Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

EFF says Microsoft is complying with NBC broadcast flags

By Ed Oswald, BetaNews

May 19, 2008, 1:56 PM

After reports of Vista refusing to record select programming from NBC, online interest group The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) says the same thing is happening for over-the-air (OTA) programming.

One user has reported that while attempting to record TV shows from Raleigh's WNCN high definition channel -- the NBC affiliate in the area -- an alert shows up saying that the broadcaster has disabled recording of the programming.

The individual was recording from an antenna signal, and the EFF said it was the first time it knew of the technology being used to restrict OTA programming. Broadcast flags come as part of the new DTV standard.

Such use of the technology, which sends a small piece of data along with the signal, was challenged by the EFF in court in 2005. An appeals court ruled that using the flags to restrict copying was not appropriate and threw the law out.

A three-judge panel said that the FCC did not have the authority to enforce such a law, which opponents argued was a violation of fair use laws.

EFF officials said Microsoft's adoption of broadcast flags was under its own volition, as other programs now ignore it, and have been able to record the programs in question, but it did not outright accuse the Redmond company of any wrongdoing.

"If it is a deliberate 'feature,' they have some explaining to do," EFF international outreach coordinator Danny O'Brien said. "That would amount to putting the desires of content holders above the best interests of its customers."

Add a Comment (35 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By batteryfast

posted Nov 9, 2008 - 10:55 PM

A three-judge panel said that the FCC did not have the authority to enforce such a law, which opponents argued was a violation of fair use laws.

EFF officials said Microsoft's adoption of broadcast flags was under its own volition, as other programs now ignore it, and have been able to record the programs in question, but it did not outright accuse the Redmond company of any wrongdoing.

"If it is a deliberate 'feature,' they have some explaining to do," EFF international outreach coordinator Danny O'Brien said. "That would amount apple a1078 battery
apple a1045 battery
apple a1175 battery
to putting the desires of content holders above the best interests of its customers."

Score: 0

By dougau

posted May 20, 2008 - 10:47 AM

MSNBC..... Hum...

Score: 0

By Aires

posted May 20, 2008 - 11:50 AM

Right on sister!

Score: 0

By Aires

posted May 20, 2008 - 9:10 AM

Wouldn't be allowed to happen in the UK. You guys ain't got it so good have you?

Score: 0

By testman

posted May 20, 2008 - 8:55 AM

I'd like to know what application are they using under Vista. Is it any that comes with Vista? Are ALL reocrding applications under Vista doing it? If it's a 3rd party application that's doing it, does it do the same thing on other OSes (like XP)? Because if it's one particular application that's doing it regardless of OS, then the article is inaccurate and spreading FUD. It's not apparent from this posting what exactly is restricting recording.

Score: 0

By preinterpost

posted May 20, 2008 - 11:49 AM

You could phrase it as such:

There is DRM utilizing technology built into Vista, which enables specific features (that are not available on any other platform) and you are free to use it or not.

Additionally you can install any other media player with or without DRM - of which there is an incredible mature diversity compared to other platforms - if this is your preference.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 20, 2008 - 9:10 AM

It's just MCE, and it's only there because the issue was ongoing during Vista's development and they didn't know which way it would go.

This is, as per usual, much overblown. MSFT will patch it so that MCE ignores the flags, or at the very least, post a work-around to disable detection of the flags via the registry or some-such.

Score: 0

By hlherron@hotmail.com

posted May 20, 2008 - 1:28 AM

Score: 0

By hlherron@hotmail.com

posted May 20, 2008 - 1:27 AM

Score: 0

By hlherron@hotmail.com

edited May 20, 2008 - 1:26 AM

It's another example of large corporations in America doing what they want, in defiance of the law. I'm sure it's no accident. MSNBC? Hmmm. I wonder if any other OTA HD signals are blocked?

Score: 0

By DudeBoyz

posted May 20, 2008 - 12:30 AM

What I hate about this, is that they are preventing you from doing what the Supreme Court already said we have a right to do (in that "timeshifting" case).

