Slashdot Mirror
Movie Studios Unveil New Anti-Piracy Lab
PaulusMagnus writes "According to the BBC Walt Disney, Sony, Paramount, Warner Bros, Universal and 20th Century Fox have formed a new organisation called the Motion Picture Laboratories. They've also given them a nice tidy sum of US$30m to play with to develop new technologies to combat piracy." From the article: "There are thousands of new concepts floating around the hi-tech community about how to develop tools to fight piracy ... Researching and developing these technologies now will help save the major studios and other motion picture producers and distributors money in the future."
$30 million stating out, and nowhere to go but UP! I want that job. It'll be like the anti-virus and operating systems security industry all over again. Pay us to protect you, make you feel good, and we'll do a crummy enough job so that you keep wanting to pay.
Evil Overlord Rule #86. I will make sure that my doomsday device is up to code and properly grounded.
According to the article they are looking into "ways to jam camcorders being used to record movies in cinemas illegally, and developing methods of detecting illegal content sharing on peer-to-peer networks". I don't have a problem with that. At least they're not proposing another copy protection scheme that will only ever inconvenience their paying customers while the pirates probably won't even notice.
Yet.
The C-64. I remember ripping the C-64 game protection just for fun. They spent tons. What will change now? Only the names.
$8 discount, $15 regular showing. But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about a comparison between different cultures. I'm talking about basic pricing philosophy. Back when I was growing up, we had a third-run theater that continually waited until the end of the blockbuster weekends before they'd get copies of movies. They'd charge $2.50/ticket- and kept doing that well into the 1990s. $10 for a family of 4 to see some third-run film; and you can bet we didn't have people with camcorders sneaking in. (Last I heard, they went up to $3.50 but started throwing in the popcorn for free). Not to mention the old drive-ins that would charge by the carload instead of individually.
The point is that the MPAA wants to make all of their investment and profits up front- where if they'd go for volume pricing instead, and roll prices back a few years, they'd have NO problem with piracy at all.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
It's kinda funny. Porn is some of the most-pirated content around, both the full blown commercial infringment (like sites stealing content from one another) and casual consumer piracy. It's also far, far, far more profitable than the regular movie industry, theres a thriving cottage industry of amateurs and an equally thriving industry providing tools (hosting, web applications, cam/phone brokering) to those amateurs. It's actually a very healthy, vibrant economy. The traditional movie houses could do worse than to watch what pornographers do more.
Yea, and then they spend another 2 million on suing the guy for circumventing their $30 million DRM protection scheme.
AND
They'll have to spend this much each year to keep up with the hackers. But at least it's nice to know that Hollywood is fighting for ethics and the little guy. And so I'm sure this useless expenditure will not be passed on to the little guy but will be footed by the pocket change from a couple movie stars and movie studios.
Why not insert a visibly hidden serial number to the film. This serial number could be applied to all releases of the film (pre-theaters reviews one, etc). A unique serial number for each real.
If a pirated moved if found just go to the point in the film where the hidden serial number is located. Then track back you had access to that film. If a theater then threaten not to allow them access to your films any more and sue them for damages for allowing the piracy. If it is a pre-release reviewer edition the same actions can be taken against them.
How hard would it be to just add a serial number to 10 frames here and 10 frames there? Hidden in the back ground somewhere. In stead of just a number it could a colour or the insertion of a special object (IE: Green coffe cup of a specific style.)
I do not think the studios want to really know where the piracy is really come from - their own staff!
My Sig indicates the end of the comment I posted.
Primer cost $10,000 USD, and it was the best film I've seen all year. The point is that you don't need a million-dollar budget to produce a quality film, and with a lower budget comes lower ticket and DVD prices. Even so, I paid over $30 CAD for the DVD of Primer when I could find it (for comparison, most DVDs cost $20-25 CAD when they're released, and usually drop by $5 after six months). The moral of the story is that people are willing to pay for quality; I know I'll be buying The Constant Gardener for full-price when it's released to DVD, but won't pick up The Brothers Grimm even at $10.
Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
Sorry, that's my fault.
I don't go to theatres because they're too expensive. Whenever I see a commercial for a movie that looks good, I make a mental note to buy that on DVD when it comes out. I figure for $3-6 more than a movie ticket, I'd rather have the DVD. Of course, by the time the movie eventually comes out on DVD, I've completely forgotten everything about it, including my past interest in purchasing their product.
I have the same problem with TV. I watch one show, and if it happens to be the one that doesn't suck, I want to purchase the season on DVD. However, they won't sell it to me until they've shown all of the episodes and gotten all the advertising money from commercials that they can get.
Movie piracy does not cost the companies anything. The people who are pirating movies wouldn't pay for them if they were a penny a piece. Claiming this as a loss is just creative bookkeeping (fraud) on the part of the movie companies.
The real harm is being done every day by people like me who could purchase their products, but don't. I'm a bad consumer. I should be taken out and shot for my crimes against the corporations.
Then why do all movies cost the same? The Matrix, and sequels were some of the $100m+ movies you speak of. Cost $8.50 at the theatre near me. Sin City was $40m, mostly paid up front by Rodriguez, also cost me $8.50 at the same theatre. Gigli was $22m, and though I didn't see it, the price was the same, $8.50. Or taking some older films, Pi had a production cost of about $60,000 (1998 dollars). It was about $8.00 IIRC, though not at the same theatre (hadn't been built yet).
You know, I don't see a scaling of price and movie tickets. It seems to me I pay just as much to see a small budget film as I do a big budget film. This is additonally odd seeing as most big budget films make back their investment. Not universally true, of course, but generally they do. Many of them even make a lot of money.
So, if ticket prices truly were based on costs, shouldn't low-budget indy films be less? Wouldn't it even perhaps be a good business decision? I mean blockbuster effects type films are widely popular and with some marketing, it's easy to convince most people to go. However low budget indys are harder, people are used to high production values and thus often snub them. Wouldn't a lower ticket price help allure them?
Or, could it be, that it's just more of the movie industry being greedy? Remember these are the same people that are mandidating that for any HD movie spec HDCP will be REQUIRED. So be it HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, you'll have to have DVI/HDMI out to an HDCP compatible display. If you go analogue, no HD for you, if it even plays at all.
My bet? Ticket prices are atrifically inflated. The studios do NO competition on price. They've fixed one price, for all movies regardless of source and cost. The only variance is per theatre or area.
The day I start seeing cheap movies for less, and start seeing one production company trying to underprice another, maybe I believe they prices are justified. For now, I think they are in every way as reality based as CD prices: Which is to say not at all.
You have actually hit on one of the open secrets of technology, porn is A. an early adopter and B. a driving force behind large amounts of technology and marketing strategems. I often baffle my friends when I tell them that, besides the obvious reasons, when I go to a gentlemans club or adult boutique (yes yes I am a dirty old man, I admit it) its to see what new tech there is or get ideas for various marketing plans I am involved in. For the doubters I invite them along on my next trip and point out certain things then tell them to watch for it over the next 6 to 12 months. They are amazed when those ideas filter to the mainstream.
If Hollywood would adopt some of the business model of the porn industry they would see a marked improvement in profits. And its not like the quality of acting or writing is all that high above porn anyway...
Honor is like virtue, if you must tell people that you have it then chances are you don't.
I am too, so at least believe me when I say I know what you're talking about.
Fine with me. All I know is that in the 1990s, businesses were willing to spend money on R&D- and now they aren't. At all.
Huh? No R&D for what industry? As someone who got one of those nonexistent R&D jobs this year, I'm going to have to question that. R&D hiring has bounced back rather well in most science fields since 2000.
Portland wasn't a high cost of living market to begin with- and it's still about 50% what it is in other cities- but it's most certainly on the rise and has been for the last 5 years.
Yeah, I'm in DC so no believe me, it's a lot worse here.
And even then. I have 42 languages and 10 years of R&D on my resume- and the best I can do is contracting for the state at a rather low rate- far too low to support my lifestyle apparently.
The number of languages you know isn't an indication of your value, if you spend time learning more than a handfull you're wasting your time and employers won't be impressed. What were your 10 yrs R&D spent doing? And when I said diversity of skills, I didn't mean the number of programming languages you know. What are you trained in other than programming? Are you trained in anything to which you might apply that programming skill?
Seriously? Just stay in my house without getting kicked out by the bank or being forced into bankruptcy. I've downgraded my dreams seriously.
Well, yeah. Owning a house on sporadic contracting work isn't going to cut it. I'm completely guessing here, but if your work history started in 95 and got tough in the last 5 years, you might find that the world you knew 95-2000 isn't a realistic one. Your expectations might not match reality. I don't own a house, if you live in a big city that is quite a luxury.
Honestly - and I mean absolutely no offense - but I don't think I'd blame macroeconomics for your problems. There are quite likely things you can to to better your situation, and there are full time jobs that certainly can be had. And I don't mean to be condescending or judgemental if anything came off that way. But the mid 90's are never coming back, and it may take some pride swallowing to take a position that might not be ideal but gets you on the path you want.
Walk, Ride a bike in 95 degree heat. Check (Peak temp was 106 degrees)
---
Walk/Run 1.6 miles to make the bus after work. Check
---
Wait for the buses to start again at 5am so I could go home and get some sleep before turning right around and going back to work. Check (sometimes just -walked- the 8.9 miles home in 3 hours- got home about 4am)
---
Ride a bicycle 8.9 miles -each way- (~45 minutes) to get from my affordable housing to my $8/hour job. Check. (started regularly getting off after the last bus- got a used 10 speed bike for $45)
---
Ride a bike in temps down to 22 degrees. Check.
---
Ride a moped in 33 degree rain to work and school. Check. (ah it as glorious to finally save up enough for $630 moped).
---
Occasionally get soaked in thunderstorms or wait until they finished. Check
---
Go to community college, then real college and self-train for 11 years so I didn't have to do that any more. Check.
---
Done all that. Know all that. Had no help from anyone (not even grants). Mother didn't finish high-school, had no dad. Not particularly smart (just not actively dumb or self-destructive).
---
I was dirt poor for at least 7 years. Part of that I was dirt poor AND supporting a wife and child.
---
You can ALWAYS make excuses why you can't succeed but the fact is people until very recently (last 40-50 years) had it much harder than us and they survived and got by.
---
Make the sacrifices and never give up and you have a shot and getting ahead. Life is never certain.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.