AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
651 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
With Hollywood forcing adoption of DVI/HDCP by both

E* & D* (and chances of D* becoming part of Fox soon)

and stated availability of DVI-only STB by "next year",

we are looking at some pretty darn grim future in couple

of years from now.


Under the mask of "content protection" MPAA is showing

HDCP down everyone's throat, with the real intention of

taking away our ability to record (timeshift) content.


As a side bonus, our $4-$10K HDTV investment is to become

useless for some, if not most, if not all, HDTV content.


This is how Congress, Dish & DTV, 5C etc all are about to thank us for being gunea pigs in the expensive HDTV experiment.


If we do see DVU-only STBs plus DVI-enabled HDTV monitors

available sometime next year, they might as well start using that little black-out circuit in our STB, which would mean no more HD movies.


While no damage is done right now, and any real stuff is about 1 year away, sitting on our behinds and doing nothing,

while hoping that decency and common sense would prevail

is the surest way to turn our investments into $10K door

stops.


Just when some of us though that much more liberal, yet

reasonably secure 5C over Firewire has won, MPAA has stirred

up the pot yet again. We are looking at absolutely crazy mix of 5C/1394 & DVI/HDCP, that have nothing in common and are absolutely sure to cause even more confusion.


So what do we do ???


Offense being the best form of defense, I think some1 (us ?) has to challenge MPAA over fair-use act. Now, it is very tough to prove that MPAA is responsible for lack of HDTV-recording gear in this country (which defacto takes

away our fair-use HD recording rights).


I am sure copy of correspondence between MPAA & Panasonic,

where MPAA blackmailed Panasonic into withdrawing the only HD recorder we ever had from the market, would hit the spot

in court (or Congressional hearings), but I am even more

sure those letters were tripple-shredded.


We can start contacting D* and E* and ask them about what

is to happen to our HDTV monitors, by the time the only

way to feed HD into them would be via DVI from DVI-enabled

STBs and there is no DVI connector on our HDTVs ?


What about ongoing de-facto consumer fraud, that is happening right now, when every CE store is flooded with HDTV sets, that are not compatible, and can NOT be made compatible with the bright new DVI/HDCP future that MPAA, E* and D* have in mind for us ?!


If some1 was fooled into paying $20 for merchandise that

doesn't work as adv'd, it is a perfect story for 60 Minutes.


We have hundreds of Americans fleeced every day out of thousands of dollars in your local CE stores, yet no1 is

watching.


As an owner of Mits HDTV I was rather content with the idea of eventual 5C/1394 adoption by the industry and having to pay extra $700 or so to FireWire-enable my RPTV, in exchange of finally being able to record HD.


But this DVI/HDCP stuff is back again, with vengeance, and it is really upsetting me, as it should everybody else on this forum and in this country, for that matter.


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,771 Posts
Talking about it won't do a thing. We need a LAWSUIT. That's the only way to win. That, or get a powerful Congressman on our side (one that doesn't kill interns).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
I agree totally.


I find it very disturbing that I might have to take a $4000+ loss due to equipment manufactures not figuring this out a long time ago. It seems very unfair that they feel it necessary to change standards after people have invested major amounts of money, time, and effort into this technology. Just to satisfy their paranoia about pirates, and a non-existent HDTV black market.


Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem with the MPPA wanting to have control over digital content, just not at my expense please.


I’ve seen lots of information about what they are going (or wanting) to do, but no one seems to be commenting on what we, the people driving this damn market, are going to be left with. I don’t think it is even an option for them to just leave us high and dry. It’s unfair to say “Ohhh, those early adopters are loaded, let them take the loss for our mistakes and lack of communicationâ€. That is BS!

I don’t care how much money you make, I for one will be paying on my equipment for a long time, and I am by no means loaded.


To expect me to take a loss like this is absurd, and I will not stand for it! If I have to, I’ll call every local TV station, radio, newspaper, congressman, etc, and organizing a grass roots protest. No way I am just going to get bent over because of a mistake or mis-information on their part, NO WAY!


