dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2964
share rss forum feed

gunterm

join:2006-07-30
Topeka, KS

[CATV] Can you pressure Cox to remove copy-once flagging?

All the channels including non-premiums are flagged, basically anything that I could get back in my QAM days is open, everything else dead.

I feel like I wasted 100 bucks on my CableCARD HDHomeRun because the plan was to integrate this into my current system for watching QAM with my old plain HDHR. The copy-once ruins that for the extra channels, plus I cannot stream any of those to my Android using InstaTV either.

Does Cox respond to de-flag if you ask?
--

Matt...
Oldies104
»www.oldies104.net


Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI

1 edit

They did once, then they turned it back on after a week.

This is the biggest reason why I cut the cord. Search google for sickbeard and couchpotato. Fuck cable tv, tbh, the CCI flagging is a dick move with no purpose other than to piss off customers who are already paying.

»imgur.com/gallery/i2NpK

Solution? Stop paying.



dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4
reply to gunterm

theres biiiiiiig money in them thar boxy thing that sit on tv.
ask and you shall not receive.
--
Despises any post with strings.



dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4
reply to Rakeesh

if u can live without live sports and 'same day they air' programming, go for it.
--
Despises any post with strings.


Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI

1 recommendation

said by dvd536:

if u can live without live sports and 'same day they air' programming, go for it.

Everything I have is same day it airs (sickbeard) sometimes before it sees on-demand or dvd/bd (couchpotato).

It's been almost 8 months without CATV, and I don't miss it.

gunterm

join:2006-07-30
Topeka, KS

The only reason I even have cable is for sports, however it will get turned off when summer rolls around. Back on again for winter.


whiteazn

join:2005-02-10
Henderson, NV
reply to Rakeesh

being on the west coast, i actually get shows roughly 1.5-2 hours before it airs here.

When it comes to sports, there are crappy streams you can find.... or, on some forums, there are users that will stream the game in HD.


jwdsail

join:2003-11-28
Niceville, FL
reply to gunterm

You'd think common sense and competition from legal, and not so legal, alternatives that offer more freedom of using acquired content on a wide variety of devices easier, would be pressure enough.

I've seen the number of programs I could copy from my Tivo for long-term archiving decreasing rapidly.. Before that, even what little was able to be copied, that was only allowed in 480p.

At this point, there's nothing that's been recorded in the past 3+ months that doesn't have the "don't copy" flag on it.

Sigh.

It's like they WANT everyone to kill their cable subscription and Netflix/iTunes/Amazon Prime everything?

It is yet another reason I'll likely kill my cable TV subscription all-together.. in serious talks with the whole family re: how many races we could attend and still see most all of the TV programing we could ever want or need, and still save at the end of next year, compared to our current cable bill.

Companies like Cox should be afraid, very afraid, that the most tech savvy users, the ones that statistically have the most cash, are getting fed up with this sort of BS, and leaving. You'd think that would be pressure enough!


ajwees41
Premium
join:2002-05-10
Omaha, NE
reply to gunterm

It's not Cox, but the content providers setting the flags. If you think it's Cox pressure the conent providers to pressure Cox.



BryanInPHX
Premium
join:2001-03-06
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:2

1 edit

No, it is not the content providers, the CCI Byte is set at the local Cable Plant, and Cox is not consistent with copy protection, at least 2 Cox markets that I know of, are mostly Copy Freely, except Premiums.

Comcast and Verizon FiOS do not set copy protection except on HBO/Cinemax, Comcast is also not completely consistent, but most markets are Copy Freely.



Hard Harry

join:2010-10-19
Narragansett, RI
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

I wonder how they make this determination in each market? Is it just a coin flip? I imagine the real reason is to decrease the adoptation of ClearQAM tuners and 3rd party PVR's, but I can't imagine that is Cox's official reasoning.

Also wasn't the FCC Plug and Play ruling challanged and defeated? Or am I mistaken?


brad152

join:2006-07-27
Phoenix, AZ
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
reply to ajwees41

It's definitely up to the local plant, as Cox in Ohio did not have this on when i lived there, Wide Open West did not have it on, neither did Insight but Time Warner did, and in Phoenix Cox has it on and i'm sure it's because until Prism gets a franchise agreement with Phoenix they're the only game in town.

It's a shame that they pull this crap, but i just ended up going with Dish and their DVR did not make me miss TiVo like Cox did, so i'm overall happy so far.



CoxVegas

join:2011-07-25
Las Vegas, NV
kudos:6
reply to gunterm

The CCI bytes are usually set by us when we do the various encoding and transcoding and such. However, what those bytes are set to are (sometimes) dictated by content providers. Also which group that does the setting can vary depending on content, so it gets even more convoluted.

I will say the setting of CCI bytes is... well, I suppose "extremely specialized knowledge" is the best way to put it. We have two or maybe three people in my market that know where to go to set them and the various implications, maybe another dozen who know what they are.

I'll see if I can find the right people in your market, but honestly it'll be a while - a lot of Cox folks (myself included) are on vacation right now for the holidays.

Can you provide a list of exactly what channels you're seeing incorrectly flagged, and what their current flagging state you're seeing is?



BryanInPHX
Premium
join:2001-03-06
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:2

1 recommendation

said by CoxVegas:

The CCI bytes are usually set by us when we do the various encoding and transcoding and such. However, what those bytes are set to are (sometimes) dictated by content providers. Also which group that does the setting can vary depending on content, so it gets even more convoluted.

Can you provide a list of exactly what channels you're seeing incorrectly flagged, and what their current flagging state you're seeing is?

It is hard to know what is incorrectly flagged, when everything except the Locals is flagged as Copy Once (0x02) in most markets, I would really like to know if Cox has a strict policy, and why it is not enforced in certain markets (I will not name them here again, as I do not want to be the one to single them out for new copy protection).

Here is what one Cox rep stated:
»forums.cox.com/forum_home/tv_for···109.aspx
quote:
Hi Everyone.

The copy protections standards we apply are consistent with the agreements Cox has with various programmers to carry their cable content. We assure that these comport with the copy protection rules set forth in Section 76.1904(b) of the FCC's Rules and Regulations as well.

Stephanie A

Cox Forum Moderator

Stephanie A
Cox Support Forum Moderator

Note above Cox is NOT consistent, from market to market.
--
Cox Premier HSI, SB6120, ASUS RT-N66U
TiVo Roamio Pro, XL4, Premiere 2TB-WD20EURS & TiVo Mini
Win7 WMC SiliconDust HD HomeRun PRIME

gunterm

join:2006-07-30
Topeka, KS
reply to CoxVegas

You're definitely right there, I couldn't find anyone local in Topeka, even at the store, that could tell me about the CCI settings.

I'd have to run the scan again, but it appears almost everything except the locals are copy-once. Essentially only the ClearQAM ones are freely.


gunterm

join:2006-07-30
Topeka, KS
reply to CoxVegas

 
 
Here's the entire list, I'll post a screenshot with the ones showing no "DRM" image:

