Slashdot Mirror


US Copyright Office Sides With Cable Companies Against FCC's Set Top Rules (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader writes: The United States Copyright Office has sided with cable companies in their fight against a Federal Communications Commission plan to boost competition in the TV set-top box market. The FCC proposal would force pay-TV providers to make channels and on-demand content available to third parties, who could then build their own devices and apps that could replace rented set-top boxes. Comcast and other cable companies complain that this will open the door to copyright violations, and US Register of Copyrights Maria Pallante agrees with them. The Copyright Office provided advice to the FCC at the FCC's request, and Pallante yesterday detailed the concerns her office raised in a letter to members of Congress who asked her to weigh in. "In its most basic form, the rule contemplated by the FCC would seem to take a valuable good -- bundled video programming created through private effort and agreement under the protections of the Copyright Act -- and deliver it to third parties who are not in privity with the copyright owners, but who may nevertheless exploit the content for profit," Pallante wrote. "Under the Proposed Rule, this would be accomplished without compensation to the creators or licensees of the copyrighted programming, and without requiring the third party to adhere to agreed-upon license terms." There are already "third-party set-top box devices, mainly produced overseas, that are used to view pirated content delivered over the Internet," and the FCC's plan could expand the market to include devices "designed to exploit the more readily available [cable TV] programming streams without adhering to the prescribed security measures," Pallante wrote. Cable companies are willing to pledge industry-wide commitment, but have expressed no desires of leaving control over the UI.

8 of 137 comments (clear)

  1. What about the ISP's that force you to rent gatewa by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What about the ISP's that force you to rent gateways and then change you to rent them with no way to buy them?

  2. How's this different from telephone deregulation? by doug141 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Before 1982, EVERY phone was leased from the phone company and you had no third party options. Deregulation proved to be good thing for everybody.

  3. I'm so happy by ADRA · · Score: 4, Insightful

    that I don't have cable TV anymore. Screw them all and drive their 20th century panacea into the sea faster.

    --
    Bye!
  4. What is cable? by hawguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What is this "Cable TV"? I vaguely remember it being some old fashioned improvement over "rabbit ears", but I didn't realize people still used it today.

    The cable companies may win a Pyrrhic victory on this one. I finally got rid of my cable box and went completely to Netflix + over the air TV (which looks fantastic thanks to digital broadcasting -- the over-the-air channels look a *lot* better than they did on cable (even when I was paying extra for "HD") because the cable company uses some aggressive compression that leaves very visible compression artifacts).

    The laggy UI is what made me decide to get rid of the box -- taking nearly a second for each page of the program guide, plus at least a second to change channels. I can't help thinking that a third party could make a much better cable box that's both faster and more usable.

    And all it took was a $20 antenna for my TV hanging on the wall behind the TV, saved me around $480/year in cable fees. Granted I don't have nearly as many channels as I used to, but 100 channels of crap TV wasn't worth the money.

    1. Re:What is cable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Its this weird service where you pay to have advertisements piped into your home.

  5. re: firewire on back of cable box by King_TJ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Actually, I don't think you're talking about something equivalent, even though I know what you're saying. (I have Comcast too, and my set top box also has a FireWire port on the back of it.)

    The thing is though? In order to download the files on your DVR to your computer, you'd still have to do all of that via the hardware Comcast provided you -- meaning you'd also presumably only have access to content that you were paying your monthly subscription for in the first place. (I remember when people first discovered that ability to connect some of the digital set-top boxes to computers via FireWire, the whole "piracy" thing was a hot topic. But it quickly settled back down when people realized it was just a digital version of exactly what you could always do with a VCR or DVDR connected through a different set of connectors.)

    I think what the cable providers don't like with the current FCC proposal is the idea that they lose direct control over what the set-top boxes do that decode their programming. For example... What if someone designed a digital set top box that worked the way the Plex media server works on a computer, where you can share your content with other users? One person could pay for a Showtime or HBO subscription, record a bunch of shows to a DVR built into such a box, and then allow any of their "friends" to stream the content to their own box of the same make/model, regardless of what their personal cable package contained in it.

  6. Re:How's this different from telephone deregulatio by spacepimp · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The fear of Comcast and TWC etc are not about piracy. This is a straight up control mechanism. They have already had years to open up cable cards to do similar and have dragged their feet at every attempt. the reason the FCC is attempting this is because the prior non forced attempts have been responded to not in good faith by the ISP's. So the options here are to: Hold them legally accountable for their failure top open up cable cards until they solve their probably internally, or to move ahead without the the ISP's approval.

  7. Re:Ridiculous Argument by MachineShedFred · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And some cable providers (read: all but Time Warner) are actually not asshats when it comes to CCI flagging, and don't CopyOnce every single god damn show they legally can.

    Time Warner can eat a dumpster full of dicks for that.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.