Slashdot Mirror
Broadcast Flag in Trouble
pdqlamb writes "USA Today reports an appeals court was not amused at the FCC's broadcast flag rule. Sounds like the judge bought into the argument that the FCC does not have the authority to dictate device design. The broadcast flag isn't quite dead yet, but at least it's in trouble."
Yeah, this was a complete legal smackdown all right. The only reason the court could possibly have for not killing the flag is a technicality. If they find that the plaintiffs don't have standing to bring the complaint, all it means is that they have to wait for someone with standing to bring it. Sooner or later, that flag is history. At least until the broadcasting conglomerates can find some other way to require it...
PS: First(ish) post!
Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
The broadcast flag isn't quite dead yet, but at least it's in trouble
This is by no means dead. When the entertainment industry can't foist something on you by the backdoor they use plan B: Ask the senate for a nice bit of special interest legislation.
You can tell the quality of your opponent by the cunning of their plan B, in this case their plan B is just as good as their plan A. In a way, I kinda admire the cunts.. :)
Simon.
Now what am I to do with the truckloads of flag-free tuner cards I bought? Since social security is going down the tubes, I guess it is back to plan B for my retirement plans: leech off my kids.
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
I refer the honorable gentleman to the discussion we had some moments earlier
I really hope this is the end of it. Even when the Entertainment Industry tries their end run, it'll end up in court again.
Court Says FCC Out-of-Bounds With Digital TV
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/22/21 33250&tid=123&tid=129
Jesus saves souls and redeems them for valuable cash prizes
Slashdot readership is not amused at Slashdot's repeated stories.
Just XOR the broadcast flag with the evil bit, sheesh!
Whoa! I just had deja vu
This is NOT a dupe.
Slashdot rigerously enforces the Dupecast flag, and makes sure stories are only posted if the flag is not set.
Or does that not count until after July?
liqbase
In yet another duped article
If thou see a fair woman pay court to her, for thus thou wilt obtain love
We start with: "Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world...You've gone too far. Are washing machines next?" (Edwards)
Followed by: "You can't regulate washing machines. You can't rule the world." (Sentelle)
Tag team attack! Now if only we could get one of them to hear the lokitorrent.com case or, better yet, outlaw the RIAA...
www.kiwilyrics.com - a wiki for lyrics
The broadcast flag may be dead... ... but the repeat flag is still living strong!
I dont have explicit authority to fine people for looking at me in a funny way, but it isn't outlawed. I'm woindering what mandate the FCC has to go past explicit authority.
I knew it! A day will come when washing machines rule the world.
Take that! And that, you evil dirt!
Atlast, the world will be clean of all filth, grime and stained clothes. MUWAAHAHAA!!11!
It is official; USA Today now confirms: Broadcast flag is dying. One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered FCC when USA Today confirmed that broadcast flag market share has fallen yet again, now down to less than 50 percent of federal judges. Coming on the heels of a recent ruling which plainly states that the FCC has "crossed the line", this judgement serves to reinforce what we've known all along. The broadcast flag is sending the DRM industry into complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by bottoming out in the recent ruling from Judge Edwards.
You don't need to be Michael Powell to predict the broadcast flag's future. The hand writing is on the wall: the broadcast faces a long and tortuous future. In fact there won't be any future at all for the broadcast flag because the content industry is shrinking. Things are looking very bad for the content industry. As many of us are already aware, the content industry continues to lose market share. Red ink flows from Hollywood like a river of blood.
The broadcast flag is the most hated of them all, having been ruled against by at least one circuit court judge. The sudden and pleasant release of the long developed arguments in court only serves to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: the broadcast flag is dying.
Let's look at the numbe[BROADCAST FLAG INFRINGMENT DETECTED - REDISTRIBUTION OF A DERIVATIVE WORK OF NETCRAFT, INC - POSTER NEUTRALIZED]
Ok this is offtopic and I'm sure the super secret mod cabel is going to mod me down for it, yada yada...
All you people bitching about dupes got it all wrong, we need these duplicated stories on slashdot for a few good reasons.
1) without dupes there would maybe be one story per day on the front page.
2) without dupes people would have to resort to actually being insightful on their own instead of just copying some other comment from the previous story.
3) ????
4) Profit!
This sig has no nutritional value...
It seems that /. could use people who don't even fucking read the blog they're in charge of.
