Slashdot Mirror
New Patent on TV Forces You to Watch Ads
WebHostingGuy writes "A patent application filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office says researchers of the Netherland-based consumer electronics company have created a technology that could let broadcasters freeze a channel during a commercial, so viewers wouldn't be able to avoid it. Philips acknowledged that this technology might not sit well with consumers and suggested in its patent filing that consumers be allowed to avoid the feature if they paid broadcasters a fee."
I remember seeing this a few days ago and thinking they couldn't manage it, but slashdot has broken all coding records and implemented it already ;)
The one thing thats worrying me though is that I'm a paying member here on slashdot, so theres a bug somewhere still.
Ahhh well, if slash can do it, so can I - heres the posting I made in the previous article:
Forget muting commercials, this is TV - when the ad break comes on, will I be able to switch channels?
What about the advertising on the other channels that I'm missing.
What if I am flicking around the channels (from a sanctioned spot) and happen upon a commercial, will I not be able to continue to the next channel?
liqbase
The thing I don't like on TV are all the repeats... (or "dupes" as they're known in the trade).
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
So now we don't really own our TVs?
NINJA SPIRIT - The Ancient Art of Insanity
Yes, I would much rather pay a fee to be allowed to change channels. What makes them think that we will be happy with either option?
I have nothing to hide. So, why are you spying on me?
...a method to oblige you to have a TV set ?
Just one more reason not to watch TV. There is plenty of other stuff I can spend my time one.
~CrnbrdEater
Will I still have to watch the ads?
Seriously - its a good thing that there's a patent on this. The more heavily patented (with associated royalties, etc) something is, the less likely it is that industry will actually use it...
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
i think this is dupeness :/
However it's not the most intelligent thing i can think of - to sell people a system that has the major attraction of being able to skip the commercials and then forcing them to watch them anyway?
I don't see what Philips has to gain by making people watch the commericals anyway unless they're Philips' commercials?!
OK, so that's Philips and Sony off the list. Who's next?
How has it become so accepted by people that we should be bombarded by advertising anywhere we go? So far, there are ways to kind of get around the stuff put into media (websites, TV, etc), but outside we're constantly hit by billboards, painted buses, etc. Where's the outrage? Come on people, let's get some giant protests going!
The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
They send a guy to your house, where he holds a gun to your head and makes you watch every commercial and every pop-up and you can't turn off the radio (cuz the radio doesn't play music anymore, it seems)?
Okay, so let me get this straight. I pay around $50/month for the most basic cable package (not including internet, which is almost $50 more on top of that), so that I can have a number of channels to flip through.
Now, because of this technology, if I want to make use of more than one of those channels, which I'm paying for, I have to pay more just so I can flip around.
I have to pay an additional fee to access the content I'm already paying a fee for.
That doesn't work for me. If this comes to pass, I'll just cancel my cable TV.
--
M
Great so I can be channel surfing only to get stuck on a channel playing one of these ads?
Oh, you mean like cable?
Who are you apologising to? Yourself?
You would have to get the TV makers to incorporate this feature. I suppose the broadcasters could encode their signal such that it wouldn't play on a TV that didn't cooperate but then they might find themselves frozen out of the market.
The other issue is one of safety. If I was flicking past channels looking for the local news and my TV was hijacked by someone's commercial and I missed a public safety message, I might just sue.
Someone finally found a way to make to make people go back to reading books. Good work, guys.
I'm off to patent magazines that refuse to let you turn the page for 30 seconds if there's an ad on it.
No, we couldn't, because the content provider will set the "ad" flag during key parts of the actual program, which you don't want to miss.
OMG Clockwork Orange jokes.
'Nuff said.
it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
I have patented a reverse remote control, so their system can be used to lock the shackles on your armchair to keep you from going to the kitchen or bathroom during the commercials.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
When I buy such a tv, would that mean that I also get seats that strap me in when commercials are broadcasted? You know, to prevent me from going to take a leak or grabbing something to eat?
Seriously now, apart from customer irritation and a sudden loss in market share for philips' tv-department, what else do they get from this?
Aren't we all going to have a media center PC that we get all our entertainment through, at least I thought that was Bill's ultimate plan for us all. No problem then, I'll just minimize the TV window whilst the ads are on [but I'm not switching them off] surf slashdot to check for dupes ;-) and then maximise the window again when the ads finish. When will companies realise that whatever efforts they put in to try and force something on consumers will be out matched by the efforts of consumers to get around the enforcement. Nice try Phillips!
1) Forbid viewers from switching channels during commercials.
2) Forbid viewers from turning off their TV's.
3) Get promoted to CEO of Network 23.
4) Rule the World!
Bwahhhahahahahaha!
Honestly, if this was really implemented, my digital VCR would receive signals telling him where to cut out the commercials. My personal DVB=>DVD-process would surely simplify :-)
BTW: Would anyone buy a TV that doesn't allow free zapping?
Regards,
Stirz
...force you to watch repeats?
So what if someone grabbed one of those set top cable converters, or a VCR or similar technology and ran the cable through that first and then to the TV, effective leaving the TV on channel 3 and switching the channel by the alternate device? Simple solution to a dumbass idea. Worked when my first TV could only manage 13 channels.
piss off
It's not hard to come up with a scheme to let you embed arbitrary codes in the television signal so
that a television recognizing those codes will perform some preset function.
What is even harder to understand is why a company would want to piss their customers off so they buy the competitor's products instead.
Quick, someon patent a technology that makes me unable to get up and take a dump while commercials are playing. Maybe a special chair that's required while watching TV. When the commercials come on, metal rings bolt my arms and legs to the chair so I can't get up. Then, a little robotic arm comes out of the headrest and holds my eyelids open so I can't close my eyes. The volume on the TV is autoatically turned up so that I am unable to think of anything else while I am bombarded with the new Chili's advertisement.
Man, I'm gonna be rich...
-Arthur
Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules
Anyone know how long it'll take before this is ready for retail? I want to get in early on the pre-orders - this is going to sell out pretty fast.
This is really ridiculous! Shame on Philips.
I'll never buy a TV with that feature (if it can't be activated/hacked or something)
Yes but can it keep me from turning the TV off and reading a book instead?
