Hollywood and NFL Fight TiVo

An anonymous reader writes "MSNBC/Washington Post is reporting that the NFL and tinseltown have asked the FCC to stop TiVo from expanding its service to include the ability to transfer recordings to PC's and other remote devices. TiVo says the system is secure. I say its source code will end up on the box. You do the math."

Too Hard to Regulate

[artlu]

If the FCC/NFL is that parnoid about TIVO then they would also have to requisitiona ll video card manufacturers to not include video inputs on their cards. I would assume that most of the information going to computers and then torrent sites are coming from video in cards and not TIVO. On the other hand, I definitely feel bad for advertisers because TIVO could potential hurt their effectiveness, and ads make the world go around. No ads. No Slashdot.

GroupShares Inc. [groupshares.com] - A Free and Interactive Stock Market Community

Don't need a Tivo....

[jsimon12]

Last time I checked "Computer Enthusiasts" didn't need a Tivo to capture TV shows and share them. Not to mention the fact that time-shifting is legal. What is next, garrote survivors [theonion.com] suing companies that make wire?

Amazing

[WindBourne]

With each new iteration of technology, new features get added to media. Witness VCR -> DVD. Each time, the media fight it and try to gain control. So far, they have always lost. and when doing so, it turns out that the new features actually helped the media companies , not hurt them. And in spite of a long history of being wrong about it each and every single time, they still wish to try and control it. Insanity at its best.

It remains to be seen how many politicians have been bought.

Too bad, so sad

[Anonymous Coward]

If TiVo makes advertisers' business model obsolete, that's just too bad. Find another way to make money. They're already putting more "ads" into the shows to counter this.

It's Capitalism. Get over it

[LehiNephi]

TiVo, with its associated abundance of convenient features, is merely the response of a free market to a real demand. Keep in mind these facts:

1.) People like certain shows, so they buy a TV.
2.) These shows are only shown on cable, so people subscribe to a cable service.
3.) People can't always watch those shows when the shows are broadcast, so they buy a VCR.
4.) People (in general) don't want to watch commercials, so they buy a TiVo.(I'm not saying that it's the only reason people buy it, it's just one)

With each step, the monetary expense increases. But consumers consider it worth the money. One major problem I see here, however, is that cable channels (in the beginning) were commercial-free. They were paid for by the subscription fees. Now, not only do you have to pay the cable company more than ever to watch the same shows, you now have a third of your time wasted by commercials.

This is why TiVo is becoming more popular. It's convenient. Someone needs to explain that term to the RIAA and MPAA.

Reality to NFL and HOLLY WOULD

[Sfing_ter]

That ship has sailed.
The cat is out of the bag.
The gate is open on the corral.
Been there, done that.

Zoidberg: That's why I love Earth. You can do what you want, and no one makes you feel guilty, because no one cares.
Fry: We're not listening!
Zoidberg: That's what I'm talking about!

And frankly, that's it... I have been able to do it with vhs for years, and I will continue to do it with new technology. I have my pvr card so FOAH. I record movies, ppv movies, tv shows et. and it is none of your bizness. I keep what I want.

I am not listening, I am acting.

If it comes to my tv it's for my enjoyment period.
If you don't want me to have it, don't show it.

Hollywood/NFL Living in The Past

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

It's time for hollywood, NFL,RIAA and others to wake up and smell the CPU cycles.
People want to record TV shows,films and radio broadcasts. Not because they're freeloaders. It's because they like TV and want to watch it again. If you can't accept this and make money off it, then you have a poor business model and deserve to get driven out of business by smarter competetors.

The mass media have made money for one simple reason. They had a monopoly on the production and distrobution technologies of the media. Only they could afford radio towers, film reels and copying technology. Through this they have also maintained a monopsony over the base talent which they promote. Hence the low signal to noise ratio on TV and radio. Now, thanks to technology, even your average joe sixpack has the technology to copy a TV broadcast of music track. TiVo has given him the power to record the game, the soaps, the news, so he can watch them again. Does this mean we should shut down TiVo so the monopoly can continue?

HDD based TV recorders. MPAA and NFL want to shut them down because they encourage 'theft' of signals floating around in peoples homes. Nonsense. They just wish to maintain a monopoly over the distribution of their content, so they can jack up the price for their wares.

They deserve to be driven out of business.

If you want an example of a company that is using peoples wants and likes to make money out of HDD recorders, look no further than Sky+. [sky.com] Sky actually encourage people to record TV shows and are making a mint off it.

Put that in your smoke and pipe in NFAA!!! :E

Re:Too Hard to Regulate

[stanmann]

Like the RIAA the NFL isn't interested in STOPPING piracy or copying, but simply making it non-trivial. SO they go after TIVO and Kazaa, but ignore video cards and FTP/NNTP. WHy? because it's counterproductive to sue NVIDIA/ATI or Worldnet/AOL. So they are wisely(?) picking only battles where they can achieve a public win. And they are picking battles where they can stop the "average" consumer from making the copies. Remember the Betamax decision?? they can't afford another one. so they can only go after "substantially infringing" media. So, Can they stop TIVO?? perhaps, perhaps not, depends on whether or not the judge(if it gets that far) determines that the "secure" copy to PC has substantial non-infringing uses.

Re:Can't help but equate with gun rights

[Artifakt]

Guns are effectively the only subject of the 2nd amendment. Until and unless communications related electronics are seen as a subject of the 1st amendment, our rights are not going to see the same level of protection. Right now, the legal underpinning for all to many laws controlling such devices is widely seen, in political circles, as being derived only from customary law or just possibly restricted by the 9th amendment. Ultimately, this is about a struggle for the 1st.

Re:Suggestion for a new business model

[embo]

This is a fantastic idea. And it will never happen. Why? Because no matter how cheap you make it, there will still be people who won't pay a fucking nickel to see the show, and will want to get it for free. And there will always be enough of them to discourage the purveyors of said media from doing something like this.

The minute you open this up for a nickel a show, there will be free copies of the same thing out on the P2P networks, because people would rather spend the extra time thinking they are getting it for free than they would to take the time to pay the nickel for seeing the show. Say all you want about people being willing to pay for it. There are still going to be enough who aren't, because people, for the most part, suck.

Dear Hollywood

[Duck of Death]

Dear Hollywood,

I missed the season finale of West Wing this year and no one I know has taped it. Rather than wait until you re-air it in September, I would really like download or stream a copy of the show to my home so I can watch it. Go ahead and downsample it to VCD quality if you want. I just want to watch the show. I'm quite willing to pay, too. I think $1 is a fair price for a 45 minute, low bandwidth copy of a show that has already aired. There are other episodes of other shows I would really like to have copies of (I'm not interested in buying whole collections, but there are certain episodes of certain shows I'd like to own). Please let me know where I can go to pay for and download this material. Seriously. I've got cash.

Dear NFL:

I've never watched a whole football game in my life. You can do whatever the hell you want. I don't care.

Dear Music Industry,

Your prices are too high. You are competing against DVD's for my entertainment dollars and they consistently offer better value. In the past two years I've bought about 30 DVD's and maybe four CD's. And just so you know, I haven't downloaded music for over 2.5 years. Actually, that 4 CD figure is not correct. Last year BMG offered every title in their catalog for $7 and we bought 14 CD's. So it appears that, for me at least, the $7 price point puts you right back in the running for those entertainment dollars I was talking about. Oh, and by the way, BMG messed up the order and sent 8 incorrect titles. They sent along the correct titles and told us to keep the other ones (so we actually got 22 CD's for $100). It appears that it wasn't even worth the cost to return ship and restock those 8 CD's. How much do those things cost you anyway? There are a lot of titles I'm interested in but refuse to buy at the current prices. If you drop your prices to $5, I would probably buy 20 titles immediately and at least 10 titles per year thereafter. You would earn MUCH more off of me than you are under your current pricing structure.

Love,

DoD