Pact Not to Use Image Constraint Token Until 2010?

Devlin C. writes "Ars Technica reports that many major movie studios and several consumer electronics companies have an unofficial pact not to use the controversial Image Constraint Token in movies until at least 2010, presumably in an effort to spur early adoption. As the article at Ars notes, this would explain why both the low-end PS3 and the Xbox360 lack HDMI. The companies think it's not necessary to have right now, and they would rather shave costs than sell future-proof hardware."

Comments

problem defining property rights

[Susceptor]

this DRM debate brings up soe legal issues. The companies like sony and MS are framing digital files as property, and saying that copies of files infringe on their "rights" to the files. here is the fundamental problem. law defined property as a bundle of rights that the law will enforce. if you think about it, property is nothing more then the things you can or cannot do with what you own. For example you can own a gun, but you cant use it to shoot people 9except in self defense), or you can own a home, but you cant set up a gas station on it if the area is zoned for residential. The same principle generally applies to all electronic files. What bundle of rights belong to the companies that produce content and waht rights belong to users is defined by LAW, not by some mystical or anchient system. Because electronic media as we know it today is so new, most courts have not really defined what rights property owners hold (users and content owners alike). So we are really in a crucial time right now, with the media companies trying to corner the courts into giving them more rights then the end user. DRM is a part of this, and people should be aware that whether DRM or any control system is legal or not is still up in the air since the courts have not yet determined what property rights users actually have in this new age of content. just my 2 cents -I'm an L2

An admission of hysteria?

[grammar fascist]

...they would rather shave costs than sell future-proof hardware.

Isn't this an implicit admission that piracy isn't as big a deal as they've been screaming at us?

oh goody for 4 years I can enjoy "quality"....

[atarione]

like this....

http://www2.foxsearchlight.com/theringer/

in non crippled HD.....

YAY!!!!!! no really.....

the should worry less about image tokens and more about not making crappy movies

on the other hand they are making it easier for me to say no to DRM since there is almost nothing i wanna listen to or watch right about now.

Re:This will get people hooked

[badfish99]

No, it's a colourful way of describing how the industry wants to sell a product that is "cheap" now because it is fairly open, but becomes "expensive" later when the restrictions are turned on, and you have to keep re-buying the same thing every time you want to use it in a different way.

Supply and demand doesn't work in the usual way in movie and music industries, because the supply is infinite: the goods can be replicated at zero cost. The only way of making the price higher than zero is to impose an artificial restriction on supply. The aim here is to trap people into having restrictions imposed in 2010 that they would not put up with now.