# Is it time for a class action lawsuit against Comcast for copy protection?



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

Hello,

I've been battling this problem for years with both my Tivo and now Windows Media Center. It seems Comcast is getting worse, not better. This must be a "secret" effort for them to continue their monopoly and control the TV recording market as well. 

As of late, just about every channel and any show I try to record outside of broadcast local television is blocked by CCI flag. This occurs with analog cable and with the digital box. I recently raised a tech support issue with Comcast, but I don't think that will go anywhere. Also, when and if Comcast "fixes" this, it appears they are fixing only for people that spend lots of time to complain? 

Definitely not fair, and how it is within Comcast's legal right to block all these channels from being recorded?


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Do you mean copy NEVER? That is only allowed for PPV.

If you mean copy once (e.g. can't transfer between Tivos or download to computer), that is unfortunately definitely allowed except for rebroadcast of OTA channels. 

In the past, some here have said that they HAVE successfully complained and gotten channels UN-blocked when the channel itself said it didn't want them blocked.

I suggest you complain to the cable company AND the FCC, to make your voice heard. Don't just whine, explain exactly why you want to do what you want to do (use your own PVR or whatever).


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

Class action lawsuit = lawyers getting 80% of settlement with the remaining 20% divided equally among all plaintiffs.
Am I exaggerating? 

Seriously, this is not something that can be resolved by the court system. Comcast is doing nothing illegal.

If you want to make a change, you need to petition the FCC and have the constituency and the funds to back up your position.
I'm sure you could get the constituency from people who suffer from the same plight, but the content owners will fight tooth and nail against it. Getting funding for your position might be a problem.
I'm sure Comcast has funds readily available to fight such a petition.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

thekitten said:


> I've been battling this problem for years with both my Tivo and now Windows Media Center. It seems Comcast is getting worse, not better. This must be a "secret" effort for them to continue their monopoly and control the TV recording market as well.
> 
> As of late, just about every channel and any show I try to record outside of broadcast local television is blocked by CCI flag. This occurs with analog cable and with the digital box.


Explain more about your situation, please. Are you talking about recording digital cable using a TiVo S3 or Premiere equipped with a CableCARD? When you say, "analog cable" what exactly are you referring to? (I didn't think that there was any analog cable left anywhere). What sort of equipment are your using to record with WMC? Tuner card with CableCARD?


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

mikeyts said:


> Explain more about your situation, please. Are you talking about recording digital cable using a TiVo S3 or Premiere equipped with a CableCARD? When you say, "analog cable" what exactly are you referring to? (I didn't think that there was any analog cable left anywhere). What sort of equipment are your using to record with WMC? Tuner card with CableCARD?


I am not currently using a Tivo, but I get a flag message for just about every show I try to record. I can't "record once". I can't record at all! From everything I've read, this is not an error with Windows. It's a flag being sent down from Comcast. I'm in NE Florida, so if anyone is from NE Florida and able to record without a "Comcast approved" device - I'd like to know.

I am using a comcast cable box with a hauppage usb receiver, although I do believe any cable card would show the same message.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

steve614 said:


> Class action lawsuit = lawyers getting 80% of settlement with the remaining 20% divided equally among all plaintiffs.
> Am I exaggerating?


Maybe just a bit. I believe the lawyers get one-third of any settlement and the rest is divided amongst the plaintiffs. The bottom line is that the lawyers reap the largest single payout whereas the plaintiffs each get a small slice of the pie. Believe me, if there was any chance that a class action suit of this nature could be won there'd be shysters lined up jumping at the chance to sign you up. I get solicited all the time to join in class action suits, but I toss them directly into the shredder. The only real winners in these suits are the lawyers.

If you're unhappy with Comcast's policies, ask them to change or you'll go with another provider. Even if they're the only cable provider in your area, you always have the option to switch to either DirecTV or Dish.


----------



## moedaman (Aug 21, 2012)

thekitten said:


> I am not currently using a Tivo, but I get a flag message for just about every show I try to record. I can't "record once". I can't record at all! From everything I've read, this is not an error with Windows. It's a flag being sent down from Comcast. I'm in NE Florida, so if anyone is from NE Florida and able to record without a "Comcast approved" device - I'd like to know.
> 
> I am using a comcast cable box with a hauppage usb receiver, although I do believe any cable card would show the same message.


Is the usb tuner connected directly to the cable box or to the cable itself? Is this a cable card device with a cable card installed? Or is this a plain usb tuner stick? Those sticks won't record encrypted channels. You haven't givin us enough information to help you out. Tell us what exactly your set-up is.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Don't be ridiculous. In order to win any malice lawsuit, one must prove one has suffered damages and also prove the defendant has engaged in some other than legal activity. Since you cannot show damages and since the law specifically states Comcast can give the CCI byte any value it chooses below 0x03, you haven't even the faintest glimmer of a case.



thekitten said:


> I've been battling this problem for years with both my Tivo and now Windows Media Center. It seems Comcast is getting worse, not better. This must be a "secret" effort for them to continue their monopoly and control the TV recording market as well.


There is nothing secret about it, and it is not spearheaded by Comcast or the CATV companies, or at least not the ones that are not lackeys of the MPAA.



thekitten said:


> As of late, just about every channel and any show I try to record outside of broadcast local television is blocked by CCI flag. This occurs with analog cable and with the digital box.


No, it does not. The CCI byte is a digital signature. As the name implies, it is an 8 bit number that is part of the payload of a digital video bitstream. It is not possible to make it part of an analog video. There is no place in the analog signal for it to exist, and no industry standard device could make any use of it, if it could.

In many areas, Comcast has converted to 100% digital. Is your area one of them? What makes you think any of your channels are analog?



thekitten said:


> Definitely not fair, and how it is within Comcast's legal right to block all these channels from being recorded?


It is within the legal right of Comcast to set the CCI byte to whatever value less than 0x03 on any non-broadcast channel they choose because FCC regulations explicitly say they can. That is how.



thekitten said:


> I am not currently using a Tivo, but I get a flag message for just about every show I try to record. I can't "record once". I can't record at all! From everything I've read, this is not an error with Windows. It's a flag being sent down from Comcast. I'm in NE Florida, so if anyone is from NE Florida and able to record without a "Comcast approved" device - I'd like to know.


There is no such thing as a "Comcast approved" device. There is such a thing as a "CableLabs approved device", and indeed every CableCard device must be approved by CableLabs certification, or the CATV company does not have to provide a CableCard for the device. By law they must do so for any approved device.



thekitten said:


> I am using a comcast cable box with a hauppage usb receiver, although I do believe any cable card would show the same message.


You are not being clear about what you are doing, the details of your setup, or exactly what you are seeing, but if you are using a Comcast STB, then it is virtually 100% certain you are not watching any analog video. You also haven't provided the details of the device you are using, but it sounds to me a little like you are experiencing issues with Macrovision, not the CCI byte, per se. It sounds almost as if Comcast is implementing Macrovision based upon the CCI byte, and you are attempting to record that stream. It is 100% certain that any CableCard equipped DVR would be able to record any channel whose CCI byte is set to less than 0x03. The CATV company is not allowed to set the byte higher than 0x02 on any ordinary cable channels. It can on pay-per-view and other specialized content.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

mr.unnatural said:


> Maybe just a bit. I believe the lawyers get one-third of any settlement and the rest is divided amongst the plaintiffs.


The point is, as you say, the lawyers *AS A GROUP* get 1/3 of what may be several million dollars. There may be far fewer than 100 lawyers and legal assistants splitting up the proceeds, while at the same time, there may be tens of thousands of litigants splitting up the rest. Not only does that dilute the proceeds, but since the lawyers are such a small group, they are very willing to settle for pennies on the dollar. They get millions, while the litigants get lunch. I think the settlement from the AT&T Wireless lawsuit got me $63, IIRC. I lost more than $3000.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

My bet is that OP has a signal level issue and not a CCI one. Comcast does not protect anything but the premium and movie channels and if the local is setting the byte this way they're doing it wrong.

