Slashdot Mirror


Movie Downloads to Coincide with DVD release

gihan_ripper writes "The movie download firms Movielink and CinemaNow have made a deal with the big five studios to ensure that downloads will coincide with DVD releases at Blockbuster and WalMart. Unlike previous deals, these will be full purchase downloads, and not merely for a rental period. The move is aimed at stemming the rising tide of pirate downloads, and DRM will be in force to prevent copying the movies to DVD. The first batch of downloadable movies will include Brokeback Mountain, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, and King Kong."

51 of 313 comments (clear)

  1. Order of the Phoenix? by rosalindavenue · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wow-- talk about a quickly released download-- they haven't even shot it yet! http://tinyurl.com/p58qk

  2. Brokeback by celardore · · Score: 2, Funny

    I guess the fact they're releasing 'Brokeback Mountain' as a download is a good thing, for all those too embarrased to see it at the cinema or go out and buy it.

    1. Re:Brokeback by xtracto · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why would somebody be embarrased to see a 2 hours Marlboro commercial? well ok ok, only the first half of the movie was, but seriously I was just waiting to listen to the man saying "come to where the flavor is, come to the Marlboro Country" (or the equivalent in the USA ad)

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    2. Re:Brokeback by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "Homosexuality isn't "wrong", it just IS."

      Well, I guess it depends on your viewpoint on being 'gay'...I assume you think it is a natural thing...I tend to lean towards believing it is more a learned behavior and a choice, and I think the choice is a poor one. Most everyone I've ever known that was a gay man, seemed to be a product of some sort of horribly abusive childhood. I don't know that I've ever known or seen a homosexual person that was very well adjusted...and today, especially with young girls, being gay seems in vogue. So, when I talk about homosexuality, I think of it as bad behavior...much like you asked what I thought about murder, etc....that is all very bad behavior. However, doing the gay thing really doesn't hurt me...as I said before, what you want to do behind closed doors, really doesn't bother me. I just have no interest in seeing it.

      Again, disliking something, or having a negative opinion doesn't mean you have a phobia about it. It is just an opinion....and everyone is justified to have their own.

      I guess I'm responding to the same person here on this thread...if YOU are so proud of your gay opinions (or proud to be gay), then why are you posting anonymously? If it is so open and natural, they why not post as yourself?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  3. Eh? by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 2, Funny

    Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

    Amazing! Not only can they transfer movies automagically over copper wires directly into my home, but the cables apparently create an inverse tachyon beam that brings movies in from the future!

    1. Re:Eh? by necro81 · · Score: 3, Funny

      There's some joke reference to Spaceballs to be made here. How can there be a video of Spaceballs - we're still in the middle of making it? Alas, my brain isn't working fast enough this morning.

  4. It's the Steve Jobs effect. by neoshroom · · Score: 2, Funny

    Fearful of the same digital piracy that humbled the music industry, two online vendors are poised to start offering recently released flicks via the Web. It's the Steve Jobs effect.

    I thought the Steve Jobs effect was to make you believe that G5 smokes Intel processors only to a year or two later make you believe the opposite with equal fervor.

    __
    Elephant Essays - Custom-created essays and research papers.

    --
    Big apple, new Yorik, undig it, something's unrotting in Edenmark.
  5. Can't Burn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you can't burn a copy to play on your DVD player, then forget about it... Unless it's cheaper than buying the DVD (by at LEAST $10)... I'm fine with them putting the CSS encryption on my burnt DVD, but they have to let me burn it for me to even consider it...

    *Note* I only dl movies if I want to watch it first before buying, but I normally do actually buy the DVD (if the movie doesn't suck).

    1. Re:Can't Burn? by should_be_linear · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes but this subscription will include 4 office chairs so that all family can sit in front of Windows computer and enjoy DRM'd movie together.

      --
      839*929
    2. Re:Can't Burn? by neersign · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I think cost is what drives piracy, and I think it's time the movie industry and recording industry realized this. Instead of spending more money on DRM that will be cracked anyway, they should just give in and realize that no one wants to pay $20-30 for one DVD. The people I know who purchase DVD's on a regular basis only buy them when they are on sale for $10 or below.

      and, as you were hinting, people who pay for and download a movie should be entitled to burn it to dvd if they choose. I don't see how this new DRM is going to stop a person who pirates movies now. The DRM is only going to piss off legitimate purchasers whose only means of watching a DVD on their tv is thru a DVD. And you may say, "well then they need to buy a DVD and not download it." But how many people do you think are going to pay to download the movie and then realize they can't burn it? I think that number is going to be huge at first, then enough people will get sick of dealing with whatever tech support they try to call to fix the problem, then they are going to tell all of their friends, who tell all of their friends, which in turn decreases the number of people who download any movie legitimately, which makes it not even worth the effort to begin with. And in the end, the DRM might have effectively stopped 2 people from pirating the movie.

  6. DRM? by orzetto · · Score: 2, Interesting
    both sites for now are only allowing the movies people buy through downloads to be stored on PCs or on devices like the game player Xbox outfitted with certain Microsoft software

    Cue to DVD-Jon crack in 3.. 2.. 1..

    Seriously, does anyone know how much effort it would take to crack these DRM'd formats and export to AVI? What sort of security is in place? And wouldn't anyone be able to make a "bootleg" analog copy anyway?

    --
    Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
    1. Re:DRM? by DannyO152 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why do their work for them? I say, if they don't want to release in a format I can use, then they proceed without my dollars and with my negative word-of-mouth.

    2. Re:DRM? by stunt_penguin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      OK we can't really rely on DVD-Jon (since he's gone over to The Dark Side) but hopefully there's a DRM-Kristian or DRM-Sven out there to crack the encryption.

      Having said that, the encryption can probably be updated each time a movie is released (to play this movie, click [here] to install latest player update"), making things much harder to crack. That said, there is no such thing as an unbreakable DRM system and i'm sure someone'll do it.

      There's no way of making an optical (and therefore relatively permanent copy of these movies, therefore anyone who buys one online but whose HD Crashes/Mobo fries/computer is destroyed will have lost all the movies they bought more surely than if they'd been burgled and their DVD collection stolen.

      --
      When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
  7. Thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...but I think I've already dowloaded most of those.

  8. Encrypted, cannot play on DVD players by digitaldc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who wants to download something you can't burn and then watch on your home theater?

    I will just buy the DVD thanks.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:Encrypted, cannot play on DVD players by mblase · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who wants to download something you can't burn and then watch on your home theater?

      I dunno, who wants to buy a movie you can't rip to your PC without violating the DMCA?

      Oh, that's right, everybody.

    2. Re:Encrypted, cannot play on DVD players by digitaldc · · Score: 2, Informative

      I dunno, who wants to buy a movie you can't rip to your PC without violating the DMCA?

      Oh, that's right, everybody.


      Everybody has given up ship, have gone underground, and are now setting sail from the Pirate Bay.

      --
      He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  9. Nice idea, but... by coffeechica · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unlike their current services, in which online shoppers pay around $4 to rent new movies for up to a month, the films will be sold for prices "similar to home video," says Ramo.

    Are they trying to deliberately kill the idea of movie downloads? Simultaneous release, same price... why should anyone wait for a few hours for a download when it's just as quick to get the actual DVD? And costs as much? The DVD can be passed on to others and there's no need to install special software on the PC to actually get it running.

    Looks very much like an alibi action - "we tried to offer it, but nobody wanted it! So why should we bother?"

    1. Re:Nice idea, but... by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 2, Insightful

      .why should anyone wait for a few hours for a download when it's just as quick to get the actual DVD?

      Exactly. Even with cable internet on a popular torrent, you're still looking to at least an hour for a 1.4GB compressed copy, even longer if this service uses full 4.6GB uncompressed. I can go outside, wait for and take the bus, buy a hard copy, and get home all before this is done. Or just pick it up on the way home from work.

    2. Re:Nice idea, but... by Laur · · Score: 3, Informative
      you're still looking to at least an hour for a 1.4GB compressed copy, even longer if this service uses full 4.6GB uncompressed.

      FYI, commercial DVDs are definetely not uncompressed, they use MPEG2 compression. Also, full dual layer DVDs are closer to 7-8GB, not 4.6GB (of course, this includes things like extras and special features, which I'm not sure if these downloads will have).

      --
      When you lose something irreplaceable, you don't mourn for the thing you lost, you mourn for yourself. - Harpo Marx
    3. Re:Nice idea, but... by supabeast! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They don't want to kill movie downloads - they want to kill physical media and not give consumers a price break. Americans pay far less for movies and music than the rest of the world, and the movie companies would make a hell of a lot more money by narrowing distribution down to a single middleman with no costs for physical media. It would also mean no more movies passed around between friends, shown at parties, schools, etc.. Sure people probably won't pay full price for downloads now, but the service can take a loss for a few years while they work out the bugs, and then Harry Potter six or seven can be released as an internet exclusive, at which point the movie companies start abandoning physical media and start reaping huge profits.

  10. DRM galore by giorgiofr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    FTA: Movies can't be "burned" or copied onto disks that can be played on other devices, such DVD players. The movies, however, can be copied to play on as many as two other PCs

    Of course, it would be too easy if they were let out of the DRM jail...

    Customers can hook up their computers to their TV sets using specially equipped video cables

    Uh? Specially equipped cables? WTF are they talking about? Something that's got to do with HD and/or closing the analog hole?

    --
    Global warming is a cube.
    1. Re:DRM galore by ajs318 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I guess some expensive, non-CRT TV sets can probably tolerate the scan rates used by PC monitors. All TV sets bigger than 35cm. have RGB SCART inputs; but these are expecting TV-style, negative-going composite sync, so you might have to do some rudimentary signal conditioning {use a 2903 dual comparator, which has open-collector outputs that can safely be wired together, and a pull-up resistor -- you can pick up 12 volts somewhere like a disc drive power cable. While you are at it, pull pins 8 and 16 of the SCART socket high, to select RGB mode}.

      If your graphics card will sync down to 50Hz interlaced, it should theoretically be able to display on any set with an RGB input -- if you can create the appropriate modeline. TV sets are generally more resistant to out-of-spec sync rates than monitors, since they have to tolerate all manner of weirdy shit inbetween stations.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  11. Let me guess by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    320x240 video, 96kbps mp3 audio + some drm monkey dung.

    Or I could run over to a torrent site and get BareBack Mountain,

    Brokeback.Mountain.DVDR-Replica.torrent
    RiPPER......: Replica GENRE......: Drama/Romance
    ViDEO TYPE..: NTSC RUNTiME....: 134 min
    AUDiO TYPE..: DD5.1 STORE DATE.: 04/04/06
    iMDB RATiNG.: 8.0 RLS DATE...: 03/17/06

    I wouldn't mind paying for it but make it worth my while.

  12. Hollywood still doesn't get it by Professor_UNIX · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Offering movies and then restricting them to a PC, most likely some form of Windows Media DRM crap, for the same price as you could buy the unencumbered DVD in the store is not a way to market a new service! This is even worse than iTunes Music Store and their lossily encoded AAC DRM-restricted music files. At least with that you can burn a sub-CD quality version to a CD and rerip it to MP3 format to archive it.

  13. WIndows only? by Selivanow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Both companies seem to only support Windows and IE. What about the other half of the planet. Opensource aside, there is still a pretty big Mac base out there. It makes great market sense to alienate a group of users like that.

    --
    -- ...trying to make digital files uncopyable is like trying to make water not wet. -Bruce Schneier
    1. Re:WIndows only? by way2trivial · · Score: 2, Informative

      a big mac base?
      http://news.com.com/Apple+to+ditch+IBM,+switch+to+ Intel+chips/2100-1006_3-5731398.html

      1.8 percent of the market..

      realistically, 1.8% is a fine percentage of folks to skip, when development and support would cost just as much as for the 98%

      kinda like movies that no longer get released in vhs...

      --
      every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  14. So basically... by Bogtha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The move is aimed at stemming the rising tide of pirate downloads, and DRM will be in force to prevent copying the movies to DVD.

    So basically, they aim to compete with piracy by selling me something less convenient at a higher price? Genius!

    Seriously, when are they going to get it that the only thing they have going for them is convenience? The black market of free downloads is always going to be cheaper. The only way you can fight it is to offer a better, more convenient product. And tying it up with DRM that prevents what is probably the second most desired feature after watching it is only going to screw that up.

    Why would I buy from them when I can get a copy that I can burn to DVD at a cheaper price? It's sad when anonymous pirates can provide better customer service than multinational corporations that created the damn thing in the first place.

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    1. Re:So basically... by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      it will go up on the pirate boards just like it does now

      What does that matter? It's *ALREADY* there anyway.

      -Eric

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:So basically... by flood6 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Because there is money to be made here. There are plenty of people who would be willing to pay money to download a legal copy of a movie if they could burn it to DVD or stream it to their TVs. It would be worth it to them to avoid breaking the law.

      I don't know how many of these people there are out there or what exactly they'd be willing to spend, but as far as I know, no one in the movie industry has bothered to look into it.

      This is simialr to iTMS where a large portion of the customers are aware that they can download the latest $boy_band magahit from $p2p_network, but choose to go the legal route.

  15. I hates me the DRM, but this could be good by LandruBek · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Although I don't like DRM I think this is something of a hopeful sign -- to see more legal movie distribution via download. If it gets to be common knowledge that download != illegal (much less "piracy" or "theft"), then the MPAA and RIAA won't (I predict) be able to pass a lot of goofy, anti-P2P legislation.

    The stifling effect of widespread DRM is another serious problem, but I would rather for the moment rather see legitimate, mass-consumption downloads, and then we'll see less "troll" legislation.

    --
    $META_SIG_JOKE
  16. Prevent copying it to DVD? by GauteL · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So basically they expect people to watch the films exclusively on their PC, rather than their living room TV. You end up with a product much worse than a DVD for a strikingly similar price. To make it even worse, you have to spend hours of your own broadband bandwidth to download it.

    Not only that, DVDs can regularly be had for reduced prices at high street DVD stores, I'm willing to bet these downloads will not have equally aggressively prices sales periods.

    This just lends credibility to people saying they are basically just setting legal downloads up to fail, so they can push for harder legal restrictions afterwards.

    A download is a lower quality product than a hard copy DVD, as you don't get the physical copy and packacking. Since there is no physical reproduction, no physical transport and no extra goodies, people have certain expectations to price. Since you don't get physical media, your investment is a lot less secure.

    Any download replacement should be:
    a) much cheaper
    b) convenient
    c) easy to backup

    This product fails on all of these points.

    1. Re:Prevent copying it to DVD? by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So basically they expect people to watch the films exclusively on their PC, rather than their living room TV.

      Not that I'm defending the idea (I think it's a step in the right direction, but that it doesn't go far enough), but as media PCs become more and more common, more people watching the films "exclusively on their PC" will be watching it on "their living room TV".

      Perhaps this sort of thing will be a more attractive proposition as media centre-style PCs become more common, but it's a bit of a chicken and egg situation - without a compelling reason to buy one, few people will...

  17. Not relevant for me by Ilgaz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Unless these morons (both MPAA and the legal DL sites) figure there is a LEGIT, ORIGINAL buying community got sick of waiting for DVD "plastic" to watch them on their computer OUTSIDE of "America", I wouldn't care less.

    Also as WMV and RealVideo, Quicktime supports 5.1 sound for ages, if you pay the same money as Dolby Digital or DTS DVD to a stereo download, you have been err.. what was the term? :)

    If it is kind of hard to understand why a random guy on Slashdot got real mad about the situation

    1) Consider you want to watch a Region 2 DVD , you don't care about the region fight.
    2) Go to Amazon.co.uk, turn OFF "one click" feature and..
    3) Put couple of DVDs in your shopping list
    4) Fill in the delivery form as you live in Istanbul,Turkey or some other European country outside UK
    5) Look to "shipping and handling" cost and be amazed. If you have only 1 DVD on that list, it will be generally HIGHER than the Movies original cost.

    Step 6 is generally launching a pirate client and download the freaking movie. As a guy in industry, I don't. Can't blame others if they would in current amazingly stupid scheme of things.

  18. Good news, everyone! by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now that you can download movies anywhere in the world as soon as the DVD is released, there's no reason for discs to have region codes anymore.

  19. I'm confused by bigmouth_strikes · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Exactly... If the download is at the same price as a DVD, all I get is a ripped DVD but without the backup. Where's the value in that ?

    The download should either be

    * Full retail DVD price, allowing backups, format shifting etc. Collection format.
    or
    * Rental DVD price, with DRM restrictions. Throwaway format.

    --
    Oh, I can't help quoting you because everything that you said rings true
  20. And yet again the paying customer gets shafted. by Ilex · · Score: 2, Insightful

    DRM will be in force to prevent copying the movies to DVD.


    Joe six pack will soon discover the evils of DRM when they can't burn the film they legally paid for onto DVD to watch on their new HD TV or their HDD / Computer fails and they have to buy all their movies again. Unlike the pirates who can happily burn / backup their W4r3z.

    A lot of people, especially the tech savvy ones will still choose to get the pirate downloads. Remove the DRM and let people burn their own DVD's.

    Let me spell it out for the MPAA! Will you pay for a product which is inferior to one you can get for free?

    1. Re:And yet again the paying customer gets shafted. by g4e · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Totally agree. This DRM is an absolut show-stopper.
      A new, pretty good flic about DRM and Trusted Computing:
      http://www.mustseeblog.com/?p=45

  21. It's worse than that by tessaiga · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Unlike their current services, in which online shoppers pay around $4 to rent new movies for up to a month, the films will be sold for prices "similar to home video," says Ramo.
    Ramo (Chief Executive of Movielink) is more explicit in a separate LA Times article where he admits that Movielink will actually be selling the online downloads for about double the street price of the physical DVD. The article quotes movie studios as saying that they don't want to alienate their existing DVD sales channel operators, since DVDs currently account for 46% of studio sales -- about double the take from the box office.
    Piracy fears also prevent online services from giving technological early adopters what they really want -- the ability to watch downloaded movies on their televisions. That's because the studios insist that downloadable movies include rigorous safeguards on copying. Users, for instance, can burn a DVD of a downloaded movie, but it will play only on a PC.

    [...]

    Ramo said download-to-own movies would sell for $20 to $30 -- up to double the $15 that discount retailers such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc. charge for DVDs, with downloads of classic titles for $10 to $17. He said the premium reflected the convenience of the service and the flexibility to transfer the digital download to two computers, as well as the ability to create a backup DVD that also would play on computers running Microsoft Corp.'s Windows operating system.

    Reading quotes like this really make me wonder if some of these executives are living in a bizarro parallel reality, or if they've just gotten accustomed to spewing this sort of doublespeak nonsense with a straight face. Supposedly consumers will be happy to pay double for the "flexibility" of being able to back up their new movie to computer and play them on their computers. Well, when I buy the physical DVD from the store, surprise surprise, I can play my DVD on my computer OR the TV -- and guess which display I'm going to be watching most of my shows on, my 20" monitor screen or the 35" TV downstairs? Backing up the DVD is a snap too, and I don't have to deal with the annoying hassle of Movielink/CinemaNow's homebrew DRM.

    Last I checked, paying more for something that I can do strictly less with wasn't the dictionary definition of "flexibility", but hey, I'm not a high-paid exec, what do I know.

    --
    The bold print giveth, and the fine print taketh away ...
  22. Downloading by Secret+Agent+X23 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Seems to me the industry wants to offer downloads just because they've heard people like to download movies, as if they (the movie execs) think the act of downloading were, in itself, the objective. And if it flops because people don't like the prices and/or the restrictions, the executives won't understand -- because, after all, they were letting us "download."

    Well, I dunno. That's the way it sounds to me.

  23. just face it by PrescriptionWarning · · Score: 2, Funny

    DRM is sooo "Brokeback"

  24. Theatrical release by Loconut1389 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Now if the download coincided with the theatrical release and they mailed you a real dvd when it came out, I'd be sold- DRM or no.

