Most Monitors Will Not Play New HD Video

[waheed]

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.

Not neccessarily. If in my case, i didn't achieve it from TV, then i wouldn't bother watching it a few years later. I wouldn't buy or rent, so the studios have nothing to gain or lose. If i want to watch something thats worth watching, i would buy the original. If its something i may watch, i would watch from TV, and if i didn't record it, i would no way rent or buy it just to watch it. Simple.

Its just like saying you are making studios lose money because your friend invited (or lent) you to watch his original copy he bought of a particular TV season rather than you rent it or buy it yourself.

[somebodeez]

And what about material that is not available on DVD (or VHS)?
There's many great movies and shows that still aren't available for purchase and never have been (which is sad, IMHO ) but every now & then, they come on TV (usually at some undoable time, like at 3 AM ).

[ROF]

And what about material that is not available on DVD (or VHS)?
There's many great movies and shows that still aren't available for purchase and never have been (which is sad, IMHO ).

That is truely sad. Alot of good shows, one time cable movies or others have never been released in any format. What's even more sad is the defense of people who archive TV shows that are on VHS or DVD. The defense usually goes as is stated by Waheed that if I didn't record it, I wouldn't watch it, buy it, or rent it. Wasn't that the defense of napster 1.0 downloaders years ago for the consumption of free music? So because you wouldn't buy it, you should just be able to get it for free? You pay the cable bill for the right to view the broadcast. You also have the right to timeshift. You do not own the broadcast. You also do not have the right to archive the broadcast. But as has been stated numerous times by me and others in this thread, what's this all have to do with HDCP and/or broadcast flagging? Absolutely nothing. HDCP is available in quite a few homes already. Some may not even know they bought it. Others like me may have done some research before walking into a store and picking out their video equipment. I can't begin to count the amount of times I've told people when buying computer LCD Monitors that screen real estate and resolution is ultimately a null factor. Brightness, contrast, refresh rate, and most importantly response time are some of the more important factors. All monitors aren't the same that includes television sets. As with all technology you must accept the fact that the moment you leave the store your purchase is outdated. It may continue to provide years of enjoyment but tomorrow is a new day and with it comes new technology. Anyone remember the panic the so called V-Chip caused? Most set top boxes and televisions have them built in. Did it cause widespread outrage? It's just become a part of everyday life and most people ignore it or don't even know they have it. Broadcast flags will be the same way after a few years of introduction. You'll know what you can and can't do with a broadcast and you won't have to come here asking if what you're doing is legal or not. Your video equipment won't allow you to violate the law.

The only scary thing is the invalidation method that may shut down some peoples expensive video stream because of a false report of piracy of the signal. This has given me some concern but I'd imagine my concern is mostly because of the unknown. Once it's implemented, I'm sure the guidelines will be clear. Similiar to how the guidelines for downloading legal music are clear today.

[somebodeez]

Please stop lecturing me.
I have a mind of my own, thank you and I'm not that gullible as to fall for such statements as:

It may have some downfalls or even be a nusiance in some cases, but it's definitely Pro-Consumer

or

I think you misunderstand the purpose of HDCP. It is not intended for copy protection although that is a side effect.

No matter how strongly your opinion is on how terrible and awful this is and how righteous you think yourself to be, the very plain and simple fact is, a huge number of people have gotten used to recording from TV. Only time will tell if this new scheme will be accepted or if there will be such a consumer backlash that it will fail.

[ROF]

No matter how strongly your opinion is on how terrible and awful this is and how righteous you think yourself to be, the very plain and simple fact is, a huge number of people have gotten used to recording from TV. Only time will tell if this new scheme will be accepted or if there will be such a consumer backlash that it will fail.

A huge number of people got used to downloading free music too. is it right? is it legal? It doesn't matter how I feel or how you feel, it's a matter of what's right and what's wrong. You are correct though in that only time will tell whether this will stem the flow of illegal activities.