Channels
2 TWC LIMITED
3 WGN LIMITED
4 CITY CHANNEL 1
5 KTKA CW
6 KTMJ SD
7 KSNT SD
8 KTWU SD
9 KTKA SD
10 TOPEKA COLLEGE
11 MYTOPTV
12 KSQA SD
13 WIBW SD
14 TOPEKA SCHOOL L
15 UNIVISION EXPAN
19 HSN EXPANDED
22 KS22 - NEK
23 QVC EXPANDED
24 MSNBC EXPANDED
25 CNN EXPANDED
26 CNN-HL EXPANDED
27 FNC EXPANDED
28 USA EXPANDED
29 TBS EXPANDED
30 TNT EXPANDED
31 F/X EXPANDED
32 ESPN EXPANDED
33 ESPN2 EXPANDED
34 FSKC EXPANDED
35 VH1 EXPANDED
36 MTV EXPANDED
37 ITV EXPANDED
38 LIFETIME EXPAND
39 HGTV EXPANDED
40 FOOD NETWORK EX
41 A&E EXPANDED
42 DISCOVERY EXPAN
43 TLC EXPANDED
44 SPIKE EXPANDED
45 DISNEY EXPANDED
46 NICKELODEON EXP
47 ABC FAMILY EXPA
48 TVLAND EXPANDED
49 HISTORY EXPANDE
50 SYFY EXPANDED
51 TRUTV EXPANDED
52 CMT EXPANDED
53 CNBC EXPANDED
54 TCM EXPANDED
55 AMC EXPANDED
56 ANIMAL PLANET E
57 BET EXPANDED
58 COMEDY EXPANDED
59 E! EXPANDED
60 FOX SPORTS 1
61 BRAVO EXPANDED
62 TRAVEL EXPANDED
63 CARTOON NETWORK
75 NATIONAL GEOGRA
77 OWN
79 GOLF Channel
80 TVGuide LIMITED
85 HALLMARK EXPAND
122 KS22 XTRA - NEK
133 SHOP NBC EXPAND
134 JEWELRY EXPANDE
150 INSPIRATION EXP
153 EWTN EXPANDED
244 ESPNU
245 ESPNews
246 ESPN CLASSICS
261 NFL NETWORK
270 WEATHERSCAN
279 CSPAN LIMITED
280 CSPAN2 LIMITED
281 CSPAN3
308 KSNG-DT2
312 AZTECA
401 HBO EAST
412 MAX LATINO
415 SHOWTIME EAST
427 HBO PLUS WEST
505 WESTERNS EAST
507 STARZ EAST
510 ENCORE EAST
670 KTWU DT3
671 KTWU DT2
675 KTKA WEATHER
676 MYTOPTV
707 CXIN2
709 CXIN1
710 CXINH
770 COX PPV
901 MC-901-HIT LIST
902 MC-902-POP RHYT
903 MC-903-DANCE/ED
904 MC-904-MCU
905 MC-905-HIP-HOP/
906 MC-906-RAP
907 MC-907-HIP-HOP
908 MC-908-THROWBAC
909 MC-909-R&B CLAS
910 MC-910-R&B SOUL
911 MC-911-GOSPEL
912 MC-912-REGGAE
913 MC-913-ROCK
914 MC-914-METAL
915 MC-915-ALTERNAT
916 MC-916-ADULT AL
917 MC-917-ROCK HIT
918 MC-918-CLASSIC
919 MC-919-SOFT ROC
920 MC-920-LOVE SON
921 MC-921-POP HITS
922 MC-922-PARTY FA
923 MC-923-TEEN MC
924 MC-924-KIDZ ONL
925 MC-925-TODDLER
926 MC-926-Y2K
927 MC-927-90'S
928 MC-928-80'S
929 MC-929-70'S
930 MC-930-SOLID GO
931 MC-931-POP COUN
932 MC-932-TODAY'S
933 MC-933-COUNTRY
934 MC-934-CLASSIC
935 MC-935-CONTEMPO
936 MC-936-POP LATI
937 MC-937-MUSICA U
938 MC-938-MEXICANA
939 MC-939-TROPICAL
940 MC-940-ROMANCES
941 MC-941-SOUNDS O
942 MC-942-STAGE &
943 MC-943-SOUNDSCA
944 MC-944-SMOOTH J
945 MC-945-JAZZ
946 MC-946-BLUES
1501 CXINH
2002 TWC HD
2003 WGN HD
2006 KTMJ HD
2007 KSNT HDTV
2008 KTWU HDTV
2009 KTKA HDTV
2013 WIBW HDTV
2015 UNIVISION HD
2021 KCPT HD
2022 KS22HD-NEK
2024 MSNBC HD
2025 CNN HD
2026 HLN HD
2027 FNC HD
2028 USA HD
2029 TBS HD
2030 TNT HD
2031 F/X HD
2032 ESPN HD
2033 ESPN2 HD
2034 FSKC HD
2035 VH1 HD
2036 MTV HD
2038 LIFETIME HD
2039 HGTV HD
2040 FOOD NETWORK HD
2041 A&E HD
2042 DISCOVERY HD
2043 TLC HD
2044 SPIKE HD
2045 DISNEY HD
2046 NICKELODEON HD
2047 ABC FAMILY HD
2049 HISTORY HD
2050 SYFY HD
2051 TRUTV HD
2052 CMT HD
2053 CNBC HD
2054 TCM HD
2055 AMC HD
2056 ANIMAL PLANET H
2057 BET HD
2058 COMEDY HD
2059 E! NETWORK HD
2060 FOX SPORTS 1 HD
2061 BRAVO HD
2062 TRAVEL HD
2063 CARTOON NETWORK
2075 NATIONAL GEOGRA
2077 OWN HD
2078 NBC SPORTS NETW
2079 GOLF HD
2085 HALLMARK HD
2086 HALLMARK MOVIE
2101 THE HUB HD
2102 SCIENCE HD
2103 DESTINATION AME
2104 INVESTIGATION D
2122 KS22XTRA HD - N
2198 RETROPLEX HD
2199 INDIEPLEX HD
2200 EPIX HD
2201 IFC HD
2203 LIFETIME MOVIE
2208 BBC AMERICA HD
2210 WE EAST HD
2211 NAT GEO WILD HD
2220 G4 EAST HD
2225 DISNEY XD EAST
2229 ESQUIRE TV HD
2237 FUSE HD
2240 COOKING CHANNEL
2244 ESPNU HD
2245 ESPNews HD
2247 PAC12 HD
2248 TENNIS CHANNEL
2249 DIY HD
2250 FXX HD
2253 FOX BUSINESS HD
2255 HISTORY INTERNA
2256 BIOGRAPHY CHANN
2258 OUTDOOR CHANNEL
2259 NBA TV HD
2260 CBS COLLEGE SPO
2261 NFL NETWORK HD
2262 NHL NETWORK HD
2263 MLB NETWORK HD
2267 NFL REDZONE HD
2268 ESPN GOAL LINE
2273 BTNKAN HD
2315 UNIMAS HD
2401 HBO HDTV
2402 HBO PLUS EAST H
2403 HBO SIGNATURE E
2404 HBO FAMILY EAST
2406 HBO ZONE EAST H
2407 CINEMAX HD
2408 MOREMAX HD
2409 ACTIONMAX EAST
2410 THRILLERMAX EAS
2413 5 STAR MAX HD
2415 SHOWTIME HDTV
2417 SHOWTIME SHOWCA
2419 SHOWTIME EXTREM
2423 TMC HD
2426 HBO WEST HD
2427 HBO PLUS WEST H
2431 CINEMAX WEST HD
2432 SHOWTIME WEST H
2434 TMC WEST HD
2437 HBO LATINO EAST
2507 STARZ HD
2508 STARZ EDGE EAST
2509 STARZ BLACK HD
2510 ENCORE EAST HD
2511 STARZ KIDS & FA
2518 STARZ WEST HD
2521 STARZ COMEDY HD
2677 PALLADIA HD
2678 UNIVERSAL HD
2780 TEAM 01 HD
2781 TEAM 02 HD
2782 TEAM 03 HD
2783 TEAM 04 HD
2784 TEAM 05 HD
2785 TEAM 06 HD
2786 TEAM 07 HD
2787 TEAM 08 HD
2788 TEAM 09 HD
2791 GAME 01 HD
2792 GAME 02 HD
2793 GAME 03 HD
2794 GAME 04 HD
2795 GAME 05 HD
2796 GAME 06 HD
2797 GAME 07 HD
2798 GAME 08 HD
2799 GAME 09 HD
2900 MC PLAY HD
--

Matt...
Oldies104
»www.oldies104.net

Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI

Wow that's weird, they have some channels that are always flagged on other networks unflagged, and some channels that should be unflagged flagged anyways. Univision for example is an OTA hispanic network, and afaik FCC rules don't permit flagging that channel.


paulsaz5

join:2003-06-23
Scottsdale, AZ
reply to gunterm

Cox needs to get this fixed. I wish the FCC was more involved in helping consumers. In the mean time, I have the HD Home Run Prime with cable card, I bought a XBox 360 and a Ceton Echo and use them to stream live and recorded DRM protected tv, luckily I have a wired gigabit network in all rooms of my house.


signcarver

join:2005-03-20
Phoenix, AZ
reply to gunterm

My solution may not be very popular but it would have the FCC issue a mandate that all SD linear channels (including SD premiums) have CCI marked unrestricted (I now prefer that term over copy freely as copy freely implies what the industry is trying to prevent)... at least for awhile this would allow you to have some choice but it also might expedite getting rid of the SD channels to make room for more HD.

Personally I would rather all non-premiums be marked unrestricted but my understanding (though it is just a rumor I've heard at least 8 times in the past 3 years) is that one major provider offered a savings of about 50 cents/subscriber/month if they would mark their channels protected but then also "demanded" others be marked protected so as they could not be blamed for what the flag was set to and then because all were marked protected it was already assumed to be in place and set for negotiations with other companies so it would be nearly impossible to take them out.

I would also highly encourage the h.264 channels be marked unrestricted as that will allow windows 7 pc's with intel integrated graphics to view those stations (note other graphics work fine it is generally only sandy, ivy and haswell on win 7 or sandy on win 8 that has this problem... though I agree this is an intel/microsoft problem not a cox problem and while I am at it I might as well bring up displayport not being recognized as HDCP compliant by WMC, thus not able to view protected content... again a microsoft problem but it would be nice for cox to be proactive and to have options and ways to overcome it).


Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI
reply to paulsaz5

said by paulsaz5:

Cox needs to get this fixed. I wish the FCC was more involved in helping consumers. In the mean time, I have the HD Home Run Prime with cable card, I bought a XBox 360 and a Ceton Echo and use them to stream live and recorded DRM protected tv, luckily I have a wired gigabit network in all rooms of my house.

What would you ask them to "fix" exactly? It's working as they intend.

amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·KCH Cable
reply to gunterm

Your only choice is to rent a box and hope to God it still has component video outputs (or, ask if you can get one), and then use one of these: »www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a···15116086


gunterm

join:2006-07-30
Topeka, KS
reply to CoxVegas

Thanks for looking into this! Any word yet?


ajwees41
Premium
join:2002-05-10
Omaha, NE

1 edit
reply to gunterm

your lucky your locals aren't flagged. They were in Omaha at least they were before we swithed over to tivo. Not sure anymore if they are.


Gardentool

join:2013-01-18
Oklahoma City, OK
reply to CoxVegas

said by CoxVegas:

Can you provide a list of exactly what channels you're seeing incorrectly flagged, and what their current flagging state you're seeing is?

I'm in the Oklahoma City market and I believe it has all non-locals marked as copy once as well. I had purchased a TiVo Stream a few months ago hoping to transfer some children programming to my old iPhone or iPad for my kid then figured out it wasn't going to work for transfer.


Philmatic
Premium
join:2000-07-15
Santa Barbara, CA
reply to gunterm

Santa Barbara, CA market here, every single channel except the local OTA channels are set to Copy Once (0x02). This makes My Tivo's Out Of Home Streaming completely useless because I cannot stream or download any TV Shows outside my home unless it is a local OTA channel.

Please fix this, I'm willing to speak to a tech at my local plant directly if that helps.


Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI

said by Philmatic:

Santa Barbara, CA market here, every single channel except the local OTA channels are set to Copy Once (0x02). This makes My Tivo's Out Of Home Streaming completely useless because I cannot stream or download any TV Shows outside my home unless it is a local OTA channel.

Cox doesn't want you to be able to do that, this is exactly why they put this policy there.

If you must have that capability, try this instead:

»www.ustvnow.com/

If you don't care about being legal, use sickbeard combined with couchpotato.


Philmatic
Premium
join:2000-07-15
Santa Barbara, CA

I've been using Usenet all my life, nothing new there. I want to use the hardware and software I purchase to do what I am legally entitled to do. The CCI byte is arbitrary and they have no right to enforce it on all channels. FiOS and Comcast don't do this.

I want to believe that it is an oversight, but I am cynical at heart and know they won't change anything until they are forced to.


Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI

said by Philmatic:

I've been using Usenet all my life, nothing new there. I want to use the hardware and software I purchase to do what I am legally entitled to do. The CCI byte is arbitrary and they have no right to enforce it on all channels. FiOS and Comcast don't do this.

I want to believe that it is an oversight, but I am cynical at heart and know they won't change anything until they are forced to.

They have the right to do that if they want under the current laws. I sent a message to the FCC asking them about it, and they confirmed it. You could approach it from the angle that they are crippling your equipment to unfairly favor renting theirs instead, which may or may not run afoul of your municipality's franchise agreement with them. You'll have to contact your local franchise authority if you want to approach it from that angle, but I wouldn't bother because those people are usually pretty corrupt.

Those are the kind of politicians that talk all day and all night about supporting the community, the homeless, cleaning up the streets, blah blah blah, and soak in those votes but never do a damn thing.

rldleblanc

join:2014-01-22
Santaquin, UT

said by Rakeesh:

They have the right to do that if they want under the current laws. I sent a message to the FCC asking them about it, and they confirmed it. You could approach it from the angle that they are crippling your equipment to unfairly favor renting theirs instead, which may or may not run afoul of your municipality's franchise agreement with them. You'll have to contact your local franchise authority if you want to approach it from that angle, but I wouldn't bother because those people are usually pretty corrupt.

Those are the kind of politicians that talk all day and all night about supporting the community, the homeless, cleaning up the streets, blah blah blah, and soak in those votes but never do a damn thing.

First off, I apologize that this post is so long. Second will you help me?

I've been reading FCC 03-225 trying to understand it myself and here is what I understand so far. The basic premise is that the FCC is trying to provide customers with choice in their hardware for viewing cable programming, but at the same time trying to reasonably protect content providers from having their property stolen and illegally redistributed.

Section II.3 -

"The purpose of Section 629 is to afford consumers the opportunity to purchase navigation devices from sources other than their MVPD service provider. In addition, the statute provides that the Commission "shall not prescribe regulations . . . which would jeopardize security of multichannel video programming and other services offered over multichannel video programming systems, or impede the legal rights of a provider of such services to prevent theft of service."

The intent is to do to the cable companies what was done with the telephone companies, give the customers choice and unshackle them from the burdensome rental fees that were being charged at the time.

Section II.4 -

"In order to permit a competitive market for the design, manufacture and retail sale of navigation devices to develop, a number of practical issues must be addressed. First, because one of the primary functions of these devices is to preclude the unauthorized reception or use of service, it is necessary to address service theft in situations where the device is no longer entirely within the service provider’s control. This issue is comprised of two components, unauthorized access to service (theft of service) and unauthorized redistribution or copying of programming content legally acquired for a limited use (copy protection/digital rights management)..."

There are two points of security the FCC points to, that of accessing only what you are paying for (subscription) and preventing unauthorized redistribution of the legally acquired content.

Section II.11 -

"...In addition, enacting limits on the amount of copy protection that may be applied to different categories of programming strikes a measured balance between the desire of content providers and MVPDs to prevent the unauthorized redistribution or copying of content distributed by MVPDs and the preservation of consumer expectations regarding the time shifting of programming for home viewing and other permitted uses of such material. We take such action pursuant to our Congressional mandate under Section 629 to ensure the commercial availability of navigation devices and safeguard the security of MVPD programming, as well as our ancillary jurisdiction under the Communications Act."

The FCC recognizes that there should be a balance in copy protection and the ability of the consumer to record and watch the content they pay for at their convenience.

Section V.47 -

"In our FNRPM and Declaratory Ruling, the Commission found that Section 629’s mandate encompasses copy protection in so far as we determined that the inclusion of some measure of anti-copying encryption technology within a host device does not violate our separation of security requirement. The Commission, however, specifically declined “to resolve the question of the nature and scope of any copy protection systems or rights.” While the Commission’s copy protection findings in the FNPRM and Declaratory Ruling were limited
in nature, we recognized that other copy protection issues would arise in the DTV transition. In particular, we noted that:
[W]e do not intend this declaratory ruling to signal that any terms or technology associated with such licenses and designated as necessary for copy protection purposes are consistent with our rules. We believe, however, that such issues are best resolved if specific concerns involving finalized licenses that implicate our navigation devices rules are presented to the Commission.

By stating that some amount of copy protection might be acceptable but not necessarily specifying the applicable terms or technology, the Commission indicated its willingness to assess the reasonableness of particular copy protection proposals. We believe that the draft encoding rules proposed to the Commission are an essential component of the MOU that will assure the commercial availability of navigation devices and strike a measured balance between the rights of content owners and the home viewing expectations of consumers. Absent adoption of these encoding rules, the cable and consumer electronics industries have indicated that the compromise agreement reached in the MOU will be upset and their efforts to produce unidirectional digital cable products will falter. The resulting harm would directly undermine the explicit goal of Section 629, to assure the commercial availability of navigation devices. We therefore conclude that adoption of the proposed encoding rules is necessary to fulfill our mandate under Section 629."

The FCC did not want to get into the weeds about what to protect and what not to protect, but that enforcing too much copy protection would kill off the consumer and cable electronics industry and too little copy protection would negatively impact the content owners. It also sounds like the FCC is willing to listen to any reasonable proposals for copy protection.

Section V.54 -

"Although some commenters argue that our adoption of the encoding rules would impermissibly involve the Commission in copyright issues, we do not believe this to be the case. Communications law and copyright law can create independent rights – even with respect to the distribution of the same content. The Commission’s “syndicated exclusivity”
and retransmission consent rules each create sets of rights and limitations that exist independent of the underlying copyrights. In the instant case, the encoding rules are not directed at the copyright owners, but rather establish certain limits on the technological tools used by MVPDs to distribute content. A content owner’s rights under copyright law, as well as determinations of what constitutes infringement and affirmative defenses such as “fair use,” are set by statute and interpreted on a fact-specific basis by the courts. We nonetheless recognize that the line separating communications law and copyright law is not always a clear one. As the United Video court found with respect to cable television, “the 1976 Congress did not imagine copyright law and communications law to be two islands, separated by an impassable sea.” We will continue to be sensitive to this intricate and complex issue as we implement Section 629."

The setting of the CCI bit is not to be tied to copyright, but to communications laws and is to be set at the discretion of the MVPD (cable company). The content owners are protected under copyright law and are not to be concerned about communication law. Content owners should not be dictating to cable companies what content should be copy-once or copy-free, etc.

Section V.55 -

"In addition to explicit authority under Section 629, we believe that the Commission has ancillary jurisdiction to adopt the proposed encoding rules. As discussed above, the Commission has been working to achieve Section 629’s mandate of commercial availability of navigation devices since 1996. One of the stumbling blocks has been inability of industry to agree on a comprehensive set of technical copy protection measures and
corresponding encoding rules. Adoption of the encoding rules will finally remove that block and ensure the availability of high value content to consumers in a protected digital environment. We believe that access to high value digital content will spur the transition and increase consumer demand for unidirectional digital cable products and other navigation devices at retail, thereby furthering Section 629’s goals. The adoption of rules applicable to MVPD content distribution falls within the Communication Act’s mandate over “all interstate and foreign communication by wire or radio,” and the Commission’s broad authorization “to make available to all Americans a radio and wire communication service.” In furtherance of these goals, the Commission can adopt regulations that are consistent with the public interest and not inconsistent with other provisions of the Communications Act or other law. Not only are the encoding rules “not inconsistent” with other provisions of the Act or law, we believe they will significantly advance Section 629’s stated goal."

The goal of these rules to help the public get access to the high value digital content which will spur demand for more content and other non cable company devices. We can see that the excessive restrictions of the CCI is having an opposite effect than what the FCC intended. In order to provide all Americans with radio and wire communication service, the FCC can act in the public interest as long as it is not contrary to the Communication Act and other laws.

Section V.56 -

"In addition to explicit authority under Section 629 and our ancillary jurisdiction thereunder, we believe that adoption of the encoding rules will also advance the policies underlying Section 624A of the Communications Act. Section 624A requires the Commission to issue regulations to assure the compatibility between televisions and video cassette recorders and cable systems in a manner consistent with the need to prevent theft of cable service. The end goal is to ensure that cable subscribers will be able to enjoy the full benefits of available cable programming and the functionality of their televisions and video cassette recorders. To accomplish this balancing act, Section 624A directs the Commission to “determine whether and, if so, under what circumstances to permit cable systems to scramble or encrypt signals or restrict cable systems in the manner in which they encrypt or scramble signals.”"

The FCC wants the cable companies to be able to protect their system, but also wants the consumer to be able to enjoy the full benefits of the cable programming, television and recording devices. I feel that CableCard adequately performs this function without the use of the CCI bit.

Section V.57 -

"Section 624A by its terms does not directly apply to MVPDs other than cable operators. However, the MVPD market has diversified greatly since 1992. For example, DBS did not exist at the time when Section 624A was enacted, but has since grown to serve approximately twenty percent of the MVPD marketplace. In order to accomplish the purposes of Section 624A, we believe that the Commission may exercise ancillary jurisdiction over non-cable MVPDs in order to avoid the creation of a regulatory and marketplace imbalance between cable and DBS. Absent this approach, we believe that cable operators would be at a significant competitive disadvantage in obtaining access to content which could frustrate the ability to satisfy Section 624A’s mandate. We therefore believe it will further the goals of Section 624A to apply the proposed encoding rules to all MVPDs"

Service such as digital satellite and fibre optic were unavailable or small payers at the time Section 624A was enacted and the restrictions placed on cable companies could put them at a disadvantage. It is time that the FCC made the same requirements of digital satellite and fibre optic as they require of cable companies.

Section V.65-74 describe the copy protection caps placed on certain categories of content. In section 73 Starz Encore petitions for a lower copy protection for its content and suggests that content providers will unilaterally press cable companies to use the most restrictive copy protection allowed. The general idea was to provide cable companies the flexibility to negotiate with content providers as to the copy protection for various content and be able to select the appropriate level of protection. The application of the most restrictive copy protection by cable companies (most likely influenced by the content providers) in a blanket manner seems to contradict the intent of the FCC.

Section VI and VII are all about regulating the CableLabs organization to make sure that it is not overstepping their bounds. The FCC desires to solicit input from content providers, cable companies, consumer device manufactures and the customers themselves about the regulations within the article and how things can be improved.

Section VI.78 -

"While we recognize the fundamental interest of the cable industry in ensuring that devices connecting to their distribution systems do not result in theft of service or harm to their networks, we are concerned that CableLabs’s proposed role as the sole initial arbiter of outputs and associated content protection technologies to be used in unidirectional digital cable products could affect innovation and interoperability in a number of areas, including the development of personal digital networks in consumers’ homes. These concerns stem from the convergence of digital technologies occurring in the marketplace and our belief that unidirectional digital cable televisions and products will play a key role in the digital information age. We conclude that additional public comment is needed in order to determine how and on what conditions new connectors or content protection technologies will be approved for use with unidirectional digital cable televisions and products. Below we initiate a Second FNPRM to consider these issues."

The FCC realizes that computers will play a major role in media in the future and desires that consumers can set up media networks within their homes to enjoy the content they pay for. At this point I'm not able to enjoy the content I'm paying for with my MythTV configuration and HDHomeRun Prime because a cable company (my local company is fed content from a larger cable company which already has the CCI set to the most restrictive value and the local cable company is unable to change it even though they want to) has taken the liberty to set all channels to the highest copy protection status they can. All I want to do is enjoy the content that I pay for and currently record (or have been previously able to record) using analog technology in a digital format that is easy to obtain. The current copy restrictions cable companies are enforcing are defeating the purpose of preventing piracy and is only encouraging it. With Microsoft Media Center going away (is this rumor even true?) there will be no ability for consumers to build a media network using off-the-shelf computer components which will only kill off the consumer cable device industry and allow cable companies and content providers to charge exorbitant fees to rent equipment that will only work with their systems. I propose that the FCC require the removal of DRM for all content except for VOD, PPV, Subscription-on-Demand or similar transmissions. The music industry has realized that DRM is counter productive and has already removed DRM with much praise from the consumers which has restored customer faith in the industry. If an agreement to remove DRM completely can not be reached, then I propose that the FCC extends CableLabs or sets up another body to provide DRM access to commercial entities at a reasonable cost and open source projects with little to no costs so that innovation and competition can easily be fostered in this area. The Microsoft PlayReady solution has failed to deliver on this front.

Who wants to work with me to draft a letter that many people can send to their congress representatives and the FCC? I think the more people that express their thoughts and desires regarding this topic the better chance we have to change it. The content providers have a big voice, but the voice of the people can be bigger. Who's with me?

Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI

1 recommendation

It sounds reasonable, but to be honest I and many others have already beaten this to death. Not just here, but at tivocommunity.com, avsforum.com, and several others. I did manage to convince somebody at Cox to turn it off, but that lasted for about a week before they turned it back on again.

At that point I just began phasing into a setup built around watching TV using just torrents while keeping the cable subscription, but after a while I just realized I didn't really care for TV much at all any more.

All of the TVs in my house are connected to PC's for various purposes, but mainly because a large screen is better than a 19" or so monitor. It got rather annoying having to switch to a tivo, especially one that was crippled by cox, when it really wouldn't be necessary if they had just lifted the restrictions. I did the WMC thing for a while, but it was buggy as hell (HDCP issues were the most annoying - wouldn't be required if there was no CCI hell.)

I watch some limited selection of shows, maybe 3 hours worth of TV per week. It was higher when I had a cable subscription, but I simply broke that addiction.

The simple fact is that Cable TV is dying. Not because people don't like the content; they love the content. The problem is the providers are just charging way way way WAY too much for it. Not just the cable companies, but the producers as well. The content producers are currently pricing themselves out of the market, but they have themselves convinced that it's not their problem, rather it's the cable companies' problem. They see revenues decline because people are dropping their cable subscriptions, so they try to raise revenues by raising the per subscriber retransmission fees, which causes yet more subscription losses.

My personal prediction is that in the future, things will reach critical mass where some major cable provider is going to be unable to continue to offer TV services because the retransmission fees are simply too high to be profitable. When that day comes, content providers will be stuck with the option of selling their services over the top in order to reach those customers. The end result will be an "a la carte" subscription option that doesn't need any kind of government enforcement.

I look forward to that day because then companies like ESPN can't rip you off any more. Which is another reason I cut the cord, by the way, I was tired of paying ESPN $10 a month for crap I never watch.