# Microsoft confirms Windows Media Center respects broadcasters "do not record" flag



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

From http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9946780-7.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5:

May 18, 2008 3:42 PM PDT

*Microsoft confirms Windows adheres to broadcast flag*

Posted by Greg Sandoval

*Microsoft has acknowledged that Windows Media Centers will block users from recording TV shows at the request of a broadcaster. [...]

The software company was responding to questions about why some users of Windows Vista Media Center were prevented from recording NBC Universal TV shows, American Gladiator and Medium on Monday night. [...]
* 
The rest of the article may be found here.

What does this mean for DVR users? E.g., will NBC ultimately expect DirecTV or DISH to respect this flag as well? What will this mean for the DirecTV Media Center PC initiative? /steve


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

This will be very interesting. I seriously question how MS expects us to use Media Center as our DVR of choice when they seem to be the only DVR vendor that tries to mess with their users. While the courts said its up to the vendors to decide, its funny that only one seemed to side against the consumers.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

phat78boy said:


> This will be very interesting. I seriously question how MS expects us to use Media Center as our DVR of choice when they seem to be the only DVR vendor that tries to mess with their users. While the courts said its up to the vendors to decide, its funny that only one seemed to side against the consumers.


My thoughts exactly. Microsoft does have a "special" relationship with NBC, however, as we know from MSNBC and msnbc.com. I wonder if that has something to do with this? /steve


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

Yea, I'm sure most everyone agrees with that. My question is, is it worth more then upsetting your core business demo? It seriously makes Media Center more of gimmick then a full blown working DVR.... and I actually like Vista Media Center.


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

I have been an enthusiast of Microsoft's Media Center for a long time and I was looking forward to the completion of Project "Fiji" (the new Vista Media Center) and DirecTV's HDPC20.

Should Microsoft or the networks continue down this path, I think it would be safe to say that lawsuits will fly fast and furious... what would be the point of any DVR if they are forced to follow this path? Microsoft shouldn't be including this in Media Center, if no one else is using it and Federal law doesn't require it. There also should be serious questions and answers demanded from NBC over the use of broadcast flags.

I will state unequivically that I will NOT accept the HDPC20 if when used in conjunction with Vista Media Center, if it honors broadcast flags that are unmandated.


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

LarryFlowers said:


> I have been an enthusiast of Microsoft's Media Center for a long time and I was looking forward to the completion of Project "Fiji" (the new Vista Media Center) and DirecTV's HDPC20.
> 
> Should Microsoft or the networks continue down this path, I think it would be safe to say that lawsuits will fly fast and furious... what would be the point of any DVR if they are forced to follow this path? Microsoft shouldn't be including this in Media Center, if no one else is using it and Federal law doesn't require it. There also should be serious questions and answers demanded from NBC over the use of broadcast flags.
> 
> I will state unequivically that I will NOT accept the HDPC20 if when used in conjunction with Vista Media Center, if it honors broadcast flags that are unmandated.


Couldn't agree more.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

This would really be a bad precedent to set. I know some folks are mad that consumers aren't watching their commercials... but the reality here is, if they don't allow you to record at all... then you have to pick a show to watch rather than be able to record one and watch another... and in the end, that means one show loses eventually... so it seems to me they are much better off letting you record so you don't have to choose.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

But I thought broadcasters are banned from using the broacast flag on OTA TV?


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Lee L said:


> But I thought broadcasters are banned from using the broacast flag on OTA TV?


Hopefully setting the flag was just a mistake by someone in the NBC control room.

What's potentially disturbing is that Microsoft has opted to honor the FCC proposal and respect the "DNR" flag when it is present, for whatever reason. According to the article:

_"The courts struck down the FCC's proposal in 2005, saying the regulator lacked the authority to tell electronics makers how to interpret the signals they receive."
_
/steve


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

Whoa! I never considered once we went digital that particular _flags_ could be set, but alas I see a huge increase in optional tagging etcetera...oh man!

I will be watching this thread to see where this goes since it would be an interesting this that is you can not record a show because someone doesn't wish you to, man!


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

anybody got a list of how many more flags exsist?
hate to say it but I full well expect some of the flags to start getting used... especialy if one provider gets away with it..


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

So why would anyone want to pay for TiVo, a set top box with a DVR or DVD recorder if you are going to be blocked from using those devices?

--- CHAS


----------



## jimb726 (Jan 9, 2007)

HIPAR said:


> So why would anyone want to pay for TiVo, a set top box with a DVR or DVD recorder if you are going to be blocked from using those devices?
> 
> --- CHAS


Thats the million dollar question. Imagine all of the money invested and then being told you cannot record your favorite show. I do not want to tell my wife she cannot record Medium anymore.:eek2: Hell that would mean I would have to watch it with her and I hate that show.:lol:


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

I thought NBC and Microsoft are affiliated. 

I find it interesting that NBC is testing a Do Not Record flag when there are like 6 people on the planet who can actually record with a Media Center. (ok, I know it's more than six  )

Mike


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

LarryFlowers said:


> Should Microsoft or the networks continue down this path, I think it would be safe to say that lawsuits will fly fast and furious... what would be the point of any DVR if they are forced to follow this path?


And those who file suit better be prepared to lose.

The programming that is offered is not public property. If you have an argument to the contrary, I'd be interested.

As for what the DBS companies are doing, they too are set up to respect the flag. Those who have been with DIRECTV's HR20 for a while will remember that it used to choke out certain recordings because of incorrect flag handling.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

houskamp said:


> anybody got a list of how many more flags exsist?
> hate to say it but I full well expect some of the flags to start getting used... especialy if one provider gets away with it..


I'll do some digging and get back to ya...

there are two different systems here though, right? ATSC being one, but what about Satellite and Cable?

I'll look around, this may take some doing.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> I thought NBC and Microsoft are affiliated.
> 
> I find it interesting that NBC is testing a Do Not Record flag when there are like 6 people on the planet who can actually record with a Media Center. (ok, I know it's more than six  )
> 
> Mike


I record House on my wife's XPS One mainly as a test case, but we don't use it full time for that. We use our DVRs.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

harsh said:


> And those who file suit better be prepared to lose.
> 
> *The programming that is offered is not public property. If you have an argument to the contrary, I'd be interested.*
> 
> As for what the DBS companies are doing, they too are set up to respect the flag. Those who have been with DIRECTV's HR20 for a while will remember that it used to choke out certain recordings because of incorrect flag handling.


You have an awesome point there. This was the arguement going towards digital so more control had on owned content. this should be fun to watch unfold.


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

I can understand the idea of using the broadcast flag to prevent commercial resale of programs, but I can't help but wonder if personal recording for time shifting purposes falls under the "fair use" doctrine.

Interestingly, we have Ken Burns' "The War" recorded on our Series 3 HD TiVo in our family room. When I attempted to view it via the HD TiVo in my bedroom, it was blocked.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

Flashbacks of 24hr PPV limits.....


----------



## Rob-NovA (Jan 10, 2008)

Cholly said:


> I can understand the idea of using the broadcast flag to prevent commercial resale of programs, but I can't help but wonder if personal recording for time shifting purposes falls under the "fair use" doctrine.
> 
> Interestingly, we have Ken Burns' "The War" recorded on our Series 3 HD TiVo in our family room. When I attempted to view it via the HD TiVo in my bedroom, it was blocked.


IANAL, but it would seem to me that this is squarely in the realm of fair use. It's no different that ripping music from a CD to play on an iPod. (Not that it stops the RIAA from being boneheaded about it... )


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

harsh said:


> And those who file suit better be prepared to lose.
> 
> The programming that is offered is not public property. If you have an argument to the contrary, I'd be interested.
> 
> .


Perfect argument.

They are broadcasting the shows in question over the airwaves which have been deemed for a few decades now as public property licensed to various broadcasters for use partly for the public good. CBS tried to get a broadcast flag passed that would allow them to do just this but it was ruled by the FCC and courts to not be allowed.


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

harsh said:


> And those who file suit better be prepared to lose.
> 
> The programming that is offered is not public property. If you have an argument to the contrary, I'd be interested.
> 
> As for what the DBS companies are doing, they too are set up to respect the flag. Those who have been with DIRECTV's HR20 for a while will remember that it used to choke out certain recordings because of incorrect flag handling.


I won't argue as to who owns the property, but currently The United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the FCC had exceeded its authority in creating this rule (broadcast flags). The court stated that the Commission could not prohibit the manufacture of computer or video hardware without copy protection technology because the FCC only has authority to regulate communications, not devices that receive communications.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

Mr. Cuban (is that his name is, HDNet owner) wanted more users to have access which means more business to me. Considering the alternative I would think the flags would limit availability...interesting. And what about the advertisers that pay for the show? Interesting indeed!


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Lee L said:


> But I thought broadcasters are banned from using the broacast flag on OTA TV?


My understanding is not that the broadcasters are banned but the FCC was banned from requiring equipment to honor the flag. Content providers can sometimes exert force upon equipment manufacturers and definitely to carriers via contracts to honor the flags that the FCC couldn't require.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## tiger2005 (Sep 23, 2006)

Tom Robertson said:


> My understanding is not that the broadcasters are banned but the FCC was banned from requiring equipment to honor the flag. Content providers can sometimes exert force upon equipment manufacturers and definitely to carriers via contracts to honor the flags that the FCC couldn't require.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tom


I really don't see this ever taking hold. By paying for satellite, cable, w/e service, I'm in esssence paying for the license to view the shows related to my subscription. When I watch it after that is my business. As Rob mentioned above, that would fall under the doctrine of fair use privileges. As long as I'm not taking the broadcast and uploading it via BitTorrent, I don't see the problem.

Also, there will always be a market for users to have access to DVR's. Imagine if DirecTV ever instituted this on their DVR's. There would be a mass exodus of DVR users to a TiVo type product on another service. I don't see DirecTV EVER considering such action.

And seriously, when are content providers seriously going to understand what they're doing??? All they're doing is alienating their HONEST customers and making it more difficult for them to access the content they rightfully paid for. The underground network of users that do fileshare unauthorized content will ALWAYS find a way.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

tiger2005 said:


> And seriously, when are content providers seriously going to understand what they're doing??? All they're doing is alienating their HONEST customers and making it more difficult for them to access the content they rightfully paid for. The underground network of users that do fileshare unauthorized content will ALWAYS find a way.


Looks like broadcasters are not yet ready to give up trying to circumvent the DVR.

E.g., as reported in the 4:34 entry of a recent New York Times blog, at the recent advertising "upfronts", ABC reported on their small-market testing of cable VOD technology that would block users from fast forwarding through content. /steve


----------



## Rob-NovA (Jan 10, 2008)

Steve said:


> Looks like broadcasters are not yet ready to give up trying to circumvent the DVR.
> 
> E.g., as reported in the 4:34 entry of a recent New York Times blog, at the recent advertising "upfronts", ABC reported on their small-market testing of cable VOD technology that would block users from fast forwarding through content. /steve


Good grief... It's like they're actively trying to find a way to make me stop watching their programming. Oh well, let the market decide this. And we complain here about "basic" functionality of DVRs and lack thereof... I don't see how anyone could dispute that FF is not a basic feature! :lol:


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

tiger2005 said:


> I really don't see this ever taking hold. By paying for satellite, cable, w/e service, I'm in esssence paying for the license to view the shows related to my subscription. When I watch it after that is my business. As Rob mentioned above, that would fall under the doctrine of fair use privileges. As long as I'm not taking the broadcast and uploading it via BitTorrent, I don't see the problem.
> 
> Also, there will always be a market for users to have access to DVR's. Imagine if DirecTV ever instituted this on their DVR's. There would be a mass exodus of DVR users to a TiVo type product on another service. I don't see DirecTV EVER considering such action.
> 
> And seriously, when are content providers seriously going to understand what they're doing??? All they're doing is alienating their HONEST customers and making it more difficult for them to access the content they rightfully paid for. The underground network of users that do fileshare unauthorized content will ALWAYS find a way.


