Movie Download Sites Fail Because They Don't Have Enough DRM?
from the you-lost-us-there dept
Some company says it's come up with a way to implement CSS copy protection on films from movie-download services, and heralds it as a move that will give a significant boost to the sites since it could allow consumers to burn movies they download to DVD -- assuming, of course, they have a DVD burner that supports the "feature". It's hard to know where to start with this, but the idea that movie download sites need more DRM is as good a place as any. Probably the biggest problem these sites have is the fact that all the DRM and copy protection that's been added to appease the movie studios make them ridiculously cumbersome, not least of which when it comes to burning movies to DVD so they can be watched on users' TV sets. But perhaps the most stupefying aspect of this plan is that CSS is pretty useless as a copy protection method, since it was cracked years ago by DVD Jon. CSS doesn't really stop anybody from copying movies, since so many tools exist that allow people to easily circumvent it. Of course, that's still largely irrelevant, since all these movies are ending up on file-sharing services already, and slapping more copy protection on legitimate movie downloads won't stop that. Only in Hollywood is finding a way to add more DRM to a product a good idea, especially when it's DRM that doesn't even work. All of these movie-download sites are operating under Hollywood's false assumption that releasing digital products without copy protection will increase piracy. But that simply isn't the case, and the way to "compete with free" isn't by locking legitimate products down so they're ridiculously restricted and hard to use.![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Consumers aren't stupid enough
I guess we need to dumb down the schools more so these places can succeed with their "let charge more for a movie that we don't have to burn to DVD, print packaging for, and ship. People will buy that! It is working so well for ebooks, right?" business model.
Oh yeah. FIRST!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Download DRM
I hit the dvd bin at walmart for cheep movies all the time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a simple question....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: a simple question....
eMUSIC SELLS 100 MILLION DOWNLOADS;
CATALOGUE SURPASSES 2 MILLION TRACKS
(sorry for the caps I cut n pasted)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: a simple question....
Actually, I read and comment on techDirt quite a bit. The problem is that searching the site and googling for "no drm" the only place I could find was eMusic. If 1 example is all there is then I would be a bit concerned. Also, in this case, I read an interview with the CEO of the company and basically he admitted is that a lot of the reason for his success is that he is:
a) the only alternative to iTunes and much of his success lies in the success of iPod sales (no one else can produce DRM songs for it so MP3 is the only solution).
b) much of his companies success lies in the fact that they specialize in fringe products like older stuff, classical music, and indie tracks that aren't represented in iTurnes.
(and given these points they still only represent 16% or so of sales, according to them. By the logic presented here people should be going to this site in droves, not in trickles)
So yes, eMusic would definately be an example but could the market even support more than 1 eMusics as it seems to be working as a parasite of iTunes/iPod?
Actually, this is partly my error in that I should have specified other than eMusic and more than 1 example (if it exists). My basic point is that if the model is so good there should at least be a handful of companies out there making buku bucks, but there doesn't seem to be, and as it is always said "the purpose of business is to generate profit"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: a simple question....
Finding good or "popular" content to provide without DRM is much harder than you think. Who owns the content? BINGO! Hollywood and the recording industry: the proponents of DRM.
I think it would be safe to say (IMO) that the people who buy media with DRM are not buying it because of the fact that it has DRM but because there is no alternative.
Artists and content owners can still make money without DRM. Why? Because DRM DOES NOT STOP PIRACY! It only creates problems and bad experiences for everyone who wants to do more with their purchased media than listen to it in their cd player or watch it 3 times on their pc.
I bought a DVD. I want the ability to watch it in my home, on my pc and on my portable media player of choice without paying for it three times.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: a simple question....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: a simple question....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: a simple question....
"Aside from the youTube "everyone is an artist" model, where will high production value stuff consistently come from when all the deep pockets of the record and music industry go away?"
This is the real question, yes.
One could take a free market capitalists view and say, "No worries.. the demand is there, the market will sort it out, and if the demand is not there, then what the hell anyway, that's economics for you"
This works for me as an art lover. There is an abundance of poor quality material in circulation and thinning out the pool might raise quality again. Film production will have to become more efficient. Wages will have to go down, including the outrageous salaries of actors. Producers, actors and artists will have to work because they love that career, not because it is a way to get extrememly rich. I am not pessimistic about the prospects of Hollywood going to the wall - there will still be great films made and culture will move on in its own way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: a simple question....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: a simple question....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: a simple question.
