AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
21 - 38 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
492 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Cliff Watson:

â€


When did converting intellectual property from its original digital format to another become legitimate under fair use? Can you site me a court case that supports this assumption?


I don't have the case name handy but it was the case that upheld the consumer's right to make cassette recordings of thier LP records.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,423 Posts
â€What is the original 'digital format', Cliff? Thats such an arbitrary definition, and it depends on the perspective you are taking.â€


The format is the ATSC “Standard†Transport Stream. But you know that.

â€Regarding DVspoof, AccessDTV files will work with it. The problem is that AccessDTV software is very unresistant to byte-errors in its files. DVspoof, being a less-secure recording format than most, will exaggerate it. However, if you had byte-errors from AccessDTV files stored on CD-ROM, the result would be the same - an unplayable file. Not so in the case of the other two cards.â€


The inability of your software to make bit perfect copies of the ADTV files for archiving to digital tape does not justify the removal of copy protection by accessDTV.



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

Best Regards, Cliff

Digital Connection, LLC

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,423 Posts
Hey, You started it by putting words in my mouth without knowing where I stand on this hacking issue. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif


It should be absolutely clear to everyone by now.


Discussion such as this in a public forum only serves to validate the concerns of the MPAA. It will eventually be determined in a court of law and I fear that a lose by the MPAA to provide copy protection for content providers will result in the reversal of the current HiDef programming. HD OTA network programming may actually continue or maybe not, however I doubt that Hollywood movies will be provided in anything other than 480p and certainly we would never get HD DVDs out of Hollywood.


And that is the last thing I have to say about it. You can now resume loading the gun for the MPAA. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/biggrin.gif



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

Best Regards, Cliff

Digital Connection, LLC

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,351 Posts
Quote:
The inability of your software to make bit perfect copies of the ADTV files for archiving to digital tape does not justify the removal of copy protection by accessDTV.
AccessDTV is free to do whatever they want with thier software, and people are free to vote with thier dollars on whatever features are important to them.


I do think that your implicit suggestion that there are no legitimate applications for having the ATSC stream unencrypted is a little self-serving, but of course YMMV.


And I agree that this discussion has run its course. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif


Andy K.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
One thing to keep in mind is that hardware copy protection has pretty much been a failure.


Those old DAT tape drives had SCMS to prevent multi generation digital copies and people were building little PC boards that would reset the SCMS bits on anything they wanted.


The DVD encryption system accidentally got leaked and tools to copy and edit DVDs are floating around the internet now.


When the latest Star Wars movie came out copies of the actual film were stolen from movie theaters and bootleg DVD versions showed up in China soon afterwards.


Anything that is done to protect the content is probably (at best) a hindrance to the "average user" and a strong reminder that you are not supposed to copy the content but some people will do it anyways.


I hope HDTV broadcasts contine to progress in spite of this issue.


=====================

p.s.: I am amazed that Napster was allowed to run unfettered for so long before agreeing to restrictions. It seemed to be the ultimate manifestation of piracy to date.


p.p.s.:

(I like the post that follows this one - thanks for the sensible information, Joe...)



[This message has been edited by boat-anchor (edited 06-04-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,270 Posts
This post is completely off topic.


The preservation of fair use by the average citizen is part of what's being discussed here. While the MPAA and RIAA have constantly lobbied against fair use it wasn't until the DMCA was passed that legal protection was given to companies that chose to implement technology that changed how the consumer could exercise their right of fair use. OK, so the consumer can vote with their pocket book and not buy products that implement restrictive technology.


What's more bothersome is that products that don't restrict fair use are becoming more the exception than the rule. If the current trend continues, at some point the consumers ability to vote with their pocket book will become a straw vote and not have any real impact.


In fact, every third party study of the Internet phenomena for copying MP3 or VCD has shown that the very same people who download movies and music are also the ones who BUY the most CDs, DVDs, or VHS tapes. Not exactly the smoking gun that the RIAA or the MPAA would like to see presented in court. Instead, they treat every download as a lost sale which in reality it is not.


DTV in general and HDTV in particular is being seen as some sort of enabling technology for the pirates of the world. In truth, digital technology gives the home or commercial pirate no more power to make good copies of intellectual property than analog technology. Distribution is what is being affected, and that's something that both the RIAA and MPAA are most concerned with, but don't have any idea of how to control.


That's both the Internet's greatest asset and one of it's greatest weaknesses as a platform for business. Companies than can adapt to the Internet will be successful over time, while companies that do not will find that the Internet doesn't allow them to retain the same control that their business model was based on. It's a painful process, but the best companies will be the most flexible and innovative and probably very successful.


At any rate, the MPAA and the RIAA have noting to fear from the AVSforum. The majority of members are on the cutting edge because we want the best that life has to offer and are somewhat willing to pay for it. We don't want to be ripped off, but we are willing to pay for what we receive. But, don't ask me a sign away my rights in order to get a better mouse trap. It's not a equitable trade and it's well within my rights to petition a company to preserve my rights since thanks to the DMCA it's no longer within my rights to always exercise them.


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,423 Posts
’I do think that your implicit suggestion that there are no legitimate applications for having the ATSC stream unencrypted is a little self-serving, but of course YMMV.â€


Again with a lame attempt at putting words in my mouth. There are many professional applications where unencrypted ATSC TS can be used with the accessDTV card without being concerned about bootleggers.


Of course your POV could never be considered self-serving.



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

Best Regards, Cliff

Digital Connection, LLC

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,351 Posts
JoeFloyd,


One train of thought is that if we dont submit to stringent copy-protection of broadcast HD material, then the MPAA will 'cut us off' and we will receive no more HD material.


The other train of thought is that if we *do* submit to said copy-protection, it starts the slippery slope to a pay-per-use world.


IMO I would sooner give up HiDef then allow all of my equipment to eventually become pay-per-use.


Cliff,


Whatever. How exactly would an accessDTV owner get unencrypted ATSC TS files to use with the many professional applications?


If your pro-copy-protection stance is really this strong, why did you ever rep the HiPix board in the first place?


Andy K.

(Oh yeah, this is way off-topic http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif )
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,909 Posts
What I want to know is, what does iTech think they are accomplishing with their current protection scheme? I'm not being facetious or asking a rhetorical question; I really want to know. After all, saving the files as unencrypted ATSC streams is by no stretch of the imagination illegal, and there are now 3 other products that do so. If somebody really wants to pirate HDTV programming, they could just buy a WinTV-D on ebay for $50.


Fact is, there are legitimate, perfectly legal reasons for consumers to want access to unencrypted recording files. Keep in mind the accessDTV doesn't currently implement QAM support (as far as I know), so we're talking strictly about OTA broadcasts here. I really don't think the MPAA is going to be too worried about a few hundred HTPC'ers recording the ABC Saturday Night Movie.


Besides, the pirates always figure out a way around these protections schemes, so it's only the legitimate customers who suffer any consequences.


I personally don't even have any need for archiving ability right now, because there's nothing showing in HD I want to keep. (I still prefer DVD's for movies, becuase image resolution isn't the only important thing for me). BUT, I reserve the right to want to so if I ever change my mind. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif After all, I have a WinTV-D in my workstation, and being able to record files on one card and play them on the other might be useful.


What also bothers me about the accessDTV file system is that it makes archiving and restoring individual recordings just about impossible, even if you only want to play them back on the same card that recorded them. Right now, you pretty much have to backup/restore the whole recording folder if you want things to work right. Not only do you have those annoying GUID-generated filenames, you also need more than just the transport stream files themselves to play back. Cliff, if you're still reading this thread, I think iTech needs to address this even if they don't drop the encryption scheme, because the current filesystem is just too klunky.


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

Jeff Kohn
http://home.houston.rr.com/jeffkohn
My DVD Profiler Collection
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,423 Posts
â€Whatever. How exactly would an accessDTV owner get unencrypted ATSC TS files to use with the many professional applications?â€


Become an industry professional.

â€If your pro-copy-protection stance is really this strong, why did you ever rep the HiPix board in the first place?â€


My pro copy protection stance is MINE alone (not that of the company) and is based on the strong belief that in the digital age HDTV and other sources of HD video will die without some form of content protection.


Don’t get me wrong, I really would like to believe that my fellow man would use all HD recording products for time shifting in the manner provided by our courts instead of sending unencrypted copies to other people or bootlegging.


This digital issue will make it to the courts sooner or later. I would prefer sooner than later so that digital rights can be determine and we can get on with the development of the digital age, including the full implementation of DTV. I don’t have another 60 years to wait for this development and would really like to see it within my lifetime. Oil lamps to HiDef DVD on a big projector screen in a single lifetime, that’s progress.

â€The other train of thought is that if we *do* submit to said copy-protection, it starts the slippery slope to a pay-per-use world.â€


Well if that happens you are always free to vote with your dollars. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif



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

Best Regards, Cliff

Digital Connection, LLC

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,423 Posts
"Cliff, if you're still reading this thread, I think iTech needs to address this even if they don't drop the encryption scheme, because the current filesystem is just too klunky."


Agreed



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

Best Regards, Cliff

Digital Connection, LLC

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,270 Posts
kromkamp,


Yeah, the argument of withholding until copy protection is ensured is already being felt with DVD Audio or 96Khz digital output from DVD video players. HDTV will/is experience the same painful realization on the part of the media companies. The part I don't understand is that every third party study of purchasing trends within the context of the digital distribution aware demographic points to increased sales. I.E. the technology savvy are also the ones who trend toward buying the current and new media formats that the media companies are already trying to sell us.


Just to bring the point home, the facts show that when somebody downloads a song, it's actually more likely they will buy the whole album. Is that such a hard thing to belive? I know that for me, one of my favorite parts of a CD or DVD purchase are the extras like CD inserts, or directors commentary. You don't get that from Napster.


The only reasonable explanation of the paranoia that is rampant within the intellectual property community is that with easy access to intellectual property you have to do more work to ensure that consumer will come to you for that access. Added features, easier access, better marketing, better technology are all good reasons for the consumer to choose to go to WWW.SONY.COM to get the music or movies they want rather than to Napster.


In the end the consumer will be better served, and there will be more actual value in the things we chose to pay for. Companies that fight this trend will be fighting a consumer driven phenomena and may not be successful. As a self proclaimed technology GEEK , it's clear to me that the technology being developed to maintain the status quo is just a stop gap. All technology is flawed or can be circumvented.


In terms of HDTV recording, there is nothing to prevent the major studios from preventing the broadcast of their content on free to air networks. The value of their film library would decrease as a result, but that's their decision.


Even with the current STB available there is a huge security flaw that the MPAA is trying very hard to rectify. At some point within the next 10 years it will be possible to purchase or download for free video encoding software that runs on a very fast future PC that can compress analog HDTV in real time. An analog HDTV capture card will likely take about that long to come to market as a consumer product, but there is no doubt that someday it will. That's just the reality that comes from the rapid progress of technology. It won't be cheap, but it will be possible.



Of course, copy protected digital connection formats are 100% incompatible with the current technology we all have invested in so if I vote with my pocket book it wont be for incompatible technology. If I'm not given a choice, then I think we've all lost something very valuable. Being early adopters the choices we make are somewhat more closely examined by the media and consumer electronics companies vs. well established products and markets.


So, I hope that discussion of fair use are never seen as a waste of time since being a well informed consumer is often tied to the technology of the product and how it affect fair use. At least that seems to be the case these days.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,818 Posts
Discussion Starter #35
I think that Cliff has made his concerns clear. However, I think he has a better idea of what people think of the proprietary file format for accessDTV http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif


Hopefully, Itech group will take a close look at this thread and also get a good idea of what people would like to see change.


Remember, this is only a small sample of people who dare to speak their thoughts. There are some shy people in the forum which have chosen to keep quiet about this topic in fear of being flamed.




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

-Michael

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
848 Posts

Quote:
So, I hope that discussion of fair use are never seen as a waste of time ...
Not quite an accusation of censorship, but certainly not my main point.


How about next time let's put this vitally important repetition in HDTV Programming forum because its charter is:

Quote:
For the talk about HDTV programming. Both DBS and OTA. This also includes legal issues pertaining to HDTV signals vs. HDTV programming and copyrights.
This Home Theater Computers forum is supposed to be about:

Quote:
Computers as progressive scan DVD player, video processor, HDTV tuner, music jukebox, automation controller, Internet/game machine, and more.
I hope you're not all taking "more" to mean "especially copyright."


Pardon me, but, "Sheesh!"


-yogaman
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,909 Posts
Quote:
How about next time let's put this vitally important repetition in HDTV Programming forum because its charter is:[snip]
To be fair, the copyright/fair-use issue came up within the context of discussing a PC card, so it's not entirely off-topic, although I agree we don't want to topic to drift too far down that road.


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

Jeff Kohn
http://home.houston.rr.com/jeffkohn
My DVD Profiler Collection
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,818 Posts
Discussion Starter #38
^ Bump ^ for Itech group to see consumer demand.


PS: I hope you guys dont mind. I am going to try to lock this thread since it doesn't seem it is necessary to add any more comments. Itech hopefully will get our messages loud and clear.


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

-Michael

[email protected]
 
21 - 38 of 38 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top