FCC wants to hear your voice on the MPAA's latest DRM proposal

Last month you let us know in the comments how you felt about the MPAA's latest effort to close the analog hole -- by removing the FCC's ban on selectable output control (SOC), giving them the ability to remotely disable the analog output on your cable box -- now try telling someone who can actually do something about it. The FCC has opened the petition to public comment until June 25, and replies to comments by July 7. Currently, the MPAA is arguing that allowing SOC will actually hasten the digital transition, once it feels comfortable offering early release flicks on HD video-on-demand, people will have more incentive to upgrade their TV sets. Of course, owners of older HDTVs without HDMI connections or anyone else who'd rather use analog outs would be left in the dark, and Ars Technica notes the EFF and Home Recording Rights Coalition have already spoken out against the plan. Give the MPAA's proposal a read then let the FCC know which side of the line you fall on before it's too late.

[Via Ars Technica]

Read - MPAA proposal (warning: PDF link)
Read - FCC Electronic Comment File Submission (The docket number for field #1 ("proceeding") is 08-82.)

[Ace b @ Jun 11th 2008 8:21PM]

Dang.Where's Anonymous when ya need them?

[Christy McGrory @ Jun 11th 2008 8:30PM]

Hacking the Interwebs.

[Juaquin @ Jun 11th 2008 9:23PM]

Well, the MPAA hasn't killed anyone (that we know of).

[dBs @ Jun 11th 2008 9:39PM]

We just need to tell Anon. that the MPAA is a sect of Scientology.

[Kurian @ Jun 11th 2008 11:10PM]

I don't remotely give a fuck. We will never ever have use of a HDTV in India. All the rich people just watch standard composite cable interlaced video on 50inch screens. Most of them are too dumb to even use component cables with their DVD players.

Once we start have HDTV broadcasts long after my natural life expectancy has expired, my corpse will give a fuck.

[andres @ Jun 12th 2008 5:04PM]

anonymous is not your personal army

[Garst @ Jun 13th 2008 12:49AM]

We don't need him. The courst have already ruled that the FCC doesn't have the authority to implement this new DRM. I'm sure the EFF and other advocy groups will remind the FCC of this, but I think we should also tell them that. Not to mention that this will help "further the digital television transition," is a full-out lie. And consumers will stop at nothing to remove the DRM after they find out that is why they can't record something. Unfortunately I'm too tired to think of a better way to put this, but, consumers are dumb. So while they probably won't stop this, it won't be long after it's implemented before the FCC or court system erraticates the DRM and harshly punishes all involved.

[David Hildreth @ Jun 11th 2008 8:35PM]

Fuck the MPAA

[Rob @ Jun 11th 2008 9:18PM]

No, no, no. It's "Fuck Da Police."
Well, fuck the MPAA, RIAA, and the IRS while we're at it.

[phanbouy @ Jun 12th 2008 1:19AM]

have you seen the NC-17 rated documentary "This Movie Is Not Yet Rated"? quite the expose on the MPAA

[k4ffy @ Jun 11th 2008 8:38PM]

if you can see it, you can record it.

[Aguiluz @ Jun 11th 2008 9:10PM]

With a program called FRAPS. ;)

Just be sure your PC and hard drive are blazing fast, though.

[Rick @ Jun 11th 2008 8:39PM]

He who has the most money and offers the best jobs to the outgoing Republican hacks will win anyway.

[AJ @ Jun 11th 2008 8:41PM]

Fix the ars technica link... too much HTTP!

[Aguiluz @ Jun 11th 2008 9:33PM]

http://ln2.us/04cfc0

There.

[TheGeektoriousBIG @ Jun 11th 2008 8:41PM]

MPAA can suck my big fat media server.

[Aguiluz @ Jun 11th 2008 9:38PM]

Ooops. Looks like I replied to the wrong one...

Oh well....

[kevinm @ Jun 11th 2008 8:48PM]

Here's my vote...NO DRM!

[BigD145 @ Jun 11th 2008 8:49PM]

I second this.

[Jon @ Jun 12th 2008 8:13AM]

Here's my vote, shut down the MPAA.

[Sebastian @ Jun 11th 2008 8:58PM]

"Ok, let's see what's on the menu: DRM? Hm, don't think so!" *goes away*

[Tim @ Jun 11th 2008 8:58PM]

its really pointless to even attempt drm; these industries need to accept that the majority of people are willing to pay for their media despite the proliferation of p2p services, and stop pining for the percentage of people who "steal" the content. Those people (admittedly, i was included in this group when i was younger) likely won't pay for the content if thats their only option ( In high school, between paying off car loans, insurance, gas, etc. , my job couldn't support buying very much music; if it weren't for limewire I simply wouldn't have the music I had then. Now, I gladly pay for music; the artists deserve it (at least the ones whose music I buy.)

But, if they're going to continue this route, as of course they will, then they need (from an argumentative stance) to ensure that the box to convert digital signals to analog to support legacy sets gives the absolute best quality (or in this case any at all) that would be delivered otherwise. As long as that condition was met; thereby making sure that the consumer suffers no loss, I would have no disagreement. But that won't be the case.

[Zorque @ Jun 11th 2008 10:45PM]

You're exactly right. The people I know aren't going to be stopped by DRM, only slowed. The industry spends millions of dollars trying (increasingly unsuccessfully) to keep piracy at bay, and it gets passed on to the people who actually are paying for the music.

The only people getting hurt here are honest consumers, pirates are doing just fine. Stop developing DRM.

[dennis @ Jun 11th 2008 8:59PM]

This probably isn't really accurate, but this is what I submitted:

I don't think the MPAA should be able to determine how content is
delivered (analog or digital). There is too much analog technology,
I don't care if they can bring more content to home entertainment
equipment, and I think the MPAA is fundamentally dishonest. They are
better than the RIAA (which is total crap) but only because they
don't want the same reputation as the RIAA. Once national and
international content providers have total control over the way in
which media is distributed, it is not that far away from being able
to be manipulated by government agencies or lobby groups. Sure, as
long as we're all okay, that should be fine, but it's just not safe.

[phanbouy @ Jun 11th 2008 9:02PM]

Me: "Hey, DRM sucks, k?"

FCC: "Thanks we value your input"

2 days later FCC to MPAA: "Looks like that 'public comments' thing satiated everyone".

MPAA: "Eeeeexcellent"

[Aguiluz @ Jun 11th 2008 9:30PM]

*comes next in line after phanbouy*

Me: What? You are going to close the analog hole? Note that digital has to become analog so our "analog ears" can listen to them. Analog inputs are for analog outputs so you can't close analog holes! What are you going to do? Digitize my ears? Heh heh, that's sarcasm for you DRMidiots...

FCC: Follow me to this room. *points to room*

Me: *follow*

FCC: These are "digital ear implants." You are chosen to try out this future standards and will be the new law for every human on earth in the near future. I'm going to replace your analog ears so we can protect our investment in our pro....

Me: NO!

*escapes*

MPAA: Seize him!

Me: What are you? MPAA!?

MPAA: *removes clothes*

Me: YOU!!! You.. You a-a-are a...

MPAA: Yes.

*the head of MPAA reveals that he is a robot*

MPAA: Welcome Your Robot Overlords. We have to eliminate the Analog hole to ensure our total invasion! Bow to me, pitiful flesh-thing!

Me: Um...

[phanbouy @ Jun 11th 2008 9:34PM]

MPAA: All your media are belong to us

[Aguiluz @ Jun 11th 2008 9:42PM]

RIAA: All your torrents are belong to us.

[feffrey @ Jun 12th 2008 2:59AM]

U won't get my newsgroup!!!!

[Marvin Quach @ Jun 12th 2008 8:23AM]

Me: If this new DRM proposal goes through, do you want my credit cards now, or later?

MPAA: We want all your credit cards AND your first born!!!

[OneLove @ Jun 12th 2008 12:52PM]

The robot wants to digitize his analog hole. lol.

[Motoken @ Jun 11th 2008 9:05PM]

what is so freaking wrong with analog?!!!! they make it sound like analog is AIDS or something. Analog is much more simple and easy to use.

Also.... people hate being rushed, you cant rush something like this, especially when it concerns peoples pockets.

my family has old school, CRT tvs, we watch movies on them all the time and we + i don't see any reason to get more resolution. I don't need to see the gray hairs on will smiths face, we have plenty of space so we don't care about thinness. A lot of people i know feel the same way, only reason i got a HDTV was for gaming, so i could see the text and snipe better.

I think they should just slow down on the whole DRM thing, they aren't loosing that much money. Why are they so concerned? none of my friends (and they are big nerds) go copying movies and selling/ distributing them. We go to blockbuster to get our movies.

In terms of audio, you cant "close the analog hole" our ears listen in analog, at some point you have to convert the digital info to analog sound, whether this be at your speakers or on you computer.

You just cant control sound like video, sorry music industry, you're just going to have to be less greedy.

anyway thats my rant for the day, thank you engadget.

[Juaquin @ Jun 11th 2008 9:26PM]

Analog eats bandwidth and is more susceptible to signal corruption. That's not an excuse (The MPAA can bite my shiny metal ass), but digital is a better broadcast technology when used properly (not ridiculous amounts of compression, etc).

[Tom @ Jun 12th 2008 12:32AM]

I disagree on the subject of signal corruption. I've lived in three different digital cable coverage networks, and not a single one of them can go a day without freezing the video while the audio goes on. Spongebob is not nearly as funny without seeing the comical animations. Unacceptable, digital cable! Sure, with analog you got the fuzz, but by god that never stopped anyone from enjoying scrambled Skinemax!

[XGM @ Jun 11th 2008 9:08PM]

Heard of Thepiratebay or Demonoid ? Thats just my opinion.

[Aguiluz @ Jun 11th 2008 9:12PM]

Humans are like lightning. They try to find the path of least resistance (or at least most of the time). If the DRM is giving them the headaches, they could - and will - resort to torrents to just enjoy the content. Period.

[Christy McGrory @ Jun 11th 2008 9:10PM]

Well MPAA you can bite my shiny metal ass. Speaking of Futurama, I'm watching it now on my PC, ILEGALLY. And what are you gonna do about it? didn't think so.

[Mental Issues @ Jun 11th 2008 9:18PM]

You, sir, are a dumbass.

[Juaquin @ Jun 11th 2008 9:29PM]

Wow, I posted the same thing above before reading yours. Which sucks, cus now I'm associated with someone who doesn't appreciate Futurama enough to actually buy the sets. They wouldn't be making the movies if it wasn't for the support of the fans buying the DVD sets.

[MadMike @ Jun 11th 2008 9:49PM]

Good for you Christy!

Show them who is boss! The more they try to stifle piracy, the more we will pirate BECAUSE they are stifling our fair-use. If they would allow us fair use and not try to nickle, dime and assrape us with pricing, we won't pirate.

It's simple, they can save the billions of dollars worth of losses from piracy AND the money spent on anti-piracy actions if they would just wake the fuck up and allow us to use our content the way WE want.

If they did that, I wouldn't need to pirate and thusly I wouldn't pirate. It's kinda freaking simple. But, they are the dumbasses, Mr. Mental issues.

[Tom @ Jun 12th 2008 12:27AM]

Watching Futurama in any way shape or form isn't REALLY illegal. It was originally broadcast over the Fox network - which was and still is (for the time being) also broadcast for free over the airwaves. Given the ideas of recording for personal memory enhancement and Fair Use, you could have reasonably recorded this free content onto VHS or DVD, then transferred it to your PC.
If you get arrested, it'd be akin to being arrested for "stealing" software that was once distributed as free for years, but now costs $20 for the same version and build. I say it's your right to own those free items at no cost to you. If you want the box art and the convenience/special features of a DVD, buy it - otherwise it was always free to you.

[Juaquin @ Jun 12th 2008 12:51PM]

Tom: You're so wrong it's not even funny. It is indeed illegal to watch Futurama if you did not record it yourself for personal use. In fact, you'll find that there have been many cease-and-desist letters and possible lawsuits over bittorrenting or online hosting of TV shows.

[Tom @ Jun 12th 2008 8:32PM]

Juaquin: You can write as many cease and desist letters as you want, and threaten with a hundred thousand lawsuits - doesn't mean you're right in the legal sense. Fox made a product of experience available to the general public for free, therefore you are entitled to that experience at all times for the original cost if it is at all available to you. Fox simply doesn't want it available to you because of the DVD sets - they actually can't make you take the episodes off your server. They can wave their corporate finger at the hosting company and they'll likely comply out of fear, but they have no legal basis to physically take you to court about the matter unless you're displaying the material in a public forum or on a screen larger than 6 feet.

[Kris S. @ Jun 11th 2008 9:16PM]

Everything the MPAA does or tries to do is a huge fuck up.

[Brian @ Jun 11th 2008 9:19PM]

I'll take recordable TV over early release movies ANY DAY!

Is this a joke? The MPAA cares nothing about it's image... this is a hollow offer. You can write all you want, but I'm convinced the MPAA has already made up their mind.

[MadMike @ Jun 11th 2008 9:51PM]

It's not the MPAA asking, its the FCC. Although the US government (BOTH Democratic & Republican) bends over to the MPAA/RIAA.

[Eric @ Jun 11th 2008 9:26PM]

Didn't our government just spend millions of dollars to get converter boxes in the hands of people who don't have digital TVs? Do you think they'll take that into account when considering the proposal?

And when did the federal government become the enforcement vehicle for copyright? I was under the impression that copyright violation was a civil issue.

[Josh @ Jun 11th 2008 9:44PM]

Hey Engadget - thanks for getting the public engaged in these important policy debates. We need the public to have a voice at the table in regard to the media policies made in DC. Step up folks - this is our media.

[uagent @ Jun 12th 2008 12:06AM]

You definitely get a + from me, I agree that Engadget should definitely give as much coverage to things like this as possible. I submitted my "comment", all 1.5 pages to the FCC. I tried posting it here, but I guess that's too long? If anyone's interested, I posted it to my webserver:
http://uagent.com/proceeding08-82opposition.pdf

[MadMike @ Jun 11th 2008 9:43PM]

The MPAA can't be trusted to use that power responsibly. Given their track record, there is a 100% chance they will abuse it.