Raul Ruiz writes "MSNBC is reporting that the FCC has ordered the digital broadcast flag to be implemented on all digital television signal receivers by July 1, 2005. The FCC's order may be found here [PDF] and Chairman Powell's statement here [PDF]. The EFF has an archive of information regarding the broadcast flag.
Note: I wish I had time to do more than skim the order, but the following language (page 12) jumped out at me:
Despite the robust security generally associated with encryption technologies, we
conclude that the associated implementation costs and delays make it a less desirable content
protection system for DTV broadcasts than the ATSC flag . . . .
That's right. THe FCC is claiming, with apparently straight face, that itt's too expensive to use encryption, and writing good crypto will take too long. Leave aside the fact that crypto doesn't require a remarkably intrusive government technology mandate. Leave aside the question of how long it will take to develop a technical standard for a broadcast flag and how expensive it will be to build it into every TV and toaster.
Instead, ask yourself this: did it not occur to anyone that equivalently strong crypto is required to make the broadcast flag work. When Device B promises Device A that it'll play by the rules, there's no way that handshake is going to work without strong crypto. The FCC even says, in the order itself, that his promise would be made through a technique "such as by using a cryptographic protocol." (page 40)
You want arbitrary and capricious? There's your arbitrary and capricious."