dreamcast life-cycle. (not to mention that this purpose constituted over half the sales of the ethernet "broadband" adapter.) poor marketing and initial high price by sega damaged the u.s. sales more than anything.
2.) playstation creates more revenue for sony than all of its other departments and subsidiaries COMBINED. piracy not only wasn't a concern for sony, they encouraged it because to generate greater hardware sales.
3.) intra-company debate and a few critical design flaws fouled up sony's plans to grow the PS2 into a mini-computer / multimedia center. the usb and firewire (sorry, ilink) ports are practically undocumented. the ethernet and hard drive expension is both expensive and bundled into a "home developer license" that locked any serious would-be-developer into a kiddie-pool away from playing with the big kids (who paid sony big bucks for a real developers' license).
in other words, the PS2 was over-engineered by committees and pushed out the door prematurely.
4.) DREAMCAST LIVES FOREVER! Mine's still very happy running netbsd.
The entertainment industry is telling you what you can do with their broadcasts. If you have created the broadcast, you can do whatever the hell you want with your own machine. You can't duplicate a concert or a baseball game you go to, why should you be able to duplicate a TV show you watch at home? Just because you've been able to do it for as long as you can remember doesn't make it right.
They've created the broadcast, so they are able to restrict it. The FCC probably shouldn't be getting involved, but that's another issue.
How many people actualy watch over the air programming? Most over the air programming has deterioated to the least common denominator and saturated with advertising to the point little value is left. I don't even bother with TV any more unless there is someting big on the news that gives it 24 hour coverage such as 9/11 in New York. What good is restriction free if it's mostly infomercials? The Internet has made an end run past the broadcasters. It's truly delivered on the promise of video on demand that network operators have hinted at. Those media PHB's that wanted to protect their content have simply not put it on over the air network TV. That is why Satelite TV and Cable has such a large market penetration. Stuff that used to be on the networks is on pay TV. Free TV is mostly dead. That is why nobody is making true Digital Televisions. Nobody is spending the bucks on a TV to replace their 20 - 25 inch TV. DTV (the true television that includes a digital tuner) is simply not being sold because nobody is willing to pay that much for a set to watch over the air TV. When analog goes away, the rest of us will get the news off the Internet and feed DTV ready monitors from the digital outputs from the cable or satelite box. We are definately not buying digital TV's that can pick up the network 6:00 new off the air.
If you think I'm off base, as I have in the past, and am doing again now, please list a chain store that has a small digital television set in stock. Requirements are it must replace a 20 to 25 inch set (motorhome, mobile home, mom's basement, apartment, & dorm room, dwellers) which includes built in (not DTV ready) DTV tuner. I'm looking for a plug in a UHF yagi antenna and a power cord and get DTV broadcasts. As an added bonus, it shouldn't cost more than double the analog set it replaces. Nobody's spending tons of money to watch over the air broadcasting. There is no value.
Please reply to this post with price, make and model of set, and name of chain carying the DTV in stock. NTSC tuners and home theatre don't count.
The truth shall set you free!
While I doubt anyone will read this due to the lateness of this post, I still must do so.
Lemme just say first... I am something of an expert on digital television... it is my job.
Digital TV is for the most part based on the ATSC standard, which in turn is based on the ISO/IEC 13818-1 standard (AKA "Generic coding of moving pictures and associated audio information: Systems".
Our enemy though, is the "Redistribution Control" As defined in ATSC Standard A/65B, now for a quick overview...
Within 13818, a stream of data (the transport stream is made up of packets who's length is always 188 bytes, within the first 4 bytes of the transport packet there is a field known as the PID which helps a decoder to know what is in a stream.
100 dollars worth of hardware could easily build a part which would demodulate an 8vsb signal on one end and pass the contained transport stream into a FPGA for instance who's sole job would be to do basic processing of the transport stream's EIT's to see what PID carry's the Redistribution Control (RC). Once the PID is detected, locating packets which carry it would be a simple task. Finally, once a packet is found to be carrying an RC, the FPGA would restamp the PID of the packet to 1FFF (the PID of a null packet who's payload is ignored by the decoder) then finally pass the stream to a modulator which would create the signal your decoder would receive and bada bing bada boom! No more Redistribution Control!
Sad thing is... I work with hardware everyday which would be capable of doing this... but even with my employee discount it's still far out of my price range. Of course such a device (as described above) would be illegal as it's only real use would be to bypass a copy control mechanism.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
publicly funded content such as pbs? Will they make use of the broadcast flag as well?
