Complaints About Anticompetitive Behavior Mask Next-Gen DVDs' Real Problems
from the see-no-evil dept
The next generation of DVD technology -- both the Blu-ray and HD DVD flavors -- haven't received a particularly warm reception from consumers, who look to have little interest in expensive new DVD players that don't offer a lot of easily perceivable benefits. The manufacturers themselves have done plenty to make the technologies unattractive, but now the EU's looking into anticompetitive behavior from the Blu-ray camp, with HD DVD's backers complaining about several studios signing exclusive deals with Blu-ray. This all seems slightly ridiculous. While Blu-ray has taken a larger share of the next-gen DVD market, that market remains tiny. Furthermore, the behavior that's holding back the overall market isn't some studios choosing only to make Blu-ray discs; it's the fundamental problems of a fragmented market with two groups selling a product nobody wants. If the EU is able to craft some sort of penalty or corrective behavior here, it's not going to help the market move forward, and it's not going to magically boost HD DVD sales. Like with the groups' obsession with pointless copy protection, the focus here is somewhere other than it needs to be. HD DVD's problems don't stem from the Blu-ray camp's behavior. They stem from a flawed product and business model, and the focus should be on fixing those.
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
I have a blu-ray player (re: ps3). If you have a 1080i or 1080p tv, the difference *IS* noticeable. It's not as drastic as the difference between dvd and vhs, but it is a significant difference. if you *don't* have a tv of that quality however, there is virtually no difference.
I want blu-ray to win out, but that won't happen if the EU has its way. This is about competition. There are movies available on HD-DVDs that are NOT available on blu-ray, so HD-DVD would be hypocritical if they support the EU in this.
It's true that maybe the market isn't ready for hi-def discs (mainly because the average consumer doesn't have the equipment for it), but for those that do, i prefer blu-ray over dvd. i haven't had issues with the copyright stuff, so it hasn't really affected me. so until one of the discs doesn't work for me, then i have nothing to complain about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Companies are allowed to choose which technology they go with. It's their right. They shouldn't be forced to have to pay to make two different things just because one of the other companies is crying foul.
I don't superficially claim to want the market to decide. I claimed there was competition. Let them make their deals. There are video games exclusive to various consoles. Thats the video consoles in competition. So one cries foul there. They may not like it but nobody is saying they shouldn't be allowed to do that.
It's hypocritical to force them away from exclusive rights. Its all over the place in various markets. The iPhone is only availabe on AT&T.
Exclusivity is a part of competition. Its what makes one product better then another.
There's nothing superficial about what I claim to want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
What is this "right" you speak of? Is it the same as the "right" a company has to choose who it does business with? Is it a "right" to engage in collusion and monopolistic practices? Have you no shame?
The studios don't make DVDs, they license others to do so. The complaint is that they are discriminatory and refuse to sell licenses to some based on who else they do business with. While some claim that all's fair in business, other claim that there should be limits. It's an old argument.
In that case then, where is there ever NOT some form of competition? Even in the case of assault and robbery there is "competition" between the mugger and the victim. The question is whether that competition is fair.
No, that's technical incompatibility which is a different thing. Movies are compatible with both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.
Likewise, torture goes on all over the world. Some then claim that makes it all right, others disagree.
Exclusivity is a part of anti-competitiveness. It is what an inferior product uses to gain market dominance.
Superficial is perhaps too mild a term when the actions you support are in opposition to what you claim to want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Movie licenses are only given to certain game companies to produce a game for. Not any game company is allowed a crack at it.
There are plenty of examples where the content owners are allowed to choose who gets their licenses to produce their content. I know in some areas of the market content providers have to strict control over their content but this is a case where they should be allowed to dictate how you can buy it. When DVDs came out, movies weren't immediately available on DVD. Some movies don't even have to be available on DVD. Some movies just aren't available. Even if I had a DVD creation company, I can't force the studio to sell me the license so I can put a movie on DVD that hasn't been on DVD before.
A studio can choose what media their content is on. Is every movie available on the PSP? Is every movie available on iTunes? For that matter is every song available on iTunes?
It's up to the studios who is allowed to make their content. It's a business. It's not the costumer's right to be able to get it on whatever media they want. If there's a game available on multiple CDs, its not the game company's job to also make it available on just 1 dvd cause thats what the customer wants. Just as if its only available on DVD, its not required of them to also release it on multiple CDs.
SACD and DVD-A are other music disc formats. I don't see every artist & album available on both of those as well as standard CD.
Companies aren't required to allow their content to be accessible in whatever format the customer wants.
I can write a webpage that requires IE7 or else its denied. Maybe the content doesn't show up the way I wanted it to on the other browsers. In that case, I don't have to be forced to have an inferior looking webpage display on another browser.
Companies are in this to make money... NOT to serve the customer. They shouldn't have to license their content to companies they don't want to.
Just as AVG Anti-virus Home edition CANNOT be licensed to a company. Thats not illegal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
people really have to remember that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The "right" I refer to is the right for a company to choose what it's business is. If I create content, I don't have to allow it to be available on any media that people want.
The studios don't make DVDs, they license others to do so. The complaint is that they are discriminatory and refuse to sell licenses to some based on who else they do business with. While some claim that all's fair in business, other claim that there should be limits. It's an old argument.
So, its just your opinion that they shouldn't be allowed to choose who they license their content to. Not actual fact.
In that case then, where is there ever NOT some form of competition? Even in the case of assault and robbery there is "competition" between the mugger and the victim. The question is whether that competition is fair.
I don't even know how to respond to that argument. Your analogy in no way mirrors ANY point in ANYONE'S argument at this time NOR does it mirror anything in our market place. Companies are allowed to bid on licensing rights for toys based off of some intellectual property. Not anyone is allowed to make Transformers toys. They can make knock-offs, but they can't make Optimus Prime. Should a movie have to sell their license to EVERY toy company that wants it?
No, that's technical incompatibility which is a different thing. Movies are compatible with both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.
No, Microsoft signs contracts with the company so they're not ALLOWED to make the game on another console. They get more money in return for making the game. They ACTUALLY SIGN CONTRACTS for exclusivity. Game companies that have produced on multiple platforms sometimes sign contracts that say they will only make games on specific platforms. So until you give some reason why this is allowed (or finally say it shouldn't be) its still a valid argument.
If the AT&T is willing to pay iPhone a lot of money for exclusive rights, iPhone can accept it. It was allowed to deny it, but it can accept it. If they don't want to be made available on some other network, they don't have to be. They could disagree with some aspect of how they do business and therefore don't have to be associated with it.
Exclusivity is a part of anti-competitiveness. It is what an inferior product uses to gain market dominance.
No, you forget that in the market we are not the only "customer." The Blu-ray guy is a salesman and pitched his idea to the movie studios. The movie studios bought it and went with it. Movie studios CAN lose money or MAKE more money if they go with only one or the other. They can make blu-ray more cheaply if they go only with Blu-ray. They're deals that are allowed to be made. Just as a wireless carrier will say, "hey, we'll sell you this phone for x dollars less if you stay with us for 2 years." They subsidize costs so they get continued business.
Superficial is perhaps too mild a term when the actions you support are in opposition to what you claim to want.
You offered nothing other than opinion that its superficial. Everything I claim can be backed by my opinion. Way to go.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Restaurant Owner: As a business owner I have a right to choose what my business is. If I serve food, I don't have to allow it to be available except for to the race of people I want.
Supreme Court: Yes, you do. You cannot freely choose who you want to do business with.
Yes, my opinion. Your's is not fact either. Opinion is indicated by the use of terms like "should" and "shouldn't". The EU is investigating as to whether or not laws were factually broken. That's nor for you to decide either.
As long as those companies are willing to meet the same terms, I would say so. Not that I am saying that is the way law is in most places however.
That was my initial thought about your's as well, but then I realized that an equally absurd argument would highlight the absurdity of the original argument.
It mirrors the absurdity of your argument that secret back room deals somehow represent marketplace competition.
If they are willing to meet the same terms, I think so. I realize of course that that is not what the law says.
No? Games written for specific platforms are not technically incompatible with any other platforms? Now I don't know what to say except "Well, there he goes again."
Microsoft is a good example because as convicted monopolists they well known for their anti-competitive practices.
If you'll provide an example perhaps I could argue it one way or the other.
What do you mean finally? Haven't you read what I've written? Let me spell it out for you. Companies SHOULD NOT be allowed to prevent their customers from doing business with other companies. That's anti-competitive and bad for the market. Now please try to remember my position when you respond to my comments.
More market rigging. I am not as big a fan of the way phone companies do business as you are and would have preferred to see the iPhone sold unlocked. In fact, I would even like to see the phone companies loose their govt. protection. But unfortunately, our politicians, like you, are also big fans of back room deals so that is unlikely to happen.
A rather meaningless claim but one I can make as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ported games are extremely easy to make. One of the main reasons given for not porting games to the wii was just that it had different button setups. A developer will tell you ports are not all that difficult between last gen consoles.
Your first argument about race is also extremely flawed. You can't do business with someone based on race, but you can choose to do business based on how their dressed. They have to meet your standards, but you can't discriminate on a few things according to law. Others you can. Just as if I own a store, I can kick someone out if they're misbehaving or not follow rules I established.
The reason I pointed it out as opinion is that its only an opinion I'm being superficial. My statement is only superficial if I have your opinion. Which I don't. Hence why I pointed it out.
I also don't see how my argument that competition existed BETWEEN COMPANIES was absurd enough for you to compare it to a mugger and a victim. Remember, competition doesn't only have to exist for the consumers. It can exist when a studio is trying to figure out what to put its media on.
And about your toymaker thing about meeting the same terms?
Maybe HD-DVD isn't meeting the same terms as Blu-ray was willing to do. That alone destroys YOUR ENTIRE ARGUMENT. Since we don't even have an inkling as to what the terms were, we have no reason to believe one way or the other. Maybe the studio only wants to be associated with what they think is a superior product and don't want to be associated with another. they do have some say with where their name and content gets printed in the private sector.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What developer? You? Developers have in fact told me just the opposite.
It is an example that flies in the face of your position that businesses should be allowed to discriminate.
Exactly. That is not discrimination. If you are now saying that a business should deal with anyone willing to meet the same standards then I think you are beginning to come over to my position.
I don't know how to make it any clearer. When some entities join together to lock out others and not do business with them even if they are willing to abide by the same terms it is discriminatory. The same principle as in the restaurant example. Your claim that such actions represent "competition" is just as strained as it is in the mugger example. Strained beyond the point of credulity that is.
That's the whole point of such complaints. That they were indeed willing to meet the same terms but were still refused. Otherwise there would be no complaint.
No,actually it destroys yours. And once again you need to go back and read what I wrote, not what think I wrote. You have now gone from claiming that they have some kind of "right" to behave in a discriminatory practice to postulating that perhaps they weren't discriminating at all. I think I hear the old backpedal boogie starting up.
Maybe, maybe, maybe. Maybe the restaurant owner only wanted to be associated with he considered to be a superior race also. While that used to be legal it was never right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Beta vs VHS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Beta vs VHS
I haven't used the service (buy pr0n are you kidding?), so it could be crippled w/some form of DRM but its an interesting move none the less, esp. if I can burn my own DVD.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Beta vs VHS
;')
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Beta vs VHS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Beta vs VHS
;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Beta vs VHS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Beta vs VHS
And you may have heard of it...
The Internet.
Back in the day, if you wanted to watch a hard-core skin flick, it meant pulling out your best "Aqualung" outfit and trudging down to the local "dirty movie" joint. Then, the Porn industry went with the VHS format, which meant that now people were able to watch porn in the privacy of their own homes.
But now? The Internet pipes in gigabyte after gigabyte of... whatever you want. Transsexual midget beastiality? No problem. Twincest lesbians? Yeah, we've got that. All in the privacy of your own computer. You don't even have to leave your desk chair anymore.
So yeah, while the adult movie industry's endorsement of HD-DVD is an important battle, it's not going to decide the war in the long run for either format.
It's going to boil down more to who can do the most for the computer user, which camp will bring the first player for under $200 that's not a stripped-down turd, and who has the best selection of "mainstream" movies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Winning?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Winning?
so, its not hard fact that hd-dvd has more players.
it's just they have a solid number of people buying equipment for the sole purpose of playing hd-dvd.
blu-ray has a smaller number of people buying equipment for the sole purpose of playing blu-ray, but that doesn't mean every single person who bought a ps3 isn't going to use it as a blu-ray player.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i just want blu-ray to win because there's already more studios behind them, blockbuster won't be carrying hd-dvd... AND i have a ps3 and don't want to have to buy an hd-dvd player. i'll admit, that last point is really the strongest for me =)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
this gen is the last gen
don't believe me? ask bill gates. at the end of that interview he talks about how anti-consumer blu-ray is, and how it's that last physical format there will be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: this gen is the last gen
Although in this case, he may actually (and possibly only coincidentally) be right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: this gen is the last gen
Although in this case, he may actually (and possibly only coincidentally) be right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: this gen is the last gen
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
blu ray is awesome
"Nex gen" isn't selling huge numbers right now because the players and the discs are expensive, and you need a 1080p TV to truly enjoy the potential. Give it some time people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: blu ray is awesome
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All Sony needs is a price drop and a decent library, both of which are coming this holiday season. I think the direct sells of the PS3 will effect the format war, and blu-ray wins. Even if it bombs as a movie media, there's still game content and storage media.
I find it a little funny Bill Gates is complaining about someone being anti-consumer. He also said 64K is enough memory for anybody. That's wishful thinking on Microsoft's part. Physical media may change, but it's not going away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can we finally get the straight story about that d
A) I've said some stupid things and some wrong things, but not that. No one involved in computers would ever say that a certain amount of memory is enough for all time.
The need for memory increases as computers get more potent and software gets more powerful. In fact, every couple of years the amount of memory address space needed to run whatever software is mainstream at the time just about doubles. This is well-known.
