FCC Allows Blocking of Set-Top Box Outputs

bth writes with this excerpt of an AP story as carried by Yahoo: "Federal regulators are endorsing Hollywood's efforts to let cable and satellite TV companies turn off output connections on the back of set-top boxes to prevent illegal copying of movies. ... In its decision Friday, the agency stressed that its waiver includes several important conditions, including limits on how long studios can use the blocking technology. The FCC said the technology cannot be used on a particular movie once it is out on DVD or Blu-ray, or after 90 days from the time it is first used on that movie, whichever comes first."

Comments

PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[deathcow]

1) pirates unaffected
2) legit consumers annoyed and prevented from seeing their movie

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[bughunter]

3) legit customers resort to piracy
4) MPAA cites increasing piracy to justify further usability-sacrificing restrictions
GOTO 1)

(really, you could flatten this loop anywhere, but the only realistic place to break out of it is at step 4)

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Ethanol-fueled]

Pardon my ignorance, but as somebody who hasn't watched cable TV since '06 and never leased a box, how would that prevent somebody from tapping off of the one line that still needs to go to the TV from the cable box? Or would it?

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[The MAZZTer]

The idea is the signal is encrypted so it's a bit more complicated. Fortunately these guys have done all the dirty work for you if I understand this correctly.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[andymadigan]

Presumably the only remaining working output would be HDCP-encrypted HDMI output, that's what would be connected to the TV.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

that'll be fucking awesome, since my piece of shit cable box from FIOS still can't handle a simple HDMI handshake despite the issue having been raised over two fucking years ago, so I'm still stuck with fucking component.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[gandhi_2]

MPAA considered harmful.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

1) pirates unaffected

Its better than that. Pirates should be celebrating.
What this means is that the MAFIAA thinks they can do day & date releases on Pay-Per-View and in the theaters.

However, there will always be at least a handful of people with the means to capture such PPV transmissions and distribute copies on the net. So it means no more need for crappy camcorders in the theaters and the consequent risk of the recently legislated crazy-ass sentences for getting caught doing so. Now, the pirates can comfortably record new theatrical releases in the safety of their own homes and their hundreds of millions of friends on the net can all download new theatrical releases in HD-quality long before the movies are released on bluray.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, they'll awesomely fuck you over by disabling the component output, leaving you with no usable output, and thus preventing you from capping (or watching) anything.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[AmigaMMC]

Great! Just like the stupid Region Protection of DVD and BD. What about all the honest people like myself who buy original movies in other countries because they can speak the language?

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[suomynonAyletamitlU]

(really, you could flatten this loop anywhere, but the only realistic place to break out of it is at step 4)

The problem is that the only one of those things most execs give a flying damn about addressing is (1). If along with their new DRM they added amazing new capabilities--say creating a mobile device with apps and sleek form factor that plays your protected content anywhere, to address (2), or giving an online store to easily purchase content to fix (3)--then that wouldn't be half bad. Unless of course Apple does that, in which case fuck all.

But seriously. I have an iTouch with some limited content on it, and will be upgrading to its bigger cousin when I have the money to spare. It does kind of bother me that I can't take my iTunes-bought video and put it on various devices--along with other objections--but the iPhone OS model, which is culminated in the iPad, is really an object lesson for people who think that suing is the only way to stop piracy.

Yes, iPhones get hacked, and yes, they only operate with iTunes, and yes, apps and music are still stolen a lot in spite of their efforts. However, the biggest advantage they have over the *AAs is that they give you compelling reason to use their products. And hey guess what! The consumers love them for it.

And no Apple bashing, please. This isn't comparing Apple to Linux, Microsoft, or Google. It's comparing them to RIAA/MPAA. I think we can all agree they're better than THEM.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[natehoy]

bluray

Am I the only one who sees that word as "blurry" unless it is capitalized "BluRay"?

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[tsm_sf]

For disks just buy a region free player. They're like fifty bucks on Amazon. All the effort of encoding disks and getting manufacturers to play along goes down the drain with one mouse click.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Nemyst]

bluray

Am I the only one who sees that word as "blurry" unless it is capitalized "BluRay"?

Maybe you're seeing a bit blurry?

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Thinboy00]

The idea is the signal is encrypted so it's a bit more complicated. Fortunately these guys have done all the dirty work for you if I understand this correctly.

Wait, the signal from the STB to the TV is encrypted? Are you sure you don't mean the coax from the wall to the STB? I don't think most TV's are smart enough to deal with non-pathetic crypto.

As for tapping off the STB-TV line, if it isn't HDMI, you could do that but you might have trouble getting full HD. If it is HDMI, you've got to fuck with the hardware/firmware/drivers to persuade the STB to send a signal at all, unless its broadcast flag is off in the first place.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Peach Rings]

Why is it any more OK for Apple to lock down a handheld media device than it is for the MPAA to lock down your set-top-box?

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[skine]

Actually, I tried to watch Kitchen Nightmares tonight OTA. The last 15 or so minutes were so garbled that I have no idea what happened

Edit (not a real edit, just a "I hadn't quite posted yet" edit): I'm much happier now that I've watched the fireworks display for the BMets game.

Back to the point: If I'm close enough to the city center to see fireworks from every window in my apartment (I live on Oak St, Binghamton - as for privacy, if you really want to go door to door and ask about skine on Slashdot, then feel free. It's like telling you that my sister lives at 87th and Amsterdam. Good luck), why the hell can't Fox effectively broadcast their channel here? (Note that Fox is the only channel I've had issue with OTA).

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[masterwit]

Hopefully they will have a memory out-of-range (the industry "dies off" soon). Bad jokes aside, what I learned even in the second grade:

Correlation does not imply causation!

if(!industryHealth) break idiocy;

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Hurricane78]

So in mathematical terms, this is a function with a limit of infinite downloads and the MPAA stopping to offer anything that anyone could decode at all. ^^

I approve. Please continue. ;)

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

I think we can all agree they're better than THEM.

I agree.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Illogical Spock]

You can't compare these things. [ ( Satan + Hitler + Cartman + Wicked Witch of the West ) ^ 10 year total execs bonuses ] are better than **AA . It's like comparing light years with yards.

But, still, Apple is trying very hard, what makes them second place...

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[DigiShaman]

Just wait till find out what side the FCC takes on net neutrality should they get their way.

Muahahahahha!!!

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I the only one who sees that word as "blurry" unless it is capitalized "BluRay"?

All the hd-dvd fanbois did too.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[shadowkiller137]

Can't we just comment out step 4. Then we an remove MPAA as a variable saving on memory allocation.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[pnewhook]

If you have a region 1 player, it will play anything, wont it?

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[MeNeXT]

When I buy a DVD or a CD I either pay for plastic or the convenience of enjoying the content when and how I please. In one case I will only spend pennies in the other a lot more. The iTunes solution is even less appealing than the plastic.

Hollywood and musicians are selling convenient access to their content. Anything less reduces the value of their product. Once we understand the dynamics we can build the business model. Unlike the past there are billions of opportunities to make a profitable sale its only greed that is stopping it from happening today. This same greed manifests itself both on the artist side as well as the consumer side.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[MeNeXT]

Presumably the only remaining working output would be HDCP-encrypted HDMI output, that's what would be connected to the TV.

to ensure that nobody buys!

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

I know this has been pointed out before, and I am myself tired of repeating this, but it's necessary:

1) It doesn't matter what encryption they use, the decryption key is on the device, so we'll get it eventally
2) The signal travels a long way. They can encrypt as many miles as they want, and they can encrypt the last mile, but the last 3 meters (the 3 meters from your TV to your eyes) can't be encrypted. So, eventually, the signal will need to be decrypted and there, it is vulnerable.
3) If they resort to putting mandatory DRM on your brain, and send the signal encrypted till it reaches your eyes, refer to 1) (the decryption key will be on your brain and we can get it).

What baffles me is why we are still trying to find technical workarounds to a commercial issue. People want to produce content. People want to watch content. Companies want to make money by being the middle man. This middle man has done nothing but move group 1 further and further apart from group 2. But regardless of how much they try, they won't prevent people from producing content, and won't prevent people from wanting to watch that content. We will eventually realize the artificial limitation here, remove the middle man, and find a way to pay the producers and get our content without *AAs.

To quote Megadeth: If there's a new way, I'll be the first in line, But it better work this time.

So, while all of you keep fighting each other over this moot point, I will go over to megavideo to watch Flash Forward S01E19.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[tepples]

Slashdot commenters hold monopolists to a higher standard. Apple's handheld media device has plenty of viable competitors: Android, Windows Phone 7, and even MeeGo. Your set-top box does not; without the cable box provided by the cable company, you can't receive cable TV. (Video on demand and less-popular "switched" channels don't work with a CableCARD.)

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Vandilzer]

Well,

Apple - $0.99 - $1.25
RIAA - $750 - $150,000

You can pick who you want to bend over for, at least Apple makes the effort to look sleek, sexy, and it easy to get.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[quickgold192]

"hd-dvd fanbois"

That's got to be a small club.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

No kidding. Sometimes I'd really like to forget the local context when returning from a movie.

(And yes, I fully expect nobody to get that joke. You can all GOTO yourselves.)

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Peach Rings]

You seriously didn't notice any correlation between broadcast TV reception and fireworks going off directly over your apartment?

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Phoobarnvaz]

What people are forgetting about this is...we're in the middle of the deepest recession/depression in 70 years. My roommate has all ready dropped the cable...since all the bill seems to keep doing is heading up every time a cable/satellite exec farts or needs a new boy/girlfriend. As soon as my DTV contract is up at the end of the year...that's bye-bye as well. With more & more people doing the same thing...where are all these customers going to come from for the cable companies/MPAA to keep screwing over?

If I find I'm still having trouble paying the rent this summer from not being able to find even a part-time job...will just break the contract. With rates increasing ever upward...don't need to worry about paying their salaries or my rent. Hulu...over-the-air TV & the network websites are just as good to get whatever TV fix I'm looking for.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm playing the Ewok celebration song really, really loud. Can you hear it?

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[ktappe]

Why is it any more OK for Apple to lock down a handheld media device than it is for the MPAA to lock down your set-top-box?

1) You do not have to buy an Apple; you can get other smartphones. But much of America has no choice but to get TV from their cable company. I cannot get FiOS where I live (been on waiting list for 4 years) and trees prevent me from having satellite. So I'm stuck with that set top box. You know, the box I shouldn't even have to have if Comcast were to use a STANDARD to encode their digital so that my Media Center could work without an IR blaster? That box right there.

2) Apple is a vendor. Comcast is a vendor. The MPAA is not a vendor. You cannot choose to or not to purchase from them. They insidiously work behind the scenes on crap like this, whereas you know up front when buying an Apple that it's locked down. It's a minor but notable distinction from the point above.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[ZekoMal]

Because Apple isn't tracking down individuals who got a copy of their friend's itunes purchases and then suing them for 3 million dollars >.>

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[thegarbz]

Because Apple owns the device and there are alternate devices available. And because the MPAA are exactly the opposite, they don't own the device, they don't even transmit data to the device, they simply represent a group who own the production rights to some of the content that some other random company may be streaming to the box.
Apple are pretty evil, but this is an order of magnitude worse.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

PPV is the new Telecine!

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[mehrotra.akash]

And even if they find no other method to capture the video, a decent cam with a tripod and a high quality LCD or projector is still better than a handheld cam in a theater

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[SCPRedMage]

Actually, your cable company can provide an SDV adapter for CableCARD devices. From what I hear, though, they're a major pain to get working reliably.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[c-reus]

Step 2 can be fixed by either banning or requiring an ID and registering purchases of camcorders.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[sumdumass]

There is probably going to be some sort of code injected into the video that will allow detection of which subscriber recorded the video. It wouldn't be all that hard to do either. Simply having a cut scene where a different brand of drink is used or some labeling being different can be done to track down which geographical region the PPV happened in, using something like the display on a clock can show the time and date it was shown and one or two other things could narrow it down to a specific vendor. Or they could just inject a few artifacts into the video that would contain all the important information as well.