For starters, I would say every E* owner should write Charlie, and ask him what they plan to do about us?
http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/a...at/index.shtml


And every D* owner should do the same (But with D* respectfully).


I don’t know about you, but I’m not going to get flushed down the drain without a big fight and an awful mess.


Someone needs to start addressing our concerns, and soon.


Bill



[This message has been edited by Barista (edited 07-26-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,304 Posts
Nobody is going to address any concerns if they don't know about them. This issue miraculously (or maybe not) has managed to slip under the media's radar without any mention. I say the first thing to do is get the word out. Contact every media outlet you can think of. Local Newspapers and Local TV Stations' consumer affairs reporters are a good place to start.


------------------

Vic Ruiz
STOP HDCP/DFAST/5C


[This message has been edited by vruiz (edited 07-26-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,128 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Mkwillia:
I have already contacted DirecTV about this.....I will share my response when I get one.
ROTFLMAOPIMP!!!


Don't hold your breath!


DTV has had my (and a couple dozen others') for two weeks now about CBSHD issue and only form letters sent back.


That's a good one!


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,082 Posts
I wrote to E* as soon as I saw the news. Their standard is to respond within 48 hours and that has almost always been the case in the past. I will let you know what they say about this. I fully expect some canned response but i wanted to give their regular contacts a chance before kicking it to Charlie.


There is also a Tech Chat on Monday 8-6-01. We could bombard them with calls about this issue as well.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
760 Posts
After reviewing a lot of these threads, I have concluded that I do not mind the copy protection for HDTV. I think the forthcoming HDTV PVRs will allow time shifting since it appears one will not be able to transfer the signal to a DVD or Tape.


I think we will still be able to copy and record SDTV programs. So if one cannot watch a HDTV program, one can record it in SDTV and watch it later.


I know this is not what some members of this board want. They want to record digital HDTV without limits.


I think fair use and time shifting will still be around for SDTV but maybe not for HDTV.


Any comments?


------------------

Hot
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
891 Posts
Fair use is fair use, and should be available for ALL formats that are being mandated by the government.


I recommend keeping the EFF up-to-date. They have good laywers that are into just the kind of stuff, and have won some big cases before.


[This message has been edited by Chris Carollo (edited 07-26-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,602 Posts
Make no mistake about it, these developments are by no means related to "content protection". What the MPAA really wants here is PPP (pay per play), in effect holding us all hostage to a DIVX-style business model. "Content Protection" is merely an elaborate smokescreen to hide their true intentions.


------------------

STOP DVI/HDCP; Boycott JVC
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
779 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by RickD_99:
Make no mistake about it, these developments are by no means related to "content protection". What the MPAA really wants here is PPP (pay per play), in effect holding us all hostage to a DIVX-style business model. "Content Protection" is merely an elaborate smokescreen to hide their true intentions.

I don't understand the fear of pay per play, if the market doesn't accept it, it will be tossed out and if the market likes the model it will be a success. I know I hate the existing PPP models so regardless of what they do I would most likely not use it. Unless they came up with some very innovative method that I thought had real value. I am more concerned with my equipment becoming useless.


Regards,


Brian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,128 Posts
Chris, "fair use" wiil not be found to apply to HD, if and when it goes to the courts. HD is master-quality and studios have all rights to that level of quality. If and when they decide to make it available in HD-DVD for a price, that's literally THEIR business. Just because people have gotten used to being able to record doesn't mean they still get to when the technology improves as much as HD has.

Brian, pay per play is a likely model for the future distribution of home entertainment, given digital broadband technologies. You're right, it's not so bad. Say, the next film is released Friday. With the coming technologies, I can watch it at home, with better sound, no kids throwing popcorn, and even maybe time-shift it a bit if I need to. For say five bucks for recent stuff, 10 for first release. Pretty good, huh?

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
779 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by gnosys:
Chris, "fair use" wiil not be found to apply to HD, if and when it goes to the courts. HD is master-quality and studios have all rights to that level of quality. If and when they decide to make it available in HD-DVD for a price, that's literally THEIR business. Just because people have gotten used to being able to record doesn't mean they still get to when the technology improves as much as HD has.

