Slashdot Mirror
NBC Activates Broadcast Flag
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "NBC activated the 'broadcast flag' on a number of shows this week, ranging from American Gladiator to Medium, which prevented compliant programs like Windows Media Center from recording them. The matter is being 'looked into,' but that doesn't tell us whether it was an accident or a ploy to see how outraged viewers would be at being stripped of the time-shifting rights they've enjoyed ever since Sony v. Universal. Just in case it's the latter, it wouldn't hurt to let them know what you think."
"It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
That seems like a rather large mistake to make. If it was mistake, it's the kind someone might get fired for (especially after attention from slashdot).
"It seems the flag only triggered copy protection measures in Vista, as one of our staffers with a DirecTV HD DVR recorded Gladiators as usual, and a TiVo spokesperson told CNet that the company had not received any complaints."
:)
Well well, another reason NOT to use Vista MCE. If you simply ignore a broadcast flag this only annoys people who pay for commercial software. I, on the other hand, couldbuild a MythTV box without any problems whatsoever
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
Not the XP drivers or TiVo. Microsoft should be answering this.
http://thegreenbutton.com/forums/45/262419/ShowThread.aspx
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Use non-compliant software. Or software you (or someone for you) can make non-compliant.
If you use software you have no control over it just suits you right to get shafted once in a while by it.
Vote with your money.
German Broadcaster Pro7 'accidently' and because of 'technical problems' switched on the copy protection flag twice in the past few months.
See this german article for example:
http://www.digitalfernsehen.de/news/news_295076.html
Fred Rogers would shake his head and shed a tear. (from wikipedia) During the controversy surrounding the introduction of the household VCR, Rogers was involved in supporting the manufacturers of VCRs in court. His 1979 testimony in the case Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. noted that he did not object to home recording of his television programs, for instance, by families in order to watch together at a later time. This testimony contrasted with the views of others in the television industry who objected to home recording or believed that devices to facilitate it should be taxed or regulated.
meh
Was unphased, it's wonderful. I remember the scare to grab digital tuners before the broadcast flag have become mandatory, but now all you have to worry about is Vista going out of their way to honor something noone else in the industry bothers to. Microsoft loves their customers just sooo much.
Wonder how many new MythTV installs this event prompted.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
First you tell me I need to buy a new TV or a "free' converter box (How does $60-$40 == free??). Then I'm told I can't record shows unless the broadcaster thinks I should.
This one's easy. Unplug TV, put out to the curb. Buy a book. Tell networks to go to hell.
Tell the advertisers for those program that you're really currious about their support NBC in using the broadcast flag. Not only did you get the opportunity to miss that program, but you didn't get to see any of the ads for their company promoting their products, sales, events, or anything else they were interested in letting you know about.
Believe me, word will get back to NBC that it's not to their advantage to follow such tactics.
You never know...
Just watch the video. It would make a great gift. http://www.mythpvr.com/mythtv/distribution/mythdora/4/install-1.html
I watch very little TV, so for me paying for TV shows on Itunes makes much more sense vs. paying for cable. Then NBC pulled their shows, and it made me wonder if I was an idiot for buying them in the first place.
This may be a dumb question, but if it is ok to time shift a TV show using a DVR, then why is it not ok to "time shift" using a P2P network. The only difference is that with P2P, the signal goes to hardware that I don't own and the TV program is (initially) also stored on hardware that I don't own until I download it.
I can see for movies that aren't "broadcast" that P2P is very different than buying a DVD but I don't understand for TV programs.
Which brings the other point. The media industry's pricing for TV shows sends a confusing message.
-Watch on TV (with commercials) = Free
-Watch on DVR (ability to limit commercials) = Free
-Watch online on "official site" (limited commercials) = Free
-P2P = Free
-Buy on itunes = $1.99 per show or $40-$50 per season
-Buy DVD = $40-50 per season
TV shows cost much, much less to produce than movies, but compare $15-20 for a movie DVD vs. $40-$50 for a TV show season. I know that one is 2 hours vs. the other being 30-40 hours, but margins on selling a TV season DVD are orders of magnitudes higher than for movie DVD.
Instead of a broadcast flag , I want a quality flag .. one that stops shows like American Gladiator from even being broadcast.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
Anything that would prevent people from watching American Gladiators must be a good thing. I don't see why you people are complaining.
People still watch TV?
Dammy
could someone remind me again what this "NBC" thing is, and why I should care?
thankx.
...and it cuts both ways.
My retired mother resists new techno-gadgets like a mule, but now that she's used to the DVR she absolutely loves it. She no longer falls asleep on the couch because she's trying (in vain) to catch the end of her favorite show that started at 9:00pm. Now she just "tivo's it" and watches it the next morning while she's quilting.
If a broadcast flag "glitch" prevents her from time shifting a show, will she change her behavior again or will she just not watch the "glitched" show? Place your bets...