[somebodeez]

A huge number of people got used to downloading free music too. is it right? is it legal? It doesn't matter how I feel or how you feel, it's a matter of what's right and what's wrong.

I'm glad that you are so perfect in every way and above everyone else.

Being so, I'd think that you'd be able to resist twisting my words around.

[ROF]

No words to twist. if you aren't violating the law today in your television viewing habits, HDCP and broadcast flags will have minimal impact upon you.

[thoughton]

It doesn't matter how I feel or how you feel, it's a matter of what's right and what's wrong.

Actually, it's a matter of legal and illegal. That is not the same thing as right and wrong. Unfortunately it is eminently clear from your 6 pages of posts that you are unable to distinguish between the two. Perhaps you've never tackled the "would you steal to feed a starving baby" essay in Philosophy 101.

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's for our protection eh? The truly worrying thing is that you appear to believe your own nonsense.

Kind regards,

[somebodeez]

Sorry I don't pretend to be a lawyer.

Although he does pretend to be a legal expert of some sort :P
But even if he were (which he's obviously not), he's already ruined any chance of credibility he may have had

[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

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

This doesn't answer my question. If I pay cash for a copy of a disk with a unique serial embedded on it and then duplicate it and sell copies for $1.00 apiece, the authorities may know which store sold the original disk, but they will have no way of knowing who bought the disk and is copying it.

....unless we will have to show photo ID every time we buy HD disks!

Roberta

[rhegedus]

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.

You're missing the point: allowing non-rewritable media to be used is tantamount to accepting that it's use will be for archival and not for view-once-only purposes.......... and this is from every manufacturere of set-top DVRs, some of whom are involved with the HDCP hardware.

@adam - I know this thread is all over the place, just like ROF. He needs pinning down on every subject!

[Cornucopia]

ROF, IIWY, I wouldn't liken this current debate to the V-chip.
While the V-chip did add another layer of "protection" or "control" into the broadcast viewing experience, the reason it is so innocuous is that it give PARENTS/CONSUMERS the reins of that control, not a broadcaster, not a "content producer/distributor", not a government entity.

Scott

[ROF]

ROF, IIWY, I wouldn't liken this current debate to the V-chip.
While the V-chip did add another layer of "protection" or "control" into the broadcast viewing experience, the reason it is so innocuous is that it give PARENTS/CONSUMERS the reins of that control, not a broadcaster, not a "content producer/distributor", not a government entity.

Scott

Tell that to the people in the household who probably watch the most television of all: the kids. They can not watch an awards show because of a broadcast flagl attached to the broadcast signal and a V-Chip in the set top box set by their government entity which blocks all programs with that broadcast flag.

It's very similiar with the only difference being the content producers will finally have complete control over what can and can not be done with their broadcasts. I believe some here are getting all worked up over nothing.

I got to laugh at the idea that write once media used in DVR hardware is a license to violate the law and certified as acceptable by the manufacturers of such hardware. Last time I checked there isn't a write once VCR tape available. I also guess MP3 players filled with stolen music are OK since the manufacturer allows them to play these ill-gotten tracks over and over? It's not the technologies fault or the manufacturer of the hardwares fault that people violate the law. Remember, Guns don't kill people. People use guns to kill people. It's not use of the technology or hardware that makes it illegal, it's how it's used that makes it illegal.

[canadateck]

Why Then do I have to Pay a Levy on DVD-r/rw CD-r/rw?

Because of what I "Might" do. Can I have it Back if I back up my Pictures or My home Video?

[ROF]

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 ...

This doesn't answer my question. If I pay cash for a copy of a disk with a unique serial embedded on it and then duplicate it and sell copies for $1.00 apiece, the authorities may know which store sold the original disk, but they will have no way of knowing who bought the disk and is copying it.

....unless we will have to show photo ID every time we buy HD disks!

Roberta

They won't have to, if I understand my mistaken thoughts earlier in this thread. This disc you purchased can be used in your device. When you make a copy and give it to your friends or use the copy yourself, the keys in your device will fail to authenticate with the keys on the disc and shut the stream of video down. Continued illegal use would result in permanent revocation of those device keys and your device would fail to work. I might be incorrect in that and I certainly hope I am because I originally thought as you did.

[rhegedus]

I got to laugh at the idea that write once media used in DVR hardware is a license to violate the law and certified as acceptable by the manufacturers of such hardware. Last time I checked there isn't a write once VCR tape available. I also guess MP3 players filled with stolen music are OK since the manufacturer allows them to play these ill-gotten tracks over and over? It's not the technologies fault or the manufacturer of the hardwares fault that people violate the law. Remember, Guns don't kill people. People use guns to kill people. It's not use of the technology or hardware that makes it illegal, it's how it's used that makes it illegal.

WTF are you on about? The first DVD writer I bought was RW only - no R disks could be used. How much would it take to equip every set-top DVR with a RW writer only? No more that it does to equip ir with a RW/R writer.

This has nothing to do with VCR, mp3 or guns, so stop laughing at yourself and stick to the piont.

[ROF]

Why Then do I have to Pay a Levy on DVD-r/rw CD-r/rw?

Because of what I "Might" do. Can I have it Back if I back up my Pictures or My home Video?

The levy in canada and a few other countries. The levy you pay goes to the Canadian Private Copying Collective. 80% of the levies collected goes to authors and performers which amounts to about $25 million last time I looked. As to why you pay this, I can't say for sure as the USA doesn't support such things. You pay this levy no matter what your use of the media is for.

[canadateck]

business doent pay.Only personal use. I pay it because it goes to (Like you Said) Canadian Private Copying Collective. But why? becaue it's because of what I might DO. It's all BS...

[ROF]

WTF are you on about? The first DVD writer I bought was RW only - no R disks could be used. How much would it take to equip every set-top DVR with a RW writer only? No more that it does to equip ir with a RW/R writer.

This has nothing to do with VCR, mp3 or guns, so stop laughing at yourself and stick to the piont.

OK! The point of the thread has nothing to do with DVD-RW, DVD Writers, or any other types of machinery you've introduced to the thread. It's about HDCP and monitors not being able to display an HDCP signal. I keep posting that. I keep trying to return you to that purpose.

[ROF]

business doent pay.Only personal use. I pay it because it goes to (Like you Said) Canadian Private Copying Collective. But why? becaue it's because of what I might DO. It's all BS...

It's interesting. You pay a levy so it's legal to do something which is illegal in the USA. If you borrow a CD from a friend and make a copy. Your copy is just as legal as your friends because you paid the levy on the blank media. The odd part of your law in this respect is that it would be illegal for your friend to make a copy of their CD and give it to you. The one who makes the copy is covered under your copyright laws. Part VIII of your copyright act explains this. I had to read it several times to believe it since in the US any copying is deemed illegal even for backup purposes.

[canadateck]

We can even Download Music,But cant Upload.

[adam]

You're missing the point: allowing non-rewritable media to be used is tantamount to accepting that it's use will be for archival and not for view-once-only purposes.......... and this is from every manufacturere of set-top DVRs, some of whom are involved with the HDCP hardware.

No its really not. Its probably just a result of writable drives and media being cheaper than rewritable ones. The manufacturers don't make the laws, and they are bound to existing ones, namely that time-shifting is limited to a one time later viewing and that archiving broadcast recordings does NOT fall within the time-shifting exception. That same case-law also established that hardware manufacturers do not have to make their hardware foolproof. Its ok if it can be used for infringing purposes as long as it still has a substantially non-infringing pupose. Hardware manufacturers aren't required to only offer rewritable drives...and that really wouldn't stop archiving anyway. Sorry man but this is one area of the law that is pretty well settled. Archiving television broadcasts is copyright infringement.

canadateck your levy on media (and maybe some hardware) was implemented in exchange for the general right to make archival copies. Its a unique piece of legislation that Canada has and personally I think its good. Yes it discriminates against everyone everytime they use the media for copying their own stuff, (show me a law that doesn't discriminate against someone) but its a good compromise if you ask me.

[ROF]

@Canadateck

Yep. I noticed that too. Very odd. It must be the air up there.

[BJ_M]

No matter how strongly your opinion is on how terrible and awful this is and how righteous you think yourself to be, the very plain and simple fact is, a huge number of people have gotten used to recording from TV. Only time will tell if this new scheme will be accepted or if there will be such a consumer backlash that it will fail.

A huge number of people got used to downloading free music too. is it right? is it legal? It doesn't matter how I feel or how you feel, it's a matter of what's right and what's wrong. You are correct though in that only time will tell whether this will stem the flow of illegal activities.

it is legal in my country


edit: i see that has been mentioned already - sorry

[rhegedus]

OK! The point of the thread has nothing to do with DVD-RW, DVD Writers, or any other types of machinery you've introduced to the thread. It's about HDCP and monitors not being able to display an HDCP signal. I keep posting that. I keep trying to return you to that purpose.

With respect, it was you that introduced the topic of time shifting and the legalities/moralities of archival as opposed to watch once and erase.

You're in a minority of 1 here, so be prepared to defend everything you say

[rhegedus]

@ adam

I recall we had a lengthy discussion about distribution/archival of copyrighted material a year or so back, so we'd just be dredging up old views here

However, with respect to drives and media, I don't believe that the manufacturers do anything for the benefits of our wallets, nor can they be disentangled from the broadcast/film empires. For instance, Sony is one of the largest makers of hardware, media and is also one of the biggest distibutors.

Were it not for the other manufacturers in the set-top market, set-top DVRs would be much higher priced with fewer capabilities.

It's just an opionion.........

[CaptainVideo]

Consumer DVDR/RW devices that allow for write once archive discs do so because most advertise the ability to connect your Firewire camcorder to the device to burn your own homemade movies, not to infringe copyrights.

Also not all broadcasts cannot be archived, some can. The Broadcast Flag would actually make it easier to know what you can and cannot timeshift or archive. So that is actually a consumer benefit. But ultimately I'm against it as I'm sure most copyright holders will do their best to make timeshifting difficult and limiting, such as you must watch the timeshifted program within 24 or 48 hours or something.

While I'm against HDCP and anything the limits my ability to use media as I choose to, I don't have a huge problem if I am still able to rip to a lower res version to put on a portable media player or stream to a computer in another room.

The problem is the MPAA/RIAA/Legislative Branch/FCC never EVER look at a fair compromise. I think a fair compromise to this restrictive copyright enforcing system is to lower the length of time things can be locked up under copyright, like a repeal of the Sonny Bono Copyright Act.

[junkmalle]

I think a fair compromise to this restrictive copyright enforcing system is to lower the length of time things can be locked up under copyright, like a repeal of the Sonny Bono Copyright Act.

What about the dozen other times Copyrights have been extended? Let's repeal those too.

[adam]

rhegedus if they skimped on the hardware capabilities it would be to save themselves money. My point is that their choice to use only writable drives is not a promotion of archiving...it just has nothing to do with that at all.

junkmalle: Just for the record, US copyright terms have only been extended 4 times. They of course have increased substantially in those 4 extensions though.

[rhegedus]

rhegedus if they skimped on the hardware capabilities it would be to save themselves money. My point is that their choice to use only writable drives is not a promotion of archiving...it just has nothing to do with that at all.

Possibly, but if they wanted to make RW drives only, they could do it at no extra expense at all.

RW media is not only more prohibitive in the sense that is more expensive than R media but is also much less compatible with set-top boxes.

As I said, the possibibilties to reduce archival and distribution already exist, though easily circumvented if you know how or where to look