Broadcast flag is back!!!!

[TetsuoShima]

ArsTechnica Article

 

So, after the courts decided the FCC didn't have authority to make the broadcast flag obligatory, this new amendment to "The Communications, Consumer's Choice, and Broadband Deployment Act of 2006" will make it so that the FCC DOES have the authority and after that nothing will stand in its way.

 

Under the amendment to S.2686, the Federal Communications Commission would be given the authority to reinstate the broadcast flag. Its previous attempts to create a flag for television were smacked down by the courts, which ruled that the FCC was exceeding its authority in attempting to do so. The ruling left open the possibility for Congress to explicitly give the FCC that power, which this legislation does.

 

So, there you have it... :(

[Guest c4evap]

I didn't know what a broadcast flag was until I checked out the article.

 

A broadcast flag is a set of status bits (or "flags") sent in the data stream of a digital television program that indicates whether or not it can be recorded, or if there are any restrictions on recorded content. Possible restrictions include inability to save a digital program to a hard disk or other non-volatile storage, inability to make secondary copies of recorded content (in order to share or archive), forceful reduction of quality when recording (such as reducing high-definition video to the resolution of standard TVs), and inability to skip over commercials. In the United States, new television receivers using the ATSC standard were supposed to incorporate this functionality by July 1, 2005, but a federal court struck down the Federal Communications Commission's rule to this effect on May 6. The stated intention of the broadcast flag was to prevent copyright infringement, but many have asserted that broadcast flags interfere with the fair use rights of the viewing public.

 

This sucks big time! Big brother I hate you!!!

 

c4 :mad:

[GorunNova]

With any luck, it'll get thrown out again. People didn't put up with it before, and they're (hopefully) not going to put up with it now. *sigh* This'll piss off the Linux people, all right, as it explicitly says that open source drivers for TV tuners etc. will be illegal. Any driver with source code available would not be 'robust' according to the FCC regulations attached to the broadcast flag idea, as any driver with source code available could be edited to disable broadcast flag handling (and thus marked as illegal).

 

Then again, the US did make DeCSS illegal, when it's the only way Linux users can play DVDs without buying a proprietary, closed source, licenced DVD player (i.e. NOT what is commonly available for DVD playback, like Totem and MPlayer... technically, all Linux users using those are breaking the law.)

[Symok]

Stuff like this doesn't surprise me in the least. And it's only going to get worse, unless they get some people who actually UNDERSTAND technology making the laws that govern it. Noone would accept a geek (or anyone for that matter) adding rules and regulations to sporting events in which they had never participated, or even watched. Why do we accept non-geeks making laws about geek stuff?

[StevenofNine]

The non-geeks aren't making the laws. Geeks from the technical divisions of the entertainment companies are behind the scenes, lobbying for what they want.

 

This will change nothing. DVDs are copy protected. They get copied. CDs are copy protected, they get copied. Computer Systems get huge amounts of security. They get hacked. The Open Source Geekdom will find ways around broadcast flags.

[TetsuoShima]

More important news on the matter:

 

Arstechnica Article

 

The video broadcast flag title in the original bill has been replaced with Senator Inouye's broadcast flag bill verbatim which was originally developed by Senators Smith and Boxer. Each of the major networks, the National Association of Broadcasters, and the Motion Picture Association of America have endorsed that title.

 

Referred to as the Digital Content Protection Act of 2006, the section of the wide-ranging legislation would empower the FCC to resurrect the broadcast flag for television and create another flag for digital radio. The audio flag provision, written by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR), has the full support of the Recording Industry Association of America.

 

This is bad news for consumers and consumer electronics manufacturers. Enacting the broadcast flag will make it easier for the MPAA and RIAA to limit how consumers view and consume media, forcing us to pay multiple times for the same content in many cases.

 

This becomes even more allarming once you realise that in about 10 years time all analog broadcasts will be banned from 'the ether'. Both radio and TV will only be allowed to via digital signals which carry the broadcast flag. No more recording a good song on the radio. That will be impossible without paying for it.

 

 

@StevenofNine: As for it not changing anything. Sure it does. It's another rule that makes what people consider 'regular usage': recording a show on tv/on the radio both impossible and illegal. What's more, circumvention will not be quite that easy, since it is to be implemented into all consumer technology, like your tv/radio/tuners/... Since this kind of equipment is not the sort of thing most people mess around with (software is acceptable for some people to mess with, but usually not hardware). So most people will simply not be able to record from the radio anymore like they used to. And once they place the thing directly in the IC with secure connections, there's nothing anybody can do. A modchip might do the trick temporarily, but for an easily changable configuration (a tuner for example, not an xbox) that could be stopped rather quickly too. An then another modchip appears that ca beat the new configuration, and so 'the battle' continues....

 

(even in computers, directly into the processor/video processor/audio processor/chipset/hard drive/... and in all those cases directly in the IC with secure connections to all other components involved in a transfer, this technology has been researched for some time and it will be integrated into all new equipment in about 2 years from now, the second generation to come, so to say, if your computer does not support this technology or even one connection is rated insecure, then the software/content simply won't play or play with seriously reduced features, however, in case of computers it would be somewhat understandable, but not being able to record a show from tv, that is a little too far for my tastes, and again people will only come to realise this, once it is to late)

 

But that's not the point, it shouldn't be necessary to circumvent such things. Those things simply should not be allowed to exist (broadcast flag). The thing is, that with each of these laws they take away a little bit of control from the end user and give it to some big corporation. They don't have to use or abuse that 'power', but knowing their previous actions, I am pretty sure they will.

 

 

 

EDIT:

 

even more:

 

Arstechnica: Broadcast flag makes it through committeeand more...

 

Despite objections voiced by Sen. John Sununu (R-NH), the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation has left both the audio and video broadcast flags unmolested.

 

If the bill makes it to the full Senate, it will therefore contain the broadcast flags. However, individual senators would still be able to offer amendments to the legislation that would remove the controversial flags. Sen. Sununu has indicated he might do exactly that.

 

The Commerce Committee will continue running down the bill, amendment by amendment, with network neutrality next on the list.

 

hmm, at least some Senators are on the 'good' side... Lets hope that in the end, they (good) win...

[Moonstalker]

And they wonder why people are turning away from TV towards other activities.