TiVo Community Forum

TiVo Community Forum Archive 2
Covering threads with a last post date between
July 1, 2004 and December 31, 2005.
THIS IS A READ ONLY SITE
 


 

SEARCH  |  ARCHIVE 1 MAIN SITE

 
Forum Jump
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-04-2004, 08:30 AM   #91 (Print)
ZeoTiVo
fantastic four TiVos
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,704
Quote:
Originally posted by generalpatton71
This is not a napster situation and shouldn't be treated as one, and the MPAA wants it to be treated that way. So when were talking about Tivo crossing that line in the sand and restricting recording I'm saying you can't go back once you cross that line.

Napster was born of people discovering that CDs could be ripped down to a compressed format of MP3 without significant loss of signal. Once MP3s could be shared over a modem with reasonable expectation of success - Napster was invented to make sharing easier. The only thing that prevents Kazaa from taking off is the shutdown of Npaster that showed that a centralized server to make things easier will not last long. so MP4s are relagated to the back alleys of kazaa.
from TiVos perspective , they watched Replay cross a line by allowing free sharing of video over the inernet. Like Napster - Replay was mortally crippled by its decision to fight using any rights management or controls.
That is the reality of this situation

Quote:

They have several options that range from record once to up to 5 times your allowed to record a program. So if I record The West Wing at 3 pm and wanted to record another at 5pm, but hadn't watched the other one from 3 pm the show won't be recorded. If they have flagged it for record once only.
this is just plain wrong, record once applies to the specific recording made - not a series. Record once means you can not make a copy of the recording. This sucks in that you can not record it to the TiVo - then make a DVD burn on the TiVo of that show. How this will affect MRV is the real question here. But you need to READ up on this stuff before typing away.


Quote:

To me it's a simple belief that consumer product producers should not get in the business of working with the entertainment industry in restricting what home consumers can do with content they pay for and keep in there own homes.

that is a simple belief that is simply not workable. You do not "pay" for the content - you agree to a license to consume it. If you get a DVD for 2$ because the agreement is you can not copy it and it will stop working two days after playing then you have no right to copy it onto some permanent media. For that you BUY the DVD for 10 to 19$. If you get a premium channel - it is up to you to read any license agreement on that premium channel and abide by it. Simply because it appears on a TV screen in your home does not negate any license terms. HBO among others seem ready to enforce licensing terms in futherence of their capatilistic business goals. That is their free market right, just like it is yours to not agree to the terms and stop using HBO content. That is the simple fact that negates any other belief.
ZeoTiVo is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-04-2004, 11:35 AM   #92 (Print)
generalpatton71
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 273
Zeo I completely agree with your napster easements. My point of brining it up is that copy right holders are using there victory against napster to try and force new restriction on video recording. They are screaming napster will happen to video if we don't have the restrictions.

Now I don't know what you have heard about the broadcast flag but I have to put up with it on Bravo HD and when there is no program description for a TV show and it's set to record once and I have a episode recorded already IT HAS prevented me from recording another. Now maybe my cable company has messed up there DVR settings or something but I have been having to deal with this horrible broadcast flag implementation on my HDTV channels and it has been done horribly.

I simply don't agree with some of your (interactiveTV, ZEOTIVO) easements on copy right laws. When it comes to this issue it's a very complicated situation and you can state something as fact but it doesn't make it so. Tivo has a right to allow tivo owners to share video with family and a limited number of friends. This is different then sharing with everyone like Replay or napster did. It's a very very fine line but there is a line that allows this. I also believe that Tivo has the right to make a device for consumer to record content and keep it as long they like. As long as they come by that video by paying for it in a legal matter. You may not BELIEVE they have this right, and you may be able to find case law to support that argument. However that doensn't mean Tivo doesn't have this right until a judge rules on a case regarding this very specific issue.

__________________
HDTV D* Tivo
SD DirecTivo
Humax DVDRW 229hours
SA2 80 hours
SA2 40 hours
Xbox
Xbox360
Gamertag-GENERALPATTON71
I hate EA sports!
generalpatton71 is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-04-2004, 12:42 PM   #93 (Print)
dt_dc
Mostly Harmless
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 1,279
Quote:
Originally posted by generalpatton71
Now I don't know what you have heard about the broadcast flag but I have to put up with it on Bravo HD and when there is no program description for a TV show and it's set to record once and I have a episode recorded already IT HAS prevented me from recording another. Now maybe my cable company has messed up there DVR settings or something but I have been having to deal with this horrible broadcast flag implementation on my HDTV channels and it has been done horribly.
The broadcast flag can not be used to restrict recording in that way (or as you described in your earlier post). If your DVR is is responding this way, that's an error on the software vendor's part.

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publ...CC-03-273A1.pdf
http://www.cdt.org/copyright/031216broadcastflag.pdf
dt_dc is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-04-2004, 01:40 PM   #94 (Print)
ZeoTiVo
fantastic four TiVos
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,704
Quote:
Originally posted by generalpatton71

I simply don't agree with some of your (interactiveTV, ZEOTIVO) easements on copy right laws. When it comes to this issue it's a very complicated situation and you can state something as fact but it doesn't make it so.

A fact is a fact regardless of whether I state it or you believe it

Quote:

Tivo has a right to allow tivo owners to share video with family and a limited number of friends.


-- Only so long as that does not violate license agreements regarding the content, thankfully TiVo has been working dilligently to protect its ability to do this by working with the copyright holders to show their license agreements will not be violated while TiVo owners make use of the limited sharing among ten "TiVos"

Quote:

This is different then sharing with everyone like Replay or napster did. It's a very very fine line but there is a line that allows this. I also believe that Tivo has the right to make a device for consumer to record content and keep it as long they like.


yes TiVo does, and the copyright holder has the right to sue TiVo if it can show harm to its copyrights as a result ( I forget the legal term , but if HBO can show that HBO subscriptions or DVD sales suffer as a result then they have a cause for action)

Quote:

As long as they come by that video by paying for it in a legal matter. You may not BELIEVE they have this right, and you may be able to find case law to support that argument. However that doensn't mean Tivo doesn't have this right until a judge rules on a case regarding this very specific issue.


if you rent a PPV that specifically states you have to watch it within 24 hours - you can not legally watch that specific PPV after 24 hours. Pure and simple. It is a valid license term that would be upheld by any court.

You really need to stop thinking your opinion is fact. "you may be able to find case law to support that argument, However that doesn't mean TiVo doesn't have this right until a judge rules on a case" Priceless double negative doubledy gook that contradicts itself.
ZeoTiVo is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-04-2004, 06:27 PM   #95 (Print)
dt_dc
Mostly Harmless
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 1,279
Quote:
ZeoTiVo
if you rent a PPV that specifically states you have to watch it within 24 hours - you can not legally watch that specific PPV after 24 hours. Pure and simple. It is a valid license term that would be upheld by any court.
No, it's not THAT pure and simple. Copyright holders are granted certain exclusive rights to do (or authorize) for their content ( http://assembler.law.cornell.edu/us...06----000-.html ). They can't simply assert NEW rights based on a license agreement. Even those exclusive rights are subject to certain constraints (fair use, yada yada).