Why is it cool to post the same story 3 times in the same day, but a cook who grabs the crap from yesterday's garbage gets fired?
Most often heard from Slashdot editors wives, girlfriends, boyfriends or inflatable toys:
"This again?"
Seriously, take a moment from inspecting your own balls, and DO YOUR FUCKING JOB. Really.
Or go get fired from McFuckingClownBurger. This site is full of people who do more than you appear to do in the first 5 minutes of their 10 hour day. Is it too much to ask of the editors that they actually read, scan, or glance at the site enough to be called 'editors'?
A gas station toilet has a better story queue than you worthless bitches. Is it really TOO MUCH to READ SUMMARIES OF 12 stories? IS IT? If so, I suggest special ed tutoring. Perhaps you'll learn something from the fucking tards that can at least tell me if they've seen the goddamn puppy in the book before.
Why 'edit' this site at all if you're going to masturbate on donuts all day? Fuck, I can do that, and I don't even have a degree.
You know what really blows my teensy mind? That there was four hours between the time you posted your first story, and the time you posted the dupe from yesterday. What where you doing? Playing Minelayer? Eating samitches? Posting to Fark? Please tell me you do this for free, and that OSDN doesn't pay you to smell your fingers for hours on end.
Yeah, I amy be drunk, but I can still recognize a stupid dupe on the front page of the site I edit. Which is not this one. Which is probably why I'm not working there.
(Please note: I am not drunk this time)
Too bad this story didn't have a broadcast flag on it.
All the more reason to keep working to fight it ...
Welcome to yesterday
Kiteboarding Gear Mention slashdot and get 10% off!
Anyone can copy a show for educational purposes - not just librarians (or teachers).
This new chipset might very-well prevent people from recording shows on VCRs - which is allowed per the beta-max ruling that happend over twenty years ago.
IIRC the beta-max ruling applies to recording shows onto dvd (just another medium...hell some people don't even have VCRs anymore - just DVRs and the like).
I hope the judge lays the smack down.
I also find it disconcerting that it has been mentioned that advocate groups cannot contest FCC rules...since when can't the public contest a law/rule by a gov't agency...last I heard gov't agencies (i.e. FCC) work for us.
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
When saying that the jugde didn't buy that the FCC has the right to pass this rule, it should be noted that here was no actual ruling, and that the court might even decide that the case can't be brought by the parties that filed it (which leads to the crazy logic that the judge outright says that the FCC has no right to make this rule but he'll do nothing about it). Worse, with no rule set by the courts and the deadline fast approaching, manufacturers who want to stay in business have little option but to supprt the damn flag. They are less likely to spend more money later to redesign new hardware to omit support for it again, and if they do that will only drive the price of HDTV even higher.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
I know they are not experts, but the least they could do is not confuse apples and oranges.
If Slashdot Ruled The World, these judges would have been (-1, Offtopic)
He's not saying the libraries aren't affected, just that they aren't affected more than anyone else. Ie., nobody can bring a lawsuit saying the government exceeded its bounds, as long as we're all getting screwed equally....if they throw the case out on that grounds, I'm gonna be really worried.
I'm still waiting for a ruling on the Broadcast repeat flag issue.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world," Edwards said. He said the FCC "crossed the line" beyond its authority approved by Congress. "You've gone too far," he said. "Are washing machines next?"
*ROTFL*
If the appeals panel decides that the consumers groups can't contest the FCC requirements, it would dismiss the case regardless of any concerns about the anti-piracy technology
This may be a naive question, but if not the people affected by the FCC cannot challenge them, who the hell can?
So sad, so true.
So if I put my computer in the washing machine, can I record anything I want?
It's resting...
This rocked me back on my heels:
"The FCC's lawyer, Jacob Lewis, acknowledged the agency never had exercised such ancillary power but maintained it was permitted by Congress since lawmakers didn't explicitly outlaw it."
Especially since the 10th amendment to the US Constitution says:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."
Got that, FCC boy? If you're not explicitly given the power, you can't exercise it.
Lawyers! Damn their oily hides!
668: Neighbour of the Beast
IANAL, so can someone explain why this decision should take months? Can't they just get it over and done with?
www.eissq.com/BandP.html Ball and Plate System. Amuse your friends. Crush your enemies.
