AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 124 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,129 Posts
Nope. Never did. Never will.

Bump.



------------------

The button is labeled "Play", not "Pay". STOP the MPAA!

Our Silent Angels

Please visit The Manny Page!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,082 Posts
Oh, but if we just sit back and not do anything, nothing bad will happen. These guys are just trying to keep the evil pirates from making them go out of business. Why should we care about this stuff? http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif


Too bad the pirates will find a way around this and the consumer who lawfully pays for this stuff will not do it either because it does not make sense economically because we aren't making money off of it or because we want to obey the law.


pay-per-play is coming

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,679 Posts


Pay per play (HD) would be great in my opinion. If I had on-demand access to every movie in 1080i for $3-$5 a play I'd be happy. With the amount of money I've spent on DVD changers and DVD's I could get better selection and better quality for a lot less money!


I say bring it on! (but of course that's just me http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif )
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
410 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by KenLand:


Pay per play (HD) would be great in my opinion. If I had on-demand access to every movie in 1080i for $3-$5 a play I'd be happy. With the amount of money I've spent on DVD changers and DVD's I could get better selection and better quality for a lot less money!


I say bring it on! (but of course that's just me http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif )
Yeah, Right. Like pay per play will ever get to the point that you won't have to spend a nickel on equipment right! Get real.


You will still have to buy the HDTV, the decoder box, the decrypter, the 5.1 (6.1? 7.1? 7.2? 10.3?, etc....) receiver, the speakers, the couch, etc....


Pay per play SUCKS if I have to buy all the equipment to watch it. It is just a bad idea and I will find other ways to entertain myself if it ever ends up that way.


Rick
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,082 Posts
I believe all the acronym groups want pay per play to be like Divx. You buy the actual container up front and they will charge you each time you listen or watch. There is no way we will see every movie or even most movies available anytime you want online, via satellite or via cable TV in the next 10 years, probably longer. Even then, they are going to want some money up front for the privlege. You have to assume that given the past actions of these people, if they are in favor of it, it is going to cost you and me more money than before. Also, if pay per play is implemented they way I beleive these Hollywood lawyer types really want, it will cost more than $3-$5 a view for a movie and will eliminate being able to actually own a copy. Do you really want to pay even $3 every time your kid watches Barney or any Disney movie?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,797 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
"Do you really want to pay even $3 every time your kid watches Barney or any Disney movie?"


No, and I think that's why Divx failed miserably. Americans either want to 1)rent it for a low fee and stop, pause, rewind, review, etc... to their hearts content, or 2) own it outright. No other model is acceptable.


The only reason, in my view, that PPV succeeds today is that you can record it! Without that capability, PPV is a dead horse. How many want to pony up $7 for an HD movie, then have their mother call in the middle? With a rental DVD, you simply hit "pause", or if you're recording the movie on a Tivo, DVHS, or the like, you simply pick it back up where you left off.


The Hollywood studio know this (despite assertions to the contrary, they're not stupid). So to get pay-per-play to fly, they have to take away your ability to exercise fair-use rights!


------------------
ABC = Another Boring Channel. Watch CBS on Monday Nights!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,564 Posts
Thats a good point, maybe worth a poll?


------------------

Alex
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,679 Posts


wirehead_rick - We're comparing PayPerPlay (PPP) vs. buying DVD's not PPP vs. doing nothing. Both require couches, displays, etc. The difference is DVDs have to be purchased and played on a player. The cost of a single DVD itself accounts for 4-8 PPP viewings! The decoder box costs less than $5/mo. and I need that anyway for normal cable and HDTV.


We have a few movies we watch over and over, but typically its once or maybe twice. So I would be ahead of the game right there.


Lee L - Much to my chagrine my kids enjoy Barney just as much in VHS on their 9"TV/VCR combo as in line doubled DVD on my 36" HDTV!


I know people enjoy getting riled up, but even the MPAA is never going to price itself out of profit. If the PPP pricing scheme does not apeal to the public then the public won't buy and the the MPAA will revise the pricing. This includes the important kid market.


And remember Sony owns much of the content and sells recording equipment - chill out... http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif


Mandatory downconversion for non-secure playback systems is a real concern. PPP (HD) will be fine or we won't pay and then they'll change it to make it fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,797 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
I think you're being way too optimistic here, Ken. The DVD option you pointed out is already here - most of us can go to the local video store and rent a movie for $3. What's the difference? For a limited time (24-48 hours), you can view the content as much as you want. You can pause, "rewind", "fast-forward", or what have you.


With PPP, you don't have these options, and it's a pretty sure bet that if PPP is allowed to be forced on us by a technology "solution", we may very well see an increased reluctance by the studios to release "premium" films on DVD, especially in the first few months.


If the choice between DVD and PPP were enforced, say with a statute that requires simultaneous release of a film on PPP and DVD, then I'd agree with you that choice is a good thing. However, such a statute is unlikely in the extreme, and I fear that we will not be given the choice.


------------------
ABC = Another Boring Channel. Watch CBS on Monday Nights!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,304 Posts
The main problem I see here is that most people are in deep denial ("don't worry, they wouldn't do that to us"). If there's anything that the studios and the MPAA have shown in the past is that they are not to be trusted and they WILL shoot first and ask questions later. The only thing that has prevented them from doing whatever they wanted in the past were the courts. However, thanks to our everything-for-sale Congress, now they may have the law on their side. Read this article for some sobering thoughts.


------------------

Vic Ruiz
STOP HDCP/DFAST/5C


[This message has been edited by vruiz (edited 07-25-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,679 Posts


Vic,

Read that article before and again just now. A more accurate label would be "scare tactics" rather than "living in denial".


