Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Hollywood and NFL Fight TiVo

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the because-they-hate-you dept.

Television 344

An anonymous reader writes "MSNBC/Washington Post is reporting that the NFL and tinseltown have asked the FCC to stop TiVo from expanding its service to include the ability to transfer recordings to PC's and other remote devices. TiVo says the system is secure. I say its source code will end up on the box. You do the math."

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

first post!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770403)


Re:first post!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770424)

giggity giggity giggity

hello (1)

penis fish (671987) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770407)

r u m o f ??

if u r f, plz sux cok!!!

m too, if u wan. :))

Go ReplayTV! (4, Informative)

Noksagt (69097) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770416)

Without the mindshare and press of Tivo, ReplayTV has sported this feature for a long time. Ownere preemptively filed suit to make sure they could legally use show-sharing.

Re:Go ReplayTV! (1)

Noksagt (69097) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770449)

"Ownere" is not some Korean company--it is me "mispelling" (won't this drive spelling bee champions nuts) "Owners."

Re:Go ReplayTV! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770542)

Bonus points for using 'mindshare' in a sentence. With a straight face, even!

Re:Go ReplayTV! (1)

millahtime (710421) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770570)

This could set a standard that the FCC/NFL can't fight.

Re:Go ReplayTV! (4, Informative)

Noksagt (69097) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770650)

Unfortunately not--it was voluntarily and prematurely ended by the media companies. They agreed not to sue Replay owners, but the legality of Tivo or others using the same technology wasn't tested. See EFF [] for more information.

Re:Go ReplayTV! (4, Informative)

The Lynxpro (657990) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770645)

"Without the mindshare and press of Tivo, ReplayTV has sported this feature for a long time. Ownere preemptively filed suit to make sure they could legally use show-sharing."

Yes, and that's also the feature that bankrupted SonicBlue. Replay is now on its third corporate parent thanks to the failure of branding, simplicity, etc. that TiVo captured. TiVo has 1.6 million subscribers; how many does Replay have? The last time I heard, Replay peaked at 200k. And the only person I know that owns one is Brentano on G4TechTV's "The Screen Savers." And TiVo and Replay have both been on the market roughly the same amount of years.

Re:Go ReplayTV! (1)

prozac79 (651102) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770750)

Good to see a replayTV plug as the first real post. I have been enjoying the ability to archive shows on my PC from my ReplayTV and being able to stream between the two for well over a year now. I was using a friend's TiVo a little while ago and the whole setup seemed a little bare. Where was the ethernet connection? Where was the free software to archive, edit, and stream shows? I'm not bashing TiVo (I think it has a great interface and some other capabilities that ReplayTV doesn't have... yet), but I do find it funny that there is an article mentioning something that ReplayTV owners have been enjoying for a long time. I guess there are advantages to owning something that isn't the poster child for a particular type of technology since the big dogs won't attack you first.

Too Hard to Regulate (4, Insightful)

artlu (265391) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770423)

If the FCC/NFL is that parnoid about TIVO then they would also have to requisitiona ll video card manufacturers to not include video inputs on their cards. I would assume that most of the information going to computers and then torrent sites are coming from video in cards and not TIVO. On the other hand, I definitely feel bad for advertisers because TIVO could potential hurt their effectiveness, and ads make the world go around. No ads. No Slashdot.

GroupShares Inc. [] - A Free and Interactive Stock Market Community

Re:Too Hard to Regulate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770466)

I totally respect /. showing me advertisements and all, but lately I keep getting these 503s. I swear its going to be a terrible day the minute /. dies. Think millions of geeks crying out in agony. Bring on the ads and let the /. addicts live.

Re:Too Hard to Regulate (2, Interesting)

SollyCholly (777496) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770485)

I'm still not sure why more people haven't adopted ATI's All in Wonder cards. I use mine for everything that the TiVo can do, plus a lot of the stuff that you can hack the TiVo to do. I can login remotely and set it to record. I can burn VCD/SVCD/DVDs without hacking anything. And adding storage? I've got its cache and recording space set up on my NAS. And all for less than $150

Re:Too Hard to Regulate (1)

jargoone (166102) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770714)

You got the All-In-Wonder, the Mobo/CPU/memory, case, local disk, NAS, software, and program listings for $150? Please, enlighten us with a link to your hardware vendor.

Re:Too Hard to Regulate (4, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770549)

Interestingly enough, the same story mentions a bill that codifies into law your right to kill off objectional material. Maybe objectionable material can include, for example, advertising to minors.
Meanwhile, yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee approved a bill that would significantly broaden user rights. The bill would exempt from copyright law technologies enabling users to zap objectionable parts of shows and movies so the programming can be viewed by children.

Re:Too Hard to Regulate (1)

anethema (99553) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770559)

Poor slashdot, I havent been seeing their ads for a loong time. :|

Re:Too Hard to Regulate (1)

nharmon (97591) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770690)

[i]On the other hand, I definitely feel bad for advertisers because TIVO could potential hurt their effectiveness, and ads make the world go around. No ads. No Slashdot.[/i]

I have an idea. Make us want to watch the ads...then we won't filter them.

The problem with advertising today is that so much effort is put into placing them in areas where we you can't not look at them. Rather, if they hired some genius writers, and didn't run a commercial for 6 months, we might rather enjoy watching commercials.

Re:Too Hard to Regulate (1)

cubicledrone (681598) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770768)

I have an idea. Make us want to watch the ads...then we won't filter them.

The constant mortgage refinancing ads and that miserable series of Lowe's commercials with that caterwauling nonsensical background noise are enough to make a person weep.

At this point, I'm not sure people would ever want to watch commercials. Commercials are so irritating and so redundant (and such depressing unrealistic commentaries on wanton consumerism) that it is exhausting to try and listen to the radio or watch television.

Re:Too Hard to Regulate (3, Insightful)

stanmann (602645) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770743)

Like the RIAA the NFL isn't interested in STOPPING piracy or copying, but simply making it non-trivial. SO they go after TIVO and Kazaa, but ignore video cards and FTP/NNTP. WHy? because it's counterproductive to sue NVIDIA/ATI or Worldnet/AOL. So they are wisely(?) picking only battles where they can achieve a public win. And they are picking battles where they can stop the "average" consumer from making the copies. Remember the Betamax decision?? they can't afford another one. so they can only go after "substantially infringing" media. So, Can they stop TIVO?? perhaps, perhaps not, depends on whether or not the judge(if it gets that far) determines that the "secure" copy to PC has substantial non-infringing uses.

FP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770427)


Don't need a Tivo.... (3, Insightful)

jsimon12 (207119) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770444)

Last time I checked "Computer Enthusiasts" didn't need a Tivo to capture TV shows and share them. Not to mention the fact that time-shifting is legal. What is next, garrote survivors [] suing companies that make wire?

Re:Don't need a Tivo.... (1)

Noksagt (69097) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770573)

Not to mention the fact that time-shifting is legal.
The Sony Betamax case (which established this) said nothing of space-shifting or media-shifting, which is what some are concerned about.

shouldn't this have an [obvious] tag? (1)

bunburyist (664958) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770446)

i mean honestly, With hollywood bitching at just about every single technological advancement these days all in the name of protecting their flawed and old-fashioned business model, could we really expect them to sit idly by for something like this...don't even pay attention to their crap and maybe it will go away. Thats not to say you shouldn't buy the movies, but if you have Tivo content thats yours, why shouldn't you be able to transfer it to whatever medium you desire?

Re:shouldn't this have an [obvious] tag? (1)

vinohradska (713189) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770591)

...don't even pay attention to their crap and maybe it will go away.

Ignoring their efforts will not leave you unaffected. Now might be a good time to re-read What's Wrong With Copy Protection: []

Re:shouldn't this have an [obvious] tag? (1)

Resident Netizen (769536) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770653)

If I were to record KFRC onto a cassette tape 25 years ago, I would be able to listen to it, sample it, hash it, or smoke it today.

The protection should come when using the aquired material for monetary gain or in advertising.

Personal use? Let freedom reign.


Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770450)

Zinga zinga waa, waa, zinga zgina awaawef,waferg erjga oiuahreg, OOGA BOOGA!!! FUck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck, ass fuck ass fuck bloogy bloogy bloogy CLICK ME! []

What's next - big brother? (1)

chriskzoo5 (762689) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770453)

When will media organizations realize that this sort of thing does not hurt - especially the NFL who does not release anything other than highlight tapes on video anyway.

Re:What's next - big brother? (2, Informative)

Nfnitloop (513924) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770671)

The NFL is not concerned about their highlight tapes. As the article mentioned, they don't want people on the east coast to be able to record a game and send it to someone on the west coast before the game even airs there.

My understanding is the games are blacked out now until every time zone is prime-time so that more people will watch the game and more people will watch the commercials (which is what it's all about anyway, right?)

Re:What's next - big brother? (1)

The Lynxpro (657990) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770710)

"When will media organizations realize that this sort of thing does not hurt - especially the NFL who does not release anything other than highlight tapes on video anyway."

I guess you've never seen ESPN Classic. You know, the cable channel that broadcasts ancient (no, not Greco-Roman) sporting events? Better put, its another channel that Disney (owners of ESPN through ABC) includes in their packages that they try to hard-sell to the cable companies and thus force up basic and extended prices to the consumer.

One of the major contributions to increases in basic cable pricing has been Disney's insistence of forcing cable companies to include ESPN in the basic packages and then hike up the prices charged to the cable companies for that very channel. Dump ESPN out of basic cable and the prices would stabilize. Of course, you can conclude easily that I support "a la carte" legislation championed by Senator John McCain.

Re:What's next - big brother? (1)

pilgrim23 (716938) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770711)

NFL realizes that after enough of a corpus of burly boys breaking bones and bouncing balls is developed out there in the wild, the real thing becomes moot. Or, is it possible that there is only one game played each year and the rest are skillful digitizations of various banners, uniforms and the like to produce "New" content for fans of the elipsoid bladder? In any case the NFL stands to loose a fortune of Americasn wake up and stop buying this particular "product"... Enough there to scare ANY Cartel..

