IP: more on Lawmakers Seek Rules to Stop Redistribution of Digital TV

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: Nathan Cochrane <ncochrane () theage fairfax com au>
Organization: The Age newspaper
Reply-To: ncochrane () theage fairfax com au
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 11:16:30 +1000
To: Rich Wiggins <wiggins () msu edu>
Cc: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Subject: Re: IP: more on  Lawmakers Seek Rules to Stop  Redistribution of
Digital TV

Hi Dave

Rich raises some interesting points, some of which I agree with, others
I don't. I welcome his erudite contributions to the debate. Apologies
for the length of the post.

Put simply, intellectual property laws exist to foster innovation.

"Since the Supreme Court's Betamax decision 20 years ago, Americans have
grown accustomed to recording legally acquired content for noncommercial
purposes. Tens of millions of consumers record broadcast television with
VCRs and PVRs, download their music CDs onto their computers, and bring
their music files to the gym on their MP3 players.

"These noncommercial home recording practices have been very good for
the consumer electronics industry. They have driven consumer demand for
new technologies like MP3 players and PVRs, and opened up new markets
for existing technologies-for example, home PCs are increasingly being
purchased as audio devices."

"Hollywood's concerns with respect to (digital television) purportedly
stem from the ability for copyrighted digital works to be too-easily and
illegally distributed via the Internet, but these arguments often extend
beyond the need for Internet retransmission parameters. Consumer
advocates contend that in the digital age consumers should enjoy the
same fair use and non-commercial home recording rights they have
maintained in the analog world."
MORE:
http://www.ce.org/publications/books_references/digital_america/video/copy_p
rotection.asp

The content producers may see that the ability to make digital copies is
a transfer from their sector to, mostly overseas, consumer electronics
makers. But America has a chance to lead the world in what could be the
biggest consumer electronics market since the VCR or colour television,
the personal video recorder. So the net gain to the American economy
could be greater by enabling fair sharing, expanding the pie for content
and hardware makers alike. I'm not American, so I don't care if the
bickering stuffs up the US economy.

The studios are not as interested in the l33t traders as they are the
mums and dads; that's their real target. Sure, there are mostly academic
institution servers sagging under the weight of pirated DivX;), most of
which go down to CD-RW not DVD recordable, which is more expensive than
an original retail DVD. But the game is the people at home, sitting in
front of their TV sets, time-shifting. That's a right courts have given
consumers and which is about to be taken away. And it will be done with
deep intrusion into our digital sanctum sanctorum.

The various similar control mechanisms being built into DVB-T and ATSC
digital standards have a lot more to do with telling consumers what they
will watch and buy than just simple anti-piracy. The capacity exists,
for instance, to force consumers to watch advertisements on their
recordings. A small price, perhaps, for the high quality of
entertainment and information that daily streams through the airwaves.

DV-CPCM
http://www.dvb.org/dvb_technology/pdf/cfp_cp_cm.pdf

PROTECTION OF MULTIMEDIA CONTENT IN DIGITAL HOME NETWORKS
http://www.itrc.ac.ir/ist-2001/Eskicioglu.htm

As to digital always being an exact copy, that may or may not be true.
At first blush it seems reasonable, but is a common misconception.
Digital storage and transmission is subject to many factors that affect
quality similar to analog. Firstly, the original high quality of analog
film is down-converted using a compression rate to digital, perhaps with
an intermediate step. The act of compression is the act of compromise;
it degrades the copy, and any recompression will degrade it further.

Secondly, the transmission method may or may not make a perfect copy.
Anyone who has had a scratch on a CD or DVD, or watched a satellite
broadcast in a thunderstorm will attest to that.

Rich is right that we are willing to sacrifice quality for convenience.
It's a point so obvious I didn't think it needed restating. But for the
record, I think he is right. Which is why DivX;) trading as it exists is
not the immediate threat, as it is still a technical operation outside
the realm of the average user, but perhaps not for long.

Some earlier articles on movie file trading I wrote a while back:
FYI from Tuesday 15 August 2000

Mayhem at the movies
Michael Saunders' popular website, Global DiVX, is a small but important
cog in a worldwide movement that threatens the movie industry's economic
base.
http://it.mycareer.com.au/communications/20000815/A2904-2000Aug14.html

Smile, you're on ;-) camera
DIVX ;-) is a rough and ready amalgam of two technologies - the MPEG4
video CODEC hacked from a beta version of Microsoft's Windows Media
Player (WMP) and MP3 for the stereo sound track.
http://it.mycareer.com.au/communications/20000815/A64645-2000Aug11.html

See change in the video store
HOLLYWOOD and its dependents have a narrow window of opportunity to
avoid a rerun of the MP3 traumas that have beset the music recording
industry. They can either embrace new technologies like DivX ;) or be
swallowed by them.
http://it.mycareer.com.au/columns/broadway/20000815/A64646-2000Aug11.html

DivX;) Video
http://media1.f2.com.au/ramgen.asp?fileid=1637


------ End of Forwarded Message

For archives see:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/