New Bill Threatens to Plug "Analog Hole"

ThinSkin writes "In an effort to encourage consumers to embrace digital content, The Electronic Frontier Foundation is fighting a bill that would restrict owners of analog devices from recording analog content. For instance, if a fan wishes to tape a Baseball game on his VCR, the VCR would re-encode the content of that game and convert it into a digital form, which would then be filled with right restrictions and so forth. The process would be driven by VRAM (Veil Rights Assertion Mark), a technology that stamps analog content with DRM schemes."

Comments

What??

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry I gotta post AC as I modded before RTFA, but look at this paragraph:

However, devices sold before the date the proposed legislation would be enacted, such as today's televisions, would be grandfathered in, according to the terms of the legislation. In addition, devices that were designed "solely of displaying programs," and ones that could not be "readily modified" for redistributing content would also be exempt.

If all the old capture cards, VCR's, DVR's and the like are going to be 'Grandfathered' in, what's the goddamn point? I mean, anyone with enough technical knowledge to do this, is already going to have the equipment, and I sure as hell am not going to throw it away because a new bill passes.

Re:Who are they kidding?

[DigiShaman]

1. Prison is big business in America.

2. Most if not all polititions are lawers who game the system in their favor.

3. DRM will be another nail in the coffin to inforce the limit of free speech.

We know what kind of rules and regulations are being (or trying at least) to limit the freedom of speech in the blogisphere. Now the scumbags inside the DC beltway want to limit speech of the podcasters.

Yes... I'm paranoid. But given the trends lately, can you *really* blame me?

TRUST NO ONE!

Not the only hole being plugged

[Basehart]

This brings to mind the latest iTunes compatible communication device from Motorola which doesn't have a headphone socket. Instead it is rumored to require a bluetooth device with which to experience the stereo audio feed.

If it ends up never having a stereo socket, and subsequent devices don't have an audio output either, we could be seeing the beginnings of a closed system which stops "pirates" in their tracks by sending audio directly to a device which lives inside your ears.

Although there are bluetooth products out there which have audio out, they may soon start becoming scarce if this is indeed how the industry intends to keep music in a closed loop.

Re:More info from EFF

[etymxris]

Here's mine:

As my Representative [...snip...] on Thursday, November 3rd, 2005.

My chief worry is that the universal restrictions proposed by the content makers will cripple the use of home electronics and computers. In order to enforce "digital rights", proposals such as the "ANALOG CONTENT SECURITY PRESERVATION ACT OF 2005" will require any hardware or software without certain restrictions to be outlawed. However, such built in restrictions are fundamentally opposed to "open source" operating systems that have been gaining popularity in recent years. In an open operating system, restrictions can easily be removed by anyone, and so the free open software contributed by thousands worldwide will become illegal under the proposals suggested by the content providers.

I happen to be a user and supporter of such operating systems, and have already long been under the shadow of legislation pushed through by the MPAA and RIAA. For example, I have no legal means of playing DVDs under the operating system I choose to use. Software has been written and published that allows me to play DVDs, but due to the DMCA is illegal in the US. So I must go without. This is bad enough, but the proposed legislation would make all software created by volunteers and released without restrictions to become illegal.

The RIAA and MPAA make it seem that the only ones who would want unfettered access to the working of their hardware and software are pirates. This is untrue. Those programming free and open software that is unrestricted by its nature would suddenly have their work outlawed, despite having previously broken no laws. I urge you to oppose such unreasonable restrictions on my behalf. Thank you.

Re:This doesn't matter for us...!

[blincoln]

if by convenient, you mean free, then I guess you're right.

I'm sure there are a lot of people out there who just want free stuff. I end up being a pirate because I want to watch Battlestar Galactica, but I'm not willing to pay for cable and some sort of recording device in order to watch one show. So I download episodes and then buy the DVDs when they come out. Spare me any "you could just wait until it comes out on DVD!" comments, please. I can't be bothered to get upset about the idea of adding a six month delay to the time my $40 goes into the bank account of a multinational corporation.

If I could buy the episodes as they air for a reasonable price, I would totally do that. I would be open to a number of possibilities:

- The cost of a season's worth of episodes adds up to the cost of the DVD set plus $10 for being able to watch them early. When it's released, I pay for shipping and get the DVDs.

- Same as above, but the total is e.g. 50% of the cost of the set, and I pay shipping plus the remainder and the convenience fee.

- The episodes are super-cheap, e.g. fifty cents each, and I just buy the DVD set at the store.

Option three is the easiest, but options one and two let Sci-Fi or whoever take a bigger cut from the DVD set price by selling directly to me.

Of course, this will never happen, because for it to be as convenient as it already is for me, the downloaded episodes would have to be non-DRM'd, encoded using a quality codec, and free of commercials. I'm sure this would be a huge hit, but the marketing department would never let it happen.

Why do I say a huge hit? Look at something that cannot be reasonably DRM'd, like photographic (as opposed to video) porn. There are tons of porn siterips on p2p networks, but it's still a very profitable industry. They probably realize that the money lost from bootlegs is less than what it would cost to come up with a protection system combined with the cost due to lost customers who weren't willing to put up with the hassle.

It would probably do well even with DRM. I wouldn't be a customer, but there are plenty of other people out there who are happy to deal with iTunes (which I find crippled beyond what I'm willing to exchange money for).