[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[dvd-discuss] BPDG: Some Citizens Consumers, Some Not
- To: C-FIT_Community(at)realmeasures.dyndns.org, C-FIT_Release_Community(at)realmeasures.dyndns.org, fairuse-discuss(at)mrbrklyn.com, dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: [dvd-discuss] BPDG: Some Citizens Consumers, Some Not
- From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson(at)realmeasures.dyndns.org>
- Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 14:30:14 -0400
- Organization: Real Measures
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
(Forwarded from DMCA Discussion list,
email@example.com. Article text pasted
below. -- Seth)
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [DMCA_Discuss] BPDG Exemptions Explained . . . .
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 10:08:39 -0700
From: tom poe <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Hi: Hollywood wants exemption from the BPDG Requirements:
DVR's Illegal For All But Hollywood . . . .
DMCA_Discuss mailing list
June 07, 2002
DVR'S ILLEGAL FOR ALL BUT HOLLYWOOD . . . .
Cory Doctorow, of EFF reports on the suit against Hollywood:
"And Hollywood has already started issuing official,
dismissive FUD about it:
This suit is nothing more than a publicity stunt. This
complaint mischaracterizes the nature of the case against
SonicBlue and ReplayTV. Our lawsuit is against SonicBlue and
ReplayTV - not individual users. We have never indicated any
desire or intent to bring legal action against individual
consumers for use of this device.
SonicBlue and ReplayTV were aware that they were stepping
over the line of legality when they made and marketed this
device. Any complaint that consumers may have is with
SonicBlue and Replay.
You know you're doing the right thing when studio execs go
out of their way to tell the world that there's nothing to
see here, move along."
Hollywood's explanation for why they're taking legal action
against manufacturers seems to lack any connection with
reality. Every time they sue a manufacturer, it is with the
intent to prevent customers from purchasing equipment that
would be useful and productive, if not just neat to have.
Are these devices illegal? Well, no, they're not illegal,
according to the BPDG, who is attempting to control how
these devices will be manufactured. The BPDG just wants them
to be illegal for some folks, and here's the list of
4.12 Both proposals for section X.2 of the Compliance and
Robustness Requirements anticipate that an appropriate
provision will be crafted so as to exempt the requirements
from applying to products that are specifically intended for
professional and broadcast use (e.g., equipment used by
studios, TV broadcasters, satellite and cable operators).
The above is section 4.12 of the BPDG's final report. In
other words, any device capable of replaying, copying,
skipping channels, manipulating photos, movies, songs, and
news media content, etc., is illegal except for those who
are "professionals, studios, TV Broadcasters, satellite and
cable operators". If you're not one of those, you can't
"At its heart, a DVR is only a hard drive with an electronic
TV guide, a machine that digitizes an incoming TV signal and
records it on the drive, so a user can play it back whenever
he wishes. Both TiVo and ReplayTV allow users to pause,
fast-forward and automatically record TV shows for future
playback. But ReplayTVs are broadband-enabled, meaning that
users can trade shows with each other -- including pay-TV
shows. Also, the system features a button that skips ahead
30 seconds at a time, allowing much quicker ad-skipping than
on the TiVo.", reports Wired.com. I for one, really like the
idea of being able to skip commercials. How about you? . . .
Posted by Tom at June 07, 2002 09:45 AM