Slashdot Mirror
Apple Movie Store Only Serving Disney Films?
Alex Romanelli, Variety writes "Variety has the scoop on Apple and Amazon's forthcoming movie download services. Apple's will launch with only Disney as a partner. Amazon will have most, and possibly all, of the major studios on board. The reason comes down to price, insiders said.
Amazon.com will launch its movie download service later this week, numerous sources confirmed, while Apple will start selling films on Tuesday as part of iTunes."
First of all, the Vareity article (which doesn't necessarily know anything for certain) says:
"The only studio that will definitely [emphasis added] be part of Apple's movie store at launch is Disney.
So that still doesn't preclude other studios being on board at the time of launch. Even so, it still goes on to say:
"Other studios will likely join iTunes in the next year."
Further:
"The reason Amazon will have content from most major studios, while Apple may have only one, comes down to price, insiders said. Because it also sells DVDs, Amazon has agreed to studio demands that digital wholesale prices not undercut those of DVDs. [emphasis added] As a result, Amazon.com's digital download prices are expected to range from $9.99 to $19.99 -- about the same as those for other online retailers such as CinemaNow, Movielink and AOL.
Initially, Apple was pushing to sell all films for $9.99, just as it sells songs for a flat price of 99 and all TV shows for $1.99. But due to studio pressure, it will launch with two price points: $9.99 for library titles, $14.99 for new pics in the DVD window."
Not only is this the same type of behavior we saw to a certain extent with iTunes in the context of music, and moreso with television programming, I'm quite glad that Apple is pressuring the industry on the price issue, similar to the way they took a significant part in pressuring MPEG LA for reasonable licensing terms, which made the MPEG-4 family of protocols, including H.264/MPEG-4 Part 10, actually usable by normal people for content creation, broadcasting, and playback without the encumbrances of royalties and per-use/per-time fees that would have all but killed MPEG-4 and H.264 on anything but OEM devices and commercial broadcast services.
Then there's the question of usability: the same thing that has made the iTunes universe so attractive to users is still there as it has transitioned to video. It's not just a simple "download a media file and do with it what you will" service (though it can be treated as such; note I'm not talking about this in the context of DRM, I'm speaking in terms of the process via which you download something and play it) - it's a completely integrated system that normal people can actually use that has a pleasant user experience. With things like Front Row now shipping on all of Apple's systems, they've created an end-to-end solution that actually makes viewing, using, or listening to the content a tightly integrated experience that "just works". The turnkey nature of iTunes/iPod/Front Row has been one of the key reasons for its continuing success.
Does the name iTunes Music Store still really apply? If they are now selling movies and music, you would think a name change would come about. Just a thought.
DVDs are pretty cheap these days. If this service is not cheaper than a DVD, I wouldn't use it. This is why I think Amazon's service might not be all that popular. Can I burn it to a DVD? No, I'm probably just buying lower quality, DRM files that take forever to download - and its MORE than a DVD. No way.
I'll probably try Apple's service. Wiht their TV shows on iTunes, the problem has been lack of variety. That will apparently continue to be a problem with films on this service.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
Steve's on the Disney Board! This isn't a real surprise, give the stories about Hollywood's unhappiness over Apple's insistance on a single price for all movies, according to recent stories all over the Mac press.
Let Disney show 'em it works, then they'll fall all over themselves to join in, just like the music folks did...
"Money is truthful. If a man speaks of his honor, make him pay cash." Notebooks of Lazarus Long, Robert A. Heinlein
Im sure both will be DRM-encumbered, and while the apple one will probably be quicktime-centric in some way I'm sure the amazon offering will be windows bases and require WMP in some form.
No thanks. Until they sell me a non-drm'ed movie download I can watch with xine/mplayer on my Solaris/Sparc desktop, I'll stick to the pirate bay...
Full price of DVD, except you don't get the box nor the DVD (and most likely none of the DVD extra features), and you can't even burn the DVD from the DRM-infected file you spent ages to download.
Sure, this is going to be a HUGE hit.
Not.
To be fair, I don't think Apple's pricing is going to work either.
More DRM-laden crap from Apple? No thanks, I'll stick to Netflix and friends for the time being.
It's a store of music
A store of tunes
It's a store of lyrics
And a store of videos
There's so much that we share
On Peer-to-Peer, we swear
It's a small store after all
There is just one Apple
And one golden iTunes
And a smile means
Profits for ev'ryone
Though the Disney divides
And their pockets are wide
It's a small store after all
It's a small store after all
It's a small store after all
It's a small store after all
It's a small, small store
If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
Buy a movie download from a DRMed service, then download that same movie from the Pirate Bay. That way you get the enjoyment only Solaris/SPARC can deliver while still rewarding movie studios for putting out a product that you like.
TRON!
I have a scoop! The first film available will be a science fiction cartoon about a touch screen music player set in the year 2100.
That's sooo Osama bin Laden.
FTFA: "Because it also sells DVDs, Amazon has agreed to studio demands that digital wholesale prices not undercut those of DVDs. As a result, Amazon.com's digital download prices are expected to range from $9.99 to $19.99..."
"Initially, Apple was pushing to sell all films for $9.99, just as it sells songs for a flat price of 99 and all TV shows for $1.99. But due to studio pressure, it will launch with two price points: $9.99 for library titles, $14.99 for new pics in the DVD window."
Neither of these companies will get my business. Why the hell would I pay retail for a download when I can have it in a day or two on physical media with a case and an insert? $4.99, maybe - after all that would compete with "buying" a new release on DirecTV which I can save on my Tivo. This one I really don't get.
I still don't purchase (complete) CD's online - I'll take the packaging. Individual songs make sense since I might only care for a couple tracks on a disc. I've never had the desire to download specific chapters of a DVD. Music downloads are a whole different thing than video. Oh well, I hope the market takes care of this.
I'm sorry that I already posted - if I could use my mod points, I'd mod ya down for offtopic.
Or at least, this is increasingly the case and I'm not even talking about torrents.
http://home.comcast.net/~plutarch/videos.html
I have a 100gig hard drive on my Macbook Pro. If I acquire enough movies that space is going to get used up, quickly. It's much easier for me to buy a storage rack for 20-30 some dollars and keep all my DVDs there than it would be to upgrade my hard drive or to buy an external firewire drive.
/home directory. I'd rather iTunes return an error message that says my library is unavailable, rather than start storing stuff on my hard drive and fragmenting my media collection.
Speaking of which...this brings up an interesting aspect of iTunes. You can specify that you would like your library stored on an external device, ie a samba share on your network or a firewire drive. However, as soon as you disconnect that device, your library location defaults to the music & video folders in your
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
Although I wouldn't consider a DRM'ed movie on its own, I'd consider a packaged deal where I get the DVD in the mail, but in the mean time can download the DRM protected movie immediately (and obviously I'd be willing to pay slightly more than the typical DVD). This would benefit Amazon because I'd be willing to pay more to be able to view the movie sooner. This will benefit the studios because in addition to the higher price, I'm less likely to rip the DVD into a DRM free file since I already have a soft copy on my PC. This would benefit me because I'm an American and like instant gratification. The band Pearl Jam basically did this for live shows on their 2003 tour. You could buy MP3's of the show roughly within 24 hours, and they would mail you an audio CD (acutally most shows were two CD's, some three) of the show in a couple weeks. For fans this was great, and although I don't foresee the movie studio's allowing a non-DRM format for video, I'd still be a heck of a lot more motivated to buy a downloadable movie if I knew I'd be eventually receiving a full DVD copy.
Sadly, PS/2 was yet another victim of USB, which doesn't care what you plug into it, the electrical slut.
A typical movie, if compressed by half, will fit on a standard 4.5 GB DVD (unit cost $.10 without case). Immediately we see that the cost is greater than purchasing the real thing and the quality is much less, not only in terms of picture quality, but also in terms of packaging etc.
So far, this is not much different from music right? True. However! Many ISP's cap the downloads to 100 GB's/month if not less. Few spots in the US and Canada don't have capped downloads, where the iTunes store will first be releasing the movies. This means, that for those that want to buy a good amount DVD's they will have to pay a premium once they surpass their download limit. My ISP charges $1/GB over my 100 GB limit..or I can opt to get throttled down to dial-up speeds. Convenient...
Regardless, the cost of entry is simply not on par with downloading music wherein one does not have to wait hours for the download (usually) one has near immediate gratification. As well, with the plethora of DAP products, folks don't necessarily require (or rather desire) the jewel case, cover art, liner notes etc. Yet, with DVD's the vast majority WILL be ripping to a DVD and playing in their home unit watching on their TV, not on some tiny screen on a DAP.
With prices in the $10-20 range, only the diehards will go for this, or those with massive uncapped pipes (like sysadmins at a corp or university). Drop the cost to $5 and people will be far more eager to wait for the downloads, take their chances with their ISP quirks because $5 for the new Pirate of the Carribean movie is going to be far cheaper than the 15-20 they'll pay at Best Buy for the first month of its release.
Forget the lot of them, they are all useless.
Why should I pay as much or more than a DVD for a download copy that it riddled with DRM and much lower in quality?
For any download I expect them playable on anything I might use. At the moment I have 3 machines I regularly use. A Windows XP Box, a Mac Mini and a Kubuntu box. I also expect to be able to stream whatever it is from my Kubuntu box as I use that as a file server. Also playing on my pda and laptop and hey even on my real dvd player are also pretty important things.
This stinks of the current trend of charginf ridiculour prices for something just because it is downloadable.
Hey companies downloadable saves you loads of money pass this on to me instead of expecting me to quadruple your profit on things.
I'll stick to DVD thanks, at least the problems with that have been overcome.
+----------------- | What is the question!
There is absolutely no way that I would pay as much for a digital download of a movie as I would for a DVD. Common sense tells you that the pricing is wrong as there are no box or physical media costs. Nor is there the shipping costs to get the finished product to retailers. Then there is the format. Do I really want to pay full price to watch a movie on a screen the size of an ipod with video. No way! This thing is primed for failure. Consumers can be stupid at times, but they're not this stupid.
I'm a self affirmed Mac Fanboy and also a conservative.
This is an odd move for a company with definite liberal leanings.
I'd mod you down for being offtopic too but no one should care. Frankly, unless you use the mod points, no one gives a damn how you would mod. Especially as an AC.
It's time for us to get over ourselves and stop feeding the trolls.
Will these movies have better quality than that failed UMD stuff?
Until they sell me a non-drm'ed movie download I can watch with xine/mplayer on my Solaris/Sparc desktop, I'll stick to the pirate bay
I'm with you, Matey. Until the swabs make it available to me on those little wheelie discs with the colored cellophane frames and I can project it on to my Mom's laundry hanging in the backyard, I'm going the copyright infringement route as well.
Stupid studios! When will they ever learn they have to cater to ALL our home playback technologies, no matter how eccentric or whimsical? They JUST DON'T GET IT!
But it's NOT a good product if you still have to download it on the PirateBay after you paid for it. That's the problem: if you have paid for it, they'll continue to give us this crappy format (DRM + bad quality) wihtout caring about our real needs (OTOH they'll blame it on piracy if no one buys it, we're SOL anyway).
This could be very very bad. If this method of delivery becomes the norm, perhaps diminishing hard copy mediums to the niche market, movie studios might play "Never Ending Editor" and continue to edit the films as they see fit to the detriment of us, the fans. If Lucas has his way, Greedo would shoot first, not simulataneously and certainly not getting burned without a hint of one off. No, Han would shoot second, and not be considered a murdering space pirate. But I like my space priates to be a murdering lot! So do many others.
What happens when everything is streamed? We the customers lose any control. At least once we own a hard copy of a film, we have it for life. This is one of the reasons vinyl is still very successful (outselling both SACD and DVD-A combined for the last 5 years). Right now, downloads are rippable to CD's or DVD's. If they catch on to a great extent, DRM will be included that will prohibit this and only the geek will find the work arounds. Yet, if the music and movie industry were to offer a flat rate for total access to their catalogue, most would not go through the hassle of ripping. Imagine $50/month for all music and movies streamed when you want wherever you are! The deal? Streaming only. Today Han shoots first, tomorrow he shoots second, the next week he shoots simultaneously until Han is no longer even in the scene. An extremem perspective maybe but not something I would put past either of the cartels.
'Rewarding' a movie studio by paying ten or twenty bucks for a DRM'd video file is like 'rewarding' a mugger by getting raped too.
Whoo, signature!
DesireCampbell.com
Bad, bad troll! xine is a player for MPEG videos, it is not some stupid old technology.
in around 700mb. That's it. That's the sweet spot. Anything bigger, any amount more, and it is alternate means for me.
Bad, bad troll! xine is a player for MPEG videos, it is not some stupid old technology.
I know what xine is, super-genius, I use it daily. Along with a whole bunch of other Linux players and plug-ins that I would not expect Hollywood to actively support until they achieved some marketshare approaching at least that of Firefox. Because a player exists, or is even technologically superior to what "the masses" have, should by no means bind, ethically or otherwise, a company to support that player if it does not make good business sense to do so.
The best option for me is the local public library. They offer DVDs for free. Hard to beat free. I can reserve them on-line then walk in and the DVD is tagged with my name on it and setting on a self up by the checkout counter.
Walmart is also known to have leaned on the studios about pricing on the iTunes site.
As the largest seller of DVDs in the US, they have the ability to pressure the studios as well.
Apple needs to, and will, just roll out their new offering next week. Once the public gets a taste, the other studios will get in on the gravy train, just as they have done with the TV shows, which are also produced by a lot of the studios.
If someone sold audio books bundled with searchable pdfs, they would have my business in a heartbeat. For a lot of subjects, audio books are much more convienient than paper books, as you listen to them while you are doing something else like driving or cooking. But they are inferior to books for use as a reference. E-books are even better than hardcopies for searching and reference purposes, and are easier to store (I don't like owning walls of books) but are less enjoyable to read cover to cover. If you were to combine the two into one purchase you would have the best of all worlds.
As it is now, I never buy audio-books because I only ever listen to them once, and I won't buy e-books on their own because I can't stand reading that much material on a computer. Instead I'll either rent the audio-book, or buy the hardcopy. I would happily pay the retail price of an audio book for a bundled download, maybe even a little more.
'Rewarding' a movie studio by paying ten or twenty bucks for a DRM'd video file is like 'rewarding' a mugger by getting raped too.
This is a grossly offensive and inappropriate analogy. Almost nobody likes DRM, but the fact is that most studios wouldn't allow Apple or others to sell them as downloads without it. $14.99 is still cheaper than the cost of 2 people to see a movie at the theater (in most areas), and often times less expensive than the retail DVD. Simply because you don't like DRM doesn't give you the excuse to compare it to two violent and often times negatively life altering experiences.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Porky Pig's hammer is a SOB!
Looney Toons is WB, not Disney, Einstein!
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
At the moment, Apple is only selling TV shows at 320x240. Great for iPods, but if I'm buying a movie, I demand DVD resolution minimum. Give me 480p, Apple.
I imagine this will cause some difficulties- at the moment, iTunes can simply transfer TV shows on to iPods, but if you downloaded a 480p movie, the iPod wouldn't be able to play it- imagine iTunes having to convert multiple 2-hour video files from 480p to 320x240 every time it syncs with the PC...that could take quite a while, especially on older machines.
Hopefully they'll let you choose your resolution on download, or iTunes will resize the videos if you have an iPod.
Dude, all he's asking for is standards-compliant DRM-free media, not some esoteric demand for a xine-specific video.
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
I don't get why people never get this. To manufacture a cd costs very little. I can make cds of me singing and sell them. But my singing is really really bad (It hurts my own ears).
/10$ = 1 million copies. Thats a lot of DVDs.
Content is more than the cost of the media. If I make a movie that costs 10 million dollars, and sell it on DVD. How many movies do I have to sell before I make my first dollar. (say I make 10 dollars per dvd sold).
10,000,000$
Everyone who does your thinking thinks of "blockbusters", movies that are so popular the cost per dvd sold is a very very small percentage of the cost of the disk. For less popular movies a good chunk of the cost of the DVD has already been spent on production.
Your right about the elasticity of demand though, cheaper means more buyers.
Really? When did Steve Jobs buy out WB? :P
This is a grossly offensive and inappropriate analogy.
It is certainly offensive.
$14.99 is still cheaper than the cost of 2 people to see a movie at the theater (in most areas), and often times less expensive than the retail DVD.
I'm not sure $14.99 plus the cost of a DVD on which to burn it is cheaper than the cost of the DVD in the store, most of the time. But then, The cost of iTunes downloads plus a CD on which to burn them is not cheaper than the record store for me either, but some people still go for it. The main differences I see is the size of the files, the way the media is used, and the benefit of granularity. It takes a lot longer to download a movie and more disk to store it. A lot of people only want to see a movie once or twice, but they want it now, compared to a lot of people who want to have to option to listen to a given song over and over and over again. A lot of people just one some songs from and album and iTunes gives them more granularity of choice. There is no such benefit to buying one DVD, unless they are buying one episode of a TV show (something less desired IMHO).
Simply because you don't like DRM doesn't give you the excuse to compare it to two violent and often times negatively life altering experiences.
No, the basic, unalienable, human right to express themselves guarantees that, just as it guarantees you the right to complain about it. Feel free to lambast the person for making comparisons you find offensive, but claiming they don't have the right to do so, is either a poor, inappropriate choice of words on your part, or a fundamental disagreement about basic human rights between yourself and most human rights organizations and myself.
In my experience, the DVDs that are most likely to be played often enough to have to be re-bought due to scratches are DVDs of family/children's films. The problem is that one of the movie studios best known for family/children's films is the one that makes titles available for sale to the public only for a 6-month window every 10 years.
I just buy the non-Disney "knockoff" version and give that to the kids. The funny thing is that the "knockoff" tends to stay truer to the original stories than the Disney version does. Go Goodtimes!
"This is a grossly offensive and inappropriate analogy"
Perhaps a better analogy would be "get raped, and then pay your rapist"? I didn't know being mugged was such a touchy subject.
"Almost nobody likes DRM"
I understand that many people don't care about DRM, most end-users don't know or care what it is. But I'd never think that anyone actually likes having their rights restricted.
"but the fact is that most studios wouldn't allow Apple or others to sell them as downloads without it"
I sorry, I missed the part where I said the movie studios weren't raping you too. I missed the part of my post where I said "Apple sucks for the DRM, Disney just wants its videos to be seen". I realise that the studios are pushing for DRM, I never said otherwise. It still doesn't make it acceptable, and still doesn't make it right.
"$14.99 is still cheaper than the cost of 2 people to see a movie at the theater (in most areas)"
Again, you're acting like I've said that the theatre doesn't rape you too. I've hated the theatre ('movie' theatres, not real theatre) for years. "Eight bucks for me, but four bucks for the kids to watch the same damn movie? Bullshit!"
Furthermore, theatres get away with such high prices because the movies they show are new - iTunes isn't going to be showing movies that are still in theatres.
"and often times less expensive than the retail DVD"
True. That DRM'd movie file that I have to download off of iTunes, and can only play with iTunes, is a few dollars less than getting the movie in a physical format, with a protective case, perhaps a little booklet (or a really nice booklet, in many cases), probably some 'extra features' too (which might suck, but often are really interesting).
So, I'm still not impressed that I'm getting a severely inferior product for almost the same price.
"Simply because you don't like DRM doesn't give you the excuse to compare it to two violent and often times negatively life altering experiences."
"Often"? Did you just say that rape "often" affects you negatively? "Often"?
Rape takes away the victim's ability to choose for themselves. It's something forced upon them - they don't want it but they cannot do anything about it. Their rights are being quashed by another. Restricting another's rights is always violent. No one gives up their rights easily - everyone fights for it.
Well, except for children, and the mentally handicapped. They often are seduced into agreeing to such acts - but because they aren't qualified to make such decisions for themselves.
So, I guess you're right. It's unfair to say that DRM is "digital rape". It's only rape if you know enough to fight back - most people don't know enough to resist the slick marketing campaigns that seduce them into using these 'services'. These people really aren't qualified to make such decisions for themselves. So, for most people, DRM is "digital seduction of the innocent, then rape".
PS- No, I'm not trying to make fun of the mentally handicapped, and I'm not trying to diminish the sociological impact of rape. They're accurate analogies, not flamebait.
Whoo, signature!
DesireCampbell.com
I'm pretty sure Apple will be coming out with both an online service and a hardware device that connects to your TV (just like you need an external decoder for satellite/digital cable). It will be simple and it will just work.
If you want to be a nerd and do things the hard way, go buy a Blu-Ray drive and hack the DRM on that yourself.
LionsGate announced in August that they'd be part of the new movie store. So, why does Variety appear to be reporting otherwise?
Often times? Are there times when being mugged and raped turn out to be life altering in the positive sense? ;-)
Read my blog.
So, I guess you're right. It's unfair to say that DRM is "digital rape". It's only rape if you know enough to fight back -
No, it's not unfair to say that, it's ignorant and offensive. These are not accurate analogies, they're bullshit thought up by someone who doesn't have the empathy to know better. Being offered a DVD for sale with crappy DRM is nothing to do with violent attacks, rape or mugging, and is in no way similar.
For those that want to buy a good amount DVDs they will have to pay a premium once they surpass their download limit. My ISP charges $1/GB over my 100 GB limit
Even if these stores will go for the rather arbitrary upper limit of 4.5GB per film, you'd still need to buy 22 films in a one month period to reach that 100GB limit. If you have that kind of money to spend, you probably won't even notice your ISP's extra charge.
Perhaps you missed my cleverly disguised hints. It's hard sometimes to catch on when I'm just repeating key words.
...[unless] they aren't qualified to make such decisions for themselves.
-- [C]hildren, and the mentally handicapped ... often are seduced into agreeing to such acts.
I'll bold some of the key words for you.
Rape:
-- Rape takes away the victim's ability to choose for themselves. It's something forced upon them - they don't want it but they cannot do anything about it. Their rights are being quashed by another.
-- Restricting another's rights is always violent. No one gives up their rights easily - everyone fights for it
DRM:
-- most people don't know enough to resist the slick marketing campaigns that seduce them into using these 'services'
-- [Most] people really aren't qualified to make such decisions for themselves. So, for most people, DRM is "digital seduction of the innocent, then rape".
I'm not saying rape and DRM are exactly the same - they're just similar enough in these specific ways to be used as an analogy - that's what an 'analogy' means, not the "same" but "similar". If you still can't see that both rape and DRM are based in taking rights and choice away from people, you might be one of those people who aren't qualified to make such desicions for themselves.
Whoo, signature!
DesireCampbell.com
This is hardly news. When you're testing something, you have to use whatever's to hand. There are already existing associations between Dinsey, Pixar and Apple, so it was most probably a formality to get the relevant permission to use Disney material for the testing phase. Apple wouldn't dare risk embarrassment by offering movies for download without the blessing of the copyright holders.
By the time the movie store is up and running for real, I would expect at least some of the major studios to be wanting to get on board. The Apple brand is just too strong to ignore.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
I bet they will not have any good anime movies or episodes. Lets see stuff like Ninja Scroll...
hello
No, the basic, unalienable, human right to express themselves guarantees that, just as it guarantees you the right to complain about it. Feel free to lambast the person for making comparisons you find offensive, but claiming they don't have the right to do so, is either a poor, inappropriate choice of words on your part, or a fundamental disagreement about basic human rights between yourself and most human rights organizations and myself.
I never said that they didn't have the right. I said they didn't have the excuse. There's a difference. I find their analogy to be offensive and inappropriate, almost bordering on libel. I'm exercising my freedom of expression to counter theirs.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Often times? Are there times when being mugged and raped turn out to be life altering in the positive sense? ;-)
There are times when bad things happen to us but they end up having a positive effect. Perhaps a rape victim becomes a couselor for other rape victims, and helps others heal their hurt. We don't have too much control over what happens to us, but we do have a lot of control over the way we react to it.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
"$14.99 is still cheaper than the cost of 2 people to see a movie at the theater"
Sure. And it would be a great deal if they were selling you a movie that was currently in the theaters. But these sound like movies that are currently available for purchase or rental at any store. And since it will take a lot of time to download around 1GB of movie data, you might as well buy the movie from the supermarket or rent it from the rental place next door.
At least if you buy the thing, you can sell it, or more likely let your friends borrow it.
But $15 for a film that most people can only watch sitting at your PC for a limited amount of time? Who thought that was a great idea?
Here's the really dumb part. Unlike music, movies are a natural for rental, because you watch once and you're done. So can justify $1/song on the basis of you're going to enjoy it a long time in the car, the house, the PC, the iPod. But people will rightfully see this as a rental, and a very expensive one to boot. That they can only watch on their PC. Or have media PC's connected to the 50" plasma suddenly become popular?
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
I'm on the band-wagon with the "Special Features required". I won't pay for a downloaded movie w/o the Special Features. But I don't think that we are without hope here.
DivX 6, released a full year ago, has the features required to effectively make a video file into a DVD (subtitles, menus, etc.). Apple has the benefit of closed formats, so what's to stop them from providing an "enhanced video" file that implements the DVD features. I'd like to believe that they'd have the foresight to handle the Special Features issue.
If they don't then I suspect they may be hindering their sales. Of course, they could just come out with an external backup drive / media server and pitch the whole kit as a "cool new idea". This may get the fish biting. Of course, us slashdotters will just rip our DVDs like we always have :)
Buy a movie download from a DRMed service, then download that same movie from the Pirate Bay. That way you get the enjoyment only Solaris/SPARC can deliver while still rewarding movie studios for putting out a product that you like.
the problem is, you cannot just "download" via bittorrent. while you download, you become a peer, and the parts of your files already downloaded will be uploaded to other peers. while this is technically a very good solution, from a lawyer's pov you are ALSO UPLOADING. and that is illegal. unlike, for example, downloading a SNES-ROM you own via http, which is perfectly legal.
i've got some tv-series on dvd, and i fetched them all via bittorrent again, because i want them as nicely decoded video files on my hd. i could decrypt and re-encode them, but apart from that beeing ALSO illegal it just takes too much time.
bottom line: when a perfectly legal desire (to convert some digital media i own) makes me a criminal, maybe i just should skip the buying part. damn those media whores sitting in our parliaments.
On second thought, let's not go to Camelot. It is a silly place.
Then don't ask for Hollywood movies in "standards-compliant DRM-free" formats. Ask for independent titles in "standards-compliant DRM-free" formats.
While we're comparing price points here, let's not forget that a visit to the local movie theatre costs nine bucks. Hordes of people are willing to pay that much to see a film once, on a big screen with their peers. No ownership rights at all; and afterwards they will probably never see the movie again. Plus they have to leave the house, and will probably add a four dollar soda to the bill.
Clearly there is some flexibility in prices, mostly dependent on the interest level that a potential purchaser has. The less interested they are in seeing a movie, the more affordable and convenient you have to make it before they will open their wallets.
The only reason big business is pursuing internet-based distribution AT ALL is because they perceive a demand for the additional measure of convenience that the model could POTENTIALLY deliver, and they expect to derive an acceptable profit from constructing that model.
So the big question is: Is internet-based distribution a new niche of consumers - a third category beyond theatre-goers and DVD renters - who will be convinced to watch a movie via the internet? Or are these people just a subset of that second, established category of DVD renters? In other words, do they need a lower price to bring them on board ... or do they just need the same price they're already used to paying for a movie on DVD?
Personally, I think it's a subset of DVD renters. A small subset. People who own computers, and who watch movies primarily on their computers, yet are not particularly concerned with owning a physical copy of their data, and are just a bit too impatient to order a DVD in the mail. That's not a very big demographic, really. Maybe it covers a lot of college students who move too often for a NetFlix account, but at the same time, college students are rampant pirates, to whom most music and movies are contemptuously disposable.
When anyone uses words like "DRM-encumbered" when describing iTunes, it's proof they've never, ever tried buying anything from iTunes or had any personal experience with its extremely liberal DRM--so liberal you never notice it's there.
I'm sure the artists will just love that you're making such a defiant stand with Pirate Bay by not compensating them. It amuses me that you attempt a moral stance against DRM in one breath, then advocate piracy in the next. Ah, Slashdot.
"Sufferin' succotash."
If its so liberal that you'll never notice its there, by all means copy some of your media bought with itunes onto another medium/platform and get back to us about how well it works. I'll be quite pleased to hear that apple has fixed the earlier problems I had with trying, and that I can once again spend my money with thier service...
Unless the movies are rated G and animated, and you have single-digit-year-old children in the house.
I missed the announcement where people are all forced to buy stuff from iTMS.
Maybe it's different where you are, but here in the rest of the world we get to choose whether we want to buy iTMS stuff or not.
The big advantage of digital distribution is that the costs are so much lower for the studios than manufacturing disks and selling them. What this means is that something like the iTunes Media Store is the perfect place for the studios to sell all that content that is not cost effective to release on DVD.
What will be interesting is to see if the policies of "limited run" (like what Disney does with their films) carries over to the digital world or if we finally see an end to those stupid practices.
By movie industry logic a mini-benz would cost the same as their flagship model. Lets hope the cost of distributing or making movies never reaches zero. The cost of a single copy would then be infinite plus taxes and explode the universe.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I generally agree with your post, but there's just one thing where I have to add a major "WTF???":
:)
"Well, except for children, and the mentally handicapped. They often are seduced into agreeing to such acts - but because they aren't qualified to make such decisions for themselves. "
Where - THE FUCK - did you get the idea that children and the mentally handicapped are often seduced into agreeing to rape??? I can't vouch for the mentally handicapped, but have you - EVER - talked to anybody who had sex as a child? I'll dare you to find one person who will say that it wasn't straight-up, violent and painful rape.
For the rest though - nice post.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
"did you get the idea that children and the mentally handicapped are often seduced into agreeing to rape???"
Ah, understandable confusion. I meant "molestation", being seduced or convinced into thinking what is happening is alright. Molestation is rape, but with added mental confusion. A pedophile or other sexual predator who preys on those of diminished capabilities (like children or the mentally handicapped) many times 'convince' them that "it's okay" and "not to tell anyone". They don't simply hold them down and fuck them, they take advantage of the fact that the victim can't really defend against a verbal assault (because they don't have the mental ability to).
My point in the analogy was that these people are taken advantage of and the predator has 'convinced' them that what he is doing is perfectly alright. I likened this to DRM, it takes advantage of people and they have been 'convinced' that DRM is perfectly alright for no other reason than that's what the people fucking them in the ass told them.
Again, I want to make it clear that I'm not trying to insult anyone with this analogy. Rape is a terrible, terrible thing - and because I can so easily liken DRM to rape is my way of showing that it too is terrible.
Whoo, signature!
DesireCampbell.com
Remember that Disney isn't just Disney as they pretty much own what AOL doesn't.
Starting out with Walt Disney Pictures, Touchstone Pictures, Miramax Films, Hollywood Pictures, Pixar Animation Studios, and Walt Disney Feature Animation wouldn't be half bad!
They could have everything from Pulp Fiction, to Cars, to Snow White, to The Sixth Sense, to Starship Troopers and much more.
Apple has the best segment to make money in:
Customers that watch a movie 100's of times: Kids
Customers that don't need 5.1 sound: Kids
Customers that don't notice compression aritfacts: Kids
Customers that can't don't care the DVD is cheaper: Kids
Customers that can influence a purchase NOW!: Kids
The biggest single source of kids movies: Disney
You can specify that you would like your library stored on an external device, ie a samba share on your network or a firewire drive. However, as soon as you disconnect that device, your library location defaults to the music & video folders in your /home directory. I'd rather iTunes return an error message that says my library is unavailable, rather than start storing stuff on my hard drive and fragmenting my media collection.
The solution to this problem is simple, I use it every day.- In iTunes, go into Preferences and disable "Copy to iTunes folder when adding to Library" or whatever.
- Mount your external or network drive (on Mac this will default to the same mountpoint under
/Volumes, on Windows use the same drive letter when you mount).
- In iTunes, go to File/Add to Library, select the mountpoint.
- iTunes will add the media files to the Library, pointing to the external location. Your iTunes library files will stay local. If you disconnect the external media, the Library will simply list the entries as unavailable until you reconnect the drive.
Using this method, it's possible to have multiple external filestores on multiple smaller disks or NASs (rather than one big local volume), and have all of your media combined into one library.Yeah, really.
Juat download the damn thing, fuck worrying about giving money to some of the richest companies in the world.
There is NO need to feel guilty about it. They might even get the message if nobody buys their garbage.
And remember, kids, COPYING IS NOT STEALING!!!
Actually, I would say the excuse/very good reason for making that analogy is that while it is an exaggeration, it's a pretty good comparison considering that the movie companies make the comparison of copying to stealing, which is offensive and inappropriate, almost bordering on libel.
And while you may not like negative campaigning, or "fight fire with fire" strategy, it gets people's attention, and it works.
And with the garbage being dished out in the other direction, we need something that works.
Great story, read more information about Unbox.com at: http://techaddress.wordpress.com/2006/09/07/amazon -unbox-launches-download-movies-and-tv/
No it isn't. The six Hollywood studio parents are owned by investors, and investors' idea of maximizing return on investment without the revenue leakage of rampant copyright infringement is digital restrictions management.
Jobs (Apple) helping Jobs (Disney) to get Disney's underwhelming stuff to the market once again, great idea, thank you, highly appreciated, but I doubt it will work outside the U.S., if anyplace at all.
An early bird in the online music market, Apple has been and they been rewarded for this.
And now, Apple as one of the (probably many) late-comers in the online movie market?
It is supposed to be that we decide what we will pay for, but as of late big businesses have been deciding for us. Someone has to decide so if the consumers allow them big businesses will and do push for their way. It is reflected in the price of gas to all of the stores that say oh now we will charge you more because the cost of gas went up. .... more and more and ...
If the majority of consumers balk at DRM and either purchase alternatives, S&S (steal and strip) media or refuse to buy until there is an acceptable alternative AND...here is the important part that most people NEVER do...tell them such, then we will get what we want. However, if the majority continue to be led around by the ring in their nose then we all will continue to get screwed
"All it takes for evil to win is for the good man to do nothing" RFD