Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Acknowledges NBC's Wish is Its Command
theodp writes "Responding to questions about why some users of Windows Vista Media Center were prevented from recording the NBC Universal TV shows 'American Gladiator' and 'Medium,' Microsoft has acknowledged that Windows Media Centers will block users from recording TV shows at the request of a broadcaster. 'Microsoft included technologies in Windows based on rules set forth by the (Federal Communications Commission),' wrote a Microsoft spokeswoman, apparently referring to an FCC proposal that the courts struck down in 2005. 'Microsoft has put the requirements of broadcasters above what consumers want,' said the EFF's Danny O'Brien. 'They've imposed restrictions way beyond what the law requires. Customers need to know who Microsoft is listening to and how that affects their equipment. Right now, the only way customers know what Microsoft has agreed to is when the technology they've bought suddenly stops working. Microsoft needs to come clean and tell its customers what deals it has made.'"
Last I checked... Tivo supports the broadcast flag as well, yet those of us (I have 2) with Tivo's had no issues... So I guess the question is, why is Tivo ignoring the broadcast flag (not that I am complaining mind you, I hate the broadcast flag), but I am curious..
I came, I conquered, I coredumped
I just want it to work!
shows just who the real "customer" here is... not you... you are the product, delivered to the media conglomerates...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
If Microsoft doesn't disclose what is going on, customers will be angry that they can't do what they thought they paid to be able to do, and in the future, will not give them anymore money If they do disclose upfront, many customers will not give them money in the first place. Damned if you do, damned if you don't when it comes to our friend DRM.
This is great news. Look, Microsoft has a vendor first / user second approach. The more stupid shit like this they do the more the users will catch on that they are simply taken for granted.
What is it with Microsoft and the word "technologies"?
Heeding a fucking bit is "technologies"?
[Clicks fingers] Oh, sorry, that's marketdoublespeak to hide the fact that they're selling stuff that takes its orders from someone other than the customer who bought it.
I don't think so. People are not so apathetic as you seem to think. They will take notice as soon as it impacts on their ability and their freedom to do things they have been able to do since they bought their first VCR recorder 25 years ago.
Microsoft has been putting too much faith into its monopoly position. The more people this affects, the more people WILL move to alternative systems, and the more those alternative systems will improve.
DRM will never survive.
Microsoft has never been about the customer. Microsoft will gladly screw over their customers to get a few bucks or gain marketshare.
Here's an old but great example. Back when Win95 was released you could not natively use long file names with 16-bit apps. However, there was a product called "Name-It!" which did allow that function. In other words it was possible and quite easy to enable the function, but Microsoft chose NOT to implement it. Why? Because long file names was a well liked feature among customers and denying it to customers would give incentive to upgrade to new 32-bit programs.
Another great example is Messenger, the chat program not the service. Microsoft originally made it nearly impossible to get rid of. Even if you edited your sysoc.inf file and uninstalled Messenger, it'll suddenly come back. Even if you deleted the subfolder under Program Files, it would mysteriously come back. Obviously Microsoft considered its chat war against AOL more important than ease of use for its customers.
And of course there's product activation. We were told it was to stop piracy, but that was bull-shit. You can easy obtain pirated copies of XP and Vista. Let's face it, if piracy has been decreased, then why is Vista Microsoft's most expensive OS? Why aren't they passing the savings back to us? Clearly product activation is not stopping piracy at all. Once again, the real purpose of product activation is to screw over the paying customer who wants to install the OS he paid for on both of his systems.
And lets not forget how Microsoft's Office products are constantly screwing with file formats to make the later versions incompatible with earlier versions. Once again, this is NOT done to make it easier for paying customers. It's merely leverage to get those customer paying again and again.
It'd be really hard to be passionate for Microsoft's products. It's hard to be passionate for anything that nickel and dimes you at every turn. That treats you like a criminal. And sees you merely as a cash cow to be milked at every chance.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
Sooo, it seems Microsoft has set itself up for a PR disaster and given the remote control to any content-provider that knows how to use the broadcast flags.
There is no better way to illustrate what restrictions DRM will have on the users day-to-day life, and Vista users will not like these demonstrations of Microsofts built-in Big Brother TM.
---
"The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
Is this the place where those of us who loathe Vista as a bloated, DRM-ridden piece of crap that just can't wait to rat on its owners come for an apology from all those people who accused us of spreading FUD about it?
Just wondering...
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
...you tried to record American Gladiators.
As our way of thanking you for your positive contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to disable Slashdot 2.0.
Let's see, how many different competing sources of videos are there today? And NBC thinks it's got the best ones out there and wants to restrict their dissemination with the broadcast flag?
I don't really care if Vista respects the flag or not. NBC, by putting it in the stream, thwarts its use, legitimate or not. In the YouTube/Tube world, they have *so* scratched themselves off the list.
Let's see-- was that good for marketshare, branding, asset value, shareholder value, or compennsation? Hullo?
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
pay-per-view on every single broadcast
I sure hope they leave the commercials in!
Nice one by MS, but this won't have much of an impact on Windows I think. What else are people going to use?
Huh? That is the absolutely dumbest question I've heard all week (but it's Monday). There are a lot of flavors of Linux, there's Sun, there's Be, there's Apple. or did I misunderastand the question?
Are you a Microsoft employee, did you get to slashdot by mistake somehow. or are you just trolling?
-mcgrew
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
It would help the argument a lot if people would stop posting the link to Peter Gutman's first paper. He already has acknowledged that some facts were based on pre-release versions of Vista, and Microsoft trial-balloons.
The newer slideshow addresses much the same issues, without the minor holes the MS astroturfers can use to misdirect attention away from the main points.
Mart"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
Actually, Mythtv is pretty easy to set up now, if you use one of the distro versions (knoppmyth, mythdora or mythbuntu).
I add a nice pchdtv video card, which does not detect the broadcast flag, and I have nothing to worry about. Plus, I can burn dvd's of my recordings, and many other things.
Windows media center has a number of problems, and crashes too. However, because it is windows, people ignore it. Myth is just as stable. And can be tested before buying (since mythbuntu at least has a livecd)
Has anyone using Tivo ever been able to go back to regular TV? If they took a look at the viewing habits of Tivo-ed users, they would be forced to remove the flag if Tivo had enforced it.
Ever since I got Tivo, I *never* watch programs in real-time. If I can't record it, I am not watching it.
In fact I would be surprised that the hack is already out there
It is, the fix is here.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
As long as there is analog out, I'll be able to record my favorite shows. Just retarded you have to go through all that.
Is it really any surprise MSFT puts business interests ahead of user interests? It's been that way a long time.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
15 July 1996: Microsoft and NBC form MSNBC.
31 Aug 2007: NBC pulls all content from iTunes Store.
6 May 2008: NBC puts content on Zune Store.
Now: NBC has Microsoft block Windows Media Center from recording certain shows.
What other wonderful developments can we expect?
"Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
"things they have been able to do since they bought their first VCR recorder 25 years ago."
MacroVision ACP, anyone?
Yes, you can easily filter that out with a little box you buy for a couple of bucks if you're affected by it, but you're definitely viewing things a bit too rose-colored on the whole copy-protection front if you think that this sort of thing is new.
I've been a pretty loyal Microsoft user since Win3.1, and I'm a senior I.T. professional. I'm not particularly radical, I use Vista, and its OK.
.... - you're our customers after all. Being an IT professional, I can see perhaps there might be an issue keeping it going through system upgrades, or server upgrades? Well, how hard would it be supply music on the current store? Or perhaps there aren't enough customers to make this cost effective? I don't know, then you don't have to keep many DRM servers running to keep them happy.
.... after they made them bend over to develop new hardware for the Vista Capable logo, and then redefined the conditions so HP wasted their time and money. And then they were surprised when Vendors weren't developing drivers for Vista. To quote the MS executives, the hardware vendors 'didn't trust us'.
However, Microsofts recent performance has been pretty disgraceful, enough to force change for me. I point to three incidents - This one with the broadcast flag, the recent shutdown of the Microsoft Music Validation servers, and the release of the emails where it showed that senior management had no idea how to treat customers or partners during the months leading up to the release of Vista.
How hard is it for Microsoft to treat their customers OK? I mean, the broadcast flag incident shows they bend over for the broadcast networks, even though the networks business model doesn't even require this. Why do they do this to their customers? Obviously, the networks are paying Microsoft, but surely they can't be paying as much as customers pay for licenses to use Vista/XP. Why treat your greatest revenue stream like a POS - like they're stupid?
With regard to the Music Server incident, a number of customers have paid for music, these are valuable customers again, and they are having their servers shut down so they can't play their music beyond their next upgrade/reinstall. How low is that. I mean, how much more poorly can you treat your customers. How hard is it for Microsoft to keep a few servers running to validate that music, to say to the customers, look, we'll keep this going as a sign that we give a
As for the emails, I don't know where to begin. They treated HP like
It really pains me to use Vista after reading this stuff. This isn't a complaint about Vista or whatever, its an OK operating system, its a lot easier to use than any Linux variant, and I find it stable now. But I can't keep using it beyond my current hardware iteration. I'll keep using it at work, but from a moral point of view, I just can't keep using it personally. You just can't keep treating people like that, and I feel like a gullible fool giving Microsoft more money. I am pleased that there are alternatives at last, be it Apple or a future Linux that will be more innovative and user friendly by the time my current hardware dies.
Long ago when cable TV was new, part of the draw of cable TV was "commercial free!" and signal clarity. Well, there was nothing wrong with the signals we got over the air until cable lobbied to have the RF power of TV stations lowered and the commercial-free thing didn't last long either.
Of course, the internet was not created to be yet another form of advertising media, but that is what it has become and somehow people actually believe that is what it's there for -- they don't see it as a corruption of its original intent.
I bought some DVDs over the weekend only to find that the first 5, unskippable, minutes were advertisements for other things.
Why should I have to pay for advertisements being shoved in my face?
I once worked for a weekly news rag and we fought spam hard. Meanwhile, our own sales people were constantly pushing and stepping over the line when it came to their own email behaviors. As a company that is all about advertisement, you'd think they'd be more sympathetic to the "needs of the other marketers" out there. But in their defense, I suppose, they published a paper and didn't shove it down anyone's throat... and it was a free paper too, so no one actually paid to see these ads. (This is about as legitimate as it can get) Eve so, I couldn't stand working there any longer so I don't. I hate marketing. It simply corrupts everything it touches.
...they'll find something else to record it with
You spend over a hundred dollars to upgrade a product, it won't work as advertised, and than just just say "oh well I'll download it?" That's not how I would react.
No, if you bought Vista because of the commercials that tell you how it's a "mddia center" and you find out that your "media center" won't work, you're going to be pissed.
And "something else to record it with" includes Linux (or other UNIX clone like Apple or Be) and MythTV.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
I could see Tivo in the past implementing it as they thought it was inevitable, but probably once it was determined as not inevitable, a company in a competitive marketplace can't afford to screw their customers. The networks probably offered Tivo some money to honor the flag and Tivo may have decided the better business move would be that the money wouldn't be worth the lost sales.
Meanwhile MS is not accustomed to such a situation. To them, the end-users have been a foregone conclusion, MS expects to get that money no matter how crappy they treat those users. So when the networks come to them with an offer, it's a no-brainer. This is what a monopolistic viewpoint does. In the DVR space, you would think they would realize they are not a monopoly and not act this way, but until this incident, they hadn't had their situation tested.
It's an interesting thing showing users the reality of where they stand. They are not customers to NBC, they are a necessary evil for NBC to deal with indirectly to please their customers, advertisers. Advertisers desires trump viewer desires. To MS, the end-users are to an extent customers, but again they are assumed to be guaranteed customers. MS has to pander a bit more to OEMs, but not much. MS therefore views deals with other entities (like studios) for abusing their users as the place where they can grow.
I will say I like how this has played out in general compared to the alternative. The networks tried to get the FCC to enforce it on their behalf and failed. Now, they must pay every DVR vendor and every DVR vendor gets to choose whether or not the lost sales are worth it. Allow the broadcast flag, and specify a standard path for it, but don't mandate enforcement and let capitalism work it out. Of course, I know which way this would go, obeying the broadcast flag is dvr market suicide.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
This issue has already been settled in SONY CORP. OF AMER. v. UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC., 464 U.S. 417 (1984) (http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/464_US_417.htm). Fred Rogers made a profound and compelling argument for the personal recording of television programs:
"Some public stations, as well as commercial stations, program the 'Neighborhood' at hours when some children cannot use it. I think that it's a real service to families to be able to record such programs and show them at appropriate times. I have always felt that with the advent of all of this new technology that allows people to tape the 'Neighborhood' off-the-air, and I'm speaking for the 'Neighborhood' because that's what I produce, that they then become much more active in the programming of their family's television life. Very frankly, I am opposed to people being programmed by others. My whole approach in broadcasting has always been 'You are an important person just the way you are. You can make healthy decisions.' Maybe I'm going on too long, but I just feel that anything that allows a person to be more active in the control of his or her life, in a healthy way, is important."
