Why? What do YOU need to copy their film for? Oh, I don't know...maybe to watch the movie I purchase on the device I choose, when I choose? Its a concept called Fair Use, you know, the very thing the DMCA circumvents.

Oh, I don't know...maybe to watch the movie I choose on the device I choose, when I do. Its a concept called Fair Use, you know, the very thing the DMCA circumvents.

Why do you need to copy a disc to play it on a player?? What kind of ghetto player do you have?

Why do you need to copy a disc to play it on a player?? What kind of ghetto player do you have?iPod, that ghetto player.

Why do you need to copy a disc to play it on a player?? What kind of ghetto player do you have?

Where did he say he needed to copy it to play it? I just saw something about choosing to play it on a device of his choice. You know, "Fair Use" and all.

I can't help but think that IQs have dropped sharply when I see that MORE copy protection is being hailed as a good thing for consumers. Of course, it will be a moot point shortly, when it is hacked, but I can't see any rational reason for a person to think that more copy protection is a "value added" item :) That kool-aid must be delicious!

Where did he say he needed to copy it to play it? I just saw something about choosing to play it on a device of his choice. You know, "Fair Use" and all.

I can't help but think that IQs have dropped sharply when I see that MORE copy protection is being hailed as a good thing for consumers. Of course, it will be a moot point shortly, when it is hacked, but I can't see any rational reason for a person to think that more copy protection is a "value added" item :) That kool-aid must be delicious!

the reason that a lot of guys in this forum are cheering on more DRM is that they are paranoid that if they don't get more DRM studios will cut off their precious supply of movies. It seems content wins above freedom anytime :rolleyes:

By your logic I should be able to go into McDonalds and complain that I want a back-up of my Big Mac so that sometime later in the day, when I'm finished eating and get hungry again, I can eat the back-up and enjoy that Big Mac again.

No. buy his logic you should be able to buy a bigmac, take it home, and make yourself another one using the same/similar ingredients. From there you can make as many bigmacs as you like, and you probably will because you'll realise you can make them yourself for $0.20 each. This is perfectly legal and i'll be damned if this every changes.

No. buy his logic you should be able to buy a bigmac, take it home, and make yourself another one using the same/similar ingredients. From there you can make as many bigmacs as you like, and you probably will because you'll realise you can make them yourself for $0.20 each. This is perfectly legal and i'll be damned if this every changes.and BD+ is the "special sauce" :D

the reason that a lot of guys in this forum are cheering on more DRM is that they are paranoid that if they don't get more DRM studios will cut off their precious supply of movies. It seems content wins above freedom anytime :rolleyes:
It is understandable if BR supporters accepting BD+ as necessary evil to get studios to release movies. However, what puzzles me is that they are actively arguing against fair use, by extension, consumer rights. It seems that they are acting against their own interest as consumers, this leads me to question whether or not they have financial stake in the outcome of this mess.

It is understandable if BR supporters accepting BD+ as necessary evil to get studios to release movies. However, what puzzles me is that they are actively arguing against fair use, by extension, consumer rights. It seems that they are acting against their own interest as consumers, this leads me to question whether or not they have financial stake in the outcome of this mess.

I have no financial stake but I dont care if my dvds are protected against thieves copying them. As long as they play in my players.

That sounds like some advice the studios should follow. I feed them with my $, and I keep being bitten by more and more DRM......So the studios need look only at themselves to blame anyone for their problems. Consumers are showing more unwillingness to to put up with this crap, and that is a GREAT thing!

Nobody's crying for Hollywood's content cartels. They can either adapt to new market realities or suffer. If a few of them fall, new sources will take their place.....with business models that are actually of this century.

You, the studio, make a release only to see one unit being distributed all over the internet for free. How would you feel?

Studios have been making this claim since VHS. The reality is that if they had their way you would have to give blood and pay a fee every time you viewed "their film".

You bought the movie and should be able to view it and back it up by any means you like for your own use.

You paid for the physical disc. You did not pay for the right to replicate its content.
Whoever defined "fair use" as being able to make multiple copies of a movie? You?

Don't get me wrong - it would be great if the studios were more generous. But for the last few generations, "fair use" has NOT changed a single bit. To this day, you're STILL not supposed to make multiple copies of a movie for distribution. Why are you even singling out BD+?

You, the studio, make a release only to see one unit being distributed all over the internet for free. How would you feel?Good, that means its popular :cool:

Sweet, so now I can throw my player away and get a new one to enjoy the extra DRM!!!
Unfortunately, if you're a HD DVD player owner then you might need to do so, but luckily Blu-ray players support BD+.

Good, that means its popular :cool:

Hmmm, yes, that is true too.

I have no financial stake but I dont care if my dvds are protected against thieves copying them. As long as they play in my players.

That's a very short sighted viewpoint. Just because you choose not to make fair use of your movies, you think that no one else should either? That's a very dangerous road to travel. Oh, and the more DRM that is crammed into existing standards, the bigger the chance that incompatibilities will pop up and they WON'T "play in your players." Oh well, as least those thieves won't copy them!

That's a very short sighted viewpoint. Just because you choose not to make fair use of your movies, you think that no one else should either? That's a very dangerous road to travel. Oh, and the more DRM that is crammed into existing standards, the bigger the chance that incompatibilities will pop up and they WON'T "play in your players." Oh well, as least those thieves won't copy them!

If the discs won't play in their intended players, then the studios have a problem, and I'm sure they'll correct it. But why don't you enlighten us on why being satisfied with being able to view a movie from a legal commercial product, on a legal playback unit is being short sighted? Short sighted how?

You paid for the physical disc. You did not pay for the right to replicate its content.
Whoever defined "fair use" as being able to make multiple copies of a movie? You?

Don't get me wrong - it would be great if the studios were more generous. But for the last few generations, "fair use" has NOT changed a single bit. To this day, you're STILL not supposed to make multiple copies of a movie for distribution. Why are you even singling out BD+?

NO

Why do you guys keep parroting this crap when it's been smacked down in lawsuit after lawsuit by the courts of various countries around the world?

You are paying for an entertainment product not a disc!!!! Whether you personally think that all you are buying is a disc that is not how it has been viewed by numerous courts.

You have the right to back the disc up to protect the contents and view it on the device of your choosing. That's called fair use.

What happens if "blu rot" becomes a real problem and over the next 10 years a large number of discs die? Do you think the studio is going to give you a new one? Good luck with that.

What if they stop publishing a movie and you can't get another copy of it and something happens to the disc?

What happens if they stop producing BD and you can't get a replacement copy of the movie you bought?

What happens when a cheap media server becomes available that allows you to watch all of your movies from a central repository, anywhere in your home, but you can't do it because of DRM+?

You guys are acting like SHEEP, like if you just go along quietly that the big nice studios will still give you shiny discs to watch. Pathetic.

NO

Why do you guys keep parroting this crap when it's been smacked down in lawsuit after lawsuit by the courts of various countries around the world?

You are paying for an entertainment product not a disc!!!! Whether you personally think that all you are buying is a disc that is not how it has been viewed by numerous courts.

You have the right to back the disc up to protect the contents and view it on the device of your choosing. That's called fair use.

What happens if "blu rot" becomes a real problem and over the next 10 years a large number of discs die? Do you think the studio is going to give you a new one? Good luck with that.

What if they stop publishing a movie and you can't get another copy of it and something happens to the disc?

What happens if they stop producing BD and you can't get a replacement copy of the movie you bought?

What happens when a cheap media server becomes available that allows you to watch all of your movies from a central repository, anywhere in your home, but you can't do it because of DRM+?

You guys are acting like SHEEP, like if you just go along quietly that the big nice studios will still give you shiny discs to watch. Pathetic.

you speak the trueth

Fair use involves using legal recording devices with unprotected content. It does NOT allow copying "protected" material using illegal means to by-pass legitimate copy protection. Otherwise, it would be illegal for movie studios to utilize any copy protection in the first place.

I technically agree that you SHOULD be able to make a copy of something you own. That being said, one should not be able to rent a movie off Netflix and copy it for all their friends. This I do not agree with.

There is no way to differentiate between the two. Its the digital age, so people who want to make copies and people who want to pirate really should both get over it because you are one in the same as far as the powers that be are concerned.
And thus this debate.

It is a question of morals we're arguing here.

Some think that anybody that copies is doing it illegally while others are protecting their investment.

Does anybody remember a theoretical story about a dying wife that needs a certain medication and the husband couldn't afford it? The story asks what would you do: let your wife die or steal the medication to save her?

If you steal it you are breaking the law but saving her life. If you don't she dies but you upheld the law.

And thus this debate.

It is a question of morals we're arguing here.

Some think that anybody that copies is doing it illegally while others are protecting their investment.

Does anybody remember a theoretical story about a dying wife that needs a certain medication and the husband couldn't afford it? The story asks what would you do: let your wife die or steal the medication to save her?

If you steal it you are breaking the law but saving her life. If you don't she dies but you upheld the law.


Oh good grief. :rolleyes: We're not talking about saving someone's life here.

Look... my approach to this whole 'debate' is a simple one. I want all the films and shows that I love on HD-DVD or BD, for a reasonable price. If that means that the owners of that content insist that a copy protection scheme gets implemented before they will release it in that form, then fine. As long as it doesn't interfere with the normal viewing or playback of that material when used on a device that is intended for said playback. The bottom line is this. I would rather have the movie and not be able to copy it, than have a "right" to copy a movie, but not have the movie available. Period.

And thus this debate.

It is a question of morals we're arguing here.

Some think that anybody that copies is doing it illegally while others are protecting their investment.

Does anybody remember a theoretical story about a dying wife that needs a certain medication and the husband couldn't afford it? The story asks what would you do: let your wife die or steal the medication to save her?

If you steal it you are breaking the law but saving her life. If you don't she dies but you upheld the law.
The answer is and always has been (for everyone) "I'll do whats in the best interest of me".

Oh good grief. :rolleyes: We're not talking about saving someone's life here.

Look... my approach to this whole 'debate' is a simple one. I want all the films and shows that I love on HD-DVD or BD, for a reasonable price. If that means that the owners of that content insist that a copy protection scheme gets implemented before they will release it in that form, then fine. As long as it doesn't interfere with the normal viewing or playback of that material when used on a device that is intended for said playback. The bottom line is this. I would rather have the movie and not be able to copy it, than have a "right" to copy a movie, but not have the movie available. Period.

I see that sometimes a copy is needed in order to be able to view or playback the material.

Unfortunately, if you're a HD DVD player owner then you might need to do so, but luckily Blu-ray players support BD+.

Yeah? I was referring to the BD-P1000 that I've had almost a year now. Despite not being finalized until now, it will somehow work on my machine? What about those player revocations for when BD+ is cracked? Either way, this IS NOT good for the consumer.

"HD media" = Blu-ray or HD DVD. HD media is hovering around $10 a disc right now (online), and burners (Blu-ray only) are ~$500 or more.

Not sure where you're getting your HDDs, but the cheapest 500GB HDD from newegg is $120, and their prices are typically very good. Even at that price point, when your film is 30-50GB, you can't store many on one HDD - maybe 10-15 films. When the really large drives are available at 22-24 cents per GB, then you might see more demand to store HD media on HDDs.

I just picked up a Seagate 50GB/ 16MB cache for $ 109 at Frys on my way to LA. Store was also selling 2 TBs external NAS for under $ 450 now. I'd say the price of dirt will be reached. At the rate these drives are falling, 24 cents/GB will happen sooner than you think. I bought the HD DVDs for the same exact price as the SD DVDs in the next isles of the very same movies. LOL. Not even on sale either.

Otherwise, it would be illegal for movie studios to utilize any copy protection in the first place.There's an idea I could get behind! :)

This is a tough issue. I'm sitting in front of two book cases loaded with DVD's (and a couple HD-DVD's). I tried using a 400 DVD changer, but found I wanted the physicality of the cases to browse, even though most of my collection is on DVD Profiler. I don't have room for many more disks tho'.

A killer ap for this might be an integrated HDD/HD-DVD server/player (BD seems hostile to DRM) that records, catalogs and even updates my collection on screen, cutting out FBI warnings, old previews (unless connected to a collected film). It would stream to my network If any) and allow down-rezzed copies.

The one problem is having done this, what's to prevent my selling/giving away the original? The only thing I can think of is to have each disk have a unique ID that is checked against an online DB and plays only from my gear.

Yeah? I was referring to the BD-P1000 that I've had almost a year now. Despite not being finalized until now, it will somehow work on my machine? What about those player revocations for when BD+ is cracked? Either way, this IS NOT good for the consumer.

Fox and Disney do not care what is good for you. What they care about is being able to sell you the same movie over and over and over again. As far as they are concerned you are some ATM machine that coughs up dollars every time they come up with some new scam, errr, "piracy protection plan" that they argue protects their business from pirates.

I repeatedly see the argument that "as long as the disc plays in my machine I don't care".

What about the next step, in which the disc you buy is a license to watch the movie on a single player much the way software licenses work in the PC world? Get ready to bend over if you want to watch a movie in the car or on a player in the bedroom. If history has any lessons to teach on this subject it is this..... "if you give the studios an inch they will try to take the whole yard stick".

Will you copy protection fanatics still be behind the studios then? Don't think it will happen? When it comes to copy protection and consumer rights, BD is rapidly becoming the new DIVX.

What about the next step, in which the disc you buy is a license to watch the movie on a single player much the way software licenses work in the PC world?

That is exactly where this is going. We will not have our freedom taken way. We will give it away.

That is exactly where this is going. We will not have our freedom taken way. We will give it away.

Well you know how to boil a frog right?

Don't throw a frog in boiling water, because it will jump out...

Put the frog in some room temperature water and slowly turn the heat up. The frog will be boiling away to its own demise a short while later, none the wiser.

I won't go as fas as saying I won't buy BD+ discs but it sure will help when I'm on the fence.

Fair use involves using legal recording devices with unprotected content. It does NOT allow copying "protected" material using illegal means to by-pass legitimate copy protection. Otherwise, it would be illegal for movie studios to utilize any copy protection in the first place.

Actually, fair use allows copying even protected content. The DMCA makes it illegal to defeat encryption protecting copyrighted content. If you can figure out how to make a copy without breaking encryption, that is totally legal. The courts have been very clear on this.

...It is a question of morals we're arguing here. ...
Moral is part of it, but it's really about the principle. Can people have fair use rights ? The answer is most definitely yes, end of the story.

Now there might be people who abuse certain rights, does that mean we just take that rights away from everyone, most certainly not !

Do some search and try to understand why Universal lost betamax case against Sony more than 20 years ago. Legal precedents were set long time ago, history is your friend :)

Moral is part of it, but it's really about the principle. Can people have fair use rights ? The answer is most definitely yes, end of the story.

Now there might be people who abuse certain rights, does that mean we just take that rights away from everyone, most certainly not !

Do some search and try to understand why Universal lost betamax case against Sony more than 20 years ago. Legal precedents were set long time ago, history is your friend :)

I don't think you understand what a 'Right' is. If someone else has to perform some sort of action in order for you to exercise your "right", then it's not a "right" at all. Just like 'Health Care' isn't a "Right". Doctors, Nurses, and Health care workers are entitled to get paid for what they do. And movie studios are entitled to get paid for every copy of their 'work'. In other words, if the movie studio has to supply you with one of their films in order for you to copy it, then it's NOT a right. So what's being argued here is the "legality" of copying, or not copying. But that's not the same thing as a 'Right'.

If the discs won't play in their intended players, then the studios have a problem, and I'm sure they'll correct it. But why don't you enlighten us on why being satisfied with being able to view a movie from a legal commercial product, on a legal playback unit is being short sighted? Short sighted how?

The act itself is not short-sighted, it's that attitude. Just because YOU choose not to exercise your fair use rights, I should have my rights to do so taken away? How about if you don't smoke, but I do? Obviously the right to smoke being taken away won't affect you either, so let's do that too. So where do we draw the line? If you don't see anything wrong with freedoms you choose not to partake in being taken away, you are part of the problem. I guess as long as the trains arrive on time and the movies play, they can have all of our freedoms. It's worth it!

Is there an unspoken theme to incorporate cliche melodrama into every post in this topic? :o

What about the next step, in which the disc you buy is a license to watch the movie on a single player much the way software licenses work in the PC world? Get ready to bend over if you want to watch a movie in the car or on a player in the bedroom. If history has any lessons to teach on this subject it is this..... "if you give the studios an inch they will try to take the whole yard stick".How do you feel about HD DVD requiring all players to have internet connections and then requiring people to sign up for an account over that connection to open locked content on the disc, as the situation seems to be with the recent Freedom release on HD DVD?

--Darin

I don't think you understand what a 'Right' is. If someone else has to perform some sort of action in order for you to exercise your "right", then it's not a "right" at all. Just like 'Health Care' isn't a "Right". Doctors, Nurses, and Health care workers are entitled to get paid for what they do. And movie studios are entitled to get paid for every copy of their 'work'. In other words, if the movie studio has to supply you with one of their films in order for you to copy it, then it's NOT a right. So what's being argued here is the "legality" of copying, or not copying. But that's not the same thing as a 'Right'.
Fortunately for us, the world does not run according to what your rule :rolleyes:

Oh good grief. :rolleyes: We're not talking about saving someone's life here.

Look... my approach to this whole 'debate' is a simple one. I want all the films and shows that I love on HD-DVD or BD, for a reasonable price. If that means that the owners of that content insist that a copy protection scheme gets implemented before they will release it in that form, then fine. As long as it doesn't interfere with the normal viewing or playback of that material when used on a device that is intended for said playback. The bottom line is this. I would rather have the movie and not be able to copy it, than have a "right" to copy a movie, but not have the movie available. Period.
Whatever.

I really don't care what you want. I care about what I want. And that, my friend is the analogy that you cannot comprehend.

Do you want to hear what I want? No? Well, again, then I don't want to hear what you want. Period.

Whatever.

I really don't care what you want. I care about what I want. And that, my friend is the analogy that you cannot comprehend.

Do you want to hear what I want? No? Well, again, then I don't want to hear what you want. Period.

Hmph... I guess the first sign that someone can't logically support their argument is that they get personal. :rolleyes:

BD+ is Now Available ....To be cracked.

What about the next step, in which the disc you buy is a license to watch the movie on a single player much the way software licenses work in the PC world? Get ready to bend over if you want to watch a movie in the car or on a player in the bedroom. If history has any lessons to teach on this subject it is this..... "if you give the studios an inch they will try to take the whole yard stick"

First-sale Doctrine. Many courst have ruled that buying software is NOT purchasing a license, but a sale of goods. If the studios could sell us licenses, they'd have done it a long time ago.

How do you feel about HD DVD requiring all players to have internet connections and then requiring people to sign up for an account over that connection to open locked content on the disc, as the situation seems to be with the recent Freedom release on HD DVD?

--Darin

What does accessing disc features have to do with copy protection and the ability to run hostile code on your player to "defeat" things like region coding?

You're talking about apples and oranges here.

The HD DVD spec requiring ethernet connectivity is for interactivity features, it's not for downloading "The Borg 1.0" to your player.

Nice attempt at obfuscation though.

What does accessing disc features have to do with copy protection and the ability to run hostile code on your player to "defeat" things like region coding?

How is preventing a movie from playing on a player that its not supposed to be playing on in the first place considered "hostile code?"

How is preventing a movie from playing on a player that its not supposed to be playing on in the first place considered "hostile code?"

The BD+ code is allowed to run direct on hardware bypassing normal controls. I (someone with a programming background) choose to call that hostile. It's my player, I should have a say in what gets run on it.

The BD+ code is allowed to run direct on hardware bypassing normal controls. I (someone with a programming background) choose to call that hostile. It's my player, I should have a say in what gets run on it.

I do not agree. If the player was built to let BD+ run certain functions, I would consider that part of its normal controls.

In fact, I could take the position that YOU, the person who modified his player to perform a function not originally intended (play discs from a different region), bypassed the normal controls, and BD+ is just rectifying an issue that should never have been there to begin with.

The BD+ code is allowed to run direct on hardware bypassing normal controls. I (someone with a programming background) choose to call that hostile. It's my player, I should have a say in what gets run on it.

As someone with a programming background, I assume you know that when you install a program on your computer, that program may have access to the machine's facilities in a very general way. For example, if I install a program written in C++, then the writer of that program might very well have included code that would delete all files on my disk (since the API C++ accesses has such commands).

I am not sure we call C++ a "hostile" programming language because it would permit such programs to be written.

As someone with a programming background, I assume you know that when you install a program on your computer, that program may have access to the machine's facilities in a very general way. For example, if I install a program written in C++, then the writer of that program might very well have included code that would delete all files on my disk (since the API C++ accesses has such commands).

I am not sure we call C++ a "hostile" programming language because it would permit such programs to be written.

Actually you are incorrect.

For example, the root kit that Sony was installing from audio CDs was absolutely "hostile code" that, like BD+ was designed to gain access to things it had no right gaining access to. It's your player and you didn't sign a license agreement when you bought it saying you wouldn't modify it or watch movies from outside your region.

People who bought BD players before BD+ was developed did not "agree" to anything. It sounds like you are saying that if they don't agree with BD+ then they should choose not to upgrade their firmware to support BD+ and thereby not be able to watch any new movies mastered with BD+.

I hope you guys sleep well at night defending these DRM clowns.

Rip it.....Rip it good....


I jaywalk too. ;)

Actually you are incorrect.

For example, the root kit that Sony was installing from audio CDs was absolutely "hostile code" that, like BD+ was designed to gain access to things it had no right gaining access to. It's your player and you didn't sign a license agreement when you bought it saying you wouldn't modify it or watch movies from outside your region.

People who bought BD players before BD+ was developed did not "agree" to anything. It sounds like you are saying that if they don't agree with BD+ then they should choose not to upgrade their firmware to support BD+ and thereby not be able to watch any new movies mastered with BD+.

I hope you guys sleep well at night defending these DRM clowns.

Didn't see you take on AACS. Did you sign up so that your player could be revoked? Of course, the majority of people should have little concern, since the majority don't intend to compromise their own players.

Didn't see you take on AACS. Did you sign up so that your player could be revoked? Of course, the majority of people should have little concern, since the majority don't intend to compromise their own players.

I don't have to modify my player because HD DVD is already region free. This attitude of "if you've got nothing to hide you shouldn't be worried" is very troubling. It's called giving up your consumer rights.

As far as AACS goes, it has been compromised and although I'm sure it irks the studios you don't see the HD DVD people running around insisting we have to have AACS+ now do you?

The final nail in the coffin for Blu-ray.





Just kidding :D As long as it doesn't affect the playback of movies on my Panasonic player I really couldn't care less. Within 1 to 2 years BD disks should be around the price of SD disks, so it's not such a big deal having to buy another copy if yours craps out from miss use.

BD+ was inevitable. I can't believe that people complain that BD+ wasn't here yet, and the second it comes, people complain.Not only that but most of the people that are complaining the loudest about BD+ don't even own a Blu-ray player.


What about those player revocations for when BD+ is cracked?It is AACS that is capable of player revocation and so far that "feature" of it hasn't been used. At least not with any hardware player.


The BD+ code is allowed to run direct on hardware bypassing normal controls. I (someone with a programming background) choose to call that hostile. It's my player, I should have a say in what gets run on it.Last I checked AACS can do a lot of things on both HD formats already. For instance can you decide whether or not your player is revoked? Can you decide whether or not your player obeys the ICT flag when studios start using it? Can you decide whether or not your player uses audio watermarking?

Yeah? I was referring to the BD-P1000 that I've had almost a year now. Despite not being finalized until now, it will somehow work on my machine? What about those player revocations for when BD+ is cracked? Either way, this IS NOT good for the consumer.
Your player will support BD+. It might need a firmware update.

I don't have to modify my player because HD DVD is already region free. This attitude of "if you've got nothing to hide you shouldn't be worried" is very troubling. It's called giving up your consumer rights.

As far as AACS goes, it has been compromised and although I'm sure it irks the studios you don't see the HD DVD people running around insisting we have to have AACS+ now do you?

AACS can revoke your player, even if you haven't done anything to your particular unit. How do you feel about that? Where's your consumer rights now?

You need to be clear on this. No one is insisting to have BD+. Rather, it is just that stout HD DVD fans decided BD+ was bad for us - an uninvited concern.

Hmph... I guess the first sign that someone can't logically support their argument is that they get personal. :rolleyes:
And that was you. All I did was mention that this is a debate that has similarities to an old morality question and you " :rolleyes: ". People aren't machines. We all have different perceptions as to what is right and wrong.
The funny thing is I didn't have an argument, I posted an observance. I never said which side I was on in my original post.

AACS can revoke your player, even if you haven't done anything to your particular unit. How do you feel about that? Where's your consumer rights now?

