Analog Hole Legislation Formally Introduced 549
phaedo00 writes "Ars Technica is covering a recent bit of legislation introduced to the U.S. House Judiciary Committee this past week. The laws would seek to close the 'Analog Hole' that serves as a sort of last-ditch pirating mechanism when corporate DRM goes all crazy and tramples on your fair-use rights: 'Calling the ability to convert analog video content to a digital format a significant technical weakness in content protection, H.R. 4569 would require all consumer electronics video devices manufactured more than 12 months after the DTCSA is passed to be able to detect and obey a rights signaling system that would be used to limit how content is viewed and used. That rights signaling system would consist of two DRM technologies, Video Encoded Invisible Light (VEIL) and Content Generation Management System--Analog (CGMS-A), which would be embedded in broadcasts and other analog video content.'" We've previously covered this bill.
I could write something funny... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I could write something funny... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I could write something funny... (Score:3, Funny)
How do they intend to plug it? Some kind of retrofitted device?
Maybe Some Funny Acronyms Then? (Score:3, Funny)
Doing This Can't Stop Anything
Distrustful Thieving Corporations' Self-Annihilation
Doesn't The Congress Seem Absurd
Re:Where can I buy VEIL clothing? (Score:5, Interesting)
I haven't had time to play with it yet, but I'd laugh pretty hard if people couldn't print hardcopy pictures of me wearing a certain shirt. (Oh man, my next drivers' license photo would be a fiasco. "I don't know *why* the printer spits out a purple page!")
Re:Where can I buy VEIL clothing? (Score:3, Funny)
digital to analog conversion (Score:5, Insightful)
Calling the ability to convert analog video content to a digital format a "significant technical weakness in content protection,"
I'm keen to see how these technically-inclined *ahem* folks intend to remove the digital-analog conversion: to the very best of my knowledge our eyes and ears are analog devices.
H.R. 4569 would require all consumer electronics video devices manufactured more than 12 months after the DTCSA is passed to be able to detect and obey a "rights signaling system" that would be used to limit how content is viewed and used.
I foresee a frenzy of electronics sales around ($DATE + 11_months).
Re:digital to analog conversion (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:digital to analog conversion (Score:5, Funny)
Re:A Filmmaker's Perspective (Score:4, Interesting)
If you're a small, independent filmmaker using only consumer-priced equipment, all your equipment will include copy protection on everything, so each print you make will have to be a single continuous take since it will prevent you from making any copies or entering it into a consumer-level editing system.
And thus Hollywood is protected against independent filmmakers able to make good movies on the cheap entering their market.
The crux of the issue (Score:5, Interesting)
>entering their market.
Here's the real clincher, and if I were giving the MPAA types high credit for brains, this is what I'd peg as the real reason for the legislation. Instead, they produce so much CRAP that they don't deserve the credit for thinking this cleverly. So I suspect they're asking for what they really want, for the reason they really gave.
The real issue, according to the US Constitution:
To promote invention and the arts, artists and inventors are granted limited exclusive rights to their works. Most of us think that the purpose of this is twofold. First, to get them funding so they can keep inventing or artisting. Second, the patent/copyright was supposed to expire, so future inventors/artists can build on that work. So the real issue in the entire current copyright brouhaha should be how do we insure that artists are properly compensated so they can keep creating.
At the base of all of this, electronic communications, as embodied by the Internet, has turned the concept of publication on its ear. It has reduced the incremental cost of copying information to zero. Yet we still have publication industries in place, trying desperately to preserve their existence. So in an Orwellian turn, these publication industries, especially ??AA, are spending an incredible amount of time *preventing* publication. In truth, the "replication" portion of the publication industry is pretty well obsolete, leaving the "studio," "editorial," "promotional," and other such functions. Well, even the "studio" function is diminshed as electronics makes many of those capabilities much more affordable. One could argue about the fine line between "promotional" and "payola", and one could also argue, given the quality of today's media about how well they're doing with "editorial."
But this is ALL about protecting a business model. Last I knew, there was no protection in the Constitution for business models. It just needs to be exposed as this.
Re:A Filmmaker's Perspective (Score:3, Informative)
Why not? It will be for your own protection so that others won't be able to copy your original works, giving you the same protection as enjoyed by the industry.
Except that the trusted members of the industry will be able to subvert your protections anyway.