Quite frankly, DRMs never bothered me too much, however, just what will this effect. Does this mean that my old fasion analog VCR will no longer be able to unattented record TV shows I want to see and won't be home ?! Does that mean if I was going to record every episode of Star Trek: TNG or DS(, I only have until next year to do it before all I will get is scrambled picture ? If the mainstream public knew about this, and the main news providers ran it on the headlines, then I would see that the little people beating the media corperations. This shit reminds me of the patriot act, one of the first "Privacy removing" acts ...
This signature was left intentionally blank.
GNU Radio
Of course I have not RTFA. Knowing how competent these weasels are at lawmaking I would think the congrescritters and their corporate puppet masters might have neglected to put a time limit for how long the devices must support this capability or how liable a manufacturer is when it fails to do so (especially when that manufacturer is a wholly owned subsidiary of some OFFSHORE conglomerate) at some point in the future after passing initial inspection. I would think some enterprising manufacturer could ship units that pass all the production compliancy tests but have a "faulty" circuit which after X hours or days of applied power will silently "fail" and VODKA! Unrestricted access until it is taken in for "repair". BTW, Notice is given this "business method" and any software or circuitry used to accomplish this is patent pending by yours truly, licenses available by barter only for black classic stingrays.
This post not valid in designated "no sarcasm" zones.
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
Um ok... So TiVos and digital recorders are suddenely a terrible plight. What were VCRs? Or are we going to outlaw them next??
Matt
You have 1 Moderator Point! Use it or lose it! Is that a threat? -vapid
I for one plan to vote with my wallet. Let's take a look at the facts: 1. TV generally sucks. I can't even rely on the Discovery channel any more for anything resembling enlightening entertainment. "Entertain your brain," indeed! 2. The bungling mess that is HDTV is just...farcical. Compatibility and future usability issues ABOUND. 3. The analog TVs I have currently are working for me just fine thank you very much. 4. At this point I have ZERO incentive to upgrade to a digital TV...see point number 2. Also, it sounds like they're further trying to cripple or mangle the HDTV standard by adding on shite like this broadcast flag. What a load of crap. Digital copies of movies? I can already do that. I've got a DVD burner that can override any copy prevention methods you put on it. If I had to I could just tape things to my DV camcorder via it's line input (I have ways around Macrovision too) and then distribute the video in Divx format. I should point out that I don't illegally distribute video files because it's too much of a pain in the ass and I'm sure 98 percent of the population thinks it's a huge pain in the ass too. So MPAA...RIAA...what's the freakin' point?!
"War makes me sad." - Me
Because tv is so wonderful, ha.
This will just get more people off tv, more people off hollywood movies, etc. I see no downside to this whatsoever. Let them control their content, it's terrible anyway. Tell me when they start forcing actual artists to put copy protection on the cassettes that they press in their apartment with their latest EP and then I'll care.
You can say whatever you want about piracy. Many people say, "Oh, but it is theft to copy blah blah blah," like when they're talking about videotaping something in movie theaters. Yes, it's theft... but what's the bigger theft over here? I say it's the copyright holders being allowed to become my Big Brother, watching my every move like I'm a criminal, deemed guilty until proven innocent, even without a chance to prove myself innocent.
The people who think videotaping a movie in the theater is theft just don't understand that the legislation doesn't stop there. It starts there.
Yesterday, we were at point A. At point A, you could videotape a movie off television to watch it later. I have a few movies that were recorded in this way. And you could also make copies of videotapes if you wanted to, though the copies didn't come out perfectly, but it was ok anyway. Then, the movie industry came up with DVD, and all its stupid region coding and CSS and other bullshit, so while it is possible to make a perfect copy of a movie, they have made it difficult to do. They have put together a system that is deliberately crippled. So now, we're at point B. Next, they're gonna make it so you can't record television, when YOU pay taxes and/or the cable/satellite companies for the priveledge of viewing that shit. So, we'll be at point C. Then, they'll make it impossible to view anything on TV, when you pay your taxes and cable fees, without paying an ADDITIONAL pay-per-view fee, and you won't be able to record it for later use. Then, we'll be at point D. Then, they'll increase the price. And increase it more. And increase it more. Then, we'll be at point E. Then, they'll do like Microsoft and update the television signals every two years, so you have to replace your perfectly good television with a new one, or else you won't be able to watch most broadcasts. Then, we'll be at point F.
Look at the damage that copyright law is doing to our society. Back in the day, when copyright actually EXPIRED after a few years, a lot of good books were published, everything from literature to technical books. For example, you can get a copy of Moby Dick printed by any number of publishers, or you can find it on on project Gutenberg. The author is long gone, who gives a damn if you copy his book. Who would give a damn if you did 20 years after he wrote it... you can't write one book and expect to live off it until the end of your days. What the hell kind of contribution to society is that in exchange for a monopoly on a work? There were also a lot of really good technical books published. They're long out of print, but you can buy brand new copies, actually facsimile copies of the original books, professionally printed and newly bound. These books are PRICELESS. They contain information that you simply cannot find anymore, since automation and computers have taken over a lot of the tasks that were once done by people, very, very smart people who were experts and craftsmen at what they did. Books that explain things like gears. Look in any modern book on gears and you won't find Jack Schitt on how they work or why things are done a certain way. But luckily, their copyright expired ages ago, and the books can be reproduced. What if their copyright had not expired? What if the great great grand children still had rights on that information? I can almost promise you that 99% of those works would have disappeared into oblivion, the copies being damaged, destroyed, or just plain thrown away one by one, until none, or nearly none, were left. And if God forbid anything should happen to the world that will leave us without the technology that does so much for us today, that information, which would
You mean a future without television... Sounds great to me. When can we get started?
So, if I am interpreting this correctly, in just under a year from now, we can revise that old bumper sticker to read "Ignore your broadcaster."
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong (hey, I know it's
If that is true, then one year from now, I will be watching a whole lot less TV. Not that I watch all that much now due to low quality programming.
Let's play Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. I'll be Pestilence.
(or, "Toward A DRM Consumer Manifesto")
.
.
1. The Stick . .
No matter what DRM technology they develop and insert into the media play-back chain,
every such chain must eventually terminate in a human-sensible output device (speakers, monitor, etc.). And every such device is vulnerable to having its inputs tapped for recording by an unprotected device.
For the forseeable future, it's impossible for the Watch-Dogs to move the DRM technology so close to the terminating device, as to make it impossible to tap the signal. At worst, they can make it annoying.
In the case of video, they might eventually make it useless for the Little Guy to tap the video cables, and she/he might have to open the monitor's case. But if you're willing to do that, what can the Watch-Dogs do? Move the DRM into the CRT's electron gun? (or the LCD's individual TFTs, or the plasma screen's individual sub-pixel electrodes?)
And audio signals are even harder to protect: will they outlaw the conventional magnet-coil speaker, or maybe outlaw the possession of Crown or Marantz hi-fi equipment which is packaged as separate media-reader + pre-amp + amp?
IMO, the key strategic move for militant consumers (people similar to us) is to get the jump on future legislation and technology, by working NOW to develop tapping devices which are:
(a) so cheap as to be too ubiquitous (and too small) to make it practical to attempt to remove them from public possession;
(b) so generic as to be field-upgradeable from a binary download, as easily as current BIOS chips (so that, when DRM tech advances, there doesn't need to be another effort to distribute the tapping devices);
(c) *plausibly* marketable as being diagnosis / repair eqipment;
(d) capable of capturing (and storing, and replaying) a signal with fidelity and resolution equal to the signal which the terminal device would receive anyway, so that issues of multi-generation signal-degradation are irrelevant.
This sure sounds to me like the archetypal open-source project, surely within the capability of a community with such strong historical ties to phone-phreaks. There could even be "quilting bees", where people gathered to assemble these devices in mass quantities, to be subsequently distributed at nominal cost to all of their friends and family.
(True story: during the Viet-Nam War, the VC taught peasants to de-fuse, disassemble, and convert unexploded USA ordnance into very effective anti-personnel devices, using only simple hand-tools.)
Remember, this community succeeded in making first-class encryption unstoppable and available world-wide.
2. The Carrot . .
is to borrow from the traditions of RIAA broadcast royalties and UK consumer television-set licenses:
institute a system whereby revenue for Content-Creators is collected from taxes on each initial sale of play-back / recording devices and on storage-media. One way of assessing and apportioning the taxes could be from measuring popularity by the Watch-Dogs' sampling of legitimate broadcasts, ticket-sales, etc.
(Of course, in return for this, the RIAA etc. must see to the reversal of all anti-copying technology and legislation.)
Now, I can think of a lot of technological obstacles to The Stick which will be posted by readers of this post, but none which aren't practically and economically surmountable.
The sooner and closer that The Stick approaches reality, the sooner that the Watch-Dogs will view The Carrot as an attractive proposition. And the sooner that all this nonsense will end.
"When multi-meters (oscilloscopes, etc.) are outlawed, only outlaws will have multi-meters."
4 years ago I got so mad at my Cable TV Company that I decided NOT to have cable installed, and I'm glad I did. Not only do I use my time more wisely, but I have also been able to use the money I've saved to buy a very nice video collection - most of which has been purchased at bargin prices. However, in addition to the above benefits is my realization that made-for-TV Programming is actually institutionalized insanity. If you don't believe me, then don't watch TV for a month, and afterwards, spend a few hours watching sitcoms, news casts, talk shows, serials etc.. You will be amazed at the utter B$ that tries to pass itself off as credible dialogue. Until I did that, I didn't realize just how much B$ I was exposed to, and how much I unconsciously "filtered out" on a daily basis. So, I guess not watching TV has in effect turned up the gain on my "Subconscious B$ Detector" - which ain't necessarily a bad thing! Have a nice day, and happy holidays to all.
See my journal for details. Cheap shots from the anonymous cheap seats do nothing but add noise to an otherwise entertaining discussion.
Pretty shallow of you to discount my point because you have a problem with Moore. So, if I surround key MOORE info with MOORE placed in key MOORE places, will you MOORE not MOORE you are an ass MOORE read that either?
*plonk*
Blogging because I can...
"I wouldn't seek to take away their right to innovate if they would quit trying to take away mine. Don't stop the copyright holders, but don't stop the Digital cable manufacturers either."
So which came first? The piracy, or the iron grip?
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see what this will change. I can still hook up a VCR (or VCD/DVD burner, hard drive, or whatever) to my television and record whatever comes on my screen, and this law wouldn't prevent that. This legislation only seems to block the recording of an exact copy of the original, decrypted digital signal. A TiVo-like device would still be legal, so long as it recorded its own 'interpretation' of the broadcast in a format like divx or mpeg, rather than simply copying the HDTV data byte for byte as it goes into the TV.
one of the fundamental rules of common law is if you let someone do something for too long withount complaining, you loose your right to complain about it.
Trademarks are this way: If you do not defend your trademark you lose it.
Homestead Rights are also this way: If you've conspicuously lived on land long enough and nobody complained, you now own that land.
And finaly, Common Law marrage is this way: If you've lived together for long enough, the woman you are living with IS your wife.
So yes, if people have been doing something for a long time, it is THEIR RIGHT to continue doing it.
Maybe you'd like to go back to the 16th century where kings made up laws on the fly to get rid of any person or situation they didn't like.
Am I the only one noting the irony here. Yesterday someone gets a +5 by basically saying "I'm too weak to do anything about the government", while here we have a +4 basically saying "We can do something against corporations" Get back to me when you've all cleared your befuddled minds.
Point ONE: I'm a software developer and a professional writer. ...I don't believe that my writes as a copyright holder...
Point TWO:
Point THREE: The evilness of the...
A professional writer trying to protect his "writes" against "evilness"?
You must be starving, if your post is indicative of your work...
How many people actualy watch over the air programming? Most over the air programming has deterioated to the least common denominator and saturated with advertising to the point little value is left.
Which is a funny side effect of the increasing greed of the television industry.
Rather than provide quality programming, the formula has been to provide something that would appeal to the broadest number of people (read, lowest common denominator) as cheaply as possible, and then force you to watch it on their terms.
Television for me represents a tremendous shame on humanity since something that can be used to disseminate so much valuable information is used instead to propogate cheap, artificial shows.
So, the end result is... nobody watches it, anymore, defeating the purpose of all the lock-ins that greedy executives worked so hard at. (rather than working at quality shows)
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Unfortunately, this appears like the one of the only sensible solutions to piracy. Current technology allows the user to make perfect, redistributable copies. This is quite a major problem considering that media costs money to create.
This is a serious problem that needs to be resolved, without restricting the user's use of their computer/tivo/etc. Basically, someone needs to come up with a fair solution to the rampant piracy that is so common today.
Normally I just ignore. Sometimes I am in a bit of a mood, so I reply, then ignore. You hooked me.
The name has little to do with the merit of the argument. It's about trust really. The AC can see my posting history while I cannot. Then there are identity issues. Are you the same or not? I don't know.
I like having the ability to post AC because there are plenty of good reasons to do so. However, posts like the one that started this little thread are hitting below the belt.
None of this indicates the Moore comment has any merit at all, BTW.
I have responded to good AC posts in the past --will continue to do so. This one was crap from the cheap seats that's all.
Blogging because I can...
Man, that potatohead dude sure can make a good point. Cheap ass AC noise does nothing but bring down the whole thread.
this disgusts me. however, maybe it is good in the end. whenever a method of protection is created, smart people are compelled to break it. This brings more attention to the subject than it deserves, and in the end the person using the protection method loses. This is what we have seen in the migration of DBS satellite services to different encryptions over the last few years.
Investing forum
You can't handle an account!
Moore is nothing but a media slut, bending over for the mighty dollar.
How can you call someone on something when you don't know who they are?
Who is who?
(It is obvious from the posting times and my comment who the new AC posts are from, but maybe this helps illustrate my point a little.)
Cheap shots from the anon seats are not worth dealing with, leaving most AC posts read only...
Blogging because I can...
"The name has little to do with the merit of the argument. It's about trust really. The AC can see my posting history while I cannot. Then there are identity issues. Are you the same or not? I don't know."
OK, we've established that names really don't play much in the merits of an argument. So you speak of trust. Very well. What exactly are you trusting? That someone will not be the voice of conflict? Remember good debate is about having an open mind, and a good argument, not the absense of strong emotion. One must be careful in the "name game" to not surround oneselve with just a group that will mirror our thoughts (choir), nor eliminate conflict (the stuff of good drama, and great discoveries). Remember you're responding not to an identity(s), but an argument, piece by piece. Establishing your argument as the superior one, not your identity.
The FCC should start upping the ante by collecting taxes, and increasing the annual 'cost' of broadcasting licences proportional to the use of this bit.
The 'broad' of out broadcasting has now changed to 'narrowcasting', and as such the FCC should allow new entrants into the market to plug this gap, and offer real broadcasting, and new free to air licences. A ready excuse for this tax, would be to say, - look here, you promised to broadcast, you are not, so we will remedy this, buy selling a few more broadcasting licences. This anti-record insurgency flag is a windfall to existing players, and costs the FCC and the public, revenue. The fix is to tax the use of this flag.
The flag devalues the public's benefits, and allows the siphoning, of what would be taxable revenue. The spectrum management agency urgently needs to tax/levy these restrictions, lest licences loose their value, as content gets tied/siphoned up by cable/physical media channels.
END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore attempting to "stop certain content from surfacing again"
I dare say this is a good example of how an individual (Mike Moore in F911) has, as you say, attempted to "stop certain content from surfacing again" Babylon 5 - "stopping certain content from surfacing again" ... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN
news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts
together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that "truth" might not always be ethical truth and that content that exists may be prevented from seeing the light of day
Orwell ...
You wrote "reminds me of a book I once read"
I believe Juanita
There is the one: Lower prices! If movie would cost a cent no-one would pirate. You just have to figure right prices. (I'm not saying price should be a cent!) I'm saying distribute more with lower prices! Digital copying doesn't cost much.
....we impose severe sanctions and penalties upon them.
We need to build into our constitution severe sanctions and penalties triggered by popular vote in referendum and initiative. For example, each politician should be subject to potential recall by popular vote ever 6 months or so.
But just doing that would not be enough: we need to punish severely any politician who is recalled. For example, if a politician is recalled by a 55-45% vote, they should be fined. If recalled by a 60-40% vote, they should be jailed for 1 year. If by a 65-35% margin, life imprisonment. If by a 70-30% margin, they should be executed publicly.
We have let our "public servants" make themselves into gods and kings. We need to show them who is boss. Being a politician is a great boon to a person and they should be grateful for the chance to SERVE the public. But instead they sell us out to corporations.
So we need to make an example of some of them. All to be done by rule of law....
Are we men or are we sheeple? Are we still pack animals, giving our obesiance unto the animals at the top of the hierarchy, or are we something more than animals? Are we truly rational creatures? Show me that we are.....
Homo Sapiens Americanus--A documentary in p
I have a DVI-HDCP compliant TV, problem is whenever I tried to use an hdcp protected device (like the dvi samsung dvd player, or the dvi enabled motorola cable tuner provided by our cable company) the HDCP protection is very sensitive to "tampering"... such as turning off the tv or changing the input/channel.
The device would output "The HDCP protection of your television has been comprimised, disabling DVI output" on the component output and therefor I have to unplug the cable box/dvd player, wait half an hour for it's memory to clear, then plug it back in and wait half an hour for it to "negotiate" the terms of my HDCP compliant TV's surrender.
Suffice to say it wasn't worth the trouble and I went back to using the tv's built-in cable receiver (which receives less channels, but is much higher quality (the cable box'x quality was horrible) and went back to using my old dvd player.
So this DVI-HDCP idea was bad, except the difference here is supposedly my "older" (which I bought a few months ago) HDTV will still work, while non HDCP DVI enabled tv's can't use HDCP enabled devices at all... Holywood annoyances 1, consumer 0.
Nope, piracy will solve itself once somebody comes up with a solution to the problem in the signature below. Most people feel no moral obligation to take piracy seriously when IP law gives away such ridiculous, unfair advantage to oligopoly players.
---
It's wrong that an intellectual property creator should not be rewarded for their work.
It's equally wrong that an IP creator should be rewarded too many times for the one piece of work, for exactly the same reasons.
Reform IP law and stop the M$/RIAA abuse.
