-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Paramount boards the BD+ bus...


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
27 replies to this topic

#1 of 28 OFFLINE   Pete T C

Pete T C

    Second Unit

  • 299 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 01 2003

Posted April 29 2009 - 04:55 AM

Press Releases - Digital Entertainment Technology - Macrovision

Just what we need, more DRM...

Thanks Paramount. :/
For every shadow, no matter how deep, is threatened by morning light.

#2 of 28 OFFLINE   Stephen_J_H

Stephen_J_H

    Producer

  • 4,013 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 30 2003
  • Real Name:Stephen J. Hill
  • LocationNorth of the 49th

Posted April 29 2009 - 07:05 AM

Can anyone say slower load times? Posted Image
"My opinion is that (a) anyone who actually works in a video store and does not understand letterboxing has given up on life, and (b) any customer who prefers to have the sides of a movie hacked off should not be licensed to operate a video player."-- Roger Ebert

#3 of 28 OFFLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    Lead Actor

  • 7,212 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted April 29 2009 - 07:08 AM

Makes little difference to me.

"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#4 of 28 OFFLINE   Ethan Riley

Ethan Riley

    Producer

  • 3,380 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 12 2005

Posted April 29 2009 - 08:50 AM

Or me--since I'm not one for illegally downloading and ripping films--which I consider to be another's property in the first place. And this is a problem why?
 

 


#5 of 28 OFFLINE   Matt DeVillier

Matt DeVillier

    Supporting Actor

  • 781 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 03 1999

Posted April 29 2009 - 11:17 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan Riley
Or me--since I'm not one for illegally downloading and ripping films--which I consider to be another's property in the first place. And this is a problem why?

BD+ does nothing to stop those who wish to rip bluray movies, since it was broken long ago. All it does is cause player compatibility issues, slower load times, etc, and in the end makes the product more expensive for the consumer without any actual benefit to the studio.

#6 of 28 OFFLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    Lead Actor

  • 7,212 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted April 29 2009 - 03:34 PM

Everyone know that 99% of the point of anti-piracy encoding is to keep honest people honest. The thieves are gonna steal no matter what.

BD+ and the like is intended to make it difficult for your average person to rip a disc without going through troublesome hoops. The point is to make it easier to just legally buy the damn thing.

The 1% of the population that insist on being criminals are fought via other means.

"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#7 of 28 OFFLINE   Matt DeVillier

Matt DeVillier

    Supporting Actor

  • 781 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 03 1999

Posted April 29 2009 - 04:16 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Conway
BD+ and the like is intended to make it difficult for your average person to rip a disc without going through troublesome hoops. The point is to make it easier to just legally buy the damn thing.

and like all other DRM, it fails miserably at that. With AnyDVD-HD installed, copying a bluray disc to an (unencrypted/unprotected) image or ripping the main movie to a file (complete with all audio tracks, chapters, etc) is ridiculously trivial.

#8 of 28 OFFLINE   Ryan-G

Ryan-G

    Supporting Actor

  • 621 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 13 2005

Posted April 29 2009 - 04:34 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt DeVillier
BD+ does nothing to stop those who wish to rip bluray movies, since it was broken long ago. All it does is cause player compatibility issues, slower load times, etc, and in the end makes the product more expensive for the consumer without any actual benefit to the studio.

IIRC isn't the general point of BD+ the ability to change keys, and render all of the previous hacks useless? Leaving only the already comprimsed discs at risk while the new ones are immune?

#9 of 28 OFFLINE   Chris S

Chris S

    Screenwriter

  • 2,522 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 09 2000
  • Real Name:Chris S

Posted April 29 2009 - 04:35 PM

Eventually the movie industry will come to realize the same thing that the music industry has, that products restrictions don't stop thieves. As long as the DRM doesn't impact my enjoyment of the film they are free to waste their time and efforts combating this endless game.
DVD & Blu-ray - It's all about the movies!

#10 of 28 OFFLINE   AaronMK

AaronMK

    Supporting Actor

  • 768 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1999
  • Real Name:Aaron Karp
  • LocationOrlando, FL

Posted April 29 2009 - 06:21 PM

Quote:
IIRC isn't the general point of BD+ the ability to change keys, and render all of the previous hacks useless? Leaving only the already comprimsed discs at risk while the new ones are immune?

If I am not mistaken, it is more like the ability to change the method of encrypting and decrypting itself, not just the keys. BD+ is more like a specification for a virtual computer than a static encryption algorithm. Thus, the cat and mouse game is more like having to hack a new program each time they decide to change the software to patch previously hacked program, instead of a key discovery process.

The specifications of that "computer" are only available to licensees under non-disclosure, creating a major roadblock to reverse engineering the program protecting the content. (Although it seems that "computer" has been reverse engineered to a large extent.)

Quote:
Or me--since I'm not one for illegally downloading and ripping films--which I consider to be another's property in the first place. And this is a problem why?

I actually would be one for illegally ripping some of my purchased blu-rays to my laptop so I can watch them at better than SD quality while traveling. I don't want to hand out copies to my friends, nor post them on the Internet, nor any other non-DMCA infringement. So yes, even for copyright respecting individuals this can be a problem.

It always irks me when people argue that a film is another person's property. The copyright is the property of another, not the copy, nor the right of copyright owner to dictate legal and illegal uses of my purchased copy.

Don't get me wrong, I realize the necessity for the protections such as BD+ and the less than ideal realities that cannot be helped as a result. I just wish people did not automatically equate illegal ripping to disrespect for copyright and theft. IMHO, it becomes theft when you copy to avoid the purchase of the film in the first place.

OK, rant done. Posted Image

#11 of 28 OFFLINE   DeanWG

DeanWG

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 89 posts
  • Join Date: May 29 2003

Posted April 30 2009 - 03:51 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronMK
I actually would be one for illegally ripping some of my purchased blu-rays to my laptop so I can watch them at better than SD quality while traveling.
So your trying to justify breaking the law. Sorry, but it's not a gray area in this regard. If you defeat copy protection, for whatever reason - then you are in violation.

There is a legal solution to your problem. I can watch high-def discs while travelling anytime I want. It's called a Blu-ray ROM drive, and they are readily available out there.

#12 of 28 OFFLINE   ATimson

ATimson

    Second Unit

  • 398 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 16 2008

Posted April 30 2009 - 04:28 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeanWG
So your trying to justify breaking the law. Sorry, but it's not a gray area in this regard.
Just because it's the law doesn't make it right. (That's more or less the founding principle of the United States, which is where AaronMK lives, if not you.)
"Niceness is the greatest human flaw, except for all the others."
--Brendan Moody

#13 of 28 OFFLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    Lead Actor

  • 7,212 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted April 30 2009 - 05:09 AM

I agree with Aaron. I think if there was a way in which the studios could assure that someone is only making a backup copy for personal use and not posting it online or selling it they would be just fine with it. The problem comes with not being able to prevent people from illegally sharing or profiting from it outside of fair use. The whole digital copy experiment is to tap into this very market Aaron is describing.

"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#14 of 28 OFFLINE   cafink

cafink

    Producer

  • 3,038 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999

Posted April 30 2009 - 02:01 PM

I am not a lawyer and so cannot comment on the legal aspects of the issue, but it seems to me that there's no reason I should be disallowed to make a copy of a DVD or Blu-ray disc for personal use. It is extremely convenient to do so for leaving in the car, taking on a trip, or giving to the kids (to name just a few reasons), so that there's no worry about damaging the original disc.

Recently, I purchased Slumdog Millionaire on DVD, only to learn that the copy I got was, though a manufacturing error, missing the special features advertised on the box. It is apparently a widespread problem, and Fox is mailing replacement DVDs to affected purchasers, but only after they first send in the erroneous DVD. Because I wanted to send the DVD in as soon as possible, but didn't want to be without the movie (which I was very excited about watching) during that time, I made a copy of the disc before sending it, which I plan to discard when my replacement arrives. Surely there is no reason anyone should want to have stopped me from doing this?

There are lots of legitimate reasons for wanting to make a copy of a DVD or Blu-ray disc. The notion that copy-prevention measures only affect pirates and other unscrupulous types is not only insulting, it's demonstrably false.
 

 


#15 of 28 OFFLINE   Nicholas Martin

Nicholas Martin

    Screenwriter

  • 2,683 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 18 2003

Posted April 30 2009 - 04:17 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by cafink
Because I wanted to send the DVD in as soon as possible, but didn't want to be without the movie (which I was very excited about watching) during that time, I made a copy of the disc before sending it, which I plan to discard when my replacement arrives. Surely there is no reason anyone should want to have stopped me from doing this?

There are lots of legitimate reasons for wanting to make a copy of a DVD or Blu-ray disc. The notion that copy-prevention measures only affect pirates and other unscrupulous types is not only insulting, it's demonstrably false.

Using a program like AnyDVD is critical to what I do with DVDs. Blu-ray has nothing to do with what I do, and won't ever be. I don't duplicate DVDs unless they are double-sided, in which case I absolutely duplicate one side for two reasons -

A) double-sided discs are a total annoyance and one has to be too careful (for example, I turned the double-sided Terminator SE into a 2-disc set, duplicating the bonus feature side of the disc, labeled both and put them in a 2-disc case. Also did the same for the double-sided BONES season 1, turning a 4-disc set into an 8 disc set, which caused my own issues as to where to put the discs)

B) I've found that in some cases duplicating a defective double-sided disc allows me to make a fix - it worked with a defective SLIDERS Season 3 disc.

What I do with DVDs is part of a hobby of mine - utilizing the video to make my own discs using the film's score albums and putting them together, sort of like silent films. Well, that and the extended Titanic I made a few times (took many times to get that right).

I don't sell anything, and I don't copy movies for any reason other than what I just stated. I don't think that makes me a pirate, in fact I don't know what that makes me aside from a guy with a fairly bizarre hobby.

Also, I don't think anyone who edits DVDs into funny 'mashups' and so on (Brokeback parodies, making the "Shining" trailer into a comedy film, making "Sleepless In Seattle" into a suspense thriller, the "Vader Sessions" video, all of which required people to get around said protection) are pirating movies either, and more than likely made no money doing what the makers of those videos did.

This post will likely be deleted regardless, but that won't change what I do, which affects literally no one whatsoever. No one loses anything with what I do.

#16 of 28 OFFLINE   Ryan-G

Ryan-G

    Supporting Actor

  • 621 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 13 2005

Posted April 30 2009 - 06:24 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeanWG
So your trying to justify breaking the law. Sorry, but it's not a gray area in this regard. If you defeat copy protection, for whatever reason - then you are in violation.

There is a legal solution to your problem. I can watch high-def discs while travelling anytime I want. It's called a Blu-ray ROM drive, and they are readily available out there.

Actually, legally, he owns the disc, and the contents. It is his property to do with it as he will, for himself.

It is illegal to reverse engineer the encryption/decryption algo, it is also illegal for him to offer copies to other people.

But it is not illegal for him to copy the disc for himself, nor is it illegal for him to use a program to do it. The program itself might be illegal, but his actions are not.

The reason his actions are not illegal is because for it to be illegal, he must first have full knowledge that the program he is using has violated the legality of hacking the encryption.

Now, it is not illegal to decrypt the disc. It is only illegal if he were to hack the encryption algo to do so, if he could find another method that returns the proper values, he'd still be legal.

Of course, in general, it would take a computer something like 100,000 years or more to legally decrypt something.

It's only illegal when you're hacking the disc, or when you're offering copies for free.

This is why Emulation is legal, because so long as you don't look at the original, you're allowed to create something functionally identical. Of course, what generally happens in these instances is, to get the same output you need to duplicate the input, which results in something that is identical to what you weren't looking at.

Regardless, point being, there's nothing illegal about copying a disc for your own use. Nor does copy protection change that. It would only be illegal if you signed a contract with every purchase that you wouldn't copy it even for yourself.

I really doubt you'd find anyone in power in Hollywood who'd care if he copies it for his laptop. They care about the P2P and black market, someone copying their disc to watch on their laptop isn't an impact.

#17 of 28 OFFLINE   Lew Crippen

Lew Crippen

    Executive Producer

  • 12,060 posts
  • Join Date: May 19 2002

Posted April 30 2009 - 11:58 PM

Quote:
Just because it's the law doesn't make it right. (That's more or less the founding principle of the United States, which is where AaronMK lives, if not you.
Equating the Declaration of Independence and not liking copyright protection and laws that attempt to control copying products is a bit over the top.
¡Time is not my master!

#18 of 28 OFFLINE   cafink

cafink

    Producer

  • 3,038 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999

Posted May 01 2009 - 01:42 AM

Andrew's analogy seems perfectly apt to me. Saying that two things have one specific characteristic (such as being illegal yet morally right) in common does not imply that he equates them totally. Nowhere in his post did he suggest that copy-prevention measures are as important an issue as is taxation without representation. Only that they are similar in one very narrow respect.
 

 


#19 of 28 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 22,046 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted May 01 2009 - 01:52 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lew Crippen
Equating the Declaration of Independence and not liking copyright protection and laws that attempt to control copying products is a bit over the top.
Just a little bit. By that logic, anything I do is fine if I feel I'm morally correct.

#20 of 28 OFFLINE   Robert George

Robert George

    Screenwriter

  • 1,014 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted May 01 2009 - 03:35 AM

Quote:
Just a little bit. By that logic, anything I do is fine if I feel I'm morally correct.

Don't confuse the issue with individual rather than a "whole". The US was founded by a group of people that were, at the time, based on the imposed laws of the time, law-breakers. If a majority of citizens deems a law to be unjust, they can change it, or by simply ignoring it, cause it to become irrelevant.

If enough of the citizenry of the US collectively decide that certain aspects of copyright law are unjust or unduly restrictive, they can change it, or in the case of a corrupt legal/legislative system, simply ignore the laws. It is entirely possible for there to be laws passed in the US that due to unfair influence of a small group do not represent the best interests of the general citizenry. That is where many believe we are vis a vie copyright law. Essentially, a small group of corporations have bought enough influence in the legislative branch of government to enact laws that serve only to protect their revenue stream, which many believe to be overly restrictive.

But that is another thread...


Back to Blu-ray



Forum Nav Content I Follow