Walmart Entertainment’s Disc-to-Digital Service Powered by VUDU - Page 2

Well, a passport, while it can be used as an ID, is designed to stamped, otherwise it's rather pointless to even have one. A DVD or Blu-ray disc is not a piece of hardware, it's function depends on it's physical condition being sound.

I'm sure there are people who won't care, but I'd rather not have some identifying mark put on my 1996 Warner Home Video release of Blade Runner.

April 16th according to the PR

Yeah, we just don't know enough details yet, April 16th we'll need a canary to see exactly how it works.

Yes, I just found that, thanks.

What are your thoughts on the fact that Walmart has entered into an agreement with studios. That for a perdiem fee that is shared amongst Walmart and the studios, enables an end user for additional monies, to do what most of us have complained about the grey area before of (and using the PR release from VUDU) "while preserving the investments they've made in disc purchases over the years" (backup) and "movies they already own on a variety of new devices" (playback on electronics for a myriad of reasons can't have a DVD drive).

Both of those excerpts point to a bit of a warped sensed of perspective prior to the model that nets them additional revenue after the initial sale of the disc. The irony being that they now all the sudden 'realize' what legions of people have been saying all along only after they figured out a way to get their hand in the stream again.

Does this mean K-Scape, Real Networks, SlySoft and others can come in out of the cold if they only ink a deal with studios? Is Walmart the only one that can reasonably ensure "while preserving the investments they've made in disc purchases over the years" and "movies they already own on a variety of new devices".

Are end users or other enterprising companies allowed to provide the same service of portability and protection? Will another company be allowed to come along and offer $1.75 a DVD/BR or $1.50?

In the light of injunctions against k-Scape and Real Networks pretty much wanting to offer some of the same convenience and protections it does smack of collusion.

My guess is they will require the case so they can verify that you own it instead of a rental, they might remove the UPC code or put a stamp on it. I'm sure the studios will require some sort of verification while Walmart doesn't care, they just want more potential shoppers in their stores. The kiosks will be in the photo center in the back of the store, sort of like the dairy section is always in the back of grocery stores.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cnbGeskq7U

perdiem fee http://www.thefreedictionary.com/per+diem They charge you daily?

The difference here being they're charging you again for content you already own. That would be different from just purchasing a film, that you presumably already don't have, from Vudu.

I get that you don't "own it, but in reality, you can do what ever you want with it as far as personal viewing goes.

Actually you do own it. You absolutely own that copy within the bounds of copyright. Just like you own your car (break too many traffic laws and see if you get to still drive it) Just like you own your own house (don't pay property taxes and see how long you live there). Ownership as an absolute doesn't really exist for the vast majority of things.

You are not licensed a copy. When you purchase a DVD or BR you never agree to a EULA or any other form of license. The only thing that creates boundaries that you are not allowed to cross are those of law.

If you pay for a ticket that is an agreement for one time viewing. When you purchase a DVD (I use that word expressly) you own that copy. Allowed to use that copy in the confines of law. Not contract nor license with a Studio.

Ticket prices, concession prices, typically mediocre PQ and SQ, are all reasons I don't give the model my $$ and purchase DVD or BR instead.

Guess you won't be using the service then:


http://www.my9tv.com/dpp/money/Walma...rvice_20120313

So Walmart will give you a digital copy of your bluray that is less than bluray quality AND put a blemish on your disc all for $2. Sounds like a deal...

I'll be using BDs. So maybe they will only do it with DVDs like they say in the article. I'll have to see what it looks like.

They will mark all discs. The article mentioned DVDs just because it is the generic term. They need to ensure the disc wasn't previously redeemed, regardless of format. If it is a disc, you can bet it gets a stamp.


Oh, and selection will be limited, not all movies will have a Vudu/UV version:


http://consumerist.com/2012/03/walma...ies-for-2.html

Directly from the Vudu page:

http://www.vudu.com/disc_to_digital.html

Some movies might not be available at all, some only in SD, some in HD, and some in HDX.

My question is - suppose you take in a bluray only to find out that movie isn't digitally available in HD. They still want $2 to get a SD version even though I am using an HD disc? So basically I'd be paying the $2 solely for portability but not "equal" resolution. I'd be a loser with respect to the resolution, going from HD down to SD.

I hate that generic term then. A BD has more in common with a CD than it does with a DVD.


I would think one would want to check to see if the title is available in HDX before taking them to Walmart.

If you own a movie on DVD, does that give you a right to a free Blu-ray copy too? Of course not. You have to pay again to get the higher quality Blu-ray copy. Likewise, you'll have to pay again if you want a streaming copy.

It is a license and it's considered a license in court and in the lawbooks, and in practice it works exactly like a license. It's just that the license for that copy is unlimited and unrestricted for personal viewing purposes. That's why there is no EULA, because copyright law already covers the licensing issues. The content itself is owned by the copyright holder.

If it wasn't considered a license, there would be absolutely no restrictions on copying and redistributing it. But there are.

We may be arguing semantics, but if you talk to a copyright lawyer, they'll tell you the same thing.

We probably are talking semantics. I view the purchase of a DVD, and the subsequent personal use allowance a matter of US law. Not an agreement between me and the Studio.