  25. Obligatory 1984 comment by MonoSynth · · Score: 3, Funny

    'When I was arrested, Apple said that PPC processors were evil.'

    'PPC processors are evil. Good. And Apple always said that PPC processors are evil, has it not?'
    Winston drew in his breath. He opened his mouth to speak and then did not speak. He could not take his eyes away from the dial.

    'The truth, please, Winston. Your truth. Tell me what you think you remember.'
    'I remember that until only a week before I was arrested, Apple used PPC processors. They even proved that they were the better ones. Intel's processors were the evil ones. That had lasted for nine years. Before that '

    Jobs stopped him with a movement of the hand.

    [..]

    'Do you remember,' he went on, ' writing in your diary, "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two
    make four"?'
    'Yes,' said Winston.
    Jobs held up his left hand, its back towards Winston, with the thumb hidden and the four fingers extended.
    'How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?
    'Four.'
    'And if the party says that it is not four but 4.0000000097768 then how many?'
    'Four.'

  26. Sell individual scenes by dpbsmith · · Score: 2

    One of the reasons why iTunes Music Store works is that although music is priced at about the same price per minute as the same content on CD, you have the option of buying individual songs. And in fact this works very well for me. I have probably purchased between fifty and a hundred individual songs where I want the individual songs but do not like the artists well enough to want eleven more.

    So... maybe they should try offering individual scenes from movies.

    This wouldn't work for every movie, but "Basic Instinct" would probably lend well itself to this treatment.

  27. It's a convenience to you... by novus+ordo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's around $20 to $30 for newer films, and $10 to $20 for older flicks. CinemaNow intends to be more aggressive, offering some of its new flicks for under $20 and to build traffic, it will offer a two-for-one sale at the outset.

    Movies can't be "burned" or copied onto disks that can be played on other devices, such DVD players. The movies, however, can be copied to play on as many as two other PCs, says Ramo.

    Why the hell would anyone want to pay that kind of money for crippleware? These guys just don't get it. Internet distribution should be a godsend because it costs them close to nothing to distribute. They think it's some special service that is oh so convenient. It's like the house I was looking at the other day, there's a train station 30ft away and they actually charge $10k more because "it's a convenience." Yeah I want my house to shake every 20min and wake me with the horn, how convenient.

    --
    "You're everywhere. You're omnivorous."
  28. Did Sony come up with this idea? by techstar25 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From the article
    Movies would cost $20-$30.
    They would be resticted to specific hardware (your Windows equipped computer).
    You can't watch them on your HD home theatre system.
    Sounds like the PSP UMD format.

    Why can't we just buy the DVD from Wal-Mart for $15, and then walk to our PC and put it in, and then watch it? Then when we're done, we take the DVD, walk to the home theatre DVD player and drop it in and watch it again. Boy, all that walking has got me tired.

  29. DVD prices by justthinkit · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Am I the only one who finds that DVD prices are very much better these days? I just bought a special edition (Red Heat) for $7 from Amazon, for example. At these prices what is going to compete with DVDs? Certainly not HD DVDs. Certainly not DRM limited downloads, at any price.

    It seems to me the whole movie downloading thing started because DVDs were over priced. Now it seems that they aren't.

    Score one for the good guys.

    --
    I come here for the love
  30. DoubleSpeak yet again by kimvette · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Unlike previous deals, these will be full purchase downloads, and not merely for a rental period.


    Which is DoubleSpeak, because it's untrue. If you can't transcode it to run on other devices, extract clips for purposes allowed under Fair Use, and the DRM prevents you from playing a restored backup on an upgraded or reinstalled purchase, it's not a full purchase now, is it. . .
    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  31. 16% small? by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Informative

    16% doesn't seem that small to me.

    Even if you think that number is too large, the argument they make is compelling for a market share of at least 10%.

    The mistake you have made is a common one of confusing market share (percentage of computers sold per year) with the installed base. There are a variety of reasons why that is much higher for Macs, especially among home users as corperate sales mask the percentage of macs in people homes - you know, where they might actually buy and watch movies.

