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

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
Chew on it for what purpose? I've already posted (maybe in the Tivo forum though) that any Tivo owner should be pulling for SonicBlue to win this thing.


Also, just looking at what's been mentioned so far, I don't see what the networks expect to win on. Sharing shows - as long as the copy protection, if any, is respected, what's the problem? CommercialSkip - VCR's have had the same exact feature for about 10 years, right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,119 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Right... I think this one is gonna be big and it's fun to be here on the ground level. You can't ask for better publicity than this. The more silly Metallica and Miss Rosen got, the bigger Napster balooned. And there is one little difference here too... Sonic Blue has a business plan already in place. (Even beating expectations in the current climate) And it will be easy enough to fine tune this product to remain legal without stomping on us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
536 Posts
It sure is free publicity for Replay/sonic blue. I don't think the networks will win this one. It appears they are reacting to what they THINK a problem is, when it really isn't an issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
312 Posts
Does anyone think that, if it doesn't get taken out via a loss in a lawsuit, that the commercial skip will trickle down to the older ReplayTV/Showstoppers? I mean is it a hardware or software feature? Will they need to maintain 2 versions of firmware to support both types of DVRs or will it be added in 4.0 or something?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by theedge
Does anyone think that, if it doesn't get taken out via a loss in a lawsuit, that the commercial skip will trickle down to the older ReplayTV/Showstoppers? I mean is it a hardware or software feature? Will they need to maintain 2 versions of firmware to support both types of DVRs or will it be added in 4.0 or something?
One of the Replay guys specifically said that there is no way for the CommercialSkip feature to function on the current models.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
826 Posts
I've read all of these articles. The smoke and mirrors over commercial skip isn't what this is about. They're afraid of two things:


1. The network capabilities. Distributing a program over a network, especially DSL or cable modem, could potentially be "rebroadcasting".


2. The Motorola Connection---putting the RePlay in a major cable box spreads the technology to a whole new public. Once Ma and Pa get a taste of this technology, they aren't going back down to the farm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
536 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by hroeder
I've read all of these articles. The smoke and mirrors over commercial skip isn't what this is about. They're afraid of two things:


1. The network capabilities. Distributing a program over a network, especially DSL or cable modem, could potentially be "rebroadcasting".

But the term broadcasting does not apply here. To broadcast you would be sending out the show for the general public to watch as you send it.


Distributing is the term, IMHO, that would apply. But you can give a copy of a tape to a friend or friends by hand.. it's just the distribution channel is different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,207 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by NJChris
But you can give a copy of a tape to a friend or friends by hand.. it's just the distribution channel is different.
But even doing THAT is illegal, isn't it? So making it easier to break the law is an issue.


They may not go after people who makes tapes for a friend, but that doesn't make it legal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
452 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by RandyL712
But even doing THAT is illegal, isn't it? So making it easier to break the law is an issue.


They may not go after people who makes tapes for a friend, but that doesn't make it legal.
Actually, under the current legal (as opposed to corporate) interpretation of "Fair Use", it is legal to make a couple of copies for friends or relatives. The big issue that they got Napster on was the unrestrained distribution. AIMster is using just this interpretation of fair use to try to slip under the radar scope - it only distributes to your "Buddies". I don't think that it will fly long-term - just being on a buddy list is probably not restrictive enough for the courts.


We are in the middle of a war between what the law sees as "fair use", and what the corporations want "fair use" to be. Under the law, we have a reasonable amount of lattitude over who, how and why we can share with others. Under the corporate interpretation, they don't want us sharing with ourselves (ripping MP3s for personal use). They don't even want us to have the right to skip commercials.


Are they insane enough to think the courts will actually buy it? Sadly, yes. Fortunately, many courts are run by a guy/gal with a couple of neurons still firing, although it seems to be tougher to find them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
826 Posts
Whenever these come up I'm reminded of the early days of television. Television was going to "Destroy the Movies". Of course it had the opposite effect.


But Time Shift is something that the networks have yet to cope with. As is cable TV. They want their captive audience. The end result is that soon someone while measure how much your show is watched and how much it's recorded. And then the advertizing rates will be adjusted. Stupid? But advertizers want to line their pockets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,119 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
"Bad News for ReplayTV 4000" to quote Rupert's TV guide. Well is it any surprise he might see it that way?? After he was rejected in his bid for DirectTV and his stock falling... and didn't he used to be like the forth or fifth major network?? (well PBS) So why is he not in the suit??? Maybe too busy loosing DirectTV? I do like the Fox network but I like it even better watching it commercial free on a Replay!!! And that could prove even easier on a 4000!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,115 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by scochran666



Actually, under the current legal (as opposed to corporate) interpretation of "Fair Use", it is legal to make a couple of copies for friends or relatives. The big issue that they got Napster on was the unrestrained distribution. AIMster is using just this interpretation of fair use to try to slip under the radar scope - it only distributes to your "Buddies". I don't think that it will fly long-term - just being on a buddy list is probably not restrictive enough for the courts.


We are in the middle of a war between what the law sees as "fair use", and what the corporations want "fair use" to be. Under the law, we have a reasonable amount of lattitude over who, how and why we can share with others. Under the corporate interpretation, they don't want us sharing with ourselves (ripping MP3s for personal use). They don't even want us to have the right to skip commercials.
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that taping and sharing tapes does not fall under fair use. In order for this guideline to exist you have to use the material for editorial (the press) or educational purposes, you can't use a significant portion of the material (a quote from a book is ok, reprinting the whole thing -- or even a full chapter is not), and it cannot affect the ability of the creator/copyright owner to benefit from the creation.


1) John Doe is not taping "Enterprise" for the purpose of educational or editorial purposes, particularly if the copy is meant for other people to use. That is re-distribution of a copyright creation (you can't just photocopy a whole book to lend to a friend).


2) You can't use a significant portion of the creation--copying a whole show is using the entire portion of the creation.


3) If you copy the program and redistribute it several times, you do affect the ability of the creator to benefit from the creation.


Broadcasters turn a blind eye to some infringement. It is in their best interest. However I too think that the broadcasters will lose the suit because SonicBlue is playing by the "copy protect" rules by allowing broadcasters to determine which programs can be distributed and which cannot.


Now, I am not a lawyer, but I do have significant experience in the realm of copyright law as it pertains to the cultural industry. And truthfully we are in a new realm here--much like the situation with photocopiers in the 70's. American law works through precedent and whomever wins this one will be setting the precedent by which all other suits will be measured.


Best,

Matthew in CO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
I don't see how SonicBlue could have picked a worse time to introduce the 4000's, and this lawsuit is just one more thing they don't need right now. I would be willing to bet that November 15 will come and go without any orders being filled (on units as originally described).


Dave W.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
536 Posts
From what I've been reading, the law "favors" non-profit, educational purposes. I'm not under the impression it excludes other purposes.


Also, the nature of the copyrighted work is taken into account. I'd like to know just *how* a network is hurt by letting someone see their program? It's not like Napster and trading MP3's that are in stores. Wouldn't it be similar to taping it off the radio and giving it to a friend? It's not like the TV version would be as good quality as a DVD. It wouldn't. There is no Dolby Digital, for one, in the signal. There are many other differences that would not make this a perfect copy of what you could get in a store, unlike MP3s.


One of the most important factors, I've read, is how the copying affects the market for that copyright/show. I don't see how the market is affected adversely by sending Buffy to a friend to watch.


On the other hand, I'm also not sure if fair use applies to cable & satellite. I thought it was just for broadcast signals that you do not pay to get them (such as with cable & satellite).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
826 Posts
Fox is FOX the movie people.

WB is Warner Brothers.

Disney is one of the all time "rights suers" and now they're a network competitor.

AOL-Time-Warner.



These people don't care if you record Buffy and share it with your friend. They are antsy as hell about digital copies. Sure S-VHS looks almost like a professional recording when done from a good source and at high speed. But VHS isn't professional quality. But these new machine will come with S-Video and/or component.


Replay is just an easier target than Panosonic. The DVD recorder I mentioned in another thread has them just as worried. It's why the current home DVD format is only no becoming compatible with DVD player standards. Because they're afraid of pirates.


If I can get a whole film into my computer I can do almost anything with it. People crack them now. But distribution is hard. And it's a lot of work. Six or eight or ten hours per film. But if you have it connected directly to a network, and broadband access. . .


They're afraid of China, and Bosnia, and these other places which don't honor copyright law. I swap DVDs. There are loads of people in Eastern Europe who want those DVDs because they actually use projection equipment and run movie theaters.


This is the redux that Sony faced when it released the first Betamax. And wait until that DVD recorder player is down to $400.


Remember, this is Hollyweird, where they don't even want to pay the royalties they've contracted for. Money Money Money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
536 Posts
But they are going after the wrong people then.


The average consumer isn't out to pirate. And, honestly, the big-time pirates (who distribute tons of copies) will find a way to do it regardless of the home-consumer products.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
George Lucas has already said that the world will go filmless. In his vision, movies will be beamed via sattelite to theaters, which will show them, then delete them for the next movie when the time comes. IMHO, this is much more of a video pirates's wet dream than the Replay 4000. It's a lot easier to intercept a sattelite broadcast, and it will be first run films. Why don't we hear anything about that? (Maybe because we just talk PVR's here, but you get my drift.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
536 Posts
George needs a little ego-deflation.


Maybe filmless... but I doubt it will be satellite driven. Just think of the problems.. watching Darth Vadar turn to pixels as rain fade sets in. heheeh
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top