Slashdot Mirror
Film Studios Sue Samsung Over DVD players
Lam1969 writes "The Korea Times reports that five U.S. film studios have taken Samsung to court for selling DVD players which allow users to bypass DRM features. The film companies, including Walt Disney and Time Warner, are demanding Samsung recall the players. According to a Samsung spokesman quoted in the article, the movie studios probably 'take issue' with Samsung's HD841 model, which Samsung sold in the United States for five months in 2004."
From the article: ''The Motion Picture Association of America estimates that the movie industry lost $5.4 billion last year due to piracy.'' Hrm, yeah, and I bet that's all people buying dvd's from other countries and bepassing the DRM with samsung equipment. Oh, wait, wasn't that the Linux pirates last week?
What I have done for all the DVDs in my OWN collection is bypass the DRM using DVD decrypter (w00t!) because I am sick of these goddamn preveiews, menus, copyright notices, birth control notices, and other shit. DVD Shrink is a nice utility that allows you to reformat a DVD so that you can put the disc in the drive and JUST WATCH THE MOVIE. Some of these more recent DVDs that have come out require ten minutes of mandatory (e.g. you can't fast forward) viewing of SHITE before you can see WHAT YOU PAID TO WATCH. For rental DVD's, don't even bother... it's worse than the old VHS tapes, even though the retailers are PAYING LESS now to maintain their inventory!!
sue them
Samsung is the bad guy here. Well, insofar as Rambus was the bad guy in JEDEC. Everyone who was involved in the creation of the DVD standard agreed to a certain set of rules that they would abide by, but Samsung (like Rambus) flagrantly violated those rules and put other members of the association at risk.
Now, DRM and especially things like region locks are really terrible for the consumer, but that's not the issue here. If there were a non-DRM standard for DVD, Samsung could manufacture players for that standard all they like. The fact is that they agreed to a set of rules which included not making non-DRM players, and they decided to go ahead and make a player that is for all intents and purposes non-DRM.
They will be hit with a penalty, no doubt.
This is why I always recommend avoiding DVD players badged by large companies.
Large companies have more to lose if they don't toe the MPAA line (I'm seriously wondering how long it will be until players refuse to play a movie more than once a week or so).
Buy cheap players packed with features from middle east companies that may not even exist - much harder to threaten a company like that and features sell those sort of players and fierce competition keeps prices low.
...if I "reformat" one of their falafel rolls before eating it, so why should a content provider have any say in how you view their content?
To be certain, it's nice for them to be able to ensure that the original content is high-quality and in a certain order and all, but I should be the one to decide whether I want to watch ads and splash-screens, or even more pointedly whether my kids watch the entire movie or just the 98% of it that isn't offensive.
Would they care if I piped it into the 320x200 monochrome screen on my mobile 'phone to watch? Or watched it through a filter that corrected for colour blindness? Or just colour-inverted it? Or played it at 120% of realtime? Or toneshifted the soundtrack? Or karaoke style? If so, why?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
"The fact is that they agreed to a set of rules which included not making non-DRM players, and they decided to go ahead and make a player that is for all intents and purposes non-DRM."
Um, by definition this makes them the good guy.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Samsung stopped making this particular player nearly two years ago and the lawsuit looks more like a warning to other manufacturers.
Any recall would be useless - if someone has one of these players and wants to keep it they'll just say it broke and they binned it. This wouldn't be impossible since a quick skim thought online forums indicates build quality on this particular model wasn't up to much.
Instead the studios are sending a message to all DVD manufacturers to beef up their future models so this kind of thing can't be done in the first place. If they don't they too can expect a legal fight.
Personally I think they are on to a loser - studios have very little pull over hardware manufacturers and if there's strong demand for an open player they will build it.
Erm, how could Samsung make a recall on these players? They can't force people to give them back.
Recalls are only for products that are faulty, when the purchaser gladly and willingly returns them.
So they basically put this number out of their *ss, and whip it out every time things get rough for them :) This is so amazing!
Samsung: That's it, we're releasing the DVD-s as is.
MPAA: No! You can't!
Samsung: WTF?
MPAA: "The Motion Picture Association of America estimates that the movie industry lost $5.4 billion last year due to piracy."
Samsung: What are those estimates based on, not on Samusng DVD players right?
MPAA: Can't you read man, come on, SHOCK! See: "The Motion Picture Association of America estimates that the movie industry lost $5.4 billion last year due to piracy."
People: MPAA you're suing your users and manifacturers and keep pulling those numbers out of your *ss and applying silly DRM restriction so people don't buy your production, what did you expect?
MPAA: And you'll all be sued!!! You know why!? "The Motion Picture Association of America estimates that the movie industry lost friggin $5.4 billion last year due to friggin piracy."!!! Estimate=Fact! Estimate=fact!! Don't question us or you be sued!!! Arghh..
Maybe because players with known 'tricks' to bypass DRM crap sell like hotcakes?
Back when I was in the market for standalone DVD player, savy customers asked for one thing - 'how easy is this to mod region free/macrovision free?'. After that was settled, then discussion turned into the other features.
In other words, at least over here, high end DVD player market was one where not-easily-moddable devices were DOA at retail. nobody wanted them.
Yes, uneducated masses bought crap from chain stores at low prices with no such care (tho even those players were often unlockable with remote control keycodes), but at high end, it was the first feature people would ask from the salespeople.
Samsung is not stupid. They want to produce consumer electronics that SELL. This model probably sold a lot better than crippled ones. In fact, some manufacturers seem to be engaged in 'shell game' regarding this - they put out player model, then 'leak' the unlock info, and when MPAA cries foul, they have already a new model ready to replace the old one.
This time it's different in that, 1. HDCP was involved and 2. I think MPAA wants to set an example to the 'consumer-licking nogood electronics manufacturers'...
IMHO Samsung should flip the middle finger to the MPAA.
If waiting 2,5 minutes for a film to start seems unbearable to him, should he even be watching TV?
2.5 minutes. That's 150 seconds. Try something: Sit there and count off 150 seconds. That's rather a long freakin' time to be waiting for a video to start, no? It takes less time to make a bag of microwave popcorn.
Really, waiting 2.5 minutes isn't the problem, it's waiting 2.5 minutes when you know that it's totally pointless that's really annoying.
- Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Every player on the market can be made region-free
You couldn't sell them in Europe otherwise
nah, MPAA would sue them too - trading non DRM-copliant devices now equals trading firearms and drugs..
The MPAA seems to think there's a dichotomy of pirating films or purchasing them, and by extension that if we make pirating impossible, then every pirate will go out and purchase everything that they would otherwise have pirated. And that, my friends, is a rather baseless claim (even if you're completely unaware of the animosity towards studios in general).
My, that was a yummy potato!
Reminds me of what has lately become one of my favorite quotes from The Insider.
Movies released on DVD have been available in the internet in very good quality since DeCSS. And even before that professional pirates could make a bit-for-bit copy of any DVD that worked just like the original. One DVD player model that made it possible to circumvent DRM does not have any effect on international piratism. Not one fucking bit.
That cat's totally out of the bag.
We're talking about massive amounts of potential customers taking your product without paying for it.
You are wrong because: arguement by bizzare definition
Take (n): To get into one's possession by force, skill, or artifice, especially: To capture physically; seize
Even in the most egregious case, where I sneak into the RIAA president's house, boot his computer and pirate his entire collection of music, the property has not actually been taken. It's still there. Except I have my own copy now.
Star Trek calls this technology a "replicator"
The "DRM" (Fair-Use Circumvention Kit) features the MPAA would like to see in the player are not legal everywhere, and where they are, turning them off frequently is not illegal. Further, it's a widely held belief that one day the consumer or the powers that be might realize that people are getting the proverbial shaft and ultimately take a more sensible tack that obviates (or at least, no longer mandates) the need for such measures.
Samsung is simply building a player where the anti-consumer features can be made as consumer-friendly (or hostile) as the prevailing market conditions permit. This saves them effort of hardwiring different rules and functionality for each and every market or whenever there's been changes to local laws or customs.
Lets face it -- a minority have the player, and there's no tangible effect on the MPAA, since professional pirates wouldn't use a player like this to make bootlegs; heck, most amateur pirates would just as well rip the DVD.
The player in question is unique in being one of the only upscaling DVD players that would output the pseudo-HD DVD picture over analog outputs and was not limited to the DRM-infected digital ports- that's what this is all about. The studios think everyone with a HD set without digital inputs is a potential pirate and as such wants to lock us out from being able to watch HD movies on our non-DRM'd HDTVs (or at least that's the message they seem to be sending).
Taking another's content and selling it for profit is pirating.
No, boarding a ship and stealing its cargo on the open sea is piracy. Doubly so if you make the ship's captain walk the plank. ARGH!
What you're talking about is COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. No matter how many times the ??AA tell you it's theft or piracy, it is NOT. They have not been deprived of property; they have been deprived of potential revenue. If we let them define the language of the debate, then the terrorists have already won. Or something.
Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
Christian ..... as in "christian rock music". Characterised by the absence of what is usually considered to be the defining element of a kind of thing, and therefore acceptable only to one who is utterly deluded.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
You know what really annoys me? It's how these articles always lie to me because they're just parroting what the MPAA said: ...avoid encryption features that prevent unauthorized duplication...
That's a bald faced lie. The Samsung players allowed users to bypass region coding, which has absolutely nothing to do with encryption or unauthorized duplication. Rather, the players allow you to play movies you bought in other countries. That's it. The MPAA has to lie about this because if they told the public what they were really mad about, they would get no sympathy at all from the public (But we want to charge more in Europe! Just because we can! Why are these pirates ruining the game for us?!?).
It's no wonder the average person turns on them when they finally learn the truth. You can't keep lying to people and expect them to trust you.
I read the internet for the articles.
It's abusive even for copyright notices. If you buy a DVD, you have the right to watch the video thereon in any order you want; your DVD player shouldn't be telling you what to watch.
The only time when P-UOPs can really be used legitimately is when allowing the viewer to change course at a certain point would break the disc's navigation (by leaving registers in an inconsistent state, etc.). Even then, there are usually better ways to solve the problem.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
If someone in Europe wanted to view US movies, it seems they could easily and cheaply buy a US DVD player and watch all they want.
But why should they?
I can walk into any consumer electronics shop and get me a region free/selectable region player (usually with the possibility to disable macrovision and the like as well, at times with alternative firmware).
Those players will have the advantage of playing both pal and ntsc content, being able to play both on the typical pal tv set people have here, has a scart connector so I can use a rgb connection to my TV etc..
Oh, and I don't get the bother of having to find me a 110V outlet or converter.
Usually such players start at around 30 euro (new)
So, no there is no reason for people in Europe to buy a DVD player from the USA, rather, there are lots of reasons to not do so.
There are laws in place that they have to play by, and when their competition/customers ignore those laws, it's not a fair playing field. Of course they have a right to complain.
Most of those laws are bought and paid for by the industry to further their own needs. Who do you think lobbied and gave campaign contriobutions to have Copyrights extended from 14 years to the life of the artist PLUS 70 years? Who do you think paid to have the DMCA passed? The PIRATE and INDUCE acts? If you think an industry buying laws to protect it's own interests is the American way and truly a fair market, i disagree.
We're not talking about obsolete business plans. We're talking about massive amounts of potential customers taking your product without paying for it. Illegally.
We ARE talking about an obselete business plan. Even as deplorable as pirated DVDs are, from a purely economic point of view, even ilegal competition is still competition. When someone is undercutting your prices and you are selling a ludicrously over priced product, you should drop your prices to compete, then make it up in volume. That's High School economics.
Also consider that someone commiting copyright infringement is NOT neccessarily a loss for the industry, since many of them would not have bought the product anyway.
They are also producing a LOT of crap. If you look at certain movies, they rake in huge numbers and other... just aren't worth the inflated prices to watch.
Lastly, they ARE dealing with an obselete business model. In the past, the AA's had a great monopoly on the industry, simply because startup costs were so great that no one else could truly compete. Now that is getting less and less. They are also facing other competition that never truly matter years ago. VIdeo games are geting huge. The bigger video games get, the smaller the % of people's incomes will be spent on Music and Movies.
I believe sex is highly over rated... unless it involves me
if you don't abide by the contract you have with them (EULA)
Just a sidenote, but EULAs aren't contracts. EULAs have unclear status - if the EULA is found to be unenforcable (as they have been in multiple cases), the software is limited to the protection offered by copyright law.
Note that you are correct that they can void your warranty.
They do not purposefully add code to their operating system which is specifically designed to take control away from you.
Not the case at all. OS X for Intel has substantial and increasing hardware-lockouts, ensuring that you can only run the software on Apple-approved hardware. How does that not take control away from the user?
You are free, by law, to take your copy of OS X and attempt to install it on your toaster if you like (iToaster?)
Yes, you are. The problem is that Apple doesn't seem to think so - and they have threatened legal action against websites that so much as link to information on how to circumvent the hardware lockout.
The other thing I notice is that Apple doesn't really care WHAT you do with the products you buy from them, as long as you don't violate copyright law.
Not the case either. Apple has clearly stated that they do care what you do with their products, and they have threatened legal action against a number of parties who have attempted to circumvent their hardware locks.
Previously, my plan was to buy a copy of Mac OS X for Intel when it becomes available at retail. I already have a nice notebook, don't have $2000 for a MacBook, and want to be able to run Windows on my system as well. I wasn't expecting Apple to make it easy and wasn't expecting any support at all. Now, however, with the actions that Apple has been taking, I don't think that I can buy any Apple products at all.
At least Windows Vista will run on my hardware.
That's easy! By denying you the ability to watch films from other countries, the members of the MPAA cartel encourage you to get your media fix by spending your money on their own films. As a fringe benefit, since you won't be exposed to other films, you won't even realize how bad their schlock is, nor will you be aware that their increasing influence over American politics is creating a more restrictive environment than that found in countries over which America has traditionally touted its freedom!
Good times here in America.