[IP] more on STUPID STUPID High-Def Forced To Down-Convert

[David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Rahul Tongia <tongia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: January 25, 2006 5:19:56 PM EST
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] more on STUPID STUPID High-Def Forced To Down-Convert

Dave,

If one accepts Mark's arguments below, I think a fundamental question  
becomes one about owning vs. renting bits (information, content,  
media, software, etc.)

Most consumers want to be able to record a TV show.  And then watch  
it later, in pristine quality.  Can or should the network determine  
if we can do that?  Same goes with a song.  Am I buying the rights to  
listen to a particular album in whatever format I want, or only  
ability to playback a particular version a company sells, perhaps on  
only specific hardware?

Naturally, just because we've done something one way in the past  
doesn't mean it will continue.  On the other hand, with the right  
framing and legal support (wishful thinking!), we can try and ensure  
we are allowed to continue what we think we should be able to do...

Also, how does (or doesn't) this change as we cross intl. boundaries?  
Do we expect all manufacturers to comply?

Rahul

--On Wednesday, January 25, 2006 5:11 PM -0500 David Farber  
<dave@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Newmedia@xxxxxxx
> Date: January 25, 2006 4:02:55 PM EST
> To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [IP] ] more on STUPID STUPID High-Def Forced To Down-  
> Convert
>
> Dave:
>
>  > When are people going take the hint that
>  > Hollywood does not want HD to be successful?
> Quite the contrary -- the studios are completely betting their  
> future  on
> HD . . . completely.  Super HD (4K x 2K) is in the theaters now  and
> coming to our homes in a few years.  Ultra HD (8K x 4K) is in the   
> labs
> now.
>
> This is precisely why they are insisting that all digital  
> interfaces  be
> encrypted and out-of-control analog interfaces be down-converted.    
> These
> are businesses that are structured around the ability to resell  (and
> resell) previous investments.  They must control access to their  only
> assets -- their libraries.
>
> The fact that we will all have to buy new equipment to view this HD
> media is also an important part of the picture -- that's how the
> equipment vendors have been brought into the game.  Lotsa forced
> obsolesence means lotsa growth in equipment sales.
>
> But more importantly -- much more importantly -- the inevitable  
> shift  to
> systems with security built into every interface is laying the   
> basis for
> consumer systems that can attempt to handle really critical  data
> securely.  In particular, our personal financial and medical
> information.  Really critical data.
>
> Media is simply the sharp edge of a much larger wedge -- the   
> conversion
> of *every* aspect of our economy to digital services.
>
> Physical-level security is necessary for any of this to happen and
> encrypted digital interfaces are a crucial step in that direction.
>
> Resistance -- for better or worse -- is futile,
>
> Mark Stahlman
> New York City
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------
> You are subscribed as tongia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To manage your subscription, go to
>   http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
>
> Archives at:
> http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/




-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/