Brian, pay per play is a likely model for the future distribution of home entertainment, given digital broadband technologies. You're right, it's not so bad. Say, the next film is released Friday. With the coming technologies, I can watch it at home, with better sound, no kids throwing popcorn, and even maybe time-shift it a bit if I need to. For say five bucks for recent stuff, 10 for first release. Pretty good, huh?

What part of "I know I hate the existing PPP models so regardless of what they do I would most likely not use it." was so hard to understand. My point is if we don't like it and don't use it it will fail.


IMO 1080i is not master print quality there are higher standards that that.


BTW do you work for the MPAA, a studio? When you say things like "model for the future distribution of home entertainment" you sound like you are quoting some MPAA propaganda. I think you are selling to the wrong crowd.


Regards,


Brian

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
gnosys may have been sarcastic (or not), but he has just described the basic studio position.


Studios are not interested in publishing media, and so copyright is irrelevant (it only applies to published works). Studios are interesting in showing media, and since the first days of Hollywood have charged per showing. The home recording act and such merely say, "if you publish it, people are allowed to copy it for personal use." Thanks to advances in technology, studios can now say, "OK, no problem. We won't publish it."


Digital distribution and copy protection allows them to do this. Instead of publishing a movie (or any piece of media), the digital representation remains a trade secret, protected by the DMCA, with consumers able to purchase individual viewings.


From the studio point of view, you don't have any rights to record or timeshift their content, only to view it if you purchase a viewing. They are extremely hot on video-on-demand for just this reason: it removes any need for "time shifting", since you can just request any content at any time (after paying the appropriate viewing fee, of course).


Is pay per play ridiculous? If you are a consumer, yes indeed. Not if you are a studio--if you are a studio, it's the way things have always been and always will be, except for a few decades when people could record things off the air.


Amanda Walker
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by btmoore:
I don't understand the fear of pay per play, if the market doesn't accept it, it will be tossed out and if the market likes the model it will be a success. I know I hate the existing PPP models so regardless of what they do I would most likely not use it. Unless they came up with some very innovative method that I thought had real value. I am more concerned with my equipment becoming useless.


Regards,


Brian
DIVX failed because people didn't want their play button turned into a pay button and DVD was the other method. MPAA failed with DIVX because people had a choice. MPAA learned their lesson, MPAA has made sure there is only one way to view HDTV ith DVI/HDCP or 5c both ways MPAA is in control both ways your existing technology is a boat anchor. If there is only one method that method will pravail. This is more then just recording HDTV, with this scheme you can't view HDTV either without purchasing new hardware. i.e new TV/projector



Jim


[This message has been edited by harlock (edited 07-26-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,113 Posts
Can someone tell me what our "fair use" rights are? I thought it meant if you buy an HDTV, that means you are entitled to use it for HDTV not SDTV. If they(MPAA) try to render our sets ineffective, then can't we sue? Someone on this forum must know the 'ins and outs' of this law and how should proceed.


JediMastr


------------------

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,564 Posts
The core of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act:
Quote:
a) VIOLATIONS REGARDING CIRCUMVENTION OF TECHNOLOGICAL MEASURES.-(1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
IMHO ,when copy protection is in place all 'fair use' has no meaning. If no protection free material is provided, there is nothing to which the 'fair use' provision apply. That is, 'fair use' only applies when there is no copyright protection on the material.


The DMCA provides severe penalties for attempting to circumvent any copy protection applied and the 'Fair Use' provisions of the Copyright Act (and the specific DMCA re-iteration of those provisions) apply only to material that is provided without software or hardware copyright protection.



------------------

Alex


[This message has been edited by work permit (edited 07-26-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
936 Posts


Before we get our balls in an uproar, DMC hasn't been throughly tested in court. It's happening as we speak.


The copyright issues we now face are not natural laws. Congress gives, Congress takes. When the MPAA takes on several million voters, MPAA loses.


Just because DVI/HDCP is available, it doesn't mean it will be used. Witness the ability of DirecTV and Dish to disable HD broadcasts. They can, but they don't.


Just $.02,

Mike
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top