TiVo Goes After Sites Hosting Image Backups 423
TiVo User writes "TiVo has apparently decided to come down on sites that hosted 'image backups,' essentially tarballs of the OS for the machine, which just happens to be Linux. TiVo owners use the images to install on new, larger hard drives (increasing the recording capacity of the unit) or to recover a dead system. Why TiVo has a problem with this, but allows others to sell the same images for profit is beyond me." Read on for the rest of TiVo User's comments.
"The images are not used to create pirate TiVos (as a subscription service, TiVo justifiably controls access to their database tightly), so there wouldn't appear to be much harm in allowing them to be hosted. TiVo has always walked a fine line in allowing the user community to mod their units, perhaps they have finally stepped over that line, considering there are free alternatives that are less restrictive. To their credit, the legal mumbo jumbo in their cease letter is non-threatening compared to most other of this type, but it's interesting the letter draws no distinction between the portions of the software that are Linux, and therefore expressly distributable, and those that are proprietary to TiVo."
Hmm (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Hmm (Score:5, Informative)
But if they've added drivers for TiVo specific hardware (don't know if there is any, don't have a TiVo) then it's down to the old binary modules argument, and if they've modified the kernel in any way then they need to release those modifications.
Tivo's userland code is the issue (Score:5, Informative)
There is and they have. http://www.tivo.com/linux
The objection to distribution of images is that image necessarily contain their proprietary userland code, which is decidely not GPL.
Re:Tivo's userland code is the issue (Score:5, Informative)
As well as certain video content which is also copyrighted by TiVo, such as the menu background video loops.
It has been made clear to the people at the AVS Forum website [tivocommunity.com] that offering drive images for download would be infringing and that no postings there would entertain such action. In not-so-recent history this appeared to become more lax. Apparently the hammer has come down.
Another issue is people installing Series2 standalone images on their USB-enabled DirecTiVo combination boxes so that they could run 4.0 on that platform. The installation apparently works. Any discussion of this is now forbidden on the aformentioned forum. Shutting down image providers will shut down people's ability to make the installation.
This may also however make it impossible to do the kernel monte hack to regain access to the software in face of the lockdowns in the firmware. Though it should be possible to hack together a monte-able image without including TiVo-proprietary code.
Re:Hmm (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Hmm (Score:2)
This seems to be an odd provision of the GPL. Since the components they use are undoubtable widely available in source form at other sites, why should they be required to provide a mirror of it? Pointing you to a mirror site of the source packages should be sufficient for most reasonable people.
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Interesting)
They aren't - the GPL doesn't specify how the code must be made available. They simply have to make the source available somehow, and are entitled to charge the cost of providing it. I imagine pointing to a mirror would be sufficient, at least in practice, if not in theory. The point is to make sure that any changes they make are also distributed to anyone who wants them.
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Informative)
So, a link the the mirror is only acceptable if you're re-distirbuting binaries without modification, and then only if you're doing it non-commercially.
Re:Hmm (Score:5, Informative)
The GPL DOES specify how the code must be made available, either by using a or b:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Informative)
The clause still makes sense in the Internet world though. Suppose I include a link to a third party site to get GPL code I distribute. They go out of business or change their domain name, or even take down the version I used because it became obselete. I'm now in violation of the GPL.
Re:Hmm (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Hmm (Score:3, Informative)
Re: Is GPL in law? (Score:5, Informative)
What do you mean by "recognized"? It is a license, which is essentially a contract. IANAL, but I do know that all licenses/contracts that do not explicitly violate laws and are by definition legal, hence "recognized" by law.
Now it hasn't been tested in court. It's possible that it violates some provision of contract law, which differ by country, but I've never heard anybody ever suggest any violation of law in the GPL, other than SCO's hallucinogenic diatribe about it being unconsititution, which doesn't pass the laugh test.
But AFAIK, my licenses to use just about any software on my computer (MS Windows, Office, Matlab, CorelDraw, etc.) have not been tested in court either. That doesn't make them "pipedreams". There really is no such thing as "recognized by law", only valid or invalid licenses & contracts, and you need an explicit violation to be invalid.
It's just nuts and bolts, and software (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It's just nuts and bolts, and software (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's just nuts and bolts, and software (Score:4, Informative)
I'm sure this used to be on the Freevo roadmap, but it seems to have disappeared.
Re:It's just nuts and bolts, and software (Score:5, Informative)
Too bad no one offers a subscription-based xmltv feed.
Insightful? You don't have a Tivo, do you? (Score:5, Insightful)
The software in the Tivo images contains Tivo's code. Taking that code and distributing it without permission is very simply and plainly copyright infringement. You just shouldn't do it. By all means take a backup, but the code is not yours to give away.
Tivo do comply with the GPL, (http://www.tivo.com/linux/) so if you want the GPL'd code, go get it.
TiVo (Score:2, Interesting)
TiVo is a company with no scruples, this practice does not surprise me in the least.
Re:TiVo (Score:2)
Re:TiVo (Score:2)
If Tivo didn't wipe the drive when they sold it, someone could have mucked with the settings for live tv and changed the bit rate settings.
Re:TiVo (Score:3, Informative)
You'd probably get the best luck at the community forums over at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/ they've heard just about anything and everything.
Re:TiVo (Score:2, Informative)
TiVo themselves actually have a very good reputation for customer service (if you bought a standalone TiVo and purchased service directly rather than through DirecTV, of course).
Re:TiVo (Score:2, Informative)
Double check that warranty! (Score:2, Informative)
However, this is what you need to check on - with H
Re:TiVo (Score:5, Informative)
Try this [mythtv.org] -- you need a standard computer, and a couple of TV cards.
Re:TiVo (Score:3, Insightful)
Why on earth would anybody want to waste their time trying to get a proprietary anything to work the way they want just to discover it doesn't it isn't flexible enough and "settle" for what it can do?
Even if I have to tinker with it, 9999 of 10000 times I can be confident that there IS a way to accomplish what I'd like to do with open source and thus I never settle.
Re:TiVo (Score:5, Informative)
Now once you have a working TiVo, they may be able to say to hell with you, but until then they are still bound by the original warranty, no matter how much time has passed.
Re:TiVo (Score:5, Interesting)
"A buyer of this product in California has the right to have this product serviced and repaired during the warranty period. The warranty period will be extended for the number of whole days that the product has been out of the buyer's hands for warranty repairs. If a defect exists during the warranty period, the warranty will not expire until the defect has been fixed. The warranty period also will be extended if the warranty repairs has not been performed due to delays caused by circumstances beyond the control of the buyer, or if the warranty repairs did not remedy the defect and the buyer notifies the manufacturer or seller of the failure of the repairs within sixty (60) days after they were completed. If after a reasonable number of attempts, the defect has not bee fixed, the buyer may return this product for a replacement or a refund subject, in either case, to deduction of a reasonable charge for use. The time extension does not affect the protection or remedies the buyer has under other laws.
Here's a clue (Score:5, Insightful)
If they are allowing other sites to sell their images for a profit, presumably they are getting royalties, and would therefore want to encourage the growth of this market by stopping people doing it for free. Follow the money...
This is BS (Score:4, Interesting)
A few months later the HD broke. So I pulled it out and got the linux-based rescue CD-image from someone at the excellent tivocommunity forums. Luckily that old drive had a little life left in her and I managed to do a DD copy onto a new 80 gig drive.
What Tivo should be doing is producing better products and stop punishing us who are trying to fix the junk they sold us. Making money off of a fauly product is ridiculous and those with the skills to be able to fix these things deserve access to the images.
If Tivo thinks I'm going to waste another 4 months on warranty service or pay for a damn OS image that should be mostly OSS they've got another thing coming.
Tivo, I'm afraid (because I truly love their product) will be non-existant once the Comcast and Dishnetwork DVRs start coming free with the service. You can take at look at them at gizmodo. [gizmodo.com] If Tivo wants to compete they need to kiss more customer ass, not spit on existing customers with lemons.
Re:This is BS (Score:4, Informative)
Not only that, it doesn't record shows sometimes. A had a period of time where every show was recorded for only 1 second. I had to delete and re-create all of my manual timers.
