FCC ruling

Ummmm....it also means that a corporation can block access to analog output from your cable box and other appliances....I don't know that I'm comfortable with that.
 
The "selectable output control" technology blocks consumers from recording the movie while it's being shown on the TV set
Click to expand...

I suppose this is the line you're referring to. If you're that paranoid about a corporation invading your space you should probably cancel your cable company, phone and ISP before it's too late. Oh wait, it's already too late - never mind.
 
Ben_B said:
Ummmm....it also means that a corporation can block access to analog output from your cable box and other appliances....I don't know that I'm comfortable with that.
Click to expand...

How can you not be comfortable with preventing people from stealing content!?
Don't you make a living producing content? It's their content. Who cares how comfortable you or anyone else is? They owe you nothing. Don't like their movies? Don't buy them.
 
All n' all pretty cool beans. But do we really need yet another excuse to not leave the house?

I want to take part in creating things people want to get off their butts and go out of their way to experience. I suppose we'll just have to get even more creative to do so.

And to the last two guys I say... "RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE"
 
I feel sort of "meh" about this. People will still go out of their way to pirate. The theater experience hasn't changed much either.

What I do like about this is that I might finally be able to get those damn movies that slip off the theater far too fast without having to wait a ridiculous number of months and hence losing interest...

On the other hand, anything that increases control in the opposite direction (ergo not in the consumers way) I see as A Bad Thing (TM). I can let this one off though, since it has at least some merit. :2vrolijk_08:
 
i'm an old "wait for cable" kind of guy anyway. i'm in no rush. seeing a movie i haven't seen is still "new" for me, even if it's years after it came out. in fact, i like it that way...seeing films when people have finally shut up about it is about the best time for me to relax with a beer and watch it.
 
Meh...don't like this at all. Films need theatrical release before they are available to watch on televisions. It's like a right of passage and an honor that separates "real" movies from the straight to DVD ones. No offense to DVD films.
 
warning: slightly off topic rant:

How can you not be comfortable with preventing people from stealing content!?
Don't you make a living producing content? It's their content. Who cares how comfortable you or anyone else is? They owe you nothing. Don't like their movies? Don't buy them.
Click to expand...

I'm all for people having the right to protect their intellectual property, and equally so, for people respecting that right.

However, (and, not in reference to this article, but more a general thought in response to your post) I'm not exactly cool with certain copyright laws that infringe upon consumer rights, and this seems to be an increasing trend that has faced little opposition. I question the long term effectiveness of such practices, and even if they might be counter productive in the fight against piracy and the like.

Take much computer software for example. We, as consumers, have a legal right to make a legitimate, working backup copy of our purchased software. However, in some cases, it is impossible for us to do so, without first breaking the law (circumvent copy protection). So, how can it be ok for someone to have to break the law in order to exercise their legal rights?

I'm all for copyright, and protecting ones property and work, but I feel more and more like the pendulum has swung too far away from the consumer (and, even the small businesses) and towards the giganto corporations. consumers need their rights protected as well, not just big corp's. And, that it *may* have become unnecessarily restrictive.

Personally, I feel like copyright laws need to be seriously looked at, and it needs to be examined just how effective strong arm copyright policies actually are in preventing piracy vs. how they may be infringing more and more upon consumer rights without any real resistance, and how they might be shrinking the available market of legally purchasing consumers over the long term.

I also feel that fining a teenager 10's of millions of dollars for downloading a cd's worth of music is not only excessive and unreasonable, but I question the effectiveness of such a public policy to prevent piracy on the grander scale, or, to do anything other than to breed hostility from consumers against "greedy mega corporations", if you will. I think if a state decided to pass a law stating that the offense of going more than 5 miles over the speed limit would cost you 10 million dollars in fines, folks would see the absurdity, and excessive nature of such an action. Particularly when offenders driving drunk at 60mph over the speed limit 24 hours a day might only face a penalty similar to that of the 5mph speeder. Who is really making the roads unsafe in that particular analogy? And, who should resources be spent going after in an effort to make the roads safer?

