or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Home Theater Computers › With new Tvs are HTPCs needed?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

With new Tvs are HTPCs needed? - Page 4

post #91 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryansj View Post

Anyway, are HTPCs needed with new TVs?
Hey, what's the big idea? You trying to stay on topic or something?

FWIW, need has absolutely nothing to do with it. HTPCs are a hobbyists device and not for everyone. I assume by "new TVs" you are referring to Smart TVs, correct? Based on my limited knowledge of the subject. I assume that most Smart TVs are basically TVs with media players built in that can stream content from internet sources. If that's all you want it for then a HTPC is probably overkill for you. However, HTPCs are far more capable than any Smart TV so it all depends on whether you need the extra features.
post #92 of 136
Yes, I was attempting to move back towards the silly OT.

I have a Panasonic GT30 "Smart TV" and every few months I decide to try to incorporate the Smarts into our viewing. Currently I'm trying to use Netflix and Amazon Prime, but the interface is very lame. Once in the app things are a little better, but the WAF is very questionable. I've been trying to create proper interface screens on my iRule layout and I'm almost there, but I'm not sure there will be much of a payoff. As far as using a USB stick, I think that is probably the very bottom on WAF. I assume the OP is single.
post #93 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by politby View Post

@blueiedgod

Well, law is law, and if you start thinking you can decide on your own which laws to uphold and which not, then it's you who are the self appointed judge, not I.

There is no such thing as "Less illegal". Either you follow the law or you don't.

Here in Sweden, it is legal to make a backup of purchased media but you are NOT allowed to break or circumvent protection/encryption in doing so. That would be illegal.

Which is why I rip to ISO, keeping the encryption. That way I stay within the law.

Huh, never thought of that technique. So this is a way to have a "movie jukebox" and still be legal, I think the law is the same in the US.
post #94 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryansj View Post

I like the following example:

Buy disc; rip movie = illegal
Download ripped movie = illegal

What is the point of buying the disc if the end result in both cases is still illegal? Warm fuzzies?

Anyway, are HTPCs needed with new TVs?

Thats why I say don't buy the disc in the first place, streaming and redbox is your friend.
post #95 of 136
The debate on piracy is always a good one around here. These threads seem to get rolling.....
post #96 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by politby View Post

Well that is where our law probably differs from U.S. Making an unprotected copy is illegal. Playback of a legally (i.e. copy protection kept) created backup using e.g. AnyDVD is legal as long as the decryption is not permanently applied to the media.

But the MKV route is a copyright violation.

In any case, my copy protected ISOs are going to be worthless anyway for any discs with Cinavia.

I am going to stop arguing now. smile.gif

No idea about the law in your country (if you have a link I'd be happy to read it), but why it would be illegal to break the protection to rip but legal to break the protection to play seems very strange, it doesn't make sense, either way the protection is broken and you are doing the exact same thing.

Also if you have AnyDVD then Cinavia protection is not currently an issue for any current PC software player on any type of files.
post #97 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffkro View Post

Thats why I say don't buy the disc in the first place, streaming and redbox is your friend.
I don't like streaming services and RedBox selections on Blu-Ray are hit or miss. Netflix doesn't always have the movies I want when I want them and the popular ones are always on a waiting list. I've found some movies on torrent sites that were Blu-Ray rips whereas Netflix could only provide me with the same movie on standard DVD.

I don't buy movies on actual media because I rarely watch a movie more than once. It's not cost effective and the discs take up too much physical space. I dislike streaming because the quality isn't always up to snuff, at least from what I've experienced in the past. I want full 1080p with HD audio and not something that's been compressed to death. That basically just leaves renting Blu-Rays. In my case, I rip them to mkv's so I can play them on my HTPC. I don't have an internal Blu-Ray drive and I prefer to watch just the main movie without having to wade through all of the extra crap on the disc to get there, hence the reason for ripping to mkv. Once I've watched a movie I delete the file.

If that makes me a criminal then so be it. I guess I'm just breaking bad.
post #98 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain_video View Post

I don't like streaming services and RedBox selections on Blu-Ray are hit or miss. Netflix doesn't always have the movies I want when I want them and the popular ones are always on a waiting list. I've found some movies on torrent sites that were Blu-Ray rips whereas Netflix could only provide me with the same movie on standard DVD.

I don't buy movies on actual media because I rarely watch a movie more than once. It's not cost effective and the discs take up too much physical space. I dislike streaming because the quality isn't always up to snuff, at least from what I've experienced in the past. I want full 1080p with HD audio and not something that's been compressed to death. That basically just leaves renting Blu-Rays. In my case, I rip them to mkv's so I can play them on my HTPC. I don't have an internal Blu-Ray drive and I prefer to watch just the main movie without having to wade through all of the extra crap on the disc to get there, hence the reason for ripping to mkv. Once I've watched a movie I delete the file.

If that makes me a criminal then so be it. I guess I'm just breaking bad.

Yep. You're a criminal.

What a completely ridiculous and self-defeating law.
post #99 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

Yep. You're a criminal.

What a completely ridiculous and self-defeating law.

It is ridiculous. I do a lot of renting too, although I don't rip the rental, I use AnyDVD to remove the protection allowing me to play the main movie playlist with a non licensed software player, doing this makes me a criminal too. It's crazy.
post #100 of 136
It's not only crazy, but completely moot. When have you ever heard of anyone being accused, let alone convicted, of circumventing disc encryption for personal use? The law was meant to thwart pirates, but the law was extended to consumers as well just to keep Hollywood happy. As far as I'm concerned, what I do with a disc while it's in my home is nobody else's damn business as long as the data from that disc does not extend beyond the boundaries of my home. If I'm not selling or distributing intellectual property then it's a victimless crime. The real crime is the law and the way it's written (and we all know the real criminals are in Washington anyway). With today's technology, anyone that purchases anything on optical disc should be able to copy it for personal use. I believe that's already permitted with music CDs so we should be able to do it legally with other media as well. Hollywood is forcing us all to become criminals (middle fingers pointed at both Washington and Hollywood).
post #101 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain_video View Post

It's not only crazy, but completely moot. When have you ever heard of anyone being accused, let alone convicted, of circumventing disc encryption for personal use? The law was meant to thwart pirates, but the law was extended to consumers as well just to keep Hollywood happy. As far as I'm concerned, what I do with a disc while it's in my home is nobody else's damn business as long as the data from that disc does not extend beyond the boundaries of my home. If I'm not selling or distributing intellectual property then it's a victimless crime. The real crime is the law and the way it's written (and we all know the real criminals are in Washington anyway). With today's technology, anyone that purchases anything on optical disc should be able to copy it for personal use. I believe that's already permitted with music CDs so we should be able to do it legally with other media as well. Hollywood is forcing us all to become criminals (middle fingers pointed at both Washington and Hollywood).

This is where Hollywood disagrees with you. They want you to purchase a new copy of the material for each device that you are wanting to use it on. They DON'T want you to be able to move it off the disc.

So if you were to purchase Cars 2 for your kid they want you to purchase one copy for your main TV, 1 copy of Ultraviolet/VUDU for each mobile device, etc.

The point I have been making is should downloading a torrent, by your definition of it being a "victimless crime", be viewed in the same way? Both are illegal, no? At the very least you should contact Hollywood and offer to give them the $5 Ultraviolet/VUDU fee for each and every one of your Blurays that you have ripped to your hard drive (and also offer them another $5 for each and every display where you show that movie for each and every movie).

Ridiculous but those are the rules.
Edited by assassin - 10/3/13 at 6:07am
post #102 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by acejh1987 View Post

No idea about the law in your country (if you have a link I'd be happy to read it), but why it would be illegal to break the protection to rip but legal to break the protection to play seems very strange, it doesn't make sense, either way the protection is broken and you are doing the exact same thing.