The problem with stuff like MythTV is that it does not appeal to the average DVR user. Most people who use a Media Center PC and can set it up probably have no idea what a SVN is or how to operate something like MythTV.
This is not newbie friendly. It's easy to say "MythTV, MythTV" and espouse the benefits of it, but you're not going to get people to use it if it is not easy to set up.
When you have an installer that you can click on and get the program working without having to mess with Linux and command lines (like WinMyth), THEN it will have a chance in the consumer market. Until then, the average user will put up with it or just hook up the ol' VCR.
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
What do you want? To just not watch blu-ray movies?
No, I think most people here want(ed) MS to fight their battle for them, and got pissed when they didn't. Oddly enough MS weighed up a fight they couldn't have won (there's no way the media industry would have let them off with not implementing copy prevention measures and still enable Windows to play HD content) versus their customer's likely desire to play HD stuff on their PCs, and decided the only way they could have.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Just bear in mind that the CPU requirements for playing HD on the frontend are pretty high....2.8 or 3 Ghz at least. You also need a lot of disk for the 6+ GB/hour of HD mpeg.
For anyone with a decent amount of linux experience it's not difficult on any decent distro. My frontend and backend are both Gentoo, and frankly I think it's ideal, as it's easy to build a system with only what's needed for myth and nothing more.
Oh yea...and this whole thing with M$ and the broadcast flag...I can't believe they're enforcing a rule that was struck down my the courts at the expense of their customers...that's pretty amazing even for them.
(apologies for the bad Indy joke)
I don't know how your post got modded to "5, Insightful" when it should have been "0, Flamebait".
Read a little and learn something Informative, junior:
The terms http://www.cablelabs.com/udcp/downloads/DFAST_Tech_License.pdf/ of just one of the licenses necessary for selling a Uni-Directional Cable Product (better known to you as "CableCard support") requires the vendors to obey these copy-control flags (including the flag that says not to make even an initial recording). TivoHD and Tivo Series 3 recorders as well as newer versions of Windows Media Center support CableCards and thus are contractually obligated to obey this flag even when the station or cable company screwed up and mis-set it; MythTV does not support CableCards and that is why it ignores the flags. Tivo Series 2 recorders do not support CableCards and, accordingly, continue pay no attention to the flags because there is no contractual obligation for them to do so.
This was not a result of MS stepping on end-users or Tivo having been paid off by broadcasters. This is a result of the FCC giving a broadcast-industry group final authority over the licenses a DVR needs to support digital-cable.
I guess you didn't RTFA or at least the summary. Consumers are already negatively affected when they are blocked from recording their shows from NBC. For some TV programs, there may be re-runs. For live TV shows, there may be no way to record them again.
It is up to MS whether or not to honor the broadcast flag. They have chosen to do so while Tivo does not. MythTV does not. The United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has already ruled that the FCC could not force manufacturers to adhere to it.
Huh? Blu-ray has nothing to do with Windows. In fact, MS went against Blu-ray for HD-DVD. However, the point of the article is that MS is taking away the rights of consumer to record broadcast programs and play them back.
Again, this article is about people not being able to record their favorite programs on their Media Center. This is not about file sharing. You do not have rights to alter the media, however, you do have a right to record and store it. In Sony v. Universal, the Supreme Court ruled that consumers can record whole programs and watch them later (called time-shifting).
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Microsoft has come clean with its customers. Its customers are, of course, Dell, HP, NBC, and other computer and entertainment business plus the rest of the Fortune 500. Any home user is NOT a customer of Microsoft, or at least not one Microsoft wishes to have as a customer. Assuming the end user is Microsoft's customer leads to all kinds of logical dilemas. When you realize they are not then Microsoft's actions appear much more logical and customer focused and supporting.
Careful, you may damage his self of steam.
Sacred cows make the best burgers.