Slashdot Mirror
Spielberg Bitten by DVD Encryption
diodesign writes "The Guardian newspaper has reported that 5000 DVD based preview copies of Spielberg's 'Munich' sent to reviewers in the UK can't be played due to the copy protection system involved. Human error at the laboratory where the DVDs were encrypted lead to the wrong region code being set, plus the reviewers use special players from Dolby that prevent the pirating of 'screeners'. An ironic twist in the on-going battle of DRM and media vs. consumers."
Then they now know how someone who only has a linux machine feels when he tries to play the dvd he just bought.
I suggest them to download the movie that works without problems.
200GB/2TB $7.95 Coupon: SAVE90DOLLAR
This is more a problem of quality control at the manufacturing plant. It's like those Barbies that got shipped out with G.I. Joe voice boxes a few years ago. The people who were supposed to view these aren't even going to notice. They'll likely get new copies in a week or two and watch them without even having one thought of shaking their fists at the MPAA.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
You don't need to anyway. Pretty much every DVD player on sale in the UK has a code you enter on the remote that makes it region free.
But as it says, these "screener" copies need special Dolby DVD players anyway. Surprising that they are region coded.
"Someone pushed the wrong button," she said. "It was a case of rotten bad luck."
I sure wish I could blame pushing the wrong button on bad luck. Unfortunately, I live in the real world and have to live with the consequences of my negligence.
Be a real patriot: Question authority. Think for yourself. Formulate your own conclusions.
I'm sure it did. His chances of winning awards based on this film just decreased, if for no other reason than the screeners will be pissed that they can't watch it because of actions by Spielberg's people. True, it wasn't him personally that did it, but he still is the boss, and his name is the one all over the credits.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
The are biting there own hands off, as well as those that feed them. Will this wake them up maybe?
The problem, it appears, was partly down to teething troubles with the limited edition DVD players issued last year to Bafta members. Developed by Cinea, a subsidiary of Dolby, the players permit their owners to view encrypted DVD "screeners", but prevent the creation of pirate copies. Munich screeners were encoded for region one, which allows them to be played in the US and Canada, rather than region two, which incorporates most of Europe.
If they're using specially encrypted DVDs meant to only be played back on specially-made DVD players, why are they even bothering to region code them? This just reeks of stupidity...
Be a real patriot: Question authority. Think for yourself. Formulate your own conclusions.
If you're prepared to go with unheard of players you'll find virtuall all of them are region unlockable and often contain a slip of paper telling you how to do it.
Region encoding is a farce anyway. It's hard to see why studios are so worked up about it.
Like they expect us to do.
Exactly why you'd implement region encoding on a screener-only DVD system is open to question. Maybe it's a legacy thing. Either way, it's dumbass, and much as I like the guy, I'm glad a major hollywood figure is getting a virtual beating for using DRM.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
I could have sworn that a "screener" was just another word for "cam," a designation that means the pirated version comes from someone sneaking a camera into a theater and bootlegging it that way. If you have the DVD, why do this? Also, I thought that the proper designation for a prerelease that is bootlegged from a DVD preview was "Royal." If anyone can correct me on this, I'd appreciate it, as AFAIK, there is no bootleggers vocabulary list anywhere... and the whole culture, from a socialogical standpoint, is very interesting.
The Admin and the Engineer
This has almost nothing to do with the DRM battle between media and consumers. These people aren't consumers. These are screener copies used in the awards process. I have absolutely no problem with whatever kinds of DRM they want to use on screener copies, as these have already been found to be a genuine source of piracy. This is EXACTLY the kind of target that the media companies should pursue. The only problem is that they goofed on their first attempt at using some of their new strategies. Other than that, nothing to see here.
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
Who cares if the people making the nominations don't get to see the movie, since when are these awards handed out for the content anyway? The movie will get nominated anyway because of the buzz, and Spielberg.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
As has been known for years, academy members simply don't watch many of the movies they select. It's a huge farce. I'll bet that even though they didn't get the movie within a reasonable time, many vote for it anyway.
The article points out that this wasn't the case last year where Bafta voters weren't provided with screeners of Million Dollar Baby:
It seems that a wrong button was pressed. However the real problems is that there was NO QA process. It would of been very simple to add the step of trying to play the DVD on the DVD player that was the target. If they did not have the DVD with the proper region encoding, they choose not wait for the DVD player to be delivered.
