Slashdot Mirror


Netflix Will Delay Renting New WB Releases

DesertBlade tips the news that Netflix will delay renting new releases from Warner Brothers for 28 days, and adds "Luckily I am so far behind in my movie watching that I will probably never catch up anyway." "It's part of a strategy by several studios to create staggered releases of DVDs so that the most profitable transactions are available first and cheaper rental options take effect further down the road. The move could be copied by other studios, forcing consumers to wait nearly a month if they want to rent popular movies from Netflix. ... The studio is hoping that the four-week window will push consumers interested in watching movies at home to buy the DVDs or pay a premium to rent them from stores like Blockbuster or from Internet and cable video-on-demand services. Warner Bros. already imposes a 28-day window on $1-a-night kiosk firm Redbox."

418 comments

  1. What a great idea! by Pojut · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Artifically deny your customer the ability to buy your product. They'll love you for it!

    Feh.

    1. Re:What a great idea! by NFN_NLN · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "The studio is hoping that the four-week window will push consumers interested in watching movies at home to... pirate the movie instead."

    2. Re:What a great idea! by Moryath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah. They used to wait over a year before you could even get the VHS... and we hated the hell out of that.

      Artificial scarcity doesn't work. Period. If only they could learn this.

    3. Re:What a great idea! by Pojut · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I'm remembering wrong, but during that window weren't you able to purchase a real VHS copy for some absurdly large amount of money (low triple digits)?

    4. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymusing · · Score: 5, Insightful

      On the plus side: "Netflix will use the savings to expand its stock of the studio's DVDs and triple the number of Warner catalog titles it provides through its online streaming option."

      In other words, you won't have to wait for the DVD so much -- you'll be able to watch it on your computer. Certainly, the newest releases won't be available that way, but still... anything that expands the (legal) streaming movies options is a good thing.

      --
      Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
    5. Re:What a great idea! by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      That's not at all what's going on, they are adding a 28 day period from when the movie is released on DVD till when it is available on Netflix
       
      This being /. I don't expect you to read the article but did you even read the title?

    6. Re:What a great idea! by jgtg32a · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah it was like $100

    7. Re:What a great idea! by MBGMorden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sometimes. Rental places tended to do it. I remember being able to rent a copy of Star Trek Generations 8-10 months before I could find a copy for sale.

      And I promptly dubbed a copy of it. I suspect that people will do the digital equivalent (grab it off a torrent site) these days.

      Companies just don't get it. We have a way to get your shit for free. If you find ANY way to get us to pay for it then count your lucky stars and hope we keep using that method. Try anything that aggravates us though and we go back to getting it for free.
       

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    8. Re:What a great idea! by Hatta · · Score: 1

      They'll love making their way down to walgreens/mcdonalds/grocery store to rent it out of a vending machine instead.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    9. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Netflix is the customer, they buy a lot of DVDs because their clients (i.e. us) want to watch movies but not have to buy the damn things each time. It's an old model, video rental was quite popular in the 80s. Once WB movies are no longer the newest thing out, they're going to have to be pretty big titles for renters to want to watch them, particularly as other studios' new offerings will be available sooner. Not being able to rent a movie from netflix for a month is not going to increase sales for WB.

      It would be interesting to know the details of this. If Blockbusters have them a month ahead of Netflix, the lawyers will be rubbing their hands with glee.

    10. Re:What a great idea! by Sebilrazen · · Score: 1
      No they won't.

      Warner Bros. already imposes a 28-day window on $1-a-night kiosk firm Redbox.

      --
      "There are no facts, only interpretations." --Friedrich Nietzsche.
    11. Re:What a great idea! by DigitalCrackPipe · · Score: 1

      You seem to have confused renting with buying, or perhaps you didn't finish reading the summary. The entire purpose is to push the overly eager to buy the product rather than rent it. Renters don't help their bottom line nearly as much as buyers.

    12. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Artifically deny your customer the ability to buy your product. They'll love you for it!

      Feh.

      yeah, and we pirate as a result... they're idiots

    13. Re:What a great idea! by Ceiynt · · Score: 1

      IIRC, a lot of Redbox machines are owned and operated by individuals, who go can, if they want to, go to Wal-Mart and buy X number of said video, and stock the machine if they want.

    14. Re:What a great idea! by MikeFM · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seriously - how many people are so eager to watch the released movies that they can't wait a month but weren't going to buy the movie? Yeah so they are going to piss off a lot of people just so they can pick up a tiny portion of the market?

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
    15. Re:What a great idea! by rastilin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Who was it that said "The first rule of business is never make it harder for people to give you their money."?

      --
      How do you kill that which has no life?
    16. Re:What a great idea! by RichardJenkins · · Score: 1

      This is talking about renting, not buying. Did I miss something?

    17. Re:What a great idea! by operagost · · Score: 1

      But is it legal to rent that way?

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    18. Re:What a great idea! by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Mod parent up. This is an important caveat.

      I'm not that happy with the precedent this sets, but I get many of my movies through Netflix streaming these days, which is improving all the time. There are still hundreds of great classic movies I want to see, and I'd prefer an emphasis on those (which tend to be what is showing up on Netflix streaming) rather than getting the most recent crap out of Hollywood as fast as possible.

      If you really want to see the damn movie a couple weeks sooner, buy the DVD... or better yet, go to the theatre when it's playing.

      There are various trade-offs here, but there are lots of customers who don't use Netflix only as a replacement for the "latest releases" section of Blockbuster.

    19. Re:What a great idea! by Tikkun · · Score: 2, Informative

      But is it legal to rent that way?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

    20. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if they want to, go to Wal-Mart and buy X number of said video, and stock the machine if they want.

      Not legally they can't, unless they have some existing agreement specifically allowing them to do so. When you buy a DVD, it's for personal use only. Rights like public showings or rentals are specifically not granted.

    21. Re:What a great idea! by X-Power · · Score: 1

      There are those of us who are not comfortable watching a movie in a setting of 300 of your closest strangers sitting next to you.
      I hate going to the movies, but love the movies :)
      MKV is the best creation since AVI.

    22. Re:What a great idea! by jgtg32a · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Netflix agreed to this because they are getting a discount on their DVD purchases and letting them cut costs.
       
      Netflix also doesn't have the same business model that BlockBuster has I pay $x a month and I get unlimited rentals, the less I use the service the better it is for Netflix.
       
      WB's research shows that a majority of their sales take place in the first 4 weeks. I assume that they did an analysis and found out that the discount that they give to Netflix will be outweighed by the additional sales.
       
      Netflix has no risk in this deal, actually they may even have a bit to gain, they only buy a limited number of each movie. If one of Netflix's customers buys a movie because they were too impatient to wait for it to appear on Netflix; Netflix now has slightly better customer approval because there will be slightly less of a wait time on some of the new releases.

    23. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell that to DeBeers, they've operated quite successfully on artificial scarcity.

    24. Re:What a great idea! by SCPRedMage · · Score: 5, Funny

      Pirating is just so 19th century.

      Perhaps. But the hats are AWESOME.

      --
      My sig can beat up your sig.
    25. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just hope my torrent download doesn't get stuck on 98% for 27 days :(

    26. Re:What a great idea! by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Informative

      You are confusing performance rights with the erosion of the first sale doctrine that decades of propaganda printed on DVDs and VHS tapes has convinced you to buy into.

      Actually performing a work (like on a stage) is and always has been seperate and not something transferred by a mere copy of a play, screenplay or sheet music.

      COPYright --- see those first 4 letters.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    27. Re:What a great idea! by Sancho · · Score: 1

      Not very apropos. Netflix is still going to buy their DVDs (and likely the same amount of them.) Warner doesn't lose any money by delaying this, and they stand to make quite a bit more.

    28. Re:What a great idea! by Obfuscant · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      Seriously - how many people are so eager to watch the released movies that they can't wait a month but weren't going to buy the movie? Yeah so they are going to piss off a lot of people...

      Seriously, how many people are so eager to see a movie that they'll be pissed by a thirty day delay in being able to rent it and yet didn't bother seeing it when it first hit the theaters?

      If you are pissed off because you had to wait thirty days to rent a specific movie that you didn't care enough about to see in the theater, you need a life.

    29. Re:What a great idea! by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      Artifically deny your customer the ability to buy your product. They'll love you for it!

      If only there were something more convenient and free I could use to watch their movies that was also on the interweb....

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    30. Re:What a great idea! by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Companies just don't get it. We have a way to get your shit for free. If you find ANY way to get us to pay for it then count your lucky stars and hope we keep using that method. Try anything that aggravates us though and we go back to getting it for free.

      Paging Admiral Ackbar, but what if it's a TRAP!?!?

    31. Re:What a great idea! by PCM2 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I believe the term was "priced for rental." The idea was yes, the prices were absurd -- for anyone but a VHS rental business.

      The economics of VHS tapes were different, though. Unlike DVDs, comparatively few people tended to actually go out and buy them, bar a few "core" titles (Disney movies for the kids, Star Wars, Godfather, etc.) VHS tapes were bulky and not easy to store, their packaging tended to look kinda crappy on your shelf, and their picture quality really was not good. Not only did they tend to wear out just from playing them -- and occasionally your VCR would outright destroy one -- but storebought tapes weren't that great quality to begin with. Remember, this was an analog tape medium, and it was in the manufacturers' interests to duplicate them for as low cost as possible. Often this meant they were made from low-quality materials and were duplicated on high-speed equipment. From a collector's/fan's standpoint, all but a very few were 4:3 pan and scan -- so between that and the poor resolution, the only real way to see your favorite movies was to wait for them to come to a local second-run theatre. So it became a kind of Catch-22 -- because VHS tapes were never that attractive, studios were never really able to get the economies of scale that would drive the cost of VHS releases down to where mainstream customers would pay for them.

      People did buy laserdiscs, though, and those collectors were among the first to jump on the DVD-buying bandwagon. When regular people got word that DVDs gave you picture quality comparable to laserdiscs without all the disc flipping and swapping, DVD sales exploded. Way back in 2001, when cheap VHS tapes had become more common and DVDs were fairly new, revenue from VHS sales was still far less than that from VHS rentals -- but it was also less than the revenue from DVD sales, even back then. (This according to the Video Software Dealers Association.) I honestly think enough people buy DVD releases regularly enough that this waiting period won't be that big of a deal -- especially in the age of home theater. Even if you have to pay $20 to buy the disc, it's still cheaper than taking a date to the movies.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    32. Re:What a great idea! by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      My family loves Nexflix streaming. And now with a suitable Myth client that runs on Windows, my living room project is again the 'bees knees'. So yes, more catalog is great!

    33. Re:What a great idea! by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Artifically deny your customer the ability to buy your product.

      If that was what they were doing, you'd have a point. But their customers ability to buy is unimpeded. What they are doing is limiting the availability to rent the product, a very different thing.

    34. Re:What a great idea! by mcmonkey · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      "The studio is hoping that the four-week window will push consumers interested in watching movies at home to... seek or create an alternative distribution source."

      That was my first thought, because I've already switched to the alternative--not from Netflix, but from cable movie channels.

      After time for DVD sales, then the rental window, then On Demand, by the time a movie hits HBO or Showtime, it's a golden oldie.

      So I've canceled all the premium channels that don't have significant original content, and get my movies from an alternative source.

      It's cheaper, faster, and in many cases not only do I get movies before they are available to rent, I get them before they hit the theatres!

    35. Re:What a great idea! by jollyreaper · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sometimes. Rental places tended to do it. I remember being able to rent a copy of Star Trek Generations 8-10 months before I could find a copy for sale.

      I don't know what the current practice is but VHS tapes for rental places used to be $75 a copy. There was a staggered release where the $15 to $25 tapes didn't come out for a while after rental. I remember trying to get the MST3K movie on tape after it came out for rent and it was at the ridiculous price. I think the theory was they could soak the rental places and then mop up the remainder of the market by mass-producing tapes at a lower price point. It's been so long since I've bought a movie I have no idea if they're still doing tiered distribution or if rentals are available before purchase copies. Physical media is so 20th century.

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    36. Re:What a great idea! by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's simply wrong. With the exception of "phonorecords", if you buy a DVD, book, video tape, etc, you can rent or give it to others, no special license needed. Copyright law still makes at least a little sense in some areas.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    37. Re:What a great idea! by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      No, I think it is merely a disincentive. I'm fairly certain that the box rental stores get it from the same place you and I do these days. There used to be a separation, but I don't think that exists any longer.

    38. Re:What a great idea! by ottothecow · · Score: 4, Informative
      Where is the -1 incorrect mod?

      This is flat out wrong. First sale doctrine gives you the right to do whatever you want with the physical disk (including rent it to people from a vending machine). The content isn't yours, you still can't do public performance or make copies to rent but the original disk is yours.

      The reason you pay more for a rented disk that you lose is probably because they like to gouge you. Also, sometimes "rental" copies are different, often they might have a different set of previews and a lack of special features (but get sold at an initial discount with a higher later replacement cost). In the VHS days, the expensive tapes were actually nicer than the retail copies--blockbuster would buy a couple copies on the expensive tape for long term rental and a bunch on retail quality (fast degrading) tape that they would sell off after new-release status was over.

      Please don't spread incorrect info about things like first sale doctrine...it is a very important part of copyright law that a lot of companies would like to see go away and that will be easy if people already think it doesn't exist.

      --
      Bottles.
    39. Re:What a great idea! by DerekLyons · · Score: 0, Troll

      It's not like pirates need any excuse to pirate, they'll do so no matter what.

    40. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His point still stands. "Buying the product" refers to renting the DVD when it is released. They are effectively preventing you from buying the product for a month.

      Don't echo the point and then pretend the OP made an off topic post because it's not worded in a way you like when everyone else gets it (notice his mod).

    41. Re:What a great idea! by jockeys · · Score: 1

      Netflix also doesn't have the same business model that BlockBuster has I pay $x a month and I get unlimited rentals,

      in point of fact blockbuster DOES have this same business model as an option... I'm currently using it, can't for the life of me remember what it's called, movieswing or moviepass or something. i pay a flat fee each month and get to keep 2 dvds or blurays checked out at any given time and can swap them as often as i like, even more than once a day (have done this on boring weekends)

      --

      In Soviet Russia jokes are formulaic and decidedly non-humorous.
    42. Re:What a great idea! by JATMON · · Score: 1

      Most of the people that are renting the movie are those that did not want to pay the $30-$40 to see it in the theater and were willing to wait to rent it. So what makes them think that these same people will spend $20-$30 for the movie instead of waiting an extra 30 days. They have already waited atleast a couple months, what is 30 days more?

    43. Re:What a great idea! by armyofone · · Score: 1

      "Perhaps. But the hats are AWESOME."

      Yaahrrr... but gettin' the peg-leg and hook installed can be a mite painful.

      --
      "A revolution without dancing is... a revolution not worth having"
    44. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BAWWWWWWWWWWW No really, I'm so sorry for you Mr. Internet Tough Guy.

    45. Re:What a great idea! by Aeros · · Score: 1

      there actually will be plenty. Among them some of the idiots that stand in line all night (or several days, weeks for some). I hate the idea of this but from a marketing standpoint its actually a pretty decent idea. Yes it will piss people off but those peopel will still rent it when it comes out.

    46. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The studio is hoping that the four-week window will push consumers interested in watching movies at home to... pirate the movie instead."

      Exactly.

    47. Re:What a great idea! by zindorsky · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Artificial scarcity doesn't work. Period.

      I don't know ... seems to work pretty well for the diamond industry.

      --
      If the geiger counter does not click, the coffee, she is not thick.
    48. Re:What a great idea! by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      Unless they push people who are trying to be good customers and rent the movie into finding it on TPB because it's easier. Enough people do this and Netflix needs to buy less movies because by the time they stock it people will have already downloaded and watched it.

    49. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I prefer to be called a person, and dislike being referred to as a "consumer". At the very least call me a customer so I can retain some shred of sentience, humanity, and individuality.

    50. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      legal downloading of un-encrypted content to watch anyway you see fit (including burning to your own dvd) yes... I'd go for that..

      streaming? on congested dsl/cable lines? forget it - have to wait too long to be able to watch it, and if there's a hiccup, have to wait for it to stream fully before trying to watch it again...

    51. Re:What a great idea! by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hmmm.

      The people in front of me blinding me with cell phones.
      The people behind me kicking me as they walk by mid movie.
      The people on my row stepping on me and kicking me.
      The people 5 seats over talking enough that I can't pay attention to the dialogue*.
      The crying baby... at an adult date film.

      I usually see films at off times now. I like seeing some movies first showing because people who want to see the movie are there.
      People might care about germs in flu season but race? Get real.

      * Except now the theatres play the noise at 185db to overcome this.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    52. Re:What a great idea! by BradleyUffner · · Score: 1

      Sounds like one of the Rules of Acquisition.

    53. Re:What a great idea! by Golddess · · Score: 1

      And Netflix has (had?) options with limits like "no more than 4 movies a month".

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    54. Re:What a great idea! by ByTor-2112 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's because there are more vaginas involved in the application of diamond products than pirated movies.

    55. Re:What a great idea! by jemtallon · · Score: 1

      From the above wikipedia article: "No special new copyright protection was given to movies on video and DVD by the two above amendments, and consequently buyers of retail DVDs in the United States are free to sell or exchange them, and rent and lend them to others. This right was underlined by the US courts in the case of NEBG v Weinstein[4], in which a film-industry defendant accepted that it had no right to restrict buyers of DVDs from renting them to third parties." So actually, that would appear to be legal as the parent said. Please RTFS yourself in the future.

    56. Re:What a great idea! by nine-times · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed. I know that lots of people around here are probably keeping up on all the latest and greatest sources for pirated movies and TV shows, but for most people, it's simply too much of a hassle. I sincerely think that movie studios and TV networks need to learn that ultimately most people aren't really willing to pay for "content". Rather, people are willing to pay for convenient, easy, and reliable access to that content. If they make it as more of a hassle to get the content legally as it is to get it illegally, and too expensive to boot, then they'll lose out on that revenue. I don't say this as someone who approves of pirating, but sometimes it doesn't do you much good to disapprove of reality.

      But anyway, I'm just not sure it matters. I don't even know when DVDs are released most of the time. I only know when Netflix tells me that the DVDs will be available. Move that date forward a month, and I probably won't notice.

    57. Re:What a great idea! by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well its not like I can download diamonds by bittorrent - yet.

    58. Re:What a great idea! by LandDolphin · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The way Obfuscant ended his comment was a bit of "flamebait", but his (or her) point is still valid. Someone's waited X number of weeks to see a movie already for various reasons (money being a main one), what's another 28 days going to be?

      If you weren't looking to buy it and are an avid Netflix user, you probably only pay attention to when Netflix tells you the movie you've saved is available and not DVD release dates (Or at least that's what I do).

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
    59. Re:What a great idea! by LandDolphin · · Score: 1

      Somewhere along the line (Around the time VHS switched to DVD), they removed the pricey advanced copy and started selling the $15-$25 copy to the public and rental companies on the same day. (Rental companies can order in advance so they have them available to rent on day 1).

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
    60. Re:What a great idea! by jemtallon · · Score: 1

      I think the assumption was that, over time, this delay will hurt them as more people will turn to alternative means of watching the content. This probably won't hurt them right away, as you said, since Netflix will still buy the same amount. But over time if people start to pirate or rent WB content from local stores instead of Netflix, it wouldn't be in Netflix's best interest to stock as many of their videos since the demand is lower. So ultimately, they stand to lose long-term sales to a major purchaser for some short-term gain. One could argue that the increased demand on local stores might make up for some of the sales there but I'd bet the piracy angle will cut deep over time.

      Ultimately, I doubt the short-term profit they make from this deal will offset the long term costs associated with alienating their audience and damaging their brand.

    61. Re:What a great idea! by besalope · · Score: 1

      You have an illegal way to get their shit for free, and the more you do it, the more they fuck with *my* internet. When it's no-tolerance and I lose my access because of an MPAA dragnet, I'm going to come looking for you. Also, you are an unscrupulous ass, and usually people don't brag about that, so congratulations I guess.

      Since when are Amazon digital downloads or Netflix streaming over the internet illegal? "Not Physical Media" does not always mean Pirated. Furthermore, it's cheaper than buying the actual disc.

    62. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mostly, you have to worry about feeding the parrot.

    63. Re:What a great idea! by Retric · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wait two weeks and go at an off time and their might be 3 people in the room, assuming you brought two friends.

    64. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's be realistic here, the extra WB streaming content will be old crap that you won't even see on a Target DVD shelf for $5. Netflix streaming titles are few and far between, particularly when they're mostly very old TV shows, with a handful of newer shows whose seasons ended almost a year ago. So 3x more of something very small and poor remains a bag of shit however you package it. If netflix streaming actually had a decent library, there would be no DVD sales.

    65. Re:What a great idea! by networkBoy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I use netflix.
      I will still use netflix.
      I do not download movies or songs from torrent sites because the risk is too high.
      I do download BBC material I can not watch in the states (hopefully some day they will take me up on my offer to give them money for this).

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    66. Re:What a great idea! by L3370 · · Score: 2, Funny

      my mom worked at a video rental store for a bit and I'd loiter around a lot.

      $75 was norm--up to 150 for big time releases. The tapes would then go on sale for 15-$20 after they've made enough money on rentals or when the tapes were played so much that quality started to wane. I think producing the videos on linear media took a significant block of time, even after the progression of the technology. Probably why the prices remained high even after years of use.

      One day I saw what they do to "fix" bad tracking sections on the tape. They just cut it out. 2 seconds of bad tracking was like 10 feet of tape. I got a kick out of how they could chop this out and no one would notice.

    67. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > you'll be able to watch it on your computer

      No, actually, for completely artificial reasons they've made sure that won't work on my computer.

    68. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Notice how the OP and GP post both say "get their shit for free"?

      Amazon digital downloads and Netflix aren't free. Please read and comprehend before posting.

    69. Re:What a great idea! by TheKidWho · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Jeez what a whiner.

      Pick any one of those issues you just posted, I get maybe one of them once a year....

    70. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I don't believe there has ever been "high-speed" duplication possible for video tape. The mechanics of the head/tape movement at just twice the playback speed, keeping it aligned and whatnot, were too costly in terms of engineering. Easier to buy 100's of mechanisms operating at SP or EP speeds, and splitting the signal across them.

    71. Re:What a great idea! by LandDolphin · · Score: 1

      If we hold true that Netflix will continue to purchase the same number of DVDs, jsut 28 das later (As the GP said), than if someone who was going to "be good customers and rent the movie" from Netflix chooses to download and watch it, WB has not lost any sales or profit.

      It is only going ot be a loss for WB if Netflix chooses to purchase less DVDs. And even then, it's only a loss of the number of DVD sales does not go up enough to cover the decline in Netflix purchases.

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
    72. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Companies just don't get it. We have _infinite ways_ to get your shit for free.

      fixed.

    73. Re:What a great idea! by __aasqbs9791 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I know! How you you think I got this eye patch!

    74. Re:What a great idea! by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 4, Funny

      "I do not download movies or songs from torrent sites because the risk is too high."

      Too true!

      If only there was SOME way to use the net to safely download the latest.

      What news this would be to groups of people seeking an alternative to bit torrent for their binary files.

      Oh, Internet! Why have you failed us so?

      --
      Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
    75. Re:What a great idea! by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And I assume you go to the movies once a year?

      Not only are there those issues, but the fact that every single refreshment costs five times as much as it would at a store for no more convenience or taste. I mean, I don't mind paying $3 for a really good burger because there isn't a way I could cook it that way and it would turn out that good. Sure, I might be able to make a burger that costs $.50 but I'd still have to make it and it wouldn't taste as good. With popcorn it takes what? 2 minutes in the microwave (less time than you would be waiting in line) and costs five times less. Same with drinks, I can get a 2 liter of soda for $1 or so, it costs more for a small drink at the theater.

      If I'm paying $15 per person to enjoy a movie (ticket+popcorn/drink), it better be high quality enjoyment. That means A) Very high definition B) Great sound system C) People actually acting decently. Because, really the masses have determined a view of a movie in standard to be worth $1 for a family (look at how successful Redbox is), plus with a DVD you can pause, rewind, skip through boring parts, etc. that you can't in the theater. But instead when you pay $5 per person for a ticket you get generally pretty low quality, a sound system that is only focused on being LOUD, terrible people, terrible options for refreshments, and when you have to pee midway through the movie there is no way you can get them to pause/rewind it for you.

      No wonder piracy/rentals have taken up the way they have.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    76. Re:What a great idea! by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      Go watch a movie in IMAX then? That's what I do...

    77. Re:What a great idea! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      it's not about people seeing the movie. It's about established players like Blockbuster willing to pay a larger cut to studios to rent movies first. So the studios are going after Redbox and Netflix to curb the "cheap" rentals that aren't paying kickbacks.

      I've noticed at my regional chain store as well more videos are marked "rental" meaning they can't be sold as "used" later. It's a focused effort from studios across the board to create the tiered system. Why "sell" a DVD when they can get the same $15 from a download on Xbox or Apple TV. Why let Netflix or Redbox charge $1 per rental when they can get $4-$5 selling via Apple TV or On Demand Cable. They want to limit the supply, then push the "piracy" card to get the extra demands on consumer electronics.

    78. Re:What a great idea! by uncqual · · Score: 1

      They just cut it out. 2 seconds of bad tracking was like 10 feet of tape.

      Ouch, sounds like a copyright violation to me.

      --
      Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading /.
    79. Re:What a great idea! by calmofthestorm · · Score: 1

      Well when you get down to it, all copyright is artificial scarcity. When supply is infinite...

      --
      93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
    80. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your second point is somewhat insightful, just ruined by the first which was that of a trollish asshole.

    81. Re:What a great idea! by Comen · · Score: 1

      I do not see a issue with this at all, it makes sense to pay more for a movie when its newer to me.
      I think the reason NetFlix streaming is only on older titles is because of this, you can not expect to be able to watch as much as you want 24/7 for 8.99 a month and it include newly released to DVD movies also.
      What I hate more than anything is the fact I can not just watch movies on VOD Cable or Netflix streamed when the movie first comes out on DVD, but I can rent it at a store or threw the mail. These movies are never available on the first Firiay night everyone wants them, but it could be streamed easily.
      I find myself more likely to download stuff when I can not seem to rent it anywhere, and I never just buy a movie I have not seen before.
      A service like Netflix needs to change to a watch all older movies for standard monthly free, but pay for each new release you watch. This is more like cable VOD where you have lots of monthly fee VOD (HBO, SHO etc...) that you can watch all you want 24/7, but you also have to for each newer movie. Problem is only rarely does cable VOD have a movie at the same time as its released on DVD, so that makes me want to download it for free. I have no problem paying 5$ for a new release and less for older movies.
      I really wish they were released straight to VOD, and could still go see big titles in the theater if you wanted to, but you also had the choice to watch it at home, for maybe 15-20$ (maybe more) for a first run movie, it would still be cheaper than going to the theater for me and my wife anyway.

    82. Re:What a great idea! by compro01 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not legally they can't, unless they have some existing agreement specifically allowing them to do so

      Incorrect. see NEBG v. Weinstein.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    83. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      1990 called... It wants its prices back.

    84. Re:What a great idea! by hedwards · · Score: 1

      For box office flops you might end up spending a similar amount. I seem to remember Dick Tracy being sold for something similar when it first was released on VHS.

    85. Re:What a great idea! by Toonol · · Score: 1

      the extra WB streaming content will be old crap that you won't even see on a Target DVD shelf for $5.

      Those and foreign films are the real value of netflix. Who uses Netflix to watch recent blockbusters? The great thing about Netflix is being able to track down stuff you won't see at the local megamarket.

    86. Re:What a great idea! by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      Companies just don't get it. We have a way to get your shit for free. If you find ANY way to get us to pay for it then count your lucky stars and hope we keep using that method. Try anything that aggravates us though and we go back to getting it for free.

      Actually, no... you don't get it for free. There's always a cost. You're putting time, effort, and resources in to making that copy. Ignoring legal risk and morality as these are wild cards person to person, if a content producer can beat you on one or more of these points, their copy is going to be much more attractive than making it on your own. What's going on here is risking raising an artificial barrier that upsets that balance against the studios' favor.

    87. Re:What a great idea! by GWBasic · · Score: 1

      Sometimes. Rental places tended to do it. I remember being able to rent a copy of Star Trek Generations 8-10 months before I could find a copy for sale. And I promptly dubbed a copy of it. I suspect that people will do the digital equivalent (grab it off a torrent site) these days.

      I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that the economics of VHS duplication were quite different then DVD printing. From what I understand, there really was scarcity for awhile.

    88. Re:What a great idea! by coolsnowmen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What movie house sells 3$ burgers?! For a good burger (better than I can make myself) around where I live, I usually pay 7$. But I guess that's city life.

    89. Re:What a great idea! by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Did you not live through the 80s and 90s? Everyone had I know had a bunch of VHS tapes. I for one know I had more store bought (not copies) vhs tapes than I've had DVDs.

      We swapped tapes back then too.

      I'm basing this on personal experience of course, but your experiences do not match mine.

      Maybe you didn't have any friends to swap tapes with?

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    90. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The article I read stated the delay will allow also Netflix to stream more movies sooner, and as we watch maybe 10 streaming (Instant) movies on our HDTivo & Roku device for every dvd we rent, having more available for streaming sooner is actually better for us. I confess we are Netflix lovers, even gave up downloading because netflix gives us more than enough and at a price that is a lot less than one of the premium channels. These days the bit torrent program doesn't get used much.

    91. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Much like Star Trek's series. $400, $500 is enough to drive up piracy for those series. It's insane. If these studios and other people involved were to embrace rental systems fully, then agreements could be made. Instead, they are trying to limit them.

    92. Re:What a great idea! by gad_zuki! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do people even buy movies? Your typical WB movie is a mild distraction over the weekend. Its not fine art. Its not something you ever need to watch more than once. Without the spectacle of the big screen, the allure of fresh popcorn, and THX sound, its really not much else. Its like TV. Entertainment for the lowest common denominator. Watch it once and forget it about. This is why people gravitate towards rentals and on demand.

      What great gems does WB think we're all going to rush out to buy? I just went to their website and heres a list of the items they are showcasing:

      The Book of Eli, Terminator Salvation, The Hangover, The Ellen Degeneres Show, Valentine's Day, Final Destination 3D, Whiteout, Sherlock Holmes, Gossip Girl, The Invention of Lying.

      Wow, I want to see maybe one of those and only in the theater. The idea of owning any of that is pretty silly. WB, your products are a commodity. Theyre chewing gum. We chew them for a short while and we spit them out. Get on the rental bandwagon and give up your fight to sell me 30 dollar bluray discs of your junk.

    93. Re:What a great idea! by StuartHankins · · Score: 1

      Tor <----

    94. Re:What a great idea! by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      I have netflix and most of the streaming selection are B movies that studios dont care about. They are still very much protecting their bigger productions. Im sure "more streaming choices" is stuff like Encino Man 4 or White Chicks 3.

      I dont know if more of these types of movies are helping. If anything it lowers the signal to noise ratio and makes people want to give up on streaming. Ive come pretty close to canceling over that. Im sure Im not the only one.

    95. Re:What a great idea! by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      God, you people are frigging terrible. Why the hell do you have a problem with them doing this? This bothers me zero joules of rage energy, just like I don't complain that movies don't go to the run-down dollar theater on opening day and books come out in hardback first.

      And they're artificially increasing the incentive to buy, not denying the ability. I mean, do you even think before you type?

    96. Re:What a great idea! by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Read 17 USC 109.

    97. Re:What a great idea! by evann · · Score: 2, Interesting

      http://boxofficemojo.com/yearly/ No wonder profits are....higher than ever at the box office? Maybe it's the premium people pay or raised prices but apparently people are willing to consume more at the box office than ever before. Of course the numbers don't tell the whole story but was 2009 even inflationary?

    98. Re:What a great idea! by dachshund · · Score: 1

      Netflix has no risk in this deal, actually they may even have a bit to gain, they only buy a limited number of each movie. If one of Netflix's customers buys a movie because they were too impatient to wait for it to appear on Netflix; Netflix now has slightly better customer approval because there will be slightly less of a wait time on some of the new releases.

      With respect, I think this analysis is exactly wrong. Hollywood goes to a lot of trouble to excite people about the latest DVD releases. They throw tons of money at it. While that might not have much impact on me, I know plenty of people who are waiting to get Action-Flick-X on the weekend it's released. Some of those people buy, some of those people go to Blockbuster, some go to Redbox, but probably many of them count on Netflix.

      The thing is, now Netflix is saying to those people: sorry, you're paying the same subscription fee but we're not going to be able to provide that service that Hollywood has spent a zillion dollars exciting you about (watching new releases anywhere near the date they're released). So instead those people will spend $X obtaining the service from somewhere else. Consider that purchasing a movie costs nearly as much as a month of Netflix, and even Redbox can run you 1/4 of a month if you forget to return the movie for a few days. All of a sudden it becomes much harder to justify spending $20/mo on Netflix when you're on a limited budget. This is very, very bad for Netflix.

      This might not be a big deal if we were talking about a week or two, but a month is a long time for some people. I'm really surprised they're willing to take such a huge and visible hit when I imagine that they could just pay retail prices for new DVDs (as Redbox does) and avoid pissing off their customers. The best guess I've got is that WB has them by the balls on the streaming service and they've determined that playing nice with the manufacturers is the only way to build up this business, and the DVD business is about to die anyway.

    99. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this humor? Sarcasm? Surely you know of the 2 great alternatives to torrenting. U*SN*T and R*P*DSH*R*. Both work MUCH more effectively IMHO as you are only dependent on the initial uploader. There are no problems with lack of seeders over time. How did this torrent tech get popular anyway? It's new but it doesn't work as well as tech that's been around to do the same job for decades in one case. Plus torrents create many times the demand necessary on limited upstream bandwidth. Die torrents die!

    100. Re:What a great idea! by CrankyFool · · Score: 1

      Just to be pedantic, the box rental stores CAN get it from the same place you and I do these days, but probably don't -- because they get vastly better pricing by striking up deals with movie studios.

      But the basic point -- that you can go ahead and rent movies you buy as a consumer -- is absolutely true. Want to compete with Netflix? Go and clean out a Best Buy and start renting to your friends. The IRS may be interested in you, but the MPAA can't touch you.

    101. Re:What a great idea! by bartwol · · Score: 0, Troll

      Artificial scarcity doesn't work. Period. If only they could learn this.

      The scarcity is not artificial. It's real. The studio, as the sole licensor of the content, can and does restrict supply. The scarcity is only artificial for people who practice piracy. For the rest of us, it's quite real, and for some of us, it's worth paying the additional premium for immediate gratification. The studios will only exploit this to the point that it *does* increase profit.

      The studios are simply exploiting a profit opportunity that you incorrectly dismiss out of hand.

    102. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is informative? Really? What am I missing?

    103. Re:What a great idea! by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's the best excuse to pirate I've ever read. You win Slashdot.

    104. Re:What a great idea! by StuartHankins · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I saw BIG! in the IMAX theater at West Palm Beach Cityplace. 2 of my kids complained the IMAX screen was too large and the theater way too loud (the younger putting her hands over her ears in several parts). They see "regular" movies often. We sat in the center of the theater.

      As a nearly-tone-deaf person who reads lips, even I found the volume excessively loud.

      The tickets cost me $36 just to walk in the door -- the 15-year-old was an "adult" according to Muvico. It was a noontime movie. 3 sodas, a popcorn, and a couple boxes of candy was another $24.

      No thanks, we will stay at home next time and rent a movie. We can order pizza and breadsticks and still save $35.

    105. Re:What a great idea! by BrianRoach · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm not sure why this was modded "funny", it's the truth.

      Back in the dark ages when VCRs roamed the earth, the movie studios didn't want you to actually own anything but decided that renting was ok ... as long as the rental stores paid $100+ per copy for each tape. This is why it was $5 a frigging day to rent the things.

      Same with LaserDisc but it was even worse because most places weren't renting them ( Yes, get off my lawn. I think I paid something like $350 - $400 for the first Star Wars trilogy on LaserDisc. I still have them )

    106. Re:What a great idea! by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1

      That's true, but watching them come up with excuses is more entertaining than most movies.

    107. Re:What a great idea! by nomadic · · Score: 1

      People did buy laserdiscs, though, and those collectors were among the first to jump on the DVD-buying bandwagon.

      Actually I think a lot of the real hardcore LD people held out for a long time because after boasting for years of their format (and thus their) superiority, they just couldn't accept the fact that DVD was not only clearly superior to LD, but that it was being marketed and sold to (shudder) slack-jawed philistines who didn't spend 90% of their salary on home theater equipment.

    108. Re:What a great idea! by mattack2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They are not *letting* Redbox (nor anyone else) rent DVDs. They have no say whatsoever about someone buying their product and then rending it.

      See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_sale_doctrine

      These issues (as well as "rental" discs) are VOLUNTARY agreements between the companies and the movie companies, presumably in exchange for lower costs on the rental places' end.

    109. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WHOOOOSH

    110. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How did this torrent tech get popular anyway? It's new but it doesn't work as well as tech that's been around to do the same job for decades in one case. Plus torrents create many times the demand necessary on limited upstream bandwidth. Die torrents die!

      *s**** used to be kind of a pain to learn how to do...it still can be for non-technical types. Torrents attracted a different crowd.

    111. Re:What a great idea! by mcsqueak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't know ... seems to work pretty well for the diamond industry.

      Artificial scarcity works for physical products that are hard to manufacture, not for items that can be instantly replicated by anyone with a computer.

    112. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I'm paying $15 per person to enjoy a movie (ticket+popcorn/drink)

      I noticed a while ago that the popcorn and refreshments for movies theaters were no longer at a price I would consider reasonable, so I did something really innovative. I stopped buying them.

      I'll still go to a movie theater for some movies (Avatar, Sherlock Holmes, District 9), but it's probably been about 3 years since I last purchased any sort of food from a theater.

    113. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or people like me will just cancel the netflix account and check out blockbusters service that lets me rent from the store or have them mailed to me for a flat fee.

    114. Re:What a great idea! by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      All of a sudden it becomes much harder to justify spending $20/mo on Netflix when you're on a limited budget.

      I know you said you know people who wait to rent some movie the week it's released.. But I really suspect that most people can just find a ton of other movies to add to their queues and not care about when a movie is released. Do I look at the new releases on Netflix? Sometimes, but the vast majority of the time to add to the end of my queue (though I have to go nuke items since my queue has hit the limit). So Netflix will just have a "new releases" section that now contains some titles that are new to them but were available in other ways earlier.

      I think this is causing a big stink, but won't negatively impact a huge portion of existing netflix users.

    115. Re:What a great idea! by aaandre · · Score: 1

      This decision shows both the arrogance of the decision makers and the compliance of the population.

      It makes it clear that the studio decision makers see their customers (you and me included) as cattle, easily redirected with a carrot (the goodies, price discounts) and a rod (the aforementioned delay, buying laws etc.) And, they are right. There's no organized response to their decisions, just a statistical one. So when they run the numbers, they see they're getting what they want. Why be nicer when that will make them lose money?

      A couple of people may exercise discipline to boycott such arrogance and oppression of choice. Not enough, though. We are no French farmers blocking the streets and bringing the country to a screeching stop every few months :)

      Move on.
      or, Look, Boobies!
      or, Look, Tiger Woods!
      you know, Squirrel! says it all.

    116. Re:What a great idea! by mysidia · · Score: 1

      "The studio is hoping that the four-week window will push consumers interested in watching movies at home to... watch a different movie instead of theirs."

      There, fixed it for you. Going out of your way to get stuff from a business thaht won't sell it to you is sooo 20th century.

    117. Re:What a great idea! by trenton · · Score: 1

      Works for Ferrari

      --
      Too big to fail? Does that make me to small to succeed?
    118. Re:What a great idea! by j-turkey · · Score: 1

      Not only are the extra streaming titles a bonus, but I think that it's probably a smart business decision by Netflix. I don't know the any specifics of the economics behind customer utilization of streaming versus mailing DVD's...but it's pretty easy to surmise that it's cheaper to stream video than mail it. Further, if Netflix can offer a greater proportion of their catalog via network streaming, it's going to make for happier customers. Personally, I think that this is the future or Netflix - and being forward-thinking is good business; provided that the timing is right.

      ...now, if Netflix would only allow high definition streaming to my PC.

      --

      -Turkey

    119. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      In the end we have a move that harms consumers for the benefit and profit of a company making a retarded level of profit already. Sounds like the only people getting fucked over are the people who are paying for the entire damn thing. News at 11.

      If anyone from WB is out there reading this, please note: I will never watch one of your movies in a theater. I will never buy the DVD or BluRay for one of your movies. I will never directly give you a single penny. But when you go and work out financially beneficial deals for you to continue racking up insane profits while fucking the actors, directors, and other hands in the production of your movies over that essentially forces us to wait longer to see anything you might produce, only one outcome will happen: If I'm forced to wait another 28 days to rent the movie, I can wait for the few hours it takes for the first BD rips to show up in the private communities to which I belong. Further, if I don't want to wait for the DVD/BD disks, while you're fucking us over once again to make profits from your theater showings (do realize in a little more than a decade theaters won't be a profitable business anymore, and your sales will plummet so far you'll be FORCED into adopting technology and doing what your customers have demanded for years, demands that fall on deaf ears, or rather ears so full of money that they just don't give a fuck), I can watch a CAM for free on the internet. Yeah, it's shitty quality but I see your movie. If I really like it, I'll download the BD rip. In any case, you're not going to make any money from me anyway because it's already far too inconvenient to deal with you.

      Welcome to the 21st century. You're still trying to live in the 18th. Fuck you.

      (For the record, the money is not the issue. If you put 1080p quality downloads directly from you at a reasonable price, say $15/download, released THE SAME DAY you would release the movie in theaters, I would gladly download straight from you. I will guarantee you so would hundreds of thousands of others. Offer people the download of DVD quality, BD quality, or streaming, priced appropriately. Cut out the fucking middle man, stop screwing us over, and we'll gladly pay you. The issue is trying to continue a practice that is reminiscent of times before modern technology while simultaneously trying to squeeze record profits out of your customers: the same exact suggestion that the ISPs get from us applies to you, upgrade or GET THE FUCK OUT.)

    120. Re:What a great idea! by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      No, Netflix is willingly *agreeing* to delay renting the product, so that they don't have to pay regular retail for the discs, and/or so they get more content for their streaming service. Netflix could just go buy DVDs at Walmart and rent them on day 1 if they wanted to.

    121. Re:What a great idea! by ghjm · · Score: 1

      1995 called ... it wants its "NNNN called ... it wants its XXXX back" back.

    122. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't realize this was the first year ever with good TV shows. The old stuff I want to see on Netflix far out weighs the new releases I'm waiting for. I'll wait to see them when they come around.

    123. Re:What a great idea! by Dahamma · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's absurd, of course they used high speed duplicators. What, do you think they just go buy a bunch of blanks, and put 50,000 tape-to-tape copiers in a giant room to produce the millions of VHS tapes distributed for a new release? The economics of a solution that silly are what clever engineering is made for...

      Watch this video if you don't believe me. It's actually a pretty cool video showing a high speed duplication factory in operation. And they specifically state that the duplication happens at 240x real time.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0RM1sNs4mo

    124. Re:What a great idea! by nine-times · · Score: 1

      It might be hard to say what WB is putting out. Sometimes big companies like that have subsidiaries with different names. You know, like you might not think of Phillip Morris (the cigarette company) as putting out a lot of food products, but you'd be wrong.

    125. Re:What a great idea! by OrangeCatholic · · Score: 1

      This is nothing new, mr. +5 Insightful. Back in the VHS days, they used to charge $90 per movie on the day of release. Rental stores had to pay it since they wanted new releases. Even though they had to rent it 20-30 times to break even. Prices fell to $20 a few weeks later.

    126. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? Are you scared of the germs or of other races?

      You said this because you are a closet racist and don't know any way to deal with that save to project it onto others. No other reason is possible.

    127. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Thanks for the unfair generalizations. I used to pirate games pretty heavily, until Steam proved a convenient legal venue. I haven't pirated since I started using Steam, and my legitimate collection now numbers in the hundreds. Provide me with a venue that is just as convenient and reasonably-priced for HD movies and TV or for lossless music and I'll go legit there, too.

    128. Re:What a great idea! by PCM2 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Maybe you didn't have any friends to swap tapes with?

      Leave it to a Slashdotter to grasp at every possible chance to feel superior to people he doesn't know. But if by "swapping tapes" you mean copying them to blanks you bought at the store, then that's obviously not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the video sales market. I'm talking about going down to the video store and shelling out $35.95 for a brand-new VHS copy of Prizzi's Honor. Or are you claiming you were so rich you didn't have anything better to spend your money on? Most of the VHS tapes I saw in peoples homes were either A.) the huge-selling, high-volume titles I mentioned; B.) secondhand copies bought at video rental stores; or C.) taped off Cinemax or dubbed from rentals. Even if you did buy a few, you "swapped" the rest. Compare to DVDs, where they have copies of Kung Fu Panda and The Klumps on sale for $12 in the checkout aisle at Safeway. The people I knew who hoarded VHS tapes were anomalies -- mom's basement types. But if I saw one DVD in someone's house today I'd expect to find 30 more.

      But hey, don't take my word for it:

      In VHS’ peak sales year – 2001 – there was enough VHS tape stock manufactured to reach from the earth to the moon more than 987 times.
      . . .
      In 2002 annual world production of DVD surpassed VHS cassettes. And in 2003, DVD-Video sales increased to 12.1 billion while VHS sales dropped to 2.4 billion.

      How do I know VHS tapes didn't sell as well as DVDs? Because nothing did.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    129. Re:What a great idea! by robinesque · · Score: 1

      Tell that to OPEC.

    130. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your hyperbole lost me at 185db. I don't think you know of what you rant.

    131. Re:What a great idea! by N0Man74 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I'm a Netflix customer, and I was pleased to see this news. When there's a movie I absolutely have to see as soon as it's released, I'd likely be buying it anyway.

      Waiting an extra month to get a DVD in exchange for a better streaming movie selection is trade I'm happy to make.

    132. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buying a DVD doesn't include a license. You don't need a license to watch a DVD. You can watch a DVD legally simply by virtue of the fact that you have the DVD.

    133. Re:What a great idea! by rastilin · · Score: 1

      If we hold true that Netflix will continue to purchase the same number of DVDs, jsut 28 das later (As the GP said), than if someone who was going to "be good customers and rent the movie" from Netflix chooses to download and watch it, WB has not lost any sales or profit. It is only going ot be a loss for WB if Netflix chooses to purchase less DVDs. And even then, it's only a loss of the number of DVD sales does not go up enough to cover the decline in Netflix purchases.

      What we're saying is that sales probably won't rise.

      Movies have their absolute highest value in the days they come out; and the people who have netflix memberships get these because buying movies is expensive and not worth it. Once the customer has looked at the site, seen that it's not there, and possibly made the step to download it online; however many DVDs netflix gets later is inconsequential; after all, you've already seen the movie. People would get them for family gatherings, but not to watch on their own or with their immediate families.

      Admittedly this is just my impression. But I can't see someone going, "This movie is so awesome, I'm going to track down a store so I can pay an extra $30~ (haven't priced a new-release dvd lately) on top of my netflix membership so I can see it early.", what I see regular people saying is "F*&^ it."

      --
      How do you kill that which has no life?
    134. Re:What a great idea! by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      That's definitely true, but new technology always seems to polarize the "audiophile" market. There was at least a minority of laserdisc fans who jumped onto DVD because it let them be even more 133t than their laserdisc buddies. You know the types... the ones who buy standalone D/A converters as separate components from their compact disc transports. As long as there's lots of gear to read about in magazines, there will be people who will make it their life's mission to know everything about that gear.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    135. Re:What a great idea! by TaBaScO77 · · Score: 1

      Ditto! I couldn't have said it better myself!

    136. Re:What a great idea! by rastilin · · Score: 1

      True, the prices are unreasonable. However, for new release movies, the companies take something like 90% income for the opening week and leave the remaining 10% for the theaters. So... the money comes from the refreshments.

      I'm not excusing the massive prices, but I would point out that even if people stopped buying snacks, the prices won't go down.

      --
      How do you kill that which has no life?
    137. Re:What a great idea! by mjpaci · · Score: 1

      Do you know what tone deafness is?

      From Wikipedia:

      The ability of relative pitch, as with other musical abilities, is inherent in healthy functional humans. The hearing impairment appears to be genetically influenced, though it can also result from brain damage. While someone who is unable to reproduce pitches because of a lack of musical training would not be considered tone deaf in a medical sense, the term might still be used to describe them casually. Someone who cannot reproduce pitches accurately, because of lack of training or tone deafness, is said to be unable to "carry a tune." Tone deafness affects ability to hear pitch changes produced by a musical instrument.

      However, tone deaf people seem to be only disabled when it comes to music, and they can fully interpret the prosody or intonation of human speech.

    138. Re:What a great idea! by dwillden · · Score: 1

      Or you can just go to a redbox location since they regularly buy retail releases to stock their machines with and yet still manage to make a profit without any studio discounts.

      So impose the limits studios, Redbox won't be affected.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    139. Re:What a great idea! by OrangeCatholic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >Physical media is so 20th century.

      And yet I'm not generally willing to pay for non-physical media. I know the iPod generation is throwing wads of cash at Apple's music store, but they're stupid.

      You can sell me an object, with some objective value, or you can sell me a service, such as Netflix. With Netflix (mail or streaming), I'm not paying per movie. Sure, there's a floor to how cheap it can get (about $1), but ultimately I'm paying for access to their library, as fast as I can personally consume it.

      Paying for digital copies is the great boondoggle of the 21st century. Mostly because the prices are too high. I'll pay $0.10 for an mp3 but not $0.99. That's just nuts - it's probably cheaper to get the CD. With the artwork. And the CD itself. And the packaging. And the receipt. And the experience of going to the store.

    140. Re:What a great idea! by pla · · Score: 1

      If only there was SOME way to use the net to safely download the latest.
      What news this would be to groups of people seeking an alternative to bit torrent for their binary files.


      You can thank that asshole Spitzer for single-handedly destroying one of the oldest internet protocols in the laughable name of child-porn, of all the weak excuses he could have come up with.

      Yes, it still exists... But getting anonymous access to a decent-retention server? Dream on. Better to just do like the rest of us and swap USB drives with friends. Not quite as good of a selection, but zero risk and nearly infinite bandwidth if they have what you want (and if you pick your trading partners well, you'll guarantee yourself far better quality than a typical public torrent).

    141. Re:What a great idea! by OrangeCatholic · · Score: 1

      I disagree with the quality, too. Sure, VHS is only like 180 lines, but a brand-new VHS tape was way crisper than broadcast, sometimes cable, and way better than a copy.

      The problem is that most VHS players were pretty crappy. I lived in a VHS-centric household, and yet many of our players were 2-head or mono, or both. Just around the time people realized that 4-head stereo was the way to go, DVD came out, and VHS equipment quality went down again.

      Also, VHS tapes were sold as "standard" quality or "movie grade." I made a habit of buying the movie-grade tapes until DVD came out, and then they got hard to find.

      VHS rentals held up pretty well considering how many times they were played back.

    142. Re:What a great idea! by dwillden · · Score: 1

      Who can and already DO go to walmart at midnight on release day and buy sufficient copies to stock their boxes.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    143. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean: Artificially deny your customers the ability to rent your product.

      They can still buy the DVDs, which is the whole point of the deal. I'm not saying it is a good idea, but if you are going to make a jab at them for their decisions, at least make it accurate.

    144. Re:What a great idea! by chromatic · · Score: 1

      Any scarcity which involves digging physical objects out of the ground is, in part, genuine.

    145. Re:What a great idea! by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Perhaps. But the hats are AWESOME."

      Yaahrrr... but gettin' the peg-leg and hook installed can be a mite painful.

      Aye, an the first time ye scratch yer balls afterward can be a life changing event!

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    146. Re:What a great idea! by dwillden · · Score: 1

      But Netflix won't buy as many copies if by the time they get it, everybody who was absolutely dying to rent it (not buy it but rent it) has already done so at their corner Redbox, which avoided the delay by buying the disks at full retail from the 24 hr Wal-mart when the disks are released for sale.

      The only way to hurt Redbox would to delay all retail releases for another 28 days in which case nothing is changed, so it wouldn't work.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    147. Re:What a great idea! by rahvin112 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly! You know what RedBox did? Rather than buying from the studio in bulk DVD's in sleeve's for a very slight discount they are buying all their movies at walmart retail then having an employee go through and pull the DVD's out a the boxes and stick them in a sleeve. This hasn't stopped Redbox and won't. Netflix agreed to comply so they can get the license to stream the movies digitally because they are making more money on the streaming than the rentals.

      All this is going to do is make RedBox more powerful and give them a bigger market share. This is very foolish of the studio's because Netflix is more on their side then RedBox is.

    148. Re:What a great idea! by OrangeCatholic · · Score: 1

      It does have a decent library. Heroes, Weeds, and Lost are all recent shows. They also have 30 Rock and The Office.

      I could swear they had 2001: A Space Odyssey. I guess they do delete some things. "Last watched by you on 12/21/09." Funny because it's #47 in my queue.

    149. Re:What a great idea! by StuartHankins · · Score: 2, Informative

      Picky, picky. You are looking for this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amusia . Using that term would not have gotten my point across as most people would not recognize it.

    150. Re:What a great idea! by OrangeCatholic · · Score: 1

      Nah, my Netflix queue is a year long. Netflix users are more chilled out than that. If Netflix says "short wait," I get something else. That's the benefit of having access to everything.

      Besides, $20/month on Netflix is 3 movies at a time. I pay $9.77. I can blow that on a deli sandwich, and that doesn't last me all month.

    151. Re:What a great idea! by N0Man74 · · Score: 1

      If they were going to go to TPB, they'd likely have gone there before the actual DVD was released anyway... Perspective, please... They are still getting the movies, just a few weeks later, and as a bonus there will be better streaming content (possibly including this month old DVD releases).

      It's not a bad trade-off for consumers that aren't so impatient or obsessive that they have to rent a new release as soon as it comes out... And if you are one of those, then you either skip Warner Bros films or go to Blockbuster instead.

      I watch more streaming movies than DVDs, so increasing their streaming collection is far more important to me than rushing to get brand new DVDs that I may have to wait a week or two already to get already because of initial demand.

    152. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, Blockbuster also have an unlimited rent-by-mail service priced the same as Netflix. It actually works very well. It will be interesting to see what deal if any Blockbuster has with the studios. If the price is the same and Blockbuster gets the movies I want to see 28 days faster than Netflix, it might be big incentive to switch.

      Since Netflix will be getting a much better deal on DVD pricing, I wonder if they will pass any of those savings on to the customer by lowering their monthly rates?

    153. Re:What a great idea! by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Are you sure RedBox is buying ALL of their movies retail? I remember reading a/the news story about that, but I thought it was only used in some cases.

    154. Re:What a great idea! by nolife · · Score: 1

      Like "The IT Crowd" for me, I had never heard of that show until browsing around Netflix streaming options. I've found several other shows and movies I would have never considered watching without Netflix streaming. I have Comcast digital cable with free streaming choices too. Okay, maybe the Netflix streaming along with the Hulu and Comcast free streaming options do not have the blockbusters but there is a very good selection of "good enough" commercial free (or limited commercials with Hulu) movies and content to watch.

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    155. Re:What a great idea! by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      During the holidays, I went with a girlfriend of mine to see Sherlock Holmes.

      That was pretty much the first time I"d been to a movie theater to see a movie since Spiderman 1.

      I just don't usually go to a theater for many of the reasons you mentione.

      I also seem to have a MUCH better soundsystem than most theaters, I have good viewing equipment, can be alone or just have friends over...I have the kitchen near by, I can pause the movie whenever need be, and most importantly, I have a fully stocked BAR nearby too.

      Frankly, I don't see much a reason to to out to a theater unless it is the rare movie that you really need to see larger than 100"...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    156. Re:What a great idea! by damasterwc · · Score: 1

      movies in LA are like 12 bucks, 15 for 3D >

    157. Re:What a great idea! by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Funny
      "It's about established players like Blockbuster willing to pay a larger cut to studios to rent movies first."

      I'm confused...I thought Blockbuster went out of business?

      Everyone I've seen in a few cities, have people on the streets in front of them with going out of business sales...?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    158. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...for no more convenience or taste.

      It's available right outside the cinema. That's the 'more convenience'.

    159. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Those boxes marked rental absolutely can be sold as used later. It's called the doctrine of first sale and applies to ALL movie media without exception. They could paint "IT IS A FELONY TO SELL THIS FILM" on the side of the box, it's still 100% legal to sell the original.

    160. Re:What a great idea! by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

      Some movies are good to watch at home. Others - silly. I'm not going to wait for Avatar to come out on DVD and watch it in 2D on my 65" screen. I'd be missing the entire draw of the movie which is the 3D effects.

    161. Re:What a great idea! by LandDolphin · · Score: 1

      Then WB is betting that they will make more in DVD sales to the public than they lose in sales to Netflix. If it turns out to be false, they can always switch back.

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
    162. Re:What a great idea! by dachshund · · Score: 1

      But I really suspect that most people can just find a ton of other movies to add to their queues and not care about when a movie is released.

      That may be your habit. In my experience, the #1 reason people quit Netflix is that they run out of movies that they want to see. Not that there aren't movies out there --- they just can't find enough interesting movies to keep them going. Movies pile up. They bail.

      In this case, reducing the flow of high-profile new releases is not helpful.

    163. Re:What a great idea! by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Indeed, I hadn't thought of that angle.

    164. Re:What a great idea! by swillden · · Score: 1

      Seriously - how many people are so eager to watch the released movies that they can't wait a month but weren't going to buy the movie? Yeah so they are going to piss off a lot of people just so they can pick up a tiny portion of the market?

      Agreed.

      The way I see it, there are movies that are worth seeing in the theater and buying for re-watching, there are movies worth seeing in the theater, once, and there are movies worth renting. The three sets are almost disjoint, and there is certainly no overlap between the "worth buying" and "worth renting" sets.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    165. Re:What a great idea! by iris-n · · Score: 0, Troll

      The fact that people are taking you seriously just proves that the US is a country of uncivilised savages. These things would be unthinkable here in Brasil. I go to the movies weekly, the worst I've faced was a black guy with huge hair sitting in front of me.

      Of course, I don't go to films where there will be kids present.

      --
      entropy happens
    166. Re:What a great idea! by alc6379 · · Score: 1

      No, they're still around. There are at least 5-6 of them here in Nashville, TN. Although there were more...

      --
      I don't moderate anymore. Karma penalty for 90% fair mods? Can I mod that unfair?
    167. Re:What a great idea! by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 1

      "WHOOOOSH!" Indeed, oh, perceptive AC.