Why do you think dual deck recorders are manufactured and sold at electronic stores?
Not for much longer I fear. Or at least the next mod
Re:digital to analog conversion (Score:3, Insightful)
Despite of all these bouracratic devices that try to avoid unauthorized copy of copyrighted content and illegal importing (yes, it can be made) of cheap Chinese-made recorders, there is a much bigger problem when letting lobbyist (sorry for typo) to force the aprooval of laws like this.
Fact! US is not a power exporte
Even major ones (Score:5, Informative)
Re:digital to analog conversion (Score:5, Insightful)
As the entire 'intellectual property' is based around laws circumventing competition, it's not surprising they're often involved in such behaviour.
Re:digital to analog conversion (Score:4, Insightful)
Agricultural subsidies.
Oh, wait a moment, that's a different sort of continually ongoing, pounding abuse of government to benefit so few.
Publicly funded stadiums. 6,000 earmarked projects in the highway bill.
No, that's yet another sort of continually ongoing, pounding abuse of government to benefit so few.
The prescription drug benefit, which prohibits Medicare from negotiating lower prescription drug prices.
Nope, also a different sort.
Digital Audio Tape and its SCMS. Ok, that's a lot closer.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Audio Copy Protection (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Audio Copy Protection (Score:5, Insightful)
The only real solution is to overthrow the capitalist giants whose sole purpose is to exploit "consumers" to make money.
But at the moment I'll settle for no DRM.
Re:Audio Copy Protection (Score:4, Insightful)
Then they'll realise there is an alternative to music produced by the Majors and maybe they will start listening to independent music. Just because that's the only music they can listen to on all their devices...
But that's a heck of a lot of maybes...
Re:Audio Copy Protection (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Audio Copy Protection (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Audio Copy Protection (Score:4, Funny)
"Whenever a programmer thinks, 'Hey, skins, what a cool idea', their computer's speakers should create some sort of cock-shaped soundwave and plunge it repeatedly through their skulls." [livejournal.com]
Look for legislated audio-cock-waves to be plugging your analog hole by this time next year.
Re:Audio Copy Protection (Score:4, Insightful)
Any medical doctor caught removing or offering to remove said filters will have their medical license revoked and face a huge fine and/or imprisonment.
Should also develope a video DRM filter for implant along the optical nerve. Will solve all the piracy problems.
Hey, it may sound overboard, but if the creative geniuses hadn't slaved over making it, or without the hard working efforts of the ??IAA to deliver it to you, you couldn't enjoy it in the first place. This isn't an invasion of privacy, merely a step to protect the rights and to reward the efforts of those who own that creative work. Don't blame them for protecting themselves, blame humanity for its greed. You brought this on yourselves!!
* * * * *
My sympathy to the parents of anyone who thought the above was in any way serious
Re:Audio Copy Protection (Score:3, Funny)
Pssst, if you take a Sharpie and drawn a circle around the edge of your pupil, the DRM doesn't work.
Re:Audio Copy Protection (Score:3, Funny)
Re:digital to analog conversion (Score:5, Insightful)
I like my fairly nice audio and video gear, but I don't pirate content either. I imagine that most of the purchasers of nicer equipment don't buy much pirated content. Can you imagine someone spending a few grand on AV and then being too cheap to buy a DVD?
I predict this will do very little to solve the issue of piracy because too many people doing the pirating will be plenty happy with content that ignores these roadblocks altogether. The real losers will be people like me who'll be forced to re-buy ephemeral content that disapears with time.
TW
Re:digital to analog conversion (Score:5, Insightful)
How odd. Their legislation will have no real effect on sales of pirated media, but will force most consumers to buy the same content over and over again.
Its almost like they planned it this way...
- I.V.
Re:digital to analog conversion (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, and it's awesome that idiots actually pay $11,500 for this kind of shit [stealthaudiocables.com].
Re:digital to analog conversion (Score:5, Funny)
to the very best of my knowledge our eyes and ears are analog devices.
Speak for yourself, flesh creature.
Re:digital to analog conversion (Score:4, Funny)
how the trend line is going . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Someone will try to apply this to the internet to regulate what you read.
the ascreen you read is an analog hole for information, y'know.
I am trying to be sarcastic, but I can see how the trend line is going.
Re:digital to analog conversion (Score:5, Insightful)
It's the logical next step, really. Where else are you going to go?
