Hi Pat, Re: DTV article you posted, here are a couple links that speak to the labeling issue and the copy protection issue:
"Consumer Protection and the Sale of High Definition Television Receivers" at digitaltelevision.com
a snip:
"...manufacturers and retailers of digital televisions have been marketing televisions as HDTV receivers based primarily on the vertical resolution of the receivers, even when these receivers appear not to meet the ATSC digital television standards for HDTV transmission"
and
"Perfect Picture, Perfect Copies: Protecting Digital Television Content" at digitaltelevision.com
a snip:
"...the motion picture industry's concerns over protecting the copyright of digital programming, particularly feature length movies, threaten to delay the transmittal of high quality content over digital television. Broadcasters offering pay services and the studios providing the content for those services want to ensure that only paying subscribers have access to the programming. In addition, many movie studios are reticent to allow cable systems and television stations to transmit their copyrighted programs in digital format until digital television devices incorporate copy protection mechanisms"
==========
Also, another article that speaks about the "agreement:"
(sorry no link)
CONSUMER ELECTRONICS AND CABLE AGREE ON DTV-CABLE COMPATIBILITY.
Communications Daily, Feb 24, 2000 v20 i37
CEA and NCTA officials announced agreement Wed. on technical standards for hooking up new DTV sets to digital cable systems after more than year of contentious negotiations that finally prompted threats of imminent govt. action from FCC Chmn. Kennard.
Leaders of industries said deal would pave way for introduction of cable-compatible DTV sets in 14-18 months, but they still must settle prickly differences over copy protection technology and labeling of digital sets, prompting angry complaints from broadcasters that cable-compatible digital sets still are several years away.
Kennard said he would support halting rulemaking on agreed-upon issues, but might start one later on sticking points.
Broadcasters immediately blasted agreement as window dressing. NAB Senior Vp-Technology Lynn Claudy said deal merely codifies previous agreement and "deftly maneuvers to avoid addressing issues that have been a problem all along." He said agreement won't result in cable-compatible DTV sets for several years.
As expected, cable and consumer electronics executives unveiled long-awaited deal on DTV standards covering about 60 technical specifications, including signal strength, RF issues, interface between cable and DTV equipment, on-screen program guides.
In last major issue resolved, parties agreed that cable systems will pass through independent program guides with 12 hours worth of listings to digital sets, but put limits on how much system capacity would be used. "We split the difference," CEA spokesman said. "Both sides gave and both sides received."
Praising agreement, Kennard said deal "will jump-start the digital revolution for television." Kennard, who earlier set April 1 deadline for industries to achieve DTV compatibility standards (CD Jan 10 p1), said he will recommend Commission drop its proposed rulemakings on technical standards and program guide issues, but he favors continuing review of proposed rules on copy protection and digital-set labeling, with goal of passing rules by summer.
FCC Comr. Ness also hailed agreement as "good news for the American consumer." However, saying "we can't declare victory when the game's only at halftime," she said she would support proposed rulemakings for copy protection and digital-set labeling.
CEA said agreement would allow consumer electronics manufacturers to move ahead quickly with production of cable- compatible DTV sets, allowing them to hit retail shelves in time for next year's fall shopping season.
Despite usual 18-month build cycle, they indicated compatible sets may be ready even sooner, as they incorporate technical standards into planned models that already have been announced. "We're optimistic it'll be very soon," CEA spokesman said.
NCTA officials said deal resolves all their outstanding engineering issues with DTV sets. Although copy protection technology and labeling of digital sets still haven't been settled, they see those matters as content and marketing issues, not technology concerns. "We're very pleased," NCTA Vp-Technology William Check said. "We think it's a big step forward."
Two industries plan to keep negotiating on copy protection and digital-set labeling, where they remain at odds. In particular, they'll be huddling on labeling issue, with big meeting planned for today (Thurs.) in Washington.
With Kennard still planning rulemaking on that issue, cable officials said they hoped to achieve agreement within month. "We've not been told when the ball will drop on the rulemaking but my guess is we'll have to do this promptly," NCTA Gen. Counsel Neal Goldberg said.
Cable and consumer electronics interests punted on "firewire" issue, agreeing that manufacturers will make DTV sets with and without 1394 connectors favored by cable industry.
Both said matter will be lumped together with labeling debate, leaving it to marketers to decide what to call digital sets lacking those connectors. "We and cable have to agree what to call them," CEA Vp-Technology Policy Michael Petricone said.
On copy protection issue, 2 sides seem to feel less urgency. After meeting on issue last week, they plan to wait until they have more feedback from FCC. NCTA officials, who still favor adoption of 5C standard, said they were willing to let set manufacturers and content providers work that one out. "In our view, the boat has already gone away from the dock," Check said.
"If you hold this agreement about 10 feet away and read it real fast, it looks pretty good," NAB's Claudy said. But, he said, "the real issues of cable-DTV compatibility are not addressed... The short-term problems are left hanging, as they have been all along."
Claudy expressed surprise that FCC would accept agreement: "I would hope that the FCC takes a less superficial look and on further reflection decides that there are depths yet to be plumbed."
Agreement "doesn't sound like an agreement to me," MSTV Senior Vp Victor Tawil said. "It certainly doesn't move the process forward." He said broadcasters are "very, very disappointed" because lack of agreement on copyright and 1394 connection means it will be at least 30 months before cable- compatible DTVs can be on market.
Tawil said broadcasters believe FCC still should launch rulemaking on compatibility, although agreement "does help a little bit in the technical area."
Cable and consumer electronics executives disagreed that they came up short. "I don't think anybody contemplated this agreement would address every single outstanding issue," Petricone said. -- Alan Breznick |