      I wonder if he/she/it is related to this person :

      (From "If At All Possible, Involve A Cow", page 225)

      --
      Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
    168. Re:What a great idea! by kramerd · · Score: 1

      Where the hell are you going to a theatre for $5? Here in atlanta, the student ticket matinee is $8.

    169. Re:What a great idea! by theArtificial · · Score: 1

      I think the first movie I saw on LaserDisk was a Freddy Krueger movie. I remember a few years back on MySpleen.net there were community releases for the original Star Wars trilogy that used the video from the LaserDisc and audio from another source and both A/V were touched up. Pretty cool.

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
    170. Re:What a great idea! by dave87656 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      pirate the movie instead

      I've found I've just lost interest. The entertainment industry with the constant barage of huge lawsuites, high prices and greed has finally gotten to me. I used to rent movies once a week or so but now it's just gotten a bad taste. I just don't really care what they do anymore. They can charge what they want, I'm on to new stuff: local theater, outdoor stuff, etc.

      I stopped buying music several years ago. That had more to do with living in Germany where GEMA (the equivalent of the RIAA) gets money for every computer or blank CD I buy. I figure I'm already paying for the music, so why pay for it twice. I used to spend several hundred dollars a year on CD's. Now I spend $0. In fact, the same holds true for my girlfriend and most of my friends. I don't pirate music -- I won't give them that satisfaction -- I just listen to my old CD's or the radio or I let youtube videos run in the background.

    171. Re:What a great idea! by dave87656 · · Score: 1

      R*P*DSH*R*

      ... Can I buy a vowel?

    172. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, I think you are pirating the wrong movies.

    173. Re:What a great idea! by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      When home VCR's were a new thing (early 80's) there was almost a "revolt" by theatres when Twentieth Century Fox first released a movie on video that was (gasp!) less than 10 years old!
       
      Slightly later on, the theatre industry almost died when all of the movies that people had never been able to see before were available on video. Before then, if you didn't see the film in the theatre when it was playing, you were pretty much out of luck. Then all of a sudden, THOUSANDS of movies that you may have heard of but never before had the opportunity to watch were available to take home with you!
       
      It took a couple of years for that novelty to wear off and for people to decide to return to watching movies in theatres. That was also when theatre ticket prices went up to their current levels; tickets used to be much more affordable than they are now.
       
      But there is a certain magical atmosphere at a theatre that you just can't reproduce in your living room and people expect and enjoy that, even if they don't consciously think of it in those terms.
       
      Plus, a theatre is a place to go on a date and/or a night out, something else that you can't get in your living room. Most people aren't going to go on a first date with the new flame to sit in front of your living room television. And teenagers won't want to bring a girl home to sit in the parental living room, even if the girl was willing to do that. "Not much of a date..."

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    174. Re:What a great idea! by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Houston, afternoon matinees (weekends too), $4 at older (but still first run) theatres in decent locations.
      at those prices, I don't mind dropping $6 ot $8 for refreshments.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    175. Re:What a great idea! by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      One day I saw what they do to "fix" bad tracking sections on the tape. They just cut it out.
       
      Theatres do the same thing with film if it breaks or splits or something. Not that it happens too much any more now that film is on a polyester base and is much stronger than the old acetate-based film. (Polyester based film came out about 15 years ago and quickly displaced the acetate based film.)
       
      Breakage isn't usually much of a problem but film still sometimes get chewed up due to bad tracking (usually caused by a "projectionist" (so-called) who threaded the projector incorrectly or didn't use any care at all when tearing the film down after his run) so the first several feet of a reel may occasionally end up bent and twisted such that it won't run properly. If it's bad enough, the fix is to cut the bad part out and splice (tape) the film back together.
       
      Film runs at 18 inches per second, so you can cut a fair bit out without anyone noticing. The longest strip I ever removed myself was about fifteen feet near the beginning of the second reel of "My Girl"; still in the days of acetate film and when I took it out of the can I saws that all of the sprocket holes on one side were torn off. It really wasn't noticeable at all, even to me when I knew what part was missing. It was close to the reel change when a scene change (or at least a change in point-of-view) is pretty much a standard requirement anyway.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    176. Re:What a great idea! by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Look at the rest of this thread. People are putting their hands over their ears.
      I take ear plugs with me- like I do to rock concerts.

      Is it 185db-- no, of course not, the sonic disabler runs at 190db.

      But is are movies WAY TOO LOUD, yes. Painfully so. For the first few years, they would turn the volume down. Lately, they refuse- even if there are only a half dozen of us in the theatre. I have no idea why they want to play the movies so loud.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    177. Re:What a great idea! by sglewis100 · · Score: 1

      Artifically deny your customer the ability to buy your product. They'll love you for it!

      In fairness, they are denying you the ability to RENT your product, hoping you'll BUY it. For me, I just move on to what is available. I'm not dropping $15 to $30 to buy something I wanted to rent, nor will I wait to rent - I'll just rent something else. I have a pretty bad memory, too, for anything other than an absurdly popular blockbuster that's all over the media, I'll probably never remember to go back and get that one from Warner. Besides, I hear there's a FEW other ways to see a movie without renting or buying.

    178. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hilarious post. I think Brazil is filled with uncivilized savages, but that's just me.

    179. Re:What a great idea! by ImYourVirus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would have said the itunes store, but it's not even remotely reasonable, I could go out and buy the dvds/bluerays for cheaper and still not be limited by some stupid format. When *that* option comes out let me know, too.

      --
      Why is common sense called that if it's not common?
    180. Re:What a great idea! by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      Anecdotal post is Anecdotal.

      I've gone to see almost all my recent movies in IMAX, and it has been nothing short of a wonderful experience.

      You're complaining about $35 that you might spend once every few months, jeez. Not to mention you're complaining that the screen is too large and the sound system is too powerful... Hilarious... Get back to me when you have a multi-story tall movie screen in your home.

    181. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SHHHHH!!!!! I finally dished out the $30 for newsbin pro, don't need them making it worthless now....

    182. Re:What a great idea! by NitroWolf · · Score: 1

      Even if you have to pay $20 to buy the disc, it's still cheaper than taking a date to the movies.

      I wanted to comment on this. While I disagree with some of the points of your post, it's somewhat immaterial to what I wanted to comment on so I won't get into it.

      Yes, it's cheaper to pay $20 for a DVD - but what about Blu-Ray? Don't those tend to be $35 - $50 or something? I do not own nor will I ever own a Blu-ray player so I've not priced the discs lately. So disregarding the cost issue (though I do think this is a major factor, all the same) - lets say it's an acceptable sum to pay, be it $20 or $35 - I had the misfortune of pulling the dusty old DVD player out of the closet (literally) to test a TV I was selling last week. I popped the DVD in and literally had to wait nearly 2 minutes before I could even get the movie to play. It went through all the warnings and other associated crap before it would even get to the DVD menu, which was of course locked out so you are forced to go through all that crap.

      I have been storing all of my media on my household server for going on 5 years now - I've not used a DVD in that time to speak of. After last week, it all came rushing back to me as to why I don't buy DVD's anymore. Not only is it excessively inconvenient to store discs and find the ones you want when you want them, but all the absolute junk you have to go through to even GET THE MOVIE TO PLAY is absolutely unacceptable. First run DVD's could be delivered to my house for $1 on opening day of a blockbuster movie and I would still not bother with it.

      In time and frustration, a DVD, at any price, is not cheaper than taking a date to the movies. At least around here we have the suites and fork & screen theaters, so it pretty much negates all the douchebaggery in the regular theater's. Granted, though, I do have to sit through some crap in the theater as well, but at least I can have people bring me food and drink at my beck and call. I could buy a wife to handle that, but that comes with a lot of other aggravation.

      I just set my parents up with a virtual copy of my media setup... they are technologically backwards and they are able to use the media setup. They point and the TV shows or movies they want and a little while later they are watching them in 720p HDTV (they have a small HDTV, so no point in doing 1080p). I suspect that after a month or two of this, much like when I finally convinced them Tivo was the wave of the future, which they can now not imagine watching TV without, they will not be able to imagine watching TV without the media center and all their content being available immediately, in glorious HD. No more shuffling discs or going to the store to rent a DVD. They want it and bam, there it is.

      Anyway, my point is that paying $20 for a disc is on it's way out, regardless of how cheap or expensive it is. It's just not worth the hassle at any price.

    183. Re:What a great idea! by Builder · · Score: 1

      This is very foolish of the studio's because Netflix is more on their side then RedBox is.

      Right down near the bottom...

    184. Re:What a great idea! by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 1

      > I've noticed at my regional chain store as well more videos are marked "rental" meaning they can't be sold as "used" later.

      Yes, my old DVD collection at home used have quite a few of these "for rental only" movies that I had bought from local movie rental stores. :)

      --
      He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
    185. Re:What a great idea! by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      I enjoy watching a movie to but a full season of a good TV series is more entertaining. Those I will buy when they come out but movies, seriously there a thousands of them, tens of thousands of them and the truth id the older ones are generally better. Greater movie craft and less special effects, so at the end of the day, the bargain bin and specials are the only place worth looking.

      It's weird buying a movie for five dollars on special only to see it a month latter being sold for thirty. So forget waiting a month, meh, wait a year and you can buy 6 once new releases for the price of one, let only paying what was once the rental price to buy the movie.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    186. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've found that I just got a 4 disc-at-a-time Netflix plan and am spending about two hundred dollars a year on new drives.

    187. Re:What a great idea! by crossmr · · Score: 1

      I'll call and let you know when we get those prices here in Korea..
      you can still get 2 tickets, a popcorn and 2 drinks for the equivalent of about $16.00 USD.

    188. Re:What a great idea! by crossmr · · Score: 1

      VHS tapes were bulky and not easy to store, their packaging tended to look kinda crappy on your shelf, and their picture quality really was not good.

      compared to what other popular technology at the time?

    189. Re:What a great idea! by mpe · · Score: 1

      "The studio is hoping that the four-week window will push consumers interested in watching movies at home to... pirate the movie instead."

      Or not bother with watching the movie, another "lost sale". Or they will wait the 28 days.

    190. Re:What a great idea! by mpe · · Score: 1

      I don't know ... seems to work pretty well for the diamond industry.

      Diamonds are physical objects. It's quite expensive to either dig they out of the ground or manufacture them. That being said IIRC a good part of "A diamond is forever" is because if "secondhand" gems were to be sold the bottom would soon drop out of the market.

    191. Re:What a great idea! by mpe · · Score: 1

      Paying for digital copies is the great boondoggle of the 21st century. Mostly because the prices are too high. I'll pay $0.10 for an mp3 but not $0.99. That's just nuts - it's probably cheaper to get the CD. With the artwork. And the CD itself. And the packaging. And the receipt. And the experience of going to the store.

      As well as the costs of it getting to the store and being put on the shelf so you can find it.

    192. Re:What a great idea! by YourExperiment · · Score: 1

      I remember being able to rent a copy of Star Trek Generations 8-10 months before I could find a copy for sale. And I promptly dubbed a copy of it.

      Sure, the acting was bad, but dubbing your own voice over it is a bit extreme.

    193. Re:What a great idea! by mpe · · Score: 1

      my mom worked at a video rental store for a bit and I'd loiter around a lot.
      $75 was norm--up to 150 for big time releases. The tapes would then go on sale for 15-$20 after they've made enough money on rentals or when the tapes were played so much that quality started to wane. I think producing the videos on linear media took a significant block of time, even after the progression of the technology. Probably why the prices remained high even after years of use.


      Tapes are are rather more fragile than plastic disks. Magnetic media can be affected by stray magnetic fields, also the tape physically touches the heads and tape guides in operation.

      One day I saw what they do to "fix" bad tracking sections on the tape. They just cut it out. 2 seconds of bad tracking was like 10 feet of tape. I got a kick out of how they could chop this out and no one would notice.

      Film prints could also shrink too. Since quite often they'd be spliced in order to be shown, when it came time to return the print it might be easiest to chop a frame or two either side of each splice. At least with film you can see where you are splicing (and 16mm typically only has 1 hole per frame).

    194. Re:What a great idea! by mpe · · Score: 1

      but storebought tapes weren't that great quality to begin with. Remember, this was an analog tape medium, and it was in the manufacturers' interests to duplicate them for as low cost as possible. Often this meant they were made from low-quality materials and were duplicated on high-speed equipment.

      Higher quality tape going into tapes for recording, presumably. Though the E-240 tapes needed thinner tape to physically fit in the cassette. High speed duplication is likely to be rather tricky considering the tape has both linear and helical scan tracks.

      People did buy laserdiscs, though, and those collectors were among the first to jump on the DVD-buying bandwagon. When regular people got word that DVDs gave you picture quality comparable to laserdiscs without all the disc flipping and swapping, DVD sales exploded.

      The big advantage a disk has over tape is random access, even on a VCR which uses the control track for positioning it can take quite a bit of time to get to a specific place.

    195. Re:What a great idea! by kramerd · · Score: 1

      You do realize that when I ask one person a question, and another one answers, that it is confusing as all hell. Especially when they answer a different, unrelated question. My question was about ticket prices, not how much people are willing to spend on coke and nachos. I guess I will respond in an equally confusing way.

      At the theatre I frequent, tickets are $12 for a normal evening ticket, but you get a table, a waiter, and the ability to order pitchers or pints of beer during the movie without disturbing other patrons. I don't mind spending $30 on refreshments. Then again, I only go to the movies 3 or 4 times a year, because its still better to watch at home and for what I spend, I could have bought the movie on blu-ray the day it gets released to stores.

    196. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, there is a digital VHS. It failed, but could store as much as Blu-Ray.

    197. Re:What a great idea! by FileNotFound · · Score: 1

      You're missing the whole point it seems. Never mind that "the experience of going to the store" is pretty much always a negative. No I'm not antisocial but seriously, going to the store is just a hassle and in no way a positive.

      When I buy an mp3. I'm not buying the mp3 I'm buying the song and supporting the artist. The format, be it a CD, a tape, or an mp3 is simply a matter of convenience. mp3s are easier for me. If I wanted a CD, I'd burn it on a CD - why I'd ever want anything on a CD is truly beyond me.

      I couldn't possibly care less about the box art, the CD, the 'in store experience' or whatever other value added bullshit you can come up with when it comes to physical media.

      Buying digital media is very convenient and fast plus it's safe. I can access it from anywhere in the world. I can take my music and games with me anywhere I go. I'd rather have that than a 5c CD case and a 10c CD.

      Sorry but digital distribution is the future. Amazingly even such things as "digital collectors" editions are coming out and selling for as much as physical collectors editions. Just look at Dragons Age Origins.

      Anyway...sorry for treading all over your lawn..

      --
      In Soviet Russia, the television watches YOU!
    198. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What news this would be to groups of people seeking an alternative to bit torrent for their binary files."

      Nice.

    199. Re:What a great idea! by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "No, they're still around. There are at least 5-6 of them here in Nashville, TN. Although there were more..."

      Interesting...everyone I know of in LA and AR are going out of business...selling everything off.

      I thought it was nationwide.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    200. Re:What a great idea! by BarryJacobsen · · Score: 1

      And this media setup is?

    201. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just to note...experiences may differ...

      All three of the video stores, back when DVDs didn't exist and SNES still wasn't out yet, in my town...
      The cost to rent a VHS was under a dollar, and NES games were $1.05. I spent the summers working my way from a-z rent a new NES game almost every day.

    202. Re:What a great idea! by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      It is a bit of a fray sometimes...

      You can see first run movies in houston in a big theater at multiple locations around town for $4 between 11am at 5pm 7 days a week. That's not student- that's anyone.

      I really dislike the movie taverns for any movie I care about. 2012 was okay in that environment. I go to movies about 26 times a year and movie taverns about 4-6 times a year. The routine we've fallen into lately is, "11:45am movie", then Logan's Roadhouse (in the same parking lot) for food.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    203. Re:What a great idea! by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      I specified torrent as opposed to internet...

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    204. Re:What a great idea! by Harik · · Score: 1

      Good news everybody! 10 seconds of research has discovered that copyright infringment involves SENDING copyrighted material, not receiving it! Usenet is only dangerous to contributors.

      Leech away!

    205. Re:What a great idea! by NitroWolf · · Score: 1

      XBMC, Sabnzbd+, Newzbin, Giganews on $350 worth of computer hardware. In their case, since there's no point in 1080p, I should have gone with a cheaper ION platform. I figure I could have put the whole thing together for $200 - $250 under the right sale circumstances.

    206. Re:What a great idea! by Harik · · Score: 1

      In slashdot math, 180 lines is better then 480.

      Well, I suppose 180 vs 240 isn't completely terrible, but it in no way compares to broadcast. There's a reason broadcast video was on minimum 3/4" tapes - there were actual FCC standards about what quality you could broadcast in, how much noise, how black your black could be, etc.

    207. Re:What a great idea! by Harik · · Score: 1

      The other part is a nice cartel of purchasers who set minimum prices and maintain large backstock in warehouses to avoid reducing the value of the market.

      And marketing! Don't forget marketing!

      A diamond is forever, indeed.

    208. Re:What a great idea! by tonyreadsnews · · Score: 1

      You forgot to mention the one other big reason to buy digitally.
      You buy the piece you want. Sure buying all the songs at once (possibly on a CD even) is cheaper then buying one at a time.
      iTunes, Amazon, Lala, all let you do this just like the store does.
      The real value add for digitial distribution is in not paying $10 for an album of which you only want 2 songs. Instead you can pay $2 for the exact ones you want. You don't have that option with CDs in a store, at least not economically. Last I checked 'singles' (if they still make them) were about half the cost of the full album.

    209. Re:What a great idea! by PingSpike · · Score: 1

      Because its the only way to get people to STFU during the movie. You crank it up so even if they shout they can't be heard. It works. It makes my ears bleed too, but it beats the hell out of the alternative.

      Sadly, we can't count on respect for others from the populace anymore. Movie theaters are filled with animals, hopping around, kicking, screeching, slopping food everwhere, beating their chests in moch threat displays. If most people weren't wearing pants, they would be hurling feces at one another.

    210. Re:What a great idea! by BarryJacobsen · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. Definitely looking into this, thanks!

      A few more questions if you don't mind - all of these seem to be cross platform, are you personally using windows or linux for this (just curious, I don't really have a preference, but I think I could set it up easier/faster in windows)?

      Are you using newzbin as a basic or premium member? I had never heard of this site before. Do you have an invite, available (seems to be invite only), if so could you please toss one to 'clrams' (sans quotes) at google's e-mail service?

    211. Re:What a great idea! by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Last I checked 'singles' (if they still make them) were about half the cost of the full album.

      More like 1/3 to 1/4 the price. It's been a good while since I bought one, but they were always between $3 and $4. Usually though they came with a few tracks. Usually the "single" song, several remixes of it, and often times 1 more song from the album. I think the most I ever saw on a "single" was 7 tracks. When I was in high school in particular I bought a lot of them as my only spending money was what I earned part time at a gas station stocking shelves. It was only about $40 per week after taxes (I got all the Fed and State taxes back at the end of the year, but that wasn't part of my regular paycheck), and so unless I REALLY wanted a full album I just wasn't going to pay for anything but a single.

      I still see singles released on iTunes separate from the regular album, and still see songs released as singles, so I assume that they still make them.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    212. Re:What a great idea! by xycadium · · Score: 1

      Yea, WB is quickly working their way up the company hatred ladder with me. Now they've taken a few more steps up that ladder and are close to the step wher Sony resides.

    213. Re:What a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sterling example of superb modding...

    214. Re:What a great idea! by edmicman · · Score: 1

      I dunno....my Netflix queue is pretty long and I normally will just wait until what I want comes through...but there's times where a new release comes out and I bump it up to the top so I'll get it next. Sure, it's not release day but it's a day or two later. I'm gonna be pissed if there's something I want to see now, I see it advertised everywhere, but I can't get it with my existing subscription until a month later.

    215. Re:What a great idea! by OrangeCatholic · · Score: 1

      I get it, but $2 is still too much. That's my point. Filling a 40Gb iPod at 5Mb per song, $1 each, would cost you $8000.

      By comparison, my 100 CD collection from high school cost about $1500. And that was quite a project.

      Now if you take my suggestion and charge $0.10, filling the iPod costs $800. That's reasonable. And you're getting more for less. Considering mp3's are worse quality than CD, with no artwork included (i.e. NO re-sale value), that sounds about right.

    216. Re:What a great idea! by OrangeCatholic · · Score: 1

      Mmm, well try growing up (just) 40 miles from an urban center. In broadcast quality, CBS was terrible, so was ABC. You got used to liking NBC, FOX, WB, and UPN because they were relatively snow-free. It was like the weather. You turn on the TV to find out how crappy it was that day.

      >In slashdot math, 180 lines is better then 480.

      And yet a good VHS tape looks pretty sharp. What's the rez on Betamax? Wiki says 250. VHS = 250. Betacam was 300. None of them are 480.

      Even Laserdisc and Super VHS were only 420.

    217. Re:What a great idea! by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 1

      Thank you.

      --
      Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
    218. Re:What a great idea! by MikeFM · · Score: 1

      I feel old because everything seems to have skyrocketed in price. A candy bar that was $.25 when I was a kid is $.75 now. In the past ten years my rent has more than doubled. Fuel has more than doubled and at some point had more than tripled. Everything costs a lot more than it did 10 years ago but in the same time period my pay has actually gone down by a third despite having way more experience, education, and responsibility.

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
  2. 28 days later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is anyone really that hell-bent on getting a movie that they'd rather pirate it than wait 28 days?

    1. Re:28 days later by drunkennewfiemidget · · Score: 1

      yes.

    2. Re:28 days later by calmofthestorm · · Score: 1

      I'm usually a year behind, so I consider all options. Until blueray takes over and I'm forced to pirate just to watch movies, services like Netflix are great.

      I also like the Amazon service; I don't really care if it's DRMed to hell if it's just a rental that I'm going to watch once.

      --
      93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
    3. Re:28 days later by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      When it's as easy as 1) Search a torrent site and 2) Clicking the magnet link and wait for it to download, I would say yes.

    4. Re:28 days later by Pojut · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We use the hell out of our Netflix subscription...6 out at a time, and sometimes even that doesn't feel like enough. It works out well though...she tends to rent interesting documentaries and sci-fi, while I tend to rent the classics she hasn't seen and horror movies she hasn't seen. We both work together on choosing anime and TV series.

      Having a massive selection of b-horror movies and silent films ready and waiting is awesome.

    5. Re:28 days later by omgarthas · · Score: 1

      These times you can download 1090p w/ dts sound bluray rips in less than an hour so... yes

    6. Re:28 days later by Sebilrazen · · Score: 3, Funny

      1090p, cause it's like 10 more.

      --
      "There are no facts, only interpretations." --Friedrich Nietzsche.
    7. Re:28 days later by omgarthas · · Score: 1

      I'll enjoy my extra 10 pixels, thanks

    8. Re:28 days later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1090 wow. mine are 1080.. I want my additional 19200 pixels

    9. Re:28 days later by windex82 · · Score: 1

      Ever since I signed up for netflix/blockbuster I've wondered..

      Is it really pirating by obtaining it someplace else WHILE I'm paying netflix. For example, most of their movies arent available on demand so I have to queue them. Is it really pirating at that point if I download and watch it from say TPB? The DVD will be on its way. Netflix/Blockbuster is still getting their cut as are the studios so how is it that I am in the wrong?

      Why wouldn't this line of reasoning stand up in court if you were to be busted for downloading a movie? Really the way I see it is if its rent-able by netflix and I have an account in good standing I should be entitle to watch anything I could rent no matter the means of transfer.

    10. Re:28 days later by DaveGod · · Score: 5, Insightful

      is anyone really that hell-bent on getting a movie that they'd rather pirate it than wait 28 days?

      That's movie-studio thinking. And yeah, on the face of it, it does make sense - break the law, commit a morally wrong act for the sake of 28 days?

      But that forgets what movies have become. Torrents being free is only half of it - the other half is service. Piracy is fiercely competitive on service: they are quire remarkable in getting whatever you want, however you want, as quickly as they possibly can. The studios have taken some steps towards competing: cinema releases are increasingly worldwide and DVD releases have a shorter delay. But they're not really close - it's like the big airlines trying to do the low-cost airline thing, they just don't have the mentality for it.

      It's why some people pirate despite having their cinema card, a Netflix sub and shelves of store-bought movies. It's not that they aren't prepared to pay, it's just piracy is the better service. Sure, plenty of pirates are doing it just because it's free, but there's a big chunk of people with a range of different reasons. Each step the studios take towards competing with piracy is a chunk of people for whom paying becomes their better choice. Each step away from competing with piracy, like delaying Netflix for 28 days, a bunch of people turn on the torrents. Many will actually be annoyed about not being able to get what they want by paying for it.

      I'm not trying to defend pirates, I've never illegally downloaded a movie in my life (though I'll not pretend to having never watched any). But there's what's right and there's what is. Quite basic market forces.

    11. Re:28 days later by Sancho · · Score: 1

      That's what got me into Netflix. Not new releases, but old, out of print, b-movies.

    12. Re:28 days later by BobMcD · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why wouldn't this line of reasoning stand up in court if you were to be busted for downloading a movie? Really the way I see it is if its rent-able by netflix and I have an account in good standing I should be entitle to watch anything I could rent no matter the means of transfer.

      Largely because you are creating a copy of a work protected against such behavior, you'd legally still be on the hook.

      The laws aren't designed to limit your access to the material. Instead they intend to control the circumstances under which that work can be duplicated. Just because you have the means to access it does not mean you have permission to create a copy.

    13. Re:28 days later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Great comment - you forgot one thing - Pirates can often put out a superior product - i.e. a DVD that doesn't force you to sit through FBI warnings or unskippable trailers. You get the movie you want, immediately.

    14. Re:28 days later by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's why some people pirate despite having their cinema card, a Netflix sub and shelves of store-bought movies. It's not that they aren't prepared to pay, it's just piracy is the better service. Sure, plenty of pirates are doing it just because it's free, but there's a big chunk of people with a range of different reasons. Each step the studios take towards competing with piracy is a chunk of people for whom paying becomes their better choice. Each step away from competing with piracy, like delaying Netflix for 28 days, a bunch of people turn on the torrents. Many will actually be annoyed about not being able to get what they want by paying for it.

      Bingo. I wanted to watch Inglorious Bastards. So, I head off to Netflix and it's not on streaming and the DVD is on wait. Lets ignore for a moment that we live in time where we shouldn't need physical media AT ALL in order to rent something (or even buy for that matter). Next I go to the xbox movie section and I see IB. I think good, I can rent it here. Nope, it's only for purchase and it's only SD. I'm trying my hardest to give someone money to rent their content and they won't let me! At some point more and more people are going to say f' it and just go straight to TPB. The hassle of finding it to rent just isn't worth it when I can find and download it in minutes.

      BTW, I think the music companies have started to learn this lesson, even if they were pulled along kicking and screaming. Look at Amazon and ITMS now. No DRM, Amazon has a great changing selection of $5 albums, and both make it easy to find whatever you are looking for and purchase for a fairly reasonable price. Why can't movies follow suit?

    15. Re:28 days later by I+cant+believe+its+n · · Score: 1

      No.

      With most of the movies coming out of Hollywood these days, I wait forever. This is true even when people try to lend me DVDs. I just accept if someone is trying to be nice to me and happen to bring one along. You don't want to tell someone who is trying to be nice that you think that that movie is just a waste of time.

      --
      She made the willows dance
    16. Re:28 days later by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      IANAL, but IIRC nobody has ever been sued for downloading a movie. What they have been sued for is making it available for others to download - which your example does not get around.

    17. Re:28 days later by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      Presumably Netflix pays a licensing fee whenever they stream a video to someone. By getting a video elsewhere, you are preventing such a fee from being paid by Netflix to a copyright owner.

      There is the economic harm.

    18. Re:28 days later by evann · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The studios have taken some steps towards competing: cinema releases are increasingly worldwide and DVD releases have a shorter delay. But they're not really close - it's like the big airlines trying to do the low-cost airline thing, they just don't have the mentality for it.

      Big Airlines are competing on low-cost because it is incredibly difficult to differentiate a plane ride from another plane ride to consumers. When people shop on the web they go for the lowest cost the majority of the time. Try picturing yourself eating a better meal and watching a movie on a plane, would you even pay 20$ more? Most people say to the hell with it Ill save money and eat whenever I get there.

      http://biz.yahoo.com/p/sum_qpmd.html

      Airline industry is consistently at the bottom for profit/margin, they fail if they do not have low costs. The studios make take an idea for a film, make a bunch of products based on that film, push all this shit on everyone everywhere, and are still trying to double up by not letting you even make a damn backup in the case a spec of sand finds its way onto your disc. As a secondary side note, most companies worry about customer support when they mass distribute a product. I have never got s4n74cl4wz to respond to my requests when the the frame is clipped. Think about it, how can these be "quite basic market forces" when the "competition" is distributing your product without paying you?

    19. Re:28 days later by windex82 · · Score: 1

      Re-read what I said. I said when I find a DVD , NOT something on demand. If it were on demand I would watch it on netflix.

      If they pay some licensing fee on every DVD rental they are doing it wrong as brick and mortars have no such thing.

    20. Re:28 days later by windex82 · · Score: 1

      Isn't the justice system supposed to make sense as well? Why wouldn't a judge listen to that argument and think to himself, "This is all making very good sense to me."

      But as another poster said it's generally not the downloader rather the person making it available that is the one in trouble.

    21. Re:28 days later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IANAL, but IIRC nobody has ever been sued for downloading a movie. What they have been sued for is making it available for others to download - which your example does not get around.

      I've never really understood this. How then is my local library, which lends out DVDs, not liable for making that DVD available to me? Similarly they have a bunch of books and a photocopier right there. How is that enabling copyright infringement?

    22. Re:28 days later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The videos that aren't available for streaming aren't available for a reason, Netflix isn't licensed to distribute them that way. Their ability to legally rent DVDs limited by the number of copies they own, so they charge you more if you want to have more movies rented out. So if you're downloading movies faster than your queue can keep up, you're getting more movies than Netflix has paid to let you have.

      That's besides the point, though, as even owning a DVD doesn't have any effect on the legality of downloading that movie.

    23. Re:28 days later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the "pirated" movie is streamed, is there still a "copy" made? Or is it just a bunch of 1s and 0s?

    24. Re:28 days later by Andorin · · Score: 1

      Largely because you are creating a copy of a work protected against such behavior, you'd legally still be on the hook.

      Legally, yes. Ethically is an entirely different matter.

      Our copyright system needs heavy revision.

      --
      That Anonymous Coward guy is pretty annoying. Can we have the government censor him or something?
    25. Re:28 days later by methangel · · Score: 1

      Nigel Tufnel: The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven and...
      Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most amps go up to ten?
      Nigel Tufnel: Exactly.
      Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it's louder? Is it any louder?
      Nigel Tufnel: Well, it's one louder, isn't it? It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at ten. You're on ten here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on ten on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where?
      Marty DiBergi: I don't know.
      Nigel Tufnel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?
      Marty DiBergi: Put it up to eleven.
      Nigel Tufnel: Eleven. Exactly. One louder.
      Marty DiBergi: Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?
      Nigel Tufnel: [pause] These go to eleven.

    26. Re:28 days later by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Your library lends a physical copy to you; by doing so, it makes it unavailable to others. It's not illegal for Best Buy to sell DVDs and blank DVD-R's, but it is illegal for you to use the latter to make copies of the former available to everyone on your block.

    27. Re:28 days later by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      "Streamed" implies remote use of a single copy. "Downloaded" implies the copy is replicated and kept.

    28. Re:28 days later by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Absolutely not. The justice system is engineered to be about as complex as it can be and still function. Whether this is the original design or a result of corruption isn't clear, but as far as I know every legal system in the world works this way.

    29. Re:28 days later by windex82 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the reply, I'm aware of this. It was mostly a rhetorical question as it seems like the system SHOULD make sense.

    30. Re:28 days later by rgviza · · Score: 1

      From a engineer's standpoint, writing the stream constitutes a copy, whether it goes to disk or a network. It has to be written to a buffer on your local machine to play smoothly therefore at some point all of it is stored on your computer. It doesn't matter how long it's there, or what type of storage (memory or disk) it's written to, it's a copy if it exists in two different places at the same time.

      Copyright law doesn't imply how much of a movie needs to be there to constitute a copy, but IANAL, I'm an engineer. That's where the lawyers take over ;)

      Streamed simply means that it's watched as the bytes come in. You've still downloaded the entire thing. You have to download it to "stream" it.

      --
      Don't kid yourself. It's the size of the regexp AND how you use it that counts.
    31. Re:28 days later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting. I've heard the poor argument, not going into it here, that people pirate, because they would not have bought anyway, but...

      You actually try to rationalize the piracy by saying that you would pay ("I'm trying my hardest to give someone money to rent their content and they won't let me!"), but you don't like the terms that the provider of some object/service provides; the fact that you can't have it the second you want it. You actually admit to being the TRUE pirate. You admit that your piracy results in a lose of money to the provider. You just made their case for them.

      To look at it another way...
      So if I have no internet, or easy way to rent a movie online, and I go to my local store, and the movie is sold out/rented out, you think it is okay to pirate the movie, because, well, I tried to buy/rent it, but it was not available, at the time I wanted it? Disregard the fact that in a few days a shipment of new videos will come to the retail store, and the people who rented them from the rental store will return them. I just need to wait.

    32. Re:28 days later by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      Interesting take. I haven't ever pirated a movie. My argument was simply showing how the movie distributers are going to push their customers away from paying for the content. Instead of making it easier to rent, they make it harder with the hopes that the customer will pay 2x-3x more and buy the movie.

      So if I have no internet, or easy way to rent a movie online, and I go to my local store, and the movie is sold out/rented out, you think it is okay to pirate the movie, because, well, I tried to buy/rent it, but it was not available, at the time I wanted it? Disregard the fact that in a few days a shipment of new videos will come to the retail store, and the people who rented them from the rental store will return them. I just need to wait.

      This might be valid pre-internet/on-demand/etc..., but that's not the environment we live in today. On-demand content is the way everything is moving and fighting that trend is only going to push your customers away.

  3. I'll just wait longer... by SOOPRcow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I really want the movie on dvd I'm gonna buy it anyway. If I was just gonna rent it when it comes out on dvd what makes you think I'll want to buy it instead of waiting 28 extra days? Or at worse one could always pirate it since I'm sure there will be dvd rips on the net. Anyway, this isn't all bad... more streaming stuff :)

    1. Re:I'll just wait longer... by maxume · · Score: 1

      It isn't about your behavior, it is about the aggregate behavior of millions of people, and it is a little more plausible that there will be impulse purchases in that window if you consider everyone instead of just yourself.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:I'll just wait longer... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      An impulse buy of $20 for a DVD you weren't planning on buying anyways?

      Versus FREE?

      No wonder national and personal finances are in such a mess.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re:I'll just wait longer... by Binestar · · Score: 1

      These are my thoughts exactly. What do I care that I have to wait another 28 days before I can watch $random_WB_movie? I have so much in the queue I couldn't care less when I watch something.

      The real news here is more streaming content. With my TiVo linked to my Netflix account I almost don't care about the DVD's they send me anymore.

      --
      Do you Gentoo!?
    4. Re:I'll just wait longer... by maxume · · Score: 1

      Well, my personal finances are fine. My income isn't anything I am excited about, but I am in control of my consumption.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    5. Re:I'll just wait longer... by bit9 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Mod parent up.

      I don't know anybody (myself included) who actually keeps track of DVD release dates, much less counts down in anticipation of a DVD being released. Pretty much every movie that I rent from Netflix is something that I've decided I don't mind waiting for, and apart from the 2-3 movies down at the bottom of my Netflix queue that say "Releases mm/dd/yyyy", I literally never have any idea when a given movie is/was/will be released on DVD.

      Okay, so maybe not everybody is like me in this respect. Maybe there are hordes of people who will now be thinking to themselves "Damn! I just can't wait another month! I guess I'll have to buy that DVD after all." But I just don't see it happening that way. I don't know anybody who thinks that way. I do know a couple DVD junkies who seem to think they just have to own every movie ever made on DVD, but this isn't going to change their habits anyway.

    6. Re:I'll just wait longer... by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      An impulse buy of $20 for a DVD you weren't planning on buying anyways?

      Versus FREE?

      No wonder national and personal finances are in such a mess.

      No moral or ethical qualms about not paying for something that you should pay for? No wonder national and personal ethics are in such a mess. No wonder nobody seems to "care" anymore...

    7. Re:I'll just wait longer... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      >> It isn't about your behavior, it is about the aggregate behavior of millions of people

      So. The typical guy among the millions has to be dumb enough to be so easily lured by
      a mere in store display that he will pay several times more for the "privelege" of
      owning something he was planning on renting anyways.

      If he is a Netflix/Blockbuster subscriber then that means that he is paying for something
      that he could have legally obtained for no additional cost.

      If the whole "figure out what you want before you want it" and "wait a few days for shipping"
      thing worked for me then I could watch anything in the Netflix catalog as many times as I want
      to for no more than I am paying for my monthly subscription.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    8. Re:I'll just wait longer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Versus FREE?

      I suppose "free" depends on free from Netflix, where I pay a monthly rate, or free as in stealing.

      While the movie and music studios continue to destroy their reputations, and their business, I still cannot justify stealing, and I am not alone.

      However, I can justify waiting to see the movie as a rental rather than buying it. To play the Devil's Advocate, I will say that DVDs tend to be 50% off their first week on sale. I would also say that "not planning on buying" is a little skewed because the desire to see the movie when it's out may outweigh the rental company's timeout period.

      The beauty of renting is that you pay a much smaller fee, but you lose the film once you give it back (obviously, and only considering legal uses). The beauty of buying is that you get to keep it forever, but you pay a lot more for it. This is nice for great movies (Lord of the Rings, etc), but you inevitably run into a gray area where you think the movie is great enough to purchase, but in hindsight, decide it's not. I think that is where the "responsible" impulse buys will come from.

      Of course I say that while owning literally 10 DVD movies and a Netflix membership.

    9. Re:I'll just wait longer... by maxume · · Score: 1

      I understand what you are getting at, I've just seen the movie collections of people who buy shit on a whim.

      I figure the U.S. cellular market shows another side of poor decision making; most people just pay enough each month so that they never 'go over', rather than controlling themselves a little bit and only spending money on what they 'need' (presumably there is room for prices to go down, my theory is that they mostly don't because everyone has a cell phone anyway).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    10. Re:I'll just wait longer... by maxume · · Score: 1

      Sorry to reply twice: Also, the idea might be to make Netflix less attractive, which makes (foregoing Netflix entirely and) purchasing more attractive.

      I don't think it is overall a great idea or anything, but I doubt that they (WB) are actually going to lose money on the deal (they may incur an opportunity cost though).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    11. Re:I'll just wait longer... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Well, I am like you. I put movies in my queue before they even are released to the theater. I see a commercial for them (Yes, I still see commercials), and they go in my queue. When they come in, they come in.

    12. Re:I'll just wait longer... by TroyM · · Score: 1

      If I really was in a hurry to see the movie I would have watched it in the theater.

    13. Re:I'll just wait longer... by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Or they're targeting people for whom $20 is an impulse buy. There aren't a lot of them, but they are very, very profitable. (Census data for 2008, there are almost 25 million households with incomes over $100k and almost 2.5 million with incomes over $250k.)

    14. Re:I'll just wait longer... by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 1

      "Pretty much every movie that I rent from Netflix is something that I've decided I don't mind waiting for..."

      Same here. Eventually, whatever film is at the bottom reaches the top of the queue and then it reaches my mailbox.

      And if, for some reason, I MUST see a WB film the day it's released on DVD, well, that IS why we have the Internet, right?

      --
      Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
    15. Re:I'll just wait longer... by adolf · · Score: 1

      Feh.

      With the Internet, I don't even have to wait until release day to see it.

    16. Re:I'll just wait longer... by bit9 · · Score: 1

      With the Internet, I don't even have to wait until release day to see it.

      You're referring to the original theatrical release, not the DVD release, right?

    17. Re:I'll just wait longer... by adolf · · Score: 1

      Sometimes.

      It's not as prevalent today as in the past, but it's still not all that infrequent that movies show up online in excellent fidelity days, weeks, or months before the home DVD release.

      Sometimes, it's a screener intended only for the folks who vote on Academy Awards or whatever. Sometimes, it's a retail DVD. Sometimes, who knows where it comes from...

      Whatever the case, those who just can't wait to see a new movie, often needn't even wait for release day if they know their way around the tubes.

    18. Re:I'll just wait longer... by mcsqueak · · Score: 1

      I've just seen the movie collections of people who buy shit on a whim.

      I know a few of these people. My first though is "Really, you want to watch THAT movie over and over again, and paid $17.99 for the opportunity to do so?". To me, most movies are worth watching once every few years. You can rent it, borrow it from a friend, or even buy it second hand for mere dollars. Very few movies, in my opinion, are worth watching all the time. I've been buying DVDs for 7 or 8 years and my movie collection is probably around 25 films. I know enough people that I can borrow almost any film I really want to watch, I'm sure.

    19. Re:I'll just wait longer... by mcsqueak · · Score: 1

      I'd argue the other way. My observation is whim-based purchasing isn't the realm of rich folks. There is a reason those racks of crap are located near the check stands of every super market, Wal-Mart, and Target. Poor people, and people of "normal" median incomes ($30,000-$50,000/yr) are the largest impulse purchasers, simply because they are a larger percentage of the population.

      All the people I know who make impulse purchases are in the normal median income bracket for the US. That is probably another reason why credit card debt is so high...

    20. Re:I'll just wait longer... by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      "I think I'd like to own that movie"
      "why don't you just queue it up first and see if you want a permanent copy?"
      [time passes]
      "Wow, I'm glad I only rented that"

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    21. Re:I'll just wait longer... by tixxit · · Score: 1

      Seriously. They show teasers for movies a year in advance now (sometimes more). Then it comes out in theatres for a month or two. Then a couple months down the road, its out on DVD. I've probably waited 16 months, at least, to rent this movie already. Why would 1 more bother me?

    22. Re:I'll just wait longer... by demonlapin · · Score: 1
      The total-numbers bit is probably true.

      All the people I know who make impulse purchases are in the normal median income bracket

      If you know a lot of people in the median income bracket, how many do you know in the top ones (or vice versa)? Very few people know many in both unless they are young professionals who are only temporarily in the median brackets, in which case buying habits tend to be the ones you would expect for someone who makes a lot more money than they actually do.

  4. They are betting that their customers won't care by Meshach · · Score: 2, Interesting
    From the FA:

    "This deal uniquely works for Netflix because our subscribers are desensitized to street dates and more interested in being matched to the perfect movie," said Ted Sarandos, Netflix's chief content officer, who handles studio relationships. "Some subscribers will so passionately want to see it in the first 28 days they may go out and buy it, just as some people want to see 'Avatar' so badly they pay to watch it in 3-D."

    This sounds like a risky strategy. Creating more hassles and delays for your customer does not seem to be a "customer first" attitude. But I guess ultimately the market will decide if it is reasonable.

    --
    "Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
    Aldous Huxley
  5. The Hangover by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Mike Chauvet opened a red envelope from Netflix and popped "The Hangover" into his DVD player.

    I didn't see why the hype was over that movie. It wasn't funny.

    Many of those movies really aren't worth it - so I have to wait - big deal.

    I'm seeing that we're getting closer and closer to *"Ouch! My Balls!" as being the height of what's considered funny in this society.

    Reference to "Idiocracy".

    1. Re:The Hangover by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually "Ow, My Balls"

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_4jrMwvZ2A

    2. Re:The Hangover by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Normally I'm of the same opinion and The Hangover looked like yet another college-humor crapfest. However, after watching it I thought it was pretty good. Not the best movie ever, but not bad at all for the type of film it is.

      Sorry but bathroom jokes and physical slapstick has always been funny and will continue to be (when used appropriately). In general it has nothing to do with some sort of degradation of intelligence. It is when it is overused or otherwise inappropriately used that it becomes stupid instead of funny. A fine line there.

      In fact, I didn't like Idiocracy all that much. It has some funny moments but it is nowhere near as good as Office Space.

  6. Soo all the more reason for me by future+assassin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    to visit more pawn shops to get my brand new dvd for $3.99 Way to take away a choice for consumers so you can alienate even more of them.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    1. Re:Soo all the more reason for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? Do you put a tape recorder up to the radio to record your favorite songs too?

    2. Re:Soo all the more reason for me by zogger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He said he buys them, legally, on disk, but used in the pawnshop for much closer to what they are really worth. I do the same thing, because I know what digital copies on a piece of plastic cost. I am perfectly willing for them to charge a full doubling of their actual digital copy costs, a 100% markup, but I won't pay thousands or tens of thousands of percent markup. So, I wait until I get them used or severely marked down in the bargain bin.

      If the big studios and distributors would just stop price gouging, and really make copies impulse purchase cost, they would sell billions more copies a year to people. But see, they are fixated on "per unit" pricing that reflects copy production costs from like 30 years ago, something like that. They refuse to drop their prices down "enough" so that people are willing to buy them in larger quantities.

      At 20 bux, I buy zero DVDs, I don't care what movie it is, that's a price gouging level, a serious one. At ten, I start to think about it,but resist, because it is still way too high for a dime's worth of plastic and some printed cardboard, at five, sometimes I buy one out of the bargain bin at importmegamart. At 4 or lower, I pick some up used, pawnshops, yard sales, etc. I don't pirate any, but I also refuse to pay their obvious cartel full ripoff pricing model either.

      These guys could probably make MORE money by seriously dropping their prices, from much larger volume sales. I know I have paid as little as two dollars brand new at the store for some older titles, just the disk in a plain paper sleeve, printed, no fancy box even. If they started doing all releases like that, I'd buy one or two a week, as it is now, I buy a couple disks a year new, but only severly marked down, or used, and zero at full retail. They just annoyed an old faithful customer who started paying for entertainment media in the 50s, and now I just can't stand their ripoff prices. I'm not cheap, I just hate getting gouged, and there is a difference.

      If you go back and remember, when downloading/pirating really took off seriously, with Napster, it was about exactly the same time that home CD recorders became more or less affordable, and people started buying blank CDs by the millions. This hit huge mass consciousness as to just *how much* they were getting price gouged for digital bits on a plastic disk. This caused a profound seachange in the mindset towards the music industry, and now the movie industry. People just drop most "moral qualms" in circumventing annoyances when dealing with ripoff scammers, and the traditional distributors sure as heck have been engaging in this blatant price gouging for a long time now. It USED to cost quite a bit to make a "copy" for sale, when I first started buying it was music vinyl and expensive to make a single copy for sale, so you expected to pay a lot for a copy, but once it got to close to zero to make copies, which digitally it is today..people reacted accordingly, they stopped being so interested in paying the same or similar prices as before.

      There's obviously a nice market for music and movies, just "official" prices don't reflect a true market level, the "black market" level is closer to a real price. The old "AllofMP3" was much closer to a real/rational market level that would have been fair all around, to both sides of the transaction.

      Something is needed that would encourage people to outright buy, and discourage not paying a penny/pirating, and that "something" is extremely easy to see, and that is drastically reduced "legit" copy prices.

      The ball is in the producers and distributors courts now, they can see this is true, it will be up to them to adapt to a more fair and much cheaper price that reflects bona fide modern tech advances. Their costs dropped dramatically, they need to pass similar savings along to their legit customers. Until then, all their schemes and plans will get ignored by a large amount of the public as they will take the "black market" price instead, given the option and opportuni

  7. Something tells me BT sites won't do this by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    Which makes them retarded. Seriously, one of the best ways to combat copying is to make it easier/more attractive to buy. People are lazy, make it worth their while to pay you, and they'll probably do that since it is easier and less risky than downloading. However, be a moron about it, and they'll go to where they can get what they want.

    1. Re:Something tells me BT sites won't do this by MWoody · · Score: 0, Troll

      Really? So you're saying pirates are patiently waiting for the DVD or Bluray to come out before watching films? How polite.

    2. Re:Something tells me BT sites won't do this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eh, no. He's saying the exact opposite:

      "Something tells me BT sites won't do this

      Which makes them retarded. Seriously, one of the best ways to combat copying is to make it easier/more attractive to buy. People are lazy, make it worth their while to pay you, and they'll probably do that since it is easier and less risky than downloading. However, be a moron about it, and they'll go to where they can get what they want."

    3. Re:Something tells me BT sites won't do this by MWoody · · Score: 1

      Your sarcasm meter is broken. My point was that as soon as a title hits theaters, it has a torrent up. From a "competing with pirates" angle, there's little difference between having a rental up now or a month from now: the morally bereft have already partaken.

  8. Cancel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm going to cancel my netflix over this. I don't care if I cannot watch WB movies, but I don't like the precedent. The only way we can get across to WB and netflix that this is not a good idea is to speak with our wallets.

  9. Re:They are betting that their customers won't car by CannonballHead · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One could argue that ever deciding that the company should make more money is not a "customer first" attitude.

    "Customer first" is at best a goal of a company. Most companies want to stay afloat first ... which may or may not be directly tied to a "customer first" ideal.

    But to think that companies are actively trying to seek ways to lower their profit in order to put the customer first seems a little idealistic. Sorta like thinking that most customers *won't* choose the cheaper of two products, all other things with the product identical. Some to have a brand loyalty, but I'm not sure most do.

  10. They still don't get it by JamJam · · Score: 2, Interesting

    These movie studios are still stuck in their old ways of doing things. They try to DMR content, for the longest time deny online streaming and basically go out of their way to stymie the consumer from what they want. Why are these studios having such a hard time moving to a new delivery model without imposing limits? Surely it's got to be more than just making an extra buck or two. Do they have a sense of entitlement and control over us?

  11. I can wait. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    eom

  12. First year economics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because WB is ignorant of economics and the idea of price discrimination, the motivation for doing this is pure hatred of consumers. Obviously Slashdot commenters cannot be wrong!

  13. messing with the free market by WarJolt · · Score: 1

    if it mattered that much then a site that only rents 28 day old wb movies would show up. I doubt that there is that much demand.

  14. 28 days diiference? Not quite. by rossdee · · Score: 1

    But then theres the shipping time. Unless you want to pay extra for overnight or 2 day shipping. If you want free super saver shipping, you can wait 10 days or so. Netflix is 2 days. So its only 20 days difference.

    1. Re:28 days diiference? Not quite. by nxtw · · Score: 1

      There are stores that sell movies other than Amazon, like Wal-Mart, Target, and Best Buy in the United States, all of which have thousands of retail locations and sell new media on the release date.

    2. Re:28 days diiference? Not quite. by rossdee · · Score: 1

      The postman brings me my Netflix movies (and Amazon purchases too)

      Walmart is over 5 miles away - I don't walk that far even in summer.
      K-Mart is within walking distance (half an hour) in summer, but it is winter now. Its upwind, and its nearly -40 wind chill outside.

    3. Re:28 days diiference? Not quite. by nxtw · · Score: 1

      Millions of Americans have no problem driving to a store, and might even drive past stores that sell new DVDs/Blu-rays daily.

    4. Re:28 days diiference? Not quite. by Paul+Carver · · Score: 1

      I hate to burst your bubble, but those distances are not invariant. It's not like the speed of light which is the same everywhere and for everyone. The distance that Walmart and KMart are from your home is absolutely irrelevant to anybody who doesn't live in your home (which at last count was almost everyone on the planet.)

      When evaluating decisions of a company with a target market of an entire country or planet it's really necessary to consider people who live outside of your own mom's basement. If you can't comprehend that, it's a pretty good indication of WHY you're living in your mom's basement.

    5. Re:28 days diiference? Not quite. by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Unsurprisingly you are likely the only person in the World with the exact restrictions of having stores at exactly those distances, not driving to them, not paying for faster shipping, not having friends to pick things up for you, and not going out anyway to buy food occasionally.

      Hence that's completely irrelevant to everyone else.

    6. Re:28 days diiference? Not quite. by rossdee · · Score: 1

      I am sure that there are people that live ecven further away from stores like Walmart, K-Mart, and Target than I do and may go to town i.e. a big city like Fargo) only once a month.

    7. Re:28 days diiference? Not quite. by nomadic · · Score: 1

      i.e. a big city like Fargo

      Ha. Big city?

  15. Great way to "prove" piracy hurts by GuerreroDelInterfaz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Really.

    People only buy movies they really, really like. The others, they rent them.

    Delaying rent will not cause people to buy them bu to download them. Thus "proving" that piracy is really, really bad, evil and unAmerican...

    It looks like they are getting smarter :-/

  16. Free market at work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you don't like this, then DONT USE THEIR SERVICE. The fact that netflix does this and is still outrageously profitable means that consumers really don't care as much as the statists on slashdot want us all to think they care.

    1. Re:Free market at work! by bensode · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have over 110 movies in my queue and I check the new releases at least once a month and add anything that appears in there that I want to see. With the 3 disk option, I am about 6-8 months behind the "new release" curve anyway. I would find it hard to believe that I am unique in this situation. I mean, I can watch 3 movies a week, maybe 4 or 5 if I really have some extra time over the wekeend. But seriously, if WB wants to make people wait 28 days, good for them. At least DVD release cycles are better than VHS back in the old days (get off my lawn?) of the 80s and 90s you had to wait a year, sometimes two for a movie to get released for rental from the local Erols ...

      --
      "Keep at least 3-6 full bottles of hard alcohol on hand, a 2 week resignation notice,..." - Poetmatt
    2. Re:Free market at work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's interesting that you call a bunch of people who are against IP laws "statists". Please tell me how copyright and patent is even remotely enforceable without some sort of government/coercive power to enforce them.

    3. Re:Free market at work! by I+cant+believe+its+n · · Score: 1

      If you don't like this, then DONT USE THEIR SERVICE.

      Ok.

      --
      She made the willows dance
  17. Piracy by whisper_jeff · · Score: 1

    Are they _TRYING_ to increase piracy of their movies? I actually think they are with a long-term view towards "See! Look! Piracy is on the rise! You MUST create new laws that enable us to control the populace's computers and media players!" I cannot imagine anybody not knowing this will increase piracy rates and, thus, I am forced to believe they're doing this with that goal intentionally in mind.

    1. Re:Piracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just like chess . . . My dumb move may encourage you to make a dumber move.

      MPAA + RIAA new business model = make product, delay product, charge outrageous fees for product, encourage copyright violation (I refuse to call anything that's not violent in the least piracy) and sue sue sue. Forget about making a product that's worth buying, hire better attorneys than your artists. The law suits are a better return on their investment, the lawyers are bought and paid for, and don't even need to be creative with their arguments anymore.

  18. Re:They are betting that their customers won't car by MWoody · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How is it a hassle? It IS a delay, but as Netflix is the only place I use to check new releases, it's one I admittedly won't notice. In return, we'll get way more instant-watch movies available, which I don't have to wait for and can watch on my laptop or two of the three consoles in the house.

    It's hardly an anti-customer strategy when they make the same choice I'd have asked them to, given the option. The only thing currently stopping Instant-Watch from being really awesome is its subpar selection. And really, if I cared about seeing the movies from Netflix soon after they came out, I'd have seen them in theaters.

  19. Resentment by vvaduva · · Score: 1

    I won't spend $30 on a movie just because they make me wait a month. They are only creating resentment and increasing the dissatisfaction customers already have. How long will they ride this wave of arrogance??

  20. Why only some rentals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can see their logic to wanting a limit on all rentals, and that you can only buy it within some window. (I don't agree with it, and I think it's stupid logic, but I can at least see why someone might agree with it.)

    But why single out Netflix vs. my neighborhood video store? Do they get any less money if I rent from one vs. the other? I mean, they both need to buy some number of copies.

  21. Back to downloading again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to download movies merciless, because:

    1) I don't want to pay for a movie I don't know if it sucks
    2) I rent movies because I don't want to commit $20-30 for something that'll take space on my shelf.
    3) Renting these days is faster than downloading, especially when I have impromptu parties/ guest

    But now, 4-16 hrs to download sure beats 672 hours (28 days).

    Good luck WB.

  22. Another legal pipeline bits the dust by fermion · · Score: 1
    So I had a choice of using Netflix or some other rental service and getting a movie around the date of availability. Sure I had to wait for a movie to come to DVD, but that generally happens pretty quickly. It wasn't a huge deal. It feels good not to break copyright, and Netflix does compete well with free.

    But now the rules have changed. Today it is a 30 day delay. Tomorrow it might 60 or 90. If one is not willing to buy a DVD, one does not get the movie. Purchase does not compete well with free.

    Sure the studios have every right to do this, but it certainly opens holes for those who are not so dedicated to the copyright. Some might buy a copy of move, rip it, and then resell it to recoup some of the money. Or just give up on the whole trying to obey the law thing and just go back to downloading tapped copies the week before the film is released to theatres.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  23. Only will work if DVD + theater = same day by davidwr · · Score: 1

    If I didn't watch it in the first few weeks in the theater, I can wait another month.

    On the other hand, if they are releasing DVD/BlueRay within a week or two of the theater release, this may be a good strategy.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  24. Awesome job! by kellin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As everyone has already pointed out, making it HARDER for customers to get YOUR product is only going to DRIVE THEM to find it another way. IE BIT TORRENT or any other piracy trend.

    This is quite clear, in the recent decision by the BBC to broadcast the recent Dr Who two-parter in the US the DAY AFTER it broadcast in the UK. Gee. What were my choices, bit torrent, or wait a WHOLE DAY to DVR it? I chose to DVR, cause it was EASIER and better to watch on my TV.

    --
    GWB to President of Brazil - "You have blacks, too?"
    1. Re:Awesome job! by zlogic · · Score: 1

      I think torrenting would actually be easier - no ads, no need to program anything, easier to create a copy for a mobile device, and no need to worry about power failures or cable provider's problems.

    2. Re:Awesome job! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm getting closer..... Just rented Pineapple Express from Netflix. Pop it in the player and wonder of wonders, ten minutes of stupid shit Sony adverts. No way to get around them.

      Pop it out of the player, pop it into the Mac, copy and rip the files to the hard drive, pick out the movie and copy it to a fresh DVD. Nice clean movie. Still a bit of a pain and getting closer to just downloading it from a torrent site.

      Keep going Sony. Nice work. Alienate even more people. You do this enough and folks that shy away from torrent sites because of legal concerns or moral concerns will find that paying you less and less gets a better product. Amazing.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:Awesome job! by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm no fan of those pre-DVD-movie ads either, but how much time does it take to put the DVD in your Mac, rip it to the hard drive, burn a new DVD and then play that one? Wouldn't it take less time to watch the 10 minutes of ads (or go to the other room and do something else while they run)? Especially if it is a rented DVD that you'll be sending back in a few days.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    4. Re:Awesome job! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      You sound so much like my wife it's not funny. Of course it takes more time.

      If you will excuse me, my wife is complaining that the toaster won't accept her login credentials again. Gotta debug that little problem....

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  25. Rogue by pete-classic · · Score: 2, Informative

    When Netflix was a rogue outfit that bought DVDs "off the shelf" and thumbed their noses at the studios it was an awesome service.

    Streaming seems to have turned them into a negotiating machine that gives the studios what they want at the expense of the Netflix customer. The result is that it has become a clearinghouse for unpopular content.

    I just tried 'em again for a month, and it has become dismal.

    -Peter

    1. Re:Rogue by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Streaming seems to have turned them into a negotiating machine that gives the studios what they want at the expense of the Netflix customer.

      WB must be giving them a massive discount on discs to do this. In theory they can parley that savings into better customer experience in other ways, maybe first-run WB content on streaming.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    2. Re:Rogue by pete-classic · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they don't even have second-run WB content on streaming.

      The streaming content absolutely sucks. There's an occasional gem due to their Starz relationship, but that's small consolation.

      -Peter

  26. Re:They are betting that their customers won't car by businessnerd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It might be risky, but I think his assessment of the average Netflix customer is fairly accurate. At least is describes me, a Netflix customer, accurately. Typically, when you hear of a movie coming out that you want to see, you add it to the queue. It's not out yet, but once it is sitting at the top of the queue ready once it becomes available. Except that movie is in high demand, so it says "Long wait" next to it. The second movie in the queue comes instead. But you don't really care, because you still want to see that movie. It's not like I'm a seven year old that has to see THAT one NOW! It will come when it's ready. In the mean time, I have a long list of movies that I have already said I want to see that will ship in its place until it is my turn. At a certain point, you stop paying attention to what's next, and you just accept what arrives in the mail. Any movie that I really really want to see, I would have already seen in the theaters. Avatar was a good example. Wanted to see badly and also appreciated the big screen experience.

    The thing that bothers me a little is how Netflix is being prioritized by the studios due to the fact that they are cheap. The article mentions the same with the RedBoxes. Both are far cheaper for the consumer than in-store rentals or on-demand from Cable/Satelite and they get the worst priority. It's as if the studios resent those customers for finding a great bargain and want to take out their anger on them. But again, if seeing that movie right away is that important, you can pay the premium to do so.

    --
    "It's not whether you win or lose, it's how drunk you get." -- H. J. Simpson
  27. It's a plan by Looce · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's a plan to make crappier movies and still make money from them.

    Some people rent movies as they come out, before they buy them, to make sure that what they buy is good movies.

    By delaying renting for a month (of February in a non-leap year), the studios are making the more impatient and impulse-buying people buy hyped movies, and you can't back out on that, unless of course you outsmart these guys and wait the month before renting the movie, deciding that it's crap and not buying it.

    Companies prey on impulse buyers. Patience is a virtue.

    1. Re:It's a plan by dreamt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree on the 2nd sentence there -- I won't buy a movie unless I've seen it. There were 1 or 2 overhyped movies that I bought prior to watching them, and never again. If they are delaying my ability to see it first, they are only delaying my ability to purchase it. And if I've waited a month after its come out already, I might as well wait a few more months for it to hit the bargain bin price. So not only have they lost out on me being able to purchase it, they've lost out on my purchasing it anywhere near the "retail" price. Good work. Epic FAIL.

    2. Re:It's a plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      99.9% of the movies that come out every year aren't worth buying. Most I watch once and I never feel the need to watch them again. I may buy one DVD a year. That's how many movies I find worthy of actually owning. Hollywood puts out mostly crap these days. You watch it and then you forget about it.

      28 days won't matter to me at all.

    3. Re:It's a plan by bensode · · Score: 1

      If I'm not mistaken it is the retailer that takes the hit for the bargain bin / reduced prices and not the studios. Retailer XYZ buys 10,000 copies of Movie A at a negotiated price from the distributor that I would bet is far below the MSRP of $19.99 on the sticker of the dvd package. I would find it hard to believe that when Walmart sells a movie for $19.99 that they paid even one quarter of that price for it.

      --
      "Keep at least 3-6 full bottles of hard alcohol on hand, a 2 week resignation notice,..." - Poetmatt
    4. Re:It's a plan by dreamt · · Score: 1

      I am guessing that the price that the retailer pays for a movie for comes down over time as well, but that is just a guess. I mean, you have all of these $2.99 and $3.99 movies, I'm sure that the retailer didn't pay more than $1 or $2 for them to begin with.

  28. Just Say No to revenue by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The studio is hoping that the four-week window will push consumers interested in watching movies at home to..

    ..check the torrent sites.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  29. Perhaps I'm the only one, but... by Knara · · Score: 1

    I really don't need to see "new releases" right away in order to feel like I'm connected in some social sense. Would it be nice? Sure, but it's no more a grand conspiracy against movie consumers than limited-time platform exclusive video game releases are against video game consumers.

    I'm sure someone will find a flaw in my logic.

  30. Like it really matters with netflix by shemp42 · · Score: 1

    Like this matters! Who can ever get new releases from Netlix when they come out? Every time I add a new movie that is popular(I.E. The Hangover) it sits in my queue with the words "Very Long Wait" for three months. So its not really an issue. Who has Netflix for new releases?

    1. Re:Like it really matters with netflix by bensode · · Score: 1

      When movies hit theatres or are just starting the marketing wave of trailers everywhere, I look the movie up on Netflix and "Save" it. Queue management can be handy -- you'll notice eventually that there is a release date listed next to the saved items that are coming due and they will auto-populate into your queue. Keep an eye on it and pop it to the top when it does. I've gotten a few movies within a few days after release date whereas a couple people at work still had "long wait" or "very long wait" because they added it to their queue after or right on infamous DVD Tuesday.

      --
      "Keep at least 3-6 full bottles of hard alcohol on hand, a 2 week resignation notice,..." - Poetmatt
  31. Oh Jeez Not this Shit Again by rudy_wayne · · Score: 1

    forcing consumers to wait nearly a month if they want to rent popular movies from Netflix

    Well boo fucking hoo. Hey fatass. Get off the couch and do something besides watch TV all day.

  32. Re:They are betting that their customers won't car by Knara · · Score: 1

    How is it a hassle? It IS a delay, but as Netflix is the only place I use to check new releases, it's one I admittedly won't notice. In return, we'll get way more instant-watch movies available, which I don't have to wait for and can watch on my laptop or two of the three consoles in the house.

    Yeah, I use Netflix almost exclusively to stream movies these days. A delay in new releases is almost unnoticeable to me, since if I wanted to see it, I would have seen it in the theater.

    Plus, Netflix has some awesome indie crap-gems on Instant for those of us who love to watch bad movies with friends.

  33. Cant be any bigger argument for piracy by unity100 · · Score: 1

    "It's part of a strategy by several studios to create staggered releases of DVDs so that the most profitable transactions are available first and cheaper rental options take effect further down the road"

    a quite elaborate marketerspeak for "a new way to rape the customer". and then they come complain about piracy ...

  34. Silver lining by bdrewery · · Score: 1, Informative

    The summary forgets to mention that in return for the 28 day delay, WB is opening its library to Netflix for streaming. For the cheap price this service costs, waiting 4 weeks to see a crappy movie which I've already waited months to see since it was in theaters, really isn't a big deal.

    1. Re:Silver lining by chrispitude · · Score: 1

      I'm a Netflix customer. I'm much happier about the greatly improved streaming options, and could care less about a 4-week delay of new releases. I've got several dozen unwatched movies on my list at any given time anyway. In my mind, Netflix pulled a fast one on Warner on behalf of the customer. Good move, Netflix.

    2. Re:Silver lining by bdrewery · · Score: 0

      Yup, same here. Rarely am I getting a new release even in the first few *months* let alone 4 weeks. I've got a queue full of stuff, along with quite a bit in instant streaming queue. Love this news.

    3. Re:Silver lining by svendsen · · Score: 1

      Same here. I have so many movies queued on streaming and DVD/Blu-Ray it really doesn't matter to me. It just means there are going to be even more movies to see streaming which will be great!

      I wonder how many people complaining use netflix and/r the streaming service?

  35. Re:The smell of smug is overwhelming by nxtw · · Score: 1

    Netflix subscriptions cost money.

    The people who get free content won't have to deal with this restriction; many DVD/Blu-ray rips are available online before the retail release date anyway.

  36. It won't make one bit of difference by EyesofWolf · · Score: 1

    It's not going to make any difference. I don't know about any of you, but I wait that long for my movies anyways when they are new releases. Just about every new release that is even moderately popular gets listed as "Very Long Wait" for a few weeks. So, I'm already waiting. I think the record was for the latest season of Dexter - I think it was three months after it was released on DVD when I saw the first disc. So... meh.

    --
    "A wolf's eyes can see into your soul"
    My writing
  37. doesn't matter by RingDev · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you are waiting for the movie to show up on Netflix, it won't matter if it comes out 1 day after the theatrical release, 6 months after, or 6 months +28 days.

    I'm perfectly fine living 6+ months in the past for movies, so long as those AAA movies are still making it into my queue eventually.

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    1. Re:doesn't matter by tepples · · Score: 1

      I'm perfectly fine living 6+ months in the past for movies

      But are you perfectly fine living 95+ years in the past for movies, which is what will happen once the studios get their way?

    2. Re:doesn't matter by RingDev · · Score: 1

      Nope. I'm fine with content owners exerting their copy rights to form binding contracts for the distribution of their content in a profitable way.

      I'm not ok with copy rights that extend more than 25 years or 10 years from the death of the (last remaining) author, which ever is shorter.

      I'm all for people making a profit, but lets not take that out of context. IP laws in this country (and largely the world) are getting more and more absurd.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    3. Re:doesn't matter by fm6 · · Score: 1

      I think most Netflix customers feel that way. If we didn't, all the delays involved in getting DVDs that way would be intolerable.

      I personally don't even let the hot releases get to the top of my queue until they've cooled off. If an in-demand disc is at the top of your queue, it will often be delayed for a day or two become it was mailed from a non-local distribution center and/or delayed while more discs come in. Because Netflix only sends me non-hot discs, they almost always go out the same day the returned disc came in, and I get more discs without paying more.

  38. The upside for Netflix (and us) by Stealth+Dave · · Score: 3, Informative

    The summary did not mention what Netflix gets out of the deal: more on-demand content. From the article:

    Although Warner's unilateral move against Redbox has led to a court battle, Netflix agreed to the 28-day window in exchange for improved financial terms and more content for its Internet streaming service. (my emphasis)

    As someone who has Netflix Instant Queue available directly on my television (thanks, TiVo), I'm more than happy to wait another month for a latest release if it means I can decide on a Thursday evening that I'd rather watch "Big Movie A" instead of "Big Movie B" without having to wait 2 days (one day to mail back, one day to receive) to see it.

    --
    Evil is as eval("does");
    1. Re:The upside for Netflix (and us) by shirotakaaki · · Score: 1

      By "more content for its Internet streaming service this just means more content from the WB library. For all we know this is movies from the 1960s or 1970s, I love old movies but why they were not on there already is just artificial scarcity.

  39. Why can they do this legally? by BatsShadow · · Score: 1

    Doesn't Netflix have the same rights as anyone else to buy new releases? Am I allowed to buy movies and charge other people to borrow them or is that a special right not granted by law but instead licensed by the studios to rental services?

    1. Re:Why can they do this legally? by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Netflix isn't being forced. They're entering into an agreement with pros and cons.

    2. Re:Why can they do this legally? by Pontiac · · Score: 1

      It's not that Netflix can't buy the movies.. They can't get them at the discount they need for 4 weeks.
      I doubt this was Netflix's choice either.. The studios already tried this with Redbox

      Ya know what Redbox did? They started getting DVDs from Walmat..

      --
      If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur. --Red Adair
    3. Re:Why can they do this legally? by schlesinm · · Score: 1

      They made a deal with the studio to get more streaming movies in exchange for holding back for 4 weeks. I think Netflix had a choice and decided this worked better for them

    4. Re:Why can they do this legally? by bensode · · Score: 1

      Yeah I was pissed when I went to a RedBox to get a couple movies for my kid's birthday party. I rarely used RedBox in the last 6 months but I see they stealthily changed the pricing to "first night $2" when I got my email invoice the next morning. No signs, no obvious prompts on the display. Sneaky sneaky sneaky ... but no more RedBox for me since I got burned unexpectedly. Love my NetFlix have had it for years ...

      --
      "Keep at least 3-6 full bottles of hard alcohol on hand, a 2 week resignation notice,..." - Poetmatt
  40. hmmmmm by Dark4Sorrow · · Score: 1

    28 Days Later? Wasn't that a movie already?

  41. Re:They are betting that their customers won't car by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems like it might work, considering how most people I know use Netflix. You hear of a movie, you queue it up, it eventually comes. Sometimes it comes sooner, sometimes later, depending on release dates, availability, whether you move things above it, etc. I'm guessing lots of people won't really notice this extra factor determining availability, especially since new releases on Netflix are already often delayed due to the not-enough-copies thing giving them a "long wait" status. If you queue up new movies when they're in theatres, and then forget about doing so, you might not even notice when it's released to DVD until it actually shows up in your mailbox.

  42. Just when you thought they couldn't get dumber... by Perp+Atuitie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Amazing. Could it possibly be that a whole bunch of former customers will just forget they were ever interested? Are they going to move back the window for showing on on-demand and premium cable, too? When 95 percent of the product you produce is utter crap, each mostly indistinguishable from all the other pieces of crap, it sure makes sense to make yours harder to get. Of course when the obvious an inevitable effects are felt it will all be the pirates' fault, or some woman videoing a theater party.

  43. Who do they expect to buy into this? by VeritasRoss · · Score: 1

    Any movie that I could possibly want enough to buy, I would have already seen at the theater. For any movie that I just saw in the theater, I can certainly wait an additional month before I have to see again.

    --
    If my post were a car, this sig would be its bumper-sticker.
  44. Re:They are betting that their customers won't car by BobMcD · · Score: 1

    Don't most Netflix customers have to wait to get new releases anyway? You queue them up and are pleasantly surprised when they arrive in your mailbox. No loss of instant gratification when there was none in the first place.

  45. Illegal restraint of trade - loss of copyright by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure the big guys are not going to see the title as a threat.
    But it sure seems to me the big giants are wielding their market share as near monopolists to manipulate the free market.

    If you or I can buy the DVD then Netflix should be able to buy the DVD and rent it. Sure this is more digital rights oriented. But this is still the big guys throwing their weight around for losses of freedom for the consumer. This is just a time lock added on top of region coding.

    Time for some tea party like action. Either they stop with the artificial trade barriers or the company loses all copyrights.

  46. Why this is not going to work by joeszilagyi · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It didn't work before, as mentioned elsewhere, with artificial scarcity in the VHS rental days. It won't work now either with the DVD days. Why?

    NOTE: My wife and I have SEVEN full bookshelves of DVD & Blu-Ray. We're movie nuts. We love to watch them. We love to go back and watch ones we particularly like. If they're good, we'll buy multiple editions we want--I've bought two copies of Iron Man, two full sets of Lord of the Rings, and lord knows how many Star Wars. I'll rebuy the latter two on Blu-Ray when they come out. I like to think we're the model of good customers. I don't bit torrent films because unlike some I like the way it looks on the shelf. The same as I like the way my books look on the shelf. Screw E-readers and stacks of ripped discs.

    We also consume Netflix and Comcast OnDemand ravenously, and sometimes the Amazon download rental service or the local actual DVD rental store. Why?

    I don't want to buy EVERY film I see. Some I'm fine with only seeing the once. I don't know if I'll like it. We only go to 10-15 films a year maximum in theaters (probably a lot compared to most). It's one of our main hobbies. Do I buy every film I see in theater on disc? Of course not. Half of them I'll never want to see again because they're either not memorable, not important to me, or total shit. Do I buy films that I've rented? ABSOLUTELY! All of them? Absolutely not! I recently watched GI Joe on a flight. Then we downloaded it on Amazon on a lark. My wife loved it, and she hates that sort of film. Now I want to buy it on Blu-Ray--why? It's fun, and it's a fun film you can watch again and toss on with company over to show off the pretty HDTV and laugh about the heinous execution of our childhood memories of GI Joe. Most importantly, again:

    It's rewatchable.

    Put out consistently quality, engaging films. Aim for every film to be Oscar caliber in some way. That doesn't mean every film has to have an Avatar budget or 99% of the Royal Shakespeare Company in the speaking cast. Pay for a good script. It doesn't have to be a great film--see my GI Joe example above. It's not a great film, but visually? Amazing, and rewatchable for sheer fun with people over. Pay for a good director. Pay for good lighting, decent CGI, good cinematograpy. Make films people will ****WANT**** to see more than once. You many music CDs I've bought in my life for one track that, after I played that track several times, I never listened to that CD ever, ever again? The same thing. Your trailer may be ace--but the film shit. Don't make shit films, and I'll be more likely to buy them. I'm sure the same goes for everyone else too.

    Most importantly, don't piss on your devoted customers that pay your salaries. Rentals drive sales. Quality films drive sales. Crap product to simply have a release will never drive sales.

    You ever notice how each week we get 3-5 new major film releases? You ever notice how 3-4 of them are substandard to the others? I think they're put out as loss leaders. You put out shit like that, and then complain that people don't all buy your annual release catalog on DVD? What did you expect would happen?

    You work at our pleasure. We don't watch your products at yours.

    --
    Dude, where's my packet?
    1. Re:Why this is not going to work by malp · · Score: 1

      We also consume Netflix and Comcast OnDemand ravenously, and sometimes the Amazon download rental service or the local actual DVD rental store. Why?

      Lack of something better to do? Addictive personality?

    2. Re:Why this is not going to work by joeszilagyi · · Score: 1

      It's called a hobby, one of many we have.

      --
      Dude, where's my packet?
  47. How about being reasonable and seeing both sides? by Tuan121 · · Score: 1

    I'm not one to argue this viewpoint usually, but I think it's kind of scary to imagine the near future when any piece of media we want is so dirtcheap that it can't fund the people making it. Or heck, even fund some of them fairly well. We need incentives out there. Sure it can create some crap media/art/whatever else, but it's pretty lame if everyone just takes everything for granted and thinks they should be able to just click and have full access, for extremely cheap, to what people put a hell of a lot of time into (and all the fixed costs over the years that have developed all the technologies for the amazing stuff we have now).

    Sorry but I think the only people being greedy here are those that expect everything for free/near free.

    If we lived in a Star Trek world with so many resources/easy of manufacturing where no one had to worry about doing something to just "get by" comfortably*, then of course the drive would be purely intellectual/personal satisfaction, etc. Yes that is ultra geeky/optimistic, but come on, this is slashdot (well, about the geekyness.. not so sure most of you are optimists).

    *Counterpoint: one may argue we are somewhat reaching that stage. I wonder how many people out there have their plasmas, surround sound systems, game systems, powerful computers that we probably didn't dream the average person could afford not too long ago... (and the insane amount of awesome open source software out there!)

  48. Re:They are betting that their customers won't car by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Netflix customers are used to waiting. You rarely get new releases within a month of release anyway. Harry Potter has been on the top of my queue since before it came out and I still haven't seen it (nor do I care). If Netflix can get more copies of the dvd for the same or less price a month after release than they would have gotten release day, average wait time over all customers may actually go down.

  49. Re:What a great idea! Not so fast, little cowboy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Netflix streaming box will then become the de facto "Warner Cable Channel". First a 28 day delay, then a 45 day delay, then if you pay "a little extra each month" there will only be a 14 day delay, etc. Then they will start putting ads and coming attractions on it that you can't skip through. Then it will become the Netflix Cable Channel as the studios compete with each other for face time for their products. You might want to see if Netflix stock is available before Microsoft or Google buys them and profit as history repeats itself.

  50. Redbox isn't doing this by keithpreston · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Redbox sure isn't waiting 28 days on Warner Brother release (or Universal). I saw the Hangover(WB release) just a few days after the December 18th release from a redbox. From a previous post someone said that their brother works for Redbox and basically buys every copy from every walmart in the area at midnight and stock machines. If you don't sell to Redbox, they basically with use the First Sale Doctrine without you.

    Netflix really only has a few reasons for doing this. They know streaming is the future, and they need to reduce costs to be more profitable. Netflix basically don't have much real competition left and have a lot of momentum. So now they are just focusing on profitability rather then growth and competition.

    1. Re:Redbox isn't doing this by LandDolphin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Redbox used to be able to pre-order (Like other rental companies and retail stores) so that they could have the machines stocked and ready to go on the release day. Now they've lost that privilage and have in turn resorted to purchasing copies from walmart, etc.

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
  51. Citation needed by tepples · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "The owner of a lawfully made copy" is the rental shop. The copyright owner's exclusive right to distribute ends the moment the rental shop buys the copy, and the rental shop can do what it wants short of making further copies or holding a public screening. If you disagree with my analysis, I'd love to see you cite some U.S. circuit court cases interpreting 17 USC 109 in a way favorable to the studios.

  52. Streaming is Greater Than (Throttled)Mailed DVDs by stardude82 · · Score: 1

    More streaming is a better deal on Netflix than media because of the de facto limits they put on DVD by throttling. Netflix made the right deal, for me. It's nice to see the "classic" films on my queue come up with the blue "play" button.

    So on the other hand I'm sure Netflix will get a lot of forgettable titles. Warner Bro.'s has put a lot of effort into digitizing their extensive library for archival purposes and therefore it won't be any skin off of WB's back to give them tons of crap nobody's really interested in.

  53. Fuck this, I'm pirating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too long has the entertainment industry fucked us. Too long have we been worshiping the most shallow and least-useful people on the planet. Fuck them, and by them I mean execs and artists alike. Fuck them all. I used to side with the artists, but they aren't even lifting a finger to protect themselves, so fuck them. Everybody is in it for the money and there is no art left it seems. I for one will pirate every movie or album I buy as long as its not completely indie. I choose to vote with my wallet even if it means breaking the law. The law (pertaining to the entertainment industry) is fucked, just like the industry.

    If a suit has a payday, I pirate. Fuck them. I want all my money to go to the people who make the art (AND IT MUST BE FUCKING ART! Not bullshit remakes and hacks). Art cannot be a business, ever. Yes, artists can make money but the true artist doesn't create to make money. They create because they are compelled to do so. Because they are artists. Fuck the corporate art farms. Fuck movie stars who think they need more money. Fuck directors that add explosions to make a buck off of meatheads. Fuck musicians that ride pop trends for the sake of profit. Fuck every single TV network. Fuck news outlets who sensationalize everything. Fuck this fabricated society full of fakes, frauds, and assholes.

    1. Re:Fuck this, I'm pirating by pclminion · · Score: 1

      Ooooh! You're so.... SOPHISTICATED!

      You are a tool. They've got you hooked on the good smack, and you can't stop watching it. But go ahead, go on hating the shit out of them anyway.

      By the way, congrats on your upcoming graduation from high school. What is it, two years away or three?

  54. Extremely long wait; ETA: January 1, 2042 by tepples · · Score: 1

    Except that movie is in high demand, so it says "Long wait" next to it. The second movie in the queue comes instead. But you don't really care, because you still want to see that movie. It's not like I'm a seven year old that has to see THAT one NOW!

    How do you feel when several films in your queue say things like "Extremely long wait; ETA: January 1, 2042"?

  55. God DAMMIT by Bluesman · · Score: 1

    Now I'm going to have to wait in the long line to buy Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants.

    --
    If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
  56. shrug by greymond · · Score: 1

    It's not like I'm going to buy or pay for the movie anyway....

  57. If it's good, then it will be good in 28 days by Simonetta · · Score: 4, Funny

    But "28 Days Later" wasn't that good.

        If there's a 'must-see' then we don't know about it until it's out of the first-run theaters. How else are you going to know that the film is good? People that go to first run movies, spend $10 each for tickets, $25 for babysitter, $5 for popcorn, and $4 for popcorn aren't going to tell you that the movie wasn't anything but good. And the second week people are always going to say the film is good to prove that they can wait for quality.

        No, you gotta wait until the movie reaches the second-run $3 theaters. If it isn't any good then it won't get to these theaters. The studio will blitz the opening night with deceptive ads for a turkey and then go straight to DVD.

        If it's a real 'must-see' then just watch the previews/trailers until you know the whole movie. Your average Hollywood movie can have its entire look/feel/plot experienced in a three minute preview (Spiderman III, Superman Ten, anyone?).

        Nah, If it's worth seeing, then it's worth waiting for the DVD. And if it's really good, then it will make it to the library shelf where it will be free for a week or more.

        And if it's great, then it's timeless quality. So why not wait a year or two to see it? What difference does it make? Now's the time to go to the library and check out for free all the excellent movies that you decided not to see because you didn't want to spend $10 on an independent or foreign film when it was in the theaters.

        Myself, I always save the best for last. Maybe this week I'll watch this movie called 'Star Wars' that I've been hearing people rave about for so long.

    1. Re:If it's good, then it will be good in 28 days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe this week I'll watch this movie called 'Star Wars' that I've been hearing people rave about for so long.

      Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father. There, I saved you a trip to the library.

    2. Re:If it's good, then it will be good in 28 days by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      But "28 Days Later" wasn't that good.

      Just FYI, the sequel "28 Weeks Later" was much better. Strangely.

    3. Re:If it's good, then it will be good in 28 days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if it's great, then it's timeless quality. So why not wait a year or two to see it? What difference does it make?

      I know what you mean, I waited almost a full 2 years to watch the sixth sense and I can't imagine the movie being any different than it would have been had I watched it before finding out the plot and ending of the movie.

  58. Re:The smell of smug is overwhelming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Straw man arguments are lies.

  59. 28 days by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Waiting 28 days? OMGWTF?!? That's unconstitutional! Call a waaaaghmbulance!!!!!

    Check the January sales - you might find a good deal on a sense of proportion.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  60. You won't get an answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The post you are replying to is libertarian propaganda. It doesn't have to make sense or be honest, it just has to whine about "OMG teh gummint!" and it satisfies them.

  61. Streamed video is crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll gladly wait to rent the Blu-Ray.

  62. Who the hell by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    Watches a movie the year it's out, anyway?

    It'll keep. And you'd be surprised how cheap it is once the hype is over...

  63. They think a delay will make me buy the movie? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    I think they overestimate the value their movies have to me. If seeing the movie was that important, I'd have gone to the theater in the first place - and I haven't done that in probably five years. This idea, like much of what appears to pass as thinking on the part of the movie studios, is just silly.

    But the "bright side" that the article mentions in passing - the increased availability of WB movies via Netflix streaming - actually is a huge plus in my mind.

    So in total: I think the big winner of this "confrontation" - a confrontation forced by the studios, mind you - is going to be Netflix.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  64. 28 days ... not a huge deal. Plus more streaming. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While artificially limiting is generally bad, it's only 4 weeks. This isn't 6 months to 5 years like in the VHS days.

    And out of it we will likely see more WB movies on Netflix and other legit streaming/download services. It sounds like movies will be on multiple "pay" streaming/download services day one. This is a good thing. IMHO I think this will reduce piracy from some people who can easily get a high quality downlaod for a rental fee ... if they really want it day one. If they don't want/need it day one they can wait on Netflix 28 day limit.

    While I would argue that 2 weeks is a better timeframe. 1 month fits in better with the financial tracking of sales.

  65. Re:The smell of smug is overwhelming by freshmayka · · Score: 1

    The people who get free content have to deal with.... wait for it...

    BREAKING THE FUCKING LAW

  66. Already done @ Redbox . . . did not notice by chasisaac · · Score: 1

    Oops, I did not notice that WB already does this to RedBox. I rent all my movies from RedBox. I guess they are really sticking it to me.

    --
    -- A computer without Windoze is like a choclate cake without mustard
  67. Re:They are betting that their customers won't car by crackspackle · · Score: 1

    It IS a delay, but as Netflix is the only place I use to check new releases, it's one I admittedly won't notice

    If that's all you check, then you are probably already waiting a month or more for new movies already. Have a check and see if you can find "Terminator: Salvation" or "Inglorious Basterds". They are available but you have to know they are released and search for them manually, like almost any other new movie. They "hide" them initially to keep everyone from ordering them at the same time. That's why I always have some other site open like Amazon that lists all the popular new releases while browsing Netflix. I guess that won't work now.

    From the article, the real injured party in all of this other than possibly consumers is RedBox. Unlike Netflix, the delays were foisted on them by WB and other studios without any favorable terms. I'd like to know more details about it but it seems like RB has a pot of gold waiting for them at the end of their lawsuit.

  68. Re:They are betting that their customers won't car by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just boycott their products... all of them.. including their TV channels and shows..

    then see what happens..

  69. Foot..... meet bazooka..... by ogdenk · · Score: 1

    So why do they want Netflix to die and PirateBay to have one more good reason to exist?

  70. Re:They are betting that their customers won't car by Facegarden · · Score: 1

    How is it a hassle? It IS a delay, but as Netflix is the only place I use to check new releases, it's one I admittedly won't notice. In return, we'll get way more instant-watch movies available, which I don't have to wait for and can watch on my laptop or two of the three consoles in the house.

    It's hardly an anti-customer strategy when they make the same choice I'd have asked them to, given the option. The only thing currently stopping Instant-Watch from being really awesome is its subpar selection. And really, if I cared about seeing the movies from Netflix soon after they came out, I'd have seen them in theaters.

    You say it's good because you'd rather have more instant watch movies, but you're assuming that increasing the amount of instant watch movies can only happen if they delay rentals, which isn't true.

    Increasing the number of instant-watch movies is a good decision, but that doesn't somehow make delaying rentals a good idea - it doesn't have to be one or the other, but the studios are making it that way because they don't understand consumers.

    For a random analogy: If a gunman shoots my dog, and then tells me he was going to shoot me but decided to shoot my dog instead,that doesn't make the gunman's motives any less cruel or acceptable, even though I would have chosen the same thing, given the choice between my life or my dog's. You'd choose more insta-watch movies over getting rentals sooner, but that doesn't mean that it was the best decision.

    I'd rather just have my movies any way I want. I don't mind paying for some kind of rental (like Netflix, which I have) but I'm NOT going to go out and buy every movie I want to watch, I have other expenses that matter more.
    -Taylor

    --
    Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
  71. It's about the streaming by Kelson · · Score: 2, Informative

    Netflix agreed to this because they are getting a discount on their DVD purchases and letting them cut costs.

    I'm sure that's a big part of it...but the press release also mentioned that WB is giving them access to more of its catalog for their streaming service.

    With physical DVDs, if WB refuses to sell directly to Netflix, they can always send someone to Costco, buy a bunch of DVDs, and rent them under the first sale doctrine. With streaming, they need an active contract with WB to do it (legally) at all. If WB decides not to renew that contract...well, there goes their streaming service. Or at least anything from Warner Bros.

  72. "Please torrent our movies!" by Spewns · · Score: 1

    $30-40 for a brand new Blu Ray disc from your local store. $20+ still for a new DVD, for crying out loud. Repeated attacks on even legal avenues for accessing content (as this article points out). Who can really fucking afford to be a movie buff?

  73. Netflix subscription question. by antdude · · Score: 1

    Does Netflix have an on-demand payment instead of subscription? I do not watch a lot of movies and TV shows to rent. From its Web site, it seems like I have to subscribe to download/rent stuff. :(

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    1. Re:Netflix subscription question. by Yosho · · Score: 1

      Nope. That's their entire business model, really -- for a flat fee per month, you get as many movies as you can watch.

      --
      Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
  74. Doesn't matter.. much. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

    But, you'd better do another advertising blitz around the time it's actually available for me the way I plan on viewing it. If I forget I wanted to see your movie, I don't really consider that a loss. That's just more time for more productive hobbies.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  75. blockbuster express by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I started with netflix, then went to redbox after I had seen all my legacy movies... now I use blockbusterexpress to get new releases for the same price as redbox. blockbusterexpress doesn't have online availability info, but that doesn't matter when I pickup movies on Tuesday morning on my way to work. Sorry redbox, but you have gone the way of netflix.

  76. Advertising... by evilviper · · Score: 1

    The problem with trying to get people you buy your movie is that it costs 6X as much as renting it, so you are eliminating a large impulse-buy crowd.

    The theory, of course, is that they'll just rent it a month later. But that ignores advertising... The reason DVD releases have been moved up is because they want the first round of big-budget advertising to be fresh in your mind when they're pitching the DVD... Now, are they going to launch a 3rd round of ads, to promote the rental? Definitely not. So they're pretty well guaranteed to lose out on a big chunk of rentals, and the infamous Blockbuster entire wall covered with copies of a new release.

    I'm in the crowd that really doesn't care if I see most movies months later... Some of my favorite films often pre-date me, and they're good despite being on the shelf for decades and decades. Still, I think it's a pretty cynical and short-sighted strategy. Often times, those with the money have to be FORCED by powers beyond their control, to do something that is MORE PROFITABLE FOR THEM, because they don't happen to see it, or just have a deep dislike for the changes in the market they used-to know.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  77. Stupid. by cyn1c77 · · Score: 1

    If I have the patience to skip the theater showing and wait 6 months for the DVD to come out, I have the patience to wait another month for Netflix to rent it.

    Maybe if WB made some movies that were actually great instead of OK, people would buy more DVDs.

  78. Or they will forget about the movies altogether by assertation · · Score: 1

    Seriously, maybe my friends and I are atypical, but we have lives and if there is too big of a hiatus in mediocre ( or even good entertainment ) there is a chance we will forget about it.

    I can't tell you how many television series I have lost track of when they went on hiatus for months at a time.

  79. Renting as a test for buying by assertation · · Score: 1

    Many movies are okay, but just okay. I usually don't buy a DVD unless I've rented it, cheaply and know from watching it that I will want to watch it several more times in my life.

    By prolonging the time I have to wait to see a DVD I may just forget about it altogether.

    If a movie is good enough (rare these days ) for me to keep track of its availability, I will go see it in the theater.

  80. Who cares? by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

    I've got 200-300 items in my Netflix queue. Who cares whether I can see the latest WB picture now or a month from now... it will probably be next year before I get around to it anyway.

    This kind of marketing only works if your customers are crazed, slobbering idiots and you'll only do it if you hold your customers in utter contempt. I won't deny that there may be Warner Brothers movies I want to see, but what's the rush? I've got other things to do and other things to watch.

    I utilize Netflix primarily to catch up on all those classics I never saw. I watched "On the Waterfront" the other week and loved it. If the movie is good today, it will be good in a month or a year... or 50 years.

    There are a hundred years' worth of good movies that are available today.

    I can wait.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  81. Reversal of History by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is absolutely fascinating. Back in the day, "club" prices were for rental companies or wealthier consumers who wanted the first release of a movie to VHS/beta. They would purchase a VHS tape at $90-$100 to be able to rent it *before* the average consumer could buy it. This gave rental companies the advantage. Now, they want to discourage rentals in favour of initial purchases.

  82. Pirating by Hamsterdan · · Score: 1

    Another genius idea from the studios. And how's this supposed to reducepiracy how exactly? THat's just giving people *another* reason to download instead.

    --
    I've got better things to do tonight than die.
  83. Well for this to really matter... by Grimster · · Score: 1

    They're gonna have to release some movies that are so good I can't wait another month for. Here lately, they haven't managed that feat very often. Frankly I can count on one hand the # of movies released in the last year where another 28 days would really bother me.

    Those movies I'll just pirate as soon as a good dvd rip is available anyway, it's rare even without the 28 day wait for a dvd rip not to beat the dvd release by several days.

    --
    --- www.f-theocean.com
  84. Re:They are betting that their customers won't car by kramerd · · Score: 1

    I dont get the logic.

    We will make you wait longer for movies, therefore you will have access to more movies...

    Damn, why did netflix take so long to come up with this?

  85. Just a little aside by ILuvRamen · · Score: 1

    Since they mentioned Redbox, I think the 28 day delay is just the time it takes to get a damn DVD out of it sucessfully lol. My parents were sitting outside a Walgreens waiting for me to shop and they said every single person who went up to the DVD rental thingy took forever and then eventually left, looking pissed off and without a DVD in their hand :P Which brings me to my point that they're not just saving the most profitable methods for immediate release but saving the second rate ways for later. Just think, the crappier, cheaper theater near me is on like a 2 month delay. Now it'll be where you can go pick up a personally owned, complete-in box, non-used copy immediately the same day or you could wait for shipping time to get it from Netflix. Now they just tacked on 28 days on top of the delayed, used disc rental system. So really if you REALLY want to see the movie and are REALLY excited or whatever, you REALLY have to spend more money to get it in a better format or with less effort etc. If you kinda don't care and want to spend less, you wait. I don't think there's anything too abnormal about that business model. It's sort of the same as pricing on graphics cards falling over time. If you're not THAT excited about the card, you wait the usual waiting period until it's cheaper.

    --
    Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
  86. Proof that piracy loss calculations are wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's my reasoning: by this move, WB implicitly admits that there are people who just wouldn't buy the product at full price (i.e. cinema ticket or DVD purchase). Those people will, at most, be willing to pay only a very cheap rental price, and that's why WB accepts to sell at a lower price after 28 day - better to make a small sell than nothing at all. Therefore when someone "pirates" a movie, the studio looses, at most, only the revenue from a rental, not the revenue from a full DVD sale. Q.E.D. On a side note, when will a Netflix-like service be available in Europe? (I'm talking similar offering and similar pricing). The studios are so obtuse about their geographical licensing BS that they are blocking a pretty large market. They are loosing money on their own stupidity.

  87. Cartmanland by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/152804

    "...and the best part is: you can't come!"

  88. Delay? What delay? by Roogna · · Score: 1

    My wife and I are a good example of what the studios are missing I think. If we -really- want to see a movie, we see it opening night in the theater. Anything not seen opening night that we want to see just ends up stuck on our Netflix queue. At that point it's already months before Netflix will have it to send out anyway, another month, or even three isn't going to be noticed at all. It shows up when it shows up. If we love a movie in the theater, or even get something from Netflix and like it, then we tend to buy a copy. But even if we're going to buy it from having seen it in the theater, then it's a movie we would never have gotten from Netflix anyway as we already decided we liked it enough to own. If we buy it after seeing it from Netflix, well we wouldn't have bought it before seeing it in the first place. So either way our Netflix queueing, and viewing of movies hasn't changed a lick, no matter how much the studios would want to delay them from getting movies.

  89. That's too bad... by PerfectionLost · · Score: 1

    I hope TN gets the interweb soon so those citizens can enjoy the wonder of netflix.

  90. Only 28 days would be an improvment by RapmasterT · · Score: 1

    I don't know about everyone else, but I haven't gotten a new release from Netflix in under a month in at least a year. If I look in my queue now, EVERY movie that was released less than a year ago is in "very long wait" to "long wait" status. In fact, it's to the point right now that my "four at a time" plan hasn't resulted in actually having four movies out at a time in a month. Netflix is having delivery problems, add on top of that gouging for Bluray "access" (with no promise of actually delivering any) and now release delays, I'm seeing their days numbered.

  91. Note to Self... by olsonde · · Score: 1

    Don't buy any Blu Rays or DVD's from any publisher who denies me the ability to satiate my Netflix fix on the day the new movie is available for sale.

    I will never buy a WB Blu Ray or DVD again. Period.