See.. the flaw in your thinking is this... the PURPOSE of DRM is to make it so inconvenient you buy the same content repeatedly. NOT to prevent piracy.
DRM in your house lock analogy is allowing a locksmith to enter your house, put a lock inbetween every room in it, and then having a third party decide at the point of entry whether or not you should be allowed into the room.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: a simple question....
If all (or almost all) consumer-desired content is owned by those who would have DRM thrust upon those who wish to view it then it becomes virtually impossible for any of these 'examples' to become reality. Too early too tell my ass. The fact is that these business cannot generally get started because they are under the iron gavel of the industry (**AA's).
This is a no-brainer. Which product would you choose:
Product A that you have to pay for every time you switch devices or Product B that costs the same as product A but can be moved from device to device?
It isn't a genius concept so what's you're deal?
If you want more concrete examples of the business model, fight against the overlords who hold all the keys to the ability to create them? eMusic can do it cause it has a nitch market, but main stream can't because they're controlled from the top.
Who taught you critical thinking anyway?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: a simple question....
No. You have misinterpreted our stance.
Our point is not that it should be the end goal, but that it's where the economics will lead to in an efficient market -- and that it will present many more opportunities to profit for those who get there.
However, claiming that it's bogus because there aren't enough examples means that you haven't been paying attention to how the business works. The reason there aren't many successful examples yet is because the industry still hasn't figured out where the market is heading.
But they will. Just keep watching.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: a simple question....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: a simple question....
I think you are 110% correct in stating that that everyone is downloading for free now but I don't agree with those who say there is a way to compete with that in all cases. Sure, for some products, but my major concern is that the internet has created a cultural paradigm in which taking someones work without paying for it is not only accepted, people actually fight to do it as though it were a right.
I'm looking into my crystal ball and the future looks kind of murky. What happens as traditional media companies really start to get hit in the bottom line and have to start packing up shop? Aside from distribution the other thing that these companies, especially movie companies, did was actually front the bill for production of content. Aside from the youTube "everyone is an artist" model, where will high production value stuff consistently come from when all the deep pockets of the record and music industry go away?
I agree with everyone that the current implementation of DRM is flawed, but the alternatives I've heard proposed are not sustainable for the larger industry, especially those segments that not only distribute but also produce content. Companies like eMusic can survive because they are not content generators, just distributors.
So, in a sense, I can see where RIAA and MPAA companies would be extremely reticient to adopt technologies like this because there is such a culture prevailing on the internet that it is OK to download and redistribute files without purchasing them, and I don't see people magically paying for something that they can get for free. I'm not offering a solution, because I really don't have one, except that maybe trying to stop file sharing is like the war on drugs, a battle that should be fought because it is an ethical problem, but a war that is bound to be lost in the long term. Then what will be left, downloading videos of little Johnny burping the star spangled banner? Hey, that actually sounds kine of funny...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: a simple question....
you mean high production cost stuff. the costs that go into something and the value that comes out are vastly different, and not often related to eachother. just cuz you spent $200 million to make a turd, doesn't automatically make that turd valuable.
in the 90's hollywood stopped being a place where people took chances to produce things of value and became an investment bank. art is about sacrificing to create something, investors don't sacrifice. investors want guaranteed success.
how do you guarantee success? by following a formula. take a firmly established genre, a big name star, maybe a bigshot director... and you have a bunchof big egos that translate to big costs and not much variety. will the movie be a success? well if you cut corners on the writing or rush the production because you spent so much money on the actors and special effects, then no, it probably won't be a success.
the same is true for music. ground breaking artists are a thing of the past. it's all about grinding out trendy crap with no staying power.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: a simple question....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: a simple question....
--Robb
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
uh...retard!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
> using the business model they propose (no DRM, using free stuff as a means to induce sales, etc) versus more traditional business models.
allofmp3.com ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Sure, but aren't they being sued by the RIAA for copyright infringement? They basically take CDs and make MP3s out of them without permission, how is that different than piracy? I'm talking about legitimate legal companies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
So, other than "it's the right thing to do" why would you stop copying rentals? The only reason I could think of is that if they were cheaper than buying the DRM free version. My larger question, still, is if someone is used to using BitTorrent or Morpheus or something to get movies FOR FREE, why would they start buying them (unless they were no longer on BitTorrent or Morpheus, which isn't going to happen). Seems almost counterintuitive.
Actuially, you might want to take a look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AllOfMP3.com_legality
Currently the Russian government is moving forward with charges against allofmp3 and their "legality" is suspect at best. Most countries have provisions that say you can't get copyrighted material from a website without the permission of the copyright holder to distribute it.
Also, you may want to look up allegations that allofmp3 was basically a front for a spamming operation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I can offer my answer to this, I use utorrent now cause I'm sick and tired of 1) buying a dvd and 6 months later they come out with another version of "Special edition" (They did this for Underworld 1 and Almost Famous) 2) The reason people would be it when they can get it for free is the packaging. Of the movies I've copied I've bought a legal copy because I was no longer worried about reason #1.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Anyone who believes the RIAA deserves them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
cuz it takes so freaking long. you have to wait for the disc to arrive. watch it to see if it's worth copying. rip it and then burn it or transcode it. if you are renting them from the store, it will take even longer.
if the kids that sold bootlegs on the street corner bothered to sell dvd rips or transcodes of older movies i would just buy from them instead of making them myself. but the street corner kids don't have the selection that netflix has.
i could try to find the transcodes or ISOs on bittorrent, but like the street forner kids, it's mostly new stuff that they have.
hmm, that sounds like a business opportunity in the making... someone should do that (netflix, i'm looking at you)
if you are into transcodes (divx/xvid), there is also the issue of playing it on a TV. that means that you need to build/buy an HTPC or mod a console to do that. that's fine for me, but my mom could never do that. a prebuilt box with a search and buy button is what she would need.
wow, that sounds like a business opportunity in the making... someone like microsoft should get on that (apple, i'm looking at you).
if netflix sold divX's already made and DRM free, i would just buy those... or i would pay netflix a monthly fee so i could use their search and recommendation system to find the stuff i wanted to download.
i could download what i want, keep the things i like and delete the stuff that's disappointing. like tivo, only better.
even if i downloaded constantly, it would take me years to build up a good library, even if i was trading stuff with my friends and vice versa.
it needs to be DRM free so i can play it on new/additional players as i acquire them... like when i run myself out of disk space for the second time in a year or get enough cash to put a HTPC in my car.
hmm, that's a business opportunity in the making, someone should get on that (alpine, i'm looking at you)
all that just for movies... imagine the opportunities for TV.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
protection scammers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not more DRM, compatible DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
if it's easier that searching for a torrent...
Searching for a torrent of a movie often leads you into a mire of porn and malware. When you find the movie it's often an esoteric format that needs a strange codec pack that wants to reset your browser homepage....
While a reasonably tech savvy user will work through these problems (to watch a downgraded, downsampled version of the movie) Joe Public (and me on a day where I don't have time to spend fighting this stuff) wants to get home, turn on the tube, grab a beer and watch a movie.
If it's one-click and instant-on it's going to get traction as long as they don't price themselves out of the market. Folks don't often factor in the Cable cost (especially on an all-you-can-eat package) and do a cost analysis of download vs packaged... their value proposition is watching the movie.
For me renting a first run, advert free, DVD quality experience through my Xbox Live Marketplace, getting the movie from Netflix or buying from Amazon are easy and so I do that.
Sometimes there's a rare movie or missed TV ep I can't find and I will search the backwaters for it but I'm time poor and so the easiest option wins most times...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRMBytes
I buy all my music on iTunes, mostly because they use mp4 instead of the old & pathetic mp3 format, if other companies offered this without DRM I would migrate over to them.
Solutions are easy, RIAA and the other Record Companies complaining of this will soon meet their ends, after-all this industry has been holding onto a fantasy, that artists who sing deserve mucho dollars for it. All they do is make sound out of their extremely annoying mouths, it's not worth even 1 cent to hear, they should be paying us for listening! I look forward to the day all record labels die an the companies go out of business, it will be hilarious to watch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
LOL
Congrats, this has to be the "Best blog post title of the Year". Had me laughing out loud :-)
The DRM issues of the movie industry are unfortunately similar to those in music: the majors are scared to the bone of piracy and hold on to DRM as an unfortunate lesser evil, while the smaller distributors are more than happy to gor DRM-less as they can see more clearly the increase in market visibility and reach.
To make matters worse, in the movie industry there is still a lot of uncertainty as to what the right delivery windows should be for each format.
The digital world is used to getting all information/entertainment almost instantly, but in the movie world theaters still hold a strong bargaining chip.
Change will come, albeit slowly. Hopefully 2007 will be the year when the music industry gives up on DRM. The movie industry will still need more time to wake up to the digital reality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]