TiVo-like Application for XM Radio Under Fire 415
Strudelkugel writes "USA Today reports: 'Catching Blondie's reunion tour broadcast at 4 in the morning wasn't an option for XM satellite radio subscriber and single father Scott MacLean. "I was missing concerts that were being broadcasted when I was asleep or out," he said. So the 35-year-old computer programmer from Ottawa, Ontario, wrote a piece of software that let him record the show directly onto his PC hard drive while he snoozed.' As expected, the lawyers are coming out. Seems like a good idea, though. This capability might actually entice me to get an XM radio."
Re:dish network users already have this w/Sirrus! (Score:2, Informative)
Sirius [sirius.com] has better sound quality anyway, plus free online streaming (at reduced quality) and exclusive NFL coverage.
You could even make a similar setup with a standalone Sirius tuner, if you don't mind a little hacking (and I know you don't, Slashdotters...). Just get any Sirius receiver, attach its line out and an IR transmitter to your PC, and change the station with infrared. Cake!
So what's new? I do this now all the time... (Score:4, Informative)
XM leaving out USB connectivity in new receivers (Score:3, Informative)
My question is, it seems pretty obvious to me that someone was going to do this, so why release the PCR at all? My guess is that they didn't want to offer online streaming like Sirius [sirius.com] and wanted to pick up extra subscriptions for PCRs. Look what that got them. In any case, XM has a neat product and is doing well.
Missing adjective (Score:3, Informative)
Please insert "crappy" before "songs". I've had XM for a year and it's rare to hear two worthwhile songs back to back on any station. They seem to focus on "deep tracks", defined to be the stuff fans of the band don't even like.
After a few hours of listening to my friend's Sirius, I regretted choosing XM, and only chose XM because they seemed to have the subscriber numbers to last long term.
Re: Link to software page (Score:5, Informative)
One interesting post by the developer indicates that he has purged purchaser's personal information from his database:
As there has been some concern about contact information held by me, I have changed my database so that the only information stored is the issued key number. Email addresses and any other identifying information about purchasers is discarded immediately after the credit card validation process has completed.
The key number is derived from a one-way hash using your radio ID and some other internal information. It will work only with your radio, however no information (including the radio ID) can be derived from it.
Terms of Service (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Since when is XM legally available in Canada? (Score:4, Informative)
B: XM's satellite signals are aimed towards the USA because, well, nearly all signal they send outside of the US borders would be a total waste of energy. They could legally paint all of Canada with signal with a broad beam that also hits part of the USA thanks to the "we'll tolerate each other's signal splashes" deal between the nations, but since they'll never be allowed to openly sell up there, they might as well direct their signal to where paying customers actually will be.
Re:No DMCA violation required... (Score:5, Informative)
These are not important in a car, but don't stand up to any kind of critical listening.
Its a tempest in a teapot.
Re:dish network users already have this w/Sirrus! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:A few bits.... (Score:4, Informative)
the Recording Industry Association of America said his organization had not reviewed the software
Interestingly, the programmer is from Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Out of the RIAA's jurisdiction.
Re:Easy. (Score:3, Informative)
Read the TOS... (Score:2, Informative)
Section b:
"b) Use Limitations.
You may not reproduce, rebroadcast, or otherwise transmit the programming, <i>record the programming</i>, charge admission specifically for the purpose of listening to the programming...." (Emphasis mine)
So, it's against the Terms Of Service of the subscriber...thus, the reason legal action is probably going to be taken...
BItch out their mouthpiece (Score:3, Informative)
About Us - Press Room - Login ... Please call Jennifer Markham (202) 380-4315. Contact Information. Press Contact:
Chance Patterson, VP Corporate Affairs chance.patterson@xmradio.com [mailto]. ...
www.xmradio.com/newsroom/ - 15k - Cached - Similar pages
Hell, even Tivo is more enlightened than this.
Let them know what you think....
Re:No such law (Score:4, Informative)
But to fight them long term we have to make the politicians who give us crap like the DMCA fear us more than they want to make the MPAA/RIAA happy. As things stand BOTH major political power structures are against us. The Democrats supported DMCA, the Sonny Bono extension, etc because they depend on cold cash from the Hollywood left. The Republicans went right along because they like busineses like Time Warner and News Corp and the cash they pony up. Neither sees us as either a voting or donor block important enough to bother listening to.
Re:Bleh (Score:4, Informative)
Re:RIAA unleaches army of lawyers (Score:4, Informative)
I agree it would be a travesty, but there is a very real risk of it happening. There are quite a few people who want to do exactly that, including several congressmen and even the head of the US copyright office. Sickening.
-
Re:A few bits.... (Score:5, Informative)
I'm sure they'd love to sue the pants off Scott MacLean too, fortunately our judicial system is a little more sane.
The stuff the RIAA gets away with in the US just wouldn't fly in Canada.
Re:Since when is XM legally available in Canada? (Score:2, Informative)
I took some pictures of the receiver along the way...
http://alcan5000.alaynaworks.com/XM%20Radio%20T
XM in Canada? (Score:3, Informative)
(And no, that's not an XM antenna on the roof of my car... :P )
I think there is actually a mod out there to add either a coaxial or optical connector to your XM, though i think someone might have already posted about that...
Why they can challenge it legally (Score:2, Informative)
Here are the relevant sections in the dmca.
Title 17, chapter 12 section 1201 part c section 1 from dmca:
"Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringment including fair use under this title."
But,
Section 1201 part b section 1:
"No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that - "
part B:
"has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof"
So, if someone makes a product that say copies a dvd even if its only for fair use, it could be construed as circumventing a technological measure(breaking encryption). Thus it could be said that they can be held liable for copyright infringement.
Think this is far-fetched? Its already happened. Look at 321 studios and what has happened to their company.
Now, looking at that example, the question comes down to whether this poor guy broke ANY form of encryption, or broke any technological measure to allow people to achieve fair usage. If he did, then he can be held liable.
This is what XM is talking about when they say they are looking into the matter. I think its cruddy too, but if they can prove he broke a technological measure, then copying XM will never happen.
That is unless you code it yourself. You see, everyone still has the right to fair-usage, but no one can sell or distribute tools to allow fair-usage if there is any form of encryption involved.
Just like breaking DVD encryption, you can do it legally, but you just can't give the software out(legally).
To me, it seems pointless. The wheel must be reinvented everytime, but what can we do with laws such as the DMCA, which just contradicts itself.
XM Actually Likes this feature!!! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Uhh...What wins? (Score:4, Informative)
Common law always wins over individual licenses.
Disclaimer: IANAL
Pure Digital's 'The Bug' (Score:2, Informative)
Nobody's lawyers' seem to be jumping up and down about this over here - I guess it just fits in with 'fair use' rights of broadcast content we tend to enjoy here in the UK!
Re:No DMCA violation required... (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, that's awful. It's a damn shame when people are able to enjoy what they buy, especially if YOU think the quality is too shabby for your discerning tastes.
In the area of digital satellite/cable, unless you're willing to pay through the nose in terms of money and space for a big dish, NTSC MPEG-2 is the best you can get (I consider HDTV a very separate category, especially since it's still not even nearly the majority of available programming). If a few artifacts are the price to be paid for having a couple hundred channels, that's just the way it goes.
Further, it's not a matter of the "average American" - and, wow, you sure make that seem like an insult - not being able to tell the difference. On a decent TV. I expect most CAN tell the difference between a good DVD and the same content on digital cable/satellite. It's a matter of WHAT IS AVAILABLE and WHAT IS COST-EFFECTIVE. It would be great to have the original, pure NTSC analog signal coming through with no interference, but that's just not practical for the vast majority of TV viewers.
As a side note, I would mention that part of the artifacting problem is indeed increased MPEG-2 compression, but another part is the fact that the signals are being encoded in real-time. DirecTV, Comcast, Dish Network, etc. don't get all the programming a couple weeks in advance, encode it and then broadcast it on the appropriate days. The signals arrive in their native form from the content providers and are encoded on the fly for distribution (or, for analog cable/VHF/UHF, just retransmitted) within seconds - this is the biggest reason for the very artifacts you describe in busy CG video and jump cuts (Homicide: Life on the Street was very difficult for me to watch on two different Dish Network stations - Lifetime and CourtTV - due to their very liberal use of handheld cameras). The quality of these signals is inevitably going to be lower than DVD quality, and this is magnified when dealing with an NTSC tape source as opposed to the HD masters from which most movie DVDs are derived.
Of course, if the FCC has their way, eventually there will be no such thing as live TV anywhere and they can put every channel on a five- to ten-minute delay. It would be a shame in free speech terms (I consider all FCC forays into this area direct violations of the 1st amendment, myself) but it would probably allow for better MPEG encoding.
Re:laws (Score:3, Informative)
The RIAA has a lot of posturing in this, but no real control.
Re:Risking redundancy... It's a paradigm change... (Score:2, Informative)
In the UK the 'Red Flag Act' was introduced in 1865. The meant that horseless carriages (read automobile) could only travel at 4mph in the country and 2mph in built up areas. They also had to have 3 'drivers' , 2 in the vehince, and one out from carrying a red flag.
The Act remained in force until 1896.
Re:Bleh (Score:4, Informative)
But TFA is in USA Today. Who'd think there was any more information than the
Re:Bleh (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Bleh (Score:3, Informative)
I have XM and I didn't sign anything.
Re:A few bits.... (Score:3, Informative)
Yours currently applies to DAT and CD-R Audio [neil.eton.ca] (it was last revised in 1995), and is 3% of the price.
Ours does not go straight to CRIA's pockets. The fee is collected by the CPCC and is distributed as follows:
To Eligible Authors 66.0%
To Eligible Performers 18.9%
To Eligible Makers 15.1%
Nice try.
Meanwhile, we can point and laugh as Americans get sued by the hundreds for sharing music, while our Canadian courts say that CRIA has no right to subscriber contact info.
Re:RIAA unleaches army of lawyers (Score:2, Informative)
Except that in the ruling you cite, the Court stated rather specifically that Congress could change the whole game on a whim. Since the Constitution explicitly grants Congress domain over copyright, they can do whatever the hell they want. (Don't believe me? Define "...a limited time...").