or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by eightzero

Agreed. In this case, it isn't a technological problem, or evan a business problem - it's a legal issue. Remember all those copyright notices you see during games? "This broadcast is the property of the National Football League"? It is that way because of a contract, and likely a pretty lengthy one to boot. If the owner of the "game" has given an exclusive contract for broadcast, iTV is sort of out of luck. But how many have? And how many will wish to go with another...
Wow. Where are you? My cable bill is upwards of $60. Fairly, I have HD service and lots of channels I don't watch, but the two I do are in the package that is insanely expensive. No premiums (HBO etc.) Sounds like you've got a deal.
For me = way. I simply don't watch that many "shows." A couple times a month maybe, and I'm just not into reruns. What I'd really like the iTV to do is stream sports live in HD. 720p is just fine. And if the iOS is enabled, this could be done directly by the leagues. Their app could do the streaming, and add the iAds to boot. I'd pay for a stream of a hockey game or a football game...or even some of those isoteric olympic things that come around every 4 years...but it...
Cool. Exisiting stuff is being consumed. Thrilling. Now where are the announcements for the Apple "new goodies coming your way soon" event?
For $99 I'm certainly willing to give it a shot. What will make it killer for me is if I could buy a live/streaming sports event on it at a reasonable price. Say, get the Hockey Night in Canada stream for $1.99/game in HD. Sold, sold, sold.
Have my visa card in hand.
You do have a ATT contract for your iPhone though. And if you don't have a tether plan, could ATT see you using your iPhone to tether in violation of your agreement? Can they see the MAC address of the tethered device, like the iPad?
Indeed. The opinion by the librarian cited that section of the statute. The vailidity of the expressed opinion and subsequent enforcability, of course, if still exclusively within the perview of the courts. That said, courts generally defer to administrative opinion (see Chevron). Even so, the opinion only seems to be reflective of the DMCA's prohibition on circumvention of DRM schemes. This is not the same as "jailbreaking has no legal consequence."
They did so because they can make you pay for a second data plan. Un-crippling it also likely violates your ATT agreement. Many won't care, but ATT probably reserves the right to shut you off, send you a termination fee etc etc etc. Will they? Likely not for business reasons. Unless many, many people do and they feel they have no choice. For you techies out there, can the service provider (ATT) easily see the MAC address of the device that is consuming/connected to the...
What the constraints of the law are is very much not obvious. It is kind of you to apologise though.The Library of Congress did recently express an opinion regarding circumvention of copyright controls. Many say this means jailbreaking is now legal. I'm not so sure. First, the LoC is not an article III court. While their construction of their rules might be instructive (and under the Chevron USA case perhaps dispositive) it is not the final say on the matter. Secondly, the...
New Posts  All Forums: