# how to transfer copyrighted video to computer



## slyone (Jul 22, 2005)

I haven't used this in a while but I transfer stuff to laptop then over to Ipod. I looked today and everything is copyrighted so it won't transfer(using I-Tunes). what up brother....


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

Not exactly a new topic, see this thread:

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=451107

Also search on key words "copy protection" -- many threads on this topic. It's a fact of digital cable, used by a growing number of cable systems.


----------



## ajwees41 (May 7, 2006)

I don't think you can.


----------



## slyone (Jul 22, 2005)

man that sucks! I'm on Time Warner upstate NY.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

There's a TiVo support page on the issue. TiVo is just following the rules set forth in the DFAST and CableCARD licensing agreements which they had to sign in order to manufacture products with CableCARD interfaces.


----------



## jcthorne (Jan 28, 2002)

There are two ways around the problem and one permanent solution.

The Tivo HD is hackable to get around it. Not for discussion here but it exists.

2nd method involves an HD tuner card with analog component video inputs, essentially recording the tivo output, in real time.

The permanent solution is to tell Time Warner what you think of thier heavy hand in copy protection of media you paid for use of and leave. Cut the cord. I did, and if many more do, they will change thier ways or die.


----------



## Chris Gerhard (Apr 27, 2002)

jcthorne said:


> There are two ways around the problem and one permanent solution.
> 
> The Tivo HD is hackable to get around it. Not for discussion here but it exists.
> 
> ...


How is this the fault of TW? If Fox (or any other rights owner) requires copy protection, should TW just thumb their nose at them and allow free copying? It seems to me anybody owning rights to programming should have the right to use whatever legal security measures they deem fit and as consumers we have the right to not purchase the programming. Technology exists and laws permit its use and I sure don't see how using it will cause TW to die, more likely not using it will. I am OTA and streaming only but I sure have no complaints with TiVo or any cable company for using or honoring copy protection when it is appropriate and legal and required by the rights owner.

The best business decision may be to just allow free copying and transfer among various devices but it isn't my decision to make, it is the company owning the rights to the property that should get to make those decisions.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

Only problem with that, TW liberally applies the copy protection even if the content owner doesn't request it.
I'd bet 80% of the channels don't request that their programming be copy protected.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

jcthorne said:


> ....... The permanent solution is to tell Time Warner what you think of thier heavy hand in copy protection of media you paid for use of and leave. Cut the cord. I did, and if many more do, they will change thier ways or die.


First, it isn't just TWC doing this although they are the worst.

More important, this is no solution at all. TiVo digital cable subscribers are less than 1% of their digital customers and realistically you're never going to get most of them to cut the cord, i.e., there is no leverage.

There is a major thread buried on this forum somewhere that involved a letter-writing (actually email writing) campaign on this. All it netted was legalese from TWC saying in essence: it's legal for us to do this -- we're doing it -- and we're not telling you whether it's because our programmers require it. <insert cartoon>beating a dead horse</insert cartoon>.


----------



## en sabur nur (Oct 30, 2007)

Use the second method suggested:

2nd method involves an HD tuner card with analog component video inputs, essentially recording the tivo output, in real time.

The only way to LEGALLY achieve the result you want. No letter-writing needed.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

en sabur nur said:


> Use the second method suggested:
> 
> 2nd method involves an HD tuner card with analog component video inputs, essentially recording the tivo output, in real time.
> 
> The only way to LEGALLY achieve the result you want. No letter-writing needed.


By CableCARD licensing TiVo is required to apply analog copy control signals to analog video output; the DMCA requires recording equipment to recognize and obey those signals.


----------



## JoeTaxpayer (Dec 23, 2008)

Chris Gerhard said:


> How is this the fault of TW? If Fox (or any other rights owner) requires copy protection, should TW just thumb their nose at them and allow free copying?


Most cable channels don't request protection. In fact, I have Comcast an nothing is protected. Friends who have HBO, or other pay channels say those channels are protected.

Fox is not the OP's issue, TW is.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

JoeTaxpayer said:


> Most cable channels don't request protection. In fact, I have Comcast an nothing is protected. Friends who have HBO, or other pay channels say those channels are protected.


When people complained to Comcast about wanton channel protection early in the post digital-cable-agreement era, Comcast enacted a corporate-wide policy of only applying copy-one-gen protection to channels whose providers explicitly required it. Of course, HBO is one such channel.

If you ask me, the FCC should require a filed request for copy protection from the programming provider prior to the cable companies being allowed to apply the codes.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

jcthorne said:


> The Tivo HD is hackable to get around it. Not for discussion here but it exists.


I thought this only worked with the original TiVo Series 3 (model TCD648250), not the TiVo HD.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

Chris Gerhard said:


> How is this the fault of TW? If Fox (or any other rights owner) requires copy protection, should TW just thumb their nose at them and allow free copying? It seems to me anybody owning rights to programming should have the right to use whatever legal security measures they deem fit and as consumers we have the right to not purchase the programming. Technology exists and laws permit its use and I sure don't see how using it will cause TW to die, more likely not using it will. I am OTA and streaming only but I sure have no complaints with TiVo or any cable company for using or honoring copy protection when it is appropriate and legal and required by the rights owner.
> 
> The best business decision may be to just allow free copying and transfer among various devices but it isn't my decision to make, it is the company owning the rights to the property that should get to make those decisions.


Do any content owners request copy protection? Verizon FIOS doesn't protect anything. Are they just ignoring the content owners? Somehow I think they are not and the content owners simply aren't requesting copy protection. Given the fact that some cable companies copy protect nearly every channel, I am doubtful of your claims.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

mikeyts said:


> If you ask me, the FCC should require a filed request for copy protection from the programming provider prior to the cable companies being allowed to apply the codes.


AMEN! Preach on, brotha!


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

aadam101 said:


> Do any content owners request copy protection? Verizon FIOS doesn't protect anything. Are they just ignoring the content owners? Somehow I think they are not and the content owners simply aren't requesting copy protection. Given the fact that some cable companies copy protect nearly every channel, I am doubtful of your claims.


I believe that the premium subscription channels do. There's a FAQ entry on HBO's site about their use of CGMS-A analog output protection and I assume that their attitude is the same about their digital content. I'd be surprised if the others didn't have similar policies.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Chris Gerhard said:


> How is this the fault of TW?


It is at least *partly* TW's fault since they apparently copy protect many channels that are not required to be copy protected by the copyright owners (i.e. the channels themselves).

I don't have a citation, but I think there was a discussion here years ago where someone actually got a channel to officially say that they didn't want copy protection. I don't remember what became of it.


----------



## JoeTaxpayer (Dec 23, 2008)

mikeyts said:


> If you ask me, the FCC should require a filed request for copy protection from the programming provider prior to the cable companies being allowed to apply the codes.


Can't disagree with that. Excellent suggestion.


----------



## takeshi (Jul 22, 2010)

Chris Gerhard said:


> How is this the fault of TW? If Fox (or any other rights owner) requires copy protection, should TW just thumb their nose at them and allow free copying?


As pointed out in other posts in this thread: not all channels do yet TW has the flag (allegedly) enabled on all channels. If Fox does require it then, yes, TW should comply. The key word is if. If Fox doesn't then TW shouldn't.

It's certainly possible that TW is like Comcast, only enabling the flag for providers like HBO that specify it. However, it seems unlikely that the OP would happen to only record shows with the flag enabled. Certainly possible...


----------



## JoeTaxpayer (Dec 23, 2008)

takeshi said:


> If Fox does require it then, yes, TW should comply. The key word is if. If Fox doesn't then TW shouldn't.


Fox was just an example by another poster, the OP said "all channels." 
That was the tip-off that TW was doing something wrong.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

I used to know the FCC regs around the use of copy protection backwards and forwards but not so much anymore. I forget where the list of rules is for this but I think that cable providers aren't allowed to mark any rebroadcast of over-the-air television as copy protected. They can only use "Copy Never" protection of pay-per-view and VOD can apply "Copy One Generation" protection to everything else.

EDIT: I found the relevant regs: Code of Federal Regulations Title 47, Part 76.1904: Encoding rules for defined business models.


----------



## thomb (Jan 22, 2008)

lpwcomp said:


> I thought this only worked with the original TiVo Series 3 (model TCD648250), not the TiVo HD.


The TiVo HD is also able to be hacked. Works great to allow multi-room viewing.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

mikeyts said:


> I believe that the premium subscription channels do. There's a FAQ entry on HBO's site about their use of CGMS-A analog output protection and I assume that their attitude is the same about their digital content. I'd be surprised if the others didn't have similar policies.


So is Verizon FIOS just ignoring them? I would think the premium channels would have a problem with that.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

aadam101 said:


> So is Verizon FIOS just ignoring them? I would think the premium channels would have a problem with that.


I have no idea what the deal is with FiOS having everything copyable. FiOS represents 4 million of 58 million cable video customers nationwide plus who knows how many satellite customers. Maybe they're just letting them slide?


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

mikeyts said:


> I have no idea what the deal is with FiOS having everything copyable. FiOS represents 4 million of 58 million cable video customers nationwide plus who knows how many satellite customers. Maybe they're just letting them slide?


Is FiOS particularly affiliated with any content providers, the way a company descended from Time Magazine and Warner Brothers Studios could be said to be?


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

mikeyts said:


> I have no idea what the deal is with FiOS having everything copyable. FiOS represents 4 million of 58 million cable video customers nationwide plus who knows how many satellite customers. Maybe they're just letting them slide?


The deal is that Verizon isn't a paranoid TWC, at least IMO.
I also see a lot of things Verizon does in FiOS because they're "the new kid" that the old CableCOs don't, like not insisting on pairing CableCARDs until recently, and even then making it painless.

Verizon doesn't have that monopoly mentality in FiOS, they know they're a choice, whereas the old school cable companies feel that you're lucky to have them around. It's amusing because it's exactly the opposite with Comcast and their phone service vs Verizon and in that instance Verizon is the bad egg.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

dianebrat said:


> The deal is that Verizon isn't a paranoid TWC, at least IMO.


The question is not whether Verizon has less restrictive policies than TWC, but that, if HBO is requesting copy protection for their channels, which they're at rights to do, why is Verizon non-compliant with that request? It's probable that the FCC doesn't require that Verizon comply, but you'd think that HBO's carriage agreements with Verizon would.

Comcast adopted a national policy of not copy protecting anything except those channels whose providers requested it. Does anyone here with Comcast have any copy protected channels, and if so, which ones?


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

mikeyts said:


> The question is not whether Verizon has less restrictive policies than TWC, but that, if HBO is requesting copy protection for their channels, which they're at rights to do, why is Verizon non-compliant with that request? It's probable that the FCC doesn't require that Verizon comply, but you'd think that HBO's carriage agreements with Verizon would.
> 
> Comcast adopted a national policy of not copy protecting anything except those channels whose providers requested it. Does anyone here with Comcast have any copy protected channels, and if so, which ones?


We aren't talking about slapping the anti-copy bit on premium channels like HBO but on stuff like the locals (NBC, ABC, etc) and on stuff full of commercials like TNT and USA.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Chris Gerhard said:


> How is this the fault of TW?


It is entirely their prerogative.



Chris Gerhard said:


> If Fox (or any other rights owner) requires copy protection


If you mean Fox broadcasting, they cannot. By law, no OTA channel can be copy protected.



Chris Gerhard said:


> should TW just thumb their nose at them and allow free copying?


By law they are perfectly free to do so, just like Verizon, Grande, and quite a few others do. Indeed, TWC didn't start copy protecting content until 2007.



Chris Gerhard said:


> It seems to me anybody owning rights to programming should have the right to use whatever legal security measures they deem fit


It doesn't matter what seems right or wrong to you, the law says otherwise.



Chris Gerhard said:


> I am OTA and streaming only but I sure have no complaints with TiVo or any cable company for using or honoring copy protection when it is appropriate and legal and required by the rights owner.


Again, by law, this is not the case. In any case, however, a number of broadcasters have publicly decreed they do not care to have their content protected, and the one (HDNet and HDNet Movies) who actually made a lack of copy protection a requirement of the contract was promptly dropped by TWC. What does that tell you?



Chris Gerhard said:


> The best business decision may be to just allow free copying and transfer among various devices but it isn't my decision to make, it is the company owning the rights to the property that should get to make those decisions.


Bull pookey. The consumer has paid for the use of those products, and they should have the right to use them as they please, so long as they do not distribute or sell copies of the content or publicly display them without permission. It should be absolutely no business whatsoever of anyone, least of all a giant corporation, what someone does in the privacy of their own homes.

The bottom line here, though is in spite of what could, should or would be, the CATV company has 100% authority to set the CCI byte to any value below 0x03 for any regular broadcast channel other than a local broadcast channel. All local broadcast channels must be 0x00 (copy freely).


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

lrhorer said:


> ... In any case, however, a number of broadcasters have publicly decreed they do not care to have their content protected, and the one (HDNet and HDNet Movies) who actually made a lack of copy protection a requirement of the contract was promptly dropped by TWC. What does that tell you?
> ...


That it sucks that my only cable choice is Time-Warner, and I should expect them to screw me every chance they get.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

unitron said:


> We aren't talking about slapping the anti-copy bit on premium channels like HBO but on stuff like the locals (NBC, ABC, etc) and on stuff full of commercials like TNT and USA.


Again, by law, the locals cannot be copy protected. The rest can, including HBO, Showtime, etc. They also can choose to not protect them, as they see fit, including HBO, Showtime, etc. Of course, the content providers can make it a part of the contract the CATV provider must protect the content or they will not sell it to the CATV company, but a number of those content providers have publicly stated they are not supportive of and definitely not demanding the protection. This rings true since most companies do not employ copy protection.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

unitron said:


> That it sucks that my only cable choice is Time-Warner, and I should expect them to screw me every chance they get.


So do something about it. Or do you have a Premier?


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

mikeyts said:


> Comcast enacted a corporate-wide policy of only applying copy-one-gen protection to channels whose providers explicitly required it.


That would be "request", not "require". Obviously the revenue stream is more important to them than copy protection, or else their contract would demand it, in which case Verizon et al would either copy protect HBO or else not carry it. Neither is the case, to my understanding.



mikeyts said:


> Of course, HBO is one such channel.


And HBO is ultimately owned by, guess who, Time Warner. Does anyone sense a common theme, here?



mikeyts said:


> If you ask me, the FCC should require a filed request for copy protection from the programming provider prior to the cable companies being allowed to apply the codes.


If you ask me, they should not be allowed to apply the codes, period.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

lrhorer said:


> So do something about it. Or do you have a Premier?


Discontinuing this household's cable subscription it not an option at present.

EVerything I've heard so far has convinced me I do not want a Premiere.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

unitron said:


> Discontinuing this household's cable subscription it not an option at present.


I'm not suggesting it.



unitron said:


> EVerything I've heard so far has convinced me I do not want a Premiere.


