New Bill Threatens to Plug "Analog Hole" 374
ThinSkin writes "In an effort to encourage consumers to embrace digital content, The Electronic Frontier Foundation is fighting a bill that would restrict owners of analog devices from recording analog content. For instance, if a fan wishes to tape a Baseball game on his VCR, the VCR would re-encode the content of that game and convert it into a digital form, which would then be filled with right restrictions and so forth. The process would be driven by VRAM (Veil Rights Assertion Mark), a technology that stamps analog content with DRM schemes."
Who are they kidding? (Score:5, Interesting)
Even if such a bill were to be passed, it would be laughed at as the public went on its merry way using older analog and unencumbered digital devices.
My "favorite" part (Score:5, Interesting)
Of all the disingenuous malarky. "Incent the consumer". Since when did "incent" become synonymous with "bufu"?
They want to keep me from making copies of stuff I buy, so if it gets ruined I have to buy another one. Or so I can only play it from the media I bought it on.
Guess what, pally: most of the stuff I listen to is on sweet old vinyl. I want to preserve the music from my analog media, and the best way to do that is digitally. But don't try to tell me I can't do whatever I want with something I buy, as long as I don't try to give it to someone else.
Re:As a record store owner. (Score:1, Interesting)
What?? (Score:5, Interesting)
However, devices sold before the date the proposed legislation would be enacted, such as today's televisions, would be grandfathered in, according to the terms of the legislation. In addition, devices that were designed "solely of displaying programs," and ones that could not be "readily modified" for redistributing content would also be exempt.
If all the old capture cards, VCR's, DVR's and the like are going to be 'Grandfathered' in, what's the goddamn point? I mean, anyone with enough technical knowledge to do this, is already going to have the equipment, and I sure as hell am not going to throw it away because a new bill passes.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Not the only hole being plugged (Score:5, Interesting)
If it ends up never having a stereo socket, and subsequent devices don't have an audio output either, we could be seeing the beginnings of a closed system which stops "pirates" in their tracks by sending audio directly to a device which lives inside your ears.
Although there are bluetooth products out there which have audio out, they may soon start becoming scarce if this is indeed how the industry intends to keep music in a closed loop.
Re:As a record store owner. (Score:5, Interesting)
Riiight. That's just too bad, isn't it. If your business model is suddenly irrelevant, that's just way too damn bad for you.
Anyway, the real purpose of this bill is to prevent people from recording their own movies. Every camcorder made now will have to have DRM protection -- which will allow the movie industry to prevent you from recording independent films. With no independent films, the MPAA will be the only game in town for movies. Profit profit profit.
I wish Congress would tell the MPAA and RIAA that if they keep lobbying for this shit they'll repeal copyright completely. That would be so hilarious that I think I'd cry.
Re:More info from EFF (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:How about THIS idea (Score:2, Interesting)
If they really want to make money and importantly maintain control over primary distribution they should improve the purchase experience of the physical media rather than DRMing it and annoying their only paying customers. Give out in the CDs things like rebates to concerts or posters or anything else that's hard for a pirate to reproduce. Make it clear that while it's possible to download the music it's impossible to get premium content without buying the CD. Another idea would be to distribute most of the tracks on the CD without DRM (word of mouth never hurt anybody) but add some kind of premium content that is DRMed (music videos, interviews with the band, hidden tracks or whatever).
Basically show people that there are three ways they can get the media they want, by buying the disc which will give them all kinds of goodies to play with, through iTunes or other legal download methods which will give them what they want with no frills (and possibly not obscure content) and piracy which will give them the same no frills content but with guilt, possible lawsuits and the risk of infection by trojans, viruses and spyware.
Re:New meaning to an old word (Score:4, Interesting)
Frankly, it shouldnt be that much of a struggle. In essense it's just another subsidy/welfare system, where we take in money in the form of taxes (equivalent to the monopoly rent on artificially scarce 'protected' items), and give to those we wish to subsidize. Currently, the system is indirect, as the money usually goes to other parties than the ones we wish to subsidize, and the monopoly rent is an indirect tax that doesnt quite show up in the government budget, but that doesnt make it any less real.
Once you realize the whole IP issue is just an economic sleight-of-hand illusionist trick, you realize it isnt that hard to come up with a solution either. Like any other such system it's just a question of how much the taxpayers will accept paying for, and how to best use those taxes for the specific purpose they are supposed to serve.
strange definition of "illegality" (Score:5, Interesting)
They are? In what way? If I record something on Hi-8 and later want it on VHS, I can do that, and I have paid for it. I have paid for it with the fees I paid for blank media.
The question we should be asking is the legality of asserting copyrights on content that cannot be copied and can never fall into the public domain; technological restrictions on copying and copyright ought to be mutually exclusive.
Re:This doesn't matter for us...! (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm sure there are a lot of people out there who just want free stuff. I end up being a pirate because I want to watch Battlestar Galactica, but I'm not willing to pay for cable and some sort of recording device in order to watch one show. So I download episodes and then buy the DVDs when they come out. Spare me any "you could just wait until it comes out on DVD!" comments, please. I can't be bothered to get upset about the idea of adding a six month delay to the time my $40 goes into the bank account of a multinational corporation.
If I could buy the episodes as they air for a reasonable price, I would totally do that. I would be open to a number of possibilities:
- The cost of a season's worth of episodes adds up to the cost of the DVD set plus $10 for being able to watch them early. When it's released, I pay for shipping and get the DVDs.
- Same as above, but the total is e.g. 50% of the cost of the set, and I pay shipping plus the remainder and the convenience fee.
- The episodes are super-cheap, e.g. fifty cents each, and I just buy the DVD set at the store.
Option three is the easiest, but options one and two let Sci-Fi or whoever take a bigger cut from the DVD set price by selling directly to me.
Of course, this will never happen, because for it to be as convenient as it already is for me, the downloaded episodes would have to be non-DRM'd, encoded using a quality codec, and free of commercials. I'm sure this would be a huge hit, but the marketing department would never let it happen.
Why do I say a huge hit? Look at something that cannot be reasonably DRM'd, like photographic (as opposed to video) porn. There are tons of porn siterips on p2p networks, but it's still a very profitable industry. They probably realize that the money lost from bootlegs is less than what it would cost to come up with a protection system combined with the cost due to lost customers who weren't willing to put up with the hassle.
It would probably do well even with DRM. I wouldn't be a customer, but there are plenty of other people out there who are happy to deal with iTunes (which I find crippled beyond what I'm willing to exchange money for).
DRM-Free Analog will NEVER go away (Score:4, Interesting)
My parents bought one of the very first model VCRs ever made, and at over 20+ years old, it *still* records and plays. Unrestricted analog will NEVER go away. Even if, one day many decades from now, the last unrestricted analog device finally breaks and can't be repaired, people will smuggle them in from other countries.
They may as well try to license and restrict water, air, sunlight, addition, subtraction, and english grammer along with D/A conversion.
There will always be a market for freedom. Always.
DRM derivatives - A threat to national security (Score:2, Interesting)
But it was worth it... the MIAA made an extra million dollars profit that year and the executives could afford to refit out their private jets.
The MIAA/RIAA want to label the general public as pirates and 'supporters of terrorism'... but perhaps the technology their trying to force on us will end up supporting terrorism instead!
Expense? (Score:2, Interesting)
And who is actually going to foot the bill for adding this stuff to new hardware? The content providers? Fat chance. Hardware manufacturers? Yeah, I can just see them falling over themselves to pay for sinking their own business. Consumers? Maybe. But it won't be long before the non-techies start wondering why they're paying more for hardware that does less.
Reminds of a time back in the days of yore when I happened to overhear a Circuit-City aisle monkey trying to persuade an elderly couple to buy a DivX DVD player instead of a cheaper, regular unit. Somehow they just couldn't grasp the concept of paying more for the privelege of being able to watch time-restricted media. Needless to say, they left without buying *anything*.
The author of the bill is Sensenbrenner (Score:2, Interesting)
I am sure as a part of the DRM on the devices, you will not be allowed to skip commercial advertisements.