It's official: BOTH Blu-ray and HD-DVD downrez component (1 Viewer)

[Cees Alons]

Ed,

And I already replied to your question in my previous post. No need to repeat the question.

As said: I replied.


Cees

 

[Glenn Overholt]

Ok, now this is really getting fun!

If a DVD is shoplifted, the studio isn't out anything, but rather the store is out their cost, and that cost they add on to the prices of everything else in the store.

I don't hate the stores, and I fully understand why they have to tack on 'extra' charges to cover their lost costs, and I do hate the shoplifters, but even more I hate the tangled mess that our legal system has turned into. Any store should be able to detain a suspect and call a mall cop over to witness the illegal possession of the store's wares, and take the idiot down to their office where they can call the police up to have he/she/it turned in.

It doesn't justify any shoplifting, of course, but these same types of people are the ones downloading for free.

Although we don't know exatly how the studios are making up their figures for lost sales, I think the fact remains that if downloading and illegal copies stopped, Hollywood would have to make more, so in my book I really don't care what their figures are. I only know that sales wouldn't possibly go down.

Glenn

 

[Cees Alons]

Glen,

But it is important to know "how much it is", it really is, they're losing. Some people think their counter-measures are overkill, and some people don't like that.

If you inflict a damage to someone, it's quite legal for the person to ask why you did it and how much damage to yourself you're trying to avoid.

It's not like any potential loss by the studios (the way they see it) justifies any measures they want to take to diminish the chance for such loss.

But, again, even if I would fully understand (or even justify) their "features", that doesn't mean I have to like it on a DVD for my own use. Let alone buy the stuff!


Cees

 

[Bryan X]

Since these great copy-protection schemes are going to be employed on these discs to thwart pirates, I'm sure we can expect to purchase these movies significantly cheaper than regular DVDs, right...

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Allow me to try to explain my statement above by writing one of a real-life example.

When I saw the trailers, promo etc for the movie "Zoolander", I had no intention to see it in the theatre, no intention to buy the movie, not even renting it. One day, I went to a friend's house and he played a downloaded crummy version on his PC. While we were chatting etc, I saw glimpses of the movie. Only then I decided to buy the DVD. So that's an extra sale for the studio.

Now if by chance I didn't happen to watch glimpses of the pirated movie, the studio will never see a cent for that movie from me.

I'm not saying that I'm the majority (heck, I won't even bother downloading the movie myself and wasting my bandwidth and electricity), but I find that I buy more DVDs and CDs when I happen to see/hear glimpses of titles that I would never give a chance to begin with.

Hopefully I'm crystal clear now. :b

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Of course! using the same creative mathematics the studios use, we should pay no more than $5 a pop.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

How about the studios start making some movies that are actually worth pirating!?

How about THAT for a radical idea. :frowning:

Instead we're stuck with a bunch of garbage: sequels, remakes, and just generally idiotic and uncreative popcorny nonsense.

Maybe I should be angrier at the buying public for going to see these movies and not watching good flims, overall.

*sigh*

 

[george kaplan]

There is, to my mind, a huge difference between people making a backup copy of a dvd they've bought, or people being able to watch said dvd in multiple machines in their house (and on airplanes, etc.), and someone downloading a film or making a copy of a rental dvd in lieu of buying it.

While I doubt if the "lost sales" from these last two would amount to very much (since if the people were stopped, they'd simply not watch the film - they wouldn't in most cases go out and buy a copy), I do understand the studio wanting to stop the practice.

BUT, if the only way they can do that is to infringe upon the ability to backup dvds by people like me who've spent over $30,000 just on dvds alone, then I say to hell with them. They will, in my case at least, be cutting off their nose to spite their face.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

We're on the same boat. For movies that my daughter watch over and over again, I always make back up copy because I don't want to ruin the original. Also for movies I bring during business trips. I'll bring easily 20 movies for a 2 week trip and at the end of the trip I'll bring home 0 (zero) DVD. Much lighter load for me.

It's neither here nor there, but I'll be quite ticked off if I can no longer back up my movies.

 

[Nils Luehrmann]

I am deeply disappointed that this topic is being allowed to continue in this fashion on HTF of all places were circumventing a DVD's copy protection - for ANY purpose is against the law…. That’s why the copy protection was placed there in the first place…. Or did people think the studios put it there as a fun puzzle for Hackers to learn how to break and then pass on the necessary software to everyone who wants it so they can break it as well?

