Slashdot Mirror


MPAA Wants To Prevent Recording Movies On DVRs

I_am_Rambi writes "At the request of theatrical film makers, the Federal Communications Commission on Friday quietly launched a proceeding on whether to let video program distributors remotely block consumers from recording recently released movies on their DVRs. The technology that does this is called Selectable Output Control (SOC), but the FCC restricts its use. The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) wants a waiver on that restriction in the case of high-definition movies broadcast prior to their release as DVDs." The FCC is soliciting comments until June 25th.

13 of 225 comments (clear)

  1. Good luck with that by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I can watch it, I can record it. There will always be a way to do so. They can try to use the laws and technology to stop me, but they will lose in the end.

    1. Re:Good luck with that by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They simply want enough people not being able to record.

      Yes, and they also want to make people into criminals for exercising Fair Use rights so they can continue to reap huge margins on plastic discs.

    2. Re:Good luck with that by aurispector · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Funny, isn't it? If you like it you'll buy it - that's what I do. If I can't watch it, I won't know that I like it.

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    3. Re:Good luck with that by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Given the quality of recently released movies, I'd say that's part of the strategy...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Good luck with that by Naughty+Bob · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly, I spend more on music now than I ever have done, precisely because of the vastly increased exposure to it bittorrent has enabled. I used to wish the entertainment industry would wake up to this reality.

      Now I realise that that, from now on in, it can only impede my access to artists, and their access to my cash.

      --
      "Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
    5. Re:Good luck with that by dreamchaser · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The you're doing it wrong. There is *always* going to be a way to record anything you watch. I didn't say you could use your cable company's crippled DVR system to do so. You just have the wrong tools.

    6. Re:Good luck with that by Dan541 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Now I realise that that, from now on in, it can only impede my access to artists, and their access to my cash. I gave up trying to do the right thing long ago.
      I learned that the studios are only interested in playing underhanded so Im not giving them the money to file lawsuits.

      http://thepiratebay.org/
      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  2. How about not broadcasting it? by mangu · · Score: 4, Insightful
    There used to be a certain schedule for films. First they were shown at theaters. Then, a few months after, they were released in VHS. Broadcasting started only a year or so after theater release.


    It seems that the MPAA is trying to maximize their profit, at the expense of the public in general. We are stuck with technical hassle just because the MPAA wants to use government regulation instead of logical market forces to prevent unauthorized copying.

  3. Re:If you can watch it on a computer by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the recording cards work great. Cable TV simply encrypts everything so your recording card will not work. In fact they do that now. locally here all you can get is the 3 locals unencrypted.

    Honestly the FCC needs to get some balls and FORCE cable companies to have all the channels available UNENCRYPTED. but it will never happen.

    Digital TV is a step backwards. Quality sucks because they compress it hard. plus they remove your ability to record it or use anything advanced to watch it. you have to use that piece of crap cable box of theirs.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  4. *aa wants to prevent content consumption by nurb432 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What they all want is a way to prevent possession of any content, and you have to lease it from them per use for the rest of your life..

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  5. Re:Reading the Article ftw by the_B0fh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And you think it's only going to be limited in this case, right? Just like all those anti-terrorism laws will only be strictly restricted to fighting terrorists. Really, you can trust us, we are the government.

  6. Wait, wait, I've heard this strategy before... by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...is this the "We will prevent piracy by making our product even more crippled for our legitimate customers, though the online pirates will be remain unaffected" strategy? Don't forget that recording and timeshifting is what most people consider fair, not as piracy. "Oh hello uncle Jim, wasn't expecting you. I was just watching a movie, let me just put it on record." or "Oh, you can't tonight? What about tomorrow night? Ok cool, I'll put it on record and we can watch it together tomorrow". I guess TPB must love these laws: "Yeah well, I had to download it from TPB because my stupid DVR wouldn't let me record it".

    In every other kind of industry, I associate "pirates" either with counterfeits or cheap look-a-likes that are vastly inferior to the real product, the kind that street salesmen will sell tourists at a few bucks a piece. Since a digital copy is a perfect copy, I guess digital piracy will be equal. But when pirated goods start looking better and better, so you pay for the privilidge of using and inferior product and the feelgood of being legal, then there's something very, very wrong.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  7. Lotta "if's" by Stanislav_J · · Score: 4, Insightful

    IF this technology is used to restrict recording for a LIMITED period of time, until the initial theatrical release has run its course and they have milked the initial profits off the DVD release, THEN I would not have a serious problem with it. After all, unless you are one of those folks that MUST see a new movie as soon as it comes out, you can wait a little while. And even with the restriction, you could still WATCH the flick and even pause/rewind/etc. the thing -- you just wouldn't be able to dump it to a permanent source (disk, hard drive) right away. And hell, most movies will show up on non-PPV TV eventually anyway. By restricting the recording disability to the initial "surge" of the movie's release, the "can't wait" crowd are going to rush to the theater or buy the DVD the first day it's on sale and send the cartel its dough anyway, and the rest of us can just wait until it trickles down to a non-premium source from which we can record and save it if we want.

    That's all very speculative, though. Knowing the methods of the MPAA as we do, it's more likely that this is just a way to get a foot in the door to eventually restrict or prevent ALL recording of its releases. That's an old tactic -- you know you can't get EVERYTHING you want right now, so you ask for just a limited option that most people would agree on, then slowly expand the parameters over time. Like the ban on "partial birth abortion." Or just like all the Bush era "anti-terrorist" legislation -- most people accepted it as necessary within the limited scope of "fighting terrorism," but we have already seen these laws starting to be used for things that have little, if anything, to do with terrorism. (Unless you then expand the definition of "terrorism," which is also happening.) The MPAA probably is playing the same game. (As we have often seen, the worlds of business and government are pretty much interchangeable in their more underhanded tactics...)

    --
    "Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer