Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
As someone whose patent apps have been mentioned in New Scientist (and later mocked in Gizmodo), I feel qualified to comment:

This is a stupid idea. However, if the guy(s) who filed it got $$ from Philips, good for them. As long as it is never put into a product.
 
Philips suggests adding flags to commercial breaks to stop a viewer from changing channels until the adverts are over. The flags could also be recognised by digital video recorders, which would then disable the fast forward control while the ads are playing.

Why would a consumer want this? I find myself flipping between channels often during commercial breaks to see what else is on. For example, say I'm watching the local news and they go to a commercial break, I may want to change to a national/global news channel to see what is going on elsewhere until the commercials are over.
 
There are all kinds of motives for filing something like this. A patent like this that the company refuses to license could keep this tactic away from standards committees, for one.
 
yg17 said:
A consumer wouldn't want it. But I guarantee you the advertisers on the channels want it.
I doubt it - who wants their commercial to be the one burned into a furious consumer's mind when it can't be turned off? It's one thing to be remembered, another to be remembered with anger.

Still, my guess is that just was just Philips increasing their Intellectual Property portfolio with no real desire to implement the idea.
 
Commercials are the thin edge of the wedge. Imagine a show that wouldn't let you turn it off. What if watching friends kept the TV turned on so you would have to watch Joey.

As for who would want a TV that did that, who would want a video player that wouldn't let you watch movies from other countries?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.