I don't know if the DMCA is what allows them to get away with this because it's a digital platform instead of an analog form like the original VCR's were, but it just makes me frustrated.

It frustrated Apple too, apparently, so much so that they no longer carry NBC shows on iTunes.

I really hope that people just refuse to stand for this type of junk. Microsoft corporate policies have always sucked, and I think many of us feel that Vista sucks too.

I'm sorry to see this come to fruition. Thankfully, I use Windows XP and don't do my recording on my PC, but on two VCR's and one DVR, where there appears to be no problem recording shows.

I hope this attempt to reduce user rights by NBC and Microsoft fails, but my fear is that it won't. :(

Score: 0

By giwo

posted May 19, 2008 - 7:21 PM

"That would amount to putting the desires of content holders above the best interests of its customers."

Sounds like Vista in a nutshell.

Score: 0

By melkor

posted May 19, 2008 - 7:50 PM

Yep, with Vista MS forgot which customers really matter. It doesn't matter how much Big Content may pay you or reward you if you can't get the customers to buy it.

Score: 0

By Neoprimal

posted May 20, 2008 - 10:36 AM

I don't agree with it. But my take, is that if I were an OS providing proprietary tools to record TV, that I would try my best to adhere to rules that those that are providing TV set - lest they fall prey to suits brought on by these huge corporations. So ofcourse they're going to listen to them over customers.

IF the law had been upheld, what do you think would have happened if Vista could record flagged shows? It's basically a 'who can sue us' scenerio. Let's see... Get sued by giant TV/Movie studios vs. deal with some grumpy customers... you take your pick.

I'm sure now that the issue has come up they'll patch it in an update.

Score: 0

By ToeKneeC

edited May 19, 2008 - 8:37 PM

Again - Vista bashing yet the stats show 140 million copies sold, and compared to XP - on track. Of course there was about a billion less people in the world 6 years ago :) But seriously you have to look at the big picture, MS isn't gonig to kill the Media Center by blocking everything else all other PVRs do the same.

Score: 0

By giwo

posted May 20, 2008 - 11:12 AM

I own (and use every day) 2 copies of Vista. That gives me the right to bash it all I like (which isn't all that often). But the amount of DRM they incorporated in with their latest OS doesn't exactly give me warm fuzzies. Especially when I (not the content providers) paid for it.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 20, 2008 - 11:55 AM

*shakes head*

What did you pay for that Vista isn't letting you do?

Frankly, your argument should be the opposite.

HDMI protected content? Well, if you like HD, you'll be glad to hear Vista supports HDMI and the ICT token so that your HD streams and movies will play in full HD in Vista when (not if) the studios begin to trigger it.

Score: 0

By ToeKneeC

edited May 19, 2008 - 10:18 PM

This is just stupid. I can almost understand blocking recording NFL Superbowl but normal weekly TV Shows. If NBC starts and others such as FOX, ABC, CBS, HBO follow - it kills DVRs as we know them. Just stupid.
The flag is not just for Vista either, they want to do this for every PVR. Top that off, there are rummors that - hey if you want to record this show here is the fee. It is just sad to think they will kill TV as we know it. I'll just turn it off can get the DVD's used on eBay. If I can't record the shows I can't watch them with my schedule - period.
OK vented - I thought Broadcasting flags also required a HDTV card that supported flags? At worst we might have to go to another software PVR.
As for Vista - You might hate Vista but the Vista Media Center is stable. I have three at home, they just run (I don't even have a keyboard and mouse connected). With XP Media Center 2005, stable - if you restart it every so many days.

Score: 0

By Jahmekan

posted May 19, 2008 - 4:15 PM

While, I do not like the fact that Vista is blocking recording options for certain shows, I don't think it's a bad OS. MS made the choice to put stronger DRM features in the OS and they will have to live with that choice. If you don't want a Vista PC then opt out for one with XP and let this be a now whine zone.

