September 30, 2005 6:05 PM PDT
Politicians want to raise broadcast flag
- Related Stories
-
Why the broadcast flag should go forward
May 26, 2005 -
Why the broadcast flag won't work
May 26, 2005 -
Court yanks down FCC's broadcast flag
May 6, 2005 -
Court questions FCC's broadcast flag rules
February 22, 2005 -
Are PCs next in Hollywood piracy battle?
November 5, 2003 -
FCC nears vote on TV 'broadcast flag'
October 28, 2003
In a letter Thursday, the politicians called for rapid approval of a federal law adopting the broadcast flag, which would outlaw over-the-air digital TV receivers and computer tuner cards that don't follow strict anticopying standards.
"Program producers will naturally be reluctant to license their high value programs for digital distribution without protection from widespread acts of infringement over the Internet," said the letter, sent to Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., chairman of the House of Representatives panel on Internet and commerce.
No legislation has advanced in either the House or the Senate, but opponents of the broadcast flag have been warning that the proposal could be attached to spending bills. The bill funding the Federal Communications Commission through 2006, for instance, is still before a conference committee.
In a 3-0 ruling in May, a federal appeals court rejected the FCC's regulations adopting the broadcast flag. But the ruling was a limited one: the judges said that though the FCC lacked the authority to outlaw TV tuners, Congress could choose to enact a law allowing it.
Since then, the Motion Picture Association of America has been lobbying Congress to reinstate the scheme. In an essay for CNET News.com in May, MPAA head Dan Glickman wrote: "The broadcast flag does not inhibit copying, nor does it prevent redistribution of programming over a personal home network--it only restricts unauthorized redistribution of programming over the Internet and other digital networks."
Thursday's letter from Rep. Charles Pickering, R-Miss., and Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y., demonstrates that the MPAA has secured broad bipartisan support. It was signed by 12 Republicans and eight Democrats.
Public Knowledge, an advocacy group that has sued to yank down the FCC's broadcast flag, said in an e-mailed response to the letter: "The broadcast flag legislation would give the Federal Communications Commission control over virtually any technology, from set-top boxes to computer software."
Other signatories to the letter: John Shimkus, R-Ill., George Radanovich, R-Calif., Mike Ferguson, R-N.J., Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., Bart Gordon, D-Tenn., Mary Bono, R-Calif., Lee Terry, R-Neb., Ed Whitfield, R-Kt., Bobby Rush, D-N.J., Vito Fossella, R-N.Y., John Shadegg, R-Ariz., Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., Albert Wynn, D-Md., Michael Doyle, D-Penn., Charles Gonzalez, D-Tex., Charles Bass, R-N.H., John Sullivan, R-Okla., Frank Pallone, D-N.J.
30 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment (Log in or register)
Is it really fair to prevent viewers from copying movies and TV shows, just because they are digital in nature? Isn't that heavy-handed?
Slippery slope, here we come. Lets not allow this.
But secretly I will be wanting to record Supernanny and distribute it on Bittorrent and try and make a buck through advertising it (:
Gimme a break! 99% of the people out there just want to use it fairly and maybe 1% will do that, so why should be all be punished?
Tape recorders? VCR's? no problem (all of sudden its a problem?)
Digital files, unlike VCR tapes, can be copied endlessly. I will take only one person to make the show/movie available to everyone, in perfect quality. Sorry DVD sales are too important.
I don't think this will end Tivo recording ability. These "roach motel" devices will probably retain ability to record, since you can't take the files out without DRM.
Is it really fair to prevent viewers from copying movies and TV shows, just because they are digital in nature? Isn't that heavy-handed?
Slippery slope, here we come. Lets not allow this.
But secretly I will be wanting to record Supernanny and distribute it on Bittorrent and try and make a buck through advertising it (:
Gimme a break! 99% of the people out there just want to use it fairly and maybe 1% will do that, so why should be all be punished?
Tape recorders? VCR's? no problem (all of sudden its a problem?)
Digital files, unlike VCR tapes, can be copied endlessly. I will take only one person to make the show/movie available to everyone, in perfect quality. Sorry DVD sales are too important.
