Losing Control of Your TV

sp00 writes "The MPAA is now trying to prevent high quality copies made from TV broadcasts. The latest anti-piracy move will prevent you from making high-quality copies of broadcast TV programs. And the new "broadcast flag" technology enables all manner of other restrictions. In the future, the Motion Picture Association of America will control your television set."

What about low-quality copies?

[AtariAmarok (451306)]

Does this include low-quality copies, like standard VHS recordings?

Re:What about low-quality copies?

[SoupGuru (723634)]

Low quality? You mean there's something better than VHS out there?

Re:What about low-quality copies?

[sik0fewl (561285)]

Low quality? You mean there's something better than VHS out there?

Where have you been? Of course there's something better. It's called Betamax [wikipedia.org].

Re:What about low-quality copies?

[pilgrim23 (716938)]

Indeed. Seems to me that if this only applies to High Quality TV then, given the current status of the art, there is nothing to block. I stopped watching TV over a decade ago. Only High Quality on TV any more is the drug ads.

Re:What about low-quality copies?

[tverbeek (457094)]

Your VHS recorder (at least the current one, with marginal - if any - copy protection built into it) doesn't know that any of the these flags exist, so it presumably wouldn't honor them.

Re:What about low-quality copies?

[drinkypoo (153816)]

On the other hand, the decoders will probably output a macrovision signal on their analog outputs when the broadcast flag is set...

Re:What about low-quality copies?

[cdrudge (68377)]

Which is easly defeated with an even older VCR (put that old beta machine to use!) or by a 24.95 device [lik-sang.com].

Re:What about low-quality copies?

[nosilA (8112)]

It only applies to digital outputs - S-Video and even Component Analog and RGB (VGA) are perfectly legit. Copies can be made digitally so long as they are made using approved technologies, to be determined by the FCC later this year.

From http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/ FCC-03-273A1.pdf:

(a) A Covered Demodulator Product shall not pass, or direct to be passed,
Marked Content to any output except
(1) to an analog output;
(2) to an 8-VSB, 16-VSB, 64-QAM or 256-QAM modulated output, provided
that the Broadcast Flag is retained in the both the EIT and PMT;
(3) to a digital output protected by an Authorized Digital Output Protection
Technology, in accordance with any applicable obligations established as a part of its
approval pursuant to 73.9008;
(4) where such Covered Demodulator Product outputs, or directs to be output,
such content to another product and such Covered Demodulator Product exercises sole
control (such as by using a cryptographic protocol), in compliance with the Demodulator
Robustness Requirements, over the access to such content in usable form in such other
product;
(5) where such Covered Demodulator Product outputs, or directs to be output,
such content for the purpose of making a recording of such content pursuant to paragraph
(b)(2) of this section, where such content is protected by the corresponding recording
method; or
(6) where such Covered Demodulator Product is incorporated into a Computer
Product and passes, or directs to be passed, such content to an unprotected output
operating in a mode compatible with the Digital Visual Interface (DVI) Rev. 1.0
Specification as an image having the visual equivalent of no more than 350,000 pixels
per frame (e.g., an image with resolution of 720 x 480 pixels for a 4:3 (nonsquare pixel)
aspect ratio), and 30 frames per second. Such an image may be attained by reducing
resolution, such as by discarding, dithering or averaging pixels to obtain the specified
value, and can be displayed using video processing techniques such as line doubling or
sharpening to improve the perceived quality of the image.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 03-273
42
(b) A Covered Demodulator Product shall not record or cause the recording of
Marked Content in digital form unless such recording is made using one of the following
methods:
(1) a method that effectively and uniquely associates such recording with a single
Covered Demodulator Product (using a cryptographic protocol or other effective means)
so that such recording cannot be accessed in usable form by another product except
where the content of such recording is passed to another product as permitted under this
subpart or
(2) an Authorized Recording Method in accordance with any applicable
obligations established as a part of its approval pursuant to 73.9008 (provided that for
recordings made on removable media, only Authorized Recording Methods expressly
approved pursuant to 73.9008 for use in connection with removable media may be
used).
(c) Paragraph (b) of this section does not impose restrictions regarding the
storage of Marked Content as a Transitory Image.
(d) The requirements of this section shall become applicable on July 1, 2005.

