TV-Commercial Enforcer

Jadeite · Post by **Jadeite** » 2006-04-18 10:00pm

http://www.newscientisttech.com/article ... orcer.html

For over 30 years, Barry Fox has trawled through the world's weird and wonderful patent applications, uncovering the most exciting, bizarre or even terrifying new ideas. His column, Invention, is exclusively online. Scroll down for a roundup of previous Invention articles.

The advert enforcer
If a new idea from Philips catches on, the company may not be very popular with TV viewers. The company's labs in Eindhoven, The Netherlands, has been cooking up a way to stop people changing channels to avoid adverts or fast forwarding through ads they have recorded along with their target programme.

The secret, according to a new patent filing, is to take advantage of Multimedia Home Platform - the technology behind interactive television in many countries around the world. MHP software now comes built into most modern digital TV receivers and recorders. It looks for digital flags buried in a broadcast, and displays messages on screen that let the viewer call up extra features, such as additional footage or information about a programme.

Philips suggests adding flags to commercial breaks to stop a viewer from changing channels until the adverts are over. The flags could also be recognised by digital video recorders, which would then disable the fast forward control while the ads are playing.

Philips' patent acknowledges that this may be "greatly resented by viewers" who could initially think their equipment has gone wrong. So it suggests the new system could throw up a warning on screen when it is enforcing advert viewing. The patent also suggests that the system could offer viewers the chance to pay a fee interactively to go back to skipping adverts.

"Philips' patent acknowledges that this may be "greatly resented by viewers""

Understatement of the year.

RThurmont · Post by **RThurmont** » 2006-04-18 10:08pm

Release a technology platform like that, and watch CATV die in favor of video over IP that much faster.

DarkSilver · Post by **DarkSilver** » 2006-04-18 10:14pm

I'm sorry......

you want to introduce a system which will FORCE me to watch a advertisement, and not change the channel....

and you will then want me to pay, to go back to being able to change the channel any god damn time I want?

What the fuck are these people smoking....hopefully the FCC would shoot this down before it got into practical or even experimental use...

Adrian Laguna · Post by **Adrian Laguna** » 2006-04-18 10:16pm

Since I found my radio's remote control I just don't see or hear comercials any more. All TV I tape, and thus I can skip the commercials. For the radio, I listen to five different stations, and they never have commercials at the same time. On occasion four will be on commercials, but never all five.

In a sense, you could say I'm freeloading.

DarkSilver · Post by **DarkSilver** » 2006-04-18 10:33pm

Adrian Laguna wrote:Since I found my radio's remote control I just don't see or hear comercials any more. All TV I tape, and thus I can skip the commercials. For the radio, I listen to five different stations, and they never have commercials at the same time. On occasion four will be on commercials, but never all five.

In a sense, you could say I'm freeloading.

That's the kicker, with these digital flags, thier talking about embedding one which will deactivate the fast forward "feature" of your player, thus not letting you skip those commercials on recorded television......

Elheru Aran · Post by **Elheru Aran** » 2006-04-18 10:34pm

As I said in the chat, this has not a dream of being implemented. And if through some satanic feat, it is actually put into use, I assure you, within a week at most there'll be websites detailing how to circumvent this shit. They did it for the radio ankle bands that they put on convicts... this'll merely be more of the same.

Hotfoot · Post by **Hotfoot** » 2006-04-18 10:49pm

So it's not enough that you have to pay them for cable or satellite, pay for digital service, pay for a DVR, pay for premium channels, and in some cases (like NJ), HAVE TO PAY TAXES FOR A COMPANY YOU CAN'T GET, but now, some jackass wants to make it so you can't skip past commercials?

Fuck him. Guess what? I can make a DVR out of an old computer and free (open source) software, and it's 100% legal. Whoops, where'd that code go?

If people want to go through the trouble of not watching commercials through a DVR or some such, why not let them? It's not like there's some crazy lack of advertising in the world. It's not like advertisers haven't sunken to new depths, like infiltrating web forums to plug products.

RThurmont · Post by **RThurmont** » 2006-04-18 11:59pm

As a professional marketer, I can assure you that the majority of professional media buyers wouldn't touch commercials flagged so that you couldn't skip them, for the simple reason that they're smart enough to recognize that the average viewer would be so annoyed by it, they would automatically refuse to buy what was being advertised.

Thus, if this abomination of a product ever does make it to market, the majority of people taking advantage of it will be:

(a) Large companies that suck at marketing, like your local cable company, which will have a field day forcing you to watch their pathetic homegrown commercials.

(b) Small businesses, buying media from your local Cable company, run by moronic dipshit entrepreneurs who will have an orgasm at the thought of forcing people to watch their advertising, and no comprehension of the potentially adverse side effects.

That said, I would not be at all suprised if Philips never takes this to market, but simply patented it to prevent someone else (Sony perhaps) from doing the same thing. Philips does not have nearly as bad a record as Microsoft, Sony or the Hollywood people when it comes to DRM.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2006-04-19 12:27am

Yeah, there's nothing stopping Phillips from patenting this and then just sitting on it. I can't imagine the uproar if people discovered their TV was locked on a channel while a commercial was on. Christ, the sports fans alone would burn the cable company down.

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2006-04-19 02:41am

Uh-huh...y'know, I've actually been waiting for something like Adblock for TV commercials. I'd pay good money to be able to selectively block out particularly annoying ads - just have the TV automatically go blank while they're airing, y'know?

If something like this does get implemented, then I just may disconnect my TV permanently. All I really need it for is games.

bilateralrope · Post by **bilateralrope** » 2006-04-19 02:58am

Elheru Aran wrote:And if through some satanic feat, it is actually put into use, I assure you, within a week at most there'll be websites detailing how to circumvent this shit.

I dont think they will stop at simply circumventing it.

It order to implemente this, they need to tag the commercials in such a way that the TV knows its a commercial so that it locks channel switching on all commercials, but only on them.

Now this means that the commercials are now tagged so that you can program your DVR to not record them by simply not recoding anything transmitted with this tag.

Then you would likely get the TV stations also adding the commercial tag to parts of the program itself, meaning that there will be a lot of people who complain because they can't change channels for no apperant reason and therefore their TV must be broken.

Or they simply air some commercials without the tag, but then the commercials with the tag on them lose out so the advertisers will stop wanting to use it.

RThurmont · Post by **RThurmont** » 2006-04-19 03:10am

Yeah, there's nothing stopping Phillips from patenting this and then just sitting on it.

*tsk tsk* Phi-lips...one "L". Sorry, just being an annoying spelling Nazi.

Philips is quite possibly the most frequently misspelled company on Earth, next to the QANTAS, the Australian airline (its an abbreviation for Queensland And Northern Territories Air Service). The full name of Philips is actually Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V., and its one of the elite Dutch companies that is allowed to use the Royal designation.

Now this means that the commercials are now tagged so that you can program your DVR to not record them by simply not recoding anything transmitted with this tag.

That's something I hadn't even thought of. At the moment, consumers using DVR "zap" commercials by fast forwarding. This would make "zapping" even more powerful, in that it would allow you to completely obliterate commercials from your recordings with absolute precision.

By the way, one interesting aspect of this technology not even mentioned is that it would not neccessarily be usable just for commercials. I would assume that networks could position the tags at the start or end of entire programs, in essence, forcing you to watch the full length of whatever they happened to be showing at the moment. Heck, a network could theoretically put a tag on that would cause your TV to be stuck to that network for as long as it was turned on. Disturbing, isn't it?

GuppyShark · Post by **GuppyShark** » 2006-04-19 03:45am

Yes, disturbing... until you turn it off and back on again.

Netko · Post by **Netko** » 2006-04-19 06:29am

At which point a lot of TVs autotune back to the last viewed channel... Which means that to get rid of the crap you would need to find some sort of reset button/hole/system.

Meh, I'm in the "Philips just wants to deny someone stupid a way to annoy people" group since I can't envision anyone trying to push this crap except thru some sort of new service with propriatery hardware...

bilateralrope · Post by **bilateralrope** » 2006-04-19 06:43am

RThurmont wrote:By the way, one interesting aspect of this technology not even mentioned is that it would not neccessarily be usable just for commercials. I would assume that networks could position the tags at the start or end of entire programs, in essence, forcing you to watch the full length of whatever they happened to be showing at the moment. Heck, a network could theoretically put a tag on that would cause your TV to be stuck to that network for as long as it was turned on. Disturbing, isn't it?

Only for those with unhacked players

GuppyShark · Post by **GuppyShark** » 2006-04-19 06:49am

bilateralrope wrote:
RThurmont wrote:By the way, one interesting aspect of this technology not even mentioned is that it would not neccessarily be usable just for commercials. I would assume that networks could position the tags at the start or end of entire programs, in essence, forcing you to watch the full length of whatever they happened to be showing at the moment. Heck, a network could theoretically put a tag on that would cause your TV to be stuck to that network for as long as it was turned on. Disturbing, isn't it?
Only for those with unhacked players

Or one made by... wait for it... the COMPETITION, Inc.

Netko · Post by **Netko** » 2006-04-19 07:01am

That being the reson I can only see something like this working with some sort of new service, which provides other incentives to tolerate it. Or it becoming mandated by law, which wouldn't be surprising (broadcast flag(s) anyone?).

WyrdNyrd · Post by **WyrdNyrd** » 2006-04-19 07:06am

GuppyShark wrote:
bilateralrope wrote:
RThurmont wrote: Disturbing, isn't it?
Only for those with unhacked players
Or one made by... wait for it... the COMPETITION, Inc.

Tsk, tsk. Don't you know that hacked players are illegal? Thank the DMCA. Furthermore, "the competition" will soon be obliged to provide the same "feature", thanks to the FCC. This would be almost identical to the proposed (enacted?) "Broadcast Flag" provisions.

Who do you think has the most power in the US "democracy" - the voters, or Hollywood?

WyrdNyrd · Post by **WyrdNyrd** » 2006-04-19 07:07am

Ack, curse my verbosity - mmar beat me to it...

GuppyShark · Post by **GuppyShark** » 2006-04-19 09:15am

No one even tries to sell region-locked DVD players anymore...

CDiehl · Post by **CDiehl** » 2006-04-19 11:42am

I would like to believe that this technology will last only as long as it takes for someone to get arrested for trying to circumvent it, because I want to think that the public will be horrified that someone got arrested for trying not to be forced to watch TV commercials.

What really scares me is the thought of this technology being extended to whatever other means people have to watch TV shows. I can picture devices being developed to get over every attempt by the public to get around or away from this sort of thing. Maybe I'm worrying too much, but if I'm right, I think it'll force us to boycott TV altogether.

Vertigo1 · Post by **Vertigo1** » 2006-04-19 12:04pm

DarkSilver wrote:
Adrian Laguna wrote:Since I found my radio's remote control I just don't see or hear comercials any more. All TV I tape, and thus I can skip the commercials. For the radio, I listen to five different stations, and they never have commercials at the same time. On occasion four will be on commercials, but never all five.

In a sense, you could say I'm freeloading.
That's the kicker, with these digital flags, thier talking about embedding one which will deactivate the fast forward "feature" of your player, thus not letting you skip those commercials on recorded television......

Psst, I think he was talking about a VCR.

No ammount of broadcast flags can stop you from fast-forwarding on a tape.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2006-04-19 02:08pm

Ah, so someone wants to bring DVD's P-UOP' s (prohibited user operations) to the DVR market.

Hopefully Philips will do what some other posters have said and just sit on the tech.
If not, then there's one other company to add to my 'do not purchase from if at all possible' list

RThurmont · Post by **RThurmont** » 2006-04-19 06:58pm

Is it legal to circumvent the P-UO feature in DVDs, out of curiosity, or does that constitute a violation of the DMCA?

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2006-04-19 08:04pm

RThurmont wrote:Is it legal to circumvent the P-UO feature in DVDs, out of curiosity, or does that constitute a violation of the DMCA?

Knowing the DMCA, it's illegal. Of course, knowing the DMCA, it's illegal to just _think_ about circumventing it.