Also if you have AnyDVD then Cinavia protection is not currently an issue for any current PC software player on any type of files.

I suspect the reasoning is that if you have made an unprotected copy it is ready for illegal sharing. A protected one is probably not all that attractive to downloaders. smile.gif They are too cheap to pay for ANYDVD.
post #103 of 136
I have a smart tv, only cause most decent tvs nowadays are tricked out with BS stuff I don't want. HTPC>>>>>>smart tv.

Some folks like apple cause everything just works. Some folks like to tinker and get things working the way they want and generally go with pc.

If you want something to just work and not have to spend any time on it then a smart tv is a good option for those who just want to watch a show on netflix or on a external drive. A lot of people with HTPCs want the nice front end you get with media browser or XBMC. They also like to customize all that stuff. I can't have a nice XBMC aeon neo interface with custom categories, custom artwork, nes, snes, N64, ps, ps2, dream cast, game cube emulators, over 600 games, over 300 movies, over 2000 tv shows, acess to steam pc games, and any webpage on the internet with a smart tv.
post #104 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain_video View Post

It's not only crazy, but completely moot. When have you ever heard of anyone being accused, let alone convicted, of circumventing disc encryption for personal use? The law was meant to thwart pirates, but the law was extended to consumers as well just to keep Hollywood happy. As far as I'm concerned, what I do with a disc while it's in my home is nobody else's damn business as long as the data from that disc does not extend beyond the boundaries of my home. If I'm not selling or distributing intellectual property then it's a victimless crime. The real crime is the law and the way it's written (and we all know the real criminals are in Washington anyway). With today's technology, anyone that purchases anything on optical disc should be able to copy it for personal use. I believe that's already permitted with music CDs so we should be able to do it legally with other media as well. Hollywood is forcing us all to become criminals (middle fingers pointed at both Washington and Hollywood).

Believe it or not, but it is THEIR business what you do within your own house.

Back in the 80's when VCR's were just becoming popular, TV and movie industry lobbied to make video recordings of TV broadcasts illegal. Luckily, at the time Sony did not own movie studios, and fought them, which resulted in "Fair Use Act" which basically allowed you to legally record broadcast TV on your VCR.

Fest forward 20 years, and Sony owns most of the movies studios, and there is no one defending the masses, and you have your "Digital Millenium Act" which basically says that you can not circumvent protection, whether it is in your own house, cave, or garage.
post #105 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiedgod View Post

Believe it or not, but it is THEIR business what you do within your own house.

Back in the 80's when VCR's were just becoming popular, TV and movie industry lobbied to make video recordings of TV broadcasts illegal. Luckily, at the time Sony did not own movie studios, and fought them, which resulted in "Fair Use Act" which basically allowed you to legally record broadcast TV on your VCR.

Fest forward 20 years, and Sony owns most of the movies studios, and there is no one defending the masses, and you have your "Digital Millenium Act" which basically says that you can not circumvent protection, whether it is in your own house, cave, or garage.

This is correct. Great historical reference.

I think the only exception to this is public libraries which can make copies and/or break encryption behind closed doors legally.
post #106 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

This is correct. Great historical reference.

I think the only exception to this is public libraries which can make copies and/or break encryption behind closed doors legally.

So open your home as a public library biggrin.gif
post #107 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

So open your home as a public library biggrin.gif

Now that's a good idea! Don't want to share my 120" screen with the riff-raff though.
post #108 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiedgod View Post

Believe it or not, but it is THEIR business what you do within your own house.

Back in the 80's when VCR's were just becoming popular, TV and movie industry lobbied to make video recordings of TV broadcasts illegal. Luckily, at the time Sony did not own movie studios, and fought them, which resulted in "Fair Use Act" which basically allowed you to legally record broadcast TV on your VCR.

Fest forward 20 years, and Sony owns most of the movies studios, and there is no one defending the masses, and you have your "Digital Millenium Act" which basically says that you can not circumvent protection, whether it is in your own house, cave, or garage.

