# Time Warner & CCI protection byte



## jbaum (Jul 23, 2002)

I found in the last 48 hours Time Warner in NYC has set CCI protection byte for broadcast channels(CBS, NBC, ABC). 

So, I've lost the ability to download shows to my ipad, which I use traveling.

Any suggestions? 

Clearly calling Time Warner's customer service number is getting me nowhere.


----------



## Smirks (Oct 7, 2002)

jbaum said:


> I found in the last 48 hours Time Warner in NYC has set CCI protection byte for broadcast channels(CBS, NBC, ABC).
> 
> So, I've lost the ability to download shows to my ipad, which I use traveling.
> 
> ...


Are they allowed to do that? I think by law any channels you could get OTA had to be unprotected?

(Of course I could be making that up... )


----------



## CuriousMark (Jan 13, 2005)

jbaum said:


> I found in the last 48 hours Time Warner in NYC has set CCI protection byte for broadcast channels(CBS, NBC, ABC).
> 
> So, I've lost the ability to download shows to my ipad, which I use traveling.
> 
> ...


That is a violation of FCC regulations, if you complain to the FCC they will fix it.


----------



## Aero 1 (Aug 8, 2007)

FCC granted Cablevision in the NY market the ability to encrypt everything last year, and they have been doing it.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...tier-customers-now-need-cable-boxes/index.htm

i assume Time Warner just got the same waiver.

Its not a violation if the FCC waives it


----------



## Smirks (Oct 7, 2002)

Encryption != CCI


----------



## Aero 1 (Aug 8, 2007)

Smirks said:


> Encryption != CCI


TW probably took it too far, like they do everything. encrypting everything for years and blaming the content holders. This allows them to encrypt and in their minds, also disable transfers.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

Aero 1 said:


> TW probably took it too far, like they do everything. encrypting everything for years and blaming the content holders. This allows them to encrypt and in their minds, also disable transfers.


Most cable providers have been encrypting most channels for a long time. Encryption and copy protection have absolutely nothing to do with one another.


----------



## Aero 1 (Aug 8, 2007)

lpwcomp said:


> Most cable providers have been encrypting most channels for a long time. Encryption and copy protection have absolutely nothing to do with one another.


i understand that, i am just speculating.

Most cable companies encrypt *most *channels? where is the proof of that? out of the top 5, TW is the only one that flags *most *channels. verizon, cablevision, comcast, cox (not to sure about them) do not encrypt every single channel like TW does.

again, i know the difference, so i was just speculating because TW is the ONLY MAJOR provider that has been discussed on this board that encrypts EVERYTHING. My speculation is that since they encrypt EVERYTHING, they took it too far in the NY market.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

Aero 1 said:


> iMost cable companies encrypt *most *channels? where is the proof of that? out of the top 5, TW is the only one that flags *most *channels. verizon, cablevision, comcast, cox (not to sure about them) do not encrypt every single channel like TW does.


You say you understand the difference between encryption and copy protection and yet by this statement you show that you don't. A channel can be copy protected w/o being encrypted and encrypted w/o being copy protected. I assure you that Comcast has for years encrypted almost every channel and has received a waiver to encrypt *every* channel, including locals, using a ridiculous claim of widespread "theft of service" as justification. In reality (at least IMHO), they just want to be able to charge for every piece of equipment attached to the cable. They have not implemented that yet, at least not here, so the locals are still "Clear QAM", but when they do, no more connecting your digital TV directly to the cable.