I worked like hell all day yesterday and did not get to read slashdot at all. Today, I log in and find a very interesting story, and for me it's the first time to see it. These stories inspire some people to write their congressmen/women instead of just ranting and raving about slashdot's editors. Your philosophy would mean that TV news stories that were first reported in the morning would never be aired again at night. Use your head before you spout off at the keyboard and start back to doing your five minutes's of work that is equal to some editor's full day of work!
It doesn't matter if the FCC is forced to repeal the broadcast flag. Manufacturers have already spent money to implement it, and the consumers probably won't force them to change it. Manufacturer's wallets are probably influenced more by the MPAA than by their customers. (As evidenced by PC manufacturers embracing DRM technologies and trusted computing.)
I bet that the flag will be repealed but manufacturers will continue to see the crippled hardware. Consumers will whine and complain but that will change nothing. The best we can hope is that it will become an excuse to sell you new hardware that is identical to what you just bought, except with a solder connection removed somewhere. The manufacturers then stand to double their money. Still, the consumer loses.
Do they have the authority to regulate birds?
500GB of disk, 5TB of transfer, $5.95/mo
Yes. You are completely, utterly, flamingly gay. As gay as Tiny Tim in a tulip factory.
Am I the only one who's amused at the footer? :-)
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
/* Steinar */
(This comment is of course GPLed.)
The FCC's lawyer, Jacob Lewis, acknowledged the agency never had exercised such ancillary power but maintained it was permitted by Congress since lawmakers didn't explicitly outlaw it.
Hmmm... according to the Tenth Ratified Ammendment to the Constitution of the United States of America: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. -- The FCC should not be able to impose sanctions on anything, yet alone private trade (the devices).
Video Production Support
The only one you'll ever see is the one that passed you into the world.
This story should be in the interest of nearly everybody who watches TV, yet the USA Today article makes it sound like it's only going to affect pirates, then has some vague reference to libraries being unable to use TV programs as educational tools.
Here's the problem: The broadcast flag can prevent normal people from recording any of their favourite TV shows. People care about that because they record shows all the time so they can view them later. People need to understand that what the FCC wants to do will give them less rights to watch TV how they want.
The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
Actually, because the broadcast flag is not in effect yet, the stories have been time-shifted. The other story was actually posted after this one. You're just reading them out-of-order.
Happiness is like peeing yourself. Everybody can see it but only you can feel its warmth.
I do believe this is the single funniest post /. has seen in a good long while.
... does that mean i can't download Stargate SG1 any more?
This may, in fact, work in favor of the corporate media moguls.
If precedent is set that the FCC can't regulate HDTV hardware implementations then they can legitimize their plans to enforce restricted access to media through the HDMI interface. Once the OTA signal is demodulated the FCC can't prevent the transmission of the video over an encrypted link. HDMI implementors are prohibited from providing unencumbered access to the full-res HD signal. Existing HD monitors and tuners will not matter since any new hardware with HDMI will not work with these legacy devices.
My guess is that the proponents of the broadcast flag are willing to lose it because it only serves to strengthen the fortifications for their next attempt at plugging the HDTV hole.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
It's been tried before; by King George, who was widely considered to be a combination of crazy and stupid. It turned professional smuggling into a honorable, even praise worthy, profession. Somehow I don't think people are terribly different some 230 years later. But our weapons are vastly more effective.
Their plan sounds like a good way to get a container of consumer electronics thrown in a harbor.
Unless the flag's fetures are trivial, it's going to be software. For testing, I'm sure that the absolute last thing that the manufacturers are going to put in is the broadcast flag checking. It's going to be an absolute pain in the ass to get it to work correctly. The easiest way to test all the features is to check everything WITHOUT the flag, then put it in later. That may be bad coding practice, but that's my guess.
//Do the silly flag checking //Just abort this function if flag is set. (Hack)
So, my hunch is that at the top of most of the firmware source code, there is a
#define BROADCAST_FLAG_ENABLE 1
and in the code, there will be more than a few places where you'll see:
#ifdef BROADCAST_FLAG_ENABLE
return();
#endif
Seriously, do you guys forget that there are other countries in the world that won't put up with this kind of shit? They're not going to make extra firmware if they don't have to.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
From TFA: "But another appeals judge on the panel questioned whether consumers can challenge the FCC's rules in the courtroom."
If consumers have to abide by FCC rulings and can be taken to court if they don't follow them then why would consumers not be allowed to take their rulings to court?
Well isn't this great? Now I need to go buy a new washing machine before July.
U.S. appeals court debates anti-piracy TV technology
It's being dubbed 'AntiPiracy' . Not Digital Rights Management or any other Politically Correct term. It's being shock valued, to bias the interpretation by the regular Consumers, and Average Mom & Pops. Mom & Pop VCR User doesn't want to consider themselves in the same light as the wiley Video Pirate. Seems to me an attempt to make it a little more palatable to the masses, and smooth the adoption via other means.
My cat's picked up a Hammer. HEY! Put down that Hammer. Put Down that Hamm...THUNK!
does anyone have auto-text for this and/or its kin. I'd sort of hate to think that we were still at the stage where they're each more or last handcrafted, or hand finished from a rough mold. We can do better.
And of course this is only one circuit, others could hold differently if multiple challenges were filed around the country.
So judicially, this could play out for a long time.
And of course, Congress could just pass a bill mandating the broadcast flag or expanding the FCC's authority so that they can readopt this rule.
Armchairgenius.com - Where everyone is a genius.
If the appeals panel decides that the consumers groups can't contest the FCC requirements, it would dismiss the case regardless of any concerns about the anti-piracy technology. A decision by the court could happen within months.
What this means to me if I interpret correctly is:
Although the judge knows well what the FCC is trying to accomplish, and doesn't like it, that does not mean that this will not pass. There are recognized examples of where this regulation would hamper currently legal uses, however, the regulation by nature is not a block to those groups only, but to the broader public. I get the sense that it may be passed, on the stipulation that the FCC have contingengies to address known exceptions to the rules, such as libraries and such.
More disturning is the possibility of it getting passed, while the judges are aware that challenges from groups recognized to be exempt may be deemed moot. This would mean that if it passes, it would be with the understanding that libraries and schools (not to mention everyday joes through fair use) would have existing rights stripped.
I don't live in the US, but I really hope that my American friends don't have to swalow this garbage. I can picture the judge's grim face when he made those statements. Hopefuly is fails.
If this passes, I seriously believe that America (as I believe American's view America) is lost.
It's a trick! Get an axe.
+1 incomprehensible.
the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
> But Sentelle questioned whether the consumer and library groups can lawfully challenge the FCC decision, since the rules in question affect television viewers broadly.
but surely the consumers groups represent large amounts of consumers generally. What does he expect? every US citizen to individually turn up to court?
is there mechanism in the US constitution to allow US citizens to vote on individual issues?
Is the FCC totally blind? Before starting to enact strict and controversial regulations, they should step back and take a look at the problem.
A broadcast flag is really stupid. It prevents Joe Consumer from recording his favorite show if he is out of town. It does little to - as the article put it - "permit entertainment companies to designate, or flag, programs to prevent viewers from copying shows or distributing them over the Internet."
If they had actually done 10 minutes of research, as i did, they would discover that the most common source of "bootlegged" tv shows on the internet is not from affialiate/local TV broadcasts. It is from Wild Feeds. Wild feed is a term used to describe the satellite broadcast streams that are used to distribute network television shows to local affialates. These feeds are all digital quality (even HDTV sometimes) and completely commercial free. The local affiliate stations have giant satellite dishes that recieve these streams, splice in the commercials, and broadcast them to your home. If ever you downloaded a TV show via one of the popular Bit Torrent sites, and found that it was perfect HDTV quality w/perfectly cut out commercials, you probably downloaded a show ripped from a wild fire stream.
Wild fire streams can be encrypted -- some are -- and thus impossible to intercept. The FCC should regulate these if it wants to make a difference. It would mean regualting only a handful of companies. Since the signals travel over airwaves, it is arguably in the FCC jurisdiction. Definitely less questionable than regulating the TV set that I have in MY HOME.
Obviously this will not stop end-users from ripping lower quality signals from local airwaves, but neither will the broadcast flag. Unless the FCC can find a way to stop me from obtaining software capable of recording streams from my PC/TV Tuner, shows will still be copied and distributed.
In conclusion, this flag is a bunch of bull shit. It will only suceed in stopping my grandmother from recording her favorite movie when she is on vacation.
There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.
Get an axe.
What about the V-Chip? Hasn't this successfully been done to a certain degree already?
But another appeals judge on the panel questioned whether consumers can challenge the FCC's rules in the courtroom.