MPAA Strikes Again (1)

rsrsharma (769904) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770456)

Well, looks like the MPAA has won over the TV industry. What next, them saying we can't tape TV shows at all? "This tape could be digitalized and shared over a P2P network. Although most don't know how to do it, it happens enough to outlaw the home-use of any recording device." Great, just great.

MPAA Strikes Again with INDUCE Act (1)

The Importance of (529734) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770538)

You think that is ridiculous, just imagine what the INDUCE Act will do to TiVo. INDUCE Act Archives [] and LawMeme's Index to the INDUCE Act [] . Every technology that even gets close to copyrighted content will have to be vetted by lawyers and approved by Hollywood and the BSA.

Shhhh! Not so loud! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770457)

The MPAA is listening so ixnay on the ansfertray. Just make the TiVo to PC transfer feature an "easter egg", just like 30 second skip.

Finally! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770458)

yeah! more ways to watch the crap on tv!

Bring Back the XFL (2, Funny)

Gumpmaster (756851) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770463)

Jesse Ventura would have never opposed the free sharing of information. Down with the NFL.

If not for Tivo.... (5, Funny)

Dark Paladin (116525) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770465)

Millions of people wouldn't have known what Janet Jackson's left breast looked like.

I only know because I was out of the room during the halftime show, missed it, had no idea what occured, then within hours had various friends of mine with PVR's sending me the files via email.

And all I could think as I looked at them was "Eh - my wife's are better. And probably more real."

Re:If not for Tivo.... (1)

HBI (604924) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770523)

Women were commenting to me later about how ugly her breast was. I agree. It wasn't arousing in the slightest, just kind of gross. That nipple clamp didn't help either. I prefer tits with no metal in them.

Re:If not for Tivo.... (1)

Dark Paladin (116525) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770787)

I prefer tits with no metal in them.

That's understandable - that's an easy way to get mouth sores.

Re:If not for Tivo.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770524)

And all I could think as I looked at them was "Eh - my wife's are better. And probably more real."

Dark, I have to disagree with you on this one...

Cheers, your brother.

Re:If not for Tivo.... (4, Funny)

fupeg (653970) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770596)

I call bullshit. Let's see your wife's breasts so we can all judge for ourselves.

Re:If not for Tivo.... (2, Funny)

Dark Paladin (116525) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770764)

You'll have to wait a year until our new baby boy is done with them first....

Re:If not for Tivo.... (5, Informative)

gosand (234100) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770631)

Millions of people wouldn't have known what Janet Jackson's left breast looked like.

It was the right one. Not that I noticed or anything.

Re:If not for Tivo.... (1)

dr_dank (472072) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770651)

With Tivos recommending viewing feature, I'm surprised it didn't recommend, based on viewing habits, some other tits you might like.

Re:If not for Tivo.... (1)

baudilus (665036) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770717)

"Eh - my wife's are better. And probably more real."

mwahaha... you said "probably".

ReplayTV can already do this (1)

cilqster (569098) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770467)

using 3rd party, i can transfer movies out of my replay. it's a nice way to build a dvd of a season of your favorite shows. i don't understand why the NFL is really against this, i can't imagine the vast majority of people who watch NFL games don't do it as the sporting event is occuring.

Re:ReplayTV can already do this (1)

mgs1000 (583340) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770657)

Well, the NFL is afraid that users will take adavantage of this to avoid "blackouts", when the NFL does not allow local broadcast of a game because not enough tickets were sold. (As if that really affects ticket sales)

If this could work in real time, somebody could get a buddy of theirs in another city to send the game to them, and avoid the stupid blackout. I guess that is what scares the NFL.

Re:ReplayTV can already do this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770797)

Boo fucking hoo.

But I need it... (2, Interesting)

jeffshoaf (611794) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770469)

Having lost the two programs I was saving to demo HD when my new DirecTV HD Tivo crapped out when it was only two months old, I'd really like a way to transfer stuff to a PC. DircTV promptly sent a replacement unit, but my demos were gone and they haven't been repeated yet. It'd suit me if I could just do an automated (or semi-automated) backup to a PC or another hard drive w/o having to crack the case.

Fight the Man! (1)

pixelbend (628541) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770473)

Fight the Man, roll your own Tivo! []

Wonder what Tridge might say 'bout this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770474)

Andrew Tridgell (Samba Team) has a pretty good understanding of the Tivo (wink, wink, nudge, nudge, a wink's as good as a nod to a blind bat, eh? Eh?) and I would think he'd be fairly competent to judge the validity of these claims.

Amazing (4, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770480)

With each new iteration of technology, new features get added to media. Witness VCR -> DVD. Each time, the media fight it and try to gain control. So far, they have always lost. and when doing so, it turns out that the new features actually helped the media companies , not hurt them. And in spite of a long history of being wrong about it each and every single time, they still wish to try and control it. Insanity at its best.

It remains to be seen how many politicians have been bought.

Re:Amazing (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770580)

> So far, they have always lost. and when doing so, it turns out that the new
> features actually helped the media companies , not hurt them

I guess if a company was in trouble they'd take risks but if your company is doing very well out of the status quo why risk change upsetting your revenue stream when you can simply buy laws to keep things as they are?

let me beat the mythtv diy PVR drum =) (1)

enrico_suave (179651) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770481)

Obviously I'm biased (I run a DIY PVR / HTPC [] site), but this type of shennanigan, whether it comes to fruition or not, is one compelling reason to roll your own homebrew tivo-workalike.

Now hopefully the Broadcast flag [] won't come and ruin the party regardless of commercial/set-top or homebrew PC PVR.


Re:let me beat the mythtv diy PVR drum =) (1)

enrico_suave (179651) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770540)

To clarify: I meant, if MPAA/NFL's request is comes to fruition... (not if Tivo's transfer content to PC's...)


Re:let me beat the mythtv diy PVR drum =) (1)

ivan256 (17499) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770608)

Come talk to me when you add "takes 5 minutes to set up", "entire cost subsidized by your sattelite TV provider for adding a year to your contract", and "can record the actual digital feed without re-encoding" to your list of compelling reasons.

DIY units just can't compete yet.

Re:let me beat the mythtv diy PVR drum =) (3, Interesting)

enrico_suave (179651) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770759)

I'll play your game rogue...

There ARE easy to setup PC PVR options. I shlopped a PVR350 in a box paired with SageTV (review) [] and it was pretty simple.

The cost thing is a valid concern. There is potentially a larger initial cash outlay (but no subscription fees.)

With that said the DirectTV deals with Tivo (which are they still being offered? Didnt't DTV and tivo have a bitter divorce quite publiclly last month?) ARE a great value if you go the satellite route. Dual tuning, digital only stream, Tivo ease of use, low subscription...

But out of the box without modification (software or hardware) you can't get the content off your DTV tivo box, which is the point of this article.

Another compelling reason is if you are a paranoid schizo and don't trust TiVo (no matter WHAT their privacy statements say, and oh by the way they can change them at any time) about collecting info on your viewing habits... if you DIY you can have more control over what goes in and out of your DIY PVR (unless you tape MTV, I can't help the GIGO there)

Note: I own and love my tivo and don't wear a tinfoil hat, just thought I point it out as a potential reasoning.

Now if Dishnetwork and DirectTV would supply the needed daughter cards/access cards to digital satellite PCI PVR cards [] we wouldn't be able to argue about the "re-encoding digital content" issue. (you can use those cards in Europe with subscription satellite services, but not here, from what I understand)

*shrug* YMMV,


Only 144 hours to transfer a football game .. (3, Funny)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770484)

to another registered machine in a different time zone where the game is blacked out? It's like they're just opening the barn doors and letting the horses run free? Where's the concern for the poor copyright holders rights? This will bankrupt the NFL and Hollywood in short order (if we assume that a over 50 decades qualifies as short order).

Too bad, so sad (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770490)

If TiVo makes advertisers' business model obsolete, that's just too bad. Find another way to make money. They're already putting more "ads" into the shows to counter this.

Tivo needs this feature (1)

Mostly Monkey (454505) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770497)

I would say that being able to digitally transfer video to my computer is the only thing I miss about my Tivo. It's obviously possible to transfer to VHS tape but I don't want to move backwards quality wise. Right now it is possible to transfer stuff but it takes a bit of modding (adding an ethernet card) and a lot of linux familiarity to get it to work, something most casual users don't care to do. Fight the good fight TIVO!

Series 1 UK can be hacked to do this anyway (1)

mccalli (323026) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770502)

OK, so this is a faff but...

  1. Add in a network card (I bought a Cachecard - have a look at I believe)
  2. Telnet in and install vserver
  3. That's it - connect to vserver using mplayer or I believe vlc and you've got streamed recordings. Identifying the recording number is awkward, but not if you install TivoWeb or TivoWeb Plus

No links to provide - do a few searches for the above software with 'Tivo' included in the search and you should find something.


Why tivo only (1)

nomad63 (686331) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770505)

Don't they know it is not the casual user of tivo they need to be worried about but the hacker type, who has the utmost capability of circumventing any protection and if necessary, building their or building their own Tivo-like system [] and do what they are trying to circumvent and dump the recordings on to p2p networks for widespread sharing ? When will they learn not to fight the system ?

Live by the sword, die by the sword. (1)

hrieke (126185) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770506)

They have no idea how many people are going to become pissed off just because the media companies want to protect their income streams.
When your parents / grandparents / non-technically savive friends & family can do something as simple as record a TV program because of 'broadcast flags' and the like then Congress will hear from the masses in the most unpleasent way possible.

Re:Live by the sword, die by the sword. (1)

Nikker (749551) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770638)

Are they really protecting their income streams?

I (Hollywood, NFL, anyone) broadcast an event that who ever has access to this event wheather it be in person or television views it. Now I have a susbscription to the channel and the event for the date and time it was broadcasted. Why is it such a big deal eventhough for _whatever_ reason I was not able to see it so I duped the tape off of a friend and watched it.

What is the matter with what I have just done?

Re:Live by the sword, die by the sword. (1)

hrieke (126185) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770773)

Well the thing is that they don't want you to tape the show. they either want you to watch it when it airs, or by demand from one of their servers (wnna bet that it will include commericals too?)

And that's the point, if you don't see the commericals, the advertisers don't see value in paying money to the broadcasters, then why should they broadcast anything?

Now, when you copy the tape, do you include the commericals as well?

I don't get it... (1)

xbrownx (459399) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770509)

Can someone explain how being able to record a television show on TiVo, and then potentially watch it from other devices, and share it with your friends or over the Internet, is in any shape or form different than recording a show with a VCR and passing the tape around to your friends?

Re:I don't get it... (1)

jfmerryman (670236) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770808)

The difference (thinking like the MPAA) is that the internet makes it a lot easier and more convenient to pass content around. It does not make it any more possible than it was before. Just like MP3 versus audio tape. Both made it possible for average consumers to share recordings with friends, but MP3 (and especially P2P networks) made it easy and more convenient than going out to the local Sam Goody.

I think the issue here is that the MPAA/NFL want to make sure it doesn't become more convenient for the average consumer to call a friend with TiVo and get copies of movies/NFL Sunday Ticket games than to buy them.

I disagree with the idea of limiting technological progress to serve existing business models, but they aren't completely crazy. (And yes, I've modded my TiVo and can extract video very easily.)

how many VCRs do you own? (1)

Mars Ultor (322458) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770810)

Problem is that it would take you more time than you have to make, say 20,000 copies and distribute them out (physically) vs. recording Spiderman 2 on your TiVO, then p2ping the result out to the masses.

I'm just being a smart ass though, I think the tv execs are playing morons to perfection.

Re:I don't get it... (1)

hobo2k (626482) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770818)

Sure, I'll give it a shot. VCR lowers the quality of the recording. VCR is a pain in the butt to use hense people are less likely to use it. And with broadband and p2p software, your group of "friends" suddenly becomes 10,000 people around the world who you've never met.

Why this would be a bad thing for the content producers... I don't know. Maybe bad for your cable company if you drop your subscription and just download your favorite shows.

paranoia (1)

millahtime (710421) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770515)

They are just paranoid. They forgot their tin foil hats. It's like recording it on your vcr. They are just worried about distribution. With my upstream I would never try to upload a 2+ hour video.

Quality does NOT matter to pirates! (1)

ayeco (301053) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770516)

Haven't they heard, or seen, people who trade tv shows don't care about quality. Higher quality is just a bonus. There are hours and hours of low quality 80's tv shows online for trade.

Re:Quality does NOT matter to pirates! (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770674)

There are hours and hours of low quality 80's tv shows online for trade.
And there are hours and hours of low quality 2004 tv shows on the air right now :-)

And summer reruns ...

No wonder I'd rather buy a book.

Who would download an OLD football game?! (1)

Anita Coney (648748) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770518)

Football is boring enough as it is, but who in their right mind would ever try to share it online AFTER the game is over?! And worse, who would be afraid of that happening?! Where's the lucrative market in old football games.

Re:Who would download an OLD football game?! (1)

grunt107 (739510) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770716)

I would like to replay the Joe Thiesmann leg fracture, though (over and over and over...)

Interesting snippet in article... (1)

John Harrison (223649) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770536)

The HoR is working on legislation that will authorize the use of players that filter objectionable content. While many /.ers see this as censorship, others view it a gaining the right to consume media in a way that is more Free.

Yes, and also it's a win for artists (1)

Perianwyr Stormcrow (157913) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770763)

If you can re-interpret content freely to remove what you find objectionable, why can't you remix the material to your liking in any other way? It's a good thing for sure.

It's Capitalism. Get over it (4, Insightful)

LehiNephi (695428) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770537)

TiVo, with its associated abundance of convenient features, is merely the response of a free market to a real demand. Keep in mind these facts:

1.) People like certain shows, so they buy a TV.
2.) These shows are only shown on cable, so people subscribe to a cable service.
3.) People can't always watch those shows when the shows are broadcast, so they buy a VCR.
4.) People (in general) don't want to watch commercials, so they buy a TiVo.(I'm not saying that it's the only reason people buy it, it's just one)

With each step, the monetary expense increases. But consumers consider it worth the money. One major problem I see here, however, is that cable channels (in the beginning) were commercial-free. They were paid for by the subscription fees. Now, not only do you have to pay the cable company more than ever to watch the same shows, you now have a third of your time wasted by commercials.

This is why TiVo is becoming more popular. It's convenient. Someone needs to explain that term to the RIAA and MPAA.

avoiding commercials ISN'T it (1)

Perianwyr Stormcrow (157913) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770620)

If it wasn't for the TiVo, I wouldn't watch most of the TV that I do watch. Why? Well, I am never home when that stuff is on. In fact, I don't own the TiVo- my friend does (it's a ReplayTV, but same difference.) I watch the shows at his house (in fact another friend of mine gets the shows off of the ReplayTV and watches them on his laptop.)

It does allow a real shift in how TV is watched that will eventually change the meaning of time on TV. Sure, "prime time" will still be valuable for live shows, but if everyone has a TiVo-like device (I suspect they will be standard equipment in future TVs,) every other time slot will vastly increase in value.

Just a little confused.... (1)

Aerog (324274) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770555)

Why the NFL? I mean, I can see networks being paranoid; you can watch a show later on with no commercials and it's all fine. There's where you're "losing" ad revenue. However, don't most sports fans want to watch the game as it happens? And if they do, don't they see the commercials anyway? And what about the massive product placement during the game? I'm wondering what sort of a sports fan population out there is willing to wait a day or two (avoiding all talk about said game) just so they can download a copy of it without commercials.

And secondly, I haven't got it working yet myself, but with certain digital cable / DSL Cable subscribers, there's really only the matter of plugging your computer into the line and streaming the data from the IP that matches the channel into a file and then editing it later (if you so desire). I've seen it done firsthand and it's rediculously easy, which leads me to wonder why the fuss about TiVo?

Tivo Is Just Legitimizing What's Already Possible (2, Interesting)

baudilus (665036) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770564)

While I can see why the MPAA and NFL would want to fight Tivo on this, I don't think Tivo is doing anything revolutionary at all. Digitizing content from TV has been possible for several years. If it's illegal with Tivo, then it's illegal with a VCR, a DVD-R, a PC-base PVR, and a host of other ways to get broadcast TV onto the PC. There is no way this can possibly be enforced. Tivo is the target because it is the most popular commercially available PVR, plain and simple. I just don't see Tivo losing this battle.

Simbolical battle (1)

lostmagik (776421) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770575)

I think the know TIVO is not realy a threat. But should they win this legal battle it will open new doors; its legal repercutions are the objective of these powerfull people I believe. Who knows maybe one day youll need a permit to use those video capture cards. 1984 people!

And Maybe Some Day... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770730)

...You will learn how to spell and punctuate. Here's a little help:

"Simbolical Battle" should be "Symbolic Battle"

I think THEY know THAT TIVO is not REALLY a threat TO THEM. But, (note the comma) should they win this legal battle, (note the comma) it will open new doors. (note the period instead of the semicolon) I BELIEVE (note that I believe was moved to the beginning of the sentence) THE legal repercutions are the objective of these POWERFUL people. Who knows, (note the comma) maybe one day YOU'LL (you forgot the apostrophe in "you'll") need a permit to use video capture cards. ("those" in the original sentence was unneccessary and was removed) IT'S LIKE 1984 people! (The addition of "It's like" makes the last phrase sound smoother.

Please tell me you are a troll and not another fine product of our public schools.

SSDD (1)

killdashnine (651759) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770586)

It's the same old story ... whining over our technological prowess. The fact remains is that if we have the technology to copy videos, music, or other things, then we WILL copy those things. Eliminating or otherwise inhibiting that ability seems to be "indian giving".

I don't really understand why the NFL should care much about this though; the last time I checked with my friends who watch a lot of sports, there's still this big stigma about them "not being able to watch a recorded game" anyway. I don't know anyone who would get a "season pass" on TiVo to their fav football team (or whatever) and watch them all at some later time.

Of course (1)

focitrixilous P (690813) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770625)

Let's see now, if someone saves "the best" of every football game he watches onto a TiVo, imports them to his computer and makes a neato keen iMovie about "the best of $team", said person will not purchase a hollywood produced best of $team DVD [] . This is a loss of profit to the NFL, so of course they will try and find some way to stop them from doing it, or at least delay them another profit filled year.

It doesn't matter what merit the lawsuit has, they just need to get TiVo to delay or stop this whole concept, and they won't stop suing until they do.

This is exactly why I like TiVo's new concept, though, because of the fact you never even consider getting a best of DVD ever again, you can make your own. Which is exactly why the big media companies are trying to stop them, cause it means less profit.

Reality to NFL and HOLLY WOULD (3, Insightful)

Sfing_ter (99478) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770627)

That ship has sailed.
The cat is out of the bag.
The gate is open on the corral.
Been there, done that.

Zoidberg: That's why I love Earth. You can do what you want, and no one makes you feel guilty, because no one cares.
Fry: We're not listening!
Zoidberg: That's what I'm talking about!

And frankly, that's it... I have been able to do it with vhs for years, and I will continue to do it with new technology. I have my pvr card so FOAH. I record movies, ppv movies, tv shows et. and it is none of your bizness. I keep what I want.

I am not listening, I am acting.

If it comes to my tv it's for my enjoyment period.
If you don't want me to have it, don't show it.

I don't understand the NFL's concerns (5, Interesting)

angle_slam (623817) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770635)

The NFL, the largest and most popular sport league in the US, is concerned that someone might TiVo a game and send it to someone else. Why? A game is only useful if it is live. Even a 1 hour delay makes the game's value nearly nil.

There are two reasons a fan would want a TiVo'd game. (1) the game isn't broadcast in their area. E.g., a Steelers fan who lives in Nebraska might not get the Steelers on their TV. The solution: NFL Sunday Ticket. "But that's exclusive to DirecTV?" says the NFL. Well whose fucking fault is that. There are plenty of people who would be willing to pay for NFL Sunday Ticket if it were available through Cable companies. They can't because the greedy NFL signs a multi-billion dollar contract with DirecTV. (I want Sunday Ticket, but my apartment faces north. I can't get DirecTV.)

