Will We Need A SmartCard to Watch Digital TV? 326
An anonymous reader writes "This story on EE Times points out that Hollywood and major electronics manufacturers are in agreement on a SmartCard requirement for digital video interconnectivity. Note that the article talks about them 'closing the analog hole.'"
Next time they will make you pay for the service.. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Next time they will make you pay for the servic (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Next time they will make you pay for the servic (Score:5, Insightful)
Step one - realize that you are NOT the consumer for broadcast entertainment -- you are the product. The consumer is the advertiser, the "content" is the vehicle for delivering the product (you) to the consumer.
Step two -- get sick of being sold
Step three -- look at your "favorite shows" in a whole new light
--
Re:Next time they will make you pay for the servic (Score:2)
Yes, and look at how many hacked cards there are over here.
In fact there was even a story a while ago that one pay-TV provider was deliberately hacking the smart cards of another. (I can't find the reference, but I'm sure it was right here on
To quote famous phrases.... (Score:5, Funny)
Or do I just go ahead and get my number and be quiet?
-------
Those who don't understand, will probably vote (-1, Offtopic)
Re:To quote famous phrases.... (Score:2)
Expect the lamb next year sometime, I guess.
I wonder... (Score:4, Insightful)
Sounds like these folks need to read Cringley's "Curtain Call" article and stop wasting so much effort on things that are doomed to fail.
Re:I wonder... (Score:2, Informative)
'nuff said
Re:I wonder... (Score:2)
I misspoke, meant more like "will the satellite crackers lend a hand and crack it in about 45 seconds". But you get the idea.
Probably a stupid question, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
Price - Worth waiting. (Score:2)
Re:Price - Worth waiting. (Score:2)
Meanwhile, you've got all of these PVR geeks running around watching things at sub-NTSC anyways to get good compression and lots of stuff on their TiVo's.
Nevermind the fact that there is NO high resolution content on DVD. Once HDTV comes out in full force, you'll have to replace your DVD collection to take full advantage of it and even if your PVR supports hi-res then you might not even bother with it to get more hours of recording time.
WHO CARES if you can watch Will & Grace in high res. This is the absolutely MOST worthless use for an HDTV.
stupid question / stupid industry / beware! (Score:5, Insightful)
What this means for consumers is simple: No matter what the sales clerk tells you, and no matter how much you spend on a fancy digital ready monitor or plasma display today, there will never be a tuner that puts out a signal that your expensive monitor will accept at the high definition resolutions you want and expect. Buy now and you will be screwed! Once they figure out how to copy protection hobble the system, then and only then will you be able to get a display that might someday display the full promise of DTV, but unless you plan on being part of a massive class action consumer lawsuit, stay away from any new equipment until they figure out how they are going to cripple the equipment you pay for.
Re:stupid question / stupid industry / beware! (Score:2)
Re:stupid question / stupid industry / beware! (Score:3, Insightful)
That said, if new digital sets are crippled as much as the entertainment industry is trying to make them, I won't go near them either.
Sorry folks, I have NO problems staying with a decent analog picture if it's free.
Even if they put smartcards of some sort in TV sets, what are they going to do, tell everyone who has purchased a set that "in 6 months we'll be altering the encryption, you must now go and purchase a new card for your TV or you won't receive any signals".
Oh wait, yes, that's EXACTLY what they're going to do. And I won't have it.
The funny thing is that the entertainment industry has been absolutely whining up a storm about DVD piracy, but the fact is that DVDs are selling incredibly well (far better than VHS tapes used to), and as an added benefit, they cost less to produce.
Just goes to show the greed of the industry...
Re:Probably a stupid question, but... (Score:2)
I don't know why you think he's trolling. He's got an interesting point. What would one do with a Bluetooth enabled TV?
I can imagine a PVR talking to a TV and vice versa. "Hey, I'm recording a show this guy likes. Turn to the channel I occupy!"
I can also imagine using a PDA or computer to talk to the PVR via Bluetooth to schedule recordings. Imagine going to TVguide.com, clicking a button to record, and Bluetooth does the rest.
