Cable, TV Makers Agree on Digital Standard 154
shylock0 writes "Reuters has this article about the digital cable standard agreed upon today. Amazingly enough, it places little or no copyright restrictions on content -- and it even includes specification for 1394/FireWire output to PVRs. I think this is a victory for fair use. Let's hope the FCC approves."
Sssshhhhhh! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sssshhhhhh! (Score:5, Informative)
I'm sure this is the lawyers doing, as once the intrested parties realize the lack of attention to such vital details, they'll be at each others throats again, keeping the lawyers fully employed until 2010.
BTW, in case you didn't notice it, also in the news today, AOL quietly was awarded Patents on IM. All very low key and bearing the finest attention and guesswork you can muster.
Re:Sssshhhhhh! (Score:5, Interesting)
When such a standard gets agreed upon, it's usually been in the pipeline for quite a long time. Companies rarely have the flexibility to say, "We've been working on this standard for (insert long time period here) but now we'd like to add 5 new requirements". It just don't work that way.
Re:Sssshhhhhh! (Score:2)
Actually, it's more simple than that. Hollywood and the cable providers have been pushing for really draconian protections. The hardware makers have been refusing to implement them, because they know consumers don't want them, don't want the extra cost (significant), and the extra design time (which equates to even more cost).
The FCC has been pushing the industry to come to a resolution on its own for 3 years now. And threatening to impose one if they didn't (hah - yeah, right... the entire industry knew the FCC was bullshitting, since they haven't imposed a government created standard on the TV/cable industry in decades).
I haven't checked the various industry sources yet, but I suspect that this is a big win for consumers and DTV in general.
Re:Sssshhhhhh! (Score:2)
Good God, people! What have you been reading?
In addition, I'd just like to say that I won't pay for any set-top box that doesn't allow me to watch one thing and record another. All recievers these days can recieve only one channel at a time, and typically need to be programmed seperately from your VCR...
victory? 1394 connection obeys "recordable" flag (Score:2)
Re:victory? 1394 connection obeys "recordable" fla (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:victory? 1394 connection obeys "recordable" fla (Score:1)
Standards. (Score:5, Insightful)
I can hope something like this becomes a standard, but more to the point, I should rather be hoping that companies actually impliment it.
Re:Standards. (Score:2)
I can hope something like this becomes a standard, but more to the point, I should rather be hoping that companies actually impliment it.
Now let's hope that Powell accepts the agreement in its entirety. I don't want none of that 'line-item veto' business on this puppy. It could lead to huge disagreements between the FCC and the cable companies, therby delaying the implementation.
-Cyc
Re:Standards. (Score:5, Funny)
That's the great thing about standards... If you don't like the standards that are currently out there, you just invent your own. At least that's what the senior engineers at my company tell me.
Re:Standards. (Score:2)
Re:Standards. (Score:2)
Once the FCC approves it they will. At least, if they want to continue doing business in this country.
This is one of the standards that the FCC has been asking the industry to agree upon for 3 years now. Powell even stated that he expected a quick review and approval on it.
Once approved you must conform to the standard by a certain date. If you don't then your FCC license gets revoked and you're out of business.
spectrum loss (Score:5, Insightful)
And mostly because they don't want to lose their existing analog signal, so they are stalling. The know that spectrum is worth big money and they are going to do everything they can to either make sure they don't lose it or make a lot of money selling it.
Re:spectrum loss (Score:5, Insightful)
Notes: You know, if the government was smart (sorry - I know that is an oxymoronic statement) it would lease the airwaves to radio and tv stations (instead of selling them) and use this as a way to reduce income taxes (and possibly eliminate the need for them altogether - although that is probably a pretty far reach given the present way in which things are going). It is like copyrights. I don't mind every fourteen years having to refile for my copyrights. If you haven't made $10.00 in fourteen years - then the item isn't worth copyrighting again. But the important part is - it is a way to collect taxes without bothering the individual. Even if they went by the "one generation (ie: twenty years)" method (instead of the fourteen year method, and allowing one additional filing after someone has died) the government would have quite a bit of money coming in each year just from people/corporations refiling their copyrights. But I'm digressing.
Re:spectrum loss (Score:2)
With respect to TV and radio stations -- no they don't.
would lease the airwaves to radio and tv stations (instead of selling them)
Hrm... I don't suppose that's what the multi-thousand or multi-million dollar licensing fees that broadcasters pay yearly are for... nah.
The broadcasters do not "own" the spectrum, despite their attitude otherwise. They do pay hefty fees on a yearly basis for the right to utilize that spectrum (and the fees are proportional to the amount of power, and thus coverage, they have).
The parent post was equally wrong. The broadcasters are not holding out to sell the analog spectrum -- you can't sell what you don't own. And the FCC has made it abundantly clear that they are going to reclaim the analog spectrum in the (nearish) future, and that the broadcasters are not allowed to resell the digital spectrum for primary uses other than broadcasting digital television (yes, they can lease a portion of the spectrum out, but they must be using most of it for DTV).
Re:spectrum loss (Score:2)
That is just plain wrong. The TV stations don't own the spectrum they use. The spectrum is licensed to them and may only be used for the purpose it was assigned. They cannot sell the spectrum and certainly cannot use it for any other purposes. The only thing they can do with the spectrum they have is broadcast TV signals.
Re:spectrum loss (Score:3, Informative)
What "spectrum"? This is a cable standard. Last time I looked cable TV was transmitted over cables - not radio waves!
Re:spectrum loss (Score:2)
Also, if any of them are cable subscribers, they will be largely unnaffected. It's just those who recieve airwave-broadcast TV that will be affected.
So where is it? (Score:5, Insightful)
In that case, go pick up a few HDTV tuner cards for the PC before they lock those down. Currently, you can time shift and record the full HDTV stream. But its only a matter of time before those are regulated.
Or will they change the standard such that these will become obselete? The article isn't clear on this but this would also mean screwing over current HDTV customers, since they do not have an integral decoder...
Re:So where is it? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think this ties into what you're talking about. Digital in, digital out. The article refers specifically to allowing output on the television to connect to other devices, specifically the possibility of "other TVs" in the house. Couldn't one of those "other TVs" just be a PVR or a computer w/digital input card?
Re:So where is it? (Score:5, Informative)
Not all HDTV or HD-compatible TV owners will be screwed. If you bought a Mitsubishi, then you can upgrade for only a few hundred dollars (Mitsubishi is supposed to have an upgrade unit out soon that will add firewire, an internal decoder, etc to current HD-compatible sets, and I'd be surprised if the same thing or similar won't be available for the HD-ready sets).
Then again, by the time this is all implemented (say, roughly 5 years), it'll be time to buy a new set anyway. The current HD-ready and HD-compatible set owners are not your mom and pop that buy a set and keep it for 20 years (well, okay, except for my parents -- but they got a good deal on their current HD set after their previous non-HD one of 15 years blew up from a lightning strike).
wow, that's nice (Score:2)
I'll be able to "upgrade" to DRM for only the price of a new TV? Excellent! What am I waiting for?
Re:wow, that's nice (Score:1)
Well, when the price of a good HD-compat TV starts around $1500-$2000, a couple hundred dollars is a good deal. Which would you rather do, buy a good TV now for $2000, enjoy it now, and spend $400 to upgrade it in two years, or spend $2000 on a TV now, enjoy it, and spend $2000 on a new TV to "upgrade" in two years? There's always the option not to buy a TV now, but that doesn't help the people that have already bought TVs.
Of course you can get a TV for a couple hundred dollars, but it's not going to be a good one, and it's certainly not going to be HD-compatible, much less HD-ready.
Re:So where is it? (Score:2)
Re:So where is it? (Score:2)
No no no... There's nothing stopping a STB manufacturer from making an STB with component outputs that supports the new standard. Really, you're not screwed, you can still recieve OTA HD broadcasts (what most HD viewers do anyway) and a second STB for the new digital cable standard will bring you right up to speed.
Re:So where is it? (Score:2)
Cats and dogs.. (Score:5, Funny)
Mass Hysteria!
Re:Cats and dogs.. (Score:1, Offtopic)
Dr. Peter Venkman: This city is about to face a disaster of biblical proportions.
Mayor: What do you mean, "biblical?"
Dr. Raymond Stantz: We mean real wrath-of-God type stuff. Plagues, darkness--
Winston Zeddemore: The dead rising from the grave!
Dr. Egon Spengler: Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes--
Dr. Peter Venkman: Riots in the streets, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria!
Re:Cats and dogs.. (Score:1)
Re:Cats and dogs.. (Score:1)
You just demonstrated the kind of flagrant copyright violations Jack Valenti (God bless him) is fighting so hard against!
copyright and DRM (Score:5, Insightful)
Copyright is a legal issue, not a technical one. The "copyright restrictions" on the content are the same as they always have been.
What appears to be the case is that it doesn't try to put a lot of technical DRM restrictions on the content, and that is nice. DRM generally restricts use of content much further than copyright.
Re:copyright and DRM (Score:2)
True. However, borrowing from our 'In Soviet Russia' fan, might we expect (probably already in place where you watch TV) you're watching habits will be kept by the cable company, in turn the FBI will keep tabs on what you watch, too, all in the names of targeted marketing and national security.
"Subject #579145 watches reruns of StoneFeld and Monty Pythagoras Flying Circus... and has fails doesn't skip Matsumora Fishworks and Tamorobuchi Heavy Manufacturing Consultants commercials."
"Yeah, must be a terrorist, haul him in."
Re:copyright and DRM (Score:3, Interesting)
You ignore that under the DMCA (or the european EUCD) technical restrictions translate into legal ones.
You think too logical, and hence cannot relieve your mind of the obsolete concept of "fair use". You have been assigned to reeducation, please stand by for further instructions.
cat got my toungue. (Score:5, Insightful)
Great, so I don't have to pay for the box. I still have to pay for the service. More channels of little or no worthwhile content and a fancy menuing system (yes, nice, but worth triple the cost... no).
I'm really annoyed w/recent changes in the cable system moving premium channels to digital only. I don't think that cable systems should be allowed to do that. That's DOUBLE charging for HBO. Although w/the recent "slips" by the censors (Cher anyone?) maybe regular-old cable will end up carrying much the same content as HBO... We can always hope.
Re:cat got my toungue. (Score:5, Interesting)
Additionally, all channels (not just the premium ones) are digital, using the international standard MPEG2 format (though of a lower bitrate than DVD). I have no idea what they use for HDTV broadcasts, though.
Of course, I have neither it nor cable because I don't watch enough T.V.
Re:cat got my toungue. (Score:1)
I'll second the call for DirecTV. Especially if you're a sports fan, DirecTV is a godsend. I get the NFL Sunday Ticket package (every NFL game on Sunday afternoons), ESPN Full Court (all sorts of college basketball games), and the Sports Pack (which includes Fox Sports World... so I get all the international soccer and rugby action I could want). Oh yeah, and even with all those packages, I only pay about $70/month, which is what a lot of people pay for digital cable.
Re:cat got my toungue. (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh, and I also have cable internet (1.5mbps down, 128kpbs up, pings 100ms). All for about the same price you're paying. Now, I know folks on the other side of town who are stuck with AT&T cable, and their digital cable sucks eggs through a straw and costs more than ours....
Re:cat got my toungue. (Score:1)
DirecTV has that... (Score:2)
If you just get HBO + Starz + Tivo (which gets you HBO Programming that rocks plus a million movies from Starz), you're looking at ~$65/month, plus time shifting. With a DTivo + Starz, you'll never lack movies waiting for you.
Don't work for them, just a VERY satisfied customer... HD-Tivo, where are you?
Alex
Re:cat got my toungue. (Score:1)
Re:cat got my toungue. (Score:1)
On a possibly unrelated note, menuing has already been supported by analog cable for some years. If your TV has guide plus, you get full programming info even if you only have analog cable. It's quite convenient, and another reason not to bother going digital (here anyway).
Incidentally, it took me over 2 years, and 115 phone calls, to get Cox to come to my house 23 times, before installing an amplifier to help my shitty picture. They are total fucking morons.
OT Re:cat got my toungue. (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:OT Re:cat got my toungue. (Score:1)
Re:cat got my toungue. (Score:1)
Huh? I don't know what you pay for cable, but adding HD channels to my current digital cable subscription (okay, "channel" singular, but they're supposed to be getting more ...) only costs another ~$4/mo for the HD receiver. Maybe I'm overpaying on the digital subscription (just under $50/mo), but how am I being double-charged for HBO? Rather than getting one analog (yeah, I know, the "digital" cable stuff can look worse than analog due to compression, but whatever) channel of HBO, I get 10 (actually 11, if you count the HD channel, though that's the same as the main non-HD channel, so I just don't count the latter) channels of HBO, plus 10 total channels of STAR and ACT, and other stuff (TechTV, G4, some others). I could get 10 channels of Showtime and Cinemax, too, if there were anything on those I'd care to watch. I feel I'm getting a good deal for my money (maybe I'm not, but I feel that way), and now that AT&T have finally started rolling out HD channels, it's just getting better.