In which case you can do something about it without cancelling your cable subscription.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

lrhorer said:


> If you ask me, they should not be allowed to apply the codes, period.


The entire system of copy protection was included in the cable/OEM agreement and thereafter codified into the regulations at the insistence of the cable providers, whose content providers wanted it as a condition for releasing their more "high value" content to digital cable. The FCC felt that the content providers feeling safe to release such content was important to the success of the digital transition.

Why the FCC would place the decision as to whether to copy one gen on any non-ota-rebroadcast content in the hands of the cable service providers is beyond me.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

lrhorer said:


> I'm not suggesting it.
> 
> In which case you can do something about it without cancelling your cable subscription.


Would this involve getting a great DEAL on how my S3 processes certain DATA here in my community just down the road from a military BASE?

Should I ask the guy with the Greek name to the prom?


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

mikeyts said:


> The entire system of copy protection was included in the cable/OEM agreement and thereafter codified into the regulations at the insistence of the cable providers, whose content providers wanted it as a condition for releasing their more "high value" content to digital cable. The FCC felt that the content providers feeling safe to release such content was important to the success of the digital transition.


IOW, tons of bribes changed hands, and the Bureau of Unintended Consequences (AKA: the FCC) decided it would be OK to allow the CATV companies to create and set a CCI byte on all digital bitstreams except those from OTA sources.



mikeyts said:


> Why the FCC would place the decision as to whether to copy one gen on any non-ota-rebroadcast content in the hands of the cable service providers is beyond me.


Well, I think there were several reasons.

1. Since coding is often done at the CATV modulator, the physical responsibility frequently would have to lie with the CATV company in the most common case. Placing logical responsibility with the same organization actually makes some sense. Since they are going to have to be the ones to throw the switch, having them decide whether or not to throw the switch simplifies matters.

2. During the development of CableLabs and separable security, the content providers were fairly silent, so the FCC didn't really include them in the control structure. Indeed, even today, the content providers are generally not very concerned about the matter. In short, most don't really care if their content is copied. It's the MPAA, more than anything else, that wants their material protected, and they really never were part of the equation as far as the FCC is concerned. Indeed, the FCC has no control over or concern with the MPAA. That meant the MPAA had to come in the back door, and since they collectively owned a big chunk of the members of CableLabs, they did.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

unitron said:


> Would this involve getting a great DEAL on how my S3 processes certain DATA here in my community just down the road from a military BASE?
> 
> Should I ask the guy with the Greek name to the prom?


Well, personally, I would ask his daughter, but you are certainly welcome to HACK your way to his door and let the CHIPS fall where they may. He has a CHAIN around his girl's waist, but I TRUST I could break it.


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

I'm also affected by this in upstate New York. I've asked TW about it in the past and they've blatantly lied saying they only apply the flag to channels that request it.

Bull.

They block EVERY SINGLE CHANNEL on my system except the local broadcast networks (which they legally cannot). They even block one local broadcast network's secondary digital channel. I'm not sure if they're legally allowed to do that. Anyone know?

I'd love to blow them in for that and at least get them to release their lock on that one channel.

They even block QVC and C-Span... channels that I'm 99.99% positive did not request their content blocked.

My Premier is 91% full and I tried to off-load some content temporarily to my computer this afternoon and only 2 hours of content was able to be moved.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

cwoody222 said:


> I'm also affected by this in upstate New York. I've asked TW about it in the past and they've blatantly lied saying they only apply the flag to channels that request it.
> 
> ...
> 
> My Premier is 91% full and I tried to off-load some content temporarily to my computer this afternoon and only 2 hours of content was able to be moved.


That is very near the top or at the top of the list of reasons I do not recommend the Premier. Shy of using an external capture device, you're pretty much stuck.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> That is very near the top or at the top of the list of reasons I do not recommend the Premier. Shy of using an external capture device, you're pretty much stuck.


I've never had this issue with any of my Premieres. Whether 100% full, 0% full, or 50% full it doesn't matter. I can transfer my content from the premieres without issue.

Of course the flag issue has nothig to do with the premiere. Whether using an S3 or S4 if transfer is prohibited, you won't be able to transfer it from the box.


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

Right. It has nothing to do with the Premiere. My Series3 did the same thing.

It also has nothing to do with the fact that my Premiere is almost full. That's just the reason I WANTED to off-load some shows (to clear up some space).


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> I've never had this issue with any of my Premieres. Whether 100% full, 0% full, or 50% full it doesn't matter. I can transfer my content from the premieres without issue.


Bully for you. Many of us are not so lucky, and until a couple of weeks ago that included me. It could turn around again for either or both of us tomorrow.



aaronwt said:


> Of course the flag issue has nothig to do with the premiere.


There is no "of course" about it. It has a great deal to do with the Premier.



aaronwt said:


> Whether using an S3 or S4 if transfer is prohibited, you won't be able to transfer it from the box.


Don't tell my Tivos that. They have transferred well over 2000 programs, essentially all of them copy protected. Of course, now that I have dropped TWC, that aspect is a moot point for me, because at least for the moment my CATV provider does not copy protect anything, but if and when they do, it won't affect my S3s or my THD. It will affect the "free" Premier they gave me.

The bottom line here is if the OP had an S3 or THD TiVo, there is something rather straightforward he could do to his Tivo to alleviate his situation. Since he has a Premier, there isn't.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

cwoody222 said:


> Right. It has nothing to do with the Premiere. My Series3 did the same thing.


Yours did. Mine don't, nor does anyone else's who cares to do something about it. It has everything to do with the Premier, because no matter how much one cares about it, with the Premier there is nothng to be done about it, at least not at this time.



cwoody222 said:


> It also has nothing to do with the fact that my Premiere is almost full. That's just the reason I WANTED to off-load some shows (to clear up some space).


I never said it did. Full or empty, no premier can transfer copy protected content. This is not the case for all S3 machines, which is, I repeat, one reason among several I do not recommend the Premier.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

lpwcomp said:


> I thought this only worked with the original TiVo Series 3 (model TCD648250), not the TiVo HD.


No. The THD uses a different PROM with slightly different code on it, but it is still fundamentally the same chain of trust. The THD also requires 64 bit software for some applications, while the S3 can only handle 32 bit, but that is merely a compilation issue.

If you mosey on over to the "other" TiVo forum, look for my handle there, and follow the link in my tagline, you will see a script I wrote that handles the difference automatically.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

lrhorer said:


> ........The bottom line here is if the OP had an S3 or THD TiVo, there is something rather straightforward he could do to his Tivo to alleviate his situation........


"Rather straightforward" ?? Now you're just braggin' For most TiVo owners relocating their home to a cable system that doesn't copy protect would be more straightforward than what you have in mind.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

dlfl said:


> "Rather straightforward" ?? Now you're just braggin' For most TiVo owners relocating their home to a cable system that doesn't copy protect would be more straightforward than what you have in mind.


That is straightforward, too, although a great deal more expensive and vastly more of a PITA. The point is, no matter how many contortions one tries, with the Premier it can't be done. A fair number of very talented people have gone to great lengths and quite a bit of expense for many months to try with no success. By comparison, half an hour with a soldering iron and less than ten minutes with a PC gets the desired result on an S3. If the owner himself does not have the fairly moderate skills required, it's not hard to find someone who does.

Oh, and just BTW, I did just "relocate my home to a cable system that does not copy protect", which is to say I called Grande, ordered an install, called TWC, and ordered a disconnect. Every single step of the process was far more tedious, difficult, and often more expensive than modifying my TiVos. If Grande were not less expensive and if TWCs customer service had not ticked me off one too many times, I never would have attempted it.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

lpwcomp said:


> I thought this only worked with the original TiVo Series 3 (model TCD648250), not the TiVo HD.


I think the dividing line that falls between the orginal S3 and the HD/HD XL is the orig S3 is the last one where you can move the crypto chip (and thereby move the TSN) to another of the same model motherboard.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> I've never had this issue with any of my Premieres. Whether 100% full, 0% full, or 50% full it doesn't matter. I can transfer my content from the premieres without issue.


Well, you may have spoken too soon:

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=489184

I don't know if you have FIOS, or not, but if FIOS is joining the bandwagon, how long will it be before everyone jumps on?


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

unitron said:


> I think the dividing line that falls between the orginal S3 and the HD/HD XL is the orig S3 is the last one where you can move the crypto chip (and thereby move the TSN) to another of the same model motherboard.


That is correct. The crypto chip does not enforce the chain of trust, though.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

lrhorer said:


> That is correct. The crypto chip does not enforce the chain of trust, though.


No, but it does a darn fine job of "you ain't saving the shows on this hard drive without hooking it to the motherboard it was on when the shows were recorded", and of "you ain't got no lifetime sub no more" unless you fool it by moving the crypto chip


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

lrhorer said:


> Well, you may have spoken too soon:
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=489184
> 
> I don't know if you have FIOS, or not, but if FIOS is joining the bandwagon, how long will it be before everyone jumps on?


It's interesting that Verizon's letter says:


> We also would like to inform you that on or after July 31, 2012, Verizon will begin to implement the requirements of certain premium channels (which requirements are authorized by the Federal Communications Commission), that prohibit the copying of recorded content to more than one recorder (such as a DVR or mobile device).
> This may affect the functioning of some multi-room DVRs. Recent software updates from the manufacturers of these devices may provide options, such as streaming, that preserve multi-room functionality for affected channels.


What interests me is "(which requirements are authorized by the Federal Communications Commission)". Other than VOD and pay-per-view, I don't know where FCC regs enforce content provider "requirements" of copy protection.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> Well, you may have spoken too soon:
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=489184
> 
> I don't know if you have FIOS, or not, but if FIOS is joining the bandwagon, how long will it be before everyone jumps on?


Yes I have FiOS. Supposedly this will affect some of the Premium channels.
Fortunately I don't archive my content as much as I used to. Since getting a couple of the Elites with 2TB of storage each I haven't offloaded much content. I just keep it on the box and stream it to another location. Plus so much more content is available in good audio and video quality from legal online sources now. Not like it used to be in the old days.