-Alison

Thank our government for this!

[garcia (6573)]

The broadcast flag could be expanded into a whole family of little flaglets, and together giving the system a much more expressive repertoire. One flag might say, "you may not time-shift this program." Another flag might tell your TiVO "you may not fast-forward or skip this program's commercials." A very special flag might disable your TV's channel changer and "off" buttons. There might even be a Mission Impossible flag that makes your digital video recorder self-destruct in five seconds (or at least erase every movie owned by Universal Studios.) Who knows what Hollywood will dream up next!

I realize this guy is sort of pushing the bullshit lines with controlling the OFF BUTTON and the MI sequence but I can actually see them banning you from timeshifting, etc. Look at some DVDs. You already can't skip some commercials on those. I can see it being that way on a rented movie but on one you purchased? That's bullshit.

HDTV was mandated by the government at YOUR expense so that these people could control YOUR choices. Make sure you thank them.

Re:Thank our government for this!

[Zed2K (313037)]

"Look at some DVDs. You already can't skip some commercials on those"

Actually when the studios first started putting trailers and stuff before the movies on dvd's they fixed it so you couldn't get around them. Especially the warning pages. But every new dvd I've rented over the past few months has allowed me to hit chapter forward to skip past them. Even the FBI warnings. It shows up but chapter forward decreases the time you have to sit there watching. You still can't just hit menu sometimes to jump past the trailers but you can skip them. Obviously not ideal but better than it used to be.

Re:Thank our government for this!

[FrostedWheat (172733)]

In the UK, all the latest DVDs from Fox have adverts at the start that you cannot skip. They go on for a while aswell.

What's worse is that these are the retail disks, not rental. I've written a letter of complaint and won't be buying any Fox DVDs from now on.

Same goes for Disney and there Ad-DVDs.

Re:Thank our government for this!

[rs25com (710712)]

This is ALREADY happening, don't you see? If any of you have a DVD player, then you know what I am talking about.

Pop in a DVD, press play, and you are FORCED to watch the Piracy Warning, and the Company Name banners. Some previews are even hard to get past. This takes up to a few minutes for some DVD's.

You cannot fast forward.
You cannot rewind.
You cannot stop.

This kind of technology being suggested just serves to stop people from having any control over their TV's. Pretty soon I can easily see TV's that will not allow you to change the channel during commercials, mute the volume during commercials, or turn off without watching the last few commercials. It's already gotten to the point where some channels have decided to pad a 2 hour show to 3 hours by adding an additional hour of commercials.

And so far, no one is complaining. So sad.

This will not stop piracy, in my opinion, it will only make it worse. The forbidden fruit, so to speak.

When I buy DVD, it should begin playing the movie the instant I put it in the machine. I paid for it, it's mine. Commercials are fine on TV stations, because that is how they make their money, but not on my PAID FOR retail DVD.

Hollywood, MPAA, and RIAA are all a bunch of greedy bastards, IMO! :)

Re:Thank our government for this!

[pegr (46683)]

Pop in a DVD, press play, and you are FORCED to watch the Piracy Warning, and the Company Name banners. Some previews are even hard to get past. This takes up to a few minutes for some DVD's.


...until I found a hacked firmware for my DVD player that makes it multiregion, disables macrovision, and allows my to skip past FBI warnings and the like... (also known as using MY DVD player with MY DVDs in any way I want...) Is it a DMCA violation? Probably... But the more people do this, the more obvious it is that this type of encumberment is NOT what the market wants.

Re:Thank our government for this!

[Christianfreak (100697)]

[tin foil hat]

Yeah and next they're going to put in a battery backup so that even when you unplug it just keeps playing forever.

And then they'll make them so that it contains nano-bots that repair everything if you try to physically break the hardware.
[/tin foil hat]

Are you sure?

[Jerf (17166)]

And so far, no one is complaining. So sad.

Are you sure nobody is complaining? Sometimes, people don't "complain", they just silently change their purchasing/consuming habits. Haven't you seen the stories on Slashdot where people are spending time on the web or with video games, taking the time out of their television viewing?

That is even better than complaining.

DiVX, the Circuit City self-destructing DVD technology, in the end wasn't killed by geek complaints. It was killed by people who didn't buy it. (Sometimes, the "sheeple" aren't. "Sheeple" is mostly a term for feeling yourself superior anyhow, but I digress....) DVDs, IMHO, have already crossed the line of what people will tolerate, as evidenced by being forced to back down from forced previews to allowing people to skip them. Don't expect them to get any worse, or if they do, expect rapid punishment exacted on the offending studio by the market.

I'd not bet on it yet but it is a perfectly plausible outcome that by 2006 or 2007, no broadcaster will use the flag, because they can't afford the viewership loss! PVRs aren't going away over the next year. The Internet isn't going away. Video games certainly aren't going away. The optimal time for TV to pull this shit was about four years ago; now too many people have tasted the "forbidden fruit" of interactive media, especially PVRs, and many of them are already choosing to decrease their TV usage, before the TV industry implements the squeezing! (If you've got the disposable funds, buy your representatives a TiVo; that donation will probably have a greater effect then anything else you could do with the money.)

Oh, there's valid reason for concern and I still would like to see a lawsuit that labels this as unconstutitional restriction on our speech, and personally I find attempts to control viewers who aren't sharing effectively unethical [jerf.org]. The fight should be fought... but I'm pretty sure that in this arena, we've already won. The TV industry would like to think otherwise, but they are, in the end, dispensible now. Viable alternatives exist and most of them are one-way transitions for the people who try them; the television's only choice now is between declining slowly and maintaining a real but smaller existance, or throwing a hissy fit until we starve them as a society. (No laws necessary; we can't be forced to watch TV barring a sudden UK-like tax law.)

If they want control.....

[gillrock (517577)]

Then I want control over the price....

If I don't own the TV set outright, I shouldn't have to pay $3000 for a plasma TV. I think I should only have to pay $3.

You do have control of the price

[FreeUser (11483)]

Then I want control over the price....

If I don't own the TV set outright, I shouldn't have to pay $3000 for a plasma TV. I think I should only have to pay $3.

We (collectively) have complete control over the price. Do not buy an HDTV with these sorts of crippling features. I own an HDTV, which I use as a 61" computer monitor and DVD playback device. I own an HDTV (Linux PCI card) tuner which does allow digital recording. I will not purchase a device with these flags enabled.

If enough other videophiles are informed enough and smart enough to do likewise, the product will go the way of the original DIVX self-destructive DVDs ... i.e. they (and HDTV) will be a complete flop, and television will be replaced by the Internet completely, once and for all.

(There is a lot to be done on the content side to offer entertainment alternatives to the Corporate State's Bread and Circuses program, but Red v. Blue and other content online is already showing the way, and Blender et. al. put the tools in our hands to make our own high quality content. The rest is up to us).

Re:You do have control of the price

[FreeUser (11483)]

Only one problem is that hdtv is government mandated.

Paying money for an HDTV isn't. The government can mandate that HDTV is offered, they can't mandate that we buy it.

Buy a computer monitor instead, and download your free, legal content online. Machinima, Blenderwars, assorted Povray sites, etc. are a good starting point.

Bored? Make your own TV show and disseminate it online. If you're good, maybe you'll be able to sell ad placements (Coke signs in the background a la Blade Runner, etc.) and make a living at it. If not, you have a cool hobby and are helping yourself and others choose a path different than that the thugs with the flack jackets and jack boots are ushering us toward.

pcHDTV is your friend

[FreeUser (11483)]

On an off-topic note - what Linux HDTV tuner do you use, and how open are the drivers?

I use a PC HDTV [pchdtv.com] card. The drivers are free software (GPLed) and available online (they are v4l2 based, rather than v4l, but can be made to work with mythtv and xine-hd).

Buy 'em early and often ... who knows how long before the thugs in Washington ban the technology outright.

Wrong

[FreeUser (11483)]

Even if all of the videophiles in the nation united, it would not compare to the number of people who would buy them anyway because they just don't care.

Wrong.

Early adopters are critical to a new product's success. If the videophiles, who are the early adopters of HDTV, do not buy the products, there is a good chance few others will.

Remember, not only do enthusiasts buy the expensive ("development-cost recouping") equipment, they are also the ones their friends and families turn to for advice on what to buy and what not to buy. Withholding their willingness to purchase will almost certainly be enough to kill obnoxious new products ... telling their family and friends not to buy obnoxious products will most certainly kill them dead.

This has already happened, with DAT tapes and divx DVD's. It can happen again with crippled HDTV ... if the early adopters are informed enough, and intelligent enough, to make the right choice.

Don't kid yourself about the potential impact ... video and audiophiles have a disproportionate impact on which consumer electronic devices succeed and which ones fail.

Re:Wrong

[mcmonkey (96054)]

Early adopters are critical to a new product's success.

Ah, good ole days. That once was true. Television, and later color television, spread this way. Early adopters on both sides--folks taking a chance on some new gadget and folks taking a chance on providing content for that new gadget--set the path to a brave new world.

And for many years it worked. Color tv spread; AM stereo radio didn't. Market forces worked, and it was good.

Those days are gone. In the USA HDTV is law. Broadcasters have to broadcast it; manufacturers have to make it.

The market chose CD over DAT and DVD over DivX, but in this case there is no competing technology. If you don't want an HDTV, eventually your only option will be no TV at all.

BTW, if you're planning on buying in the USA a TV 36-inches or larger, and don't want to be forced to pay a few hundred dollars for HDTV hardware you don't need, butter buy before July 1 [pbs.org].

Re:If they want control.....

[by Anonymous Coward]

Not that I favor the broadcast flag, but it is not a new phenomenon for equipment that you own to be highly regulated and for its capabilities to be micromanaged by government. There are restrictions on the emissions controls of a car, the radio frequency and power that a cordless phone may use, etc.

Perhaps you should only have to pay $3 for a car, since you don't own it outright (you're restricted from changing it in certain ways).

What's different here, is who is restricting. With a car's emissions equipment, the restriction is placed upon you by everyone; we all (theoretically ;-) agree that it is in all our interests to limit pollution. So your neighbor isn't getting any more out of supressing your rights, than you are, also.

With the broadcast flag, it appears that the only party benefitted by the supression, is the MPAA. Thus, it's a blatantly corrupt law.

But they will then argue that it isn't true, because copyright law benefits us all, since it encourages the creation of works that we all enjoy.

The revolution will be televised...

[Omega (1602)]

The revolution will be televised...

Please check with the MPAA to acquire a license to view the revolution.

But...

[insmod_ex (724714)]

There's always going to be a way to get around it though. Look at XP's Activation, that was cracked. Even the activation in Longhorn has been cracked. No matter how strong of a wall you put up, all it takes is a big wrecking ball to bring it down.

All they are doing

[smartin (942)]

Creating a market for tv's imported from countries that don't have the restrictions and a black market for chipping sets.

Re:All they are doing

[garcia (6573)]

and do you think that 99% of the people out there care that they are doing this? NO THEY DON'T. People seem to feel that TV is a necessity in their lives!

My gf is actually pretty pissed off that I don't have cable. This interrupts her Reality TV bullshit with fuzz and intermittent loud buzzing. She can't understand why I am not ready to fork out $55/mo to watch what they feed us.

Ok, so back to the topic... People out there don't care about a broadcast flag. It's not going to affect them. It's just something else that they will hear about, shrug their shoulders, and say, "so?" Remember... We live in a time where people will vote for American Idol contestants (25+ million a week watch that shit) but we can't get anyone to vote for who runs our country. We also live in a time where people look at you crazy when you tell them that their freedoms are being infringed on.

Voting...

[GAVollink (720403)]

Actually, the tide is turning. Remember the Super Tuesday primaries actually had record turnouts.

I'm a proud voter, and I'm happy to see that more people are taking the 5 minutes required to do the same.

And as another post-er already pointed out, the failure of DivX based DVD players was a consumer shug-the-shoulders, "I wonder who would buy that," response. But those consumers did not buy that.

Something about this confuses me

[by Anonymous Coward]

High quality? TV broadcasts? This does not compute.

It's the show

[AtariAmarok (451306)]

Come to think of it, it is impossible to make a "high quality" anything if the TV show concerned is "Dharma and Greg". I think the entire UPN network will be exempt from these restrictions too. (I'd mention the ABC network, but I didn't think it was around anymore)

"In the future...

[BigChigger (551094)]

the Motion Picture Association of America will control your television set."

At which point I won't have one.

There is something to be said for getting older and not giving a *&@# about keeping current as-far-as TV shows are concerned. I could'nt even tell you who is sleeping with who on Friends ;-) You know what? I don't miss it either.

BC

Not quite

[Rick the Red (307103)]

In the future, the Motion Picture Association of America will control your television set.

They won't control my TV set. I intend to vote with my wallet. Of course, I may not be able to watch broadcast TV after 2006 unless I buy an MPAA-owned digital TV, but I don't consider that a great loss.

And that is one reason to stop watching TV

[zapp (201236)]

There are many many good reasons to stop watching TV, so many that I can't really list them all. But I know that I am finding I have less and less inclination to watch TV. All the new shows that come out are crap, and as all my old favorites end their life time, I find I watch less television.

With all the crap on TV these days, and things like this coming into play, I can only hope people will at least reduce the amount of tv they watch.

TV's future?

[FattMattP (86246)]

In the future, the Motion Picture Association of America will control your television set.

In the future, I don't think the TV set is going to be that important. It's extremely easy to make your own videos. As time goes on people will start making their own high quality content. Those people will find other delivery mechanisms such as the net to get their work out and possible sold.

Re:TV's future?

[jhoger (519683)]

Well it would be nice if the masses really did start to create high quality art instead of just being passive consumers of "content". Released under a Creative Commons license... but movie production ain't all that cheap and I don't see it getting there anytime soon.

Yeah one can make decent home movies and wedding videos... maybe even videos of some live performances and sporting events (well, some sporting events...). But do you really think those will have a wide audience as to compete with commercially produced content?

No they will NOT control my television set

[dcavanaugh (248349)]

I will keep my old stuff for as long as it works. When I am confronted with HDTV crippleware, it's time to get rid of TV altogether. There isn't any problem MPAA can create that I can't solve with the power switch.

These MPAA people are determined to follow in the footsteps of RIAA. Crappy content, obnoxious protection, struggling for more and more control over media that has less and less content. Pretty soon they will control 100% of nothing.

Its all very simple...

[elrick_the_brave (160509)]

Just stop watching TV... speak with your wallet and stop watching TV. Notify your provider in writing that you object to this limitation of the service you enjoy. Write your MP or Senator and state that you do not enjoy the fact that someone is limiting your freedom to enjoy a product which you pay for.

My point being is that the TV/MPAA industry is bound and determined to make money whatever way they can in order to both profit and to 'subsidize' 'providing' broadcast television. This typically means advertising. It is up to you to determine whether you will put up with restrictions or not. The problem is that all of us viewers allow these corporations to do what they want because its not worth 'your time'. That's your choice.. your time. These days I am chosing to not use TV anymore. I live with the lack of entertainment.. but I am finding my way with.. gasp.. reading... exercise... developing social networks for work, friends, and family.

Its amazing what you can do when you plug those 4 to 8 hours a day into something other than watching television.

Admittedly there are a lot of folks quite happy to do so... hoorah for them. They've made their choice whether they actively did so or not.

Get rid of it

[mrs clear plastic (229108)]

I have not had a TV since May, 1978.

I have not missed a darn thing.

There is too much in life to enjoy without
having a TV.

How can the MPAA control the empty space where
your TV is not?

Re:Get rid of it

[Anonymous Crowhead (577505)]

I bet you have a 'Kill your television' sticker on your car.

I also bet that anytime someone mentions a TV show, you chime in with "$TV_show? Never hear of it. I don't even own a TV. Haven't since May, 1978. You really should get rid of your TV, etc."

Re:Get rid of it

[ChrisN79 (615123)]

Obligatory link to Onion article about guy who doesn't own television:

http://www.theonion.com/onion3604/doesnt_own_telev ision.html [theonion.com]

In case you've forgotten...

[morningdave (259151)]

Your friendly neighborhood public library still doesn't treat you like a criminal. Amazing as it sounds, you can walk in and ask for a book, and they'll lend it to you. All they ask is that you return it when they ask you to. That's right, they'll actually take you at your word. No deposits, DRM, FBI warnings or EULAs involved. Why not go today, and remind yourself how it feels to be treated with a little respect?

Software Tuners Are The Way "Out"

[Doug Dante (22218)]

The broadcast flag is old news. The FCC can control hardware, but not software.

Thus the GNU project brings us an open source software tuner, which is not subject to regulation, and can tune/record HDTV.

Check out these HDTV screen shots:

http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuradio/hdtv-sample s. html

Sadly, the software controlled tuner cards, powerful processor, DRAM, wide screen monitor, good computer stereo, etc put this toy out of the reach of most geeks - for now.

I don't think they need to worry.

[Java Pimp (98454)]

Who is actually recording television anymore? With what [go.com] they [nbc.com] consider [cbs.com] quality [nbc.com] television [nbc.com], I'm surprized more people aren't doing more interesting things like taking a Craftsman cordless drill to the soles of their feet or jamming needles in their armpits.

Slippery Slope

[aelfric35 (711236)]

Slippery slope arguments always make me suspicious. Garfinkel assumes that the use of flags to prevent high-quality recording of digital broadcasts will inevitably lead to a "in Soviet Russia, your TV watches you" scenario. Of course, if the RIAA provides an analagous case, Garfinkel may be right, and we'll have yet another battle fought between Orwellian copy protection schemes and geeks wielding magic markers. Come July 4, 2005, we'll read on Slashdot about how to build your own black box to get around the flags. The "Soviet Russia" scenario assumes we'll take this lying down, like the puppets of corporate America we are. Again, if the RIAA's efforts are any indication, I don't think that's a valid assumption.

Re:Wait a second

[krog (25663)]

Television is a Motion Picture.

And legally, the MPAA doesn't control anything. They're a lobbying group. They control things illegally.

Re:Wait a second

[Skye16 (685048)]

No, they control things legally. They do it immorally, however.

Re:Wait a second

[garcia (6573)]

They are talking about controlling the "broadcast flag" on movies that are put out over the airwaves. Once the TV monopolies realize what this could mean to them (especially with DVD releases of shows) it will shift to them as well.

Re:Wait a second

[squiggleslash (241428)]

Once the TV monopolies realize what this could mean to them (especially with DVD releases of shows) it will shift to them as well.

You know, from my point of view, that might not be a bad thing. I don't subscribe to cable/satellite, and generally just watch DVDs and videos. Right now, getting TV shows is awkward - some shows get on, usually many, many years after they've been shown, aimed at a rather small market of diehard fans who are willing to pay up to $40 for a "season" rather than everyday viewers; but the majority are usually not available in any way.

If TV channels start seeing DVDs as a potential revenue source by default, this will increase the number of programs available on DVD, creating an opportunity for those of us who'd rather not spend $80-100 a month on dross to pick up the occasional boxed DVD set of something we actually want to watch instead. We're looking at cafeteria TV by the back door, essentially.

And yeah, it sucks if you're paying the subscription and wondering what the hell you're getting for your money if all you can do is timeshift a few hours worth of TV, while suffering hundreds of ads. But there's a solution to that: If you're given a better choice, and to me ad-free programmes I want to see when I want to see them is a better choice, then grab it with both hands.

Overuse of the broadcast flag may be the death knell for television channelling as we know it; TV could easily end up being as different and as of little importance in the future as radio is today in comparison to its position fifty years ago. This may be a good thing for everyone.

Dunno about your TV

[jefdiesel (633290)]

Dunno about your tv.. but mine has all kinds of cool moving pictures. They dance, and laugh, and shoot each other, and on Cop Rock, they even SING! [jumptheshark.com]

Re:Time to drag out this old chestnut, It might ap

[AtariAmarok (451306)]

First they came for the ooffshore pirate DVD factories,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't an offshore DVD pirate.
Then they came for the Kazaa users,
and I didn't speak up,
because I didn't use Kazaa.
Then they came for the VHS copiers,
and I didn't speak up,
because I still used Betemax.
Then they came for me,
and I turned off the set.

Re:It Figures - My Bad Timing

[happyfrogcow (708359)]

But they think that if you can't record your show, you'll go rent or buy a DVD of it. Take "Sex and the City" for example, you can record it, and yet they have DVD's available for renting, and knowing quite a few girls in their 20's, it does get rented by them. Now take away their right to record it (some do record it, in case they miss it) and you'll have a few more girls renting it. They're trying to create a market where there isn't a need to. It's all in the name of greed, and not neccesarily about piracy.