pcHDTV Card Available, Legal for Now

corby writes "pcHDTV has announced that their new HD-3000 Hi Definition Television Card will be shipping tomorrow, November 8th. The card is supported under Linux, and captures NTSC and ATSC video streams. It also ignores the Broadcast Flag, which means that it will be illegal in the States starting July 1st, 2005, under a recent FCC Order. If you are interested in being able to make your own decisions about what you can do with broadcast HDTV content, this is your last, best, chance."

Comments

Why?

[boohiss]

Could someone explain what the broadcast flag is, and why it's going to be illegal to ignore it?

Re:Why?

[CountBrass]

In essence it's a DRM flag that says "don't allow this broadcast to be copied, recorded or anything else". So you can't record it to video tape or on your Tivo or any other device. Outrageous really as it goes against an explicit Supreme Court Ruling.

This card ignores that flag...

(As an aside: for a long, long time I bemoaned the fact that we in the UK had no written constituiton and was jealous that the US did. And then you got Dubyah. Twice. And I rejoiced that we have an unelected head of state and no written constitution that politicians can ignore whenever they pack enough like minded jurists into the supreme court. But then I remembered we've got Blair and no limitation on how often he can be re-elected...)

Re:Why?

[mark-t]

Something I'm not seeing here is what is to stop _software_ (which does the recording, if the HDTV hardware is part of PC card), from ignoring this flag?

We all remember what happened with DeCSS, after all...

Re:Why?

[cpt kangarooski]

Sony vs. Universal did exactly what you describe: they ruled that recording programs for the purpose of timeshifting was fair-use. Call this an "entire species" if you like, but that's what the decision said.

I disagree. From the opinion:

Thus, although every commercial use of copyrighted material is presumptively an unfair exploitation of the monopoly privilege that belongs to the owner of the copyright, noncommercial uses are a different matter. A challenge to a noncommercial use of a copyrighted work requires proof either that the particular use is harmful, or that if it should become widespread, it would adversely affect the potential market for the copyrighted work. Actual present harm need not be shown; such a requirement would leave the copyright holder with no defense against predictable damage. Nor is it necessary to show with certainty that future harm will result. What is necessary is a showing by a preponderance of the evidence that some meaningful likelihood of future harm exists. If the intended use is for commercial gain, that likelihood may be presumed. But if it is for a noncommercial purpose, the likelihood must be demonstrated.

In this case, respondents failed to carry their burden with regard to home time-shifting.

(emphasis mine). The Court did not say that in every case, home time shifting was a fair use. Only that it was insofar as it was looked at in the Sony case. Now, I grant that plaintiffs are going to have a godawful hard time, but the possibility is still open.

This is entirely within the framework of fair use, which is a rule of equity that hinges entirely on an examination of the facts of each case to such a degree that it's virtually impossible to establish a thorough test.

However, that in no way means that fair use is "merely" a defense: it is not. It is a gap in the applicability of copyright (and DMCA) law.

Meh. Fair use is unlike the other exemptions in that in practice it isn't like rebutting the prima face case. But yes, it is in the 107-122 range.

Re: prior art, well, fair use doesn't invalidate a copyright. It's not only highly personal, but it's circumstance limited. Again, it seems most similar to self defense in a criminal case.

As for the DMCA, however, there is disagreement. 1201 et al deal with causes of action for circumvention and such, not infringement, and fair use is traditionally only relevant for infringement. And the DMCA says that it doesn't enlarge fair use, so if circumvention is outside the scope of infringement, then fair use doesn't apply.

In order for fair use to apply to the DMCA, those sections will need to be under the copyright power, and fair use will need to be a constitutionally required doctrine applying to anything under the copyright power. Both issues remain to be seen.

Lastly, the broadcast flag will not fall under anything *but* copyright law, or an extension thereof, like the DMCA.

The only cases I've heard that seem useful for that are Martignon, the similar bootlegging case out on the west coast, IIRC, the Trade-Mark cases, etc.

