MPAA Doubletalk On FCC Request To Block DVR Recordings
from the the-mainstream-press-may-believe-you,-but... dept
You may recall back in June we wrote about the MPAA's petition to the FCC to block DVR recordings of certain movies by removing a restriction on "Selectable Output Control" (SOC), allowing it to set rules that forbid recording. What the MPAA is clearly trying to do here is start releasing movies on TV before they're available on DVD, but wants to do so in a way that users won't be able to record on their DVRs (though, they hardly come out and say that). Matthew Lasar has an absolutely hilarious interview with an MPAA representative where the MPAA guy tries to pretend that this has nothing to do with blocking recordings of movies and everything to do with stopping piracy."I can't emphasize this enough," Oster finally exclaimed. "We've hit on this a number of times so you might sense some frustration in my voice. 'Recording'—take it off the table. Put it out of your mind. This has nothing to do with recording at all in any way."Let's translate this for everyone. Basically, the MPAA falsely believes that it has a problem with camcording. It likes to come out with all sorts of bogus stats that don't add up. The truth is that camcorded versions don't keep people from going to the movies, and most movies online have studio quality versions leaked from insiders.
"Ok. I guess I'm confused," I replied. "What is selectable output control about then?"
"It's in large part, first and foremost, about the fact that our industry has a multibillion-dollar theft problem, which is that billions and billions of dollar's worth of film content is stolen every year," Oster replied.
"How is it stolen? What's the mechanics of its being stolen?" I asked. "What happens?"
"It comes in many forms," Dean Garfield interjected. "It comes in camcording."
"Did you just say the word 'recording'?" I asked.
"No!" Oster intervened. "He said 'camcording'!"
"But isn't that just basically recording?" I begged.
"No!" Oster insisted. "What we want is to offer consumers high-definition content earlier than they can today. That's what we want to do! We want our studios to have the flexibility to put in place business models that allow them to offer high definition content on demand to the home, earlier than they do now. Period! Full stop!"
So what does that have to do with SOC? Not much, really. But the MPAA wants to change the release window pattern it currently uses for movies. Rather than theaters, video, PPV, cable TV, it wants to be able to put some movies on TV before they're released to video, hoping that it can charge cable channels a lot for showing them. But, if it does that, it's worried that it will undercut its own business model in the video rental space. So, it falsely believes that it needs this "exemption" from SOC to effectively enable DRM on those movies to prevent them from being recorded. It's the same old mistake, believing that DRM somehow enables new business models when the truth is that DRM only restricts opportunities. The content will still get recorded and released. The effective DRM will do nothing to stop that -- and once the content is out there, it's out there. However, this will be a pain for plenty of legitimate viewers who start wondering why their DVRs don't work properly.
It's not about stopping any kind of piracy. This won't do that. It's not about enabling any new business models or new content. It's about a misguided MPAA which thinks it needs DRM to add yet another way for it to make money while pissing off legitimate users. For that, the FCC should not grant a special exemption.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: blocking, business models, drm, dvrs, fcc, mpaa, soc
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Huh?
Even by their own logic, they're not making any sense. And their logic is a long, long way from reality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Huh?
Pretty much. The MPAA just wants to call it something completely different kinda like how George Bush makes up his own words for things. They are trying to take the approach to how ignorant the law actually is when it comes to technology since it is so far behind today's standards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Huh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Huh?
Back in the day when it was Matrix being pirated, it didn't look so bad. I don't know if that was a camcorder capture though. It doesn't really matter ultimately because seeing that version just made me more interested in going out to the cinema and seeing it again.
I recently got another more recent film for cheap on DVD once the DVD got cheap. That also triggered some interest in seeing that movie on a larger screen and now I am kind of sorry I didn't see it first run.
An inferior copy of a work is always the best way of advertising the original.
The MPAA needs to start concentrating on making better originals again.
Fire the bean counters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The obvious question
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The obvious question
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The obvious question
Exactly. Just like everything else in corporate America doing things that makes sense just doesn't make sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The obvious question
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The obvious question
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Free Market at Work
Given our litigiousness society, the DVR manufactures should undertake a preemptive lawsuit against the MPPA for trying to put them out of business. After all, don't DVR manufactures also deserve their own "special" regulations to foster their business model.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
YOU DON'T WANT A TRULY FREE MARKET
This has more to do with a hodgepodge legal system showing its issues and no one fixing it because Its The Law. Like they didn't have to make it all up in the first place.
Didn't you know? DMCA is a Gift From God. No mere mortal created it. It was handed down from on High and can have no flaws...
Yea, right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Free Market at Work
The DVR makers are "in bed" with the MPAA
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520034901
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Useless
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Delusions
DRM is a plague that is being dealt with in the marketplace - it's dying everywhere. I can't imagine how studios justify the amount of money they put into 'fighting piracy,' when it's not a battle that's even remotely winnable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gasp! What a surprise!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pretty sure I could crack that right now
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Pretty sure I could crack that right now
> with a capture card, it should be easy enough to keep a
> copy.
This is exactly what keeps amazing me about all the money spent on 'copy protection'. If the content needs to be seen and heard, it has to be unencrypted at that point. What this effectively means is that if you can see and hear it, you can plug it in and get at least a decent quality copy, depending on the used hardware. D'oh.
Maybe they'll start installing DRM chips in our brains one day :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Attendance Drop
The focus needs to be on improving the paying customers experience. Even pirates will pay to see a movie if they make it worth it again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Basically it's just wasting FCCs time by making it a requirement when it doesn't need to be.
Granted all DRM is moot. eventually you're going to have to output your data is a standard digital/analog format that is pretty easy to grab and grabs at a higher quality anyways.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
you miss the point
if you would pull your head out of your ass for half a second you would see that the best way to stop people from using a camcorder in a theater and uploading to the internet is to prevent people from recording pay per view programming in their homes.
i swear, sometimes it's like you people are being deliberately obtuse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: you miss the point
lol
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's It!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That's It!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MPAA Always Good For a Laugh!
You're always guaranteed a laugh at the complete absurdity of these archaic organizations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
camcordering
Take that DRM. A very low tech solution. My father-in-law does exactly the same thing. It is just too easy. No need to teach him how to use Linux or get an expensive PC and capture card.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Everyone Knows
You guys are all ignorant and apparently know nothing about real quality. Heh, I bet you guys think composite cables suck too! Here's a hint for all of you, Composite cables are the highest quality digital connection you can get!
LOSERS. WAKE UP!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just walk away from these bastards
Stop consuming what they have to offer. Let them have the toxic laws they want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PPV?
It's been so long, I had forgotten all about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
An opinion of decent
Of course, this could be completely wrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some ideas
And what if we "downgraded" our technology: if this kind of DRM blocks TIVO and DVR's, why not just plug a VCR into the TV? Sure, people have replaced their VCR's with DVD recorders, but maybe it's time to dust them off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Make good stuff, people buy.
Make bad stuff, people won't spend money.
How many years is it going to take to understand this?
I'm not going to spend $10 to go watch some trash.. I'd rather just not watch it at all. Maybe I would be surprised, and the film wasnt complete garbage as I had thought, and be more likely to pick up the dvd when it came out if it was better than expected for the extra dvd content additions but.. If I dont watch it at all, I wont be doing any word of mouth spreading or buying dvds.. so why waste the millions making those shit films to begin with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The final solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]