Slashdot Mirror
Universal to Offer its Movies Online
JoseAugusto writes "From IMDB: 'Universal expects to be able to offer movies online by the end of the year or early next year, company chairman and CEO Bob Wright said Tuesday. Speaking at a conference on piracy in London, Wright described the studio's entry into online movie services as 'something we have to do.' However, he cautioned, the studio's entry into the Internet sphere must be accompanied by fail-safe methods to prevent the films from being copied and redistributed. 'These movies are so expensive, we have to be careful,' he said.'"
Ain't that sweet of 'em?
Game... blouses.
Wow, the post is the entire article! So, this isn't much to go on. Sounds mostly like PR with a shot across the bow they intend to make it as consumer unfriendly as possible. (Consider "These movies are so expensive, we have to be careful" -- doesn't sound like ability to take advantage of inexpensive delivery cuts the consumer any slack.)
I still wonder:
This is spin. Whatever it is, I'm not looking forward to it.
It a cat. I also have this bag. Notice that the cat is not inside the bag.
Well then, maybe they should make more films that rely on plot and qualities other than expensive special effects.
--
IMDB articles.
What's the quality of the picture and sound going to be with these movies? I certainly wouldn't want a 30x15 sized film with MIDI sound.
A failsafe way to prevent piracy? Try never putting it on any form of media readable on a PC then. Or better yet, never put it on any media. Spoken word, live performances for a naked audience (so they can't smuggle in audio recorders of course). And still...not even close.
Come on, they just need to embrace the internet and trust that most of us will pay for it when it is easy to get. I know I will. Same with tv, when I miss my favorite show, rather than download it, I would pay a few bucks to get the commercial free version online...
"the studio's entry into the Internet sphere must be accompanied by fail-safe methods to prevent the films from being copied and redistributed."
.mp4s?
Apple DRM'd
A B A C A B B
...as further pieces of the viPod puzzle fall into place, perhaps?
Interesting.
--Petey
Speaking at a conference on piracy in London, Wright described the studio's entry into online movie services as "something we have to do."
Wow, way to be enthusiastic about it. What were we talking about, getting a root canal?
...rare and priceless collection of ...
How will they handle overseas distribution? How will they handle inter-state taxes?
They say they will be online by the end of the year, but that is less than 3 months away. There are so many problems with actually distributing original content online that I highly doubt any movie company will be able to successfully make the jump.
I'd love to be proved wrong, but then again, I'd love to have a 60 inch monitor. I don't see either one happening in the next 3 months.
Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
And when?
And for how much?
On the other hand, this might be a boost for media centre pc's, portable video players (like the archos gmini400)... All the better for me to watch my XviD DVDrips on!
The toad can't burp - and for some reason can't fart either, so it swells up and eventually explodes. --Anonymous Coward
You could start hiring people with talent.
Like this movie. I've watched it 5 times. One of the most enjoyable independant films I've ever seen. It cost $7000 to make. And, of course, it's geeky to the max.
How we know is more important than what we know.
it's kinda weird how people in these positions still don't realize that's not going to happen.
Because they're too fucking expensive.
Drop the price to $10 or less and I'd buy about 10x as many CDs as I do now.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
It'll be a hell of a lot easier to make a CAM version of the movies :)
"I'm proud to have one of the most extensive Christian rock sections that I know of"
If I were you I'd post as an AC too!
Here are some better articles.
Reality test... am I dreaming?
I actually might consider buying some downloadable movies if the price was right. If they are thinking about charging $10 or more for them, I will just download them for free if they aren't anything special (and if they are, I would buy the pressed DVD). If the price point was around $5, it would make a whole lot more sense than renting the DVD, and would likely be quicker to acquire. Throw in the cost of a DVD-R, and you have the movie for a fairly good price. The movie studios do not have to go through a middleman (video store), and neither do we, and we get the movie for about the same price. Everyone wins.
I've never been that interested in paying for songs, as downloading the music is about the same price, or more than actually buying the CD. And you have to be out of your mind if you think I am paying $20 for a music CD. So I just download all the music I want for free (I'm Canadian). I would rather spend the money on going to see a live concert.
All that written two minutes after article posted? Looks like someones been paid^H^H^H^H planning on writing this for a while.
Man are you real ?
..anyways, so what is the point of having strong drm that the user will just dislike on the product? it's not like you could protect it.
to compete they would need to provide a better "product" than the torrent sites... if they just offer something that is worse, in quality or conviency, and charge for it, would they get any of those users "back"?
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
This message was brought to you by the RIAA. RIAA: Helping Capture Pirates(TM).
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that I'm sure this guy has posted something very similar on /. before. Except at one point in his comment he talked about not being able buy things for his son and telling his son that it was "the pirates' fault".
OMG, this is a re-post of a troll from 2003. (Google the first sentence, and you will find a few hits on it...)
I suggest you read Slashdot
Impressive.
If they are just going to put their new releases online, then there is no point really. I am not going to watch the next big blockbuster online, I am going to see it in the movie (or perhaps rent the DVD).
What will make online movie rental or purchase worth something is if they can put a huge catalog of every movie ever made available for download. There are a lot of pretty obscure films out there, that I wouldn't buy the DVD, and the video store will never have, that could be made available.
It is like iTunes... half the music I want just isn't available on iTunes. If iTunes had more than your standard HMV fare, then maybe it would be worth it.
Why do they care sooooooooo much about anti-piracy when you can already download any movie from most of the popular p2p networks?
Its too late! All your movies have already been pirated!
Just forget about anti-piracy and start selling those movies. You'll make much more money this way. (And its not like your gonna lose anymore than you already have from p2p networks.)
" Well then, maybe they should make more films that rely on plot and qualities other than expensive special effects."
I take it then that you aren't a Universal customer, nor plan to be one in the future? And I would go even farther and guess you don't have any Universal movies in your possession?
I'm saddened that on a site as big as Slashdot, this is the best the trolls can do? The "music store owner" angle is fairly original, but consistency is the key to any proper troll - you have to make your reader believe you're for real. This post has none of that needed consistency. There really should be a website for those just starting out in the trolling art, to provide pointers and techniques so embarassments like this don't make it out it public.
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
Two things for you:-
(1) Don't post something on Slashdot about how piracy is hurting people and industries. You'll just get modded to -1000. You can't fight it, so just give it up.
(2) I've seen this post before somewhere. Did you cut and paste it? Do you repost it everytime an RIAA/Music piracy article pops up? If you do, that's kinda lame. Sorry.
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
The "news/stories" get printed on /. first, and then the said company of the story either tries to figure out what where the story came from or they then get the idea from /. and start working on it immeediately.
video.
You download the video with a credit car, it embeds a tag that will ID you. It will be sprinkled about in the movie so that if you put it on bit torrent they can track you down and lock you up. That sounds like it might work, eh? For kicks they can require that you give blood or something in order to positively ID you.
2 years and no mod points. Join reddit. Because openness is good.
Make it consumer-unfriendly, then, when it flops, they can wave some cash under the nose of selected members of the Politburo, er, Congress, and whine more about "piracy." If they wave enough cash, they can buy all sorts of nice laws that basically insure that you don't really own the things that you buy.
Oh, no! You have walked into the slavering fangs of a lurking grue!
Obviously online distribution and/or On Demand is going to be the rule in 5 years, not the exception. But I keep buying DVDs for the commentaries and extra material.
Is there going to be the economic incentive to provide all this extra material with online distribution?
What's going to happen to Criterion?
If one of those movies were to make its way onto a P2P network, God forbid, the results would be disasterous...
:q!
