Apple phones to block you taking concert pictures in future!

Biggins

If the non-fans of Apple wanted another reason to avoid their phones - its seems Apple is giving them more reasons!

Apple phones to block you taking concert pictures in future!
(The Times - England)

There was a time when the crowd at a rock concert was marked out by small flashes of fire emanating from cigarette lighters, waved in the air. Now those pockets of light are more likely to emanate from the glowing screens of mobile phones, held aloft, as festival-goers take photos or video of their favourite bands.
But new technology being developed by Apple may mean that this may soon be at an end.

The Californian company has plans to build a system that will sense when a person is trying to film a live event using a mobile phone and automatically switch off their camera.
Introduction of the system would mean ticket-holders at events such as Glastonbury, Wimbledon or next year’s London Olympic Games, could be stopped from filming the occasion on their iPhone.

A patent application filed by Apple, and obtained by The Times, reveals how the software would work. If a person were to hold up their iPhone, the device would trigger the attention of infra-red sensors installed at the venue. These sensors would then instruct the iPhone to disable its camera.

The software is seen as an attempt to protect the interests of event organisers and television broadcasters who have exclusive rights to film an event. These companies often sell their own recordings but are frustrated when mobile phone videos appear online via websites such as YouTube, allowing people to watch the concert free. The concept may also allow Apple to reach more favourable terms with record labels when negotiating deals to sell content though its iTunes online store.

Bambuser, a technology firm based in Sweden that has created an app allowing people filming any event to stream their recording live on the internet, sees it as a potential money-making exercise for Apple. Hans Voors, chairman at Bambuser, said that a better use of the technology would be to create a system through which Apple charged users a small fee to record a live event. “Apple is smart. I assume Apple is not doing this just to protect against people sharing copyrighted material,” he said. “Hopefully, they see there’s an opportunity to make money here.”

Apple’s iPhone accounts for about one in five smartphones sold in Britain, but music fans attending next weekend’s Glastonbury festival said that they would be concerned if it developed the video-blocking technology.

“It’s sad [if] I can’t keep my own memories of the festival,” said Heather Turner, 22, an iPhone owner from London. “It’s rubbish, I will just take a different phone.”

Jack Morgan, 21, from Cardiff, said: “It seems authoritarian that I can’t do what I want with my phone.”
Florence Brockway, 22, who is attending this year’s Glastonbury Festival, said: “That’s a real shame, you won’t be able to share your enjoyment of the festival with friends and family.”

Apple filed its patent application with US authorities 18 months ago, but details have only become available this month.

How it would work: http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/79/tthiphone2169555a.jpg

---

I can see their point - they want to not lose sources of revenue.
That said, its seems to leave a bitter taste in the mouth of possible users!
I know I like to take a picture or two of a show - just as a memory keepsake sometimes.
With Apple phones in the future, I might not be able to do that. Pity.

chin_grin

Genius!

Run_to_da_hills

Won't be long before this would be cracked

Forest Master

Camera-phone photos always look sh*t at gigs anyway. Always a blurry dark distorted mess. I see people in front of me take them, and I think to myself "right, what are you going to do with that piece of sh*t now?" It's hardly capturing the moment or a memento of the gig. You can't make out ANYTHING except the fact there's a stage with coloured lights on it and a few blurry figures.
Imagine looking back 10 years later - ah yes, and this was Santana in the O2! Was it? It could be anything!

Seachmall

Settings -> Flight mode -> On

Sorted.

Biggins

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Won't be long before this would be cracked

Maybe - but what percentage of audience users would actually be able to do that?
A small percentage might but the rest would be stuck.

smash

Seachmall wrote: »

Settings -> Flight mode -> On

Sorted.

yep

bijapos

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Won't be long before this would be cracked

Indeed, there will soon be an app for cracking that app.

mackg

Is this really hurting sales of anything. I wouldn't even watch the phone videos on youtube. Some drunk who can't even hold the camera straight. The sound quality is non existent, thats the reason you watch a video of a band. Is Apple on a mission to make everyone hate them. Surely if the garner too much hatred from the public it will hurt sales?

Forest Master

Seachmall wrote: »

Settings -> Flight mode -> On

Sorted.

Yeah, Apple never thought of that. You're a genius. :rolleyes:

smash

Forest Master wrote: »

Yeah, Apple never thought of that. You're a genius. :rolleyes:

With Flight mode on, IR will not work.

Biggins

steve06 wrote: »

With Flight mode on, IR will not work.

Would they in their wisdom, not find away around that?
Just asking. I wouldn't put it past the buggers.

Auvers

just buy Android, problem solved

Seachmall

Forest Master wrote: »

Yeah, Apple never thought of that. You're a genius. :rolleyes:

Airplane mode disables all wireless receivers due to laws and regulations related to flying. They'll either have to remove airplane mode or this idea is easily bypassed.

nice1franko

You don't buy an iphone- you rent it.

Get an Android phone!

smash

Biggins wrote: »

Would they in their wisdom, not find away around that?
Just asking. I wouldn't put it past the buggers.

I'd be surprised if they did. Apple want to look like they're making an effort but want people to still buy their products.

I suppose that's why you can still jailbrake an iPhone.

Mr Benevolent

Ah Biggins ya big conspiracy theorist.

Biggins

There is two things that stick out for me.

1. That the tech could be further used beyond just concerts and
2. The fact that once you've thought you have bought a product with enabled features, the makers can later turn around and take them off you.

Contentious points for some people.

Bonavox

Android users are trickling in now. Before a flamewar starts, can we avoid the "get an Android!" posts and the subsequent responses?

PogMoThoin

Forest Master wrote: »

Camera-phone photos always look sh*t at gigs anyway

Get a better phone then so, these were taken with my Galaxy S

http://s419.photobucket.com/albums/pp279/PogMoTho1n/Roger%20waters/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfgAZV-xPcA

hardCopy

Seachmall wrote: »

Airplane mode disables all wireless receivers due to laws and regulations related to flying. They'll either have to remove airplane mode or this idea is easily bypassed.

Or turn off the camera when flight mode is active?

Strange move by apple, disabling features to suit big business, just like with tethering

Biggins

Bonavox wrote: »

Android users are trickling in now. Before a flamewar starts, can we avoid the "get an Android!" posts and the subsequent responses?

Aye.

Honesty I'd like the thread to concentrate on how users rights are being possibly later effected after their have bough their product.
It seems a bit much to be told later on then that "sorry - we're taking some of those abilities away from you now."
I can understand why they are doing it - just seems a bit much and not very nice to be honest.

Mr Benevolent

Bonavox wrote: »

Android users are trickling in now. Before a flamewar starts, can we avoid the "get an Android!" posts and the subsequent responses?

Google controls all Android phones already with the killswitch.

TheZohanS

Auvers wrote: »

just buy Android, problem solved

Or jailbreak the iPhone and you still have access to lots and lots of apps.

chin_grin

Just wondering is there a link to the article? I want to gloat to a iPhone-lovin' mate. I did a search and couldn't find anything.


Yes, cos I'm a pr!ck.

cookie1977

No doubt they'll let you buy a pass so you can take pictures at the concert. Crazy altogether. Lets hope it doesn't catch on.

Biggins

chin_grin wrote: »

Just wondering is there a link to the article? I want to gloat to a iPhone-lovin' mate. I did a search and couldn't find anything.


Yes, cos I'm a pr!ck.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/technology/article3063419.ece

Quick capture: http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/6482/capturehni.jpg

Scram

what a stupid idea and another reason not to buy an I-Phone, jesus apple are so full of themselves.:mad:

kirving

Flight mode has nothing to do with it.

Infra-red emmitters, like those in remite.controls emit light that we cannot see, but cameras can. Point your remote control at a camera and press a button. You'll see the IR LED emit a specific sequence of flashes which are read by a sensor on the front if your TV. The TV decodes this sequence of light impulses and changes the channel.

Since cameras can see this light, they can decode it just like your TV. The iPhone would turn off the camera if it sensed the correct light sequence. The emmitter would not have to be powerful, just powerful enough and positioned so that the iPhone would pick it up.

Auvers

TheZohan wrote: »

Or jailbreak the iPhone and you still have access to lots and lots of apps.

I own a jailbroken iPhone4, still want the new Galaxy though

chin_grin

Biggins wrote: »

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/technology/article3063419.ece

Quick capture: http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/6482/capturehni.jpg

It's a subscription? F*ck that, I'll just link him to this thread. ^_^

Sanjuro

Biggins wrote: »

There is two things that stick out for me.

1. That the tech could be further used beyond just concerts and
2. The fact that once you've thought you have bought a product with enabled features, the makers can later turn around and take them off you.

Contentious points for some people.

Agreed. Take a look at the Arab Spring currently ongoing in the Middle East. The same tech could be used to stop people from taking footage of protests and posting it to the net, which is where a great deal of what we know about it has come from. I know it's a more extreme example of this, but step one is benevolent...

smash

Kevin Irving wrote: »

Since cameras can see this light, they can decode it just like your TV. The iPhone would turn off the camera if it sensed the correct light sequence. The emmitter would not have to be powerful, just powerful enough and positioned so that the iPhone would pick it up.

then all you have to do is get a camera app that decodes the IR sequence differently. It's simple.

Biggins

Sanjuro wrote: »

Agreed. Take a look at the Arab Spring currently ongoing in the Middle East. The same tech could be used to stop people from taking footage of protests and posting it to the net, which is where a great deal of what we know about it has come from. I know it's a more extreme example of this, but step one is benevolent...

You just know the Chinese/the North Koreans/Burma government (and others) would copy/steal the tech and do this at the first opportunity!

