Slashdot Mirror
Hollywood and NFL Fight TiVo
An anonymous reader writes "MSNBC/Washington Post is reporting that the NFL and tinseltown have asked the FCC to stop TiVo from expanding its service to include the ability to transfer recordings to PC's and other remote devices. TiVo says the system is secure. I say its source code will end up on the box. You do the math."
Without the mindshare and press of Tivo, ReplayTV has sported this feature for a long time. Ownere preemptively filed suit to make sure they could legally use show-sharing.
If the FCC/NFL is that parnoid about TIVO then they would also have to requisitiona ll video card manufacturers to not include video inputs on their cards. I would assume that most of the information going to computers and then torrent sites are coming from video in cards and not TIVO. On the other hand, I definitely feel bad for advertisers because TIVO could potential hurt their effectiveness, and ads make the world go around. No ads. No Slashdot.
GroupShares Inc. - A Free and Interactive Stock Market Community
-------
artlu.net
Last time I checked "Computer Enthusiasts" didn't need a Tivo to capture TV shows and share them. Not to mention the fact that time-shifting is legal. What is next, garrote survivors suing companies that make wire?
i mean honestly, With hollywood bitching at just about every single technological advancement these days all in the name of protecting their flawed and old-fashioned business model, could we really expect them to sit idly by for something like this...don't even pay attention to their crap and maybe it will go away. Thats not to say you shouldn't buy the movies, but if you have Tivo content thats yours, why shouldn't you be able to transfer it to whatever medium you desire?
When will media organizations realize that this sort of thing does not hurt - especially the NFL who does not release anything other than highlight tapes on video anyway.
Well, looks like the MPAA has won over the TV industry. What next, them saying we can't tape TV shows at all? "This tape could be digitalized and shared over a P2P network. Although most don't know how to do it, it happens enough to outlaw the home-use of any recording device." Great, just great.
The MPAA is listening so ixnay on the ansfertray. Just make the TiVo to PC transfer feature an "easter egg", just like 30 second skip.
yeah! more ways to watch the crap on tv!
Jesse Ventura would have never opposed the free sharing of information. Down with the NFL. http://www.officialxfl.com
Pod Six was jerks- Capt. Murphy
Millions of people wouldn't have known what Janet Jackson's left breast looked like.
I only know because I was out of the room during the halftime show, missed it, had no idea what occured, then within hours had various friends of mine with PVR's sending me the files via email.
And all I could think as I looked at them was "Eh - my wife's are better. And probably more real."
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
using 3rd party, i can transfer movies out of my replay. it's a nice way to build a dvd of a season of your favorite shows. i don't understand why the NFL is really against this, i can't imagine the vast majority of people who watch NFL games don't do it as the sporting event is occuring.
Having lost the two programs I was saving to demo HD when my new DirecTV HD Tivo crapped out when it was only two months old, I'd really like a way to transfer stuff to a PC. DircTV promptly sent a replacement unit, but my demos were gone and they haven't been repeated yet. It'd suit me if I could just do an automated (or semi-automated) backup to a PC or another hard drive w/o having to crack the case.
Putting the "anal" back into "analyst"...
Andrew Tridgell (Samba Team) has a pretty good understanding of the Tivo (wink, wink, nudge, nudge, a wink's as good as a nod to a blind bat, eh? Eh?) and I would think he'd be fairly competent to judge the validity of these claims.
With each new iteration of technology, new features get added to media. Witness VCR -> DVD. Each time, the media fight it and try to gain control. So far, they have always lost. and when doing so, it turns out that the new features actually helped the media companies , not hurt them. And in spite of a long history of being wrong about it each and every single time, they still wish to try and control it. Insanity at its best.
It remains to be seen how many politicians have been bought.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Obviously I'm biased (I run a DIY PVR / HTPC site), but this type of shennanigan, whether it comes to fruition or not, is one compelling reason to roll your own homebrew tivo-workalike.
Now hopefully the Broadcast flag won't come and ruin the party regardless of commercial/set-top or homebrew PC PVR.
E.
Build Your Own PVR/HTPC news, reviews, &
to another registered machine in a different time zone where the game is blacked out? It's like they're just opening the barn doors and letting the horses run free? Where's the concern for the poor copyright holders rights? This will bankrupt the NFL and Hollywood in short order (if we assume that a over 50 decades qualifies as short order).
If TiVo makes advertisers' business model obsolete, that's just too bad. Find another way to make money. They're already putting more "ads" into the shows to counter this.
I would say that being able to digitally transfer video to my computer is the only thing I miss about my Tivo. It's obviously possible to transfer to VHS tape but I don't want to move backwards quality wise. Right now it is possible to transfer stuff but it takes a bit of modding (adding an ethernet card) and a lot of linux familiarity to get it to work, something most casual users don't care to do. Fight the good fight TIVO!
Chika Chik-ah... do-e ow ow.
No links to provide - do a few searches for the above software with 'Tivo' included in the search and you should find something.
Cheers,
Ian
Don't they know it is not the casual user of tivo they need to be worried about but the hacker type, who has the utmost capability of circumventing any protection and if necessary, building their or building their own Tivo-like system and do what they are trying to circumvent and dump the recordings on to p2p networks for widespread sharing ? When will they learn not to fight the system ?
__________
The more I know people, the more I love animals
They have no idea how many people are going to become pissed off just because the media companies want to protect their income streams.
When your parents / grandparents / non-technically savive friends & family can do something as simple as record a TV program because of 'broadcast flags' and the like then Congress will hear from the masses in the most unpleasent way possible.
III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIII
Can someone explain how being able to record a television show on TiVo, and then potentially watch it from other devices, and share it with your friends or over the Internet, is in any shape or form different than recording a show with a VCR and passing the tape around to your friends?
They are just paranoid. They forgot their tin foil hats. It's like recording it on your vcr. They are just worried about distribution. With my upstream I would never try to upload a 2+ hour video.
Evolution or ID?
Haven't they heard, or seen, people who trade tv shows don't care about quality. Higher quality is just a bonus. There are hours and hours of low quality 80's tv shows online for trade.
Football is boring enough as it is, but who in their right mind would ever try to share it online AFTER the game is over?! And worse, who would be afraid of that happening?! Where's the lucrative market in old football games.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
The HoR is working on legislation that will authorize the use of players that filter objectionable content. While many /.ers see this as censorship, others view it a gaining the right to consume media in a way that is more Free.
Lasers Controlled Games!
TiVo, with its associated abundance of convenient features, is merely the response of a free market to a real demand. Keep in mind these facts:
1.) People like certain shows, so they buy a TV.
2.) These shows are only shown on cable, so people subscribe to a cable service.
3.) People can't always watch those shows when the shows are broadcast, so they buy a VCR.