I don't think this will end Tivo recording ability. These "roach motel" devices will probably retain ability to record, since you can't take the files out without DRM.
if the content doesn't get dramatically better.
There's nothing terribly compelling about DTV
unless you're a hard-up sports nut. It just means
people need to buy a new set.
This just serves as a value-detractor for DTV:
you have to buy a new TV to, possibly, get a
somewhat crisper picture (DTV is not HDTV) that
you know will have features that promise to be
more annoying and mysterious than programming the
VCR or having a "V-chip" kick in for no apparent
reason.
Way to speed up adoption, morons!
if the content doesn't get dramatically better.
There's nothing terribly compelling about DTV
unless you're a hard-up sports nut. It just means
people need to buy a new set.
This just serves as a value-detractor for DTV:
you have to buy a new TV to, possibly, get a
somewhat crisper picture (DTV is not HDTV) that
you know will have features that promise to be
more annoying and mysterious than programming the
VCR or having a "V-chip" kick in for no apparent
reason.
Way to speed up adoption, morons!
The final result of all of this (the "Broadcast-Flag", "Trusted-Computing", "Copyright" and government-authority being expanded to absolutely INSANE levels) will be that the "average American" will soon be nothing more than a "surf" deprived of any real rights to "property-ownership", "political-representation", "privacy" or "self-determination". All of those, "cherished American-values", will only exist at the whim of a few powerful "property-owners" who will run everybody elses lives through a SHAM-GOVERNMENT, and "legally-required" technological design-requirements, such as this.
In short, these LYING, self-interested CROOKS, are CLEARLY NOT a legitimate government, ...which operates under the Constitution, "...the law", and, the "...will of the people". In fact, these politicians are rapidly becoming THE VERY "...ENEMY" that our "...Founding Fathers" revolted against.
The final result of all of this (the "Broadcast-Flag", "Trusted-Computing", "Copyright" and government-authority being expanded to absolutely INSANE levels) will be that the "average American" will soon be nothing more than a "surf" deprived of any real rights to "property-ownership", "political-representation", "privacy" or "self-determination". All of those, "cherished American-values", will only exist at the whim of a few powerful "property-owners" who will run everybody elses lives through a SHAM-GOVERNMENT, and "legally-required" technological design-requirements, such as this.
In short, these LYING, self-interested CROOKS, are CLEARLY NOT a legitimate government, ...which operates under the Constitution, "...the law", and, the "...will of the people". In fact, these politicians are rapidly becoming THE VERY "...ENEMY" that our "...Founding Fathers" revolted against.
Coupled with the Patriot Act, DMCA, and gun control laws, the bill of rights has been effictively nixed.
It is time that the people checked the governments power.
Coupled with the Patriot Act, DMCA, and gun control laws, the bill of rights has been effictively nixed.
It is time that the people checked the governments power.
"Program producers will naturally be reluctant to license their high value programs for digital distribution without protection from widespread acts of infringement over the Internet,"
Fine, then don't. Take your baseball and your bat and go home.
It really is that silly. Those who hesitate to license their programs will be the losers. There's no need for viewers (or legislators) to worry. There are enough willing producers out there to satify the demand.
By the way, the definition of BROADCAST is: To transmit (a radio or television program) for public or general use. The term "broadcast flag" is an oxymoron.
"Program producers will naturally be reluctant to license their high value programs for digital distribution without protection from widespread acts of infringement over the Internet,"
Fine, then don't. Take your baseball and your bat and go home.
It really is that silly. Those who hesitate to license their programs will be the losers. There's no need for viewers (or legislators) to worry. There are enough willing producers out there to satify the demand.
By the way, the definition of BROADCAST is: To transmit (a radio or television program) for public or general use. The term "broadcast flag" is an oxymoron.
The only people to benefit will be the Media execs, their lawyers and yes the politicians who now benefit from the Motion Picture industries payoffs and bribes.
The only people to benefit will be the Media execs, their lawyers and yes the politicians who now benefit from the Motion Picture industries payoffs and bribes.