Slashdot Mirror
FCC Extends Set-Top Box Deadline
Kadin2048 writes "The FCC today announced that it was once again rolling back the date (PDF!) for the eventual ban of "integrated set-top boxes" distributed and leased by cable companies to consumers, from 2006 to 2007. The move was a slight nod to the cable providers, who wanted the ban removed altogether, and a minor setback to the consumer electronics industry, who would have preferred that it stay on schedule. The ban would prevent the largest cable companies from integrating their digital content security devices with their navigation devices, allowing consumers to 'mix and match' the navigation or DVR set-top-box of their choice with a standard CableCARD security interface device. Currently, most digital cable set top boxes combine these two functions, meaning that digital cable customers who want DVR functionality must rent one from their cable company. By preventing the cable companies from leasing them to end-users, the FCC hopes to foster competition in the set-top-box market and allow more consumer choice. A statement from FCC Commissioner Johnathan Adelstein (PDF) was released simultaneously. The battle has been carefully watched by all the major players in the entertainment and electronics markets, including Microsoft, which had previously weighed in on the side of the consumer electronics camp (pro-deadline), but then later agreed with the one-year extension."
I still think they should force the cable companies to allow third-party boxes, using open standards (even new ones).
altho I am glad to see the FCC doing something to benfit the consumer, I really wonder if this is their place. it sounds to me like it is a "monpoly" type issue and should have been taken up with the FTC. But like the FCC rules to make broadcasters switch to digital I really wonder if this is the goverments place at all to be.
I thought the FCC would actually take the opposing side of the Cable providers. Looks as if that's not so -- maybe the FCC should visit the homes of the top cable provider executives, get on their knees, and just finish what they're currently doing.
For the love of Jesus, let the consumers win for once.
This glut of reality TV ain't just because it's fun and interesting to watch average people compete for big dollars in unrealistic scenarios. There just isn't money to produce cool shows like Farscape or Friends anymore.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
Pushing back the deadline buys the cable companies more time to throw it out altogether. It's standard corporate legal strategy, where the only strategy is short-term - one after another.
--
make install -not war
AFAIK there are no plans to ban cable companies from leasing set top boxes, only requirements they allow me to use devices without leasing a set top box. Sounds like a good thing to me.
Examples like this do make me wish the FCC had control over Canada. The CRTC only seem to care about Canadian content percentages on our stations, and not about competition, innovation, or anything that makes sense. Maybe if more Canadian shows and artists were GOOD, we wouldn't have to baby them on to the scene with handouts.
Frankly I hate the cable boxes the cable company offers.
I liked the good old days when the sign can and I could split it to my 2 TVs.
Now they think I should buy/rent two cable boxes - one for each TV.
Now that I have a TV that has Side by Side picture they think I should have two cable boxes for that one TV.
It is geating crazy. My TV has a built in decoder for basic channels.
Stop these stupid cable boxes!!!! just send the whole signal to my house and allow me to buy spliter and such as I see fit.
but no choice in cable providers.
Personally, I would prefer the latter to the former.
Its a ban from cables boxes that are not CableCard (or whatever they want to call it) enabled. It (essentially) means that instead of the cable box "decrypting" the signal AND being a tuner, it must have a seperate entity that is responsible for each of those functions. This means that other standard equiment can handle the "tuner" portion. The "decrypting" part is plugged into the tuner, just as the "decrypting" part would be plugged into a TiVo, HDTV or other standard item.
You didn't say it directly, but it's worth bringing out: Stand-alone TiVo's record an analog signal, and digitize it and compress it itself.
DirecTiVo takes the digital stream from the satellite and writes it to hard disk.
Wouldn't it be nice if I could buy a box, hook it up to my cable service, plug in an authentication module provided by the cable service, and record their digital stream directly to hard disk? Why do I have to rent their box which only has analog outputs, control it with an IR dongle, and have the digital signal go through decompression, d-to-a, a-to-d, and compression again?
I'm sure this was also pushed back because the manufacturers of devices with cablecard technology still do not have all their ducks in a row. My local cableco supports and provides cablecards to customer's that would rather have them but the lack of 2-way communication certain niceties are ousted like the digital guide and pay per view(which is why I _enjoy_ the box in the first place). Our local cable company allowed customers to purchase their own HD converter boxes at local retailers and it was toppled because customers deemed the $350 price tag on the HD boxes outrageous so the cable company picked up the tab, ordered a slew of boxes and now leases them. Complaints about the use of set-top boxes need to be directed at the manufacturers of Televisions/VCRs and DVRs. They are the ones having most of the issues with compatibilty. Ask anyone with a Sony WEGA or a Mitsubishi TV how well their cableCARD works .. well it worked for a few days but now it's acting odd.
I work in the elctronics industry, and in the last year I have seen a tow fold increase in the number of sets with cablecard capability. I think its a good thing.
I have seen samsung, sony, and thompson (RCA,GE, ect) with cablecard slots for the pcmcia card.
so, will this derail production of set with this integrated capability? ive seen a lot of sets, and a lot of sets that arrive that customers actually lease cablecards from the cable co. here (time warner)
so, I wonder if the number of sets with cablecard that I see for repair will come to a halt in the near future or what?
seems like its heading down the path to being nuked altogether.
but, I cant understand why the FCC has delayed this?
the cable cos is still going to charge you to lease that pcmcia card, and its still going to be the same amount. now if there were rules that placed a cap on that, I am even more for it.
The cable companies can win a one year extension every six months, they win. I personally bet they will try this. Content providers do this with copyright and trademark extensions.
I don't know about you guys, but I have leased DVR boxes from Time Warner for the last 2 years and in that time I have gone through 6 DVR boxes and 5 HD-DVR boxes with the 5 HD-DVR boxes being consumed since August. If I had to buy a new one each time it broke, I would be poor. With Time Warner I just drive down to their office and get a new one. $1,000 says that no consumer electronics manufacturer could top that. You would probably have to mail it in at a cost of $20, then wait for 1-2 weeks to find out if its eligible for warranty repair, and then another 2-6 weeks for it to be repaired and returned to you. I always thought home-brewed DVR systems were a waste of money because I have had such excellent service from Time Warner. But if I have to buy these things, consumer electronics manufacturers can suck my left nut.
If they do it your way, how do they cover their fixed costs? Do you know what fixed costs are?
I'm almost positive the marginal cost in adding a new channel to your lineup is minimal; the majority of the subscription cost likely covers overhead. So they might be able to give you a la carte channel subscription, but there'll still need to be a heavy base service fee to do it. I might pay $65 a month for digital cable with the base channel package, and yeah they could probably charge me $40 for service plus a few dollars per channel. At that point, though, you might as well just pay the $65. The FCC might be able to help the consumer by opening up competition in various areas of the market as they're trying here, but they simply cannot alter your cable company's cost structure.
You might argue that a cable company is a monopoly, which it isn't, but it is a pretty small oligarchy when you include the satellite providers (who, in many cases, arent any cheaper than cable). What half of slashdot seems to forget is that even in a market with few players, there are costs involved. Those costs will prevent you from paying by the channel without some sort of heavy base fee.