When IBM introduced its PC in 1981, many people attacked Microsoft for its role. These critics said that 8-bit computers, which had 64K of address space, would last forever. They said we were wastefully throwing out great 8-bit programming by moving the world toward 16-bit computers.
We at Microsoft disagreed. We knew that even 16-bit computers, which had 640K of available address space, would be adequate for only four or five years. (The IBM PC had 1 megabyte of logical address space. But 384K of this was assigned to special purposes, leaving 640K of memory available. That's where the now-infamous '640K barrier' came from.)
A few years later, Microsoft was a big fan of Intel's 386 microprocessor chip, which gave computers a 32-bit address space.
Modern operating systems can now take advantage of that seemingly vast potential memory. But even 32 bits of address space won't prove adequate as time goes on.
Meanwhile, I keep bumping into that silly quotation attributed to me that says 640K of memory is enough. There's never a citation; the quotation just floats like a rumor, repeated again and again."
- Bill Gates
addressing his most popular wrongly attributed quote in a children's interview
"Q. Did you ever say, as has been widely circulated on the Internet, "640K [of RAM] ought to be enough for anybody?"
A. No! That makes me so mad I can't believe it! Do you realize the pain the industry went through while the IBM PC was limited to 640K? The machine was going to be 512K at one point, and we kept pushing it up. I never said that statement - I said the opposite of that."
- Bill Gates
addressing his most popular wrongly attributed quote in a U.S. News interview
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bill Gates = memory abuser
As for the topic at hand, HD-DVD and Blu-ray are way overrated. When DVDs came out, I made the leap instantly: no need to rewind, better picture, quality never degrades, smaller storage space (big plus), etc. I think Blu-ray and HD-DVD both misunderstand that transition to imply that everyone made the jump strictly for the picture quality. Seriously, if you take picture quality out of the comparison, DVDs and its high definition equivalents are identical. Now, put picture quality back into the equation, and it is just not worth breaking my movie collection into different formats. The leap I make after DVD will be to the non-physical format. I no longer wish to pay for the cost of packaging, labor, physical media production, etc. I want to pay for broadband.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bill Gates = memory abuser
It wants to replace DVDs EVERYWHERE, not just in your movie library but on your computer as well. The first step for that however is the movies. Once they have that, its only a matter of time to replace DVD media entirely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Bill Gates = memory abuser
And people DO care about picture quality. Look at the video cards required to power brand new computer games at full-everything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blu-Ray Is Great... HD-DVD, not so...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Blu-Ray Is Great... HD-DVD, not so...
While I agree blu-ray is better, the difference between blu-ray and hd-dvd isn't as big as your making it sound. In any real side-by-side comparison, it fluctuates which is better and its always a marginal difference.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Blu-Ray Is Great... HD-DVD, not so...
I did. HD-DVD was better. Sorry.
Especially now that you have a vested interest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Blu-Ray Is Great... HD-DVD, not so...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Blu-Ray Is Great... HD-DVD, not so...
Ditto.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Supreme Court: Yes, you do. You cannot freely choose who you want to do business with."
Do you know how to write a legitimate analogy? The correct analogy would be the restaurant owner who wants to make only burgers, but you want him to make vegiburgers as well, not some inflammatory racial thing that has nothing to do with the thread.
There's nothing similar between racial bigotry and Company X not wanting to release their stuff on UMD.
Are you trying to Godwin* this or what?
* As much as can be Godwined without nazis.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
HD-DVD companies are complaining that studios are refusing to sell movies to them as they do Blu-ray companies which could be a form of illegal discrimination under EU laws. A poster (probably you, I think) then proceeded to try to make a case that businesses have some kind of "right" to engage in such discrimination (with no legal justification). An example of how businesses do not have a "right" to discriminate was then given as a counter argument. The example was racial discrimination but it could have just as easily been any one of a number of other types of discrimination cases is which courts have ruled that businesses indeed do not have a "right" to discriminate. Examples could have been sexual discrimination, religious discrimination, age discrimination, handicap discrimination and so on. Pick any of them if you'd rather avoid a "racial thing", they are all strong examples. Of course a strong counter example is exactly what you'd rather not consider, isn't it?
The point is that businesses do NOT have a "right" to discriminate as they please that somehow places them above the law, although some people continue to think that they do despite many examples to the contrary.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
But if you want to continue with the restaurant analogy it would be like a restaurant owner (studio) refusing to sell the same hamburgers (movies) it sells to others (Blu-ray) in an attempt to starve a particular race (format) out of the neighborhood (market).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rich People
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rich People
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There is already i diode that reads BlueRay HD-DVD DVD and CD that just been announced aswell
[ link to this | view in chronology ]