Slashdot Mirror
FCC Broadcast Flag Struck Down
An anonymous reader writes "CNet is reporting that the courts have struck down the FCC's broadcast flag requirement! 'In a stunning victory for hardware makers and television buffs, a federal appeals court has tossed out government rules that would have outlawed many digital TV receivers and tuner cards starting July 1.'" The EFF has details on the flag, the official ruling is online for examination, and commentary is available from BoingBoing and Ars Technica.
This is exactly what has caused me to abandon the Republican party. The Republicans used to be the party of small business and the Democrats were the party of big business. That's not the case and it's getting to be less and less the case. The Republicans are firmly in the pockets of big business and the Democrats are ... just insane.
I'd hope that the consumer electronics lobby is stronger than the MPAA, but I fear it isn't so.
Part of the consumer electronics industry is also part of the content management industry. Sony's subsidiaries are both members of the RIAA and other subsidiaries produce consumer electronics. O, the tangled we weave!
"I have never won a debate with an ignorant person." -Ali ibn Abi Talib
Wow, that's great news, but isn't it coming a little late in the timeline? If sets on sale in July were supposed to have BF support, you'd think that they would already be being manufactured that way. The TV makers would have had to already have designed BF circuitry into their sets and be producing them with that capability, if all the sets in the stores by July were supposed to work that way, as required by the law.
I wonder if there will be a way to disable BF circuitry in sets which get sold that already have it built in? Or will the makers even tell people that they are buying sets that are BF enabled? Maybe some people will buy them without even knowing it.
This is fantastic news for products like http://www.pchdtv.com/ which would have all been destroyed by this. Means a bright future for custom pvrs no less and creativity. When you start limiting what consumers can do with information you start limiting that which is often what leads to greatness.
FCC had no business in mandating the broadcast flag at the behest of MPAA and its cronies. This throws the claim out the window, for now, to be picked up by lobbyists for the next run with the congress. I would not be surprised if it aint a breeze convincing the majority of clueless that this helps innovation and protects copyrights.
:). As long as I can still make out the characters, I would continue watching it..bad feed or no feed.
FCC had no right to assist the content creators, pushing them on to the HD realm. The market and the millions of tv viewers should instead spearhead that, and creators who turn a deaf ear will find out finicky eyeballs prefer HD over SD as HD compatible TV's get ever cheaper and between equally bad scripted shows, they pick the better looking one.
Wonder what the Southpark creators would do with HD
Rapid Nirvana
The reason the FCC tried to regulate this is probably because Congress *didn't* want to act. No Congressperson wants to be on record as voting to take away TV.
We shall see though.
I'm sure that the parent poster meant his comments to be tongue-in-cheek.
This is the problem I have with the FCC. They have no constitutional authority, but the executive branch has usurped legislational authority through agencies like the FCC, EPA, and other cabinet-level authorities.
The courts are right in saying that the FCC has no right to enforce the broadcast flag. But, IMHO, the FCC has overstepped it's bounds imposing a lot of authority over private industry, and consumer choice.
At some point congress needs to step up and take it's authority back from both the executive AND judicial branches. I could rant on, but I've probably bored you to death already.
When there weren't anything but non-BF devices on the market, the MPAA couldn't use the DMCA against the manufacturers. Now that everything is BF-compliant any device that isn't can easily be painted as a circumvention device under the DMCA and the manufacturer sued out of existence.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Yes, and in the name of protecting the artists, the whole process of the broadcast flag has cost our country millions or wasted dollars. There are all the hardware companies that... since it's May, must have already spent millions in R&D getting the flag working. Not to mention the people buying HDTV's early, or stocking up on un-DRM'd TV tuner cards before the July 1st deadline.
I honestly believe the FCC stopped fighting for the broadcast flag because of all the negative publicity it would have caused. Anybody who knew what it is would just buy a tuner card early and not be affected by it. Everybody else would find out when they tried to record things and couldn't... making them furious. Overall this was a PR nightmare, and was only going to get worse.
Recent events seem to indicate that the U.S. is moving closer and closer to some kind of state mandated censorship. A growing number of states are trying to pass legislation that would outlaw the sale of "violent" video games to minors. So far these laws have been struck down on constitutional grounds, but I don't believe that will be the final word on the matter. Anyway, once video games are censored or otherwise restricted, it is just a short hop to doing the same thing for movies, music and television.
So far the entertainment industry has strongly opposed anything that looks like censorship. But they are also so vigorously pursuing stronger copyright restrictions that they may be willing to deal. If they believe they can make more money by giving up creative freedom in exchange for stronger copyright laws, I believe they'll do it in a heartbeat. To get the broadcast flag now, they'll have to deal with Congress.
