# FiOS restriction --- Transferring prohibited by the copyright holder.



## Phantom Gremlin

From what I've read about FiOS, there has never been any sort of restriction on transferring files from box to box. But I just browsed to another of my TiVo HD boxes and saw:

*Transferring prohibited by the copyright holder.*​
I don't really care, this was for some programs on Disney HD and Disney XD HD that some family members recorded.

But this is disturbing if it means that this CCI stuff is now creeping into FiOS.

Edit: not all programs are restricted. Perhaps it's just movies. E.g. it's OK to transfer Phineas and Ferb, but not OK to transfer the 1994 movie Blank Check.


----------



## bicker

Service providers are, of course, permitted to apply some of the CCI restrictions, by their own choice (though generally FiOS has not), but what you may be experiencing is a case where the content provider is requiring it.


----------



## steve614

My vote goes towards Disney requesting it. They are anal when it comes to copy protection.


----------



## cwerdna

Good catch! It looks like Verizon has started putting copy protection on virtually ALL content that's non-broadcast. Previously, the only protected (can't be transferred content) I ever had was on stuff that I downloaded from Amazon or video on demand like podcasts, never recordings. I've never seen stuff protected like stuff from CNN, CNBC and HDNet. I know because I archive some stuff from there.

Now, I'm seeing these protected: Star Trek Enterprise (HDNet), Larry King Live (CNNI) Mythbusters (DSCP), Mad Money (CNBC) and even stuff in COMEDY and HLN!

It looks like no recordings before 6/8 (such as eps of the above) had this damned protection. Perhaps that what the monkeys at Verizon/Frontier screwed up with their outage on 6/7.  It's easier to check using kmttg (and probably TiVo Desktop).

I've archived bits of Mad Money and entire eps of Enterprise before. I've also set more shows to record that I've archived in the past w/o no problem (xferred using kmttg, transcoded then burned to AVCHD format) to see if they're also now protect. We'll see in the new few days.

I've started http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7982774#post7982774 asking non-FiOS people to check their recordings. I think Verizon ****ed up. 

If it turns out to be a FiOS-only thing, it'll be time to call CSR. If it's their fault and they don't yank the protection crap, I'll be dropping them as soon as my commitment is up. I do archive stuff to AVCHD and this would really suck.


----------



## MPSAN

I also can add HBOHD. I recorded Smash His Camera on 6/8 and other THD's in the house list it with a red icon and will not transfer! I can understand HBO, but Mythbusters?

I wonder if a call to Verizon would help or if we would just gat a "HUH" response?

I may check dslreports to see what people are saying!


----------



## Jonathan_S

cwerdna said:


> Good catch! It looks like Verizon has started putting copy protection on virtually ALL content that's non-broadcast. Previously, the only protected (can't be transferred content) I ever had was on stuff that I downloaded from Amazon or video on demand like podcasts, never recordings. I've never seen stuff protected like stuff from CNN, CNBC and HDNet. I know because I archive some stuff from there.


I wonder if this is related to the sell-off of some FIOS areas to Frontier.


> Frontier will acquire include all of Verizon's local wireline operating territories in Arizona, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin


The few people who've specifically noticed issues live in the affected areas. So maybe Frontier is setting the copy protection.

(I've got FIOS and haven't noticed any protected recordings, but I'm in a non-Frontier area. I'll try to remember to double check on the no protected recordings tonight)


----------



## rifleman69

Yep, I think Frontier is setting this. They're going to lose me as a customer very very quickly. First step is the regular home phone line (hello Vonage or something similar), the next is the tv.


----------



## cwerdna

rifleman69 said:


> Yep, I think Frontier is setting this. They're going to lose me as a customer very very quickly.


If this is their policy moving forward, they will lose me as a customer as soon as my commitment's over. I might even try to wrangle out of it before it's over, if I can.


----------



## rifleman69

cwerdna said:


> If this is their policy moving forward, they will lose me as a customer as soon as my commitment's over. I might even try to wrangle out of it before it's over, if I can.


As soon as July 1st hits, you will be eligible to leave Frontier unless you re-upped within the past few months. They will also lose me as a customer too if this is how they run their business.


----------



## MPSAN

rifleman69 said:


> As soon as July 1st hits, you will be eligible to leave Frontier unless you re-upped within the past few months. They will also lose me as a customer too if this is how they run their business.


I thought the VZ to Frontier State approval required them to change nothing.


----------



## rifleman69

On their end, they're not technically changing anything. But in our eyes, it's a big change!


----------



## MPSAN

rifleman69 said:


> Yep, I think Frontier is setting this. They're going to lose me as a customer very very quickly. First step is the regular home phone line (hello Vonage or something similar), the next is the tv.


Per my private dealings with VZ_Frank on VerizonDirect this MAY be an error.

Film at 11, as they say on the T and V.


----------



## Jonathan_S

Jonathan_S said:


> (I've got FIOS and haven't noticed any protected recordings, but I'm in a non-Frontier area. I'll try to remember to double check on the no protected recordings tonight)


Just checked and I have no copy restrictions on recent recordings, even for recording from premium channels.


----------



## MPSAN

I believe it has something to do with our CableCard outage...a kind of a part 2.

I got off the phone with FIOS support and they said they had nothing to do with it...it is our TIVO's. Sure it is!


----------



## cwerdna

MPSAN said:


> I believe it has something to do with our CableCard outage...a kind of a part 2.
> 
> I got off the phone with FIOS support and they said they had nothing to do with it...it is our TIVO's. Sure it is!


Great...  I'm still at work and can't check if it's still a problem. Hopefully enough customers scream bloody murder and are able to get them to fix this.


----------



## MatthewH12

I'm in Delaware with FiOS, and nothing I recorded shows as protected for me except my podcasts.


----------



## cwerdna

MatthewH12 said:


> I'm in Delaware with FiOS, and nothing I recorded shows as protected for me except my podcasts.


I wouldn't be surprised if the problem is confined to the states being transferred (or already partly transferred?) to Frontier. The OP, MSPAN and myself fall into that category.


----------



## MPSAN

rifleman69 said:


> On their end, they're not technically changing anything. But in our eyes, it's a big change!


The Oregonian has a person who loves this stuff. She has already gone after Verizon!


----------



## richsadams

I just spent about two hours on the phone with VZ support. Details are below, but feel free to skip to the last paragraph for the outcome.

MPSAN and I talk often and while I was on the road he made me aware of the copyright problem. I got home and sure enough we have the same issue. The copyright protection is arbitrary as far as I can tell but it covers everything from HBO to CNN. Not just some programs, everything is flagged on every channel that's affected but not all channels are affected. CNN? That clearly tells me they've made a mistake. It began late on 6/7, the same date that the outage happened (we lost all of our cable channels above 554). Someone flipped a switch and caused a lot of us a lot of grief. 

Getting our cable cards back up and running only required a couple of calls. This go round it was fairly painful and the end result was no result at all. Initially I had to explain to the CSR what a copyright flag is, the different types, etc. That was mildly surprising, but not unexpected. Then he commenced to communicate everything I was saying to a tech person on the other end of his computer keyboard. The back-and-forth went on for a long time. Initially I would tell the CSR something, he'd type it into his workstation and the tech would write something back. 

Obviously neither one of them had run into this. The first thing they tried was reinitializing one of my cable cards. I read them the S/N and they did their thing. Everything went away and eventually came back, and I quickly recorded a couple of channels that were protected prior and they were still flagged. So I talked, the CSR listened, typed and read back what the tech told him. The responses included...

- You should be receiving all of the channels now (I was already receiving all of the channels)
- The cable cards are working 
- This doesn't have anything to do with the outage
- The cable cards don't copyright the recordings
- TiVo copyrights the recordings
- We can't control what TiVo does
- Copyright flags have always been there
- The tech knows a dude that has TiVo and he can't transfer recordings to another TiVo (seriously, he said exactly that)
- The recordings are blocked by TiVo
- This is a TiVo problem
- Verizon is copyrighting all programming except local stations (not the case)
- All recordings are copyrighted...always
- This is a TiVo problem
- Transferring between TiVo's is no longer allowed (seriously?)
- We don't know why some programs are copyrighted, we think someone is working on it.

The last answer came after a very long period of waiting on hold listening to bad music. It was obvious that whoever the CSR was communicating with talked to someone else...finally. But that really didn't make any difference.

The disappointing reality is that right now no one at Verizon (at least we the Great Unwashed can get to) has a clue as to what's going on. I've no idea if this is part of their preparation for the Frontier takeover. I suspect it's just someone's panic induced error when they tried to fix the multi-state outage. However if it is I'm really inclined to cancel VZ and go OTA and just download the shows we want to see with Boxee, iTunes, Netflix, etc. Hopefully they'll get this fixed though...and soon.


----------



## rifleman69

Good post rich. I say screw Frontier if this is how they're going to run things. I can run my S3 box off OTA, sell my Premiere box and go back to DirecTV yesterday.

This can't be a TiVo problem...BUT I know a few people who have Windows Media Centers and the like, and their cards are a-ok...and they're in Frontier territory.


----------



## cwerdna

Thanks for reporting the problem to me. Sigh... it sucks that they seem clueless. 

Coming home, I can see these also got copy protection:
Mad Money on CNBC (standard def), recorded 6/10/10 3 pm and 8 pm Pacific
Attack of the Show (191 G4), 6/10/10 4 pm Pacific

Surprisingly, this one *didn't *get CP:
Ultimate Factories on SPEEDHD (583), 6/10/10 10 pm Pacific

Don't know if they fixed the problem or if this is a fluke.


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> Thanks for reporting the problem to me. Sigh... it sucks that they seem clueless.
> 
> Coming home, I can see these also got copy protection:
> Mad Money on CNBC (standard def), recorded 6/10/10 3 pm and 8 pm Pacific
> Attack of the Show (191 G4), 6/10/10 4 pm Pacific
> 
> Surprisingly, this one *didn't *get CP:
> Ultimate Factories on SPEEDHD (583), 6/10/10 10 pm Pacific
> 
> Don't know if they fixed the problem or if this is a fluke.


That's what I mean...the copy protection seems fairly random. I would bet we all have the same channels flagged, it's just that we don't see it until something is recorded. Comedy Central HD is copy protected, but MSNBC-HD next door isn't. CNN-HD is, HGTV-HD is, Showtime (all channels) isn't. Makes zero sense IMO. In other areas (that weren't hit by the outage) there's still zero copy protection like we have/had. All of which leads me to believe it's a mistake.

I expect (hope) that they'll get enough complaints to take some action soon...hopefully before they bail and leave it to Frontier to deal with.


----------



## cwerdna

rifleman69 said:


> As soon as July 1st hits, you will be eligible to leave Frontier unless you re-upped within the past few months. They will also lose me as a customer too if this is how they run their business.


Can you point me to a source of this?

I re-skimmed the letter I got from Verizon/Frontier about the switchover but didn't see any mention of being able to cut out early that'd apply to me. The letter seemed more geared towards local and long distance POTS which I don't have anyway. I have no landline.


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> Can you point me to a source of this?
> 
> I re-skimmed the letter I got from Verizon/Frontier about the switchover but didn't see any mention of being able to cut out early that'd apply to me. The letter seemed more geared towards local and long distance POTS which I don't have anyway. I have no landline.


Here is an excerpt from a letter VZ sent out in November 2009:



> The following is an outline of an important change to the verizon Online
> Terms of Service, which is effective as of November 30, 2009. We have
> described this change in general terms below and recommend that you
> review the complete Terms of Service to determine how this change
> applies to you or your use of the Service. The Terms of Service can be
> accessed by clicking on the "Policies and Terms of Service" link
> (www2.verizon.net/policies) at the bottom of any page of our Website.
> The Terms of Service, as revised, will govern your rights and
> obligations, and ours, with respect to your use of the Services we
> offer. As set forth in Paragraph 3 of the Terms of Service, your
> continued use of the Service after the effective date of this change
> will constitute your agreement to the change.
> 
> 1. If you are on a term plan and verizon ceases offering service to
> your location prior to the end of your term commitment, you will not
> have to pay an early termination fee.
> 
> Please take time to review the complete verizon Online Terms of Service.
> 
> Thank you for being a verizon Online customer.


It's interesting to note that the link that they refer to on that web page is dead.

More info from this Oregon PUC press release (http://www.puc.state.or.us/PUC/news/2010/2010005.shtml)

An interesting part...



> Customers of Verizon's FIOS voice, data and video fiber service in Washington, Yamhill and Multnomah counties could opt out of long-term contracts if Frontier reduces internet speeds or drops channels.


That could be why we're seeing VZ dropping channels just about every day now. Of course I'm in Clackamas County...my representative must have called in sick that day. 

Here's some info from the WA State Regulators office: (http://wutc.wa.gov/webimage.nsf/0/BD97957114A730D4882577070078F3D2)

Of note...



> Another provision would allow a 90-day window for customers who use Verizon for their long-distance carrier to choose another provider without incurring a $5 switching fee. Current Verizon long-distance customers may retain Frontier as their toll provider in the future. Low-income customers who qualify for phone service through the Washington Telephone Assistance Program would receive a one-time $75 credit if the company fails to offer appropriate discounts or deposit waivers.


Not sure if they were looking out for VZ TV customers in the same way.

I'm sure there's more to be found, but it's getting to be past my bedtime!


----------



## rifleman69

cwerdna said:


> Can you point me to a source of this?
> 
> I re-skimmed the letter I got from Verizon/Frontier about the switchover but didn't see any mention of being able to cut out early that'd apply to me. The letter seemed more geared towards local and long distance POTS which I don't have anyway. I have no landline.


If they leave the channel copy-protected, that's more than enough to fight the ETF if they choose to hit you with it. I'm month to month any way so it won't matter to me.


----------



## MichaelK

you guys dont need to record somethign to see if it's flagged.

go to the troubleshooting screens via the main menu (sorry not at my tivo to give you the way)- I think they are found both under cable card and under troubleshooting.

Scroll through all the data and you will see a line about CCI byte. 0X02 is flagged for no transfer. 0x00 is do what you want.

if you get to the diag screen you can check the channels you are currently on. Then hit the live tv button and flip to new channels you want to check then press left arrow and it will go back the diag screen. lather rinse repeat to check all the channels you want. 

It's a lot faster than setting up a recording, canceling it, and checking npl.


----------



## MichaelK

rifleman69 said:


> If they leave the channel copy-protected, that's more than enough to fight the ETF if they choose to hit you with it. ...


maybe but i wouldn't bet on it. Frontier might also let people out to keep the bad press to a minimum. But I doubt any regulator without a tivo on a time warner system knows enough about content flags to include such a provision.

the snip above says drop speeds or remove channels, says nothing about turning on copy protection.

Hopefully for you folks though it's just a mistake.


----------



## cwerdna

cwerdna said:


> Don't know if they fixed the problem or if this is a fluke.


It's definitely not fixed. These are still receiving copy protection:
Larry King Live - 6/11/10 2 am CNNI
Star Trek: Enterprise eps - 6/11/10 7 am and 8 am HDNET


----------



## vurbano

If I cant even transfer recordings then the Tivo's I have are useless.


----------



## richsadams

MichaelK said:


> you guys dont need to record somethign to see if it's flagged. <snip>


Excellent info. Thanks for that! :up:


----------



## vurbano

IS there a solution to this at DDB.com?


----------



## richsadams

MichaelK said:


> the snip above says drop speeds or remove channels, says nothing about turning on copy protection.
> 
> Hopefully for you folks though it's just a mistake.


True enough, but VZ's own letter clearly states that if they discontinue providing service there would be no ET fee. Some local PUC's also added their own requirements before they approved the sale. Oregon made Frontier stipulate to 50 various requirements  including the waiver of ET fees so I don't think that will be an issue.

If this flag thing continues it will certainly drive a lot of us to reconsider our options.


----------



## MPSAN

rifleman69 said:


> Good post rich. I say screw Frontier if this is how they're going to run things. I can run my S3 box off OTA, sell my Premiere box and go back to DirecTV yesterday.
> 
> This can't be a TiVo problem...BUT I know a few people who have Windows Media Centers and the like, and their cards are a-ok...and they're in Frontier territory.


Good post, Rich. One clarification about channel numbers, however. They even protected the Game Show Network (CH 184).


----------



## rifleman69

MichaelK said:


> maybe but i wouldn't bet on it. Frontier might also let people out to keep the bad press to a minimum. But I doubt any regulator without a tivo on a time warner system knows enough about content flags to include such a provision.
> 
> the snip above says drop speeds or remove channels, says nothing about turning on copy protection.
> 
> Hopefully for you folks though it's just a mistake.


It's taking away something that I already had...that's specifically written into the VZ/OR (and I believe WA and IN too) contract. Easy waive of the ETF.


----------



## MPSAN

VERY IMPORTANT!!

Hello ALL:

PLEASE call TIVO and tell them what is going on. Rich and I have both been told by Verizon that this is a TIVO issue. In fact I pointed the Tech to this thread and he does not like what Rich was told! I was told that we should call in to TIVO and especially if you have a TIVO Premiere!

They even said that if a copy flag is used, it is never spread across all of the stations as we now see! There must have been an issue with our CableCard failure that they did not resolve yet or was added when they forced our cards to work again! The more who call TIVO the better as I am sure they contact a higher level of people at Verizon than we can!


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> VERY IMPORTANT!!
> 
> Hello ALL:
> 
> PLEASE call TIVO and tell them what is going on. Rich and I have both been told by Verizon that this is a TIVO issue. In fact I pointed the Tech to this thread and he does not like what Rich was told! I was told that we should call in to TIVO and especially if you have a TIVO Premiere!
> 
> They even said that if a copy flag is used, it is never spread across all of the stations as we now see! There must have been an issue with our CableCard failure that they did not resolve yet or was added when they forced our cards to work again! The more who call TIVO the better as I am sure they contact a higher level of people at Verizon than we can!


It appears our cable cards have been paired by VZ. I'm running an experiment right now to see if that's the case (more here).


----------



## cwerdna

On a side note, I'm looking at http://www.tivo.com/copyprotection and it says


> WARNING: Your cable provider must pair (bind) the CableCARD to its slot in the TiVo box before you can view content with any CCI value other than 0x00.


Now that I think about it... during the 6/7 and 6/8 outage, I didn't check ALL channels (there are way too many) but I know I couldn't receive CNN (100) and CNBC (102).

I'd receive that damned "In order to start cable service for this device, please contact your cable provider..." message on those channels and most ones above 100, other than high def version of broadcast channels (e.g. 504)

Now, shows recorded on 100 CNN and 102 CNBC are getting copy protection. Hmmm...


----------



## MPSAN

So if Verizon did not bind the card, as they never did before, all we could see was a 000. That is how I see it.


----------



## cwerdna

MPSAN said:


> So if Verizon did not bind the card, as they never did before, all we could see was a 000. That is how I see it.


Exactly...

This is pure speculation on my part (call BS on me if I'm wrong):
When I spent ~2 hours on the phone w/them due to the 6/7 and 6/8 outage on most channels >100, when I finally got all this resolved, the rep had to ask for 3 numbers off the please call your provider screen. Did they end up pairing the card to my TiVo HD at that point?

If so, then I'm guessing that VZ turned on protection on a whole bunch of channels (like CNN, CNBC, HDNET, etc.). I couldn't get to them because, the card wasn't paired. If my call caused it to be paired, that's why I can see them again.


----------



## rifleman69

So if they pair them, why did they not copy-protect every single channel that's not local? ESPNU was left on during the outage for me, same with National Geographic Channel...according to others, Showtime channels are not protected (and really if there's a case of stuff being protected, it would be for a premium add-on service like Showtime or HBO or Cinemax).


----------



## MPSAN

cwerdna said:


> Exactly...
> 
> This is pure speculation on my part (call BS on me if I'm wrong):
> When I spent ~2 hours on the phone w/them due to the 6/7 and 6/8 outage on most channels >100, when I finally got all this resolved, the rep had to ask for 3 numbers off the please call your provider screen. Did they end up pairing the card to my TiVo HD at that point?
> 
> If so, then I'm guessing that VZ turned on protection on a whole bunch of channels (like CNN, CNBC, HDNET, etc.).  I couldn't get to them because, the card wasn't paired. If my call caused it to be paired, that's why I can see them again.


I am not sure the 2 were the same. I think that the CableCard can be enabled even without pairing. However, without pairing, we can only transfer shows with a 000 flag.


----------



## MPSAN

rifleman you have a PM


----------



## richsadams

It turns out that our cable cards are now paired. More here:

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7985113#post7985113

We should probably consolidate these two threads somehow. Moderators?


----------



## rifleman69

Just respond to the other thread only...this one will fall off the page once no one posts on it or reads this message.


----------



## NYHeel

richsadams said:


> It turns out that our cable cards are now paired. More here:
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7985113#post7985113
> 
> We should probably consolidate these two threads somehow. Moderators?


Is the pairing for all Fios customers or only those in the frontier areas?


----------



## cwerdna

richsadams said:


> It turns out that our cable cards are now paired. More here:
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7985113#post7985113
> 
> We should probably consolidate these two threads somehow. Moderators?


Should we really consolidate? My original purpose of the other thread was for non-FiOS people to tell me if those channels were protected. I wanted to see if it was VZ/Frontier's doing vs. the content provider.

After all, if let's say CNN, CNBC, HDNet, Discovery, etc. are all protected for everyone else, then me going to Comcast would be pointless.


----------



## richsadams

NYHeel said:


> Is the pairing for all Fios customers or only those in the frontier areas?


Not sure...I don't have the list of all states VZ serves, but the outage and new copy flags appear to be limited to the future Frontier FIOS states.


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> Should we really consolidate? My original purpose of the other thread was for non-FiOS people to tell me if those channels were protected. I wanted to see if it was VZ/Frontier's doing vs. the content provider.
> 
> After all, if let's say CNN, CNBC, HDNet, etc. are all protected for everyone else, then me going to Comcast would be pointless.


Good point. I think most of the folks here have the same channels flagged, but there are VZ subscribers in states other than those that Frontier is taking over that still have no CP. We can't assume anything but I'd think it would be a safe bet that this is limited to the future Frontier FIOS areas.

We should probably do some research on the Comcast threads and outside forums to see what the buzz is...if any...to find out if they are experiencing new CP issues as an earlier poster mentioned.


----------



## richsadams

rifleman69 said:


> Just respond to the other thread only...this one will fall off the page once no one posts on it or reads this message.


I'll do that. Oh wait...d'oh!


----------



## vurbano

I have no problems. My cards must be paired


----------



## cwerdna

vurbano said:


> I have no problems. My cards must be paired


What area are you in?

Define "no problems". Have you tried recording/checking for the presence of CP on problems channels that I've listed (100 CNN, 102 CNBC, HDNet, DSCP, etc.)?


----------



## MPSAN

Verizon said it was a TIVO issue. I said it was not and that the TIVO was just responding to the Flag that Verizon was sending. They then said that there was no problem and that Verizon was just sending what they were told to send.


----------



## rifleman69

MPSAN said:


> Verizon said it was a TIVO issue. I said it was not and that the TIVO was just responding to the Flag that Verizon was sending. They then said that there was no problem and that Verizon was just sending what they were told to send.


I think our PM conversation is correct MPSAN. VZ can't say anything about it...and we weren't supposed to know about it until the 1st!


----------



## MapleLeaf

Ugh! I just upgraded my FiOS service two days ago and signed on for a two-year commitment (I'm in WA state, so I'll be affected by the upcoming transition to Frontier). I had previously been getting 20/5 internet, Extreme HD TV, and Freedom Essentials phone, and paying $105/month for the bundle. They offered me 35/35 internet, Ultimate HD TV, and the same phone package for $80/month for the first 6 months and then $110/month for the remaining 18 months of my commitment. Oh, and they also threw in a bunch of movie channels (HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, TMC, and Epix) for free for 6 months. I figured that not only was this a really good deal, but it would protect me from any Frontier price increases for at least a couple of years.

But given these latest developments, I'm having second thoughts. I *think* I have 30 days to get out of my commitment without incurring an early termination fee, so I'll have to see how things shake out over the next few weeks. If it turns out that copy protection is in fact here to stay, then I'll have to weigh how impactful these increased copy restrictions are to me versus the cost and other benefits of my bundled services before deciding whether or not I should stick with Verizon/Frontier and exploring what my other options might be.


----------



## MPSAN

rifleman69 said:


> I think our PM conversation is correct MPSAN. VZ can't say anything about it...and we weren't supposed to know about it until the 1st!


Yeah...I guess they figured that no one would know!


----------



## vurbano

cwerdna said:


> What area are you in?
> 
> Define "no problems". Have you tried recording/checking for the presence of CP on problems channels that I've listed (100 CNN, 102 CNBC, HDNet, DSCP, etc.)?


Newport News, VA... I just tried HBOHD and USAHD. 3 minutes of JAG from HDNET are transferring to this PC as I type.


----------



## richsadams

MapleLeaf said:


> But given these latest developments, I'm having second thoughts.


Hang in there. Even if the CP stays in place I can't believe it will stay copy zero, that doesn't make any sense for anyone. Whatever happens I'm almost certain we'll have 30 to 90 days to leave Frontier FIOS w/o an ET fee.


----------



## cwerdna

vurbano said:


> Newport News, VA... No I just tried HBO and USA. 3minutes of JAG from HDNET are transferring to this PC as I type.


Do you know if your area is transitioning to Frontier? Did you get hit by the outage across most channels >100 on 6/7 and 6/8?

Please do give some of the channels/shows I mentioned at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=450334 a whirl.

That's good for you w/HDNET. Every single ep of Enterprise I recorded from HDNET >=6/8 has been protected (unless something suddenly changed this afternoon). None before it ever were protected.


----------



## vurbano

cwerdna said:


> Do you know if your area is transitioning to Frontier? Did you get hit by the outage across most channels >100 on 6/7 and 6/8?


Not sure
No no outages here.


----------



## rifleman69

Outages only in Indiana, Oregon, and Washington. Everyone else didn't get it, and looks like they don't have any copy protection either.


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> Do you know if your area is transitioning to Frontier? Did you get hit by the outage across most channels >100 on 6/7 and 6/8?


The operations Frontier will acquire include all of Verizon's local wireline operating territories in Arizona, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin. In addition, the transaction will include a small number of Verizon's exchanges in California, including those bordering Arizona, Nevada and Oregon. EE eye EE eye OH!

From: http://bit.ly/FQEEX

Okay, I added the EE eye Oh part. '



rifleman69 said:


> Outages only in Indiana, Oregon, and Washington. Everyone else didn't get it, and looks like they don't have any copy protection either.


So should they expect to get the same treatment (CP...not an outage hopefully) or should we expect ours to go away (hint: doubt it).


----------



## richsadams

I found a Verizon to Frontier Transition FAQ website (run by Frontier) that had a very minor amount of information about their plans for us; it will be smooth, nothing will change, yadda, yadda. Don't worry, be happy.

If I had "more questions" they kindly listed a phone number. So out of curiosity I called to inquire about their plans to restrict the transfer of television recordings as previously Verizon had no restrictions. I was on hold for a while, in fact longer than I would have liked (about 10 minutes) listening to some upbeat elevator music interspersed with brief commercials about various Frontier "features" of which I could take advantage.

The Frontier CSR was very polite but after I told her who I was, a concerned customer, and what we were dealing with regarding copyright flags and such she really had no answers...even referring me back to the website. Although she knew what a TiVo was (at least she said she did) I could quickly tell that she really didn't understand the technical aspects of what I was relating. However she stayed pleasant and clung to the party line.

Her basic response to my list of questions and feedback was "Nothing will change; whatever you have with Verizon the day before we take over is what you will have with Frontier." That wasn't what I wanted to hear of course but not unexpected either. She did say that if there was something "unusual" going on with my Verizon service that I should call Verizon. Been there, done that...not even a T-shirt.

I asked her if she had any means of letting the powers that be know of my and other's concerns. I added that if things remained the same as they are today that I and likely many others would probably cancel our service with them. She danced around the subject for a bit but really didn't have the ability to or wasn't interested in passing on my concerns to anyone else. End of conversation.

So, still no answers. 

If anyone else wants to give it a go you might find someone with a little more information...

Frontier Customer Support: 1-866-718-5386 - Residential customers press 1

Let us know if you have any better luck!


----------



## steve614

I feel for you guys, but I have to say I had a feeling this day would come. Every time I saw a TW or Comcast thread that dealt with copy protection, there would always be the suggestion to go FIOS. 
That may not be true anymore.
Hopefully, it's a mistake because I'm all for being able to MRV between DVRs.
TiVo's mistake (IMO) with this issue is not having MRV and TTG as separate protocols.
I understand the issue of piracy, and now days if you're able to get something to your computer, you can copy it ad infinitum, so don't blame TiVo. They have to obey the rules using the tools they have available.
I would hope they are working on a solution as MRV is a main selling point.


----------



## richsadams

steve614 said:


> I feel for you guys, but I have to say I had a feeling this day would come. Every time I saw a TW or Comcast thread that dealt with copy protection, there would always be the suggestion to go FIOS.
> That may not be true anymore.
> Hopefully, it's a mistake because I'm all for being able to MRV between DVRs.
> TiVo's mistake (IMO) with this issue is not having MRV and TTG as separate protocols.
> I understand the issue of piracy, and now days if you're able to get something to your computer, you can copy it ad infinitum, so don't blame TiVo. They have to obey the rules using the tools they have available.
> I would hope they are working on a solution as MRV is a main selling point.


I guess it doesn't surprise me either and I absolutely don't blame TiVo. I also agree that MRV is a big selling point, one that I refuse to give up. I think this will be resolved when VZ gets enough blow back and perhaps when TiVo gets enough complaints. However if it's left to Frontier, who knows? Like I said, I'd just go OTA and use various broadband resources to get everything else if this nonsense sticks.


----------



## cwerdna

steve614 said:


> I feel for you guys, but I have to say I had a feeling this day would come. Every time I saw a TW or Comcast thread that dealt with copy protection, there would always be the suggestion to go FIOS.
> That may not be true anymore.
> Hopefully, it's a mistake because I'm all for being able to MRV between DVRs.
> TiVo's mistake (IMO) with this issue is not having MRV and TTG as separate protocols.


I actually only have 1 active TiVo, so MRV isn't of concern to me. I actually archive some video that I deem worth keeping. I also burn some standard def stuff to DVD-RW for use when traveling. Putting goofy copy protection on channels that I've archived from before w/no issue sucks.

I use kmttg, VideoRedo, Ripbot264, MultiAVCHD, and ImgBurn to create AVCHD DVD +/-Rs of high def content I want to keep. For SD content, I use my DVD recorder as it's less work. But, since TiVo emits Macrovision to prevent my recorder from recording (at least it did on content from Amazon Unbox), I'm blocked.

Kmttg/TTG would help also if my TiVo's drive shows signs of dying.


----------



## bicker

The less the regulator knows, the more likely they are to include such a provision as penalty for what the regulator didn't realize was explicitly permitted. A knowledgeable and fair regulator, with or without a TiVo, would use the law to determine if anything is actually being done wrong.


----------



## vurbano

I am undecided as to what I would do. This would render my 2 TivoHD's useless IMO. I wonder why anyone uses Tivo with other providers since most are using the CP flags. That means no MRV. Perhaps Tivo should develop real MRV streaming as a way around this at least keeping their boxes as an option. If it happens, I may look into a 4 tuner Centon card for my HTPC. 4 tuners in one location may eliminate the need for streaming in the living room. But that still doesnt solve my bedroom streaming problems. Maybe I would just go with Verizon DVR's that can stream and keep one Tivo in the house for programs I want to keep. Of course I would have to become a DDB regualr again and learn how to modify the software on the TivoHD like the old HR10-250 days to remove the flags.

Does Moxi have this MRV problem? I guess it doesnt matter. The transfer to PC was the real reason I didnt get V* boxes. That and hard drive capacity. Moxi would be an expensive option just to get more capacity than a V* DVR. What a mess! What a sick feeling


----------



## bicker

The Moxi mate relies on streaming, not copying, like TiVo MRV.


----------



## vurbano

bicker said:


> The Moxi mate relies on streaming, not copying, like TiVo MRV.


so CP flags do not affect the streaming correct? I really do not understand why Tivo doesnt do this and eliminate a lot of the problems. They could still leave the transfer to PC feature for recordings that do not have flags.


----------



## bicker

vurbano said:


> I really do not understand why Tivo doesnt do this


Money.


----------



## richsadams

vurbano said:


> I wonder why anyone uses Tivo with other providers since most are using the CP flags. That means no MRV.


Actually that's not true...there are a number of different copy protection options. The one being discussed here is known as 0x02 which allows TiVo to make a recording but will not allow that recording to be transferred (to another TiVo, computer, etc.) This is not the norm for any service provider, Verizon, Comcast, etc. Perviously all Verizon FIOS content was flagged as 0x00 which meant the cable card(s) were not paired or bound to TiVo and allowed copies to be made (including MRV) freely.

Most of us believe what happened with respect to copy protection on some (not all) FIOS channels in Oregon, Washington and Indiana was implemented by mistake and hopefully will be corrected to at least allow MRV of non-premium channels as other providers do. For example HBO channels are copy protected (as other service providers like Comcast normally handle most premium channels) but Showtime channels are not. The CP that VZ suddenly implemented doesn't follow any logic so it would seem that a mistake was made.

More info about copy protection can be found here:

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



> CCI Copy Protection
> 
> CableCARDs display copy protection for the current channel(s) as CCI bytes. The following CCI byte values affect only digital content:
> 0x00 - Copy freely - Content is not copy protected. This is the only CCI value that allows content to be transferred via multi-room viewing (MRV) or TiVoToGo™ transfers.
> 0x01 - Copy No More - Internally, TiVo boxes treat this the same as 0x02
> 0x02 - Copy Once - The box can make a recording, but can't transfer it via MRV or TiVotoGo transfers.
> 0x03 - Copy Never - the content can be recorded and viewed for 90 minutes after transmission, and is not transferrable. Content disappears from the Now Playing list after 90 minutes.
> Additional CCI values put restrictions on both digital and analog content:
> 0x04 - Content is Copy Once for digital output, but would have Macrovision 7 Day Unlimited restriction applied on the analog outputs. This affects content viewed either on an HDTV with component cabling or on a standard definition TV. It also affects content saved to VCR or DVD when the recorder is connected to an analog output on the TiVo box.
> 0x07 - Content is Copy Never for digital content (deleted after 90 minutes) and Macrovision 7 day/24 hour for content recorded from analog channels. Content cannot be transferred via TiVoToGo transfers or MRV, and cannot be saved to VCR or DVD.





> To view the CCI byte value for a channel:
> 
> 1. Tune to the channel in Live TV.
> 2. Press the TiVo button to go to the TiVo Central® screen and then select Messages & Settings, then Account and System Information, and then Diagnostics.
> 3. Check the Channel value for Tuner 1, which is on the first page of the Diagnostics screen. If you do not see the one you want, use the CHANNEL DOWN button to scroll to the information for Tuner 2.
> 4. Once you find the channel number, look below it for the CCI byte setting. If the CCI Byte setting is N/A, the channel is analog.


----------



## orangeboy

bicker said:


> Money.


But how much? I already know the answer: More that TiVo is (currently) willing to pay. 
But...
The TiVos accept streaming input from Netflix and user apps, and seems to be able to push content, as evidenced by MRV methods already in place. Could it be that difficult to marry the two, that TiVo couldn't throw some budget money at the engineers to say "Make it so"? I've heard that the pre-Series4 code was hard to maintain, so hopefully the Adobe Stagecraft code would make the meld a bit easier (once converted, if it isn't already).



TiVoJerry said:


> I confirmed there is an official checklist item to publish the GPL that is indeed being worked on. I *believe* there was a changing of the guard and we're just dealing with a learning curve.
> 
> I don't have an ETA but I just wanted to let you know this isn't being ignored.


Not to take Jerry out of context (but I will), perhaps there was a changing of the guard as well, concerning the developers of the olde code, and the knowledge for such a melding is no longer with TiVo...


----------



## steve614

orangeboy said:


> Could it be that difficult to marry the two, that TiVo couldn't throw some budget money at the engineers to say "Make it so"?


That's probably the easy part.
The hard part (imo) is going to be getting CableLabs approval and since CableLabs is biased toward the cable companies, it's going to be a tough sell.


----------



## bicker

orangeboy said:


> But how much? I already know the answer: More that TiVo is (currently) willing to pay.


True but also perhaps more than TiVo currently has available to spend.



orangeboy said:


> But... Could it be that difficult ...


Yes, it could be "that" difficult (costly).


----------



## MPSAN

Funny, one of the things I missed about ReplayTV was that even they did streaming of a program from 1 RPTV to another. Too bad TIVO did not do that as well! I bet the Verizon whole house DVR streams as they would not prevent their units from working.

I do agree, however, that this copy byte of hex 02 seems hit or miss, but will they even bother to fix it?


----------



## bicker

And if they do, will they fix it just for the Premiere, or will the fix it for the S3 and HD too?


----------



## orangeboy

steve614 said:


> That's probably the easy part.
> The hard part (imo) is going to be getting CableLabs approval and since CableLabs is biased toward the cable companies, it's going to be a tough sell.


I don't know if it would be _that_ tough. As mentioned, other products (I'm thinking Moxi here <spit>) stream from one unit to another. What would make TiVo so different?


----------



## lrhorer

bicker said:


> Money.


Although this is usually the short version of your answer to everything, as is often the case, you are once again wrong. The S3 class hardware does not have the umph to stream all HD MPEG II data with 100% reliability while retaining the required encryption. Eliminating encryption would allow the TiVo to stream with 100% reliability, but then it would be in violation of CableLabs requirements.


----------



## lrhorer

orangeboy said:


> But how much? I already know the answer: More that TiVo is (currently) willing to pay.


Short of recalling all S3 units, no amount of money would make it work.



orangeboy said:


> The TiVos accept streaming input from Netflix and user apps, and seems to be able to push content, as evidenced by MRV methods already in place.


For MRV it might work. For TTG and TTCB, it would sometimes work. Netflix and Amazon are not streaming high bandwidth MPEG II video.



orangeboy said:


> Could it be that difficult to marry the two, that TiVo couldn't throw some budget money at the engineers to say "Make it so"?


The S3 class machines - especially the THD - just don't have the stones to handle this under all situations. Some of us might very happily live with "not always", but mnay, perhaps most, users will kvetch at anything that only works under limited conditions.


----------



## lrhorer

orangeboy said:


> I don't know if it would be _that_ tough. As mentioned, other products (I'm thinking Moxi here <spit>) stream from one unit to another. What would make TiVo so different?


The fact its processors are a generation behind the Moxi (and the Premier).


----------



## vurbano

steve614 said:


> That's probably the easy part.
> The hard part (imo) is going to be getting CableLabs approval and since CableLabs is biased toward the cable companies, it's going to be a tough sell.


Well Directv and Dish are able to do it.


----------



## vurbano

lrhorer said:


> The fact its processors are a generation behind the Moxi (and the Premier).


so are the HR20-100's directv has???


----------



## lrhorer

vurbano said:


> IS there a solution to this at DDB.com?


For the S3 and the THD, yes. For the Premier, no (at least not yet).


----------



## lrhorer

vurbano said:


> Well Directv and Dish are able to do it.


DirecTV and Dish are not bound by CableLabs certifications.


----------



## lrhorer

vurbano said:


> so are the HR20-100's directv has???


I do not know what level or type of encription the DirecTV receivers employ, if any. I also do not know if the HR20-100 (officially) supports copying to or from an external PC. The TiVo has to be able to record two maximum definition MPEG II streams from Cable and / or OTA and at least one inbound IP stream while simultaneously reading at least one outbound IP stream and one stream being sent to the attached display. That's a lot of processing when all of the streams may be MPEG II and all of them except perhaps one MRV stream have to be encrypted or decrypted, as the case may be.


----------



## orangeboy

lrhorer said:


> The fact its processors are a generation behind the Moxi (and the Premier).


Yes, I guess I was focusing more on the Premieres, where coding a Stagecraft streaming model (perhaps from scratch) could be viable. I need to pay more attention to the forum I'm posting in!


----------



## shwru980r

vurbano said:


> This would render my 2 TivoHD's useless IMO. I wonder why anyone uses


You're overstating your case. You can still watch the recording on the TIVO it was recorded on.


----------



## bicker

lrhorer said:


> Although this is usually the short version of your answer to everything, as is often the case, you are once again wrong.


Actually I'm almost always correct, at least with regard to times when you and I disagree. You're generally wrong about just about everything business related. My answer was indeed a business answer, and it didn't regard the technical considerations. Relish this unique opportunity where you have something useful to add to a discussion I participate in.


----------



## lrhorer

richsadams said:


> This is not the norm for any service provider, Verizon, Comcast, etc. Perviously all Verizon FIOS content was flagged as 0x00 which meant the cable card(s) were not paired or bound to TiVo and allowed copies to be made (including MRV) freely.


The CCI byte has nothing to do with the CableCard or any pairing or lack thereof. It is a byte, embedded in the video stream. The CableCards only decrypt the video stream if it is encrypted. Hypothetically, the CATV company could distribute unencrypted video with the CCI byte set, in which case the user could record the video even if they don't have CableCards, yet they *still* would not be able to copy the video to another device.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

lrhorer said:


> The S3 class machines - especially the THD - just don't have the stones to handle this under all situations. Some of us might very happily live with "not always", but mnay, perhaps most, users will kvetch at anything that only works under limited conditions.


I'm not sure why you think the TiVo HD couldn't implement effective copy protection. It should be trivial. I'm not familiar with the details of how TiVo stores the programs on the hard disk, but it's one of two cases:

1) programs are already encrypted on disk
or
2) programs stored on disk in the clear

I believe the correct answer is #1. So why can't TiVo just ship previously encrypted data from machine to machine? Everything I've tried with my HDs leads me to believe that TiVo<-->TiVo copying of high def material occurs at faster than real time. And even if it were slower than real time, "streaming" could easily be implemented by simply having the destination machine buffer a certain amount of the program before allowing playback.

And if the data is not encrypted on disk, there's a very simple solution for that if the CPU doesn't have much horsepower. Before sending to the destination TiVo, just encrypt key portions of I-frames only. E.g. encrypting just a random 10% of the bytes in each I-frame would render the entire MPEG stream useless w/o the key. The Qualcomm supplied encryption algorithm is already very fast. Applying it to only 1% or even 5% of the total bytes would make it even faster and still maintain complete security.


----------



## cwerdna

lrhorer said:


> The CCI byte has nothing to do with the CableCard or any pairing or lack thereof. It is a byte, embedded in the video stream. The CableCards only decrypt the video stream if it is encrypted. Hypothetically, the CATV company could distribute unencrypted video with the CCI byte set, in which case the user could record the video even if they don't have CableCards, yet they *still* would not be able to copy the video to another device.


http://www.tivo.com/copyprotection/ says


> WARNING: Your cable provider must pair (bind) the CableCARD to its slot in the TiVo box before you can view content with any CCI value other than 0x00.


In the past (at least before 6/7), Verizon never paired CableCARDs. Also, before 6/7, (I don't have any premium channels like HBO or Showtime) I'd NEVER seen a single recording have copy protection applied to it. Thus, it seems they had CCI set to 0x00.

In order to resolve the outage across most of our channels that began on 6/7, I spent an hour on the phone w/them on 6/8 and I had to give them 3 ids on the CableCARD screen. Others who also had to call to get their service restored have reported that apparently their cards are paired.

Now that we have service back, we're finding CCI set to 0x02 and it's some of the same channels that became inaccessible on 6/7.


----------



## rifleman69

ESPNU is 0x00, all other ESPN's are 0x02. National Geographic is 0x00, DiscoveryHD is 0x02. There's no rhyme or reason for what they're setting. If they made all of the ESPN's 0x02...that would make some sense as it's an entire channel group as a whole by the same broadcasting company...but it's not.


----------



## richsadams

lrhorer said:


> The CCI byte has nothing to do with the CableCard or any pairing or lack thereof. It is a byte, embedded in the video stream. The CableCards only decrypt the video stream if it is encrypted. Hypothetically, the CATV company could distribute unencrypted video with the CCI byte set, in which case the user could record the video even if they don't have CableCards, yet they *still* would not be able to copy the video to another device.


I understand that, but my understanding is also that the CP/encryption cannot be implemented with cable card equipment _unless_ the cable cards are paired/bound to the equipment. VZ had never paired their cable cards (making everything coming from their FIOS distribution system 0x00) until now and then only in the three states that suffered the outage on 6/7 and then on only what appear to be arbitrary channels.


----------



## richsadams

A TCF member arranged a three-way call w/VZ and TiVo today. The VZ network tech said that what he and other TiVo owners were experiencing (CP on various channels and the inability to use MRV) was not right to his knowledge. The TCF member received ticket number(s) and the VZ tech is to call back with a progress report (no time frame). So of course there are no guarantees, but perhaps something will be done to correct the error...and hopefully before the Frontier takeover.


----------



## cwerdna

richsadams said:


> A TCF member arranged a three-way call w/VZ and TiVo today. The VZ network tech said that what he and other TiVo owners were experiencing (CP on various channels and the inability to use MRV) was not right to his knowledge. The TCF member received ticket number(s) and the VZ tech is to call back with a progress report (no time frame). So of course there are no guarantees, but perhaps something will be done to correct the error...and hopefully before the Frontier takeover.


Thank you for your work and to whoever the TCF member was. I didn't have time to call TiVo before they closed today.


----------



## vurbano

shwru980r said:


> You're overstating your case. You can still watch the recording on the TIVO it was recorded on.


Not overstating anything. I can do that without a 1500 dollar investment in a Tivos and Lifetime service. If it comes to that you are better off with the FIOS DVR media center solution. For me no MRV and no transfer to PC means no Tivo. It turns a caddillac into a Yugo. Don't get me wrong, I would probably keep one around and hack it to transfer shows I want to keep but it would not be the backbone of a whole house system. I had been considering buying a 3rd one but this has me worried.


----------



## killzone

There are ways Tivo could deal with this besides the best solution which is streaming (yeah I know the S3 and HD aren't powerful enough). For a transfer to another Tivo hey should allow the decryption, transfer and reencryption, or perhaps when a household has more than 1 Tivo tied to an account, they should all use the same encryption key. Treat both units as 1 even though they are physically distinct. These are details that the consumer shouldn't have to worry about. It should just work.


----------



## MichaelK

rifleman69 said:


> It's taking away something that I already had...that's specifically written into the VZ/OR (and I believe WA and IN too) contract. Easy waive of the ETF.


trust me- having had flagged channels to some degree or another since the week the S3 came out- and have changed for better or worse over time.- i totally get that you guys have something taken away. I agree they have changed terms and so you guys should get EFT's waived if the transfer included such provisions that nothing should change.

But I'm trying to explain to you that the cable people AND the regulators are idiots. Those of us who have been complaining to our cable companies and regulators for years have gotten no where as a general rule. The regulators dont understand the issues or dont care to try or dont have the power- you see the answers cable gives above when you even mention the flags. There's times when they flag cable in the classroom content- clearly content that isn't intended to be flagged- yet you can't get any headway.

maybe things are better with regulators in the northwest but certainly things aren't as simple as we would like in my neck of the woods.

good luck but as i said above I wouldn't bet it will be so simple. Maybe you'll get the EFT waived- but good luck getting through the 10 layers of people till you can find someone who understands what you are talking about and what has changed.

Just trying to inject some real world experience to what you folks might expect.


----------



## richsadams

MichaelK said:


> trust me- having had flagged channels to some degree or another since the week the S3 came out- and have changed for better or worse over time.- i totally get that you guys have something taken away.


All good points...and understood. :up: To get back on this thread's original topic, in "our" (VZ FIOS customers in OR, WA and IN) case we think what happened is likely a mistake that occurred when VZ's network techs rectified an outage that hit our three states. We hope that they can resolve it and soon.

There are several scenarios I can think of where it could remain, get worse or get better. On July 1 Frontier will take over a majority of VZ's FIOS and other systems in these three and other states. Frontier's position is that they will continue to deliver whatever VZ had as of June 30th. We've already witnessed VZ dropping numerous channels and now this so it's possible VZ is positioning their service to meet Frontier's requirements.

So this may have been an attempt to pair our cable cards and add CP to the appropriate channels and it went very wrong (outage, improper pairing, etc.). and they halted the work to assess damage and go forward plans.

It could remain because VZ is leaving and will leave it up the the next "administration" to clean up their mess. As Frontier has no experience in this field I don't have high hopes that they'd do well.

It could get slightly worse if in this case it is their (Frontier's) intent to CP premium channels, or it could get much worse if their intent is to CP everything.

It could certainly get better if VZ returns things to they way they were before and life will go on. Fingers crossed and so on.

So this will be a wait-and-see. Hopefully common sense and subsequent technical support will prevail, but you're right...it could turn out to be that no one really cares. If that's the case OTA, Netflix, Boxee, etc. are beginning to look like viable options IMO.

BTW, customers being sold to Frontier will be able to switch/drop FIOS without an ET fee per VZ's current agreement if they (VZ) ends service delivery.


----------



## bicker

killzone said:


> There are ways Tivo could deal with this besides the best solution which is streaming (yeah I know the S3 and HD aren't powerful enough). For a transfer to another Tivo hey should allow the decryption, transfer and reencryption, or perhaps when a household has more than 1 Tivo tied to an account, they should all use the same encryption key. Treat both units as 1 even though they are physically distinct.


That would be a violation of the the license that TiVo was granted.



killzone said:


> These are details that the consumer shouldn't have to worry about. It should just work.


However, the expectations you're imposing aren't things that TiVo is allowed to do for you.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> A TCF member arranged a three-way call w/VZ and TiVo today. The VZ network tech said that what he and other TiVo owners were experiencing (CP on various channels and the inability to use MRV) was not right to his knowledge. The TCF member received ticket number(s) and the VZ tech is to call back with a progress report (no time frame). So of course there are no guarantees, but perhaps something will be done to correct the error...and hopefully before the Frontier takeover.


Here is what I can gather so far and what makes sense to me. See if I have this correct!

1. VZ decided to flag some stations with a non 0x00 flag byte. Perhaps a few stations wanted this, but VZ went too far.

2. VZ thought that the flag change was all that was needed...it would not be noticed by anyone.

3. VZ did not realize that since our CableCards were NOT Paired, that a non 00 flag would render that channel unwatchable. This was the reason for our first issue!

4. In order to "fix" it, VZ paired the cards. VZ used to ONLY use 2 of the datapoints that were given on our TIVO CableCard screen. When we called they used all 3 pieces of info. (they always had the CableCard ID as optional and did not input it).

5. This seemed to fix our problem as the flagged stations were now viewable as our CableCards were now Paired (Bound).

So, either we were not supposed to have any flags (doubtful) or VZ flagged way too many stations. I only hope that we do not hear that this is how it is...deal with it!


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> Here is what I can gather so far and what makes sense to me. See if I have this correct!<snip>


Pretty much my take on things. My WAG is that VZ was attempting to put CP in place for some number of channels at the behest of Frontier and prior to the Frontier acquisition. They opted to roll it out to a few states to start with and suddenly found that whatever they implemented crashed part of the delivery network. They got things up and running again but the result is what we have now...CP on a bucket load of channels, many of which having CP makes no sense and others that would normally have CP free and clear. That's not to mention all of the VZ customers in the other "Frontier bound" states never being affected. 

The other scenario may be closer to your theory; that there was a network crash and in their haste to get things back on line they managed to pair our cable cards. In their view the channels were back, everyone's happy, let's get the heck out of Dodge. That is until we started whining about MRV and the like.

Whatever the case I'm praying to the Great Cosmic Muffin in the sky that they revert back to no CP, take their money and run. We'll see.


----------



## MPSAN

I do not believe that there have been no further posts on this. I think it is VERY important that we all call Verizon and report this and NOT let them blame TIVO. They now know there is some kind of outage in at least Oregon and Washington, but if the calls stop, they will believe that all is OK.


----------



## hmm52

I have just a little experience with CCI, Comcast 2006, and not much knowledge about it but it seems unlikely to me that each of 3 events was accidental or in response to an outage - cablecard pairing, enabling of the protection key and flagging a group of channels 0X02. Have any of you attempted to contact someone in Verizon's corporate offices? I had success with Comcast that route years ago but not on the CCI issue.

Probably naive but I can't fathom whose interest is being served when many or all channels are copy restricted by a service provider. I could understand if it was done just at the request of Disney, Sony or other anal content providers because that would fit their profiles. Beyond the anal ones, I can't see the purpose. What am I missing?


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> I do not believe that there have been no further posts on this. I think it is VERY important that we all call Verizon and report this and NOT let them blame TIVO. They now know there is some kind of outage in at least Oregon and Washington, but if the calls stop, they will believe that all is OK.


AGREED! Everyone in this boat needs to call both VZ and TiVo ASAP. :up:


----------



## killzone

bicker said:


> That would be a violation of the the license that TiVo was granted.
> 
> However, the expectations you're imposing aren't things that TiVo is allowed to do for you.


Then they should bite the bullet and support streaming on hardware that is powerful enough to handle it. If nothing else, it gives people a reason to upgrade their hardware.


----------



## COBeav

richsadams said:


> A TCF member arranged a three-way call w/VZ and TiVo today. The VZ network tech said that what he and other TiVo owners were experiencing (CP on various channels and the inability to use MRV) was not right to his knowledge. The TCF member received ticket number(s) and the VZ tech is to call back with a progress report (no time frame). So of course there are no guarantees, but perhaps something will be done to correct the error...and hopefully before the Frontier takeover.


Any update regarding this existing ticket?


----------



## bicker

killzone said:


> Then they should bite the bullet and support streaming on hardware that is powerful enough to handle it. If nothing else, it gives people a reason to upgrade their hardware.


And a reason to ***** (not providing the new capability on older hardware. Y'know people are going to do it. AAMOF do we know a good count of how many people complaining about THIS have older hardware? I bet >90% of them would not be satisfied with the answer, "Upgrade to the new TiVo."

Regardless, it is easy for you to spend someone else's money. You say, "Then they should bite the bullet -- " What makes you think that that is going to serve *their* objectives better than what they're doing?


----------



## MichaelK

hmm52 said:


> ...
> Probably naive but I can't fathom whose interest is being served when many or all channels are copy restricted by a service provider. I could understand if it was done just at the request of Disney, Sony or other anal content providers because that would fit their profiles. Beyond the anal ones, I can't see the purpose. What am I missing?


that's the 64k$ question.

Disney, Sony, HBO and all the rest could just add the CCI bits on their uplink and then for the most part every downstream system would pass it forward. (at least that is my undertanding of the head end equipment). So it makes no sense that the content providers would tell one system of another to implement CP while ignoring others.

I'd even say that by taking any action at all the owner of the head end opens themselves to liability. If they flagg 99% of the channels but accidently forget one channel and then someone bit torrents it then it's the head ends fault it got loose. Why not point to the content owners and tell them to add whatever flags they want and avoid all potential liability?


----------



## MPSAN

COBeav said:


> Any update regarding this existing ticket?


See post #104 above.


----------



## cwerdna

I'm on the phone w/VZ FiOS support right now and went thru the whole explanation of CCI bytes, www.tivo.com/copyprotection, the outage that I had on 6/7 and 6/8 that I had to call to resolve, the net effect of 0x02, others having the same problem, etc.

She didn't seem to know anything about CP and put me on hold. After a few minutes, she came back, claiming it's a known issue that they're trying to work on. She said they've gotten many other calls from people about the CableCARD issue.

Will try to call TiVo in the next day or two.


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> I'm on the phone w/VZ FiOS support right now and went thru the whole explanation of CCI bytes, www.tivo.com/copyprotection, the outage that I had on 6/7 and 6/8 that I had to call to resolve, the net effect of 0x02, others having the same problem, etc.
> 
> She didn't seem to know anything about CP and has put me on hold.


Thanks for taking the time to let them know. It's not surprising that the VZ CSR doesn't know anything about CP. They usually have to IM tech support to help them figure things out. Hopefully your CSR will hook up with someone that has a better answer than "It's a TiVo problem".  I had to push back a number of times to get the tech support person to ask another tech support person about it before they'd acknowledge that there was an issue.

Best of luck and let us know how it goes!

BTW, this is probably a good time to call...things s/b fairly quiet there. It'll give them something to do besides downing gallons of Mt. Dew! :up:


----------



## MPSAN

To whoever called VZ a bit ago from 97223...thank you!
To the Verizon tech ...now do you believe us?

To all on TCF...PLEASE call NOW about this and get a ticket number!! It is VERY important.


----------



## COBeav

MPSAN said:


> To whoever called VZ a bit ago from 97223...thank you!
> To the Verizon tech ...now do you believe us?
> 
> To all on TCF...PLEASE call NOW about this and get a ticket number!! It is VERY important.


I will call, but can you suggest how we describe the problem to them? Whenever I call for this type of issue the agent usually has no clue what I'm talking about. If I just say that I can't transfer shows because the CCI byte is 0x02 will they even know what I'm talking about?


----------



## dresden69

I am a FIOS NT... moving over to Frontier... We are aware of the issue and making every effort to resolve.. 

Edit: If someone would like to send me a list of the channels that are affected by this... it will save me some time doing it on my own tivo tonight.


----------



## MPSAN

dresden69 said:


> I am a FIOS NT... moving over to Frontier... We are aware of the issue and making every effort to resolve..
> 
> Edit: If someone would like to send me a list of the channels that are affected by this... it will save me some time doing it on my own tivo tonight.


Where are you located. This thread has a ton of examples. However, The Networks are clear with a hex code of 0x00, but CHHHD and GSN (yes the game show network) and almost every other station now has a code of 0x02. It means we can only copy once. The 1 copy is when we record it on our TIVO so MRV will NOT work. If you have a TIVO HD look at the DVR Diagnostics and look at the tuner info. You will see CCI Byte of 0x02 on the station tuned to if it is protected.


----------



## MPSAN

COBeav said:


> I will call, but can you suggest how we describe the problem to them? Whenever I call for this type of issue the agent usually has no clue what I'm talking about. If I just say that I can't transfer shows because the CCI byte is 0x02 will they even know what I'm talking about?


It was true that they had no idea what was going on. But now, if you mention the cablecard issue from June 6th or 7th, and now you have an issue with your TIVO's on most stations because of a copy flag that VERIZON set at that time, they should be aware of it if they contact the Network Techs...or IHD or NOC.

I tell them that all is OK on the Network shows, but that they added the flags to almost every other station!


----------



## dresden69

MPSAN said:


> Where are you located. This thread has a ton of examples. However, The Networks are clear with a hex code of 0x00, but CHHHD and GSN (yes the game show network) and almost every other station now has a code of 0x02. It means we can only copy once. The 1 copy is when we record it on our TIVO so MRV will NOT work. If you have a TIVO HD look at the DVR Diagnostics and look at the tuner info. You will see CCI Byte of 0x02 on the station tuned to if it is protected.


I am in Everett, WA... I need a complete list of channels.. I have heard everything from Disney to HBO... I can go home tonight and get the list, but I would love to give something to our engineers immediately... If needed... I was going to go through the entire channel list tonight and get all channels that are 0x02... and give them to the engineers tomorrow.


----------



## rifleman69

dresden69 said:


> I am in Everett, WA... I need a complete list of channels.. I have heard everything from Disney to HBO... I can go home tonight and get the list, but I would love to give something to our engineers immediately... If needed... I was going to go through the entire channel list tonight and get all channels that are 0x02... and give them to the engineers tomorrow.


All ESPN channels EXCEPT for ESPNU, Discovery, all HBO and Cinemax...there's a good start.


----------



## dresden69

rifleman69 said:


> All ESPN channels EXCEPT for ESPNU, Discovery, all HBO and Cinemax...there's a good start.


SD or HD?


----------



## MPSAN

dresden69 said:


> I am in Everett, WA... I need a complete list of channels.. I have heard everything from Disney to HBO... I can go home tonight and get the list, but I would love to give something to our engineers immediately... If needed... I was going to go through the entire channel list tonight and get all channels that are 0x02... and give them to the engineers tomorrow.


OK, ask Maggie as she has a good list. CH 600-CNNHD is set to Hex 02 as well, but that number is in the Portland area.


----------



## MPSAN

dresden69 said:


> SD or HD?


In my case it is BOTH...ie even GSN SD (184)!


----------



## cwerdna

dresden69 said:


> I am in Everett, WA... I need a complete list of channels.. I have heard everything from Disney to HBO... I can go home tonight and get the list, but I would love to give something to our engineers immediately... If needed... I was going to go through the entire channel list tonight and get all channels that are 0x02... and give them to the engineers tomorrow.


Going thru all the channels manually is WAY too painful w/the TiVO UI.

See below for some more. All of these channels below are SD (except HDNet). But, IIRC, 602 high-def CNBC is protected too.


cwerdna said:


> Now, I'm seeing these protected: Star Trek Enterprise (HDNet), Larry King Live (CNNI) Mythbusters (DSCP), Mad Money (CNBC) and even stuff in COMEDY and HLN!





cwerdna said:


> Attack of the Show (191 G4), 6/10/10 4 pm Pacific


----------



## dresden69

MPSAN said:


> OK, ask Maggie as she has a good list. CH 600-CNNHD is set to Hex 02 as well, but that number is in the Portland area.


Maggie and I sit close together... I told her I would compile the list on one of my three tivos tonight... so I guess I get to have fun doing that... 

Also... the only thing that is different between the three regions on the channel lineup is the local channels (PEGS) and the Sports Networks (FSN, CSN)


----------



## richsadams

dresden69 said:


> I am in Everett, WA... I need a complete list of channels.. I have heard everything from Disney to HBO... I can go home tonight and get the list, but I would love to give something to our engineers immediately... If needed... I was going to go through the entire channel list tonight and get all channels that are 0x02... and give them to the engineers tomorrow.


I would dearly love to help you out, but this is how we have to go about finding out which channels have copy protection on our TiVo's:

1. Tune to the channel in Live TV.
2. Press the TiVo button to go to the TiVo Central® screen and then select Messages & Settings, then Account and System Information, and then Diagnostics.
3. Check the Channel value for Tuner 1, which is on the first page of the Diagnostics screen. If you do not see the one you want, use the CHANNEL DOWN button to scroll to the information for Tuner 2.
4. Once you find the channel number, look below it for the CCI byte setting. If the CCI Byte setting is N/A, the channel is analog.

Since there are numerous (hundreds?) of channels w/CP it could take a very, very long time to determine which ones have it and which don't.

That said, almost all of the channels that were lost in the three-state outage June 7th now have copy protection (at least in my area - Portland, Oregon FIOS) as far as I can determine, again without spending hours and hours scrolling through every channel. Basically for me it is almost every channel from 553 and above...although not all. I know there are other channels that have CP below that number as well. I know that's not a list, but I think it's about the best that can be expected.

Thanks very much for your help with this, it's truly appreciated. :up:


----------



## MPSAN

dresden69 said:


> Maggie and I sit close together... I told her I would compile the list on one of my three tivos tonight... so I guess I get to have fun doing that...
> 
> Also... the only thing that is different between the three regions on the channel lineup is the local channels (PEGS) and the Sports Networks (FSN, CSN)


Great...I had given the link to this thread. Can I suggest anouther route? How about finding out if ANY stations needed to be set to a CCI flag of Hex 02? If it is only a few, why not turn the rest back to Hex 00. As Rich said...there are so many that are now set to 02.


----------



## MPSAN

FYI...CNN SD (ch 100) is also set to Hex 02, so this is not an HD issue.


----------



## cwerdna

MPSAN said:


> FYI...CNN SD (ch 100) is also set to Hex 02, so this is not an HD issue.


Yep, definitely NOT HD specific. I reported a bunch of SD channels being protected at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=450334 and it's visible in my kmttg screenshot too.


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> Yep, definitely NOT HD specific. I reported a bunch of SD channels being protected at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=450334 and it's visible in my kmttg screenshot too.


Same here. SD, HD, Premium, non-premium...there's no logic to the channels that have or don't have CP.


----------



## MPSAN

cwerdna said:


> Yep, definitely NOT HD specific. I reported a bunch of SD channels being protected at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=450334 and it's visible in my kmttg screenshot too.


Well, I hope dresden69 lets us know tomorrow what he finds out. He could start a record on the Game Show Network and stop it after a few minutes. Since he has 3 TIVO's he should see what we are talking about. I can not believe he is going to make a list of all channels!


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> Well, I hope dresden69 lets us know tomorrow what he finds out. He could start a record on the Game Show Network and stop it after a few minutes. Since he has 3 TIVO's he should see what we are talking about. I can not believe he is going to make a list of all channels!


I'm afraid it would be this time tomorrow before he'd finish!


----------



## CraigK

richsadams said:


> 1. Tune to the channel in Live TV.
> 2. Press the TiVo button to go to the TiVo Central® screen and then select Messages & Settings, then Account and System Information, and then Diagnostics.
> 3. Check the Channel value for Tuner 1, which is on the first page of the Diagnostics screen. If you do not see the one you want, use the CHANNEL DOWN button to scroll to the information for Tuner 2.
> 4. Once you find the channel number, look below it for the CCI byte setting. If the CCI Byte setting is N/A, the channel is analog.


Also as noted before, you can then press the LIVE TV button, change the channel, then LEFT ARROW will take you back to the Diagnostics screen.

It's still tedious, but you don't have to keep going through the menu to check other channels.


----------



## orangeboy

CraigK said:


> Also as noted before, you can then press the LIVE TV button, change the channel,* then press the LIVE TV button again, change the channel,* then LEFT ARROW will take you back to the Diagnostics screen.
> 
> It's still tedious, but you don't have to keep going through the menu to check other channels.


FYP. Changing both tuners should cut the time by some, and help structure the process, i.e.: 
tuner 1, ch 1, tuner 2, ch 2 > diagnostic screen >
tuner 1, ch 3, tuner 2, ch 4 > diagnostic screen >
tuner 1, ch 5, tuner 2, ch 6 > diagnostic screen >
etc...


----------



## hmm52

I'm interested in this problem you're all dealing with but I'm not clear on the facts. There was an outage 6/7 roughly in areas served by the VHOs in Portland, Seattle and Ft. Wayne. Subsequently CCI:0X02 flags were newly found on many channels. I see many copy protection posts from OR and WA but none from IND. Is it the same sequence of events in all 3 regions?


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> I'm afraid it would be this time tomorrow before he'd finish!


Yup, it is going to take him a long time. I think it would be better if VZ figured out just what does need the 0x02, if any, and redo it! Perhaps turn them all back to 0x00 for a bit, and then add the 0x02 to the stations that were supposed to get them...if any!

I have a funny feeling that this is going to be sent to all of VZ FIOS, not just to Frontier.


----------



## mgama

I tried going to the diagnostics screen on two of my three tivos, and they both froze with a "please wait" message. Any and all button presses wouldn't get the tivo to do anything.

I'm not at home right now, but the channels I noticed that I couldn't transfer were:
CNNHD, DSCPHD, BRAVOHD, TOON.


----------



## CraigK

mgama said:


> I tried going to the diagnostics screen on two of my three tivos, and they both froze with a "please wait" message. Any and all button presses wouldn't get the tivo to do anything.


That has happened to me a couple of times, too. From what I've read here on the forum if you haven't checked the diagnostics screen in a long time then it will freeze and you have to pull the plug to reboot. From then on it will work correctly until there is a big gap again before you use the feature. I don't think the actual amount of time after inactivity before it hangs has been determined.

If I plan on using the diagnostics screen I now know to make sure I'm not recording/watching anything since I might have to reboot.


----------



## mgama

I just got off the phone with FIOS tech support. They couldn't find any problems on their end, and her "hot-desk tech" person didn't know about this issue. Has anyone spoke with a knowledgeable person at Verizon who has confirmed the copy-protection CCI byte issue?

I started a thread on the Verizon forum too about this. Maybe we need to drive this issue home on their forum too, in order for them to see this.

http://forums.verizon.com/t5/FiOS-T...-with-Tivo-and-multi-room-viewing/td-p/209670


----------



## MPSAN

mgama said:


> I just got off the phone with FIOS tech support. They couldn't find any problems on their end, and her "hot-desk tech" person didn't know about this issue. Has anyone spoke with a knowledgeable person at Verizon who has confirmed the copy-protection CCI byte issue?
> 
> I started a thread on the Verizon forum too about this. Maybe we need to drive this issue home on their forum too, in order for them to see this.
> 
> http://forums.verizon.com/t5/FiOS-T...-with-Tivo-and-multi-room-viewing/td-p/209670


Well, plenty of people have reported this and when you call VZ, tell them that Maggie in Network Support is aware of this.

I have had 2 calls today, and some are saying that it seems to be a TIVO issue and that it happened after a TIVO update. That is RUBBISH, and I am going to call TIVO and update my open ticket. TIVO is mad that VZ is trying to blame them. After all, TIVO is only doing what the 0x02 copy flag, that VZ is sending, is telling them to do...copy once!


----------



## richsadams

mgama said:


> I just got off the phone with FIOS tech support. They couldn't find any problems on their end, and her "hot-desk tech" person didn't know about this issue. Has anyone spoke with a knowledgeable person at Verizon who has confirmed the copy-protection CCI byte issue?
> 
> I started a thread on the Verizon forum too about this. Maybe we need to drive this issue home on their forum too, in order for them to see this.
> 
> http://forums.verizon.com/t5/FiOS-T...-with-Tivo-and-multi-room-viewing/td-p/209670


If you read back through the posts you'll see that most of us have contacted both VZ and TiVo. MPSAN arranged a three-way conversation between himself, VZ and TiVo. VZ understands the problem and are "working on it" but it's hard to say what will happen or when.

Thanks for the link and it's not a bad idea for generating awareness but forums rarely have much of an affect on problems like this. The best thing to do is to call both TiVo and Verizon. Get a ticket number from each and continue to follow up.


----------



## richsadams

FWIW both our Series3 and Premiere XL's have frozen more than a few times since the 6/7 outage. Initially I chalked it up the the outage/cable card/CP issues. However several times now I've turned the TV's on and the picture is frozen. With one exception where I had to do a hard reboot I can push the Live TV button on the remote and it will switch to the other tuner and things go back to normal. I checked the DVR Diagnostics screens afterward and didn't find anything unusual (RS Corrected and Uncorrected Errors are fine, SS is good, etc.)

I've also had a few occasions when TiVo refused to respond to remote commands even though the orange LED indicates reception. After a few to maybe 15 seconds things come back to life. 

Neither symptom was ever a problem prior to the outage. I'd chalk it up to a hard drive issue or something else, but since both TiVo's are acting up it sounds like it has something to do with VZ FIOS and the newly paired cable cards.

I see mgama's TiVo froze on the diagnostic screen (and I've heard of that happening before) but is anyone else noticing anything unusual since the FIOS outage of June 7th and 8th (besides the non-sensical CCI copy protection issues)?


----------



## MPSAN

BAD NEWS!!!


I just had it confirmed that VZ/Frontier will NOT support TIVO MRV any longer! It will only be available using VZ/Frontier Equipment.

I will call MACC to see what they say about it and I suggest that us Portland area people do the same.


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> BAD NEWS!!!
> 
> I just had it confirmed that VZ/Frontier will NOT support MRV any longer! It will only be available using VZ/Frontier Equipment.
> 
> I will call MACC to see what they say about it and I suggest that us Portland area people do the same.


Ugh. I was afraid of that. Now I have to make the decision about dropping FIOS, going OTA and downloading everything else from iTunes, Netflix, Amazon, etc. Ugh.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> Ugh. I was afraid of that. Now I have to make the decision about dropping FIOS, going OTA and downloading everything else from iTunes, Netflix, Amazon, etc. Ugh.


What about MACC saying that there will be no change? In Portland the number is 503-645-7365.

I also called TIVO and they are now going to follow up as well! I do have the VZ techs direct lines, but TIVO knows who to call.

MACC is also on

www.maccor.org


----------



## mgama

MPSAN said:


> BAD NEWS!!!
> 
> I just had it confirmed that VZ/Frontier will NOT support TIVO MRV any longer! It will only be available using VZ/Frontier Equipment.
> 
> I will call MACC to see what they say about it and I suggest that us Portland area people do the same.


Thats just mean and wrong. Its just another way to drive customers to their hardware, which was the whole point of cable cards in the first place. Im disappointed that VZ/Frontier is doing this to us. They find one little area that Tivo is vulnerable to their wrath, while their own equipment is exempt from it.

Now I need to choose between two evils  Comcast and VZ/Frontier ???


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> What about MACC saying that there will be no change?


Isn't it no change after Frontier takes over...meaning that whatever VZ leaves us with will continue (including CP, etc.)?

In any case, I got on the phone w/VZ and the CSR actually understood CP and had "heard that things will change with Frontier in that respect". So I basically told her that I had their Triple Play (phone/broadband/TV) but since there would be no more MRV for our TiVo's that I wanted to cancel my VZ FIOS TV. She was very nice and worked very hard to talk me into staying. She offered to give us two of their DVR's at no charge for a year, etc. She couldn't believe that we liked TiVo more..."the Verizon DVR's are just like TiVo". Ah-hem...no, no, not really. (We actually had one for a short time...they are better than Comcast's, but they still aren't TiVo.)

I stuck to my guns and she finally offered to leave everything as is and cut $240 off of my annual bill ($20/mo.) if we'd stay with FIOS...no contract, cancel any time. I told her I wanted to think about it so she typed the offer into the notes on our account and I have a few days to decide. I want to weigh my options plus I'm still a little concerned about the glitches I've seen since the outage.

Obviously now is the time to renegotiate your deal with VZ.


----------



## MPSAN

Rich...no need to quote your message but did you talk to the sales dept that cut $240?


----------



## orangeboy

richsadams said:


> Isn't it no change after Frontier takes over...meaning that whatever VZ leaves us with will continue (including CP, etc.)?
> 
> In any case, I got on the phone w/VZ and the CSR actually understood CP and had "heard that things will change with Frontier in that respect". So I basically told her that I had their Triple Play (phone/broadband/TV) but since there would be no more MRV for our TiVo's that I wanted to cancel my VZ FIOS TV. She was very nice and worked very hard to talk me into staying. She offered to give us two of their DVR's at no charge for a year, etc. She couldn't believe that we liked TiVo more..."the Verizon DVR's are just like TiVo". Ah-hem...no, no, not really. (We actually had one for a short time...they are better than Comcast's, but they still aren't TiVo.)
> 
> I stuck to my guns and she finally offered to leave everything as is and cut $240 off of my annual bill ($20/mo.) if we'd stay with FIOS...no contract, cancel any time. I told her I wanted to think about it so she typed the offer into the notes on our account and I have a few days to decide. I want to weigh my options plus I'm still a little concerned about the glitches I've seen since the outage.
> 
> Obviously now is the time to renegotiate your deal with VZ.


I did the same with BHN's Triple Play that I had: dropped Digital Television service, and opted for a Double Play of phone and internet. BHN is still getting my money rolleyes, but not NEARLY as much of it! :up:


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> Rich...no need to quote your message but did you talk to the sales dept that cut $240?


I just called the number on their statement (1-877-462-8188) and after umpteen automated Q&A's a human switched me to another CSR...not sure what department (retention?).


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> I just called the number on their statement (1-877-462-8188) and after umpteen automated Q&A's a human switched me to another CSR...not sure what department (retention?).


OK...BTW, so far this has had little impact on me as most stuff is clear. Still when we get Free HBO/Cinemax (promo on now everyone) then I can fill my stock HD. The 1TB one is not on the big screen set. Still, this is not right and it shows that it was not the content provider who asked for all of these flags!


----------



## dresden69

MPSAN said:


> BAD NEWS!!!
> 
> I just had it confirmed that VZ/Frontier will NOT support TIVO MRV any longer! It will only be available using VZ/Frontier Equipment.
> 
> I will call MACC to see what they say about it and I suggest that us Portland area people do the same.


Yeah... I was just coming here to let you guys know... Frontier is not supporting MRV on their own dvrs... so the flagged programming is for real and staying... I personally am looking at Directv, becuase they have their MRDVR.

Sorry folks.

Let me know if you have any other verizon/frontier issues.


----------



## richsadams

dresden69 said:


> Yeah... I was just coming here to let you guys know... Frontier is not supporting MRV on their own dvrs... so the flagged programming is for real and staying... I personally am looking at Directv, becuase they have their MRDVR.
> 
> Sorry folks.
> 
> Let me know if you have any other verizon/frontier issues.


Thanks very much for the update. The Verizon CSR I spoke with earlier today indicated that the Verizon/Frontier HD DVR's would actually be capable of MRV, but that they weren't going to allow cable card equipped DVR MRV. If that were the case the intent would be to force Frontier customers to use their proprietary DVR's exclusively (which appears to be against the FCC's requirements for cable companies to support cable card equipment, but that's another story).

However you're saying that your understanding is that Frontier won't offer MRV on their own DVR's either?

I may take VZ up on their discount offer and add OTA to our TiVo's. That will at least allow me to use MRV on all of the local broadcast programs.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> Thanks very much for the update. The Verizon CSR I spoke with earlier today indicated that the Verizon/Frontier HD DVR's would actually be capable of MRV, but that they weren't going to allow cable card equipped DVR MRV. If that were the case the intent would be to force Frontier customers to use their proprietary DVR's exclusively (which appears to be against the FCC's requirements for cable companies to support cable card equipment, but that's another story).
> 
> However you're saying that your understanding is that Frontier won't offer MRV on their own DVR's either?
> 
> I may take VZ up on their discount offer and add OTA to our TiVo's. That will at least allow me to use MRV on all of the local broadcast programs.


I thought that Frontier does not have TV yet. They provide DISH, etc.

Rich, for stations you can get OTA FIOS is still in the clear hex 00.


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> Rich, for stations you can get OTA FIOS is still in the clear hex 00.


Ah, good point! :up: It sounded like dresden69 was saying that Frontier might put CP on _all_ channels.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> Ah, good point! :up: It sounded like dresden69 was saying that Frontier might put CP on _all_ channels.


I am not sure that they are allowed to protect OTA stations.


----------



## COBeav

Time for the PROM hack.


----------



## dresden69

richsadams said:


> Thanks very much for the update. The Verizon CSR I spoke with earlier today indicated that the Verizon/Frontier HD DVR's would actually be capable of MRV, but that they weren't going to allow cable card equipped DVR MRV. If that were the case the intent would be to force Frontier customers to use their proprietary DVR's exclusively (which appears to be against the FCC's requirements for cable companies to support cable card equipment, but that's another story).
> 
> However you're saying that your understanding is that Frontier won't offer MRV on their own DVR's either?
> 
> I may take VZ up on their discount offer and add OTA to our TiVo's. That will at least allow me to use MRV on all of the local broadcast programs.


Maybe the knowledge that Frontier is not supporting MRDVR has not hit the tech floor yet... but when talking to fellow NTs here, it was stated that Frontier will not be using the MRDVR... they are also not going to be supporting the Web DVR feature... Again this is not something that has been let out of the bag on the tech side, giving to you guys first...

As far what is going to happen with Frontier and TV... we don't even know... we assume that Frontier is keeping all the TV... I have heard that they are going to have all the same channels... but again, this is like when Verizon just moved into the TV business... Frontier has always allowed DISH to package with their copper business... so who knows what is really going to happen down the road... I would personally like to see Directv take over the entire thing... and just beam Directv's signal into the VHOs and out to the customers, it would open up alot more programming options for us. But who knows.

Sorry for the wall of text... As far as putting all the COPY Protection on everything... I don't know if they are going to be moving to CP on all encrypted channels 50+ and 550+ up or not... that is made at a much higher level than me. I know that the unencrypted channels will not have CP on them. It would not make sense to CP an unecrypted channel.

Let me know if I can help any way...


----------



## dresden69

COBeav said:


> Time for the PROM hack.


PROM hack? Will have to go home and bing this...


----------



## JWThiers

MPSAN said:


> I am not sure that they are allowed to protect OTA stations.


OTA Channels MUST be set to CCI -0x00. Unless FIOS is under a different requirement than regular cable.


----------



## richsadams

JWThiers said:


> OTA Channels MUST be set to CCI -0x00. Unless FIOS is under a different requirement than regular cable.


A small bit of good news at least.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

richsadams said:


> FWIW both our Series3 and Premiere XL's have frozen more than a few times since the 6/7 outage.
> 
> ...
> 
> I see mgama's TiVo froze on the diagnostic screen (and I've heard of that happening before) but is anyone else noticing anything unusual since the FIOS outage of June 7th and 8th (besides the non-sensical CCI copy protection issues)?


Four active TiVo HD's, recording lots of programs on each. No freezes before or after the "outage". But I didn't actually have an outage when you guys did, just the CCI nonsense.


----------



## pdxsam

Today I spoke with two gentlemen from Verizon. They echoed exactly what was posted here. The copy protection is here and to stay.

That said, like MPSAN, I emailed MACC because I'm on the west side. The gentleman there replied in less than 5 minutes.

I also emailed the PUC and the Attorney General's office.

LIkewise I emailed Mike Rogoway of the Oregonian, who's the tech geek there.

Doubtful anything will happen with any of it, but, at the very least if the Oregonian grabs it there will be a temporary black eye.


----------



## MPSAN

Well, we are at least trying. Some of the non scrambled stations are protected like The Game Show Network...geeze!


----------



## COBeav

pdxsam said:


> Today I spoke with two gentlemen from Verizon. They echoed exactly what was posted here. The copy protection is here and to stay.
> 
> That said, like MPSAN, I emailed MACC because I'm on the west side. The gentleman there replied in less than 5 minutes.
> 
> I also emailed the PUC and the Attorney General's office.
> 
> LIkewise I emailed Mike Rogoway of the Oregonian, who's the tech geek there.
> 
> Doubtful anything will happen with any of it, but, at the very least if the Oregonian grabs it there will be a temporary black eye.


I just emailed the MACC as well. Probably won't help, but I explained that Frontier is requesting this change and it is changing the way the system is operating which violates this statement on the MACC website:

"There will be no change in rates, equipment or in the way the cable system is used or operated."

I understand that the legal agreement might say that nothing will change from the day before to the day of the transfer, but if Frontier is requesting this change ahead of time then it violates the agreement.

Everybody should email the MACC even if they are not affected by this.

EDIT: Just sent the email to Mike Rogoway too.


----------



## rifleman69

Technically nothing is changing since it's being implemented before the switchover. That said, since Verizon isn't doing this in every other market that isn't being sold off to Frontier makes it pretty obvious that Verizon and Frontier have already broken their word on not changing a thing.

S3 and a Premiere Box being sold very soon and welcome back DirecTV!


----------



## MPSAN

rifleman69 said:


> Technically nothing is changing since it's being implemented before the switchover. That said, since Verizon isn't doing this in every other market that isn't being sold off to Frontier makes it pretty obvious that Verizon and Frontier have already broken their word on not changing a thing.
> 
> S3 and a Premiere Box being sold very soon and welcome back DirecTV!


But, I said to Greg that doing this a few weeks before the change is just trying to get around the system!

OH, who is this person at the Oregonian?


----------



## cwerdna

MPSAN said:


> BAD NEWS!!!
> 
> I just had it confirmed that VZ/Frontier will NOT support TIVO MRV any longer! It will only be available using VZ/Frontier Equipment.





pdxsam said:


> Today I spoke with two gentlemen from Verizon. They echoed exactly what was posted here. The copy protection is here and to stay.
> 
> That said, like MPSAN, I emailed MACC because I'm on the west side. The gentleman there replied in less than 5 minutes.
> 
> I also emailed the PUC and the Attorney General's office.


Geez! Ok, crap, I think I'm going to be on the phone w/VZ again this weekend and finally give TiVo a call too. (Still at work right now. )

So, they're just going leave copy protection on a random set of channels? If that's the way it stands, I'm very likely going to drop FiOS and get them to not hit me w/ETF.

For me, I don't care about MRV since I don't even have another active TiVo in my household. I care about archiving some content, some of which airs on channels that are now protected.


----------



## richsadams

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Four active TiVo HD's, recording lots of programs on each. No freezes before or after the "outage". But I didn't actually have an outage when you guys did, just the CCI nonsense.


Hmmm...happened again just tonight on our S3. Turned the TV on and all was well and a split second later the picture froze. I hit the "Live TV" button and it switched to the other tuner...running just fine. Hit it again and it went back to the original tuner and it was fine as well. My wife said it's happened to her a couple of times too. Rah-ro.

Any other time I'd say it was the hard drive going south (still might be) but since it also happened on the Premiere twice (perhaps more, I don't use it a lot) and only after the FIOS outage I'm leaning toward something else. Perhaps I should get a replacement drive just in case. Another fun thing to have to deal with. %&$#@* you Verizon! I used to love you...now? Not so much. 



COBeav said:


> I just emailed the MACC as well. (I never knew they even existed until now.) Probably won't help, but I explained that Frontier is requesting this change and it is changing the way the system is operating which violates this statement on the MACC website:
> 
> "There will be no change in rates, equipment or in the way the cable system is used or operated."
> 
> I understand that the legal agreement might say that nothing will change from the day before to the day of the transfer, but if Frontier is requesting this change ahead of time then it violates the agreement.
> 
> Everybody should email the MACC even if they are not affected by this.
> 
> EDIT: Just sent the email to Mike Rogoway too.


I e-mailed the MACC too. Got a response within a half-hour...which is pretty amazing these days. I replied with some more info and they wrote back right away saying that they are taking my and the other complaints to the GM of Verizon. I don't know what if anything will happen, but at least a number of people know we're not happy. That won't get me anything at Starbuck's, but I feel better having made some noise anyway.


----------



## alexislightus

howdy everyone 
im going to be reading though alotof thies posts here to kinda get a head up about whats going on
i work for an FSC for the Frontier area anyone in this area i can help a lil bit im reading up on tivos cause well.. we have little info on em 
and i wanna know some more
feel free to ask aswell ill try to find out some info if i can


----------



## cwerdna

To add to the list of protected channels:
104 BLOOM, 128 HISTP, 140 LIFEP, 141 LMN, 53 FXP, 71 ESPNCL

On the phone w/VZ again. The tech didn't know anything about this. I had to explain to him CCI bytes, MRV, transfering, etc. He went away for awhile, then asked for a list of example channels "that I couldn't record". I told him I can record but can't transfer the content (and gave him http://www.tivo.com/copyprotection/), explained the bytes, and gave my personal list of known protected channels.

He seemed to be IMing a network tech. Te tech conveyed to him that it's up to TiVo, blah blah and I had to re-explain the CCI bytes, etc. The claim was then that it was up to the content provider and they just pass it thru. I explained again that everything was wide open and that it's too coincidental that now random channels are protected after the outage on 6/7 - 6/8, the 3 known affected states, pairing, etc.

After more back and forth, the tech claimed all they can do is try to deactivate and reactivate the card again. He offered this 2x, to which I said no, I doubt this will do any good: if it's not paired and they continue to use 0x02 then I won't be able to watch those channels. I told him I will be considering other TV provider options as soon as my commitment is up or will try to get out ETF due to the Frontier transition.

He suggested I call TiVo which I told him I will.


----------



## orangeboy

alexislightus said:


> howdy everyone
> im going to be reading though alotof thies posts here to kinda get a head up about whats going on
> i work for an FSC for the Frontier area anyone in this area i can help a lil bit im reading up on tivos cause well.. we have little info on em
> and i wanna know some more
> feel free to ask aswell ill try to find out some info if i can


I think what you'll learn is:

CCI byte equal 00 = happy TiVo customers
CCI byte greater 00 = migration of TiVo customers to other providers


----------



## alexislightus

orangeboy said:


> I think what you'll learn is:
> 
> CC byte equal 00 = happy TiVo customers
> CC byte greater 00 = migration of TiVo customers to other providers


this ive seen recently.. and tbh.. no one else in my center knows about this.. but ill be sure to try to keep an eye out a good portion of the ones we can handle seems to be alright after we re validate the card and or reactivate it 
im gathering that [ if i get what the cc byte is]
is verizon.frontier re encoded something and causes somehting else to change i dont know specifics yet but thats why im here 
[btw i work in the charleston center if any of you have contacted that one you may have talked to me]


----------



## cwerdna

alexislightus said:


> this ive seen recently.. and tbh.. no one else in my center knows about this.. but ill be sure to try to keep an eye out a good portion of the ones we can handle seems to be alright after we re validate the card and or reactivate it
> im gathering that [ if i get what the cc byte is]
> is verizon.frontier re encoded something and causes somehting else to change i dont know specifics yet but thats why im here


http://www.tivo.com/copyprotection/ is a good primer. I've been on FiOS TV Extreme HD since end of September 09 and NOTHING I ever recorded from FiOS TV has EVER had any protection until 6/8 (after I got the my service restored after the 6/7 outage. See my posts starting at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7976518#post7976518 about the outage. It affected a bunch of here on TC and some people at my work.

When CCI byte is set to 0x02 on a channel and you've recorded that show, then TiVO will NOT let you transfer that show to your PC/Mac via http://code.google.com/p/kmttg/ and TiVo Desktop software (http://www3.tivo.com/store/accessories-software.do and http://www.tivo.com/mytivo/product-features/dvr-to-go/index.html). You'll see the red no sign by the show (at least in kmttg). I have a screenshot up at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=450334.

It will also prevent you from transferring and viewing the videos on other TiVos in the household on the home network via multi-room viewing (MRV).

I didn't know that we suddenly got copy protection until the the OP (Phantom Gremlin) started this thread.


----------



## lew

MPSAN said:


> BAD NEWS!!!
> 
> I just had it confirmed that VZ/Frontier will NOT support TIVO MRV any longer! It will only be available using VZ/Frontier Equipment.
> 
> I will call MACC to see what they say about it and I suggest that us Portland area people do the same.


Is this for all of VZ/FiOS or just those customers transitioning over to Frontier?


----------



## bdraw

I just checked a few channels and many of my recordings in the past week and none were copy protected so this only appears to affect those moving to Frontier. And since each provider must have their own contracts with the content providers, this does actually make sense. As for the claim that this is a change and violates the agreement, it may very well be the case.

If Frontier is marking broadcast content as anything but Copy Freely, then don't hesitate to file a complaint with the FCC. Copy Once is permitted on everything except broadcast content though.

But the CCI byte being set to Copy Once doesn't prevent the providers MRV from working or even Media Centers or DirecTVs because unlike TiVo's solution, those don't need to make a copy to watch in another room. You see the flag doesn't prevent streaming the content to another room, just making a copy of it. In fact TiVo could make MRV work by steaming or by just moving the copy (which of course would mean deleting the original).

So you see it really is a TiVo problem and they've known about it for years have made no public proposals to fix it.

A funny side story. I was lucky enough to take a tour of one of the two FiOS Super Head Ends and a Video Hub and I asked the VHO manager how he sets the CCI bit and he had no idea what I was talking about. So you see it isn't just CSRs who don't know what it is.


----------



## hmm52

lew said:


> Is this for all of VZ/FiOS or just those customers transitioning over to Frontier?


For now it's just those in Oregon, Washington, possibly Indiana. But it sounds almost certain to include the rest of the Frontier areas - Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, some of eastern California. (Don't quote me on the list)

The track record of Verizon's recent spinoffs is horrendous - mountain of debt, poor service, bankruptcy; Fairpoint Communications in particular, Idearc. While the CCI:0X02 byte has got to be annoying, I suspect that the copper line customers in the hinterlands will be the ones really screwed by the deal. Nice work, regulators!


----------



## shwru980r

Tivo has no choice but to implement streaming on the premiere. Especially with Moxi breathing down their neck.


----------



## richsadams

alexislightus said:


> howdy everyone
> im going to be reading though alotof thies posts here to kinda get a head up about whats going on
> i work for an FSC for the Frontier area anyone in this area i can help a lil bit im reading up on tivos cause well.. we have little info on em
> and i wanna know some more
> feel free to ask aswell ill try to find out some info if i can


There are several of us that are hip-deep in this and would be happy to discuss it in depth. PM me if you'd like to chat sometime.


----------



## pdxsam

I saw this morning that Engadget got wind of it. At least the word is out there.


----------



## richsadams

pdxsam said:


> I saw this morning that Engadget got wind of it. At least the word is out there.


Thanks for that. BTW, here's the the link to the story...

http://bit.ly/a31664


----------



## MPSAN

lew said:


> Is this for all of VZ/FiOS or just those customers transitioning over to Frontier?


Well, to be honest, the person who called me back thought it would be for EVERYONE soon. I did not mention it, as I have no way to confirm it!


----------



## bicker

shwru980r said:


> Tivo has no choice but to implement streaming on the premiere.


You must be using the term "no choice" in a manner inconsistent with the actual meaning of those words.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

alexislightus said:


> howdy everyone
> im going to be reading though alotof thies posts here to kinda get a head up about whats going on
> i work for an FSC for the Frontier area anyone in this area i can help a lil bit im reading up on tivos cause well.. we have little info on em
> and i wanna know some more
> feel free to ask aswell ill try to find out some info if i can


Your competitor Comcast says:

*Say hello to the new AnyRoom DVR.

Now you can share your DVR recordings with any room in the house.*​
I predict that, if Frontier keeps these restrictions, and continues with this demonstrated contempt for their future customers, that people will simply switch back to Comcast. I will. They are already offering me plenty of "deals" to switch. At least in my area Comcast doesn't set the CCI byte except for premium channels like HBO.


----------



## rifleman69

Just filled out the complaint form on the MACC website as well, requesting that my in-laws and parents also fill it out even if it doesn't directly affect them. Nothing will change about your service my ass Verizon/Frontier!


----------



## rifleman69

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Your competitor Comcast says:
> 
> *Say hello to the new AnyRoom DVR.
> 
> Now you can share your DVR recordings with any room in the house.*​
> I predict that, if Frontier keeps these restrictions, and continues with this demonstrated contempt for their future customers, that people will simply switch back to Comcast. I will. They are already offering me plenty of "deals" to switch. At least in my area Comcast doesn't set the CCI byte except for premium channels like HBO.


I'd slit my wrists before going back to Comcrap. I still have an HR10-250 from DirecTV (I know the HD channels have been changed to MPEG4) but it'll still work on the SD channels so that's one less cost to getting back in with DirecTV.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

rifleman69 said:


> Just filled out the complaint form on the MACC website as well ...


I'll probably fill something out, but it appears to me those guys have simply been corrupted by the system. It's called regulatory capture. What else would explain stellar verbiage such as this:

_With Frontier comes local management and, MACC expects, better, more attentive, and thoughtful customer service._​
Given Frontier's demonstrated contempt for customers (by making this CCI byte change), in reality I expect "worse, less attentive, and thoughtless customer service". That's probably what's coming. Worst case what's in store for us is something like the similarly named FairPoint Communications, which wound up filing Chapter 11 after royally f***ing things up.


----------



## dresden69

There is alot of speculation going on right now... and it is all in good fun... but in all honesty... we don't know how Frontier is going to be... from all indications inside... it looks to be back to the old GTE days before Verizon came in...

I am sorry that this happened... my wife loved the ability to record on one box and watch it on the tivo in the bedroom, was one of the major factors going over to FIOS from Directv. Now, going to wait and see what happens.

I am on the inside and outside, because I know what you guys are going through... It sucks... but I still think that FIOS (by Verizon or Frontier) is the best service that money can buy, bar none... And I would think that even if I wasn't employeed by the company.

Sorry about the frustration that it is causing most of you... If you have any questions or concerns about your FIOS service... and need help on a tech support side... I would be more than happy to try to assist... (Need moca set up inside your house, I am the guy, got three routers doing it right now  )

Take care!


----------



## dresden69

Also... I don't know what the build out plans for the other states are... I have a feeling that Frontier is just going to focus on providing the best product they can to the states that they service now... and next time I see a higher up walking around in my Center.. I will be more than happy to mention to them that a number of people are very dissatisfied with the copy protection that we are putting out on our cable cards.


----------



## MPSAN

Well, dresden69, one thing you can do is to tell Howard to set up his voicemail box! He is at 5842


----------



## killzone

bicker said:


> You must be using the term "no choice" in a manner inconsistent with the actual meaning of those words.


lol, that is true, however it would be a smart move on their part. Moxi already does it and removing MRV from the Tivo basically makes it a second tier product - unless you only have 1 unit.


----------



## killzone

dresden69 said:


> Sorry about the frustration that it is causing most of you... If you have any questions or concerns about your FIOS service... and need help on a tech support side... I would be more than happy to try to assist... (Need moca set up inside your house, I am the guy, got three routers doing it right now  )
> 
> Take care!


Just curious, why would you want moca, and with 3 routers? I had them switch my ONT to ethernet and have just 1 wireless - n router (no more tiny NAT Actiontec router) and gigabit set up in the entire house.


----------



## pdxsam

dresden69 said:


> but I still think that FIOS (by Verizon or Frontier) is the best service that money can buy, bar none... And I would think that even if I wasn't employeed by the company.


Looking at it from another angle, I agree with you FIOS with Verizon was the best money could buy. We don't know that about Frontier. Based on recent events my gut tells me this is the first of many changes to come..

So far MRV on Tivo - Gone
Web Interface to DVR - Gone
Smartphone Interface - Gone

From the data side, rumours abound that there will be data caps put on the system in short order, similar to Comcast. Never stated in a definitive manner but still in place.

I may be crying the sky is falling here, and, I hope I am. From what little I've seen so far, it doesn't bode well going forward.


----------



## rifleman69

dresden69 said:


> Also... I don't know what the build out plans for the other states are... I have a feeling that Frontier is just going to focus on providing the best product they can to the states that they service now... and next time I see a higher up walking around in my Center.. I will be more than happy to mention to them that a number of people are very dissatisfied with the copy protection that we are putting out on our cable cards.


I'll believe it when I see it, Frontier has ZERO experience running video services. Sure they're using the same VZ employees but it's different from the top down. VZ will then come back into Oregon, Washington, and Indiana in about 3 years and offer a better service that Frontier can't offer...I GUARANTEE it.

F Frontier.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

rifleman69 said:


> VZ will then come back into Oregon, Washington, and Indiana in about 3 years and offer a better service that Frontier can't offer...I GUARANTEE it.


The *only* reason Verizon sold to Frontier is they weren't getting good enough ROI on the expensive fiber they were rolling out. The housing density just wasn't there, plus not enough people were switching from cable. That's why they kept the older East Coast areas where Verizon was the ILEC, much higher density. It's the lower density GTE suburbs that they mostly got rid of.

There are analysts that are alarmed by Verizon's cash flow statements. In just a year or two from now, if Verizon kept spending, they wouldn't be able to cover their dividend. So something had to give (and so the FiOS deployment in new areas came to an end). But don't cry for Verizon. They are using every penny from their control of Verizon Wireless (they own 55%, Vodafone the rest) to pay off the wireless debt. So very soon wireless will be debt free and have huge cash flow available to upstream to both Verizon and Vodafone.

Having said that, there's no way Verizon would "come back" to Oregon and pull new fiber to overlay the existing Frontier fiber. No way at all. The only scenario where Verizon would come back would be to take over the physical assets of a bankrupt Frontier, and only if they could get the assets on the cheap. Oh, and by the way, if they did that, I guarantee you they wouldn't hire back all the Verizon employees that will soon become Frontier employees. No way would they want those pension obligations back on their books.


----------



## richsadams

Phantom Gremlin said:


> I'll probably fill something out, but it appears to me those guys have simply been corrupted by the system. It's called regulatory capture. What else would explain stellar verbiage such as this:
> 
> _With Frontier comes local management and, MACC expects, better, more attentive, and thoughtful customer service._​


Agreed. I'm not sure what they mean there. I've taken the time to ask and every VZ CSR I've talked to and all said that they are staying on with Frontier. If Frontier gives them some additional training they might get more thoughtful and attentive I suppose. Although with one exception all of the VZ CSR's I've encountered recently have been very patient (even when I'm not) and as helpful as they could be given the circumstances.

I suspect this CP thing is going to cause a lot of unrest if its rolled out across all of the VZ and/or Frontier FIOS networks. I'm guessing the sharks (Comcast, et al) are discussing this and are preparing to circle already.


----------



## richsadams

pdxsam said:


> Looking at it from another angle, I agree with you FIOS with Verizon was the best money could buy. We don't know that about Frontier. Based on recent events my gut tells me this is the first of many changes to come..
> 
> So far MRV on Tivo - Gone
> Web Interface to DVR - Gone
> Smartphone Interface - Gone
> 
> From the data side, rumours abound that there will be data caps put on the system in short order, similar to Comcast. Never stated in a definitive manner but still in place.


You forgot to mention the channels VZ has been dropping on a regular basis. For a while there it seemed like every time I turned on the TV there was a TiVo message saying that channel such-and-such had been removed from my lineup. Just the opposite was occurring when we first signed up for FIOS. So I'd add "less channels" to the list.

And if they go anywhere near data caps color me gone.


----------



## bicker

killzone said:


> lol, that is true, however it would be a smart move on their part. Moxi already does it and removing MRV from the Tivo basically makes it a second tier product - unless you only have 1 unit.


What percentage of customers purchase 2 HD TiVos? Probably so small that it is an insignificant number. I am considered "the" television guy, on a non-A/V-related forum (one of those on the Top 30 of the Big Boards list, with over 86,000 posts per week) I participate in, and I only have one HD TiVo. Beyond that, if I had two HD TiVos, 90% of what I'd transfer would be OTA programming, where "Transferring prohibited by the copyright holder" is not permitted.

Sometimes, I think we allow our insular situation here, as members of an *enthusiast *forum, blind us to the broader reality.


----------



## bicker

richsadams said:


> And if they go anywhere near data caps color me gone.


Gone... where?


----------



## vurbano

bicker said:


> What percentage of customers purchase 2 HD TiVos? Probably so small that it is an insignificant number.


You are joking right? Verizon offers a whole house solution as does cable, directv and Echostar. Why would anyone just have one TivoHD and no way to ahre with the rest of the rooms when your service provider offers it with their own equipment? I can live without on demand but not MRV. I even had that with D*'s crappy HR20- 100's. Losing transfer or no MRV will be the end of Tivo for me in my home. Take that away and the box does nothing that the service provider boxes dont do. And if you dont like your service providers box your logical choice is moxi, maybe HTPCs with centon 4 tuner cable card but not Tivo.


----------



## steve614

bicker said:


> Gone... where?


Is that really necessary? It's obvious if you had been reading the thread, that he meant he will be leaving FIOS/Frontier.


----------



## wmcbrine

richsadams said:


> I suspect this CP thing is going to cause a lot of unrest if its rolled out across all of the VZ and/or Frontier FIOS networks. I'm guessing the sharks (Comcast, et al) are discussing this and are preparing to circle already.


I wouldn't bet on it. AFAIK, Fios was almost unique in _not_ using the flag until now. You'll see lots of complaints about lack of MRV/TTG from users of other services on here. But the other services are less consistent than Fios [used to be].


----------



## David Platt

richsadams said:


> I see mgama's TiVo froze on the diagnostic screen (and I've heard of that happening before) but is anyone else noticing anything unusual since the FIOS outage of June 7th and 8th (besides the non-sensical CCI copy protection issues)?


I've been having pretty severe problems with a Series 3 since the outage. No matter what Verizon tried, they were not able to get my cards back up and working again after the outage. Not only was I not able to get all my channels, but the TiVo was suffering frequent reboots and lockups where the only option was to unplug and reboot. Thinking my old S Cards might be the problem, Verizon came out and replaced them both with M Cards. Still no dice-- the TiVo still rebooted constantly and never could get all of the channels.

I finally got so fed up with it that I decided to remove FiOS from the equation completely and switch that TiVo to OTA only. I disconnected the FiOS feed and removed both CableCARDs and attempted to redo guided setup, but the box still rebooted so frequently that I could never make it through the setup. Thinking the CableCARD issue may have revealed an underlying problem with the hard drive, I got a new drive and copied everything over. Still no dice-- reboots still happened constantly. The thing that finally did the trick was restoring a fresh image and starting from scratch, so I lost almost an entire terrabyte of shows I had saved up for the summer.

Not so happy with Verizon right now.


----------



## bicker

steve614 said:


> Gone... where?
> 
> 
> 
> Is that really necessary? It's obvious if you had been reading the thread, that he meant he will be leaving FIOS/Frontier.
Click to expand...

Hehe, but of course I was asking where would he go *to*.


----------



## bicker

vurbano said:


> You are joking right?


No, not joking. People aren't buying multiple HD DVRs in great numbers. They're just not. Get over it.



vurbano said:


> Verizon offers a whole house solution as does cable, directv and Echostar.


Ask people who have two TiVos whether that will satisfy them.


----------



## orangeboy

vurbano said:


> ...Verizon offers a whole house solution as does cable, directv and Echostar...


I'm curious how that even works. Aren't those providers constrained to the same CCI byte restrictions imposed? Or are those solutions stream based?


----------



## rifleman69

Phantom Gremlin said:


> The *only* reason Verizon sold to Frontier is they weren't getting good enough ROI on the expensive fiber they were rolling out. The housing density just wasn't there, plus not enough people were switching from cable. That's why they kept the older East Coast areas where Verizon was the ILEC, much higher density. It's the lower density GTE suburbs that they mostly got rid of.
> 
> There are analysts that are alarmed by Verizon's cash flow statements. In just a year or two from now, if Verizon kept spending, they wouldn't be able to cover their dividend. So something had to give (and so the FiOS deployment in new areas came to an end). But don't cry for Verizon. They are using every penny from their control of Verizon Wireless (they own 55%, Vodafone the rest) to pay off the wireless debt. So very soon wireless will be debt free and have huge cash flow available to upstream to both Verizon and Vodafone.
> 
> Having said that, there's no way Verizon would "come back" to Oregon and pull new fiber to overlay the existing Frontier fiber. No way at all. The only scenario where Verizon would come back would be to take over the physical assets of a bankrupt Frontier, and only if they could get the assets on the cheap. Oh, and by the way, if they did that, I guarantee you they wouldn't hire back all the Verizon employees that will soon become Frontier employees. No way would they want those pension obligations back on their books.


Trust me, VZ is coming back here...not with fiber. Think of Clear today, and think of what that can do in four years. There's a big reason why VZ didn't sell the wireless division in Oregon, Washington, or Indiana (I know it's a separate company but the reason still remains).

And if you believe the ONLY reason VZ sold us off is because of ROI...I have a small bridge to sell you. Notice the areas where FiOS is currently installed in Oregon and where it is not (not including non-Verizon areas such as Portland proper)...you'll begin to see the differences between those areas.


----------



## rifleman69

bicker said:


> What percentage of customers purchase 2 HD TiVos? Probably so small that it is an insignificant number. I am considered "the" television guy, on a non-A/V-related forum (one of those on the Top 30 of the Big Boards list, with over 86,000 posts per week) I participate in, and I only have one HD TiVo. Beyond that, if I had two HD TiVos, 90% of what I'd transfer would be OTA programming, where "Transferring prohibited by the copyright holder" is not permitted.
> 
> Sometimes, I think we allow our insular situation here, as members of an *enthusiast *forum, blind us to the broader reality.


So when both companies issue press releases saying that, "Nothing will change"...you just blindly believe them? BTW, glad to hear you're such a vital member to another non-A/V related forum...does that and a few bucks buy you a cup of coffee each morning? :up:


----------



## MPSAN

bicker said:


> No, not joking. People aren't buying multiple HD DVRs in great numbers. They're just not. Get over it.
> 
> Ask people who have two TiVos whether that will satisfy them.


Hello bicker...me again. 

Some people with only 1 TIVO are mad as they copy shows to their PC in order to save them. Now they can not do this on most stations.


----------



## wmcbrine

orangeboy said:


> I'm curious how that even works. Aren't those providers constrained to the same CCI byte restrictions imposed? Or are those solutions stream based?


I've said it before, I'll say it again: It's really not about streaming vs. copying. The CCI system is imposed _by the cable companies_. They can thus freely exempt themselves.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

David Platt said:


> I finally got so fed up with it that I decided to remove FiOS from the equation completely and switch that TiVo to OTA only. I disconnected the FiOS feed and removed both CableCARDs and attempted to redo guided setup, but the box still rebooted so frequently that I could never make it through the setup. Thinking the CableCARD issue may have revealed an underlying problem with the hard drive, I got a new drive and copied everything over. Still no dice-- reboots still happened constantly. The thing that finally did the trick was restoring a fresh image and starting from scratch, so I lost almost an entire terrabyte of shows I had saved up for the summer.
> 
> Not so happy with Verizon right now.


I think you're blaming the wrong company. You should be blaming *TiVo*, not Verizon. It should not be possible for Verizon to corrupt the contents of your hard disk in such a way that you need to restore from a fresh image. That's TiVo's sloppiness.

The other thing about the situation that really p***es me off is that TiVo software loves to act stupid. The probability of an undetected disk error is vanishingly small compared to the probability of a detected error. And yet TiVo fails to report errors. A reboot should not be the way a TiVo lets you know you might have a disk problem.


----------



## cwerdna

I tried calling TiVo 2x yesterday but their systems were down so they couldn't even log my call/complaint. Today I got through, explained to them the situation and telling them that I was hoping they could escalate w/folks higher up at VZ.

Unfortunately, the rep basically said I'd be better off complaining to VZ (which I told her I have) and that VZ would likely listen more to a customer than another company, esp. one that's a competitor in some sense since VZ rents out DVRs. 

When I have some time, I'm going try digging round for some other channel thru which to complain to VZ. In the past, when I've tried emailing them (I believe thru a form on their web page) w/general (non-tech) questions when their non-tech support # was closed, it was a total waste of time. The'd send a generic reply that basically said to call them.  Thanks for nothing.


----------



## cwerdna

bicker said:


> Just like when you get an impulse that you want things to be a certain way, *you* blinding believe that.
> 
> Besides, you're perverting the context of the statements you allege within the context of the message you're replying to. Pretty pathetic way of trying to assuage your feelings of inadequacy. Sad.


What's your purpose in arguing w/posters here and picking apart their statements? Do you have FiOS? Are you in area that was affected by an outage that began on 6/7 and later ended up with a whole bunch of channels having copying protection where none existed on any of them before? I am along w/MSPAN, richsadams, Phantom Gremlin and others.

We had NO idea that we'd suddenly get copy protection on a whole bunch of our channels, seemingly picked at random. Why does standard def CNN, CNN Headline News (!), G4 TV, Game Show Network (!) suddenly have CP while standard and high def Science Channel don't?

We had no idea that the outage and sudden onset of copy protection _appears_ limited to customers being transitioned over to Frontier.

We've gotten no official statement from VZ, gotten mixed messages from VZ and dealt w/clueless CSRs and wasted a whole bunch of time on the phone w/them.

I'm personally not affected by MRV being blocked on those channels due to CP since I only have 1 active TiVo in my household. I AM affected in that I do archive some HD content to AVCHD format (to burn to DVD +/-R) by transferring it to my PC. I also archive some SD content by burning to a standalone DVD recorder (which I believe will be affected to).

If you don't have anything useful to add here...


----------



## MPSAN

cwerdna...

Thank You! 

OH, one point is that Verizon FIOS did call me Friday and told me that MRV would no longer be supportd on TIVO's. That is why I updated this thread (post 143) with the first official word!


----------



## cwerdna

MPSAN said:


> cwerdna...
> 
> Thank You!
> 
> OH, one point is that Verizon FIOS did call me Friday and told me that MRV would no longer be supportd on TIVO's. That is why I updated this thread (post 143) with the first official word!


No prob.

Yeah, your post 143 is why I called VZ again. The result of my call is at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7996832#post7996832 which leads me to believe they don't know what they're doing.


----------



## shwru980r

cwerdna said:


> No prob.
> 
> Yeah, your post 143 is why I called VZ again. The result of my call is at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7996832#post7996832 which leads me to believe they don't know what they're doing.


If they want to get the word out that Tivo has problems working with Verizon and obfuscate the cause, then they seem to know what they are doing. Looks like they can set the CCI bytes any way they want as long as they don't mess with OTA channels.

Verizon is publicly owned company in the DVR business. If they can gain a competitive advantage by turning on the CCI bytes, they have an obligation to their shareholders to do so.


----------



## rifleman69

bicker said:


> Just like when you get an impulse that you want things to be a certain way


*click* Go meat!

*edit* I can't *click* for this DB: http://brianandrobbie.com/2109.jpg


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> What's your purpose in arguing w/posters here and picking apart their statements?


Don't feed the trolls.


----------



## richsadams

David Platt said:


> I've been having pretty severe problems with a Series 3 since the outage.


Thanks for the follow up David. I've no idea if the outage corrupted things (or if it's an ongoing issue), but since we experienced problems on both of our TiVo's immediately afterward it seems more than coincidental IMO. I also have about 1TB of recordings at risk on the Series3 so I may start transferring and/or saving the more important ones JIC...at least the recordings that aren't copy protected.


----------



## bicker

cwerdna said:


> What's your purpose...?


Presenting a different perspective.



cwerdna said:


> If you don't have anything useful to add here...


What I'm posting is very useful, especially for casual readers. Very. You just want an unrebutted soap-box for your bashing. Tough.

So we've had the personal attacks for taking a different perspective. We've had the cyberstalking and personal attacks on my appearance. And on my ethical choice to not eat animals. Don't folks realize that by attacking the poster they're just showing that their perspective on the issue - their opposition to the content I posted - has no merit?

Stick the subject. Stop the personal attacks.


----------



## cwerdna

bicker said:


> Presenting a different perspective.
> 
> What I'm posting is very useful, especially for casual readers. Very. You just want an unrebutted soap-box for your bashing. Tough.
> ...
> Stick the subject. Stop the personal attacks.


Please add real value to this thread instead of worthless picking apart of people posts. We have PR fluff from VZ and Frontier and we have little in the way of answers from VZ yet our service has been affected. A bunch of us have wasted a bunch of time interacting w/VZ to first resolve our outage and then explain and re-explain copy protection.

You're on my ignore list now. I've not ever used it here on TC, until now.


----------



## dlfl

richsadams said:


> ........there are a number of different copy protection options. The one being discussed here is known as 0x02 which allows TiVo to make a recording but will not allow that recording to be transferred (to another TiVo, computer, etc.) This is not the norm for any service provider, Verizon, Comcast, etc. ........


Rich, a slight correction needed here, just FYI:

Time Warner applies CCI=0x02 to all their channels (except OTA copies) and it seems to be a national policy. I searched the thread to see if someone else had already caught this and didn't find it.

It's too bad if you FIOS customers are losing your good deal. Now you have to be like TWC customers -- keeping your bags packed, ready to move out to other territory (OTA, Netflix etc.).


----------



## blacknoi

cwerdna said:


> You're on my ignore list now. I've not ever used it here on TC, until now.


I've had him on my ignore list for a while now. I have seen that poster on other sites conveying the same attitude.

Too bad the ignore option doesn't work when someone else quotes the poster. Oh well.

Cablevision has been slowing adding the CCI bit to more channels over the past few months. It started off with no CCI at all, then just the movie channels, now its seemingly at random. ...so I feel all of your pain.


----------



## Grumock

bicker said:


> We've had the cyberstalking and personal attacks on my appearance. And on my ethical choice to not eat animals..


nothing wrong with not eating animals in my opinion, especially since most them in the store are filled with poison like hormones, & other unmentionables. I commend your choice. I also appreciate your perspective though some do not. Keep posting


----------



## COBeav

bicker said:


> Stick the subject. Stop the personal attacks.


Apology accepted.


----------



## rifleman69

bicker said:


> Stick the subject. Stop the personal attacks.


Pot, kettle, black? Don't post your personal website in your profile if you don't want people commenting about your "appearance".

Now back to your regularly scheduled thread.


----------



## rifleman69

dlfl said:


> Rich, a slight correction needed here, just FYI:
> 
> Time Warner applies CCI=0x02 to all their channels (except OTA copies) and it seems to be a national policy. I searched the thread to see if someone else had already caught this and didn't find it.
> 
> It's too bad if you FIOS customers are losing your good deal. Now you have to be like TWC customers -- keeping your bags packed, ready to move out to other territory (OTA, Netflix etc.).


But FiOS isn't directly applying it like TWC is. Showtime channels are currently not set to 0x02, which in reality makes no sense. Why would you allow show from Showtime to be copied freely when shows from the Game Show Network are not? Not to mention that when both Verizon and Frontier state, "Nothing will change with your service", and this comes along...does it not make you wonder how much wool they pulled over each state's regulators eyes?

Yes it's their right to enable the 0x02 setting, but don't do it when it's going against what you've already publicly stated as well as not enabling it correctly.


----------



## Grumock

rifleman69 said:


> But FiOS isn't directly applying it like TWC is. Showtime channels are currently not set to 0x02, which in reality makes no sense. Why would you allow show from Showtime to be copied freely when shows from the Game Show Network are not?


just keep this in mind. "If it makes sense it's not going to happen" that seems to be a rule they all use.


----------



## rifleman69

Good news for anyone with a contract with Verizon FiOS. Verizon eliminates ETS fees effective immediately.

http://newscenter.verizon.com/press-releases/verizon/2010/new-verizon-fios-customers.html

The Worry-Free Guarantee now covers new bundled customers in California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Virginia and the District of Columbia markets where FiOS is offered. *The month-to-month option is available in those states, plus the FiOS markets of Indiana, Oregon, South Carolina and Washington, which are in the process of being transitioned to Frontier Communications.*


----------



## richsadams

dlfl said:


> Rich, a slight correction needed here, just FYI:
> 
> Time Warner applies CCI=0x02 to all their channels (except OTA copies) and it seems to be a national policy.


Good point. I had forgotten about TWC's draconian policies. Seems VZ/Frontier FIOS are headed in the same direction. My toothbrush is already in my suitcase.


----------



## richsadams

Grumock said:


> just keep this in mind. "If it makes sense it's not going to happen" that seems to be a rule they all use.


Agreed. I think what we have now was VZ's first attempt at full CP across their and what will eventually be Frontier's FIOS networks and it blew up in their face. I'm sure they're regrouping now, preparing to "do it right" in the not too distant future.


----------



## richsadams

rifleman69 said:


> Good news for anyone with a contract with Verizon FiOS. Verizon eliminates ETS fees effective immediately.
> 
> http://newscenter.verizon.com/press-releases/verizon/2010/new-verizon-fios-customers.html
> 
> The Worry-Free Guarantee now covers new bundled customers in California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Virginia and the District of Columbia markets where FiOS is offered. *The month-to-month option is available in those states, plus the FiOS markets of Indiana, Oregon, South Carolina and Washington, which are in the process of being transitioned to Frontier Communications.*


A confirmation of their November '09 e-mail is good news. I neglected to mention in my earlier post that in addition to the discount they offered me the VZ CSR wanted me to know that they weren't going to have "contracts" anymore and that we could cancel our services, features, or everything without any early withdrawal penalties. Now if only they'd take that business model to their wireless phone services!


----------



## vurbano

I think the best thing any of us can do is to vote with our wallets. If VZ is slapping on protection that prevents MRV then cancel them. IF it is Tivo's fault then ebay your boxes.


----------



## rifleman69

vurbano said:


> I think the best thing any of us can do is to vote with our wallets. If VZ is slapping on protection that prevents MRV then cancel them. IF it is Tivo's fault then ebay your boxes.


+1 I'm willing to go this direction but would prefer to at least give Frontier a chance to see if the service stays the same (all signs point to no, and that's not including Fairpoint or the company they sold their Hawaiian stuff to).


----------



## MPSAN

Grumock said:


> nothing wrong with not eating animals in my opinion, especially since most them in the store are filled with poison like hormones, & other unmentionables. I commend your choice. I also appreciate your perspective though some do not. Keep posting


Is it possible to get any more Off Topic? Is it possible that Verizon or Frontier is somehow responsible for this as well?


----------



## Grumock

MPSAN said:


> Is it possible to get any more Off Topic? Is it possible that Verizon or Frontier is somehow responsible for this as well?


I am sure that it's possible, but the hate for a different perspective on these forums is disturbing at times. 

Personally I like to hear everyone's perspective even if i don't agree with it. This thread has nothing to do with the area i live in but I like to read about issues that go on in case they affect me in the future. Being in TWC country I have been affected by the lack of using MRV for longer then i can remember.


----------



## dlfl

Grumock said:


> I am sure that it's possible, but the hate for a different perspective on these forums is disturbing at times.
> 
> Personally I like to hear everyone's perspective even if i don't agree with it. This thread has nothing to do with the area i live in but I like to read about issues that go on in case they affect me in the future. Being in TWC country I have been affected by the lack of using MRV for longer then i can remember.


I agree with you about being open minded to different perspectives -- heck I even find myself in agreement with bicker most of the time (although I usually find his posting style very irritating).

But MPSAN still has a point about staying OT. It has to do with the subject of the perspective you're presenting -- ideally it should have a close relationship to the thread topic.

Mea Culpa to being part of the OT problem here.


----------



## MPSAN

Phantom...too bad you do not accept PM's!


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

MPSAN said:


> Phantom...too bad you do not accept PM's!


I didn't realize my Private Messages setting was set to off. I just changed it. But I've always accepted email.


----------



## killzone

vurbano said:


> I think the best thing any of us can do is to vote with our wallets. If VZ is slapping on protection that prevents MRV then cancel them. IF it is Tivo's fault then ebay your boxes.


That's a loaded statement. It's clearly VZ/Frontier, but at the same time, Tivo should have added streaming to nip the cc issue once and for all.


----------



## MPSAN

Phantom Gremlin said:


> I didn't realize my Private Messages setting was set to off. I just changed it. But I've always accepted email.


OK, you have your first PM.


----------



## cwerdna

killzone said:


> That's a loaded statement. It's clearly VZ/Frontier, but at the same time, Tivo should have added streaming to nip the cc issue once and for all.


For me, streaming isn't the issue as I only have 1 active TiVo in my household. I archive some content to AVCHD format by using kmttg to transfer it to my PC + running thru my workflow. Some of those channels that I archived from are now protected (CNBCHD, HDNET and a few others). 

Does anyone have the bandwidth to try to raise a stink about this w/more press than just Engadget? We need to spread the word and get all the affected people to put pressure on VZ to give an explanation.

It strikes me as bizarre that VZ could be so inept that 2 weeks after this happened that we still (to my knowledge) have no official explanation. Perhaps they're just trying to "run out the clock" until Frontier takes over?

If there's no resolution to this on VZ/Frontier and I confirm that Comcrap in my area doesn't blanket put CP on those channels, I'm dropping FiOS.


----------



## cwerdna

rifleman69 said:


> Good news for anyone with a contract with Verizon FiOS. Verizon eliminates ETS fees effective immediately.
> 
> http://newscenter.verizon.com/press-releases/verizon/2010/new-verizon-fios-customers.html
> 
> The Worry-Free Guarantee now covers new bundled customers in California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Virginia and the District of Columbia markets where FiOS is offered. *The month-to-month option is available in those states, plus the FiOS markets of Indiana, Oregon, South Carolina and Washington, which are in the process of being transitioned to Frontier Communications.*


Are you sure that really helps w/people that are in contract? The language is a little vague. It sounds like new customers can get month-to-month in both VZ and Frontier areas.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Verizon-lets-FiOS-customers-apf-1213037392.html?x=0&.v=4 states


> Verizon had previously charged $20 more per month for the no-contract service. Now, new FiOS customers will be able to get contract-free service at the regular price of $99 per month, plus taxes and fees. *Existing customers, however, will still be subject to the contracts -- and to termination fees for ending the service early.*


----------



## vurbano

killzone said:


> That's a loaded statement. It's clearly VZ/Frontier, but at the same time, Tivo should have added streaming to nip the cc issue once and for all.