If it's not a signal level issue, OP needs to escalate the matter to the regional ops VP (IMO), nobody is going to know what to do at the first/second level of help. Google the number. Also contact [email protected] or call corporate and escalate.


----------



## NotNowChief (Mar 29, 2012)

Time Warner Cable, NYC area locks down anything and everything. No copy once, no copy freely, nothing.

There's nothing you can do but change providers if you can.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

NotNowChief said:


> Time Warner Cable, NYC area locks down anything and everything. No copy once, no copy freely, nothing.


Well, not broadcast locals. That would be illegal. It's not just the NYC area, though. It is nationwide TWC policy.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

NotNowChief said:


> Time Warner Cable, NYC area locks down anything and everything. No copy once, no copy freely, nothing.


You're a bit confused on the terminology. If the show was not flagged at least "copy once" then your TiVo wouldn't even be able to record it, because the TiVo recording it counts as a "copy". Cable companies are only allowed to use something stricter then "copy once" on PPV channels. Also they are required to mark anything from local broadcast stations "copy freely" which is what allows shows to be transferred between TiVos or copied to a PC.

TW uses the strictest implementation they're allowed to by law. Which means they mark all channels except the locals as "copy once". As Irhorer pointed out this is a national policy and not just limited to NYC. Some Comcast areas do the same thing, but for them it's by market so only some markets are effected. Most other cable companies adhere to the restrictions imposed by the channel provider. Which mostly means that only premium channels are flagged "copy once" and everything else is flagged "copy freely".

Dan


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> As Irhorer pointed out


That's lrhorer, if you please, not irhorer.



Dan203 said:


> Most other cable companies adhere to the restrictions imposed by the channel provider. Which mostly means that only premium channels are flagged "copy once" and everything else is flagged "copy freely".


Well, I'm not sure that it is "most" and the two are not the same. Time Warner / HBO is the only one typically requiring their content to be protected. Thus, for example, the HBO and Cinemax channels are the only ones protected on Verizon FIOS and also on my provider, Grande Cable TV. Other systems do indeed protect all their premium channels, but not reportedly by any requirement from the content providers, other than Time Warner, of course.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

That's funny I always thought that was a capital I. Stupid non-serif fonts. 

I thought all the premiums required that. If it is just HBO requiring it, then I wonder why my cable company (Charter) protects all premiums but nothing else. Perhaps the MPAA is putting pressure on them to do it? Or maybe it's to promote their own VOD offerings rather then people archiving movies for themselves?

Dan


----------



## Tenzarian (Jan 8, 2006)

Start an online petition. I'll sign it.


----------



## ggieseke (May 30, 2008)

I'd bet a cold beer that it's an RNG110 cable box. There have been several posts over at TiVo lately from S2 users.

The pattern seems to be Comcast + RNG110 = wildly inappropriate Macrovision signals.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> That's funny I always thought that was a capital I. Stupid non-serif fonts.


Yeah. Traditionally, user IDs in *nix have been all lower case.



Dan203 said:


> I thought all the premiums required that.


No. Some, like HDNETMV and AXSTV actually require their customers *NOT* to copy protect their content. TWC and Brightouse would rather die than admit it, but it is highly likely that is why they both dropped Mark Cuban's channels immediately when he made it part of the contract agreement.



Dan203 said:


> If it is just HBO requiring it, then I wonder why my cable company (Charter) protects all premiums but nothing else.


Who knows? Such things should be required to be part of the public record, but they are not.



Dan203 said:


> Perhaps the MPAA is putting pressure on them to do it?


Perhaps, or perhaps if you dig into the backgrounds of the senior management team and / or the board of directors, you may find members or former members of the MPAA and its constituent companies. That is most definitely the case with TWC.



Dan203 said:


> Or maybe it's to promote their own VOD offerings rather then people archiving movies for themselves?


Or perhaps all of the above. Whatever the actual set of reasons, there is no particular finanical down-side to copy protecting everything in sight, so even the slightest whim is sufficient cause for doing it. For those rare occasions when someone complains, they can merely lie and say the content providers are demanding it, like TWC does.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

ggieseke said:


> I'd bet a cold beer that it's an RNG110 cable box. There have been several posts over at TiVo lately from S2 users.
> 
> The pattern seems to be Comcast + RNG110 = wildly inappropriate Macrovision signals.


That is rather what it sounds like, yes.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

For a S2 there is ant least a solution. If your cable company abuses Macrovision for cable box output you can just put a Macrovision stripper between the box and the TiVo and the TiVo will never even get the signal to protect the show. With an HD TiVo the protection bit is part of the signal and can not be stripped. 

Dan


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> With an HD TiVo the protection bit is part of the signal and can not be stripped.


Protection byte, actually, not bit, and don't tell that to my HD TiVos. 

It can't be done on an unmodified S3 class TiVo. Fortunately, I don't have any unmodified S3 class TiVos.


----------



## NotNowChief (Mar 29, 2012)

Dan203 said:


> You're a bit confused on the terminology. If the show was not flagged at least "copy once" then your TiVo wouldn't even be able to record it, because the TiVo recording it counts as a "copy". Cable companies are only allowed to use something stricter then "copy once" on PPV channels. Also they are required to mark anything from local broadcast stations "copy freely" which is what allows shows to be transferred between TiVos or copied to a PC.
> 
> TW uses the strictest implementation they're allowed to by law. Which means they mark all channels except the locals as "copy once". As Irhorer pointed out this is a national policy and not just limited to NYC. Some Comcast areas do the same thing, but for them it's by market so only some markets are effected. Most other cable companies adhere to the restrictions imposed by the channel provider. Which mostly means that only premium channels are flagged "copy once" and everything else is flagged "copy freely".
> 
> Dan


Dan and lrhorer - I beg to differ. They block EVERYTHING, even broadcast. Specific example? If I record CSI or CSI:NY on CBS or CBSHD in my family room (Premiere), I cannot transfer it to my bedroom to watch (HDXL). Same thing vice versa. I tried. Every single thing TiVo records gets the nasty red NO COPY icon. Yes, even the SD channels, I tried that too. Does not work either way. Locked. Locked. Locked.

As I recently switched to FiOS as I was sick and tired of this, along with their slow internet and cumbersome tuning adapters, I no longer have this problem. I can copy from one box to another without any restriction. I do have several shows still on my HDXL and HD DVRs that I havent watched yet that still show they are local broadcast channels and cannot be copied.

I would be happy to snap a few pictures and show the flags if youd like in a proper thread. I understand you are saying its against the law, but this is just one example of the nightmares I dealt with. Once my 2-year commitment to them was done, I was on the phone with Verizon.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

NotNowChief said:


> Dan and lrhorer - I beg to differ. They block EVERYTHING, even broadcast. Specific example? If I record CSI or CSI:NY on CBS or CBSHD in my family room (Premiere), I cannot transfer it to my bedroom to watch (HDXL). Same thing vice versa. I tried. Every single thing TiVo records gets the nasty red NO COPY icon. Yes, even the SD channels, I tried that too. Does not work either way. Locked. Locked. Locked.
> 
> As I recently switched to FiOS as I was sick and tired of this, along with their slow internet and cumbersome tuning adapters, I no longer have this problem. I can copy from one box to another without any restriction. I do have several shows still on my HDXL and HD DVRs that I havent watched yet that still show they are local broadcast channels and cannot be copied.
> 
> I would be happy to snap a few pictures and show the flags if youd like in a proper thread. I understand you are saying its against the law, but this is just one example of the nightmares I dealt with. Once my 2-year commitment to them was done, I was on the phone with Verizon.


Are the CBS channels you mentioned cable copies of local OTA channels that can be received via antenna at your location? If so you need to contact your provider and insist they are violating FCC regulations. If they don't respond satisfactorily complain to the FCC, which can be done on the web.


