# Getting content off of HR20 DVR



## rcobuzio (Feb 5, 2008)

I want to get the HD material off my HR20 DVR and onto a computer to do so video editing to the content. Other than the copy to VCR function which would lose all of the HD and high quality content, is there a way to get the HD video. After networking the HR20, can the mpeg files be copied from the HR20 to a PC?


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

No. Best quality is to record the 480i component output to a dvd recorder with component input, using as high a bitrate as the recorder allows. The files on the HR20 itself are encrypted. Needs your valid access card to decode.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Welcome to the forums, rcobuzio! :welcome_s

At this point there is no way to extract the video content from the HR2x family other than playing to a video capture card. DRM does not permit DIRECTV to extract HD content directly, so I don't expect to see this ability for a long time.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## CJTE (Sep 18, 2007)

I've never seen a Copy to VCR function on the HR20.
HR10-250, yea...


----------



## BGreen965 (Aug 12, 2007)

I would imagine that after MRV is released someone may come up with a way to get files off the DIRECTV box, however it may require you to break the DMCA to use them for anything.


----------



## Smuuth (Oct 4, 2005)

CJTE said:


> I've never seen a Copy to VCR function on the HR20.
> HR10-250, yea...


Why would you need one? Hook DVD recorder or VCR to composite or SVideo output, start playing recorded content on HR2x, start recording on DVD recorder or VCR.


----------



## chrisexv6 (Sep 14, 2002)

Smuuth said:


> Why would you need one? Hook DVD recorder or VCR to composite or SVideo output, start playing recorded content on HR2x, start recording on DVD recorder or VCR.


The Tivos had a decent setup to allow for syncing everything nicely. Little harder without the prompts, but nothing too hard.

Wondering....has anyone TRIED to copy something off the component output to a PC, at 720p or 1080i? Does it just record nothing?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

chrisexv6 said:


> Wondering....has anyone TRIED to copy something off the component output to a PC, at 720p or 1080i? Does it just record nothing?


When you find someone who has dropped nearly two large on a HD component capture card for the PC, I'll be happy to ask them for you.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I'm moving this to the HR20/HR21 forum.


----------



## jaymd (Sep 25, 2007)

Smuuth said:


> Why would you need one? Hook DVD recorder or VCR to composite or SVideo output, start playing recorded content on HR2x, start recording on DVD recorder or VCR.


If I am not mistaken you can now transfer multiple episodes by pushing play on the group list on the HR20. I think this is a major improvment over having to go through pushing play for each episode.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I'm moving this to the HR20/HR21 forum.


Your prerogative, but this is a cross-platform issue that applies to all DIRECTV receivers and it almost all cases, the answer is the same.


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

Smuuth said:


> Why would you need one? Hook DVD recorder or VCR to composite or SVideo output, start playing recorded content on HR2x, start recording on DVD recorder or VCR.


It's not "needed." But a dedicated function as offered on some other DVRs can add nice touches such as a built-in title/info screen and a lock-out of remote keypresses while the output is in process.


----------



## MountainMan10 (Jan 31, 2008)

I use a HAVA Platinum HD to get content off of my DVR using the component outputs. It only saves at 720x480, but it is better than the DVD recorder I was using. The files are 2 to 3 gigs per hour and play back as good as a store bought DVD. I play them back using a computer with DVI to HDMI output and they upscale to near HD quality.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Welcome to the forums, MountainMan10! :welcome_s

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## 1948GG (Aug 4, 2007)

This device will change the 'landscape' of recording/portability of HD content no matter what the reception device, cable/satellite/OTA/you name it.

'Projected' release is '1st qtr 2008'.

http://www.hauppauge.com/pdfs/Hauppauge_HD_recorder.pdf


----------



## MountainMan10 (Jan 31, 2008)

It is disappointing that the only way to get content off of the DVR is using some kind of capture device, whether it be DVD or HD quality. 

When the USB port first showed up on the Tivo I hoped that it would allow connectivity to a computer to copy the content.


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

MountainMan10 said:


> It is disappointing that the only way to get content off of the DVR is using some kind of capture device, whether it be DVD or HD quality.
> 
> When the USB port first showed up on the Tivo I hoped that it would allow connectivity to a computer to copy the content.


The problem isn't one of technology. It is fear (paranoia?) on the part of content providers.


----------



## kentuck1163 (Apr 20, 2006)

Their fears are quite understandable. These programs - remember - are copyrighted material.


----------



## 1948GG (Aug 4, 2007)

kentuck1163 said:


> Their fears are quite understandable. These programs - remember - are copyrighted material.


And there's this neat little thing, embedded in it since the founding of the country, although forgotten about in recent years, called *FAIR USE*. Each time certain folks get a bit too much 'strict' in their 'interpretation' of this (the recent blow up over the RIAA saying that folks don't have the right to put CD's they own on their computers), the lawyers rein them back in. Kinda.

The problem is, that the courts have been flooded with people who believe that fair use is an outdated concept. Remember that as you vote this fall.


----------



## jahgreen (Dec 15, 2006)

1948GG said:


> And there's this neat little thing, embedded in it since the founding of the country, although forgotten about in recent years, called *FAIR USE*. Each time certain folks get a bit too much 'strict' in their 'interpretation' of this (the recent blow up over the RIAA saying that folks don't have the right to put CD's they own on their computers), the lawyers rein them back in. Kinda.
> 
> The problem is, that the courts have been flooded with people who believe that fair use is an outdated concept. Remember that as you vote this fall.


My understanding is that the RIAA position is more limited. It is not the ripping to your computer that the RIAA attacks, but the ripping and making those files available over a peer-to-peer file sharing network.

I have no problem with the RIAA if that is its position.


----------



## homerdodge (Sep 9, 2007)

MountainMan10 said:


> It is disappointing that the only way to get content off of the DVR is using some kind of capture device, whether it be DVD or HD quality.
> 
> When the USB port first showed up on the Tivo I hoped that it would allow connectivity to a computer to copy the content.


Actually, with an HR10-250 and other Tivo DVRs, you have the option of purchasing a new disk from DVR Upgrade to replace the original disk. Their software adds the network access via the USB port through which you can open telnet sesisons. At that point you can h**k the machine to disable the Tivo encryption and use software like "tytools" to download unencrypted content to your PC, transcode it to mpg or VOD, and ultimately burn DVDs.

There is no way to do that sort of thing with the HR2x DVRs to my knowledge. 
I expect someone will find a way to unlock the files captured on a PC using an HDPC20. I also expect that it would be somewhat more challenging, kind of like what you have to do to strip DRM-protected files of their DRM encoding. A pain, but doable.


----------



## paule123 (Dec 14, 2006)

There are HDCP "strippers" floating around (none of which are made in the U.S.) for people to use DVI/HDMI video sources with older non-HDCP compatible displays.

Theoretically you could attach this to a proper capture card in a PC and grab your full 720p or 1080i HD. But the cost of capture card, software, and the PC rig needed to handle that kind of video bandwidth would run you a bunch of money and hassle. Too much trouble for the average joe.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Guys,

We need to be very careful in our discussions. Talking about hacks to extract protected video or bypass protections are forbidden topics. Also mentioning any particular political concepts must be done with great care.

Talking about Fair Use is fair game, legitimate tools, etc. are all fine. You've done a great job so far, thanks in advance for keeping it that way.

Thanks,
Tom


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

kentuck1163 said:


> Their fears are quite understandable. These programs - remember - are copyrighted material.


Understood. But their responses often go beyond what is reasonable (IMHO).


----------



## ulbonado (Nov 29, 2007)

jahgreen said:


> My understanding is that the RIAA position is more limited. It is not the ripping to your computer that the RIAA attacks, but the ripping and making those files available over a peer-to-peer file sharing network.
> 
> I have no problem with the RIAA if that is its position.


That's only sort of correct. I think legally they recognize that ripping for personal use is allowed, but they also realize that if ripping is possible at all, then some subset of people will redistribute it. So, they want to stop all ripping. With music, that cat is basically out of the bag, and there's no stuffing it back in. But with video, it's not quite as far along. Ergo, HDCP, and deals like DirecTV not offering any way to extract HD video from its DVRs.

Their efforts will fail in the end anyway, no doubt, but in the meantime, the honest people are the ones who suffer for the rest, as usual.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

1948GG said:


> And there's this neat little thing, embedded in it since the founding of the country, although forgotten about in recent years, called *FAIR USE*.


Perhaps you didn't know that "fair use" wasn't codified into the United States Code until the Copyright Act of 1976?.

Fair use is something that you get when your copy meets certain criteria. It isn't a matter of claiming fair use and calling it good.

For a much needed investigation on your part into the reality of fair use, start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use


----------



## 1948GG (Aug 4, 2007)

ulbonado said:


> That's only sort of correct.
> 
> Ergo, HDCP, and deals like DirecTV not offering any way to extract HD video from its DVRs.
> 
> Their efforts will fail in the end anyway, no doubt, but in the meantime, the honest people are the ones who suffer for the rest, as usual.


The point is, that virtually every other DVR out there, from the original TIVO to the TIVO-HD, through the TIVO- Series3, and including all the cableco DVR's I've seen, do, that is, allow all kinds of 'transferability' of SD and HD content to various devices and such. It's DirecTV that is way behind the 'curve', as it is.

Now, that may change in the near future, but until that point, that 'portability' is the single greatest reason why customers are not going with DirecTV right now unless there is some compelling programming reason (more actual HD, sports programming, etc.). There are other reasons as well, but none as great as this, and are beyond the scope of this thread.

But, your idea that HDCP somehow stops anyone from transferring even HD content is, well, laughable. When this is brought up at IEEE meetings, it takes minutes for the howls to die down, simply because anything that is displayed on a monitor is.... simply there. Once it's in a form that eye's can see it, that's the end.

Very shortly, the device I mentioned above (the Hauppauge HD-PVR) will be available, and this will all be moot for the application that 'rcobuzio' originally started this thead about.


----------



## Guest (Feb 7, 2008)

1948GG said:


> This device will change the 'landscape' of recording/portability of HD content no matter what the reception device, cable/satellite/OTA/you name it.
> 
> 'Projected' release is '1st qtr 2008'.
> 
> http://www.hauppauge.com/pdfs/Hauppauge_HD_recorder.pdf


Great news; thanks for the information. We will finally have a way to record HD to DVDs. According to the information in that pdf, 2 hours of HD content can be recorded to a conventional DVD and played in a Blu-ray player. That really will change the landscape. Maybe this will lead to the release of standalone HD recorders.


----------



## Guest (Feb 7, 2008)

1948GG said:


> The point is, that virtually every other DVR out there, from the original TIVO to the TIVO-HD, through the TIVO- Series3, and including all the cableco DVR's I've seen, do, that is, allow all kinds of 'transferability' of SD and HD content to various devices and such. It's DirecTV that is way behind the 'curve', as it is.
> 
> Now, that may change in the near future, but until that point, that 'portability' is the single greatest reason why customers are not going with DirecTV right now unless there is some compelling programming reason (more actual HD, sports programming, etc.). There are other reasons as well, but none as great as this, and are beyond the scope of this thread.


I think it's at least partly due to DirecTV being owned by the same company that owns Twentieth Century Fox and the Fox TV network. They have the same mentality as all the other giant media companies - they think consumers shouldn't have any "fair use" rights other than those which they see fit to give us. This is the same industry that tried to kill the VCR just as it was about to emerge as the greatest money-maker in the history of the industry.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

1948GG said:


> The point is, that virtually every other DVR out there, from the original TIVO to the TIVO-HD, through the TIVO- Series3, and including all the cableco DVR's I've seen, do, that is, allow all kinds of 'transferability' of SD and HD content to various devices and such. It's DirecTV that is way behind the 'curve', as it is.
> 
> Now, that may change in the near future, but until that point, that 'portability' is the single greatest reason why customers are not going with DirecTV right now unless there is some compelling programming reason (more actual HD, sports programming, etc.). There are other reasons as well, but none as great as this, and are beyond the scope of this thread.
> 
> ...


The Hauppauge HD-PVR, being a component in, will not receive HDCP protected content at resolutions higher than 480p. Yes you can get HD content but not at HD resolutions.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

Tom Robertson said:


> The Hauppauge HD-PVR, being a component in, will not receive HDCP protected content at resolutions higher than 480p. Yes you can get HD content but not at HD resolutions.


And, unfortunately, as devices such as this become more common, we will undoubtedly see the use of such protection increase and the death (for most purposes) of component connections for HD.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

rcoleman111 said:


> I think it's at least partly due to DirecTV being owned by the same company that owns Twentieth Century Fox and the Fox TV network. They have the same mentality as all the other giant media companies - they think consumers shouldn't have any "fair use" rights other than those which they see fit to give us. This is the same industry that tried to kill the VCR just as it was about to emerge as the greatest money-maker in the history of the industry.


Another point of view: DIRECTV has to support this or lose their contracts with their content providers...

Also, recall DIRECTV has supported HDCP before News Corp acquired them. (Not by much, I admit.)

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## ulbonado (Nov 29, 2007)

Tom Robertson said:


> The Hauppauge HD-PVR, being a component in, will not receive HDCP protected content at resolutions higher than 480p. Yes you can get HD content but not at HD resolutions.


So is there not a lot of HDCP content out there right now? I have my TV hooked up via component (I use a surround receiver for switching, it doesn't do HDMI, and I haven't been motivated to replace it just for that), and according to the TV's own 'info' button, it is receiving 720p/1080i from my HR21 as it should. I assume that in any case where that works, the Hauppauge device would work too.


----------



## ulbonado (Nov 29, 2007)

1948GG said:


> But, your idea that HDCP somehow stops anyone from transferring even HD content is, well, laughable.


I did say that the efforts would ultimately fail.


----------



## 1948GG (Aug 4, 2007)

Tom Robertson said:


> The Hauppauge HD-PVR, being a component in, will not receive HDCP protected content at resolutions higher than 480p. Yes you can get HD content but not at HD resolutions.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tom


Re-read what you wrote, it's non-sensical. The *component* output of the HR20 is HD, at HD resolutions, i.e., 720P/1080i, and HDCP is not involved; it's how those of use with early HD sets (non-HDMI), or those with professional-grade monitors, connect up. The input on the Hauppauge device is component, thinking that it's anything less is... do your read the specs? Wait for the howls of laughter again. :lol:

And the thought that the HDMI/HDCP would block 'up-converted' SD content is already a moot argument, as many devices have gone around that 'roadblock' (from up-converting DVD players to A/V receivers and stand-alone processing boxes, from major consumer-electronics manufacturers), but is a topic for another thread.


----------



## nerfjames (Sep 21, 2007)

1948GG said:


> Re-read what you wrote, it's non-sensical. The *component* output of the HR20 is HD, at HD resolutions, i.e., 720P/1080i, and HDCP is not involved; it's how those of use with early HD sets (non-HDMI), or those with professional-grade monitors, connect up. The input on the Hauppauge device is component, thinking that it's anything less is... do your read the specs? Wait for the howls of laughter again. :lol:
> 
> And the thought that the HDMI/HDCP would block 'up-converted' SD content is already a moot argument, as many devices have gone around that 'roadblock' (from up-converting DVD players to A/V receivers and stand-alone processing boxes, from major consumer-electronics manufacturers), but is a topic for another thread.


Actually, you should study up on the subject. If some content is HDCP protected (blu-ray, HD DVD, DirecTV HD DVR), typically the player will not output full resolution over the analong component HD outputs. It will downcovert to a lesser quality. Read up on HDCP a little.


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

1948GG said:


> Re-read what you wrote, it's non-sensical. The *component* output of the HR20 is HD, at HD resolutions, i.e., 720P/1080i, and HDCP is not involved; it's how those of use with early HD sets (non-HDMI), or those with professional-grade monitors, connect up. The input on the Hauppauge device is component, thinking that it's anything less is... do your read the specs? Wait for the howls of laughter again. :lol:
> 
> And the thought that the HDMI/HDCP would block 'up-converted' SD content is already a moot argument, as many devices have gone around that 'roadblock' (from up-converting DVD players to A/V receivers and stand-alone processing boxes, from major consumer-electronics manufacturers), but is a topic for another thread.


Many devices (Toshiba HD-DVD, for instance) do not allow upconversion over component, only HDMI.

There have been cases seen on various DVRs where certain programs will only allow 480 output over component connections. These were apparently errors, but the technology is certainly there.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

1948GG said:


> Re-read what you wrote, it's non-sensical. The *component* output of the HR20 is HD, at HD resolutions, i.e., 720P/1080i, and HDCP is not involved; it's how those of use with early HD sets (non-HDMI), or those with professional-grade monitors, connect up. The input on the Hauppauge device is component, thinking that it's anything less is... do your read the specs? Wait for the howls of laughter again. :lol:
> 
> And the thought that the HDMI/HDCP would block 'up-converted' SD content is already a moot argument, as many devices have gone around that 'roadblock' (from up-converting DVD players to A/V receivers and stand-alone processing boxes, from major consumer-electronics manufacturers), but is a topic for another thread.


The output resolution of component connections can and will be downrezed to 480p anytime the protection flags are set in the program content. You will not get 720p/1080i/1080p via component anytime the protection flag is set--exactly because it can not participate in an HDCP handshake.

Check the output of an upconverting DVD player on its component output with a protected DVD (most any of them nowadays.) 480p is all you'll get.

And I have read the specs, many of them. Including the ones that describe exactly how the protection scheme is to work. Component will be downrezed to 480p on all compliant devices for protected materials.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Guest (Feb 8, 2008)

Tom Robertson said:


> Another point of view: DIRECTV has to support this or lose their contracts with their content providers...
> 
> Cheers,
> Tom


Not quite that simple, Tom. Contract negotiations are a two-way street and content providers need to have their content carried by DirecTV as much as DirecTV needs the content. Look at the trouble NFL Network is having getting cable companies to carry them. Do you think maybe they could gain some additional leverage by demanding that copy-protection flags be used?


----------



## IndyLions (Sep 3, 2006)

In theory, Tom, you are right. 

However, there are millions of people who have non-HDCP compliant TVs, and it will be 7-10 years before a majority of those are out of service. Only a few thousand geeks like us will use a component/MPEG4 device to archive content. 

Unless DirecTV and Cable are complete morons (which IS a concern), I don't see component outputs being limited to SD only resolutions for broadcast content anytime soon.


----------



## Guest (Feb 8, 2008)

Tom Robertson said:


> And I have read the specs, many of them. Including the ones that describe exactly how the protection scheme is to work. Component will be downrezed to 480p on all compliant devices for protected materials.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tom


Do you have any information that indicates that the Hauppauge HD PVR will recognize copy protection flags? If not, then how is it going to prevent anyone from recording over component connections?


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

It is not the Hauppauge that recognizes the copy protection flag. It is the source device, be it upconverting DVD player, High Def DVD player, STB, or DVR that is required to enforce the downrez on all non-hdcp compliant connections. That also includes DVI connections to older devices that didn't incorporate HDCP, btw. 

By definition, all analogue connections do not exchange the handshakes for HDCP, so all component connections will be downrezed.

Now, all the OTA input devices for PVRs can receive and store digital ATSC in highdef, but then the OS on the PC is expected to protect the content from being distributed if the protection flag is set. (Not expected for broadcast content anytime soon, if I understand correctly.)

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

IndyLions said:


> In theory, Tom, you are right.
> 
> However, there are millions of people who have non-HDCP compliant TVs, and it will be 7-10 years before a majority of those are out of service. Only a few thousand geeks like us will use a component/MPEG4 device to archive content.
> 
> Unless DirecTV and Cable are complete morons (which IS a concern), I don't see component outputs being limited to SD only resolutions for broadcast content anytime soon.


I have one. (and I'm very upset with the manufacturer for not honoring their promise to add digital inputs to the TV as expected.)

But I don't think the millions you refer to are really millions. Only the very early adopters like myself have component only TVs, that is the thousands. In the last two years, when HD sets have really taken off, do we see millions--and they are all HDCP compatible.

One other thing, the original Xbox 360s can't do hdcp. Major bummer for their owners.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

IndyLions said:


> However, there are millions of people who have non-HDCP compliant TVs, and it will be 7-10 years before a majority of those are out of service. Only a few thousand geeks like us will use a component/MPEG4 device to archive content.


The older equipment is the saving grace for now. But that is just temporary.



IndyLions said:


> Unless DirecTV and Cable are complete morons (which IS a concern), I don't see component outputs being limited to SD only resolutions for broadcast content anytime soon.


Some content providers have made noises about this already. It's just a matter of time.

And I don't say this as one who is rooting for this to happen.


----------



## Guest (Feb 8, 2008)

Tom Robertson said:


> It is not the Hauppauge that recognizes the copy protection flag. It is the source device, be it upconverting DVD player, High Def DVD player, STB, or DVR that is required to enforce the downrez on all non-hdcp compliant connections. That also includes DVI connections to older devices that didn't incorporate HDCP, btw.
> 
> By definition, all analogue connections do not exchange the handshakes for HDCP, so all component connections will be downrezed.
> 
> ...


In order for the copy protection to work over component connections, the receiving device has to be able to recognize the flag. That's why it's called the "analog hole". And it's why there are DVD recorders on the market that can record copy-protected DVDs from DVD players.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Yes, you can copy at up to 480p. Not HD. That is how the hole is sorta plugged.

(There are some interpretations where the analogue may be completely blacked, but I don't think that will last.)

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## nerfjames (Sep 21, 2007)

rcoleman111 said:


> In order for the copy protection to work over component connections, the receiving device has to be able to recognize the flag. That's why it's called the "analog hole". And it's why there are DVD recorders on the market that can record copy-protected DVDs from DVD players.


you may want to reread what is being said here. No one is arguing the fact that you can capture/record from an analog component output, what's being said is that if the source player is HDCP compliant, playing HDCP protected content, the analog HD component signal will be a lesser quality/downconverted signal.

