FC: Sen. Hollings wants FCC to implant "broadcast flag" in hardware

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Mon Jul 22 2002 - 22:55:43 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: More on DOJ's TIPS-informant program, from Der Spiegel"

    Politech archive on Sen. Hollings' related efforts:
    http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=hollings
    
    Note the MPAA anticipates new federal laws or regulations:
    >http://www.mpaa.org/Press/Broadcast_Flag_QA.htm
    >"Full implementation is expected to require a legislative and/or 
    >regulatory mandate."
    
    Because who would use it otherwise?
    
    -Declan
    
    ---
    
    
    July 19, 2002
    
    
    The Honorable Michael K. Powell
    Chairman
    Federal Communications Commission
    445 12th Street, S.W.
    Suite 8C453
    Washington, DC  20554
    
    
    
    Dear Chairman Powell:
    
    
             I am writing to urge that you implement a ‘broadcast flag’ 
    solution to protect digital content delivered over the broadcast 
    airwaves.  I believe the Commission has the authority, pursuant to specific 
    statutory provisions in the Communications Act, as well as under its 
    general public interest authority, to implement such a solution for the 
    benefit of the digital television transition and consumers across America.
    
             For the better part of a decade, the U.S. copyright industries, 
    the consumer electronics industry, and the information technology industry 
    have been engaged in negotiations over how best to protect copyrighted 
    content transmitted over a variety of platforms, such as DVD players, 
    analog VCRs, digital broadcast television, and the 
    Internet.  Notwithstanding some limited successes (for example with respect 
    to copy protection for DVD players, conditional access systems for cable 
    and satellite distribution, and analog VCRs) these talks have largely 
    languished as technology has advanced.  And as technology has advanced, 
    copy protection schemes developed voluntarily in the marketplace have not 
    kept pace.  While the advance of technology has undeniably benefitted 
    consumers, it also has facilitated piracy.  The content industries are 
    understandably reluctant to provide their top quality products in digital 
    form in areas (such as over-the-air digital television) where potential 
    piracy is a real threat.
    
             This reluctance has real and adverse consequences for the digital 
    television transition, for consumers, and for the broadcast 
    industry.  Absent robust protection, copyright owners may increasingly 
    restrict their best television programming to cable and satellite networks, 
    which are conditional access systems that can accommodate digital rights 
    management (“DRM”) solutions that protect content.    As you know, Congress 
    and the Commission have mandated that local broadcasters construct digital 
    facilities  at a significant cost  premised on the notion that widespread, 
    high quality digital content will lead consumers to purchase digital 
    television sets.  But broadcast stations that have spent considerable 
    capital to upgrade their facilities are currently denied access to a broad 
    consumer base as consumers are unwilling to pay thousands of dollars for 
    digital television reception equipment, when there is little high quality, 
    digital broadcast content available in the absence of agreement on copy 
    protection technologies.
    
             In light of this growing problem, I am pleased that the leading 
    representatives of the affected industries have come together to solve this 
    problem.  Broad multi-industry consensus has emerged around the 
    appropriateness and feasibility of the ‘broadcast flag’ technology since it 
    was originally proposed by a coalition of the motion picture studios and 
    equipment manufacturers late last year.  This consensus originated in talks 
    organized by the Broadcast Protection Discussion Group (BPDG), which was 
    set up in November 2001 specifically for the purpose of seeking input from 
    all affected companies and interest groups on the technological merits of 
    the “flag” proposal.  The final report submitted by group Co-Chairs from 
    Intel, Mitsubishi, and Fox on June 3, 2002 confirm that the fundamental 
    technological aspects of the ‘broadcast flag’ proposal are now both fully 
    understood and supported by numerous affected industry participants.
    
             These developments represent a considerable achievement by the 
    private sector.  I would particularly like to commend the consumer 
    electronics and information technology industry representatives for 
    negotiating in good faith and agreeing on the need to protect digital 
    broadcast content from redistribution over the Internet.  Moreover, the 
    representatives of the content industries warrant praise for agreeing to a 
    proposed technological solution that allows consumers to make physical 
    copies of digital content for use on compliant devices (consumer 
    electronics devices designed to comply with the ‘broadcast flag’ 
    technology), regardless of where those devices may be.  This give and take 
    by affected industry parties is exactly what I had hoped to achieve through 
    introduction of broad bipartisan legislation earlier this year.  While we 
    do not want to have to legislate in this area, the industries must know 
    that the government stands ready to ratify consensus agreements, and to 
    step in if no agreements can be reached after a reasonable time is given 
    for negotiations to move forward.
    
             Indeed, additional legislation to protect digital content has 
    already been announced in the House, on the heels of the successful 
    ‘roundtables’ conducted by House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman 
    Billy Tauzin.  I have discussed this matter with Chairman Tauzin, and look 
    forward to working with him, and ranking member Dingell on this and other 
    critical issues associated with the digital television 
    transition.  Similarly, our ranking member, Senator McCain has a long 
    standing interest in this area and I expect that we will work together this 
    August toward the development of DTV legislation.
    
             With respect to a ‘broadcast flag,’ however, the FCC may act 
    absent legislation.  Such implementation is clearly authorized by statutory 
    provisions in the Communications Act specifically delegating to the FCC 
    wide authority to facilitate the digital television transition.  For 
    example, 47 U.S.C. § 336(b)(4) authorizes the FCC to “adopt such technical 
    and other requirements as may be necessary or appropriate to assure the 
    quality of the signal used to provide advanced television services,” and 47 
    U.S.C. § 336(b)(5) grants the FCC the authority to prescribe regulations 
    relating to advanced television services “as may be necessary for the 
    protection of the public interest, convenience, and necessity.”  It is 
    beyond dispute that the public interest would be served by regulations 
    protecting digital broadcast content; while at the same time preserving 
    lawful consumer use of that content such as making a physical copy for time 
    and/or device shifting purposes.
    
             Moreover, I must note that intervention is consistent with the 
    FCC’s authority under Title I of the Communications Act, which provide 
    jurisdiction that is “reasonably ancillary” to its specific grants of 
    authority over numerous telecommunications issues.  Specifically, Title I 
    grants the FCC the authority “to perform any and all acts, makes such rules 
    and regulations, and issue such orders, not inconsistent with this Act, as 
    may be necessary in the execution of its functions.”  47 U.S.C. § 154(i).
    
             When the Commission acts to implement a ‘broadcast flag’ solution, 
    it is critical that the views of all relevant interested parties, including 
    consumer groups, be incorporated through the standard notice and comment 
    process at the FCC to protect digital broadcast television from 
    piracy.  Any solution, and the process that led to it, must be credible and 
    transparent. At the same time, however, given the central importance of 
    broadcast content protection in expediting the digital television 
    transition, it is imperative that the FCC quickly arrive at a final 
    resolution and implementation.
    
             Thank you for your quick attention to this important public 
    interest matter.
    
    
                                                  Sincerely,
    
    
    
                                                  Ernest F. Hollings
                                                  Chairman
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jul 23 2002 - 03:17:51 PDT