Campaign for TW to get rid of CCI Byte issue

[Stormspace]

Not at all. The competition spawned is for the equipment. Again, that was the point of the regulation.

You're making gibberish up now. The law promotes effective competition, and it is clear that increasing demand for STBs will help spawn competition in a space, the sale of digital host devices (STBs), that the FCC itself recognized has not enjoyed enough competition in recent years.

Respectfully, I think you are missing the point. The CCI bit(legal or not) undercuts the competition by removing a feature offered by the Cable co's competition. That particular practice limits competition.

[bicker]

No, I'm not missing the point. Rather, I making it clear that the competition that the FCC aimed to foster was competition between STB makers. The CCI flag doesn't "undercut the competition". Indeed, it fosters competition between STB makers, as i indicated earlier.

[Brainiac 5]

No, I'm not missing the point. Rather, I making it clear that the competition that the FCC aimed to foster was competition between STB makers. The CCI flag doesn't "undercut the competition". Indeed, it fosters competition between STB makers, as i indicated earlier.I think another major point is that if the cable company sets the CCI flags, their equipment has to respect those flags just like TiVo, Moxi, and whatever else. TiVo is free to engineer around the problem by streaming, doing a move instead of a copy, etc.

[steve614]

I think another major point is that if the cable company sets the CCI flags, their equipment has to respect those flags just like TiVo, Moxi, and whatever else.
And I think that is the point. The cable co. doesn't care that the CCI flag is set because their DVR's don't allow transfering (AFAIK), while at the same time, they know that Tivo does allows transfers.
They now have the ability to undercut a competitor's feature with a legal alibi.
Therefore, they get the people who figure "well, if I can't do <insert feature here>, I might as well get a cable co. DVR".
TiVo is free to engineer around the problem by streaming, doing a move instead of a copy, etc.

I don't think anyone disagrees with this statement.

[JWThiers]

I think another major point is that if the cable company sets the CCI flags, their equipment has to respect those flags just like TiVo, Moxi, and whatever else. TiVo is free to engineer around the problem by streaming, doing a move instead of a copy, etc.

All of the above are good points but still doesn't explain why the cable company should be allowed to set the CCI Byte to something other than what the originating network wants if they express the desire for it to be some specific setting? This only becomes an issue when the network specifically says they want their content to be set to one thing and the cable company mandates it be another. That IMO is wrong no matter which way the cable company mandates the setting. If a network wants it one way that is the way it should be.

[dlfl]

All of the above are good points but still doesn't explain why the cable company should be allowed to set the CCI Byte to something other than what the originating network wants if they express the desire for it to be some specific setting? This only becomes an issue when the network specifically says they want their content to be set to one thing and the cable company mandates it be another. That IMO is wrong no matter which way the cable company mandates the setting. If a network wants it one way that is the way it should be.
I'm not aware of a known case where a cable co is setting copy protection different than what the network wants -- did I miss it?

I agree with your desire for the way things should work, however. Apparently the existing option of a network simply specifying what they want in their agreement with the cable co (or else no agreement) doesn't cut it for you, correct?

So are you advocating what you think should be written into law? How would this law work to achieve what we want? The cable co could still just refuse an agreement with a network rather than be forced to set the flag a way they don't wish to. If you write the law to say that this issue cannot be the basis of a cable co refusing the agreement, that is unworkable. They can always come up with a plausible other reason for refusing the agreement, e.g., can't agree on price or other terms.

[steve614]

They can always come up with a plausible other reason...

Yep. The same way a racist employer can skirt the anti-discrimination laws.
The excuse could be anything from "under qualified" to "we've ceased hiring at this time".

[SCSIRAID]

Well in that case they should remove copy protection on all my SDV channels, since they are never perfect (always pixelated, some freezes)! :D

Haha... been there... done that... Misery loves company. :D

[dlfl]

Yep. The same way a racist employer can skirt the anti-discrimination laws.
The excuse could be anything from "under qualified" to "we've ceased hiring at this time".
It does get complicated when you attempt to legislate morality. But we do agree it must be done in some cases, e.g., "Thou shall not kill", even with all the complications. Is it worth the complications in other cases, such as you mention? I don't know. It takes a sting operation to catch the racist employer (or apartment landlord, etc.), then there's the court case, and we just don't have the resources to do that for every suspected violation.

[Stormspace]

No, I'm not missing the point. Rather, I making it clear that the competition that the FCC aimed to foster was competition between STB makers. The CCI flag doesn't "undercut the competition". Indeed, it fosters competition between STB makers, as i indicated earlier.

How?

Lets put it out there. How many people in this thread think that doing an end run on features offered by competing products fosters competition?

[dlfl]

How?

Lets put it out there. How many people in this thread think that doing an end run on features offered by competing products fosters competition?
I'm not sure what you mean. Can you clarify or be more specific? Do you essentially mean "does it foster competition for TWC to set CCI=0x02 on all channels except local broadcast?" ?