Score: 0

By phenomnaruto

posted May 19, 2008 - 2:49 PM

You expect me and others to regret buying Vista because I cant record a few NBC shows, that I can otherwise get off of torrent, pit?

good luck with that.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 19, 2008 - 2:58 PM

He doesn't expect anything. He noticed an opportunity to troll MSFT and it was all over. His brain shut down at that point. He probably spent the next 20 minutes drooling in a corner somewhere wringing his hands obsessively.

It's his own special version of Tourette's Syndrome.

Score: 0

By pitdingo2

posted May 19, 2008 - 2:15 PM

can't help but laugh at all the suckers who ran out and bought the steaming pile of DRM known as Vista.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 19, 2008 - 2:38 PM

blahblahblah....same ol' pit.

Vista!=DRM. It's been explained to you countless times.

It came down to a decision during Vista production:

FCC penalties (if it passed and they didn't support it), or a few pissed off customers (if it didn't and they did).

Try actually thinking before you post. It'd do wonders for your credibility.

They will disable the detection of the flag pretty quickly now, I'd wager.

Score: 0

By Ethelred

edited May 20, 2008 - 5:09 AM

"
Vista!=DRM. It's been explained to you countless times."

How does that make it acceptable?

You usually are far more rational than the Vista bashers. This is not one of those times.

"FCC penalties (if it passed and they didn't support it), or a few pissed off customers (if it didn't and they did)."

However there aren't any penalties. So there is no need for pissing off a LOT (not a few) of customers. MS has had plenty of time to fix this unnecessary and unwarranted limit on users choices. The Supreme Court decision on time shifting hasn't been overturned.

"
They will disable the detection of the flag pretty quickly now, I'd wager."

In the meantime you are wrong on this and it's bad bet as MS hasn't shown any sign of complying with anyone but NBC.

Edit - Oops. Left out an important "no".

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited May 20, 2008 - 4:34 PM

Vista!=DRM. It's been explained to you countless times."

How does that make it acceptable?

how does that question make sense.... They support it. If you want to play a file protected by DRM, Vista will play it. If you want to play files not protected, Vista will play it.... Starting to see a pattern here?

However there aren't any penalties

OK. You missed the point of the post. Let me try again:

This whole Broadcast flag bit happened during the development process of Vista. At the time, they had *zero* idea what way it would go, and the FCC has been known to be heavy handed in it's fines for non-compliance (re: Best-Buy - Analog TV). As for the number of customers, I'm talking percentages. If you can prove greater than 1% of the Vista user-base was affected by this, I'll take it back.

In the meantime you are wrong on this and it's bad bet as MS hasn't shown any sign of complying with anyone but NBC.

*laughs*

I'm wrong, eh? I'll let it slide this time since you apparently misunderstood the original post to a degree.

As for the bet, let's make it interesting. Pick a username. Whomever loses the bet (we'll give them 6 months to patch it?), may only post here under that name. Agreed?

Score: 0

By Ethelred

posted May 21, 2008 - 3:03 AM

"how does that question make sense.... They support it."

You mean they support NBC's no copy bit. Not the user with a desire for timeshifting.

"
This whole Broadcast flag bit happened during the development process of Vista. "

I got that part. However the FCC does not have the power to overturn a Supreme Court decision. Plus Vista is now over a year old and its post SP1 and still no change.

"If you can prove greater than 1% of the Vista user-base was affected by this, I'll take it back."

One percent of Vista users is still lots, not a few. A few usually means three. You didn't say a few percent you said a few.

"I'm wrong, eh? I'll let it slide this time since you apparently misunderstood the original post to a degree."

How is this letting it slide? Well someone is misunderstanding. So yes, your wrong. Perhaps you mistyped "a few" and misunderstood were the FCC is on the legal scale.