Re:This is BS (Score:5, Informative)
Figuring out a Tivo (Score:3, Interesting)
A lot
Re:This is BS (Score:3, Insightful)
Its not reasoning its fact. I have a melted card to prove it. A replacement card didn't work.
Whether or not the card reader broke or something else is beyong me, but it seems like the most likely scenario.
> I suspect that under closer examination one would find that you were attaching an external circuit to your DTIVO.
I have no idea what you're talking about and accusing people of theft without any proof is about as close to moral bankrupt as one can get.
Re:This is BS (Score:3, Informative)
Granted, Not Tivo's fault in my case. And I have had no other problems since replacing the fan.
Re:This is BS (Score:5, Informative)
See also: My usenet post regarding Hughes fans from 2002. [google.com]
Facts beat conspiracy theories any day of the week.
Re:Here's a clue (Score:3, Informative)
Copyright, like patents, are ironclad for their term, no matter what you do (or don' do).
Re:Here's a clue (Score:3, Informative)
Man, that's hilarious.
The word you were looking for, however, is 'diluted.' And that's not really the result of failing to actively defend a mark.
A mark must inform consumers as to the source of goods or services. E.g. everything with 'Slurm' on it must be coming from the same basic source, regardless of what (or who) that source is. If it doesn't, THEN there's no mark at all.
Infringement is basically when someone else uses your mark on his own go
A question (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:A question (Score:5, Insightful)
I suspect their concern is that someone will figure out how to hack their way into their servers or steal DirecTV service or eventually manage to run the whole image on "stock" hardware.
Much better for them to nip this copyright violation now than to try to stop it in a year or two when they'll annoy even more people. It may be harder for people to fix "hacked" TiVo's, but you take your own chances when you break that warranty seal...
Re:A question (Score:5, Informative)
Already done, but easily detected on their end, more or less.
or steal DirecTV service
Also already done, and not easily detectable either. But it's no easier than stealing DTV on any other DTV box.
or eventually manage to run the whole image on "stock" hardware.
Not bloody likely, and considering that this particular site has been in operation *at least* three years to my explicit knowledge, nobody is really interested.
I know a lot about Tivo and the hacking community and such, and I'm at a loss to satisfactorily explain why Tivo would do this. I suspect a Tivo lawyer found out about it. Most of the Tivo engineering people have no real issue with this sort of thing.
Tivo is well within their rights here, but to my absolute and certain knowledge, several key people at Tivo have known about ftp.abs.net for at least 2 years. I'm just not sure why this is happening now.
Three points (Score:5, Interesting)
2. They're bound to get a lot of people jumping on them "you must distribute", etc. See (1).
3. They're walking a fine line. I'm setting up a Mini-ITX/Hauppage 350 PVR with MythTV as a front-end. It looks cool, and it'll have a lot more features (like: burn a DVD as well as the normal PVR stuff
Simon
Concerning point 1 (Score:5, Informative)
Your website (ftp.abs.net) has recently come to our attention. We appreciate your enthusiasm for the TiVo(R) DVR and we have some specific requests regarding your website.
We request that you cease hosting backup images of TiVo's proprietary software. The software represents valuable intellectual property of TiVo's, and making it available for copying and distribution is a violation of TiVo's copyrights. Such use is without our consent and is illegal under US federal copyright law. In particular, we are requesting that all of the files and directories located at ftp://ftp.abs.net/tivo/Backups/ be removed.
If they are correct in their statements, then this does indeed suggest that there is some proprietary code in addition to the GPL'd kernel in there. I suppose the best thing to do here is verify what can be distributed (under the GPL) and what can't, from the TiVo package.. (But I don't own a TiVo, so that may not be possible)
Re:Concerning point 1 (Score:3, Informative)
TiVo releases their kernel mods, but they have tons of userland apps that provide all the functionality that makes a Tivo what it is.
These images that were asked to be taken down were not simply kernel images, but images of the entire Tivo disk.