I think you are right and unfortunately VZ has the best PQ and best bundle prices so right or not Tivo will get the boot in my home if it happens here. That is unfortunate but it is partly their fault for not doing something that every other whole house solution DVR is doing it seems. it stinks even further after paying full price for 2 TivoHD units, 1 lifetime and one 3 year. This will be like going from absolute HD Nirvana with the ability to MRV and DL to PC to nothing really.


----------



## rifleman69

cwerdna said:


> Are you sure that really helps w/people that are in contract? The language is a little vague. It sounds like new customers can get month-to-month in both VZ and Frontier areas.
> 
> http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Verizon-lets-FiOS-customers-apf-1213037392.html?x=0&.v=4 states


This one you could fight in a court of law and win. Had they changed this after July 1st, it wouldn't work.


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> Are you sure that really helps w/people that are in contract? The language is a little vague. It sounds like new customers can get month-to-month in both VZ and Frontier areas.
> 
> http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Verizon-lets-FiOS-customers-apf-1213037392.html?x=0&.v=4 states


FWIW I am just entering the second year of a two-year, rate protected agreement w/VZ. When I spoke with the CSR about leaving because of the CP issue last week she said that I was free to change anything I wanted or leave w/o any ET fees. She also said that going forward there wouldn't be any "contracts", that everything would be month-to-month (no mention of any additional rate fees).


----------



## cwerdna

After I sent back a "thanks for nothing" email in reply to their useless (call the repair #) reply... here's an excerpt of their reply.


> Thank you for contacting the Verizon eCenter. I have received your email dated 6/21/10 regarding your FIOS TV Service. My name is Mariea, and I will be happy to assist you.
> 
> I'm looking into the problem for you and as soon as I get more information I will be contacting you. I did speak with someone in the FIOS Repair Department and the only information that I received was that the TIVO is giving a error and it's not compatitable. At this time they are unsure of how long it will be before this will be corrected. I've given this information to a supervisor and she is passing this information on. It will take a few days before I can get back with you, but you can contact me at...


It's still blows my mind that they _still_ either don't get it or feign ignorance.


----------



## rifleman69

cwerdna said:


> After I sent back a "thanks for nothing" email in reply to their useless (call the repair #) reply... here's an excerpt of their reply.
> 
> It's still blows my mind that they _still_ either don't get it or feign ignorance.


My bet is that they don't attempt any real fixes until after the 1st where it's out of VZ's hands.


----------



## cwerdna

rifleman69 said:


> My bet is that they don't attempt any real fixes until after the 1st where it's out of VZ's hands.


Yeah, I'm guessing they're trying to "run out the clock" by stalling.

I emailed my city's cable franchise person last night since for WA, it seems oversight ups to the local government and FCC per http://www.wutc.wa.gov/webdocs.nsf/0/0130df5a60d6f6e8882564d000834983?OpenDocument. I doubt mailing the FCC would help though...


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vurbano said:


> it is partly their fault for not doing something that every other whole house solution DVR is doing it seems. it stinks even further after paying full price for 2 TivoHD units, 1 lifetime and one 3 year. This will be like going from absolute HD Nirvana with the ability to MRV and DL to PC to nothing really.


umm - just what other whole house DVR solution allows for the ability to MRV and Download to PC these same shows?

Moxi has no download to PC and I wonder how great the streaming really is.
HTPC can do streaming to Xbox and the show is on the PC that recorded it but still with copy protection on it.


----------



## richsadams

ZeoTiVo said:


> umm - just what other whole house DVR solution allows for the ability to MRV and Download to PC these same shows?


According to the VZ CSR I spoke with their proprietary DVR's will allow MRV. My understanding is that their Moto boxes have internal cable cards so I'm not sure how that happens when it won't with TiVo, although some here said that their DVR's have streaming capabilities. I'm almost certain that you can't transfer recordings to PC's with the VZ HD DVR's though.

In the end if VZ/Frontier premium channels (HBO, Showtime, etc.) will have CP I get and have to accept that. It's not what we have grown accustomed to but life goes on. However if they leave it in the messy state that it's in now with some premium channels protected, others not while HGTV and CNN are it really doesn't make sense. If they eventually opt to CP everything except the locals that's another story as well.

I'm hopeful with all of the e-mails, phone calls, etc. we've generated that someone somewhere will pay attention and get things rectified. I suspect our real challenge is that TiVo owners are a very small percentage of their subscribers and a naturally low incentive to address our DVR issues. More importantly they are knee deep in next week's hand off to Frontier in a majority of the markets they serve. I'd wager that it's not likely that our "problems" are on their top 10 "To Do's" at the moment. Don't get me wrong, I've always gotten very positive responses from VZ in the past, but I'm not hopeful that things will be the same at this point in time...or perhaps in the future.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

richsadams said:


> According to the VZ CSR I spoke with their proprietary DVR's will allow MRV. My understanding is that their Moto boxes have internal cable cards so I'm not sure how that happens when it won't with TiVo, although some here said that their DVR's have streaming capabilities.


it might stream. Or it might be limited by CCI flag as well.
in nay case the point tsands that there is no other "whole home" DVR that does MRV of anything and downloads to PC. If TiVo kept everything inside the DVR then they might have an easier time with cable labs


----------



## cwerdna

richsadams said:


> My understanding is that their Moto boxes have internal cable cards
> ...
> I'd wager that it's not likely that our "problems" are on their top 10 "To Do's" at the moment. .


They do. I rented on of their high def DVRs temporarily when my Tivo HD's A drive was kaput. The manual shows a CableCARD slot on the back and you can see the CableCARD thru the vents. There's a metal cover w/security screws basically blocking the slot w/card inserted. IIRC, there was a warning saying that the card will stop working if removed.

Agreed on your last comment.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

I'm the thread starter. I created the title of this thread by faithfully transcribing the error message displayed by my TiVo when I tried to copy a show from one TiVo to another.

But I just realized (okay, maybe I'm a little slow) that the thread title is wrong. What the discussion in this thread makes clear is that, at least in this case, it is *the cable provider* and *not the copyright holder* that is prohibiting the transfer.

I think TiVo could and probably should display a more accurate error message. But what could they say that wouldn't be more verbose and probably even more confusing to the average TiVo customer?


----------



## dresden69

richsadams said:


> According to the VZ CSR I spoke with their proprietary DVR's will allow MRV. My understanding is that their Moto boxes have internal cable cards so I'm not sure how that happens when it won't with TiVo, although some here said that their DVR's have streaming capabilities. I'm almost certain that you can't transfer recordings to PC's with the VZ HD DVR's though.
> 
> In the end if VZ/Frontier premium channels (HBO, Showtime, etc.) will have CP I get and have to accept that. It's not what we have grown accustomed to but life goes on. However if they leave it in the messy state that it's in now with some premium channels protected, others not while HGTV and CNN are it really doesn't make sense. If they eventually opt to CP everything except the locals that's another story as well.
> 
> I'm hopeful with all of the e-mails, phone calls, etc. we've generated that someone somewhere will pay attention and get things rectified. I suspect our real challenge is that TiVo owners are a very small percentage of their subscribers and a naturally low incentive to address our DVR issues. More importantly they are knee deep in next week's hand off to Frontier in a majority of the markets they serve. I'd wager that it's not likely that our "problems" are on their top 10 "To Do's" at the moment. Don't get me wrong, I've always gotten very positive responses from VZ in the past, but I'm not hopeful that things will be the same at this point in time...or perhaps in the future.


Unfortunately... you are correct Rich... the tivo cp issue is not at the top of the priority chain... I have not heard word one of it since last thursday, we were suppose to get a memo about the reasoning... but I have yet to see that...

Also (takes off his verizon/frontier suit for a moment) Tivo customers are a very small minority of the subscriber base... and if I was a higher up in the Verzion/Frontier world... I would be wondering more on how a vast majority of my customers are going to react when they can't transfer any content between their Verizon/Frontier branded box to another Verizon/Frontier branded box... Put your feet into that customer's shoes, and wonder how they are going to feel on July 1st...

I don't know... we don't have the best of the world right now, but it could be a lot worse...

I am still on the look out to see what is going on... but with the lack of mention around here... I don't think the CP is coming off...


----------



## MPSAN

dresden69 said:


> Unfortunately... you are correct Rich... the tivo cp issue is not at the top of the priority chain... I have not heard word one of it since last thursday, we were suppose to get a memo about the reasoning... but I have yet to see that...
> 
> Also (takes off his verizon/frontier suit for a moment) Tivo customers are a very small minority of the subscriber base... and if I was a higher up in the Verzion/Frontier world... I would be wondering more on how a vast majority of my customers are going to react when they can't transfer any content between their Verizon/Frontier branded box to another Verizon/Frontier branded box... Put your feet into that customer's shoes, and wonder how they are going to feel on July 1st...
> 
> I don't know... we don't have the best of the world right now, but it could be a lot worse...
> 
> I am still on the look out to see what is going on... but with the lack of mention around here... I don't think the CP is coming off...


Well, dresden69, I know here in the Portland area this is what was promised to our cable authority. From their website, with my emphasis ...

_Frontier FiOS will have the same programming line-up as Verizon FiOS. There will be no change in rates, equipment or *in the way the cable system is used or operated.* _

This most certainly IS a change in the way the system is used!


----------



## rifleman69

MPSAN said:


> _Frontier FiOS will have the same programming line-up as Verizon FiOS. There will be no change in rates, equipment or *in the way the cable system is used or operated.* _
> 
> This most certainly IS a change in the way the system is used!


This is what we're complaining about. If they wanted to implement no MRV for TiVo's on their own...fine, we can vote with our pocketbooks and leave if we don't like it. But to go against what they've told both regulators as well as customers is a travesty, a sham, and a mockery. A travashamockery if you will!


----------



## cwerdna

MPSAN said:


> Well, dresden69, I know here in the Portland area this is what was promised to our cable authority. From their website, with my emphasis ...
> 
> _Frontier FiOS will have the same programming line-up as Verizon FiOS. There will be no change in rates, equipment or *in the way the cable system is used or operated.* _
> 
> This most certainly IS a change in the way the system is used!


The worst part is, the above will technically be true if VZ decides to run out the clock/stall for time until the switchover.  The change, accident, whatever got implemented while under VZ and would presumably carry over to Frontier


----------



## richsadams

dresden69 said:


> Unfortunately... you are correct Rich... the tivo cp issue is not at the top of the priority chain... I have not heard word one of it since last thursday, we were suppose to get a memo about the reasoning... but I have yet to see that...
> 
> Also (takes off his verizon/frontier suit for a moment) Tivo customers are a very small minority of the subscriber base... and if I was a higher up in the Verzion/Frontier world... I would be wondering more on how a vast majority of my customers are going to react when they can't transfer any content between their Verizon/Frontier branded box to another Verizon/Frontier branded box... Put your feet into that customer's shoes, and wonder how they are going to feel on July 1st...
> 
> I don't know... we don't have the best of the world right now, but it could be a lot worse...
> 
> I am still on the look out to see what is going on... but with the lack of mention around here... I don't think the CP is coming off...


Thanks for keeping us posted. :up: So was the CSR wrong...that VZ/Frontier HD DVR's _cannot_ or _will not_ have MRV? Also, I just received a VZ flyer in the mail today and it states...



> _*"Multi-room DVR that plays recorded shows in up to 6 rooms in the house" *_
> 
> There is a referenced footnote that says...
> 
> _"Watch recorded shows on up to six TV's with Set Top Boxes; additional charges apply"_


So I can't imagine that they would send that out if it's going to change would they? Since the VZ boxes apparently employ cable cards, are they not paired the way the TiVo cable cards are now or are they talking about streaming between boxes? I'm assuming MRV still works for VZ DVR's in our areas (WA, OR, IN) and based on the flyer that will continue right?

That said the flyer offers FiOS Phone/TV/Internet for $99.99/mo. 2-Year Price Protection but a "Two-Year agreement is required". I thought that "contracts" were a thing of the past?

Sorry for all of the questions, but I'm confused. I should probably be asking a VZ rep about all of this instead but thought you might have the inside track.

THE SOLUTION: All that really needs to happen is to have VZ un-pair/un-bind our cable cards from our TiVo's. That would take us back to square one. MRV would work once again and we could all sleep at night. Since TiVo subscribers are only a small part of the big picture...what harm could come of it? Now go tell those memo writing types that's all we need...easy peasy (and to be sure to include the cover sheet on their TPS Reports!)


----------



## richsadams

rifleman69 said:


> A travashamockery if you will!


I _LIKE_ it! ROFLMAO


----------



## Tivogre

While I am not directly affected (yet), I just sent the following complaint to the FCC via their web site.

There was a 1000 character limit, which I eeked in under with edits.

Verizon FIOS is setting CCI (copy protection) bits on nearly all of their DTV broadcast channels to x02 in many areas of the US.

Unless the content owners (not cable companies) are specifically requiring that these copy protection bits be set by the cable companies, then the only reason for the cable company to set CCI is to gain an unfair advantage of their equipment over competing CableCard devices - such as Tivo - in effect driving consumers back to the cable company's own provided set top boxes and DVRs.

There is a LONG thread about these activities, and their impacts to Tivo users here: http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=450307

tivocommunity.com has many other threads complaining about other cable companies / franchises.

If these cable companies are indeed violating the Cable Card standards / intents, let me (us) know how we can fight back.

Failure to act will effectively nullify the Cable Card standards and the competition they were created to drive.


----------



## rifleman69

richsadams said:


> I _LIKE_ it! ROFLMAO


I forgot to throw in "Bargleflickle". Can't remember which commercial that came from (Snickers I think) but I laughed every single time.

*edit* It was Miller


----------



## vurbano

ZeoTiVo said:


> umm - just what other whole house DVR solution allows for the ability to MRV and Download to PC these same shows?
> 
> Moxi has no download to PC and I wonder how great the streaming really is.
> HTPC can do streaming to Xbox and the show is on the PC that recorded it but still with copy protection on it.


you either have a reading comprehension problem or you are purposely trying to make up a point where there is none. The one thing tivo cannot do that all the others does is MRV via streaming. ANYONE who ever owned a Tivo knows it is about the only thing that will download to PC. Likewise anyone that has researched Moxi knows it doesnt download to PC. Now stop being so annoying, even more annoying than your oversized signature. Either case you and bicker are on ignore and the point remains


> " that it is unfortunate but it is partly their fault for not doing something that every other whole house solution DVR is doing it seems"..


Again anyone that can twist that into how Tivo downloads to PC and the rest do not neeeds 6th grade english again.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> snip
> THE SOLUTION: All that really needs to happen is to have VZ un-pair/un-bind our cable cards from our TiVo's. That would take us back to square one. MRV would work once again and we could all sleep at night. Since TiVo subscribers are only a small part of the big picture...what harm could come of it? Now go tell those memo writing types that's all we need...easy peasy (and to be sure to include the cover sheet on their TPS Reports!)


Rich, that will not work. They need to set the CCI flags back to 0x00. IF the CableCards are unbound, and the flag is STILL 0x02, then that station will not come in at all. This is what started the whole CableCard mess in the first place.

ie: They added flags to our TIVO's unbound CableCards and stopped us from even being able to view the stations. That is why they then bound our CableCards to resolve the problem. Then we discovered that we had MRV issues!


----------



## innocentfreak

rifleman69 said:


> I forgot to throw in "Bargleflickle". Can't remember which commercial that came from (Snickers I think) but I laughed every single time.
> 
> *edit* It was Miller


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> Rich, that will not work. They need to set the CCI flags back to 0x00. IF the CableCards are unbound, and the flag is STILL 0x02, then that station will not come in at all. This is what started the whole CableCard mess in the first place.
> 
> ie: They added flags to our TIVO's unbound CableCards and stopped us from even being able to view the stations. That is why they then bound our CableCards to resolve the problem. Then we discovered that we had MRV issues!


Are you sure? According to what I've read the CCI byte was always there...it's just that our cable cards weren't bound to our TiVo's that caused them to have no affect. I could be wrong of course...not the first or the last time. What you say does make sense. Did I get that all wrong? In any case, I don't have any hope that that would happen...just thought I'd throw it out there.


----------



## m_jonis

cwerdna said:


> What's your purpose in arguing w/posters here and picking apart their statements? Do you have FiOS? Are you in area that was affected by an outage that began on 6/7 and later ended up with a whole bunch of channels having copying protection where none existed on any of them before? I am along w/MSPAN, richsadams, Phantom Gremlin and others.
> 
> We had NO idea that we'd suddenly get copy protection on a whole bunch of our channels, seemingly picked at random. Why does standard def CNN, CNN Headline News (!), G4 TV, Game Show Network (!) suddenly have CP while standard and high def Science Channel don't?
> 
> We had no idea that the outage and sudden onset of copy protection _appears_ limited to customers being transitioned over to Frontier.
> 
> We've gotten no official statement from VZ, gotten mixed messages from VZ and dealt w/clueless CSRs and wasted a whole bunch of time on the phone w/them.
> 
> I'm personally not affected by MRV being blocked on those channels due to CP since I only have 1 active TiVo in my household. I AM affected in that I do archive some HD content to AVCHD format (to burn to DVD +/-R) by transferring it to my PC. I also archive some SD content by burning to a standalone DVD recorder (which I believe will be affected to).
> 
> If you don't have anything useful to add here...


Bicker's sole purpose in the tivo forums is to well, bicker.

Just do what I do and put him on your ignore list.

Don't feed the troll.


----------



## richsadams

innocentfreak said:


> "Miller Lite Debate"


Giving credit where credit is due. :up: Still funny!!


----------



## killzone

ZeoTiVo said:


> it might stream. Or it might be limited by CCI flag as well.
> in nay case the point tsands that there is no other "whole home" DVR that does MRV of anything and downloads to PC. If TiVo kept everything inside the DVR then they might have an easier time with cable labs


It's a moot point. If the cc flag is set you aren't getting MRV and you can't copy to the PC. At least with the Moxi you can stream it to other units. I guarantee it works a LOT better than Tivo MRV if you're a soon to be Frontier customer.


----------



## cwerdna

MPSAN said:


> Rich, that will not work. They need to set the CCI flags back to 0x00. IF the CableCards are unbound, and the flag is STILL 0x02, then that station will not come in at all. This is what started the whole CableCard mess in the first place.
> 
> ie: They added flags to our TIVO's unbound CableCards and stopped us from even being able to view the stations. That is why they then bound our CableCards to resolve the problem. Then we discovered that we had MRV issues!


I believe you're correct on all your counts. I thought Rich was just joking/being sarcastic.

Perr http://www.tivo.com/copyprotection:


> WARNING: Your cable provider must pair (bind) the CableCARD to its slot in the TiVo box before you can view content with any CCI value other than 0x00.


Not surprisingly, during the outage on 6/7 and 6/8, I was trying channels above 100 including 100, 102 and so on. Most of the ones below 100, that did come in were locals which had and still have CCI byte = 0x00.


----------



## rifleman69

MPSAN has it right, we didn't have the 0x02 copy flags until 6/7 or thereabouts.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> Are you sure? According to what I've read the CCI byte was always there...it's just that our cable cards weren't bound to our TiVo's that caused them to have no affect. I could be wrong of course...not the first or the last time. What you say does make sense. Did I get that all wrong? In any case, I don't have any hope that that would happen...just thought I'd throw it out there.


Rich, the reason our TIVO's worked when they were unbound was that the CCI 's were ALL set to 0x00. The trouble began when they added flags. That was when we had stations that would no longer work. When unbound we could ONLY view 0x00 stations...they were all 0x00. When they added the 0x02 flag, then our STILL unbound CableCards would no longer let us view the station at all. They then bound our cards, as you noticed, and we THOUGHT all was fixed! Just when you thought it was safe.....


----------



## cwerdna

Yep. I personally have transferred a # of shows to my PC for processing then archiving to AVCHD format including from CNBCHD and HDNET. (I even had a whole thread on it when I was trying to figure out the workflow at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=439679&page=2 and discussed Enterprise eps on HDNET). The fact that they (and all channels that I knew of) were 0x00 was why I could transfer them.

Now CNBCHD and HDNET are 0x02. 

Someone in a neighboring city to mine who's also been affected has posted the great letter he sent to his city. He welcomes people poaching it at http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=18814047#post18814047.


----------



## koonan

I've been reading this thread with interest, because I'm in Wa and I'm having the same issues with transferring shows between Tivos. This is an important feature for me and without it it makes owning multiple Tivo useless.

I called Verizon on Monday to complain and see if there was a fix coming. I was told they know about the problem and that the problem is with my Tivo not their service. He said Verizon and Tivo are working on the problem together. To me that is BS. I asked if flipping the copy protect flag is something Verizon is doing, why haven't they done this to all their customers? I said the only people who are reporting this problem are those moving over to Frontier. Then he said, oh well that was a configuration change Frontier requested.

I then called an talked to Tivo. As expected Tivo support was helpful but couldn't add much. The guy I talked to was very knowledgeable, at least from my point of view. It's very clear to Tivo, they will and are legally bound to honor any copy protection set on show. I can't argue with that. I also feel that cable companies don't like Tivo as competition. Quite frankly I think Verizon/Frontier are just asking for law suits here.

I talked with several of my friends that have Comcast, and they aren't having this issue (at this time). I have been a longtime Verizon customer, from way back before they were called Verizon (at least for phone service). It wasn't an easy decision but I'm moving my service (Phone/Internet/TV) over to Comcast. If Verizon doesn't tread lightly, they could lose my wireless business too.

Mike


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> Rich, the reason our TIVO's worked when they were unbound was that the CCI 's were ALL set to 0x00. <snip>


Ah, got it...makes perfect sense. :up:


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> Someone in a neighboring city to mine who's also been affected has posted the great letter he sent to his city. He welcomes people poaching it at http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=18814047#post18814047.


Well stated and well worth poaching and sending to anyone and everyone involved! :up:


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> Well stated and well worth poaching and sending to anyone and everyone involved! :up:


Good to send to MACC here but only one poach should be sent to Greg as it would look weird if he got a bunch of the same letters!


----------



## mgama

Tivogre said:


> <snip>Unless the content owners (not cable companies) are specifically requiring that these copy protection bits be set by the cable companies, then the only reason for the cable company to set CCI is to gain an unfair advantage of their equipment over competing CableCard devices - such as Tivo - in effect driving consumers back to the cable company's own provided set top boxes and DVRs.</snip>


Of the channels that now have 0x02 set, I would imagine that "192 CURRENT TV" would be the last channel company to request the copy restriction. They carry such a wide variety of independent content, that I am surprised that they have the CCI Byte set. I think some of us should write to them, to ask them to tell Verizon to turn off the CCI Byte on their channel. Maybe, just maybe, they could to the right people at Verizon.


----------



## dresden69

MPSAN said:


> Well, dresden69, I know here in the Portland area this is what was promised to our cable authority. From their website, with my emphasis ...
> 
> _Frontier FiOS will have the same programming line-up as Verizon FiOS. There will be no change in rates, equipment or *in the way the cable system is used or operated.* _
> 
> This most certainly IS a change in the way the system is used!


Not to be a spokesman for Frontier... but how are they changing the way you use or operate? They still allow you to record the content... They allow you to view the content... Look this affects me as much as it does you if not more... my three tivos are doing the exact same thing that your tivos are doing... I can't transfer certain shows... but if I wanted to... I could record those shows on all of my three dvrs...

If you dislike it that greatly... (again not being a spokesman for Frontier or Verizon, just a 3rd party that telling you his personal opinion) then you should choose a different provider... but I think it is all going to be this way some day...

You don't know if Warner Bros (Owner of HBO, Cinemax, CNN, Cartoon Network) went to Verizon/Frontier and said in the new carriage agreement that they had to copyright protect those channels....

The same thing happened to Directv a couple years ago... you went from being able to record a PPV movie that you could keep forever... to a 24 hour window... all done by the copyright holder... Directv didn't make that decision... the copyright holder made that decision...

We are just rampantly speculating that it is Verizon/Frontier... and that there is some evil private colussion is happening the background to screw over a very small minority FIOS video customers that are tivo users... and they are not...

Again... these are just my own opinions... they have no baring on the opinions of the company I work for.


----------



## COBeav

dresden69 said:


> Not to be a spokesman for Frontier... but how are they changing the way you use or operate? They still allow you to record the content... They allow you to view the content... Look this affects me as much as it does you if not more... my three tivos are doing the exact same thing that your tivos are doing... I can't transfer certain shows... but if I wanted to... I could record those shows on all of my three dvrs...
> 
> If you dislike it that greatly... (again not being a spokesman for Frontier or Verizon, just a 3rd party that telling you his personal opinion) then you should choose a different provider... but I think it is all going to be this way some day...
> 
> You don't know if Warner Bros (Owner of HBO, Cinemax, CNN, Cartoon Network) went to Verizon/Frontier and said in the new carriage agreement that they had to copyright protect those channels....
> 
> The same thing happened to Directv a couple years ago... you went from being able to record a PPV movie that you could keep forever... to a 24 hour window... all done by the copyright holder... Directv didn't make that decision... the copyright holder made that decision...
> 
> We are just rampantly speculating that it is Verizon/Frontier... and that there is some evil private colussion is happening the background to screw over a very small minority of tivo users... and they are not...
> 
> Again... these are just my own opinions... they have no baring on the opinions of the company I work for.


Actually, they did change the way I use the cable system. I used to transfer shows between Tivos. Now I can't. They also changed the way they operate the cable system. They used to not set the Copy Flag in the data stream. Now they do.

Do you really think that all those obscure networks (I'm not talking about HBO, ESPN, etc) demanded that copy protection be put in place? Really?


----------



## dresden69

Someone asked me why I had three routers... Well with the verizon routers you can use the coax cable input on the back and convert them to NIM. Network Interface Modules. Since I had verizon hook my ont up with coax, I then took two routers and converted them into these NIMs. Basically putting them on the MOCA network established in the house and creating ethernet jacks in the places I needed them, the TIVOs.

So the coax comes out of the wall and into a two way splitter (5 to 1ghz). One coax lead goes into the router, and the other into the tivo. Then an ethernet cable comes out of the router and into the tivo... So my tivo is now hardwired to my network. and I have done this for both the tivos that are not near my office.

The Moca network is faster than wireless and ethernet, and it use to allow me share shows between all my tivos.   

Now... I just use it to transfer shows from my computer to my tivo.

I found out how to do this on www.dslreports.com/faq/verizonfios


----------



## dresden69

COBeav said:


> Actually, they did change the way I use the cable system. I used to transfer shows between Tivos. Now I can't. They also changed the way they operate the cable system. They used to not set the Copy Flag in the data stream. Now they do.
> 
> Do you really think that all those obscure networks (I'm not talking about HBO, ESPN, etc) demanded that copy protection be put in place? Really?


I honestly do not know... I know that Frontier had to go get carriage agreements with providers... at least that is what I heard... I don't think that they just threw a bunch of numbered ping pong balls into a bucket and started pulling them out...


----------



## mgama

COBeav said:


> Actually, they did change the way I use the cable system. I used to transfer shows between Tivos.


+ I used to be able to transfer shows to my laptop via the Tivo Desktop software. That functionality is now gone.


----------



## MPSAN

dresden69 said:


> I honestly do not know... I know that Frontier had to go get carriage agreements with providers... at least that is what I heard... I don't think that they just threw a bunch of numbered ping pong balls into a bucket and started pulling them out...


Yeah, we do not want anyone recording the Game Show Network! Anyway, I do not believe that any of us can do any more about it. This was actually a plan between Verizon/Frontier and WD so that we will buy more 1TB or larger HDD's to upgrade our TIVO's. Then we can record HBO on all our TIVO's! 

P.S. Any person who worked for me would be out the door in an afternoon with an "if you don't like it go somewhere else line" to a customer. There are better ways to handle it! Not sure dresden69 actually meant that!


----------



## shippy

dresden69 said:


> I honestly do not know... I know that Frontier had to go get carriage agreements with providers... at least that is what I heard... I don't think that they just threw a bunch of numbered ping pong balls into a bucket and started pulling them out...


Well, when it's pretty much any channel besides a broadcast channel, that doesn't seem very random like a lottery system to me.



> If you dislike it that greatly... (again not being a spokesman for Frontier or Verizon, just a 3rd party that telling you his personal opinion) then you should choose a different provider...


I would have already switched if it wasn't for the early termination fee. I'm already discussing with my legal counsel about this.


----------



## cwerdna

dresden69 said:


> Not to be a spokesman for Frontier... but how are they changing the way you use or operate? They still allow you to record the content... They allow you to view the content... Look this affects me as much as it does you if not more... my three tivos are doing the exact same thing that your tivos are doing... I can't transfer certain shows... but if I wanted to
> ...
> If you dislike it that greatly... (again not being a spokesman for Frontier or Verizon, just a 3rd party that telling you his personal opinion) then you should choose a different provider... but I think it is all going to be this way some day...
> 
> You don't know if Warner Bros (Owner of HBO, Cinemax, CNN, Cartoon Network) went to Verizon/Frontier and said in the new carriage agreement that they had to copyright protect those channels....
> ...
> We are just rampantly speculating that it is Verizon/Frontier... and that there is some evil private colussion is happening the background to screw over a very small minority FIOS video customers that are tivo users... and they are not...


It _does _change the way *I* operate. I can no longer archive shows from many channels. Granted, I don't archive a ton of stuff but I'm SOL if I want to archive something from HDNET, CNBC or CNBCHD. I've some shows archived from all 3 (and more) semi-recently.

If this copy protection crap is here to stay on FiOS on most channels, then I WILL drop it.

As for VZ/Frontier and carriage agreements, please explain why areas not being transitioned to Frontier are still wide open. *All the rampant speculation is exactly because we haven't gotten proper and clear messaging* as to what's going on and *why?*. We've gotten finger pointing, conflicting messages, techs who don't understand the issue, no ETA, etc. It's been ~2 weeks since this cropped up.

There are potentially business motivations (evil or not), contractual agreements, incompetence and a multitude of others.

I and others on this thread have wasted a bunch of time participating on this thread, contacting VZ, TiVo, regulatory boards, etc.


----------



## shippy

cwerdna said:


> Yep. I personally have transferred a # of shows to my PC for processing then archiving to AVCHD format including from CNBCHD and HDNET. (I even had a whole thread on it when I was trying to figure out the workflow at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=439679&page=2 and discussed Enterprise eps on HDNET). The fact that they (and all channels that I knew of) were 0x00 was why I could transfer them.
> 
> Now CNBCHD and HDNET are 0x02.
> 
> Someone in a neighboring city to mine who's also been affected has posted the great letter he sent to his city. He welcomes people poaching it at http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=18814047#post18814047.


Thanks for sharing the letter with me. It's really well written. I live right next door to Kirkland and found our equivalent city contact so I snagged it, modified it a bit, and sent it to him. This is what I got back:



> Thanks very much for your detailed concerns regarding cableCARD and MRV in regards to Verizon/Frontier. While the City is limited in its authority to regulate such specific performance details, we are very interested in ensuring clear and accessible customer service responses. To that end, I have forwarded your message to our Frontier liaison requesting official company comment on this issue as well as current customer service representative awareness and response messaging.
> 
> I hope to have something to share with you within the next 48 hours.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Patrick Hirsch
> Video Communications Manager
> City of Redmond


I hope it at least gets somewhere, although I suspect it won't be what I want to hear.


----------



## cwerdna

shippy said:


> Well, when it's pretty much any channel besides a broadcast channel, that doesn't seem very random like a lottery system to me.


It does seem pretty random when standard def Game Show Network is protected yet (when at last check) SD and HD Science Channel and NGCHD aren't.

I also received a very similar response from Patrick Hirsch this afternoon although mine had a sentence or two more.

I'm going to contact Current TV tonight upon confirmation of its "protection".


----------



## richsadams

dresden69 said:


> Not to be a spokesman for Frontier... but how are they changing the way you use or operate?


Seriously? You really don't get it? I understand that your TiVo's are acting the same as ours but you've decided that's okay, nothing you can do about it. I get that and that's your choice. However a number of us aren't going to roll over that easily. If your attitude really is "if you don't like it take a hike" that's very sad, particularly as a future spokesperson for Frontier. I hope that wasn't your intent, but that's how it sounded.

Others have pretty well outlined how things have in fact changed, and changed _only_ for the VZ customers being offloaded to Frontier. Since both Verizon and Frontier have previously stated (multiple times) that nothing will change and then they end up changing things you have to understand why people are upset. Both companies have done a terrible job of managing expectations. The fact is that many channels have been dropped, most channels now have copy protection and no one at VZ or Frontier have any explanation as to why, if it will continue, if more will channels will receive CP and/or others will have it removed or yet more channels will be dropped. No one seems to have a clue to what's actually going on. It's quickly becoming a cluster... Precisely what they said it wouldn't be. The fact that it only affects a small percentage of subscribers doesn't let them off of the hook.

After spending more than four hours on the phone these past couple of weeks speaking to multiple VZ CSR's (all of which have been very polite mind you)...to a one, every single one tried to convince me to switch to the VZ HD DVR because they _WILL_ allow MRV. Does anyone here really believe the copyright holders said to themselves, "Gee, let's let Verizon customers record programs in their living rooms and watch them in their bedrooms...but not TiVo owners"? Get serious. That is discriminatory, preditory behavior IMO.

The fact of the matter is that until June 7th VZ FiOS allowed MRV...on their DVR's as well as TiVo's. Since then CP has been applied, again, only to those being moved to Frontier and only those employing cable card equipment including TiVo. The evidence speaks for itself.

I don't want to switch but if VZ/Frontier opt to CP everything except broadcast channels they'll be minus at least one customer. I have to believe others will follow. Good riddance you say? So be it.


----------



## cwerdna

richsadams said:


> Seriously? You really don't get it? I understand that your TiVo's are acting the same as ours but you've decided that's okay, nothing you can do about it. I get that and that's your choice. However a number of us aren't going to roll over that easily.


To be fair, it sounds like he's in a position where (if he wanted to) could make noise about it but may not have the influence or be able to really do anything about it on his end, possibly w/o it becoming a "career limiting move". Even if his career were "limited", it still may not change the situation.

I work in software and there are lots of things I'd like to see done but I'm not in a leadership role and can only try to convince or influence others. I can only make so much noise and I know some things aren't feasible given the schedule or any # of business reasons. Even middle managers face the same problem.

But, I reiterate, I'm unhappy with this, the lack of proper communication on this and the time I've wasted on this. I will likely leave FiOS if it's left unresolved assuming my other choice (Comcast) doesn't do this CP crap over here.

edit: I've dropped Current TV an email about the situation and asking the me to contact VZ/Frontier if they didn't ask for CP.


----------



## vurbano

shippy said:


> I hope it at least gets somewhere, although I suspect it won't be what I want to hear.


They will just get a reply back from Frontier saying that certain networks want the protection and that copying programming is illegal. Its not really Frontiers fault if the tivo's are too stupid to stream programming like everything else. I hate it but I don't think we have a chance in hell of getting it changed. What has to change here is tivo and they really dont care about anything but money. Proven by their lack of participation here. Heck their TivoHD still has audio problems with my Denon. The only way to get them to change is for a ton of customers to stop paying service fees.


----------



## steve614

vurbano said:


> Proven by their lack of participation here.


No. The reason TiVo doesn't participate here anymore is due to rude posters who attack them when all they are doing is trying to help.


----------



## koonan

I know that this off topic but somewhat related. Did anyone notice their Verizon bill went up this month? My bundle price increased by $10. I heard Verizon wasn't going to have contracts anymore and deals would be month-to-month, but I didn't know that was for existing contracts. I called Verizon and sure enough I'm not under a contract anymore. Funny I never got a notice about this. I already stated I'm moving my business elsewhere, not having a contract will make it that much easier. When I'm unhappy with the service I get, I vote with my feet.

Mike


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> To be fair, it sounds like he's in a position where (if he wanted to) could make noise about it but may not have the influence or be able to really do anything about it on his end, possibly w/o it becoming a "career limiting move". Even if his career were "limited", it still may not change the situation.


I hadn't considered that aspect. I was of the mind that since the OP had TiVo's that he was in the same boat. However it's quite possible that he may be getting an employee discount and/or that his account is somehow tagged with the fact that he's an employee. Raising h**l with your employer isn't always a wise career move if ever. I can see why he'd have to keep a low profile.



vurbano said:


> They will just get a reply back from Frontier saying that certain networks want the protection and that copying programming is illegal. Its not really Frontiers fault if the tivo's are too stupid to stream programming like everything else.


So I was trying to understand why VZ DVR owners can still enjoy MRV while TiVo owners can't. It turns out that VZ DVR's do not stream to other VZ DVR's either. A VZ flyer I received a couple of days ago says you can play recorded shows in up to six rooms in the house. There's a footnote that says "Watch recorded shows on up to six TVs with Set Top Boxes". After a call to VZ it turns out what that means is that if you wanted to watch recordings made on a VZ HD DVR you'd have to have one to six STB's connected to TV's in other rooms...STB's _not_ DVR's. VZ DVR's can only stream to (non-DVR) STB's.

That clarified a difference I wasn't understanding. In essence you could have more than one of their DVR's but you cannot watch recordings made on one VZ DVR on another VZ DVR. So if your DVR is in the living room and you happen to be in the bedroom and you want to record a program, you'd have to get out of bed and go into the living room to get that DVR to record it. (The CSR didn't know if you could start streaming to another room while the recording was being made.)

The bottom line is the same with their DVR's or TiVo...if you want to record programs wherever you happen to be you'd need a DVR in that room...and you could not watch that recording in another room if that TV also had a DVR. Until June 7th TiVo did have a distinct advantage (not to mention PC archiving, etc). I've no idea if that's always been the case with VZ or whether the change is being driven by Frontier to generate additional income or not. However the business model is clearly geared toward extracting additional money from their customers in charges for each DVR and each STB they get. IIRC each STB is something like $7 and each DVR is around $15 per month. Compared to $3.99 per cable card, the difference could add up a a healthy chunk of change for people wanting MRV.


----------



## cwerdna

vurbano said:


> They will just get a reply back from Frontier saying that certain networks want the protection and that copying programming is illegal. Its not really Frontiers fault if the tivo's are too stupid to stream programming like everything else. I hate it but I don't think we have a chance in hell of getting it changed. What has to change here is tivo and they really dont care about anything but money...


Yet another moronic statement from VZ/Frontier that doesn't hold water,  just like more of their crap they've been feeding us. It doesn't account for the everything being wide open prior to 6/7/10, it still being open on FiOS areas not being transitioned to Frontier nor other cable providers leaving these channels open.

Again, the issue for me isn't streaming, it's that I want to archive some content. Even if the streaming were allowed w/CCI byte = 0x02 but TivoToGo transferred weren't allowed, I'd still have the same problem. It seems like I'm going to have to drop FiOS due to Frontier's moronic behavior.

Perhaps people who are upset by this CP should mail Current TV (http://current.com/s/contact_us.htm) as suggested, so that they can try to escalate w/Frontier/VZ.


----------



## killzone

dresden69 said:


> Someone asked me why I had three routers... Well with the verizon routers you can use the coax cable input on the back and convert them to NIM. Network Interface Modules. Since I had verizon hook my ont up with coax, I then took two routers and converted them into these NIMs. Basically putting them on the MOCA network established in the house and creating ethernet jacks in the places I needed them, the TIVOs.
> 
> So the coax comes out of the wall and into a two way splitter (5 to 1ghz). One coax lead goes into the router, and the other into the tivo. Then an ethernet cable comes out of the router and into the tivo... So my tivo is now hardwired to my network. and I have done this for both the tivos that are not near my office.
> 
> The Moca network is faster than wireless and ethernet, and it use to allow me share shows between all my tivos.
> 
> Now... I just use it to transfer shows from my computer to my tivo.
> 
> I found out how to do this on www.dslreports.com/faq/verizonfios


Moca is not faster than Gigabit ethernet (which would also be limited by the cards and interfaces of the devices being used). Since the Tivo (even the premiere) doesn't support gigabit, the way you have it connected it wouldn't communicate any faster than if you had 100BaseT ethernet setup. Of course if the backbone is gigabit, devices can communicate with each other at 100BaseT speeds and have the full throughput.

As far as I'm concerned, the only reason to use Moca is if you need to reuse your existing coax or you need the guide information on a FIOS box which you can only get via Moca. But I would suspect that all those devices you are using to bridge to ethernet would be more expensive than getting 1 router with a built in Gigabit switch and wireless - N (so you can roam around the house with laptops and such).


----------



## vurbano

richsadams said:


> I hadn't considered that aspect. I was of the mind that since the OP had TiVo's that he was in the same boat. However it's quite possible that he may be getting an employee discount and/or that his account is somehow tagged with the fact that he's an employee. Raising h**l with your employer isn't always a wise career move if ever. I can see why he'd have to keep a low profile.
> 
> So I was trying to understand why VZ DVR owners can still enjoy MRV while TiVo owners can't. It turns out that VZ DVR's do not stream to other VZ DVR's either. A VZ flyer I received a couple of days ago says you can play recorded shows in up to six rooms in the house. There's a footnote that says "Watch recorded shows on up to six TVs with Set Top Boxes". After a call to VZ it turns out what that means is that if you wanted to watch recordings made on a VZ HD DVR you'd have to have one to six STB's connected to TV's in other rooms...STB's _not_ DVR's. VZ DVR's can only stream to (non-DVR) STB's.
> 
> That clarified a difference I wasn't understanding. In essence you could have more than one of their DVR's but you cannot watch recordings made on one VZ DVR on another VZ DVR. So if your DVR is in the living room and you happen to be in the bedroom and you want to record a program, you'd have to get out of bed and go into the living room to get that DVR to record it. (The CSR didn't know if you could start streaming to another room while the recording was being made.)
> 
> The bottom line is the same with their DVR's or TiVo...if you want to record programs wherever you happen to be you'd need a DVR in that room...and you could not watch that recording in another room if that TV also had a DVR. Until June 7th TiVo did have a distinct advantage (not to mention PC archiving, etc). I've no idea if that's always been the case with VZ or whether the change is being driven by Frontier to generate additional income or not. However the business model is clearly geared toward extracting additional money from their customers in charges for each DVR and each STB they get. IIRC each STB is something like $7 and each DVR is around $15 per month. Compared to $3.99 per cable card, the difference could add up a a healthy chunk of change for people wanting MRV.


sorry I wasnt more clear. Theirs is a lot like the moxi system. Their home media DVR streams to their Stb's. Directv's dvrs to stream to each other, I did it with 2 -HR20-100's. I agree that Tivo was the best thing going. The prices I see listed for VZ equipment are $20 dollars for the home media DVR and $10 for the HD set top box with a regular HD DVR at $16 bucks. there was just no way I was going to pay 40 bucks a month in box charges so I have never had the pleasure. I suppose if you wanted more tuners or recording capability you would locate 2 of their media DVRs in the same room and have stb's in the other rooms. wow that would be 60 dollar a month set up for 3 rooms (2x 20 + 10 + 10). AS I recall that is the reason I went tivo with FIOS


----------



## MichaelK

for the record, copyright holder as an excuse is almost certainly full of crap if as posted above HDNET is flagged. 

Marc Cuban said publicly in the past that he specifically had no need for flags on his channels and thought they were bad. 

things could have changed but i doubt it.

Also sounds like HBO isn't flagged but other channels in the "HBO family" are. Again that would point to picking numbered balls from a can. 

I've got no dogs in the race- I'm on the other end of the country, on comcast, no fios in my town although everyone around has verizon fios, and I only have flags on hbo and the other movie channels. So i'm fine here. So just trying to help with facts as best I can.

(also I'd toss in that if the channels themselves really gave a crap they apparently could insert the CCI byte right at their uplink- one SINGLE point of insertion and every head end in the country would respect it and pass it downhill- rather than waiting on 200 companies and 10,000 head ends to do it without any screwups).


----------



## richsadams

MichaelK said:


> for the record, copyright holder as an excuse is almost certainly full of crap if as posted above HDNET is flagged.
> 
> Marc Cuban said publicly in the past that he specifically had no need for flags on his channels and thought they were bad.


VZ's current CP situation is the result a failed attempt to CP some channels, but probably not all IMO. When their network went down on the 7th they were able to get things working again, but as you point out, there's no rhyme or reason for which channels have CP and which do not. For instance HBO is flagged but Showtime is not. I'm almost certain they must be re-working their approach and that we'll see something different before the July 1 handoff to Frontier, but who knows what it will look like.


----------



## vurbano

cwerdna said:


> Yet another moronic statement from VZ/Frontier that doesn't hold water,  just like more of their crap they've been feeding us. It doesn't account for the everything being wide open prior to 6/7/10, it still being open on FiOS areas not being transitioned to Frontier nor other cable providers leaving these channels open.
> 
> Again, the issue for me isn't streaming, it's that I want to archive some content. Even if the streaming were allowed w/CCI byte = 0x02 but TivoToGo transferred weren't allowed, I'd still have the same problem. It seems like I'm going to have to drop FiOS due to Frontier's moronic behavior.
> 
> Perhaps people who are upset by this CP should mail Current TV (http://current.com/s/contact_us.htm) as suggested, so that they can try to escalate w/Frontier/VZ.


hey I didnt say it would be true. I too want to archive. Im burning to Bluray and to servers all over the house. But if the jig is up and Tivo can't stream then its probably moxi for me. Certainly not going to pay VZ their rental prices.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vurbano said:


> What has to change here is tivo and they really dont care about anything but money.


 well since they are a for-profit company with stockholders and all..........


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> I hadn't considered that aspect. I was of the mind that since the OP had TiVo's that he was in the same boat. However it's quite possible that he may be getting an employee discount and/or that his account is somehow tagged with the fact that he's an employee. Raising h**l with your employer isn't always a wise career move if ever. I can see why he'd have to keep a low profile.
> 
> So I was trying to understand why VZ DVR owners can still enjoy MRV while TiVo owners can't. It turns out that VZ DVR's do not stream to other VZ DVR's either. A VZ flyer I received a couple of days ago says you can play recorded shows in up to six rooms in the house. There's a footnote that says "Watch recorded shows on up to six TVs with Set Top Boxes". After a call to VZ it turns out what that means is that if you wanted to watch recordings made on a VZ HD DVR you'd have to have one to six STB's connected to TV's in other rooms...STB's _not_ DVR's. VZ DVR's can only stream to (non-DVR) STB's.
> 
> That clarified a difference I wasn't understanding. In essence you could have more than one of their DVR's but you cannot watch recordings made on one VZ DVR on another VZ DVR. So if your DVR is in the living room and you happen to be in the bedroom and you want to record a program, you'd have to get out of bed and go into the living room to get that DVR to record it. (The CSR didn't know if you could start streaming to another room while the recording was being made.)
> 
> The bottom line is the same with their DVR's or TiVo...if you want to record programs wherever you happen to be you'd need a DVR in that room...and you could not watch that recording in another room if that TV also had a DVR. Until June 7th TiVo did have a distinct advantage (not to mention PC archiving, etc). I've no idea if that's always been the case with VZ or whether the change is being driven by Frontier to generate additional income or not. However the business model is clearly geared toward extracting additional money from their customers in charges for each DVR and each STB they get. IIRC each STB is something like $7 and each DVR is around $15 per month. Compared to $3.99 per cable card, the difference could add up a a healthy chunk of change for people wanting MRV.


I would rather pay $60 and upgrade THD's to 157 hours of HD and record the show on each TIVO, than Rent a VZ dvr. Makes me wonder how many hours you can record on the VZ DVR!


----------



## cwerdna

MPSAN said:


> I would rather pay $60 and upgrade THD's to 157 hours of HD and record the show on each TIVO, than Rent a VZ dvr. Makes me wonder how many hours you can record on the VZ DVR!


Not many. I rented one for ~a week when my TiVo HD's A drive went bad. IIRC, it had a 160 gig drive in it. It also wasn't on par w/TiVo, in terms of the end user experience.


----------



## dresden69

MPSAN said:


> I would rather pay $60 and upgrade THD's to 157 hours of HD and record the show on each TIVO, than Rent a VZ dvr. Makes me wonder how many hours you can record on the VZ DVR!


15 to 20 hours...

As far as my pull with Verizon/Frontier... I don't really have any.. I have escalated the situation to my supervisors, and let a high level Sup know yesterday... but in all honesty... I am kinda putting myself out on the line by talking about the situation with you folks... if Verizon/Frontier really wanted to play hardball.. I am sure they could get me for Code of Conduct violations and I could probably suffer extreme discipline including termination...

But I have always thought that you guys deserve to know what is going on inside.... and I have tried to convey that message to you... I am sorry that it has angered some of you... and I am sorry that you have taken some of my statements the wrong way...

Absolutely, if I was to talk to you on the phone and help your problem.. I would put 100 percent effort in resolving your issue... I would not tell you to take a hike and shove it... But if we were sitting in an bar... and I was looking at you face to face... I would tell you... If you are not happy in your current situation... then you need to get to a situation to make you happy... Life is too short to be unhappy.

Have a great day... and let me know if I can be of any further help.

P.S - Still no information on the channel front... I will continue trying to make small waves if I can...


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> I would rather pay $60 and upgrade THD's to 157 hours of HD and record the show on each TIVO, than Rent a VZ dvr. Makes me wonder how many hours you can record on the VZ DVR!


Heartily agree! FWW, from this article comparing VZ HD DVR's to (pre-premiere) TiVo and WMC...

http://hd.engadget.com/2008/12/24/verizon-fios-hd-dvr-review/



> - 160GB HDD -- 18 hours of HD, really Verizon?
> - No external storage option -- eSATA, USB, etc.


And this...



> Like many other providers, the FiOS DVR only has a 160GB hard disk. We can't even imagine only being able to record 18 hours of HD, but when you think of trying to record everything for an entire house, you can see how this would be nearly impossible. Sure, you could just rent more than one DVR, but the multi-room functionality only works with regular STBs, and not between DVRs. So if you want to have access to the same programming in every room, you're limited to two tuners and 18 hours of programming for an entire house -- pretty lame. huh?


Yes..._very_ lame. I'll keep my 157 hours of HD recording capacity thank you very much!


----------



## richsadams

dresden69 said:


> As far as my pull with Verizon/Frontier...<snip>


Understood...all good points and thanks for your input and more importantly your attempts to get some action on your end...much appreciated! :up:


----------



## [NG]Owner

As someone with TWC who has suffered through the exact same thing with "switching on of CP, breaking MRV and breaking PC transfers," I'm just sitting here on the sidelines with my popcorn counting off each of the seven stages of grief you guys are going through. I assure you all of us in TWC-land went through the same thing and came out (more or less) on the other side.

You'll get over it (and likely in the process realize that there's really no other place to go to get your unfettered video). But you're not that far along just yet. In the meantime, go run this thread up another eleven pages ....

[NG]Owner


----------



## BobCamp1

richsadams said:


> After spending more than four hours on the phone these past couple of weeks speaking to multiple VZ CSR's (all of which have been very polite mind you)...to a one, every single one tried to convince me to switch to the VZ HD DVR because they _WILL_ allow MRV. Does anyone here really believe the copyright holders said to themselves, "Gee, let's let Verizon customers record programs in their living rooms and watch them in their bedrooms...but not TiVo owners"? Get serious. That is discriminatory, preditory behavior IMO.


That's Tivo's fault. All other DVR sets can MRV except Tivo's. It's because of the way Tivo does it. You're frustrated with Verizon, but really you should be frustrated with Tivo. They've had a long time to fix it or come up with something. They haven't.

Having said that, it looks like someone told Verizon to turn on the flag for certain channels, but Verizon got the channel numbers wrong.


----------



## mgama

BobCamp1 said:


> Having said that, it looks like someone told Verizon to turn on the flag for certain channels, but Verizon got the channel numbers wrong.


I really hope that is the case, and they were trying to target the HBO/Showtime/PPV/Etc. movie channels. But I'm not going to hold my breath.


----------



## killzone

BobCamp1 said:


> That's Tivo's fault. All other DVR sets can MRV except Tivo's. It's because of the way Tivo does it. You're frustrated with Verizon, but really you should be frustrated with Tivo. They've had a long time to fix it or come up with something. They haven't.
> 
> Having said that, it looks like someone told Verizon to turn on the flag for certain channels, but Verizon got the channel numbers wrong.


I totally agree with you regarding their MRV implementation. Keep in mind though, there are people who specifically bought a Tivo because of it's ability to transfer recordings to their PC. That functionality has effectively been changed too and with the CC bit set to 2, no implementation would be allowed to transfer it.

The bottom line is, by turning that bit on, Frontier/Verizon has changed their service.


----------



## orangeboy

BobCamp1 said:


> That's Tivo's fault. All other DVR sets can MRV except Tivo's. It's because of the way Tivo does it...


I actually believe wmcbrine's explanation is a MUCH more likely reason than the method in which TiVo implemented MRV:



wmcbrine said:


> orangeboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm curious how that even works. Aren't those providers constrained to the same CCI byte restrictions imposed? Or are those solutions stream based?
> 
> 
> 
> I've said it before, I'll say it again: It's really not about streaming vs. copying. *The CCI system is imposed by the cable companies. They can thus freely exempt themselves.*
Click to expand...


----------



## richsadams

[NG]Owner;8005554 said:


> As someone with TWC who has suffered through the exact same thing with "switching on of CP, breaking MRV and breaking PC transfers," I'm just sitting here on the sidelines with my popcorn counting off each of the seven stages of grief you guys are going through. I assure you all of us in TWC-land went through the same thing and came out (more or less) on the other side.
> 
> You'll get over it (and likely in the process realize that there's really no other place to go to get your unfettered video). But you're not that far along just yet. In the meantime, go run this thread up another eleven pages ....
> 
> [NG]Owner


Gloating is reallly unbecoming. We do have other choices. Comcast only flags premium channels. I'd rather not go back, but...


----------



## richsadams

BobCamp1 said:


> That's Tivo's fault. All other DVR sets can MRV except Tivo's.


No no they can't. VZ's own DVR's cannot stream to other VZ DVR's either.


----------



## cwerdna

Ok, I've contacted Glenn Valenta @ HDNet as they looked like a reasonable person to contact at http://www.hd.net/contacts.html short of going all the way up to Mark Cuban.

From what I've gathered from some digging, I don't believe Mark Cuban's stance against copy protection has changed. Maybe they can at least get CP removed from that channel.

I wish there were a better way to make waves about this and that it's an issue that the "average Joe" understands and cares about.


----------



## hmm52

MichaelK said:


> for the record, copyright holder as an excuse is almost certainly full of crap if as posted above HDNET is flagged.
> 
> (also I'd toss in that if the channels themselves really gave a crap they apparently could insert the CCI byte right at their uplink- one SINGLE point of insertion and every head end in the country would respect it and pass it downhill- rather than waiting on 200 companies and 10,000 head ends to do it without any screwups).


You're saying what I believe, correct? That CCI bytes have *never* been applied at the request/insistence of a content provider. Is there any evidence that this has *ever* happened? Scripts auto generated by DVRs and the words of cableco CSRs are obviously meaningless. The anecdotal evidence is completely the other way. That in *all* cases copy protection bytes are applied by cablecos (and now telcos) on a regional basis. If copy restriction is so important to some content providers, they're ignoring a massive breach with Verizon FiOS - most of it.

In the northwest now I suspect that the copy restriction is coming from the VHOs in Portland and Seattle (Everett, wherever, I don't know their exact location). I haven't seen one post on this thread from any other state that will be served by Frontier. If this remains the case next month, I'd certainly pitch a fit over your _exclusive_ treatment.

I'm not young anymore and I don't have full confidance in any memory but I'll relate one _memory_ from my time with Comcast Phila. nevertheless. Before I went to FiOS near the end of '06, Comcast was transitioning in steps from 0X00 on all channels to 0X02 on all. I recall that during one of the steps I saw CCI:0X02 but also CopyProtectionKey: Disabled. The CCI byte 02 had no effect at this time while it very much had an effect when the CPK became enabled; the Sony DHG HDD250s I was using wouldn't allow back to back recordings of the same channel with 0X02. If my memory is correct, there's a third element to go along with cablecard pairing and CCI bytes. (Conditional Access screen)


----------



## BobCamp1

richsadams said:


> No no they can't. VZ's own DVR's cannot stream to other VZ DVR's either.


By "set" I meant a DVR + set top boxes combo. So where is Tivo's plain set top box? Moxi has one. Verizon has one. DirecTV has one. It's very easy to prove you're not making a copy when the receiving device doesn't have a hard drive. (DirecTV DVRs can stream to each other, FYI.)

I hope people in this forum did not buy a Tivo based on its MRV capability, when many other people have complained that it doesn't work for them due to the CCI flags. Even if it did work for some cable companies (or..ahem...Verizon), all someone had to do is flip a switch and it wouldn't work anymore.


----------



## vurbano

richsadams said:


> Heartily agree! FWW, from this article comparing VZ HD DVR's to (pre-premiere) TiVo and WMC...
> 
> http://hd.engadget.com/2008/12/24/verizon-fios-hd-dvr-review/
> 
> And this...
> 
> Yes..._very_ lame. I'll keep my 157 hours of HD recording capacity thank you very much!


well to be fair I think my two TivoHD units came with 160's


----------



## jshaffernc

I am a multi-room fanatic. I want my family to use one remote and watch whatever they want in every room of my house. I did that fine with TiVo Series 1 and 2 by using modulators to broadcast TiVo as channel 123. It still works in my house today. 

When I bought a TiVo HD (and added a 1TB drive), I was determined to do the same thing with the three TVs in my home that can handle HD. I put the TiVo in the basement atop my older TV that has no HDMI input (using Component Vid). Then, I cobbled together an HDMI splitter/amplifier, two pair of CAT5 HDMI extenders, and in-wall CAT5 cables. Pricey and complicated. Worked fine but for a few glitches once I got it going. 

Last week, it failed catastrophically, probably lightning. Fried three HDMI cables, the splitter/amplifier, and both CAT5 extenders. 

So I replace all the components that fried, add a heavy-duty surge suppressor, and a UPS. All this to keep me from copying programming that's so bad I am often sorry I recorded it.

I would have been cheaper buying two more HD TiVo's, but as you point out, a fair amount of the programming is simply not distributable on the TiVo in-house network.


----------



## richsadams

BobCamp1 said:


> By "set" I meant a DVR + set top boxes combo. So where is Tivo's plain set top box? Moxi has one. Verizon has one. DirecTV has one. It's very easy to prove you're not making a copy when the receiving device doesn't have a hard drive.


 Got it and understood. I'd even opt for a VZ STB and just switch between HDMI inputs if TiVo would do as you say...which I'm assuming it won't.



BobCamp1 said:


> I hope people in this forum did not buy a Tivo based on its MRV capability, when many other people have complained that it doesn't work for them due to the CCI flags. Even if it did work for some cable companies (or..ahem...Verizon), all someone had to do is flip a switch and it wouldn't work anymore.


I'm certain many, many people purchased more than one TiVo with MRV in mind...it's one of the features they tout of course. TiVo Desktop (or KMTTG, iTiVo, etc.) were designed to be able to transfer recordings from TiVo to the computer as well so it wasn't a small feature. Even when we had Comcast it worked just fine as they only flag premium channels like HBO. We were spoiled with FIOS not flagging anything of course. However with the exception of TWC (not sure if it's everywhere or not) most cableco's only have premium channels flagged. Of course we'd prefer it if FIOS would go back to no flags, but I could live w/premium channels being protected. CP on all channels would be a deal breaker, and as mentioned we do have the option to go w/Comcast.


----------



## richsadams

jshaffernc said:


> I am a multi-room fanatic. <snip>


Thanks very much for posting...and sorry to hear how mother nature had her way with some of your equipment. Yikes! FWIW be sure that you don't have a surge protector before or after a UPS. In other words a UPS plugged into a surge protector or something plugged into a surge protector which is then plugged into the UPS. According to the experts (APC, etc.) the two should never be used in concert.

Maybe I missed it but AFAIK you're the first person from Indiana to join the conversation. I think that's what you meant in the last sentence of your post, but can you confirm that there is now copy protection on your FiOS system as well? A good example might be CNN (HD or SD). We know this happened in WA and OR and if that's the case for you as well we can confirm that the new CP was established in all three states (which by no small coincidence are being handed off to Frontier next week). TIA!


----------



## richsadams

vurbano said:


> well to be fair I think my two TivoHD units came with 160's


Good point. Most folks thought that was pretty pathetic as well.


----------



## rifleman69

richsadams said:


> Good point. Most folks thought that was pretty pathetic as well.


And either expanded internally or externally too.


----------



## dresden69

As I stated before... Frontier is not going to support MRDVR... it is going away as of July 1st on their own boxes.

I went through the channels last night... and I could find no reason on what was cp'ed and what wasn't... I was looking at packages... because I though that maybe some channels in the Prime HD would be cp, or some in the Extreme or Ultimate... I honestly don't know how they choose the channels.


----------



## cwerdna

jshaffernc said:


> I am a multi-room fanatic.





richsadams said:


> Maybe I missed it but AFAIK you're the first person from Indiana to join the conversation. I think that's what you meant in the last sentence of your post, but can you confirm that there is now copy protection on your FiOS system as well? A good example might be CNN (HD or SD). We know this happened in WA and OR and if that's the case for you as well we can confirm that the new CP was established in all three states (which by no small coincidence are being handed off to Frontier next week). TIA!


jshaffernc: Besides the two CNN channels, if you'd like, I posted some more channels you could check for CP at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7998524#post7998524 along w/a semi-quick way to check.


----------



## cwerdna

An avsforum user got back a reply from http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=18827109#post18827109. As usual, it's a bunch of crap and doesn't really answer the question.


----------



## JWThiers

hmm52 said:


> You're saying what I believe, correct? That CCI bytes have *never* been applied at the request/insistence of a content provider. Is there any evidence that this has *ever* happened? Scripts auto generated by DVRs and the words of cableco CSRs are obviously meaningless. The anecdotal evidence is completely the other way. That in *all* cases copy protection bytes are applied by cablecos (and now telcos) on a regional basis. If copy restriction is so important to some content providers, they're ignoring a massive breach with Verizon FiOS - most of it.


If you write the cable companies the reply you get is usually along the lines of they are complying with law and with their contract with the networks. They NEVER talk about specific contracts with specific channels. What I am pretty sure happens is the Cable Companies have a boiler plate contract that either says they are setting all content to 0x02 or is completely mute on the subject allowing them to do whatever they need to do to "run their company as they need to to be efficient". The ONLY example (that I am aware of) that this has ever caused an issue is with HDNet. Supposedly HDNet didn't want the flag set to 0x02. On BHN they no longer carry HDNet which could be coincidental. IMO most networks probably don't care one way or the other.


----------



## killzone

dresden69 said:


> As I stated before... Frontier is not going to support MRDVR... it is going away as of July 1st on their own boxes.
> 
> I went through the channels last night... and I could find no reason on what was cp'ed and what wasn't... I was looking at packages... because I though that maybe some channels in the Prime HD would be cp, or some in the Extreme or Ultimate... I honestly don't know how they choose the channels.


I also hear that remote scheduling is going away. It's going to be interesting to see if they get hit with a lawsuit over the significant change to their services. I'm sure as part of the approval for the deal they claimed no changes would be made, but clearly that is not the case. It's the old bait and switch.


----------



## vurbano

richsadams said:


> No no they can't. VZ's own DVR's cannot stream to other VZ DVR's either.


lets not nit pick DVR to DVR vs DVR to STB. We all know the reason Tivo is having trouble. It is that it doesnt stream it transfers. Tivo knew this day was coming for ALL of its users eventually and has done nothing to change. I would think that knowing the state of things that Tivo Premeire would have fixed this. But for me its nothing but an Ultra expensive risk. If anyone knows how to "modify" a moxi to transfer to PC, that would be the way to go IMO.


----------



## COBeav

vurbano said:


> If anyone knows how to "modify" a moxi to transfer to PC, that would be the way to go IMO.


Or you can do this to a Tivo HD (or any Series 3) and get back MRV and Tivo-to-PC transfers for ALL channels regardless of what the cable companies try to do. ;-)


----------



## MPSAN

COBeav said:


> Or you can do this to a Tivo HD (or any Series 3) and get back MRV and Tivo-to-PC transfers for ALL channels regardless of what the cable companies try to do. ;-)


...and it "almost" looks like only 1 modded THD needs to be done.

ie: Say you have 3 THD's. If only one has a 1 TB drive...or larger...you can mod that one, use it to record CCI shows, and MRV WILL work from that 1 modded THD to the other stock 2 THD's. Is that correct? Also, we are not talking about anything bad here as it is on a different part of this forum. I was just looking at the instructions and it looks like only 2 bytes of data need to change...and a PROM.


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> I was just looking at the instructions and it looks like only 2 bytes of data need to change...and a PROM.


Okay, I'll bite...point me in the right direction.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> Okay, I'll bite...point me in the right direction.


I just did in an email as TCF strips URL's from PM's.


----------



## rifleman69

MPSAN said:


> I just did in an email as TCF strips URL's from PM's.


Send me one too MPSAN, I'll send you my email in a PM.


----------



## rocko

The guy who does the procedure does them in batches. The next date is June 30 so you may need to negotiate an extension if you want it done any time soon. The last date was in Feb.


----------



## hmm52

JWThiers said:


> If you write the cable companies the reply you get is usually along the lines of they are complying with law and with their contract with the networks. They NEVER talk about specific contracts with specific channels. What I am pretty sure happens is the Cable Companies have a boiler plate contract that either says they are setting all content to 0x02 or is completely mute on the subject allowing them to do whatever they need to do to "run their company as they need to to be efficient". The ONLY example (that I am aware of) that this has ever caused an issue is with HDNet. Supposedly HDNet didn't want the flag set to 0x02. On BHN they no longer carry HDNet which could be coincidental. IMO most networks probably don't care one way or the other.


The way copy restriction plays out in the various Frontier areas will be interesting (obviously). I think there should be a thread devoted just to that. BTW what SHE, super head end, will be serving Frontier's FiOS customers? I assume it will remain Verizon's facility in Florida for some time as final approval on the deal was quite recent. VZ's backup SHE in Illinois sits well within Frontier territory but I doubt they are planning to give it up.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

richsadams said:


> Okay, I'll bite...point me in the right direction.





MPSAN said:


> I just did in an email as TCF strips URL's from PM's.





rifleman69 said:


> Send me one too MPSAN, I'll send you my email in a PM.


actually they only strip that particular URL  It is a deal of a database and comes up on first page if you put in "tivo hacking" in google.
Now the PROM change does require soldering work as the PROM to be changed is not in a socket on a stock TiVo. TiVo should consider the fact that more and more people will be hacking their TiVo DVRs if TiVo can not offer a solution of their own and soon.


----------



## richsadams

ZeoTiVo said:


> TiVo should consider the fact that more and more people will be hacking their TiVo DVRs if TiVo can not offer a solution of their own and soon.


+1


----------



## MichaelK

hmm52 said:


> You're saying what I believe, correct? That CCI bytes have *never* been applied at the request/insistence of a content provider. Is there any evidence that this has *ever* happened? Scripts auto generated by DVRs and the words of cableco CSRs are obviously meaningless. The anecdotal evidence is completely the other way. That in *all* cases copy protection bytes are applied by cablecos (and now telcos) on a regional basis. If copy restriction is so important to some content providers, they're ignoring a massive breach with Verizon FiOS - most of it....


that's basically what i believe too. I have no knowledge but the clues seem to point that way to me.

Also toss in that different headends are set differently on the same MSO at times points to it's not any contract with the content provider requiring things.


----------



## MichaelK

ZeoTiVo said:


> actually they only strip that particular URL  It is a deal of a database and comes up on first page if you put in "tivo hacking" in google.
> Now the PROM change does require soldering work as the PROM to be changed is not in a socket on a stock TiVo. TiVo should consider the fact that more and more people will be hacking their TiVo DVRs if TiVo can not offer a solution of their own and soon.


I guess if it gets totally hacked to hooey then it's a problem for them, but if it just stays fringy like it has since way back when, then one of the cablelabs documents specifically said that hacks requiring soldering are not deemed to be the fault of the manufacturer- they understood that it's impossible to stop such things.

If tivo ever socketed the prom then likely it would be an issue, but as long as you have to have soldering done, I'd guess something significant would have to change to matter to them.


----------



## orangeboy

What I want to know is: Exactly why are the Cable Operators allowed to set the CCI byte in the first place?


----------



## ZeoTiVo

MichaelK said:


> then one of the cablelabs documents specifically said that hacks requiring soldering are not deemed to be the fault of the manufacturer- they understood that it's impossible to stop such things.


right - it is not cable labs that is the worry for TiVo. Hopefully long term cablelabs will drop out of the picture.

The problem is that people will add in more complex hacks and then start setting things to stop updates from TiVo to keep the hacks in place, etc...
This was a real issue for TiVo before they released the first TiVo desktop


----------



## wmcbrine

orangeboy said:


> What I want to know is: Exactly why are the Cable Operators allowed to set the CCI byte in the first place?


Regulatory capture. FCC = stooges.


----------



## vurbano

If you do hack 2 units will file transfer between units be as simple as it is now or do you have to initiate it from a PC?


----------



## MPSAN

MichaelK said:


> I guess if it gets totally hacked to hooey then it's a problem for them, but if it just stays fringy like it has since way back when, then one of the cablelabs documents specifically said that hacks requiring soldering are not deemed to be the fault of the manufacturer- they understood that it's impossible to stop such things.
> 
> If tivo ever socketed the prom then likely it would be an issue, but as long as you have to have soldering done, I'd guess something significant would have to change to matter to them.


Well, one thing that TIVO can do is give us a firmware update that will always have the PROM say the code is legit. THEN if someone wanted to take out their HDD and change a few bytes TIVO can not be blamed. In this way we would not have to play with the PROM.


----------



## DaveDFW

MPSAN said:


> Well, one thing that TIVO can do is give us a firmware update that will always have the PROM say the code is legit...


I don't think that's a possibility. I think the prom-based security chain was one of the requirements for cablelabs certification.


----------



## steve614

orangeboy said:


> What I want to know is: Exactly why are the Cable Operators allowed to set the CCI byte in the first place?





wmcbrine said:


> Regulatory capture. FCC = stooges.


Yep. It's because there is no regulation against it.
<tin foil hat> I'm sure it's only being done for anti-competetive reasons. </tin foil hat>
Copy protection needs to be put in the content owner's hand.
I'd bet we see a lot less copy protection.


----------



## MPSAN

DaveDFW said:


> I don't think that's a possibility. I think the prom-based security chain was one of the requirements for cablelabs certification.


I did not know, but TIVO would be advised to think of something. Perhaps they could transfer the show if they removed it from the THD they were MRVing from after the copy..


----------



## shwru980r

orangeboy said:


> What I want to know is: Exactly why are the Cable Operators allowed to set the CCI byte in the first place?


I think you've got it backwards. The cable company would have to be forbidden from setting the CCI byte.

Setting the byte gives the cable company dvr a competitive advantage over Tivo. The cable company has a duty to their shareholders to set the byte if they think it will generate more revenue.


----------



## orangeboy

shwru980r said:


> orangeboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> What I want to know is: Exactly why are the Cable Operators allowed to set the CCI byte in the first place?
> 
> 
> 
> I think you've got it backwards. The cable company would have to be forbidden from setting the CCI byte.
> 
> Setting the byte gives the cable company dvr a competitive advantage over Tivo. The cable company has a duty to their shareholders to set the byte if they think it will generate more revenue.
Click to expand...

Huh? How could I get a question backwards? 

Anyway, how does allowing the cable operators setting the CCI byte comply with Section 629 of the Communications Act, which is titled "Competitive Availability of Navigation Devices". What you just described is the exact opposite.

The closest to an answer that I found for my question is in Filing 03-255:


> In order to permit a competitive market for the design, manufacture and retail sale of navigation devices to develop, a number of practical issues must be addressed. First, because one of the primary functions of these devices is to preclude the unauthorized reception or use of service, it is necessary to address service theft in situations where the device is no longer entirely within the service provider's control. This issue is comprised of two components, unauthorized access to service (theft of service) and *unauthorized redistribution or copying of programming content legally acquired for a limited use* (copy protection/digital rights management).


If the content owner has deemed it's content as "copy freely", how in the world can that be interpreted as "limited use"? If the content owner doesn't care and says "copy freely", the Operator (I would think) should comply with the content owner's intent. Yes? Setting the CCI byte doesn't prevent theft of service in any way, CableCARDs do that.


----------



## JWThiers

hmm52 said:


> The way copy restriction plays out in the various Frontier areas will be interesting (obviously). I think there should be a thread devoted just to that. BTW what SHE, super head end, will be serving Frontier's FiOS customers? I assume it will remain Verizon's facility in Florida for some time as final approval on the deal was quite recent. VZ's backup SHE in Illinois sits well within Frontier territory but I doubt they are planning to give it up.


If it plays out like most companies, unfortunately it will mean everything except locals will eventually 0x02'ed. And also unfortunately for the consumer they are within their rights to do so.

If I could be king for a day, what would happen is all locals would be 0x00, all PPV's would be 0x03 and EVERYTHING else would be set by either (I'm not sure which but either one has a better claim than the cable company) the original networks airing the content or the copyright holder to the program to either 0x00 or 0x02 (If they didn't put anything in by default it would be 0x00) and the Cable Companies couldn't change it. It fundamentally bothers me that the cable company is the one setting the flag. IMO the cable company is just a middleman providing the distribution. The don't own the copyright they have the distribution rights and that is it.


----------



## JWThiers

steve614 said:


> Yep. It's because there is no regulation against it.
> <tin foil hat> I'm sure it's only being done for anti-competetive reasons. </tin foil hat>
> Copy protection needs to be put in the content owner's hand.
> I'd bet we see a lot less copy protection.


or maybe not, but that at least puts the responsibility in the hands of the people that actually own the content.


----------



## JWThiers

shwru980r said:


> I think you've got it backwards. The cable company would have to be forbidden from setting the CCI byte.
> 
> Setting the byte gives the cable company dvr a competitive advantage over Tivo. The cable company has a duty to their shareholders to set the byte if they think it will generate more revenue.


Actually IIRC the cable companies DVR follows the CCI byte rules as tivo does. That is the part of the reason for separable security and the fact that cable companies cable boxes also have cable cards in them. The difference is for MRV they are either streaming the content to other boxes or are doing a copy in such a way that the content is not available on more than 1 box at a time.


----------



## innocentfreak

wmcbrine said:


> Regulatory capture. FCC = stooges.


Unfortunately I agree, but this does seem to be something that could be used as part of the feedback as to problems with the third party devices especially since many people seem to be told to switch to the cable companies equipment.


----------



## rifleman69

Got a response from Greg Lang at the MACC today

We received information back from Verizon regarding their copyright protection and the difficulties with TiVO MRV customers. We are told that this change is a national initiative on the part of Verizon and was planned prior to any sale or transfer of ownership to Frontier Communications. In looking at the Federal statute (47 CFR § 76.1904), it appears that Verizon is within their rights to take this action. MACC, as a local franchise authority, does not have the authority to pursue this further.

Perhaps the TiVO community can work with Verizon-Frontier and other cable companies on a copyright/viewing agreement.

I am sorry we were not able to cure this, but please keep us informed and let us know if other topics of concern come up during the Frontier transition.

Greg Lang
MACC Communications Analyst
503-645-7365 x207

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

Response From Verizon:

Below is an explanation of the copyright/TiVO issue.

We can readdress this matter after July 1st once the transfer to Frontier is complete.

1. The change in coding that dictates how many times a program can be recorded is being implemented across the Verizon footprint. 
2. Implementation started with the North Central Region (OR and WA as of June 1st). 
3. The change permits one copy of certain programming (broadcast stations not affected). 
4. This restriction is based on copyright protection and is permitted by federal statute (47 CFR § 76.1904). 
5. The multi-room viewing function of TiVO DVRs is affected because TiVO technology requires two copies for this functionality. 
6. TiVO is aware of the limitations of its technology (http://support.tivo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/243)

Raymond Deede 
Franchise Service Manager


----------



## BobCamp1

shwru980r said:


> I think you've got it backwards. The cable company would have to be forbidden from setting the CCI byte.
> 
> Setting the byte gives the cable company dvr a competitive advantage over Tivo. The cable company has a duty to their shareholders to set the byte if they think it will generate more revenue.


The cable company and Tivo also have a duty to not get sued. By setting and abiding by the copy protection flags, they can claim that they did all they could to stop illegal copying.

Really, it's Tivo's implementation that is causing the problems. It's too bad. My choices are TWC, FIOS and DirecTV. Tivo MRV won't work with the first two, and the third (future DirecTivo HD) is unknown. Now I'll have to use Moxi or the provider's DVR if I want MRV.


----------



## DaveDFW

rifleman69 said:


> ...Response From Verizon...
> 1. The change in coding that dictates how many times a program can be recorded is being implemented across the Verizon footprint.
> 2. Implementation started with the North Central Region (OR and WA as of June 1st)...


This seems to be stating that the new CCI policy will spread to all Fios areas. Am I reading this correctly?

Tivo really needs to address this.


----------



## cwerdna

rifleman69 said:


> Response From Verizon:
> 
> Below is an explanation of the copyright/TiVO issue.
> 
> We can readdress this matter after July 1st once the transfer to Frontier is complete.
> 
> 1. The change in coding that dictates how many times a program can be recorded is being implemented across the Verizon footprint.
> 2. Implementation started with the North Central Region (OR and WA as of June 1st).
> 3. The change permits one copy of certain programming (broadcast stations not affected).
> 4. This restriction is based on copyright protection and is permitted by federal statute (47 CFR § 76.1904).
> 5. The multi-room viewing function of TiVO DVRs is affected because TiVO technology requires two copies for this functionality.
> 6. TiVO is aware of the limitations of its technology (http://support.tivo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/243)
> 
> Raymond Deede
> Franchise Service Manager


Thanks for posting your reply. It's too bad that MACC couldn't do anything, but they have no authority over WA state anyway (which is probably why I never heard of them until this thread).

The stupid reply from VZ was just like the one an avsforum user was given at http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=18827109#post18827109.  What a load of crap. It still doesn't answer most of the questions we have. What a bunch of morons. Considering they've been so hard to deal w/and useless so far, I doubt we'll get much traction after the switchover.


----------



## rifleman69

DaveDFW said:


> This seems to be stating that the new CCI policy will spread to all Fios areas. Am I reading this correctly?
> 
> Tivo really needs to address this.


Yes, this will be implemented across the FiOS footprint...Verizon as well as Frontier. Time table unknown obviously, as they haven't done a good job with what they've thrown out there already.


----------



## wesmills

DaveDFW said:


> This seems to be stating that the new CCI policy will spread to all Fios areas. Am I reading this correctly?
> 
> Tivo really needs to address this.


Yes, it does, sadly. Anybody know what Charter's CCI settings might be?


----------



## sgip2000

I'm in Hillsboro and I have not seen this problem yet. 

What would be a good channel to do a test on?


----------



## MPSAN

sgip2000 said:


> I'm in Hillsboro and I have not seen this problem yet.
> 
> What would be a good channel to do a test on?


You could try 184 the Game show network. Just set a tuner there and look at messages and settings. Go to dvr diagnostics and look at the tuner with channel 184 and you will see the CCI flag at 0x02 and NOT 0x00 as it had been.


----------



## rifleman69

sgip2000 said:


> I'm in Hillsboro and I have not seen this problem yet.
> 
> What would be a good channel to do a test on?


Any ESPN channel BESIDES ESPNU. Not sure if the SD only ESPNClassic is set this way or not as I haven't checked that one out. DiscoveryHD, any HBO or Cinemax channel.

That's a good start.


----------



## hmm52

rifleman69 said:


> ....................
> Response From Verizon:
> 
> Below is an explanation of the copyright/TiVO issue.
> 
> We can readdress this matter after July 1st once the transfer to Frontier is complete.
> 
> 1. The change in coding that dictates how many times a program can be recorded is being implemented across the Verizon footprint.
> 2. Implementation started with the North Central Region (OR and WA as of June 1st).
> 3. The change permits one copy of certain programming (broadcast stations not affected).
> 4. This restriction is based on copyright protection and is permitted by federal statute (47 CFR § 76.1904).
> 5. The multi-room viewing function of TiVO DVRs is affected because TiVO technology requires two copies for this functionality.
> 6. TiVO is aware of the limitations of its technology (http://support.tivo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/243)
> 
> Raymond Deede
> Franchise Service Manager


Can I just say that this sucks. Not only is it to be permanent and spread across all possible channels in WA and OR, the rest of us will receive the identical treatment nationwide - Frontier, Verizon all the same. I don't do MRV unless most broadly defined, 1 remote TV through HDMI, and I don't copy much to PC. But I do move cablecards between various devices at two residences, same name, different accounts, big bills nevertheless. All but certain that that chapter will be closing soon. Maybe I'm one of the bad boys VZ thought to be pinching their (massive) revenue stream. Oh well.

Good work from all of you on the left coast to chase down definitive answers from the powers that be, even if they weren't what we wanted to hear.


----------



## innocentfreak

I definitely think FiosTV, the Fios tv rep, on twitter should be informed of everyone's displeasure about this. He seemed surprised that people would consider leaving Fios over this.

I don't watch sports so once this hits nationwide I may just dump Fios TV and go OTA with Hulu and Netflix.

Even if Tivo allowed streaming this would still be an issue at least for me. I transfer everything now so I have it saved until I have time to watch it. Without that, I need a Super Tivo with as much storage as I can which of course isn't an option and none of the third party options will really work except Media Center but you will need tons of storage.


----------



## rifleman69

F twitter. And yes cci bytes would make me switch providers.

Looking down a few tweets on his page, the FiOS guy has no clue about cci bytes.

@mikegama CCI is set by the programmer - we set how that it is passed to devices like cablecards about 22 hours ago via HTC Peep in reply to mikegama



BS!!!


----------



## cwerdna

sgip2000 said:


> I'm in Hillsboro and I have not seen this problem yet.
> 
> What would be a good channel to do a test on?


See http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7998524#post7998524 for a list of a some more channels to test along w/the method.


----------



## cwerdna

rifleman69 said:


> F twitter. And yes cci bytes would make me switch providers.
> 
> Looking down a few tweets on his page, the FiOS guy has no clue about cci bytes.
> 
> @mikegama CCI is set by the programmer - we set how that it is passed to devices like cablecards about 22 hours ago via HTC Peep in reply to mikegama
> 
> BS!!!


Not surprised... I'll chime in on Twitter when I have some more time.


----------



## richsadams

rifleman69 said:


> Got a response from Greg Lang at the MACC today <snip>


I received the same email today as well.  At least we tried.

FWIW I went back to VZ and re-negotiated my service. I mentioned Comcast multiple times and finally got a $40/mo. discount plus the Movie Package (Showtime, Starz, etc.) free for one year plus HBO/Cinemax free for three months. No contract, quit when I want. BTW the VZ CSR was very nice and actually understood what CP was...and why I was not a happy camper. She said that she'd be a Frontier employee July 1st and hoped things would get better. I hope they do too...for all of our sake's.

So I'll ride this Frontier thing out for a while and see how it goes. Honestly I'm very curious to see what they do with copy protection if anything. I think this is going to be a real learning curve for them.


----------



## E94Allen

I have read all the posts in threads releated to copy protection etc and I am not in FiOS area andI just like to read the threads.

It has occured to me there might be better questions to ask like "Why is my cablecard has been bounded and why it has been changed, why now?" etc... instead of asking why TiVo MRV has been changed/blocked or explaining what is 0x00 and 0x02 to them.


----------



## richsadams

E94Allen said:


> I have read all the posts in threads releated to copy protection etc and I am not in FiOS area andI just like to read the threads.
> 
> It has occured to me there might be better questions to ask like "Why is my cablecard has been bounded and why it has been changed, why now?" etc... instead of asking why TiVo MRV has been changed/blocked or explaining what is 0x00 and 0x02 to them.


At least a few of us have gone down that path...why now, why just in the Frontier states and all. The stock VZ answer is either "We don't know" (most common) or "Because we can"...paraphrased, but essentially that's it.

Bottom line is generally that they don't know much about it and really don't have any way to address it at any level we, the Great Unwashed, can get to in any case. In 48 hours it'll be Frontier's problem and VZ will move on.


----------



## cwerdna

E94Allen said:


> It has occured to me there might be better questions to ask like "Why is my cablecard has been bounded and why it has been changed, why now?" etc... instead of asking why TiVo MRV has been changed/blocked or explaining what is 0x00 and 0x02 to them.


As Rich stated, we have. I don't care about the MRV issue/limitation since I don't have another active TiVo at home. I _do_ care about archiving some of my shows and now I'm blocked from transferring most future shows due to this stupid CCI byte value change.

I have asked, over and over via phone and email. VZ/Frontier is worthless in their responses. From my dealings w/them (+ those of others): they don't know, they don't understand the issue, give illogical answers, give conflicting answers, point fingers (at TiVo and content providers), have no explanation as to why things were wide open prior to 6/7/10 and not now, why the non-Frontier areas still are wide open, why some (non-broadcast) channels are left open while others are protected, etc.

Bottom line: they suck and they don't know what they're doing and/or they don't know how to properly communicate changes and their motivations to their customers.

Thus, we've tried other means of trying to reach the powers that be: Current TV, HDNet, franchise authorities, TiVo, etc.

I would be less upset and be directing my anger towards the content providers if they were the ones flagging them w/these un-consumer friendly CCI values (and this were being done across _all_ cable providers), but this doesn't at all appear to be the case.


----------



## m_jonis

Seems to me the question is: Why are they doing this?
The answer, unfortunately: Because they can.

I see only two reasons (okay, three if you count my reason above):
1) To deliberately disadvantage "other" party DVR (ie, Tivo)
2) Caving into cable labs or some other entity nonsense


----------



## bdraw

It more than likely has nothing to do with a competitive advantage, CableCARD users are not even 1&#37; of the cable TV market. 

It is because the content owners are scared that shows will be redistributed over the internet and believe it is necessary to lock down content in any way that they can. They ignore the fact that the content is available online within an hour of the broadcast anyways.

And it has always been rumored that FiOS would start setting the CCI byte as well as a rumor that FiOS would start pairing the card to the host device.


----------



## richsadams

m_jonis said:


> Seems to me the question is: Why are they doing this?
> The answer, unfortunately: Because they can.
> 
> I see only two reasons (okay, three if you count my reason above):
> 1) To deliberately disadvantage "other" party DVR (ie, Tivo)
> 2) Caving into cable labs or some other entity nonsense


Agreed to #1, but I doubt it has anything to do with #2. The fact that this is being implemented now smells something fierce IMO.

To gain approval from local and state authorities for the sale of VZ's assets and customer base to Frontier both companies made repeated statements that "nothing would change" with respect to the services Verizon customers were receiving. Now, in the eleventh hour, a serious change has been made which is clearly not in the best interest of their customers. It is predatory and flies in the face of, if not the actual law, the spirit of the FCC's requirements for cable companies to support cable card equipment.

Whether TiVo can or can't do something is really irrelevant IMO. The bottom line is that neither company has abided by their commitment to the governing agencies or their current and/ or future customers by making this change and they should be held accountable. I seriously doubt that will happen and they will have gotten away with it.


----------



## rifleman69

richsadams said:


> Agreed to #1, but I doubt it has anything to do with #2. The fact that this is being implemented now smells something fierce IMO.
> 
> To gain approval from local and state authorities for the sale of VZ's assets and customer base to Frontier both companies made repeated statements that "nothing would change" with respect to the services Verizon customers were receiving. Now, in the eleventh hour, a serious change has been made which is clearly not in the best interest of their customers. It is predatory and flies in the face of, if not the actual law, the spirit of the FCC's requirements for cable companies to support cable card equipment.
> 
> Whether TiVo can or can't do something is really irrelevant IMO. The bottom line is that neither company has abided by their commitment to the governing agencies or their current and/ or future customers by making this change and they should be held accountable. I seriously doubt that will happen and they will have gotten away with it.


Well according to Verizon, the implementation of the CC byte flags was already going to be scheduled BEFORE the talk about Frontier buying us out...which would be quite a few months ago. So even that's a load of crap.


----------



## sgip2000

rifleman69 said:


> Any ESPN channel BESIDES ESPNU. Not sure if the SD only ESPNClassic is set this way or not as I haven't checked that one out. DiscoveryHD, any HBO or Cinemax channel.
> 
> That's a good start.


It looks like I have even bigger problems.

I checked some of those channels and a couple of them say that it's not even subscribed.


----------



## cwerdna

sgip2000 said:


> It looks like I have even bigger problems.
> 
> I checked some of those channels and a couple of them say that it's not even subscribed.


Try rebooting your TiVo and your ONT (for good measure) before calling for help. I've had 3 recent instances of many (most? all?) of my subscribed channels (channel 100 and up) being blank that's been resolved by a reboot.

If you're getting a screen on most channels where it says "This screen is being displayed on behalf of your..." w/the 888 number which corresponds to VZ's support line, then you're hitting the outage we hit on 6/7 at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7976518#post7976518.

The latter seems unlikely as I think you'd have noticed most of your channels >100 being out, by now.

BTW, you can use TiVo Desktop or kmttg to look for protected recordings that should've appeared on many channels beginning ~6/7 and confirm that nothing (or virtually nothing) recorded from FiOS was protected prior to that.


----------



## MPSAN

Well, I got the $40 off per Month as some of you know in my PM.  Although it is a PITA, I figure for the $40 off for a year, VZ/Frontier is buying me 2 1TB drives for my two remaining stock THD's. My other one already had a 1 TB drive and that is where I recorded shows that would no longer fit on the other two. So, when I put 1 TB drives in the other two I will record shows that I am not sure which room I am going to watch them on on BOTH THD's. So, I can watch where I want. Hey, VZ, put that in your smoke and pipe it! Anyway, they will be paying for my 2 new drives in 3 months of savings. Nice plan VZ!


----------



## nrnoble

Originally Posted by wmcbrine said:


> Originally Posted by orangeboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm curious how that even works. Aren't those providers constrained to the same CCI byte restrictions imposed? Or are those solutions stream based? :
> 
> 
> 
> I've said it before, I'll say it again: It's really not about streaming vs. copying. The CCI system is imposed by the cable companies._* They can thus freely exempt themselves.*_ :
Click to expand...

Can someone confirm this is true? A cable company can lock down their system to exclude other devices (ie TiVos) from having specific functionality (recording\copying\streaming\etc), then allow their own devices to support what has been excluded? Seems like that would violate some anti-trust laws, but I'm no expert on such matters.


----------



## vurbano

1. whats a good HD media extender/streamer from an HTPC with a 4 tuner centon card?
2. How easy is it to unlock recordings for archiving to BD done with an HTPC and win7?
3. Has anyone hacked a moxi yet?

i dont plan on dumping FIOS over this. In reality they are just doing what everyone else has already done.


----------



## richsadams

nrnoble said:


> Can someone confirm this is true? A cable company can lock down their system to exclude other devices (ie TiVos) from having specific functionality (recording\copying\streaming\etc), then allow their own devices to support what has been excluded? Seems like that would violate some anti-trust laws, but I'm no expert on such matters.


It's somewhat apples and oranges. Just as with TiVo (now) you can't have MRV between two or more of Verizon's DVRs. You can only stream from one VZ DVR to a VZ set top box (non-DVR). TiVo requires a copy of a recording to be made from one TiVo to the other TiVo for MRV (TiVo has no streaming capabilities). The ability to copy a recording from one TiVo to another, or to a computer, is what the new copy protection prevents.


----------



## rifleman69

sgip2000 said:


> It looks like I have even bigger problems.
> 
> I checked some of those channels and a couple of them say that it's not even subscribed.


You may be suffering from the initial outage. Or did you originally sign up with FiOS and the Premiere Package when it first came out, and then never called in to upgrade to ExtremeHD (free upgrade at the time)? There are people like that around (parents for one) and they don't get a few of those channels because those channels were added later to the ExtremeHD package.


----------



## turbobozz

vurbano said:


> 1. whats a good HD media extender/streamer from an HTPC with a 4 tuner centon card?


The obvious answer is an Xbox 360... I don't even know if any other MC extenders are even made anymore.


----------



## innocentfreak

vurbano said:


> 1. whats a good HD media extender/streamer from an HTPC with a 4 tuner centon card?
> 2. How easy is it to unlock recordings for archiving to BD done with an HTPC and win7?
> 3. Has anyone hacked a moxi yet?
> 
> i dont plan on dumping FIOS over this. In reality they are just doing what everyone else has already done.


First it is ceton not centon  . The only extender right now is the 360 but right now is a great time to buy with the various deals on the arcade unit. Of course we may see new extenders come cedia or ces in the next 6 months.

There is no hack to archive media center recordings with the flag. You can though add another hard drive and just tell media center to record to the new drive so you have somewhat unlimited space.


----------



## mgama

cwerdna said:


> Not surprised... I'll chime in on Twitter when I have some more time.


Thanks all for commenting and replying to FiosTV on Twitter. I'm the MikeGama that originally posted there. Last day as a Verizon customer... It was great until 3 weeks ago...


----------



## rifleman69

mgama said:


> Thanks all for commenting and replying to FiosTV on Twitter. I'm the MikeGama that originally posted there. Last day as a Verizon customer... It was great until 3 weeks ago...


FiosTV on twitter doesn't know squat. Just a paid buffoon to throw stuff at. You did a good job putting him in his place.

*edit* @Tigerboy069 CCI is set by the programmer not by us

WHAT A F'N IDIOT!!!!!!! Showtime doesn't care? ESPN cares about all channels except ESPNU? How does this guy have a job?


----------



## JimboG

turbobozz said:


> The obvious answer is an Xbox 360... I don't even know if any other MC extenders are even made anymore.


The new Xbox 360 slim runs cooler and far quieter than the earlier models.

I have an Xbox 360 Elite with a Jasper chip that sounds quite loud during quiet scenes in a movie. I really like the 360, but I don't like the noise.:down:


----------



## cwerdna

mgama said:


> Thanks all for commenting and replying to FiosTV on Twitter. I'm the MikeGama that originally posted there. Last day as a Verizon customer... It was great until 3 weeks ago...


I just finally got around to it this morning. 


rifleman69 said:


> FiosTV on twitter doesn't know squat. Just a paid buffoon to throw stuff at. You did a good job putting him in his place.
> 
> *edit* @Tigerboy069 CCI is set by the programmer not by us
> 
> WHAT A F'N IDIOT!!!!!!! Showtime doesn't care? ESPN cares about all channels except ESPNU? How does this guy have a job?


I've seen his replies. What a frickin moron!

Sigh... What is wrong w/customer facing people in VZ FiOS-land anyway? They don't know what they're talking about, don't understand the issue, give wrong and illogical answers, point fingers, don't give reasons, etc.


----------



## vurbano

turbobozz said:


> The obvious answer is an Xbox 360... I don't even know if any other MC extenders are even made anymore.


yeah I was sure of Xbox360, its a little pricey and I have no intention of playing games on it in my bedroom..


----------



## sgip2000

rifleman69 said:


> You may be suffering from the initial outage. Or did you originally sign up with FiOS and the Premiere Package when it first came out, and then never called in to upgrade to ExtremeHD (free upgrade at the time)? There are people like that around (parents for one) and they don't get a few of those channels because those channels were added later to the ExtremeHD package.


So I have the "Extreme HD" package from January. Those channels come in on one TV but not the other.

They obviously screwed something up and either don't want to fix it or don't know how.


----------



## mgama

FiOSTV on twitter: *we are writing a blog post that explains what you are seeing - apologize for the issues you are having *

Ok. Can anyone guess who they are going to point their fingers at? 
-- TiVO
-- Content providers (HDNET, Current TV, etc.)
-- Verizon

<sarcasm> Naaa. They wouldn't point their fingers... instead they will just fix their mistake. </sarcasm>


----------



## rifleman69

After tonight, they'll issue a statement. They're waiting until the 1st so that it's out of their hands.


----------



## steve614

Yeah, I'd bet that it will sound eerily familiar to the e-mail TWC customers got when they queried about copy protection.


----------



## innocentfreak

vurbano said:


> yeah I was sure of Xbox360, its a little pricey and I have no intention of playing games on it in my bedroom..


It is about the same price right now that an extender would run.
You can get the 360 Arcade for $149 with a $30 gift card at Best Buy. An extender would easily run you $100 and if anything would be more based off previous extender pricing.

The way Media Center works I doubt you will see a $50 extender unless they just support playback of WTV files and you don't get the Media Center UI or a very basic version of it.


----------



## vurbano

innocentfreak said:


> It is about the same price right now that an extender would run.
> You can get the 360 Arcade for $149 with a $30 gift card at Best Buy. An extender would easily run you $100 and if anything would be more based off previous extender pricing.
> 
> The way Media Center works I doubt you will see a $50 extender unless they just support playback of WTV files and you don't get the Media Center UI or a very basic version of it.


OK because I am new at this and an HTPC neophyte... If I have a 4 tuner ceton card in my HTPC and wired to ethernet. I can use xbox360's in other roomswired to ethernet network to access live TV on the HTPC or recordings and stream them EVEN IF the FIOS CP flag is On? This basically gives me what I can do with a moxi setup?


----------



## innocentfreak

vurbano said:


> OK because I am new at this and an HTPC neophyte... If I have a 4 tuner ceton card in my HTPC and wired to ethernet. I can use xbox360's in other roomswired to ethernet network to access live TV on the HTPC or recordings and stream them EVEN IF the FIOS CP flag is On? This basically gives me what I can do with a moxi setup?


Correct. Tivo doesn't work on flagged content since it tries to copy the content. Moxi and Media Center both stream the recordings.


----------



## cwerdna

From FiOSTV Twitter account:


> @cwerdna Post is going to say what that email in ur link said and it says we are doing it because we have to - required by content providers


----------



## rifleman69

Ask them about ESPN not caring about ESPNU, or Showtime itself. They'll duck the answer.


----------



## cwerdna

rifleman69 said:


> Ask them about ESPN not caring about ESPNU, or Showtime itself. They'll duck the answer.


Feel free to chime in on Twitter. FiOSTV's further responses seem equally useless.

At least the response I got from humans at HDNet seemed to indicate they were interested in resolving this and were going to contact their Verizon rep. If HDNet told me "oh! We want it set to 0x02" then, my beef would be w/HDNet and not VZ. They did NOT say that.

I can't speak to Showtime since I don't subscribe to it. As for ESPNU, I can't check right now on protection status, but I could care less about ESPN. I wouldn't miss it if it got removed from my lineup nor would I notice.


----------



## rifleman69

cwerdna said:


> Feel free to chime in on Twitter. FiOSTV's further responses seem equally useless.
> 
> At least the response I got from humans at HDNet seemed to indicate they were interested in resolving this and were going to contact their Verizon rep. If HDNet told me "oh! We want it set to 0x02" then, my beef would be w/HDNet and not VZ. They did NOT say that.
> 
> I can't speak to Showtime since I don't subscribe to it. As for ESPNU, I can't check right now on protection status, but I could care less about ESPN. I wouldn't miss it if it got removed from my lineup nor would I notice.


I've not used twitter up until now and I'm not about to start.


----------



## cwerdna

rifleman69 said:


> I've not used twitter up until now and I'm not about to start.


There's little harm in getting an account and posting response to FiOSTV then never using it again.

I personally don't care much about Twitter and hardly use it. I only joined to enter drawings (giveaways) at CES as that was the only means of entering some of them.


----------



## mgama

cwerdna said:


> I personally don't care much about Twitter and hardly use it.


I have trouble following Twitter... I just don't get it. It seems like so much work to see what FiosTV said, and to what they were replying. Wish there was some way to view the back and forth dialog in a single threaded queue of messages.


----------



## MPSAN

rifleman69 said:


> I've not used twitter up until now and I'm not about to start.


+1

Although, if I had a twitter account I could have told a whole lot of people who did not care that I just got back from Fry's with 2 WD10EARS...I wonder what I can do with them? !


----------



## richsadams

sgip2000 said:


> So I have the "Extreme HD" package from January. Those channels come in on one TV but not the other.
> 
> They obviously screwed something up and either don't want to fix it or don't know how.


We have the same HD Extreme sub w/Verizon. The same thing happened to a lot of us. You'll need to call Verizon and have them "re-initiate" your cable cards. You'll need to go into the cable card stats menu screen and copy down all of the numbers including the serial number, host ID, etc. They will need at least three of those numbers. Note, tell them that the hyphens have to be entered if they don't know that already. This will bind your cable card(s) to your TiVo. They will restart everything on their end and in a short time all of the stations you are supposed to get will be available...unfortunately with the non-sensical copy protection on some channels.


----------



## cwerdna

I ended up posting a slightly edited version of my email at http://getsatisfaction.com/currentc...n_current_tv_applied_by_verizon_frontier_fios since I got this when trying to mail [email protected] 


> Sorry to hear you're having trouble! We're in the process of switching our support over to Get Satisfaction, so if you've run into a problem or just have a question you'd like to ask, please head over to our Get Satisfaction page and leave us a comment: http://getsatisfaction.com/currentcom


and heard nothing back when I forwarded my mail to [email protected].

If you're facing this crap CP, perhaps click on "I have this problem, too!" on the above page? Hopefully a human at Current TV will do something.


----------



## sgip2000

richsadams said:


> We have the same HD Extreme sub w/Verizon. The same thing happened to a lot of us. You'll need to call Verizon and have them "re-initiate" your cable cards. You'll need to go into the cable card stats menu screen and copy down all of the numbers including the serial number, host ID, etc. They will need at least three of those numbers. Note, tell them that the hyphens have to be entered if they don't know that already. This will bind your cable card(s) to your TiVo. They will restart everything on their end and in a short time all of the stations you are supposed to get will be available...unfortunately with the non-sensical copy protection on some channels.


Sadly, this may just cause me to go back to Comcast.


----------



## fatlard

vurbano said:


> 3. Has anyone hacked a moxi yet?


There has been two hacks done on the Moxi.

One is to use any type of SATA drive as an external drive.

The second is to upgrade the internal drive space to the largest available SATA drive in the market (2TB).


----------



## thomb

cwerdna said:


> I ended up posting a slightly edited version of my email at http://getsatisfaction.com/currentc...n_current_tv_applied_by_verizon_frontier_fios
> <snip>
> 
> If you're facing this crap CP, perhaps click on "I have this problem, too!" on the above page? Hopefully a human at Current TV will do something.


Done. :up:


----------



## cwerdna

Ok. Now a bunch of us FiOS customers are in Frontier-land. Now what? Who do we take up battle with now? Do we call the same 888/800 numbers again and re-explain the story? Where can we post now?

My Verizon forums credentials stopped working (either due to the switch or because they intentionally deleted my account) so I can't even reply to http://forums.verizon.com/t5/FiOS-T...ivo-and-multi-room-viewing/td-p/209670/page/2 w/o a new account.

Is it pointless for us Frontier folks to engage w/VZ and FiOSTV on Twitter now?

Will they turn a deaf ear and/or give us the same runaround as VZ has?


----------



## mgama

FiosTV on twitter: @cwerdna are you in WA? 

lol *sigh* We all know what the next words out of FiosTV's mouth are going to be...


----------



## cwerdna

mgama said:


> FiosTV on twitter: @cwerdna are you in WA?
> 
> lol *sigh* We all know what the next words out of FiosTV's mouth are going to be...


Yep... more finger pointing, I'd bet. I'd guess he'd now point us at Frontier and all the other runaround crap was just to stall for time.

I've added WA state to my Twitter location now. Never bothered before...


----------



## MichaelK

MPSAN said:


> I did not know, but TIVO would be advised to think of something. Perhaps they could transfer the show if they removed it from the THD they were MRVing from after the copy..


the cablelabs license agreement specifically says that is permitted. Tivo just hasn't bothered to implement such a system after all these years.

cable/fios is evil for playing games with the byte. 
Tivo is moronic for not doing anything about it (implementing the solution you suiggest above or streaming) after all these years to protect THEIR customers.


----------



## MichaelK

bdraw said:


> It more than likely has nothing to do with a competitive advantage, CableCARD users are not even 1% of the cable TV market.
> 
> It is because the content owners are scared that shows will be redistributed over the internet and believe it is necessary to lock down content in any way that they can. They ignore the fact that the content is available online within an hour of the broadcast anyways.
> 
> And it has always been rumored that FiOS would start setting the CCI byte as well as a rumor that FiOS would start pairing the card to the host device.


I believe that is COMPLETELY FALSE. HBO et al could add the CCI byte at THEIR OWN uplink and it would propagate down to every head end in the world.

In fact- never mind the digital flag of just CCI 0x02- they could start armageddon and flag BOTH digital and analog copies with a different CCI byte (too lazy to look up the chart at the moment). The CCI byte can also add macrovision to the analog outputs.

Its NOT the content owners- plan and simple. Or they are collectively the biggest morons in the world and leaving it up to scores of companies, hundreds of engineers, and thousands of head ends to do it right- When all they need to do is flip one bit on their end and blanket the world.

there's a lot of stupid people in the world- but there's not enough idiotic mistakes to account for all the flagging that is going on by the various CABLE COMPANIES- they have a plan. Question is what does cable gain by using the flag- that's the 64k question.


----------



## MichaelK

nrnoble said:


> Can someone confirm this is true? A cable company can lock down their system to exclude other devices (ie TiVos) from having specific functionality (recording\copying\streaming\etc), then allow their own devices to support what has been excluded? Seems like that would violate some anti-trust laws, but I'm no expert on such matters.


you can freely look up the cablelabs list of approved cablecard devices. Last i heard not a single cable company leases box was on the list. They dont even bother to get their stuff approved. If it doesn't need to get approved theres no way to be sure if they are or aren't playing by the rules.

If it is true that cable is not submitting their own boxes for approval then it does seem to fly in the face of the shared reliance that the FCC wanted by forcing cablecards.

_edit: link : http://www.cablelabs.com/opencable/udcp/downloads/OC_PNP.pdf ONE moto device- nothing from cisco or scientific atlanta cable leases boxes dont get tested so who knows if they bother respecting the CCI flags or not._


----------



## MPSAN

cwerdna said:


> Ok. Now a bunch of us FiOS customers are in Frontier-land. Now what? Who do we take up battle with now? Do we call the same 888/800 numbers again and re-explain the story? Where can we post now?
> 
> My Verizon forums credentials stopped working (either due to the switch or because they intentionally deleted my account) so I can't even reply to http://forums.verizon.com/t5/FiOS-T...ivo-and-multi-room-viewing/td-p/209670/page/2 w/o a new account.
> 
> Is it pointless for us Frontier folks to engage w/VZ and FiOSTV on Twitter now?
> 
> Will they turn a deaf ear and/or give us the same runaround as VZ has?


Well, we had a Welcome ad in our morning paper from Frontier. They said they wanted feedback and gave a phone number of 1-877-462-8188. I think it is great that someone in your area posted (not sure where...maybe on this forum) that they sent email to HDNET and they said that they most definitely did not tell Verizon to add copy flags, and, in fact do not want them. They emailed this person that they were going to call Verizon.


----------



## richsadams

Maybe it's a coincidence but sometime today someone spray painted the location of all of the buried FiOS cables from the street into our side yard...up to our house. Those little orange Verizon FiOS flags are stuck in the ground at various painted points.  

There's nothing else marked (water, gas, etc.) and we haven't ordered any work done...nor has our next-door neighbor. Maybe they've seen my posts!


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> Maybe it's a coincidence but sometime today someone spray painted the location of all of the buried FiOS cables from the street into our side yard...up to our house. Those little orange Verizon FiOS flags are stuck in the ground at various painted points.
> 
> There's nothing else marked (water, gas, etc.) and we haven't ordered any work done...nor has our next-door neighbor. Maybe they've seen my posts!


I think they were sent out by TIVO! TIVO called them and said to disconnect you.


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> I think they were sent out by TIVO! TIVO called them and said to disconnect you.


----------



## steve614

I think it's part of the handover.
VZ people mark their lines so that the Frontier people can come in and map them.


----------



## richsadams

steve614 said:


> I think it's part of the handover.
> VZ people mark their lines so that the Frontier people can come in and map them.


I thought so too...but I had a look around and I didn't see anyone else's yards marked and I'm pretty sure several have FiOS.


----------



## orangeboy

Kind of related:
My parents in Indiana had Verizon as their local telephone provider. Today, after being transferred to Frontier, one of their phone rings (the rest remain silent), but doesn't answer. They can pick up on the second ring, but the person calling continues to hear the phone ringing. They are not able to make outgoing calls at all. Using their cell phone to call Frontier/Verizon/whoever, they learned that they will not be worked on until July 6th. Fiasco with a capital F.


----------



## richsadams

orangeboy said:


> Kind of related:
> My parents in Indiana had Verizon as their local telephone provider. Today, after being transferred to Frontier, one of their phone rings (the rest remain silent), but doesn't answer. They can pick up on the second ring, but the person calling continues to hear the phone ringing. They are not able to make outgoing calls at all. Using their cell phone to call Frontier/Verizon/whoever, they learned that they will not be worked on until July 6th. Fiasco with a capital F.


No calls for five days? Possibly longer?!! Yikes!  Our phones are working here...so far, fingers crossed.


----------



## orangeboy

richsadams said:


> No calls for five days? Possibly longer?!! Yikes!  Our phones are working here...so far, fingers crossed.


What's worse is that my mother's birthday is the 4th, so all those folks that don't know to call her cell phone will be unable to well wish! :down:


----------



## cwerdna

orangeboy said:


> Kind of related:
> My parents in Indiana had Verizon as their local telephone provider. Today, after being transferred to Frontier, one of their phone rings (the rest remain silent), but doesn't answer. They can pick up on the second ring, but the person calling continues to hear the phone ringing. They are not able to make outgoing calls at all. Using their cell phone to call Frontier/Verizon/whoever, they learned that they will not be worked on until July 6th. Fiasco with a capital F.


Fortunately, I don't have POTS over copper nor FiOS, so it doesn't affect me.

That's horrible! It sounds like it's time for them to file a complaint to the local regulatory body, FCC and other applicable agencies. If the prob is more widespread, it could be a public safety issue.


----------



## MPSAN

orangeboy said:


> What's worse is that my mother's birthday is the 4th, so all those folks that don't know to call her cell phone will be unable to well wish! :down:


Well...since it is a phone issue and NOT TV, then they HAVE to fix it VERY soon. Try to contact your PUC about this. I KNOW that phones must be kept working!


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

MPSAN said:


> Well...since it is a phone issue and NOT TV, then they HAVE to fix it VERY soon. Try to contact your PUC about this. I KNOW that phones must be kept working!


Ha ha. Yeah, they *have* to fix it! I'm sure the ex-Verizon customers who were dumped off on FairPoint Communications a few years ago felt the same way. And then, things like this started to happen:

_Many other problems have plagued the New England subscribers of FairPoint's services, including thousands of serious and recurring billing errors, very poor customer service, lack of (and delay of) an electronic bill-pay option, slow or intermittent services, and sluggish and inadequate response to customer complaints and service issues._​
And then FairPoint filed Chapter 11. Oh joy! Of course, both Verizon and Frontier have assured everyone that this won't happen to us.


----------



## BobCamp1

MichaelK said:


> Question is what does cable gain by using the flag- that's the 64k question.


That's simple. It's called "CYA". They're protecting themselves from getting sued later. They set the flags for the same reason Tivo would honor them even if they weren't required to by CableLabs.

It's simple. A record company gives you a pre-release CD. You put it in your friend's PC so he can listen to it. Even though you are there watching him the whole time, he secretly rips the CD using a special program. He later gives it to someone on the Internet who publicly posts it, ruining the launch of the album. Who does the record company sue? Everyone!

But the focus here is you. Even if you survive the lawsuit, you can be sure that you'll never get another pre-launch CD without paying a lot for it (if at all). And not just from that company, but from all of them. You'll be blacklisted. Life just got a lot tougher for you because even though you were careful, you weren't as careful as you could have been.

Besides, there are only five companies that own all of TV programming. If they all got together and agreed to set the flags from their end, would it make you feel any better? No, because MRV still wouldn't work on Tivos but would work on everyone else's equipment.


----------



## BobCamp1

MPSAN said:


> Well...since it is a phone issue and NOT TV, then they HAVE to fix it VERY soon. Try to contact your PUC about this. I KNOW that phones must be kept working!


If it's VoIP, they don't. According to the FCC, pure VoIP is not a phone service. All those federal laws only apply to traditional phone service. It is unknown what the FCC thinks of VoIP services that tie into regular POTS. Or whether their opinion even matters.

If it's traditional phone service over fiber, they DO have to fix that. But soon? Over a holiday weekend? Not likely.


----------



## MichaelK

BobCamp1 said:


> That's simple. It's called "CYA". They're protecting themselves from getting sued later. They set the flags for the same reason Tivo would honor them even if they weren't required to by CableLabs. ...


that's frankly IDIOTIC if that is their motivation. if you read all the bazillion threads here the flags are inconsistent as hell. If they are attempting to cover their ass but flag all but a handful of channels and then one of those channels is compromised then that channel has a beef that the cable company didn't follow their own standard of care. See the above example that showtime is apparently unflagged.

It's stupid to half way do anything. And more legally defensible to do NOTHING and say it's the content owners job.

Every head end respects any upstream cci BYTE. so there's no reason to manually set anything. (and if the head end fails to pass the byte then it's cisco or moto's fault and the cable company is still off the hook)- getting involved is stupid. period. Unless they beleive they gain something else from it to make the risk worthwhile. As you point out tivo is a drop in the bucket so it's really silly to bother just to hose tivo.



BobCamp1 said:


> Besides, there are only five companies that own all of TV programming. If they all got together and agreed to set the flags from their end, would it make you feel any better? No, because MRV still wouldn't work on Tivos but would work on everyone else's equipment .


IF I WERE AFFECTED by the flags- would it make me fell better? Frankly it would in fact make me less disgusted. If the content owners were applying it to all of their programming then I'd at least understand there was something of a legitimate concern they were trying to address. When cable half-heartedly applies the flags it's tough not to thing they are attempting to exploit an loophole in the laws and regulations to counteract the spirit of the law in regards to 3rd party devices.

Analogies always suck but It's kind of like taxes- probably most people don't mind paying their "fair share" but when they thing someone is manipulating the system unfairly it makes them annoyed. (taking out all the other feelings people have about taxes- laughing- maybe not the best analogy!)


----------



## cwerdna

I checked CP status on all my ESPNs last night. Here are my tweets:


> # @FiOSTV Please explain why all ESPNs have CP except ESPNU and ESPNUHD. ESPN told you to leave those 2 open?
> about 8 hours ago via web in reply to FiOSTV
> 
> @FiOSTV mikegama is also in WA and thus affected by this CP nonsense.
> about 9 hours ago via web in reply to FiOSTV
> 
> @FiOSTV Yes, I am in WA state. Those in OR have been affected too.
> about 21 hours ago via web in reply to FiOSTV



FiOSTV's worthless reply:


> @cwerdna at this point I cannot deliver you any resolution - my apologies that u are unhappy w/ the security measures that were put in place


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> I checked CP status on all my ESPNs last night. Here are my tweets:
> 
> FiOSTV's worthless reply:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @cwerdna at this point I cannot deliver you any resolution - my apologies that u are unhappy w/ the security measures that were put in place
Click to expand...

"Security measures"? Seriously? 

Thanks for giving it a shot...obviously FiOSTV is a Twit.


----------



## MPSAN

BobCamp1 said:


> If it's VoIP, they don't. According to the FCC, pure VoIP is not a phone service. All those federal laws only apply to traditional phone service. It is unknown what the FCC thinks of VoIP services that tie into regular POTS. Or whether their opinion even matters.
> 
> If it's traditional phone service over fiber, they DO have to fix that. But soon? Over a holiday weekend? Not likely.


Well, Verizon has said many times, to me, that they are NOT VOIP and that they would have to fix it no matter if it were a weekend or Holiday. They had rules about phone repair that were strict as compared to TV, etc. They can not tell you to wait DAYS.


----------



## rocko

MPSAN said:


> Well, Verizon has said many times, to me, that they are NOT VOIP and that they would have to fix it no matter if it were a weekend or Holiday. They had rules about phone repair that were strict as compared to TV, etc. They can not tell you to wait DAYS.


FiOS voice is not VoIP. The customer side of the ONT is POTS.


----------



## wmcbrine

Fios offers both POTS-over-fiber, and a VoIP service, "Fios Digital Voice". They are encouraging people to move to Fios Digital Voice (more features, lower price).


----------



## NotVeryWitty

wmcbrine said:


> Fios offers both POTS-over-fiber, and a VoIP service, "Fios Digital Voice". They are encouraging people to move to Fios Digital Voice (more features, lower price).


This.

I got Fios internet service 3 1/2 years ago (before they were offering TV service), and at that time the voice service was just POTS-over-fiber (not VoIP).

I upgraded from Charter to Fios TV a few months ago, and the Verizon sales rep talked me into changing my voice service over to their new (to me) "Fios Digital Voice" (which *is* VoIP). FWIW, I have noticed no change in voice quality, and I get all the same features I had before (like caller ID). The only real difference is that I save about $7.00 a month on my bill, because VoIP is taxed differently than POTS.


----------



## richsadams

wmcbrine said:


> Fios offers both POTS-over-fiber, and a VoIP service, "Fios Digital Voice". They are encouraging people to move to Fios Digital Voice (more features, lower price).


Is there an easy way to tell the difference?


----------



## wmcbrine

It should say on your bill, or on the website. Dunno, I haven't made the switch. They won't do it without asking.


----------



## richsadams

wmcbrine said:


> It should say on your bill, or on the website. Dunno, I haven't made the switch. They won't do it without asking.


I looked on my bill and all it says is:

Triple Play Includes:
- Verizon Freedom Essentials
- FiOS TV Extreme HD
- FiOS Internet 20/5

There are a couple of things noting "Voice", but no references elsewhere to "FiOS Digital Voice" or anything like that.  Guess I'll have to do some research...when I get time.


----------



## rocko

I just upgraded my package to FiOS Digital Voice - it is still POTS. There was no equipment change.


----------



## vurbano

fatlard said:


> There has been two hacks done on the Moxi.
> 
> One is to use any type of SATA drive as an external drive.
> 
> The second is to upgrade the internal drive space to the largest available SATA drive in the market (2TB).


Is there a link to that info? I am having a hard time even finding a decent forum for moxi. I have several more questions, like if a hard drive cannot be used with the moxi mate then why is there an sata port on the back of it? and will there ever be an option to make the DVR record initiating the scheduling action from the mate. I do really like that it accesses hulu.


----------



## aaronwt

vurbano said:


> Is there a link to that info? I am having a hard time even finding a decent forum for moxi. I have several more questions, like if a hard drive cannot be used with the moxi mate then why is there an sata port on the back of it? and will there ever be an option to make the DVR record initiating the scheduling action from the mate. I do really like that it accesses hulu.


There is a Moxi AVS thread with some good info. Ask your questions there and you should get some informative answers.


----------



## wmcbrine

Freedom Essentials is their POTS package.

No, FDV is not POTS. Yes, there's no equipment change on your side. But it's different on the other end of the line.


----------



## richsadams

wmcbrine said:


> Freedom Essentials is their POTS package.


Good to know. Thanks for that. :up:


----------



## vurbano

richsadams said:


> Is there an easy way to tell the difference?


well with traditional POTS service and an old phone... just cut the power to the house. The old phone still works on POTS because of the powered POTS line. I wonder what happens with my freedom essentials service? The box does have a battery backup.


----------



## aaronwt

vurbano said:


> well with traditional POTS service and an old phone... just cut the power to the house. The old phone still works on POTS because of the powered POTS line. I wonder what happens with my freedom essentials service? The box does have a battery backup.


The best thing to do is to connect the ONT Battery Backup Unit(BBU) to you own battery backup. I have mine along with my main routers and switches connected to an APC 1500XL with an extended runtime battery. So all my FiOS services will be up for 18 to 20 hours during an outage so I can continue to watch TV, use the Internet, or make phone calls while the power is out.


----------



## dresden69

wmcbrine said:


> Freedom Essentials is their POTS package.
> 
> No, FDV is not POTS. Yes, there's no equipment change on your side. But it's different on the other end of the line.


wmcbrine is correct... about a year and half ago... we started to get training on FDV... because Verizon wanted to move away from POTS. Why you might ask? Well because they can put two huge servers in Ft. Worth, TX and another in New York, NY I think... anyway... those two servers would handle all their Fios Digital Voice traffic... (My personal theory) so they then could sell their copper services in those areas.

Another personal theory was they wanted to go this route because unlike Comcast and everyother Cable Voice provider, Verizon is under the PUC's thumb because of their POTS service. With FDV, they are no longer under PUC's thumb.

Hope everyone had a great 4th, the transition went smoothly... have not heard of any outages... but we are still hosed on the copy protection.


----------



## dresden69

vurbano said:


> well with traditional POTS service and an old phone... just cut the power to the house. The old phone still works on POTS because of the powered POTS line. I wonder what happens with my freedom essentials service? The box does have a battery backup.


The Battery in the BBU will support your phone service for 4 to 6 hours. After that time, it will not be able to support voice.


----------



## MPSAN

dresden69 said:


> Hope everyone had a great 4th, the transition went smoothly... have not heard of any outages... but we are still hosed on the copy protection.


Does this mean that there is still a chance that some of the stations may come back to a flag of 0x00? No one seems to have a list at Verizon or Frontier of the stations that were supposed to have the flags.


----------



## cwerdna

cwerdna said:


> Ok. Now a bunch of us FiOS customers are in Frontier-land. Now what? Who do we take up battle with now? Do we call the same 888/800 numbers again and re-explain the story? Where can we post now?
> ...
> Is it pointless for us Frontier folks to engage w/VZ and FiOSTV on Twitter now?
> 
> Will they turn a deaf ear and/or give us the same runaround as VZ has?


Anyone have any idea on the above?


MPSAN said:


> No one seems to have a list at Verizon or Frontier of the stations that were supposed to have the flags.


Yeah, it would help if they had a list or if they could generate one based upon their settings/what customers are receiving. For all we know, there could be some incorrectly configured equipment at the head end w/default settings of 0x02 causing this random set of channels being protected.

So far, the responses (or lack of) we've been getting haven't been confidence inspiring.


----------



## vurbano

dresden69 said:


> The Battery in the BBU will support your phone service for 4 to 6 hours. After that time, it will not be able to support voice.


Unless you have another charged battery.


----------



## BobCamp1

MichaelK said:


> that's frankly IDIOTIC if that is their motivation. if you read all the bazillion threads here the flags are inconsistent as hell. If they are attempting to cover their ass but flag all but a handful of channels and then one of those channels is compromised then that channel has a beef that the cable company didn't follow their own standard of care. See the above example that showtime is apparently unflagged.
> 
> It's stupid to half way do anything.


You're confusing intent with intelligence and competence. Just because someone WANTS to do something doesn't mean they will always do it well.

The motivation of "not getting sued" is idiotic until you get sued. Then you learn to check with a lawyer before you do ANYTHING.


----------



## aaronwt

vurbano said:


> Unless you have another charged battery.


Or you have it connected to another UPS which would be the easiest way.


----------



## lrhorer

MichaelK said:


> I believe that is COMPLETELY FALSE. HBO et al could add the CCI byte at THEIR OWN uplink and it would propagate down to every head end in the world.


Nope. It's true the CATV provider can pass the byte transparently, but I imagine few do. Both technically and legally, implementation of the CCI byte is completely at the discretion of the CATV provider on any non-broadcast channel.



MichaelK said:


> In fact- never mind the digital flag of just CCI 0x02- they could start armageddon and flag BOTH digital and analog copies with a different CCI byte (too lazy to look up the chart at the moment).


'Care to explain how an analog stream is supposed to have a digital flag added to it? Or how an analog device receiving the steam would be able to make use of it?



MichaelK said:


> The CCI byte can also add macrovision to the analog outputs.


While hypothetically possible, this feature would have to be implemented 100% within the receiver - it would have nothing to do with any broadcast artifice. I know of no receiver which does this.



MichaelK said:


> Its NOT the content owners- plan and simple. Or they are collectively the biggest morons in the world and leaving it up to scores of companies, hundreds of engineers, and thousands of head ends to do it right- When all they need to do is flip one bit on their end and blanket the world.


This is just nonsense. First of all, in most cases it is not the content owners who produce the signal. In some cases, of course, it is , such as made-for-TV movies owned by the content provider which broadcasts them, or premium channel series such as HBO's Sex in the City. Most broadcasters, however, serve up other people's content, such as movies from Paramount, MGM, etc. Secondly - and more importantly - the simple fact is the content provider can set the byte any way they like, and they can request the CATV company keep their settings, but the CATV company is in no way required to comply with their wishes, and it is technically trivial to change the value.



MichaelK said:


> Question is what does cable gain by using the flag- that's the 64k question.


The answer is rather obvious.


----------



## lrhorer

BobCamp1 said:


> That's simple. It's called "CYA". They're protecting themselves from getting sued later.


'Highly unlikely this would be the reason. One cannot be successfully sued for specifically covered by black letter law in federal regulations. Federal regulations specifically state the CATV companies have absolute discretion to set the CCI byte on non-broadcast channels to any value they choose between 00 and 02. The only exception would be if the CATV company entered into a contract with the content provider agreeing to set the byte to a specific value, and then failed to do so. Then of course they could be sued for breach of contract.



BobCamp1 said:


> They set the flags for the same reason Tivo would honor them even if they weren't required to by CableLabs.


It's easy to make such a statement when there is no way it can be tested for veracity. I somewhat doubt TiVo would honor them if they were not required to do so by CableLabs. If they did, it would *NOT* be for the same reason the CATV companies are setting them. The CATV companies are setting them because they have close ties to the MPAA and its affiliates. Note Verizon does not. Note also that TW Cable refused to set the CCI byte to 00 when Mark Cuban insisted they do so, and in fact dropped his channels nationwide when he made setting the byte to 00 part of the contract requirement for continuing to provide HDNet and HDNetMovies. There's no way he could sue them for doing precisely what his own contract required them to do.



BobCamp1 said:


> It's simple. A record company gives you a pre-release CD. You put it in your friend's PC so he can listen to it. Even though you are there watching him the whole time, he secretly rips the CD using a special program. He later gives it to someone on the Internet who publicly posts it, ruining the launch of the album. Who does the record company sue? Everyone!


'Not if federal regulations specifically state in no uncertain terms that you have the absolute right to put the CD on your friend's PC and that your friend has the absolute right to post it on the internet.



BobCamp1 said:


> But the focus here is you. Even if you survive the lawsuit, you can be sure that you'll never get another pre-launch CD without paying a lot for it (if at all). And not just from that company, but from all of them. You'll be blacklisted. Life just got a lot tougher for you because even though you were careful, you weren't as careful as you could have been.


Uh-huh. So why isn't Verizon setting the CCI byte? Why aren't dozens of other CATV companies setting the CCI byte? Especially why is it that relatively smaller CATV companies with no close ties to the MPAA, and thus much more likely for two reasons to be sued by the MPAA or its members, don't set the byte?



BobCamp1 said:


> Besides, there are only five companies that own all of TV programming.


'Completely untrue, although the number is not vast. Among the owners of content regularly broadcast on CATV systems:

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting
The British Broadcasting Corporation
The National Broadcasting Company
The American Broadcasting Company
The Columbia Broadcasting System / Showtime Inc.
Sony Television
Metro Goldwyn Mayer / United Artists
20th Century Fox
Paramount Studios
Time Warner Entertainment / Warner Brothers / Home Box Office, Inc.
Time Warner Cable TV
Comcast Cable TV


----------



## lrhorer

MichaelK said:


> It's stupid to half way do anything. And more legally defensible to do NOTHING and say it's the content owners job.


Content owners do not set the byte. It is the content providers who set the byte, and in most cases the content provider is not the content owner.



MichaelK said:


> Every head end respects any upstream cci BYTE.


Did you mean to say, "Every headend *CAN* respect the upstream CCI byte?" The notion that every headend does respect it is ludicrous.



MichaelK said:


> so there's no reason to manually set anything.


Of course there is! Any time the CATV company wishes to set the DRM either differently than the content provider or else irrespective of the content provider, they have a reason to do so, and since there is nothing legally or technically preventing them from doing so... they do.



MichaelK said:


> Unless they beleive they gain something else from it to make the risk worthwhile.


What risk? They are as much perfectly within their rights to set the byte as they are to broadcast the content in the first place.



MichaelK said:


> When cable half-heartedly applies the flags it's tough not to thing they are attempting to exploit an loophole in the laws and regulations to counteract the spirit of the law in regards to 3rd party devices.


This is utterly ridiculous! What loophole? FCC Title 47 Part 76 specifically and exclusively assigns the right to set the CCI byte to any value below 03 for any non-OTA content to the CATV company, period. The content oweners can growl, squeal or rant, but the CATV company has the express right to ignore them. The content provider can set the byte to any value they like (below 03), but the CATV company has the absolute right to change it as capriciously as they choose, excepting contract stipulations to the contrary.


----------



## Stormspace

lrhorer said:


> FCC Title 47 Part 76 specifically and exclusively assigns the right to set the CCI byte to any value below 03 for any non-OTA content to the CATV company, period. The content oweners can growl, squeal or rant, but the CATV company has the express right to ignore them. The content provider can set the byte to any value they like (below 03), but the CATV company has the absolute right to change it as capriciously as they choose, excepting contract stipulations to the contrary.


Interesting that when confronted with a content owner requesting a certain value, instead of honoring that request they remove it entirely from their line up. Kinda makes the whole content owners wishes thing moot. It's bad regulation plain and simple and needs to be changed. At the very least, content providers should be forced to honor the content owners wishes.


----------



## Stormspace

Maybe we should be getting one of these?


----------



## aaronwt

Stormspace said:


> Maybe we should be getting one of these?


Why? You can still run into issues when trying to burn to disc. Depending on the content, it won't let you burn it to disc, even when using the analog input.


----------



## orangeboy

Just got a call from my dad. Their copper line POTS (no fiber where they live) is working again. The problem was fixed before 4:30 PM, even though they were told it wouldn't be looked at until 8:30 PM, so at least that's something!


----------



## mgama

Back on topic, has anyone seen additional channels get the CP flag since it first happened?


----------



## richsadams

mgama said:


> Back on topic, has anyone seen additional channels get the CP flag since it first happened?


AFAIK nothing new here...but I only looked at some of the channels that I use which didn't have CP prior and they are still 0x00.


----------



## lrhorer

Stormspace said:


> Interesting that when confronted with a content owner requesting a certain value, instead of honoring that request they remove it entirely from their line up.


To be completely fair, I do not know for certain there may have been other considerations, as well, including possibly the price he wanted to obtain for the services. That said, the situation is at best fishy, at worst blatantly anti-consumer.



Stormspace said:


> Kinda makes the whole content owners wishes thing moot.


Well, again, it is the content provider's wishes, not the owner's which are in question. The owners don't have a say in any case. Well, hypothetically. In the case of Time Warner, the owner and the CATV provider are only putatively different. TW Cable is a publicly traded company, but believe me, Time Warner Inc still has their hands deep in TWC's loincloth.



Stormspace said:


> It's bad regulation plain and simple and needs to be changed. At the very least, content providers should be forced to honor the content owners wishes.


I think you mean the CATV provider. Of course, in some cases one entity is all three, although usually at least the content provider and the CATV provider are different.


----------



## BobCamp1

lrhorer said:


> The CATV companies are setting them because they have close ties to the MPAA and its affiliates. Note Verizon does not.


I think you and I are basically on the same page here. Except Verizon DOES have ties to the MPAA and affiliates, or else they couldn't offer all those VOD movies and TV shows. If Verizon didn't offer that, they couldn't be competitive. If Verizon or TWC don't comply, they'll either get sued or get punished by their parent company.

Also, you can get sued even if the other person's case is weak. You still have to hire lawyers and you still fret over it, so it still does cost you time and money. And blacklisting doesn't involve any lawyers.

The small cable companies haven't set the flags yet because they haven't been asked to yet and simply haven't bothered. They're flying under the radar. But they see what's happening to the bigger companies and know it's only a matter of time.

I'm also modifying your list (off the top of my head, I could be wrong):

1. News Corporation (includes all "Fox")

2. Disney (not just the American Broadcasting Company  )

3. The Columbia Broadcasting System / Showtime Inc.

4. GE / The National Broadcasting Company / Comcast - did you forget about the proposed merger? (Comcast is next with CCI flags).

5. Time Warner Entertainment / Warner Brothers / Home Box Office, Inc./ Time Warner Cable TV

6. Viacom (Paramount Studios)

x. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting - this is a conglomeration, not a company. Besides, it's just 1 local station whose absence wouldn't be felt.

7. BBC Worldwide - owns 2 U.S. stations

That makes six major players and one very minor player. So I was off by one. So sue me. 

The other two you mentioned do not do TV (AFAIK) except for VOD, and the CCI flags for that are already set as stringent as possible: Sony Television, Metro Goldwyn Mayer / United Artists

(Note: I found this link AFTER I made that list, and have to go back to work, so here it is for your enjoyment: http://www.cjr.org/resources/index.php )

This whole thing is too bad, because I have TWC or FIOS avialable, and the bottom line for me is that Tivo's don't have MRV (or TTG) while everyone else does.


----------



## MichaelK

BobCamp1 said:


> You're confusing intent with intelligence and competence. Just because someone WANTS to do something doesn't mean they will always do it well.
> 
> The motivation of "not getting sued" is idiotic until you get sued. Then you learn to check with a lawyer before you do ANYTHING.


totally agreed on the first point. 

Trust me I'm ALL ABOUT 'not getting sued' - I just think by futzing with the settings they are more likely to get sued as they have taking an action one way or another and decided to inject themselves into the equation. Nothing requires them to set any bits at all. NOTHING. No law. No regulation. Seems likely no contract (or they are violating contracts left and right). No court rulings. No standard of care. Not a single thing.

I heard a story (I say story because i have no idea if true) once- which may be a complete load of bunk- but someone told me the electric companies dont insulate their larger transmission lines specifically so they dont get sued. If they dont insulate them and everyone knows touching them will kill you then you just dont touch them. But if they insulated them then people would expect them to be insulated and would perhaps touch them. Then if their were faults in the insulation the power company would be liable. Again no idea if it's true or not- but futzing with CCI bits is like trying to insulate wires. If you do it then you better do it correctly because you are now taking responsibility for the issue.


----------



## MichaelK

lrhorer said:


> Nope. It's true the CATV provider can pass the byte transparently, but I imagine few do. Both technically and legally, implementation of the CCI byte is completely at the discretion of the CATV provider on any non-broadcast channel.
> 
> 'Care to explain how an analog stream is supposed to have a digital flag added to it? Or how an analog device receiving the steam would be able to make use of it?
> 
> While hypothetically possible, this feature would have to be implemented 100% within the receiver - it would have nothing to do with any broadcast artifice. I know of no receiver which does this.
> 
> This is just nonsense. First of all, in most cases it is not the content owners who produce the signal. In some cases, of course, it is , such as made-for-TV movies owned by the content provider which broadcasts them, or premium channel series such as HBO's Sex in the City. Most broadcasters, however, serve up other people's content, such as movies from Paramount, MGM, etc. Secondly - and more importantly - the simple fact is the content provider can set the byte any way they like, and they can request the CATV company keep their settings, but the CATV company is in no way required to comply with their wishes, and it is technically trivial to change the value.
> 
> The answer is rather obvious.


I'm totally shocked you are so clueless. I thought you worked in the industry? Every single cablecard receiver (from 3rd parties at least- it's unclear to me if moto and cisco have to follow any of the rules when they built boxes) can and will add the macrovision flag to ITS analog outputs if the CCI byte is such on a DIGITAL channel the cabelcard box decodes. it's required by the dfast license that one needs to abide by to get cablecard certified.

see
http://www.cablelabs.com/opencable/udcp/downloads/DFAST_Tech_License.pdf

6.1.1 are the digital copy control bit definitions
6.1.2 is the analog output protection bit definitions
6.1.3 is image constraint bit definition (I believe this used to be called the "downrez" bits)
6.1.4 is redistribution control bit (no idea what that is...)

they can mix and match the various bits to create different CCI Bytes. One needs to know how to convert binary to hex to know what bits creat why hex CCI values we see on the device. (sorry I need to use an online calculator)

Also- for years now it's apparently been standard for all moto head end software to automatically pass the CCI bytes from upstream. It only makes sense. And I would imagine that cisco does the same.

Sorry about poor terminology on my part about 'content owners'. Point is if HBO (whatever they are) wanted the stupid frigging flag set they would be idiotic to bother doing it contractually and then hope that hundreds or thousands of people and pieces of head end equipment do what they want. If HBO wanted the flag then HBO could inject it ONCE at their uplink and it seems likely every last headend would pass the flag along on it's own without user intervention.


----------



## MichaelK

lrhorer said:


> ...
> 
> Did you mean to say, "Every headend *CAN* respect the upstream CCI byte?" The notion that every headend does respect it is ludicrous.
> ...
> 
> This is utterly ridiculous! What loophole? FCC Title 47 Part 76 specifically and exclusively assigns the right to set the CCI byte to any value below 03 for any non-OTA content to the CATV company, period. The content oweners can growl, squeal or rant, but the CATV company has the express right to ignore them. The content provider can set the byte to any value they like (below 03), but the CATV company has the absolute right to change it as capriciously as they choose, excepting contract stipulations to the contrary.


No I meant to say every head will respect the upstream byte as programmed by the manufacturer. That is my understanding as posted here some years ago by an actual real life head end engineer who touches the things. So until someone who knows shows me otherwise I take that to be the current state. If you have proof or real world experience otherwise please share it.

from dictionary.com
Loophole = a means of escape or evasion; a means or opportunity of evading a rule, law, etc.: There are a number of loopholes in the tax laws whereby corporations can save money.

It appears to me that the flag is currently being use as a way to evade the intent of the law and the enabling rules which require the support of 3rd party boxes. See the definition- just because it's legal doesn't mean it's not a loophole. Ask a tax accountant or a lawyer.


----------



## nrc

On a vaguely related note I just posted my comments to the FCC about further rulemaking on CableCARD, tuning adapters, etc as discussed in this other thread.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=450967

I made a point to mention the copy protection issue. At first I wasn't sure it was really relevant to those proceedings but on further thought decided that it clearly is on two points.

First, the FCC continues to dither about the requirement for digital interfaces on navigation devices (formerly IEEE 1394 specifically, now they're looking to open it to a number of standard interfaces). The clear intent there was to allow consumers to transfer digital data. That whole effort becomes meaningless if cable companies lock down all their content.

Second, by restricting copying the cable company will have an unfair advantage if they provide DVR features from the head office. They essentially have unlimited ability to archive and copy content while you do not.

Unfortunately the way the CCI byte was implemented it has become a backdoor the cable industry to eliminate the consumers traditional right to fair use within their own home. It places third party devices at a disadvantage. My comment to the FCC is that they need to examine this issue if they expect third party devices to be competitive.


----------



## steve614

Unfortunately, until the regulations are changed, the cable companies can do what they want. 
And I thought the current regulations were supposed to keep the cable companies from inhibiting 3rd party devices. 
If only enough people were affected by this...



--edit--

Just filed a submission with the FCC myself.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

MichaelK said:


> I heard a story (I say story because i have no idea if true) once- which may be a complete load of bunk- but someone told me the electric companies dont insulate their larger transmission lines specifically so they dont get sued. If they dont insulate them and everyone knows touching them will kill you then you just dont touch them. But if they insulated them then people would expect them to be insulated and would perhaps touch them. Then if their were faults in the insulation the power company would be liable.


A brief search on snopes didn't turn up anything. I don't have any power engineering experience, but I don't consider your story to be very likely. I think there are very very good engineering reasons (as opposed to legal reasons) *not to insulate* transmission lines.

The wires expand and contract with outside temperature and from the heat generated by the current running through them. Sometimes the wire expands *a lot*. E.g. the Northeast blackout of 2003 was caused by sagging wires:

_*Findings*

In February 2004, the U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force released their final report, placing the main cause of the blackout on FirstEnergy Corporation's failure to trim trees in part of its Ohio service area. The report states that a generating plant in Eastlake, Ohio (a suburb of Cleveland) went offline amid high electrical demand, putting a strain on high-voltage power lines (located in a distant rural setting) which later went out of service when they came in contact with "overgrown trees". The cascading effect that resulted ultimately forced the shutdown of more than 100 power plants._​
So at first glance the above findings might suggest that the blackout could have been prevented by using insulated wires (not arcing over into trees). But that's the wrong conclusion. Because the wires aren't insulated they can dissipate much more heat (better cooling) and so they can carry much more current (or conversely cost much less to build). This extra capacity really helps during heat waves.

It could be a little tricky to engineer an insulation that would have a coefficient of expansion matching the wire, and to have this insulation function reliably through 20 or more years of exposure to the elements. And it would probably be impossible to engineer an insulation that wouldn't be very heavy and could still insulate 500 kV or more (which is what some lines have)!

The bottom line is this stuff was all figured out maybe 50 years ago, long before the legal parasites were nearly as active as they currently are.


----------



## dresden69

BobCamp1 said:


> I'm also modifying your list (off the top of my head, I could be wrong):
> 
> 1. News Corporation (includes all "Fox")
> 
> 2. Disney (not just the American Broadcasting Company  )
> 
> 3. The Columbia Broadcasting System / Showtime Inc.
> 
> 4. GE / The National Broadcasting Company / Comcast - did you forget about the proposed merger? (Comcast is next with CCI flags).
> 
> 5. Time Warner Entertainment / Warner Brothers / Home Box Office, Inc./ Time Warner Cable TV
> 
> 6. Viacom (Paramount Studios)
> 
> x. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting - this is a conglomeration, not a company. Besides, it's just 1 local station whose absence wouldn't be felt.


Viacom/CBS - They are one in the same.

Sumner Redstone still controls approximately 80 percent of the voting stock of both companies, and is the chairman of both companies.

So they might have different names, but if you have a chairman of both companies... you are pretty much the same...


----------



## lrhorer

BobCamp1 said:


> I think you and I are basically on the same page here. Except Verizon DOES have ties to the MPAA and affiliates, or else they couldn't offer all those VOD movies and TV shows.


Not "ties" as in "has contracts with". After all, we have extensive contracts with our bitterest competitors. I mean "ties" as in, "used to be owned by..." and "has several board members in common".



BobCamp1 said:


> Also, you can get sued even if the other person's case is weak.


Yes, but then you could file suit against me because you think I am ugly. OTOH, no competent lawer is going to agree to take the case, the fact I am so ugly it *should* be illegal notwithstanding. The fact it is legal by black letter law makes it not worth the trouble for any lawyer to take the case. They wouldn't stand 15 minutes in court before the judge threw the case out.



BobCamp1 said:


> You still have to hire lawyers and you still fret over it, so it still does cost you time and money.


Companies like Verizon and TW Cable have cadres (battalions, almost) of lawyers on retainer and on permanent staff. True, for a small matter (like a small claims suit), it isn't worth their trouble, but they aren't going to flinch for a $multi-million lawsuit they can win in a heartbeat.



BobCamp1 said:


> And blacklisting doesn't involve any lawyers.


No, but then blacklisting can potentially cost the blacklister $millions as well. As a tooth-and-toenail competitor against AT&T, nothing would thrill us more than not having to pay the better part of $50 Million a year to them for access to off-net customers, but refusing to do so would cost us more than $150 Million in revenue, so we cough up the dinero to our competition to use their network. Similarly, a content provider refusing to allow a CATV company to carry one or more of their channels is a very significant lss of revenue. It has to be pretty important to them for it to be a deal breaker.



BobCamp1 said:


> The small cable companies haven't set the flags yet because they haven't been asked to yet and simply haven't bothered. They're flying under the radar. But they see what's happening to the bigger companies and know it's only a matter of time.


While not far-fetched, that's pretty lacking in hard evidence.



BobCamp1 said:


> 4. GE / The National Broadcasting Company / Comcast - did you forget about the proposed merger? (Comcast is next with CCI flags).


"Proposed" and "Currently" are two different things. Also, if you are saying NBC is pushing or is going to push for CCI flags, then I don't see your point, at all. At least as far as their primary business is concerned, NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox (TV) and PBS are all required by law to have content flagged as 00.



BobCamp1 said:


> 5. Time Warner Entertainment / Warner Brothers / Home Box Office, Inc./ Time Warner Cable TV


No. Time Warner Cable is a publicly traded company. It is no longer owned by Time Warner Entertainment. Legally, they have nothing to do with one another. Certainly Time Warner Entertainment has no say whatsoever concerning the contetn owned by Time Warner Cable. Of course, the volume and especially the revenue assicated with TWC's content is minuscule compared with that owned by Time Warner, Inc.



BobCamp1 said:


> x. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting - this is a conglomeration, not a company. Besides, it's just 1 local station whose absence wouldn't be felt.


In the context of the original statement, they still count as a significant content owner. More to the point, they are not "just 1 local station whose absence wouldn't be felt". They own a vast quantity of content amassed over the last 60 years. In addition, they are integrated into the official infrastructure of the government. They are a non-profit entity (although it is interesting that their hardware is far more expensive, extensive, and sophisticated than the other broadcasters) who is required to fulfil various public functions.



BobCamp1 said:


> 7. BBC Worldwide - owns 2 U.S. stations


The question concerned content owners, not stations. They lease their content to many stations, including PBS stations.



BobCamp1 said:


> That makes six major players and one very minor player. So I was off by one. So sue me.


Don't forget Turner, who not only is a broadcaster and content provider, but also one of the largest motion picture content owners in the world, having purchased $billions in movies from most of the major studios.



BobCamp1 said:


> The other two you mentioned do not do TV (AFAIK) except for VOD, and the CCI flags for that are already set as stringent as possible: Sony Television, Metro Goldwyn Mayer / United Artists


Are you unaware that MGM has its own channels? Indeed, MGMHD is one of the best channels in the entire TWC lineup, if you ask me. The point, however, is they *OWN* the content. Content providers are middlemen, who typically lease the right to broadcast the video from various owners. Think of the content owner as the manufacturer, the content provider as the wholesaler, and the CATV company as the retailer.



BobCamp1 said:


> This whole thing is too bad, because I have TWC or FIOS avialable, and the bottom line for me is that Tivo's don't have MRV (or TTG) while everyone else does.


I don't have a whole lot of use for MRV, and TTG is not the only way to skin the cat. (For that matter CCI is not an absolute show stopper for MRV, either.)


----------



## lrhorer

MichaelK said:


> I heard a story (I say story because i have no idea if true) once- which may be a complete load of bunk- but someone told me the electric companies dont insulate their larger transmission lines specifically so they dont get sued.


It's not true.



MichaelK said:


> If they dont insulate them and everyone knows touching them will kill you then you just dont touch them. But if they insulated them then people would expect them to be insulated and would perhaps touch them.


By definition, if they are insulated, then touching them wouldn't kill you, so there would be nothing about which to sue. Of course it *should* be difficult for a corpse to sue anyone, but then such minor details have never stopped any lawyer.

The actual truth is reliably insulating high tension aerial power lines is not in practical terms possible. It would vastly increase the cost and weight of the cables, make them more difficult to manage, and drastically reduce the life expectancy of the conductor. It also would increase the termerature of the conductors, wasting significant amounts of energy.



MichaelK said:


> Then if their were faults in the insulation the power company would be liable. Again no idea if it's true or not- but futzing with CCI bits is like trying to insulate wires. If you do it then you better do it correctly because you are now taking responsibility for the issue.


They are already responsible for them. They and they alone have the legal responsibility for deciding what the value will be. If they deciude to pass on the value unchanged then so be it. If not, they can make it whatever they like within the limits of FCC regs unless their contracts with the content providers specify otherwise.


----------



## cwerdna

Anyone have any significant updates on this?

I haven't heard a peep from:
- Current TV (none from my email nor to http://getsatisfaction.com/currentc...n_current_tv_applied_by_verizon_frontier_fios)
- my city's cable franchise person beyond his initial reply on June 23
- HDNet beyond their initial replies on June 27
- VZ - last email reply from a human on June 22nd
- Frontier - Haven't contacted them yet.

I haven't really had the bandwidth to take this up again but perhaps we should complain to Frontier... but I'm doubtful the result will be any better.


----------



## MPSAN

cwerdna said:


> Anyone have any significant updates on this?
> 
> I haven't heard a peep from:
> - Current TV (none from my email nor to http://getsatisfaction.com/currentc...n_current_tv_applied_by_verizon_frontier_fios)
> - my city's cable franchise person beyond his initial reply on June 23
> - HDNet beyond their initial replies on June 27
> - VZ - last email reply from a human on June 22nd
> - Frontier - Haven't contacted them yet.
> 
> I haven't really had the bandwidth to take this up again but perhaps we should complain to Frontier... but I'm doubtful the result will be any better.


I, too, wonder if we would start over again with Frontier or if they have at least heard about the issue. My only hope is that most of the reps from Verizon FIOS in the NW were hired by Frontier.


----------



## JWThiers

lrhorer said:


> By definition, if they are insulated, then touching them wouldn't kill you, so there would be nothing about which to sue. Of course it *should* be difficult for a corpse to sue anyone, but then such minor details have never stopped any lawyer.


Not that it really matters but, for accuracy, you can touch an energized high tension power line as long as you do it properly. Ever see a bird sitting on a power line?


----------



## aaronwt

Ever see a person get their head blown off from an energized high tension power line? My cousin did when he used to be a volunteer fireman.

Several of the guys stopped being firemen after that.


----------



## COBeav

MPSAN said:


> ...and it "almost" looks like only 1 modded THD needs to be done.
> 
> ie: Say you have 3 THD's. If only one has a 1 TB drive...or larger...you can mod that one, use it to record CCI shows, and MRV WILL work from that 1 modded THD to the other stock 2 THD's. Is that correct? Also, we are not talking about anything bad here as it is on a different part of this forum. I was just looking at the instructions and it looks like only 2 bytes of data need to change...and a PROM.


SUCCESS!!! I won't go into details here because I think this kind of discussion isn't allowed, but a modified Tivo HD with the PROM hack and a couple of modified files rendered the CCI byte non-effective. I was able to transfer protected shows from a modified Tivo to a non-modified Tivo. I also was able to transfer the protected shows to a PC.

As far as I'm concerned Verizon/Frontier can take a hike (family friendly wording for this message board).

Mike


----------



## richsadams

COBeav said:


> SUCCESS!!! I won't go into details here because I think this kind of discussion isn't allowed, but a modified Tivo HD with the PROM hack and a couple of modified files rendered the CCI byte non-effective. I was able to transfer protected shows from a modified Tivo to a non-modified Tivo. I also was able to transfer the protected shows to a PC.


Outstanding! Er, I mean...that's terrible, circumventing the will of the conglomerates and all. 

BTW, how many beers would be involved in a bribe to get you to tweak someone else's TiVo's...said someone remaining anonymous of course.


----------



## aaronwt

COBeav said:


> SUCCESS!!! I won't go into details here because I think this kind of discussion isn't allowed, but a modified Tivo HD with the PROM hack and a couple of modified files rendered the CCI byte non-effective. I was able to transfer protected shows from a modified Tivo to a non-modified Tivo. I also was able to transfer the protected shows to a PC.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned Verizon/Frontier can take a hike (family friendly wording for this message board).
> 
> Mike


Booooooo!:down:


----------



## MPSAN

COBeav said:


> SUCCESS!!! I won't go into details here because I think this kind of discussion isn't allowed, but a modified Tivo HD with the PROM hack and a couple of modified files rendered the CCI byte non-effective. I was able to transfer protected shows from a modified Tivo to a non-modified Tivo. I also was able to transfer the protected shows to a PC.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned Verizon/Frontier can take a hike (family friendly wording for this message board).
> 
> Mike


OH, you are going to cost Frontier so much money...NOT! 
Who knows, you can start your own business.

That is great news...too bad they soldered in the PROM! OH, I updated my remaining two THD's to 1 TB each. Now that all 3 are 1 TB, I guess I can always record the same show on more than 1 THD if I am not sure which room to watch it in.


----------



## Stormspace

MPSAN said:


> OH, you are going to cost Frontier so much money...NOT!


By the MPAA's math, you'll be stealing $1.99 for every show you copy from one device to another even if you'd never have bought it to begin with.

MPAA:down::down::down:


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

MPSAN said:


> OH, I updated my remaining two THD's to 1 TB each. Now that all 3 are 1 TB, I guess I can always record the same show on more than 1 THD if I am not sure which room to watch it in.


The problem with your solution is that it clutters up the Now Playing list for each TiVo. It's bad enough that my wife's Hallmark movies clutter up the TiVo in the family room, I'd go crazy if I also had to wade thru all the kids' Disney rubbish.


----------



## vurbano

aaronwt said:


> Booooooo!:down:


Boo? 

Any thing a consumer has to do to the equipment he owns in order to maintain the functionality it previously had when the buying decision was made is fair game IMO.


----------



## thomb

vurbano said:


> Boo?
> 
> Any thing a consumer has to do to the equipment he owns in order to maintain the functionality it previously had when the buying decision was made is fair game IMO.


EXACTLY! _A friend of mine_  has decided to take the plunge this week and re-enable his MRV. He's never used MRV for selling / profiting / handing out copyright material. When he bought his TivoHD it was a big selling point to his wife. "Look, you can watch a show that was recorded in the basement while you cook in the kitchen." Imagine how stupid my _friend_ looked when Fios started with adding CCI all over the place.

Now that my friend was forced to take up this new _hobby_ his marriage shall soon return to that blissful state. :up:


----------



## ZeoTiVo

aaronwt said:


> Booooooo!:down:


no Boo on that and TiVo and cable companies should realize that people will just take matters into their own hands if a reasonable solution is not provided.
there is not one 'content stealer' in this thread, it is just folks who want to watch a recorded show wherever in their house they want to. It is ridiculous security to prevent MRV between 2 TiVo DVRs, no self respecting torrent seeder would make use of that but instead record in high quality OTA on a PC and then compress the same for torrent use.

I truly hope the FCC limits cable labs far too broad control in this software area but until then people will make their own solution without a care as to what the MPAA and others try to get away with.


----------



## richsadams

ZeoTiVo said:


> I truly hope the FCC limits cable labs far too broad control in this software area but until then people will make their own solution without a care as to what the MPAA and others try to get away with.


+1 :up: (But I'm not holding my breath)


----------



## rifleman69

COBeav said:


> SUCCESS!!! I won't go into details here because I think this kind of discussion isn't allowed, but a modified Tivo HD with the PROM hack and a couple of modified files rendered the CCI byte non-effective. I was able to transfer protected shows from a modified Tivo to a non-modified Tivo. I also was able to transfer the protected shows to a PC.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned Verizon/Frontier can take a hike (family friendly wording for this message board).
> 
> Mike


Good to hear that it works again COBeav. I might be looking into this in the very near future.


----------



## JWThiers

aaronwt said:


> Ever see a person get their head blown off from an energized high tension power line? My cousin did when he used to be a volunteer fireman.
> 
> Several of the guys stopped being firemen after that.


No But I worked with a guy that had a finger blown off by the distribution lines.

Check this youtube video, about a minute in a guy puts his face on a 230 kv power line


----------



## MPSAN

Phantom Gremlin said:


> The problem with your solution is that it clutters up the Now Playing list for each TiVo. It's bad enough that my wife's Hallmark movies clutter up the TiVo in the family room, I'd go crazy if I also had to wade thru all the kids' Disney rubbish.


I agree, of course, but I think I will wait to see what Frontier will do about this!


----------



## steve614

JWThiers said:


> Check this youtube video, about a minute in a guy puts his face on a 230 kv power line


Hah! I'd like to see him do that without "clipping on" first.


----------



## dianebrat

thomb said:


> Imagine how stupid my _friend_ looked when *Frontier Fios* started with adding CCI all over the place.


FYP, 
This is not a Verizon-wide issue at this time, it's Frontier-wide, that clarification needs to be clear.

Diane


----------



## richsadams

dianebrat said:


> FYP,
> This is not a Verizon-wide issue at this time, it's Frontier-wide, that clarification needs to be clear.
> 
> Diane


Agreed, but to be fair it was Verizon that implemented copy protection across the soon-to-be Frontier FIOS network, _not_ Frontier, and it blew up in their face with a network meltdown for two days. The result is a non-sensical mess of CP on some but not on other channels. AFAIK (or we know) VZ left the mess for Frontier to clean up and is laughing all the way to the bank.

We can only hope that when VZ rolls out CP across the rest of their network (as they have promised to do) they will have learned something from their mistakes and our VZ FIOS cousins won't have to endure what we're dealing with now. One can only hope that they won't make good on their promise in the same manner as when they went back on their word that "nothing would change" at the eleventh hour just prior to the Frontier take over.


----------



## dianebrat

richsadams said:


> Agreed, but to be fair it was Verizon that implemented copy protection across the soon-to-be Frontier FIOS network, _not_ Frontier, and it blew up in their face with a network meltdown for two days. The result is a non-sensical mess of CP on some but not on other channels. AFAIK (or we know) VZ left the mess for Frontier to clean up and is laughing all the way to the bank.
> 
> *We can only hope that when VZ rolls out CP across the rest of their network (as they have promised to do) they will have learned something from their mistakes and our VZ FIOS cousins won't have to endure what we're dealing with now.* One can only hope that they won't make good on their promise in the same manner as when they went back on their word that "nothing would change" at the eleventh hour just prior to the Frontier take over.


I completely agree, and I would hope Verizon hasn't been totally blind to the screwup with Frontier. In a lot of ways it's like the users afflicted with TWC saying that "MRV is dead" when it's a provider based problem, not industry-wide.

For the first time we have two FiOS providers, and we can't use the term FiOS generically anymore when there might be differences between them.

Am I concerned? somewhat, am I running around saying it's the worst phone I ever bought? ^H^H^H^H^H^H oops, wrong thread, sorry!

Diane


----------



## MPSAN

dianebrat said:


> I completely agree, and I would hope Verizon hasn't been totally blind to the screwup with Frontier. In a lot of ways it's like the users afflicted with TWC saying that "MRV is dead" when it's a provider based problem, not industry-wide.
> 
> For the first time we have two FiOS providers, and we can't use the term FiOS generically anymore when there might be differences between them.
> 
> Am I concerned? somewhat, am I running around saying it's the worst phone I ever bought? ^H^H^H^H^H^H oops, wrong thread, sorry!
> 
> Diane


Hi Diane, if you look at dslreports for Verizon FIOS (not Frontier), there are people on Verizon who now have the Flags. I believe one of them is in Camillus, NY. Look for knordrw on page 3 as he now says he is the first to get the flags in a non-Frontier area. While it DID start as an MRV thread on June 29th, by page 3 or 4 it shows more areas with the issue. Just thought you may want to take a look. I hope you never get the flags and I hope that Frontier will do something about ours! Anyway, we are finding so far that we can not do much about it.


----------



## thomb

dianebrat said:


> FYP,
> This is not a Verizon-wide issue at this time, it's Frontier-wide, that clarification needs to be clear.
> 
> Diane


I never said it was Verizon wide NOR did I say it was Frontier wide (as your insert into my quote made it seem). Based on the text you insert into my quote you are assuming _my friend_ is using Frontier, I'd be careful about assumptions. I never said he is (or is not) using Frontier. I simply said it was on *Fios* that the problem occurred - no more, no less.

My point was that a tivo on Fios was behaving wonderfully for _my friend's_ family from day one, and then the next day that family lost functionality for no apparent reason. I know why, and most others here know why, but those excuses don't go over well with some family members. Tivo, Verizon, Frontier, FCC, the content providers themselves, you name it, there's a lot of fingers being pointed, but _my friend_ was in no mood to wait for something to be fixed which will likely NEVER happen. IMHO the situation is more likely to get worse before it gets better and _my friend_ thinks its best to take matters into his own hands.


----------



## vurbano

richsadams said:


> We can only hope that when VZ rolls out CP across the rest of their network (as they have promised to do)........


But didnt that promise come from some rep on twitter? hasnt it been shown that he really doesnt know what he is talking about? ISnt it true that such a thing could be done very quickly at their head end for everyone? Why would they wait?


----------



## richsadams

vurbano said:


> But didnt that promise come from some rep on twitter? hasnt it been shown that he really doesnt know what he is talking about? ISnt it true that such a thing could be done very quickly at their head end for everyone? Why would they wait?


I don't have time to dig back into the various e-mails and such that we received from VZ, our local PUC folks, etc., but there was confirmation by more than one VZ exec saying as much. Whether that was a CYA on their part to explain the Frontier debacle or not remains to be seen...although IIRC there have been a couple of posts here (or was it on the AVS Forum?) that said that VZ FiOS had added CP in a non-Frontier area or two on the East Coast recently.

Why would they wait? You'd have to ask them, but my WAG is that it was so screwed up on their first go at it that they need time to regroup and figure out where they went wrong. Having three states lose most of their digital channels for a few minutes much less 48 hours isn't something they'd want to repeat I suspect.


----------



## aaronwt

richsadams said:


> I don't have time to dig back into the various e-mails and such that we received from VZ, our local PUC folks, etc., but there was confirmation by more than one VZ exec saying as much. Whether that was a CYA on their part to explain the Frontier debacle or not remains to be seen...although IIRC there have been a couple of posts here (or was it on the AVS Forum?) that said that VZ FiOS had added CP in a non-Frontier area or two on the East Coast recently.
> 
> Why would they wait? You'd have to ask them, but my WAG is that it was so screwed up on their first go at it that they need time to regroup and figure out where they went wrong. Having three states lose most of their digital channels for a few minutes much less 48 hours isn't something they'd want to repeat I suspect.


I have not seen anything yet here in Northern Virginia. I am still able to freely transfer any recording I make on FiOS.


----------



## NotVeryWitty

aaronwt said:


> I have not seen anything yet here in Northern Virginia. I am still able to freely transfer any recording I make on FiOS.


Same here in Massachusetts, but I've already warned my wife that it's probably coming soon.


----------



## steve614

richsadams said:


> Why would they wait? You'd have to ask them, but my WAG is that it was so screwed up on their first go at it that they need time to regroup and figure out where they went wrong. Having three states lose most of their digital channels for a few minutes much less 48 hours isn't something they'd want to repeat I suspect.


I imagine that they are going to roll out copy protection gradually by region.
I don't think the support staff could handle all the calls if they switched everyone at the same time.


----------



## Brainiac 5

richsadams said:


> I don't have time to dig back into the various e-mails and such that we received from VZ, our local PUC folks, etc., but there was confirmation by more than one VZ exec saying as much.


If this actually happens where I am, I won't hesitate to drop FIOS. In my area Comcast has actually now switched from having copy protection to _not_ having it on most channels - as much as I disliked Comcast when I used to have them, I'll give my money to whichever company is offering what I want.


----------



## vurbano

Nothing here on the east coast of VA yet.


----------



## vurbano

steve614 said:


> I imagine that they are going to roll out copy protection gradually by region.
> I don't think the support staff could handle all the calls if they switched everyone at the same time.


If I were them Id rather have a week of calls not getting through than a year of constant complaints about the same thing.


----------



## vurbano

Any further news on this?


----------



## dianebrat

aaronwt said:


> I have not seen anything yet here in Northern Virginia. I am still able to freely transfer any recording I make on FiOS.





NotVeryWitty said:


> Same here in Massachusetts, but I've already warned my wife that it's probably coming soon.


Still nothing in MA


----------



## rocko

Nor Jersey


----------



## mgama

Just keeping tabs on which channels have the copy-once flag set, and which ones don't. This way I will be able to see if they make any further changes that negatively affect me.


----------



## JWThiers

mgama said:


> Just keeping tabs on which channels have the copy-once flag set, and which ones don't. This way I will be able to see if they make any further changes that negatively affect me.


Lets see, I would expect ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, PBS and anything you could pick up with an antennae to be copy freely, and everything else (Except PPV) you can record but thats it. At least thats what it will probably shake out too when everything is said and done. Thats what all of the other major cable companies are doing anyway.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

mgama said:


> Just keeping tabs on which channels have the copy-once flag set, and which ones don't. This way I will be able to see if they make any further changes that negatively affect me.


Almost everything is copy protected except for the locals. They left a few channels off, probably by pure accident. E.g. I can MRV 583 Speed HD. With my luck some telco bozo will read this and I'll lose that channel as well.


----------



## richsadams

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Almost everything is copy protected except for the locals. They left a few channels off, probably by pure accident. E.g. I can MRV 583 Speed HD. With my luck some telco bozo will read this and I'll lose that channel as well.


I have the same concern about Showtime (currently unprotected).


----------



## sfm529

I have one out of three Tivos that is now paired with the cable card. I live in Silver Spring, MD.


----------



## Citrus

So far, no CCI where I am, Nassau County (Long Island), NY.


----------



## lew

vurbano said:


> If I were them Id rather have a week of calls not getting through than a year of constant complaints about the same thing.


Cards that haven't been properly paired will have to be paired. It's not the complaints. It's having the resources to pair cards that either were never paired or where the customer moved the card to a different device.


----------



## perilousp69

hmm52 said:


> Can I just say that this sucks. Not only is it to be permanent and spread across all possible channels in WA and OR, the rest of us will receive the identical treatment nationwide - Frontier, Verizon all the same. I don't do MRV unless most broadly defined, 1 remote TV through HDMI, and I don't copy much to PC. But I do move cablecards between various devices at two residences, same name, different accounts, big bills nevertheless. All but certain that that chapter will be closing soon. Maybe I'm one of the bad boys VZ thought to be pinching their (massive) revenue stream. Oh well.
> 
> Good work from all of you on the left coast to chase down definitive answers from the powers that be, even if they weren't what we wanted to hear.


I loved that Fios was wide open. I used to record Daily Show, Colbert Report and Futurama and transfer them to my iPod Touch for the commute.

Thing these morons don't seem to understand is I watch MORE commercials viewing this way than if I'm at home.


----------



## vurbano

still wide open here.


----------



## richsadams

perilousp69 said:


> Thing these morons don't seem to understand is I watch MORE commercials viewing this way than if I'm at home.


It's not really about commercials; copy protection doesn't guarantee anyone watching them one way or the other. Preventing copies of recordings being made (and subsequently MRV on our TiVo's) is about the property owner's delusional belief that by copy flagging the material it won't be bootlegged or otherwise used without someone somewhere paying for it. We all know that's nonsense but the cableco's opt to play along with this farce...and in this circumstance they got it royally wrong.


----------



## bicker

Content owners have no such belief (delusional or otherwise). They simply realize that copy protection eliminates the bulk of casual users who would pirate if it were easy. Making it hard, moves a bunch of people from the "I want I want gimme gimme" column into the "too much bother; I'll just pay for it" column. Each person moved is a win.


----------



## Stormspace

bicker said:


> Content owners have no such belief (delusional or otherwise). They simply realize that copy protection eliminates the bulk of casual users who would pirate if it were easy. Making it hard, moves a bunch of people from the "I want I want gimme gimme" column into the "too much bother; I'll just pay for it" column. Each person moved is a win.


It has the additional benefit of cutting TiVo off at it's knees and thus making their competing DVR offerings more attractive.


----------



## rrg

Stormspace said:


> It has the additional benefit of cutting TiVo off at its knees and thus making their competing DVR offerings more attractive.


I hate the coming lock-down as much as anyone here. But, to be fair to Verizon (and other cable providers): TiVo has had more than enough time to come up with an MRV solution that conforms to the restrictions (e.g. streaming to the remote location, rather than copying), and they haven't.

That's TiVo's fault, no one else's.


----------



## richsadams

Stormspace said:


> It has the additional benefit of cutting TiVo off at it's knees and thus making their competing DVR offerings more attractive.


When it comes to VZ/Frontier, their DVR offering is actually only slightly more attractive as they don't allow DVR to DVR viewing either. Their version of MRV is being able to record on their DVR in one room and watch it in another via streaming to a STB.



rrg said:


> I hate the coming lock-down as much as anyone here. But, to be fair to Verizon (and other cable providers): TiVo has had more than enough time to come up with an MRV solution that conforms to the restrictions (e.g. streaming to the remote location, rather than copying), and they haven't.
> 
> That's TiVo's fault, no one else's.


I've no idea what technology would be required for that (particularly if it could be a retrofit of some sort so we wouldn't all have to buy new equipment) but I agree, it seems like this has been a long time coming and could have been addressed somehow by now.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> When it comes to VZ/Frontier, their DVR offering is actually only slightly more attractive as they don't allow DVR to DVR viewing either. Their version of MRV is being able to record on their DVR in one room and watch it in another via streaming to a STB.


Also, they only have a 20 hour HD DVR at that. So, my solution was to just add 1 TB drives to my 3 THD's and IF I do not know which room to record a Movie in, I just do it on more than 1 THD. I know we need to then delete the show from 2 THD's but I find that I am not doing this often and we watch where we want. Kind of a Virtual MRV.


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> Also, they only have a 20 hour HD DVR at that. So, my solution was to just add 1 TB drives to my 3 THD's and IF I do not know which room to record a Movie in, I just do it on more than 1 THD. I know we need to then delete the show from 2 THD's but I find that I am not doing this often and we watch where we want. Kind of a Virtual MRV.


That gets around their "protection" for sure...it's just a bit of a PIA to have to remember to record something in multiple rooms. But in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't rank very high I suppose. Such is life.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> That gets around their "protection" for sure...it's just a bit of a PIA to have to remember to record something in multiple rooms. But in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't rank very high I suppose. Such is life.


Yup, we only do it on the stations that have a CCI byte of Hex 02. We only need to delete it on the other TIVO as we delete it on the TIVO we watch it on when done.


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> Yup, we only do it on the stations that have a CCI byte of Hex 02. We only need to delete it on the other TIVO as we delete it on the TIVO we watch it on when done.


I wish I could delete recordings on my other TiVo's from the one I'm using at the moment. That would be a nice feature.


----------



## rrg

richsadams said:


> I wish I could delete recordings on my other TiVo's from the one I'm using at the moment. That would be a nice feature.


ReplayTV had that. And the ability to schedule recordings on other units, and to handle conflict resolution across multiple units.


----------



## richsadams

rrg said:


> ReplayTV had that. And the ability to schedule recordings on other units, and to handle conflict resolution across multiple units.


Hi Ron. That would definitely be sweet. I use the online scheduling periodically, but I've often wanted to control one TiVo from another for years. I suspect whoever owns Replay's rights isn't willing to give up that sort of info cheap but I wonder if technology has progressed to the point of doing it another way? Maybe one day.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> I wish I could delete recordings on my other TiVo's from the one I'm using at the moment. That would be a nice feature.


edit...I did not see rrg's post. 

You mean you want a feature in your TIVO that ReplayTV had from the start? You could also tell any ReplayTV to record a show on another Network attached ReplayTV!

P.S. I sold my 3 ReplayTV's a few months ago. I had not used them in a few years, but they were connected and getting guide info! When I got my THD's I sure missed some of the features!


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> Content owners have no such belief (delusional or otherwise). They simply realize that copy protection eliminates the bulk of casual users who would pirate if it were easy. Making it hard, moves a bunch of people from the "I want I want gimme gimme" column into the "too much bother; I'll just pay for it" column. Each person moved is a win.


I agree that Tivo could make a device to legally do MRV (stream instead of copy) but, There is no such thing as a "Casual Pirate". And that the copy protection does NOTHING to stop piracy. a typical pirate is going to go to Pirate Bay or some such, or do a prom mod to eliminate the CCI byte. A "casual user" just wants to be able to use a DVR like they used their VCR. That includes keeping a copy for long periods of time and being able to watch them in many locations in their home. They don't care about things like CCI bytes or the difference between streaming and copying.


----------



## BobCamp1

MPSAN said:


> Also, they only have a 20 hour HD DVR at that. So, my solution was to just add 1 TB drives to my 3 THD's and IF I do not know which room to record a Movie in, I just do it on more than 1 THD. I know we need to then delete the show from 2 THD's but I find that I am not doing this often and we watch where we want. Kind of a Virtual MRV.





richsadams said:


> When it comes to VZ/Frontier, their DVR offering is actually only slightly more attractive as they don't allow DVR to DVR viewing either. Their version of MRV is being able to record on their DVR in one room and watch it in another via streaming to a STB.


Both of those issues will be addressed soon, and their GUI is going HD as well.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/18/verizon-fios-set-top-boxes-getting-a-new-hd-guide-external-stor/


----------



## flyers

> A "casual user" just wants to be able to use a DVR like they used their VCR. That includes keeping a copy for long periods of time and being able to watch them in many locations in their home. They don't care about things like CCI bytes or the difference between streaming and copying.


+1


----------



## richsadams

JWThiers said:


> ...but, There is no such thing as a "Casual Pirate". And that the copy protection does NOTHING to stop piracy. A typical pirate is going to go to Pirate Bay or some such, or do a prom mod to eliminate the CCI byte. A "casual user" just wants to be able to use a DVR like they used their VCR.


Exactly.


----------



## richsadams

BobCamp1 said:


> Both of those issues will be addressed soon, and their GUI is going HD as well.
> 
> http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/18/verizon-fios-set-top-boxes-getting-a-new-hd-guide-external-stor/


If that comes to pass it will be a plus for VZ subscribers and hopefully push TiVo into doing more. It'll almost certainly be a disappointment for those suffering with Frontier FiOS however as I don't see them moving in that direction based on their current MO.


----------



## Stormspace

JWThiers said:


> I agree that Tivo could make a device to legally do MRV (stream instead of copy) but, There is no such thing as a "Casual Pirate". And that the copy protection does NOTHING to stop piracy. a typical pirate is going to go to Pirate Bay or some such, or do a prom mod to eliminate the CCI byte. A "casual user" just wants to be able to use a DVR like they used their VCR. That includes keeping a copy for long periods of time and being able to watch them in many locations in their home. They don't care about things like CCI bytes or the difference between streaming and copying.


Well said.


----------



## dianebrat

JWThiers said:


> I agree that Tivo could make a device to legally do MRV (stream instead of copy) but, There is no such thing as a "Casual Pirate". And that the copy protection does NOTHING to stop piracy. a typical pirate is going to go to Pirate Bay or some such, or do a prom mod to eliminate the CCI byte. A "casual user" just wants to be able to use a DVR like they used their VCR. That includes keeping a copy for long periods of time and being able to watch them in many locations in their home. They don't care about things like CCI bytes or the difference between streaming and copying.


Excuse me, but I believe I am this "casual pirate" that doesn't exist, and I don't have any interest in hardware hacks. 

Diane


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> I agree that Tivo could make a device to legally do MRV (stream instead of copy) but, There is no such thing as a "Casual Pirate".


Yes there is. There are many. However, I acknowledge that the existence of so many people who would pirate things if it were easy makes it harder for people who hate DRM for personal reasons to voice cogent and persuasive objections to DRM, and so that makes it important to attempt to deny their existence.


----------



## richsadams

Don't feed the troll.


----------



## JWThiers

dianebrat said:


> Excuse me, but I believe I am this "casual pirate" that doesn't exist, and I don't have any interest in hardware hacks.
> 
> Diane


Let me ask this. Are you uploading things to P2P sites or are you downloading from them? If you are uploading to the sites most likely you will have had to do something to break the encryption. That is not the act of a casual user like I describe. IF you are downloading from the sites, again you are going out and actively searching for the content. Your average casual user don't go to those lengths (or is even be aware of that option) for long if at all. Its too much of a hassle.

If as I suspect given your limited description of you not being interested in HW Hacks, you are downloading content from some P2P, given the option of downloading content so you can do the things you can with a VCR (Keep for long term archive, move from place to place for viewing when and how you want) or being able to do the same directly on your Tivo (MRV, move to a central server for long term archive, etc. (this would be what people here most commonly want by the way)) which would you do?


----------



## Stormspace

JWThiers said:


> Let me ask this. Are you uploading things to P2P sites or are you downloading from them? If you are uploading to the sites most likely you will have had to do something to break the encryption. That is not the act of a casual user like I describe. IF you are downloading from the sites, again you are going out and actively searching for the content. Your average casual user don't go to those lengths (or is even be aware of that option) for long if at all. Its too much of a hassle.
> 
> If as I suspect given your limited description of you not being interested in HW Hacks, you are downloading content from some P2P, given the option of downloading content so you can do the things you can with a VCR (Keep for long term archive, move from place to place for viewing when and how you want) or being able to do the same directly on your Tivo (MRV, move to a central server for long term archive, etc. (this would be what people here most commonly want by the way)) which would you do?


In my mind the term "Casual Pirate" is what the content providers call people that are using technology the way it was designed to be used that the content providers don't agree with. Some examples of casual piracy would be:
 Ripping a CD for use on a portable device
 Recording a TV show with a DVR or VCR.
 Watching a TV show or listening to music on more than one device with out making a purchase for each device. 
 Making a copy of a software program or loaning it to a friend.
It's important to remember that the content industry is using propaganda and denouncing methods of watching and listening to content that are completely legal. Content industries have consistently not admitted that these things are OK. At most they have said that they aren't going to "go after" anyone doing some of these things as in the case of the RIAA and ripping CDs.

As far as the content industry is concerned there is never and never has been any fair use rights. They simply don't acknowledge fair use as a legitimate reason for making a copy.


----------



## JWThiers

Stormspace said:


> In my mind the term "Casual Pirate" is what the content providers call people that are using technology the way it was designed to be used that the content providers don't agree with. Some examples of casual piracy would be:
>  Ripping a CD for use on a portable device
>  Recording a TV show with a DVR or VCR.
>  Watching a TV show or listening to music on more than one device with out making a purchase for each device.
>  Making a copy of a software program or loaning it to a friend.
> It's important to remember that the content industry is using propaganda and denouncing methods of watching and listening to content that are completely legal. Content industries have consistently not admitted that these things are OK. At most they have said that they aren't going to "go after" anyone doing some of these things as in the case of the RIAA and ripping CDs.
> 
> As far as the content industry is concerned there is never and never has been any fair use rights. They simply don't acknowledge fair use as a legitimate reason for making a copy.


You say Potato, I say Potato (doesn't work right written). Point being what you are calling a "Casual Pirate" is for the most part using it for PERSONAL use not distribution, something they obtained legally.


----------



## steve614

To me, the casual pirate is someone who breaks encryption for personal use, e.g., ripping a DVD to a media server to play back on a Tivo.

The true pirate has hopes of making some extra money.


----------



## aaronwt

Unfortunately, whether for monetary gain or not, it is just as illegal.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

Stormspace said:


> . Some examples of casual piracy would be:
> • Ripping a CD for use on a portable device
> • Recording a TV show with a DVR or VCR.
> • Watching a TV show or listening to music on more than one device with out making a purchase for each device.
> • Making a copy of a software program or loaning it to a friend.


looking at your list
1. (I do it) this was not the license I agreed to when buying the CD and the industry can point to legit means of getting music on a portable device. For instance I use rhapsody now and actually just buy less CDs since their license no longer fits my use.
2. (I do it) this one is a stretch - long ago the Sony case noted you can time shift as fair use - name me one show that can not be recorded one time unless the copyright holder wanted it gone soon after recording (PPV). Also the flag here under dispute is not set by the copyright holder but by the broadcast company. If someone took this to court it may well end up not being a DMCA violation since the copyright holder did not license under those terms to the user.
3. That is just a rehash of 1 and 2

4. Now you have become a pirate. There is no one who would agree that you bought distribution rights when buying software or media. There is no fair use here at all. So while people may casually do that and the police wont be trying to monitor it this one does cut into revenues and the friend really should just buy there own copy.
With immediate family I do this - example Daughter is traveling and wants to take some DVDs we own to watch. I make copies of the DVDs for her to take so the originals stay safe at home. One of her friends wants to watch some movie we own. She can have the original to watch and bring back but not a copy to keep.

so it is all casual and some fair use is mixed in with some that just is not fair use. Also I fully agree that the BROADCASTER setting the CCI flag is blatantly stomping on fair use.


----------



## Stormspace

ZeoTiVo said:


> looking at your list
> 1. (I do it) this was not the license I agreed to when buying the CD and the industry can point to legit means of getting music on a portable device. For instance I use rhapsody now and actually just buy less CDs since their license no longer fits my use.
> 2. (I do it) this one is a stretch - long ago the Sony case noted you can time shift as fair use - name me one show that can not be recorded one time unless the copyright holder wanted it gone soon after recording (PPV). Also the flag here under dispute is not set by the copyright holder but by the broadcast company. If someone took this to court it may well end up not being a DMCA violation since the copyright holder did not license under those terms to the user.
> 3. That is just a rehash of 1 and 2
> 
> 4. Now you have become a pirate. There is no one who would agree that you bought distribution rights when buying software or media. There is no fair use here at all. So while people may casually do that and the police wont be trying to monitor it this one does cut into revenues and the friend really should just buy there own copy.
> With immediate family I do this - example Daughter is traveling and wants to take some DVDs we own to watch. I make copies of the DVDs for her to take so the originals stay safe at home. One of her friends wants to watch some movie we own. She can have the original to watch and bring back but not a copy to keep.
> 
> so it is all casual and some fair use is mixed in with some that just is not fair use. Also I fully agree that the BROADCASTER setting the CCI flag is blatantly stomping on fair use.


What I did was dig up some old definitions of casual pirate and add a couple of my own based on what people typically do and what content companies think is ok to do. Also the only reason we can record and time shift material is because of the betamax decision. The content industry doesn't want us to do it, even though we can, and if asked I bet that would fall into THEIR definition of casual pirate. 

Most of my examples are fair uses of the material except for the last one which crosses the line of legal behavior.


----------



## Stormspace

steve614 said:


> To me, the casual pirate is someone who breaks encryption for personal use, e.g., ripping a DVD to a media server to play back on a Tivo.
> 
> The true pirate has hopes of making some extra money.


Typically a casual pirate is one that doesn't have to do anything out of the ordinary to make the copy. Handing a disk to a friend, making a copy, or using easily obtainable software to break encryption. Most of the time the casual pirate doesn't know they are breaking the law.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

Stormspace said:


> What I did was dig up some old definitions of casual pirate and add a couple of my own based on what people typically do and what content companies think is ok to do. Also the only reason we can record and time shift material is because of the betamax decision. The content industry doesn't want us to do it, even though we can, and if asked I bet that would fall into THEIR definition of casual pirate.
> 
> Most of my examples are fair uses of the material except for the last one which crosses the line of legal behavior.


so you agree with what I say (NOTE Sony-betamax)
Now the CD illustrates the concept that if it is easy to do then people will. The music industry can legitimately point to lost sales because of how easy it is and the fact people really do not have to buy songs again they already have on CD. Of course they inflate the figures, but there it is.
If all forms of DRM were removed then "casual pirating" would take off like a rocket. Ironically it is likely bittorrnet would be the biggest looser since people no longer had to hunt around for secret servers and be all anonymous. It would be back to the early days of napster and content traded all over the place.


----------



## JWThiers

ZeoTiVo said:


> so you agree with what I say (NOTE Sony-betamax)
> Now the CD illustrates the concept that if it is easy to do then people will. The music industry can legitimately point to lost sales because of how easy it is and the fact people really do not have to buy songs again they already have on CD. Of course they inflate the figures, but there it is.
> If all forms of DRM were removed then "casual pirating" would take off like a rocket. Ironically it is likely bittorrnet would be the biggest looser since people no longer had to hunt around for secret servers and be all anonymous. It would be back to the early days of napster and content traded all over the place.


Lost sales is only an estimate, and I think is overestimated. They claim that EVERY illegal DL is a lost sale, How much of that is are songs that if they had to pay for they wouldn't have bought anyway. Friends of mine (wink) rarely buy an entire album, but in the day when friends (wink) would do the napster route or other services they would get the entire album even if they only really wanted a song or two. Honestly, I have bought more music in the last 10 years than I did the previous 20 by a large margin.

Actually* I think* what CD's / MP3 / ripping / Napster et al shows is that basically they needed to rethink their business model. People were tired of over priced CD's that were 3/4 crap. MP3's and MP3 players showed there was a demand for single songs in a portable digital format. Once they figured out that people will pay a price per song for a legitimate copy of music (or a free copy if a legal copy isn't available). while there is still some ilegal trading still going on I think the record industry has been doing very well since legal downloads became available. Definate wasn't the end of the business.


----------



## vurbano

JWThiers said:


> Lost sales is only an estimate, and I think is overestimated. They claim that EVERY illegal DL is a lost sale, How much of that is are songs that if they had to pay for they wouldn't have bought anyway. Friends of mine (wink) rarely buy an entire album, but in the day when friends (wink) would do the napster route or other services they would get the entire album even if they only really wanted a song or two. Honestly, I have bought more music in the last 10 years than I did the previous 20 by a large margin.
> 
> Actually* I think* what CD's / MP3 / ripping / Napster et al shows is that basically they needed to rethink their business model. People were tired of over priced CD's that were 3/4 crap. MP3's and MP3 players showed there was a demand for single songs in a portable digital format. Once they figured out that people will pay a price per song for a legitimate copy of music (or a free copy if a legal copy isn't available). while there is still some ilegal trading still going on I think the record industry has been doing very well since legal downloads became available. Definate wasn't the end of the business.


I have yet to understand how just compensation for any "stolen" song or movie is thousands of dollars and simply not the shelf price of the item.


----------



## JWThiers

Its supposed to be a deterrent and a punishment. A buck for the song times the thousands of times it was "shared". I don't agree with the extremely stiff penalties but then again if you are putting it out for anyone to download.


----------



## vurbano

JWThiers said:


> Its supposed to be a deterrent and a punishment. A buck for the song times the thousands of times it was "shared". I don't agree with the extremely stiff penalties but then again if you are putting it out for anyone to download.


I don't agree with cherry picking defendants either which is what they do just to get a huge amount in a news story. If they are going to enforce it then prosecute everyone. Flood the courts with millions of defendants screaming that it is unfair and then lets see where this goes. I would bet that 50% of every household in America has a kid who has committed this "crime".


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vurbano said:


> I don't agree with cherry picking defendants either which is what they do just to get a huge amount in a news story. If they are going to enforce it then prosecute everyone. Flood the courts with millions of defendants screaming that it is unfair and then lets see where this goes. I would bet that 50% of every household in America has a kid who has committed this "crime".


They should arrest anyone who steals anything for any dollar amount by your theory -- oh wait...

Typically the cases I see are people who had hundreds or more of songs up for grabs. The only innocents I ever saw were older relatives who were charged since it was their account but the kid had done all the sharing. Still the kid was knowingly putting the songs up for grabs.

anyhow I agree with JWThier that legit business models providing the songs is the only real way to deal with this. Pirate Bay shows that dedicated pirates cant be stopped.

I also agree with others like Bicker that if they just ignored the folks who "casually" put a bunch of files on the internet for others to download then that practice would become very common again. Original Napster had a boatload of people using it who would never take the time to figure out bit torrent and get an invite to the servers out there


----------



## bicker

aaronwt said:


> Unfortunately, whether for monetary gain or not, it is just as illegal.


Correct, and indeed represents real money. Some people want violation of copyright to be acceptable. It isn't. What those people want to do costs money, money that should be paid to the copyright owner if they are to do those things.


----------



## JWThiers

vurbano said:


> I don't agree with cherry picking defendants either which is what they do just to get a huge amount in a news story. If they are going to enforce it then prosecute everyone. Flood the courts with millions of defendants screaming that it is unfair and then lets see where this goes. I would bet that 50% of every household in America has a kid who has committed this "crime".


I wish they wouldn't cherry pick either, but I do wish they would go after the large clearing houses first not the some poor college kid. Unless they are sharing a catalog of hundreds or thousands.


----------



## JWThiers

ZeoTiVo said:


> They should arrest anyone who steals anything for any dollar amount by your theory -- oh wait...
> 
> Typically the cases I see are people who had hundreds or more of songs up for grabs. The only innocents I ever saw were older relatives who were charged since it was their account but the kid had done all the sharing. Still the kid was knowingly putting the songs up for grabs.
> 
> anyhow I agree with JWThier that legit business models providing the songs is the only real way to deal with this. Pirate Bay shows that dedicated pirates cant be stopped.
> 
> I also agree with others like Bicker that if they just ignored the folks who "casually" put a bunch of files on the internet for others to download then that practice would become very common again. Original Napster had a boatload of people using it who would never take the time to figure out bit torrent and get an invite to the servers out there


I agree 100%



bicker said:


> Correct, and indeed represents real money. Some people want violation of copyright to be acceptable. It isn't. What those people want to do costs money, money that should be paid to the copyright owner if they are to do those things.


What people want to do is basically share with themselves. The way current law is written it is a violation to rip a DVD or record A TV show to a home server and share it out to devices on a local network. or transcode to put on a portable player. That shouldn't be illegal. If you share it out to the masses then you should be in violation. People don't mind reasonable restrictions (OK some do, but reasonable people don't). Is it unreasonable to be able to take content that is legally obtained and consume it in a manner that you prefer?


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> What people want to do is basically share with themselves.


Correct. Without paying the copyright owner for that.



JWThiers said:


> That shouldn't be illegal.


First, it should be illegal: Taking from someone more than what they offered is wrong, and nothing should ever allow someone to do something like that. If no one offers what you want to take, then it isn't right to take what you want anyway.

Second, even if it "shouldn't be illegal", it is illegal.



JWThiers said:


> Is it unreasonable to be able to take content that is legally obtained and consume it in a manner that you prefer?


If that consumption isn't what you purchased, then yes, it is unreasonable. It's like buying a can of corn and taking a bunch of fresh ears of corn, instead. It's still corn, just in a "manner that you prefer". But that "take what you want" attitude is wrong. (Indeed it is even worse than you say: They're not just taking what they want in the "manner that you prefer" but rather they're having it both ways, the way it was offered, and the way they want it.)


----------



## richsadams

JWThiers said:


> What people want to do is basically share with themselves.


Exactly and end of story with regard to this thread's topic. TiVo owners s/b able to record a program on the living room TiVo and watch it in the bedroom TiVo. Period. It worked for years and years, the world did not end and no animals were harmed.


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> First, it should be illegal: Taking from someone more than what they offered is wrong, and nothing should ever allow someone to do something like that. If no one offers what you want to take, then it isn't right to take what you want anyway.
> 
> Second, even if it "shouldn't be illegal", it is illegal.
> 
> If that consumption isn't what you purchased, then yes, it is unreasonable. It's like buying a can of corn and taking a bunch of fresh ears of corn, instead. It's still corn, just in a "manner that you prefer". But that "take what you want" attitude is wrong. (Indeed it is even worse than you say: They're not just taking what they want in the "manner that you prefer" but rather they're having it both ways, the way it was offered, and the way they want it.)


When I said it shouldn't be illegal , I was acknowledging that it currently is illegal but IMO that should be changed.* In fact that is what I said in the sentence between the two you quote. *The analogy is more like you bought a can of corn, and you should be able to put that can of corn in any recipe you want and eat it anyway you want. The way it is now you buy a can of corn and the only way you can consume it is in the recipe they provide on the side of the can. Additionally you can only eat that corn in the dining room and only for diner and no left overs allowed. So no corn in your Shepherd's pie for lunch. and you can't eat it outside at the picnic table.


----------



## JWThiers

richsadams said:


> Exactly and end of story with regard to this thread's topic. TiVo owners s/b able to record a program on the living room TiVo and watch it in the bedroom TiVo. Period. It worked for years and years, the world did not end and no animals were harmed.


But that was in an analog world, digital changes everything <whine>


----------



## richsadams

JWThiers said:


> But that was in an analog world, digital changes everything <whine>


Well...okay, but it worked for a couple of years then (at least for us) and the sun still came up in the morning.


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> In fact that is what I said in the sentence between the two you quote.


It's great when we can agree about things.



JWThiers said:


> The analogy is more like you bought a can of corn, and you should be able to put that can of corn in any recipe you want and eat it anyway you want.


No, that's not a good analogy because you're simply imposing your own personal preference. Indeed, if it was just a matter of what you suggest, then there wouldn't be any difficulty. Instead, the presentations are offered to you for specific uses. When offered for use on your DVR _is different than _when offered for use on your portable player. Before they're offered to you, they belong absolutely to the copyright owner, and so it is up to the copyright owner to decide what they should or shouldn't offer.


----------



## vurbano

Did everyone read the comparison of the premeire to windows 7 media center and a ceton card? I think they said that Tivo doesnt even have a solution for MRV because of its implementation of copying files. Sad.



> in the meantime Media Center wins this one because although the 360 isn't the perfect extender, it is better than TiVo's solution, which is nothing


http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/05/tivo-premiere-vs-windows-7-media-center


----------



## vurbano

ZeoTiVo said:


> They should arrest anyone who steals anything for any dollar amount by your theory....


bingo. put up or shut up IMO. Not charging everyone is cherry picking and should be illegal also. The fact is if they did try to enforce it they simply couldnt due to the shear volume of defendants and cases.


----------



## bicker

vurbano said:


> Did everyone read the comparison of the premeire to windows 7 media center and a ceton card? I think they said that Tivo doesnt even have a solution for MRV because of its implementation of copying files.


And yet WMC does. I just tried my XBox out as a MCE, for the first time last night, and it looks interesting. Our problem is that we have to check everything twice - once for whether it works, and then again to determine if we get closed captioning/subtitles. It's a bit too much of a stretch to buy the Ceton card not knowing that we're going to be okay with captioning/subtitles. (Though we're not really in the market for a new solution yet, anyway.)

TiVo's decision to not offer a streaming solution is probably the best decision for them, but it is causing a lot of us to hold-off buying another TiVo, because streaming is really the way things are going, since it affords content owners superior protection from abuse.


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> It's great when we can agree about things.


Good we agree what is currently the law.



bicker said:


> No, that's not a good analogy because you're simply imposing your own personal preference. Indeed, if it was just a matter of what you suggest, then there wouldn't be any difficulty. Instead, the presentations are offered to you for specific uses. When offered for use on your DVR _is different than _when offered for use on your portable player. Before they're offered to you, they belong absolutely to the copyright owner, and so it is up to the copyright owner to decide what they should or shouldn't offer.


Lets see can of corn is analogous to the recorded content. Eating the corn is like watching the content. That seems to match up pretty good so far. Other recipes require cooking differently like transcoding to watch on a portable device Using only their recipe is like only being able to watch on the device type you recorded on. Only being able to eat in the dining room is like only being able to watch where it was recorded. That seems OK. No leftovers means you can't put it in the freezer to eat later. OK I'll give you that one, But In was shooting for being able to store it long term for later use. I think I did pretty good. But I think that the specific use issue is interesting. I am pretty sure most people feel that the specific use is to watch this content that I personally obtained in a legal fashion on whatever device I personally own. to use another analogy it would be like only being able to use a car for one specific use. You can only use this car to go back and forth to work, but can't go to the grocery store. so you have to buy another car to go to the grocery store and another to go to the mall.

What it is boiling down to is that the industry and technology for consuming it is changing rapidly. Like the record industry in the 90's, what the TV and movie industry are going to have to come to terms with is that their consumers want to be able to record their content and move it around their home networks, to move it to portable devices. If they want to remain viable they will have to change or they will be forever suing their customers. If they don't change to meet the demands of the consumers, the consumers will find a way to do what they want to do. As kids grow up if they want to be able to do all this stuff, they will move to pirate bay or wherever to accomplish that. Or worse yet for old media move onto new media based content that allows the to do what they want.


----------



## vurbano

Frankly I would have no problem if they outlawed all sharing sites if that would free our Tivo's from this copy once nonsense. I have no interest in getting or recieving anything except what I pay for it. But if I pay for it, whether it be programming or a new BD movie it is mine and I will do whatever I please with it inside of my home. And if anyone believes that is illegal then too bad.


----------



## richsadams

vurbano said:


> Frankly I would have no problem if they outlawed all sharing sites if that would free our Tivo's from this copy once nonsense. I have no interest in getting or recieving anything except what I pay for it. But if I pay for it, whether it be programming or a new BD movie it is mine and I will do whatever I please with it inside of my home. And if anyone believes that is illegal then too bad.


BIG +1 :up:


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

JWThiers said:


> But that was in an analog world, digital changes everything <whine>


Yes, digital does change everything.

Anyone remember the "old days" when someone had either a store bought VHS tape or some home movie that was somehow "interesting" and so it got copied a few times?

VHS after 2 or 3 copies was *not* a pretty sight. But digital video bits are like software. An infinite number of perfect copies "forever".

Anyone remember the old saying: "software is like VD, you can give it away and you've still got it"?


----------



## JWThiers

vurbano said:


> Frankly I would have no problem if they outlawed all sharing sites if that would free our Tivo's from this copy once nonsense. I have no interest in getting or recieving anything except what I pay for it. But if I pay for it, whether it be programming or a new BD movie it is mine and I will do whatever I please with it inside of my home. And if anyone believes that is illegal then too bad.


:up:


----------



## JWThiers

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Yes, digital does change everything.
> 
> Anyone remember the "old days" when someone had either a store bought VHS tape or some home movie that was somehow "interesting" and so it got copied a few times?
> 
> VHS after 2 or 3 copies was *not* a pretty sight. But digital video bits are like software. An infinite number of perfect copies "forever".
> 
> Anyone remember the old saying: "software is like VD, you can give it away and you've still got it"?


I personally don't think it changed things that much. Yes we got better picture and yes it is digital perfect and yes those digital bits can be copied perfectly an infinite number of times. BUT, the vast majority aren't doing anything with that. That includes, the vast majority of DVR users. Even Tivo Users, the majority of them probably don't do MRV or even know what it is.

Its no secret, that I think that copyright laws should be changed to allow people to use any content that a person acquires legally on any device that the same person (or family) also legally owns. This does not mean that I should be allowed to make copies for every person I know or even don't know. This is much like a software site licence. You purchase permission to install x number of copies of a piece of software.


----------



## BobCamp1

vurbano said:


> Frankly I would have no problem if they outlawed all sharing sites if that would free our Tivo's from this copy once nonsense. I have no interest in getting or recieving anything except what I pay for it. But if I pay for it, whether it be programming or a new BD movie it is mine and I will do whatever I please with it inside of my home. And if anyone believes that is illegal then too bad.


One of the reasons sharing sites exist is because people want to watch programs they already have or ones that have already aired. Then they can watch it anywhere at anytime they want. That's why streaming is so popular, especially with Netflix and Hulu. But not everything is available that way, so BitTorrent fills those gaps.

Let's see, since I woke up this morning, I:

1. Watched part of a downloaded F1 race I missed and forgot to record (and there wasn't a streamed version available),

2. Made a copy of a Disney DVD the kids like to watch, since they do tend to scratch them. This involved more than using a DeCSS program.

3. Drove my car 70 mph in a 65 mph zone,

4. Talked on the cell phone while driving for about 5 seconds,

5. May have ran a red light (probably not, but it was close),

6. Rolled through a stop sign going 2 mph making a right turn with no one else around,

7. Used my GPS attached to the windshield,

8. Used an EZ-Pass, which they tell you to attach to the windshield, but is illegal to do so.

9. Drove with a license plate frame covering the edges of the rear plate.

and it isn't even lunch yet. Quite frankly, everyone breaks some laws every day. It's gotten to the point where most people don't care.


----------



## aaronwt

Get EZ pass that goes on the license plate. This is what my girlfriend uses on her cars.


----------



## Stormspace

bicker said:


> And yet WMC does. I just tried my XBox out as a MCE, for the first time last night, and it looks interesting. Our problem is that we have to check everything twice - once for whether it works, and then again to determine if we get closed captioning/subtitles. It's a bit too much of a stretch to buy the Ceton card not knowing that we're going to be okay with captioning/subtitles. (Though we're not really in the market for a new solution yet, anyway.)
> 
> TiVo's decision to not offer a streaming solution is probably the best decision for them, but it is causing a lot of us to hold-off buying another TiVo, because streaming is really the way things are going, since it affords content owners superior protection from abuse.


Streaming is not a good solution because of the varying network topologies people have which creates an inconsistent viewing experience. At least with the copy you can gauge your network speed and watch a few minutes later. A streaming solution will force you to sit through the lag.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vurbano said:


> bingo. put up or shut up IMO. Not charging everyone is cherry picking and should be illegal also. The fact is if they did try to enforce it they simply couldnt due to the shear volume of defendants and cases.


so the fact we do not catch all criminals mean we should just change the laws to make taking someone's stuff legal.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vurbano said:


> Frankly I would have no problem if they outlawed all sharing sites


I think sites sharing stuff they do not have the rights to share are already outlawed  That alone does not seem to have eliminated the problem.


----------



## Stormspace

ZeoTiVo said:


> so the fact we do not catch all criminals mean we should just change the laws to make taking someone's stuff legal.


The Biggest issue I have with all of this is the use of drm which prevents fair use of the product. No one should have to buy the same thing six times to enjoy it on every device they have. And because DRM is a failure, people find ways to get around it. If DRM allowed for fair use we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.

Still bummed about my iPhone.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

Stormspace said:


> The Biggest issue I have with all of this is the use of drm which prevents fair use of the product. No one should have to buy the same thing six times to enjoy it on every device they have. And because DRM is a failure, people find ways to get around it. If DRM allowed for fair use we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.
> 
> Still bummed about my iPhone.


the assumption you are making is that you have fair use to watch a DVD you bought on your phone. Assuming you bought a DVD that did not have a digital copy ability or distribution license then why is that fair use assumed on your part when all you paid for was the ability to watch a movie on a DVD player?

the answer needs to account for - they do not sell you the actual movie and rights to all content. They sell you a way to watch the movie, while they retain all rights to the content of the movie itself.


----------



## JWThiers

Probably that if the law is listed on this website, its probably OK to break it, use your best judgement.


----------



## Stormspace

ZeoTiVo said:


> the assumption you are making is that you have fair use to watch a DVD you bought on your phone. Assuming you bought a DVD that did not have a digital copy ability or distribution license then why is that fair use assumed on your part when all you paid for was the ability to watch a movie on a DVD player?
> 
> the answer needs to account for - they do not sell you the actual movie and rights to all content. They sell you a way to watch the movie, while they retain all rights to the content of the movie itself.


I think DVDs are a special case even though i think an exception should occur. Moving recordings of television shows to a phone is something different and just double dipping by the content providers.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

Stormspace said:


> I think DVDs are a special case even though i think an exception should occur. Moving recordings of television shows to a phone is something different and just double dipping by the content providers.


You mean special case in regards to having to watch it as a DVD? Tehn yeah that is how.

for the TV show terms need to be identified
content provider to me is the person who made/owns the content. They get to decide how the content is sold or rented, simple as that.

Broadcasters and pipe providers like FIOS should not get to decide if content can be moved from your TiVo to a PC and then to your phone.


----------



## JWThiers

ZeoTiVo said:


> You mean special case in regards to having to watch it as a DVD? Tehn yeah that is how.
> 
> for the TV show terms need to be identified
> content provider to me is the person who made/owns the content. They get to decide how the content is sold or rented, simple as that.
> 
> Broadcasters and pipe providers like FIOS should not get to decide if content can be moved from your TiVo to a PC and then to your phone.


I agree that is what the law currently is, BUT, I do think that eventually once a person legally obtains digital content (Doesn't matter what kind of content or how it is obtained as long as it is legally obtained (i.e. DVD, CD, MP3, H.264 movie, ebook...)) they should be allowed to use that content on whatever device they choose as long as they also own that device. This doesn't mean there isn't any DRM. As long a reasonable DRM is in place that is uniform and won't go away because a specific company goes belly up, people won't care about the DRM. For example, it is currently legal to rip a CD that you own into a digital format for playback on an mp3 player. The mp3 didn't kill the record industry (and the mp3's i rip have no DRM), in fact they have had some of the best years of late because of mp3's and the ability to easily purchase content online. My kindle is another example. It's not perfect but I can purchase books and read on books on multiple kindles on the same account, also on mac, PC, iphone, ipad, android, blackberry. The TV and movie industries will either have to adapt their business model to the changing reality or they will go away. It won't happen overnight but it will happen and you and I will probably see it.


----------



## BobCamp1

JWThiers said:


> Probably that if the law is listed on this website, its probably OK to break it, use your best judgement.


That website is out-of-date. New York just enacted a no-fault divorce law.

Perhaps that's why there's still a $25 fine for flirting.


----------



## JWThiers

BobCamp1 said:


> That website is out-of-date. New York just enacted a no-fault divorce law.
> 
> Perhaps that's why there's still a $25 fine for flirting.


I have no idea how often they update if at all, but I do know that the FL "No Pregnant Pigs in Cages" law is fairly new (definitely in the last 10 years more like 6 or 7).


----------



## Stormspace

ZeoTiVo said:


> You mean special case in regards to having to watch it as a DVD? Tehn yeah that is how.


I was thinking mostly that traditionally if you wanted to watch a movie you bought the VHS or DVD, took it home and watched it. You could put that in a portable player and watch it on that as well. Making a copy of the VHS or DVD to use on a digital device was complicated and time consuming to do (still is) vs the relatively quick process involved in ripping a music CD. Combine that with a cultural trend to make "mix tapes" and the fact that music is just consumed differently makes the DVD an exception that has only recently been an issue.

The vast majority of people don't know how to rip a DVD nor would they want to, but that is changing as ripping software is becoming more mainstream and suffering from fewer lawsuits. (Cat out of the bag, and all that) It's only recently that ripping a DVD for commentary and discussion has been allowed, and the courts/system is still out on how to make a fair use of them, thus the exception.

As for music CD's the RIAA refuses to acknowledge that ripping a CD for playback on a portable device is a fair use while many believe that it is. I think that the music industries refusal to acknowledge it but ultimately allow it is motivated by a couple of things. 1) They'd likely lose any court battle if they pushed it and 2) thus setting a precedent for future physical formats they might try to sell.


----------



## BobCamp1

Stormspace said:


> Streaming is not a good solution because of the varying network topologies people have which creates an inconsistent viewing experience. At least with the copy you can gauge your network speed and watch a few minutes later. A streaming solution will force you to sit through the lag.


Streaming can work incredibly well. My Netflix experience using the Wii on a 768 kbps DSL line is as smooth as silk. It's the same on my PC. The only lag appears when I fast forward.

DirecTV and FIOS are even better at streaming, because they use MoCA and therefore they already know their network topology. They have even optimized it for streaming.

Let's face it -- the was no real technical excuse for the Premiere to not support streaming. If the Xbox can stream HD, the Premiere should do it too.


----------



## Stormspace

BobCamp1 said:


> Streaming can work incredibly well. My Netflix experience using the Wii on a 768 kbps DSL line is as smooth as silk. It's the same on my PC. The only lag appears when I fast forward.


Mine on my dear departed Roku was great as well, not so on it's surviving family member, the TiVo.



BobCamp1 said:


> DirecTV and FIOS are even better at streaming, because they use MoCA and therefore they already know their network topology. They have even optimized it for streaming.


That's probably the best solution, but was the MoCA install included with the hardware? Probably required a installer to visit the house, right? TiVo as designed is a plug and play solution that doesn't require rewiring your home.



BobCamp1 said:


> Let's face it -- the was no real technical excuse for the Premiere to not support streaming. If the Xbox can stream HD, the Premiere should do it too.


Likely very true, but streaming TiVo content over wireless can be problematic with the only solution again to rewire your home thus defeating the plug and play advantage it has over the competition, whatever little remains of it.


----------



## JWThiers

Stormspace said:


> That's probably the best solution, but was the MoCA install included with the hardware? Probably required a installer to visit the house, right? TiVo as designed is a plug and play solution that doesn't require rewiring your home.


MoCa is as easy to set up as a router is. Mine had power in, coax in, coax out (for pass thru to a TV), Ethernet. Requires no special tools, no drilling, no cutting into wall boards and took all of 15 minutes to set up the 3 adapters I use. The most difficult thing was to hide cables for Spouse Approval Factor and get more power where I needed it.

Almost forgot, I don't have Fios, but my understanding that with them yes the MoCa install is included.


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> Lets see can of corn is analogous to the recorded content. Eating the corn is like watching the content.


No. Let's say the can of corn is a container for corn. That's one way that corn is sold. If you like that on-the-cob experience, you're going to have to purchase something other than the can of corn. That's why your analogy was inadequate.



JWThiers said:


> What it is boiling down to is that the industry and technology for consuming it is changing rapidly. Like the record industry in the 90's, what the TV and movie industry are going to have to come to terms with is that their consumers want to be able to record their content and move it around their home networks, to move it to portable devices.


What you're really saying, without admitting it, is that you think that the industry has to "come to terms" with having its assets devalued so that you don't have to pay so much for what you want. The record industry utterly failed to protect itself from casual piracy. They lost. They collectively betrayed their investors, their employees, and their artists. Their way was the wrong way. The right way maintains as much of the current revenue stream as possible, in the face of the transgressive and exploitative nature of their customer-base.



Stormspace said:


> Streaming is not a good solution because of the varying network topologies people have which creates an inconsistent viewing experience. At least with the copy you can gauge your network speed and watch a few minutes later. A streaming solution will force you to sit through the lag.


However, a streaming solution is generally easier to secure from casual exploitation.


----------



## bicker

Stormspace said:


> The Biggest issue I have with all of this is the use of drm which prevents fair use of the product.


That makes no sense. Fair Use, even when it does apply, is a defense against infringement. It is not a right to access anything.



Stormspace said:


> No one should have to buy the same thing six times to enjoy it on every device they have.


Sure they should, if that's the way it is being sold, and it is.


----------



## BobCamp1

Stormspace said:


> That's probably the best solution, but was the MoCA install included with the hardware? Probably required a installer to visit the house, right? TiVo as designed is a plug and play solution that doesn't require rewiring your home.


MoCA is included free with Verizon, but you have to upgrade the service for an extra $4/month to use MRV. The D* fee for the MoCA upgrade is $99 and comes with all the hardware (including free equipment upgrades) and free installation, plus $3/month for the service.

D* also unofficially lets you use your home network, but discourages it and strongly recommends you use MoCA.

Tivo has offered wireless adapters before, even though most of the unsupported ones work. It could also sell a MoCA package. It isn't that complicated to install.

Streaming is the future. Whether its VOD, Netflix, or MRV. The Premiere doesn't do VOD at all, does Netlfix poorly, and can't do MRV in many markets.


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> No. Let's say the can of corn is a container for corn. That's one way that corn is sold. If you like that on-the-cob experience, you're going to have to purchase something other than the can of corn. That's why your analogy was inadequate.


Or I could just open the container and put the corn in whatever other container I have. Thats the problem with analogies, we can each have a valid opinion as to what they mean. I would think of on the cob corn as the raw ingredients (the actors, directors, producers, scripts etc.)



bicker said:


> What you're really saying, without admitting it, is that you think that the industry has to "come to terms" with having its assets devalued so that you don't have to pay so much for what you want. The record industry utterly failed to protect itself from casual piracy. They lost. They collectively betrayed their investors, their employees, and their artists. Their way was the wrong way. The right way maintains as much of the current revenue stream as possible, in the face of the transgressive and exploitative nature of their customer-base.
> 
> However, a streaming solution is generally easier to secure from casual exploitation.


What I will say and admit to is that JUST LIKE THE RECORD INDUSTRY, the movie and TV industry are going to have to come to terms with is that their consumer base is rapidly changing. Just like the record industry their consumers don't want to purchase (or record on multiple devices) (nor should they have to) multiple copies of the same content just because they have multiple devices. If they don't change themselves they will eventually fail.

I'll be very specific what I think people should and should not be able to do.

Things people should be able to do* with content they have legally obtained*:

Copy content to same format (i.e. Bluray to Bluray, DVD to DVD ...) for archival reasons.
Trans-code from one format to another for compatibility with other consumer devices you own.
Store content on a home server for the purpose of viewing on other consumer devices you own.
Stream content from home to mobile devices over the internet.

Things people should NOT be allowed to do:

Make content available to people not living in you residence.
Make content available over internet for other to use.

I don't have a problem with paying for content, I do have a problem with having to pay for the same content multiple times.


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> Stormspace said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one should have to buy the same thing six times to enjoy it on every device they have.
> 
> 
> 
> Sure they should, if that's the way it is being sold, and it is.
Click to expand...

That will just drive people to places like Pirate bay.


----------



## richsadams

BobCamp1 said:


> The Premiere doesn't do VOD at all, does Netlfix poorly, and can't do MRV in many markets.


 Cableco VOD guides do not work on any TiVo but you can call in to order any VOD programming you want to view. That's certainly not convenient but it does work. Netflix works perfectly on our Premiere XL (and Series3). MRV also works fine on all TiVo's providing the recordings we want to view on another TiVo aren't copy protected by the cableco. Like everyone everywhere, we can use MRV on all of our local channels of course (CCI Byte 0x00). However (back on topic) Verizon screwed up by adding CP to some but not all channels a few weeks before they abandon us and turned things over to Frontier (who BTW has made zero effort to resolve this mess AFAIK). Interestingly we can use MRV (or transfer recordings to our computers) with the entire FiOS Premium Movie Package (including Showtime, etc.), but not with CNN or HGTV and so on.


----------



## aaronwt

richsadams said:


> Cableco VOD guides do not work on any TiVo but you can call in to order any VOD programming you want to view. That's certainly not convenient but it does work. Netflix works perfectly on our Premiere XL (and Series3). MRV also works fine on all TiVo's providing the recordings we want to view on another TiVo aren't copy protected by the cableco. Like everyone everywhere, we can use MRV on all of our local channels of course (CCI Byte 0x00). However (back on topic) Verizon screwed up by adding CP to some but not all channels a few weeks before they abandon us and turned things over to Frontier (who BTW has made zero effort to resolve this mess AFAIK). Interestingly we can use MRV (or transfer recordings to our computers) with the entire FiOS Premium Movie Package (including Showtime, etc.), but not with CNN or HGTV and so on.


That does sound Borked.


----------



## Stormspace

bicker said:


> That makes no sense. Fair Use, even when it does apply, is a defense against infringement. It is not a right to access anything.
> 
> Sure they should, if that's the way it is being sold, and it is.


17 U.S.C. § 1008, as legislated by the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, says that non-commercial copying by consumers of digital and analog musical recordings is not copyright infringement. Non-commercial includes such things as resale not in the course of business, perhaps of normal use working copies which are no longer wanted.


----------



## JWThiers

JWThiers said:


> Or I could just open the container and put the corn in whatever other container I have. Thats the problem with analogies, we can each have a valid opinion as to what they mean. I would think of on the cob corn as the raw ingredients (the actors, directors, producers, scripts etc.)
> 
> What I will say and admit to is that JUST LIKE THE RECORD INDUSTRY, the movie and TV industry are going to have to come to terms with is that their consumer base is rapidly changing. Just like the record industry their consumers don't want to purchase (or record on multiple devices) (nor should they have to) multiple copies of the same content just because they have multiple devices. If they don't change themselves they will eventually fail.
> 
> I'll be very specific what I think people should and should not be able to do.
> 
> Things people should be able to do *with content they have legally obtained*:
> 
> Copy content to same format (i.e. Bluray to Bluray, DVD to DVD ...) for archival reasons.
> Trans-code from one format to another for compatibility with other consumer devices you own.
> Store content on a home server for the purpose of viewing on other consumer devices you own.
> Stream content from home to mobile devices over the internet.
> 
> Things people should NOT be allowed to do:
> 
> Make content available to people not living in you residence.
> Make content available over internet for other to use.
> 
> I don't have a problem with paying for content, I do have a problem with having to pay for the same content multiple times.


I added a clarification " with content they have legally obtained". this does make a difference and thought I should point it out.


----------



## BobCamp1

JWThiers said:


> That will just drive people to places like Pirate bay.


Already there.


----------



## dswartz

It's also kind of pointless to state that streaming is not as good, given that we are being forced into a position where MRV will be totally broken for Tivos, if they don't provide that


----------



## JWThiers

dswartz said:


> It's also kind of pointless to state that streaming is not as good, given that we are being forced into a position where MRV will be totally broken for Tivos, if they don't provide that


Only for stuff you record. I believe Stormspace was actually referring to Netflix Streaming vs something like Amazon downloads. While if you have a fast connection stream can give very good results, downloaded content there is no restriction on the picture quality. Picture Quality is limited by file size and encoding prior to download, while a stream requires a fast sustained download rate. Therefore the picture quality of a download can always be theoretically better than a stream.


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> Or I could just open the container and put the corn in whatever other container I have.


You can put your TiVo in any room you want. It's still just a TiVo. It isn't smaller than it is. It isn't battery-operated.

You could also glue to corn onto a fake cob you made out of the inside of a toilet paper roll. That doesn't mean you're entitled to a real corn-on-the-cob experience from your canned corn.

It just doesn't.



JWThiers said:


> Thats the problem with analogies, we can each have a valid opinion as to what they mean.


Except my analogy reflect the reality that folks are going to be experiencing, while your analogy is programmed to cause disaffection. So taking our own personal opinions out of it, and deferring to the reflection of the society we live in, my analogy prevails.



JWThiers said:


> What I will say and admit to is that JUST LIKE THE RECORD INDUSTRY, the movie and TV industry are going to have to come to terms with is that their consumer base is rapidly changing.


Yes, but PROTECTING THEIR CONTENT is one of the ways that they're responsibly doing precisely that. In other words, the Recording Industry failed to get in front of the curve of casual piracy, and as a result, the practice became not only commonplace, but considered by so many to be generally-acceptable that a great number of people, yourself included, refuse to acknowledge the right of a copyright owner to actually sell what they offered to sell (as opposed to what you wanted them to have offered you), and refuse to acknowledge the right of a copyright owner to be protected with regard to those other, unlicensed uses of what they own. The failure of the Recording Industry was not that they "forgot" to roll over, and let a transgressive and exploitative consumer-base take whatever they wanted and pay as little as they wanted, or pay nothing at all. The failure of the Recording Industry was letting the transgressive and exploitative consumer-base get ahead of them, and develop their counter-technology faster than the industry developed technology to protect what was actually truly and complete and unequivocally theirs.



JWThiers said:


> Just like the record industry their consumers don't want to purchase (or record on multiple devices)


Consumers never want to pay more than they are led to believe they necessarily need to. For things like food, water, basic shelter, and other essentials of life, that's worthy of consideration. However, in a free enterprise system, for non-essentials, sellers should be aiming to maximize their returns, in recognition of their fiduciary responsibilities to their owners, to their employees, to their business partners, and to the community whose economic vitality is fostered by the economic activity the business generates. Their obligation to their customers is to predict what desires there are, make offers, and then fulfill the terms and conditions of the offers that customers have accepted.



JWThiers said:


> (nor should they have to) multiple copies of the same content just because they have multiple devices.


No matter how many times you say it, it won't make it true. What consumers want and what they "should have" are not the same thing. What they "should have" is precisely what they were offered, not one stitch more. You have a very well-thought-out set of parameters for what you want, but that has no bearing on what actually "should" be.


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> That will just drive people to places like Pirate bay.


Rationalization of transgressive behavior is not a firm basis for society to make its rules.


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> Rationalization of transgressive behavior is not a firm basis for society to make its rules.


Not a rationalization just a statement of what I think will happen using the music industry as a guide. RIAA was not real happy when recordable CD's came out. They said it would kill the industry. it took things like , as Stormspace pointed out, the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 to even accept the idea of making personal backups. They nearly had puppies when MP3's started to become popular. Now they make more money than ever before off of MP3's and other portable formats. As I have said things like Napster in the day and Pirate Bay should be shut down, but at the same time I see nothing wrong with an individual making a personal copy or transcoding for use on other devices and IMO if you make it easier for people to do that pirate bay would be making less of an impact. The industry can either get out in front of the change or they can forced into change by their customers or by law changes, or they can cease to exist. With internet and other strictly web based content that I can consume when and were I want on what I want I could get by on that. The competition for them is the web as I just described, and their own content on pirate bay. You can't win if you don't play and pirate sites wont go away.


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> You can put your TiVo in any room you want. It's still just a TiVo. It isn't smaller than it is. It isn't battery-operated.
> 
> You could also glue to corn onto a fake cob you made out of the inside of a toilet paper roll. That doesn't mean you're entitled to a real corn-on-the-cob experience from your canned corn.
> 
> It just doesn't.


Tivo just cooks the content for that one container. But I am not using FAKE corn (and you started with canned corn not on the cob regardless) I bought the can of corn (or corn on the cob) and I should be entitled to eat that corn however I choose to cook it, wherever I want, when I want.



bicker said:


> Except my analogy reflect the reality that folks are going to be experiencing, while your analogy is programmed to cause disaffection. So taking our own personal opinions out of it, and deferring to the reflection of the society we live in, my analogy prevails.


Where in the post do I claim this is how it is right now??? My opinions are about how things should be and/or how they should be changed. But your analogy is still wrong. IMO when I said


JWThiers said:


> ...The analogy is more like you bought a can of corn, and you should be able to put that can of corn in any recipe you want and eat it anyway you want. The way it is now you buy a can of corn and the only way you can consume it is in the recipe they provide on the side of the can. Additionally you can only eat that corn in the dining room and only for diner and no left overs allowed. So no corn in your Shepherd's pie for lunch. and you can't eat it outside at the picnic table.


I was dead on, and that can of corn analogy came from you so I didn't even have the benefit of choosing where to come from. The difference between the two is you thing that people are and should be buying the container and should be limited to only that container. and that there is no reason to change. I on the other hand feel that the copyright laws governing this are too restrictive and don't allow for fair use. Therefore the container is irrelevant. Once someone legally obtains content they should be allowed to move the content around their devices as they see fit for personal use.


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> Not a rationalization just a statement of what I think will happen using the music industry as a guide.


Again, the difference is that the music industry was too non-committal, got too far behind the technology curve, and basically allowed things to happen that they should have fought, and fought hard, sooner. Clearly, the movie and television industries aren't going to make the same mistake.



JWThiers said:


> You can't win if you don't play and pirate sites wont go away.


I think the key is going to be our society standing up and making a decision that we're going grow a backbone and take aggressive action against people who would even consider using such sites. Vigorous and exacting punishment, unrestrained by consideration for bleeding-heart sob stories, will put a damper on use of such sites. Assertive restrictions on service providers, requiring them to cooperate with enforcement measures. Doing whatever is necessary *to stop stealing*. When society determines that's important (like when society decided that a telephone in every home was important) it can be done.

And if not, then fill the airwaves with reality game shows, and fill the movie theaters with cheap shlock, and the investors in quality video production can take their money to some other investment avenue, where they're not just flushing it all down the toilet because pirates are having their way with them.


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> ... I should be entitled to eat that corn however I choose to cook it, wherever I want, when I want.


You can watch programming off your TiVo in the day, and in the night. That's analogous to how you choose too cook the corn.

Taking that programming to another piece of hardware is changing the corn.



JWThiers said:


> My opinions are about how things should be and/or how they should be changed. But your analogy is still wrong. IMO when I said


Actually, my analogy is correct, and things shouldn't change the way you want them to change.

Even though it would benefit me personally, what you're suggesting is wrong.


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> Again, the difference is that the music industry was too non-committal, got too far behind the technology curve, and basically allowed things to happen that they should have fought, and fought hard, sooner. Clearly, the movie and television industries aren't going to make the same mistake.
> 
> I think the key is going to be our society standing up and making a decision that we're going grow a backbone and take aggressive action against people who would even consider using such sites. Vigorous and exacting punishment, unrestrained by consideration for bleeding-heart sob stories, will put a damper on use of such sites. Assertive restrictions on service providers, requiring them to cooperate with enforcement measures. Doing whatever is necessary *to stop stealing*. When society determines that's important (like when society decided that a telephone in every home was important) it can be done.


There is ZERO chance that piracy will ever go completely away. sites can start grow and move far quicker than they can be taken down. Movies are making it to Pirate bay BEFORE the are released to the theaters. And that is for the sites that are outright posting the shows. Add on top of that people that use software to rip protected Blu-Ray and DVD, or hacked Tivo's what you call piracy will never go away. There is more outrage about child pornography than sharing a movie and they still have several high profile busts every year. And it still hasn't even come close to going away. That is just plain sad fact.



bicker said:


> And if not, then fill the airwaves with reality game shows, and fill the movie theaters with cheap shlock, and the investors in quality video production can take their money to some other investment avenue, where they're not just flushing it all down the toilet because pirates are having their way with them.


Or they could come up with a new business model that will both make them money and give the customer what they want. Kind of like what the record industry did and are now enjoying the best profits that they have had in decades. Add that the cat is already out of the bag so to speak. Software already exists that does the ripping, the sites exist that do the "sharing", portable devices exist that allow viewing of properly formated content. Add to that sites like Netflix, Hulu, amazon etc already exist legally that will eventually (IMO) eliminate the need for physical content (DVD's, Blu-Ray, etc.). Throw in I think major studios will eventually seen that direct to the viewer via the net might make an interesting revenue stream. And that doesn't even count stuff that is available for free ONLY on the net.



bicker said:


> You can watch programming off your TiVo in the day, and in the night. That's analogous to how you choose too cook the corn.
> 
> Taking that programming to another piece of hardware is changing the corn.
> 
> Actually, my analogy is correct, and things shouldn't change the way you want them to change.
> 
> Even though it would benefit me personally, what you're suggesting is wrong.


Cooking usually requires the application of some work. Adding other ingredients, applying heat, etc. The act of watching is more analogous to eating or consuming as opposed to cooking IMO. Hence watching a recorded show on a tivo is more analogous to eating or consuming the corn. But thats just my opinion. And as I stated before different people interpret analogies differently we can both be correct depending on how people interpret the analogy.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

bicker said:


> Doing whatever is necessary *to stop stealing*.


You can keep posting this over and over and it still won't change the essential lie that it is.

The US Constitution says: *To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;*

This used to mean that copyright extended for 14 years with a single 14 year renewal if the author was still alive. But blithering imbeciles like Sonny Bono (watch out for that tree!) were bought and paid for by big media and now *"limited times"* means *"forever"*.

My tax dollars and the government's police powers enfore these one-sided copyright laws. And so IMO the current situation is not stealing, it's closer to *civil disobedience.* Not that "stealing" is the correct word anyway, it's more like "copyright infringement". But don't let the facts get in your way as you repeat your *Big Lie.*

Let me know when the copyright for the 68 y/o film Casablanca expires. Then the situation won't be so one-sided and we can talk about enforcing reasonable laws.


----------



## JWThiers

Phantom Gremlin said:


> You can keep posting this over and over and it still won't change the essential lie that it is.
> 
> The US Constitution says: *To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;*
> 
> This used to mean that copyright extended for 14 years with a single 14 year renewal if the author was still alive. But blithering imbeciles like Sonny Bono (watch out for that tree!) were bought and paid for by big media and now *"limited times"* means *"forever"*.
> 
> My tax dollars and the government's police powers enfore these one-sided copyright laws. And so IMO the current situation is not stealing, it's closer to *civil disobedience.* Not that "stealing" is the correct word anyway, it's more like "copyright infringement". But don't let the facts get in your way as you repeat your *Big Lie.*
> 
> Let me know when the copyright for the 68 y/o film Casablanca expires. Then the situation won't be so one-sided and we can talk about enforcing reasonable laws.


It will expire the same time that Disney finally realizes that Mickey is a trademark for them and they file for a trademark on him rather than a copyright. Its not called Mikey Mouse Legislation for nothing.


----------



## Brainiac 5

Gee, I haven't been reading this thread lately, and when I check back in, we're on this again?



bicker said:


> You can put your TiVo in any room you want. It's still just a TiVo. It isn't smaller than it is. It isn't battery-operated.


You're right, you can. And you can run HDMI to another room and watch content there that way. So clearly the mere act of watching in another room is not a violation of anyone's rights; it's breaking the copy protection that is prohibited by law.



> You could also glue to corn onto a fake cob you made out of the inside of a toilet paper roll. That doesn't mean you're entitled to a real corn-on-the-cob experience from your canned corn.


Yes, that's how it is, by law. JWThiers' analogy is the way it is for things with no copy protection.



> ... and refuse to acknowledge the right of a copyright owner to be protected with regard to those other, unlicensed uses of what they own.


The copyright owner does not in fact have an inherent right to restrict, for instance, in what room you consume their content (and therefore sell you the rights separately for different rooms). The right we are talking about here is the right granted by the DMCA to not have their copy protection circumvented. You can easily see this by thinking about DVDs - it's clearly legal to watch a DVD wherever you want. (Or read a book wherever you want, etc.)

Interestingly, the content industry is moving to give us pretty much what JWThiers is suggesting, at least for content that you buy (vs get as a service on cable). The UltraViolet DRM scheme, which many content providers have signed on with, will allow people to do things like copy to different media while maintaining copy protection so that they can't distribute it to other people, effectively making things work like his corn analogy.


----------



## Brainiac 5

bicker said:


> Even though it would benefit me personally, what you're suggesting is wrong.


What he's suggesting is to make things work just the way they always did before the introduction of the DMCA - which wasn't meant to create new rights, just to provide the ability to protect copyrights in the digital age.

In any case, what's "wrong" is of course subjective, that's why we vote to elect the people who decide these things. Clearly at the moment, things have been decided more your way, but people are free to suggest and campaign for other alternatives.


----------



## vurbano

ZeoTiVo said:


> so the fact we do not catch all criminals mean we should just change the laws to make taking someone's stuff legal.


No one is taking anyones stuff,  We pay for that content to be delivered to our homes legally.


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> There is ZERO chance that piracy will ever go completely away.


Of course, however *every *bit of casual piracy stopped is worthwhile. There is no excuse, no rationalization, and no equivocation that excuses violating copyright, and the more we make that clear, the more casual piracy is stopped.



JWThiers said:


> Or they could come up with a new business model that will both make them money and give the customer what they want.


That's exactly what they are doing. Perhaps the reason why you don't see it that way is because you want the balance biased strictly in your consumerist-biased favor?



JWThiers said:


> Kind of like what the record industry did and are now enjoying the best profits that they have had in decades.


That's ridiculous. The music recording industry *lost* for the reasons I outlined earlier. Indeed, your ascribing a positive color to the music recording industry's situation indicates strongly what I said before: That perhaps the reason why you don't see the movie/television industry as projecting a new business model is because you want the balance biased strictly in your consumerist-biased favor, as was the case with the music recording industry.

Try this: Try coming up with a "new business model" that involves the industry gleaning the maximum amount of profit, not some lesser amount.


----------



## bicker

Phantom Gremlin said:


> You can keep posting this over and over and it still won't change the essential lie that it is.


It isn't a lie. It is the truth. A truth that you don't like. However, that doesn't mean it isn't the truth.

And it makes sense that a consumerist-bias would try to project that truth as if it were not.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> The US Constitution says: *To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;* This used to mean that copyright extended for 14 years with a single 14 year renewal if the author was still alive. But blithering imbeciles like Sonny Bono (watch out for that tree!) were bought and paid for by big media and now *"limited times"* means *"forever"*.


You're raising issues that your side of the argument has already lost. You're clearly frustrated that your consumerist-bias didn't prevail. However, the reality is that these changes you referred to were made to best serve the public interest, *even though* you believe that the opposite is the case.

What's most troubling is if you cannot come to terms with the reality that, first, reasonable people disagree with you about this, and second, that those other reasonable people prevailed in the public arguments about it. It is really important that folks ground themselves in the reality of the situation, rather than crafting fictions to try to cast their advocacy as being on the only reasonable resolution, when in reality it is only one perspective and one that failed to prevail.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> My tax dollars and the government's police powers enfore these one-sided copyright laws.


I could list a dozen things that I disagree with, that *my* tax dollars support and promulgate. We live in a society with other people. We don't each always get our own way.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> And so IMO the current situation is not stealing,


Actually, your opinion doesn't have any bearing on whether it is stealing or not: It is stealing. What is and is not illegal is based on the law, not based on your opinion.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> it's closer to *civil disobedience.*


That's ludicrous. The point of civil disobedience is to publicly show the injustice of the sanctions imposed. Pirates scurrilously hide their transgression so as to not get caught - that's stealing, not civil disobedience.


----------



## bicker

Brainiac 5 said:


> Gee, I haven't been reading this thread lately, and when I check back in, we're on this again?


I suspect the reason is that so many consumerist-advocates refused to acknowledge that the other side of the argument is just as valid as their perspective, and has indeed prevailed over their perspective.



Brainiac 5 said:


> You're right, you can. And you can run HDMI to another room and watch content there that way. So clearly the mere act of watching in another room is not a violation of anyone's rights; it's breaking the copy protection that is prohibited by law.


Yes correct.



Brainiac 5 said:


> JWThiers' analogy is the way it is for things with no copy protection.


No, his analogy fails to acknowledge different formats as different things. When you buy content, you're buying it in a specific format, even though you wanted to buy it format-agnostic. No one is selling content to you format-agnostic. You're not paying enough for content to make offering it format-agnostic the most profitable approach. Consumer behaviors, themselves, dictate this - this unwillingness to pay a premium for this premium aspect of what you're wanting to purchase.



Brainiac 5 said:


> The copyright owner does not in fact have an inherent right to restrict, for instance, in what room you consume their content (and therefore sell you the rights separately for different rooms).


That's a bit like saying that someone selling a can of corn can't tell you which side of your mouth to chew the canned corn on. Regardless, note that the copyright owner, if they so choose, can indeed restrict the right to view to specific rooms, i.e., the X movie theaters that they release a film into. And beyond that, the copyright owner can indeed restrict playback to specific playback devices, if they so choose, and such stock of registered devices are placed into the marketplace.



Brainiac 5 said:


> Interestingly, the content industry is moving to give us pretty much what JWThiers is suggesting, at least for content that you buy (vs get as a service on cable).


I think, rather, that what you're referring to is the fact that routine transgression is continuing to degrade the industry's ability to protect their assets. It's horrible that transgression is driving things. What's next? Routine shoplifting legitimizing set-your-own-discount attitudes? Sad.


----------



## bicker

Brainiac 5 said:


> What he's suggesting is to make things work just the way they always did before the introduction of the DMCA - which wasn't meant to create new rights, just to provide the ability to protect copyrights in the digital age.


 Why not just make your copies using A/V connections? That's what you were able to do before the introduction of the DMCA.


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> That's exactly what they are doing. Perhaps the reason why you don't see it that way is because you want the balance biased strictly in your consumerist-biased favor?
> 
> That's ridiculous. The music recording industry *lost* for the reasons I outlined earlier. Indeed, your ascribing a positive color to the music recording industry's situation indicates strongly what I said before: That perhaps the reason why you don't see the movie/television industry as projecting a new business model is because you want the balance biased strictly in your consumerist-biased favor, as was the case with the music recording industry.
> 
> Try this: Try coming up with a "new business model" that involves the industry gleaning the maximum amount of profit, not some lesser amount.


Sure you can come up with a model (i'm pretty sure that is what they already have) that will squeeze every last possible cent out of the consumer (you know those people that are buying their stuff (BTW whatever happened to the customer is always right?)). In doing so they will drive other customers (most of them) away from them directly to the not so casual pirates.

What NEW model have they embraced? Besides suing anyone who even thinks about ripping a blu-ray so they can watch it on a business trip?


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> Why not just make your copies using A/V connections? That's what you were able to do before the introduction of the DMCA.


You mean with the analog loophole that they have been trying to close (I think I recall them making some progress on that), if you do that then people could post it at pirate bay


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> Sure you can come up with a model (i'm pretty sure that is what they already have) that will squeeze every last possible cent out of the consumer


And if they don't try to do that, then investors will be justified in suing their butts off for breach of fiduciary responsibility, or at the least, throwing the bums out and putting some officers in charge of the company who will respect the investors' primacy.



JWThiers said:


> (you know those people that are buying their stuff


Customers are customers because they pay for things. Paying for things is what makes people customers.



JWThiers said:


> (BTW whatever happened to the customer is always right?)).


That's a consumerists' fiction. The adage was actually closer to, "Make the customer *feel like* they're always right." The idea was that you make the customer *feel* valued, and they'll be more willing to be loyal to you (i.e., willing to *pay a premium* for what you're offering).

However, over time, consumers have become jaded, and superlatively price-focused. Consumers simply don't care as much about feeling valued anymore, and so that adage no longer applies.



JWThiers said:


> In doing so they will drive other customers (most of them) away from them directly to the not so casual pirates.


Or why don't we just shut down the industry entirely? 

The point is that a company is not a charity to its customers. Rather, it is a servant to its owners.



JWThiers said:


> What NEW model have they embraced?


See above. Again, I am not surprised if you choose to not see their efforts to fight casual piracy as part of their integration of changes in their business environment. It doesn't support your contention to grant that reality.


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> Why not just make your copies using A/V connections?
> 
> 
> 
> You mean with the analog loophole that they have been trying to close (I think I recall them making some progress on that), if you do that then people could post it at pirate bay
Click to expand...

No, that's not at all what the analog loophole refers to. The analog loophole refers to analog reception of digital data. A/V connections are for analog reception of analog data (specifically via component video connections). There are no significant efforts underway to do away with A/V connections.


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> No, that's not at all what the analog loophole refers to. The analog loophole refers to analog reception of digital data. A/V connections are for analog reception of analog data (specifically via component video connections). There are no significant efforts underway to do away with A/V connections.


On May 7th 2010 the FCC granted a limited waiver of Section 76.1903 to allow the use of SOC. SOC is Selectable Output Control. Basically what the limited waiver allows is for broadcasters to "Turn Off" the analog outputs on your devices <sarcasm on> so all of us casual pirates can't steal their property.</sacasm off>. That is the "progress" I was refering to.

If it is a digital signal it is received digitally (input), The output can be either digial or analog. Analog output has no encryption that is where the analog loop hole is.


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> And if they don't try to do that, then investors will be justified in suing their butts off for breach of fiduciary responsibility, or at the least, throwing the bums out and putting some officers in charge of the company who will respect the investors' primacy.


And when they have chased most of their customers away because they are charging too much for what they are providing? then ...



bicker said:


> That's a consumerists' fiction. The adage was actually closer to, "Make the customer *feel like* they're always right." The idea was that you make the customer *feel* valued, and they'll be more willing to be loyal to you (i.e., willing to *pay a premium* for what you're offering).
> 
> However, over time, consumers have become jaded, and superlatively price-focused. Consumers simply don't care as much about feeling valued anymore, and so that adage no longer applies.


If they keep it up the customers will "Feel like" they are being anally raped and having money extorted from them because they want to transcode a movie onto a portable device.



bicker said:


> Or why don't we just shut down the industry entirely?


Cold happen and be replaced by some stuff being done by people on the internet. Some of the stuff I've seen is actually technically done quite well as a distribution medium. I haven't seen much on TV that can't be done from a small indie shop. Chop off the giant corporate middleman crap and cost would go down, making that a viable option.



bicker said:


> The point is that a company is not a charity to its customers. Rather, it is a servant to its owners.
> 
> See above. Again, I am not surprised if you choose to not see their efforts to fight casual piracy as part of their integration of changes in their business environment. It doesn't support your contention to grant that reality.


Never claimed they were a charity to the customers you are putting that particular spin on it. But without customers (people who are buying you stuff) you won't be in business very long.

Lets see if off the top of my head I can come up with a relatively reasonable *NEW *model. As opposed to more of the same. Continue to put out content like they do now. For a SMALL fee, you purchase the rights to transcode for personal use. I know its not perfect BUT, it does open new revenue streams for a segment of their customers that are doing it anyway. Now they have a legal alternative "casual piracy" and the companies are getting a value added stream of money for not much extra work. The fee would have to be small under probably $5 at the most (if it is too high people will continue to pirate because of cost) but since the customer are providing all the labor and materials and tools and the content was already purchased (or legally obtained in the first place) the company is just providing some kind of unlock code or license number they aren't really doing a lot of extra work. The goal is to attract people who were doing this for free anyway. You already agreed that the is zero chance of stopping all piracy, this is a way to get some money from those that are going to do it anyway.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

bicker said:


> What's most troubling is if you cannot come to terms with the reality that, first, reasonable people disagree with you about this, and second, that those other reasonable people prevailed in the public arguments about it.


Who defines "reasonable people"?

I'll take my inspiration from a great American statesman, one of the founding fathers, the principal author of the Declaration of Independence, who later became the third president of the USA. He understood how the plutocrats could conspire against the interests of the people. He said:

*If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so.*​


----------



## steve614

Amen to that! :up:


----------



## DCIFRTHS

Well, the last few pages of this thread have turned into a debate, and as shocked as I am this derailment, I do have some questions regarding the original title of this thread. Hopefully, someone can help me out with an answer.

Is Verizon now pairing cards? How can I verify if my cards are paired? I have S3 boxes.

Is the copy protection flag now being set on FiOS TV broadcasts in some locations? If yes, is there a list of locations? I haven;t noticed the flag on any of the shows I record. I am right outside of the city.

Thanks!


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> On May 7th 2010 the FCC granted a limited waiver of Section 76.1903 to allow the use of SOC. SOC is Selectable Output Control. Basically what the limited waiver allows is for broadcasters to "Turn Off" the analog outputs on your devices <sarcasm on> so all of us casual pirates can't steal their property.</sacasm off>. That is the "progress" I was refering to.


And it still remains totally irrelevant to the point you replied to.

Again, to be clear: Brainiac said, "What he's suggesting is to make things work just the way they always did before the introduction of the DMCA..." The point I made is that you can *still *do what you could do "back then". SOC has nothing to do with what the typical viewer was able to do "back then".


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> And when they have chased most of their customers away because they are charging too much for what they are providing? then ...


If that ever happens, *then* you can raise it. Until then, you're just trafficking in FUD.



JWThiers said:


> If they keep it up the customers will "Feel like" they are being anally raped and having money extorted from them because they want to transcode a movie onto a portable device.


So you claim. It serves your curmudgeony. It has no actual factual basis though. All I need to say is that you're wrong. People have been saying things like this forever, and it still hasn't come true.

Just because you don't like ti doesn't mean it is wrong.



JWThiers said:


> Cold happen and be replaced by some stuff being done by people on the internet.


Because the quality of that stuff is so good eh? 

It's really very simple: High production values cost money. Money comes from investment. Investment chases profit. QED.



JWThiers said:


> Never claimed they were a charity to the customers you are putting that particular spin on it. But without customers (people who are buying you stuff) you won't be in business very long.


However, the premise you're trying to float ("without customers") has no merit, for the reasons mentioned above. It's again, just FUD.



JWThiers said:


> Lets see if off the top of my head I can come up with a relatively reasonable *NEW *model. As opposed to more of the same. Continue to put out content like they do now. For a SMALL fee, you purchase the rights to transcode for personal use. I know its not perfect BUT, it does open new revenue streams for a segment of their customers that are doing it anyway.


However, you're probably going to claim that whatever fee they charge is not "SMALL". Free enterprise means that they're going to make that fee such that they still earn the maximum return on their investment, and I bet that that would raise your ire.



JWThiers said:


> Now they have a legal alternative "casual piracy"


They already do. You can buy episodes from Amazon.com for a "SMALL" fee. Instead, you insist on transcoding yourself, just to try to make it seem like you have a justification for your objections.


----------



## bicker

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Who defines "reasonable people"?


I think that's the crux of the issue: Too many people place their own personal preferences above rationality and consideration for being part of a society, rather than a society unto themselves.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> I'll take my inspiration from ...


(Without even reading the rest of the sentence, so as to not bias my first response...) And that's your choice. And everyone else deserves the same consideration and respect that you're implicitly asserting you deserve, with regard to their choice of "inspiration". There is no legitimacy in unilaterally placing one's own over others.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> a great American statesman, one of the founding fathers, the principal author of the Declaration of Independence, who later became the third president of the USA. He understood how the plutocrats could conspire against the interests of the people. He said:
> 
> *If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so.*​


You're quoting a *public* declaration of defiance, and one that included, "And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence,* we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor*." They acknowledged *explicitly* that they were risking everything. If you aren't taking action *publicly*, effectively throwing your disobedience in the face of your oppressors, and you're not accepting the risk of ending up on the losing side of the dispute, then you're not living up to Jefferson's legacy; rather, you're defiling Jefferson's legacy for your own, personal, petty wants.


----------



## bicker

DCIFRTHS said:


> Well, the last few pages of this thread have turned into a debate, and as shocked as I am this derailment, I do have some questions regarding the original title of this thread. Hopefully, someone can help me out with an answer.
> 
> Is Verizon now pairing cards? How can I verify if my cards are paired? I have S3 boxes.


The point was made several times early in the thread that the title of the thread is misleading. I have FiOS and have never had this problem. As far as I know, the issue was limited to areas that Verizon was getting rid of.


----------



## DCIFRTHS

bicker said:


> The point was made several times early in the thread that the title of the thread is misleading. I have FiOS and have never had this problem. As far as I know, the issue was limited to areas that Verizon was getting rid of.


Well, that's good news - at least for the people it doesn't affect. Do you know if your cards are paired to the device?


----------



## dianebrat

DCIFRTHS said:


> Well, that's good news - at least for the people it doesn't affect. Do you know if your cards are paired to the device?


Verizon has not gone to the process of pairing the CableCARDs in their system at this time, they just need activation when newly installed.

Diane


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> Why not just make your copies using A/V connections? That's what you were able to do before the introduction of the DMCA.





JWThiers said:


> You mean with the analog loophole that they have been trying to close (I think I recall them making some progress on that), if you do that then people could post it at pirate bay





bicker said:


> No, that's not at all what the analog loophole refers to. The analog loophole refers to analog reception of digital data. A/V connections are for analog reception of analog data (specifically via component video connections). There are no significant efforts underway to do away with A/V connections.





JWThiers said:


> On May 7th 2010 the FCC granted a limited waiver of Section 76.1903 to allow the use of SOC. SOC is Selectable Output Control. Basically what the limited waiver allows is for broadcasters to "Turn Off" the analog outputs on your devices <sarcasm on> so all of us casual pirates can't steal their property.</sacasm off>. That is the "progress" I was refering to.
> 
> If it is a digital signal it is received digitally (input), The output can be either digial or analog. Analog output has no encryption that is where the analog loop hole is.





bicker said:


> And it still remains totally irrelevant to the point you replied to.
> 
> Again, to be clear: Brainiac said, "What he's suggesting is to make things work just the way they always did before the introduction of the DMCA..." The point I made is that you can *still *do what you could do "back then". SOC has nothing to do with what the typical viewer was able to do "back then".


Here is the thread of conversation of the Analog loop hole.

Being able to turn off the unencrypted analog outputs of a piece of A/V gear irrelevant to the point I replied to? Turning off the analog outputs closes the hole completely, unless you count taking a hand held camera as part of the hole. Sure whatever.


----------



## richsadams

DCIFRTHS said:


> Well, the last few pages of this thread have turned into a debate, and as shocked as I am this derailment, I do have some questions regarding the original title of this thread. Hopefully, someone can help me out with an answer.
> 
> Is Verizon now pairing cards? How can I verify if my cards are paired? I have S3 boxes.
> 
> Is the copy protection flag now being set on FiOS TV broadcasts in some locations? If yes, is there a list of locations? I haven;t noticed the flag on any of the shows I record. I am right outside of the city.
> 
> Thanks!


Can't blame you for not wanting to slog through the OT material. With regard to Verizon's remaining network and copy protection/binding cable cards, it all remains to be seen. For those of us that spent weeks working on this including untold hours on the phone with Verizon at the time (June) we were repeatedly told by Verizon employees (at several levels of authority) that Verizon plans to roll out CP to the entire "Verizon footprint". Several members received e-mail responses from VZ with identical wording at the time as well. Verizon's response to various regulatory agencies at the same time said the same thing.

Since VZ sold their services in numerous states to Frontier (where the scatter-shot CP was implemented June 7/8), I haven't seen any reports of VZ actually implementing CP on their remaining FiOS network. To me that's a good argument for it not happening, but again, only time will tell.

If it turns out that they don't implement CP on the rest of their FiOS network (and I hope for your and other's sakes that that turns out to be the case) it means that they not only reneged on their and Frontier's absolute claim that services would not change with the transition, but that they made additional false statements to their customers and other parties to side-step the issue until they could walk away and leave the existing CP mess Frontier customers are living with today.

Best of luck to all of our VZ FiOS cousins!


----------



## cwerdna

DCIFRTHS said:


> Well, the last few pages of this thread have turned into a debate, and as shocked as I am this derailment, I do have some questions regarding the original title of this thread. Hopefully, someone can help me out with an answer.


I haven't the bandwidth to deal w/this issue and engage w/Frontier (since I along w/the OP and richsadams are in areas that got transitioned from VZ to Frontier) nor read the debates.

I am annoyed that this thread has gotten completely off topic and turned into a debate. I was going to suggest and still suggest that *the parties who want to debate whatever the heck they are talking about* (bicker is on my ignore list) to* take it somewhere else, like to Happy Hour.*

The original cruz of this thread was the sudden CP on most channels >100, discovered by the OP and confirmed by other folks in WA and OR, after an outage. VZ was #$%#%[email protected] worthless and a waste of time, when we tried to engage them.

I suggest that we ONLY stick to FiOS CP on VZ or Frontier, in this thread. Debates about EZ passes, Mickey, Disney, analog connections, etc. don't help us.


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> I suggest that we ONLY stick to FiOS CP on VZ or Frontier, in this thread. Debates about EZ passes, Mickey, Disney, analog connections, etc. don't help us.


+1 :up: (But I don't hold out much hope.)


----------



## JWThiers

Boils down to it seems from the outside (Don't have Fios) is that things have somewhat settled down and what whatever you have now is likely to be what you will keep. Welcome to what we the unwashed masses have had to put up with for a long time. Sorry about that.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> +1 :up: (But I don't hold out much hope.)


+2...I too, am sorry that this thread got transitioned into an ethics debate!


----------



## richsadams

JWThiers said:


> Boils down to it seems from the outside (Don't have Fios) is that things have somewhat settled down and what whatever you have now is likely to be what you will keep. Welcome to what we the unwashed masses have had to put up with for a long time. Sorry about that.


That would certainly seem to be the case. I'm continually moving toward severing ties, at least when it comes to TV, with Frontier now. I have a half-dozen CE products that will stream Netflix (and some BlueRay movies that show up in my mailbox now and then), plus Amazon VOD, etc. My new Apple TV is on order and Boxee/Hulu works pretty well on my Mac Mini Media center. Next step is to install a decent antenna in the attic and who knows?

I really liked being able to dump Comcast for VZ FiOS. It was great when we first had it installed a couple of years ago. Now...not so much since Frontier has taken the wheel. Now I not only have bizarre copy protection to deal with, our billing is screwed up and their CSR's don't seem to be able to resolve any of it.

MPSAN alerted me to what Frontier's CEO said about their future plans and her apparent ignorance about their fiber optic network recently...

http://bit.ly/bUufVc

http://bit.ly/b8CGkf

Add to that that Frontier has no stated intention of adding any of the newer features VZ FiOS is now bragging about in other markets and well, I don't see things improving and can envision how they could easily deteriorate. Perhaps that's how they intend to keep their pricing "stable".


----------



## DCIFRTHS

dianebrat said:


> Verizon has not gone to the process of pairing the CableCARDs in their system at this time, they just need activation when newly installed.
> 
> Diane


Thanks for the info!



richsadams said:


> Can't blame you for not wanting to slog through the OT material.





cwerdna said:


> I haven't the bandwidth to deal w/this issue and engage w/Frontier (since I along w/the OP and richsadams are in areas that got transitioned from VZ to Frontier) nor read the debates.
> 
> I am annoyed that this thread has gotten completely off topic and turned into a debate. I was going to suggest and still suggest that *the parties who want to debate whatever the heck they are talking about* (bicker is on my ignore list) to* take it somewhere else, like to Happy Hour.*


Yes. It's very frustrating, and the main reason I don't frequent the forums as often as I used to.



richsadams said:


> With regard to Verizon's remaining network and copy protection/binding cable cards, it all remains to be seen. For those of us that spent weeks working on this including untold hours on the phone with Verizon at the time (June) we were repeatedly told by Verizon employees (at several levels of authority) that Verizon plans to roll out CP to the entire "Verizon footprint". ... Several members received e-mail responses from VZ with identical wording at the time as well. Verizon's response to various regulatory agencies at the same time said the same thing.
> 
> Since VZ sold their services in numerous states to Frontier (where the scatter-shot CP was implemented June 7/8), I haven't seen any reports of VZ actually implementing CP on their remaining FiOS network. To me that's a good argument for it not happening, but again, only time will tell.
> 
> If it turns out that they don't implement CP on the rest of their FiOS network (and I hope for your and other's sakes that that turns out to be the case) it means that they not only reneged on their and Frontier's absolute claim that services would not change with the transition, but that they made additional false statements to their customers and other parties to side-step the issue until they could walk away and leave the existing CP mess Frontier customers are living with today.
> 
> Best of luck to all of our VZ FiOS cousins!





cwerdna said:


> The original cruz of this thread was the sudden CP on most channels >100, discovered by the OP and confirmed by other folks in WA and OR, after an outage. VZ was #$%#%[email protected] worthless and a waste of time, when we tried to engage them.
> 
> I suggest that we ONLY stick to FiOS CP on VZ or Frontier, in this thread. Debates about EZ passes, Mickey, Disney, analog connections, etc. don't help us.


Thanks to both of you for the detailed info. This is a messy situation, and I have a feeling it will negatively impact all of Verizon's (FiOS) customers in the future.

So Frontier has been quiet, and made no changes, since the CP was implemented?

Does a CableCARD have to paired to a device to honor the CP flag (when it's set to a finite value)?

If this is not OT: How can I determine if a CableCARD is paired to my S3 as opposed to just being activated? I have the Motorola M-Cards. I was never really clear on how to tell the difference.


----------



## cwerdna

DCIFRTHS said:


> So Frontier has been quiet, and made no changes, since the CP was implemented?
> 
> Does a CableCARD have to paired to a device to honor the CP flag (when it's set to a finite value)?
> 
> If this is not OT: How can I determine if a CableCARD is paired to my S3 as opposed to just being activated? I have the Motorola M-Cards. I was never really clear on how to tell the difference.


Frontier hasn't said anything. I haven't had any bandwidth to engage them but probably will have some, in a few weeks. This CP garbage was instituted when still under Verizon control.

As for your 2nd question, I think what you're asking is: "does the card need to be paired, if it isn't?"

Answer: Yes, if you care about receiving any channels that have CCI byte set to 0x02 (which is almost every channel above 100 in WA and OR). If they're not paired, when trying to tune to those channels, you receive the stupid "In order to start cable service for this device, please contact your cable provider..." message. Season passes for those channels fail. IIRC, you'll have no recording, not even a 0 length one.

I first posted about the outage troubles at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7976518#post7976518. After 24 hours of "outage", I got it resolved (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7978478#post7978478). Apparently, that procedure paired the cards, resolving the issue, since CCI byte got set to 0x02 on virtually all channels I was trying (ones >100).

Of course, VZ couldn't be bothered warn us ahead of time, tell us about this CP garbage, pairing or explain why. Well, they sort of explained (not to me) w/essentially "because we can" and vague claims that content providers are asking for it.

Right, I'm sure Current TV and HDNet are asking for CP. Standard def CNN Headline News (101) and Game Show Network (184) _need _CP while NGC HD (621) and Science Channel HD (622) are wide open. 

Eventually, everything made sense to us (other than the channels they chose to CP and leave open): outage, eventual restoration, pairing, discovery of CP, looking at CCI byte values in TiVo UI, observations etc. Per http://www.tivo.com/copyprotection/: 


> WARNING: Your cable provider must pair (bind) the CableCARD to its slot in the TiVo box before you can view content with any CCI value other than 0x00.


No idea on question #3. I don't think that's too off topic.


----------



## bicker

DCIFRTHS said:


> Well, that's good news - at least for the people it doesn't affect. Do you know if your cards are paired to the device?


Mine surely are not.


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> Here is the thread of conversation of the Analog loop hole.


No, that's *not* the thread. It didn't start with my message. My message was in reply to something. Please go back and read the whole thread, so you can understand what you replied to, in its proper context. Then, as others have suggested, if you have something to discuss that is not Frontier related, then let's take it somewhere else.


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> *And it still remains totally irrelevant to the point you replied to. *
> 
> Again, to be clear: Brainiac said, "What he's suggesting is to make things work just the way they always did before the introduction of the DMCA..." The point I made is that you can *still *do what you could do "back then". SOC has nothing to do with what the typical viewer was able to do "back then".


Please note the point I replied to.



bicker said:


> No, that's *not* the thread. It didn't start with my message. My message was in reply to something. Please go back and read the whole thread, so you can understand what you replied to, in its proper context. Then, as others have suggested, if you have something to discuss that is not Frontier related, then let's take it somewhere else.


That was the the *ONLY *thread about Analog loop hole that *I *replied to. Don't ascribe the opinions of others to me. it is unfair to both me and the person who actually made the point. Again, IMO, being able to turn off the analog outputs of your CE devices using SOC goes a long way to closing the analog hole (or A-hole). Apparently you seem to think that turning off analog outputs does not do that. Like I said sure whatever. I think you are wrong, IMO having zero analog output on a CE device eliminates all analog holes with the possible exception of using a camcorder on a tripod. But I guess I am missing something.


----------



## Stormspace

JWThiers said:


> using a camcorder on a tripod. But I guess I am missing something.


That was an actual example put forth by the MPAA as a way to make a fair use of an encrypted video.


----------



## JWThiers

Stormspace said:


> That was an actual example put forth by the MPAA as a way to make a fair use of an encrypted video.


Somehow that doesn't surprise me. Are you sure they weren't calling it a way to steal their content? Which would surprise me even less.


----------



## JWThiers

richsadams said:


> That would certainly seem to be the case. I'm continually moving toward severing ties, at least when it comes to TV, with Frontier now. I have a half-dozen CE products that will stream Netflix (and some BlueRay movies that show up in my mailbox now and then), plus Amazon VOD, etc. My new Apple TV is on order and Boxee/Hulu works pretty well on my Mac Mini Media center. Next step is to install a decent antenna in the attic and who knows?
> 
> I really liked being able to dump Comcast for VZ FiOS. It was great when we first had it installed a couple of years ago. Now...not so much since Frontier has taken the wheel. Now I not only have bizarre copy protection to deal with, our billing is screwed up and their CSR's don't seem to be able to resolve any of it.
> 
> MPSAN alerted me to what Frontier's CEO said about their future plans and her apparent ignorance about their fiber optic network recently...
> 
> http://bit.ly/bUufVc
> 
> http://bit.ly/b8CGkf
> 
> Add to that that Frontier has no stated intention of adding any of the newer features VZ FiOS is now bragging about in other markets and well, I don't see things improving and can envision how they could easily deteriorate. Perhaps that's how they intend to keep their pricing "stable".


Well I suppose technically Fiber is high speed internet.


----------



## MPSAN

JWThiers said:


> Well I suppose technically Fiber is high speed internet.


That and what you should be eating more of.


----------



## JWThiers

MPSAN said:


> That and what you should be eating more of.


Have you been talking to my wife?!? I can't get away from that. ROFL


----------



## MPSAN

JWThiers said:


> Have you been talking to my wife?!? I can't get away from that. ROFL


OH...you've got one of those too?


----------



## JWThiers

MPSAN said:


> OH...you've got one of those too?


Don't we all?? They say that married men live longer. I think they are wrong, it only SEEMS like we live longer.


----------



## Brainiac 5

bicker said:


> I suspect the reason is that so many consumerist-advocates refused to acknowledge that the other side of the argument is just as valid as their perspective, and has indeed prevailed over their perspective.


Since this is off-topic for this thread, I've started a new thread to continue the discussion. My reply to Bicker's message is there.


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> Please note the point I replied to.


Did you read what you quoted? It doesn't seem like you did. You were raising points that have nothing to do with anything I've written, which was that using A/V connections you have the ability to record what you've always been able to record. Again: SOC has no impact on A/V connections. SOC is aimed only at component video connections.


----------



## JWThiers

bicker said:


> Did you read what you quoted? It doesn't seem like you did. You were raising points that have nothing to do with anything I've written, which was that using A/V connections you have the ability to record what you've always been able to record. Again: SOC has no impact on A/V connections. SOC is aimed only at component video connections.


BOTH composite and component are analog A/V outputs. I'm sure that people with older HDTV's that only have Component video inputs are thrilled to hear that they can now have the choice of using composite video inputs on some content or just not watch. I guess that is no impact.


----------



## cwerdna

Brainiac 5 said:


> Since this is off-topic for this thread, I've started a new thread to continue the discussion.


Thank you! :up::up::up: Please take all OT discussion there.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

Frontier prevents copying on most of my channels. This hasn't changed in over 3 months (since the start of this thread).

But today, something interesting happened. I got a free preview of the NFL Redzone channel (it's normally a premium service I don't get). The CCI byte for it was 00. So that means I'm free to copy the program from TiVo to TiVo (doing so now, blue light on).

To me, it seems like these premium channels are exactly what the content providers would want to lock down, more so than the silly stuff like HGTV. But, apparently, not in this case. Maybe Frontier made a deliberate decision not to protect this content. But, there is a second (IMO more probable) explanation:

*Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.*​
I don't think there are too many people at Frontier who even understand WTF the CCI byte is supposed to do.


----------



## richsadams

Phantom Gremlin said:


> *Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.*​
> I don't think there are too many people at Frontier who even understand WTF the CCI byte is supposed to do.


Here, here! My thoughts exactly. :up:


----------



## vurbano

So far the infection has not reached my area.


----------



## JWThiers

Lucky You


----------



## bicker

JWThiers said:


> BOTH composite and component are analog A/V outputs. I'm sure that people with older HDTV's that only have Component video inputs are thrilled to hear that they can now have the choice of using composite video inputs on some content or just not watch. I guess that is no impact.


It is, because the analogy made earlier, that I refuted, was pertaining to a time when the vast majority of people did not have HDTVs. Yet again: They can indeed still do now what they could do then, contrary to what was asserted earlier.


----------



## vurbano

JWThiers said:


> Lucky You


I just think it would be nice to know if there are any changes or if anyone sees it spreading.


----------



## rrg

It's finally happening. FiOS just added HUBHD in my area (NJ) on Ch. 789. All recordings on this new channel are flagged as non-transferable. First time I've ever seen this on FiOS.

Also--and I don't know if this is coincidental--I can't receive this channel at all on one of my Series 3s, though it comes in fine on all the others. I spent a long time on the phone with FiOS tech support this afternoon and this issue was not resolved; I'm currently waiting on a complete cancel-and-reinitialize sequence to complete (takes about an hour, I'm told).

The good old days are probably over.


----------



## innocentfreak

I checked mine also and it looks like I may have to pair. I figure I don't need the channel so I will just wait and see what happens.


----------



## rrg

innocentfreak said:


> I checked mine also and it looks like I may have to pair.


Can you please tell me how to accomplish this, i.e. pairing? Because the FiOS techs I spoke to today seem unaware of it.

Before my first call to FiOS today, I was getting the channel on 5 of 7 cablecards. Because the two non-working instances happen to be in the same TiVO, FiOS's position was tending toward "must be TiVo's problem."

After multiple card reloads and resets and reinitializations, nothing had changed. On their advice I then swapped in a "working" card from another TiVo and not only did that card fail to tune anything in the new TiVo, but after it was returned to the original TiVo, it now can't tune HUBHD either, even though it could before.


----------



## innocentfreak

Pairing would have to be done on Verizon's end. I am waiting a couple days to see since it looks like Fiostv on twitter is looking into it. I really don't care about the channel so if it requires pairing I will probably just pass.


----------



## rrg

I just thought of something else.

The problematic TiVo is the only unit of mine which has been changed since FiOS first installed my cablecards in August 2009.

What happened was, a unit of mine failed, and when I got a replacement unit, Verizon told me to take the cards out of the old unit and put them in the new unit. I did, and everything worked.

Is it possible that all the other cards were explicitly paired, at original installation time, to the units in which they're still housed, but that the cards in the problematic unit never were so paired, and that this is the source of the problem now that Verizon has introduced a channel with restrictions?


----------



## rrg

innocentfreak said:


> Pairing would have to be done on Verizon's end.


So I just have to convince FiOS of the need for that. And hope that I'll find a tech who will do it.



> I really don't care about the channel so if it requires pairing I will probably just pass.


They're running the original Adam West/Burt Ward "Batman" on this channel. How can you not care about that?


----------



## DCIFRTHS

rrg said:


> It's finally happening. FiOS just added HUBHD in my area (NJ) on Ch. 789. All recordings on this new channel are flagged as non-transferable. First time I've ever seen this on FiOS. ... The good old days are probably over.


I just recorded a partial showing, on the new channel, and it's showing up as copy protected.


----------



## innocentfreak

rrg said:


> So I just have to convince FiOS of the need for that. And hope that I'll find a tech who will do it.
> 
> They're running the original Adam West/Burt Ward "Batman" on this channel. How can you not care about that?


That is a pretty good reason right there 

Pairing and copy flags are worth avoiding for as long as possible especially if it means I have to miss Batman.


----------



## DCIFRTHS

Updated: Answer located here.

The CCI Byte for Channel 789, in NY, showing as *0x12*. What does that mean?


----------



## innocentfreak

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=8167191#post8167191


----------



## debtoine

Hub is copy protected here in central NJ as well.

This doesn't bode well.

deb


----------



## vurbano

The infection has hit Virginia. Hub is copy protected. This is the beginning of the end of Tivo in this household.


----------



## DCIFRTHS

vurbano said:


> ...Hub is copy protected. This is the beginning of the end of Tivo in this household.


Unfortunately, the same goes for me. MRV is critical


----------



## ryanrk

So has anybody able to fix this? Like everyone else I can't copy any shows from one Tivo to another. It sounds like it's a permanent thing according to the engadget HD article http://hd.engadget.com/2010/06/19/fios-customers-moved-to-frontier-getting-copy-once-drm/. May have to move back to Comcast.


----------



## wmcbrine

Why would you think it would be different on Comcast? Seriously, they've been doing this for years, along with most of the other cable companies. Lots of threads about that here. Fios is (and for now, remains -- only "Hub HD" is flagged, outside of Frontierland) more permissive than average.

If it does spread on Fios, it might push me more towards OTA-only.


----------



## JWThiers

To "Fix it" would require a change to FCC guidelines and laws governing this. Tivo is working as required by law.


----------



## Jonathan_S

vurbano said:


> The infection has hit Virginia. Hub is copy protected. This is the beginning of the end of Tivo in this household.


But oddly only Hub HD. Hub (SD) is unprotected even though it's also a digital channel.


----------



## vurbano

well it will not push me from FIOS. Nothing else here is non copyprotected but EVERY other option Verizon equipment, Directv, Dish, Cox Cable, does have MRV which Tivo will not have. 
What a freaking shame as I was contemplating a premeire purchase at xmas. Now it may be a ceton card and 2 used xbox basic units which will be a great expense and learning curve .
The statement by Tivo that they have MRV is slowly becoming a lie IMO.


----------



## MPSAN

What I did was update all 3 of my TiVo HD's to 1 TB. IF I have a show I want to record that I do not know where I want to watch it, I will record it on 2 THD's. Networks are not protected anyway, so I can still MRV. Of course there is the PROM change thing but my solution works fine for us.


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> What I did was update all 3 of my TiVo HD's to 1 TB. IF I have a show I want to record that I do not know where I want to watch it, I will record it on 2 THD's. Networks are not protected anyway, so I can still MRV. Of course there is the PROM change thing but my solution works fine for us.


Exactly what we've decided to do. A PIA, but it's better than whatever alternative I've explored. (Plus I don't want to get out my soldering iron and tackle our newish Premiere XL just yet.  )


----------



## Dstap06

Bummer. Just checked it out and HubHD is copy protected here in Massachusetts. Have had FIOS for a couple of years and this is the first channel I have seen that is copy protected.


----------



## vurbano

Not for nuttin but I didnt spend all this money for it to be a PIA


----------



## wmcbrine

vurbano said:


> well it will not push me from FIOS. Nothing else here is non copyprotected but EVERY other option Verizon equipment, Directv, Dish, Cox Cable, does have MRV which Tivo will not have.


That's not "every other option", that's "every other option controlled by the provider". If you abandon TiVo for provider-supplied equipment because of the application of the CCI flag by the provider, you're conceding their right to deny you the use of your choice of equipment.



> _Now it may be a ceton card_


Ceton cards also have to obey the CCI flag, just like all third-party equipment.


----------



## innocentfreak

wmcbrine said:


> That's not "every other option", that's "every other option controlled by the provider". If you abandon TiVo for provider-supplied equipment because of the application of the CCI flag by the provider, you're conceding their right to deny you the use of your choice of equipment.
> 
> Ceton cards also have to obey the CCI flag, just like all third-party equipment.


Well he could go with Moxi or Media Center.

They have to obey the CCI flag, but with the setup he is talking about he would be able to stream it to other rooms. Also 7MC does allow you to back up the copy once recordings to a WHS since it moves the file rather than copying it. The original PC that recorded it just has to be the PC streaming the playback which it can do with the WHS as a networked drive.


----------



## vurbano

wmcbrine said:


> Ceton cards also have to obey the CCI flag, just like all third-party equipment.


yes but you can stream to other devices which is what the problem is. NO MRV. Or I suppose you could go moxi


----------



## vurbano

wmcbrine said:


> That's not "every other option", that's "every other option controlled by the provider". If you abandon TiVo for provider-supplied equipment because of the application of the CCI flag by the provider, you're conceding their right to deny you the use of your choice of equipment


The point was that every other provider option has this ability. Lets not debate the obvious. I thought I made it clear I wasnt considering provider equipment but the choices are dwindling. Ceton seems like the only option that would stream every recording with extenders as well as transfer uncopyprotected material for archiving. So IMO, its the best option, Moxi second, then provider equipment with tivo heading up the rear if its "MRV" is taken away. We all have our priorities, mine are different than others. Thats why frankly I don't understand why anyone would own a tivo with a cable provider since most have their material on lockdown. In my twisted mind its unfathonable how Tivo even survived this long. But still, Tivo+unprotected FiOS = Nirvana IMO. But Tivo+ protected service = crap last place, IMO. Again others have different priorities.


----------



## richsadams

In my quest to get rid of cable completely I took a look at our SP's and WL's and found that about 50&#37; of the shows we record are from regular OTA broadcast channels so we can still use TiVo's MRV capabilities (as well as moving them to a computer for archiving, etc.). Then I found about 75% of the rest of the material readily available over IP, either from Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Apple, etc. Hulu Plus offers a majority of the current programming, sometimes within 24 hours of broadcast, but the rest are behind to some extent, sometimes as much as a whole season. The rest of it is a little harder to obtain, much of it being for computer download only. Now that our iPad will be able to stream video to the Apple TV that gap is closing, but it's certainly still not as simple as when all of our FiOS channels were unprotected of course.

I thought about augmenting our setup with a couple of FiOS DVR's but came to find out that they don't offer MRV either. Their DVR can stream to a STB, but not to another DVR. So if I'm in the STB room and I find something I want to record I'd have to get up and go into the DVR room to set the recording (or at least start it) if I wanted to watch it later. At least with TiVo I can start a recording wherever it is.

If TiVo would simply have the ability to stream between their boxes all of the rest of this would be a moot discussion AFAIC. I don't see copy protection getting anything but worse. Perhaps it is time to dig out that old soldering iron.


----------



## shwru980r

richsadams said:


> Hulu Plus offers a majority of the current programming, sometimes within 24 hours of broadcast


But you have to watch commercials with Hulu and you can't fast forward through them. For me, the ability to skip commercials is more important than MRV.


----------



## richsadams

shwru980r said:


> But you have to watch commercials with Hulu and you can't fast forward through them. For me, the ability to skip commercials is more important than MRV.


Excellent point, and couldn't agree more. For ten bucks a month I don't think I should have to be subjected to ads as well...even if they are shorter/one at a time.  I was just looking for _any_ opportunity to get away from our current cable situation.


----------



## lrhorer

JWThiers said:


> To "Fix it" would require a change to FCC guidelines and laws governing this. Tivo is working as required by law.


There is no law requiring the TiVo to function as it does. It is only a CableLabs requirement for certification, and not in any way, shape, or form a law. Indeed, if you ask me it is far worse for this fact than if it were law. The end effect is that we, the citizens, are being forced to accept restrictions that are perfectly extralegal. The CATV companies are allowed by FCC regulations to set the status byte that no device is required by law to honor, but no device which seeks CableLabs certification can fail to do so.

Note it is not illegal for the owner of the device to modify this behavior. It is illegal for the owner of the device to make and distribute unauthorized copies of copyrighted material, whether for profit or not, and whether via the modification of a CableLabs certified device or not.


----------



## lrhorer

DCIFRTHS said:


> Unfortunately, the same goes for me. MRV is critical


What, really, is the big deal about MRV? If I chose, I could very easily enable MRV on all my S3 class TiVos, but the modifications I have made cause it to be effectively disabled on one of the boxes, and I really don't care. I almost never use it on the two for which MRV is available. It's also trivial to enable MRV on protected content, but once again, it's not worth even the minuscule amount of trouble it would be to enable it. Of course, I suppose having an external video server makes a significant difference, but honestly I don't know why almost anyone would not set up a video server. It doesn't have to a giant server like the one I have built. A laptop will suffice - although it probably isn't the best choice for a video server.

Anything I want to "move" between TiVos I push to the server and delete off the recording TiVo, eliminating commercials, if any, along the way. Anything else I record on the TiVo where I intend to watch the recording. I'm not saying MRV is a bad thing, of course. To be sure, it's a neat little bell, but the TiVo has lots of neat bells and whistles. It just puzzles me why some people consider this particular bell to be so important.


----------



## lrhorer

richsadams said:


> If TiVo would simply have the ability to stream between their boxes all of the rest of this would be a moot discussion AFAIC. I don't see copy protection getting anything but worse. Perhaps it is time to dig out that old soldering iron.


It was time for that three years ago, if you ask me, although in my case it was someone else's soldering iron. If I had been ten years younger, it would have been my own iron, but alas, neither my hands nor my eyes are what they once were.


----------



## innocentfreak

lrhorer said:


> What, really, is the big deal about MRV? If I chose, I could very easily enable MRV on all my S3 class TiVos, but the modifications I have made cause it to be effectively disabled on one of the boxes, and I really don't care. I almost never use it on the two for which MRV is available. It's also trivial to enable MRV on protected content, but once again, it's not worth even the minuscule amount of trouble it would be to enable it. Of course, I suppose having an external video server makes a significant difference, but honestly I don't know why almost anyone would not set up a video server. It doesn't have to a giant server like the one I have built. A laptop will suffice - although it probably isn't the best choice for a video server.
> 
> Anything I want to "move" between TiVos I push to the server and delete off the recording TiVo, eliminating commercials, if any, along the way. Anything else I record on the TiVo where I intend to watch the recording. I'm not saying MRV is a bad thing, of course. To be sure, it's a neat little bell, but the TiVo has lots of neat bells and whistles. It just puzzles me why some people consider it to be so important.


You question MRV, yet you talk about pushing to your server. If they can't MRV, they also can't push to their server. You wonder why everyone finds it so important but you specifically enabled it so you would be able to do it. MRV and TTG are part of the same functionality. Either both work or they both don't.

I guess they could find someone to do the prom hack for them, but your average person isn't going to do that. They are just going to find they can't watch content in other rooms so either have to record anything they might possibly want to watch anywhere on every TiVo or just change rooms if they want to watch a show that isn't in that room. Or they could just go with something that is consumer friendly and supports streaming off the shelf without having the user jump through hoops for what boils down to the same functionality.


----------



## lrhorer

wmcbrine said:


> That's not "every other option", that's "every other option controlled by the provider". If you abandon TiVo for provider-supplied equipment because of the application of the CCI flag by the provider, you're conceding their right to deny you the use of your choice of equipment.


And by corollary to dictate what features one may or may not have available. That's one of the really big issues with tru2way, as well. IMNSHO, the FCC needs to tell the CATV companies in no uncertain terms that they do *NOT* have this right. Instead, they continually back down from the CATV companies and the MPAA.



wmcbrine said:


> Ceton cards also have to obey the CCI flag, just like all third-party equipment.


To be clear, the Ceton cards, in order to obtain CableLabs certification, had to be able to obey the restriction. I expect the implementation is actually in software, so when someone writes Linux drivers for the card, they may not implement the feature. Note the CATV company is not required to allow you to hook up a non-certified system to their plant, and that is precisely what such a system would be (and so is a modified TiVo), but there is nothing at all preventing the user from booting Windows for the installer to see and then booting Linux for daily use. Indeed, with the newly proposed regulations requiring the CATV companies to allow self-service CableCard installs, there is no way the CATV company would know your HPTV is running an open system.


----------



## lrhorer

richsadams said:


> Exactly what we've decided to do. A PIA, but it's better than whatever alternative I've explored. (Plus I don't want to get out my soldering iron and tackle our newish Premiere XL just yet.  )


As of yet, the soldering iron approach will not work on the Premier.


----------



## lrhorer

vurbano said:


> The point was that every other provider option has this ability. Lets not debate the obvious. I thought I made it clear I wasnt considering provider equipment but the choices are dwindling. Ceton seems like the only option that would stream every recording with extenders as well as transfer uncopyprotected material for archiving.


No, it isn't. The S3 class TiVos are quite capable of it. As I pointed out in my post above, enabling unrestricted MRV on the TiVo is quite easy - especially when compared with setting up an HTPC using a Ceton card.



vurbano said:


> So IMO, its the best option, Moxi second, then provider equipment with tivo heading up the rear if its "MRV" is taken away. We all have our priorities, mine are different than others. Thats why frankly I don't understand why anyone would own a tivo with a cable provider since most have their material on lockdown.


There are lots of reasons. A big one for the average DVR owner is that they only own one DVR. The fact MRV may or may not be disabled is completely moot for the majority of people who consider purchasing a TiVo. For six years I only owned one TiVo.

The second good reason for those of us who do have or intend to have more than one TiVo is that until the introduction of the Premier, CCI Byte copyright protection was easy to defeat.



vurbano said:


> In my twisted mind its unfathonable how Tivo even survived this long.


Well, I don't know about twisted, but it does seem to be wearing blinders. To date, TiVo's revenue stream has not depended in any significant measure upon potential owners who demanded that MRV work. That's pretty simple.



vurbano said:


> But still, Tivo+unprotected FiOS = Nirvana IMO. But Tivo+ protected service = crap last place, IMO. Again others have different priorities.


If you realize that, then you should understand why TiVo has survived this long. It should not be unfathomable to you.


----------



## lrhorer

innocentfreak said:


> You question MRV, yet you talk about pushing to your server. If they can't MRV, they also can't push to their server.


Buzz! Sorry, but that is incorrect.



innocentfreak said:


> You wonder why everyone finds it so important but you specifically enabled it so you would be able to do it. MRV and TTG are part of the same functionality. Either both work or they both don't.


No, they are not. They are similar, and they use the same hardware and some of the same software, but they are not the same thing. I was pushing content to my server long before MRV and TTG were enabled by TiVo on the S3 platform. Indeed at this moment, MRV does not work on my TiVos, and TTG only works for unprotected content. I can push anything to my server, and far faster than TTG or MRV, I might add. It's also a lot easier, especially if one is selecting multiple programs to transfer and also especially if one wishes to delete some of the programs off the TiVo(s).

For that matter, IIRC, TiVo introduced MRV and TTG at very different times on the S2. Unless I am mistaken, the functionality of one preceded the other by quite some months. They are very different, which BTW, is why TTG is so much slower than MRV.



innocentfreak said:


> I guess they could find someone to do the prom hack for them, but your average person isn't going to do that.


Since TiVo's market penetration is far, far less than 50%, the average person is not going to buy a TiVo, at all. The question is, "What options are available to handle the issue?" One of the answers is, "TiVo". There are a number of people out there offering PROM mods for a modest fee, just as there are people offering to upgrade the HD for a modest fee. It's an option, is the point.



innocentfreak said:


> They are just going to find they can't watch content in other rooms so either have to record anything they might possibly want to watch anywhere on every TiVo or just change rooms if they want to watch a show that isn't in that room.


They have got to purchase (or lease) something to do that. Purchasing a Moxi is one option, with significant limitations. Leasing a DVR from the CATV company is another option, with significant limitations. Purchasing a modified TiVo is a third option, with significant limitations. There is not and will never be a solution that does not present significant limitations unique to the solution being considered. All three are viable options, however. When making the decision, one should be aware of all the options. It is disingenuous to suggest an option should not be mentioned or considered merely because a majority of consumers may not ultimately choose it.

Indeed, although this is not strictly speaking a hacker's forum, it is a hobbyist's forum, and the fraction of people in this forum who would consider a hack is much higher than that of the population at large, or even of TiVo owners at large.



innocentfreak said:


> Or they could just go with something that is consumer friendly and supports streaming off the shelf without having the user jump through hoops for what boils down to the same functionality.


Well, first of all, it doesn't boil down to the same functionality. There are quite a few options and features enabled along the way that are not otherwise available. Some people consider some of those features critical. Secondly, I would hardly consider 3 minutes worth of time to be "Jumping through hoops", especially when one considers the capabilities it enables. Perhaps more to the point of this thread, however, is the fact that if MRV is truly that important to the individual, then the very minor inconvenience involved with enabling the feature should not be a large consideration. Does the individual really and truly desire the feature, or do they just like to whine about not having it? Speaking for myself, if I want something, I go get it, and a few minutes worth of extra work on my part isn't going to stop me. I'm also not going to abandon a patently superior platform just because it requires a little more work on my part to get one or more features working. I am supremely lazy, but even I am not that lazy.


----------



## richsadams

lrhorer said:


> It was time for that three years ago, if you ask me, although in my case it was someone else's soldering iron. If I had been ten years younger, it would have been my own iron, but alas, neither my hands nor my eyes are what they once were.


I probably would have been right there with you, but it was only a few months ago that Verizon initiated copy protection (a couple of weeks before they sold everything to Frontier, turned tail and ran). So until now, things were good...but obviously they aren't so good now.


----------



## richsadams

lrhorer said:


> I don't know why almost anyone would not set up a video server. It doesn't have to a giant server like the one I have built. A laptop will suffice - although it probably isn't the best choice for a video server.


I'm intrigued. I haven't done any research and I'm sure there's no one stop shop, but would you be so kind as to point me in the direction of what it would take to build such a video server? I have a NAS I use for iTunes and DVDs I've ripped but this sounds interesting. I've got a few computers collecting dust that I'd be happy to put to work if they'd behave as you suggest. TIA.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> Exactly what we've decided to do. A PIA, but it's better than whatever alternative I've explored. (Plus I don't want to get out my soldering iron and tackle our newish Premiere XL just yet.  )


CORRECTION...that is PITA! 

We can now go back to a somewhat OT thread. Remember I was told in June that I was an alarmist for mentioning the flags and was told that they are not going to be used in FIOS! OK, next step is that when Comcast takes over NBC the Sunday Night Football will only be shown on Comcast Cable!


----------



## lrhorer

richsadams said:


> I probably would have been right there with you, but it was only a few months ago that Verizon initiated copy protection (a couple of weeks before they sold everything to Frontier, turned tail and ran). So until now, things were good...but obviously they aren't so good now.


Well, I didn't hack for copy protection purposes. I hacked my first S3 long before TW Cable was doing widespread CCI Byte implementation.


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> CORRECTION...that is PITA!
> 
> We can now go back to a somewhat OT thread. Remember I was told in June that I was an alarmist for mentioning the flags and was told that they are not going to be used in FIOS! OK, next step is that when Comcast takes over NBC the Sunday Night Football will only be shown on Comcast Cable!


You know, I think you're right. IIRC there were quite a few folks in the "Verizon would never do that!" camp. Luckily we're not the "I told you so" types.


----------



## rrg

While it's possible that this really is the beginning of the end, it's also still possible that setting this on HUBHD is just some stupid mistake on Verizon's part.

Has anyone here EVER seen 0x12 used as a CCI setting before? An analog image constraint token? Really?


----------



## lrhorer

richsadams said:


> I'm intrigued. I haven't done any research and I'm sure there's no one stop shop, but would you be so kind as to point me in the direction of what it would take to build such a video server? I have a NAS I use for iTunes and DVDs I've ripped but this sounds interesting. I've got a few computers collecting dust that I'd be happy to put to work if they'd behave as you suggest. TIA.


Well, it depends on just what functionality you want. The simplest involves taking an ordinary PC and loading pyTivo, streambaby, or Galleon (or if you absolutely must, TiVoDesktop). If you want to dip your toe in the water, then I suggest you do just that on any old PC you have lying around. This will give you basic functionality to collect videos on the server and publish them back to your TiVos. Since pyTivo can transcode on the fly, it will even allow you to publish HD content from an S3 TiVo back to an S2 TiVo. Galleon will allow you to initiate TTG transfers from any TiVo in the house while sitting at any TiVo in the house. ( Copy protection rules apply.) I love Galleon's music app, and its weather app beats the others hands down, if you ask me. Consequently, I run pyTivo to publish my .mpg videos and my DVDs on the TiVos and Galleon for music and weather.

Note you may be able to load the above mentioned (other than TDT) on your NAS. TexasGrillChef is a fan of doing that.

For full functionality I heartily recommend running the server on Linux. TDT will not run on Linux, but I would be hard pressed to consider that a limitation or disadvantage. My car doesn't have an option to peddle with my feet, either. The rest will all run happily on Linux. I suggest you try out both pyTivo and Galleon, and at least take a look at streambaby. Ask lots of questions and read up on their respective functionalities. IF the PCs don't have Linux on them, you can try out the Windows versions, and move to Linux later, if you like.

As far as the hardware is concerned, not much is really required. Obviously, a network card is required and as large a hard drive or array as you are willing to provide. A 2T drive can be had for $100 these days, but the servers themselves need less than 1G. It's the video that takes up all the space, and as you well know, the more the better. It is definitely best to have a dedicated server, or at least a machine that is up and connected to the network 24/7. Unlike the TiVo, however, the drives don't need to spin continuously and they need bupkus for performance, so the least expensive drives are just fine. If you will be serving up virtually all .mpg videos (or MPEG IV via pyTivo's push function) to S3 cleints, then the server won't be transcoding and so little in the way of processor horsepower is rerquired. If you are going to be offering up a lot of files that need to be transcoded, the something with a bit of oomph under the hood is suggested, but nothing really massive. You definitely don't need 4 or 8 cores, and probably a decent old single core CPU will be fine. If not transcoding, a Pentium will be fine, or even a 486. If you run a text-only or headless Linux system, a 386 might do.

Of course, the server can handle a lot more than just pyTivo / Galleon / streambaby, so you may want to consider what other server applications you may want to implement. Both of my main servers, for example, are also web servers, and one of them is a VPN server and IMAP mail server. The other is a DNS server, and used to handle DHCP for my network. One thing to consider is the files on the server may be more "precious" than those on the TiVos, so a backup solution is probably in order, and probably fault tolerance. I'm running nearly identical RAID6 servers, with one as backup.

Basically, the server can run the gamut, metaphorically from a battered old single speed Schwinn bicycle to an NHRA top fuel dragster, depending on your needs (or level of obsession). I suggest you mosey over to the TiVo Home Media Features & TiVoToGo forum and start browsing and / or posting threads.


----------



## lrhorer

rrg said:


> While it's possible that this really is the beginning of the end, it's also still possible that setting this on HUBHD is just some stupid mistake on Verizon's part.


It may be neither. The content provider has the right to not sell the content to the CATV provider unless they implement a certain CCI setting. Indeed, in a reverse of the topic of this thread HDNet and HDNetMovies refused to continue to allow TW Cable to broadcast those channels unless they set the CCI flag to 0x00, so TW Cable dropped the channels. It may be that the channel in question specifies in its contract the CATV provider (FIOS in this case) must set to "copy never".


----------



## KLINK

shwru980r said:


> But you have to watch commercials with Hulu and you can't fast forward through them. For me, the ability to skip commercials is more important than MRV.


If you get streamtransport at http://www.streamtransport.com/

You can download the video you want from Hulu and there won't be any commercials and you can FF. It will be a .flv file.


----------



## JWThiers

lrhorer said:


> There is no law requiring the TiVo to function as it does. It is only a CableLabs requirement for certification, and not in any way, shape, or form a law. Indeed, if you ask me it is far worse for this fact than if it were law. The end effect is that we, the citizens, are being forced to accept restrictions that are perfectly extralegal. The CATV companies are allowed by FCC regulations to set the status byte that no device is required by law to honor, but no device which seeks CableLabs certification can fail to do so.
> 
> Note it is not illegal for the owner of the device to modify this behavior. It is illegal for the owner of the device to make and distribute unauthorized copies of copyrighted material, whether for profit or not, and whether via the modification of a CableLabs certified device or not.


I'm pretty sure that the way the law is written allows cable companies to bar non certified devices from using their infrastructure. Actually probably worded something like they can't bar certified equipment (implies that they can bar non certified equipment). So yes you are right cable labs certification is not governed by law but they (cable companies) are allowed by law to say who can play in their playground. IF the FCC changed the wording of what the CCI bytes do or changed wording to change when each byte is applied it changes how tivo works. Bottom line, its the FCC that decides how the CCI byte can be applied. They can also change it and cable labs or the cable companies couldn't do a thing about it. Right now the cable companies comply with current law and regulation, change the law or regulation and they would then have to comply with that.

IMO the FCC is very specific about how CCI 01 is to be appled and how CCI 03 is applied, but are wishy washy about 02. They could if they wanted change that to only premium cable channels such as HBO, Cinemax or any channel running first run movies or movies less than 10 years old. Does a 50 year old rerun of I love Lucy have to be CCI 02? Avatar, yes. I Love Lucy, no.


----------



## richsadams

lrhorer said:


> Well, it depends on just what functionality you want. The simplest involves taking an ordinary PC and loading pyTivo, streambaby, or Galleon (or if you absolutely must, TiVoDesktop). <snip>


Terrific info...thanks very much! :up: I've used pyTiVo/streambaby before...mostly to send home made videos of our dogs and such to our TiVo's. (I use iTiVo, pyTiVoX or KMTTG with our Macs now.) I tried Galleon on a Windows machine a few years ago and found it pretty buggy, but no doubt it's much better now and I'd rather go with Linux anyway so I may give it another go.

I have Ubuntu running on an extra PC and a couple of 1TB drives I could put into service so I may repurpose it and get into this...sounds like fun while being practical as well. Thanks again!


----------



## richsadams

KLINK said:


> If you get streamtransport at http://www.streamtransport.com/
> 
> You can download the video you want from Hulu and there won't be any commercials and you can FF. It will be a .flv file.


A Flash file? Really?  Eeewwwww! But it looks like a worthwhile program for a few other things, so thanks for the tip!


----------



## lrhorer

JWThiers said:


> I'm pretty sure that the way the law is written allows cable companies to bar non certified devices from using their infrastructure. Actually probably worded something like they can't bar certified equipment (implies that they can bar non certified equipment). So yes you are right cable labs certification is not governed by law but they (cable companies) are allowed by law to say who can play in their playground.


The distinction becomes important in two ways:

1. A manufacturer is not doing anything illegal if they make a box that does not comply or can easily be modified to not comply.

2. A consumer is not doing anything illegal if they modify such a box. The same is not true, for example, if the user steals service by defeating the CableCard encryption.



JWThiers said:


> IF the FCC changed the wording of what the CCI bytes do or changed wording to change when each byte is applied it changes how tivo works. Bottom line, its the FCC that decides how the CCI byte can be applied. They can also change it and cable labs or the cable companies couldn't do a thing about it. Right now the cable companies comply with current law and regulation, change the law or regulation and they would then have to comply with that.


Yes, but your original post referenced what was legal for TiVo, not CableLabs or CATV companies. There's a difference. It also means that TiVo is complying for economic reasons, not legal ones. No one could indict them for making boxes that ignored the CCI byte. They just wouldn't sell many, as most CATV systems would categorically refuse to install CableCards in them.



JWThiers said:


> IMO the FCC is very specific about how CCI 01 is to be appled and how CCI 03 is applied, but are wishy washy about 02. They could if they wanted change that to only premium cable channels such as HBO, Cinemax or any channel running first run movies or movies less than 10 years old. Does a 50 year old rerun of I love Lucy have to be CCI 02? Avatar, yes. I Love Lucy, no.


Yes, but in my estimation, it isn't true for Avatar, either. It is already illegal to copy and distribute Avatar, or even for that matter I Love Lucy. This law is fully enforceable, and although I think it, also, should be radically altered, there simply should not be any regulations against an individual enjoying in whatever way he chooses within his own home content for which he has already paid. It is a useless and unenforceable law that does noting but needlessly limit what should be legitimate use of the product while tying up law enforcement resources that need to be spent in much better ways. The end result is nothing but to increase the size of an already vastly bloated bureaucracy. Making two laws to cover the same offense does not make the laws twice as enforceable or effective.


----------



## lrhorer

richsadams said:


> Terrific info...thanks very much! :up: I've used pyTiVo/streambaby before...mostly to send home made videos of our dogs and such to our TiVo's. (I use iTiVo, pyTiVoX or KMTTG with our Macs now.) I tried Galleon on a Windows machine a few years ago and found it pretty buggy, but no doubt it's much better now and I'd rather go with Linux anyway so I may give it another go.
> 
> I have Ubuntu running on an extra PC and a couple of 1TB drives I could put into service so I may repurpose it and get into this...sounds like fun while being practical as well. Thanks again!


You're welcome. Galleon is much easier to install than it was and a number of nasty little bugs have been stamped out. Unfortunately, although bugs are being addressed, it isn't being developed. There are a number of really nice plug-ins for it, though. OTOH, pyTivo is currently very actively developed, and while it is somewhat more limited in scope than Galleon, it does a terrific job of transferring video to the TiVo. It offers both a push utility (initiated from a web page hosted on the server) and a pull utility (initiated from the NPL of the TiVo). The web utility can initiate pulls from the TiVo (i.e. TTG transfers) to the pyTivo server. (Again, copy protection applies.) I also really like the pyTivo DVD plug-in. DVDs can only be pulled from the NPL, but still... DVDs can be pulled from the NPL!!

Basic configuration of both is quite easy. One can get fancy, though. For example, I have my main share consisting of a directory where all the hard links to the videos reside. All the stand-alone movies (and their metafiles) are in the parent directory, but every TV series or movie franchise is in its own subdirectory, making the main list much smaller, and collecting all the series / franchises into their own folders. You can see it here.

I also have another share, though, which consists of a vastly smaller directory containing only symlinks to the stand-alone videos. Instead of them all being in the top directory, they are each contained in a directory labeled "A", "B", "C", etc. according to the first letter of the movie name. If I know what movie I want to watch (and it isn't one of a franchise), it's much faster to go to the "Sort by Alpha" share in the NPL and search through 40 or 50 files to find the one I want than many hundreds of them.

Then I have another share consisting of directories labeled, "Action", "Adventure", "Comedy", "Series", "Western", etc. Each program has a symlink pointing to it from whatever directories fits its genres. Thus, Two Mules for Sister Sara has symlinks to it from "War", "Western", and "Comedy".

Of course managing all of this would be horrendously tedious if I had to do it manually. Instead, I have some simple bash scripts doing all the work. 'Just one of the many, many ways Linux comes in handy for this purpose.


----------



## richsadams

lrhorer said:


> You're welcome. Galleon is much easier to install than it was and a number of nasty little bugs have been stamped out. <snip>


All good stuff! I'm particularly interested in the DVD/NPL capabilities. :up: Is there any reason this wouldn't work on an Premiere? That's our "main" TiVo now. Although I continue to test it I'm still not satisfied with the HD UI command response time. (I was hoping for another improvement with the update we received a few days ago, but nothing's changed.) So we're still using the SD menus. Just wondering if everything would still work in the newer HD menus. Thanks again!


----------



## MikeAndrews

lrhorer said:


> ...
> Basic configuration of both is quite easy. One can get fancy, though. For example, I have my main share consisting of a directory where all the hard links to the videos reside. All the stand-alone movies (and their metafiles) are in the parent directory, but every TV series or movie franchise is in its own subdirectory, making the main list much smaller, and collecting all the series / franchises into their own folders. You can see it here.
> 
> I also have another share, though, which consists of a vastly smaller directory containing only symlinks to the stand-alone videos. Instead of them all being in the top directory, they are each contained in a directory labeled "A", "B", "C", etc. according to the first letter of the movie name. If I know what movie I want to watch (and it isn't one of a franchise), it's much faster to go to the "Sort by Alpha" share in the NPL and search through 40 or 50 files to find the one I want than many hundreds of them.
> 
> Then I have another share consisting of directories labeled, "Action", "Adventure", "Comedy", "Series", "Western", etc. Each program has a symlink pointing to it from whatever directories fits its genres. Thus, Two Mules for Sister Sara has symlinks to it from "War", "Western", and "Comedy".
> 
> Of course managing all of this would be horrendously tedious if I had to do it manually. Instead, I have some simple bash scripts doing all the work. 'Just one of the many, many ways Linux comes in handy for this purpose.


Not just Linux. It works in Mac OS X, too. I just spent a lot of time managing my Mac Mini JBOD NAS by separating TV shows from Movies and I'll have to divide further to manage the space as the collection continues to grow.

I'll look into Galleon if will help that because I did waste a lot of time last weekend doing house keeping. I intended to get a round tuit and set up some shell scripts for the purpose, although I suppose I could use Applescript if I could even find a decent reference resource on it.


----------



## JWThiers

lrhorer said:


> The distinction becomes important in two ways:
> 
> 1. A manufacturer is not doing anything illegal if they make a box that does not comply or can easily be modified to not comply.
> 
> 2. A consumer is not doing anything illegal if they modify such a box. The same is not true, for example, if the user steals service by defeating the CableCard encryption.
> 
> Yes, but your original post referenced what was legal for TiVo, not CableLabs or CATV companies. There's a difference. It also means that TiVo is complying for economic reasons, not legal ones. No one could indict them for making boxes that ignored the CCI byte. They just wouldn't sell many, as most CATV systems would categorically refuse to install CableCards in them.
> 
> Yes, but in my estimation, it isn't true for Avatar, either. It is already illegal to copy and distribute Avatar, or even for that matter I Love Lucy. This law is fully enforceable, and although I think it, also, should be radically altered, there simply should not be any regulations against an individual enjoying in whatever way he chooses within his own home content for which he has already paid. It is a useless and unenforceable law that does noting but needlessly limit what should be legitimate use of the product while tying up law enforcement resources that need to be spent in much better ways. The end result is nothing but to increase the size of an already vastly bloated bureaucracy. Making two laws to cover the same offense does not make the laws twice as enforceable or effective.


I'd go one step further by saying if a manufacturer made a device that either ignored the CCI flag or was easily modified to ignore it and didn't get cable labs certification NO cable company would allow it on their system not most. And without that the number of boxes sold would be closer to none rather than a small number. If that were the case whats the point in making them?

Yes there are other ways to skin the cat, but if they changed the way the CCI bytes worked as I had briefly described, would that fix MOST of the issues people are having? In particular would it "Fix" the issue of not being able to MRV (by copy as tivo does) which is what I was replying too? IMO it does. It also has the benefit of it would more clearly define what content is intended to be strictly protected and it would not require changes to hardware.

I fully agree that copyright laws are in desperate need of reworking. I think I have been pretty vocal in my opinion that ANY legally obtained content should be able to be used freely by me (and hosehold) as I see fit for my personal consumption (or members of my family) as long as I do not transfer to someone else (especially for money). If I want to store it on a home server fine. If I want to transcode to another format fine, if I want to put it on an iPod, DVD, Blueray, iPad and I own them fine.


----------



## lrhorer

richsadams said:


> All good stuff! I'm particularly interested in the DVD/NPL capabilities. :up:


Unfortunately, TheBayer seems to have disappeared, and the DVD plug-in could definitely use some polish. That said, it does work, and pyTivo's NPL interface is quite good. There's one annoying issue in large child directories that's a bit of a pain, and it looks like that can't be fixed, but otherwise William has an excellent track record of development on pyTivo.



richsadams said:


> Is there any reason this wouldn't work on an Premiere? That's our "main" TiVo now. Although I continue to test it I'm still not satisfied with the HD UI command response time. (I was hoping for another improvement with the update we received a few days ago, but nothing's changed.) So we're still using the SD menus. Just wondering if everything would still work in the newer HD menus. Thanks again!


It should. I don't think there have been any backwardly fatal changes to HME or HMO.


----------



## lrhorer

JWThiers said:


> I'd go one step further by saying if a manufacturer made a device that either ignored the CCI flag or was easily modified to ignore it and didn't get cable labs certification NO cable company would allow it on their system not most.


Oh, there are some small ones that wouldn't care.



JWThiers said:


> And without that the number of boxes sold would be closer to none rather than a small number.


No, there are some people out there doing strictly OTA.



JWThiers said:


> I fully agree that copyright laws are in desperate need of reworking. I think I have been pretty vocal in my opinion that ANY legally obtained content should be able to be used freely by me (and hosehold) as I see fit for my personal consumption (or members of my family)


The folowing is *NOT* how copyright / patent law works, but it should be:

Anyone should be able to copy or manufacture and distribute any properties they like so long as proper royalties are paid to the patent / copyright holder during the tenure of the patent / copyright. No one, no matter who, should be allowed to prevent any other party from selling to the public. Fines and punishment for failing to pay royalties should be much stiffer and surer than they are, but there should be no such thing as "piracy". Of course, this would require setting up a system of fair pricing for royalties. Such a system would be somewhat complex to develop, but far less complex than the existing bunch of muck. It should be perfectly legal for John Doe to make 100 copies of an ABBA album and distribute it to his friends, so long as he sends, say, $500 to ABBA.


----------



## richsadams

lrhorer said:


> It should. I don't think there have been any backwardly fatal changes to HME or HMO.


Great, thanks!


----------



## DCIFRTHS

lrhorer said:


> What, really, is the big deal about MRV? If I chose, I could very easily enable MRV on all my S3 class TiVos, but the modifications I have made cause it to be effectively disabled on one of the boxes, and I really don't care. I almost never use it on the two for which MRV is available. It's also trivial to enable MRV on protected content, but once again, it's not worth even the minuscule amount of trouble it would be to enable it. Of course, I suppose having an external video server makes a significant difference, but honestly I don't know why almost anyone would not set up a video server. It doesn't have to a giant server like the one I have built. A laptop will suffice - although it probably isn't the best choice for a video server.
> 
> Anything I want to "move" between TiVos I push to the server and delete off the recording TiVo, eliminating commercials, if any, along the way. Anything else I record on the TiVo where I intend to watch the recording. I'm not saying MRV is a bad thing, of course. To be sure, it's a neat little bell, but the TiVo has lots of neat bells and whistles. It just puzzles me why some people consider this particular bell to be so important.


It's very simple. I like to transfer shows from one box to another, and I don't want to use an external server.


----------



## JWThiers

lrhorer said:


> Oh, there are some small ones that wouldn't care.


I know, never say never and always I'll concede that, but you get my point I doubt a major provider would allow it.



lrhorer said:


> No, there are some people out there doing strictly OTA.


But then again OTA doesn't have a CCI byte to worry about (and if they did current regulations explicitly say it is set to copy freely).



lrhorer said:


> The folowing is *NOT* how copyright / patent law works, but it should be:
> 
> Anyone should be able to copy or manufacture and distribute any properties they like so long as proper royalties are paid to the patent / copyright holder during the tenure of the patent / copyright. No one, no matter who, should be allowed to prevent any other party from selling to the public. Fines and punishment for failing to pay royalties should be much stiffer and surer than they are, but there should be no such thing as "piracy". Of course, this would require setting up a system of fair pricing for royalties. Such a system would be somewhat complex to develop, but far less complex than the existing bunch of muck. It should be perfectly legal for John Doe to make 100 copies of an ABBA album and distribute it to his friends, so long as he sends, say, $500 to ABBA.


That could work, but the only problem with that is the current tenure of patent / copyright is up to what now 99 years? IIRC the constitution just says for a limited time, which originally codified as 7 years. All thanks to Mickey Mouse. I suppose limited could also mean 10,000 years (so I guess I shouldn't complain), but I don't think that was the intent of the law. The intent in the constitution was to "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries" (Yes that is the entire clause that all these laws are based on). IMO the intent was to limit the length of copyright so others could then use it and do equally important works building on what was previously done. A LOT needs to done to fix copyright laws.


----------



## Jonathan_S

JWThiers said:


> That could work, but the only problem with that is the current tenure of patent / copyright is up to what now 99 years? IIRC the constitution just says for a limited time, which originally codified as 7 years. All thanks to Mickey Mouse. I suppose limited could also mean 10,000 years (so I guess I shouldn't complain), but I don't think that was the intent of the law.


Obligatory not all IP is the same post. Currently in the US:
A Patent is good for 20 years (although until recently you could play some games with keeping in in the patent pending stage to string out your protect). Or if it's a design patent it's only good for 14 years.

A copyright is good for 95 years from publication (or 120 from creation; whichever is shorter), if it was a work for hire. 
If the author owns the copyright it's life + 70 years.

A Trademark is good for as long as it is in use and enforced (Which is why Disney's stated rational for extending copyright is disingenuous. Other people can't make new Mickey Mouse movies because Mickey is _trademarked_. If they were out of copyright people could sell the existing old ones, but they still wouldn't be able to make new ones)


----------



## Dstap06

Dstap06 said:


> Bummer. Just checked it out and HubHD is copy protected here in Massachusetts. Have had FIOS for a couple of years and this is the first channel I have seen that is copy protected.


Well, it appears that at least some shows on HubHD in Massachusetts are not copy protected. A couple of animated shows on this morning were CCI 0x00. I'll check it tonight and see if it's just certain shows or if everything on HubHD is now copy freely.


----------



## JWThiers

Jonathan_S said:


> Obligatory not all IP is the same post. Currently in the US:
> A Patent is good for 20 years (although until recently you could play some games with keeping in in the patent pending stage to string out your protect). Or if it's a design patent it's only good for 14 years.
> 
> A copyright is good for 95 years from publication (or 120 from creation; whichever is shorter), if it was a work for hire.
> If the author owns the copyright it's life + 70 years.
> 
> A Trademark is good for as long as it is in use and enforced (Which is why Disney's stated rational for extending copyright is disingenuous. Other people can't make new Mickey Mouse movies because Mickey is _trademarked_. If they were out of copyright people could sell the existing old ones, but they still wouldn't be able to make new ones)


Thank you for the clarification. I didn't think they were the same, Too lazy today to check exact durations. Point still valid in that copyrights (which is what we are concerned with) are enforceable WAY too long. And I'm sure once Mickey gets to be a few years older it will be 150 years or so just to kick the ball down the road.

Excellent point BTW about Mickeys trademark.


----------



## lrhorer

DCIFRTHS said:


> It's very simple. I like to transfer shows from one box to another, and I don't want to use an external server.


Of course you do. That is not the question, at all. The question is, "Why is that such a big deal?" I would like to be able to walk from my bedroom to my home office without having to pass through either the guestroom or the living room, but it's not physically possible. The fact does not keep me up nights, however, or come anywhere close to inducing me to sell my house. I'm not criticizing your or anyone else, nor suggesting that you should not wish to do such a thing. I'm just asking why you consider it to be a critical or near critical feature; why it has such a high priority, as opposed to something that would be nice to have available.


----------



## lrhorer

JWThiers said:


> I know, never say never and always I'll concede that, but you get my point I doubt a major provider would allow it.


Oh, absolutely, which would of course be the major concern for any company seeking to design a DVR. I think few, if any, would blithely eliminate more than 95% of their potential demographic by failing to consider CableLabs certification.



JWThiers said:


> But then again OTA doesn't have a CCI byte to worry about (and if they did current regulations explicitly say it is set to copy freely).


Yes, but the point is there is a small segment of the population who would knowingly purchase a DVR that would not work with almost all CATV systems. Once again, however, any company who made such a DVR would be eliminating more than 90% of their potential revenue. I can imagine in general cases where such might be a valid idea, and indeed there are companies who do specialize in something and so have artificially limited sales potentials for some or all their products, but in general it's probably not the best idea from a company's perspective.



JWThiers said:


> That could work, but the only problem with that is the current tenure of patent / copyright is up to what now 99 years?


How is that a problem? If the distributor has to pay a royalty, then they have to pay a royalty. It makes no difference if it is ten minutes after the patent / copyright becomes effective or ten decades. I agree there should be limits on the duration of the grants, but that has nothing to do with preventing someone from paying the royalties and distributing the product.



JWThiers said:


> IIRC the constitution just says for a limited time, which originally codified as 7 years. All thanks to Mickey Mouse. I suppose limited could also mean 10,000 years (so I guess I shouldn't complain), but I don't think that was the intent of the law.


No, it wasn't.



JWThiers said:


> The intent in the constitution was to "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries" (Yes that is the entire clause that all these laws are based on).


Note it says "authors and inventors", not "companies and corporations". The current set of laws all but guarantee the Authors and Inventors (and Artists) derive almost none of the benefits of the patent / copyright. The vast bulk of the royalties go to some corporation. In many cases, all of it goes to the corporation. It's also far, far too easy for a corporation to break a patent or copyright.

As a side note, while the phrase you quoted is the entire justification for patent and copyright law in the United States, it's not quite true it is the basis for all U.S. copyright and patent law. Much of our law is based upon legal artifacts going all the way back to the 14th century - long before the existence of the constitution. Much of it has also developed in consideration of foreign laws and policies. Really, the only reason I mention it, however, is the fact our laws are covered with rather more mold than would have developed in only 22 decades, and perhaps more than if we had been left, as it were, strictly to our own devices.



JWThiers said:


> IMO the intent was to limit the length of copyright so others could then use it and do equally important works building on what was previously done. A LOT needs to done to fix copyright laws.


Yes, and also IMO in order to prevent an individual from being able to create one tiny artifact and have him and his heirs live effectively on the dole for the rest of eternity. I feel the founding fathers would have agreed there is a reasonable limit to how much profit one should be able to enjoy from a limited amount of work. With both things in mind, I feel that:

1. Copyrights and patents should not be considered "property", in the ordinary sense. They should not be transferable nor salable. The ability of heirs to profit from a patent or copyright should be limited - although arguably perhaps not zero.

2. Patents and copyrights should never be assigned to anything other than human beings. Rights can be granted to group of people, rather than a single individual, but if so that group will be corporate strictly for the purposes of the patent or copyright itself, irrespective of any and all relationships, business or otherwise, external to the application for the patent or copyright.

3. Employment agreements indemnifying the company for the rights to any patent or copyright should be strictly forbidden, with the exception that a company may require the employee to forgo royalty collections from the employer for the duration of the employee's tenure with the company for any patents or copyrights developed by the employee directly as a part of their employment. Creative output by an employee outside the confines of his activities on the job should be excluded and the restriction should terminate immediately upon the termination of the individual's employment.

4. Failure to collect from one or more distributors, with or without the knowledge of the activities of the distributors on the part of the patent / copyright holder should not constitute waving the rights to the royalties afforded by the patent or copyright.

5. Patent or copyright infringement should not be actionable under civil law, but rather under federal criminal law. Incarceration and heavy fines should be mandatory for each and every individual - potentially up to and including every employee in the company - who did know or legally should have known the product was in violation of patent / copyright law. Even the janitor should be thrown in jail if he knew the company was not paying royalties, and the senior management team should be culpable irrespective of their actual knowledge. The same should hold for some guy duplicating CDs in his basement. If he pays the royalties, then he should be free to copy and distribute whatever he likes. If not, he should expect a knock on the door.


----------



## lrhorer

Jonathan_S said:


> Obligatory not all IP is the same post. Currently in the US:
> A Patent is good for 20 years (although until recently you could play some games with keeping in in the patent pending stage to string out your protect).


Has that hole been plugged? I hadn't heard. Trying to argue a patent has been pending for 20 years is absurd.



Jonathan_S said:


> A copyright is good for 95 years from publication (or 120 from creation; whichever is shorter), if it was a work for hire.
> If the author owns the copyright it's life + 70 years.


As I mentioned in passing above, it really should not matter if it is a work for hire, or not. It should be black letter law the entity doing the hiring would be exempt from royalties, but the royalty rights should accrue strictly to the individual(s) hired.



Jonathan_S said:


> A Trademark is good for as long as it is in use and enforced (Which is why Disney's stated rational for extending copyright is disingenuous. Other people can't make new Mickey Mouse movies because Mickey is _trademarked_. If they were out of copyright people could sell the existing old ones, but they still wouldn't be able to make new ones)


Another ridiculous loophole that needs to be plugged. Trademarks need to be inviolate only for the purpose of ascribing business intent and production, and should be applicable only to corporate entities in and of themselves. If "Mickey Mouse" is a corporation, then no one other than they should be able to claim their film was made by Mickey Mouse corporation, but non-plagiaristic development of characters originally developed by the company should not be illegal, and if the company patented a Mickey Mouse doll, then anyone should be able to manufacture and distribute the doll, provided they pay the royalties and do not claim the doll was manufactured by Mickey Mouse...

Lord, what a ridiculous sentence. I trust my meaning is clear, though.


----------



## cwerdna

Hey, can we please keep this thread on topic as it relates to copy protection (CCI byte values != 0) on FiOS? I haven't had time to monitor this thread but from skimming, it looks like it's going way OT again.

Please take your copy protection, patent, inventions, Mickey Mouse, legal, etc. discussion to http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=455628.


----------



## JWThiers

lrhorer said:


> How is that a problem? If the distributor has to pay a royalty, then they have to pay a royalty. It makes no difference if it is ten minutes after the patent / copyright becomes effective or ten decades. I agree there should be limits on the duration of the grants, but that has nothing to do with preventing someone from paying the royalties and distributing the product.


Technically under such a setup (I guess more details or combined with my idea of I can use on any device I own could change it) if I make a copy to move something to a home server of some kind I need to pay a royalty, Then If I make a copy to send back to some kind of media extender a royalty is required. I think once I obtain legally I should be allowed to consume it as I see fit. But I also think that a copyright owner should be allowed to control the original sale or distribution of their work. If they only want to release for sale as a Bluray only they can control the original sale, I can still rip and copy for personal use, but the original distribution is theirs.

The rest I think we pretty much agree in principle but differ slightly in details (I think companies should be allowed to own the copyrights/patents for things their employees developed while employed for said company for example) but the underlying principles we agree on.


----------



## JWThiers

cwerdna said:


> Hey, can we please keep this thread on topic as it relates to copy protection (CCI byte values != 0) on FiOS? I haven't had time to monitor this thread but from skimming, it looks like it's going way OT again.
> 
> Please take your copy protection, patent, inventions, Mickey Mouse, legal, etc. discussion to http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=455628.


The underlying copyright and patent laws do make it related since the CCI byte is being used to enforce those copyrights. So the why is the byte set to... is because of protecting those copyrights. Besides it is well established that legally Fios, and any other cable company can legally change the CCI byte of any channel other than those available OTA to 2 eliminating copying of files on Tivo. I suppose that includes PPV stuff which may be set even more restrictive.


----------



## cwerdna

JWThiers said:


> The underlying copyright and patent laws do make it related since the CCI byte is being used to enforce those copyrights. So the why is the byte set to... is because of protecting those copyrights. Besides it is well established that legally Fios, and any other cable company can legally change the CCI byte of any channel other than those available OTA to 2 eliminating copying of files on Tivo. I suppose that includes PPV stuff which may be set even more restrictive.


Yes, cable operators have the legal authority to set it.

So, even though you don't have FiOS, you're asserting that Verizon did this to FiOS customers in WA and OR because of copyright reasons? So, HDNet and Current TV asked for it? Standard def Game Show Network and CNN Headline News need "protection" whereas SD and HD Science Channel and Nat Geo don't? Can you tell me why it seems all ESPNs have CP while (SD) ESPN and ESPNUHD don't? (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=8018870#post8018870) I just checked and this is still the case.

You have insight into what's going on in their heads?

If so, please elaborate as to why this wasn't done to FiOS customers not being transitioned to Frontier. Please elaborate why everything was in the clear (CCI byte=0) and CableCARDs weren't paired prior to June 2010 across all of FiOS.

You arguing about copyrights, Mickey, patents and everything is OT. It doesn't help us. Please take such debates to the other thread.

Those still on Verizon controlled FiOS as far as we know still have most/all of their channels w/CCI byte set to 0 unlike those of us in (now) Frontier-land FiOS.


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> Yes, cable operators have the legal authority to set it.
> 
> So, even though you don't have FiOS, you're asserting that Verizon did this to FiOS customers in WA and OR because of copyright reasons? So, HDNet and Current TV asked for it? Standard def Game Show Network and CNN Headline News need "protection" whereas SD and HD Science Channel and Nat Geo don't? Can you tell me why it seems all ESPNs have CP while (SD) ESPN and ESPNUHD don't? (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=8018870#post8018870) I just checked and this is still the case.


Don't forget, all HBO channels have CP but the FiOS Movie Package including Showtime does not. 

What VZ did during the eleventh hour was go back on their promise that no changes would be made before handing things over to Frontier. Their attempts to comply with Frontier's apparent request (although denied by VZ) was grossly mishandled, defies common sense and the resulting mess was left for others to clean up. It's just as clear that Frontier doesn't have a clue what to do, has no intention of even trying to resolve the issue or even cares about their customers. :down: The sooner I can cut them lose the better.


----------



## JWThiers

cwerdna said:


> Yes, cable operators have the legal authority to set it.
> 
> So, even though you don't have FiOS, you're asserting that Verizon did this to FiOS customers in WA and OR because of copyright reasons? So, HDNet and Current TV asked for it? Standard def Game Show Network and CNN Headline News need "protection" whereas SD and HD Science Channel and Nat Geo don't? Can you tell me why it seems all ESPNs have CP while (SD) ESPN and ESPNUHD don't? (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=8018870#post8018870) I just checked and this is still the case.
> 
> You have insight into what's going on in their heads?
> 
> If so, please elaborate as to why this wasn't done to FiOS customers not being transitioned to Frontier. Please elaborate why everything was in the clear (CCI byte=0) and CableCARDs weren't paired prior to June 2010 across all of FiOS.
> 
> You arguing about copyrights, Mickey, patents and everything is OT. It doesn't help us. Please take such debates to the other thread.
> 
> Those still on Verizon controlled FiOS as far as we know still have most/all of their channels w/CCI byte set to 0 unlike those of us in (now) Frontier-land FiOS.





richsadams said:


> Don't forget, all HBO channels have CP but the FiOS Movie Package including Showtime does not.
> 
> What VZ did during the eleventh hour was go back on their promise that no changes would be made before handing things over to Frontier. Their attempts to comply with Frontier's apparent request (although denied by VZ) was grossly mishandled, defies common sense and the resulting mess was left for others to clean up. It's just as clear that Frontier doesn't have a clue what to do, has no intention of even trying to resolve the issue or even cares about their customers. :down: The sooner I can cut them lose the better.


I said it previously in this thread somewhere, while it sucks that "they" (Verizon/Frontier) are changing how they do CP, First as we all know they within their rights to do it, and second IF you get an answer to the question why they changed or why they are doing it this way other than "We are doing it in accordance with law and their contractual agreements..." your one up on any other Cable Company.

Which is why IMO the best hope for changing this (and it is slim hope indeed) is to try to get FCC, Congress, Library of Congress and any other stake holder to push to get copyright law reworked to actually reasonably protect content and at the same time respect fair use in the digital age. Like it or not Copyright is closely tied to the CCI byte. In fact as I pointed out it is the reason for its existence. Why is it different accross VZ /Frontier? They are doing it in accordance with law and their contractual agreements. Anything else is sheer speculation.


----------



## cwerdna

JWThiers said:


> Like it or not Copyright is closely tied to the CCI byte. In fact as I pointed out it is the reason for its existence. Why is it different accross VZ /Frontier? They are doing it in accordance with law and their contractual agreements. Anything else is sheer speculation.


How do you know this? It seems your statement is speculation. You still haven't explained the reasoning for the haphazard application of CP on FiOS (e.g. most ESPN channels have it yet ESPNU and ESPNUHD don't and many other examples already cited), why channels have CP when their founder is seemingly against CP (HDNet) nor countless other things such as why the sudden change.

Getting copyright law changed to fix the CCI byte problem affecting Frontier FiOS customers in WA and OR is extremely unlikely. Getting bozos who don't know what they're doing to get their act together and shouldn't have turned it on in the first place is likely easier. For all we know, there's some default setting (of CP on) on some/much of their head-end equipment. Something similar happened years ago w/a university's cable system.

Again, arguing about copyrights, patents, overturning laws, Mickey, etc. doesn't help us and doesn't belong in this thread.


----------



## JWThiers

cwerdna said:


> How do you know this? It seems your statement is speculation. You still haven't explained the reasoning for the haphazard application of CP on FiOS (e.g. most ESPN channels have it yet ESPNU and ESPNUHD don't and many other examples already cited) nor countless other things such as why the sudden change.
> 
> Getting copyright law changed to fix the CCI byte problem affecting Frontier FiOS customers in WA and OR is extremely unlikely. Getting bozos who don't know what they're doing to get their act together and shouldn't have turned it on in the first place is likely easier. For all we know, there's some default setting (of CP on) on some/much of their head-end equipment. Something similar happened years ago w/a university's cable system.
> 
> Again, arguing about copyrights, patents, overturning laws, Mickey, etc. doesn't help us and doesn't belong in this thread.


I said "IF you get an answer other than...", I know this because it is the answer given by every other major cable company when they changed the way that they handled CCI when they went to digital channels, just look for all the other threads about CCI/Copy Protection in this forum. Is this what Frontier says? I am speculating but it is the most common answer that is technically correct, but doesn't really say anything about why , which is what you want. What they don't say is, if their agreement specifically states what the CCI byte is or if they just apply it to everything they can. FIOS prior to Frontier was the exception to the rule, but obviously Frontier does not want to continue this. It sucks, just as much as it did for BHN, Comcast, Cablevision...

Changing CCI bytes "fixed" wont, just affect Frontier but also EVERY other cable company that have been living with this for several years(? A while anyway.). If you want to fix CCI then you have to know WHY they are there in the first place. They are there to protect copyrights. You fix copyrights in a way to protect the holders and the consumers in a reasonable way and the issue COULD go away. Other solutions include Tivo going to a streaming model of MRV or a secure move model. I personally don't like those solutions (Streaming especially), but they are also possible solutions.


----------



## JWThiers

cwerdna said:


> How do you know this? It seems your statement is speculation. You still haven't explained the reasoning for the haphazard application of CP on FiOS (e.g. most ESPN channels have it yet ESPNU and ESPNUHD don't and many other examples already cited), why channels have CP when their founder is seemingly against CP (HDNet) nor countless other things such as why the sudden change.
> 
> Getting copyright law changed to fix the CCI byte problem affecting Frontier FiOS customers in WA and OR is extremely unlikely. Getting bozos who don't know what they're doing to get their act together and shouldn't have turned it on in the first place is likely easier. For all we know, there's some default setting (of CP on) on some/much of their head-end equipment. Something similar happened years ago w/a university's cable system.
> 
> Again, arguing about copyrights, patents, overturning laws, Mickey, etc. doesn't help us and doesn't belong in this thread.


I also know that the CCI byte is used to enforce Copyright (which on second reading seems to be what you asked how I know this ratgher that my statement about other cable companies) because that is the message that pops up when you try to transfer "prohibited by copyright holder".


----------



## orangeboy

JWThiers said:


> ...because that is the message that pops up when you try to transfer "prohibited by copyright holder".


But that message is misleading, because the copyright holder isn't the only one with the ability to apply copyright protection. Both holder and distributer are legally able to apply copy protection. But as you said, this topic has been discussed ad-nauseum with no clear reasons _why_ the distributer has that right (other than "The FCC said so"). Dress on a donkey.


----------



## JWThiers

Thats why I have contended that the Copyright law and regulations pertaining to CCI byte needs to be changed or at least clarified. The CCI Byte has a legitimate reason to exist (namely copyright considerations), the problem with it is that the restrictions are too onerous IMO. Also IMO any meaningful discussion about CCI being fixed needs to include the underlying reason for its existence copyright law in general which also is in desperate need of fixing.


----------



## KillTheGrimace

We are Frontier FIOS customers in Oregon and my wife just told me last week she wasn't able to transfer some recordings. I figure this is the problem, but we have over 200 channels and do not know which ones (if any) are affected.

Those of you who have run into the problem on Frontier FIOS- is it still happening? Also, is it limited to specific channels or programs- or is it a blanket block across all programming?


----------



## richsadams

KillTheGrimace said:


> Those of you who have run into the problem on Frontier FIOS- is it still happening? Also, is it limited to specific channels or programs- or is it a blanket block across all programming?


The quick answers are yes nothing has changed and yes it is on specific channels and not on others...broadcast channels (NBC, CBS, etc.) are never protected.


----------



## Stormspace

KillTheGrimace said:


> We are Frontier FIOS customers in Oregon and my wife just told me last week she wasn't able to transfer some recordings. I figure this is the problem, but we have over 200 channels and do not know which ones (if any) are affected.
> 
> Those of you who have run into the problem on Frontier FIOS- is it still happening? Also, is it limited to specific channels or programs- or is it a blanket block across all programming?


I've added Frontier to the thread in my sig, but I need confirmation on the channels affected.


----------



## richsadams

Stormspace said:


> I've added Frontier to the thread in my sig, but I need confirmation on the channels affected.


It would be nice if someone had the time to check the CCI Bytes on several hundred channels, but that doesn't seem practical. If you scan through the early posts on this thead and some on the AVS Forum you'll get an idea about the more popular ones.

FWIW Frontier has no idea either.


----------



## Stormspace

richsadams said:


> It would be nice if someone had the time to check the CCI Bytes on several hundred channels, but that doesn't seem practical. If you scan through the early posts on this thead and some on the AVS Forum you'll get an idea about the more popular ones.
> 
> FWIW Frontier has no idea either.


The linked thread doesn't go into a great deal of detail. For instance if locals are clear but some standard and premium cable channels are protected I might list them as "Locals Clear, some extended basic and Premiums protected". I don't expect someone to check all of them.


----------



## richsadams

Stormspace said:


> "Locals Clear, some extended basic and Premiums protected".


That would be accurate.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> It would be nice if someone had the time to check the CCI Bytes on several hundred channels, but that doesn't seem practical. If you scan through the early posts on this thead and some on the AVS Forum you'll get an idea about the more popular ones.
> 
> FWIW Frontier has no idea either.


I am thinking of reporting you for trying to get this thread back on topic!


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> I am thinking of reporting you for trying to get this thread back on topic!


D'oh! Bad Rich...BAD Rich!


----------



## cwerdna

Stormspace said:


> "Locals Clear, some extended basic and Premiums protected". I don't expect someone to check all of them.





richsadams said:


> That would be accurate.


I can't speak to the premiums (since I don't have them) but I'd say it'd probably more accurate to state "Locals Clear, most extended basic" are protected. Of the "extended basic" channels, I'd say the vast majority are protected. 

It would be very painful to check all of them (and likely unhelpful).


----------



## MPSAN

cwerdna said:


> I can't speak to the premiums (since I don't have them) but I'd say it'd probably more accurate to state "Locals Clear, most extended basic" are protected. Of the "extended basic" channels, I'd say the vast majority are protected.
> 
> It would be very painful to check all of them (and likely unhelpful).


Yes, even the Game Show Network is protected. They do not want you selling Match Game '67!


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> Yes, even the Game Show Network is protected. They do not want you selling Match Game '67!


Pssst...I'll give you a sweet deal on the 1992 season of Super Market Sweep!


----------



## lrhorer

JWThiers said:


> Technically under such a setup (I guess more details or combined with my idea of I can use on any device I own could change it) if I make a copy to move something to a home server of some kind I need to pay a royalty, Then If I make a copy to send back to some kind of media extender a royalty is required.


No, I think fair use would restrict the royalty to external distribution, if for no other reason than to expand it into the domicile or onto the person themselves would make it unenforcible. In addition, I think, pragmatism aside, it is reasonable to assert that having paid the royalty, an individual person within his demenses should be allowed to make whatever use he likes, extralegal activities of some other nature aside.



JWThiers said:


> I think once I obtain legally I should be allowed to consume it as I see fit.


Yes, at least within the confines of properties inhabited by you or in your own person. An owner of a large string of nightclubs should not, for example, be allowed to purchase a single copy of a CD and then play it at nightclubs across the nation, and a radio or TV network should be required to pay more than $15 for the rights to broadcast an album or a movie.



JWThiers said:


> But I also think that a copyright owner should be allowed to control the original sale or distribution of their work. If they only want to release for sale as a Bluray only they can control the original sale, I can still rip and copy for personal use, but the original distribution is theirs.


I think you are saying the creator should be able to have some control over the ways and means the product is distributed. That's probably reasonable within limits, especially as regards the quality of presentation. One might be justifiably dismayed to have one's quality work packaged in a way that detracts from the end user's opinion of the product. An inventor might reasonably demand a certain quality standard for the production of the invention, for example.



JWThiers said:


> The rest I think we pretty much agree in principle but differ slightly in details (I think companies should be allowed to own the copyrights/patents for things their employees developed while employed for said company for example) but the underlying principles we agree on.


I can see how one could argue this, but in fact I think in practice it merely winds up with large inequities in the whole situation and in the end does more to discourage inventiveness and innovation than otherwise. Even if the playing field were level - and it never will be - individual inventors and independant artists simply cannot compete with large corporations. The bottom line, really, is that the creativity is 100% the result of the efforts of the creative individuals. 'Not the owners of a company, not the janitor, not the secretary, and not the managers. The person, period. To be sure, the company may provide an environment wherein the person can do the things they do, and the company should be allowed to profit from that, but they do profit from it. They make and distribute the product, and they can be free from paying royalties as long as the person remains employed. Indeed, this is the very same advantage in this respect they would have as the owner of the patent with one important difference: if they fire the individual or induce him to quit, then they lose the advantages of being a virtual owner.


----------



## lrhorer

orangeboy said:


> But that message is misleading, because the copyright holder isn't the only one with the ability to apply copyright protection. Both holder and distributer are legally able to apply copy protection. But as you said, this topic has been discussed ad-nauseum with no clear reasons _why_ the distributer has that right (other than "The FCC said so"). Dress on a donkey.


In this context, the copyright holder and the distributor are one and the same. The copyright holder has no rights, however, unless the CATV provider agrees to enter into a contract which explicitly grants the distributor a say-so in the setting of the protection. Similarly, the copyright owner waives the right to control the copyright by selling the rights to the content provider, unless the contract reserves those rights to the owner. Thus, a chain of contracts could cede the copyright owners full control over how the CATV provider sets the byte, but then the same is true of anyone at large. If the CATV provider enters into an agreement which gives John Doe the rights to control the way the byte is set, then John Does has that right, unless the contract is in conflict with prior contractural committments. Contract wrangling aside, the CATV provider can set the byte for any channel or specifically any program on any channel they like for whatever reason they like, unless the channel is broadcast OTA locally. Neither the owners nor the distributors have any say-so in the matter. The holder, however, can refuse to allow the provider to air the channel at all unless they agree to do something specific with the byte, and before that the owner can refuse to allow the distributor to put the program on their channel unless they agree to refuse to sell to the CATV company without the restriction.

In practice, however, the content owner, distributor, and provider may be one and the same or at least joined at the hip. Can you say, "Time Warner?"


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> Pssst...I'll give you a sweet deal on the 1992 season of Super Market Sweep!


Can I trade you for two episodes of Password?


----------



## JWThiers

lrhorer said:


> No, I think fair use would restrict the royalty to external distribution, if for no other reason than to expand it into the domicile or onto the person themselves would make it unenforcible. In addition, I think, pragmatism aside, it is reasonable to assert that having paid the royalty, an individual person within his demenses should be allowed to make whatever use he likes, extralegal activities of some other nature aside.


Those are the details I was talking about.



lrhorer said:


> Yes, at least within the confines of properties inhabited by you or in your own person. An owner of a large string of nightclubs should not, for example, be allowed to purchase a single copy of a CD and then play it at nightclubs across the nation, and a radio or TV network should be required to pay more than $15 for the rights to broadcast an album or a movie.


Naturally, I was talking about personal consumption playing it at a bar would be a public performance and subject to a different set of rules. But we agree.



lrhorer said:


> I think you are saying the creator should be able to have some control over the ways and means the product is distributed. That's probably reasonable within limits, especially as regards the quality of presentation. One might be justifiably dismayed to have one's quality work packaged in a way that detracts from the end user's opinion of the product. An inventor might reasonably demand a certain quality standard for the production of the invention, for example.


It goes back to the constitution here. The rights holder has "...for a limited time...*EXCULSIVE *right..." (emphasis added). I am only talking about where the first gen legal sources are. If they want all their work to originate from their website in a 4k HD format they have exclusive right to it, If they want it to go only thru Walmart on VHS tape, they still have exclusive right to say that. After you obtain that copy you can do with it what you want (within the confines we described) but that original source has to be from a legal source that the rights holder has said this is where you may obtain this work. Otherwise what good are EXCLUSIVE rights.


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> Can I trade you for two episodes of Password?


With Betty White's husband or one of those later wannabes?


----------



## lrhorer

JWThiers said:


> It goes back to the constitution here. The rights holder has "...for a limited time...*EXCULSIVE *right..." (emphasis added). I am only talking about where the first gen legal sources are.


The Constitution can be changed, you know. Indeed, the most fundamental rigtht offered by the Constitution, preceeding and superceding the first ten amendments, is our right to change it when it needs to be changed. This is a situation that calls for just that. The thing is, it doesn't require a broad, sweeping re-write of the constitution, merely a chisel taken here and there to realign the system so it functions equitably and appropriately. The Founding Fathers did a wonderful job, but they were men, and they neither forsaw nor completely understood everything. That is why they gave us the right to change it. Unfortunately, they did not set up a good mechanism to change it, and so for 220 odd years the only changes have been via the auspices of a corrupt, lazy, shortsighted governing body.



JWThiers said:


> If they want all their work to originate from their website in a 4k HD format they have exclusive right to it, If they want it to go only thru Walmart on VHS tape, they still have exclusive right to say that. After you obtain that copy you can do with it what you want (within the confines we described) but that original source has to be from a legal source that the rights holder has said this is where you may obtain this work. Otherwise what good are EXCLUSIVE rights.


Well, depending upon one's definition of "exclusive", who says exclusive rights to a patent or copyright is a good thing? The public needs to have free market access to all goods and services. The inventor or author needs to be guaranteed to profit from their labors, presupposing of course people actually want to buy the fruits of those labors. In the current situation, the inventors and authors of most "intellectual property" are virtually guaranteed to not be able to profit significantly from their efforts and the goods are guaranteed not be delivered via a free market. Instead, giant corporations reap virtually all the profits and completely and singularly control all distribution. The number of people who have any rights at all or any control at all of their intellectual output is vanishingly small.

This thread is a good example. Do the actors, actresses, and other artists and craftsmen who create a movie have any control over how the CCI byte is employed? Not in the least.


----------



## lrhorer

richsadams said:


> With Betty White's husband or one of those later wannabes?


Betty White *ROCKS*! That is one of the funniest, most talented ladies of all time. By the reports I've seen, she was madly devoted to Alan Ludden until his death from cancer.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> With Betty White's husband or one of those later wannabes?


Well, in order to put this thread back Off Topic again, I can look for Allen Ludden hosting...did you know that is where He met Her...on Password?


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> Well, in order to put this thread back Off Topic again, I can look for Allen Ludden hosting...did you know that is where He met Her...on Password?


I did in fact know that...showing my age again.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> I did in fact know that...showing my age again.


OH YEAH!! Well, can you remember running home from work to get dinner and not miss Laugh In or the Smothers Brothers?


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> OH YEAH!! Well, can you remember running home from work to get dinner and not miss Laugh In or the Smothers Brothers?


Ah, two of the all-time great Dicks! Dick Martin and Dick Smothers. . Jo Ann Worley...one if my favorites. Tommy's pet chicken? Killer. I was working, but only part-time after school...so you may have me beat. 

Wowee...isn't this OT blather fun!


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> Wowee...isn't this OT blather fun!


Well, at least I am not being told that I am an Alarmist!

I also liked the David Steinberg Show. A few of the funniest bits I ever saw. He used to do a bit where he pointed to his white coat that had an MD on it. He would introduce a famous guest and say Hello, I am the doctor...MD, Me Doctor. Lorne Greene pulled the greatest prank I saw and David did not miss a beat! Did you see that or am I the only OT poster old enough to remember?

Can I get back On Topic if I said that I hope they can put some of those shows back on with a CCI Byte of 0x00?


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> Well, at least I am not being told that I am an Alarmist!
> 
> I also liked the David Steinberg Show. A few of the funniest bits I ever saw. He used to do a bit where he pointed to his white coat that had an MD on it. He would introduce a famous guest and say Hello, I am the doctor...MD, Me Doctor. Lorne Greene pulled the greatest prank I saw and David did not miss a beat! Did you see that or am I the only OT poster old enough to remember?
> 
> Can I get back On Topic if I said that I hope they can put some of those shows back on with a CCI Byte of 0x00?


"Dr. Steinberg" smiles into the camera, suddenly looks at his shoulder in alarm, grabs an invisible something, shouts "Get off!" and throws it to the ground. Classic. I actually met Lorne Green once...as a kid. I can't remember what he did on David's show though.  Refresh my memory.

Oh, and the folks at Frontier still have no idea what channels have CP or why.

Generalissimo Fransico Franco is still dead.

EDIT: Found it!


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> "Dr. Steinberg" smiles into the camera, suddenly looks at his shoulder in alarm, grabs an invisible something, shouts "Get off!" and throws it to the ground. Classic. I actually met Lorne Green once...as a kid. I can't remember what he did on David's show though.  Refresh my memory.
> 
> Oh, and the folks at Frontier still have no idea what channels have CP or why.
> 
> Generalissimo Fransico Franco is still dead.
> 
> EDIT: Found it!


WOW, you remembered. What happened, after so many guests were at the Doctors office, and smiling when David would say "Get Off", Lorne Greene just bent over, picked it off the floor, and threw it back at David. The audience went crazy. When they calmed down David said "Don't you EVER throw one of them at a Doctor again"!


----------



## richsadams

MPSAN said:


> WOW, you remembered. What happened, after so many guests were at the Doctors office, and smiling when David would say "Get Off", Lorne Greene just bent over, picked it off the floor, and threw it back at David. The audience went crazy. When they calmed down David said "Don't you EVER throw one of them at a Doctor again"!


Ahhh...that's terrific. Good old Pa Cartwright having some fun. 

FWIW Frontier doesn't answer e-mails (at least mine) about what they are planning to do about the CP anymore. Just thought I'd throw a little topical content out there.


----------



## JWThiers

lrhorer said:


> The Constitution can be changed, you know. Indeed, the most fundamental rigtht offered by the Constitution, preceeding and superceding the first ten amendments, is our right to change it when it needs to be changed. This is a situation that calls for just that. The thing is, it doesn't require a broad, sweeping re-write of the constitution, merely a chisel taken here and there to realign the system so it functions equitably and appropriately. The Founding Fathers did a wonderful job, but they were men, and they neither forsaw nor completely understood everything. That is why they gave us the right to change it. Unfortunately, they did not set up a good mechanism to change it, and so for 220 odd years the only changes have been via the auspices of a corrupt, lazy, shortsighted governing body.


Ouch, yes the constitution can be changed but in this case it really doesn't. The underlying laws need to be reworked. OR the USSC needs to rule that the underlying laws are not constitutional. Unfortunately they already have ruled that the mouse gets his IMO excessively long copyright. As far as how to change the constitution, it is difficult to do intentionally, otherwise any small change in public opinion would result in amendments. That is why the while the second amendment gives the right to keep and bear arms, it is not legal for us to use fully automatic machine guns or 105mm howitzers. but this is way off topic, but illustrates how the laws can change without the constitution being amended.



lrhorer said:


> Well, depending upon one's definition of "exclusive", who says exclusive rights to a patent or copyright is a good thing? The public needs to have free market access to all goods and services. The inventor or author needs to be guaranteed to profit from their labors, presupposing of course people actually want to buy the fruits of those labors. In the current situation, the inventors and authors of most "intellectual property" are virtually guaranteed to not be able to profit significantly from their efforts and the goods are guaranteed not be delivered via a free market. Instead, giant corporations reap virtually all the profits and completely and singularly control all distribution. The number of people who have any rights at all or any control at all of their intellectual output is vanishingly small.


Exclusive rights are a good thing when you are the one that wrote the book that the hit movie is based on. Otherwise, a movie company could say thats a great story I think I'll make a movie based on it, and not pay the book author a dime. This is where the "...for a limited time..." come into play. Short time is good for innovation , but poor for right holder, Long time is good for the rights holder but poor for those that could build on it. The trick is to balance those two. 95 years is too long (IMO) and I think the USSC got it wrong when they ruled that the current law is constitutional. It overly protects the original rights holder at the expense of others who might innovate and create other meaningful things.



lrhorer said:


> This thread is a good example. Do the actors, actresses, and other artists and craftsmen who create a movie have any control over how the CCI byte is employed? Not in the least.


No they don't, nor should they, the do not hold the copyrights


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> FWIW Frontier doesn't answer e-mails (at least mine) about what they are planning to do about the CP anymore. Just thought I'd throw a little topical content out there.


Well, I spoke to them on the phone a few weeks ago and they said that they are trying to get this "fixed". I do not believe that anything will ever happen!


----------



## mgama

Bad news..  I haven't had time to go through all the channels, but by the looks of it, all non broadcast channels are now 0x02. 

On 11/08 I could transfer recordings from several channels. But the recordings on the same channels made on 11/09 cannot be transfered. I'm using the Tivo Desktop software to see this, and looking at Tivo Suggestion recordings at the bottom of my play list, everything today and yesterday cannot be transfered. 

Here are a few channels that were recently changed from 0x00 to 0x02. 
120
121
122
139
170
210
211
233
552  this is TBS, guess I'm not taking Conan on the road..


----------



## richsadams

It does look that way. 

Because God forbid anyone copy "How It Works" or "Anderson Cooper 360" 

The locals are still clear (by law they better be), but that appears to be it. 

Thanks Verizon, thanks Frontier...thanks for nothing. :down: :down: :down:


----------



## sgip2000

richsadams said:


> It does look that way.
> 
> Because God forbid anyone copy "How It Works" or "Anderson Cooper 360"
> 
> The locals are still clear (by law they better be), but that appears to be it.
> 
> Thanks Verizon, thanks Frontier...thanks for nothing. :down: :down: :down:


This is exactly why I'm dumping Frontier. Sadly, Comcast is looking better now.


----------



## richsadams

sgip2000 said:


> This is exactly why I'm dumping Frontier. Sadly, Comcast is looking better now.


Indeed a sad statement. I'm going to do my best to switch to OTA and fill in the rest with IP (Netflix, Hulu, iTunes, etc.). I really don't want to go back to Comcast.


----------



## mgama

Agreed. It's amazing how the cable companies and channels are worried that people will drop cable tv and watch everything online/hulu/streaming/mail. But when Frontier restricts our functionality it's hard not to cancel and switch to the next best thing.


----------



## cwerdna

mgama said:


> Bad news..  I haven't had time to go through all the channels, but by the looks of it, all non broadcast channels are now 0x02.
> 
> On 11/08 I could transfer recordings from several channels. But the recordings on the same channels made on 11/09 cannot be transfered. I'm using the Tivo Desktop software to see this, and looking at Tivo Suggestion recordings at the bottom of my play list, everything today and yesterday cannot be transfered.
> 
> Here are a few channels that were recently changed from 0x00 to 0x02.
> 120
> 121
> 122
> 139
> 170
> 210
> 211
> 233
> 552  this is TBS, guess I'm not taking Conan on the road..





richsadams said:


> Thanks Verizon, thanks Frontier...thanks for nothing. :down: :down: :down:


For me:
- 120 has been protected for a long time, AFAIK, since the beginning of the CP mess. 
- 121 and 122 did change, along with their HD versions 621 and 622. It was previously unprotected (after this CP mess). This bites, because I used to archive some content from 621 and 622 via kmttg. Now I won't be able to.
- 170 changed as well. This also bites. I transferred some Bizarre Foods eps in the past to my PC to transcode and watch on my iPhone and iPod while traveling. I won't be able to now.

I can't speak to the others since I don't watch them.

But yes, this really bites. :down: My time and bandwidth to deal w/this is low again but when I have time, I will try to engage w/Frontier and if no luck, I might be forced to drop them too.


----------



## mgama

I'm not sure what some of those channels are. Or when they changed. But the method by which I determined this was to periodically go through the TiVo desktop software and note which recordings' channels could be transfered, and which couldn't. Given the recent findings, today I compared my "could transfer" list with the "can't transfer" list and this was the resulting list of channels that appeared in both lists, meaning that they changed at some point.


----------



## cwerdna

mgama said:


> I'm not sure what some of those channels are. Or when they changed. But the method by which I determined this was to periodically go through the TiVo desktop software and note which recordings' channels could be transfered, and which couldn't. Given the recent findings, today I compared my "could transfer" list with the "can't transfer" list and this was the resulting list of channels that appeared in both lists, meaning that they changed at some point.


I see. Well, 120 DSCP has been protected since the beginning of this Verizon FiOS CP mess. I posted about this at http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=18809194#post18809194 and http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=450334.


----------



## thomb

More channels? That really sucks. 

My friend got tired of beating his head against the wall with his Fios provider when this started. It became obvious that nothing was going to be done to correct the issue, so he chose to fix the problem himself - through ways that we shall not speak of. Now his Tivos are freed from the confines of CCI, and MRV is working on all channels. That was a very liberating experience that he has never regretted.

Hopefully someday this process will not be necessary for all Tivos unjustly held captive.


----------



## sgip2000

richsadams said:


> Indeed a sad statement. I'm going to do my best to switch to OTA and fill in the rest with IP (Netflix, Hulu, iTunes, etc.). I really don't want to go back to Comcast.


Yeah, no real good option anymore...


----------



## richsadams

thomb said:


> so he chose to fix the problem himself - through ways that we shall not speak of. Now his Tivos are freed from the confines of CCI, and MRV is working on all channels. That was a very liberating experience that he has never regretted.


I could do that with my trusty soldering iron on my Series3 as well. However AFAIK no one has attempted it on a Premiere so it would be one-way at least for now and not in the direction that we have our TiVo's set up. I guess I could rearrange things. It's just so frustrating to have to deal with this nonsense when it isn't necessary. Either cableco's get the message and stop it (highly doubtful) or folks will be cutting the cord more and more. TiVo could introduce streaming which would be almost as good an option, but I doubt that will happen anytime soon if ever either.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

You missed the most important channel, 583, Speed TV. That's also locked down now. But the F1 season ends this weekend, and all the rest of the season was OK.

My biggest reason in not switching to Comcast is the outstanding image quality that FiOS delivers. I won't give that up.

Also I fully expect that Comcast will eventually follow suit and activate CCI. Why not? In various surveys, Comcast is rated below telcos for customer satisfaction. At least one web site has, perhaps with some hyperbole, declared Comcast to be *"the worst company in America".*


----------



## cwerdna

richsadams said:


> It's just so frustrating to have to deal with this nonsense when it isn't necessary. Either cableco's get the message and stop it (highly doubtful) or folks will be cutting the cord more and more. TiVo could introduce streaming which would be almost as good an option, but I doubt that will happen anytime soon if ever either.


Or... if you're JWThiers, you debate about copyright laws here on TC and try to get the laws changed so that it trickles down to the cable companies. Great, that's a really expedient way w/such great chances of success, if you ask me...

For me, streaming isn't the issue. I have no other active TiVo in my household so it wouldn't change anything. I transfer some content to my PC and then transcode and burn to AVCHD format on DVD +/-R, for archival purposes.


----------



## lrhorer

richsadams said:


> I could do that with my trusty soldering iron on my Series3 as well. However AFAIK no one has attempted it on a Premiere


Yes, they have. The chain of trust is far more sophisticated on the Premier than the S3. Each chain of trust has unique signatures embedded in the processor and the PROM, so that each hack would have to be unique. It also might require hacking not only the PROM but also the CPU. It's a very much bigger nut, but investigation is ongoing nonetheless.


----------



## richsadams

lrhorer said:


> Yes, they have. The chain of trust is far more sophisticated on the Premier than the S3. Each chain of trust has unique signatures embedded in the processor and the PROM, so that each hack would have to be unique. It also might require hacking not only the PROM but also the CPU. It's a very much bigger nut, but investigation is ongoing nonetheless.


Good to know...it just doesn't get discussed much. My understanding is that you have to re-hack after every OS update. True?


----------



## JWThiers

cwerdna said:


> Or... if you're JWThiers, you debate about copyright laws here on TC and try to get the laws changed so that it trickles down to the cable companies. Great, that's a really expedient way w/such great chances of success, if you ask me...
> 
> For me, streaming isn't the issue. I have no other active TiVo in my household so it wouldn't change anything. I transfer some content to my PC and then transcode and burn to AVCHD format on DVD +/-R, for archival purposes.


I could have just said this is OLD news every other cable company did this a year or more ago stop wasting bandwidth on something t6hat has been discussed ad nauseum. But that wouldn't have been polite would it have? 

The issue is that the cable companies can legally do whatever they want with the CCI byte on every channel except local OTA channels. Your choices are do nothing, whine about it and do nothing, hack you equipment to allow you to do what you want or try to get the law changed.


----------



## lrhorer

richsadams said:


> Good to know...it just doesn't get discussed much.


Well, not on this web site, except somewhat in the underground fora. There's of course another website where it gets discussed a lot. I won't mention the name, but it's the real _*deal*_. 



richsadams said:


> My understanding is that you have to re-hack after every OS update. True?


Yes - well, more or less, but the process is fairly trivial. There are various approaches, including some which allow the user to re-hack the unit without removing the hard drive. ATT, I am still electing to allow the upgrade from TiVo to take place, then attaching the hard drive to an external PC and running a simple script that re-hacks the system. It takes less than 2 minutes, plus reboot times. I have moved all my primary drives into external enclosures, so mounting the drive is just a matter of shutting down the TiVo and plugging the enclosure into the external PC.

BTW, with some exceptions, and if one has a THD, I recommend performing the drive swap even if one is not going to hack the system. It makes drive replacements, upgrades, and backups much easier. It's trivially easy, and an external enclosure only costs about $60.


----------



## lrhorer

JWThiers said:


> Your choices are do nothing, whine about it and do nothing, hack you equipment to allow you to do what you want or try to get the law changed.


That, or one can whine about it, hack one's system, *and* try to get the law changed. 'No need to wait on the law, and no need to stop whining just because other measures are in place.


----------



## richsadams

lrhorer said:


> Well, not on this web site, except somewhat in the underground fora. There's of course another website where it gets discussed a lot. I won't mention the name, but it's the real _*deal*_.


Thanks for that. I certainly would utilize exterior drives if I were to go down that road. Soooo...(probably a question for the other site) if I hacked my S3 I could transfer shows _from_ it to our Premiere correct? I rarely have the need to do it the other way around so wouldn't need to futz with the Premiere just yet. Thanks again!


----------



## lrhorer

Phantom Gremlin said:


> My biggest reason in not switching to Comcast is the outstanding image quality that FiOS delivers. I won't give that up.


There's not really a good excuse for Comcast's overly aggressive rate shaping. I expect some day they will re-engineer their headends to follow industry norms.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> At least one web site has, perhaps with some hyperbole, declared Comcast to be *"the worst company in America".*


They've obviously never dealt with Cricket Wireless.


----------



## lrhorer

richsadams said:


> Thanks for that. I certainly would utilize exterior drives if I were to go down that road. Soooo...(probably a question for the other site) if I hacked my S3 I could transfer shows _from_ it to our Premiere correct? I rarely have the need to do it the other way around so wouldn't need to futz with the Premiere just yet. Thanks again!


There are lots of ways to skin this particular cat, and the scope of the available hacks ranges far, far beyond merely the CCI byte and removing the ads. To answer your question: yes. For more details, I suggest you join the other website, or at least move to the underground forum on this website. Be warned, however. The other website is a hacker's website, and they do not cotton to hand holding or spoon feeding.


----------



## richsadams

lrhorer said:


> There are lots of ways to skin this particular cat, and the scope of the available hacks ranges far, far beyond merely the CCI byte and removing the ads. To answer your question: yes. For more details, I suggest you join the other website, or at least move to the underground forum on this website. Be warned, however. The other website is a hacker's website, and they do not cotton to hand holding or spoon feeding.


 :up:


----------



## lrhorer

richsadams said:


> Thanks for that. I certainly would utilize exterior drives if I were to go down that road.


Note that making the external drive on the S3 the primary drive requires a bit of mechanical work. On the THD, it's merely a matter of opening the case, swapping the internal drive jumpers, and swapping the drives (or just moving the internal drive if one does not already have an external drive). With the S3, though, one must cut slots in the case for adapter cables. For a dual drive S3, this is definitely a bit of a bother, but it only has to be done once, of course.


----------



## JWThiers

lrhorer said:


> That, or one can whine about it, hack one's system, *and* try to get the law changed. 'No need to wait on the law, and no need to stop whining just because other measures are in place.


True I did forget that option.  But my point was there really is very little that can be done (without getting into shall we say grey areas (hacking to bypass CCI)). As much as I despise it, cable companies are legally making the CCI bytes what they are and the only thing that can be done to stop that practice is to get the law changed or convince them not to set the byte. You can bypass it but that does not stop the cable companies in the first place.

So realistically to stop the behavior either convince the cable company (small chance), or change the law (slightly better chance, not much better).


----------



## cwerdna

JWThiers said:


> I could have just said this is OLD news every other cable company did this a year or more ago stop wasting bandwidth on something t6hat has been discussed ad nauseum. But that wouldn't have been polite would it have?
> 
> The issue is that the cable companies can legally do whatever they want with the CCI byte on every channel except local OTA channels. Your choices are do nothing, whine about it and do nothing, hack you equipment to allow you to do what you want or try to get the law changed.


There are plenty of cable cos that don't slap CP on most of their channels. I'm contemplating switching to Comcast  and dropping Frontier FiOS upon confirmation that Comcast in my area hasn't pulled this same crap. They hadn't, as of a few months ago.

We didn't become subject to this garbage that VZ didn't even know how to deal with until June 2010. The result was an outage for us, across most our channels and we didn't discover the CP until later. FiOS in areas still served by Verizon, as far as we know, have 0 or almost 0 protected channels.


----------



## JWThiers

cwerdna said:


> There are plenty of cable cos that don't slap CP on most of their channels. I'm contemplating switching to Comcast  and dropping Frontier FiOS upon confirmation that Comcast in my area hasn't pulled this same crap. They hadn't, as of a few months ago.
> 
> We didn't become subject to this garbage that VZ didn't even know how to deal with until June 2010. The result was an outage for us, across most our channels and we didn't discover the CP until later. FiOS in areas still served by Verizon, as far as we know, have 0 or almost 0 protected channels.


I think "There are plenty of cable cos that don't slap CP on most of their channels" is a bit of an overstatement for *most* people. Don't get me wrong I'm glad you have an alternative, but *MOST *people don't have a choice of cable companies (Tivo S3 or better isn't compatible with satellite so I am not including them in this discussion) they have a choice of cable or not cable. The fact that you have more than one to choose from just means you probably live in either one of the areas that Verizon serves ( or Vz formerly served, not a large market), live in a large city that is served by more than one system (again not most people in the country), or both of the above. Add to that more than one provider not using the CCI byte you are truly living in an area that does not represent what MOST people have access to.

MOST people have access to 1 major national provider, and if they are lucky a small regional or local provider. anything more than that is a rarity. And I don't know numbers, but I would be very surprised if in most markets they didn't set the CCI byte. But I suppose it is all about what you get that matters. Pardon me for having an opinion that would fix the issue for everyone. Yes, it would take a while, but it has as least as good a chance of succeeding as trying to get the cable companies to not set the CCI byte AND it would affect all the providers in all areas not just a specific provider in a specific area. If you have a better idea about how to successfully fix the issue as quickly as you want I would be glad to hear it, I just don't think that it is possible.


----------



## Stormspace

mgama said:


> Bad news..  I haven't had time to go through all the channels, but by the looks of it, all non broadcast channels are now 0x02.
> 
> On 11/08 I could transfer recordings from several channels. But the recordings on the same channels made on 11/09 cannot be transfered. I'm using the Tivo Desktop software to see this, and looking at Tivo Suggestion recordings at the bottom of my play list, everything today and yesterday cannot be transfered.
> 
> Here are a few channels that were recently changed from 0x00 to 0x02.
> 120
> 121
> 122
> 139
> 170
> 210
> 211
> 233
> 552  this is TBS, guess I'm not taking Conan on the road..


Yet another MSP falls to the CCI Byte while those that are unaffected keep their heads in the sand insisting it'll never happen to them. I see OTA and Over the Top(OTT) coming my way sooner rather than later.


----------



## cwerdna

cwerdna said:


> For me:
> - 170 changed as well. This also bites. I transferred some Bizarre Foods eps in the past to my PC to transcode and watch on my iPhone and iPod while traveling. I won't be able to now.


Back to this... in looking at my NPL via kmttg, it looks like the change to 170 happened sometime between 10/27/10 and 11/15/10. All my channel 170 (Travel Channel) recordings prior to 11/15/10 (I have a big gap) have no CP but everything from 11/15/10 is CPed.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

As I've pointed out previously, this thread is misnamed because it's not really the "copyright holder" prohibiting the transfer. It's the cable company. Just yesterday I was reminded once again of the real reason they're so keen to do it: competitive advantage.

My pre-teen daughter wanted to view a Disney Channel show on the downstairs TV (the show already has a season pass upstairs). She searched for it by title, and the next showing was the next day. She was upset because her friends don't have this limitation, they can view shows on demand. So there you go: blocking MRV makes the TiVo less competitive with the POS that Frontier wants you to rent for some ridiculous monthly charge.

OTOH, I wouldn't be surprised if Disney was discouraging MRV. They're really into DRM. Still, Verizon has been able to avoid this ********. My bad luck that we got dumped off to Frontier.


----------



## richsadams

Phantom Gremlin said:


> My bad luck that we got dumped off to Frontier.


No sir! _OUR_ bad luck.


----------



## MPSAN

richsadams said:


> No sir! _OUR_ bad luck.


ALL of our bad luck!


----------



## richsadams

Does anyone think Frontier will match this?

http://www.bgr.com/2010/11/22/new-v...=Feed:+TheBoyGeniusReport+(Boy+Genius+Report)



> If youre a Verizon FiOS residential broadband customer, with a need for Internet speed, listen up. Big Red has just announced a new plan that boasts some ridiculously fast, lust-worthy uplink and downlink speeds. How fast you ask? How about 150Mbps down and 35Mbps up.


----------



## lrhorer

richsadams said:


> Does anyone think Frontier will match this?


I don't know, but who can afford almost $2400 a year just for internet service?


----------



## richsadams

lrhorer said:


> I don't know, but who can afford almost $2400 a year just for internet service?


Ah...chump change.


----------



## aaronwt

lrhorer said:


> I don't know, but who can afford almost $2400 a year just for internet service?


The same people who pay $600 to $1000 a month on a car payment.

I know I would get many times more satisfaction from their $200 internet service than any car.


----------



## cwerdna

While trying to dig around for other chatter about this Frontier CP crap, I stumbled across http://blog.oregonlive.com/siliconforest/2010/07/two_weeks_into_frontier-verizo.html.

The statements still don't really fit the facts based on what people on VZ FiOS are seeing. No surprise...

Here's what I posted on avsforum:
I just spent almost 50 minutes on the phone w/Frontier explaining CCI bytes, kmttg, Tivo Desktop, MRV, Tivo To Go, paring, outage on 6/7/10, what things looked like prior to 6/7/10, the weird (now closed) holes in CP (e.g. NGC, NGCHD, Science Channel and Science Channel HD), lack of pairing and CP on most VZ FiOS areas, etc.

He didn't understand the issues at first and even several times claimed that they (Frontier) wasn't putting on the CP and that it made no sense for them to go channel by channel deciding to put on CP or not (duh, made no sense to us either). He further claimed that they've never supported not pairing the CableCARDs, even under Verizon. (Not true.) I had to explain to him the whole outage we hit on 6/7/10, everything being in the clear and the outage being caused by them suddenly turning on CP and us not having paired cards, etc. I told him about how VZ never paired cards in WA nor other areas.

Eventually, he claimed that the content providers are asking for CP and that we'll see it more and more across other providers, too.

I asked him about the 6/7/10 date and whether that was being done as prep for transition to Frontier and he basically said, that's right. I speculated to him about there being something contractual agreement between the content providers and Frontier, differing between providers and VZ and he said yes. Beats me if he really knew this or was just trying to get me off the phone.

Sigh... Hopefully HDNet responds and says they don't want CP and can get it turned off on at least that channel.

Time to check w/see if Comcast in my area still is mostly wide open.


----------



## lrhorer

aaronwt said:


> The same people who pay $600 to $1000 a month on a car payment.


I rather doubt it. I could probably squeak by with a $600 a month car payment, provided the car was a good enough value. Getting $200 worth of value from a home internet connection would be difficult, especially since the internet payments would be open ended.



aaronwt said:


> I know I would get many times more satisfaction from their $200 internet service than any car.


I'm skeptical. Are you aware it would be moderately difficult ever to even fill up a pipe that size from a single PC? Do you realize that for a TCP connection to run at 150 Mbps, the host site is going to have to be within about 150 miles from your house? That the server is going to have to be free enough and be on a system with enough bandwidth to cover?


----------



## wmcbrine

lrhorer said:


> Are you aware it would be moderately difficult ever to even fill up a pipe that size from a single PC?


I'm sure a torrent could do it. Anyway, who said anything about a single PC?


----------



## cwerdna

cwerdna said:


> I haven't heard a peep from:
> - Current TV (none from my email nor to http://getsatisfaction.com/currentc...n_current_tv_applied_by_verizon_frontier_fios)


Someone decided to merge the above with an unrelated topic. It's now merged with My cable/satellite provider doesn't offer Current TV which isn't the issue. So, now I'm getting a bunch of notifications of people complaining of non-carriage of the channel on their provider...

CP on Current TV still remains along most/all other channels not broadcoast OTA.


----------



## cwerdna

Sigh... after the Current TV Get Satisfaction merged my CP post into "My cable/satellite provider doesn't offer Current TV", (I got notification that) they decided to delete my post along their reply and my reply to it. 

Before they deleted my moved post, they replied (now deleted):


> I moved all 'my provider doesn't carry Current TV' topics together because they are easier for us to solve this way. Thanks.


Of course, I and others griped that their issues weren't the same as non-carriage of the channel.

http://getsatisfaction.com/currentc...n_current_tv_applied_by_verizon_frontier_fios still lives, but it seems to be not listed within http://getsatisfaction.com/currentcom/problems/common nor searchable.

I really hope someone at Current TV is doing something about this.


----------



## xultar

I like to ask them if the channels are protected from transfer on their Cable DVR and see what they say. I want to know if they are doing it to TiVo customers only. If they say no they aren't protected on their Cable DVR then I ask them well you need to figure out what the problem is.

IT lets them know that I'm about to play the unfair business protective practices card.


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> Sigh... after the Current TV Get Satisfaction merged my CP post into "My cable/satellite provider doesn't offer Current TV", (I got notification that) they decided to delete my post along their reply and my reply to it.
> 
> Before they deleted my moved post, they replied (now deleted):


I can see why they pulled their response...it made absolutely no sense.


----------



## cwerdna

Frontier FiOS reps were at my apartment complex this afternoon to give demos and drum up business. There were 3 guys there and I spoke to two of them: a local manager, while a tech listened in.

I explained to him the chronology of all this (apparent outage one month before switch to Frontier, resolution via pairing the cards, discovery of CP, weird gaps in the application of CP, then closure of those holes). I gave him examples of the weird holes (before NGC and NGCHD weren't protected yet Game Show Network had it, mentioned HDNET having CP, etc.)

He was unaware of this issue and didn't know anything about CCI byte values. Same goes for the tech. He gave me his card so I can email him the http://www.tivo.com/copyprotection/ (which I showed him) and a summary of the issue.

I mentioned to him the useless FiOS TV Twitter guy, our frustrating experiences w/customer service, and some people receiving a response from VZ along the lines of "we're doing it because we can". His reaction was along the lines of we're not going to get anything helpful from customer service...


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> Frontier FiOS reps were at my apartment complex this afternoon to give demos and drum up business. There were 3 guys there and I spoke to two of them: a local manager, while a tech listened in.
> 
> I explained to him the chronology of all this (apparent outage one month before switch to Frontier, resolution via pairing the cards, discovery of CP, weird gaps in the application of CP, then closure of those holes). I gave him examples of the weird holes (before NGC and NGCHD weren't protected yet Game Show Network had it, mentioned HDNET having CP, etc.)
> 
> He was unaware of this issue and didn't know anything about CCI byte values. Same goes for the tech. He gave me his card so I can email him the http://www.tivo.com/copyprotection/ (which I showed him) and a summary of the issue.
> 
> I mentioned to him the useless FiOS TV Twitter guy, our frustrating experiences w/customer service, and some people receiving a response from VZ along the lines of "we're doing it because we can". His reaction was along the lines of we're not going to get anything helpful from customer service...


Really?!  Wow! First I'm a really shocked that Frontier is doing any sort of marketing, particular of FiOS after their scandalous (and failed) effort to gouge subscribers with a proposed 50% rate increase...and their subsequent "take a hike if you don't like it" attitude and then their ludicrous "we didn't realize this was going to be so hard" confession. Are they still charging a $500 installation fee?

I'm really glad you took the time to talk to them but it doesn't surprise me that they didn't have a clue. I'm afraid the issues we're ticked off about are not on most of their customer's radar so our voices don't carry much weight. I also think any further attempts at rectifying their errors are probably for naught.

What surprises me the most is that they haven't thrown in the towel completely. In less than eight months Frontier screwed up everything Verizon had built so badly that their CEO and President Maggie Wilderotter should demoted to cable line ditch digger IMO.  Epic fail as they say. :down: :down: :down:

But thanks for giving it the old college try! :up:


----------



## cwerdna

richsadams said:


> Really?!  Wow! First I'm a really shocked that Frontier is doing any sort of marketing, particular of FiOS after their scandalous (and failed) effort to gouge subscribers...
> 
> Are they still charging a $500 installation fee?
> 
> I'm really glad you took the time to talk to them but it doesn't surprise me that they didn't have a clue. I'm afraid the issues we're ticked off about are not on most of their customer's radar so our voices don't carry much weight. I also think any further attempts at rectifying their errors are probably for naught.
> 
> What surprises me the most is that they haven't thrown in the towel completely. In less than eight months Frontier screwed up everything Verizon had built so badly that their CEO and President Maggie Wilderotter should demoted to cable line ditch digger IMO.  Epic fail as they say. :down: :down: :down:
> 
> But thanks for giving it the old college try! :up:


I was too. Every unit got a flyer attached near our door a few days ago that says stuff like "Welcome to the new Frontier... IPTV is here... free ROKU box for New Double Play (Internet and phone) ordered on the day of the event
...
Bring this flyer & your current intenet provider bill with you to the event to be eligible for the free ROKU... blah blah... You want fast high speed internet. FiOS is the answer."

They were there today only from 3-6 pm... not exactly a great time or day and very short nortice.

There's no mention of TV service (other than IPTV and ROKU) anywhere on the flyer. They had some TV and some box in the apartment office but I didn't bother to see what was up with that. I didn't ask about the $500 installation either since it doesn't apply to me. My main concern was the CCI byte crap.

He did agree that it seemed odd Current TV would have CP. I mentioned to him Mark Cuban's stance on CP and how HDNet now has "protection". He acknowledged that it's not anything on the local side but probably something at the head end.

I sent off the email to him a few hours ago. I'm not optimistic anything will change.


----------



## richsadams

Ah, so they're promoting broadband with an "IPTV" hook. It wouldn't surprise me to see them sign a bunch of people up, give them a free Roku and then initiate a data cap. I can just hear it now, "Gee...we didn't understand how much data people would use." 

Thanks for the additional info!


----------



## cwerdna

If anyone's curious, I uploaded the flyer but blurred out anything that would identify my apartment complex.


----------



## [email protected]

It's this darn issue that brings me out of TiVo hacking retirement... sheesh. I'm busy assembling all the needed materials and sourcing SST Proms/sockets and the tools needed to flash them. Already have the hot air reworking station set back up along with my architect lit magnifying glass, soldering equipment and my old PIII which I used for TiVo work prior. Shame all my old resources are pretty much all dead links.

I hate not being able to MRV my shows!


----------



## E94Allen

cwerdna said:


> If anyone's curious, I uploaded the flyer but blurred out anything that would identify my apartment complex.


I noticed that in the flyer that says double play not triple play.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

cwerdna said:


> If anyone's curious, I uploaded the flyer but blurred out anything that would identify my apartment complex.


*Welcome to the New Frontier.*​
I love that slogan. I don't love that company.


----------



## lrhorer

[email protected] said:


> It's this darn issue that brings me out of TiVo hacking retirement... sheesh. I'm busy assembling all the needed materials and sourcing SST Proms/sockets and the tools needed to flash them. Already have the hot air reworking station set back up along with my architect lit magnifying glass, soldering equipment and my old PIII which I used for TiVo work prior. Shame all my old resources are pretty much all dead links.
> 
> I hate not being able to MRV my shows!


PM me if you need some links to a good hacking reference for the S3 class machines. Otherwise, you can search the "other" TiVo forum for my handle and follow the link in my signature from any one of my posts.


----------



## cwerdna

Good luck to the folks still stuck w/Frontier's CP. 

I've moved back to CA and had to go w/Comcrap since FiOS isn't available here. I got my Tivo HD thru guided setup yesterday and it appears that many (most?) channels have CCI byte set to 0x00.

So far, at first glance, the PQ isn't that terrible and it seems that Comcrap has some channels in HD that were never available in HD on FiOS like G4TV HD.


----------



## richsadams

cwerdna said:


> Good luck to the folks still stuck w/Frontier's CP.
> 
> I've moved back to CA and had to go w/Comcrap since FiOS isn't available here. I got my Tivo HD thru guided setup yesterday and it appears that many (most?) channels have CCI byte set to 0x00.
> 
> So far, at first glance, the PQ isn't that terrible and it seems that Comcrap has some channels in HD that were never available in HD on FiOS like G4TV HD.


Jealous...very jealous.


----------