I'm not aware of anything like this happening down the road, but the BT idea would be interesting. I know I like my laptop talking wirelessly to my phoine.
Re:Probably a stupid question, but... (Score:2)
Well firstly, he's a known troll. He posts on trolltalk for instance. It's a game to him. 35 inch TV 8 years ago? Please. He tries to get replies and mods. It's quite amusing to watch, at least, when you catch them :)
Secondly, Bluetooth doesn't have much use in a TV. Note that a PVR doesn't need the TV to be tuned to the actual channel, it contains its own decoding engine.
Thirdly, Bluetooth is very short range, like 10ft at maximum, water in the air blocks it (which is why those frequencies were chosen). Your computer would have to be very near the TV, for little gain.
I'm not aware of anything like this happening down the road, but the BT idea would be interesting. I know I like my laptop talking wirelessly to my phoine.
That's different. That's a) short range, b) low bandwidth and c) a useful way to exchange information. A TV typically doesn't have or need much information exchange. Maybe we'll see bluetooth TVs in the future, but I doubt it.
Don't even think of using BT to transfer video data, it's severely bandwidth limited.
Re:Probably a stupid question, but... (Score:2)
I was never talking about using BT as a way to transfer video. I was talking about using it as a method for other computers to control it. Right now I have a cell phone that talks to my laptop via BT. I thoguht that sounded gimmicky until I actually played with it. Now, I can set reminders etc so that my phone will remind me. Do I need to get up early on Saturday to catch a sale? No prob, plug it into Outlook and on Sat morning my cell phone's alarm goes off with a text description of why I need to wake up.
I didn't anticipate anything like that when I got the phone. It was a pleasant surprised. It really makes me feel that BT's has a lot of potential to be explored.
So yeah, I think there are uses we're not even thinking of that would make a BT interface on TV useful. Hell, I'd love the idea of my laptop talking to my TV. I could program a channel 'playlist'. "At 7, change to channel 12 so I can watch the Simpsons. At 7:30, change to 3 so I can watch Drew Carry, at 8 change to AMC because there's a movie I want to watch.." and so on.
Anyway, that's what I was thinking.
Re:Probably a stupid question, but... (Score:2)
Re:Probably a stupid question, but... (Score:2)
Yeah, what about it?
Re:Probably a stupid question, but... (Score:2)
There are charities (and quite likely even individuals) that would gladly take that old set off of his hands. There's absolutely no reason that it should end up in a dumpster.
If you want the world to be a greener place, adjust your own perspective first.
Secure smart cards (Score:5, Funny)
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to watch free HBO.
Citizen, you have committed an error. (Score:2)
Why are they picking on me ? (Score:5, Funny)
Note that the article talks about them 'closing the analog hole.'"
Should I be alarmed ?
Re:Why are they picking on me ? (Score:2)
Whole new meaning to the.... (Score:2)
And to think I thought being a certifed asshole was in the public domain. Now the feds are gonna sue me...
Dear Hollywood - Get a cluestick (Score:5, Insightful)
Specifically:
- I want to be able to view anything on any device.
- I also want at least some capability to make a single copy. If this is limited to 1 generation, then this will be acceptable to me, but possibly not to everyone.
- I want to be able to record any broadcast for later viewing. Including Pay Per view.
-
This must not be location limited at all.
It is not my concern that the media cartels have a business model that divides the world into regions. It is possible to make a profit without region control. They should adapt their business model to what the consumer (i.e. me) wants.Re:Dear Hollywood - Get a cluestick (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally, I don't think I will get a new idiot box when I am "required" to. These new rules and regulations are just too much. No time shifting? Fine, no TV.
Re:Dear Hollywood - Get a cluestick (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dear Hollywood - Get a cluestick (Score:2, Interesting)
All my news comes via the internet.
Three predictions for you...
1) In five years one eighth of the population will use a cell phone for their primary number and will either not have a land line at home or will have local service only with no long distance.
2) In five years streaming video will be good enough that video over the internet will be the "TV" of choice for most of the
3) Said dinosaurs will be announcing a new encryption standard for video which is "Unbreakable! Unlike the last standard which was hacked 14 days after it was announced..."
Re:Dear Hollywood - Get a cluestick (Score:2)
I'm very confused by the orrery of errors being perpetrated by the Hollywood cartel and the FCC, but don't those regulations only apply to over-the-air broadcasts, leaving cable unaffected? I remember reading somewhere fairly recently that cable companies were blowing HDTV off.
Re:Dear Hollywood - Get a cluestick (Score:2, Interesting)
Have you ever stopped watching TV? The hard part is probably the first month or so...after that, it gets significantly easier as you find other ways (most more productive) to occupy your time. By the time you are a season or two out, you don't care anymore and have already replaced your TV time with other activities. If 100,000 people don't switch and remain non-switchers for a year or so, they probably won't go back without compelling reason.
My wife and I gave up television for over 5 years. During that time the only thing we missed was the ability to watch videos in our own home. We bought a TV this past summer for two reasons: 1) I have a son who is going on two years old and we wanted to be able to get videos for him and 2) DVDs offer enough extra value for the buck that we thought they were worth the expense.
We do not subscribe to cable television and do not watch local, broadcast-through-the-air-spectrum-whatever-you-ca ll -it TV either (I think we can get a few local stations in but they are hazy and we never turn them on).
When I stopped watching TV it was because I was fed up with all the commercials, the cost for the value, and the lack of what I considered "quality programming". I missed a few shows (I was a big Trekkie, was just getting really into Farscape, etc.) but I got over it. After the first month or so, I barely even thought about it.
From talking with others who have kicked-the-boob-tube habit, this pattern seems pretty common. Of course, your experience may be/may have been different
codemonkey
Re:Dear Hollywood - Get a cluestick (Score:2)
The last thing that the Media Moguls want to do is to allow the average SUV driving schmuck to realize that they're getting screwed.
Joe Sixpack is simply too numerous to ignore.
Re:Dear Hollywood - Get a cluestick (Score:2)
Exactly. Getting them to switch to DRM-hobbled A/V equipment should be like convincing them to buy a Geo instead of their Ford Excursion.
Re:Dear Hollywood - Get a cluestick (Score:2)
Maybe SUV drivers catch a lot of flak from tree hugging bicycle riders in Berkeley. However, in the rest of the country there are no negative pressures to get rid of them.
Compared to what you would likely replace the average SUV with, an SUV is better in any concievable respect except gas mileage.
Re:Dear Hollywood - Get a cluestick (Score:2)
While I agree with you, I do want to clarify one thing - I want to be able to make a single *digital* copy. If I miss a digital broadcast, I should not be punished by having to tape it on an analog VCR.
I agree, though, that I want a single copy. I think that is a workable "fair use" compromise. There are some problems with it (families, for example), but a single digital copy (and an infinite number of analog copies) could definitely be worked with.
Will We Need A SmartCard to Watch Digital TV? (Score:5, Insightful)
Will I need to buy a Digital TV if they make it too hard for me to watch? Seriously, all this 'flags' crap makes me want to avoid it all together.
TV needs me, I don't need TV. Without my eyeballs on the commercials, they aren't making money. They should consider that before they try pushing restrictions I don't want.
Re:Will We Need A SmartCard to Watch Digital TV? (Score:2)
Yeah (Score:5, Interesting)
Here ONdigital collapsed after pirated cards flooded the markets. The Canal+ card/crypto system was broken. There was later a scandal when it was revealed that the team of hackers who broke it appeared to have significant backing from News Corp who operated the rival Sky TV which used its own crypt system.
This article talks about watermarking which is a tad more advanced than what's used here, but it makes little difference. The cards will be cracked, cloned, whatever. They should see what is going on outside their own borders.
Re:Yeah (Score:5, Insightful)
The cards will be cracked, cloned, whatever. They should see what is going on outside their own borders.
I'm sure you're right. Here's why I think you'll always be right:
Content protection for broadcast media is a fundamentally hard problem. Other smart card systems can make use of key diversification and card blacklists to limit the damage that can be caused by breaking one card. The idea is that in a system where every card has its own, unique keys, stealing the secrets from one card only allows you to duplicate that card, so if the system can recognize and blacklist duplicate cards relatively quickly, crackers will give up because it's just too much work for too little gain.