Re:Three points (Score:5, Interesting)
That's not what Linus said in this [slashdot.org] earlier Slashdot story from Monday. It seems pretty unbelievable that TiVo developed their "proprietary kernel modules" for whatever hardware they're using without any knowledge of the kernel internals or intention to link the resulting binary module to the kernel. IANAL of course, but from reading through Linus' postings it seems like he thinks this kind of situation would require TiVo to release the source code to any binary kernel modules as well since they are derived from the GPL'd Linux kernel. I'm not familiar with TiVos in particular, but does anyone have any proof that they've made no derivative works from userland code or the Linux kernel without releasing source code to the modifications?
Personally I think TiVo should have to distribute the source code to their product so that people can choose whether or not they want to buy the service or would prefer to just write their own interface to guide information using XmlTV. One of the main reasons I wouldn't buy a TiVo is I don't want to be tied to one company's guide information. If they fold I am screwed and my TiVo would be useless. It almost happened to ReplayTV users.
Re:Three points (Score:5, Informative)
a) Tivo does distribute their kernel changes. See http://www.tivo.com/linux/index.html . There's enough there to build a Tivo kernel with a lot of effort on the user's part. In the case of later Tivo's you can't build your own *working* kernel because you can't sign the code, but there's ways around that.
b) Most of their code runs in userland, not in the kernel. This includes the MFS filesystem stuffs, AFAIK.
Re:That's not the *complete* source code (Score:3, Informative)
Mmmm... decisions, decisions...
Re:TiVo != NVidia (Score:4, Informative)
You'd probably be wrong there. I haven't seen the actual userland code either, but I have messed about on the Tivo extensively, and it's not "tightly" tied by any means. They do have modules for the hardware which they have released, I think, but these provide more or less normal interfaces to it for the most part, and there's little need to compile their headers and such into the userland code and so forth. The kernel modules mostly just provide
Re:Three points (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Three points (Score:4, Interesting)
Speaking of MythTV - does anyone know if there are processes in MythTV that could benefit from OpenMosix?
Definitely! The transcode processes would be perfect candidates for moving to another machine; they are usually quite computationally-expensive, since one is usually trying futher to compress an already-compressed stream. In my MythTV set up at home, I use a Hauppage PVR-250 to capture video in MPEG-2 format. Since the hardware does this initial encoding, the CPU is pretty much untaxed by the capture.
However, when it comes to transcoding the MPEG-2 files into MPEG-4 (to achieve double space savings), the transcode processes chew up quite a bit of CPU time. If this job could be moved to other machines, that would be very good, since it would leave spare CPU cycles on the master for playback.
Question for Mr. Cowboy (Score:3, Interesting)
I was considering doing this, but the screenshots on the MythTV site are just awfully ugly. Is the interface really this klunky? It seemed to me there would be no way for my wife to operate the thing once i set it up on our living room tv. People don't want to see filepaths in the final interface, and, again, it was just extremely raw
Re:Question for Mr. Cowboy (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually at the moment, I'm spending more time on the hostip stuff, though that's peaked now (as far as demands on my time go), and the PVR stuff will start to take over after Xmas.
Simon.
Re:Question for Mr. Cowboy (Score:3, Informative)
DVD rips against the IMDB display cover art, title, etc.
The ones displaying filepaths are the ones MythTV cannot determine any other information for, i.e. the ones without proper tagging. Nothing MythTV can do about that, it tries to make a match and falls back on displaying
Re:Three points (Score:5, Informative)
TiVo's filesystem is proprietary and closed source.
Kernel modules need to be GPL, although there are some grey areas that Linus acknowledges. It's unlikely that a new filsystem would have fallen into one of those grey areas.
So, TiVo solved the problem in a novel way. They hacked the NFS client code in the kernel so that instead of communicating with an NFS server over TCP/IP, it communicates with a local userland process. They released this code under the GPL.
Then they wrote the filesystem code to run in userland, and kept that closed source, as is their right.
RE: (Score:4, Interesting)
If it wasn't for someone having their image of the OS out there, I wouldn't have been able to fix my Tivo Series 2 that's less that one year old!
Commercial skip? WRONG! (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
All advertisers need to do is make their commercials interesting and relevant. I hardly ever skip the commercials during Adult Swim because they're so fun to watch.
