# Fios' free copying to end



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

The grim news, from DSLReports:

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r27276765-TIVO-Here-comes-the-copy-protection-bit-letter-

The letter says "certain premium channels", so hopefully it will be confined to that (i.e. not even all the premiums).


----------



## Generic (Dec 27, 2005)

I would bet it is HBO and possibly Cinemax.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Considering that Verizon doesn't bother pairing their cableCards, this is going to be a bigger support nightmare than it would normally have been as people will simply "lose" their premium channels.

Also FIOS users are used to being able to swap cards between devices, which will no longer work.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

They do pair their cards, and have for some time now. For older installations, that's why the bulk of the letter is about how to get your cards paired.

I think the cards in my remaining S3 are still unpaired. Since they're single-stream cards, the information is presented in a slightly different way, and I'm not sure Verizon's procedures will work.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

morac said:


> Considering that Verizon doesn't bother pairing their cableCards, this is going to be a bigger support nightmare than it would normally have been as people will simply "lose" their premium channels.
> 
> Also FIOS users are used to being able to swap cards between devices, which will no longer work.


I will still be able to swap the cards, it's just a matter of pairing them again. And the automated pairing service on the phone is quick and easy. I just used it tonight to pair my three remaining cable cards.

I called the number on the sheet and had my three cable cards paired in less than five minutes. They already had my cards on my account and it was all automated on the phone. I just had to enter the Host ID and Data ID for each Premiere. And the test channel showed up within a minute after entering the info.

When I tried it a few months ago it would not work since it was looking for a new card that was recently sent out. But my cards were a few years old. Now they have the system set up properly to re-pair the cards on your account. It was surprisingly quick and painless. In the 5.5 years I've been using cable cards with TiVos, this process was easily the quickest and easiest way I have ever paired a cable card. In the past I had gone through the process of pairing a bunch of cards with Comcast and FiOS. And it either took a visit by a tech or a rather lengthy phone call with a CSR. Either method was a pain.
This automated phone process was truly quick and painless.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

I don't recall how differently the info was presented back when I had an S3, but as long as you can get CableCard IDs, Host IDs, and Data IDs for both cards in the S3's cablecard menus, the automated system should work.

I recall also that it's recommended that you pair the card in slot #2 first. But I don't know if that was only for the initial activation of the cards, or if it mattered for pairing.


----------



## NotVeryWitty (Oct 3, 2003)

Im in the Boston Fios market, and just received my letter today.

FWIW, I had Fios installed with my two Tivo Premieres two years ago, and based on seeing the Information Channel on channel 131 of each box, it looks like my CCs were paired when they were installed. I dont subscribe to any premium channels, so Im hoping this has no effect on me.


----------



## vurbano (Apr 20, 2004)

Sure glad streaming was enabled a while back. otherwise there simply would be no reason to have a TiVo. As for copying material looks like its going back to the days of my directv HDtivo and that deal database site. Oh the things I've forgotten how to do.


----------



## Gregor (Feb 18, 2002)

I got the letter today - in the Philly market.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

I got the same letter and wasn't thrilled to get it. One of my TiVo's was actually already paired, and my Windows 7 box with Media Center and a Ceton Card installed was also already paired. 3 other TiVo boxes weren't paired. Except for the fact that the instructions on the letter told me to say "I don't have one" for the activation code and the voice recognition was apparently looking for the words "I don't have *it*", it was pretty painless. I worried a little that if I skipped over already activated cards that it might wipe their activations, but it didn't, and the 3 boxes that needed to be reactivated were all going fine within about 10 minutes of the completion of the call.

Very disappointed that apparently Verizon has been forced into honoring the copy restrictions. I wish that had been completely precluded long ago, but I understand that it isn't coming from Verizon and instead comes from the content producers -- many of which are just too stupid to realize that if they restrict the methods I can consume their content by, then I'm far less likely to ever bother consuming it, recommending it to others, watching any product placement spots they might have included, seeing any commercials that were included, etc.


----------



## Gregor (Feb 18, 2002)

The Mac Inhomeagent apparently doesn't support cable card pairing.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

terpfan1980 said:


> Very disappointed that apparently Verizon has been forced into honoring the copy restrictions. I wish that had been completely precluded long ago, but I understand that it isn't coming from Verizon and instead comes from the content producers -- many of which are just too stupid to realize that if they restrict the methods I can consume their content by, then I'm far less likely to ever bother consuming it, recommending it to others, watching any product placement spots they might have included, seeing any commercials that were included, etc.


HBO is one of the providers which, by all reports, is requiring copy restriction. I wouldn't call HBO stupid. You can purchase a DVD if you want to archive a show. Tivo could have done something years ago. Streaming. Implement a MRV "move" instead of copy so shows with copy restrictions can be viewed on a tivo in another room.

Blame tivo for MRV issues. Blame the content provider for wanting to make money selling DVDs and digital versions of the programming (I Tunes)


----------



## shamilian (Mar 27, 2003)

lew said:


> Tivo could have done something years ago. Streaming. Implement a MRV "move" instead of copy so shows with copy restrictions can be viewed on a tivo in another room.


I agree TIVO should have implemented a move (transfer and delete old copy) as well as the copy which they have now.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

shamilian said:


> I agree TIVO should have implemented a move (transfer and delete old copy) as well as the copy which they have now.


CableLabs may not have a 'transfer and delete' specification. Don't know. But, yeah, MRV was ahead of its time for a long time. But was obviously lapped by secure streaming and TiVo's hardware wasn't comfortably capable - until the Premiere. I still prefer to blame HBO. Copy Once does nothing to prevent or limit piracy, it just inconveniences those of us will to legitimately pay HBO.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

davezatz said:


> CableLabs may not have a 'transfer and delete' specification. Don't know. But, yeah, MRV was ahead of its time for a long time. But was obviously lapped by secure streaming and TiVo's hardware wasn't comfortably capable - until the Premiere. I still prefer to blame HBO. Copy Once does nothing to prevent or limit piracy, it just inconveniences those of us will to legitimately pay HBO.


The effect isn't significant for people with upgraded HDs. People who want to keep an HBO, special, movie or series for an extended period of time no longer have the option of archiving to a PC. Those people now have to purchase a DVD or , if available, a digital copy (Amazon or Itunes). It also prevents a HBO subscriber (with tivo) from making DVD copies for friends who don't subscribe to HBO.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

lew said:


> HBO is one of the providers which, by all reports, is requiring copy restriction. I wouldn't call HBO stupid. You can purchase a DVD if you want to archive a show. Tivo could have done something years ago. Streaming. Implement a MRV "move" instead of copy so shows with copy restrictions can be viewed on a tivo in another room.
> 
> Blame tivo for MRV issues. Blame the content provider for wanting to make money selling DVDs and digital versions of the programming (I Tunes)


I'll still call HBO stupid... if I want to see the show on my iPad, or my iPad, etc., I should be able to do so. I've paid them (HBO) the monthly subscription fees and should be able to see the content where I want without having to have a cable company provided crappy DVR just so I can use the cable co.'s "On Demand".

Granted, HBO offers me "HBO Go" and I can use my devices to watch stuff that way, but I could just as easily have used TiVo Desktop to pull the content back over from my TiVo to put into iTunes and then put on whatever device I wanted. Sadly, it seems that HBO is more concerned that I'll then take my copy of the content and give it to someone else. They don't trust that I won't do that, so they are going to demand enforcement of the prevention of me possibly doing that while also reducing my ability to use their content in the forms that I want.

I can drop HBO entirely and ignore everything they do, watch it only on my TV, watch it on the HBO Go app, or buy DVD's or Blu-rays, or pick a combo of all of the above if I want. The issue will be just how much content gets protected and whether or not I'll ever be able to find that content elsewhere or instead, will I just get p.o.'d and frustrated enough to just say eff-it and instead find something else to for my own entertainment. That applies not just to HBO, but to any other provider that starts demanding the copy flag to be set.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

lew said:


> The effect isn't significant for people with upgraded HDs. People who want to keep an HBO, special, movie or series for an extended period of time no longer have the option of archiving to a PC. Those people now have to purchase a DVD or , if available, a digital copy (Amazon or Itunes). It also prevents a HBO subscriber (with tivo) from making DVD copies for friends who don't subscribe to HBO.


The thought of the upgraded HDs was something that I chalked up as a positive for me since I had just upgraded two of the TiVo's in the house, one with a 1.5TB and the other with a 2TB drive. Since I already had an XL with 1TB in it, I figure I'm pretty well set and don't have to worry much about having content deleted before I can get to it, but it still doesn't lessen my frustration in not being able to take content with me as easily as I would be able to if not prevented from being able to use the TiVo Desktop software to transfer it over to my iDevices.

I can still make use of my Slingbox to work around the issue if I really want, but that has the disadvantage of using precious bandwidth that I might be restricted on by the stupid Telcos. The big advantage (for me) to putting the content on my iDevices is that it lives there and doesn't need to be streamed and doesn't use up bandwidth on those devices.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

davezatz said:


> CableLabs may not have a 'transfer and delete' specification. Don't know. But, yeah, MRV was ahead of its time for a long time. But was obviously lapped by secure streaming and TiVo's hardware wasn't comfortably capable - until the Premiere. I still prefer to blame HBO. Copy Once does nothing to prevent or limit piracy, it just inconveniences those of us will to legitimately pay HBO.


Yeah, what he ^ said.

:up:


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

davezatz said:


> CableLabs may not have a 'transfer and delete' specification. Don't know.


From the DFAST Technology License Agreement:


> 3.5.2 A Unidirectional Digital Cable Product that makes a copy of content marked in the CCI as "Copy One Generation" in accordance with this Section 3.5 may move such content to a single removable recording medium, or to a single external recording device, only when (a) the external recording device indicates that it is authorized to perform this Move function in accordance with the requirements of this Section, and to copy such Controlled Content in accordance with the requirements of this Section 3.5; (b) such content is marked for transmission by the originating Unidirectional Digital Cable Product as "Copy One Generation";
> (c) the content is output over a protected output in accordance with Sections 2.2 or 2.4 of this Exhibit B; (d) before the Move is completed, the originating Unidirectional Digital Cable Product recording is rendered non-useable and the moved content is marked "Copy No More" and (e) the device to which the removable recording medium is moved is unable or rendered unable to output the content except through outputs authorized by these Compliance Rules. Multiple moves consistent with these requirements are not prohibited.


Most of the other related technology license agreements contain this clause (they seem to have each used the earlier agreements as boilerplate). I'm not sure if any device has actually used it.


> Copy Once does nothing to prevent or limit piracy...


HBO et al have publicly agreed with that statement. Content Copy Protection on this level achieves what they call "keeping honest people honest". They don't want it to be easy for you to copy stuff and give it friends and relations who don't subscribe. They don't particularly care for it to be easy for you to archive their stuff.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

mikeyts said:


> Content Copy Protection on this level achieves what they call "keeping honest people honest". They don't want it to be easy for you to copy stuff and give it friends and relations who don't subscribe. They don't particularly care for it to be easy for you to archive their stuff.


I suspect very few people are archiving and then stripping TiVo encryption. Most folks are transferring from one TiVo to another. So they may be keeping honest people honest, but they're generating bad feelings amongst those honest people. Who may choose to move on from their service and/or check out the dishonest approach. I'm probably not renewing HBO when we change providers in August (moving!). They can peddle their condescending and shortsighted approach elsewhere.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

Hey--I'm just stating their point of view as I've read it expressed elsewhere. Obviously it causes bad feelings, particularly among people who've been unaffected by it for a long time, like FiOS subs.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

mikeyts said:


> Hey--I'm just stating their point of view as I've read it expressed elsewhere. Obviously it causes bad feelings, particularly among people who've been unaffected by it for a long time, like FiOS subs.


I understand and will not shoot the messenger.  And, honestly, the move throws my whole plan into limbo. Our new house can receive either Comcast or FiOS. Neither service enters the house yet and while FiOS seemed like a no brainer a few days ago, the scenario has suddenly shifted. Will have to evaluate prices. FiOS Internet speeds have gone up recently, but so have their prices. Hm.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Still a great deal on the FiOS internet speeds. You can drop down to a lower TV tier which doesn't have any premium channels and increase your internet speed and pretty much keep the same price.

I'm still flip flopping on doing this so I can go up to the 75/35 tier. I really don't need the Premium channels. But in the past, everytime I dropped down to a lwoer TV tier, shortly after some new HD channels were added which required the higher tier to receive them. So I might just wait around for a sale around the holidays before I make any changes.

If I hadn't received such a great deal when I renewed earlier this year for two years I would have probably just increased my speeds by now since the increase would have been smaller. But I'm only paying $110 a month for DV, 35/35 internet and Ultimate HD. Plus they gave me a $327 gift card. This is he lowest price I've paid for FiOS over the last five years.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

davezatz said:


> I understand and will not shoot the messenger.  And, honestly, the move throws my whole plan into limbo. Our new house can receive either Comcast or FiOS. Neither service enters the house yet and while FiOS seemed like a no brainer a few days ago, the scenario has suddenly shifted. Will have to evaluate prices. FiOS Internet speeds have gone up recently, but so have their prices. Hm.


More food for thought. Comcast is set to match FIOS's speeds in the coming months. 
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r27246579-Speed-Northeast-speed-changes-coming.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

Fios Internet speed is much more solid than Comcast's, and download/upload is less lopsided. These things will remain true for the foreseeable future.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

lew said:


> HBO is one of the providers which, by all reports, is requiring copy restriction. I wouldn't call HBO stupid. You can purchase a DVD if you want to archive a show.


Doing so does not make HBO any money, nor does a failure to buy one lose them any money. It is the studio and production company (and possibly depending on contracts, some of the talent) who putatively stand to lose money by allowing a DVR owner to copy programming.



lew said:


> Tivo could have done something years ago. Streaming. Implement a MRV "move" instead of copy so shows with copy restrictions can be viewed on a tivo in another room.


Which does nothing for those of us who do not care to use MRV, or more importantly to live with the (unacceptable) restrictions inherent in trapping the content on a DVR.



lew said:


> Blame tivo for MRV issues. Blame the content provider for wanting to make money selling DVDs and digital versions of the programming (I Tunes)


That is utter nonsense. The content providers do not sell DVDs or BRDs nor do they obtain any revenue whatsoever from the sale of any DVD or BRD. If anythng, they are hurt by sales and rentals of DVDs and BRDs. OTOH, some of the content providers, like HBO, are owned by movie production companies, in the case of HBO, by Time Warner. Selling DVDs is bad for HBO, but good for its owner.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

morac said:


> More food for thought. Comcast is set to match FIOS's speeds in the coming months.
> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r27246579-Speed-Northeast-speed-changes-coming.