Fuck you. The commercials are the stupidest part of my television-watching experience. Everytime a commercial break happens, I feel my intelligence is insulted. The idiots ensure that the commercials are as annoying, as loud, as irritating as possible in the chance that I might pay attention and buy whatever it is they are pushing, kinda similar to when you visit some neighborhoods in Detroit, and the pimps and pushers start trying to hawk their wares to whoever will listen.
Best example: Matthew Lesko, the screaming asshole who hawks the book full of gubbermint programs to help you go to college, get a job, get money to pay your bills, etc. This idiot runs around in a coat covered in $-signs, looks like Waldo of "Where's Waldo" fame, and SCREAMS ABOUT HOW MUCH HE'S GOING TO HELP ME FIND MONEY FROM THE GOVERNMENT TO GET A CIRCUMCISION OR BOFF MY WIFE NEXT WEEK OR USE CAT FECES AS AN ALTERNATIVE FUEL SOURCE.
Second best example: Recently, Burger King started a commercial campaign to promote a new chicken sandwich. To do so, the commercial starts this slow music with lyrics that go like this:
Big.... buckin' chicken...
You are big... and you are chicken...
Big... Buckin' chicken...
The commercial features some clown in a chicken suit with a saddle on its back and another idiot riding in the saddle, probably a midget. I work from home, usually leaving the television on, tuned to Spike TV, since there's like a 5 hour marathon of ST:DS9 and ST:TNG reruns, which seem like heaven when compared with the rest of the afternoon fare. Spike ran this commercial at every break during that 5 hour marathon every weekday for the entire months of January through March. On my wife's days off, it was a race to see who could grab the remote the fastest to at least mute the idiocy that was that commercial. Since then, I've vowed never to eat at a Burger King again.
So, now they want to extort money from me to have control over an appliance I've paid upwards of $400 to $1000 US for? Fuck you, you assholes. I'll toss the bleedin' thing in the garbage and start pirating even *more* movies than I do from USENET. It's getting so that I really don't need the TV any more.
Every month when my cable bill comes in, I pay a fee, I should be able to time shift and skip any commercials I want, I pay nearly $80 per month for all the bells, whistles, and channels I get and by god I feel like that gives me all the right I need to skip the stupid commercials.
Product placement is gonna get more and more common and intrusive as the old way of just showing commercials becomes less and less profitable. Wait till people stop mid show, hold up a bottle of dawn and smile and say how much they love how it makes their hands feel. What's old is new again.
--- www.f-theocean.com
I remember in the early 80's here in Canada, Rogers Cable offered "Pay Television" whereby you pay them for a cable hookup, and enjoy television without commercials... that's why it costed money. The rabbit ears hookup only showed commercials for the sake of covering broadcasting costs.
What happened? How incredibly greedy can people become? Television shows make millions, and cable providers make millions, etc. etc.
I remember they once talked about showing ads while shows aired, an almost Truman Show-esque "Joey drinks Coca-Cola" while watching Friends.
And now they wonder why people pirate television programs, movies, games, music, etc.? Because it has become not only inconvenient to watch, use, or play due to the number of advertisements in everything nowadays, but we are PAYING for them.
Just like buying clothes at the Gap, and billboarding their logo to everyone, what's next? Car Insurance companies will require you to paste their logo on your car? Or how about when you see the dentist? Will they make you wear a hat pointing downward saying "This smile brought to you by Dr. Dentafark".
Now possibly moving outward to an off-topic, but people question why youth today are so different, have a look at how many advertisements they see, and wear every day!
New Patent on Slashdot Forces You to Read Articles Twice (if you're lucky).
Advertising that will make your potential customers hate and resent you! Who wouldn't want that?
As with some aspects of Hollywood and DRM, it's just a patent to shore up a dying economic model by attempting to use coercion rather than choice. If implemented, it will simply create a huge amount of ill will and do nothing to change the fact that the traditional broadcast TV model is on the way out. Perhaps it's only a matter of time before one of the industry's tame politicians introduces a bill saying that not watching adverts is unpatriotic and must be made a criminal offence toute suite. Then we can all see grannies being carted off to jail for skipping the latest news about fruit-flavoured douches and even shinier floor polish.
Las qué passoun
tournoun pas maï
and then they force you to pay to avoid it. Maybe this will discourage children to watch more TV. I cant find anymore use of it.
They called me mad, and I called them mad, and damn them, they outvoted me. -Nathaniel Lee
With TV viewership declining and TV execs scrambling to find a way to retain the remaining viewers and attract more, I cannot think of a better strategy. I can imagine the discussion now..
"Should we try to improve the quality of the programming? No screw that, let's roll out a few dozen more reality shows and then really piss them off by locking their TVs during commercials." Or maybe it is a threat: Amercia better start watching more TV or next we will start selling TVs that bitch slap you every time you get up to head to the kitchen (although there may be an innovative weight loss plan there)
I guess the TVs that add this patented feature will target the same customers who purchase Windows Vista. You know the kind, they feel as though what they currently own has way too many features and capabilities and are eager to pay more for something that includes a lot of technical restrictions on what they can do.
Finkployd
They still let me mute it and/or change the channel I don't care.
When travelling, it's ok if the airlines lose your emotional baggage.
These articles are syndicated articles. So, they're not on any real schedule and will be shown at different times. After a while, these same articles will appear on late night /. .
just revert to extortion.
Nothing to see here, please move along.
After a word from our spons
<I don't know how to pause text, but when I figure it out, I'll patent it for web advertsements>
I wonder if it was developed in an underground lair? Using magma?
"We are all geniuses when we dream"
- E.M. Cioran
A few months after Philips are manufacturing these things, you know that Daewoo will start buying the same chipset. One quick firmware hack later, you will have a telly that automatically changes channels for you when the adverts come on. Or a DVD+RW recorder that automatically puts chapter marks fore and aft of every piss-break.
..... come on. If there is ever a reliable way to distinguish advertising from editorial content {such a thing actually was nearly mandated in the UK once but was rejected}, then it will end up being used in ways that benefit the consumer more than the advertiser.
I mean, seriously
Also, I don't see what there is to grant a patent against. Either there's already a spec for an "advertisement" flag, in which case making use of it to enforce viewing of advertisements should be obvious; or there isn't a spec for an "advertisement" flag, in which case introducing such a flag would be obvious. Patent application is invalid on grounds of obviety either way. Ting! Next, please.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
Or does the TV turn on when there is ads so that they can be sure I will watch it?!?
