Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Legal DVD Burnable Downloads Launched 218

rogabean writes to tell us that Hollywood studios have taken a large step into the future by launching their new program with CinemaNow which allows users to legally download and burn DVDs. While the current of offerings seems to be just the dregs, studio execs hope to expand the list quickly and offer a new way to find niche or older films that are difficult to locate.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Legal DVD Burnable Downloads Launched

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @05:15PM (#15746293)
    ... the reason they opted for this was supposedly having discovered a way to create a DVD that can be played in a DVD player, but cannot itself be copied. How is that even possible? TFA has no information.
  • by 14erCleaner ( 745600 ) <FourteenerCleaner@yahoo.com> on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @05:18PM (#15746310) Homepage Journal
    The prices "start" at $9, plus I have to download a few gigabytes and then burn it myself? Plus no storage box or artwork? Thanks, but it'll be faster, cheaper, and result in a better product if I just drive to Wal-mart and buy the same DVD for $7.
  • $9 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Golias ( 176380 ) on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @05:21PM (#15746329)
    Nine bucks for old movies that can be found in the bargain bins for $5 - $10 already is not really going to turn a lot of heads. When they start pushing out current releases with this model, then we'll see if the studios are serious about doing something like this.

    To me, it doesn't really look like a serious business strategy, so much as a pre-emptive strike by the studios against eventually being held over a barrel by Apple Computer the way the record labels are right now. They want the infrastructure for something like this in place early in the game, so they don't give up their power to make the rules.
  • the selection (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Benw5483 ( 731259 ) on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @05:21PM (#15746330) Homepage
    Those are some of the absolute worse movies to offer for an initial selection. I imagine the studios are just throwing on some shitty movies and when nobody downloads them they'll say...
    "well, that didn't work, we obviously shouldn't use this as a business model."
  • by isecore ( 132059 ) <{isecore} {at} {isecore.net}> on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @05:41PM (#15746464) Homepage
    I think this thing is just like all the other "downloadable movie"-sites. It's purposefully broken (in this case overpriced) in order to drive customers off, either to the traditional go-buy-a-disc-at-walmart or go-download-some-warez. Because most customers want convenience, they'll of course scoff at this offering and continue to download Xvids from the local bittorrent-tracker.

    Hence, MPAA et al can claim that "our potential customers WANT to pirate movies, we tried but it didn't work, woe be us!" and the retarded justice system will let them continue their crusade against evolution, since the industry has "proven" that downloadable movies "don't work".

    It was the same with the other sites that offered "downloadable" movies. The movies were heavily tied down with DRM (which prevented them from being burned to DVD or moved to another computer), customers were expected to provide the bandwidth for the other customers, and the movies were horribly expensive - usually twice the price of a dvd in the bargain bin, but without the flexibility of a DVD, without the extras, and with lesser audio/video quality.

    *adjusts tinfoil-hat*
  • by MrFebtober ( 922100 ) on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @05:46PM (#15746489)
    Even if they did bring the prices down to a competitive level (cheaper than buying the DVD in a store), they are pretty vague on the format. Would this be a ready-to-burn .ISO file? Would it be sized small enough to fit on a single-layer DVD-R (which likely means viewer extras, languages, etc) or would it be a duel-layer .ISO file requiring a dual-layer burner? Technical questions, yes, but these are the things that would make or break this idea in my mind. well...assuming the even did become competitive price-wise.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @05:58PM (#15746560)
    Most of the movies are avaliable in the bargin bin at WalMart. About the only thing I saw that I would consider was Firefly and even that would be cheaper to drive out and just buy the whole season on factory DVDs. I was really curious to see if anything here was even worth buying but I can't bring myself to buy any of these for $9 a pop.
  • by kimvette ( 919543 ) on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @06:08PM (#15746610) Homepage Journal
    WalMart offers many movies at $4.50 each (I just picked up Lethal Weapon 2 and 4 for $4.50 each last week). The studios need to do at least that well and post them as ISO images in order to make this worthwhile (Hello. MPAA? BitTorrent is the ideal mechanism to make distribution cheap, just charge for the "subscription" to the password for the tracker).

    There are a LOT of old movies (and even freely-available stuff we're encouraged by the producers to bootleg, e.g., all the MST3K episodes) I'd buy from a service such as this. Lots of the old sci-fi movies from the '50s I've never seen, stuff that WLVI 56 in Boston used to air in their saturday "Creature double feature" run in the late 70s/early 80s (you know, stuff like Godzilla, Gamera, etc.), lots of dead TV shows that aren't in sydnication (I'd pay a few dollars for all the episodes of, say, Good Grief, Parker Lewis Can't Lose, Alf, Tracy Ullman, ALL the muppet show episodes, The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson, etc. - dig up a LOT of stuff that Generation X caught the tail end of or missed out completely on). If you want to plug commercials in to subsidize the "cost" of distribution (e.g., to offer it at such a cheap price) then go right ahead- it's a fair tradeoff and I'll sit through the commercials to get legal downloads of stuff which isn't "legally" otherwise available. In other words, make it cheap enough, I'll buy lots of shows that aren't worth paying full price on a DVD on, but would be fun to watch if for no other reason to figure out exactly why I liked the show when I was 10 yrs old to begin with. :D