Hardware requirements for free alternatives? (Score:5, Interesting)
Will a 1GHz VIA MiniITX board be able to do simultaneous encoding/playback (timeshifting) in MPEG2 or is an Athlon XP 1800+ necessary?
What hardware do YOU use?
Re:Hardware requirements for free alternatives? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Hardware requirements for free alternatives? (Score:5, Informative)
A GHz processor should do timeshifting - Freevo lists 400MHz as minimum for operation (not including simultaneous enc/dec for timeshifting), and I seem to recall 1GHz being bandied about as recommended for that.
Re:Hardware requirements for free alternatives? (Score:5, Informative)
Some useful links:
MythTV requirements [mythtv.org]
And for Freevo [sourceforge.net]
PVR Database [goldfish.org]
Hope that helps.
DMCA? DMCA. (Score:4, Informative)
Is it fair? No.
But it's the law -- an asinine and relatively untested law -- but the law nevertheless.
Get used to it. Your property is no longer your property. You merely own the license for its use.
Re:DMCA? DMCA. (Score:5, Informative)
Even in this case it's not against the DMCA until Tivo puts controls in place to specifically prevent it from happening. If Tivo had put weak encryption in place and someone found a way around it, the hacker couldn't post it to the web how to do it; but also they could not be taken to jail for just doing it.
What's the problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
How is this different to somebody hosting Windows ISOs? If there is software that is copyrighted by Tivo inside the images and they haven't given the people distributing them license to do so, then they are well within their rights to stop the distribution.
Re:What's the problem? (Score:5, Interesting)
TiVo software is tied to the hardware anyway, there's no use for it other than on a TiVo. They are legally within their rights (as long as they don't go after people only distributing the GPL'ed bits), but morally it's a shakier situation. In essence they're using their copyrights to go after people who modify their kit; and they have no other legal avenue or compelling interest to go after people modifying their own, fully owned hardware. If you'll remember, people get uppity about such things (e.g. DMCA, modchips) all the time..
And for a windows example; why do you need a separate license to put your IT departments image of windows XP on a Dell that comes with an OEM version of XP? It's the same collection of bits, just from a different source. It's a rip off.
Re:What's the problem? (Score:2)
I don't think a judge will be impressed by that argument. TiVo seems to be within their rights, but perhaps it's not such a smart move. They may lose customers from it, while they don't lose customers from the distribution. Anyway, I'm sure they've thought about it, and they are sure allowed to make the distribution stop.
ReplayTv (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:ReplayTv (Score:2, Informative)
Re:ReplayTv (Score:5, Informative)
You obviously aren't a true geek...
The true geeks custom-built their recording system from pieced together shell-scripts, perl code, and a little C. And carefully control every step of the process, to get the absolute highest performance from their setup.
ReplayTV, with it's inability to crop off black borders, hence requiring MUCH higher bitrates, and it's regular tendency to drop frames, and no way to get around that, is not functional enough to be very useful at this point. I hope it improves, but I'm not holding my breath.
Those of us who put a little more work into it, can easily have a system with much higher quality, needing less CPU time, less disk space, less memory, and overall-getting much more functionality out of the system. But I guess I'm just ranting at this point. I hope the two projects quickly get to a point that they are good options, but they certainly aren't right now, and nobody seems to be in a hurry to integrate the most important features.
More informative link. (Score:5, Informative)
Some people don't do any research (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.tivo.com/linux/index.html
One good reason they may have (Score:5, Interesting)
The images for different Tivos are slightly different - a Phillips unit is not quite the same as a Sony, a DTivo is different than a stand alone Tivo, and of course Series II Tivos are MIPS rather than PPC based.
The common use case for these images goes something like this:
Joe L. Usr tries to upgrade his system. He, of course, does not back up his system. He adds a drive and botches the process.
Joe figgrs he will just download a new image and "fix" his system. So he pulls down the first image he can find, and BAM! his Tivo is now not merely broken, but toast.
Now, the upgrade sites actually require you to tell them what hardware you have, and thus (one hopes) can insure you get the correct image.
