Studios Continue To Ignore Just How Badly They Hamstring Legal Download Sites
from the blue-in-the-face dept
It's been clear since the outset that the movie download sites supported by Hollywood studios have been far too clunky and user-unfriendly to attract many users, and they've made only marginal improvements over the years. They provide the perfect insight into how the movie industry puts its stupid fears about piracy above everything else -- including creating a product that consumers will actually want to pay for. While it's been blindingly obvious to many of us, Jeff writes in to point out that BusinessWeek is highlighting, for Hollywood's benefit, the fact that these sites will never be successful when copy protection is the top priority. It's often easy to marginalize complaints that an overemphasis on DRM and copy protection are hurting big content's business as the whining of a tiny group of geeky consumers, but articles like this one in mainstream publications make it clear that isn't the case, and that only when services like these are usable and useful do they stand a chance of succeeding. Still, the movie studios must not read BusinessWeek, since it was almost a year ago that another article in the magazine pointed out that the movie studios couldn't find a buyer for Movielink, the download site they own, because all the potential buyers realized that it will never succeed as long as the studios insist on locking down their content so rigidly.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
[ link to this | view in thread ]
On a Kind of Unrelated Point
I'm not sure what my point is, but I think this is something that many companies would do well to realize, accept, and learn to work with. I don't think it's a tendency that's going to go away.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It would be interesting
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Who will show them the light?
That company is Apple, with their CEO, Steve Jobs being the majority owner (and board member) of Disney.
Steve said in his "thoughts on music" essay that he thought DRM was doing nothing but holding back the industry, and that removing it was the only valid way to move forward (bad summary is my fault).
However, it looks like Steve is completely two-facing this issue, as he has stated the oposite applies to video. In the realm of audio, he blames the labels for holding back their own industry.
Meanwhile, HE IS THE LABEL when it comes to video. He *COULD* convince Disney to ship DVDs without CSS on them, and he *COULD* have iTMS sell those same movies for Apple TV and for iPods with no encryption. (and of course with no DRM, that same video could also be used on any other device)
How much you wanna bet he doesn't?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Self serve
Apart from jewelry stores, who else keeps their merchandise locked behind a counter these days. Self serve wiped out the old model of retailing because it puts the customer first.
There is a lesson in there for the movie studios. Put the customer first.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:On a Kind of Unrelated Point
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:On a Kind of Unrelated Point
Media and burners. The home consumer usually does not have the money to buy professional grade burner or high-capacity media disks, therefore their copy is of lower quality. Also, why not make it so only the movie is offered, but you need to buy the disc for the bonus features? I like the bonuses and would gladly fork over the money for a DVD.
Most people are not inclined to steal and most of those people who DO steal videos tend to grow out of it when they get older and begin making more money. I think the movie industry should at least give people a chance rather than label everyone a thief. They might be surprised.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The Legal Sites
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:On a Kind of Unrelated Point
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:On a Kind of Unrelated Point
You do realize that all it takes is one pirate to purchase/steal an "original" DVD to allow the bonus features to be available for download, right?
As for quality of pirated versions - you really can't tell the difference. Of course, being played back on a 109" television might bring out imperfections... But if you own such a display device, you probably have enough money to afford the storage required for higher quality pirated copies of your movies.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:On a Kind of Unrelated Point
What I found was that I stopped pirating as I got older. But I did not replace my pirating with purchasing. I just consume far less mindless drivel nowadays.
(yes, I'm one fo those jackasses who used to go buy stuff after pirating it, yes, we really do exist. Now that I ahve stopped pirating, I have also stopped buying. What a weird coincidence...)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Netflix
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: On a Kind of Unrelated Point
[ link to this | view in thread ]