Never approach a vast undertaking with a half-vast plan.
I've already let them know what I think. I don't watch any NBC/Universal shows. Hell, as much as I want the Quantum Leap box sets I'm not buying them until they stop this bullshit. Geeks, I know it'll be hard without BSG, but if you keep watching it, you keep supporting this kind of thing.
"Why Subscribe?" Good question...
The broadcast flag was created for precisely this purpose and they were obviously testing it. Every good capitalist and market leader will keep testing "what the market will bear." If they never tested, how will they ever know for certain?
So yes, be VOCAL about it. It may also help to point to the recent studies showing that the younger audiences are more inclined to not skip commercials which means allowing recording is TRULY in their favor.
I want to voice my distates at your use of broadcast flags to deny your viewers their legal rights of timeshifting (as per Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984)). I understand that computers and the internet may have an impact upon your business models, but the proper way to address these concerns is not to treat honest customers as potential criminals by denying them the legal rights they have held for over a quarter century. Thank you for your time, and I hope that you will take a more reasonable policy toward timeshifting in the future.
When was it decided that watching TV should become a technological maze?
Unless it's Heroes, it's not worth watching anyway. Tell NBC what you think by... oh, I don't know... NOT WATCHING? Just tell NBC that you're "going green," they'll understand.
The same thing happened in Germany last week. Pro7Sat1 did send an anti recording signal and many users of DVR could not see a thing.
According to company which runs the satellite signal, it was just an technical error.
This brings up what I think is the biggest potential for unfair use of DRM: restrictions that are built into the technology and acknowledged by fine print in the user agreement, but not enforced until after millions of consumers have already purchased the product.
There's nothing new about this. You can waste an awful lot of time reading contracts and discovering that you've agreed to obnoxious things... and that there's not an awful lot you can do about it because all the competitors have similar contracts... and that, surprise, surprise, the employee behind the car rental counter is not interested in striking out clauses and negotiating contracts with an individual customer with a line behind him.
What's new is the potential for cheap, automatic, mechanical enforcement at some later date.... and the consumer's inability to know the company's real intentions.
When you buy something with unenforced DRM you are truly buying a pig in a poke.
The free market can't operate in the absence of the buyer having reasonable information on what they're buying. In the case of unenforced DRM, that means not just the theoretical existence of restrictions, it means that companies should be required to disclose a policy on their intentions for future enforcement... a policy that must be included in the contract for the contract to be valid, and one which they can be held to in the future.
It should be use-it-or-lose-it. A company that fails to use automated restrictions for a long period of time, and has failed to disclose clearly its intention of using them in the future, ought to right to enforce them.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
I work in media, and I can tell you, NBC and similar companies are the absolute pawns of their advertisers. DRM is getting a big push from the ad guys because of commercial skipping. But (since the whole DRM/Broadcast Flag thing is a fiasco in the first place) they're not all subtle in their thinking, and if they hear a big fuss, they'll back off, and tell NBC to do the same.
This is something activists have to learn: go after advertisers.
NBC has recently activated a broadcast flag in its news studios. This large red flag is raised whenever the cameras are rolling to prevent newscasters blurting out obscenities on live TV.
...any company with any involvement in this idea needs to answer.
One of the arguments that's always been bought up regarding technology like this is "What happens when something goes wrong and it inconveniences or prevents users from doing what they should be able to", the answer that's always come back is "Well it wont go wrong", but it does and it has.
Technology like this is one thing if it works, if they want to implement it and it works then it's up to us to decide if we want to use their product. If they convince us to use their product by assuring us it wont be a problem and it is then they've lied to us and should compensate us.
It's a problem for the industry as a whole, they need to accept once and for all that technology like this only servers to inconvenience legitimate users.
This could be a good thing. If nobody can record American Gladiators, that many people are spared from watching American Gladiators, thereby raising the collective IQ of the nation slightly. Kudos, NBC!
Suppose an assassination happened on live TV but the coverage was flagged no-record. All 'official' copies at the networks could be easily altered to hide evidence, and no one with a proper recording to step up and challenge the subterfuge.
With "heroes" they set the "not until September" flag
By definition, everything a network would broadcast should have the "broadcast flag" enabled. So isn't this a non-news item?
Furthermore, if you can record a flagged broadcast with XP or TiVo you should probably file a complaint that this software is circumventing the DRM and failing to manage your digital rights properly.
Priceless. :-)
Ironically, here in the UK, the front of today's Guardian Technology section has a full-page story on how pretty much anyone who is anyone is dropping DRM as fast as they can open their fingers. Among other things, it cites research showing that shows DRM has no impact on piracy levels (and makes the obvious but rarely stated observation that this means DRM is just annoying legitimate customers), and mentions several major on-line music distributors who are already offering DRM-free tracks or have definite plans to do so later this year. Apparently the market has a different view on how it would like its digital rights managed than Microsoft do...
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
I'm not usually a tinfoil hat type, but NBC and Microsoft have been associated in other news recently. I thought the idea of making an unpopular media player play less content than others is unlikely. The developers denied it: "We have no plans or commitments to implement any new type of content filtering in the Zune devices as part of our distribution deal with NBC." This could be an unfortunate coincidence, but I doubt it will be good for Zune sales.
Either way, if my time-shifted NBC shows stop playing, then I'll stop watching NBC. I hardly watch it anyways. Seems like a strange strategy for a media company though. Isn't the goal to have popular shows so they can sell more advertisements? How does reducing the number of viewers == "Profit"?? Especially since not everyone is skipping the ads
It's a good thing I still have my trusty old VCR. Of course it's not like I'm actually going to watch gladiators anyway. But if I wanted to record it I'd use good old VHS!!!!
---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"
'nuff said.
Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.-rms
I don't think ANY TV show season is 30 to 40 hours long, much less without commercials on DVD. The longest I've seen, 24, which was an hour long on TV with commercials was under 20 hours (ironic isn't it) in total for a season over 4 DVDs.
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
If broadcasters want to use DRM to prevent me from recording their programming, that's fine with me. I'm not so attached to TV that I can't miss a show.
At some point, the DRM burden will be so heavy that I'll walk away. As will, I suspect, many others who do not want their lives orchestrated by the timing of non-recordable TV programs.
Broadcasters need to understand that there's a balance here. DRM is a burden. Some viewers will chose to bear the burden longer than others.
They use it to conduct psyops against the populace, and whip up support for whatever military operation GE might be selling weapons systems for next.
Also comes in handy for whitewashing their union-busting and environmental crimes, as well.
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
Who in the HELL would ever want to record American Gladiator????
Fortunately, I have a DVR that respects my wishes over the networks'. My mom watched Medium without incident.
I refuse to believe that anyone tried recording American Gladiators.
American Gladiators is on the nbc web site with the full show on there.
You can waste an awful lot of time reading contracts and discovering that you've agreed to obnoxious things... and that there's not an awful lot you can do about it because all the competitors have similar contracts... and that, surprise, surprise, the employee behind the car rental counter is not interested in striking out clauses and negotiating contracts with an individual customer with a line behind him.
The interesting thing here is that contract law in most places already makes allowances for this sort of thing. There's even a legal term — contract of adhesion — describing standard contracts where there wasn't equal power for each party to negotiate on the details. Also, contracts generally require a meeting of minds, with both sides understanding what they are agreeing to; where this is not the case, courts can (and do) hold that unreasonable conditions are unenforceable.
In other words, it shouldn't be necessary to change the law to achieve what you want. If a contract of adhesion includes deceptive provisions that a typical person would be unlikely to agree to if they understood the implications, then it's already the case that courts might strike those provisions. You just need someone to bring the case.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
There's very little worth watching, and what is, is available to watch by the season on DVD. With the key demo, males 18-35, spending more and more time playing GTA IV and Halo, the TV industry would be well-advised to stop poisoning the well. Else, in 10 years' time the only ones watching will be retired Baby Boomers who live on $800 of social security every month.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
Or, if you are using Vista Media Center and are affected by the broadcast flag, just download VMC Netflix and play the "Watch Instantly" NBC shows on your TV, on demand, for no additional cost above and beyond your Netflix subscription. It works with xbox 360 extenders too.
Television's purpose is to sell, not to entertain.
To make advertising pay, corporations need viewers to sit in front of the stupevision. "Entertainment" just has to keep you in your seat. If that means T&A shows, the "wide world of sports", live car accidents and one cartoon making fun of other cartoons, then so be it.
Whatever is cheapest to produce and easiest to recycle week after week to keep viewers in their seats is what stays on television.
This is not a perfect book, but reading it will make you think:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Arguments_for_the_Elimination_of_Television
http://www.amazon.com/Arguments-Elimination-Television-Jerry-Mander/dp/0688082742/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1210859168&sr=8-1
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
apparently this "flag" feature is not supported by Mythtv. Damn you open source, always one step behind.
Living in Germany I am affected by the same ongoings, as mentioned in a comment earlier. :)
Though I find it deeply troubling to see more and more 'content' being locked away by the use of drm and related technologies, and at the same time laws being introduced to step by step set the ground for illegalizing free software, I do want to add that the irony of the hole 'drm-issue' is, that 'They' are locking away 'their' contents, which only exist to distract us from the simple fact that 'we' generally find 'our own' content to be much more satisfying/informative/interesting/fun than all that hollywood non-informative/propagandistic/moralistic crap. Its like getting setup to taking hard drugs, the first shots are free, then once you're hooked, they want you to pay...Now they're turning off the tap, and yay I'm finaly free
This stuff reminds me of the track copy flag on audio CDs. It's enabled on many discs but it always is ignored. Why should this stupid flag be different?
Stupidity is the root of all evil.
1. Every DRM effort aimed at recording just pushes more people into the arms of the people cracking these systems.
2. Who still watches NBC? According to the rating, no one.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
I'm guessing you don't download many p2p shows? You'll notice that without commercials, they are all pretty much they same length and file size because they all have the same amount of time scheduled for commercial breaks.
The Solution to his problem is simple: MythTV.
Build your own on any spare PC and forget about it.
TiVo supposedly honors the broadcast flag. I wonder why this didn't stop my TiVo from recording Medium?
Is buying a Harley Davidson as your first motorcycle since you were 16 at age 49 a midlife crisis issue?
Given NBC's ratings, who is going to boycott them? Until Heroes and then Chuck, I don't think I watched a show on NBC in YEARS. It's hard to boycott NBC when they are the little watched network as is.
There are two very different goals implied here.
1) Disclosure: The customer should be made aware of potential changes to their usage by the company. Even if every company does it, every company should disclose it, and I would think that a court would allow a customer to break out of a contract without contract termination penalty aside from the legal costs incurred(the amount of legal costs to the customer will vary depending on the company's temperament)
2) Understanding what is disclosed: 60 pages of fine print is still good enough for disclosure. Even if there's just 1 page of fine print, you've still got to sit and read through it while everybody else waits and many people don't want to cause that kind of disturbance and will simply sign. That's their responsibility of course, but that's how most people are. Even if disclosure is satisfied it will have very little effect since most just won't read all that bullshit.
That's why the bullshit is there. It's not enough to say that "We're not responsible for damages", which is an all-inclusive statement. They'll explicitly list every kind of potential damage they can possibly imagine just to fill the page out, and THEN follow it up with legalese that translates to: "And anything else we haven't mentioned", which makes all that filler redundant anyway. Then after a few pages of this fine print, you'll see 1 brief sentence about a very important issue, sandwiched between more fine print. For example, "This unlimited service may be subject to termination for excess use." (I.e an undetermined bandwidth cap on your unlimited service).
But in either case, it's moot, because these agreements are standard across all companies and contracts are non-negotiable unless you are a large company(which no consumer is).
OT, but in the same vein...
Back in the days of Napster, I attended a "satellite" senate hearing on campus. Orrin Hatch, Sean Fanning, and two musicians were there. One musician was a local independent artist who said he had no problem with Napster, but had huge problems with the record companies. The other musician was the lead singer for the Byrds, and he testified that his concert attendance was up and a "whole new generation of fans" learned about his music through Napster.
Also there were a few small tech firms who gave overviews of how they intended to use P2P technologies and expressed their concern that legislation that targeted Napster would interfere with their business.
Orrin Hatch seemed to agree, nodded, smiled, even presented Fanning with a hat from the college bookstore. He closed with remarks like, "This is a complicated issue that needs more attention." And then promptly furthered his work to kill P2P and consumer rights.
Your anecdote about Mr. Rogers just contributes further evidence that what's happening here is not what the artists want and definitely not what the consumers want. It's the middlemen forcing something on both parties, limiting the reach of the artists and what consumers can do with the artists' work.
I'd rather have someone respond than be modded up.
Now I can't record their crappiest shows for posterity.
Were that I say, pancakes?
And here I thought it was a mediocre show with a stupid plot and second-rate actors!
I should know, I forced myself to finish the first season before I abandonned it.
What's also sad is how people who similarly campaign for higher causes (Richard Stallman on free software is a prime example) are maligned until situations like this come along and show us how right he is to insist on framing the debate in terms of a user's freedom to control their lives, relish social solidarity, and cooperate in a society of peers where you're limited largely by the restrictions you impose on yourself. Slashdotters cite Stallman's "The Right to Read" as we quickly head toward a culture that denies how everything we do is built on the past (Lawrence Lessig frequently reminded us of this) but how many read the dystopic short story and take it to heart?
Stallman can be hard to get along with at times, to be sure, but understanding his message doesn't require you to be his buddy and it should be harder than it is (judging by posts I've seen on so many discussion websites) to convince people to throw away their freedom in pursuit of some agenda set by business.
Digital Citizen
They may be testing it to see how well it works before the Olympics. People will want to record and delay the events, which could interfere with them watching NBC's nightly Highlightopalooza they seem so fond of.
Never argue with a man carrying a water buffalo
So many things wrong....
#1: The difference between DVR and P2P that seems to be escaping you is that with a DVR you are paying the cable/satellite company for the TV that comes into your house. With P2P, you don't even need to be living in the same country as the person that paid for the signal.
#2: A TV show season rarely fits on less than 5-6 DVD's (especially if you include bonus footage.) A movie DVD almost always fits on one DVD (with the exception of some special features). How is this "orders of magnitude" higher than DVD?