Re:digital to analog conversion (Score:3, Funny)
Ha! (Score:5, Funny)
Already being worked on. (Score:2)
Re:Ha! (Score:4, Funny)
Check out the SeatSale [wearcam.org] EULA for the preferred solution to the "telling people what happens" part.
I predict... (Score:5, Insightful)
Got the cash? (Score:2)
__
Funny Adult Video Clips [laughdaily.com]
And this stops who? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:And this stops who? (Score:5, Insightful)
They are our representatives, yet they don't represent us.
It doesn't matter - I haven't watched Hollywood movies or TV in the last 6 months - and you know what? I found out I don't have a need for it either. Hollywood isn't going to get another dollar of my cash nor a minute of my attention anymore (TV). That's how I'm voting from now on.
I'd rather have a good book or website or/and do something productive with my time than be a slave to the media industry anymore.
Re:And this stops who? (Score:4, Funny)
Which just "proves," statistically, that you must be pirating the steaming piles of shit.
Obviously we need a Content Remembursment Appropriations Policy (CRAP) Act to make sure the content providers are suitably recompensed out of your tax dollars for all the shows you're stealing from them by not watching them.
Of course not watching the ads in the content you aren't watching is going to be a criminal offense, you fucking thief you.
KFG
Re:And this stops who? (Score:3, Interesting)
Which is pretty fucking dumb considering one random EE inclined hacker is enough to leak their precious motion picture. I know it's been said before, but I'll reiterate: this will not even inconvenience me, the pirate, while it will surely hurt paying consumers.
I'm glad I'm not a paying consumer; at least I don't feel bad about being treated
Re:And this stops who? (Score:5, Interesting)
You'll buy the first set of eBooks because they'll be so convienient and have so many great features. We'll all decry the closing of bookstores with lots of comments like, "Oh, I still read a hard-book every now and then, it's got more feeling that way. Too bad everyone else prefers eBooks." Then, once the eBooks are the majority, they'll jack up the DRM. Hell, these days, most people will buy the eBooks even if the DRM is restrictive.
Let's see... then they'll pass legislation restricting the use of printing presses due to their analog nature and potential for rights abuse. Firemen will be dispached to finally burn all the leftover paper books because "all you need is your offically-licensed DRM eBook reader to enjoy all content." Most people will participate willingly, holding neighborhood book burning parties.
It's so easy to forsee and the corporations are extremely patient. Sure, there will always be EE's and hackers out there who can get around the protections. The protections don't have to be perfect, just enough to stop most casual users, as this legislation will do. Eventually possession of unrestricted content will be a crime. Funny how any "subversive" books and information will be restricted content, but yet nobody will publish it legally. Insert your desired definition of subversive here. Today's version is Mao - which gets you a visit by Homeland Security [southcoasttoday.com].
For the record, I stopped watching TV and most movies as well, but for more practical reasons, not as a protest of any sort.
Re:And this stops who? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:And this stops who? (Score:3, Insightful)
When you stop buying products because they suck, that's just market choice.
Bad legislation (Score:5, Insightful)
This is bad legislation because it attempts to force certain types of technology into existence. While a government program designed to discourage people from engaging in media piracy would be a good thing, mandating that all devices have this built in is simply a way to skirt the issue while appearing to be tackling the problem.
Such a law does not stop what it is intended to stop. Pirates will still be able to break the encryption, replicate the media, and resell it on the open street in lands far away from where American law can reach. This law is useless anywhere other than America.
What you get, instead of stopping piracy, is a mandated standard form of copy encryption and DRM that may or may not be adequate for everyone's needs. Instead of letting the market figure out what forms of DRM will be used, the government decides that it's items A, B, and C that need to be addressed. Nevermind that in the future item B may no longer be useful and item D is not provided for at all.
It's unfortunate that the respectable John Conyers (D) is drafting this bill. I would have expected more from the gentleman.
It's Not For The Big Guys (Score:5, Insightful)
This law is in no way designed to go after the big guys. It's all about the small fish and keeping them in check.
Essentially the TV and Movie industry is terriffied that what happened to the music industry will happen to them. I.e., people will stop viewing entertainment as a commodity [bbc.co.uk]. Or at the very least, people will realise that the prices they pay for it are unreasonable.
How does this law try to change that? Essentially it makes it more difficult for Joe Consumer to view his music, movies, films, tv shows, etc as something he can do what he likes with,
The movie industry is afraid of what's already happened. New technologies have made people realise that information is cheap, and even cheaper to duplicate. There is no justification for charging $20 per gigabyte when I can upload terrabytes for less than a dollar. And people have realised this. Even Joe sixpack cops it after a few days in front of his computer.
But, if you can legislate, you can slow this tide and perhaps even reverse it. It is possible. Rhetoric won't make people revolt. An example of this system failing, but having lasting effects, is alcohol prohibition in the 30's. An example of this system working well( for its proponents) is the illegalisation of marijuana.
Re:It's Not For The Big Guys (Score:5, Insightful)
This law is in no way designed to go after the big guys. It's all about the small fish and keeping them in check.
This is not designed to stop pirating at all. Small scale pirating does not lose the media companies a significant amount and even a medium sized operation can manage to find old hardware or foreign hardware without these restrictions. The purpose of this legislation is to ensure that the next media format and hardware has no way to import your current media, thus forcing you to buy yet another copy of the music, book, or song you already own. That is big money and that is diametrically opposed to the interests of these politicians supposed constituents. That is also why this crap is always presented as a piracy issue, rather than what it really is. Please stop believing their lies.
Analog Pirates are so yesterday... (Score:5, Funny)
Pirates always follow the law.
Not flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
Fascism is a system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
For all you Bush-haters, this is not a rant about Bush, because he has zero power to pass laws. This is about members of both major parties in Congress, who regularly put aside their differences to expand the state-granted power of privileged businesses at the direct expense of our rights. This is fascism, by definition, yet we keep saying, "Thank you sir; may I have another?"
The problem is that politicians need pander to voters only on two or three issues, and then are free to do whatever is most profitable to them on all other issues. You might even be able to make the argument that the "major" issues we hear Congress critters rant about (the war, social security, the war, taxes, the war) are simply a smokescreen for the corruption, because it keeps our rights off most peoples' radars.
Re:Not flamebait (Score:3, Insightful)
Trouble is, something akin to fascism is what many large corporations seem to be after, with the dictatorship run by "profit-only" boards of directors. Seems to me they forget the trouble that caused the last time the power of the corporation became to great. Namely well empowered trade unions, cross-corporate product boycotting, not to mention the eventually passage of a whole lot of legislation which limited the malignant powers of the corporation and opened up many many avenues of legal ret
Re:Not flamebait (Score:3, Interesting)
The problem here isn't entirely the representatives; in fact, I would argue
Re:Not flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
And we bend over and grease up year after year because they tell us that it's for the good of the children, for our own safety, or for the stability of our economy.
The fact is, as long as we allow these fascists to rule our government by NOT voting them out of power, it is not as simple as the take over of the fascist state -- it is we who are the fascists, even though most of us don't even know it.
It's time to become aware of what's going on around us and STOP it. It's time to start voting for candidates who support freedom as opposed to special interests. Forget about such minor issues as social security and taxes and start focusing on the core reasons that made this country the great nation it once was -- liberty and freedom for all of her citizens.
Okay, okay, I'm getting off of my soap box now...
Re:Not flamebait (Score:3, Insightful)
I just choose to ignore these new laws. Me and a few million people. If they want to arrest us, they'll have to either arrest all of us or do it lottery-style. Won't matter, I'm not afraid either way.
Fact is, if they wanted to throw you in jail, there is likely already SOME law that you have broken. Or are a suspect of breaking.
So, I don't care that my rights are trampled, because I refuse to acknowledg
Re:Not flamebait (Score:5, Interesting)
Technically speaking, sure, except you can't ignore the way everybody parrots exactly the same talking points with almost verbatim the same words.
The basic political/media strategy of the Republican party is to win the debate by defining the terms used in the debate. This requires a great deal of cooperation and coordination between leading party members and their media flunkies. The aparachniks must be coordinate from somewhere. Currently this is the White House.
The more abstract an issue is to people the better this works. Gay Marriage, DRM, these things don't really mean anything concrete in most people's daily lives. In any debate where you have to start by educating the public, a coordinated media effort beats accuracy. Issues with real and concrete impact on people's lives, such as gas prices, can't be controlled this way.