If you don't get any enjoyment from the extra channels, then don't get a subscription with them. Nobody said you have to subscribe to everything your cable provider offers. I hear basic+local channels is exceedingly cheap.
Re:cat got my toungue. (Score:2)
You do, for the time being, have to pay to rent the decoder, but this standardization effort is required by the FCC so that you'll eventually able to buy a "digital cable ready TV" or a settop box of your own without a monthly rental of the box.
BTW, we all know the reason why they want to get rid of analog HBO... all of the analog TV encryption specs have been cracked for years, digital cable has yet to be reliably hacked.
Re:cat got my toungue. (Score:2)
Thus, if I want to watch the "last" season of the Sopranos, I am going to have to get them off Kazaa. HBO, blame and sue AT&T, not me.
wow .. .No MPAA involvement! (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow! Nothing from the entertainment industry at all. There's the answer to why there's little-to-no DRM.
Somehow, I think the FCC will get some nice gifts from that industry sometime soon.
Re:wow .. .No MPAA involvement! (Score:5, Insightful)
Some guy once told me there was a time long ago when the people had strong opinions and powerful friends in government! Heh, fuck knows what he was smoking...
Ali
Is the FCC Expensive? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Is the FCC Expensive? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Is the FCC Expensive? (Score:2)
What exactly does this mean? (Score:4, Interesting)
If this is just a "standard" for getting all the extra-cost set-top-boxes to talk to all the government-mandated [govtech.net] digital TVs, then it's not much of a victory for consumers. That will just mean the government is mandating we all "upgrade" our cable subscriptions to watch plain old TV.
Re:What exactly does this mean? (Score:2)
Re:What exactly does this mean? (Score:2)
Yes, they are trying to kill analog cable services, but it's going to be a slow and painful death.
Not about coax (Score:2)
Re:Not about coax (Score:2)
What gives the FCC the right? (Score:2)
Re:What gives the FCC the right? (Score:1)
IANAL, but I think I can outline this briefly. FCC has the authority to specify how radio equipment behaves. In the early 60's, to support UHF channels that were just coming online, Congress also specifically empowered FCC to write regs that assure that TVs receive the signals that the FCC is authorizing. The FCC refered specifically to this legislation when it made the digital tuner rule.
Yes! (Score:2, Interesting)
w00h00! I am so glad to hear the people close to the consumers (we really buy from the cable company and the tv manufacturers..) are starting to get a grip on what we want and are ignoring those bastard groups.
Companies doing good! now if only i can think of something to do until 2004/7...
Digital TV (Score:2, Interesting)
couches... (Score:3, Funny)
I'm asleep (Score:4, Funny)
I'll wait a few days for the retractions and such before I get excited about this. If it's true, though, it is good news.
Cripes... (Score:5, Interesting)
DVB/S and DVB/T work very well for all other continents already. Why is it so hard to make it work for us here? Is it because of some sort of insatiable desire for HDTV that I've never actually seen?
Oh well. At least things will get more standardized, which is good.
Re:Cripes... (Score:3, Interesting)
Big aimable satellite dishes are still WAY useful.
Re:Cripes... (Score:4, Informative)
There are a lot of reasons. First, the channel size in Europe is different than the US (8 MHz vs 6 MHz) which would make using identical technology impossible if we wanted to do a phased rollout.
Second, DVB is not considered by the FCC to be HDTV. The big thing is the whole interlaced non-square pixels thing at 4x3.
Third, ATSC is more efficient with the spectrum than DVB-T is. It requires less power to cover the same area (60% was the last number I heard.) Since a transmitter can cost upwards of $20,000 in electricity bills, that kind of savings is quite impressive.
And finally, the ability to run 4 channels on one 6 MHz block was attractive. It does generate some odd channels (2, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3), but then so does radio.
Here are some comparisons:
DVB-T Aspect Ratio: 4x3
ATSC Aspect Ratio: 16x9
DVB-T Audio: MPEG-1 Audio
ATSC Audio: Dolby Digital AC-3
DVB-T Modulation: COFDM
ATSC Modulation: VSB
DVB-T Max Usable Bandwidth: 18.66 Mbps @ 5.7 MHz
ATSC Max Usable Bandwidth: 19.39 Mbps @ 5.38 MHz
DVB-T Max Resolution: 2048x1152
ATSC Max Resolution: 1920x1080
DVB-T Pixel Format: Interlaced/Non-square
ATSC Pixel Format: Mostly Progressive/Square
Now there are some negatives. ATSC has been shown to have some problems with multipath interference and also not suitable for mobile devices (for some reason this was a big concern.)
The great thing about standards.. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the most important part of this article was this line:
So essentially, this "standards agreement" is meaningless.
Buzz words... (Score:3, Funny)
Cable Companies and Electronics Companies (Score:5, Insightful)
That said, it's certainly a happy skirmish win.
So what does the actual recording? (Score:4, Interesting)
It will be up to some hard-working programmer to even figure out what they are doing in the data stream and then deal with the wrath of the DMCA.
An awful lot of ambiguous things in there: "consumers can hook up everything and the equipment will ALLOW viewing elsewhere" -- at the same quality level? At the time of my choosing? The content I wish (ad-free if I want)?
AFAIK you would not be able to hook any of this up to any existing firewire recorders (Canon and Sony cameras for instance as they aren't HD) so you'd have to buy a NEW recorder with goodness knows what built-in to "protect" you from yourself. Sure you can watch it in the other room or from your camera or jukebox or network -- until Tuesday when the digital time-stamp expires in every piece of equipment.
Picture this -- someone makes DeHDTV and you have a cracked copy of Buffy on your PC! Yippee! You then go to play it and it is isn't "signed" properly so the HDTV decides not to show it. Or you spoof the signature and the TV talks upstream to report that you are playing it just to verify against the rights database -- oops you don't have that permission today! Blue Screen Of Denial. That's a cable, you know, and not RF.
Looks like a move forward, but I'll have to see...
Re:So what does the actual recording? (Score:1)
Frankly, I'd be quite surprised if Apple comes out with a DVR, but stranger things have happened.
And yes, this does not negate the possibility of a DRM nightmare, but for Ma and Pa consumer, they don't have to get lots of those new-fangled cables for things to work. It just will, and with only 1 cable per device to boot. That they may not be able to do all of the things that they could before may not make a difference if the price of Video On Demand is relatively low.
Re:So what does the actual recording? (Score:3, Interesting)
Every nite when we go to sleep we'd turn on the robot and it'd attentively watch all the ads we skipped that nite.
Or maybe I'll just let my cat watch them.
Let's get ready to rumble (Score:4, Insightful)
The title isn't suprising. With an agreed-upon standard, cable companies can charge more for HD-format programming and TV manufacturers can sell more units as everyone moves to the new systems. These parties have a lot to gain from getting together and working things out. But...
While the agreement outlines some copy-protection guidelines, it was drafted without the input of Hollywood or consumer groups, which have strong opinions and powerful friends in government.
The Hollywood crowd has a lot to loose if perfect copies of their works are easy to record, and the equipment becomes standard enough to get cheap. Given that people are pretty much accustomed to being able to record anything that comes down their cable, many more people are gonna notice when this stops working than noticed when a few Brittany Spears CD's stopped working in their computer drives. Get ready to watch an interesting fight when the MPAA and it's lobbyists are pit against the wrath of Joe Average when he finds out that his attempt to record Everyone Loves Raymond failed shortly after coughing up a good chunk of money for HD cable and a new set.
I think this is a victory for fair use.
Not yet, it's not... but since it'll put politicians in a tough spot between lobbyists and lost votes, it could become a victory if the MPAA gets too greedy with their restrictions.
Digital standard. (Score:2, Funny)
I thought digital was standardised a long, long time ago. 0 and 1. Easy.
Re:Digital standard. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Digital standard. (Score:5, Funny)
Mine goes all the way to 11
Re:Digital standard. (Score:1)
Hollywood won't accept it (Score:2)
Leaves out EVERYONE except existing cable companie (Score:1)
Major screwing in the works, especially for new technology. Really for any technology except the cable companies.
Another article on the same subject.... (Score:1)
This article, I think, does a little better job talking about some of the controversial provisions that would come once the FCC approves.
Some day, we're all gonna miss the days of hooking up two VCRs side-by-side to dub that movie we rented, just like the Gemco salesman showed us. What? We're not supposed to be doing that?
HDTV Set Top (Score:1, Interesting)
What may kill it is that it took so long to decide. Already there are cable HDTV set top boxes on the way.
HDTV is already coming (QUICKLY!) to cable operators. I work for a cable company in the southeast and we've already ordered all the headend gear and sample boxes to start beta tests.
By early 2nd quarter, customers will be able to get HDTV-enabled set top boxes that hook up to home TVs with svideo, component video and (optionally) DVI. This is combined with digital optical out, more 'interactivity' and more. These boxes can support ethernet, DOCSIS modems and even hard drives. How they are going to be rolled out and with what capabilities is still up in the air.
By the end of 2003, beta testing for Video-On-Demand will be ramping up.
If you want to read more, check out http://broadband.motorola.com/noflash/index.html
The ONLY problem is that there isn't that much programming utilizing HDTV. In the coming years that should change.
Analog CableTV WILL GO AWAY in the future. It accounts for most of the service theft.
Mod Parent Up! (Score:3, Insightful)
Namely:
Now wait a minute... either you can record a copy of a PPV program or you can't. Delaying and pausing using a PVR is done by recording, so does this proposed regulation imply that a PPV program can be recorded, but is then somehow erased or locked?I have a couple of problems with this. First, I don't want the cable provider (or anyone) to have that much control over data on my media. And I think the average Joe Six-gig is going to feel the same way.
Which leads me to the second misgiving: someone will find a way around it. What if I hack my TiVo? What if I turn it off, or lose power, or otherwise interfere with the deleting or locking process? This will just give the cable companies (and Hollywood) the excuse to impose more and more restrictions on their content, or demand more and more access and control over the contents of my mass storage devices.
And why 90 minutes? Who decided that was fair? Why not 24 hours? Where was the consumer included in this decision? Oh... I forgot, this is not about the consumer, it's about 3) PROFIT!!!
Nosir, it doesn't look settled yet...
FCC approval means NOTHING!! (Score:4, Interesting)
now what happens... (Score:2)
Any other good foreign shows besides Monty Python reruns?
CBS threatened to pull out of HDTV altogether (Score:4, Informative)
CBS is playing hardball on the copy protection issue, threatening to withhold its vaunted HDTV programming next fall if the FCC doesn't come up with effective rules to prevent digital piracy.
In an FCC filing, CBS parent Viacom warned that it could lose hundreds of millions of dollars in revenues if its digital offerings are illegally copied and distributed in the growing world of broadband Internet.
"If a broadcast flag is not implemented and enforced by Summer 2003, [CBS] will not provide any programming in high definition for the 2003-2004 television season," Viacom said. "Viacom believes that DTV sales and broadband subscriptions have reached the 'tipping point' at which it can no longer afford to expose its content to piracy. A broadcast flag regime is needed now to protect the value of our important assets or we must withhold our quality HD digital content."
If CBS or other networks followed through with the threat, it could be a blow to DTV manufacturers and boosters who have recently been able to point to broad availability of HD programming. CBS leads the networks with 24 hours of HD programming weekly. The network says it is broadcasting 120 hours of HD sports in the 2002-2003 season.
A spokesman for the Consumer Electronics Association, which has advocated less restrictive protection schemes than the networks, was not immediately available for comment. Earlier this year, CEA awarded CBS three "DTV Pioneer" awards for its HDTV programming and promotion efforts.
Before the
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of )
Digital Broadcast Copy Protection ) MB Docket No. 02-230
COMMENTS OF VIACOM
Viacom hereby submits the following comments in the above-captioned proceeding. As the parent company of Paramount, a member of the Motion Picture Association of America, Viacom participated in the drafting of the technology- and jurisdiction-based comments filed separately by that entity and fully supports them. Viacom's comments below, therefore, are limited to addressing the critical questions raised in paragraph 3 of the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM). Those questions pertain to the withholding of digital programming in the absence of a broadcast flag regime and the impact such a reduction in high quality programming would have on the DTV transition and on the broadcast industry. For the reasons discussed below, if a broadcast flag is not implemented and enforced by Summer 2003, Viacom's CBS Television Network will not provide any programming in high definition for the 2003-2004 television season.
Viacom's Digital Content
Viacom is a leading global media company, with preeminent positions in broadcast and cable television, radio, publishing and online. With programming that appeals to audiences in every demographic category across virtually all media, the company is a leader in the creation, promotion, and distribution of entertainment, news, sports, and music. It is a major producer of theatrical, premium cable, basic cable and broadcast television content, and syndicated programming through its Paramount, Showtime Networks, MTV Networks (including MTV, Nickelodeon, VH1, TNN, CMT: Country Music Television), BET, and CBS divisions. In addition to creating content, these Viacom divisions are also major distributors of content they license from other producers.