Todays market is a market of convenience. One of the first, best thing companies can do, is to catch up to where the market is and has been heading. Offering, affordable and convenient ways for consumers to consume media. Being unnecessarily restrictive is not convenient to consumers. Be more proactive, rather than dragging their feet and only evolving when they must and then, not having anything in place to face the demands and challenges of new technology. Addressing copyright concerns of newer ways of content distribution only after those methods are already entrenched in the daily consumption of media is not effective practice. 2ndly, don't unreasonably punish the whole of the consumer base and impose restrictions upon them that *may* infringe upon the legal rights of consumers with excessive and (questionably) ineffective tactics. It's in everyone's best interest to examine just how effective (or not) the current landscape is on preventing piracy... Compare the amount of money spent on preventing piracy vs. the impact it actually has on preventing it. Does it have a cost effective return? b/c if it doesn't, we the consumer end up paying the bill in the form of higher prices.

The issue of copyright and piracy is a very serious one. It is very serious for big companies, small businesses like many of us, and consumers. Which is why it is something I personally get worked up about when I read some of the laws in place. A little reason and logic would not be a bad thing in future brainstorming about how to get media to as many people as possible while minimizing the impact of piracy. I fear the people *informing* lawmakers on such issues are (perhaps) a bit one-sided and perhaps domineering in their viewpoint. I don't see much balanced discussion and reasonable assessment of the effectiveness of various options taking place in the places where these policies are being made.

And, to answer one of your questions... They owe us something, I would say, considering "we", as the collective consumer, are the money in their bank account, ultimately. And, the collective "we" have a lot more power than we realize in shaping future law on such important issues as this (I believe). As filmmakers, and as consumers. And, at the very least, I don't believe that asking for laws that equally consider the rights of all parties (big and small business, consumers, content providers, etc) ultimately impacted by copyright laws is asking for too much. The american consumer in particular, in terms of the amount of money we all move on a daily basis, is probably the biggest *corporation* in the world... 120 million households, with average expenditures of around 50 grand per year in this country. You do the math. Seems the consumer has been the neglected party in these discussions.
 
Fully agreed. That's what iTunes did for the music industry, it made a solution that was more convenient than piracy...you just had to pay for it. It didn't stop the people that will always pirate not matter what, but it did stop the people that were just doing it because it was convenient, which was a ton of them.

Any normal person looks at what Apple did for the music industry and says, wow, they saved these guys. Unfortunately the TV and movie industry looks at iTunes and says "wow look how Apple screwed these guys, they didn't get things back to the way things were when you were paying $15 a CD...we don't want to play ball with them."

Fools.

I want to consume your content, just make it available to me in a manner that is convenient and fair.
 
milksac said:
I suppose this is the line you're referring to. If you're that paranoid about a corporation invading your space you should probably cancel your cable company, phone and ISP before it's too late. Oh wait, it's already too late - never mind.
Click to expand...

I use analog cable only for this reason. I also continually monitor my internet connection for things like throttling, etc. My phone company hasn't even figured out that I am using an iPhone on their network, am paying half-price for unlimited data, and tether it to my computer...and if they do and try to do something about it they're breaching contract.
 
Ben_B said:
Fully agreed. That's what iTunes did for the music industry, it made a solution that was more convenient than piracy...you just had to pay for it. It didn't stop the people that will always pirate not matter what, but it did stop the people that were just doing it because it was convenient, which was a ton of them.

Any normal person looks at what Apple did for the music industry and says, wow, they saved these guys. Unfortunately the TV and movie industry looks at iTunes and says "wow look how Apple screwed these guys, they didn't get things back to the way things were when you were paying $15 a CD...we don't want to play ball with them."

Fools.

I want to consume your content, just make it available to me in a manner that is convenient and fair.
Click to expand...

ITunes represents a pittance. It helped a bit, but the music industry is almost dead due to piracy - it only lives on as live shows, which the film industry does not have - these would be plays.

I just don't get what's the big deal: You lose your blu-ray, you scratch it - you have to buy another. Avoiding this minor inconvenience for consumers is not worth killing of an artform. As it is the small, straight to DVD movie is almost a dead genre, because of piracy. If you think that is not true you are not pitching in Hollywood today. These films were not produced by "mega corporations" these films were produced in large numbers by boutique prodcos like mine and perhaps yours.

Even Hollywood "big' films are often put together by small indy outfits who then sell them to these mega corporations. You would be surprised just how small many name prodcos are - sometimes 5 people or less in a small office trying to get something off the ground - and give us all a job.

If these corps have no money, forget a check from them. Do you really want to lose your job just so some idiot who can't keep his DVD in a case has the "right" to a free back-up? This is ludicrous.

Consumers are only consumers if they pay for content. People who pirate are thieves, and their wishes are in my opinion irrelevant.
 
Robert Ruffo said:
ITunes represents a pittance. It helped a bit, but the music industry is almost dead due to piracy - it only lives on as live shows, which the film industry does not have - these would be plays.

I just don't get what's the big deal: You lose your blu-ray, you scratch it - you have to buy another. Avoiding this minor inconvenience for consumers is not worth killing of an artform. As it is the small, straight to DVD movie is almost a dead genre, because of piracy. If you think that is not true you are not pitching in Hollywood today. These films were not produced by "mega corporations" these films were produced in large numbers by boutique prodcos like mine and perhaps yours.

Even Hollywood "big' films are often put together by small indy outfits who then sell them to these mega corporations. You would be surprised just how small many name prodcos are - sometimes 5 people or less in a small office trying to get something off the ground - and give us all a job.

If these corps have no money, forget a check from them. Do you really want to lose your job just so some idiot who can't keep his DVD in a case has the "right" to a free back-up? This is ludicrous.

Consumers are only consumers if they pay for content. People who pirate are thieves, and their wishes are in my opinion irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Well ok, but think about this. The mixtape. The generation old form of being social is now a federal crime. Technically.

If they really want to reduce piracy they will have to go as far as making a player that doesn't read any disc but the "widgetblackandbluray" disc that only one company can make and is extremely technichally complex to produce hence no black market version. Imagine a hdd that only plays one film into a special dock that only reads that format.

Basically forget dvdr, cdr, casette tape and brdrw. The only way to stay afloat is to calculate the loss to piracy into the business model.

Or maybe they would get me back into the theatre if the projector was actually infocus, and the seats didn't smell like urine....
 
Remember all that on these boards we cannot have any sort of argument that in anyway defends piracy of any kind -- they'll boot your comment and hit you with a demerit.

But yeah, personally I don't see what the ish is. If you want to go to a movie, you go to a movie, if you want to go to a concert you go to a concert. I think it's silly, when we have 100 inch screens sitting in our living rooms that we should have to go to some theatre with a bunch of screaming annoying kids to watch a movie. It's so that the ONLY movies I can stand to see in theatres anymore are action flicks, horror movies or The friggin Hangover.

Anything that gets the movie onto my HDTV faster is better IMO. If I really want to see a movie, I'll go see it opening night. But, let's face it, most of what goes to the movie theatres in wide release is some of the worst that film has to offer. And most of the art house theatres have crappy chairs and crappy screens and crappy sound.
 
If these corps have no money, forget a check from them. Do you really want to lose your job just so some idiot who can't keep his DVD in a case has the "right" to a free back-up?
Click to expand...

Talk about an over-simplification...

ITunes represents a pittance. It helped a bit, but the music industry is almost dead due to piracy
Click to expand...

Music industry is "almost dead" b/c of it's lack of ingenuity... heck, even it's lack to see the writing in big capital letters on the wall... and it's own slothfulness in adapting to an ever changing market. Piracy is one side-effect of that. It's more about convenience than money, I'd wager, for many. If it weren't, itunes wouldn't be even marginally successful. Otherwise, why pay 99 cents a tune when you could pay zero? b/c itunes for many is more convenient than the available pirated options.

Other than napster being free, it was also highly successful b/c of its convenience. Perhaps if the industry hadn't sat on their thumbs after closing napster down (and had been more quick to put the nail in that whole thing and put up an alternative, since they didn't see that one coming themselves) it wouldn't have taken 4 years for an itunes to come around and fill a gaping void... 4 years? lot can happen in 4 years, and by then they'd already lost.

The DVD market is also dying b/c of the consumers changing habits in the way they digest media... plain and simple. The industries have been slow to adapt to these changes, and to monetize them... and by the time they do, they are already well-behind the curve. They should be on the cutting edge, not dragging their feet with this... This is nothing new... People have been moving to broadband for their media consumption for several years at an ever increasing rate. From youtube, to now streaming hd content straight to your tv over netflix, etc... Instead of being creative and finding ways to tap these markets, and to bring new ones to the market... these folks try to put the clamp on them, or sit on their thumbs until they've negated themselves in that particular market. Technologically archaic distribution that refuses to adapt until absolutely necessary when they should be the ones at the head of the pack with this stuff. I don't feel sorry for you if you cap my bandwidth as a cable company as a way to minimize competition from sites like netflix, rather than providing an alternative of your own. I don't feel sorry for you if you wait around for 5 years until something comes onto the market to usurp napster that should have been out 7 years before.

Besides... no one here is defending piracy... lets' make that perfectly clear... In fact, it's in our site rules... But, that doesn't mean that other folks should get away with whatever they want under the guise of preventing it, particularly when it's pretty obvious that their methods up until now have been pretty ineffective. You said so yourself... The dvd market is dying b/c of piracy... obviously that copy protection doesn't prevent pirates as effectively as one might hope... Though, there are lots examples of copy protection preventing consumers from properly/legally using their media.

Instead of the same tired practice of trying to keep people out (even at the expense of keeping your legally purchasing consumers out in some cases, and/or pissing them off/limiting their ability to use the product/etc) using whatever extreme measure you can dream up, I tend to be of the opinion that perhaps developing ways of enticing people in might be a better option to at least try. The former certainly isn't working. In fact, some pc video game makers have done the latter with success. Some of the best selling games for pc upon release the last several years had no copy protection whatsoever, or just basic cd keys...

Piracy is a big problem. But, current methods are quite obviously mostly ineffective, and are becoming increasingly prohibitive to the consumer. It's time to try something new.
 
Remember all that on these boards we cannot have any sort of argument that in anyway defends piracy of any kind -- they'll boot your comment and hit you with a demerit.
Click to expand...

You don't have to defend an illegal act in order to discuss the effectiveness (or lack) of anti-piracy practices. Piracy is very clearly stealing of someone's work that they spent their time and money on. It's illegal. There should be no need to defend it. But, yes... you're pretty much right :)
 
Jason Ramsey said:
Music industry is "almost dead" b/c of it's lack of ingenuity... heck, even it's lack to see the writing in big capital letters on the wall... and it's own slothfulness in adapting to an ever changing market. Piracy is one side-effect of that. It's more about convenience than money, I'd wager, for many. If it weren't, itunes wouldn't be even marginally successful. Otherwise, why pay 99 cents a tune when you could pay zero? b/c itunes for many is more convenient than the available pirated options.
Click to expand...

You can throw Redbox in here too. I don't subscribe to Netflix, but there's a Redbox down the street. It's cheaper and more convenient than Blockbuster and I rent almost every week. I also started buying music with iTunes. I would just record songs I liked off the radio (I had a tape deck) now iTunes is much simpler and I pay.

-Nate
 
If history has taught us anything, it's that it won't be very long until someone figures out how to un-block the outputs on cable boxes, and how-to instructions start spreading, along with black market un-blocked cable boxes.

Just look at satellite receivers, DVD encryption, DVD region codes, DRM on music and computer games...
 
strangways said:
If history has taught us anything, it's that it won't be very long until someone figures out how to un-block the outputs on cable boxes, and how-to instructions start spreading, along with black market un-blocked cable boxes.

Just look at satellite receivers, DVD encryption, DVD region codes, DRM on music and computer games...
Click to expand...

Exactly. The people that are going to break the law are going to break it no matter what, the people that never will never will, and the people that will maybe do it won't do it if you make it easy for them not to, not hard for them to do it.
 
Actually there is some misinformation here. For one, the Steam Engine is a very successful method of preventing piracy of PC games. It works. It is beginning to revive the PC gaming industry.

Likewise for the PS3 and Xbox 360 consoles themselves. It is illegal and hard to find mod chips for them, and the general public does not have easy access. because the seller of mod chips could now face jail time, they are very, very expensive in most places.

The Dreamcast had no protection against piracy - and many analysts cite that as a reason (amongst others) for its failure, as you can track illegal downloads of Dreamcast games against falling software sales very exactly.

I take real issue with whiny consumers who think they have some "right" to use other people's content created at other people's expense. in any particular way. Where does this idea come from? Sinec when are film studios public service agencies funded by tax dollars?

DVds are clearly labeled - they say right on the box that you can't make a copy. Geez, get over it. Keep it in the case. This whining (of the public, I'm not blaming you guys) makes me think of spoiled children with a great sense of entitlement and a blatant victim mentality and no sense of responsibility.

Conceivable Sony could sell blu-rays that would only play on Sony hardware. This would be fully their right, as long as it did not come as a surprise after purchase.

This goes against my moral core. You do not have the right to come in my house uninvited and drink my wine, because I paid for it.

As per movie houses, they were/are. in many suburban areas, the only truly public place left. Is it really healthy that people be stuck in their homes even more? Have one less gathering place? I find even the video store was a great place to meet people. run into old friends, etc. Granted I live in a pedestrian-friendly city where going on errands is a fun thing that results in exercise, not hours stuck on a collector road, but I shutter to think of the long term effects of all that isolation. It can't be healthy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top