Slashdot Mirror


Movie Burning Kiosks Coming To Retailers

Vitaly Friedman writes "The motion picture industry is in talks with some major retailers about installing DVD burning kiosks in stores. It's an interesting idea, but one that almost entirely misses the point. Hollywood's movie distribution system is in dire need of a fix - very few will dispute that. Movie attendance has been suffering, DVD sales are slumping, and all the industry has managed to do is come up with a half-baked, unpopular download service and a scant handful of simultaneous releases. In another attempt to sort of give consumers what they want, the motion picture industry is thinking about allowing retailers to set up in-store kiosks for distribution."

31 of 173 comments (clear)

  1. Why would I buy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...something that:

    * Will last much less time than a standard DVD before failing
    * Not play in all of my DVD players
    * Mean I have to wait around for it to finish burning
    * Probably cost as much, or more than, a regular DVD

    I won't, that's the answer to that. Get with it Hollywood, you need to offer movies to download at a significantly discounted price, or with no DRM. Offering me less for more, which is what you try to do at every step, doesn't make me want to give you my hard-earned cash.

    1. Re:Why would I buy... by zidohl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, the retail stores want to stay in the DVD buisness, and obviously, if they present a much worse product than the alternative of downloading it legally from the internet, they wont for long. So basicly it will be up to them to make a deal with Hollywood and present you with a better option if they really want to sell these DVDs.

      The cost could essentially become lower, if they actually want to lower the price, because you eliminate the need of transporting the fully packed DVDs, you remove them from the shelves which gives them extra space for other products and they wont make more DVDs than they actually sell. However, standing around for the kiosk to download and burn the DVD would probably strain most peoples patience..

    2. Re:Why would I buy... by Kasis · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I agree, I dislike having to wait five minutes for my passport photos to be developed, I wonder how long this would take exactly?? In my personal home kiosk, it takes anywhere from half an hour to several hours to download a movie, then another quarter of an hour to decompress and burn it. And it's free...


      If I'm standing in a retailers and I feel that a movie is worth paying for, I'll pick up a ready-pressed DVD from the shelf in a glossy box, pay for it and leave.


      What exactly is the benefit of this service? Yes I did rtfa but I still can't see any advantage.

    3. Re:Why would I buy... by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Get with it Hollywood, you need to offer movies to download at a significantly discounted price, and with no DRM.

      Fixed it for you.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  2. DVD+-R archival lifetime isn't so great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hollywood found out they can sell you a product that self destructs.

  3. Adaptation by suv4x4 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    FTFA: Retailers are concerned that digital downloads might spell an end to the sale of DVDs, and see the download-to-burn kiosks as a way to keep them in the DVD business.

    If only could they realize they gotta adapt instead of run hacks to keep the good ol' days.
    There weren't plenty of typing machine manifacturers that started making keybaords and mice as well I think. They just tried to keep the old ways and ceased to exist.

    1. Re:Adaptation by patio11 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      There weren't plenty of typing machine manifacturers that started making keybaords and mice as well I think.

      Yeah, who ever heard of a rusty old anachronism like that typewriter manufacturer International Business Machines competing in the new economy.

  4. Movie burning? by MadFarmAnimalz · · Score: 5, Funny

    For a second, I thought this had something to do with the proper disposal of movies like Battlefield Earth...

    --
    Blearf. Blearf, I say.
  5. Let them know what you think! by babbling · · Score: 4, Informative

    Now that Skype offers free calls to US numbers until the end of the year, why not drop the MPAA a line and let them know what's on your mind? Maybe we can all check in on them daily and thank them for their efforts!

    Oh, and if you'd be so kind, could you also let them know that The Pirate Bay is back up? They seem to still be under the impression that it's down... (PDF link)

    Oh. You might need their numbers:
    Washington: (202) 293-1966
    LA: (818) 995-6600
    New York (listed as their "anti-piracy office"): (914) 378-0800

  6. I have one already... by AudioEfex · · Score: 4, Funny

    I already have a movie-burning kiosk in my home.

    It's called BitTorrent. :)

    AE

    1. Re:I have one already... by Xugumad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      *sigh* /.'s attitude of "It's okay to copy anything I want" is really, really getting tiring.

      Look, yes, the movie companies are almostly solely producing overpriced undifferentiated mush. However, it's clearly mush a lot of you want. As such, is it so crazy to suggest you either pay for it, or if you genuinely feel it's over priced, make a stand by neither buying nor copying? All you're doing by copying movies/music/games/etc. is saying to the producers "I want your product, but don't want to pay for it".

      The MPAA/RIAA are both fairly clearly evil incarnate, I agree. However, copying everything you want is not actually going to help, it's just going to give them more legal leverage. If you actually feel things need to change, stop buying, and stop copying. Go read a book or something :)

    2. Re:I have one already... by pla · · Score: 5, Insightful

      /.'s attitude of "It's okay to copy anything I want" is really, really getting tiring.

      While I somewhat agree, you need to realize that (unlike most geek-oriented issues), that attitude reflects what the majority of humans feel.

      People do not, and did not ever, respect the concept of copyright as more than a good idea in theory if not in implementation. But until very recently (historically speaking), individuals didn't have the option of violating copyrights on any significant scale, so the system remained basically intact.

      Even prior to last 50 years, "piracy" still occurred (how many hand-painted copies of the Mona Lisa exist? I recall reading a number in the thousands recently). It just took much longer, and the resources necessary to pull it off on a large scale almost guaranteed detection.

      But from moment photocopiers gained widepread availability, college students have photocopied textbooks. The introduction of the cassette tape also saw the introduction of massive music sharing - likewise for the VCR. As soon as software-compatible PCs appeared, everyone swapped software among friends. When CD burners appeared on the scene, they just replaced the cassette tape, and likewise for DVD burners.

      And when the internet made piracy ever so much easier, people flocked to using it for exactly that purpose. When P2P made finding and downloading copyrighted content as close to trivial as any user-initiated action can get, the P2P networks turned into nothing short of massively distributed digital radio stations with the users as the program directors.


      So why do I write the above? For perspective. You say that in-your-face piracy as a form of civil disobedience won't work for swaying minds - But no one's mind needs swaying. Society has seen the idea of copyright, and rejected it outright whenever physically possible.

      We don't need to win mindshare buy-in - The media producers need to come up with a model that allows them to make money while accepting that people will copy their work regardless of the law.



      And if P2P scares the RIAA, wait until the next step. Some wireless-enabled portable music players already allow sharing songs actively, but it still takes too much effort to consider more than a quirk. When (not if) that turns into a passive action, compatible with devices just about everyone has (whether iPod-like players, or cell phones, or PDAs, or wrist watches, or some new killer toy we haven't even imagined yet) - When everyone you pass in rush-hour traffic, or on a busy sidewalk, or in a crowded mall, automatically sends you their entire music library almost instantly and without the need for you to even click "okay" - I think that really will mean the absolute death of anything similar to our modern content-selling industries. And what I just described will happen - Some portable music players already can do exactly that, they just need faster transfer rates, more storage space, and most importantly, either ubiquity or compatibility with other devices.

      The RIAA and MPAA has until then to come up with a new trick. If they want to focus their energy on litigation, or even on a laughable anti-piracy PR campaign - They may as well close up shop today.

      So when you see geeks saying "I will pirate it if I can, stick it to The Man!", don't bother getting annoyed - Whether or not such people know their "real" motives, they don't say anything new, or surprising, or even express an unpopular sentiment. Instead, look at them as a symptom of a badly broken system, broken from the start and finally approaching complete disintigration.

    3. Re:I have one already... by swillden · · Score: 2

      People do not, and did not ever, respect the concept of copyright as more than a good idea in theory if not in implementation.

      True. Further, I think the legislation purchased by the media industry over the last couple decades has actually made it worse. The man on the street in 2006 doesn't even know that copyright does expire, or understand that it's supposed to be a short-term sacrifice for a long-term good. Seriously, go ask a few non-geek, non-lawyer, average people who owns the works of William Shakespeare. It's amazing how many of them think that's a reasonable, if trivial, question.

      Since copyright is (rightly) percieved as perpetual, the trade of short term restriction for long-term increase in the public domain is not understood at all (rightly, since it no longer exists), and copying is (rightly) seen as doing little harm, the average person feels just fine about it, in spite of the media industry's continuing attempts to demonize personal infringement.

      And that's largely the media industry's *fault*. They made their bed, let them lie in it.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  7. If they want better sales... by TheDunadan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...They should make better movies.

  8. Well, I guess the obvious question is... by zodiaccat · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...when are we gonna start seeing book burning kiosks?

    1. Re:Well, I guess the obvious question is... by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Funny

      There were a few in Germany and Austria a few decades ago, but they weren't that popular in the long run. Also because they kinda lacked the value.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. We already have these in Thailand by Zemran · · Score: 2, Informative

    There nothing new here but the quality is shite.

    --
    I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
  10. Industry insiders describe... by jeffehobbs · · Score: 2, Funny

    Industry insiders describe the kiosk prototypes they have seen as a DVD burning iMac with the browser's homepage set to "http://thepiratebay.org/". This strikes me as an mindblowingly ill-fated idea -- I mean, if I had to drive somewhere to get to the iTunes Music Store, I can't imagine I'd use it. It's all about the American I wannit now impulse.

    ~jeff

  11. Sales/attendance slumping... why? by cliffwoolley · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I guess it never occurred to the movie industry that perhaps sales/attendance are slumping because all of the movies they're coming out with these days are (a) expensive and (b) exactly the same as all the other movies for the last N years? "This story line worked before, it'll work again!"

    Thanks, guys. :-P

  12. Here's what I would buy by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I currently have a movie rental subscription. It costs £13/month, and gives me as many DVDs as I can watch, up to three at a time. This works out to about one a day. I would pay a similar amount, maybe a little more (say, £15) for the convenience of a service that offered:
    1. DVD-quality downloads. 1GB of H.264-encoded movie should give 'good enough' quality.
    2. No DRM; I often watch films on my laptop, and I occasionally watch them on a handheld device. Don't tie me to any particular platform.
    3. Any film or TV series that's been released on DVD.
    4. Up to 30 downloads a month.
    Sure, some people would archive everything they've downloaded, but would the industry lose much from that? I rarely watch a film more than two or three times, and so it wouldn't make much sense; particularly when you can just re-download any film you want.

    Of course, these films would also end up on peer to peer networks, but at that price it just wouldn't be worth my time and effort to get them illegally.

    I don't want any more DVDs. I own fifty or so movies on DVD, but I stopped buying new ones over a year ago. They are simply not worth the money; when I can rent close to thirty for the price of buying one it's only a good investment to buy if I plan on watching it more than thirty times[1].

    Sadly, I don't think the movie industry is likely to adopt such a model for quite some time.


    [1] The opposite is true for music. Looking through my iTunes library, the vast majority of tracks have a play count of 50-80, making music rental services a very bad financial choice for me.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    1. Re:Here's what I would buy by justthinkit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      With NetFlix, the "one DVD a day" turned out to be a bad dream. The reality was more like one every two days. The other big problem was they didn't have every DVD I wanted to watch. Amazon does but it takes a week to get it. A rare-movie-burned-while-I-wait sounds like a niche-filler to me -- bring it on.

      --
      I come here for the love
    2. Re:Here's what I would buy by Rib+Feast · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For £15 the film industry will have have to use their formula of Film x DVD Retail Price and evaluate if offering downloads in a market is worthwhile.

      Let's see - 30 (films per month) x £10 (DVD) = £300 net sales that are being replaced by a £15 fee.

      Yup, I see them going for it!