I was visiting the US recently (from the UK) and tried to watch TV. I just couldn't bear it - the adverts were just so frequent and intrusive that I had wandered off and started browsing the web by the time the show came back on. And these guys want to make that *worse* by removing the option of just flicking channels? Stupid in the extreme.
The owners of Slashdot have patented technology to force readers to read and comment on dupes - just in case they didn't get it the first time.
Freedom of choice Is what you got Freedom from choice Is what you want thank you devo (or A Perfect Circle depending on your bent)
nature loves variety::society hates it get your variety at http://www.monkeypantz.net
Extortion: That's what it is, plain and simple.
For the perfect anti-Unix, write an OS that thinks it knows what you're doing better than you do and let it be wrong.
The technology and the patent for sure it real, but there is no reason to be upset. Philips (I think?) have no power of broadcasting per se and the technology will only be in their box. Their idea is that various companies will bundle their box with TV sets or special offers and that the customers will recieve the box for free. If they do not like the "feature" they can always buy another box which will allow them to zap away from the ads. Of course, in the future this patent might prove to be worth Gold if the broadcasters themselves finds a way to enforce everyone to include this technology on their boxes.
Get over yourself, some of us didn't see it the first time around. Instead of bitching about it how about not clicking on the article if you think it's a dupe? It's not like we get a huge amount of new content here anyway.. it's certainly no Digg or Fark. You're lucky to get 4 or 5 articles a day anymore on Slashdot.
Producing and distributing TV shows ain't free. One way or another, we have to pay. Get over it.
I would really like to know exactly what this technology is about because I see it in two contexts, one annoying, and the other evil (and maybe not legal?).
I can't tell from the article if this technology relates to constraining a viewer to watch commercials when watching a pre-recorded show, i.e., something on a Personal Video Recorder (like a Tivo), or if this is something that prevents a viewer from channel surfing while a channel breaks for commercials.
The former (pre-recorded show viewing) is something I've heard about for a long time, for example I've heard Tivo has played with instantiating "popup" ads if you fast forward through commercials while watching a recorded show. Regardless, while this is annoying, I guess it's their call -- but for sure, it'll cut back on how much I'm watching -- it's already borderline for what I find tolerable with encroaching advertising (product placement, etc. -- anyone see the pandering "sidekick" product placement in Tuesday's Gilmore Girls? For Heck's sake, it was actually written into the script!).
However, if this is about locking in to a station during commercial breaks, I would be (and I assume the viewing public) outraged! How dare they. Aside from the egregious nature of this, I can't imagine it would be a legal tactic. Certainly any potentially "competing" channel would be up in arms over something like this, unless of course there is future collusion to ensure commercials are all aired at exactly the same time, thus attenuating the incentive to surf during commercial breaks.
Anyone know the answer to exactly what this technology is?
Thank you for pointing out how angry advertisements make you. I would like to point out to you, that without advertising Television as you know it would not exist. you're upset because you paid 1000 dollars for a TV that won't let you skip ads, but you don't seem to mind using that very (relatively) cheap device to watch hundreds of hours of free television programming. Such as, (from your post) Star Trek. Let me expand your mind a little with the notification that programming like Star Trek costs money, and that money comes not from your puny 1000 dollar TV, but from the 10 million dollars worth of ads that get sandwiched into every star trek episode.
it's big business, huge revenue, and it pays for the TV programs you watch. It's a huge industry, and although patents like this might annoy you, they are there to ensure that your children will also be able to enjoy hours and hours of B-list actors with putty-ridges on their foreheads running around plywood spaceships.
for all the content you want to watch. Leaving to one side all the DRM arguments it actually costs quite a bit of cash to make a decent TV program. Either you pay through public subscription - like the TV license fee here in the UK, or you pay via advertising. And if you pay via advertisong then it's down to the advertisers to say what ads they want to show.
And the annoying ones - they're the ones that work. Ask any Brit about the most annoying add ever and you'll hear 'shake'n'vac' mentioned. Ask any Brit if they know of any other carpet cleaner...
init 11 - for when you need that edge.
Something I think that has been ill considered. In this, Philips, Sony (with the rootkit CD), et al are attacking their "consumer" customers. Don't their senior management or share holders realize that those same "consumer" customers are also the engineers, technicians and mid/lower level managers that create, design and produce other companies products? Other companies products that could use Philips or Sony components and subassemblies. Those of us who do the creation, design and production of new products (for those other companies) not only can avoid their "consumer" products, but, we can also design using a competitors component or subassembly into our products (e.g. design out Philips or Sony stuff)! Thus these monkeys lose twice and more. After all, if I avoid Philips or Sony components and subassemblies, they lose every time that we sell a product using a competitors component or subassembly. Remember, Philips and Sony have many competitors at the component and subassembly level. As an engineer, I can defend the decision to avoid Philips, Sony et al on the grounds that a corporation that preys on its "consumer" customers will prey on and abuse its corporate customers. Even if Philips/Sony promise cheaper components and subassemblies, price is only ONE requirement of many, in the decision of choosing a component and vendor! Often, trustworthyness (reputation) is more important. If I can't get a part in a timely manner, or it doesn't meet published speicifications, then, price is irrelevant. Respectfully: Anonymous Design Engineer
This is a reference to the classic (and surprisingly good) and short-lived TV show Max Headroom, where televisions didn't have an "off" switch.
Oh, I think it was "30 minutes into the future", wasn't it? Anybody out there whose memory wasn't shot off in the war?
I guess disabling the off button will be the next patent from Phillips.
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
If by some unholy forces of evil this does come to pass, and every TV starts to carry this technology, will manufacturers use this to their advantage? I mean, if Phillips can somehow tell through the broadcast flags that a commercial for Sony or another competitor is playing, will that commercial "accidentally slip through the system" and not be played, or people would be able to change the channels and not watch them?
Networks already syncronize commercials so that there's little or no incentive to change the channel to avoid them. There's no way this new channel-locking feature is going to improve on that enough to justify its existence.
"So who exactly is going to pay for all the content you want to watch."
Maybe the advertisers will? Just a thought. Seriously, they seem to have no problem paying the broadcasters under the current system, where everyone's free to change the channel whenever they want.
I'm so sick of this sort of whining. "Oh no! The poor broadcasters! If you aren't forced to sit through the advertisements, where will they get thier money?" The fact is, we haven't ever been forced to sit through the advertisements in the entire history of television, or in radio for that matter, and yet we have a larger variety of channels and programming than ever. Maybe, instead of forcing us to watch the ads, maybe they'll just have to make them less mind-numbing. Or make shows that are so good, we'll put up with the ad breaks.
Oh, and as for your comment on the annoying ads being "the ones that work," you're only right in the sense that I remember them. I remember them so I know where not to shop. (The most recent isn't even TV, actually. AIG Insurance sent me an official-looking "Rate Reduction Notice." They aren't my insurance company. If they feel they have to trick me into buying thier insurance, then I'll be sure to not buy it. Oh, I'll remember them alright. So I guess their advertising "worked.")
--
"I personal[ly] think Unix is "superior" because on LSD it tastes like Blue." -- jbarnett
Those weren't too bad: sure, there were gratuitous car chases in easily-identifiable Ford vehicles, (and, IIRC, a 5-minute pitch on the new Ford truck at halftime) but there weren't 5-minute commercial breaks every 10 minutes, and most of the product placement was subtle enough that it didn't intrude on the show.
Philips acknowledged that this technology might not sit well with consumers and suggested in its patent filing that consumers be allowed to avoid the feature if they paid broadcasters a fee.
We already do!
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
My first thought when I read your post was,
what the fuck is this guy watching that he see's that $ suit guy constantly. I've seen that- maybe twice, and yes- it is distinctive.. but I couldn't imagine my tv habits being such that I'd see that commercial often.
then you identify that you have on, apparently most weekdays, five hour marathons of ST shows.
I think the shows you are watching should be insulting to your intelligence.. to the degree in which you are watching them.
Everything in moderation man....
try watching more PBS
P.S. You shouldn't be eating at BK anyway.
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
I agree. The way to get rid of devices with "unwanted features" is to not buy them. When Philips makes a few thousand tons of "shelfware", they will get the message loud and clear. Collectively, there is almost nothing that can't be killed off by consumers refusing to purchase.
Then Google came along and now you could look for stuff you really wanted or needed. Broadcasting advertising is mostly for stuff you wouldn't want and for which someone is trying to create a demand. So you resist watching it. So to preserve the business model you must be forced to watch it.
Conclusion: no matter how many lawyers are paid to argue about freedom of speech, or "commercial speech" ("Have a nice day"?) it's a bad business model. We the people find ways to avoid the ads: broadcasters and advertisers in collusion try to find ways to project them on our retinas, because this means they don't have to pay for high quality creative content, whether for the ads or for products that don't suck. Eventually they will become so annoying that even Walmart Joe will start boycotting the products for really annoying ads.
Then they will have to go back to the idea of producing ads so well designed and clever (think the Honda mechanical sculpture ad) that people rate them higher than the programmes. Which will create competition for the artistic talent, which is in much shorter supply than would be Big Brothers. And so it will cycle as the manufacturers try to cut costs and the broadcasters try to find ways to get their dollars.
Pining for the fjords
That's sort of the point. This WON'T let you change the channel. You have to be a good little sheep sit there till the hammer comes to hit you in the head.
I've seen this mentioned on here a couple of times and everyone's reactions are kinda mixed. I think we all knew something like this was coming eventually. So will current DVR's get a forced firmware upgrade to use this new technology if/when it is implemented?
...when these TV shows show up on DVD, will they have commercials embedded in them that can't be skipped over? It seems like the next natural step. Is this then going to migrate to web content? Sounds like a kind of DRM-in-disguise, only instead of keeping you from altering the content, they're keeping you from watching the content the way you want.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
and we are being forced to watch it again
-- lol pwned
If I am flipping through channels and find myself unable to switch away from a commercial, or turn up or down the volume, I will use the big red OFF button to solve the problem. And if that is also disabled I'm likely to put my foot through the display and never use the thing again. Just an FYI.
My book, podcast
what about a system that will actively search for channel with ads and switch if one is found. To disable it, customer will have to pay...
It's only a patent. Even Philips says, "it had no plans to use the technology in any of its products."
Unless the federal government mandates it on all TVs, any manufacturer that unilaterally adds this "feature" to their product line will find consumers rejecting this feature by buying any other brand that does not include it. End of problem.
If you're going to bitch and moan, at least bitch and moan about something within the realm of possibility.
Oh yes, and it's a dupe too.
Jeez, I'm starting to feel more and more every day like I'm living in 1984.
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Here's an idea that doesn't seem to have dawned on people. If you don't want to become victim of commercial advertising, get off the fucking couch and do something with your life.
You feel sleepy. Close your eyes. The opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.
You shouldn't be watching all the crap on TV anyway.
Maybe I'd be more concerned if I watched TV. I haven't watched TV since sliced bread...er, broadband.
Do not mark in this space. For official office use only.
Alex: No. No! NO! Stop it! Stop it, please! I beg you! This is sin! This is sin! This is sin! It's a sin, it's a sin, it's a sin!
Dr. Brodsky: Sin? What's all this about sin?
Alex: That! Using Ludwig van like that! He did no harm to anyone. Beethoven just wrote music!
Dr. Branom: Are you referring to the background score?
Alex: Yes.
Dr. Branom: You've heard Beethoven before?
Alex: Yes!
Dr. Brodsky: So, you're keen on music?
Alex: YES!
Dr. Brodsky: Can't be helped. Here's the punishment element perhaps.
.
.
.
.
If a man cannot choose, he ceases to be a man.
--Anthony Burgess
The Admin and the Engineer
as well as leaving the room, turning off the TV, playing a handheld game, recording the show and speeding through the commercials. My family uses all of these techniques today. Most if not all of them will work even with the Phillips patent.
On a side note, there was a study a few months ago that showed that people that fast forward through commercials retained the same amount of information from the commercials as those that watched them as they played. The conclusion of the study is that advertisers should not worry about the viewers that record shows missing the commercials. I wonder if they considered the intelligence difference between the people that CAN record shows and speed through the commercials and the ones that MUST watch the show as it is broadcast (due to inability to program a recording device).