For broadcast systems, though, there's a problem: every card (or at least large sets of cards) has to have the same keys, because you can't generate a different data stream for each card. At best you can encrypt the datastream with time-varying keys and have a separate keystream consisting of a zillion copies of the current datastream key, each encrypted under a different card key. Scale that up to a large system with tens of millions of subscribers, though, and you either need vast bandwidth just for the keystream (keep in mind that in practice there are a bunch of different datastreams, all of which must be keyed independently so you can sell different channel), or you need to make some cards with duplicate keys (actually, a possible way to address this just ocurred to me... but there's probably a flaw in it).
If some legitimate cards are duplicates, then you can't blacklist illegitimate duplicates without killing paying customers, and pissing off paying customers is very bad business. Not to mention the fact that in a broadcast environment, it's fairly difficult to *identify* illegal duplicates. In most other smart card systems there is a back channel for sending data to a central system where it can be correlated to look for anomalies. Such auditing is a crucial part of most secure smart card systems.
Building secure smart card systems (like building any secure systems) isn't about making smart cards completely impenetrable, because no real-world system or device ever is (particularly not when you place a key component of the system in an attacker's unsupervised hands!), it's about structuring things so that the cost of breaking the card exceeds the likely benefit. In most environments, this is feasible, and, hence, smart cards are useful secure tokens. In broadcast content protection, however, many of the techniques used to limit the benefit of breaking a card are simply unavailable. And where benefit exceeds cost by a significant margin, someone will surely see a business opportunity...
Re:Yeah (Score:2, Insightful)
Couldn't prove it by me. Two recent examples:
DishTV (relevent, I think). I moved across the street. After reinstalling, aiming my dishes, and running the cable, was only able to hit two of the three birds I pay to get, and those only on one of two receivers I pay for. After many calls to their tech support, many frustrating hours of trying different LNBF's and switches (on the advice of their tech support reps), I threatened to go to DirectTV with their free install/two receiver deal. The service rep pretty much said "That's your decision. Go for it."
White Castle. Yeah, the belly bomb place. They recently decided that it's too much trouble to put mustard on your hamburger for you. But they'll happily provide you with mustard packets. One of the neat things about White Castle hamburgers is that they're easy to handle in the truck for lunch on the go. Ever try and open a mustard packet and put it on a hamburger while you're driving? (And the mustard in the packets just isn't as good as what they put on in the store.) THEIR reply when I flat out stated I wouldn't be back until they changed this policy? "We've made this decision because it was taking too long to serve our customers. We hope it doesn't affect your purchasing habits with us." Sounds like a training problem to me. I haven't been back since, and they probably haven't noticed.
Oh, and don't even get me started on the Kroger card, lol. They probably don't miss my business either.
And Inside their own borders (Score:2)
Re:Yeah (Score:3, Informative)
Care to explain that one?
I have seen and handled all in one homebrew cards for the Analogue system that worked look here [google.co.uk]
I have seen and handled cards that connected to a laptop to do decryption on the digital system - to be fair not working at the time I saw it.
You can also make attempts at cloning smartcards if you feel you're l33t enough try Cardman [cardman.co.uk] for some hardware - but don't please ask him *how* to do it - he got burned by some of the flack around the ITV Digital pirating issues and is now sticking firmly to just supplying hobbists tools to stay well clear of the allegations. Spend some time looking if it interests you.
One of the problems in broadcast systems is the system is only as secure as the people that run it. As soon as a disgruntled tech leaks some info about the encryption used then you have a chance to brute force it. Self authenticating systems are only secure when they can 'phone home' otherwise tech savvy consumers pop the lid off and start sticking the logic probes around the EPROMS - maybe this is why the Sky Digiboxes have to be connected to a live phone line or they have a paddy?
