Apple to Announce iTunes Movie Rentals?

An anonymous reader writes "Think Secret is reporting that the next Apple Worldwide Developer's Conference may be the company's platform to announce movie rentals via iTunes. The files would probably have a built-in shutoff timer, or only allow a certain number of viewings." From the article: "Apple is said to have ironed out agreements with Walt Disney, Universal Studios, Paramount Pictures, and Warner Bros., and is currently in talks with other major movie studios as well. It's unknown to what extent content will be available come the August 7 announcement, or whether Apple will announce all of its studio deals at that time ... Apple had been trying for months to persuade the movie studios that the a-la-carte model of buying individual titles, as the iTunes Music Store offers with music, was the way to go. The studios, however, have been fixed on offering only a subscription or rental-based model."

Re:DRM Creep? no, FUD.

[Anonymous Coward]

> Please state what functionality the updates took away. Making it harder to circumvent is not removing functionality, as circumvention was never promised.

Well, they changed the number of burns to CD. That is removing a function you could do (the 8th copy, or whatever).

> If you don't like it, don't buy it.

Do you get your money back from iTunes if you decide you don't like the change? No? Well, it's too late, then.

Are ISP's ready for this?

[YrWrstNtmr]

A significant number of people, sucking down 5-8Gb every day or so. I think we'll start to see the ISP's enforcing their (unwritten) bandwidth limits.

Re:DRM Creep? no, FUD.

[Pirogoeth]

Let me guess... you'd buy poo in a white box if it had the Apple logo on it, right?

Okay, moving on...

Apple reduced the number of times a playlist can be burnt to a CD from 10 down to 7.

They also increased the number of computer you could authorize from three to five.

The videos will undoubtedly play via iTunes and be purchasable from the iTunes store. People who buy songs from iTunes will obviously be the first people to use this new service.

Obviously. So?

I know that Apple's music store sells encrypted files that can only be played with crippled software...

I've got a feeling that Apple wouldn't be able to sell anything without DRM attached; it's the record companies that require this. Last I checked, pretty much every "legitimate" online music seller has some sort of DRM attached and requires being played with "crippled" software.

...but most users do not realise this and Apple does not make it clear to them.

Really? You asked them?

Re:DRM Creep?

[SuperMog2002]

I'd be more concerned if not for the fact that, on music at least, the DRM has gotten LOOSER since iTMS debuted. You used to only be able to authorize three machines. Now you can authorize five.

Re:DRM Creep? no, FUD.

[Anonymous Coward]

They also increased the number of computers it is usable on from 3 to 5, which is far more useful than the number of times you can burn the playlist (not playlist, not song).

Re:DRM Creep?

[eltonito]

Three things I feel compelled to point out that...

#1. Contrary to popular belief, the RIAA does not earn money on each song/cd/record sold. The RIAA is primarily financed through membership. These days the RIAA probably makes more money from negotiated settlements with P2P users than anything else.

#2. AllOfMP3.com does not pay the artists, labels or the rights organizations that represent artists or labels. ROMS, one of two "organizations" they claim to pay, has nothing to do with artists rights or the payout of royalties. FAIR seems equally dubious.

#3. Check with Merge Records and ask them how many copies of "69 Love Songs" by the Magnetic Fields have been sold on AllofMP3.com. They won't know because 1.) AllofMP3 is not open to audit as most distributors are (online and otherwise) and because 2.) They have not received a dime from AllofMP3.com.

Morally speaking, buying from AllOfMP3.com on par with downloading via P2P. Either way artists get the same amount of money - none.

And to be on topic, I don't find most basic DRM that evil as long as I know what I'm getting into before I commit my money. I don't think Apple using an expiration date on "rented" videos is a big deal. In fact, I welcome having a new choice in the marketplace.

If I don't like it I won't spend my money on it. Amazing how that works for so many aspects of life.