Again, no business or business organization is going put in place procedures to lose money. Just isn't going to happen. The marketplace will determine a price and PPP policy that everyone is happy with. The members of the MPAA don't make movies for the joy of ownership they do it to make money. Putting up draconian barriers to consumers buying their product won't happen and if it mistakenly does it wont last.


I haven't used the PPV on my cable system but I can see that the price has dropped considerably from its inception years back. It was too expensive and noone used it - now its cheap and everyone is happy.


If a future version of PPV (our PPP here) were to dissallow fair use copying and it hurt sales - it would change. Don't you get marketing survey calls from time to time? Companies use this info to adjust their offerings. If statistically noone cares about recording then yeah might not happen but statistically noone will care.


Its not denial its capitalism. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,270 Posts
When you wrap a turd in a nice pretty pink bow and call it a cup cake, it's still not a cup cake.


New technology, particularly if it's endorsed by the MPAA or the RIAA will have to pass the sniff test before I buy into it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,679 Posts


Have you seen DVI? It's inherently awesome as it digitally specifies the *exact* color of each and every *individual* pixel.


If fear misplaced or real is keeping content from our eager eyes then pick a copy protection scheme and lets get it on! If DVI/5C allows me to watch Raiders of the Lost Ark or Star Wars Trilogy etc. in HD then I fail to see the problem.


Are you all whining because progress is going to obsolete your existing hardware? Welcome to the real world. I'd much rather buy something much better (my/your choice by the way) than be stuck with little HD content to view.


Sony has already talked about a model where your digital rental is for a time period of say a day or so - like Block Buster. I guarantee that Sony and others will want to make a few more dollars allowing you to make a copy if you feel you must.


Yeah, I've thrown away a few computers on the way to my $500 1GHz PIII desktop, but the alternative of staying with my Commodore 64 to avoid obsolescence is unthinkable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
433 Posts
You're comparing apples and oranges here. I've never been forced to upgrade a computer to continue to use my existing software. I've upgraded because I wanted the additional benefit a faster computer capable of more running complex software, etc.


In this scenerio, I may be forced to buy a new HDTV to continue to enjoy the same capabilities (less in fact!) that I enjoy today. We're not talking about upgrading simply to get the benefit of digital connection between the STB and the display. In fact, I can't think of single other consumer product in all of history that compares to this. Imagine if the MPAA was able to make all NTSC TVs no longer function when HDTV was introduced, that would be comparable. Yeah, yeah, I know, eventually all NTSC owners will have to purchase some kind of cheap STB to be able to downconvert DTV to continue to watch TV. If all I had to do was buy a new STB to continue to watch HDTV, I could probably deal with that.


Do you even own an HDTV? If not, shut up. You're not out anything and have no reason to bash others that may be out huge investments. I spent a hell of lot more than $500 on my existing HDTV. Try more like $10,000!


[This message has been edited by belmore (edited 07-25-2001).]
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,174 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by KenLand:


Yeah, I've thrown away a few computers on the way to my $500 1GHz PIII desktop, but the alternative of staying with my Commodore 64 to avoid obsolescence is unthinkable.
If I had only paid $500 for my Mits 65905 and my 12 foot dish, 4DTV receiver with my HDD-200, my Navigo 401 and my UM box, my Proceed AVP etc. I might agree with you. As it is, what they are trying to do is take away my ability to record a program to watch it later when the phone is not ringing etc. I thought the old Sony Beta Max court (?? may not be the right name, but you know the case) case established my right to record programs for my own personal use.


------------------

jm in Boulder
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
433 Posts

Quote:
Imagine if the MPAA was able to make all NTSC TVs no longer function when HDTV was introduced, that would be comparable.
You know what. I take it back. This is still not even comparable. At least in this scenerio, I'd end up with something better if I upgraded.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,679 Posts
belmore, yeah I own a HDTV. However, I did decide against the new 50" Panny Plasma due to this issue. I see a potential situation where newer sets with digital/5C (or whatever) will represent a desirable step up in content availability. I think this will take another year or two, but $10k was a bit much for me. I could handle $2k though and will enjoy (am enjoying! - I *love* HDTV and I get 5 OTA channels with $14 antenna) it until this digital copy protection issue is resolved.


Where have you read that you will lose the use of your existing equipment? May be true, but I've read several places that where the video signal is available in an unrestricted analog form it will be reduced to SDTV. (Not sure if that's 480i or 480p)


Whine all you want, but I want to enjoy *all* of my favorite channels and movies in HD. If the providers need 5C to give them the warm fuzzy to turn on the spicket then so be it. You know they do pay to produce the content and they do own it.


If you paid $10k for a great picture then why would you want to hold back progress? I would think that qualifies you as a bonafied "enthusiast" (and a well off one at that)


JMartinko, Is the current thinking that Mitsubishi is going to renig on its compatibility guarantee? Or did you buy outside of its window? Or are you concerned about the rest of your rig only?


Anyway, I'm not bashing anyone. Just trying to remind you that you probably got into this hobby to pursue cutting edge excellent viewing experiences. (Am I close?) Don't knock new technology that contributes to this pursuit. If you're putting yourself or your family in financial peril with expensive and risky early adopter hardware I suggest you rethink your strategy.


The amount of HD content available on my 5 channels is not worth saving if it can be replaced with 50+ channels and (basically)) all movies! More channels and movies available in HD digital perfection is a good thing.

 
1 - 20 of 124 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top