Slashdot Mirror
Playstation 3 Video DRM Only Allows One Download
Nom du Keyboard points out an Ars Technica report that the Sony Video Store on the Playstation Network is running some rather restrictive DRM. When purchasing movies, users are allowed just one download — even if they delete the movie to make space and want to download it again on the same machine. A Sony representative told Ars that users could be issued an extra download as a "one-time courtesy" with help from customer support. Quoting:
"When we're discussing a system that seems to release new hardware configurations every few months and a company that actively encourages you to swap hard drives yourself, it appears users are going to run into problems if they ever decide they want to switch out their hard drive or even upgrade into a larger system; the information on the back-up utility makes it clear that video content can't be moved over to new system, although new hard drives should be safe. Sony claims that the PS3 is operating on a 10-year timeline: is one extra download, which you need to contact customer service to apply for, good enough for the next decade?"
"Please, sir, can I have some more?"
It's never just a game when you're winning. - George Carlin
As long as they clearly mark this as a rental, I'm OK with it. As soon as they describe it as a sale, then I think they're conducting felony fraud and should be prosecuted criminally.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
How kind of them to privilage us with an extra download for something we paid for.
It almost feel like your renting a product, but never owning it.
The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
.. because once you've downloaded your music, you can't get it again unless you badger Apple. Couple that with the fact that iTunes doesn't officially support taking music off your iPod back onto iTunes and you've got a system that's a real pain in the arse.
I don't know what the prices are at the Sony Video Store - but if they are any substantial fraction of the cost of the physical media, then you should just buy the disc instead.
With the DRM on DVD a defeated minion of darkness, and BluRay certain to go the same way, the format with the most longevity, barring manufacturing defects, is a pressed ROM disc. You can be sure that you will be able to read, transcode, format-shift and enjoy these to your hearts content.
Not so for something that vanishes in a puff of virtual smoke when some vital component of your console goes "phut".
I intend to avoid downloadable content until it's at least as flexible as physical media. I want the ability to move my copy of a movie from machine to machine, and to lend it, give it or sell it to somebody else once I'm done with it. A one-time download is a sucker's deal.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
No one learns anything from Valve/Steam. I was against Steam initially, but it's seductive because it's just so damn easy. All I have to do is log in, and it brings my games to me.
The lesson there to be learned is, if DRM makes your life easier, then people are more willing to put up with it. But if it makes your life harder? If it exists to screw you out of what you've already bought? Screw that.
Until the content providers remember that their supposed job is to provide CONTENT, then they're doomed to a declining market share and consumer antipathy.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
DVDs are dying! Blu-Ray is going nowhere! Why would anyone buy a real physical disk when for almost as much money you could use your limited bandwith allowance downloading a copy which will last unti the hard drive, or the console dies. Oh, and you don't get the extras. Erm, and it's unclear what happens if something goes wrong with the download. Oh, yeah, and you can probably download about 10 before you have to delete one.
WTF?
Its news because not only is it DRM, but its poorly implemented. Steam and the 360 let you delete stuff you've bought and download it later. I can go to a friend's house, log in to my account on his xbox, and I'm able to download things I've bought.
The only reason this isn't really big news is because its something they can fix fairly easily.
Sony would NEVER do anything like that!
Next you'll be telling me banks are acting irresponsibly and the government doesn't act in my interest!
Free Martian Whores!
I can't comment on the Xbox live service, but with Netflix you aren't BUYING a movie, you're paying to watch it (as part of the standard monthly fee). If you are not longer paying for the service, you can no longer view the Instant View movies. With this Sony service you're buying a digital-only copy that can't be moved and can only be downloaded one additional time.
Why is this thus? What is the reason for this thusness?
I backed up everything to an old 10GB drive I had, and swapped out the drive. The restore failed - I got back a few non-DRM'd videos, and some game saves, but it lost network settings, the actual games (I'd better be able to re-download them, haven't tried yet), and the new 'Life With Playstation' thing. I haven't been tempted to download videos yet... and I probably won't, now. Certainly not until after I install Linux on it (one reason I bumped up the drive in the first place.)
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
Steam and the 360 let you delete stuff you've bought and download it later.
So does the PS3.... For everything but Movies. Which according the the Xbox live website is the same way it works on the 360. For movies.
Although at least Microsoft is kind enough to market them strictly as rentals.
Don't download movies from Sony.
No downloads means no profit which means Sony will rethink their policy.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
I love the PS and the PS2...this is enough to get me to buy a Wii...congrats Sony you made one of your long time customers leave because your being stupid...keep it up.
-Ours is the wisdom of Solomon, the magic of Merlyn, the fall of Icaris.
This isn't DRM. All this is is a limit on the number of times you can download the file. Even if the file had no DRM at all, you'd only be able to download it once. Get your terminology straight.
and often the video store ends up selling that off at discount.
.. We're not discussing that. We're discussing the fact that it *is* a rental, not the fact that the physical object get sold at a later point in time. Thanks for coming out, though.
Sony vendor lock-in so they can do this stuff at their whim? Forget it. I will never own a console, they are just an over priced bad deal.
I, too, was initially opposed to Steam. I can deal with it now, and can even appreciate some of its benefits. I first got a Steam account so I could keep on playing old CS and TFC many years ago. Now, on the same Steam account I play TF2, BioShock, CSS, DoDS, on a newer PC. I really like the fact that I can still download and play ALL the old Valve games I ever owned (right back to HL, Blue Shift, etc...) on any computer I have now, or will have in the future. Now THAT'S content management that doesn't jack you out of something you bought!
Yesterday I rented "The Usual Suspects" as an HD rental. It cost $4.50. I feel I got my money's worth, since it would have cost me at LEAST that in gas/time/rental price to go to the video store to rent it. It expires today at around 4:00 pm, after which I'll delete it (if it doesn't delete itself first). The rental is good for up to 14 days after you rent it, but once you play it the first time within that 14 day period, you can only play it within the next 24 hours after that. Just a heads up for anyone renting - they do tell you this before you click "Confirm" on the purchase, however, so I didn't feel "taken".
I will say, however, that this ONE download per purchased movie stuff is utter BS. Have they learned nothing from the Steam/Valve model?
But more damning, I think, is that the selection absolutely SUCKS. You could not cobble together a more random selection of (mostly) shitty movies/TV shows if you tried. It's really pathetic. There are some gems, but most of it is utter shit. I guess their target demographic are pubescent teens who think Wil Farrell is funny and "Step Brothers" should be on AFI's Top 100 list. There are a couple of Kubrick films (Eyes Wide Shut and A Clockwork Orange) which add a heavy weighted value to the selection, but still...
Seriously, not to be flamebait, but I have a Wii, and I can download.. uh.. wait.. GAMES!! and, the beauty is, if I delete it, I can download it again, for free, anytime, as long as it is on my console only.
That's the type of DRM I can live with. I mean, sure I wish I could load up my SD card and bring it to my friend's place who also has a Wii, but hey, you know, let's face it, I understand Why Nintendo stops me from going on with my SD card from machine to machine, and it's ok.
Now I don't get to play movies on my Wii.. boo hoo.. like I care, that's why I have a DVD player anyways. Beside, if the Wii ever went defective and it was my sole means of watching a movie, I would be in effect pretty damn bored!
Now, The PS3 let's you download movies only 1 time. That's Gestapo like DRM for you uh? :)
But who would want to download a movie for the PS3 anyways? especially with that type of DRM?
Better off buying a program like AnyDVD-HD which also support Blue-Ray and simply rent a movie and make a copy if you wish it.
DRM makes people's life a living hell, it's why it's not working.
If you don't control it, you don't own it.
Colin Dean Go a year without DRM
Wait, I only get to say it the once?
I made the mistake of buying Warhawk online instead of retail. The problem is that my user account on the system is the only one tied to my PSN network login (of course) so if my kids log into their PS3 accounts, they can't even start the game. That means that they need to log on as me whenever they want to play, even offline. XBox Live has a better system for DRM - purchases are tied to the serial number of the device that purchased them, ALONG WITH the userID of the purchaser, so the purchaser can go to a different device (friends house, replacement system) and as long as they're logged in still access the content, or anyone who's on the same system that originally made the purchase can access the content WITHOUT LOGGING IN TO XBOX LIVE. This is a huge oversight on Sony's part and I really hope they fix it. For families with more than one game player it will never be acceptable to tell each member of the family to purchase the same game if they want to play it. They are shooting themselves in the foot with their own DRM for DLC.
It's unlimited downloads, but 5 PS3's can be authorized.
This seems to be just for video rentals and purchases. Movie rentals annoyingly stay on your HD, even after the rental period is over - you have to manually delete them. I am assuming though if you rent the movie again in the future, it will let you have another download, or just reactivate it on the HD if you already have it downloaded. Have not really tried - $4.50 for a 24 hour download just seemed really high, and I only tried it to see one movie that they have yet to release on Blu-Ray.
The article makes it clear that this is just for movie purchaces. I have yet to make any, as HD stuff is only available for rental.
Trailers and gameplay videos seem to allow you unlimited downloads.
I have had one PS3 brick on me with the 2.42 firmware, and the one they replaced it with is starting to go out, and it looks like I may be replacing it as well before too long. However, GAMES and add-ons I have purchased seem to have let me have more than 2 downloads, as I keep so much on my PS3 I delete whatever I am not playing at the time, and redownload when I want to play again. Has always worked quite well.
This is absolutely ridiculous!
The only valid reason for such restrictive DRM and rights (it's just "rental for the life of your hardware or until you run out of space" - thank god it's not a 360 I guess) is to put people off the idea of digital downloads.
Apple have shown that DRM can be applied in a light manner that works for most people. Stick it on up to 5 computers, deauthorise computers in order to authorise others, back up the media. There is simply no excuse to implement anything less.
Call it a rental. Charge rental prices. Delete it after 30 days. Fine.
Call it a sale, charge full price, and then limit how you use it? No. No fracking way.
You'd think that with the BluRay+ features, that people would have a hint?
You'd think that with the rootkit fiasco, people would get a clue?
You'd think with the ATRAC format, and the way Sony MP3 players behaved in 'converting' ALL YOUR MUSIC, that it would be an iota of a hint...
Nope. We are all just idiots and want "bluray". It's exactly why I supported HD-DVD at the time. You reap what you sow.
Either way, I've been boycotting Sony on all fronts until their ways change.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
I think for the full weight of the law to protect copyright, an original work must be provided in such a way that the right of first sale exists and/or "fair use" is preserved.
If neither of these exists, then the "IP" will not be protected by copyright.
Does anyone want to start a political movement?
It's not that hard. Steam is value-added DRM - which means the impetus to crack it is low. I've had pirated Half-Life, Half-Life 2 and Ep. 1, but Steam was easier than managing that (well, that and the games were worth every penny)
Steam has seen me through 3 computers and 8 OS reinstalls. I double-click a game and come back when it's 60% downloaded, and play it. That's worth money to me, even if it is stuck in my account and linked to their servers.
I don't see what's so hard about re-implementing Steam, aside from the fact that it doesn't allow the producer to double-dip (sell you a license when you try to copy it, but change it to a product when it breaks)
And I fear that's the crux of this whole thing - they're hoping that people will just re-buy.
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
The point is not that people want stuff for free. If you think that you're either being deliberately obtuse or are ignorant. The point is the scope and extent of copyright, especially in regards to consumer "purchases" which are actually just licenses according to "the man". There has long been an argument by "intellectual property" owners that we, the consumer, are not actually buying anything when we purchase a CD or game (fortunately book publishers do completely admit that when you buy a book, you can do what you want with it). The trouble is, if you're buying a license to use said music or software for any period of time, you should know your fucking rights beforehand. This is absolutely impossible now for the end user with the licenses and EULAs etc. Legalese has made it impossible for end users to make informed choices about purchases - the reason everyone just clicks yes is because they simply do not have enough time on this earth to read everything they agree to. Any kind of restrictive license aimed at end users is inherently shit purely because end users will not read the terms.
Video and DVD rental is obviously different because everyone already knows the basic terms of the rental. However, unreasonable terms on DVD rental (like, for example only being able to play it on one machine) are not expected.
Also, finishing each snide question with interesting? Shit.
I recently upgraded my 60GB HD to a 350GB HD. Before I removed the 60GB, I performed a backup to a 500GB USB HD. The backup files were 4.5 GB each, perfect for spanning across DVDs. I had 3 movies and ~20 1 hour TV episodes, all in SD. The whole backup folder was about 30GB and the process took roughly 2 hours to complete. After install and format, the restore took about 1 hour and 45 minutes. At the end, all my movies, SingStar songs, and other DLC were perfectly restored.
YMMV, but movies are supposed to survive a successful backup and restore on the same system.
i don't buy groceries and expect to use them more than once
Muffins aren't digital.
Every muffin you eat and want to replace means the farmers and bakers and shipping people need to get busy, and need to be paid for their efforts. A media company, however, doesn't have to invest in more worker hours or physical resources to give you another identical Mickey Mouse. So why should they be paid an equivalent amount for a digital duplicate?
Only one reason. Because people like you have been duped into thinking that Muffins and Mickeys are the same thing. They're not.
-FL