All that can be done by computer when the video is streamed to the user. It can be documented and stored. It wouldn't surprise me if it's not already able to be done and they aren't jumping on it in order to catch the major distributors.

Of course what can be done by the MPAA can also be undone by the user with another computer depending on how much detail they want to get into. Something as simple as cutting several copies together into one full length feature could pretty much inject so much uncertainty to make enforcement near impossible.

I'm suggesting this so you don't run out and be the first ones to discover it. Look for this crap before doing it- even if your not the one I'm replying to.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Eskarel]

Hate to burst your bubble but while the MPAA and RIAA in and of themselves are not a vendors they are made up of vendors. You can choose not to purchase products from those vendors any time you like. You will of course pretty much have to stop watching commercial television and your choices for music and movies will be rather severely limited, but you can definitely still do it.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[mehrotra.akash]

Yea, similar stuff is already being done but in a more obvious way, random numbers popping up on the screen.
Waiting for them to move to more subtle ways so that atleast when paying for the stuff I dont have to have blocks of numbers with opaque backgrounds showing up in the middle of the screen blocking my view

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[OnePumpChump]

Nothing which makes major campaign contributions is harmful.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Stiletto]

But much of America has no choice but to get TV from their cable company.

I live in the USA and I've never been forced to buy TV service. What the hell place do you live in?

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Dutchmaan]

Why do people continue to insist that 'nothing' is a viable choice in the *marketplace*?

My way or the highway does not constitute a market choice.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Whuffo]

I'm curious - where is this lockdown you speak of? Is it in the Fairplay DRM that Apple uses on some of their digital media? Something that the nay-sayers conveniently ignore is a simple little iTunes trick. Create a playlist of your DRM encrusted tunes and burn it to a CD. Presto, no more DRM and the CD is unprotected.

Or is it that you have to use iTunes to load media? That's not exactly true; there are other alternatives that perform the task. And you could download a bunch of pirated MP3 files and iTunes (or one of the alternatives like DoubleTwist) will happily load them up and play them for you. This doesn't seem to be locked down either.

Maybe these unhappy people would be happier if they put their iPod in disc mode. Then they could copy files to and from it with ease; it would appear as another drive letter on their Windows PC.

Something I suspect many don't realize or understand is that those RIAA members won't let you handle their tunes unless your player meets their requirements. They don't want you to buy a tune then turn around and give everyone else a copy. What this means in the real world is that there is NO music player that can obtain legal copies of RIAA company tunes that doesn't include DRM. Apple has done an amazing job of meeting those requirements and at the same time making their devices as free and open as possible. Part of those requirements is that the players be secure and any breaches of that security be patched promptly - so when people point at how Apple blocked Real or Palm what was really happening was Apple complying with those contracts.

Something that people don't seem to understand is that the RIAA and MPAA companies aren't trying to control the distribution of their media as much as they want to control the players that you access that media through. Remember how much fuss was kicked up over DeCSS? Here's some insight for you: you can make a bitwise copy of a encrypted DVD and it'll play just fine - you don't need to remove the DRM to copy it. What DeCSS threatened was the MPAA's control of DVD players; you can't play a DVD without a decryption key and keys are only available to players that meet the design requirements of the MPAA. Strangely, nobody seems to be whining about how their DVD player is locked down

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[symbolic]

Maybe because 'nothing' can be a highly motivating factor for those that want 'something' (typically your money).

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

1) It doesn't matter what encryption they use, the decryption key is on the device, so we'll get it eventually

Not always true - PS3 after years of hacking no encryption keys. Devices are getting smaller, components working on higher frequencies, you need fully equipped lab to hack. With high-tech devices it's not possible anymore to solder a wire or two and enjoy full unlocked functionality.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[selven]

If they resort to putting mandatory DRM on your brain

Become a lawyer so when the DRM, hooked up to life-critical parts of the brain, breaks you can enjoy the fallout.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

Android maybe... but theres nothing like the iphone/itunes combo

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[TheRaven64]

Slashdot commenters hold monopolists to a higher standard

Nope, the law holds companies that are in a position to abuse their market share to a higher standard. Slashdot readers, by and large, don't accept 'but we don't have a monopoly' as an excuse for being an asshat. Just because something is legal, doesn't mean it's admirable.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[TheRaven64]

I realise that Slashdot is an international forum, so English may not be your first language, but you should generally only use 'all' for groups of more than two. It is better to say 'both of the HD-DVD fanboys.'

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Hognoxious]

[ ( Satan + Hitler + Cartman + Wicked Witch of the West ) ^ 10 year total execs bonuses ]

I have no idea what dimensions that equates to, but at least light-years and yards are both lengths.

Which leads me neatly into parsecs.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, just region 1.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Ironhandx]

and trees prevent me from having satellite.

I have a solution for you. Its new and cutting edge. People have been raving about it. Its called a "chain saw".

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Opportunist]

The fallacy is that they are interested in you being able to play the content you paid to see. They're not. They're interested in getting your money for the content. From this moment onwards, that content in your hands is to no value of them anymore. Whether you can use it or not does not matter. You paid.

To put the lever at 1 or 2, they'd first of all have to realize that customer satisfaction plays a huge role in the question whether someone buys or copies. They're used to having a monopoly on their goods (you can only get a song from artist X from company Y, there is no other supplyer), so whether or not the customer is satisfied did never play an important role in their business. Or rather, the goal was only to raise an interest for artist X, not to ensure that the customer is also eventually satisfied with the "product" itself, the CD the DVD, the download, or whatever other form the content is transported to the customer. The customer had no choice but to take what was given to him, since there was no other supplyer of this particular good.

Now there is. Illegal as it may be (ymmv), but there is someone able and willing to give you this good in better quality. And by quality I do not mean higher bitrate or less lossy compression. That's rarely the case, actually that quality is sometimes even inferior. I mean the product quality. And that's higher if a good allows me more liberty with its use. DVDs without unskippable ads, CDs that play in every kind of player, downloads that can be transfered to various devices and store wherever you please.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Opportunist]

Because NOT to buy is a valid choice. If the offer does not match demand, no sale will happen, no market exists.

To make a market happen, supply must meet demand, usually (in a free market) they meet at the point where a maximum of trade can happen. The only exception to this rule is a monopoly situation where either side cannot make a decision.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Idbar]

What baffles me is why we are still trying to find technical workarounds to a commercial issue. People want to produce content. People want to watch content. Companies want to make money by being the middle man.

And people want to make money out of the middle man too. Security is very expensive, people give their privacy up for it, some others pay a load of money for it. If people working on watermarking and encryption techniques, can take a piece of that cake, they will. If not, someone else will find a way. I'm baffled by the fact that **AA keeps paying them for a system that as you listed will be cracked down because of its nature.

But hey, they are just lawyers. :P

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[leswt]

Why is it any more OK for Apple to lock down a handheld media device than it is for the MPAA to lock down your set-top-box?

1) You do not have to buy an Apple; you can get other smartphones. But much of America has no choice but to get TV from their cable company. I cannot get FiOS where I live (been on waiting list for 4 years) and trees prevent me from having satellite. So I'm stuck with that set top box. You know, the box I shouldn't even have to have if Comcast were to use a STANDARD to encode their digital so that my Media Center could work without an IR blaster? That box right there.

2) Apple is a vendor. Comcast is a vendor. The MPAA is not a vendor. You cannot choose to or not to purchase from them. They insidiously work behind the scenes on crap like this, whereas you know up front when buying an Apple that it's locked down. It's a minor but notable distinction from the point above.

If you live in southeast Michigan I have a chainsaw that can solve your satellite problem. (This is my first slashdot post by the way, starting out with a wise-ass comment)

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[DeanFox]

So it means no more need for crappy camcorders in the theaters and the consequent risk of the recently legislated crazy-ass sentences for getting caught doing so.

Even better than better. Even if there isn't the capability to break and intercept the output at the signal level now all the camies can sit at home with a HD camcorder recording an HD picture from their HD televisions without the chance of getting caught. No more cam jobs of the crappy theater screen. At worst rather than cam jobs made at a theater we'll get HD versions made at home from an HD image.

THANK YOU MPAA and FCC!!!

-[d]-

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Opportunist]

Unfortunately that's basically the logical limit when you extrapolate. Not only this loop, but the actual development.

More copying -> more restrictive DRM -> more troubles with DRM -> people pissed at DRM and thus not buying content -> more copying. This loop will not cease. Breaking the loop at people buying content despite not being able to use it is certainly not going to work. Nobody is going to throw money at something they cannot use. Keeping them from copying instead requires either content they can use the way they want or even more restrictive DRM means. Since I doubt the studios are going to willingly part with their control over content entirely, the only option visible here is more DRM.

The endpoint can only be devices that only allow the playback of very specific kinds of content in a very specific kind of fashion, even more than we have today. With the increasing decline in hardware cost, I could even see them insisisting that content is sold bundled with its own player, which can then probably only be used a limited amount of times or for a specific duration.

Personally, I foresee a huge waste problem waiting to happen. Far worse than those throwaway discs proposed a few years ago that could only be used a few days before deteriorating.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[sharkey]

There is probably an ax wielding maniac threatening to kill him if he doesn't keep up with LA Ink.

IIRC, the ax wielding TV enforcers are partnered with the masked men that like to force people into smoke filled restaurants at gunpoint and force them to eat, drink and party in a smoky room.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[npsimons]

We will eventually realize the artificial limitation here, remove the middle man

Some people already have; they are called "pirates" by some and "thieves" by others, although the correct legal term is "copyright infringers."

, and find a way to pay the producers and get our content without *AAs.

Aye, now there's the rub; assuming they should be paid indefinitely for work they did once, how do you pay the producers? Of course, no one likes to hear that maybe they should have negotiated payment upfront, but that's viable way that doesn't even require copyright.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[jedidiah]

What exactly gave you the impression that we accept the disabling of our Hauppauge 1212's any more than we put up with Apple?

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[jedidiah]

Can your grandma handle the "trick"?

Otherwise then it's just the same as CSS or AACS except for the fact that I can get BD players from 10 different vendors.

I am not stuck buying only from JVC or Sony.

Besides, you are conveniently ignoring everything else besides music that is infested with DRM over at Apple.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Runaway1956]

Because, obviously, MPAA didn't sell the box. They didn't invest in the box, they didn't distribute the box, they have no say in the box. At least Apple is only meddling with stuff they sold - rightly or wrongly. You will note that I'm not defending or justifying Apple's way of doing business - I'm merely pointing out an obvious distinction.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[ibsteve2u]

The sad fact is that what we in the United States are creating is a system of specialized monopolies, whether real or where the number of players is so small that a move by any one player is immediately copy-catted by all. Broadband television and internet access provision is, you might say, on the cutting edge of that movement.

And on top of that we have layered "the commodities market", where the increasing concentration of wealth enables a shrinking handful to tie up raw materials (to include energy, of course) and hold them off the market until they get the price that they want. Not a big deal, you may say - but it is when the individuals making those market plays have accumulated so much personal wealth since the advent of "flood-up/trickle-down" economics that it would take five of their lifetimes before they felt any personal economic pressure to sell.

Particularly in those areas where the consumer's needs are the most profound due to the nature of "modern life", such as health and automobile insurance, internet and television provision, entertainment, and energy, we increasingly simply do not have a competitive system of free enterprise where the consumer benefits from the laws of supply and demand; instead, we have monopolization and extortion.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Hijacked Public]

Because it is? Certainly it is in this case.

I don't know how long you've been paying attention, but media organizations have fought to control nearly every single advancement in the content distribution arena. Their insanity has derailed or generally fucked up a number of great technologies. They've sued their own customers. They've pushed ridiculous monitoring overhead off on people in the business of just carrying packets. They've invaded privacy. They've lied about you to authorities. They've bought laws.

But when I read stories like this its like 10 years ago and I'm watching Cops and here is some beaten housewife, face bruised, blubbering through her bloody lips that even though her husband beats her and drinks to much and she knows he is a degenerate piece shit, she still loves him and does he really have to go to jail? Like her, people like you complain about the transgressions above but you reliably choose them over 'nothing'. No music no movies No TV.