4.) People (in general) don't want to watch commercials, so they buy a TiVo.(I'm not saying that it's the only reason people buy it, it's just one)
With each step, the monetary expense increases. But consumers consider it worth the money. One major problem I see here, however, is that cable channels (in the beginning) were commercial-free. They were paid for by the subscription fees. Now, not only do you have to pay the cable company more than ever to watch the same shows, you now have a third of your time wasted by commercials.
This is why TiVo is becoming more popular. It's convenient. Someone needs to explain that term to the RIAA and MPAA.
Help find a cure for cancer. Join the [H]orde
You think that is ridiculous, just imagine what the INDUCE Act will do to TiVo. INDUCE Act Archives and LawMeme's Index to the INDUCE Act. Every technology that even gets close to copyrighted content will have to be vetted by lawyers and approved by Hollywood and the BSA.
Why the NFL? I mean, I can see networks being paranoid; you can watch a show later on with no commercials and it's all fine. There's where you're "losing" ad revenue. However, don't most sports fans want to watch the game as it happens? And if they do, don't they see the commercials anyway? And what about the massive product placement during the game? I'm wondering what sort of a sports fan population out there is willing to wait a day or two (avoiding all talk about said game) just so they can download a copy of it without commercials.
And secondly, I haven't got it working yet myself, but with certain digital cable / DSL Cable subscribers, there's really only the matter of plugging your computer into the line and streaming the data from the IP that matches the channel into a file and then editing it later (if you so desire). I've seen it done firsthand and it's rediculously easy, which leads me to wonder why the fuss about TiVo?
- Relativistic? That's barely Newtonian!
While I can see why the MPAA and NFL would want to fight Tivo on this, I don't think Tivo is doing anything revolutionary at all. Digitizing content from TV has been possible for several years. If it's illegal with Tivo, then it's illegal with a VCR, a DVD-R, a PC-base PVR, and a host of other ways to get broadcast TV onto the PC. There is no way this can possibly be enforced. Tivo is the target because it is the most popular commercially available PVR, plain and simple. I just don't see Tivo losing this battle.
I think the know TIVO is not realy a threat. But should they win this legal battle it will open new doors; its legal repercutions are the objective of these powerfull people I believe. Who knows maybe one day youll need a permit to use those video capture cards. 1984 people!
It's the same old story ... whining over our technological prowess. The fact remains is that if we have the technology to copy videos, music, or other things, then we WILL copy those things. Eliminating or otherwise inhibiting that ability seems to be "indian giving".
I don't really understand why the NFL should care much about this though; the last time I checked with my friends who watch a lot of sports, there's still this big stigma about them "not being able to watch a recorded game" anyway. I don't know anyone who would get a "season pass" on TiVo to their fav football team (or whatever) and watch them all at some later time.
If it wasn't for the TiVo, I wouldn't watch most of the TV that I do watch. Why? Well, I am never home when that stuff is on. In fact, I don't own the TiVo- my friend does (it's a ReplayTV, but same difference.) I watch the shows at his house (in fact another friend of mine gets the shows off of the ReplayTV and watches them on his laptop.)
It does allow a real shift in how TV is watched that will eventually change the meaning of time on TV. Sure, "prime time" will still be valuable for live shows, but if everyone has a TiVo-like device (I suspect they will be standard equipment in future TVs,) every other time slot will vastly increase in value.
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
It doesn't matter what merit the lawsuit has, they just need to get TiVo to delay or stop this whole concept, and they won't stop suing until they do.
This is exactly why I like TiVo's new concept, though, because of the fact you never even consider getting a best of DVD ever again, you can make your own. Which is exactly why the big media companies are trying to stop them, cause it means less profit.
SAILING MISHAP
That ship has sailed.
The cat is out of the bag.
The gate is open on the corral.
Been there, done that.
Zoidberg: That's why I love Earth. You can do what you want, and no one makes you feel guilty, because no one cares.
Fry: We're not listening!
Zoidberg: That's what I'm talking about!
And frankly, that's it... I have been able to do it with vhs for years, and I will continue to do it with new technology. I have my pvr card so FOAH. I record movies, ppv movies, tv shows et. and it is none of your bizness. I keep what I want.
I am not listening, I am acting.
If it comes to my tv it's for my enjoyment period.
If you don't want me to have it, don't show it.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
There are two reasons a fan would want a TiVo'd game. (1) the game isn't broadcast in their area. E.g., a Steelers fan who lives in Nebraska might not get the Steelers on their TV. The solution: NFL Sunday Ticket. "But that's exclusive to DirecTV?" says the NFL. Well whose fucking fault is that. There are plenty of people who would be willing to pay for NFL Sunday Ticket if it were available through Cable companies. They can't because the greedy NFL signs a multi-billion dollar contract with DirecTV. (I want Sunday Ticket, but my apartment faces north. I can't get DirecTV.)
(2) the game is blacked out. A Steelers fan might not see the Steelers because the game is blacked out. Actually, the Steelers are a bad example because they haven't been blacked out in 30 years. So let's use the Cardinals. Their home games are never broadcast in Phoenix because they never come close to selling out. The whole purpose of the blackout policy is to force fans to buy tickets to prevent the blackout. It obviously doesn't work because the Cards still only get 30,000 fans per game. So why do they still use this outdated, policy that doesn't work? None of the other major sports black out home game.
The NFL can end the market for Tivo'd games by merely offering NFL Sunday Ticket to all cable companies and ending the blackout policy that doesn't work.
- VoIP must be stopped! It lets people make phone calls without paying someone [other than the broadband provider]!
- Making people pay [a fortune] for commercial television. I remember when people thought it was okay to pay for cable because you got things like HBO, which didn't have commercials. HBO still doesn't have commercials, but it's still an extra $12/mo on your $60 cable bill.
- When did ease-of-use become piracy? I used to make mixtapes for girlfriends. I had the Jerky Boys calls on some umpteenth generation copy of a copy. I don't remember anyone up in arms about this--the Jerky Boys got a movie deal out of that underground phenomenon. Now that I can easily make a share a mix it's illegal?
Don't give up everyone. Write your Congressperson. Some of you live in Utah. Do something about it.blarg.
"The NFL, meanwhile, is concerned that a user could send a copy of a game to someone in another time zone, where the game is blacked out."
What do time zones have to do with blackout rules? Blackout applies to X distance from the stadium (or is it city, I can't remember). In fact, if NFL wants to keep people from overriding blackout rules, perhaps they should be as stern with DirecTV as they are with TIVO. I have known a couple of bar owners in the NE GA who used to claim the dish was in SC in order to show Falcons games at their bars.
It's time for hollywood, NFL,RIAA and others to wake up and smell the CPU cycles.
:E
People want to record TV shows,films and radio broadcasts. Not because they're freeloaders. It's because they like TV and want to watch it again. If you can't accept this and make money off it, then you have a poor business model and deserve to get driven out of business by smarter competetors.
The mass media have made money for one simple reason. They had a monopoly on the production and distrobution technologies of the media. Only they could afford radio towers, film reels and copying technology. Through this they have also maintained a monopsony over the base talent which they promote. Hence the low signal to noise ratio on TV and radio. Now, thanks to technology, even your average joe sixpack has the technology to copy a TV broadcast of music track. TiVo has given him the power to record the game, the soaps, the news, so he can watch them again. Does this mean we should shut down TiVo so the monopoly can continue?
HDD based TV recorders. MPAA and NFL want to shut them down because they encourage 'theft' of signals floating around in peoples homes. Nonsense. They just wish to maintain a monopoly over the distribution of their content, so they can jack up the price for their wares.
They deserve to be driven out of business.
If you want an example of a company that is using peoples wants and likes to make money out of HDD recorders, look no further than Sky+. Sky actually encourage people to record TV shows and are making a mint off it.
Put that in your smoke and pipe in NFAA!!!
May the Maths Be with you!
that Congress might need to change the law to invalidate a Supreme Court decision that established a key underpinning of fair-use rights, which is that developers of technologies cannot be held responsible for the actions of those who might use them to violate copyright.
So that means that Gun makers will finally be held liable for how people use their guns?
What, no?
When will the xxAA's and their buddies like NFL, MLB, etc. realize that the paradigm has already shifted? All they are doing is delay tactics against the inevitable with these innovation inhibiting (illegal) actions. We all have rights to *Fair Use* copies of any media that we've bought so their actions to stop that are illegal, IMO. IP that is broadcast is, again IMO, in the public domain as soon as it leaves the transmitting antenna/cable head-end. It's time for them to shift the efforts they are putting into these rear guard actions into efforts to adjust their business model to the 21st Century.
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
- I believe television should be like books.
- I get the right in perpetuity (forever) to re-view any show I purchase, as many times as I wish.
- I get the right to copy the show as many times as I wish to whatever media I wish.
- I do not have the right to sell any show.
In order to make this business model work, the amount of data sent per show should make it prohibitively expensive to keep everything.Thus, I pay $0.05 (5 cents) for the 'Ask This Old House' epsiode 112. I would be silly to burn it to media because it would cost $0.50 to store it. Of course, if I have that much money, I have the right to do so, but it'd be silly. Any time I want to watch it again, I'll just order it up again and they'll get another 5 cents. If everyone does this, they actually get lots of money.
This is similar to my idea about music. I'd be happy to pay approx. 2 cents per song to the copyright owner (the artist, I hope?). I'm willing to spend a total of $1000 to own a library of the 50,000 most popular recordings of all time. That's probably most everything I'd want to listen to ever.
The record companies and artists get their money, I get the right to listen to all the songs I want when I want how I want where I want, and everybody's happy.
Eventually the price will come down to reasonable levels.
Music and TV and Movies all operate on the same concept as Books - Intellectual property. They should realize their business model allows for plenty of profit, just adjust it for the new realities of media costs.
Unitarian Church: Freethinkers Congregate!
well, 1 of 2 reasons why I didn't get Tivo.
ReplayTV has had this functionality for how long?
the history of the world
Just another example of how corruption flows to power the way water flows downhill.
Bob-
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
Someone above made a good point about the industry always fighting the technology and losing. VCR was the prime example. It spelled the DEATH of Hollywood remember. No one would buy VHS tapes every again, just rent and copy. The bastards are wrong, wrong, wrong. And on a side note, it's useless to fight, you can't stop technology. Period, end of story. (Well short of nuclear holocaust and that would just be a set back). Cheers.
A one hour game that takes 3 1/2 hours to play? Afficionados have been taping the games for decades and fastforwarding through commericals to the breaking of the fake huddles. It was "crimethink" back then, it's "crimethink" now. But there's nothing they can do about it.
...You will learn how to spell and punctuate. Here's a little help:
"Simbolical Battle" should be "Symbolic Battle"
I think THEY know THAT TIVO is not REALLY a threat TO THEM. But, (note the comma) should they win this legal battle, (note the comma) it will open new doors. (note the period instead of the semicolon) I BELIEVE (note that I believe was moved to the beginning of the sentence) THE legal repercutions are the objective of these POWERFUL people. Who knows, (note the comma) maybe one day YOU'LL (you forgot the apostrophe in "you'll") need a permit to use video capture cards. ("those" in the original sentence was unneccessary and was removed) IT'S LIKE 1984 people! (The addition of "It's like" makes the last phrase sound smoother.
Please tell me you are a troll and not another fine product of our public schools.
if anyone does not want people making copies of misoc or video or movies then they better keep it locked up in a safe where nobody can view or listen to it...
if there is a will they will find a way to record whatever media is displayed on TV or the internet...
...for the common people to roll out a grass roots campaign to encourage copying movies. The mainstream US film industry is only 13billion, they wouldn't be missed financially, and film wise it'd be just like the 70's all over again with films with terrific writting and shitty production values. It could be a new golden age of entertainment if only the common people took back the reigns with the help of technology.
Entertainment is not a legitimate industry and deserves no protection. It's complete bullshit that we let a bunch of accountants tell us what to like. It's time to let this house of cards collapse, but if we wait too long, our one chance to stick it to these assholes will be legislated away.
If you can re-interpret content freely to remove what you find objectionable, why can't you remix the material to your liking in any other way? It's a good thing for sure.
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
Hollywood, the RIAA and others would like to charge you every time you use their content. They would like to charge you for every format of their content.
The NFL wants to restrict their content. Make you buy expensive satellite service or go to their games live if they haven't sold enough tickets.
As painful as it sounds, the only way to escape the trap is to stop consuming their content.
Cry me a freaking river. I'm a huge NFL fan, but as I'm just out of school, I don't have the money to afford to buy tickets for the games. Yet, if the stadium isn't sold out, the home-team TV markets are forbidden from showing the game because if people really wanted to see it, they'd pony up and buy up all the available tickets. Thats the contractual agreement the NFL made with CBS and Fox. So what happens if other people don't want to buy tickets? I'm unable to watch my team play.
The networks are broadcasting it elsewhere, just not in my area. So if the NFL has a problem with me doing what it takes to LEGALLY acquire game footage, they can go screw themselves. Last I heard, having someone give me a tape of anything broadcast on network television, so long as its not sold for profit, is entirely legal.
This is me, playing My Heart Bleeds For You on the worlds smallest violin. It looks amazingly similar to my middle finger.
-Shadow
Here is why the NFL doesn't want tapings of games on the Internet
- NFL just started there own cable channel the "NFL Network". Rebroadcasting all pre-season games this year. Only a matter of time before the rebroadcast all the games.
- Direct TV contract. You can watch the games you want it you pay for the $300+ Direct TV package.
- Local teams need the plug. The NFL chooses the game you will watch. Even if the game is meaningless and there is a really good game somewhere else.
- Still want to black out if needed. Teams don't blackout local coverage much anymore but they still will if the game is not sold out. Oh yeah if that happens you don't get another game you get an infomerical. Oh yeah they can still black you out on Direct TV.