Not only is it illegal to make these copies, but I keep hearing folks justifying this behavior by saying that they do it so they can avoid having to pay for another copy should they or anyone they lent it to wear out the original. So guess what, they are in fact ripping off the studios and the retailers by illegally making copies so that you never have to replace them due to their own use.

Point to me where it says that DVDs come with a lifetime guarantee. Which BTW, despite no such guarantee, I have found almost all studios to be very accommodating to anyone who sends in a malfunctioning DVD, even years after it was bought and replacing it with a new one. But even if they were not so accommodating, or if the DVD is no longer in print, then it is our choice to BUY (not copy) a second DVD and save it as a back-up. Not to use some software to break the copy protection and make your self free copies.

The problem is that it is so easy and cheap to copy DVDs, somehow regular law-abiding individuals are justifying making these copies with many of the excuses I have been reading in this and other recent threads on HTF.

"I wouldn't have bought it any way"
"I only have it on in the background and never really watch it"
"I make copies so I don't damage the original"
etc...

I personally have been involved in too many display technology shootouts to count, and let me tell you, even though we need to use multiple copies of the same DVD for direct comparisons - I and everyone else at those shootouts BUYS multiple copies for this reason. We don't make copies, because not only is it against the law, it is ethically wrong.

I agree that it is extremely unfortunate that content providers have to resort to far more aggressive copy protection methods, but is it really any wonder why this is happening. There are HTF members over the last few months who have straight out admitted to making copies, and watching copies of DVDs that were downloaded. One short search on the internet reveals hundreds of file sharing sites with thousands of copies of DVDs ready for downloading. We have illegal copies selling on eBay and all over the net as well. We have many reports from the rental industry expressing concern about the high volume of rentals for many accounts, far more than any one person could ever have time to watch… anyone want to lay odds on what they were doing with those rental DVDs?

DVD piracy has gotten way out of hand, the studios know this, and yet in many ways their hands are tied. To try and go after each individual would costs them an unbelievable amount of money, so besides trying to shutdown as many professional pirates as possible, their only other choice is to continue to raise the bar on copy protection. Otherwise, piracy will in fact become so uncontrollable; it will result in a drastic change in the industry. We are already seeing this as producers are far less likely to risk financing a film knowing there is a good chance they will never turn a profit due to a changing market that prefers watching films at home and with many who will use any number of alternate ways of getting DVDs without paying for an original

Yes, DVDs are still highly profitable products for the studios and on a few occasions have brought in more sales than the theatrical release, but the writing is on the wall. All signs point towards decreasing sales, and increasing numbers of pirated DVD exchanging hands.

BTW: it isn’t just the studios and retailers who suffer from piracy. For those of us with large collections, who occasionally retire a DVD and sell it on eBay or other similar sites, the resale value of DVDs has absolutely plummeted due to the vast numbers and easily accessible copies of DVDs.

After having seen a half dozen of my mint condition DVDs which if bought new where worth about $20 each on Amazon, all sold for under $3 w/$3 shipping… Our neighborhood does an annual garage sale, and considering the demographic, I figured I’d get a much better price for them if I sold them there. Wrong. Not only were not many people interested, but a couple even said that they would only give me $5 a DVD because that’s what they sell them for at the weekly flea market. Want to bet those are copies and not legit DVDs?

We all lose from piracy. Studios (and anyone who gets a cut from DVD sales) and retailers lose revenue. Consumers are left with devalued products, and copy protection methods that they would just as well wish were not there.

If you are truly upset over specific copy protection methods then my suggestion, rather than rant how evil and money hungry the studios are being, consider that the real problem are some of the people around us who are taking advantage of the weak copy protection of regular DVDs. There is no possible way the studios can stop them without making better copy protection methods. Even if we are to forget about how difficult it is to stop file sharing, how are the studios supposed to stop John Doe from borrowing or renting a DVD and copying it? They can’t! Not without at least trying to come up with far more aggressive copy protection methods.

Thus what has brought us all to this point, and unless piracy is controlled, expect it only to get far worse.

