DVD modulators

They should not be affected but equally I see no reason they wouldn't pass the MacroPuke crap through to a VCR.

"NSM" wrote in news:khQwd.2765$nN6.2720@edtnps84:

Sony Beta format was immune to Macrovision,IIRC.

That's a myth that I've seen proven untrue countless times.

AAMOF, I've had Beta machines, including Sonys, which reacted to MacroVision with video that dimmed and brightened repeatedly. - Reinhart

Most of the Beta macines I've owned were immune to Macrovision. A few were affected by it, but the vast majority weren't. Andy Cuffe

snipped-for-privacy@psu.edu

My understanding is that, early on, a significant number of VHS machines were relatively immune to macrovision as well. Macrovision (at least in its basic form) works by exploiting the fact that a VCR's input (recording) AGC circuitry's time constant is much faster than that of a regular TV's video inputs, so a recording (or just passing the video through a VCR) will follow the brightening/darkening caused by jimmying the average video level during the VBI, but a regular TV won't (so much... there is the unusual TV out there that shows noticeable screen changes too!).

Anyway, the rumor was that after Macrovision had been designed and implemented, Macrovision (the company) began "encouraging" VCR manufacturers to ensure their AGCs were is the rate that would "work" with Macrovision (the technology). (Something I don't know is whether or not the AGC rates were part of the original VHS spec and hence whether Macrovision was really just encouraging manufacturers to actually abide by standards that were already around but perhaps often ignored or whether they really were trying to institute new specs.)

In any case, I suspect it's very possible that Beta machines were more immune to Macrovision than VHS machines only because AGC timing was either different on Beta or else simply not yet as standardized as it is today. You can bet a nickel that if Beta hadn't died, Macrovision most certainly would have gotten around to creating a version of their technology that "worked" on Beta machines as well.

Although piracy of videocassettes and cable TV is not something to be condoned, there did seem to be a certain sense of "adventure" between the folks building the analog video scrambling systems and those trying to undo them. I remember when Popular Electronics (or was it Radio Electronics?) had multi-part articles of building various descramblers, and one could learn an awful lot based on studying the designs. I expect this adventure is still on-going with digital encryption systems, but a lot of it has been driven underground with the advent of so much legislation making a lot of reverse engineering downright illegal. One really wonders just who the FCC and our politicians are serving when you see media providers push through the use of such silliness as the HDTV "broadcast flag" these days (see:

---Joel Kolstad

"Joel Kolstad" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@corp.supernews.com:

One really wonders just who the FCC and our

That is to prevent people from recording HD movies or TV shows off cable or air onto DVDs of their own,instead of buying commercially-produced DVDs. (Protecting the DVD industry/anti-"piracy";that's who they're serving.)

our

of

Well, who do the Supreme Court of the USA think they are? Some sort of judges? If you can't get the result you want in court you just bribe your congress things and get a new law (or several) passed.

Yes, and it's a pretty poor reason. The same argument was heard (in the form of people taping shows off cable or the air instad of going to movie theatres) some 25 years ago when VCRs first came out. If a film owner doesn't want people taping the show, fine -- don't sell it to the broadcasters! As it is now, movies end up on DVD in stores _long_ before they show up on broadcast TV and significantly before they show up on the cable movie channels. Trying to prevent viewers from taping the movie for their own re-use to squeeze out just a couple of extra DVD sales (even when the home viewer's tape will lack all the DVD extras anyway!) is just being greedy, IMO.

The vast majority of people use video recorders for time shifting, not for building their own video libraries.

I suppose the movie studios would outlaw Blockbuster, Hollywood Video, etc. if they could too...

---Joel

The only VCRs I've seen that were immune to Macrovision are most Betas (virtually all Sony Betas) and a few Panasonics from about 1987-1992. Some early VHS machines may have been immune, but I can't remember ever seeing any. The way I understand it, Macrovision took advantage of the design of the AGC circuit used in most VHS VCRs, but that Most Beta VCRs were different. I don't doubt they encouraged manufacturers to make their VCRs respond to macrovision later on. I believe some of the more recent VCRs and camcorders actually detect it, refuse to record and put up a message on the screen telling you what's happening. Andy Cuffe

snipped-for-privacy@psu.edu

And now they make MORE money from selling videos than from the theaters. And to think they tried to make VCRs illegal.

I couldn't agree more! If their content is that valuable, don't broadcast it. Keep it in a vault where no one can see it.

It's far easier and faster to copy a DVD using a PC, but they seem more worried about stopping people from going from DVD to tape, or using a DVD recorder.

I can't believe how much effort is put into preventing video devices from working together. HDCP on DVI makes no sense to me. If I wanted to save a copy of a HDTV program I would find a way to save the original MPEG data (like with a PC HDTV card). No device even exists that can record DVI. All it does is prevent people from connecting their "old" HDTV to their new DVD player with HDCP DVI out. Andy Cuffe

snipped-for-privacy@psu.edu

"Joel Kolstad" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@corp.supernews.com:

I agree.

IMO,the people who record movies off cable or air are not those who would buy DVDs in the first place.It's not like a song or album that one would listen to over and over again.I suspect that the so-called "music piracy" was not that big an impact as the RIAA would like us to believe.Their lousy marketing schemes are much more responsible for any drop in sales or revenue,IMO.

Besides,they still get a cut from sales of blank media,just like they do for blank video and audio tape.

TIVO and others do that now,but do not allow recording to permanent media,IIRC.

I don't know why people would want to record movies off the air or cable,they're all edited these days.