I went "green" 3 years ago. I don't miss TV at all anymore. In fact, on the few occasions I see my gf watching it, I'm amazed at what keeps the masses entertained. It hurts to even watch some of it (e.g. The Hills).
I broke from the music industry right after the Napster explosion. Currently, I'm working on breaking from the movie habit. Then I will be free from the grip of the media companies...okay, I'll keep my internet, but mostly free of the media companies.
Now, if only I could get my yard to "go" green.
Last I checked, VHS still records when you tell it to.
:>
Time shift that!
I was going 'back and forth' on dropping the coin to buy a HD setup for recording over the air TV - as that is the only way I watch TV is via time shifting.
Now I do not have to spend that money knowing that the equipment will not work. Thank you NBC for saving me money!
My schedule being what it is, if I cant record it I can't watch it.
The only time I can watch TV is on the train when commuting on to the city on Metra. It is an hour and 35 minute ride each way to and from Union station Chicago. I record to dvd-ram or dvd+rw watch and record over. when you have to be out the door no later than 5:40am and usually don't get home till 7:35pm on a good day. I no has got life. That schedule is a killer and I sleep all day Saturday but at leat I have a job and my bills are up to date with minimal credit card debt and my mortgage is paied up 3 months ahead.
....it is still being recorded. I thought this flag is for future transfer to a different machine (computer, handheld, other DVR). Not necessarily to stop time-shifting. Esp since the "live" show you are currently watching on your DVR is actually recorded anyway.
...if you want to record encrypted digital HD...
If you only care about SD, and broadcast networks, sure. It's really easy.
I used to run MythTV for years, and loved it. But as soon as my signal provider moved to encrypted QAM, it became useless. I'm still patiently waiting for somebody to sell decryption device (PCI-E cableCARD slot?) so I can start using it again... But until then I went to an HD TiVo. The hardware is cheaper anyway, and the updates are automatic...
Don't be surprised if buried in the analogue output circuitry of your digital set top box is a macrovision circuit just itching to be switched on by a hidden flag hidden in some program to mop up the remaining analogue recorders such as yourself! :)
You could just, oh, I don't know, change the channel? Or better yet, turn off the TV?
I've been a Myth user for years now (running knoppmyth). Unless Mythubuntu is incredibly more advanced than the Knoppmyth distros though - I'd hardly be able to claim MythTV is "dead simple" for anyone to install!
Sure, you might be able to get the basic system up and running easily enough -- but the devil is in the details.
Just off the top of my head, I can think of numerous things they need to do to make an install easier and more "friendly" for the typical computer user:
1. The TV guide subscription process needs to be automated, so it's done entirely from the installation screens for the Myth distro. As it is now, the uninformed user has to read through documentation to figure out which web site to go to to sign up and create a new paid account, so they can then go back into Myth and configure that same account info in it. (Compare this to the "1 click and it's ready" ease of the TV guide provided in Windows MCE.)
2. Good luck getting the "mythgame" stuff working 100%. Sure, it promises you can use the MAME emulation, SNES emulation, and many others - but it's far from "ready to copy over your game titles and go", out of the box. You're in for hours of editing config files and tinkering to get your joystick set up properly, to get your game titles to all run "full screen" on your particular TV, and to give you a way to exit out of them back to the Myth menu when you're done without having to have a keyboard attached (so you can bang on ESC).
3. Configuration of the "IR Blaster" could be far easier. EG. I have AT&T U-Verse service, and I had to manually copy/paste a config file from a web page just to get the serial IR Blaster to work with the U-Verse boxes. I had to do a lot of manual editing a while back when I had Charter cable, too, to make Myth talk to their box over a direct serial cable connection.
4. Adding more hard disk space to a Myth box after it's already set up involves a lot of command line incantations, if you're trying to merge the drives to act as one big disk. Newer knoppmyth distros seem to be good about merging multiple drives into a big virtual disk at the time of initial setup -- but not so much after the fact.
I don't think the cost of the extra DVDs is a big consideration.... how much does it cost to have a DVD pressed? I think that "orders of magnitude" was a bit of an exaggeration but I don't find it hard to believe that the margins on TV releases are much higher then those on a movie. Consider:
1) How much does a typical TV season cost vs the typical Hollywood blockbuster?
2) Didn't the TV season (assuming a successful show) already pay for itself with advertising? Aren't the DVD sales just gravy?
3) Older TV shows that are currently being resold are pure profit for the studios/networks involved.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
I see a lot of hoopla going on here. People yapping about their 'rights' and apparently not even reading the article to see this only affected Windows Media Center and not other digital recorders like DirecTV, Dish, or cable. First off, who cares if Media Center can't record a program for whatever reason? You shouldn't be running Windows to begin with. Even if you are running MythTV, it's not time to piss your knickers just yet, as other DVRs recorded these programs just fine and in high definition digital. You can stick that low-def s-video cable so far up where the sun doesn't shine that it reappears back in the 1990s where that video/audio quality was acceptable.