----------



## Aero 1 (Aug 8, 2007)

lpwcomp said:


> You say you understand the difference between encryption and copy protection and yet by this statement you show that you don't. A channel can be copy protected w/o being encrypted and encrypted w/o being copy protected. I assure you that Comcast has for years encrypted almost every channel and has received a waiver to encrypt *every* channel, including locals, using a ridiculous claim of widespread "theft of service" as justification. In reality (at least IMHO), they just want to be able to charge for every piece of equipment attached to the cable. They have not implemented that yet, at least not here, so the locals are still "Clear QAM", but when they do, no more connecting your digital TV directly to the cable.


that was my mistake, im all over the place today. ill try to clarify my mere speculation: TW probably went overboard and encrypted and flagged the OTA channels after they took them out of the clear due to the cablevision precedent. Since they already flagged every channel except OTA, they went ahead with their over reaching.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

Aero 1 said:


> that was my mistake, im all over the place today. ill try to clarify my mere speculation: TW probably went overboard and encrypted and flagged the OTA channels after they took them out of the clear due to the cablevision precedent. Since they already flagged every channel except OTA, they went ahead with their over reaching.


You may be right, but I suspect it's more likely due to laziness/incompetence. Whatever encryption process they employ probably also sets the CCI to "Copy Once".

This could *possibly* result in a good thing for TWC customers with TiVos. If they are _*forced*_ to separate the two, they may cease setting the CCI for everything and only do it for channels where the content provider has requested it. Unfortunately, the more likely scenario is that they will obfuscate and delay, even if you assume that the FCC takes action at all.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

Encryption is why you have to use a cable card, and they can do that, both technically and legally, to everything they send down the line non-analog.

Setting the anti-copy bit can be done on a digital signal, encrypted or not, but they aren't supposed to be allowed to do it to the broadcast channels they retransmit, so sic the FCC on them.

For channels like TNT, USA, etc., you're out of luck.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

unitron said:


> Encryption is why you have to use a cable card, and they can do that, both technically and legally, to everything they send down the line non-analog.


Actually, they need to an FCC waiver to encrypt locals.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

lpwcomp said:


> Actually, they need to an FCC waiver to encrypt locals.


I think the FCC changed the rules so that if all the channels are digital, and there is no analog simulcasting going on, then they're allowed to encrypt everything without a waiver.


----------



## jbaum (Jul 23, 2002)

After calls with Time Warner, getting nowhere, I filed a compliant with the FCC.


----------



## craigf (Oct 30, 2002)

TWC here in LA put copy never setting on a subscription channel which wouldn't allow a recording. I called them to no avail. They blamed the programmer. I ended up calling the programmer directly and told them that I had been a long time subscriber and was canceling because of "their" new policy. Obviously, this had been a lie. They ended up calling TWC and got the CCI bit adjusted.


----------



## jbaum (Jul 23, 2002)

craigf said:


> TWC here in LA put copy never setting on a subscription channel which wouldn't allow a recording. I called them to no avail. They blamed the programmer. I ended up calling the programmer directly and told them that I had been a long time subscriber and was canceling because of "their" new policy. Obviously, this had been a lie. They ended up calling TWC and got the CCI bit adjusted.


Interesting, Time Warner told me that it was the networks. I gave up at the point as I knew that wasn't true. Do you think I can complain to the network or the local affiliate?


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

jbaum said:


> Interesting, Time Warner told me that it was the networks. I gave up at the point as I knew that wasn't true. Do you think I can complain to the network or the local affiliate?


FCC.


----------



## NotNowChief (Mar 29, 2012)

I've been saying this for years. I was finally able to get FiOS last year and couldn't order it fast enough to get away from TWCNYC. At the time I was using two TiVo HDs, and I couldn't even use "Multi-Room Viewing" for the local channels because they had everything locked down. Yes, Fox, ABC, CBS, NBC, even PBS. 

Everyone always says "they can't do that!". Well, they did, they continue to do so, and there is nothing that anyone is going to do about it because they are one of the most atrocious companies I have ever had to deal with.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Edit: Maybe it was just my borough that had everything locked down for so long, so I'm surprised to hear that you were just subjected to this recently.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

lpwcomp said:


> FCC.


Might not do any good with the government being shutdown. 
No one will be there to respond.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

steve614 said:


> Might not do any good with the government being shutdown.
> No one will be there to respond.


That occurred to me but the networks and affiliates couldn't care less.


----------