Now issues that do concern me with Sky is that the various broadcasting regulations in the UK mean that any digital reciever should be able to display free to air broadcast. This is because the operators with a license to broadcast nationally are obliged to carry the national stations (BBC) that people have already paid for through thier TV license. This is via cable / terrestrial or sat. They are also required to provide support for other broadcasters decrypt cards - this is designed to prevent monopolies by one company flooding the market with 'free' STB's - the ON Digital boxes mostly had two slots for a reason.
But on Sky the 'free to air' channels are encrypted - you have to apply for the 'free to air' decrypt card. And this is on the very boundry of breaking the conditions. There is also no capability of taking an extra decrypt card, nor as in the old analogue system adding an external decoder.
Additionally if the Digibox does not receive a signal from one of the Astra (Sky's own) series of satellites for a while then it resets its memory.
Why is this done? Well the Digibox is 'free' - of course it actually isn't it costs around 300 UKP. Now Sky doesn't actually pay for the boxes, a company called OPEN does - and they run all the online side of Sky's operation and build the operating environment on the STBs. They rely on a certain number of the customers using the charged for services that the Digibox can provide to make thier money back.
Canny independant dealers realised you could get the 'free' Digibox, hook it up to a good positioning dish and one cheap free to air system to go!
Hence the need to apply to Sky for the 'free' card and the reason for the memory wipe - not so long ago they closed down a company that sold an offboard backup system for thier Digiboxes because as well as great to save you the pain of reprograming after a power cut, it also bypassed thier 'wipe the memory' system.
This is what a major broadcasting company is doing in the UK - a country where we are used to free quality programming, and have a culture of regulation that tries (most of the time) to keep things fair.
I'd be very concerned over in the USA that your broadcasters don't just ram control into your front rooms.
it's more than piracy (Score:5, Insightful)
What does this have to do with piracy? Nothing, they use piracy as an excuse (and remember piracy is not a legal term, it's called copyright infringement) to help maintain a failing busines model. They want to control how and when people consume media, under the guise of protecting the consumer from the dangers of pir^H^H^H unauthorized consumption of copyrighted content.
The Truth? (Score:2, Interesting)
Besides - any guesses as to how long it'll be before this is circumvented? Place your bets!
Re:The Truth? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The Truth? (Score:2)
Excuse me? What was that? FCC NOT able to force shutdown of analog TV?? Havent they already set the date [wired.com] for analog TV phase out?
In a few years you'll only be able to buy digital TVs... and I still can't figure out why that is being done (what good is it for me as a customer that is). I could point out plenty of useful things FCC could do instead of this.
ALL of their demands.. (Score:2)
And what of existing equipment??? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yet another reason DTV will FAIL. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yet another reason DTV will FAIL. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Yet another reason DTV will FAIL. (Score:5, Informative)
2006? Nah. 2012? Probably. The 2006 figure was never taken seriously by anybody with a clue. Screw replacing the TVs - that's chump change. Replacing every bit of electronics in the broadcast chain, including the tower, in 10 years? When there was absolutely nothing available in 1996? No f'ing way.
But if you think that DTV is going to outright fail, well, you're just as blind as those who thought it would be nationwide by 2006.
Re:Yet another reason DTV will FAIL. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yet another reason DTV will FAIL. (Score:2)
but i don't see why it would fail around here, since i can see the price of a set-top box coming tumbling down by that time(to the point where the price is something ridiculous, like 30e).
oh yeah, the broadcasts begun a over year ago... if i wouldn't have cable, i'd probably buy a set top box, or digi tv card for my computer, just because of the few extra channels.
iirc they plan to stop analog around 2006 to free up the air, i'm not sure what they plan to do with the frequencys though.
'here' is in finland.
i would be more skeptic of the stopping of analog if they were still sketching the standards and planning to air in the 'near future'..
To close the analog hole (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: To close the analog hole (Score:2)
I think you're one step removed, even without eyes you might still have an illegal copy of the copyrighted work in your brain, damn memory. Although I'll be heading for Cuba before they remove mine.
New geek motto?
Sure communism sucks, but the zombies suck your brains.
Re:To close the analog hole (Score:2)
rock music. Your ears would never notice it, but it would be in the analog signal, and digitally-resampling the sound would just put it straight back into the
digital form.
