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."

64 of 430 comments (clear)

  1. The epitome of unbiased summaries by Macthorpe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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 you don't know which one the submitter thinks is true, it's the latter...
    --
    "It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
    1. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Microsoft just sell the guns. It was NBC that fired first.

    2. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by adpsimpson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Whether the flag was set on purpose or not, it indicates that any system paying any attention to it is broken.

      Time shifting was ruled many years ago as an allowed privilege. That doesn't change when the broadcaster says they don't want it any more (remember who brought the court case to try and ban it? The broadcasters). It certainly doesn't change when your computer decides to deny you that ability.

      --
      Is crushing a suspect's child's testicles illegal?
      John Yoo: "No, [if] the President thinks he needs to do that."
    3. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by Phillup · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Microsoft just sell the guns. It was NBC that fired first. They designed the gun, built the gun... and forced everyone to have the gun.

      Of course someone was going to shoot the damn thing!
      --

      --Phillip

      Can you say BIRTH TAX
    4. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by damienl451 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Time shifting is not a right, it's a defense. It means that you cannot be found guilty of copyright infringement if you time-shift some TV shows. However, it does *NOT* mean that networks cannot implement measures, such as the Broadcast Flag, that prevent you from time-shifting. The law does not require copyright holders to allow users to exercise their fair use `privileges', it simply says that fair use is not copyright infringement.

    5. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by yuna49 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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?

    6. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by electrictroy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      hey!

      Good thing I use Super VHS VCRs for my recording. Good old analog technology... it just works & says "bah" to digital no-record flags. (Ditto my analog cassettes ignoring digital radio's no-record flags.) I can record whatever I want off NBC or XM or HD Radio.

      It's gotta suck though for digital users. You want to tape a show in the middle of the day (say, Oprah) or night (Letterman), but you can't because of that stupid flag. Therefore that show loses time-shifting viewers. NBC == "Stupido" (to borrow from NBC's cousin Telemundo).

      --
      The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
    7. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by electrictroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's okay.

      We still have a vote.

      We can vote with our dollars & stop watching NBC. Get your shows from alternate sources like DVDs. When NBC Broadcasting sees its ratings drop to 1.0% of the nation, then maybe it will wake-up (or go out of business). THE PEOPLE hold the power to kill corporations. They just need to learn to exercise that power.

      --
      The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
    8. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by haeger · · Score: 5, Insightful
      It's almost like they want me to go to The Pirate Bay and get my media fix. Seeing how this is the simplest and least annoying way of enjoying my favorite shows.

      .haeger

      --
      You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. -- Harlan Ellison
    9. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by davolfman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That said copyright exists because it is granted by society. Fair use is part of the social contract by which it is granted. Actively preventing fair use was never possible before so I just don't think the law has caught up with the need to Nullify copyright for those who break that social contract.

    10. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by Amouth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      i look at it this way.. i have a box set up with media center (hey it does a good job).. the only TV i watch is what i records - if there is nothing recorded then i don't watch anything and go do something else..

      if they block the recording .. that is fine with me.. it means i will never have something to watch and will go on with my life as if their channle never existed.

      i will admit.. while my wife when she watchs stuff alwasy fastforwards through ads.. personaly the TV is back ground noise to what ever i am doing .. be it a book or a game or something.. so i while i pay enough attention to get the story the show is portraying.. when the ads start my brain shuts off.. so i don't fastforward them.. all they are doing by this is preventing people from seeing any of their content.. if that is what they want.. it is their own foot they are shooting.. not mine

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    11. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by roystgnr · · Score: 4, Interesting

      it simply says that fair use is not copyright infringement.

      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.
    12. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by Dragonslicer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We can vote with our dollars & stop watching NBC. Get your shows from alternate sources like DVDs. Buying DVD's would do exactly the opposite of what you want. The studio that produces the show makes money from every DVD sale. The studios only make money from the broadcasts by selling advertising, so if you aren't a Nielsen house, whether or not you watch the broadcast doesn't change the studio's income.
    13. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by jotok · · Score: 4, Informative

      No. I use MythTV (albeit through the analog hole); my computer tells the set-top box what channel to tune in, and converts whatever comes into the s-video jack to MPEG4.