Zenith C32V37 32" HDTV Integrated TV
may not be small enough and cheap enough for you but whatever, WHo in their right mind wants to watch 16x9 on a 19 inch screen. I've been there and done that and lawrence of Arabia was absolutley painfull letterboxed on my 19 Sony many years ago
from amazon
Amazon.com Product Description
Set yourself up for full 1080i high-definition glory with one piece: Zenith's 32-inch, high-definition C32V37, which offers a flat, fine-pitch, dark-contrast picture tube with an Invar mask and a host of other audio and video enhancements. The set's fully integrated ATSC tuner receives off-air high-definition broadcasts (in 480p and 1080i resolution)--without the need for an external set-top box. A built-in digital cable tuner (QAM) receives unscrambled digital cable signals, while a dedicated DVI input grants an optimal (and copy-protected) pure digital connection with an external high-definition device such as a stand-alone receiver (not required). The set's advanced 8-VSB chipset technology offers better indoor reception of DTV broadcasts than earlier receivers and also enables reception of broadcast programming data.
A shadow mask is a thin sheet of perforated metal behind the screen that restricts electron flow, each hole in the sheet corresponding to a single pixel. An Invar mask uses an alloy that's especially resistant to the high temperatures generated by the electron beam, allowing in a brighter, clearer picture.
The C32V37 performs 3:2 pulldown detection, a handy feature for watching progressive-scan movie programs in their native 24-frame format. Digital video mastering introduces a common distortion when adjusting 24 frames-per-second movies to 30 fps video; 3:2 pulldown digitally corrects this distortion, removing the redundant information to display a film-frame-accurate picture.
Special 16:9/4:3 aspect-ratio correction lets you view feature-length movies in either their original widescreen format (16:9) or in regular TV format (4:3), with no loss of resolution--the set devotes all available lines to the letterboxed image, wasting none on the black bars above and below. Even more fun, the set's dual tuners let you view two channels at the same time, without the need for an extra external source such as a VCR. Split screen (unlike PIP, which has a smaller inset) shows two channels of equal size, side-by-side.
A 3D Y/C comb filter combines the adaptive digital processing of a three-line digital comb filter with 3-D motion detection. This eliminates hanging dots and color noise on stationary images, as well as reducing "dot crawl" and overall picture noise. Scan velocity modulation dynamically varies the scanning speed of the electron beam to create clear, well defined images for the sharpest picture possible. Finally, Zenith's Dynamic Focus aligns the red, green, and blue color beams in the center of the screen to ensure accurate side-to-side focus.
Inputs include the above-mentioned DVI digital in, three S-video/composite-video sources (including stereo audio for each), and two high-definition component-video inputs. A set of convenient front-panel inputs (with S-video) fosters easy hookups with a camcorder or gaming console, and a set of composite-video/stereo analog-audio outputs lets you route a signal to a VCR, DVR, or surround receiver.
And speaking of surround sound, the C32V37 offers that, too--in the form of an optical digital-audio output to route an immersive, 5.1-channel Dolby Digital surround signal to a compatible AV receiver and speaker system. If you're set up for good old two-channel stereo for the time being, you'll appreciate the set's SRS TruSurround processing, which simulates a surround effect from any two speakers.
Product Description With its integrated ATSC, Digital Cable Tuner (QAM Unscrambled) and 1080i resolution capability, this TV is ready to watch right out of the box - no HD set-top box is needed! It receives off-air high definition broadcasts and digital cable
The FCC was asked to carve out an exception to the broadcast flag system for public domain programming. But the broadcasters complained and the FCC served its true purpose, to keep corporate america happy.
Thus, broadcasters in the US will have MORE rights over content than even the original copyright holder did!
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
Zenith C32V37 32" HDTV Integrated TV
Wow. After several years of trolling for someone to mention a set, there is realy a set now. It's still a little big for a motorhome or dorm room and it's about 4X the price of the set it's to replace. At least the sets are starting to appear on the market. Are there any other small sets on the market? Is my choice limited to one set that's too big and costs too much?
I don't need HDTV, just DTV for the evening news.
The truth shall set you free!
An interesting point. Why is it that so-called "intellectual" work should be rewarded forever, while other types of work are rewarded only once? Does someone who builds a house get paid every time someone enters that house? If people who create "IP" want to retire on the earnings of their work, they should invest in retirement funds, like everyone else.
Now, without repealing the First Amendment, I am no longer permitted ownership of the work I have purchased, not even the copying of that work, not even the ability to copy for my own archives, for fear that I might distribute my archive without permission.
This, I think, means I am no longer permitted to own certain sorts of Presses. Henceforth, I will do as I'm told, and only as I'm told, by officially approved authority, as defined in the officially approved Press. So much for the First Amendment.
Ed Craig "Who cares what you think?" George W. Bush, 4th of July 2001
Rightly so...
This is why I donated 20 dollars to the EFF.
I also sent along a little message when asked as to why....
