Goodbye, Tivo

tom.arthur    says:

Does that red flag in the corner correlate to the 'broadcast flag' that told TiVo not to keep the show?
Posted 50 months ago. ( permalink )

ahurley    says:

The red flag appears there and on the "Now Playing" list to indicate programs that have been limited by Tivo and will be deleted when it wants to, not when I tell it to.
Posted 50 months ago. ( permalink )

k c m    says:

I cancelled my TiVo subscription when I found out about this (a small issue in a long line of recent issues), and it's a shame, since I've had a TiVo since the very first HDR112.

What a way to shoot yourself in the head.
Posted 50 months ago. ( permalink )

tom.arthur    says:

It is quite disappointing that TiVo isn't staying true to its roots.
Posted 50 months ago. ( permalink )

ahurley    says:

I first bought a DirectTivo Sat-T60 the Christams they first came out (2001?) and have been a huge evangelist selling many people on the benefits since then. Those days are now over.
Posted 50 months ago. ( permalink )

byopvr says:

aaron, if you need any info on rolling your own PVR or have specific questions feel free to drop me a line
Posted 50 months ago. ( permalink )

swardraws    says:

Ack, I was getting ready to investigate getting a Tivo (finally) and now I see that it just might not be as cool as I thought it was
Posted 50 months ago. ( permalink )

TomatoHunter says:

Like many you misunderstand what the Betamax ruling was about. You DON'T have any rights. It doesn't guarantee you ANYTHING. What it basically says, is that if someone makes a product that can violate copyright it is not automatically illegal. As long as the product is capable of substantial non-infringing uses it can be legal.


Of course this was a different time and place, with modern DVR technology they might well decide that its too dangerous.
Posted 50 months ago. ( permalink )

ahurley    says:

You are correct about the question that started the case being about a product have non-infringing uses. However, the majority opinion in the Betamax case explicitly defines time-shifting as a legal, non-infringing use.

The question is thus whether the Betamax is capable of commercially significant noninfringing uses ... one potential use of the Betamax plainly satisfies this standard, however it is understood: private, noncommercial time-shifting in the home. It does so both (A) because respondents have no right to prevent other copyright holders from authorizing it for their programs, and (B) because the District Court's factual findings reveal that even the unauthorized home time-shifting of respondents' programs is legitimate fair use.