Slashdot Mirror
Space Shifting DVDs to Cost Extra?
Depending on who you listen to Steve Jobs has supposedly been pitching the idea of selling "premium" DVDs that would include an extra fee for the privilege of transferring your legally-purchased DVD to a different device. "The courts have held that "space-shifting" your CDs to a portable music device is a fair use. So you can legally import your CD collection to your iPod, or any other device, without paying a penny. But Steve Jobs apparently wants to charge you $4 for the privilege of doing the same with your DVDs."
I tell you, I *might* be persuaded to pay that price if it was some sort of continuous license w/unlimited downloads. For example, if I could take a DVD from my current collection, get it so if I lose the file I can always re-download from Apple, and if they release an HD version I get it for free, then that might be worth $4. Otherwise, screw you, I'll rip the DVD myself.
This might explain why there is a "Deauthorize Media" option in the Features menu of Leopard's DVD Player.
Yes, customers have rights. Exercising them is up to the customer. I don't have to help them/you. If my help is desired, ask nicely. Payment would help.
Apple is (apparently) offering to help. They would expect payment - natch.
E.g., you have the right to keep and bear arms. If you don't have said arms, they may be provided to you - at a cost. (As a deflection to arguments from people outside of the US, I would say that you also have the same rights. I'm sorry if you don't have the same opportunity to exercise them.)
I may have misunderstood the article, but I thought that Steve was the one pitch the idea of putting the copy on the DVD. The encryption is going to be there whether or not anybody outside the MPAA likes it. I believe that Steve was mostly pushing the idea of putting an itunes compatible file on the disc as well.
Even that sucks though, limiting the file to just an Apple format and charging far more for the file than it is reasonably worth it. And at that point, either the file is locked to one device or it renders the DRM on the disc completely useless. In either case it doesn't seem to benefit consumers much, if at all.
Shouldn't the courts acknowledge that DRM isn't a protection measure if most people can break it easily. I mean at that point, what's the real difference between DRM and exotic file format?
So you're willing to pay more for content that hasn't had expensive snake oil spent on it?
;) As it is, DRM is just an excuse to con you out of using "content" you already own ('cept in the UK of course, where any format shifting is technically illegal).
Not intending that as a jibe - guess it'd be quite nice to have a service/app that'd provide an optional 1-click "send to my MP3 player" or what have you for people who aren't inclined to transcode their own or download an iPod-ised version from TPB... but I think the DVD publishers are missing a trick by not including an already converted MP4 file on the DVD itself. It'd be low quality and therefore useless to most people but it'd certainly get people more used to watching stuff on their 2" screens
My MP3 player (iAudio X5) supports MPEG4 stuff in an AVI if you transcode it right, and I dare say I might use it more if the screen was a little better. As a further aside, I've transcoded a few ephemeral TV shows recorded the night previously on my Myth box via a custom job so as to be able to watch them on the way into work. That's quite handy, and means I don't have to spend 30 minutes of my at-home time watching it.
Moderation Total: -1 Troll, +3 Goat
Who wants to grasp the concept that the only way to secure future rights from the grip of a DRM locked down future is to convince the studios, as Jobs is trying to do, that they can make money and give consumers more freedom.
This is one way for for a positive outcome. However, look at what (if this article is to be believed) Jobs is asking. He is asking for $4 (it's not clear if the money goes to him or the studio or both) for the ability to do something that we should be able to do for free. The reason we can't do it for free is not (entirely) because of the studios, but mostly because our laws are screwed up. I am hoping that our lawmakers will fix this, but until that happens I'd rather people like Jobs push for fixing the laws rather than (just) being opportunistic and trying to capitalize on it.
I would pay 4$ extra for a DVD that would include the following bonuses:
- One iPod and PSP version video of the movie along with one version in a standard codec.
- One iPod and PSP version video of each episode (if it's something like a Futurama season DVD) along with one version in a standard codec.
- Flac/Wav/lossless version of the songs, if it's a concert DVD.
- No DRM on the ripped stuff.
I am sick of installing 10 gazillion CD/DVD rippers and encoders just so I can watch my DVDs on my PSP and my DSM-320. 4$ for me would be no big deal to pay for that service.
I find it more handy to just download the program from the torrent sites the next day. It's likely better quality, commercial free, and required no transcoding. Hell, it's faster to download a movie than it is to transcode it. Azureus will even allow you to use RSS feeds to download content so that it's waiting for you on your desktop the morning after the show airs.
The content industries need to realize that they are competing with "Free and illigal". Free is very attractive, especially when the free version is better than the non-free version, due to it's lack of restrictions. I think that the content industry needs to make thier content more accessable and cheaper. Movies should be $1.00 (maybe 2.00 for new releases) to buy. Here's my idea:
Have a video vending machine that will allow you to select a number of movies and after you pay for them, it will transfer them to your USB drive, which you can take home and play on your computer, or on your Xbox360, PS3, Modded xbox, Apple TV, whatever. The low cost will allow people to buy more movies then they did before, and having people provide thier own media, keeps the costs down, and profits up. The money that get's lost by the lower price tag, would be recovered by higher sales (because of the lower cost) and the higher profit margin (100% - cost of electricity to run the kiosk).
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
I actually wonder about this as well, but propose a different outcome:
If Steve Jobs promotes these DVDs that allow you to copy the movie, and it only costs $4 to avoid a very in-depth discussion of your rights as a consumer in regards to intellectual property, there may be quite a few people who adopt to this format.
Now suppose, and this probably isn't too likely, the public begins to purchase these slightly-more expensive DVDs. Would we see price cuts in the original format as well as this new format? Furthermore, would we eventually see this new format become the standard? Interesting to ponder.
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
Personally I would not pay. IMO it is Fair Use for me to make a backup copy of the DVD movies I purchase. I'm no lawyer, but it seems that the DMCA does allow for copies made for fair use. I'm referring to Sec.1201(c)(1). It seems like there may have been a case that ruled in favor of DVD ripping for personal use considered fair use, but I may be confusing that with the contrary. Regardless of the way it is, I feel that it is fair use for me to rip my legally purchased DVDs for personal uses only. I'm in the process of ripping all my DVDs to my server so I can watch it on demand from my TV or one of the computers. Once I'm done with ripping them, I'll be putting them into storage for safe keeping and freeing up much needed shelf space.
Kinda funny how it happened.
Steve Jobs was CEO of Pixar... Pixar was bought by Disney.
CEOs of other companies being on the board of directors is actually pretty common. Up until a few months ago I worked at JP Morgan Chase. The CEO of Comcast was on the board of directors (probably still is).
If you had super powers, would you use them for good, or for awesome?
On the other hand, I have around 50-100 DVDs (not sure exactly how many, some are seasons of TV shows in boxed sets with multiple disks). Assuming around 7GB per DVD, that's 350-700GB. Even reencoding as H.264, that's a few more generations of iPod before I have enough space. More to the point, you don't need to buy too many DVDs a year to make your current storage device obsolete.
If iTunes let you rip DVDs in the same zero-click way it lets you rip CDs, I would probably have ripped a lot of my disks already, and would be a lot more interested in an iPod with video out (especially one that had support for 5.1 sound out via an external splitter). For $4, I'm not interested though. I suspect the aim of this is to get the functionality shipping in iTunes and then lose a class action lawsuit objecting to them charging.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News