I don't intend to go outside those boundaries. I just think the circumvention question regarding DRM for making a copy of legally obtained media needs to be cleared up for Joe consumer.

I don't know about anyone else but I find it ironic that Walmart is allowed to do what technically competent others like K-Scape and Real Networks are not. The only difference being the greasing of palms.

Not entirely accurate. The streaming copy is/should be technically a format shifted sameness of the original purchase. The inability to stream from a DVD is simply a technical shortcoming of the format given today's technologies.

It shouldn't matter if my Pepsi comes in a mug, a glass, a ziploc bag. Now if I paid one price for Pepsi but wanted the Pepsi with double the caffeine that is another matter entirely.

I have made very few repurchases of titles I already own in BR vs DVD. Most aren't worth the extra expense IMO but some are.

The studio is a party to it, though, as is any "purchase" of any copyrighted material for your personal use. If you break the copyright law, remuneration goes to the studio through civil means. That's the same as any other licensing issue.

It's the same thing as buying a book. You're purchasing an unlimited license to view that book. You're not allowed to photocopy that book and redistribute it to anyone you please. It's not spelled out in an EULA, but that doesn't mean it isn't a license. And regardless of whether you call it one or not, it's treated the exact same way.


It's the reason why copying to a personal device is considered "unauthorized." You didn't give notice to the studio you were going to do so, so while it falls under fair use (and therefore legal), it's not an officially recognized authorized copy. Again, that's another licensing issue. So buying a DVD is considered buying the unlimited viewing license to the material, as opposed to buying the content itself (which you could do if you had enough money) and buying the copyright along with it.


I agree wholeheartedly, and viewing it as a license IS the way to clear it up for Joe.

BTW, I'm not a copyright lawyer, but I deal with copyright issues every day as part of my job, and am in constant contact with lawyers, both in house and outside. I also deal with copyright issues with a local performance art group. It's an issue I'm very familiar with on multiple levels.


That's not the same thing, though, as Pepsi is considered a "consumable." The act of using Pepsi for its intended purpose (drinking) uses it up. DVDs/streaming are not consumables.

It's like anything else. If you buy a book, you're not entitled to a free audio book copy. The publisher may offer it for free, but you're not entitled to it.

By your logic, since you bought a particular movie on VHS 30 years ago, you are entitled to free DVD, Blu-ray, Digital Copy, 35mm release prints, and 4K theatrical hard drives all delivered to your door free of charge in perpetuity.


No offense, but your personal buying habits have no bearing on this discussion.

I am going to laugh my ARS off when Walmart stops providing that service in a few months due to lack of interest. Call me negative, but the way modern business is going, if a company is not making money on a service, they cancel that service. I still think this is crazy that Walmart wants me to spend an aditional $2 on a movie I spent $20-$30 on. HAHAHAHAHA!!! This is the typical sucker trap that companies try to get people to get trapped into. I will never do this. NEVER!!!

Even if they stop the service, the titles will still be on my VUDU account. I still have titles on my account from years ago that I purchased. And it sounds like the $2 fee you pay will have the titles show on my account the same as the ones I got four years ago on VUDU.

Go ahead and watch your compressed, crappy sounding movie that you paid good money for. I prefer disk over streaming movies any day. DTS Master Audio HD baby!!

Where did I say that? You are entitled to the same resolution and aspect ratio.

If I purchased a VHS copy 30 years ago I am entitled to backup that copy and within the boundaries of fair use, first sale doctrine, and copyright enjoy that.

I didn't say, I didn't infer that since you own a VHS that you are entitled to a work that went back through the mastering and restoration process to become a BR title. You do have to pay for that.


Josh, how could you post the first part of your response in light of my posting my purchase habits? Where I explicitly state that I have re-purchased same title on BR that I already own on DVD? Slow down and read in the entirety and it won't look like you are going off half-cocked.

This is not like you are purchasing a different content. What this amounts to currently is collusion. It's collusion, it's price fixing.

If I can't take my DVD/BR collection to another like, competitive service that either may offer me a lower price for same utility, or offer me same price for more utility (within the bounds of legality) then this is tantamount to megacorp collusion.

If you as a studio sue K-Scape, sue Real Networks for a product that allow end users to do this and months later roll out a pay service where you are part of the revenue stream.

Do the lines have to be drawn between the dots?

True but it's apples and oranges, VOD vs PPV.


http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1399539


Again apples and oranges, it's buffet style VOD not PPV. I do agree their movie selection sucks.

Now some of the cons of buying digital movies:
They can terminate your account at anytime.
They can pull content whenever they feel like it.
If you cancel your account you will lose all your content.
VUDU can change the terms at anytime.


http://www.vudu.com/termsofservice.html

First off, I do not pay for cable or satelite. I have OTA antenna and pick up all local stations.
Second, yes I will pay for HULU+ because they have a great amount of TV sitcoms I like to watch.
Third, I pay for Netflix and rent Blu-ray disk movies to play on my $15,000 home theater.
Fourth, there is a difference between sitcoms and movies. I was talking about movies with DTS Master Audio HD and Dolby TrueHD uncompressed audio.
Fifth, I save about $150 per month on HULU and Netflix and I still get all the sitcoms and movies I need.