Talk:Broadcast flag

POV?

Personally, I don't know much about the subject, but the text seems rather biased against the broadcast flag. Indeed, it looks like a Bad Thing, but the page shouldn't condemn it outright, because that's opinion and not fact. Perhaps it'd be better to make a separate paragraph called "Criticisms of the Broadcast flag" or something like that? saturnight 18:21, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)

I agree. The criticism section would probably take up more than half of the page, but that'd be o.k., there's not much more than downsides to the broadcast flag. 84.227.209.249 00:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

This isn't a negative article

The article presents facts, and it shows who finds the legislation troubling. That is not bias, he is simply showing who finds problems with this ordeal. Perhaps it would be better to add something to the article explaining why the laws came into place, but there is no reason to take anything out. (posted Mar 21, 2005 by 63.100.44.98)

Well, I believe the following quotes (almost the entire article really) are clearly written by someone who doesn't like it. "The Demodulator Robustness Requirements are particularly troubling for open-source developers."
"...the FCC ties the hands of even sophisticated users and developers".
"Devices must be "robust" " (note the scare quotes)
"It's not even clear that binary-only drivers would qualify."
"The products that they do build will be epoxied against user experimentation and future improvement."
"The rules mean that open-source developers and hobbyists will be shut out of the HDTV loop altogether"

I really don't know anything about it, but expressions like "ties the hands of even..." or "epoxied against future improvement" should not be presented as a commonly agreed-upon fact (for one, the FCC clearly doesn't). And even if they are all completely correct facts, "the other side" is hardly represented. It's a fine article, but it definitely needs more work from someone who knows more about it. saturnight 22:45, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

How does it work?

This article provides no information about how the broadcast flag actually works. Is it part of the ATSC standard? or seperate from it? could it be implimented in countrys that use DVB? This would be a good addition to the article if anyone wanted to research it. --202.1.119.192 11:21, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Just the facts, please

Please keep in mind that this is an encyclopedia, not a news magazine. We don't need editorials. If you're going to provide information and call it a fact, then back it up with references. Tell us what you're basing your information on. Quote your sources (or at least use footnotes or endnotes) and give credit where credit is due. If you don't know or can't remember where your heard something, do your best to explain the details without indulging in speculation. As this is an obstensively technical article, the author(s) should have stuck to explaining the technology: leave the politcs out of it. If there's a political aspect to the story, put that in a seperate section. Don't mix the two!

As an example of what's wrong with this article, let me just take one line. When the writer said: "The rules mean that open-source developers and hobbyists will be shut out of the HDTV loop altogether" he breaks a couple of rules. 1) He is interpreting "The rules..." without refering to a ruling by a judicial or quasi-judicial body, by a law-enforcement organization, or by examining how the ruling is interpreted in common (everyday)practice. FCC rules & regulations can be challaged in a court of law, and if the court rules against the FCC then the FCC's rule or regulation can be struck down. He does refer us to the FCC ruling, but he neglects to inform us of how the courts (and the FCC itself) have interpreted these FCC rules & regulations. So.. I guess we just have to take his word for it? 2) He closes an argument without providing much of a body of evidence to back up his claim when he says "...open-source developers and hobbyists will be shut out of the HDTV loop altogether." The preceding paragraps do not contain sufficent basis for me to agree with this claim, nor to count the claim as credible. Worse, he does not provide any information for the "open source" or "hobbyists" that he purports to know about. How does he know that open-source developers and hobbiests wil be impacted by what he's talking about? I don't know: aparantly he didn't bother to tell us. 3)He refers to the "...HTDV loop". I'm not going to get into how and why this is poor english (which it is, in my opinion). I just want to point out that the author has just refered to something without defining that something. So, uh... does anyone reading this have any actual understanding of what this "loop" is that he has just refered to? Can someone fill us in on that?

NPOV

I believe I have addressed the concerns of those who consider the article POV. Would whoever posted the POV template please review my changes and consider removing it? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 18:35, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

Okay, thanks very much for adding the info and npov'ing it :) saturnight 19:24, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

Negative Effects

Today, you can use any device you like with your television: VCR, TiVo, DVD recorder, home theater receiver, or a PC combining these functions and more. If the FCC's broadcast flag mandate [PDF] had taken effect, some of those capabilities would have been forbidden.

The last sentence in the above paragraph is no longer true. The Magnavox ZV450MW8 DVD recorder is one example of a device that responds to digital broadcast protection flags and is unable to record Speed TV to DVD because of them.

