AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
21 - 40 of 298 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Quote:
Also, my testing on the Philips DSR6000 IR control was not successful.
I use mine with a DSR6000 just fine. All the remote codes work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
130 Posts
I think a great feature would be a built in channel guide, something like guide plus(for those of us who plan to use regular cable as to not disturb those using the digital). I also dont think it would be do difficult of a software add-on(but i could be wrong)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I saw a previous post about possible beta testing on a WIN2K platform, I would be very interested in being part of that testing,


I have heard SOLID reviews of the product and its technology. Great Job!


Best of luck
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Something like guide plus would require a bit more infrastructure and a bit more setup for the user. They would have to select what kind of service they have, who their service is through, and what package they have, and any extras they have. I could easily foresee it being more confusing for a user personally, especially since most systems have a guide channel (on cable).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenW
I also have multiple TiVo boxes. From my testing it appears you use the "0" code that will operate any TiVo. This can cause a TiVo to reset to using code "0", causing no end of problems. The software should allow us to pick the code, from 0 to 9, with the default set to "0".
This already happened to me - what a pain. I absolutely LOVE the slingbox, but you guys have to add the remote address codes to the database for each TiVo remote. Please. The only other alternative for me is to buy an additional DTiVo and put it in my computer closet and have it dedicated to slingbox - not exactly what I was envisioning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
I would like to see if somehow additional user added remote codes could be added for devices not currently available. This would allow for devices not found to somehow be manually added to the Slingbox codes. Currently only listed codes can be used.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
130 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by gagorder
Something like guide plus would require a bit more infrastructure and a bit more setup for the user. They would have to select what kind of service they have, who their service is through, and what package they have, and any extras they have. I could easily foresee it being more confusing for a user personally, especially since most systems have a guide channel (on cable).
I think i misrepresented what I wanted. I dont really want a guideplus type service on the box itself. I would have it on the client end, basically it would be a built in a version of something like tv guides website when you go to listing grid, where alll you do is basically enter your zip code and cable provider. The only difference would be the ability to click a channel you want to go to by click on the show thats on the channel, and that it would be built into the program.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,078 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grampa
I really don't think this is anything like the Grokster case. There, the Court emphasized the substantial evidence tending to show that Grokster was not only facilitating copyright infringement, but actively encouraging it. Sling Media has never encouraged unlawful behavior; the fact that each user needs to enter a unique device code and password, and that everyone using the Slingbox must watch the same content, indicates that the Slingbox is intended only for personal use. Moreover, the Grokster case involved massive file sharing, which arguably has a devastating economic effect on the recording industry. The Slingbox, even with a five-user maximum, is narrow-cast, and will have negligible economic effect. In the case of broadcast TV, the Slingbox user even sees all of the advertising that pays for the content. I don't see allowing multiple users as much different from having a cable splitter or distribution system within the home, except that it has greater geographic reach. It is certainly no worse than Shoutcast.
Yes, Sling has emphasized that they don't condone the illegal or improper sharing of content. But so did the Grokster folks. Of course, they were talking out of both sides of their mouths as they were directly benefiting from the illegal use and really doing very little to stop it.


By limiting the number of streams to one per box, Sling is taking a very active role in thwarting rampant misuse of their product. The possibility for abuse is readily apparent to anyone who understands what the Slingbox does, so Sling can't claim that they don't know that it could be used in such a manner. The single stream limitation gives them real ground to stand on by making the device one to one vs one to many. The flipside argument they'd have to make is how multiple streams not only constitute fair use, but also are more likely to be used for proper sharing vs improper. They'd really just be opening themselves up to liability. The fact that the content stream is the same regardless of the number of users actually gives the copyright owners of that content more of a leg to stand on as multiple streams could infringe upon their works multiple times at once.


Your cable argument doesn't hold water as splitting a cable signal within a household is well within the rights of a cable subscriber. Splitting that signal at your house and sending a line over to your buddy's house next door, is not. I'm not talking about proper use of the technology where multiple members of the same household happen to be in different locations and want to watch the same content streamed from home. I'm talking about improper use akin to the sharing with your buddy example above, except that the conduit is the Slingbox via the internet. Even one stream of that type would be considered improper use, let alone multiple.


Even for broadcast TV, I would strongly argue that any professional sports organization would have something to say about their games being slung across the web to out of region viewers. They have subscription based services for that kind of thing and would argue that such sharing directly cuts into that revenue. This type of sharing can and will happen and has even been mentioned on the boards. I wouldn't be surprised if "sharing boards" or clubs spring up to pair interested viewers with willing sharers. In an extreme case, you could see money changing hands for the privledge.


