Slashdot Mirror


New Movie Download Pay Service

SailorBob writes " After nearly two years in production, Hollywood-backed Movielink is giving the green light to its online movie rental service. The Web site, a joint project of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Universal and Warner Bros., will debut Monday with a limited selection of first-run and classic films from the five major motion pictures studios, in a test of the technology to select U.S. residents. Though the film studios have licensed content to other video-on-demand sites, it is the first time they've introduced a service of their own. Of course, just like the new music services, this is also only available to US residents. "

11 of 342 comments (clear)

  1. Interesting.. by glh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here is the jist according to me:

    1. You can download certain videos that are probably like the "new release" section at the video store, but also some classics (examples- A beautiful mind, harry potter, ..)

    2. You can view it within 30 days of the download, but once "play is hit" you can only watch it within a 24 hr period (but as many times as you want).

    3. Cost will be between 2.99 and 4.99

    My question is- Why not save yourself 1 1/2 hrs and possibly a buck and drive to the video store? The only thing I can think of is no late fees. A little more convenient in that sense. But what about video quality? Who wants to watch a video on their pc as opposed to the big screen tv upstairs?

  2. Re:Microsoft Windows only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Severely limiting their audience to 90+% of all users on the internet? Obviously a usage of the word "severely" I'm not previously familiar with.

  3. Before the rants and flames start... by gregwbrooks · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Lacking in clue content on the movie industry's part? "Maybe," says Joe Public and "Damn straight!" says the average Slashdot reader. But all in all, we have to view this as A Good Thing(tm).

    Yes, someone will crack the DRM. Yes, the adoption rate will suck because most non-geeks really do want to watch movies on their televisions. But all in all, movie-industry suits have shown themselves to be more adaptable in the face of change than their counterparts in the music industry -- CDs cost what they cost a decade ago, but DVDs are probably about a tenth or twentieth of what the first VHS movies cost when you factor in inflation.

    Bottom line: I'd rather have the movie industry experimenting and learning than have them go into siege mode the way the music industry has done. They both have a lot of money to throw at Congress -- money and influence we can't ever match -- so signs (even dull glimmers) of cluefullness are greatfully appreciated.

    --


    "It was a summer's tale: Just a boy, his Linux, and a head full of dreams..."
  4. Rent films at your public library by migstradamus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's a bit low-tech, but since I moved to NY I've been getting four or five movies a week from the public library. The selection is vastly larger than my local Blockbuster, you can request things online (telnet lives!) and they send them to your local branch and then e-mail you when it comes in, you can have up to 15 requests active, you get the movies for a full week, and it's all completely free! Most films even come in DVD now. (The system is for books, too. Remember books?) It's amazing. Plus, when you pay your dollar-a-day overdue fee you get a warm fuzzy feeling for giving to the library, as opposed to handing four bucks to some mumbling chowderhead at the video megalopoly outlet. The NY site is here.

  5. Same old problems by parliboy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    We already know what's wrong with these sites. But to summarize for latecomers:
    • $3.00 to rent a movie for 24 hours, versus $5.00 to rent it for a week from the shop down the road.
    • It's not portable. I can only watch it from the downloading computer.
    • Forced, automatic "updating" of their software.
    For any lurkers: Charge me $5 to $10, depending on age, for a permanant copy which I can burn to DVD myself. Charge me extra if I want the "value added" version (the retail DVD, versus just a movie.) Afraid I might pirate your stuff? Please, if I have broadband, I already can. So, take my money, the way I want you to, or I'll get your product somewhere else. Get over it and get with the economy.
    --
    "You're never ready, just less unprepared."
  6. Re:Microsoft Windows only by Dot.Com.CEO · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I don't mean to start a war here, but, personal choices of the /. community aside, something like 95% of the world's desktops run Windows, in one way or another. Furthermore, and I would argue more importantly, the typical Linux enthusiast is very vocal in his/her choice of free (beer/speech, irrelevant really), therefore such a paying service would, really, just induce laughter in the Linux community.

    I think that blocking Mac users is far more stupid. I mean, they are content on shelling out some $100 a year for .mac, I think that testing such a service would be a no brainer.

    --
    Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
  7. $4.99, one day, low quality a/v, watch on PC only? by rabbitpoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did they make up a big list of things that would make the service suck and pick them all?

    Okay, so lets review. You pay $4.99 for a new release, you get one day to watch it, it's lower video quality than DVD, you can only watch it on the PC (unless you have video out hooked to a TV) and to top it all off, you can't use the service without Windows let alone even browse the site without IE?

    How this is even close to spending $3.99 to rent a DVD new release you can watch on a TV for two days with full quality video and sound is lost on me. Yeah, you don't have to drive anywhere to get it, but you pay more and get a lot less.

    I can't imagine why this service would fail to catch the business of regular people, and of course those people trading DVDs.

  8. linux lnthusiasts are necessarily cheap by smd4985 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "the typical Linux enthusiast is very vocal in his/her choice of free (beer/speech, irrelevant really), therefore such a paying service would, really, just induce laughter in the Linux community."

    i think this is a incorrect generalization. i'm a big supporter of OSS, GPL, free speech, etc., but i'm also very willing to pay for content i appreciate. not *everything* has to or should be free, and i gladly pay for content i could get for free (ie music). i do this because i understand that an efficient way to encourage content production (code, art, etc.) is through monetary support.

    --
    smd4985
  9. Re: public library by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Plus, when you pay your dollar-a-day overdue fee you get a warm fuzzy feeling for giving to the library, as opposed to handing four bucks to some mumbling chowderhead at the video megalopoly outlet.

    I consider library fines to be one of my major modes of charitable donation. I don't deliberately keep books overdue, it just works out that way... a lot ;-) Yeah, paying late fees at Roger's or Blockheads^H^H^H^H^Hbuster really sucks. And yes, local libraries can have a surprisingly good selection, everything from arty European stuff to Kurosawa to four copies of The Matrix :-D

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
  10. i love it by asv108 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    <recording studios>
    Lets make a site that is ridiculously restrictive so that when most people come to it, they will be forced to either upgrade or go away. This way when can point to movielink and say, "We tried, but the pirates do not want to pay for anything." Then we will be able to convince congress to force mandatory drm.
    </recording studios>

  11. Re:"Work made for hire" is weaker outside the USA by einer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which makes the parent's original post that much more important. Proxy servers based in the US could potentially throw a kink into this scheme. The studios are welcome to negotiate as many contracts as they like, but so long as a proxy server can negate their rights to a work being downloaded to a foreign country, they're screwed.

    I wonder if the UN will soon become the new world copyright enforcement body. I'd love to see a dozen UN tanks parked outside my house when I get home tonight. Maybe I'll even get 'sanctioned.' If that doesn't give my W4R3Z dud3 street cred a bump, I don't know what will.