Goodbye, Tivo

    Newer Older

    I noticed this while recording a show on Turner Classic Movies this morning. This idea that Tivo is going to completely disregard the Betamax ruling to bend over backwards for TV studios to enforce an arbitrary length to my legal right to fair use is disgusting. I am ordering the parts for my non-Tivo PVR today. They've lost an early adopter and a VERY vocal proponent with this crap.

    Learn more about it here www.pvrblog.com/pvr/2005/09/drm_on_ifc.html

    sMoRTy71, byopvr, and heyrog added this photo to their favorites.

    1. tom.arthur 116 months ago | reply

      Does that red flag in the corner correlate to the 'broadcast flag' that told TiVo not to keep the show?

    2. ahurley 116 months ago | reply

      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.

    3. k c m 116 months ago | reply

      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.

    4. tom.arthur 116 months ago | reply

      It is quite disappointing that TiVo isn't staying true to its roots.

    5. ahurley 116 months ago | reply

      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.

    6. byopvr 116 months ago | reply

      aaron, if you need any info on rolling your own PVR or have specific questions feel free to drop me a line

    7. swardraws 116 months ago | reply

      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

    8. TomatoHunter 116 months ago | reply

      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.

    9. ahurley 116 months ago | reply

      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.

      I stand by my original statement that this is a technological attempt to circumvent legal, court recognized fair use.

    keyboard shortcuts: previous photo next photo L view in light box F favorite < scroll film strip left > scroll film strip right ? show all shortcuts