J


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

rcoleman111 said:


> In order for the copy protection to work over component connections, the receiving device has to be able to recognize the flag. That's why it's called the "analog hole". And it's why there are DVD recorders on the market that can record copy-protected DVDs from DVD players.


But when the "sending" device disallows sending HD resolutions over component connections, you can't receive/record _HD_ via that "hole."


----------



## Guest (Feb 8, 2008)

bwaldron said:


> But when the "sending" device disallows sending HD resolutions over component connections, you can't receive/record _HD_ via that "hole."


That's true. If the signal is output in SD over the component connection, it's obvious it could only be received or recorded in SD. But that would mean anyone using component connections, even just to view it on a TV, would get SD video.


----------



## Guest (Feb 8, 2008)

Tom Robertson said:


> Yes, you can copy at up to 480p. Not HD. That is how the hole is sorta plugged.


That's because all of the DVD recorders on the market today are SD. Needless to say, you can't record in HD with a standard-definition DVD recorder. That doesn't prove that the Hauppauge recorder won't be able to record HD. If what you're saying is true, then why are any of the existing HD video-capture cards on the market today able to record in HD?


----------



## dgordo (Aug 29, 2004)

harsh said:


> Perhaps you didn't know that "fair use" wasn't codified into the United States Code until the Copyright Act of 1976?.


True, but it has existed at common law for around 150 years.


----------



## grandpaken (Feb 4, 2006)

bwaldron said:


> But when the "sending" device disallows sending HD resolutions over component connections, you can't receive/record _HD_ via that "hole."


 Does anyone really think that viewing HDTV over component would be banned? The device supplying the signal has no idea whether the cables are plugged into a TV or a recorder. I have one of those older component only HDTV's and I have no plans to replace it until it bites the dust. Does anyone know if the current crop of HD receivers even have the ability to limit component resolution based on the HDCP flag?


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

rcoleman111 said:


> That's because all of the DVD recorders on the market today are SD. Needless to say, you can't record in HD with a standard-definition DVD recorder. That doesn't prove that the Hauppauge recorder won't be able to record HD. If what you're saying is true, then why are any of the existing HD video-capture cards on the market today able to record in HD?


They all (are there that many?) _can_ record HD if sent HD material. The sender decides, not the capture card.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

grandpaken said:


> Does anyone really think that viewing HDTV over component would be banned? The device supplying the signal has no idea whether the cables are plugged into a TV or a recorder. I have one of those older component only HDTV's and I have no plans to replace it until it bites the dust. Does anyone know if the current crop of HD receivers even have the ability to limit component resolution based on the HDCP flag?


Will they is the $1 million question that many of us are asking. Perhaps there will be a "time period hole" where content providers will not set the flag until the non-hdcp compliant TVs are fairly old. (another 5-10 years-ish.) Perhaps they will frustrate us and turn it on sooner. 

Already upconverting DVD and high def DVD players enforce the downconversion on protected discs and most discs are protected.

Yes, almost all the set top boxes do. The HR10-250 had that feature when it was introduced, the current DIRECTV HD receivers and DVRs do. The Dish network receivers are fully capable as far as I know.

In short, to get permission to send HD content, the content providers forced the set top box manufacturers to enforce the rules that the FCC could not. (The FCC rules were struck down by the courts.)

Cheers (hmmm... maybe cheers isn't quite the right word for the situation.)
Cheers to you then,
Tom


----------



## jazzyjez (Jan 2, 2006)

You know there comes a time when you just have to accept that there are some things you just don't get for free. I really love my DVRs -- I have 2 HR20s -- and what they bring to me, i.e. what they were primarily intended for: the ability to watch a program at a time when it's more convenient. It also enables me to watch something I really enjoy more than once. Being able to do this with HD video and 5.1 Dolby Digital sound makes these experiences even more rewarding. In more than one instance it's also been more rewarding for the artists/company concerned because I've then sought out other material they may have. In particular I'm thinking of some concert performances on HDnet or MHD; if I hadn't been able to set my DVR to record that "unknown-to-me artist" at 3 a.m. then they would never have subsequently have sold me their DVD.

Now, if I had the technology to record a BD or HD-DVD quality disk from say a PPV movie, then I'm effectively getting a clone of purchased product but at the cost of a rental. I have to say that as a consumer, even one who is always on the lookout for a good deal, that to me is pretty close to stealing. For most movies, concerts and documentaries, I'm quite happy to keep it for a while on my DVR and eventually I'll let it go. If there's something I really have to have on disk, then I'll go and buy it. OK, the idea of transferring programs to DVD at reduced 480i quality (and for personal use) is fine as that doesn't really threaten the market -- and that horse has already left the stable anyway.

I'm definitely pro the fair-use concept, but for me, that's not at odds with such technology as HDCP. Because of such implementations, I'm more likely (I hope) to be able to continue doing things in the future in the same way I do now. If these technologies were circumvented, or even nearly so with such devices as component HD recorders, then the likely effect would be that DirecTV and others would eventually be forced to clamp down further -- perhaps by disabling non-compliant outputs completely for any protected content. Hard to imagine that now, since many people use component video for their HD content, but ultimately their arm may be twisted by the content providers and then even the idea of recording in 480i might only be remembered as a long-lost luxury.


