Slashdot Mirror


With Cinavia DRM, Is Blu-ray On a Path To Self-Destruction?

suraj.sun tips an article at AnandTech about a Blu-ray DRM scheme called Cinavia. The author makes the case that software like Cinavia is hastening the death of a Blu-ray industry already struggling to compete with online media streaming. Quoting: "In our opinion, it is the studios and the Blu-ray system manufacturers who have had the say in deciding upon the suitability of a particular DRM scheme. Consumers have had to put up with whatever has been thrust upon them. The rise in popularity of streaming services (such as Netflix and Vudu) which provide instant gratification should make the Blu-ray industry realize its follies. The only reason that streaming services haven't completely phased out Blu-rays is the fact that a majority of the consumers don't have a fast and reliable Internet connection. Once such connections become ubiquitous, most of the titles owned by consumers would probably end up being stored in the cloud. ... The addition of new licensing requirements such as Cinavia are preventing the natural downward price progression of Blu-ray related technology. Instead of spending time, money and effort on new DRM measures that get circumvented within a few days of release, the industry would do well to lower the launch price of Blu-rays. There is really no justification for the current media pricing."

36 of 429 comments (clear)

  1. No justification for the current media pricing? by Panspechi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I didn't know conglomerates were charities? Why would they lower their prices, unless forced to?

    1. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, there is justification; it costs a lot of money to develop these new DRM schemes!

    2. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by boristdog · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If blu-ray disks were $5 each I would have hundreds of them.

      As it is, I have none.

    3. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by ZeroSumHappiness · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I believe the author means that there is no rational, economic justification. As in, the current prices are not maximizing return and spending money on DRM is not showing any return on investment.

    4. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by Technician · · Score: 4, Interesting

      At $5 per disk, I would not have them because of the player cost, unless I find a great price on a used one somewhere.

      I made the mistake of buying a Laserdisk player. The disks were supposed to be cheaper than videotape because they could be easly mass produced. Video tape prices fell and laserdisk remained expensive. DVD's filled the promise with many titles in the bins under $5.

      Blue-ray started at a higher price and remain at a higher price for the player and content. No thanks.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    5. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by jythie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Though rather importantly, once you have that $40 disk you can watch it any time. One of the downsides of the streaming services is content can disappear at any time, sometimes part way through watching a series (has happened to me twice now). Until such services deal with that problem, physical media will continue to have that edge.

    6. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      THIS SO MUCH.

      These idiots in charge really don't understand very simple concepts like this.
      It has already been proved countless times in other industries throughout the decades.
      The lower the price, the more people will buy, when you reach certain prices, impulse-buys considerably increase to the point that it offsets potential losses from a much larger price.

      Not to mention that so many people buy 2nd-hand goods, which they get none of the profit from, simply because the price of the originals are so much higher.
      If they were to lower the price to typical prices you see 2nd hand goods at, the sales increase from that alone would more than make up for that lower price.
      People buy 2nd hand for a reason, it is more in their price range. Bring the initial releases down already!
      Piracy isn't even on the scale of how much they lose to 2nd hand sales due to their own greed.

      Whether it is films, games, music or whatever else, lower price points have already proven worthy causes in various different attempts throughout the media industry.
      A very good example of this is Humble Indie Bundle. Those things are absolute goldmines for indie devs, sales that indie devs could only dream of most of the time unless they hit it lucky like Angry Birds or Minecraft.
      I think from the last one alone, each group involved got around $90k+ from it. All from people donating on average around $6. That was barely 100k sales if I remember correct. Imagine if that was those millions from the rest of the games industry.
      $20-40 seems like the absolute sweet spot where most people can afford it and the best amount of profit gained, varying depending on the type of game it is. (popularity, basically)

      If you start to treat your customers as pirates, you make them pay a large price for said content when it is in fact your own mess you created by pissing off the stores and in turn forcing them to significantly increase the 2nd hand market size, of course you are going to lose sales.
      Adapt or die. Locking people out isn't adapting, it is dying.

    7. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sorry but no. Blu-ray content is absent from my computer because it requires HDCP protected equipment and DRM-laden OS, which while now ubiquitous in the form of HDMI connectivity on graphics cards, TVs etc, is absent from my home setup. My monitor doesn't support HDMI despite being over 1080p in resolution, and I've no intention of "upgrading" it any time soon.

