Slashdot Mirror


DSL Gateways to Fight Piracy by Marking Video

Stony Stevenson wrote with an article about home gateway devices being set up to identify video pirates. The article reads: "Home gateway manufacturer Thomson SA plans to incorporate video watermarking technology into future set-top boxes and other video devices. The watermarks, unique to each device, will make it possible for investigators to identify the source of pirated videos. By letting consumers know the watermarks are there, even if they can't see them, Thomson hopes to discourage piracy without putting up obstacles to activities widely considered fair use, such as copying video for use on another device in the home or while traveling to work."

3 of 337 comments (clear)

  1. Re:I'm not buying. by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A tool is supposed to do things my way. Not the manufacturer's way.

          What you fail to understand is that it's so much easier to find a way to screw you over than to actually come up with something new and useful.

          I started getting pissed when I found out the video card that I had bought specifically with a TV-Out port wouldn't let me watch DVDs I had purchased on my TV (despite this being fair use) because surely I was a pirate and wanted to copy that DVD. Well fuck them, now I rip movies that I rent and/or download movies, and watch them anywhere I want in my house. Call me a thief. They are bigger theives - I don't remember a label on my video card saying "Hey, the TV Out port you want and paid an extra $100 for won't actually WORK due to something called Macrovision".

          Come and get me, no DMCA in THIS country. Let's see, which movie should I download tonight?

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  2. Re:I'm not buying. by cduffy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There is only one reason that a third party would want to get involved with this bullshit -- kickbacks from the MPAA and other media conglomerates.

    No, no, no. The reason for a hardware manufacturer to get involved (and I think it's a damned compelling one) is avoidance of contributory infringement suits.

  3. Re:I'm not buying. by cduffy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hey, Dave -- it's been a while. Look me up if you're even in the Austin area, 'kay?

    Back onto topic... the Betamax case is no longer so sweeping as it once was; the breadth of its holding was significantly reduced by Grokster, and there are ongoing attempts to legislate around it entirely. A simple PVR is safe for now, but once one starts adding any kind of network functionality to it (even functionality clearly intended for space-shifting within a household), things become significantly less clearcut.

    As you say, the law should be changed for the better (and ongoing attempts to change it for the worse should be resisted) -- but if I were a hardware manufacturer in that line of business right now, I'd want to cover my arse for the event that it changes for the worse.