SageTV's HD Theater gets Blu-ray streaming

by Steven Kim posted Mar 3rd 2009 at 1:08PM

Fans of SageTV will love this one -- out now in the latest beta release of the software is HD Theater streamer playback of ripped Blu-ray discs. There's no support for the interactive features, but based on what we've seen from BD-Live so far, you won't be missing much; what you are able to do is point the HD Theater at the ripped BDMV folder on your SageTV PC and enjoy multiple audio tracks and chapter support, with subtitles promised somewhere down the road. For now, this only works when the HD Theater is used in extender mode, but a future firmware upgrade promises to bring the functionality to streamers used in standalone mode. This certainly gives SageTV something to crow about with respect to, say, a Kaleidescape setup, doesn't it? Beta testers, let us know how this feature works out for you.

Filed under: Blu-ray, Media PCs, Media streamers, Others

Tags: blu-ray, hd200, sage tv, sage tv hd theater, SageTv, SageTvHdTheater, streaming

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Neutral

pluckyhd @ Mar 3rd 2009 1:21PM

Works 100% flawless and they say dts-hd and dd-hd are coming via pcm. This is the icing on the cake for sage.

Neutral

Brent @ Mar 3rd 2009 1:30PM

Works great so far. Amazing to see a small company like SageTV lead in innovation like this all the time. Frequent updates and feature additions for no upgrade cost has been the norm which makes it a great fit for my Home Theater PC.

Neutral

Jon @ Mar 3rd 2009 2:19PM

Damn PCH get your asses moving : )

Neutral

Loban @ Mar 3rd 2009 2:43PM

What are the major differences between this and the PCH devices. I have a PCH and I love it, I was just curious as to what the differences are.

Neutral

Mark @ Mar 3rd 2009 3:32PM

wow, nice!. As soon as DTS-HD, DD-HD are added in, I'm purchasing one!

Neutral

Carlton Bale @ Mar 4th 2009 9:33AM

Sage needs a better interface for browsing movies, such as OML for Windows Media Center. If Sage had that, I'd replace all of my Media Center PCs in a second.

Neutral

kevon27 @ Mar 3rd 2009 4:11PM

Ha, Ha.. Sage is gonna get shot down by the RIAA.
But I like the direction they are going.

Neutral

mlody11 @ Mar 3rd 2009 4:54PM

You mean the MPAA?

I doubt it... the way they do it is by providing a method for streaming non-drm blu-ray discs (such as camcorder blu-ray discs) but not including and DRM circumvention. You need to circumvent the DRM yourself via AnyDVD or similar program.

They did it the same way with DVDs...
Anyway, its just a matter of time until Blu-ray DRM is circumvented.

Neutral

Mark @ Mar 3rd 2009 5:17PM

The RIAA has nothing to do with blu-ray. That would be the MPAA.

Neutral

Sobczek @ Mar 3rd 2009 5:17PM

Would that be the MPAA?

Neutral

squiggleslash @ Mar 3rd 2009 7:03PM

May I be the 17th person to point out you meant MPAA.

Anyway, supposedly the reason we don't have any Blu-ray recorders in the US and precious little that can record from component inputs is because the movie industry has threatened to sue.

So even without AnyDVD being involved, I suspect it's quite probable that the MPAA will be putting pressure on Sage about this one, especially given there are no unencrypted Blu-ray discs (and never will be, it's in the spec) and thus Sage can't claim pointing at a BDMV directory can be done without breaking the law.

Neutral

Rick Winkler @ Mar 3rd 2009 7:42PM

@mlody11

AnyDVD HD can do most BR titles just like it can DVD.

Neutral

mlody11 @ Mar 3rd 2009 7:44PM

@ squiggleslash

Just because there aren't any now unencrypted discs or in the spec (how do the camcorders work?) doesn't mean that making software that can read a BDMV directory is illegal, unless it is patented, copyrighted. Why do it you ask? Well, why not? Why have mkv? Why do companies make proprietary crap? Because it can be done and it serves some kind, any kind of purpose, just because it can be used for illegal stuff doesn't make it illegal.

That being said, I think the argument that threatening to sue is quite plausible, especially for such a small company such as SageTV.

Neutral

mlody11 @ Mar 3rd 2009 7:46PM

@ Rick Winkler

"AnyDVD HD can do most BR titles just like it can DVD"

Yes... so? I believe that is what I said. :p. The same way is referring to what sage is doing.

Neutral

squiggleslash @ Mar 4th 2009 9:51AM

meldy: Read the entire post next time, not just that.

The movie industry is ALREADY pressuring CE makers and threatening to sue over Blu-ray recorders and anything that reads component inputs. There are many legitimate uses for doing either or both, but the industry has made it clear that any CE maker doing this is going to sue.

There are no legal users of BDMV directories. Everyone who has content in that form has ripped it or downloaded a rip over the Internet. The former is a crime punishable by up to four years in prison under the DMCA, because it requires circumventing an access control. If the movie industry is going to make an issue off of recording from component inputs, imagine how clear cut the situation is regarding BDMV directories.

Neutral

mlody11 @ Mar 4th 2009 11:27AM

"Read the entire post next time, not just that"
Just what? What post? Yours? What the hell are you talking about?

"The movie industry is ALREADY pressuring CE makers and threatening to sue over Blu-ray recorders and anything that reads component inputs"
Really? Is hauppauge being sued or threatened? I could see it very hard to sue over something, such as component inputs, that IS perfectly legal. I don't care what the freaking purpose is...

"There are no legal users of BDMV directories. Everyone who has content in that form has ripped it or downloaded a rip over the Internet. The former is a crime punishable by up to four years in prison under the DMCA"
Do you mean uses? Nice assumption... just because you can't think of a use doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

As for the DMCA... http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=105_cong_bills&docid=f:h2281enr.txt.pdf

The only real section to worry about is 12 U.S.C 1201 Section (a),(b)...The Copyright protection and management systems chapter section 1201.
In both sections, it talks about the illegality of "circumvention" of "technology measures." These two phrases are legal definitions and also outline in the statute in 12 U.S.C 1201(a)(3) but we only, for this discussion, care about circumvention...

Circumvention - "to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work,
or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner"

Has Sage done this by reading a container format? Unless the BDA can say that they used this container format specifically for the purpose of scrambling encrypting protected work, then I don't see how Sage has violated the DMCA.

Section (b) talks about importing and manufacturing... meh.

The catch, I think, is if the container is a copyright work, then they can sue under that to stop them. Or, like you said, simply sue and hope it scares them off because there is so much legal wiggle room.

Personally, I think the MPAA is fighting a loosing battle but I think they will continue to fight because if they don't they think they will loose billions. Their logic is better to loose millions now with lawyers in the hopes of keeping their billions secure, even if for a little bit. In the end they will come out bruised and beaten because no matter how much the "Authority of the Law" tries to stop, even illegal, activity, the trend of the world will continue like a freight train and "The Law" will need to adapt by getting the hell out of the way or it will get run over.

Neutral

mlody11 @ Mar 4th 2009 11:35AM

Correction to my comment (I wish this comment system had edits...): its 17 U.S.C XXXX... I was thinking of the chapter and not the title. sorry.

Neutral

squiggleslash @ Mar 4th 2009 12:38PM

mlody - again, you don't seem to have bothered reading my comment. You've read parts of my comment, decided I've said that reading BDMV directories is illegal, and responded accordingly. You've not understood the comments I've made about the movie industry threatening legal action, so instead of acknowledging that and recognizing that unless you understand a comment you have no way to respond to it, you've decided to respond as if I wrote something else.

Let me repeat what I said in simple words:

1. There are no Blu-ray recorders on sale in the US, despite there being obvious demand.
2. The reason for this is that the movie industry has threatened legal action. The consumer electronics industry does not want to be sued.
3. There is nothing illegal about most uses of a Blu-ray recorder. Nonetheless, the consumer electronics industry sincerely believes Hollywood can do damage to them with a lawsuit over it.
4. In order for a user to be able to read a BDMV directory, that user has to have broken the law. This is not open for debate. You cannot rip a Blu-ray disc without circumventing AACS, which is an access control mechanism.
5. Hollywood therefore has a much stronger case against any company that would make it easier to read movies from a BDMV directory than it does against Blu-ray recorders.

This is not up for debate. These are all true statements. The only speculation involved is that it's likely that Hollywood will put pressure on SageTV.

It sucks the CE industry are scared of releasing equipment to do things that are perfectly legal. It's kinda obvious they'd be under pressure for releasing equipment that makes it easier for users to do things that are always illegal.

Neutral

mlody11 @ Mar 4th 2009 1:19PM

This is a moot now, especially since you elaborated on your point. In my defense...

"Anyway, supposedly the reason we don't have any Blu-ray recorders in the US and precious little that can record from component inputs is because the movie industry has threatened to sue."

This sentence says, the reason that, perhaps, we don't have blu-ray recorders is that the MPAA might threaten to or is threatening to sue the CEs for it, and this also applies to anything that can record from component. (inferring from the sentence... recording from component (analog hole) is a thing that the MPAA hates and might threaten to sue... otherwise what good are blu-ray recorders?)

Your third point, "There is nothing illegal about most uses of a Blu-ray recorder. Nonetheless, the consumer electronics industry sincerely believes Hollywood can do damage to them with a lawsuit over it," while interesting, is distinguished easily and therefore probably an incorrect inference from your own sentence because Blu-ray recorders would NEED to be licensed. How is this related to stuff that DOES NOT need to be?

So either the sentence is drawing a completely wrong distinction between Sage and Blu-ray recorders or its talking about component recording, which has nothing to do with Sage and Blu-ray.

"So even without AnyDVD being involved, I suspect it's quite probable that the MPAA will be putting pressure on Sage about this one, especially given there are no unencrypted Blu-ray discs (and never will be, it's in the spec) and thus Sage can't claim pointing at a BDMV directory can be done without breaking the law."

This sentence says, even if anyDVD is not there, the MPAA will got after Sage.
My answer: WHY? What did they do, especially when your first sentence is either easily distinguished or draws an incorrect analogy?

It goes on saying that this point is also support because there are no unencrypted blu-ray discs and there never will be and Sage can't say it is used for that.
My Answer (as before):This does nothing to support the point. (look above why)

It goes on to support that very same contention by assuming that a blu-ray structure can't be read unencrypted without breaking the law.
My Answer (as before):Because you assume that unencrypted structures don't exist, it doesn't mean they don't exist outside the BDA.

"In order for a user to be able to read a BDMV directory, that user has to have broken the law. This is not open for debate. You cannot rip a Blu-ray disc without circumventing AACS, which is an access control mechanism"
1. It is open for debate and 2. Creating a software for reading unencrypted data for a BDMV does not violate the DMCA. (Read above why... Its only the decrypting that is illegal, not reading of the unencrypted data). In other words, WITHOUT THE DECRYPTION OF DATA FROM ANOTHER SOURCE, SAGE CANNOT READ THE FOLDER STRUCTURE, hence they are not violating the DMCA.

"Hollywood therefore has a much stronger case against any company that would make it easier to read movies from a BDMV directory than it does against Blu-ray recorders."

No idea where the heck you got that out of your first post but I'll entertain it. MPAA's power against the BDA comes from their influence and fear, nothing more. The MPAA is worried about using the analog hole to record blu-rays and therefore would argue that the CEs are using that hole to circumvent the technology. This is the legal wiggle room but its poor at best. They haven't gone after the HD-PVR which is a COMPUTER and ANALOG HOLE, the worst of both worlds for the MPAA. So why after the recorders? On top of this, this has nothing to do with Sage because sage is not providing a way around the encryption, only a way to read stuff that is unencrypted.

Neutral

Rick Winkler @ Mar 3rd 2009 4:36PM

W00T!!! We've been trying to get them to do this for some time now in their forums. It's rare to see a company actually listen to their customers for a change. Time to upgrade to the beta firmware!

Neutral

MI @ Mar 4th 2009 1:25AM

Just curious, how much space does teh average 2 hour movie use once 'ripped' from BD?

Neutral

Bob @ Mar 4th 2009 3:12AM

30 GB give or take

Neutral

cpompee @ Mar 4th 2009 8:52AM

I have been using this feature a lot and it has worked perfectly for me. I have watched Pirates of the Caribbean 3, The Dark Knight and Planet Earth BD without issues. The other advantage to this feature is that you can now purchase a BD drive for your SageTV server and use the extender to watxh Blu-ray. The price of admission for that is ~$99 vs $200+ for a standalone BD player that you can not share across your house to any number of TV's.

Neutral

pluckyhd @ Mar 4th 2009 9:10AM

That is not true price of admission as you still have to have a $200 hd200 in each room.

Neutral

cpompee @ Mar 4th 2009 9:41AM

Good point. Well, I guess I just assumed you'd have the HD200's anyway. But from my perspective I see the primary function first as an Media extender, then Blu-ray streaming is just an added bonus. But, be that as it may, you do have to include the price.

Neutral

3dpenguin @ Mar 4th 2009 10:01AM

Here is what I'm surprised about, BDA hasn't stepped in and cried about it. The DRMs and encodings on Blu-ray discs had several functions BDA preferred from both ends of the process. Studios still feel it stops piracy (it doesn't) and the Consumer Electronics companies like the fact that it made it a pain to do what this companies device does, forcing you to buy multiple players for the multiple rooms in the house just to watch a movie, since this device is one step away from making back up copies of movies and if it starts cutting into the CE end of BDA there will be hell to pay because that end is still fighting to make a profit off the technology.

Neutral

HelenWeathers @ Mar 4th 2009 10:09AM

I have three of the HD-200s and this feature is a Godsend. I put my BD movie in my shared server BD player drive with ADVDHD loaded and I can watch the movie anywhere I have an HD-200.

As far as the MPAA/BDA is concerned, they promised us managed copy back in 2006. If I do copy a movie to my hard drive, in my mind I've just implemented managed copy ahead of the curve. I don't burn copies to give to friends and I keep my Blu-ray discs as backups in case of disk failure. I don't use this feature for anything except making my viewing experience easier and more 21st century.

Neutral

aflat @ Mar 4th 2009 10:47AM

@Carlton Bale you should look at iMoveis for Sage, http://forums.sagetv.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37672

Sage is mush more open to customization then MCA could ever dream of being. Considering the ratio of MCE to Sage users, it is astounding how much more people have done with Sage compared to MCE, nevermind the Sage devs themselves.

Neutral

Toony @ Mar 5th 2009 8:21AM

I was amazed how easy this was, go the new update installed and watched a Bluray right from my server!
All I can say is HD200... Where have you been all my life?

Neutral

Toony @ Mar 5th 2009 8:56AM

Sage is doing nothing wrong IMO, they are doing nothing wrong by allowing the ability to play an m2ts file in a folder called BDMV. They don't provide any way to circumvent the encryption, they do not encourage it, hell there aren't even instructions how to do it on their site.

I think that the Bluray owners are more at fault than anyone, and I believe they do not try to stop it, in-fact I think they encourage it without saying it.

They own the technology,
they get royalties for every movie made in Bluray format
They sell & license computer readers and writers
They sell & license the blank media
I would not be at all surprised that the profits to be made are much higher from blank media than movies sold.

We all know that if they truly did not want anyone to copy their movies they would put it on a format that was either to cost prohibitive for the public to use on their own or they would use a format that they did not sell the readers, writers and blank media for.

The vinyl record was the best form of anti-piracy media, it all took a down hill when tape was invented.

Besides the millennium copyright act is nothing more than Fascist legislation. If you buy something you can do what ever the hell you want to do with it as long as you don't make any money from it or give it to others to keep or to make their own copies.

Neutral

Tony @ Mar 8th 2009 12:33PM

Anybody know how well does this stream 1080p blu ray at 100Mbs? I am suprised it doesnt require gigabit to run consistantly smoothly. anybody ACTUALLY tried this yet?

Thanks.

Mythic reassures customers of stability in face of firings Dante's Inferno concept was greenlit immediately Japanese Final Fantasy XIII includes 'secret in-game item' for FFXIV	Bing rolls out new features, partnership with Wolfram Alpha Free boobs: It's too good to be true Yast offers ridiculously easy time tracking on the web
Apple updates Safari to 4.0.4 New iPod touch rumors go against the grain of "holiday lineup is set" iPhone cellular data not working? Try resetting your network settings	Waste Management: Waste little, profit much Chasing Value: Ten stocks for 2010 -- Part 1 Samuel Heyman was 80's corporate raider
X3F TV -- XBLA in Brief: Encleverment Experiment, NBA Unrivaled, 0D Beat Drop How to unlock a one billion point Achievement Real-life Halo spike grenade not for the timid	Funny Car Commercial of the Day: Politically Correct Edition REPORT: BMW plans to offer four-cylinder diesels in the U.S. VIDEO: Volvo goes after tween vampire demographic with New Moon promotion
Review: Dragon Age: Origins Star Trek Online system requirements unveiled Southpeak Interactive records small profit in latest quarter	At Least Two Redskins Fined for Melee Coach Killers, Week 9: Packers ST Tony Gonzalez and Wife Pose Nude for PETA Ad Campaign