      A Blu-ray player may well be $42, but the accompanying 1080p TV and speaker system are considerably more. I would expect a system which can actually make use of the improved video and sound quality of Blu-Ray to cost at least $1000, whereas my existing DVD playback system has no problems at all.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    8. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by Ouchie · · Score: 5, Informative

      If blu-ray disks were $5 each I would have hundreds of them.

      As it is, I have none.

      I will add the supporting evidence Louis C. K.

      Rather than take a flat rate of $50,000 - $100,000 for his special from the industry where they would price the disks at $10 - $20 he just produced it himself and put it up online with no DRM for $5. By circumventing the major industry players and just doing it himself he has made more than double. He has effectively done what the media industry says is impossible without them suing and forcing people to pay out the nose.

      I have bought several copies for myself and gifts to support the idea of paying what the market really thinks the product is worth rather than forcing a higher market price.

      --
      "Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most." ~Ozzy Osborne
    9. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by jandrese · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The fact that your set doesn't do HDMI isn't in spite of being over 1080p, it is because of it. HDMI only goes up to 1080p, so it doesn't make sense for higher resolution displays. That's why monitors have plateaued at 1080p even though much greater pixel densities are possible and PC hardware is more than powerful enough to drive it these days. I think it's embarrassing that the 9.7" screen on an iPad has more pixels than the vast majority of full on 23"+ computer monitors.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    10. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by Bert64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If they were cheap, free of drm and free of region restrictions i would have lots of them...

      The players would be considerably cheaper if they were not forced to both license and implement the drm schemes...

      I imagine the time and money spent on implementing these ridiculous schemes is massively more than what the cracking groups expend to break them.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    11. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by iamhassi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not looking to replace my entire library of DVD with Blu Ray, since I have literally hundreds of DVDs. But some movies which I really like I've re-invested in them because seeing them in full HD is worth it if I can find the disk on sale.

      Doesn't matter, lowering the price is a stop-gap to what's inevitable. The consumers will get what they want whether the movie industry likes it or not.

      Music industry fought mp3, suing everyone, until Apple came in and cleaned their clock. Now instead of $15 CDs we buy songs for $1 and the music industry does whatever Apple says because Apple sells more music than Walmart. Had the music industry stopped suing their customers and start selling to their customers they would be the ones with $100 billion instead of Apple.

      Fast forward, and the movie industry is on the exact same path of destruction as the music industry. Doesn't anyone learn? Look, you can try and sell blu-ray discs for $20+ a pop, but that's just going to drive more people to streaming. Give us $5 BD and start a universal streaming service and make money again or someone else will and they'll take your money. It's your choice, but in the end we will have a streaming movie service and we won't be paying $20+ for discs just like no one buys $15 CDs anymore.

      Resistance is futile. We are your consumers.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    12. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by cpu6502 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I view DVDs/Blurays as a convenient backup for my media.
      (DVD-Rs self-erase and HDDs stop spinning eventually.)

      And yes companies are "forced" to lower their prices because of pressure from the customers (the "invisible hand"). If we think $20 for a Bluray is outrageous, we'll buy it somewhere else (like the DVD for $5). That forces companies to lower their Bluray prices to remain competitive.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    13. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by xaxa · · Score: 4, Informative

      Everybody complains about region restrictions. I don't like region restrictions but the reality is different regions have different laws and some movies aren't allowed there. I think region restrictions are primarily about making sure legal behinds are covered.

      They have nothing to do with that, since in lots of countries outside the US it's easy to buy a "region free" DVD player, and in none that I know does the region of the DVD make any difference to its legality.

      Notice that Europe, Japan and most of the Middle East have the same DVD region (2), and Australia and South America (4), yet those regions have the biggest differences in censorship laws.

    14. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is amazing how much you can make as an already established successful artist when you cut out the middleman.

      If you are not already known with a good audience, you will never have the distribution, marketing, and advertising that the big boys bring to the table. But once you hit the level where everybody knows who you are, yeah you don't need the big marketing machine behind you anymore. But anyone thinking any unknown comedian/musician could just start putting out their own stuff and make a ton of money is pretty naive about the way the industry works. If it were really that easy, don't you think a lot more artists would be doing it like that already?

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    15. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      DRM doesn't stop pirates.

      All DRM does is punish the PAYING CUSTOMER.

      DRM just ads another level of uneccessary complexity that is prone to break or otherwise limit the usefulness of the product.

      "Being a pirate" is the best way to avoid all of that nonsense.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    16. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by Ihmhi · · Score: 4, Funny

      Of course the remote is $18. Do you have any idea the kind of R&D involved in getting a rootkit into a remote control?

    17. Re:No justification for the current media pricing? by KhabaLox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's a nice assertion there. How do you figure?

      Because I'm a pricing analyst for a major post production company and I've recently submitted DVD/BD RFPs to two major studios.

      Now, I don't have as much insight into the replication side, but I would expect that the cost differences would be much smaller, so for an A title where they are expecting to sell 100s of thousands of discs the cost of the "master" should amortize nicely.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
  2. International service by rootnl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only reason that streaming services haven't completely phased out Blu-rays is the fact that a majority of the consumers don't have a fast and reliable Internet connection.

    Also the fact that Netflix and Vudu is only available in the USA. The rest of the world still rely on physical media.

    --

    We are the people our parents warned us about.
    1. Re:International service by rodrigoandrade · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And on TPB, thankyouverymuch.

  3. There's a big leap of faith there by LehiNephi · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The author throws this premise and assumption in without giving it too much examination:

    a majority of the consumers don't have a fast and reliable Internet connection. Once such connections become ubiquitous...

    That's a big leap. Countries with high populations densities, such as those in Europe and the Far East, will have a much easier/cheaper time of building out the infrastructure for reliable high-speed internet to a vast majority of their population. Here in the US, however, it's a lot more expensive. Simply hand-waving the "once such connections become ubiquitous" ignores the cost of installing that infrastructure, and the time required to extend it to enough households.

    Besides, a 1080p movie is going to suck a lot of bandwidth, and I'm guessing most people won't want to pay for a connection fast enough when they can save a few bucks with a slower connection. Not to mention the whole throttling/bandwidth cap issue.

    --
    Help find a cure for cancer. Join the [H]orde
    1. Re:There's a big leap of faith there by IICV · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's a big leap. Countries with high populations densities, such as those in Europe and the Far East, will have a much easier/cheaper time of building out the infrastructure for reliable high-speed internet to a vast majority of their population. Here in the US, however, it's a lot more expensive.

      Which is why we have such great Internet connectivity in our cities with high population density, like New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston or Philadelphia?

      Face it, the "population density" argument just doesn't work. The real reason the USA is fucked in terms of infrastructure is because for some reason we prefer spending money blowing up other people's roads and bridges and networks over maintaining our own.

  4. Agreeded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You pick a movie on netflix, 5 seconds later your watching it. You download a pirated movie, open it and 2 seconds later your watching it. You put a blu ray in, you wait a minute for it to pass the security check, get notified you need to download a firmware update for your blu ray player, get that done, be forced to watch the fbi notice, non skippable studio notices, skip past the previews, get to the overly animated menu and have to wait 20 seconds before it get to the play / select chapters buttons.

    I have always wondered how much money the studios have spent (wasted) on copy protection and huge legal teams over the years. Just lower the prices, when people walk by the 5$ dvd bin at walmart, they stop and grab a few. Bring down prices across the board and sales will go up. Also, start making better movies people want to watch more than 1 time.

    Our house is rural, we can only get verizon 3G internet, with 5GB per month, we cant do any streaming. No cable, no dsl. We still need netflix (by mail) or download movies someplace else and being them home.
    Redbox has shown people are more than willing to pay for physical movies,well, upto 1$ or a bit more for blu rays.

    1. Re:Agreeded by Rakishi · · Score: 5, Informative

      This info graphic sums it up pretty well I think:
      http://i.imgur.com/GxzeV.jpg

  5. I'd watch Blu-Rays if I could get them... by rbrander · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All the video stores - I mean all but three in a city of 1.1M, none within many miles of my house - have closed. And I don't get streaming, in every sense of the word "get".

    In Canada, at least, Netflix recently reduced it's bandwidth again, down below 1Mbps - sub DVD, much less Blu-Ray. Why bother having HDTV if you use it?

    I've become a steady browser at the library, where they have more DVD titles than any video store - but for anything popular, put the disc on a hold and wait 3 months, and all Blu-Rays (about 5% of the collection) are out all the time. And, no, I'm not paying $29.99 for "Contagion" to watch it once, possibly twice ten years later.

    The rental people had about the right number - $5 for an evening for something quite popular, a little less for the older ones. And there are few movies I'll watch twice, very, very few more than twice, so $10 as a purchase price is already high for most discs. For me.

    So I do seem to be trapped in some kind of market failure here, where I've got the money, want the product, and the one market mechanism for meeting product with customer at an agreeable price has just collapsed, beaten out by "good enough"....and if 1Mbps is "good enough" (is it really that people are too damn lazy to go to the mall to browse instead of clicking from the sofa??), then maybe BR is doomed because nobody appreciates resolution. And not having freezes and artifacts and glitches.

  6. Gave up on physical storage long ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Posting anonymously for obvious reasons.

    I have a rather vast collection of DVD's. Several hundred, in fact. I don't actually watch a lot of films, but I do enjoy owning the ones I like.
    When Blu-ray first came along, or rather when I first got a Blu-ray player (A PS3 I managed to grab on the cheap, back when they were still £350+), I started the transition to Blu-ray. If I bought a new film, I'd buy the Blu-ray version instead of the DVD. If I wanted to watch an old film, I'd see if I could find it on blu-ray before raiding my collection.
    Then the irregularities hit - obviously being a collector, I'd want to get the "best" version of the films in question. Yet for the longest time, you could get a "vanilla" DVD, a "Special" DVD (which often came with a second disk full of "Features" and maybe some art cards) or THE blu-ray. Which came with only some, or none, of the special features. And it was still £5 more than the special DVD.

    I stopped buying either. I found that I could just as easily spend £10 a month on a newsgroup subscription and download whatever film I wanted in whatever quality I wanted, whenever I wanted. Why rebuy my whole collection when I can just watch what I want, when I want? If I wanted the extras, I could have them as well - at no extra cost. What's more, I could play them wherever I wanted, including streaming them to various other non-bluray capable devices. Much how people preferred MP3's simply because anything could play them, I now prefer downloaded copies for the same reason. I'm sorry that "crooks" are getting my money instead of the people who made the films, but it all just got too much. I will switch to a streaming service as soon as one offers a decent catalogue of films without charging stupid amounts. I refuse to "rent" films for anything more than £1 a pop - particularly as brand new DVDs can be had for less than £5 and most streams are NOT actually HD quality (they're often about as good as DVD quality, maybe a bit better - certainly no 1080p). The content is the killer though - why does Netflix US have 10x the content than Netflix UK does? Oh yeah, because the Movie companies are plainly greedy. They want licensing rights done on a per-country basis so they can squeeze as much out of everyone. Well fuck you, how about you let anyone access all your content for a set price and let competition do the work.

  7. I don't think they get it ... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The only reason that streaming services haven't completely phased out Blu-rays is the fact that a majority of the consumers don't have a fast and reliable Internet connection. Once such connections become ubiquitous, most of the titles owned by consumers would probably end up being stored in the cloud.

    Some of us have no interest in streaming our media. And many of us have no interest in storing our stuff in the cloud.

    I want my movies stored local, offline, and accessible when I want it and without asking permission. Streaming is just going to lead to 'monetizing' each view. Storing it in the cloud means I can't watch movies on the plane, in bed, or by the pool.

    I'm probably old fashioned, but I still buy Blu Ray discs and CDs which I rip to MP3. With ISPs adding bandwidth caps and the like, I'm not going to pay to stream down a movie I've already bought, and then pay my ISP again for the bandwidth for re-watching the movie again. Everyone wants a piece of that action, and I'm not playing.

    So, for many of us, the physical disk is going to remain as the way we play these movies for a long time yet.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:I don't think they get it ... by Jim+Hall · · Score: 5, Informative

      I had no idea what you meant in your "Arkell v Pressdram" comment, so I had to google it. Perhaps this is well-known in the UK, but I didn't know it. For the benefit it others, it's a reference to a British satirical and current affairs magazine called "Private Eye". From wikipedia:

      An unlikely piece of British legal history occurred in what is now referred to as the "case" of Arkell v. Pressdram (1971). The plaintiff was the subject of an article relating to illicit payments, and the magazine had ample evidence to back up the article. Arkell's lawyers wrote a letter which concluded: "His attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of your reply." The magazine's response was, in full: "We acknowledge your letter of 29th April referring to Mr J. Arkell. We note that Mr Arkell's attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of our reply and would therefore be grateful if you would inform us what his attitude to damages would be, were he to learn that the nature of our reply is as follows: fuck off." In the years following, the magazine would refer to this exchange as a euphemism for a blunt and coarse dismissal: for example, "We refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram".

  8. I wanna watch Sin-duh-weh-wuh again by tepples · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even though watching a movie even just two times is unlikely.

    Unless you have single-digit-year-old kids who "wanna watch Sin-duh-weh-wuh again, Daddy." There are some films suitable for a repeat viewing, and a lot of those are G-rated animated films. For me when I was growing up, it was The Care Bears Movie.

    1. Re:I wanna watch Sin-duh-weh-wuh again by jandrese · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Having a small child myself, I freaking hate most of the DVDs targeted to them. Especially Disney DVDs, with their either 10 or 25 minutes (your choice, you have to hit the button shortly after inserting the disc) of unskippable ads before it starts the movie. Fastplay my ass. It's infuriating to me when he gets a Handy Manny DVD for Christmas and I have to go back and rip it and re-encode the disc so he doesn't have to sit through an outrageously long stretch of ads just to play the movie. Every time I go through the process I think to myself: I should have just pirated this, I'm being punished for trying to do the right thing.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
  9. Fast and reliable? How about cost? by smooth+wombat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    that a majority of the consumers don't have a fast and reliable Internet connection.

    While certainly there are large portions of the U.S. who for various reasons do not have fast or reliable net connections, there is also the issue of costs.

    In my area, to get 25/25 by itself costs $70/month. That's if you have a verizon phone line. Without the line you can add another $5/month.

    If you want 50/20, that will cost you $140/month ($145 without phone).

    Even 15/5 is expensive at $50/month with a phone line).

    So people have to think: do I want to shell out $70/month just to have a high speed connection? Do I need that high speed connection?

    Right now, there is a large portion of the population who says no, that is too high and not worth the money.

    Until some form of TRUE competition is injected into the marketplace (2 providers is not competition), the cost/benefit ratio is not consumer friendly.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  10. Sold my PS3 after Cinavia. by Zoson · · Score: 5, Interesting

    After updating my PS3's firmware, I could no longer play my blu-ray backups that I had ripped with AC3 audio.
    I didn't hesitate. I sold my PS3 and bought parts to build an HTPC - and never looked back.

    I don't regret the decision at all. Neither will you.

  11. Bluray vs streaming quality by HockeyPuck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When will we be able to stream bluray quality to our homes over an affordable internet connection? Given that a bluray based 1080p movie is about 15GB in size, to stream that amount of data to your house in 2 hours would require an internet connection of about 17Mb/s.

    I know, I know, most people can't tell when you're getting heavily compressed, downsampled whatever using H.264 ogg-something-or-other. But when someone invests a couple grand into their TV+stereo+speakers, we'd like to be able to get a high quality input into it and not a something that's sufficient for the 6 o'clock news.

    I'm not a audiophile, but a believer in garbage-in = garbage-out. I hope the media companies or movie studios don't force us down the path of the lowest common denominator which would be low quality streams fit for an iphone. It's a shame that in order to get a high quality stream you need to pay a ton for the internet connection and then most likely pay a ton for a 1080p stream.

  12. Consumers don't have to put up with it by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's exactly the point. Yes, the vendor dictates the terms, but I decide whether I accept them. And I don't.

    I don't quite get the idea why throwing more shit at my face is supposed to make me buy it.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  13. Streaming Iron Man on Netflix by OzPeter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One slight problem .. Iron Man 2 is available for streaming, but Iron Man is not. No high speed streaming solution is going to help out when there is a legal roadblock to streaming movies.

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  14. Bluray was a step backward in usability by hawguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What I want to know is why Blurays take so long to load.

    When I want to watch a movie, typically, I want to watch the movie, not wait sevefral minutes for the disk to load, then try to skip through 15 minutes of commercials (if it's possible to skip through them at all).

    When I first got my Bluray play, I upgraded my Netflix membership to Bluray. 2 weeks later, I downgraded back to DVD because DVD's are more usable. I've bought a few movies on Bluray, but for the vast majority of what I watch, DVD quality is more than sufficient (even Netflix streaming quality is more than sufficient).

    The operating system on my laptop boots up faster than the time it takes most Blurays to load on my bluray player.

    And what's with the firmware updates that are needed for some disks to work!? My 8 year old DVD player has never needed a firmware update and it plays all of the DVDs I own but I've already run into a couple disks that refused to work without a bluray player firmware update.

    I'm sure the Bluray gives content producers much more freedom to produce rich content, fancy menus and other features (which includes enhanced DRM), but all I want to do is watch my movie.