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."
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.
And, I'll take a regular analog tv that can be watched at my leisure over the clearest signal possible if the price is that I have no control of the content... thank you very much.
P.S. I have IPTV (in rural northern Minnesota... go figure). Myth records directly from the network, digital all the way.
--Phillip
Can you say BIRTH TAX
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.
The broadcasters didn't sue Sony in the Betamax case; the studios did. (The original suit is Universal, et. al. v Sony.) It was their product that was allegedly being infringed by taping. The broadcasters either didn't care, or quietly supported taping since it would ultimately expand their audience reach.
Of course, today NBC and Universal are both owned by General Electric, so their interests are now aligned in a way that was legally impossible in 1976. Now that we've abolished the "financial interest" rules, the sharp divisions between content and conduit in US television have dissolved.
How do someone a get a "+4, Informative" when the information being presented is wrong?
I was kinda pumped for the new American Gladiators, but I stopped watching after the first few episodes.
The fun game atmosphere is gone, and now it's all hyper-competition and 'roid-fueled trashtalking. I would never have expected that basic sportsmanship was actually so integral to my enjoyment of this whimsical game. It's like going from little league softball to halo 3 team deathmatch teabagging.
Netflix + seasons of DVDs = cheaper, commercial free, restriction-free viewing.
You just end up 1 season behind the people who are willing to wade through the eternal bog that is broadcast and cable television. It's home-grown ala-carte TV.
I can't tell you the last time I found something interesting by flipping channels, I've reverted solely to pre-recorded shows, and even that is still a PITA compared to watching a DVD.
Not that I would of course, but if you were so inclined, you could use HandBrake + MetaX to record those DVD's to time-shift their viewing to a later date. Buy yourself a network SAN and a library front-end such as AppleTV, and never watch another commercial or worry about the broadcast flag again.
Slay a dragon... over lunch!
Yes, but cable companies are starting to encrypt all non-OTA digital TV signals they put out, and the pcHDTV-5500 doesn't support encryption.
Back to the original topic: I for one hope that this is as big a mistake for the content providers as I think it is. Basically, someone just turned the heat up too quickly on the stove, and I want the frog to notice that the water's getting kinda hot.
If people stop watching, they'll use the standard RIAA-style defense: "We're losing viewers because everyone is recording/pirating/stealing our shows! Quick, implement more restrictions!" Then they will slowly, ever so slowly, die off.
This is one of those situations where it actually makes sense to root for free-market capitalism.
Tomato wedge sperm darts that are Republican.
At least, that's what the law used to say, before the DMCA case against DeCSS confirmed that software for decoding someone's video obfuscation scheme is an illegal "circumvention device". I'd like to know whether a court thinks that "removes or ignores broadcast flag" would be a similarly illegal property for a consumer device to have, but I suspect that the threat alone will persuade many PVR manufacturers to avoid pushing the issue.
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.
They probably do. Who needs ad revenue when you can sue all of your former eyeballs for $150,000 apiece?
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
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.
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.
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
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.
...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...
Vocal? Meh.
I timeshift everything. I don't watch any live TV. Even sporting events. Pause 'em for 20 minutes first, so I can skip the commercials and commentators (more annoying than the commercials).
Set the broadcast flag? Ok. I can't and won't watch your show. I'm not going to go watch it on your website, either. I have a big 47" HDTV for a reason. I don't want to watch a 320x240 version of a show in a tiny window on my computer.
The days of planting your ass on the couch and being a captive audience to one of the big networks is over. They'll either need to learn to cope, or lose their audience entirely.
Nobody ever used a VCR to fast-forward and skip through the commercials in Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood.
No, now is the time to piss in your knickers, clean up then write some letters to congress and to NBC.
It is easier to stop the sooner people react.
Like it or not, many people will be running media center.
To just quit watching as an answer is to stick your head in the sand. How about you DO something?
It's really not your palce to tell other people what they like is bad. It might not be bad to you, but they seem to enjoy it. TV is just a medium, like books. PBS and NOVA is on TV do you honestly think those are worse then reading fan fiction?
It's not the medium that matters.
A lot of people liked Buffy. I didn't, but that doesn't really matter.
No, I don't watch any broadcast TV. I don't like my kids being exposed to those damn commercials.
However we will probably get it soon. My son is having troubles relating to other kids when they talk about shark week. Initially you would think it wasn't a big deal, but the social aspects of communicating with your peers in grade school is not something that should be overlooked.
"It seems highly unlikely that content providers will absolutely block digital time shifting of THEIR property,"
They've wanted to to that for years, why should it being digital matter. Now that they realize that after market DVDs can be a huge money maker they ahve even MORE reason to block them.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Fred Rogers also gave kids a bit of cultural education on the sly, by having Johnny Costa's kick-ass jazz be a subtle yet integral part of his show. I think he was quite the forward-thinking individual on a number of levels.
>> Since TV is of little value to begin with
I always like when higher-than-thou's make this point, it tickles me in a way. This guy falls into an especially large trap since the whole point of his post is that one method of delivery is better than another method.
TV, books, radio, newspapers, magazines, email, forums, websites... they are all media. They are all information. Only the delivery method is different. I watch very little news on tv, mostly get my news online or from the radio. My parents only get their news from tv and we can both communicate the same points to each other having garnered it from very different sources. Of course the spin and bias is applied differently in different mediums but the basic transmitted message is the same.
Saying TV is of little value is like saying books are of little value. HaHa! You read books?!? Like the romance novels with the long haired muscle men? HaHa you suck. Oooooh wait a minute maybe there are numerous types of books/tv shows/radio programs/websites/forums... OOOOH and maybe different topics interest different people.
1: 99% of the country does not care what you think, and will not give a rat's ass if NBC sets the "broadcast flag", the "liberal flag" the "1984! flag", or the "evil bit." If their Tivo or DVR breaks, they'll blame the manufacturer -- who should be able to patch their box to allow time shifting lickety split.
1a: So, the ONLY people who care about the broadcast flag are folks using Windows Media Player to record TV? Is there ANYONE like that?
2: You cannot kill a corporation. At best, you can cause it to lose enough revenue that it will change its policies. Considering that Wal-Mart is still around, I wouldn't hold my breath.
Now, GOVERNMENTS -- yeah, a GOVERNMENT can kill a corporation. All it takes is a single "corrupt enterprise" ruling from a court, and it's gone. And that's ignoring that, as property, a corporation can be siezed via emminent domain, and then sold-off.