Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Philips Patents Technology to Force Ad Viewing

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Tue Apr 18, 2006 07:28 PM
from the pure-evil dept.
Patents Hardware
An anonymous reader writes "According to New Scientist, Philips has filed a patent for technology to force viewers to watch the ads in a program. Basically they plan to add extra flags to the Multimedia Home Platform that would stop controls from working until the ads are finished." From the article: "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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Philips Patents Technology to Force Ad Viewing 25 Comments More | Login /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login
Keybindings Beta
Q W E
A S D
Loading ... Please wait.

  • Also in the works... (Score:5, Funny)

    by conner_bw (120497) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:30PM (#15153501) Homepage
    ...Is a patent for "paying us because we say so" and another for "a device that cuts out your eyelids" said one Phillips executive as he vanished in a cloud of his own vomit.

  • Well... (Score:5, Funny)

    by StevenHenderson (806391) <stevehendersonNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:30PM (#15153505)
    Philips' patent acknowledges that this may be 'greatly resented by viewers'

    Hard to resent something you will never buy.

    • Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Cheapy (809643) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:36PM (#15153558)
      Oh sure, you won't resent it at all since you'll never buy it.

      But what about the masses?
      [ Parent ]

  • Gotta get me one of those (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DrSkwid (118965) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:30PM (#15153507) Homepage Journal
    A TV that won't let me turn it off when it catches fire sounds great !

  • next up? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:31PM (#15153515)
    a tv that realizes you've gotten up to get a sandwich and replays the commercials when you return.

    MY GOD, THIS IS PROGRESS?!!?

    • yes, amazing how far we've come... (Score:5, Informative)

      by MrFebtober (922100) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:47PM (#15153625)
      ...Anybody remember those Magnavox TVs that actually detected when a commercial was playing and attenuated the volume to make them less annoying? I believe it detected the audio compression technique that commercials use to seem louder than the actual program or something like that. Now that was technology for the consumer.
      [ Parent ]

  • make money fast (Score:5, Insightful)

    by v1 (525388) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:32PM (#15153518) Homepage Journal
    Just start a lottery, where the winner gets to beat the piss out of the guy who thought of "forced advertisement".

    A sure winner.

  • clockwork tv chair (Score:5, Funny)

    by (chubbstar) (963218) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:32PM (#15153519) Homepage
    the next step is to simply have metallic arms come out of your chair, pin your arms down, peel your eyeballs open, and moisturize those pupils for 3 minutes.

  • Well look on the bright side... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by roadrash608 (542600) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:32PM (#15153520)
    ...if they patent this, then nobody *else* will do it, and than we can all just go and not buy Philips TVs.

  • Nice job! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by shut_up_man (450725) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:32PM (#15153525) Homepage
    My desire to buy a Philips product ever again in my lifetime just plummetted to zero. Nice work, marketing department!

  • offensive (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Yahweh Doesn't Exist (906833) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:33PM (#15153534)
    I hate the forced adverts on DVD. what pisses me off even more is when they aren't even advertising products, they're just forcing me to watch their "copying DVDs is piracy and is the same as mugguing someone so don't do it" bullshit. on a DVD I've just fucking bought anyway.

    stuff like this, like computer game protection, just makes it easier as well as cheaper to get things illegally.

    • Re:offensive (Score:5, Funny)

      by cgenman (325138) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:40PM (#15153579) Homepage
      You know, if you just pirate the movie you can skip the adverts.

      Hmm... There should be some lesson in there about giving consumers more for their money, but as far as I can tell that just means more adverts.

      [ Parent ]

    • Re:offensive (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Yaztromo (655250) <yaztromo.jsyncmanager@org> on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:48PM (#15153634) Homepage Journal
      what pisses me off even more is when they aren't even advertising products, they're just forcing me to watch their "copying DVDs is piracy and is the same as mugguing someone so don't do it" bullshit.

      My nieces, who are 4 years old, have a number of childrens DVDs they like to watch (Disney movies and such). These sorts of discs are the absolute WORST for forced advertisements. One of the discs they like to watch (and I forget which one it is) has a 10 MINUTE advertisement for "Madagascar" which can't be skipped.

      And do you know what the galling part about this is? They own a copy of Madagascar!. And yet, every time they want to watch this other movie, I have to stand there with my thumb on the fast forward button to get through the advertisement for a movie they already own (you can't skip the track, but at least fast forward works to get through it quicker).

      Thank goodness my nieces are generally very well behaved and patient people, and don't seem to mind (or question) the fact that I have to fast forward through these things for them. But still, if you think the DVDs you watch are bad, try pretty much any kids movie. Grrr.

      Yaz.

      [ Parent ]

  • Wel... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kryten_nl (863119) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:37PM (#15153562)
    that's it I'm going back to books.

  • Poor choice of words (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Braedley (887013) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:42PM (#15153596)
    "Philips' patent acknowledges that this may be 'greatly resented by viewers'" I don't think resented is a strong enough word. Maybe loathed, but even that, I don't think, is strong enough.

  • Best Idea Ever! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by byron036 (178130) <<rgant> <at> <alum.wpi.edu>> on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:47PM (#15153626)

    And I am not being facetious. I can't wait for them to start adding flags identifying commercials to TV signals. One day later I bet there is a plugging to MythTV that perfectly edits your recordings to be commercial free.

    What with Digital TV lock-ins & broadcast flags I have no intention of ever buying mass market cable equipment again anyway. In the future all of my TV watching will be downloads anyway. This will just make it easier to get commercial free programming.

    I hope people buy these TVs like hot cakes, cause I won't.

  • No honey... (Score:5, Funny)

    by jfclavette (961511) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:50PM (#15153638)
    I'm not watching porn ! *Clicks button desperately*

  • Sid Meier and my money ... (Score:5, Funny)

    by joe_n_bloe (244407) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:51PM (#15153649) Homepage
    Pretty soon it will be cheaper and less annoying to go see movies in the theater.

    I guess I'll have plenty of former TV time to perfect my Civilization IV skills. Or I could write another book.

    But Civ IV first.

  • Philips fails to comprehend the meaning of 'own' (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zzatz (965857) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:54PM (#15153666)
    When I buy something, I buy it for one very simple purpose: to gain exclusive control over it.

    If Philips wants to keep control over a TV or other device, that's fine. Give it to me, loan it to me, and I can accept that the owner keeps control over it - and I'm not the owner. But we have a technical term for selling property without turning over control, and that term is 'Fraud'.

    When I sold my previous home, I surrendered control over it to the new owner. I no longer control how that house is used, who may come and go, and which TV shows may be watched in the living room.

    It looks like Philips wants to pretend to sell me a device, while keeping control over it. That's not a sale, and presenting it as one is a clear case of fraud.

    • Another patent will prevent this (Score:5, Funny)

      by sgant (178166) <ksgant@NoSPAM.gmail.com> on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:51PM (#15153648) Homepage Journal
      I don't think you get it. You're FORCED to watch the advertisements.

      Part of this system will be eye-instruments similar to the ones used in A Clockwork Orange that keep the lids of your eyes fully open and staring directly into the screen. There will be no way of skipping the ads nor averting your eyes away from the ads.

      Of course, for a small fee you can avoid all of this.
      [ Parent ]

    • Re:Fine by me. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by antarctican (301636) on Tuesday April 18 2006, @07:54PM (#15153675) Homepage
      When ads are on I go read articles on /.

      I used to hit mute and do the same (or read email) until I got my MythTV box. I couldn't live without it - watching ads and tv in real time, how archaic.

      Actually, this article gives me a better idea, which as probably been thought of before, but it's new for me! Let's start thinking up technologies (like not being able to skip commercials) which we reeeeeally would hate to see come to market. Then let's patent it, and not license the patents. If these media companies can use the law to limit fair use, then I think we should use the law to limit their anti-consumer techologies. We could then make money on the side when they try to implement these techologies by suing them for infringment.
      [ Parent ]
Check for more

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 SourceForge, Inc.