Flag Baring

The movie and music industries have been relentless in their efforts to implement their execrable plan for a "broadcast flag" regulation—rules that would require technology makers to sell crippled products to serve the interests of content control, not consumers. First, they wanted the FCC to mandate it—but the courts helpfully reminded them that the FCC has no power to tell Dell how to make computers. Then they tried to get Congress to quietly slip it into a massive appropriations bill, but bloggers exposed the ploy, and techie pressure put the kibosh on it.

Now, The Electronic Frontier Foundation's Danny O'Brien outlines what Beltway buzz suggests may be their next attempt: Sneak provisions into a reconciliations bill that would require follow-up legislation fully implementing the flag. Of course, now that this potential tactic has been exposed, industry may have to try another route—or at any rate, it'll be much tougher for them to push through.

Comments

[joe]

I still call my CD player "the HiFi."

Can someone please explain how a broadcast flag "cripples" anyone's equipment?

[Jennifer]

The movie and music industries have been relentless in their efforts to implement their execrable plan for a "broadcast flag" regulation?rules that would require techonlogy makers to sell crippled products to serve the interests of content control, not consumers. First, they wanted the FCC to mandate it?but the courts helpfully reminded them that the FCC has no power to tell Dell how to make computers

Is there a sentence missing from this paragraph? I thought broadcast flags were for televisions, not computers.

[Julian Sanchez]

It would cover anything capable of playing digital content--TV, computer, DVR, whatever.

[Jennifer]

Ah. Thanks.

[Jennifer]

The thing that I really don't get about this digital stuff (which Jeff often gripes about, since he works in broadcasting) is that the only presumed benefit of it seems to be prettier, better-quality reception. (Assuming it works, of course.)

But what has the FCC to do with THAT? Even if you buy into the notion that we need the government to protect us from Janet Jackson's nipple or Bono saying "fucking great," where in their charter does it talk about picture crispness and quality?

TV made the switch from black and white to color without government mandates. If digital TV is as great as all that I'm sure that switch will also go through on its own.

[celtlion]

Joe - think of a broadcast flag as a tag which can be turned on or off to allow or stop a consumer from recording a program. Once something like that is mandated any provisions of fair use are pretty much at the discretion of the broadcaster - most proposals would mandate broadcast flags in all electronic reception devices for HDTV as I understand it - maybe someone here with a better understanding could elaborate?

(Off topic - these ads on the reason.com site seem to be causing problems with my ability to type and scroll around in this comment box..not sure if it is an overly aggressive javascript or flash based AD on the site but the reason.com tech staff might want to look into this)

[Russ D]

Jen,

Things like signal strength were the entire original purpose of the FCC. Content policing is the add-on.

[NathanB]

The broadcast flag cripples your device by preventing fair use recording (time shifting, fast forwarding, etc...) of programs. Digital Rights Management is not about preventing piracy but locking in and controlling the audience.

With encrypted messages you have a sender, a recipient, and an attacker. ALL attempts at DRM are doomed to fail because the recipient and attacker are the same.

For more on this check out Cory Doctorow's BoingBoing posts:

http://www.boingboing.net/2004/06/17/why_microsoft_should.html
http://www.boingboing.net/2005/09/13/tivo_wont_save_certa.html

[Krybo Amgine]

Jennifer:

The broadcast flag is something that is embedded in the media transport (i.e. the HDTV signal). The content companies are looking for Congress to mandate that any equipment capable of receiving HDTV signals must obey the broadcast flag that indicates whether or not a copy of the media stream is allowed to be stored on someone's recording media (disk drive, DVD-ROM, etc). It affects the manufacturers of anything capable of receiving and decoding HDTV signals: TVs, TiVo and TiVo-like DVR clones, HDTV tuner cards, etc.

[jdog]

OK, and I would like the government to help me build a 12' tall, barbed-wire, high-voltage electric fence around my house. A mote with alligators and snakes, and some high-tech survaillance gear would be welcome also.

[Jennifer]

Okay, my dirty little secret is exposed: I don't always give my boyfriend one hundred percent of my attention when he gripes about technological issues at his workplace.

But as I understand it, the whole mandated-digital-TV thing is separate from the broadcast flags, and near as I can tell the only presumed benefit of digital is that it looks nicer. Except when the whole screen breaks down into pixillated squares.

[ChicagoTom]

But as I understand it, the whole mandated-digital-TV thing is separate from the broadcast flags, and near as I can tell the only presumed benefit of digital is that it looks nicer. Except when the whole screen breaks down into pixillated squares.

Isn't the over air HD signal supposed to free up frequencies that are currently in use for something or another as well ? Wasn't that part of the reason they were trying to man-date that all new TVs be HD capable by year XXXX or something?

[Jennifer]

Chicago--

Yeah, now that you mention it, "frequency" sounds familiar. I know that the deadline for making the full switch keeps getting pushed back and back and back all the time, and I think a few stations have gone under because they couldn't afford to make the switch.

[Lazlo]

But as I understand it, the whole mandated-digital-TV thing is separate from the broadcast flags...

Depends on who's talking. The broadcast flag is essentially meaningless without mandated digital TV. If the flag isn't required by law until after the mandatory switch to digital, there'll be a bunch of hardware released in the interim that can legally* ignore the flag when recording digital content. The content industry wants that hole closed.

* Note that under the DMCA, using hardware that ignores the broadcast flag is a federal crime. "Fair use" (e.g., timeshifting, ripping to another format for a portable player, etc.) is not a defense when copying "protected" content.

[jdog]

"as I can tell the only presumed benefit of digital is that it looks nicer."

Ask your boyfriend about this, but digital technology is way more interesting than just good looks. Digital content does not suffer from the decay analog content does. You can copy and re-copy, and re-re-copy digital content without alterring or fuzzying the original content. The implications of this go way beyond movie viewing.

[Lowdog]

Why don't they just come out and say it? They don't want fair use anymore. They don't trust anyone. And instead of altering their business model, they just go whining to the politicians to fix their problems.

I say they can rot.

I don't illegally download a whole lot, I buy almost all of my video games, music, and movies, and yet they don't want me to be able to use what I paid good money for? Fuck 'em.

[Jeff P.]

Broadcast HDTV is pathetic untested technology that has, so far, a shitty track record, and is nothing more than a gov't scam to make UHF extinct so Paxton can have his spectrum efficient wireless monopoly. It will crash and burn several times within the next three years.
The current batch of HDTV transmitters were hobbled together in a rush to meet arbitrary deadlines which were set (and repeatedly pushed back) by the FCC. Nine stations had to be sold or went dark (with a couple still in limbo) because thier owners could not foot the bill. Cable networks got to test and choose thier own standards while broadcasters had to stay with 1040 undithered, non-interlaced, pseudo-composite video. On top of that it can't hold chroma, and all the closed captioning and SAP bloak the signal.
On the plus side, the pixelated digital artifacting looks so lifelike!
If an AWAC plane flies within 100 miles of our transmitter, the radar reads as reflected power on our transmitter limiters and the whole rig shuts down. On muggy nights our signal will actually ghost itself off of nearby mountain because of the microwave array up there.
Fox has the world series and superbowl for the next few years, I can only hope the HD fails then so the viewers get a glimpse of how twisted this whole set-up is.

[mike]

It seems that the RIAA and MPAA does not understand that if broadcast flag regualtion becomes a reality, somebody will figure out to circumvent the technology and make it obsolete. RIAA and MPAA are nothing but a bunch of idiots.

[Timothy]

So are the congresscritters who passed that damnable DMCA.

[jdog]

"It seems that the RIAA and MPAA does not understand that if broadcast flag regualtion becomes a reality, somebody will figure out to circumvent the technology and make it obsolete. RIAA and MPAA are nothing but a bunch of idiots. "

No, the RIAA and MPAA understand that completely. They are not idiots. They are fishing for some proactive government help in securing of their content.

[jdog]

"It seems that the RIAA and MPAA does not understand that if broadcast flag regualtion becomes a reality, somebody will figure out to circumvent the technology and make it obsolete. RIAA and MPAA are nothing but a bunch of idiots. "

No, the RIAA and MPAA understand that completely. They are not idiots. They are fishing for some proactive government help in securing their content.

[Lazlo]

It seems that the RIAA and MPAA does not understand that if broadcast flag regualtion becomes a reality, somebody will figure out to circumvent the technology and make it obsolete.

The RIAA/MPAA know this and don't care -- the point is to prevent casual copying, not widespread piracy. No Various Media Associations of America apologist me, but it does make some kind of sense -- it's technically trivial to get around (analog) Macrovision protection, for example, but it still stops 95% of the population from dubbing off copies of the DVDs they rent. When they do the books, these guys really do tally up every illegal copy as a lost sale, so the ROI is pretty compelling.

[Russ D]

Broadcast HDTV is pathetic untested technology that has, so far, a shitty track record, and is nothing more than a gov't scam to make UHF extinct

Jeff, can you explaion this a little better? Sounds like you work in tv broadcast engineering, but from my use of broadcast HDTV, the problems are on VHF, not UHF. I understand more UHF stations are apt to be underfinanced compared to their VHF competitors, but it seems like they have a distinct advantage signal-wise with HDTV, provided they can afford the initial equipment outlay. (And I don't get the whole Paxton rant.)

As a user, I can understand where a little ghosting is a heck of a lot more acceptable than a little pixellation-and-dropout, and I can accept that the FCC mandates were somewhat anti-competitive (even in cases where they weren't designed to be), but I don't understand the "chroma" you mention (and I can't even figure out the SAP on the digital signal - which comes in real handy for FOX football because they often forget to put the booth announcers on the SAP so all you get is stadium audio which is great because their announcers suck ass).

[mrbill]

The idea is to resell you the DVD's. The Friends set cost something like $150. If you already have a copy then that dilutes their next revenue stream.

And this flag is not the only thing coming down the pike. The next version of Windows "Vista" will have tech to stop NON permitted viewing at the screen level. If the DVD does not have Digital Rights Management then the monitor will not display it. Even if you have a hacked copy. The new monitors themselves will be DRM'd. You can only view authorized material as the monitor will ask for a handshake from the material. Which will require eveyone to update their computer monitor....if they get it in.

[jdog]

Dear Mr. Bill,

You sez:

"The idea is to resell you the DVD's. The Friends set cost something like $150."

I'll sell you next Disney hit, new-in-box, no copying whatsoever, for $149.99, shipping included.

[whocares]

This is all a moot point as the upcoming economic depression will prevent anyone from being able to afford ANY content.

[Jeff P.]

It doesn't matter if the host station is UHF or VHF, because all HD assignments are UHF. A station can have the most powerful HD signal for 100 miles, but it doesn't matter of the FCC sticks them between the state police radio frequency and the band used for wireless medical monitors (as happened here in CT).
The only advantage is if a good chunk of a station's viewership is watching via cable. Most cable headends take broadcasts signals via fiber line as opposed to "rabbit ears," but often the processin at the cable headend is not 100% compatable with the HD signal and you get digital distortion. If you watch your local Fox affiliate, HD or not, on a Comcast system, a guarentee you'll see break up on a nightly basis.

Paxson communications spent most of the late 80s and 90s buying up small low-to-mid power UHF stations. These consisted of tape decks in transmitter buildings and showed mostly infomercials. In 1998 the PAX network was born, and thanks to the saturation of these stations it was watchable in over 70% of the country (although it's ratings were dismal.) While all this was happening, Lowell Paxson was lobbying the FCC to make HD mandatory, with an original turnover date of 1996. His original proposal was for standard def TV to be gone by 2002. However, license holders would still have use of the frequencies. Right around the time of the first deadline pushback, it was learned that Paxson planned to use all of his available frequencies for "cheap" cellphone and wireless computer networks. He had bought the gear and was already drawing up contracts. If his plan had worked he would currently be the only viable independant multi-purpose wireless provider in quite a few states. If memory serves, he actually brought suits and injunctions against the FCC to:
1: Speed up the turnover process by assigning HD channels to broadcasters. WIthout negotiation.
2: Strong arm TV makers to develop HD televisions NOW, not when feasible.
3: Pick the cheapest HD standard and tell everyone it was now the law.
4: Prevent the initial deadline pushback (and every pushback since).
Eventually Paxson's plan fizzled. He sold off a bunch of stations (a few of which went dark) and lost gobs of revenue. He's still lobbying the FCC on a regular basis, including trying to block every wireless contract that the FCC approves.

Chroma is the color portion of the picture signal, the way Lux is brightness. In NTSC signals Chroma tends to be more integrated. In HD it seperates easily, which is why a lot of boxey pixillation is accompanied by loss of color.

[NathanB]

In any encryption scheme you have a sender, a recipient, and an attacker. In DRM the attacker and the recipient are one and the same, so the attacker has both the encrypted message and the key to open it. This is why all DRM is breakable. Check out Cory Doctorow's piece on DRM for more: http://www.dashes.com/anil/stuff/doctorow-drm-ms.html

[jdog]

NathanB,

I think that you are not up to speed on encryption technology. No one can even break the Open Source Kerebos authentication technology let alone a closed sourced algorithm.

[celtlion]

Ok, so I'm hearing that old arguement - "even if the technology becomes law someone can always come up with technology to circumvent it"

well, yes..probably - but if the inclusion of the broadcast flag provision became law then persons creating or using such devices would open themselves up to all kinds of federally supported legal and/or financial liabilities. Do you really think many manufacturers would still design products that allowed you to bypass that flag in those circumstances - this is why certain groups want a law written as opposed to using their own technology to restrict copying?

[jdog]

"even if the technology becomes law someone can always come up with technology to circumvent it"

I am not at all convinced that's true. A digital media purveyor could encrypt his content with many free-for-the-taking algorthms available on the Internet. I maintain that no mortal could presently decrypt his content, if he did so.

Content providers don't want to do this. Why ? They like the fact that people share their experience of the content with each other. Free adveritising. They seem to want to draw their forefinger across the sand with a shallow, straggly line in a effort to define their property and ask the government to enforce this boundary, but just sometimes. Silly laws follow.

[drf]

DVDA!!!!!!

(sorry, all of the four-letter(ed) abbreviations were getting to me)

Chicago Tom: mandate = rondezvous with a fellah.

(90 minutes to the first drink)

[Eion Murdock]

"I think that you are not up to speed on encryption technology. No one can even break the Open Source Kerebos authentication technology let alone a closed sourced algorithm."

But with kerberos, the attacker and the 'recipient' (legitimate user) are not the same person. In the case of media DRM schemes, the person attacking the system (with the desired result of content extraction, as opposed to obtaining an authentication token) can already view the content, making their task much easier.

In my experience, HDTV content looks an awful lot better than normal OTA TV or than cable - on big televisions, SD looks *terrible*. Of course, I think that government's forcing of digital migration is misguided and unnecessary, and if I had my say then the FCC would be abolished, their headquarters demolished and a statue of Hayek (Friedrich or Salma, to be decided by referendum) built with the rubble.

[The Wine Commonsewer]

TV made the switch from black and white to color without government mandates. If digital TV is as great as all that I'm sure that switch will also go through on its own.

That is actually a pretty brilliant statement and spot on.

I am Hit & Miss on Hit & Run so maybe you already told everyone, but I'm curious as to what kind of shotgun you bought.

[The Wine Commonsewer]

I don't illegally download a whole lot, I buy almost all of my video games, music, and movies, and yet they don't want me to be able to use what I paid good money for? Fuck 'em.

You know what keeps me from the guilts about an occasional download of a song I like? The fact that I have bought tapes to replace the records I bought and then CD's to replace the tapes I bought. I'm about done buying the same music over and over and over again.

Way back in the old days I had a Sony reel-to-reel and I would buy a record album and then tape it onto reel-to-reel. It was spectacular, it actually improved the sound quality and preserved my delicate records because they only got played once. It was also illegal to do that if I recall correctly.

[Eion]

"TV made the switch from black and white to color without government mandates."

Playing the devil's advocate here: the distinction between the black-and-white to colour transition and the analogue to digital transition is that existing black-and-white receivers would display the colour broadcasts without any additional equipment (in black-and-white, obviously), whereas analogue televisions will not display digital broadcasts without an additional set-top box, converter etc.

That said, I can't think of any reason why market forces wouldn't be enough for the analogue to digital transition, and it's unlikely they'd do a worse job of it than the FCC has so far.

[red diamond jim]

As a Comcast subscriber, I can tell you, that I have the occasional(every night!) black out and/or pixelated distortion, but even worse is the fact that I can only access "On-Demand" about once every 10 times(20 ?). No matter how many times I call them they always tell me "we're really sorry and all... but, this is like, realy new technology and all"

[Jason]

This actually wouldnt work in a reconciliation bill because parts of or all of it would not change outlays or revenues, in which case they could be stripped in the Senate on a point of order (called the Byrd rule) that would need 60 votes to be overcome.