It will be interesting to see what kind of formats will be used, exactly how much they charge, and how much DRM they cram into the thing.
If they do charge the same cost for downloading a film as the DVD version then where is the incentive to download? Surely the price should be lower to reflect the savings in materials and distribution costs.
It should be noted that this was a civil prosecution, not a criminal one:
The term "illegal" refers only to criminal cases and not civil cases such as this.
Also, the judge seems to have ruled against the defendents for simply making the files AVAILABLE for download - whether they actully uploaded them to anyone else or not.
Slashdot Mirror
It will be interesting to see what kind of formats will be used, exactly how much they charge, and how much DRM they cram into the thing. If they do charge the same cost for downloading a film as the DVD version then where is the incentive to download? Surely the price should be lower to reflect the savings in materials and distribution costs.
It should be noted that this was a civil prosecution, not a criminal one: The term "illegal" refers only to criminal cases and not civil cases such as this. Also, the judge seems to have ruled against the defendents for simply making the files AVAILABLE for download - whether they actully uploaded them to anyone else or not.