You need to be clear on this. No one is insisting to have BD+. Rather, it is just that stout HD DVD fans decided BD+ was bad for us - an uninvited concern.


It's my player and I should be able to do what I want with it, whether AACS or BD+ is involved.

The key difference is that HD DVD is already region free. This was the biggest hangup that caused people to modify players or obtain players that could play DVD from outside their own region.

What is more about consumer rights, region coding or region free playback?

It's my player and I should be able to do what I want with it, whether AACS or BD+ is involved.

The key difference is that HD DVD is already region free. This was the biggest hangup that caused people to modify players or obtain players that could play DVD from outside their own region.

What is more about consumer rights, region coding or region free playback?

Well, isn't this exactly the "attitude" of "if you've got nothing to hide you shouldn't be worried", using your own very words? AACS can still revoke your player. Where's your rights now?

Well, isn't this exactly the "attitude" of "if you've got nothing to hide you shouldn't be worried", using your own very words? AACS can still revoke your player. Where's your rights now?

I'm arguing that BD+ and BD in general are more restrictive of a consumer's rights than HD DVD with AACS, is that an argument you would like to take on or would you prefer to go round and round trying to imply that they are equivalant when they are not??

HD DVD has mandatory managed copy in the specification
HD DVD is region free
HD DVD is not enhancing encryptions (making it harder to back up your own discs) due to the activities of hackers to satisfy waffling studios

But really, keep going round and round trying to argue that one is as good or bad than the other. I'm sure that it's transparent to only me. :rolleyes:

Well, isn't this exactly the "attitude" of "if you've got nothing to hide you shouldn't be worried", using your own very words? AACS can still revoke your player. Where's your rights now?
At least your player will still play all the existing content and the content you currently own. If key to your player is revoked, that is between you and manufacturer of the player and one that should be warranted. At least there is no potential of AACS bricking your player or PC.

I'm arguing that BD+ and BD in general are more restrictive of a consumer's rights than HD DVD with AACS, is that an argument you would like to take on or would you prefer to go round and round trying to imply that they are equivalant when they are not??

HD DVD has mandatory managed copy in the specification
HD DVD is region free
HD DVD is not enhancing encryptions (making it harder to back up your own discs) due to the activities of hackers to satisfy waffling studios

But really, keep going round and round trying to argue that one is as good or bad than the other. I'm sure that it's transparent to only me. :rolleyes:

Region lock is a format requirement, not a BD+ requirement. Will HD DVD stay region free forever? I doubt it.

While you're waiting for MMC (and you're willing to pay for making a copy?), how do you make your backups? Where's your rights now? Right, you never had them, the way you thought you should.

At least your player will still play all the existing content and the content you currently own. If key to your player is revoked, that is between you and manufacturer of the player and one that should be warranted. At least there is no potential of AACS bricking your player or PC.

Not being able to play any future content is somehow not bricking? You ought to know (maybe you didn't *shock*) that batch revocation is possible, and innocents will be involved.

Region lock is a format requirement, not a BD+ requirement. Will HD DVD stay region free forever? I doubt it.

While you're waiting for MMC (and you're willing to pay for making a copy?), how do you make your backups? Where's your rights now? Right, you never had them, the way you thought you should.

Ah, now you're speculating about the future of a supposedly doomed format.

Great to know that we have that clear.

I'd rather discuss facts, not speculation.

PS, the tools already exist to rip and store HD DVD, they just aren't tools that the studios support.

Not being able to play any future content is somehow not bricking? You ought to know (maybe you didn't *shock*) that batch revocation is possible, and innocents will be involved.

I know that is possible but at least you *can* watch all the content that you own as well as all content before revocation. That is NOT bricking your machine, it is blocking it from future releases and something that should be fixable by your machines manufacturer via firmware update. If you have a VM *altering* your machine like BD+ supposedly can, your machine could be bricked for all content - past, current and future.

It's my player and I should be able to do what I want with it, whether AACS or BD+ is involved.

The key difference is that HD DVD is already region free. This was the biggest hangup that caused people to modify players or obtain players that could play DVD from outside their own region.

What is more about consumer rights, region coding or region free playback?

Of course you have the right to do whatever you want with your hardware. But if you purchased a BD player in a specific region, that player is meant to only play discs from its respective region, and the manufacturer has not promised anything otherwise. You have no right to expect that your player will perform ANY functions it was not orginally spec'd out to do. BD+ is just a mechanism to ensure the player is doing what it was supposed to do. It is no different than say, intel using multipliers to lock a CPU to a specific clock speed.

Bricking your machine means making it no longer functional, equivalent to a brick.

Region lock is a format requirement, not a BD+ requirement. Will HD DVD stay region free forever? I doubt it.


"HD DVD: Importing your way to extinction." :eek:

Bricking your machine means making it no longer functional, equivalent to a brick.

Well then that's the risk you take when you modify any hardware - that it will not function properly after the modification(s). Ask any PSP owner who has a bricked PSP due to a failed firmware swap.

HD DVD has mandatory managed copy in the specification
HD DVD is region free
HD DVD is not enhancing encryptions (making it harder to back up your own discs) due to the activities of hackers to satisfy waffling studios

You also for got to add:
HD DVD does not force studios to use encryption.

AACS is voluntary for HD DVD, yet mandatory for BD. I personally want a format that at least allows non copyprotected/encrypted content to exist, because then the consumer has a chance (although slim) for the best possible outcome to happen.

"HD DVD: Importing your way to extinction." :eek:
Well, personally I'm glad for the 40+ BD US imports that play just fine in my region B player. Also, I have to wonder what the story will be once European publishers start releasing Region B exclusives...

HD DVD has mandatory managed copy in the specificationWhich neither means that it will be free or that it will happen anytime soon. Also last I checked the BDA had already declared that BD+ won't be an issue in terms of MMC so when it does happen it will happen for both HD formats. Also from everything I have read MMC is actually a part of the AACS specs.


HD DVD is region freeThat has nothing to do with BD+ so lets not make this into Blu-ray vs HD DVD thread since we already have several of those.


HD DVD is [b]not enhancing encryptions (making it harder to back up your own discs) due to the activities of hackers to satisfy waffling studiosThe problem is the same thing that allows one to make a backup of a movie they own also allows them to make a backup of a movie they don't own. That is why the studios don't like the ability for consumers to make an unlimited number of backups of a movie.


I'd rather discuss facts, not speculation.Isn't that bit of an ironic thing to say when most of the posts against BD+ are pure speculation? After all we haven't even seen a Blu-ray movie with BD+ released yet.

Which neither means that it will be free or that it will happen anytime soon. Good point.

All the more reason tor the consumer to 'manage' their own copy. ;)

HD DVD is region free
That has nothing to do with BD+ so lets not make this into Blu-ray vs HD DVD thread since we already have several of those.

Since BD+ has the potential to enforce region encoding above and beyond what is already part of the BD spec, then yes it is an issue worth discussing when talking about BD+ and how it will effect the consumer.

Since BD+ has the potential to enforce region encoding above and beyond what is already part of the BD spec, then yes it is an issue worth discussing when talking about BD+ and how it will effect the consumer.

BD players are region locked. This is common knowledge. You make a modification to you player to override the region lock, BD+ detects it and does not allow discs from the wrong region to play. The player is doing EXACTLY what it is specified to do. How does this affect the consumer?

BD+ detects it and does not allow discs from the wrong region to play. The player is doing EXACTLY what it is specified to do. How does this affect the consumer?

What about players that are offically region free? Can a BD+ disc tell the difference, and will it permentaly modify my player?

I still cant even believe this is being talked about as possibly being good? Is this a joke topic? How can anyone possibly believe that this kinda of thing will lead down a good road? The honest consumer keeps getting punished while the pirates keep wasting the studios money on DRM. It will never stop. If anything the studios themsevles have almost pushed me over the edge because I keep being punished for being honest and I have to keeping supporting an unbeatible war against pirates. Why I even "buy" my movies anymore is a small wonder.

I still cant even believe this is being talked about as possibly being good? Is this a joke topic? How can anyone possibly believe that this kinda of thing will lead down a good road? The honest consumer keeps getting punished while the pirates keep wasting the studios money on DRM. It will never stop. If anything the studios themsevles have almost pushed me over the edge because I keep being punished for being honest and I have to keeping supporting an unbeatible war against pirates. Why I even "buy" my movies anymore is a small wonder.
The OP is a Mod over at Bluray.com so what do you expect? :)

The OP is a Mod over at Bluray.com so what do you expect? :)

That's good to know, he should identify himself as such.

I still cant even believe this is being talked about as possibly being good? Is this a joke topic? How can anyone possibly believe that this kinda of thing will lead down a good road? The honest consumer keeps getting punished while the pirates keep wasting the studios money on DRM. It will never stop. If anything the studios themsevles have almost pushed me over the edge because I keep being punished for being honest and I have to keeping supporting an unbeatible war against pirates. Why I even "buy" my movies anymore is a small wonder.Probably it's good in that Universal can make a quicker switch to Blu-ray because no Hollywood directors/producers want less DRM.

What about players that are offically region free?What Blu-ray players currently being sold are officially region free and do they work fine with discs from other regions?


The OP is a Mod over at Bluray.com so what do you expect? :)That's good to know, he should identify himself as such.Why exactly should he have to mention that in his signature? In fact how can you two see no problem with the HD DVD supporters posting here that don't even own Blu-ray players but you seek to attack an actual Blu-ray owner that cares about the format?

I still cant even believe this is being talked about as possibly being good? Is this a joke topic? How can anyone possibly believe that this kinda of thing will lead down a good road? The honest consumer keeps getting punished while the pirates keep wasting the studios money on DRM. It will never stop. If anything the studios themsevles have almost pushed me over the edge because I keep being punished for being honest and I have to keeping supporting an unbeatible war against pirates. Why I even "buy" my movies anymore is a small wonder.

exactly how is the honest consumer being punished? any legit disc will work in any legit unmodded player.

exactly how is the honest consumer being punished? any legit disc will work in any legit unmodded player.
As long as that doesn't change, I don't have a problem. Also I have some movies I brought in from the US they are A,B,C region so as long as it doesn't affect these playing on my Panasonic I will be happy.
I still can't for the life of me understand the reasons for region coding. I can for copying, that's fair enough, but region coding just gives me the shits.

What about players that are offically region free? Can a BD+ disc tell the difference, and will it permentaly modify my player?

Officially there are no region free br players allowed. It's A,B or C.

Only the 1st gen Samsung was region free for a brief moment. That was 'fixed' by a firmware upgrade.


With BR+ they can investigate your player and detect if it was tampered with.

If the code detects an illegal firmware fix in your player any BR+ disc will not play.

A region B player hacked to become region free can become useless for BR+ discs from any region including region B.

In some Euro countries it's legal to have a region hack in your player. It can be that certain BR+ countermeasures are illegal in some Euro countries as these violates basic human rights.

Yes but why do we even have region coding for BD. It was illegal for manufactures in New Zealand and Australia to region code there Dvd players. I just can't understand why BD players have to be region coded.

Yes but why do we even have region coding for BD. It was illegal for manufactures in New Zealand and Australia to region code there Dvd players. I just can't understand why BD players have to be region coded.

Some movie studios want the ability to release a film to theatre and on to disk at different times eg many films are released on disk in the USA before or at the same time as they are here in the theatre here in Oz. They don't want the theatre's profits to be diminished by having high quality imported/downloaded copies floating about.

Interesting to see how the Aussie/NZ courts deal with that one on BD.

Originally Posted by wreckshop
exactly how is the honest consumer being punished? any legit disc will work in any legit unmodded player.


are you insane? how are we not being punished? how about the HUGE mark up on the dics? it costs a few cents to make these and they sell them for 20 to 25 dollars? Why should we have to pay that? Its the exact same thing with cds....it costs cents to make and they charge way too much and they wonder why so many people steal the music...I do buy but I can 100% understand why they do steal. And when with a lot of new cds and dvds you cant even put them on your computer (im sure theres a way around it i just havent looked for it) if i buy a cd i have every damn right to put it on an i-pod. it should be the exact same thing with dvds....if i want to put them on my psp....i already bought the movie i should be able to put it on any piece of tech that i damn well please. my point above all....is the fact that the honest cusomters are gonna keep taking it up the tail pipe....we give an inch and the studios well take a mile....who knows what all of bd+ entails but from the signs and disscussions how can it possibly be good? its only the first step and it will only get worse...look at these companies and there histories....if you support them in more DRM then you might as well be s%^&*^% them off too. hey while were at it why dont we support more and more government control too!!! why should we be in control of anything? after all...its not our money that keeps these companies around!!!

Yes but why do we even have region coding for BD. It was illegal for manufactures in New Zealand and Australia to region code there Dvd players. I just can't understand why BD players have to be region coded.

Just to correct you there, as far as I'm aware it's not actually illegal to distribute region locked players in Aus or NZ. It's just that modifying them to bypass a region lock is perfectly legal, even if the off shot is that it also allows the playback of "backed up" media.

Only the 1st gen Samsung was region free for a brief moment. That was 'fixed' by a firmware upgrade.

Exactly, so what happens if you put a BD+ disc that say has "advanced region control" in a non updated Samsung player? Does it:

Movie doesn't load
Movie loads but doesn't play
Movie loads and patches your firmware to be region locked.

If the code detects an illegal firmware fix in your player any BR+ disc will not play.

What happens if an offical firmware is released post disc production, and gets accidentially confused as a modified firmware?

My main concern is the BD+ system may incorrectly detect a region modified player as a player that allows extraction of the uncompressed video stream, and will the execute "advanced counter messures" within the virtual machine to disable functionallity/access to the disc, to which those changes become permenant weather i be through poor programming, power outage etc etc.

Actually I think that region coding should be viewed as a discriminatory tariff that violates fair trade agreements.

- Tom

Exactly, so what happens if you put a BD+ disc that say has "advanced region control" in a non updated Samsung player? Does it:

Movie doesn't load
Movie loads but doesn't play
Movie loads and patches your firmware to be region locked.


Movie loads but doesn't play or it plays and the scrambled video content is outputted.



What happens if an offical firmware is released post disc production, and gets accidentially confused as a modified firmware?


Chances are that it will not play unil a next player firmware fix becomes available.


My main concern is the BD+ system may incorrectly detect a region modified player as a player that allows extraction of the uncompressed video stream, and will the execute "advanced counter messures" within the virtual machine to disable functionallity/access to the disc, to which those changes become permenant weather i be through poor programming, power outage etc etc.

There is a good chance that this turns out to be a real nightmare. It all depends on the BR+ spec and how it get's/it's implemented in hardware and software.


I doubt that the advanced countermeasures will actualy brick or modify player hardware. The way it is setup now it will only affect playability of BR+ protected discs. (I have no doubt that BR+ is actually capable of doing it though. Installing library code with new advanced countermeasure routines in persistent memory is a real possibility.)

If players get bricked then br is a dead duck. No pr campaign is going to save br from extinction.

Actually I think that region coding should be viewed as a discriminatory tariff that violates fair trade agreements.

- Tom

Bravo.

The only point of region coding is to keep the discs from low dollar markets, like Asia from playing in the players of high dollar markets, like Europe and the US.

It's bogus.

What Blu-ray players currently being sold are officially region free and do they work fine with discs from other regions?


Why exactly should he have to mention that in his signature?

:rolleyes: Ouch. It is one of the most basic principle of any journalism, even in such 'journo-light' mockery circles like CE review sites and alikes, that you must declare your affiliations ahead or right after your opinion.
It's called full disclosure, you know.

I, for one, would really like to hear about few people including you, to be honest but unfortunately most of you don't write anywhere except here, in the forum, voicing a profoundly pro-BDA stance like you do on regular basis.


In fact how can you two see no problem with the HD DVD supporters posting here that don't even own Blu-ray players but you seek to attack an actual Blu-ray owner that cares about the format?


...who also happens to be a writer on a pro-Blu-Ray site?
Look in a perfect world we would all declare al laffiliations etc but since it's a public forum and it would be completely useless and impossible to verify it makes no sense form a practical point of view, I admit.
However if I would write for a, say, HD-DVD review site then I'd put it into my signature line - because that's the fair way, that's what you do if you are more than your everyuday poster on a forum.
If someone has a connection to Toshiba or HD-DVD, the same applies to him, of course.

How do you feel about HD DVD requiring all players to have internet connections and then requiring people to sign up for an account over that connection to open locked content on the disc, as the situation seems to be with the recent Freedom release on HD DVD?

--Darin

I think you need to seperate the two issues.

HD DVD mandating connections: good.

Content author offering additional content via online means (incl. either registration or download): that depends on how it was advertised to the user prior to purchase.

Just release the movies so they can be enjoyed.

If the studios release movies that can't be watched, then I won't buy them. So whatever comes down the pike better be usable.

The studios aren't too concerned about the few people who actually respect fair use and use the law as intended, it's the millions of other people that do not.

It can be that certain BR+ countermeasures are illegal in some Euro countries as these violates basic human rights.Basic human rights? No offense but considering all of the atrocities and genocides in this world of all the things that could be put on a list of basic human rights I have a hard time imagining that "no region coding for movies" would be considered one of them. Now it might be a right that you believe people should have and in that case if BD+ ever does prevent you from having a region free Blu-ray player than complain to your local European government about it. But honestly exaggeration of this issue is not needed.


It's called full disclosure, you know.I understand the issue of affiliations more than you might think since I have been seen this issue come and go in many a discussion over the last 2 years. Currently in terms of affiliations AVS Forum only requires signatures from company employees involved in this format war and from industry insiders. If you believe that this definition should be expanded than you should PM the mods about it.


I, for one, would really like to hear about few people including you, to be honest but unfortunately most of you don't write anywhere except here, in the forum, voicing a profoundly pro-BDA stance like you do on regular basis.I am incredibly honest about this format war and care greatly about the truth in regards to both HD formats. I just believe that Blu-ray is the better format and that it would be best if it wins this format war. Obviously other posters on this forum disagree with that opinion.

Basic human rights? No offense but considering all of the atrocities and genocides in this world of all the things that could be put on a list of basic human rights I have a hard time imagining that "no region coding for movies" would be considered one of them. Now it might be a right that you believe people should have and in that case if BD+ ever does prevent you from having a region free Blu-ray player than complain to your local European government about it. But honestly exaggeration of this issue is not needed.



So freedom to obtain information and available content , books, film, documentaries, is not a big deal for you?

It's because of the above right that we learn about atrocities and genocides in the first place these days.

It's very telling how BDA is withholding vital information from consumers.
-(Obselete) player profiles.
-'Advanced countermeasures'.

We don't actually own any of this material (all rights reserved) just the medium on which the material resides.

It's like computer software from Microsoft -- we are licensed users. Microsoft, as part of the "genuine Windows advantage" keeps a record of *your* computer's installation components tied to the product key. If any of that configuration changes it sets off a "red flag" that something has changed and the user gets a three day grace period to reactivate. The logs show it.

Change a sound card? MS is going to know about it and determine if that is enough to warrant a revactivation or purchase a new license because the installation is on a "new" machine -- regardless whether or not the HD changed, video card changed, motherboard changed, etc. The logs show it. MS is making it difficult for one to experiment with their own home-built computers. This goal of this "genuine advantage" outwardly is to protect us from use of possibly virus plagued copies, but inwardly is to prvent piracy and one user from installing Windows on multiple machines in, say a small or lager business and pay for one license.

Change a sound card? MS is going to know about it and determine if that is enough to warrant a revactivation or purchase a new license because the installation is on a "new" machine -- regardless whether or not the HD changed, video card changed, motherboard changed, etc. The logs show it. MS is making it difficult for one to experiment with their own home-built computers. This goal of this "genuine advantage" outwardly is to protect us from use of possibly virus plagued copies, but inwardly is to prvent piracy and one user from installing Windows on multiple machines in, say a small or lager business and pay for one license.Hence the rise of the Linux desktop. Ubuntu rocks! :)

There was a brief period in the 1980's when users were actually marching in the streets in front of Lotus headquarters picketing the "unreasonable user burden" of extra copy protection added to the then dominant Lotus 1-2-3 software. At that time the US Navy told Lotus it could not afford the copy protection issues and switched to another product.

For a brief period of time the "Genuine Advantage" program decided my original OEM version of XP was not authorized and would not allow me into Windows Update, though it has apparently since reconsidered.

My next box will also be Linux. And if HD DVD or BD has an unreasonable user burden of copy protection I'll also seek alternatives.

- Tom

So freedom to obtain information and available content , books, film, documentaries, is not a big deal for you?

It's because of the above right that we learn about atrocities and genocides in the first place these days.

It's very telling how BDA is withholding vital information from consumers.
-(Obselete) player profiles.
-'Advanced countermeasures'.

So you're basically making the claim that the BDA is limiting free speech. LOL

....as these violates basic human rights.
I hear BDA is also partly responsible for the crisis in Darfur and supplying uranium enrichment technology to the Iranians. I mean, they're SERIOUS about copyright protection....

Well since antigua won its court case at the WTO over th new US poker laws, and the US isn't recognizing the decision,they can now violate US intellectual property laws. So music movies,software,patents can now be duplicated and sold by antigua LEGALLY.

Maybe they will save us from the draconian DRM

Well since antigua won its court case at the WTO over th new US poker laws, and the US isn't recognizing the decision,they can now violate US intellectual property laws. So music movies,software,patents can now be duplicated and sold by antigua LEGALLY.

Maybe they will save us from the draconian DRMYou mean these guys and their foxy company? ;)
We're a software company on the beautiful island Antigua. We have our own management and software development team.

So freedom to obtain information and available content , books, film, documentaries, is not a big deal for you?Come now we are talking about region coding movies and TV shows to protect distribution deals and low movie prices used in third world countries. In fact region coding doesn't even need to be used and any company that wants to can easily release Blu-ray content that will work in all three regions. As such in no way, shape, or form is this an issue that deserves to be called a violation of basic human rights.


It's because of the above right that we learn about atrocities and genocides in the first place these days.Well besides the fact that you listed books when we are talking about Blu-ray region coding I have the hunch that anyone who cares about the atrocities and genocides of the world can get that information regardless of Blu-ray region coding. But thanks for providing by far the strangest explanation I have ever heard for someone being against region coding.

Come now we are talking about region coding movies and TV shows to protect distribution deals and low movie prices used in third world countries. In fact region coding doesn't even need to be used and any company that wants to can easily release Blu-ray content that will work in all three regions. As such in no way, shape, or form is this an issue that deserves to be called a violation of basic human rights.


Well besides the fact that you listed books when we are talking about Blu-ray region coding I have the hunch that anyone who cares about the atrocities and genocides of the world can get that information regardless of Blu-ray region coding. But thanks for providing by far the strangest explanation I have ever heard for someone being against region coding.


It does bother me that my freedom is limited to access region 1/A content that might never be released in other regions.

This violation is not as severe as genocide or kidnapping 'suspect' individuals to location outside normal jurisdictions.
Burning books and braking some windows is not that severe either.

What I do found strange that sliding morals are deemed acceptable when there is a Blu ray logo involved.

It does bother me that my freedom is limited to access region 1/A content that might never be released in other regions.

This violation is not as severe as genocide or kidnapping 'suspect' individuals to location outside normal jurisdictions.
Burning books and braking some windows is not that severe either.

What I do found strange that sliding morals are deemed acceptable when there is a Blu ray logo involved.

I'm curious, under what authority do you feel gives you the right to dictate to the studios how they wish to distribute their content?

Next thing ya know, they will be calling themself "Freedom Fighters"! :o

I'm curious, under what authority do you feel gives you the right to dictate to the studios how they wish to distribute their content?

What gives the studio's the right to limit my acces to content?

For example region 2 releases having only 5.1 DD where the R1 release has DTS ES (6.1).
Often R2 releases didn't got the additional content that was available on the R1.
All film based r2 releases are suffering from the dreaded pal speedup which I don't like.

That's why over 80% of my collection is r1 instead of r2.

A nice bonus is that in total I estimate that it saved me about a 1000 euro.

What gives the studio's the right to limit my acces to content?

Let's see. Its their stuff and they can do whatever they want. Nothing says that you have to buy what they offer you.

What gives the studio's the right to limit my acces to content?


What gives Comcast the right to block my access to channels I don't pay for?

(Does anyone forbid you to buy a region 1 player and compatible equipment? It's just that you don't want to pay for it.)

What gives Comcast the right to block my access to channels I don't pay for?

(Does anyone forbid you to buy a region 1 player and compatible equipment? It's just that you don't want to pay for it.)

Once again we get the apples and oranges comparisons to try to justify DRM on optical media.

There are multiple devices from multiple manufacturers capable of playing back an optical HD disc. This includes computer drives, set top boxes and (in the future) home media servers.

The content distributor should not be telling people what equipment they can and can't use to watch the software product.

You used the cable analogy (poorly), well guess what? Congress is forcing all cable companies to switch their proprietary set top boxes to generic ones that work with cable cards, they are expressly doing this to foster competition and give consumers more choices.

People can go on and on about folks pirating (backing up their own) discs but at the end of the day what this is really about is consumer choice.

Once again we get the apples and oranges comparisons to try to justify DRM on optical media.

There are multiple devices from multiple manufacturers capable of playing back an optical HD disc. This includes computer drives, set top boxes and (in the future) home media servers.

The content distributor should not be telling people what equipment they can and can't use to watch the software product.

You used the cable analogy (poorly), well guess what? Congress is forcing all cable companies to switch their proprietary set top boxes to generic ones that work with cable cards, they are expressly doing this to foster competition and give consumers more choices.

People can go on and on about folks pirating (backing up their own) discs but at the end of the day what this is really about is consumer choice.

I guess I'm confused. If it's an HD-DVD player, then it will play HD-DVD's. Right? No matter if it's a stand alone unit, a computer based unit, or a game platform unit. So, I don't really see what your argument is.

I guess I'm confused. If it's an HD-DVD player, then it will play HD-DVD's. Right? No matter if it's a stand alone unit, a computer based unit, or a game platform unit. So, I don't really see what your argument is.

Yes, you're confused. The whole point of strong DRM such as BD+ is to prevent you from having flexibility in how you access the content.

Why do this? Simple. It's not about piracy, it's about selling the same damn content to the same damn consumer over and over and over again.

Since you seem perfectly happy with this future state of affairs, I will not waste any more effort on explaining to you why this is a BAD thing.

Yes, you're confused. The whole point of strong DRM such as BD+ is to prevent you from having flexibility in how you access the content.

Why do this? Simple. It's not about piracy, it's about selling the same damn content to the same damn consumer over and over and over again.

Since you seem perfectly happy with this future state of affairs, I will not waste any more effort on explaining to you why this is a BAD thing.

How are they restricting your access to the content? If it's an HD-DVD, or a BD disc... it WILL play in the appropriate player. Surely you don't expect a BD disc to play in your VHS recorder?

it WILL play in the appropriate player. I'll choose my own 'appropriate' player.

It does bother me that my freedom is limited to access region 1/A content that might never be released in other regions.Well a lot of stuff bothers me but I don't go around trying to claim that it is a violation of basic human rights. Also it isn't illegal to buy a Region A Blu-ray player regardless of were you live so technically they aren't actually preventing you from buying content from that region. They are simply making it more difficult to do that.


Burning books and braking some windows is not that severe either.Well that depends if you own those books and windows.


What I do found strange that sliding morals are deemed acceptable when there is a Blu ray logo involved.Just because some posters disagree with your opinions doesn't make they are less moral than you but thanks once again for exaggerating this issue far beyond the realm of reason.


What gives the studio's the right to limit my acces to content?Well if you own the rights to a movie you can basically do whatever you want with it. That includes deciding what video formats to release it on, where it will be released, when it will be released, and at what price it will be sold at.

Those that have the opinion that questioning questionable technology intended/having the ability to violate some of my basic rights is far beyond the realm of reason do have low morals indeed.

Those that have the opinion that questioning questionable technology intended/having the ability to violate some of my basic rights is far beyond the realm of reason do have low morals indeed.First off most people would not consider region coding a violation of your basic human rights. Secondly just because people disagree with you about that does not mean that they are immoral people. Finally if you can not logically refute what other people have said in a debate insulting them is not going to do any good.

... Finally if you can not logically refute what other people have said in a debate insulting them is not going to do any good.

I agree, it shure does you no good.

How are they restricting your access to the content? If it's an HD-DVD, or a BD disc... it WILL play in the appropriate player. Surely you don't expect a BD disc to play in your VHS recorder?

Not really, my neighbor bought a BR drive for his HTPC and software, but could not play movies because it did not like his video card that it said was not HDCP compliant. So he had the appropriate player, but it did not work.

Also, if Sony sells a movie in Lichtenstein for 1/2 the price of the same movie sold in the US, why can't I buy it and have it play in a Blu-ray player? Sony BR disc and Sony BR player, but not compatible?

Maximizing profits is what it is all about.

Not really, my neighbor bought a BR drive for his HTPC and software, but could not play movies because it did not like his video card that it said was not HDCP compliant. So he had the appropriate player, but it did not work.
.

I'm sure the software requirements stated a fully compliant graphic card was needed in order for BD playback..
In the case of HTPC, the user will have to be fairly well informed to avoid mistakes such as this..

Not really, my neighbor bought a BR drive for his HTPC and software, but could not play movies because it did not like his video card that it said was not HDCP compliant. So he had the appropriate player, but it did not work.

Also, if Sony sells a movie in Lichtenstein for 1/2 the price of the same movie sold in the US, why can't I buy it and have it play in a Blu-ray player? Sony BR disc and Sony BR player, but not compatible?

Maximizing profits is what it is all about.

Well, it's about control AND maximizing profit. If you bought the movie on BD then you essentially bought that content. You should be able to rip it and display it however you want for as long as you want.

But lets look at it from the studio point of view. They know that other distribution means are coming (home media servers like AppleTV, etc) and they don't want you to be able to use the BD movie you already bought on these devices. So 10 yrs from now when you shell out for a home media server you find out that there's no way to get your content onto it due to BD+.

Guess you have to buy that movie again.

Oh your media center PC crashed and we can't find your account?

Time to buy the movie again.

Want to burn a DVD of the downloaded movie to take in the car for the kiddies, time to buy the "burn a DVD" feature for the movie.

This is 100% about studios trying to squeeze as many dollars out of naive consumers as they possibly can, and the real chuckle is, that many of you are foolish enough to believe that if you resist this you will never get your movies in high def.

Also, if Sony sells a movie in Lichtenstein for 1/2 the price of the same movie sold in the US, why can't I buy it and have it play in a Blu-ray player? Sony BR disc and Sony BR player, but not compatible?

Because region B movies are only meant to work with region B players? We all know about BD's region restricitions, I find it very odd that people continue to complain about it. It's like me buying a song off itunes then saying my basic human rights have been violated because I can't play it on a zune.

Because region B movies are only meant to work with region B players? We all know about BD's region restricitions, I find it very odd that people continue to complain about it. It's like me buying a song off itunes then saying my basic human rights have been violated because I can't play it on a zune.

It is funny that you should mention that since DRM free music downloads (from some music distributors) is now rapidly gaining popularity for its ability to be played on any music device.

...I find it very odd that people continue to complain about it. ...
I found it very odd that you have problem with consumers complaining about region code, some (most ?) BR purchasers probably know about region code going in, that does not mean they have to like it and accept it happily. After all, HD DVD does not have region code and BR has fewer regions, perhaps all the bitter complaints about DVD region code have something to do with it :rolleyes:

I found it very odd that you have problem with consumers complaining about region code, some (most ?) BR purchasers probably know about region code going in, that does not mean they have to like it and accept it happily. After all, HD DVD does not have region code and BR has fewer regions, perhaps all the bitter complaints about DVD region code have something to do with it :rolleyes:

You can make that sort of complaint about ANYTHING. For instance, Microsoft only lets you use its own proprietary peripherals with it's xbox 360 system, whereas Sony lets you use any compatible peripherals for PS3 as long as it is standards compatible. MS made a decision which resulted in total control of its platform, is that a violation of basic human rights?

Not really, my neighbor bought a BR drive for his HTPC and software, but could not play movies because it did not like his video card that it said was not HDCP compliant. So he had the appropriate player, but it did not work.

Also, if Sony sells a movie in Lichtenstein for 1/2 the price of the same movie sold in the US, why can't I buy it and have it play in a Blu-ray player? Sony BR disc and Sony BR player, but not compatible?

Maximizing profits is what it is all about.

HDCP has been around for a while now. Sounds like your friend was due for a new video card anyway.

I bought a PC game about a year ago. It wasn't until I got it home that I realized that it required Windows XP, and wouldn't run on Windows 2000. I simply upgraded to XP. That's the way things work. New stuff comes in... old stuff goes out. What? Do you think I had a "Right" to run a game on Win2K that was optimized for XP? Of course not.

And BTW, Region Coding is an entirely different stack of carrots than copy protection. Some of you guys are all over the map on what you're complaining about.

You can make that sort of complaint about ANYTHING. For instance, Microsoft only lets you use its own proprietary peripherals with it's xbox 360 system, whereas Sony lets you use any compatible peripherals for PS3 as long as it is standards compatible. MS made a decision which resulted in total control of its platform, is that a violation of basic human rights?
Did I mention anywhere about human rights ? Let's not get overboard here :) Complaining is one way consumers can fight big corporation, it works sometimes. My point is simple, consumers do have right to complain, there is nothing odd or strange about it, accepting something (we don't like) shoved down our throat without complaining is odd.

Obviously voting with one's pocket is the most effective way, which I do practice.

You can make that sort of complaint about ANYTHING. For instance, Microsoft only lets you use its own proprietary peripherals with it's xbox 360 system, whereas Sony lets you use any compatible peripherals for PS3 as long as it is standards compatible. MS made a decision which resulted in total control of its platform, is that a violation of basic human rights?

Except a proprietary Xbox360 peripheral works with all Xbox360s, and a Sony Blu-ray disc only works with some Sony Blu-Ray players. Region coding is clearly a whole 'nother level.

I don't think it a violation of human rights, but it SHOULD be a violation of consumer rights.

Well, it's about control AND maximizing profit. If you bought the movie on BD then you essentially bought that content. You should be able to rip it and display it however you want for as long as you want..

Er... no... you shouldn't.


But lets look at it from the studio point of view. They know that other distribution means are coming (home media servers like AppleTV, etc) and they don't want you to be able to use the BD movie you already bought on these devices. So 10 yrs from now when you shell out for a home media server you find out that there's no way to get your content onto it due to BD+.

Guess you have to buy that movie again..

Man, with your logic you might as well say that if you pay to see a movie at the theater when it first comes out, then you're entitled to get it for free on DVD because you already paid to see it at the theater.


Oh your media center PC crashed and we can't find your account?

Time to buy the movie again..

I don't see what this has to do with BD discs.



Want to burn a DVD of the downloaded movie to take in the car for the kiddies, time to buy the "burn a DVD" feature for the movie..

See above.


This is 100% about studios trying to squeeze as many dollars out of naive consumers as they possibly can, and the real chuckle is, that many of you are foolish enough to believe that if you resist this you will never get your movies in high def.

Studios are in business to make money. No money... no movies. No money... no TV shows. See how that works?

I'm sure the software requirements stated a fully compliant graphic card was needed in order for BD playback..
In the case of HTPC, the user will have to be fairly well informed to avoid mistakes such as this..


I agree, you need to be very well informed in order to get something like that to work. It stinks that they make it so complicated, and people end up wasting a lot of time and money just so some CEOs can have warm fuzzies about selling their movies.

Studios are in business to make money. No money... no movies. No money... no TV shows. See how that works?

I'm not going to waste much more time on you because it's evident to me that you will happily fork over as much dough as the studios want from you for the "privilage" of getting to see their movies.

As I've previously pointed out, the music studios tried this same thing, making it illegal and impossible to rip your purchased CDs to digital form so you could enjoy that music on your portable music player (iPod, etc).

Since consumers didn't want to re-purchase the music they had already spent thousands on, they fought back.

The companies tried that tact and lost and they are trying this tact and will also lose.

Studios are in business to make money. No money... no movies. No money... no TV shows. See how that works?

LOL! Movie companies will go broke because of this one little issue? No more $100 million dollar weekend box offices because you can make a backup copy of a disc?

BTW, even if their was no money, we would still have shows. Check out a thing called youtube.
See how that works?

As for 'Some of you guys are all over the map on what you're complaining about. ' ... You said a BR disc will play in a BR player, and I was just proving that is not true. Region Coding blocks some Blu-Ray discs from playing in some Blu-Ray players!

If BD+ were critical for success, studios would not be releasing on DVD. I think the current slow down is that there isn't enough BD replication capacity and this was an excuse while studios await their turn at the lines....Fox is at the back since they are probably paying less than WB or Paramount to Sony to get their disks pressed. Plus, only having WB and Paramount release on HD DVD would be a PR disaster....so BD+ is an excuse and not a reason. Has a studio ever said they are waiting for BD+, I know Fox said they had replication issues..JMHO.

^^ So if the next Fox BD has BD+ on it then what are you going to say?

I'm not going to waste much more time on you...



Well... Frankly... that's all you've been doing is wasting your time (as have I). The Studios are going to do what they're going to do. It's their property. And it really doesn't matter what you or I think. So, when you finally get tired of writing here, you will simply stop. As will I. In the mean time, I'm entitled to my opinion and so are you.

Well... Frankly... that's all you've been doing is wasting your time (as have I). The Studios are going to do what they're going to do. It's their property. And it really doesn't matter what you or I think. So, when you finally get tired of writing here, you will simply stop. As will I. In the mean time, I'm entitled to my opinion and so are you.

Current trends show you are probably mistaken. The backlash against DRM music is resulting in some labels releasing DRM free music downloads and they are seeing great sales as a result of it.

When consumers get frustrated with DRM and resist it, smart companies make the changes they need to make to continue making money.

The pig headed ones who want to continue to treat the customer as an ATM machine go by the wayside.

Did I mention anywhere about human rights ? Let's not get overboard here :) Complaining is one way consumers can fight big corporation, it works sometimes. My point is simple, consumers do have right to complain, there is nothing odd or strange about it, accepting something (we don't like) shoved down our throat without complaining is odd.

Obviously voting with one's pocket is the most effective way, which I do practice.

Well the other guy was saying it was a violation of his basic human rights and other people seemed to be agreeing with that. I am not saying that one shouldnt complain...by all means do so. I agree that the most effective way is to vote with your pocket.

Except a proprietary Xbox360 peripheral works with all Xbox360s, and a Sony Blu-ray disc only works with some Sony Blu-Ray players. Region coding is clearly a whole 'nother level.

I don't think it a violation of human rights, but it SHOULD be a violation of consumer rights.

What I'm trying to get at is that all companies make arbitrary decisions about their product which limit choice. MS limits our choice by not allowing any 3rd party peripherals onto their platform. The BDA limits our choice based on region. The studios and CE manufacturers never intended for inter regional compatibility, and does not want its products sold outside of its regions. This is nothing new. Try buying an electronic product in a different country and getting warranty service in your home country, not gonna happen.

Another example: I can go to korea and purchase a Samsung handset which is identical to the handsets sold here, but there is no way in hell Sprint will let me use it on their network. Sure it's a totally arbitrary decision and limits choice, but Sprint has a right to control its network the way it sees fit.

.... The BDA limits our choice based on region. The studios and CE manufacturers never intended for inter regional compatibility, and does not want its products sold outside of its regions. ...

You must be in the industry because no consumer in his right mind mind would defend region coding as being perfectly acceptable.
There are no laws that give the right to enforce such a thing as region coding. They just do it. And overhere we are free to have hacked players and circumvent it. Some countries even have laws that give consumers the right to circumvent region coding.

Now BDA gives studio's the ability to sniff arround in players with BD+ code and do as they like to prevent me from viewing content I bought legally.

Goose stepping behind a blu ray flag isn't for me.
I prefer to walk at my own leisure.

You must be in the industry because no consumer in his right mind mind would defend region coding as being perfectly acceptable.
There are no laws that give the right to enforce such a thing as region coding. They just do it. And overhere we are free to have hacked players and circumvent it. Some countries even have laws that give consumers the right to circumvent region coding.

Now BDA gives studio's the ability to sniff arround in players with BD+ code and do as they like to prevent me from viewing content I bought legally.

Goose stepping behind a blu ray flag isn't for me.
I prefer to walk at my own leisure.

I'm not in the industry, but I strongly believe that a company should run its business in any way it sees fit, as long as no laws are being broken. If the BDA thinks region coding is in its best interests and you don't agree with it, then don't buy the product. If you do buy the product and can't defeat the region coding, you have no reason to be upset since you knew about the region coding in the first place.

I'm not in the industry, but I strongly believe that a company should run its business in any way it sees fit, as long as no laws are being broken. If the BDA thinks region coding is in its best interests and you don't agree with it, then don't buy the product. If you do buy the product and can't defeat the region coding, you have no reason to be upset since you knew about the region coding in the first place.

While I agree with your approach to being an informed consumer and "voting" with your dollars . . . there's a bit more to the story, IMHO. In this particular case, if Sony wins, they will have won because if their size, span, influence, and financial prowess. Namely, they "locked up" a goodly portion of the content providers, owned a studio themselves, sold subsidized goods in an adjacent market, and in general did a lot of things to win the format war that aren't all that possible for other companies. So IF Sony ends up winning, it won't be necessarily on the merits of their product (or the dollar "votes" of a largely ill or uninformed public), it will be more likely an outcome of Sony's size and financial wherewithall -- which is something I personally object to. Granted it happens a lot, but I object to those other cases as well (when I'm aware of or can readily observe what is going on).

I'm not in the industry, but I strongly believe that a company should run its business in any way it sees fit, as long as no laws are being broken. If the BDA thinks region coding is in its best interests and you don't agree with it, then don't buy the product. If you do buy the product and can't defeat the region coding, you have no reason to be upset since you knew about the region coding in the first place.

So I guess no Blu Ray in Australia then? As it IS against the law there to Region Code..

Some years ago I found I could only buy Buffy DVD sets as PAL DVDs from Amazon UK. So I did, and found ways to play them in spite of the region and copy protection. Currently I have an HTPC that I use for playing all media. It does not have HDMI, nor does my projector so I also have to seek other options there. I prefer to continue using my HTPC and have no intention of buying any standalone player soon.

Generally if things become inconvenient people will find ways around them.

- Tom

BD studio executives come out in full support of BD+ (duh):

“Fox has vigorously fought against piracy for years, and the adoption of BD+ as part of the Blu-ray Disc specification, and an enhancement over and above AACS, was a key factor in our decision to publish on the format,” noted Mike Dunn, president, worldwide, 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment. “This added layer of content protection gives Blu-ray yet another distinct competitive advantage.”

Bob Chapek, president, Buena Vista Worldwide Home Entertainment, commented: “We are excited that BD+ has now come to fruition. In this day and age, no content provider can risk not fully protecting their assets.”

Steve Beeks, COO and president of Lionsgate, said: “The ability to protect IP is the most important issue facing our industry and the level of copyright protection Blu-ray offers is one of the major reasons we supported BD from the onset. Adding this extra layer of protection has made us even more confident that we made the right choice for the studio and the public interest.”

On behalf of MGM Home Entertainment, GM Eric Doctorow noted: “This is great news for the market. Content providers can release more product knowing there is stronger copy protection – and for consumers that translates into a greater choice of films.”

David Bishop, president of Sony Pictures Home Entertainment, said: “BD+ serves as an additional safeguard to protect next generation HD content from piracy. Sony Pictures believes that it will become a valuable option for Blu-ray Disc content providers going forward.”

HMM (http://www.homemediamagazine.com/news/html/breaking_article.cfm?article_id=10839)

Less talk and more deeds. No more excuses, we need more releases!

So I guess no Blu Ray in Australia then? As it IS against the law there to Region Code..
It is with Dvd, but not with BD as far as I know.

If you take care of your optical media and treat it as it should be treated, you have abosutely NOTHING to worry about and absolutely no need for a back-up.
I have thousands of DVDs, oldest ones dating to the first-ever releases from Japan and have lost plenty of discs to rot. I also treat my discs with utmost care and store them in custom-made shelves. Absolutely nothing to worry about, you say? Poppycock.

All known media is subject to one form of loss or decay or another. And there can be no doubt that making backup copies can limit this loss.

- Tom

Degradation of CDs and DVDs is well documented. Those that claim that such degradation doesn't exist are either ill-informed or are intentionally ignoring the information because it does not support their POV.

Studios are in business to make money. No money... no movies. No money... no TV shows. See how that works?

That argument breaks down in the case of classic movies. Those are just another investment/business and new movies will get made or not made regardless of how that business does. You might as well argue that we should have all been drinking Coke when they owned Columbia.

In fact, many people despise the bloated high-budget messes that are mainstream Hollywood films. Why would you expect consumers, especially outside the US, to feel happy subsidising them?

What I'm trying to get at is that all companies make arbitrary decisions about their product which limit choice. ... I can go to korea and purchase a Samsung handset which is identical to the handsets sold here, but there is no way in hell Sprint will let me use it on their network. Sure it's a totally arbitrary decision and limits choice, but Sprint has a right to control its network the way it sees fit.

Not allowed in Australia, and, as far as I know, only allowed in the US. Everywhere else, people commonly take their phone overseas and buy a SIM card to put in it.

Several posters here have extrapolated the consumer-hostile legal environment of the US onto foreign markets. The European Union in particular has its laws - and, not only is it not an objective of public policy there to preserve the US film industry, many decision makers are actively hostile to it and its products.

All known media is subject to one form of loss or decay or another. And there can be no doubt that making backup copies can limit this loss.

- Tom

Yes. And recordable CD's/DVD's have even less of a shelf life than the factory manufactured pre-recorded discs.

Yes. And recordable CD's/DVD's have even less of a shelf life than the factory manufactured pre-recorded discs.

Hard Discs get cheaper and cheaper.

A Terrabyte disc array to store your 50-100 most cherished films in compressed image form might be a sound investment compared to replacing $1500 worth of software.

You can get TB drives for around $300 these days.

Not allowed in Australia, and, as far as I know, only allowed in the US. Everywhere else, people commonly take their phone overseas and buy a SIM card to put in it.

CDMA handsets don't have a SIM.

It'll be cracked within days of the first release that ships with it, and you can count on that.
Well, it most likely won't ever be cracked. It will take a mistake to undo it. OF course, a few million people looking for a flaw in something are going to find one.

I will buy one movie on one kind of media for all of my playback equipment (except PPVs). Only buying a different one when technology evolves.

If the MPAA or RIAA get their way they want you to buy their movie/music many, many times (to maximize profit) on different playback eqiupment of the same movie (not possible anymore with powerful PCs available to consumers and NERDs).

"DRM' is such an ugly word now thanks to the cumbersome applications, requirements and who can forget the Sony "rootkit" fiasco (thanks to that J6P is now aware of it).

Qouted from Electronic Frontier Foundation:



Digital Rights Management and Copy Protection Schemes

Major entertainment companies are using "digital rights management," or DRM (aka content or copy protection), to lock up your digital media. These DRM technologies do nothing to stop copyright pirates, but instead end up interfering with fans' lawful use of music, movies, and other copyrighted works. DRM can prevent you from making back ups of your DVDs and music downloaded from online stores, recording your favorite TV programs, using the portable media player of your choice, remixing clips of movies into your own home movies, and much more.

To the extent DRM interferes with perfectly legal uses of digital media, it's plenty bad enough. But thanks to the lobbying of the major media companies, DRM is now backed up by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). If you circumvent DRM locks or create the tools to do so, even to enable noninfringing fair uses, you might be on the receiving end of a lawsuit. The DMCA has been a disaster for innovation, free speech, fair use, and competition.

And Congress is now considering new laws that go beyond the DMCA, mandating DRM in a wide array of digital media devices and personal computers, giving entertainment industry lawyers and federal bureaucrats veto power over new gadgets.

Hollywood and the music industry have always attacked new technologies that help you get more from your media—these industries brought lawsuits against the VCR, DAT recorder, the MP3 player, and the PVR. Today, these media giants want to use DRM to take away your legitimate fair use and home recording rights, hoping to sell those rights back to you later. Worse still, recent DRM has invaded users' privacy and created severe security vulnerabilities in computers.

Fans shouldn’t be treated like criminals, and neither should the innovators who build the gadgets on which they rely. EFF has fought against many DMCA suits, including defending the makers of DVD backup software, and sued Sony-BMG for their "rootkit" CD copy protection scheme. Learn more about our efforts through the links below, and consider donating to support efforts.

BD+ is the latest DRM to hit consumers and it looks like it may work for the studios (if not cracked). It can "phone home" in the background and the best one of all run codes (in VM environment) everytime you pop in the disc. I hope no one puts out fake BD movies on the store shelves containing virus or hacker codes victimizing unsuspecting buyer.

I will buy one movie on one kind of media for all of my playback equipment (except PPVs). Only buying a different one when technology evolves.

If the MPAA or RIAA get their way they want you to buy their movie/music many, many times (to maximize profit) on different playback eqiupment of the same movie (not possible anymore with powerful PCs available to consumers and NERDs).

"DRM' is such an ugly word now thanks to the cumbersome applications, requirements and who can forget the Sony "rootkit" fiasco (thanks to that J6P is now aware of it).

Qouted from Electronic Frontier Foundation:



BD+ is the latest DRM to hit consumers and it looks like it may work for the studios (if not cracked). It can "phone home" in the background and the best one of all run codes (in VM environment) everytime you pop in the disc. I hope no one puts out fake BD movies on the store shelves containing virus or hacker codes victimizing unsuspecting buyer.
How anyone can defend this crap is beyond me. It's amzing that someone will sell their rights so they can watch a movie, but there have always and will always be those that side against themselves, I guess.

How anyone can defend this crap is beyond me. It's amzing that someone will sell their rights so they can watch a movie, but there have always and will always be those that side against themselves, I guess.

It makes some people feel "morally righteous" if they buy 10 copies of the same movie so that they make the studios happy.

"Golly gosh mr. studio guys, I'm just going to keep shoving cash at you and kissing your butt, please oh please keep releasing my movies, I'll pay anything."

All known media is subject to one form of loss or decay or another. And there can be no doubt that making backup copies can limit this loss.

- Tom

I'll admit upfront that I am way over my head here, because I don't really know my consumer rights. I have no problem with people doing things legally. I do think that downloading copy writed material is stealing. I am also guessing that BD+ is a legal copy protection system in the U.S.

I just want to play my Blu-Ray disk as hassle free as possible on my Blu-Ray standalone player. If BD+ means more studio support and therefore more movie choices then I'm OK with it.

As far a decay goes I believe that my Blu-Ray disks if taken care of, will last long past the next "big thing" that I will purchase to get the best picture.

Again, as long as it's legal I can see your point. :)

It makes some people feel "morally righteous" if they buy 10 copies of the same movie so that they make the studios happy.

"Golly gosh mr. studio guys, I'm just going to keep shoving cash at you and kissing your butt, please oh please keep releasing my movies, I'll pay anything."

Again... Do you think that if you pay to see a movie at a theater, that you should get it for free on DVD? Afterall... you already paid to see it, right? :rolleyes:

Again... Do you think that if you pay to see a movie at a theater, that you should get it for free on DVD? Afterall... you already paid to see it, right? :rolleyes:
Right...
You paid to see it. You have the right to one viewing.
When you buy a movie or music, you own it for personal use. Huge difference.

Fans shouldn’t be treated like criminalsHow do you tell fans from criminals, and what about criminal fans?

It makes some people feel "morally righteous" if they buy 10 copies of the same movie so that they make the studios happy.

"Golly gosh mr. studio guys, I'm just going to keep shoving cash at you and kissing your butt, please oh please keep releasing my movies, I'll pay anything."

There are "needs" and "wants". I need air, water, food etc.. I want Blu-Ray, 65 inch Plasma, sound....etc. Just who is forcing you to buy one copy, much less two or more :confused:

Right...
You paid to see it. You have the right to one viewing.
When you buy a movie or music, you own it for personal use. Huge difference.

When you buy a movie, you have the right to view the movie off of the disc in it's intended playback device. You DON'T have the right to copy it. In fact, it says so at the beginning of every movie in something called the... give me a second... it'll come to me... Oh, that's right... The FBI Warning.

When you buy a movie, you have the right to view the movie off of the disc in it's intended playback device. You DON'T have the right to copy it. In fact, it says so at the beginning of every movie in something called the... give me a second... it'll come to me... Oh, that's right... The FBI Warning.
That is only possible since the passing of the DMCA, which was the studios way to get around fair use as it has been know since the 70's. The difference between going to the movie and buying a movie is that you own it when you buy it. When BD moves to a system like DIVX are you still going to support it. How would you like movies to be licensed like software? What if the studios say you can't sell a movie you bought? What length are you willing to go to in your support for giant corporations. No one is advocating ripping them off. We are advocating the fair use of things we buy.

How do you tell fans from criminals, and what about criminal fans?

I guess BD+ can tell?

I reckon which side you come down on will determine if that was funny or not.

My Prediction:
If BD wins and becomes the only format. Within 2 years of that event Fox and Disney will make their discs exactly like the DIVX discs that they supported in the 90's.

If they do (and people dislike the program), that would only sabotage their own sales, not the sales of BR as a format. If the sales hit hurts enough, then the divx model will disappear just as quickly as it appeared.

If they do (and people dislike the program), that would only sabotage their own sales, not the sales of BR as a format.

A lot of people bought DVIX. This would be a home run, and all the evidence you need is in this thread.

A home run? You are aware that divx failed the first time, right? It's still the same customers then as now.

My Prediction:
If BD wins and becomes the only format. Within 2 years of that event Fox and Disney will make their discs exactly like the DIVX discs that they supported in the 90's.

Yup. BD+ or BD++++++++ DRM implementation will make this doable. Network connectivity on BD players is already out there.

I'm not going to delude myself that the studios have not taught about this.

A home run? You are aware that divx failed the first time, right? It's still the same customers then as now.
The world is a lot different now than it was 10 years ago, my friend.

It's also very much the same.

It seems the good news keeps pouring in.. I wonder which non BD studio's showed interest in this?

It's also very much the same.

Really?
If 10 years ago you had asked someone to buy music they wouldn't own they'd have told you to kiss their arse.
Today hundreds of millions of those songs have been sold via iTunes and other services.

The disc itself is yours. But what's on the disk isn't.

Um, sorry, but no. This crap was started by Microsoft, if I'm not mistaken (oh, the irony here...); The idea that I am not buying anything, but merely licensing it, and "they" have the right to revoke said license at any given time. Once I hand over my credit card, the disc, the plastic coating, the aluminum, the recorded pits, content, everything is now my property. There was so much ado about modifying the content for private viewings a while back (mainly about sanitizing objectionable material). If I buy a copy of Batman Forever, and decide that Val Kilmer looks better as Bruce Wayne with a Doc Holiday mustache, I am perfectly within my rights to burn it to my HD, add in some CGI facial hair, and then back to a DVD-R, as long as I do so for my private viewing. The only restriction as to what I cannot do is deny the copyright owner any potential income by distributing copies, having public showings (whether I charge for them or not), etc. As far as I am concerned, what I do with my property is none of the studio's business (again, as long as it doesn't deny them potential income in any way).

It is being touted that BD+ is a runtime-only application - this coming from the same company that gave us such gems as rootkits, and when they were found out, they claimed it was harmless and only protected their legal interests. It is burying your head in the sand to say that other, more controlling, features are not a possibility (probability). Time limited viewing is only the beginning. What's to say that when a film falls out of politically correct favor (ahem, Disney), they won't limit the viewing of disc I have already bought? Maybe blank out certain chapters, or even an entire title? What if a film promotes ideas that are actively politically incorrect? Right now, I can laugh in the general PC public's face - they have absolutely no say. And if the IACLU shows up at my door because I'm raising my children with a given set of beliefs, I am equally free to drop-kick them over the house across the street. But, if Big Brother (oops.... I mean BD+) can dictate to me what I can or can't do with my property...? Microsoft's EULA states that the license to use the product can be revoked at any time. So, their lawyers reserve the right to show up on my doorstep and demand the disc back...? I would pay real money to see them try that one…

BD+ is just another annoying form of copy protection. Even if BD becomes the only standard if the copy protection becomes too much of a hassle then other media will emerge. It's already been years they have been working to get a blue laser DVD standard and it is not obvious that either format is yet declared a winner. Meanwhile, storage is rapidly becoming free so, at the very least, everyone could store and carry around a practically infinite amount of pirated media if they. And, believe me, that will become MUCH more popular if a media monopoly attempts to point to DMCA-like fine print to make legal consumer media inconvenient and unattractive.

- Tom

Really?
If 10 years ago you had asked someone to buy music they wouldn't own they'd have told you to kiss their arse.
Today hundreds of millions of those songs have been sold via iTunes and other services.

...and if those music titles suddenly time expired, how long do you think iTunes et al would stay viable? It runs both ways. Hence, the statement that "things are different than 10 years ago" is a poor justification to make any meaningful point about public receptivity to a modern-day divx model.

...and if those music titles suddenly time expired, how long do you think iTunes et al would stay viable?
I know at least three people that lost hundreds of dollars of music from iTunes to drive crashes. They now buy CDs and rip them to their drives. I understand you're trying to be fair with content providers, but you don't have to support screwing your fellow consumer to get there.

I had a little daydream while plunging my coffee. It was a world where Shrek and its ilk were all time-expired according to the traditional Disney model where you could only see them for a short window every seven years. And the San Andreas fault opened up and swallowed all the masters. There would be one or two films out there in circulation so you would need two earthquakes a couple of years apart to do the job properly.

It was a blissful moment until I realised the DVDs are still out there.

sgb,

That's pretty different from an electronic file that becomes expired, by design. Apple expressly recommends that iTunes users backup their collection, as well. Granted, Apple could be a little more kind and retain records of past purchases to enable a mitigation path for such situations, but hey, the integrity of your own media is still your own responsibility. Your "three people" lost hundreds of dollars ultimately due to their own negligence.

Isn't it this very topic where several posters have expressed their desire to store their content on hdd's?! Now all of a sudden you are admitting that hdd reliability is eminently at risk from unfortunate drive crashes? So do you then disagree with their fervor for managed content existing on hdd?

Your original point that a divx model is so much more desirable today than 10 years ago, simply because "things have changed", still remains on wobbly ground.

Um, sorry, but no. This crap was started by Microsoft, if I'm not mistaken (oh, the irony here...); The idea that I am not buying anything, but merely licensing it, and "they" have the right to revoke said license at any given time. Once I hand over my credit card, the disc, the plastic coating, the aluminum, the recorded pits, content, everything is now my property. There was so much ado about modifying the content for private viewings a while back (mainly about sanitizing objectionable material). If I buy a copy of Batman Forever, and decide that Val Kilmer looks better as Bruce Wayne with a Doc Holiday mustache, I am perfectly within my rights to burn it to my HD, add in some CGI facial hair, and then back to a DVD-R, as long as I do so for my private viewing. The only restriction as to what I cannot do is deny the copyright owner any potential income by distributing copies, having public showings (whether I charge for them or not), etc. As far as I am concerned, what I do with my property is none of the studio's business (again, as long as it doesn't deny them potential income in any way).

It is being touted that BD+ is a runtime-only application - this coming from the same company that gave us such gems as rootkits, and when they were found out, they claimed it was harmless and only protected their legal interests. It is burying your head in the sand to say that other, more controlling, features are not a possibility (probability). Time limited viewing is only the beginning. What's to say that when a film falls out of politically correct favor (ahem, Disney), they won't limit the viewing of disc I have already bought? Maybe blank out certain chapters, or even an entire title? What if a film promotes ideas that are actively politically incorrect? Right now, I can laugh in the general PC public's face - they have absolutely no say. And if the IACLU shows up at my door because I'm raising my children with a given set of beliefs, I am equally free to drop-kick them over the house across the street. But, if Big Brother (oops.... I mean BD+) can dictate to me what I can or can't do with my property...? Microsoft's EULA states that the license to use the product can be revoked at any time. So, their lawyers reserve the right to show up on my doorstep and demand the disc back...? I would pay real money to see them try that one…

You make some good points in first paragraph. The second, put me down for ostrich status. :eek:

This stuff gives me a headacke. I am making an effort to understand and still side with BD+. Bigger powers than me will have the final word. Can't see how the general public will even consider it when they buy.

I will give the studios the benefit of the doubt, and trust they will only use BD+ to stop mass piracy.

sgb,

That's pretty different from an electronic file that becomes expired, by design. Apple expressly recommends that iTunes users backup their collection, as well. Granted, Apple could be a little more kind and retain records of past purchases to enable a mitigation path for such situations, but hey, the integrity of your own media is still your own responsibility. Your "three people" lost hundreds of dollars ultimately due to their own negligence.

Isn't it this very topic where several posters have expressed their desire to store their content on hdd's?! Now all of a sudden you are admitting that hdd reliability is eminently at risk from unfortunate drive crashes? So do you then disagree with their fervor for managed content existing on hdd?

Your original point that a divx model is so much more desirable today than 10 years ago, simply because "things have changed", still remains on wobbly ground.

iTunes is DVIX, and people have no issue with it until it goes bad. And I never said it was "desirable" (except from the studios angle, and it's their wet dream), so please don't "put words in posts".

iTunes files do not time expire. Additionally, no persistent or recurring internet link is required between the playback device and Apple's servers to allow authentication for playback. So how do you come up with it being equal to divx???

If this basic distinction is lost on you, how in the world can you possibly hope to rationally decide what bd+ does and if it is detrimental to your practices? My understanding is that bd+ is a whole lot more complex than divx. So if the latter flies over your head, I don't think you'll have a chance to understand the former.

iTunes files do not time expire. Additionally, no persistent or recurring internet link is required between the playback device and Apple's servers to allow authentication for playback. So how do you come up with it being equal to divx???

If this basic distinction is lost on you, how in the world can you possibly hope to rationally decide what bd+ does and if it is detrimental to your practices? My understanding is that bd+ is a whole lot more complex than divx. So if the latter flies over your head, I don't think you'll have a chance to understand the former.

You know I was just thinking the same thing about you, but my mother taught me better. Now that it's out in the open if you can't see the similarities and the studios desire for such a system, who can help you? We already know that BD is incomplete as a format and certain discs/features may not play on future players. What's stopping them from printing "this disc requires an internet connection for playback" on a sleeve? The only reason it isn't a concern with HDDVD is because there is no way to do it without changing the entire format.

To summarize, you were demonstrably incorrect in your statements involving the following:

iTunes
divx

...and subsequently are most likely lacking the expertise to make any judgements about BD+. Clearly, your statements are coming out of irrational fear over things you do not understand. Hence a certain degree of skepticism should be hanging over your initial statement that a divx model will be introduced for BR releases which utilize BD+, and that this divx model would be wildly successful, unlike its introduction nearly 10 yrs ago.

To summarize, you were demonstrably incorrect in your statements involving the following:

iTunes
divx

...and subsequently are most likely lacking the expertise to make any judgements about BD+. Clearly, your statements are coming out of irrational fear over things you do not understand.
Insults are where one goes when they run out of actual arguments. Have a good night.

These are observations, not insults. It's good to see you go, since you never had an actual argument to begin with.

This crap was started by Microsoft, if I'm not mistaken (oh, the irony here...); The idea that I am not buying anything, but merely licensing it,My memory begs to differ -- seem to recall IBM doing it for mainframe software long before Bill Gates and Paul Allen made that first trip to New Mexico. The software industry for microcomputers (latter PCs) just copied the business practice of what was already being done on minicomputers and mainframes for "licensing software".

These are observations, not insults. It's good to see you go, since you never had an actual argument to begin with.
Ahhh, more insults. Since, you were going to think you won no matter what. Argue with yourself from now on.

Ahhh, more insults. Since, you were going to think you won no matter what. Argue with yourself from now on.

I think that since you have not contradicted his explanation of how you were completely wrong comparing DIVX and iTunes, he isn't the only one who is going to think he won the argument.

How are DIVX and iTunes the same again? :confused:

My memory begs to differ -- seem to recall IBM doing it for mainframe software

I stand corrected.

Thank you, Bob....:)

... put me down for ostrich status

No offense intended, Salty :)

My memory begs to differ -- seem to recall IBM doing it for mainframe software long before Bill Gates and Paul Allen made that first trip to New Mexico. The software industry for microcomputers (latter PCs) just copied the business practice of what was already being done on minicomputers and mainframes for "licensing software".

Roughly. The "lease" was for a fixed period, and in the case of IBM also included the hardware and source code. This was customer-friendly, because at the end of the lease you could upgrade to a newer model, and all the technology risk was assumed by IBM. In fact, it was a big reason for their success at the time.

The wheels came off in two stages. First, in the early 1980s DEC took over as a major supplier. You got to read the source code on microfiche, but changing it was inconvenient and required a lot of ingenuity. DEC's proprietary VMS operating system was still licensed for 12 month periods, and you got upgrades free while your license was valid.

When MS-DOS arrived, the Microsoft licensing model was different in three ways. It was licensed by version, not time period. You didn't get to even read the source. And upgrades weren't free, even if they were just to fix bugs.

I think that since you have not contradicted his explanation of how you were completely wrong comparing DIVX and iTunes, he isn't the only one who is going to think he won the argument.

How are DIVX and iTunes the same again? :confused:

They are(were) both media that you rent instead of buy. And iTunes has recently become even more like DVIX by offering to let you fully purchase media for a premium price.

BD studio executives come out in full support of BD+ (duh):

HMM (http://www.homemediamagazine.com/news/html/breaking_article.cfm?article_id=10839)
Just another of a number of bad choices by these jerks.

It makes some people feel "morally righteous" if they buy 10 copies of the same movie so that they make the studios happy.

"Golly gosh mr. studio guys, I'm just going to keep shoving cash at you and kissing your butt, please oh please keep releasing my movies, I'll pay anything."

No one's forcing you to buy their movies.

My Prediction:
If BD wins and becomes the only format. Within 2 years of that event Fox and Disney will make their discs exactly like the DIVX discs that they supported in the 90's.

Well if that's the case, then it has to be labled as such on the packaging. Although, why would they even bother with physical media for pay per view? Back when divx first came out, I can see why. But today, seems pretty pointless.

Um, sorry, but no. This crap was started by Microsoft, if I'm not mistaken (oh, the irony here...); The idea that I am not buying anything, but merely licensing it, and "they" have the right to revoke said license at any given time.

There are many court rulings that have said that software is NOT licensed and in fact a sold as goods - meaning the seller has no legal claim over the property sold and you are free to do what you want with it (as long as you don't break any laws). Movies sold on disc have never been able to qualify as licensed software before, what makes you think it will in the future?

They are(were) both media that you rent instead of buy. And iTunes has recently become even more like DVIX by offering to let you fully purchase media for a premium price.

You are going to have to enlighten me on this point then (I have ZERO experience with iTunes). What do you mean when you say that you "rent" from iTunes? Can you only listen to a song that you download a certain number of times, or for a certain period of time??

You are going to have to enlighten me on this point then (I have ZERO experience with iTunes). What do you mean when you say that you "rent" from iTunes? Can you only listen to a song that you download a certain number of times, or for a certain period of time??

Music downloaded from iTunes is DRM'd to only play in iTunes on a PC that has been "authorized" to play the content.

You can have up to three "authorized" PCs set up to play the music. You can also only sync the songs from iTunes onto an iPod that is on one of the aforementioned PCs.

So, in other words, you are shelling out $1 a song for music on iTunes that will only play on one of the authorized PCs or on an iPod that is paired up to one of these PCs.

So you can't migrate your expensive iTunes music collection to another music playback device of your choosing without doing something assanine like burning the music to CD and then ripping it back to MP3.

You also can't "loan" your music to a friend or ever sell the music that you purchased.

All of these things are a stark departure from music CDs and are a direct portent of what the future holds for MOVIES.

Music downloaded from iTunes is DRM'd to only play in iTunes on a PC that has been "authorized" to play the content.

You can have up to three "authorized" PCs set up to play the music. You can also only sync the songs from iTunes onto an iPod that is on one of the aforementioned PCs.

So, in other words, you are shelling out $1 a song for music on iTunes that will only play on one of the authorized PCs or on an iPod that is paired up to one of these PCs.

So you can't migrate your expensive iTunes music collection to another music playback device of your choosing without doing something assanine like burning the music to CD and then ripping it back to MP3.

You also can't "loan" your music to a friend or ever sell the music that you purchased.

All of these things are a stark departure from music CDs and are a direct portent of what the future holds for MOVIES.

Ah, thanks for the excellent explanation!

Overall, it sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Ah, thanks for the excellent explanation!

Overall, it sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Obviously you are not alone as they have sold millions of itunes tracks. On the other hand some music moguls have started to sell non DRM versions of their music and have seen sales dramatically spike.

For example, I have a "Phatbox" MP3 player in my Audi. I have a Slim MP3 Networked Music Player (www.slimdevices.com) hooked up to my home stereo. And, I have an iPod.

The thought of DRM music is terrible to me. I would only be able to play the music on my iPod and wouldn't be able to use it in the car OR on my fantabulous home media system. So what to do? Well, I buy the CDs, rip them to high bitrate MP3 and play them on the device of my choice. I fully expect to be able to do the same damn thing with the movies that I purchase.

Well, you may fully expect to be able to......but you more than likely won't!

You got to read the source code on microfiche, but changing it was inconvenient and required a lot of ingenuity. DEC's proprietary VMS operating system was still licensed for 12 month periods, and you got upgrades free while your license was valid.IIRC later some software vendors of stuff that ran on VMS only supplied libraries and object files with often a possible option of getting the source for an additional (steep) fee. If you were lucky you could re-link the modules when a new VMS version update came around without having the source for the application.

And then -- before MS-DOS -- CP/M from Digital Research came along for microcomputers. Binary executable applications from multiple software vendors -- not just MSFT. New major version upgrades of applications required spending more money -- most often at a discount if you had a prior version. Again I do not recall MSFT inventing this practice. Wordstar, Visicalc, various database programs, etc all did this -- before 1981 and the PC.

Well, you may fully expect to be able to......but you more than likely won't!

It should also be noted that the restrictions that jmpage has cited are even further diminished if you are willing to consider options that enable connecting your iPod/PC to your home stereo and connecting your iPod to your car stereo. It is also possible to use certain cellphones that are iTunes compatible, and then you could just bluetooth the music into your car stereo (naturally, the head unit must be bluetooth ready).

It should also be noted that the restrictions that jmpage has cited are even further diminished if you are willing to consider options that enable connecting your iPod/PC to your home stereo and connecting your iPod to your car stereo. It is also possible to use certain cellphones that are iTunes compatible, and then you could just bluetooth the music into your car stereo (naturally, the head unit must be bluetooth ready).

Yes, running out and buying car kits and home stereo hookups to make a portable walkman like device do something it wasn't designed to do is certainly the answer to coping with oppressive DRM.

:rolleyes:

Yes, running out and buying car kits and home stereo hookups to make a portable walkman like device do something it wasn't designed to do is certainly the answer to coping with oppressive DRM.

:rolleyes:
What's wrong with that? Apple has the right to make money, don't they? :rolleyes:

Yes, running out and buying car kits and home stereo hookups to make a portable walkman like device do something it wasn't designed to do is certainly the answer to coping with oppressive DRM.

Naturally, it is your own choice to do it or not. The fact remains, that it can be done, and not w/o much effort, at all. So ultimately, the restrictive sensation you observe is entirely out of a situation you create yourself. Sorry.

Naturally, it is your own choice to do it or not. The fact remains, that it can be done, and not w/o much effort, at all. So ultimately, the restrictive sensation you observe is entirely out of a situation you create yourself. Sorry.
Funny, that the EU completely disagrees with you. In a few years that decision will work it's way over here. The only possible problem is Apple got in front of it a bit with the higher priced DRMless tracks, but I suspect that will be seen for what it is.

Referring to playing DRM'ed music in your car:

Naturally, it is your own choice to do it or not. The fact remains, that it can be done, and not w/o much effort, at all. So ultimately, the restrictive sensation you observe is entirely out of a situation you create yourself. Sorry.

Here I think you are being unrealistic. I have a seven year old car which has a CD player but no bluetooth or iPod dock (and no MP3 support for that matter). It's a rather nice Blaupunkt that was factory-standard. I frequently do a 690km each-way trip and I need something to listen to, especially for the first 250km which are freeway. The outside temperature has been 45 C on two recent runs and no way am I going to leave originals in the car on a rest break.

I have been looking at new cars and the one that is presently top of my list doesn't have bluetooth and has an iPod adaptor which is said to be poorly designed. And neither am I going to allow some doof-doof installer to rip apart the dash of my new European imported car. By the way, the runner-up car on my list does not accept an aftermarket head unit at all.

Wtf are you on about now?! The EU disagrees with me in my statement that you can connect your iPod to a car stereo and a home stereo??? Do you have even the slightest idea of what you are arguing against when you reply to my statements?

What the EU disagrees with is having DRM music that prevents you from listening to it on the device of your choice and they have passed laws making such restrictive DRM ILLEGAL.

Still don't get it????????????????

Or maybe you'd like to go order up some "I am a DRM apologist and proud of it" T-shirts.

This is all beside the point that sgb quoted me on. The fact remains is you can connect an iPod to your car stereo or home stereo, using additional equipment. The "EU doesn't agree with that", has nothing to do with that remark. My point has nothing to do with your own choice of playback devices or what the EU says you are entitled to. I made no comment saying you should or shouldn't be allowed to use whatever playback device you wish. I simply stated that there are ways to still use your iPod with a car stereo or home stereo. That is where sgb has gone off the mark.

The fact remains is you can connect an iPod to your car stereo or home stereo, using additional equipment.

I can't in my car.

Enough bickering, topic closed