I'm well aware of the history with Sony and the Betamax case. The studios may want to make it THEIR business, but they can f*@k off as far as I'm concerned. While it may be illegal to circumvent copy protection, it's basically an unenforceable law. My point was that if it's handled behind closed doors in the privacy of my own home then nobody's the wiser. What they don't know won't hurt me. There isn't a single studio that's going to waste time and resources going after individuals ripping BDs or DVDs for personal use. If they're ripped to make bootleg copies for sale or distribution then that's a whole different ballgame and you can bet they'll have you in their crosshairs at some point. Ripping a disc to make a backup or to place it on your server for in-house distribution won't even get you on their radar.

That being said, let your conscience be your guide. Please note that I'm not condoning piracy or any act that is illegal, just the lunacy of an existing law. I fully support the idea that intellectual property should be paid for as it does belong to someone. What's stupid is making it illegal to allow me to access something I've legally paid for in a form that suits my needs.
post #109 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain_video View Post

What's stupid is making it illegal to allow me to access something I've legally paid for in a form that suits my needs.

I think Hollywood's argument is that you have NOT bought something that suits your needs --- you need to purchase additional copies to really meet your needs. When you paid for the disc you purchased the movie to be viewed on the disc and any alteration is illegal. Whether you (or I) agree with that is irrelevant. They want you to pay for multiple copies of the movie for each device it is going to be played on. So what you are doing is illegal.

Put another way if I pay $100 for my family to see a movie and then download it later is this any more or less illegal? My argument would be that I actually paid MORE than the price of the bluray. Both of us have paid Hollywood to view a movie on a very specific type of media (their movie theater vs just your bluray disc --- not a rip). What about when I pay $2 to rent a bluray but something comes up in my schedule and I don't have the time to watch it --- so I rip it to my hard drive to watch it later? I see these examples as more similar than dissimilar to your example.

I find this whole topic extremely fascinating and respect everyone's views on it. Not trying to start an argument --- merely trying to point out why some people may be more accepting of "illegal" downloading when compared and contrasted to "illegal" ripping.
Edited by assassin - 10/3/13 at 11:45am
post #110 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

I think Hollywood's argument is that you have NOT bought something that suits your needs --- you need to purchase additional copies to really meet your needs. When you paid for the disc you purchased the movie to be viewed on the disc and any alteration is illegal. Whether you (or I) agree with that is irrelevant. They want you to pay for multiple copies of the movie for each device it is going to be played on. So what you are doing is illegal.
That would be fine except for the fact that they do not offer it in the format I require. If they did then that would be another matter entirely. To keep things legal there should be a bit more leeway in the law rather than making it illegal to copy a disc for any reason, period.
Quote:
Put another way if I pay $100 for my family to see a movie and then download it later is this any more or less illegal? My argument would be that I actually paid MORE than the price of the bluray. Both of us have paid Hollywood to view a movie on a very specific type of media (their movie theater vs just your bluray disc --- not a rip). What about when I pay $2 to rent a bluray but something comes up in my schedule and I don't have the time to watch it --- so I rip it to my hard drive to watch it later? I see these examples as more similar than dissimilar to your example.
That is definitely illegal. If you pay the price of a movie ticket then you have paid for the right to view that movie in a theater. You're paying the theater owner to view it in his theater on his screen using his projector while Hollywood gets their cut. The cost of a movie ticket and concessions is exactly why I don't go to the theaters anymore, except on very rare occasions. The cost of a movie on Blu-Ray vs. renting the disc is why I don't buy hard copies either, unless it's something I know I'll watch multiple times (which is almost never). As for copying to view it later, it may be illegal, but that's where your actions behind closed doors comes into play. Who would know or even care if you watch the movie while it's in your possession or six months from now? You've paid for the right to view it at least once. When that occurs should be irrelevant, IMHO.
Quote:
I find this whole topic extremely fascinating and respect everyone's views on it. Not trying to start an argument --- merely trying to point out why some people may be more accepting of "illegal" downloading when compared and contrasted to "illegal" ripping.
Same here. It's always fun when the holier-than-thou folks crawl out of the woodwork and start wagging fingers (present company excluded, of course).
post #111 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post


I find this whole topic extremely fascinating and respect everyone's views on it. Not trying to start an argument --- merely trying to point out why some people may be more accepting of "illegal" downloading when compared and contrasted to "illegal" ripping.

This thread needs to be killed with fire but this statement sparked my interest in that I don't agree that it's fascinating. It's frustrating. This wouldn't be a topic if movie studios weren't run by complete morons. Find a delivery medium that people actually want and they will gladly pay for it. How Fing hard is it? The fact that Hollywood is incapable AND unwilling to do this is the reason people disregard the bogus, purchased laws.
post #112 of 136
I'd say it's fascinating, frustrating, and at times hilarious

XBMC makes a big stink, for example, on their forums about never mentioning the illegal add-ons like Icefilms, NaviX, and 1Channel

Yet the majority of the front-end is designated to playback stored media of gray-area-legality. It's not built for people to run over and put DVDs in their internal drives even though it does work that way as well. XBMC / Mediabrowser / all front-ends scrape the crap out of themoviedb/imdb/thetvdb/etc. Nobody is setting this stuff up just to watch home videos, etc.
post #113 of 136
Good thing the government is shut down, the NSA won't be tracking us all down today!

Lets all just agree that this forum is about the tools we use to play media once we have it in our possession or it is otherwise made available to us, and not about is not about the many means, be they illegal or legal, of coming into possession of that media.
Edited by DanPackMan - 10/3/13 at 3:50pm
post #114 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain_video View Post

That is definitely illegal.

What you are doing is "definitely illegal" as well.

That was my whole point.

As someone just said its frustrating. Fascinatingly frustrating.
post #115 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

What you are doing is "definitely illegal" as well.
Hey, who said I was doing anything? We're just talking hypothetically here. wink.gif
post #116 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain_video View Post

Hey, who said I was doing anything? We're just talking hypothetically here. wink.gif

Of course. All of this is hypothetical. wink.gif
post #117 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

Now that's a good idea! Don't want to share my 120" screen with the riff-raff though.

Paint one side of the house white, put up a projector, and bam, public movie library without letting anyone into the house. eek.gif
post #118 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

Of course. All of this is hypothetical. wink.gif

Of course it is all hypothetical talk. I don't even exist, and just a figment of all of your imagination cool.gif
post #119 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by itznfb View Post

This thread needs to be killed with fire but this statement sparked my interest in that I don't agree that it's fascinating. It's frustrating. This wouldn't be a topic if movie studios weren't run by complete morons. Find a delivery medium that people actually want and they will gladly pay for it. How Fing hard is it? The fact that Hollywood is incapable AND unwilling to do this is the reason people disregard the bogus, purchased laws.

If one were to dig deeper, and truly wanted to see what causes technology to sway one way or another, one has to look at porn. As prude of a country we are, we are the biggest producers and consumers of pornography in the world.

The true reason VHS won over betamax, was because porno industry adopted VHS. Same goes for DVD over Laserdisc, and BluRay over HDDVD.

The reason all these video compresison codecs were created is becaue of limited bandwidth and desire to download porn.

Look, porn industry has adopted to the new world. I don't know anyone who actually pays for porn, but, yet, it remains a very stable and profitable business. It is only a matter of time for the big movies studios to adjust to the way pornography is distributed.

Edit: To answer the original question, when smart TV's can get porn is when they will be widely accepted. If previous technology trends are any indication.
post #120 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiedgod View Post

when smart TV's can get porn is when they will be widely accepted. If previous technology trends are any indication.
Same goes for 3D?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Home Theater Computers
AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Home Theater Computers › With new Tvs are HTPCs needed?