Slashdot Mirror
Kaleidescape CEO Speaks Out About CSS Lawsuit
An anonymous reader writes "Engadget has an interview with Michael Malcolm, the CEO of Kaleidescape, which you might remember as the high-end DVD jukebox manufacturer that was sued by the DVD Copy Control Association for violating its CSS license.
Despite the fact that anyone who can afford a $27,000+ DVD jukebox also usually ends up buying
hundreds of movies to load onto it, the DVD-CCA wants
them to redesign the Kaleidescape to require the presence of
the physical DVD disc in the drive during authentication and playback.
Besides defeating the whole purpose of having a jukebox in the first
place (none of their jukeboxes allow for copying, streaming, or sharing
DVDs), Malcolm says he can't find any clause in their CSS license which
would require them to implement this "feature" anyway and they're about
to file a counter-action against the DVD-CCA."
"I just loaded my DVD into my Jukebox... I don't need the DVD anymore, so I guess I'll go sell it on ebay or give it away..."
That's what they're afraid of, and they're probably right.
It's nice to see companies standing up to the class bully...
One day everyone will realize that the bully just had a self-esteem problem. Let's hope that day comes soon.
umm did you RTFA? A 400 dvd carousel isnt going to power 8 diferent plasma screens and a huge projector all with different movies all in 1080i now is it. nor is it expandable and adaptible like this system is.
dont get me wrong i'm not going to buy one, but the is alot more to it.
Their suit says that Kaleidescape must redesign its system to require the presence of the physical DVD disc in the drive during authentication and playback.
"I forgot my password. Can you reset it?"
"Sure, what's your password?"
// file: mice.h
#include "frickin_lasers.h"
The truth is, that someone that pays over $30,000 for a DVD system (the people that can afford the system are probably going to not settle for the bare minimum $27,000 configuration) are not interested in screwing over the MPAA. Many of these customers are probably music and movie stars anyhow. They buy it for the unique experience of the well-built UI and the convenience of the system. They don't care if a DVD costs $20 or $100.
Of course, the lawsuit is more about the long term possibilities... that someday this type of system will be available at lower prices, and then the studios will get ripped off. But still, the lawsuit is absurd. Especially since the complaint is that this device permits the "wholsale copying of DVDs, which CSS was designed to prevent." If that were true then any DVD-ROM drive would be in violation. I think CSS is not so much to prevent copying of DVDs, but to prevent unauthorized playback. I wish the DVD-CCA would stop abusing the purpose of their precious CSS.
The Kaleidescape is a great device, I would be very sad to see it get buried by people who see it as the threat that it isn't.
Basically all the movies you'd ever want. As quick as you can get them from your company of choice.
The Doormat
If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
Rich people don't know better.
Know better? They don't give a shit. When your house costs $10 million, and you've got $500,000 worth of custom-installed home theater gear, plasma screen TVs, multiroom audio and video, etc., an additional $27k or even $100k isn't that much to spend to ensure that you can watch any of your movies from any of your screens any time you want. It's a helluvalot more elegant and intuitive than some hack-it-together-yourself DVR or DVD caching box. Besides, you're going to be taking your family on a holiday to Barcelona or Shanghai or Aspen during the couple of weeks it takes to get that whole thing installed, configured, tested and debugged. And you probably will pay Kaleidescape the money to duplicate your entire DVD collection onto the hard drives so you don't have reload them yourself, or have your personal electrical engineer spend a week loading your DVDs onto the system.
Besides, if I'm some rich guy who's spent that much on his house and electronics, I'm showing off my latest "I'm cooler-than-you" gadgets to my other ultra-rich friends before we head off to cruise the Mediterranean in my private yacht. The people who buy this are the same people who buy the Ford GT (~$140k), the Mercedes SL65 AMG (~$140k), the Bentley Arnage T (~$250k), the Maybach 57 ($~$330k) or the Porsche Carrera GT (~$440k). The cost is irrelevant--it's all about the cool.
BTW: The CEO of the company I work for has recently bought both a Ford GT (~$140k) and a Mercedes SL65AMG (~$140k). That's to go along with the BMW 760Li (~$90k) he already owns, his $14 million Learjet, his $12 million house, etc.
Why sure, I'm going to buy a $27,000 machine to copy DVD's that I actually bought, because I can't afford them. That would be much smarter then using a $400 PC to get them off of Bittorrent.
Once the **AA's decide to embrace digital distribution instead of attempting to squash it, they'll make the same killing they have off every other technology they fought at first. Remember, radio and, later, the cassette tape were going to be the end of the music business. We're tired of hearing that the sky is falling. Start adapting your business model to technology, and quit telling us to adapt technology to your business model.
To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
I guess Lucas is guilty of pirating his own films . . . The concept of extreme protection of digital content is really getting out of hand when someone like Lucas can't legally "backup" his films onto another media. I don't really understand this when no one prosecutes the average Joe from copying a CD to tape or CD to MP3 player for convenience . . . Isn't this all that the Kaleidescope box does? Copies from one media to another for ease and convenience?
If you can do it with music, then why can't you do it with movies?
People at all income levels can be thieves. I doubt you could find any correlation between income level and thievery. As one poster commented, why not just add every NetFlix rental to their jukebox?
signature pending slashdot approval
Listen folks, it's really fucking simple here.
YOU created this monster. Just like South Park's "Walmart" episode--who is number 1? YOU are.
The "threat" of DVD has been known for years. The DVDCCA came up with consumer-hostile garbage from day one: CSS, Region Encoding (aka RESTRAINT OF TRADE), and Macrovision in every pot (sorry, under every TV). YOU BOUGHT INTO IT. You just HAD to have your fucking "Matrix" DVD, didn't you? Nevermind all the problems with DVD--look at DIVX! HAH what fools! Right.
And now we have "big brother" DVD-CCA clubbing people over the head for violating their bullshit license for their bullshit "encryption" which has already been compromised 100 ways from Sunday. We STILL have region encoding despite the fact that it IS restraint of trade. And YOU allowed it. Every one of you that ran out to get a DVD player and filling your shelves with boxed-sets of whatever--you allowed this to happen.
So do NOT bitch about the DVDCCA. You fucking gave them the power. And you know what? Now that you let them stick their foot in the door JUST A LITTLE, they're going to try and see what ELSE they can get away with...the "broadcast" flag, the bending-over of TiVo...it's going to get worse because YOU, the drooling hordes, couldn't stop for ONE moment to say "hey, this is just a candy-coated fish hook!" Nope, GOTTA have that latest anime collection! Just GOTTA get that Matrix DVD Boxed Set!
Now go ahead--do your Slashdot duty...whine about the DVDCCA and how they "don't get it." Contradict me by saying "so? You can just get a hacked player!" (Yeah, and Apex is SUCH great quality too *snort*). Somehow tie Bittorrent into the conversation (it's just not slashdot if you're not blathering about how great bittorrent is). Mod me down to nothing. Continue preaching to the choir.