FungiWalsh

Guys, don't forget that this is just a patent application, which is by no means a confirmation of implementation into the iPhone operating system. Companies like Apple file patent applications constantly, and only a tiny fraction of them ever make it to market. A patent application just exists to protect an idea someone develops. I'd be very, very surprised if this ever made it into any version of iOS. In fact, if anyone wants to bet on it appearing in any version of Apple's mobile operating system within the next, say, two years, just name your amount!

EDIT: Snap!

Seachmall

OSI wrote: »

Do you believe every bit of scare mongering crap you read in the papers Biggins? No doubt you have a subscription to the Daily Mail and take it as Gospel to.

It's completely feasible that they'd implement this and is worth a discussion.

Biggins

OSI wrote: »

...Do you believe every bit of scare mongering crap you read in the papers Biggins? No doubt you have a subscription to the Daily Mail and take it as Gospel to.

While I like the Mail to wipe my arse with, I take the Times to be more honest.
And you could be right in regard to they might not do this BUT given Apples record on restricting users rights, I suspect what way they will go on this.

Your free to disagree - just don't sound so bitchy when doing so.
We're all trying to get along here and have a friendly discussion.

Amalgam

There's a big legal hurdle to disabling a feature on a phone, any feature, remotely, without a very good reason. It's the elephant in the room.

To be fair to Apple, this has been on the slate as a phone 'feature' for a good while, with Nokia mulling it years back, not with venues in mind, but schools, government buildings, hospitals etc..

Various industries are gagging to be able to do this. Employers sometimes insist on employees using non camera phones only, but that is becoming more and more difficult.. with the small issue of having no control over the public visiting your premises.

CRANK EDIT: I'm all for disabling phone cameras in schools. Puts undue pressure on teachers and pupils.

Will I Amnt

What a load of absolute sh1te.
Who in their right mind thinks they would lose a viewer for a televised concert because said viewer seen a 10 minute fuzzy,drowned out,compressed to sh1t video on youtube

craggles

Apple are a horrible company with an absolutely disgusting approach to treatment of their customers.

Biggins

Amalgam wrote: »

There's a big legal hurdle to disabling a feature on a phone, any feature, remotely, without a very good reason. It's the elephant in the room.

To be fair to Apple, this has been on the slate as a phone 'feature' for a good while, with Nokia mulling it years back, not with venues in mind, but schools, government buildings, hospitals etc..

Various industries are gagging to be able to do this. Employers sometimes insist on employees using non camera phones only, but that is becoming more and more difficult.. with the small issue of having no control over the public visiting your premises.

You have good points.
Eventually I think, it will just be a further progression of the ability in some cases to already block users from making actually phone calls (like in some prisons, etc) - might be different tech used but broadly in some cases along the same outline principle of stopping people doing what they want to do with their purchased equipment.

Krusader

OSI wrote: »

Gotta laugh at this. This is a patent for an idea, it is by no means a declaration that it is going to be created.

Do you know how many patents the likes of Apple lodge every yea? Thousands!

Do you know how many actually make it into a product? 1%. If that.

This is a case of some one in the office came up with an idea and they decided to patent it in case any one decided to do it in the future they could charge them for it.

Nail firmly hit on the head, why would apple try and alienate their customers

stovelid

How does this work. Would the phone detect the increased levels of niche subcultural smugness emissions due to the combination of multiple iPhone users and a hip concert and just disable the camera?

matchthis

I'd say this would more than likely play a role against movie piracy. Cameras on phones are getting better and would be easy to record a movie from a cinema on one. The cinema would be able to have a blocker at the screen to prevent recording. Could also work to prevent livqe casting of the wwdc:D

Biggins

Crosáidí wrote: »

...why would apple try and alienate their customers

Hasn't stopped them before when they don't allow apps, SD ports for extra abilities, digital rights managenent (DRM) to block people from utilising their music better, for example.

However, that said, I honeslty DON'T want this just to be about Apple.
My main concern is the use of such tech, to be eventually extended else where and its implications.
Its Apples (but not just them alone!) type of thinking that dictates what are the directions of companies (possible later governments) might be going too.

jester77

Seeing as IR sensors need direct line of sight, all you would need is a case that covers these IR sensor on the phone

squod

.........and not even a feckin' keyboard. Why people buy this shite is beyond reason.

conorhal

The more you tighten your grip, Jobs, the more star systems will through your fingers.......

Biggins

OSI wrote: »

...If you looked at the patent you would see they also talk about the ability of using the camera to receive information for augmented reality type stuff such as museum tour guides and stuff. The blocking of recording concerts and such is just another example of what it could be used for, and again something that has already been considered.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/06/6-2-2011appleinfraredcampatent.jpg

Cheers for that info and link.

STIG83

This is a great idea!! i can't stand people who go to concerts and watch it through their phone or camera!!

enda1

jester77 wrote: »

Seeing as IR sensors need direct line of sight, all you would need is a case that covers these IR sensor on the phone

You could quite conceivably move the IR sensor into the camera module. Or make the CCD in the camera sensitive to the IR range too.