Most Monitors Will Not Play New HD Video

[edDV]

@ edDV -
... then what is to stop the people who want free copies from coping the lesser quality stream and sharing that on the internet?

They seem to be most paronoid about digital resolutions over 720x480 that could be used to replicate DVDs that would be sold by pirates. It seems to me that serious prirates will have additional ways of extracting the data. I'm no expert but I think a more effective strategy would be to place unique tracing watermarks on every HD DVD so that pirate copies could be traced back to the source. This makes more sense than preventing legitimate DVD customers from watching the DVD in high resolution.

[robertazimmerman]

The problem with watermmarking is that if I go in to my local video store and pay cash for a copy of the DVD, how would the authorities trace back the 1,000 copies that I make back to me?

Roberta

[edDV]

The problem with watermmarking is that if I go in to my local video store and pay cash for a copy of the DVD, how would the authorities trace back the 1,000 copies that I make back to me?

Roberta

registration requirement for HD maybe? or online/modem authentication from player.

[BJ_M]

The problem with watermmarking is that if I go in to my local video store and pay cash for a copy of the DVD, how would the authorities trace back the 1,000 copies that I make back to me?

Roberta

each HD disk has a unique serial code on a chip in the disk ...

[Zen of Encoding]

Not even implemented and it's already been compromised:

http://www.macfergus.com/niels/dmca/faq.html

[edDV]

Not even implemented and it's already been compromised:

http://www.macfergus.com/niels/dmca/faq.html

Not necessarily. I would expect Intel to provide methods to counter breaks. Intel is providing this technology to media distributors so that media can be more freely distributed on Intel products.

Intel has no reason to fight this guy. The media distributors might. I would think the technology is robust enough to resist one time breaks. The technology needs to be dynamic or nobody would buy it. Don't assume stupidity.

The solutions are political, not technical. Write your Congressman if in the USA. My comments are focused on the proposed broadcast flag.

http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/HDTV/?f=broadcastflag.html

[Invader Bugs]

ah. this isnt much of a problem for me, as i graduate high school in 07, by then vista hd-dvd and all that stuff will be out. and my mom said that she will buy me a laptop for college, so im definately getting an hd vista one. but since that stuff is coming out next year, thats probably my only option.

[junkmalle]

ah. this isnt much of a problem for me, as i graduate high school in 07, by then vista hd-dvd and all that stuff will be out. and my mom said that she will buy me a laptop for college, so im definately getting an hd vista one. but since that stuff is coming out next year, thats probably my only option.

It may not be a problem in terms of having to upgrade your hardware. But it may be a problem when you want to record something and watch it later. It may be problem if you want to skip past the ads. And it definitely will be a problem if you want to keep a copy of your recordings.

Once they have complete control of your system they will determine what you're allowed to do with the video. That's the problem.

[ROF]

Once they have complete control of your system they will determine what you're allowed to do with the video. That's the problem.

That's the problem. Right now they have no control. Anyone who wants to can archive television or DVDs or any other media. There are software only solutions out there, but as is evident by quite a few people, the software solution doesn't seem to work and each time the owners of IP come up with a different software protection scheme there is someone who ruthlessly releases a break to this protection. Sometimes this happens in the first 24 hours of release. That's why hardware/network based encryption is being implemented.

Make no mistake. It's not about greed. They own the media, they own the contents of the media, they own the broadcasts, they own the content of the broadcasts. You purchase the license to view the contents in the way they broadcast/package it. Since too many people can't seem to follow the current rules and guidance systems out there, new rules and guidance systems will be implemented. You may not like them, I may not like them, but because of the thieves who archive television programs and steal media copies all of us are now forced to deal with these new hardware/networked protection schemes. They may be inconvenient to some people, but most will just adopt new equipment and not even realize the authentication of IP that occurs.

[somebodeez]

Once they have complete control of your system they will determine what you're allowed to do with the video. That's the problem.

That's the problem. Right now they have no control.

And I want control over MY system that *I* have purchased in good faith.
I bought it, I own it, it's mine.
No one else should have any control over it but the owner, which is me.
Period.

