[opendtv] Re: MPAA wants to stop DVRs from recording some movies
- From: "Adam Goldberg" <adam_g@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 19:37:58 -0400
John,
I happen to know quite a bit about A/70 (sadly). Next time I see you
face-to-face, remind me and I'll tell you in great detail why I'm sad.
In any case, no, to my knowledge, no one has ever implemented A/70. There's
nothing in there that's difficult to do, nor any stuff which would require
bending-over-backwards by a PSIP generator. What's missing is commercial need.
5% off the top to the feds, coupled with zero installed base (and a couple of
dozen non-technical problems) leads to "not happening".
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of John Willkie
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 7:20 PM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: MPAA wants to stop DVRs from recording some movies
I can giggle.
Do you know of anybody that has implemented or deployed it?
Thankfully, nobody to date [aside from 'something' to which I probably
shouldn't even allude] has never suggested to me that I even need to know about
word one about encryption.
I've tried to understand A/70, but lacking customer/market pull, it tends to
glassify my eyes within minutes. I do remember something about key chaining,
including triple-encryption (encode/decode/encode) all with different keys.
I only 'think' that I can take in the data via PMCP and output something in
PSIP, but never having tested that functionality, even 'think' might be an
exaggeration.
I must be a fool, since I not only make mistakes here (and there), but I
(sometimes belatedly) admit them, without feeling the need for a dose of the
little blue pill (or equivalents.) Besides, I don't think those drugs make
people smarter, per se.
John Willkie, who once had a buddy that would say "per se" at least once per
three sentences.
-----Original Message-----
>From: Adam Goldberg <adam_g@xxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Jun 28, 2008 6:59 PM
>To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [opendtv] Re: MPAA wants to stop DVRs from recording some movies
>
>Just for giggles, ATSC A/70 -->is<-- a Simulcrypt-based system. And the fact
>is it doesn't matter which PID the EMMs and ECMs are carried with. I don't
>know what you mean by "MPEG-2 Encryption", except perhaps DVB-CSA ... but more
>likely, nowadays on a newly-fielded system, to be something else.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
>Behalf Of John Willkie
>Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 5:03 PM
>To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [opendtv] Re: MPAA wants to stop DVRs from recording some movies
>
>here are the choices: you, in the posting below, either
>
>1) don't know the meaning of "is", or
>2) are just typing to hear your lips flap, or
>3) can't comprehend English-language sentences
>
>(or some combination)
>
>I said -- and I quote from the message below "I don't think anyone in the U.S.
>is using ATSC to transmit encrypted a/v content"
>
>You offer up USDTV, and you mention that they aren't in business. Note the
>"is using" in the above sentence. Does the dichotomy escape you?
>
>I should have said "ATSC technologies." I don't think USDTV used an ATSC
>standard for encryption, perhaps Sezmi (the release only came out last week;
>and I thought I was having short-term memory issues) uses ATSC technologies,
>but I suspect they use Simulcrypt or something else. Nothing requires
>encryption to use ATSC-specific technologies, and there is already MPEG-2
>encryption, which anyone can use, even ATSC broadcasters.
>
>MPEG-2 ECMs and EMMs (entitlement communications messages and entitlement
>management messages) all travel on pid 1 with a table_id of 1; ATSC uses at
>the very least, different table_id values and specifies several techniques,
>while in MPEG-2, it's all "user private."
>
>John Willkie
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Tom Barry <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Sent: Jun 28, 2008 4:23 PM
>>To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: [opendtv] Re: MPAA wants to stop DVRs from recording some movies
>>
>>Didn't the old and now failed USDTV have some encrypted channels? And I
>>thought there was also some new (but announced) startup that operated
>>similarly but also used the Internet in addition to ATSC sub-channels.
>>Something with a big hard drive but I don't remember the name or details.
>>
>>I tend to avoid purchasing encrypted pay channels because I'm cheap and
>>also usually cannot then use them to view on my computer driven system
>>due to the copy protection. But I don't really have anything against
>>them in principle. Like advertising supported material (or a mix of
>>both) I think they fit in a valid business model.
>>
>>- Tom
>>
>>John Willkie wrote:
>>> to pick a nit, the only restriction on over the air broadcasters in the
>>> U.S. is that they transmit a single a/v channel (at least equivalent to an
>>> NTSC channel in quality) in the clear.
>>>
>>> They can transmit any other virtual channels encrypted. I don't think
>>> anyone in the U.S. is using ATSC to transmit encrypted a/v content.
>>> Encrypted content, or non-advertiser supported content, invokes payment of
>>> 5% of net revenues for that service to the U.S. government.
>>>
>>> The relevance of this distinction might be illustrated in practice in the
>>> not-so-distant future.
>>>
>>> John Willkie
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Sent: Jun 28, 2008 5:03 AM
>>>> To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Subject: [opendtv] Re: MPAA wants to stop DVRs from recording some movies
>>>>
>>>> At 9:53 PM -0400 6/27/08, Albert Manfredi wrote:
>>>>> > You know, sort of like locking your car. No one is allowed
>>>>>> to steal stuff from your car, or steal the car itself. That
>>>>>> does NOT mean that car manufacturers don't need to install
>>>>>> locks, however. They should, definitely.
>>>>> In this climate of proud and deliberate, peristent, obtuseness, I
>>>>> should not have used the above analogy.
>>>>>
>>>>> My intention was merely to say that the problem of unlawful copy
>>>>> protection can be attacked at both ends. At the FOTA broadcaster or
>>>>> content owner's end (supply), copy protection is not allowed. Period.
>>>>>
>>>>> But that DOES NOT mean that CE manufacturers have to trust the
>>>>> supply end to do what's lawful. Since there are simple means to make
>>>>> the system work as the courts intend, CE vendors should use those
>>>>> simple means. No need to trust the other guy to be doing the right
>>>>> thing, in this case.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or restated, you are NOT "circumventing" a copy protection
>>>>> mechanism, since such mechanism does not, or more accurately should
>>>>> not, by law, exist.
>>>> The only restriction on FTA broadcasts is that they be delivered in
>>>> the free and clear. The Betamax decision did not say that copy
>>>> protection is not allowed, only that using the VCRfor time shifting
>>>> was a non infringing use.
>>>>
>>>> Can you show me anything that says that broadcasters CANNOT invoke a
>>>> regimen that restricts copying of a program?
>>>>
>>>> The real issue is whether they can force the manufacturers of
>>>> downstream devices to honor any attempts to restrict copying. They
>>>> tried with the Broadcast Flag, but lost because the courts ruled that
>>>> the FCC does not have the authority to regulate how devices that are
>>>> used to view broadcasts deal with this issue.. Note, tat they can
>>>> regulate some aspects of what a TV receiver is, thanks to the All
>>>> Channel Receiver Act, which gave them the authority to require HF and
>>>> now ATSC receivers in a device.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Craig
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>--
>>Tom Barry trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>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.
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