So two or three people out of the 100 or more on each node can max out the available bandwidth?

Sent from my HTC ReZound using Forum Runner


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

davezatz said:


> I suspect very few people are archiving and then stripping TiVo encryption.


Only about 1 person in 8 in the U.S. is black, and fewer than 2 people out of 100 are native Americans. That does not make it right to pass legislation that negativey impacts members of those groups.



davezatz said:


> Most folks are transferring from one TiVo to another.


Perhaps, but OTOH there are a lot of TiVo owners who only have 1 TiVo, and even among those of use with multiple TiVos, there are plenty who transfer to external devices, not between TiVos. Certainly I almost never use MRV, but I use TTG literally several times daily.

The bottom line, however, is it is irrelevant how few people take advantage of the feature. The only salient point is that everyone, not just a lucky few, should have a right to enjoy the feature. Whether they do or how many do exercise that right or not is not even of the slightest consideration.



davezatz said:


> I'm probably not renewing HBO when we change providers in August (moving!). They can peddle their condescending and shortsighted approach elsewhere.


I dropped HBO when I changed CATV providers a couple of weeks ago.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> So two or three people out of the 100 or more on each node can max out the available bandwidth?
> 
> Sent from my HTC ReZound using Forum Runner


No, that's not quite how it works. If we assume for the moment everyone is continuously pulling down the maximum bandwidth they can, then if only two or three people are using the bandwidth, then they each can use as much as they like until they max out the bandwidth. Add a fourth, and if the bandwidth is maxed out, then the bandwidth of the other three drops by some amount. Add another 46, and each one will have access to perhaps 2% of the bandwidth. In the real world. however, one never sees such flat bandwidth demands. The odds of all 50 simultaneously downloading at maximum throughput is zilch. Instead, each user calls for bursts of bandwidth. Of course, downloading video extends the duration of those bursts by a significant amount, but it still means that of 50 users, on average only perhaps 4 or 5 are going to be downloading at any given moment.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

wmcbrine said:


> Fios Internet speed is much more solid than Comcast's, and download/upload is less lopsided. These things will remain true for the foreseeable future.


Since Comcast implemented 8 channel downstream bonding and 3 channel upstream bonding, there's not much of a difference. For example, currently one of my upstream channels has failed because of a bad card at the CMTS (which hasn't been fixed in over a week), but it hasn't affected my download or upload speeds or my pings because of channel bonding.

FIOS has faster theoretical speeds, but they haven't implemented then. Also CableLabs has come up with a scheme to bond a ridiculous amount of channels resulting in speeds over 1 Gbps. http://newsroom.intel.com/community...ocsis-30-gateway-capability-at-the-cable-show


----------



## cjgadd3 (Mar 30, 2008)

Gregor said:


> The Mac Inhomeagent apparently doesn't support cable card pairing.


 Do it by phone. I just did mine and it took all of two minutes, but I had to say "reactivte" to get to the pairing process.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> No, that's not quite how it works. If we assume for the moment everyone is continuously pulling down the maximum bandwidth they can, then if only two or three people are using the bandwidth, then they each can use as much as they like until they max out the bandwidth. Add a fourth, and if the bandwidth is maxed out, then the bandwidth of the other three drops by some amount. Add another 46, and each one will have access to perhaps 2% of the bandwidth. In the real world. however, one never sees such flat bandwidth demands. The odds of all 50 simultaneously downloading at maximum throughput is zilch. Instead, each user calls for bursts of bandwidth. Of course, downloading video extends the duration of those bursts by a significant amount, but it still means that of 50 users, on average only perhaps 4 or 5 are going to be downloading at any given moment.


When I had Comcast the node was heavily over saturated. Every evening speeds would drop well below 1Mb/s. Although this was before FiOS came to my area. Over 90% of the people have FiOS now in my area so I doubt speeds would be an issue with Comcast now. But even at my brothers place, he has a DOCSIS 3.0 modem and one of the faster tiers that requires it. He see slowdowns in speeds from what he should have. Which is something I have never seen in my five years with FiOS. At least not yet.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> Doing so does not make HBO any money, nor does a failure to buy one lose them any money. It is the studio and production company (and possibly depending on contracts, some of the talent) who putatively stand to lose money by allowing a DVR owner to copy programming.
> 
> .


I thought it was obvious my point was in reference to HBO original programming. Copying such content not only deprives HBO of DVD sales but might cost them some subscribers.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

lrhorer said:


> Only about 1 person in 8 in the U.S. is black, and fewer than 2 people out of 100 are native Americans. That does not make it right to pass legislation that negativey impacts members of those groups.


That's a ridiculous analogy.


----------



## todd_j_derr (Jun 6, 2000)

nrc said:


> That's a ridiculous analogy.


It certainly is.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> Only about 1 person in 8 in the U.S. is black, and fewer than 2 people out of 100 are native Americans. That does not make it right to pass legislation that negativey impacts members of those groups.


That's a bad analogy.

1. The government does pass legislation that negatively impacts certain groups (see DOMA, Don't Ask Don't Tell and Affirmative Action) but that's another topic.

2. Many internet providers have already made it very clear that not all customers are equal. They throttle service for users as they see fit.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

Can anyone explain why Verizon FIOS cable card pairing seems to be so easy when most of the other providers have turned the process into a nightmare? I have had my own experiences with FIOS and Comcast and it was like night and day. FIOS took a couple of minutes. Comcast required five hours on the phone plus a truck roll. 

I have seen countless complaints about cable cards on this website and have even seen people return their Tivo's because the cable provider couldn't get their act together.


----------



## vurbano (Apr 20, 2004)

aadam101 said:


> Can anyone explain why Verizon FIOS cable card pairing seems to be so easy when most of the other providers have turned the process into a nightmare? I have had my own experiences with FIOS and Comcast and it was like night and day. FIOS took a couple of minutes. Comcast required five hours on the phone plus a truck roll.
> 
> I have seen countless complaints about cable cards on this website and have even seen people return their Tivo's because the cable provider couldn't get their act together.


Well, I gave an old tivohd to my father. It took 2 weeks to get the CC working and the stupid SDV box. Apparently the CSRs on the phone with cox cable can't really do anything. Trouble tickets to engineering have to be made then they have to Visit and be stumped a couple of times and then they have to be the ones to contact the mothers ship in Atlanta to fix stuff. it's Absolutely ridiculous. And I thought I was gonna buy him that big screen and self install everything before Xmas. What a nightmare that was. It was so bad that I had the show the technicians the tutorials on TiVo website and what the error messages meant. Some code wasn't being sent form cox authorizing some of the channels.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

In shipment my Premiere was delayed for a day. I gave Cox a call to make sure that what I wanted to do was possible (install one of the CableCARDs from my S3 in it and return the other). The guy that I talked to on that call seemed very knowledgeable. On the day, the tech support person I got connected to did not seem to know much about the process and was telling me that everything should work now and I asked, "Don't you need the Host ID to complete the pairing?" She replied that she didn't think so, then said, "Oh--I see a place for entering it!" 

It's sad when you have to know what the CSR should be doing.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

mikeyts said:


> ........
> It's sad when you have to know what the CSR should be doing.


Unfortunately that has been the norm.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

terpfan1980 said:


> I'll still call HBO stupid... if I want to see the show on my iPad, or my iPad, etc., I should be able to do so. I've paid them (HBO) the monthly subscription fees and should be able to see the content where I want without having to have a cable company provided crappy DVR just so I can use the cable co.'s "On Demand".
> 
> Granted, HBO offers me "HBO Go" and I can use my devices to watch stuff that way, b....Content Copy Protection on this level achieves what they call "keeping honest people honest". They don't want it to be easy for you to copy stuff and give it friends and relations who don't subscribe. They don't particularly care for it to be easy for you to archive their stuff.


You've answered your own point. HBO makes it easy for current subscribers to watch shows they missed. Shows are scheduled multiple times and many shows are available via VoD. HBO Go lets you watch shows on other devices.

Most of us don't think it's dishonest to archive our shows. Evidently HBO doesn't agree archiving isn't something they want you to do.



lrhorer said:


> Only about 1 person in 8 in the U.S. is black, and fewer than 2 people out of 100 are native Americans. That does not make it right to pass legislation that negativey impacts members of those groups.


You're assuming you're permitted to archive programs. HBO sells DVDs for many of their popular programs. Using the CCI flag is a way of HBO telling you archiving is not permitted. You have to pay (via DVD, ITunes...) if you want to be able to archive.

Extremely motivated people will be able to work around the restrictions. Most people will go with the solutions offered by HBO.

The HBO options, VoD and HBO Go benefit far more customers then the relatively few who own a tivo and who use those features.

HBO is taking care of their customers who want the ability to watch on other devices.


----------



## Taget (Jul 2, 2012)

davezatz said:


> I suspect very few people are archiving and then stripping TiVo encryption. Most folks are transferring from one TiVo to another. So they may be keeping honest people honest, but they're generating bad feelings amongst those honest people. Who may choose to move on from their service and/or check out the dishonest approach. I'm probably not renewing HBO when we change providers in August (moving!). They can peddle their condescending and shortsighted approach elsewhere.


I sometimes will download a show and use dlna to stream it to another tv set. Now I'll just have to download a pirated version and stream that instead. Why should I even have to consider that when I'm legally paying for it?

It does nothing to stop piracy. Pirates can get what they need either way. And as far as keeping the little guy "honest." That little guy can download a pirated version faster than it would take to download a program to your harddrive, convert to mpeg2, and perhaps even re-encode.

When you're trying to harass and control those who are trying to use your product legally you're going after the wrong folks.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

Taget said:


> And as far as keeping the little guy "honest." That little guy can download a pirated version faster than it would take to download a program to your harddrive, convert to mpeg2, and perhaps even re-encode.


But many of those little guys who would have copied the un-copy-protected content won't use mechanisms that they know are illegal. Some like you will but I think that they assume that you're in the minority.

As I said above the content IP holders will tell you themselves that these mechanisms have nothing to do with stopping _real_ piracy.


----------



## tivohaydon (Mar 24, 2001)

lew said:


> HBO makes it easy for current subscribers to watch shows they missed. Shows are scheduled multiple times and many shows are available via VoD. HBO Go lets you watch shows on other devices.
> 
> Most of us don't think it's dishonest to archive our shows. Evidently HBO doesn't agree archiving isn't something they want you to do.
> 
> HBO is taking care of their customers who want the ability to watch on other devices.


I do not want to archive.
I do not want to retain.
I do not want to complain.

I can not watch it on a boat.
I can not watch it on a train.
I can not watch it on a plane.

Live programming is not for me.
It seems I'm just too busy.

HBO Go does not help.
On Demand is just as spotty.

CCI bytes remove the solution.
To migrate between devices.
My mindless entertainment.

Okay, so this isn't proper anything but it was fun.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

lew said:


> Most of us don't think it's dishonest to archive our shows.


Just to make it clear though, 'archiving' is not legally protected. (It is not prohibited, either.. Its legal status has not been decided either way.) The famous "VCR case" (Sony vs Universal) explicitly legalized time-shifting, but not its term for archiving -- librarying.

Yes, I know there isn't an explicit time limit when one turns into the other, and I too archive things (that aren't copy protected.. though I do it as much to expand disk space than to save for keeps).


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

mattack said:


> Just to make it clear though, 'archiving' is not legally protected. (It is not prohibited, either.. Its legal status has not been decided either way.) The famous "VCR case" (Sony vs Universal) explicitly legalized time-shifting, but not its term for archiving -- librarying.
> 
> Yes, I know there isn't an explicit time limit when one turns into the other, and I too archive things (that aren't copy protected.. though I do it as much to expand disk space than to save for keeps).


The justice who wrote the opinion pooh-pooh'd the possibility of "library building", saying that the respondents hadn't proven that it would be a common activity .


----------



## vurbano (Apr 20, 2004)

I typically, archive several HBO series and one on Showtime. Trueblood, Game of Thrones, Borgias on Showtime. I will continue to do so, it just won't be from my Tivo.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

mattack said:


> Just to make it clear though, 'archiving' is not legally protected. (It is not prohibited, either.. Its legal status has not been decided either way.) The famous "VCR case" (Sony vs Universal) explicitly legalized time-shifting, but not its term for archiving -- librarying.
> 
> Yes, I know there isn't an explicit time limit when one turns into the other, and I too archive things (that aren't copy protected.. though I do it as much to expand disk space than to save for keeps).


Archiving might be legal. Circumventing DRM (or CCI) isn't.

It doesn't take any technical skills to use TTG along with Roxio (or whatever package tivo promotes). Using programs like pyTivo require a little more skill. Circumventing the CCI flag is a lot harder, maybe impossible for some hardware.

Setting the CCI flag means archiving went from very easy to extremely hard.


----------



## RangerOne (Dec 30, 2006)

By the way, does the CCI flag affect the ability to transfer programs to the Netgear ReadyNAS? I just picked one up and saw that one of the features was that it integrates with TiVo.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

RangerOne said:


> By the way, does the CCI flag affect the ability to transfer programs to the Netgear ReadyNAS? I just picked one up and saw that one of the features was that it integrates with TiVo.


Unfortunately, copy protected content cannot be transferred to the ReadyNAS unit.


----------



## tootal2 (Oct 14, 2005)

I think it legal for your own use. but you cant make copys for people or sell copys shows.



mattack said:


> Just to make it clear though, 'archiving' is not legally protected. (It is not prohibited, either.. Its legal status has not been decided either way.) The famous "VCR case" (Sony vs Universal) explicitly legalized time-shifting, but not its term for archiving -- librarying.
> 
> Yes, I know there isn't an explicit time limit when one turns into the other, and I too archive things (that aren't copy protected.. though I do it as much to expand disk space than to save for keeps).


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

tootal2 said:


> I think it legal for your own use. but you cant make copys for people or sell copys shows.


No, read the decision. I bought a book entirely about that legal case.. (and it was before eBay, or at least before it became popular.. somehow I found it online, but it was MORE expensive than if it had been new.)


----------



## am95 (Jun 2, 2012)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

I just bought a TiVo + 1-year subscription mainly for the purpose of copying sports content from premium channels with HBO being a huge part of that and it's not like you can go out and buy this stuff on Blu-ray. Hopefully it's just HBO and Cinemax which I could probably live with. Otherwise, see ya TiVo.


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

Can someone help me out. I got the letter from Verizon. I tried reactivating my cablecards and was unable to do so. (Tried calling them) then I downloaded InhomeAgent and that failed as well. I started up a chat and they were able to "reset" my cable cards but STILL unable to view channel 131 so they sent out a TECH. 

The Tech basically looked at my letter and had NO IDEA what I was asking them to do. He went to his truck waited 30 minutes then came back and said don't worry about it you are fine. Said I don't need channel 131 anyway. WTF!!!!

I have a feeling this is going to blow up for me at the end of the month...


----------



## DeWitt (Jun 30, 2004)

I had a similar experience. In home agent says I have no cable cards to activate. I used the voice prompts and after entering my card no and zip, it reconfirms the zip then transfers me to a representative. Rep says only way is to use voice prompts or in home agent, then tells me to call the number I called. Refused to believe I called that number and got her. Refused to believe I did not have an activation code, despite the letter telling me to tell them I did not have one. She escalated to tech, told as long as cable working nothing they can do. She found the letter and then told me it did not effect me other than losing HBO. I said I don't want to lose HBO DVR at the end of the month. She said sorry there is nothing we can do you have to call and use the voice prompts or in home agent. Same story of don't worry about it if your cable is working. I said it is but not on 131. Answer, sorry sir there is nothing we can do for you. She stated tech would not help, but had not heard of the letter. I gave up after spending an hour and a half on it.

I love FIOS, but there customer service is terrible.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

I wonder why it transferred you to an agent? When I did it two weeks ago with my three cable cards it went through quickly without transferring me to an agent.


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

When I typed in my cable card info at the prompts it would obviously FAIL the pairing/activation and then default to sending me to an agent. 

I know come Aug 1st I am going to get screwed.


----------



## DeWitt (Jun 30, 2004)

aaronwt said:


> I wonder why it transferred you to an agent? When I did it two weeks ago with my three cable cards it went through quickly without transferring me to an agent.


I am assuming it means the entries in the system are wrong somehow. This would also explain why the in house agent can't access them either. I have two Premieres, so two cards. The one in its original Tivo is paired properly. The one where the Tivo was replaced is not. (Not surprising)

I am hoping they where just understaffed due to all the east coast storm damage. I'll try again in a few days after I cool off a bit....


----------



## dbenrosen (Sep 20, 2003)

I had a similar experience yesterday. I tried the IHA and it claimed it couldn't find the cards. After getting all of the info for the cards from Ch 131 (I have 4 CableCARDs, 3 gave me info screen and 1 worked as it would if already activated). I called the phone number and it went through 4 CableCARDs, one of which I had a number for and entered the info to activate it. The other numbers it gave me were either the one that worked or numbers I didn't have.

I transferred to a person, who claimed all of my cards were activated. I explained about the letter and the activation screen. She went away to look up info and when she came back she said the system would not let her edit the CableCARD activation info. I again mentioned the letter and she said the letters were sent out too early and there was nothing she could do until the cards were not activated again. She thinks this will happen at the end of the month,and which point I guess I would have to call them back. I will try the process again in a week or so and see if I have any better luck.


----------



## vurbano (Apr 20, 2004)

For me, its so long tivo desktop. Everything I transferred was HBO or showtime anyway and those days will be over. it all seems ridiculous to me. You would think that the recordings could be tied to your home Ip address and as long as it stayed on that network then transfer to NAS or PC's with Raid systems and etc could be allowed.


----------



## hmm52 (Feb 25, 2008)

aaronwt said:


> I wonder why it transferred you to an agent? When I did it two weeks ago with my three cable cards it went through quickly without transferring me to an agent.


What's the trick to stay within the automated system? Time of day to call? I tried the IHA then voice prompt setup early yesterday for four cards. No recognition on the first, silence on the second. Called FSC and got a fairly green CSR/tech. Worked with him for 1 1/4 hours! - last 1/2 hour with "senior tech" advising in background. Result - no 131 with 2 cards, other 2 were deactivated when I came home after suggested power cycling both TiVos (red flag). Voice prompt worked this morning but connected quickly to agent, not so green. He delisted 2 non-working cards from account then reactivated them. Still no 131 on either. I had suggested "reactivate" and "swap cards" during the 1/2 hour call.

These are 4 S cards that I've had forever and which have been moved around many times between various TVs and DVRs. Maybe none of them started in the S3s. I wouldn't think that this would make a difference. Any advice?


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

vurbano said:


> For me, its so long tivo desktop. Everything I transferred was HBO or showtime anyway and those days will be over. it all seems ridiculous to me. You would think that the recordings could be tied to your home Ip address and as long as it stayed on that network then transfer to NAS or PC's with Raid systems and etc could be allowed.


What about when your home IP address changes?( I assume you mean the WAN IP address otherwise my IP address range on my LAN has been the same since the late nineties) On FiOS my WAN IP address sometimes changes several times a week. And sometimes can go months without changing. Currently, for the last few weeks, it's changed several times each week. It's changed at least a dozen times in the last month.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

vurbano said:


> For me, its so long tivo desktop. Everything I transferred was HBO or showtime anyway and those days will be over. it all seems ridiculous to me. You would think that the recordings could be tied to your home Ip address and as long as it stayed on that network then transfer to NAS or PC's with Raid systems and etc could be allowed.


How is transferring to your computer any different than letting it 'out into the open' anywhere on the Internet?

Hey, I don't like DRM more than the next guy, but these requirements are at least the kind of 'front door lock' kind of impediments to people.


----------



## CreepinDeth (Jul 13, 2012)

lew said:


> The effect isn't significant for people with upgraded HDs. People who want to keep an HBO, special, movie or series for an extended period of time no longer have the option of archiving to a PC. Those people now have to purchase a DVD or , if available, a digital copy (Amazon or Itunes). It also prevents a HBO subscriber (with tivo) from making DVD copies for friends who don't subscribe to HBO.


Doesn't sound like a bad thing.

They're just protecting content from being passed along for free. 
It's most likely being asked of them in their contract with HBO, Cinemax, etc.

Many of these FREE streaming online services like Roku are piggybacking off the big carriers and hurting their business. 
They have to protect the content from free re-distribution methods.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

That's ridiculous - Roku is accessing the content that the providers choose to allow, with authorization required as needed.

Try again.


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

Anyone resolve their CableCard activation issues? 
D day is next week.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

So far I've hit nothing but brick walls with Verizon, 
In-home agent software says I have no CableCARDS
Chat agent was clueless and never asked for IDs, said "I have them all"

Giving a try with the phone lines now

update: automated system was working, it gave me all the prompts for NEW data and host IDs which I entered, it went far better than chat.


----------



## am95 (Jun 2, 2012)

So...any idea when they copy flag will go into effect? 

The letter said on or after July 31st and as of today, August 1st, HBO is still copy free.