There are 2 sides to this whole thing. Not just theirs.

[rhegedus]

Make no mistake. It's not about greed.

[racerxnet]

ROF,

Give up the battle, you are in the minority on this issue. It appears your technical skills on this subject are limited as is your basis for defending the clampdown on the free flow of information.

Later,

MAK

[ROF]

Once they have complete control of your system they will determine what you're allowed to do with the video. That's the problem.

That's the problem. Right now they have no control.

And I want control over MY system that *I* have purchased in good faith.
I bought it, I own it, it's mine.
No one else should have any control over it but the owner, which is me.
Period.

There are 2 sides to this whole thing. Not just theirs.

Agreed. You own your equipment that you purchased. What you do not own is the broadcast it receives. You also do not own the contents of any media transmitted from your purchased device. I believe that's what we're talking about here.

[somebodeez]

Cool.
Then as long as *my* stuff works just as it always has (w/out being crippled in any way) then I'll have no problem.

[Sillyname]

ROF,

Give up the battle, you are in the minority on this issue. It appears your technical skills on this subject are limited as is your basis for defending the clampdown on the free flow of information.

Later,

MAK

What "free flow"?

[Topher5000]

I can handle the ads, I just want to be able to continue copying the dvds I purchase onto my computer hard drive for playback with XBMC. They might be able include a divx version on a second disc for copying to a hd, but I don't know how to control rentals. Not being able to pause, rewind or fastforward the main content (the movie) would not be good.
As for TV, being able to timeshift is a must. You need to be able to pause, rewind & fast forward, but perhaps there is a way to flag the ads to keep free tv free.

[ROF]

@Topher5000

I got to agree. I hope timeshifting is maintained, but in some way prevents the archiving of the material. I believe the model presented in this thread will maintain that, so long as the device used to timeshift is HDCP approved. Copying media to other formats other media or other devices is illegal in most countries even for media you have purchased. I've seen arguements to the contrary but everytime I load up a DVD no matter if it's a rental or a purchased copy I still see a warning about the illegality of copying or rebroadcasting the contents of the media. Most copying is through a process called ripping which in 99% of the cases removes the copy protection which is a violation of the law in the US.

[phelix]

because of the thieves who archive television programs and steal media copies

ROF, please explain how pressing the record button on my VCR makes me a thief. And "steal media copies"??? What does shoplifiting have to do with this?


Perhaps I should start a poll:

What is ROF?

a) An Industry Plant
b) A Troll
c) An Idiot
d) All of the Above


Though I must congratulate you for 6 pages worth of trolling.

[Sillyname]

because of the thieves who archive television programs and steal media copies

ROF, please explain how pressing the record button on my VCR makes me a thief. And "steal media copies"??? What does shoplifiting have to do with this?


Perhaps I should start a poll:

What is ROF?

a) An Industry Plant
b) A Troll
c) An Idiot
d) All of the Above


Though I must congratulate you for 6 pages worth of trolling.

Maybe he is a content "creator".

You guys are acting like your doctor just cancelled your pain medication perscription. Looks like everyone will have to go back to taking care of their collections and only buying movies they really enjoy, instead of being compulsive collectors.

[ROF]

ROF, please explain how pressing the record button on my VCR makes me a thief. And "steal media copies"??? What does shoplifiting have to do with this?

pressing the record button does not make you a thief. You have a right to do so. But after you timeshift the broadcast you are bound legally to erase this timeshift as you are not authorized to archive it. doing so makes you a thief because you are not entitled to rewatch the timeshifted broadcasted hundreds of times. That's called archiving and is different from timeshifting. Stealing media involves renting or borrowing media and copying the content to another media or format. it's the equivalent of shoplifting because you are not following the law by doing so and you are stealing the contents of the media.

[akrako1]

All of the above...

[Zen of Encoding]

pressing the record button does not make you a thief. You have a right to do so. But after you timeshift the broadcast you are bound legally to erase this timeshift as you are not authorized to archive it. doing so makes you a thief because you are not entitled to rewatch the timeshifted broadcasted hundreds of times. That's called archiving and is different from timeshifting. Stealing media involves renting or borrowing media and copying the content to another media or format. it's the equivalent of shoplifting because you are not following the law by doing so and you are stealing the contents of the media.

ROF,

Why do you persist in wasting Videohelp.com's precious band-width?

Seriously, I'm asking about your motivations, your emotional drive
to carry-on with this topic.

Are you being paid by representatives of the recording industry?
(many of us believe this to be true......genuinely)

Are you a content creator who's work was illegally used without
proper licensing agreements?

Please explain !

[canadateck]

pressing the record button does not make you a thief. You have a right to do so. But after you timeshift the broadcast you are bound legally to erase this timeshift as you are not authorized to archive it. doing so makes you a thief because you are not entitled to rewatch the timeshifted broadcasted hundreds of times. That's called archiving and is different from timeshifting. Stealing media involves renting or borrowing media and copying the content to another media or format. it's the equivalent of shoplifting because you are not following the law by doing so and you are stealing the contents of the media.

it's the equivalent of shoplifting?? Hows that? Also watching it 100 Times? how does that Make them lose money?

Really dont understand where or how you are coming to this. I will never Buy Say "Lost" on DVD, but I will record it and I will watch it 2 maybe 3 times in 4 years. How do they lose Money. I pay the Cable bill thats all the money I will pay for this show. I wont lend/sell it But will watch it as many time as I want.

[ROF]

it's the equivalent of shoplifting?? Hows that? Also watching it 100 Times? how does that Make them lose money?

Really dont understand where or how you are coming to this. I will never Buy Say "Lost" on DVD, but I will record it and I will watch it 2 maybe 3 times in 4 years. How do they lose Money. I pay the Cable bill thats all the money I will pay for this show. I wont lend/sell it But will watch it as many time as I want.

It would appear I don't have to answer the question, because you just did yourself. If you didn't archive it, how would you watch Lost (currently available for purchase or rent) 2 maybe 3 times in 4 years. How much are rental fees at your local video shop? Subscriptions? How much does it sell for if you were to purchase it? You make them lose money by not renting or purchasing their hardcopy media. You have become an archival service. What happens when one of your friends says she is going to the video store to rent the first season of Lost? Do you let her rent it or do you "loan" your archived media? The loss may seem insignificant to some. Just look at the troll posts in this thread who bash this discussion to figure out who those people are.

Archiving is just as illegal as walking into the store and walking out with a copy of the season. The problem is their is nobody to stop you. HDCP and broadcast flags will become a way to stop this needless loss of income to the producers, packagers, marketers, actors, writers, and all the rest who make each episode possible and provide hard copies to those willing to support the show and pay for the media.

[painkiller]

What a load.

[rhegedus]

EDIT

[rhegedus]

pressing the record button does not make you a thief. You have a right to do so. But after you timeshift the broadcast you are bound legally to erase this timeshift as you are not authorized to archive it. doing so makes you a thief because you are not entitled to rewatch the timeshifted broadcasted hundreds of times. That's called archiving and is different from timeshifting. Stealing media involves renting or borrowing media and copying the content to another media or format. it's the equivalent of shoplifting because you are not following the law by doing so and you are stealing the contents of the media.

Right.......... so why are set-top DVDR or HD/DVDR combos RW and R when all it would take to make copies erasable (and legal by your view) is a simple firmware flash at the factory to make them write RW only? Burning to DVDR is meant to be archivable!

[ROF]

Right.......... so why are set-top DVDR or HD/DVDR combos RW and R when all it would take to make copies erasable (and legal by your view) is a simple firmware flash at the factory to make them write RW only? Burning to DVDR is meant to be archivable!

Really? Have you ever right clicked on a file and selected delete from the drop-down menu? What does this do? Does anyone do it? HDCP will ensure that you don't have to. You can argue the implications or whatever all day long. The fact remains that HDCP will ensure that your viewing rights are maintained while at the same time ensuring the copyrights are maintained without any intervention by the end user. It's for your protection and the protection of IP. It also ensures that only the highest quality equipment will display this high quality video.

[adam]

rhegedus time-shifting is expressly limited to a one time later viewing. I do not think that archiving ota broadcasts is either morally or legally equivalent to stealing a hardcopy, but it IS an infringement. This was all discussed in great length in the Betamax decision where the right to time-shift was created. ROF is largely correct on this and it does cost both the copyright holder (movie studio) as well as the broadcaster money in many incidental ways....but I honestly don't see what any of this has to do with this thread. HDCP and the broadcast flag are not an attempt to force people to comply where they otherwise wouldn't because of a misunderstanding of what time-shifting actually allows. The whole point of this new scheme is to cut the pc out of process to frustrate people from distributing it online.

The vast majority of broadcast recording, whether done lawfully as time-shifting or unlawfully as archiving (library building) is done either via a vcr or with a settop box and service like Tivo. Well all of this new protection is moot with a vcr and most Tivo et al boxes already comply with HDCP and if they don't you can just trade it in for another one. So time-shifting for most people will be unaffected. Yes broadcasters will have the option of limiting the number of viewings of the recorded content, and in this respect ROF is right on. The broadcasters will force people to stay within the boundaries of time-shifting, but I really think this is such a minor and incidental feature of the broadcast flag and I doubt it will be used often.

Like I said the real focus is on just preventing a pc from being able to access the recorded broadcast in unprotected form and in HD. Yes this will cut out those people who used to lawfully time-shift with capture cards, but I also presume that this constitutes an extreme minority of time-shifters and the US courts have already ruled countless times that at best time-shifting only GUARANTEES an analougue and/or lower quality copy so these people will still be able to time-shift the content will just be downgraded to D1 resolutions. The great big unintended effect of all this though is that there is just too much hardware on the market that doesn't comply with HDCP and thus people are going to be cut off who want to do nothing more than WATCH the HD material they specifically bought their display for. So in my opinion it all boils down to this... If the risk of allowing HD content to be generally accessible via a pc (if you deny there is a risk then you just plain don't understand the entertainment industry) outweighs the burdens placed on consumers (limits lawful time-shifting and alienates early adopters) then the broadcast flag bill should probably pass. I personally think the scales have not shifted this far yet and the bill will not pass until some provision is made for at least HDTV televisions sold without HDCP.

This thread is just all over the place and the issue has been clouded by alot of misinformation. This protection is not for the benefit of the consumer...its just not, at least not in any direct way. The only benefit the consumer gets is that the motion picture industry and broadcast stations will have the protection they feel they need to proceed with new HD techologies, which the consumer will ultimately benefit from. This techology does not ensure a higher quality viewing experience. How could it, the only thing it can ever do regarding quality is decrease it? This protection is about greed but a justifiable one. It will limit unauthorized distributions thus giving the industries a better chance of bringing that demographic back into the market so that they can earn their fair return. There's nothing sinister about this. The industries have a right to implement these types of protections and anyone who argues otherwise is either kidding themselves or is just very misinformed. BUT the real question is to what degree can the industries protect their content and this is where they have probably crossed the line. There is a middle ground somewhere folks. If you say they shouldn't use protection, or they don't really lose money, or they are just scum...then you are just as biased as ROF who seems to think that the industry should be able to do whatever the hell they want within the markplace since they own the material in that market.

[satviewer2000]

Well the bottom line here is ... Will the consumer purchase the product?

Because, if the consumer doesn't buy it, it will very soon not be produced anymore ... Economics 101. So they can throw in as many levels of protection as they want to, but unless the whole thing is transparent to the end user, nobody will buy the thing. And if people have to spend $$$ just to upgrade their TV set so that they can watch a specific movie, well, I think 99% of people won't do it. For any product to be successful, they need more than 1% of the consumer population base to buy into it. I don't think even now that more than about 5-10% of the consumers have upgraded their TV's to HDTV models, and that's nothing compared to what they want to do with these new proposed formats.