Slashdot Log In
Space Shifting DVDs to Cost Extra?
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Wed Dec 05, 2007 02:04 PM
from the digital-restrictions-monkeybusiness dept.
from the digital-restrictions-monkeybusiness dept.
Depending on who you listen to Steve Jobs has supposedly been pitching the idea of selling "premium" DVDs that would include an extra fee for the privilege of transferring your legally-purchased DVD to a different device. "The courts have held that "space-shifting" your CDs to a portable music device is a fair use. So you can legally import your CD collection to your iPod, or any other device, without paying a penny. But Steve Jobs apparently wants to charge you $4 for the privilege of doing the same with your DVDs."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
No way... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:No way... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:No way... (Score:5, Insightful)
If Apple is able to pull in a few extra fees for developing and licensing the technology then good for them I suppose. They are in the business of selling hardware remember. I'm sure they would sell more hardware if there was an easy and legal way to transfer content from original media, but there is not and Apple is dealing with it in a way they are good at.
Parent
Re:No way... (Score:5, Insightful)
I worry about this as a precedent. If we keep going down this route, eventually media purchases will be tied to a single device, using digital hardware IDs. I could see a day when you buy a movie, and only have "rights" to play it on one specific DVD player. You would have to provide the hardware ID of that DVD player at the time of purchase. It's no secret that content providers want you to repurchase the same movie a dozen times. One for home use, one for in your car, one for your portable player, one for your PSP, etc. DMCA makes this consumer nightmare possible.
Parent
Re:But, you're missing something... (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple is (apparently) offering to help. They would expect payment - natch.
Now with DVDs and Handbrake it is slightly different; i wouldn't pay $3 to $4 to save me the work of turning a DVD into h.264 format, but some people would. I would probably willingly pay some lesser amount. What people need to realize is that even though it is your right, it is still work.
Parent
Re:But, you're missing something... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:But, you're missing something... (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple is (apparently) offering to help. They would expect payment - natch.
Generally I agree with you, although it's slightly more complicated than that because of the DMCA.
To use your 2nd amendment analogy (my thoughts on that subject being an entirely different story, but I'll go with it for the purposes of illustration), it would be like saying you have the right to bear arms, but then saying it's illegal to actually open the box that the weapon comes in because the copyright is owned by the box maker and they don't want you opening it. So then Apple comes in and says they have a legal box-opener that's sanctioned by the box maker, and only they can sell it to you.
That would be pretty ridiculous, right? You can buy the weapon, you can legally use it, but you have to buy the means to open the package separately from some third party? That's what's going on here.
I do agree completely that those offering a service should be compensated for it. I just bought an "MVI" DVD, for example, that includes the band in question's full audio CD, plus pre-ripped mp3's of the entire CD (and yes, real mp3's, on a Warner Music disc), plus 5 bonus tracks, plus about seven videos, plus extra junk like wallpaper, buddy icons, etc. I paid $2 extra over the standard audio CD for all that and I was happy to do it. I probably would have paid $2 extra just for the officially-ripped mp3's by themselves (only because I figure they've gotta have some better quality system to do it with than my LAME... although I'm probably wrong). Point being, it's an extra thing that I don't have to do, and I'm pretty tech savvy - I could do it myself pretty easily - but a lot of people couldn't, they don't even know how to import a CD in iTunes. So for them, they're paying for something that they wouldn't otherwise have at all.
But to pay for the right to do something that you otherwise should have anyway is the problem here.
Parent
Re:No way... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think that the issue is if Mr. Jobs wants to make money of Consumers the question is how.
The thing is, I don't think that Apple is going to make much money off of this. They traditionally don't make much on content.
I have to wonder if this isn't a way to advertise "ripping" your movies as a feature of their hardware. Remember that the original slogan for the iPod was something like "Rip, Mix, Burn" but they had to stop that lest they be accused of encouraging infringement. This way, it's all DMCA friendly.
Parent
Re:No way... (Score:5, Insightful)
And Steve Jobs is on the Disney board of directors.
Parent
Re:No way... (Score:5, Interesting)
On the other hand, I have around 50-100 DVDs (not sure exactly how many, some are seasons of TV shows in boxed sets with multiple disks). Assuming around 7GB per DVD, that's 350-700GB. Even reencoding as H.264, that's a few more generations of iPod before I have enough space. More to the point, you don't need to buy too many DVDs a year to make your current storage device obsolete.
If iTunes let you rip DVDs in the same zero-click way it lets you rip CDs, I would probably have ripped a lot of my disks already, and would be a lot more interested in an iPod with video out (especially one that had support for 5.1 sound out via an external splitter). For $4, I'm not interested though. I suspect the aim of this is to get the functionality shipping in iTunes and then lose a class action lawsuit objecting to them charging.
Parent
Re:No way... (Score:5, Interesting)
- One iPod and PSP version video of the movie along with one version in a standard codec.
- One iPod and PSP version video of each episode (if it's something like a Futurama season DVD) along with one version in a standard codec.
- Flac/Wav/lossless version of the songs, if it's a concert DVD.
- No DRM on the ripped stuff.
I am sick of installing 10 gazillion CD/DVD rippers and encoders just so I can watch my DVDs on my PSP and my DSM-320. 4$ for me would be no big deal to pay for that service.
Parent
Steve Jobs or the MPAA (Score:5, Insightful)
Luckily iTunes is not the only tool in town.
Re:Steve Jobs or the MPAA (Score:5, Interesting)
Even that sucks though, limiting the file to just an Apple format and charging far more for the file than it is reasonably worth it. And at that point, either the file is locked to one device or it renders the DRM on the disc completely useless. In either case it doesn't seem to benefit consumers much, if at all.
Shouldn't the courts acknowledge that DRM isn't a protection measure if most people can break it easily. I mean at that point, what's the real difference between DRM and exotic file format?
Parent
For that price... (Score:5, Interesting)
I tell you, I *might* be persuaded to pay that price if it was some sort of continuous license w/unlimited downloads. For example, if I could take a DVD from my current collection, get it so if I lose the file I can always re-download from Apple, and if they release an HD version I get it for free, then that might be worth $4. Otherwise, screw you, I'll rip the DVD myself.
DVDs are encrypted (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess if you don't like it, you shouldn't blame Jobs who's trying to exploit a commercial opportunity, but rather contact your lawmaker and explain in layman's terms why this is messed up.
Re:DVDs are encrypted (Score:5, Insightful)
Clearly Steve ONLY makes money off you if you CAN rip your DVD to an iPod. So I suspect what he's saying is hey MPAA, if we pay you a small extra fee will you let us turn off your encryption so my customers can put your movies on my iPods?
Parent
Re:DVDs are encrypted (Score:5, Insightful)
The way I read it, what he's saying is "hey MPAA, if our mutual customers pay you a small extra fee will you re-encrypt your movies in an iPod-compatible format so our mutual customers can put the movies on their iPods, but not on other devices which may not be compatible (and which are not sold by Apple.)
The ideal situation for the consumer would be no DRM and no DMCA... too bad consumers (aka "we the people") don't have any influence in Washington or we wouldn't be in this situation.
Parent
But how much to watch on an AppleTV? (Score:4, Insightful)
They really need to make up their mind. Either they're selling us a license to their content (in which case the media should be irrelevant) OR they should be charging us for a physical product, in which case we can do whatever we want with that product including turning it into something we can use in ways they didn't expect.
If I buy some boards and a nails from Home Depot, they don't get a piece of the action if I try to sell the cabinet I made.
Let's do it! (Score:5, Insightful)
Charge me the extra $3-4 and leave off ALL DRM. That includes that macrovision crap and all of it. Don't require special software or hardware. Just don't put the DRM in place.
IMHO (Score:5, Insightful)
A Non-Starter (Score:5, Insightful)
"supposedly", "apparently" (Score:5, Insightful)
I know this might be a radical departure for Slashdot editors, but have you ever considered only linking to articles that have, I don't know, actual facts? Instead of rumor and innuendo to drive Apple bashing for Page Hits.
Also, did you hear that rumor about ScuttleMonkey? Supposedly he likes to have sex with washing machines. Apparently it's something he does quite a lot...
Why Should We Have to "Buy" Back Our Rights? (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, it may be the case that through DRM they have made it difficult to exercise my rights without paying them (i.e. I have to break the DRM to enable my rights), but that brings up another problem with DRM and specifically the DMCA. It is unlawful (technically) to break the DRM (aka access protection mechanism) even if I break it for the purpose of re-enabling my rights to time or format shift or for fair use. As the law is currently written it is unlawful to break the DRM no matter what the intent and that is wrong. The DMCA needs to be changed so that safe harbors for breaking the access protection mechanism are created when the consumer is re-enabling RIGHTS that the creator or owner has seized improperly via DRM (aka the access protection mechanism).
Am I missing something? Where does Jobs say this? (Score:5, Informative)
The following paragraph continues, "More interestingly perhaps, the studios are hoping to create "premium" versions of DVDs that include a copy of the movie that can easily be put on an iPod (and presumably a laptop with iTunes or an Apple TV). Fox has tried this already, with a version of "Die Hard 4 that includes a digital copy. Mr. Greenfield writes that this version costs $3 or $4 more than an ordinary DVD."
This paragraph doesn't refer to Jobs at all, but rather to a DVD that Fox released.
I'm missing the connection between Apple and Fox that Tim Lee's seeing. Can someone explain where this is hiding?
Re:Might explain "Deauthorize Media" option (Score:5, Informative)
------
Authorizing DVDs
When parental controls are enabled, the computer administrator must authorize a DVD before it can be played.
To authorize DVDs (if you are the administrator):
Select how you want to authorize the DVD:
To allow the movie to be played this time only, and then to require an administrator name and password every subsequent time, click Play Once.
To allow the movie to be played this time and every subsequent time without requiring an administrator name and password, click Always Allow.
Type the administrator name and password.
To remove authorization, insert the DVD and choose Features > Deauthorize Media. Then either quit DVD Player or insert another disk to complete deauthorization.
----
Parent