The broadcast flag returns [LWN.net]

The broadcast flag is an attempt to mandate the use of digital restrictions management (DRM) technology with U.S digital television and radio broadcasts. In short, the broadcast flag regulations, as adopted by the Federal Communications Commission, would require that reception equipment honor a "do not copy" bit in a digital signal. The end result is that, among other things, free TV and radio systems would not be allowed, since they would fail the "robustness" requirement in the regulations. Happily, a federal court threw out the broadcast regulation last May, ruling that the FCC was not authorized to regulate what a piece of equipment does with a signal after reception.

The return of the broadcast flag was inevitable; the commercial interests behind this sort of regulation never give up that easily - or at all. Even so, the return of the broadcast flag has been surprisingly quick. Twenty U.S. members of Congress are now pushing for legislation which would give the FCC the regulatory authority it currently lacks. Susan Crawford has posted the proposed language:

The Federal Communications Commission (a) has authority to adopt such regulations governing digital audio broadcast transmissions and digital audio receiving devices that are appropriate to control the unauthorized copying and redistribution of digital audio content by or over digital reception devices, related equipment, and digital networks, including regulations governing permissible copying and redistribution of such audio content....

This language is quite broad - the FCC would be empowered to regulate "digital networks" in whatever ways it sees fit to keep the entertainment industry happy. It does not take much imagination to foresee heavy-handed rules which are not particularly friendly to free software. This legislation needs to be defeated; BoingBoing has a list of offending "congressjerks" and their contact information. We don't doubt that they would be delighted to hear from their constituents on this matter.

The broadcast flag looks like a U.S. problem, but the situation in Europe is similar. The EFF has just posted a report on the activities of the Digital Video Broadcasting project, a body which sets television standards for use in Europe, Australia, and even parts of Asia. The upcoming DVB standard contains some familiar provisions:

This project is called Content Protection and Copy Management (CPCM), and the DVB has put it centre-stage in its plans for DVB 3.0, the forthcoming version of the DVB standard. The scope of the U.S. broadcast flag regulation was relatively narrow -- the redistribution control flag could only be present or absent. DVB CPCM, by contrast, is specifying remarkably fine-grained and elaborate means by which broadcasters can control the detailed functionality of receiving devices. In effect, CPCM and its constituent specifications amount to a complicated, lengthy, and, at present, secret body of private law that describes rules and restrictions potentially applicable to all manufacturers of DTV devices.

The CPCM includes provisions for "proximity control" and such, regulating just how far a digital signal can be propagated. It includes a revocation feature allowing existing hardware to be disabled should the industry conclude that it has been compromised. The inevitable "robustness requirement" will make it impossible to create digital television systems with free software. The CPCM, in other words, is the broadcast flag, only worse.

A broadcast flag for Europe is not inevitable. The process which CPCM will have to follow is long: it must be adopted as a European telecommunications standard, then mandated by law in each nation. There is plenty of warning, and no end of good reasons to fight back. With effort - and luck - our ability to create free television systems can be preserved on both sides of the Atlantic.

(Log in to post comments)

The broadcast flag returns

Posted Oct 6, 2005 6:46 UTC (Thu) by dmantione (guest, #4640) [Link]

No, the fight in Europe is already taking place, no laws necessary. As
reported in several sources, for example here
(http://www.sat4all.com/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Numb...),
Dream Multimedia, manufacturer of Linux based satellite receivers is
being threathened by NDS, alias Ian Murdoch.

By means of the ETSI, NDS is accused to have prevented that Dream
Multimedia got a license for the CSA encryption of DVB signals. (They
would need to remove the ethernet port and make the software closed
before they would get one.)

As a result IBM is reported to be forbidden to ship their Vulcan chipsets
to DMM.

While this story has been mentioned in several sources, there have been
no official comments yet. If LWN is searching for a story to report
on... :)

The broadcast flag returns

Posted Oct 6, 2005 23:50 UTC (Thu) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link]

Maybe someone can answer a question I have from the previous defeat of the broadcast flag.

At the time of the court decision, I read quotes from multiple equipment manufacturers saying the facility to respect the broadcast flag was already in the pipeline and it was too late to stop it from going into consumers' devices. But they followed up by saying that because of the court ruling, it didn't matter -- the consumer wouldn't even know the facility was there.

But since the facility is there, why wouldn't broadcasters turn on the flag in their broadcasts and take advantage of it?

The broadcast flag returns

Posted Oct 7, 2005 4:19 UTC (Fri) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link]

They certainly will, even if just for the possibility it will become law in the future. What it means is that it has no legal force. You won't be a criminal for not obeying the bit. End users with devices which can't be modified won't be able to take advantage, but people with capture cards for their computers, with devices which can have new firmware flashed, or which are handy with a soldering iron, could.

The broadcast flag returns

Posted Oct 8, 2005 0:37 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link]

So the manufacturers were wrong when they said the presence of the facility would be transparent to consumers because of the court decision? It sounds to me like the court decision had virtually no practical effect, but nobody was saying that at the time.

Considering that copyright owners really don't care about people with video capture cards or who modify their equipment or update firmware (there aren't enough of us to matter), it sounds like the regulation actually took effect, whether the FCC had the right to make it or not.

The broadcast flag returns

Posted Oct 8, 2005 7:47 UTC (Sat) by ddaa (guest, #5338) [Link]

Whether users of unmodified devices from major manufacturers are subject to a de-facto broadcast flag restriction does not matter.

What matters is that it is legal to develop and use devices that are not bound by this restrictions.

In the digital world, the difference between "notionally allowed to" and "legally prevented from" is big, because it only take a few people to come up with something new and, with time, change rules, if only there are not legally prevented from doing so.