Still not a very solid claim. Though I do agree, personally (and that fair use applies constitutionally to all copyright power exercises). But the courts don't often listen to me.

If you read the Sony vs. Universal decision, there is a lot of commentary by the judge

Justice, not judge, unless you're talking about the district or circuit opinions, which are rarely read.

US Laws

[Clappingman]

Perhaps a publicly available hardware hack would be the answer to such legislation? I mean deCSS worked well for everyone, no?

Have the older card, works great

[YetAnotherName]

I've got the older pcHDTV card for Linux, the so-called model 2000, and it works great. With a RAID array and three quarters of a terabyte of storage, I've been legally time-shifting broadcast HDTV. (You've got to see the cute freckles on Jennifer Garner on Alias!)

I will go ahead and buy one of the new ones, too; it would be nice to do dual-stream recording.

And Linux only. Does it get any better than that?

Re:Have the older card, works great

[Pipermalibu]

Yes it can get better than that. Many, many areas of the country do not broadcast HDTV, and even then...who the hell wants to watch network TV? I want to see my Six Feet Under or Movies or Discovery in HDTV. So when someone finally gets the idea of controlling a sat or cable box AND records HDTV AND ignores the broadcast flag....THEN they will have a TOTAL winner. No matter what OS they support!

pcHDTV

[Silwenae]

This is good to see, they've been out of stock, what, going on two months now? I've been (im)patiently awaiting buying one of these to build my Myth box.

The card itself won't be illegal as the headline implies, but it will be illegal to import any card or component that ignores the Broadcast flag. Any cards or tuners built and installed prior to July 1st, 2005 will be grandfathered in and should work just fine.

This is one of they key reasons to support the EFF - visit their HDTV Action Center and and learn more about the Broadcast Flag. The second link about the Broadcast Flag has some great information and links to building a HTPC for multiple OS's and exactly what the federal government is trying to do.

I've very disappointed by the FCC's decision - it shouldn't be up to Hollywood to decide what TV I can and can't record and when I want to watch it. This battle has been fought (and won!) before, and here is the government messing with it again.

Support the EFF and make your voice heard!

Re:pcHDTV

[Enry]

Lessee...

Reduced the size of government? Check
Balanced the budget? Check
Sent the military all over the place? Check
Made Americans feel good about themselves? Check
Reduced unemployment? Check
Got people off welfare? Check

Yup. He's a Republican all right. The best one in at least 50 years. The current crop are Republicans in name only. They're certainly not conservative, unless you count that whole 'moral values' thing.

I'm more interested in a video card

[EmagGeek]

... with an HDTV output... it would be oh-so-nice to throw 1080 resolution to my 42" HDTV..

I haven't seen any thus far... has anyone else?

Re:I'm more interested in a video card

[cruelworld]

Is that DVI-D (i.e. digital) or analog DVI?

Re:I'm more interested in a video card

[Anonymous Coward]

Being that I've tried this within the last few weeks, I can say that simply having a DVI input on the TV isn't enough. The TV's input uses a different format than the computer's output. We were able to get it to sync at 1080 (nothing lower would even work), but about a 50-75 pixel border was missing around all 4 sides of the screen. Not exactly what I was looking for.

You have to adjust for the overscan. You can do this in your TV's service menu. I have done this with my Sony WEGA.

Broadcase Flag?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't this an OTA HD tuner card? Will the broadcast flag even be used for this type of signal? I though it was reserved for Cable/Satellite and over the air signals were in the clear?

HDTV Cable and Satellite still a no go?

[Famatra]

According to the EFF's, article here, on how to build a PVR, there are no cards to get High Definition Cable or Satellite. Time is running out to get these features into a card before next summer ;).

Anyone know if they've made a card for HDTV cable or satellite?

Re:HDTV Cable and Satellite still a no go?

[Anonymous Coward]

You'll never ever see an HDTV card that works directly from a cable or satellite feed. Just like there are no cards which work directly with nonHDTV encrypted content. That won't ever happen so put that out of your mind.

What you can do and is feed from you Sat box's Svideo out to your PVR card which is what most people have to do. Then you have to use an IR blaster so your Tuner gets set to the right channel to record.

Personally IMHO unless you just get broadcast basic which is unencrypted just get a Tivo from your Sat company. Otherwise the whole tie up the TV because you have to tune to the same channel your recording thing blows.

Oh that or download everyhting from alt.binaries.multimedia which lets you A) not have to worry about buying any hardware B) most TV shows have the commercials editted out. I honestly don't even use my PVR anymore since I can download anything I need.

I dunno ....

[YeeHaW_Jelte]

.. but how big is the chance that HDTV, when(if) it finally gets adopted, will be broadcasted on air-waves? I mean, here in the Netherlands, the television antenna's are being slowly dismantled because almost all homes either are connected to cable or can receive via a satellite dish.

Re:Not a big deal

[Zorilla]

Most TV tuners are multiformat. My BT878 can do NTSC, PAL, SECAM, you name it. This is probably also true for HD, as nothing needs to change in the DSP to adapt to a different format.

Re:Not a big deal

[smurf1974]

Digital content is not broadcast using ATSC in europe. We use the DVB standard.

They are both supersets of MPEG-2 but service information is encoded in a different way, and the tuner hardware is also different. And then there is the whole PAL/NTSC issue, but I'm not sure it applies to HDTV and almost all tv's nowdays can display both NTSC and PAL anyway.

But why?

[jandersen]

I mean why would anyone want to own a HDTV not to mention an card to stick into a PC? TV is bad enough at the current low resolution, I certainly don't want to make it worse by seeing it any clearlier.

Seriously, though - I feel I have seen far more than enough crappy TV in my life. Sometimes I watch the news - BBC - and sometimes, say once a month, there is a program that is actually worth your time, that gives you factual information without a load of stupid fade in/out, 'cool' soundtrack and other rubbish. The rest of the time it's quizzes, 'reality' tv, sport and worst of all: garden programs, house makeovers and celebrity chefs, none of whom have anything in the direction of taste or even common sense.

When (if) the day comes when you have to have digital and HDTV, I'll simply go without. And perhaps go to the cinema once every other year, when a film is released that is worth my time.

Re:Cognitive Dissonance

[TummyX]

Oh, and if your neighbour breaks your WIFI encryption key then he has every right to use your credit card numbers, passwords and anything else he snoops because they were transmitted into his house....

Time to Fight Back!

[gcheek]

Is it just me, or is EVERYONE getting so fed up with all the rules and regulations. If we're all fed up why not do something about it.. Look at the 60's everyone would boycot and riot, now I'm not saying we need to go to their extreme but it worked. Maybe we can start a petition and starting emailing the movie houses for EVERYONE's signature. If I can't watch a show when its on.. I'd like to watch it later.. If I can't watch a movie when it's on.. I'd like to watch it later... Now am I so wrong to want to be entertained by what I when I have the time? I'd love to hear others views! To: TV and Government... Don't like what I'm saying? Bring it on... Just post a reply and I'll give you ALL my contact info so you can come knock on my door. That's right I'm fed up.. and am not afraid. I download new movies tv programs you name it! If a movie is worth the $ I go see it if it stinks I don't.. until the movie houses offer me a refund if I'm not happy I'm not going to change. Make good movies and I'll pay to watch! or make bad movies and give me my money back if I'm not happy!

Funny you should mention that!

[SuperKendall]

For what? At least with alcohol, anyone and their mother could produce the stuff.

Funny thing - with computers and digital video cameras and rendering software lots of people can use now, the same is true for TV now!

Look at one of the most popular types of shows around now - reality TV. Just about anyone could slap one of these together on a limited budget and charge for broadcasts over the net.

There are other outlets for video that can have far less in the way of restrictions, and people will use them if TV starts locking down convienience. If people can't record things and share them with friends they are going to get mad, and there are going to be a lot of them.