This is why the article talks about D/A (Digital to Analog) and A/D (Analog to Digital) converters.
Then filter it! If you can't hear it then filtering it out wont hurt anything.
As popular as the original Divx. (Score:5, Funny)
"Please, sign me up for this new technology. It offers me no benefits, costs me money, and gives up my rights."
-- You. At least, you in the eyes of Hollywood.
Congressmen beware (Score:5, Insightful)
God can save a Congressmen who lets
smartcards come between Americans and their
free television.
Waste of effort (Score:3, Informative)
Someday these corps. are going to have to realize that digital is _more_ easily copied than analog, not less. No matter what clever locks and barriers they put up, the data is the same, and so it is inherently easy to reproduce. The demands of digital secrecy/security are fundamentally opposite to the demands of broadcasting and never the twain shall meet.
You mean easier free TV? (Score:5, Funny)
(Score: 5, Funny)
-RickTheWizKid
(And to think, I don't even _own_ a TV anymore... is this a bad thing?)
Vote with My Wallet and then my Ballot (Score:4, Funny)
I bet my kids will hate me for it.
On the other hand, now might be a good time to learn how to fix the current generation of 'disposable' kit and start hoarding parts. It might eventually become a nice little niche market.
Re:Vote with My Wallet and then my Ballot (Score:2)
That's one of the reasons they hate VCRs.
Good for you. (Score:2)
Of course, there's always the chance that Joss Whedon will throw a big monkeywrench in my plan at some point...
Obsolete current HDTV gear (Score:3, Interesting)
Bloody great for society as a whole (Score:5, Funny)
- Read a book!
- Go outside!
- Participate in democracy!
- Volunteer for charity!
This guys may be the best thing that's happened to western civilization since before Ed Sullivan sucked our collective brains out.Re:Bloody great for society as a whole (Score:2)
Re:Bloody great for society as a whole (Score:3, Insightful)
'closing the analog hole' (Score:3, Insightful)
It needs to be done, if only because people have been spending thousands and thousands of dollars on flat-panel TVs, HDTVs, etc. and they're all loath to buy another one anytime soon.
I had a point but I forgot what it was, so I'd better stop now.
You can't "close" it... (Score:2)
make something to much of a hassle (Score:5, Insightful)
I uess paper books will be the next target of this "analog hole"
so once people decide to stop watching TV, and begin to read more books, the publishing industry will begin to fase out paper books in favor of e-books....got to close that analog hole right.
wooo...now we will have a new underclass, those who can not afford electronic equipment...
will content publishers learn that when they try to keep control over the published information that it looses all value becasue no one wants to buy there crap? no, they will not and this is what will send us into the next dark age.
Just a little bit of help ?! (Score:2, Interesting)
A blessing in disguise (Score:3, Funny)
IN SOVIET RUSSIA (Score:4, Funny)
This really sucks for local anime clubs (Score:3, Interesting)
Unplug (Score:4, Insightful)
Why not unplug? Listen to the radio, read a book, go for a walk..
What's so special about Law & Order, Pay-per-View Heart concerts, and even, dare, I say, the Discovery Channel? Go to a library, INTERACT WITH PEOPLE. The only reason that the population will turn into a mob of wallscreen-watching zombies is if we decide to.
I can live with this... (Score:5, Interesting)
This is very much what the home cinema press (here in the UK, at least) has been predicting for years, and it seems to be an improvement on the current impasse.
Currently, you receive an encrypted data stream through your digital cable or satellite system, and it's decoded by a smartcard, but you're never allowed to get your hands on the datastream at all.
Under this proposal, you'll be able to get your hands on the encrypted datastream, and pipe it around your home network, save it to disk, whatever. You'll still need a valid smartcard to be able to decrypt and view it, but you need one now already. It even sounds like they are thinking about not requireing you to have a smartcard for every TV (or keep moving your smartcard about), but instead allow one card to serve an entire home AV network.
As for 'closing the analog hole' with digital watermarking techniques, this really doesn't sound any different from a souped-up Macrovision. We already have analogue signals tagged with a 'do not record' marker, so there's nothing really new here.