----------



## NotNowChief (Mar 29, 2012)

dlfl said:


> Are the CBS channels you mentioned cable copies of local OTA channels that can be received via antenna at your location? If so you need to contact your provider and insist they are violating FCC regulations. If they don't respond satisfactorily complain to the FCC, which can be done on the web.


Yes they are copies, and as I stated above, I dumped TWC altogether. No point in calling, their customer service is incompetent anyway and wouldn't have the faintest idea what I was talking about anyway.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

NotNowChief said:


> Dan and lrhorer - I beg to differ. They block EVERYTHING, even broadcast. Specific example? If I record CSI or CSI:NY on CBS or CBSHD in my family room (Premiere), I cannot transfer it to my bedroom to watch (HDXL). Same thing vice versa. I tried. Every single thing TiVo records gets the nasty red NO COPY icon. Yes, even the SD channels, I tried that too. Does not work either way. Locked. Locked. Locked.


You missed Dan's point. If it were flagged "copy never" then you would not even be able to record it on your family room DVR.

That said, it is definitely illegal for the CATV company to flag any locally broadcast channel - which definitely includes the national network channels like CBS. The FCC is *very* quick to stomp on any such violation, and stomp really hard. A single complaint to the FCC in such a case usually produces results in a matter of a few weeks, at most.



NotNowChief said:


> As I recently switched to FiOS as I was sick and tired of this, along with their slow internet and cumbersome tuning adapters, I no longer have this problem. I can copy from one box to another without any restriction.


Not if you have HBO or Cinemax, or at least not for long. FIOS is locking down content on those channels. Indeed, I was of the impression they had completed the process, but I may be mistaken about that.



NotNowChief said:


> I do have several shows still on my HDXL and HD DVRs that I havent watched yet that still show they are local broadcast channels and cannot be copied.


Your evidence seems compelling. It sounds like someone at the local headend screwed up. TWC is most definitely aware they are not allowed to do this.



NotNowChief said:


> I would be happy to snap a few pictures and show the flags if youd like in a proper thread.


If you like. I have no reason to disbelieve you, and there is no question that it is possible for a CATV engineer to make a mistake.



NotNowChief said:


> I understand you are saying its against the law, but this is just one example of the nightmares I dealt with.


You are preaching to the choir. The overwhelmingly primary reason I dumped TWC a few months ago was their lousy customer service.



NotNowChief said:


> Once my 2-year commitment to them was done, I was on the phone with Verizon.


What committment? Time Warner does not have contracts.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

dlfl said:


> If so you need to contact your provider and insist they are violating FCC regulations. If they don't respond satisfactorily complain to the FCC, which can be done on the web.


As he said, he is no longer with TWC, but even if he were, I wouldn't recommend he bother calling TWC. 'Just report them to the FCC. It's a lot less trouble. Indeed, even though he is no longer with TWC, he can still report them, just for spite.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

lrhorer said:


> Just report them to the FCC. It's a lot less trouble. Indeed, even though he is no longer with TWC, he can still report them, just for spite.


Sending copies to TWC and the local cable franchising authority .


----------



## NotNowChief (Mar 29, 2012)

lrhorer said:


> What committment? Time Warner does not have contracts.


OK, "contract" is a bad word. The "discounts" ran out after 24 months. And being fed up with their nonsense, I couldn't wait to run away from them.


----------



## jrtroo (Feb 4, 2008)

NotNowChief said:


> Yes they are copies, and as I stated above, I dumped TWC altogether. No point in calling, their customer service is incompetent anyway and wouldn't have the faintest idea what I was talking about anyway.


If you are so POd, then I would suggest you go to the FCC anyway. Just for fun. The form is easy to complete.


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

I haven't been able to deal with this problem, as I have little time for TV. However, I am very surprised by the posts, and a bit confused.

Can someone please clarify some points on this whole "equipment" issue, and from what I am reading the fact that I may get a CCI related message (e.g. broadcaster restrictions) due to the tuner device I am using?

Right now, I'm just using one tuner device for comcast cable, as my other two devices I use for OTA. That device is an older external USB hauppage dvr device. I don't have the exact model in front of me, but suffice it to say it's older and it DOES work fine for watching live television. It is very simply connected from the analog coax output of the comcast cable box to the usb tuner. Then, the usb tuner is plugged directly into the computer. At least, I'm pretty sure it is, but I can check on that again. I am also able to rewind any channel, get sound, etc. However, as previously stated, in Media Center, I get these warnings when I try to record ANYTHING, and years ago, I didn't get them with the SAME equipment.

So, before I file my complaint with the FCC and the BBB, I'd like to better understand these technical issues, and how they might relate to my setup. What exactly is meant by "cable card", etc.?


----------



## flynhawaiian (Nov 8, 2012)

It would be wonderful if we had a choice of cable providers, rather than being forced to use one that got a contract with the city.


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

moedaman said:


> Is the usb tuner connected directly to the cable box or to the cable itself? Is this a cable card device with a cable card installed? Or is this a plain usb tuner stick? Those sticks won't record encrypted channels. You haven't givin us enough information to help you out. Tell us what exactly your set-up is.


As stated, it's connected to the analog output of the comcast cable box. I really thought this was a pretty standard setup. My media center uses an ir blaster to change channels on the box, and the tuner is just tuned to that one channel on the analog output of the box.

Totally not understanding your point about "encrypted" channels. How is the output of the cable box on the analog port "encrypted", and if it is , how is it that I can watch it just fine but not record?


----------



## flynhawaiian (Nov 8, 2012)

Have you thought about getting the ATI cablecard adapter? They run for about $35~40 on ebay.


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

flynhawaiian said:


> Have you thought about getting the ATI cablecard adapter? They run for about $35~40 on ebay.


I'm not going to "think" about getting anything , until I understand what some of these posters are saying. I'm a technical person, and have used TIVO's and Media Center since 2005. In fact, I have an older tivo series 2 that I think has a lifetime sub. I might just try that as well. I have several tv tuners for PC, and the newest are ATSC.

Right now, I don't even have HD with comcast, and have no desire to increase my already ridiculous bill to get that. Comcast is absolutely horrible nowadays, and it's sounding like their new "game" with screwing over customers is to require them to either pay some more to them for THEIR DVR, or possibly use some new "working" device such as a newer Tivo or some special "cable card". That's ridiculous if true, and especially ridiculous considering I'm only watching SD Analog tv from the box itself.


----------



## flynhawaiian (Nov 8, 2012)

I live in the bay area, and have a digital antenna for HD and basic cable SD. So I understand about not wanting to have more charges on your account. I mean really charging $10 for HD is a gimmick. Kinda like charging for text messaging when you have a data plan.


----------



## flynhawaiian (Nov 8, 2012)

Okay going back through the post. A cablecard is a pcmcia card that has the decryption key from comcast to allow you to use your cable box. The cable card is registered with comcast, which allows the users key to pass to the device. This is how they can restrict channels, such as HBO.


----------



## flynhawaiian (Nov 8, 2012)

The ATI video card I was talking about has a cablecard slot, and allows you to use your computer like a digital cable box. Cable companies went to this type of method to prevent people from stealing cable by removing the old keyed filter, when you didn't have cable tv.


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

flynhawaiian said:


> Okay going back through the post. A cablecard is a pcmcia card that has the decryption key from comcast to allow you to use your cable box. The cable card is registered with comcast, which allows the users key to pass to the device. This is how they can restrict channels, such as HBO.


OK, so basically it's what I was saying. Comcast has somehow "disabled" the feed coming out of their cable boxes for all but watching live TV. In order to record ANYTHING you need to be using a digital device which "handshakes" with your computer/tivo/etc. to allow you to record. What a scam! How is that legal?

Also, to the poster who said something about Macrovision, where does that come from? I've been researching this problem on and off for years, because it seemed years ago it was only on certain channels , where now it's on all. That message in media center is CCI related. Never read anything about macrovision, and again am puzzled as to why Comcast would be "macrovision"ing cable I pay for!


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

flynhawaiian said:


> The ATI video card I was talking about has a cablecard slot, and allows you to use your computer like a digital cable box. Cable companies went to this type of method to prevent people from stealing cable by removing the old keyed filter, when you didn't have cable tv.


So , you have to call Comcast , and enable this device, like some sort of customer owner cable box? If not, I'm still confused as to how it would work.


----------



## flynhawaiian (Nov 8, 2012)

macrovision is a copy protection code. Similar to the old DVD code that would prevent you from copying dvds back in the day. The CCI is simply a code that tells the system whether or not you can copy the channel. Tivo has a listing of the CCI codes which should help you understand a bit better. Basically this was created to prevent the old "unauthorized recordings without the express written consent"

http://support.tivo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/243


----------



## flynhawaiian (Nov 8, 2012)

Yep you get a cablecard and call up comcast to register the number with their computer system. Just like a good old cable box. Actually the newer cableboxes from comcast essentially have cablecards in them. I have a motorola cablebox that has an M-Card slot that is security torx locked.

Comcast will provide you with 1 free cablecard or you can do what I did, just buy a cablecard online from ebay for $12. Register the card with comcast and you are good to go!


----------



## flynhawaiian (Nov 8, 2012)

This is the model number of the ATI in case you need it: ATI (P/N: 100-703268) TV WONDER USB DIGITAL CABLE TUNER


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

flynhawaiian said:


> Yep you get a cablecard and call up comcast to register the number with their computer system. Just like a good old cable box. Actually the newer cableboxes from comcast essentially have cablecards in them. I have a motorola cablebox that has an M-Card slot that is security torx locked.
> 
> Comcast will provide you with 1 free cablecard or you can do what I did, just buy a cablecard online from ebay for $12. Register the card with comcast and you are good to go!


Thanks, and I wonder if this will reduce my bill at all, since they now like to charge for just about every piece of equipment , by the month, and the rates have gone up.

However, this only reinforces my original point. Comcast IS blocking everything "just cuz" on the outputs of their cable boxes. I still haven't seen any clear or credible reference that this is legal. I SHOULD be able to record at least once, a simple cable channel, with my old device. Until someone explains this to me, I think an FCC complaint is in order.

I tell ya, between the cell phone companies and Comcast, communications monopolies are the worst they have ever been in this country. I have gone through absolute [email protected]#$ after recently "upgrading" my metro pcs phone service to both verizon and now t-mobile. The more you pay, the less you get, and these companies simply do not care. Verizon unceremoniously blocked me from calling their ceo office, and now t-mobile only allows customers to complain "in writing" to the ceo. In other words, they don't care, but they are 1,000% concerned about you paying their ridiculously high bills for little to no service. My next step is to complain to the BBB and then the FCC about T-mobile and their lies about coverage and their completely "broken for some" wi-fi calling. Might as well add Comcast in the work...


----------



## flynhawaiian (Nov 8, 2012)

Oh if you buy your own cable card I heard you get a $2.50 discount with comcast. I still haven't gotten my tivo up and running with cable, as I just got cable again. Make sure you get the multistream card.

Consider this ebay listing for a cablecard. It's not my listing only someone I purchased my cards from: 370343611072


----------



## jrtroo (Feb 4, 2008)

I don't believe you can buy a cablecard and use it with Comcast service. Never seen this working out successfully here, buyer beware. These are most likely stolen property, they are not available at retail.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=484148

Normally you pay a digital outlet fee and get a 2.50 credit for using your own box (of course, this is a tivo site, so i have no experience with your equipment).

They can block anything they want, except for ota. TW does that almost universally, though Comcast normally only does that with premium channels.


----------



## caddyroger (Mar 15, 2005)

flynhawaiian said:


> Oh if you buy your own cable card I heard you get a $2.50 discount with comcast. I still haven't gotten my tivo up and running with cable, as I just got cable again. Make sure you get the multistream card.
> 
> Consider this ebay listing for a cablecard. It's not my listing only someone I purchased my cards from: 370343611072


Buying your own cable card using it with Comcast is wrong. Probably 99% of Comcast does not allow it and will not pair it.


----------



## flynhawaiian (Nov 8, 2012)

Comcast told me they allow customer purchased cable cards. And they give you $2.50 credit each month on your bill. I figured I might as well buy my own rather than renting it from them. Less comcast owned stuff in my house the better


----------



## flynhawaiian (Nov 8, 2012)

I'll let you know what happens when I get the new cablecard. I&#8217;m hoping I don't have to have them come out and do the install.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

thekitten said:


> Right now, I don't even have HD with comcast, and have no desire to increase my already ridiculous bill to get that. Comcast is absolutely horrible nowadays, and it's sounding like their new "game" with screwing over customers is to require them to either pay some more to them for THEIR DVR, or possibly use some new "working" device such as a newer Tivo


"Newer", as in a 6 year old Series III?



thekitten said:


> or some special "cable card".


There is no such thing as a special CableCard. All CableCards are required to be designed to CableLabs specs. The only thing "special" is that every CableCard is unique to a particular provider. That is how separable security works. The CATV provider delivers encrypted digital video streams to the back of the customer's device (or the CATV company's own device, if it is leased). In order for such encryption to be secure - and there is no valid argument why it should not be - the decryption must be tied to a key contolled by the CATV company and specific to the CATV company. That is the CableCard.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

flynhawaiian said:


> Comcast told me they allow customer purchased cable cards.


Did you get that in writing, or at the very least get the name and employee ID of the person who told you this?



thekitten said:


> And they give you $2.50 credit each month on your bill. I figured I might as well buy my own rather than renting it from them. Less comcast owned stuff in my house the better


Well, more to the point, it will be a whole heck of a lot cheaper in the long run.

I'm surprised if Comcast is really allowing this, but there is no insurmountable technical issue with doing so.


----------



## jrtroo (Feb 4, 2008)

thekitten said:


> Thanks, and I wonder if this will reduce my bill at all, since they now like to charge for just about every piece of equipment , by the month, and the rates have gone up.


I imagine you'll save more by going with your own cable modem. I just mine going last week, and the savings to my bill is $7/month at current prices. Payback is ~20 months (it would be quicker if you don't need a modem to handle phone service). This is officially supported by Comcast, just not advertised.


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

Irhorer. Your posts still don't make sense to me. 

Let's simplify this , please.

WHY am I not able to take the ANALOG OUTPUT of my COMCAST CABLE BOX and hook it to any device I wish, and RECORD or otherwise do whatever I want with that particular signal without restriction? The "control" should be at the cable box level. I am a subscriber. That's what I pay for! I pay to be able to watch that TV channel , and record it if I want. Where/how/why is it all possible for Comcast to prevent recording that output, except in the case of a pay-per-view or possibly a movie channel where recording is not allowed by the provider? NEWS CHANNELS are not forbidden to be recorded. Regular cable channels such as TBS or Sci-Fi are not forbidden to be recorded. From where are you drawing these conclusions?


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

jrtroo said:


> I imagine you'll save more by going with your own cable modem. I just mine going last week, and the savings to my bill is $7/month at current prices. Payback is ~20 months (it would be quicker if you don't need a modem to handle phone service). This is officially supported by Comcast, just not advertised.


In any case, try to be careful with Comcast. I just went through a horrific dispute with them where they signed me on on a "promo" package. This is typical with the big monopolistic ripoff, Comcast. Most customers do "promo" packages to get their cable/internet bill down to some sort of price they can pay for without selling their kidneys. So , this can "work out" as good as it can until Comcast billing pulls a new trick they are doing nowadays. What they did in my case, was to wait til the promo expired. Then, instead of just raising the bill , and allowing me to call to discuss another pricing plan, they went and DELETED my cable modem service!

Yes, I'm not kidding. This went on for weeks. Even though I had a tech out several times, and am actually leasing a COMCAST modem, and had been paying the bill in full each month , and had been receiving service, they started cutting my service off only on Sundays. they said this is some kind of audit period. Then, when I called in to complain, they blindly insisted I had no cable service, and hadn't had cable service since I agreed to it back in February! This went on for weeks. Finally , I got in touch with their customer service , which is now in MEXICO (not New Mexico). From there, I was strongarmed into a more expensive plan, and they turned the cable net back on ... at least for now, but the monopolistic corporate scum can of course turn it back off again without telling me in order to rip me off some more and raise the price.* Real sneaky shady tactic. Just insist the customer never had the service , while they were paying for it and receiving it, and then cut it off, and demand more money to turn it back on*. Unfortunately, like many I'm in a position where Comcast is the only real choice for internet. DSL service quality is very poor here, and wireless is extremely slow. They know this, and are trained "undercover" to exploit their monopoly.:down:


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

thekitten said:


> I haven't been able to deal with this problem, as I have little time for TV. However, I am very surprised by the posts, and a bit confused.
> 
> Can someone please clarify some points on this whole "equipment" issue, and from what I am reading the fact that I may get a CCI related message (e.g. broadcaster restrictions) due to the tuner device I am using?


In every digital broadcast video stream on a CATV system, there is a reserved pair of bytes embedded repetitively in the stream. These bytes, known as the CCI Bytes, will determine whether or not any CableLabs approved device is allowed to receive the content and what it may do with it, if it can. If the device is a recording device (like a DVR), then the device may only record the stream if the value of the byte is less than 0x03. Values of 0x03 ad above are known as "copy never", although a value of 0x03 is allowed ot be recorded and saved for no more than 90 minutes. Values of 0x01 or 0x02 allow the device to record the stream, but not to copy the resultant file to another device. These are known as "copy once" values. A value of 0x00 is known as "copy freely", and any number of copies may be freely made of the content.



thekitten said:


> Right now, I'm just using one tuner device for comcast cable, as my other two devices I use for OTA. That device is an older external USB hauppage dvr device. I don't have the exact model in front of me, but suffice it to say it's older and it DOES work fine for watching live television. It is very simply connected from the analog coax output of the comcast cable box to the usb tuner. Then, the usb tuner is plugged directly into the computer. At least, I'm pretty sure it is, but I can check on that again.


None of that is really particularly relevant, except that the fact you are using a USB dongle pretty much rules out a digital video device. IT is almost surely analog, which means the device itself knows nothing of the CCI byte.



thekitten said:


> I am also able to rewind any channel, get sound, etc. However, as previously stated, in Media Center, I get these warnings when I try to record ANYTHING, and years ago, I didn't get them with the SAME equipment.


Also not particularly relevant. Comcast may be enabling macrovision for copy protected content based upon the value of the CCI Byte, or via some other means, but it is not transmitting the CCI byte to your analog device.



thekitten said:


> What exactly is meant by "cable card", etc.?


A CableCard is the industry standard mandated by the FCC for a means of supplying decryption of encrypted CATV provided streams which allows devices such as TVs and DVRs to receive said signals. Companies started introducing these devices around 2004. The FCC required the CATV companies to deploy CableCard based STBs and DVRs in 2007, over the objections of the CATV companies.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

thekitten said:


> Irhorer. Your posts still don't make sense to me.


That is lrhorer (LRHORER in lower case), if you please, not irhorer.



thekitten said:


> WHY am I not able to take the ANALOG OUTPUT of my COMCAST CABLE BOX and hook it to any device I wish, and RECORD or otherwise do whatever I want with that particular signal without restriction?


Almost surely because the analog outputs have Macrovision enabled.



thekitten said:


> The "control" should be at the cable box level. I am a subscriber. That's what I pay for! I pay to be able to watch that TV channel , and record it if I want. Where/how/why is it all possible for Comcast to prevent recording that output, except in the case of a pay-per-view or possibly a movie channel where recording is not allowed by the provider? NEWS CHANNELS are not forbidden to be recorded.


Because the law says they can, and in fact it is illegal to defeat Macrovision.

What's more, in terms of the CCI byte, the law specifically states the CATV companies at their sole discretion may set the CCI byte on any regular broadcast channel other than an OTA channel to any value below 0x03 they arbitrarily choose. Every device submitted to CableLabs for certification will refuse to allow the copying of any content with a CCI byte value greater than 0x00 to any external device, or it will not be certified. The latter is not a matter of law, but any CATV company can by law refuse to allow any non-certified device to be attached to their service.

The fact you do not personally like these regulations for whatever reason in no way changes their legality.



thekitten said:


> Regular cable channels such as TBS or Sci-Fi are not forbidden to be recorded. From where are you drawing these conclusions?


I did not draw any conclusions. I merely outlined the technical situation based upon my best inferrences from the things you told us, and stated the relevant regulations concerning them.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

jrtroo said:


> I imagine you'll save more by going with your own cable modem. I just mine going last week, and the savings to my bill is $7/month at current prices. Payback is ~20 months (it would be quicker if you don't need a modem to handle phone service). This is officially supported by Comcast, just not advertised.


Yeah, unfortunately my new CATV provider has a system that does not work with my wireless cable gateway, or at least not yet. There is some hope they will get it working in the near future, but in the mean time I have to lease both a modem *AND* a router from them. Fortunately, when I complained, they removed the carge for the router, at least, from my bill.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

thekitten said:


> OK, so basically it's what I was saying. Comcast has somehow "disabled" the feed coming out of their cable boxes for all but watching live TV.


'Sounds like it.



thekitten said:


> In order to record ANYTHING you need to be using a digital device which "handshakes" with your computer/tivo/etc. to allow you to record. What a scam! How is that legal?


It is legal because consumers and 3rd party electronics manufacturers demanded that the FCC force the CATV companies to produce a standard for such devices, and they did, by creating regulations ratified by Congress requiring it of the CATV companies. The CATV companies dragged their heels as much as they could, but eventually the FCC clamped down on them. Since 1998, IIRC, esentially all CATV companies (except small, local companies) have been required to support CableCard devices. Since 2007, all CATV companies have been required to employ CableCards in their own STBs and DVRs.

In short, it is legal because it is black letter law. The alternative would be to allow CATV companies to prevent consumers from attaching *ANY* third party device directly to their CATV plant, which is what the CATV companies would prefer. Far from being a scam, it is what consumers have demanded.



thekitten said:


> Also, to the poster who said something about Macrovision, where does that come from? I've been researching this problem on and off for years, because it seemed years ago it was only on certain channels , where now it's on all. That message in media center is CCI related.


My guess would be it is a general copy protection message. Its reference to CCI is probably specious.



thekitten said:


> Never read anything about macrovision, and again am puzzled as to why Comcast would be "macrovision"ing cable I pay for!


That I can't say. TiVo does the same thing, as do just about all DVD players and VCRs.


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

lrhorer said:


> That is lrhorer (LRHORER in lower case), if you please, not irhorer.
> 
> Almost surely because the analog outputs have Macrovision enabled.
> 
> ...


I must assume it's something that new Tivo devices "ignore". While it may be legal (but should be illegal), apparent "the big corporation is getting away with murder" again. Oh well, we all know that , and how the country feels about that, especially in light of recent events. Regarding your conclusions, no offense, but your delivery of the fact on the laws does sound like an endorsement for this ridiculous notion that cable companies can and should block their PAYING customers from making simple TV recordings. Talk about moving backwards. Years ago, VCR's were very common. I guess today we have the technical equivalent of making VCR's useless , unless they are overpriced "Cable Labs" VCR's or some approved comcast equivalent. That's some serious monopoly and market control right there.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

thekitten said:


> I must assume it's something that new Tivo devices "ignore". While it may be legal (but should be illegal), apparent "the big corporation is getting away with murder" again. Oh well, we all know that , and how the country feels about that, especially in light of recent events. Regarding your conclusions, no offense, but your delivery of the fact on the laws does sound like an endorsement for this ridiculous notion that cable companies can and should block their PAYING customers from making simple TV recordings. Talk about moving backwards. Years ago, VCR's were very common. I guess today we have the technical equivalent of making VCR's useless , unless they are overpriced "Cable Labs" VCR's or some approved comcast equivalent. That's some serious monopoly and market control right there.


Don't shoot the messenger.

He didn't write the laws, he just knows what they are.


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

unitron said:


> Don't shoot the messenger.
> 
> He didn't write the laws, he just knows what they are.


I'm still not convinced on the entire "Macrovision" issue with blocking of recording on the OUTPUT of a subscribed cable box , for every channel. While it may not be legal, what "law" says it is legal? Since corporations wrongfully actually write their own laws to suit their own businesses, it could be possible, but unless I missed it I don't see that one cited.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

thekitten said:


> I must assume it's something that new Tivo devices "ignore".


Why would you assume something so completely wrong?



thekitten said:


> While it may be legal (but should be illegal), apparent "the big corporation is getting away with murder" again.


You obviously did not read a single word I wrote. CATV companies positively hate CableCards. They lobbied endlessly for the FCC to hold off until they could get downloadable security working, but the Consumer Equipment Manufacturers were pushing hard for DCR+. That leads to a discussion of SDV and the Tuning adapter, however, which is beyond the scope of this thread.



thekitten said:


> Regarding your conclusions


Again, they are not conclusions, just simple statements of historical and legal fact.



thekitten said:


> no offense, but your delivery of the fact on the laws does sound like an endorsement for this ridiculous notion that cable companies can and should block their PAYING customers from making simple TV recordings.


Quite the opposite. Without CableCards (or some form of separable security), the CATV companies would have been able to prevent anyone from recording or watching TV on anything but a leased DVR or STB. TiVo would have gone down the tubes faster than Moxi ever did. (Now that *is* a conclusion.)



thekitten said:


> Talk about moving backwards. Years ago, VCR's were very common. I guess today we have the technical equivalent of making VCR's useless


Funny, I have four TiVos, and between them they record hundreds of programs a month from more than 400 available channels. The only ones from which I cannot record are the ones for which I do not pay (HBO, some sports channels, etc.).

I'm sorry, but your problems stem entirely from your own choice not to upgrade from a technology that has been obsolete for over 8 years.



thekitten said:


> unless they are overpriced "Cable Labs" VCR's or some approved comcast equivalent.


That is precisely what would be the case without CableCards.



thekitten said:


> That's some serious monopoly and market control right there.


More utter nonsense. CableCards are a published *standard*. Anyone can build a device that uses one. CableLabs is also required by law to certify any device that meets CableCard 2.0 specs for use on any large CATV system in the United States. How is that a monopoly?

CableLabs should never have been allowed to be formed from CATV company representatives (it should have been an independent standards organization), but it is definitely not a monopoly. It is also 100% legal, no matter what you think.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

thekitten said:


> I'm still not convinced on the entire "Macrovision" issue with blocking of recording on the OUTPUT of a subscribed cable box , for every channel. While it may not be legal, what "law" says it is legal? Since corporations wrongfully actually write their own laws to suit their own businesses, it could be possible, but unless I missed it I don't see that one cited.


Try looking here.

Enjoy.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

At one time you could purchase a black box to defeat Macrovision, this allowed one to copy a VHS original movie to another VCR tape. Today not many people want to do this with HD and all, I know of no consumer product that can take in Component or HDMI inputs for recording, and if such a product does exist I know no black boxes that could remove the copy protection of HD or SD cable digital signals for recording. As for the cable box output, one could use the black box to record any analog cable box composite output onto any type of recorder, Macrovision protected or not. The Series 1 and Series 2 TiVos would do this type of analog (non HD) recording, and also control the cable box.


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

lhr: That's a lot of "strange" support for the cable MONOPOLIES, and the status quo ... however it does nothing (again) to address my simple question and concern.

Why am I blocked from recording regular TV stations , as tuned by my leased cable box, by the cable company? With all due respect, the problem seems to be that you are trying to justify that ridiculous NEW practice with a lot of mostly meaningless technobabble. I'm not sure why, but that's what you are doing. 

I think we can all "get" your point about spending the money and having these "cablelabs" devices, but it still doesn't address the "protection" for a "problem" that isn't a PROBLEM anyway. I could use some other examples, as you words are riling them up, but I'm sure politics discussion is prohibited here. 

Suffice it to say, for YEARS , and many more year than these new "changes" have been in place ... cable companies never , ever attempted to block or otherwise impede such recording of television shows by their paying customers. So, they are doing so now, and that is at least wrong and ridiculous. It's also arguable grossly anti-consumer, and with the way it is implemented anti-competitive , aka MONOPOLISTIC actions by a large monopolistic type company. However, I don't wish to get caught up in your definition of a monopoly. Let's just agree that it's wrong, of course hasn't been done before, and should really be stopped.


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

lrhorer said:


> Try looking here.
> 
> Enjoy.


Yes, and? THat doesn't answer my claim. According to that link, Macrovision can be turned off. So, that means, when I want to record PoliticsNation with Al Sharpton on MSNBC for example ... it should be turned OFF, because that's a cable news channel and I should be able to record it - regardless of the views of the wealthy family that owns Comcast!


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

How about THIS point about this whole "big cable company BLOCK the poor paid middle class and poor sucker subscriber"? 

Ya know how you "avoid" this problem entirely nowadays? You BEND to the monopolistic will of the cable companies and BUY their, and only their , recorder. This will always result in a higher bill, and sometimes quite higher. For, if you choose any other route, technicalities, difficulties, and at worse complete prohibition await you. 

FUNNY how it all works out exactly that way isn't it? 

VCR <---- Not just a relic from the old days. It's a relic from a time when the cable companies didn't seek to gain a monopoly on the simply convenience people took upon themselves to record TV shows off the cable connection they were paying for!


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

thekitten said:


> Yes, and? THat doesn't answer my claim. According to that link, Macrovision can be turned off. So, that means, when I want to record PoliticsNation with Al Sharpton on MSNBC for example ... it should be turned OFF, because that's a cable news channel and I should be able to record it - regardless of the views of the wealthy family that owns Comcast!


Have you tried getting MSNBC to tell Comcast not to do it?


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

thekitten said:


> How about THIS point about this whole "big cable company BLOCK the poor paid middle class and poor sucker subscriber"?
> 
> Ya know how you "avoid" this problem entirely nowadays? You BEND to the monopolistic will of the cable companies and BUY their, and only their , recorder. This will always result in a higher bill, and sometimes quite higher. For, if you choose any other route, technicalities, difficulties, and at worse complete prohibition await you.
> 
> ...


If there had been a way, back then, for the cable companies to force you to pay them every month to rent a VCR from them, or do without, they would have do so in a heartbeat.

They've always been out to squeeze every last nickel out of subscribers any way they could. It's nothing new, and no one here is an apologist for them.

You are confusing explanation with defense.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

thekitten said:


> Yes, and? THat doesn't answer my claim. According to that link, Macrovision can be turned off. So, that means, when I want to record PoliticsNation with Al Sharpton on MSNBC for example ... it should be turned OFF, because that's a cable news channel and I should be able to record it - regardless of the views of the wealthy family that owns Comcast!


Buy a video stabilizer on Ebay to defeat macro-vision and use your media center PC to watch shows you missed on line for free.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

Don't intervene now, they're on a roll. Always amusing to see folks arguing about how to keep analog SD going no matter how ancient it is.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

I'm confused. The OP is saying her recording device is refusing to record the output of the cable box.

Is this a Tivo or an HTPC?

Either way, this should not be. The cable company can not set the copy protection any higher than "copy once" (except for PPV and VOD).
If the cable box is not allowing a recording device to obtain that "one copy", then the OP has a legitimate complaint.

It almost sounds like the OP is trying to record the analog output of a cable DVR.
This would make sense as the cable DVR would be the device that records the "one copy" that is allowed, so it blocks recording from the analog outputs.

Sounds like the OP needs to take this issue up with her cable company / local franchising authority.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

steve614 said:


> I'm confused. The OP is saying her recording device is refusing to record the output of the cable box.
> 
> Is this a Tivo or an HTPC?
> 
> ...


How does a cable box know whether its analog outputs are feeding the analog inputs of a TV or the analog inputs of something that can record analog?


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

unitron said:


> How does a cable box know whether its analog outputs are feeding the analog inputs of a TV or the analog inputs of something that can record analog?


not that I really want to involve myself in this trainwreck of a thread, but... 

Isn't that the point of applying Macrovision to the output? a display device will ignore the signal, but a recording device will see the VBI issue and make the quintessential unwatchable Macrovision recorded content?


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

steve614 said:


> I'm confused. The OP is saying her recording device is refusing to record the output of the cable box.


Apparently.



steve614 said:


> Is this a Tivo or an HTPC?


Apparently an old S2 TiVo.



steve614 said:


> Either way, this should not be. The cable company can not set the copy protection any higher than "copy once" (except for PPV and VOD).
> If the cable box is not allowing a recording device to obtain that "one copy", then the OP has a legitimate complaint.


This isn't related to the CCI byte, or at least not directly. Her reports are rambling, indisctinct, and filtered through a great deal of ignorance, making any inferences on our part quite tenuous, but she seems to be reporting the issue is only on CCI > 0 channels. Whether this is accurate and her CATV provider is implementing Macrovision only on CCI > 0 channels or not, I don't really know.



steve614 said:


> It almost sounds like the OP is trying to record the analog output of a cable DVR.


I think it is an STB, but I'm not at all certain. I'm a bit more firm on the analog aspect.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

dianebrat said:


> not that I really want to involve myself in this trainwreck of a thread, but...


What an excellent description. I'm rather sorry I ever did.



dianebrat said:


> Isn't that the point of applying Macrovision to the output? a display device will ignore the signal, but a recording device will see the VBI issue and make the quintessential unwatchable Macrovision recorded content?


In essence, yes.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

unitron said:


> How does a cable box know whether its analog outputs are feeding the analog inputs of a TV or the analog inputs of something that can record analog?


I don't know but they do. When I first bought a DVD player many years ago my TV only had a coax input. I thought I could run the DVD player through my VCR to my TV (DVD players did not have coax outputs) - I could not, it scrambled the picture on many DVDs (but not all of them). I had to buy a little converter box that converted the output from the DVD player to coax. I was told at the time it was because of Macrovision (actually they just called it copy protection).


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

atmuscarella said:


> I don't know but they do. When I first bought a DVD player many years ago my TV only had a coax input. I thought I could run the DVD player through my VCR to my TV (DVD players did not have coax outputs) - I could not, it scrambled the picture on many DVDs (but not all of them).


That is a different matter. His rhetorical question concerned the target device, not the source material.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

My theory is,

either the OPs cable box is incorrectly putting a macrovision signal on the analog outputs and the Tivo will not record it,

or the OP is trying to record the analog output of a cable company DVR.

If it's the former, then her beef is with the cable company, not TiVo.

Maybe the cable box is faulty? Cable company incorrectly applying copy protection?
Both of these is not out of the realm of possibility.

The OP is ranting to the wrong crowd.


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

steve614 said:


> My theory is,
> 
> either the OPs cable box is incorrectly putting a macrovision signal on the analog outputs and the Tivo will not record it,
> 
> ...


No, I seriously doubt the box is faulty. lrh's commentary and other cleared that up. What I simply object to, and disagree with, is the implied DEFENSE and RATIONALIZATION of this ridiculous corporate monopoly tacting on behalf of Comcast/Xfinity. Apparently, lhr of course disagrees with my disagreement on his response on this, and has resorted to personal attacks on me. Again, that's fine, but I would be willing to BET that 99% of PAYING cable customers would not approve of this macrovision recording block practice, much less as flippantly and passively "approving" of it as he appears to be. This issue is NOT related to having updated equipment, and I find the other comments on using new equipment such as a cablecard, quite conflicting. It seems the bottom line is this, and I welcome anyone to "clear" this up for me if I'm mistaken:

Regardless of WHAT equipment you use for recording the cable television you pay for, if that equipment isn't something you are purchasing and/or service you are renting from the cable company, you can and will be subject to blocks and other problems with recording. The reason for this according to explanation by lhr? It's "legal", and now common practice.

Earlier, I expected I should be contacting Comcast and complaining , which I already have with no progress. However, now it seems like I won't get anywhere. Worse, Comcast simply has the right to rip me off , in this yet another way. Again, the average consumer just pads the pockets of Comcast executives, and what does he/she get in return? A big kick in the teeth!


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

Also, and again, I'm using a Windows 7 Media Center. I do have a Tivo S2, but not currently using that. Analog output of cable box to external USB tuner. Again, I've not heard anyone on this forum or any other describe a solution to this particular message being anything other than a CCI flag, or now Macrovision (since this is an analog signal going to the media center from the output of the cable box). 

What's really amusing about all of this, is that it would be difficult or impossible to find a comcast representative to actually confirm or deny the presence of this macrovision "protection" on the output of the box. Again, ignorance and diversion enable the grand ripoff to continue...


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

unitron said:


> If there had been a way, back then, for the cable companies to force you to pay them every month to rent a VCR from them, or do without, they would have do so in a heartbeat.
> 
> They've always been out to squeeze every last nickel out of subscribers any way they could. It's nothing new, and no one here is an apologist for them.
> 
> You are confusing explanation with defense.


I don't know how many different ways I can say the same thing, but I really don't agree with this response. The "explanation" isn't there. I've seen links to information saying that it's possible to block the recording. I know that, and I've been having that problem for some time. I've also seen bits and pieces about the CCI flag and what the industry is doing with that.

HOWEVER, and this is a big HOWEVER, I haven't read anything that explicitly states doing something like "global record blocking" on the output of a cable box is either stated in law or the cable company is otherwise legally compelled to do so. Now, the cable monopolies are both private, and a monopoly , but in this case the actions are downright insidious. Sure, they "can" block these things, and have been able to for many years now, but SHOULD they? Also, should the customers be aware of this fact, even if they happen to not be running into the block bases on the services and products they are using?

Even on this thread, people have commented , as I would, that they don't believe this is right. Many simply don't believe it. They think it's a technical issue, but according to lhr , who obviously knows a lot about the technical details, it's not a "technical problem". It's a block on purpose!


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

thekitten said:


> I don't know how many different ways I can say the same thing, but I really don't agree with this response. The "explanation" isn't there. I've seen links to information saying that it's possible to block the recording. I know that, and I've been having that problem for some time. I've also seen bits and pieces about the CCI flag and what the industry is doing with that.
> 
> HOWEVER, and this is a big HOWEVER, I haven't read anything that explicitly states doing something like "global record blocking" on the output of a cable box is either stated in law or the cable company is otherwise legally compelled to do so. Now, the cable monopolies are both private, and a monopoly , but in this case the actions are downright insidious. Sure, they "can" block these things, and have been able to for many years now, but SHOULD they? Also, should the customers be aware of this fact, even if they happen to not be running into the block bases on the services and products they are using?
> 
> Even on this thread, people have commented , as I would, that they don't believe this is right. Many simply don't believe it. They think it's a technical issue, but according to lhr , who obviously knows a lot about the technical details, it's not a "technical problem". It's a block on purpose!


Of course it's on purpose.

If a cable company can screw you over, they will.

Now that most cable companies are owned by "content providers", that's more true than ever.


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

So, speaking from a strictly practical level. Will this ATI cablecard actually work with Comcast today, and allow me to view and record my basic cable television channels? Can anyone personally vouch for this that's actually using it right now, and hopefully that knows they will still "activate" this device?


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

thekitten said:


> Also, and again, I'm using a Windows 7 Media Center. I do have a Tivo S2, but not currently using that. Analog output of cable box to external USB tuner. Again, I've not heard anyone on this forum or any other describe a solution to this particular message being anything other than a CCI flag, or now Macrovision (since this is an analog signal going to the media center from the output of the cable box).
> 
> What's really amusing about all of this, is that it would be difficult or impossible to find a comcast representative to actually confirm or deny the presence of this macrovision "protection" on the output of the box. Again, ignorance and diversion enable the grand ripoff to continue...


You can purchase an original Tivo Series 3 with the led face plate and have it modified to ignore the CCI flags. You can purchase a video stabilizer to defeat macrovison. You can stream most any show from the browser on your media center PC.


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

shwru980r said:


> You can purchase an original Tivo Series 3 with the led face plate and have it modified to ignore the CCI flags. You can purchase a video stabilizer to defeat macrovison. You can stream most any show from the browser on your media center PC.


Thanks, but if an "ATI cablecard" would work, and provide overall better results, it seems that's the best way to go for your average few show a week TV watcher. If not, then I guess I'm sorta stuck, as I'm not sure if the stabilizer will rid me of the block message in Media Center, and I can't use a Tivo now because my setup is based on the computer.

I know about the streaming, and have done that in many ways for years with several devices. However, downloading/streaming is a real pain compared to simply recording weekly shows that I want to watch.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

shwru980r said:


> You can purchase an original Tivo Series 3 with the led face plate and have it modified to ignore the CCI flags.


To the best of my ability to tell, this is not necessary for her requirements. All she needs is to get a modern TiVo, hacked or otherwise.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

The ATI CableCARD solution as well as the comparable HDHomerun Prime from Silicon Dust will only work with Win7/Win8 computers due to the restrictions of the CableCARD license holders. At least that's been the status quo since they came out.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

Sometimes the trainwreck threads are the most educational.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

This thread is hilarious.


----------



## moedaman (Aug 21, 2012)

OK, since the actual device model was not named, I assumed that what is being used is a video capture device and not a true tv tuner. From what I've read on these devices from comments on Newegg, is that they're universally medicore at best. And one of the problems is the copy protection pop-up. I would say not use this device and find something else instead. 

The op should have gone to a pc forum instead of a Tivo forum, since this isn't a Tivo (or really a Comcast) issue at all.


----------



## bhoch99 (Jan 21, 2003)

Let the lawyers keep 99% of the money. For me, it's about the principle. Analog Tivos let me transfer everything I record, but digital do not due to the CCI byte. Sign me up for the lawsuit!


----------



## thekitten (Oct 22, 2012)

bhoch99 said:


> Let the lawyers keep 99% of the money. For me, it's about the principle. Analog Tivos let me transfer everything I record, but digital do not due to the CCI byte. Sign me up for the lawsuit!


AGREED! I don't like attorneys and what they do with their businesses anymore than any other "non-shark", but if they can do something GOOD for WE THE PEOPLE then so be it. Time to stick it to Comcast. It's bad enough they are ripping us off and monopolizing. They can't take our V C Rs!


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

For years HBO has required the application of CGMS-A to analog output of their stuff (see this).


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

thekitten said:


> AGREED! I don't like attorneys and what they do with their businesses anymore than any other "non-shark", but if they can do something GOOD for WE THE PEOPLE then so be it. Time to stick it to Comcast. It's bad enough they are ripping us off and monopolizing. They can't take our V C Rs!


You could put a Tivo in every room of your house for what an attorney would charge you, but then you wouldn't have anything to complain about.


----------



## moedaman (Aug 21, 2012)

mikeyts said:


> For years HBO has required the application of CGMS-A to analog output of their stuff (see this).


It isn't applied everywhere though. I record HBO/Cinemax shows on my dvr and then copy them via composite to the hdd of my Panasonic dvd recorder and then make dvd's of those shows. No problems at all. And no, I won't tell you who my provider is!


----------



## ggieseke (May 30, 2008)

I've seen several threads regarding Comcast and certain cableboxes. Evidently the box adds Macrovision to the analog outputs on every channel including OTA. It affects S1/S2 TiVos, HTPCs and probably even old VCRs.

Since they're a lot more reasonable than TW regarding the CCI byte I doubt that it's deliberate. I think they just screwed up somewhere in the STB firmware.

Filing an FCC complaint is probably the only way to get the ball rolling. I doubt that most Comcast CSRs even know what analog is, much less Macrovision.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

A video stabilizer will solve the macro-vision issue.


----------



## dstarr2112 (Jan 17, 2013)

how can I get in on this class action suit? they're ripping me off too


thekitten said:


> Hello,
> 
> I've been battling this problem for years with both my Tivo and now Windows Media Center. It seems Comcast is getting worse, not better. This must be a "secret" effort for them to continue their monopoly and control the TV recording market as well.
> 
> ...


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

dstarr2112 said:


> how can I get in on this class action suit? they're ripping me off too


If there were any realistic possibility of success of such a suit the lawyers would already be all over it (in their ceaseless struggle for freedom and justice for the American people!).

Quit whining! We Time Warner Cable customers know what copy protection is, long before Comcast started it. I see this is your first post so you obviously haven't researched this issue on this forum. Fact is it's legal, per FCC regulations, for the Cable Cos to apply copy protection at their whim, without explanation, to any channel they desire except for cable copies of local broadcast stations. You're wasting your energy on this issue. Even if you could get ALL the affected CATV subscribers (less than 1% of all subscribers) marching on DC with torches, it wouldn't be enough political clout to get this changed.


----------



## ramblinche81 (Oct 7, 2012)

thekitten said:


> Hello,
> 
> I've been battling this problem for years with both my Tivo and now Windows Media Center. It seems Comcast is getting worse, not better. This must be a "secret" effort for them to continue their monopoly and control the TV recording market as well.
> 
> ...


Great minds think alike.....your is a great mind and I was having the same thoughts as I evaluated the multi room functionality of Comcast vs TiVo. Comcast claims to offer MultiRoom from a single DVR, with companion converter boxes in auxilliary rooms. Comcast does NOT support streaming with multiple DVR in a home. If you have multiple DVR only ONE can stream. Others are stand alone, and cannot stream from the parent DVR to a second DVR.

While the letter of the law could be on the side of Comcast, the reality is they are interfering with competition. The intent of the mandatory cablecard regulations was to open up competition.

This one gets interesting because one of the remedies (a legal basis) is for TiVo to figure out how to stream from devices (in this case S3 to S4), if I read, S4 already allows streaming to networked S4. S3 doesn't support live streaming.

So.....the problem isn't Comcast, the problem is TiVo has not provided software for streaming on S3.

So, it isn't a Comcast problem, it is a TiVo problem.

that said, if Comcast interferes with streaming or blocks streaming, then there is a basis for legal complaint against Comcast.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

Comcast does not protect anything but the movie channels per corporate policy, so if the local is doing something different escalate the issue to corporate.

You're nuts if you think suing them (or TWC, or Brighthouse, who HAVE a corporate policy to protect everything but the locals) will get anywhere. IIRC the FCC says that only the locals have to be kept in the clear.

Finally, Tivo is not going to update the S3 software to allow streaming to get around this issue - if they were going to do it they would have done so when it was released for the S4s.


----------



## EVizzle (Feb 13, 2005)

Really awful experience today with copy protection. I subscribe to NHL Gamecenter, but with the Center Ice trial I figured I would see how that service works in conjunction with a TiVo (xl4). I recorded two games plus the local game from FoxSportsNorth and watched the local game first, and noticed a 24hr window needed to view. Oh yeah, now I remember why I don't subscribe...

Anyway, after watching the local game, no more than 6 hours after the games aired, they were gone. Not 24, not 12, but 6 hours after they aired they were not watchable.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

That's normal and expected - those are considered to be PPV channels and are set to copy never, so you better watch them fast.


----------