The media organizations do not believe that you are unhappy with them. When they look at their monthly reports they see you still give them your money. It isn't like they have demonstrated particularly clear and forward looking vision.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[the_bard17]

From what I hear, though, they're a major pain to get working reliably.

So they're no different that my current Time Warner DVR?

Their recent "update" significantly changing the front end and God knows what on the back end certainly didn't do any improvement, either.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[j_166]

"My way or the highway does not constitute a market choice."

It does if your are Roadhouse.

ROADHOUSE.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[j_166]

I don't agree to that.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[JSG]

> and trees prevent me from having satellite.

Me too until I chopped the top of one but perhaps you don't have that luxury.

Is there really nowhere on your land/house that could conceivably support a line of sight to the relevant satellite and is allowed within your local planning laws?

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[geminidomino]

Slashdot commenters hold monopolists to a higher standard

Nope, the law holds companies that are in a position to abuse their market share to a higher standard. Slashdot readers, by and large, don't accept 'but we don't have a monopoly' as an excuse for being an asshat. Just because something is legal, doesn't mean it's admirable.

Unless it's Apple. Then there's a nice subset who will come out and trip all over themselves making bullshit rationalizations and excuses for them.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[geminidomino]

Alas, there's no SI unit with which to measure "evil"

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[ArsonSmith]

Because general economic theory states that there is no such thing as a "need" and everything in life is based off of a "want." You don't need entertainment. According to the market you don't need food, water or even air. You just want these things because you want to stay alive and out of pain and discomfort. With this in mind then nothing is always a viable alternative. That is the alternative that i have mostly chosen when it comes to the Music and Film Industry of American (MAFIA) products. I do watch movies through netflix, and I do have XM radio, but I haven't bought a CD in over 10 years and almost never buy a DVD unless it is a truly good movie IMO which has averaged about 1 maybe 2 a year.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[ArsonSmith]

I think you mean you've never been forced to "watch" TV service. Through the FCC and PBS and other government subsidies you have been forced to pay for it.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[gstoddart]

3) legit customers resort to piracy
4) MPAA cites increasing piracy to justify further usability-sacrificing restrictions

Customers say fuck it, cancel cable subscription en masse, rediscover books and the great outdoors.

Can someone get Ted Nugent riled up about these guys? I think the gun-toting crowd needs to have a run-in with the IP lockdown-the-world crowd.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[gstoddart]

However, the biggest advantage they have over the *AAs is that they give you compelling reason to use their products. And hey guess what! The consumers love them for it.

ixnay on the appyhay ustomerscay -- people on Slahdot don't want to hear about that, you're just going to reopen the "but it won't run flash" screed again.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[gstoddart]

Why do people continue to insist that 'nothing' is a viable choice in the *marketplace*?

For the same reason people continue to say such annoying things as "the free market will find a solution" to environmental and social problems.

The "free market" has become deified, but a system which operates on corporate greed doesn't "solve" problems. It only means that if there's a buck to be made, someone will try it.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[sixsixtysix]

neither are ok

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course what can be done by the MPAA can also be undone by the user with another computer depending on how much detail they want to get into. Something as simple as cutting several copies together into one full length feature could pretty much inject so much uncertainty to make enforcement near impossible.

This is the important part of your post and it shows how easy it is to fight "watermarking" methods. It's not exactly by "cutting several copies together", but the logic is the same: you just need several copies of the media from different sources to figure out what is the "common data" (i.e. the original media) and what is the "variable data" (i.e. the watermark) and then find a way to strip or corrupt the watermark. Once the watermarking method is understood, coming up with a way to foil it should be relatively easy. Regardless of the watermark technology, they ALL have to find a way to robustly embed some data that cannot be removed/corrupted without completely distorting/destroying the original media: far from trivial (if it is even possible), given people's willingness to watch low-quality cam movies.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

That's funny and all, but if you are going to predicate your humor on correct interpretation of English, allow me to refer you to the word "did" not "do" but "did."

There were just as many fanbois for HDDVD as there were for BLURAY at the time. Bluray didn't win because of the number of fanbois, it won because of the number of joe-sixpacks. Anybody who is a bluray fanboi today is just as stupid as being an HDDVD fanboi since there is no practical choice anymore.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

When unlicensed copying occurs, no sale happens either. I can find millions of consumers who will choose that form of opting out of the "market". The sad thing is that many people would prefer to pay something reasonable to get something reasonable. Instead, with every new "copy protection" scheme, we end up paying more and what we get is something less reasonable.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

(This is my first slashdot post by the way, starting out with a wise-ass comment)

Oh, you're obviously going to fit right in.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Illogical Spock]

We can propose one. It would be called "MicroAA". It would be like that: "Man, this guy is sooo bad! He is like 200AA bad!

It would be like Kelvin for temperature, but instead of the absolute zero we would have the absolute one, that would be the MPAA or RIAA level - phisically impossible in the known nature laws, and where all the goodness would cease to exist if reached.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[SCPRedMage]

So you're telling me the shitty DVR the cable company tries to force on you is, *gasp*, SHITTY? Say it isn't so!

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[lpq]

Cuz the apple handsets look "cool", so even as a paperweight, they still are a status symbol?

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would they change the watermarking to make a better product for you, the consumer?
They're already fucking you in the arse, why should they care when you say it hurts?
They will only change from obvious watermarking when they realise the pirates can easily remove it.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Eskarel]

The "free market" hasn't been defiled, it's just a fantasy.

The market is an optimizing algorithm, like any other. Over time it finds the optimal solution given a certain set of constraints. Generally speaking it's really quite good at this. Unfortunately at the moment our constraints seem to be "x => x makes rich people richer", but that's neither here nor there.

The big issue is that people a lot of people keep thinking that there is some sort of magical way in which this market can generate the best of all possible worlds even if we don't actually know how to define that best of all possible worlds or what constraints we need to set to generate it.

It's a bit like when you take physics and you learn all those formulas which define what an object would do in a vacuum. It's all well and good to know what a ball will do if you throw it in a vacuum, but you're never actually going to do that. There are always going to be all those complex factors like wind resistance and all the other things which turn the nice simple formula into 3 months worth of computation on a super computer.

The "free market" doesn't exist because fundamentally the market can never be 100% absolutely free. That doesn't mean the market can't be an incredibly useful tool for generating the best possible outcome, just that it's not going to do that by magic.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

its not OK, but it is better in the sense that when you buy an Apple product / use an Apple service you know that they are locked down and generally know what the restrictions are (if you have done the slightest amount of research at all), when you buy a TV / VCR / Etc you bought an unrestricted (relatively) device.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[gstoddart]

The "free market" hasn't been defiled, it's just a fantasy.

I didn't say defiled -- I said deified. They mean very different things.

My problem is that there seems to be a widespread spouting of "oh, the market will find a solution, and that will be the best one".

As you say, the "market" is a hypothetical construct used to explain how it all works -- the problem is, people talk about it reverentially as if it's some deity which we must all serve and which has our best interests at heart.

I think the "free market" is bullshit, and all of the laissez-faire economists out there are basically saying we should let corporate greed rule the world. Because, that's basically the result. It's an economic model, but only applicable in a vacuum.

There are no perfectly spherical monopole ducks. :-P

Cheers

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Anonymous Coward]

without the cable box provided by the cable company, you can't receive cable TV. (Video on demand and less-popular "switched" channels don't work with a CableCARD.)

That's not entirely true. My tv is plugged into the coax that is sticking out of my wall. I get about 500 cable channels (although a ton of them are redundant - high def streams and standard def streams of the same channel). I neither have a cable box, cable card, or anything in between my tv and the cable in the wall, nor do I pay for cable tv service. The box merely allows for decoding of scrambled channels.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Eskarel]

Sorry bout that, misread it.

I do believe the market is fairly powerful. I just think that the market is never going to be entirely free, so presuming that it is is rather idiotic.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[gstoddart]

Sorry bout that, misread it.

It happens. No foul.

I do believe the market is fairly powerful. I just think that the market is never going to be entirely free, so presuming that it is is rather idiotic.

I believe it's powerful, but I don't believe it's ever been free, and it's not necessarily impartial and benevolent like everyone seems to ascribe to it.

Since everyone is trying to manipulate it, it doesn't necessarily have optimal results -- sometimes, not even good. A lot of people assume that whatever solution the market arrives at is ultimately the "correct" one.

I believe we're arguing the same essential point. ;-)

Cheers

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Eskarel]

That we are.

Re:PREDICTIONS ARE IN

[Thinboy00]

What about the webcam in practically every laptop these days?

Best DRM

[TheMeuge]

Federal regulators are endorsing Hollywood's efforts to let cable and satellite TV companies turn off output connections on the back of set-top boxes to prevent illegal copying of movies

Good. Turning off ALL the outputs will certainly prevent those movies from being copied. I've always thought that such an approach will be the ultimately successful DRM the companies are looking for.

Re:Best DRM

[bughunter]

And with all those outputs turned off, people are just going to abandon Cable and Satellite TV altogether. Upon finding it harder to watch what they want, the cable companies' customers (imminent ex-customers most likely) will just download their content... legal or bootlegged. Most consumers don't really care - they'll follow the path of least resistance and rationalize their behavior.

Re:Best DRM

[Platinumrat]

It's called a brick at this point. I've got a pile of them in the back yard, which I could slap a sticker on, call them HD quality set-top boxes. or even better Quad HD, and make a tidy profit.

Re:Best DRM

[lindoran]

not likely but whatever... the problem here is that people who buy into ppv content use it much like a video rental service. those who legitimately want the movie long term go and buy it from the store; download it as you say or rent the DVD from red box or netflix and copy it. So basically this will not drive those who are legitimately using the service away, and the few customers who use the service to steal first run DVD's will have to go another step to do it.

Re:Best DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

actually that just does not fly, If the units are leased ok, but if I buy a tivo, then that means my rights are being infringed, that is the preverbal slippery sloop

Here's a hint consumers...

[pspahn]

Pay for something else!

Could it be that Federal Regulators might actually want you to stop subscribing to crappy services?

Adam Smith would be so proud.

Re:Here's a hint consumers...

[WrongSizeGlass]

Could it be that Federal Regulators might actually want you to stop subscribing to crappy services?

Puhleez! They can't even decide on a secret handshake let alone anything that would be in the consumer's best interests. All Federal regulators want is to remain Federal regulators (until they get a better paying job in the private sector where they can lobby their replacements).

^ Gross ^

[TrisexualPuppy]

In all seriousness, we are going to see what we saw ten years ago with DSS hardware customizations and what we see now with Dish Network. Some crafty Koreans reverse engineer the "legit" hardware and build much improved hardware sell it dirt cheap with the security removed (e.g. make them programmable to get free satellite) and a slew of added features that the guys with the hardware monopolies never implemented...

Funny now that there is competition from this gray market, the "legit" IRDs have kind of copycatted them albeit without the security removed. ;)

Re:^ Gross ^

[morari]

Links? :)

Saw it coming... rolled my own

[bughunter]

Tactics like this are exactly why I prefer systems like MythTV for windows and EyeTV for Mac. Heck, I can much more easily expand my storage space and install commercial skipping scripts with those, so I'll just roll my own PVR.

For sources, you can get clear QAM service on most cable systems, including broadcast digital HDTV. And there's things like Boxee, Hulu, Miro and of course, bittorrent.

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[mrchaotica]

It really sucks that you can't use it with cable or satellite HDTV though.

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[dgatwood]

Don't know why not. There are HDMI capture devices out there, and it takes all of a few minutes to build an IR blaster and attach it to a serial port or whatever.

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[Sloppy]

It really sucks that you can't use it with cable or satellite HDTV though.

Sucks for MythTV users? Are you kidding?

If the cable company doesn't let customers watch the TV shows, then the customers need to download the shows via bittorrent. Once the customers download all their TV, then .. um .. what service does the cable company provide? Oh, right: nothing. Result: save money!

Sucks that they are actively trying to save me money by telling customers

I know you have been sending us money month after month for years, but we really really want you to stop. Really, we are committed and will do whatever it takes to stop having you as a customer, because cutting off our revenue is job #1 here at Comcast, and job #1 for our upstream providers. We can't supply quality programming unless our partners have our assurance that they won't be paid.

? You're right, it sure does. It sucks for them. Or rather, their stockholders. Presumably management gets a good enough kickback from the DRM snakeoil salesman and set top box manufacturers, that it doesn't suck for those individual people. And I guess that's what really counts in business today.

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[pnewhook]

I'll just roll my own PVR

I have yet to see a home built PVR with the capabilities of the PVR that comes from the cable company. Until it does, home rolled PVRs are just an interesting project, but not a viable alternative (for me anyway).

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[znerk]

I have yet to see a home built PVR with the capabilities of the PVR that comes from the cable company. Until it does, home rolled PVRs are just an interesting project, but not a viable alternative (for me anyway).

What capabilities are you not seeing in the DIY version? I haven't seen any DIY PVR systems that didn't have every feature under the sun (unless they were "lemme see what I can do with this old 486" versions). Seems to me that rather than whining about "missing features", it might do some good to specify which features you feel are missing - perhaps someone will suggest solution that escaped your notice, or perhaps a bored coder will be inspired to implement it.

Admittedly, I have yet to actually use a PVR/DVR/whatever, since I haven't owned a television in years, and my cable bill has been internet-only for nearly a decade...

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[Achromatic1978]

Ummm, who exactly do you think will be funding millions of dollar TV shows if everyone is torrenting stuff for their MythTV box, just out of curiosity?

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[unitron]

...Once the customers download all their TV, then .. um .. what service does the cable company provide? ...

Uh, cable internet? Or are those customers downloading all their TV via a station wagon loaded with 9-track tapes speeding down the highway, or however that old saying about bandwidth goes?

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[c-reus]

Are you implying that what they're doing is OK, as long as they produce the episodes of American Idol and such?

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[Anonymous Coward]

No Clear QAM in Canada...

However if you have one of the IP Digital TV boxes (Telus, Sasktel for example) there are ways of recording packets sent to the device. You still need a way of decrypting it. Hell you don't even need the STB for TelusTV to watch it, you just need to subscribe to the channel, and let VLC join the multicast stream. The STB could be sitting in the corner not plugged into anything but power and ethernet.

But I assume they will either eventually encrypt the channels or already do on their HD channels.

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[drsmithy]

Ummm, who exactly do you think will be funding millions of dollar TV shows if everyone is torrenting stuff for their MythTV box, just out of curiosity?

Maybe TV shows will just have to get cheaper to produce ?

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[TheRaven64]

No one. Then these companies can go out of business and ones that think selling a product that people want to buy in a format that they're willing to pay for is a good idea. Or maybe the shareholders will vote the current board out and replace them with a more competent one that has the same idea.

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[Diantre]

Maybe TV shows will just have to get actual content in them?! What a strange idea.

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[Anonymous Coward]

Its completely understandable that you prefer to get content for free. Similarly you can understand the desire of content creators to make as much money as possible. This is just another battle in the ago of struggle between buyers and sellers, landlords and tenants, producers and consumers.

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[pnewhook]

What capabilities are you not seeing in the DIY version? I haven't seen any DIY PVR systems that didn't have every feature under the sun

Well primarily with my DVR I can record/watch three shows simultaneously, whether they are HD or regular. I don't actually watch a lot but for some reason the shows i want to watch are on the same time or overlap. So I find if I'm watching something, one or sometimes two programs could also be recording, or I could be watching a pre-recorded and have three others recording. Haven't seen a home version that can do that.

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[Sloppy]

who exactly do you think will be funding millions of dollar TV shows if everyone is torrenting stuff for their MythTV box

I can't imagine what their plan is, other than to have moved on to other lines of work by the time that has happened.

For the content creators who still want to make a living in that businesses, the best way to fund TV shows would be to re-open for business. And as a potential customer, I would endorse and support that. If a PVR can record the stream, why bother torrenting? Cable television still has the potential to be an excellently efficient use of multicast bandwidth; think about the volume of stuff streaming (encrypted to the point of uselessness) into row-after-row of houses, 24x7. It's staggering and there's big money to be made on that. But of course, everyone knows that, which is why Comcast exists to self-destruct in the first place.

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own

[znerk]

...with my DVR I can record/watch three shows simultaneously...

Perhaps you just need more video inputs on your DIY PVR?

Anonymous Coward.

[Anonymous Coward]

in related news...I cancel my cable subscription...i used STB with Firewire out to my mythtv box, however I didn't really need to watch that show in HD...So now i'll just grab the SD feed.

mod parent up

[Anonymous Coward]

I happen to receive pirate satellite and what she/it/he (???) says is true. Once someone pops in with "unblocked" hardware everyone will buy that receiver..

I turned off all the inputs on my set-top box too.

[Anonymous Coward]

I got fed up with the crappy bug-ridden set-top boxes Shaw Cable distributes up here in Canada, and cancelled my service.

They too used to offer firewire output on the Motorola boxes, but decided to disable them one day. After a lengthy discussion with their tech support, I decided it was in /my/ best interest to cancel my account and forgo any future dealings with these yahoos. The money I saved by *not* paying for HDTV allowed me to pay for a pretty fat pipe instead (not from Shaw, mind you) and a reasonable HTPC to boot. Mostly all my content comes from Demonoid or Torrent Leech now. I can watch anything I want in just under an hour off TL, or typically under 2 hours off Demonoid.

In fact, I've saved so much money, I actually don't mind going out and buying good movies that I enjoy. I almost never unwrap them or play the disks, but I don't mind supporting the people who make good things happen that genuinely entertain me. I've actually watched more movies and bought more movies as a result of this then I ever have before. And I can pretty much do what I please with the disks afterwards, too (rip them to PMP, archive them on my media server, etc).

-AC

No this is good.

[thegarbz]

Law makers have now passed a law that really doesn't affect anyone, yet Hollywood is probably sipping from the schampagne.

Really who copies something from the outputs of their set-top boxes? Anyone here? (legit question) Pretty much every set top box has recording features built in down in Australia where admittedly the industry is a bit different, but isn't this the same in America?

As long as TiVo can still record your movies, surely you can wait 90 days or till the DVD comes out before you say ahrrrrr I be takin this of the intanet.

Re:No this is good.

[frdmfghtr]

A lot of cable subscribers still have analog televisions, since a digital TV is not required if you don't subscribe to your cable provider's HD channels. By turning off the analog outputs at Hollywood's notice, these subscribers won't be able to watch these movies. You don't have to want to copy the content in order to need those analog outputs to stay turned on.

Re:No this is good.

[TheGratefulNet]

its not about COPYING from set top boxes; its about 'analog holes' and how big media hates it.

I cancelled my direct-tv about a year ago. I had an hour long chat with the 'disconnection dept' or whatever they're called when they try to salvage a 'leaving' customer. (edit: its called 'retentions').

they had the nerve to advise me to use an analog capture box since I told them the whole reason I was leaving was because I couldn't save the shows on MY disk. twice, before, I've had tivo's die and take their drives (encrypted) with them. never again. so I told them I wanted to go with mythtv and that their direct-tv box was very anti-myth (non-friendly).

they even told me there was an hdmi 'sniffer' that I could buy at newegg (??) that would let me tap into their stream. I told them that, at best, it would be for non-encrypted signals over hdmi and almost all their hdmi is encrypted (not talking about qam; but the hdmi interconnect, here).

I JUST KNEW that at some point, they'd turn on 'the switch' and even if I bought one of those hdmi sniffer boxes, I'd be out of luck. I told them that their whole model was not working for me and anyone else my age and younger. told them goodbye. they lost me for good.

the analog hole is to stop myth-tv guys as much as the 'pirates'. I just want to time shift things, not keep them. but I can't even do THAT, now.

cable and satallite tv are dead to me. I'm late 40's and even people 'my age' have had enough with this crap.

Re:No this is good.

[bl968]

Sure they are sipping from the Champagne because once you have the ability to do something it's far easier to lobby for expansions of that ability, than it would have been to get it as they really wanted it to be in the first place...

Re:No this is good.

[natehoy]

Good. Then the average person who doesn't understand the whole debate will now get the message that they are being fucked with loud and clear.

Re:No this is good.

[Mr. Underbridge]

Really who copies something from the outputs of their set-top boxes? Anyone here? (legit question)

If I understand, the question is "why record to an external medium when the DVR already has it recorded", correct?

Two reasons: 1) Long term storage of stuff you've recorded but you don't want clogging your DVR. Wouldn't be a problem if I could swap out the hard drive on the damn DVR, but I think it's 40GB or something equally stupid. I've recorded things to DVD that I want to watch again multiple times. 2) Copying of DVR'd stuff to DVD for playing in the car. My fellow breeders will understand.

Re:No this is good.

[Anonymous Coward]

We already got that message. That's why we still have analog televisions.

New technologies that take away abilities like copying simply don't get bought, in many households.

If we're going to buy a product to replace our current one, the new product had better be better than the old one.

Re:No this is good.

[Mix Master Nixon]

I definitely record from the outputs on my STB. Plenty of movies never made it to DVD or even VHS, or made it in horrible condition, which get run from time to time on cable, frequently in pristine condition. Stuff that I'd have bought if only it were an option - but a perceived lack of demand, indifferent, mismanaged, out-of-business distributors, rights issues, or whatever have kept it out of circulation.

Or, I should say, I USED to record from the STB outputs... until the most recent FIOS software update broke FireWire output and HDMI simultaneously. Thanks, Verizon douchebags!

Re:No this is good.

[bdo19]

Not likely, unfortunately. They'll just write it off as another technology change they don't understand, and get a new TV so they can keep watching Desperate Housewives.

Why?

[gillbates]

Um, how exactly does this those folks downloading content off the net?

Oh, wait. It doesn't. Instead, it gives me one less reason to use an STB, and one more reason to ditch cable.

With every passing year I consume less and less commercial content. Hollywood's most effective DRM to date has been their adversarial attitude toward their customers; they can't seem to figure out that I'm not going to pay for what I can't enjoy. Funny, that.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Hollywood's most effective DRM to date has been their adversarial attitude toward their customers

That, and the abundance of crap movies getting produced there.

Re:Why?

[lonecrow]

I wanted to patch my DVR through my 27" iMac to have TV available in that room. The block outputs made it kinda useless. If the firewire port wasn't blocked it should have been trivial. So instead I have the DVR in my bedroom and I bought a $150 tuner for the iMac. I can still record TV with the tuner software but as yet I don't have guide information available so that I can scan ahead and choose what to record.

So ya blocking ports on $600 DVR's prevents copying so people have to buy $150 tuners instead. Sense making it is not.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

The cable TV industry will just go the way of the music industry. People got sick of the value they got from the products they purchased. They got sick of albums bundling killer with filler and singles offering nearly nothing. People have been sick of TV quality for a long time now and it's only getting worse.

What gets me most is that the TV industry is willing to keep on taking and taking and expecting customers to put up with it. There's more advertising than ever on cable/broadcast, they jack up the volume, and it even invades your purchased content. Have they not learned anything from other industries? What do they think will happen aside from customers abandoning them?

Re:Why?

[rxan]

Oh shit I forgot to sign in for that one. Don't know how that happened...

Re:Why?

[Pentium100]

I can still record TV with the tuner software but as yet I don't have guide information available so that I can scan ahead and choose what to record.

Can't you do it in the old way by reading a paper or online TV guide and then manually programming the start/stop times (like I do with a VCR)?

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

ofc, their next step is to put commercials directly in the movie plots, so that you cannot remove them without ruining the story.

Seriously?

[Voyager529]

I mean not for nothing, but I don't think I've ever seen a movie being distributed on the internet that's been ripped from a cable box. There isn't even a Scene spec for it. By time movies hit Pay-Per-View, there's almost always a version of the film circulating the internet. Maybe somewhere, somehow, there's an exception, but the only piracy I could possibly see this deterring is Joe Sixpack using a set-top DVD recorder to lend to Frank Furter. Stopping piracy is one thing, but I'm wondering how much further this string of ridiculousness can go. Actually, that's probably a bad thing to wonder...

Re:Seriously?

[ncohafmuta]

I would bet this is more prevalent on the internet for TV shows rather than movies.

