HDCP.org -- HDtv Consumer Protection Organization

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Chris S, Jan 26, 2001.

  1. Chris S

    Chris S Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2000
    Messages:
    2,537
    Likes Received:
    8
    Real Name:
    Chris S
    I'm currently working on a new website called the HDtv Consumer Protection Organization, or http://www.hdcp.org
     
  2. Steve Owen

    Steve Owen Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 1999
    Messages:
    416
    Likes Received:
    0
    Fantastic work, Chris. It needs to be said. I'm just amazed that more people aren't angry about this. DIVX was easy to understand, and thus easy to fight against. This is a bit more abstract, so I think education will be key. Your site is a big step in that direction.
    As far as the site goes, it's a little difficult to read and to follow. You might want to concentrate the main page on a brief syopsis of why this is bad for the public, then add links to the various forum pages and articles later.
    There are also some excellent pages with good commentary on Slashdot. Just look in the "Television" section. There might be some good ideas there for your FAQ too.
    And another thing I'd change is the EFF link. It should be more pronounced. Everyone who cares about these issues should be a member... period!
    -Steve
    ------------------
    [​IMG] Home Theater Gear
     
  3. Chris S

    Chris S Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2000
    Messages:
    2,537
    Likes Received:
    8
    Real Name:
    Chris S
    Thanks for the comments, I really appreciate it! I'm going to add style sheets to all of the text to make it a bit more readable, but I do realize the concern about it looking to crowded. As for the links, I think that you are right. I need to find a better place to set them all up so that they are easy to find and noticeable. Maybe on the front page just under, or above, the HDCP banner or something like that. If you have any other thoughts don't hesitate to please let me know. Thanks again, Chris
    ------------------
    Home Theater: http://www.ig-88.net
     
  4. Thomas Newton

    Thomas Newton Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    1,515
    Likes Received:
    27
    Yes, the front page needs to explain what is at stake, in terms of the effects on our wallets and home theaters, and in terms of the more abstract assaults on our legal system. As it stands now, if you come into the front page and you don't know what the site is all about, you won't get much of a clue, and you might leave and never return.
    Possible high-level topics (each of which should link off to one (or more) detailed second-level pages):
    1. How a multi-industry group of studios, consumer electronics vendors, technology suppliers, etc. intends to install copy protection, access control, and encryption into all digital TV equipment, such that your only choices are to live with their computerized private 'police' in your household, or to not watch TV at all.
    (Whatever happened to the idea of a free market, where you could buy equipment not infested with copy protection and vendors could make it? For that matter, whatever happened to the principle that you're innocent until proven guilty? We cared for King George III's implementation of "law and order" so little that we wrote protections against several abusive practices into the Bill of Rights. If we don't take guff from a King, why should we take it from TV vendors?)
    2. The threat to timeshifting and archiving: how industry has demanded the ability to copy-protect even broadcast HDTV shows, in spite of a Supreme Court ruling stating that timeshifting broadcasts is legal Fair Use -- and that all forms of noncommercial use are presumptively Fair.
    3. How the FCC has thumbed its nose at the Supreme Court, the copyright laws, and the public by requiring inclusion of copy protection ability in broadcast HDTV. The agency that should be looking out for the public interest is instead working to make things much easier for those who would interfere with our exercise of our legal rights.
    4. The threat to "HDTV-ready" sets: that the industry will not "allow" them to receive HDTV-quality signals because an analog HDTV interface does not allow the companies who want to cripple digital TV to encrypt the signal from end to end. Suddenly your $3,000 to $8,000 "HDTV-ready set" will become about as useful for viewing a high-definition signal as TVs selling for much less.
    5. The Big Lie that copyrights recognize property rights in "intellectual property" -- property rights which Government must protect at any cost (to the public).
    As the 'Betamax' decision makes clear, the Constitution does not recognize any "natural right" to "intellectual property". Copyrights are a pragmatic tool for inducing authors to release more work. When copyright laws are properly balanced, they inflict a small evil (temporary, limited monopolies) on the public that is outweighed by the good of increased production and availability of works. When they are not balanced, they can do great harm. The anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA, which delegate so much effective policy-making power to copyright holders that they are probably unConstitutional, are an example of this. Those provisions, much-desired by the studios, actively encourage the use of gratituous "technological protection" by allowing a vendor to use such "protection" to keep users from exercising their legal Fair Use rights.
    So, does digital TV copy protection pass the "sniff test" of something that copyright law should reward? To put it another way, will the studios stop making broadcast TV programs forever, if we don't let them cripple HDTV-ready TV sets and digital VCRs? Of course not! Just because they would like for the law and the technology to give them unprecedented levels of control over your home entertainment center (and over time, some of the contents of your public library), doesn't mean that we must give it to them.
     

Share This Page