You can lose something that is loose, so tighten the loose item so you don't lose it.
My monthly cable bill is for what, exactly?
My book, podcast
Don't be ashamed. I used to work at Philips and always tell people that my time there was one of the happiest.
The place was full of open minded, smart, enlightened scientists and engineers. What happened? Frits Philips died quite recently. It's obvious the weasals were waiting in the wings to take over and turn the once great company into another corporatist sham run by sweaty palmed lawyers, Golgafrinchan marketing freaks and oily pencil pushing nonces. Be proud of what Philips *was*, the company that invented things like energy efficient lighting, the CD player, single IC radio trancievers and so on. I'm sure Fritz is spinning in his grave. Philips is just another casualty of the general rot that is endemic in western technology now, and why the Chinese are going to hand us our asses on a plate. All true engineers and scientists be warned, this kind of BS is what happens when you let ignorant suits take over your company.
An easy enough work-around I should think.
Could it be that Philips is actually trying to save the TV viewing audience? Could they have obtained this patent just for the sake of keeping some other company from actually implimenting it?
While I doubt that this is the case, it is a possibility.
Jim
Or how about when you see the dentist? Will they make you wear a hat pointing downward saying "This smile brought to you by Dr. Dentafark".
That wouldn't work because you can take the hat off and throw it away... well... unless they staple it to your skull. Another solution would be a temporary tattoo on your forehead. Either way thanks for that post, I needed a laugh... heh... Dr. Dentafark!
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
This one quote:
The company also said it had no plans to use the technology in any of its products.
Illustrates exactly what is wrong with the patent system as it stands. If you're not making a product that uses the technology, then whey patent it? You have no real invention to protect. You shouldn't be allowed to patent something unless you're actually making something with what you've patented.
Just be sure to wear the gold uniform when you beam down -- you know what happens when you wear the red one.
I guess Philips is gonna lose that patent pretty soon. There's prior art to it.
Orwell, George, "1984", first published in 1948.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Nevertheless, this is still a worthy topic of conversation. One hopes that this will lead to consumer and/or political activism, by which I mean educated purchasing decisions and letters to competing products that fail meet non-DRM tests, and letters to potential political candidates and/or letters to incumbent politicians.
Athy, athier, athiest.
"The company also said it had no plans to use the technology in any of its products."
Just add that to the list of the world's biggest lies:
1. The check is in the mail.
2. Honest, I won't come in your mouth.
Friends don't let friends line-dance.
(...) suggested in its patent filing that consumers be allowed to avoid the feature if they paid broadcasters a fee.
Sounds fair, but if I pay, will they remove the commercials altogether? No?... thought so...
Ok, so I can't change the channel... can I switch the damn tv off? Can I shoot it!?...
What is there to stop them from using this flag for other uses? During shows, for example. Suddenly, they'll prevent you from turning off American Idol. Yay!
;-)
Oh well... at least we'll get indications when commericals start. If someone makes a hack for the TV, we could use this flag for other purposes. To switch to another channel automatically, perhaps. So maybe this isn't that bad, after all.
Sig Nature
- Get a TV with this feature.
- Tune in to a shopping channel, which is all ads all the time
- Switch off the mains power to you house,
- The TV should continue to run, thanks to this patent
- Put a photocell bank in front of the screen...
- Free electricity!
Make that 'Get a truck-load of TV-s with this feature', and get Megawatts for free!Assuming that the law of conservation of energy cannot be violated, where is the energy coming from?
Over the coax & fiber from your cable operator (or specially beamed to your antenna from the TV station or satellite if you have a broadcast TV or DTH) --- that's where from!
W00t!
Holy crap, they're actually going to try it. They're actually going to build a television that won't let you change the channel during a commercial.
Hopefully this will be the catalyst that finally gets Joe Sixpak pissed off enough for anti-DRM angst to go mainstream.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Automatically added edit markers at least? Makes editing quicker. I like someone's comment about being able to control ad volume (I hated it when they would wake up the baby.) Which will only put more pressure between the very popular programs and everything else. A very popular show would be the only one to get away with this. Less popular shows would alienate viewers quickly using this. TV Guide would love this. Another reason to actually plan your viewing. Of course, if a surfer can't change channels away from your show, they can't change to it either. Broadcasters already try to put commercials inline with each other so you don't find anything but more commercials when you surf away. prior art: bad DVD titles have been forcing commercials on us for years.
Producing and distributing TV shows ain't free. One way or another, we have to pay. Get over it.
Last I knew, television was an elective.
So no. We don't HAVE to pay anything.
It's a value proposition.
However much you think that crap is worth.
Personally I 'got over it' a long time ago.
They don't call it an idiot box for nothing buddy.
...and suddenly we have to pay to be able to fast forward through recordings of shows we already paid for the "privilege" to watch?
It wouldn't be as big a deal if there was actually more worth watching out there
Now all they have to do is figure out a way to lock the plug into the wall.
What if the weather outside is looking bad? So I decide to check one of the local channels for information but can't switch. I miss the tornado warning because I'm locked in to 5 minutes of commercials, and I get killed or injured because of it. This "feature" of a "comsumer product" is a safety hazard.
In a way, AXN already do this. They have TV text with schedules, but they turn it off something like 5 minutes before each show's end, so that you can't check what's next during end credits or commercials.
But then there is TV Guide and the like :)
The only TV show that I watch when aired is Smallville. However, it pisses me off that I have to watch 15+ minutes of advertising per hour, and once the show comes back on, I have to watch another minute of advertising in the lower half of the screen. Usually it's for what's coming up next or later in the week, etc. Remember when those types of commercials used the be shows during the commercial break, not during the show?
For other shows that I want to watch, I just buy the DVDs at the end of the season. No advertising, crystal clear picture & sound, and each episode is ~45 minutes. That'a big F U to the advertisers. They've made my TV viewing experience so horrible that I just don't even watch TV anymore except for that 1 show. I don't even turn it on as background noise when I'm on my PC. No corporate jingles or graphics or one-liners for me.
I already don't watch broadcast TV or cable, as it is now. If I hear of a show that's worth watching, I'll just order the DVD's from Blockbuster or Netflix. Yeah, that means I'm seeing it 6 to 12 months late; and, in some ways they are winning -- I'm paying to watch it. I am getting to watch, commercial free, digital quality, and on my schedule.