You can tell me I don't have the right to reproduce your copyrighted work ... that's your exclusive right(see link above). You can grant me the right to reproduce your copyrighted work if you so desire.

However, VIEWING a copyrighted work is certainly NOT an exclusive right of a copyright owner. Trying to enforce the above agreement would get laughed out of court ... along with:

"By viewing this PPV, you agree that you can not quote portions of it for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research."

"By viewing this PPV, you agree that you (and only you) may be in the room watching. Any additional viewers must purchase their own copy."*

etc.

* - Displaying the copyrighted work publicly is another exclusive right. That's why the NFL can prevent a Las Vegas casino from having a big, huge, SuperBowl party ... but can't prevent you from doing the same in your house (subject to the courts' interpretation of 'publicaly').

Several of generalpatton71's comments are a bit off-base. However, he was right when he said "it's a very complicated situation". This simplistic view of "anything can be enforced via sales/licensing/usage agreements" is also way off-base ...

As you aluded to above, you can sell me a DVD that self-destructs in 5 days. However, that's very different from selling me a DVD cheaply and telling me I have to destoy it myself in 5 days ... otherwise ... if I want to keep it longer ... I have to pay full-price.
dt_dc is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-05-2004, 12:59 PM   #96 (Print)
ZeoTiVo
fantastic four TiVos
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,704
full article at http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/si...ey/10107978.htm

Movie studios launch legal offensive against online pirates


LOS ANGELES (AP) - Movie fans who trade Hollywood films over Internet file-sharing networks could soon find themselves on the receiving end of a copyright infringement lawsuit.

Hollywood's major movie studios said Thursday they will begin filing hundreds of lawsuits later this month against individuals who swap pirated copies of movies online.

``This was not an easy decision, but it must be done now before illegal online file sharing of movies spins out of control,'' said Dan Glickman, the new head of the Motion Picture Association of America.

The move is a reversal of the studios' earlier reluctance to follow the aggressive legal path taken by the music industry, which began suing individual file-sharers last year.
ZeoTiVo is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-05-2004, 01:06 PM   #97 (Print)
ZeoTiVo
fantastic four TiVos
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,704
Quote:
Originally posted by dt_dc

You can tell me I don't have the right to reproduce your copyrighted work ... that's your exclusive right(see link above). You can grant me the right to reproduce your copyrighted work if you so desire.

However, VIEWING a copyrighted work is certainly NOT an exclusive right of a copyright owner. Trying to enforce the above agreement would get laughed out of court ... along with:


I agree with what you are saying and you somewhat misunderstood what I was trying to say.
I was speaking of the specific PPV as a recording itself - not the content. It was in the context of recording a PPV that is set to expire at some time period. It is the copyright holders right to set a time period like that and a reasonable expectation to have recording units honor that expiration or not be allowed to record it in the first place. That is why I made the example of a 2$ PPV vs a 19$ DVD. so I gues this falls somewhere in the first use doctrine.
ZeoTiVo is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-06-2004, 11:33 PM   #98 (Print)
Kimt
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 121
Well I think the execs at Tivo need a reality check.
Perhaps they did the interview to see how their customer base was going to take any such changes.

1) The technical minded Tivo users will not put up with this for a minute, and will block any updates to the boxes. YES it can be done. No I won't tell you how.

2) There may be some legal issues here, something about the final product not matching what the box says in terms of features.
My suggestion, if you suddenly unexpectedly lose content on your harddrive, request an RMA and return it to the manufacturer as defective.

3) Many people have went with TIVO vs. dvr's being offered by the cable providers because TIVO's are less restrictive. Without that advantage how many people will be dumping TIVO.

4) Their is a very attractive alternative to the TIVO.

That is a pc based pvr.

Windows media center is very attractive, it too has dmr restictions, but the pc hardware platform is relatively well documented.

BeyondTv offfers pretty much the same quality of a tivo box,.

SageTv can "distribute" the recording sources feeding the pvr. A laptop/nas combination makes a great diskless pvr.

And finally,
It may come down to only those who don't know about what Tivo is doing will buy them, and that were web blogs come in, if you don't think the internet can have an infect on decisions just ask John Kerry and the news media.

TIVO EXECS I hope your listening.

Thats my opinion.
You can find a lot more on our webpage.

__________________
visit us at www.distributed-home.com
Kimt is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-06-2004, 11:57 PM   #99 (Print)
Kimt
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 121
Quote:
Originally posted by interactiveTV
You aren't buying a physical good. You are accepting a LICENSE and its terms are what they are.


_ITV


Their is one more situation here, that has never been legally tested because it wasn't possible before.

and that is does the consumer have any right to monetary damages, if the product they own no longer abheres to the legal packaged discription of the product ( the hardware not the software) at time of purchase, because a software update to the firmware totally changes the character and operating principles.

Also how about loss in "productivity" due to time spent by the consumer spent in diagnosing and correcting a problem induced by an update to a product that did not properly go through a qa process.
Seems like consumers are being put into situations only business have been put into in the past.

I'm sure you're a lawyer so maybe you know more about this, but I bet these situations have never been tested in court. All I am is a very upset system developer with 20 years of hardware and software development experience, this little attempt by the content providers is going to fail miserably. The casualties will be the little companies like TIVO and those politicians that support them.
Nice that Tom Daschle is out, guess all those entertainment contributions didn't help that much.

__________________
visit us at www.distributed-home.com
Kimt is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-07-2004, 12:22 AM   #100 (Print)
Kimt
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 121
Quote:
[i]. Unreasonable men are those not willing to listen to reason or find their own beliefs based on facts.

_ITV [/B]


I couldn't agree more, seems like you should practice what you preach. I'm new to this forum, more of an outsider. But I have to answer this, because I find you arrogrant and distasteful. I know were your coming from but I know were some of the other commentors are too. This is a complicated situation. One that the software industry encountered some time ago and is still fighting with. The entertainment concerns believe they have political clout and they do now but that may change very soon..

I agree with you on what is law, but also a bad law is not necessarly better than no law. All the content providers are doing is encouraging people to hack their boxes.

Personally I don't care, I don't really watch that much ppv to care, if I really wanted the content I know a half dozen ways to get it. And the content providers are fooling themselves if they think people won't find ways around this.

But another issue is these products are being falsely sold, that changes as of now but there is the matter of so called legacy equipment.

I am of the opinion that their may be some legal challenge to physically changing the hardware remotely. Its true that the cable company can change their service whenever they wish, however the cable companies usually supply and thus retain owernership of the settop boxes. The tivo boxes require an initial monetary investment. maybe an analogy would be the cable guy breaking into your house at night and putting a chip physically into you tv and vcr.

Because thats exactly what is happening when a service provider anomonously downloads and installs an unanouched update during the night.

So now go ahead and belittle my argument the way you did the others, I don't care. I know that by the end of the year there will probably be 20 or 30 web blogs protesting this, by next year another 10 fold, than within weeks some college kid will figure out how to circumvent the changes , that my friend is the relality of the 21th century, its a lesson we learned in the software industry in the 20th. As you started adding dongles, and special cd activations revenues went down . (unless your microsoft I guess) , because there were always alternatives.

__________________
visit us at www.distributed-home.com
Kimt is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-07-2004, 10:36 AM   #101 (Print)
interactiveTV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 828
Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
I agree with you on what is law, but also a bad law is not necessarly better than no law. All the content providers are doing is encouraging people to hack their boxes.
Well, I agree with you on the first part and as I've said, I haven't given my opinion on this specific instance at all. As for "encouraging people to hack their boxes," I guess they are creating a situation where some people could take that step but I'd refrain from saying they are "encouraging" it.

Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
I am of the opinion that their may be some legal challenge to physically changing the hardware remotely. Its true that the cable company can change their service whenever they wish, however the cable companies usually supply and thus retain owernership of the settop boxes. The tivo boxes require an initial monetary investment. maybe an analogy would be the cable guy breaking into your house at night and putting a chip physically into you tv and vcr.
Not really. You got a terms of service when you activated your Tivo and your Tivo is NOT a stand-alone piece of hardware. You are *required* to sign up for the "service" when you buy the hardware -- or you get Tivo basic for free but you *must* still use that service. That service is allowed to change. This change is even, in a very generic manner, written into the TOS. Your TV and VCR don't come with a "service" and neither has a TOS that I am aware of so the analogy is missing that crucial piece.

Tivo isn't physically altering the hardware. No extra chip is being installed. The software is being altered, upgraded, changed, etc. as Tivo's TOS says it could be.

The only Tivos that can legally exist "serviceless" are certain Series 1 Tivos -- I happen to have one -- that have a type of mode that allows you to use them basically like a VCR. Since you don't need to connect those to call in if you don't want -- those will not get the update and can be operated "outside" the Terms of Service agreement by the virtue of not calling into Tivo. Besides those, all Tivos must be connected to the service periodically in order to operate. My VCR, my TV, my toaster, my coffee maker do not require a SERVICE to operate so yes, if one of those companies tried to change my coffee maker, I will be upset.

Now, my system-locked cell phone, my On Star, and my cable modem (which I paid for) all require a service. All three have changed the terms of that service on me many times before. My cell phone provider has changed how international dialing may work, my cable modem company has changed how I may share my service -- within my household only, not to be used as a public hotspot, etc.

I have the right to cancel my service -- and in the case of a cell phone, with a change of TOS, I can even cancel although I have a long-term contract and not be penalized for early cancellation since they changed the terms. That still wouldn't "unlock" my cell phone, however.

In each case, the hardware REQUIRES a service to operate correctly and I agreed to the TERMS of that service when I signed up and to possible changes to those terms. Whether the hardware will operate with another service provider (the cell phone won't without hacking, the On Star certainly won't, and the cable modem should work) is my problem.


Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
Because thats exactly what is happening when a service provider anomonously downloads and installs an unanouched update during the night.
It isn't anonymous, is it? It's Tivo. We know that. I'm also pretty sure Tivo will not only announce it -- they sort of have to -- but that we'll get a notice on the box when it happens so it won't be "unannounced" either. You are right though. It will probably happen at night for many people but some may call in during the day and get it during sunlight hours so I'm not sure that part applies completely either.

Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
So now go ahead and belittle my argument the way you did the others, I don't care.
My frustration there was and remains and complete lack of desire to bother to get facts correct even after I bothered to go point to links that corrected them (for example, that there isn't a record once restriction on digital broadcast networks). Posting outright falsehoods does no good for anyone and the continued belief in them based on nothing but how it "should be" doesn't really make for a constructive discussion. Re-read your earlier post about Tivo's and MSO DVRs and the "less restrictive" language. You are missing the point that this ISN'T Tivo related but MacroVision licensee related and the MSOs are also MacroVision licensees.
http://macrovision.com/partners/ent...ensee/index.jsp
(currently down but when up it lists the Licensees)

Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
I know that by the end of the year there will probably be 20 or 30 web blogs protesting this, by next year another 10 fold, than within weeks some college kid will figure out how to circumvent the changes , that my friend is the relality of the 21th century, its a lesson we learned in the software industry in the 20th.
I won't take that bet. I'm sure there will be outcry but it will apply to all MacroVision licensee PVRs which includes SFA and MOT so while I'm sure Tivo will bear a disproportionate amount of the criticism -- such is the life as the "leader of the pack" -- it really shouldn't be Tivo's burdon to bear alone. And there ALREADY exist ways to strip that MacroVision code out before it even hits your Tivo so I don't think it takes a college kid. I'm sure a third grade drop-out is also capable to walk into a Radio Shack and buy a "video stabilizer." It doesn't take aa PhD to do that.

Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
As you started adding dongles, and special cd activations revenues went down . (unless your microsoft I guess) , because there were always alternatives.
Well, CD revenues went down for a whole host of complicated reasons that I'm not sure apply to this discussion but somehow I doubt PVR take rates will begin to decline because you can't archive PPV and VOD material.

_ITV

P.S> Zeo -- you mean "First Sale" Doctrine, not first use, which has to do with VHS and DVD rental stores.

Last edited by interactiveTV : 11-07-2004 at 10:45 AM.
interactiveTV is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-07-2004, 01:11 PM   #102 (Print)
Kimt
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 121
please correct me if I'm wrong but the few times these so called TOS agreements as they apply to legacy products have been tested in court, the court came down on the side of the consumer.

The origininal case with replaytv for instance, the agreement allowed the 4600 and 5500 boxes to retain the controversial features removed from the later series.

Even in a case involving only software, the 321 case, were an injuction against 321 studio to stop selling dvdx copy did not outlaw the customer from owning software they already purchased.

With the broadcast flag for instance, I believe the ruling is that settop boxes produced after july 2005 must incorporate hardware/software that support it. It encourages but does not mandate that legacy hardware should be made compatable.

when I refered to this being tried before and cutting into revenues I was refering to the Software Industry not CD sales.
Time and time again it has been shown that adding things like doggles and activations to application programs do cut into sales. AND there is no real proof that it deters piracy.

As to your argument about the modifications being to software and not hardware, you try to explain the difference between software on a harddrive and software burned into a firmware eprom to a consumer or a judge. Good luck.

Yes we all know about macrovision and how to get around it. But if you read my posts you know I really don't care about macrovision, my beef Is with this whole concept of forced updates to consumer products, without an opt out option. This can be dangerous because some of this stuff does not go through very good qa.

Time and time I've encountered this, With my cell phone for instance, more recently with my dlink media player. This used to work very well playing mpegs but the last two firmware updates broke the functionality. It took many hours to get the device to function as it did when I brought it. And I'm a software engineer.

Comcast made a change to the menu system, and all of a sudden all the replaytv boxes that used a ir blaster failed to change the channels. Took much research via google to find the fix.
This is frustrating, from a consumer point of view you expect something to work the same from day to day.

__________________
visit us at www.distributed-home.com
Kimt is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-07-2004, 01:57 PM   #103 (Print)
alinke
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 4
Arrow do home media pc's do this

I was going to get a TIVO but this new development has got me thinking. Does anyone know if the home media pc's from Microsoft do this?
alinke is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-07-2004, 03:13 PM   #104 (Print)
interactiveTV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 828
Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
please correct me if I'm wrong but the few times these so called TOS agreements as they apply to legacy products have been tested in court, the court came down on the side of the consumer.
I'm not sure what you mean by "legacy products" in this instance but in Spera V AOL the contract entered into by virtue of the Terms of Service (TOS) and the Rules of the Road (ROR) were upheld. Much more complicated than that but let's go with it for the sake of brevity.

The Seventh Circuit appeals court has also found that unless the terms of the license are unconscionable, or otherwise excused by contract law then the buyer was required to honor the terms of the license.

An interesting and often cited shrinkwrap license case is M. A. Mortenson Co. v. Timberline Software Corp.

I'd be curious as to what SPECIFIC cases to which you refer as lower court decisions sometimes get press while the overturn on appeal gets less.

Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
The origininal case with replaytv for instance, the agreement allowed the 4600 and 5500 boxes to retain the controversial features removed from the later series.
Let's not confuse things. A specific FEATURE advertised to work should work especially if it can be deemed substantial to the product. If Tivo were to take out the ability to say, pause a program, any program, then yes, we, as Tivo owners could make a strong case. HOWEVER, Tivo SPECIFICALLY states that

We Don't Control Third-Party Content!
The TiVo service gives you the ability to access audio, video, and other media over which TiVo exercises no editorial or programming control ("Third Party Content"). You understand that: (a) TiVo does not guarantee the access to or the ability to record, display, or transfer any particular program; (b) programming is not under TiVo's control; (c) programming providers may restrict or limit the ability to record, display, view or transfer particular programs by using a variety of copy protection mechanisms


You are told, BEFOREHAND, that this can occur.

Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
With the broadcast flag for instance, I believe the ruling is that settop boxes produced after july 2005 must incorporate hardware/software that support it. It encourages but does not mandate that legacy hardware should be made compatable.
It's an FCC regulation, actually, on broadcast flag. That's nice but this ISN'T ABOUT THE BROADCAST FLAG. I don't know how many times I have to say that. This is a cable only flag that does not fall under (either analog or digital) broadcast flag rules.

Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
when I refered to this being tried before and cutting into revenues I was refering to the Software Industry not CD sales.
Time and time again it has been shown that adding things like doggles and activations to application programs do cut into sales. AND there is no real proof that it deters piracy.

As to your argument about the modifications being to software and not hardware, you try to explain the difference between software on a harddrive and software burned into a firmware eprom to a consumer or a judge. Good luck.
My arguement wasn't software but SERVICE versus hardware. The change is NOT to the hardware...you were talking about someone breaking into my house and adding a chip to my VCR. My point was the difference between a stand-alone product and one that REQUIRES service to operate. It wasn't on the technicalities of where software code is run from.

Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
Yes we all know about macrovision and how to get around it. But if you read my posts you know I really don't care about macrovision, my beef Is with this whole concept of forced updates to consumer products, without an opt out option. This can be dangerous because some of this stuff does not go through very good qa.
Quality is a different issue from LEGAL. Whether YOU care about MacroVision or not is interesting, but this discussion is about the MACROVISION LICENSE CHANGES THAT WILL AFFECT ALL MACROVISION LICENSEE PVRs. A philosophical discussion of "forced updates" could be fun but I would say, don't sign up for a SERVICE that REQUIRES FORCED UPDATES if you don't want them. Don't like it? Don't buy it.

Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
Time and time I've encountered this, With my cell phone for instance, more recently with my dlink media player. This used to work very well playing mpegs but the last two firmware updates broke the functionality. It took many hours to get the device to function as it did when I brought it. And I'm a software engineer.

Comcast made a change to the menu system, and all of a sudden all the replaytv boxes that used a ir blaster failed to change the channels. Took much research via google to find the fix.
This is frustrating, from a consumer point of view you expect something to work the same from day to day.
Frustrating? Yes. Illegal? Not automatically.

Not only did Tivo WARN YOU in the terms of service -- read above -- but by its very nature, the Tivo SERVICE is needed for this product to work correctly. It isn't a stand alone hardware product. You might not like "forced consumer upgrades" but that's a different issue than the LEGALITY of changing the Terms of Service.

I'd reread the Tivo quote I -- and others -- have posted here. If you AGREED to those terms and this MacroVision license changed is limited to cable programming only, I don't see much of a legal arguement to change this or stop this from occuring.

Do I like it? Well, I haven't given my opinion yet but here goes...

Not really. I don't think it will effect me too much so I'm not all that concerned about it. I do see more restrictions on PVR content use coming, as many have, as the product becomes more widespread and I think it is a natural part of the evolution. Do I think that Tivo or MacroVision is doing something illegal? No. I don't. I can't find a single piece of caselaw, regulation, ruling, anything that would make even a weak arguement. I think anyone who DOES isn't looking at the LEGAL REALITY. On an emotional level it stinks but so do lots of things. I'm capable of seperating the legal reality from the emotional side. I also think that changes to technology allow an ENFORCEMENT of rights that may not have been easily enforced before and people tend to believe in those rights where they may not exist.

Law and technology is a constant see-saw. Could Congress pass a law giving consumers the right to record anything, anytime, and archive as long as they want? Probably not, depending on the specifics -- the courts could rule against it if it contradicted copyright and license case law unless the courts were truly interested in re-writing it all. I don't see that happening.

Schools (through Kinko's) used to believe they could photocopy chapters from different books and package it for a course into one big book. That changed with Basic Books v Kinko's. "Fair Use" was defined a little more and schools have adapted.

Whether we LIKE something or find it ANNOYING isn't much of a legal standard. I've attempted to clarify some of the legal FUD being thrown around here -- which rights consumers have, what legally is possible, etc.

You can argue the law with me but the emotional or "annoying" arguement is one I have avoided. When people disagree with the current law based on the emotional or the "I want my right!" arguement, I find it silly, especially as they AVOID READING the FACTS and continue to post INACCURACIES. Claiming a right is a LEGAL arguement, not an emotional one and if someone wants to claim a legal right, it makes sense to discuss it in the legal realm, not the emotional one.