Trying to take a shortcut on the QA process has turned into big problem. Reminds me of the old nursery rhyme, "For the want of a nail, the kingdom was lost..."
Research is what I doing when I don't know what I am doing - Werner von Braun
I never really understood the whole region-lock thing anyway. It just seems to be 100% greed.
It is 100% greed. DVD could be more expensive in Europe than in the US, even with the postage and custom (saying could, because it depends on the country). MPAA members want to be able to sell the same product for different prices depending on region. So, for a western European, buying from the US might be cheaper than buying locally. For a northern American, it could be cheaper to buy from Asia than to buy locally. They really want the public to pay as much as possible for a given product, and not the world average.
Also, they usually get local distributors to sell their DVDs. These would go away, they fear, if everybody buys DVDs from another country.
To be honest, I don't think they should fear the last point. Most people in Norway would prefer to have DVDs with Norwegian subtitles, so they probably wouldn't order from the US anyways (since those DVDs aren't subtitled in Norwegian).
Je ne parle pas francais.
I always thought that Regional distinctions were wrong, and illegitimate. Even if you want to "protect your IP" and prevent people from copying your product, there is no legitimate reason to prevent someone from buying something in one country and viewing it in another. People can be called upon to move because of work or family. They can bring a present to a family member abroad... maybe because things are cheaper at home. There are so many legitimate reasons for the movies to have to be played in other markets than their destination markets that that kind of protection should plainly be illegal. On the other hand, here we have a beautiful example of karmic retribution. Maybe there is intelligent design after all.
I like my dinosaurs feathery, and my pterosaurs hairy (or is it pycnofibery?)
The submitter and I have very different criteria for "ironic twist". A Cask of Amontillado this is not. Hell, it isn't even up to M. Night Shyamalan standards.
Seriously, every time I reread the submission I find something else wrong. This has nothing to do with encryption, consumers, or copy protection. Region codes serve only one "useful" purpose: preventing the import/export of legit discs. The lab mistakenly put in a "1" instead of a "2", so the disc wouldn't play. This is a non-event. This is not a stunning blow against the media pigopolists. No points were made. No wars were won. No minds were blown.
Rename the headline to "Lab fucks up; switches 2s with 1s. Almost nobody affected" or I will start submitting a new article for every DVD-R I coaster.
Remember that reviewers are helping the guy who makes the picture.
If he doesn't trust you with an readable DVD, why would you want to use your time to help him?
I never really understood the whole region-lock thing anyway. It just seems to be 100% greed.
Exactly. So what about it don't you understand?
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
How is this any different than me sending someone in the UK a file, encrypting it with a password, but typing the wrong password, or using the wrong algorithm to encrypt it, thus making it unreadable at the other end.
There is nothing in the field of morality or ethics that says Spielberg shouldn't be able to send some people of his choice encrypted copies of data that he created. He did make the movie, after all.
Sheesh.
If you SELL me a movie that has encryption or DRM limiting how I can watch that movie, then there's a problem. These people in the UK never purchased a copy of the movie.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
Nobody is mentioning the obvious reason (obvious, at least, to smart people) why there's region coding. It's directly related to cinema releases. The reason movies are released at different times in different territories because a single film print that one theatre shows costs approximately $10,000 to print. They're not cheap, and on average they're shown for a few weeks before they're pulled from cinemas. Therefore, depending on anticipated audience numbers, a certain number of prints are made up for American cinemas. It then gets its month or two in cinemas, before the prints are returned to the distributor, and shipped off to other territories where the whole process begins again. It's not greed, its a sensible cost saving measure to prevent wasting millions of dollars on prints that will only be used a few weeks, even if the movie is a mega hit (which is only a small percentage of released films). It's not just Hollywood that follows this example, its every distribution company in the world. Therefore, when it comes to DVDs, they have to be region encoded because the above distribution method can take a year. You might argue, why shouldn't people be allowed to own a DVD before the movie is released to theatres, and maybe they should, but then theatres would start to go out of business. Maybe, that's the way the industry is headed, but for now, put up or shut up, and don't criticise an industry when you don't understand how or why it works. I know this because I work in film.
Films start at different dates in different parts of the world. If people in Europe would get the newest Hollywood films before or during they run in their local theatres, they might decide only to watch them on DVD.
If DVD-Video region coding were about theatrical vs. video release dates, then DVD copies of a film produced after the film has completed its theatrical run in the developed world would be all-region, right? Why are classic films from the 1950s and earlier still region-coded?