So let me get this straight, I would have to pay for services I don't want? I thought it was the other way around. It's bad enough that stations currently use tactics like making the volume of commercials louder than the program your watching, so you'll hear it better, but now they want to make me pay them so I can ignore their commercials. I'm telling you all we need a consumer revolution because we are losing this battle against the companies. They have us by the balls and are telling us that we can't survive without them, when it should be the other way.
Can I bum a sig?
Regarding "content": when did anyone ever own any of it, ever. What's content? First replier nailed it -- the broadcaster owns fuck all inside my house. If the broadcaster wants to stop shooting EM rays into my house, that's hisher prerogative what do I care?
But there isn't any content anywhere to be "owned". There's my hardware and the broadcaster's hardware and what we do with our stuff is our own lookout. If I decide that a coffee maker is the ideal tool for colleting these EM rays and translating them into quality entertainment, that's my business.
One thing's pretty sure: if I decide to go into the TV- or remote-control-manufacturing business, I won't be infringing this patent at any point. Until DMCA3 outlaws the sale of any hardware that doesn't have this technology in it.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
I hear that Slashdot has a patent on a technology that forces you to read the same articles over and over again.
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
The company also said it had no plans to use the technology in any of its products.
They're just making us shit ourselves because, you know, corporations are EEEEEEVIL.
...a "service" like that would end free television, at least for me. the inability to flip channels would annoy me to no end.
not that it makes much diff.. they all show commercials at the same time anyway.
-- I am. Therefore, I think!
In USA^H^H^H Soviet Russia, TV watches you
They seem to be surprised at the furor. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.2 0060421.IBPHILIPS21/TPStory/TPBusiness/
They're in damage control mode now, but what will happen when the noise and fury dies down???
Looks like I'll just have to pirate more TV and Movies with torrents and gnutella. Darn. I like how cable companies think they're in charge. I'm pretty sure I dictate if I'm going to give them money.
stop watching TV.
Or do you have a "hacked" DVD player that allows you to skip the initial trailers, etc?
first, do no harm! oh wait that's the hippocratic oath.
Also, call your investment advisor and tell him to watch Philips (and Sony). You want out of them, profitably.
I recall the forced ads in almost every Realplayer feeds. They would make you watch an add and won't allow to fast forward untill you seen it through, and then you can see the media content.
Is it different?
High atop my mountain lair I can see that all the underlings are now under my control. They will watch with glee and they will like it!
Worst. Product. Ever.
-AC
Let me be clear:
I will not spend one dime on a television (or other television-watching device) that has this feature.
Ever.
So I buy a TV, that has the added "feature" of not forcing me to watch commercials. I pay this money to the TV producers - are the supposed to then send a check to the broadcasting company? They will probably charge me for this handling. While the broadcasting companies are all up for this - I would hope the TV makers say "whatever".
Also, isn't this some kind of violation of my civil liberties? Can someone "force" me to watch something? I will have to remember to buy the TV model that is one version below the model that comes out with this technology.
If broadcasters want me to watch their commercials (I still use a VCR to record my tv shows, so i fast forward them the old fashioned way) then they should target commercials towards me. That is why I am up for Internet TV broadcast. I sign up at Fox website - tell them I only want commercials involving pr0n, computer games, and womens lingerie commercials...trust me - they won't have to worry about me not watching the commercials...I will probably fast forward through the TV show to get to the commercials. Using this method, they can charge the companies that want the commercial MORE money because they can say "hey this guy Avi...he is INTERESTED in seeing your stuff." But alas, our commercial broadcasting producers are MORONS!
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Being a practical, middle-aged, male geek, the content of 99.99% of the commercials do not appeal/apply to me. I'm happy with my car, which should last another 10 years, and I'd never buy an SUV. I don't drink. I certainly don't need any feminine hygiene products. I don't go to McDs, BK, Wendy's, etc. For shipping, I choose whatever is cheaper from the online retailer. Computers? I build my own. (DUH!)
About the only type of commercials that interest me are the ones of the type, "BTW, the Season Finale of Battlestar Galactica is 90 minutes long," and I missed that one becuase I skipped all the crap listed in the previous paragraph. (BitTorrent to the rescue!)
Think about it. The average hour long show really only has about 45 minutes of content. If I watch 8 hours of TV a week, I've saved myself *TWO HOURS*. How much is that family/housework/work time worth?
Enough that if they implement this I'll be cancelling my cable service and buying seasons of stuff on DVD. One month's bill more than covers the cost of one season. Heck, once I watched it, I could sell it and get half the money back.
I tossed my cable/satellite subscription 2 months ago and I'm loving life. I can still watch Brewer games on MLBTV.com, I can still watch streaming news, I read a lot, and I generally don't have to put up with the broadcast industry's shit anymore.
In Digital Millenium, Content Owns You
Turn based strategy game that runs over XMPP. Phalanx
What an incredibly stupid post. I can never get enough of self important slashtards like you who come up with the most improbable, moronic, ridiculous objections. You don't think they'd scroll the tornado warning at the bottom LIKE THEY ALWAYS FUCKING DO NOW? Kill yourself please, and if you've managed to impregnate some hog, kill your idiot offspring too.
So I guess advertising companies are joining the fight against obesity? Now to avoid an ad, people will actually have to get up and leave the room. I suppose the downside, though, is the most logical place to go would be the kitchen...
Bravery is not a function of firepower.
~J.C. Denton (Deus Ex)
...I feel for you, I really do. My television has never received any kind of broadcast, and is used only for dvds and games. 15 years and counting, no broadcast tv in my house. I see it at the neighbors sometimes, and hear the echos of it in the way people talk...wtf is this "good times, good times" thing about anyhow? You folks really shouldn't do business with the broadcasters. I think they are trying to control your minds.
Woohoo! The time is finally ripe to patent my auto-engaging steel straps/La-Z Boy enhancement.
I've already planned several upgrades too! The straps will engage when the commercials start and a pleasant jolt of electricity will be administered via the anal probe at the start of each commercial to ensure wakefulness and attention to the importance of the message.
I'll be rich!
Bill Shaw
Dedicated to Alternate Reality Gaming
Salesman: OK. Now this TV doesn't have the no-channel-changing feature built in.
Me: Hmm.....