----------



## bsnelson (Jul 6, 2007)

I almost started a new thread, but this seems like a good place:

I have a friend who has a non-HDCP-compliant display. He's considering an HR21, but we're unsure as to what (if any) content is protected today. Yes, we realize that things can change, but can anyone offer solid answers on what of the following is currently blocked for non-HDCP and/or downrezzed for component:

LIL channels
"normal" HD channels (e.g. HDNet, Science Channel HD, History Channel HD)
Premium channels (HBO HD, SHO HD etc.)
HD PPV

He has a TiVoHD that he's tried to use with cable, but it has content protection for EVERY channel that comes through the cablecard, even the local stations. OTA works OK, but he's hoping for a solution to get the other channels. 

And no, getting a new display is not an option at this time. 

Brad


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

Nothing is protected today, as far as I know. My main HD set is connected via component and I haven't seen any issues with downrezzed content.


----------



## IndyLions (Sep 3, 2006)

Because there was some debate as to how many sets are out there that lack HDCP compatible ports, I did some research.

I found an article from Home Theater Magazine dated December 2003. It stated that the estimated sales (thru Dec 2003) of HDTV sets in the USA was 9 million units. You would have to believe that a majority of those lacked HDCP ports.

Doesn't mean that content providers won't start downrezzing soon, but it does give you a perspective that it literally is "millions" of sets out there lacking HDCP, not "thousands".


----------



## IndyLions (Sep 3, 2006)

jazzyjez said:


> I'm definitely pro the fair-use concept, but for me, that's not at odds with such technology as HDCP. Because of such implementations, I'm more likely (I hope) to be able to continue doing things in the future in the same way I do now. If these technologies were circumvented, or even nearly so with such devices as component HD recorders, then the likely effect would be that DirecTV and others would eventually be forced to clamp down further -- perhaps by disabling non-compliant outputs completely for any protected content. Hard to imagine that now, since many people use component video for their HD content, but ultimately their arm may be twisted by the content providers and then even the idea of recording in 480i might only be remembered as a long-lost luxury.


Here's the problem...HDCP could work to protect the rights of consumers AND content providers, but DirecTV IS NOT EVEN OFFERING the connections that are needed for Fair Use in the HD world.

How many DirecTV receivers are providing FireWire or (file sharing) Ethernet ports? Necessity is the mother of invention, hence the Happhauge device. This is no fly-by-night, foreign company looking to skirt the rules to promote piracy. This is a legitimate company filling a need that is there because there is a market (albeit limited) that is looking to exercise their Fair Use rights, and they have no other way to do that.

If my brother-in-law is on CNN-HD, and I want to archive that appearance in the highest quality resolution that I paid for, am I wrong to want to do that (for my own in-house use)? I say no. There are guidelines established (copy once, copy freely), but Cable Companies abuse them, and DirecTV pretends they don't exist, and somehow gets away with it.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

bsnelson said:


> I almost started a new thread, but this seems like a good place:
> 
> I have a friend who has a non-HDCP-compliant display. He's considering an HR21, but we're unsure as to what (if any) content is protected today. Yes, we realize that things can change, but can anyone offer solid answers on what of the following is currently blocked for non-HDCP and/or downrezzed for component:
> 
> ...





IndyLions said:


> Here's the problem...HDCP could work to protect the rights of consumers AND content providers, but DirecTV IS NOT EVEN OFFERING the connections that are needed for Fair Use in the HD world.
> 
> How many DirecTV receivers are providing FireWire or (file sharing) Ethernet ports? Necessity is the mother of invention, hence the Happhauge device. This is no fly-by-night, foreign company looking to skirt the rules to promote piracy. This is a legitimate company filling a need that is there because there is a market (albeit limited) that is looking to exercise their Fair Use rights, and they have no other way to do that.
> 
> If my brother-in-law is on CNN-HD, and I want to archive that appearance in the highest quality resolution that I paid for, am I wrong to want to do that (for my own in-house use)? I say no. There are guidelines established (copy once, copy freely), but Cable Companies abuse them, and DirecTV pretends they don't exist, and somehow gets away with it.


Parts of these statements seem incongruous. Cable companies (above) are enforcing even more strongly than DIRECTV.

Thanks for posting the 9M number, IndyLions. Imagine how more there are between 2003 and 2005 when HDCP was more formally introduced, if I understand correctly! 

Hauppauge is not breaking any rule at all. The copy protection (with downrez) is to be enforced by the sending device not the receiving capture card.

The fair use rules are not up to date with the current technology, alas. I completely agree that we should be able to follow the same fair use guidelines for HD content as any other content. DIRECTV, I believe, is following the contracts of the content providers who are the ones (perhaps) breaking with Fair Use doctrines.

Brad, at this point, I'm not seeing any copy protected materials on DIRECTV where downrezing is enforced aside from the occasional test channels. I do not know how long that will last. FYI: I have premier with NFL ST/SF, OTA, HD LILs, and a smattering of DNS channels.

Good luck!
Tom


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

Tom Robertson said:


> Parts of these statements seem incongruous. Cable companies (above) are enforcing even more strongly than DIRECTV.


Incongruous as it seems, it is true that there are functioning firewire ports on a number of cable boxes that people are able to use for offloading HD content. Don't know exactly how widespread it is, or how long it will last.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

That's the thing, some cable companies went one way, others went the other. Some are enforcing *very * (overly?) tightly, some are not at all yet.

This will be a very hot topic for the next 5 years at least.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

Tom Robertson said:


> That's the thing, some cable companies went one way, others went the other. Some are enforcing *very * (overly?) tightly, some are not at all yet.
> 
> This will be a very hot topic for the next 5 years at least.