Sent from my HTC ReZound using Forum Runner


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

dlfl said:


> "Rather straightforward" ?? Now you're just braggin' For most TiVo owners relocating their home to a cable system that doesn't copy protect would be more straightforward than what you have in mind.





lrhorer said:


> ..... half an hour with a soldering iron and less than ten minutes with a PC gets the desired result on an S3. If the owner himself does not have the fairly moderate skills required, it's not hard to find someone who does. ......


I stick by my original statement above. I invite others to review the "other" forum and do their own assessment of how "straightforward" it is, or how easy it would be to find someone to do it for them.

BTW, congratulations on dumping TWC. I wish I had Verizon FIOS as an option. Copy protection is a minor irritation compared to the other issues I have with TWC.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

dlfl said:


> I stick by my original statement above. I invite others to review the "other" forum and do their own assessment of how "straightforward" it is, or how easy it would be to find someone to do it for them.


The "fellow with the Greek name" offers to swap out the PROM for a moderate fee to all comers. I'd say that is pretty easy. People who work in the electronics industry are not hard by which to come, either. Indeed, my housekeeper, who is quite computer illiterate, would have no problem de-soldering and re-soldering a PROM. She worked for Fairchild for several years soldering components to boards. Finding someone who knows a little Linux is not difficult, either, and it doesn't take much. 'Nothing fancy, at all. It took me a lot less time to write the script I published than it did to get everything transferred to the new account. As a matter of fact, I had to call in again just an hour or so ago, because they still did not have my account set up correctly.



dlfl said:


> BTW, congratulations on dumping TWC. I wish I had Verizon FIOS as an option. Copy protection is a minor irritation compared to the other issues I have with TWC.


My only major problems with them were the cost of their service and their lousy customer service. The new company's internet service is much faster, and their prices are considerably lower, though. Their customer service also leaves much to be desired, but it is light years ahead of TWC. I will miss some of the channels I will not be able to get with the new provider, though. They have far fewer HD offerings, and they are missing a handful of terrific channels (like MGM HD) outright.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

lrhorer said:


> ...... People who work in the electronics industry are not hard by which to come, either. Indeed, my housekeeper, who is quite computer illiterate, would have no problem de-soldering and re-soldering a PROM. .......


Darn! Not one of my housekeepers has such skills!


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

mikeyts said:


> What interests me is "(which requirements are authorized by the Federal Communications Commission)". Other than VOD and pay-per-view, I don't know where FCC regs enforce content provider "requirements" of copy protection.


Well, it doesn't say the FCC makes the requirements. Its says the FCC authorizes them to make the demands. In fact, of course, the FCC simply does not prohibit such a requirement, which in turn means making such a requirement part of a contract is not illegal.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

lrhorer said:


> ..... The "fellow with the Greek name" offers to swap out the PROM for a moderate fee to all comers. I'd say that is pretty easy. ........


From the Greek's thread it isn't clear he is still doing this. The last few posts are by customers threatening to dispute his paypal charges because he hasn't delivered or communicated.

I don't see any signs of other people doing this either. Methinks thou doest color the situation a little too rosy!


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

lrhorer: I have no idea if you're talking about modifying your Series3 or what but a stock model Series3 or HD cannot transfer content marked 0x02, just like a Premiere.

It sounds like you're talking about some hack that was possible with the S3/HD and not possible with the Premiere.

Great. A fantastic solution for .01% of TiVo users.

I'm talking about the rest of us who take the thing out of the box, plug it in, and use it. In that case, the S3/HD and Premiere are identical to how they handle 0x02 protected content.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> Well, you may have spoken too soon:
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=489184
> 
> I don't know if you have FIOS, or not, but if FIOS is joining the bandwagon, how long will it be before everyone jumps on?


Except there's a real world difference between the way Comcast applies their flags and the way TWC does, one I can live with, the other I can not.


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

dianebrat said:


> Except there's a real world difference between the way Comcast applies their flags and the way TWC does, one I can live with, the other I can not.


Exactly. I have zero problem with my cable company blocking channels when the channel themselves requested it.

TW just blocks everything 'cause they can. :down:


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

lrhorer said:


> Well, it doesn't say the FCC makes the requirements. Its says the FCC authorizes them to make the demands. In fact, of course, the FCC simply does not prohibit such a requirement, which in turn means making such a requirement part of a contract is not illegal.


Oh, I'm perfectly certain that it's legal for them to make it a carriage contract requirement. But I can't see where the FCC is involved (though they probably have some rules as to what a carriage contract cannot affect). Mentioning them seemed like Verizon trying to "hide behind the FCC's skirts", so to speak.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

mikeyts said:


> Oh, I'm perfectly certain that it's legal for them to make it a carriage contract requirement. But I can't see where the FCC is involved (though they probably have some rules as to what a carriage contract cannot affect). Mentioning them seemed like Verizon trying to "hide behind the FCC's skirts", so to speak.


Hey, that's what lawyers are for! TWC has emailed statements to those of us who raised the issue with them that were carefully worded so they could easily be misinterpreted as saying they copy protect because of programmer agreements. But upon careful reading all they say is that it's legal for them to copy protect.