While I mostly agree with you, I'm going to remind that the license to view can come with restrictions, especially on the non-broadcast media.

That said, I would not be surprised to see some fool trying this anyway. And watch how fast it either gets shot down or people avoid the show(s). Then the second wave, people break the technology anyway.

What I really expect will happen is a couple of things: 1) downrez of protected content to non-HDCP compliant outputs (protects from copying); 2) blocking technologies preventing complete bypass of comercials (maybe a fast forward will be permitted, but no skips?); 3) other advertising strategies/technologies (product placement, screen pops during FF, etc).

The other way to get people to watch commercials is to make them worth watching!  (What a concept.) 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

harsh said:


> And those who file suit better be prepared to lose.
> 
> The programming that is offered is not public property. If you have an argument to the contrary, I'd be interested.
> 
> As for what the DBS companies are doing, they too are set up to respect the flag. Those who have been with DIRECTV's HR20 for a while will remember that it used to choke out certain recordings because of incorrect flag handling.


Besides a Media Center, how many ways do I have to record a TV show?

VCR
Recordable DVD
DVR
Camcorder

How is a Media Center any different.

Engineer not Lawyer...However, how I record a TV show for my own viewing/time shifting/convenience should not, all of a sudden, be of concern of anyone but me(of course I mean legal use).

There are decades if fair use in which broadcasters allowed the viewers to record shows. Now all of a sudden broadcasters want to tell me I can't record my shows the way that is comenient for me.

Heck, my 10 year old VCR (Panasonic) will mark and automatically FW through commercials and broadcasters didn't have a problem with that.

It would seem that there is a good argument against restriction of recording.

Mike


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> Besides a Media Center, how many ways do I have to record a TV show?
> 
> VCR
> Recordable DVD
> ...


Of the ones you listed, only DVRs (of which Media Center is one) can record digital HD signals without any recompression.

VCRs, DVDs, and Camcorders can only record SD, which has no "hardware" restrictions.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

As simple as it seems to design things these days, it won't be long before someone designs a recording device to handle it. Based on this discussion it is a matter of either honoring or not the flag. Flags and bits can be manipulated...someone will make a way to do it. Is it legal? That is another question...


----------



## airedale (Aug 8, 2007)

I sometimes think we have been spoiled with the skipping of advertising. They are the ones paying for our shows. The problem is, we obviously aren't happy with the medium and choices they make for advertising to us.

It seems as DRM becomes more pervasive we are going to be locked in without choices more and more. Already with our HR-20s we can not shift the content we have recorded without a lot of work. The media center gives us the option to shift content to other DRM compliant devices. It is such a catch 22 with all of this content.


----------



## stogie5150 (Feb 21, 2006)

I use VMC to record all my OTA stuff, and I have been noticing more and more 'copy protected' programs popping up in my playlist lately, I figured it wouldn't be long before something like this came along. If fully implemented, it would be the last straw for me and Vista, I would order a copy of XP and shift all my OTA recoding to a FTA receiver with an OTA tuner, which I already have, but currently don't use for that purpose, but you can bet I will. I will not use crippled hardware. :nono:

I predict the AnyDVD folks will be ALL OVER this one VERY soon.:lol:


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

IIP said:


> Of the ones you listed, only DVRs (of which Media Center is one) can record digital HD signals without any recompression.
> 
> VCRs, DVDs, and Camcorders can only record SD, which has no "hardware" restrictions.


Blu-Ray burners are available. However, what difference does it make if I record "Two and Half Men" in "HD or SD?

It shouldn't matter. If I'm recording to watch tomorrow morning I shouldn't be penalized because I'm recording via media center.

Mike


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

MicroBeta said:


> Heck, my 10 year old VCR (Panasonic) will mark and automatically FW through commercials and broadcasters didn't have a problem with that.
> 
> It would seem that there is a good argument against restriction of recording.
> 
> Mike


I agree the restictions are silly, but the thing with VCRs is that most people did not actually use them for anythign more than playing movies and maybe recording an event once a year. Few used them like a DVR. (though I and I suspect many here did) Now, DVRs are being built into many devices like cable and sat boxes and their ease of use compared to VCRs is having them get more usage. That is why they want to do somethign now and not then.

I have thought since DVRs came out that we would have a nice 10 or so years of fun times with them before the studios started screwing things up for us once the masses started using them.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Lee L said:


> I agree the restictions are silly, but the thing with VCRs is that most people did not actually use them for anythign more than playing movies and maybe recording an event once a year. Few used them like a DVR. (though I and I suspect many here did) Now, DVRs are being built into many devices like cable and sat boxes and their ease of use compared to VCRs is having them get more usage. That is why they want to do somethign now and not then.
> 
> I have thought since DVRs came out that we would have a nice 10 or so years of fun times with them before the studios started screwing things up for us once the masses started using them.


I have to disagree.

As an example, my wife, like many other women I know, used to record soaps every day.

I believe there were more people recording shows to be watched later than you might think.

Mike


----------



## EXTACAMO (Apr 7, 2007)

During the VCR's hayday the internet was not as intrenched in everyday life like it is today. Cheap portable storage was unheard of. This is what the content owners have to fear. That their material can be distributed around the world in a matter of minutes. I'm not defending them. But I do understand their fear.


----------



## CJTE (Sep 18, 2007)

I will have to find the quote...

I was reading some tech blogs today, nevermind, found it.
American Gladiators vanquished by optional broadcast flag



> *Update*: NBC tells Ars that setting the flag was "an inadvertent mistake" and not part of some evil corporate conspiracy to destroy DVR technology (that job belongs, in a roundabout way, to Hulu and NBC Direct). The company's policies toward DVRs haven't changed, and the flag won't be set in NBC shows in future except by mistake.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

CJTE said:


> *Update*: NBC tells Ars that setting the flag was "an inadvertent mistake" and not part of some evil corporate conspiracy to destroy DVR technology (that job belongs, in a roundabout way, to Hulu and NBC Direct). The company's policies toward DVRs haven't changed, and the flag won't be set in NBC shows in future except by mistake.http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...vanquished-by-nonexistent-broadcast-flag.html


Ya. I'm less troubled by NBC's mistake than I am by Microsoft's willingness to support an optional and unmandated standard that harms it's customers. /steve


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Here's some more c|net chatter on what happened, though this article really doesn't really shed any more light on the story: http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9950082-7.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5

I think the last section of the article sums up how I feel on the subject (my bolding):

_"You have a fair-use right to record TV content, as specified by the Supreme Court in the now-famous Betamax case," O'Brien said. "The important thing to remember," he added, "is that *digital-TV viewers must not lose any of the rights they owned as analog users*." 
_
/steve


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Steve said:


> Here's some more c|net chatter on what happened, though this article really doesn't really shed any more light on the story: http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9950082-7.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5
> 
> I think the last section of the article sums up how I feel on the subject (my bolding):
> 
> ...


Thats the key right there. The method of delivery to our homes is exactally the same. The hardware may be different but whether analog or digital, the end result is the same.

My rights as a viewer should be no different. :nono2:

Mike


----------



## morphy (Jun 5, 2007)

When the media distributors finally cave in and block the ability to freely record and internally move data that we have purchased, well, that's what the factories in Southeast Asia are for. I don't think "Broadcast Flag" or "HDCP" translate into anything over there, if you know what I mean.


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

Apparently Microsoft is going to make apublic statement about the Vista Media Center issue. I am trying to find out when and will post it here when I find out.

Anything short of a patch to remove the current blockade unless and until Federal Law supercedes the Fair Use Doctrine, would be unacceptable I would think, and will have a direct impact on my feeliongs towards the future of the HDPC20.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

I've been eagerly waiting for the HDPC20 so I can switch to D*. If Vista is going to block recording, that's one less sale.


----------



## Guest (May 29, 2008)

harsh said:


> And those who file suit better be prepared to lose.
> 
> The programming that is offered is not public property. If you have an argument to the contrary, I'd be interested.
> 
> As for what the DBS companies are doing, they too are set up to respect the flag. Those who have been with DIRECTV's HR20 for a while will remember that it used to choke out certain recordings because of incorrect flag handling.


Programming practices have to comply with FCC regulations. That means:

1) Broadcast TV cannot be copy-protected.

2) Pay channels (aka premium channels) and non-premium subscription channels can only be protected with "copy once" restrictions. That means they can't prevent you from recording the content, only from making more than one generation of copies (how hard do you think it is to remove that type of copy protection once the content is off the set-top box?).

3) Use of "selectable output control" (i.e., blocking output over analog connections while allowing it over encrypted digital connections) is prohibited.

Sorry to have to repost this information, but here's the link to the FCC rules for those who didn't read it in the thread "Copy Protection is Coming..."

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-03-225A1.pdf


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

rcoleman111 said:


> Programming practices have to comply with FCC regulations. That means:
> 
> 1) Broadcast TV cannot be copy-protected.
> 
> ...


I get a 404 error on this doc. 

#3 is interesting. If this is true then the component outputs on 100, 200, and 500 DirecTV are showing that they are not able to be used . . . I may have to research this further.


----------



## Guest (May 29, 2008)

smiddy said:


> I get a 404 error on this doc.
> 
> #3 is interesting. If this is true then the component outputs on 100, 200, and 500 DirecTV are showing that they are not able to be used . . . I may have to research this further.


Not sure why that link isn't working now, but here's another link to the same document.

http://www.hrrc.org/File/FCC-03-225A1.pdf


----------



## Guest (May 29, 2008)

And here's another link from EFF that spells out the rules:

http://w2.eff.org/IP/pnp/filecomplaint.php

These rules were enacted for a reason - to prevent the giant media companies (aka "content providers") from trampling on the fair-use rights of consumers.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

rcoleman111 said:


> Not sure why that link isn't working now, but here's another link to the same document.


I suspect that you cut and pasted the link from your message or another message and the printed text of the link is truncated. Notice the elipsis.


----------



## Guest (May 29, 2008)

Steve said:


> E.g., as reported in the 4:34 entry of a recent New York Times blog, at the recent advertising "upfronts", ABC reported on their small-market testing of cable VOD technology that would block users from fast forwarding through content. /steve


Different rules apply to VOD and PPV. They can do all kinds of stuff that isn't permitted with regular TV.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

rcoleman111 said:


> These rules were enacted for a reason - to prevent the giant media companies (aka "content providers") from trampling on the fair-use rights of consumers.


One could make a connection between hitting something with a broadcast flag and "encrypting" it.


----------



## Guest (May 29, 2008)

harsh said:


> I suspect that you cut and pasted the link from your message or another message and the printed text of the link is truncated. Notice the elipsis.


Thanks, I didn't notice that.

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-225A1.pdf


----------



## Guest (May 29, 2008)

Here's a summary of the rules from the EFF's link:

The FCC's rules are...


No copying restrictions can be put on any unencrypted over-the-air broadcast content carried via cable or satellite, including shows like Lost, 24, Desperate Housewives, and The Office.

Pay television, non-premium subscription television, and free conditional access must allow at least one generation of copies for programming, though all copying can be prohibited for video-on-demand, pay-per-view, and subscription-on-demand programming.

Cable and satellite providers cannot block use of particular outputs on a program-by-program basis ("selectable output control").

Providers cannot purposely reduce the resolution of broadcast content carried over cable or satellite, and they must notify the FCC before "down-rezzing" other programming.

Basic tier cable must be provided unencrypted.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Good news from Larry Flowers, posted here.

If we can believe what both companies had to say, NBC mistakenly set a CGMS-A (VOD) copy-protection flag on the two shows that started this thread. Microsoft does support VOD copy protection, but does not voluntarily support "broadcast" copy protection, as we feared.

/steve


----------

