Ceton issue recording ESPN College Gameplan

Ask fellow members about Ceton's infiniTV tuners here.
Forum rules
Ceton no longer participate in this forum. Official support may still be handled via the Ceton Ticket system.
erkotz

Posts: 1378
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#21

Post by erkotz » Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:26 pm

Double-post
Last edited by erkotz on Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:34 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Quality Assurance Manager, Ceton Corporation

erkotz

Posts: 1378
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#22

Post by erkotz » Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:33 pm

Sorry for the delay - I've been traveling and it kind of fell off my plate.
Is there anyone else that has this package, and can they confirm that it is (or is not) copy never for them - I'd like to find out if this only affects one area. Also I still need your address in the ticket.
Quality Assurance Manager, Ceton Corporation

erkotz

Posts: 1378
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#23

Post by erkotz » Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:03 pm

OK, so I was able to sync up with TWC. The short version is they are intentionally marking this Copy Never, as they consider it a PPV package (outlined at http://www.timewarnercable.com/east/lea ... eplan.html)
Reading the FCC's Plug and Play order, it does allow PPV content to be marked Copy Never:
(1) Unencrypted broadcast television – no copy restrictions may be imposed;
(2) Pay television, non-premium subscription television, and free conditional access
delivery transmissions – one generation of copies is the most stringent restriction
that may be imposed; and
(3) VOD, PPV, or Subscription-on-Demand transmissions – no copies is the most
stringent restriction that may be imposed, however, even when no copies are
allowed, such content may be paused up to 90 minutes from its initial
transmission.


The same document defines PPV as:
(n) Pay-Per-View shall mean a delivery of a single Program or a
specified group of Programs, as to which each such single Program is
generally uninterrupted by Commercial Advertising Messages and for
which recipients are charged a separate fee for each Program or specified
group of Programs. The term Pay-Per-View shall also include delivery of
a single Program as described above for which multiple start times are
made available at time intervals which are less than the running time of
such Program as a whole. If a given delivery qualifies both as Pay-Per-
View and a Pay Television Transmission, then, for purposes of this Rule,
such delivery shall be deemed Pay- Per-View rather than a Pay
Television Transmission.

The same document defines Pay TV as:
(o) Pay Television Transmission shall mean a transmission of a
service or schedule of Programs, as to which each individual Program is
generally uninterrupted by Commercial Advertising Messages and for
which service or schedule of Programs subscribing viewers are charged a
periodic subscription fee, such as on a monthly basis, for the reception of
such programming delivered by such service whether separately or
together with other services or programming, during the specified
viewing period covered by such fee. If a given delivery qualifies both as
a Pay Television Transmission and Pay-Per-View, Video-on-Demand, or
Subscription-on-Demand then, for purposes of this Rule, such delivery
shall be deemed Pay-Per-View, Video-on-Demand or Subscription-on-
Demand rather than a Pay Television Transmission.
Unfortunately, this would seem to (in my non-legal opinion) make TWC's interpretation of the program as PPV permissible. The one interesting question I have is both definitions require the programs to air "generally uninterrupted by Commercial Advertising Messages" - are the games (and other programs) themselves generally free of commercials (not the channel as a whole, just within each actual program) or do they generally have ads? That's the only way I can think of to argue that they aren't actually PPV or Pay TV.

I am pursuing a discussion with TWC about re-classifying this program, however they indicate their Cable Card-enabled STBs are also unable to record this. Do we have anyone that has experienced otherwise?
Quality Assurance Manager, Ceton Corporation

gpatlanta

Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:00 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#24

Post by gpatlanta » Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:42 am

They do not have ads, but they are not being truthful about their own cablecard dvrs ability to record. I have not tested this year since I dropped their dvr last year, but I had to keep their DVR (which was a ocur version) all last season since I was able to record with it and i had several instances where I needed to. I guarantee you if they dropped DVR recording on their own boxes they would have an uprising on their hands with subscribers of the package.
Last edited by gpatlanta on Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
Greg

gpatlanta

Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:00 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#25

Post by gpatlanta » Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:44 am

Added my info to the ticket too. Sorry for delay on that.
Greg

gpatlanta

Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:00 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#26

Post by gpatlanta » Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:53 am

On a related note, in my opinion marking this as copy never is just silly. I am paying over $125 per season to watch these games. They are broadcast in other markets and the reason i get the package is to watch my college and my wife's college teams play when they are not televised in our region. This isn't the latest Harry Potter...it is football games that anyone else in the country can dvr at will if it is playing in their market. Just a silly thing to do to your subscribers if you ask me. Couple that with the ability to record with their DVRs and it seems like they aren't playing fair with the competition, thus making the Ceton card not as capable as TWCs DVR for this.
Greg

erkotz

Posts: 1378
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#27

Post by erkotz » Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:22 pm

gpatlanta wrote:On a related note, in my opinion marking this as copy never is just silly. I am paying over $125 per season to watch these games. They are broadcast in other markets and the reason i get the package is to watch my college and my wife's college teams play when they are not televised in our region. This isn't the latest Harry Potter...it is football games that anyone else in the country can dvr at will if it is playing in their market. Just a silly thing to do to your subscribers if you ask me. Couple that with the ability to record with their DVRs and it seems like they aren't playing fair with the competition, thus making the Ceton card not as capable as TWCs DVR for this.
I agree it's silly - unfortunately, I don't get to make the rules.
Can you confirm that the TWC DVR that was capable of recording this had a CableCARD - I believe separable security units will fail to record it, but units that do not use a CableCARD will succeed (at least, based on what TWC is telling me)
Quality Assurance Manager, Ceton Corporation

gpatlanta

Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:00 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#28

Post by gpatlanta » Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:35 am

It was a cablecard DVR previously. If you think it would help, i may be able to try to get a DVR for a month and try again to confirm this is still the case.
Greg

erkotz

Posts: 1378
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#29

Post by erkotz » Sat Oct 29, 2011 4:04 pm

gpatlanta wrote:It was a cablecard DVR previously. If you think it would help, i may be able to try to get a DVR for a month and try again to confirm this is still the case.
TWC has stated that their CableCARD DVRs are subject to the same limitations. If that's not the case, it may help our argument, so I would say yes, if you're willing, please get a TWC DVR and test - it must be one with "separable security" (CableCARD) and not an old unit.
Quality Assurance Manager, Ceton Corporation

gpatlanta

Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:00 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#30

Post by gpatlanta » Sat Oct 29, 2011 5:55 pm

I'll get one, although it will likely be another week before i can test. On principle, even if i did have a non cablecard DVR, while should a DVR without cablecard treat these recordings any differently than with cablecard? This also seems like an invalid argument. Why punish people with cablecard devices?
Greg

gpatlanta

Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:00 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#31

Post by gpatlanta » Sat Oct 29, 2011 5:57 pm

To be sure, does separable security mean anything different from cablecard? The tech for my last DVR told me it was a cablecard when he replaced my original unit that was broken. Plus it had a different OCUR screen that pipped up and took about 5-10 full minutes to boot up.
Greg

erkotz

Posts: 1378
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#32

Post by erkotz » Sat Oct 29, 2011 6:15 pm

gpatlanta wrote:To be sure, does separable security mean anything different from cablecard? The tech for my last DVR told me it was a cablecard when he replaced my original unit that was broken. Plus it had a different OCUR screen that pipped up and took about 5-10 full minutes to boot up.
Separable security means that it has a CableCARD in the back (even if the MSO provides both to you as the same unit). On the older SA boxes, a "C" suffix to the model number denoted this (eg 8300HD did not have a CableCARD, but 8300HDC did). All the new boxes have CableCARD
Quality Assurance Manager, Ceton Corporation

Post Reply