Harry Potter, Macrovision and Economics

markthebrewer writes "Apparantly Warner Home Video have released Harry Potter and the Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone without any of the usual Macrovision copy-protection systems. Looks like its just a trial, but someone's done the maths and decided it may be cheaper not to copy-protect videos after all. Find the full article in the New Scientist." There is certainly something desperate about macrovisions response to this development. Does anyone see macrovision as a real barrier to copying anymore? What a bunch of snake oil salesmen these people are. In related news, I'm marketing my own personal copy protection device.

Comments

Reasons for not cp'ing

[NickRob]

The reason is simple. The first wave of Harry Potter video buyers are going to be parents driven crazy by their children to get the thing. Middle America usually just goes to Wal-Mart or some store and picks it up. For $20 they get the best babysitter in the world. It's cheaper to make non-cp videos so that makes profit margins go even higher up for the video.

No parents is going to let their kid keep screaming while they go call people they know and see if they can't make a copy for it. They'll go to the store and get it and quiet the kid.

Re:Reasons for not cp'ing

[denisbergeron]

An other reason for not cp'ing, it in the article :
Analysts suspect that Warner left the release unprotected, to investigate whether this would have a significant impact on sales.

Go ahead everybody, buy a copy of Harry Potter, and if they find that the "unprotected" video have more sales than expected, this will be the end of protected DVD :-)

Good.

[TheSHAD0W]

Adding Macrovision to video doesn't prevent the pirates from duplicating videos, so the biggest effect of Macrovision is to reduce the quality of the video. I applaud Time Warner for having some sense. (Now if they'd only let people log onto AOL without using their stupid software...)

Re:Violation of DVD Consortium Licensing ?

[Anonymous Coward]

They publish the content, they get to decide the level of copy protection. They could make a DVD that only works on special DVD players that require a retina scan, or they can unencrypt everything and try to sell as much as possible.

At a crossroads...

[Hangtime]

We are now getting down to the nuts and bolts i.e. cost-benefit analysis of copy protection. There will always be an element that will not pay for a product and the large studios know that. However, where 10 years ago people would hook up two VCRs and record the movie they rented, your now casual copier goes out to Kaaza before a movie is even released in theaters and downloads a copy. With the ease of use, proliferation of broadband, and movement of copying forces to another medium no wonder Warner decided to put up a test balloon and ship a product without Macrovision. Besides that five cents maybe spent better elsewhere especially if that five cents doesn't buy you anymore protection against copying then you already have. Be afraid Macrovision...its not the fact that you don't do your job because you do for the most part; its the fact that you have become obsolete in a day of P2P and broadband.

HT

DVD value CD

[zzubzzub]

I think the MPAA is (slightly) smarter than the RIAA as the retail/cost ratio of DVDs is not as insane as CDs. Many DVDs can be found for under $10. For most folks, it's just easier to buy a DVD than to deal with copying it.

-- Buzz

Brilliant move

[joel8x]

I really don't believe that Macrovision is necessary, and this Harry Potter example is a perfect one. If your a fan of the movie, you want to own the original. That pretty much sums up the whole Video and Music pirating industry. I guarantee there are thousands of Slashdotters out there that own the bootlegged DVD screener rip of Lord of the Rings, and I bet that almost everyone of you will buy at least one if not both of the DVDs when they become available later this year - just to have it. You like to display it in its packaging on a nice shelf next to your home theatre system, you enjoy the special features that one time you look at them (except for the Kevin Smith movies - the extra stuff on those are golden). Its just a strange little need to have the original - you feel like your contributing to something you enjoy. I'll download any movie I'm a fan of, but rest assured that as soon as its available on DVD, I'll pick it up.

Theares, Home and Otherwise

[xSterbenx]

(I say this in terms of DVD not VHS)

When I want to see a movie, I want to see the whole effect: the sound, the quality, everything. I have never watched a pirated DVD movie before, so I will be the first to admit that I don't know how good of a quality the rip may be. Perhaps very good, I just don't know.

In terms of actually _watching_ the movie it doesn't matter. Anyone can hook up on the web and grab pretty much whatever movie they want to watch. From what I've seen, movies found online are substandard quality. Yes, some are top-notch; however, then you must watch them on you computer system (which for some people a 21 inch monitor suffices).

Personally, I would prefer to watch movies with my wife in my living room on my TV with surround sound and DVD component quality. Perhaps this is old fashioned; yet I believe the atmosphere of a movie is just as important as the movie itself. I know quite a few people who had rips of AToC who refused to watch them until they had seen it in the theatres for the _full_ effect. Those same people will buy the DVD when it comes out regardless of their opinions of the movies itself (after all its Star Wars, though this has been debated already a million times already). This isn't always the case, obviously. However, I think the majority of people (ie computer-illterate) would much rather prefer to shell out a few bucks for the actual DVD than watch some ripped version on a computer screen (or burned to a DVD, which again I have not yet seen and maybe it IS as good as the original). I myself have taken to buying pre-viewed DVDs from blockbuster, they usually cost around $15.00 and in most cases are in perfect condition.

In terms of Harry Potter, Blockbuster actually has a deal where if you rent the movie, you can can come in later and buy a previewed DVD for only $10.00. Not to sound like an ad for BB, but 10.00 for a DVD is not a bad deal (although you have to add in the 4.00 you spent to rent it in the first place).

Re:Theares, Home and Otherwise

[evilpenguin]

but if I'm going to spend $4.00 to rent a movie, why not spend $6.00 more to own it?

You have proverbially hit the proverbial nail on the proverbial head. This is what the "entertainment industry" needs to realize. People pirate their stuff because it is too expensive. They are trying to maintain an imblanced market. Instead of spending money to cpoy protect and spending money to buy senators to pass bad social legislation to make petty theft a felony they should simply drop the proce to the point where people will not bother to pirate!

Personally, I've been furious with them since CDs came out costing twice as much as cassette tapes, despite the fact that they are many times cheaper to produce. I understand the theory that says I'm paying for the superior quality of CDs (yes, I agree that "quality" is a factor in price), but when the other major factor in "price" (that is: "cost to produce") is less than a thenth the cost to produce the other product, why am I paying two to three times as much?

I've pretty much stopped the legal practice of recording movies off of cable. I buy the damned things. And I like having them on my shelves. But just as with CDs, DVDs are much cheaper to produce than VHS cassettes. And don't hand me that guff about "special features." Even if we assume a ridiculous price for getting two people to sit in a studio for two hours and chatter inanely about how they rewrote the movie while they were making it (don't get me started!), a ridiculous price like $100,000, divide that over 1 million copies of a movie and that adds 10 cents. 10 godd--ned cents! Take a DVD with fancier special features (like a "MIB" or a "Harry Potter" for instance) and let's assume a million dollar proce tag on the special features. Those movies sell tens of millions of copies, so we are right back at 10 godd--ned cents! This is added on to the price of discs that cost pennies per unit to manufacture!

And then these greedy bastards have the guts to say the pimply-faced teenager who burns a few mp3 CD-Rs is a thief? Who is fleecing whom?

So, while this crusty old curmudgeon has never downloaded a song, or attempted to defeat the copy protection on a VCR, while I actually believe in and support limited IP law (you remember, copyright law before it was made perpetual for corporate owners?), I still say the "entertainment industry" is screaming because they aren't finding as much as they want when they break into our piggy banks. "They took the money before we could steal it! Waaa! Waaa!"

They simply fail to realize that the market has changed and they can't make people want to pay too much anymore. If they don't wake up and simply adjust the price to remove the WILL to pirate, they will find the need for their services disappearing. It will happen with music first, because musicians and bands can afford the means of production. We are still a few decades away from every home being a motion picture studio, but that day is coming too.

If they want their industry, it is time for defensive pricing, not aggressive criminalization of the use of tools that have legitimate creative (and perfectly legal) uses.

Re:DVD value CD

[big_hairy_mama]

...the retail/cost ratio of DVDs is not as insane as CDs.

Not to mention that it costs a lot more to make a movie (100's of millions of dollars) than to make a CD.

Re:You know ...

[Anonymous Coward]

I always thought that the heads of the Studios weren't really intending all this to happen.

Some contractor came in and said that this technology would prevent copying, and that regional keying would prevent copying even if the system was broken. The studio execs thought that the contractor was talking about the major pirates in Hong Kong, and the side streets of NYC, not just some kid trying to get a copy to play on the vcr in his bedroom.

So the studio exec must have been a bit suprised when this copy protection thing didn't stop the pros, but stopped the little kids.

The Macrovision corporation.

[Anonymous Coward]

I work in the set-top-box industry, and on several occasions I've worked with folks from Macrovision, Inc. I always found them to be quite intelligent and aware of the limitations and problems concerning their technology. Granted, these were engineers and not marketoids, but they seemed to be a genuinely cool group of people. I certainly didn't get any of the Copying=Communism bullshit we hear from so many in the Hollywood sphere of influence.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that you shouldn't judge a company on their press releases alone. Obviously Macrovision has an interest in seeing their copy protection scheme applied to DVDs, but that's what their company does.
And as far as the question of whether anyone sees Macrovision as an obstacle to copying, the answer is definitely YES. I would liken it to the security on your house - you lock the door, right? Well, will that keep out a determined burglar? No, but it will keep the honest people honest.

Please, feel free to flame away. This is just my opinion, based on the people I've dealt with at Macrovision.

Glitch?

[NFNNMIDATA]

People are putting way too much faith in Warners here. I would not be surprised to find out that this was just a manufacturing glitch, not intentional, and that Macrovision was indeed paid their per-copy fee as usual.

Re:DVD value CD - Soundtracks

[frovingslosh]

I particularly enjoy the insanity of this when the soundtrack of a movie costs more than the movie.

Best cure for casual piracy.. BE NICE!

[NanoGator]

If the MPAA is worried about me downloading a movie w/o paying for it, the best defense they have is to have a good rapport with me. If I respect you, I'm not going to let harm come to you. Unfortunately, they have treated us all like they need to throw us all in jail. At least that is what I envisioned when I heard about the SSSCA.

Let's face it, the tools are out there. They'll always be out there. Whether we use them in a damaging way or not is dependent on two things: 1.) Incentive not to, i.e. extras on the DVD and so on... 2.) Whether or not we care.

Frankly, when I first heard about the SSSCA and it's over-reaching implications, I was out for blood! I still am, really. If I do something the MPAA wouldn't like, I feel good about it. Film88.com? I probably would have been all over that had it not gone down, half because I knew the MPAA would have a shitfit. This sentiment is far more damaging than DeCSS or any other circumvention tool around.

What the MPAA needs to do, instead of trying to invent new technology to thwart copying they don't want, is to make us friendly towards them. Show that they're out to have fun instead of out to squeeze money out of our wallets. When that happens, I'm happy to give them my money for stuff like DVD's.

Make it socially unacceptable to download copies of movies w/o paying for them and you'll get far more done than using encryption that somebody's going to break.

HP DVD has Macrovision on

[comic-not]

At least the one I bought for the kids had Macrovision enabled. Well, I pressed the magic buttons to conjure Macrovision away and copied the movie on VHS. Mind you, that was completely legal, since the video was for personal use (kids went to see their DVD-less grandparents for a couple of weeks and the only way to prevent the kids from driving poor gramps and granny nuts was to supplement them with the movie). Anyway, I find the whole Macrovision scheme laughable and completely disingenious, other than from the point of Macrovision the Co. who has successfully sold hi-tech snake oil for some time now.

Why remove Macrovision

[yerricde]

what's the point of VHS if you've got DVD quality

For one thing, some TVs don't properly blank the VBlank portion of the signal. For another, mothers want to make durable copies of Dreamworks animated movies so that the originals don't get scratched up.

Macrovision Bad For Families

[SEWilco]

Macrovision does increase the chances that you can't copy your DVD to a videotape so it can be played on the videotape player in the car. It's good to know that I can get a DVD of Harry Potter which the kids can enjoy on a long trip.

Price Sells!

[scharkalvin]

I bought my Laser Disc player (you know those 12" video discs?) when the studios were pushing the technology by offering the software for half the price of vhs tape. (remember when new releases on vhs sold for $50-$70 each!). Then K-mart started discounting movies on vhs. Today whenever a new movie comes out you can find it discounted SOMEWHERE. Harry Potter was on discount for $9.99 ON DVD two weekends in a row by CompUsa! Makes you wonder what the markup on DVD's are.

The point is price matters. If the software is priced right it will sell. Why bother making a pirate copy (or buying one) when you can have the real thing cheaply.