I think unless it is largely wrapped up within the next year, the war will be the issue that will break the back of this strategy. Before a war starts, it is an abstraction. Afterwards, it becomes undeniably concrete to more and more people. As an American, I think we should get out of there quickly. However if we don't, although our national interests will suffer greatly, and many indiviiduals and families will suffer unspeakably, it will be a blow against American fascism.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's not what the American Heritage Dictionary.. (Score:3, Informative)
From the actual dictionary:
Fascism a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government. 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.
That's not quite the same thing, is it? Did you, per chance, think you could just slip through a ra
Re:Not flamebait (Score:5, Interesting)
Your suggestion assumes that every election actually features a candidate matching that description...
Reminds me of something I heard tonight on 60 Minutes about Bill Proxmire. Evidently he had a policy of never accepting a campaign contribution. Further, he was said to have never spent more than $200 on a campaign, and most of that was said to have been spent on the stamps used to return campaign contributions. I'm couching it in such careful terms because I haven't verified any of that report myself, but that caution itself sort of points to the problem today -- I have a hard time believing such a thing is even possible.
Imagine, a time when senators thought they were in Washington do do the will of the people. We've managed to evolve a political system where people who don't accept campaign contributions don't have the slighest chance of making it to Washington. Unless, of course, they're already independently wealthy, but I think history has shown us that those people tend not to be entirely in touch with the average person.
Half-assed populism still wins, and will continue to do so until a viable alternative can be created.
Re:Not flamebait (Score:3, Insightful)
I wonder if anyone has ever charted out the incidence of revolution, vs. the average person's income and value of possessions? I suspect the relationship is fairly close, and that once a threshold of fewer than 50% at the poverty
Re:Not flamebait (Score:3, Interesting)
The analog hole, my eye (Score:2, Funny)
Are we going to stand for this? Are we?
So does that mean... (Score:2, Insightful)
Xserv
Re:So does that mean... (Score:3, Insightful)
The Real Pirates Win Again! (Score:5, Insightful)
Off target again (Score:5, Insightful)
I, Karma Whore (Score:5, Informative)
Remember, Wisconsin and Michigan residents, these are your representatives. Unless you support the massive "content creation" in your area, you might want to drop these assholes a note:
http://www.house.gov/sensenbrenner/ [house.gov]
http://www.house.gov/conyers/ [house.gov]
Oh, and this is how they think on the subject:
Tell them why they are wrong.
"Consumer Electronics" (Score:5, Insightful)
Not kits? How about components? Hardware hackers will be making money on the side selling stuff. Or maybe the Chinese will just make it and sell it.
Also, I remember how easy it was to mod a scanner in '93 to make it pick up cellphone signals -- just remove a single SMT resistor. This was the work of minutes. And voila -- full band reception.
So easily modded consumer goods (whatever that is) will be banned too.
This looks to be tough to enforce.
Re:"Consumer Electronics" (Score:5, Informative)
So easily modded consumer goods (whatever that is) will be banned too.
To add to your comment..
That is exactly what they did with scanners. They went back and edited the law to include that the scanner must not be able to be easily modified. Here is a paste from a scanner faq:
In its simplest form, US Federal laws (Communications Act of 1934, Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, Telecommunications Disclosure & Dispute Resolution Act of 1992, Digital Telephony Bill of 1994) make it illegal to
1. Repeat what you hear to anyone but the transmitter or intended receiver of the transmission
2. Use what you hear to aid in the commission of a crime (e.g. evading police)
3. Use what you hear for personal gain (e.g. tow trucks listening for accidents to show up opportunistically at the scene)
4. Listen to transmissions relating to the following services
* cellular phones
* cordless phones
* public land mobile systems
* voice paging services
* satellite/microwave/studio-to-transmitter links
* broadcast point-to-point relays.
5. Import a receiver which is capable of tuning cellular telephone frequencies
6. Import frequency converters which can be used to circumvent the blockage of cellular telephone frequency bands
Then took it a few steps further in 1997 and released directive DA 97-334 [fcc.gov] to make the modification you described above illegal:
Scanning receivers are required by Section 15.101(a) of the FCC Rules to be certificated by the Commission. Section 15.121 states that scanning receivers, and frequency converters designed or marketed for use with scanning receivers, must be incapable of operating (tuning), or readily being altered by the user to operate, within the frequency bands allocated to the Domestic Public Cellular Radio Telecommunications Service. Scanners that are capable of "readily being altered by the user" include, but are not limited to: those for which the ability to receive cellular telephone frequencies can be added by clipping the leads of, or installing, a simple component, such as a diode, resistor and/or jumper wire; replacing a plug-in semiconductor chip; or programming a semiconductor chip using special access codes or an external device. Scanners and frequency converters for use with scanners, must also be incapable of converting digital cellular frequencies to analog voice audio. Under Section 15.37(f), the manufacture or importation of scanning receivers, and frequency converters used with scanning receivers, that do not comply with Section 15.121 shall cease on or before April 26, 1994.