So Tivo MAY want to prevent folks from moron-izing their systems, but not have a problem with folks that don't have a history of doing so.
Re:One good reason they may have (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:One good reason they may have (Score:2)
This is kind of a silly thing for people to get worked up over, anyway. If you're hacking your Tivo,
Re:One good reason they may have (Score:3, Insightful)
If you fudge up your system with bad software, you're out of warranty. Buy a new system. Sale! So that's not the motivation..
If you don't have access to software, there's no way to upgrade, say the harddrive, without springing for a newer model. Sale!
So, apparantly it's come to the point that more people are succesfully upgrading their kit than people who're moron-izi
Re:One good reason they may have (Score:4, Insightful)
a. Open up the Tivo - Torx Drivers required.
b. Play with the IDE cables, IDE jumpers and other crap.
c. Run Linux, or use a Linux Boot disk.
No one who does that even remotely thinks that calling CS is going to help.
Do you all freaking work for Microsoft? (Score:5, Informative)
I remember way back in the day, when Tivo hacking was overly encouraged by the company, the president of Tivo posted on the boards pissed off that people were imaging. Evidently, several people had imaged a Philips image on a Sony system or vice-versa, and it was screwing up the company's update system. That may be why they're cracking down on the sites.
Then I come here and read stuff like "Since they use linux, they're required to send an engineer over to my house to explain how their data structures work." Great! Some microsoft exec is already planning a happy hour for their marketing group. Maybe you'll get invited.
There is another...... (Score:2)
Myth TV
It's better.
Can't make an image yourself? (Score:2)
Of course you can... (Score:5, Informative)
It was well known (or should have been) that distributing these was illegal, and this was in fact why I didn't allow posting links to these sites on the Tivo Community forums, back when I was running the Underground forum there. But they were well known nonetheless, and I myself sent links to abs.net to users in need.
Tivo is well within their rights to not have these images distributed, but it's a pretty sad thing that they now feel the need to exert those rights. I guess it's finally happened and Tivo is no longer "hacker" friendly. Oh well. It was a joyous time while it lasted, I guess.
Re:Of course you can... (Score:5, Insightful)
business model is based on extorting a monthly fee for a VCR
With the standalones, it's not all that unexpected.. The unit needs continuing guide data, Tivo provides that data. Value received for payment made. With the D-Tivo's you have a point, but the fee on the D-Tivo's is so low that it's not even worth thinking about it.
acting like a jackbooted thug and violating the GPL
Tivo isn't violating the GPL, in even the most restrictive sense you can possibly put the GPL. They're totally in the clear on this one.
you're saying that you're surprised
I'm surprised in that I'm not sure what this particular action gets them in terms of a gain. It's one thing if this was costing them subscriptions or sales, but it's not, as far as I can see. So I fail to understand why they took this course, because it gains them nothing of import.
The reason they're starting to do this now. (Score:5, Informative)
It also caused problems with DirecTV's over-the-phone software update, as every night the machine would attempt to get new software but fail after applying the patch, tying up lines for several hours.
Re:The reason they're starting to do this now. (Score:5, Insightful)
Not yet they don't.
DirecTivo's still get their software updates over the phone line. The capability exists to do software patching via the satellite, but to my knowledge (admittedly limited on this point), they have not used it yet.
And the "magic" way to make HMO work on Series 2 D-Tivo's is indeed to copy a Series 2 standalone image with activated HMO to the unit. This was discovered a few months ago. Tivo unified their code base with the series 2 systems a while back, and one side effect of this was that the code became unified enough to where the standalone image was in fact "close enough" to work more or less correctly on a D-Tivo. Doing this and letting it then dial in would be an exceedingly stupid thing to do, but no doubt some morons did it anyway.
This highlights a bit of a problem with Tivo's latest offerings, one that I bitched about on the Tivo Community forums back when I was still welcome there. They are charging, on a monthly basis, for what is essentially a one time software update. Every feature of the HMO (Home Media Option) stuff, with the exception of web access to your Tivo, is done by the unit itself and requires no external connection as such. The MP3 playing, show sharing, picture viewing, all of that doesn't need the unit to call home to be able to do any of it. So it was really only a matter of time before someone flipped their own switches on the box, I argued. The unification of the code base between D-Tivo's and Standalones let people figure out how to flip their own switches on the D-Tivo's as well. Take an HMO activated standalone, copy it to the D-Tivo, voila.
Tivo is headed down the drain, IMO. They made a very good product, and changed the landscape of TV viewing. But they've made some very poor decisions with regards to their business strategies and software designs, and now it's starting to bite them in the ass.
I'm starting to feel like it's only a matter of time before it's full on war between Tivo hackers and Tivo Inc., and Tivo Inc. doesn't stand a chance on this one. The majority of Tivo sales have classically been via word of mouth, and if they don't turn it around, they're going to alienate their best and most vocal sellers, ya know?
alternatives? (Score:3, Insightful)
Is it really an alternative? I don't mean that lightly, i mean is freevo really just as good as tivo in every single way so as to make it a prefectly viable alternative?
Or is this is a case of it'll work reasonably well, some things it'll do that Tivo can't, something won't work as well, the interface won't be quite so polished, it won't do everything you'd hope it did, it's got a few quirks here and there and above all the hardware actually costs more to purchase before you even start thinking about messing around trying to get it installed.
Or will it save you hours of pain if you just cough up the money and get something that works as soon as you plug it in?
Yes, I know there is KnoppixMyth, but can you really set that up and give it to your parents? Looking at the technical specifications for one record and one playback (1.4 GHz CPU and 384 megabytes of RAM) thats quite pricey and you haven't even considered the fact it'll be a huge box and you need a DVD drive, controller, HD and some serious soundproofing.
Not something that you can sit under the TV!
No, it's not (Score:3, Insightful)
No "free alternative" can compete with an integrated unit with dual tuners and direct digital capture of the original DirecTV data streams combined with a mature GUI for (as of today) $99. Generic PC solutions will rarely beat a specialized device with embedded components dedicated to a single function.
The fanatics will cry about the monthly fee because, as far as I can tell, they place zero value on their time. Honestly, I sometimes get an image of these guys stuffing their
Re:alternatives? (Score:3, Interesting)
Don't bet too much on that. While I bought a TiVo for the recording features, I've quickly found pausing live TV to be one of the most-used features it has.
I'm not kidding when I say that the pause and replay buttons get used to death in my house, while watching live TV. Maybe if all I watched was pre-recorded I would feel differently, but as it stands now I still watch a fair amount of live TV. Being able to pause the news whi
money (Score:4, Interesting)
TiVo alternatives not viable (Score:3, Informative)
The service providers hold thier hardware close to the chest, as long as all I can do with a PC card is standard broadcast or remote IR control I am locked out. The service with a single integrated unit it too good.
I don't even dump video to disc or anything, I don't care about TV enough to do it, but the cable/satellite people don't release PC based decoders because they are afraid of what may happen (I am not really sure why, the ones that aren't content providers shouldn't even care what we do with the feed)
Maybe the "broadcast flag" will give them an excuse to make computer peripherals that work with satellite and digital cable ? (slim chance I know but I can hope
the death of TiVo (Score:3, Interesting)
TiVo has buzz. Yes, it is true that Dish has been hurting TiVo by giving away the inferior DishPlayer PVR as standard fare and thus DirecTV has been putting pressure on TiVo to renegotiate their contract to keep price competitive, but when people hear what a PVR is, they think TiVo. Look at the current DirecTV promo; up to 3 rooms for $38.99 per month (plus the $99 sign-up fee) and you can get the master receiver as a TiVo Series2 unit for only $5 per month more (service fee) or free if you bump up to one of the Total Choice Packages. That's a great deal. Unfortunately, DirecTV has chosen not to enable the Home Media Option for whatever reason.
Bottom line is, TiVo will be profitable by Q1 2004 (with the increase of subscribers), both to the chagrin of lots of advertisers, the Nielsens, the chief of Turner Broadcasting, the new owners of Replay, Microsoft, and some Slashdotters who refuse to support a company that is actually putting Linux devices at the heart of entertainment centers throughout the nation...of course, without TiVo as a subject, these same posters would be ranting about the deaths of Apple or Sun instead...