Now, there are still ways they can screw this up; I'd really like them to drop the regional coding idea. And I hope that if I record a datastream for later viewing, that datastream doesn't become inaccessible to me if I subsequently cease to subscribe to the cable or satellite operator it was recorded from.
Overall though this sounds promising, and I feel moderately optimistic that this will end up being a system I can live with...
-roy
Re:I can live with this... (Score:4, Insightful)
That alright, I'll be... (Score:2)
I'll be broadcasting my own analog stuff on the unlicensed spectrum [slashdot.org] and bypass digital all together.
Re: Will We Need a Smart Card to Watch Digital TV? (Score:3, Interesting)
More to the point, will we need to pay for the privilege of buying the smartcard so we can watch digital TV? IIRC, digital TV was supposed to be a free, broadcast medium, available to everybody, just like analog broadcasting. Why is it necessary to have some kind of technology to control who is watching? More to the point, if the copying of digital content so bothers the movie studios, why don't they just opt not to release their flicks for digital broadcast? Oh, that's right, Jack Valenti and Co. threatened to take their toys and go home from the digital party unless something was done. This really scared the broadcasters and electronics makers.
Apparently, this was that "something." It could be used to extract payments from folks with digital TVs; I guess they feel they can't get these couch potatoes to go to the cinema or get up and go to Blockbuster and buy DVDs. Once again, it's all about control and DRM (Digital Reach for your Money). If these measures are necessary, why is it that the movie studios don't seem to mind if their product (rubbish, for the most part) is broadcast on analog TV all the time? Even after the Betamax case, they don't seem to mind that one can record movies on a VCR-- that is a copy, right? (no pun intended) I am rather surprised that they allow their flicks to be broadcast, rather than lose all that revenue.
All I conclude is that these industries aren't serving my interests as a potential customer. Once again, Big Media has attempted to put their grubby fingers on emerging technology.
TV just isn't worth this. (Score:4, Insightful)
The day HDTV and SmartCards become a requirement is probably the day we stop watching TV shows altogether, though we'll likely keep the TV around for watching movies and playing games and the like. I don't know who they think they're kidding, but the crap they're trying to protect just isn't worth this kind of annoyance.
Case in point - Why do we need 14 channels of HBO in our cable package -- is it so we have more choice? No, it's because exclusivity deals and vertical ownership mean they have to be a Time-Warner billboard. Oh, that and the movies suck, so they have to have 14 channels of it to make it seem like you're getting your money's worth. When I was a kid, we got 1 HBO channel, but they ran primo movies every night, and it was generally worth the subscription fee. Now, it's 14 channels of Sex&City reruns and crap movies from the 80's and (early)90's. Screw them. Don't **EVEN** get me started on "Slowtime" - the premium cable network for morons and the terminally horny.
Now they want me to get a smart card and an encryption ID key for the priviledge of watching Will & Grace? Sorry. I'll do without - It's more fun playing with my wife anyway.
What about my material (Score:2, Interesting)
Paul
Future Scenario (Score:3, Interesting)
TV: All viewers must insert their identity cards and authenticate with the Viewing System before playback can commence.
TV: This TV can see 4 potential viewers and a dog in the room. Three viewers are on the TSN subscription plan and have automatic access to the broadcast. These viewers have household authentication and have validated within the last 24 hours. Viewing is authorized. The forth viewer, Bob Neighbour has inserted his viewerID(tm) card but not authenticated and will need to authorize the use of credit to enable the viewing. TSN allows dogs to watch Monday Night Football for free.
TV: Viewing paused. Awaiting authorization or departure. TSN thanks you for your viewing habits.
Parallel with e-books? (Score:3, Insightful)
Its too early so say for sure, but I see the possibility of the same thing happening here. Even leaving aside issues like playing media on Linux desktops, if Joe Sixpack can't do all the same stuff with this newfangled digital technology that he could do before with the old, if it is inconvenient to him, if he is getting less for the same money or more, he ain't gonna want it.