(2) the game is blacked out. A Steelers fan might not see the Steelers because the game is blacked out. Actually, the Steelers are a bad example because they haven't been blacked out in 30 years. So let's use the Cardinals. Their home games are never broadcast in Phoenix because they never come close to selling out. The whole purpose of the blackout policy is to force fans to buy tickets to prevent the blackout. It obviously doesn't work because the Cards still only get 30,000 fans per game. So why do they still use this outdated, policy that doesn't work? None of the other major sports black out home game.

The NFL can end the market for Tivo'd games by merely offering NFL Sunday Ticket to all cable companies and ending the blackout policy that doesn't work.

Dammit dammit dammit! (3, Interesting)

jeblucas (560748) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770641)

I feel like a sheep. Like I'm just being sheparded around told what to like, how to like it, and how long to like it before have my hindquarters slapped over to the next pasture. "You're done enjoying that NFL game. Go watch this now." Everytime a company comes along and says "hey, we're not trying to screw you, do what you want," a thousand other companies come out of the woodwork to shout them down. This is just part-and-parcel with the following other travesties:
  • VoIP must be stopped! It lets people make phone calls without paying someone [other than the broadband provider]!
  • Making people pay [a fortune] for commercial television. I remember when people thought it was okay to pay for cable because you got things like HBO, which didn't have commercials. HBO still doesn't have commercials, but it's still an extra $12/mo on your $60 cable bill.
  • When did ease-of-use become piracy? I used to make mixtapes for girlfriends. I had the Jerky Boys calls on some umpteenth generation copy of a copy. I don't remember anyone up in arms about this--the Jerky Boys got a movie deal out of that underground phenomenon. Now that I can easily make a share a mix it's illegal?
Don't give up everyone. Write your Congressperson [] . Some of you live in Utah [] . Do something about it [] .

Time zone? (1)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770649)

"The NFL, meanwhile, is concerned that a user could send a copy of a game to someone in another time zone, where the game is blacked out."

What do time zones have to do with blackout rules? Blackout applies to X distance from the stadium (or is it city, I can't remember). In fact, if NFL wants to keep people from overriding blackout rules, perhaps they should be as stern with DirecTV as they are with TIVO. I have known a couple of bar owners in the NE GA who used to claim the dish was in SC in order to show Falcons games at their bars.

Hollywood/NFL Living in The Past (5, Insightful)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770652)

It's time for hollywood, NFL,RIAA and others to wake up and smell the CPU cycles.
People want to record TV shows,films and radio broadcasts. Not because they're freeloaders. It's because they like TV and want to watch it again. If you can't accept this and make money off it, then you have a poor business model and deserve to get driven out of business by smarter competetors.

The mass media have made money for one simple reason. They had a monopoly on the production and distrobution technologies of the media. Only they could afford radio towers, film reels and copying technology. Through this they have also maintained a monopsony over the base talent which they promote. Hence the low signal to noise ratio on TV and radio. Now, thanks to technology, even your average joe sixpack has the technology to copy a TV broadcast of music track. TiVo has given him the power to record the game, the soaps, the news, so he can watch them again. Does this mean we should shut down TiVo so the monopoly can continue?

HDD based TV recorders. MPAA and NFL want to shut them down because they encourage 'theft' of signals floating around in peoples homes. Nonsense. They just wish to maintain a monopoly over the distribution of their content, so they can jack up the price for their wares.

They deserve to be driven out of business.

If you want an example of a company that is using peoples wants and likes to make money out of HDD recorders, look no further than Sky+. [] Sky actually encourage people to record TV shows and are making a mint off it.

Put that in your smoke and pipe in NFAA!!! :E

Can't help but equate with gun rights (1)

mr.nicholas (219881) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770669)

that Congress might need to change the law to invalidate a Supreme Court decision that established a key underpinning of fair-use rights, which is that developers of technologies cannot be held responsible for the actions of those who might use them to violate copyright.

So that means that Gun makers will finally be held liable for how people use their guns?

What, no?

Hello, media folks, the paradigm has shifted. (1)

the_rajah (749499) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770675)

When will the xxAA's and their buddies like NFL, MLB, etc. realize that the paradigm has already shifted? All they are doing is delay tactics against the inevitable with these innovation inhibiting (illegal) actions. We all have rights to *Fair Use* copies of any media that we've bought so their actions to stop that are illegal, IMO. IP that is broadcast is, again IMO, in the public domain as soon as it leaves the transmitting antenna/cable head-end. It's time for them to shift the efforts they are putting into these rear guard actions into efforts to adjust their business model to the 21st Century.

"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain

Suggestion for a new business model (1, Redundant)

justanyone (308934) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770678)

I'm willing to pay per view for all shows I view.
  • I believe television should be like books.
  • I get the right in perpetuity (forever) to re-view any show I purchase, as many times as I wish.
  • I get the right to copy the show as many times as I wish to whatever media I wish.
  • I do not have the right to sell any show.
In order to make this business model work, the amount of data sent per show should make it prohibitively expensive to keep everything.

Thus, I pay $0.05 (5 cents) for the 'Ask This Old House' epsiode 112. I would be silly to burn it to media because it would cost $0.50 to store it. Of course, if I have that much money, I have the right to do so, but it'd be silly. Any time I want to watch it again, I'll just order it up again and they'll get another 5 cents. If everyone does this, they actually get lots of money.

This is similar to my idea about music. I'd be happy to pay approx. 2 cents per song to the copyright owner (the artist, I hope?). I'm willing to spend a total of $1000 to own a library of the 50,000 most popular recordings of all time. That's probably most everything I'd want to listen to ever.

The record companies and artists get their money, I get the right to listen to all the songs I want when I want how I want where I want, and everybody's happy.

Eventually the price will come down to reasonable levels.

Music and TV and Movies all operate on the same concept as Books - Intellectual property. They should realize their business model allows for plenty of profit, just adjust it for the new realities of media costs.

this is why I got ReplayTV instead (1)

dmnic (452122) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770679)

well, 1 of 2 reasons why I didn't get Tivo.

ReplayTV has had this functionality for how long?

If you don't vote Libertarian, you ASKED FOR THIS (0, Offtopic)

Bob_Robertson (454888) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770681)

Just another example of how corruption flows to power the way water flows downhill.



boscodegama (652475) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770712)

Someone above made a good point about the industry always fighting the technology and losing. VCR was the prime example. It spelled the DEATH of Hollywood remember. No one would buy VHS tapes every again, just rent and copy. The bastards are wrong, wrong, wrong. And on a side note, it's useless to fight, you can't stop technology. Period, end of story. (Well short of nuclear holocaust and that would just be a set back). Cheers.

yeah, right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770727)

A one hour game that takes 3 1/2 hours to play? Afficionados have been taping the games for decades and fastforwarding through commericals to the breaking of the fake huddles. It was "crimethink" back then, it's "crimethink" now. But there's nothing they can do about it.

well??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770738)

if anyone does not want people making copies of misoc or video or movies then they better keep it locked up in a safe where nobody can view or listen to it...

if there is a will they will find a way to record whatever media is displayed on TV or the internet...

It's time... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9770757)

...for the common people to roll out a grass roots campaign to encourage copying movies. The mainstream US film industry is only 13billion, they wouldn't be missed financially, and film wise it'd be just like the 70's all over again with films with terrific writting and shitty production values. It could be a new golden age of entertainment if only the common people took back the reigns with the help of technology.

Entertainment is not a legitimate industry and deserves no protection. It's complete bullshit that we let a bunch of accountants tell us what to like. It's time to let this house of cards collapse, but if we wait too long, our one chance to stick it to these assholes will be legislated away.

Stop Consuming (1)

MojoRilla (591502) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770784)

Hollywood, the RIAA and others would like to charge you every time you use their content. They would like to charge you for every format of their content.

The NFL wants to restrict their content. Make you buy expensive satellite service or go to their games live if they haven't sold enough tickets.

As painful as it sounds, the only way to escape the trap is to stop consuming their content.

Boo-frickety-hoo... (2, Funny)

Shadow2097 (561710) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770798)

From TFA: "The NFL, meanwhile, is concerned that a user could send a copy of a game to someone in another time zone, where the game is blacked out."

Cry me a freaking river. I'm a huge NFL fan, but as I'm just out of school, I don't have the money to afford to buy tickets for the games. Yet, if the stadium isn't sold out, the home-team TV markets are forbidden from showing the game because if people really wanted to see it, they'd pony up and buy up all the available tickets. Thats the contractual agreement the NFL made with CBS and Fox. So what happens if other people don't want to buy tickets? I'm unable to watch my team play.

The networks are broadcasting it elsewhere, just not in my area. So if the NFL has a problem with me doing what it takes to LEGALLY acquire game footage, they can go screw themselves. Last I heard, having someone give me a tape of anything broadcast on network television, so long as its not sold for profit, is entirely legal.

This is me, playing My Heart Bleeds For You on the worlds smallest violin. It looks amazingly similar to my middle finger.


Avid Football Fan View (1)

FriedTurkey (761642) | more than 10 years ago | (#9770809)

This being Slashdot, I have to give the opinion of a footbal fan as one of the few.

Here is why the NFL doesn't want tapings of games on the Internet
  • NFL just started there own cable channel the "NFL Network". Rebroadcasting all pre-season games this year. Only a matter of time before the rebroadcast all the games.
  • Direct TV contract. You can watch the games you want it you pay for the $300+ Direct TV package.
  • Local teams need the plug. The NFL chooses the game you will watch. Even if the game is meaningless and there is a really good game somewhere else.
  • Still want to black out if needed. Teams don't blackout local coverage much anymore but they still will if the game is not sold out. Oh yeah if that happens you don't get another game you get an infomerical. Oh yeah they can still black you out on Direct TV.
I would pay for a reasonable way to watch the games I want to see. I would also like to go to games but football tickets are insane. The NFL really knows how to screw thier fans sometimes.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?