    Will this stuff get pirated? Inevitably, yes, however if you sell, say, 1,000 units of each season of, say, the Ed Sullivan show, and the content would otherwise be rotting away in a vault somewhere, what's the harm? Hell, you'll get a viral marketing effect. Today's Jr. High kids might download Ed Sullivan and rediscover the Beatles, the Doors, Elvis, and a bunch of other old acts that have a cult following but doesn't otherwise attract new customers. Heck, I'd pay $15 for the Top of the Pops episode where Pink Floyd made an appearance. You're a lot better off selling SOME content, even knowing it's going to be pirated, than to make zero sales on it.

    In other words, it's a great idea and not only should you jump on it, but take the maximum advantage you can by not being so closed-fisted and short-sighted. You may be surprised at what opening up your vaults to what the customers want may lead to increased revenues, rather than being so closed-fisted that if you can't lock it down with DRM every step of the way, you kill off any customer interest. HD-DVD is stillborn, don't do the same with this idea.
  • by SanityInAnarchy ( 655584 ) <ninja@slaphack.com> on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @06:09PM (#15746615) Journal

    There are three ways I know of making a normal audio CD impossible to pirate/play on a computer:

    1. Mess with the Table of Contents. I believe this [dontbuycds.org] is an example of a ToC that has somehow been changed so that computers don't see it as an audio CD. Unfortunately, it would also probably affect mp3 cd players and other, similar devices which are not computers, cannot possibly enable piracy, but still read the ToC and the data areas so they can find mp3 files.
    2. Mess with the audio data. There have been some clever attempts at changing the audio such that it sounds normal on a normal CD player, but it has annoying pops and hisses when played on a computer, or ripped to mp3. Unfortunately, this also has the same problems -- devices could always have the same problem reading the disc as computers.
    3. Install a rootkit or other evilness in the autorun. This can be countered by one or more of the following:
      • Turning off autorun
      • Ripping on anything that isn't a Windows OS
      • Suing the shit out of Sony for abusing our computers
      While the rootkit method will have the least false positives, it will also cause the most damage, and it's the easiest to circumvent.

    I suspect that any method which allows you to burn your own DVD, even if it'll let us use single-layer media, is going to use one of the above retarded methods for attempting to prevent copy protection. They could try using Blu-Ray, except that Blu-Ray media isn't cheap enough yet.

    The real question is, will the downloads be full DVD quality, and if not, will they be DRM'd before they get to the DVD? In other words, could I download these using their software (undoubtably they'll require software), then copy them over the network and play them on my Linux box?

    If not, then this will likely be used to say that people will always pirate, no matter how cheap/convenient they make it. They could take a hint from the pirates, though. You can't make it much more convenient than an un-DRM'd BitTorrent download, and it's certainly cheaper to publish that way.

    Here's my conditions for using this service or a service like it:

    • Saturate my connection, whether you use BitTorrent or HTTP.
    • Use a standard protocol -- BitTorrent or HTTP. Please don't use FTP.
    • Charge a reasonable amount (I think they're doing that now).
    • Let the files themselves be un-DRM'd and in a standard format -- I'd love h.264 in an avi, mkv, even mov. Note that h.264 != high def.
    • If you give me subtitles, let them be soft subtitles.
    • If I must download commentary and special features, they should be no more than 20% of the total download size.

    I'd like high def with lots of extras, but that's not necessary. The above list is, though. Miss even one of those and I'll just rent them and rip them, the way I always do.

  • by ivan256 ( 17499 ) on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @06:41PM (#15746752)
    Hello. MPAA? BitTorrent is the ideal mechanism to make distribution cheap

    There's not a chance in hell I'm using my precious upstream bandwidth to help the MPAA member companies turn a profit. If they use a peer to peer distribution model, I better get compensation for my bandwidth in the form of cash, or credit for more movies. That credit better be linearly proportional to the amount of data I upload.
  • Free Movies (Score:3, Insightful)

    by onkelonkel ( 560274 ) on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @06:43PM (#15746758)
    Just went to the site and had a look at their list of free movies. That's 5 minutes of my life I will never get back. Page after page of Z-list crapola and not one (NOT ONE !!!111) movie I have ever heard of. It must have taken a lot of work to come up with a list of movies this bad.

    "Bad beyond all infinte possible dimensions of badness"

    Enough suck to pull small planets out of orbit.
  • Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @07:04PM (#15746853)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by swillden ( 191260 ) * <shawn-ds@willden.org> on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @07:42PM (#15746993) Journal

    There's not a chance in hell I'm using my precious upstream bandwidth to help the MPAA member companies turn a profit.

    That's fine for you, but for good-quality, DRM-free downloads at a reasonable price, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

    I'd expect the distributor to run several seeds on fat pipes, so that my incoming bandwidth would be maxed out even if I was the only one downloading, and so that the distributor was providing the bulk of the bandwidth, but I can see using bittorrent to make sure that the download rate stays high during surges of interest in a title.

  • by aliquis ( 678370 ) on Wednesday July 19, 2006 @10:23PM (#15747533)
    My first thought was "they even almost got the price right!" thought they would of course sell many more movies with a price of say $4 or $5 but anyway, but yeah, even if the price was right and the copy protection wasn't there, they still made sure it wouldn't work since they only will release things they themself consider is SHIT.
  • by shark72 ( 702619 ) on Thursday July 20, 2006 @12:38AM (#15747915)

    "You don't like this sort of compromise WHY, exectly?"

    I can't speak for the GP, but I've noticed that many Slashdotters appear to have a flow chart in their head that has a single terminator labelled "And so, I have no choice but to continue pirating!". It's a given, of course, that the content industries creep along at a speed slower than we'd like (you younger folks can ask your parents what it was like living in the time period between the launch of the first affordable CD players and when a decent amount of content was available), but whenever the content industry does advance toward that point that we'd like, or even do exactly what we've been asking them to, we simply add more boxes to that flow chart in our head so that "And so, I have no choice but to continue pirating!" is still the sole terminator.

    One of these days I'm going to write a web-based excuse-o-meter that will give each user their own custom-tailored rationale for piracy. God forbid some people just admit that they're cheap.

  • This won't work (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Simonetta ( 207550 ) on Thursday July 20, 2006 @02:12AM (#15748140)
    This is just another foolish idea that the desperate community of download entrepreneurs are trying to get past the cement-heads of the MPAA. All they can get currently are cinema dregs. No one is going to want pay to download junk when they can download good quality DIVx titles from the unlicensed distributors for free. And the entrepreneurs need big profitable download numbers to get the studios to offer popular big name titles. This is another 'zombie' company; already dead and doesn't know it yet.

        So why would the studios want paid downloads? They can distribute DVDs inexpensively and profitably to the video outlets that have proliferated widely in the US and developed world. And they generally get the cost of the film product covered through the initial theatre release (where 90% of the box office goes to the studio for the first few weeks of release and 50% of the viewers chose to see the new movie). What does the studio have to gain from paid downloads? Pratically nothing.

        Paid downloads are good for films that don't get wide DVD or theatre release. Brilliant little foreign films, etc... But if noone knows about them, then there is no demand. No demand means no paid downloads. Eight dollars isn't cheap and three hours of download time is a high opportunity cost to pay for a bozo film. Three hours spend downloading a turkey is three hours spent that wasn't downloading a good film. It's so much easier just to go to the DVD store in the local supermarket and pick up a six month old title for much less cost in dollars and download time.

        Nor could you convince foreign directors to release their films in the USA or other countries as downloads. These guys are very traditional and want their films to be seen in theaters; they don't even like DVDs. The more that the download entrepeneurs are able to pressure them to license their 'vanity' films for download, the less likelyhood that they will be pressed into DVDs. They will be limited to their local national market and whatever government subsidies that they can hussle from their local cultural ministers. Which means boring films, which means fewer people taking a chance on downloading them regardless of the reviews in specialized film magazines.

        All in all this is a dumb idea. The only thing that will work is the only thing that is currently working. Which is people crafting their favorite new films into DIVx format 'illegally' and posting them for download on the P2P sites. Eventually the MPAA will have to come to terms with the P2P community, on the terms of the P2P community, and accept whatever residual fees that the P2P community considers it appropriate for the studios to have. In the same manner that the RIAA came to a partial truce with the P2P community with iTunes.

        It will take a long time because these guys are exceptionally thick in the head department. Which means we have to wait for a lot of dumb zombie companies like this one to fail before any real progress gets made.
  • by James McGuigan ( 852772 ) on Thursday July 20, 2006 @07:47AM (#15748801) Homepage
    I also would be curious as to how they unforce the one copy limit, the only way that makes sense to me is to force the user to be online and do some type of validating with their servers, otherwise just making a copy of the file before burning it would be able to get around the one copy limit since they would have to edit the file in some way to recognize it as "used".

    You don't need to modifiy the file itself. Assuming a user is not going to buy the same movie twice, each time you burn a disk, take a note of the movie title and/or file checksum, add it somewhere deep and dark in the registery and then run a lookup on this list each time you want to burn a new downloaded DVD. This could be bypassed by modifing the registry.

    Though chances are they do use remote authentication, verifing the server via a pgp key (to avoid bypassing the server by modifing the hosts file to a fake 'yes man' server). It also serves a second purpose of giving the marketing department lots of lovley stats on useage info (like how long between downloading a buring, what percentage try to burn more than once, what time of day to people burn).

"Gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling in love." -- Albert Einstein

Working...