WASHINGTON -- A key lawmaker has complicated the movie industry's push for a law to restrict consumers' ability to redistribute digital TV content over peer-to-peer networks and the internet at large.
Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), chairman of the House Commerce Committee, has indicated that he opposes inserting a broadcast flag measure in his newly introduced digital TV bill, which would set a 2008 hard deadline for broadcasters to give back their analog spectrum.
Motion Picture Association of America Executive Vice President John Feehery on Wednesday confirmed that Barton told the MPAA he doesn't support broadcast-flag provisions in his bill, but Feehery said the group hasn't determined its next course of action.
"If that's what he thinks, that's what he thinks," said Feehery. "But we're continuing to educate members on the broadcast flag, and we're not sure where it will go."
The MPAA began its legislative push on Capitol Hill shortly after a May 6 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
In that decision, the court reversed a Federal Communications Commission order that required makers of consumer-electronics devices capable of receiving broadcast digital TV signals to recognize a "broadcast flag" -- code that allows content owners to place limits on redistribution of digital content streams. The rule was to apply to devices manufactured on or after July 1, 2005.
The MPAA had been circulating draft language to lawmakers that would have authorized the FCC to ban "the indiscriminate redistribution of digital television content over digital networks." The most expedient home for the language would be within Barton's bill.
House Commerce Committee spokesman Terry Lane noted that, "We have a draft DTV bill, and there's nothing about the broadcast flag in there," but he and Barton's personal spokesman declined to comment specifically on whether Barton opposes the broadcast-flag concept.
The MPAA could always push for stand-alone broadcast-flag legislation or even attach their draft language to another bill out of Barton's hands.
"Obviously, the MPAA isn't going to just go home," said Mike Godwin, legal director of Public Knowledge, which opposes the broadcast-flag concept. "They'll look for other avenues. But Barton really wants an uncomplicated bill. He wants to keep it simple."
Any controversy in Barton's bill related to the broadcast flag could indeed create fights that complicate its passage.
"Setting a hard deadline is a critical priority," said Michael Petricone, vice president of technology policy at the Consumer Electronics Association. "We would oppose anything that would make that more difficult."
Lawmakers are also concerned about the conclusions of an April 2005 report (.pdf) by the Congressional Research Service that seemed to bolster the arguments of broadcast-flag opponents.
"Current technological limitations have the potential to hinder some activities which might normally be considered 'fair use' under existing copyright law," the report stated. "For example, a consumer who wished to record a program to watch at a later time, or at a different location (time-shifting and space-shifting, respectively), might be prevented when otherwise approved technologies do not allow for such activities, or do not integrate well with one another, or with older, 'legacy' devices."
The report said such limitations could preclude "future fair or reasonable uses.... For example, a student would be unable to e-mail herself a copy of a project with digital video content because no current secure system exists for e-mail transmission."
The report, Barton's opposition and other factors may be presenting the MPAA with fewer options by the day.
"There is a lack of enthusiasm on the Hill for something like this," said Fred Von Lohmann, senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "That's why the MPAA tried to push this through the FCC in the first place."
Lohmann, however, said no one should count the MPAA out yet.
"It's not the final chapter," he said. "The Hollywood folks will continue to fight for the flag."