----------



## dbenrosen (Sep 20, 2003)

I called yesterday (7/31) because my Series 3 still has the "call to activate" screen on channel 131. I called and the rep, who had little idea what I was talking about, admitted such and claimed to have checked with his "network" guy. They said the update had already gone out and if I wasn't having a problem with any of the channels than everything was fine. Since I was still getting HBO, I didn't pursue it further. I'll check again tonight to make sure it is still working.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

dbenrosen said:


> I called yesterday (7/31) because my Series 3 still has the "call to activate" screen on channel 131. I called and the rep, who had little idea what I was talking about, admitted such and claimed to have checked with his "network" guy. They said the update had already gone out and if I wasn't having a problem with any of the channels than everything was fine. Since I was still getting HBO, I didn't pursue it further. I'll check again tonight to make sure it is still working.


I found them to be clueless, they think everything is all set if any data is in their system.
The phone based automatic system is easy and it lets you re-enter the digits, it worked perfectly for me.


----------



## am95 (Jun 2, 2012)

dbenrosen said:


> I called yesterday (7/31) because my Series 3 still has the "call to activate" screen on channel 131. I called and the rep, who had little idea what I was talking about, admitted such and claimed to have checked with his "network" guy. They said the update had already gone out and if I wasn't having a problem with any of the channels than everything was fine. Since I was still getting HBO, I didn't pursue it further. I'll check again tonight to make sure it is still working.


To my understanding the cable card and them implementing a copy-flag to "certain premium channels" (with HBO being a definite) are two separate issues so I'm wondering how HBO is tied into the cable card issue your having?


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

am95 said:


> To my understanding the cable card and them implementing a copy-flag to "certain premium channels" (with HBO being a definite) are two separate issues so I'm wondering how HBO is tied into the cable card issue your having?


You can't view copy-flagged channels on unpaired cablecard devices.


----------



## am95 (Jun 2, 2012)

BigJimOutlaw said:


> You can't view copy-flagged channels on unpaired cablecard devices.


Thanks for the explanation.

So if I'm understanding correctly, the letter about how certain channels might not be available if the cablecards aren't paired is referring to the copy-protected channels they going to start flagging?

If he's correct and the update has already gone out, I'm wondering why HBO is still marked 0x00...


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

Correct. Some channels are going to be flagged and thus unpaired devices won't be able to tune them anymore. The letter was a notice to make sure cards and devices are paired.

Fios has been known to deploy changes in stages, one VHO/region at a time. So the deployment may have begun, but not carried out fully yet. Or someone was mistaken and it may not have actually happened yet. Who knows.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

BigJimOutlaw said:


> You can't view copy-flagged channels on unpaired cablecard devices.


Which is why they did the CH131 thing, if you have an unpaired card you can't view it, a paired card can. This way it doesn't matter if they've moved HBO over in your area.


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

I am going to revisit this issue this weekend. So far no luck pairing my cards.


----------



## dbenrosen (Sep 20, 2003)

I've had no luck pairing the two cards in my S3. Using the automated system, it doesn't give me the CableCARD # for those 2 cards so there is no way to pair them. Talking to people (CSR) seems to be little better for those 2 cards. So far, my channels are still coming in fine.

Does anyone know for sure what stations are/will be impacted? Everyone is assuming HBO, but can anyone confirm the copy flag is set on HBO in their area?


----------



## Gregor (Feb 18, 2002)

I had a pretty decent experience with Verizon. Had one card that did not work on channel 121.

The home agent app did not show any cards, so I initiated a chat session. Told the agent about the problem and he asked for the serial # of the card. When he said it appeared to be working correctly, I asked him to tell me the host ID he saw in his system.

It was different than the host ID on my TV screen so he replaced it and asked for one other piece of info. Once the info was correct he hit the card and the channel appeared.

My advice is that if you have a card that isn't working, ask V what data is in their system for that card, and see if it matches what you have on the TV screen.


----------



## am95 (Jun 2, 2012)

dbenrosen said:


> I've had no luck pairing the two cards in my S3. Using the automated system, it doesn't give me the CableCARD # for those 2 cards so there is no way to pair them. Talking to people (CSR) seems to be little better for those 2 cards. So far, my channels are still coming in fine.
> 
> *Does anyone know for sure what stations are/will be impacted? Everyone is assuming HBO, but can anyone confirm the copy flag is set on HBO in their area?*


A user on broadbandreports.com mentioned this:



> Attention All Verizon FiOS TV Customers !
> 
> The 0x02 - Copy Once Byte is Only Being Applied to HBO and Cinemax !
> 
> ...


----------



## vurbano (Apr 20, 2004)

mattack said:


> How is transferring to your computer any different than letting it 'out into the open' anywhere on the Internet?
> 
> Hey, I don't like DRM more than the next guy, but these requirements are at least the kind of 'front door lock' kind of impediments to people.


Impediment? If they had have a brain they would realize that with a not so expensive piece of software from a little company in Antigua a far superior BD version of their movie or series can be released out into the open. Going to these lengths to protect a degraded 1080i TV broadcast from being stored by a legal subscriber who purchases the programming for viewing in their home is absurd. Heaven forbid someone take their 90 year old father a degradedd copy of the pacific to watch. 

hey I've got an idea for the MPAA and Sony. how bout they imbed a gps chip in the movie rental cases and if they discover you have taken the movie over to your girlfriends house to watch it with her they throw you in jail? oh Oh Oh better yet treat every broadcast like its the Super Bowl and make it illegal for X many people to watch it in your home at the same time.

So what is this going to stop? certainly not someone intent on putting a perfect 1080p copy on the net. A true criminal act. And it won't stop someone intent on making personal backups from their TiVo either. TivoHD + prom + a lot of reading on a certain website will get them that. the only thing this stops is a lawful person With a premiere unit from making a backup to watch at home later or storing it on a server.


----------



## vurbano (Apr 20, 2004)

am95 said:


> A user on broadbandreports.com mentioned this:


As of about 8pm today its still copy freely.


----------



## vurbano (Apr 20, 2004)

aaronwt said:


> What about when your home IP address changes?( I assume you mean the WAN IP address otherwise my IP address range on my LAN has been the same since the late nineties) On FiOS my WAN IP address sometimes changes several times a week. And sometimes can go months without changing. Currently, for the last few weeks, it's changed several times each week. It's changed at least a dozen times in the last month.


Not sure but I bet if you were downloading illegal movies Verizon could track you down no matter how many times a week it changed. I'm sure these clever people could come up with a solution if they were interested. but I doubt they are.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

nothing active here from VHO4 yet. At least by checking to see if the programs can be transferred. Although I only have the Cinemax channels to test with.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

I've got a SiliconDust HDHomeRun Prime cablecard tuner that wasn't allowing me to see channel 131. I tried the Verizon In-Home Agent and ran into he same brick wall that everyone else did. I also tried activating the card over the phone using the automated system with no luck. I was eventually able to get into the phone menu and reactivate the cablecard and get it paired with the tuner. Now channel 131 comes in just fine.

FWIW, I routinely record shows and copy them over to my PC. I'm not currently subscribed to any premium channels so I'm not running into the copy once flag on any channels I receive. So far it hasn't been an issue with any other channel on FIOS.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

vurbano said:


> For me, its so long tivo desktop.


I said that about ten seconds after trying the program. That was about six years ago.



vurbano said:


> Everything I transferred was HBO or showtime anyway and those days will be over. it all seems ridiculous to me.


I'm not sure about ridiculous, but it certainly is trying to empower CATV companies in a way they should not be empowered.



vurbano said:


> You would think that the recordings could be tied to your home Ip address and as long as it stayed on that network then transfer to NAS or PC's with Raid systems and etc could be allowed.