      They own the content - they make the price. While we continue to buy DVDs they will continue not to offer cheaper downloads as the economic model of DVDs is clearly working for them and only the geeks are having little hissy fits but continuing to buy (or pirate) films. In their minds it's less costly to pay a pack of lawyers to squash as much of the latter as possible and continue their DVD model.

  13. First Amendment issue: by LiftOp · · Score: 3, Funny

    Can I shout "fire!" in a movie burning kiosk?

  14. Uh but... by countach · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But "burned" DVDs have a limited life. They may only last a few years depending on the quality of the DVDs etc. Properly pressed DVDs last nearly forever. How happy will the consumers be when a few years down the track the DVDs stop working?

  15. DVD cannibalising the industry? by thelamecamel · · Score: 2, Interesting

    DVD is certainly having a negative impact on cinemagoing. There are certainly times when you want to go out and see a movie, but in many (most?) cases the difference between watching the movie at home or at a cinema is decreasing. Therefore more people are buying DVDs, and fewer people are going to cinemas.

    Whenever I go to a cinema (unfortunately rarely these days), I am subjected to trailers which often show me really cool movies that I then want to go to see. So if I go to one movie, chances are I'll go to a few more in the next few weeks. I'm sure that i'm not alone here (and the advertising industry hopes i'm not too!)

    But there aren't compulsory trailers on DVDs (and if there were i would get very pissed off and boycott the DVDs concerned), and so audiences aren't exposed to future movies that they might like. So they are then less likely to continue seeing as many more movies.

    How can the movie industry fix this? More, better advertising on TV perhaps. More trailers on DVDs (though if you make these unskippable you WILL piss people off and they'll rent less DVDs because of the annoyance). But the best strategy, if it is possible, is to entice the public back to watching movies at the cinema, probably by lowering prices. Then they'll want to keep seeing more movies at the cinema if the movie's good enough, or otherwise on DVD.

    1. Re:DVD cannibalising the industry? by isecore · · Score: 2, Funny

      But there aren't compulsory trailers on DVDs (and if there were i would get very pissed off and boycott the DVDs concerned), and so audiences aren't exposed to future movies that they might like. So they are then less likely to continue seeing as many more movies.

      True, but instead we get non-skippable "informational" commercials calling us pirates and sprouting corporate bullshit about how pirates are not only evil, but also communists.

      --
      I enjoy large posteriors and I cannot prevaricate.
  16. A Brief, Feeble Defense of an Execrable Idea by Crash+Culligan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The motion picture industry's line of thinking (if it can be called that) probably ran something like this:

    • Problem: People aren't paying for movies, either to see them in the theaters or for DVDs.
    • Observation: There are honest people out there that will pay for the media, as well as people who are almost ready to do so if only it were more convenient.
    • Solution: Make it more convenient. If people go see the movie and like it, they can buy a freshly burned copy in the lobby afterwards and take the experience home with them.

    I'll agree, the idea is an interesting one. And if circumstances were different, I could see it taking off. There are already bands which record the concert live and then sell CDs after the concert. That seems to work fairly well. So yes, there could have been a chance for this model. (I did say that this would be a brief, feeble defense, yes?)

    Now, where does this idea really fall flat? Well, the problem as stated is pretty much accurate. (It's solely their problem, but technically, to them, it is a problem.) Although, parsed through the lens of objectivity their problem actually reads, "People aren't paying enough for our movies." Meaning that making money hand-over-fist isn't enough for them, they want to make more money, both hands over three fists, damnit.

    The observation is also correct: if the need is great enough and the item is unique enough, there will be someone honest enough to pay nearly any price. (As a corollary, there will also be someone crooked enough to never pay for the thing if there's any chance at all of getting it cheaper or for free elsewhere.) The sales rate to product going out may approach, but will never reach, either 0% or 100%.

    I see the biggest problem in the solution, because they're providing a convenient sales mechanism for people who are already using this other sales mechanism, both of which are tanking in the marketplace! If the problem is people not buying DVDs or going to see movies, tying the two of them together is silly! It's like trying to build a flying machine by tying two bricks together.