      There are digital capture cards that predate the broadcast flag, as well. They're just hard to find.

    14. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by scharkalvin · · Score: 4, Informative

      No they are not!
      http://www.pchdtv.com/
      (if you run Linux!)

    15. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think you just made-up some BS. If they did design TVs like that, how would people playback their old SVHS-C, Hi8, or miniDV home movies from the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s? Nobody would buy such a TV that refused to show their old wedding and baby videos. It would die a quick death.

      http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/04/aacs-key-revocation-future-drm

      They did design TVs like that. The technology is in every modern computer processor, every modern television, every set top box. This isn't just about preventing recording. You can use this to revoke playback rights after something has been recorded. Like a news program that leaks information embarrassing to the government, for example.

      Oh, and those TVs that you'd rather buy? The ones that don't have this technology? They're illegal to manufacture and illegal to sell. You'll have to build your own or smuggle them into the country if you want one.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    16. Re:The epitome of unbiased summaries by Xesdeeni · · Score: 3, Informative

      Umm. I thought the FCC tried to make it illegal, but was struck down by a court who said they overstepped their bounds. I believe they are still trying to make this a requirement, but I'm pretty sure it's not illegal to make a DVR that ignores the flag...yet. But some people are trying to prevent them.

      Xesdeeni

  2. From the site: by Daimanta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "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.
    1. Re:From the site: by adpsimpson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It does seem ridiculous when any form of security is built around proprietary software telling you what you can and can't do.

      If timeshifting is a court-granted right, then a broadcaster saying you can't do it and a recording system believing them should be plenty of evidence that it's time to change to a system you control.

      There have been many cases of this recently, but essentially it's the Alice/Bob/Charlie situation - Alice wants to send Bob some data, without Charlie getting it. The problem with ANY form of DRM is that Bob and Charlie are the same person.

      If Vista refuses to record it cos it's told not to by the broadcaster ("Oh, uh, I'm Bob, right? I can watch this! No, hold on, who am I? Charlie? They say I'm Charlie, so I must be! I'm not letting you see it!"), then from the user's perspective it's broken.

      --
      Is crushing a suspect's child's testicles illegal?
      John Yoo: "No, [if] the President thinks he needs to do that."
    2. Re:From the site: by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yup and it did not affect Windows XP running Mediaportal (something far better than MCE), GBPVR, or Mythtv.

      I asked 6 friends that did have those Media Centers and all of them were able to record it just fine.

      Sounds like it only affects the DRM special from microsoft.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:From the site: by hal2814 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "If timeshifting is a court-granted right, then a broadcaster saying you can't do it and a recording system believing them should be plenty of evidence that it's time to change to a system you control."

      Then it's a good thing for broadcasters that time shifting is not a "court-granted right." For that, you'd have to assume A implies B is equivalent to B implies A. The specific case of record television shows to watch later does not violate copyright laws. That does not mean that broadcasters have to make the recording of television shows easy or even possible. Timeshifting is merely a legally valid excuse for what would normally be considered copyright infringement. The court has granted you no rights forcing timeshifting to be made available.

    4. Re:From the site: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If timeshifting is a court-granted right, then a broadcaster saying you can't do it and a recording system believing them should be plenty of evidence that it's time to change to a system you control.

      US Courts don't grant rights. They only affirm that we do or do not have a right.

      The Constitution was written with "implicit allow" rules for citizens and "implicit deny" for government.

      Over the years people have lost sight of this fact and that has been seized upon those in a position of power. The average citizen now believes if a right isn't listed in the Constitution, they don't have it aka "implicit deny". Even worst they think the government has an "implicit allow" aka they are without bounds.

  3. Only Vista DRM has a problem by jkrise · · Score: 5, Informative

    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....
    1. Re:Only Vista DRM has a problem by MrMr · · Score: 5, Funny

      It appears that Vista has DRM functioning properly. Stopping you from recording something when the program is flagged is exactly the feature you have bought.
      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.

  4. Easy fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Easy fix by Devout_IPUite · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even better, how many people who were out of the house for American Gladiator are about to be introduced to the world of piracy and bit torrent because of the broadcast flag?

  5. Re:Benefit of a doubt? by somersault · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nobody can be fired for patriotically pressing a button that they thought would fly an American flag!! If your average person saw a big button marked 'Broadcast Flag', what would they think? :)

    --
    which is totally what she said
  6. Mr. Rogers is crying. by bigattichouse · · Score: 5, Informative

    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
    1. Re:Mr. Rogers is crying. by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 5, Funny

      noted that he did not object to home recording of his television programs Well, he's kind of a special case. If I had a toy train track that opened up a wormhole between my living room and a whole alternate reality, then I wouldn't be very focused on minutia like copyrights either.
    2. Re:Mr. Rogers is crying. by demachina · · Score: 4, Insightful


      Probably wont be a popular thing to say but back in the VCR days the stakes were a lot lower than they are today. It didn't matter so much back then because the tape of the show inherently couldn't travel very far and there was inherent pain in stripping out or fast forwarding through the commercials, to they were mostly for fair use.

      In the digital and Internet age, most people might record for fairly benign fair use purposes, but some people are going to record, strip the commercials, put the shows on the Internet and undermine the business model under which TV networks currently function.

      Me personally I'm not sure I can think of any content NBC produces I would actually want to watch or record, let alone post on the Internet, its not like they have a Daily Show or Colbert report. To counter my own argument John Stewart and Stephen Colbert seem to do OK encouraging free Internet trafficking in their shows but thats because their shows are A. wildly popular and B. cheap to produce.

      Here is a question for all the Slashdot crowd that want all their media freed from the man. Do you want to watch content that actually costs a lot to produce, you know with writers, actors, sets. This would mean pretty much anything beyond game shows and reality TV. If so how do you expect the producers to pay for them? The options are pretty limited. One model depends on you watchings ads, and unfortunately its fairly rare for people to actually want to watch ads outside of the Super Bowl. If you let people strip the ads at a wholesale level the model doesn't work. Are you willing to pay a subscription fee for all content? Some people will pay for some content, its just wont work for most people and most content. What else is there? Shows which sucker you into voting or calling in for prizes and charge you on your phone bill? Do you want to just watch content mostly produced for free on YouTube, kind of entertaining and weird, but not exactly compelling drama?

      Free network TV is a business model that is failing so desperation on the part of the networks is understandable. It worked when there were three networks, not many other mass market entertainment options and no digital recordings. Now there are so many channels diluting the market, and people are spending more time on the Internet and games. As a result ads don't produce as much revenue, so the networks counter by loading up shows with more and more of them in more obnoxious ways and try harder to force you to watch them. In turn they are annoying people more and more, causing a snowballing effect that will drive down their ratings and their revenue. If the networks allow people to rip the shows, cut the commercials, and post them on the Internet its inevitable more and more people will watch them there instead and further destroy any motivation to produce content in the first place.

      --
      @de_machina
    3. Re:Mr. Rogers is crying. by electrictroy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's because Fred Rogers did his job for a *higher* cause: To speak to the children & families. He'd still have done the exact same job, even if they only paid him minimum wage, because it wasn't about greed for him. It was about the message.

      For (almost) everyone else in television, it's about greed.
      Hence they hate giving anything away for free (like time-shifting).
      If someone asked them to "Donate to the children's orphanage" they'd probably ask, "What's in it for me?"

      Sad.

      --
      The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
  7. Re:Benefit of a doubt? by 91degrees · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most people don't get fired for a single mistake. This isn't The Apprentice. In the real world people need to be replaced and that's a costly process. The person who made the mistake will know not to do it again.

  8. Don't complain to NBC. by rusty0101 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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...
  9. Just how easy is MythTV to install? by RaigetheFury · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just watch the video. It would make a great gift. http://www.mythpvr.com/mythtv/distribution/mythdora/4/install-1.html

  10. I want a quality flag by OzPeter · · Score: 5, Funny

    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?
    1. Re:I want a quality flag by maxume · · Score: 3, Funny

      Get an American Gladiators t-shirt and some guns. Then, every time someone says "I love that show" to you, kill them.

      Be sure to flash the correct signs to other American Gladiators so that they don't kill you for wearing the t-shirt.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:I want a quality flag by Kelbear · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

    3. Re:I want a quality flag by Ioldanach · · Score: 5, Funny

      Have you been to a little league softball game lately?

  11. Whatever... by OMNIpotusCOM · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Whatever... by electrictroy · · Score: 5, Funny

      NBC is already dead last in the ratings (#4)!

      Maybe they're trying to lose even more viewers by not letting these viewers tape their programs. How brilliant. Attract more customers by treating them like crap. Reminds me of RIAA.

      --
      The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
    2. Re:Whatever... by arotenbe · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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.
  12. Same in Germany by tmk · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  13. Re:NBC? by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Informative

    could someone remind me again what this "NBC" thing is, and why I should care?

          It's this place where people watch programs interrupted by commercials at the time least convenient to them, and have to wait a whole week between episodes; instead of downloading them one season at a time and watching them whenever you want...

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  14. Submarine restrictions: how can they be stopped? by dpbsmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  15. Re:These things are rarely accidental by OhPlz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Perhaps they're testing to generate articles like this. Then they get a nice shopping list of products that don't enforce the flag. They know they have to address each of them before setting the flag on everything, all the time. That way people have no escape. So be vocal, the content distributors need this information so they can lock up their content.

    I guess it depends on whether you're a cynic like me, or an optimist that thinks corporations really care.

  16. Exactly Right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  17. History Eraser Button by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  18. Heroes is even worse by sorak · · Score: 3, Funny

    With "heroes" they set the "not until September" flag

  19. Re:And my MythBox by Phillup · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How do you like those non-OTA HD channels? Since TV is of little value to begin with, analog with no possibility of DRM seems to me to be the perfect value choice. (I certainly could not justify spending more for my TV than I do for my computer monitor, which I spend way more time in front of)

    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
  20. Ironic timing by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:Ironic timing by electrictroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To quote an often stated phrase:

      - "Banning guns doesn't stop criminals from owning guns."
      - Using DRM doesn't stop criminals from owning illegal copies.

      Illegal ownerships still continues amongst the criminals who know how to circumvent the law/crack the code, so all you've accomplished is piss-off your legitimate customers.

      --
      The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
  21. Re:NBC? by OzPeter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's this place where people watch commercials interrupted by programs at the time least convenient to them, and have to wait a whole week between episodes; instead of downloading them one season at a time and watching them whenever you want... There .. fixed it for you.

    It amazes me that people think that shows are the reason for the existence of TV stations, when really the whole broadcast system depends on hooking in enough people in order to get them to watch the commercials.

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  22. Re:Benefit of a doubt? by veganboyjosh · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Yeeeaaahhh...You're gonna need to talk to payroll..."

  23. LIES! by bickle · · Score: 4, Funny

    I refuse to believe that anyone tried recording American Gladiators.

  24. Contract law already covers this by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.
  25. TV accelerating its own decline by Phoenix666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  26. not supported by BigGerman · · Score: 3, Funny

    apparently this "flag" feature is not supported by Mythtv. Damn you open source, always one step behind.

  27. Re:Benefit of a doubt? by crawling_chaos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of the best bosses I ever had had a simple rule: "If you aren't making mistakes, then you probably aren't working. Just don't repeat those errors, and don't try to hide them when you do screw up." He ended up retiring after 30 years with the company, so his philosophy certainly never cost him his career.

    --
    You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
    -- Colonel Adolphus Busch
  28. Typical by cvd6262 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  29. Stallman calls for freedom. Are we listening? by jbn-o · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  30. Don't get too smug - remember Macrovision? by Viol8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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! :)

  31. Re:Do you people really care? by geekoid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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 /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  32. Re:Benefit of a doubt? by jollyreaper · · Score: 3, Funny

    More importantly, this person knows not do to that. The new person they hire will not have received this training information. Mount the old person's hand by the button. The new person will see it, ask why it's there, and learn a valuable object lesson in not pressing that button. I do believe they will remember not to in the future.
    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  33. Re:Going Green by potat0man · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wow, good work. Maybe soon you'll be able to rid yourself of theater, novels, poetry, radio, periodicals, video games, board games, essays and albums.

    Then you'll be able to focus on what's REALLY important...