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.

30 of 385 comments (clear)

  1. wait wait...I must have missed it... by fjordboy · · Score: 5, Funny

    How are the illuminati involved in this again?

    1. Re:wait wait...I must have missed it... by BlowChunx · · Score: 5, Funny

      There is nothing fnord to see fnord here. Move along.

  2. Not Important by Cyclopedian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

    1. Re:Not Important by NixLuver · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I agree that the quality of Disney productions is declining, but Disney will continue to be the pre-eminate supplier of Children's content until some one steps up to fill the gap.

      Also, let's not forget Touchstone, either. Or their licensing business, which is still doing a stunning trade, judging by the number of Winnie-the-pooh and Tigger products I see.

    2. Re:Not Important by andih8u · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Disney was on the decline for a long time in the 70s and 80s, and then picked up again with The Little Mermaid, etc. They're on the decline again with their recent poor animated movies and losing the Pixar contract, but at some point they'll produce another few winners and be back on top of the pile again. Aside from the movies, they still have all of the theme parks and the merchandising.

      --


      slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
    3. Re:Not Important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Speaking as a parent of two kids, I'd say that Nick and Pixar are enjoyed by my kids far more than Disney.

      The magic is *gone*.

  3. Free Movies for Everyone by 99bottles · · Score: 5, Funny

    With Microsoft's record for security, this should help assure free [Disney] movies available to anyone who wants them.

    1. Re:Free Movies for Everyone by physicsboy500 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "this should help assure free [Disney] movies available to anyone who wants them."

      I sense nobody is jumping for joy.

      --
      The original generic sig.
  4. Just wait by AllInOne · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just wait 'til Steve Jobs, who is already head of Apple and Pixar, decides that he wants to be the head of Disney too.

    How long would the MSFT deal last then?

    1. Re:Just wait by Erwos · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, and if only new pr0n movies only played on Linux, right? EVERYONE would be running it!

      -Erwos

      --
      Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
  5. Disney movies on MS? by kc0re · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does this mean that half way through the Disney movie, right when Mary Kate and Ashley are starting the best porition of their acting, you're going to have to reboot?

    1. Re:Disney movies on MS? by MindStalker · · Score: 5, Funny

      Mary Kate and Ashley are starting the best porition of their acting? I'm confused, they are in Pr0n now?

  6. So, this is the other show dropping..... by Selecter · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the Pixar/Apple deal gone bad. Eisner is going to try to punish Jobs for dismissing him.

    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.

    1. Re:So, this is the other show dropping..... by chod · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The timing of this decision is definately suspect. After Mike and Steve had that public spat. It reminds me of Dr. Seuss's Zax:

      "And I'll prove to YOU," yelled the South-Going Zax, "That I can stand here in the prairie of Prax For fifty-nine years! For I live by a rule That I learned as a boy back in South-Going School. Never budge! That's my rule. Never budge in the least! Not an inch to the west! Not an inch to the east! I'll stay here, not budging! I can and I will If it makes you and me and the whole world stand still!" Well... Of course the world didn't stand still.

      Only time will tell who really needed the other person. But from this spot, it certainly looks like Disney is making one bad decison after another and Eisner may run Disney into the ground before he gives up the controls.

  7. Titans yes, monopolies no. by dada21 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?

    1. Re:Titans yes, monopolies no. by mr.capaneus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Do you know what a Monopoly is? Extending the definition to include social security and unemployement insurance is really a stretch and not really in any way useful. We have a different word to describe what you are talking about. It is "government". There's really no need to make it any more complex than that.

    2. Re:Titans yes, monopolies no. by NixLuver · · Score: 5, Informative
      The measure of a monopoly is not whether you are forced to buy their products. No one has to watch movies - does that mean it wouldn't be a monopoly if there were only one company? No one has to have a telephone; does that mean that there can't be abuses of the Sherman Antitrust Act by a phone company?

      If you think that Microsoft, Disney, or most other large corporations have not violated the sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, you should probably read it. The word 'monopoly' has been bandied around specifically to confuse the issue. Section 2:

      Section 2. Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty
      Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

      "Attempt to monopolize" etc. Section 1 discusses restraint of trade - which this could most certainly be percieved as a step towards, dependin g on how Microsoft and Disney deal with the DRM issues - and with their track record, it's not looking good.

      Creating a barrier to entry is what the industry is trying to accomplish with mandatory DRM. If you have to pay a $50 license for DRM, and it's illegal to distribute something (software, os, hardware, or all three) without it, then the Free Software world - and, perhaps, open source - is essentially relegated to irrelevance here in the US. And in any country that would hope to do business with US and the IMF/Wold Bank. Bleah.

  8. and this will help disney? by zboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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..

  9. Disney vs. Apple by heironymouscoward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  10. Seems rather early by SparafucileMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?

  11. Time for an upgrade by Bingo+Foo · · Score: 5, Funny
    I guess I'll get that 8 gig memory card for my phone now. Oh, and 5.1 DTS sound.

    CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW MR. BRUCKHEIMER? BOOOOOOM!

    --
    taken! (by Davidleeroth) Thanks Bingo Foo!
  12. Re:Great News! by LehiNephi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  13. I had a vision last night by teamhasnoi · · Score: 5, Insightful
    of a mouse in chains. But it wasn't any ordinary mouse - this mouse was gigantic and fat. It ate everything it saw, and stomped on the things it couldn't bend down to eat.

    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.

  14. In other news by wine · · Score: 5, Funny

    As part of the new Disney-Microsoft deal, Bill Gates will be starring as Peter Pan in the new Disney remake of this well known epos. A source close to Microsoft said that Steve Balmer will co-star as Tinkerbell.

  15. Re:Great News! by BJZQ8 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  16. Re:Turn on PBS instead of the Eisner Channel by NixLuver · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Lots of good stuff without the marketing dollars behind Disney. I'm not a Disney fan, I assure you, and my child watches PBS and Nick Jr., not the Disney Channel. But we have quite a few of the old Disney movies - can't deprive her of Dumbo and Winne the Pooh :).

    I would love to see PBS with the budget that Disney has. :)

  17. Re:Great News! by TobiasSodergren · · Score: 5, Funny

    From the sales department:

    - If you have two phones, you get stereo sound!
    - Also, if you hold the phones really close to your eyes, it'll be like going to the cinema!

  18. Re:Turn on PBS instead of the Eisner Channel by Frymaster · · Score: 5, Interesting
    can't deprive her of... Winne the Pooh :)

    the irony here is that it's debatable whether winnie the pooh is really disney's to use and distribute.

    some guy called slesinger bought, lock stock and honey pot, all the rights to pooh from a.a. milne back in something like 1930. he licensed those rights to walt disney (the guy, not the company) sometime later for a royalty payment.

    now disney co. is apparently being remiss in their royalty payments and has been manufacturing poohware outside of the scope of the licensing agreement for twenty-something years. so slesinger's widow is suing.

    and now disney wants to put drm on pooh content to stop people from "stealing their property."

    sweet irony.

  19. Diznee == old and busted, PIXAR == NEW HOTNESS! by Thud457 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    You overlooked a crucial player -- Pixar. They just ended their distribution contract with Disney, who took an unfair share of the profits.

    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

  20. Poor parents... by DrCode · · Score: 5, Funny

    Kid: (Whine) (Whine) Dadddyyy!!! I'm bored! (Whine) I want to see a disney cartoon on the phone.
    Dad: Sorry, my phone won't do that.
    Kid: (Whine, Sniffle) But Joey gets to watch them on his dad's phone.
    Dad: I know, son, but I don't have the right kind of phone for that.
    Wife: Damnit, Bob! I told you not to buy that Linux phone. (Nag, nag, nag) All my friends bought phones that let their kids watch Disney, but you had to go buy another one of your geek toys!