• On GameSpot: Wii Fit tells 10-year-old she's fat
FCC is taking wrong turn on digital media
Forty years ago, there was a scary TV show called "The Outer Limits."

The show started with the narrator's words: "We can reduce the focus to a soft blur, or sharpen it to crystal clarity. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. For the next hour, sit quietly and we will control all that you see and hear."

Who knew that today the Federal Communications Commission would be trying to turn that sci-fi introduction into a regulatory reality? Not only is the commission considering rules that would result in the digital television picture from reaching its full, sparkling potential, but the FCC also is considering defining where, when and with what rights consumers can use digital media.

There are two separate, but related, issues that the FCC is considering. What they have in common is that they are generated by the fear, yet again, by the "content community"--principally the movie industry--that consumers will have too much say in how and when and where we can have access to digital TV or cable.

It's hard to believe, but one issue is whether the broadcasters should be able to make their picture quality more fuzzy as a means of limiting the distribution of programming, say over the Internet. The technical term is "down-resolution," or "down-rezzing."

In an FCC proceeding to set the rules for allowing consumers to see digital cable without a cable box, Public Knowledge opposed any use of down-rezzing. The content industry wants to aim this feature at consumers who want to record digital programming. There's no clear reason for down-rezzing, except that the content companies want to transform the consumer electronics industry into something that's more controllable.

The content companies want to transform the consumer electronics industry into something that's more controllable.
Overlooked by the proponents of down-rezzing is the obvious question: Why would anyone pay thousands of dollars more to buy a TV set that sometimes could have a picture scarcely better than the one they already have? Also overlooked is the irony that the FCC years ago started to create the digital television service in a bid to provide better picture quality and service than currently exists.

While the FCC has put some limits on how down-rezzing could be used, the fact that it's still being considered in some context at all contradicts the commission's entire philosophy to date. Broadcasters were given billions of dollars worth of spectrum for the conversion to digital TV, particularly outrageous given the fact that consumers are faced with the prospect of buying new digital TV sets.

At the same time that the FCC is considering whether to make your TV picture worse, it's also considering another program--the Personal Digital Network Environment (PDNE), which would set boundaries on where consumers can view and use the digital programming that comes into their homes.

Consumers seem intent on having the right to use digital TV and other content wherever they want, despite what the big media companies would like. As part of FCC proceedings on the "broadcast flag," which is supposed to prevent copying and redistribution of digital TV by embedding a warning flag in the signal, the commission recognized that in some cases, the Internet could legitimately be used by consumers to move programming they might want to use other than in front of the TV.

The FCC proposed the PDNE as the solution--a boundary, within which consumers could shift their digital content. The agency suggested that the PDNE could be thought of as a zone, "within which consumers could freely redistribute digital broadcast television content." The problem is that there really is no way that such a zone could be defined, and it would be silly, as well as wrong, to try to do so.

As our technology, particularly wireless technology, advances, a PDNE could expand until it's either meaningless or would become the most all-encompassing regulation ever suggested. Think about it, the next time you stop into a coffee shop that has wireless Internet access or board an airplane that has Internet connections.

The PDNE "zone" could be everywhere--from the office in your home to 30,000 feet in the air, as you fly across the country. However, that may be what the content providers have been thinking, as they try to put even more restrictions on what you can do with material you want to see, as it is distributed over cable or through the air. Whatever they were thinking, the idea that the FCC, at the behest of the big-media lobby, should control our technology--and deprive consumers of their rights--is just wrong.

There was one other part to that "Outer Limits" introduction. It started out by saying, "There is nothing wrong with your television set." If the FCC and the content community get their way, there will be.

Biography
Gigi B. Sohn is the president and co-founder of Public Knowledge, a Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group.

More Perspectives

See more CNET content tagged:
digital television, digital media, content company, commission, TV

Add a Comment (Log in or register) 4 comments
Deja vu?
by Nils Jespersen April 13, 2004 6:01 AM PDT
It seems we've been down this path before. Does anybody remember the paranoia that the content providers openly revealed regarding digital audio tape (DAT) and VCR recordings? All those fears ended up being completely unwarranted. So, here we have it again: paranoid content providers flexing their muscles (money) with the regulators that are supposed to be watching out for public interest and our precious freedoms. Frustrating for the 'Average Joe' is that the 'Golden Rule' is likely to apply here (the one with the gold makes the rules).
Reply to this comment
Black Market
by April 13, 2004 11:41 AM PDT
As the first post reiterated,"Here we go again"! I, for one, will not sit-by and not be able to receive and record, for my own personal archive, any audio or video that I so desire. And, at no charge. These idiotic, autocratic beauracrates and our "spineless congress" so easily forget: "of the people, by the people, and for the people"!!!!!!! If CPRM(Content Protection for Recordable Media), as is included on all DVD recorders, and also including PC's restrictions, one can rest assured that "We The People" will always "adapt" and get what is already ours under the "Fair Use" language. "We The Consumers" will prevail, one way or the other!!!!!!!!! And "to hell" with the recording establishment!!!!!!
Reply to this comment
Content providers haven't come up with...
by bjbrock April 18, 2004 4:14 PM PDT
enough political renumeration so the FCC is dragging their feet. Politics as usual. Perhaps a deal will never be reached and this absurdity will go away for a year or two.
Reply to this comment
supply new tv's
by Earl April 19, 2004 10:50 AM PDT
If the fcc is willing to supply the new tv's, then could prss a law of that nature, if not they have no right too.
More & more this country is being put in more of a dictation than Freedom.
Reply to this comment
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement

Latest tech news headlines

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

More feeds available in our RSS feed index.

advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right