Responding to pressure from Hollywood, the FCC had adopted a rule requiring future digital television (DTV) tuners to include "content protection" (aka DRM) technologies. All makers of HDTV receivers would have been required build their devices to watch for a broadcast "flag" embedded in programs by copyright holders. When it comes to digital recording, it would be Hollywood's DRM way or the highway. Want to burn that recording digitally to a DVD to save hard drive space? Sorry, the DRM lock-box won't allow it. How about sending it over your home network to another TV? Not unless you rip out your existing network and replace it with DRMd routers. Kind of defeats the purpose of getting a high definition digital signal, doesn't it?

Thanks to our court challenge, ALA v. FCC, that rule and its July 1, 2005, deadline were thrown out. But that doesn't mean the danger is behind us. Hollywood will likely head to Congress -- and quickly -- to ask for the flag again. That's why the DTV Liberation Front won't stop. We at EFF want to do our part to advance the DTV transition -- and the public's rights to receive and manipulate DTV broadcasts with technologies they choose.

We want to keep the right to time- and space-shift that the VCR has given us (against Hollywood's protest). We want to keep the fair use rights that let us excerpt clips from press conferences or make our own "Daily Show" from the evening news. That's why we're encouraging people to buy HDTV tuner cards now and build multi-function receivers and recorders around them.

Here's where you can help. The folks at www.pcHDTV.com make an HD-capable (ATSC) tuner card with Linux drivers. The MythTV project has built a terrific personal video recorder (PVR) platform that gives a GNU/Linux PC features like TiVo's pause live TV and "season pass" recording. These are great for geeks, and we're looking for volunteers to help make the combination more accessible to the general public.

There are also a number of alternatives for Windows and Macintosh computers that offer similar features. We still need volunteers to help make these products more accessible to more people.

The Broadcast Flag, as it was:

The essence of the FCC's rule was in 47 CFR 73.9002(b) and the following sections:

"No party shall sell or distribute in interstate commerce a Covered Demodulator Product that does not comply with the Demodulator Compliance Requirements and Demodulator Robustness Requirements."

The Demodulator Compliance Requirements insisted that all HDTV demodulators must listen for the flag (or assume it to be present in all signals). Flagged content must be output only to "protected outputs" or in degraded form: through analog outputs or digital outputs with visual resolution of 720x480 pixels or less--less than 1/4 of HDTV's capability. Flagged content may be recorded only by "Authorized" methods, which may include tethering of recordings to a single device.

The Demodulator Robustness Requirements were particularly troubling for open-source developers. In order to prevent users from gaining access to the full digital signal, the FCC tied the hands of even sophisticated users and developers. Devices must be "robust" against user access or modifications that permit access to the full digital stream. Since open-source drivers are by design user-modifiable, a PC tuner card with open-source drivers would not be "robust." It's not even clear that binary-only drivers would qualify.

Together, these rules meant that future PVR developers would have had to get permission from the FCC and/or Hollywood before building high-definition versions of the TiVo. The products that they did build would be epoxied against user experimentation and future improvement. The rules meant that open-source developers and hobbyists would have been shut out of the HDTV loop altogether. The Flag's courtroom defeat halts these developments for now, but they may well re-appear in coming months.

EFF's Project:

Since machines you build now will still work in high-def if any variant of the broadcast flag rule goes into effect, we'd like to make HDTV tuner cards easy to use now, while they can still be manufactured. We want to help the MythTV project work seamlessly with the pcHDTV card so less technical users can beat the broadcast flag. We'll also use these systems as benchmarks against which to compare the capabilities of later HDTV devices. We also want to hear about Windows and Macintosh HDTV tuner cards, with an eye toward helping people make the most of existing products.

In addition, if you've already seen devices limited by premature broadcast flag compliance, we'd like to hear about them -- to warn others away and to track the limitations flag rules impose.

» Presentation slides from Defcon12 » EFF's HDTV archive » EFF's Annotations to the MPAA Broadcast Flag FAQ » ALA v. FCC, Public Interest Groups' Challenge to the Broadcast Flag

source: http://www.eff.org/broadcastflag/

We've been slashdotted

A slashdot article has linked to this page. Slashdot page at: http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/05/03/2313242

Article is out of date

It's been awhile since Sununu was going to offer that amendment. Do we have any updates so we can revise the article?--Rosicrucian 01:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Broadcast flag. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929100427/http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/13nov20061500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2006/octqtr/pdf/47cfr73.9002.pdf to http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/13nov20061500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2006/octqtr/pdf/47cfr73.9002.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:44, 11 January 2018 (UTC)