As more and more content is available online by legal means, e.g. netflix, broadcaster' websites, this decision will matter less and less.

Which is fine by me, i'm ditching my cable and hdpvr.

Re:Seriously?

[thejynxed]

Actually, there is, it falls under TVRip on pretty much every torrent site that I've ever visited, and I've seen scene group .nfo files along with the releases there.

Re:Seriously?

[wiredlogic]

It isn't about preventing copies of movies. It's about controlling the use of external DVRs and any means to avoid watching ads. The cable/satellite service wants to be certain they can force you to watch ads tacked on around premium services and thrown up in the OSD when you do any operations like skipping around. They killed CableCard with their foot dragging and now they're going after the last hole in their fortress of pablum.

Re:Seriously?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

I mean not for nothing, but I don't think I've ever seen a movie being distributed on the internet that's been ripped from a cable box. There isn't even a Scene spec for it.

Scene is far from be all and end all of video piracy, especially when it comes to quality - scene is really only for stupid little kids who are more interested in their silly little rules and their rush to see who can 'release' something first - scene doesn't give a damn about quality, its all quantity and ego. There are plenty of people sharing movies outside of 'the scene' and all their drama.

Years before bluray, hddvd, or even x264 and mkv people were distributing full-bitrate HDTV caps as mpeg2 transport streams (.ts files). There were two main sources - over the air broadcasts and caps from channels like HBO and Showtime, occasionally people would share caps from 'wildfeeds' - 45mbps satellite backhauls. Ironically, as it is today, almost all PPV transmissions are unencrypted. They might have the 'no copy' bit set, but on the wire between the head-end and the cable box, they are in the clear. So if you tune to the right QAM channel you can record most PPV shows, even the ones your neighbors are watching (just hope they don't pause or rewind because you'll record that too). There are even some scripts floating around out there to periodically scan the block of channels used for PPV and record anything that shows up. Kind of the DVR version of google's "I'm feeling lucky."

Re:Seriously?

[mehrotra.akash]

Most of the good quality Hindi movies are either DVD rips or DTH rips.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean not for nothing, but I don't think I've ever seen a movie being distributed on the internet that's been ripped from a cable box. There isn't even a Scene spec for it. By time movies hit Pay-Per-View, there's almost always a version of the film circulating the internet. Maybe somewhere, somehow, there's an exception, but the only piracy I could possibly see this deterring is Joe Sixpack using a set-top DVD recorder to lend to Frank Furter. Stopping piracy is one thing, but I'm wondering how much further this string of ridiculousness can go. Actually, that's probably a bad thing to wonder...

Actually, a lot of TV-only releases are ripped from Satellite TV.

People in the "real" scene don't bother copying movies from a consumer STB, they just decrypt the MPEG stream right off the satellite with a PCI card/modified STB.

Sorry, but as usual, this just hurts consumers. The real pirates are going to get content anyways.

Re:Seriously?

[Ash-Fox]

I mean not for nothing, but I don't think I've ever seen a movie being distributed on the internet that's been ripped from a cable box

Evidence it works!

Re:Seriously?

[webheaded]

Not that I support this, but they're doing this because they want to put movies out on Pay-Per-View sooner than they do now but they won't do it without this retarded DRM. Good luck guys...I stopped paying for cable a long time ago. They're shooting themselves in the foot when people with analog TVs can't watch movies. I honestly can't understand why they are such assholes to their paying customers. They don't seem to get that everything they do is eventually going to get undone by pirates. Quit trying and just give me my god damn movie and let me play it without your bullshit. That's all I want. I do indeed still buy movies, games, and music...I've been doing it more and more as I have more money to spend on it. If I like something I pay for it...quit trying to screw me.

This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[thms]

Is this for real or did I misunderstand what this is about?

These set-top boxes will be loaded with image identification software, given targets (but nothing that is on DVD already and some other phony limitations) and the scan the output continuously for a matches. If they find one they will scream "Hah, Pirate!" and cut the output. Oh brother!

And when they find something, they most certainly won't send that data back over the wire, right?!

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[Anonymous Coward]

Completely off the mark :)

This is about cable boxes turning off all outputs except HDMI w/ HDCP for new movies on "on demand" video.

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[Peter Steil]

That is absolutely not the case. The proposed system here merely limits outputs of your STB for movies purchased from the cable co. (e.g. video on demand titles). So it's like renting a movie, only this way you can't make a backup copy. The disabled output is implemented on a per-title basis, and not just some wide blanket case. You can still pirate your movies as normal, this only stops people that actually record from the STB outputs.

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[mysidia]

What happens when the other outputs are what you use to watch the on demand video, and your TV has no HDMI w/ HDCP input?

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[DarkKnightRadick]

No TV?

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[Anonymous Coward]

No TV?

and no beer make homer go something something

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[Pentium100]

Get a converter? I know there is a HDMI->Component and HDMI->VGA converter and it would probably be possible to convert the VGA or component signal to S-Video or composite if needed.

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[Joe U]

That's not HDCP compliant.

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[mysidia]

Sounds like a bait and switch scam....

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[Pentium100]

Seems that there are devices that can decode HDCP to analog.

HDfury3 specifications:

Input: 2 x HDMI v1.3 (DVI 1.0 compatible) (Switch: Auto / PortA / PortB )
Output: VGA FEMALE output connector, 10 bit analog resolution.
Output format: Either RGB or YPbPr, dip-switch selectable
HDCP supported (Integrated HDCP decipher engine, Pre-programmed HDCP key) ...

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[Thinboy00]

That completely defeats the purpose of the block in the first place. Why did MPAA bother?

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[Anonymous Coward]

But if the devices support HDCP because, you know, their decoders were ripped from a device which *IS* HDCP compliant, then it's not an issue, is it?

Once again, the legit consumer is the only one inconvenienced.

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[Pentium100]

I don't know.

DVD CSS has been completely broken for many years and now is about as useful as a "please don't copy this" message on the disk, but new DVDs still have it. In principle it is not possible to make a working DRM for non-interactive medium, but they continue to try.

Why the block? Maybe they hope that most people would not know about devices like HDFury and as such be prevented from copying the movie (or even seeing it, if they have an older TV that does not support HDCP). But again, legitimate consumers will be more affected, since pirates know about HDCP strippers already or will find out about them very fast and then it will be business as usual. People who do not have a computer or use the internet will be affected, but most likely because they have an old TV and not because they want to pirate.

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[DarkKnightRadick]

Who cares what sort of scam it is. It's a scam. Whether or not this only applies to PPTV or not, I don't care. I do not like. I actually purchase what I watch (rental DVD, own the DVD, watch on tv via cable) or I don't watch it.

I'm not missing much, though.

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[DarkKnightRadick]

I don't watch the Simpsons so the reference is lost (I've caught an episode or 10 in the past, but nothing in the past 5 years).

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[theJML]

Except for the HDFury2: http://hd.engadget.com/2008/08/18/hdfury2-adapter-kit-tunnels-hdcp-laden-hdmi-content-via-componen/

HDCP compliant HDMI in, Audio Optical/Analog and Component/VGA&RGB out.

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[dwarfsoft]

Homer: No TV and No Beer Make Homer something something... Marge: Go Crazy? Homer: Don't mind if I do!

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[TheRaven64]

CSS still does something. It makes the region coding work. A region 2 DVD won't play in a region 1 player, and you can't rip it from a RPC-2 DVD drive, because it does the region checking in hardware and doesn't make the disk content visible unless the region code matches.

It doesn't prevent piracy, but it was never meant to. It protects the authorised distribution chains and prevents them from competing with each other.

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[Pentium100]

You mean you don't have a region-free player?

Some time ago I could legally rent Region 1, 2 and 5 disks, so it was either flash the DVD drive so it always has "4 changes left" or only rent disks for one region. I don't rent DVDs anymore so maybe they changed it now to region 2 and 5 only.

Re:This seems absurd, did I get that correctly?

[Anonymous Coward]

No that's not it at all.

Looks rather weak to me logically

[Captain Spam]

The FCC said the technology cannot be used on a particular movie once it is out on DVD or Blu-Ray, or after 90 days from the time it is first used on that movie, whichever comes first.

Wait, wait. What?

So let me get this straight... once the movie is released on DVD or Blu-Ray, the technology is not allowed to be used on it? As in, this only (theoretically) affects... what, just the movies that hit PPV a week or so before they hit DVD/Blu-Ray? That's it?

I mean, that's weak not just from a technological standpoint. That's weak the whole way around. Do people actually pirate movies off of PPV to any extent to make this even worthwhile? Do people actually USE PPV that much? I thought it was all DVD/Blu-Ray copies or leaked theatre reels or whatnot.

Wow. That just seems... sad.

Re:Looks rather weak to me logically

[DarkKnightRadick]

I've had access to cable tv almost all my life and I don't ever remember my parents buying PPV (nor have I ever purchased PPV).

Re:Looks rather weak to me logically

[Anonymous Coward]

The FCC said the technology cannot be used on a particular movie once it is out on DVD or Blu-Ray, or after 90 days from the time it is first used on that movie, whichever comes first.

Wait, wait. What?

So let me get this straight... once the movie is released on DVD or Blu-Ray, the technology is not allowed to be used on it? As in, this only (theoretically) affects... what, just the movies that hit PPV a week or so before they hit DVD/Blu-Ray? That's it?

I mean, that's weak not just from a technological standpoint. That's weak the whole way around. Do people actually pirate movies off of PPV to any extent to make this even worthwhile? Do people actually USE PPV that much? I thought it was all DVD/Blu-Ray copies or leaked theatre reels or whatnot.

Wow. That just seems... sad.

I have a feeling that the FCC just threw them a bone. Basically, I can only see this as applicable to try and prevent Screeners (i.e. copies of the movie which are released on disc to reviewers and other people before the "official" release comes out) from being ripped. Often screener copies are released before the movie comes out at the earliest, and before the official consumer copy comes out at the latest. These are usually the most badassed pirate copies, as they are 100% quality (not counting a message which might appear on the screen or a watermark).

If it stops there, then that's perfectly fine. Preventing Screener leaks (like the x-men wolverine fiasco) while keeping their god-damned hands off my property rights is just fine.

Re:Looks rather weak to me logically

[kb_one]

I wonder if this is the start of a slippery slope situation. The goal here wasn't really to combat piracy but to assert control over cable box output. Now that they've justified one situation to block output (no matter how weak) they now have something concrete to point to the next time they want to block output. Basically, once one action to limit your rights is legal, how far is it until another action is deemed legit. So on and so forth.

Re:Looks rather weak to me logically

[Anonymous Coward]

TFA points out that the case for this waiver mostly applies to a potential future service where studios are offering first-run movies via PPV. In the current, typical distribution model it doesn't really serve much purpose since, as you point out, the waiver will have met it's expiration condition by the time it could be applied. It will actually be interesting to see how theater owners react to it as it has the potential to be putting them out of business.

Re:Looks rather weak to me logically

[Anonymous Coward]

Obvious answer:

Media companies will "Postpone" releasing to DVD and BD. Given the wording, waiting the *FULL* maximum period before even considering releasing on disc medium would allow them to pimp out their new movie to all those people that are unable/unwilling to go to the theatre, and to charge insane PPV prices.

Re:Looks rather weak to me logically

[Anonymous Coward]

..And the truly sad part is not that it will likely hurt some legitimate paying customers (very few probably). Nor that it's pretty much useless effort. The truly sad part is that you (IANA) will all pay for the costs of lobbying, specification, implementation and deployment of this useless solution in your cable bills. Vote with your wallets (and I don't mean using torrent, but paying for the content from providers focus on providing a better service).

Re:Looks rather weak to me logically

[mehrotra.akash]

yes they do
Just search on google for DTHRIP
ofcourse it is more prevalent in India, and we have just got our 2nd HDTV service. Also most of the TV's are not HDCP compliant here so replicating the blocking here would result in the companies seeing a loss of 90+% of their subscribers

Re:Looks rather weak to me logically

[Anonymous Coward]

25+ years of cable, never a single ppv

Re:Looks rather weak to me logically

[Anonymous Coward]

The only answer to this that I can think of is sporting events like the UFC. Many have received angry and threatening letters from ISPs and Zuffa, Inc alike demanding takedowns of past PPV events. Knowing Dana White, there's likely an army or lobbyists and supports behind this in DC.

This is actually great news.

[Anonymous Coward]

The FCC has affirmed that cable companies cannot completely disable these outputs, and I doubt that any company has the resources to implement their solution yet (out on blueray/dvd or the 90 day rule). I suspect that older boxes aren't even capable of such fine grained control. Frankly, even if they did, I can live with that solution anyway - the vast majority of movies that I'd DVR would be out on dvd or bluray already. The only movies that I can even think of that hit the cable channels before that are those made specifically for TV, and most of those suck anyway.

Re:This is actually great news.

[mysidia]

The cynic in me says they'll disable the outputs entirely on older boxes, and if you complain, support will tell you it's a problem with your box, go buy the new fancy box that they have finer-grained control over.

Wayne

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, so I cant run Audio and Video through my Home Theater Receiver anymore? Or am I understanding this wrong? Even if I could, what prevents me from getting a digital to analog converter and running it through there?

FCC, FDA, etc

[OrwellianLurker]

The Federal government isn't on our side. Anyone with a clue has already realized this.

Re:FCC, FDA, etc

[quickgold192]

The Federal government isn't on our side. Anyone with a clue has already realized this.

Funny. Isn't that like some kind of cue for a people to "alter or abolish it?"

Re:FCC, FDA, etc

[OrwellianLurker]

The Federal government isn't on our side. Anyone with a clue has already realized this.

Funny. Isn't that like some kind of cue for a people to "alter or abolish it?"

And promptly be labeled as terrorists and hated by all other Americans. And soon enough, get your citizenship stripped.

Re:FCC, FDA, etc

[omnichad]

Wait...you must be new here. There you go, just properly using the word "cue." And no confusion with the word queue spawning a long thread of grammar nazis. I'm not sure what's going on here.

Seems to Me...

[Nom du Keyboard]

1: Rip the content by all means necessary and have it out on the BT sites within hours of release.

2: Go to the FCC and point out how this did nothing to prevent piracy, while annoying everyone in the process.

3: SoC dies the death it should have died long ago.

4: Profit!

And if this doesn't work, vote for the other party next election.

Re:Seems to Me...

[Anonymous Coward]

Then to back to (1) and when that doesn't work, you're screwed.

TV?

[sohp]

People still watch this "Television" thing?

Re:TV?

[thestudio_bob]

More importantly, what's this "Cable" thing?

Re:TV?

[Stormwatch]

Yeah, where else would we plug the game consoles?

Government knows best

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's pass net neutrality so the same group of half-wits can regulate our Internet too.

In no way do I see this foolproof plan introducing any unforeseen repercussions.

Change "US" to "MPAA" or "RIAA"

[crackerpipe]

And be done with it. Sick of the facade. Actually, it's not just that crew. Any organization with the money to work all three branches plus media; $$ for attorneys to set precedents, $$ for lobbyists to work congress, $$ for executive campaign contributions, and $$ for advertising, is eventually going to get what it desires. The only group after all of them are the voters, and we are way down the food chain. All that stuff about suing their own customers indicates these organizations consider consumer opinion last and believe we will continue to keep buying their products even though they sue us. We very well might.

Re:Bad sign

[mysidia]

I'm sure we'll soon be hearing about concessions like the FCC says it's OK for providers to turn off some ports, such as port 5060 TCP/UDP, port 6667, port 6881, and whatever port Skype uses.

At the same time their pushing their own telephone/VoIP + cable bundle as hard as possible

Re:Bad sign

[KahabutDieDrake]

I'm not sure why you think the FCC is there to protect consumers. It's not. It exists to look out for business investments. The FCC in my lifetime has consistently sided with "big business" over private interests. This isn't exactly odd however. The FDA is similar in it's function, if not it's charter.

Money Slips Through The Fingers of Greedy Hands

[Anonymous Coward]

Heaven for bid they get the shit together and get all those movies online and rentable at a reasonable rate (e.g. $.99 or so). They would make make more money than ever. They haven't out yet that the market is telling them something. If there is a lot of piracy going on it is b/c prices are too high and availability too low. But no, greedy execs are too short sighted. They rather pay a bunch of lawyers and bride government officials and ruin average peoples lives. Makes them feel important and in control.

How is this different?

[jandrese]

I have Verizon FIOS Cable and Verzion disables all output ports all the time. They also disable all of the inputs, even the anynet port because they hate people with HTCs. Won't everybody just do this now? In fact I've never had a cable company that enabled any of the ports on their boxes (although I've only had Cox and Comcast), so maybe this is just more common in other parts of the country. It's always kinda sad to see a USB or IEE1394 port, try it out, and discover that it's not even electrically active. I was wondering why STB manufacturers even bothered.

Re:How is this different?

[musturd]

I'm pretty sure that the FCC (or FTC) required cable companies to have output ports from their cable boxes so that consumers aren't forced to use the cable company's DVR (they can use TiVo or capture cards). If you complain to your cable support I think they are required to open them for you. I can't find any exact laws at this time, unfortunately.

Re:How is this different?

[m85476585]

My last cable box had (in addition to the usual HD video outputs) firewire, USB, eSATA, and ethernet. Only firewire worked with an obscure driver, but the Mpeg TS output was hard to do anything with. eSATA would have been nice to expand the capacity of the DVR, and ethernet would have been nice to stream content to computers or other boxes around the house. It's sad that that's possible but not allowed just because Comcast would have made less money. I don't remember what our Direct Tv satellite box has, but I know it has optical audio out, which I can use to rip unlimited music from the XM channels with my laptop (though it saves it in a continuous stream and there is no good way of splitting and tagging individual songs).

Re:How is this different?

[Mix Master Nixon]

Verizon's FIOS FireWire port, at least in my house, is fully active, and I have a HD full of programs recorded entirely legally from it. Now, the port's currently BROKEN, thanks to the latest "update", but certainly not disabled. I could get a horribly mangled MPEG stream out of it right now (if there was any point, as it IS horribly mangled to the point of uselessness).

MPAA news

[tepples]

$$ for advertising

It's not just the advertising but also the content. Five MPAA studios own all TV news outlets except PBS, and they decide which stories to run or not to run.

Re:MPAA news

[Kashell]

Oddly enough, PBS is one of my favorite stations. I didn't even realize this fact.

Funny how that works.

Re:MPAA news

[Thinboy00]

That's funny, most news sources are slightly liberal (or at least not completely batshit Bill O'Reilly insane)...

Re:MPAA news

[tepples]

most news sources are slightly liberal (or at least not completely batshit Bill O'Reilly insane)

CNN and especially MSNBC are more liberal than Fox News, but do they run stories about the coming global DMCA that is ACTA? No, because it would alert to the actions of the networks' corporate masters.

Re:MPAA news

[Mix Master Nixon]

It's saddening that there's people who still believe there's anything substantially liberal about the American media. Unless we're talking about Pacifica or something - and somehow I don't think that's what most people mean by "liberal media". Then again, nobody in this country knows what liberalism even is anymore. Barack Obama gets called a SOCIALIST routinely... which I'm sure is a source of endless amusement and no small amount of confusion to actual socialists the world over.

Wait...

[2.7182]

are they saying "All your TV belong to us?"

Re:Wait...

[Anarki2004]

stop screwing up the meme

Re:Wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck you

Re:Wait...

[Anarki2004]

Excellent rebuttal. I retract my statement.

Re:Wait...

[Sulphur]

All your block are belong to us.

--

K.T. may write a book on how to forget, now that the frozen Blackberry frosted the Judge.

How about my 5 year old DLP set?

[zerofoo]

My 6 year old DLP set is hardly old technology, yet it does not have HDMI inputs. It only has unencrypted DVI inputs and analog inputs.

If all the unencrypted outputs are disabled, how do I connect my HDTV to the set top box?

I refuse to throw away a $4000 television because big-content has a piracy problem. I have an antenna on my roof, and it does a damn good job of getting me 40 digital channels for free. Cable companies should be very careful where they tread. The internet and an antenna satisfy almost all of my TV needs.

-ted

Re:How about my 5 year old DLP set?

[Pentium100]

Use this: http://www.hdfury.com/

Re:How about my 5 year old DLP set?

[ProfanityHead]

Hate to mention this but the "$4000 television" is now worth about $150-$250. I have a 7 yr old Sammy DLP, same boat.

Re:How about my 5 year old DLP set?

[MBCook]

That's why the FCC made this decision the way it did. Actually, it seems like a really fair decision to me.

They did not say Hollywood could cut the analog (or unencrypted digital) signal any time they wanted. DVDs will be the same, and your Comcrud DVR can't disable it's non-HDMI output when HBO plays Spiderman 2 or some other previously released movie.

This is only for movies that aren't available otherwise in the home, and only for a limited time. As Ars Technica said, this was designed explicitly so that you don't lose functionality. If you can watch it today, you can watch it next month and next year.

When Aladin 4: Jafar Gets a Haircut comes out next year, Hollywood can choose to put it on PPV in a way you won't be able to watch, but after 3 months (or when they release it on DVD/Blueray, whatever is first), they have to stop doing that, and allow you to watch it.

It only effects new content. Compared to what Hollywood has been demanding, this is extremely fair and reasonable. It's unnecessary and anti-consumer, but it's not that bad. Just like I now have to wait an extra 30 days to get some stuff from Netflix, you'll have to wait a little longer for some content.

Re:How about my 5 year old DLP set?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, I demand that you give me all of your money? Too unreasonable? Well let's compromise at only 10% of your net worth? Compared to what I'm demanding, it's extremely fair and reasonable.

Re:How about my 5 year old DLP set?

[natehoy]

You don't. That's why this is good. So far, people are getting the message they've been fed. "Pirates are evil, you need to accept bullshit to fight them." Now the average person will understand that the pirates are not affected by this, but that their multi-thousand-dollar HDTV rigs will now be useless once Hollywood is done getting all these controls passed.

Then, maybe, people will accept that this is just entertainment, and stop supporting this shit as if it was something important and worth our attention as a society. They'll stop spending their money supporting this crap and start living a life again. I have a dream, but I'm afraid it's just a delusion.

Re:How about my 5 year old DLP set?

[Torodung]

Hey, whoa, what do you mean "this is just entertainment?" Next you'll be telling me that dessert is merely the last course.

--
Toro

Re:How about my 5 year old DLP set?

[Anonymous Coward]

on PPV in a way you won't be able to watch, but after 3 months (or when they release it on DVD/Blueray, whatever is first), they have

Yes, it's not like that the MAFIAA always tries to bend the rules in their direction, and there is no chance that they will "accidentally" turn it on on all PPV channels just to see if they get away with it, and on all other channels if they do...

Re:How about my 5 year old DLP set?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've got some bad news for you. You don't have a $4000 tv set, you have a $100 tv set. Don't believe me? Try selling it on Craigslist.

Now, you may have PAID $4000 for your $100 tv set, but whose fault is that?

Re:How about my 5 year old DLP set?

[natehoy]

No, silly billy, dessert is a religion (especially the bacon gelato I had for dessert last night, with maple syrup on it - YUM!)

But TV and movies are, in fact, "just" entertainment. :)

Re:Bad sign

[Anonymous Coward]

Bwahahahaha. Protect us? Oh dear, that is funny

And the only reason the FCC are interested in net neutrality is because it gives them justification for their continued existence.

It's a classic feud except ...