I have been loosely following the changes over the years and have always been a scanner person. What stands out with these modifications to the communications act to prevent cellular listening is the speed the FCC acted and continued to act and modify the laws as people found ways around the initial wording. I never really fully understood the motivations. I assume it was the cellular providers trying to provide consumers a false sense of security in combination with not having to admit they went cheap and used plain old non encypted analog commun
The best copy protection is semantic (Score:5, Insightful)
Return of the good old days (Score:2)
And for "old" equipment: HD-DVD, Blu-ray or any other new storage medium needs the backing of the recording & film industry to get of the ground. If necessary they will start a new standard incompatible with all the older equipment if
Terminology descriptions (Score:3, Interesting)
legislation - conversation amongst lawmakers and people in power to perpetuate their power through making new laws (see circular reasoning)"Analog Hole" - Hole does not have particularly positive connotation,but the denotation is pretty benign. It just means a void, butsometimes a void is not good such as a hole in an argument (unlike circular reasoning). Analog means parallel or "old school" electronicsspeak where the signals are much more like the real world, especially interms of audio and video signals, but digital signals that are quantizedor algorithmically fuzzed encoded of analog signals is currentlyprefered because it is easier to manipulate with digital electronics andit has little to no signal loss when being transferred from one device to another. "Analog Hole" is a term used to increase the validity of end users' ability to copy material that is much easier to copy digitally except the people that "own" the data don't like people to copy it because it threatens their business model of profit of content distribution even though people are more than willing to distribute content for free or at a much lower price than the people that do it
now. This is a very similar job of those that do legislation.
"last-ditch pirating mechanism" - another term to increase the validity of end users' skill and ability to copy content without the permission
of the people that try to make a profit off of content distribution.
Pirate used to be associated with people that used to rob ships at sea.
For some reason, this is not much of an occupation despite the lack of
physical or legal protection of goods on ships. Pirates today are more
known for distributing digital content without the consent of those
that try to profit from distributing digital content. "last-ditch" is a
strange term meaning a desperate attempt to do something that has not
been successfully done through more conventional means (see last-resort)
DRM - aka Digital Rights Management. A funny term to describe a way
for those who try to make a profit from distributing digital content by
making it more difficult to distribute digital content (see eliptical
reasoning)
I hope this clears things up, and that it gets seen as a post on
slashdot.org because it is something that actually took time and effort
to think about so it will be placed lower in the ordered list of
quicker, less thought out posts of others.
It must be Tuesday, I could never get the hang of Tuesdays.
Don't ask why the formatting is weird.
let them do it! (Score:5, Insightful)
Well then that might be a problem (Score:3, Interesting)
Texas Instruments (usually under the name Burr-Brown), Analog Devices, Cirrus Logic, and Asahi Kasei (AKM in the US). Of those, three are US firms, one is Japanese.
Now those may not be the only companies, but if you look at the hardware you own, I bet you find all of it uses converters from one of those four sources. If they all get on board with something like this, could be real hard to find a non-DRM source.
Three things about this. (Score:3, Interesting)
The analog hole will always exist as long as 'we' amature musicians can buy microphones and 'us' engineers can buy or design data aquisition hardware (MP3's are just data points). Can't wait to make my PIC based Analog to digital converter/recorder.
People who have more freedom than US citizens will not be affected.
No, I did not RTFA. Maybe I'll go back and do it now.
Veil? (Score:5, Funny)
"Encoded Video Invisible Light"?(EVIL)
"Video Invisible Light Encoded"?(VILE)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Let them plug away (Score:4, Interesting)
So the analog-to-digital channel is denied -- big deal! How many times have I passed vendors in the NYC subway hawking copies of movies that have just been released in theatres in cheesy cases with obviously color-copied covers? As long as you can afford a digitial video camcorder, DVDs, and a burner, you can copy movies or TV or whatever. Who needs analog?