Exactly who was the FCC created for if not the consumers. At one point do the people who prop up the government get pushed to the side?
the broadcast flag, will be required after July 1 .......It would permit entertainment companies to designate, or flag, programs to prevent viewers from copying shows or distributing them over the Internet.
I'll just feed the analog video cable into my computer and rip the high def signal. Should be pretty good quality.
Then I'll stick it on the Internet.
The FCC currently overstepped its bounds. The backup plan is to extend those bounds, so that the FCC can regulate the broadcast flag, nice and legally.
... exposing corrupt officials ... influencing how citizens cast their votes, fer Chrissake ...!
While extending bounds of regulatory agencies, maybe the administration can do something about problems with the First Amendment.
People do all kinds of unpleasant things under this so-called First Amendment!
Criticizing the President
-kgj
-kgj
If they get any kind of broadcast flag permitted at all, they will turn it on and never turn it off. You won't even be able to record commercials.
Just what is the big deal here? I'm fairly certain at least half of the posters here are capable of defeating this easily. We should be in favor of the flag, since it puts us in more demand.
This was a pretty big smack down. But, did it seem to you like the judges were a tad bit obsessed with washing machines?
Netjak.com independent reviews of domestic & import video ga
...the judge owns a VCR. Try explaining to anyone who owns, or has owned a VCR, that they will be no longer be able to record the television shows that they're paing to see, and most people will end up with the correct conclusion: We pay for this service, and it's up to us when, and if we watch the shows.
It's so f'in ludicrous that the FCC thinks it can dictate what you watch, and when, but then still expect vendors to be able to charge us full price for a monthly subscription.
In fact, if something like this passed, I would propose a series of class action suits which would limit our monthly cable/sattelite bill to only that which we've watched! If we can't record shows, and watch them at a later time, then we shouldn't be charged for that which we're unable to watch, due to scheduling, conflicts, or personal choice!
Think about it... How fast will the cable providers be pounding on the FCC's door if they realize that they can only charge us for what we watch, on a per show basis! And if a bill like this passes, than that same logic applies to this: If I can't record and watch my TV at my leisure, then I shouldn't have to pay for something which I'm unable to watch due to federal legislation (and/or scheduling conflicts).
A country of television providers would be calling for the FCC's ass on a stake if this happened, and I don't think it'd be too hard to bring such a suite to court and win, if the FCC gets their way with the proposed limitations.
I am a lawyer, but this isn't legal advice. If you can somehow construe this as legal advice, the circus wants you as a contortionist.
The 10th would only affect whether or not Congress had the power, not whether or not htey delegated it.
Even assuming that Congress *does* have it, it would have to explicitly grant authority for this function to the FCC (or any other administrative agency). OTOH, if Congress doesn't have it, there is no way, whether it granted it or not, that the FCC could excercise it.
hawk
All the device manufactors paid millions to redesign their products for it by June. Infact I bet all of them are already mass producting the flagged units as I type this to have on the shelves.
So in effect its already here and its too little too late.
Any manufactor not doing the broadcast flag will risk being sued or not being able to view content since media companies will see that 98% of all devices in 2 years will have flags by default since they already invested in the R&D/design to use them.
http://saveie6.com/
**WHISTLE**
Offensive foul!
Overused refrence to played out movie!
5 karma point penalty!
First down!
For those of you in the audience, the items quoted above are from a game called football, despite the fact that only one guy on the team actually touches the ball with his foot. (See 'British English' footie for a proper definition.)
This game is primarily played outside (i.e. in The Big Blue Room (not IBM, btw)) which may explain its relative obscurity on
Anyway, the poster above made a hackneyed (i.e. N0n-1337) reference to a movie that is ancient (i.e. more than 4 years old). The parent poster pointed this out gently by indicated that the use of the OldMovRef is cause for forfeiture of some karma points (i.e. manna for
HTH. HAND.
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
My take on the 10th Amendment is that all levels of government must be granted power before that power can be exercised.
The Commerce Clause is the eye of a needle through which our elected representatives have successfully pushed an elephant. Which is a pity - it's essentially the nullification of the 10th Amendment.
Still, I guess at least part of my original point stands, at least in part. Namely, that the FCC has to have explicit authorization to do the things it does.
668: Neighbour of the Beast
What did Jacob Lewis learn at Harvard?
Mostly how to subvert the US Constitution, it appears.
Mind you, my first answer is in the subject line.
668: Neighbour of the Beast
I'm not shure, but wouldn't the broadcast flag make it illegal for tivo to record shows that have the broadcast flag set? Can anyone comment on this?
-- john
"You've gone too far," he said. "Are washing machines next?"
Yah, imagine the day where your clothing vendors strike deals with the washing machine vendors and the soap manufacturers. Suddenly the RFID on you underware demands that it be washed with Tide and your wife's bra wants Woolite. What a mess! Talk about brand lockin'
.... banner ads over the top of your favorite shows
The court hasn't ruled yet. It's not going to rule for months, most likely. So it's very early to be saying that the broadcast flag is in trouble.
Mostly people seem to be looking at what one of the judges said. This is a big mistake.
Judges routinely will adopt a position opposite to that of what the lawyer before them has. By challenging the lawyer, they force him to make good arguments on behalf of his side, and to answer tough questions that he'd otherwise prefer to avoid. It doesn't mean anything as to the judge's opinion, or how he will rule. It's just a technique for getting information.
It's entirely normal to go in front of a judge, arguing on behalf of A. The judge will be very harsh, point out the flaws of A, and ask why B isn't better. When the other side has their turn, the judge immediately starts praising A and making the other side defend B. The constant is that he's putting whoever is in front of him on the defensive, making him explain his argument and admit to its weaknesses as well as the strengths that would be extolled anyway.
This sort of questioning doesn't mean anything about the eventual outcome.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
It is very nice to hear a judge say "You can't rule the world.", after all those monopolies and lobbying... let's hope it sets a strong precedent and some more judges find the balls to say that to more corporations.
After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
- The Tao of Programming
Man that must be nice ehh? To loose in one court and be able to say: 'Nah, I don't like that outcome, let's try another one...'
No Comment.
At least 2 out of the 3 judges were skeptical of the FCC's arguments, though some of them were also skeptical of some of the claims of hte challengers. I attended the hearings and blogged a play-by-play of the argument.
are running Java, so you can watch a progress bar of how clean your clothes are.
...
Progress: *********----- 59% clean, ETA: 5.32 minutes
Dirt remaining: 421 dog hairs, 15mg sweat,
Budget deficits are only one part of the problem.
What? The complaint is about how the government can't seem to balance its checkbook. Budget deficits, by definition, are the problem!
What the heck are you talking about?
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
I hate to keep screaming this one out..
What happened to fair use....
What happened to our ability to record a show...
I like to think a little more optimistic when it comes to such blatant "corporate love" in government.
Where is the EFF in this... I gave them 20$ to kick someone's ass.
I would also recommend donating a few bucks with a message similar to mine "Broadcast flag: Don't screw this one up."
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
The only thing that the FCC should regulate is transmission. What a device can emit or not emit and then only in the RF spectrum. Not optical or DC.
You should be able to receive anything that is on the public airwaves. I will say that you do not have a right to encryption keys but to the actual signal I say yes.
If you do not want my to receive your signal keep your photons off my property.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
FCC Docket 98-80
It does note that washing machines are exempt from this particular matter.
Depending on the electronics in your washing machine, there is a good chance it qualifies as a Class B computing device and is subject to FCC interference regulations.
Why, oh why, didn't I take the Blue Pill?
Umm the EFF is then plantiff in this case along with the ALA.
but don't they already dictate FUNCTION?
two items
V-Chip
Closed Captioning.
FCC REQUIRES them of TV Manufacturers.
How is the Broadcast flag mandate any different?
can anyone split this hair for me?
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
I am a lawyer - and that's not the way it works. The legal concept of Res Judicata (Litterally - the thing is judged). Prevents parties who are unhappy with the results of a legal suit from refiling the case between the same parties based on facts arising out of the same events. So if they lose in the D.C. Circuit (which, unlike most circuits, has nationwide jurisdiction) they can't just try again in another circuit. They can, of course, apply for an en banc rehearing and after that to the US Supreme Court.
I think that the people who copy these programs, along with people who copy music will continue to get away with it. We can play CD's and DVD's on a computer and we can watch TV on the computer, so I think that no matter what happens, people will still find a way to write something to capture that signal. This is providing they don't make it impossible to view on a computer, but I am sure that some people watch tv from their comptuer and do not actually own a television.
I am a lawyer (although litigation is not my area). The general rule is that standing to bring a case requires more than the generalized injury that all citizens suffer (The thinking goes that congress is charged with addressing that sort of generalized injury). If the courts find that consumer groups (weak - because we are all consumers - thus the injury is generalized) and libraries (stronger) don't have standing, then the most likely plaintiffs will be hardware manufacturers - who can point to added costs. Are there any manufacturers who have voiced opposition to the flag? If not a good plaintiff may be hard to find. Courts have held that in some cases - bascially no one has standing.
Did anyone bother to notice that the article only referred to the oral arguments in the case? This was not a decision. These were only statements and questions from two of the judges sitting on the panel hearing the case.
Its not a question of valuing clean air. Everybody needs air but you don't know who to ask to buy any. That's how and why it got so crapped up in the seventies.
Likewise, we all want our chests to remain unskewered but the carnage would have continued unabated if the gummint hadn't stepped in because the people most affected weren't buying cars. They were buying coffins.
There is nothing as stupid as a businessman who sees a possible threat to his bottom line.
Like people stopped buying cars because they'd have to pay. No they stopped buying cars that were unsafe at any speed. They bought the other kind.
Business sell cigarettes and guns, neither of which have any redeeming social value.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Money well spent then ;)
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
No government is without corruption. Is there anyone truly immune to an offer of a sufficiently large amount of money?
Satan.
-kgj
-kgj
The FCC responded to the court by declaring that court decisions could not be legally recorded on new technology since it did not employ their new broadcast flag standard
Back in the 80's, the congress talked about a balanced budget admendment and then congress and reagan backed out of it. Big mistake. From where I sit, congress/admins are unable to be responsible (or ethical/moral).
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The market on its own would disagree with you.
Since when did abstract concepts have opinions?
People don't value clean air, water, soil, etc. enough for their purchasing decisions to force polluters out of business, or to even change their production methods.
A clean environment, has NO MARKET VALUE. That does not mean it has no value whatsoever.
It is a myth spread by polluters that that EVERYTHING can be (and would by some magical process, automatically be) reduced to a monetary value. This myth is convenient, because it means that everything is available to those who have the money. (And the biggest polluters have most of they money). Even things which can not be sold or bought become available for cash if this myth is widely accepted.
Can I sell you your clean environment? I don't own it. But if you value it so much, then perhaps you should pay me so that I don't burn toxic chemicals?
Polluters want to be paid for something they dont own. It is quite simply: FRAUD and EXTORTION.
mere criminal acts which even Free Marketers usually look to a government entity to prohibit.
To allow FRAUD and EXTORTION to go unpunished, is to encourage and reward it.
The strongest advocates of a FREE MARKET sit on trillions of dollars of wealth which was originally aquired by acts of violence and military power, at far less than MARKET value, under the guise of divine right/will, manifest destiny or the justification of "spreading justice and civilization".
Now polluters want to be paid lest they will destroy the environment which they dont own.
No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
"What happened to fair use..."
We abused our right to fair use a long time ago.
We copied a few tapes among friends, They didn't care. We started mass pirating their shows, They stopped being so understanding.
Its hardly fair use when houndreds of thousands of people all download the exact same release. Entirely stripped of comercials, usually blurred out the network logo too. Who pays for the production of the show? Who pays the dozens of actors, writers, directors, producers, etc? Of course they're going to get upset.
Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
I don't understand why manufacturers don't or didn't fight against this. I mean really why the fuck would I want to buy a VCR, DVR, Tuner card, anything the fuck else when this completely defeats the purpose of buying the fucking thing in the first place.
Complete and utter fucking morons, I tell ya!
Huh? I'm guessing you are refering to the comment made about Congress passing a law mandating the flag. Note that the court is not saying the government itself doesn't have the authority, just that FCC crossed the authority given to it by Congress and the President through previous laws. If the court eventually finds that the FCC did not have the power to mandate the flag, it doesn't mean Congress can't go back and change the law to give it the authority. It's not as if the courts have the ultimate say as to what the law should be, the people do through elected representatives. Of course, this power is somewhat limited by the Constitution, but even that can be changed by the people.
Forget the whales - save the babies.
Simple, point a video camera at your television and record the sections you need for your right to fair use.
Oh, you wanted a complete, perfect digital copy of the broadcast? Um, where do you get that right?
Forget the whales - save the babies.
Um, try reading the post I was replying to and then you might get it.
But in short, no, that's not what I was refering to.
No Comment.
that's what they said about the "discussion" about what HDTV signals to use ... and look what that got us ...