Also I strongly suspect this doesn't address the essential point(s) of disagreement between you and bicker.

[Stormspace]

I'm not sure what you mean. Can you clarify or be more specific? Do you essentially mean "does it foster competition for TWC to set CCI=0x02 on all channels except local broadcast?" ?

Also I strongly suspect this doesn't address the essential point(s) of disagreement between you and bicker.

It sounds like Bicker says Nullifying features, such as MRV, using the CCI byte on competing products fosters competition.

[dlfl]

But why would we expect a competitor to "foster competition"? I don't like what TWC does but if they think it helps their competitive position in the DVR market they may well do it, as long as it's legal.

I can't vote on your question because it seems to have a false premise.

[ZeoTiVo]

If the cable company didn't care, then they'd do the least (i.e., nothing). There have been discussions about how cable companies can benefit from the right to set CCI if they choose to and aren't prohibited to. I suspect people biased against the application of CCI bytes by service providers will deny the existence of those reasons, as a matter of course, like some airline passengers deny the existence of the reasons for aspects of TSA security screening.

I am sure they have their reasons and I think TWC does care how the bit is set. I think they set it to try and get more digital outlets in the home. Why do you think MRV is a feature that is only reluctantly looked at by cable companies.
I am perfectly ready to concede they have a business reason for setting the restriction. I doubt TWC has some personal vendetta going on. :)
However I think that business reason for TWC or any other needs to balanced against the FCC mandate to foster competition by creating an environment for 3 rd parties to compete.
Thus my call for the FCC to look at rules on the wholesale setting of CCI and provide some clear guidelines/rules that includes the interests of cable companies and content owners (some want less restriction) and CE companies making 3rd party devices with features designed to make their product more competitive(MRV).

now from TiVo inc. perspective I would think that developing a streaming approach to sharing shows would have a better long term payoff than lobbying the FCC. Though they could do both.

[Stormspace]

But why would we expect a competitor to "foster competition"? I don't like what TWC does but if they think it helps their competitive position in the DVR market they may well do it, as long as it's legal.

I can't vote on your question because it seems to have a false premise.

My point really is that TWC is actively reducing their competitions STB features using a mechanism designed to prevent certain behavior. And while this practice may be legal, it does not foster competition by providing a level playing field.

So while the cable companies may be doing something completely legal lets not pretend they are doing any thing other than looking out for their own best interests.

[dlfl]

My point really is that TWC is actively reducing their competitions STB features using a mechanism designed to prevent certain behavior. And while this practice may be legal, it does not foster competition by providing a level playing field.

So while the cable companies may be doing something completely legal lets not pretend they are doing any thing other than looking out for their own best interests.
I'm not sure anyone (including bicker) is pretending this. For the most part it's natural for corporations and people to act in their own interest, unless prevented by law or moral code. Even acts of charity, sportsmanship or altruism (IMO) are in the interest of the person/entity doing them because they make them feel better about themselves, which is a big reward, not to mention the good publicity.

[Stormspace]

I'm not sure anyone (including bicker) is pretending this. For the most part it's natural for corporations and people to act in their own interest, unless prevented by law or moral code. Even acts of charity, sportsmanship or altruism (IMO) are in the interest of the person/entity doing them because they make them feel better about themselves, which is a big reward, not to mention the good publicity.

I think TWC is abusing the authority they were given (Setting the CCI byte) to
hamper a competing product (STB's). Also, based on the fact that TWC will be offering MRV within the next 6 months(Info courtesy the Cable guy) on their own boxes using a mechanism designed around the limitations they imposed in the first place suggests to me that it was done at least in part to hinder competition in the STB market, not foster it.

[CrispyCritter]

My view is that it's probably not a coincidence that Time-Warner is a media company and thus at the top level has strong proponents in favor of DRM. I don't think they are setting the bytes because of TiVo.

I am concerned that the NBC-Comcast merger will affect Comcast's position on this.

[JWThiers]

I'm not aware of a known case where a cable co is setting copy protection different than what the network wants -- did I miss it?

The ONLY case that has ever been reported here, is HDNet. Reportedly Mark Cuban wanted CCI set to 00 and the cable company (I don't recall which one was reported in the post) wanted 03. HDNet is now only on FIOS and U-Verse that I am aware of (major carriers) U-Verse has its own boxes that allow for an MRV type expirience and FIOS sets EVERYTHING to 00. All other carriers either already or are moving to everything (except whats required by law) to 03. Is it the ONLY factor? I don't know but it seems odd to me.

I agree with your desire for the way things should work, however. Apparently the existing option of a network simply specifying what they want in their agreement with the cable co (or else no agreement) doesn't cut it for you, correct?

So are you advocating what you think should be written into law? How would this law work to achieve what we want? The cable co could still just refuse an agreement with a network rather than be forced to set the flag a way they don't wish to. If you write the law to say that this issue cannot be the basis of a cable co refusing the agreement, that is unworkable. They can always come up with a plausible other reason for refusing the agreement, e.g., can't agree on price or other terms.

Should it be written into law? There are a ton of issues surrounding it the least of which are copyrights issues and the like. But it appears to me that the the cable companies its my way or the highway approach isn't really a negotiation. I think that the intent of the CCI byte as written us correct by saying that PPV is copy never with limited life, premiums may be copy once and allow streaming, and OTA as copy freely. I think the intent is that set between Premium and OTA should be either what the network wants or if nothing is requested what the cable company decides (Them erring on the side of caution is OK with me). But IF a NETWORK request something else let them have it. If the cable companies wont honor the requests from a network it might have to be added into the FCC rules. I don't like a ton of rules, but I think that what we have now is an unintended consequence and cable companies exploiting the letter of the rules.

[bicker]

http://mrchristmas.com/images/products/79851.jpg

And so we go around again. As if anything anyone has said in this thread over the last year or more has meant anything. At this point, all I'm reading is retreading of the same, tired old "I'm a consumer and the world should revolve around me" silliness that we have way too much of in our country already.

I asked several times in this thread and related threads whether the folks asking for clarifications, explanations, and such were sincerely looking for information, or were just looking to get their rocks off by having another platform to take baseless pot-shots at service providers. Effectively, those folks have lied by claiming sincerity.

I'm getting off this carousel at this point. I'm sure that I'll meet you on the next carousel -- my objective to ensure that casual readers get the real story, see a balanced picture of how things are, instead of a gurgling stew of consumerism-gone-mad. I figure at this point, the only people left in this thread are those who actually have already made up their mind, have no interest in understanding the business' side of things, and therefore will gain nothing from further discussion.

[JWThiers]

My view is that it's probably not a coincidence that Time-Warner is a media company and thus at the top level has strong proponents in favor of DRM. I don't think they are setting the bytes because of TiVo.

I am concerned that the NBC-Comcast merger will affect Comcast's position on this.

+1

[ZeoTiVo]

I figure at this point, the only people left in this thread are those who actually have already made up their mind, have no interest in understanding the business' side of things, and therefore will gain nothing from further discussion.

the already made up mind would also include you ;)

and now I will go apologize to our cable company overlords :rolleyes:

[Stormspace]

TWC has started putting CCI 0x02 on all channels but locals as of Wednesday. Anyone know if I remove the cable cards I could get around that?

[notting]

TWC has started putting CCI 0x02 on all channels but locals as of Wednesday. Anyone know if I remove the cable cards I could get around that?

Only in the sense that you might then get the analog version of channels, which can't have CCI set.

[Stormspace]

Only in the sense that you might then get the analog version of channels, which can't have CCI set.

I'm seriously considering dropping digital cable. We've reviewed what we watch on the digital stations and believe we can do with out them, or find another way to watch them if they are important.

[lafos]

TWC has started putting CCI 0x02 on all channels but locals as of Wednesday. Anyone know if I remove the cable cards I could get around that?

We have 3 HD's and a S3. Only two have cards. We left the cards out of the other two for just this reason. Though SD analog, it does let us get some use out of MRV. I've been tempted to drop digital cable, too, but was outvoted, 1 to 1.

[eric_n_dfw]

Not sure if it will do any good, but I also just emailed TWC:

I have been a TWC customer using a Tivo HD, cablecard and tuning adapter for a while now. I switched to your service after 9+ years of DirecTV because they had stopped offering a Tivo based DVR and I wanted to go HD. I have used your company's DVR as well as the DirecTV, Dish and UVerse ones and found them all lacking compared to Tivo.

I just purchased a 2nd Tivo HD to use in our kids game room and am waiting (over a week) for a truck roll to install the cablecard for it. (I find it ridiculous that you require a truck roll that costs ME money for that, but that's another issue.) My main complaint is that I'm finding out that, apparently, your company is setting the CCI copy protection bit on every program I have recorded on my original Tivo unit; thus blocking a core feature of the Tivo DVR's: Multi Room VIewing (MRV)

From the research I've done on this, it seems that this is a Time Warner imposed issue, not something the content creators are asking you to do. I don't know what your reasoning is here, but it appears to be a backhanded way of pushing your DVR's and/or set top decoders on people. As I understand it, your biggest competitors, Verizon FIOS and Comcast do not do this.

Now I'm forced to consider canceling my cablecard request and shelving that 2nd Tivo HD in hopes that the forthcoming Tivo based DirecTV box is release soon all because your company has made this draconian, anti-consumer decision.

Please reconsider your position on this and open the CCI bit's to those of us with Tivo's.

Sincerely,

Eric Smalling
Euless, TX

[Malk]

Not sure if it will do any good, but I also just emailed TWC:

good luck, I'm sure you'll get the canned response from the corporate office if you get any at all.

[Brainiac 5]

good luck, I'm sure you'll get the canned response from the corporate office if you get any at all.He probably will, but I think it's still a good idea to send it. Most companies do at least track how many requests/complaints they get on various topics, so every letter may help.

[Malk]

He probably will, but I think it's still a good idea to send it. Most companies do at least track how many requests/complaints they get on various topics, so every letter may help.

I would agree with you 100%, that some may track information like that, if they care about their customer base.

[Stormspace]

We have 3 HD's and a S3. Only two have cards. We left the cards out of the other two for just this reason. Though SD analog, it does let us get some use out of MRV. I've been tempted to drop digital cable, too, but was outvoted, 1 to 1.

As an update. We dropped digital about three months ago. Using the cost savings of returning the equipment we added netflix. The addition of netflix made those that missed digital happy and we can once again MRV.

[dlfl]

If letters could make TWC change it would have happened long ago. If they ever do change it will be for their own business reasons.

If you want to write somewhere where it could actually make a difference, send a comment to the FCC, see **this** (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=450967). This is almost as simple as sending an email.

BTW, the boilerplate response TWC sends out may be found in **this post** (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7562980#post7562980) earlier in this thread. It will be interesting to compare this to what eric_n_dfw gets now. Cutting through all the words this response simply says "what we are doing is legal, and that's all we're going to tell you". Frustrating isn't it?

TiVo owners are less than 0.5% of TWC's customers. Don't expect to exert much pressure on them (other than possibly through the government, i.e., Congress and the FCC).

[eric_n_dfw]

Well, ice cubes may be forming in hell today because an actual human being from TWC called me about my complaint email. She said she would be contacting the technician for my area about it and would call or email me back.

Not holding my breath, but I was pretty surprised to even hear from someone.

[Stormspace]

Well, ice cubes may be forming in hell today because an actual human being from TWC called me about my complaint email. She said she would be contacting the technician for my area about it and would call or email me back.

Not holding my breath, but I was pretty surprised to even hear from someone.

I'll bet you that they didn't understand the email and are sending the technician out to "fix it". That basically means he'll find out the issue is with a policy they have, communicate that upstream, and then you'll get a verbal saying they can't do anything about it.

[Grumock]

I'll bet you that they didn't understand the email and are sending the technician out to "fix it". That basically means he'll find out the issue is with a policy they have, communicate that upstream, and then you'll get a verbal saying they can't do anything about it.

I think you are for sure on the right track.

[vstone]

Now, where's that jpg of Don Quijote

[Stormspace]

Now, where's that jpg of Don Quijote

It won't hurt for him to try. Another voice being heard that is displeased cannot be bad.

[eric_n_dfw]

As feared, the response is, basically, "There is no problem, all is working as we want it." :mad:


Mr. Smalling,

All of our CCI levels are set by corporate guidelines. Yes, a lot of our programming is set to "Copy Once". Our off air broadcasters are set to" Externally Defined", and PPV are set to "Copy Never". Again this is governed by Corporate, not locally.


Thank you,


[ name redacted ]
Executive Customer Relations
Time Warner Cable
North Texas Division
[ phone and email redacted ]

[eric_n_dfw]

Here is my draft reply to TWC - anyone see anything I should revise?


​Thank you for your investigation of this, however you've only confirmed my suspicions that TWC corporate policy is to basically give non-TWC DVR owners the shaft.

The statement that, "a lot of our programming is set to "Copy Once"", seems very dubious to me since of the 100+ programs currently recorded on my older Tivo HD, the only ones being allowed to be copied to my new Tivo are those from the local broadcast stations. Besides, why wouldn't you put, "Externally Defined" on all content? (outside of maybe premium or PPV shows)

Please communicate to your corporate office that I believe this appears to be a clear abuse of power; and from the many complaints on both TivoCommunity.com forums and the FCC Comments System ( For instance, FCC proceeding 97-80, http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/proceeding/view?name=97-80 ) that there are many others who agree.

Also, while unrelated to the CCI level issue, another complaint that I believe plays into the apparent animosity TWC has toward Tivo is the horrific customer support around CableCards and SDV Tuning Adapters.

Just yesterday, a TWC installer came to my house to install the CableCard in my new Tivo HD (a process that took over a week to schedule). After at least 20 minutes on the phone with TWC he came back inside and said that the card pairing should be complete in 5 to 10 minutes and then left. 2 hours later it was still not paired and the Tuning Adapter also was still inoperative.

I had an online chat session with a TWC support representative who, after 15 minutes or so, was able to get the Tuning Adapter to sync up, but she had to schedule another truck roll to get the CableCard pairing fixed. This all after I took a day off of work and am being charged for the installation!

Based on prior experiences with TWC CableCard pairing, and the reports of countless others online I can only guess that TWC just doesn't care. This process should be as simple as mailing me the card and having an automated touch-tone phone system and/or web page to register it, not wasting my time waiting on the installer and dealing with repeat visits.

In conclusion, due to what I beleive is TWC's abusive use of CCI flags to limit the usefulness of Tivo DVR's, and the incompetence of your company's technicians to make a simple CableCard pairing work, I can only conclude that I am not valued as a customer and that when DirecTV's new Tivo based DVR comes out later this year, I might as well go back to them. I definitely will be adding my experiences to the above mentioned FCC proceeding complaints.

Sincerly,
Eric Smalling
Euless, TX

[Stormspace]

Here is my draft reply to TWC - anyone see anything I should revise?

You misspelled "Sincerely".

Give it a shot. Like I said earlier, it certainly can't hurt.

[eric_n_dfw]

You misspelled "Sincerely".

Give it a shot. Like I said earlier, it certainly can't hurt.

:rolleyes: I scrutinized spelling everywhere but there!

Thanks.

[eric_n_dfw]

Going to rewrite it before sending to be a little less inflamatory.

Also, the CableCard finally paired up. The Twitter folks ( @TWCableHelp ) checked with the CCard help desk but they said they didn't do anything - just a really slow pairing for some reason.

[dlfl]

http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f159/RaulMonkey/Animated/beating-a-dead-horse.gif

TWC doesn't like TiVo's because they decrease their bottom line. They "care" only to the degree the FCC makes them care, and so far that hasn't worked very well. It's not because they are bad guys -- there is no moral imperative they should like TiVo's.

Their copy protection policy is legal and they don't have to tell us anything other than stating that what they do is legal.

I don't like it any more than the rest of you -- but these facts have been established for a long time now.

[Brainiac 5]

I don't like it any more than the rest of you -- but these facts have been established for a long time now.Nonetheless, I think it's worthwhile to complain. It's probably true that there aren't enough TiVo owners for their complaints to make a difference, but the only way to absolutely ensure that is not to send those complaints at all. In any case, complaining won't do any harm, so why wouldn't one do it?

I agree that the facts are well established, and there's really no need to discuss them amongst ourselves. However, complaining about the (well-understood) state of affairs to our respective cable companies is a different matter.

[dlfl]

Nonetheless, I think it's worthwhile to complain. It's probably true that there aren't enough TiVo owners for their complaints to make a difference, .....
It's not just probably true. TiVo users are less than 0.5% of their customer base and all of us are captive customers if we want to use our TiVo's to record cable programming.

.....but the only way to absolutely ensure that is not to send those complaints at all. In any case, complaining won't do any harm, so why wouldn't one do it?

I agreed with this when this campaign started (see my post #2 in this thread) but that was nine months and many letters to TWC ago. As bicker correctly analyzed in post #6:
The solution to this is strictly commercial: Folks need to demonstrate to the company that making this change will be more profitable than not making this change. There surely aren't enough TiVo owners who are TWC customers to be a convincing number to convince anyone of anything. This really needs to be a much larger and broader effort, or it will just be a waste of time and energy. You need to make contact with literally millions of TWC customers, and get them to care about this issue enough (that "enough" part is essential) to have thousands of them take action in response, such as canceling service or reducing service to basic. That will register as a significant event, in TWC's book, and will motivate them to consider your concerns seriously.

I agree that the facts are well established, and there's really no need to discuss them amongst ourselves. However, complaining about the (well-understood) state of affairs to our respective cable companies is a different matter.
OK -- if you like beating dead horses! :p

If you want to write somewhere where it would be more likely to make a difference, send a comment to the FCC, see **this** (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=450967).

[JWThiers]

http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f159/RaulMonkey/Animated/beating-a-dead-horse.gif

...

I don't like it any more than the rest of you -- but these facts have been established for a long time now.

We need to learn what the Mongols taught the Chinese. "When the horse dies, get off." :D

[eric_n_dfw]

I decided not to send the response email I posted here yesterday and, instead sent this shorter, less inflammatory one:

Thank you for your response. Can you please described the meaning of, "Copy Once"? Because I would assume that would mean I could copy it to one other TiVo in my house after the initial recording. In reality, absolutely nothing recorded on non-broadcast channels is copyable at all. Including over 100 different recordings across dozens of channels.

[eric_n_dfw]

Re: Beating a dead horse
You may be right, but if we don't complain to TWC and/or the FCC, then there definitely is no chance of a fix. I would vote with my pocket book if there was a viable alternate, but, IMO, there currently is none.

[ZeoTiVo]

I decided not to send the response email I posted here yesterday and, instead sent this shorter, less inflammatory one:

better - the first one was filled with so many different things and accusations hard to prove that they could evade answering in so many ways. ;)

the second one, with its focus on one issue, is much better. Sometimes you just have to keep asking simple single subject questions to get at the truth. Kinda like playing 20 questions.

[steve614]

Regarding "copy once"...

When your Tivo records a show, it is copied to the hard drive. That is the one and only copy you are allowed to have.
Transferring to a computer or another Tivo constitutes a second copy, which is not allowed under "copy once".