 

[FrancisP]

You are dead wrong. It has not been determined that it is illegal. The court has not ruled on whether making
back-up copies is legal. Your idea that if something that has not been declared legal is illegal is ridiculous. The DMCA says there has to be a commercial or financial gain in the penalties clause. Also who has been arrested for making a back-up? Recently two men were charged with violating DMCA for hacking customers' X-Boxs. Customers were not charged which brings up the question how they view it.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Say what you want, but even a shootout like that can be construed as public-viewing, which is also... tadaaaa!... illegal. Yeah, that holier than thou attitude still have legal holes.

Want to know how to curb piracy? Instead of spending billions in creating copyright schemes that will be cracked within days of release, sell those DVDs for US$5 a pop, close the time gap between theatrical to DVD release date, and piracy will stop.

 

[ChristopherDAC]

I have said before, and I will say again, that the chiefest and principal cause of so-called DVD piracy is the speed of duplication. It is not the ease of duplication, for ten years ago one could purchase a LaserDisc copy of a recent movie, without any copy protection whatsoever, and simply by making three connexions and pusing two or three buttons create a videotape copy of superior quality to the official videotapes of that film which were being sold in stores.
There was no widespread problem of disc-tape piracy -- it was confined to a few instances involving rental outlet owners who could not get sufficient copies of the legitimate release, even at inflated prices, to serve their clientele, and was dealt with by imposing a delay on the LD release of a few weeks.

The reason for this is immediately apparent: any such duplication had to be in real time. Dubbing LaserDiscs to tape, for purposes of illegitimate sale, even if one were prepared to invest in several VCRs and an audio-video distribution amplifier, required time.
What could be more different at the present day! If one has in one's Personal Computer a DVD-recording drive, of the kind which can be found for less than one hundred dollars, which is cheaper than VCRs usually were, one can make a copy of the disc to one's hard drive at sixteen or thirty-two times the standard playback speed, and record it repeatedly at eight or twelve times the natural speed, onto blanks which can be had for fifty cents each.

If one wished to solve the problem of "casual piracy", one would be best advised to limit the speed of the drive playing back the prerecorded disc, and to limit the speed of the drive when recording files originating from such a disc, and to prohibit the re-recording of files from a disc recorded from a prerecorded disc. A hardware-software control system incorporating these functions would serve to render non-viable the activities of causal copiers, while still leaving freedom for those with a legitimate claim of use to maipulate the content.

Without getting into the startling claims being made that every use of copyrighted material other than passive receptivity is immoral [I personally record non-copy-protected music from LaserDiscs to my computer, to allow me to make mix CDs and listen to the music without an inexpressibly tedious routine of cueing-up and disc changing; does this make me a monster and a thief?], or that a copyright holder has the right to do anything he likes with the works he holds copyright to, including imposing restrictions by mechanical means on the usage of copies of those works which he sells to the public, I will state that many of the measures which have been implemented on DVD or proposed for the new formats are not well-suited to the purpose of protecting the rights of copyright-holders against illegitimate duplication and sale of their copyrighted works, but that they do seem to me prejudicial to the public good.

 

[george kaplan]

That some people continue to spout the nonsense that it is illegal to make back-up copies would be funny, if it weren't so sad. :frowning:

Of course, if more consumers were willing to give up all of their rights to the studios, and agree to a pay-per-view view of the world, the studios would be in nirvana.

Next, maybe we can get people to be willing to pay the publisher every time they reread a page in a book.

And let's give up our tivos. And let's prevent any backing up of computer files. Let's just give up all our rights. :frowning:

After all it's far more important that studios make even more money from uses that we have a right to now, by giving those rights to the studios, so we'll have to pay them for what we get now as part of our purchase price.

 

[TravisR]

God, I wish there was some real news in these HD threads so the constant bitching would stop. No offense to anyone but I think the same people have been making the same arguments for months now. It's like a CD stuck on repeat.

 

[RobertSiegel]

Nils: you make some very good points, but it still doesn't make me feel any better. The projector I saved for several years to buy, my first projector and probably my last, will not play full 1080i or 1080p movies because it only has component inputs and no digital. The studios have slapped me and many other people in the face for just buying our equipment ahead of time, and it TOTALLY STINKS. No matter what any of you say about the studios and their rights (which I have always honored and never duped a copy), I don't believe they deserve any respect for this decision, and for now, have lost my support for either hd dvd format...because I am not going to buy a new dvd player and re-buy movies I own only for about 60 extra lines of resolution.... They know darn well that their digital signal will be cracked and very quickly by the pirates and tech teens out there, so all this has solved is to make early adopters the losers, and we are the ones that were obviously more excited than most to go out and spend their money to be ready for HD dvds.