"Broadcast flag is the devil Bobby Boucher"
ala waterboy
The problem being that unless there's going to be a lawyer sitting in every device, these eliminate fair use, because the only difference between fair and unfair use is semantic--e.g. nothing decideable by a computer program.
So what we're left with is outlawing general use devices in favor of "you can do only what we approve of with this device" which is NOT sensible, NOT fair, and NOT workable.
Many times I have to work, or something else keeps me from seeing a TV program I want to see. Don't they realize that if I can't record it, I can't watch it at all. And if I don't watch it, I'll never see the commericals?!
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
The electron gun itself still has to be analog. You can just sample the voltages right at the electron gun. With a good ADC the quality loss should be minimal. Even if they all use LCD, you can still capture whatever signal is used to drive the LCD screen after it is decrypted but before it reaches the part of the LCD screen that actually displays the image. Of course it will mean more people will start downloading off the internet rather than taping because not many people will be able to record in that manner.
I just discovered this by looking at the Amazon site....
In stock soon. Order now to get in line. First come, first served.
It may be close, but it still does not meet the critera I mentioned of "in stock". It's still vaporware until it ships.
It may turn into vaporware if they don't get enough pre-orders.
Back to my original post.
Anybody know of a Digital TV that is in stock to replace a 20 - 25 inch analog set? Please reply to my original grandparant post.
The truth shall set you free!
>If content producers want to control how their
>content is distributed, isn't that the content
>producer's perogative?
Then they should keep their content for themselves and have full controll. Just as someone selling chairs should/could not controll how someone uses it, a content creator should not either. Sure, a chair manufacturer would love if you had to buy a new chair for each room, whenever you moved to a new house and prevent someone from siting in your lap (without you paying twice) but that is not thier bussiness if they want to sell chairs.
Keep things for yourself if you want to control them, but if you sell it to others, and you can't any more.
Clever, I like this!!! Tap into the uncrypted channel, let's hope they don't DRM the LCD and electron gun drivers.
Much better than the point the camera at the screen ideas. It should maintain the max possible resolution that you could hope to get out of the TV.
Sample, clean up, compress... but playback may be a problem (you may have the expertise but others won't) although it could potentially be done through Linux?!? OR some manufacturer could make a device which both records, cleans and plays back electron gun signals.
I foresee the modding community expamnding rapidly soon.
As you may or may not know, in the UK we have a thing called a "TV Licence". This currently costs around 120 UKP per year, and it 'allows' you to have television receiving equipment on your property, and certain portable devices (assuming they are not being used at the same time as the fixed devices).
This "TV Licence" is ostensibly needed to pay for the upkeep of the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation). There are no adverts* on the BBC channels, and you are 'free' to watch any BBC channel.
However, if you do not watch BBC channels at all, just the commercially funded channels, you still require the "TV Licence". If you do not watch terrestrial tv at all, but have cable or satellite (which you must pay the provider for directly) then you STILL need a "TV Licence" !
My irritation at this state of affairs has been growing for some time, especially, as the BBC raises funds by selling its programming to commercial companies, who use it on satellite/cable and non-BBC channels. I am fed up with seeing BBC made programs on Discovery Channel, (it seems I have paid twice). The BBC also has a thriving DVD/Video market running, which further reduces the need for a "TV Licence".
BTW, the "TV Licence" is enforcable by law, with a penalty of 1000 UKP, for non-compliance, or jail !
This really pisses me off, when we get the same recycled crap, charged for twice, and then threatened with jail if we don't comply.
The reason this is so close to my mind at the moment, is I got an ominous letter last week saying : To the current occupier, we see you don't have a "TV Licence", either get one or we'll be round and then you'll be for it ! (It all works off post/zip codes, so if your address doesn't register as having a "TV Licence", whether you have a tv or not, you get a letter. Oh, and they do come round to check. Where was I ? Oh yeah, the reason this is so close to my mind is that I had to get a "TV Licence" pretty quick, before they came round, and found all the DVD rips lining the walls, with empty cases under the bed, and various ripping utils filling the computer !
Extortion I call it ! It's not like I watch the damn tv, its not even connected to power, as I have a tv card in the pc which I use to record F1.
Bah humbug
* actually there are lots of adverts, all promoting BBC products, like DVDs etc.
You misunderstand. The content producers *don't* have control over how their content is distributed. Instead, the content distributors have -- contractually -- said, "If you sign over the rights to your content, we will distribute it and give you a royalty. Oh, by the way -- we have a monopoly on distribution -- so you really have no choice."
For those who say, "Well, I'm just going to distribute my stuff over the net!", the distributors' comeback is in the form of "Welcome to the wonderful world of Digital Rights Management and Broadcast flags! We're busy making sure that you can't do that."