I'm sure someone could show me a pretty good legal arguement about all this. I just haven't seen one yet. Not that it doesn't exist. There are a lot of creative people out there and maybe there is some angle that changes the whole landscape. I'm willing to say I'm not smart enough to have thought it all through but I haven't seen a single decent legal arguement yet that shows MacroVision's (and its licensees) to be in violation of any law or right.

_ITV
interactiveTV is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-07-2004, 04:29 PM   #105 (Print)
dylanemcgregor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Astoria, NY
Posts: 2,093
Quote:
Originally posted by interactiveTV
You can argue the law with me but the emotional or "annoying" arguement is one I have avoided. When people disagree with the current law based on the emotional or the "I want my right!" arguement, I find it silly, especially as they AVOID READING the FACTS and continue to post INACCURACIES. Claiming a right is a LEGAL arguement, not an emotional one and if someone wants to claim a legal right, it makes sense to discuss it in the legal realm, not the emotional one.


_ITV

I agree with just about everything that you said here and have found your posts both informative and enjoyable both in this thread and others, but I'd like to disagree slightly with this one statement. There certainly are rights that are codified into law, but a discussion of "Rights" is more fundamentally a philisophical discussion IMO. I believe that a discussion of Rights should be completely seperate from any discussion of "legal rights" and when there is a discrepancy between what is believed to be a "Right" and what is currently a legal right, then one should attempt to bring the law closer in tune with the former.

Not that this is particularly relevant to this discussion. I don't know if I could make the argument that one has a natural right to archive PPV on their TiVo for eternity.

I just took a little bit of an exception that a discussion of rights belongs only in the legal realm.

JMHO

Dylan
dylanemcgregor is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-07-2004, 05:24 PM   #106 (Print)
interactiveTV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 828
Quote:
Originally posted by dylanemcgregor
There certainly are rights that are codified into law, but a discussion of "Rights" is more fundamentally a philisophical discussion IMO. I believe that a discussion of Rights should be completely seperate from any discussion of "legal rights" and when there is a discrepancy between what is believed to be a "Right" and what is currently a legal right, then one should attempt to bring the law closer in tune with the former.
You are 100% right. We have "natural rights" and our legal system is actually based on a British common law system (except for Louisiana based on the bizzare Napoleonic code).

The copyright laws, however, have been refined and ruled on to the point where we've taken most of it into account. Certainly, technology brings up new issues which force us to go back and take a fresh look and privacy in the 21st Century will be the greatest example there.

This SPECIFIC issue of MacroVision's license change doesn't really bring up the philisophical issues, IMO. If we were taking about broadcast, a defined "public good" then I would certainly get into the issues of society's rights and the inherent rights a public good should bestow. But we're talking about a purchased "premium" product distributed exclusively on a closed, owned network no longer considered a monopoly. This is about MacroVision's vision right, as a business, to develop and sell product. Tivo could, of course, cancel its license agreement with Macrovision. That is its business decision to make just as we may cancel our agreement with Tivo by selling or just plain unplugging the product.

Tivo's TOS is pretty clear on this. Your cable company has the right to eliminate the cable station CNN. You may not "like" it or may think getting TBS is your "right" but that doesn't bestow any specific legal rights to you just as the purchase of a product, such as a just released book, doesn't give you the right to photocopy it in its entirety of post its complete text to the web. The Constituion is somewhat vague on copyright but through legislation and case law, we -- collectively -- have refined it to its current point. Those rulings have taken into account both the "natural rights" the public should have with the legislation and Consitutional issues.

I'd love to see a "natural rights" arguement for a consumer deciding how a business should sell its product like the case we have here. There's an interesing discussion on dpreview.com right now over a well known and regarded ebook whose author does not permit, through PDF restrictions, the selection of text. A purchaser would like to babblefish the text to translate it into Spanish. Should the Government force the author to allow text selection? Or should the author be allowed to decide which technological protections are enacted on his ebook in order to protect it from piracy? Does this limit the fair use (probably not as I can type a paragraph or two for the purposes of quotation even though I cannot select and copy that text)?

There ARE interesting and possibly troubling issues in the PVR world. I don't see MacroVision's PPV and VOD license change as applied to Tivo (with its clear language in its TOS) to be one of them. I don't "like" it either but I see no real "right" being violated. The protection to be applied is within the purpose and intent of the product, is distributed on a private network utilizing no public good, and is sold as a premium. If Time Warner cable decides, foolishly, to move CNN to a premium tier ($20/month), do I have the "right" to CNN? Or is it TWC's business decision to price CNN as it sees fit? Does your right to make a "backup copy" of a product get violated in the product is copy protected to hinder piracy? Can these DeCSS issues hinder competition (see the recent and very laudable Lexmark ruling)?

There are plenty of grey areas and plenty more where major issues -- the century of privacy as the main issue is here -- come into play. This isn't one of them, in my opinion. This isn't broadcast and it isn't digital. It's analog cable on a premium product. Where does the business's right to control its product get interfered with? Where does restraint of trade come into play?

We certainly must balance public interests and capitalism. The public airwaves (broadcast), IMO, *must* be protected and regulated for the public's good. There is another side to it when it involves commerce entered into freely and willingly.

Sorry for the long winded post. I see an uproar based on very little other than a "it's mine, gimme" kind of attitude. Taking something or wanting something isn't the same as having a right. You can loan that book to a friend or that CD, but you can't give her a copy even if you have been doing it for years and are very comfortable with it. MacroVision recording "restrictions" have been around for years on the VCR. Ever try and record a PPV event on your VCR? Just because it wasn't technoligcally feasible to plug that "hole" on the PVR until recently, that doesn't "grant" Tivo or other DVR owners the right.

_ITV

Last edited by interactiveTV : 11-07-2004 at 05:50 PM.
interactiveTV is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-11-2004, 04:52 PM   #107 (Print)
pmackie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 24
recordingPPVs

I rarely watch movies more than once anyway...Of course untilIget Altzheimers
then I can watch the same movie all of the time...haha Does the Humax have the unofficial 30 second skip button?
pmackie is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-28-2004, 05:51 PM   #108 (Print)
danehym
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2
There are many times that I record a movie from PPV (at the end of the month, before the new ones come out), but then don't watch it for a month or so. I will be very irritated if they begin deleting programs that I have not watched (after all, I paid to watch it!)

I do see that they don't want me storing a PPV feature forever, and that they don't want me making DVDs of the PPV before the commecial DVD comes out, and I have no problem with that. But DON'T AUTODELETE before I watch a show! There ought to be a way top trigger the delete if a program is X days old AND has been viewed, of only allow viewing twice.
danehym is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-28-2004, 06:08 PM   #109 (Print)
terminus303
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally posted by danehym
There are many times that I record a movie from PPV (at the end of the month, before the new ones come out), but then don't watch it for a month or so. I will be very irritated if they begin deleting programs that I have not watched (after all, I paid to watch it!)

I do see that they don't want me storing a PPV feature forever, and that they don't want me making DVDs of the PPV before the commercial DVD comes out, and I have no problem with that. But DON'T AUTODELETE before I watch a show! There ought to be a way top trigger the delete if a program is X days old AND has been viewed, of only allow viewing twice.


I identify with all those irritations. I don't understand the people arguing about their "rights." But certainly auto deleting things from my Tivo would make me stop buying PPVs or whatever else they start deleting and it would make Tivo less valuable...

But it hasn't happened yet so I'm not stressing.

There are other PVRs and other ways to get movies if they make Tivo inconvenient.

__________________
No signature selected
terminus303 is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-28-2004, 07:05 PM   #110 (Print)
Kimt
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 121
Quote:
Originally posted by interactiveTV
You are 100% right. We have "natural rights" and our legal system is actually based on a British common law system (Tivo or other DVR owners the right.

_ITV


I am sick and tired of this whole discussion. This thread is going no where.

You havenít heard from me in a while and there is a good reason. I have decided not to post in this forum any more. I have come to the conclusion that to many of the posters in this forum are either Lawyers or TV executives or both. My attidude towards lawyers is much like Shakespeareís. (Re: Julius Caesar). I place you Mr. InteractiveTV in the same group as the revisionist radical judges who would like to eliminate God from everything to do with the country, most recently Thanksgiving. Let me remind you that the so called blue states lost in the last election.
And their candidates were heavily backed by Hollywood.
Its not that I have anything against protecting copyright, I think our current copyright laws are way out of date. I believe some way needs to be devised to compensate those who produce original works.
Where my beliefs and yours probably clash is I do not believe just because a content provider produces some piece of illiterate trite, and funds a congressional lobby they have a right to dictate what every consumer in this country can do with the electronic content that comes into their homes.

I also have no problem with macrovision, I always assumed you should not be able to copy PPV content, and I would rather have it that way than the uncertainty caused when one day I am able to record something and watch it at my choosing and the next day after a software ďupgradeĒ it and other media gets deleteted from my hard drive.
I must admit I donít watch a lot of TV anymore because I am becoming disgusted with the little productions taking more and more realstate on the screen . All these little shows within shows within shows. There is no break from the constant bombardment of ads now. This is wrong, not from a legal, not from a business standpoint but there is something fundamentally wrong with this from a human standpoint. In many of these posts you mention that this is irrelevant, I contend that it is more relevant than you give it credit for.
Consider that only a generation ago the average consumer was confounded by the simple task of programming a vcr, ďthe flashing 12 syndromeĒ, the consumer today is burning cdís and building wi-fi networks. I see a war coming, a war between the content providers who have paid their way into government influence and the OEM providers. You donít think so? I donít think it will be long before a generation raised on free mp3ís becomes influential in congress, refuses to buy consumer products heavy in DRM and demands accountability for every cent that goes into congressional lobbies by the entertainment industry (and other special interests).

You donít think so, consider that the induce act does not seem to be going anywhere,
Consider that the a very watered down Intelectual copyright act was finally passed,
Part of which allows for the editing of objectable content from programs by consumers (so much for the argument by content producers that their works must be kept in original state, much like the outcry when black and white movies were first colorized by Ted Turner)
consider that the entertainment cartel lost two of its most influential politicians Tom Daschle and Owin Hatch. At least one leading puplication called the attempt by this congress to fasttrack the induce act the entertainment industries last ditch effort.

For now my Tivo has been regulated to the living room, used mostly for time-shifting and infrequent recording, There are plenty of other better less intrusive solutions.




__________________
visit us at www.distributed-home.com
Kimt is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-28-2004, 08:46 PM   #111 (Print)
svenhummer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 155
Does anyone know if these Macrovision restrictions will stop the ability of using HMO to send programs between two TiVos? That would really make this whole thing that much worse.

__________________
TiVo Series2 (40 hour w/ lifetime) :: Model TCD24004A
Second hard drive upgrade bracket from weaKnees.com
Seagate 160GB 7200RPM B drive
Up to 206 Hours capacity

TiVo Series2 (40 hour w/ monthly) :: Model TCD240040
Upgraded to Samsung 80GB 7200RPM A drive
Up to 89 Hours capacity
svenhummer is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-28-2004, 09:36 PM   #112 (Print)
The_Real_Trebor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Somewhere in Space!
Posts: 367
The point of this is moot.

I have come to the realization that it truly does'nt matter what law is placed out there.
We can hee and haw, back and forth about the insane, stupid, insipid, and brainless actions, bills, and laws politicians make. In the end, most of the time, it won't do any good.

The appeals process is the best and most likely only hope.
The common man can't match the travel junkets, political contributions, and inside deals lobbyists and their corporate pimps make with Congressmen/Senators.

I also believe it does'nt matter in terms of the highly fast paced technology we live with. There are many hacks out there (not here) which allow downloading of programs to DVD Recorders, and PC's for burning.
There will continue to be technological advances and "get-arounds", which will help us by-pass this "inconveinence". Of course, this would be unlawfull, and those who choose this will have to weigh the choice to do so.
http://news.com.com/TiVo+hacks+flou...ubj=news.1041.5

There are also alternatives.
Alternatives which would have difficulty changing their previously sold software to stop current users.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1669909,00.asp
Of course this isn't TiVo, but it can be used for areas of programming that is restricted by any User/Operator agreements TiVo changes.

In the end, it's just an inconveinence. PPV movies for example are aprox. 3 months away from being broadcast on HBO and the other Premium movie channels.
As long as the law does'nt intrude into recording (TiVoing) these channels as well, we would be okay.

Trebor.

__________________
THANKS FOR WATCHING FARSCAPE: THE PEACEKEEPER WARS on SCI-FI Channel. It had very high ratings!!!
Good, quality television isn't a privlige, it's a RIGHT!!!

John: "Nebari mental cleansing doesn't get the tough stains out." - Durka Returns

Aeryn: "Dont Worry, I'm watching your backside."

John: "It's beer o'clock, where the frell is my riot?"
The_Real_Trebor is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-28-2004, 10:12 PM   #113 (Print)
interactiveTV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 828
Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
I am sick and tired of this whole discussion. This thread is going no where.

You havenít heard from me in a while and there is a good reason. I have decided not to post in this forum any more. I have come to the conclusion that to many of the posters in this forum are either Lawyers or TV executives or both. My attidude towards lawyers is much like Shakespeareís. (Re: Julius Caesar). I place you Mr. InteractiveTV in the same group as the revisionist radical judges who would like to eliminate God from everything to do with the country, most recently Thanksgiving. Let me remind you that the so called blue states lost in the last election.
And their candidates were heavily backed by Hollywood.

Let's not let a little accuracy get in the way of your rant but here's some facts:

1) No Federal Judge has tried to "eliminate God" from anything. Consult your priest, rabbi, or other spiritual advisor and you might get a lecture on how God can not be eliminated
2) "Hollywood" is a joke term. Viacom and Time Warner are based in NEW YORK and both contributed mightily to both campaigns. But please, hold an old an easy to grasp yet false concept in your head.
3) States aren't red or blue.
4) I'm a registered Republican


Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
You donít think so, consider that the induce act does not seem to be going anywhere,
Have you seen the recent revisions? I guess not. Do a search but maybe you can read this thread...

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-v...threadid=207760

In the meantime, your political, separatist rant is just that. "Blue states" didn't lose the last election. We held an election for president. Dividing states up based on the electoral college (the margin of victory in some was lower than 2%) then JUDGING states based on that is, well, un-American.

You want to divide the country? Time for my political rant. I believe in 50 states in my country. All of them. Even Idaho. And the American PEOPLE won because we had a safe, fair election. Corny? Well, shucks, call me Mr. Smith but your rant on lawyers and "radical judges" (you know nothing about law and what makes a "radical judge" so please, give me a break) and on blue states is really just the ugly side of people who aren't in my opinion, acting very American. My son in Iraq, from a blue state, he count less than one from a red state? Stop the state color crap. It's a joke and so is your whole rant which you dragged me into.

I discuss the legal aspects and some of the most CONSERVATIVE judges in the country would agree with me. But don't let a little knowledge and actual comprehension get in the way of your anger and vitrol and separatist attitude. Don't divide my country and tell me who lost in the election.

I place you in the same catagory as those Cardinals who said that voting for Kerry meant one had to go to confession. You want a rant back? You got one.

Ignorance isn't a right. It shouldn't be a way of life either.

I am pissed? Yup. You want to talk about what's "human" (YOUR WORD) while you demonize a profession and WHOLE STATES? Give me a break. Defend "human rights" but sorry, watching TV without ads isn't high on my list of "human" rights. What a total crock of ****. Like the concept of "morality" in this country then go look at what TV shows do well in the "Bible Belt." I love people with strong beliefs. I can't stand hypocrocy. Don't talk to me about what's "human" when you use a comment about lawyers like that or blue states or red states.

_ITV
interactiveTV is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-28-2004, 11:03 PM   #114 (Print)
Kimt
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 121
This discussion is over, there will be no further replies. However I must answer a few points.

1) I too am a republican
2) I purposely used the term "so Called" blue states, because I find it to be a lot of rubbish too, but it seems to be the matra carried on every news channel, msnbc, abc, fox the list goes on. The sad truth is the country is devided, I live in a "so called" blue state and I have to tell you I can't tell some of my best friends I voted for Bush. And with some of them we just don't talk about it. They had this idea that Kerry was going to change the world, I'm not sure it would be different under any administration.

3) the incident about God I was referring to was one I just heard about in t involving the Thanksgiving and the Pilgrims thanking god for there good fortune. There are many other instances. And yes I am a praticing catholic.
4) I admit my remark about lawyers was a bit off color, however I have some legitimate reasons for not liking the profession. None I wish to discuss, I will add one of them was because of my experience as a juror on a murder trial and how the defense lawyers conducted themselves. there are other reasons.
5) I come from a military family and also know people who have been sent to Iraq. Do I agree with the war? Yes I think it was a necessary action.

I take exception to you calling me a separtist just because I do think the country is divided , is it devided amoung red and blue, I don't think so, Their were many in the blue states who voted for bush and the red states that voted for Kerry. Deviding people along electorial lines wasn't invented by me , check with your local news agency.

Nice how you focused on this part of my post and passed up the Tivo stuff. Since you have folks in Iraq I would think you would understand the next statement.

The US goverment should focus its attention on the important issues like resolving the iraq coflict and getting the troops home, and not spend any of our tax payers money on issues that are better solved in the market place.
Its simple economics really, If thereis no content the manufactures will not produce the tivo's and if theirs no assurrance that the content will be protected the content providers will not provide the content.

The content providers need to come up with new business models and not expect the federal goverment to prop up their "business as usual" models. Otherwise people will create their own distribution channels.

__________________
visit us at www.distributed-home.com
Kimt is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-28-2004, 11:28 PM   #115 (Print)
dgh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 4,878
Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
Nice how you focused on this part of my post and passed up the Tivo stuff.


There was something about TiVo in that rant? I was trying to get my head around the implications of "red state congressmen" writing "Thou shall steal laws".

If that's what you meant... I really couldn't tell.
dgh is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-28-2004, 11:37 PM   #116 (Print)
ZeoTiVo
fantastic four TiVos
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,704
Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
I am sick and tired of this whole discussion. This thread is going no where.

You havenít heard from me in a while and there is a good reason. I have decided not to post in this forum any more. I have come to the conclusion that to many of the posters in this forum are either Lawyers or TV executives or both.



you just know that a post that states at the top "I have decided not to post in this forum" is going downhill from there.

PS I am neither a Lawyer nor an TV executive.
ZeoTiVo is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-28-2004, 11:41 PM   #117 (Print)
jones07
eff.org warrior
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Phila, Pa. "In the City" Not the Burbs
Posts: 2,463
Re: do home media pc's do this

Quote:
Originally posted by alinke
Does anyone know if the home media pc's from Microsoft do this?


Your home free with sagetv. I do not know about Microsoft

http://sage.tv/

__________________
Defend your rights in the new Digital world. http://eff.org/
jones07 is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-29-2004, 09:19 AM   #118 (Print)
Kimt
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 121
Right now microsoft does not allow you to view ppv content, They promise a future upgrade which will address the issue. Since the solution uses wmp 10 I suspect the dmr just won't let you play it and not delete anything from you harddrive. Which would be a dangerous security risk on a pc based solution.

That said, here's to all the Tivo owners in this forum.

Help me decide if I want to keep my Tivo. Iím a software engineer with experience in network design and security. I am also a long time user of replaytv PVRís and more recently Microsoft media center. I have also experimented with beyond tv and sage tv.

We decided to add an additional pvr, because of the promotions we brought a Humax tivo. Compared to the other DVRís I donít see what the advantage is to the Tivo.
Could any of you tivo users in this forum give me a compeling reason why I should adopt Tivo as my PVR of choice.

Pros :
Not cost prohibitive
Quick channel changing
Extra content features
Wide variety of equipment (unfortunately all based on the same reference design)

Cons:

Heavy DMR protection
Adds added to content
PVR features not visible via coaxl connection
Slow networking even with usb 2.0, requires separate adaptor , no built in Ethernet
Phone line required for initial setup
Closed system, proprietary, Threat to local network unknown
Privacy threat unknown
Only non hardware method to get video from unit still vaporware, or requires analog copy to dvd. No known planned support for emerging centralized media server technology.

