[opendtv] Re: MPAA wants to stop DVRs from recording some movies
- From: John Willkie <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 16:08:03 -0400 (EDT)
Let's see if I can "help."
first, the foreground. When the FCC closes a proceeding, it usually issues a
document.
That document is composed of several standard sections.
1) The background of the proceeding, including the issuance of the document
that started the proceeding and the bare reasons the FCC initiated the
proceeding.
2) Abstracts of the relevant comments from parties and relevant replies to
those comments
3) The findings (or conclusion) of the Commission
4) the changes (if any) that the Commission proposes to put into place.
There are several things I'm glossing over, such as the regulatory flexibility
analysis, any environmental considerations, the OMB process for making changes
to forms, but the above covers it in a nutshell.
The last aspect is the easiest to spot, it starts with "BE IT THEREFORE
RESOLVED;" Conclusions are usually labelled as such. And, the background
opens the document.
You quoted selected material from the comments section. And, since you offered
no affirative conclusion (merely a negative one, that amounted to dicta
[non-procedural commentary], you were not helpful. You created the first noise
in this thread. I'll leave for others how to place that in context.
The only time that the commentary comes into play is if there is ambiguity in
the outcome. You didn't post the outcome; just dicta (at best). So, I guess
the conclusions and outcome didn't address the matter, or didn't support your
'position', or both.
Now, for the sake of discussion, let's discuss the relevance of what you cited
to the discussion of the "FCC refuses" (commentary; you should have said
something like "declined"). It's a negative conclusion, it was dicta, and it
had no bearing on the discussion, EXCEPT to support a position contrary to
yours.
Instead, you offered it as support for your position. I'll leave for others
how this comports with your general attitude and just how relevant this was to
our discussion. On the latter point, I think it's best not to repeat oneself.
If you want to actually put forth a finding or resolved matter of the
commission, that is relevant to a discussion. Dicta is not. Especially dicta
that declined to impose restrictions that you favor.
Then, there's the "behalfism." Your world is confined to OTA television. The
proceeding in question had nothing to do with your world; it's a world that you
proudly reject. And, the holding wasn't in support of your position.
You used a negative dicta to attempt to create a postion in support of yours.
Then, you repeat until you turn blue in the face.
I love it when people bring up new and innovative ways of thinking, or points
that help move a discussion along. I love good points in opposition. You just
love hearing your lips flap.
What I am told is that you and Tom Barry also do this type of stuff somewhere
on AVS forum, but that at least one other guy tries to out-do you two.
As much as I'd like to participate there on PSIP issues, I can only stand so
much needless aggravation. So, I "decline" to enter the room.
John Willkie
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Jun 27, 2008 3:21 PM
>To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [opendtv] Re: MPAA wants to stop DVRs from recording some movies
>
>Adam Goldberg wrote:
>
>> I see. Can we completely forget about this document, then?
>> The paragraphs you quote are summaries of what proponents of
>> various positions have said, followed by the Commission's
>> decision to not deal with any of this. It's got nothing to
>> do with what you're talking about.
>
>Well, let's see. Someone asks whether there's a difference between what
>is allowed for time shift recording of FOTA programming and what is
>allowed of MVPD programs. I find an FCC document in which the FCC
>refuses to put any restrictions on what MVPDs can do wrt copy
>protection, but restates the Supreme Court decision with respect to OTA
>time shift recording.
>
>And this has nothing to do with our discussion?
>
>Okay.
>
>Bert
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>
>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
>FreeLists.org
>
>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
>unsubscribe in the subject line.
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
