Slashdot Mirror
Disney Licenses MS Windows Media DRM
securitas writes "CNet/ZDNet reports that Walt Disney has licensed Microsoft's Windows Media DRM technology for use in online movie distribution via the Internet. Reuters reports that Disney plans to sell movies online in late 2004 or early 2005, while AP reports that the multi-year license for Microsoft's digital rights/restrictions management and copy-protection software will let Disney distribute content on mobile phones, PDAs and portable media players (mirror). The companies are expected to officially announce the deal later today (Monday)." Conspiracy theorists, start your engines; kidding aside, this is something to watch, as these are two titans of industry.
Disney is not going to be a "titan" any longer. They're on the decline. Unless Eisner and the current board of directors are gone, Disney will be run into the ground. At that point, we won't have to worry about Disney DRM or their Senate Lackeys.
-Cyc
/.'s 10 Millionth
Vain egos often make bad business decisions. Pixar does not need Disney any longer, and most of Disney's recent ventures have been pale imitations of Pixar's work.
Thank you for using the proper term here: titans. Disney and Microsoft are surely powerful in their industries (right now, today). But everyone here has the choice to not purchase or support these products. No one is forcing you to buy Disney products, watch ABC television, or wear their licensed gear. No one is forcing you to buy products using MS DRM technology.
Remember that before you suggest that either is a monopoly. Look at things in your life and find out where the real monopolies are.
Can you bow out of Social Security? Are you forced to eat at McDonalds? Do you have to pay into federal unemployment insurance? Did you pick your car insurance company, or was it "granted to you" by the voting majority?
The only Disney movies I've actually paid to see in the last few years were all Pixar animations. Now that Pixar's gone, Disney doesnt have much left, and I dont think a little cell phone screen is going to make their animations look any better. I think they need to focus on creating quality features before they try and start selling them...unless they're trying to bypass stores all together and go to a direct-to-phone distribution..
Or rather, Eisner vs. Jobs.
They hate each other.
Jobs is determined to become the next Disney.
And Disney is turning to Microsoft. I almost feel sorry for them, no-one (and I mean no-one) has ever done a deal with Microsoft and not regretted it later.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
Considering most people in the U.S. don't have broadband, this seems rather premature. And would those with broadband really want to wait an hour or ten to watch what, compared to a DVD, is pixelated crap? Would you really want to invite your gf to watch some grainy compressed video or would you splurge on the $3 DVD rental?
I'm guessing that all this will mean is that Mac users won't be able to watch 'Lion King 7' on their computers when it come out... :p
Without Pixar, Disney could be in real trouble film wise...
copy-protection software will let Disney distribute content on mobile phones, PDAs and portable media players
Does anyone around here have an interest in watching a movie on a 1.5" (4 cm) lcd? I guess some people may like it, but for some reason I have a hard time believing people are going to shell out their hard-earned cash for a movie that will only play on their cell phone.
Help find a cure for cancer. Join the [H]orde
The mouse was very old; seemed like it had been around forever. Whenever anyone talked about the mouse, it'd better be good or *stomp*! No one was allowed to take a picture of the mouse or fashion its likeness in any way.
All the people around the mouse were tired parents in chains - as long as you put chains on when you were in the presence of the mouse you were safe. As soon as you took the chains off - *stomp*!
I really have to lay off the homemade guacamole.
Figure it'll cost as much as going to Hollywood/Blockbuster and renting a DVD. Add in potential connection issues with streaming, time do dl if it's download, and then it's on a computer. I'll take renting a DVD, throwing it in and watching it on a TV. Less issues, probably the same cost. Movie downloads aren't going anywhere for several years at least, let Disney roll with MS DRM, it's going to fail anyway.
"Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott
Don't forget the fact that not only will they allow you to watch movies on a tiny screen, they'll cost you $7 a pop, and only be watchable for 48 hours before they evaporate...the real purpose of DRM in this case is not to prevent copying, it is to facilitate per-view fees and the "rental model" for movies.
I would love to see PBS with the budget that Disney has. :)
Thinking outside my Head
This is a great step forward in Microsoft's strategic plans forthe future. Facing a growing threat from competing operating systems, and losing market share in international circles, mostly business clients, Microsoft has braced itself for the future, when it will not be the no. 1 OS. Take for example MSNBC, a money losing venture for Microsoft since its launcha few years back. Xbox barely takes in a profit. Yet these two products are examples of how MS is carefully pushing itself into media delivery, a business I believe Gates is targeting in the future. By having even a presence in these industries, even if a small one, companies and shareholders in the future will learn to trust MS in this field.
Some years from now (like 8) when MS does another big buyout or forms a subsidiary in a movie business or production studio or home entertainment encryption, MS may have established itself as a trustworthy name, and the OS part of its company may play a lesser role at that point. Remember that Disney has influcence and presence in many circles of business as well, making this an alliance to watch carefully.
[Please sign here]
I have a long memory, and have been working with Disney professionally on-and-off for over 20 years. I remember Disney before Pixar, their ups and downs. Mostly ups. Sure, the Disney/Pixar relationship was great for both organizations, and a more cynical person could easily argue that Pixar, despite their obvious talents, needed Disney *then* more than Disney needs Pixar *now.* There are other Pixars "out there" just waiting to be taken under a big corp's wing (the MS/Bungie deal come to mind immediately, I don't know why...), and both EisnerCo and GatesCo have demonstrated they know how to find them. Sure, Pixar has raised the bar, and my hat's off to them, but the animation bar now rises at an almost exponential rate annually due as much to the tearing down of tech barriers as to the pushing of creative envelopes. Content is of course still "king," but in no field is that crown held on so uneasy a head as it is in animation.
As for the whole DRM bugaboo, I gotta tell you, most people don't care. In fact, most geeks don't care. Should they? Sure, but it's a topic for a different conversation. Disney will be making and distributing -- and MS will be securing -- entertainment for the mass populace. If everybody who sez they'll never buy a DRM'd download REALLY never buys a DRM'd download, it will still be less than a rounding error on the Disney/MS titan's ledger.
Given Disney's trackrecord of turning every DRM solution they touch into a consumer backlash, we should be able to watch the market failure of MS's DRM product.
;-)
Remember, these are the guys that have watched DivX and disposable DVDs flop in the market. Maybe third times a charm, but it'll be more fun to watch MS get sucked into Disney's inability to squeeze more money from the pre-school crowd who watch those movies till the VHS tapes are worn thin.
I say, let the games begin.
Arrogance is Confidence which lacks integrity. -- me
No-one _needs_ Disney movies: we need to eat, we need to drink, we don't _need_ to watch 'Disney's Little Aardvark'... any demand that exists is pure hype and marketing. You're making the fatal mistake of assuming that just because Disney have a monopoly on Disney movies, that people don't have a choice as to whether they watch them or not.
Look at their comparative output in the last ten years. PIXAR is the new Disney. (Well, at least in the animated feature arena. To be fair Disney has several other allied businesses that Pixar is not in. Yet.) And Disney, lacking any real vision or innovation, it resorting to anti-consumer DRM lockin. Just the kind of strategy you'd expect from a company that's lost it's edge.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
On which you can't play any mainstream movies or music. The media giants are learning. From CDs they learned, don't distribute digital content in the clear. From DVDs they learned, encryption based on trade secrets can and will be reverse engineered. WMA offers the "advantage" that some aspects of it are covered by patents, that any player not properly licensed infringes on the patents, and that MS can easily win the infringement cases against the developers in court. Financially ruin a couple of hackers for life (personal bankruptcy won't get you any relief from that $10M judgement you owe MS -- you're going to be poor FOREVER) and the hackers will quit.
And for better or worse, Joe Sixpack and his family want to consume mainstream content. Joe WANTS to see the local sports teams. His tykes WANT to watch Disney cartoons. And so on. If the Linux-based device won't play WMA, Joe's not going to be interested. And possession of an MPEG version of the video (as an example) will be a trivially easy copyright infringement case to win -- since the only legal copies that are distributed are in WMA...
I used to do technology intelligence work for a large media firm, and predicted this as a likely evolution at least three years ago.
Pixar is a bunch of very creative folks with a lot of CPU horsepower, but no distribution channels. Disney is a very large, diversified company with a LOT of "pull" (or is it "push"?) with theaters and rental outfits. It doesn't matter how good the movie, if no one can view it.
I can't think of one movie distribution channel in Hollywood who wouldn't give a major portion of their anatomy for the chance to distribute Pixar's stuff (and get a cut of the action, natch).
Pixar will have NO PROBLEM finding someone to distribute their stuff.
--R.J.
Electric-Escape.net