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Those two items do not restrict use of the signal except where asked. For example, I imagine my TV has a v-chip but I don't use it. I don't have any kids so I don't need to restrict access to certain show ratings (what the intent of the v-chip is).
Closed captioning once again doesn't limit me. If I want it it's on, if I don't it's not. Besides it only allows MORE people access to the media instead of restricting access.
This broadcast flag limits my usage of the media in some way, mostly by not letting me time-shift. The difference is I will be kept from using the media that I rightly paid for and already has precedent which allows me to record and time-shift programs.
"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
The FCC mandated that support of the broadcast flag needed to be robust.
"the FCC does not have the authority to dictate device design."
I missed the subsection that refers to "unless it doesn't limit you"
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
I don't need a perfect copy.
Just something that isn't the equivalent of a cam view.
I can live with vhs quality. (My digital captures are not even high quality as I'm very particular about wasting disk space)
The point is, right now I have mythtv grab all of my programming including my HBO's. I use a serial line to my motorola cable box. With broadband access, channel line up, and a "for pay" series of channels the cable bill is actually rather high.
I rarely watch television when it is supposed to be on and I don't give copies to my friends. It's too much effort to burn a copy to dvd-r or even copy it to a 20gb usb drive. Call it compliance through laziness.
So what's wrong with wanting to record television I pay for and wanting to watch it in the way it the broadcast was distributed?
Nothing...
Nothing except the labels want me to pay for that right too.
Additionally, I don't even watch it on my monitor. I output the video stream through a dxr3 (very nice quality, but a bit of a processor hits when transcoding from say mpeg4 to mpeg2).
All of this tied into an active video switcher that kicks in when my DVD player or PC begins outputing video.
All of this screams fair use. I paid for it... I get to watch it. And if you complain that I watch it when I want... well someone already decided I could... ala vcr.
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
I suspect a good appellate attorney worries more when a judge sleeps through his arguments in dead silence than when he rises to challenge them openly.
Then promptly ignore me. :-)
Forget the whales - save the babies.
The V-Chip and Closed Captioning were required by the FCC based on CONGRESSIONAL decisions. The FCC introduced the Broadcast Flag on their own, which may be exceeding the limits of their authority.
So in other words, instead of lets just try another one, he should have said, "let's just buy the congressional approval"?
The answer is the same place: the Constitution.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it mention any restrictions on digital copies. Somewhere in the Constitution it states that all rights not mentioned are held by the people (or something similar, perhaps it mentions states but states are just a set of people).
I fumbled it a bit at the end there, but my main point is that you, as a citizen of the USA, have the right to do anything not specifically forbidden.
As a society, we've been losing touch with that over the last 5 or so years; now, people expect that they can't do most things, unless given permission.
But that's what happens when you go to war under false pretenses, I suppose.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
To loose in one court
"lose".
Bah! I think it is all a /*BIG*/ waste of time... The Flag should be dropped and banned.
... I'd be in your 'Fans' list.
LilMikey.com... I'll stop doing it when you sto
The Constitution gives the Congress the explicit right to govern copyright and intellectual property issues in Section 8, clause 8. So I was wondering where one thinks they get a right to a perfect digital copy of someone else's copyrighted work when the Congress has done no such thing. In fact, they've said quite the opposite.
Trust me, I entirely agree with your main point, but I don't think that we have rights over other people's property.
Forget the whales - save the babies.
You have no absolute right to have a copy of anyone else's copyrighted work. See my other response.
Forget the whales - save the babies.
Again...
/privledge/.
Just because you keep saying something does not make it true.
I've already been entitled to that
Let me quote something from ce.org... which was originally a press release.
"The Supreme Court held on January 17, 1984 that a product cannot be banned simply because some, or even most, of its uses would result in copyright infringement. Rather, manufacturers and retailers have a right to sell a product if it is capable of any commercially significant non-infringing uses. On only this basis, the Supreme Court allowed the consumer VCR to remain in stores."
There is far more to the article.
The term "Perfect Digital Copy" is a bit of a loose one as well. I would hope someone can define it in exact terms so that I can comply with this non-existant statute.
Nothing forbids it and nothing grants it precisely... other then the fair use act which did not define quality as a factor in determining that right.
Too bad this one is a bit of a late punch in the face, but I've been busy.
Same concept, same fundamental proceedures and all the entitlement I require.
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra