Slashdot Mirror
Warner Bros: New Program To Digitize Your DVDs
shoutingloudly writes "Warner Brothers has just announced a new 'Disc-to-Digital' program to convert your DVDs into digital files that you can play on your internet-connected computers. As the helpful Public Knowledge graphics demonstrate, all you have to do is find a participating store, drive there, pay again for your movie, wait while it's ripped for you, drive home, and hope it works. This will surely have tech-savvy movie fans saying, 'Brilliant! I've been looking for an excuse to uninstall this free, 1-step DVD ripper that I can use in the comfort of my own home. This is much better than DMCA reform.'"
In exchange for paying a bit more you might get a higher resolution copy (DRM encumbered and stored in "the cloud"). The launch process is absurdly cumbersome, but: "Later on, Internet retailers like Amazon.com will email customers to offer digital copies of DVDs they previously bought. Eventually, consumers will be able to put DVDs into PCs or certain Blu-ray players that will upload a copy, similar to the way people turn music CDs into MP3 files." Will the video distributors ever offer DRM-free files that you own? The music industry doesn't seem to be any worse off than they were when they insisted upon DRM.
The self destructing DVDs weren't a terrible idea. It allowed a rental model without having to return them. This would have made it a consumer convenience.
The problem is public acceptance. I think people have a natural belief that the cost of buying something is related to the cost to make it. If they can buy exactly the same thing for less, but they're paying extra to have it not be deliberately sabotaged. Even if they do understand the business model it's hard to shake this feeling of being fleeced.
The MPAA and RIAA have been playing the shell game of leasing and owning content with consumers for years. They might have finally stuck their foot in it.
The RIAA is currently going after digital music re-sellers with the argument that consumers licensed the music use and do not own the asset for re-sale. Recently musicians have taken notice of the case because they get a one time payment for each sale. Treating the sale as a license means they are being grossly underpaid.
Now Warner is going to legally re-define your DVD from a sale to a digital license. I have a feeling many of the hundreds of people involved in creating each film will have an opinion about this.
The following is not my stance.
It does a couple things:
1. It shows there are alternatives to piracy so that "I have no alternative" isn't valid anymore.
2. #1 allows legislatures to lay down laws that are harsh since there are alternatives.
3. It's a labor intensive process that will make someone say why bother my time is worth more. Then the option of buying through some internet portal is made available at slightly higher price than conversion. win - win.. right?!?
4. profit off the docile and persecute the unbelievers.
Beware of those who profit off the docile and persecute the unbelievers.
I'm not protesting it ... but I'm not going there until I have no other choice.
I want my media contained on my machine, and in a way that doesn't require an internet connection or make it possible for someone to decide that I've "unbought" it.
I'm not paying my ISP for the bandwidth to download something I already have ... I for one will not be putting anything into the cloud, because you basically lose control over it.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
I'm not protesting it ... but I'm not going there until I have no other choice.
Arrr, there's always a choice, matey. When bowing and scraping to the king's men becomes too hard for ye, mayhap you'll sign articles with us?
And that is why they will succeed. Because you think that at some point you have no choice, so you will go there.
I will not go there. is the only option. And that might mean not seeing any movies. The moment you are willing to accept whatever they trow at you, you have lost.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Not true. That's what copyright has been perverted to now, but that's not what it was supposed to be. Copyright is supposed to be the public temporarily giving up their right to do whatever they want with what they bought so the creator/author has temporary exclusive distribution rights to provide a monetary incentive for the creation of said work. The goal of copyright was not to allow people to make money. The goal was to have more works created for the public, with the assumption that more works is a good thing. The money is just the carrot to entice the artists/authors/creators/whatever to create those works. Or to put it another way, the money is the means, not the end. The original authors of copyright law clearly felt the end justified the means. Unfortuately, due to the steaming pile of feces copyright law has become, that is no longer the case. The end no longer justifies the means. That is why so many people pirate and don't care.
There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
you never owned it, what you bought was a license, not the content.
So, I scratch my DVD, they'll send me another, right? After all, I didn't buy the DVD itself, I bought a license to the content on the DVD, which, because of the scratch, I can no longer access. And since I paid for access to that content, they'll send me another DVD free, Right??