So, while Sling knows the technology could be abused (as so many accepted and legal technologies can these days), they have to take reasonable precautions to prevent improper use. Sure, the individuals who improperly use are the primary offenders, but any chance the big boys have to take down a facilitating company or technology, they'll certainly do it. It doesn't make sense for Sling to expose themselves to additional risk unnecesarily.


Oh, by the way, using Shoutcast to broadcast copyrighted works IS ILLEGAL! Don't think so? Check the RIAA's FAQ on webcasting here and even a recent thread in Shoutcast's own forums on the subject here .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
rgbyhkr,


Very well said. SlingMedia has taken an unprecedented step in their effort to prevent piracy. Including the following.


1) A VERY specific TOS/AUP/EULA

2) A 32 character unique identifier required to connect to a slingbox.

3) A password required to connect to the slingbox

4) Allowing only a single user to watch the slingbox at a time.

5) User selectable port for the slingbox

6) Required proprietary software to be able to view what is on the slingbox.


Any of these alone may be weak, but implemented all at once as sling has done is absolutely phenomenal compared to what many products/hacks do.


On another note about it being a "re-broadcaster" or a "Personal Broadcaster" those are truly inaccurate terms in my opinion. The slingbox is more of an extension cord for your cable TV. You are extending where you can view YOUR cable signal that YOU bought, so that YOU or YOUR FAMILY may watch it.


-gagorder
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by gagorder
rgbyhkr,


Very well said. SlingMedia has taken an unprecedented step in their effort to prevent piracy. Including the following.


1) A VERY specific TOS/AUP/EULA

2) A 32 character unique identifier required to connect to a slingbox.

3) A password required to connect to the slingbox

4) Allowing only a single user to watch the slingbox at a time.

5) User selectable port for the slingbox

6) Required proprietary software to be able to view what is on the slingbox.


Any of these alone may be weak, but implemented all at once as sling has done is absolutely phenomenal compared to what many products/hacks do.


On another note about it being a "re-broadcaster" or a "Personal Broadcaster" those are truly inaccurate terms in my opinion. The slingbox is more of an extension cord for your cable TV. You are extending where you can view YOUR cable signal that YOU bought, so that YOU or YOUR FAMILY may watch it.


-gagorder
As far as I remember TIVO got official approval from the FCC for up to 10 clients being able to access content from 1 Tivo. I need to go back and look for the press release and will try and post it here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvrman
As far as I remember TIVO got official approval from the FCC for up to 10 clients being able to access content from 1 Tivo. I need to go back and look for the press release and will try and post it here.
Here is the article from USA Today

FCC Lets TiVo Users Send Shows 'Anywhere They Go' Technology Gets Approval


TiVo users will be able to zap recorded programs over the Internet to their offices or vacation homes under new rules for the emerging digital TV world that federal regulators approved Wednesday.


The Federal Communications Commission gave its blessing to 13 technologies that will enable copying digital programs for personal use while preventing their mass distribution on the Internet.


But TiVo's technology offers the most leeway for its subscribers to copy shows. The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) says that could pave the way for ''indiscriminate'' redistribution.


The FCC's action follows its decision last fall to require electronics products to include encryption technology, known as the ''broadcast flag,'' to prevent digital shows from being blasted over the Internet.


Most of the technologies approved Wednesday by the FCC -- including those developed by Microsoft, RealNetworks and Thomson -- allow digital broadcasts to be copied and transferred to a PC or laptop only within the home.

TiVo's system would let subscribers register up to 10 devices they could attach to PCs or other TiVo devices anywhere. The gadgets would unscramble encrypted shows. The feature is an extension of the company's TiVoToGo service, to be introduced this fall.'It's all about giving consumers the flexibility to enjoy their entertainment anywhere they go,'' says TiVo spokeswoman Kathryn Kelly. TiVo offers a digital video recorder that lets users easily record shows and pause live programs.


But the National Football League worries a TiVo user could give the unscrambling devices to friends or sell them to others who could then watch games transmitted via the Internet that might be blacked out in their markets.


Also, the MPAA says viewers who receive the digital recordings via the Web would be less likely to watch broadcasts with commercials on their local stations, cutting into advertising revenue.


''It's the indiscriminate distribution that concerns us,'' says MPAA counsel Fritz Attaway. ''There's no effective controls on where and to whom you send this.''


Kelly disagreed, saying, ''We have the right technology and security in place to prevent that.'' She was not more specific but noted TiVo subscribers would pay monthly fees for each unscrambling device, making it less likely they would share it.


''We're moving to a world where people are connected in many different places, and they'll want to use television in many different ways,'' says Alan Davidson of the Center for Democracy and Technology.


Source: USA Today
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
542 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgbyhkr
So, while Sling knows the technology could be abused (as so many accepted and legal technologies can these days), they have to take reasonable precautions to prevent improper use.
I believe you are misreading the Grokster case. The Court in Grokster held that a party could be found liable for contributory infringement where it "distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement." The Court expressly declined to require parties to take "reasonable precautions" to prevent possible abuse:


"Of course, in the absence of other evidence of intent, a court would

be unable to find contributory infringement liability merely based on a

failure to take affirmative steps to prevent infringement, if the device

otherwise was capable of substantial noninfringing uses. Such a

holding would tread too close to the Sony safe harbor."


Indeed, it is the safe harbor of the Sony case that protects Sling Media. First, there is no question that the Slingbox has substantial noninfringing uses. Second, for the reasons outlined by gagorder, Sling has clearly NOT encouraged infringing behavior (Grokster may have claimed it discouraged abuse, but you cannot read the Court's opinion without feeling the influence of overwhelming evidence to the contrary). Third, unlike file swapping in the Grokster case, it is not clear that the bulk of direct Slingbox use will itself be infringing, so contributory infringement by Sling would be very difficult to show. Placeshifting is more akin to the timeshifting found in Sony, much of which was found to be either authorized or fair use.


The great fear of the entertainment industry is digital copying which leads to mass distribution of protected material. With Sling, you are conveying material that is analog, not digital; generally live, not copied (even with copied material such as with Tivo, the player must be running in real time); and narrowcast, not broadcast. All I am suggesting is that Sling could support a handful of simultaneous viewers, all of whom must have a box code and password, and nobody but the owner would have control of the content. To me, this is not too different from inviting the neighbors over to watch TV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,078 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grampa
I believe you are misreading the Grokster case. The Court in Grokster held that a party could be found liable for contributory infringement where it "distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement." The Court expressly declined to require parties to take "reasonable precautions" to prevent possible abuse:


"Of course, in the absence of other evidence of intent, a court would

be unable to find contributory infringement liability merely based on a

failure to take affirmative steps to prevent infringement, if the device

otherwise was capable of substantial noninfringing uses. Such a

holding would tread too close to the Sony safe harbor."


Indeed, it is the safe harbor of the Sony case that protects Sling Media. First, there is no question that the Slingbox has substantial noninfringing uses. Second, for the reasons outlined by gagorder, Sling has clearly NOT encouraged infringing behavior (Grokster may have claimed it discouraged abuse, but you cannot read the Court's opinion without feeling the influence of overwhelming evidence to the contrary). Third, unlike file swapping in the Grokster case, it is not clear that the bulk of direct Slingbox use will itself be infringing, so contributory infringement by Sling would be very difficult to show. Placeshifting is more akin to the timeshifting found in Sony, much of which was found to be either authorized or fair use.


The great fear of the entertainment industry is digital copying which leads to mass distribution of protected material. With Sling, you are conveying material that is analog, not digital; generally live, not copied (even with copied material such as with Tivo, the player must be running in real time); and narrowcast, not broadcast. All I am suggesting is that Sling could support a handful of simultaneous viewers, all of whom must have a box code and password, and nobody but the owner would have control of the content. To me, this is not too different from inviting the neighbors over to watch TV.
I asked Blake directly and his response was:


"We did a lot of homework up front to ensure we respect the rights of copyright holders.


Limiting the outgoing stream to one device at a time (hence the term we coined: “me2meâ€) was a key outcome of our homework. Sling Media does not support nor condone sharing of Slingbox ID’s for the purposes of sharing copyrighted material. The Slingbox is for personal use only."


My point was that the reasonable actions taken by Sling to prevent improper use serve as a defense that they are not encouraging or supporting that type of activity. It's not a case of whether the courts force them to, it's about removing the appearance of support for any wrongdoing. Sling, as a company could very well continue to operate and be successful even if their technology was being misused by a number of users as long as they take steps to distance themselves from such users. This decision is one pre-emptive move that makes it clear that they aren't talking out of both sides of their mouths. Even fighting off an unfounded suit would cost Sling time, effort and money. If they present a strong front to copyright holders and distibutors backed up by real limitations like this, they may be better positioned to avoid even the threat of legal attacks. Blake's comments show that the decision was a conscious one made along those lines and not just a technological limit. You may disagree, but it's not your company at stake if you are wrong.


Edit: Blake also mentioned one other item of note for possible future expansion that would allow for multiple streams while still staying within fair use rights. His quote was:


"Though we may allow something like it inside of a house/LAN."


