[mythtv-users] Switching away from comcast to online streams

CACook at Quantum-Sci.com CACook at Quantum-Sci.com
Mon Jan 27 19:17:51 UTC 2014


On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 12:52:02 -0500
"Michael T. Dean" <mtdean at thirdcontact.com> wrote:
> Yes, and that's what people do with it.  Time shifting is allowed
> under fair use, so MythTV was made to allow time shifting.  If you
> re-read what I said, it's archiving and librarying that are not
> allowed.  MythTV was /not/ made for archiving or librarying, which
> are generally considered a violation of copyright law in most all
> countries.

'Fair use'.  That's what it comes down to, isn't it.  And we have conflicting definitions of it in case law and statute.  You think that fair use still includes time-shifting, but it doesn't.  It used to, but not any more.  Why haven't PVR manufacturers been sued?  Because  a) it would be a massive undertaking, and  b) content providers' customers (consumers) wouldn't stand for it, and it would lose any legal challenge, despite the fact that the statutes as written specifically proscribe it. (Yes, this is how things really work)  Fair use for digital content, as written and enacted, means paying for each instance of watching, and no ownership or duplicating of content.  And no, I'm not going to look it up for you.

'Fair use' used to mean that you could record a show and archive it, but only if it was for purely personal or academic use.  That is what the Sony-Betamax decision was about.  But that's not the case anymore with these new laws which content providers paid to have enacted specifically tailored to benefit their business, and in conflict with 100 years of IP law.


> I record TV, watch it (once), and delete it.  IMHO, if it's anything 
> worth keeping, it's also worth buying in a better format (without all 
> the TV logos and news/weather/... interruptions and ...), anyway.

Please.  We all know you do differently.  But we won't say anything if you don't.

 
> Please point to the section of the Terms of Service (or any other
> legal document or contract to which MythTV users may be bound) that
> says that skipping commercials or fast forwarding through them or
> whatever is not allowed.  If you do, we'll discuss how to ensure
> we're in compliance with said requirements.  I know of no such
> constraints on any service.

You really want to go there.  Rly?

I am not going to do the legal research for you, I have better things to do with my time.  ReplayTV was sued out of existence because of the exact type of commercial skip which Myth uses:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReplayTV#Legal_battle
"They alleged that the ReplayTV 4000 series was part of an 'unlawful scheme' that 'attacks the fundamental economic underpinnings of free television and basic nonbroadcast services'" ...

Ask yourself, how does TV pay for its shows?  Commercials. (I won't go into why we still have commercials on pay TV)  What does MythTV do with commercials?  It is set to automatically skip all of them --by default no less-- using up to eight different algorithms to detect what is and is not, a commercial.  No different than Replay.

Dish Network was sued by the four networks over the same automatic ad-skipping feature of their Hopper.  They responded with a counter-suit.  In this case the networks were depending on their contracts with Dish as written, and on statute to that date.  The courts though demurred, as Dish is a far larger company and is known for being a rough player in the business.  That does not change the fact though, that commercial skip is in direct contravention of contracts with providers and federal statute.  Why isn't Myth frightened of getting a cease and desist letter for its commercial skip?  You should be, although the fact is that Myth is so small that it probably won't happen (unless lots of people talk about it).  But in any case I doubt that crossed the devs' minds (has now though), as it hasn't been a concern.

Face it.  Given the ridiculously bifurcated Myth decisions on commercial skip vs the r5000, objection to the R5000 is obviously emotional and political, however you try to portray it.  For Myth there is very real legal exposure for commercial skip, but absolutely none for the R5000.  Maybe it's jealousy...  hadn't thought of that before.  That would explain the objecting-too-much beyond what it's worth and the nosiness of those who love to argue.

I am not trying to convince anyone, because I know the R5000 has petered out.  And I am not concerned over whether anyone else uses it, but I do and am happy with it, and frankly having more users would mean extensive support would be asked of me.  I have better things to do with my time.

It is you (and poor, uneducated Stephen) who continue this discussion.  I've stopped responding to Stephen as he is emotional, but you Michael make some worthwhile points that I have to respond to.








More information about the mythtv-users mailing list