S: But if you want it, we have this set-top box that'll limit your TV's functionality for you.
Me: Interesting... How much is it?
S: $600 by itself, but $575 with the purchase of a TV. And we'll throw in a kick to the crotch for free.
Me: Awesome! I'll take it! Can it get kicked in the nuts now?
Can they stop us from turning the TV off and never watching their channel again ?
I think we will soon need an Adblock for our Televisions also ;)
and you thought it was a comedy.
Each day, as I read more and more about how content providers are trying to control our view habits, I am reminded of the old Max Headroom show where Corporations ruled and Ratings were more important than anything else.
We better prepare to get off the grid!
Blanks Unite!
But how will we know when and where to unite if we're not connected?
Attention dumbass moderators: It isn't redundant if I'm the first person to mention it. Since there were two other posts logged before me, neither one mentioning a dupe, it isn't redundant.
Who did what now?
Not often you see a clockwork orange ref on /. :-)
here's an image to go with that script snippet.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
So what happens if my show ends, and I'm just flipping channels trying to find something interesting. Does it lock me in to the first commercial I come to?
I'm going to patent a device that will detect if you changed to the channel in the middle of the commercial and let you flip through it. If some else beats me to the patent, then this should serve as prior art!
[J]
It sounds like they would be asking me to pay to watch a blank screen whenever there would have been a commercial. Either that, or they are thinking of embedding a Tivo-like device in my TV.
Wankers!!!!
Philips has filed for a second paten for a system where large burly men hold your eyes open and prevent you from doing something else during the comercials.
If it's dead, you killed it.
Commercials as such will die, what we will have is ridiculous amounts of product placement in every TV show made. And more of those annoying 'pop-up' ads at the bottom of the screen. Blech. At least you can skip commercials.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I hope every TV made in the future will have this feature. That would accomplish a wonderful thing--people by the millions would turn off the damn things and do something worthwhile for a change! Bring it on!!!
And I'm not.
And in a few years, neither will you unless you shelled out beacoup bucks for a digital screen.
I just can't justify the money for what little content is left before the put in the ads, never mind after.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Many shows I've recently watched have commercials every few minutes (sometimes even less than a minute between breaks). If you take a dump that often, you're going to be in for some serious hurt ... but at least you'll be getting some much needed exercise ;)
I think the subject says it all. It's my TV; I bought it. If they want to lease me a TV, say, for about the same rate I would charge them for storage space and power for that TV, then they can put any restrictions on it they want. Otherwise, they should expect that I will hack it until it works right.
www.wavefront-av.com
would that I could..
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
If they do this, my father will go ape-$hit and toss his new Westy 42" out the window, lol. Then he'll say something to the effect of "See, I *can* avoid your damn commercials!"
For me, if they do this, it just guarantees that my TV will play pr0n DVDs and Video-Podcasts exclusively.. Cable will be kept at cheapest rate that will allow me to keep my cable modem.
Screw em all I tell ya!
Assume you are watching TV and the weather turns bad. You are a bit concerned and decide to check your local station for weather warnings. The tornado is three minutes from your house and the local station is running a crawl that says this. The cable station you are watching suddenly begins a four minute commercial block. Your house would have been destroyed anyway, but with the three minute warning you could have had except for the Phillips patented scheme you could have gotten your family into the shelter. Instead the only survivor is your son who is away at college, studying law.
That is not an improbably scenario, and we *know* what happens next. The only question is who gets sued.
T.E.D.
Philips acknowledged that this technology might not sit well with consumers and suggested in its patent filing that consumers be allowed to avoid the feature if they paid broadcasters a fee.
Or I could just say "fuck you", cancel my cable subscription, and if I really wanted to see something on TV, I could buy it on DVD or download it off the internet. How about that asshole?
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
If they want me to accept this technology, I get the service for free. If I pay the same fee I've always paid, I should be allowed the same service I always have.
Otherwise, fuck them. I'll pirate their shows if they're good enough, otherwise I'll find other ways to entertain myself.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Don't buy products that support that technology. They can't affect current models so they will have to implement it in future products. Just don't buy them. There will always be manufacturers that make money on selling TV tuners that don't implement this technology. There will always be 3rd party tuners that you will be able to substitute for the crap ones that implement this disastrous technology.
if I submitted an article from the previous day rather than something, you know, not from the previous day.
Here's a scenario. A small chiild wakes up in the middle of the night and walks into the living room where the parents are watching TV. While there, a Girls Gone Wild ad comes on the screen, which the parents decide they don't want their child to see. With this technology, they'd be screwed. One would hope the power could simply be turned off, but what if that feature is disabled too? One would hope the TV could be unplugged, but what if TV manufacturers start installing batteries or capacitor-banks to provide just enough juice to run the unit for a single commercial?
There is a rule in user-interface design that says the user must always be in control. Unfortunately, the quest for bigger profits seems to be redefining who the user is, taking control away from the consumer and giving it to the producer.
>> I was visiting the US recently (from the UK) and tried to watch TV.
... when I was in the UK last year (from the US) I could not believe how many times that damn "Crazy Frog" commercial popped up ... about twice each commercial break ... after a while you just want to slit your wrists ;-)
>> I just couldn't bear it - the adverts were just so frequent and intrusive
I guess it is just what you are used to
OS X, Linux, Tivo, Amiga, my fascination with cult-like technologies would intrigue any psychiatrist.
they forgot one important feature: the TV doesn't tie you to your seat during the commercials... it also doesn't catch you and bring you back to the dumbening if you left the room before the commercials started...
why don't TV stations just take hostages and force them to watch commercials?
I say I'd rather NEVER watch ANY tv broadcast again than obeying to this dictatorship - cause that's what this is!
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
This technology makes it impossible to flip through channels because many of them would be showing commercials and you'd be forced to wait several minutes for them to end. So instead of flipping through 20 channels in 20 seconds, it can take one hour.
~CGameProgrammer( );
/me snags patent on Device That Monitors Eyelid State, making possible regulations against closing one's eyes to shut out advertising. Repeat violators will pay a Per-Blink Fee. (I'll be nice and let somebody else have the Anti-Earplug patent.)
"If we don't change direction soon, we'll end up where we're going." - Prof. Irwin Corey
On Wednesday, company officials issued a statement that noted the technology also enables the opposite: allowing viewers to watch television without advertising. The intention was never to force viewers to watch ads against their will, the company said of the technology.