HE'S THE ONE! (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't think the industry or anyone expects it to pass. I think they expect it to fail, and then they'll get a lesser, though still not acceptable, bill passed that does what the industry really wants.
Because let's be honest, all you're going to do with this bill is piss people off. You want to get people up in arms? Get between them and their TV. See how long you live.
Why do you think the digital TV transition, which was supposed to occur in just over a year, has now been pushed to 2009? The people in Washington don't want people to be able to point to them and say "THEY KILLED TV!"
but...? (Score:3, Insightful)
Complicated, silicon solutions aside, my father-in-law, who doesn't know how to send email, figured out how to digitize his old 8mm films on his own - point a digicam at the screen.
Last time I checked, I didn't have an organic usb port in the back of my head, so at some point the digital signals have to be converted to light and sound, and neither of them can be DRMd without making the whole system useless, because unless they are going to make home studios and digital cameras illegal they can't stop us from recording it.
When will they learn that DRM is a deterant not a solution? Not least of all, its an incentive to others, who break it 'because they can'.
This should ruin export sales (Score:3, Insightful)
In terms of TVs and other consumer hardware, this might not hurt too much - it's all made by the Japanese and Koreans anyway. However, if this nonsense gets integrated into computer hardware, it would spell the end of any export sales for such equipment.
And as other posters have commented - it won't stop the dedicated.
What amercian hardware? (Score:4, Insightful)
I have no problem with this (Score:5, Insightful)
... as long as one proviso is added. In addition to requiring all consumer devices to honor the copyright protection system, the law must also require all consumer devices to honor all of the exceptions codified in current copyright law. In particular, devices need to detect and permit Fair Use as well as reproduction of content whose term of copyright protection has expired. The things that copyright law allows are just as important as the things it restricts, so if you're going to require device manufacturers to build devices that enforce the law, they need to enforce *all* of the law, not just most of it.
Re:I have no problem with this (Score:3, Interesting)
More importantly, there should be provision for rights requests to be honored remotely. That is to say, if I actually do call up Disney and get rights to make a copy of a movie that will be on TV tonight, how are they going to be able to "allow" me to do so?
Sophisticated keying systems with authority placed in neutral bodie
Re:I have no problem with this (Score:3, Interesting)
Can you suggest a way to "detect and allow Fair Use" while still protecting against unauthorized copies?
As a matter of fact, no. Actually, I think it's impossible, because intent is central to determination of Fair Use, and the machine can't read the user's mind. That's not the issue, though. A law that prohibits broad classes of activities, many of which are legal and valuable, in order to attempt to stop those that are illegal, is a bad law. For example, suppose we introduce a new bill to fight chi
The new Vernor Vinge book... (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyone who seriously wants to record HDTV and has a modicum of technical knowledge can bypass all this cruft. Fast A/D converters on the RGB drivers and scan circuitry of an HDTV set plus some code to convert the raw voltages back into pixel data would do it. The same thing in the digital domain would work for LCD drive signals. VEIL, HDMI and other encryption systems will do bupkis to prevent recording at this level because it's directly at the point of display and that HAS to be unencrypted for himan beings to make sense of the visual and auditory data.
Priorities? (Score:4, Insightful)
OK, so the people that could and should be pursuing articles of impeachment against President Bush for his illegal domestic wiretaps are instead spending their time whoring themselves out to the MPAA?
Maybe they should look into enforcing existing laws every once in a while instead of writing new and needless laws.
Take a few min and write your committee member (Score:5, Informative)
Hon. Hyde(R) Illinois, 6th [house.gov]
Hon. Coble(R) North Carolina, 6th [house.gov]
Hon. Smith(R) Texas, 21st [house.gov]
Hon. Gallegly(R) California, 24th [house.gov]
Hon. Goodlatte(R) Virginia, 6th [house.gov]
Hon. Chabot(R) Ohio, 1st [house.gov]
Hon. Lungren(R) California, 3rd [house.gov]
Hon. Jenkins(R) Tennessee, 1st [house.gov]
Hon. Cannon(R) Utah, 3rd [house.gov]
Hon. Bachus(R) Alabama, 6th [house.gov]
Hon. Inglis(R) South Carolina, 4th [house.gov]
Hon. Hostettler(R) Indiana, 8th [house.gov]
Hon. Green(R) Wisconsin, 8th [house.gov]
Hon. Keller(R) Florida, 8th [house.gov]
Hon. Issa(R) California, 49th [house.gov]
Hon. Flake(R) Arizona, 6th [house.gov]
Hon. Pence(R) Indiana, 6th [house.gov]
Hon. Forbes(R) Virginia, 4th [house.gov]
Hon. King(R) Iowa, 5th [house.gov]
Hon. Feeney(R) Florida, 24th [house.gov]
Hon. Franks(R) Arizona, 2nd [house.gov]
Hon. Gohmert(R) Texas, 1st [house.gov]
Hon. Berman(D) California, 28th [house.gov]
Hon. Boucher(D) Virginia, 9th [house.gov]
Hon. Nadler(D) New York, 8th [house.gov]
Re:Take a few min and write your Rep.. Part 2 (Score:5, Informative)
again this is from:http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMembersh
Hon. Scott(D) Virginia, 3rd [house.gov]
Hon. Watt(D) North Carolina, 12th [house.gov]
Hon. Lofgren(D) California, 16th [house.gov]
Hon. Jackson Lee(D) Texas, 18th [house.gov]
Hon. Waters(D) California, 35th [house.gov]
Hon. Meehan(D) Massachusetts, 5th [house.gov]
Hon. Delahunt(D) Massachusetts, 10th [house.gov]
Hon. Wexler(D) Florida, 19th [house.gov]
Hon. Weiner(D) New York, 9th [house.gov]
Hon. Schiff(D) California, 29th [house.gov]
Hon. Sánchez(D) California, 39th [house.gov]
Hon. Van Hollen(D) Maryland, 8th [house.gov]
Hon. Wasserman Schultz(D) Florida, 20th [house.gov]
Hidden danger... (Score:5, Insightful)
Plus, there is a tiny detail these companies have forgotten: They can't lobby other countries. Try passing a law that forbids analog recording in Venezuela, Argentina, Indonesia or Hong Kong (not to mention the great dragon).
What will happen when the average american finds himself at disadvantage with other countries?
If TV companies insist on closing the doors to their own viewers, suddenly they'll realize they only locked themselves out.
Smart move, really.
In other news..... (Score:3, Insightful)
In other news, calling "the ability to choose not to watch crappy movies" a "signifficant weakness in our buisness model", the **AA are calling for critical thinking to be outlawed.
Strange timing (Score:3, Insightful)
How did they find time to put this into committee and not time to file orders of impeachment for our government spying on its citizens without court supervision.
This is gonna be one hell of a New Year.
Zone Denial for Vacation Videos! (Score:3, Interesting)
Creating a bunch of devices that emit the "Do Not Copy" signal cheaply, battery powered... Now place this device in front of your favourite landmark. In fact, place them wherever you want!
All of a sudden, people are unable to take pictures of it.
Now, take one of these devices to a press conference. The TV cameras won't be able to cover it!
I forsee a lot of warranty returns if that happens.
Still, might be good for individual privacy. Can you imagine carrying one of them and security cameras not being allowed to record your presence?
Awesome!
Re:The truly sad part... (Score:3, Insightful)
What? Most people never even get around to watching this kind of programming. They're too busy watching some guy getting arrested for a shooting or a robbery... on the national news station.
The kind of programming you're talking about is becoming increasingly rare, and if this legislation and more like it gets passed, then it looks like you won't be able to record th
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why are people worried? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Why are people worried? (Score:5, Insightful)
The moral or the story? The Chinese aren't stupid, and anyone who thinks otherwise is a goddamn fool to believe they will not surpass us if we continue down the road where no one can earn a living unless their job is management of some kind. Exporting all labor will turn us back into a country of farmers, once places such as India and China figure out they no longer need us to do their own thing. I almost don't want to have children simply because if I can't escape the United States, I wouldn't want to raise a child into the situation that we both know is about to happen.
Amen (Score:3, Interesting)
The parent post is dead-on. Back in the early to mid-90's, the castings and machining was sub-par out of China. Nowadays, that is NOT the case. The products coming from China are excellent. World-class, in fact. And guess who's jobs those used to be? Yep. Amer
Re:this is the death knell of neoliberalism (Score:3, Insightful)