The world isn't ending (Score:3, Informative)
Sure, TiVo has had issues with some of the hacking done, especially wrt video extraction. Overall, however, they have been very laid back about the tinkering with the internals of a consumer electronics box. They appear to be scared stiff about running afoul of content distribtuion laws, but they don't want their business model (and hard work) to go up in smoke because of over zealous users to whomo they provided assistance. The assistance of TiVo is what has given it the core of it's cult following.
Perhaps if abs.net opened a dialog, a solution might be found which keeps some or all of the images online. And of course, as mentioned in other posts, if the host goes down the folks who are smart enough to use the images are also smart enough to know where to find 'em without an ftp site.
Cracking/theft of service...now that's just not nice, and TiVo has every right to pound 'em into the ground.
I know why (Score:4, Informative)
Just my $0.02.
GPL and non-GPL code. How Tivo works underneath. (Score:5, Informative)
From some of the posts online, you'd think some people have no idea how the law works and/or how a Tivo works.
Tivos) The images for series1 and series 2 tivos are essentially the same, allowing for differences in the hardware. The capabilities each Tivo has is dependant on what they are "allowed" for. Ie, home media option and such is enabled when the Tivo connects to the server and determines that it should be enabled.
Along that note, the things which a downloader of a Tivo image would be potentially "stealing":
The GPL states that if you modify the kernel itself and distribute it, you will need to distribute the modified source code as well. Tivo HAS done this. They have placed the GPL related portions along with their own direct modifications to the kernel for download on their web site.
Kernel modules and other object linked source code is still being hotly debated, for better or for worse. The stance most companies take is to distribute binary modules.
The application which runs on top of Linux, however, is NOT gpl'd. Nor are all of the other control mechanisms which Tivo has written. Nor are the images and other creative works put into the Tivo system.
By offering an image of the drive for download, that Tivo user is offering both GPL'd(which is ok) and Copyrighted(which is not okay) works. And since just backing up the GPL portions of the Tivo system will not restore the system, the image that user is offering is in violation of Copyright laws and Tivo has the right to and needs to tell them to stop.
Just because you use a GPL base for an OS does NOT make your application GPL as well. Graphical libraries are another matter and hence the LGPL, the BSD license, and a few others.
People need to understand that it isn't about being against GPL. It is about protected the portion which ISN'T GPL. And people aren't seeing that distinction when they should.
I've been a user of a Series2 Tivo for 2 years now and love it. One of the first appliances I bought when I moved into my current place. I upgraded mine and have had no problems with it. Though I'm thinking I'll be doing some routine maintenance myself to make sure the drives are okay, but otherwise, I have no complaints about image quality or any other problem with the system. (Except maybe the USB1.1 port which limits me to 11mbps when I really want 100mbps... :)
Tivo has been a great company and has always been courteous when I had problems or questions of them. They see something wrong happening and they are doing what needs to be done to rectify the problem.
They should not be dinged when they try to protect something legitimately, unlike another company which comes to mind.
Re:I smell FSF lawyers... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I smell FSF lawyers... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I smell FSF lawyers... (Score:3, Insightful)
What, you mean like this source code [tivo.com]?
Anyhow, I don't see how distribution of images is related to the GPL. The GPL doesn't require that TiVo provide binary versions of its software. Furthermore, just because TiVos are Linux-based, who says all of the software on a TiVo box is GPL'd? Surely they have their own proprietary programs on there that don't use GPL'd code, and those programs would not allowed to be distributed in TiVo disk images.
Re:I smell FSF lawyers... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Done Nothing Wrong? (Score:3, Insightful)
Tivo's KERNEL is GPL, and SOME of tivo's userland is GPL, and tivo has always released the code for their modifications to GPL software they used. But tivos also have proprietary software on them, that is not based on GPL code, and is not released under the GPL, and they have every right to control distribution of it. Just because the GPL binaries and the proprietary binaries are on the same hard drive doesn't give someone the rig