As a major content producer and program packager, Viacom has played a crucial role in the digital television transition. Showtime, Viacom's premium subscription television service, launched its two high definition feeds more than two years ago, in January 2000, when it aired the high-profile film Star Trek: Insurrection in HD. Since that time, Showtime HDTV has been made available directly to consumers nationwide. It is currently distributed nationally through both DBS and cable distributors and is available in 1080i, the highest transmission format available. Showtime offers high definition and other value-added DTV programming for more than half of its prime-time schedule. This past summer, Showtime aired the first-ever original series on a premium network to be completely shot and aired in HDTV, making Showtime the first premium network to create a series with complete end-to-end HD production and distribution. Showtime's HDTV programming furthers Showtime's commitment as a premium programmer to offer consumers the very best viewing experience.
Paramount, too, has advanced the transition to digital. Specifically, HDTV masters are created for all of Paramount's current major theatrical releases. In addition, HDTV masters, along with standard definition masters, are delivered for a majority of its network television series. With respect to catalog product, Paramount is in the process of converting its library to HDTV on a title-by-title basis.
And CBS, the undisputed leader in broadcast digital television, has been producing high definition programming for its affiliates nationwide since the fall of 1998, when it documented in HD the historic space shuttle voyage of Senator John Glenn and the crew of the Discovery and pioneered the first HD broadcasts of three NFL games. CBS began airing at least half of its prime-time schedule in the 1999-2000 television season in HD. In the 2001-2002 season, all but one of CBS's scripted prime-time programs were broadcast in HD. And for the 2002-2003 season, CBS is offering all 18 of its prime-time comedies and dramas in HD.
CBS has also provided an unprecedented level of sports programming in HD. In 2000 and 2001, CBS broadcast in HD the majority of its AFC Playoff games, including the AFC Championship games both years and the 2001 Super Bowl. For the last three years, CBS has produced the NCAA Men's Basketball Final Four and Championship Games and The Masters Golf tournament in HD. In the 2001-2002 television season, CBS aired in HD more than 100 hours of its premier sports events. This year CBS improved its fourth consecutive HD broadcast of the U.S. Open Tennis Tournament by expanding its HD offering to CBS's entire coverage of the tournament, nearly 40 free, over-the-air broadcast hours including the Saturday night prime time women's final and the Sunday afternoon men's final. For the 2002-2003 season, CBS Sports HD coverage will expand to at least 120 hours.
Together with its prime-time schedule, selected CBS Sunday movies, weekday ratings leader The Young and the Restless and CBS Sports' leading HD schedule, CBS will provide an average of 24 hours of HD programming per week this television season, far more than any other broadcast network.
In addition, as a leader in HD programming, CBS has had to create technical solutions where none existed before. For example, CBS pioneered both the techniques and the cost of converting film-based prime-time content to HD. CBS Sports has pioneered "unified" productions where single production facilities produce both SD and HD broadcasts, as well as developments such as "super slow motion" equipment, production switchers, and HD hand-held RF cameras.
CBS has invested millions of dollars in HD production, separate and apart from the hundreds of millions it is spending to convert its broadcasting plant to HD.
The Unauthorized Redistribution Factor
Broadcast television content, which is available over the air for free, is extremely expensive to produce: A single episode of a one-hour drama series can cost as much as $2.2 million to make. Program creators rely on a multi-window distribution plan to recoup the initial investment in the content along with a return on that investment. These windows include the first-run domestic distribution via network or syndication, domestic syndication, and foreign first-run and syndication. The shattering of any of these windows will have a dramatic effect on producers' ability to recoup their costs, let along make a positive return on their investment.
Broadcast television programming is paid for through license fees paid by program packagers (such as cable and broadcast networks) and broadcast television stations. Some television content, particularly syndicated product, both first-run and off-network, is also funded by advertising that the content owner inserts into the program. The initial release of the content usually does not pay for the production of the content. Producers who create network television series assume great financial risks in hopes that their shows will air long enough to reach the 100 episodes needed to later sell them as a package in syndication.
In addition, studios make their theatrical film titles --and sports leagues make their games and matches-- available for television for a license fee. In almost all cases, the license to televise content is limited in geographic scope in order to preserve the value of the programming for simultaneous distribution to other licensees or for later distribution domestically or to other parts of the world. Thus, a national program distributor such as a cable or broadcast network usually obtains rights to an entertainment program for transmission within the United States and to a sports program within a specified region, while a broadcast television station's rights to programming are limited to its market.
Because the number of media outlets chasing after television content has substantially increased over the last decade or so, the competition to acquire compelling content is fierce. Program creators have a wider choice of outlets and thus greater bargaining power with distributors. DTV broadcasters, who are vying for content without the ability to assure program creators that their content is secure from unauthorized redistribution, will be at a severe disadvantage in this competition. DTV's content is digitized, compressed and sent via digital transmissions to DTV receivers where the content is decompressed and made ready for viewing. It is the fact that the content is digitized and compressed that makes it easy to be redistributed. In essence, the broadcaster puts the content in a form that is ready-made for Internet distribution. Once the digital signal leaves the transmitter's antenna, a digital set-top DTV tuner with an unprotected digital output is all that is needed to take the DTV content and make it available throughout the world via the Internet. The consequences of content escaping to the Internet are very significant.
In the absence of a broadcast flag regime, anyone receiving digital broadcast television signals on a digital set-top box with an unprotected digital output or a tuner card-equipped computer is capable of distributing the television content to millions of people all over the globe through peer-to-peer file mechanisms, through e-mail, or through a website. Left unaddressed, this vulnerability to unauthorized redistribution could destroy television production economics such that the value of syndicated product would plummet, advertisers would pay far less to buy time in devalued programming and out-of-market entertainment and professional and college sports transmissions. As a self-help measure, therefore, no doubt, those who produce digital content for television are apt to provide their most compelling and high-value content only to distribution platforms that can ensure the protection of their content, that is, to those with conditional access systems or copy protection systems. Thus, the highest quality entertainment and sports programming would migrate to cable and satellite, rendering free, over-the-air television the poor stepchild of the distribution platforms, if it can even survive carrying second-rate, leftover programming.
Efforts to Resolve the Unauthorized Redistribution Problem
Viacom recognized early on the importance of protecting its crucial content assets and, as a result, Viacom's engineering personnel have actively pursued development and evaluation of copy protection technology for digital content such as movies, images, and broadcast and cable television programming since the early 1990s. These technologies include user and device authentication, Content Scrambling System (CSS), conditional access systems, Digital Transmission Content Protection (DTCP or 5C), OpenCable POD Host Interface, HDCP, the broadcast flag, DVB, encryption algorithms, fingerprinting, and watermarking. Activities include participation in industry and trade associations and standard-setting organizations along with meetings with many of the equipment manufacturers and service providers.[1] These activities have easily consumed many years of effort by Viacom's engineering staff over this period.
Protection of free, over-the-air broadcast content alone has been the subject of intense inter-industry discussions for nearly two years, having been raised by the motion picture studios in their negotiations with the 5C companies relating to the protection of encrypted conditional access content. The 5C companies rejected including such broadcast protection as part of their license agreement, but agreed to contribute to a multi-industry effort to develop a solution for broadcast content.
In May 2001, one of the major broadcast networks, Fox, proposed the elegantly simple solution of the broadcast flag, which relied on the "redistribution control" descriptor that recently had been adopted as part of the ATSC transport stream standard, as the method for protecting free, over-the-air broadcast content. Discussions with 5C ensued, but no real progress was made until October and November of that year, when a series of separate Congressional DTV Roundtables (convened by Congressmen Tauzin, Upton, Dingell and Markey, among others) and FCC gatherings separately were launched to facilitate a meeting of the minds between the studios and 5C companies. By the end of November, as a result of these meetings and the strong encouragement of Members of Congress and the FCC, the Broadcast Protection Discussion Group (BPDG) was born.
This entity is run under the auspices of the Copy Protection Technical Working Group (CPTWG), an open, cross-industry forum that includes representatives from the entertainment, information technology and consumer electronics industries, as well as consumer group representatives and other interested parties. The goals of the BPDG were to provide a detailed technical specification for the detection and response to the broadcast flag; to define the secure handling, output and recording of broadcast content marked with the flag (compliance and robustness); and to recommend how the flag should be implemented and the governmental and regulatory actions needed to support its enforcement in the U.S. market.
On June 3, after countless hours in face-to-face meetings, on conference calls and in drafting sessions, and the passing of more than one deadline for completion of its mission, the BPDG, consisting of 70 organizations, issued its final report to the CPTWG. The report demonstrated near-unanimous agreement on the broadcast flag descriptor itself. There was universal agreement that the flag would not prevent home copying of broadcast programming and would not interfere with the ability of consumers to send authorized and secure copies of digital broadcast programming around home networks. As for compliance and robustness, only 14 of the 70 organizations dissented, and of these, six were small consumer groups opposing any restraints on the reproduction and redistribution of content.
In July, Members of Congress sent letters to Chairman Powell noting the BPDG broadcast flag consensus and urging FCC action.
Effects on the DTV Transition and Broadcast Television without a Broadcast Flag
The Commission is now addressing the issue of the broadcast flag and its mandated implementation. Viacom commends the Commission for launching this important proceeding and for asking difficult, but critical, questions. Specifically, the NPRM seeks comment on whether: (1) quality digital programming is now being withheld because of concerns over the lack of a broadcast flag; (2) such programming will be withheld in the absence of a regulatory regime; (3) the absence of a broadcast flag could delay or prevent the digital transition; and (4) this dynamic would threaten the viability of broadcast television and impact consumers. We respond to each of these in turn.
* Viacom has not yet withheld quality digital programming
Viacom has not withheld any of its digital content from broadcast television up to now. To the contrary, as discussed above, Viacom's broadcast television division CBS has been the undisputed leader in moving the television world from analog to digital, well along in the process of spending hundreds of millions of dollars to convert its plant and programs to digital. It so firmly believes in digital that it has gone beyond HD content production and reached out to other industry sectors important to a digital conversion. CBS has partnered with consumer electronics manufacturers and consumer electronics retailers to identify and promote HD programming and to market DTV receivers. At the end of this past September, after four weeks of sales, for example, the CBS/Sears/ Samsung HDTV promotion of NCAA Saturday football games resulted in triple-digit growth of Samsung's HDTV set sales numbers.
As for Paramount, up to this time it has not withheld digital content which was available to it.
Viacom has continued to produce and provide digital content to broadcasters and viewers up to now because the concern for widespread piracy has been mitigated by the relatively low number of households with DTV receivers. In November 1998, the first DTV models were introduced. Broadcast television stations in eight cities were transmitting a digital signal and the average price for an HDTV monitor was $6,000.[2] From that launch through April of this year, 2.8 million DTV sales have been recorded, with an average unit price for digital TV sets and displays in 2002 of less than $1,700.[3] And in July of this year alone, DTV sales totaled 213,159 units.[4] The Consumer Electronics Association projects that 2.1 million DTV products will be sold this year, 4 million in 2003, 5.4 million in 2004, 8 million in 2005 and 10.5 million in 2006.[5]
As the digital TV receiver becomes a mainstream product, consumers will demand more and better digital programming. Content producers, in turn, will create that programming, and those equipped at home with a set-top box with an unprotected digital output or a computer and a TV tuner card will now have further incentives for distributing that content via the Internet. Like DTV, broadband Internet connections, which will facilitate and feed the incentives for distributing content, are also on a rapid upward trajectory. Sixty percent of the 20 largest U.S. cities show at-home broadband population growth of more than 50 percent for the year ending April 30, 2002.[6] And by 2004, Forrester Research forecasts, 40 million North American households will have broadband Internet connections.[7] Internationally, it is estimated that by 2005, 24.2 percent of European homes will subscribe to a broadband Internet service, and one year later, 76 percent of Taiwanese homes will do the same, with the majority of new subscribers added over the next two years.[8]
Viacom believes that DTV sales and broadband subscriptions have reached the "tipping point" at which it can no longer afford to expose its content to piracy. A broadcast flag regime is needed now to protect the value of our important assets or we must withhold our quality HD digital content. The potential loss in revenues for Viacom alone due to the unauthorized redistribution of broadcast television content and the resulting devaluation of broadcasting could reach hundreds of millions of dollars. Thus, Viacom has much at stake in the success of all affected television industry sectors and the government joining together now to establish secure measures for the transmission of digital broadcast television programming. The benefits of such measures for broadcast television will inure to the benefit of other industry sectors and the American public, as well. With a continuing and ever-increasing flow of digital content, consumer electronics manufacturers and retailers will enjoy flourishing DTV sales,[9] and with a stabilized broadcasting television system, Americans can continue to count on receiving high quality digital programming for free.
* Viacom may begin withholding digital content
Accordingly, Viacom wishes to make clear for the record in this proceeding that the absence of a broadcast flag regime in the near future will have a materially adverse effect on the levels of digital broadcast television programming it makes available. Specifically, if the broadcast flag is not implemented and enforced by next summer, CBS will cease providing any programming in high definition for the 2003-2004 television season. And, without the security afforded by a broadcast flag, Paramount will have less incentive and enthusiasm to make digital content available and will factor that into its decision-making at the time.
* Without a broadcast flag, the digital transition will be delayed and broadcasting could be threatened
That content is the single most important driver of the migration to digital is agreed upon by all. Chairman Powell recognized this last April in asking the major broadcast and premium cable networks to provide at least half of their prime-time schedule in HD or other value-added DTV programming as part of his plan to boost the digital transition. Indeed, in his letter to Congress announcing the plan, Chairman Powell cited an increase in the amount of compelling digital content as one of its two "key goals."[10] The Consumer Electronics Association recently said that "[t]he essential prerequisite for a successful DTV transition is high quality, compelling high definition (HDTV) programming."[11] Programmers, of course, know that HD will lure viewers to their product and their brand, as evidenced by recent announcements by Discovery and ESPN of their new HD launches.[12] ""HD changes viewer habits," according to Discovery head John Hendricks.[13] His family, he says, seeks out HD shows no matter what, even if they have already seen the program before in analog format.[14] And retailers, who stand on the front line of the digital conversion campaign, understand that consumers buy DTV sets to watch enticing programming. As one salesman at a Southern store owned by Tweeter Home Entertainment Group said in response to the question of whether he would buy an HD set right now: "No, because there's not a lot of HD programming. . .
Viacom alone cannot make or break the transition to a DTV era, but we undoubtedly have done more than our fair share in the digital migration, most notably through our creation of high quality, high value HD entertainment and sports programming and our provision of that product -as well as the television programming and motion picture product we obtain from other producers-- via the CBS Television Network over the air for free to all American households. If we are forced by the absence of a broadcast flag to withhold this content, millions of Americans who have already individually invested thousands of dollars in digital television receivers certainly will feel disenfranchised when they are no longer able to view current levels of CBS's HD programming. The ramifications of this will be felt in all sectors of the HDTV community. And those contemplating the purchase of DTV receivers may elect to cancel or postpone purchasing plans in light of a decreased menu of HD viewing options.
Worse, in the absence of a broadcast flag to protect against unauthorized redistribution over the Internet, not just Viacom but all content producers no doubt will be forced to reassess broadcast television as a medium for the provision of their high quality digital programming. And then the most profound concern of the day will not be how to save the transition to digital television but how to rescue digital broadcast television and, potentially, broadcast television overall. For some 50 years, the FCC has sought to preserve the broadcast network-affiliate system, that unique national-local partnership that has been a substantial engine for premier news, sports and entertainment programming that free, over-the-air broadcast television provides. Unauthorized Internet retransmission undermines the network-affiliate model and broadcasting itself.
We are all at a critical crossroads in the course to DTV. That includes not only those who create the content that drives consumer adoption of DTV, but those who distribute that content, those who manufacture digital receivers, those who design information technology, those who sell that equipment and technology, those in new wireless services who await the freeing up of spectrum now utilized for analog broadcasting, and those in government charged with overseeing the migration to DTV. Therefore, it is imperative that we all join together now, within the context of this FCC proceeding, in moving down the road that leads most directly and expeditiously to a DTV world. That road is implementation of the broadcast flag.
Respectfully submitted,
Anne Lucey
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
Viacom
1501 M Street, NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20005
Dated: December 6, 2002
[1] Industry and standards organizations include CableLabs, Copy Protection Technology Working Group (CPTWG), Digital Audio Visual Council (DAVIC), MPAA, MPEG, and the NCTA. Manufacturers and service providers include AT&T, Digimarc, Hitachi, IBM, Intel, Kowa, Lucent, Macrovision, Matsushita Electric Industrial Company, Microsoft, Motorola, NEC, Philips, RealNetworks, Sarnoff, Scientific-Atlanta, Sony, Soundtag, Telcordia Technologies, and Toshiba among many others.
[2] "Digital Television," Digital America, CEA Website, www.ce.org/publications/books_references/digital_
[3] "Digital Television Takes Off," Digital America, at id.
[4] "DTV Sales Flourish in July," September 5, 2002, Press Room of CEA Website, www.ce.org.
[5] Id.
[6] Nielsen/Net Rating, as reported by BroadJump, www.broadjump.com/mediarelations/mediakit/downloa
[7] Id.
[8] Id.
[9] In July of this year alone, DTV product sales totaled nearly $370 million. "DTV Sales Flourish in July," September 5, 2002, Press Room of CEA Website, www.ce.org.
[10] Letter from Michael K. Powell to Senator Ernest F. Hollings, dated April 4, 2002; Letter from Michael K. Powell to Representative W.J. "Billy" Tauzin, dated April 4, 2002.
[11] "Cable Compatibility, Consumer-Friendly Copy Protection and Content Availability Remain Keys to Accelerating DTV Transition, Says CEA," September 25, 2002, Press Room of CEA Website, www.ce.org.
[12] "ESPN to Add HD Channel," CableWorld, September 30, 2002; "Discovery Launching HD Theater net," April 16, 2002, www.emonline.com/news/web041602.html.
[13] CableFAX Daily, October 23, 2002, at 4.
[14] Id.
[15] CableFAX Daily, Wednesday, October 23, 2002, at 4.
Re:CBS threatened to pull out of HDTV altogether (Score:1)
Don't worry. DTV will not be evil as soon as someone deonstrates to those guys how they can make money with it.
Re:CBS threatened to pull out of HDTV altogether (Score:2)
How do they figure that? Their revenue comes from the fees cable companies pay to carry the premium channels and advertising. Channels that people can record get watched more (if you're not home for a show, you can only watch it if you can record it) and thus sell more cable subscriptions and reach more viewers for the advertisers.
A broadcast flag regime is needed now to protect the value of our important assets or we must withhold our quality HD digital content.
That would be a real threat, if they had any quality HD digital content. If they have to point to Star Drek: Yeastinfection as an example, I pity them.
What this really means... (Score:5, Informative)
Okay, currently, DTV (digital television) has 18 transmission settings, some of which are HDTV, some are SDTV (standard NTSC quality but digital), and some are EDTV (480p like an Xbox, Gamecube, or Progressive Scan DVD player). For a few decades, television manufacturers have had to include VHF and UHF decoders. However, most Americans get signals from cable and/or satellite (something like 10%-14% of homes are OTA only). As a result, televisions became "cable-ready" which means that your TV can tune cable channels in. Those hold enough to remember pre-'cable-ready' televisions remember having a cable box that would output on channel 3 or 4, and you'd get your channels that way. Cable-ready benefits everyone. The cable company didn't need to provide boxes, and consumers were happier.
Now, DTV is available OTA. A small handful of regions have HDTV over cable, where your digital cable STB outputs an HDTV signal via DVI, Component Video, or RGB (VGA). Many consumers with HDTV use Satellite, where their HDTV Dish/DirecTV box includes an ATSC (OTA HDTV) decoder. In fact, most OTA decoders are DirecTV boxes as well. This is a matter of economics.
DTV is an MPEG-2 stream, so OTA STBes need to decode MPEG-2 to decode OTA. DirecTV and Dish send in MPEG-2 as well. As a result, adding DirecTV or Dish to an OTA STB is pretty cheap. Dish, however, makes all their own equipment, so many OTA STBes can also get DirecTV. In fact, normally the D* boxes are cheaper, because DirecTV subsidizes DirecTV hardware. Including an OTA-only decoder is a bit silly, so some televisions that are HDTV have a DirecTV decoder built.
While this is great for DirecTV, the 70% of the contry that uses cable is left out in the cold. The FCC mandate for including a decoder was coming, so the television manufacturers were in trouble. They could include an OTA decoder that consumers had no interest in (they get signals from cable, remember), so they couldn't really pass the costs on to consumers. (Manufacturing costs affect supply, not demand, so the price goes up and the quantity sold goes down, w/ manufacturers making less per box, that's no good).
So, while every television could include an integrated DirecTV receiver, that's less beneficial to the manufacturers than a Cable tuner. To make matters worse, the cable companies aren't terribly interested in buying equipment from Motorola to rent to consumers. While they may make some money on the boxes, remember that they have to put the money up to buy it (the debt levels you hear about in telecom), and the box rentals piss off consumers so some of them stay analog.
They are rolling out Digital and have no interest in keeping analog as well, they can get 4-6 SDTV (depending on compression) signals in the space of a single analog station, or ~1 HDTV signal (if the cable companies can compress it a bit more, maybe 1.5 HDTV signals).
Everyone hates eating the costs of two systems. While the television companies have "free" bandwidth, they can't use it. Right now they are maintaining a DTV AND analog transmitter (more money) for no additional viewers (so no extra money), plus they had to buy DTV broadcasting gear.
Everyone wants the DTV changeover to end, so they need to push us to DTV. Once we are all on DTV, they can eliminate the HDTV channels that were the carrot to move us over, and put 4 SDTV signals in the place plus "value added" service like purchasing shit, etc.
So, the cable companies agree to pass along whatever the broadcasters put in that spectrum (or most, or whatever), the broadcasters shut down analog and either offer more channels, services, or HDTV, or something, and the manufacturers get to sell us all new televisions. Consumers get more/better service, either more channels or better quality. Hopefully the satellite companies offer something impressive to compensate for cable matching their previous advantages, and everybody wins.
Of course, rates go up, but c'est la vie.
Alex
Digital TV? HDTV? WTF! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Whiipee dooo! (Score:3, Insightful)
Because the Japanese standard was ANALOG and was a huge bandwidth hog and as far as I know been abandoned. From what I understand they are replacing it with basically the US standard.
Re:Whiipee dooo! (Score:1)
Well, you are ;))
Japan had analog HDTV for a while. They started digital HDTV broadcast in 2000, two years later than in US.
NTSC/PAL fiasco?
TV broadcasts in US started in 1939, NTSC was approved in 1953. PAL and SECAM were adopted in 1967.
Re: (Score:2)
Still one big ommission in the digital standards (Score:2)
Currently, all consumer digital video standards involve compression, which is the natural choice, if your source is already compressed, such as a DVD or satellite stream. BUT, if you're generating video/graphics on the fly, such as in a video game, it's senseless to compress on the fly and then decompress it again in the set.
The major game console players, including Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are trying to work with the electronics makers on an uncompressed consumer digital video interface.
Re:Still one big ommission in the digital standard (Score:1)
FireWire is not necessarily cleartext (Score:2)
Also there is the possibility that the FCC will mandate a "broadcast flag" (a bit that says "no copying") in the Firewire stream; any hardware or software that doesn't respect that flag would be outlawed in the US. (much like Macrovision-free VHS and DVD players...)
As an interesting side note, the TV Firewire standard is just plain old MPEG-2, which means that once Firewire PVRs are available, they would also be able to record video straight off a DVD without any loss of image quality. (assuming you had a DVD player with Firewire output, which I expect will start to appear soon)...
Re:FireWire is not necessarily cleartext (Score:2, Interesting)
DVD players with firewire outputs will not appear soon, if ever, because the CSS license doesn't allow digital outputs (except the suround audio connector). Im not sure if it allows encrypted digital outputs, but if it does the manufacturers wouldn't be too happy about getting another license for DRM to worry about with its own anti-tamper requirements in addition to CSS. If DVD players do support DTCP output PVRs still wont be able to record. Non-dtcp wouldn't be able to read the encrypted signal, or even authenticate to get it, while DTCP compatable PVRs would only display a "recording prohibited" message.
Under one possible escape clause, the CPSA system does allow recorders to record copy-protected video provided the copies are "temporary and localised". Those terms are not defined. Temporary must mean on a non-removeable internal hard drive, but temporary could mean anything. Delete after 24 hours? Delete after one viewing? Delete after one week?
DTCP is one of four key CPSA technologys. The others are CSS, CPRM and CPPM. The CPSA system is the biggest threat to free digital multimedia, but also the biggest threat to the content industrys lockdown attempts. Once all of those four technologys are properly broken the CPSA system will be completly usless. That suggests we are 25% done
I havn't read the spec, but if it doesn't include DRM now it will edventually. The spec might not actually include DRM for PR reasons, but if that happens another specification will be put on top, probably based round CPSA, which specifies where to put the copy protection flags and which encryption schemes should be used on the firewire output. Cable companys would support this system because the TV channels would refuse broadcasts on an "insecure" system.
Ok... what about v1.0.1? (Score:2)
Digital TV in 2006? Jan 2nd, 2006, they update the boxes. All signals carry a little extra space for extra info. In Engalnd, isn't Teletext pushed that way? Doesn't radio send info to capable receivers? How much space does a no-copy byte take? Answer: 8 bits! Not hard to pack in...
Not so surprising... (Score:1)
IN NAZI GERMANY (Score:2, Funny)