That is definitely akin to the splitting your cable signal inside a house example and should certainly qualify as fair use. The key there, of course, is restricing the streams to in-house/LAN only.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
542 Posts
I can't tell Blake how to run his company. But this is a thread soliciting feature requests, and I do not think my suggestion is unreasonable, either legally or commercially. Blake's response, also reasonable, demonstrates the "chilling effect" on the development of new technology that Justice Breyer warned, in his concurring opinion, can result from too narrow a reading of the Sony case. Imagine how different the world would be if the safe harbor of Sony sheltered photocopiers only where they were capable of making a single copy at a time.


I applaud Sling for the technology it has developed, and for its willingness to consider multiple streams within a LAN. This would certainly go part way toward meeting my request. Nor do I fault the company for taking a cautious approach in the face of the aggressive litigation stance taken by the entertainment industry. I am, however, saddened that legitimate uses of that technology will be stiffled because of the fear of litigation or, worse, a misplaced deference to the rights of copyright holders. If this product category takes off, I predict that the copycats to follow Sling will be less squeamish about such things.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
When I purchased my slingbox, I certainly did not understand that it would stream to only one user at a time. I'm seriously dissapointed by this. The main reason I purchased the box was so that my wife and I could both watch our local tv news when we were on the road (which we are both often).


As it is now, only one of us can watch at a time and it's extremely annoying.


The only solution I can see is to buy another slingbox to broadcast to the second user. Not affordable at all and likely the real reason that SlingMedia is limiting the connections to 1 per box.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
253 Posts
Discussion Starter #36
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadserious
likely the real reason that SlingMedia is limiting the connections to 1 per box.
Deadserious,


First off, thanks for buying a Slingbox...


but sorry to say that you are Deadwrong. (don't mean to disrespect...just couldn't resist)


The reason we limit to one connection at a time is to respect the rights of copyright holders.


I hope you continue to keep the product and enjoy it...perhaps you and your wife will be travelling in different time zones and thus won't have too much conflict.


...of course, we wouldn't be sad to hear you that you bought another one since your wife demanded it ;)


...but i can assure you that there is no consipiracy going on over here.


Cheers,


Blake
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
I already watch broadcast programing on a pocket pc using www.smartvideo.com . btv will also stream to a pocketpc. you can actually get decent bandwidth over an 802.11b connection. The problem with vpc is its a software emulation of hardware components. I use version 6.0 and it emulates a 300mhz pc, pretty low end, with a lowend graphics processor.


A modern ppc has a 300 - 600 mhz ris chip in it, some are optimized for video.

In terms of pc vs. ppc your talking apples and oranges.

Slingmedia says they will also have an applet for cell phones, thats even more impressive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
totally cosmetic request ... how about being able to skin the virtual remotes .... so a remote for the Tivo looks like a Tivo remote !!!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake_k
First off, thanks for buying a Slingbox...
No problem... According to CompUSA, I was the first in the tristate (NYC) area to purchase one. And overall I'm happy... except for two major irritations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blake_k
but sorry to say that you are Deadwrong. (don't mean to disrespect...just couldn't resist)
None taken.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blake_k
The reason we limit to one connection at a time is to respect the rights of copyright holders.
Except that both my wife and I have the right to the content. We pay cablevision for the right. You are assuming that there are only one-person households in this world, and that is no where near accurate. There has got to be some way to enable it for multiple logins and still maintain control. For example, just limiting it to one stream per user/pass combination will keep multicasters from using this as a broadcast tool. I can set up a login for my wife and one for me as well. That's all I need.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blake_k
I hope you continue to keep the product and enjoy it...perhaps you and your wife will be travelling in different time zones and thus won't have too much conflict.
It's not a matter of timezones as the local news is on the same time wherever we are. And I expect that we will keep the box and forever hope for an update that makes it really usable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blake_k
...of course, we wouldn't be sad to hear you that you bought another one since your wife demanded it ;)
At $250, I doubt that would happen. I probably would have paid $350 for the same box if it supported mulitple logins. But I can't justify $250 per login. I'm sure you understand that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blake_k
...but i can assure you that there is no consipiracy going on over here.
That's good to know.


BTW, the other issue that I'm experiencing is a audible static that occurs only during certain commercials. It is not in the original broadcast and goes away when the scene changes or commercial ends. When it sounds off, it often gets to be louder than the audio itself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
As I was just watching some poker on my SlingPlayer, I realized that I could not easily see the holecards during an intense all-in moment.


It would be really cool if I could hold my cursor over a section of the player and get a zoomed popup of a small section of the screen. As I move my cursor, the zoom follows... much like a magnifying glass. It would save me from having to swap to fullscreen mode all of the time when a quick detailed inspection of the screen is needed.
 
21 - 40 of 298 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top