Don't mistake me for the dingo even if I am on his side (shudder) this one time. Considering that Dingo was involved I did have to think twice you know. Its like agreeing with any crank, you have to examine your thoughts closely as they may have gang aglee.

"As for the bet, let's make it interesting. Pick a username. Whomever loses the bet (we'll give them 6 months to patch it?), may only post here under that name. Agreed?"

They had a year plus already, the six months are up.

Do you agree to stop making stupid wagers? You are sounding like one of those idiots that think with their balls and dare those that disagree to make a bet as somehow that makes them right. So mark yourself down one on the Flame Warrior list.

http://redwing.hutman.net/%7Emreed/index.htm

You seem to be a Big Dog in this post.

As for names I think that being stuck with PC_Tool or Ethelred is already bad enough. And I am not switching with you. I find the errors that some make about the name Ethelred useful in flame wars. Hadn't planned on them but I can take advantage anyway.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 22, 2008 - 10:33 AM

So mark yourself down one on the Flame Warrior list.

I'd be honored if I gave a sh*t.

Here it is, as simple as I can make it:

MSFT enabled detection of the Broadcast Flag during Vista's development as the issue had not yet been resolved in preference to *not* getting their assess handed to them by the FCC. (this explains why it was enabled)

The issue resolved in favor of the user. (this explains why it's an issue)

MSFT had bigger fish to fry during the creation of SP1, and no-one had as yet had an issue with it. (this explains why it wasn't dealt with in Sp1)

Now that it is an issue, they will resolve it in due time. (this is where we are at now.)

Leave the trolling to the retards like Dingo, Zaine and sjc001. You're smarter than they are. (You can actually type coherently)

Score: 0

By Ethelred

posted May 23, 2008 - 3:36 AM

"Here it is, as simple as I can make it:"

Here is my reply.

I understood you the first time. I disagreed.

"The issue resolved in favor of the user. (this explains why it's an issue)"

False. If it was resolved in favor of the Vista user than there wouldn't be an issue. NBC setting the flag wouldn't have blocked recording.

"and no-one had as yet had an issue with it. (this explains why it wasn't dealt with in Sp1)"

It ALSO explains why I disagreed with you and still do. AT PRESENT MS is blocking the user. Which is what I said and I can't figure out why you keep on saying:

"
The issue resolved in favor of the user. (this explains why it's an issue)"

Which makes no sense. If they had resolved in favor of the user then NBC setting the flag would have had no effect. They resolved according to a deprecated FCC ruling which is in no way in favor of the user and was never intended to be so.

Yes I do understand the legal ramifications. I also understand MS chose the FCC's ideas over the Supreme Court. I think thats timid at best. Perhaps Bill just didn't want to be grilled on the stand again but that wouldn't be likely in this case.

"Now that it is an issue, they will resolve it in due time. (this is where we are at now.)"

MS says no. At least their response is that they are trying to get the broadcasters to not set the bit. They appear to have no intention of changing the way their software works on this.

Perhaps the coder has quit and the commenting is wholly inadequate and they figure its easier to get the broadcasters to behave than to change one subroutine(O.K. its likely more than one to stop users from easily bypassing it with a hex edit hack). They aren't saying that though and their explanation is duplicitous considering that there never was an official final FCC regulation on the books, something they carefully neglected to mention.

NBC claims the flag setting was inadvertent. I certainly can see that as a possibility. The question is why is MS being as stubborn on this as they are so far, at least in public.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9946780-7.html

"Leave the trolling to the retards like Dingo, Zaine and sjc001."

Not trolling. Disagreeing. You are finding this concept difficult. Too many easy pickings I suppose. I know its sometimes fun shooting fish in a barrel but care must be exercised to avoid laziness. I have reread some of my own old posts that I have kept from the Maximum PC Forum and some have me scratching my head as to what the heck got me so riled up. Not many of those but they are there.

The court decision was made in 2005. Not exactly crunch time for a product that came out in early 2007.

Now maybe if the stink gets high enough MS will change its mind. Its had a long time and got lucky as no broadcaster was setting the flag. NBC claims it was a mistake. Its a mistake by MS to stonewall on this.

Of course the MS programmers may at this moment be ignoring the publicity flacks and trying to patch up the routines.

"(You can actually type coherently)"

Only because I keep checking what I type. I can't spell without help. My grammar makes my copy of Word cringe whenever I use it. Tough for Word, its grammar check would result in stultifying prose.

"I'd be honored if I gave a sh*t. "

Its not an honor. Maybe that was an attempt at humor. Maybe you need smiley's. I refuse to use them as it undermines my dry humor. Of course it would cut down on the occasional misunderstanding but I must take that risk for the sake of the jokes working for me.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited May 23, 2008 - 4:41 PM

"The issue resolved in favor of the user. (this explains why it's an issue)"

False. If it was resolved in favor of the Vista user than there wouldn't be an issue. NBC setting the flag wouldn't have blocked recording.

The "issue" in that sentence being the FCC decision, not the detection in Vista. This misunderstanding pretty much seems to be the basis for the rest of your post except the bit below.

The court decision was made in 2005. Not exactly crunch time for a product that came out in early 2007.

Given the dev time of Vista, do you really think they should have been sweating the small stuff?

Score: 0

By Ethelred

posted May 24, 2008 - 1:56 AM

"The "issue" in that sentence being the FCC decision, not the detection in Vista"

Well thats different. Perhaps if you had said so in the first place. Not that Pidiot would have changed his post. Of course its still not quite right. It wasn't the FCC's decision, it was a court decision. Yes I am a pedant, not to be confused with pederast.

Yes MS should sweat the small stuff. I know they can't do it all though. Its just not possible to fully debug any modern program.

However they did say they are trying to get the broadcasters to change. That has got to be more time consuming than changing the code.

Of course those are entirely different kinds of personnel and priorities must depend on the usefulness of the people involved. Hmmm programmer, publicity flac, business major, two are a dime a dozen and the other is in short supply. O.K. that makes sense.

Score: 0

By techdawg667

posted May 20, 2008 - 12:33 AM

I read somewhere that the DRM wasn't even supposed to go into effect until 2010!

Score: 0

By testman

posted May 20, 2008 - 5:23 AM

That was for Blu-ray and HD DVD discs.

Score: 0

By Anastasia2007

posted May 19, 2008 - 2:26 PM

I love Vista Media Center. I have all my rooms hooked up in blazing HD via multiple Xbox 360's.

It is quite nice actually. You could always download American Gladiator and it would play fine without commercials...

I'm sure you haven't tried it and will maintain that bias. But, laugh all you want, nobody likes the dork in the corner anyways.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 19, 2008 - 2:41 PM

I'm sure you haven't tried it and will maintain that bias.

QFT

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted May 19, 2008 - 2:35 PM

Ha, you got that right.
Poor poor el dingo.

Vista Media Center is nice. My cousin uses it all the time to record his shows and loves it.

Score: 0

Nov 21 - 9:29 PM ET Hurd's the word in Ballmer's e-mail nightmares

Nov 21 - 6:51 PM ET Coalition urges better laws for e-mail and cell phone privacy

Nov 21 - 6:42 PM ET How is Internet advertising faring in this bad economy?

Nov 21 - 6:15 PM ET From out of the Amazon Cloud, an AWS winner emerges

Nov 21 - 5:20 PM ET Mufin music finder enters public beta, adds widgets

Nov 21 - 5:01 PM ET Google launches its SearchWiki semantics plug-in

Nov 21 - 4:57 PM ET Asus previews a slimmer, less costly Eee PC

Nov 21 - 4:32 PM ET New Adobe Media Player ushers in AIR 1.5

Nov 21 - 2:11 PM ET AT&T to add Pantech's low-cost C630 phone to 3G lineup

Nov 21 - 1:11 PM ET iPhone gets firmware 2.2 update