Next for radio, etc. (Score:2)
Re:Next for radio, etc. (Score:2)
All the more reason to kill your television ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Still locking themselves out from PC displays (Score:2)
Modern PC's have more than enough CPU power to decode and display digital video streams from the ethernet. Monitors have more than enough resolution to display HDTV. 100mbit ethernet is fast enough for HDTV. We just need cable boxes with ethernet ports.
HDTV could have an order of magnitude more viewers, if the entertainment industry would get over their computer phobia.
I know why they complain about piracy. (Score:2, Interesting)
big money even if we read about serious studies stating that losses are marginal or non-existent.
But I think I know why, it's because they want to
control the market in order to raise the pricing
of all their products.
In brief they want to bleed us to death and they
know that if piracy is too easy it will flourish
when they raise those prices.
If ever they get rid of piracy one way or another
we will pay the price, those movies will be
unaffordable.
Those big corporations are not treating their
customers as they should.
I hear the people answering to me "It is the
way it happens in a capitalist society" and I even
hear some people trying to tag me as a communist,
to them I answer right now that controling a market is the opposite of a free market and I don't like it.
Big corporations colluding together to create
an environment where the customers are deprived
of features, commodities and freedom should be
considered as illegal because it is the exact same thing as a monopoly.
I get angry each time that I read such news in Slashdot and it is not healthy. Soon I'll be forced to stop reading Slashdot for health reasons.
Come on people, wake-up, some big guys in big offices want to steal you your way of life, they would charge you the air you're breathing if they ever find a way to do it. Tell them now that it is unacceptable.
A question Hollywood needs to ask itself... (Score:2)
Its the missing link.
The assumption is we'll watch however it suits the studios.
We'll see how it all plays out. I've got a hunch though.
Dear big M&E, (Score:2, Insightful)
Competition already here - don't worry. Satellite (Score:4, Insightful)
I got satellite TV last week. I won't say the brand (don't accuse me of advertising) but suffice it to say it was one of the two major players.
Picture quality: best I've ever seen. Far better than cable (analog) and far, far, *far* better than the crappy digital cable we here have in San Francisco (Thanks AT&T-crapola).
Restrictions: NONE!!!
I purchased a PVR that has no monthly fee - and I can record to outside devices such as VCR without macrovision - even from the PVR recorded content.
Now - I just got this last week - but must say: I'm 110% very happy with it. So flame away, but I'm sure that as soon as they *force* us on to digital TV, and *force* us not to record shows (hmmm - any TIVO fans???) there will be mass exodus from the evil *them* and people will start using alternatives.
Other thoughts: how about TV via DSL/other broadband in 5-10 years??? I think it's possible. Satellite - definitely possible.
For those of you who will flame that they "don't have access to satellite" due to landlords or physical space considerations - I'm sorry & just like many of us look for broadband with our next apartments/homes, I'll be looking for a clear view to the south
The day this is enforced.. (Score:2)
Sort of forgot one (Score:2)
Nearly every level, except the most important one: the consumers themsevles. Time will tell whether this will be a boon for the broadcasting industry or a DIVX debacle on an epic scale...
Books are next.. (Score:2)
" Im sorry sir, but your lease to read that title you are requesting, 'the US constitution' has expired.. please come to the center, we will be waiting in the white zone for you.. "
'proverbial' (Score:3, Funny)
Thats just my take on it though, I could be wrong.
Question .... (Score:4, Interesting)
And what about all of the current analog TV's that are out there ... will it be illegal to own one? Even if you had a digital converter box, that box HAS to output analog signals to a current (non-digital) TV.
Hmmmm ... maybe time to stock up on supplies for the coming revolution.
Re:Hmm.... (Score:3, Funny)
Maybe there aim is off.
Re:Bill and Orwell... (Score:2)
Re:I'm all for it... (Score:2)
True, but once you've been told you're a filthy thief and you can't be trusted, what's your incentive to play by the rules. Reward is not the same as non-punishment and there's no reward for doing it, because you can't earn their trust.
I'm not saying it's right to access more streamed data than you're paying for, just that it's getting harder every year to condemn those that do it.