Agreed to both points.


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2008)

Tom Robertson said:


> They all (are there that many?) _can_ record HD if sent HD material. The sender decides, not the capture card.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tom


Right, if the signal is sent out over the component output in HD, there is nothing to prevent it from being recorded in HD. The sender only decides whether the signal goes over wire in HD, not which devices can receive it in HD.


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2008)

bwaldron said:


> Nothing is protected today, as far as I know. My main HD set is connected via component and I haven't seen any issues with downrezzed content.


That is correct. I have both component and HDMI connections and I haven't seen anything that is available in HD over HDMI but SD over component. The reason that isn't likely is the competition from cable. You can get a Cablecard with your local cable system and connect a standalone Tivo HD to it. You'll be able to transfer your HD recordings to other devices and there's nothing the content providers can do to stop it.


----------



## bsnelson (Jul 6, 2007)

rcoleman111 said:


> You can get a Cablecard with your local cable system and connect a standalone Tivo HD to it. You'll be able to transfer your HD recordings to other devices and there's nothing the content providers can do to stop it.


How would you do this? The issue that prompted my post was that my friend has a TiVoHD, and unlike DirecTV, EVERYTHING coming through his cablecard in the TiVoHD has the ICT bit turned on. He can't view ANY HD over component.

Brad


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2008)

bsnelson said:


> How would you do this? The issue that prompted my post was that my friend has a TiVoHD, and unlike DirecTV, EVERYTHING coming through his cablecard in the TiVoHD has the ICT bit turned on. He can't view ANY HD over component.
> 
> Brad


I have a friend with Comcast who is using the Tivo HD and Cablecard. I'll have to reconfirm what he's doing, but I'm pretty sure he is transferring the HD recordings over the network from the Tivo to his PC. He is definitely getting the HD recordings from his Tivo to his PC.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

rcoleman111 said:


> I have a friend with Comcast who is using the Tivo HD and Cablecard. I'll have to reconfirm what he's doing, but I'm pretty sure he is transferring the HD recordings over the network from the Tivo to his PC.


Hacked Tivo? Or unhacked? (And we have to be careful with this line of thought.)

And his Comcast is quite probably different from others.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## ulbonado (Nov 29, 2007)

Tom Robertson said:


> Hacked Tivo? Or unhacked? (And we have to be careful with this line of thought.)


Tivo offers a utility called "Tivo-to-go" that lets you transfers shows off the DVR onto a Windows PC. I think it was only recently enabled on the HD Tivos, but has existed for some time on standalone Series 2s. It was never offered with any of the DirecTivos, afaik. But it's a completely legitimate and supported product from Tivo itself. No hacking required.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Looked it up and in the TiVoToGo FAQ:


> Programs that have been flagged as copy-protected by the content owner and broadcaster will not be allowed to transfer. TiVo cannot predict or control which programs will be copy-protected.


So, copy protected content is even less available via TiVoToGo as it won't even transfer a 480p version. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

ulbonado said:


> Tivo offers a utility called "Tivo-to-go" that lets you transfers shows off the DVR onto a Windows PC. I think it was only recently enabled on the HD Tivos, but has existed for some time on standalone Series 2s. It was never offered with any of the DirecTivos, afaik. But it's a completely legitimate and supported product from Tivo itself. No hacking required.


I didn't think this was working for HD content on the Series 3?


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Supposedly it can, according to the TiVo FAQs, perhaps that is a recent addition to the S3 codeset? (Or the Desktop software?)

Altho, perhaps all the HD content that users have tried and reported as failing are protected content which can't be downloaded?

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Guest (Feb 10, 2008)

Tom Robertson said:


> Looked it up and in the TiVoToGo FAQ:
> 
> So, copy protected content is even less available via TiVoToGo as it won't even transfer a 480p version.
> 
> ...


I don't know if he's using TivoToGo, but it's possible he's just transferring non-copy protected content; I'll have to check on that. There are rules that prohibit copy-protecting local TV broadcasts, which represents a large portion of what most people watch, so maybe that's all he's transferring.

Regarding your previous comment:



Tom Robertson said:


> The fair use rules are not up to date with the current technology, alas. I completely agree that we should be able to follow the same fair use guidelines for HD content as any other content. DIRECTV, I believe, is following the contracts of the content providers who are the ones (perhaps) breaking with Fair Use doctrines.
> 
> Brad, at this point, I'm not seeing any copy protected materials on DIRECTV where downrezing is enforced aside from the occasional test channels. I do not know how long that will last. FYI: I have premier with NFL ST/SF, OTA, HD LILs, and a smattering of DNS channels.


These two paragraphs pretty much sum up the issue. The giant media companies that control the bulk of the content are as determined as ever to take away any "fair use" rights that consumers still have. What is really a crock is that it is legal for them to use the technology to prevent consumers from exercising their fair use rights, but in most cases it is _illegal _for consumers to use technology to get around these restrictions.

Recording devices like the Hauppauge PVR are going work just fine as long as DirecTV doesn't cave in to demands to shut off HD over analog outputs. If they do, you can be sure that those who want to record HD will find other workarounds.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

DIRECTV might not have much control. The flag will be set by the content providers and DIRECTV might be in serious trouble to remove that flag. All depends upon the contract.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

rcoleman111 said:


> There are rules that prohibit copy-protecting local TV broadcasts, which represents a large portion of what most people watch, so maybe that's all he's transferring.


Yep, that will be safe to transfer in HD. Of course, the networks are doing their best with logos, animated pop-ups, and other intrusions to make doing so less desirable -- hoping we'll just give in and buy the DVD sets, I guess.


----------



## freerein100 (Dec 14, 2007)

The DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) would be the rules that have to be followed if I remember correctly, so Fair Use Doctrine might be trumped


----------



## Guest (Feb 10, 2008)

Tom Robertson said:


> DIRECTV might not have much control. The flag will be set by the content providers and DIRECTV might be in serious trouble to remove that flag. All depends upon the contract.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tom


If that were the case, you would see some content being blocked over component output already. As you've already acknowledged, none of DirecTV's HD channels are blocked or downrezzed on component outputs.


----------



## ulbonado (Nov 29, 2007)

bwaldron said:


> I didn't think this was working for HD content on the Series 3?


It wasn't initially, but I believe it has been enabled sometime relatively recently. Ah yes, here's a report:

http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/09/hands-on-with-hd-tivotogo-and-multi-room-viewing/


----------



## Everyperson (Nov 26, 2006)

I had recorded "Inside the NFL" this week to my Hr20-100(a NON HD program). Then I played it back through 480i output to my Sony VRD-VC20 DVD recorder. I wanted to make a backup for my personal viewing and I wanted to clear some HD space on the HR20. It would not record(tried another channel and it recorded fine-so it's not the recorder). Does this mean that HBO has the flag on?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

ulbonado said:


> It wasn't initially, but I believe it has been enabled sometime relatively recently.


If you read the article, it mentions that HD transfers are "out of the question, obviously".


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

harsh said:


> If you read the article, it mentions that HD transfers are "out of the question, obviously".


But it seems like that statement was in the context of sending to a Series 2 (SD only) Tivo.


----------



## Smuuth (Oct 4, 2005)

Everyperson said:


> I had recorded "Inside the NFL" this week to my Hr20-100(a NON HD program). Then I played it back through 480i output to my Sony VRD-VC20 DVD recorder. I wanted to make a backup for my personal viewing and I wanted to clear some HD space on the HR20. It would not record(tried another channel and it recorded fine-so it's not the recorder). Does this mean that HBO has the flag on?


What flag would that be?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

bwaldron said:


> But it seems like that statement was in the context of sending to a Series 2 (SD only) Tivo.


I was simply pointing out how the article didn't support the contention that an HD TiVo could send HD content to a computer.

Rather than trying to stretch something that doesn't fit, I figured I'd go to the source:



TiVo TTG FAQ said:


> What content can I transfer off my Series3 or TiVo HD?
> 
> 1. Using TiVo Desktop software for Windows or Roxio Toast 8 or Popcorn 3 for Mac OS, TiVo subscribers can now transfer recordings from their Series 3 and TiVo HD boxes for playback, DVD burning, or converting to portable device formats on personal computers.
> 2. This includes standard definition and high definition recordings from any input source (analog, ATSC, cable card).
> 3. Programs that have been flagged as copy-protected by the content owner and broadcaster will not be allowed to transfer. TiVo cannot predict or control which programs will be copy-protected.


----------



## Everyperson (Nov 26, 2006)

Smuuth said:


> What flag would that be?


Originally Posted by Tom Robertson 
DIRECTV might not have much control. The flag will be set by the content providers and DIRECTV might be in serious trouble to remove that flag. All depends upon the contract.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Smuuth (Oct 4, 2005)

Everyperson said:


> Originally Posted by Tom Robertson
> DIRECTV might not have much control. The flag will be set by the content providers and DIRECTV might be in serious trouble to remove that flag. All depends upon the contract.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tom


The flag to which Tom Robertson referred is the HDCP flag. Even if set, it would not affect 480i output.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

rcoleman111 said:


> If that were the case, you would see some content being blocked over component output already. As you've already acknowledged, none of DirecTV's HD channels are blocked or downrezzed on component outputs.


Your logic is that because there are no channels downrezed yet, none will ever be on current DIRECTV hardware? 

And are you ignoring the test channels we've seen from time to time? 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Everyperson said:


> I had recorded "Inside the NFL" this week to my Hr20-100(a NON HD program). Then I played it back through 480i output to my Sony VRD-VC20 DVD recorder. I wanted to make a backup for my personal viewing and I wanted to clear some HD space on the HR20. It would not record(tried another channel and it recorded fine-so it's not the recorder). Does this mean that HBO has the flag on?


That was probably HBO's use of the Macrovision copy protection scheme that most DVD recorders honor too.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

harsh said:


> I was simply pointing out how the article didn't support the contention that an HD TiVo could send HD content to a computer.
> 
> Rather than trying to stretch something that doesn't fit, I figured I'd go to the source:


Gotcha. Thanks for the FAQ excerpt.


----------



## Guest (Feb 11, 2008)

Tom Robertson said:


> Your logic is that because there are no channels downrezed yet, none will ever be on current DIRECTV hardware?
> 
> And are you ignoring the test channels we've seen from time to time?
> 
> ...


You're the one claiming DirecTV has agreed to contracts that allow content providers to downrez HD over component outputs. The fact that it isn't happening suggests otherwise. If you have some proof to support your claims, please present it. Otherwise it's just more unsupported speculation on your part.


----------



## Guest (Feb 11, 2008)

Tom Robertson said:


> That was probably HBO's use of the Macrovision copy protection scheme that most DVD recorders honor too.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tom


The fact he's using a Sony DVD recorder is most likely why he can't record. Those recorders are notorious for having copy-protection features built in that don't exist on other recorders. I've recorded "Inside the NFL" to my DVD recorder any number of times and I've never had a problem. That's why it's best to stay clear of Sony's hardware.


----------