Really I canít see how the tivo is better than my cable companies offerings in pvrís and I canít see any advantage over the replaytv units I own or the media center pc.
Convince me Iím wrong.

__________________
visit us at www.distributed-home.com
Kimt is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-29-2004, 10:23 AM   #119 (Print)
ZeoTiVo
fantastic four TiVos
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,704
Quote:
Originally posted by Kimt
Right now microsoft does not allow you to view ppv content, They promise a future upgrade which will address the issue. Since the solution uses wmp 10 I suspect the dmr just won't let you play it and not delete anything from you harddrive. Which would be a dangerous security risk on a pc based solution.

That said, here's to all the Tivo owners in this forum.

Help me decide if I want to keep my Tivo. Iím a software engineer with experience in network design and security. I am also a long time user of replaytv PVRís and more recently Microsoft media center. I have also experimented with beyond tv and sage tv.

We decided to add an additional pvr, because of the promotions we brought a Humax tivo. Compared to the other DVRís I donít see what the advantage is to the Tivo.
Could any of you tivo users in this forum give me a compeling reason why I should adopt Tivo as my PVR of choice.

Pros :
Not cost prohibitive
Quick channel changing
Extra content features
Wide variety of equipment (unfortunately all based on the same reference design)

Cons:

Heavy DMR protection
Adds added to content
PVR features not visible via coaxl connection
Slow networking even with usb 2.0, requires separate adaptor , no built in Ethernet
Phone line required for initial setup
Closed system, proprietary, Threat to local network unknown
Privacy threat unknown
Only non hardware method to get video from unit still vaporware, or requires analog copy to dvd. No known planned support for emerging centralized media server technology.

Really I canít see how the tivo is better than my cable companies offerings in pvrís and I canít see any advantage over the replaytv units I own or the media center pc.
Convince me Iím wrong.


if you want to escape DRM and advertising then go to Sage or stick with an older DVR you do not plan to update ,within a few years all upto date DVRs will have both of these.

as to your cons
heavy DMR protection - umm macrovision on PPV and VOd to abide by agreed upon viewing constraints when getting the PPV content does not seem heavy. To guess upon the future is not a good way to make it your first con.

ads added to content - this is stated wrong. the ads are billboards that show up on part of the screen when you FF a commercial. I consider content to be the actual show I want to watch - nothing will happen or be added to the screen during that time, even if FFing. Makes this a very weak con - especially since all other comemrcial DVRs will jump on this if it proves to make revenue.

PVR features not visible via coaxl connection - not even sure what this means - I use my TiVos on standard Time Warner cable with no cable box. I have full use of my TiVo no problem.

Slow networking even with usb 2.0, requires separate adaptor , no built in Ethernet - I popped the adapter(USB 2 spec) on the back of my TiVo - plugged in my ethernet wire and get better than real time transfers. I did ZERO cionfiguration on the TiVo to make this work other than enabling MRV at the TiVo web site and forcing a call. Also if I had gone wireless I simply would have picked the other adapter from the same display at best buy. if I had an etherent port I would have had to get a more expensive wireless bridge. What Cable company DVRs offer MRV in any form ? so this CON only applies to replay and PCs. Since I can not watch the show faster than it transfers on my TiVos I do not have this as a con. I also expect that that both wired and wireless drivers will get to the USB 2.0 and G standards which will have everyone transferring faster than the show can be watched.


Phone line required for initial setup - a con to perhaps 1% of the buying public. This will go away in some future release as well. A very weak con that only applies to specific people. Since the call is toll free or local it can be overcome.

Closed system, proprietary, Threat to local network unknown -- are you serious with this one. This is not a web server or file server sitting wide open on your network, it only does specific things to specific commands. The only issue would be you can not patch it yourself if an exploit beciomes known, but what issue could that be? with Windows PCs typically being on the same network we all know where the security issues are, and any attack on a TiVo on your personal network would have to come from these windows PCs. a VERY WEAK con

Privacy threat unknown - privacy threat is VERY known. TiVo has issued a full privacy policy - no individually identified info is collected without specific opt IN. Also you can find within the policy policy the steps to opt out of aggregate info collection. I think it is a call to TiVo. This equals the TOP level of privacy expectations you could get from any product that would get such data or online site. This is nopt even a CON

Only non hardware method to get video from unit still vaporware, or requires analog copy to dvd. No known planned support for emerging centralized media server technology. --- since it is slated to be released this fall which still has 4 weeks to go and it will be out before the end of the year then calling TiVoToGo vaporware is also a very weak CON based solely on your assumption. what authorized, included with the product does Replay have ? since HT PCs by default put content on the PC then obviously they have the advantage here IF you want to archive or copy to a portable video device. Now my biggest use of MRV is to continue watching a show on another unit - with a PC based solution do I get a continue to play from last point watched option if I move from downstairs to upstairs. Is it simple on the screen option.
as for no known planned support for media server tech they have an alliance with one of the largest collections of DVD content out there to provide that content via broadband sometime next year. To call it a con that they are not publicly releasing details in a VERY competive emerging business shows how little thought you really put into the con list - you are not trying to convince yourself at all - your mind already has ditched the TiVo and you just want to rationalize your self.

------------------------------

the bigegst pro you missed (most likely for same reasons of simply justifying your closed minded decision) is that you take two hours to set up the TiVo - most of that being spent with the TiVo doing the steps itself with about 10 minutes of user action and you are done and using it.

also the user interface is superior to all others out there for ease of use. To you that may not be an issue but since my whole family uses it without having to call me at work or get me to do what they want to do - it is a huge PRO to me. Simple interface that all use with no hassles. my wife setup her own season passes just by watching me set some up, my 6 year old goes to now playing and watches her shows without asking anyone. My 8 year old boy showed some pictures to his freinds without asking anyone. My kids listen to music on it all the time. They copy shows from the TiVo upstairs when they want to watch something on the main TV no problem and FF through all the commercials .That is a Home Media server to me!!

when TiVoToGo comes out I will have the portability I want which is the only REAL con I have with the product - getting files to a Portable Video player to take to the gym or lunch or on a road trip. I expect to be doing this by the end of the year

Last edited by ZeoTiVo : 11-29-2004 at 10:39 AM.
ZeoTiVo is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 11-29-2004, 10:39 AM   #120 (Print)
Fustanella
Homo sapiens tivus
 
Fustanella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: CoolLando
Posts: 4,576
Phew, good thing I don't do PPV.
Fustanella is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
 
Forum Jump
Thread Tools

Go Back  TiVo Community Archive2 > Main TiVo Forums > TiVo Coffee House - TiVo Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:38 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(C)opyright - All Rights Reserved. No information may be posted elsewhere without written permission.
TiVoģ is a registered trademark of TiVo Inc. This site is not affiliated with TiVo Inc.


Spider History Index