PVRs:The future of digital home

recording

PVRs:The future of digital home

recording

Grace Tu

Kim Yamada

Jocelyn Eillis-Wang

Tilman Kispersky

May 28, 2002

Genealogy of PVRsGenealogy of PVRs

TiVoborn 1997

made by TiVo Inc.

Replay TVborn in 1999

made by SonicBlue

Ultimate TVborn in early-2000smade by Microsoft

(service, not hardware)

VCRsborn in mid-1980s

made by Sony and affiliates

Betamaxborn 1976

made by Sony

Introduction to the issues surrounding PVRs

Introduction to the issues surrounding PVRs

• Before we can talk about ethics we need to get some background and talk about legal issues

• Copyright• Copying and redistribution

• Fair Use• Acceptable uses for TV recordings

• Contracts• Viewer enters into contract with TV producers by

watching TV?

Notable Court Cases:

Sony v. UniversalNotable Court Cases:

Sony v. Universal

• Sony v. Universal (1985)• Issue: Are VCRs legal devices ie. do they infringe on

copyright laws?

• Verdict: VCRs are legal. The Supreme Court ruled that time-shifting is acceptable for personal use.

• Significance: Act of recording TV shows is not copyright infringement.

• Decision affected by the fact that VCRs were already socially accepted and prevalent in American households; to recall them would be economically inefficient and unfeasible.

Notable Court Cases:

SonicBlue v. Disney (et. al)Notable Court Cases:

SonicBlue v. Disney (et. al)

• SonicBlue v. Disney, Paramount (et. al.) 2002• Issue: Was it legal for PVR companies to collect

viewing behavior data? • Verdict: Yes, L.A. Court ruled that SonicBlue had to

track subscriber usage and viewing patterns and deliver the information to TV networks.

• Significance: Showed government overriding privacy of PVR subscribers in favor of businesses

• With new technology, we are starting to see trends in possible privacy violations

• Courts are trying to set new boundaries on what is acceptable and not acceptable regarding digital recording.

• As we know, legal doesn’t always mean ethical!

Copyright…Copyright…

• Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution gives Congress the power:• "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."

• Copyright is further defined as the exclusive right of a creator to reproduce, prepare derivative works, distribute, perform, display, sell, lend, or rent their creations.

PVRs and Copyright : The Issues

PVRs and Copyright : The Issues

• Swapping shows with friends is now possible.• Product allows Napster-like services:

• ReplayTV includes high speed firewire ports for outside archiving to computers and hard drives.

• TiVo also includes show swapping capabilities via an optional ethernet card.

• Both allow large amounts of storage space for shows and movies.

Fair UseFair Use

• Defined in the US Constitution, Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 107.

• Fair use is a legal principle that defines the limitations on exclusive rights for copyright holders.

• In the courts, fair use has been interpreted to mean a use that:• "serves the copyright objective of stimulating

productive thought and public instruction without excessively diminishing the incentives for creativity.”1

• Question: Do PVRs fulfill this fair use objective?

Fair Use : Determining FactorsFair Use : Determining Factors

1. The purpose and character of use:• Commercial versus non-educational purposes.

2. The nature of the copyrighted work.• Full-length movie or advertisement

3. The amount or portion of the work used in comparison to the whole of the copyrighted work.

4. The effect of the use on the market of the copyrighted work

• VCRs, for example, don’t cut into the market of television networks

PVRs and Fair Use: The IssuesPVRs and Fair Use: The Issues

• Which applications of PVRs qualify for Fair Use?• Use TV show for educational purposes?• Share public TV show with friend?• Share cable TV show with friend? • Record movie and make copies?

• Is TiVo socially and/or economically beneficial to society?• If TiVo sells, a new market is created• Waste less time watching TV you don’t want to see?

• Where is the boundary at which recording television is no longer a fair use?

Products vs. Services under Fair Use Law

Products vs. Services under Fair Use Law

• Question: Are PVRs a service, or a product?• Products are protected under fair use law,

services are not

• PVRs include both a service and a product• Which should be considered when determining

the legality and ethicality of PVRs?

Intermediate ConclusionIntermediate Conclusion

• VCRs and PVRs are not different, PVRs are just an evolution of the same technology.

• The question is at which point the technology becomes and infringement of copyright laws or violates fair use boundaries.

• That is where ethical questions are raised!

Contracts: A Turn to EthicsContracts: A Turn to Ethics

• Do TV watchers enter into contracts (either ethically or legally)?• Question: By watching TV do viewers have an obligation to

watch advertisements (ie. Pay for the service they are receiving)?

• Is it ethical for advertisers to enforce (or force, in the case of DVD previews) the viewing of commercials and ads for their products.

• Advertisers have to protect their business• Advertisers should not be able to dictate viewing patterns

• Are advertisements protected under time-shifting laws?• Sony v. Universal: time-shifting was OK, but not altering the

content• Is skipping commercials altering content?

Ethics of PVRsEthics of PVRs

• Markets aren’t protected under US law • TV networks don’t have the

right to determine TV schedules.

• Why should I watch what producers dictate?

• Product that enables time-shifting and skipping was paid for.

• Opening a whole new business niche (web-enabled TiVo could allow TV shopping)

• Undermining the business of producers• “High quality” shows might

be forced to migrate to cable

• Valuable advertising time is paid for and not watched by its intended audiences, and in effect not selling the product.

• Producers of TV should be able to determine how their creations are viewed

Ethical Issues: Skipping vs. Fast Forwarding

Ethical Issues: Skipping vs. Fast Forwarding

• ReplayTV and TiVo allow for commercial skipping• TiVo allows for fast-forwarding• ReplayTV allows for instant one-button skip

• Is fast-forwarding better than skipping?• TV executives have decried skipping but have

not spoken out against fast-forwarding• Fast-forwarding allows filtering of

commercials, while skipping does not.

Revisiting Contract Violation

Revisiting Contract Violation

• Violation of contract between viewer and TV network?• Targeted advertisements

• Ads don’t pertain to me, then it is ethical to filter them out• I can choose which ads interest me and watch only those

• Past threats to advertisement-funded TV have not removed the incentive to watch and create free TV• VCRs

• PVR owners are able to “violate” contracts while regular viewers are forced to watch ads to fund TV

Redistribution of Recorded Material

Redistribution of Recorded Material

• Your subscription to the TiVO/ReplayTV service gives you the right to record as you see fit.

• Making copies for myself to watch later, even in another format, doesn’t violate copyright laws

• After paying for something I should be able to lend it to my friends

• If you send TV signals to my house, you shouldn’t be able to determine how I watch them

• Not ethical to make copies of copyrighted material ie. It is unethical to violate copyright law!

• Too easy to abuse the ability to send material over the Internet

• Creativity of TV networks and advertisers would be compromised

ConclusionsConclusions

• Copyright• Becoming more difficult for producers to control

copying• Public acceptance of the ability to make copies of media

• Fair Use• Likely that PVRs will be deemed fair as VCRs were• Similarly to VCRs this decision might be affected by the

number of PVRs in use

• Contracts• Technology continually giving users ability to redefine

what they are obliged to do

ConclusionsConclusions

• PVRs likely to be declared officially legal• TV networks will have to adjust broadcasting

accordingly

• Ethics• Ethical issues are still up for debate!

The Future of CommercialsThe Future of Commercials• Increases in product placement in

shows/movies.• The “commercial ticker”• Targeted audiences

• More effective advertising based on collected information from users.

• Better commercials -- more entertaining. • Ex. BMW Films

• Will commercials fade out? NO!

BibliographyBibliography

1. Pierre N. Leval, “Toward a Fair Use Standard”, 103 Harv. L. Rev. 1105, 1110 (1990).

2. Loren, Lydia Pallas. “Redefining the market failure approach to fair use in an era of copyright permission systems”, J. Intel. Prop. Volume 5 Fall 1997, No. 1 (http://www.lclark.edu/~loren/articles/fairuse.htm)

3. The Constitution of the United States of America