Should I import a blu ray recorder from the UK or Japan

[HDTV1080P]

Originally Posted by nec1912

Some one was saying the only thing you can record is over the air and you cannot record off cable or satellite do to copy protection .

And those Blu-ray recorders in the UK and Japan have HDMI copy protection in them.

All digital HD cable boxes you rent from the cable companies in the United States are required by law to have one working IEEE-1394 interface. Currently there are consumers making perfect bit for bit recordings of 1080I cable channels like HBO and Showtime movies if they own a discontinued D-VHS machine. All HD D-VHS machines have the I-link (IEEE-1394) interfaces. The D-VHS 1080I tape based system uses the 5C content protection that allows program providers to control and mark which programs on TV can be copied. Almost all programs on cable are marked with no restrictions or marked as copy only once. Some video on demand programs might be marked as copy never.

5C Digital Transmission Content Protection White Paper

In theory if you import a standalone blu-ray recorder into the United States that contains a IEEE-1394 interface then it will record any program off the HD cable box as long as the program is not marked as copy never.
I wish OPPO or some other company would build a Blu-ray standalone recorder for the US market. Right now consumers are only limited to 480i DVD recorders or temp recordings on a HD DVR. The first blu-ray recorders in the United States should at the very minimum have an ATSC and clear QAM tuner (also NTSC for legacy analog cable).

Satellite companies for several years now have not been placing IEEE-1394 interfaces on their boxes since they are not required by law to do so. So recording in HD quality from satellite is not possible with a D-VHS or Blu-ray recorder that uses IEEE-1394.

[Ichimaru]

Well, I am living in Japan now for half a year, and recently bought a BR Rekorder from Sharp. I am really happy with it, quality is really good and it also enables you to record through special encoding to record 8.1 times as long as normally possible, with the integrated 500GB disc, that are already about 300hours in HD. It is also possible to record 2 different channels in HD at the same time, I was really surprised when my gf told me that she did that, since I thought it would only be possible to watch another channel at the same time. I think it's also not very expensive at all, it was only 600$.

But I really can't imagine, that it would be easy to operate it in the USA, since it's totally built for the Japanese antenna systems.

One other aspect you should consider, if you should decide on importing a Japanese recorder, please be aware, that all menues and instructions are only available in Japanese language. Although I am normally good when it comes to this kind of devices, I had much trouble to understand, how I do the simplest things. Luckily, my girlfriend could help me and now I know what to do.

I really don't understand why it takes so long until recoders appear in the USA. I think the technology is alrady good enough and surpasses DVD recorders in every possible way.

[nec1912]

I have a DVR (digital video recorder) in my HD box and cannot record any HD programs do to copy protection .It does not matter what program.

It is cable that all the HD programs are run and own by the cable company ?

Or I'm I doing some thing wrong? Also what is D-VHS machine?

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by nec1912

D-VHS machine?

Digital VHS. Basically high def VHS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-VHS

[nec1912]

What is big thing now more than any thing else is digital video recorder / DVR or people using a computer.

I will say other year or two before blu ray recorder comes out in the US and Canada.

[nec1912]

Anyone up on the new 3D tv stuff and if recorder can record that?

The 3D stuff seems to be the next major thing.

[MaxxFordham]

Originally Posted by HDTV1080P

All HD cable boxes you rent from the cable companies in the United States are required by law to have one working IEEE-1394 interface....

Not true! I would love it if that were true, but I called Comcast and asked them. They don't.

I would be using Comcast if they did have that, because I do have a D-VHS machine (I bought it on ebaY even before I got HD service from a paid provider, thinking this was true.) It would be easier than having to run my HD though the special box that sucks it into the computer, only to then have to wait hours while the computer converts that into a format that works on the BD player!

[molson3530]

Originally Posted by MaxxFordham

Not true! I would love it if that were true, but I called Comcast and asked them. They don't.

It is absolutely true. I looked into this when I worked in the Enforcement Bureau of the FCC while I was in law school. According to the Code of Federal Regulations Title 47 Section 76.640(b)(4)(i):

(4) Cable operators shall:
(i) Effective April 1, 2004, upon request of a customer, replace any leased high definition
set-top box, which does not include a functional IEEE 1394 interface, with one that
includes a functional IEEE 1394 interface or upgrade the customer's set-top box by
download or other means to ensure that the IEEE 1394 interface is functional.

They probably said they didn't have to in order to get you off of the phone.

[RBBrittain]

Originally Posted by molson3530

It is absolutely true. I looked into this when I worked in the Enforcement Bureau of the FCC while I was in law school. According to the Code of Federal Regulations Title 47 Section 76.640(b)(4)(i):



They probably said they didn't have to in order to get you off of the phone.

Absolutely. Also, other FCC regs forced most cable companies to get rid of their older STBs in stock for other reasons, so all their current HD STBs should comply with this reg. More than likely, the cable company didn't have any new boxes in stock, but fibbed to keep you from calling back later when they get them in.

[oppopioneer]

What ever you buy just make sure it's from a licensed authorized dealer/distributor that covers it's factory warranty. Don't buy from outside dealers/3rd parties.

[MaxxFordham]

Originally Posted by molson3530

It is absolutely true. I looked into this when I worked in the Enforcement Bureau of the FCC while I was in law school. According to the Code of Federal Regulations Title 47 Section 76.640(b)(4)(i):



They probably said they didn't have to in order to get you off of the phone.

No, dude, they'd say it to get youoff the phone, not me.

That'd be pretty stupid of them to say that for that reason. Why would they say it just to get someone off from the phone soon? What, lose a potential customer just because of one question? They could have just as easily said YES, they DO have boxes with those jacks in them, and gotten someone off from the phone!


And the same for you, RBBrittain:

Originally Posted by RBBrittain

... More than likely, the cable company didn't have any new boxes in stock, but fibbed to keep you from calling back later when they get them in.

It doesn't make sense that a company having me as a potential customer if they DO have boxes like that wouldn't want me to call back (and probably become one of their customers) if they didn't have the proper models back in stock before but would later. Why would they do that, when instead, they could say something like, "Right now we don't have those, but we will be getting someone back in later, and we expect them by about...." (such-and-such a time), "...so try calling back at that time"?

Try using a different, and actually logical, logic next time, "buds."

Also, if they were supposed to keep having those boxes with the FireWire jack in them, which were what the old boxes had--so that would mean that the old boxes have them and the newer boxes have them--then why would there have been a period in the middle when they didn't have them, but followed by a period when they have them again?

Okay, if it's still so "true," then I'll call them back and ask again. And if they still say no, then I'll recite the law that you told me about and ask them why they're not following it. Then should I call the police on them? What kind of enforcement is usually used to make someone that that law applies to actually follow it?

[molson3530]

Originally Posted by MaxxFordham

No, dude, they'd say it to get youoff the phone, not me.

First of all, I am not "dude" or "bud". I see that you are a new member here. I thought that I would tell you that the tone you are using is generally frowned upon on these boards. I may not have a lot of posts, but I know what is acceptable. I tried to be helpful and I cited the applicable regulation for your situation. You then proceeded to write a long diatribe on how we must be wrong because in your opinion the CSRs answer was illogical. I am still unsure of your intentions because you were given the correct regulation by several different posters. If you want to argue and attempt to belittle people who are trying to help you I suggest you do it somewhere else.

To the OP and others trying to discuss importing a BD recorder, I am not trying to threadcrap but rather I am trying to add correct information that could be useful to other members doing a forum search. Carry on!

[Clark Kent]

None of the foreign BD standalone recorders are compatible with U.S. broadcast standards. Those countries all have different HD distribution specifications for broadcast, and importing one would be useless for an American. The only real solution is to create your own using a PC in the U.S. at the moment. Hollywood studios and content owners do not want Americans having easy access to recording their precious intellectual content. They tolerated it during the prior eras because they lost the famous time-shifting case and analog copies had generational loss.

[MaxxFordham]

Originally Posted by molson3530

I am still unsure of your intentions...

What "intentions" would you be wondering about? I don't even get where you can wonder about some so-called "intentions," as you call them, here. I don't have any special "intentions." I'm just trying to figure something out.

I can call you "dude" and "bud" if I want. There's nothing wrong with that, and just because someone says it doesn't mean they supposedly have what you call, in your opinion, according to you, a supposed "bad tone." I wasn't belittling anybody; just simply going with logic. If you don't like the way someone spells out real logic, then... YOU should go somewhere else. Besides that, you have no authority to be bossing people around.

I believe a law like that which you mentioned could exist. It would be nice if it did. And if it still does, then I was just saying that I'd like to hold Comcast up to it. And if they don't follow it, then why not, and what has to happen to enforce that on them. But what I don't believe is what two of you (not "several") said about the cable TV wanting someone off from the phone so they'd just say that they don't have those boxes. That'd rais their potential to lose customers, and they have no point to try to get someone off from the phone when they could potentially have a new customer from that call!

And I wasn't writing what you call a "diatribe." Whatever I wrote was all the stuff I had to say in order to complete my point. And no, I wasn't belittling you and the other guy. I was simply stating the fact that the kind of logic you and he supposed about not wanting someone to be on the phone with them would be bad for business, and that either IF there's a law like that, then something's wrong with Comcast, or if Comcast is right, then that law isn't still in place. One of the two. So that's why I said I'd call Comcast on the matter. I haven't taken the time to do that yet, but I will soon.