[Anonymous Coward]

In most feuds no one remembers who fired the first shock but I clearly remember a time before DRM of any type. Security was a direct response to piracy. People have always done some copying like mix tapes but it was when they started to hand out copies to friends so they didn't have to buy that Hollywood responded. Be upset fine but it was a provoked response and most respond by stepping up piracy so it's a cold war and it's not going away. Also all these threats by everyone to never buy just means that one day we may all face a total lack of material to either buy or pirate. It's easy to be a Karma whore and point out the evils of DRM and greedy Hollywood but most of those that try to point out the other side just get modded down. This utopia of free high quality movies, music and games may sound great but no one has explained where it's all supposed to come from? Advertising annoys people and rarely is a major source of income. People will say they are willing to pay a $1 but would like it optional. Well given the option all the examples I know people only paid a few percent of the time and even a $1 wouldn't fund a movie if everyone paid. Most Hollywood movies would need a 100 to 200 million paying to break even and some more. Let's put it this way if 5% actually pay the $1 then there aren't enough people on the planet to fund a film let alone ones with access to technology. Make films for 10 grand? Just how often have you seen a 10K blockbuster? There was exactly one that cost 15K and another that cost 35K. After that the numbers go up fast. El Mariache wasn't that big and it cost a hell of a lot more than the 8K quoted. That much wouldn't have paid for his film stock let alone processing. Let's face it the ones that won't pay aren't leeching off Hollywood but the ones that do pay. Go ahead and mod this down but it's the truth.

Re:It's a classic feud except ...

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1305806/

El secreto de sus ojos

Won Oscar. Another 34 wins & 19 nominations

IMDB score: 8.4

Total budget: 2.500.000 (two and a half million dollars)

Compare that to Avatar, that also has an IMDB score of 8.4 ... and costed ~280 million dollars (actual budget) and ~200 millions in marketing and other stuff.

It's not that the price tags are high because the movies are expensive ... the movies are expensive because the price tags are very high. They need to justify the outrageous amounts of money they are spending.

And, before you tell me that the huge budget is because of Avatar's FX ... all hollywood prodctions, even those without any FX at all cost dozens of million dollars, at least.

Re:It's a classic feud except ...

[BoberFett]

No, the paranoia about security came long before anybody was pirating anything. Clearly you don't remember the furor over VHS.

Re:It's a classic feud except ...

[Posting=!Working]

Well, the studio made well over half a billion dollars off of Avatar just in box office alone, El Secreto De Sus Ojos made less than $20 million (Box office - cost to make (+marketing estimate for Avatar only.)) "El Secreto..." might be a great movie, but it's a crime drama. There is almost no chance that anyone would see it twice in the theater, like almost everyone I know did who saw Avatar. It's the only movie in the last 20 years I paid to see twice. I need to be in the mood to sit down and watch a crime drama, if I stopped by someone's house and they were watching Avatar, I'd probably watch the rest of it unless I had somewhere to be.

The studio could care less what got the same IMDB score. It's a internet poll, a large group of idiots can make "Ernest Goes To Camp" have a higher rating than "Shawshank Redemption." A rating of 7 doesn't mean much when the margin of error is +-3.

Ratings are just a reflection of the peron who rated it. According to Insight Cable's rating system last year, a movie starring Jessica Simpson (can't remember the title) is just as good as Al Pacino in Scarface (2 stars.)

Why stop with just outputs?

[zymurgy_cat]

I'm surprised the MPAA hasn't asked for the ability to disable your friends' cars so they can't drive over to watch the movie at your house. That way, they'd have to pay to watch it at their houses. Obviously, for those without cars, they'd need a waiver to cap their knees so they can't walk, bike, or rollerskate over to your house. A waiver to jam sticks in wheelchair spokes should also be granted.

Re:Imminent Ex-Customer

[Anonymous Coward]

My daughter gave up cable when they required a box that broke her Replay. They are now changing my cable so that I MUST have a box. In so doing, they are "upgrading" my service so I can't see HD without a physical switch, I get lot fewer channels, I have to use their crappy remote (I like mine), and I have to find a place for an ugly piece of equipment I don't want in my bedroom. This change will likely terminate any remaining desire I had for cable.
I don't understand why they have to keep changing things to more and more annoy their paying customers until they drive them away. Do they perhaps prefer to have NO customers so they don't have to pay their customer service employees and can ask for a bailout?

In related news...

[tlambert]

The FCC said the technology cannot be used on a particular movie once it is out on DVD or Blu-Ray, or after 90 days from the time it is first used on that movie, whichever comes first.

In related news... the Copyright Act of 1790 granted copyright for a term of "fourteen years from the time of recording the title thereof", with a right of renewal for another fourteen years if the author survived to the end of the first term.

I'm sure they won't enable the technology to do this, and then change the terms out from under us once the technological means are present.

-- Terry

They won't turn them all off

[Sycraft-fu]

Just all the analogue ones. The media industry is convinced that HDMI with HDCP is completely uncrackable and thus what they need to go with. Output over HDMI only, and then nobody can capture your signal.

Of course there's plenty of ways around that, HDCP is not particularly good encryption and has been broken in numerous ways. However they are convinced if they can just get everyone on it, things will be great.

However that screws over anyone with an older display. If you have a display that was made before HDCP came in to play (or before they had digital inputs), you are SOL.

So what will happen is pirates will simply get around it and distribute the content, legit consumers will get screwed. Same as always.

Re:They won't turn them all off

[sourcerror]

Ok, the just record my LCD TV/monitor with my camera. And it won't even flicker as CRT would. (Yeah, I lose a bit of quality, but most people won't care. It's still better than the ones taken in the cinema with handycams.)

Re:They won't turn them all off

[pnewhook]

I don't know why anyone bothers to record a movie in a theater on a handycam, or worse still actually pays money to buy a movie recorded in that manner. The quality is pathetic. Complete waste of time and money.

Re:They won't turn them all off

[Sycraft-fu]

You don't need to do that. I haven't gone looking recently, but there were HDCP remover devices out there. More or less they acted as repeaters, the input side negotiates HDCP so the device is happy, but the output side doesn't check with the device it is hooked to.

However, while those might be hard to locate because of the DCMA and all that garbage, you can simply convert it to analogue. The HDFury devices are quite popular with projector heads that have old equipment without HDMI. It takes HDMI, with HDCP, and converts it to VGA, 5-cable component, or 3-cable component. Take that and feed it in to a Blackmagic Intensity and there you go, HD capture solution. Now there's be a very tiny bit of quality loss since you are going digital/analogue/digital, but not much. Probably no more than the quality loss of decompressing an MPEG-2 stream and recompressing it to something else, which you'd be doing anyhow.

While the setup I'm talking about isn't all that cheap. You are talking probalby $100-200 for the HDFury 3, and then another $200 for the Intensity. However that's all it takes.

Also this is only necessary for broadcasts, ad with Blu-ray discs people simply crack the encryption and nab the original compressed data.

Re:They won't turn them all off

[rossdee]

"Just all the analogue ones. The media industry is convinced that HDMI with HDCP is completely uncrackable and thus what they need to go with. Output over HDMI only, and then nobody can capture your signal."

I have still got an analog TV you insensitive clods!

And the cable guy told me I didn't need to buy a new TV. Of course that advice may change.

BTW I thought that analogue was the English spelling, isn't this an american website?

Or is this something to do with the trademark of the magazine once edited by John W Campbell...

Re:They won't turn them all off

[Diantre]

I'm sure the MAFIAA has alot of friends who would benefit from people having to buy new TVs...

Re:Bad sign

[Thinboy00]

What about the "third way" and net-neutrality?

"...to prevent illegal copying of movies."

[John Hasler]

No. To prevent legal copying of movies. See Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.

Speaking of the MPAA

[kurt555gs]

Does anyone have the GPS addy of of Jack Valenti's final resting place in Arlington National Cemetery? Next time I am in Washington DC, I would go out of my way to stop there and piss on his grave. Actually, this could be a new Slashdot "thing".

Re:Speaking of the MPAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone have the GPS addy of of Jack Valenti's final resting place in Arlington National Cemetery? Next time I am in Washington DC, I would go out of my way to stop there and piss on his grave. Actually, this could be a new Slashdot "thing".

Whos to say good old Jack wouldnt like that?

Re:Speaking of the MPAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Careful, he's not far from Kennedy and there will probably lots of people watching.

            VALENTI, JACK JOSEPH
        1ST LT US ARMY
        WORLD WAR II
        DATE OF BIRTH: 09/05/1921
        DATE OF DEATH: 04/26/2007
        BURIED AT: SECTION 32 SITE 516
        ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY

http://www.arlingtoncemetery.org/interactive_map/section30.html

Re:Speaking of the MPAA

[Anonymous Coward]

No, but I have this: http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=19109468 Plot: Section 32, Lot 516

We need...

[Anonymous Coward]

So, will so somebody please pay a 4chan user to hack and destroy MPAA's network...

Protecting the Vast Wasteland

[Anonymous Coward]

From my PoV, most everything Hollywood (the supposed antagonist) has to offer is utter crap. The only thing this 'effort' does is protect the lucrative arrangement between cable companies, 'content' creators, and the useless cable 'station' operators, from the technologically unsavvy.

Besides, why complain... the cable companies have developed a market, marketed a product & service, and they own the boxes that are rented to the unwitted consumer who accept the marketing drivel designed to encourage belief in an unrealistic description of said 'service'. Vote with your wallet if you want things (like ala carte pricing) to change.

The FCC is only promoting commerce. That's their job, isn't it? Just because Colin Powell's son isn't in charge, doesn't mean anything has changed... Don't forget that cable companies were able to negotiate legal monopolies with municipalities over the entire country claiming the cost of infrastructure was otherwise prohibitively high. Of course, time has revealed this infrastructure to serve not only 'TV' but ISP and now VOIP, rendering the fib to be on par with any offered the likes of the unsuspecting virgins who might sit on what passes for state regulatory commissions.

But hey, it's all about creating jobs, isn't it!?

Just stop it guys. I'll pay already.

[Anonymous Coward]

At this point as someone who has pirated much entertainment, I'm doing it less and less and would rather get my content through "legitimate" sources. As real life gets busy pirating can be a hassle with quality, availability and risk, whereas Hulu/Netflix are there when I want them. I won't pirate "Lost", I'll watch on ABC/Hulu and trade-off commercials for quality and instant availability. Issue is they're still playing this game of "some content here, some over there, and you cant put it over here... or here" when that's just driving consumers away. . One day theyll realize that 90% of the population doesn't care about pirating, get over they'll complex with it and give us our content already.

Re:Bad sign

[kosmonot]

FAA is the same with airlines, they have a conflict of interest in their mission statement to both promote air travel and be responsible for safety. Lyndon Johnson made his considerable personal fortune manipulating the FCC for personal gain in acquiring Texas broadcast entities. The outdated mission statements of these parastatal entities need to be rewritten for the common good. Scumbaggery abides and will continue to do so otherwise.

Anonymous Coward

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like nobody bothered to read the article. Movie studios want be able to release movies to the theaters and PPV at the simultaneously, thus the FCC's endorsement..

FCC? How's this fit with Net Neutrality?

[Attila Dimedici]

FCC? Aren't these the people that many slashdotters want to enforce Net Neutrality? So, how do you think that would work out in light of this latest ruling?

Cable/satellite companies hasten their own demise

[Anonymous Coward]

Already 1 out of 8 consumers are pulling the plug on cable/satellite and never going back. This is going to accelerate the process. (sell your comcast stock, buy netflix)

Hey

[mister_playboy]

see fireworks from every window in my apartment

My mother's basement doesn't have any windows, you insensitive clod!

(I live on Oak St, Binghamton - as for privacy, if you really want to go door to door and ask about skine on Slashdot, then feel free. It's like telling you that my sister lives at 87th and Amsterdam. Good luck)

Location-dropping on Slashdot? You must be really desperate for some company. :)

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

American movies, TV & music are unimportant cr

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you. Let them stick DRM crap on blu rays, music CDs, etc. It's not important stuff. If they were restricting installation of software on my COMPUTER or SMARTPHONE, that would be something else.

The "blur" in Blu-ray

[tepples]

Am I the only one who sees that word as "blurry" unless it is capitalized "BluRay"?

You're not the only one, once movie studios start using the Image Constraint Token on Blu-ray Discs next year. A player has to downsample outputs without HDCP (e.g. component and early DVI) to SDTV resolution if the disc has an Image Constraint Token. When your TV tries to upsample it back to fill the 1080p panel, your Blu-ray will become a bit more Blu-rry.

Paradigm Shift

[Mike610544]

I think we're going to have to go back to the patronage model.
I would donate $10,000 for a new season of Firefly.

MPAA, is that you?

[Eternal Vigilance]

It appears the MPAA are commenters here at /. !

At least this answers the question of whether Jack Valenti has internet access in his coffin.

"Hey Bert, what's goin' on down there at grave 44D? Looks like somethin' outta that movie 'Tremors'..."

Re:I turned off all the inputs on my set-top box t

[znerk]

... I actually don't mind going out and buying good movies that I enjoy. I almost never unwrap them or play the disks, but I don't mind supporting the people who make good things happen that genuinely entertain me. I've actually watched more movies and bought more movies as a result of this then I ever have before. And I can pretty much do what I please with the disks afterwards, too (rip them to PMP, archive them on my media server, etc).

Quoted for truth. This pretty much sums up my response to DRM (Download it, go buy it if I like it, toss the shrink-wrapped DVD/CD into the box in the closet with the others (my "rainy day cache", for when the authorities come busting down my door because I'm torrenting, and must be an evil pirate. Hope they enjoy explaining to the jury how the 18 different linux distros I'm seeding are "copyright evasion tools").

Re:Bad sign

[thegarbz]

Net-neutrality isn't about making sure you get fair data being pushed to your end of the pipe and the protection of your internet connection. It's about bigwigs throwing money around. i.e. Google shouldn't have to pay the ISP because it's their data going over the line.

Your example like the last has everything to do with business investments and nothing to do with the consumer.

Here's a quirky idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop watching television. Stop being a source of ad revenue for them. Pick up better mediums of entertainment. Might I recommend books?

Here's one to get started on:
http://www.amazon.com/Glass-Teat-Harlan-Ellison/dp/0441289886/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1273296751&sr=8-1

HTH HAND

HDCP defeated a long time ago

[Anonymous Coward]

I am completely confused with what they think they are going to accomplish here. HDCP was defeated in several ways a long time ago. One with stripper devices that simply use chips that were meant to go into other devices to decode the signal. Unless they want to turn off major vendors like Sony's television sets, they are not going to disable these keys. Two, it was proven that by taking the public key from 40 hdcp using devices that you can determine the domain of the master key and thus create new legal keys. Third, several devices were sold that failed to protect the path between the HDCP decoder to the electronics exposing them as clear analog output so all you need to do is solder some wires. Fourth, pixel scanning of the output from a LCD cannot be stopped as humans need to be able to view them. While, not talked about much it is possible to create a simple device that can read the signals sent to a LCD panel pixel by pixel and use that data to recreate a high quality copy. Think of it as a camera aimed at every single pixel recording which one of their 3 states they are in for each frame of a movie. In the end you combined the data for the 2073600 pixels to get a near perfect copy of the original. So what do they think they are going to accomplish. I feel this is a ruse to push for worse laws since they know they are going to fail or perhaps they really are that stupid.

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own...Mine works

[Fallen Kell]

I have yet to see a feature in a cable company PVR that I can't do with my DIY home built one, and I have MANY features that the cable company PVR does not have. For instance:

Web based scheduling: I can program my PVR from any device in the world which has an internet connection
Massive storage space: I have 5TB of usable storage in my PVR, plus the ability to expand and/or use network based storage from servers/NAS
Watch recording on different device: I can re-encode my recordings to any format I want for use on any device I want, laptop, PSP, PS3, iPad, iPod, etc
Create DVDs: I can create a DVD of my recordings to watch with a normal DVD player, or for storage and delete the show from the DVR
Create Blu-Rays: I can create a Blu-Ray of my shows/Movies for watching on standard Blu-Ray players or storage and can delete the original
Record by show name: I simply tell my DVR the name of a show/movie/series and then can specify if I want to record new shows/re-runs/or both, and optionally restrict it to only record the show from certain channels (i.e. the HD version), or certain times, otherwise it will record that show/series/movie whenever it finds that it is being broadcast
Pause live TV: yep, I can do that
Automatically skip commercials: you won't find any PVR from a cable company that will ever do this since they make money off of you being forced to watch that commercial
Upscale SD content to 1080p: yep, it does this on the fly, live, and even does things like noise reduction, video artifact removal, edge detection enhancement, color and lumen smoothing, and a lot of other video enhancements on the fly
Organize my DVD and Blu-Ray movie collection: yes, it can store my ripped DVDs and Blu-Rays so I don't need to go find the DVD/Blu-Ray disk and insert it into the device to watch my content. The movies all have lots of artwork downloaded from the internet, like movie posters, DVD/Blu-Ray covers, screenshots, synopsis (tunable to not show spoilers, even to the point that it can show one thing if it has been watched or not), fan artwork, film/movie ratings, reviews, etc
Organize/group TV series: by series name, season number, and episode number hierarchy, along with all the same information features that are available to my movies, like screen shots of individual episodes, episode synopsis, awards, actors, director, etc.
Output DTS-MA and True-HD audio: and many other audio formats
Interface and control three 200 disk DVD burner/changers: it controls all three and can use them to burn data to blank DVDs in them or load a disk to playback

That is just to name a few things my DIY PVR can do. You won't a fraction of those features available on something from a cable company.

I'm quite interested in the limits

[erroneus]

The limits themselves seem somewhat reasonable. 90 days? It's hardly a lengthy amount of time. Let's just wait and see if they actually adhere to their side of the bargain -- to unblock for some content while blocking specific content. I guess I'll have to read to find out if and what recourse has been defined in the event that they fail to comply with that aspect. My guess is that there is none and it will call for a review by the FCC after complaints are issued.

Re:I'm quite interested in the limits

[Flambergius]

I agree. Technical issues notwithstanding, the deal in itself seems reasonable. 90 days of heightened monopoly rights for the producers and significantly faster access at home to the newest content for those consumers that wish to opt-in - and you can opt-in per item.

The same FCC you want to impose net neutrality?

[Anonymous Coward]

This comes from the same guys you WANT to impose "net neutrality".

Do you REALLY think the FCC wants to do that in YOUR best interests?

Really?

This action is called a "clue".

"Net Neutrality" is nothing more than content providers (MAFIAA!!!) wanting to prevent anyone else from being able to charge for their "content".

And the Slashdot crowd sides with the MAFIAA.

Gotta love it.

Why do Democrats support "net neutrality"? Take a look at political contributions and see which party is in hock to the MAFIAA. Remember, you can't spell DMCA without that big, fat D.

Search here

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd look it up here if you want to see the grave.

But I don't recommend doing what you're thinking of. I'm pretty sure it'd count as public indecency or something like that. Might even get you on a sex offender list or something. Also, it's rather disrespectful to the other people buried there (as well as those visiting their graves). Also consider that anyone who sees you doing it might conclude that you're disrespecting the troops, given that so many of them are buried there.

Re:Search here

[kurt555gs]

Good points. To bad he isn't buried in a private cemetery. If he was, I would bet that grass would never grow over his miserable corpse.

ClearQAM encryption allowed

[Anonymous Coward]

Cable companies are losing the early adopter customers by encrypting channels that were formerly ClearQAM. For the last 18 months, Comcast has broadcasted over 100 channels in ClearQAM for my area. In April, they started encrypting most of those channels leaving locals, QVC and public access unencrypted. How many people had built Windows7 media center PCs around a QAM tuner like me? I'd spend almost $400 - and I'm pissed.

Someone will say that I wasn't paying for all those channels - I was. I have an HD receiver and get a few of the movie channel bundles. I'm canceling as much of cable TV as I can and still keep the internet service. I'm also transferring phone service to a different provider. I was using the triple-play, but this is the last "screw you" from Comcast that I'm willing to accept. They have me by the balls for ISP - nobody comes close to their price/bandwidth in my area.

Good vs Evil.

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, those evil business loving republicans fought this while they were in office, those compassionate loving socialists get into office, and they welcome this with open arms. What you bet they plan to use this in 2012 to cut off news broadcasts that are reporting that Obama has declared itself dictator for life. ;-(

Re:Good vs Evil.

[Anonymous Coward]

What do I want to bet? I want to bet $1,000,000! I want to bet $10,000,000. I want to bet any amount of money you can actually cover! Dude, where do I get in on that action? It's idiots like you who have fallen for the " is EVIL!" crap that makes all this possible. Otherwise, we might be able to vote someone into office that wasn't in the pocket of big money. Obama isn't going to declare himself dictator for life. He's not a secret Muslim. He was born in Hawaii. He's just influenced by special interests that are different than the special interests that own the media demagogue you slavishly follow. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Here's the news flash: Neither set of special interests really are concerned with looking out for you, except as a guaranteed revenue stream.

Here's a better suggestion

[Anonymous Coward]

But I don't recommend doing what you're thinking of. I'm pretty sure it'd count as public indecency or something like that. Might even get you on a sex offender list or something. Also, it's rather disrespectful to the other people buried there (as well as those visiting their graves). Also consider that anyone who sees you doing it might conclude that you're disrespecting the troops, given that so many of them are buried there.

Excellent point. A better approach would be to piss into a Mason jar, cap it and ensure the seal is tight, drive over to the cemetery, and unceremoniously (and discretely) dump the contents onto his grave. Equivalent result, without the public exposure.

Idiots

[Anonymous Coward]

Say goodbye to innovation and profitability. This will open the door to all sorts of regulations by unelected bureaucrats. Waiting for better broadband? Add another 20 years to your wait. This is the FCC, and they only want to help!

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own...Mine works

[Diantre]

Would you be kind enough to provide links to software and/or tutorial and plans? I'm really interested.

Apple better than MPAA/RIAA? Surely you jest!

[npsimons]

I think we can all agree they're better than THEM.

No, we can't agree that Apple is better than the MPAA/RIAA. For one, thing Apple enables them and seems to have no qualms about using the same tactics, right down to being a member of a terrorist front group.

Which Begs The Question...

[tunapez]

How soon will the cracked boxes show up on Dregslist?
I can smell a blackmarket blooming already, just what the economy needs.

Re:A fairly simple work-around for this idiocy

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless, of course your provider doesn't let you use your own device. Then, you should just ditch your provider (and probably all the other providers) entirely. This lost sale will be interpreted as piracy, and used to justify even more restrictions for the future.

I can't be fucked pirating...

[Anonymous Coward]

But this pissing around with my stuff in my home kind of grates most badly....

.

These fuckers are like cunts who run holiday resorts, and only offer continental breakfasts between 7 and 8 am.

.

I am on holidays you arseholes..

.

I'd like to sleep in once in a while...

.

So why not leave the breakfast stuff out from 5am until 12am? - or all day?

.

Same with these fucking movie studios and their anal glove puppets the RIAA and MPAA - It doesn't induce me to pirate the movies, but it doesn't induce me to put up with their shit either.

Re:Saw it coming... rolled my own...Mine works

[pnewhook]

Nice list, but:

(Massive storage space) - have yet to run out (I keep a month of backlogged programs occasionally if I get behind), and I can tell it to automatically delete the oldest or specific shows to make room if necessary.

(Record by show name) - Yup. This is useful when the broadcaster moves the timeslot, the show still records regardless of when it actually came on, even if they move it to a different day.

(Pause live TV): Yup.

(Upscale SD content to 1080p): Yup.

My PVR can record up to three HD/SD channels simultaneously. And I can watch a prerecorded fourth. Can a homegrown do that? For this reason I use cable and not satellite (that and satellite guide searches are ridiculously slow).

Some of the others are useful, some I would not use.

Scrambling all channels

[tepples]

The box merely allows for decoding of scrambled channels.

How long before your cable company starts scrambling all channels other than locals like Comcast already does?

I wonder what movie theaters think of this...

[Anonymous Coward]

This could cause theater business to go down. While I agree this also sucks for those with older TV's, if this is what it takes to be able to get Hollywood to be comfortable with us watching new releases at home, this is a potential huge WIN for all consumers with HDMI. Especially for the disabled and those who can't easily get to a theatre.

My only fear is cable companies offering it as a stupid monthly package like Netflix, rather than a pay-per-view deal.
If they're smart, they'll do it PPV-style, and be somewhat competitive with a normal movie ticket price. But even if it's $20, just invite 3 friends over and split the cost.
So then you have a $5 movie. In HD. With the beer that you got on sale at 7-11. And being able to pause it for a bathroom or a smoke break.
WIN