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.'"
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...
...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?
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.
This sounds like a PR statement, sort of testing the waters of consumerism so to speak. Finding out what the consumer collective thinks about the idea of a legit central movie store online.
I Doubt even they know how it will all work yet. But at least they are admitting it needs to be done if they are to stay "Alive" in the market.
Fingers crossed someone in management realizes we don't owe the studios anything...
Go Away! Not for Sale
it's kinda weird how people in these positions still don't realize that's not going to happen.
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.
..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.
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.
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
"The movie industry still doesn't get "it". People won't buy something that is crippled. "
Not if they position and price it as a rental.
"Derp de derp."
There are ways to get around the Apple DRMing. It's not too hard if you think about it.
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.
What's more, watermarking as a deterrent/detection method for piracy is supported by the EFF. This won't be particularly useful for DVDs (as there's no way to link watermark with purchaser), but it could be very useful for DRM-free Internet distribution.
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
I think it is a brilliant idea though.
For example DRM'd WMA10 or whatever, using bit torrent, $5.00 per movie unlimited viewings, $.99 per movie, one viewing. That would take off like wildfire (and likely displace a good measure of piracy).
If they want to host all the bandwith then make it $10/$3. For super DRM'd, can't watch it on TV without a "special decoder ring" media I think the sweet spot (for unlimited viewing) is in the $5-7 range. much more than that and people will complain, because they can buy the disk at WalMart for $10-$20 and watch it where ever/when ever they want.
-nB
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump