Slashdot Mirror
In Japan, a Battle Brewing Over the Right To Record 4k and 8k Broadcasts (itmedia.co.jp)
AmiMoJo writes: Japanese broadcasters have indicated that 4k and 8k broadcasts may have recording disabled via a 'do not copy' flag [via Google Translate], which receivers would be expected to obey. Now the Internet Users Association (MIAU) and Shufuren (Housewives Federation) have submitted documentation opposing the ban. The document points out that the ban will only inconvenience the majority of the general audience, while inevitably failing to prevent unauthorized copying by anyone determined to circumvent the protection.
And, once again broadcasters and copyright assholes want veto power over technology, and the evil bit of "thou shall not record" has reared its head.
Every new piece of technology immediately gets co-opted as corporations tell us what we're allowed to do because they apparently feel the world exists to serve their fucking business model.
Oh, and of course if ratified the TPP will make this entrenched in law -- so you could spend life in prison for recording a show to watch later.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Unlike past efforts, our NEW copy protection scheme will totally work.
By the way, by any chance, would you happen to be in the market for a bridge?
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
Japanese broadcasters have indicated that 4k and 8k broadcasts may have recording disabled via a 'do not copy' flag [via Google Translate], which receivers would be expected to obey.
Wait, they're demanding that their content receive special legal protections solely on basis of its resolution? Wow, I thought I couldn't be any more disgusted with IP lobbyists, but as usual, Japan is always finding new ways to surprise me.
Seems like the broadcasters are shooting themselves in the foot! If you can't record, you can't store up a bunch of shows to watch later.
This means that people won't watch broadcast at all, but rather will default to streaming services for convenience of watching when they want.
Seems like they've got the wrong solution. Instead of "do not record", it should be "do not copy the recording you make to other media"--which, guess what, is what most people do anyway with their DVRs.
Best,
--PeterM
Most copy protection devices only achieve the task of annoying the living crap out of legitimate users, while doing nothing to prevent grand scale piracy.
In Japan, most TVs and DVD/BR players contain the ability to record. It is fairly entrenched to record shows for later viewing, especially things like daytime dramas, hence the housewives outcry. This will affect millions of daily viewers.
"Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
> Oh, and of course if ratified the TPP will make this entrenched in law [...]
That bears repeating, slowly and loudly: Japanese, look at all the goodness TPP is pouring over you.
Fight it tooth and nail.
Of course, Aussies, NZers, and -- yes, USians too. Let your representatives know that you *don't want that crap ratified*. Don't listen to what lobbies and corrupt politicans say about it. It's always a bad idea to let lobby groups write laws.
No. They are renaming the "Evil" bit.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
The premise is right that restrictions inconvenience users who aren't interested in piracy and probably drive many of them to piracy.
Yep, and it's not just the DRM. I've found that legitimate channels are often worse than illegitimate ones in many ways. Hulu is a fantastic example of this. You pay monthly and are still subjected to advertisement. Even at the highest paid service level with (mostly) no ads, Hulu insists on plastering a damned watermark of the local affiliate station (essentially an advertisement) over the stream for the entire duration of the show. Actually, calling it a watermark is a stretch, because it's not even translucent - it's nice and bright and in your face for the entire show. It's very distracting to me.
Moreover, Hulu doesn't provide past seasons of many shows, so if you haven't been watching for the past few years already, you can't catch up. What's the point of an on-demand streaming service if they don't provide a full catalog so new subscribers can catch up? I could rent those shows, but the prices are outrageous. That's old-school broadcaster thinking for you. Idiotic.
On the other hand, I could easily download every show I currently watch on Hulu via bittorrent with better quality encoding and no distracting watermark, and I can download all past seasons of any show with no hassle. Why am I being a chump and paying Hulu for the privilege of a degraded experience? Well, because I want to support the shows I like, I suppose. I've honestly been considering cancelling Hulu, as I already subscribe to a few other streaming services. This is what happens if your legitimate offering is worse than pirating.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
It's asking you to respect your own honor and integrity by not taking something the owner is willing to share but not give to you. The logic that says because determined dishonorable people will do it that it should be honorable for me to do it beggars belief.
Furthermore even if you have no honor when the door is closed and your are anonymous at your computer then it still is highly effective. For example, I'd truly like to watch Black Sails. But it requires a Starz membership I don't think is worth the price. I could easily go over to some place like couchtuner to pirate it but then i'd get shit quality and some russian drive-by trojaning attempts. No thanks. On the otherhand if this were super easy to pirate there'd be a gazillion ways to see it in high def all without the russian trojans. Thus the fact that it's not worth the effort to subvert the process actually is a barrier to entry more than just relying on an honor system. it works for people inclined to honorable but never the less tempted by the lure of sticking it to the man and his outrageously high priced restrictions.
Steve jobs proved the point when songs became $1. Lots of people are happy to pay a reasonable price for convenience and feeling they didn't cheat.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
This is the age of the DVR. Who the hell actually watches a broadcast TV show when it's actually scheduled? Everyone records it on a DVR and watches it later. Wait, not allowed to record it? Gee I guess that show doesn't get watched then. I'm sure content providers will just love that, their shows all die in the ratings because people aren't willing to have their lives rotate around a TV show schedule. This is about as stupid as stupid can get; you'd think some politician thought of it, it's about as pants-on-head retarded as wanting backdoors in encryption. Also it won't work, there'll be hacks around it, and it'll just promote the idea of filesharing those shows even more than they would be otherwise. Stupid idea, needs to die, LET PEOPLE RECORD WHAT THEY WANT.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!