Ah, being ingenuous! The next best thing to bald-faced lying! (Our TV sets will abound with blatant examples up til the November elections.)


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

cwoody222 said:


> lrhorer: I have no idea if you're talking about modifying your Series3 or what but a stock model Series3 or HD cannot transfer content marked 0x02, just like a Premiere.


The difference is, with the Premier, there is no other option.



cwoody222 said:


> It sounds like you're talking about some hack that was possible with the S3/HD and not possible with the Premiere.


*IS*, not was.



cwoody222 said:


> Great. A fantastic solution for .01% of TiVo users.


No, a fantastic solution for any S3 class owner that wants to make tremendously greater use of their TiVo than the stock TiVo. Want an S3 that is significantly faster than the Premier? No problem. Want to get rid of Pause Ads? Go for it. Want to enable pop-up caller ID on the TiVo? A mere bag of shells. Want to back up season passes to a PC hard drive? As easily done as said. Want to view and manipulate the guide data using tools like a spreadsheet or text editor? Easy as falling off a log. Put up custom text and / or graphics on the screen? Run an NTP server on the Tivo? Telnet? FTP? OpenVPN? Want to transfer copyrighted material? 100% of S3 / THD owners can do all of this and far, far more if they want. 0% of Premier users can.



cwoody222 said:


> I'm talking about the rest of us who take the thing out of the box, plug it in, and use it. In that case, the S3/HD and Premiere are identical to how they handle 0x02 protected content.


In which case you are also talking about people to whom this thread does not apply, not to mention ones who are willing to live with unacceptable limitations on equipment they paid for, but obviously are uninterested in actually owning.

What really flummoxes me is how people seem unable to understand the difference between what needs to be possible versus what they themselves want to do. I have absolutely no desire to strip off my shirt, paint my body, and show up at a football game in freezing weather. Neither, obviously, do 99.9999% of the people in the nation. It is exceedingly important, however, that no one try to limit the rights of each and every person to do precisely that should they so choose. I think it is an incredibly silly thing to do, if you ask me, but I will fight tooth and nail for the right of every American to make that choice themselves. I also am quite willing to fight for the (far less trivial, if you ask me) right to do as I see fit with any device which I own, provided of course it does not violate the rights of any other individual. It is also just as important to oppose the activities of giant corporations that seek to so limit the rights of the individual as it is to oppose a government that does so.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

cwoody222 said:


> Exactly. I have zero problem with my cable company blocking channels when the channel themselves requested it.


You really and truly don't mind paying hundreds of dollars a year for something and then having a wholesaler (not even the manufacturer!!) tell you what you can and cannot do with it? If so, I don't understand you, because that is utter bullcrap, and you are chugging it down like it is iced tea.

The content providers don't pay for that programming, you do. They just act as the middleman, passing the content on to you and taking a commission. Would you let a wholesale distributor of hand tools tell you what you can and cannot do with a drill you bought at Home Depot?


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

mikeyts said:


> Oh, I'm perfectly certain that it's legal for them to make it a carriage contract requirement. But I can't see where the FCC is involved (though they probably have some rules as to what a carriage contract cannot affect).


Yeah, specifically it cannot apply to any locally OTA broadcast channel. They also specifically allow much greater restrictions on VOD and IPPV content.



mikeyts said:


> Mentioning them seemed like Verizon trying to "hide behind the FCC's skirts", so to speak.


Oh, yeah. Certainly they are seeking to deflect any blame from themselves. It is the business equivalent of Political Correctness.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

dlfl said:


> Ah, being ingenuous! The next best thing to bald-faced lying!


Who says it is the next best? One of the slickest ways to lie is to tell the absolute truth, but do it in such a way that the listener is deliberately induced to infer something that is not true.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

dlfl said:


> From the Greek's thread it isn't clear he is still doing this. The last few posts are by customers threatening to dispute his paypal charges because he hasn't delivered or communicated.


He was in Poland until just recently. He just responded yesterday, apologizing for the silence. His PM notification mechanism was apparently broken. They recently upgraded the software on the website. That may have been part of the problem.



dlfl said:


> I don't see any signs of other people doing this either. Methinks thou doest color the situation a little too rosy!


There have been a couple doing it for pay, and quite a few have done it themselves. His diligence and fast response has pretty much driven any other wannabes out of the race, but if he were ever truly out for the count, I am sure one of the other members could be induced to pick it up.

Barring that and the owner having the relatively modest skills required for re-working small, medium pitch SMD devices, I submit a post on Craigslist or the bulletin board of any local college or tech school can roust up someone with more than sufficient skills to do the solder work, and someone who has a PROM programmer. Virtually anyone who works at an electronics repair shop should be able to do it, as well as any EE student and the majority of CS students. Heck, most people who work in a hobby shop or build radio controlled models could do it.

We're not talking about skills only a top notch veteran machinist would have, nor computing skills on a par with Linus Torvalds.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

cwoody222 said:


> They block EVERY SINGLE CHANNEL on my system except the local broadcast networks (which they legally cannot). They even block one local broadcast network's secondary digital channel. I'm not sure if they're legally allowed to do that. Anyone know?


So, you're reporting them to the FCC, right?

If you fight hard enough, you could even get other channels unlocked, with someone officially from that channel saying they don't want it blocked. A few others here have said they have succeeded in that.


----------



## Johncv (Jun 11, 2002)

cwoody222 said:


> Right. It has nothing to do with the Premiere. My Series3 did the same thing.
> 
> It also has nothing to do with the fact that my Premiere is almost full. That's just the reason I WANTED to off-load some shows (to clear up some space).


A novel suggestion why not just sit down and enjoy the show you recorded and the erase them to free up space in order to record other show to enjoy. 

The TiVo is NOT a long term storage device, it time shifting device.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

Johncv said:


> A novel suggestion why not just sit down and enjoy the show you recorded and the erase them to free up space in order to record other show to enjoy.
> 
> The TiVo is NOT a long term storage device, it time shifting device.


No one's talking about using TiVo as a long term storage device. They want to use storage devices on their PCs for that.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

Johncv said:


> A novel suggestion why not just sit down and enjoy the show you recorded and the erase them to free up space in order to record other show to enjoy.
> 
> The TiVo is NOT a long term storage device, it time shifting device.


Also, an issue is that without Streaming on S2, S3, and THD's, MRV doesn't work when shows are protected. For someone like me that pools the tuners of all the TiVos in the house it becomes an issue when I can't watch from any room I want, but am forced to be in another room that might be in use for other purposes.


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

Johncv said:


> A novel suggestion why not just sit down and enjoy the show you recorded and the erase them to free up space in order to record other show to enjoy.
> 
> The TiVo is NOT a long term storage device, it time shifting device.


If you must know, I had been recording the nightly re-airings of the last 4 seasons of Breaking Bad. I had close to 30 episodes of that show because they were airing them (3 times per night) faster than I was watching them.

With my TiVo becoming VERY close to being 100% full, I just wanted to temporarily move a few shows off to my PC because I did not have the time to watch episodes in the short-term.

However, as I said, only 2 hours (of close to 40) were able to be off-loaded (due to Time Warner) so I was forced to delete some shows off TiVo that I had not watched yet. I selected shows that had upcoming re-airings so I could record them again in the near future.

I don't keep ANYTHING on my TiVo that I have already watched.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Stormspace said:


> Also, an issue is that without Streaming on S2, S3, and THD's, MRV doesn't work when shows are protected. For someone like me that pools the tuners of all the TiVos in the house it becomes an issue when I can't watch from any room I want, but am forced to be in another room that might be in use for other purposes.


Once again, there is a solution for that.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

cwoody222 said:


> If you must know


I'm not so sure he must, but it is kind of you to inform him nicely.



cwoody222 said:


> I had been recording the nightly re-airings of the last 4 seasons of Breaking Bad. I had close to 30 episodes of that show because they were airing them (3 times per night) faster than I was watching them.


Well, there is the rub. It may be a larger hard drive may be a part of your solution, but in the larger picture and in the long term, if there are more shows being broadcast than you have time to watch, you are just going to eventually have to miss some. The TiVo does a fabulous job of "smoothing out" the time demands of watching shows, especially with a video server attached, but neither the TiVo nor any other piece of hardware is going to create more time for you to watch - other than fast forwarding through commercials, of course.



cwoody222 said:


> With my TiVo becoming VERY close to being 100% full, I just wanted to temporarily move a few shows off to my PC because I did not have the time to watch episodes in the short-term.


And that is certainly reasonable, if you ask me. Of course, I don't write the CableLabs requirement specifications. Other ass... <ahem> individuals do that.

Of course, it's too late to do anythng further as far as this particular instance is concerned, but if you are occasionally but not continuously running into this issue, then a larger hard drive is indeed probably a good solution. The "other" solution still has great merit, however, quite apart from hard drive capacity issues.



cwoody222 said:


> I don't keep ANYTHING on my TiVo that I have already watched.


OK, that's not a bad habit. Especially if you have a large hard drive, however, it isn't strictly necessary. Don't get me wrong, I, too, usually delete a program on the TiVo after I have watched it, or even if it is one I don't care to watch, but the fact is, the TiVos do most of the deleting, especially of suggestions.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

lrhorer said:


> Once again, there is a solution for that.


Yeah, I know. My current no cost solution is to forgo cable cards and tuning adapters and purchase from Amazon or torrent those shows I pay for but can't access without them. It's worked so far, and with the issue I just discovered on my THD I'm not certain I want to put any money into it.


----------



## CreepinDeth (Jul 13, 2012)

Comcast encrypts almost anything that's a protected channel.

PPV, Adult, Premium Channels, etc. 
They're done with Motorola SEM's. 

I'm not going to say there isn't ways around it, but that's not something I can discuss.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

Comcast encrypts all but the basic (local) channels, but only protects the movie and PPV channels. 

Lots of people confuse encryption with copy protection - just because it's decrypted by the Cablecard does NOT mean that it can't be transferred to a PC - that's only prohibited by the copy once/never protection flags.


----------