The bottom line is that the distributors are parasites with no creativity of their own who have manipulated the property-rights system (formerly known as the legal system) to *legally* seize control over the content producers' creative work, on the grounds of "merely" being the distributors. The producers have had two choices: join the distributors' monopoly, so people can see their work -- or have *no distribution at all*. Perhaps you can understand why they have not selected the second choice.
*Now* do you understand?
DNA is a Turing machine. You, however, being dynamic and emergent, are not.
Why is it that so-called "intellectual" work should be rewarded forever, while other types of work are rewarded only once
Because Disney says so.
Once upon a time the creator of the IP only had a limited window with which to profit from the work, after which point it went into the public domain. Disney have changed that, they don't want their cash cow characters like Mickey and Donald to go public domain and they have the political influence to make sure it never happens.
It's unfortunate, but it's unlikely any work created post-Steambaot Willie will EVER go into the public's hands.
I watch over the air programming. We use rabbit ears and have for about 22 years. No cable or satellite since 1981. I think we have avoided paying about $6000 to cable companies.
I think about 6% of Americans don't have cable/sat tv. And about 2% don't have TV at all.
Now for your DTV equipment... go to Target! I've been watching for widescreen digital TV's with built-in tuners for years. They have finally started showing up. I found a 31" Samsung model recently listed on Amazon listing for about $1300.
I was tempted by that, but it didn't seem to be in any stores around Lansing, MI.
But then I was at Target 3 weeks ago. They had a Samsung 26" tv on sale for $699. The model # is TXN2670WHF, they had a demo model sitting on the shelf. Our largest TV at home is 20" (the other one is 13"), this 26" Samsung widescreen is about the same height as our 20" tv, but of course wider.
I think these tv's, (smaller, cheaper) with built-in tuners are only starting to be available now because of cheaper tuner chips. About two years ago, Phillips came out with a HD tuner chip that they said would be under $10 in quantity. I tried to get one to make a tuner card for a computer, but you had to sign a Macrovision license to even get a sample.
I'm still up in the air about TiVo vs DirecTV vs a small HDTV set, but this set is the sort of thing I've been waiting for.
PS - get 10% off a Target purchase by signing up for their credit card.
It's about time for everybody to stand up to those fuckheads at the FCC.
The FCC is supposed to represent the people. Unfortunately, like politicians, they seem to be more responsive to the biggest corporations, which is why they are doing this.
However they do listen.
Two FCC Commissioners recently held a townhall meeting in Portland, Oregon to hear what real people want from the FCC. Note that these two (out of five I think) were opposed to the proposal to even further deregulate the mainstream media's ability to consolidate and tighten the media monopoly.
When Janet's nipple was shown on TV Focus on the Family got something like 40,000 letters written to the FCC to complain.
We can do better than that. Write to them and tell them you don't care about nipples or the seven words George Carlin supposidly can't say on television. What you want is control over your own electronic devices, and more diversity in the media.
Or whatever it is that you want from them. They are supposed to serve us, not dictate to us.
This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you
Thanks for the first post indicating a store with smaller digital TV's IN STOCK. I'll have to go check them out. The sets are still more than 3X the price of the sub $200 sets they are to replace. I'll have to go and see what features and jacks are provided on the sets. Will they work with a DVD, VCR, sound system etc.
The truth shall set you free!
From http://grotto11.com/blog/archive/1021535000.shtml dated Wednesday, May 15, 2002
Because Sony manufactured custom components for PlayStation 2, initial manufacturing costs were high and Sony lost an estimated $50 on every console sold. Now, however, Sony has shipped 30 million PlayStation 2s and the economies of scale have cut the cost of manufacturing the console. In the same interview, House said Sony was making a profit on its hardware sales.
Of the big three, only the XBox is a loss leader. The PS2 was a loss leader initially and the G-cube (I think) was never a loss leader.
Sony has learned its lesson and the PSP hardware wise is supposedly going to be profitable from day one.
If content producers want to control how their content is distributed, isn't that the content producer's perogative?
Recording TV for timeshifting etc. is something that people expect to do with TV. People don't consider it reasonable for a cable company to, say, say "you can record our programming with devices X and Y, but you can't use device Z to do exactly the same job".
Just as it wouldn't be legal for a TV company to put a clause in the small print saying "subscribing to our services gives our executives the right to come round to your house and have sex with your teenage daughter", so it shouldn't be legal to say "you can only record with these devices" or "you can only vacuum your carpet with this brand of cleaner".
I find that a common problem with Americans is that they seem to equate "right" with "what the constitution says". It may even be true in a legal sense, but if the be-all and end-all of your argument is "you're only entitled to what's in the US constitution, and otherwise prepare to be butt-raped" then there seems little point in attempting to have a discussion with you.