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
No more donating to the ACLU for me - it's all EFF from now on.
The ACLU was needed in the age of McCarthy, but the work of the EFF seems more beneficial to me right now - in the short as well as the long term.
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
While I think it is likely that the set top box and tv manufacturers will not change back after having to redesign everything, I would not be at all surprised to see more tuner cards. This law meant that companies making those cards had to get rid of a product line that could of potentially made quite a bit of money. The companies had no money invested in making BF compliant cards because there was no way any would be approved. Now all they have to do is start manufacturing the cards again and they haven't lost any money researching ways around this law.
all they did was rule the FCC didn't have the authority. It takes 1 act of congress to give them that authority. The only real hope here is this'll delay things long enough that flag free hardware will become the standard, and people'll start to expect it. Then again, if congress forces the flag down everyone's throats, what good is a defacto standard?
If your expecting a public outcry, don't. The content providers will just wait to start flagging their shows until flagged hardware is everwhere and everything. People won't know/care until it's too late.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Yeah same here. The neo-republican party is about as republican as new coke is coke. Maybe it's time America went to a 3 party system of Democrats, Republicans and Ex-Republicans...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Close. But as noted by another poster, it has to be a (supposedly) clever acronym (and/or terrorism-related name), too. Maybe they'll call it the:
Beneficial
Reuse
Of
Airwaves/
Defending
Content to
Assure
Secure
Television
Act.
At some point congress needs to step up and take it's authority back from both the executive AND judicial branches. I could rant on, but I've probably bored you to death already.
How? In order to force through a law you need a 2/3 majority. No matter how future elections swing, no Senator or Representative is going to commit career suicide by hamstringing his party.
Lets look at the two situtions where it's most likely to even make it to the floor for a vote.
One, Democrat president with a Republican Congress.
The Republicans would get HAMMERED by the media for attempting such a power grab. The resultant blitz would cause they to get swept out of office in the next election.
Two, Republican President with a Democrat Congress.
The Democrats would never strip the Executive branch of any power, because that's how they force through so many policy changes.
In short, it just ain't going to happen.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
There's a variety of factors in place, but if you posit that the average voter is intellectually curious and able to form opinions not based on sound bites I'd tend to agree with you.
However, this simply isn't the case. Congressional elections are viewed with much less interest than the Presidential election (which is ironic in itself) and voters as a whole don't tend to be intellectually curious OR well informed. So it truly does become a matter of money, which is where the corporations CAN influence policy.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
The FCC is an independent agency. It does not take orders from the executive branch. Its powers are delegated to it by Congress through the Communications Act of 1934.
Yes, but it's high level positions are directly appointed by the executive branch, and therefore, it is essentially an extension of the executive branch for all intents and purposes.
"When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
You were modded funny, but I have a feeling you might be right.
Many, many people still use VCRs (gasp!) to record their favorite shows. If you take away their right to record these shows , they may very well start rioting in the streets.
but corporations aren't electing these people into Congress. Other people in your community are.
Yes they are. Other people in my community are so apathetic that they'll vote for whomever they recognize from TV, and all major TV outlets are owned by corporations.
If you don't like that ... Go out and tell people why they should vote the way that you want them to.
Both major U.S. political parties support expansion of the scope of copyright. The problem here is the first-past-the-post system, which rewards voting against a candidate rather than for a candidate, such that a vote for Nader instead of Gore or Kerry is equivalent to half a vote for Bush. Besides, how can I tell people to vote Libertarian if there's no Libertarian running in my congressional district and I have neither the age nor the money nor the political science background to run for office myself?
According to the Libertarian presidental candidate for 2004's website, he wanted to privatize police forces. Is that not insane?
Personally I think that we need to do away with a party system, because political parties only divide the country, and real men should be able to clearly deliniate whom they stand with on any issue without neccessarily standing with said person on all issues.
Also, the two main political parties are money-whores.
SRSLY.
Hope that works out for you.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
This Congress and this adminstration are so firmly in the pockets of large corporations that I am having a hard time comprehending it. Review every decision made, every law passed in the last five years, and you'll see that it's been tipped in favor of large corporations. The Bankruptcy Bill? Authored by Visa. The war on the crazy man blocking our oil? Halliburton, Exxon et al. The Social Security plan? Wall Street. Copyright extension? Disney. Lawsuit damage caps? Insurance industry, pharmaceutical industry. Every single piece of legislation they've enacted has been slanted to corporations that have paid good money for them.
If the broadcast flag meant that you'd have to buy a whole new TV from Sony, then sign this Congress up! Sony's got lots of money to spend on Congressmen.
John