New legislation to ban commercial skipping

[Freegoo]

http://wired.com/news/politics/0,128...w=wn_tophead_2

Looks like MPAA and the networks are trying to get big brother even more involved, like the broadcast flag wasn't bad enough. They are trying to rush it through quickly to take advantage of a Lame Duck congress.

The bill would also permit people to use technology to skip objectionable content -- like a gory or sexually explicit scene -- in films, a right that consumers already have. However, under the proposed law, skipping any commercials or promotional announcements would be prohibited. The proposed law also includes language from the Pirate Act (S2237), which would permit the Justice Department to file civil lawsuits against alleged copyright infringers.

[salsbst]

Unfreakingbelieveable

[ErsatzTom]

Will it also be illegal to go to the bathroom during commercials? Do you have to wait for objectionable content to take a leak?

t

[Cayars]

If some how, some way this get passed, I guarantee you will see this rise up possibly to the Supreme court and it will get overturned.

[Jere_Jones]

As this directly affects my efforts, I have done some research and I can't find any verbage in the bill itself that would prevent any skipping of commercials. As a matter of fact the dissenting brief on the bill says the following:

As a result, the bill would legalize a filter that skips, for in-
stance, all commercial advertisements during playback of free,
over-the-air broadcast television programming.

Take it for what it's worth.

Jere

[stanger89]

How do they plan to distinguish between "commercials" and "objectionable content"?

[salsbst]

Once it's an all digital path they can do whatever they want to us.

[Cayars]

Not as long as we can output the signal via S-Videa (analog) and then capture it via a PVR board.

[Crashless]

I'm really begining to hate these f'ing people. They freaked out when VHS came out, and then realized it was a good thing. Now that it's digital, it's evil and should be stopped.

The problem is that these huge media conglomerates have no vision. They see their current revenue streams in danger and can't see past that to the new possibilities that digital brings.

We would all be using rabbit ears if it were up to these companies.

[Opus4]

Originally Posted by stanger89

How do they plan to distinguish between "commercials" and "objectionable content"?

Um... is it even possible to do that? I thought commercials were "objectionable content". I never bothered to look into comskip, but I always jump through commercials in my kids' shows. I object to them seeing commercials.

[sponsor's ad removed from this spot]

- Andy

[Cayars]

Originally Posted by Opus4

Um... is it even possible to do that? I thought commercials were "objectionable content". I never bothered to look into comskip, but I always jump through commercials in my kids' shows. I object to them seeing commercials.

[sponsor's ad removed from this spot]

- Andy

Yea, I guess "Objectionable Content" is in the eye of the beholder, unless the congress/senate "tell" us what is objectionable. I'm sure that will be the next thing they do.

[PGPfan]

Originally Posted by Cayars

Not as long as we can output the signal via S-Videa (analog) and then capture it via a PVR board.

This seems to be a great example of people talking a good line, and doing little to 'follow through'. (Not directed at you Cayars, just people in general)

How many of us actually participated in this poll when we had an opportunity to get a product nearly custom made for us that would've provided the very freedom that all this legislation seeks to prohibit.

We can't all just bury our heads in the sand an say 'it'll never pass', or 'it'll be overturned later by a higher (wiser) court', or 'people will just stop buying the product, that'll show them'. Bottom line, unless we DO something about it rather than talk about it we WILL loose the chance to use cool toys like this. It happened with DMCA, it will happen AGAIN.

-PGPfan

[salsbst]

My take is that those who would consider developing such a product look at the impending removal of HD analog outputs from HD STBs and figure it might not be worth the cost to develop it.

Having had this subject come up at a dinner party on Saturday night, and having gotten no traction in my pleas for people to care, I agree that people are uninformed and unmotivated on the subject and that we won't get anywhere until that changes.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by salsbst

My take is that those who would consider developing such a product look at the impending removal of HD analog outputs from HD STBs and figure it might not be worth the cost to develop it.

Impending? I've seen nothing to state the analog outputs are going anywhere anytime soon. Eliminating analog outputs would alienate a very large number of the early adopters who have HDTVs without digital and/or HDCP inputs.

[salsbst]

I am under the impression that broadcast-flag-compliant devices are required to down-res analog outputs. Is this incorrect?

[stanger89]

AFIAK, it was ruled that analog outputs could not be down-res'd. I believe it's digital connections (like non-HDCP DVI) that can be downres'd. Of course this appears to only apply to free OTA, as pay services can do whatever they want:

To appease the owners of older digital sets, the agreement forbids the down-resolution of free broadcast programming.

Of course from the same article:

Originally Posted by MPAA VP

"It’s necessary for us to protect our high-value programming. I’ve seen reduced-resolution broadcasts, and you can’t tell the difference between them and an HDTV feed."

Shows you what kind of out-of-touch morons are running things. If that were true, then why downres, apparently it makes no difference

If they keep pushing all this copy protection/DRM, HDTV is going to end up like DVD-A and SACD, niche products for a niche market.

Here's the article:
http://www.emmys.org/emmymag/june03/newmedia.php
More interesting stuff:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/HDTV/

[salsbst]

Thanks.

Without consumer protection, those who can do whatever they want (the cableco's) are doubtless going to down-res. They're licking their chops at such an easy monopolization the DVR market.

[PGPfan]

"I’ve seen reduced-resolution broadcasts, and you can’t tell the difference between them and an HDTV feed."

What an A$$. If down-rez looks the same, I guess there's not much point in spending all the time and money to create HDTV to begin with. Damn, how do people like this get to the point that they run companies?

-PGPfan

[mls]

Originally Posted by PGPfan

"I’ve seen reduced-resolution broadcasts, and you can’t tell the difference between them and an HDTV feed."

What an A$$. If down-rez looks the same, I guess there's not much point in spending all the time and money to create HDTV to begin with. Damn, how do people like this get to the point that they run companies?

-PGPfan

I suspect that is because there is very little true HDTV out there yet. The whole movie industry is geared up for making DVD's and the majority of what people get as HDTV is simply up-converted DVD quality.

[Crashless]

I can say from experience that the people who run these networks, and large companies have no idea what they're doing whatsoever.

You all would be amazed how much better television and movies would be if corporate executives were not involved in the creative process.

For the most part, they are village idiots with suits who get paid too much for the little work that they actually do. I would say most shows/movies are good inspite of their contributions.