That's silly. Most people's home IP addresses are either on the 192.168.0/24 or 192.168.1/24 subnets. Tying the DRM to either one of those subnets would allow half the people on earth to pirate it, and prevent people with perfectly proper routing from watching the piece on their LAN. I'm sorry, and no offense, but while the idea of DRM is really foolish, that one is just plain stupid.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

vurbano said:


> Impediment? If they had have a brain they would realize that with a not so expensive piece of software from a little company in Antigua a far superior BD version of their movie or series can be released out into the open.


That is what a "front door lock approach" means. It doesn't prevent dishonest people from stealing, it merely dissuades otherwise honest people from doing so.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> What about when your home IP address changes?( I assume you mean the WAN IP address


No computer within a firewall (except the firewall router) knows anything about any IP address outside the firewall. There is no way to tie anything to that address.



aaronwt said:


> otherwise my IP address range on my LAN has been the same since the late nineties)


As long as it is nonroutable, it can be anything you want it to be. It could even be routable, but in that case you would lose access to part of the internet. It can change at your whim, and chances are that millions of people have the same IP on one of their PCs as you do on one of yours.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

mattack said:


> How is transferring to your computer any different than letting it 'out into the open' anywhere on the Internet?


No one is going to buy multiple DVDs or BluRay disks just so they can watch a show in different rooms. Ten thousand different people as much as a continent away from each other certainly will, unless it as available free on the internet.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> ......................It can change at your whim, and chances are that millions of people have the same IP on one of their PCs as you do on one of yours.


Probably not likely. I use 221.214.xx.xxx. When I picked it in the 90's I made sure it wasn't an IP address that would be an issue for me. It's an IP address that is used in China. I've been using that IP address range for my LAN for a long time now.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> Probably not likely. I use 221.214.xx.xxx. When I picked it in the 90's I made sure it wasn't an IP address that would be an issue for me. It's an IP address that is used in China. I've been using that IP address range for my LAN for a long time now.


As long as you don't announce routes into the internet, no one can really stop you from using whatever address you choose behind a firewall, but using a routable address is really not a good idea, and it serves no purpose whatsoever. The fact it was used in China in the 1990s does not mean that is the case today, or tomorrow. You should choose a nonroutable subnet.

There are more than plenty of nonroutable addresses. In 1994, RFC 1597 specifically set aside nonroutable addresses that will never be assigned anywhere on the internet, and it is these that should be used for private networks. It provides for up to 65,534 addresses in the range from 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.255.254, or 1,048,574 addresses in the range from 172.16.0.1 to 172.31.255.254, or 268,435,454 addresses in the range from 10.0.0.1 to 10.255.255.254. These ranges can be divvied up into subnets of 2, 14, 62, 254 (the most common), 1022, 4094, all the way up to 65,534 hosts for the 192.168/16 net, and far more for the others. I'm sure close to 270 million addresses is more than enough for your home LAN.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> As long as you don't announce routes into the internet, no one can really stop you from using whatever address you choose behind a firewall, but using a routable address is really not a good idea, and it serves no purpose whatsoever. The fact it was used in China in the 1990s does not mean that is the case today, or tomorrow. You should choose a nonroutable subnet.
> 
> There are more than plenty of nonroutable addresses. In 1994, RFC 1597 specifically set aside nonroutable addresses that will never be assigned anywhere on the internet, and it is these that should be used for private networks. It provides for up to 65,534 addresses in the range from 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.255.254, or 1,048,574 addresses in the range from 172.16.0.1 to 172.31.255.254, or 268,435,454 addresses in the range from 10.0.0.1 to 10.255.255.254. These ranges can be divvied up into subnets of 2, 14, 62, 254 (the most common), 1022, 4094, all the way up to 65,534 hosts for the 192.168/16 net, and far more for the others. I'm sure close to 270 million addresses is more than enough for your home LAN.


It's still used in China. I have no intention of ever changing them since I'm so used to using them over the years. They have never caused me any issues since I have no need to access Chinese websites since I can't read Chinese. If I ever start having some kind of issue then I will be forced to use them. I also use this IP address range at my GFs house. Since it makes it easier when I move devices back and forth between both locations.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> It's still used in China. I have no intention of ever changing them since I'm so used to using them over the years. They have never caused me any issues since I have no need to access Chinese websites since I can't read Chinese. If I ever start having some kind of issue then I will be forced to use them. I also use this IP address range at my GFs house. Since it makes it easier when I move devices back and forth between both locations.


As I said, it is a poor idea, but no one can force you to stop, unless you inadvertently announce a route into the internet. Of course, you will have to change before too long anyway in order to comply with IPv6.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

According to some folks on DSLReports, HBO and Cinemax are starting to get turned over to 0x02.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

BigJimOutlaw said:


> According to some folks on DSLReports, HBO and Cinemax are starting to get turned over to 0x02.


Yes, I see it showing up here on VHO4 now for Cinemax. When accessing the TiVo from another box it only shows play as the option for the Cinemax recordings.


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

So if I have 1 TivoHD & 1 Tivo Premiere this means I won't be able to transfer/watch HBO & Cinemax shows from one unit to another?


----------



## am95 (Jun 2, 2012)

I can confirm the unfortunate news that HBO is now 0x02, for me at least. It also seems to be apply to all the HBO stations. I was hoping for a miracle that maybe HBO 2 wouldn't be for some reason.

For what's it worth, I remember when I had my Motorola box where HBO has always shown up at 0x02 but during HBO free preview weekends it would chance to 0x00 so maybe the same thing will apply here.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

NatasNJ said:


> So if I have 1 TivoHD & 1 Tivo Premiere this means I won't be able to transfer/watch HBO & Cinemax shows from one unit to another?


Exactly.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Time to upgrade the TiVoHD to a Premiere.


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

aaronwt said:


> Time to upgrade the TiVoHD to a Premiere.


With lifetime on HD it is tough to spend money for just ability to stream on the RARE occasion I would even want to. (for 2 channels only)


----------



## tivohaydon (Mar 24, 2001)

If I didn't have 50% off of all premium channels I'd drop HBO and Cinemax. But right now it makes absolutely no sense for me to do that.


----------



## jwebby (Oct 30, 2008)

am95 said:


> I can confirm the unfortunate news that HBO is now 0x02, for me at least. It also seems to be apply to all the HBO stations. I was hoping for a miracle that maybe HBO 2 wouldn't be for some reason.
> 
> For what's it worth, I remember when I had my Motorola box where HBO has always shown up at 0x02 but during HBO free preview weekends it would chance to 0x00 so maybe the same thing will apply here.


Where are you located? Is HBO the only channels at 0x02?


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

HBO and cinemax.

Sent from my HTC ReZound using Forum Runner


----------



## dallastx (Sep 27, 2007)

I've got fios in Dallas and I'm getting a "transfer interrupted" error using tivo desktop when trying to copy a show recorded from the local cbs affiliate chan 11. The show is not marked as copy protected and the copy seems to start, but the error occurs very quickly.

Is this normal now? I've never installed pyTivo, but I was wondering if it could still copy programs.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> Time to upgrade the TiVoHD to a Premiere.


First of all, I consider that a significant downgrade. Secondly, that does not allow one to transfer anything anywhere that cannot be done with a THD. The ownership of two or more premiers allows one to stream from one to the other, not to transfer. A Premier cannot transfer copy protected material. Since I have almost no use whatsoever for streaming but a vast need for transferring, this would certainly be an issue for me - a major one. OTOH, anyone who owns an S3 or a THD can, if they choose to make the effort, see to it they can transfer those programs to anything, including a Premier.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> First of all, I consider that a significant downgrade. ............


After using my GFs S3 boxes(OLED) a bunch over the last couple of days, I was reminded about how much better I like the Premieres when running the HDUI and how much I hate using the SDUI.
I definitely think the Premiere is a nice upgrade over the S3 boxes. Plus it takes what seems forever to transfer content between two S3 boxes,. And her S3 boxes transfer faster than the S3 TiVoHD boxes, but it is still dog slow.

I really wish she would have taken a couple of the launch Premieres I had . But at the time they could not be expanded and she wanted to have a 1TB drive in it. And at the time she didn't want the interface to change. And after 18 years seeing her I know it's futile to try to change her mind. So instead I sold those launch lifetime Premieres and let her keep the lifetime S3 boxes. Which fortunately are still working well and will be six years old this December.


----------



## agredon (Jul 26, 2011)

For me at least, they're better off not protecting. I and I'm sure many others get premium channels for that 1 or 2 shows that you like. Now, if they make it too much a PITA, I might simply buy the Blu-Ray, or iTunes versions and not subscribe. If I subscribe, they get $10-20/month, which works out to $120-240/year. For that, I could buy 2-6 seasons on Blu-Ray or iTunes. Plus, if I cut my subscription, I'm less likely to become interested in their future shows and thus less likely to buy them on Blu-Ray or iTunes. Not to mention, if I subscribe and am happy, I'm likely to continue subscribing, which means they keep getting my money every month.


----------



## swarto112 (Sep 10, 2012)

aaronwt said:


> After using my GFs S3 boxes(OLED) a bunch over the last couple of days, I was reminded about how much better I like the Premieres when running the HDUI and how much I hate using the SDUI.
> I definitely think the Premiere is a nice upgrade over the S3 boxes. Plus it takes what seems forever to transfer content between two S3 boxes,. And her S3 boxes transfer faster than the S3 TiVoHD boxes, but it is still dog slow.
> 
> I really wish she would have taken a couple of the launch Premieres I had . But at the time they could not be expanded and she wanted to have a 1TB drive in it. And at the time she didn't want the interface to change. And after 18 years seeing her I know it's futile to try to change her mind. So instead I sold those launch lifetime Premieres and let her keep the lifetime S3 boxes. Which fortunately are still working well and will be six years old this December.


i noticed y xl3 pulling from my hd xl iver a wifi g pulls fast then expected


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

Wow. Just discovering this. Not happy at all. I often archive a whole season (or two) and watch at once. I won't be able to do this with TiVo anymore.

Seems like Verizon is more than happy to obey HBO's wishes. It diminishes TiVo value and makes Verizon's set top boxes and DVRs more valuable. I assume all the content I want is available via HBOGO via those vehicles.

I need to figure out to do. Perhaps drop HBO.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

waynomo said:


> ...makes Verizon's set top boxes and DVRs more valuable.


How? Can you copy HBO onto your computer from a Verizon STB?


----------



## DocNo (Oct 10, 2001)

agredon said:


> For me at least, they're better off not protecting. [...] Not to mention, if I subscribe and am happy, I'm likely to continue subscribing, which means they keep getting my money every month.


Copy protection was never about doing what's right for _paying_ customers.

Just remember that 

And even knowing that, they still cling to it. Bah! Apple/iTunes and the music industry have shown them that if you offer reasonable choices, people will pay and you will make more than if you treat everyone as a criminal as your starting point.

I guess the issue is the music industry still thinks Apple "tricked" them and is still in denial. I think many in the music industry look fondly at the MPAA with jealousy and think "we could be making that much _more_ if we still had copy protection"....

Sigh....


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Yeah, I don't see how it makes their own DVRs more valuable.. Isn't Tivo the only standalone DVR that even allows ANY copying to computer? (Obviously I'm not counting WMC machines since they're essentially PCs, not standalone consumer boxes.)


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

mattack said:


> Yeah, I don't see how it makes their own DVRs more valuable...


It doesn't.

What they are doing makes TiVo look less attractive, therefore driving customers to use their "in house" DVR.

Why would the average consumer pay extra for TiVo when it is castrated down to the level of the "free" cable company DVR?


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

The problem is the "free" cable DVR is now around $17 a month from FiOS and Comcast in my area.
Just to get a non DVR STB from FiOS is now $12 or $13 a month. It's certainly much cheaper for me using TiVos.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

steve614 said:


> Why would the average consumer pay extra for TiVo when it is castrated down to the level of the "free" cable company DVR?


Being able to copy subscription premium content like HBO onto your PC isn't the only thing that makes TiVo superior to the "free" cable DVR. For one thing, being able copy most everything else recorded from any of hundreds of channels onto a PC is something that you can't do with a Verizon DVR.


----------



## glug0 (Jul 4, 2012)

mikeyts said:


> ...being able copy most everything else recorded from any of hundreds of channels onto a PC is something that you can't do with a Verizon DVR.


As long as the CCI allows it you can record the transport stream from the STB over firewire. iirc they're mandated to support it.


----------



## tjtv (Jul 3, 2007)

glug0 said:


> As long as the CCI allows it you can record the transport stream from the STB over firewire. iirc they're mandated to support it.


That's exactly the point...they are setting the CCI such that it does not allow you to transfer OR record from firewire.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

glug0 said:


> As long as the CCI allows it you can record the transport stream from the STB over firewire. iirc they're mandated to support it.


Not with anything approaching the ease of copying a recording over your LAN from a TiVo. To do what you're talking about you have to record the firewire output in real time while playing a recording; copying a recording from a TiVo can be as easy as downloading a file from a link on a web page, no extra cabling required and you can do it onto a computer physically located anywhere on your LAN. It's possible, but I think that Jill and Joe Average would find archiving recordings onto their computers over 1394 to be challenging to say the least.


----------



## glug0 (Jul 4, 2012)

mikeyts said:


> Not with anything approaching the ease of copying a recording over your LAN from a TiVo. To do what you're talking about you have to record the firewire output in real time while playing a recording; copying a recording from a TiVo can be as easy as downloading a file from a link on a web page, no extra cabling required and you can do it onto a computer physically located anywhere on your LAN. It's possible, but I think that Jill and Joe Average would find archiving recordings onto their computers over 1394 to be challenging to say the least.


Yeah, it can be a challenge to set it up on a PC. But it's pretty straight forward on a mac; they typically come with firewire and the program to record is included in the sdk.

On my cable system, tivo transfers are useless. Most channels have multiple audio tracks and tivo transfers don't just automatically use the default audio track selected on the tivo. I want to record the same audio/video you'd see on the tivo/stb. I get that with the stb but not the tivo. I've reported this to tivo and the people I spoke with classified it as a feature request rather than a bug... My only alternative is to change cable systems and hope this issue doesn't surface with them.


----------



## am95 (Jun 2, 2012)

Just to give a heads up, HBO is having a free weekend preview from the 14th-17th and the CCI byte is currently set to 0x00 (copy freely).


----------

