How TV honchos are trying to control your remote (Judge orders company to spy on customers)

A federal magistrate has ordered digital video recorder maker Sonicblue to spy on customers. It's just the latest move in a lawsuit filed last October by entertainment companies upset about Sonicblue's ReplayTV devices, which let users skip commercials and share recorded programs over the Internet. The company has been told to monitor what TV programming its customers record, duplicate, or send to others.

"We have been told to invade the privacy of our customers and hand over the data," Sonicblue CEO Ken Potashner told CNET Radio's Tracy Romine on Friday. (Click here for links to the full interview.)

THE COMPANY promises to appeal the ruling, saying it presently collects no information about its customers' behavior. Sonicblue's opponents, represented by a Disney attorney, accuse it of misrepresenting the issue, saying no information would be used to personally identify customers and that the action is allowable under Sonicblue's existing privacy policy.

(Replay competitor TiVo is already collecting this same information, although TiVo products cannot be used to share recorded programs and allow customers to only fast-forward through commercials, not destroy them.)

The first is program sharing. In a parallel to the Napster case, ReplayTV customers with broadband cable or DSL connections can send recorded programming to other customers. (Of course, according to ZDNet testing, it can take between 8-24 hours to send a single, hour-long program.) According to my friend Phil Swann, CEO of TV Predictions, a loss in this case could stop the sharing of TV programs almost before it starts.

THE OTHER ISSUE is whether or not it's legal to give customers the tools to skip commercials. Some broadcasters claim that, by skipping the commercial breaks, ReplayTV is helping viewers "steal" television programming. The presumption here is that by accepting the free programming, customers are agreeing to watch the stupid commercials. If this is true, then it follows that leaving the room while a program is on (bathroom break, anyone?) would also be "stealing." Seems like a bit of a stretch to me.

These are both tough questions. I am generally in favor of letting consumers share programming. (Of course, HBO would point out that sharing a copy of Six Feet Under amounts to theft of its pay service.) Yet I've written columns asking readers not to use ad blockers (except on obnoxious pop-ups and pop-unders) because their widespread use would, quite frankly, endanger AnchorDesk.

I also speed through television commercials as often as I can, using either my TiVo's fast-forward or the one-button skip offered by Replay and UltimateTV. I justify this by pointing out that while it’s easy to ignore online ads (most people are very good at it), television ads are closer to spam in requiring some amount of attention from viewers, whether they like it or not. Also, I argue that most TV ads aren't even directed to me--I don't have kids, I'm not a kid myself, and don't buy women's or beauty products.

So why should I be forced to sit through them? It may be a convenient rationalization, but I find it useful.

I THINK SONICBLUE will probably lose the program-sharing battle, even though broadcasters would be wise to permit it as a way of spreading around their programs and building an audience. The pay broadcasters--movie channels and their ilk--have a more reasonable argument that sharing their programs is stealing.

On the commercial skipping issue, I understand that broadcasters don't want their revenue model threatened, especially when no clear replacement exists. This is the same issue the record companies are trying to avoid dealing with by attacking file sharing networks like Napster. But I think they'd be better off finding a better revenue model. Or, better yet, use technology to deliver fewer, more targeted commercials to the individual viewers who might actually care about them. Send me interesting commercials and I'd be much more likely to watch them.

The key for the threatened media companies is to find a way to embrace new technology, including digital recording and commercial skipping, instead of launching a frontal assault on it. Ultimately, they can't succeed in fighting technology; it's hard to enforce a law that most citizens see no harm in violating. (

This quite astonishing. I guess the key is to find out what IP addresse(s) this gadget is trying to phone home to - and block them on every router in the world.

We don't want no stinkin' Big Brother.

You cant really block the units from phoning in. I dont have ReplayTV but I do have Tivo and I love it. But it has to phone in once a week to download program info. This allows it to not only provide an onscreen guide, but to use the intelligent features that make it worthwhile (auto-recording of favorite programs, guessing likely programs which fit my viewing preferences, etc). If you eliminate that phone call, you eliminate the value of the product, make it just a big VCR basicaly. According to the company, Tivo doesnt relay your viewing data, I hope it never does because if that starts I'll have a tough decision to make.

I hope it never does because if that starts I'll have a tough decision to make.

I love my Tivo, too. And I could care less if someone
finds out what I like to watch. Hell, if they find out
what we like and don't, maybe they'll make more of the former.

My concern isnt really about them knowing what I watch, heck, will it kill me if people figure out I watch "Law and Order", "South Park", and occasionally "Wild On"...only for the informative view of other cultures of course, not the gratuitous bikini shots :D

Its more that I fear they will do things like this new case leads them to. Like prevent me from skipping commercials (like, if they know you really like "Law and Order" and see you skipping all the commercials it could potentially block recording of that show unless you do watch them). Or simply filling my mailbox up with "targetted" junk mail and/or spam in my e-mail inbox. I dont even read that crap, I dont care how interesting the deal looks in the headline. But I certainly dont want more because TiVo decided to sell my preferences off to the highest bidder. Think about it, in the marketting world data on consumer preferences is gold. If I didnt have to pay for the Tivo service I might have a different opinion but since they charge me, I choose to retain the rights to my own consumer preferences and hence whatever value they might be to someone else.

I think ReplayTV has a phone-in setup just like TiVo but you can add broadband to it as an option. The benefit, such as it is, of doing that is that you can mark a recorded program to sent to someone else with a ReplayTV via the net. And I suppose you elinate the need for a phone call too. But I would guess the majority of users still use the good 'ol fashioned phone method for the moment.

Hey folks - why do you think that they call it TV programming?

Get rid of those idiot boxes - you'll be glad you did once the programming wears off. You'll also be surprised how much your buying habits change, as well as your opinions on a wide variety of subjects. After all, if you're in here you don't necessarily subscribe to the media spew anyway - you're already "awake".

And no, it's not tinfoil - it's personal experience. Just try it.

You are not of the body...

I'm thinking of ditching cable. Basic is up to almost $600 a year. For what? Only watch it to see what they get right and what propaganda wave is next. Only in America do people pay to be indoctrinated. Had the Soviets only known. . .

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.