Idea about what the S3 can be used for

[mikesown]

For me, the most exciting part about the S3 is the digital hd cablecard tuners. This opens up an array of possibilities for hacking. For one, you could use the Tivo as a conduit to getting unencrypted cablecard content to your computer by means of the network interface. This is really the first chance anyone has had of getting encrypted hd channels onto your computer digitally to make archive copies. While CableLabs will never certify such a device, the Tivo is hackable, and many users have amassed a large amount of information on how it works.

I personally can't wait to see the plethora hacks for the series3. While I don't own one currently, I will certainly buy one when the price drops down to a level which I can afford.

[Jamie]

deleted my irrelevant post.

[jasch]

It seems to me that what you are referring to might be ilegal, theft and/or a clear violation of the DMCA or the DRM of the digital streams. As such I don't think discussion of such topics on this board is appropiate.

[lgkahn]

no the law specifically states you can make archive copies of shows you paid for and/or recorded.. if you give them to someone else that is another issue.. you are also allowed to download shows to a computer to watch instead of a tv.. take a look at the article in the latest wired.

[jasch]

I'm not sure it's as clear as you say. Cablecard specifications specifically prohibit you from extracting and moving content around. That's why TTG and MRV are disabled in the Series 3, until TiVo negotiates or finds a way around the legal implications.

Even if the law let's you make archival copies for yourself, you have to respect the original DRM of the digital stream and whatever limitations the providers puts on them.

I mean, we've all seen them on current Tivos, with some programs expiring 7 days after being recorded, and some content that cannot be moved or extracted. Sure you can hack around these roadblocks, but there's a really fine line between bending and breaking the law.

I would rather confirm any legal advice with a lawyer, rather than a magazine.

[Roger Dylan]

Even if the law let's you make archival copies for yourself, you have to respect the original DRM of the digital stream and whatever limitations the providers puts on them.There's significant doubt many of the legislators knew that's what they _seemed_ by many interpretations to be saying (DMCA trumps fair use). Testing in court might eventually test their intent according to public record of the time, that and other anomalies of that bizarre act, but clarifying legislation may come first.

[cheer]

no the law specifically states you can make archive copies of shows you paid for and/or recorded.. if you give them to someone else that is another issue.. you are also allowed to download shows to a computer to watch instead of a tv.. take a look at the article in the latest wired.
This is why legal advice on the Internet is dangerous. The DMCA says no such thing, and in fact very clearly says that defeating encryption or DRM is a violation. (But I don't think that's a verboten discussion here, or else the superpatch would be verboten.)

[mbellot]

no the law specifically states you can make archive copies of shows you paid for and/or recorded.. if you give them to someone else that is another issue.. you are also allowed to download shows to a computer to watch instead of a tv.. take a look at the article in the latest wired.


No, you are NOT allowed to archive broadcast shows that you record, PERIOD. That fact predates the DMCA by a good 25 years.

You have the limited fair use right to "time shift" broadcasts (originally with a VCR, which is what brought the law into being) for the purpose of viewing once at a later point in time.

And I doubt seriously that you could ever legally archive a show you paid for (ie pay per view or other special programming). Otherwise people would just Tivo first run movies and then extract them to DVD instead of purchasing the movie DVD. I'm sure there are some who do just that, but it doesn't make it legal.


Medium shifting (to a PC or whatever) wasn't thought of back then, but I doubt moving it to a PC for archiving is any more legal than keeping a room full of video tapes.


However, IANAL. If you want a really good discussion of copyright and fair use I suggest you dig through the forums @ www.videohelp.com for all the information (and misinformation) you could ever hope to digest.

[santa8claws]

Not to drag this thread down into the sewer, but IMO archiving and timeshifting is the same thing with the perhaps a subtle connotation that when you archive it is to watch more than once.

So in that case, Tivo would have to limit all HD "recordings" to watch only once and automatically delete when they are watched.

Hmm... I don't think so!

So how is "moving" content via network any different (in concept) from taking a VCR tape across the room to another VCR? Or letting your mom/grandma/next-door-neighbor borrow a tape of yesterday's "Oprah" show!

What is the point of encrypting, protecting, limiting access, limiting copies, if you pay through a cable provider for the HD content and service to begin with?

What more does the tv/movie industry want from you? To go see more movies? To buy higher priced DVD's? To buy the movie merchandise? To watch more commercials telling you to buy products you don't really need?

OK I will spend more when there are movies from Hollywood that are better than just "ok", when even a no-name actor can win an emmy, when the movie is truly worth seeing again and again and still is fantastic.

Until then hollywood, wake up and smell the coffee!
Ok, my $.02 worth, take it or leave it!

[cheer]

OK I will spend more when there are movies from Hollywood that are better than just "ok", when even a no-name actor can win an emmy, when the movie is truly worth seeing again and again and still is fantastic.I think any movie where an actor wins an Emmy is pretty unusual.

Please let's not have yet another thread of people trying to rationalize/explain away/etc. the various legal and technical restrictions with archiving v. timeshifting v. burning to DVD v. whatever. It's been argued. A lot. Nobody here is bringing anything new to the debate. The law in the US is what it is.

[mbellot]

Not to drag this thread down into the sewer, but IMO archiving and timeshifting is the same thing with the perhaps a subtle connotation that when you archive it is to watch more than once.

Subtle to you perhaps, but "archive" carries a note of permanance that time shifting intentionally omits.

So in that case, Tivo would have to limit all HD "recordings" to watch only once and automatically delete when they are watched.

Hmm... I don't think so!

Of course not, Tivo wouldn't have sold a single unit.

from taking a VCR tape across the room to another VCR? Or letting your mom/grandma/next-door-neighbor borrow a tape of yesterday's "Oprah" show!

Strictly speaking, lending the tape to others is not legal. Screwy but true. Also probably the reason "show swapping" is a disallowed topic on this fine forum. :D

What more does the tv/movie industry want from you?

Money. And more money. Oh, and yeah - more money.

CSS and macrovision were put in place to prevent/limit piracy, but also to prevent (or at least make more difficult) "backups" of your video collection. Its a miserable failure, but they DID try.