"We developed a system where the viewer can choose, at the beginning of a movie, to either watch the movie without ads, or watch the movie with ads," the company stated. "It is up to the viewer to take this decision, and up to the broadcaster to offer the various services."
The company also said it had no plans to use the technology in any of its products.
Philips wanted to provide the technology and seek the patent only as part of the broader developments within the industry, Philips spokesman Andre Manning said.
As well as the dark side, it's power can be used for good.
TFA says they will NOT implement this. They just created patent, effectively denying others from implementing such a thing without royalties to them.
BTW what happens if somebody powercycle TV? Box must memorize channel number and allow restoring only this when back on. Huge disadvantage - you cant turn on channel you want, only that you watched yesterday and then switch, if or when ad-block is over. OTOH if they didnt go that far - powercycling is trivial method to circumvent this.
A device and method for detecting the signal in a video stream indicating that a commercial is about to begin, which will immediately cause the channel to change prior to the establishment of "commercial lock".
I think MY patent will be a lot more popular than THEIR patent...
I sent Philips a note and here's the reply:
2 7/article-14677.html
Hi Jeffrey,
Thanks for the note.
Unfortunately, the initial reports were inaccurate.
Please see our statement, that we issued on Wednesday after the first media reports, below, as well on our own website:
http://www.usa.philips.com/about/news/section-135
Andre A STATEMENT FROM PHILIPS ELECTRONICS REGARDING US PATENT APPLICATION
#20060070095 - CONCERNING TELEVISION VIEWING AND ADVERTISING COMMERCIALS
New York, United States, April 19 2006. To clarify any confusion regarding the intent of this application, Philips stated,
"Inventors from Royal Philips Electronics (Philips) filed a patent application, as yet not granted, that enables watching a television movie without advertising. However, some people do want to see the ads. So, we developed a system where the viewer can choose, at the beginning of a movie, to either watch the movie without ads, or watch the movie with ads. It is up to the viewer to take this decision, and up to the broadcaster to offer the various services.
Philips never had the intention to force viewers to watch ads against their will and does not use this technology in any current Philips products, nor do we have any plans to do so."(emphasis is mine)
For further information, contact:
United States
Andre Manning
Director Corporate Communications Philips Electronics North America
Global & Europe:
Caroline Kamerbeek
Director Communications Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
There was a time when movies had plots. So you knew who's ass it was, and why it was farting.
-Not Sure
So apparently this technology works by playing the same articles commercials repeatedly with no actual content, so if you want to get any use of your slashdot television your only option is to watch the same thing over and over.
it's amazing that they can come up with shit to make commercials worse than they already are. what they really need is technology/a law that forces commercials to be played at the same volume as the show you're watching. who the fuck thought that making my ear drums bleed by doubling the volume during commercials would make me want to buy the shit in the ads? im sure im not alone when i say that im LESS likely to buy that kind of crap, just out of principle. I also find it amazing that they don't want people using bittorrent/p2p to circumvent the commercials, but then they go and provide an even greater incentive to do so.
** wiping away tears**
Though a hardened New York IT girl its hard to stomach at&t tunneling their customer traffic through the NSA and SONY rootkiting PCs then Philips screwing TV remotes. Its sad aint it.
Monica. NYC
Next up, broadcasters will get with La-Z-Boy for a chair with built in restraints that automatically activate during commercials, forcing the user to sit and watch commercials.
that if broadcasters spent a little less money trying to implement these stupid technologies and lobbying congress for more content protection that maybe, just maybe they may have more money? Could it be that the reason they are seeing less money is that they are spending way too much just trying to maintain control of an industry that was never controllable? Its not p2p downloading that is costing them so much money, its the shyster security people that have them dupped into thinking that everyone is just trying to steal their content.
Forces you to watch the same thing over and over again..
Potential millions as every 70 and 80's sitcom will have to pay up.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I didn't see any explicit support for MythTV. Does anyone know if it has support?
the bills. See HBO and its like for details. Nor does cable cover broadcast television.
Sorry, but you need to contribute more time or money.
Read the last part from the article people.
It's actually good news, as you can choose wheter you want ads or not. Only if you choose to have the ads (and probably pay less), then you are forced to watch them. This is good because providers will start offering deals on "no ads" packages for less, as long as there is some competition.
Seriously, I think this is the next best thing to Ad-free TV.
How about this:
How about I just won't watch their stupid-ass shows, their packaged, manipulative, commercialized news, their inane formulaic product placements masquerading as edgy dramas? 99.999% of this crap isn't even worth pirating, for free, without commercials, to watch in half a window during long compiles. So why in god's name would ANYBODY sit in a chair and watch it, even if they're not hijacking your set?
How about I won't pay for cable channels which are, themselves, becoming more and more infested with ads?
How about the entire media establishment go fuck themselves?
Last time I watched TV was for about 3 days in September, 01. I don't intend to ever do it again.
Although Hannity handing it to the Westboro Baptist Church lady was hilarious, I'll give it that:
http://empiresfall.blogspot.com/
Intolerance for ambiguity is the mark of the authoritarian personality.
Commercials have a mild/pleasant charge, with a nasty suprise for deviant behavior. Where the hell did I put that patent application form ...
They can have my command prompt when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.
As long as there is still an OFF button, I can reclaim my brainwaves!
Read the prohesy.
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
Today the channels just coincide their ad breaks at the same time so that if you zap a channel you are caught by ads in another channel until you zap out only to be caught by yet some different ad in another channel. There is not much difference it seems, albeit the freezing thing is totally inacceptible.
Read radical news here
Not at all. As soon as someone owns a patent on it, there's someone to develop a more solid concept behind the technology (such as a specific implementation), and -- most importantly -- to market the idea.
Contrary to popular belief in modern society, not all patent holders simply sit on a patent in the hope that someone might stumble on their vague idea. Some of them actually do what was expected of the patent system when it began, and try to develop their idea into a marketable product.
1. Couldn't you turn it off for that span. 2. Couldn't you create something that turns it off when the signal gets too loud. 3. If all else fails, they don't own your plugin. Some days, I thing Truman had it easy...
"In no instance have the churches been guardians of the liberties of the people." James Madison