No one is really saying the studios should not be worried about copyright and piracy, I think everyone here understands that-but there are alot of pissed off people who worked hard for hundreds of hours to afford their "compatible" equipment, and now end up with nothing but 540 lines compared to the 480 we already have. Who in their right minds is going to sit and watch these movies at the down-rez and be happy, sitting there thinking how they were slapped in the face, and watching HALF of what they should be seeing for the thousands of dollars spent?

Oh, and Travis, no offense but some of us spent close to 10,000.00 on a projector that is HD, only to find you can't play the movies in that resolution now. That is what the bitching is about and it should continue.....people have the right and need to complain as much as they can, especially on sites like this which the studios read. I am not just going to sit back and build up my anger. I hope no one else does either. I thank God for forums like this where we CAN complain and share our anger!

And George, I couldn't agree with you more!

 

[RobertSiegel]

...

 

[Marko Berg]

Nils, legal issues (which vary from country to country) aside, can you explain why you consider it so morally reprehensible to make a backup copy of a DVD one bought?

I'm asking because I don't really understand your tirade against all copying no matter what the purpose. DVDs can become unplayable over time, as has happened with many early titles, and I fully understand those who don't want children to handle the original DVDs.

Studios argue that you do not buy a copy of the movie, you buy a licence to view it. Therefore, if the media the movie is stored on goes bad, what exactly is ethically wrong with watching a backup copy of the movie?

 

[Aaron_Brez]

Robert,

There's nothing illegal about the Dtrovision boxes, but they carry some small but significant risk of having their keys revoked because they violate the HDCP license agreement. They should work, for now.

 

[Nils Luehrmann]

I thought I already did, but I’ll try a different approach.

It is the same reason it would not be legal to make a perfect copy of any product so that you can avoid having to replace it when it wears out. Besides the legal and copy right issues, by duplicating a product you are basically saying you have the right to replace a product without having to buy it again even though it is worn out and there is no guarantee.

Imagine if the technology to duplicate jeans was available, and instead of $50, you could make "back-up" copies for $1. Are you suggesting that it would be perfectly legal, and ethical to buy a pair of jeans, and then simply keep replacing it with a perfect duplicate copy you made every time you want to replace it?

It's because it is now easy and cheap to circumvent the copy protection of DVDs and make perfect copies is probably why there are MANY who now feel it is their right to make back-up and never have to purchase replacement DVDs.

Furthermore, considering the robust nature of DVDs (personally I have been collecting DVDs since 1997 including over 100 children's titles and have had only a couple fail from scratches due to misuse, and in each of those cases the studios, Warner and Fox, sent me replacement copies) it does leave one wondering why the necessity for "back-ups", even if it were legal and/or ethical.

I don't think I am alone in suspecting many so-called "back-ups" are generated for a different purpose, and I'd bet most folks with "back-ups" don't have the original anymore. Like my neighbor, who "backed-up" his entire DVD collection and got rid of the original DVDs. Some he said he sold on eBay and others he gave away as gifts.

I'm sure you can see just how wrong that is. Needless to say, I tried to explain why this was not only illegal, but unethical, but perhaps like many others, he didn't care.

Bottom Line: Like any other product, when it wears out, or you break it, you can BUY replacement DVDs, not make them yourself. Just because the technology is out there to make perfect copies, doesn’t make it legal. If you honestly fear the DVD may go OOP, then you have the right to buy two copies and save one as a legal back-up. Once again, this is no different from any other product that might go OOP.

Imagine how the antique business would collapse if the technology was available to make perfect indistinguishable copies of “OOP” products. We are already seeing drastic declines in OOP DVD prices due to the easy access to perfect copies of OOP titles. So instead of only a few hundred copies of the original release of “Little Shop of Horrors”, there are now an endless supply of copies available online and at auction sites. This caused the value of the original to fall from as high as $500 a few years ago to about $50 or less today.

As I said before, DVD copies are not just hurting studios and retailers financially, they are also hurting collectors who occasionally sell off some of their DVDs.