It seems highly unlikely that content providers will absolutely block digital time shifting of THEIR property, it's more likely the control measures will more commonly be not allowing you to skip ads or limiting how long you can keep a recording.
If it matters so much, you can just be smart and quit watching. This is capitalist America!
Really, NBC doesn't have a single program worth a damn. Heros is bad. Face it. The concept was cool, but the product is shit. Don't just sit there and make excuses about it. People did that enough with Buffy. Stop the addiction now and read a book, draw a picture, or yell at people for being stupid on the Internet.
Whew!
I have not watched television since I was fifteen
years old (and only then because I didn't know any better). It is the most insipid and banal medium imaginable.
To encounter such a turgid reaction to such a deplorable and lamentable pastime is beyond amazement. It bespeaks the intellectual and psychic degeneration of our current culture.
Get a life, people. Get a real life.
Are they one of those has been alphabet channels that so few intelligent people watch any longer? Talk about playing to the lowest common denominator!!
Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
Easily 90% of the television shows I watch are first recorded on my DVR. I do not have time to sit and watch the show on the network's schedule. Consider this: If the broadcast flag is set so that I cannot record the show and watch it at a time when it is convenient to me, then I will simply not watch the show. If the concern is that viewers will skip some commercials when watching a recorded broadcast, imagine how many commercials will be skipped if they don't watch at all.
The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
So, they've eliminate a whole segment of potential viewers by setting the broadcast flag. That must have a significant effect on the ratings.
At the very least advertisers that are hoping to reach that viewership will want to know which shows and/or networks have the broadcast flag enabled, and they should automatically downgrade the resulting ratings.
I still can't believe that the networks think they are better off eliminating potential viewers from their market. It doesn't make much sense.
I seriously don't care about broadcast flags! I have studiously made sure any and all equipment I purchase is DRM-free or DRM-circumventable. MythTV doesn't care about broadcast flags for my current analog recordings; with a nice ATSC (and also DVB) recording card, it will equally not care about any stupid flags.
It sounds a bit selfish that I won't fight this flag personally, but I DO warn anyone that asks not to get rights-restricted products (and point them to products that are unrestricted, and help them set it up if they want.) Generally people just say "meh", buy the most restricted product possible, then wonder why the stuff quits working for them (due to restrictions or rights restriction system malfunctions.)
My TiVo HD recorded NBC's Medium without incident. Can the networks selectively block certain DVRs with the broadcast flag but not others? I always assumed it was an all or nothing kind of thing.
As far as I'm concerned, they're all obsolete and irrelevant.
Lets see... remind me how would it affect my quality of life if all of the major networks, and all of the MAFIAA member companies either locked up their content so tight I never got to see it, or went out of business entirely?
Oh, yeah, it wouldn't.
There will be sources of music with or without the RIAA. There will be people willing to buy copies of music with or without DRM. There are plenty of ways to entertain ourselves or communicate stories with or without the television and movie industries.
I really don't give a darn what they do with their content. And I really don't give a darn how they treat their customers. If they piss people off enough, then people will just find something else to do with their time. If they annoy you, just go somewhere else for entertainment.
(The only thing I do care about is the predatory lawsuits based on non-existent evidence-- because that DOES affect people who just ignore them and go someplace else. Though I've never pirated any of their content, I'm probably just as likely as anyone else to get one of their lawsuits...)
When NBC was just one of the Big Three networks, I didn't have much choice over what I watched and when. Now that I have choice, NBC really doesn't have much programming that even interests me, much less that I would like. As such, I hardly ever watch anything from the Big Three networks at all.
If the broadcast flag causes an issue, I'll buy one of these.
YMMV--We have all analog equipment--and specifically avoid upgrading to digital because of the rights restrictions involved.
Even if there were no restrictions, I have NEVER sat down in front of the TV and said to myself--Gee, that TV looks good, but I'd fork over several thousands of dollars if the image would only look AWESOME.
Hell, nobody even buys CDs for the full potential sound quality. Once the snap-crackle-pop of the albums is gone, who cares? Most are mastered in crap fidelity, anyhow. Of course the audiophiles can beat all this with a green marker.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
I didn't know anyone still watched any of the "broadcast" networks... (:
NBC.com has all their recent shows timeshifted for you on their website. Though the quality sucks and the player is a pain.
Does it matter what I think?
Whether the activation was accidental or not, you have to believe that they'll treat this as a test case for whether or not people are ready to put up with it.
Anyhow, that's why I put my bias out in the open. I make no claim to being "fair and balanced" nor any other such thing. And you're free to call me wrong, but I don't intend to apologize for having an opinion.
- I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property
Network TV is slowly dying, no doubt. We're going to see some interesting scenarios play out as everyone makes the jump to digital broadcast first, and then ultimately web streaming (maybe 5-10 years from now). Right now we are still in the infancy of web streaming but if you look at how much content was available a year ago verses how much is available today, I bet it's a change on the order of several magnitudes. I mean, even channels like CW and TNT are offering their shows online. The winners in this evolution are going to be the ones who are proactive and not reactive; so far the major networks are in the "putting out fires" mode rather than "planning for the future" mode.
There is a caveat that goes with this inevitable march towards online programming, and that is the current state of affairs with our internet infrastructure. It's too early in the game for the networks to make major inroads into web broadcasting, but you just wait until everyone has FIOS. I know, I probably won't see it in my lifetime--I'm talking EVERYONE, like the phone system. Internet access will eventually become either a utility or something available to everyone for virtually nothing (Wimax), and the networks will need to invest in new ways to make revenue in that world. The ones who are doing it now will reap the rewards later; the companies that just don't get it, and who continue to insist on further hindering their end-user experience will just fade out of existence, wondering what happened and why their models did not work. DRM isn't dead yet, but hopefully soon.
In the here and now though, I hate commercials as much as the next guy, but I would much rather watch an online show with one commercial per break than the same show on TV with 5-6 commercials every 10 minutes. I think this is the most favored model that the networks are employing and that they will continue to do so as long as the current internet era lasts. I fear this will change in the future as the market swings towards the 'net, but I'm enjoying it right now at least. (Oh, and on the d/l, Adblock+ for FF actually blocks some commercials from showing at all. Go ahead, surf over to the Jericho on CBS with IE and then compare it to FF with Adblock+. You're welcome. )
There is simply too much glass..
so they can get a 1st round draft pick for next season. DUH!
Even the Sun goes down.
there's only been ONE episode broadcast
Inability to know intentions? You have a good point in general, but let's be realistic here. The customers knew they were buying a Microsoft product. The "real intentions" could be safely assumed to be malevolent, regardless of whether or not the details were known. MythTV users did not have a problem and are not vulnerable to submarine restrictions.
Don't blame NBC. They are supplying input data to the application, and one of the fundamentals of computer programming is that you don't trust the input. Microsoft not only trusted the input, but even had implemented a use case for their software to act deliberately broken when given that bad input. Let's pin the blame where it belongs, people.
I try to record a show on NBC.
Come back to watch it later and find I don't have it.
I don't watch it.
I don't see any of the commercials.
None of the advertisers reach me.
Or, from NBC's view:
1. Turn on broadcast flag.
2. Prevent viewers from seeing commercials.
3. Lose profit.
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
The matter is being 'looked into,' but that doesn't tell us whether it was an accident or a ploy to see how outraged viewers would be at being stripped of the time-shifting rights they've enjoyed ever since Sony v. Universal.
As much as I enjoy being able to timeshift, I don't consider it a right - rather it is a legally allowable action; however a content owner is free to take actions to prevent someone from time shifting. their doing so does not violate my rights; it's simply the content owner deciding to exercise their ability to control how the content is used. I'm free to decide whether or not I like it by my watching or forgoing the content.
I realize there are ways to circumvent the flag'; but that is seperate issue.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
The broadcasters alerted the cable companies (including the one I work for) a few months ago that they would be turning on the copyright flags, and that the cable services must be able to acknowledge the fact. (or else they risk losing broadcast rights)
The result is that if you get cable through a digital box (this means satellite too), your shows will be flagged open, record once, or record never.
If your cable is still analog, you won't notice any changes.
If your digital box has an *internal* DVR it will not (usually) be affected.
On a show flagged 'never', if you hookup to your analog outputs the box will add a macrovision-style encoding to the output stream. If you go from your digital outputs it will add the DRM coding, and any DRM-compliant device will 'obey' the flag rules.
The 'never' flag is reserved primarily for pay-per-view programming, and a few select events like UFC or boxing matches.
The 'watch once' flag is usually used for new shows, movies that just came out on tv, and other popular programming that they need to milk some ad revenue out of.
The 'open' flag is used for things like the news, weather, old movies, repeat tv series, etc. In fact, most shows carry the 'open' flag unless the copyright holder has a problem with it.
So what I get from the network's statement is not that they turned on the flags by accident, but that they accidentally used the 'never' flag on programming that they meant to set the 'once' or 'open' flags.
I have a Season Pass on my DirecTiVo and for some reason it did not automatically start recording American Gladiators like it was supposed to. Luckily, I was watching TV at the time and saw that it was not recording and pressed the record button. Then TiVo started recording, but I missed the first few minutes of the show.
I looked through the history to see why my Season Pass didn't fire and there was no info. It just didn't automatically record. Maybe this had something to do with it? Anyone else have issues with their TiVo for DirecTV?
JOhn
Campaign for Liberty
In all my reading I've never heaard confirmation NBC did turn on the broadcast flag. personally I doubt they did.