[Stormspace]

Regarding "copy once"...

When your Tivo records a show, it is copied to the hard drive. That is the one and only copy you are allowed to have.
Transferring to a computer or another Tivo constitutes a second copy, which is not allowed under "copy once".

I think he knows that, but asking them to explain it brings the issue to light. :)

[Brainiac 5]

When your Tivo records a show, it is copied to the hard drive. That is the one and only copy you are allowed to have.Interestingly, Motorola cable company-supplied DVRs don't see it that way - people with devices like D-VHS that can record from firewire are able to copy shows with copy once from a recording on their DVR onto D-VHS. (Of course, just try getting a cable company DVR with firewire nowadays... not easy.)

I think they can and will easily argue that the copy on the hard drive is the one copy, but it's interesting that the cable companies themselves have in the past supplied equipment that bases its restrictions on a different interpretation. (Not that it helps us any.)

[dlfl]

Re: Beating a dead horse
You may be right, but if we don't complain to TWC and/or the FCC, then there definitely is no chance of a fix. I would vote with my pocket book if there was a viable alternate, but, IMO, there currently is none.
I suspect some of the recent posters here haven't reviewed this thread to learn more of the history of this, but anyway I was one of the first people to write a letter to TWC on this 9 months ago. TWC has never responded with anything more meaningful then the letter I referenced in an earlier post and I see no reason to think things would change (unless forced by the FCC) -- in fact the trend has been for other cable systems to impose similar protection.

I too initially received a response that they would have a local rep contact me about it, but after several weeks nothing happened and when I pinged them again the standard response verbage (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7562980#post7562980) was sent.

[Brainiac 5]

... and I see no reason to think things would change (unless forced by the FCC) -- in fact the trend has been for other cable systems to impose similar protection.One person on this forum (I don't remember who now) contacted their local Comcast office, and eventually got the copy once taken off their channels. This person was also told that Comcast's national policy is or would be to only protect the channels of networks that specifically asked for it. I have Comcast where I live, and originally all my channels were copy once; I don't know if this is related to that person's experience, but some time ago my channels suddenly all changed to copy freely. So as far as I can tell, the trend with Comcast is toward removing the protection.

Maybe TWC will never change their mind about this, but as I said before, the only way to absolutely guarantee that 100% is to stop asking them to. I say complain away, of course keeping the realistic expectation in mind that nothing is going to change.

In any case, I don't see why it would be important to anyone for people not to complain to their cable company. What will complaining hurt? It can't be that they just can't stand to think of the person wasting their time, because we spend far more time discussing it here than it would take to send a letter of complaint.

[dlfl]

......... I say complain away, of course keeping the realistic expectation in mind that nothing is going to change.
:D That speaks for itself! Doesn't that define "futile" ?
In any case, I don't see why it would be important to anyone for people not to complain to their cable company. What will complaining hurt? It can't be that they just can't stand to think of the person wasting their time, because we spend far more time discussing it here than it would take to send a letter of complaint.
Time spent writing to TWC is wasted because TWC isn't engaged in the discussion. Time spent on this forum is not wasted because (hopefully) all parties are actually engaged.

I don't see why it would be important to anyone to encourage people to waste time and energy complaining when the realistic expectation is that nothing is going to change (using your words). Is the unspoken thing here actually just that complaining makes us feel better? If so let's all open our windows tonight, lean out, and yell "TWC I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!". :D This will do as much good as writing them letters, I suspect.

[Brainiac 5]

:D That speaks for itself! Doesn't that define "futile" ?Well, I don't mean there's absolutely no possibility that anything will ever change until the end of time. What I mean is, no one should expect TWC to immediately change their mind based on one letter. In the long run, maybe there's a 0.000000001% chance they'll change their mind if you and others write to them - but if you don't write to them, the chance is 0%.

Time spent writing to TWC is wasted because TWC isn't engaged in the discussion. Time spent on this forum is not wasted because (hopefully) all parties are actually engaged.It's entirely likely that TWC does keep track of the number of people who've complained about this. The point of writing them is to add one to that number, for whatever effect that might have someday. Time spent discussing whether or not we should do that is mildly amusing, but has even less probability of affecting anything than writing.

I don't see why it would be important to anyone to encourage people to waste time and energy complaining when the realistic expectation is that nothing is going to change (using your words).Well, it's not like complaining involves heavy manual labor and takes years of your life. You write a quick note and drop it in the mailbox. It's entirely rational; while the expectation is that nothing will change, that's not a certainty; writing is a very small amount of effort in exchange for a very small chance that it will do any good. If someone wanted to devote their entire life to campaigning for TWC to remove copy protection, I would advise against that.

Is the unspoken thing here actually just that complaining makes us feel better?No, the point is that if everyone stops complaining, then they haven't even the tiniest reason to ever reconsider. A tiny, minor, insignificant reason like the TiVo owners being upset is better than no reason at all.

If so let's all open our windows tonight, lean out, and yell "TWC I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!". :D This will do as much good as writing them letters, I suspect.Well, if they're keeping track of complaints (which is somewhat likely, given that they have a form letter reply for this exact complaint), then writing will add your vote for no "copy once." Yelling out your window will just make you hoarse.

[dlfl]

If TWC ever does relent on copy protection it will be for some reason that is a lot more important to them than one more complaint!

By now I think all thread readers have heard (more than) enough pros and cons on whether it's worth their time to complain to TWC -- may the force be with them whatever they choose to do!

[Brainiac 5]

Agreed!

[StanSimmons]

When TWC Dallas first started putting the cci byte on everything, they put it on the rebroadcast OTA channels as well. I wrote them and they promptly removed it from the OTA channels... They have never budged on any other channels. I gave up after a year of letters and phone calls and just hacked my TiVoHDs to ignore the cci byte entirely, making MRV useful once again.

I hate that they are forcing me to "break the law" to make my equipment continue to function in the way that it was designed.

[eric_n_dfw]

Well, it's not like complaining involves heavy manual labor and takes years of your life. You write a quick note and drop it in the mailbox. It's entirely rational; while the expectation is that nothing will change, that's not a certainty; writing is a very small amount of effort in exchange for a very small chance that it will do any good. If someone wanted to devote their entire life to campaigning for TWC to remove copy protection, I would advise against that.
Yeah, that's pretty much my attitude about this. You never know who you'll get a hold of when you talk to a big company like TWC. You could get that one person with some common sense who has lunch with a senior exec and mentions it.

Probable, no. But worth a shot at least.

I also figure that if the new HD DirecTivo's ever come out and they have working MRV or at least streaming and TWC still hasn't changed their tune, I'll jump ship back to them. (I was a DirecTV HDVR2 user before going HD and being forced onto TWC to keep my Tivo experience)

[TheSubmariner]

When TWC Dallas first started putting the cci byte on everything, they put it on the rebroadcast OTA channels as well. I wrote them and they promptly removed it from the OTA channels... They have never budged on any other channels. I gave up after a year of letters and phone calls and just hacked my TiVoHDs to ignore the cci byte entirely, making MRV useful once again.

I hate that they are forcing me to "break the law" to make my equipment continue to function in the way that it was designed.

Love to know how you hacked it... ;) Might want to try that myself.

[eric_n_dfw]

When TWC Dallas first started putting the cci byte on everything, they put it on the rebroadcast OTA channels as well. I wrote them and they promptly removed it from the OTA channels... They have never budged on any other channels. I gave up after a year of letters and phone calls and just hacked my TiVoHDs to ignore the cci byte entirely, making MRV useful once again.

I hate that they are forcing me to "break the law" to make my equipment continue to function in the way that it was designed.
Curious if you did your own EPROM swap or farmed it out. I'm a competent solderer, but just barely.

[dlfl]

Yeah, that's pretty much my attitude about this. You never know who you'll get a hold of when you talk to a big company like TWC. You could get that one person with some common sense who has lunch with a senior exec and mentions it.

But it's common sense that causes them to copy protect! TiVo's are a PITA to them, and hurt their bottom line. Anything they can legally do to lessen the TiVo experience, and thus drive customers to their DVR's and VOD, is common sense. You should be hoping you get the one person who thinks their company should be run as a charity.

I also figure that if the new HD DirecTivo's ever come out and they have working MRV or at least streaming and TWC still hasn't changed their tune, I'll jump ship back to them. .......
Now your talking common sense! This would do more than 10,000 complaints to get TWC to relent.

[JWThiers]

Re: Beating a dead horse
You may be right, but if we don't complain to TWC and/or the FCC, then there definitely is no chance of a fix. I would vote with my pocket book if there was a viable alternate, but, IMO, there currently is none.

An alternative is to drop cable completely or at most the minimum you can get for local channels. Then use the money you save to get the fastest internet you can afford and use Netflix, Amazon, Apple, to get legal downloads, streams of the shows that you can no longer get on cable. If you still need more there is always other means (Torrents). depending on your viewing habits you may find you actually get the same content and save money because you are only getting exactly what you wanted. It ain't perfect (might be watching stuff delayed or from last season), but ...

[StanSimmons]

Love to know how you hacked it... ;) Might want to try that myself.

Curious if you did your own EPROM swap or farmed it out. I'm a competent solderer, but just barely.

I farmed out the installation of the surface mount socket for the patched rom. I found the guy by searching for "Deals, Freebie and TiVo" and "Full Service PROM Modification" I'm not sure if he is still doing it.

After replacing the rom, the hacking is pretty straight forward. At the site you found above, search for "cci byte" and you should find everything you need. If all you want is MRV back, then you only need to apply the 3 cci byte patches. This will leave encryption alone and allow you to transfer programs to unhacked S2/S3/S4 boxes.

[BobCamp1]

I hate that they are forcing me to "break the law" to make my equipment continue to function in the way that it was designed.

When you wrote "they", did you mean TWC, Tivo, or both?

I'd also write letters to Tivo telling them how disappointed you are that other products can MRV just fine and theirs can't. Not even their newest product. You can also ask them when their "Home Media Solution" will be released, and if we should tack two years on the end of that like we did for the new DirecTivo.

[StanSimmons]

When you wrote "they", did you mean TWC, Tivo, or both?

I'd also write letters to Tivo telling them how disappointed you are that other products can MRV just fine and theirs can't. Not even their newest product. You can also ask them when their "Home Media Solution" will be released, and if we should tack two years on the end of that like we did for the new DirecTivo.

TWC... My TiVoHDs functioned just fine until TWC started being jerks.

I have written (many times) to TiVo suggesting that they modify MRV to allow streaming as an option on CCI Byte protected shows. The S3/HD/HDXL units have been capable of this since at least v9.4, but TiVo hasn't implemented it in MRV. For more info, see: http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=403174

[slowbiscuit]

Streaming web video via HME/VLC != streaming 1080i HD with MRV. The word here is that the Tivo HDs cannot reliably stream up to full HD (19mb/s) from Tivo to Tivo via MRV because of horsepower limits. I don't think this is true for a single stream from T->T, but it's certainly true for more than one. Of course they could have put in a limit to only allow one stream to/from a single Tivo, but for whatever reason they haven't.

And the only answer I can come up with, especially now that the Premieres could do it without breaking a sweat, is that they have a quid pro quo going with the content providers or cableCos.

[Phantom Gremlin]

And the only answer I can come up with, especially now that the Premieres could do it without breaking a sweat, is that they have a quid pro quo going with the content providers or cableCos.

That's also the best answer I can come up with. Here's a snippet from the CEOs bio: (http://investor.tivo.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=106292&p=irol-govBio&ID=186942)

Prior to joining PRIMEDIA, Tom was President of NBC Cable and Executive Vice President of NBC, as well as NBC's chief strategist. Among his many accomplishments, Tom founded CNBC, the nation's leading business news channel and established the NBC/Microsoft cable channel and Internet joint venture, MSNBC. In addition, he served as co-chairman of the Arts and Entertainment, and History Channels, and was responsible for overseeing many other cable channels including Court TV, Bravo, American Movie Classics, Independent Film Channel, the National Geographic Channel, and numerous regional sports channels.

I'm sure he's got a lot of buddies still working at those content providers.

[Brainiac 5]

I'm sure he's got a lot of buddies still working at those content providers.Yep, and from the beginning, even before he took over, TiVo has always been very concerned about not upsetting content providers.

[eric_n_dfw]

I don't want to go off topic here so I've started a new thread about my TWC displeasure and the prospects of going elsewhere, feel free to chime in if you want: http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=453144

Otherwise, thanks to you all for giving me a sounding board to complain about TWC's CCI shenanigans.

[eric_n_dfw]

FWIW, I never did hear back from the TWC contact regarding my followup CCI question to here. Maybe she thought it was rhetorical? In any case, I just sent her this email and doubt I'll hear back from her as a result of it either:

Although I haven't heard back from you with my last question, research online has convinced me that your company has no interest in ever changing this policy. I believe Time Warner cable places the most stringent CCI flag they can legally use in order to coerce their customers into leasing TWC equipment instead of Tivo's DVR's. I also believe that unless forced by legislation, they will continue this bullying practice as there are just not enough Tivo owners out there for them to care.

This practice, combined with amazing levels of ineptitude by your company's technicians to get CableCard and SDV tuning adapters to work are forcing me to consider ending my relationship with TWC. As a 9+ year Tivo owner, the majority of which on DirecTV, I am sad to have to stop supporting a company like Tivo because of TWC's poor level of service, but I simply can't justify paying a monthly fee for a service that cripples my own equipment for no good reason.

I also was a DirecTV user (both with the Tivo and beforehand) for about 9 years and never any bad experiences with their service - in fact I would have stayed with them if their HD DVR was as good as Tivo's back then. Now that they do have a compelling HD DVR system with multi-room viewing capabilities, I have no reason to stay with TWC.

Again, thank you for your time in researching the CCI issue here and, although I'm sure they could care less, please communicate this soon-to-be ex-customer's displeasure and why they've lost another one to satellite.

Sincerely,
Eric Smalling

[dlfl]

FWIW, I never did hear back from the TWC contact regarding my followup CCI question to here. Maybe she thought it was rhetorical? In any case, I just sent her this email and doubt I'll hear back from her as a result of it either:
Again, why not send a version of your comments somewhere where it has a better chance of making a difference, e.g., see **this** (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=450967). You could just put a small wrapper on your most recent letter. Filing a comment only takes a few seconds.