    I could also launch into a diatribe on the cost/benefit analysis of piracy vs. purchasing, but this isn't the place.

    --
    You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
  17. numbers by zogger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    this is just my subjective impression, but it appears that the sheer numbers of new movies seems to have gone up radically over the past decade or so. There are just so many movies that people want to watch I think, I know I dont care to see so many, certainly not all of them or even close to that. Seems like a long time ago, when a new "big" movie came out it was a relatively big deal, now its like every weekend there are a dozen (whatever) new movies. Same with bands and music for that matter.

    Like I said, subjective, I have no actual hard numbers to point at.

    As to the kiosks, I think it could be a fine way to do it if the movie plays in anything called a DVD player and if the discs are significantly cheaper than what you get now off the shelf. The main problem is disks need to be around three bucks, not 20 dollars.

    *snort* We bought some movies yesterday out weekend yard saling, I got VHS tapes three for a dollar. Thats about the only way I buy movies or music now, used and at a cheap reasonable price. At 20 bucks, I buy zero movies. Under ten dollars I start to think about it, bargain bin new 5 or under I grab a few if I feel like it.

  18. Better idea by aquabat · · Score: 2

    If they want to increase their market share, the movie companies should take that share away from other media, for example, the print media. To that end, I propose that they set up book burning kiosks in video stores world wide.

    --
    A republic cannot succeed till it contains a certain body of men imbued with the principles of justice and honour.
  19. How this could work by Simonetta · · Score: 2, Informative

    All the points above are valid and each will nulify any business plan that Hollywood had planned for this service.

    This plan can only work if the films being distributed are:
        - Not available from Hollywood. This is great for the thousands of films made in Europe and India that don't get any distribution or review in the USA. The disadvantage of distributing films (or anything in the 'long tail') in this manner is that noone knows which few titles are good, and which of the remaining ones are mediocre.

        - Significantly cheaper than the current pre-pressed DVD distribution of blockbusters mode of business. Perhaps an 'eBay'-type of auction for little known titles whereby the highest bid after a day would get the opportunity to pickup the DVD-ROM with the downloaded and formatted film from the video store distribution point. The local video store would get half the auction price for the burning service against a minimum guaranteed price that would be made by the film distributor. Many details need to be worked out, but this major change in business model could work.

        Ah, but there's the rub.... It requires a major change in the mentality of the entertainment industry for a major change in the business model to occur. However, we all know that can never happen until they are either all bankrupt (unlikely with receipts at record levels) or some big company like Apple tricks or talks them into it.

  20. Distribution Economics from an early attempt by billstewart · · Score: 3, Interesting
    About 10 years ago I had a customer who wanted to set up movie stores like this - they'd always have the current movies in stock, and they'd always have every movie that had ever been made. (They'd done a similar model with record stores, and had some fast digital-to-VHS burning technology.) The main catch was that you needed an OC3 network connection (155 Mbps) to be able to do 5-minute downloads, which was laughably unrealistic at the time, as opposed to today when it's only fairly unrealistic. Since this was before DVDs, they also had issues with the costs of data storage for movies they had cached - 500GB was still pretty big, though there were some digital tape technologies that might work if you had a robot, or you could copy videotapes if you didn't mind the quality hit.

    On-Demand downloads weren't very practical - but pre-loading movies as they're released works quite well, especially since that's what you're most likely to sell. A 1 Mbps network connection lets you download 75 GB a week, which is about 15 movies, depending on resolution, 2-disk-sets, etc. Hollywood seldom produces more than 10 movies a week, and Bollywood's pretty similar. (The pr0n industry produces a lot more.) So if you've got a cable modem or decent DSL connection, you can keep ahead of the mainstream movies and have some bandwidth available for CD-quality ad-hoc downloads. Network availability can be a problem - the obvious place to put DVD burner kiosks is in malls, but they often don't have cable, and they're usually far away from telco offices so DSL bandwidth is lower. On the other hand, grocery stores are usually in/near residential neighborhoods, so they've usually got cable nearby and often have decent DSL.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks