Amazon Unbox Video Store Launches

andrewl6097 writes "Amazon.com has launched it's Amazon Unbox video store. Looks like about 1300 movies and 350 tv series, at $9.99 and up for movies and $1.99 per TV episode. Downloads come with a DVD quality version and a version more appropriate for portable players (using Windows DRM). Also, videos can be re-downloaded from your Amazon media library. Cool!"

Comments

"Cool!"

[sulli]

slashdot is now running accolades for DRM crippled movie downloads? uncool!

Re:"Cool!"

[cptgrudge]

slashdot is now running accolades for DRM crippled movie downloads? uncool!

The submitter might be a shill. Seems way too obvious in the cheerleading aspect, at least to me. Shall we break down the summary?

"Amazon.com has launched it's Amazon Unbox video store."

Good, if obvious, lead sentence here. It makes sure that the company name is repeated twice, and by using the word "it's" we may get a slight feeling that of "it's amazing" before we read the rest of the product, even if the thought is just subconscious. Interesting, if perhaps unintentional usage of the incorrect "it's" instead of the correct "its", we also may get the feeling doubly reinforced again with the uncontracted "it is amazing".

"Looks like about 1300 movies and 350 tv series, at $9.99 and up for movies and $1.99 per TV episode."

Here we see the information about the service and products, including numbers and prices. This is obviously something that will be brought up in the discussion below, but by introducing the readers to it in the summary, the submitter can keep the content tied to the positive aspects conveyed in the summary. This is in contrast to reading about it below where it is coupled with Slashdot users' negative responses to selection and pricing. No control over those comments, but the initial impression is made.

"Downloads come with a DVD quality version and a version more appropriate for portable players"

Again, more information about the service. Sentence structure gives us the words "quality" and "appropriate", which are rather neutral terms, but may make a positive subconscious impression on the readers. The mentioning of the generic "portable players" does not exclude any type of device on name alone, so it will not alienate potential customers.

"(using Windows DRM)."

Then we come to the most interesting part. By qualifying the "portable players" statement with the phrase "(using Windows DRM)", the submitter may actually gain a small measure of trust from us readers. It is likely based on the demographics of the users of Slashdot. As generally informed people, Slashdot users dislike DRM for both it's technical and philisophical nature. By using parentheses, the submitter seems to be imparting information that is somehow cloaked or not for general public knowledge, like a whispered secret. With these two concepts, we may actually trust the submitter more than we would a normal submission.

"Also, videos can be re-downloaded from your Amazon media library."

Here we get a bit more info on the service itself and another placement of the company name and additional product. We are still possibly affected by the subconscious trust level, so we may have an abnormally positive response to this information. Such as a "Great feature!" reaction instead of an "I should hope so!" reaction.

"Cool!"

This final statement, while seemingly out of place, may be accepted simply because the summary has been crafted to elicit a positive reponse and we may find ourselves in agreement, though there is nothing that special about this company's service. It does have the potential to backfire when the target audience is quick enough that they can pick out the strange concepts, as the other posts already show.

Overall, it's designed to give a positive spin and impression to the service, which will hopefully drive more click-throughs to the site. I've seen plenty of links to the iTunes store, but never went there. I clicked on this link, and I don't even plan to buy anything. I didn't buy anything, but I guess it worked on me to at least go there and check it out.

I'm currently for hire.

why pay for single-OS content?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would I pay for video files that are tied to a particular OS?

Funny thing is, i *would* pay for non-DRMed movies. I've bought plenty of non-DRM music online.

It deserves to fail, IMHO.

Re:why pay for single-OS content?

[Nataku564]

Fans. Artists must never be allowed to accumulate enough of a fanbase where they can actually survive on their own. If they sold non-drm'd stuff, you would be able to lend it to friends, and spread the popularity of the artist. This rogue promotional method is far cheaper and more effective than the big label's methods, and must never be allowable under law.

Support

[Yahweh Doesn't Exist]

No Mac support == dead to me.

No support for iPod == dead to the market.

iTunes movies will probably be dead to me too since I live in !USA.

DVDs are cheaper anyway. the entire concept of movie downloads priced the same, or more expensive, as DVDs is retarded.

"Plays for Sure" ... MUHAHHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

[MarkTina]

The phrase "If your device is Plays for Sure compliant it may work," is quite amusing.

So the device claims to play for sure ... but it might not ... great stuff! ;-)

WMV files

[gEvil (beta)]

The site says they use wmv files. I'm assuming the recently mentioned FairUse4WM will work on them. Looks like I might need to check out one of their $3.99 (-$1.99 first time user discount) movie "rentals" to see how well it works (FairUse4WM, not Amazon Unbox).

Re:WMV files

[Anonymous Coward]

I can confirm that FairUse4WM version 1.1 successfully un-DRMs content purchased from Amazon Unbox (a South Park episode, in this case). FYI, the filesize is 432MB for 22:22 minutes at 640x480 resolution.

I agree, this sucks - can't transfer b/t comps

[eliot1785]

You can't even transfer the file that you download between computers. Check this out, from their FAQ:

"You can only view the files using Amazon Unbox installed on the computer that originally received the downloads."

So that means if I buy one of these files and burn it on a DVD to transfer it to another computer that I own, I won't even be able to play it on that other computer. I will have to actually download it again from Amazon.com. You can store it on up to 2 computers (and 2 corresponding video players) at any given time, but files can only be played on the computer to which you downloaded it.

So that means if I want to use up to the 2 computer limit, I have to actually download it twice. There is no way to save download time by using alternative transmission methods, like a flash drive or a DVD-R. This sucks.

Remember all the early iTunes-like stores that failed? Although iTunes has DRM, it succeeded in part because its restrictions were less strong than, say, AOL's. I think Amazon.com's is too restrictive.

ITMS could beat it by being nicer about it, at least allowing you to transfer it between computers however you like. Honestly, that restriction doesn't even make sense from a DRM point of view, because you could always just require people to "authorize" a computer like ITMS. Maybe they aren't as skilled at this as Apple is?

"Wonderful" Quotes from the Terms of Use

[ween14]

"From time to time, Amazon will automatically deliver promotional video content (e.g., movie trailers, celebrity interviews, reviews, etc.) to your Authorized Device. Amazon may automatically delete such promotional video content from your Authorized Device without notice to you."

"If Amazon changes any part of the Service or modifies license terms applicable to Rental Digital Content or Purchased Digital Content, which it may do in its sole discretion, you acknowledge that you may not be able to access, view, or use Digital Content in the same manner as prior to such changes, and you agree that Amazon shall have no liability to you in such case."

The Software automatically checks for upgrades, but the Software will not automatically upgrade without your consent, except as provided herein. If you do not consent to an upgrade that we make subject to your consent, the Digital Content may no longer be viewed on your Authorized Device."

Re:iTunes

[wall0159]

Why will there be a price war when the same interests are behind both sites? The face looks different, but the gizzards are the same.

Won't succeed. Here to stay.

[sporkme]

I would like to point out that when I looked at the website, the top ten downloads included:

#5 Firefly
#6 Adventures of Mary-Kate & Ashley: The Case of the Funhouse Mystery
#8 Adventures of Mary-Kate & Ashley: The Case of the Volcano Mystery

This proves beyond a shadow of doubt that Slashdot users are a significant part of the early adoption crowd.

Amazon's lies about why no Mac support

[gsfprez]

They are spinning like a politician on this...

from the FAQ:
Unfortunately, Apple Computer Inc. has exclusive rights to the
hardware and software that would make it possible for Amazon.com to
provide Amazon Unbox for these devices. Because of these
restrictions, we are unable to make Amazon Unbox compatible with
these products.

Additional information on using Amazon Unbox and purchasing videos
is available on our Help pages at this URL:

www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeI d=161988011

now wait just a damn minute - there is NOTHING stopping Amazon from writing software for Mac OS X. nothing. Apple allows anyone to write software for Mac OS X. They do not have exclusive rights to the hardware and software to make this work on the Mac.... Microsoft does.

Micorsoft does not write any software to allow non-Windows operating systems to view Windows Media files. (they used to have Windows Media Player for the Mac - but now, they let a small company write a codec for Quicktime to play non-DRM WMP files - Flip4Mac)

Anyhow - screw Amazon - they are lying. They can write any damn software they want for the Mac - and the iPod will play any mp4 file you want.

Nothing is stopping them from making Mac compantible files - its their own problem that they don't.