The movie industry still doesn't get "it". People won't buy something that is crippled. They will probably invest millions of dollars into this project, money that could be better spent on cutting the price of their products by $1-2, which would probably get them more sales and thus more profit. Really, anything over the production cost of the medium is pure profit on the better movies (that is, anything that wasn't a flop, because the theatrical release would normally already cover the cost of production of the movie itself). So, knowing that, a medium like the internet where the costs of the content itself is litterally the cost of the bandwidth used to download/stream, just about any price is greedy. Now having said that I know that is not how things work... The reason this is doomed is because people are not going to be able to use it how they want to. First off, there are too few households that do not have the capability to download a movie or even watch a video stream over the internet because no broadband access is availble. Add to that fact that people don't want to watch movies on their 17-19" 4:3 computer display if they have a 27" or larger TV, let alone a front projector or HDTV. Any DRM that is placed on the content will ensure that watching it on those displays will be very difficult unless they own a "Home Theater Personal Computer" (HTPC). Even assuming that there is a HTPC, with broadband access and everything else required, why would someone want to use your product over the more conventional methods like purchasing the DVD, or renting the DVD? With the restrictions that will be put in place to give a "secure" method, what usage will be lost to the consumer? At this point we are already well beyond the technical compitency of the average movie consumer, which means that the customer base is extremely limted, both do to technical requirements and technical know-how. You are now looking at a customer market that DO know what they are doing, and know how things work. So if your product is not as good in quality at the rental DVD that is avalible, they will simply use the higher quality product, because they actually know better then to take the PR department's word on it.
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
Probably all ready been asked by now, but how will they distribute them? Just put the file on their servers and see bandwidth fly away? Or will they actually embrace a P2P technology like BT to release the files? Another question, how big would the files be? I know that a 2 hour movie is easily about 700MB - 1.2 GB from what I have downloaded in the past.
However, I doubt I would subscribe to such a service because I assume it would be lacking many of the special features that DVDs have, like directors cuts and deleted scenes.
I dont feel like typing a novel here, so I'll be brief.
1 - I buy very few CDs because I think the cost is horrific; especially when I have to work around DRM just to copy the music to my (non-windows media playing) mp3 player.
2 - The CDs that I DO buy, I generally do so because I downloaded a few songs that happen to be on the CD and enjoyed them, so I went out and tracked down the album. If I download somthing and dont like it, I delete it. If I like it, I will probably buy the album. Is it wrong for me to check out the cd before I pay for it? No. If I did not download these files, I would NOT have purchased the albums.
3 - It's people like you that can't see far enough down their own noses and look objectively for the real issues at hand that are the reason the industry is in shambles. Have you ever though that your 'Neich' market may no longer be a popular one? You said yourself that nobody listens to most of what you sell; and to be totally honest, most Christian music I have listened to is god awful (no punn intended). Have you even considered that the demographics in your area may have changed? Or that the teens (who are generally the ones buying cds) are more focused on buying the newest rap-crap the industry is releasing?
Seriously; If you would take an objective look at the issues, you might see that the evil pirates are not the ones destroying your business. Times change, adapt to them or get over it and stop complaining.
And before you go on about your financial position because of your failing business, I am also a business owner and if I was in your position, blacklisting customers is the last thing I would be doing.. Your market is going so adapt your business model to go with it.
Damn, I ended up with a novel anyways... oh well.
he thought that putting post-release christian rock on p2p nets was 'leet'? he was probably kidding. frankly i can't decide if your article is a very long joke.
Guys, everyone calm the hell down. This clearly is NOT from the RIAA as numerous posts have claimed. Just listen to the lines he has used. Look at the evidence.
But now, this dream is turning into a nightmare.
Isn't this missing a "Dun dun duuhn!" sound effect?
"Dude, I'm going to put this CD on the Internet right away."
"Yeah, dude, that's really lete [sic], you'll get lots of respect."
Clearly, the kids are getting a l33t Christian rock CD, like all video gamers. Totally Xtreme (too extreme for an E) dood!.
They have fought the War on Drugs with skill, so why not the War on Piracy?
+1 irony
This evening, my daughters asked me. "Why do the other kids laugh at us?"
I wanted to tell them the truth - it's because they wear old clothes and have cheap haircuts. I can't afford anything better for them right now.
Corny lines... come on people, you must be feeling who is behind this silly post by now. It is at the tip of your tongue...
When my girls ask me questions like that, I feel like my heart is being wrenched out of my chest.
Dramatic pause... come on people, you KNOW who wrote this.
I just shook my head, and tried to hold back the tears. "I don't know, Jenny. I don't know."
If this doesn't give away who wrote this, NOTHING will. Even the RIAA could not come up with such a cliche and corney line. There is only ONE culprete he could dredge up such a crappy plot with terrible dialoge. Hollywood! That is right, even the RIAA couldn't write such a horrible piece of fiction. Either that, or the RIAA hired out the guy who wrote Alien Vs Preditor to write this touching piece.
(psst, this is +1 funny mods)
Yeah, what use is a music player that only runs vi? Bah! ;-) :%s/music/video/g :wq!
And now the speculators will tie this annoucement into the "one More Thing" annoucement that apple will host on oct 12th aren't they, just because of the red curtains on the invite. iTMS will no longer mean just iTunes Music store, but also movie (or more encompassing,) Media store
In Soviet Russia the insensitive clod is YOU!
This will be known as Mutual Assured DRM.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
"A failsafe way to prevent piracy? Try never putting it on any form of media readable on a PC then. Or better yet, never put it on any media. Spoken word, live performances for a naked audience (so they can't smuggle in audio recorders of course). And still...not even close."
It doesn't need to be failsafe, any more than computer security needs to be fool-proof.
"Come on, they just need to embrace the internet and trust that most of us will pay for it when it is easy to get. I know I will."
Considering all the messages (mixed and otherwise) illegal copyright violaters have been sending over the years, both implicit and explicit (here and elsewere). I don't see why they should trust anyone with a DVD burner. Maybe blind faith is OK for those who have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
[Grey Ninja]
"I actually might consider buying some downloadable movies if the price was right."
Now can we get Grey Ninja and Jmcmunn to both agree on what constitutes an agreeable price, and if one of them disagrees? Will he turn into a pirate? Extrapolate to the public at large and now you see why the "price it right, or I will fight" argument fails. The only acceptable way to fight is to not buy nor possess, and buy from those you deem OK.
Trying to make bits uncopyable is like trying to make water not wet. The sooner people accept this, and build business models that take this into account, the sooner people will start making money again. - Bruce Schneier
Exactly. I would easily pay for a DVD quality copy of Eraserhead, or Shaolin Soccer, etc. that I can't (and will never) find in the local video store.
I certainly won't dish out even a measly $.02 for a remake of the Amityville Horror if that's all they're offering.
Hell is starting to freeze over, pigs are flying, and a monkey just crawled outta my butt!!
Movie files are so big, they will have to make sure that they can positively downloaded completely and reliably by techmorons before their buyers can be charged for them, because as soon as someone gets billed for a file he can't download, you can guess the uproar that will cause...
Looking at the article, I'm thinking Windows-only, WMP or propriatary program-only, low quality, only offering renting options, at a higher price than Blockbuster.
It will be used to show that online distribution of movies does not work, in preparation for pushing another anti-P2P law through congress.
If this deal ends up to be anything like Steve Jobs' bout with the music industry, the movie industry will price their movie downloads as much as it costs to rent one at the video store ($3 to $4) for a single download. May as well spend the money to go rent the DVD for the extra features...AND THEN RIP IT TO MY COMPUTER ANYWAYS! ...
Oops...I said the loud part soft and the soft part loud...ugh.
This may be a troll, but it's a hilarious one.
- In a store that prides itself on Christian and family values, the store owner is pulling aside teenagers and calling them "little shit" and "bitch."
- It's funny, I don't recall piracy being a family value, and I'm pretty sure there's something written on a stone tablet about it too. Rather ironic that a store catering to people who like to think of themselves as more moral and pure than the rest of us would go under because their family/Christian customers are STEALING music.
Thanks for the laugh.
Seems to me this sets up a perfect working relationship with Apple, if Jobs does in fact come out with a video iPod as his "one last thing" at the press release.
Agreed. We also need to put an end to the nefarious electricity industry: It's putting the little-guy coal-miners out of business.
Oh wait, that's just the inevitable advancement of technology.
I'm sorry that you can't make money selling overpriced crap to dumb people. To be perfectly candid, I download music online. I download movies online, and I download Dungeons and Dragons books online. But, I only download things 'illegally' because I don't feel like paying for poor quality crap. If I had to choose between paying 15$ for a CD or not having access to that music, I would go without.
1. CDs are absurdly expensive. They should be priced like newspapers or magazines and sold in little cardboard dust covers to reduce the storage/transport costs. With the economies of scale, and the reduced price incentives for pirating, you'd be making money hand over fist. Take note of the example of the commercial success of computer magazine cover disks.
2. Take note of the live music scene in pubs and bars. It's largely collapsed. Yes, that's largely because people are doing other things with their time. The rise of computer games into the mainstream (both PC and consoles) hoovers a lot of money out of wallets and purses.
3. The rise of the Internet as a new nearly-essential utility and the privatisation of other public utilities has meant increased fixed costs to all consumers. More money hoovered out of wallets before non-essential purchases are even considered.
4. All the music released today sounds like over-produced American Idol contestants and the content's watered down to the lowest common denominator. Yet, the studios make their back catalog of prior good stuff largely inaccessible.
People flocked to my store, knowing that they (and their children) could safely purchase records without profanity or violent lyrics.
Families don't buy music, young people aged 14-40 do. Learn your demographic.
So that's my idea - a national blacklist of pirates.
Bound to fail for the same reasons the US War On Terrorism fails now: the security infrasture to police it will bankrupt you and for every pirate caught, another springs up in their place.
I'm sorry, I don't read articles. All I do is make inane posts.
Er, No, not necessary.
Here's how it works, Bob: you make it possible for me to very easily pay you a price I like and I won't pirate it. Because, you see, it's to my advantage to pay for it.
Basically, Bob, you're a hooker: you got something I want, I got something you want, and we gotta agree on a price.
Indeed, you're one of three hookers on this block. You lucked out: the only parking spot was around the corner, so you're the first hooker that's got something to offer. There's another hooker half-way down the block: she's the "reparatory" hooker. The one at the end of the block is the "blockbusters" hooker. And past the end and across the tracks is the "torrent" hooker. All the hookers on this block are looking pretty much the same, but within that range, you're definately the tops, Bob.
Now, Bob, you seem to think you're worth about twenty-five bucks. Because by the time I pay for my ticket and my wife's, we're getting into that range.
I want you to know the reparatory hooker only wants twelve bucks. I just have to walk down to her; not long, 'cause I'm not so overwhelming horny that I just gotta get blown right this second, Bob. And the blockbusters whore, why she's just four bucks -- but she'll blow me twice and I don't have to leave my house!
The torrent whore gives free blowjobs, but she's got ragged teeth and is pretty de-rezzed. I'm not such a cheap sumbitch that I'll go to her, Bob. I do pay for my movie entertainment.
Anyway, Bob, my point is this: you're an overpriced whore. I almost always rent the DVD; when I don't, I almost always end up at the reparatory. The last mainstream cinema showing I attended was Lord of the Rings. Exceptionally few films justify the first-print, top-rate quality, IMO.
So anyway, my point is this: so long as the free whore is skanky-looking, I'm not going to pirate: I'll take whatever reasonable cheap alternative provides me a home-system-quality experience. That experience is not going to be worth more than a DVD rental.
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Wright described the studio's entry into online movie services as 'something we have to do.'
Meaning, they would rather not, but they are finally getting the picture that they have to. I must say though, I don't have quite as much contempt for the movie industry as I do for the recording industry. They aren't quite as slimey and they do offer a product worth the money they are asking. Plus, they are making this effort on their own. As opposed to being dragged into it kicking and screming, then throwing temper tantrums when they didn't get their way.
'These movies are so expensive, we have to be careful,' he said.'"
Why are they so expensive? Is it the ridiculous salaries demanded by the "stars", insane amount of money spent on promotion, CG run amok because it's "cool", exorbitant salaries paid to executives, legal fees?
What it's all about is an industry that is feeling the squeeze lately. It's an industry that has been fat & happy for about 50 years and now has to come to terms with reality.
I foresee "star" salaries coming down quite a bit and a lot of backstabbing in the executive suites as everyone jockeys for position.
Having trouble getting excellent films that report real issues in a truthful manner? Can't get through to www.infowars.com or www.prisonplanet.com? Well, guess what, it is Time-Warner and AOL ISPs filtering the DNS. Fancy that. (Traceroute is great.)
Just go to infowars.net. They overlooked that one.
Go there and get your free movies and info-links about real issues as reported in major news media.
Those hypocritical Christians again! Making trouble for the rest of us.
Don't they know the 11 Commandments? Thou shalt not infringe!!!!
If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
I'm going to ignore the fact that this an obvious re-post...
As a record store owner, my business faces ruin. CD sales have dropped through the floor. People aren't buying half as many CDs as they did just a year ago. Revenue is down and costs are up.
Doesn't the fact that, despite the buzz about the new medium, that the music scene itself is fairly stagnant at the moment? Aside from notable exceptions like the Rolling Stones & U2, the touring industry is dying too. Can't blame that one on piracy...
It was one of those boutique record stores that sell obscure, independent releases that no-one listens to, not even the people that buy them. I decided that to grow the business I'd need to aim for a different demographic, the family market
So you dropped the defining characteristic of your shop to sell a line that Wal-Mart is famous for (who can guarentee censorship and a lower cost to the consumers)? Doesn't sound like a great move to me. As a buisness owner, you have the power to adapt to a changing market. Newbury Comics (I'm not sure if that's just a Boston-area chain, but it's my best example) started off selling, well, comic books... when the market dried up, they started stocking cds... when that market when south, they started selling DVD's, toys, and tshrits. They've been successful for as long as I can remember.
I personally think that the parent makes a good point. I liked both Enterprise and Firefly. My problem what that I just can't live by the damn TVs schedule. I am far too busy to be tied to a certain hour each week. Further, I really only want to see the show in order. This is exactly who I was more then happy to shell over money to Netflixs to see Enterprise and Firefly. Yes, I could have easily pirated both of those shows, but if you give me an easy way to pay for them, I am will happily take it.
Now, take Battle Star Galactica (BSG). I love the show. It is the first show in a very long time that I have tried to sit down and watch every single show. The biggest problem is that some times I miss a show. Once I miss a show I can either
A) Wait for rerun and watch the shows out of order
B) Wait for the DvD to come out.
C) Just go download it so that I can watch the next show in order.
Guess which one I pick?
I would be MORE then happy to shell out $5 to simply not go through the bother of getting it via bit-torrent and all the irritation that finding a decent connection can bring. Hell, I would pay them $5 to get tracker from their website and get the double satisfaction of gettin the show easily AND contributing more money then they make on commercials per person. They could even kill me access to the video after a week or two and I wouldn't be upset.
They don't though. If I miss an episode, the only option I have is to go pirate it. If some stupid bastard would simply let me give them my money, I would.
These businesses vastly underestimate how much people will pay for convince. iTunes is a perfect example. You can get anything you can get on iTunes via pirating. Yet iTunes some how manages to do AMAZING business. Why? If given the choice between shelling out a few dollars or pirating, most people will shell out a few bucks. Will there be people who pirate anyways? Sure. Who cares about them? Think of all the other dumb bastards that are aching to give you money if you would just FSUCKING take it.
I don't know where Mr. Bob Wright goes to see movies, but around here they're $8.50 a ticket, not too bad. And if you get on the internets, you can download a lot of movies for FREE!
Why doesn't he just do that?
Perhaps you should get out now and see the wave of the future: iTunes Music Store. Maybe iTunes won't be it, but that is the way everything is going. I saw a CD for $10 at one store, $12 at another, and $15 at a third. On iTunes I bought the 2 tracks that were worth something, and saved $8-$13 depending on how you look at it. Much rather buy the good tracks than buy all of the bad ones and get the 2 good ones packaged in there for quite a bit more.
People are already buying copies of movies copied off the screen in the movie theater complete with the comments of the filmer. Do you really think people wont just point there camcorders at there computer and/or tv screen and make a copy. Lets face it thats basicly how they make pan and scan conversions anyway. The only to reduce piracy is to make it easier to buy a movie then to pirate it.
"Just forget about anti-piracy and start selling those movies. You'll make much more money this way. (And its not like your gonna lose anymore than you already have from p2p networks.)"
Hmmm. Lets see which is the greater loss.
[1]
They keep the movies in the vault.{1} No one (Customer or otherwise) gets to see the movie. They go out of business but the movies still stay in the vault because someone owns the IP.
[2]
They release the movies out to the Internet. Someone cracks it and distributes it everywere. Of course "it's not like they would have bought it" then means they don't get any money for those copies. They go out of business. Everyone else wanting to go into the movie business looks at the wreckage and says. "That's not going to be me" and promptly goes into the gardening business.
In two society gets a temporary gain (a bunch of free movies not in a vault), while suffering a permanent loss (no one wants to go into the movie business).
Now let's look at the way it should be. Those who want to produce movies can do so even though it's a risky endeavour because they know all the factors and can account for them.{2} They produce something good, and are rewarded and motivated to produce even more and better by the free exchange of money. They produce something bad, a clear message is sent via both non-purchases and verbal feedback. There's not the ambigious message of non-purchasing but lots of P2P downloads.
{2}The randomness of illegal downloads, both in "what", and "quantity", as well as "when".
{1}Meanwhile listening to all those "Set our culture free" whiners.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Wow man, Im'm glad you posted. I was begining to think I was caught in some heavy deja-vu action.
I dont remember the "christian rock" angle though, but maybe I just filtered out that crap the first time.
Hell, maybe this guy just cut and pasted his original rap.
C.
"Doctor, it's not the voices I hear in MY head, but the voices I hear in YOUR head that really frighten me."
Forget preventing piracy, that horse left the barn with the home movie camera.
Instead tag each legitimate copy and hold buyers financially liable for downstream copies if they allow copies to be made. This will serve as a strong deterrent to "honest" customers sharing their paid-for copy with friends while keeping their own "backup copy." As for dishonest people, well, those who are determined will copy any road blocks be damned.
Non-brittle watermarks unique to each copy, while possibly visible in the finished film as artifacts, will be only mildly distracting if done well.
Furthermore, anyone possessing a copy with an altered or missing watermark will be by definition possessing a bootleg copy, subject to confiscation and in some jurisdictions much worse.
By the way, this same customized-copy technology has other uses too:
Imagine children's movies with your child replacing the main character.
Imagine movies with product-placement ads tailored to your tastes, delivered to you free courtesy of sponsors who target ads specifically at you.
Imagine localized versions of movies where maps can say "Taiwan" or "Province of China" or have different borders for Kashmir depending on who is buying the film and what country they live in.
I for one cannot wait to serve our new MPAA overlords. Oh wait, I already do.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Is it just me, or is Slashdot extremely slow since the upgrade? I was holding my tongue, figuring it was passing, but after this page took literally five minutes to load on my T1 university connection, I figured I ought to speak out. I'm using Safari 2.0.1 (412.5) on Mac OS X 10.4.2 on a 1.33 GHz iBook.
Shiira and Firefox are slightly faster, and Opera and Camino are both asininely slow. I'm not even bothering to try IE.
For the love of whatever deity you may or may not believe in put a fucking disclaimer on these things. Somewhere somebody is emailing a link of that to a clueless congressperson who might take it seriously.
We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
NBC/Universal programming. now all we have to do is wait a week to find out whether this will be two-tier off iTunes (rent cheap, buy pricey) or what.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Yeah, I hate this world where there are one or two mega players with enough clout to define the market. Apparently Universal was part of the Vivendi idiocy and was recently sold to NBC (a Division of GE now called NBC Uni).
Anyway, I decided to look up Universal Studios to see if they had a beefier press release. Here is a slightly longer article on Reuters. It sounds like NBCUni and Microsoft are siting in a back room brewing up some sort of concoction that the rest of the world will regret. This efforts appears to be part of something called BASCAP (Business Action to Stop Counterfeiting and Piracy).
I wish these people would just realize that the way to beat piracy is simply to establish channels for distributing the movies that are neither too costly nor too burdensome to the public. Instead, we have monopolies working in backrooms with monopolies making something that is both expensive and restrictive to the point that piracy will continue to prevail.
The parent comment is a known troll. This same comment gets posted over and over and over again. Stop responding to it. Mod it down. All the responses to it have been said over and over and beat to death.
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
ROFLMFAO
Am I the only one who found this post to be absoloutly hilarious? I am literaly crying right now from laughing so hard.
"I don't know, Jenny. I don't know."
LMFAO, classic man... classic.
This is an older troll, it gets posted every time an RIAA or similar story is posted. Recently it has been modded funny and thus draws responses from those who haven't seen it before. Here is a recent example. Good job, troll author. You have won. Have a nice day.
Exactly, this is at least the third time I've seen this post, whenever a piracy/riaa thing pops up.
This is bits and bytes we're talking about, right? The same laws apply here as everywhere:
- if it can be applied, it can be removed, regardless of whatever security measures implemented
- if security measures are implemented, all it takes is time for it to be decoded, as there are many ravenous pirates just waiting for another lock to crack
Another thing, what prevents these ID/tags/whatever from being changed to someone I personally chose to dislike? I could change it to their ID if I knew theirs, and they would be blamed. What if it were changed to some sort of ID tag for every pirated movie, thus giving a sort of noteriety or imfamy.
Comment: this rip is dedicated to 5a46hg47a289c, who released the first movie offered by Universal [assholes], power to the pirates!
And the ID tag would be that string of random characters, supposedly some person. It could be anything, the 1337h4x0rz, who the hell knows what these IDs could be changed to, and for what purpose.
my 2c
i suggest you do the world a favour, take a gun and kill yourself now
Universal, among other major motion picture companies, have had their movies online for years! I'm suprised people are just finding out about this now, I've been watching movies online since the dawn of the internet...
Why hello Mr. Nice MPAA Representitive... what are you doing to my compu...
+++NO_CARRIER
Frink: Nice try floyd, but you were designed for scrubbing, and scrubbing is what you shall do.
Or you can make them so affordable that it's not worth the time to pirate.
Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
I don't know who you are, AC, but this is a reposted comment. I've read this at least once before on /., and that was months ago. Which means you're either lying or, at the very least, covering the facts up quite a bit.
The truth of the matter is that the theatrical release of movies is (and has been, for fifty years) a money-losing proposition. Home entertainment is where the studios make some of their money, with the rest coming from licensing. As the marginal cost of entertainment distribution approaches zero, the studios will be forced to give their movies away, if only to ensure that they can make money from licensing. You can't download a t-shirt.
I got news for them. Their movies are already online. Probably better versions than the ones they will "offer" as well. Best of luck to them though, way to enter the market three years too late.
Um.. you do realise that this guy doesn't exist, right ? It's just a bunch of cliches run one after the other brought to you by the RIAA.
There is nothing wrong with a chili bowl haircut and high-water pants kids....
Drinking the blood of jesus
Drinking it right from his veins
Learning to swim in the ocean
Learning to prowl in his name
The body of Christ looked unto me
A preacher with God-given hands
He wants you to suck on the holy ghost
And swallow the sins of man
please type the world in this image: refills
I bet you came back for more.
If I had mod points I'd mod this as funny.
A quick google search shows this text everywhere, still funny though.
I love the part about "Chistian Rock" - Amazing. I suppose my current Black Sabbath track would have me going "straigh to hell", shame, I wanted to take the scenic route.
I don't buy as many albums as I used to, not because of piracy, but because the music sucks today.
I listen to XM Radio alot, and when I hear someone I like, I buy them. Like the Russel Allen's Atomic Soul CD I have sitting on my desk.
I will go and download music if the music isn't avaliable anymore in the States. Like Kingdom Come (Clone), I got into late 80s rock after hearing it on XM 41, and wanted some CDs, it's not generally avaliable in the States anymore, so I got the one CD I could from Amazon and have looked for others, unsuccessfully on the Internet.
This year, bought 5 CDs.
Downloaded 0.
Universal's movie's are already available online.
try www.movielink.com or www.cinemanow.com
Cut your hair and get a job. Nobody wants your silly record stores anymore.
price,speed,quality.
it's well within studio's power, they WILL make money off it, the only thing stopping them is their own stupidity.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
i love how half of this page is devoted to how this comment is fake/reposted. you people need to take a joke, fucking losers are doing nothing but crying about it. "-1, flamebait" on the way.
My UID is a palindrome, that must be good for some type of prize.
Aside from notable exceptions like the Rolling Stones & U2, the touring industry is dying too. Can't blame that one on piracy...
Could it be that a major contributing factor to the decline in touring industry is the cost of tickets and the increasing quality of available media? I can not only hear the band better on mastered recordings, but I can; turn them off when I want, pause, take it with me, and repeat the 'performance' whenever I want, all for less than the ticket cost of a single show?
Unless they have a flair for performance while live that justifies the extra $20-$40 there is no reason for me to go to the show. The same applies for movies.
If I can now get a high-quality (HD) show on a DVD or online from Universal, play it in my home theatre, why would I want to mess with the lines, bad seating, sticky floors, screaming children, et cetera, of a traditional theatre? (I think there will always be the nostalgia of a darkened theatre, but this move by Universal could be a signal of the market finally changing to meed demand.)
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to govern any other" -John Ada
When they came to the counter to make their purchase, I grabbed the little shit by his shirt. "So...you're going to copy this to your friends over The Internet, punk?" I asked him in my best Clint Eastwood/Dirty Harry voice.
"Uh y-yeh." He mumbled, shocked.
"That's it. What's your name? You're blacklisted. Now take yourself and your little bitch friend out of my store - and don't come back."
Someone who is 2/3rds your physical size comes into your store, makes a selection, and has a brief private conversation with a friend. You eavesdrop on the conversation, get upset, and physically threaten the customer after he gives you money for the purchase. Then tell him never to come back.
And you wonder why people have stopped coming into your store?
Why should you care what your customers i.e. the people who come into your store and give you money do with the stuff that they buy from you?
I too wonder if this post is actually a cut-and-paste job written by the RIAA for use as a block upload to any discussion on the web about file sharing. A pseudo-testimonial. The beginning seems real, but the ending text reads like a Karl-Rove-style political dirty trick.
"I for one cannot wait to serve our new MPAA overlords. Oh wait, I already do."
Your idea hurts the resale market. Who exactly would want your customized childrens movies?
The most amusing misconception about people who download content illegally, is that if they couldn't do so, they would pay for it. In my case, and I suspect most others, that simply isn't true. For example, I might say to myself, "self, I'd really like to hear 'Turning Japanese' by The Vapors," so I grab an Mp3 from where ever, and give it a listen. Would I spend 8 bucks (or even 5) for a used Vapors CD? Absolutely not! The RIAA, and its shills, like the lame made-up story above, are always moaning about lost sales due to piracy. I don't buy it, pun intended.
Dear God, why wait so long? I want Serenity now.
$ whatis themeaningoflife
themeaningoflife: not found
There really should be a website for those just starting out in the trolling art, to provide pointers and techniques so embarassments like this don't make it out it public.
The Subtle Art of Trolling
And for fairness...
Beware the Troll: A Practical Guide
the theatrical release of movies is (and has been, for fifty years) a money-losing proposition.
Two points, Home entertainment hasn't been around for fifty years. Except if you consider broadcast television in the definition. The ability to select and watch a movie in the home has only been around for twenty years. Since the introduction of inexpensive VHS players and rentals.
Two, most movies then and now do make their costs of production back through theatrical ticket sales. Check the numbers on BoxOfficeMojo.com.
I don't believe that much revenue actually comes from licensing of products associated with movies. The Star Wars films are the major exception. But most Hollywood films have very little licensed product offered.
Bollywood has developed a failsafe method to keep people from pirating their creative works...
They make almost nothing but Hindi musicals.
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
edPod is the one true Pod!!!
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Mr. Small Guy, are you for real? While you were attending service, the music industry has been rebuilt.
1. Music buyers have realized that they don't need to buy into the scam of having to buy an entire album when all they want is a single or two.
2. They are no longer willing to accept the flawed business model of pressing CDs before the music on them has been purchased.
3. They are no longer willing to pay your downtown store rent when they can get their music directly from a server that could be located anywhere from California to Copenhagen.
4. They do not like to pile up plastic cases on their shelves anymore.
5. They now think of the same disks that were once thought to be "compact" as too big.
6. They like the idea of being able to purchase their music from the comfort of their home.
7. They have finally acquired their "customer is king" rights.
Wake up! Sell your business and do something else because the business model you are fighting to save is already dead.
One more thing. Pretty soon, the music download business model will also be dead. When everyone has ultra fast broadband, no one will want to store music locally. They will prefer to pay a flat subsciption to get wireless access to all the music in the world. On their extremely tiny wireless in-ear receivers.
On the other hand, I don't see coffeeshops going out of fashion anytime soon. I'm serious. A Christian Coffee Shop where people would get to socialize with other like-minded people might just be a good idea in the right neighborhood.
Did anyone else notice that this post is practically identical to another post in another story a few weeks ago or so?
Makes me wonder.
Dr. Hfuhruhurr: I don't find this amusing!
5
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/10/2/103735/27
Why the negative comments? This is a pretty funny parody of the whole RIAA situation. It's subtle but it's clearly deliberate. He's drawing parallels between the whole Parental Advisory fiasco and the current habit of the RIAA in suing pirates and placing it the the setting of a small local store. Bravo, I say.
heh heh :-)
Scott McNealy to Michael: "Suck my Sun!" Michael Dell to Scott : "Lick my Dell!"
Universal is very bad about locking viewers out of the ability to press menu, fast forward, or skip to get past the initial previews on their dvds. On several Universal DVD's I own, I cannot even press stop after inserting the disc to stop the previews. It has angered me so much that they are forcing me to watch previews on their dvd's that I try to stay away from buying universal DVD's alltogether. I can almost understand DRM for online movies provided it's flexible, but if they get so controlling over the distribution that whatever media player used is locked out of skipping past the previews, then they won't see one fucking dime of my money.
Probably? So there is music that you download instead of buying, like it, and never pay for? Does this happen often. This week? Today? Why don't you buy it kahless2k? Is $13.99 an album too expensive? Is $.99 a download too much for you? Tough. 3D Studio Max is too much for me so I just don't buy it. I'll work something out.
It's pretty funny how despite admitting you own music you like that you haven't paid for you tell him to adapt his business model. How does a business adapt to a model that's getting it for free? How does a business compete with that. You would think the obvious answer is to make it available online as legitmate downloads. Well, it's been here for 2 years yet P2P music sites are still busy as ever.
What do you suggest? It's hardly expensive, unless $.99 for a song is too expensive for you, in which case you've got BIGGER problems. Is it because the quality is bad? No, you've got music you like that you haven't paid for? So what is it? What makes you download music you like and not pay for it, and how is a business meant to adapt to that? They've lowered their prices in the past few years, yet people will still bitch about it. If you don't want to pay for music then try a site like http://epitonic.com/ and check out some indie music which is available at no charge, and the quality is excellent.
How about realizing that the old methods of distrubition are fading away and that you should probably offer music online for sale? You sound alot like an RIAA PR rep.
I want to own music.
I want to rent movies.
I can download movies... I have the technology. I don't because its not worth it. For £7.99 a month I get 4 DVDs posted through my door and I can choose the movies online. Its takes a couple of days for the movie to arrive, but thats comparable to bittorrent on a 1MB downpipe. Once the DVD arrives I know the quality will be good and there are usually a few extras.
Looking at my DVD collection only about 20% have been watched more than once, the rest I would have been better off renting.
I would gladly hand over $10-15 for 8 downloads a month and then pony up an extra $2 for the right to burn a downloaded copy to DVD.
We've been bouncing this around for years now and no single proprietary-software company has put together an iTunes equivalent for movies and yet it shows all the signs of being a cash cow. Its time for FOSS to stand up and create that software and use it to generate an income for FOSS projects.
FOSS DRM might be bit of misnoma, and charging for a product isn't something FOSS is very good at, but think of all the good it could do! It could revive BSD, it could bring HURD to life, it could mean that Wine actually catches up with MS - it could charge the war chest in the fight against DRM, patents and copyright.
Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
There's also music I bought instead of downloading, didn't like, but did pay for.
Usually about half the tracks of the album they came on.
In the end, we're even.
Must it also be accompanied by dry water, a working perpetuum mobile and world peace?
Free as in mason.
Why would you go to the video store to rent a DVD if you had a set-top box that allowed you to download the movie from a central location and have it immediately?
IE, something akin to pay-per-view, with a better interface whereby you could just download any movie you wanted that ever existed. $5-10 a pop and it's downloaded to a hard drive on your box. It sounds like a winner to me, even if it is locked down with heinous DRM.
For some reason, once a media company is big enough, they can ram pricing down our throats ($10 for a movie, commercials included, no matter how good or bad the movie) and they control so much distribution that even Water World made money. So, I have no sympathy for them. God, I hate MBA weenies. They have such a perverted and mercenary view of the world.
Ah, I feel better now. Thanks.
If you don't like it either return it or sell it. It's not their fault you don't like half their songs. Nobody likes everything. There are enough free samples, radio plays, reviews and word of mouth for an intelligent person to make decision about whether something is worth buying. I'm a huge movie fan, and I haven't seen a movie in 2 years that I didn't regret seeing, because I've finely tuned my decision system on which to judge. I base it on several trusted sources and past history of the director, screenwriter, actors, and production company etc. I do the same now with music. Haven't bought an album I didn't like in years either. Sure, there are songs on it that I don't really listen to, but I don't buy an album for its individual songs, because any idiot would know that if that's what you want you buy the singles, right? When I buy an album I buy it as a whole. I bought for the songs I like, the artwork, the writing by\or about the band. If there are a few songs on it that I don't like that's not a problem to me. I understand that that's the NATURE OF ART. Some you like, some you don't. You don't blame the artist and you use that as an excuse to steal it.
Do you always think you should only buy pits and pieces of products that you like. In the bookshop do you rip out the pages of books you don't like? Do you try and get a paper cheaper because you don't like the sports section?
You can always find excuses to justify getting something for nothing. But anyone with a brain can see through that.
>Every day, fewer and fewer customers enter my store to buy fewer and fewer CDs. Why is no one buying CDs? Are people not interested in music?
Bingo! I'm no longer interested in music. There's so much noise and talk and shit about "intellectual property" and "copyright" and "theft" and whatnot that I simply disentangled myself from all that crap. I read books, I play games, I sometimes listen to Virgin Radio Classic Rock. And that's about it. I don't buy CDs, download music, or care what the whole scene is harping about.
I. Just. Don't. Care. Anymore.
---- Take the Space Quiz!
The link on the story is not future-proof once a new Studio Briefing is published by IMDB.
The archive URL is http://www.imdb.com/news/sb/2005-10-05
erroneous: look me up in a dictionary
- intelligent Troll
Is that like a Compassionate Republican?
wired had a great article about this a while back - they call it the long tail essentially it argues that companies can make as much money on obscure titles as they can on hits.
jokes often lose their humor after telling them a couple times in a row.
I am really beginning to feel the love for Universal. First they give me Serenity, now downloadable content :)
Think about it, the more and more music they make, the more and more present releases have to compete with past releases
especially if old releases are still damn good. Fast forward 200 years, you'll have new release competeing with 250yrs
worth of old stuff. But they dont care, thats why they want to increase (C) to 10000000 years. So they make money for infinitey.
Jee, I wish I had such a cushy easy job , a bit like a mafia boss really.
Maybe when ww3 starts, the masses will run for the hills to the execs giant mansions and live on their front yard.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
Dude, AVP was good i thought.
The guy who directed it or write it, he was a fan of the originals, they did well in it. I thought
the story was good and hard to do because of prejuduce of the old one, try to see it with a new light
without bias of the old one.
1. Antarctica is a good choice
2. both together is good since predatorIII without Arny would be as good as Jurassicpark3.
Now if they did stargate-avp then it would blow.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
...because every copy that is sold costs several hundred million dollars to produce and manufacture. Errrr.....
Two answers for you:
(1) I'll post what I want. No, I won't. Fuck you.
(2) That's because I've posted it before. No, I copied and pasted it. Yes. Fuck you. I'm not.
Note to self, watch it again when you have the time.
Moreover, for most people, in the time it will take to download the movie, you can drive to your local Blockbuster, rent the movie, come home, and start watching it in your living room.
But what do I know? Sony and Hollywood seem to think there's a market for watching movies on your PSP. I won't watch them, but that doesn't mean someone else won't.
Make love, not reality television.
That's pretty much it. I hope they put their material online and then sue everyone who downloads it because of the possibility that they may illegally share it. Also I want them to sue because the company may decide to raise the price later on, and the consumer not having paid that price increase is clearly in violation.
wookie from the planet Kashyyyk...
HAND.
The movies are _already_ out there, DVD quality and all. Stop worry, ok? Every bleeding single copy you can sell online is one more "kaching", ok? If they copy that file, or some other file with the _same_ movie, what is the big difference? Put the money into 1. Making it easy to use 2. Giving as many as possible a chance to buy 3. Marketing. Do no care if people can pirate, because... they already can and do!
"However, he cautioned, the studio's entry into the Internet sphere must be accompanied by fail-safe methods to prevent the films from being copied and redistributed."
I bet this failsafe method will only run on windows. must be the same drm that windows is using on iptv.
I am not quite sure that they need to establish "fail safe" DRM and that a crack on the online service DRM would be catastrophic... We are talking about the same movies that will be on DVD, which has very poor DRM. This bein said, even if they put super hyper restricting DRM, people will still be able to extract the movie from the DVDs. People who want to burn or copy the movie will use BitTorrent. I really hope that they will provide an honest DRM that will allow people to play to different output (I.E Not MS' secure computing) and will not require weird players. If you think about it, if someone wants to copy a DVD, he will go to blockbusters, rent the movie for the same price, save on bandwidth, circumvent DRM easily and archive the DVD. It is not like having weak DRM or fair use on their online DVDs that it will create an unprecedent hole for movie copy...
We know that you can lick your nose. Now keep quiet about it!
Guy asked me for a quarter for a cup of coffee. So I bit him.
While speaking at a conference on piracy, they used the term "fail safe." Doesn't that strike you as odd? I have yet to see anything fail safe. Everything so far has ultimately been hacked. You look at any copy-protection schemes out there and they all ultimately get broken. I'm in no way discounting their efforts and I really wish them the best, but it seems almost aloof to use "fail safe" before the product is even launched. Are they really naive enough to think that their technology will never be broken?
Finance tutorials and more! Understandfinance
I feel the exact same way, although my situation is a bit different; I have a HDTV set from my days of living in a house (I live in a small 1br in Manhattan now) and there's no reasonable way for me to get OTA HDTV broadcasts without upsetting the board or the wife. Every show I like is OTA. So, my options are:
1) Bend over a chair for HDTV cable (very pricey in Manhattan), just so I can see the shows I like (which are all OTA)
2) Watch OTA analog broadcasts (I can get a signal by plugging in the cable, doesn't work for HDTV as a lot of you probably already know), reception's not too good but at least I'm _seeing_ it.
3) Download HDTV rips the next day.
Guess which one I go with?
I would be OK with paying a couple of bucks per show, or (even better), "subscribing" to the show for like $25 / season, with HDTV versions available online at the time of broadcast. But, here's another idea, and I think it's a good one: highly targeted ads. Have subscriptions to the show be free, but before you can sign up, you need to fill out a 15-minute survey with all the standard marketing data (age, gender, income, hobbies, neighborhood, do you have kids / do they watch the show with you, etc). After you fill out the survey, you get a login which can then be used to download any show that the network offers subscriptions to. Using your login, you can download a version of the show(s) you want with specifically targeted ads (ads for the Mexican restaurant two blocks from your place, ads for the local plumber, ads for stores / boutiques / games / etc all based on your survey). You're still watching ads, but they're ads that are really specifically targeted for you! A lot of people might not mind seeing that kind of ad, and even if you do, you can still FF or skip over it (it's a high-quality avi). Can you still share that? Sure, but if you can get it from the source just by filling out the survey (and hey, you might actually see an ad for something you _want_), why bother going the BitTorrent route?
Yes, I know there are all kinds of technical hurdles here; bandwidth for the servers with tons of people dl'ing high-bitrate video files, how to inject the ads properly in the first place, how to store all that stuff (since theoretically you've got a seperate file for each dl'er), and of course the algorithm to choose which ads go to which customers. Tech hurdles, to be sure, but how much harder is it than the rat race of copy protection?
Which brings me to the second point (probably echoing a lot of other people here) - why go through all this trouble to install copy protection on your downloadable / Internet-deliverable content? I mean, if I want a pirated copy of something, I can get it _now_ from someone who ripped a DVD. What exactly would Universal be trying to prevent? The worst-case scenario (people are taking the content and sharing it illegally) is already happening! Why not focus on giving people a good experience for a reasonable price? I think a good percentage of people who download something illegally would happily pay a reasonable fee for it, and the lower the price, the higher the percentage of people who would do it. Make a less-than-DVD-quality version available (particularly of movies that don't rely on special effects or other visuals) that's quick to download, charge $1 and see how many people purchase it. What's the risk? That people will illegally share and download the medium-quality version (as opposed to the high-quality versions that are already floating around the BT universe)?
Seriously, I often wonder if I'm missing something here. All this fuss about making content available online to prevent piracy. News flash: piracy is already here - you should know, you're the one putting those god-awful commercials at the beginning of movies. So what exactly are you trying to prevent?
--Nate
The choice is almost never between paying for something or "stealing" it. There is almost invariably a third option, which is doing without. However, the marketing people are so convinced that their product is indispensable, that they consider it inconceivable that anyone would choose to forgo their product altogether. {Of course, doing without a DVD hurts the movie studios every bit as much as watching it without paying. But it doesn't get their backs up so much, because their heads are so far up their own arses that they don't notice this kind of lost sale}.
Let's consider a group of mates. {Mostly} honest, working-class people. They are closely-knit, often doing things together -- dinner parties, barbeques, minding one another's kids, that sort of thing. Not necessarily always the whole group together. Their means are modest, such that the purchase of a DVD is something that requires a good deal of evaluation and may well ultimately be eschewed in favour of something else.
If any one of them buys a DVD of a film that they all like, they will all end up watching it {either by borrowing it in turn, or by having a viewing party}. Each method has its own problems: in the first case there is a risk that the DVD might be returned late, in unsatisfactory condition or not at all; and in the second case, there is an obligation to supply food, drink and drugs and a risk of damage to the home. And both methods carry a slight risk that the purchaser might not like the film after all. Although these people are generally good friends and trust one another, these are real practical considerations given the costs involved and will undoubtedly figure in the pre-purchase evaluation.
So a group of people who can ill afford a DVD {costing somewhere between 80 and 100 fags} that they may or may not like, have to engage in much soul-searching -- and in the end might well decide to wait for it to come around on TV. If one of them has Sky {or a relative with Sky and a VCR/DVD+RW} then this is a more promising path. Waiting costs nothing but time, which is plentiful when you don't have much money, and they have already paid for the subscription anyway.
This presents a window of opportunity for an entrepreneur, distributing independently-sourced copies of feature films and passing on the cost savings {from things like, not having paid any royalties to the studio} to customers. These "Pirates" can offer their product more cheaply than the legitimate outlets despite costing significantly more to manufacture. Contrast this situation with the printed word. Many newsagents' shops have photocopiers; but the total cost {including non-monetary factors} of copying even one article from a newspaper or magazine usually exceeds the purchase price of the paper. Likewise, scanning and OCRing a Harry Potter book and making it available for download would be a significant effort. Whoever downloads it has either to print it out, or make do with reading it on-screen; and it's a PITA when it costs so little to buy the "real thing". {Of course, if someone has a point to prove, they'll be prepared to go through with it. But they wouldn't have bought the original anyway.}
The price of DVDs is a psychological barrier to purchase. If a DVD cost £4.99, people would be less likely to think too hard about the implications and more likely just to buy it, on the grounds that if it goes wrong it's "only a fiver". {A team of experts probably have already worked out the exact threshhold for impulsive purchases.} Out of our hypothetical group {but be honest, you do know people who are just like that}, it's far more likely that at least one person will buy the movie rather than everyone waiting for it to show up cheaper elsewhere.
So my plan to stop piracy is this: Make DVDs cheaper and not only will you sell more of them, you will end up making more money than before because people will be buying them who ordinarily would not have.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
Oh yeah sure i want to wait 6 hours to download a 4 /8 gig movie over the net and bust my ISP's maximum download limit each month.
Geez how cool can you be when you say; hey in 6 hours i'll have this movie downloaded. Oh gee i got to the video store and bought 3 movies in less than a hour with the case and all the goodies.
Loser features,, like downloading crapy music from the net,anyway.People dont see the difference specially kids because they listen music on MP3 players and look at a movie on their computers so standard are lowering for the media.
Nobody can tell that a MP# player the size of a credit card has the same output quality of a cd player , more convenient and a lot more songs i agree, but it's not to be compare.
Same thing with dvd downloads, If you dont burn your dvd on some media you risk loosing what you bought over the net and one double layer cd cost like 9$ canadian, add the price they would charge for one dvd (at least 10$). It's not worth it one bit
there is no advantages to download over the net except to get fat and lazy people grow in numbers.
take a bike,a walk,get out of the house.
Universal's movies WERE expensive. But the costs have long since been recouped through the theatrical release, through the DVD release, and through the televised released. Stop trying to pretend that every movie loses money as it's complete bullshit!
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
Jesus saves...
He passes to Moses.... who shoots.... AND SCOOOOOOORES!
How many times are you going to post the EXACT SAME anectdotal "evidence" of piracy hurting the small guy. I've seen this post before, and I'd not be surprised to see it again. Is this some kind of RIAA conspiracy? I wouldn't be surprised if it was.
I always hear about copy prevention. The media companies want to force technology on everyone to prevent copying. How about looking at this from another angle? Improve tracking technology. If Alice gives her digital copy of a movie to Bob who gives it to Charles, which eventually ends up with Zack, we should be able to see from Zack's copy that it started with Alice. They can add something to a P2P download client to watermark each movie download so when they do bust someone for illegal copying, they can track down where it started. Fair use copying wouldn't be interferred with and they can track down the real problem, the pirates.
I'm proud to have one of the most extensive Christian rock sections that I know of.
My store has survived for years, but I now face the prospect of bankruptcy.
Cause, meet effect.
Otherwise, it is no more convenient than the video store, or even Usenet/BitTorrent and I probably won't be bothered. They can argue that #4 is too conducive to piracy, but a DVD from the video store is easily copied - so it really wouldn't be any worse.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
See you must have thought that VOIP was some sort of telephony thing... really it was always Video Over IPOD... they just wanted to get the word out there ala viral marketing.
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
CEO Bob Wright said Tuesday.
'We're raking in billions of dollars and we have to be careful that we remain in a position of power, shouldn't be too hard since we also control the White House too,' he said.'"
I just watched "Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning" (downloaded via the torrent) and throughly enjoyed it and ordered a shirt online. I find almost all of the Hollywood movies are trash and insulting. I don't blame Bob for trying to hang on to one of the easiest and best paying jobs in the world being a CEO of a GE company. He has to learn like the "music industry" is learning, the "music" is fine it's just the "industry" that has to go. Nobody became a musician (or film maker) to make a bunch of guys (and they are mostly men) in suits rich. In most cases it no longer takes millions to make and distribute good entertainment, most of the suits should get a real job in some other industry and not hang around runing this one.
Could it be that a major contributing factor to the decline in touring industry is the cost of tickets and the increasing quality of available media? I can not only hear the band better on mastered recordings, but I can; turn them off when I want, pause, take it with me, and repeat the 'performance' whenever I want, all for less than the ticket cost of a single show?
... how does one reproduce that at home? Fine, that might not be your scene, but if that's the case, are you really the kind of person that would go in the first place?
Maybe, it doesn't help.
But I don't think you can make the claim that music DVDs are to touring what move DVDs are to theatres. You can replicate the atmosphere of a theatre in you're own home pretty easily (after all, its just a dark, air conditioned room with a big screen where no one can talk). But going to a show is inherently social.. tailgaiting before the show, drinking/smoking, dancing, general rock show craziness
As far as cost, clubs/local bars have been charging about the price of a CD for years now. In the larger arenas, ticket prices aren't that much higher for MOST bands, but it does feel like tickemaster and arena parking/food stands are gouging customers... I hope that is remedied soon, but I still feel like the large problem is a lack of great bands. Seriously, how many bands can you think of that could fill an arena these days, compared to IMHO higher points in rock history (late 60's/early 70's, early 90's)?
especially if it's available online before the DVDs
who wants to take a bet they they will be releasing all the flops on their online service first at about $20.00US a pop...
:)
and you can only watch the downloaded file twice before it deletes itself and you have to fork out more money to download another copy.
I think that I would prefer to go to the movies with a camcorder and see a movie I really like
*** I had a
Yeah, you're one hell of a Christian, ain't ya? You're a damned liar, buddy. You worship money, not God.
Meanwhile, my heathen musician friends GIVE THEIR MUSIC AWAY!
One last note, fellow: "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" (look it up).
Alternatively, they could have a premium pay-access version tracker, sans commercials, and a free tracker with the commercials intact. A careful choice of codec and a file truncation to trim off two seconds of the last five second cable logo from the video before making the torrent would also prevent fast forward from working, if they want to be a bit more self centered and less user freindly.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
This efforts appears to be part of something called BASCAP (Business Action to Stop Counterfeiting and Piracy).
Will ASCAP, a performance rights organization for songwriters and their publishers, sue for use of a confusingly similar mark? Or is ASCAP in on this BASCAP thing?
Why would you go to the video store to rent a DVD if you had a set-top box
Because a set-top box is expensive to purchase, and especially in college, not everybody has a "set" to put a box on "top" of.
I already have this. I can select a movie to rent from a menu, it downloads to my cable box hard drive, and I can watch it for 24 hours, after which it erases itself. No need to return it. Most big cities in North America offer this as an option with their digital cable service nowadays, and if they don't they will be offering it very soon!
While this is very convient, and has replaced going down to the local video rental place for me, it isn't revolutionary. The service only has several thousand movies, about the selection of a local video store. And they circulate the movies, so it appears that they only have the technology to offer several thousand movies at one time.
What WOULD be truly revolutionary, is if it had every movie ever made available. For example, the H. P. Lovecraft Historical Society made a Call of Cthulu movie (the story was on Slashdot a couple days ago). It is available on DVD, but for $20 plus shipping and handling it isn't something a lot of people will buy. But $4 to rent it, I am game.
I am also a big fan of low-budget sci-fi movies. I can purchase them on Amazon for $20, plus SH, but that is an expensive proposition, and I only have so much physical room to store the movies even if I had the money to purchase them. Also, I have to wait half a week to recieve them, so that eliminates impulse purchase.
Having access to ALL movies (or at least a selection that is as good as Amazon.com's DVD selection) would change the way a lot of people watch movies. It isn't the technology of renting videos online or through my cable service that is the key technology (That has already been fully developed, and actually deployed in a lot of places). It is all about the catalog! Choice and diversity is what will make the technology attractive.
The solution is to do exactly that - tie DVDs to the purchaser.
Put a unique bar-code on each DVD case which is scanned at checkout. Require that no store sell any DVD without obtaining some proof of who the customer is - this can be a security-camera videotape, a copy of a credit card, a copy of a drivers license, or anything else that does the trick.
Of course, with all this big-brother-ism, freedom-minded people will stop buying DVDs at stores, resorting to the resale market or *gasp* piracy. But the sheep will go for it especially when industry promises fewer price increases because of lower piracy.
Ironically, downloadable DVDs, mail-order purchases, and just about anything done on a credit card is traceable and most sheeple don't seem to mind.
In 10 years we won't have many new CDs or DVDs anyways, everything will be on-demand or buy-over-the-network.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
You'd be right except for the price is still way off. A quarter a song and millions of people would be forking over, but $.99 is still way too high. Especially for something that's SO low-cost. No CD to make, package, distribute etc. Hell a quarter is probably too much really.
O~ Him that studies revenge keeps his own wounds green. -- Francis Bacon
Who are they?
This is an interesting moral question. Check out this article, you may find it interesting.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
I was sort of assuming that one had these already. DVD players were expensive once too you know.
Unlike DVD players, set-top cable boxes cannot be purchased by an end user; they can only be rented, and only as part of a basic cable television subscription which often costs more than $720 per year. Netflix costs much less than that.
You are right. Both the left and the right of the great IP debate was not about piracy but about destroying the vibrant market that started to emerge.
Every day I ask myself why this is happening.
It was one of those boutique record stores that sell obscure, independent releases that no-one listens to, not even the people that buy them.
I think you answered your own question.
The clearance system sounds logical. It is not. It is completely arbitrary. -- John Bolton