I would pay for a reasonable way to watch the games I want to see. I would also like to go to games but football tickets are insane. The NFL really knows how to screw thier fans sometimes.Problem is that it would take you more time than you have to make, say 20,000 copies and distribute them out (physically) vs. recording Spiderman 2 on your TiVO, then p2ping the result out to the masses.
I'm just being a smart ass though, I think the tv execs are playing morons to perfection.
"Nokia is not a country, it's the capital of Finland!" -Moderated "Informative". Yeesh.
What they're worried about is the High Def versions of the shows and movies. Think about the kind of bandwidth necessary to transmit a regular show - TiVo estimates about a gig an hour for their native format. Converted that format to MPG they stay about the same.
An HD broadcast tops out aroung 11 GB per hour.
Do you honestly think that these guys are worried about people trading 17 GB files? (using 90 min movie as an example)
My read: They want to limit consumers ability to copy content around. Nobody is going to buy a D-VHS recorder when TiVo is much more convenient and user friendly, and they know it. If nobody buys D-VHS recorders then consumers will wind up buying the same content two, three or more times and they get to pad their wallets with the profits.
Say it with me boys and girls - this one is all about the money. You've got it and they want it.
To me, TV has become an activity I can pursue when/if I want to. "What's on TV" means "What's on Tivo?"
:30 or so of a commercial break before "Duh, I can FF it".
Simply skipping commercials isn't what it's about; in fact, I sometimes forget what I'm watching is on Tivo and not live, and I end up watching
Content providers need a paradigm shift in the way they think about digital rights management. The more they say no, the more fun it is to fire up BT and just get it. Instead of whining about lost sales why not package the stuff to make it attractive for me to go to them. I don't care what they prevent TIVO from doing, it will end up on the net in a nice compact avi file. Start rewarding your loyal customers and cultivate relationships with them instead of wagging the finger all the time and pissing on everyting. Educate, respect and deliver. Nothing more pig headed then a boardroom full of of old white haired guys in fancy suits. Idiots.
TiVo says the system is secure. I say its source code will end up on the box.
What? Huh? Guh? Buh? The source code to TiVo's software will wind up on TiVos? Why? They contribute back changes they make to the Linux kernel because it's GPL but the actual TiVo application is closed source. Why would they distribute source to their fixed platform when they can distribute binaries?
Am I completely misreading this statement?
Why can't I moderate something "Wrong" or at least "Grossly Misinformed"?
Normally I hate commercials, but I have to admit that there are some I don't. Some I even ... enjoy.
... I've been sucked into those American Express Adventures of Seinfeld and Superman commercials. I am willing to sit in front of my computer and watch commercials that are much longer than a typical TV commercial. Mind you, typical TV commercials have some constraints that make such ads unlikely.
For example
YS
"Arrr! The laws of science be a harsh mistress." -- Bender
The RIAA and the MPAA have objected to all the advances that made it easier to make personal copies of music/movies etc. Each and every one of them (most notably VHS) was condemmed as industry destroying.
I just wish they'd learn.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
Surely Tivo knew that this would get alot of people upset in the entertainment industry if they tried moving forward with this. Are they doing this as a way to test the waters to see what they can get away with or are they trying to get a little publicity because they are starting to lose some customers to the cable companies providing DVR capable boxes?
My sig of choice is Marlboro
There is TV in the UK and they don't have commercials. How about HBO? or any other pay channel. If people weren't so fucking cheap we'd have a lot better content with channels for children, those for adults and those with more racy adult content. Land of the Free is the biggest fucking lie I've ever heard.
comical codpiece
Remember the RIAA wants DRM installed on EVERYTHING digital, even the a/d converter in your soundcard .... so going after tv cards next would not be out of character for the 'media giants'..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
How about a compromise? They can have all of the anti-copying, anti recording, and anti skipping flags they want, BUT only if they agree to a series of measures to widen competition in production and broadcasting and to disallow any stro9ng-arm tactics to get content they don't own flagged.
Which will people be more exposed to, content they can only watchy in it's approved timeslot with no recording, or the stuff that can be freely passed around?
Perhaps with unflagged programming benefitting from the 'you gotta see the show I watched last night, let me send you a copy', in a really open market, competition will correct the problem.
As an alternative, may I suggest to hollywood and the NFL that if their IP is so valuable and deserving of maximum protection, perhaps they should place all copies of it in a vault and sink it to the bottom of the ocean. That should keep it nice and safe.
The TIVO gives the advertisers the ability to send the ads to people who actually give a shit about what they're selling, and people who don't fast forward through their style of ad. If they would just get their shit together, they could end up creating much more effective ads (by knowing what people watch & don't watch), hitting their target market (meaning you & I just don't see ads for stupid crap), and selling more stuff with less ad time to people who actually want their stuff.
It's another case of dragging an industry by the hair, kicking & screaming, to vastly greater profits.
They were paid for by the subscription fees. Now, not only do you have to pay the cable company more than ever to watch the same shows, you now have a third of your time wasted by commercials.
the fault lies in the hands of your local government (franchise fees, or kickbacks to your city hall to do business as a cable company in that city) and the tv networks getting greedy and CHARGING the cable companies to carry that channel.
yes, USA,TNT and the others CHARGE the cable company money to have that channel on the cable lineup.
so your rates go up as their costs go up and as your local city decide to increase the franchise fees they recieve.
a large chunk of your cable bill is a kickback to your local city.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
A game is only useful if it is live.
wtf? Spending an hour and a half watching the game with my $100 VCR after spending a sunny fall day outside instead of neglecting the waning sunlight and wasting 3 1/2 hours in front of the TV : complete with it's FOX upcoming specials and Viagra commercials. It's the only way to catch pro football.
PS: check out ESPN classic sometime : an entire channel devoted to played games.
And they pay a freakin' TELEVISION TAX for every TV they own.
Why doesn't the NFL offer a service where you can purchase any past game that you wish on DVD (as long as video exists)? I can't imaging that it would cost them much to do it, and many fans would probably buy a couple of the "really good" games.
I, for example, am a Packers fan and I would not mind paying some reasonable amount of money to get DVDs of the Packers Superbowl win, last season's game after Favre's dad died and Brett kicked ass, and a Packers/Vikings game where a Packer receiver fell down and caught a pass on his back, then ran it in for a TD.
What do the rest of you think about this idea?
Angleyne: You can't bend that girder - it's unbendable! Bender: Well I don't know anything about lifting, so that ju
"You do the math" has now taken the spot for most annoying phrase known to mankind. And yes, it really doesn't sound THAT cool.
Get a bill introduced in Congress that all games played in stadiums financed with public money must be broadcast free, without any copying restrictions, sold out or not. Watch the NFL squirm.
maybe they shouldn't be broadcasting their material over public airwaves...
Digitizing content from TV has been possible for several years. If it's illegal with Tivo, then it's illegal with a VCR
not to mention impossible.
Tivo = VCR = PC with capture card. These things are all the same, they've been legal for a long time, get over it.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
The organizations fear that computer enthusiasts would capture those programs and begin trading them online in the same way that millions of music files are shared daily, which record companies have said has cut into their profit.
But "enthusiasts" haven't done that yet on any widespread basis. Nor has a good case been made that music file trading has cut into profits compared with the situation of no file trading.
The solution is not to hobble the technology (which is what killed DAT in the United States), but to prosecute specific instances of violations of the law (where users assuming the right to distribute copyrighted material to others where they don't own the copyright).
The ability to watch programs outside the home should not be an issue by itself.
Lots of people with RV's bring recorded shows with them on vacation that they've recorded on their VCR's at home. It's natural that they'd want to be able to see those shows somewhere different than where they've recorded it.
Basically, this Digital Bill of Rights summarizes a reasonable view and does not prevent copyright owners from pursuing legal action against individuals that violate their legally-protected rights as copyright owners.
Whether the current laws concerning copyrights and patents are appropriate for society is a separate, larger issue.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Supposedly I get a generational loss over direct digital transfer, but the stuff looks fine. I have the previous seasons of Dead Like Me, The Sopranos & The Shield on DVD now. :-) Along with a pile of moovies. If you're careful and use nice cables and keep it all clean, you can minimize the degradation to the point where only the OCD types will care.
And they cannot stop it. What are they going to do? Disable the Tivo's video output? They can dork about with analog protection (Macrovision) but you can only screw up the signal to the point where problems occur for normal "legal" viewing.
I really need a hardware MPEG2 encoder, though. :-\
--- Ban humanity.
>>The organizations fear that computer
>>enthusiasts would capture those programs and
>>begin trading them online in the same way that
>>millions of music files are shared daily
Maybe they're just a little behind the times.... this is already happening and has been for years. Even more popular now with the rise of Bit Torrent.... Maybe they should check out supernova
the content industry, which promised to roll out more digital programming over free television networks only after insisting that the FCC adopt rules requiring makers of recording devices to certify that they have technologies to prevent mass Internet distribution.
Well, they did. The FCC adopted these rules.
TiVo was one of 13 companies that asked the FCC for approval, arguing that its copy-protection system met the requirements.
TiVo then put a lot of effort into insuring that this distribution protection was there.
"Our concern is grounded in the fact that the remote access is not limited to the recipient's summer home or boat or office," said Fritz Attaway, the MPAA's Washington legal counsel.
So, now the MPAA wants more power over exactly who and how anything is distributed! Who here really thinks that any distribution is going to be allowed by the MPAA? With endless wrangling and mindless nitpicking, the end result will be that absolutely no distribution of any kind is acceptable to the MPAA.
Write your congress-critters, people. It's time to put an end to this farce! And, if all the congress-critters happen to be in the MPAA's pocket, maybe it's time to put an end to that farce!
If you goto certain sites on the internet you can download entire seasons of shows like 24, and Alias and basically anything else that is broadcast in HDTV. Perfect digital copies, no commericals, nothing. I don't have HDTV but I can download the broadcasts. I mean there were copies of the entire superbowl in HDTV floating around. The cat is already out of the bag people. TiVo isn't going to do anything to this scene that already exists...
Likewise. As much as I want to send the message that I'm fed up with both major parties, getting Bush out is step 1.
I'm not sure who we need to be blaming for the madness. The NFL wants to make as much as possible in every way possible. After all they are in this to make a profit. They also have very high costs. Stadiums aren't cheap, although in a lot of cases it's not the teams or the NFL that build or pay for the stadiums. The players and coaching staff aren't cheap. But you don't see any teams going bankrupt do you? Between the outrageous ticket prices, contract with DirectTV and contracts with networks for tv coverage, the NFL is making money hand over fist. Why then do they screw over the fans? My brother has DirectTV and he tapes games and sends them to my dad so that my dad can watch them. He uses his pvr and then burns them to dvd. How is that any different than taping something on your vcr and loaning it to a friend? Or taping it with your pvr and then throwing it up on whatever p2p app tickles your fancy? It's not like you can go to the local video store and buy the game on dvd. Some TV Shows are the same way... I have a pretty large collection of movies that I have purchased. Some on DVD and a lot on VHS. I've also downloaded a few shows off of the web. Scrubs (no dvd avail yet) and Family Guy (before it was avail in the US on dvd) are the two main ones. I would have gladly bought them on dvd but couldn't. And now I find myself wanting to replace all of my vhs movies with dvd versions. I don't particularly like vhs. The quality is lacking and some of my tapes are beginning to show their age. It would be nice if I could trade in my vhs copies for dvd copies... with a small fee for the cost of the materials or something. Maybe the old movie and $2 to cover costs... but that will never happen. They won't let you upgrade to new media and they don't even want you to copy your vhs tapes to dvd. If you do that, they aren't making any money. So instead you should go and buy all of the movies you already own so that you can have them on the media that you want them on. And 5 or 10 years from now when the media shifts once again. Some claim that we aren't buying the movies, we are licensing the content... if that's the case then why can't we move that content to whatever media we want it on? If we record something on Tivo and then want to move it to a laptop so we can take it with us for a long flight or whatever, what is wrong with that?
How is it that one careless match can start a forest fire, but it takes a whole box to start a campfire?
I'm sick of this shit. What about video capture cards on their PC's or VHS recorders and DVD burners... this is rediculous.
I've been tossing around the idea for a while now, but now I'm sold. Being a consumer I speak with my money. For the same reason I go to concerts to support artists, I'm going to buy a TIVO.
Maybe others will too...
-Mark
Dovie'andi se tovya sagain.
Thanks for that insight Mr. Gates.
A reasonable compromise is to require TVs and other devices to recognize a copyright bit, and when they see it, embed meta-data to the signal that will uniquely identify any downstream digital or even good-quality analog copies. This addition of meta-data can even introduce some loss-of-signal up to a point for audio and video, much the way steganographic hiding of data in a picture introduces loss. Assuming the copyright bit is preserved, such meta-data additions would accumulate with each copy, as would lossiness.
Granted, the "traceability" aspect of such technology can be defeated or weakend by resampling or digital-analog-digital conversion, but it would deter casual copiers if they knew they could easily be traced. This would let the entertainment industry focus its efforts on those deliberately ripping them off en masse.
This does have civil-liberties implications, in that if everything is flagged "copyright" and 5 years from now someone aquires a DVD you burned, they'll know when it was made and what device recorded it. In a Big Brother society, this could be A Bad Thing. But not as bad as not being allowed to make the recording in the first place.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
"TiVo says the system is secure. I say its source code will end up on the box. You do the math."
;)
What math?
Are you implying that something is insecure just because the source code is available?
I can't believe Slashdot didn't jump all over you for that - so I guess I'll start
Implementing laws that make manufacturers liable for how their products MIGHT be used IS JUST PLAIN WRONG!
TiVO is not selling a product or service with the deliberate intention to break the law--it has a legitimate use. Furthermore, although it is possible to use the new TiVO to unlawfully distribute copyrighted material, to do so would requires deliberate actions on the part of the user. Such users should be the ones RIAA et al go after, NOT TiVO or ReplayTV, or ATI or nVidia or any of their *law-abiding* customers.
The same goes for Smith and Wesson. They do not sell products specifically for the purpose of killing people. Of course, anyone who says they cannot be easily used to do so would be a fool, but guns have legitimate, legal uses. A former minister of our family's church owned several guns--several generations of his family have been medal-winning, olympic-calibre target shooters (yes, target shooting is an official sport in both the summer and winter olympic games). Even today, in remote areas of the far north guns are still vital tools for sustinence hunting.
Where does the line get drawn? Far more people are killed in car accidents than in gun incidents (definately here in Canada, and I believe even in the US). And to my knowledge there's never been a TiVO related fatality. Does that mean that General Motors should justifiably be responsible if some punk steals a Ponitac Firebird and kills a cop in a high-speed chase? That's total crap! It's one thing to hold such companies accountable for wilful disregard of safety-related design flaws (exploding Pinto's and GMC's and flipping Bronco's). It's quite another thing to make them pay for actions of random criminals.
I think to change the law to make manufacturers or distributors liable would set a very dangerous precedent. As much as corporations have demonstrated the capacity to do evil, making them shoulder the responsibility for every single possible use of their products implies less individual accountability. "Judge, if they were never allowed to make that shotgun I'd never have sawed it off and used it to rob that store". "If that Camaro wasn't such a cool, fast gar I'd never have jacked it and ran it into that old lady's house going 120". "I'd never have burned that movie onto 200 DVDs and sold them at the flea market if I didn't have TiVO to record the movie".
Pure and total crap all around! Things don't commit crimes. PEOPLE use things in the act of committing crimes, and people who are willing to commit crimes will use whatever tools are at their disposal. If they didn't have TiVO they'd use a PC with a video input hooked to a bootleg digital sattelite or a DVD player and a rented movie, or they'd revert back to video tape. If all cars were 1982 Volvos some dumb kid would still steal it for a joyride. If there were no guns around, people would use knives, bats and stones.
All of this seems to come down to a culture of avoiding individual responsibility--even in the US, with it's history of individualism and freedom--seems to have become trapped in this attitude that the government ought to protect people from their own stupidity or immorality.
Then you would burn the file to DVD and it would include some TiVo-like menu system for accessing the files and selecting/fast-forwarding/rewinding the shows on the disc.
You already can transfer programs from one registered TiVo to another registered TiVo on the same account and network. The article states:
I haven't gone back to see if TiVo has changed their plan for burning saved programs to DVD, but this doesn't sound like what I remember the original plan to be.All of this complaining about losing advertising dollars is a bunch of crap.
I don't know if you've noticed, but those annoying little overlays DURING the programs are occuring constantly. Some of them are consuming as much as 20% of the screen these days. Commercial breaks are quickly becoming the realm of local cable providers. Soon, you will not only see overlay ads for the next episode of Law & Order, but also for Tide and Pepsi.
With that certain future, the complaining about Tivo's expanded services is just that. A whiny industry taking the opportunity to gain headlines by standing on a soapbox and proclaiming their eminent demise. When all is said and done, the push of PVR recorded media to a pc will increase their disbursement of advertising, not kill it.
If firefighters fight fire and crime fighters fight crime, what do Freedom fighters fight?
Dear MPAA/RIAA/NFL,
Consumers pick products based primarily on the content, not the distribution method. However, if the distribution method allows them to get more of what they want, faster, cheaper, and with greater convenience, then that will be the method of choice. The new technology has the potential to create millions of new jobs and generate billions in revenue for those that deliver through the new technology, or deliver the new technology. You're in the way. Kindly step aside.
Sincerely,
The 21st Century
Fred
"A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
-RMS
LOL U R TEH GHEY!!1!
Why on earth do these people try to stop us from enjoying their broadcasts? They're either unaware, or don't care, that even without digital copying I can hook up an alaog recorder (VCR) and do whatever I want with their precious broadcast. What's the difference? Electronic distribution? *yay!* Who cares? Do you think I'm going to spend the time to hack a system to send out old sports broadcasts? Old sports broadcasts are probably the least interesting things I can think of to watch after they occur.
I'm sorry, but aside from the electronic process, the technology needed to copy and distribute copies of broadcasts has been in most people's living rooms since the late 70's or earlier.
"Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
Working for an advisory firm in the ent industry, this is such an incredibly hot topic these days. We're very focused on what's going to happen when (and if) real VOD starts to happen. Once you can actually get 500+ titles at your fingertips, do you stop going to Blockbuster entirely? What happens when those titles are all recordable and perhaps easily swappable over the internet...and i don't mean by the /. user base, I mean by ma' and pa' that could even figure out KaZaaa.
There are massive implications for the entire television advertising market (which is literally on the order of some 50 billion dollars) which is massive compared to theatrical piracy (total box office spend in the US is roughly 8 billion). Further, once you remove the power and interest of advertisers to spend money on television, you essentially remove the ability of television networks to subsidize film programming and therefore reduce the budget levels and (implicit) quality of films shown on television and in theaters.
Although these types of topics have been on the burner for years now, with the lower prices of DVD-R / Tivo devices coupled with emerging VOD networks, this is going to become such a hotbed of activity.
There is a project on sourceforge called Freevo that allows you to make your own. Anyone know any other open source projects?
3dinfo@maficstudios.com
Let's start with all the commercials, trailers, and FBI warnings at the start of every DVD nowdays.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
What? Replacing one loser with another?
Voting for a 3rd party is ideal, especially in my state (California) where voting Republican is just throwing a vote in the toilet. I'd rather give it to the Libertarian party where it'll do some good.
I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
Timeshifting and avoiding commercials can both be accomplished with the standard VCR. No problem. What the VCR can't do easily is download onto my laptop, so that I can watch a show while waiting at the airport.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
Time to compete.
The only reason they have blackout, is so they can have a monopoly on the local market.
If it was aired, they would have to have decent prices.
Some stadiums would need to have better security as well. Oakland, I'm looking at you...
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I got my analogy sucked. Here's a better one. Imagine a band not allowing their music to be played on local radio unless their concerts sell out.
Sorry for the sucky one.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
On what box? On the Tivo? How would it end up there?
A guy named angle_slam talking about the Steelers... it just doesn't get much more Pittsburgh than that ;-) Black & Gold!
As a consumer of mass-market entertainment, how can I let the industry know what I want?
Are there working groups and other places I can go to participate in the how-to-handle-this-issue decision-making process?
-davidwr.geo - davidwr
at yahoo.com
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I can understand the fear and trembling among the broadcasters, the MPAA, and the RIAA - everyone who derives primary income from the control of distribution through time, but not withstanding the truly compelling Classic ESPN where we can watch the 1974 Eagles vs Browns matchup that decided fourth place in the AFC Central division ( don't quote me on that, I made it up) just what economic interest does the NFL think will be harmed. It can't be pirated before it hits the theater, it happens in real-time, and anyone who has ever watched a time delay telecast of a sporting event knows how deadly dull it is when you know the outcome, so what's their thinking? Any ideas?
I have nothing to hide. So, why are you spying on me?
That being said, there are MANY bigger fish for the NFL to fry, many of which would short-circuit this problem.
1) Sell secondary TV rights. There are how many hundred random channels on extended cable/satellite now? Allow those channels to bid on secondary and even tertiary rights to show games. This would take some money off the top of the broadcast contracts, but it would almost certainly be at worst break-even on a cash basis, AND improve interest in the league.
2) End local blackout rules. Most people simply won't be motivated to buy a ticket to a game because it's not on TV. They're either going, or they're not. Period. Furthermore, if let people build interest in your team by watching them on TV, they might WANT to buy a ticket later in the season. The fact that I can walk into a dozen sports bars within a 5 mile radius and watch the blacked out game further renders this policy ridiculous.
3) End NFL Sunday Ticket exclusivity. I can't understand in the slightest how limiting the audience for an easily replicated product to 12% of the cable/TV market is at all intelligent. Once again, while DirecTV may pay a premium for the exclusivity, it seems evident that the contracts with EchoStar and all of the cable operators would more than make up for this, not to mention that the lower costs would lead to competitive, lower rates and thus increased subscriptions ($250 is prohibitive for many, but $100 isn't).
4) End all other stupid TV restrictions. Although it seems about impossible to find the full terms of their restrictions, I know this - in any given week, only one network may show a double-header. The other network can only show one game, no matter how interesting the matchup might be. This is just senseless. Further, there seem to be other restrictions about not showing other games at the same time as a local team, and not showing a game before or after a local home game. These Byzantine restrictions hurt the sport, and I find it doubtful that there's any significant, demonstrable financial windfall that results.
Why companies cling tirelessly to old, closed methods of doing business is beyond me. They're sitting there trying to legislate away the symptoms instead of looking at the source. The "problem" is that people WANT to watch their product! Sports are naturally a rare sort of television - the perceived value of seeing it as it happens tends to override the desire so skip commericals or watch it for free later.
People want to watch the games they want, preferably live. Give them this, and the TiVo/sharing concern becomes a non-issue.
Seen any BadMarketing lately?
> TiVo says the system is secure. I say its source code will end up on the box. You do the math.
I don't understand what you're trying to say? Could you be a little less obtuse and cliche?
These days, I'd go with MythTV anyhow.
> TiVo says the system is secure. I say its source code will end up on the box. You do the math.
I don't understand what you're trying to say ? Could you be a little less obtuse and cliche ?
These days, I'd go with MythTV anyhow .
John Kerry is a Joke!
Don't they realize that Congress has stated that Broadcasts OTA, either by antenni or cable, must remain copy freely for the consumer and that the Broadcast Flag is to only restrict distribution?
God these people are getting a bit insane. All you need to do to share video is just use the video out into either your computer, or your handy dandy dvd recorder. But why does it matter? If nothing else, the sales of old tv shows on dvds should have shown them (ok, maybe not the sports people) that even if people have their own copy of a program, they will pay for a better copy on dvd ;-)
;-)
> I won't mention how easy it is to download shows before they air on the internet, as opposed to having to wait until *AFTER* they air to see them on tivo.
I wouldn't be surprised if we went back to the 50s style of comericals inside the tv show. It's reall a better idea since most of us tune out, mute, or fast forward comericals anyways. God knows those of us who fast forward comericals never end up buying new things
Googled a bit and didn't find it, but I'm sure Jack Valenti has given an interview in the past couple of years in which he said he thought he was right about VCRs all along. After however many years of huge profits on tapes, in a marketplace in which "Spiderman" -- an okay but forgettable summer prefab hit -- can still take in record gate receipts, the guy is still saying VCRs have robbed his industry. 'Cause, you know, think of all those tapes people made off TV that they didn't pay for. It's not that the market is booming in lots of senses -- it's the calculation he's making about how much money he's lost on those other supposed thefts.
As you say -- insanity. The most depressing sign of the madness is their total lack of common feeling with their audience. The more people ask for something, the more they instinctively resist it. The "spin" they put on legislation like this is often so insulting to their market, it's hard to believe. At some point it isn't just a matter of buying politicians, it's a matter of winning over the public. Telling us you think VCRs are inherently criminal is not going to win us over.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
Dear Hollywood,
I missed the season finale of West Wing this year and no one I know has taped it. Rather than wait until you re-air it in September, I would really like download or stream a copy of the show to my home so I can watch it. Go ahead and downsample it to VCD quality if you want. I just want to watch the show. I'm quite willing to pay, too. I think $1 is a fair price for a 45 minute, low bandwidth copy of a show that has already aired. There are other episodes of other shows I would really like to have copies of (I'm not interested in buying whole collections, but there are certain episodes of certain shows I'd like to own). Please let me know where I can go to pay for and download this material. Seriously. I've got cash.
Dear NFL:
I've never watched a whole football game in my life. You can do whatever the hell you want. I don't care.
Dear Music Industry,
Your prices are too high. You are competing against DVD's for my entertainment dollars and they consistently offer better value. In the past two years I've bought about 30 DVD's and maybe four CD's. And just so you know, I haven't downloaded music for over 2.5 years. Actually, that 4 CD figure is not correct. Last year BMG offered every title in their catalog for $7 and we bought 14 CD's. So it appears that, for me at least, the $7 price point puts you right back in the running for those entertainment dollars I was talking about. Oh, and by the way, BMG messed up the order and sent 8 incorrect titles. They sent along the correct titles and told us to keep the other ones (so we actually got 22 CD's for $100). It appears that it wasn't even worth the cost to return ship and restock those 8 CD's. How much do those things cost you anyway? There are a lot of titles I'm interested in but refuse to buy at the current prices. If you drop your prices to $5, I would probably buy 20 titles immediately and at least 10 titles per year thereafter. You would earn MUCH more off of me than you are under your current pricing structure.
Love,
DoD
"Can I finish? Can I finish?
And the only person I know that owns one is Brentano on G4TechTV's "The Screen Savers.".
It's funny when you start going into the discussion of PVRs/DVRs (personal video recorders/digital video recorders) in a crowd of unfamiliar faces. It's a known fact that when asked about his/her entertainment setup at home, a person will just say "I have a TiVo," when referring to owning a DVR, even if it's not even a TiVo. Why? Because TiVo has the branding, it's synonymous with DVRs and time-shifting video devices and it is immediately understood. Secondly, it's just faster and easier to say, versus saying "I have UltimateTV" or "I have ReplayTV" or "I have Comcast Digital Cable with DVR", etc. There was a recent NY Times article that went into this phenomena in depth. So when you say you only know one person who owns a ReplayTV, chances are there are more owners than you think. And there are more owners of other devices other than TiVO than you think. I'm a ReplayTV owner myself -- I love it, can't live without it and will probably never own a TiVo because by the time my ReplayTV breaks on me there will be other, better DVRs to buy or rent from the cable company.
Linux at home
which party is supported by Hollywood when you go to the polls.
Yeah your wife's breasts are better.
http://www.commaecho.com
Aren't there digital VCRs? HAven't they been around a long time?
Great nothing like watching a Football game two days later...
One of the important aspects of voting for a 3rd party is that when the percentage of voters gets substantial, both of the major parties begin to look at the 3rd party platform for issues which they can use to lure the 3rd party voters back.
Thus the Democrats have changed over time to take on more of the Green Party platform. My hope is that Republicans will see that there are a bunch of so-called "conservatives" who are upset enough to vote for someone else, and will begin to actually follow through with their fiscal responsibility talk.
There's no need for a 3rd party candidate to win, just that the 3rd party candidate has to get enough votes to make the the oligarks nervous.
Bob-
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
I couldn't watch the game live because I was doing something else. When I get home, I watch the game instead of looking up the score on ESPN.com.
I've actually found that I enjoy watching football "time-delayed". Besides fast-forwarding through the commercials, I can fast-forward through the downtime between plays.
No, this is about the new digital broadcasts. Under new FCC rules it will be illegal for any hardware to receive these signals unless they encrypt them and impose all sorts of restrictions.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
I would ask Hollywood to stop cheating on taxes first before they get to take advantage of a taxpayer funded service. All of those blockbuster movies lose money as far as the IRS is told - Hollywood just keep on losing money to entertain us out of the goodness of their cocaine ravaged nostrils.
The truth of the matter is that the cable companies are now offering cable boxes with DVR's in them.
The advantage is that you don't own the box so when new features (like HD support) come out, you just tell them take back the old box and bring me the new one.
Additionally, no IR blaster is necessary to change the channel on the cable box.
Really, it will be the end of TIVO and Replay, and I still own a replay aside from my nice new Scientific Altanta Explorer 8000 cable box!
Thus the Democrats have changed over time to take on more of the Green Party platform.
Or, from a historical perspective, the Democrats under FDR took on much of the Progressive and Socialist agendas in the 1930s.
The other precedent in the US is that when one or more major political party gets internal divisions sufficiently dire, a third party may be able to cut voters off from one or both, such as with the Lincoln Election. While the Republicans appear to my superficial view to be headed in that direction with the dominance of the Christian Ultra-Right (versus the Business/Financial conservatives), they have a few more years to go before there's any real danger of a party split.
If someone could come up with a consistent and appetizing set of principles to reconcile the libertarian small government and de minimum personal conduct rules with a pro-environment stance, you'd have a party that could manage to take large chunks from both sides. However, that isn't likely to work any time soon.
There's also no consistently powerful orator these days on these issues anywhere in sight, to match the stature of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Bryant, or Webster, so I wouldn't count on any radical changes in politics in the next decade or so.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
If someone could come up with a consistent and appetizing set of principles to reconcile the libertarian small government and de minimum personal conduct rules with a pro-environment stance...
Have you read the Libertarian party platform on the environment? How is enforcement of private property rights inconsistent?
More to the point, I think, is that simple enforcement of property rights is far more effective as a means of pollution control than the arbitrary setting of standards that the EPA uses. People and companies will have to come up with clean processes just to keep from polluting other peoples air, water, and soil for which the polluter can be held absolutely responsible.
There's also no consistently powerful orator these days on these issues anywhere in sight
I agree with you on this one. The mass media has been able to keep the message contained. Have you heard Michael Badnarik speak? The only time you could have is either in person, or if you're fanatical enough to stay up late watching C-SPAN.
Against a media blackout like this, how is a great orator to be heard even when found?
Bob-
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
Actually, yes. To put it bluntly, the measures the currenly stated pricinples allow, such as as described in the platform, appear utterly inadequate.
As an single example, the impact that XYZ-Corp's completely unfiltered coal burning plant has only a de minimus impact on the breathability of the air over the 1.1 acre my last house was on. The platform seems to suggest that the laws should be altered allow me recompense or cleanup assistance. However, this neglects marginal cost of enforcement actions: to wit, the cost of my proving that it was XYZ-Corp's plant contributing to the unbreathability of my air, the time and resources that XYZ-Co spends on proving that coal ash is perfectly safe, and the time of the judge and lawyers spent arguing over this drivel. These non-zero costs largely act mostly as "friction" losses in the economic system.
Assuming that the public trust is not betrayed by politicians in power, the economies of scale provided by the fiction of "public property" make enforcement economically practical. There are obviously lots of other similar examples besides XYZ-corp. Libertarians far too often appear to ignore these economies of scale, the informational cost in economic transactions, the imperfect utility value of money and the existance of non-commesurables, the number of assholes already clogging our courts and spam-filters, and a number of historical hazards like abusive monopolies.
Furthermore, in a longer term view, I see very little in the current libertarian principles that encourage maintaining biodiversity, which is essential to making an ecosubsystem (EG, life on land) resiliant under climatalogical shifts-- which occur naturally even without human greenhouse intervention. Now, these shifts by themselves are unlikely to wipe out all life on earth, but it could easily remove the nitche for 50-100 kilo bipedal large-skulled mammals which (most days) I would find a Bad Thing.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
Assuming that the public trust is not betrayed by politicians in power,
I, too, wish the world were perfect. Unfortunately, power not only corrupts, it attracts the corrupt and corruptable.
So I must submit that your assumption does not reflect the real world.
As to the economies of scale, that is what class action suits are designed to overcome. Paying for the clean-up of your 1.1 acres by BigMightyPowerCompany might very well be trivial, but it's not trivial when several thousand or million people's property is being soiled.
Biodiversity is easy to demonstrate considering private property. It is private property owners who protect the animals on their land, it is individuals who choose to harbor and save endangered species. There are also millions of people like yourself who are concerned about this. I am certain that you would contribute to the effort if the Government weren't taking 80% of your economic potential, just as I am certain that those who already contribute would contribute even more if they thereby had more to give.
I know I would. And do.
By expressing a personal priority, you demonstrate that it is something that you would contribute to in the absence of government reallocation of my money doing it for you.
The prime plank of the Libertarian principle is that you take responsibility for the things important to you, rather than having your priorities set by force by someone else.
Just because your pet project(s) isn't mentioned explicitly only means that there are lots of people who believe government has no place dealing with it at all.
Bob-
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
Lack of interesting content drives them to protect what little they have left I guess.
You still watch "football" (ne, American Football for people in the real world)?
I don't