    No worry for Mac users though as studios will be caving in to the iTunes juggernaut eventually after Disney makes a killing selling movies online at $9.99 that people actually buy.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  32. Vivid is releasing porn that can be burned to DVD by SpryGuy · · Score: 2, Interesting
    This is interesting news, in light of this story:


    A new service being launched by Vivid Entertainment on April 3rd, 2006 will allow consumers to purchase, download and burn a complete DVD for instant gratification. Always on the leading edge of technology innovation, the adult entertainment industry is again among the first to offer the ability to download and burn a fully functioning DVD complete with menus, chapter navigation and subtitles (do adult entertainment videos even have subtitles?). The initial launch of the service will include 30 movies from the Vivid Video collection and will cost about $25, which is the same price as purchasing the physical DVD.

    This may not be exactly what Bill Gates was referring to when he said that the format war between Blu-Ray and HD DVD would likely be the last, but this is clearly a step forward for the digital distribution of content. The Vivid download DVDs are using a DRM technology that will only allow the video file to be burned to a DVD once. This technology is an important step in providing Vivid with the confidence to go forward with its plan. It's not known whether the burned DVDs will be encrypted with CSS and can be unencrypted and replicated using software such as DVD Decrypter or DVDShrink.

    Mainstream studios will probably pay close attention to this service to see if the initial 30 DVDs start to show up on P2P networks with any greater frequency as an indication of piracy rates of movies distributed in this manner. The benefits of digital distribution are significant since it reduces manufacturing and distribution costs as well as any issues with inventory surplus or shortfall (not to mention personal discretion). Despite these advantages, I don't think we'll be seeing any of the major studios following suit anytime soon.


    I think they're shooting themselves in the foot by not allowing you to burn a DVD of major Hollywood titles, personally, but maybe they'll fix that after they see how Vivid's experiment goes.
    --

    - Spryguy
    There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
  33. Bullpuckey. by C0deM0nkey · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I can't believe I'm allowing myself to be dragged into this but...

    I'm ready to defend myself in court.

    Good luck with that...your tail will be handed to you. No matter how you try to portray it, the point will remain that you downloaded and viewed content distributed through (presently) illegal channels.

    Look. I agree with you in principle; my family thinks its funny how upset I get over those anti-piracy commercials. My five-year-old can recognize those as "the commercials Daddy don't like". But your "jab" at "The Man" or whatever it is you *think* you are doing to the *AAs out there only fuels their propaganda. Try before you buy does not apply.

    You've got plenty of options to exercise your rights that are perfectly legal:

    • Don't watch the movie. Period.
    • Read reviews: check independent review sites and check with friends *before* you see the movie. This may require you to skip the first few weeks that the movie is open. Having principles is tough, man. :)
    • See the movie at the "cheap seats" i.e. go to a second run theater (usually costs less than a rental). Now you've probably had to wait a month or two.
    • Rent the movie

    When you circumvent the legal distribution channel (whether you agree with it or not), what you tell the *AA is: "I *really* value your product, enough so that I will do whatever it takes to get it and I'm also willing to contribute to your propaganda regarding piracy and illegal downloads by actually being a participant in your (already) inflated statistics!". What you are not telling them is: "Your product sucks, your business model sucks, your distribution channels suck and your attitude to wards your own customers sucks. Until you change your act, I'm not willing to give you any more of my money."

    Which do you think will be more effective:

    • Committing what is presently defined as a criminal offense (and not likely to change if you live in the US).
    • Hitting them in the pocket book by denying them first-run revenues

    Here's a hint: This isn't "civil disobedience" - its theft of service (or something of the sort - spare me the "theft only applies to physical property, yadda, yadda, yadda arguments - the point is that you've not paid for something for which you are obligated (presently) to play; there is no one feeling sorry for you who is willing to do anything about it.

    You want to be effective: convince your friends and family to stop going to the first-run theaters; convince your friends and family to not download DRM'ed DVD images (should be an easy sell); if you can, convince your friends and family to not purchase DVDs.

    If you value the content enough to view it (and you are giving up 120 minutes, on average, of your time to view it) you should pay the $3-4. Its not your content and the owner of that content has a right to earn money from it. Your *only* rights are to choose not to view the content or purchase the product upon which the content is found.