Tivo implements DRM completely to the letter of the law, they had to to get cablecard certification. I remember years ago a broadcast flag was turned on by mistake, and Tivo wouldn't tape it.
Since this problem seems relegated to only Vista PC's the obvious conclusion is that its a Vista bug.
If NBC had turned on the broadcast flag and Tivo still recorded they would get their cablecard license revoked.
The article mentions that broadcasters would love to be able to stop recording and skipping commercials...
/. , Wiki or something else on the internet holds my attention better and I forget to go back to the television program.
I will not watch the 20 minutes of commercials in a hour long show. Apparently the networks do not understand that this was a minor factor that led to the creation of the movie networks like Showtime, HBO, TMC, etc...
On the rare occasion when I do watch a program "real time" I mute the commercials and turn to the computer for the next 3-4 minutes or I change channels. Usually I find that
Maybe 10 minutes before the show ends (2 minutes of actual content) I un-mute, find out I lost the story thread, or it's stupid, or I figured out the "who-done-it" in the first 30 seconds and change channels again.
My viewing loyalties are around a few shows (BSG). Nearly everything else is tripe and maybe I will watch an episode of something if I am paralyzed in a hospital bed. I cannot even tell what networks things are on, I set the DVR and watch things at my convenience.
Gone are the days of ten million households sitting on the edge of their seats at 7 pm for the movie of the week. The networks are living in a 30 year old dream of our viewing habits and what we find interesting.
Tisha Hayes
Hurt em' in the pocket books. I already sold mine mostly because of NBC.
I already vote my pocketbook routinely. I do NOT watch cable/ satellite tv at all, the money otherwise spent on bloated user fees is instead paying for bloated DSL fees. It's a more efficient way to satisfy my need for pr0n.
It's a good thing I don't watch American Gladiators or House or 24 or any other mind-numbing american TV. This problem would solve itself if, oh I dunno, people turned off their TV and engaged in outdoor activities, or time with the family, etc.
Don't mean to preach, but come on people, American Gladiators? Who among us cares to actually record those shows for posterity and multiple viewings? Please identify yourselves so the purging can begin.
Hi, I Boris. Hear fix bear, yes?
Can we please call it the proper name, the "redistribution contol descriptor" in PSIP EIT, as defined by ATSC A/65C!
It doesn't come easy wrote:
I strongly agree. For me, I'd estimate that more than 98% of the TV I watch is recorded via a DVR. It is extremely rare that I watch TV as it is actually broadcast. Also, just about everything I watch is not on network TV (the only network show that comes to mind is "Samantha Who?").
Also, if a show cannot be recorded due to an activated broadcast flag, there is nothing to stop viewers from moving to other shows they CAN record, or to DVDs, or to on-line entertainment, etc. It is not the three-network-channel days anymore, people have many sources of television entertainment that the networks are in competition with, including their own older shows on DVD.
Anyone acting to prohibit the recording of crimes against viewing humanity like 'American Gladiator' is a true humanitarian in my eyes ;-)
Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
Years ago, when I first encountered shows that I couldn't record, I was outraged. "What right do they have to prevent me from time-shifting my television viewing!" I complained to ATI (the maker of the recording software) - but they told me that they had no choice but to honor the broadcast flag - even though it prevented their customer (me) from recording shows. I complained to Comcast, but they told me that they were just passing on the signal from the network. So I gave up and stopped watching shows that blocked me.
Now that the broadcast flag is in the news again, I realize that it doesn't affect me directly. I'm still against the idea of limiting my viewing rights - but I haven't watched commercial television in some time. Podcasts take up all my time.
p.s. I won't buy ATI tuners anymore. A company should fight for the rights of their customers.
So a network is blocking American Gladiators and Medium. Gee, what is next, they will block recording of America's Funniest Home Videos, replete with groin kicks?
That is so true. If someone cannot see the TV show, they never see the commercials. At least if they record it, there is still the chance they will watch the commercials instead of fast-forwarding through them.
Here is an idea. If fast-forwarding through commercials is such a problem, they could just implement banner ads while fast-forwarding. Just like there is closed captioning carried with the signal, they could create a small still-framed banner to display when fast-forward is in effect, with respect to the commercial being fast-forwarded through.
I think pay-per-view is the only issue, since someone is paying to view that once (or for 24 hours or so). Some could argue that you could simply record it, watch it once, then delete/remove it, but that becomes complicated.
Stallman can be hard to get along with at times, to be sure, but understanding his message doesn't require you to be his buddy and it should be harder than it is (judging by posts I've seen on so many discussion websites) to convince people to throw away their freedom in pursuit of some agenda set by business.
If Stallman behaved more like Fred Rogers more people would listen to his message.
I have no first-hand experience, but I've heard stories of behavior that seem incompatible with the principles that underlie Free Software.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)